seeder Posted September 15, 2017 #26 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Suspect 'identified by security services from CCTV footage'http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/15/explosion-tube-train-parsons-green-reports-injuries-district1/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seeder Posted September 15, 2017 #27 Share Posted September 15, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, RoofGardener said: There is currently NO evidence that this was an Islamic terror attack. Quote UK terror threat raised to critical as ISIS 'cell' claims responsibility for Tube train attack Heightened terror alert status means another attack may be imminent https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/uk-terror-threat-level-raised-to-critical-after-isis-cell-claims-responsibility-for-tube-train-a3636326.html Edited September 15, 2017 by seeder 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acute Posted September 15, 2017 #28 Share Posted September 15, 2017 5 hours ago, RoofGardener said: There is currently NO evidence that this was an Islamic terror attack. Remember, according to the FBI, it is far more likely (statistically) to be an attack by far-right or white supremacist terrorists. Militant Methodists, perhaps ? Or Buddhists ! Yes, that's it! Militant Buddhists chanting people to death. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted September 16, 2017 #29 Share Posted September 16, 2017 9 hours ago, seeder said: Suspect 'identified by security services from CCTV footage'http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/15/explosion-tube-train-parsons-green-reports-injuries-district1/ I thought that would quickly be the case. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted September 16, 2017 #30 Share Posted September 16, 2017 11 hours ago, RoofGardener said: There is currently NO evidence that this was an Islamic terror attack. Remember, according to the FBI, it is far more likely (statistically) to be an attack by far-right or white supremacist terrorists. Militant Methodists, perhaps ? Or Buddhists ! A couple years ago, this would have automatically been associated with the IRA. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 16, 2017 #31 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Don't tell me....he was on the "watch list". And why did I automatically assume the perp was a "he"? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted September 16, 2017 #32 Share Posted September 16, 2017 1 hour ago, DieChecker said: A couple years ago, this would have automatically been associated with the IRA. A couple of years ago, this would automatically have been associated with Islamists. Ditto 10 years ago. You'd have to go back 25+ years before the IRA would be suspected. Apparantly ISIS have taken responsibility for this attack, along with responsibility for Hurricane Irma, Global Warming, and Aubergines ! 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #33 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Islamic State claim responsibility God it's laughable isn't it. So it takes a bunch of ruthless Terrorist Masterminds to instruct some sad individual how to concoct a pretty amateurish bucket bomb? when the **** are people going to realise that "so-called Islamic State" are just a bunch of opportunists who'll claim the "credit" for anything anyone does anywhere? And meanwhile, UK terror threat raised to critical Measure means intelligence and security agencies have decided another attack may be imminent Well, that's really really helpful. What are we expected to do? Oh yes, I remember, Be Vigilant. Still, the Government will be able to put a few hundred more Police Officers striding about everywhere looking important clutching machine guns. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted September 16, 2017 #34 Share Posted September 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: threat raised to critical Measure means intelligence and security agencies have decided another attack may be imminent Well, that's really really helpful. What are we expected to do? Oh yes, I remember, Be Vigilant. Indeed... but not vigilant about Muslims acting suspiciously.. that would be Racist and IslamophobicTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #35 Share Posted September 16, 2017 You know, the attitude of Governments in the "west" is not completely the opposite to how it was in the days of Hitler. Then it was "keep calm and carry on". (Though that poster was never actually issued in any great quantity). It was cheerful, "who do you think you're kidding Mr. Hitler"* defiance. Now it's "exist in a constant state of fear." We're virtually instructed to be as paranoid as possible about anyone we might suspect to be Muslim (they call it "being vigilant".) I expect the Government's Top Secret Cobra Emergency Committee will be meeting, and we all know what they'll decide, don't we, they'll Step Up Security, which means a few hundred more body-armored police striding about clutching machine guns. Do you think that'll be remotely possibly likely to deter someone from planting a bomb and scuttling off, let alone anyone fanatical enough to carry out a suicide attack? When are people going to realise that "stepping up security" can do absolutely nothing to prevent what the media love to call "Lone Wolf" attacks. (yes, let's glamorize them as much as possible!) All that it's about is making people afraid. And of course, paranoid about anyone they might suspect to be Muslim. * Yes, I know that was written specially for Dad's Army. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #36 Share Posted September 16, 2017 3 hours ago, Michelle said: Don't tell me....he was on the "watch list". And why did I automatically assume the perp was a "he"? well a woman would be less noticeable carrying that big bulky Lidls bag around - and a woman in a burka (or man wearing a burka) would be disguised for the CCTV cameras .. ? But if a woman in a burka is involved I think the 'authorities' will try and keep quiet about it - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #37 Share Posted September 16, 2017 7 minutes ago, bee said: well a woman would be less noticeable carrying that big bulky Lidls bag around - and a woman in a burka (or man wearing a burka) would be disguised for the CCTV cameras .. ? But if a woman in a burka is involved I think the 'authorities' will try and keep quiet about it - oh for Chris's sake, your conspiracy theorising really gets idiotic sometimes. So now you're saying they'd want to cover up if a Muslim was involved? Yeah, that's why they're always so eager to accept it when "So-Called Islamic State" claims that they organised it, isn't it. They want to deny that Muslims are responsible because they secretly have a plot to hand the UK over to Militant Islam, yes! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #38 Share Posted September 16, 2017 9 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: oh for Chris's sake, your conspiracy theorising really gets idiotic sometimes. So now you're saying they'd want to cover up if a Muslim was involved? Yeah, that's why they're always so eager to accept it when "So-Called Islamic State" claims that they organised it, isn't it. They want to deny that Muslims are responsible because they secretly have a plot to hand the UK over to Militant Islam, yes! jeeesus calm down --- did you get out of the wrong side of bed this morning - If you can't see why they would be reluctant to let the public know IF... IF... a woman in a burka was involved (which may not be the case anyway)... then I can't help you -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #39 Share Posted September 16, 2017 5 minutes ago, bee said: jeeesus calm down --- did you get out of the wrong side of bed this morning - If you can't see why they would be reluctant to let the public know IF... IF... a woman in a burka was involved (which may not be the case anyway)... then I can't help you -- It would be the perfect disguise, you mean, and they could blend into the crowd undetectably? You might have a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #40 Share Posted September 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: You know, the attitude of Governments in the "west" is not completely the opposite to how it was in the days of Hitler. Then it was "keep calm and carry on". (Though that poster was never actually issued in any great quantity). It was cheerful, "who do you think you're kidding Mr. Hitler"* defiance. Now it's "exist in a constant state of fear." We're virtually instructed to be as paranoid as possible about anyone we might suspect to be Muslim (they call it "being vigilant".) I expect the Government's Top Secret Cobra Emergency Committee will be meeting, and we all know what they'll decide, don't we, they'll Step Up Security, which means a few hundred more body-armored police striding about clutching machine guns. Do you think that'll be remotely possibly likely to deter someone from planting a bomb and scuttling off, let alone anyone fanatical enough to carry out a suicide attack? When are people going to realise that "stepping up security" can do absolutely nothing to prevent what the media love to call "Lone Wolf" attacks. (yes, let's glamorize them as much as possible!) All that it's about is making people afraid. And of course, paranoid about anyone they might suspect to be Muslim. * Yes, I know that was written specially for Dad's Army. so what's your answer to the problem then -- just let the bombing and hammering and mowing people down etc carry on with no opposition - oh dear a few more people have had their throats cut --- never mind - from what I gather they are using the army to help protect significant places and landmarks to free up the police so they can get on with investigations - It is speculated that the Parsons Green bomb may have been heading for Westminster Station but accidentally detonated - and failed to go off properly --- luckily for the people in that train and anyone in Westminster Station at the time - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #41 Share Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: It would be the perfect disguise, you mean, and they could blend into the crowd undetectably? You might have a point. thank you (if you aren't being sarcastic) ---- edit to add --- and they don't want the public to turn (more) against women wearing burkas - and people demanding that the burka be banned etc etc and the problems that would stem from that - I'm not making a judgement either way .. just saying what I think the 'authorities' will be considering IF... IF... a woman in a burka is involved... (which might not be the case) the BBC are carefully saying ... 'he or she'... so who knows? can't find the link now but it was on a BBC web site - Edited September 16, 2017 by bee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #42 Share Posted September 16, 2017 21 minutes ago, bee said: so what's your answer to the problem then -- just let the bombing and hammering and mowing people down etc carry on with no opposition - oh dear a few more people have had their throats cut --- never mind - how about spending money and manpower resources where it might be useful, in intelligence and the detecting side of policing, rather than utterly pointless gestures like having Judge Dredd striding around toting portable armour-piercing cannon. Is that likely to reassure the ... Oh wait, it isn't intended to reassure the public is it, just the opposite in fact. Which is why they're always so keen to report when "So-Called Islamic State" claims they were behind it. Because what do they want of course? They want Maximum Fear. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #43 Share Posted September 16, 2017 4 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: how about spending money and manpower resources where it might be useful, in intelligence and the detecting side of policing, rather than utterly pointless gestures like having Judge Dredd striding around toting portable armour-piercing cannon. Is that likely to reassure the ... Oh wait, it isn't intended to reassure the public is it, just the opposite in fact. Which is why they're always so keen to report when "So-Called Islamic State" claims they were behind it. Because what do they want of course? They want Maximum Fear. re bolded --- I don't think I agree with that -- and I don't live in London but I think that the public might feel reassured - every time there is an Islamic terror attack I expect there is a collective groan from government etc because of the potential social unrest -- I mean Kim Jong Un and North Korea are the new enemy now and they would happily sweep Islamic State et al under the carpet if they could - so I don't think they want to maximum fear --- probably the opposite - but at the same time the public need to know it's all being taken really seriously because the attacks are real - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #44 Share Posted September 16, 2017 1 minute ago, bee said: every time there is an Islamic terror attack I expect there is a collective groan from government etc because of the potential social unrest There's a collective cheer more like because they know they can suppress any potential unrest behind a United Front against this Greater Evil that Threatens us All. Governments love "terror threats", make no mistake about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #45 Share Posted September 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, bee said: I mean Kim Jong Un and North Korea are the new enemy now and they would happily sweep Islamic State et al under the carpet if they could - Yes, it's always handy to have a Threat in reserve, isn't it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #46 Share Posted September 16, 2017 5 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: There's a collective cheer more like because they know they can suppress any potential unrest behind a United Front against this Greater Evil that Threatens us All. Governments love "terror threats", make no mistake about it. that depends who makes the terror threats ?? and I think the Islamic ones are inconvenient now --- because of the social 'assimilation' issue in the UK and Europe -- we had wall to wall anti ISIS reporting when they wanted to go into Syria and crush Assad - under the pretext of crushing the Islamic State -- but then they realsed they had over egged it and it was back firing on the social cohesion at home - so now we hardly have anything on the news about Islamic State and the Muslims involved - unless there is a terror attack that cannot be ignored - I'm remembering the leaked emails about the Gay Night Club attack in America and how the Democrats (might have been Podesta) were disappointed that the attacker wasn't white and non muslim -- like they couldn't catch a break and the Islamic attacks were inconvenient to their agenda..? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Caspian Hare Posted September 16, 2017 #47 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Arrest, suspect not identified yet http://news.sky.com/story/man-arrested-over-parsons-green-tube-train-bombing-11037838 Quote An 18-year-old man has been arrested in the port area of Dover in connection with the Parsons Green Tube bombing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bee Posted September 16, 2017 #48 Share Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said: Yes, it's always handy to have a Threat in reserve, isn't it. edit to add -- a threat or two - don't forget Russia by the way - I think Farmer is enjoying our little disagreement and he's on your side - congratulations - Edited September 16, 2017 by bee added AND removed something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acute Posted September 16, 2017 #49 Share Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Michelle said: Don't tell me....he was on the "watch list". And why did I automatically assume the perp was a "he"? I hate all this politically-correct anti-profiling nonsense. I can not only tell you the sex of the perp, but also the color of his skin! But I fear this will not be the case in the future. Edited September 16, 2017 by acute . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted September 16, 2017 #50 Share Posted September 16, 2017 8 hours ago, bee said: I'm remembering the leaked emails about the Gay Night Club attack in America and how the Democrats (might have been Podesta) were disappointed that the attacker wasn't white and non muslim -- like they couldn't catch a break and the Islamic attacks were inconvenient to their agenda..? Well, remember that at that time the ruling Party, the "Democrats", were keen to hype up the danger from White Supremacism, in view of the looming threat of the Donald, and they were trying to convince us of the reality of "Moderate" Rebels in Syria and trying to go "Ssshhhh" to anyone who tried to remind people that some of these "moderate" Rebels to whom America was busy supplying arms used to trade under the name Al Qaeda. They were trying to play down Militant Islam then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now