It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police Assessing Al Shabaab UK & US Mall Threats

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   
JonJon, Tinfoil & Sremmos...


Sremmos was correct...

I was only referring to this perceived threat of Sharia Law which will never fly in the UK...

Honestly, it's crazy to even think that would occur.



I'm not, repeat not, making light of the Al Shabbab threats...

I'm not with the Intel Services and I'm not privy to information...
But 99% of the time I trust their input.



We are Great Britain...
The reason we remain that way is because our Intel Services are the Greatest...

So making light of their "heads ups" would be counter productive as well as irrational.
edit on 22-2-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
Who is to blame for this mess?

Blair and the Labour Party or what?


The people who decide to murder people are the ones to blame for this. And yes, that goes for Blair too, and Bush, and every other "leader" waging a war against other nations for anything other than self defence.

These individuals are to blame, no one else.
You cannot blame the actions of someone else for the murderous acts of others, we all have free will and we all have to take responsibility for what we personally do.

If someone murders or maims someone, they and they alone are responsible.


originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
We have let them create their own Communities over here and their own rules according to 'Sharia', is it any wonder these threats are occurring?


Sharia Law is no different to any other religious group offering counseling to their community, they do not have their "own laws" to live by, they are just as obliged to obey the laws of this country as you are. You would know this is you actually investigated this rather than trusting right wing tabloid headlines.

And, lets not forget, we suffered for decades of bombings and terrorist atrocities at the hands of the IRA, this is not some new and fandangled threat we are only just seeing today. We've had fascists blow up pubs and murder people, IRA murdering people, Islamic extremists...

Like I said, if you want to blame anyone, save your blame for the INDIVIDUALS who decide to hurt others in the name of the mindless ideology.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

From his vivid imagination.

If I were to hazard a guess.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   
Well, you folks in the UK might have trouble with "some folks" calling themselves Al Shabaab, but clearly there is no such thing here in the US. DHS has spoken and we have no threats except for right-wingers. So clearly the Great Mall need only worry about the attack of the killer grandmas.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
Well, you folks in the UK might have trouble with "some folks" calling themselves Al Shabaab, but clearly there is no such thing here in the US. DHS has spoken and we have no threats except for right-wingers. So clearly the Great Mall need only worry about the attack of the killer grandmas.


Except that's not what the DHS actually said, is it.

The report was that the domestic terrorist threat was potentially more dangerous to the American public than the threat from ISIS.

This is why people don't take this site seriously anymore, random people twisting facts and reality to make politically motivated points that do nothing other than make themselves feel clever, just for a moment.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

Actually it's not about making myself feel clever. It's about me being pissed.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
JonJon, Tinfoil & Sremmos...


Sremmos was correct...

I was only referring to this perceived threat of Sharia Law which will never fly in the UK...

Honestly, it's crazy to even think that would occur.



I'm not, repeat not, making light of the Al Shabbab threats...

I'm not with the Intel Services and 99% of the time I trust their input.



We are Great Britain...
The reason we remain that way is because out Intel Services are the Greatest...

So making light of their "heads ups" would be counter productive as well as irrational.


As I thought, just wanted clarity on this particular issue man.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   


These individuals are to blame, no one else.
You cannot blame the actions of someone else for the murderous acts of others, we all have free will and we all have to take responsibility for what we personally do.


I agree, to a certain extent, I don't believe, however, that it is the case here. Some of these killers actually believe they are justified by the teachings of Imams and religious teachers of Islam. You must see that.
edit on 22-2-2015 by Jonjonj because: grammar



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj


These individuals are to blame, no one else.
You cannot blame the actions of someone else for the murderous acts of others, we all have free will and we all have to take responsibility for what we personally do.


I agree, to a certain extent, I don't believe, however, that it is the case here. Some of these killers actually believe they are justified by the teachings of Imams and religious teachers of Islam. You must see that.


Makes no difference, people know right from wrong and no matter how strong an opinion or belief may be there is never any excuse for harming others in anything other than self defense.

This is a problem we seem to be creating for ourselves, somehow "justifying" murder. That's what we're doing, by accepting their excuses and acknowledging their reasons for committing such sickening acts.

There is and can be absolutely no excuse for it, none. If we continue to believe that these people kill because of their faith, and blame the faith rather than the individuals, then we are complicit in their delusional excuses.

By blaming an entire group of people, or blaming an entire religion, we are excusing them from personal responsibility, and thereby reinforcing their delusions.

The only response we should have to these murderers is to call them what they are - deranged murderers devoid of Humanity, the lowest form of Human scum, and not because of a belief, but because of their actions.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

I think that you just said what I said. Fundamentally, there is no justification. However, justification is sought and indeed encountered, in the teachings of certain radicalised and radicalising individuals.
After all, a child will do what its father says it should do. So lets think, in a way, of children.


edit on 22-2-2015 by Jonjonj because: grammar

edit on 22-2-2015 by Jonjonj because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: Rocker2013

I think that you just said what I said. Fundamentally, there is no justification. However, justification is sought and indeed encountered, in the teachings of certain radicalised and radicalising individuals.
After all, a child will do what its father says it should do. So lets think, in a way, of children.



So really we're both leading to the obvious point... when is a belief and the resulting action considered to be the result of a psychiatric illness, and are we then expected to view such people as incapacitated?

There are really only two ways to view these individuals.

They're either mentally ill and should therefore be treated as such under the law, or they're simply murderers.

We can apply the same thing to the random serial killer in any country who acts based on a belief that might have nothing to do with religious ideology.

So, again, the religion is really pretty much irrelevant, the individual is either insane, or simply a cold and calculating murderer in the same way any other killer would be.

If not mentally ill, then they are choosing through their own free will to kill others.
edit on 22-2-2015 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: Rocker2013

I think that you just said what I said. Fundamentally, there is no justification. However, justification is sought and indeed encountered, in the teachings of certain radicalised and radicalising individuals.
After all, a child will do what its father says it should do. So lets think, in a way, of children.



So really we're both leading to the obvious point... when is a belief and the resulting action considered to be the result of a psychiatric illness, and are we then expected to view such people as incapacitated?

There are really only two ways to view these individuals.

They're either mentally ill and should therefore be treated as such under the law, or they're simply murderers.

We can apply the same thing to the random serial killer in any country who acts based on a belief that might have nothing to do with religious ideology.

So, again, the religion is really pretty much irrelevant, the individual is either insane, or simply a cold and calculating murderer in the same way any other killer would be.


I have been thinking the same thing for a very long time. Not only are they socially immoral but they seem to be mentally bereft of any morality at all. One could almost call them, without any psychiatric evidence, psychotic. Hence a pet theory I have. What better way to rid humanity of the majority of psychotic amoralists than to give them a calling? Give them a point of interest as it were. All in the same place at the same time? One could hardly wish for a better situation in a way. After all, is it not ideal to have all one's enemies in one place at the same time?
Of course if this were true, that would not make those in charge good men, far from it in fact. But as they say, desperate times require desperate measures.
edit on 22-2-2015 by Jonjonj because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: FalcoFan
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Notice that these coward terrorists very very rarely attack military targets.

It's shopping centers,airports,etc.


Soft targets get far better 'results' when your agenda is to cause terror among the civilian population.

They also require a lot less manpower because of their low security.

You have to remember, the goal of these groups is to scare us into submission.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj
I have been thinking the same thing for a very long time. Not only are they socially immoral but they seem to be mentally bereft of any morality at all. One could almost call them, without any psychiatric evidence, psychotic. Hence a pet theory I have. What better way to rid humanity of the majority of psychotic amoralists than to give them a calling? Give them a point of interest as it were. All in the same place at the same time? One could hardly wish for a better situation in a way. After all, is it not ideal to have all one's enemies in one place at the same time?
Of course if this were true, that would not make those in charge good men, far from it in fact. But as they say, desperate times require desperate measures.


Psychopaths rally around all kinds of things, and none. We certainly wouldn't get all the psychotic people collectively agreeing that one particular ideology as the one and only excuse for their lust for violence. Ideal if that were the case, then we could indeed just get them all together for a "psychopaths annual conference" and bomb the &*^% out of them. lol

I don't think anyone would have any moral complaints over ridding the world of such disgusting Humans. It's actually more morally difficult to excuse the notion of murdering Hitler as a child to prevent him from growing up to commit such atrocities. Would we be able to justify killing someone who hasn't killed yet knowing they will be responsible for the deaths of so many? In the case of these nutters, we know they're responsible and we know their intent. I don't think there is anything morally or ethically wrong with killing someone you know is planning to kill.

I'm reluctant to call these people mentally ill, because then we're almost obliged to accept that they might not be entirely responsible for their own actions, and I don't see any evidence for that suggestion. There's no coercing here, these people are actively choosing to become maniacs who murder others.

I think they're just sickening people who were perhaps already prone to becoming violent, they choose to maim and murder others, and it seems to be entirely based on a desire to control others and inflict their ideologies onto others - which is the very definition of terrorism.

I wonder if it's more about the sense of being weak and powerless? It seems to fit - those who were weak suddenly see an opportunity to be the bully, and they take it.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013






It's actually more morally difficult to excuse the notion of murdering Hitler as a child to prevent him from growing up to commit such atrocities. Would we be able to justify killing someone who hasn't killed yet knowing they will be responsible for the deaths of so many?

I think we absolutely can justify, with hindsight, that action. The question must be can we PREDICT such behaviour, and to what extent is it PROBABLE.




There's no coercing here, these people are actively choosing to become maniacs who murder others.

Once again I must disagree, how can you suggest there is no coercion when it is clear that social media and radical Islamists use any means at their disposal to help these people onto their disgusting goals?
I still believe that fundamentally our ideas are the same.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:39 PM
link   
I'm thinking that this video is a fake - all part of a false flag attack on the United States.

A video, with terrorists wearing hoods, that is from some remote Somalian group that no one ever heard of, that every analyst says has all but disappeared?

It's a time when Obama is asking Congress for extended war powers (the like of which has NEVER been asked for before - "geographical border free strikes"?). The proposed war against #ISIS is incredibly unpopular with the American people.

However, if a mall were to be attacked, with a high number of civilian casualties, public opinion and support for such a war would rise exponentially, and the public will ask that Congress pass a war bill as soon as possible. It would pass in a matter of days after such an attack.

After 9/11, the PATRIOT act was passed in 11 days, almost unprecedented for a Congressional bill, and with over 90% support from the public. After an attack on a mall, I'd be very surprised if it took them that long.

They may also be able to tie it to some sort of Gun control bill, especially if a "good guy with a gun" doesn't take out he people who attack the mall (which I suspect would be the case). Most civilians wouldn't dare pull their guns against actual armed aggression, they would never put themselves in such a position, despite all the rhetoric from the NRA.

Basically, don't be surprised if there's a false flag attack on an American mall sometime in the next 7-10 days.

Mall of America also says that they're "working closely with DHS" that is due to be defunded next week unless Republicans pass a spending bill, which doesn't look likely. Imagine, just after the DHS shut down because of a funding dispute, a mall gets attacked because there was no security due to a lack of funding. The GOP will then claim that Dems caused massive American civilian casualties because they wanted to protect illegal immigrants from deportation. It's a terrible scenario, but plausible, I would think.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   
Just a thought , Why would they be so stupid as to target Mall of America and announce it . Minnesota had 163,758 carry and conceal licences as of february 2014 . Would not the whole place be full of people waiting to have a crack at anyone that even looked like launching a terrorist attack . Or have i got that wrong .



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: hutch622
It doesn't matter one whit whether or not they ever attack any mall, anywhere. Security forces in all three countries have already announced heightened security measures. They're costing us millions of dollars I'd guess, in this extra security, without ever firing a shot.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone someday shows that the video came from some alphabet agency in one country or another..... After watching a few of these "terrorist videos", I have a lot of skepticism about who is making them.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt



It doesn't matter one whit whether or not they ever attack any mall, anywhere.


It would matter to any that may be killed i would think .



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 02:45 AM
link   
The way I see it is western countries, with the USA being at the front of policy for the rest, as making this world situation STAY and making sure it does not go away, in order to claim their need of taking care of things as their way to keep the power structures intact and the cash flowing.

The only way to stop it will be very bloody and expensive for everyone because they will not make policies that grant any of us peace with foreign nations, half the nations maybe all are hating us because they are being paid a lot of money to do so by the central banks and the global power structures. And now it is being said that weaponized drones might be given to Saudi Arabia, perhaps as a thank you for making sure we are always under an umbrella of fear they are paid to bring to us via this conveyor belt of war and the threat of war.

Death to all of them, as they are giving only death to us.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join