Police rush to London Bridge after reports of van hitting pedestrians

[GuiseppeD]

If not this attack then the next will be the straw that broke the camel's back.  I'm hoping this time.

 

I'm perversely looking forward to it as I've had enough of this nonsense as the government fails to react time and again.

 

If our enemies are blowing children to kingdom come then it's definitely time to react so, this time, it's death to the disbelievers and not us.

 

 

[Morch]

34 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The usual redneck nonsensical counterproductive, impractical/impossible responses when the scumbag perps are usually native born citizens anyway.

 

Yeah ... lets get 'em, paint a quarter of the world's population with the same bigoted brush, stereotype 'em, ban 'em, deport the lot, intern 'em, demolish their places of worship. The latter four of course (lets get real) have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

 

You'd have all made good Nazis.

 

But I know it feels good to rant on to vent your fury. But for crying out loud, think of realistic steps to stop these atrocities happening again. 

 

Seek out any cells the terrorists belong to. Prosecute, imprison, deport those you find. Criticize  what the UK  is doing in terms of its morally corrupt interfering/populist vote winning/money grabbing foreign policy. But don't do what the terrorists want you to do..attack the entire faith of Islam, thus inevitably creating more converts for revenge, whose mosques tomorrow get graffitied, whose sisters get their hijabs torn off, whose mothers get abused on public transport ..all fired by the same blind hatred that inspired the OP maniacs. All that will do more harm than good.

 

Not buying. And here's why.

 

Doing more than is currently done to address these issues, within the scope of counter-terrorism,  will necessarily impinge on civil rights. It will also require a certain level of discrimination, which will be based on factors related to profiling. Greater presence of law armed law enforcement and security forces, with greater leeway. And yet, whenever these issues come up, not in conjunction with a concrete terrorist attack, they are vehemently objected to.

 

The other two angles often discussed involve either fundamental changes to foreign policy, or a push toward a multicultural society.

That neither, especially in their "hard core" versions) is acceptable to wide tracts of the public seems immaterial (while at the same time going on about democracy...). That neither provides anything but a long term solution, and that even those are fuzzy and uncertain does not deter advocates.

 

One doesn't have to subscribe to the mob attitude prevailing in these topics in order to reject your post. Having a reasonably functioning memory is quite enough.

[Khon Kaen Dave]

44 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

 

This is the kind of thinking that truly amazes me. We know why they do it - they go out of their way to tell us. They post their reasons online, they explain them in videos. They even print them in English-language magazines, for heaven's sake.

 

For example, here is a snippet from an article in the ISIS magazine Dabiq, entitled "Why We Hate You and Why We Fight You"

 

 

It couldn't be much clearer, could it?

But surely, to the 21st century mind, this could all be a fairy tale.Jesus, the disciples. We know they existed because so much is written about them. But its all a 2000 year old fairy tale.These people are fanatics, who want to take the modern world back 2000 years. They want to subjugate women, and be free to bugger young boys.We must never allow these animals to be recognised. We must wipe them from the face of the Earth and allow true Muslims to practise what they preach.If you get a swarm of ants in your house, you destroy them, what is different?

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Here's a tip. If a couple of mad mullahs appear at your front door canvassing for ISIS ..just say no and vote accordingly!

 

Islamic (not so sure about Christian) fanatics havent a hope in hell of taking over western democracies. That's just hysterical bs.

 

And certainly murdering innocent people as in the OP will not help their cause.

 

There's no need to "take over". Having sufficient electoral clout is quite enough for affecting change.

[Grouse]

SAS Blue Thunder were involved

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-terror-attack-sas-blue-thunder-unit-helicopter-bridge-atrocity-borough-a7771831.html

 

If I was a Muslim I would be getting a shave about now...

[Morch]

14 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

OK you can joke all you want,  obviously you don't give a monkeys about museys taking over England in the future and just another sitting on the fence..

 

Obviously. If you say so.

Did not waving the pitchfork give me away?

[Kwasaki]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Obviously. If you say so.

Did not waving the pitchfork give me away?

[bartender100]

"Theresa May says Manchester and London attacks are NOT linked" 

 

How does she possibly know this quick?

 

 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/theresa-says-manchester-london-attacks-13135342

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, Khon Kaen Dave said:

But surely, to the 21st century mind, this could all be a fairy tale.Jesus, the disciples. We know they existed because so much is written about them. But its all a 2000 year old fairy tale.These people are fanatics, who want to take the modern world back 2000 years. They want to subjugate women, and be free to bugger young boys.We must never allow these animals to be recognised. We must wipe them from the face of the Earth and allow true Muslims to practise what they preach.If you get a swarm of ants in your house, you destroy them, what is different?

I think the only problem I have with your post Dave, is that they are all reading the same book, albeit they understand it by the Iman that preaches it to them, I suppose it could be said whether you get a good Iman or a bad one will influence your thinking about Islam. I may be wrong but I think if Muslims could rationalise they would not be Muslims.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, IMA_FARANG said:

My British friends.

If your country could survive the V-1 fling bombs and the V-2 attacks in 1939 and 1940, a few "terrorists"  won't stop you  now.

Just remember, as the T shirt from that time sad, "Keep Calm and Carry On".

Your parents grandparents did it, and so can you.

I myself was in Vietnam or 5 years, and I survive the TET offensive in Saigon and one attack on the communications site I served at.

I remember shining a flashlight (Torch to you) to see that I was  standing in a pool of about 3 cm of blood from a wounded friend at that time.

Don't let your fear defeat you, that's what terrorists want,

Been there, and got the T-shirt as the saying goes.

 

 

 

 

 

A good post.

Some perspective doesn't go amiss.

 

The UK isn't going to fall apart because of terrorist attacks, and there were much greater hardships experienced in the past - without the hysteria and hyperbole featuring on this topic.

 

That's not to say that there isn't a threat, or that serious efforts to counter it shouldn't be taken. 

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

[Khon Kaen Dave]

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

I think the only problem I have with your post Dave, is that they are all reading the same book, albeit they understand it by the Iman that preaches it to them, I suppose it could be said whether you get a good Iman or a bad one will influence your thinking about Islam. I may be wrong but I think if Muslims could rationalise they would not be Muslims.

Muslims are afraid of the radicals that rule them.most of the Muslims in the uk are terrified to speak out against the fanatics.They have been threatened with the rape of their daughters and the castration of their sons. What would you do? They cannot rationlise, because they are under a 'purda' to stay silent.You live in a world where every thing is equal. Not so with these fanatics i feel.Why do you think that imans are imans?what do you think their job really is? Islam is losing the war, but they will ever give up. The tendrils of the beast is in every country now.We and Europe will suffer these bombings for a long time yet. They have to be stopped.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

The OP made the statement that the majority of Muslim countries banned Christianity - patent nonsense spurned either by ignorance or the desire to foster hatred in those who are malleable to such insidious untruths.

 

Indeed. Anyone reading the many reports about Christians facing prosecution in Muslim countries would realize there's no such ban.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, Thongkorn said:

interestingly Of the 3000 on the police watch list in the UK, 95% of them live off state handouts, Its about time it was cut off i think, 

 

Trust but verify. Source? Link?

[Morch]

6 hours ago, transam said:

And none of the Islamic folk you continually protect are not thugs or killers...?

 

I believe the stock phrase is "tiny minority".

[Morch]

6 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 I do not 'protect' thugs and killers of any religion, or none,.

 

I 'protect' innocents of all religions, or none.

 

I beg to differ, we've been there before. More than once.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Every time a police officer in the UK fires their weapon there is an IPCC inquiry.

 

Which is right in a democratic society.

 

Do you really want armed police to have the power to shoot and kill with impunity?

 

Have you forgotten the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes?

 

I am sure that the inquiry will find the shooting of these three men to be justified.

 

I am sure that those actually pulling the trigger do not always share your confidence.

[Prbkk]

33 minutes ago, bartender100 said:

"Theresa May says Manchester and London attacks are NOT linked" 

 

How does she possibly know this quick?

 

 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/theresa-says-manchester-london-attacks-13135342

Therein lies the greatest danger....that the attacks are unrelated and merely the work of individuals, small cells/groups, clusters...whatever. Because that would lend support to the long-held fear that "lone wolf" attacks would be the way fundamentalist violence/terror would develop. It seems likely to be the case. There is no grand plan/conspiracy but a very small number of people, influenced by a philosophy but not directly controlled by an organisation, working independently. It's no less terrifying but so much more difficult for the security forces to anticipate and intercept....almost a classic definition of a sleeper cell.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 You should pay more attention.

 

From The Sun; hardly a PC, leftie source!
'AFFRONT TO RELIGION' London Bridge attackers slammed by Muslim Council of Britain as ‘cowards’ for launching attack during Ramadan

 

 

The Ramadan bit is bizarre.

Would it have made a difference if it wasn't on Ramadan?

And, generally speaking - Ramadan is not especially known as a peaceful time of year. Maybe it's the fasting practices, and maybe the added religious fervor. Perhaps not in the UK, but think there's usually more violence - criminal, terrorist or religious related. 

 

[aslimversgwm]

14 hours ago, steven100 said:

travel ban for muslims entering these countries ....  

the less allowed in the less chance they can do attacks.

The attackers in the 2  previous attacks were both British citizens and I have little doubt these latest lunatics will also be found to be British citizens so I fail to see how the travel ban  you advocate would help in any way.

The answer is to root out the people indoctrinating Muslims turning them into insane fanatics. 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 We all know who these terrorists are. Constantly labelling as Muslim or Islamic only gives them credibility they don't deserve.

 

No matter what he says or does, certain people will twist it in an effort to show that he sympathises with, or even supports, the terrorists' aims.

 

That has always been the way of terrorists, no matter their so called cause.

 

 

Constantly (and willfully) ignoring the religious affiliation only serves to obfuscate and deflect. Being called Muslim or Islamic does not necessarily convey credibility.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Wholly and utterly tedious, and woefully off topic, but the term OP is used by many posters on TV to refer to a thread within a subject. 

Sorry but not in my experience. OP is always the first post ( ORIGINAL post ).

[evadgib]

This 6 month old rant from Pat Condell covers what a good many are thinking despite the fact that these purps may prove to be 2nd or 3rd generation rather than plastic refugees

 

 

Edited June 4, 2017 by evadgib

[RuamRudy]

31 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Indeed. Anyone reading the many reports about Christians facing prosecution in Muslim countries would realize there's no such ban.

Persecution or prosecution? The former is undoubtedly a major and widespread problem that is not necessarily given the importance it should have by the respective authorities in many places, but, apostasy aside, how many countries can you name where Christians are prosecuted by the state specifically for practicing their faith?

 

Whilst it is clear that being a Christian in certain countries is a massive and dangerous commitment, as far as I can tell, Somalia, Saudi Arabia and the Maldives, along with Myanmar, Laos and Bhutan prosecute practicing Christians.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Flustered said:

I think that my greatest fear is that if we have any more of these Islamic Terrorist attacks, people may well take matters into their own hands and start burning down Mosques. Then there will be retaliation and bloodshed on the streets.

 

There will only be one outcome of this scenario and that is the eradication of Islam from this country.

 

The Muslim community need to take a quantum leap forward and start to integrate. Open their communities to other religions and allow inter faith marriage. They need to report (not say they have reported when no record of this exists) any person who starts to take a radical view. Perhaps they need their own internal organisation to root out these radicals and deal with them.

 

Either way, far from the situation getting better by following Liberal advice to not retaliate, welcome these people and talk, talk, talk,  the terrorist attacks in the name of Islam are growing. The "don't retaliate" view has proven wrong. (Jeremy Corbyn.....Please take note. Talk talk, talk allows your enemies to defeat you while you are busy talking).

 

Just hope I am wrong and the Muslim community will change it's ways.

The Muslim community need to take a quantum leap forward and start to integrate

Have you viewed the vdo that was posted a while ago? There is no way those people will ever integrate, or that any normal person would want them anywhere near.

 

No "good" Muslim will ever allow a female Muslim relative to marry a kaffir. Only non muslim WOMEN are allowed to marry Muslims and their children have to be Muslim.

 

If the women are required to cover up in the presence of an outsider even in their own home, how much integration is going to happen.

 

You are using logic against indoctrinated belief. The only way to break the cycle is to ban Muslim schools and force all Muslim children ( co ed classes and no veils ) to attend British schools so they grow up as integrated people. If their parents don't like it, send them to a Muslim country without right of return.

Edited June 4, 2017 by thaibeachlovers

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Persecution or prosecution? The former is undoubtedly a major and widespread problem that is not necessarily given the importance it should have by the respective authorities in many places, but, apostasy aside, how many countries can you name where Christians are prosecuted by the state specifically for practicing their faith?

 

Whilst it is clear that being a Christian in certain countries is a massive and dangerous commitment, as far as I can tell, Somalia, Saudi Arabia and the Maldives, along with Myanmar, Laos and Bhutan prosecute practicing Christians.

 

 

The former, slip of a word. But if the latter - why leave apostasy aside?

And could have done without the usual deflections, but eh.

[evadgib]

Latest from the beeb is that 8 officers fired 50 rounds killing three terrorists and injuring a member of the public.

 

Hats off to the 8 & I hope the injured party is ok.

Edited June 4, 2017 by evadgib

[thaibeachlovers]

Interesting point on Sky News just now. Someone pointed out that in 2011 Cameron made a speech saying all the things May is talking about now, when she was home secretary.

She is pretty good at talking about "tightening up" etc, but will she do anything, or will we be hearing it all again soon?

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

The former, slip of a word. But if the latter - why leave apostasy aside?

And could have done without the usual deflections, but eh.

Is deflection your go-to cry, in the same way that some call troll whenever they find something objectionable?

 

I suggested leaving apostasy aside because it is something that is covered by Sharia law, and is, therefore, a factor if Islam. Important in itself, yes, but it clouds the true picture. 

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Latest from the beeb is that 8 officers fired 50 rounds killing three terrorists and injuring a member of the public.

A member of the public was saying that they were using automatic fire. I wonder how many rounds hit the targets?

I guess they were worried about explosive vests being detonated if they didn't kill them fast.