Shooting outside the House of Commons

better dead than red said:
I'm going to guess there are armed police/security forces/maybe even soldiers in that area you won't or should not notice as easily. They may be in suits or dressed as tourists to fit in to the surroundings.
Click to expand...

From what i can gather the armed cops tend to patrol that area but i can imagine when mp's are at peak in and out times they are to make themselves more discreet or something along those lines.

parliamentsquare.png


If you look along the right of that pic you can see in the middle the curved walking path where the stabbing and shooting occurred. Now in that little square that funnels to the entrance i understand has non armed police. You see what looks like 9 solar panels or something? the armed cops patrol up and down to about that point from what people are saying, going off the picture i mean and that is panel is where they would possibly stop.
 
TCIB said:
From what i can gather the armed cops tend to patrol that area but i can imagine when mp's are at peak in and out times they are to make themselves more discreet or something along those lines.

parliamentsquare.png


If you look along the right of that pic you can see in the middle the curved walking path where the stabbing and shooting occurred. Now in that little square that funnels to the entrance i understand has non armed police. You see what looks like 9 solar panels or something? the armed cops patrol up and down to about that point from what people are saying, going off the picture i mean and that is panel is where they would possibly stop.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
 
Damocles said:
Modern jihadism started in the 1990s at the earliest. Jihadism conceptually probably started somewhere around the Sudan Conflict in the 1800s. What are you referring to with 100 years ago?



There's no evidence to back this up.



Turns out that Rotherham council had very little to do with Islamic apology, and instead more to do with poor information sharing and multiagency work - specifically that the CSE team in the area carried really stupid case loads where they couldn't possibly have given any of them proper attention.

I don't know how Rotherham has been tied to Islamic apology; the problem was that the perpetrators were Asian and the council didn't want to inflame racial tensions, not that they were Islamic. Their religions were never brought into it.

And no, I don't believe that thinking that a religion of 2 billion people should be unilaterally condemned makes me somebody who would overlook child sexual abuse. I tend to like blaming people for their actions rather than concepts wherever possible. I'd like to blame Sunni jihadism, I can get behind that.
Click to expand...
"Rotherham" happened across multiple disconnected towns, multiple gangs and dozens, possibly hundreds of rapists across a decade.

The rapists were NOT "Asian"
(Edited: funny how stereotyping is so fine when its useful to the "liberals")
They were almost entirely Muslim

There are large groups of
1. Indian hindu / sikh
2. African hindu
3. Sri lankan buddhist / hindu
4. African Christian
Refugees in the Uk,

all from similar third world backgrounds, education and often the same jobs (they are all well represented in minicab services for instance)

Explain why none of these groups used those "poor information sharing" to gangrape thousands of minor girls.

And yes, the main culprits were not the muslims, agreed. They are the leftist islam apologists for whom gangrape on an industrial scale was acceptable.
 
M18CTID said:
I'm not sure how an attack in one of the world's most iconic cities in what is arguably that city's most iconic location (pedant alert: Yes I know it was the city of Westminster rather than the city of London!) could be anything but headline news, especially in the country that the attack happened. I was in Prague at the time of the failed 21/7 bombings back in 2005 and that was headline news over there all day even though there were no casualties.

That said, I do agree wholeheartedly about the repetitiveness of the reporting
Click to expand...

Totally agree. It should be headline news. Just not ALL the news, constantly on all the channels. Its OTT.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Totally agree. It should be headline news. Just not ALL the news, constantly on all the channels. Its OTT.
Click to expand...
I agree, the thing that irks me the most watching the BBC News Channel is the sense of excitement over the whole thing that you get. I know as journalists they probably live for big stories but you just get the feeling that they are fucking loving it. About half an hour ago I switched it on and they were still explaining the fairly basic details of what happened as if it was breaking news. A man has deliberately driven into pedestrians...yes we fucking know you cunts, you've told us nothing else for 24 hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.