Glasgow Airport-under attack

Nitefly · 1 Jul 2007 at 22:28

Dolph said:
No you didn't, you cut parts out and rearranged them, then quoted them claiming they were the links. That's not quite the same thing

The forum Michael Moore?

Shackley · 1 Jul 2007 at 22:35

Nitefly said:
The forum Michael Moore?

Oh no, don't tell me - he is a fat person :eek:

Crofter · 1 Jul 2007 at 23:34

So chuffed that these two guys didnt come from Scotland.

IN my experience the asians I know are good hard working people who keep there head down and keep themselves to them selves. We have really benifited from having Asian communities in Scotland because there such good grafters and dont cause any bother and I think Your Asians in Scotland are glad to be here too.

So following on from that , The thought that Scottish people , born here , regardless of there familys originality would want to cause bother like this is unbarable considering how well we all get on.

Because the truth is, if it had turned out these guys had come from Glasgow , na it dosent bare thinking about.

weescott · 2 Jul 2007 at 06:53

I SOMEHOW got back to Aberdeen last night! I was lucky to catch my plane that was delayed by 50 minutes then was late on taking off. Then it was stuck in the air because of fog. Then my flight managed to land with 10 minutes to spare before the airport closed! I travel from the other side of the world through 3rd world country airports and they lose my luggage in England! Typical!

Oh well, at least a nice Englishman let me on board with 1ltr of Spirits coming from Al Jazeera country Qatar in the midst of pandamonium. At least some people have thier priorities right! :rolleyes:

I'm off back to bed because it isn't 1:54 pm here.

dirtydog · 2 Jul 2007 at 07:20

Shackley said:
Incredible!

"Glasgow Airport-under attack" morphs magically into a discussion of the origins of the British people - and guess who is at the centre of this particular transformation

Dolph?

Well the thread has evolved but the topics currently being discussed are still pertinent.

SexyGreyFox · 2 Jul 2007 at 08:13

Crofter said:
IN my experience the asians I know are good hard working people who keep there head down and keep themselves to them selves.

I think that goes for the majority of Asians all over Britain, its just that it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the cart.

Shackley · 2 Jul 2007 at 08:38

VIRII said:
Who was it then?
Do you honestly believe that it was not British born Muslims?
I don't know for a *fact* but I'd put £50 on it.

As I understand it, the Police have said that none of the five people they have arrested so far were actually born in Britain.

Security sources said later none of the five arrested was born in Britain. Guardian Link

I believe that they are vaguely described as having arrived from "somewhere in the Middle East".

The BBC has learned those arrested are believed to be of varying Middle Eastern nationalities. BBC Link

Scotland's Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill described those behind the airport attack as "not born and bred here," indicating they were not Scottish, the UK Press Association reported. Authorities have not released the nationalities of any of the five arrested. CNN Link

But what would the Police, Security sources or Scotland's Justice Secretary know?

The bombers certainly can't have come from Iraq, Iran, Lebanon or Palestine because we are held in such high regard by the people of those places. Perhaps they were part of the sixty suicide bombers that you reliably informed us were heading our way, details of which the media are conspiring to hide

Like you, I don't know. However, I don't have your desperate need to blame immigrants for absolutely everything so am prepared to wait until more is known about these people.

Bar · 2 Jul 2007 at 08:40

I think the difficulty for a lot of muslims is that those who have a lot of faith find themselves at a cross roads and unfortunately they choose their faith and their community over the greater community.

It was interesting to see the words that the Muslim MP used in Glasgow in which he referred to the muslim community within Glasgow/Scotland. Why did he not use the words the muslim members of the Glasgow community? For those that may accuse me of reading too much into words the guy is a politician and knows how his words will be examined and should therefore be explicit in his meaning. This for me is the crux of the problem. They are a community within a community. As long as this segregation remains it will be extremely difficult for immigration issues to be resolved.

A couple of things that don't add up for me are these:

The muslim community is extremely tightnit and everyone knows pretty much everyone.
Mosques are a well known recruiting ground for extremists.
The vast majority of muslims are regular attendees to their mosques.

Yet these people are never identified or reported to the police.

It is very possible that information is being passed from the muslim community to the police but it is not being reported. I personally doubt this as the facts could be made known, thus pacifying some of the country, without putting any informant in danger.

The only comparison that I can draw in this reluctance to provide information is that of the NI situation. Local catholics and prodestants refused to co-operate with the security services for two main reasons. Fear of retribution and/or the fact that they agreed with the actions of the irish terrorists.

According to everything we hear about Islam is that to harm another Muslim is a great sin. So fear cannot be that big. Therefore the only logical conclusion is that they agree passively with the actions currently being undertaken.

Ultimately for me the muslim community need to be far more outspoken in both words and actions against these extremists. A good example would be these rallys that you see where Muslims are basically attacking the principles of the UK. Why can the mainstream Muslims not mount a counter protest? At least this would show that they believe in what they say?

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:41

Dolph said:
No you didn't, you cut parts out and rearranged them, then quoted them claiming they were the links. That's not quite the same thing

Nope. The second post was the entire link. The first one was about 50% of it and it was not "rearranged". You should try reading your links in future if you want them to support your imaginary argument.

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:42

Shackley said:
Incredible!

"Glasgow Airport-under attack" morphs magically into a discussion of the origins of the British people - and guess who is at the centre of this particular transformation

THat would be Dolph with his assumption that the UK has always had a "rich history of immigration". :rolleyes:

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:44

Shackley said:
Oh no, don't tell me - he is a fat person

LOL once more shackleys sole line of debate is a personal insult.
Is that the best you can do?

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:49

Shackley said:
As I understand it, the Police have said that none of the five people they have arrested so far were actually born in Britain. I believe that they are vaguely described as having arrived from "somewhere in the Middle East".But what would the Police, Security sources or Scotland's Justice Secretary know?

Woot congrats. The spped with which news reaches you is incredible

Shackley said:
The bombers certainly can't have come from Iraq, Iran, Lebanon or Palestine because we are held in such high regard by the people of those places. Perhaps they were part of the sixty suicide bombers that you reliably informed us were heading our way, details of which the media are conspiring to hide

They may well have been from one of those countries. What's with this "that you so reliably informed" garbage? I saw an article on the BBC televised news, I found several other mainstream newspapers discussing it and then nothing on the BBC website. I found that strange. The article and the video was braodcast on mainstream BBC TV. IT is not on their website. That is unusual. Smugness or stupidity? I can't tell.

Shackley said:
Like you, I don't know. However, I don't have your desperate need to blame immigrants for absolutely everything so am prepared to wait until more is known about these people.

Ok well let's make it simple. Either they were british born or they were immigrants. It is one or the other. It really is that simple. If they weren't british born then they were immigrants...... so who should be blamed? This simple logic thing seems to really stretch your abilities doesn't it. Have the JOOOZ rotted your brain or something?

The Running Man · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:53

VIRII said:
THat would be Dolph with his assumption that the UK has always had a "rich history of immigration".

to be fair if you think about the clan like separation and divergance of the groups within such close proximatey does kind of attest to that notion.

for example, the lancs people are very different from the yorkshire fgolk, in terms of theyr actions and the way they speak.

similarly if you can take this down to a city level, and note the inter city rivalry (Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool etc) you will notice that they are all very different groups. extend this over the whole country and the differences, values, habits, speach are quite astonishing.

this does stem from immigration to an extent...

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:57

Nickg said:
to be fair if you think about the clan like separation and divergance of the groups within such close proximatey does kind of attest to that notion.

for example, the lancs people are very different from the yorkshire fgolk, in terms of theyr actions and the way they speak.

similarly if you can take this down to a city level, and note the inter city rivalry (Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool etc) you will notice that they are all very different groups. extend this over the whole country and the differences, values, habits, speach are quite astonishing.

this does stem from immigration to an extent...

But it is entirely NOT the "rich history of immigration that the UK has ALWAYS had is it".

Oh and another fallacy that is so often posted is about how only a TINY minority of the muslim community are against these bombings etc.

From the dispatches summary of the survey they did:

dispatches said:
The survey results provide some backing for this view. The sense of being a community under siege can create a climate of paranoia, one expression of which are bizarre and often dangerous conspiracy theories. Nearly half of Muslims appear to think that 9/11 was some kind of US Zionist conspiracy; only one in five reject entirely any kind of conspiracy theory about the bombing of the World Trade Centre. Almost 20 per cent believe either that stories about the Holocaust are exaggerated or that it never happened.

Linked to such conspiracy theories is a wider reservoir of extremist views. Almost a third of those polled would like to live under sharia law. More than one in ten understand why British Muslims might want to carry out suicide missions in this country. Nearly a quarter thought that the 7/7 bombings were justified because of Britain's foreign policy. Almost one in five respect Osama Bin Laden to some extent. We should not overstate such fanaticism. The poll shows that the majority of Muslims reject such views and that there is a strong drive towards integration. There exists, nevertheless, a wellspring of extremist views which cannot be ignored.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/dispatches/kenan+malik+analysis+of+the+muslim+survey/158240

Shackley · 2 Jul 2007 at 09:59

VIRII said:
Ok well let's make it simple. Either they were british born or they were immigrants. It is one or the other. It really is that simple.

Whoops - there goes our tourism industry, an end to overseas students and people who come here to learn about our rich and tolerant way of life

Come on Michael, be a man for a change, admit that you jumped to a conclusion, based on your hatred of anyone who doesn't have blue hair and blonde eyes and got it wrong

SunaseIPs · 2 Jul 2007 at 10:06

Shackley said:
Come on Michael, be a man for a change, admit that you jumped to a conclusion, based on your hatred of anyone who doesn't have blue hair and blonde eyes and got it wrong

No thats the simpsons.

So England and Scotland have had an attack, does that mean Wales and Ireland will get one?

VIRII · 2 Jul 2007 at 10:07

Shackley said:
Whoops - there goes our tourism industry, an end to overseas students and people who come here to learn about our rich and tolerant way of life

Come on Michael, be a man for a change, admit that you jumped to a conclusion, based on your hatred of anyone who doesn't have blue hair and blonde eyes and got it wrong

No personal attacks
They were either born here or they were immigrants. That is a simple fact. Get over it.
None of this means an "end" to anything, your strawman arguments are pointless.

I don't hate anyone and iirc the person who was into "blue hair and blonde eyes" [sic] was Adolf Hitler. A good close friend of yours and a man who had your fanatical hatred of the jews. You are such a hypocritical bigot claiming to see racism in everyone else yet hating the jewish nation and israel with thr passion that you do.
Haven't you got some "help the aged" walk or something to collect your 43p sponsorship money for?

I made an educated guess given that the bombers on 7th July 2005 were all british born, the bombers who failed bombers on 21st July 2005 were british born, the bombers in the fertiliser plot were all british born. Given that pattern of british born suicide bombers in the last 24 months it is hardly an unreasonable assumption.

Bar · 2 Jul 2007 at 10:16

One of the facts that seems to have been overlooked is the poor decision to attack Scotland.

For immigrants Scotland is one of the most welcoming parts of the UK and I would say has the lowest level of intolerance. Why risk this friendly welcoming attitude by attacking it?

Scots are slow to anger and were often left alone by the irish terrorists. This attack could change that view and perception.

afraser2k · 2 Jul 2007 at 10:27

Bar said:
One of the facts that seems to have been overlooked is the poor decision to attack Scotland.

For immigrants Scotland is one of the most welcoming parts of the UK and I would say has the lowest level of intolerance. Why risk this friendly welcoming attitude by attacking it?

Scots are slow to anger and were often left alone by the irish terrorists. This attack could change that view and perception.

The attacks are designed to divide the communities and have already had some level of success with the threats made that were reported in the BBC towards the Muslims.

dirtydog · 2 Jul 2007 at 10:28

Bar said:
One of the facts that seems to have been overlooked is the poor decision to attack Scotland.

For immigrants Scotland is one of the most welcoming parts of the UK and I would say has the lowest level of intolerance. Why risk this friendly welcoming attitude by attacking it?

Scots are slow to anger and were often left alone by the irish terrorists. This attack could change that view and perception.

It's not very welcoming for the English though is it? And as for tolerance - in Glasgow with the Old Firm religious rivalry? Don't make me laugh