London Bridge Incident

possibly because it may take quite a lot of engineering work to figure out how to put up barriers that can take the impact of a car/truck without permanently damaging the bridge?

They could use the one they use for xmas markets surely the bridge is huge.
 
I seriously despair at this, no wonder we are in the mess we are in. We want to fight this evil by overwhelming it with rose petals and hugs.

This "evil" is not able to be stopped by force, and indeed will just let it spring up elsewhere. The decentralised nature of it too makes this more difficult. The stick that you are suggesting is at best a short term idea, but I don't think that (even if it worked as you mistakenly think it will) it's enough.

Dialouge, diplomacy, raising economic and social standards both here and abroad so that people have no interest in commmiting these acts is the only viable solution. These actions are not just "rose petal and hugs"

Even then, the occasional nutter will get through because that's how probability works. We just need to shift it so the actions really are just of a lone crazy person rather than masses of people whipped up into an extremist frenzy and plotting.
 
Last edited:
It's probably not been widely reported because it's barely relevant at this moment, is it? Three men choose to go out and murder a bunch of people - quick, we must hold those Muslim leaders to account before we can fully establish what has happened and what links said leaders have with those individuals above and beyond they abide by the same religion 'in name'!! If they have been shown to be actively attending certain mosques and these specific leaders can be shown to encourage breeding grounds for extremism, then yes, people associated with those institutions should probably make a statement in explanation and be held to account.

And, as already posted, the Muslim British Council have condemned it - so not only is it a completely moot point, the suggestion that they haven't condemned it already is factually wrong.

What would it take to appease you?

To get up and everyone stop holding their spines in there hands. Communicate and infiltrate the Islamic side and get it sorted properly.
 
Ah I thought it was the same bridge as last time but my point still stands

I don't believe there's anything particularly vulnerable about the fact it's a bridge. You put bollards up on a bridge and it will just happen on a road, put bollards up on a road and somebody will find a busy crossing instead.

Assuming you remove the threat of running people over, who's to stop the attack becoming a few cars pulling up on a busy shopping street and people jumping out with machetes? You'd constantly be playing whack-a-mole. I think the funds would be better spent on intelligence.
 
I believe that the only way of getting a solid grip on this terrorism in our country is if the muslim population grow some balls and eradicate from within. They need to clean out from within.
 
Since the police ran away, leaving the terrorists free to rampage for EIGHT minutes until the armed police arrived, probably not very much.

It was eight minutes from police being made aware of the incident, to all the attackers being dead. Not until they arrived.

The general consensus seems to be that this was an incredibly fast response and the police are being praised for it.
 
Yeah them cutting edge missiles and bombs blowing people up every day must make them think we are soooo weak :rolleyes:

How has bombing them into submission for the last couple of decades been going ???

Exactly, all that it has done is fuel more hatred and conflict and given them even more sympathisers.
 
Great, May talking about the Internet. She loves the Internet.


well shes right isnt she.

most of the radicalization is happening through the internet not mosques.

so surely all of you calling for action, change, DO SOMETHING!!! should be in full support of locking dow the internet?

after all better than than locking up people or deporting their parents no?



or do we hit the real rub, you care about them tackling radicalisation through the internet because it will affect you?

iirc all the of the uk islamic attacks inthe last decade have been radicalized by information they found on the internet?
 
Exactly, all that it has done is fuel more hatred and conflict and given them even more sympathisers.
So why have places like Germany, who haven't been bombing anyone, been targeting by Islamic terror attacks? We need to understand these reasons and also understand the reasons why places like Poland, Hungary, Chile and Japan - some of whom have been involved in middle-eastern interventions - have not been targeted.
 
I don't believe there's anything particularly vulnerable about the fact it's a bridge. You put bollards up on a bridge and it will just happen on a road, put bollards up on a road and somebody will find a busy crossing instead.

Assuming you remove the threat of running people over, who's to stop the attack becoming a few cars pulling up on a busy shopping street and people jumping out with machetes? You'd constantly be playing whack-a-mole. I think the funds would be better spent on intelligence.

I get your point but intelligence has failed in this and the Manchester attack now
 
The more I listen to May the more I think this is a setup of some sort, it just seems to be setting us up for more surveillance, regulated internet and a government realection... sounds mad for me to even say it but it's the feeling I'm getting!!
 
Back
Top Bottom