Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Many dead in coordinated Paris shootings and explosions

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't want to prejudge what others might get from reading it.

However, just to humour you, primarily I agree with one of his conclusions:
I think you mistake Urban for a bunch of shrinking violets - I can't see anyone likely to post on this thread thinking "Onoez, weltweit has told me what he thinks about it, and now I suddenly don't have a mind of my own! :( :eek: :mad:"

;)
 
No doubt the England fans enjoyed the fleeting sensation of singing something with a bit of oomph rather than the usual dirge :)
The French Government very helpfully tweeted a pronunciation guide.

CUCasrXWsAE5Q99.jpg
 
Thanks for your advice OU, I actually am reading a lot more than commenting, but I object to the notion that this thread belongs to a particular poster, because it does not.
It's nothing to do with that! butchersapron is expressing his view, in exactly the way you haven't. It's interesting that you should take exception to his doing that.

I don't always (often?) agree with butchersapron, so I certainly don't have any axe to grind on his behalf, but when people are fully engaged in a pretty detailed discussion of things, I also think it's discourteous to start dangling around links without making even the hint of an effort to engage with it, or what people are saying.
 
twitter now saying no explosives were found at stadium
Thing is, whether or not there were explosives your armchair jihadi or lone nut is now going to be able to keep the security forces of Europe on a state of high alert and embed the fear of attending events in large crowds amongst the populace with one well-placed phone call. The attacks in Paris have created a fairly enabling environment for setting off mass panic at the drop of a hat.
 
Being widely reported that many Turkish fans have booed the minute's silence at their game with Greece and livened it up with a bit of 'God is Great'.

Was also reported that the minute's silence for the Ankara bombing was also booed giving some hefty clues to the disposition of a sizeable section of the Turkish National Football support.
 
Kerry seems to have made some rather inopportune comments this evening. In attempting, for some reason, to distinguish between the CH murders and last Friday's, he appears to say that the former were based upon some form of rationale or even legitimacy.
23:21
John Kerry: 'rationale' for Charlie Hebdo attack was more understandable

In US media parlance, John Kerry is America's top diplomat. But what a crass, misguided, undiplomatic statement this is. Speaking at the US embassy in Paris, he appears to be saying the attack on the journalists atCharlie Hebdo earlier this year was in some way understandable or justifiable...

quotes_1817837a.gif
There's something different about what happened from Charlie Hebdo, and I think everybody would feel that. There was a sort of particularised focus and perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of - not a legitimacy, but a rationale that you could attach yourself to somehow and say, 'Okay, they're really angry because of this and that.' This Friday was absolutely indiscriminate.
Blimey.
 
Kerry seems to have made some rather inopportune comments this evening. In attempting, for some reason, to distinguish between the CH murders and last Friday's, he appears to say that the former were based upon some form of rationale or even legitimacy.
Blimey.

He does have a point - if the Kouachi brothers had wanted to, they could have murdered far more people than they did (at the original scene, as they were fleeing and when they were on the run) and there was at least a rationale behind their attack, however wrong it was. On the other hand friday's attacks (and Coulibaly's murders of Clarissa-Jean Philippe and the people at the hypermarket) were just utterly mindless.

(edit) None of that should excuse anything of what they did, ofc.
 
Last edited:
Given his position, I find that an extraordinary crass and more importantly deeply unhelpful thing to say. He should know better.

What is this, some kind of hamfisted attempt to relate to some version of religious sensibility? Unbelievably misjudged.

Friday's attacks weren't mindless.
 
Given his position, I find that an extraordinary crass and more importantly deeply unhelpful thing to say. He should know better.

What is this, some kind of hamfisted attempt to relate to some version of religious sensibility? Unbelievably misjudged.

Friday's attacks weren't mindless.

You've changed your tune.
 
Friday's attacks weren't mindless.

They were the very definition of mindless. What other way could you describe "punishing" France for airstrikes by striking at a visiting death metal band's audience, a group of cafe employees celebrating a colleague's birthday and people who tried to turn up late at a football friendly? Or shooting an unarmed policewoman in the back and trying to shoot a street sweeper?
 
They were the very definition of mindless. What other way could you describe "punishing" France for airstrikes by striking at a visiting death metal band's audience, a group of cafe employees celebrating a colleague's birthday and people who tried to turn up late at a football friendly? Or shooting an unarmed policewoman in the back and trying to shoot a street sweeper?

Lbj is a vacillating liberal. Let him swirl around until he disappears down the plug hole.
 
He does have a point - if the Kouachi brothers had wanted to, they could have murdered far more people than they did (at the original scene, as they were fleeing and when they were on the run) and there was at least a rationale behind their attack, however wrong it was. On the other hand friday's attacks (and Coulibaly's murders of Clarissa-Jean Phillippe and the people at the hypermarket) were just utterly mindless.

(edit) None of that should excuse anything of what they did, ofc.
He may well do, but I'm not sure it's the sort of point that a senior politician should be making. I'm assuming his prime motivation for making the comparison was to emphasise the horror and barbarity of Friday's attack upon innocent members of the public, but I'm not sure I like the implications of the corollary.
 
They were the very definition of mindless. What other way could you describe "punishing" France for airstrikes by striking at a visiting death metal band's audience, a group of cafe employees celebrating a colleague's birthday and people who tried to turn up late at a football friendly? Or shooting an unarmed policewoman in the back and trying to shoot a street sweeper?
Surely the rationale could see those discrete targets as part of a larger attack on French society and its normality? Obviously I don't know but I can imagine various ways they could dress it up. Not seen any statements they might have issued.
 
He may well do, but I'm not sure it's the sort of point that a senior politician should be making. I'm assuming his prime motivation for making the comparison was to emphasise the horror and barbarity of Friday's attack upon innocent members of the public, but I'm not sure I like the implications of the corollary.

He should have had more nous than to come out with such a statement now, certainly.
 
Surely the rationale could see those discrete targets as part of a larger attack on French society and its normality? Obviously I don't know but I can imagine various ways they could dress it up. Not seen any statements they might have issued.

They apparently dressed it up as attacks on "crusaders", which is probably as close as they get to admitting that they didn't really have any rationale for killing any of them - given that they have included two year old girls, Coptic immigrants and other such folk in the same term previously.

That said, when you have to defend the attempted murder of a bloke whose job it is to sweep the roads of a suburb then you really should be wondering what on earth it is you are up to.
 
"Otherness"

"I wouldn't ever take up arms against civilians or bomb them, so therefore someone who does must be absolutely different from me."

And we have a long tradition of using madness/insanity as a very handy "othering" tool. Even in normal speech...

It's precisely what you've been doing in you're previous posts . You didn't even need to watch the clip and listen to the points made .
 
Just heard this elsewhere. Snippets of it I agreed with but I thought most of it was utter, conspiraloon drivel mixed with 'it's all the west's fault.' Not a single mention of ISIS other than to say it was created by the US :rolleyes::facepalm:

Some nice pics here, for posterity

We created Islamic extremism: Those blaming Islam for ISIS would have supported Osama bin Laden in the ’80s - Salon.com


Redacted but it pretty much welcomes the prospect of an Islamic caliphate or emirate in Syria

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-con...12-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf




Terror trial collapses after fears of deep embarrassment to security services
 
Last edited:
Another option is troops in. Are we willing to send our young people to die there though? Perhaps we must accept that to end this, blood must be spilled, and will be spilled, whether it is service people, or civilians such as those slaughtered in London. At least service deaths would be meaningful in terms of a good outcome.

We are up against an enemy that is not afraid to die, many would embrace death. Negotiation is not an option, but neither is doing nothing. Had we put troops in at the genesis of IS, then it would be finished now. They will not be able to win against substantial numbers of regular troops.

Whether or not IS is the result of Western actions in the area is immaterial, we can't roll the clock back. We have to deal with the situation that now exists.

How though?

You seem to be advocating invading Syria . A recipe for utter disaster .

The facts are though that IS will be defeated and defeated by the people who've been fighting them from the beginning...the Syrian army and it's militias, Iran, Hezibollah and their Russian allies . And to a lesser extent the kurds. Those people will be basically cleaning up the mess the western powers and their gulf allies made of Syria on yet another one of their mad adventures . An adventure that has backfired extremely badly .

If western powers want to help they must first immediately put a stop to the weapons deliveries to jihadist groups that have fuelled this disaster. IS are just one head of the snake. Other rebel groups have issued statements of support for the Paris attacks. Not only are they little different but every round of ammo, every gun and every missile given to them is a knife in the back of the forces fighting IS on the ground . The territory they overran is what IS have taken in turn . Often IS helped them take it in the first place and te west and the gulf were up to their necks in it .

There's very little the west can really do to help after all the mess they created, but at the very least they should stop hindering. And if they really want to invade and bomb somewhere then go to the Saudi palaces and drain the dirty fucking swamp that breeds this virus worldwide . Talk of defeating this menace is laughable unless the head is cut off the snake. And that snakes head is everything the house of Saud stands for .
 
Two Air France flights bound for Paris from the United States were diverted late on Tuesday due to bomb threats, media reports said.

CNN reported that one was diverted to Salt Lake City, Utah, after taking off from Los Angeles while the second left Washington and was diverted to Halifax, Canada.

In a brief statement, Air France said both flights had been the "subjects of anonymous threats received after their respective take-offs."

"As a precautionary measure and to conduct all necessary security checks, Air France, applying the safety regulations in force, decided to request the landings of both aircraft," the airline said in its statement.

Both aircraft - flight 65 out of Los Angeles, and flight 55 out of Dulles International Airport in Virginia outside the U.S. capital - have landed safely.

A Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman confirmed to AFP that flight 65 was diverted to Salt Lake City.

“It landed safely,” she said but declined to comment on the reported security threat.

“Passengers are being removed from flight. No word on why flight diverted,” Canada’s CBC said on Twitter of the jet that landed in Nova Scotia.

Social media comments alluded to an emergency landing of the jet that left Los Angeles, saying it had touched down in Utah, with many police cars on the tarmac.

“It was diverted to Salt Lake City because of a security incident,” CNN quoted the FAA as saying.

[With Reuters]

Last Update: Wednesday, 18 November 2015 KSA 07:31 - GMT 04:31
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom