Stop with the lies already

[kidley]

Do you know how many muslim terrorist attacks the us have foiled,? i will include England - France - Germany etc in that.

 

Solomon 1 just what are you trying to get across?

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:24 ----------

 

I think, in the UK, that while we should take the threat extremely seriously it is important to have a sense of perspective.

 

We invest massive sums of cash in surveillance and we know MI5 do a great job breaking up planned attacks. We have a low number of successful attacks.

 

That is not to be complacent but we have tighter borders than other countries, low availability of firearms, decent security, and a reasonably effective security service.

 

We should be feeling relatively safe here, not increasingly hysterical.

 

My Bold

 

You have got to be joking

[Solomon1]

We should be feeling relatively safe here, not increasingly hysterical

 

I totally agree

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:29 ----------

 

Solomon 1 just what are you trying to get across?

 

A number of things really:

 

1. We are all being played

2. Daesh is a problem, not the whole of Islam

3. Relative risk is small in the UK

4. Risk is being exaggerated and manipulated by Murdoch's scum press

5. Engineered wars are how governments stimulate the economy

6. Muslims are loudly denouncing daesh - the media isn't covering it

7. Have I said we're all being played?

[I1L2T3]

There are sections of the 'alternative media' which both ludicrously overplay and ludicrously downplay threats from islamic terrorism. A wide variety of sources of info is no bad thing but the idea that agenda driven amatuers are the arbiters of 'truth' is rather concerning.

 

You have to be careful really. Saying the threat is being downplayed could be the same as making a realistic estimate of risk at odds with the way the threat is portrayed in the mainstream media.

 

Let's be brutally honest. Your risk of being involved in a terrorist incident is practically zero. Yes the incidents are horrific when they happen but the horror is what is intended. That's terrorism. You can choose to freak out at a risk that is less than having an accident in your home. Or you can be rational. Being rational is not appeasement.

[Solomon1]

You can choose to freak out at a risk that is less than having an accident in your home. Or you can be rational. Being rational is not appeasement.

 

Well said

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:45 ----------

 

"In the last 5 years, less than 2% of terrorist attacks in the EU have been religiously motivated"

 

http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/terrorism-EU-2-638x599.png

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:47 ----------

 

"Whats many times more deadly than terrorism? Britains roads"

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/25/deadly-terrorism-britain-roads-security-risk

[Quik]

You have to be careful really. Saying the threat is being downplayed could be the same as making a realistic estimate of risk at odds with the way the threat is portrayed in the mainstream media.

 

Let's be brutally honest. Your risk of being involved in a terrorist incident is practically zero. Yes the incidents are horrific when they happen but the horror is what is intended. That's terrorism. You can choose to freak out at a risk that is less than having an accident in your home. Or you can be rational. Being rational is not appeasement.

 

I got off the stop before leytonstone and would have been going through the ticket hall at around the time our 'for syria' chum was trying to remove heads the other saturday had I stayed on one more stop so while i agree the odds are small enough not to worry about overly I'm aware they are not merely theoretical. As I posted at the time the main annoyance was having to get a bus back as a result of the over reaction of shutting downthe entire east central line but we also have to be aware of the many plots these creatures attempt that are foiled.

 

Islamic terrorism is the main security threat of our generation, a proportionate and effective response in wiping it out is clearly in everyones interests (except theirs). That means not pooh poohing the problem or blowing it out of all proportion, going back to the OP the 'alternate media' seem to exclusively do one or the other.

[kidley]

I totally agree

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:29 ----------

 

 

A number of things really:

 

1. We are all being played

2. Daesh is a problem, not the whole of Islam

3. Relative risk is small in the UK

4. Risk is being exaggerated and manipulated by Murdoch's scum press

5. Engineered wars are how governments stimulate the economy

6. Muslims are loudly denouncing daesh - the media isn't covering it

7. Have I said we're all being played?

 

Thank you for your reply, i hope you are correct

 

your description daesh is noted

Edited December 20, 2015 by kidley

[Solomon1]

Two people have died from 'terrorism' in the UK, in the last 5 years - Mohammed Saleem, a muslim (!) and Lee Rigby.

 

---------- Post added 20-12-2015 at 23:55 ----------

 

Thank you for your reply, i hope you are correct

 

I AM

 

So don't have nightmares

[RootsBooster]

Evenin All

 

It has recently come to my attention

 

That there is a LOT of bull crap out there being pedalled by the media

 

In order to whip a frenzy of fear

 

So that our government has free reign to commit atrocities

 

With public consent.....

 

Just FYI

 

"Most of the terrorist activity in the US in recent years has come not from Muslims, but from radical Christianists, white supremacists and far-right militia groups"

 

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/10-worst-terror-attacks-extreme-christians-and-far-right-white-men

 

So just bear this in mind people - do your own research!

 

And use alternative media from the mainstream.

 

Love

As Always

Sol

I don't disagree about (some) mainstream media spreading lies and misinformation, Fox News, Russia Today and the Daily Mail are probably some of the best known for it.

However, you'd be naive to think that most 'alternative' news sources are credible, factual or impartial.

 

Could you give a specific example of a recent mainstream media lie, so I know in what context you're talking about it? Link, copy and paste will do.

[Solomon1]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-formally-apologizes-for-claiming-muslims-have-taken-over-european-cities/

 

Another interesting article here:

http://www.islamophobiawatch.co.uk/yasmin-qureshi-mp-media-publishing-complete-lies-about-muslims/

 

---------- Post added 21-12-2015 at 00:15 ----------

 

your description daesh is noted

 

[I1L2T3]

I got off the stop before leytonstone and would have been going through the ticket hall at around the time our 'for syria' chum was trying to remove heads the other saturday had I stayed on one more stop so while i agree the odds are small enough not to worry about overly I'm aware they are not merely theoretical. As I posted at the time the main annoyance was having to get a bus back as a result of the over reaction of shutting downthe entire east central line but we also have to be aware of the many plots these creatures attempt that are foiled.

 

Islamic terrorism is the main security threat of our generation, a proportionate and effective response in wiping it out is clearly in everyones interests (except theirs). That means not pooh poohing the problem or blowing it out of all proportion, going back to the OP the 'alternate media' seem to exclusively do one or the other.

 

Of course it's no consolation if you are one caught in the mayhem but the risk remains minute.

 

I'm not dismissing the threat, which of course is genuine, just making a rational judgement that our risk is small and also highlighting the success of intelligence in minimising the risk even further.

 

Remain rational and retain your perspective.

 

Hysterical behaviour will lead to even worse outcomes. Outcomes we simply do not need or want.

 

Don't validate Islamic extremism by behaving exactly how they want you to. Basically.

 

---------- Post added 21-12-2015 at 00:20 ----------

 

I don't disagree about (some) mainstream media spreading lies and misinformation, Fox News, Russia Today and the Daily Mail are probably some of the best known for it.

However, you'd be naive to think that most 'alternative' news sources are credible, factual or impartial.

 

Could you give a specific example of a recent mainstream media lie, so I know in what context you're talking about it? Link, copy and paste will do.

 

Loads. For a start the way that Cameron's claim of a 70,000-strong moderate Syrian army was not seriously challenged until after the commons vote had gone through.

 

Maybe not an outright lie but it is clear the media held back. They did not question it.

 

Shades of Blair and Iraq and dodgy dossiers. Nothing has been learned.