Parliament attack.
#61
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As is usual around here... I take a slightly different view.
He's as much a victim as those he has killed... in that he's been sold a load of religious bollocks to the point of killing because of it.
Irony being that in doing so he's played into the hands of those he was conditioned to hate... now they have more justification for the things they do in the name of "Keeping us all safe from harm"...
It's a complicated web we have all been woven into.
He's as much a victim as those he has killed... in that he's been sold a load of religious bollocks to the point of killing because of it.
Irony being that in doing so he's played into the hands of those he was conditioned to hate... now they have more justification for the things they do in the name of "Keeping us all safe from harm"...
It's a complicated web we have all been woven into.
Who are the 'they' in your statement?
Last edited by Martin2005; 23 March 2017 at 02:17 PM.
#64
Right. Now the Sky News informs that IS is taking responsibility and saying that the killer was an IS soldier.
#65
I'm surprised that Trump hasn't yet made any flippant tweet or a loud statement to the 'fake news' re. this act-of-terrorism incident in Britain. His spokesperson did speak some empathic words yesterday, but I'm a bit surprised for Trump quietly watching the fireworks. He must have his reasons.
#67
Pontificating
I'm surprised that Trump hasn't yet made any flippant tweet or a loud statement to the 'fake news' re. this act-of-terrorism incident in Britain. His spokesperson did speak some empathic words yesterday, but I'm a bit surprised for Trump quietly watching the fireworks. He must have his reasons.
#69
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
I'm surprised that Trump hasn't yet made any flippant tweet or a loud statement to the 'fake news' re. this act-of-terrorism incident in Britain. His spokesperson did speak some empathic words yesterday, but I'm a bit surprised for Trump quietly watching the fireworks. He must have his reasons.
Edit: Funkii beat me to it.
Last edited by markjmd; 23 March 2017 at 02:34 PM.
#70
No, on this occasion he seems to have delegated the task of mouthing off his usual flavour of moronic drivel to his son.
Edit: Funkii beat me to it.
Edit: Funkii beat me to it.
#72
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
Yes, his son is also a half-head like him. Reminds me of some half-heads on Scoobynet when they interpret something quite innocent in their own twisted way and start arguing/slating for the sake of it. Thank God, such Scoobynetters don't have the jobs to run any country!
#73
Not you, silly! You do know the types I'm talking about. The mentally challenged types that get the wrong end of the stick and start jumping up and down; exhibiting challenging behaviours.
Last edited by Turbohot; 23 March 2017 at 03:17 PM.
#76
On one hand, I'm hearing from the MPs on the News that this incident was a 'fail' on IS's part because he couldn't really touch the parliament, but on the other hand, the parliament (live on TV) has talked nothing but this incident today so far. TV news is also going on and on about this incident, repeating the details and occasionally bringing in some fresh clue.
About 24 hours already spent by the parliament on this incident alone makes the incident a successful attack.
Christ, the perpetrator 'knew' that he wouldn't be able to pass through the security! He know that he would be killed and he was prepared for it. If he and his chums really wanted to get in the building, they would have had a different strategy to dodge the security, rather than carrying out a lone act, running people over openly on the Westminster bridge and then fatally stabbing a police officer in a broad day light.
IS wanted to make another blood-drenched statement by causing a terror publicly, and they have done it. 'Pass' for them, not a 'fail', as it seems like.
About 24 hours already spent by the parliament on this incident alone makes the incident a successful attack.
Christ, the perpetrator 'knew' that he wouldn't be able to pass through the security! He know that he would be killed and he was prepared for it. If he and his chums really wanted to get in the building, they would have had a different strategy to dodge the security, rather than carrying out a lone act, running people over openly on the Westminster bridge and then fatally stabbing a police officer in a broad day light.
IS wanted to make another blood-drenched statement by causing a terror publicly, and they have done it. 'Pass' for them, not a 'fail', as it seems like.
#78
#79
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: in the woods...........555 Wagon Sqn
Posts: 13,347
Received 55 Likes
on
42 Posts
No, no I didn't...I replied to someone else post with a question mark. The question mark denotes a question not a statement.
Perhaps you should read the post next time? (sorry, that was a bit tricky of me; it was a rhetorical question which you don't need to answer).
Why not pop off here brush up on the basics and then contribute to the forum
#85
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course they are. If I was running the PR department of a terrorist group I'd be claiming responsible for just about every terrorist attack that takes place, regardless of how tenuous the link. It's free advertising at the end of the day.
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You really are a ****ing idiot