Terror Attacks

[Mounts Kipper]

The British chap who’s lost his kids and wife, how does he rebuild his life. Brutally sad. 

[stevieb]

Northern Ireland - that murder in Derry was being treated as terrorism. Got mates from uni over there and their feeds are showing news of 'devices' being planted at councillors properties. 

Seems like things are bubbling back up over there with relatively little news making it over here. 

[royal white]

8 minutes ago, stevieb said:

Northern Ireland - that murder in Derry was being treated as terrorism. Got mates from uni over there and their feeds are showing news of 'devices' being planted at councillors properties. 

Seems like things are bubbling back up over there with relatively little news making it over here. 

That place will always be bubbling. There’s so much that goes on that doesn’t get reported over here 

[Jol_BWFC]

On 21/04/2019 at 07:30, royal white said:

Lets see if there’s a reaction to this like there was in NZ 

 

On 21/04/2019 at 13:26, bolty58 said:

This will be interesting. As a gambling man, I suspect not. 

Very similar coverage from the BBC. They’ve sent Clive Myrie out there and he is co-anchoring the 10.00pm news from Colombo. Terrible stories.

[royal white]

On 21/04/2019 at 12:29, miamiwhite said:

All silent from the left on here as always, they must be sanitised to Christian genocide 

Happy Easter.

I’m pretty sure after the NZ attack Police patrols were stepped up around mosques. Does anyone know if patrols have been increased around UK churches after the Sri Lanka attacks?

[bolty58]

You know the answer RW. Whiteys/Christians/Europeans are expendable.

To qualify for treatment like that you have to be an "oppressed minority" - preferably of a darker hue than white.

#illhidewithyou

[Jol_BWFC]

You two are priceless. Gave me a smile this morning. Thanks.

I have a tiny violin you can borrow.

[royal white]

1 hour ago, Jol_BWFC said:

You two are priceless. Gave me a smile this morning. Thanks.

I have a tiny violin you can borrow.

No answer to the question then? 

[bolty58]

10 minutes ago, royal white said:

No answer to the question then? 

 

Of course not. Just the usual smug, 'know-it-all' smarmy comment. I'll wager he has plenty of tiny things.

[Jol_BWFC]

3 hours ago, royal white said:

No answer to the question then? 

I’m sure that if the police / security forces believe there is a need, they will step up patrols. If they don’t, they probably won’t. 

You can’t assess police resourcing on the basis of a few folk saying “if mosques get protection, we want churches to have it to, otherwise it’s not fair”.

[royal white]

13 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I’m sure that if the police / security forces believe there is a need, they will step up patrols. If they don’t, they probably won’t. 

You can’t assess police resourcing on the basis of a few folk saying “if mosques get protection, we want churches to have it to, otherwise it’s not fair”.

Strange, haven’t the police come out and said they’re short of numbers and need extra patrols to curb increasing crimes such as knife crime. 

So your first paragraph is utter bollox as per.

[gonzo]

Had 5 live on this morning. I didn’t realise the scale in which the main mon is China is dishing out the aggro on Muslims.

whats the crack there then?

Isis gonna start taking a pop at some fuckers that’s actually done something wrong to them instead of taking pot shots at countries where they’re welcomed?

[royal white]

10 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Had 5 live on this morning. I didn’t realise the scale in which the main mon is China is dishing out the aggro on Muslims.

whats the crack there then?

Isis gonna start taking a pop at some fuckers that’s actually done something wrong to them instead of taking pot shots at countries where they’re welcomed?

Have you tried getting on a train in China  

ISIS probably wouldn’t because they know if they got caught over there they would be tortured in a bad way.

get caught over here and it’s a en suite cell with sky and 3 meals a day 

[Jol_BWFC]

53 minutes ago, royal white said:

Strange, haven’t the police come out and said they’re short of numbers and need extra patrols to curb increasing crimes such as knife crime. 

So your first paragraph is utter bollox as per.

Absolute garbage. You can't compare the two, as they require totally different types of police response / presence.

The extra patrols relating to mosques (and your suggestion of churches) would be a short-term response to a perceived immediate threat in the wake of a specific incident. It would be targeted, focussed and time limited. When there are perceived immediate threats in relation to specific knife crime incidents (such as the recent stabbings in Edmonton), there were increased police patrols to deal with that threat. They too were focused and short-term.  

The comments to which you refer concern a longer term strategy of how to deal with knife crime and social disorder across entire cities. That is an entirely different scenario. There are insufficient resources to have an adequate long-term / permanent increase in patrols in order to deal with that threat. 

 

[royal white]

4 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Absolute garbage. You can't compare the two, as they require totally different types of police response / presence.

The extra patrols relating to mosques (and your suggestion of churches) would be a short-term response to a perceived immediate threat in the wake of a specific incident. It would be targeted, focussed and time limited. When there are perceived immediate threats in relation to specific knife crime incidents (such as the recent stabbings in Edmonton), there were increased police patrols to deal with that threat. They too were focused and short-term.  

The comments to which you refer concern a longer term strategy of how to deal with knife crime and social disorder across entire cities. That is an entirely different scenario. There are insufficient resources to have an adequate long-term / permanent increase in patrols in order to deal with that threat. 

 

Ok then seeing as you think you know how the policing system works why would there be an increase of patrols on mosques and not churches? Why would the police/security forces see one incident  on the other side of the world have the potential to cause problems here,  but another incident on the other side of the world (in which Brits were killed) causing no problems? 

Personally after the attack in NZ I would have thought there would have been a police presence on churches and now after the attack in SL I would have thought a police presence on Mosques to stop any retaliation. 

[Jol_BWFC]

17 minutes ago, royal white said:

Ok then seeing as you think you know how the policing system works why would there be an increase of patrols on mosques and not churches? Why would the police/security forces see one incident  on the other side of the world have the potential to cause problems here,  but another incident on the other side of the world (in which Brits were killed) causing no problems? 

Personally after the attack in NZ I would have thought there would have been a police presence on churches and now after the attack in SL I would have thought a police presence on Mosques to stop any retaliation. 

I've never said I'm an expert on the police system; however, I don't need to be to see your flawed analysis, when you are (a) trying to justify police response based upon perceived religious equality, rather than actual threat and (b) comparing apples with oranges with regard to police resourcing.

In terms of your specific questions, have you ever considered that attitudes such as yours and Bolty's are actually the reason why increased patrols are needed at mosques and not churches? Islamaphobia has been increasing in the UK for years and when people try to turn every response and set of actions into one based upon religion (and pedal a mantra of unfairness over certain religions getting "preferential treatment") it breeds a feeling of divisiveness which leads to such Islamophobic incidents.

Have a read of the article below, published after the NZ attack. Islamophobic incidents rose 600% following the attack, including 5 mosques being targeted in Birmingham. After the Manchester bombing, there was a large increase in attacks on Muslims (for example the Finsbury Park attack). It's not referred to in this article, but hate crimes also increased after the Brexit vote, following the negative focus on immigrants during the Bexit campaign. The more that people like you focus on an anti-Muslim agenda, the more Muslims will be targeted whenever there is an attack whether it is by or against Muslims.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/new-zealand-shooting-attack-muslim-hate-crime-rise-uk-a8836511.html

It's interesting to note in the article that there is a £1.6m fund for protection of places of worship, which is open to Muslim mosques, Christian churches, Hindu temples and Sikh gurdwaras (Jewish communities have separate funding).

[Zico]

terrorists over here aren't daft, they know no fucker goes to church anymore anyway

[royal white]

The attitudes of mine and Bolty? Can I ask what you’re  implying? As you will see my original question is a reasonable question it’s yourself who has turned it into a bit of an issue (no surprise there) so if you could please explain this attitude.

“The more people like me focusing on an anti Muslim agenda” again could you elaborate? 

As for the rise is islamaphobia you would probably see a rise in racist attacks on all sides if it was reported on correctly by police. I know of 2 families who’s kids have both been racially attacked and mugged. When reported in the press it was an attack by 4 x males with no mention of their skin colour (always helpful when looking for someone) and the racist abuse that they received. (One of the lads who’s kid it was posts on here).

As for your summary on the policing, yes you’re quite right youre far from an expert your last post helps prove that. I got that totally wrong.

 

[Jol_BWFC]

I don't need to imply anything, it's written in your posts (which I have quote below). You started the topic of whether the reaction would be the same to an attack on Christians as it would on Muslims* (implying there may not be as much of an outcry for an attack against Christians) and Bolty followed it up with his usual reference to gambling and then the suggestion that the reaction would not be the same. 

On ‎21‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 07:30, royal white said:

Lets see if there’s a reaction to this like there was in NZ 

On ‎21‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 13:26, bolty58 said:

This will be interesting. As a gambling man, I suspect not. 

A few posts later, another post from you questioning whether there is differential treatment between Christians and Muslims (again, suggesting pro-Muslim protection of mosques)*, with Bolty following this up with a post indicating these is an anti-white (or pro-minority) agenda.

17 hours ago, royal white said:

I’m pretty sure after the NZ attack Police patrols were stepped up around mosques. Does anyone know if patrols have been increased around UK churches after the Sri Lanka attacks?

14 hours ago, bolty58 said:

You know the answer RW. Whiteys/Christians/Europeans are expendable.

To qualify for treatment like that you have to be an "oppressed minority" - preferably of a darker hue than white.

* This is where you inevitably reply and suggest that you weren't talking about Sri Lanka and NZ being different reactions because one was committed by Muslims and the other against Muslims, nor that you were implying differential protection of places of worship. However, that's not how Bolty saw it (and he responded accordingly) nor is that how I read it. At least have the courage to stand by your posts instead of scurrying/backtracking because someone has called you out on it.

As for the attacks you've heard of, I have no doubt that hate crime is up across the board and it's sad to see. I don't see it getting better any time soon, unfortunately.

[miamiwhite]

7 minutes ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I don't need to imply anything, it's written in your posts (which I have quote below). You started the topic of whether the reaction would be the same to an attack on Christians as it would on Muslims* (implying there may not be as much of an outcry for an attack against Christians) and Bolty followed it up with his usual reference to gambling and then the suggestion that the reaction would not be the same. 

A few posts later, another post from you questioning whether there is differential treatment between Christians and Muslims (again, suggesting pro-Muslim protection of mosques)*, with Bolty following this up with a post indicating these is an anti-white (or pro-minority) agenda.

* This is where you inevitably reply and suggest that you weren't talking about Sri Lanka and NZ being different reactions because one was committed by Muslims and the other against Muslims, nor that you were implying differential protection of places of worship. However, that's not how Bolty saw it (and he responded accordingly) nor is that how I read it. At least have the courage to stand by your posts instead of scurrying/backtracking because someone has called you out on it.

As for the attacks you've heard of, I have no doubt that hate crime is up across the board and it's sad to see. I don't see it getting better any time soon, unfortunately.

Check your boyfriend’s tweets (Obama) in response to the Christchurch attack and the multiple Sri Lankan attacks which killed many more.

You may just then glean a tiny inkling re the agenda which others have implied.

As you don’t directly answer, I wonder if you care to answer this one in one word ?

Who in the modern day commits the most terror attacks, Christians or Muslims ? A one word answer please instead of your usual jejune bravado and endless pompous digression away from the subject.

[royal white]

Wow you have a wild imagination. The question I asked about the reaction being the same was one asked by many around the world from all colours and religions.

I then said I was pretty sure patrols were stepped up after NZ and asked if anyone knew if they had since SL. Genuine question as I have already stated however you want to put a twist to it. 

Asking a question about a religion or faith doesn’t make someone islamaphobic and certainly doesn’t promote it. It’s folk like you that try to put a spin on anyone who has an opinion then label them how you like. I guarantee I could say to any Muslim I know “where the fucks the extra security for the churches”and they wouldn’t see that as islamaphobic.

I’ve questioned the Catholic church on here am I now a christianaphobic? 

I will stand by all these posts and if you feel they’re islamaphobic then it’s you with the issue. In fact if they are and mine and Boltys attitudes are Part of the reason extra patrols are needed then report me. You have all the evidence here so just send it to the police. 

 

[miamiwhite]

4 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I’m sure that if the police / security forces believe there is a need, they will step up patrols. If they don’t, they probably won’t. 

You can’t assess police resourcing on the basis of a few folk saying “if mosques get protection, we want churches to have it to, otherwise it’s not fair”.

Do you live in the shed ?

If “security forces believe there is a need”

Hello Jol, ISIS have declared war on the West and most specifically Europe for several years now. Did that news not appear on the screen of your rose tinted glasses ?

Police should be everywhere but that whining hypocrite mate of yours Mr Khan is too busy deploying coppers to monitor hurtful words online instead of getting that several hundred strong force of officers on the streets, then he has the audacity to bleat about Resources, but as RW rightly says, he’s soon,ever so quick to get them protecting his beloved mosques.

You really are priceless, and folk like you will be begging a helping hand off decent folk when the inevitable happens in this country which it most certainly will.....don’t ring me son.

 

[gonzo]

Id say the rise in Islamaphobia came about when they started blowing up concert venues and grooming English white girls.

Tarring with brushes and all that. 

Nobody gives a fuck other races. 

[miamiwhite]

2 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Id say the rise in Islamaphobia came about when they started blowing up concert venues and grooming English white girls.

Tarring with brushes and all that. 

Nobody gives a fuck other races. 

Spot on mate.

The filthy bastards fought it on themselves.....and I couldn’t give a toss what the wet farts think about what I’ve said.

Take a look at the cycle of Islam in countries they now rule.....look from start to finish......it’s actually quite horrific, but they quote the Quran as their convenient excuse to rape,pillage and cause endless unnecessary bloodshed......we are realists not racists.....history modern and past proves how barbaric Islam is.

Religion of peace ? Hahaha....that is priceless.

[Jol_BWFC]

34 minutes ago, royal white said:

Wow you have a wild imagination. The question I asked about the reaction being the same was one asked by many around the world from all colours and religions.

I then said I was pretty sure patrols were stepped up after NZ and asked if anyone knew if they had since SL. Genuine question as I have already stated however you want to put a twist to it. 

Asking a question about a religion or faith doesn’t make someone islamaphobic and certainly doesn’t promote it. It’s folk like you that try to put a spin on anyone who has an opinion then label them how you like. I guarantee I could say to any Muslim I know “where the fucks the extra security for the churches”and they wouldn’t see that as islamaphobic.

I’ve questioned the Catholic church on here am I now a christianaphobic? 

I will stand by all these posts and if you feel they’re islamaphobic then it’s you with the issue. In fact if they are and mine and Boltys attitudes are Part of the reason extra patrols are needed then report me. You have all the evidence here so just send it to the police. 

 

Just the response I predicted above.  You are sounding more and more like Miami every day.