[Closed] Terrorism

positive identification of [s]weapons[/s] a tripod and mistaken belief that the camera was an RPG, cease fire and no shooting at wounded.

FIFY

cease fire and no shooting at wounded.

not until a mini van turned up to help the wounded and they shot that up too.

from 8 mins

So the worst you can attribute it to is honest mistake but genuine belief (within a war zone) rather than murder.

You do get the difference between the two, right?

Did you watch the video, Ninfan? Perhaps you didn't notice the shooting of unarmed people fleeing the carnage. No-one was left alive. Massacre, murder, anything less is a lie.

What defines a war zone and how is one created?

Probably start reading here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

Ah, we're back in the silly 'you can shoot them when they are Throwing a bomb at you, but as soon as they let go of it they are no longer a threat' moral relativism of the bleeding heart lefties again, quelle surprise.

there were children in the minivan btw.

it was their fault for bringing kids to a battle

perhaps it's where they live 🙄

there is a small but viscous sect within Islam that honestly believe their role is to take the fight to non believers, kill or convert non believers and spread Islam...by force if necessary.

Very privileged to be in the presence of so many experts on this thread. Can you explain where your deep insight into Islam comes from, deviant?

The problem with lumping terrorism and Islam together is nothing to to with political correctness. It's about treating our citizens fairly. So you can't really stop and search all Muslims any more than you can stop and search all black people in Chicago, say, even if more black people are involved in certain crimes.

Ah, we're back in the silly 'you can shoot them when they are Throwing a bomb at you, but as soon as they let go of it they are no longer a threat' moral relativism of the bleeding heart lefties again, quelle surprise.

I don't think you get the point, Ninfan.

"Bleeding heart lefties" or people who realise that you can't massacre thousands of people without upsetting people who are then likely to follow the "eye for an eye" logic whichever good book they've read it in.

Don't start a fight you can't win.

positive identification of group with weapons (00.59) and mistaken belief that the camera was an RPG (01.24) cease fire and no shooting at wounded.

&

So the worst you can attribute it to is honest mistake but genuine belief (within a war zone) rather than murder.

You do get the difference between the two, right?

Hmm.

So, initially you try to pass the incident off as a positive identification - which professionally, I can tell you, they didn't look like weapons in the slightest (previous life as a trained observer in the British Army. Look up STA patrols if you're bothered)...

Then you admit it was a mistake.

Do you know what you want??

I don't think you get the point, Ninfan.

You're probably right - maybe they should have tased and arrested them as well?

initially you try to pass the incident off as a positive identification -

I'm not passing it off as anything, they believed they had a positive identification of weapons - you can argue till you're blue in the face over whether they were wrong or right to do so, but it's categorically clear that that was their belief at the time, that the group were combatants, even if mistaken, which is enough to disprove the allegation of murder being thrown about against them.

I'm sorry but that call was a shite one. It's obvious there were no weapons.

& I only quoted you..

Your words...."positive identification".

Clearly it wasn't, yet you chose to use them. Why?

To some extent i reckon the folk committing these acts are desperate to be part of an in group. Like van owners getting remaps or people planking it's similar but more sinister.

It's all done on line, in forums, and chat groups. People with agendas are taking advantage of vulnerable folk, and they in turn inspire other easily led idiots. Basically the same as abuse grooming. I'd consider them as victims too.

Why are young people so desperate though? What's missing from their lives? The ones travelling to fight or blowing themselves up don't always come from terrible backgrounds, they can be incredibly fortunate too. I'm not sure anyone really understands.

To put a quote in the mouths of the Americans...
It's their god given right to go into another country and kill people...

When an American or a Brit says God heading into war or when foreign people die it's never questioned.

Oh and classic ninfan distraction, happy to argue the semantics on one issue and duck away from any of the tough questions.

Because that's what they [u]believed[/u] they had - "yes we have seen weapons" not "we suspect they might have weapons"

When an American or a Brit says God heading into war or when foreign people die it's never questioned.

Perhaps because they are saying "God is with us" not "God told me to do this", in which case we would think they were crazy

What defines a war zone and how is one created?

Probably start reading here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

That's a lot of bumpf to get through and I'm still none the wiser.

Can civilians declare war, or is it purely a government led activity?

That's a lot of bumpf to get through and I'm still none the wiser.

From the BumpfPoster Master General! 😀

That's a lot of bumpf to get through and I'm still none the wiser.

[img] [/img]

Do your own research.....

Can civilians declare war, or is it purely a government led activity?

So, rolling back to the core of the argument

If these people turn out to have been known to the security services (and I suspect they will) then what were they still doing on the street, and should we have locked them up earlier (even if they had not yet done anything currently illegal)?

If you want to know go look it up, at this point you seem to want to lead the thread off track with ninfan there. Still no practical solutions and suggestions?

and should we have locked them up earlier (even if they had not yet done anything currently illegal)?

Whoops, looks like you posted too soon there Mike 🙂

care to answer the question?

Would you be willing to be locked up for your thoughts?

You're implying that he thinks...

Would you be willing to be locked up for your thoughts?

Who suggested that?

Well as you don't know what gets you on a watch list, and you want the watch list arrested what if you ended up on one? Bit too much research into something, meet the wrong people and your in an orange jump suit having water poured into you. See how some of this goes?
Have we been here before?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi

there is a small but viscous sect within Islam that honestly believe their role is to take the fight to non believers, kill or convert non believers and spread Islam...by force if necessary.

Very privileged to be in the presence of so many experts on this thread. Can you explain where your deep insight into Islam comes from, deviant?

Do you disagree with his comment?

 

Still no practical solutions and suggestions?

Go back to the start of the thread mike, I've made it pretty clear...

Still no comment on this? i.e. The Home Secretary, one of whose main jobs is defending the nation from terrorist threats, preventing a fellow candidate from speaking the truth in her local hustings just yesterday, shortly before the latest attacks...

And the home office of Her Majesty's Government, financed by the populus, [url= http://www.newsweek.com/uk-report-terror-saudi-arabia-public-finding-618508 ]failing to publish a report on Saudi links to funding of terrorism?[/url]

Solutions? Raise awareness, demand public accountability...

I've been fairly active on that front 😉

Who suggested that?

Er..You?

should we have locked them up earlier (even if they had not yet done anything currently illegal)?

Overhead some people chatting about terrorist attacks this morning. The consensus was this is the start of a period of sustained and frequent attacks.
I hope they are wrong but can't find much evidence to disagree.

Saudi Arabia. End of discussion.

From page one and still correct.

I've said it before and I'll say it again today that in the midst of another terrible atrocity we need to look at and understand the root causes; one hundred years of British foreign policy, and the failings within our own society that has let these individuals slip through the cracks and become radicalised.

No-one wakes up one morning and decides to be a terrorist. No-one goes to a Mosque and one day has someone convince them to be a terrorist.

These people are, in general, the ones that society has failed, the ones from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas, the ones failed by an underfunded education system, the disenfranchised, those missed or failed by underfunded mental health service, and I admit the occasional inherently violent that have been missed by an underfunded justice system. It is these people who feel like society has failed them, who don't feel like they have a future, those suffering from depression and despondency. Those who have come to this country seeking refuge and have been met with vitriol, racism, bias and hatred from the right-wing press and right-wing groups on social media (and those who take its words as gospel) blaming them for all societies ills because of their colour, religion or heritage.

It is these people who those who seek to propagate terror target, whispering in their ear, telling them that they are their friends, that they understand, that the west hates them; "the evidence is in all the papers, see how they hate you", "look at what they do to our families in (insert recently bombed country here)". They offer them the support and comfort that society has failed to, and in turn promotes hatred of this society and it's this hatred that leads to the atrocities we are seeing across the world.

This is the doorway that society opens to let radicalisation in.

Blame the English, why not?

Er..You?

No, you're extrapolating "not yet done anything currently illegal" into something else

It's perfectly possible that they have [b]done[/b], not just thought about, lots of things that at the moment cannot lead to imprisonment, you only have to look at the background of the Manchester bomber to see examples - travelling abroad to war zones like Libya and Syria and believed to have been in training camps there being the type of thing that you could potentially criminalise, leading to detention or refusal of entry.

British foreign policy, and the failings within our own society that has let these individuals slip through the cracks and become radicalised.

ninfan - Member

It's perfectly possible that they have done, not just thought about, lots of things that at the moment cannot lead to imprisonment, you only have to look at the background of the Manchester bomber to see examples - travelling abroad to war zones like Libya and Syria and believed to have been in training camps there being the type of thing that you could potentially criminalise, leading to detention or refusal of entry.

I thought travelling to Syria was already enough to get you potentially locked up?

One thing at a time eh?

The causes and catalysts of (Islamic) terrorism, (political, religious, socio-politica, culturall and personal) are:

1. ?
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
Etc

The way I see it - unless these are identified, verified and agreed upon then any discussion about 'solutions' is worse than moot.

OK so we can blame ourselves for the terrorism in our own country?!

What about the Muslim child abusers/rape gangs in Rotherham and Oxford etc etc etc? How is that our fault???

Bear in mind this is from 25 years ago... aside from myriad more deaths, what's changed?

OK so we can blame ourselves for the terrorism in our own country?!

To some degree.

What about the Muslim child abusers/rape gangs in Rotherham and Oxford etc etc etc? How is that our fault???

Like Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris etc. I don't think child abuse etc. is a wholly exclusive Muslim issue.

I've said it before and I'll say it again today that in the midst of another terrible atrocity we need to look at and understand the root causes; one hundred years of British foreign policy, and the failings within our own society that has let these individuals slip through the cracks and become radicalised.

No-one wakes up one morning and decides to be a terrorist. No-one goes to a Mosque and one day has someone convince them to be a terrorist.

These people are, in general, the ones that society has failed, the ones from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas, the ones failed by an underfunded education system, the disenfranchised, those missed or failed by underfunded mental health service, and I admit the occasional inherently violent that have been missed by an underfunded justice system. It is these people who feel like society has failed them, who don't feel like they have a future, those suffering from depression and despondency. Those who have come to this country seeking refuge and have been met with vitriol, racism, bias and hatred from the right-wing press and right-wing groups on social media (and those who take its words as gospel) blaming them for all societies ills because of their colour, religion or heritage.

It is these people who those who seek to propagate terror target, whispering in their ear, telling them that they are their friends, that they understand, that the west hates them; "the evidence is in all the papers, see how they hate you", "look at what they do to our families in (insert recently bombed country here)". They offer them the support and comfort that society has failed to, and in turn promotes hatred of this society and it's this hatred that leads to the atrocities we are seeing across the world.

This is the doorway that society opens to let radicalisation in.

I'm not sure whether our society has failed them. The Manchester bomber was university educated wasn't he? I haven't seen any working class white kids carrying out terror attacks. Perhaps the Muslim community has failed them?

What about the Muslim child abusers/rape gangs in Rotherham and Oxford etc etc etc? How is that our fault???

Dunno what this has to do with the terror attacks TBH.

It's all part of their total contempt for the country they are living in, that's what it's got to do with it.
Do you know they branded a letter 'M' onto a 13 year old girl to show she was now the property? of Mohammed.
Disgusting.

"War" does have a legal status in terms of state-on-state conflict as defined via the Geneva conventions - for terrorism to be classed as an act of war, then there would need to be proof that it was effectively state-sponsored. Even the Afghan conflict was not a "war" but was a NATO-led peace-keeping activity at the request of the Afghan government.