Suspected terrorist attack in London 4 dead including the attacker

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I used to be one of you "don't fall for their plan" types, but after watching this for years, I've changed quite a bit.  If we react or change our lifestyle, they win...right?  How do we win?  When do we win?  Well, our lives have changed dramatically since 9/11, and I don't see the west as "winning" anything.  4 innocent people are dead, 4 families dealing with a dead family member and another 40 will have their lives drastically altered - so, is this what you'd call a win for England.  

Yep, the very last one of us can laugh at his own death secure in the knowledge that he didn't fall for it.

Edited March 23, 2017 by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction - Blaise Pascal

[marcus]

19 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I used to be one of you "don't fall for their plan" types, but after watching this for years, I've changed quite a bit.  If we react or change our lifestyle, they win...right?  How do we win?  When do we win?  Well, our lives have changed dramatically since 9/11, and I don't see the west as "winning" anything.  4 innocent people are dead, 4 families dealing with a dead family member and another 40 will have their lives drastically altered - so, is this what you'd call a win for England.  

Through your observation and calculations of what has transpired since 911, have you ever taken into consideration West's foreign policy and actions as part of the equation?

Everything from supporting dictators to installing dictators to selling weapons that are used to kill innocent people and of course the military interventions.

Edited March 23, 2017 by marcus

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

1 ) How do we win?  When do we win?  

2 ) Well, our lives have changed dramatically since 9/11, and I don't see the west as "winning" anything.  

3 ) 4 innocent people are dead, 4 families dealing with a dead family member and another 40 will have their lives drastically altered - so, is this what you'd call a win for England.  

1 )  We are winning.  The terror attacks are fewer and smaller, and ISIS is going nowhere.

2 )  Dramatically ?  How so ?  I don't feel very different.

3 )  If you measure winning by zero threat of terrorism then you've guaranteed yourself to be a permanent loser.  Virtuous living is its own reward.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

3 )  If you measure winning by zero threat of terrorism then you've guaranteed yourself to be a permanent loser.  Virtuous living is its own reward.

And then there's the lightning.  Let's not forget the lightning.

Edited March 23, 2017 by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when the skies are unusually dark - Not Blaise Pascal

[blackbird]

32 minutes ago, marcus said:

Through your observation and calculations of what has transpired since 911, have you ever taken into consideration West's foreign policy and actions as part of the equation?

Everything from supporting dictators to installing dictators to selling weapons that are used to kill innocent people and of course the military interventions.

What part of the world do you live in?  It sounds like you might be opposed to the west's war on terrorism in the world.  What's your solution?

[Hal 9000]

26 minutes ago, marcus said:

Through your observation and calculations of what has transpired since 911, have you ever taken into consideration West's foreign policy and actions as part of the equation?

Everything from supporting dictators to installing dictators to selling weapons that are used to kill innocent people and of course the military interventions.

Oh yeah, I forgot the good ol' "we deserve it" argument...and you know, at one point in my life, I might have bought into that too - I even used to believe in the idea of "oh hey man, if only they knew us better, we'd all get along" - man was I stupid to believe that crap.  The fact is; It's not us...it's them.  As you people keep saying, it's homegrown terrorism, and many of these people are from countries that England, France, Belgium etc have never done a solitary thing to.

The Islams have waged a religious war and the west is terrified to accept that fact.  I don't care who started it, but I know what side I'll be on when it comes to my country.  The way we win is the same way we ended Japan's threat - plain and simple.

[taxme]

5 hours ago, Hudson Jones said:

Believe what? That the mosque killer was a scared little white nationalist who supports Trump?

Ya, blame it on Trump again even though he had nothing to do with what has happened in the past but who now will have to take on and try to clean up the swamp that those wonderful little snowflake leftist liberals brought to western countries with their multicultural dreams. When Canada had an immigration policy that accepted their majority of immigrants from Britain and Europe there were no need to concern ourselves about race and culture. Now that is all we seem to get these days is more races and cultures, traditions and religions that must now all be protected and promoted. One day a Canadian prime minister might have to speak four languages in order to become the PM of Canada. Hey, you never know. This is Canada, don't you know. Anything goes.    

[marcus]

40 minutes ago, blackbird said:

It sounds like you might be opposed to the west's war on terrorism in the world.  What's your solution?

Perhaps you're unable to distinguish between what is fighting against terrorism and what is fighting for oil, territory and feeding the military industrial complex. 

[taxme]

6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

It's never too late.

It's never too late to remove these illegal criminal so-called refugees from Canada. It just takes you know what on the part of our politicians to summon up enough courage to do the job. If I were a politician and allowing this criminal act to continue than I should not be a politician at all. After all as a politician is it not a part of your job to defend and protect Canada from people who enter Canada illegally? By encouraging and accepting them and allowing them to shout refugee is a joke. They already have shown that they have contempt for the law. Sad indeed. 

 

 

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, marcus said:

Perhaps you're unable to distinguish between what is fighting against terrorism and what is fighting for oil, territory and feeding the military industrial complex. 

Sounds like you've been reading socialist/marxist propaganda.   Those are the exact words they often use.  I take it you are a young idealist.  I read the odd book with those phrases when I was young.  Thankfully I eventually woke up to reality about 40 years ago.  Sometimes it takes time. 

[marcus]

15 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Sounds like you've been reading socialist/marxist propaganda.   Those are the exact words they often use.  I take it you are a young idealist.  I read the odd book with those phrases when I was young.  Thankfully I eventually woke up to reality about 40 years ago.  Sometimes it takes time. 

How was invading Iraq, "fighting terrorism"?

How is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, the countries that fund ISIS and Al Qaeda, "fighting terrorism"?

How was attacking Libya, "fighting terrorism"?

How is pushing a democratically elected government out of power in Egypt, by supporting Mobarak's military in a coup, "fighting terrorism"?

How is shooting missiles from drones, with a 40:1, civilian:terrorist kill ratio, "fighting terrorism"?

I would appreciate a discussion and replies based on substance, rather than empty, shallow accusations.

Edited March 23, 2017 by marcus

[blackbird]

17 minutes ago, marcus said:

How was invading Iraq, "fighting terrorism"?

How is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, the countries that fund ISIS and Al Qaeda, "fighting terrorism"?

How was attacking Libya, "fighting terrorism"?

How is pushing a democratically elected government out of power, by supporting Mobarak's military, "fighting terrorism"?

How is shooting missiles from drones and with a 40:1, civilian:terrorist, "fighting terrorism"?

I would appreciate a discussion and replies based on substance, rather than empty, shallow accusations.

I didn't say every single thing that happened was something I agreed with or that it was a good thing.  We live in an imperfect world and not everything that happens can be approved of.

-The U.S. invasion of Iraq was based on a report that Sadam has weapons of mass destruction and might use them.  I can't recall what I thought about it at the time.  I think I may have agreed with the U.S.   Many think now it was a mistake to go into Iraq.

-Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE are I believe allies of the U.S.  They are not funding ISIS and Al Qaeda.  Not sure where you got that.

-Libya had Khadafi who I think was causing the west a lot of trouble.  Wasn't he killing a lot of people in his own country?  They decided he had to be removed.  I think there are still a lot of problem with Libya.  Those countries are very unstable and have internal civil wars and revolutions periodically.

-Egypt has been an ally of the U.S. for many years.  The U.S. supplies a lot of money or military aid for Egypt in order to keep them as allies. 

It is better to have Egypt and Saudi Arabia as allies than opponents.  That is why the U.S. gives them money and military assistance.

-Drones are used by the U.S. to go after high-ranking Al Qaeda leaders.  They have been successful.  It is a major part of the war on terrorism.

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by blackbird

[taxme]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

It's too late, taxme, unless you want to mass deport all of the... immigrants, I suppose.... that you don't like.

It's never too late for anything. Of course immigrants already here legally should no be deported to their home land if they are here waiting to become a Canadian citizen. The ones that need to be deported are the ones entering Canada illegally. They are criminals plain and simple. Every person on earth should know that entering a country thru the back door is against the law. But there is no will by our elected politicians to do what needs to be done. They seem to prefer to want to allow them to enter Canada illegally, and then let them shout refugee. If they are willing to break one law of Canada, and Canada let's them get away with it, then they may assume that it is alright to commit another crime against the laws of Canada, and get away with it. 

Yup, there are some immigrants that I don't like. They are the ones that break the laws of Canada, and enter Canada illegally. And just how can they call themselves refugees when they are coming from America? How can they be called refugees when they were able to travel all the way to Canada from countries like Somalia and other Arab homelands half way around the world? It takes a lot money to get to Canada from Somalia to Canada. If they have that kind of money to get here than they cannot be considered to be refugees. Real refugees have nothing. No, they are not real refugees, they are criminals, and they should be treated as such. It is time to let the rest of the world know that Canada is not going to be an easy country to enter into anymore. Works for me. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

What part of the world do you live in?  It sounds like you might be opposed to the west's war on terrorism in the world.  What's your solution?

He's opposed, and rightly so, to the war for dictatorship that the west has waged in many parts of the world.  What was that supposed to solve again? Oh right, tyranny.

[marcus]

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I didn't say every single thing that happened was something I agreed with or that it was a good thing.  We live in an imperfect world and not everything that happens can be approved of.

-The U.S. invasion of Iraq was based on a report that Sadam has weapons of mass destruction and might use them.  I can't recall what I thought about it at the time.  Many think it was a mistake to go into Iraq.

-Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE are I believe allies of the U.S.  They are not funding ISIS and Al Qaeda.  Not sure where you got that.

-Libya had Khadafi who I think was causing the west a lot of trouble.  Wasn't he killing a lot of people in his own country?  They decided he had to be removed.  I think there are still a lot of problem with Libya.  Those countries are very unstable and have internal civil wars and revolutions periodically.

-Egypt has been an ally of the U.S. for many years.  The U.S. supplies a lot of money or military aid for Egypt in order to keep them as allies. 

It is better to have Egypt and Saudi Arabia as allies than opponents.  That is why the U.S. gives them money and military assistance.

-Drones are used by the U.S. to go after high-ranking Al Qaeda leaders.  They have been successful.  It is a major part of the war on terrorism.

 

So basically, everything that I listed which have happened in the past 15 years are not "fighting terrorism".

A few points about your comments:

- The information about Iraq's WMD was made up by the administration. The reason given to attack Iraq was not just an "oops". It was a lie.

- Saudi and the Gulf States DO fund ISIS and Al Qaeda. It's important that you learn and acknowledge this fact.

- Libya was causing "a lot of trouble"? What? Lots of countries kill people and have killed a lot people than Gaddafi did. This policeman attitude is a perfect example of fanning the flames of terrorism.

- Egypt: You didn't respond to the comment I made. What I said was that, after the Arab spring and after the democratically elected government was elected by Egyptians, U.S. was involved in a coupe in Egypt to re-install the Mobarak military back into power. Essentially, helping another dictator come into power.

- Drones: When you kill thousands of innocent people for the sake of getting a few so-called terrorists, that's another example of fanning the flames of terrorism.

Every single action above in the past 15 years has not been about "fighting terrorism". In fact, every one of those acts have nurtured terrorism and animosity towards the West. It's important for you to acknowledge what we have helped to create, instead of empty, superficial claims that we are "fighting terrorism". 

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by marcus

[blackbird]

9 minutes ago, marcus said:

So basically, everything that I listed which have happened in the past 15 years are not "fighting terrorism".

A few points about your comments:

- The information about Iraq's WMD was made up by the administration. The reason given to attack Iraq was not just an "oops". It was a lie.

- Saudi and the Gulf States DO fund ISIS and Al Qaeda. It's important that you learn and acknowledge this fact.

- Libya was causing "a lot of trouble"? What? Lots of countries kill people and have killed a lot people than Gaddafi did. This policeman attitude is a perfect example of fanning the flames of terrorism.

- Egypt: You didn't respond to the comment I made. What I said was that, after the Arab spring and after the democratically elected government was elected by Egyptians, U.S. was involved in a coupe in Egypt to re-install the Mobarak military back into power. Essentially, helping another dictator come into power.

- Drones: When you kill thousands of innocent people for the sake of getting a few so-called terrorists, that's another example of fanning the flames of terrorism.

Every single action above in the past 15 years has not been about "fighting terrorism". In fact, every one of those acts have nurtured terrorism and animosity towards the West. It's important for you to acknowledge what we have helped to create, instead of empty, superficial claims that we are "fighting terrorism". 

 

I don't claim to be an expert on anything, least of all Libya. I would have to look into it.

If you're adamant about believing that Saudi Arabia is funding ISIS and Al Qaeda, there is not much I can say to you about it.

Egypt had been taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood which is a terrorist organization.  The U.S. didn't overthrow it.  The Egyptian military took over. 

I never heard that drones kill thousands of people.  I don't think that is true.  They serve a purpose.

I never said every single thing that happened was to fight terrorism.  Terrorism is a real threat in the world today, whether you believe it or not.

You seem to have some very strange beliefs.   I think you will not believe anything I tell you. 

I may start another thread in which we can discuss some of these things.  We might be chastised for straying too far from the topic here, so I will let it rest for now.

[-1=e^ipi]

2 hours ago, marcus said:

How is pushing a democratically elected government out of power in Egypt, by supporting Mobarak's military in a coup, "fighting terrorism"?

I get your point, but out of the things in your list, getting rid of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was one of the best things to occur in recent years in terms of reducing future terrorism. As bad as Syria / Iraq currently is, at least we don't have the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt trying to spread radical Sunni Islam and working with Turkey to create a new Caliphate.

 

Also, the Egyptian military got rid of the Muslim Brotherhood without US support. Obama was naively pro-Muslim Brotherhood and to an extent betrayed liberals in Egypt during the Arab Spring.

Edited March 23, 2017 by -1=e^ipi

[H10]

The thing I don't understand is how come all of Islam gets blamed when a muslim does a crime, but all white people, or all christians don't get blamed when white christians like o, dillan roof commit a crime.  Seems like a double standard to me.

Also, isn't it the claim of the UK there is a war on terror?  And further the UK leader dubs herself the commander and chief.  So technically this wouldn't be a terror attack because terror attacks are aimed and targetted towards civilians.  This is actually simply an asymmetrical military style assault or suicide mission.  It is obvious the British government was the target of the attack.  This does kind of make sense given the recent assault on the al qaeda in yemen where a soldier died and attacks on ISIS and all that.  Now some might say but they didn't hit the government so it is terrorism!  But how many times has the uk and usa bombed and missed the terrorist target for various reasons (ie blowing up weddings)?  Does that make USA and UK terrorist or terror attacks?  of course not, people need to dial down their terrorism hysteria.  If you live in a country who grouped a nation as terrorist, then said we are at war with them, you got to accept they are going to strike every now and then.  After all, wars are never one sided, the other side always fights back.  Otherwise its not a war, its a surrender.  While the terrorist had a minor victory today, I believer freedom wil win in the end, when we completely withdraw from the arab world, all soldiers and support of corrupt governments.

[DogOnPorch]

Arab World? Do you mean all the land Arab Muslims captured in the conquests of Mohammad and his Companions?

Does that include Spain and France? Or anywhere Islam sets it foot?

Poor Islam...always misunderstood. All it wants is everything. What's wrong with that??

[marcus]

41 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I don't claim to be an expert on anything, least of all Libya. I would have to look into it.

If you're adamant about believing that Saudi Arabia is funding ISIS and Al Qaeda, there is not much I can say to you about it.

I'm not just throwing comments around. You are welcome to challenge any of the information I am giving here. Not only did majority of the 911 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia and Egypt but it is well-established that most of the funding to Al Qaeda and ISIS comes from Saudi and the Gulf States. 

Egypt had been taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood which is a terrorist organization.  The U.S. didn't overthrow it.  The Egyptian military took over. 

The Muslim Brotherhood is not a terrorist organization. Not by the U.S., Canada or the UN. It's important to acknowledge that. The U.S. had a strong hand in allowing the military coup to happen to topple a democratically elected government. I'm for democracy. If you are as well, then you would not be okay with the coup where the old regime in Egypt was able to regain control, with the blessing and support of the West. How should an Egyptian that elected this government feel about this?

I never heard that drones kill thousands of people.  I don't think that is true.  They serve a purpose.

You have never heard of civilians dying? I'm wondering then why you have such strong opinions on something that you have not bothered to learn about.

For example: 41 men targeted but 1,147 people killed: US drone strikes – the facts on the ground

Do you think that is going to create angry people? Any brothers, sisters, mothers, cousins of a dead civilians will want revenge for this? 

I never said every single thing that happened was to fight terrorism.  Terrorism is a real threat in the world today, whether you believe it or not.

Yes. Of course it is. My argument is that terrorism doesn't start from thin air. We need to learn about and acknowledge our role in the terrorism we are seeing today. We should also learn about the terrorism we create around the world. Like the constant sound of drones flying over Pakistani towns, bullying a government into accepting that their sovereign rules are beneath us Westerners and we can fly whatever we want and bomb anything we want, without consequences. Imagine the children and their mothers, living in fear every day, wondering if they're going to be oops bombed, like the weddings that have been hit or the funerals or just random people on the streets who have turned into charcoal after a drone pilot decides to shoot a missile from his bunker in the U.S., based on a faulty evidence.

You seem to have some very strange beliefs.   I think you will not believe anything I tell you.

Strange beliefs? I am talking about real, proven facts that cannot be disputed. What I am saying are not conspiracy theories or beliefs.

I may start another thread in which we can discuss some of these things.  We might be chastised for straying too far from the topic here, so I will let it rest for now.

Sure. If you like. However, my recommendation is for you to get a better understanding of the topics, instead of going into auto mode and dispute anything that criticizes our (West's) mainstream version of events.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, hernanday said:

The thing I don't understand is how come all of Islam gets blamed when a muslim does a crime, but all white people, or all christians don't get blamed when white christians like o, dillan roof commit a crime.  Seems like a double standard to me.

 

The reason it's so tough to understand is because it doesn't happen.  It's like trying to understand how Santa can visit all the homes in the world in one night.  It's tough, but when you realize it doesn't actually happen, it gets easy.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, marcus said:

Yes. Of course it is. My argument is that terrorism doesn't start from thin air. We need to learn about and acknowledge our role in the terrorism we are seeing today.

So, if people started bombing Mosques and shooting Muslims randomly, as a response to the current batch of Islamic terrorism, your first impulse would be to acknowledge the role Muslims play in such actions.

I have to say I would just be against it.

[hot enough]

"Suspected terrorist attack in London" as compared to known terrorist attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Chile, Brazil, Iran, China, Grenada, Panama, ... . 

[hot enough]

The US is far and away the biggest terrorist nation/group in the world. Has been for well over a hundred years. It replaced the UK after WWII, although the UK still supports these mega-terrorists. And all the "christian" churches supporting these worse than Nazis don't share the blame.

[hot enough]

50 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

So, if people started bombing Mosques and shooting Muslims randomly,

That's been done on a massive scale, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Philippines, Libya, Egypt, Iran, ... .