Terrorist Attacks - WARNING: CONTAINS DISTRESSING IMAGES

[AlexLaw76]

47 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Lockerbie was 37 years ago today. 

Anyone blaming the zionists yet?

[sadoldgit]

On 21/12/2025 at 11:32, AlexLaw76 said:

Anyone blaming the zionists yet?

Do you recall when you told us that you asked the mods to change your name from Delldays to Batman because no one was taking your posts seriously?

The above post is the reason why.

[AlexLaw76]

Just part and parcel etc….

 

[trousers]

I guess we ought to move the Ann Widdecombe discussion over to this thread...?

 

[Gloucester Saint]

18 minutes ago, trousers said:

I guess we ought to move the Ann Widdecombe discussion over to this thread...?

 

Whole saga is as bizarre as it is tragic. Arrested suspect appears to be living on his own in an ex-council house in Rotherham after the mother and two other grown up sons relocated to Devon. It’s a huge county so may or may not be relevant. 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

I guess we ought to move the Ann Widdecombe discussion over to this thread...?

 

How very sad. I think it's very much in the interest of other political figures that all this information comes to light as quickly as possible. Ridiculous that the police announced there was no evidence to suggest this wasn't politically motivated. The facts showed that to be nonsense almost straight away. 

Edited 3 hours ago by hypochondriac

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

I guess we ought to move the Ann Widdecombe discussion over to this thread...?

 

Can't be a terrorist, as we've consistently been told all terrorist are brown and Muslim.

Edited 3 hours ago by Farmer Saint

[John B]

28 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

How very sad. I think it's very much in the interest of other political figures that all this information comes to light as quickly as possible. Ridiculous that the police announced there was no evidence to suggest this wasn't politically motivated. The facts showed that to be nonsense almost straight away. 

It was likely to be terrorist related because to many her views were pretty appalling especially to gays asylum seekers and supporters of abortion which gives rise to hate.

People  who do not have any real knowledge of the facts are pontificating and getting worked up for no rational reason eventually we will know the full facts. It is a tragedy for Miss Widdicombe's family but her stance on many issues including Brexit has had an adverse affect for thousands of people.

We do not live in a very nice era with politicians constantly upsetting many parts of society with their rhetoric and people who believe in a god have become so aggressive forcing their beliefs on all and sundry

 

 

 

 

[aintforever]

Shouldn't we be demanding to know all the facts about the suspect so we know whether to riot or not?

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, John B said:

It was likely to be terrorist related because to many her views were pretty appalling especially to gays asylum seekers and supporters of abortion which gives rise to hate.

People  who do not have any real knowledge of the facts are pontificating and getting worked up for no rational reason eventually we will know the full facts. It is a tragedy for Miss Widdicombe's family but her stance on many issues including Brexit has had an adverse affect for thousands of people.

We do not live in a very nice era with politicians constantly upsetting many parts of society with their rhetoric and people who believe in a god have become so aggressive forcing their beliefs on all and sundry

 

 

 

 

I just think that's a load of shit. I think loads of politicians hold appaling views that makes people's lives much worse off. Zack Polanski holds some absoutely disgusting views that make people's lives worse. In no way does he deserve to be the subject of violence because of the views he holds. He would never be responsible if someone killed him in the manner that someone has done here. If the rest of the political establishment had any sense at all, they would utterly condemn all political violence from wherever it comes from. Instead there's a double standard at play where it's seen as less bad or even something be proud of if the violent aggressors are on the left against someone on the right. It's disgusting and should have no place in our society. If Nigel Farage gets killed at some point you know some people are going to be celebrating or making horrible remarks. The rise of social media has led to an acute loss of empathy in some people. 

[Sir Ralph]

49 minutes ago, John B said:

It was likely to be terrorist related because to many her views were pretty appalling especially to gays asylum seekers and supporters of abortion which gives rise to hate.

People  who do not have any real knowledge of the facts are pontificating and getting worked up for no rational reason eventually we will know the full facts. It is a tragedy for Miss Widdicombe's family but her stance on many issues including Brexit has had an adverse affect for thousands of people.

We do not live in a very nice era with politicians constantly upsetting many parts of society with their rhetoric and people who believe in a god have become so aggressive forcing their beliefs on all and sundry

 

 

 

 

What a load of tosh. She had different political views to some other people. If that winds up other people with different political views (who are by their very nature intolerant of other peoples views) they should understand the meaning of the word “democracy” and grow a thicker skin. If people don’t like it go and live in Iran or North Korea. We live in a world where the religion of woke forces its opinion on everybody.

Edited 2 hours ago by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

22 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

religion of woke forces its opinion on everybody.

😀

[iansums]

51 minutes ago, John B said:

It was likely to be terrorist related because to many her views were pretty appalling especially to gays asylum seekers and supporters of abortion which gives rise to hate.

People  who do not have any real knowledge of the facts are pontificating and getting worked up for no rational reason eventually we will know the full facts. It is a tragedy for Miss Widdicombe's family but her stance on many issues including Brexit has had an adverse affect for thousands of people.

We do not live in a very nice era with politicians constantly upsetting many parts of society with their rhetoric and people who believe in a god have become so aggressive forcing their beliefs on all and sundry

 

 

 

 

Apalling, or just different to yours?

[whelk]

Terrorism used to mean something but now seems easily applied to any nutter who has a reason to hate. Obviously I don’t know the facts but always seems needlessly dramatic saying passed over to counter terrorism. 

[aintforever]

26 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

What a load of tosh. She had different political views to some other people. If that winds up other people with different political views (who are by their very nature intolerant of other peoples views) they should understand the meaning of the word “democracy” and grow a thicker skin. If people don’t like it go and live in Iran or North Korea. We live in a world where the religion of woke forces its opinion on everybody.

What the hell has it got to do with being woke?

There is nothing woke about beating someone to death with a stick because they have different views to you.

[whelk]

27 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

If people don’t like it go and live in Iran or North Korea

What about Dubai?

[Farmer Saint]

7 minutes ago, whelk said:

What about Dubai?

Too right wing...

[Farmer Saint]

8 minutes ago, aintforever said:

What the hell has it got to do with being woke?

There is nothing woke about beating someone to death with a stick because they have different views to you.

Come on, as we all know "woke" incorporates all of the dangers and ills of the World in one neat catch-all.

[Sir Ralph]

18 minutes ago, aintforever said:

What the hell has it got to do with being woke?

There is nothing woke about beating someone to death with a stick because they have different views to you.

He insinuated that Widdecombe forced her beliefs on others because she is religious. My point was that the negative aspects of wokeism, which widdecombe stood against, actually does that instead. That wasn’t the main point of my post which was that  someone’s political views, which are contrary to yours, doesn’t mean that it’s understandable as to why somebody would attack them- do you agree?

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Come on, as we all know "woke" incorporates all of the dangers and ills of the World in one neat catch-all.

Correct

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

3 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

He insinuated that Widdecombe forced her beliefs on others because she is religious. My point was that wokeism, which comprises many beliefs that widdecombe stood against, actually does that instead. That wasn’t the main point of my post which was that  someone’s political views, which are contrary to yours, doesn’t mean that it’s understandable as to why somebody would attack them- do you agree?

Widdecombe forced her ideas on others because she was a bit of a cunt.

[aintforever]

5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

He insinuated that Widdecombe forced her beliefs on others because she is religious. My point was that wokeism, which comprises many beliefs that widdecombe stood against, actually does that instead. That wasn’t the main point of my post which was that  someone’s political views, which are contrary to yours, doesn’t mean that it’s understandable as to why somebody would attack them- do you agree?

Of course it is not right to attack someone because of their political views, that is obvious.

John B is right in that extreme views can give rise to hate though, that works on both sides. The problem is nowadays everything seems more polarised - probably because of social media.

[hypochondriac]

20 minutes ago, whelk said:

Terrorism used to mean something but now seems easily applied to any nutter who has a reason to hate. Obviously I don’t know the facts but always seems needlessly dramatic saying passed over to counter terrorism. 

I'd say it's semantics really if some nutter has driven across half the country to kill someone because they dislike their political views. 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Widdecombe forced her ideas on others because she was a bit of a cunt.

What a sad post that reflects poorly on you. 

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

Of course it is not right to attack someone because of their political views, that is obvious.

John B is right in that extreme views can give rise to hate though, that works on both sides. The problem is nowadays everything seems more polarised - probably because of social media.

Good we agree. What I didn’t like about his post was that it read that having an “extreme” view (subjective) means that somebody attacking that person could be understandable. I think the Green Party are extreme (probably stupid more than anything) but I would not go close to understanding why a nutter would harm one of them.

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'd say it's semantics really if some nutter has driven across half the country to kill someone because they dislike their political views. 

It’s not as if they have found a Baader Meinhoff kill list and need to find the cell. But yes semantics 

[Sir Ralph]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

What a sad post that reflects poorly on you. 

Absolutely embarrassing and classless. Just a reminder he has said that about a nearly 80 year old women beaten to death in her own home. Lovely

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Widdecombe forced her ideas on others because she was a bit of a cunt.

In what way were her views "forced" on anybody ?

[whelk]

Widdlecombe was old school. Full of sincerity and integrity though (for a politician) and absolutely her views were fine to be aired in a tolerant society

[aintforever]

7 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Good we agree. What I didn’t like about his post was that it read that having an “extreme” view (subjective) means that somebody attacking that person could be understandable. I think the Green Party are extreme (probably stupid more than anything) but I would not go close to understanding why a nutter would harm one of them.

I couldn't understand how anyone could do that sort of thing regardless of political views. But it's just a fact that extreme views can give rise to hate and with some nutters in ends up turning violent.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by aintforever

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, whelk said:

Widdlecombe was old school. Full of sincerity and integrity though (for a politician) and absolutely her views were fine to be aired in a tolerant society

100%. Even if they weren't though there's no place in civilised society for randoms acts of violence and murder. Problem is some people seem to think that violence is in some way excused because it is violence against someone who holds opposing political views. You can think that Ann Widdecombe was a cunt and simultaneously call out violence committed against her. 

Edited 1 hour ago by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I couldn't understand how anyone could do that sort of thing regardless of political views. But it's just a fact that extreme views can give rise to hate and with some nutters in ends up turning violent.

 

Right but the definition of extreme is subjective so actually an incredibly large number of views could "give rise to hate" and "end up turning violent". Someone could call JK Rowling's views extreme for example and then someone could kill her because of them and blame the act of violence on her extreme views. 

[Farmer Saint]

19 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Absolutely embarrassing and classless. Just a reminder he has said that about a nearly 80 year old women beaten to death in her own home. Lovely

Sorry, but someone can be dead and a bit of a cunt can't they?

You're alive and a bit of a cunt. If you died tonight that wouldn't change.

Edited 1 hour ago by Farmer Saint

[Farmer Saint]

20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

What a sad post that reflects poorly on you. 

Why?

[aintforever]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Right but the definition of extreme is subjective so actually an incredibly large number of views could "give rise to hate" and "end up turning violent". Someone could call JK Rowling's views extreme for example and then someone could kill her because of them and blame the act of violence on her extreme views. 

Of course it's subjective, it all depends what triggers the lunatic.  

[Farmer Saint]

22 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In what way were her views "forced" on anybody ?

It was what Sir Ralph said.

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

It was what Sir Ralph said.

Err no;

Sir Ralph said "He insinuated that Widdecombe forced her beliefs on others because she is religious" in response to John B, you responded that it was because "..she was a cunt".  

[Sheaf Saint]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

100%. Even if they weren't though there's no place in civilised society for randoms acts of violence and murder. Problem is some people seem to think that violence is in some way excused because it is violence against someone who holds opposing political views. You can think that Ann Widdecombe was a cunt and simultaneously call out violence committed against her. 

Nobody has said it's excusable. John B's post was simply pointing out that her outspoken views on certain subjects just increase the likelihood that her murder was politically motivated. He wasn't saying it was justified. 

Personally, I found her pretty objectionable and disagreed with her about most things. Her "Let my people go" speech in the EU parliament was one of the most desperately pathetic things I think I've ever seen from a British politician. But I'm still absolutely appalled by her murder and would never wish that on anyone. 

[Gloucester Saint]

8 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Nobody has said it's excusable. John B's post was simply pointing out that her outspoken views on certain subjects just increase the likelihood that her murder was politically motivated. He wasn't saying it was justified. 

Personally, I found her pretty objectionable and disagreed with her about most things. Her "Let my people go" speech in the EU parliament was one of the most desperately pathetic things I think I've ever seen from a British politician. But I'm still absolutely appalled by her murder and would never wish that on anyone. 

Most sensible post of today, especially the last sentence. That’s Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dem’s and Reform had politicians murdered/staff murdered/life changing injuries.

And no Richard Tice, this tragic case shouldn’t be politicised, and The Times do not owe your leader an apology for exposing the fact of him taking a £5m bung and help/funding from convicted money launderers. In the same way that it’s not Ann Widdecombe’s fault that she didn’t install electric gates as advised to because we all have a right not to be brutally murdered in our own homes by lunatics. 

[Farmer Saint]

22 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Err no;

Sir Ralph said "He insinuated that Widdecombe forced her beliefs on others because she is religious" in response to John B, you responded that it was because "..she was a cunt".  

Yeah, I was just replying to that statement. 

I thought she was an appalling woman. She obviously didn't deserve to be murdered, but she was a piece of work.

Edited 46 minutes ago by Farmer Saint

[trousers]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

she was a bit of a cunt.

 

[Farmer Saint]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

I feel honoured you've expanded your two picture repertoire for me.

[Farmer Saint]

More white terrorism hidden on the BBC news page:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgl20x1ggpo

Two tier reporting from the Beeb again.