Events in Woolwich

I've only just home from golf, and am reading the horrendous reports about what happened in Woolwich this afternoon. I bet those morons at the EDL are mobilising as we speak.

Where does this hate come from?

1 user has voted.


those EDL fascists!!

The hate I was referring to was not from the EDL, but from the perpetrators of this horrible crime. Just to be clear.

I don't envy the powers that be who have to decide what to do about this. When confronted with something like
this, one might take the line that it is an isolated incident committed by 2 crazy men (and risk seriously understating the nature of the problem, as I suspect has been the case for some time) or calling for civil war (and making things 1000 times worse).

That poor man's family. I'm in tears thinking about them. It's just horrific.

As you would expect Twitter is awash with EDL Tweets, and their leader Tommy Robinson is expected in Woolwich at 9.00 tonight. He is calling for 'feet on the street'. As if the police haven't got enough to deal with today they are going to have watch to ensure there is no conflict between the locals and the EDL.
What a sorry state of affairs and what a sad world we live in.

a realisation by a certain type of person that most people want to be sheep and want to be told how to think and act. That type of person then arms themselves with ideas, devices and rules that can both manipulate and subjugate the sheep to act according to their will. Sometimes that will is apparently derived from a divine being, but not exclusively.

If you then put that person and those sheep in a physical context where concepts such as democracy and secularism are considered either out of reach or 'bad' or 'weak' then you have something against which that person can apply power and instruct the sheep to act in accordance with that power.

That the level of "hate" perpetrated becomes something that can occur in broad daylight on the streets of the UK is only shocking if one considers only the context of where it happened, and not why.

Just a feeling of sorrow for the victim, who seems to have been forgotten amid all the political grandstanding.

That poor lad and his poor family. That's my only response. Seems to be a golden opportunity for certain types to ride their hobbyhorses. I'm not interested.

The certain types are riding their hobby-horses up your street.

They're really not, you know.

Okay. Miles away.

ACTUALLY miles away

But you may have noticed that it's your opinions I'm interested in, as residents of the country in which this happened. But maybe you haven't.

Thanks a bunch.

*Shuffles off sobbing to the asterisks thread*

*makes mental note to stick to stupid threads in future*

It was designed to get the boot boys out. It won't work and it will diminish EDL support. But like Jim and others say, that poor poor boy. Can't get past that.

...and someone at work said "I wonder what sort of a world he'll grow up in?". I think he got his answer today.
That poor lad in London.
A pox on the houses of all those bastards who stood around filming it.

Aspect of this dreadful event was the bravery of the women who went to the victim's assistance. Immense bravery on their part.

The unfurling consequences of this event are deeply scary

Hear bloody hear.

7 mentions of the EDL. Zero mentions of Muslims. Let's all pussyfoot around the issue.

How is frothing at the mouth about Muslims going to help? The people who have been mentioned 7 times are doing enough of that already.

that quells the savage beast that dwells within him

That making this about ianess is helpful or in good taste. Please desist.

back to the pointless debate over a confused situation currently devoid of clear facts that is being whipped up by various factions for their own use - with you.

From the BBC:

Man dead in suspected UK terror attack

A man is killed in a machete attack and two men are shot by police in London in what UK government sources say is a suspected terror incident.

Police confirmed two men had been arrested in connection with the murder.

There are unconfirmed reports that the dead man was a soldier.

Both French President Francois Hollande and MP Nick Raynsford said the dead man had been a soldier at Woolwich barracks.

The footage shown on the ITV website shows a man, speaking to the camera, saying: "We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

From Huffpost:

A man was reportedly killed in an attack with a knife and a meat cleaver in London's Woolwich neighbourhood on Wednesday.

In a statement, London's Metropolitan police commander Simon Letchford said that police have shot two men who had attacked the victim in Woolwich's John Wilson Street. The Telegraph reports that local MP Nick Raynsford said that he believed the victim was a soldier returning to his barracks, while several witnesses described the attack as a "beheading."

its all conjecture. This is the trouble with 24 hours news and in turn the internet. Rolling news in The UK is falling over itself tonight with "experts", religious leaders and 12 year old eye witnesses.

Its the sort of knee jerk reaction that the EDl love.

Your use of the phrase is puzzling. The words you put in quotes constitute standard journalistic form. You'll find them in many news stories. The events are clear and not really confusing at all.

The woman who intervened says the man confessed to the soldier's slaying, and then declared, "I killed him because he killed Muslims."

Despite earlier reports that the men were possibly drunk or on drugs, Loyau-Kennett says the man she spoke with was neither. "He was in full control of his decisions and ready to everything he wanted to do," she told the Telegraph.

"We want to start a war in London tonight," Loyau-Kennett recalled one of the men saying.

but you might want to pop over to the double glazing thread. You'll never guess who's back.

nor am I a 'savage beast'. I'd have thought these descriptions could be better applied to the nutjobs who perpetrated this atrocity.
This is not about the EDL, nor is it about me pointing out the elephant in the room. In recent years, we have now had the murder of Theo Van Gogh in Holland and various attacks on the Scandinavian cartoonist and another Scandinavian journalist recently. These attacks were carried out by Islamofascists, not by the EDL or equivalent fringe right-wing groups.

- and there are a few here - seem more comfortable with discussing Islamophobia than Islam extremism. Ian had a point - expressed (for him) very reasonably - that this thread was about the EDL, who are involved only peripherally, after the event. Why can't the subject of Islam extremism - terrorism - be addressed here? Mikethep seems to think that frothing and raving is the only alternative to not mentioning "the elephant in the room". I don't think Ian's trying to stir up hatred (correct me if I'm wrong, Ian). Unless we - the reasonable minds - can look at Islam extremism, without dismissing it as a bunch of nutcases, random mad men, but as the very specific issue that it is, then Islamophobia will be the response.

You can be sure of that. Any mention of Islamic extremism will be instantly dismissed as racism by the apologists on the left.

I'd hate to think there were any apologists for Islam extremism here, of whatever political stripe. But the "elephant in the room" is a rogue elephant, not a friendly Jumbo performing circus tricks. Is it reasonable, or even safe, to turn our backs on it?

to some kind of half-hearted condemnation of these terrorist atrocities, right enough.

But it won't be long before we hear attempted justification along the lines of "American foreign policy, blah, blah, blah...".

Maybe Jim Cain - the man I've always thought of as The Moral Compass Of The Afterword - will have stopped spinning and formulated an opinion about an English soldier getting beheaded by an Islamic terrorist on British soil. Good? Bad? The lines are open ...

Murder is always bad. But you'll not get a knee-jerk reaction out of me about Islam, sorry. If they were fundamentalist Christians, people would dismiss them as 'nutters' and that would be that.

What about terrorism, Jim? Specifically - Islamic extremist terrorism? I'm not asking for a knee-jerk opinion here (certainly not about the broader topic of Islam), but if you've thought about the subject perhaps you could share your views? Nutters?

You're condemning people's response before you've even heard it, and before the facts are in.

Personally, I think we should be fighting Islamofascism tooth and nail. I've no problem at all with us having been in Afghanistan and I don't think it's remotely reasonable to blame US foreign policy for people attempting to kill British or US civilians, or for cowards attacking off duty soldiers with machetes.

I don't agree with moral relativism and I don't think we need to make excuses for honour killings, homophobia of any stripe or people going batshit crazy and becoming violent in response to cartoons of their prophet.

I also positively loathe the EDL (and what meagre fractions of human beings they once again proved themselves to be last night) + I do think it's relevant that they be mentioned here.

Oh, and I think it's utterly, utterly vital that we do not treat the terms "Islamofascist" and "Muslim" as interchangeable, or that what happened yesterday is cause for an attack on that most ill defined concept, "multiculturalism". I live in London. It's a cultural melting pot and that's one of the best things about it.

There you go: something for (or to offend) everyone.

And, as per the below, I think it's foolhardy to get too deep into this when we're all still angry and upset - and I think that right now we're all still angry and upset (I know I am).

They are an irrelevance, little more than a bunch of shit-stirring meathead yobs who will never have any political power.

That's a world away from hate-fuelled religious fanatics who murder people on the street while yelling Islamist slogans.

They were calling for "revenge attacks" on Muslims.

They were flooding into Woolwich in large numbers, attempting to use this horrendous incident to start trouble on the streets.

They were wearing masks and fighting with the police.

Their response is quite clearly part of the story here. I don't see why people can't comment on it, or that doing so implies an acceptance/greater tolerance of terrorism. Frankly, I assume people were focused on the EDL last night because the terrorist attack was "over", while the EDL action was still ongoing, and at risk of escalating.

I would hope it goes without saying that what the EDL did is nowhere near as bad as what the terrorists did, but they're ultimately part of the same problem: violent, fascist morons.

The EDL comments are because they were demanding 'feet on the ground'

The only thing that could make this worse is if the EDL etc manage to make it all kick off everywhere

Nobody is under any illusion that its Islamist extremists - and since they were shouting slogans about what the British are doing in Afghanistan then perhaps foreign policy is relevant and isn't some sort of wet liberal hand-wringing get-out?

So it is all our fault after all? Thanks for clearing that up.

Jeering at us isn't going to help

Why you think I am making excuses defeats me - or why you feel it necessary to start having a go at us as a country

What does that have to do with anything?

I don't understand what you mean when you say I'm "jeering" and "having a go at us as a country". I'm as British as you (presumably) with family in England, so I take an interest in what goes on.

"Its all the fault of you leftie liberals and here come the excuses". So - I repeat - FFS.

And those quotation marks are not needed since you're only paraphrasing what you think I said.

I grew up down the road - my family live all over London - most of my early life the re was an IRA bombing campaign which brings this very sharply home to me.

I don't take kindly to people telling me that everyone is denying the central most important fact and that we'll bend over backwards to avoid blaming those responsible. Its horseshit

And no returns.

to people foaming at the mouth and endlessly substituting "FFS" for rational debate followed by xenophobic comments along the lines of 'you don't even live in this country, so you're not allowed an opinion'. You know how that sounds, I hope?

We were obsessed with the EDL when it was clearly the fault of Islamic terrorists

I thought - and think that - to be completely beside the point because nobody was seriously saying otherwise.

What would be terrifying would be a communal bloodbath as is happening in Burma and has happened elsewhere many times. Thats what the terrorists want - that was the whole point of the appalling crime - so the EDL are directly relevant to what happens next. And you were having a go at the 'Left' - hence my acronymed swearing.

I don't think we've ever rowed before - I will stop ranting now - feelings are very high - seriously, nobody is excusing the perpetrators anything

introduced the EDL into the debate (and this theme was continued by several of the following posts) I thought it not unreasonable to suggest their importance was being overplayed in this instance.

Let's kiss and make up, eh?

I demand a Turkish Oil Wrestle. Just you and me. Buck nekkid. Covered in chicken fat. On a rubber sheet. In the car park of the Winnersh Do-It-All.


Is now a Wicks.
Not to worry though, the car parks still there so it's all good.

liveblogging from somebodys tblet. oiled up an watnghere he is o no its th plce im audi

started doing those incredibly annoying Wickes ads on tv I have vowed never to visit that store. And that includes the car park. Not that I got an invite or anything. Just saying.

they conveniently fail to recognize any efforts by the (hated) West on behalf of Muslims in former Yugoslav republics because it doesn't fit their agenda.
True fascism: ignoring and surpressing the truth.

some people may point to the failure of the West to protect muslims in the former Yugoslavia in the early 90s as the turning point that led to the current situation.

I was going to add the rider that the "protection" (?) that was eventually afforded could appear to be grudging, if someone wanted to take that view.
It still happened - eventually.
My point was more to define the fascism bit of what is happening. Without straying too far from the OP which I successfully managed to do by talking about the former Yugoslavia's troubles.

I'm not dismissing any mention of Islamic extremism as racism.

I would call it Islamist extremism though.

is utter bollocks.
There are those here, both left and right, who cannot resist turning anything that comes along into a poke at the other side. Rather childish IMO.

dismissing someone's POV as "utter bollocks" is entirely reasonable debate in the finest Wildean tradition, isn't it?

Nicely done.

Unlike everybody else round here, you actually know me, and you know that I am a civilised and (ahem) perceptive cove who is unlikely to hold any brief for Islamofascism, Islamophobia or indeed Islam in general. My point, such as it was, was this: in the coming days and weeks we are going to be bombarded with opinion - expert, non-expert and out to lunch - on the subject. It seemed to me that Ian's intervention was likely to raise the temperature, and that frothing at the mouth was likely to ensue, with the usual consequences - in fact already has. As far as I know nobody round here has any particular expertise in this area other than personal opinion and what they learn from the media; what can possibly be gained by a bunch of white, middle-class (apologies if I'm insulting anybody here) Afterworders "looking at Islam extremism"? This is not censorship; I'm not trying to shut down debate; I'm suggesting that such a debate might not lead anywhere.

I apologise to everybody for trying to cover the elephant with an antimacassar.

But I stand my ground: are we not reasonable men? Ian's comment seemed on the money to me, and it wasn't like he was lobbing his usual verbal molotov cocktails (which I rather enjoy). Any debate here, be it about that difficult second album, Marmite, levitation, or Islamic fundamentalism, is unlikely to lead to a consensus, votes taken and policy formed. That's a given. At the risk of repeating myself, I'm not going to repeat myself.

(You are a God amongst men, Mike. This I know.)

FWIW, the main reason for making my initial comment was that I'd been travelling yesterday and had no idea what had happened in Woolwich. The OP and the first few comments that followed made me believe that whatever incident had occurred involved the bunch of morons that comprise the EDL. Having then discovered what the reality was, I made my comment pointing out that many mentions had been made of the feeble bunch of inadequates in the EDL, yet no mention had been made of the Muslims who had committed this atrocity in the name of Allah. It seemed bizarre and ostrich-like to me that these initial comments all focussed on the EDL.
As regards the Muslim world, I lived and worked in Bahrain for over a year. By Muslim standards, it was a liberal country. They educated the women and allowed the consumption of alcohol. Rather nice, friendly people also. I couldn't say that about the arrogant, decadent Saudis and Kuwaitis who swarmed in every weekend to get hammered.
I lived in London throughout the period of IRA bombings. The Irish issue was discussed at length. Why should Islamic extremism and the consequences for the West not be also?

As per this thread. And all over every newspaper. And the BBC news

The idea that it isn't being discussed because of some sort of bien pensant liberal consiracy is bizarre

but in a way it's comforting to think that you and I and a few others from round here are believed to form a bien pensant liberal conspiracy.

If others think it, it must be true.


They basically sound like an acoustic, folk version of Rage Against The Machine (a "Grumble Against The Machine" if you will).

but do we have to use the phrase "bien pensant"?

is that "right-thinking" confuses people because most right-thinking people are left-leaning.

But the sentiment itself seems redundant and the phrase is ostentatious. I suppose "politically correct" is a step too far.

the Victorians' "respectable".

is 'right-thinking' for people who think 'right-thinking' makes them sound a bit fascist.

I can work with this. If the focus groups aren't biting then we can switch bait.

How about this? Sack the drummer, everyone in Fred Perry, take the sound in more of a classic Britpop direction and change the band name to "Toynbee".

Waddayasay? Gold - am I right?

to their imaginary first 45. But folks round here know them as The Toynbees.

of notorious Oi! throwbacks The Littlejohn Tendency, of course.

The loneliness of being right.

There is only one way of being right

Or his?

Not his. Lots of them.

Can't stop. I'm just off to arm a terrorist to salve my bleeding heart conscience

a nutter.
No matter what colour they tie their flag to.

and ever shall it be :(

The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson which I would highly recommend. These murderers fit the profile (obvious I know). Does it mean anything more than there are nutcase psychos in the world? We could ban religion - which I'd be quite into - and ban politics, but there'd still be murderous lunatics in the world.
Anyway, back to that book - these guys are obviously psychotic, whatever they say about why they did it is irrelevant and not worth discussing.

By which I mean an act specifically aimed at kicking off a shitstorm. Something that no rational person would want but these islamo-fascists clearly do.

The best response to those who wish to make life cheap is to show the value we put on the victim and those who tried to help him.


Life is too precious to be snuffed out in the name of a religious crusade.

Passions are clearly running high this evening. Out of respect for the dead, it might be best to leave getting into the politics of this incident until the body is at least cold. It might also help ensure that we all keep our heads.

Hard this evening to see beyond the human tragedy of this man's death and the apparent bravery of some of the passers by.

Thoughts with the family. Utterly appalling.

Judging by the headlines appearing in the press it is a very unfortunate choice of words from Bingo above. Strange how we are talking EDL here by and large and not the twisted perversions carried out in the name of islam.


..go away for a few days and then come back when facts are clearer.

I didn't see Bingo's comment, and my remark was in no way meant as a criticism of Bingo just a reference to the developing story.

I was simply agreeing with the main thrust of what Bingo was saying about waiting.

By the way Fiction, I have 17 years experience of living in Luton and experiencing both Islamist and EDL nonsense. Happy to swap experiences with you from the front line.

Make them better in hospital, then put them on trial. IF guilty (still only suspects at the moment), lock them up & throw away the key.

I honestly believe that they wanted to be shot & killed by the police, that way they could be perceived as martyrs.

As news broke of the savage murder of man on a London pavement, the prime minister flew back immediately to chair a hastily convened COBRA meeting at No. 10 and consult with senior policemen and intelligence chiefs. The BBC was quick to tell us that the killers were "Islamic-looking".* The rolling news kept us updated with reports from witnesses and even reports from people who'd just talked briefly to witnesses before going home. Shaky mobile-phone footage of the aftermath was flashed all over the world's screens, sometimes pixellated, sometimes not.

No, wait. None of that happened. Or rather, yes, it did happen last night, but not when Ian Baynham was kicked to death in the middle of Trafalgar Square in September 2009. None of that happened because Ian Baynham was killed for being gay, not for being a soldier, and his killers were chavvy-looking homophobic youths rather than Islamic-looking Islamist terrorists.

Britain was not under attack. Nothing to worry about.

(*You know, like a cross between Omar Sharif and Muhammad Ali.)

Look! It's Henry Stanley, 3rd Baron Stanley of Alderley, everybody...

expressing an anti-homophobic opinion, Archie. People are getting killed all the time for beaucoup of reasons or no reason at all. But the reluctance of "certain types" (to throw Bob's curious phrase back at him a second time) here to condemn Islamic terrorism is, to me, more baffling than anything else. I find the (excuse me) R.I.P. guff a little worrying, too. "My thoughts are with the victim ..." - what does this mean? Effectively, nothing. Those thoughts will be of little comfort (I'm guessing) to the guy who got his head cut off. But if it gives the "thought-sender" some comfort, then perhaps it's no bad thing. Candle-lit vigils are also a good way of showing how sad you are.

We'all out in the street and murder a few people at random to show that we've finally awoken from our long slumber. YOu can watch it on the news.

Meantime - I condemn Islamic terrorism. Always have. Make you feel any better?

I'll sleep easy a-bed this evening knowing that you're running amok on my behalf!

(Why is it that you and mikethep - amongst others, possibly - seem to think the only alternative to not debating/not "being interested" in this is going wild in the streets?)

We have a police force and intelligence services - I don't know what else I am supposed to be doing. But I am certainly not doing the thing you accuse me and others of - making excuses. That accusation really maddens me

I'm not accusing anyone of making excuses. So please calm down. I don't mind you getting mad at things I have "said" here, but that's not one of them. Deep breaths, Forks ... in ... and out ... in ... and out ...

But they were different.

One was an spur of the moment, drink-fuelled (not a mitigation), hate crime by bigots.

The other appears to have been a calculated attempt by Islamic extremists to start an ideologically-motivated religious war on the streets of London, and their fascist counterparts in the EDL were happy to attempt to oblige them. That clearly demands a different kind of response to the first crime.

I appreciate that... er, actually I don't, really. The EDL pitched up at the scene only because everyone knew by then that the killers were supposedly "Islamic-looking" and everyone had seen the picture of the blood-soaked cleaver-wielding black guy. We were told that Cameron was hot-footing it home from Paris (having been criticised for not doing so during the Tottenham riots).

It was the media, not the oh-so-predictable EDL alone, who made this a terrorism/race issue by setting the scene perfectly for everything to "kick off".

part of the murderers' plan to use the media (particularly social media given their encouragement to onlookers to film them) to ignite the situation. The press response has been quite remarkable - the front pages today are unquestionably inflammatory - and we can't defend them for their reaction, but they were clearly factored in right from the start by the murderers.

Its designed to provoke a murderous reaction. The crime is bad enough but if they succeed and turn it into a general bloodbath then god help us

Perhaps we are giving these two f##kers to much credit. I personally think we are letting them off the hook if we say (by we, I mean the media and public) that they did this in the name of religion.

Treat them as two murderers, no more no less because they want this to be a call to other extremists. Take that away from them and we don't treat this outrage on their terms, no COBRA no witch hunts no anti-anybody that isn't the same as us (whoever us is!) then we will have a small victory out of this terrible situation.

Seems to me be the best answer here. Things define themselves by the language that we use to describe them or attaches itself to events and people. Terrorism. War. Murder. Which is which?

All result in death and the destruction of human values. We have laws that apply the process of justice to perpetrators of death and destruction. We need to apply those laws in a dry eyed and detached manner.

Like 9/11 this event is getting a disproportionate amount of attention due to having happened in broad daylight on home territory and with full screen shocking actual coverage in sound and vision. Understandable but how much of a threat is this Islamic fundametalism really? A threat certainly. Something that needs action and understanding clearly but statistically as a danger to individuals living in the UK, not that great in the scheme of things. A shocking, horrible, tragic event? Of course but for me to go on social media just to say so seems ridiculously inadequate and surely goes without saying for any right-thinking person. What does my predictable reaction add or do to help matters? Bob's point about hobby horses is valid I think. Us regulars can easily imagine what the usual suspects', who frequent here, various angles will be and no minds will be changed. People are dying every day in large numbers and in horrible, distressing ways that in tbe main we readily and conveniently ignore. Times like these I reckon you need to keep things in perspective.

What an extraordinary response she made. She stayed calm, walked up to and confronted one of the murderers in an attempt to protect those around her and in the hope he would relinquish his weapons. Her testimony that the man was calm and in full control of his faculties after he'd committed his atrocity is noteworthy. He was able to conduct a conversation with her and answer her questions. That's a chilling scene isn't it? He knows that what he has done will shock millions, that it's being captured on film and video and in knowing that he feels validated and unafraid of what comes next; his work is done. Two people in the middle of a London street talking relatively calmly and rationally about the murder one of them has just committed. Their exchange was the eye of the storm.

I'd like to think her actions will be in the minds of all the commentators and politicians over the next few days in how they respond and conduct themselves. I know for sure they won't be in the minds of Islamist terrorists, EDL thugs and the knee jerkers. For them, her selfless and measured response is possibly the most inconvenient truth that will ever come out of this horrible act.

Such a good post.

But I do get you two mixed up. Bingo and Bisto. Such a fine line.

Vegemite & Marmite.

...the female police officer who somehow managed to wound but not kill these attackers: for me, these incredibly courageous, compassionate, self-controlled and intensely admirable women define why Islamo-fascism will never, ever win in the West.

Various elements on the right are stirring up the anti-multiculturism pot, horrible horrible things like this only speed up that stirring. But London, my city of birth, like a lot of cities in the UK has been built by multiculturism. It is layer upon layer of immigrant life going back hundreds and hundreds of years. We have been invaded/colonised by people from across the sea forever. Even the idea of Great Britain as a Christian country was brought here from overseas with the Romans, another multicultural Empire.

I am from various nationalities and race, as are large amounts of the people I know and grew up with. The music I listen to is from all over the world and benefits hugely from being a result of melting pot culture.

Not entirely sure what I'm trying to say. I'm horrified that something like this has happened on the streets of my city, but I'm also a bit jaded about it too having grown up through the years of the IRA threat. But all I know is the melting pot did not create this. Evil and madness create things like this, nutters operating in the name of religion create things like this.

layer upon layer of immigration, ie assimilation into the host society, and there is a middle-class socialist philosophy of multiculturalism ie that communities do not need to integrate or adapt to the host society. Heck, you can actively hate it if that's how you feel!

What is going on now is not about multiculturalism though, it's about the UK following the foreign policy of the US, for good and for bad. What happened yesterday was pretty predictable, and by that I don't mean 'hindsight' predictable, because of our involvement in US led wars, and our weak willed approach to home spun Islamic fundamentalism, especially that propagated in UK university societies for 20 or so years.

See, that's a tough one. As a person of the left, one would encourage home spun cultural celebrations but who's to say when it tips over to fundamentalism? It's not like there are seven warning signs of fomenting fundamentalism.

What I don't understand is exactly why there is the lack of integration and open hostility to the 'host society'. It's not just the freedom within that society that permits it.

intelligence services have been aware of the anti-west, fundamentalist nature of these societies for years and did nothing about them. You don't need loads of warning signs if the basic ethos of the group is ant-west, anti-infidel; if you are not a muslim you are expendable and will burn in Hell. You don't even need to be clever to infiltrate them, you just show up with an Asiatic appearance and you will be approached and .. groomed. They are openly fundamentalist and actively support islamist terrorism.

MI5 tolerated these groups because they wanted them out in the open. Hence, London became the place to go if you were an Islamic terrorist in the 90s (Algeria, Morocco). These groups then spread their message on to soft targets; 1st generation UK muslims with an identity crisis.

See, I'm the type to 'tolerate' fundamentalist hate groups too. The better to keep an eye on them. A policy that occasionally works; you read about a 'plot being foiled' with arrests and most times we don't realise it could have been something like yesterday or far worse.

Other times, leaving them in the open to keep an eye on them is a policy that fails abjectly.

that's one way of dealing with it. But if it fails ... double the stick you get.

Have often described London as the true capital of the Middle East. It goes back way way before the 1990s. A huge proportion of the funny money flowing through our bent and incompetent banks, and propping up London houses prices to nobody's benefit, comes from the Eastern Mediterranean. The links between the City , arms dealers, and ME governments are one of the main reasons that Iranians call us the Little Satan (the Great Satan is the US).

These psychopaths were known to the security services it seems

As a long-time resident of the UK with strong family ties here, I take objection. I mean, it's a big shadow to be standing in but Little Satan? Junior Satan, perhaps. 51st State Satan, more like it.

'Scrappy' Satan to your 'Scooby' Satan.

Not 'my' Scooby Satan. Lived longer out of there than in there. But I hope little Blightey can punch up to 'Scrappy'.

who turned up in later cartoons - is that China?

As many have pointed out - dogs don't tend to keep familial links like these up very well

Dates back to the days of Anglo Persian Oil and earlier to the Great Game between the UK and Russians across Trans-Oxiana into the Islamic kingdoms up and down the Silk road.

Britain has very ancient, complex and extremely important links to the Islamic world that outweigh all the terror and imbecility of whats happening now. Its something too few Britons understand or realise - the fact that these two appalling murderous bastards have been arrested in hospital, will be charged, and are being treated - as opposed to the Guantanamo Bay version - will be noted

Ancient, ok. Complex? Fuckin' A right. Important? Not the word I'd've used. 'Once important' perhaps. Can you explain?

London is one of the most important cities in the Middle East - and has been for a very long time. Even if it were only in money terms London is very important in the Eastern Med - the money moves through London (this isn't something I am saying I think is great news) and vast deals are done - the worlds biggest foreign exchange and commodities markets are still the CoL. I'm not talking about the scummy derivatives markets I mean the actual money, oil, arms.

Its nothing to do with delusions of Empire or of Military Might or Rule Britannia - its money and the power that goes with it. The Arab Spring started on the Edgeware Road. Now so many of the Araba strong men leaders have been toppled things might change for London - especially if the dodgy offshore tax havens come under any sort of genuine threat from HMRC

yes I know but I was half asleep

And was surprised to see that they were covering the incident. I was less surprised that a commentator claimed "groups within England (sic) had bought this evil on themselves" placing the blame on immigration policies, socialists and general liberal PC groups. They also pulled US gun control into the argument suggesting that if the soldier and\or public had been armed then this would have been prevented. A bit of pathetic point scoring at home using a death from abroad there.

My point would be - why not describe the perpetrators as mentally ill? Why bring religion into it at all? Their actions clearly to not apply to texts or teachings of any faith. In the same way that a religious group like the Westboro Baptist Church are derided for their twisted views, why do these murderers get the tag "Islamic Extremists"? They believe that their actions are for God but they are not really devoutly religious - merely deluded. The media are trying to tie them in with terrorist networks but I fear we might just discover that these are a pair of murderous cunts.

You can shout about 'Allah' as much as you like but your actions make it clear you haven't listened to a word. The Church Of England does not have to apologize every time a Christian is found guilty of murder so why should ever Muslim group have to issue an apology when something like this happens as if we all assume that they are in on it somehow. Its insulting to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

The angle Fox might have taken, had they engaged brains, is to compare the relationship between Islamic terrorists and the average Muslim with the relationship between the perpetrators of high school shootings and the average US gun owner.

Not saying that the two are directly equivalent, but I suspect that the comparison might prove to be more fertile ground if Fox really must use this incident to push their agenda.

US high school murderers and 'politically inspired' murder in Woolwich...

riffing randomly here but whereas the terrorism we're used to in the UK has organisation and identifiable roots (British-Irish relations, say), any testosterone-fuelled yahoo with a tin hat can pick up the anti-muslim, 'imperialism in the middle east' meme and go and try to detonate his pants on a 737... maybe the largely non violent left parties of yore (CPGB, SWP, RCP, RCG, IKEA) and the rather more violent examples on the right (BNP, NF) channelled that kind of youth disaffection where now (atomised, post industral service economy, huge wealth gap, distributed comms) the pressure cooker comes to be occupied by ones and twos who want to 'do something'...
this is not a fully formed thought - you can doubtless tell
the Londoner guy on video yesterday seemed rational, focused and far from mad - just having murdered a young man hand-to-hand notwithstanding... in effect he was as near to being a suicide bomber as makes no difference, attitudinally... but where did his views form? in political meetings or in the echo chamber of his own head, aided by a very selective view of the internet?

and at the risk of being outed as a mad leftie, Afghan civilians have been dying at a rate of over 1,000/year since the 2001 invasion ... i guess a number of people will assume to know the dynamics of my thought process by dint of me even mentioning that... hmm... mind you, i wonder how many Afghan civs were dying annually as a result of bullets and bombs beforehand...

finally i'm not sure if we can credit the murder with being 'designed to achieve' anything, except a sterile vindication of someone's political solipsism...

showed signs of being a psychopath. To do that to another human being and appear relative calm and focussed afterwards, apologising that women had to see the violence. If you don't think thats a sign of some kind of mental disorder rather than simple indoctrination and brainwashing - calling someone "mad" is way too simplistic

a symptom of brainwashing.

it's a choice; redefining certain points of view as mental illness removes the opportunity for self determination... generally, i'm agin that

However I see no reason to doubt that this was a religion-motivated crime. The islamo-fascists are certainly a minority - the question is whether they are a significant minority.

Which would be a failure of government and a failure of religious authority - it cannot be tolerated by either. Dumb or corrupt UK foreign policy is a factor but never an excuse

This brings to mind certain footage from that terrible day. On the one had we saw genuine expressions of outrage and disassociation from leading Muslim figures. But we also saw footage of wild celebrations from classrooms full of Muslim kids. Certainly the percentage of Muslims who support this sort of thing is small, but it is perhaps still significant.

and at my age I can barely remember what I had for breakfast yesterday, but I am fairly sure I read a little while after the event that a bit / some / a lot of the cheering Muslim stuff was actually footage of reaction to other events that US news networks had run with anyway and then crossed over to other media outlets.

I'd be interested to know if anyone has anything a bit more concrete. Like I say, it's a memory that may not be 100% accurate, but I'm not googling "9/11 media inaccuracies" or the like. There is no way back out of that particular rabbithole.

9\11 was nothing to do with the attacks. Taken out of context and used to whip up Islamaphobia.

Not to say a tiny minority of Muslims may have celebrated but that particular piece played ad nauseam at the time was unconnected. And every religion \ country has morons

On attitudes amongst UK Muslims. It is not particularly comforting, I think.

Did a very wide ranging survey of Muslims across the globe.

An excellent interview on the survey heard on NPR:

cos that would be rational

They congratulated Cameron for calling the incident a terrorist attack and slammed Obama for not doing the same over the Fort Hood massacre. They said it was because of PC forces within the USA and the less right-on "call-a-spade-a-spade" POV prevalent in the UK.

When they said "next we get Anne Coulter's take on this" I called it a night for the sake of the blood vessels in my forehead.

If it wasn't so tragic you would laugh.

is the best response. Excellent article by Brendan O'Neill in spiked:

Today, from Boston to London, what gives so-called acts of ‘al-Qaeda terrorism’ their impact is not the acts themselves, which are always tragic but also small and scrappy, but rather the fragility of the target societies themselves, the deep feeling of insecurity in modern Western communities. It is our fearful response that gives terrorism its momentum, which completes the terrorist script set in motion by one or two men with knives or homemade bombs.

The danger is that in advertising our vulnerability in this way, we unwittingly invite future opportunistic attacks; certainly we do nothing to discourage them. In its response to the Woolwich murder, British society has thoughtlessly sent out a clear and quite scary message: if you want to hold the British political elite to ransom and transform yourself into an instantly famous representative of modern-day, civilisation-rattling evil, then all you need to do is carry out one bloody act on a street somewhere in London. You know what would have been a far better response? If Cameron had stayed in Paris, if COBRA had never met, if the two stabbers had simply been arrested and investigated by the police alone, and if their act of pseudo-political knife crime was covered on page 4 or 5 of the papers, not on page 1.

Whole thing highly recommended. Also some good points about the attackers' enthusiastic cries of 'film us!'.

I found myself watching ITN news footage for the first time in about 4 years. It's an ill wind...

The rush to associate this event with Islamist terrorism has been so great that rather than a measured reaction by the media and their "senior sources" to a grotesque street crime, it looked like wishful thinking. And the impetus for that rush came not from the streets or even from Twitter but from Whitehall, via its mouthpieces in the media (hi, Nick Robinson! And, yes, even hi, Alan Rusbridger!).

MI5 - one of the "intelligence agencies" reported as having attended the two COBRA meetings (hi, Austin Powers!) that have been held so far - no longer have any atom spies or Provos to keep them busy. Terrorism is all they've got left to justify the whopping increase in resources, with a 50% staff increase, that they were granted in 2004. And terrorism can now mean only one thing: Al-Qaeda, not a pair of deluded nutters who should be the concern solely of the police.

More than safeguarding a society under threat, the spooks' self-determined mission is to protect their budget. How the story of yesterday's events unfolded and is still unfolding suits them down to a tee, to the extent that one wonders whether they might have engineered it (the spin, I mean, not the crime - I'm quite conspiratorially inclined by nature, but not that much, eh).

Even though the name COBRA is pretty dynamic and G.I.Joe-sounding, it's always worth remembering that it stands for Cabinet Office Briefing Room A.

killed more people than terrorism yesterday. Don't see a lock down on the breweries.

...goes on dealing with cyber attacks, but whatever. In fairness MI5 and the police have dealt with a number of plots of late. If memory serves there were a couple of groups comvicted last month , including one group involving people who lived round the corner from me.

according to their website. (Doncha sort of miss the days when intelligence agencies didn't even officially exist, much less have fancy websites?)

15% described as non international terrorism could be what goes on non Al Qaeda, although that could equally be whatever the Real IRA calls itself currently.

IS to do with cyber warfare. But who knows.

I always found it intriguing that the hidden part of the Enigma story is that GB had its own equivalent of the German Enigma, which was never broken. & For years the UK govt allowed us to think that the Bletchley Colossus machines were smashed up and the knowledge lost - I know for a certain fact (because of my job and who I work with) that this wasn't the case.

God alone knows whats really going on but this is war by other means - and we won't be told

... But also some sweeping statements.

Number one. MPs and the media do not constitute the whole of ' British Society' much as the political and journo classes would like to think otherwise.

Number two. It is disingenuous to suggest that a murder this gruesome would ever be relegated to page 5, whatever the motive. I seem to recall the story of the British woman decapitated by a Bulgarian lunatic on one of the Spanish islands featured fairly high up on the news

just how stupid some of these extremists are. Have they not had it pointed it out to them "it's okay to kill someone because our people are being killed themselves" just makes their people the next legitimate target by their own logic? Fucksticks.

Never mind, let's pander to them and give them the whole hoo ha they clearly wanted, eh media? Fucksticks.

I also note from Twitter this morning that the EDL appear to believe Salman Rushdie was killed by Muslims. Fucksticks.

I'm on the next spaceship out of here.

but I wonder if anyone has added up the number Of Muslims killed by soldiers from non-Muslim countries since say, about the year 632, and compared it with the number of Muslims killed by other Muslims during that time?

Not that Islam has anything at all to do with these morons, but in case any cub-scout leaders have to negotiate with any more of these fuckwits in future, it might be a handy statistic to have to hand.

if leftie students shouting "yaa boo" at Nigel F in an edinburgh pub are fascists and a murderer in Woolwich is a fascist then Fascist® now means the square root of fuck all

I thought that the Prime Minister's statement today was excellent, and struck precisely the correct note - national unity, rather than division and finger pointing.

Credit where it's due.

For all his faults, he is undoubtedly good at 'this kind of thing'.

Despite my previous post supporting Brendan O'Neill's wish that Cameron had stayed in Paris, the reality of his quite beleagured political situation at present would probably not have allowed this to happen.

Turns out one of the "suspects" was a Romford boy, the year below my son at school. Even played in the same school band. All those cries I'm seeing on Twitter & Facebook about "sending em back home" suddenly have a new perspective.

Man hears voices in his head, murders someone : paranoid schizophrenic
Man hears word of (insert deity here), murders someone : terrorist

Of course, we don't yet know if this was a man acting on someone else's inner voices.

is a very good point. And I can't help but think that the young man from Romford, and his companion didn't grow up with those thoughts in their heads.

It also seems to me that the core of the problem is that we seem incapable of doing anything about those planting the voices in their heads. We continue to offer shelter to Qatada and his ilk (whilst refusing help to those who have served us - interpreters etc) and allow them to continue to impress their evil upon impressionable young men.

The mistake society makes is humouring people who hear voices but call them (insert name of deity here).

It is similar to how we treat vegetarians.

People who only eat chips and burgers - fat bastards
People who only eat vegetables - responsible and concerned member of society

Both could be viewed as being spoilt and awkward about food. Some behaviour gets a free pass without being put under the microscope.

when I were but a whipper, there was a kid at my school only ate baked beans - three meals a day. People, in his case justifiably, generally gave him a wide berth.

On the hovercraft principle he must have saved a fortune in shoe leather

...involves sugar, salt, other refined carbs, loads of fat and cheap meat... your notion that society 'indulges' the heretics in this regard might lead me to suggest you've got a chip on your shoulder about this kind of thing - but i'd hate to be accused of being an extremist with voices in my head (shouting "Asparagus, do as thine wilt...")

Are perhaps not best characterised as "people who eat vegetables".

Nor are they readily comparable to people who only eat chips and burgers. I've never met anyone who only eats chips and burgers for moral reasons.

As for "spoiled and awkward about food" - extremely harsh, no? Each to their own.

"Offer shelter to Qatada" - our shelter is very much not offered, governments have been doing their best to deport him for 10 years now.

"Refusing help to those who have served us" - a resettlement scheme has been agreed (you may argue the terms of it, but it's hardly refusing help).

the experience of Muslims in the US with those in the UK. The former, despite living in 'the Great Satan' are far more assimilated into American culture than they are here. Also, since 9/11, despite potentially volatile conditions for inter-ethnic conflict, the ever-dreaded white backlash against Muslims has largely not transpired. In the UK, however, there seems to be a much greater degree of ghettoisation of Muslim communities. There is therefore a case to be made that our ultra-liberal approach to radical Islam may have had precisely the opposite effect to what was intended, while the unashamed patriotism in the States has, perhaps counter-intuitively, created a genuine melting pot.

Perhaps you may have noticed in a recent agreeable perusal of the civilised periodicals - a bomb in Boston?

I maintain, however, that my broader point about the (actually utterly remarkable when you come to think about it) relative lack of inter-ethnic strife in the US, post 9/11, still stands.

But the lack of inter ethic strife is remarkable n England too. I'm making no assumptions about your opinions (genuinely) but I do think if you're right then we should be knee deep in gore by now - indeed should have been for decades

but equally I feel the 'Londonistan' idea can't be glibly dismissed as the fevered imaginings of right-wing columnists. Even without the extreme events of this week or the 7/7 bombings it's clear (to me at least) that there has been a largely 'hands off' approach to Islamism in this country - no doubt for well-intentioned reasons. It's also a reflection of a growing political class who don't fear a public backlash as they once did. As always, there are positive and negative aspects to such a change. On this occasion, I'm pointing out the negative...

on the first page of this thread.

Failure to talk about aspects of this for fear of being seen racist HAVE been a problem, certainly. I don't think that is the case in the last few years and this site is the past place I would want to see people fail to talk about it.

I don't have a huge wideranging experience of life on this planet but lots of people I work with are from all round the world especially Oz India & Pakistan (IT & software you see...) and they do say that the racial & cultural tolerance of the Brits is one thing we have got more correct than most countries. But thats us as Brits rather than our leaders - who have repeatedly failed us, and dreadfully so in the last ten years.

I'm sure we would generally agree on the symptoms of our national malaise even if we probably completely disagree on the cure.

We don't know yet if it s couple of appalling nutters - homegrown ones it seems - or a conspiracy - but nobody could use whats going on elsewhere in the world as a justification for this even if its done in our name

I don't recall responding specifically to any of your points.
FWIW, I read The Guardian first, then The Times today. There was a report in the Guardian about riots in a small town in Sweden following the arrest of a machete-wielding individual. So unlike our mild-mannered Scandinavian brethren, I thought. The Times did actually mention it was immigrants, mainly Muslim, who were rioting.
Apparently, on Ch 4 news, the reporter said that the Woolwich killers had indulged in 'ritualistic chanting in a foreign language'. That's one way of commenting that they'd shouted 'Alluhah akbar' as they hacked the soldier to death.

You will also have spotted this in the Guardian:

"Indeed, if there is collective responsibility for the killings, it belongs to the hawks whose policies have caused bloodbaths – directly, as in Afghanistan and Iraq, and indirectly in places as far apart as Woolwich and Boston, which in turn have created political space for the far right to peddle their hatred, as we saw in the immediate aftermath of the Woolwich attack."

Personally, I'd say responsibility for these killings lies with the men who tooled up, rammed the victim with their car and then hacked him to bits in broad daylight before boasting to camera about having done so, but there you go.

I thought we disagreed a bit about whether people were talking about the elephant in the room - I don't think they are avoiding the topic here. But Bingo's post above this is an example of almost caricature Guardian-ness and its an excellent example of why I can't stand to read the sodding paper. There is a much better comment piece on BBC news about extreme Islamism by a former adherent - its worth a read even if it might seem quite familiar.

the reason behind my original comment a bit further on. Having been completely unaware of the murder, the original comments led me to believe the EDL had been up to something.
That Guardian quote is akin to an extreme parody. Craig Brown must despair at times.

but I have to correct you and the Guardian.
It's not a small town in Sweden, it's in some of the surburbs of Stockholm, the capital city (where I live).
The man didn't wield a machete, he wielded a knife (allegedly after being harrassed by some teenage boys) before returning to his flat.
When the police arrived they didn't arrest him, they shot and killed him.
That was the start, but why it keeps going is a much more complex issue and I really can't be arsed to go that deeply into it.
It's a bad thing that is happening, but not very surprising. Nothing to do with Islam - it's a universal truth that the more you take away from people who have very little to begin with, then you'll end up with people who have nothing to lose. The police shooting that man was the trigger; frustration, boredom and a sudden sense of power when the rioting spreads and TV and the press show an interest in these young guys for the first time, that's what keeps it going and inspire others to join in.
But absolutely no religious reasons behind these Swedish riots.
I won't comment on the British killing, don't know enough about it.

Seems that westernised privileged well educated muslims can end up becoming terrorists partly because what they learn of the west disgusts and sickens them set against their idea of Islam developed by that movement of which Al Qaida is part. Therefore integration in itself is not necessarily the answer any more than multi-culturalism is the cause. Of course this happens very rarely. I say terrorist because it was an act of violence in the name of a cause which to must people makes it so even though it may seem to give events an extra infamy that isn't helpful.

The alleged killer* who's been arrested was apparently fully integrated. He came from a devout Christian family** and had lots of white friends at school and at the University of Greenwich, where he studied sociology. For some reason he chose to de-integrate himself and [tabloidspeak] fell into the clutches [/tabloidspeak] of a radical Islamist group.

What I find quite striking is that he left that group two years ago and nobody seems to know (or be saying) where he's been, or who with, in the interim.

* As he was filmed saying "We've killed this man here today", I don't think that "alleged" is strictly necessary.
** Could rejection of his parents' belief system have been a trigger for his conversion to Islam?

were aware of this man and had been keeping tabs on him and his partner in crime for a few years, it seems.

The cops are now coming in for a lot of flak for letting this murder happen, despite knowing the man was a radical.

The police can't win in a situation like this, though. If they'd pulled him in and found nothing to charge him with, you just know accusations of racial harassment would have been flying around.

If they didn't have enough evidence to bring a charge.

Being "radical" isn't enough for the police to arrest you. You need to actually commit a crime.

but perhaps if they'd pulled him in for questioning a few times, it may have changed the outcome. Who knows?

I'm not aware of complaints about racial harassment flying around about the Met anymore, either

Seems more and more likely that it was two lone home grown nutters - don't know if anyone has anything to the contrary?

Assuming you are serious, do you really think that is a suitable way for police to treat anyone with a radical mindset?

You can't pull someone without first arresting them. You are legally arrested when you are no longer free to go about your business. (Scots law and I'm assuming English too.)

And would this be any radical, or just islamists?

for distributing extremist literature among other things. Perhaps if they'd been arrested and questioned (but not charged, if you prefer) it might have made them more cautious, who knows?

But this places the onus of what is 'extremist' in the hands of the poor polis. In the past, and maybe still to this day, at the two famous football grounds in Glasgow you will find people distributing extremist literature. But it isn't islamic literature. Does that make a difference?

You really can't expect to quell feelings when you see your brothers lifted on sus now and then.

I'm not trying to close down your idea, mojo, but I don't see how it would work in practise.

I was simply commenting on the news that the police are coming in for criticism because these men were known to them and yet the events in Woolwich went ahead.

In this instance I'm sympathising with the cops. They can't win either way.

They can't win.

Might equally have made him do something sooner.
Who indeed knows.

In other words there isn't a straightforward policy with regard to integration or ghetto-isation that can be adopted to stop these people emerging. The only way I guess is to focus on where the ideas are coming from which is what is being done with some success to be fair though it's not easy to stop the propaganda thanks to our wonderful modern communications.

Isn't the best way to defeat islamists to criticise their ideology? Not race, but belief. Maybe start by asking "I believe all men and women and born equal. Do you?"

before you know it you'll be asking awkward questions about Islam, rather than Islamists.

If the question needs asking.

but are there parallels between the Woolwich attack(s) and the Boston Marathon bombing?

- Young men who were remembered as quiet "good guys" at school
- Period of indoctrination
- Flagrant attacks with little/no attempt at "going to ground"
- Immediate bragging about what they'd done and why they'd done it (Boston bombers to driver of car they hijacked)
- Stated intention to inflame wider action

It's a mistake to think of terrorism as being characterised by miltants operating from caves (or basements). It's also a mistake to think of this as a "knife crime" or a random nutbar slaying. "Conspiracy"? Evidently - more than one person planned this and carried it out. The extent of the conspiracy is unknown.

But I think its copycat stuff rather than somebody pulling the strings. This makes it more not less frightening....

I'd say it indicates terrorist methodology rather than "copycat". If it was copycat, then I'd guess they'd have used bombs, at a marathon. It's the context that shows up the parallels (if any). It's a methodology (or could be). The indoctrination is the key. That's definitely there.

Has been there for centuries - in the wilder fringes of Islam. There have always been jihadi 'martyrs'.I don't dispute that they are terrorists for a second, but I don't think that they are being directed - there is a huge volume of terrifying material easily available to anyone with an internet connection

Nothing new here. I'm just supposing - imagining - specific parallels between the Boston and Woolwich attacks. As itemised. Which would seem to indicate a terrorist methodology. One that initially makes it seem like the perpetrators are "acting on their own". You don't think they're being directed? That's what indoctrination is, Forks!

Did anyone see the family's press moment? Why did they do this to themselves? I don't think it was organised by the police. It looked a bit 'This is my Jerry Springer moment' to me.


… i heard them on the radio
… but scrutinising someone's grief in that manner is emotionally pornographic...

but I've always imagined that the purpose of a press conference like that is to get the media off people's backs and away from their house. A deal, basically. A one-off conference in return for some privacy.

is incredibly harsh, unless I've misunderstood your inference. Do you mean you think the family were somehow looking for their 15 minutes of fame, or revelling in it in some way, Jorrox? I can't believe that for a moment. Have you not considered that they might have done this as an act of defiance against the murderers? That they don't want Lee Rigby to be reduced to the faceless soldier he was to his killers? That they don't want him to be merely a victim, and that they want to tell the world what he was like as a person, a son, a husband, a dad?

I can guarantee you that the family will have received advice, either from police press office or from someone independent, to hold a press conference as they did. Public grief like that is raw and terrible and incredibly uncomfortable for anyone choosing to watch, but it is actually one of the best ways for the family to deal with the bombardment of media attention. They get to have their say, 'control' the situation (or rather have help controlling it), pay tribute to Lee Rigby in their own words and as much as is possible on their own terms. And they get to do it all at once. They can walk away from the conference and not speak to the media again, because they've provided the photos, the quotes, the detail that the press require. They've given the 'exclusive' to all the press at the same time. And Sting is right: there is a 'deal' involved: "we give you what you want, and you leave us alone". It's not pretty. In fact, in the midst of their searing grief, it's pretty rotten. But it works. We can argue the rights and wrongs of whether families are cornered into doing this, and whether the media - and those who consume the output - should serve up and feed on this type of "emotional pornography" (as rab so aptly describes it). But I am genuinely astonished that you should think of describing it as a "Jerry Springer" moment, which is essentially people 'acting up' for the camera in order to get on the telly and earn some cash. As far as I'm concerned this doesn't bear any relation to that whatsoever.

To clarify, I don't think it was planned that way but I didn't see much reality in that event. They didn't have to put themselves through it - they could have told the press to fuck off. I would have. Would any of you have put yourselves through that? If one can't tell the press to fuck off after something like Woolwich then Leveson was for nothing.

I can see the point if they are appealing for witnesses but that display that was for no purpose other than to feed the media. The language (and the body language) was very much learned behaviour from trash TV.

I'm not suggesting it was cynical (per the Phillpotts and the woman who kidnapped her daughter) but it certainly wasn't necessary.

I was almost expecting one of the hacks from Sky or the tabloids to ask the family "What would you like to say to the men who did this terrible thing?"

You're right - they could have told the press to fuck off. Like you, I wouldn't want to put myself through it. But I've never been at the centre of a media storm like that, and I've never had my world ripped apart in such ah horrific, brutal fashion. I don't know anything of the agony they'e going through and the pressure they are under. I can't say for sure what I would do - or what I'd be willing to do if I thought it would give me some breathing space from the presspack. Still not sure about the language being learned from trash TV, though. Don't most people talk in clichés when it comes to death? Just what can you say? Not everyone is a poet.

in our current media age "telling the press to fuck off" just doesn't work. They want a story and will get one somehow. If you give them the story in a press conference that usually satisfies them.
So yes, in such a situation I would give an agreed press conference, on my terms, in return for being left alone afterwards.

Why should anyone have to make a deal with the press? What was all that fuss about press intrusion about? If it was me the only words they would get would be 'fuck' and 'off'.

... Bingo suggested we might want to take a pause and see what facts emerged before firing from the hip ( that it my paraphrase of what I took him to mean). He was right. Ps I agree entirely with Drakey' sentiments on the specific point re the family's reaction

1. What is a radical Islamist doing quoting The Bible ("eye for an eye" is Old Testament)? That is highly unusual. I can't recall hearing that before.
2. Did the media not appreciate that the main purpose was to be on the news world-wide? I know they can't do much about the Internet but ITV showed the clip of the perpetrator spouting his rationale very quickly.
3. I though Cameron's initial speech was very good. I particularly liked the bit where he called for calm and for everyone to conduct their business as normal. He then proceeded to do entirely the opposite, dropping everything to rush back to England and focus solely on the issue.

This was an act of evil carried out by psychopaths. Sadly, psychopaths of various ethnic origins, often use religion, of various kinds, to justify their actions. As someone said over the page, if there was no religion, psychopaths would still kill people.

I'd like to add to the cheers for the ladies. The cub-scout leader behaved remarkably. And that policewoman who shot first is one cool lady!

they were brainwashed Islamic fundamentalists.

You won't catch any self-respecting Islamic fundamentalist quoting The Bible in the name of Allah.

Has a very similar passage expressing the same sentiment

but isn't it in the context of being a concept for the children of Isreal?

a central tenet of Sharia law known as Qisas meaning equal retribution. Hence the amputation of a hand as a punishment for robbery such as practised in Saudi Arabia

(Qur'an 2:178) "O you who have believed, prescribed for you is legal retribution (Qasas) for those murdered - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But whoever overlooks from his brother anything, then there should be a suitable follow-up and payment to him with good conduct. This is an alleviation from your Lord and a mercy. But whoever transgresses after that will have a painful punishment."

The examples aren't the same, even if the sentiment is similar. Mind you, all these texts often get misquoted.

That slavery is normal.

You'd think that a book dictated via a hotline to God would have been a bit more progressive on the subject.

Let's face it, they all date back millennia. It's no real surprise that gay marriage or women priests are not actively advocated, for example.

those of psychopaths, and all human violence as the result of mental illness. "You have to be a psychopath to do such a thing", or, "this is the act of a psychopath, therefore it was committed by a psychopath." A mental health issue, then. Presumably best dealt with by medical authorities, and treated rather than judged and punished. What you (and others here) are not doing is seeing this in the political context its perpetrators set it. This was not a random nutcase slaying. This was not even a religious slaying. It was a politically motivated act of terrorism. It may (or may not) go against central tenets of Muslim religion, that isn't the point. It should be unnecessary to say that not all Muslims are like this, this is not what Islam is about. This is what terrorism is about, and terrorism is about politics, under whatever flag. Niscum makes the mistake of confusing/conflating fundamentalism with terrorism. Unless you, tigger, understand what terrorism is (and it has closely defined legal meaning) and unless you can bring yourself to use the word in this instance you will be always be administering placebos where there is no illness.

It may be the act of a lunatic. It may be the act of a terrorist. It may be the act of of a terrorist who is also a lunatic. You don't know and neither do I.

Six minutes between me posting and you posting.

Although I wish I had yoor ability to interpret events half a world away

I said this was an evil act. I do actually believe the perpetrators intended to instill terror. They committed the act in daylight, in public, filmed it & wanted the world to know all about it, especially their 'reasons' for doing it. The meeja meekly complied. It's too early to tell, but I'm not convinced they have been trained by an organisation as such. They do seem to have been influenced by radical Muslims of some kind. Niscum would describe that as brainwashing. But my impression at this point is that these two were effectively lone wolves fired up with strange thoughts.

I do think that they are psychopaths and evil. That's not the same as believing all evil acts are committed by psychopaths. In addition, psychopathology isn't a mental illness. It's a personality disorder not amenable to psychiatric treatment (bar the odd maverick who thinks otherwise).

Americans killing doctors because of abortion are similarly disordered in their thinking, perpetrating terror in the name of religion. They are just as sick.

I have no cure to offer. It's really very depressing.

Perhaps the point is we don' t know. Let's wait and see. (With apologies to Burt for my sggressive post. Both Mrs tothecentreofthearth and I deal with such types and it is complicated. Mrs tothecrnter etc has 12 lifers on her books and they cover the spectrum from all purpose nutter to religious zealot.

All this is conjecture. I'll shut up now.

I don't know if things have changed, but back in the day when I dealt with ' em it was received wisdom that psychopaths could not be treated. Thsy might mofify their actions, but standard drug and other regimes had no impact
Of course, the world may have moved on since then

There have been claims that intensive CBT & specialised psycho and behavioural therapies have an impact. Nothing earth shattering, though, otherwise you would have heard of it.

an act of terrorism, carried out because the individuals were brainwashed Islamic fundamentalists.

Any better burt? I take your point but I think my original comment is not wide of the mark, ie that it wasn't perpetrated by psychopaths but by delusional religious fanatics.

We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers.

The silly boy hadn't understood it very well, had he?

That M15 might well have known all about these two to the point where they considered themselves to be being harassed by the security services. I obviously have no way of knowing if this story is true but it sounds like a plot they didn't foil rather than something out of a clear blue sky

on the BBC website
moslems offer tea and biscuits and a game of footie to the EDL protestors who turned up to protest outside their mosque.

Cheap Ugg UGGs Outlet Cheap UGGs cheap ugg boots cheap nfl jerseys wholesale