A van has reportedly crashed into pedestrians outside a mosque in London causing a "number of casualties" at 00:20
One person was arrested following the incident on Seven Sisters Road in Finsbury Park.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960
No doubt there will be more details come Breakfast time.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 19 Jun 17 at 02:01
|
Terrible news.
Have The Daily Mail claimed responsibility yet?
|
"Terrible news.
Have The Daily Mail claimed responsibility yet?"
For your information, Bobby, and in case you daren't check the Mail, it is reporting that a "White, 48-year old man was arrested by officers". As far as I can see, the Mail hasn't claimed responsibility.
|
>> Terrible news.
>> Have The Daily Mail claimed responsibility yet?
>>
They are giving it top billing, with extensive photo/video coverage including showing the alleged terrorist.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4616452
One dead and 10 hurt in new London terror attack
Perhaps you might care to compare it to that by your preferred news media and report back if the Daily Mail coverage meets your impartiality standards.
|
I read Bobby's comment as an attempt at wry humour, suggesting the Mail should take the blame for whipping up religious based hatred.
|
>> I read Bobby's comment as an attempt at wry humour, suggesting the Mail should take
>> the blame for whipping up religious based hatred.
That was my reading too.
|
I read it as a reference to the mail's readiness to claim someone else's responsibility.
As it appears to be a white person it is obviously the work of an extreme militant Christianic group, indoctrinated through faith schools.
|
>> I read it as a reference to the mail's readiness to claim someone else's responsibility.
>>
>> As it appears to be a white person it is obviously the work of an
>> extreme militant Christianic group, indoctrinated through faith schools.
Its a nutter. White Anglo Saxon communities produce them as well as Islamic ones do. Remember the IRA anyone?
|
>>
>> whipping up religious based hatred.
>>
Against the law in UK.
|
>> Perhaps you might care to compare it to that by your preferred news media and
>> report back if the Daily Mail coverage meets your impartiality standards.
I'm sure that as soon as wikipedia has an entry about it you will be able to proffer your own opinion
|
Tit for tat retaliation is all we need.
It will just give the extremists more (unjustified) excuses.
|
|
While condemning utterly ALL terror attacks, I'm minded of this..... Hosea 8:7
|
>> While condemning utterly ALL terror attacks, I'm minded of this..... Hosea 8:7
You have the audacity to post that AFTER the carp you published last week about 'snowflakes' and DUP?
Is their no limit how low you will stoop?
|
>> Is their no limit how low you will stoop?
You know that answer to that.
|
>>
>> >> Is their no limit how low you will stoop?
You need to ask? Of course there isn't. Has there ever been?
|
>>
>> >> Is their no limit how low you will stoop?
>>
>> You know that answer to that.
>>
Isn't that similar to you trying to justify jihadi terrorist attacks - i.e. reaping what we sowed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.?
People killing innocent citizens anywhere at anytime in the world is abhorrent, regardless of religion, race, colour, nationality. Sadiq Khan: "To murder innocent people, especially during Ramadan, is a rejection of the true values of my religion" - My question ? perhaps murdering innocents outside the Ramadan period might have been less of a "rejection of the true values of my religion".
Last edited by: BrianByPass on Mon 19 Jun 17 at 13:44
|
>> Isn't that similar to you trying to justify jihadi terrorist attacks - i.e. reaping what
>> we sowed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.?
Can you show where anyone on this site has tried to justify jihadi attacks?
NB: The words 'justify' and 'explain' are not synonymous.
|
>> Can you show where anyone on this site has tried to justify jihadi attacks?
Still waiting. Or are you content to be thought a liar?
|
>> Sadiq Khan: "To murder innocent people, especially during Ramadan, is a rejection
>> of the true values of my religion" - My question ? perhaps murdering innocents outside
>> the Ramadan period might have been less of a "rejection of the true values of
>> my religion".
Imagine the words spoken by a white Christian and substituting Christmas for Ramadan.
Wouldn't be a problem would it.
|
SQ 4 LB
>> Wouldn't be a problem would it.
How about anyone, anywhere?
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 20 Jun 17 at 01:50
|
>> Sadiq Khan: "To murder innocent people, especially during Ramadan, is a rejection
>> of the true values of my religion
I didn't really understand the problem with this comment the first time the subject came up, so I guess I might as well seek explanation this time.
If someone maintains that they are committing a murder in the name of a religion, which is what these lowlifes mostly claim, then surely to say something along the lines of "well to do it at Ramadam is a rejection of that religion" is a perfectly rational comment?
Surely he wasn't saying that was the only reason that it was bad, but that even by the murderer's own explanation/attempted justification it was bad?
Seems to me like its seeking offence.
On which point, I am awaiting Woger's apology for the behaviour and actions of the van driver. Because Woger expects that all Muslims apologise when the circumstances are reversed, so surely he will do the same now?
|
I took Khan's comment to mean that, as Muslims are supposed to be concentrating on spiritual matters during Ramadan, it was an extra bad betrayal of Muslim values to carry out the atrocity during this time. I read nothing else into it.
I am also aware that Isil/Daesh have encouraged their supporters to do that very thing - what their rationale is I don't know - which also doubly condemns them from an "orthodox" Muslim point of view.
|
>>On which point, I am awaiting Woger's apology for the behaviour and actions of the van
>>driver. Because Woger expects that all Muslims apologise when the circumstances are
>>reversed, so surely he will do the same now?
I’m not sure you’re really comparing apples with pears (and just for the record I certainly don’t expect all (or even many – or even a small minority of) Muslims to apologise when the circumstances are reversed, that’s silly) but I think that in saying this you’re possibly missing an important point? These Muslims are often radicalised on UK soil in religious Muslim communities in, around, or associated with UK mosques and Universities. The Muslim Council of Great Britain presumably has some sort of knowledge of these mosques. I could certainly point you in the direction of churches in Britain where the law of the land is broken every day on account of all sorts of failure to comply with ritual procedures. Nobody, rightly, cares; these are procedural points. But in the 1870s priests were jailed for similar offences and even today those undertaking the illegal acts (like using the wrong book) know they are breaking the law. So I’m just as sure that the Muslim Council of Great Britain know where to find these people on the periphery of their own community. Maybe, now they have seen that failure to act to do something has led to retaliation against their own community, they might do something a bit more concrete.
It's their community so it’s easier for them to know. I’m sure everybody knows somebody who is a bit dodgy in their own community. Maybe you suspect they don’t pay all their taxes, taking cash for building work, perhaps you wouldn’t leave your children alone with them, maybe you wouldn’t leave them in charge of a charity collection, whatever it is you know who they are. I have no doubt that it is similar in the Muslim community (And yes I know I’m talking about 3 million people, but I bet the radical are easily found). Time for the Council to be a bit more proactive.
Your average north Londoner – I work with some of them – really doesn’t care about yesterday’s attack any more than they would care if it had taken place in Libya. Compare this with the London Bridge attack which has caused even foreigners to replan their London trips. We shall see if attitudes change.
And it goes without saying that of course the attack was dreadful.
|
>> Imagine the words spoken by a white Christian and substituting Christmas for Ramadan.
>>
>> Wouldn't be a problem would it.
I am a white, church-going Christian. I should be very astonished if a Christian considered it worse that it were done on Good Friday rather than on a Thursday in the middle of August. It would be a preposterous thing to say; it would make no difference. And I suppose Daisy the cleaner might say it, but I could be absolutely certain that an educated person like Theresa May or Tim Farron or Tony Blair would not.
Maybe those of you who don't understand this are not Christian. I'm pretty sure that Brompton isn't. Mark?
Last time it came up, somebody pointed out that Amber Rudd had said of some atrocity something along the lines of "And to lose their loved ones near Christmas too." I think that's a bit crass, as if it's worse because Christmas is coming. But it's talking about the impact on the victims, not considering the mind-set of the perpetrator.
|
>> Maybe those of you who don't understand this are not Christian. I'm pretty sure that
>> Brompton isn't. Mark?
As you rightly surmise, although I went to CofE schools I am not religious - agnostic/unbeliever.
The act itself is no more/less worse for day it's carried out but perhaps the rejection of religious teaching is greater at a time of peace and goodwill.
|
|
Nobody could argue with that assertion. But that isn't what he wrote, is it? The corollary of his note is that, as a Muslim, he would have preferred them to have done it at another time.
|
>> Maybe those of you who don't understand this are not Christian. I'm pretty sure that
>> Brompton isn't. Mark?
Not much of anything really. Wife & my Mother are Catholic, most of the rest of my family is CofE, but I've never really decided. I go to church but that's mostly out of support for the others, and because I like the associated behaviour, at least in English villages.
>> I should be very astonished if a Christian considered it worse that it were done on Good
>>Friday rather than on a Thursday in the middle of August. It would be a preposterous thing
>>to say; it would make no difference.
I think I am not explaining myself very well.
I absolutely agree, it makes no difference to the evilness and despicableness of the crime. None at all.
However, if a scumbag is using his religion to justify his action, and yet even his religion says that he should not be doing it, surely that is worth pointing out? Surely we should undermine everything about him, and that includes pointing out the ridiculousness of his justification?
|
>>However, if a scumbag is using his religion to justify his action, and yet even his religion
>>says that he should not be doing it, surely that is worth pointing out?
Yes indeed. The vast majority of Muslims would hold out Islam as a peaceful religion.
My point is... that the corollary of saying it was a particularly bad time to do it is that there would have been a better time to do it. Which is tantamount to saying that we should sleep more easily in our beds during Ramadan. That's what my problem is. Should the Mayor of London be telling us that because it's Ramadan we're less likely to be murdered? Seriously?
|
|
I think you're over thinking it a bit.
|
>> I think you're over thinking it a bit.
>>
I should suggest that the Mayor was underthinking a bit when he wrote it. Enough people agree with me for me not to doubt my thinking. I include within this category a slew of barristers whose life work is words. Also some of this category who couldn't see the point we were making.
|
I didn't know slew was the name for a group of barristers.
Anyway back to the point, if I'm honest I'm not too concerned about what a group of barristers may or may not think. I think people are digging up all sorts of meanings that aren't there, each to their own.
|
IMO I don't think most people see what you are seeing in his comment, and you are taking him way too literally, just like Donald Trump did on his comment that there was "no reason to be alarmed", which was the second half of a sentence.
In this case, he was just making the point that it was Ramadan, not attaching any significance to it being better or worse because it was Ramadan.
Maybe he needs to be more careful with his words to avoid them to be analysed each way up, and criticised.
He certainly wouldn't last long on here if he didn't, with all our resident pedants!! :-)
All IMO.
|
>> I'm sure that as soon as wikipedia has an entry about it you will be
>> able to proffer your own opinion
>>
Is that the best you can do?
|
>>
>> Is that the best you can do?
>>
No, but its usually yours.
|
Finsbury Park attack: Son of hire boss held over Facebook post
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-40347813
|
Not an original by me (many of you will say - "what's different about that" ) ;-) - lifted from a Facebook post, in its entirety. I do, actually, agree pretty much with the underlying sentiment, although the author's posts are often a bit tongue in cheek!
"Al’s thought for today: An attack on one faith is an attack on us all.
I cannot resist a wry smile when, in the wake of some atrocity or disaster we have a line up of the main men from the various faiths either in plain clothes or fancy dress to tell us solemnly that an attack on one religion is an attack on them all. I don’t criticise their efforts. They have to do it.
Surely even these wise and holy rollers must grasp the irony here though. Over the centuries the participants in each religious entity have been chopping chunks out of one another. Whether it be Christians V Christians, Christians V Moslems: Moslems V Moslems; Moslems V Christians: Hindus V Moslems and many intent on giving Jews a good kicking. This is a small portion of the religious listings.
Quite obviously, the God trade has been a very intensive industry in the past and millions have had to suffer in the constant need to make a sale. I guess that had I been writing this a few hundred years ago, I might by now have been spit roasted on a nearby barbecue.
Religion has always been the handmaiden of politics and the means by which empires have expanded and to be fair once embedded in an area of the globe has in many ways been a force for good. Nevertheless in the intervening period when millions are either forcibly converted or murdered, it has not made for a happy environment.
So after the next inevitable atrocity when the various faiths stand together in peace and harmony, just think to yourselves each one of these men will be thinking, “How the Hell can I pinch some of his lot for my bunch without being too obvious about it.â€
|
Another major incident in London - Bobby
