And for years Iran was the at the heart of the Axis of evil yet they and the Saudi's are sworn enemies with both wanting to be the dominant force in Middle East.
Yet, it seems the Shia muslims are now less of a threat than the Sunni's
-
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
And for years Iran was the at the heart of the Axis of evil yet they and the Saudi's are sworn enemies with both wanting to be the dominant force in Middle East.
Yet, it seems the Shia muslims are now less of a threat than the Sunni's
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Earlier today, this lovely young lass told me I needed to go back to Paris and commit my terrorist attacks over there and not attack her own. As a British citizen it was her 'right' to tell me this. She also called me Novak Djokovic's wife.
I've always wanted to live in Paris for a bit but I dont understand what she has against the French? Or Novak Djokovic. Or his wife...
I wrote this while taking a dump
is it federer on a bad hair day?
Thanks for posting these. Obviously due to the non-events they don't make as many headlines. I still think they are far less likely to cause as much mayhem there and think we are a far more legitimate target in the eyes of these animals.
Jurgen the German
Erik Thorstvedt
More moderate muslims like Maajid Nawaz would certainly help the cause. This is a ideological phenomenon.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
So one of the guys was on the TV show my neighbor the Jihadi shown on channel 4, on the show he was spouting anti western hate and praying to the flag of ISIS in the park. I remember at the time when I saw the show how that was not enough evidence to act, channel 4 had probably done MI5s job for them, but nothing was done and one of them turned out to be a killer.
So is this a case not about police numbers but police power in being able to act? I never thought this problem was police numbers but more about the fall out from the PC phalanx lead by Corbyn and his "nothing wrong to follow a idea" crap
So is this a case not about police numbers but police power in being able to act? I never thought this problem was police numbers but more about the fall out from the PC phalanx lead by Corbyn and his "nothing wrong to follow a idea" crap
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Intelligence agencies are funded completely separately from the police.
It makes sense to cut police numbers while general crime is falling (which it has steadily since 1992) and reallocate that resource to the single intelligence account
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
What can be done?
Unless people are serious about indefinite detainment, and I really hope that's not the idea here. What happens when these people are released from prison? If they're arrested in the first place.
People can be put on no fly lists. Gun control works reasonably well in Europe (imagine if these 3 terrorists all had automatic rifles). But we can't stop people from stealing motor vehicles or buying knives.
Meanwhile people are worrying about the narratives and not creating ammunition for extremist recruiters. How does the "UK government arresting Muslims for thought crimes or political memberships" narrative play out?
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Thats what I am agreeing with, but whats the point if the information is there but not acted on?
I will pull up the channel 4 documentary for you or you can watch it on NetFlix if you like and these people are making threats in the UK against the west, if thats not enough to act on and one of the people in the video goes on to kill and injure 50 people then there is serious problems with empowerment.
The ammunition for extremist recruiters, well thats a larger subject and one thats harder to control when a large majority are overseas. The best we can do at times is deal with those here that are showing signs of intent that they will attack?
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
One man called the anti-terrorism hotline in 2015, and a woman went to the local police because she was scared Butt was trying to radicalise her children.
Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner Mark Rowley said an investigation into Butt began in 2015, but "there was no intelligence to suggest that this attack was being planned and the investigation had been prioritised accordingly".
The inquiry was "prioritised in the lower echelons of our investigative work", Mr Rowley added.
Asked if that had been a poor decision, Mr Rowley said he had seen nothing yet to suggest it, according to the BBC's home affairs correspondent, Danny Shaw.
This was from the BBC today and goes back to a number of points made.
I get that the police etc have to prioritise their work and investigations but if a Muslim reports another Muslim (which is what people have been calling for recently) for radicalising or trying to radicalise their children is that not enough intent to do more for a longer time? This isnt Tommy Robinson saying "that blokes a radical islamic mug" this is a Muslim saying "this guys tried to brain wash my kids into radical ways"
And this guys went on to do what he did at the weekend, so I would suggest if thats seen as the norm and is not classed as a threat then that is a HUGE problem
Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner Mark Rowley said an investigation into Butt began in 2015, but "there was no intelligence to suggest that this attack was being planned and the investigation had been prioritised accordingly".
The inquiry was "prioritised in the lower echelons of our investigative work", Mr Rowley added.
Asked if that had been a poor decision, Mr Rowley said he had seen nothing yet to suggest it, according to the BBC's home affairs correspondent, Danny Shaw.
This was from the BBC today and goes back to a number of points made.
I get that the police etc have to prioritise their work and investigations but if a Muslim reports another Muslim (which is what people have been calling for recently) for radicalising or trying to radicalise their children is that not enough intent to do more for a longer time? This isnt Tommy Robinson saying "that blokes a radical islamic mug" this is a Muslim saying "this guys tried to brain wash my kids into radical ways"
And this guys went on to do what he did at the weekend, so I would suggest if thats seen as the norm and is not classed as a threat then that is a HUGE problem
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
I get what you're saying, but if those 'thought crimes' and/or political memberships are in fact illegal, highly dangerous and deemed utterly unacceptable by the vast majority of the right-minded public, then that nettle just has to be grasped.
May is entirely correct to state that there has been far too much tolerance of extremism. It should have been tackled long before now, but has been allowed to grow out of control. I'm not suggesting internment, I'm talking here about a much more basic principle where this piece of scum has paraded his evil ideology on Britsh television no less, and barely an eyelid has been batted.
There's being tolerant, and then there's being outright stupid. The fact that this occurred unchecked is most definitely the latter.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
The fact these guys are being investigated and deemed non dangerous only for them to be dangerous proves that the system is wrong no? The proof is in the facts.
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
Absolutely. Not just the system though. It's the entire culture of 'extreme tolerance' that has been allowed to take root that is, in my opinion, what really needs changing.
Last edited:
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
it's not a flat line, mindset at time of investigation is only the mindset at the time of investigation, they could go months or years without reacting, likewise i'm sure many people are investigated who fall off the radar completely because they manage to bring some order to their life and move away from it
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
So a guy says "death to the west" etc and we do nothing because we don't know the timeline of when they will attack? That in itself plays into their hands, keep you head down for a few months enough to fall off the radar then strike.
I totally get where you are coming from but the tactic isn't working really.
I understand where you are coming from but people have the right to question the effectiveness of it all when this guy was on mainstream TV spouting hate and the untrained eye could spot he was a danger.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
there's a million people saying things to that effect, the difference between what people are willing to say and actually willing to do is enormous, radicalisation isn't a switch
parklane1
Tony Galvin
This, going round throwing people into jail every time they say something anti establishment would only make more problems in a already overcrowded jail system. There is no quick fix to these problems which because of our forgien policy ( ie bending over and doing what America says) has helped lead us to this.
Parklaner81
Steve Hodge
There's an awful lot of ground between saying 'something anti establishment' and the kinds of views these people espouse. And the state of our prison system is absolutely no excuse not to act. It is quite clear that certain freedoms in our society have been and are being abused, and that needs addressing however difficult it may be.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
The nettle has to be grasped in a smart and effective way though.
May's comment seems like useless populism to me. I don't follow UK politics all that closely, but what a random place to draw the "enough is enough" line in the sand. Why not after Manchester? Why not after the tube attacks? Why not after one of the Paris attacks?
I find the idea that we've been soft on extremism bizarre. We've not been smart enough. But we've not been too soft.
How do you know what has happened?
He wasn't punished as far as we know. That's not a judgement based on him being either dangerous or not dangerous. That's a guilty our not guilty of breaking a law thing.
He probably was seen as a potential danger. But what is one to do about that? These will be judgement calls and resources are limited. What resources are necessary to invest to be able to stop all attacks like this?
Imagine he was imprisoned for a year on whatever charges. Who deems if he's been rehabilitated or if he's still a threat? How does that happen?
There are plenty of things that need to change. I agree. I'm not quite convinced that extreme tolerance is a main part of the problem.
For me people like Maajid Nawas (video earlier) and Sam Harris speak very well on these topics. People weep want to be seen as serious people are calling them islamophobes, extremists and (for Sam Harris at least) racists. Is this extreme tolerance?
To solve this let's at least start enabling serious conversations on this topic.