British Soldier Killed by Muslim Terrorists in London

lolwhassup said:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4938197/shooting-in-woolwich-london.html

My condolences to the family of the soldier. Glad to see the terrorists got shot, As they all should. Too bad they weren't shot dead.
Click to expand...

I am somewhat befuddled by this story:
1) basically some guy is attacked by knife wielding lunatics and killed, one of the attackers who is still armed then gives an interview to news reporters on hand before being shot by police?

2) What makes these guys terrorists and not murderers? It concerns me that we are turning every criminal act into an act of terrorism which effectively circumvents civil justice.

3) Do we actually know the guy killed was a soldier, he starts out the story as a one and then it becomes "the man believed to be a soldier" and other sites seem just as wishy washy and why does the victims profession matter so much surely it would still be just as heinous a crime if the victim was a Glasgow dishwasher.
 
Last edited:
The Islamists have long threatened to kidnap a Brit soldier and kill him, then hacking off his head ' like a pig' and hoisting it on a pole.

That is why the identity of the victim is significant.

Fusilier Lee Rigby 25, m/c gunner and drummer, described by his W011 as a brave warrior and a smiler.

RIP SOLDIER.


.
 
Last edited:
My BIL was in from the 70s to the early 90s I think.
Can't get hold of him, to find out more.
 
I fully realise that there are other causative factors, but I hate the fact that Political Correctness has taken over the legal system in many countries, and although Police and Intelligence services are aware of these people they can't do anything until they make the first move, by which time the damage is done.
 
MontyB said:
I am somewhat befuddled by this story:
1) basically some guy is attacked by knife wielding lunatics and killed, one of the attackers who is still armed then gives an interview to news reporters on hand before being shot by police?

2) What makes these guys terrorists and not murderers? It concerns me that we are turning every criminal act into an act of terrorism which effectively circumvents civil justice.

3) Do we actually know the guy killed was a soldier, he starts out the story as a one and then it becomes "the man believed to be a soldier" and other sites seem just as wishy washy and why does the victims profession matter so much surely it would still be just as heinous a crime if the victim was a Glasgow dishwasher.
Click to expand...

1) He was spouting his BS to any passer by with a camera phone who wanted to be the first vain sicko to post the footage on youtube, not a news crew

2) Because the person (to my knowledge so far) was unknown to them personally, their aim was to commit a murder in a public place, in front of witnesses and in the most brutal and sadistic fashion possible for the express purpose of instilling fear & terror in the community. Personally I'd say this would be classed as terrorism in its truest form

3) As Del Boy stated, the victim was Fusilier Lee Rigby

The last I'd heard was they had captured two more individuals in relation to the murder, a male and a female
 
Mr KillKill said:
1) He was spouting his BS to any passer by with a camera phone who wanted to be the first vain sicko to post the footage on youtube, not a news crew
Click to expand...

Even so you don't find that a little bit odd for a "terrorist"?
Most would either commit the act and then get the hell out of dodge or keep hacking and slashing with the aim to causing more damage not stand around posing for camera's.

2) Because the person (to my knowledge so far) was unknown to them personally, their aim was to commit a murder in a public place, in front of witnesses and in the most brutal and sadistic fashion possible for the express purpose of instilling fear & terror in the community. Personally I'd say this would be classed as terrorism in its truest form
Click to expand...
But arent most murders?
I have yet to see a case of friendly, pleasant murder.
As far as instilling fear goes I cant see how that can apply when a woman went up and talked to them straight afterwards and they spoke back so clearly they were neither seen as a threat nor implied a threat immediately after the incident.

3) As Del Boy stated, the victim was Fusilier Lee Rigby
The last I'd heard was they had captured two more individuals in relation to the murder, a male and a female
Click to expand...
Indeed he was a soldier but I stand by the argument that it should not matter what his profession was the crime should be regarded no less heinous had he been a homeless vagrant.

Do understand that I am not commenting on what should be done to these people nor mitigating what they have done and as far as I am concerned they can bring back the death penalty to cover cases like this but it is my opinion that this should be regarded as a civil crime and not terrorism (unless of course new evidence comes to light to change that view).
 
Last edited:
As it happens, our Muslim communities have come down very heavily in comdemnation of this diabolical act. They referred to them as 'scumbags'.
 
There are some crimes for which the death penalty is just too damned easy.

This is probably the best example of that, which I have seen so far.
 
senojekips said:
There are some crimes for which the death penalty is just too damned easy.

This is probably the best example of that, which I have seen so far.
Click to expand...

Yes but I am a huge believer that while the death penalty does not stop murder it does stop re-offending, I am not into slow lingering deaths for the sake of revenge I just believe that if you are going to have a death penalty make it quick clean, cheap (I like firing squads myself) and get on with life.
 
MontyB said:
Even so you don't find that a little bit odd for a "terrorist"?
Most would either commit the act and then get the hell out of dodge or keep hacking and slashing with the aim to causing more damage not stand around posing for camera's.

But arent most murders?
I have yet to see a case of friendly, pleasant murder.
As far as instilling fear goes I cant see how that can apply when a woman went up and talked to them straight afterwards and they spoke back so clearly they were neither seen as a threat nor implied a threat immediately after the incident.

Indeed he was a soldier but I stand by the argument that it should not matter what his profession was the crime should be regarded no less heinous had he been a homeless vagrant.

Do understand that I am not commenting on what should be done to these people nor mitigating what they have done and as far as I am concerned they can bring back the death penalty to cover cases like this but it is my opinion that this should be regarded as a civil crime and not terrorism (unless of course new evidence comes to light to change that view).
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it odd if they were deliberately trying to get caught or martyr themselves in a hail of Police bullets, which seemed to be what they were trying to do. They were there to make a point and by simply killing him and running, it might have been days before England realized the true reason behind the murder. But by standing around and speaking to passers by and allowing themselves to be filmed, within 24hrs the world has been exposed to this murder as well as the reason. They have received maximum coverage which was their main goal and all they had to do was kill one person in the most horrific way possible - maximum result for minimum effort - sometimes this is worse than a killing spree.

I still stand by my choice that its a terrorism related matter simply because the sole purpose of the murder was to install fear and intimidation within community. Had they only been interested in murder and not interested in the public's reaction to it then yes I would have agreed that it was nothing more than murder

And yes you're totally right that it shouldn't matter whether or not he was a soldier but the fact remains that when its reported that a murder has occurred outside military barracks, the first question that will be raised is if military personnel involved.
 
senojekips said:
There are some crimes for which the death penalty is just too damned easy.

This is probably the best example of that, which I have seen so far.
Click to expand...


Yes I agree. Some time ago, perhaps on this forum, I noted sentiment I had not seen before. Their wish was for a special category for certain crimes such as this; The equivalent of a life sentence, served in full, followed by the death penalty.
 
lolwhassup said:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4938197/shooting-in-woolwich-london.html
Click to expand...

RIP Soldier. Thoughts go out to comrades, friends and family.

lolwhassup said:
Glad to see the terrorists got shot, As they all should. Too bad they weren't shot dead.
Click to expand...

To clarify, the were shot because they ran at police officers with their weapons. They weren't shot because they were terrorists.

I'd rather they weren't shot dead. They are more valuable alive and shooting them dead would have made them "martyrs".

Tankboy said:
That is weird,my brother in law was in them too.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you pair are long lost cousins. :lol:
 
Fair punishment: Toss them in a pen with a 600 lb over sexed boar hog, baste em good with sow in heat scent. Or second choice, in a cell with the guys from "Deliverance", heavy on the sow in heat scent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top