Another Incident On London Bridge

[Rico1304]

One in Melbourne now.

[cloggypop]

If there is a suicide bomber in Israel don't the authorities bury their remains in pigs blood? In their cryptic ideology they can't go to heaven then.

I don't think that's true but it probably comes from here

 

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.asp

 

There's probably not much left to bury anyway after someone has blown themselves up.

[Jose Jones]

One in Melbourne now.

Shot one person in a posh suburb and took a girl hostage who is fine, before the cops shot him. Sounds just like a loon rather than any dedicated terrorist at this stage.

[Jairzinho]

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/05/why-the-london-terror-attack-happened-now/

 

Why the London Terror Attack Happened Now

by JONATHAN COOK

 

 

One has to wonder why terrorists like those who struck on Saturday night in London, and earlier in Manchester, launched their attacks now. It is difficult not to infer that their violence was timed to influence the UK election this coming Thursday.

 

Those behind the attack – whether those carrying it out or those dispatching the terrorists – want to have an effect. Terrorism is the use of indiscriminate violence for political ends. It has a logic, even if it is one we mostly do not care to understand.

 

So what do these terrorists hope to achieve?

 

Based on prior experience, they will assume that by striking now they can increase fear and anger among the British population – intensifying anti-Muslim rhetoric, justifying harsher “security” responses from the British state and shifting political support towards the right. That is good for their cause because it radicalises other disillusioned Muslim youth. In short, it brings recruits.

 

Islam is not exceptional in this regard. This is not a problem specifically of religion. As experts have repeatedly pointed out, disillusioned, frustrated, angry (and mainly male) youth adopt existing ideologies relevant to them and then search for the parts that can be twisted to justify their violence. The violent impulse exists and they seek an ideology to rationalise it.

 

Once Christianity – the religion of turning the other cheek – was used to justify pogroms and inquisitions. In the US, white supremacists – in the Ku Klux Klan, for example – used the Bible to justify spreading terror among the black population of the Deep South. White supremacists continue sporadically to use terror in the US, most notably Timothy McVeigh, who was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

 

Terrorists can exploit secular ideologies too, on either the far-right or far-left. Just think of the Baader Meinhof Gang or the Symbionese Liberation Army, back in the 1970s. The latter famously made a convert of Patty Hearst, granddaughter of publishing empire magnate William Randolph Hearst (aka Citizen Kane). After she was taken hostage, she quickly adopted the group’s thinking and its violence as her own.

 

The Islamic terrorists of our time believe in a violent, zero-sum clash of civilisations. That should not be surprising, as their ideology mirrors the dominant ideology – neo-conservatism – of western foreign policy establishments. Both sides are locked in a terrifying dance of death. Both believe that two “civilisations” exist and are incompatible, that they are in a fight to the death, and that any measures are justified to achieve victory because the struggle is existential. We use drones and “humanitarian intervention” to destabilise their societies; they use cars, guns, knives and bombs to destabilise ours.

 

The dance chiefly takes place because both sides continue it – and it will not be easy to break free of it. Our meddling in the Middle East dates back more than a century – especially since the region became a giant oil spigot for us. The tentacles of western interference did not begin in 2003, whatever we might choose to believe. Conversely, a globalised world inevitably entails one where a century-long colonial battlefield can easily come back to haunt us on our doorsteps.

 

The solution, complex as it will need to be, certainly cannot include the use by us of similarly indiscriminate violence, more “intervention” in the Middle East, or more scapegoating of Muslims. It will require taking a step back and considering how and why we too are addicted to this dance of death.

[skend04]

 

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/05/why-the-london-terror-attack-happened-now/

 

Why the London Terror Attack Happened Now

by JONATHAN COOK

 

 

 

 

One has to wonder why terrorists like those who struck on Saturday night in London, and earlier in Manchester, launched their attacks now. It is difficult not to infer that their violence was timed to influence the UK election this coming Thursday.

Those behind the attack – whether those carrying it out or those dispatching the terrorists – want to have an effect. Terrorism is the use of indiscriminate violence for political ends. It has a logic, even if it is one we mostly do not care to understand.

So what do these terrorists hope to achieve?

Based on prior experience, they will assume that by striking now they can increase fear and anger among the British population – intensifying anti-Muslim rhetoric, justifying harsher “security” responses from the British state and shifting political support towards the right. That is good for their cause because it radicalises other disillusioned Muslim youth. In short, it brings recruits.

Islam is not exceptional in this regard. This is not a problem specifically of religion. As experts have repeatedly pointed out, disillusioned, frustrated, angry (and mainly male) youth adopt existing ideologies relevant to them and then search for the parts that can be twisted to justify their violence. The violent impulse exists and they seek an ideology to rationalise it.

Once Christianity – the religion of turning the other cheek – was used to justify pogroms and inquisitions. In the US, white supremacists – in the Ku Klux Klan, for example – used the Bible to justify spreading terror among the black population of the Deep South. White supremacists continue sporadically to use terror in the US, most notably Timothy McVeigh, who was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

Terrorists can exploit secular ideologies too, on either the far-right or far-left. Just think of the Baader Meinhof Gang or the Symbionese Liberation Army, back in the 1970s. The latter famously made a convert of Patty Hearst, granddaughter of publishing empire magnate William Randolph Hearst (aka Citizen Kane). After she was taken hostage, she quickly adopted the group’s thinking and its violence as her own.

The Islamic terrorists of our time believe in a violent, zero-sum clash of civilisations. That should not be surprising, as their ideology mirrors the dominant ideology – neo-conservatism – of western foreign policy establishments. Both sides are locked in a terrifying dance of death. Both believe that two “civilisations” exist and are incompatible, that they are in a fight to the death, and that any measures are justified to achieve victory because the struggle is existential. We use drones and “humanitarian intervention” to destabilise their societies; they use cars, guns, knives and bombs to destabilise ours.

The dance chiefly takes place because both sides continue it – and it will not be easy to break free of it. Our meddling in the Middle East dates back more than a century – especially since the region became a giant oil spigot for us. The tentacles of western interference did not begin in 2003, whatever we might choose to believe. Conversely, a globalised world inevitably entails one where a century-long colonial battlefield can easily come back to haunt us on our doorsteps.

The solution, complex as it will need to be, certainly cannot include the use by us of similarly indiscriminate violence, more “intervention” in the Middle East, or more scapegoating of Muslims. It will require taking a step back and considering how and why we too are addicted to this dance of death.

I was being a bit tongue in cheek yesterday. Didn't expect others to follow.

[Jairzinho]

Genuinely have no idea what you're talking about.

[skend04]

Genuinely have no idea what you're talking about.

I posted that the attack was designed/timed to influence the election vote, it got poo-pooed.

[Jairzinho]

I posted that the attack was designed/timed to influence the election vote, it got poo-pooed.

 

The very definition of terrorism is the use of violence in order to achieve political aims. It would be rather remiss of them not to consider the timing of such violence.

 

It's beneficial for terrorists, and it's beneficial for the right. Neither of which give a fuck about civilian life. Same balance with Anti-Semites and Zionists.

 

Little cunt wars of mutual benefit.

[littletedwest]

I heard a witness say they didn't manage to hit anyone with the van. If true how shit are they? I nearly run people over all the time and I'm not even trying

[moof]

'Your' party started the war that destabilised the region. Does that keep you up at night? Millions dead. Millions.

 

Here's some other news. All the parties will let people die. Yours may save some more but it'll be marginal, there will decisions made and that come down to cash and Corbyn will allow people to die.

 

I come from Stockport which is a fucking hole and for some reason a breeding ground for serial killers. I care more about my family than people I don't know.

What a load of bollocks. Wouldn't it be better for your daughter if she were to grow up in a forward thinking, progressive society governed by the people for the people, where everyone has an equal chance in life. As opposed to this fucked up race-to-the-bottom plutocracy that you're going to vote for?

 

The Tories are bad for everyone, you just don't get it.

[Mook]

I heard a witness say they didn't manage to hit anyone with the van. If true how shit are they? I nearly run people over all the time and I'm not even trying

 

The BBC reporter who was on the bridge at the time said they went straight into the woman behind her so I think that witness was talking bollocks.

 

Having said that, I can't even drive & I reckon I could kill more than 7 people driving a van about in the centre of London on a Saturday night. Apparently three of them attacked one woman as well so I don't think these scumbags were exactly John Rambo.

[dennis tooth]

Apparently one of the attackers was thrun out a mosque after saying it was unislamic to vote.

[dennis tooth]

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960315000398

 

Plan for regime change in quatar.

[TalkSilly]

Anyone else seen the stories about one of the attackers calling himself "Abz" and wearing an Arsenal shirt?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Section_31]

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960315000398

 

Plan for regime change in quatar.

 

I know a couple of people who went to work in Qatar and fled literally in the middle of the night. They have a penchant for groping your wife apparently and the police always side with the locals. No wonder they have to pay people 50 grand a day to work there.

[skend04]

The 2022 World Cup will be a blast. Sending pampered millionaires to Russia and then Qatar, it's like a FIFA version of Battle Royale or something.

[Baltar]

I don't know how we're going to bring an end to these terror attacks. I do know that one of the first things we should do however is get the hell out of the Middle East. Seriously. We've been bombing that place for decades now. We're still doing it today. Of course some nutcase here is going to react with terror attacks in response to his or her brethren being bombed. And why are we bombing them or propping up different militias in that region? What did Iraq do to get 2 wars inflicted by the West, resulting in hundreds of thousands dead? Resulting in ISIS coming to power? Iraq did fuck all to us. It's not rocket science. If you're going to invade, occupy, bomb, change regimes through violent means, sponsor various factions in civil wars etc. which results in folks over there being killed, then we're going to face retaliation over here. This is compounded by Britain giving sanctuary to countless extremist preachers, leaders and and supporters over the years and for allowing these extremist groups to flourish here. 

[Strontium]

What did Iraq do to get 2 wars inflicted by the West, resulting in hundreds of thousands dead?

 

You what?

 

The first Gulf War occurred because Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait and refused to withdraw. Rather than being "inflicted by the West", Iraq was pushed out of Kuwait by a United Nations-backed coalition of more than thirty countries from every populated continent on the planet.

[Mook]

You what?

 

The first Gulf War occurred because Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait and refused to withdraw. Rather than being "inflicted by the West", Iraq was pushed out of Kuwait by a United Nations-backed coalition of more than thirty countries from every populated continent on the planet.

 

I think his general point that we should get the fuck out of the Middle East stands.

[Section_31]

I don't know how we're going to bring an end to these terror attacks. I do know that one of the first things we should do however is get the hell out of the Middle East. Seriously. We've been bombing that place for decades now. We're still doing it today. Of course some nutcase here is going to react with terror attacks in response to his or her brethren being bombed. And why are we bombing them or propping up different militias in that region? What did Iraq do to get 2 wars inflicted by the West, resulting in hundreds of thousands dead? Resulting in ISIS coming to power? Iraq did fuck all to us. It's not rocket science. If you're going to invade, occupy, bomb, change regimes through violent means, sponsor various factions in civil wars etc. which results in folks over there being killed, then we're going to face retaliation over here. This is compounded by Britain giving sanctuary to countless extremist preachers, leaders and and supporters over the years and for allowing these extremist groups to flourish here. 

 

It doesn't excuse the cunts but the issues we're facing now are directly attributable to our action and inaction in the Middle East.

 

ISIS was formed out of the disgruntled Iraqi army high command (the ones who the USA in their wisdom sacked en mass - blokes with no money and access to guns running wild, what could go wrong), and the manchester mentalist was irate about the Libya situation, and by all accounts his ilk were allowed to ply their trade as long as they were focussing their angst against gaddafi.

 

I'm not a liberal do-gooder by any means and sometimes I think it's right to crack heads, but there's no denying we're knee deep in our own shit with this one.

[dennis tooth]

You what?

 

The first Gulf War occurred because Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait and refused to withdraw. Rather than being "inflicted by the West", Iraq was pushed out of Kuwait by a United Nations-backed coalition of more than thirty countries from every populated continent on the planet.

Not because we the west had installed Saddam and armed Saddam in the first place.

[magicrat]

I see Piers Morgan has jumped on the blame May band wagon.  Incensed that one of the attackers wore and Arse shirt no doubt, Leaves thread after thinking better of posting a bad taste Ozil comment  

[Guest Pistonbroke]

The World is shite when you have to agree with something Morgan has said. 

[tokyojoe]

Wasn't Bin Laden an Arsenal supporter? It's all falling into place now.

[Strontium]

I think his general point that we should get the fuck out of the Middle East stands.

 

My point just demonstrates that his general point is far too simplistic.

 

We should act in the Middle East when it is appropriate to do so.

 

I don't think we would benefit if the world's major powers just stood idly by while countries annex bits of their neighbours, or murder thousands of their own citizens.