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 respond to 'serious incident' in Woolwich

page: 40
159
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

There was a large impression in the windshield which makes me suspect he was hit pretty hard (assuming this was the cause of the damage). Considering what they did to him afterwards, I kinda hope he was dead or at least unconscious after being hit by the car.

Whatever the case, I don't think carrying a gun would have helped him one iota today.
edit on 22-5-2013 by FOXMULDER147 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I'm not sure how others would react, but if I were an armed by-stander and I saw someone run down, dragged from the car and beheaded, I believe I would have to draw down to stop the brutality.

Given the opportunity, I could not stop the vehicular assault, but stopping the actions of a beheading by machete attack is a different story.



reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


I agree, in fact, if he were carrying a weapon, I wouldn't be suprised if the attackers found it and used on on him (which may have been a much quicker way to go).





edit on 22-5-2013 by esteay812 because: add reply



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Did not read the long thread but how to deal with human animals is the main question. I think Islamic immigration to west and other countries should be deeply curtailed until such acts stop happening.

Al-Queda has lost frontal war on terrorism, so now they have come down to walking behind the common person and doing animalistic acts. This is more dangerous. Moderate Islamic leaders should step up and calm their people down or Islamic nations will be left on their own to fend off with no trade or technology passing to them.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by _Phoenix_
 


I do know what war is, I know that those two are not terrorists, but are soldiers fighting a war. Save your rhetoric for someone else. I am not claiming to get rid of all the Muslims, I welcome those Muslims who embrace change and assimilation to western culture.



They are not soldiers, two against one armed with gun and knives is thuggery, and on a humble citizen.
They are just as Machiavellian as any government. People are more important than any government, any ideology, these two failed miserably.
There could also be a caveat, when just last night we had a soldier on HARDtalk who refused orders,

www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
reply to post by ipsedixit
 

There was a large impression in the windshield which makes me suspect he was hit pretty hard (assuming this was the cause of the damage). Considering what they did to him afterwards, I kinda hope he was dead or at least unconscious after being hit by the car.


It is hard to say without more video coming out. I hope he was unconscious, but after watching a lot of Russian dash cam video I wouldn't necessarily count on it.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
It would depend on what condition he was in at that point.

You'd hardly be likely to be immediately reaching for your firearm if you've just been hit by a motor vehicle. Unless there had been some incident prior to it, you'd just think it was some kind of accident, not that youwere about to be attacked with blades.

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Unarmed citizens are sitting ducks.

Yet, despite this claim, people aren't being set upon daily by those criminals who carry firearms as a matter of habit.


Originally posted by ipsedixit

Incidentally, even if gun laws in the UK were relaxed to the point of allowing licensed citizens to carry firearms, that wouldn't mean that you would have to carry one if you didn't want to. It has been reported that passersby were trying to stop the assassins at their work. Armed passersby might have been successful at it.

Personally, I would rather have the choice of carrying a weapon, particularly if I were an off duty soldier or policeman. Criminals will arm themselves no matter what the law says. Law abiding citizens should not be disarmed by law and left defenceless against anyone who takes a notion to attack them, for whatever reason.


edit on 22-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)


Yes, because that's working pefectly in the good old US of A, amirite?

ps. Why has this post come out all weird looking?
edit on 22-5-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-5-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by esteay812
I agree, in fact, if he were carrying a weapon, I wouldn't be suprised if the attackers wouldn't have found it and used on on him (which may have been a much quicker way to go).
edit on 22-5-2013 by esteay812 because: add reply

I believe they had a gun themselves. They didn't use it on him because they were going for "terror" and knives and blood is more terrifying.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by esteay812
reply to post by DigitalKid
 


I agree his voice could carry the accent of a London native and, though I do not know much about that particular accent, I do have many friends who have an accent that sounds nearly identical to what is heard on the video.
They are from Captetown, South Africa. I also have a friend from Namibia who sounds near identical to this guy.

Dispicable they, murdering a stranger in public and claiming it is a neccessity, as they move to be proactive in their beliefs.

I am sure it has been mentioned before, as I have seen it mentioned in the comments of several sources, is this what Shari Law looks like on the streets of London?

The idea that the streets of London would be the scene for the beheading of a London Soldier by Muslim Extremists would have never crossed my mind 10 years ago!

Please don't consider this an attempt to bring 'gun laws' into the equation, or think I am making a condescending comment, I am genuinely curious if the outcome may have been different had a citizen been armed? It's really an empty curiosity, since there is no way to be certain.





edit on 22-5-2013 by esteay812 because: (no reason given)


I am English and have traveled the world, it's definitely London and not South Africa either as I have been there many times. I know a London accent when I hear one I live 20 miles up the road.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by spacedog1973
 


So by definition you condemn thousands of UK Muslims who have openly displayed slogans stating ' Kill The Infidels' etc.
Would you have them all convicted of terrorism charges as well?



As I stated before;
How many people have EDL blown up?
How many people's head's have EDL chopped off?

Or even how many terrorist plots have EDL been complicit in?


I refer to the definition, its what it is. If Muslims or anyone threat, harm, intimidate government or groups in society for a political cause, then by that definition its terrorism.

You keep asking how many people have the EDL blown up like you have your very own and unique definition of terrorism. The definition exists, refer to that. No need to make new ones up.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

Depends what time frame you look at. Christians have massacred millions of pagans over the centuries for not believing in their god.


Exactly. And more recently I seem to remember a Christian extremist blowing up a bunch of people in Norway a couple of years ago.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

It's working fine where it is allowed to work.

You made a code mistake. Just edit and find it.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by esteay812
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I'm not sure how others would react, but if I were an armed by-stander and I saw someone run down, dragged from the car and beheaded, I believe I would have to draw down to stop the brutality.

Given the opportunity, I could not stop the vehicular assault, but stopping the actions of a beheading by machete attack is a different story.

Well, at that point, you'd be a little too late, wouldn't you? If they were no longer threatening anybody else, you'd just be assigning yourself the job of judge, jury and executioner.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
The British tax payer is essentially funding Jihadists to go around third world countries hacking people to bits, the Gov brag about it, and want to send them even more money so they can hack even more people to bits.

The chickens come home to roost.

Monkey see, monkey do.

Ect.

I'm surprised the police didn't show up with a million quid and a couple of plane tickets to Syria.
edit on 22-5-2013 by threewisemonkeys because: (no reason given)


The British taxpayer is also paying for soldiers and bombs to kill innocent people day after day, year after year. it would be the height of ignorance to ignore that as also being a factor.

The chickens do indeed come home to roost.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


I could be mistaken but terrorism, by definition, targets civilians. If it is the case that the victim was a serving military man, or even if it was thought that he might be, this is not terrorism in the accepted use of the word.

There were plenty of actual "civilians" around. None of these were attacked. Most didn't even look all that surprised, never mind "terrorized".

Given our conduct in other parts of the world, it could be argued that the victim was "fair game".



edit on 22-5-2013 by threewisemonkeys because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 


I wasn't certain, but assumed they were armed - most premeditated acts are carried out by criminals who know the value of a firearm in physical altercations.

What I meant is that, had the assailants not been armed and the victim was, I wouldn't be suprised if the criminals found it and used it. Due to the injuries the victim must have sustained during the initial impact, he would have most likely been unable to brandish the fire arm anyway.







edit on 22-5-2013 by esteay812 because: tyops



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedog1973
The British taxpayer is also paying for soldiers and bombs to kill innocent people day after day, year after year. it would be the height of ignorance to ignore that as also being a factor.

The chickens do indeed come home to roost.


This is the price of globalism, but I don't think anyone is going to back up and go down another road, unfortunately.

If it were up to me, immigration laws would be much different and no NATO troops would be doing globalist errands in the Middle East or Africa.
edit on 22-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

It's working fine where it is allowed to work.

Not really. What it appears to be doing is encouraging violent criminals to move to easier pastures, or strike first and strike lethally.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 



A preemptive strike? Wonder where they could have got that idea?

edit on 22-5-2013 by threewisemonkeys because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 




The day that I am in a place where someone is being beheaded in the middle of the street, with the attackers screaming Aluha Ahkbar, is the day I will gladly take on the role of 'Judge, Jury, and Executioner' - if I must be damned for that, damn me now, or damn me then, or lock me up for those sins, it will not change the actions I will take.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
What it appears to be doing is encouraging violent criminals to move to easier pastures, or strike first and strike lethally.


Those two strategies are undoubtedly happening. If more and more people arm themselves that should change.

I have heard that violent crime is down in the US.

I grant you, crooks will be crooks, but that being the case, I would like to have a fighting chance against them.



new topics

top topics



 
159
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join