Religion of peace
-
Yup, and the best that this major member of an uber-major ter'r'rist organisation could do was use a car and a pointed stick (which may or may not have been a knife from his mum's kitchen). The amount of bullsh1t we're being fed about ter'r'rism is so incredibly huge that it almost matches the amount of taxpayers' money that's being stolen by governments to "make war" on it by spying on us.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
He killed 4 people so far. I'm sure you are glad that your loved ones weren't one of the victims. The amount of bullshit we are being fed, is just right, and on time.
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
And who is "them"?
Radical Muslims that want to hurt non-muslims. I am of the mindset that you are a strong liberal/socialist ( I could be wrong) and that is fine. When the story broke out here in the States and when I went online it was clear that the suspect was a radical Muslim based on the information presented to me. I hate radical Muslims who want to hurt/kill non-muslims and non-radical muslims. If that makes me the bad guy, then I am glad to be that bad guy. I voted for Trump because he wants to keep radical Muslims who want to hurt/kill non-radical muslims out of my country. Maybe England, Scotland, Ireland, etc. should do the same. Just a thought.
I'm centre right with a strong belief in not jumping to conclusions. Yes, he was a radical muslim, but there was every possibility that he was a completely different type of arsehole. Right now, the UK is riddled with hatred and division, so this could have been from any disaffected group - the Irish troubles are still simmering away and the whole Brexit thing could cause that to rise up again. My philosophy is simple - if you're a decent human being, I couldn't give a shit what nationality/religion you are. If you're a murderous arsehole, that's when I have a problem. But murderous arseholes can come from anywhere. So, to get back to your original question, I guess you were asking why I defend "them" - the answer is, I don't defend "them" when your definition is radical muslims. I do, however, defend muslims when they have nothing to do with atrocities, and actively condemn them. However, this is where people's views get a touch hypocritical, and that really annoys me. As an example, you have people who, on the one hand approve of a ban on muslims entering a country from certain states but who, on the other hand, was happy to be connected to the IRA, and who said about the death of Martin McGuinness "Martin McGuinness was a warrior for Ireland & for peace. He was a man of absolute integrity. Im proud to say Martin McGuinness was my friend". For clarification, if you aren't aware, McGuinness was convicted and imprisoned for his involvement with a vehicle containing 250lbs of explosive and several thousand rounds of ammunition. To the people of Great Britain, McGuinness was a terrorist. That is what I have a problem with - when terrorism isn't treated equally. BTW - The person I was referring to in the paragraph above is Republican Representative Peter King[^].
This space for rent
-
He killed 4 people so far. I'm sure you are glad that your loved ones weren't one of the victims. The amount of bullshit we are being fed, is just right, and on time.
Slacker007 wrote:
He killed 4 people so far
No, he didn't. The police killed at least one of the four. But if you're convinced that the occasional psychopathic w@nker like this is worth giving up half your taxes and two-thirds of your human rights, then there's probably no point in discussing it further. Here's a more credible perspective, for you: If the amount of money that is spent on treating decent people like sh1t, under the guise of "anti-ter'r'rism", were to be spent on wiping out organised crime, then there would be no more organised crime. Organised crime kills several orders of magnitude more people than ter'r'rists ever have or ever will kill, and ruins more lives than you could count -- but it also lines the pockets of a lot of people, so we don't want to put a stop to that, do we? Upwardly wake and the coffee smell, eh? The general populace gains nothing from this "war on ter'r'rism". All the money and power goes to people who want to treat the general populace like sh1t.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
The recent pictures of the attacker don't look asian to me. In fact, the suspect is named Abu Izzadeen from Clapton in Hackney. Not asian origin.
No, he's not a suspect, he's still in prison. For good reasons. But you should really check your sources better.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
No, he's not a suspect, he's still in prison. For good reasons. But you should really check your sources better.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Indeed. I was surprised that a name was given anywhere considering the Counter Terrorism Unit had only just started their investigations.
This space for rent
-
I'm centre right with a strong belief in not jumping to conclusions. Yes, he was a radical muslim, but there was every possibility that he was a completely different type of arsehole. Right now, the UK is riddled with hatred and division, so this could have been from any disaffected group - the Irish troubles are still simmering away and the whole Brexit thing could cause that to rise up again. My philosophy is simple - if you're a decent human being, I couldn't give a shit what nationality/religion you are. If you're a murderous arsehole, that's when I have a problem. But murderous arseholes can come from anywhere. So, to get back to your original question, I guess you were asking why I defend "them" - the answer is, I don't defend "them" when your definition is radical muslims. I do, however, defend muslims when they have nothing to do with atrocities, and actively condemn them. However, this is where people's views get a touch hypocritical, and that really annoys me. As an example, you have people who, on the one hand approve of a ban on muslims entering a country from certain states but who, on the other hand, was happy to be connected to the IRA, and who said about the death of Martin McGuinness "Martin McGuinness was a warrior for Ireland & for peace. He was a man of absolute integrity. Im proud to say Martin McGuinness was my friend". For clarification, if you aren't aware, McGuinness was convicted and imprisoned for his involvement with a vehicle containing 250lbs of explosive and several thousand rounds of ammunition. To the people of Great Britain, McGuinness was a terrorist. That is what I have a problem with - when terrorism isn't treated equally. BTW - The person I was referring to in the paragraph above is Republican Representative Peter King[^].
This space for rent
I can sign that as well. :thumbsup:
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Indeed. I was surprised that a name was given anywhere considering the Counter Terrorism Unit had only just started their investigations.
This space for rent
Alas, I'm not surprised at all. We're living in a time when people are regurgitating bullshit without a single thought. Myself, I blame twitter and facebook. It was obvious to me that it was false, for the same reason as you stated.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Spreading its love once again. This time in London.
FYI - [Westminster Attack | Muslim Council of Britain (MCB)](http://www.mcb.org.uk/westminster-attack/)
veni bibi saltavi
-
I've seen no indication about anything about the attacker other that he appeared to be of Asian origin. You must have closer links to the security services than the rest of us; or you are just blindly speculating.
This space for rent
I wasn't going on just the official news sites. I was going from social media sources where the coverage was a lot more raw and plentiful. Besides it wasn't much of a leap of faith to work out who was responsible. Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck etc. There were also reports of a white accomplice. Not sure if that's been confirmed.
-
I wasn't going on just the official news sites. I was going from social media sources where the coverage was a lot more raw and plentiful. Besides it wasn't much of a leap of faith to work out who was responsible. Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck etc. There were also reports of a white accomplice. Not sure if that's been confirmed.
Ah yes. Social Media because that's where the responsible news happens. And cat memes. Mustn't forget the cat memes.
Pom Pey wrote:
it wasn't much of a leap of faith to work out who was responsible
Up to two minutes ago, Joe Punter still doesn't know who's responsible. It's speculation and assumptions.
This space for rent
-
Ah yes. Social Media because that's where the responsible news happens. And cat memes. Mustn't forget the cat memes.
Pom Pey wrote:
it wasn't much of a leap of faith to work out who was responsible
Up to two minutes ago, Joe Punter still doesn't know who's responsible. It's speculation and assumptions.
This space for rent
Maybe, and I realised at the time of posting I might end up with egg on my face. But I think we both know I'm more than likely right. There's two types of "humans" that kill innocent people randomly in this manner. Radicals and nutters. And a nutter probably wouldn't choose the heart of democracy. The location has enough symbolism to tell you what motivated this.
-
FYI - [Westminster Attack | Muslim Council of Britain (MCB)](http://www.mcb.org.uk/westminster-attack/)
veni bibi saltavi
That makes it perfectly alright then. The Muslim community is very close-knit, it will be interesting to learn why none of his community offered their concerns to the authorities in the coming days.
-
Maybe, and I realised at the time of posting I might end up with egg on my face. But I think we both know I'm more than likely right. There's two types of "humans" that kill innocent people randomly in this manner. Radicals and nutters. And a nutter probably wouldn't choose the heart of democracy. The location has enough symbolism to tell you what motivated this.
Ah, so it's the Catholics behind this. Yup, they've got form on this right enough.
This space for rent
-
Ah, so it's the Catholics behind this. Yup, they've got form on this right enough.
This space for rent
Guessing that's a reference to Guy Fawkes? But isn't that just proving my point? If it was the 17th century then the Catholics would be the main suspects. But it's not. We all know who did it and we all know why. I get your angle. We can't tar everybody with the same brush etc. You also understand mine. That the perpetrator has probably lived in this country for sometime. Maybe even second or third generation. And during that time he and possibly his parents and grandparents has enjoyed the benefits that living in this country brings. And repays that by doing this.
-
Depends. With nutters like me involved, you never know where a thread will lead.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Indeed ;P
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
Guessing that's a reference to Guy Fawkes? But isn't that just proving my point? If it was the 17th century then the Catholics would be the main suspects. But it's not. We all know who did it and we all know why. I get your angle. We can't tar everybody with the same brush etc. You also understand mine. That the perpetrator has probably lived in this country for sometime. Maybe even second or third generation. And during that time he and possibly his parents and grandparents has enjoyed the benefits that living in this country brings. And repays that by doing this.
Pom Pey wrote:
I get your angle. We can't tar everybody with the same brush etc
You obviously didn't get my angle. My angle was that you were leaping to conclusions - and based on the fact that the only information pertaining to the attacker, at the time you posted, was a photo of him, you were leaping to that conclusion or listening to someone who leapt to that conclusion based off his skin colour and the fact he had a beard.
This space for rent
-
Spreading its love once again. This time in London.
Pom Pey wrote:
Religions of peace
All of them.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
-
Pom Pey wrote:
I get your angle. We can't tar everybody with the same brush etc
You obviously didn't get my angle. My angle was that you were leaping to conclusions - and based on the fact that the only information pertaining to the attacker, at the time you posted, was a photo of him, you were leaping to that conclusion or listening to someone who leapt to that conclusion based off his skin colour and the fact he had a beard.
This space for rent
Wasn't really a big jump to be fair. And it's a bit harsh to assume my conclusion was solely on the colour of his skin. There were other factors I used too. Location Modus operandi, i.e. Using a vehicle matches recent attacks. Determination. Being shot. Where he was heading for. And of course at the end of the day I was right.
-
Pom Pey wrote:
Religions of peace
All of them.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
Nope.
-
Can't - it's sealed off by armed police.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
