Manchester Arena Bombing 22.05.17

[sammsky1]

It is, though.

I'm talking specifically about angry disenfranchised youths, who feel they've been a dealt a shit hand in life and want to lash out at the world. They're tailor made for jihadists to take under their wing and eventually encourage them to do something like this. All based around motivations and justifications which are unique to their specific faith.

You just don't see any other faith used as an outlet for violent or destructive tendencies from alienated youngsters. The closest I could think of would be white supremacists or people with their own unique and individual perverted visions of the world, like Anders Breivik. These are ideological, rather than religious motivations.

You just don't see "lone wolf" atrocities carried out in the name of any other faith. Not that I'm aware of, anyway. Can you think of any?

Not sure I can go 12 rounds on this anymore. London's parliament attack was only months ago and we all went through the full gamut of emotions and blame in that incident.

Every time an attack happens, I feel the same cycle of emotions and internal conflicts. And so I felt the same when the bomb went off in Manchester: my university city for 3 years and home of United, the football club I dearly love. It's a deep pain for the loss of innocents and a frustration that Islam is blamed for it. It feels like a festering wound, it gets re-opened on a regular and consistent basis and so it never heals.

And yet this time, I'm fed up with the empty rhetoric we get from Western politicians and leaders. They claim the terrorists will never win, and yet in the same breath, make contradictory and inflammatory foreign policy and further erode our civil liberties. Theresa May says they will never win nor change our way of life, and yet minutes later elevates the security threat to code red, flooding out streets with guns and soldiers. Her partner in hypocrisy and best friend, the US president calls terrorists 'losers', whilst he enjoys the trapping of a full royal Saudi welcome.

If this is ever to be solved, western politicians and the voters who give them power need recognise their key role in this. Ever since oil was discovered in the middle east, US/UK armies have developed relationships with the Al Saud family: guardians of the Wahabi doctrine: the most corrupted form of Islam which has inspired ISIS and many western bombing terrorists. Western politicians have played significant roles in murderous regime change and not stayed around long enough or invested enough $ to rebuild these leaderless states. Our politicians have approved military acts that have killed millions of innocent Arab civilians, including 100,000s of defenceless women and children. Those events happen on such a regular basis, we don't even know they occur.

The west provides context for ideological jihadists and fails to properly integrate displaced refugees and immigrants from the regions they destabilise or colonially subjugate. This disenfranchised youth you talk about are largely creations of the west.

I don't think it's surprising that some people who have emotional ties to this region breakdown, and when they do, are indoctrinated by jihadists into becoming murderous suicide bombers. Blame Islam all you like, I suspect the core issue is closer to home. It seems to me that this is the ball game.

It's difficult because it will require the reversal of nearly 100 years of western foreign policy thinking, it would require a fair and just solution to the crimes committed aginst Palestinian people and it would require a fairer global distribution of oil which may lower the standards of living in the west.

I can't stand any of it: hypocrisy from western powers though I'm stuck with my British identity and reactionary terrorism from British-born maniacs. Best would be to lock them all up in a cage ring and charge for cable viewing. It seems to me that unless all of these things are addressed, then terrorism against anyone and anytime is the price that has to be paid.

Condolences and sincere regret to those who affected by the killings in Manchester.

 

[2cents]

If hugely superior Muslim armies invaded, bombed and occupied Christian countries over a 5 decade period leaving a catalogue of ruined lives and cities we might see some.

That has actually basically happened, in South Sudan for example.

I don't know. It's a chicken/egg type argument, but generally speaking, religion tends to adapt to the state rather than the other way around. The moral/ethical values of the West have shaped doctrine more than doctrine has shaped those values. Which is why when you see the Westboro Baptist Church being the most hated organisation in America, it's ironic, because everything they do and say has a certain legitimacy in Old Testament doctrine. That's where you see the divergence between moral norms and doctrinal values. For churches to be legitimate in the West, they've had to exclude those parts of doctrine which exclude or condemn large parts of society. See Pope Francis for further reference.

The temporal drives the spiritual in the West, that much I'm fairly confident of. I'd also argue that it's been that way since at least the Industrial Revolution.

See, I'm just not convinced that the temporal and spiritual can be divided off into different categories so easily.

 

[rcoobc]

You just don't see "lone wolf" atrocities carried out in the name of any other faith. Not that I'm aware of, anyway. Can you think of any?

Anders Breivik said he was "100% a Christian"

Then renounced it.

 

[moses]

Well colonialism has left an unpleasant legacy all over the world, affecting people of many different faiths. Yet here we are, with one specific faith used as justification for atrocities like this again and again and again.

You're right, of course, that the west is reaping the whirlwind of heavy-handed foreign policy in the region, motivated by the need to secure a steady supply of oil. I completely agree with that. I also think it's possible that the role certain faiths have in preventing a peaceful resolution is a distinct issue which needs discussion and consideration in its own right. All the more so when you see the way it can be used as a basis for seriously unpleasant human rights abuses, including endemic misogny and homophobia. Not sure any of that can be blamed on Western foreign policy tbf.

Im not blaming the atrocities on western foreign policy. It's a 50 year old armed conflict and our superior armies leave this as a viable tool.

I'm saying it's circumstantial and if christians we're living in ruined cities and the hand of another religion we might use anything at our disposal.

I think it's despicable but it's not happening in a vacuum.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Anders Breivik said he was "100% a Christian"

But he didn't find justifications for his actions based upon that faith. Not that I'm aware of.

 

[JustAFan]

Anders Breivik said he was "100% a Christian"

Had some attacks on Abortion clinics in the US done by right wing Christian nutters. While not lone wolves and not religious, you have some pretty radical members of environmental groups who have committed acts of violence before.

 

[rcoobc]

But he didn't find justifications for his actions based upon that faith. Not that I'm aware of.

No. I was going to add and change that actually. He even admitted he has never really been a Christian.

 

[2cents]

But he didn't find justifications for his actions based upon that faith. Not that I'm aware of.

He came up with a rather novel ideological justification probably best described as "Western Supremacism" or something like that. There was certainly an element of Christian rhetoric and imagery which he appealed to (he praised the Crusades for example, and saw his own actions in their image). But his basic worldview was the Clash of Civilizations thesis.

 

[Rado_N]

But he didn't find justifications for his actions based upon that faith. Not that I'm aware of.

What about the Planned Parenthood attacks in the US?

 

[moses]

That has actually basically happened, in South Sudan for example.

.

Ok, firstly I don't see Sudan and the almost continuous 50 year conflict in the ME as comparable, abs secondly I don't know enough about Sudan to back my first point up.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

See, I'm just not convinced that the temporal and spiritual can be divided off into different categories so easily.

Well, the way I view it is like this. Temporal authority generally served at the behest of spiritual approval up until Luther and English Reformation. Then came the Enlightenment and the complete overthrow of the spiritual by the temporal in France (by violent revolution). The same process happened in England, but gradually, and through industrial revolution rather than any bloody conflict. Metaphysics became less and less valued in a landscape where empiricism was vital for growth. Over a long period of time, the dominant force was no longer the church or doctrine. It became secondary. The West is almost entirely secular, and for a church of any denomination to work here, it has to adapt to cultural values or else it's on the margins of society as taboo, tolerated only as a principal of free speech (WBC, for example).

When the West invades countries, it might do so with liberalizing values, but that only ever serves as the propagandist arm of temporal force. The liberalism is in itself the proselytism of bygone days under a new name. I think the two are certainly distinct in the West. The spiritual would have been extinct if not for the question of morality and theology being intertwined in some people's minds. Remove that last hurdle and religion no longer serves a purpose.

 

[sammsky1]

Well, the way I view it is like this. Temporal authority generally served at the behest of spiritual approval up until Luther and English Reformation. Then came the Enlightenment and the complete overthrow of the spiritual by the temporal in France (by violent revolution). The same process happened in England, but gradually, and through industrial revolution rather than any bloody conflict. Metaphysics became less and less valued in a landscape where empiricism was vital for growth. Over a long period of time, the dominant force was no longer the church or doctrine. It became secondary. The West is almost entirely secular, and for a church of any denomination to work here, it has to adapt to cultural values or else it's on the margins of society as taboo, tolerated only as a principal of free speech (WBC, for example).

When the West invades countries, it might do so with liberalizing values, but that only ever serves as the propagandist arm of temporal force. The liberalism is in itself the proselytism of bygone days under a new name. I think the two are certainly distinct in the West. The spiritual would have been extinct if not for the question of morality and theology being intertwined in some people's minds. Remove that last hurdle and religion no longer serves a purpose.

And yet a quite opposite phenomenon has occurred outside the west, especially in Islamic-centric civilisations.

A problem occurs when the west thinks its solutions are superior to those from the East and tries to impose those beliefs onto other sovereign nations.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Im not blaming the atrocities on western foreign policy. It's a 50 year old armed conflict and our superior armies leave this as a viable tool.

I'm saying it's circumstantial and if christians we're living in ruined cities and the hand of another religion we might use anything at our disposal.

I think it's despicable but it's not happening in a vacuum.

Yeah, ok, understood. And I agree with you. To a point. I'm not sure that a desire for jihad (or the equivalent) could ever arise out of a christian country, no matter how persecuted they feel but in the absence of any concrete examples that's just speculation on my part.

 

[Raoul]

 

[VidaRed]

And yet this time, I'm fed up with the empty rhetoric we get from Western politicians and leaders. They claim the terrorists will never win, and yet in the same breath, make contradictory and inflammatory foreign policy and further erode our civil liberties. Theresa May says they will never win nor change our way of life, and yet minutes later elevates the security threat to code red, flooding out streets with guns and soldiers. Her partner in hypocrisy and best friend, the US president calls terrorists 'losers, whilst he enjoys the trapping of a full royal Suadi welcome.

If this is ever to be solved, western politicians and the voters who give them power need recognise their key role in this. Ever since oil was discovered in the middle east, US/UK armies have developed relationships with the Al Saud family: guardians of the Wahabi doctrine: the most corrupted form of Islam which has inspired ISIS and many western bombing terrorists. Western politicians have played significant roles in murderous regime change and not stayed around long enough or invested enough $ to rebuild these leaderless states. Our politicians have approved military acts that have killed millions of innocent Arab civilians, including 100,000s of defenceless women and children. Those events happen on such a regular basis, we don't even know they occur.

The elephant in the room that no one is willing to acknowledge! Wahabi scum, the allies of the liberal west, who could have thought of this.

by the way, you should read about the beginning of the al-saud dominance and there merger with wahabis. The british used the looted wealth from India and propped up saudi-wahabi clan financially and militarily to rebel against the ottoman empire.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

A problem occurs when the west thinks its solutions are superior to those from the East and tries to impose those beliefs onto other sovereign nations.

I don't disagree. I'm against nearly every intervention the West has made in the ME. Mainly because there have been ulterior motives, but also because morality is relative and our way isn't the only way. So, even if the liberalizing mission was all there was to it, I'd still have been against it. It's simple ethnocentrism. We shouldn't view ourselves as moral standards from which any deviation is a crime.

I'm speaking solely in imperialist terms here. It's fine to condemn people, but to do so as a method of enforcing regime change is a different matter.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

I've read that the intelligence/security forces monitor up to 3500 people at any given time. That's quite a lot of potential terrorists, but if one of those people makes a trip to one of these countries, I can't help think that a lot of red flags should have been raised.

 

[2cents]

Ok, firstly I don't see Sudan and the almost continuous 50 year conflict in the ME as comparable, abs secondly I don't know enough about Sudan to back my first point up.

I'm not sure what you mean by "continuous 50 year conflict in the ME" but they are comparable in terms of the point being made - we haven't seen South Sudanese Christians blowing themselves up in downtown Khartoum in revenge for the horrors the north inflicted on them for a number of decades. Likewise we didn't see Vietnamese or Cambodians blowing up schoolgirls in Western countries in revenge for what the US military and its allies got up to in Indochina during the 60s and 70s.

The liberalism is in itself the proselytism of bygone days under a new name. I think the two are certainly distinct in the West. The spiritual would have been extinct if not for the question of morality and theology being intertwined in some people's minds. Remove that last hurdle and religion no longer serves a purpose.

The bolded is one of the things I was getting at.

A problem occurs when the west thinks its solutions are superior to those from the East and tries to impose those beliefs onto other sovereign nations.

I don't disagree. I'm against nearly every intervention the West has made in the ME. Mainly because there have been ulterior motives, but also because morality is relative and our way isn't the only way. So, even if the liberalizing mission was all there was to it, I'd still have been against it. It's simple ethnocentrism. We shouldn't view ourselves as moral standards from which any deviation is a crime.

I'm speaking solely in imperialist terms here. It's fine to condemn people, but to do so as a method of enforcing regime change is a different matter.

I tend to agree. Here's a quote I like:

"the European wish to make the world in its own image is not necessarily to be disparaged as ungenerous. If one believes oneself to be the source of salvation, the wish to make others reflect oneself is not unbenign, however terrible the practices by which this desire is put into effect."

I think this applies equally to Islam and its own world mission. And hence, the apparent conflict between 'the West' and 'Islam' is due as much to what makes them similar - i.e. their universal impulse - as to what distinguishes them from each other.

 

[moses]

Not sure I can go 12 rounds on this anymore. London's parliament attack was only months ago and we all went through the full gamut of emotions and blame in that incident.

Every time an attack happens, I feel the same cycle of emotions and internal conflicts. And so I felt the same when the bomb went off in Manchester: my university city for 3 years and home of United, the football club I dearly love. It's a deep pain for the loss of innocents and a frustration that Islam is blamed for it. It feels like a festering wound, it gets re-opened on a regular and consistent basis and so it never heals.

And yet this time, I'm fed up with the empty rhetoric we get from Western politicians and leaders. They claim the terrorists will never win, and yet in the same breath, make contradictory and inflammatory foreign policy and further erode our civil liberties. Theresa May says they will never win nor change our way of life, and yet minutes later elevates the security threat to code red, flooding out streets with guns and soldiers. Her partner in hypocrisy and best friend, the US president calls terrorists 'losers, whilst he enjoys the trapping of a full royal Suadi welcome.

If this is ever to be solved, western politicians and the voters who give them power need recognise their key role in this. Ever since oil was discovered in the middle east, US/UK armies have developed relationships with the Al Saud family: guardians of the Wahabi doctrine: the most corrupted form of Islam which has inspired ISIS and many western bombing terrorists. Western politicians have played significant roles in murderous regime change and not stayed around long enough or invested enough $ to rebuild these leaderless states. Our politicians have approved military acts that have killed millions of innocent Arab civilians, including 100,000s of defenceless women and children. Those events happen on such a regular basis, we don't even know they occur.

The west provides context for ideological jihadists and fails to properly integrate displaced refugees and immigrants from the regions they destabilise or colonially subjugate. This disenfranchised youth you talk about are largely creations of the west.

I don't think it's surprising that some people who have emotional ties to this region breakdown, and when they do, are indoctrinated by jihadists into becoming murderous suicide bombers. Blame Islam all you like, I suspect the core issue is closer to home. It seems to me that this is the ball game.

It's difficult because it will require the reversal of nearly 100 years of western foreign policy thinking, it would require a fair and just solution to the crimes committed aginst Palestinian people and it would require a fairer global distribution of oil which may lower the standards of living in the west.

I can't stand any of it: hypocrisy from western powers though I'm stuck with my British identity and reactionary terrorism from British-born maniacs. Best would be to lock them all up in a cage ring and charge for cable viewing. It seems to me that unless all of these things are addressed, then terrorism against anyone and anytime is the price that has to be paid.

Condolences and sincere regret to those who affected by the killings in Manchester.

Indeed.

 

[Kentonio]

I've read that the intelligence/security forces monitor up to 3500 people at any given time. That's quite a lot of potential terrorists, but if one of those people makes a trip to one of these countries, I can't help think that a lot of red flags should have been raised.

There's big question marks though over whether anyone would actually know they'd been at the time. It's usually people flying to safe countries nearby and then slipping across into these places from what I understand, not just heading to Heathrow and jumping on a plane to Syria.

 

[Fearless]

I don't disagree. I'm against nearly every intervention the West has made in the ME. Mainly because there have been ulterior motives, but also because morality is relative and our way isn't the only way. So, even if the liberalizing mission was all there was to it, I'd still have been against it. It's simple ethnocentrism. We shouldn't view ourselves as moral standards from which any deviation is a crime.

I'm speaking solely in imperialist terms here. It's fine to condemn people, but to do so as a method of enforcing regime change is a different matter.

Western values are the most superior, most evolved on the planet. If anything, the allowed divergence of opinion on this thread alone proves that.

 

[2mufc0]

I've read that the intelligence/security forces monitor up to 3500 people at any given time. That's quite a lot of potential terrorists, but if one of those people makes a trip to one of these countries, I can't help think that a lot of red flags should have been raised.

Syria should definitely raise suspicion, but in this case the guy's family was from Lybia and has legitimate reasons to be there.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Still can't believe they deliberately went after our daughters. Young innocents.

I watched this the other day. Nothing really surprises me.

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

Western values are the most superior, most evolved on the planet. If anything, the allowed divergence of opinion on this thread alone proves that.

Even if that were true, how successful do you think we'll be by imposing those values exogenously by force? If ours is the superior mode, then it won't take long for others to catch on. Revolutions have to happen from within. When it comes from without, it breeds hatred and resentment. We can't go around regime changing because we consider their values antiquated.

It's a dangerous view to take that we're more evolved and superior, though. That justifies any action you wish to name.

 

[Fearless]

Even if that were true, how successful do you think we'll be by imposing those values exogenously by force? If ours is the superior mode, then it won't take long for others to catch on. Revolutions have to happen from within. When it comes from without, it breeds hatred and resentment. We can't go around regime changing because we consider their values antiquated.

It's a dangerous view to take that we're more evolved and superior, though. That justifies any action you wish to name.

Like winning WW2 for example.

 

[Kentonio]

Western values are the most superior, most evolved on the planet. If anything, the allowed divergence of opinion on this thread alone proves that.

There aren't really many 'western values'. There are considerable differences in values between different western nations and even different regions of those nations. Values in Alabama are very little like those in Norway for instance, and Hungary has little value wise in common with say Holland.

 

[JustAFan]

Like winning WW2 for example.

Well WW2 in Europe was a bunch of Western Nations fighting other Western Nations.....which side had the superior moral values again, the Westerners or the Westerners?

 

[Mciahel Goodman]

Like winning WW2 for example.

Or Hitler's final solution, which arose from the same sense of moral/ethical and racial superiority. It's just dangerous all round.

 

[Red Defence]

The father of the alleged Manchester bomber has said his son is innocent, according to a report.

Ramadan Abedi is understood to have denied his son is linked to extremist militants or the suicide bombing that killed 22 people.

Mr Abedi said he spoke to his 22-year-old son, Salman Abedi, five days ago and he was getting ready to visit Saudi Arabia and sounded "normal”, Associated Press (AP) reported.

From the Independent

Sadly familiar response.....my son is innocent says his father.

 

[Fearless]

Or Hitler's final solution, which arose from the same sense of moral/ethical and racial superiority. It's just dangerous all round.

Well thank G-d the superior side one.

 

[SteveJ]

Well WW2 in Europe was a bunch of Western Nations fighting other Western Nations.....which side had the superior moral values again, the Westerners or the Westerners?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Doctors speak of "worst night-shift" after Manchester atrocity 22 24/05/2017
Doctors in Manchester have told how hospitals responded to the bombing atrocity that claimed the lives of at least 22 pop concert-goers.

One emergency specialist described it as the "very worst nightshift" he had ever worked.

The accounts told how teams and hospitals worked together to provide the best care for patients of all ages admitted with horrific injuries.

Eye-witness reports confirmed that the suicide bomber used a nail-bomb type device, describing injuries caused by dozens of metal projectiles.

The youngest of the small number of identified victims last night was a girl, aged eight, while 12 seriously injured children were known to be under treatment at the Manchester Children's Hospital.

The hospital transferred other trauma patients to the Alder Hey children's hospital in Liverpool - where a number of victims with less serious injuries had attended for treatment.

Consultant paediatrician Dr Sharmila Gopisetta, from Manchester Children's Hospital, wrote on Facebook: “Very tired, but going home proud. Brilliant teamwork, as soon as situation demanded, staff were in. Help from NWTs [north-west trusts], Alder Hey. Teams pulled together, worked as one team.

“We had technicians, pharmacists, CSWs, registrars, consultants, management, everyone. Coming in at odd hour and standing united!

"Offers to help from around the country!!! Proud to be part of this awesome team. Proud to be a part of RMCH and I am a proud NHS doctor!”

The Manchester Royal Infirmary emergency medicine specialist, identified only as Tariq, tweeted: “After what can only be described as the very worst nightshift I’ve ever worked, I’m honoured to say that I work alongside some absolute heroes.

"We’ve faced adversity, the very lows of society and come together, and made a difference. To all my colleagues in Green, Blue and Red … you are all amazing."

Consultant anaesthetist Dr David McCarthy wrote on Facebook about being on-call at the Manchester Royal Infirmary as the victims arrived.

He said: "An atrocity was carried out which has had an unmeasurable impact on countless lives. Many casualties were bought to our department. Once an incident had been declared dozens upon dozens attended to help.

"The response from my colleagues represented everything great about this country. Compassion. Empathy. Tireless self-sacrifice and above all else profound unity. Staff from almost every imaginable background, race and religion came together and put their all into caring for those wounded."

He added: "I was proud to be a small part of such a dedicated team, every bit as diverse as our community. I know that the people of the UK will not allow the actions of individuals to divide our society. I know that actions, such as those displayed by NHS staff across Manchester last night, will always demonstrate that together we are stronger.

"My profound thanks to those who helped throughout the night and to those who attended in large numbers to continue our efforts into what will be a difficult day. My deepest sympathies to those who have lost loved ones. I sincerely hope you have the support of those around you."

The NHS in Manchester moved its focus to support for the hundreds of children and adults facing mental trauma from their experience of the atrocity.

In a statement setting out what to expect and how to get help, NHS organisations warned: "The emotional effects will be felt by survivors, bereaved families, friends, emergency services, health care workers and the general public. If you witnessed or lost someone in the attack you will most certainly have a strong reaction.

"Reactions are likely to be strongest in those closest to the incident, who directly witnessed the aftermath and who were involved in the immediate care of victims."

NHS Blood and Transplant issued a plea to the public to sign up as donors - but said there was no immediate shortage of blood.

Some social media posts, widely shared, had urged the public to queue at hospitals to give blood.

The organisation's director of blood donation Mike Stredder said: "Thank you for thinking of giving blood at this time. We do have all the blood required for hospital patients at the present time.

"If you have an appointment to give blood in the next few days, please do your best to keep it, particularly if you are blood group O negative."

Goes without saying that these people who worked through the night to try and save lives were of many different faiths, including many muslims.

 

[Silva]

 

[Jaxdan]

Haven't been to old trafford this season, never got the chance with work and things, but the way mates who go describe it, its probably the safest building in the city when a match is on.

Inside the stadium yes. But this latest attack used different methodology. The throngs of people leaving a venue, and the security net it provides.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Took me a second viewing to see at least one asian looking dude joining in the singing. Which took the sting out of it. Until then it was uncomfortably reminiscent of Ingerland fans and their anti-IRA chants.

 

[Rado_N]

Couldn't get to the vigil last night so figured I'd have a walk through Albert's Square just now, there's feck all there aside from media vans and police.

I did see John Snow in St Peter's though.

 

[manufanatic]

Reading several posts on this and it is clear that Europe is already lost. People blaming colonialism for today's terrorism or oil and the west being involved in the Middle East but somehow forgetting the stating goal of Islam is to rule the world with the sword or As imams in Europe and in Manchester have being saying for decades they are going to breed out the native population and you lot still want accceptance of this lunacy. Most in England support hate speech laws when someone calls out this awful religion but all speech should be protected England Canada Australia Germany France etc have all gone down this path changing western values because it might offend Muslims. When 1/3 of Muslims in your country will not report someone who is about to kill innocents and your answer is still have something to say on Twitter or change your social media supporting the good Muslims? Other say it is because of poverty and while in Syria that might be a factor it wasn't here or in Boston or in Orlando this individuals had the western experience and the idiotic religion of Islam still compelled them to kill. Western men for hundreds of years have died in the millions defending Europe from Islam. Unfortunately today's men with there nihilism and narcissism are still sleeping. 1400 girls and boys raped in England by Muslim gangs hundred women are girls groped and raped in Germany and Sweden numerous attacks in Europe and you are still giving them excuses while claiming the west needs to be responsible for what we have done in the Middle East. Let's be clear most liberal leaning men have been walking around with guilt because apparently it is only the west and in particular white men who are to blame. Schools in the west, media in the west and nearly all of left leaning politics has this view. When you continually shame and blame men for decades this is the result and wether you like the term **** it is abundantly clear that it is true. Either way in the end Europe is killing itself without a real awaking your kids or grandkids will be governed under a theocracy Islamic state.

 

[moses]

Goes without saying that these people who worked through the night to try and save lives were of many different faiths, including many muslims.

Must have been mental. So many people are going to need a lot of post trauma counselling for a long time.

 

[rcoobc]

Reading several posts on this and it is clear that Europe is already lost. People blaming colonialism for today's terrorism or oil and the west being involved in the Middle East but somehow forgetting the stating goal of Islam is to rule the world with the sword or As imams in Europe and in Manchester have being saying for decades they are going to breed out the native population and you lot still want accceptance of this lunacy. Most in England support hate speech laws when someone calls out this awful religion but all speech should be protected England Canada Australia Germany France etc have all gone down this path changing western values because it might offend Muslims. When 1/3 of Muslims in your country will not report someone who is about to kill innocents and your answer is still have something to say on Twitter or change your social media supporting the good Muslims? Other say it is because of poverty and while in Syria that might be a factor it wasn't here or in Boston or in Orlando this individuals had the western experience and the idiotic religion of Islam still compelled them to kill. Western men for hundreds of years have died in the millions defending Europe from Islam. Unfortunately today's men with there nihilism and narcissism are still sleeping. 1400 girls and boys raped in England by Muslim gangs hundred women are girls groped and raped in Germany and Sweden numerous attacks in Europe and you are still giving them excuses while claiming the west needs to be responsible for what we have done in the Middle East. Let's be clear most liberal leaning men have been walking around with guilt because apparently it is only the west and in particular white men who are to blame. Schools in the west, media in the west and nearly all of left leaning politics has this view. When you continually shame and blame men for decades this is the result and wether you like the term **** it is abundantly clear that it is true. Either way in the end Europe is killing itself without a real awaking your kids or grandkids will be governed under a theocracy Islamic state.

Ignore

 

[Nogbadthebad]

Inside the stadium yes. But this latest attack used different methodology. The throngs of people leaving a venue, and the security net it provides.

I imagine what will happen is that they will set up a cordon further out from the ground when its time to leave to control the ability of people to get near the biggest groups. The attack happened simply because the foyer of the arena is completely open to the public.