RugbyRebels

White van driven into pedestrians then stabbings and shots nearby, around 10 pm.
Another cowardly attack by lunatics in our midst.

Just tuning in now.
The sounds like another really low-grade attack that's going to be basically impossible to prevent.

Obviously, thoughts go out to all involved

It seems the 3 vehicle occupants got out and started entering bars/restaurants stabbing people as they went shouting 'this is for <name of their god>.Specialist Police were soon on the scene and there were shootings. I hope none got away.
London and a god like that do not go together.
Thoughts for the victims and their families.

Apparently my cousin is/was in lock down in a pub at the scene.

0800 096 1233 is the emergency contact no Liz

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Galfon wrote:White van driven into pedestrians then stabbings and shots nearby, around 10 pm.
Another cowardly attack by lunatics in our midst.

Yup. Thoughts with all the victims.

Donny osmond wrote:0800 096 1233 is the emergency contact no Liz

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Cheers. No need, she was in contact with family. She's fine physically but did see a dude get slashed.

Christ on a bike,....May is so out of touch with reality. It's the internet's fault..?. Really..?.

It'd be better to say the internet is simply a tool, whether used in normal fashion or by the scum actually responsible and wholly responsible for the attack

It's coming to something when RT is providing the most balanced coverage.

kk67 wrote:It's coming to something when RT is providing the most balanced coverage.

Of course it is. Perfectly balanced and impartial in every way.


And peddling whatever line Putin thinks is to his advantage.

Sandydragon wrote:

kk67 wrote:It's coming to something when RT is providing the most balanced coverage.

Of course it is. Perfectly balanced and impartial in every way.


And peddling whatever line Putin thinks is to his advantage.

Also what's balanced coverage of a terrorist atrocity? It's a crime, it's obscene, it's senseless, it'll achieve none of its aims, it targeted civilians... and all such have been on Radio 4 and Radio 5 which is what I've heard today, and I don't imagine much the TV news is that different in tone

Sandydragon wrote:

kk67 wrote:It's coming to something when RT is providing the most balanced coverage.

Of course it is. Perfectly balanced and impartial in every way.


And peddling whatever line Putin thinks is to his advantage.

Hmmm. Have you watched much of RT recently, Sandy..?. Larry King and Max Keiser are well worth watching.
Is being Putin's mouthpiece that much worse than being Murdoch's mouthpiece...?.

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

kk67 wrote:It's coming to something when RT is providing the most balanced coverage.

Of course it is. Perfectly balanced and impartial in every way.


And peddling whatever line Putin thinks is to his advantage.

Also what's balanced coverage of a terrorist atrocity? It's a crime, it's obscene, it's senseless, it'll achieve none of its aims, it targeted civilians... and all such have been on Radio 4 and Radio 5 which is what I've heard today, and I don't imagine much the TV news is that different in tone

Yes,.. it's obscene. But blaming the internet and refusing to discuss the UK's foreign policy is also obscene.

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Of course it is. Perfectly balanced and impartial in every way.


And peddling whatever line Putin thinks is to his advantage.

Also what's balanced coverage of a terrorist atrocity? It's a crime, it's obscene, it's senseless, it'll achieve none of its aims, it targeted civilians... and all such have been on Radio 4 and Radio 5 which is what I've heard today, and I don't imagine much the TV news is that different in tone

Yes,.. it's obscene. But blaming the internet and refusing to discuss the UK's foreign policy is also obscene.

The sick fucks would still be that even if they deemed our foreign policy to be on the side of the angels. You might as well blame they don't like our democracy, they don't like our pluralism, they don't like, they don't like...

Digby wrote:

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:
Also what's balanced coverage of a terrorist atrocity? It's a crime, it's obscene, it's senseless, it'll achieve none of its aims, it targeted civilians... and all such have been on Radio 4 and Radio 5 which is what I've heard today, and I don't imagine much the TV news is that different in tone

Yes,.. it's obscene. But blaming the internet and refusing to discuss the UK's foreign policy is also obscene.

The sick fucks would still be that even if they deemed our foreign policy to be on the side of the angels. ...

That's a big jump, Fella. So I'll suggest a similar jump.
Let's suppose Germany won WWII and were even now raping our Oil, Coal and Gold mines. The French resistance did some pretty bad things. I suspect we would too.

We need an adult discussion about foreign policy....and we need to exclude from that discussion any MP who holds a non-executive seat on the boards of the very companies who are profiting from the backdoor imperialism that our government is enacting.
I fear that in 200 years, history will consider our current version of imperialism far more nefarious, pernicious and divisive than anything they did at the height of the English Empire.

Simply put,..... if you piss people off for long enough they will get very angry.

May should be the person held accountable. As home secretary and prime minister for these past 7 years, her primary job was the security of our nation. She clearly hasn't done a sufficiently good job.

I have to say, between the 2 party leaders, I much preferred Corbyn's approach of saying no to campaigning, and then (mostly) dead-batting questions trying to get him to go campaigning. May on the other hand gives a speech that's basically the conservative manifesto as it relates to terrorism.

She is accountable, as Thursday will show. Other than that what do we want, that those in charge resign if someone instigates an attack such as this? We could go through a lot of PMs and home secretaries on such basis.

There is a bigger picture which comes back to provision of funding for police and security services, what the actions are in those areas, and even what out foreign policy is, but again that's all wrapped up in what's about to happen with our chance to vote in a general election.

Which Tyler wrote:I have to say, between the 2 party leaders, I much preferred Corbyn's approach of saying no to campaigning, and then (mostly) dead-batting questions trying to get him to go campaigning. May on the other hand gives a speech that's basically the conservative manifesto as it relates to terrorism.

Not really picked up on comments from either, but I think there is more onus on the PM to say something, it doesn't then help that she's simply a bad speaker

Her oratory is fine. It's just when she's fibbing that she becomes unconvincing.
It would be quite an endearing quality, if she wasn't just doing it for financial profit.

Her speaking isn't fine, she's much more in akin to a Gordon Brown than a Tony Blair when it comes to public speaking. And really they're all on a bit of a hiding to nothing when the image of Obama still looms so large, Obama is an outstanding public speaker and makes just about anyone else look a little iffy.

I'm amazed that no one has done a proper documentary about Amber Rudd's family background.
If Corbyn came from a family of crooks I'm pretty sure we'd know about it now.

kk67 wrote:

Digby wrote:

kk67 wrote:
Yes,.. it's obscene. But blaming the internet and refusing to discuss the UK's foreign policy is also obscene.

The sick fucks would still be that even if they deemed our foreign policy to be on the side of the angels. ...

That's a big jump, Fella. So I'll suggest a similar jump.
Let's suppose Germany won WWII and were even now raping our Oil, Coal and Gold mines. The French resistance did some pretty bad things. I suspect we would too.

We need an adult discussion about foreign policy....and we need to exclude from that discussion any MP who holds a non-executive seat on the boards of the very companies who are profiting from the backdoor imperialism that our government is enacting.
I fear that in 200 years, history will consider our current version of imperialism far more nefarious, pernicious and divisive than anything they did at the height of the English Empire.

Simply put,..... if you piss people off for long enough they will get very angry.

There was Islamic terrorise before we invaded Iraq so to blame western imperialism is just to sing the terrorists tune.

Digby wrote:Her speaking isn't fine, she's much more in akin to a Gordon Brown than a Tony Blair when it comes to public speaking. And really they're all on a bit of a hiding to nothing when the image of Obama still looms so large, Obama is an outstanding public speaker and makes just about anyone else look a little iffy.

She is incredibly wooden.