Explosion In London

Status
Not open for further replies.
Marla_Singer said:
I would like to repeat again that all my sympathy is going towards Londoners and all the British people. I also would like to apologize after my awckward thread which had been posted 2 days ago. I'm all with you. I feel utterly torn in the inside by what happened in London.

Hey, Marla, you really got unlucky with the timing of that other thread, eh ? Clearly there's was never any harm meant though, so I don't think you need to apologise.

For my part, I'm really touched by the condolences from outside the UK. One particularly got to me - a photo of some Polish people lighting candles outside the British embassy in (I guess) Warsaw. Dunno why, but for some reason that kicked off an very emotional reaction.
 
I heard on morning TV news ... that 3 people have been arrested at the airport (I assume in the process of leaving UK) ... any more info on this?
 
Apparently Police let them go as they were not connected to the blasts.... :(
 
According to Sky News all bodies have been recovered and of the 700 injured:

The death toll is 49.

62 are still being treated in hospital.


There will be a minutes silence on Thursday to remember the dead. I'll make sure a new thread is start to remind everyone if they want to take part.
 
JoeM said:
According to Sky News all bodies have been recovered and of the 700 injured:

The death toll is 49.

62 are still being treated in hospital.

There will be a minutes silence on Thursday to remember the dead. I'll make sure a new thread is start to remind everyone if they want to take part.

I don't think this is correct. We have friends where the husband is a Met Police body recovery expert - he hasn't been home yet and doesn't expect to come home for another week but his wife had understood from him yesterday afternoon that there are still bodies to be recovered from the Piccadilly Line.

I hope you are right but fear not.
BFR
 
Regardless, the Western Project will win. nazism and communism, two much more powerful adversaries have already fallen. Why should Jihadism survive?
 
Provolution said:
Regardless, the Western Project will win. nazism and communism, two much more powerful adversaries have already fallen. Why should Jihadism survive?

The 3rd Reich and the Soviets at least were 'up front' and honest in their efforts to make us fall...

The Jihadists hide in the muck and lash out like rabid rats...

.
 
Provolution said:
Regardless, the Western Project will win. nazism and communism, two much more powerful adversaries have already fallen. Why should Jihadism survive?

Because there are like a billion Muslims and every single one of them believe in Jihad (Jihad is not the same thing as terrorism, but one prominent form of Jihad is of an armed/military nature like terrorism or other armed conflict -- just as many historians today recognize that Crusades don't have to be of an armed/military nature to count as a Crusade ... they've identified Crusades that didn't involve arms). Furthermore much of these live in countries that don't have religious freedom and where not only missionaries but anyone who converts is put to death.
 
Indeed, how they handle religion is at the root of the problem...

..
 
cierdan said:
Because there are like a billion Muslims and every single one of them believe in Jihad (Jihad is not the same thing as terrorism, but one prominent form of Jihad is of an armed/military nature like terrorism or other armed conflict -- just as many historians today recognize that Crusades don't have to be of an armed/military nature to count as a Crusade ... they've identified Crusades that didn't involve arms). Furthermore much of these live in countries that don't have religious freedom and where not only missionaries but anyone who converts is put to death.

All billion of them believe in it, huh? You know an awful lot about the Islamic world, I suppose...much more than all of the muslims who say they don't believe in violence as a way to further their religion...
 
The 'billion jihadist' number given by Mr Cierdan sounds more like his local
reverend's assessment of the islamic world, rather that the reality...

...
 
Cierdan do you KNOW any Muslims at all?
 
eyrei said:
All billion of them believe in it, huh? You know an awful lot about the Islamic world, I suppose...much more than all of the muslims who say they don't believe in violence as a way to further their religion...

Um, every single Muslim does believe in Jihad. It's an integral part of the Muslim religion and all its branches/denominations. Very liberal Muslims believe in Jihad just as much as traditional Muslims believe in Jihad. The very liberal Muslims tend to emphasize that Jihad can be of a non-armed nature whereas the more traditional Muslims emphasize the militant, sometimes armed, nature of Jihad and disagree with the modernist, liberal, watered down view. Jihad is an obligation binding on every single Muslim in Islam. So basically you've got an army larger than the army of China ... actually larger than the army of all non-Muslims countries combined! It's similiar to the situation in North Korea where everyone there is basically part of the army, ready to be called upon in a moment's notice.
 
Well some would say the same of the pope, except the muslim world doesn't have a caphilite and hasn't for some time. So in fact the pope has a much bigger army than any cleric or mullah could ever muster. ;)

Every muslim I know says these people don't follow Islam. Even Iran says these people don't follow Islam. The MCB says they don't follow Islam.

Oh wait. YOU say they follow Islam - well it must be true if our local redneck thinks so. :D

Edit: I stopped posting with the racist comments in this thread before. I'm really pissed I posted again because I said I wouldn't, but this BS is just too much to ignore....
 
cierdan said:
Um, every single Muslim does believe in Jihad. It's an integral part of the Muslim religion and all its branches/denominations. Very liberal Muslims believe in Jihad just as much as traditional Muslims believe in Jihad. The very liberal Muslims tend to emphasize that Jihad can be of a non-armed nature whereas the more traditional Muslims emphasize the militant, sometimes armed, nature of Jihad and disagree with the modernist, liberal, watered down view. Jihad is an obligation binding on every single Muslim in Islam. So basically you've got an army larger than the army of China ... actually larger than the army of all non-Muslims countries combined! It's similiar to the situation in North Korea where everyone there is basically part of the army, ready to be called upon in a moment's notice.

Just like all (or 99%) of all Christians believe in the teachings of Paul, a perverted sex-obsessed maniac?
 
anarres said:
Well some would say the same of the pope, except the muslim world doesn't have a caphilite and hasn't for some time. So in fact the pope has a much bigger army than any cleric or mullah could ever muster. ;)

Not really (and I think Muslims outnumber Catholics anyway) Catholic clerics are forbidden by Catholic Church law from taking up arms or shedding blood (you know that during the Inquisitions it was actually the secular State and not the ecclesiastical authorities that executed ... though the ecclesiastical authorities did hand them over to the secular authorities). Catholics are more peace-loving anyways :) Here's two VERY balanced articles that are very enlightening (especially the second one which will give a lot of history/sociology):

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0210bt.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/endless_jihad.asp

Also Catholics have "just war theory" just like the rest of Western civilization has just war theory. Muslims don't have that (or reject it or whatever)

Oh wait. YOU say they follow Islam

You mean the terrorists? Of course they are Muslim. If they aren't Muslim what are they? Quakers? :crazyeye: :lol: Maybe they aren't good Muslims from the perspective of SOME other Muslims, but that doesn't mean they are not Muslims. In Christianity there are groups that say certain other Christian groups are not Christian. For example there are some Christian groups that say that Catholics aren't Christian. That doesn't mean that in common discourse we should say that Catholics aren't Christian or that these very traditional Muslims are not Muslims.

Saying that they aren't Muslims is like saying that those people who kill abortionists aren't anti-abortion. Obviously they are Muslims and obviously those people who kill abortionists out of anti-abortion/pro-baby motives are anti-abortion, regardless of whether they are seen by others in their respective groups as living up to their groups ideals or going about following them in the right ways.
 
Wahhabism is also NOT a branch of Islam devoted to terrorism as people would have you believe in this thread. :rolleyes: :mad:

It is a major, peaceful branch of Islam that is fundamentalist. To claim that all, or even a sizable minority of Wahhabi's are violent is a lie and false propaganda.
 
Sorry, cierdan, I'm not even going to read your links from catholic.com that are supposed to enlighten me about Islam...
 
Sad that the political correctness we now have to comply to exempts Islam from criticism, but if someone wishes to tear apart, say, Christianity, then no one would blink twice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom