P.K. Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Certainly i think it is relevant, our history of colonial conquest adds to what other people think of us hence the reason you raised the invasion of Kuwait, a nasty move by Iraq but nothing compared to our recent history, judge not lest ye be judged You think it's relevant, I don't. C'est la vie.... As has been mentioned by others Chinese too ... Bin Laden is lionized and Wahibism is alive and well amoungst some radical Uigurs and even amoungst the Hui ... who are ethnic Chinese ... so PK I wouldn't be too surprised if a Chinese muslim set of a bomb ... they've done it in Beijing (CLICKY) why not else where? Errrr.... you seem to have skated over the "British folks" bit in my mention of those of Chinese origin. But never mind, I can see where you are coming from. Very interesting interview on the R4 Today program this morning with one of the two who started up this fuss. It seems they were messing about a lot, going under seats and so forth, which scared a little girl witless. Although when asked point blank if they were doing it deliberately he claimed "No" but it sounded a bit hollow to me. Also the apology at just how much they had scared the little might and how he agreed with them being taken off leads me to believe that they were asking for it and they got it and they know it. Case closed. I'm convinced that there is a genuine threat at the centre of the current arrests. Just as the raid where one of those brothers got slightly shot. They don't do this stuff for nothing. Interestingly the bleeding heart brigade like to point out how out of all those arrested under the "Terror" legislation few are convicted of it. They like to forget those arrested under terror laws but who are then convicted under firearm, conspiracy to cause explosions, conspiracy to murder etc etc laws that were already in existance. I wonder why that is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I'm convinced that there is a genuine threat at the centre of the current arrests. Just as the raid where one of those brothers got slightly shot. They don't do this stuff for nothing. Your faith in the intelligence services is touching... I'm sure the family of Jean Charles de Menezes would be extremely moved by it. Initial claims that de Menezes was targeted because he was wearing a bulky coat, refused to stop when challenged and then vaulted the ticket barriers have all turned out to be false. He was wearing a denim jacket, used a standard Oyster electronic card to get into the station and simply walked towards the platform unchallenged. It has also been suggested that officers did not identify themselves properly before shooting de Menezes seven times in the head. Source: Observer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Your faith in the intelligence services is touching... I'm sure the family of Jean Charles de Menezes would be extremely moved by it. Initial claims that de Menezes was targeted because he was wearing a bulky coat, refused to stop when challenged and then vaulted the ticket barriers have all turned out to be false. He was wearing a denim jacket, used a standard Oyster electronic card to get into the station and simply walked towards the platform unchallenged. It has also been suggested that officers did not identify themselves properly before shooting de Menezes seven times in the head. Source: Observer I do not know how much involvement the Intelligence Services had in this sorry affair but I'm glad you recognise that I still have faith in my one-time employers. The source of all the initial reports of the incident were eye-witnesses. It is obvious to me that those wearing bulky clothes, seen leaping barriers etc etc as they reported were actually the cops. I also suspect that the policy is not to identify yourself to the suspected suicide bomber for the obvious reason - KABOOM! Not even a good effort. Care to try again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted August 26, 2006 Share Posted August 26, 2006 I wish they would just stop pissing about and introduce profiling. I agree with the arguments against but tough. I also don't think its racist. Its just common sense. The truth is that everyone is being stopped, searched, and screened which is leading to ridiculous delays when, lets be honest, 99% of European caucasian people are not going to be Islamic extremists. Its up to the Islamic communities to assist the police in giving these extremists up. A bit of extra hassle whilst travelling might remind people in those communities that the few extremists are sullying the reputation of honest, law abiding Muslims everywhere. I used to work in London in the late 80's and you often saw Irish catholics pulled at tube stations for the same reason. Its just common sense, if your looking for potential IRA terrorists you don't go frisking a delegation of Ugandan holiday makers you go looking for a Transit full of builders parked up in Docklands. I also don't buy the argument that its rubbish because they will just start to recruit white people instead. That is bollocks. There will always be a few convertees but by and large people who fight for a cause such as this will fit a very narrow profile. Anyone in security must know this, but they are scared of being seen as racist. As a final argument against people always raise the point of Richard Reid the shoe bomber ... he was just a f**king idiot. If you pulled anyone who looked a bit naive, confused and stupid you'd get the convertees as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Very interesting interview on the R4 Today program this morning with one of the two who started up this fuss. It seems they were messing about a lot, going under seats and so forth, which scared a little girl witless. Although when asked point blank if they were doing it deliberately he claimed "No" but it sounded a bit hollow to me. Also the apology at just how much they had scared the little might and how he agreed with them being taken off leads me to believe that they were asking for it and they got it and they know it.Case closed. It now seems certain these two guys were having a bit of a laugh. I dont suppose there is anything illegal about that [but I dont know]. Should these guys be taken to task for their "jolly jape"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.