Basher Posted May 23, 2013 There are a lot of things that I disagree with about Islam, such as their typically violent reaction against drawing a picture of their prophet. I think in many ways they have not done much to show that they are friendly toward other cultures in the modern age, but that does not excuse the blanket generalization of all Muslims as murderous criminals. I am an extremely "relaxed" White Christian type (mostly) English person. I was at school with a fairly mixed ethnic group, at least from 13 years old & upwards....over the years I've lost contact with, or dropped various friends, for various reasons. My closest Male friends are an Indian (Hindu) & 2 brothers from Pakistan (Muslims) that I knew as a teenager, I'm now in my Fifties !!. When topics like Salman Rushdie are in the news, we discuss them openly, sometimes extremely heatedly. But, at the end of the day, we agree to disagree and respect each others opinions. They are my close friends first & anything else second. I've worked in an Office owned & staffed by Muslims, where I was the only person who didn't stop for Prayers. I've been accepted into their Families, like a brother & have always been treated well. Sure, I don't like the Muslim stance against Homosexuals, especially as one of my step-children is one. I also don't appreciate the fact that my girlfriend & I are separated as soon as we walk through their front door if invited for a Meal. All of the women congregate in the kitchen to chat & prepare the food. All of the men folk sit back, relax in the Living / Dining room waiting to be served !! But, if I choose to accept their kind invitation to Dinner, I play by their House rules. A true Muslim would be the very first person to denounce this sort of violence. Not because they're afraid of an anti-Muslim backlash. But because it goes against everything they believe in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted May 23, 2013 (edited) Well which is the original video, the one from the news with the blood on the hands which came out on the web straight after the event happened, or this one which has a political message after it? this one is just as likely or maybe even more likely to have been doctored Edited May 23, 2013 by Jetsun Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted May 23, 2013 Well which is the original video, the one from the news with the blood on the hands which came out on the web straight after the event happened, or this one which has a political message after it? this one is just as likely or maybe even more likely to have been doctored the answer to that question is, look at which one has artifacts resultant from doctoring with an editing program? it doesnt exactly take an expert eye to see the blurry hand colored red, the sharper hand his normal skin color - and the subsequent removal...in england, blocking, whatever, of the non-doctored one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mikeb85 Posted May 23, 2013 (edited) A true Muslim would be the very first person to denounce this sort of violence. Not because they're afraid of an anti-Muslim backlash. But because it goes against everything they believe in. Very true, and most do denounce it (if they're aware of it). Unfortunately their message gets washed out by the media and the more vocal extremists. It's also important to remember that alot of 'extremism' is more due to a tribal mentality, where one group tries to dominate another, under the pretext of religion. You could clearly see this in the recent conflict in Mali, where extremists attempted to overthrow the government, impose their rule over the land, and even destroyed mosques and Islamic texts in the process, because moderate, traditional Islam conflicts with their extremist views. My wife is Muslim, I kind of am too, and everything I was taught about the religion is that it's one of peace. Daily Islamic life consists of prayers, community life, giving to the poor, and abiding by a strict set of moral principles. The Imam that married us, and all the other Muslims I met in my wife's community all embodied that spirit, as well as all the Muslims I've met in North America too. No doubt some bring their problems from distant conflicts to the west, but I don't think that has to do with Islam as much as tribal conflicts that are carried out under the pretext of religion. In some parts you also see lots of tribal conflicts between Sikh families turn into killings and acts which some might interpret as 'terrorism', and some of the world's most violent countries are 'Christian'. Heck, gang warfare in the United States kills more people every year than all the terrorist attacks combined... 12 000+ people are murdered every year in America, mostly by other Americans... Edited May 23, 2013 by Mikeb85 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted May 23, 2013 the answer to that question is, look at which one has artifacts resultant from doctoring with an editing program? it doesnt exactly take an expert eye to see the blurry hand colored red, the sharper hand his normal skin color - and the subsequent removal...in england, blocking, whatever, of the non-doctored one. It's not blocked it is just flagged for not suitable for under 18s so child proof browsers wont be able to access it. I am watching both and trying to see and the non red one does look a bit clearer, yet it is filmed on a mobile phone so the picture isn't perfect. It would be very fast and strange doctoring of the video though if it is, as I saw the red hands video on the web very soon after the event happened and there is no real need for someone to do that as it is shocking enough as it is. Most of the newspapers today have enhanced the blood red on his hands, some more than others, I guess for shock value, but that is expected from the press the day after, but to doctor the video immediately after is very odd Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted May 23, 2013 (edited) Ok this video seems to prove that the no blood one is actually the fake one , take a look You can tell by the lines on the road that the second one has been doctored as they are orange and they should be red Orange lines on the road instead of red on the one without blood suggest that that is actually the one which has been altered Edited May 23, 2013 by Jetsun 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted May 23, 2013 That does seem to be pretty convincing evidence that the bloodier video is legitimate. I agree .... good explanation I take back my previous shock .... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted May 23, 2013 that doesnt explain the blurriness though... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted May 23, 2013 It is so easy to PhotoShop a picture anymore I think it would be a good suggestion that we all should question everything the media present for our consumption. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voidisyinyang Posted May 23, 2013 Oh yeah Medea Benjamin in action. She rocks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted May 23, 2013 (edited) !!!! I never believed this conspiracy stuff about media manipulation ... but that's proof now ... he had no blood on his hands. But he/they did kill an innocent man ... so why did anyone think they needed to change the image? Sad to say that I do expect this from print media, and American TV (sorry US friends) But for someone to decide that "this" story needs digital manipulation .... seriously wow. I know journalist ethics have been dead for a long time, but the lows people will sink too ... Edit to add : well honestly I don't know which one is correct. Snopes or somewhere like that can probably verify there is a difference in the color saturation in the street sign too... While I'm just betting on who has the bigger "agenda" to "panic people" ... it seems you can't believe anything anymore. Even if you were there memories of stressful events are often (even usually) different for different people. Edited May 23, 2013 by Mal Stainkey 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted May 23, 2013 Sad to say that I do expect this from print media, and American TV (sorry US friends) No need to be sorry. We here in the US and those in England are way ahead of you folks down under as far as corrupt media goes. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted May 23, 2013 No need to be sorry. We here in the US and those in England are way ahead of you folks down under as far as corrupt media goes. I don't about that, 11 out of 12 newspapers in Australia are owned by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp!! it's like the entire media being dominated by Fox news or the Sun newspaper 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) I don't about that, 11 out of 12 newspapers in Australia are owned by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp!! it's like the entire media being dominated by Fox news or the Sun newspaper Hehehe. Okay, I feel sorry for them then. Actually, for my needs, cable Comcast news does a fairly good job. They are timely and relatively unbiased either way. Edited May 24, 2013 by Marblehead Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) Yes our media and government are just as bad if not worse :-( .There are balanced sources but you have to search for them Edited May 24, 2013 by Mal Stainkey Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
de_paradise Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) He's just murdered a stranger in cold blood in a savage and nasty way ... how does that add up to a good mind? Based on how he's speaking, even after the event. On the street, I would rather not underestimate someone's intelligence, if he has the motivation and can murder without compunction. Homicide is an inner primordial behavior, (that we repress, ignore, deny if you would believe Mother Teresa's quote that she went to work with children "on the day I discovered I had a Hitler inside me.” )but barbaric murder is not inversely related to other cognitive functions. He just seems like he could have fit in successfuly in society, but let hatred of injustice to Muslims build up and mix with his African tribal method of justice. Officially sanctioned murder by troops in foreign lands is still...murder. If you don't believe it, the case could be made that your moral cognition is not as evolved that you must rely on external authority to set your moral standard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development Edited May 24, 2013 by de_paradise 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Basher Posted May 24, 2013 His speech did seem that of an articulate, intelligent, individual. Both Murderers seemed to hang around waiting for the Police to show up. maybe so that they could die as "Martyrs for the Cause". Wierd, seems (from what I've read) like he was brought up in a "normal" (whatever that means) Christian household until 2001. When he started to become "radicalised"..... This may be of interest...Viewpoint: What do radical Islamists actually believe in? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22640614 Basher Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xor Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) A somali was trying to help an old woman who was lying on the pavement when he was assaulted by two middle-aged men here in Finland. They must have been reminded of this incident and thought they were saving the granny instead of asking questions or thinking first. I don't usually like to use the words irresponsible reporting but to me it looks like they wanted an increase in racial violence. Edited May 24, 2013 by Guest 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voidisyinyang Posted May 24, 2013 Yeah one of the "terrorists" was Nigerian. Powerful protests here against U.S.-U.K. imperialism Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted May 24, 2013 His speech did seem that of an articulate, intelligent, individual. Both Murderers seemed to hang around waiting for the Police to show up. maybe so that they could die as "Martyrs for the Cause". Wierd, seems (from what I've read) like he was brought up in a "normal" (whatever that means) Christian household until 2001. When he started to become "radicalised"..... This may be of interest...Viewpoint: What do radical Islamists actually believe in? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22640614 Basher They were waiting for the police to show up and when they did they attacked them which is why the police shot them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
de_paradise Posted May 25, 2013 (edited) Edited May 26, 2013 by de_paradise Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idiot_stimpy Posted May 25, 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/woolwich-murder-suspects-friend-arrested-amid-claims-mi5-tried-to-recruit-michael-adebolajo-8631902.html Police have arrested an alleged friend of the Woolwich murder suspect Michael Adebolajo after he gave an interview to BBC Newsnight in which he claimed the security services had tried to recruit the suspect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idiot_stimpy Posted May 25, 2013 http://youtu.be/EVPNOR6Juww Around 36 seconds in, man has little/no blood on his hands and the paint on the side of the road is still red. The bus in the background is red too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voidisyinyang Posted May 26, 2013 Mr Adebolajo, 28, originally from Romford, east London, and fellow suspect Michael Adebowale, 22, of Greenwich, south-east London, had been known to MI5 for eight years, Whitehall sources told the BBC on Thursday. Abu Nusaybah said the approaches followed Mr Adebolajo's detention by security forces on a trip to Kenya late last year. Abu Nusaybah said his friend suggested he had been physically and sexually abused during an interrogation in a prison cell in the African country. http://concen.org/forum/thread-49377-post-259737.html#pid259737 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
