UK Parliament Terror Attack

[Gaudet]

2 hours ago, MeakMaker said:

Brexit has happened and we just have to accept it.

Interesting attitude. A bit like accepting fascism, because that's what England is right now with those Tories in power, doing whatever the fuck all they want and no one in the opposition standing against them.

If something is not right one does not have to accept it.

[Gaudet]

And can someone explain why is it that every time a lone fucker goes on a rampage, somehow said lone fucker always ends up being killed by the police so he cannot talk anymore. How convenient.

[MeakMaker]

7 hours ago, pjcowley said:

Interesting attitude. A bit like accepting fascism, because that's what England is right now with those Tories in power, doing whatever the fuck all they want and no one in the opposition standing against them.

If something is not right one does not have to accept it.

It's not about attitude though. I personally was devastated when the referendum results were announced but in all honesty what else can we do? Same in the US with Trump. Those things happened and as much as dreadful they are dwelling on them won't solve the problems. It's clear we have come to a point in history where people have different approaches and ways of looking at life. Yes with Brexit and Trump division and bigotry and racism seemed to have won but that doesn't mean all is lost. We still have the power to carry on and learn from our own mistakes.

[MeakMaker]

5 hours ago, pjcowley said:

And can someone explain why is it that every time a lone fucker goes on a rampage, somehow said lone fucker always ends up being killed by the police so he cannot talk anymore. How convenient.

I totally agree with you. It always ends up being fishy. One might think cops can use guns with drug bullets to send people to sleep or something and not completely being killed. 

[karbatal]

15 hours ago, elijah said:

Wrong. Those ppl should be in EU/USA/Canada. But those following Quran by the word, ready to stone women/gays SHOULD NOT.

And how do you difference them when they are in refugee camps or on a boat about to be drowned? Wouldn't it be far easier to try to stop the hate THERE IN THOSE COUNTRIES instead of thinking that the EU is doomed because inmigrants or refugees are coming? 

[Jazzy Jan]

Too many people have become too frightened of being labelled racist to correctly call out fundamentalists for the cowardly, freedom taking ideology they preach.  People need to say openly that there is a problem with fundamentalists and hard liners in ANY religion and be able to show they distinguish completely between the peaceful majority of Muslims compared to the Islamic fundamentalists and know they are completely different.  We should never accept any fundamentalist of any religion be it Islam or Christian - committing atrocious acts and using religious text to justify their barbaric, sexist, racist, bigoted views.

 This is not attacking Islam but people can't keep burying their heads in the sand at what damage fundamentalists do to all people of all beliefs - Muslims, Christians, atheists etc.    The same way people hate and do not accept the disgusting revolting views and actions of the Ku Klux Klan - which also have used Christianity to try and justify their disgusting, wrong, vile and abhorrent views. We don't accept them by any means and never should try and understand or justify them.   Same with how everyone needs to call out fundamentalists who only want to cause havoc, pain and use completely wrong interpretations of something they read in a book that was written over a thousand years ago. 

If people keep trying to justify and understand the actions of terrorists and fundamentalists,  they are not only somewhat accepting that we have to live with their views but are giving the right wing racist politicians exactly what they want - a platform to use that fear.  

[karbatal]

That's true.  And a great post jazzyjan!!!! 

And I think all here agree with that opinion. But now the way to fight against it is to block frontiers and forget about the refugees,  while in fact one of the worse faces of fundamentalism in Islam is growing in our very cities,  sometimes in people born in our countries who weren't in a ghetto.

Now with Internet and social nets no frontier can be locked.  Anybody can become a radical under our very noses. 

 

[Jazzy Jan]

1 hour ago, karbatal said:

That's true.  And a great post jazzyjan!!!! 

And I think all here agree with that opinion. But now the way to fight against it is to block frontiers and forget about the refugees,  while in fact one of the worse faces of fundamentalism in Islam is growing in our very cities,  sometimes in people born in our countries who weren't in a ghetto.

Now with Internet and social nets no frontier can be locked.  Anybody can become a radical under our very noses. 

 

I agree Karbatal and that is what is so frightening.  Refugees needs our help and support in every way.  I am ashamed of how so many refugees who need help are treated like criminals and shown no compassion or understanding.   I am more baffled by people who become "radicalised"  and then choose to commit terrorism and want everyone to follow a cruel, sexist, racist and barbaric way of life that goes against everything humanity stands for.  I truly think these people that promote a fundamentalist way of living are evil and are looking for an excuse to justify their delight in spreading tyranny and hate. .  

That is why I think that people are too quick to try and "understand" them.  Especially when they are not even brought up with those views.  They don't represent refugees - in fact they represent what the refugees are fleeing from. They don't represent Islam or Christianity for example and are spitting in the face of religion being loving and tolerant which is what is now taught in every modern religion ( bar where the fundamentalists have taken over ) . It is so fucked up and awful that people who live in peace and freedom want people to go back to living like barbarians who torture others who don't follow their religion or beliefs.  

[MeakMaker]

8 hours ago, jazzyjan said:

Too many people have become too frightened of being labelled racist to correctly call out fundamentalists for the cowardly, freedom taking ideology they preach.  People need to say openly that there is a problem with fundamentalists and hard liners in ANY religion and be able to show they distinguish completely between the peaceful majority of Muslims compared to the Islamic fundamentalists and know they are completely different.  We should never accept any fundamentalist of any religion be it Islam or Christian - committing atrocious acts and using religious text to justify their barbaric, sexist, racist, bigoted views.

 This is not attacking Islam but people can't keep burying their heads in the sand at what damage fundamentalists do to all people of all beliefs - Muslims, Christians, atheists etc.    The same way people hate and do not accept the disgusting revolting views and actions of the Ku Klux Klan - which also have used Christianity to try and justify their disgusting, wrong, vile and abhorrent views. We don't accept them by any means and never should try and understand or justify them.   Same with how everyone needs to call out fundamentalists who only want to cause havoc, pain and use completely wrong interpretations of something they read in a book that was written over a thousand years ago. 

If people keep trying to justify and understand the actions of terrorists and fundamentalists,  they are not only somewhat accepting that we have to live with their views but are giving the right wing racist politicians exactly what they want - a platform to use that fear.  

This 100%.

One more reason for all people to stick together and stop seeing Islam as the enemy. If anything it's about time we all start working together fighting fundalism, prejudice and hate of any kind. 

And yes I do have to agree that there must be some Muslims who might feel vindicated by these attacks and although they have no part on terrorism they dont condemn it hard enough or they stay quiet but it's also true there are many westerns who have succumbed to the idea of nationalism, racism and supremacy. Trump and Brexit prove just that. 

We are living in scarey times indeed. 

[karbatal]

And absurd too.

Who would would know that no other than Arnold Schwarzenegger, who was considered so dumb, could say one of the most intelligent things today? He said Trump that carbon as energy kills more people than ISIS. It was an answer regarding Trump's intentions of bringing back carbon systems as energy, which would lead to dissaster.

the thing is that so many things are killing us, making our lives far worse, etc, and yet our atention is driven to terrorism. Scary and horrible as it is, and as dangerous because of the fear it brings, it's in fact very random.

Maybe I think so because for decades Spain suffered from terrorism and it was allover the news all day. And there were things far more important, as we Spaniards have discovered now that that we are in the middle of this horrible political crisis. 

[XXL]

Awful

[XXL]

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/26/intelligence-services-access-whatsapp-amber-rudd-westminster-attack-encrypted-messaging

WhatsApp must be accessible to authorities, says Amber Rudd

Critics say home secretary’s demand for access to encrypted messaging to thwart attacks is unrealistic and disproportionate

 

Amber Rudd has called for the police and intelligence agencies to be given access to WhatsApp and other encrypted messaging services to thwart future terror attacks, prompting opposition politicians and civil liberties groups to say her demand was unrealistic and disproportionate.

The home secretary said it was “completely unacceptable” that the government could not read messages protected by end-to-end encryption and said she had summoned leaders of technology companies to a meeting on Thursday 30 March to discuss what to do. Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday, Rudd refused to rule out passing new legislation to tackle encrypted messaging if she did not get what she wanted.

 

 

But she stressed it was her desire to persuade internet and social media companies to cooperate voluntarily with the government on this and also the posting of extremist material online. Rudd added: “It is completely unacceptable. There should be no place for terrorists to hide. “We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp, and there are plenty of others like that, don’t provide a secret place for terrorists to communicate with each other.”

She indicated that she hoped to be able to win them over without resorting to legislation. “These people have families, have children as well,” she said. “They should be on our side, and I’m going to try to win that argument.” Her call came after it emerged that police were investigating reports that Khalid Masood, the British extremist who killed four people outside parliament before he was shot dead, had used WhatsApp a few minutes before he launched his attack on Wednesday.

Police have said they believe Masood was essentially a “lone actor”, though counter-terrorism officers continue to search for more details about his background and associations. It emerged on Sunday that Masood had been on the radar of the intelligence community for potential links to extremism in 2010, after he returned from teaching English in Saudi Arabia.

A 30-year-old man was arrested in Birmingham on Sunday on suspicion of preparation of terrorist acts, making him the 12th person to be held over the incident. A 58-year-old man who was arrested in Birmingham on Thursday remained in police custody after his detention was extended under anti-terrorism legislation. All other people arrested in the aftermath of Masood’s attack have been released.

Critics questioned both the need for powers of the kind Rudd seemed to be demanding, and also the practicalities of trying to use UK domestic legislation to curb the activities of global internet companies largely based in the US.

 

 

More of that Snooper Chart in disguise on the way  I see    

[XXL]

No, Amber Rudd, You Still Shouldn’t Get To See My WhatsApp Messages

 

 

 

The Government has begun to make demands for access to messages on WhatsApp, after it emerged London terrorist Khalid Masood sent a message on the platform shortly before his attack on Westminster. But this isn’t just a sad case of political opportunism from Home Secretary Amber Rudd (after all, her boss Theresa May has been after WhatsApp and Snapchat since 2015) - it’s also a hopelessly ineffective tactic.

Masood may well have sent a message shortly before his attack. But even the security services had had access to WhatsApp, are we really to believe that they would have had the capacity to zero in on this one fateful drop in the ocean of messages constantly being sent and delivered, then to brief and dispatch officers to its exact location, all within the couple of minutes between message and attack? It’s impossible.

 

 

More likely they would like to look at his messages retrospectively - to learn more about his contacts in the terrorist world. This is a more reasonable aim. But still not one, I would argue, that’s worth giving up the rights the rest of us have to communicate in private. The Prime Minister and Home Secretary should be asking themselves what exactly it is they are trying to protect from these terrorists, if not the basic freedoms of their citizens?

They would likely argue that if we’ve done nothing wrong, we have nothing to hide - and should therefore be more than happy for the government to snoop in on our messages. (Honestly, if the Government were ever to tap into my WhatsApp chats, I’m sure they’d likely be bored to tears by the endless inane yammering.) But that’s not the point. Private citizens who have indeed done nothing wrong have the right to say and do as they please without interference by Amber Rudd or her friends at MI5.

And further - if we were to open up WhatsApp’s encryption to the security services, we’d be creating a back door for hackers everywhere and therefore likely leaving millions open to blackmail over perfectly legal messages (ever sent a saucy photo to your other half, for example?). This is an issue I’m not even sure Rudd fully understands.

And anyway, WhatsApp don’t have a monopoly on encryption. Surely if it became an open platform for MI5 to dip into whenever, the terrorists would just switch to messaging on a new app? It’s a game of cat and mouse that nobody will ever win. The fight against terror won’t be decided by phone encryption - it’s so much bigger and more complicated than that.

So while that war still rages, we need to remain clear-headed about where our red lines are. A huge media storm and slew of reactionary legislation sounds to me like exactly the sort of thing that would encourage more terrorists. If we allow this one evil attack to curtail the freedom of the rest of us, we’re effectively holding our hands up in defeat. After all the Government talk of carrying on and not letting this attack change anything - this kind of invasion into the privacy of the public would represent the exact opposite. Masood was an evil murderer - let’s not allow him to do any more damage.

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/tom-edwards/amber-rudd-whatsapp_b_15743290.html