Forum menu
shouldn't we now widen the presence of regularly pistol-armed police?
no. because then you arm the next ring, and the next ring and we end up like usa. i think what this has shown is that parliamentary security works very well. he got, what 20 metres in? There isn't enough armed police in the world to protect the average person on the street from these random attacks or maybe MPs at home like Jo Cox.
Also just trying to bring the thread back to the subject under discussion.
Can the bickering about religion go to a separate thread please...
Just a thought but, shouldn't this predictable splinter discussion be best served in its own thread? Does someone want to go start one?
Given the original topic, turning this into another STW Religion thread seems a little distasteful to me.
Given the original topic, turning this into another STW Religion thread seems a little distasteful to me.
Are you new here?
One thing I don't understand - was the cop not wearing an anti stab vest? All cops in Edinburgh do at all times.
Cougar - I agree with you.
Edit. Repetition.
I suspect the rozzer was caught by surprise. So if he'd been armed the scumbag could have killed him from behind and sourced a pistol.
Hmm. During heightened tensions, main railway stations are patrolled by armed police officers carrying sub-machine guns.
Clearly, the force doesn't consider your caveats relevant?
I dunno if maybe some guys posting about armed police should try actually visiting London..
The police are very heavily armed in all the busy areas.
In a separate and more important note - Great interview from the Mayor of London on R4 this morning.
It's all about religion, Woppit.
But I'll go and wax some skis because the snow line is back down to 600m.
Where are the Daoist murderers and Pagan terrorists infecting our streets?
That is arguably the stupidest thing you have ever contributed on any subject.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04xr3xf ]Sadiq Khan on R4 Today, this morning.[/url]
I left work yesterday (city) not long after the attacks happened. Was pretty frantic and as expected Cannon Street had plenty of armed BTP about keeping an eye on things.
London is pretty much back to normal this morning - lots of people barging into each other getting stroppy and shouting. Much larger police presence as you would expect but other than that it's situation normal.
To a lot of people in the office (me included) this didn't come as a surprise. We've been 'waiting' for an attack for quite a while - that it wasn't worse was the only saving grace about the whole thing. The knee jerk reaction to something like this is to look at who to blame. A number of people near me commented that they hoped it wouldn't be an Islam related attack, just because it gives the mouth-breathers the opportunity to point the finger at the nearest brown person and blame them. Sadly it is and stuff like this only goes on to fuel those who can't think without moving their lips.
Someone made a good point above - this was an attack 'in the name of' rather than 'on behalf of'...there's a massive difference. I hate the people who are doing this, I hate the people that are brainwashing these individuals into thinking that mowing down a load of people is the right thing to do. I don't hate Muslims and I don't hate Islam.
somouk - MemberI do find it surprising he was unarmed in such a high risk location and agree we should probably see more armed officers in these type of locations.
There were armed officers present too. (obviously, since one of them shot him) The security detail there is mixed armed and unarmed.
Eddie, how far would have 4 battle hardened lunatics with ak47s got against a bunch of comparitively green coppers who want to go home to their families.
The place ahould be guarded by people used to getting shot at.
I actually think its a bit harsh for society to ask policemen to do that job, crap job for crap pay. Am I right in thinking the unarmed huggable ones at the gait are essentially bait to give the hidden armed coppers time to react.
I was in a conference a couple of miles away when it happened.
The Chairman asked if everyone was happy to continue and if anyone wanted to leave. No-one left.
The only difference I noticed was a lot of policeman on the streets, didn't notice are obviously armed and the later trains were busier than normal. I think people just held back to avoid the possible extra rush hour passengers.
Remarkably calm.
"Hmm. During heightened tensions, main railway stations are patrolled by armed police officers carrying sub-machine guns.
Clearly, the force doesn't consider your caveats relevant?"
I was talking about this specific incident, not in general.
The Pagan's terrorised plenty of people, Woppit, but no longer do so in great numbers. Unless you think that those sacrificed weren't terrorised and quite happy with being killed.
My thoughts and prayers are with those killed and injured, many horifically it seems.
We where travelling back to the UK yestersay so only saw the news from around 17:30 when more infirmation had been confirmed.
Given the world we live in today a car ramming affecting many people oppositte the Houses of Parliament and a subsequent knife (machette) attack and a fatal shooting the [b]only probable[/b] explanation is a Jihadist terrorist attack. Yes there are other possibilities but they are extremely unlikely.
I take the point that some posts may be "too soon" but anyone with an ounce of sense knows the likely chain of events
"Membership" of terrorst organisations is very different today than it was in the past. Now it's a sympathiser who gets his/her information via internet More than face to face. The days of radicaised individuals hoing to training campa in Libya, Afghanistan or ****stan are being replaced by "how to manauals" on the web. These car/stabbing atacks are not random or unplanned, to the contrary. Neither are they new, from Jerusalem to Austria (F1 event)!to France (multiple market attacks before Nice) to Germany (Berlin) to Lee Rigby's murder.
I commend the Muslim Council of Britain for their remarks. We are all aware that Muslims themselves are the biggest victims of Islamic extremism. However, they are also the major perpetrators.
I agree wholeheartedly with Edukator, whilst the Old Testament has passages outlining "acceptable violence" and attitides towards homsexualtity for example we find wrong today they not being used by radical preachers and extremists to encourage terrorism, violence and murder with a goal to see that religion dominate the world.
Jive Saudi's fund one form of Islam and arguably extremism but Iran funds another to a much greater and more extreme extent. As I posted above the biggest victims are other Muslims caught up in this primarily sectarian violence.
Another attack on British soil was inevitable, it won't be the last. Just as with the IRA we will go on with life and we won't be defeated.
Did we do the R4 tube station notice?
According to the reporter this has been posted - probably the best piece of writing I've seen in the subject.
"Terrorists are politely reminded that this is London and you can do what you want to us but we will drink tea and jolly well carry on"
As we say about toddlers throwing temper tantrums, they are only doing it for attention. There are enough idiots in the world to win on a 4 victims to one idiot ratio.
Set the police and intelligence services on them and ignore them.
Now spare a thought for the victims, their friends, families and colleagues (who will be of several religions and nationalities) and carry on with your lives.
Edit. Repetition.
tjagain - Member
One thing I don't understand - was the cop not wearing an anti stab vest? All cops in Edinburgh do at all times.
They're not a lot of use when some psychopath tries to behead you, unfortunately.
Edukator - Reformed Troll
The Pagan's terrorised plenty of people, Woppit, but no longer do so in great numbers.
So, on the behalf of what religion were the "Red Brigades" or the Baader-Meinhof gang or the Provisional IRA doing their terrorising?
Religion isn't the only source of human conflict, Woppit. It is however a source of some of the most futile conflicts. The troubles were always pitched as Protestants versus Catholics so the IRA was a politically and religiously identifiable group.
Political doctrines and religion have a lot in common. The doctrine is attributed to a God in one case (though is transcribed by human hands) or a visionary in the case political doctrine. In both case "belief" in the doctrine means people will commit horrors because the doctrine justifies it.
Edit: in many places the state, the political and religious doctrines are interwoven. The Queen is both head of state and head of the CoE.
The troubles were always pitched as Protestants versus Catholics so the IRA was a politically and religiously identifiable group.
It wasn't a religious thing at all. Purely political.
it just so happened that the 2 groups were different domination's of the same religion.
There was never a suggestion that the killing was performed because of a difference of opinion on what the Bible told you to do and how to do it.
I would disagree gobuchal because the religion was the thing that differentiated the two groups
I suggest you Google for some of the reverend Ian Paisley's Catholic hating speeches, Gobuchul. I haven't forgotten but don't want to post them here. Religious was at the origin and the heart of the conflict.
A difference though is that these people performing these acts in the name of religion are viewing themselves as a lot more expendable than someone from a political group, because they believe their act is going to end up with them reaping some sort of reward in another place.
There certainly is a place to blame muslim clerics for not providing a loud enough voice to clarify the possible misinterpretations of the Quran and the words of their prophet.
If the LBC presenter Maajid Nawaz can provide rational arguments disarming these radical viewpoints when expressed on his show, then it should be pretty easy for a cleric to do it.
because the religion was the thing that differentiated the two groups
No it wasn't. [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_in_Ireland ]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_in_Ireland[/url]
It was their ancestry. They are the descendants of British, mainly Scottish settlers.
The religion was a side issue, although it identified them, it wasn't the issue.
I would disagree
You can disagree all you want. But you'd be wrong, sorry. You wouldn't be the first to use "The Troubles" as a stick with which to beat theists. And, I'm fairly positive you won't be the last. Nobody was doing any beatings, kneecapping, bombing or polis informing in the. Some of god.
OK just one then:
"I denounce you, Antichrist! I refuse you as Christ’s enemy and Antichrist with all your false doctrine."
Rev. Ian Paisley on the leader of the Catholic religion.
"I denounce you, Antichrist! I refuse you as Christ’s enemy and Antichrist with all your false doctrine."Rev. Ian Paisley on the leader of the Catholic religion.
Where in that quote does he call for acts of violence be performed in the name of his God and Religion?
He obviously doesn't like it but that's different from calling for a religious War.
I note that the murdered PC would probably still be alive if he had had more than a truncheon and an air of authority to protect himself.
Hmm. During heightened tensions, main railway stations are patrolled by armed police officers carrying sub-machine guns.
This was a Policeman manning a pedestrian gate who had someone attack him at close quarters with a knife. I'd have thought a gun would be limited use in that situation
tjagainI would disagree gobuchal because the religion was the thing that differentiated the two groups
EdukatorI suggest you Google for some of the reverend Ian Paisley's Catholic hating speeches,
Historically, most or certainly a lot of Irish rebel leaders were Protestants. Irish independance and a united Ireland are political goals, not religious.
The civil rights movement of the late 50s and 60s in NI was just that - catholics were a 30% minority who were discrimnated against in every way mainly due to multiple brutal plantations in Ulster where catholic land was given to wealthy english land owners to populate with protestant labour loyal to the crown.
Paisley saw the civil rights movement as a potential threat to the Union and protestant rule in NI so he characterised the civil rights movement as an IRA resurgence, going so far as to murder catholics and carry out bombings in the name of the (then non existent) IRA.
What do you do with "vermin"? That's how Ian Paisley described Catholics.
Something still smell fishy Simmons, I hope he didnt die needlessly. We've seen unarmed coppers bring men down with machetes, it would seem that you just have to have enough manpower to do so.
It suprises me a LITTLE that he wasn't jumped on by half a dozen polcemen the moment the knives came out...at a gate like that.
HOWEVER I am completely ignorant of policing matters.
Wolfe Tone, one of the first leaders of the Irish Revolution was Protestant
Religion, Politics or just the naked lust for power.
None of these things are the CAUSE of the terrorism.
As was pointed out by binners some time ago, these things are just convenient hooks on which to hang a basic human impulse - thankfully not shared by the majority...
[I]Edukator - Reformed Troll
What do you do with "vermin"? That's how Ian Paisley described Catholics. [/I]
I thought you were going to go wax something?
To everyone else:
There are people out there right now who are having a really bad day as a direct result of the events of yesterday.
You're free to start a religion thread as previously suggested.
Yesterday a cowardly monster used a car and an edged weapon to attack unarmed people, resulting in loss of life.
Ask yourselves if this thread is the right place to have a "my knowledge of religion is better than yours" debate.
It suprises me a LITTLE that he wasn't jumped on by half a dozen polcemen the moment the knives came out...at a gate like that.
Thoughts for the poor Copper, but my first thought was ...how were they taken by surprise. I know the area quite well and the noise that car crashing caused, was huge apparently....so why were they not immediately on their guard so to speak? One of the coppers ran off to get help, rather than help his mate defend themselves. Clearly speculation and the full facts will emerge eventually, but just thought it odd they weren't ready for him.
SoloYou're free to start a religion thread as previously suggested.
Yesterday a cowardly monster used a car and an edged weapon to attack unarmed people, resulting in loss of life.
Ask yourselves if this thread is the right place to have a "my knowledge of religion is better than yours" debate.
Religious extremist kills five and critically injures 40 more in the name of religion, but don't discuss religion here. That would be inappropriate.
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/london-terror-attack-victims-pc-keith-palmer-aysha-frade-uk-muslim-community-donations-a7645396.html ]How come these religious people aren't being terrorist? I mean after all, they ARE religious...[/url]
"One of the coppers ran off to get help"
Yes, I think that term was to spare his blushes. Running off is just running off.
No blame though, most of us have never been tested so who are we to judge.
I also suspect his mate nay have been beyond help in which case running was prolly the right action.
Probably a good move to attempt to summon resources who can neutralise the threat quickly rather than ending up incapacitated and the attacker free to carry on. I wouldn't fancy going up against a machete with an asp but obviously the stw posters would do a better job
Rockape63It suprises me a LITTLE that he wasn't jumped on by half a dozen polcemen the moment the knives came out...at a gate like that.
Thoughts for the poor Copper, but my first thought was ...how were they taken by surprise. I know the area quite well and the noise that car crashing caused, was huge apparently....so why were they not immediately on their guard so to speak? One of the coppers ran off to get help, rather than help his mate defend themselves. Clearly speculation and the full facts will emerge eventually, but just thought it odd they weren't ready for him.
Do you know what the 'guard paradox' is?
let me explain. Being a sentry or guard or providing any kind of security is 99.99999999% total boredom, with the occasional 0.000000001% blind panic.
The sort of person who can be a guard has to be able to do a job that mostly includes doing nothing, but that self same person must be asked to instantly jump to full action and thwart an attack, but one that might not, and probably never does come. In the real world, that sort of person doesn't exist.
What this means is that yesterday was like any day in London, a noise from the street isn't often a terror attack, and man walking up to you generally ISN'T a terrorist, who's going to try to kill you. Normality is er, the norm, and people act appropriately.