Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 6:46 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

If you mean the right to a fair and legal trial, then yes.

what will that prove? will just waste time.

hacking a man to death is pretty conclusive evidence as it is...

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 6:48 pm  

andym1988 wrote:

dunno tbh, but its still more than these mindless scumbags deserve. anyway, corrie has started, and i know threads like this always turn into the international court of human rights, with all the expert psychologists and what not appearing, so i will say no more.

Well thats ok then, enjoy your episode of Corrie.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 6:50 pm  

andym1988 wrote:

what will that prove? will just waste time.

hacking a man to death is pretty conclusive evidence as it is...

Out of interest, when would you involve the judiciary and when not?

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 6:54 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

What constitutes a terrorist attack then in your book? So far as I'm concerned, it is committing an act with the intent to terrorise. I'm quite sure the people witnessing this event were sufficiently terrified and in fear of being terrorised, don't you think?

So terrorised they stood there and filmed them.

Of course people watching will be terrified. But they'd have been just as terrified as seeing an old person have a heart attack at the wheel and run someone over.

If this was a terrorist attack, then as I said it was a pathetically lame attack. If they want to take out soldiers THEY WERE NEXT TO A BARRACKS. If they'd gone in to the barracks and killed a few soldiers before being shot then that would be something the country could be worried by. Even worse, if they'd gone a few hundred feet further and gone into the school and started attacking children then that would have been a terrorist attack sending fear to every parent and virtually every person in the country.

But a terrorist attack to kill a soldier walking along a street? It's far more terrifying if they were care in the community loons or smack heads than an organised terrorist event.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 6:59 pm  

The air ambulance - was that used for one of the "terrorists"?

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 7:01 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Of course people watching will be terrified. But they'd have been just as terrified as seeing an old person have a heart attack at the wheel and run someone over.

I doubt it. I doubt someone having a heart attack or being run over is in the same league as two machete wielding lunatics somehow! The person having a heart attack or being run over would create shock in anyone remotely human but not terror.

If this was a terrorist attack, then as I said it was a pathetically lame attack.

Somebody died in an horrific fashion in broad daylight, next to a barracks in our capital city and you say that is lame?!

But a terrorist attack to kill a soldier walking along a street? It's far more terrifying if they were care in the community loons or smack heads than an organised terrorist event.

You clearly have forgotten that Islamists do not care if they die. In fact, they think they are going to 72 virgins in heaven if they commit these acts in the name of Allah. I would suggest that those who have no care for whether they live are very dangerous indeed. Do you know that they only intended one victim to die? We saw only a couple of years ago what one man and a gun could do in Cumbria. Two men with machetes and guns could do a whole lot worse.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 7:06 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

The air ambulance - was that used for one of the "terrorists"?

Yes. The other was taken to hospital by road ambulance. Both were shot by the police.

Incidentally, COBRA has met so the government are treating this as a potential terrorist attack and security around barracks in London is to be increased. The Muslim Council of Britain have made a statement to say that the attack has no place in Islam.

Here is a statement from one of the terrorists:

"We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

"I apologise that women have had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don't care about you."

According to witnesses, the terrorists ran the man down in a car first.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 7:07 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

You clearly have forgotten that Islamists do not care if they die. In fact, they think they are going to 72 virgins in heaven if they commit these acts in the name of Allah. I would suggest that those who have no care for whether they live are very dangerous indeed. Do you know that they only intended one victim to die? We saw only a couple of years ago what one man and a gun could do in Cumbria. Two men with machetes and guns could do a whole lot worse.

Define "Islamists" - does that mean anyone who follows Islam or do you really mean Islamic Extremist Terrorists and do you understand that there is a difference ?

A big difference actually.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 7:15 pm  

Let me get this straight.

These 'terrorists' were right next to an army barracks, in a car, and the best they can come up with is a sharp blade?

Pretty carp terrorists if you ask me. I'd have thought filling the car with unleaded and driving it at the gates would have made a bigger impact.

There's been a suggestion made by a mate in the area that it's more likely to be drugs related BTW.

Other than that, it is a truly disgusting crime, but until a few more facts emerge, I'm happy to sit here laughng at the 'I'm not racist but...' brigade.

Re: Woolwich incident : Wed May 22, 2013 7:17 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Define "Islamists" - does that mean anyone who follows Islam or do you really mean Islamic Extremist Terrorists and do you understand that there is a difference ?

A big difference actually.

I think you need to take your patronising tone and stick it up your backside, actually. But aside from that I used Islamist precisely because I was differentiating.