Another terrorist attack in England

[Jolly_Penguin]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40146916

And here we go again, and just prior to the election.

Van swerving to hit people on London Bridge. Assailant going on a stabbing spree in a restaurant.

So what is this? Islam crazies again? The political right anti-immigration party faking this to get votes? Or just random?

The three suspects they shot dead were apparently wearing fake bomb vests (why not real ones? Was this meant to be a stunt?) according to the BBC.

Trump was quick to tweeet "Whatever the United States can do to help out in London and the U. K., we will be there - WE ARE WITH YOU. GOD BLESS!"

 

[repoman]

 

[barbos]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40146916

And here we go again, and just prior to the election.

Van swerving to hit people on London Bridge. Assailant going on a stabbing spree in a restaurant.

So what is this? Islam crazies again? The political right anti-immigration party faking this to get votes? Or just random?

You are not seriously suggesting these are false-flag on their part?

The three suspects they shot dead were apparently wearing fake bomb vests (why not real ones? Was this meant to be a stunt?) according to the BBC.

There is not enough explosives to go around. Just too many terrorists.

 

[whichphilosophy]

This does not come as a surprise. The British government is expecting a wave of attacks.

While again this only involves a few people who subscribe to what they claim is Islam, just one or two people with a knife, a truck or bomb is enough to cause havoc.

Though I have spoken to a couple of migrants in the UK (now given asylum) and regularly return to Ethiopia this sort of thing may occur

Last year this article appeared in the Daily Express

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...omeland-war-persecution-German-refugee-crisis

Migrants claiming asylum in Germany take HOLIDAYS in the countries they are 'fleeing'

MIGRANTS seeking asylum from war and persecution are returning to the danger zones they have previously fled - on HOLIDAY.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...omeland-war-persecution-German-refugee-crisis

Migrants claiming asylum in Germany take HOLIDAYS in the countries they are 'fleeing'

MIGRANTS seeking asylum from war and persecution are returning to the danger zones they have previously fled - on HOLIDAY.

Despite claiming their lives would be at risk if they were forced to return home, a shocking investigation shows many asylum seekers are nonetheless returning to their homeland for a “short time”.

A German Federal Employment Office spokesman said: “There are such cases.”

The shocking revelation, uncovered by leading German newspaper Die Welt am Sonntag, reinforces the growing problem caused by the fact refugees are allowed to leave the country for 21 days a year, but are not obliged to say where they are going.

Migrants are protected and can keep keep schtum due to “data privacy”.

German MP Armin Schuster said: “If true, that leaves one speechless.

"This has to have consequences for their stay."

The issue is also a problem in the Netherlands, where the government is scrambling to impose some control.

While Switzerland has also flagged up the same issues, confirming dozens of asylum seekers who had apparently turned up penniless after fleeing what they said was a war zone were found to have flown home on holiday.

If the above it true then we should at least stop such people returning from the war zones they fled earlier.
In addition British born Jihadis who went to Syria via Turkey should also be treated likewise.

Some go to Turkey and then get a Syrian passport and cross over there. Hopefully the Turkish authorities can keep tabs on such people.

The majority of Muslims are not radicals and are often the sources of information given to the authorities.
However, when the authorities here are talking about 3,500 under surveillance, we can see that just a couple with a knife and one with a van can cause quite a bit of havoc.

Though the EU is likely to do nothing, Britain should impose travel restrictions and turn back migrants who entered a safe country before coming over.

If the UK funds some of the centres in the Middle East such as Jordan, then refugees can be diverted there while it imposes temporary travel bans even though out of every thousand just maybe 1 or 2 could be a radical.

At the same time the UK should detail its citizens or refuse them entry if they have travelled to certain war zones without making special exit arrangements before travelling.

At the same time we should not start blaming ordinary Muslims for something one or two tend to do.

23,000 potential risks?
See this Al Jazeerah report at 1.41
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQobqBT0slo[/YOUTUBE]

See Daily Mirror here

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/staggering-scale-terror-threat-revealed-10508982

I will also add in RT but I may be accused of conspiracy with the Russians to influence the elections

https://www.rt.com/uk/389945-thousands-potential-terrorists-britain/

 

[untermensche]

Does anybody know how many Muslims the forces of Britain killed during it's invasion and occupation of Iraq?

 

[Philos]

Folks,

Donald Trump has been quick to attack the mayor of London via Twitter.

A.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Does anybody know how many Muslims the forces of Britain killed during it's invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Most Iraqis killed in Iraq was from sectarian violence that resulted in the destabilization caused by the invasion and subsequent shit poor run occupation.

And it is irrelevant. We aren't living via the Hammurabi code. Though it certainly is worth reminding some that 'taking the fight to them' to stop domestic attacks didn't work well.

 

[RavenSky]

Folks,

Donald Trump has been quick to attack the mayor of London via Twitter.

A.

I noticed that, too.

And yet... still not a word against the white terrorist in the Portland train attack

 

[Derec]

Does anybody know how many Muslims the forces of Britain killed during it's invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Obviously not enough.

- - - Updated - - -

And yet... still not a word against the white terrorist in the Portland train attack

The Left is going to harp on this incident for years, while ignoring the much bigger problem of Islamic terrorism.

 

[Derec]

Folks,

Donald Trump has been quick to attack the mayor of London via Twitter.

A.

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

But he doesn't think women in bikinis do

And he wants to bring even more Muslim mass migrants into UK.

We all know what "refugee" is a code word for, even though 99% of them are just economic migrants looking for generous benefits and to impose Sharia law.

I liked Boris Johnson better.

Daniwah!
I could not find any photos of Khan enjoying a pint. Says a lot.

 

[NightSky]

This is, at least in my humble opinion, one of the worst things that could have happened to the people of U.K. for both the non-Muslim and Muslim community, primarily because this terrorist incident comes at the heels of the Ariana Grande concert attack of two weeks ago. The wounds are still fresh from the other attack, and people have not yet had a time to properly grieve or heal from the other event to be able to deal well with another one at this moment in time in a well-considered manner to focus on causes and solutions.

People have a breaking point, a boiling point. I imagine that the recipe for such an atmosphere now exists, made worse no doubt from the timing of elections being held in U.K. People will want to know from the government, “What are you doing to protect me? Are you protecting me? How do I know this will not happen again?” And the answer cannot be, “We don’t know why these things happen.” And the answer also cannot be, “This will solve itself in time.” Because people want immediate action and responsive answers. And if the pubic feels the politicians or the leaders in government are being nonresponsive to their concerns, they will in no time turn against the politicians whom they feel are betraying their responsibility and trust, the current government, and the Muslim community without second thoughts. Because after a boiling point, all bets come off.

I imagine that the liberal politicians running for elections in this politically fraught time in the U.K. must address these concerns by being honest. If they make speeches about Islam being wonderful or Muslims being nice, they’ll actually be incentivizing both anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-liberal bias. Because the people will not believe them as their own eyes will have seen what they'll believe belies those words. Instead, the liberals must say, “I want you to know we will do everything in our power to learn and address the concerns that we know you have, and we will bring to justice anyone who participates in any terror plot and will also be reviewing our current security measures to ensure a highest standard of care so that such terror plots do not become our ‘new normal.’ As a multicultural society and culture that is proud of values of freedom and acceptance of all, we also, however, must resist anti-Muslim bigotry because we are united with Muslims in fighting intolerance and hatred. We respect the concerns of all citizens, and we are open to suggestions on how we can better do our job of serving you.”

Notable Muslim organizations and all Imams must say: “Any attack on any non-Muslim is an attack on us, our community, our values, and our Islamic way of life. Our government has our full cooperation on any counter-terrorism intelligence-gathering, and we urge all peoples to understand that we’re one and united as British with our fellow British people, and we will not let the terrorists win.”

However, I am deeply troubled with this terrorist incident, because even though it included knife-wielding and vehicle-slaughter of innocent bystanders, highlighting the desperation and lower-inhabiting strata of terrorists with the faux bomb vests, these types of incidents, should they continue, will be eroding what remains of tolerance. And despite not wanting to have an alarmist’s viewpoint, I am afraid that I feel a tsunami will come if something soon does not change in U.K.: And a tsunami does not distinguish between the good or the bad, and instead drowns everyone who is unfortunate enough to be present in the wrong place at the wrong time. And by this, I mean, if something soon does not change, the U.K. public might feel compelled to take matters into their own hands. Jo Cox then might not then be the only politician we'll know to have been the casualty of a deranged person's political cause, and of course, Muslim neighbors will not be too far off removed from harm either.

Peace.

 

[NightSky]

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls similarly stated after a terrorist incident: “We would like to tell the French people that we will never give in. We will not give in to the terrorist threat. The times have changed, and France is going to have to live with terrorism.” He was of course severely criticized for his words. However, I don't think either of them meant or mean to imply that what is happening is all right. However, given the counter-intelligence information they may receive, I imagine they, from a pragmatic standpoint, at least recognize some of the terror plots are at least not able to be prevented despite counter-intelligence's best efforts, and I think that's what they meant.

But he doesn't think women in bikinis do[/QUOTE]
I'm sure we'd already had this conversation on the topic some time ago; and therefore, I will forbear repeating the same words.

[QUOTE]And he wants to bring even more Muslim mass migrants into UK. [/quote]
Most of the time, the terrorists who commit these terror attacks are citizens of U.K., second- or third-generation individuals; they are not migrants.

So, refugees and asylum seekers, even if wholly denied, will not address the underlying problem of who is committing these attacks because it is generally, from all the information at least that I've read, not them.

[QUOTE]
[img]
I could not find any photos of Khan enjoying a pint. Says a lot.[/QUOTE]
President Donald Trump practices teetotalism since his brother was an alcoholic who died young. Many people, part of AA groups across the country and the globe, also practice teetotalism. So, I am unsure what you think it says about the Mayor or London if you are unable to find a picture of him “enjoying a pint.” Islam proscribes drinking or consuming of any intoxicants. And if Mayor Sadiq Khan doesn't drink alcohol because of either his religious beliefs or for whatever other reasons personal to him, I fail to see why anyone should raise an objection to or have a problem with that private decision.

Peace.

 

[untermensche]

Does anybody know how many Muslims the forces of Britain killed during it's invasion and occupation of Iraq?

Most Iraqis killed in Iraq was from sectarian violence that resulted in the destabilization caused by the invasion and subsequent shit poor run occupation.

And it is irrelevant. We aren't living via the Hammurabi code. Though it certainly is worth reminding some that 'taking the fight to them' to stop domestic attacks didn't work well.

It is relevant when we want to call this what it is.

Blowback.

 

[blastula]

Folks,

Donald Trump has been quick to attack the mayor of London via Twitter.

A.

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

You keep repeating this fake news. What he actually said was,

“Part and parcel of living in a great global city is you’ve got to be prepared for these things, you’ve got to be vigilant, you’ve got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job."

 

[TSwizzle]

Jo Cox then might not then be the only politician we'll know to have been the casualty of a deranged person's political cause, and of course, Muslim neighbors will not be too far off removed from harm either.

Jo Cox was not the first casualty.

A radicalised student was today sentenced to life imprisonment for attempting to stab to death a former government minister for supporting the Iraq war. Roshonara Choudhry was jailed for life with a minimum term of 15 years at the Old Bailey. Choudhry, 21, was convicted on three charges after a short trial in which she ordered her defence team not to challenge the prosecution's case because she did not recognise the jurisdiction of the British court. The Old Bailey jury took just 14 minutes to return unanimous verdicts on the attempted murder charge and two counts of having an offensive weapon. Mr Justice Cooke, sentencing Choudhry, said she would continue to be a danger to members of parliament for the foreseeable future: "You said you ruined the rest of your life. You said it was worth it. You said you wanted to be a martyr."

Teh Gruaniad

 

[laughing dog]

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

He says preparation for these types of attacks are part and parcel of being in a global city. There is no reasonably intelligent or honest interpretation that terrorism of any type belongs to life in a big city. None whatsoever.

 

[Ford]

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

He says preparation for these types of attacks are part and parcel of being in a global city. There is no reasonably intelligent or honest interpretation that terrorism of any type belongs to life in a big city. None whatsoever.

Keyword there being "honest."

The people who are taking the Mayor's words out of context are being deliberately dishonest. They're on the same level of pond scum like Alex Jones or - in this case - Trump.

 

[Derec]

He says preparation for these types of attacks are part and parcel of being in a global city. There is no reasonably intelligent or honest interpretation that terrorism of any type belongs to life in a big city. None whatsoever.

It's one thing to be prepared to clean up the mess afterwards, quite another to attack the problem at the source. But that would require changing his attitude toward unrestricted mass migration of Muslims and calling every economic migrant a "refugee" who is "welcome".

 

[Derec]

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls similarly stated after a terrorist incident: “We would like to tell the French people that we will never give in. We will not give in to the terrorist threat. The times have changed, and France is going to have to live with terrorism.” He was of course severely criticized for his words.

And rightly so. The reason "times have changed" and why "France is going to have to live with terrorism" are politicians like him who have welcomed millions of Muslim mass migrants for decades. Now you have radicalized 2nd and 3rd generation Muslims who commit terrorist attacks on the regular and otherwise create colonies in cities like Marseilles and Paris that are no longer recognizable as France.

You can wave goodbye to Europe as we know it!

However, I don't think either of them meant or mean to imply that what is happening is all right.

I didn't say he did. Just that he didn't think it was a problem as pressing as say bikini-clad women on tube billboards, which he forcefully tackled as soon as he came to power.
Doing something about all the Muslim radicals who are "known to the police" was not as important. Butt was even filmed as part of "Jihadis Next Door" documentary and he was still allowed to roam freely. No arrest, no deportation, not even surveillance.

However, given the counter-intelligence information they may receive, I imagine they, from a pragmatic standpoint, at least recognize some of the terror plots are at least not able to be prevented despite counter-intelligence's best efforts, and I think that's what they meant.

The more radical Muslims there are in Europe, the more frequent these attacks will become. What Europe must do is stop mass migration, vet all immigrants for extremist/radical views, and deport criminal and radical immigrants already there. But none of these things are politically correct.

Most of the time, the terrorists who commit these terror attacks are citizens of U.K., second- or third-generation individuals; they are not migrants.

Not these guys. The two who have been identified are a Pakistani and Libyan/Moroccan who were both born in those countries.

But you are right in that many terrorists in Europe have been born there. But that is not an argument against controlling migration. The mass migrants flooding into Europe today will have their children (average five per woman!) and grandchildren (average at least¹ 25 per original migrant woman!) which are the easily radicalized 2nd and 3rd generation people of the future.

So, refugees and asylum seekers, even if wholly denied, will not address the underlying problem of who is committing these attacks because it is generally, from all the information at least that I've read, not them.

See above. This particular attack was committed by 1st gen migrants (very few of the mass migrants are genuine refugees of asylum seekers, vast majority are economic migrants looking for benefits) and 1st gen migrants will give birth to even more 2nd and 3rd gen migrants.

President Donald Trump practices teetotalism since his brother was an alcoholic who died young.

I don't like Trump on the whole either. He'd certainly be more mellow and relaxed if he wasn't tea-totaling. But at least he has a semi-rational reason for it.

Islam proscribes drinking or consuming of any intoxicants.

Khan on the contrary, doesn't drink because he doesn't want to make a sky fairy mad.

¹ if we assume independence. But if (as is likely) those migrants with more children are more likely to have children who have more children themselves, then the mean of product will actually be higher than product of means (5*5=25)

 

[whichphilosophy]

Well even a broken Trump is right occasionally. He is right about the mayor of London.
He thinks Islamic terrorism belongs to life in a big city

He says preparation for these types of attacks are part and parcel of being in a global city. There is no reasonably intelligent or honest interpretation that terrorism of any type belongs to life in a big city. None whatsoever.

Your interpretation is correct.

Of course terrorism does not belong to life in a big city. However, in recent years terrorism became parcel of being in a global city. In the UK we need to be much more prepared than we are now and not always politically correct.