• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Woman beheaded in broad daylight in a London garden[W:335:480]

The police didn't say he was Muslim - it's not the kind of thing British police will typically announce. They didn't (and I believe still haven't) say the victim was beheaded either.

Both of those nuggets of information came from the media reporting what random people in the area told them. The validity and accuracy of such statements can vary so you should be cautious putting too much faith in them.

Yeah, sure.
 
Yeah, sure.
Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you expressing scepticism at some part of my post and if so which one?
 
Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you expressing scepticism at some part of my post and if so which one?
I often hear these denials after similar incidents that the perpetrators were not really Muslims or that the incident wasn't terrorism. Instead it is classified as 'workplace violence' or some such nonsense.

"Fat Nick", the murderer, converted to Islam five years ago.
 
I often hear these denials after similar incidents that the perpetrators were not really Muslims or that the incident wasn't terrorism. Instead it is classified as 'workplace violence' or some such nonsense.
I wasn't denying that the suspect is Muslim. I was denying your claim that "it was the first thing we learned" and the implication that information came from the police.

My general warning about caution regarding media statements immediately following such incidents was exactly that; a suggestion of caution, not a claim they're always untrue or necessarily were in this example.
 
I wasn't denying that the suspect is Muslim. I was denying your claim that "it was the first thing we learned" and the implication that information came from the police.

My general warning about caution regarding media statements immediately following such incidents was exactly that; a suggestion of caution, not a claim they're always untrue or necessarily were in this example.
Speculation that the murderers in these sorts of crimes was muted when they first began and many said wait before a rush to judgement was made. Now its gone the other direction. It is now reasonably safe to assume when murders of this nature occur Muslims are involved.
 
Speculation that the murderers in these sorts of crimes was muted when they first began and many said wait before a rush to judgement was made. Now its gone the other direction. It is now reasonably safe to assume when murders of this nature occur Muslims are involved.
Even if that were true, it's not the point.

You claimed that the fact the suspect is Muslim was the first thing we learned about him from the police. That remains a lie. There's no point discussing this kind of thing if you're just going to make stuff up.
 
I often hear these denials after similar incidents that the perpetrators were not really Muslims or that the incident wasn't terrorism. Instead it is classified as 'workplace violence' or some such nonsense.

Are you seriously suggesting that the person who committed this act did so to try to get a change of British foreign policy ? I made this same point to your friend Gardener when he referred to the incident as " not terrorism in the classic sense " or some such nonsense.

The man is clearly unstable and according to one of his bosses never spoke about religion or politics and had only told him " in passing " that he had converted to Islam sometime previously.

You people will clutch at any straw to make a " terrorist " connection , no matter how tenuous or ridiculous it is
 
Are you seriously suggesting that the person who committed this act did so to try to get a change of British foreign policy ? I made this same point to your friend Gardener when he referred to the incident as " not terrorism in the classic sense " or some such nonsense.

The man is clearly unstable and according to one of his bosses never spoke about religion or politics and had only told him " in passing " that he had converted to Islam sometime previously.

You people will clutch at any straw to make a " terrorist " connection , no matter how tenuous or ridiculous it is

So you think the Muslims beheading journalists and aid workers are 'stable'? Or those who planned to behead Aussies? Or those who planted bombs in the Boston Marathon, or the many dozens of similar acts which take place every year?

Why is important to you whether this guy is a real Muslim terrorist or a pretend Muslim terrorist?
 
So you think the Muslims beheading journalists and aid workers are 'stable'? Or those who planned to behead Aussies? Or those who planted bombs in the Boston Marathon, or the many dozens of similar acts which take place every year?

Nope, I think these people are terrorists. They carry out violent acts against groups or individuals to instil a sense of terror/fear against another group in order to change that groups actions/intentions ,or in the case of governments, their policies. The examples you cite yourself confirm this. The beheading of journalists by IS was a response to US intervention against them in Iraq.

The surviving member of the Boston bombing duo reportedly said the act was in response to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq

Why is important to you whether this guy is a real Muslim terrorist or a pretend Muslim terrorist?

The above just shows how crazy you people are and highlights precisely what your agenda is , as if anyone with the capacity to think straight hadn't sussed that out already. ( to try to link ANY act committed by a Muslim to "terrorism" , IE Muslim=Terrorist )

The choices you have given confirm the above, IE the man is either a " real Muslim terrorist " or is he just a " pretend Muslim terrorist " ? There is no option given to consider whether he is a terrorist at all or that he is a man who has lost the plot and just so happens to be a Muslim ( my view at this point )

The evidence from some witnesses claim he was running around claiming that " cats had stolen/taken his lighter ". One of his bosses claimed that he never mentioned religion or politics. Not one of the people who were quoted in the Telegraph article mentioned anything about any over zealous religious sentiments expressed by the man himself.

But you people completely ignore all of this because it completely undermines your claims and your agenda ,which is to try to spread religious/ethnic hatred.
 
A 25-year-old man was arrested in connection with the death of a woman who was reportedly beheaded in the back garden of a North London home on Thursday afternoon. Officers used a Taser to apprehend the suspect, who is being treated at a hospital for injuries, according to Huffington Post UK. One officer also suffered a broken wrist, police said in a statement.
Woman reportedly beheaded in broad daylight in a London garden - The Washington Post

Well, it`s terrible. And we don`t know wether it was the attack terror-related or not. And another point in this: "officers used a taser to apprehend the suspect". I note that this is a dangerous criminal, rather than a simple thief. Why do our policemen shoot-to-kill in any situation?

The police officers have to assess how dangerous the situation is and respond accordingly; I'm not going to pretend they get it right all the time but there probably will have been an armed response unit nearby. If you look at how armed units dealt with Lee Rigby's killers (Adebowale and Adebowalo) by shooting to incapacitate even when the killers ran at police holding firearms shows that the training is to try and apprehend first so that they can be brought to justice.

I think the last shooting to death by UK police was Mark Duggan in 2012 (his was the only fatality that year by police marksmen) but even then - we get soul-searching like this to ask whether we live in "trigger happy Britain."
 
Are you seriously suggesting that the person who committed this act did so to try to get a change of British foreign policy ? I made this same point to your friend Gardener when he referred to the incident as " not terrorism in the classic sense " or some such nonsense.

The man is clearly unstable and according to one of his bosses never spoke about religion or politics and had only told him " in passing " that he had converted to Islam sometime previously.


You people will clutch at any straw to make a " terrorist " connection , no matter how tenuous or ridiculous it is
And some will deny the obvious connection, no matter how ridiculous.

Radicalization and murder by beheading or bombing is largely connected with the political-religion of Islam and with the Islamofascists. Murdering someone by cutting off the victim's head brings to mind the goals of Islam, the subjugation of the entire world's populace, even if the perp never mentioned Islam.
 
A 25-year-old man was arrested in connection with the death of a woman who was reportedly beheaded in the back garden of a North London home on Thursday afternoon. Officers used a Taser to apprehend the suspect, who is being treated at a hospital for injuries, according to Huffington Post UK. One officer also suffered a broken wrist, police said in a statement.
Woman reportedly beheaded in broad daylight in a London garden - The Washington Post

Well, it`s terrible. And we don`t know wether it was the attack terror-related or not. And another point in this: "officers used a taser to apprehend the suspect". I note that this is a dangerous criminal, rather than a simple thief. Why do our policemen shoot-to-kill in any situation?

I'm all for the cops ventilating the guy right there. He beheaded a woman? Jeez.
 
I'm all for the cops ventilating the guy right there. He beheaded a woman? Jeez.

Of course this guy deserves severe punishment. I do not condone him. But on the other hand, the police must always be humane. And the British police does the right thing. But our police doesn't know the concept of humanity. They believe they can do anything. We live in a police state
 
And some will deny the obvious connection, no matter how ridiculous.

Radicalization and murder by beheading or bombing is largely connected with the political-religion of Islam and with the Islamofascists. Murdering someone by cutting off the victim's head brings to mind the goals of Islam, the subjugation of the entire world's populace, even if the perp never mentioned Islam.

And some will call for international crimes as a response to the actions of one man who thought cats had stolen his lighter
 
Of course this guy deserves severe punishment. I do not condone him. But on the other hand, the police must always be humane. And the British police does the right thing. But our police doesn't know the concept of humanity. They believe they can do anything. We live in a police state

Well gee, I am glad you don't condone it. Maybe you can take him in and give him a warm blanket and a hug.
Members of the Brit police stood by and watched as a Brit soldier was killed in the street by men with knives. Very humane.
 
And some will call for international crimes as a response to the actions of one man who thought cats had stolen his lighter
I believe you are destined to live the rest of your life on the wrong side of history.
 
Members of the Brit police stood by and watched as a Brit soldier was killed in the street by men with knives. Very humane.

No they didn't. Even unarmed members of the British public tried to help Lee Rigby and disarm his attackers. He was dead before the police even arrived on the scene and when they did arrive they at first tried to seal the area off whilst waiting for an armed response unit who , when they arrived , shot the two attackers. Get your facts straight if you are going to comment
 
I believe you are destined to live the rest of your life on the wrong side of history.

And knowing what you believe , I'm quite happy to be on the other side of it
 
No they didn't. Even unarmed members of the British public tried to help Lee Rigby and disarm his attackers. He was dead before the police even arrived on the scene and when they did arrive they at first tried to seal the area off whilst waiting for an armed response unit who , when they arrived , shot the two attackers. Get your facts straight if you are going to comment
My facts are right. They stood there and ran video. Unarmed and scared to death to advance on the murderers.
 
My facts are right. They stood there and ran video. Unarmed and scared to death to advance on the murderers.

I'll quote you again

CRUE CAB said:
Members of the Brit police stood by and watched as a Brit soldier was killed in the street by men with knives.

The bit I highlighted infers that British police officers stood by as Lee Rigby was being killed , which was not the case. He was already dead when they arrived.

Maybe the unarmed officers should have tackled them but that is way different from trying to make out they stood there whilst he was being murdered
 
I'll quote you again



The bit I highlighted infers that British police officers stood by as Lee Rigby was being killed , which was not the case. He was already dead when they arrived.

Maybe the unarmed officers should have tackled them but that is way different from trying to make out they stood there whilst he was being murdered
Standing there filming while allowing the killer to go on a rant is bad police work.
 
Standing there filming while allowing the killer to go on a rant is bad police work.

That footage was filmed by a passerby. The footage showing Lee Rigby being knocked down and attacked was from CCTV footage. AFAIK the unarmed officers just cordoned the area off and didn't film anything themselves. Don't forget too that one of the attackers pointed a gun at the armed response unit before he was shot.

Who knows what the police knew or didn't know at the time events were unfolding
 
That footage was filmed by a passerby. The footage showing Lee Rigby being knocked down and attacked was from CCTV footage. AFAIK the unarmed officers just cordoned the area off and didn't film anything themselves. Don't forget too that one of the attackers pointed a gun at the armed response unit before he was shot.

Who knows what the police knew or didn't know at the time events were unfolding
Yea, cover for them. Un armed response may as well be no response. It will happen here, and I bet you will be one of the ones crowing for more cops.
 
Yea, cover for them.

Hehehe , not covering for them at all. Just stating the facts I know about it

Un armed response may as well be no response.

It has it's pluses and its minuses imo

It will happen here, and I bet you will be one of the ones crowing for more cops.

I don't think it will. The American gun lobby is too strong . You need them in case you get a government that tries to take away your freedoms , correct ? :lamo

And, even if it did happen , I still wouldn't be asking for more cops . What use would they be to me seeing as I live in the UK ? :shrug:
 
Hehehe , not covering for them at all. Just stating the facts I know about it



It has it's pluses and its minuses imo



I don't think it will. The American gun lobby is too strong . You need them in case you get a government that tries to take away your freedoms , correct ? :lamo

And, even if it did happen , I still wouldn't be asking for more cops . What use would they be to me seeing as I live in the UK ? :shrug:
Your facts are not more valid than mine and I got mine from all the same major news outlets as you did.
Welp, I am glad you think nothing from here on out will happen. "because of the gun lobby". WTF, that makes no sense.
 
Back
Top Bottom