Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
So you've changed your mind about 'doing something about it'.
You can't have it all ways. Either you support the terrorists cos you like their oil, or you want to stop them.
and please use their services
Incident at London Bridge
- Thread starter Bobsyeruncle
- Start date
So you've changed your mind about 'doing something about it'.
You can't have it all ways. Either you support the terrorists cos you like their oil, or you want to stop them.
Saudi Arabia and ISIS aren't the same thing Phil. A British born suicide bomber of Libyan extraction was to blame for Manchester, are you blaming the Saudis for that too? Who was to blame there?
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Make your mind up!
Have we really got to the point where you'll argue with yourself within 3 posts?
Of their ultra-conservative ideology in mosques, not ISIS. Unless you think 33 million people in Saudi Arabia are terrorists?! Probably, knowing past conversations.
Yes, because he belonged to the Saudi inspired Salafist/Wahhabi doctrine, which is promoting, funding and supporting Daesh and other extremist Islamic groups. He may have been born in this country, but he hated our culture and freedom of speech, and all Salafist/Wahhabis hate democracy, because it is in direct confrontation with their warped view of Islam.
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
You realise it was you who brought up the Saudis. You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with yourself.
Utter comic genius, probably your best yet
Islamic State thinks Saudi Arabia has deviated from the beliefs of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and that Islamic State are the true representatives of the Salafi or Wahhabi message. That's why their leader al-Baghdadi has called for attacks in Riyadh and why there have been 2 this year. The Saudis aren't liked by Islamic State, but where the Saudis are spreading their hard-line message throughout the world through 'charitable organisations' and by funding mosques or handing out their own version of the Quran in prisons and firebrand preachers pumping out propaganda and we need to counter that by not accepting funding as well as the most extreme cultural and religious practices as the norm.
Last edited:
You realise it was you who brought up the Saudis. You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with yourself.
Utter comic genius, probably your best yet
It's called Petro-Islam Phil, look it sometime and get back to me.
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes that is what I said, you obviously skimmed over my reply and not read it properly. I'll highlight the two vital words you obviously missed so it makes sense for you.
[QUOTE="nilagin, post: 7849960, member: 452" You just readjust your spending if necessary if the cost of living has gone up 2% and you don't have enough spare cash to swallow it up.
[/QUOTE]
D
Deleted sulking member 63079
Guest
[/QUOTE]
I agree with what you're saying.
The only way a 2% increase in living costs means you've taken a 1% paycut, is if your living costs are your entire salary.
Otherwise, it just means that the 1% payrise isn't quite as high as 1% in real terms.
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I agree with what you're saying.
The only way a 2% increase in living costs means you've taken a 1% paycut, is if your living costs are your entire salary.
Otherwise, it just means that the 1% payrise isn't quite as high as 1% in real terms.[/QUOTE]
Of course if you live in London and earn £19000 a year, there's far more chance of that being the case than if you earn 90,000 a year and live in Manchester.
And back to the reality that vast numbers of public servants earn less than the national average, and they've had wage rises of less than 1% a year for the last 9 years, that would seem to be the case there.
neil_g
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 30,364
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- No
Is that reported incidents or people charged?
Because I'd not be surprised if both dropped. In my town over the last couple of years crime has actually rocketed. Burglary, thefts, shoplifting/hold ups, drug crime, vandalism, antisocial crime etc etc has all gone up. Yet the local police station has closed and you're lucky if you see any sort of patrol so consequently people are rarely caught and convicted. I think a lot no longer bother calling the police as they see no point.
Last edited:
D
Deleted sulking member 63079
Guest
Of course if you live in London and earn £19000 a year, there's far more chance of that being the case than if you earn 90,000 a year and live in Manchester.
And back to the reality that vast numbers of public servants earn less than the national average, and they've had wage rises of less than 1% a year for the last 9 years, that would seem to be the case there.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying I agree with 1% pay rises. Just that for some, it'll still outstrip the rise in the cost of living.
- Messages
- 7,344
- Edit My Images
- No
Because it happened in the centre of London, I dread to think how long the armed response time would be if this had happened in a provincial town on a Saturday night.
A copper these days knows if he confronts a terrorist a stick and a pepper spray means he's likely to die, It's OK for everyone to say first responders were heroes but 20k a year to become the first to die doesn't sound very appealing
I'm sad to say it but I really think the first copper on the scene needs to be able to deal with the incident effectively , not be the first to get stabbed, shot or blown up, IMO that means the days of waving sticks are gone, if the British transport police officer had been armed this could all have been over in 2 minutes, not with 30+ people dead or with life changing injuries in 8 minutes.
In the past I've seen coppers with guns abroad and felt uneasy with it but those days have gone, on a recent trip to Barcelona, I was reassured by the guns they carried and the fitness of their police, even guys in their 40s looked like they could run a 5 minute mile.
Things need to change and fast
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When I hear of London bridge or Westminster attacks I can't believe how stupid they were. If they picked a smaller town they could kill many times more people as would have more time.
Have always said the decision to arm should be with the police federation but you can't disagree that if all cops were armed they could react even quicker to such incidents.
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
But they wouldn't get the media attention.
Terrorism isn't about body counts, it's not an act of war, it's an act of propaganda.
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I would argue they would get the attention - kill 7 people in London or 40 people in a market town, both will get similar media attention, if anything the more people the greater the coverage.
Damian Brown
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,685
- Name
- Damian Brown
- Edit My Images
- No
150 were killed in a bomb attack may 31... in Kabul. Over here, at least, it barely got any media/ social media attention.
cambsno
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 20,999
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was meaning attacks in the U.K.
Damian Brown
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,685
- Name
- Damian Brown
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 11,633
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hardly surprising - when people are getting blown to bits/murdered by various methods on a daily basis it ceases to become news. It is just a statistic.
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
How long do you think it'd take to get armed police to central Cleckheaton on a Saturday night? (they could probably kill 30 and escape)
How long for live TV crews?
When they start killing, they know they will die, if it was just about killing, they'd pick softer targets.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,944
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
sod that it is close to my gaff.
- Messages
- 4,497
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Terror = extreme fear, dread, horror panic, shock.
Why don't the media charge the word Terror to Cowards.
It wouldn't look so good on the news and front pages for them.
Cowards struck at innocent people in London/ Manchester/ Paris...
A Cowardice group was arrested today in North London.
You get the idea.
Why don't the media charge the word Terror to Cowards.
It wouldn't look so good on the news and front pages for them.
Cowards struck at innocent people in London/ Manchester/ Paris...
A Cowardice group was arrested today in North London.
You get the idea.
Slyelessar
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 766
- Name
- Slyelessar
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Because it is the media that are causing fear and prejudice. As long as they can influence they will do it.
But I agree with you entirely. Also, can we call them ninny's? '3 ninny's died virgins today'.
Because the English language already has a word for them, and it is terrorist. Its a cowardly attack by a terrorist, but the best word to describe them is terrorists. It is splitting hairs though in the end what you call them.
Last edited:
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
No I'm sorry, but terrorist isn't the right word.
C-unit is the right word.
And a thousand scantily clad free thinking women at their funeral would be fitting.
- Messages
- 18,695
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Well why not go live somewhere else.
The irony of an immigrant complaining he doesn't like where he lives because of other immigrants is just borderline idiotic.
Just Go, no one here wants or needs you.
So, why doesn't Piers Morgan "grill" Amber Rudd or Theresa May about this, as they are the ones heading up the cabinet and government. I fail to see why the mayor of London should be held responsible for this, any more than the mayor of Manchester should for the atrocity committed there.
The Mayor sets an overall vision for London. He has a duty to create plans and policies for the capital covering:
He can't just take all the trappings of being mayor and bear none of the responsibilities. He does seem particularly hopeless and willing to shirk blame onto the Tories at every opportunity.
- Arts & Culture
- Business & Economy
- Environment
- Fire
- Health
- Housing and Land
- Planning
- Policing & Crime
- Regeneration
- Sport
- Transport
- Young People
He can't just take all the trappings of being mayor and bear none of the responsibilities. He does seem particularly hopeless and willing to shirk blame onto the Tories at every opportunity.
D
Deleted sulking member 63079
Guest
Yes, he has a duty to create plans.
But who decides how much money he gets to put those plans into place?
Phil V
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,303
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Why didn't you just say you don't understand what he's 'responsible' for instead of posting that.
You really should know that the Home Secretary is responsible for police budgets and anti terror activities.
Elected mayors don't have a magic money tree to override parliament.
One of the attackers and other scumbags were on a nationwide television show basically advertising themselves as terrorist recruiters and sympathizers. They couldn't be any more blatant about it. How much money does he need when they are on Channel 4 right in front of our faces? Then to top it all Sadiq Khan is bemoaning 'Islamophobia' and the police seem to have enough resources at looking into what people say on social media but not enough to do anything about extremist Muslims on the TV prancing about London with the black flag? I don't have any faith in him and I don't even live in London.
In the video you quoted and obviously didn't watch Khan said 15-20% of the budget is funded from him, the mayor. He said the budget is being shrunk and they need to prioritize and use the resources in a sensible and savvy way. One of the attackers was on the TV in a show called 'The Jihadis Next Door'. How much money does he need to work out they might be a priority? That Muslim extremists returning from Syria might be a priority?
D
Deleted sulking member 63079
Guest
Yes, known to them. But hadn't done anything that warranted being locked away for under our countries laws. Until he was caught doing something, there was nothing the police could do about it.
Ironically, some of the suggestions I've seen about punishing people for not liking our way of life, is exactly what IS do.
No, it's nothing like Islamic State. They will lock you in a cage and burn you alive or behead you for simply not being Muslim. Here we let them preach hate, worship banners like the black flag, recruit on the street, glorify, recruit and sympathize with Muslim extremist groups and then claim we couldn't do anything. Rinse and repeat. Either the powers that be tighten up the terror and human rights law significantly or we will be having a minutes silence every month for years.