Jump to content

London Terrorist Attack


PaulT
 Share

Recommended Posts

I hate the word "Terrorist" when it comes to this sort of thing, they are not terrorists just murderers pure and simple. As soon as you call them anything else other than a murderer you put them in a special group which some sick people consider an elitist group which they are not. I don't like people being killed, even in an accident, but there comes a point where some murders are so horrific that only the death sentence is applicable and this would be one example. In my book anyone who kills a child, military personnel or policemen/women should automatically be hanged if found guilty.

I see that some mosques have been attacked last night which I find disgusting. Such behaviour is no different to how Jews were treated in Germany. The majority of Muslims in the UK are decent and hard working and there is really is no need to pick on them because of this very small group of murderers.and extremists.

As for these extremists that preach this form of hatred in the UK just through them and there families out.

My thoughts are with the family of the deceased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put Q but we cannot throw them out because it would infringe their Human Rights!!!!!!!! They also might be tortured - but what did they do to the poor chap that they, as you quite rightly say, murdered and also decapitated and tried to disembowel.

The UK is such a soft touch. In the case of Abu Qatada even the European courts have said deport him but then it comes to the UK system and they say that the poor diddums might be tried using evidence obtained under torture. So let's not worry about the hate that he has preached and the incitement in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we know they received any training at all? Future will tell, but it's not as if it took much skill to butcher the victim.  They may never have left the UK, born there, lived there all their lives??? Then what?  Home-grown abject criminals of that kind,  the worst kind of nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="5-element"]Do we know they received any training at all? Future will tell, but it's not as if it took much skill to butcher the victim.  They may never have left the UK, born there, lived there all their lives??? Then what?  Home-grown abject criminals of that kind,  the worst kind of nightmare.
[/quote]

I think the way you phrased your comment about the "skill" element is totally with out any consideration for other peoples feelings, how do you know for sure that anybody who is a member of or who reads this forum isn't related to the victim or like me has relatives in the military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting to note that on the BBC and ITV news programs several Muslims from Muslim organisations have been interviewed and they all seem to say the same thing with regard to the radicalisation of Muslim youth in that the government is not doing enough to find the leaders and get rid of them either by throwing them out the country or locking them up for preaching their hatred.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps these Muslim leaders should do their part by finding them, beating the crop out of them and deliveribng them in chains to the appropriate services. Can't expect the government to do it all.

And it might help convince the rest of the population that they are sincere decent people and not a bunch of raving assassins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just as stunned and horrified as the next person, and have nothing but the greatest compassion and sympathy for the family and relatives of the victim, and thought it was obvious. I fail to see how Nick P came to the conclusions he did. But I guess, when you don't know what else to do, try to find a messenger and shoot them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently one of the murderers comes from a devout Christian family and converted to Islam after going to college.

All this plays in to the hands of the more extreme 'political' parties within the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put the blame directly at Tony Blairs door for getting us involved in wars that are not our concern and for being a lapdog to the US. If we did what Spain did after the Madrid bombings and pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan like them we would not have these attacks. If we leave the EU things will only get worse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are mistaken Quillan. This started before that. I remember some of my colleagues and I being shocked during the First Gulf War 1991 when some of our pupils cheered at the news that an RAF plane had been shot down. If I recall correctly John Major was the prime minister at the time.

Some of us tried to explain our fears to our political leaders and were warned against being racist. Then, as now, our politicians do not listen to the people who know what they are talking about.

The sad result is the atrocity we saw in London yesterday.

Hoddy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

blogs.spectator.co.uk/rod-liddle/2013/05/terrorist-attack-or-not/

I agree with Wooly in that the UK's legal system is incapable of deporting those who encourage terrorism.

I don't understand Quillan's assertion that it will be worse if the UK leaves the EU. If it did then there is more chance of change to the legal system.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now the 'Help for Heroes' web site has crashed......... people rushing to donate.

I was wondering about making an extra donation myself, but then I wondered what the soldiers circumstances were and maybe his family could do with some financial help. So I shall wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoddy - UK took part in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) in November 2001 as a joint operation with the US to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban government.

Rebaud - The UK  is part of the EU. There is a large group of American politicians who because of the current troubles in Syria would like to put ground troops in there and to support certain "friendly" rebels. The EU, of which the UK is a member, is against such action and therefore the UK has to go along with it. If the UK left the EU it would end up with even stronger ties with the US and in some peoples opinion more likely to get involved in US actions world wide. Recently I read somewhere that during Camerons recent visit some Americans intimated this by saying that the US needed to keep the "special relationship" because of the UK's military. Whilst America can simply get involved on its own it prefers to drag others in with it to show that it is not just America being aggresive but other countries as well that supports its 'humanitarian' military intervention. If we were not in the EU we would be 'tagging' along with the US and in months be involved with ground troops being deployed in Syria. The EU I believe has a more balanced, as opposed American gung ho, attitude to events outside of Europe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="5-element"]I am just as stunned and horrified as the next person, and have nothing but the greatest compassion and sympathy for the family and relatives of the victim, and thought it was obvious. I fail to see how Nick P came to the conclusions he did. But I guess, when you don't know what else to do, try to find a messenger and shoot them.
[/quote]

If I wanted a messenger then I would choose my own thank you very much.  I never came to any conclusions at all, I just made a statement that I thought your butchering comment was inappropriate at this time, and still do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quilan wrote:

"Hoddy - UK took part in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) in November 2001 as a joint operation with the US to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban government."

I am aware of that Q. I was just pointing out that the militant anti-western movement started a good ten years before that and is not therefore the sole responsibility of Blair.

In any event I hope that we can all agree that what has happened is an outrage.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]Quilan wrote: "Hoddy - UK took part in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) in November 2001 as a joint operation with the US to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban government." I am aware of that Q. I was just pointing out that the militant anti-western movement started a good ten years before that and is not therefore the sole responsibility of Blair. In any event I hope that we can all agree that what has happened is an outrage. Hoddy[/quote]

That's as may be but it was Blair who sent the troops to Afghanistan and Iraq and that is the main thrust of why these people commit their murders. Now it transpires that the drones that kill innocent Muslim women and children as well as the odd 'terrorist' are being controlled by personnel in the UK. If we were not involved in any of this these evil people who radicalise and incite these murderers to kill in such an horrific way would have no reason to continue. Some may think that getting out will make no difference well at least Al Qaeda kept their word with Spain who did exactly that, more than you can say about America.

Anyway as if to back up my point a little about the EU and the UK and what I was saying about America and it's warmongering politicians I just found this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/22/syria-arms-embargo-rebels

There are 11 rebel groups in Syria each one with a different political leaning from fundamentalist Muslim to left of centre. In a recent interview when visiting the UK President Netanyahu of Israel intimated that his country was supplying 'aid' to one particular (unnamed) Syrian group but the 'aid' had come from another source which he also would not named. Don't think you need a degree in maths to work out who the other source is. So Israel puts pressure on the US to put pressure on the UK to put pressure on the EU to lift the arms embargo so America can arm it's chosen rebel group direct which in turn lets Israel off the hook as it were. So if the UK gets dragged further in to all this then these sick attacks in the UK will only increase and that frightens me because I still have family that live and work in London.

By the way I thought the woman who confronted one of the murderers was extremely brave as were the two others who tried to comfort the dying soldier. Made me think if I would have had the courage to do such a thing. Like many others I would like to think I would but you never know till it happens so well done them, very, very brave.

Rest in peace brave soldier, gone but not forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now if memory serves me correctly the reason for invading Afghanistan or more specifically the Taliban was because it was hosting / supporting Al Qaeda (sorry spelling may be wrong) and for those who forget what happened in 2001 was when Americans discovered that the whole World did not love them. This was via the hijacking of four aircraft, flying two into the Twin Towers causing them to collapse and kill thousands and one in to the Pentagon. The other crashed in Pennsylvania. So it was not just a case of that good ole boy George saying 'yo Blair let's go and zap Afghanistan'.

As for Iraq then this does seem to me a jolly little jape by George and Tony (Dodgy Dossiers R'Us) to make a name for themselves. A World renowned scientist had to die - and with the State being very evasive about aspects of his death it certainly does seem to me that it was State murder.

In the case of Afghanistan it seems that once the troops leave the Taliban will grab control again - these are the nice people who seem to be supported by the Pakistan secret service and also the nice people who shot that young girl because she was campaigning for education for girls.

As for Iraq the game plan seemed to be:

Act 1: Big firework display - Shock and Awe.

Act 2: Oh my, the leadership had better surrender

Act 3: The Iraqi people will look at the Good Ole Boys as heroes

And do not forget about Libya - the West supported the 'rebels' and Gadaffi was overthrown now the rebels are in disarray and some could well threaten the West.

And now there is Syria.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="PaulT"]

Now if memory serves me correctly the reason for invading Afghanistan or more specifically the Taliban was because it was hosting / supporting Al Qaeda (sorry spelling may be wrong) and for those who forget what happened in 2001 was when Americans discovered that the whole World did not love them. This was via the hijacking of four aircraft, flying two into the Twin Towers causing them to collapse and kill thousands and one in to the Pentagon. The other crashed in Pennsylvania. So it was not just a case of that good ole boy George saying 'yo Blair let's go and zap Afghanistan'.[/quote]

I remember Blair 'hot tailing it' over to the US to offer George his condolences although it was probably more to do with wanting to be seen on the world stage, rather like that bloke who keeps popping up outside the Houses of Parliament with a board proclaiming "Jesus Saves" every time somebody is interviewed. The two things I remember were Blair standing next to Bush just after 9/11 and Bush saying that they would be "going on a crusade against the Muslim terrorists". I remember thinking he and Blair forgot the Holy and to wear their white tabards with red crosses on the front. I believe to this day that neither Bush nor Blair understood why Muslims took offence at such comments. Neither can I understand how Blair became "Special peace envoy to the middle east", another of the great mysteries of life or was it Bush exercising a little humour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillan, who always speaks a good deal of sense writes:

“Rebaud - The UK is part of the EU. There is a large group of American politicians who because of the current troubles in Syria would like to put ground troops in there and to support certain "friendly" rebels.”

I believe post Iraq the neo-cons in the US are discredited and Obama is the president least likely to intervene anywhere militarily.

“The EU, of which the UK is a member, is against such action and therefore the UK has to go along with it.”

It is news to me that the UK takes any interest at all in Baroness Ashton says (it is not easy to know whatever she has ever said). I remember that during the lead-up to the Falklands war, Belgium stopping the EU (or whatever it was then called) doing anything and refusing to let the UK buy ammunition.

“If the UK left the EU it would end up with even stronger ties with the US and in some peoples opinion more likely to get involved in US actions world wide. Recently I read somewhere that during Camerons recent visit some Americans intimated this by saying that the US needed to keep the "special relationship" because of the UK's military.”

Some peoples opinion?

“Whilst America can simply get involved on its own it prefers to drag others in with it to show that it is not just America being aggresive but other countries as well that supports its 'humanitarian' military intervention. If we were not in the EU we would be 'tagging' along with the US and in months be involved with ground troops being deployed in Syria. The EU I believe has a more balanced, as opposed American gung ho, attitude to events outside of Europe.”

I think the international intervention in Libya showed the US under Obama is reluctant to intervene and the UK and France (EU members) were more gung ho and, I believe, correctly so.

Quillan is a supporter of the EU and the UK’s membership, I am not, I think this colours our views.

This is my 1,000th post and I think likely to be my last one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Renaud"]I believe post Iraq the neo-cons in the US are discredited and Obama is the president least likely to intervene anywhere militarily.[/quote]

So why does he want the arms embargo lifted? Why did he put American troops on the ground in Libya as 'advisers' for a while. France were the first to commit aircraft in Libya and the UK followed but neither put troops on the ground even as advisers.

[quote user="Renaud"]I remember that during the lead-up to the Falklands war, Belgium stopping the EU (or whatever it was then called) doing anything and refusing to let the UK buy ammunition.[/quote]

Actually Belgium always refuses to sell ammunition, always holding out for a negotiated settlement. It did not sell ammunition to anyone in either the Gulf or Afghanistan wars either. This was nothing to do with the EU, they were acting on their own. The UK didn't want to buy the ammunition to take to the Falklands either but wanted it to replace the NATO stocks (that belongs to most of the EU countries although NATO and the EU are completely different entities) that it had used there.

[quote user="Renaud"]I think the international intervention in Libya showed the US under Obama is reluctant to intervene and the UK and France (EU members) were more gung ho and, I believe, correctly so.[/quote]

The UK and France (and any other EU country) was not stopped for doing anything in Libya including selling arms to 'rebels' because there was and never has been an EU block on doing so unlike Syria. Incidentally I read that Austria (ABC News 24/11/13 @ 17:00) and a few other EU countries are applying to have the arms embargo lengthened rather than removed so as one assumes the EU follows it own rules (requiring on this issue for all EU countries to agree) that the arms embargo will not be lifted, nor because of the same rules will it be lengthened.

Meanwhile the Americans are looking to go in to Syria to 'remove WMD's'. These are said, according to many American news agencies (ABC, Fox, Washington Post etc), to be leftovers from the Iraq war and the supplies that were removed from Iraq to Syria and hidden there so as not to fall in to western hands. At least one ex President has confirmed this (now I wonder which one that is doh).

We should pull all our troops out of the Middle East and other conflicts around the world. We should not allow arms to be sold to other countries, especially those with repressive governments which is something the UK would be doing now in the case of Syria if it were not for the EU stopping it. Until we stop these involvements especially in the Middle East these horrific attacks I fear will continue and more people will end up dead. Actually thinking about something Hoddy said earlier she is right we can lay part of the blame also at Camerons door as only he has the power to bring the UK troops home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...