You are here: Home > Message Board > Gold Talk > Blasts in London
March 28 2024 1.42pm

Blasts in London

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 53 of 68 < 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 >

 

View NickPalace's Profile NickPalace Flag Horsmonden, Kent (hopefully tempor... 13 Jul 05 12.45am Send a Private Message to NickPalace Add NickPalace as a friend

Quote A_JsShorts at 13 Jul 2005 12:36am

Quote nick10650066 at 13 Jul 2005 12:28am

Quote A_JsShorts at 13 Jul 2005 12:20am

Nick I don't think anyone is saying these people don't come from ****stani origin and I that is beside the point anyway. The people who done this ARE British, they were most likely born here and educated here. I think it is unlikely their families ie parents had anything to do with it or any knowledge of it.

So I totally think Saxon is right. How will tighter immigration controls stop this when they are already here and have been for 18-20 years??

And unfortunately you can't refuse a person entry to the UK who is from ****stan or another middle Eastern/Arabic country because they "might" be a terrorist.


I do agree with you here, and when I heard that these people were all 'British', I knew there would be people coming on here saying this.

I am not necessarily saying it was the right thing to do at the time, as I am not old enough to know what was happening, but had their parents not been allowed in, none of tnhis would have happened. Having said that, I still don't think these could have been prevented.

One thing this should do, is take pressure off of the government slightly. Before this was announced, many people were blaming Blair for letting in foreigners/immigrants, and now those people have been proved wrong to a certain extent.

You can't really say that though, cos considering their parents were most likely to have come to Britain around the 1960's this war on the West by Al Quae'da wasn't even going on and the Government unfortunately don't have crystal balls to for tell whats gonna happen.

Of course this could have been prevented, by not getting involved with what was f*** all to do with us in the first place but that is for another argument.



Agreed, but I am saying that once Blair made the decision to go to Iraq, something like this was always going to happen in the future. It was always a case of not if but when.

On the matter about these bombers, whether they were 'British' or not, they will have had outside influences, either from parents or from terror groups around the world, and I think that is most people's point. When these bombings happened, it was fairly obviously not going to be a John Smith.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Farawayeagle's Profile Farawayeagle Flag Sydney 13 Jul 05 12.46am Send a Private Message to Farawayeagle Add Farawayeagle as a friend

Quote A_JsShorts at 13 Jul 2005 12:36am

Of course this could have been prevented, by not getting involved with what was f*** all to do with us in the first place but that is for another argument.


I suppose you are referring to Iraq here? Can't agree with that
A_JsShorts. These kind of people find justification going back to the ends of time. The Iraq war is just one item in a long list of real or imagined grievances these people store up in their warped little minds.

Some IRA terrorists used things that happened zillions of years ago to jusify their carnage.

 


Founder Of The Crystal Palace Roller Coaster
Association

An Affiliate Of The Never A Dull Moment Club

R.I.P. DJ Hardline -- Gone Way Too Soon

GKAS Member 54

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View A_JsShorts's Profile A_JsShorts 13 Jul 05 12.53am Send a Private Message to A_JsShorts Add A_JsShorts as a friend

Quote Farawayeagle at 13 Jul 2005 12:46am

Quote A_JsShorts at 13 Jul 2005 12:36am

Of course this could have been prevented, by not getting involved with what was f*** all to do with us in the first place but that is for another argument.


I suppose you are referring to Iraq here? Can't agree with that
A_JsShorts. These kind of people find justification going back to the ends of time. The Iraq war is just one item in a long list of real or imagined grievances these people store up in their warped little minds.

Some IRA terrorists used things that happened zillions of years ago to jusify their carnage.

I'm wrong in saying it could have been prevented, I cannot know that for sure can I!

But especially with the bombings in Istanbul, Madrid and now London, the justification has been because of these countries involvement in Iraq.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Deacon Blues's Profile Deacon Blues Flag Whangarei/Kerikeri 13 Jul 05 1.06am Send a Private Message to Deacon Blues Add Deacon Blues as a friend

Quote nick10650066 at 13 Jul 2005 12:45am


Agreed, but I am saying that once Blair made the decision to go to Iraq, something like this was always going to happen in the future. It was always a case of not if but when.

On the matter about these bombers, whether they were 'British' or not, they will have had outside influences, either from parents or from terror groups around the world, and I think that is most people's point. When these bombings happened, it was fairly obviously not going to be a John Smith.


Curerent, tragic events aside. Even that can't be said for certain.

The Oklahoma bombing was loudly pegged out for "Moslem Extremists" until they tracked down Timothy McVeigh and his crew then it all got a bit uncomfortable as the US were forced to look closer to home for the reasons.

Nutters are nutters in any skin.

All very depressing really.

 


"If you choose to live in a world ruled by hamburger, that is your choice.. I choose to wipe them out. And if I have to, I can do it by myself. "
-The Batwinged Hamburger Snatcher

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View thornton-heath eagle's Profile thornton-heath eagle 13 Jul 05 1.19am Send a Private Message to thornton-heath eagle Add thornton-heath eagle as a friend

If you are going to stop any P@kistanis and Arabs into Britain because their children MIGHT grow up to be terrorists, (which is highly unlikely anyway) why not do the same with Irish families, seeing as the IRA still exists who could also produce a brand of terrorist offspring, and Columbians and other countries where drugs like cocaine and heroine come from, and any other nationalities that might bring some evil or other to our country??? As you can see, it's a bit flawed! Whoever thought of it seems a bit confused. Or maybe it's their way of saying get rid of the Pak!s without sounding like a racist??

 


.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View A_JsShorts's Profile A_JsShorts 13 Jul 05 1.24am Send a Private Message to A_JsShorts Add A_JsShorts as a friend

Correct on that one totally agree, its no different to saying if we hadn't have allowed all the west Indians here 40 years ago we wouldn't have a major crack and gangland problem that we have today.

It's a totally rediculous thing to even think.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eulalio's Profile eulalio Flag Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 9.00am Send a Private Message to eulalio Add eulalio as a friend

What was supposed to be a thread about our shared shock and revulsion at these attacks has, predictably, begun to descend into the realms of finger-pointing and scape-goating. Sad.

Thanks NickinOX for the excellent post. And apologies for my not copying the header on the article, which was correctly identified as Gary Younge's. The man's a professional. Unlike myself, not being quick enough on the copy/paste to include the writer's name (apologies), nor even a number of reactionary paragraphs repeatedly invoking the phrase "hand-wringing liberals". Poor show indeed. ;-)

A few things, I thought, required comment from your long and interesting rebuff to Younge's article though.

1. You mention, early on, the Geneva conventions and how Al-Q doesn't apply to them because they aren't a national army. We already knew this because the US Government decided, in their wisdom, that the individuals they captured and abducted in various locations around the world and banged up in Bagram, Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, did not deserve the protections afforded to combatants under Geneva. So if we don't treat them with the respect afforded normal people under these conventions, why should we expect them to fight within these rules that we can abandon whenever it's expedient? Fair and valid though your point clearly is, we need consistency or we have chaos. Personally if I found out that innocent people like me were being tortured for no apparent reason, I'd be inclined to fight back to protect the rest of us against this fascism. Just like they do against our fascism.

2. Don't even bother arguing about the UN. It's only 50 years old so has hardly had the opportunity to get involved in most of the history relevant to these events -- and it's basically just a vehicle for the exercise of US power, so could hardly be expected to act even-handedly anyway (hence its inability to hold Israel to account for its myriad breaches). The UN is now irrelevant thanks to Dubya, it's time we abolished it and created something worthwhile instead.

3. You query the count of the Iraqi dead, and say "serious studies" question this figure. As I had only heard that no "serious" counts were made, I'd like to know which studies you mean, and what they came up with. I am not questioning your honesty, I am just curious.

4. You mention that Saddam used to "reward" the families of suicide bombers. This is true. Does this mean that, by extension, Saddam sponsored and supported terrorism? If so, then by extension so have the governments of most major powers, including the UK. Can we invade ourselves for regime change please? At least we know we have WMDs.

Nick10650066 you came by a different route to the same conclusion as me... namely that the illegal invasion of Iraq made us targets. Now go and read the childish abuse handed out by, er, Petealiator surprise surfcukinprise, when I pointed this out in 2003. Some people are so fcuking thick mate, but you saw through it.

Farawayeagle, I just had to make one point for you. 30 January 1972 was NOT zillions of years ago mate.

Edited by Moose (19 Jul 2005 9:34am)

 


face up to your share of the blame you filthy terrorist sympathiser - Petealiator 8/7/2005
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality - Theodor Adorno

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View npn's Profile npn Flag Crowborough 13 Jul 05 9.36am Send a Private Message to npn Add npn as a friend

Honest question to those mentioning the war in Iraq:

1. Do you really believe these attacks would've been averted had Britain not taken part (I'm thinking of the attacks on 'soft' targets in Kenya and Tanzania - hardly renowned for their part in that struggle). I know they were supposedly British targets, but the people killed were, on the whole, Africans

2. Do you think that a withdrawal from Iraq is any more likely now? Personally, I was also leaning towards the "get the troops out" camp, but now there is absolutely no way we can do it - allow this to be perceived as a victory, and every future grievance will be met by the same 'successful' tactic

There will always be disaffected youths open to being manipulated by those they look up to, if those people are evil enough to choose to do it (regardless of religion - Mugabe's 'training camps', Hitler youth, etc)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Balham Burner Flag 13 Jul 05 9.42am

I feel a bit bad HMHS - as though I have pissed on your chips slightly. You don't need to C an P when you are pretty good at putting your own arguments.

Generally I agree more with you more that Petealiator though. We on the left should stick together against reactionaries...

And just to note I can't stand most Guardian op-ed (Gary Younge is a t***!). I have to read it becuase of my job. My paper of choice is the Times!!

I do believe though that we should stop relating these terrorist atrocities to Iraq though.

Even if the Iraq war hadn't happened we would still be a terrorist target for being a western, democratic country - historically allied to the US.

Iraq has just been a convenient peg for people like Gary Younge to rationalise this atrocity - quite wrongly IMHO.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Balham Burner Flag 13 Jul 05 9.44am

Quote npn at 13 Jul 2005 9:36am

Honest question to those mentioning the war in Iraq:

1. Do you really believe these attacks would've been averted had Britain not taken part (I'm thinking of the attacks on 'soft' targets in Kenya and Tanzania - hardly renowned for their part in that struggle). I know they were supposedly British targets, but the people killed were, on the whole, Africans

2. Do you think that a withdrawal from Iraq is any more likely now? Personally, I was also leaning towards the "get the troops out" camp, but now there is absolutely no way we can do it - allow this to be perceived as a victory, and every future grievance will be met by the same 'successful' tactic

There will always be disaffected youths open to being manipulated by those they look up to, if those people are evil enough to choose to do it (regardless of religion - Mugabe's 'training camps', Hitler youth, etc)


Well said!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View eulalio's Profile eulalio Flag Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 9.49am Send a Private Message to eulalio Add eulalio as a friend

Fair enough mate (Balham Burner), I can fully understand your point of view there.

As NPN says just above your post, we cannot now withdraw from Iraq because it would be perceived as a victory for the terrorists. But therefore, by extension if this is true, the bombs must have been planted at least partly because of the occupation of Iraq. Otherwise, why would it be relevant that we now need to stick it out there? Do you see what I mean?

I don't know - nobody does - if these attacks would not have happened if we hadn't joined with Bush in Iraq... but I think it's reasonable to opine that we have become a more likely target because of it. As for this specific attack, we may never know. The people killed in the pre-9/11 embassy attacks in Africa were indeed mostly Africans; just as most of the people killed in the current Iraqi insurgency are other Iraqis. Such is the cruelty of terror and war.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View JollyStef's Profile JollyStef 13 Jul 05 10.15am Send a Private Message to JollyStef Add JollyStef as a friend

Quote NickinOX at 12 Jul 2005 9:49pm
New wave, before the new Romantic crap was my age group,

Welcome to the club .. Fad Gadget etc.. stake your claim

 


finished

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 53 of 68 < 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Gold Talk > Blasts in London