What's Happening in the UK?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
A nutjob who considers the killing of civilians in the Middle East to be morally equivalent to terrorist acts in the West, hence justifying the latter.

Of course all mosques are not preaching violent jihad. But investigation does not happen because western governments do not want to appear as though they are treating 'all mosques' as radical hotbeds. When a cleric is scutiniized, 'Islam' is being persecuted, and we can't have that impression floating around. Someone might get blown up. Or beheaded.
 
There is ample amount of sickening appeasement on both ends of the stick dude. The problem isn't going to go away by sitting on the sidelines.

Cameron, Obama and co need to seriously re-evaluate their relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (and Qatar) and with Israel. That would be a good place to start.
 
Innocents have always died in war. That will continue as long as there is war.

When it's an organizational policy to target innocents, then it is terrorism.
 
Innocents have always died in war. That will continue as long as there is war.

When it's an organizational policy to target innocents, then it is terrorism.

Yupp - drones - where any males of adult age and in the vicinity of a high value target are designated as enemy combatants. And then annihilated. Along with their women and children.

That is terrorism, just as much as any terrorism the media describes.

I think the following should be mandatory reading for every American. To know what your government does in your name.
https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/25/drones-wests-terror-weapons-doodlebugs-1

Drones: the west's new terror campaign
The CIA's Predator drones are bringing to Pakistan the same horror that Hitler's doodlebugs inflicted on London

Living Under Drones, a new report from Stanford and New York universities, was a difficult piece of fieldwork – I was with the law students in Peshawar as they tried to interview victims of the CIA's drone war. But it has made an important contribution to the drone debate by identifying the innocent victims of the CIA's reign of terror: the entire civilian population of Waziristan (roughly 800,000 people).

Until now, the most heated dispute has revolved around how many drone victims in the Pakistan border region are dangerous extremists, and how many children, women or men with no connection to any terrorist group. I have been to the region, and have a strong opinion on this point – but until the area is opened up to media inspection, or the CIA releases the tapes of each hellfire missile strike, the controversy will rage on.

However, there can be no sensible disagreement over certain salient facts: first, the US now has more than 10,000 weaponised drones in its arsenal; second, as many as six Predator drones circle over one location at any given time, often for 24 hours a day, with high-resolution cameras snooping on the movements of everyone below; third, the Predators emit an eerie sound, earning them the name bangana (buzzing wasp) in Pashtu; fourth, everyone in the area can see them, 5,000ft up, all day – and hear them all night long; fifth, nobody knows when the missile will come, and turn each member of the family into what the CIA calls a "bugsplat". The Predator operator, thousands of miles away in Nevada, often pushes the button over a cup of coffee in the darkest hours of the Waziristan night, between midnight and 5am. So a parent putting children to bed cannot be sure they will wake up safely.

Every Waziri town has been terrorised. We may learn this from the eyewitness accounts in Living Under Drones, or surmise it from the exponential increase in the distribution of anti-anxiety and anti-depression medication across the region.

Sometimes it is difficult for those comfortably ensconced in the west to understand. But for me, it brings to mind my mother, Jean Stafford Smith. In 1944 she was 17. She had left the safety of her school (she had been evacuated to the countryside) to do a secretarial course in London. Each evening she took the bus home from Grosvenor Place, behind Buckingham Palace, to her digs off Tottenham Court Road. Back then, darkness would truly descend on the city, as the blackout was near total.

Sixty-eight years on, my mother retains vivid memories of the gathering gloom. One night a week, she climbed the tower of a local church to spot for the fires that might spread from an explosion. When the doodlebugs (as V1s – Hitler's drones – were called) came over, she knew that she was safe so long as she could hear the engine. She knew, too, that the drones were indiscriminate killers, and that only when they fell silent did she have to worry where they might fall. Some of the engines apparently cut in and out, like the oscillating buzz of a chainsaw, heartstopping for the potential victims below.

In 1944, two doodlebugs hit the environs of Buckingham Palace, near where my mother learned shorthand. One landed on the palace wall, and blew out the secretarial school's windows. A second killed more than 100 people who had, until moments before, been singing hymns in the Guards Chapel on Birdcage Walk. It was a weekend, so my mother was back at her digs.

My mother, an eternal optimist, never really thought she was going to die, even when – on 30 June 1944 – a drone struck Tottenham Court Road. Perhaps reminiscent of the tragedy of 7/7, a witness described "a bus, still packed with people sitting in all the seats, but all the glass blown out and all the skin blown off their faces".

Many suffered far more than my mother, both in London and beyond. Indeed, they say that fear for those you love can be more devastating than facing danger yourself: my grandmother Vera, a formidable woman who had learned to trap rabbits in the Great Depression to keep food on the family table, lived 60 miles north of London near Ely, and worried constantly about her youngest daughter. The ripples of anxiety spread wide.

So little changes. Current RAF doctrine tells us, euphemistically, how "the psychological impact of air power, from the presence of a UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] to the noise generated by an approaching attack helicopter, has often proved to be extremely effective in exerting influence …" Perhaps they mean "terror", as described by David Rohde, a former New York Times journalist kidnapped and held by the Taliban for months in Waziristan. Rohde, quoted in Living Under Drones, describes the fear the drones inspired in ordinary civilians: "The drones were terrifying. From the ground, it is impossible to determine who or what they are tracking as they circle overhead. The buzz of a distant propeller is a constant reminder of imminent death."

I hope that this report reminds us all what the US – with British support – is doing to the people of Pakistan. Maybe then there will be less surprise at the hatred the drone war is engendering in the Islamic world – and a chance that we will reconsider what we are doing.
 
Last edited:
Yupp - drones - where any males of adult age and in the vicinity of a high value target are designated as enemy combatants. And then annihilated. Along with their women and children.

That is terrorism, just as much as ay terrorism the media describes.

Surely any target is designated as such because there is intelligence which deems them as such. Mistakes do occur as do atrocities in war. I would say their deaths are more the result of the way terrorists wage war than anything else. They should do the proper thing when you openly declare war and make themselves viable targets (ie wearing uniforms) rather than hiding among a civilian population like cowards.

I do agree with your point about Syria and Israel however.
 
Edited my post - have a read of the article I posted.

I think these are issues which need serious debate. Nothing is black and white in war, but over time you should be able to tell whether a strategy is doing more harm than good. I firmly contend that drones are creating more enemies for the US than they are destroying.
 
What happened was reprehensible and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.

However, to attack Muslim places of worship and to lash out against Muslims in any way, shape or form is also to be condemned.
Also - how is it terrorism when one lunatic murders an off duty army soldier, but not terrorism when an army murders innocent people?

If one is terrorism, so is the other. Enough with the double standards.

I was pleasantly surprised by David Cameron's statement on the matter. It was well balanced, and condemned wrong doing on both sides.

This was also nice to read about:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-22689552

If you actually got your facts right you would know it was infact carried out by two lunatics.
You can't compare what happened on the streets of London to what happens in warfare.
 
What happened was reprehensible and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.

However, to attack Muslim places of worship and to lash out against Muslims in any way, shape or form is also to be condemned.
Also - how is it terrorism when one lunatic murders an off duty army soldier, but not terrorism when an army murders innocent people?

If one is terrorism, so is the other. Enough with the double standards.

I was pleasantly surprised by David Cameron's statement on the matter. It was well balanced, and condemned wrong doing on both sides.

This was also nice to read about:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-22689552

:goodpost: :exactly:

Very well said Void :clap
 
If you actually got your facts right you would know it was infact carried out by two lunatics.
You can't compare what happened on the streets of London to what happens in warfare.

Yes there were two. I stand corrected. I've seen the videos, don't worry.
My point remains, however.

Thanks Nova (sorry, that's what I know you by :lol)
 
Waging war against Islamic nations won't rid the world of terrorists, it will only create thousand more. Working with governments (a hell of a lot less money spent) training them to rid the terrorists themselves would've been much more effective.

Invading Iraq was a HUGE mistake. The later is the aftermath (IMO) I mean how do you combat extremists when they're blended into your society dressed in civilian clothing? It's gonna be a damn hard battle.

Aside from the pathetic and pointless violence, individuals hijacking a religion for their own selfish cause makes me sick to my stomach. I can't express how frustrating it is to have to explain to people that you're not a violent person because of my beliefs.

If I could make it all go away I would, with my own two arms. In other words the government can't do **** to help the situation. Why is the U.S. so lenient with Saudi Arabia? There's far too much to the truth than we all know. At the end of the day we're all left like a flock of sheep, blind from their bull****.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Edited my post - have a read of the article I posted.

I think these are issues which need serious debate. Nothing is black and white in war, but over time you should be able to tell whether a strategy is doing more harm than good. I firmly contend that drones are creating more enemies for the US than they are destroying.

Which is infinitely different from when they were walking from house to house, and still firing on rooms full of women and children, which had previously been rooms from which grenades were being thrown, right?

We could certainly stand to benefit from distancing ourselves from Saudi Arabia, but that is only the start. Egypt is done. Iran was done ages ago. Lebanon is a shell of its former glory, which it will never reclaim. Jordan and Syria are a joke. West Bank and Gaza are the epitome of what's wrong in the Middle East, and Israel is the only country in the entire region with half a rational head on its shoulders.

A double standard? Similarly to Israel, the U.S. and Europe didn't start this war. Either we'll finish it, or we won't, but the question stands as to whose hands will the blood be on. If we allow it to take its course, is the rampage of murder our fault? If we prevent it from proceeding, will the deaths in retaliation be our fault? Apparently, however this all goes, it's all our fault. Never the ones who started it. Never the ones who perpetuate it. Never the ones who excuse and justify it.

There's a double standard if I ever saw one.
 
@ Voorhees

Exactly bro.

The only way to get rid of extremists from within Muslim societies is by the societies themselves being empowered and enabled to deal with them.

Supporting corrupt governments which are either dictatorships or sham democracies all across the Muslim world has a lot to do with it as well.
 
Edited my post - have a read of the article I posted.

I think these are issues which need serious debate. Nothing is black and white in war, but over time you should be able to tell whether a strategy is doing more harm than good. I firmly contend that drones are creating more enemies for the US than they are destroying.

I don't think it is appropriate to bring this debate into it in this context. What we have here is the same hatred of the West that emanates from the mouths of radical clerics in the UK being uttered in a Cockney accent, and it has almost nothing to do with how the US manages its affairs and everything to do with this gutter-dwelling excuse of a human being looking for someone to blame for his personal failings.

This is not about drones, or the war on terror, so much as it is about the use of Islam as a tool to stir up base hatred of the West in the West; the use of Islam as a crutch to support and nurture the broader disenfranchisement of some British youth to retaliatory ends.

"I'm angry, stupid and have failed at life. I want someone to blame. I'm also a Muslim, attending a mosque whose Imam reckons my failings are all the fault of the West, and that I have an obligation as a Muslim to defend the honour and integrity of Islam by taking up arms against my so-called oppressors."

Void I am broadly sympathetic to the idea that US drone attacks invite a form of blowback and promote radicalisation of elements of a foreign civilian population - in very simple terms, of course they do. This isn't to do with drones though - it's far more insidious in a domestic context, as the 'War on Terror' is granting carte blanche to every marginalised nutter, wherever they are, to perpetrate acts of barbarity in their adopted culture in the name of Islam.

The connection between this act and the broader war on terror is obviously there in a general sense, but what it really comes down to is some twit looking for someone and something to blame for his personal failings.
 
Last edited:
They should do the proper thing when you openly declare war and make themselves viable targets (ie wearing uniforms) rather than hiding among a civilian population like cowards.

:goodpost: :exactly: :lecture

Don't forgot to buy a one way plane ticket on your way out
 
All religions suck. People only use them to justify their teribble behavior or seek comfort in the fact they may see dead relatives again some day. It's all childish immature and rather selfish nonsense and I truely hate it more than anything in the world.
 
I don't think it is appropriate to bring this debate into it in this context. What we have here is the same hatred of the West that emanates from the mouths of radical clerics in the UK being uttered in a Cockney accent, and it has almost nothing to do with how the US manages its affairs and everything to do with this gutter-dwelling excuse of a human being looking for someone to blame for his personal failings.

This is not about drones, or the war on terror, so much as it is about the use of Islam as a tool to stir up base hatred of the West in the West; the use of Islam as a crutch to support and nurture the broader disenfranchisement of some British youth to retaliatory ends.

"I'm angry, stupid and have failed at life. I want someone to blame. I'm also a Muslim, attending a mosque whose Imam reckons my failings are all the fault of the West, and that I have an obligation as a Muslim to defend the honour and integrity of Islam by taking up arms against my so-called oppressors."

Void I am broadly sympathetic to the idea that US drone attacks invite a form of blowback and promote radicalisation of elements of a foreign civilian population - in very simple terms, of course they do. This isn't to do with drones though - it's far more insidious in a domestic context, as the 'War on Terror' is granting carte blanche to every marginalised nutter, wherever they are, to perpetrate acts of barbarity in their adopted culture in the name of Islam.

The connection between this act and the broader war on terror is obviously there in a general sense, but what it really comes down to is some twit looking for someone and something to blame for his personal failings.

I think it IS appropriate to talk about this subject since the nutjobs that did this directly referenced the 'war on terror' in their 'interviews'

However, I do agree we should treat these guys as disturbed individuals who are simply looking for a reason to justify their depravity.
 
Back
Top