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.

 

4 UK men admit London Stock Exchange bomb plot

page: 2
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ColCurious
 


That doesnt make collateral damage acceptable, anywhere. Be it US troops firing from helicopters or fundamentalist lunatics planting bombs. Just becuase something unexpected happens, doesn't make it right?

It's like saying that people who abuse children were likely abused themselves as a child and therefore it's alright (I'm paraphrasing for the sake of argument here.)




posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by insaan
reply to post by 0010110011101
 

If these guys truly did plot to blow up bankers, I would love to know their motive. Most likely lost their minds from watching too much BBC, I mean Muslims have deep connection with other Muslims, every time they see a Muslim getting blown up, they feel it in their hearts, as if their own brothers have been killed (note - they call each other brothers and sisters).


Are you Muslim, or are you just making sweeping generalisations about a religion you probably know very little about?

I've never heard such nonsense. Most Muslims would not condone terrorism and therefore would not have felt a "deep connection" with dead fanatics carrying out terrorist acts at all - complete rubbish.

Go to your local Mosque and actually get some real views on it rather than speaking on behalf a global population of 1.5 billion (22%) Muslims from a position of ignorance.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   
I dont think that blowing anything up is a good idea. Banks or what ever, its just that the whole system needs scrapping and starting again. The rich passing down their wealth for generations. With the same familys controlling everything. Elitest types who think that they are above every one else.
It was a fact that the IRA did attack the banksters, which helped to solve the problem. Wether or not they got what they wanted, it did bring the govt to the table and the bombings stopped. Thats what I meant. Once you attack the banksters, things happen.
We are all in it togeather, say the millionairs in govt. Unfortunately we are not all millionairs and able to hide are wealth abroad in swiss banks or off shore tax havens ect.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminnaughty
 


Before i answer this i just want to make clear that i am not rich and have no windfall heading my way!

What is wrong with those with wealth wishing to pass it on to their children? The ultimate goal of parenthood is to care for and provide for your children. I have never met anyone that would not want to pass their wealth onto their children, unless their has been some serious falling out over the years!

The system is wrong but why blame just the rich? And why punish them for wanting to look after their families. All i can say is that if i ever get some serious wealth, my daughters are first in line for my cash when i go belly up



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by 0010110011101
 


You either mis-understood me, or you just mis-understood what I said? Either way, I'm not saying anything out of ignorance, I never do that, if it was out of ignorance I would tell you that.

That being said, since you mis-understood me, do you want me to explain myself again? Or should I ask you to explain what I said before I re-explain it, that way I can see how and why you mis-understood what I said and re-explain it in a manner which you might be able to understand?

All that gibbrish aside, I never said Muslims support terrorists, and if you revisit my previous post, you will see I said nothing of the sort.

I said when Muslims see other Muslims getting blown up, I'm talking about the pictures and videos of US drones blowing up women and children, or innocent children suffering in Iraq or Afghanistan or Palestine, or Somalia, or Yemen.. because of "quote unquote" collateral damage of US drones, or British jets, or soldiers, tanks, or DU or NDU chemical weapons, or tortures, or...

When there's a population of people who have deep connection with each other, then no doubt, there will be among them those who will try to seek justice, but they will try it through different means, that is based on their mental state, their individual beliefs, their upbringing, their character, their environment... Their is too many variables, and like I said before, different segments will use different means to seek justice, whether it be "spreading the truth", or "using the legal system", or "blowing things up - things which is deemed as guilty from the perspective of that individual"...

If this isn't a clear enough explanation, then I don't know what is, but I will wait for your response to see if you understood what I was trying to say.
edit on 1-2-2012 by insaan because: grammatical something something



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0010110011101

Originally posted by n00bUK
Guess these guys are the real 'terrorists' ..instead of bombing the public, they bomb the stock exchange - at last they do something useful towards their cause.

I'm not saying any loss of life is good, but this particular aimed attack is better than just blowing up people who have nothing to do with the actual route cause.

When people blow people up, who have nothing to do with any of the circumstances their fighting for, then it leads me to think that these are false attacks, unlike this one.

Nice find



What a preposterous statement! It's alright to blow up innocent men, women and possibly children? To take mothers and fathers away from their children, because they happen to work in a stock exchange.......?

Away with you and your childish opinions.........


Childish? O.k then...


You clearly didnt get my post. I said i would say this is better than bombing random people. I also said i dont agree on any of this, but its better than bombing bystanders - who have done nothing. yes there is cleaners etc in the building, i get that, but you dont get my point at all.

When bystanders who have nothing to do with the problem are getting bombed, i see it as useless against their cause, whereas bombing the stock exchange might just forward their cause, as bad as it is.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by n00bUK

Originally posted by 0010110011101

Originally posted by n00bUK
Guess these guys are the real 'terrorists' ..instead of bombing the public, they bomb the stock exchange - at last they do something useful towards their cause.

I'm not saying any loss of life is good, but this particular aimed attack is better than just blowing up people who have nothing to do with the actual route cause.

When people blow people up, who have nothing to do with any of the circumstances their fighting for, then it leads me to think that these are false attacks, unlike this one.

Nice find



What a preposterous statement! It's alright to blow up innocent men, women and possibly children? To take mothers and fathers away from their children, because they happen to work in a stock exchange.......?

Away with you and your childish opinions.........


Childish? O.k then...


You clearly didnt get my post. I said i would say this is better than bombing random people. I also said i dont agree on any of this, but its better than bombing bystanders - who have done nothing. yes there is cleaners etc in the building, i get that, but you dont get my point at all.

When bystanders who have nothing to do with the problem are getting bombed, i see it as useless against their cause, whereas bombing the stock exchange might just forward their cause, as bad as it is.


hya
i understand what your saying
they the so called terrorists
are hitting where it hurts..in our pockets
much like the wa... i mean bankers (cough)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by insaan
 


Sorry, I thought you meant when they see dead suicide bombers as opposed to dead civillians. I retract the previous statement forthwith.........



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0010110011101
reply to post by ColCurious
 

That doesnt make collateral damage acceptable, anywhere.[...]
Just because something unexpected happens, doesn't make it right.[...]

I didn't say that either.
Collateral damage is not "acceptable"... but it's inevitable at times if warfare is the method of choice to deal with conflicts.

The point I wanted to make is that maybe this is more like a new kind of asymmetric warfare between two very different forces than "terrorism" per se...

Well, whatever. Nevermind.
edit on 1-2-2012 by ColCurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Follow the money!

Wake up people!

This is not what you think it is.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
Well the IRA only got what they wanted after they started attacking the banking system. Up until that point they had blown up bus loads of people and soldiers. Which did no good for their cause. But once they attacked the financial system things changed. Guess these guys realised that fact and wanted to emulate them. Im sure that there are many people who would agree. The bankers should be all bombed out of existance, .


they didn't get what they wanted, they wanted Irish unity

My wife works in a bank Id love to have a chat with you...............
edit on 1-2-2012 by blueorder because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 




Why?


The more logical question you should be asking yourself is "why not?"

Just saying.

The answer to "why" is very obvious. And it was just a hunch BTW. Do you normally try to dictate other people's thought processes?



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


I assure you, I don't try to dictate anything to anyone.

I merely seek clarity and understanding.

It's your thread yet you offer no reasoning or evidence to support exactly 'why' you normally suspect that those caught up in these plots are 'patsies'.
You offer an opinion but nothing to support why and how you come to that opinion.
You are obviously an intelligent person and as such it would give your opinion more credence if you explained the reasoning behind your opinion.

In addition some people seem determined not to accept that there are groups of Islamic extremists who try to carry out terrorist attacks in the UK despite the mounting wealth of evidence to support this.

I try to question everything and try to reach my conclusions and opinions based on the facts as I see them free from political dogma and rhetoric and MSM influence.
Unfortunately I am only human and prone to the same weaknesses, suggestions and forces as everyone else.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
[more
The IRA didnt bomb any banks. They closed down the banking areas of the UK, which caused a great loss of profits for them. I didnt say bomb the actual banks. I live in the south west of England and any time you want to meet me and have a chat. Im more than willing to meet up and discuss this point with you and then you can defends your wifes honour ect.
Just send me a U2U and i will gladly meet up for a chat......



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
reply to post by blueorder
[more
The IRA didnt bomb any banks. They closed down the banking areas of the UK, which caused a great loss of profits for them. I didnt say bomb the actual banks. I live in the south west of England and any time you want to meet me and have a chat. Im more than willing to meet up and discuss this point with you and then you can defends your wifes honour ect.
Just send me a U2U and i will gladly meet up for a chat......


where do you live?



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
This made me wonder - the terrorists were planning on blowing up pubs in their home town of Stoke on Trent. Why would anyone target pubs in Stoke? For sure there is an undercurrent in Stoke of Islamic fundamentalism, but its a poor area and you are always going to get poor kids with poor futures doing something like this. The town has its local areas and the Muslim areas where they have their own schools.

Just to add, why do those in control of sending new migrants over to destinations in the UK send em to Stoke? Why do we always get muslims here and not (more so) peaceful Sikhs or Hidus like Wolverhampton receives? They always send the Muslims to Stoke, why do the planners do this? There is nothing here, there is no wealth, no jobs and they can't all drive taxis and open kebab shops can they. They always send them here. Just pop to Tewkesbury, an afluent pretty place - they never send em there



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ufoorbhunter
 


There are plenty of Muslim immigrants all over the UK, even here in North East England.

I've wondered the same, but do you really think that TPTB and London biased MSM etc would really give a toss if a bomb went off in Middlesbrough or Stoke etc, however, just think of how many soft and easy targets there are in such towns and cities.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 
Soft targets? Oh yeah the northern towns are easy targets for sure. They always send muslims to Stoke, we don't get many Sikhs or Hidus, they just send Muslims in the main. Wolves gets loads of Sikhs and Hindus, I just don't get who channels them to the different towns. Our muslims are very non integrated and a minority quite new to Stoke which never had any originally. They've had it bad, some locals tried blowing the new Mosque up in Shelton a few months ago, things are very fragile here



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
I wouldnt waste a bomb on the stock exchange, id take all the greedy culprits to the roof and push em off.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
The question "Why" is easy - they were taken in by the various messages on the internet around how everyone hates the Moslems and they wanted to do something about this. For those people who are interested in this - try looking at the lectures/messages of Anwar Al-Awlaki, the recently deceased lecturer / radicalist who is mentioned as one of the groups main influencers.

Yes there are people in this world taken in by such hate messages. You do not need to invent the story of a patsie.




top topics



 
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join