Woolwich

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just got back from London, got there just as all this was kicking off mid-week. Those two guys were random nutters, I wouldn't tar all muslims with the same brush. Personally I hate all religions equally, when you consider the moderates are buying into fairy tales its no surprise the extremists are ****ing bat**** loonies, and thats any religion.
 
Dancing Elmo said:
Just got back from London, got there just as all this was kicking off mid-week. Those two guys were random nutters, I wouldn't tar all muslims with the same brush. Personally I hate all religions equally, when you consider the moderates are buying into fairy tales its no surprise the extremists are ****ing bat**** loonies, and thats any religion.
Click to expand...


So are all religions equally dangerous and causing problems when their followers live in another culture?

I can only think of only one.
 
City Agro said:
Con Coughlin writing in the DT today:-

"There will inevitably be those who have some sympathy with the justification given by Michael Adebolajo for his slaughter of a British soldier on a south London street on Wednesday afternoon. “The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers,” was his illiterate pronouncement, made to the mobile phone of a passing member of the public as he waited for the police to arrive, his blood-stained hands still grasping the machete he had used to murder Drummer Lee Rigby.
While Muslims of a more moderate temperament have been quick to condemn the Woolwich atrocity, those of a more radical persuasion, such as Anjem Choudary, the former head of the banned Islamist organisation al-Muhajiroun, seem to have no difficulty agreeing with Adebolajo’s reasoning. The murder of Drummer Rigby, Mr Choudary proclaimed from the sanctuary of a BBC television studio this week, was due to the “presence of British forces in Muslim countries”.
These sentiments were also supported by Omar Bakri Mohammed, another veteran of London’s thriving Islamist scene. From exile in northern Lebanon, where the radical preacher has settled since his banishment from Britain, Bakri Mohammed gave a newspaper interview in which he praised Adebolajo’s “courage” in carrying out the murder. “I saw the film and we could see that he was being very courageous,” the cleric was quoted as saying. “Under Islam this can be justified – he was not targeting civilians, he was taking on a military man in an operation. To people around here [in the Middle East], he is a hero.”
It is difficult to see what, precisely, is “courageous” about butchering an unarmed British soldier in cold blood as he tries to make his way back to his barracks. If anyone serving in the British Forces were to commit a similar act of savagery, they would quickly find themselves facing a court-martial and, if convicted, a lengthy prison sentence. Five Royal Marines, for example, are facing murder charges over the death of an insurgent in Afghanistan in 2011.
But then, Islamist extremists have never played by the same rules that we seek to uphold in the West. Back in 2007, when British security officials disrupted an al-Qaeda plot in Birmingham to kidnap, torture and behead a British Muslim serving in the Army and broadcast his murder on the internet, Bakri Mohammed was secretly recorded urging his followers to “use the sword and remove the head of the enemy”.

Acts of terrorism such as this week’s appalling scenes in south London are, therefore, for the likes of Choudary and Bakri Mohammed, regarded as a legitimate means of waging war against the West and all that it stands for. And in seeking to justify their barbarous conduct, they have proved themselves to be highly skilful at blaming law-abiding countries such as Britain, America and France for their actions. Just like Adebolajo, these radical Islamist preachers – who, by all accounts, helped to indoctrinate him and his accomplice in the first place – argue that they are obliged to act in this way because, in their view, the West is at war with radical Islam. In fact, the opposite is the case: radical Islam is at war with the West.
During the past decade, when British and American forces have found themselves embroiled in long and bitter conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, I doubt there has been a single politician on either side of the Atlantic who has wanted our brave young men and women to remain in these dangerous, hostile environments a day longer than was absolutely necessary.
Indeed, I suspect many of them were reluctant to deploy our forces in the first place, particularly when it came to Iraq. And if you look back at the West’s military involvement in the Muslim world since the early 1990s, it could be argued that, for the most part, Western forces have been fighting to protect Muslim interests, not to violate them.
The first Gulf War in 1991 was fought to liberate Kuwait’s Muslim population after the sheikhdom’s illegal occupation by Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, while the subsequent conflict in 2003 was designed to liberate the long-suffering Iraqi people – Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims alike – from his brutal repression. In between these conflicts, Western troops sent to Bosnia in the mid-1990s were tasked with protecting the Muslim population from the Serbs’ genocidal designs, while our more recent involvement in Afghanistan, where Drummer Rigby had served a tour of duty, has been undertaken to help the country’s predominantly Muslim population to rebuild the country after three decades of almost incessant conflict.
For, contrary to the anti-Western propaganda propagated by radical clerics like Choudary and Bakri Mohammed, the 444 British soldiers who have so far been killed in Afghanistan have sacrificed their lives trying to make the country a better place for ordinary Afghans, rather than seeking to subjugate them. Indeed, when you examine the overall casualty rate in that benighted country, the Taliban are responsible for the deaths of many more Afghan civilians than have died as a result of the military action taken by Nato forces.
But this is not the narrative you will hear from Islamist militants who, rather than concede that the West is actively seeking to improve the lot of ordinary Muslims, prefer to portray us as invaders, as neo-colonialist proselytisers attempting to impose alien values on the oppressed masses.
The real reason, of course, that radical Muslims violently oppose these well-intentioned efforts is that they interfere with their attempts to impose their own brand of uncompromising Islamist ideology.
Before coalition forces overthrew the Taliban government in Afghanistan, Islamist hardliners had subjected the Afghan population to a reign of terror equal to the worst excesses of the French Revolution. The only entertainment on offer at the local sports stadium in Kabul during that period was the regular executions that took place after Friday prayers. Not surprisingly, few Afghans want to see the Taliban return, but that has not prevented the movement from seeking to regain power by waging an indiscriminate campaign of violence in which Afghan civilians are as likely to die as British soldiers.
Indeed, the reason our forces deployed to Afghanistan in the first place, in 2001, was because the Taliban had made the error of providing al-Qaeda terrorists with a safe haven from which to launch attacks against the West. And so long as Islamist militants – be they based in Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya or Mali – are working on their vile schemes to wreak havoc in our cities, the West has no choice but to defend itself, even it means killing the occasional Islamist militant, such as Anwar al-Awlaki, the US-born cleric dispatched by a US drone strike two years ago.
Because of the success the West has enjoyed in disrupting al-Qaeda’s terror network, the organisation has been thwarted in its efforts to carry out spectacular operations on the scale of the September 11 attacks, or the July 7 bombings in London. As a result, Awlaki urged his followers to carry out their own, home-grown attacks. It might be scant consolation to the friends and relatives of Drummer Rigby, but it shows the West is winning the war against radical Islam when its supporters have to resort to such desperate measures as murdering a defenceless British soldier."
Click to expand...

Con Coughlin?

This article extract reveals only a right-winger's blind stupidity; or, at the very least, an abject support of US/UK government lies, spin and propaganda.
 
Melu said:
How do we do that, Fez, do we start to attack innocent men or women on the street. Or as a nation do we show that we are strong enough to say, do your worse, act like animals in the street, show that it is you who act without morals and respect, we punish those, whoever they are who break the law.
The reason that they have to perform attacks like they have in Woolwich, is because they know that they cannot attack us lawfully, because we as a country have a legal system that makes a nonsense out of the reason for terrorism. We as a country embrace multi cultural society, hatred for one group or colour is hardly ever spoken in front of the people it is aimed at, why is that? It's because we have been brought up not to say these things out loud and that is why most of the country will say they are angered by what happened and want something done about it, but they wouldn't miss Coronation Street to do something themselves.
You get a militia up together, Fez, with the aim of fighting terrorists and extremists, lawfully and I'll join tomorrow. In fact if the government armed all ex servicemen, with one aim, to be there if called, there would be plenty of volunteers. But they won't. Do we really want to go down the same road as Syria?
Click to expand...

Tiggaz4Life said:
Sure, don't get me wrong - I don't agree with their point of view but you must "know your enemy" if you want to defeat them. That involves understanding their grievances, which do have some basis in reality. The question is how do you take them on? Just keep killing them until they give up? They won't give up. Go over to where they are and expend huge amounts of money and lives to rebuild their failing, backwards societies? The public won't accept the losses and don't understand what we're trying to do; and our military and political establishments are piss poor at dealing with insurgencies. Put in place massive changes to our legal system to take the fight to domestic terrorists? Governments don't have the balls or the mandate. Carry on as usual and pretend there's no problem? More bombs, more brutality. Strategically speaking, we have already lost this "war".
Click to expand...

Mel and Tiggaz4Life, you are best answered together. I say that they (Muslim radicals) won't go away and I believe that will always be the case. The IRA, Argentinians coveting the Falklands, the remaining enmity in the Balkans all bear testament to the ability of hatred to promote a legacy of aggressive terror; if you saw any of this first hand then you might understand that memories are very long, but not all memories fester, some heal. This Muslim terror campaign is not new, nor have they always been the instigators, they have also been the victims, but I am focussing on those who are the problem.

I can read, on here and elsewhere opinions that come from the left and the right of politics; that amuses me as whichever way they swing, there is plenty of damning evidence of feeding the terrorist beast when it has been politically expedient.

When I say we should ‘take them on’ of course I mean in the physical sense, as that, in my opinion, is inevitable. But we should also take them on with every other means available to us, whether that be political, financial or, to use an old well proven tactic, we should aim to win over the hearts and minds of the mass, as it is they, the majority made up of decent, but mislead or suppressed moderates and not us who will win the day. This is a thesis that covers a man who used all manner of tactics to win his cause, some of them questionable, but you should make up your own minds. (If link does not work, then Google- General Wingate, capturing hearts and minds)

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcadair.aber.ac.uk%2Fdspace%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F2160%2F446%2FAnglimSimonThesis.doc%3Fsequence%3D2&ei=3eWhUa7eI-Wm0AW0iICgCA&usg=AFQjCNGrk3eqHRt-NqG8LX7dfqZZmHWlTA&sig2=PGP4yVhRHIRfpXR-HX-y3A&bvm=bv.47008514,d.d2k

We need to address the lack of unity in the United Nations; we need to understand that investment in our prosecution of terrorism, of all classes, is an investment in our children’s future. There is much intellectual process that must be entered into, then a world-wide agreement on the actions required and, of course, it will be necessary to use military power to enforce where necessary. All of this has to be a priority for the world’s leaders, because those who are not for it are against it.

The ridiculous claims that shooting a murderer would make him a martyr should be laughed at; it would not fuel a fire that is already burning fiercely, but it would show our determination to eliminate those who wish to eliminate us. Where these terrorists are caught ‘red-handed’ or they shamelessly claim their crimes as glorious acts in the name of Allah, then build the gallows and let them swing; it is no more than they deserve.
 
I despair when I hear the likes of Teresa May...'Prevention methods' etc...etc... It has all been tried before Teresa! As it been successful..? I don't know, maybe, but with thousands of potential terrorists out there (her words) something stronger needs to be done. As one human being to another I have nothing against the vast majority of Muslims who are probably fair minded people, who just want to get on with their lives in peace and harmony like the rest of us, but its the nutters who are giving them all a bad name. Prevention has to come from within. The elders and community leaders have to get into the mosques and sort this out. If not and more Brits lie dead on the streets of our cities, then they will have no defence if the people start to take their revenge or the far right comes to power and literally throws them out on their ears.
 
What we need is someone to grow some balls, and make a difference. We need someone with a long term view of things. We need a radical approach.

What we need is, someone to build the USS Enterprise. The Starship. Then everyone can get on together in harmony.

Apart from the Romulans, they can do one.
 
Happy Clapper said:
What we need is someone to grow some balls, and make a difference. We need someone with a long term view of things. We need a radical approach.

What we need is, someone to build the USS Enterprise. The Starship. Then everyone can get on together in harmony.

Apart from the Romulans, they can do one.
Click to expand...
But even then, we'd have the Cling-ons to deal with... There's no happy ending <wah>
 
I'll tell you something for nothing. If any more soldiers are killed and sweet FA is done by HMG, then the military will conclude that something needs to be done.
 
Candy Man said:
But even then, we'd have the Cling-ons to deal with... There's no happy ending <wah>
Click to expand...

Hey Cling-ons (I saw what you did there!) are fine, we're already used to dealing with them, and they don't cause any trouble as long as you know how to manage them and remember they can't be trusted.
 
Duffens_Briefs said:
I'll tell you something for nothing. If any more soldiers are killed and sweet FA is done by HMG, then the military will conclude that something needs to be done.
Click to expand...

That's even more hilarious than my post. Well done. You clearly know nothing about the military in the UK.

What's your views on the Federation btw?
 
Happy Clapper said:
Hey Cling-ons (I saw what you did there!) are fine, we're already used to dealing with them, and they don't cause any trouble as long as you know how to manage them and remember they can't be trusted.
Click to expand...

Glad you caught up on it! <laugh>

I suppose you make a reasonably valid point, it's a 'here's the line, this is my side and that's yours' with them really.
 
City Agro said:
So are all religions equally dangerous and causing problems when their followers live in another culture?

I can only think of only one.
Click to expand...
I think that there are some fundamentalists living in Palestine causing a few problems for one and all(esp the palestinians).
Out of interest Agro what would be your solution to the arab-israeli conflict?
 
lou roll said:
I think that there are some fundamentalists living in Palestine causing a few problems for one and all(esp the palestinians).
Out of interest Agro what would be your solution to the arab-israeli conflict?
Click to expand...

Leave them to it- it's not our business.

Let them eat pork.
 
Hi HC....Hope your right, but based on the content of some of your other posts, I won't hold my breath.


Oh..that Federation. I thought you meant the polis for a mo. I am far too intellectual to be in to that cack..
 
originallambrettaman said:
The vast majority of Muslims in Britain are perfectly reasonable people, who find this as abhorrent as we do.

Unfortunately, some are not and a consequence, if there were no muslims in Britain, it would be a better place.

It's sad, but it's true.
Click to expand...

During "the Irish troubles" The vast majority of Catholics in Britain were perfectly reasonable people, who found the violence as abhorrent as we did.

Unfortunately, some were not and a consequence, if there were no Catholics in Britain during that period it would have been a better place.

It's ridiculous, but it's true.
 
So much for the headlines of our PM flying back from a conference to sort this disaster out. The ****s now ****ed off on holiday fr a week.

I hasten to add a labour PM would have done the same. Because our politicians do nt give a **** what we the British public care about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back