Possible "Terrorist Incident" in Westminster, 4 killed

[Ifreann]

Mate, are you even reading the posts you are quoting? You said "Yeah, but that would involve acknowledging flaws with Islam". I am asking you what you are referring to by "that".

I was only talking about the messages of the Quran and how they encouraged extremism. I thought that was obvious from the context.

When you quoted a post ascribing cynical motivations to Muslims donating money to help the victims of this terrorist attack, talking about the messages of the Quran is not obvious from context at all.

---

For goodness sake, can you stop leaping to attack points that haven't been made?

I can assure you, it's been made.

US soldier here, wouldn't do that.

Then your experience is not relevant when talking about members of the public and schoolchildren.

It is your job to be in these situations.

Well, not really.

---

Unless you expect the lessons to be done in an afternoon then there will be half-trained children with a false belief that the know how to save lives. And I would hardly call an afternoon of lifesaving class "fully trained".

An hour of training every week, from 9th grade to 12th.

Additionally, you cannot expect adults to fully retain first aid training that they received five, ten, twenty years prior.

They don't need to. Even just little information like how to apply a tourniquet is all that's needed.

No children running towards a terrorist attack is better than any children doing so, trained or not. Let us not forget the terrorist tactic of setting two bombs, the second meant to kill the people responding to the first.

Counterterrorism classes every month too.

I had a proper response written, but then I read the last line and decided that you're taking the piss.

---

What is wrong with a militarized society per se?

Goosestepping is so last millennium.

---

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

Why are you drawing that line at Anglo Saxon exactly? They aren't English - they're Germans who moved here.

Saxons back to Saxony, Angles back to Angeln, Britain belongs to the Celts!

---

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

Christianity isn't a native religion to England; quite clearly Christians haven't assimilated and need to be banned from England.

Cease this heresy immediately. Everyone knows that Jesus was English.

---

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

So...close the Chunnel? Those Frenchmen have some dodgy views about freedom of speech and religion.

[Ethel mermania]

So they know who did it, and yet they will not release the name

Why does it matter to the public who it was?

So we know who to blame, who we need to protect ourselves from.

[The Klishi Islands]

My point is that there are millions of potentially successful immigrants from every country in the world. We should accept anyone who wishes to come in and contribute to society, and we should by no means reject somebody for what their grandchild has a less-than-miniscule chance of doing.

Oh, and I should note that, overall, immigrants (legal ones, I assume) have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans.

the NY times quoting an organization 'which advocates more liberal immigration laws.' Not surprising.

Regardless, it's not like we HAVE to accept these people. There are plenty of other people who will immigrate here from Japan, South Korea, Australia or Europe, New Zealand, even.

Try reading the studies. The data is conclusive. Immigrants have a lower crime rate.

But why not accept those people? You can't provide a good reason not to. Again, worrying about what a grandchild might do decades from now is, in my eyes, an argument against bigotry, because in a non-bigoted society people are far less likely to become radicalized.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

the NY times quoting an organization 'which advocates more liberal immigration laws.' Not surprising.

Regardless, it's not like we HAVE to accept these people. There are plenty of other people who will immigrate here from Japan, South Korea, Australia or Europe, New Zealand, even.

Try reading the studies. The data is conclusive. Immigrants have a lower crime rate.

But why not accept those people? You can't provide a good reason not to. Again, worrying about what a grandchild might do decades from now is, in my eyes, an argument against bigotry, because in a non-bigoted society people are far less likely to become radicalized.

I have no problem being a bigot when it comes to deciding who i let into my country. It's my country, after all. Our country, really. I have no problem with immigrants at all. I don't even believe that all the immigrants from those countries are necessarily bad. But it's not like we need immigrants from those countries. They're like what, 1 Billion people?

The other 6+ Billion will suit us just fine, thanks.

[Ethel mermania]

Do we even know he's a Muslim though? All we have at the moment is a photo of a man of south-asian ethnicity and the same logic that led to a spike in hate crimes against Sikhs and Hindus.

Yes, yes we do.

It damaging how people will bury themselves in the saND not confront the truth. The ironic part is, if they ever win it is going to be your LGBTQ ass up against the wall, and dead. So by all means keep ignoring what is happening, don't let the people know the truth and think for themselves.

[The Klishi Islands]

Try reading the studies. The data is conclusive. Immigrants have a lower crime rate.

But why not accept those people? You can't provide a good reason not to. Again, worrying about what a grandchild might do decades from now is, in my eyes, an argument against bigotry, because in a non-bigoted society people are far less likely to become radicalized.

I have no problem being a bigot when it comes to deciding who i let into my country. It's my country, after all. Our country, really. I have no problem with immigrants at all. I don't even believe that all the immigrants from those countries are necessarily bad. But it's not like we need immigrants from those countries. They're like what, 1 Billion people?

The other 6+ Billion will suit us just fine, thanks.

Why don't you like that particular 1 billion people when they are pretty much as likely to become successful? And have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans?

Because you're afraid of being killed in a terror attack, an event so unlikely to happen it's almost impressive?

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Do we even know he's a Muslim though? All we have at the moment is a photo of a man of south-asian ethnicity and the same logic that led to a spike in hate crimes against Sikhs and Hindus.

Yes, yes we do.

It damaging how people will bury themselves in the saND not confront the truth. The ironic part is, if they ever win it is going to be your LGBTQ ass up against the wall, and dead. So by all means keep ignoring what is happening, don't let the people know the truth and think for themselves.

What exactly does "win" mean in this context?

[The Klishi Islands]

Do we even know he's a Muslim though? All we have at the moment is a photo of a man of south-asian ethnicity and the same logic that led to a spike in hate crimes against Sikhs and Hindus.

Yes, yes we do.

It damaging how people will bury themselves in the saND not confront the truth. The ironic part is, if they ever win it is going to be your LGBTQ ass up against the wall, and dead. So by all means keep ignoring what is happening, don't let the people know the truth and think for themselves.

If "they" win? What are you suggesting, that the Muslims are trying to take over England and will implement anti-LGBT policies?
They must be sorely disappointed with their progress thus far.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

I have no problem being a bigot when it comes to deciding who i let into my country. It's my country, after all. Our country, really. I have no problem with immigrants at all. I don't even believe that all the immigrants from those countries are necessarily bad. But it's not like we need immigrants from those countries. They're like what, 1 Billion people?

The other 6+ Billion will suit us just fine, thanks.

Why don't you like that particular 1 billion people when they are pretty much as likely to become successful? And have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans?

Because you're afraid of being killed in a terror attack, an event so unlikely to happen it's almost impressive?

Because the other 6 B are likely to become successful too, and likewise have low crime rates?

Japanese terrorist attacks? South Korean, Chinese terrorist attacks? Hindu terrorist attacks? Unheard of. Besides, the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law that effect society and politics.

[The Klishi Islands]

Why don't you like that particular 1 billion people when they are pretty much as likely to become successful? And have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans?

Because you're afraid of being killed in a terror attack, an event so unlikely to happen it's almost impressive?

Because the other 6 B are likely to become successful too, and likewise have low crime rates?

Japanese terrorist attacks? South Korean, Chinese terrorist attacks? Hindu terrorist attacks? Unheard of. Besides, the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law that effect society and politics.

Can you provide any evidence at all that, en masse, American Muslims (or other immigrant groups) have successfully implemented or have tried to implement sharia law or restrictions on women?

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Because the other 6 B are likely to become successful too, and likewise have low crime rates?

Japanese terrorist attacks? South Korean, Chinese terrorist attacks? Hindu terrorist attacks? Unheard of. Besides, the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law that effect society and politics.

Can you provide any evidence at all that, en masse, American Muslims (or other immigrant groups) have successfully implemented or have tried to implement sharia law or restrictions on women?

I don't think that's a fair question because Muslims constitute such an absurd small minority(~1%) of our country. Unlike in France or Belgium.

That's why most our islamic terrorist attacks have been conducted by foreigners or the children of foreigners. It also seems like Europe has been getting the brunt of them lately.

[Vassenor]

Can you provide any evidence at all that, en masse, American Muslims (or other immigrant groups) have successfully implemented or have tried to implement sharia law or restrictions on women?

I don't think that's a fair question because Muslims constitute such an absurd small minority(~1%) of our country. Unlike in France or Belgium.

That's why most our islamic terrorist attacks have been conducted by foreigners or the children of foreigners. It also seems like Europe has been getting the brunt of them lately.

Isn't just about everyone in America "children of foreigners" though?

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

I don't think that's a fair question because Muslims constitute such an absurd small minority(~1%) of our country. Unlike in France or Belgium.

That's why most our islamic terrorist attacks have been conducted by foreigners or the children of foreigners. It also seems like Europe has been getting the brunt of them lately.

Isn't just about everyone in America "children of foreigners" though?

First generation, though. when the attitudes and beliefs are more present.

[Ethel mermania]

Yes, yes we do.

It damaging how people will bury themselves in the saND not confront the truth. The ironic part is, if they ever win it is going to be your LGBTQ ass up against the wall, and dead. So by all means keep ignoring what is happening, don't let the people know the truth and think for themselves.

What exactly does "win" mean in this context?

The extention of the umma to the UK, and the implementation of sharia law.

Yes I know that is not the goal of the majority of Muslims in the UK, and I know that most muslims who come here anyway are trying to get away from that nonsense. All that said, the guys with the bombs, guns and knives committing these attacks feel very differently about the matter, and their feelings need to be respected.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

All bias and fear aside, its important to know who's responsible so that they can track down the cells, the sources of the problems, and that others who might unwittingly have evidence can come forward with it - help get it contained, and controlled. No, not talking 'profiling' here, simply that we see things every day that could have meaning we aren't aware of. The stories are endless of witnesses seeing a news release or story, then stumbling across the perp and turning them in, or having seen something that leads to their capture.

Fear that the public is going to blow up due to who it may or may not behind it is something we've allowed to build through ignorance, bias, fear-mongering, and a whole lot of blame-gaming by a whole lot of people, in spite of how many attacks may have been carried out by someone outside the stereotypical 'dark-skinned foreign devil who hates freedom' being behind it. Legit to be concerned about some immigrants? Unfortunately, yes - we've also seen proof of that. But even so, surely we can educate ourselves and make better personal choices so that we are not running in the opposite direction if we see one of our browner brethren, or a turban or head scarf, or non-Western garb of any sort.

Whoever did it, it was a shitty thing to do. Regardless of their reasons, it is unacceptable. And I'm sorry for the victims and those traumatized by the act.

[Gauthier]

Today I Learned that chronic criminals who radicalize for absolution and affirmation are pious Muslims who prove that Islam needs to be kept out like a zombie virus.

[The Klishi Islands]

Can you provide any evidence at all that, en masse, American Muslims (or other immigrant groups) have successfully implemented or have tried to implement sharia law or restrictions on women?

I don't think that's a fair question because Muslims constitute such an absurd small minority(~1%) of our country. Unlike in France or Belgium.

That's why most our islamic terrorist attacks have been conducted by foreigners or the children of foreigners. It also seems like Europe has been getting the brunt of them lately.

Europe is not America. Europe has, frankly, an abysmal integration policy compared to the United States. Muslims in France, for example, are isolated from the rest of the country. I've long said that those countries need to reform, and fast, because there is potential for radicalization there.

It's a perfectly legitimate question, though. If you can't provide proof that your claim that "the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law," then it's not a valid claim.

Also, I assume you condemn native-born-Americans who believe in similarly restrictive policies, like deeming LGB relationships as morally wrong (34%), birth control as morally wrong (8%), or pre-marital sex as morally wrong (29%)?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/183413/ameri ... ssues.aspx

[Ifreann]

Why does it matter to the public who it was?

So we know who to blame, who we need to protect ourselves from.

You know that the guy is dead, right?

[The Klishi Islands]

So we know who to blame, who we need to protect ourselves from.

You know that the guy is dead, right?

He's still a threat!

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

All bias and fear aside, its important to know who's responsible so that they can track down the cells, the sources of the problems, and that others who might unwittingly have evidence can come forward with it - help get it contained, and controlled. No, not talking 'profiling' here, simply that we see things every day that could have meaning we aren't aware of. The stories are endless of witnesses seeing a news release or story, then stumbling across the perp and turning them in, or having seen something that leads to their capture.

Fear that the public is going to blow up due to who it may or may not behind it is something we've allowed to build through ignorance, bias, fear-mongering, and a whole lot of blame-gaming by a whole lot of people, in spite of how many attacks may have been carried out by someone outside the stereotypical 'dark-skinned foreign devil who hates freedom' being behind it. Legit to be concerned about some immigrants? Unfortunately, yes - we've also seen proof of that. But even so, surely we can educate ourselves and make better personal choices so that we are not running in the opposite direction if we see one of our browner brethren, or a turban or head scarf, or non-Western garb of any sort.

Whoever did it, it was a shitty thing to do. Regardless of their reasons, it is unacceptable. And I'm sorry for the victims and those traumatized by the act.

Turban signals possible Sikh. Sikhs do not commit terrorist acts very often at all. Being brown does not necessarily mean you're a terrorist. After all, there are Christians from Iraq. It's a matter of discretion, not fear or Ignorance. 9/11 was not perpetrated by a group of atheists. Many of the leaders of terrorist groups/cells are highly educated, doctors, PHDs etc. This is an ideology that has very wide currency and sympathy within Islam and it's diaspora.

It's not ignorance to point it out, it's folly not to recognize it. The people who opened fire in Paris, and the Orlando nightclub shooter didn't shout "Atheist Akbar!" there's a religious element, sure. But also a cultural one.

[Ifreann]

You know that the guy is dead, right?

He's still a threat!

How can I perform the rituals to banish his spirit if the police won't release his True Name?!

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

I don't think that's a fair question because Muslims constitute such an absurd small minority(~1%) of our country. Unlike in France or Belgium.

That's why most our islamic terrorist attacks have been conducted by foreigners or the children of foreigners. It also seems like Europe has been getting the brunt of them lately.

Europe is not America. Europe has, frankly, an abysmal integration policy compared to the United States. Muslims in France, for example, are isolated from the rest of the country. I've long said that those countries need to reform, and fast, because there is potential for radicalization there.

It's a perfectly legitimate question, though. If you can't provide proof that your claim that "the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law," then it's not a valid claim.

Also, I assume you condemn native-born-Americans who believe in similarly restrictive policies, like deeming LGB relationships as morally wrong (34%), birth control as morally wrong (8%), or pre-marital sex as morally wrong (29%)?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/183413/ameri ... ssues.aspx

Deeming something morally wrong, and committing terrorist acts, honour killings or mass murder and intimidation to enforce it, are entirely different. Not many Christians want to ban sodomy or kill their daughters for having pre-marital sex, not these days anyway. We left all those ideas in the past. Many Muslims have not.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

[
Turban signals possible Sikh. Sikhs do not commit terrorist acts very often at all. Being brown does not necessarily mean you're a terrorist. After all, there are Christians from Iraq. It's a matter of discretion, not fear or Ignorance. 9/11 was not perpetrated by a group of atheists. Many of the leaders of terrorist groups/cells are highly educated, doctors, PHDs etc. This is an ideology that has very wide currency and sympathy within Islam and it's diaspora.

It's not ignorance to point it out, it's folly not to recognize it. The people who opened fire in Paris, and the Orlando nightclub shooter didn't shout "Atheist Akbar!" there's a religious element, sure. But also a cultural one.

That's my point - feel free to read again there. People react in stupid ways to various things when fear and ignorance is running high. Educate, calm the masses, cut the bias and bullshit, and perhaps we can focus on actual persons who are creating problems - regardless of who they are, what they believe, or any of that.

[Vassenor]

All bias and fear aside, its important to know who's responsible so that they can track down the cells, the sources of the problems, and that others who might unwittingly have evidence can come forward with it - help get it contained, and controlled. No, not talking 'profiling' here, simply that we see things every day that could have meaning we aren't aware of. The stories are endless of witnesses seeing a news release or story, then stumbling across the perp and turning them in, or having seen something that leads to their capture.

Fear that the public is going to blow up due to who it may or may not behind it is something we've allowed to build through ignorance, bias, fear-mongering, and a whole lot of blame-gaming by a whole lot of people, in spite of how many attacks may have been carried out by someone outside the stereotypical 'dark-skinned foreign devil who hates freedom' being behind it. Legit to be concerned about some immigrants? Unfortunately, yes - we've also seen proof of that. But even so, surely we can educate ourselves and make better personal choices so that we are not running in the opposite direction if we see one of our browner brethren, or a turban or head scarf, or non-Western garb of any sort.

Whoever did it, it was a shitty thing to do. Regardless of their reasons, it is unacceptable. And I'm sorry for the victims and those traumatized by the act.

Turban signals possible Sikh. Sikhs do not commit terrorist acts very often at all. Being brown does not necessarily mean you're a terrorist. After all, there are Christians from Iraq. It's a matter of discretion, not fear or Ignorance. 9/11 was not perpetrated by a group of atheists. Many of the leaders of terrorist groups/cells are highly educated, doctors, PHDs etc. This is an ideology that has very wide currency and sympathy within Islam and it's diaspora.

It's not ignorance to point it out, it's folly not to recognize it. The people who opened fire in Paris, and the Orlando nightclub shooter didn't shout "Atheist Akbar!" there's a religious element, sure. But also a cultural one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassina ... ira_Gandhi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalistan ... nt_outfits

[The Klishi Islands]

Europe is not America. Europe has, frankly, an abysmal integration policy compared to the United States. Muslims in France, for example, are isolated from the rest of the country. I've long said that those countries need to reform, and fast, because there is potential for radicalization there.

It's a perfectly legitimate question, though. If you can't provide proof that your claim that "the real cost of these immigrants is their attitudes on women and Sharia law," then it's not a valid claim.

Also, I assume you condemn native-born-Americans who believe in similarly restrictive policies, like deeming LGB relationships as morally wrong (34%), birth control as morally wrong (8%), or pre-marital sex as morally wrong (29%)?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/183413/ameri ... ssues.aspx

Deeming something morally wrong, and committing terrorist acts, honour killings or mass murder and intimidation to enforce it, are entirely different. Not many Christians want to ban sodomy or kill their daughters for having pre-marital sex, not these days anyway. We left all those ideas in the past. Many Muslims have not.

But a sizable portion of Christians in the US do want to ban sodomy or pre-marital sex. And honor killings, for all the hype they get, are extraordinarily rare, and widely condemned by the vast, vast majority of Muslims. Again, please provide proof of that claim that they "haven't left those ideas in the past".