I am actually scared of ISIS now
Scroll to see replies
Original post by h.dan
So you're saying every terrorist in the world is a Muslim? Do you live under a rock or what?
The most numerous and most dangerous terrorists in the world are Muslims, deal with it.
There will be a successful chemical attack on the west one of these days, and probably a dirty bomb also. London is a prime target of these Muslim crazies and they want to kill the most people possible. It is not intent that stops them at the moment only capability and that will come..
The fact that you seem to live under a rock yourself won't protect you if you are anywhere close.
Original post by GeorginaLucienne
You're more likely to be killed by the police than ISIS. Government and media like to manipulate small crisis' to their advantage it's not an actual threat. 
That clearly isn't true. The police have killed 58 people since 1990 in the UK. The 7 July bombers alone killed 52, with 700 injured.
http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/fatal-police-shootings
Better to read the local news than the Daily Fail or The Communist ... sorry, Guardian.
http://www.tdg.ch/geneve/actu-genevoise/deux-syriens-soupconnes-fabrique-explosifs/story/23173358
Roughly translated, investigations are still on-going but one of the Syrian men approached officers about his tyre. As for the van that crossed over from France was actually being driven by two petty criminals known to Belgian authorities, with no links to ISIS.
Not saying we should not be careful, but fear drives irrationality and that's not wise.
http://www.tdg.ch/geneve/actu-genevoise/deux-syriens-soupconnes-fabrique-explosifs/story/23173358
Roughly translated, investigations are still on-going but one of the Syrian men approached officers about his tyre. As for the van that crossed over from France was actually being driven by two petty criminals known to Belgian authorities, with no links to ISIS.
Not saying we should not be careful, but fear drives irrationality and that's not wise.
Original post by ivybridge
No, terrorists do.
NICE!!!
Original post by Good bloke
That clearly isn't true. The police have killed 58 people since 1990 in the UK. The 7 July bombers alone killed 52, with 700 injured.
http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/fatal-police-shootings
http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/fatal-police-shootings
1,433 people have died after contact with the police
Original post by GeorginaLucienne
1,433 people have died after contact with the police
There's a slight difference between 'killed by the police' and 'died after contact with the police'. The actual definition of 'the latter includes people who were visited as victims or witnesses or who were arrested, interviewed and then released on bail, who then died whilst on bail.
Most of the 1433 people you refer to in this report will have been suffering from pre-existing medical or mental health issues, where their contact with the police was entirely irrelevant. The medical care people get whilst in custody is far better than they generally get in the outside world - if the police think they need a doctor/nurse, they get one, usually within an hour or two, whereas most of them will not bother to seek help when not in custody.
Or they just made bad lifestyle choices with fatal consequences - I'm a police officer, I once arrested a guy for a particularly incompetent burglary, he gets released on bail and dies of a lighter fluid overdose a couple of weeks later - did we have anything to do with his choice? Of course not!
In the vast majority of cases where the police have actively ended someones life, inquests and independent enquiries have found it was necessary and the police were not to blame, but officers have been charged with murder or manslaughter in the past where they have been to blame, so it's not a whitewash procedure.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by GeorginaLucienne
1,433 people have died after contact with the police
My mother died after contact with the police, but her death was nothing to do with the police.
Original post by sleepysnooze
why are they always muslim terrorists
Original post by sleepysnooze
always muslim terrorists
Original post by sleepysnooze
always muslim
Original post by sleepysnooze
always
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/12/01/3727084/yes-the-planned-parenthood-shooter-was-a-christian-terrorist/
Original post by h.dan
You're as bad as them for saying that.
-------------------------------------------------
If you've finally realised that there is an imminent thread towards Europe and America, well done, about time.
It seems like something is gonna happen, but with our amazing services such as MI5 and the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) working alongside with America's FBI and Secret Service, we are tackling these threats and hopefully they won't happen. It wasn't pure coincidence that they got stopped in their tracks from Geneva. The media and the government are not portraying this, but people coming from Eastern countries are being tracked and watched at all times.
We are not safe, but in a sense we are safer than other countries. You've got to remember that we're bigger than them.
-------------------------------------------------
If you've finally realised that there is an imminent thread towards Europe and America, well done, about time.
It seems like something is gonna happen, but with our amazing services such as MI5 and the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) working alongside with America's FBI and Secret Service, we are tackling these threats and hopefully they won't happen. It wasn't pure coincidence that they got stopped in their tracks from Geneva. The media and the government are not portraying this, but people coming from Eastern countries are being tracked and watched at all times.
We are not safe, but in a sense we are safer than other countries. You've got to remember that we're bigger than them
.If you think the government and its increasing trouncing of our personal freedoms to track Millions of potential Jihadists across the no borders EU is a solution to feel confident in, you are very naive.
We are bigger than them, and what? it still doesn't mean plots wont slip through leading to the senseless deaths of innocent civilians
Original post by sleepysnooze
pretty much - 99% or something as high as that.
not even close:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html
Extremism based on religious belief (or lack thereof) is becoming a major issue. just because one groups beliefs are in the spotlight doesn't make 99% of terrorism belong to that religion.
People need to stop giving a **** what others believe in but this isn't an islamic issue (which teaches religious tolerance).
Original post by GeorginaLucienne
You're more likely to be killed by the police than ISIS. Government and media like to manipulate small crisis' to their advantage it's not an actual threat.
Im sure the families and loved ones of the thousands of victims of Islamic terror in the past decade would have something to say about that but no no, you keep snug secure and complacent in your conceited naive little bubble of bliss. As long as its not you or your family who lose the Jihadi lottery eh
Original post by Oilfreak1
not even close:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html
Extremism based on religious belief (or lack thereof) is becoming a major issue. just because one groups beliefs are in the spotlight doesn't make 99% of terrorism belong to that religion.
People need to stop giving a **** what others believe in but this isn't an islamic issue (which teaches religious tolerance).
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html
Extremism based on religious belief (or lack thereof) is becoming a major issue. just because one groups beliefs are in the spotlight doesn't make 99% of terrorism belong to that religion.
People need to stop giving a **** what others believe in but this isn't an islamic issue (which teaches religious tolerance).
People will stop giving a **** what others believe in when it stops having a very real and tangible effect on what goes in IN THEIR LIVES
Original post by Betelgeuse-
People will stop giving a **** what others believe in when it stops having a very real and tangible effect on what goes in IN THEIR LIVES
The fact that they're Muslim means next to nothing. Extremists of any belief system are dangerous (if you'd bother to read the article linked). I'm sure the Rohingyans wish they could trade their Buddhist extremists; who throw babies on blades for the loonies in the middle east playing house taking less western lives than furniture does that terrify you so much.
tl;dr - crazy ****ers be crazy regardless of what they believe in. Just because one group is currently in the spotlight doesn't change how wonderfully diverse the worlds terrorism is - so yeah people need to stop giving a ****.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Killerstruggling
Suck my dick
okay man (Y) I'm down for all that freaky **** - let's get down to it - where and when?
Original post by Good bloke
The Free French were a government in exile, not terrorists.
The post-1922 IRA and its successors also claimed to be a government in exile (and iirc the Continuity IRA still do).
Israel is a sovereign state.
Without going into the specific example of Israel, this is a crucial point, don't you think it seems bizarre, not to mention morally questionable, to define "terrorism" not by what kind of violent actions it constitutes, or even why it's being done, but simply who is doing it?
Original post by anarchism101
The post-1922 IRA and its successors also claimed to be a government in exile (and iirc the Continuity IRA still do).
Without going into the specific example of Israel, this is a crucial point, don't you think it seems bizarre, not to mention morally questionable, to define "terrorism" not by what kind of violent actions it constitutes, or even why it's being done, but simply who is doing it?
Without going into the specific example of Israel, this is a crucial point, don't you think it seems bizarre, not to mention morally questionable, to define "terrorism" not by what kind of violent actions it constitutes, or even why it's being done, but simply who is doing it?
I think the word terrorism is used too often in general, and too loosely. I don't think the actions of the Free French in WW2 can be argued sensibly as terrorism, though all manifestations of the IRA's actions are terrorism, as are IS-planned actions, though not necessarily the Lee Rigby murder.
Original post by Good bloke
I think the word terrorism is used too often in general, and too loosely. I don't think the actions of the Free French in WW2 can be argued sensibly as terrorism, though all manifestations of the IRA's actions are terrorism, as are IS-planned actions, though not necessarily the Lee Rigby murder.
I prefer to talk of terrorist acts rather than designate an individual or an entire group 'terrorist'. For example, the IRA (here meaning the Provisional IRA, just to clarify) undoubtedly committed many terrorist acts, but I think to portray it as defined solely by 'terrorism' is misleading, as only roughly a third of those killed by the IRA were civilians (compared to about half of those killed by British security forces, and over 80% of those killed by loyalist paramilitaries).
Original post by iamthetruth
I aint scared
Me neither.
The chances of it happening to you is minor and if it happens a lot we can kick loads of people out the country.
Win.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I'm more scared of my socks than I am of ISIS...
Original post by GeorginaLucienne
You're more likely to be killed by the police than ISIS. Government and media like to manipulate small crisis' to their advantage it's not an actual threat.
This
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
