Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Terrorist Murder In London Could Revive Snooper's Charter

timothy posted about a year ago | from the transparent-power-grab dept.

United Kingdom 307

judgecorp writes "Supporters of the Communications Data Bill (also known as the Snooper's Charter) have lost no time in calling for the Bill to be revived, in response to yesterday's brutal murder of a soldier on the streets of Woolwich, South London. The Bill would have allowed monitoring of all online communications — including who people contact and what websites they visit — but was shelved after Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg opposed it, effectively splitting Britain's coalition government on the issue. Now the fear of new terrorism could rekindle support, based on the argument that even 'lone wolf' attackers use the Internet."

cancel ×

307 comments

Fear Mongering (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802149)

Perhaps I missed it, but how was this murder terrorism?

Re:Fear Mongering (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802191)

It was carried out to make a political statement by instilling fear. Are you dense?

Re:Fear Mongering (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802411)

Because that area is rife with muslim hatred against everyone else and this has been brewing for a long time. The culprits also claimed it was a reaction to the wars being waged in their lands by us Westerners. In summary:

1. religious based attack
2. muslims killing non-muslim
3. stated reason

Perhaps if the West wasn't murdering civilians with their drones on a near daily basis, these two muslims might not have been so angry?

Re:Fear Mongering (-1, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | about a year ago | (#43802501)

Fuck off. We will never given in to threats and blackmail by Muslims.

Just fuck off.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802689)

They say the same thing.

Except for the Muslim part, they use 'US lackey'.

Re:Fear Mongering (-1, Troll)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year ago | (#43803013)

Fair enough. That means we have to kill them _all_.

Re:Fear Mongering (-1, Troll)

benjfowler (239527) | about a year ago | (#43802685)

Anyway, the scum getting their arses blown off richly deserve their Hellfire enemas. If they take up arms against us, call us kafirs, attack us in our cities, invade and colonise our countries, abuse our hospitality, and impose their inferior culture and customs on our societies, then they deserve to be blown to pieces.

And I don't buy your stupid Muslim "ummah" fantasy. Where's your precious fucking Ummah, when people are starving in Somalia and Darfur? What about the Palestinians? Don't lift a fucking finger, except to use it to attack, bully and guilt trip Jews and white people. You have NO solidarity, but pretend to do so when it is convenient.

You are terrible people, who turn your faith on and off like a light bulb. You are truly vile, disgusting creatures.

Re:Fear Mongering (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802817)

Don't worry for the rest of us, muslims are only continuing to motivate and encourage the rest of the world.

It might be hypothetical since it won't be a hierarchical decision but here's the question: when killing all muslims should we also kill all who appeased them? What's the point of sparing apologists who wouldn't understand and recognize reality even during their last gasps of consciousness when either muslims or (possibly) the rest of us kill them?

I'm asking to point out something that a lot of people (and particularly muslims) seem totally oblivious to: for the time being the only thing that prevents a genocide of all muslims is western society itself. As they continue to attack it they seal their fate.

Re:Fear Mongering (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802891)

Because that area is rife with muslim hatred against everyone else and this has been brewing for a long time. The culprits also claimed it was a reaction to the wars being waged in their lands by us Westerners. In summary:

1. religious based attack
2. muslims killing non-muslim
3. stated reason

Perhaps if the West wasn't murdering civilians with their drones on a near daily basis, these two muslims might not have been so angry?

Wait a minute... let us look at WHY the west is hunting these people with drones... oh... now it makes sense, you know the whole terrorism thing... civilian casualties are regrettable but the real targets are worth killing.

Re:Fear Mongering (5, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#43802431)

Dale Cregan shot and threw grenades at killing two police officers last year.

Raul Moat before that hunted for and shot a police officer in the face after having just shot two other people and said he was starting a war with the police.

Both of these were making political statements by attempting to instil fear, neither was classed as a terrorist incident.

The only difference this time is that the perpetrators identified as muslim. The fact they were talking to and not harming everyone else that was around afterwards means they were arguably less effective at instilling fear than people like Dale Cregan was, so if this was terrorism why were other such incidents not?

More realistically these seemed like a pair of London gangbangers desperate for a cause which they could use as an excuse to commit murder. They were not your usual middle eastern jihadis, they even quoted from the Christian bible which shows how poor their association with the jihadi ideology actually was.

We'd be better off dealing with London's gang problem once and for all (the one that triggered the riots) than we would pratting around treating this as a terrorist incident and investing in the security service's ability to snoop - hint: they knew about these guys anyway using existing ability and still couldn't/didn't stop them.

WRONG (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802595)

they aint making statements THEY ARE FUCKING CRAZY
ko koo , one brick short but hey yea lets think its a political statement
thats as insane as they are you take your meds yet today

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802621)

They cut off his head in broad daylight. The barbarism mixed with the message makes it more than an ordinary murder.

Re:Fear Mongering (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#43802691)

Right, and Dale Cregan shot one female police officer as she knocked on a door, and shot the other in the back as she ran away and then threw a grenade between the two of them whilst they were still alive and desperately trying to crawl away.

You'll have to excuse me if I still don't exactly see the difference even when the level of barbarism is taken into account. Even Raul Moat walking up to a police officer whose sat pulled up in his car, sticking a shotgun in his face and pulling the trigger doesn't strike me as particularly free from barbarism.

I agree none of these are ordinary murders, they're particularly extreme murders, but neither case is any more terrorism than the other. There was extreme barbarism in each case, and there was a message in each case.

Re:Fear Mongering (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802653)

bu bu but guns are illegal in the UK, how could that have happened!!!!>?!??

Re:Fear Mongering (1, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802217)

Perhaps I missed it, but how was this murder terrorism?

Because of stupid, that's why. It's shamefully common round these parts.

It's religiously motivated murder, just like Stepehen Lawrence was racially motivated murder. People ore only shouting "oe noes teh terrorists !!!11oneONE11!" because the murderer is muslim.

Re:Fear Mongering (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802263)

Oh please. They attacked a soldier because he was a soldier, not because he was a Christian (if he even was a Christian).

That makes this political. And even if it were for religious reasons would that make it any less terroristic in nature? I believe the basis of most terrorism of this nature has religious roots but ultimately it has political ties due to questions of governance and territory.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802375)

They attacked a soldier because he was a soldier

And Stephen Lawrence was attacked because he was black. That makes his attackers still plain old murderers, not terrorists.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802405)

Ummm.... so? I never said anything about Stephen Lawrence. Stop trying to turn this into something that it's not. Why can't people around here stay on topic?

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about a year ago | (#43802701)

Why do you keep bringing up North Korea's ambition to take over the whole peninsula!??!?

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | about a year ago | (#43802861)

No that makes them racist terrorists.

Re:Fear Mongering (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802235)

Really? How was the murder of a British soldier in the middle of the street in broad daylight by two individuals who were yelling "allahu akbar" and saying they were doing it for revenge against Brits for "murdering" muslims in "muslim countries" TERRORISM? Maybe you can visit http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ and learn something... like that there have been over 20,000 terrorist attacks perpetrated by muslims in the name of islam SINCE 9/11/2001, that have left thousands dead and maimed?

And how many more bodies will it take before fruitcakes like you stop claiming this was yet another "false flag" to besmirch the good name of "the religion of peace"?

Re:Fear Mongering (3, Insightful)

Bongo (13261) | about a year ago | (#43802441)

I was wondering about Sam Harris' argument in The End of Faith, basically that we have to go beyond irrationality if we're to survive, and that amongst all the world's faiths, Islam is at present the "worst" for various reasons -- there is no separation of Church and State, Islam is seen as a "complete system" (like communism or capitalism or whatever, ie. political power) and so on. One point he made as I recall, was that all the faiths have been weakened by modern secularism, and that's a good thing, but let's not forget they were weakened into being more peaceful. You can find all sorts of barbaric stuff in religions, although some histories were perhaps a bit more barbaric than others. The Grand Ayatollah Khomeini said that the West lies about Jesus saying "turn the other cheek" because, as the Ayatollah says, no true Prophet would ever be so stupid as to say such a stupid thing. Also Islam sees itself as inheriting the real truth, a truth that the Jews allowed to corrupt, and that the Christians allowed to corrupt, so the Islamic thing is to not allow it to be corrupted ie. don't modernise no matter what, remain pure. So there are variations and differences, and Harris thinks Islam is currently the worst offender, and the "peace" is actually only peace if you join the religion, be one of them, as it is monotheistic, One True God, no other way, only one right way, you're either with us or against us. The modern secular thing is, nobody has the real truth, let's enquire together and find stuff out. But in some Islamic schools, that is blasphemy. So it is complex. But how to respond when some "sick by Western standards" individuals gravitate towards the more murderous parts of certain ideologies? I guess the secular thing is to downplay religious intolerance and try to reaffirm, look, WE ALL WANT TO BE PEACEFUL. No to religious intolerance, no to religious hatred, no to hate. So called "terrorist" acts (are soldiers just a little more worried now when they walk out the gate? should they be? is that the intended effect? well, yeah) are there to incite hatred. People like that WANT to stir up hatred. And that's why we try to ignore them. But whether that will work in the long term, that's hard to see.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802603)

Fyi, there was not only NO separation of church and state in Norway until recently, we still have a significant tie between the two and christianity as a religion is still given special preference in our constitution.

Look up Norway's situation wrt UNDP some time for context.

State religion, capitalism, communism, monarchy, fascism are just fine if everyone is in on it and no-one gets stepped on. It's when the assholes get to set the agenda the whole thing collapses and a system of checks and balances is -- probably -- best. That can fail miserably too, however. Just look at the oligopoly that the US has become.

tl;dr : It's not islam's "complete system" that is the problem, it's that they are religious fundamentalists hell-bent on destroying some weird devil image they have of the West. Not unlike what the West had with communism some decades ago.

Re:Fear Mongering (2)

Bongo (13261) | about a year ago | (#43802709)

Personally I'm not sure, but I was struck by Bernard Lewis' description that in Islam the moderate school said you have to reinterpret the Koran and Hadiths for moderns times, but the other school said, no, it doesn't matter how clever your interpretation is, if the other guys have more power then they can just kill you, so all that really matters is power, and actually the book wasn't written in an older period, thus "needing reinterpretation", it is actually "unwritten" and always exists as the true mind of Allah, so don't question it.

So anyway, the latter group won. That was a thousand years ago.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802737)

Or like what the West has today with Muslim countries.

Maybe, just maybe, the religious fundamentalists are pissed that other nations are in their country, suppressing & killing their countrymen. And are willing to do something about it.

Kind of like the British in the colonies, around 1773.

Re:Fear Mongering (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about a year ago | (#43802285)

It wasn't terrorism, it was an act of war. The UK and the US are at war, why are you so surprised when the war hits home? People are just fine with senseless random killings of muslims half a world away, but kill one white European....

I'm absolutely not defending these people at all. I'm not fine with random killings on the street whether they are in the UK or Afghanistan. I'm just saying what they've done is no worse than our own public policy implemented by people we've elected. If you hate these people, you have to hate your own government, or be a hypocrit.

If you think this act is horrible, this is what the Afghan people deal with all the time.

Re:Fear Mongering (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#43802475)

I agree this wasn't terrorism but it wasn't war either. These people have no association with Iraq or Afghanistan, it seems they were most probably British.

That means it was not war. It was simple cold blooded violent murder and little else.

I'm anti Iraq/Afghanistan war too, but let's not pretend these guys were fighting for some cause, they were just killers looking for an excuse to kill.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802643)

These people have no association with Iraq or Afghanistan, it seems they were most probably British.

We like to grow our own. "Made in Britain" is a rare thing to see these days, but at least some people are trying to keep things local.

It was simple cold blooded violent murder and little else.

Yes 100% yes.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | about a year ago | (#43802901)

If it was just about killing, they could have killed more than one guy. The Western powers are indeed waging a war against Islamism on a global scale, so anyone subscribing to that ideology has to be a militant.

Re:Fear Mongering (2)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#43803031)

They weren't killing for the sake of the love of the slaughter, they were killing for the same reason any other gangbanger kills - for "respect".

These are people with nothing in their lives, bought up in violent neighbourhoods surrounded by knife and gun crime and frequent stabbings and sought fame in the only way these sorts of people know - more violence.

The government and media has given them exactly what they wanted, they've published the mobile phone footage of them chatting before the police turned up, the government has made it a "terrorist" incident adding unjustified validity to their claim that they were sending a message. Now there will be extremists who will praise them for "joining their cause" and giving them respect for it.

The fact they didn't kill others despite having had ample opportunity to do so demonstrates further why it wasn't terrorism. If it was terrorism they'd have killed innocent people too to, you know, spread terror. The fact they stood there talking to some woman shows that they just wanted to make the news, if it was about maximising terror, they'd have beheaded her too.

Re:Fear Mongering (2, Insightful)

Anarchduke (1551707) | about a year ago | (#43802487)

you mean Civil War? Because everyone involved was British.

Re:Fear Mongering (4, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#43802695)

There were plenty of cases of Germans attacking the Third Reich, more obviously there were several attempts by Germans to assassinate Hitler. That didn't make WWII a civil war. Just an international war with some within the country opposed to it.

For sure the Third Reich would have called it terrorism.

Crime, Terrorism, Political act, Resistance, Freedom Fighting. All these things are a matter of perspective. Each using terms to mould the events to the way they see it.

[Godwin smodwin]

Which doesn't in any way mean I have any sympathy for the event in Woolwich, but equally I don't have any sympathy for the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. I abhor violence.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

pesho (843750) | about a year ago | (#43802749)

What a moron you are. This is not an act of war. It has no other purpose but institute fear. Random killings of Muslims is a very broad statement. Are you referring to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? As far as I can recall the general effort was to avoid random killings. I also recall couple of prosecutions of such killings. In fact most of the random killings in both places were preformed by muslims using the same terror tactics you just condoned to intimidate the local population or to eradicate the people not belonging to the same sect. If you are unhappy with the US/UK governments you are strongly encouraged to run for office or campaign for change following the low of the land. But justifying random killings is disgusting. As far as suffering of the muslim people, it is a bit single sided to accuse only US (which undoubtedly has a role in this). US and the West as a whole have been very good at defending their interest, quite unceremoniously I should say. They do it for the most part because they can. And the reason they have this ability is no small part due to their rapidly developing societies, where individuals take responsibility and participate in governance and do their best not to be encumbered by prejudice and religion. In case you are going to refer me to some extreme christian denominations, let me point out that they exist side by side with a host of other religions and their wings are quickly clipped off when they pass the line demarcating free speech from hate speech. Now in the light of this there is also other ways to defend you interest without random bombings or meat cleaver attacks. China is a good example of alternative strategy to the western world. Still even China's success is based on setting aside religious prejudice and focusing on technological advance.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802821)

If you think this act is horrible, this is what the Afghan people deal with all the time.

The methods of conducting war employed by the foreign armed forces in Afghanistan do not legally include running over non-combatants in the street and then hacking them to death. You can argue (successfully in my opinion) against the need to prosecute those wars, but don't draw false equivalences - it clouds the debate considerably.

Re:Fear Mongering (2)

catchblue22 (1004569) | about a year ago | (#43802427)

Those who would trade their freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security.

Ben Franklin

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#43802717)

I feel more free in an environment without guns. How does that fit into the quote?

Re:Fear Mongering (2)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43802957)

The quote doesn't say anything about guns, only freedom in general. But since you ask - you are a British subject, which says a lot. 100 years ago Britons were freer to own guns, and don't the crime statistics show lower crime then? I would guess your assessment would be that you would feel freer now than then despite the higher crime rate.

I notice HM is guarded by people with guns. I've even read a report that she has been known to carry a Webley. Do you suppose she feels less free because of it? Do you feel less free because of it?

Interesting that the terrorists had guns. (Isn't that theoretically impossible under current British law?) Apparently nobody but the police had one to stop them. Good thing they didn't decide to go on a bigger rampage - they would have been up against the defenseless. On the other hand, you feel free.

Cheers

Re:Fear Mongering (0, Flamebait)

daveewart (66895) | about a year ago | (#43802465)

Terrorism(n.): When a white person is killed by a Muslim.

They were already know to MI5... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802479)

...So existing anti terror legislation is perfectly adequate to have put them under as much surveillance as the Police or security service wanted.

Just because the Police have access to communications data does not mean they would have know what was in the heads of these 2 men.

If People are routinely watched and their emails read, they will simply not put anything incriminating in emails

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#43802503)

If it's a violent act against a government actor, it's terrorism, so it deserves your liberties to be eradicated by that government.

If it were 'just' violence against a little girl, it would be merely a statistic, not nearly as important (according to government actors).

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#43802825)

Well terrorism is most commonly committed against ordinary civilians. And mostly random - bombs in public places being the most common act. So it often is against little girls.

Targeting a soldier takes this one a bit closer to an act of war than terrorism usually is.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802527)

Glad you asked. 3 seconds of Googling shows this:

The European Union defines terrorism for legal/official purposes in Art. 1 of the Framework Decision on Combating Terrorism (2002).[48] This provides that terrorist offences are certain criminal offences set out in a list consisting largely of serious offences against persons and property that; ...given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of: seriously intimidating a population; or unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act; or seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

IOIOIO (931789) | about a year ago | (#43802543)

Terrorist murder: somebody who "murders" terrorists?

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about a year ago | (#43802697)

Did you see the footage on YouTube? Just moments after the attack the guy was talking to other members of the public, still holding the cleaver and covered in blood and people were just walking around oblivious.

The only terrorism here is from the media hyping this up into fervor just to sell some headlines, and the politicians jumping all over this to further encroach into the lives of the general populace.

Re:Fear Mongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802835)

Just look up the videos on this... But the solution of Snooper Charter is completely retarded as it targets everyone.

What I propose is profiling. Why not just look at the typical profile of these criminals and target their places and activities? Why lump the entire population when you can narrow down your scope to the ones most likely to do this? I am sure existing laws can be used effectively to do this.

Profiling works, just look at how insurance, banks and other institutions use it and apply it to security.

Posting as AC for very obvious reasons.

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about a year ago | (#43803015)

You must have missed it. There is a popular political phrase that should offer some insight on this subject:
"Never let a crisis go to waste."

Bad Haircut!!! (4, Funny)

Mikkeles (698461) | about a year ago | (#43802153)

My barber gave me a bad haircut! We need a Snoopers' Charter! Now!

Re:Bad Haircut!!! (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43802243)

Your head still seems to be attached. The haircut couldn't have been that bad.

Re:Bad Haircut!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802425)

His barber is Sweeney Todd.

Re:Bad Haircut!!! (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about a year ago | (#43802485)

Your head still seems to be attached.

Only the smaller one, apparently. ;)

No Robot Barber's anytime soon eh? (1)

Dareth (47614) | about a year ago | (#43802271)

When will you trust a "Robot Barber" to cut your hair? Sure they would test the software and such, but edge cases and an "off by 1" error would be much more painful I would imagine.

Re:Bad Haircut!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802879)

Did he take a little too much off the top?

Why can't we be more like Norway? (5, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802193)

Why can't we be more like Norway?

The prosecutor actually shook hands with Brevik because that's how they always do it and the hell some mass murdering bastard is going to make them give in and change their ways for the worse.

Yet one person gets murdered here and everyone seems to be yelling "terrorist" and going weak at the knees in fear and stupidity.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802301)

Because those are the sorts of people you want as leaders.

Not you specifically, obviously, but enough people in America want admnistrations like that of Bush and Obama that a majority are voting them into power. It's exactly your last three words that are responsible for it, fear and stupidity, but if you're wondering WHY you can't be more like an actual democratic state, it's because a majority of your people don't want one.

Maybe the real question you need to ask is, "never mind why we aren't like Norway, why are we the way we are NOW?"

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about a year ago | (#43802605)

...enough people in America want admnistrations like that of Bush and Obama that a majority are voting them into power.

...largely because the net difference between the two parties is (almost) nil. Unfortunately, this is a trend throughout the Western world, where politicians of the major parties play to the misgivings of the least social-justice oriented of the electorate rather than exhibiting any courage to stand up for actual principles.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802675)

And it's a "trend in the western world" why, exactly? There's plenty of people who run independently with values that are more in line with that of the hive mind here (more rights for me, more security for me, me me me, etc.), yet Americans don't vote for them in large numbers.

You can continue to blame politicians for failing to exhibit "any courage," for failing to stand up for actual principles," but until you're willing to do it yourselves you really have no one else to blame. You choose who to put into power -- the ridiculous two party system is the system you chose, you chose the politicians who created and continue to run Guantanamo, you chose leaders who torture in the name of security, these were all choices you made.

Maybe the real problem is that you're having trouble living with those choices? Maybe it's just easier to point the finger at the politician than to realize the politicians emerge from the same pit of slime that the rest of the general population does?

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803019)

The problem is the existence of parties altogether. Washington didn't want any of it.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802707)

There aren't enough representatives in American government. Any fear or anger in the population is magnified many times. They end up with a government scared of its tail and very eager to deploy the bombs.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#43802359)

Well, it was in fact terrorism because what makes it terrorism is not the seriousness of the crime, but the intent. On the other hand, I don't see "fear and stupidity". I can see some degree of stupidity, but certainly not fear.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802387)

but certainly not fear.

The only point of reviving the snoopers charter is to pretend it will prevent anything like this happening again. It is therefore motivated by fear.

im taking all the candy bars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802641)

im taking all the candy bars to terrorise you about all the oppression ......

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43802433)

Why can't we be more like Norway?

A year after Breivik's massacre, Norway tightens antiterror laws [csmonitor.com]

The prosecutor actually shook hands with Brevik because that's how they always do it and the hell some mass murdering bastard is going to make them give in and change their ways for the worse.

You have a rather special understanding of things if you think taking action to prevent the future murder of people enjoying the Queen's peace in Britain is somehow making things worse. Or is it that you are reacting in fear?

Will you welcome a new overlord from a foreign land if they simply offer you peace for submission [gatestoneinstitute.org] ?

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (4, Insightful)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about a year ago | (#43802609)

You have a rather special understanding of things if you think taking action to prevent the future murder of people enjoying the Queen's peace in Britain is somehow making things worse.

Because making new laws to prevent murders could never be a bad thing. Same goes for terrorists, peados and criminals right?

Murder is already very, very illegal. No new laws are needed.

Planning murder is already very illegal. No new laws are needed.

Soliciting murder is already very illegal. No new laws are needed.

Starting from July 7/7/2005, an average of 7 people are killed per year due to terrorist attacks. That's on the same level as eye-wateringly obscure medical diseases.

Basically, any money put into preventing those is a complete waste: the money would be vastly better spent elsewhere, such as improving road safety.

Will you welcome a new overlord from a foreign land if they simply offer you peace for submission?

No, I'll try and shoot them, just like the police shot at these murderers. And see, no new laws were needed.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802923)

As long as Brits can own knives, beheadings can happen. Knife Control is needed. Start with registration for all knives, then continue to things that can become knives.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802985)

I believe Britain has pretty severe knife regulations that can put you in jail for years for carrying a standard pocket knife. Obviously it's rather hard to eliminate sharpened metal entirely, however.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

10101001 10101001 (732688) | about a year ago | (#43802917)

Yet one person gets murdered here and everyone seems to be yelling "terrorist" and going weak at the knees in fear and stupidity.

In part. A tiny minority group has an agenda and uses anything and everything to pursue it. The vast majority of people are too cowardly or too stupid to confront that minority with any sort of logic or reason. Instead, the mere fact that they may be painted as pro-terrorism, pro-murder, anti-nationalistic, or simply non-compassionate leaves them to be walked all over, often go as far as parroting the party line instead of making a stand on principle or character or integrity. So, congratulations Britain; you're just like America.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802989)

OK, as this appears to be as good a point as any to say this:

I'm a Londoner.

We do not yell, we do not go weak at the knees.

We have been bombed in more ways I care to count, We've been stabbed more times than I care to mention.

We don't fap and we don't fuss, we keep going because that's the only thing to do.

This wasn't an attack by Muslims, this was an attack by cowards.

Nothing more, we should spit on their pitiful self importance.

Anything else is terrorism so be careful of your hearts as that where it resides.

We, London, continue.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803027)

I'm a Norwegian and while I take a break from the coverage of the massive regional floods I just wanted to tell you that I find you offensive. The trial was a sham, the prime minister's promise of more democracy and more liberty were lies introducing increased governmental efforts at futile censorship and desperate propaganda. You can take your predisposition towards etiquette and shove it up your ass until you suffocate.

And maybe you don't know what is happening in Sweden right now?

Do you think anyone will have the means or motivation to pick and choose between "good" and bad muslims when the levies break? Would you like me to quote a leading Burmese Buddhist monk on exactly why that would be futile with regard to muslims?

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | about a year ago | (#43803033)

Breivik is white.

Re:Why can't we be more like Norway? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803045)

Yet one person gets murdered here and everyone seems to be yelling "terrorist" and going weak at the knees in fear and stupidity.

Not in the UK. The day after the 7/7 bombings, people were back to complaining that the buses were late (including the 30). After decades of attacks by the IRA, the attitude to terrorist attacks in pretty much "Oh, this again. Carry on".

My Thoughts Go (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802211)

Out to those killed an injured and to their families and also to those who witnessed such a gruesome attack. Since this only happened a couple of miles from me i could so easily have been there.

The government which is strong enough to protect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802245)

you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.

Re:The government which is strong enough to protec (0)

vettemph (540399) | about a year ago | (#43802435)

My new tag line. Thanks.

Re:The government which is strong enough to protec (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802549)

Why? It's not particularly insightful. It doesn't take much power to take everything away from you. Much less than it would take to protect you from everything.

Science requires Evidence. (4, Insightful)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#43802253)

That the Snooper's Charter will reduce the threat of Terrorism is an untested hypothesis. Prove it will achieve such goals, THEN we'll talk about having it be a law.

Re:Science requires Evidence. (3, Interesting)

Jahta (1141213) | about a year ago | (#43802453)

That the Snooper's Charter will reduce the threat of Terrorism is an untested hypothesis. Prove it will achieve such goals, THEN we'll talk about having it be a law.

As one of my colleagues often says to me, "you're being rational again". Politics doesn't follow the scientific method. The British tabloids (which are already pretty xenophobic) will be cranking up the FUD level to the max. When the idea get's enough mindshare among their readers, the politicians will follow the votes.

Forget the law (1)

asifyoucare (302582) | about a year ago | (#43802255)

The law is ill-equipped to deal with hate preachers and their adherents, and the offenders' community seems half-hearted in their denunciation, despite the offenders slandering Islam by committing these atrocities in its name.

Citizens need to take direct action to make such people vanish. They are the enemy.

Re:Forget the law (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802567)

Here here. Kill all the muslims!

You people laugh when we defend our right to bare arms. I certainly know no mudslimes are going to touch my family.

Re:Forget the law (2)

magic maverick (2615475) | about a year ago | (#43802607)

Err, that's what these two people did. They saw the enemy, someone who (if not personally, then is part of the same gang that has) harassed their community, jailed their compatriots, etc. They took steps to "vanish" the person.

Now quick, justify the E-e-edl attacking mosques! What? You're denunciation seems rather half-hearted you right-wing racist bastard scum. I think it's about time someone took direct action to make you vanish.

Government bill gets shot down... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802331)

Soldier gets shot down...
Goverment bill gets revived.

How convenient.

Re:Government bill gets shot down... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802403)

It's starting! Yet another "false flag" eh to besmirch the good ol' "religion of peace"? 1,400 years of false flags,eh?

Re:Government bill gets shot down... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802561)

The government can exploit events without them being false flags.

Re:Government bill gets shot down... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802471)

Easy to explain.

Soldier gets beheaded.
Twit posts.

The Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802341)

At what point did they HAVE to use the internet in order to accomplish this?

Re:The Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802459)

At what point did they HAVE to use the internet in order to accomplish this?

How would you find soldiers in London with Google Search?

How would you find your way to Woolwich without Google Maps amd Google Streetview?

How would you know whether your terrorist plot worked without checked Google News?

Hmm... Maybe there's a trend here. Let me check Google Trends...

Maybe we should just ban Google instead of snooping on everyone.

Can't waste a good tragedy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802367)

These people LOVE terrorism, it gives them an excuse to impose total hegemonic domination on a weak minded populace!

The usual immoral nonsense (4, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | about a year ago | (#43802513)

Of course this bill would not prevent any repetition of this act and countless other ways psychopaths with religion can kill people. It will however foster a police- and surveillance-state where the whole population is kept in fear permanently. From the efforts to reclassify this act as "terrorism", I conclude that keeping the population in fear is highly desirable for the UK government, possibly because it is failing at its job in countless other areas.

What wonderful timing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802517)

How convenient for the puppet masters that there just happened to be a gruesome murder just days after their anti-privacy, anti-citizen, anti-freedom bill got shot down...

Must enslave us for our own protection. False flag if I ever saw one.

Just great (4, Interesting)

joh (27088) | about a year ago | (#43802565)

First, this wasn't terrorism, it was war. Killing a soldier of a nation that kills people in a nation you view as "your" nation is not terrorism, it's plain war. Well, at least it's every bit war as drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan are war. Or are the soldiers controlling the drones from Texas terrorists and killers?

And: Snooping on all Internet communications to catch "lone wolf" terrorists is a War on the People, nothing less.

This isn't going to end well and this "attack" (on one soldier, OMG) is the smallest part of it. There are people in Britain knived down in the streets every day. Two guys decide to change the course of history and everybody is helping to get the job done. Just great, really.

The Cause is Radical Islam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802635)

You know, the same transnational terrorist ideology behind:

Nidal Hasan

The ethnic clensing of Copts in Egypt

The Boston Bombers

Etc.

They kept shouting "Allah Akbar!" and political correctness demands that our governments keep saying "We'll probably never know their motivation."

They all use toilets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802637)

We must put cameras looking out of every toilet.

Simple solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802687)

As usual, the root cause of the problem is religion. The sooner it is banned, the better.

Or they could just do what we do here in Texas (1)

adric22 (413850) | about a year ago | (#43802705)

I'd like to see a guy out on the streets here in Texas try to stab people to death. He might get one, then he'll get shot by several people who were carrying concealed handguns. But unfortunately for the UK they have disarmed all of their citizens.

Re:Or they could just do what we do here in Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802933)

I'd like to see a guy out on the streets here in Texas try to stab people to death. He might get one, then he'll get shot by several people who were carrying concealed handguns. But unfortunately for the UK they have disarmed all of their citizens.

By that logic, these attackers, if they were in Texas, would have use handguns for the attack; killing many more people before finally being shot dead themselves.

Yep, an increased body count definitely sounds like a better outcome.

Re:Or they could just do what we do here in Texas (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802991)

Exactly!

Also the whole part about taking 20 MINUTES for Armed Police to arrive to a murder in progress!!!??? WTF is going on over there...

Re:Or they could just do what we do here in Texas (1)

JustNiz (692889) | about a year ago | (#43803009)

Thats because thanks to an asinine immigration policy, a large percentage of the "citizens" in the UK are themselves 1st gen. immigrants from the same countries/religions as the people that perpitrate these attacks.

Long Term - and deep failure (0)

AdmV0rl0n (98366) | about a year ago | (#43802715)

It's a symptom of the long term, tragic and disasterour immigration theory and policy that has operated in the leftist stateism in the UK.

The UK under this system hates allowing in commonwealth, white, english speakers. They get clobbered by levels of visa limitations and immigration policy blockades. 'Asylumn' seekers and refugees somehow end up in the social care system. Its unheard of that you roll up in a state, go to a place in the capital and end up in a scenario where you get to claim a roof over your head and be fed and clothed. Thats how London has ended up. Its wholy wrapped up in PC bullshit, lies and deciet. Its not just London, its a disease across the country.

The people who come do not get properly checked and vetted. Nor are they forced to make admissions of statehood, allegience, or any other boundary. So this has led to a state where large numbers who live inside hate it, have no affinity with it, detest the way of life, and the rest. The numbers of such people who serve in the civil society, or in the state, police, or military is risible. That this has been allowed to happen, and those responsible for this have blood on their hands today.

You can add in Islam on top. Islam has zero place in western society. None. Nothing. Nada. You cannot have the ridiculous ideal of some western liberals where you want gay people to have equality, and you want the Islamics who are so stupid and none intergrational that they still wish to kill gay people or people who decide to leave the 'religion'.

You'll have seen the peddling by political classes that this is not Islam. Oh yes it is. Its the Islam being peddled on the street, in the mosque, in the university, and across the internet, and by the imams. Its the same Islam being applied in endless notable countries across the globe. Its the same islam that legalises rape in pakistan, that legalises female forced criminal child abuse level sexual mutilation across most of the arab world, and its the same islam that is very simple to absorb by looking around the world you live in.

As we have failed to remove problem imams and terrorists over decades, there is zero shock in this attack, in 7/7 or in the worldwide war of the low IQ stupid islamics. So what. I expect nothing less.

I'm now 'guilty' of islamophobia a false and manmade bullshit excuse created to attempt to stifle anti islamic commentry and blame - and of 'blashpemy' - and am the target of 50+ Islamic states who have at UN level attempted to create laws in none islamic states against me, and any other free thinking or enlightened era people in particular in the west.

Very few of these 50 states make it above the state of worthless shithole dominated by islam, with appalling human rights, womens rights, and so on and so on.

I'm seeing a lot of horse shit about race. I'm seeing a whole pile of horseshit about how two people born in the UK of Nigerian family roots, who converted to Islam are angry about people dying in Iraq and Afganistan. Maybe I should go kill someone in Canada because I'm angry about people dying in new zealand. It would make about as much sense. Unless anyone dares to try to make Islam the link. If it is done, rememeber, I hold that link open in all other ways. The Umma isn't a one way street to use to the benefit of islamic stupidity, and then discarded when suitable as a bullshit cloak.

Re:Long Term - and deep failure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802969)

Mr Farage! I never knew you were on Slashdot.

How about... (0, Offtopic)

MikeRT (947531) | about a year ago | (#43802819)

You revive gun rights instead. Let's dispense with the boilerplate bullshit about how having a gun might not have saved him and just face a simple fact here. This would be substantially less likely to work in the US because terrorists know that such acts of violence would very likely end with them being met with a hail of bullets from bystanders or the police. In the US, random acts of savagery typically only happen in those areas where criminals know the citizenry cannot be lawfully armed. That those areas also tend to be minimally secured by the government to counter this fact is probably also a feature to them as well...

Terrorists win again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802875)

The moment you begin to strip people's civil liberties, in the name of fighting terrorism, is the moment that the terrorist has won.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...