Terrorist attack at Finsburgh Park

Extremism begets extremism, and this is fundamentalist Islam begetting extremists, not the other way around as liberals would wish the narrative to be.

 

who didn't cause the problem? Osborne's own actions caused the death of one man and serious injury of several others motivated by his hatred of Muslims. The court believed that the reason this man was radicalised in 3 to 4 weeks so that he decided he wanted to kill Corbyn, Sadiq Khan and as many Muslims as possible was his contact with Britain First and Tommy Robinson. So who according to you caused the problem if you believe it was someone or something different to what our Courts and Terrorist services came up with.

 

You're obviously missing the salient point, whether by accident or design I'm not quite sure. 'Who according to me caused the problem'? The simplistic 'we're all the same under the skin' liberal fraternity, and the spineless, incompetent politicians who appeased them.

BREAKING NEWS: We're not all the same under the skin.

 

So you believe it is correct to commit terrorism against British Muslims. You believe it is right to kill them?

 

Of course I'm not, but neither am I surprised when it happens as a quid pro quo.

 

Oh so is it the left wing of Britain you would like terrorist attacks committed against. You believe he was right to want to kill Corbyn?

 

You are justifying his attack.

 

Again I say of course not! The man is a nutter who has been incensed by atrocities perpetrated in the name of Islam. As for killing Corbyn (if it's true) - I'm not a mind-reader, so I don't know the answer to that question.

 

No, I understand why he did it. Trouble with me is that I think and analyse too much, rather than jump to conclusions.

 

and was further incensed by his contact with Britain First and Corbyn that he believed he would be doing his country a service if he could kill as many Muslims as possible. He got that idea from Britain First and Tommy Robinson

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-muslim-internet-britain-first-a8190316.html

This is grooming.

You are justifying terrorism against British Muslims.

You were blaming the liberal Fraternity for his attack. His first attempt was to find Corbyn to kill. That would go with what you said above. You clearly saying he had good reason for his actions and given that you mentioned the 'liberal fraternity' as being responsible for his terrorism, I assumed you would agree with him that Corbyn was a good target.

 

I agree

I regularly admonish Britts who comment on internal American issues

But just as equally I do not belong on threads having to with the internal affairs of the UK

So I have nothing more to say about this and hope we wont be seeing you on our topics in the future

 

No, you made your comment. You may have realised how you put your foot in it by now, particularly as he said that killing Kahn would be as good as winning the lottery.

I will continue to join threads I want.

 

He has just been sentenced to life imprisonment.

 

I made a comment

but someone reminded me of my own words about clueless foreigners butting their noses where they dont belong

I cant prevent you from being one of of those clueless foreigners but I dont have to be one myself

 

It isn't anything about clueless foreigners. It is perfectly possible for people coming from somewhere else to know more about a situation than those in it.

However you say 'Nothing to see here' which indicated that you saw the killing of British Muslims as no problem.

You then gave a misleading quote by Khan to justify you believing that terrorism against British Muslims was 'nothing' and the person you gave this misleading quote about happened to be the top man on the list that this person wanted to kill.

While I accept that you had no idea what you were talking about, that did not stop you then. You were probably just making a sick joke and saw better of it. I will give you credit for that.

 

all I can do is reapeat my previous and most recent thoughts

I should not be arguing with britts about issues that are none of my business

And you should not be arguing with Americans about issues thst are none of your business

 

This is because you were just giving your opinion or a sick joke knowing nothing about the situation. Had you known about the situation you had every right to post on it. As I said your post 'Nothing to see here' about terrorist murder of Muslims is at best a sick joke.

I suggest you have a word with the mods. If however you meet threads on the US or even on your own small town with as much knowledge as you brought to this one, then you clearly will be bringing to threads concerning your own small town as much as you brought to this thread.

This is wasting energy now. You made either a sick joke or said there was nothing to see concerning the killing of Muslims - that terrorist attacks and murder of Muslims was acceptable to you. One or the other and now you wish to say who can talk on which thread. Nope, you do not have that right either. A good rule of thumb is for people regardless of where they come from to be careful what they say on issues they know nothing about.

 

Now we are getting somewhere

Something happened that affected your country

Apparently you are one of the rare liberals in the world who still loves your own country and do not appreciate foreigners making comments about it that offend you

Good for you

Now you know why you dont belong on threads having to do with America

 

This makes no sense. I do not appreciate people saying terrorism against Muslims is

I do not care where the person comes from.

My issue was with what you said not where you came from. If you like I will point out to the mods what you are saying and they can let you know what the forum's position is.

 

So these are just a few of the posts you made in this thread before you gave the announcement that terrorism against Muslims was not news and giving fake news concerning the person whose name was top of the list to kill by Osborne.

As you can see by the verdict it was terrorism. He was radicalised in 3 or 4 weeks by the extremist group Trump likes to support the tweets of, 'Britain First' and by Tommy Robinson.

 

1. In the US it's called "suicide-by-cop". What's sad is that these mentally deranged asshats harm others on the way.

 

This was a genuine "Lone Wolf" attack, an excuse often used to describe Muslim terrorists, and had nothing to do with those whose names you mentioned.

It was also not a terrorist attack unless you define every murder as a 'terrorist attack'.

 

Robinson was clearly wrong in his time line but perhaps correct over the longer term.

What is necessary is that Muslims get as outraged over Muslims murdering innocent people in Britain, as well as all over the world, as they do about this one nutter, or 'sick man' as you rightfully call him.

Did you make this many posts when Muslims drove vehicles into groups of innocent Brits (and French, Americans, etc.) and murdered dozens of people? I doubt it. And certainly not when Muslim men were molesting your girls for years, and still are apparently.

But a nutter murders one Muslim and everyone gets the blame. This is just another example of why such a very high percentage of Muslims have no credibility whatsoever.

 

How about we use the dictionary definition.
terrorist
ˈtɛrərɪst/
noun
noun: terrorist; plural noun: terrorists

1. 1.
   a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
   "four commercial aircraft were hijacked by terrorists"
   synonyms: bomber, arsonist, incendiary; More
   gunman, assassin, desperado;
   hijacker;
   revolutionary, radical, guerrilla, urban guerrilla, subversive, anarchist, freedom fighter;
   rareinsurrectionist, insurrectionary

adjective
adjective: terrorist

1. 1.
   unlawfully using violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
   "a terrorist organization"

Since civilians were attacked in the pursuit of political aims I think the only reason to not call it an act of terrorism is also political.

 

What were this nutters 'political aims'?