Shots Fired Outside House of Commons (UK Parliament Building)

[Panna King]

1 minute ago, Toony said:

What's your source for that?

Quite simple to put 2 and 2 together,   a couple of years ago ISIS actually hacked the the ex servicemen details from the US and Britain.  

[Inverted]

Every time I see police in Denmark, or when I've been visiting Sweden or Germany, I realise how we take it for granted that our police are unarmed. And anyone i've spoken to who wasn't aware that that was the case really find it admirable that our police don't carry guns. 

Nobody is comfortable around a loaded firearm, and it makes a huge difference imo in the relation between the police and the public. 

[DeadLinesman]

42 minutes ago, VanPanna said:

Quite simple to put 2 and 2 together,   a couple of years ago ISIS actually hacked the the ex servicemen details from the US and Britain.  

So absolutely no source. Whatsoever. You've put 2 and 2 together and come up with 85.

[Honey Honey]

Freedom hater Theresa May wants us all to walk around the street with our pants down so that our arseholes can be inspected by anyone with the tools to wedge our cheeks open.

 

[Carnivore Chris]

On 23/03/2017 at 11:08 PM, Tanksie said:

 

Whats the point of having a bunch of cops cruising about when they are equipped to do fuck all? What are they going to do if they are on site for another attack? Get stabbed some more?

 

The fact that English police are unarmed in this day and age and it took a personal security guard to kill the terrorist is embarrassing

They aren't unarmed though.

Regular coppers who patrol the street don't carry firearms(nor should they, why should they be allowed guns?) but they have special armed forces that are never far away. They are also all armed in airports and places of this nature.

[Fairy In Boots]

4 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Freedom hater Theresa May wants us all to walk around the street with our pants down so that our arseholes can be inspected by anyone with the tools to wedge our cheeks open.

 

I get the argument that it's invasion of privacy but they're doing it where they can anyway I freely admit I like porn and betting apps

[Honey Honey]

23 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I get the argument that it's invasion of privacy but they're doing it where they can anyway I freely admit I like porn and betting apps

They've already done that. This is about encryption, they want to put a backdoor in for government when tech experts say that weakening encryption can be exploited by anyone.

It's laughable anyway. The terrorists will just use something else. It's just chasing them around the internet and pulling our pants down while doing so.

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

They've already done that. This is about encryption, they want to put a backdoor in for government when tech experts say that weakening encryption can be exploited by anyone.

It's laughable anyway. The terrorists will just use something else. It's just chasing them around the internet and pulling our pants down while doing so.

I know, i'm at the point with cyber security where i just assume everything is no longer private and because of that i've just stopped reading. I've not even bothered with vault 7 and i'm more surprised people are shocked by it in 2017.  

I bet someone from special branch has read the previous forum and seen my constant referencing of Islam and then looked at my devices because of the constant referencing. I can just imagine some cunt trawling my internet history to see i spend my time watching Ross Kemp on Gangs and Youtube & clips of Christopher Hitchens slagging off Islam, interspersed with 5 minute forays into porn hub.

The Terrorists do most of their shit in the mosques, prisons and schools anyway, if they're arranging details via whatsapp then they're just real life four lions cast radicalized by Ahmed down the masjid and they're no different from the characters in the film. This is really the problem, known hard core well trained terrorists are being tracked, the cunt that did the attack the other day was just obviously a nutter and that crazy was nurtured and set to crazy by whatever preacher he'd come into contact with. You can't really defend against this unless you attack the problem, sadly we're still in denial about it politically in this country because as i said above the Muslims have a few million votes now. 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

6 hours ago, The Rebel CRS said:

They aren't unarmed though.

Regular coppers who patrol the street don't carry firearms(nor should they, why should they be allowed guns?) but they have special armed forces that are never far away. They are also all armed in airports and places of this nature.

 

Didn't help the cop outside parliament non did it? If he had a pistol like the rest of the worlds police do he could potentially have killed the terrorist, rather than get stabbed to death wishing he had a gun

[Pig on the Wing]

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I can just imagine some cunt trawling my internet history to see i spend my time watching Ross Kemp on Gangs and Youtube & clips of Christopher Hitchens slagging off Islam, interspersed with 5 minute forays into porn hub.

I know you enjoy slagging off Islam, but surely you don't actually get so excited about it that you get onto Lisa Ann's videos every now and again to blow off some steam?

[Fairy In Boots]

6 hours ago, StefBWFC said:

I know you enjoy slagging off Islam, but surely you don't actually get so excited about it that you get onto Lisa Ann's videos every now and again to blow off some steam?

Nah I'm just a wanker. 

[Honey Honey]

9 hours ago, Tanksie said:

 

Didn't help the cop outside parliament non did it? If he had a pistol like the rest of the worlds police do he could potentially have killed the terrorist, rather than get stabbed to death wishing he had a gun

PC Palmer is a hero because he chose to engage, he chose to put his life on the line. He didn't have to. He didn't die because he didn't have a gun. He could have retreated. His colleague didn't get stabbed to death because he retreated. They knew where the armed officers were but the man had a bravery and an instinct that puts him well above the ordinary citizen. There wouldn't have been anything wrong with him retreating to the next line of defence where the armed officers were.

[Storts]

7 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

PC Palmer is a hero because he chose to engage, he chose to put his life on the line. He didn't have to. He didn't die because he didn't have a gun. He could have retreated. His colleague didn't get stabbed to death because he retreated. They knew where the armed officers were but the man had a bravery and an instinct that puts him well above the ordinary citizen. There wouldn't have been anything wrong with him retreating to the next line of defence where the armed officers were.

Exactly, I can assure you there are armed guards in the courtyard every day, they hang back but they are there.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

Good on him. Or, he could have shot the man AND been a hero AND lived. What an outcome that is. 

Patrolling police should have pistols in this day and age, especially in a large European capitol. I am not advocating an American guns for everyone policy here, I live in Australia and our cops carry our citizens don't, and I feel safer for it. We don't have police incidents shooting of unarmed civilians ect. If the UK police all do some intense firearms training and safety I am sure within the next 6-12 months you could have armed safely patrolling police nation wide.

[Honey Honey]

22 minutes ago, Tanksie said:

Good on him. Or, he could have shot the man AND been a hero AND lived. What an outcome that is. 

Patrolling police should have pistols in this day and age, especially in a large European capitol. I am not advocating an American guns for everyone policy here, I live in Australia and our cops carry our citizens don't, and I feel safer for it. We don't have police incidents shooting of unarmed civilians ect. If the UK police all do some intense firearms training and safety I am sure within the next 6-12 months you could have armed safely patrolling police nation wide.

Australian police shoot dead people with knives regardless of being attacked and then they call it "lawful" when they could use tasers. Often those with the knives are mentally ill.

Lethal force is totally inappropriate. The police in the UK are monitored and investigated over whether they used the appropriate amount of force. In Australia you don't give a shit, just kill the guy he's got schizophrenia and a bread knife.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

We had a weird burst of incidents in late 2014. Multiple occurrences of police being attacked with knives, some were shot fatally, some were not. This was a blip on a calm surface however, and if what happened at Westminster hasn't opened your eyes to what a man with a knife can do they will forever remain closed. The moment you treat an armed attacker as a non threat you die.

 

We are clearly living in a mad max esque dystopian violent future.

[Honey Honey]

27 minutes ago, Tanksie said:

We had a weird burst of incidents in late 2014. Multiple occurrences of police being attacked with knives, some were shot fatally, some were not. This was a blip on a calm surface however, and if what happened at Westminster hasn't opened your eyes to what a man with a knife can do they will forever remain closed. The moment you treat an armed attacker as a non threat you die.

Absolute rubbish. It's a matter of appropriate force for the situation. At the present time guns for knife crime is not the only option which you keep portraying it as. The Police in London have been polled and said they don't want guns they want tasers. The actual Police, the one's out there everyday said they don't want or need guns. Once they start changing their minds then I will reconsider my opinion.

They may change their minds in the future if gun crime becomes as bad as it is in Australia.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

We have AWFUL gun crime. Said no one who didn't live in Melbourne 20 years ago

[IgnisExcubitor]

While it is true that the West's foreign policy has contributed to the rise of terrorism, but to hold that as a sole reason for terrorism shows a complete lack of understanding of the problem, which @StefBWFC exhibits to the fullest. As someone who sees the various problems that emerge out of Islam first hand its blind opinions like yours (which I also see in abundance, unfortunately) that make me uncomfortable about the future. Its either this or false equivalence with other religions in 'the present time'. Sheesh.

 

[Pig on the Wing]

13 minutes ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

While it is true that the West's foreign policy has contributed to the rise of terrorism, but to hold that as a sole reason for terrorism shows a complete lack of understanding of the problem, which @StefBWFC exhibits to the fullest. As someone who sees the various problems that emerge out of Islam first hand its blind opinions like yours (which I also see in abundance, unfortunately) that make me uncomfortable about the future. Its either this or false equivalence with other religions in 'the present time'. Sheesh.

 

Could you please expand on this? You've shot my points down, which is fair enough, but haven't provided anything else to explain your understanding of the issue?

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, Tanksie said:

We have AWFUL gun crime. Said no one who didn't live in Melbourne 20 years ago

If there is no threat of gun crime to an ordinary cop and they have guns then it is an Orwellian case of the state using the threat of lethal force as an overarching behavioural control mechanism. 

No thanks.

 

[IgnisExcubitor]

 
@StefBWFC, the world will continue to have problems with Islam, because Muslims put heir faith and identity ahead of a country's laws and constitution. This is different to others. Add to that a distinct lack of reform and more importantly unacceptance of criticism, apart from lack of assimilation with other cultures and you have a recipe of disaster. There is an obssesion amongst most Muslims to be ruled by a different set of rules; their rules.

All religions in general are problematic, but I am pretty certain that criticising only one will get your head chopped off.

While west's foreign policy is problematic and one of the causes for terrorism, how do you explain problems in Baluchistan, Bangladesh, or say closer home to me in States like West Bengal, Kerala, Kashmir, etc where Hindus, Christians, etc are stopped from celebrating festivals, killed, looted. The kashmiri pandits genocide. Hindus or even Ahemadis being wiped off in Pakistan, reformers being butchered in Bangladesh, etc. I could go on and on. Of course there is an unsaid ban on coverage of these incidents by mainstream media, because there is a belief that it victimizes a religion. But shouldn't religion, which is an idea at the end of that day (and this is coming from a religious bloke) be open to criticism. It only ends up in reforming it.

But people indulge with false equivalence, or speak about the past, when say Christianity was bad. Even then, if we are going to speak about past then let's talk about Mughals. One of its many kings, Aurangzeb, killed 4.6 million people in his quest to establish Islamic state. That's just one king. There's Babur, Taimur, shah jahan, etc.

Anyway, the important point is that there is a serious problem with a religion in present times. Not all its followers are dangerous. But the extremist minority is lethal, and the silent moderates are also aiding their cause by suppressing the voice of dissent. And everyone in the world will continue to have problems with it until Islam is dramatically reformed. Of course one doesn't have to listen to Farage or Hopkins, but at least listen to Ali Rizvi, Maajid, or Ayaan. More importantly stop making excuses for that religion.

[El Profesor]

4 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

 
@StefBWFC, the world will continue to have problems with Islam, because Muslims put heir faith and identity ahead of a country's laws and constitution. This is different to others. Add to that a distinct lack of reform and more importantly unacceptance of criticism, apart from lack of assimilation with other cultures and you have a recipe of disaster. There is an obssesion amongst most Muslims to be ruled by a different set of rules; their rules.

All religions in general are problematic, but I am pretty certain that criticising only one will get your head chopped off.

While west's foreign policy is problematic and one of the causes for terrorism, how do you explain problems in Baluchistan, Bangladesh, or say closer home to me in States like West Bengal, Kerala, Kashmir, etc where Hindus, Christians, etc are stopped from celebrating festivals, killed, looted. The kashmiri pandits genocide. Hindus or even Ahemadis being wiped off in Pakistan, reformers being butchered in Bangladesh, etc. I could go on and on. Of course there is an unsaid ban on coverage of these incidents by mainstream media, because there is a belief that it victimizes a religion. But shouldn't religion, which is an idea at the end of that day (and this is coming from a religious bloke) be open to criticism. It only ends up in reforming it.

But people indulge with false equivalence, or speak about the past, when say Christianity was bad. Even then, if we are going to speak about past then let's talk about Mughals. One of its many kings, Aurangzeb, killed 4.6 million people in his quest to establish Islamic state. That's just one king. There's Babur, Taimur, shah jahan, etc.

Anyway, the important point is that there is a serious problem with a religion in present times. Not all its followers are dangerous. But the extremist minority is lethal, and the silent moderates are also aiding their cause by suppressing the voice of dissent. And everyone in the world will continue to have problems with it until Islam is dramatically reformed. Of course one doesn't have to listen to Farage or Hopkins, but at least listen to Ali Rizvi, Maajid, or Ayaan. More importantly stop making excuses for that religion.

Good post. It really made me think. Have you read "Submission"? The scenario written by Houllebecq is pluasible in my opinion. I can see an alliance between the european far right and islamists happening to halt feminism and other progressive movements in the future. And it could be sucessful since many liberals are afraid of critizing Islam and being labeled as islamophobes and racists. 

[Fairy In Boots]

5 hours ago, IgnisExcubitor said:

 
@StefBWFC, the world will continue to have problems with Islam, because Muslims put heir faith and identity ahead of a country's laws and constitution. This is different to others. Add to that a distinct lack of reform and more importantly unacceptance of criticism, apart from lack of assimilation with other cultures and you have a recipe of disaster. There is an obssesion amongst most Muslims to be ruled by a different set of rules; their rules.

All religions in general are problematic, but I am pretty certain that criticising only one will get your head chopped off.

While west's foreign policy is problematic and one of the causes for terrorism, how do you explain problems in Baluchistan, Bangladesh, or say closer home to me in States like West Bengal, Kerala, Kashmir, etc where Hindus, Christians, etc are stopped from celebrating festivals, killed, looted. The kashmiri pandits genocide. Hindus or even Ahemadis being wiped off in Pakistan, reformers being butchered in Bangladesh, etc. I could go on and on. Of course there is an unsaid ban on coverage of these incidents by mainstream media, because there is a belief that it victimizes a religion. But shouldn't religion, which is an idea at the end of that day (and this is coming from a religious bloke) be open to criticism. It only ends up in reforming it.

But people indulge with false equivalence, or speak about the past, when say Christianity was bad. Even then, if we are going to speak about past then let's talk about Mughals. One of its many kings, Aurangzeb, killed 4.6 million people in his quest to establish Islamic state. That's just one king. There's Babur, Taimur, shah jahan, etc.

Anyway, the important point is that there is a serious problem with a religion in present times. Not all its followers are dangerous. But the extremist minority is lethal, and the silent moderates are also aiding their cause by suppressing the voice of dissent. And everyone in the world will continue to have problems with it until Islam is dramatically reformed. Of course one doesn't have to listen to Farage or Hopkins, but at least listen to Ali Rizvi, Maajid, or Ayaan. More importantly stop making excuses for that religion.

It must be a stigma against me now because when I say this shit I'm ignored or snarky comments about Ray guns are doled out. 

It's a fact i've never once referenced Katie Hopkins or Farage in this Topic, I've talked about Yasmin Ahlibai-Brown or Ayaan Hirsi Ali on occasion but yeah "ray guns" fucking muppets. 

17 minutes ago, El_Loco said:

Good post. It really made me think. Have you read "Submission"? The scenario written by Houllebecq is pluasible in my opinion. I can see an alliance between the european far right and islamists happening to halt feminism and other progressive movements in the future. And it could be sucessful since many liberals are afraid of critizing Islam and being labeled as islamophobes and racists. 

Far right of Europe in Alliance with islamists 😂 Only when they become the far right themselves. 

[El Profesor]

42 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

 

Far right of Europe in Alliance with islamists 😂 Only when they become the far right themselves. 

I was thinking about the nativist teacher and his conversion to Islam after the muslim president reaches power and FN is defeated, especially about this part: