| UK terror plot thwarted | |
|
CuZzA - Student  |
Britain bans hand luggage fearing 'liquid chemical' device; arrests made LONDON - British police thwarted on Thursday what they said was a plot to blow up aircraft in mid-flight between Britain and the United States and arrested more than 15 people. Both countries stepped up security, causing severe delays at airports following the revelation of the plot, which a police source said was believed to involve a “liquid chemical” device. “A major terrorist plot to allegedly blow up aircraft in mid-flight has been disrupted,” a London police spokesman said. “The police acting with the security service MI5 are investigating an alleged plot to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life,” Interior Minister John Reid said. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security raised the threat level for all commercial aircraft to high and U.S. authorities banned liquids, including drinks, from all U.S. commercial flights. Britain’s security services raised the threat level in the country to “critical” from “severe,” the highest of its five ratings which means “an attack is expected imminently.” The British Airports Authority said it had asked all European carriers to suspend flights to London’s main Heathrow airport where new security measures caused severe delays. The news came amid high international tension over the war in Lebanon and the week British Prime Minister Tony Blair headed on holiday to the Caribbean. London police said they believed the intention was to target flights from Britain to the United States. Shares in European airlines fell on the news, with British Airways shares opening nearly 5 percent lower. The pound also fell against the dollar and the euro. Blair’s office said the prime minister had briefed President Bush on the operation during the night and had been in constant contact with Britain over the situation. Severe threat Reid said it was a “very significant plot.” “We are doing everything possible to disrupt any further terrorist activity,” he said in a statement. “This will mean major disruption at all UK airports.” Air passengers found they could take little on board. “We cannot take on anything except wallets, passports and medicine,” Dana Cojocaru-Ivoska, 28, trying to get on a flight to return to her home in St. Louis, Missouri. The security alert comes 13 months after four British Islamic extremist suicide bombers killed 52 people and injured about 700 on London’s transport network. In a speech on Wednesday, Reid said Britain was in the most sustained period of severe threat since the end of World War Two and warned there was no room for complacency. A police source said more than 15 people had been arrested. “We don’t think that it was planned to happen today,” the source told Reuters. “We had intelligence and we had to move against what was a planned attack. “The plan was to take a ready-made explosive device rather than something which would be made up on board,” the source said. Weak spot in security Independent terrorism expert Paul Beaver said hand luggage was a weak spot in airport security. “A laptop computer can carry enough explosives to blow up an aircraft,” he said. “Hold baggage and cargo can be sniffed for explosives. You can’t do that for hand luggage at the moment. The technology is there, but it’s time consuming and expensive.” Beaver said the nature of the alleged plot suggested a connection to al-Qaida. “In the last two months al-Qaida promised that it would avenge Iraq and Afghanistan by attacking British and American aviation assets -- I see a direct link with that,” he said. Britain has come under fire from Islamic militants for its military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Blair has also come under strong criticism at home and abroad for following the U.S. lead and refusing to call for an immediate cease-fire in the conflict between Israel and Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas. British Airways said no hand baggage would be allowed on any of its planes leaving British airports. It said no electrical or battery powered items would be allowed in the cabin, including laptops and mobile phones. British Airports Authority said all passengers on flights to the United States would be subject to a secondary search at the boarding gate and all liquids would also be removed. The Home Office Web Site showed the threat rating had been raised to “critical” from “severe” earlier on Thursday. Britain has a five level rating for security threats, ranging from low to critical, which is the highest level. _______________ - Even if Carlsberg made "w*nkers", Christiano Ronaldo would still be the biggest "w*nker" in the world |
| Login and add your comment! | Previous Comments > |
| Comments |
|
Buzz - Student 
|
Your BBC article says that its reasonably accurate when dealing with science. This isn't science so its about as valid as a tabloid and biased as the New York Times. Right at the top of the article it states "The neutrality of this article is disputed." What I love is stuff like this. Quote: Iran's centuries old feudal agriculture sector was abolished, and replaced with a system of collective farming and government land ownership. Which is later followed up by this:
Quote:The United States was falsely informed that Mossadegh was increasingly turning towards Communism and was moving Iran towards the Soviet sphere at a time of high Cold War fears Sounds a lot like communism to me. And at that time if you start alienating the british which was your major oil partner where could you possibly go? Why the soviets of course. Even wikipedia admits his reforms were failing and his popularity eroding. And if he really was the one wanted by the people there wouldn't have been pro-monarchy forces in existence to take him down. Quote: Yes I read the site. It was one of the few that focused on many events rather than individual events which is why I used it.I thought we were all big enough that we could separate the facts from the bias. Just because the KKK's website might have some accurate information doesn't mean I am going to link it, and then say "well you can separate the facts from the bias." Karzai is US friendly but that site calls him it a puppet government. Pakistan's leader is US friendly too, you going to call him a puppet? In fact a lot of the world is essentially US friendly. Damn we've got a lot of marrionettes out there apparently. And the paragraph on Mossadeq isn't accurate at all. For one the Shah was not placed in power. He was returned to his position. Mossadeq was elected PM but it makes no mention of his dictatorial power grab. By the time of the coup, the only people who would call Iran democratic would be communists. Quote: Neither does sticking guns in their face and setting up a government for them. I wasn't aware we had set up a government for them. Afghanistan and Iraq both had provisional governments which then set things up for an election which the people of those nations elected their own to create the governments. Then once the policies for the new government were in place, more elections were held and voted for by the people of those nations. But yeah I guess since no one received 99% of the vote its all been rigged by the US. _______________ When you are going through Hell, keep going. -Sir Winston Churchill. Those who seek power and control of others, no matter the level, no matter the intentions, should never be given it. |
|
{JF}Jesse - Student |
Quote: Learn your history before spouting off with the information michael moore used for his wonderful world montage in Bowling for Columbine. I have taken quite a few college level history courses so I do know my history. And Michael moore is not a source I would cconsider using hehe. That being said I did not know the specifics of the Mossadeq incident so I went and looked up some info. Now what I found was kind of interesting.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh Now I know you don't like wikipedia but here's an example of its accuracyhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm...though in this case its for scientific accuracy. It's not much differnet than a regular and respected online source. I'm also satisfied with the sources they used to gather the info. New York Times, BBC, and some other interesting articles. Anywhoo what I found kind of agrees and disagrees with your statement below. Mossadeq was voted in as PM by a vote of 79-12 by the parliament and his high popularity is the reason the shah could not stop his appointment. Read the part about the plot though...that's the most important and the whole article is too long to repeat here. And again its interference that counts...the U.S. didn't restore the shah because of his constitutional status....Mossadeq was the popularone, the one wanted by the people. Quote: I mean would you actually read that site? " Following the September 11th terrorist attacks, the US launches a war on Afghanistan, killing over 3,500 people. US led UN occupation of the country props up US puppet regime of Karzai." These guys are probably funded by the World Workers Party. Yes I read the site. It was one of the few that focused on many events rather than individual events which is why I used it.I thought we were all big enough that we could separate the facts from the bias. The factual part of this is true....after sept.11 we invaded Afghanistan and set up karzai who is U.S. friendly. And as I have shown above, the Mossadeq facts...for a brief trimmed down one paragraph version are fairly accurate. Just because there is a bias does not mean that the factual part of it isn't true. Quote: Any educational assistance you would give them would not work in the way you are prescribing. It would be rejected as being from the infidels and trying to force muslims. We're probably not going to agree on this so I'll leave this part at that. But I will say this....as far as I know it's never been tried. Can't hurt to try or at least offer. Quote: Your optimism is admirable but sticking daisies in their guns doesn't really work to bring about peace. Neither does sticking guns in their face and setting up a government for them. Quote: I think you misunderstand what I'm talking about when referring to the UN's cultural protection resolution. Yea I was thinking of a more broad political forcing of western ideas when you said that.Quote: That's because rumsfeld is incompetent and slashed the required force to occupy Iraq down to a third of what other generals would say. Hehe, something else we agree on. Quote: We haven't been bullying. Yes, overthrowing governments isn't bullying =/. This comment was edited by {JF}Jesse on Aug 18 2006 05:12pm. |
|
Buzz - Student
|
Learn your history before spouting off with the information michael moore used for his wonderful world montage in Bowling for Columbine. That websites second line is this: Quote: 1953: CIA overthrows democratically elected Iranian government, placing the Shah in power. In 1951, Iranian parliament had nationalized the British Anglo-Iranian oil company. This popular move was spearheaded by the reformer, Mossadegh, who was elected prime minister shortly after. Britain and the US organize ruthless economic blockade. Shortly before the coup, the Communist Party calls a 100,000 strong demonstration to protest the US and the Shah. Nine hours of street fighting finally quells popular rebellion against the coup. That's such outright B.S. Mossadeq was elected PM in 1951, dismissed a year later for trying to take over the armed forces. He then took over parliament and made the constitutional monarch of Iran (The Shah) appoint him prime minister again. Then his nationalization schemes caused triple digit inflation. He also exiled the shah and became the full on dictator of Iran. In that time he had also declared himself to be a communist. NATO led by the US and Brittain then worked to RE-ENSTATE the shah to his legally held position. I mean would you actually read that site? " Following the September 11th terrorist attacks, the US launches a war on Afghanistan, killing over 3,500 people. US led UN occupation of the country props up US puppet regime of Karzai." These guys are probably funded by the World Workers Party. To continue: Any educational assistance you would give them would not work in the way you are prescribing. It would be rejected as being from the infidels and trying to force muslims. Your optimism is admirable but sticking daisies in their guns doesn't really work to bring about peace. Find me a moderate in a muslim country speaking up vocally in the streets. I think you misunderstand what I'm talking about when referring to the UN's cultural protection resolution. Westernized culture is infectious. Its easy adaptable appealing to many, especially the youth. Its designer jeans, Macdonald's, KFC, and Starbucks. Its popcorn movies and pop music. With movies its a great example of the problems with this "cultural protection" If a country deems some product as a cultural product, then they are able circumvent rules on international trade. So a country like France would be able to say prevent the US film industry from distributing movies to their country or possibly from filming there, in a method that would otherwise have been seen as illegal. Now if there wasn't some threat from outside cultures being able to overtake the original culture why would this be needed? Friendly neighbor to them means you'll be lucky enough to die last. Sure it would work if they were willing to let you live your life the way you want. But you see the problem isn't just them thinking that we're trying to change their way of life, its that the way we live ours is an abomination to them that they must put an end to. Quote: I guess this depends on our definition of Bush's policies. If you define it as bullying, interfering, and threatening the middle east then it has been going on for at least 20+ years. If you define it as just the war part then yes its only been going on for 5 years. If you want to describe the effectiveness of this war though over the five years.... experts/analysts are saying that Bush has effectively created the very situation in Iraq that Iran has been trying to create for the last 40 years. That's because rumsfeld is incompetent and slashed the required force to occupy Iraq down to a third of what other generals would say. Was it enough to defeat their army and take over the country? Yes. Is it enough to keep order to the point that the Iraqi's can fully take over? Nope. Currently there's only one man in Congress saying we need to increase troops. We haven't been bullying. We've been kissing ass and running away almost every time except when it came to stopping communism from spreading. What bullying tactics did we use the 90's? Remember what that all resulted in? Even in the 80's we ran when it wasn't involving communists. _______________ When you are going through Hell, keep going. -Sir Winston Churchill. Those who seek power and control of others, no matter the level, no matter the intentions, should never be given it. |
|
{JF}Jesse - Student |
Quote: What popular president did we go and overthrow over there? Saddam? http://www.lossless-audio.com/usa/index0.php?page=476154763.htm Quote: Their education is what breeds extremsism there. They listen to their clerics who preach the Koran to them and their other holy books. They believe one day even the trees and the rocks will sing to them to announce if a jew is hiding behind them. Perhaps I didn't make it clear in my last post...sometimes you forget to put stuff down in long posts. You would have to make it clear to whoever you're helping that the educational help you are giving is to be used for things that are science based or 'non-religion' based education. Obviously you have to do this in a non anti-religion way but I'm sure theirs a way to put it nicely in either ours or their language. Quote: And when the moderates try to speak out they wind up dead. That's a really broad statement that isn't really true. Are there moderates that have been killed....yes. But there are plenty of them who are alive and kicking. I read something recently that said there are actually more moderates speaking out since 9/11. Quote: I did not say western culture is for everyone. I said it is pervasive and infectious. And that is scary to a lot of people out there and as I said will make them fight back more ferociously against it. Its one of the reasons the UN passed some crappy resolution about countries being able to keep things in their control if it is viewed as being a part of their culture. The only thing about that UN resolution is that it's necessary. Just because one nation disapproves of another's culture does not mean it has a right to interfere. Now obviously there needs to be some kind of line drawn between one's cultural rights and human rights. But war is not going to encourage people to stop their ways. Plus let's be honest....Iraq wasn't about human rights....and the United States doesn't have the resources to militarily try to force change in every nation that doesn't uphold human rights. I think that the only way to promote the respect of human rights is the 'friendly neighbor' helping thing I talked bout in one of my last posts. It's been my experience that education, through science and such tends to create more moderation if someone is religious. Quote: Oh yeah, and we have not been trying Bush's way for 20+ years. We've been trying it for about 5. What we had been doing beforehand is what made bin laden refer to us as the "paper tiger." They've been fighting a war with us since the late 70's. Its about time we started hitting back about 10 times as hard. The winners don't decide when the war is over, the losers do. I guess this depends on our definition of Bush's policies. If you define it as bullying, interfering, and threatening the middle east then it has been going on for at least 20+ years. If you define it as just the war part then yes its only been going on for 5 years. If you want to describe the effectiveness of this war though over the five years.... experts/analysts are saying that Bush has effectively created the very situation in Iraq that Iran has been trying to create for the last 40 years. This comment was edited by {JF}Jesse on Aug 18 2006 01:30am. |
|
El Vee For - Student 
|
Quote:
Quote: It wouldn't be so bad if it didn't hijack nearly every thread that even hints at politics. On another note the inability of this community to have a sensible discussion or debate on anything serious never ceases to amaze me. go find a gaming community that has sensible conversations about literally anything. i dare you. _______________ “Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.” |
|
Buzz - Student 
|
All the stuff with the Shah of Iran. I wasn't even talking about the hostage situation. We were viewed as their enemies before Iraq. What popular president did we go and overthrow over there? Saddam? Yes but christians didn't believe that women's hair sends men into a sexual frenzy. Their education is what breeds extremsism there. They listen to their clerics who preach the Koran to them and their other holy books. They believe one day even the trees and the rocks will sing to them to announce if a jew is hiding behind them. And when the moderates try to speak out they wind up dead. If a woman enters a beauty contest she receives death threats even if she is not a muslim. One was actually killed in Iraq. There are threats to one in Malaysia or Indonesia. I did not say western culture is for everyone. I said it is pervasive and infectious. And that is scary to a lot of people out there and as I said will make them fight back more ferociously against it. Its one of the reasons the UN passed some crappy resolution about countries being able to keep things in their control if it is viewed as being a part of their culture. Oh yeah, and we have not been trying Bush's way for 20+ years. We've been trying it for about 5. What we had been doing beforehand is what made bin laden refer to us as the "paper tiger." They've been fighting a war with us since the late 70's. Its about time we started hitting back about 10 times as hard. The winners don't decide when the war is over, the losers do. _______________ When you are going through Hell, keep going. -Sir Winston Churchill. Those who seek power and control of others, no matter the level, no matter the intentions, should never be given it. |
|
{JF}Jesse - Student |
Quote: Since at least the Reagan administration we have been politically interfering in the middle east's affairs(I am referring to the Iran-contra affair in this instance). I did not imply that the Reagan administration was the first, they were the earliest example I was sure of. As for Carter I knew of the Iranian hostage crisis but he did not really start that from what I remember of it and I was unaware of anything else. Quote: For the rest of what you said, its junk and feel good bs. Improve the economically? Sure, but then you need to deal with them blowing up everything we try to improve for them. You want to talk about bs read your own stuff  I'm talking about helping them improve as equals and not as in their eyes 'conquerers'. As long as the United States is occupying Iraq we will be viewed as their enemies.The only way changes will be made is if you do it through a legal government set up by them. You offer say the Iranian government(a hypothetical of course) some money or technology for improving something like maybe water sanitation or something(obviously nothing dangerous)with no threats attached and it will not be blown up. Oh, and another key is not to push western ideas on them. Quote: We do treat them very well. That's part of the problem. Because they have such a large supply of the world's oil we have allowed them to maintain their 8th Century views. Yes, threatening them and constantly interfering with their internal politics is really being friendly. Think of it this way......would you be happy or angry with muslims if they came over and helped overthrow our popular president(just a hypothetical). The truth is the want to govern oneself is not a new thing. I seem to recall a story about 13 colonies wanting to get away from a little island halfway across the world. Oh and their views go beyond the 8th century. While not quite as severe to women.....Christians managed to refuse women rights up until at least 150 years ago(and thats giving them the benefit of the women's rights movement in which only the most minor things were really accomplished.) Quote: Improve them socially? You must be joking. Women are the property of men. Their hair is sinful and causes men's libidos to go crazy when they see it. In Saudi Arabia its illegal to practice any religion other than Islam, might even carry the death sentence. Any of their own speaking out for moderation and liberalization of their society, while they are within that society is likely to wind up with his head chopped off. First off I suppose this depends on your definition of socially. But the only way you are going to rid people of extremism is through education in my opinion. My suggestion for this is to offer them money for education that is not religion based. Areas like science and reading and such. If the government rejects it they will only look bad to the people because I guarantee you that there is not a majority of people in Islamic countries that believe education is unimportant. This is hypothetical of course but I say its time to try something new. We've been trying Bush's way for 20-30+ years and it hasn't worked at all. Quote: And don't forget that we are the evil infidels to them, why would they ever accept help from us or want to emulate us? In fact that is actually part of the problem. Western culture is so pervasive and infectious that it can conquer and adapt other parts of the world, and that's something many in the muslim world do not want. The more we would try to move them socially forward the more ferociously would they try to attack us.And if you were to take away their reasons to hate us, you would still be left with two that is all they would need: We support Israel, We exist. They give the option of "Submit or Die." I don't like either of them. The majority of people in these countries are truly moderate. The only reason extremists come to power is that they are viewed by moderates to be more friendly than the United States. And religion is not reason enough to completely loathe people for moderate people. And I see you've bought into the western culture is for everyone idea. Is that why the middle east is so rapidly accepting it??? Quote: If a terrorist is any kind of decent terrorist he would assume that the U.S. government is watching him.....it's not like when the media comes out with something the terrorists are all that surprised. I hadn't heard of this one. It again comes down to weighing the good of the nation vs. right to know etc. etc. I would criticize the media for I believe her name is Valerie Plame as well. This may also be the case of misjudgemnet by the media. I stand by the NSA tapping and bank watching though.....if you are a half decent terrorist you know that if you are in the United States you are being watched. And the NSA is still being investigated as to whether Bush broke the law...which a lot of experts believe he did. But they still need to be watchdogs. Without it there is virtually no government accountability. Quote: Bush has been doing a lot of things to expand executive powers and it is a bit disconcerting I'll give you that though. At least we agree on something  I apologize if most of this comes off as rather sarcastic but I just sprained my ankle real bad in a softball game that we lost 6-5 and when I woke up this morning I couldn't put any weight on it so I've been hopping around most of the day . Kinda put me in a bitter mood hehe. This comment was edited by {JF}Jesse on Aug 16 2006 05:08pm. |
|
Buzz - Student
|
Quote: Since at least the Reagan administration we have been politically interfering in the middle east's affairs(I am referring to the Iran-contra affair in this instance). Try since Carter. And you can go back farther too from our involvement with Israel. But the real garbage started flying with Carter, not Reagan. For the rest of what you said, its junk and feel good bs. Improve the economically? Sure, but then you need to deal with them blowing up everything we try to improve for them. We do treat them very well. That's part of the problem. Because they have such a large supply of the world's oil we have allowed them to maintain their 8th Century views. Improve them socially? You must be joking. Women are the property of men. Their hair is sinful and causes men's libidos to go crazy when they see it. In Saudi Arabia its illegal to practice any religion other than Islam, might even carry the death sentence. Any of their own speaking out for moderation and liberalization of their society, while they are within that society is likely to wind up with his head chopped off. And don't forget that we are the evil infidels to them, why would they ever accept help from us or want to emulate us? In fact that is actually part of the problem. Western culture is so pervasive and infectious that it can conquer and adapt other parts of the world, and that's something many in the muslim world do not want. The more we would try to move them socially forward the more ferociously would they try to attack us. And if you were to take away their reasons to hate us, you would still be left with two that is all they would need: We support Israel, We exist. They give the option of "Submit or Die." I don't like either of them. Quote: If a terrorist is any kind of decent terrorist he would assume that the U.S. government is watching him.....it's not like when the media comes out with something the terrorists are all that surprised. You mean like when the media announced that the US government was able to track Bin Laden's cell phone? And so then that cell phone was no longer used. No surprise there I bet. Bush has been doing a lot of things to expand executive powers and it is a bit disconcerting I'll give you that though. NSA wiretapping though isn't one of them. _______________ When you are going through Hell, keep going. -Sir Winston Churchill. Those who seek power and control of others, no matter the level, no matter the intentions, should never be given it. |
|
{JF}Jesse - Student |
Quote: Do you even know what al-Queda is? Do you think it came into being when the UK sent troops to Afghanistan? We're at war with radical Islam but, apparently, have yet to acknowledge this fact. They have certainly understood for decades that they are at war with us. Our enemy is implacable, cannot be reasoned with and will only be satisfied by the complete genocide of all non-Muslims. They see appeasement as weakness and an invitation to press the attack against us. When we take pains to spare civilian lives, they see that as weakness too (compare this with, for example, Hezbollah, which reportedly prevented civilians from leaving southern Lebanon and then howled in the media that those civilians were dying in the crossfire there). Military force and political interference however is not how you are going win this war, which is the major source of disagreement among americans. Since at least the Reagan administration we have been politically interfering in the middle east's affairs(I am referring to the Iran-contra affair in this instance). Iraq has proven that military force isn't effective. There are more terrorists in the world now than before and according to the military commanders the country is drawing closer and closer to civil war. The only way you are going to win this war is if you undermine the radical support. And the only way you are going to do this is if we start treating the muslim world better. That means stop interfering in their internal politics and that means helping their country develop socially and economically. If you start taking away their reasons to hate us you remove most of the support for the extremeist groups. As for the media, it's a sketchy issue. You need some sort of media watchdog on the government or else the government tries to get away with stuff(think of watergate). On the other hand you have to balance out the good of the nation vs. the people's right to know. In this case I doubt that any real harm was done. If a terrorist is any kind of decent terrorist he would assume that the U.S. government is watching him.....it's not like when the media comes out with something the terrorists are all that surprised. The media probably didn't need to report that the finances of people were being monitored by the government, even though it had been openly discussed in congress and the media really didn't give anything away. And as for the NSA wiretapping that is still question of did bush break the law. It's not even really about whether the wiretapping is the legal part, its how he refused to get the required permission from the FISA court. Bush has been acting like a monarch lately. This is the president that signed a law into effect and then said he didn't have to follow the law. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/ |
|
Gil-Galad - Student 
|
Quote:
Quote: Good job by the police and MI5. On another note the inability of this community to have a sensible discussion or debate on anything serious never ceases to amaze me. I maintain the fact that, even though this is a serious matter, I left my opinion. I said what i wanted to said and was serious about it. There was no malicious intent and definatly no jabs at anyone who didn't deserve it. I've said my serious bit, and i followed it up with something to lighten the mood. Its a sad topic, so instead of everything everyone says being aggressive and down, i left another message to bring it up a bit. That doesn't mean i wasn't taking it seriously, it just means i like the world to be that little bit brighter. Hey just so you know, I was in no way having a dig or referring to you at all Mic _______________ |JAA| since 02/05/06 Green for life |
|
Mindrith Pride - Student 
|
Quote:
Quote: Good job by the police and MI5. On another note the inability of this community to have a sensible discussion or debate on anything serious never ceases to amaze me. I maintain the fact that, even though this is a serious matter, I left my opinion. I said what i wanted to said and was serious about it. There was no malicious intent and definatly no jabs at anyone who didn't deserve it. I've said my serious bit, and i followed it up with something to lighten the mood. Its a sad topic, so instead of everything everyone says being aggressive and down, i left another message to bring it up a bit. That doesn't mean i wasn't taking it seriously, it just means i like the world to be that little bit brighter. In other news: It still frightens me to this day that these people had a British citizenship. They had homes, families and friends. For all we know, i could have been talking to one in town the other day. Its a scary prospect that has me on edge to this day. Aye. I know what you mean man. _______________ [proud owner of talions 200th, 700th,1111th coment AND 1400th , DJK's 3001th coment! , saz's 400th coment! liso's 800th coment! Kitmitsu Aratan's 1200th comment! Cau's 100th comeent, Alexander's (aka CC) 210th, 888th and 2200th comments! Moriarti's 800th comment , Piccolo's 2000th comment! lirael's 505th comment , Quom Farlance's 120th comment, Alexander's 1800th comment , Eica's 1400th comment , Wicek's 3200th comment lady C's 999th comment, Echuu's 1100th comment, Takaru's 325th and 400th comment, Redeye's 200th comment picc's 3600th comment, Ostith's 50th comment, Elmo's 555th comment] |
|
Eica - Student 
|
Taken from the statement of Al-Qaeda after the july the seventh bombings: Quote: it is time to take revenge against the British Zionist crusader government in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's what I was referring to Javaguy. _______________ Former padawan of RoseRed |
|
JavaGuy - Student 
|
Not al-Queda, but a close ally: Hezbollah's web site, if you can stomach it. _______________ My signature is only one line. You're welcome. |
|
JavaGuy - Student 
|
Quote: I don't think terrorism against the UK has anything to do with Bush. I think it's to do with UK troops in Afghanistan. Do you even know what al-Queda is? Do you think it came into being when the UK sent troops to Afghanistan? We're at war with radical Islam but, apparently, have yet to acknowledge this fact. They have certainly understood for decades that they are at war with us. Our enemy is implacable, cannot be reasoned with and will only be satisfied by the complete genocide of all non-Muslims. They see appeasement as weakness and an invitation to press the attack against us. When we take pains to spare civilian lives, they see that as weakness too (compare this with, for example, Hezbollah, which reportedly prevented civilians from leaving southern Lebanon and then howled in the media that those civilians were dying in the crossfire there). My favorite comment about the foiling of this plot was in the Wall Street Journal (sorry, no link), concerning how they were caught. It was through a good old-fashioned intelligence surveillance program. The Journal remarked that it was a good thing the terrorists were arrested before the New York Times found out about the surveillance program and alerted them, as the Times has done for the terrorists in the past. Oderint, dum metuant. _______________ My signature is only one line. You're welcome. |
|
Eica - Student 
|
Quote: Thwarted... for now. I just hope they're this "good" / "lucky" / whatever you want to call it, in the future. When we (Blair and Bush) stick our big fat noses (Armies) in where they don't belong (Iraq), we're bound to get a slap. I don't think terrorism against the UK has anything to do with Bush. I think it's to do with UK troops in Afghanistan. _______________ Former padawan of RoseRed |
|
Kenyon - Lord of the Dance 
|
Quote: The names were released not by the police but by the bank of england, as the assets of those arrested were frozen. Reportedly the police are somewhat upset about it, but hey-ho, the media love it  You're right, the names were released by the Bank of England. Quote: And when apprehended their names can be released under most circumstances. It doesn't violate their rights or the innocent until proven guilty. Well, I wouldn't know how things like that work in the United States or the United Kingdom - but over here in the Netherlands, the media is given a pseudonym which they use to refer to the suspect. Ali Cossor would become Ali C. to safeguard his right to privacy. I'm not sure how it works legally, but the moral implications are quite clear. Public association by the media with a terrible crime will destroy your reputation. If it has not been proven yet that the suspect is guilty, it's slander. |
|
Mic Den Octela - Student 
|
Quote:
Quote: The police did a very good job. However, I was surprised the names of the 'terrorists' were revealed in full the very same day - after all, innocent until proven guilty, right? They're still suspects. And when apprehended their names can be released under most circumstances. It doesn't violate their rights or the innocent until proven guilty. Listen to Buzz, he's pretty much always right. Forgive my dual post. :S _______________ -Padawan of Virtue -Brother of Menaxia, *|irael, Krynn Adept, Majno, Ris Win Juljul, DaMi3N, Beowulf, Dash Starlight, Carrock and Yuken Zalak Bartender at Munes bar. Sir Mic of Nippledom! Proudly beating Wang, since '07. (Crackdown) This comment was edited by Mic Den Octela on Aug 12 2006 03:38am. |
|
Mic Den Octela - Student 
|
Quote: Good job by the police and MI5. On another note the inability of this community to have a sensible discussion or debate on anything serious never ceases to amaze me. I maintain the fact that, even though this is a serious matter, I left my opinion. I said what i wanted to said and was serious about it. There was no malicious intent and definatly no jabs at anyone who didn't deserve it. I've said my serious bit, and i followed it up with something to lighten the mood. Its a sad topic, so instead of everything everyone says being aggressive and down, i left another message to bring it up a bit. That doesn't mean i wasn't taking it seriously, it just means i like the world to be that little bit brighter. In other news: It still frightens me to this day that these people had a British citizenship. They had homes, families and friends. For all we know, i could have been talking to one in town the other day. Its a scary prospect that has me on edge to this day. _______________ -Padawan of Virtue -Brother of Menaxia, *|irael, Krynn Adept, Majno, Ris Win Juljul, DaMi3N, Beowulf, Dash Starlight, Carrock and Yuken Zalak Bartender at Munes bar. Sir Mic of Nippledom! Proudly beating Wang, since '07. (Crackdown) This comment was edited by Mic Den Octela on Aug 12 2006 03:36am. |
|
WHITLOCK - Student |
My father and my brother are both in what we refer to as the "Law Enforcement Biz" and believe me, I am all too familiar with how much the media can hurt an investigation. I can't blame them for being a little upset. This comment was edited by WHITLOCK on Aug 12 2006 01:53am. |
|
Rinzler - Student 
|
who cares says us, i wouldnt expect anything else for terror suspects. _______________ I fite for teh usars!1 |
|
Gil-Galad - Student 
|
The names were released not by the police but by the bank of england, as the assets of those arrested were frozen. Reportedly the police are somewhat upset about it, but hey-ho, the media love it _______________ |JAA| since 02/05/06 Green for life |
|
thedestroyer - Student 
|
I heard that those terrorists were on the way to the U.S (sorry if its in the post, I didn't read all of it  ), and that the aprehencion of it prevented another 9/11. |
|
Buzz - Student
|
Quote: The police did a very good job. However, I was surprised the names of the 'terrorists' were revealed in full the very same day - after all, innocent until proven guilty, right? They're still suspects. And when apprehended their names can be released under most circumstances. It doesn't violate their rights or the innocent until proven guilty. _______________ When you are going through Hell, keep going. -Sir Winston Churchill. Those who seek power and control of others, no matter the level, no matter the intentions, should never be given it. |
|
Monteeeeeee - Nugget 
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote: On another note the inability of this community to have a sensible discussion or debate on anything serious never ceases to amaze me. go find a gaming community that has sensible conversations about literally anything. i dare you. haha you make a good point I guess I compare it too much to other online communities that probably have totally different demographics. Nevermind eh. By the way it turns out some of the terrorists were white british males, who had converted to Islam. As a white british male I find it hard to understand how, no matter how much you may disagree with British foreign policy, you could turn to such extreme measures. the riddler has been set free from batman forever! _______________ If you add me to MSN, tell me who you are
Best Movie Character EVER!! |
|
Kenyon - Lord of the Dance 
|
The police did a very good job. However, I was surprised the names of the 'terrorists' were revealed in full the very same day - after all, innocent until proven guilty, right? They're still suspects. |
| Login and add your comment! | Previous Comments > |