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.

 

Greatest threat to humanity in 2017?

page: 4
28
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Idreamofme

IF someone is able to challenge the attacker they should. IF not, then i guess just turtle up and wait for your turn to get blasted


maybe if youre a service member and you have been in combat and been through that kind of training you would have a handle on what you would do but john q citizen has no idea how they will react.


No one does until they are in the situation. Each situation is different so responses from a specific individual will not always be the same, either.
As to armed citizens, the US will be doing the experiments for the world to see if that is an effective response. At large events and in government offices and school buildings, firearms are not permitted. These will likely be the soft targets of opportunity for terrorists but, at some point, an attack will be made in an area with armed citizens and we will be able to assess the value of firearms in private hands in countering an attack. Certainly, some defense is better than none while awaiting the arrival of police and may well deter or delay the terrorists until law enforcement can arrive.




posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Idreamofme

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying people do nothing.. which they didn't do.

I'm arguing against the bullsh*t idea that had civilians been armed it would have been over before the police get there. My argue was, and still is, that a knife vs a gun in approx 21feet of space is not the positive outcome you said it would be.

That was my arguement. Not for people to stand there and do nothing. WTF sort of retort is that?!



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Read what Im saying more carefully before jumping to wild conclusions, please!

I said they have already committed the crime of treason, by being enemy sympathizers. You don't get put on a terror watch list for simply attending a Mosque. They have all expressed extremest views and are known to the police but are allowed to roam free. They should be considered enemies of the state and imprisoned for treason or at least tagged and have their movements severely restricted.

Again not necessarily every Muslim as it was during the war for Germans, and East Europeans. and in your country Japanese... but AT LEAST the known extremists.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Idreamofme

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying people do nothing.. which they didn't do.

I'm arguing against the bullsh*t idea that had civilians been armed it would have been over before the police get there. My argue was, and still is, that a knife vs a gun in approx 21feet of space is not the positive outcome you said it would be.

That was my arguement. Not for people to stand there and do nothing. WTF sort of retort is that?!


The attackers were also civilians, so that makes it more likely that they would have been carrying something other than knives, if the percentage of armed civilians in the UK was as high as it is in the US.
edit on 4-6-2017 by CulturalResilience because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-6-2017 by CulturalResilience because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
a reply to: 3danimator2014
As a former member of the armed forces and a current member of a security organisation I can answer that question for you. Training is the difference between the amateur and professional. Despite not having routinely armed police in the UK, Armed Response Units were on the scene within in eight minuets and the situation was rapidly contained last night.

We are rightly proud of our highly trained police and the fact that they are not the skittish, trigger happy amateurish law enforcement officers that other countries have on their streets.


Like American LEO's?



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   
No doubt there are probably those who would say that is true of American law enforcement officers.

a reply to: RomeByFire



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: noonebutme

[WTF sort of retort is that?! ]

Sorry, im retorted.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Im sorry but you don't understand the complexity of this situation.

Heres the problem the liberal corporate media has brainwashed people into dissociating Islam & Muslims society, from Islamic terrorists.

But as Donald Trump wisely said in Saudi Arabia, Muslims must lead the charge in the fight against extremism. It is a problem that comes from within THEIR society, and and their religion, and it only appropriate for Muslims to lead the charge in driving out terrorists, from their Middle Eastern societies and the wider global Muslim society... He is absolutely correct, but this effort is held back by sensitive liberals who keep defending Muslim society against people who voice criticism of their religion after having been terrorized by people in the very name of that religion.



The people who claim to be "Islamic" who are perpetrating terrorism, are NOT considered to be Muslim by the peace loving and law abiding Muslims of the world.


This is precisely the problem. They want to wrongly wash their hands of ANY association with these terrorists. Denying the problem doesn't make it go away. Only they can truly reform their religion. Pretending it has already reformed is absurd. It hasn't and it's dangerous to feed that delusion. It's brainwashing people, and it needs to stop.



It is not even "apples and oranges." Nazis = an entire country with major weaponry breaking international law and going on an empire-building rampage throughout Europe. They "locked up" millions of "undesirables" and murdered as many as they could in order to "purify the Homeland" etc. This was a massive, solid, clear-cut BLOCK of force marauding and warmongering through Nation States.


Islamic State have held territory larger than many countries, and have gone on an empire building rampage throughout the world... just like the nazis... they have taken prison and committed genocide... just like nazis... they are very similar... infact it's not since the Nazis that we have seen such a force as ISIS were before Putin sent his Air force to do continual targeted bombings.

There really is a SIGNIFICANT similarity between the two.
edit on 4-6-2017 by 0racle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: 0racle

Something bigger could be setting the stage for WW3. Islamic world and their allies vs the West and their allies. If you pay attention, thats exactly what it looks like. No crazy conspiracies needed.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015
Let me put this asinine excuse to rest for good. Just because some-one bombs some-ones country does not automatically produce terrorists. Two prime examples for you.
The Allies in WW2 dropped over 3.5 MILLION tons of bombs on Germany killing over 3.5 MILLION Germans.
In the Vietnam war America dropped over 7 MILLION tons of bombs on Vietnam killing over 1.1 MILLION North Vietnamese.
So, by your reckoning there aught to be millions of German and North Vietnamese terrorists. But this is not the case is it? Please don't use the semantics of their deaths as in WW2 and Vietnam those people (men ,women and children) died just as horrifically as any bombing victims now.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
We don't need to create terrorist they are already there they are created from their own misinterpretation of their Holy Book. Their goal as we know is to create a worldwide Caliphate

If you keep on saying that us bombing here and there have created this problem, and the terrorists are British Citizens, then you have to ask yourself why these terrorists are responding to threats in countries they have never lived in, wouldn't live in and have probably never even visited.

The problem once again is home grown terrorists who don't believe they are British who don't integrate and don't accept our culture & values. Their religion comes first before any British law we have to accept & be tolerant whilst they can bomb and murder because we have given in to these minorities for years and now they believe they are practically untouchable. They just have to scream racist

They laugh at our stupid Western liberalism and tolerance. Why do you think they come to Europe etc in droves? Because we will accept them with open arms and sing songs whilst they infiltrate (not integrate) and plot because its soooooo bloody easy to do!



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Greatest threat to humanity in 2017 ....



Of course the greatest Threat is of a natural or man-made EMP attack..

the economic, food chain, electrical, banking, medical, communication GRIDS will all go in-operable
and whatever nation is attacked will find themselves in a pre Industrial Revolution state of the society

the religious zealots that do terror campaigns will quickly drop the 'religious' aspect and focus on taking their survival resources from their wide spread & numerous victims... the radical Jihadist problem will quickly fade away into a paradigm where Tribal War-Lords emerge to marshal resources for their Band-of-warriors..

Jihad decapitations/tossing homos off towers, will only be of passing amusement for the Islamic troop morale...
the USA is probably destined for Balkinization
edit on th30149660669004042017 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: 0racle



But today we have a situation where our own governments are refusing to imprison known enemy sympathizers, because of we don't want to take away their "human rights". Yes, our governments and security services today are more concerned about the rights of our sworn enemies than the safety of our own citizens, and as a consequence they are partly responsible for these attacks.


I believe that every mosque should be monitored and all mosques *funded* by Saudi Arabia demolished.



But no one came out defending Nazism, or "moderate Nazis" during the Blitz. And our government took appropriate steps to make sure we were safe from potential traitors and those who might have sympathy or allegiance to our enemies.


I agree with you. However, the West is in complicit with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Jordan and Israel's behaviour—which are the biggest global players that fuel extremism. In fact, the US and UK have supplied, supported, and funded these players the most for their proxy wars...

In these present times, our governments are taking appropriate steps towards making sure we are NOT safe from potential traitors and those who might have sympathy or allegiance to our enemies.

The greatest threat to humanity is our governments willingness to F# the world over for geopolitical agendas. And the media—propaganda arm of our governments—is simply doing its job of twisting narratives in various ways.



But there is another issue beyond our governments, and that is corporate media. Not only are they liars, and fraudsters, they are literally making it easier for the enemies to operate in our society and commit violence.


Yeah, you are giving the media more credit than they deserve and letting our governments off the hook with such a perspective.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   
The "Religion of Peace" is not a danger to the survival of Western Civilization.

Western Civilization is capable of destroying Islam.

There is a small Middle Eastern nation that knows this.

Millions of people with a shared religion died teaching them.

This small Middle Eastern nation is influential and clear sighted about its future security.

The more conflict there is between Islam and Western Civilization the safer this little nation becomes.

There is a Plan to shape events.

"Cui bono? Cicero asked, before Jesus was born.

"Who benefits?" is still a important question.


edit on 4-6-2017 by draoicht because: Punctuation, to add a comma.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: southbeach
The greatest trick done to the British people was to deny them gun rights which in the American Constitution are there to stop a totalitarian Government from taking power essentially........


Oh God. No. Please keep the American obsession with guns out of this. The UK is not totalitarian, nor on that road. Please, keep guns out of this.

The UK is not on the road to totalitarianism?
Have you not seen the speech just given out by Theresa May about cracking down on internet regulation which will really be used to shut down the voice of dissent under the Machiavellian guise of fighting the war on terrorism.
The Police state is already in full operation along with it's political persecution and unjust gagging orders.....just because in your ignorance and gullibility you have not encountered it does not mean it does not exist.



posted on Jun, 4 2017 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: southbeach
if the average law abiding citizen had a gun at his hip then it would have been over before the Police even showed up.

Bullsh*t. Utter bullsh*t. You're talking about someone from the films or in an completely IDEAL situation. Not a panicked, chaotic mess of few attackers amongst hundreds of innocent people.

I've lived in Canada and grew up all handguns, had a firearms license, etc. When I did my training, which I was even fortunate enough to do some with RCMP firearms friends in Ottawa, they taught me about the 21 foot rule.

Gun vs Knife close quaters

In a crowded, panicked situation, your average citizen will NOT be able to take out the attacker without injuring others.



I grew up in a violent place and know all about knives so keep your education lessons to yourself and you have totally taken my statement out of all context.

It is not about guns versus knives it's about an armed public able to defend their families against loonballs.

The gun is also a deterrent....most crime is committed in gun free zones.

And so a gun would not have been handy as they were ploughing down people walking along London Bridge.....yeah a knife would have really done a job then.


Also your argument is fundamentally flawed.....how did the Police kill the attackers?
Wait for it.....drum roll...with guns!!!
And Eight minutes after they could have already been put in the ground by armed and trained civilians saving untold dead and wounded.
edit on 4-6-2017 by southbeach because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2017 @ 06:28 AM
link   
If a London Bridge style attack happened in a country that has a higher percentage of private firearm ownership, it logically follows that the attackers would be much more likely to use something other than knives.
a reply to: southbeach



posted on Jun, 5 2017 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: CulturalResilience

yep



posted on Jun, 5 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: 0racle


Ok. Let's look at a couple of things here... You said:



But as Donald Trump wisely said in Saudi Arabia, Muslims must lead the charge in the fight against extremism. It is a problem that comes from within THEIR society, and and their religion, and it only appropriate for Muslims to lead the charge in driving out terrorists, from their Middle Eastern societies and the wider global Muslim society... He is absolutely correct, but this effort is held back by sensitive liberals who keep defending Muslim society against people who voice criticism of their religion after having been terrorized by people in the very name of that religion.


Your original OP said this:




But no one came out defending Nazism, or "moderate Nazis" during the Blitz. And our government took appropriate steps to make sure we were safe from potential traitors and those who might have sympathy or allegiance to our enemies. They were all taken as prisoners for the duration of the war. Even those who simply came from the countries we were at war with. We were not afraid of hurting their feelings or stirring up "hate". We were at war, and everyone agreed it was a sensible idea. Who knows what might have happened if we didn't lock them up?


So which is it?? Ally with them and get them to help root out the problem OR lock them up for the "duration of the war" on terror -- all "sympathizers" or even "people who simply came from 'that country'? (Or, given your argument, all those who are Muslim from 'terror prone' countries and their families?)

You can't have both. Why? First of all, locking people up based on their religion due to small cells of violent radicalized terrorist zealots is a great way to create even more terrorists! It is also a great way to turn us into Nazi Germany -- you know, the Bad Guys. Yes. Us, the US of A could become the greatest scourge the earth has ever seen by trashing our Constitution and giving into fascism and fear.

America is not immune to the forces that led Germany into becoming a horror fest. Right now we have "illegals" in "internment camps" waiting to be deported -- do we see what those conditions are? Do we care how they are being treated? Are we even allowed to see what is being done to them? Are they all fine and happy in our excellent deportation housing jails?

Second, how many Muslims are in the world as compared to the United States? Let's see!


Adherents of Islam constitute the world's second largest religious group. According to a study in 2015, Islam has 1.8 billion adherents, making up about 24% of the world population.[1] Most Muslims are either of two denominations: Sunni (80-90%, roughly 1.5 billion people)[2] or Shia (10–20%, roughly 170-340 million people).[3] Islam is the dominant religion in the Central Asia, Indonesia, Middle East, North Africa, the Sahel[4][5][6][7] and some other parts of Asia.[8]


How many are in the US??

2% of the entire Muslim population live in the US. They are a total of 0.8% - 0.1% of the entire population.

United States 2,595,000
Link - Islam wiki
Pew Research - Muslims in US

Sure, there are about 2.6 - 3.3 million - in the US, but there are approx 324,600,000 people in the United States, total. (Wiki says 2.6, Pew Research gives the 3.3 million number) The entire population of New York City is more like 8.491 million people, far greater than the entire Muslim population of the United States.

Not all of these are "Middle Eastern" Islamic, either, but some are Nation of Islam (20-50K), some are Sunni, some are Shia, some are from Islamic roots but not active themselves, etc. The level of faith and participation vary by community and individual, just like in Christianity. (Speaking of which, around 70.6% of the US population identifies as Christian, just for comparison.)

So you want to round up all those in America (for example) that are "sympathizers" to the jihadists? Who determines that - who says X person is a "sympathizer - do they get a trial? Where do you put them and in what conditions? At what age? What about their families, do they and their children go like in WWII, or just the individuals? Do you separate the families then and put them in seperate men/women camps? Who feeds them? Who pays for this? OH - PRIVATE PRISONS! Great money making opportunity!! YAY Capitalism! The GOVERNMENT PAYS, which means WE PAY.

Do you get to torture them for "information?" Do you get to Guantanomo Bay the whole population and force feed them when they hunger strike? Do you get to keep them indefinitely and withhold "due process" even if they are fully American Citizens? Do you get to put them to work in labor camps, you know, to defray our costs like Prisons do? Do you get to take away their Korans and religious rituals?

What does this sound like to you?? (Hint - rhymes with Yatzi)


Let me ask you this, if your Church denomination in another state started a terrorist cell and people called for YOUR internment like this because you were on certain web sites or whatever, how would you react to this? WHO WOULD BE YOUR ENEMEY THEN???



I'm telling you your greatest enemy isn't terrorists.

Your greatest enemy is the impulse towards fascism and cruelty in the face of fear.

Your greatest enemy is to give in to the leaders who would take you down that path, and feed those fears, and promise to give you "security" in exchange for violating other human beings basic rights at a level that all the world, in an objective light, would call "barbaric" "horrific" "terrifying" and "our worst possible animal instinct."



You inter people as "sympathizers" and you create MORE "sympathizers" - then you can lock up all the "crazy leftists" who don't want you locking people up, along with all the Muslim families who are angry that their brother/sister/cousin/child/aunt/uncle/grandfather/son/daughter/mother was locked up.

And that is how the world descends into madness...

NOW - Do you want Muslims to help root out the evil of jihadist terrorism?
Start by not threatening to lock up Muslims. Then move on to gaining their trust. Then use the intelligence that they can gather in their own communities to your advantage. Use them in the IC community and create effective and patriotic agents out of the Muslim community - make them assets and informants. Give them the resources and respect and acknowledge them when they are heroic (if you can, cause IC).

STOP fear mongering and calling for "internment," or you will face an enemy far bigger and greater than any you have known...

Saudi Arabia, Trump's new friend, the greatest consumer of Military Industrial products, is starting their own MI state sponsored program. Just FYI. I'm sure Israel is thrilled about this. And terrorist...where do they get their weapons and funding from??? Hmmmm...

Perhaps there are other ways to approach this terrorism problem as an International Community than locking up people we suspect of being "sympathizers."




posted on Jun, 5 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: southbeach
The gun is also a deterrent....most crime is committed in gun free zones.

Really? Is that a fact? So you're saying there is little crime in the US, Canada, South Africa, Russia. Because they have guns, so based on your logic, there isn't much crime in those countries. Ok.


And so a gun would not have been handy as they were ploughing down people walking along London Bridge.....yeah a knife would have really done a job then.

Glad you find it funny and something to lol about. I don't....


Also your argument is fundamentally flawed.....how did the Police kill the attackers?
Wait for it.....drum roll...with guns!!!

As I said, *trained* professionals in that situation, with approval and the law behind them, should be more than capable. This is their job, what they train for. I would expect nothing less from trained firearms police officers.

I would NOT expect the same from your average citizen.


And Eight minutes after they could have already been put in the ground by armed and trained civilians saving untold dead and wounded.

No, you're speculating based on the films you have watched. There is no evidence to suggest people out having fun, in pubs, *armed* would have been a viable solution to the tragic events.

Consider yourself educated, for free. You're welcome.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join