'Van hits pedestrians' on London Bridge in 'major incident'

[DeniseNY]

It may not work 100% but it’s a lot better than doing nothing and just reacting.

Exactly. I read this morning (can’t recall where) that there are at least 3,000 on a terror watch list. And the mayor of London says “there’s no reason to be alarmed”. What the what???

 

[Kaninchen]

Taking his comment that there is no reason to be alarmed over increased police presence in London completely out of context.

Well, yes, but . . . it works well with his constituency which is, obviously, the whole point.

 

[josie_L]

I don’t know if anyone else has posted this yet, but Donald Trump posted a tweet attacking the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan:

Taking his comment that there is no reason to be alarmed over increased police presence in London completely out of context.

This is awful. The attack in Manchester was horrific, the attack in London in March was shocking as well. Right now, the world needs solidarity, compassion and to work together. What isn’t needed is the President of the USA to spread more “fake news” about the attack, and to fuel divisions within the world. Completely unnecessary and thoughtless.

As I said on the thread about the Manchester attack, it is times like this that the worst sorts of people come crawling out the woodwork. But you also see the good - people offering shelter for the night, cab drivers taking people to safety for free, a man cycling 3 hours to get to London and give bottles of water to the police.

Also, I don’t know if anyone has yet posted this, but 50 rounds of shots were fired by the police, which is an unprecedented amount. As another poster said, the police in the UK are taught to shoot only as a last resort, and to use as little rounds as possible.

Lou

I would not call that an attack, but perhaps he was better off not saying anything at all.

 

[Kaninchen]

I don’t know that it really matters outside his own constituency because, growingly (although there wasn’t exactly a lot of regard for him to begin with), for the rest of the world, it’s: “Clown gets out of the clown car and does clown things, shock!”

 

[Beautiful]

Not ‘at times’. It is sickening and disappointing that Trump made a deal with the devil.

foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/03/london-terror-saturday-attacks-tipping-point-in-campaign-to-destroy-west.html

But here’s the thing, as Gaffney sees it: “Shi’as and Sunnis have had serious differences for centuries, but what we are seeing now is a global alliance, they are perfectly capable of making common cause to take down the West. And I think it will get worse before it gets better.”

This point Gaffney is making is precisely what I predicted quite some time ago.

 

[Kaninchen]

I expect it’s a bit of both, I don’t follow American politics/the American political drama but I expect a lot of it is playing to the choir.

 

[Vouthon]

So when the Seljuk Turks overtook Jerusalem and killed pilgrims headings to the Holy city, they were in effect going against the generally held consensus that civilians were off limits

There is surely a difference, I would think, between the ethical standards of Seljuk Turkish military leaders, as well as everyday lay Muslims of the time, and scholars who actually devoted their lives to studying Islamic jurisprudence. I can only state the fact that the general immunity of non-combatants during jihad (women, children, the elderly, disabled, monks and sometimes also peasant men and merchants) was upheld by the majority of learned Muslim divines of the four fiqhs during this period. Whether it was thoroughly implemented by the military men is a somewhat different question.

If I might make reference to a similar disconnect between laity and clergy in medieval Christendom, consider that the call for the First Crusade by Pope Urban touched off the Rhineland massacres of Jews, also known as the German Crusade of 1096, whereby prominent crusaders such as Peter the Hermit and especially Count Emicho encouraged peasants to slaughter and forcibly convert Jewish communities.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhineland_massacres

**The preaching of the First Crusade inspired an outbreak of anti-Jewish violence. In parts of France and Germany, Jews were perceived as just as much an enemy as Muslims: they were held responsible for the crucifixion, and they were more immediately visible than the distant Muslims. Many people wondered why they should travel thousands of miles to fight non-believers when there were already non-believers closer to home…There had not been so broad a movement against Jews by Catholics since the seventh century’s mass expulsions and forced conversions…many movements against Jews (such as forced conversions by King Robert the Pious of France, Richard II, Duke of Normandy, and Henry II, Holy Roman Emperor around 1007–1012) had been quashed either by Roman Catholicism’s papacy or its bishops.[10] The passions aroused in the Catholic populace by Urban II’s call for the first crusade moved persecution of Jews into a new chapter in history where these previous constraints no longer held…

The extent of the era’s antisemitism is apparent in Godfrey of Bouillon, who swore

“to go on this journey only after avenging the blood of the crucified one by shedding Jewish blood and completely eradicating any trace of those bearing the name ‘Jew,’ thus assuaging his own burning wrath.”[11]

Sigebert of Gembloux wrote that before “a war in behalf of the Lord” could be fought it was essential that the Jews convert; those who resisted were "deprived of their goods, massacred, and expelled from the cities.

**

These murderous pogroms were explicitly condemned by the hierarchy of the Church of the time:

**The Catholic Bishop Cosmas attempted to prevent forced conversions, and the entire Catholic hierarchy in Bohemia preached against such acts.[10] Duke Břetislav II was out of the country and the Catholic Church’s officials’ protests were unable to stop the mob of crusaders.[10]

The hierarchy of the Catholic Church as a whole condemned the persecution of the Jews in the regions affected (though their protests had little effect). Especially vocal were the parish priests (only one monk, named Gottschalk, is recorded as joining and encouraging the mob).[10] Chronicler Hugo of Flavigny recorded how these religious appeals were ignored, writing:

“It certainly seems amazing that on a single day in many different places, moved in unison by a violent inspiration, such massacres should have taken place, despite their widespread disapproval and their condemnation as contrary to religion. But we know that they could not have been avoided since they occurred in the face of excommunication imposed by numerous clergymen, and of the threat of punishment on the part of many princes.”[10]

In general the crusader mobs did not fear any retribution as the local courts did not have the jurisdiction to pursue them past their locality nor the ability to identify and prosecute individuals out of the mob.[10] The pleas of the clergy were ignored on similar grounds**

The opposition of the clergy to these populist, anti-semitic crimes was in accordance with long-standing papal, doctrinal policy which forbade forced baptism and afforded certain protections to Jews:

**Sicut Judaeis (the “Constitution for the Jews”) was a papal bull setting out the official position of the papacy regarding the treatment of Jews.

The first bull was issued in about 1120 by Calixtus II and was intended to protect Jews who suffered during the First Crusade, during which over five thousand Jews were slaughtered in Europe. The words “Sicut Judaeis” (“and thus to the Jews”) were first used by Pope Pope Gregory I (590-604) in a letter addressed to the Bishop of Naples. Even then the Pope emphasized that Jews were entitled to “enjoy their lawful liberty.”[1]

The bull was reaffirmed by many popes including Alexander III, Celestine III (1191-1198), Innocent III (1199), Honorius III (1216), Gregory IX (1235), Innocent IV (1246), Alexander IV (1255), Urban IV (1262), Gregory X (1272 & 1274), Nicholas III, Martin IV (1281), Honorius IV (1285-1287), Nicholas IV (1288-92)…

The bull forbade, besides other things, Christians from coercing Jews to convert, or to harm them, or to take their property, or to disturb the celebration of their festivals, or to interfere with their cemeteries, on pain of excommunication**

I can well imagine that something similar would have transpired vis-a-vis medieval Islamic religious authorities and the laity.

 

[josie_L]

There is surely a difference, I would think, between the ethical standards of Seljuk Turkish military leaders, as well as everyday lay Muslims of the time, and scholars who actually devoted their lives to studying Islamic jurisprudence. I can only state the fact that the general immunity of non-combatants during jihad (women, children, the elderly, disabled, monks and sometimes also peasant men and merchants) was upheld by the majority of learned Muslim divines of the four fiqhs during this period. Whether it was thoroughly implemented by the military men is a somewhat different question.

If I might make reference to a similar disconnect between laity and clergy in medieval Christendom, consider that the call for the First Crusade by Pope Urban touched off the Rhineland massacres of Jews, also known as the German Crusade of 1096, whereby prominent crusaders such as Peter the Hermit and especially Count Emicho encouraged peasants to slaughter and forcibly convert Jewish communities.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhineland_massacres

These murderous pogroms were explicitly condemned by the hierarchy of the Church of the time:

The opposition of the clergy to these populist, anti-semitic crimes was in accordance with long-standing papal, doctrinal policy which forbade forced baptism and afforded certain protections to Jews:

Good points, which I will have to get to later. I’m leaving my house now.

But before I go, let me express my sadness for what has happened in your country! My prayers are with the victims and your countrymen!

All my love, Vouthon!!

 

[upant]

taking a chair to a knife fight?

how many victims would a good man with a gun have saved?

 

[randomuser]

He literally attacked London’s Mayor with his tweets. A city reeling from another Radical Islamic terrorist attack and the POTUS piles on the hatred. I pray that the good people of England realize he doesn’t speak for the majority of Americans.

 

[Lou2U]

taking a chair to a knife fight?

how many victims would a good man with a gun have saved?

The police had guns. All suspects were shot dead within 8 minutes.

How many victims would a bad man with a gun have killed?

Lou

 

[Vouthon]

Good points, which I will have to get to later. I’m leaving my house now.

But before I go, let me express my sadness for what has happened in your country! My prayers are with the victims and your countrymen!

All my love, Vouthon!!

Thank you Josie, I appreciate your words, prayers and sentiments of solidarity!! This is a sad and unsettling time for everybody over here in Britain

 

[7_Sorrows]

How do you know there aren’t Muslims upset with this? That’s like saying all Christians should have to apologize any time there’s domestic terrorism committed by anti-Muslim terrorists like what happened in Portland. It’s mental illness in those cases, but it’s never mental illness when it’s Radical Islamic terrorism - as though a sane Muslim would be capable of such actions. Double standard.

I haven’t seen them on the news being outraged as Muslims these terrorists attacks are being done during the Holy month of Ramadan or asking why these terrorists think they are gaining favor with Allah for killing and maiming Muslims, Christians and others.

 

[randomuser]

I haven’t seen them on the news being outraged as Muslims these terrorists attacks are being done during the Holy month of Ramadan or asking why these terrorists think they are gaining favor with Allah for killing and maiming Muslims, Christians and others.

They’re deranged, mentally ill. They’re not Muslims. They’re as disturbed as the domestic terrorist in Portland.

 

[7_Sorrows]

The police had guns. All suspects were shot dead within 8 minutes.

How many victims would a bad man with a gun have killed?

Lou

The bad men had a van and knives and the death toll is at 7. Many others are critically injured.

 

[7_Sorrows]

They’re deranged, mentally ill. They’re not Muslims. They’re as disturbed as the domestic terrorist in Portland.

No they are not deranged or mentally ill. They are following ISIS propaganda.
They are terrorists. Islamic terrorists.

 

[Lou2U]

The bad men had a van and knives and the death toll is at 7. Many others are critically injured.

I know that, and it is appalling. But I really don’t think the answer to this is by having more weapons available.

Lou

 

[Beautiful]

I haven’t seen them on the news being outraged as Muslims these terrorists attacks are being done during the Holy month of Ramadan or asking why these terrorists think they are gaining favor with Allah for killing and maiming Muslims, Christians and others.

From the US to UK there were thousands (many of them Muslims) out protesting travel bans back in January & February. It was stunning.
I recall a Muslim woman handing out slices of pizza to travel ban protesters.

Those who would rather topple Western civilization are doing a tap dance as they do it.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I don’t know if anyone else has posted this yet, but Donald Trump posted a tweet attacking the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan:

Taking his comment that there is no reason to be alarmed over increased police presence in London completely out of context.

This is awful. The attack in Manchester was horrific, the attack in London in March was shocking as well. Right now, the world needs solidarity, compassion and to work together. What isn’t needed is the President of the USA to spread more “fake news” about the attack, and to fuel divisions within the world. Completely unnecessary and thoughtless.

As I said on the thread about the Manchester attack, it is times like this that the worst sorts of people come crawling out the woodwork. But you also see the good - people offering shelter for the night, cab drivers taking people to safety for free, a man cycling 3 hours to get to London and give bottles of water to the police.

Also, I don’t know if anyone has yet posted this, but 50 rounds of shots were fired by the police, which is an unprecedented amount. As another poster said, the police in the UK are taught to shoot only as a last resort, and to use as little rounds as possible.

Lou

England should be alarmed after 3 horrific terror attacks since March. They should be alarmed at the NEED for more police presence. They should be alarmed that two attacks used vehicles on bridges. They should be alarmed at the thought of how many
others are waiting for their turn.

 

[randomuser]

No they are not deranged or mentally ill. They are following ISIS propaganda.
They are terrorists. Islamic terrorists.

How do you know they’re not mentally ill?