Absolutely. And there in lies the problem. We have to at some point accept that we might have to turn away from trade if it is from an immoral source if we want to be seen in the ethical and fair light that I think most of our citizens would like us to be. But as you suggest, unlikely to occur and quite frankly those in power won't be that bothered by that because they have 24 hr security and aren't actually affected by any of these outrages in reality.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
London Bridge and Borough terrorist incident
- Thread starter SteveAWOL
- Start date
Absolutely. And there in lies the problem. We have to at some point accept that we might have to turn away from trade if it is from an immoral source if we want to be seen in the ethical and fair light that I think most of our citizens would like us to be. But as you suggest, unlikely to occur and quite frankly those in power won't be that bothered by that because they have 24 hr security and aren't actually affected by any of these outrages in reality.
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Maybe using some of the foreign aid budget to help foreign communities in this country adapt.
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...ry-praying-to-isis-flag/ar-BBC0bgl?li=BBoPWjQ
In 2016, he appeared in the documentary alongside a notorious preacher as they prayed to an Islamic State flag in a London park.
I can't find the words...
In 2016, he appeared in the documentary alongside a notorious preacher as they prayed to an Islamic State flag in a London park.
I can't find the words...
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
War mongers care very little for the mess they leave behind once they get what they were after.
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
tickle my balls with a feather.
thingonaspring
Radek Cerny
I work at London Bridge. Was a very sombre commute into work this morning. Never seen so much police tape, closed off areas, press, TV cameras, vans, guns and police in one area like this 
I am starting to question our foreign policy. Why have Italy, Spain, Portugal etc not been targeted as well, surely its easier to get at these countries etc
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
Any Western country is now potentially a target, whether they have been to war in the middle-east or not. However, a big factor in this is the wars in which we have taken part, creating broken nations in which Isis and Al Qaeda are able to flourish (see Libya and Iraq). We are also too friendly with the Saudi leadership, who share an ideology (Wahabbism) which is the basis of the beliefs of Al Qaeda and Isis... and who are happy for these groups to flourish when they fight against rival nations, such as Syria.
It might help to make the world safer if we stop over-throwing regimes and creating chaotic power vacuums and also, stop arming barbaric countries, in particular Saudi Arabia. In the end though, America is going to continue with all of this anyway and the rest of the world will suffer as a result. But we at least could/should not contribute to it.
Our foreign policy needs refining and possibly altering slightly but its not about throwing out the baby with the bath water. Those countries you mention are less of a target because they consistently send less resources to assist in dealing with any issues be they humanitarian or military related. Being the 6th largest economy in the world we are expected to be involved by the wider world community given our resources and that makes us a target as we are more prominent.
As I said in my previous reply, these attacks have little to do with foreign policy in reality. We don't go out to middle eastern countries in vans and run people over and stab them. We have been involved in instances in numerous operations where innocent people in those countries have been killed and that is terrible but it is unintentional. Whilst we need to redefine what we get involved in and where and for what reason, it would be wrong for us withdraw ourselves from our position as a country that shouldn't turn away from things. So for me, foreign policy and the actions that these misguided tools carry out are not the biggest connection. It starts at a much more basic level than that within everyday life here and in community. They want a draconian state yet have no desire to leave here and go live in one like Saudi or Iran and that is because they want for some reason to control other people and claim to be all-obeying Muslim whilst enjoying all the things they shouldn't be on the downlow. That can't happen in those countries and that in itself will tell you what its really about rather than our foreign policy although as I say, that doesn't make our current foreign policy decisions or recent past ones correct.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
The foreign aid budget isn't tinkled into the African desert like its critics seem to think. A very big proportion of it goes to UK universities to boost their research funding (http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/funding/gcrf/)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Madrid_train_bombings
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-findings-may-never-be-published-saudi-arabia
The Observer reported in January last year that the Home Office’s extremism analysis unit had been directed by Downing Street to investigate overseas funding of extremist groups in the UK, with findings to be shown to Theresa May, then home secretary, and Cameron.
However, 18 months later, the Home Office confirmed the report had not yet been completed and said it would not necessarily be published, calling the contents “very sensitive”.
A decision would be taken “after the election by the next government” about the future of the investigation, a Home Office spokesman said.
In his letter to May, Brake wrote: “As home secretary at the time, your department was one of those leading on the report. Eighteen months later, and following two horrific terrorist attacks by British-born citizens, that report still remains incomplete and unpublished.
“It is no secret that Saudi Arabia in particular provides funding to hundreds of mosques in the UK, espousing a very hardline Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. It is often in these institutions that British extremism takes root.”
The contents of the report may prove politically as well as legally sensitive. Saudi Arabia, which has been a funding source for fundamentalist Islamist preachers and mosques, was visited by May earlier this year.
The Observer reported in January last year that the Home Office’s extremism analysis unit had been directed by Downing Street to investigate overseas funding of extremist groups in the UK, with findings to be shown to Theresa May, then home secretary, and Cameron.
However, 18 months later, the Home Office confirmed the report had not yet been completed and said it would not necessarily be published, calling the contents “very sensitive”.
A decision would be taken “after the election by the next government” about the future of the investigation, a Home Office spokesman said.
In his letter to May, Brake wrote: “As home secretary at the time, your department was one of those leading on the report. Eighteen months later, and following two horrific terrorist attacks by British-born citizens, that report still remains incomplete and unpublished.
“It is no secret that Saudi Arabia in particular provides funding to hundreds of mosques in the UK, espousing a very hardline Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. It is often in these institutions that British extremism takes root.”
The contents of the report may prove politically as well as legally sensitive. Saudi Arabia, which has been a funding source for fundamentalist Islamist preachers and mosques, was visited by May earlier this year.
Yes,I Remember clearly this attack taking place before the elections as the invasion of Iraq at the time was more relevant.
However,in more recent times, I haven't heard of attacks etc in those countries
I am aware that no specifically mentioned it in terms of getting rid but just to say the foreign aid budget is extremely important and imho should be increased to 1.0% GDP rather than 0.7% currently but targeted in a much better way with more transparency and process in terms of where it goes with a plan for recipients reach a point of less reliance or no longer required. A much stronger and robust chain of authorisation on spending that budget should be in force.
Anyone claiming that foreign aid should go is simply talking nonsense and it would probably make us more of a target given our relative resources as well as being a false economy in the long run given what we would probably end up spending going into places afterwards to sort out after a regime has failed.
Anyone claiming that foreign aid should go is simply talking nonsense and it would probably make us more of a target given our relative resources as well as being a false economy in the long run given what we would probably end up spending going into places afterwards to sort out after a regime has failed.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Even Sweden has had a couple and they are a neutral country that isn't part of Nato (unlike Spain, Italy and Portugal)
It's more the general Western values of liberalism, democracy and secularism they are opposed to
That's why a lot of it is now going to UK universities to do research projects that benefit the third world. Then it's very easy to monitor and measure the return on investment (through existing research assessment mechanisms)
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
I posted above links to three different plots in Italy since 2015, in response to your original post. The attacks may not have 'got through', but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.
K.D.D.D.D.Soc
Paul Walsh
They don't have any ties with middle east?
AuroRaman
Chris Armstrong
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40155829
A number of Arab countries including Saudi Arabia and Egypt have cut diplomatic ties with Qatar, accusing it of destabilising the region.
They say Qatar backs militant groups including so-called Islamic State (IS) and al-Qaeda, which Qatar denies.
The Saudi state news agency SPA said Riyadh had closed its borders, severing land, sea and air contact with the tiny peninsula of oil-rich Qatar.
Qatar called the decision "unjustified" and with "no basis in fact".
The unprecedented move is seen as a major split between powerful Gulf countries, who are also close US allies.
It comes amid heightened tensions between Gulf countries and their near-neighbour, Iran. The Saudi statement accused Qatar of collaborating with "Iranian-backed terrorist groups" in its restive eastern region of Qatif and in Bahrain.
What has happened?
The diplomatic withdrawal was first put into motion by Bahrain, then Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, Yemen, Libya's eastern-based government and the Maldives all followed suit.
SPA cited officials as saying the decision was taken to "protect its national security from the dangers of terrorism and extremism".
Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain have given all Qatari visitors and residents two weeks to leave their territory. The three countries have also banned their citizens from travelling to Qatar.
However, Saudi Arabia says it will still allow Qataris to take part in the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca.
So far, there has been no sign of reciprocal moves by Qatar.
In the latest developments:
Food, flights and football at risk
Why has this happened?
While the severing of ties was sudden, it has not come out of the blue, as tensions have been building for years, and particularly in recent weeks.
Two weeks ago, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE blocked Qatari news sites, including Al Jazeera. Comments purportedly by Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani criticising Saudi Arabia had appeared on Qatari state media.
The government in Doha dismissed the comments as fake, attributing the report to a "shameful cybercrime".
Back in 2014, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar for several months in protest over alleged interference in their affairs.
'A Qatarstrophe' - social media reacts
All you need to know about Qatar
The story behind Qatar 'hack'
More broadly, two key factors drove Monday's decision: Qatar's ties to Islamist groups, and the role of Iran, Saudi Arabia's regional rival.
While Qatar has joined the US coalition against IS, the Qatari government has repeatedly denied accusations from Iraq's Shia leaders that it provided financial support to IS.
Wealthy individuals in the emirate are believed to have made donations and the government has given money and weapons to hardline Islamist groups in Syria. Qatar is also accused of having links to a group formerly known as the Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate.
The SPA statement accused Qatar of backing these groups, as well as the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood - banned in Gulf countries as a terrorist organisation - and that it "promotes the message and schemes of these groups through their media constantly".
Saudi Arabia itself is a key backer of Islamist rebels, including hardline jihadist groups, in Syria.
Where key countries stand on IS
Where does IS get its support?
Qatar - Key facts
2.7m
population
Reuters
While on a visit to Riyadh two weeks ago, US President Donald Trump urged Muslim countries to take the lead in combating radicalisation, and blamed Iran for instability in the Middle East.
"It seems that the Saudis and Emiratis feel emboldened by the alignment of their regional interests - toward Iran and Islamism - with the Trump administration," Gulf analyst Kristian Ulrichsen told Reuters news agency.
"[They] have decided to deal with Qatar's alternative approach on the assumption that they will have the [Trump] administration's backing."
Is Saudi to blame for IS?
Saudi Arabia, too, has been accused of funding IS, either directly or by failing to prevent private donors from sending money to the group - allegations it denies.
In recent days, British Prime Minister Theresa May has also come under pressure from election rivals to publish a report thought to focus on the funding of UK extremist groups by Saudi Arabia.
What has been the reaction?
Qatar, which is due to host the football World Cup in 2022, was critical of the decision. The foreign ministry said the decisions would "not affect the normal lives of citizens and residents".
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking in Sydney, urged the countries to resolve their differences through dialogue.
Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi said there was a need for "transparent dialogue and diplomacy", adding: "No country in the region will benefit from the heightened tension."
Qatar's stock market closed down 7.27%.
One of the likely knock-on effects is on food stability: about 40% of Qatar's food is believed to come by lorry from Saudi Arabia.
The Doha News newspaper reported that people had rushed to supermarkets to stock up on food and water.
Nearly 90% of Qatar's population are migrant workers, many of whom are working on the construction boom fuelled by the successful World Cup bid.
Why this decision now? - Alan Johnston, BBC Middle East analyst
There have long been tensions not far beneath the surface. Qatar has often seemed out of step with its neighbours.
It has tended, for example, to side with Islamist forces in the Middle East - like the Muslim Brotherhood, which is reviled by the Saudis and the current Egyptian leadership.
Past efforts by the neighbours to pull the Qataris into line have had limited impact. But now Doha has suddenly come under much greater and more co-ordinated pressure.
Emboldened by President Trump's trip two weeks ago, the Saudis and the Emiratis believe that this is the moment to make clear to Qatar that its divergent views will no longer be tolerated.
And right now this small country's rulers will probably be feeling very lonely indeed.
A number of Arab countries including Saudi Arabia and Egypt have cut diplomatic ties with Qatar, accusing it of destabilising the region.
They say Qatar backs militant groups including so-called Islamic State (IS) and al-Qaeda, which Qatar denies.
The Saudi state news agency SPA said Riyadh had closed its borders, severing land, sea and air contact with the tiny peninsula of oil-rich Qatar.
Qatar called the decision "unjustified" and with "no basis in fact".
The unprecedented move is seen as a major split between powerful Gulf countries, who are also close US allies.
It comes amid heightened tensions between Gulf countries and their near-neighbour, Iran. The Saudi statement accused Qatar of collaborating with "Iranian-backed terrorist groups" in its restive eastern region of Qatif and in Bahrain.
What has happened?
The diplomatic withdrawal was first put into motion by Bahrain, then Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, Yemen, Libya's eastern-based government and the Maldives all followed suit.
SPA cited officials as saying the decision was taken to "protect its national security from the dangers of terrorism and extremism".
Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain have given all Qatari visitors and residents two weeks to leave their territory. The three countries have also banned their citizens from travelling to Qatar.
However, Saudi Arabia says it will still allow Qataris to take part in the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca.
So far, there has been no sign of reciprocal moves by Qatar.
In the latest developments:
- The UAE and Egypt have given Qatari diplomats 48 hours to leave both countries
- Airlines from many of the affected countries, including EgyptAir, Etihad Airways and Emirates, said they are to cancel flights to and from the Qatari capital Doha
- The Gulf allies said they had closed their airspace to Qatar Airways, which has suspended all its flights to Saudi Arabia
- Bahrain's state news agency said it was cutting its ties because Qatar was "shaking the security and stability of Bahrain and meddling in its affairs"
- The Saudi-led Arab coalition fighting Yemen's Houthi rebels also expelled Qatar from its alliance because of its "practices that strengthen terrorism" and its support of extremist groups.
Food, flights and football at risk
Why has this happened?
While the severing of ties was sudden, it has not come out of the blue, as tensions have been building for years, and particularly in recent weeks.
Two weeks ago, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE blocked Qatari news sites, including Al Jazeera. Comments purportedly by Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani criticising Saudi Arabia had appeared on Qatari state media.
The government in Doha dismissed the comments as fake, attributing the report to a "shameful cybercrime".
Back in 2014, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar for several months in protest over alleged interference in their affairs.
'A Qatarstrophe' - social media reacts
All you need to know about Qatar
The story behind Qatar 'hack'
More broadly, two key factors drove Monday's decision: Qatar's ties to Islamist groups, and the role of Iran, Saudi Arabia's regional rival.
While Qatar has joined the US coalition against IS, the Qatari government has repeatedly denied accusations from Iraq's Shia leaders that it provided financial support to IS.
Wealthy individuals in the emirate are believed to have made donations and the government has given money and weapons to hardline Islamist groups in Syria. Qatar is also accused of having links to a group formerly known as the Nusra Front, an al-Qaeda affiliate.
The SPA statement accused Qatar of backing these groups, as well as the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood - banned in Gulf countries as a terrorist organisation - and that it "promotes the message and schemes of these groups through their media constantly".
Saudi Arabia itself is a key backer of Islamist rebels, including hardline jihadist groups, in Syria.
Where key countries stand on IS
Where does IS get its support?
Qatar - Key facts
2.7m
population
- 2m of whom are men
- 11,437 sq km in size (4,416 sq miles)
- 79 years life expectancy (men)
- 78 years for women
Reuters
While on a visit to Riyadh two weeks ago, US President Donald Trump urged Muslim countries to take the lead in combating radicalisation, and blamed Iran for instability in the Middle East.
"It seems that the Saudis and Emiratis feel emboldened by the alignment of their regional interests - toward Iran and Islamism - with the Trump administration," Gulf analyst Kristian Ulrichsen told Reuters news agency.
"[They] have decided to deal with Qatar's alternative approach on the assumption that they will have the [Trump] administration's backing."
Is Saudi to blame for IS?
Saudi Arabia, too, has been accused of funding IS, either directly or by failing to prevent private donors from sending money to the group - allegations it denies.
In recent days, British Prime Minister Theresa May has also come under pressure from election rivals to publish a report thought to focus on the funding of UK extremist groups by Saudi Arabia.
What has been the reaction?
Qatar, which is due to host the football World Cup in 2022, was critical of the decision. The foreign ministry said the decisions would "not affect the normal lives of citizens and residents".
US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking in Sydney, urged the countries to resolve their differences through dialogue.
Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi said there was a need for "transparent dialogue and diplomacy", adding: "No country in the region will benefit from the heightened tension."
Qatar's stock market closed down 7.27%.
One of the likely knock-on effects is on food stability: about 40% of Qatar's food is believed to come by lorry from Saudi Arabia.
The Doha News newspaper reported that people had rushed to supermarkets to stock up on food and water.
Nearly 90% of Qatar's population are migrant workers, many of whom are working on the construction boom fuelled by the successful World Cup bid.
Why this decision now? - Alan Johnston, BBC Middle East analyst
There have long been tensions not far beneath the surface. Qatar has often seemed out of step with its neighbours.
It has tended, for example, to side with Islamist forces in the Middle East - like the Muslim Brotherhood, which is reviled by the Saudis and the current Egyptian leadership.
Past efforts by the neighbours to pull the Qataris into line have had limited impact. But now Doha has suddenly come under much greater and more co-ordinated pressure.
Emboldened by President Trump's trip two weeks ago, the Saudis and the Emiratis believe that this is the moment to make clear to Qatar that its divergent views will no longer be tolerated.
And right now this small country's rulers will probably be feeling very lonely indeed.
elyid
Gerry Armstrong
Unbelievable!! So, this guy (and others) openly admit to being members of ISIS.... and we just let them stay here...
This makes me just as angry as the attacks themselves!
Seriously - how can you justify letting members of ISIS live here openly!?!?
