One dead, 10 injured after vehicle rams into people leaving London mosque

I agree with Ike. What is presented as "news" is much of the problem.

Main stream news services and the alternative media of this "informational" Internet Age that state or imply that a perpetrator is representative of a group are responsible for preparing the stage for such incidents. In many cases the perpetrator turns out to be someone with serious mental problems which were overlooked or dismissed by relatives, friends and, if reported, by authorities.

Restraint by all media is what is required. It is not suppressing free speech, but a call for self-discipline. I do not expect this to be demonstrated soon, but the biggest players might lead by example rather than wait for government censorship.

There's a lot of anti-Muslim propaganda out there

There's a lot of "news" out there, too, but I've noticed a dirth of beheading stories over the last six months. Has DAESH changed tactics, have media voluntarily stopped giving coverage or, more likely, are such gruesome murders no longer novel, i.e. "newsworthy"?

Perhaps if that was fixed, then there would be no oil to the fire ?

"Fixed"? Sounds ominous.

Agreed, the guy was a bit disturbed. However what led to him being so ? There's a lot of anti-Muslim propaganda out there, some of which suggests the Muslim Religion encourages their Attacks upon non-Muslims, and as such the Terrorism seen in the UK and Europe.

Perhaps if that was fixed, then there would be no oil to the fire ?

I wonder where in the world people are so absurd and sick to think. Will he kill all Muslims? As he imagined, a man who had been brain washed, a human wreck could be said. Fear and panic lead to thoughtless actions. I have the impression that the media have a great share in it!

The "root cause" is human nature. Humans enjoy anger and inflicting pain. "Homo hominis lupus est". How are you going to eradicate that? Remember that God is dead and the only replacement is ... man.

Re "human nature", true or not, it seems that posters really enjoy their anger.

So what you are saying to me is, Brits are allowed to criticize the US or even Americans, but Americans are NOT allowed to criticize the UK or British people? Hmmm....interesting.

Not at all but some critics could do a bit more research than browse the more hysterical right wing outlets.

There was far more terrorism in London and other English cities then than there is now, let alone what was going on in Northern Ireland itself.

Not just the UK and 6 counties but the Republic, too.

Technically Southall is not west London but a 5 minute drive from the border of..,,,

I wouldn't call Southall a ghetto, myself. Was very impressed with the Sikh community when they were a visible presence against would be rioters some years back. Riots which also hit Ealing close by. And that's no ghetto, either.

Meanwhile, more idiocy

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40351178

A man has been Tasered by police after reports people were being attacked at a London mosque just before 01:30 BST.

The force said it was not treating the incident as terrorism-related and said the item being waved was a shoehorn.

It's getting into Four Lions territory, at this stage.

Technically Southall is not west London but a 5 minute drive from the border of..,,,

@Cleo There seems to be some query about the word 'ghetto' Of course, it depends on how you define a ghetto but they certainly exist in the UK. In fact, the Brick Lane area,Tower Hamlets,Barking in London might be viewed as such.In those areas there has been an attempt to impose Sharia law.Rotherham in the north could be another example.Southall in West London is another example. In fact, there is another wave of immigrants there now with the previous generation having moved out.

By the way, if you and likeminded posters from your country ever wonder why British people on JT (and everywhere else no doubt) are so resistant to your prolific ranting on how to deal with terrorism in the UK, consider that preceding 9/11, Britain had already been through 30 years of terrorism, overwhelmingly carried out by Irish republican groups who received crucial support and funding from sympathisers in the United States. We move on but we don't forget. There was far more terrorism in London and other English cities then than there is now, let alone what was going on in Northern Ireland itself. As a nation, we quickly get on with our lives after each of these incidents, because we've had a lot of practice. But when we get lectured by post-9/11 experts about our weakness in the face of terrorism, our none-too-deeply buried memory of who was paying for the bombs exploding in our streets and buildings over those three decades tends to resurface.

wipeout- excellent point.

Krestel

Btw, the IS magazine Dabiq is available (all issues) online. I read it. I dont recall what Robert Fisk is purported to have stated being mentioned in the magazine.

Then you didn't read it carefully enough.

The line that terrorists seek to sow division is a chimera.

No it isn't

So what you are saying to me is, Brits are allowed to criticize the US or even Americans, but Americans are NOT allowed to criticize the UK or British people? Hmmm....interesting.

That is very clearly NOT what he said; a straw man attack based on a disingenuous interpretation of an argument. How Trumpian.

There have already been two terrorist incidents in Texas committed by Muslims: in Garland in 2015 (by two perpetrators, with firearms and ammunition provided by a third), 

Yes and on their way to an art exhibit to a drawing of the prophet, they were locked and loaded and by the time they drove up, they were met with gunfire and killed.

and Fort Hood in 2009. 

How was Major Hasan able to pull that off? NO ONE on that Base was carrying a firearm and he knew that they were all easy targets, sitting ducks. That kind of mistake won't happen again.

These people didn't allow fear of being shot by outraged Texans to deter them. That fear you so frequently flaunt to readers on JT comment threads is little more than a masturbatory fantasy.

What?

At a heavily armed military installation, in the most heavily armed state, Nidal Hasan was able to kill 13 people and shoot an additional 29 - and survive the experience.

Had everyone or the officers were allowed to carry guns on the base, he would never have been able to murder so many people, a lesson well learned.

Interestingly, all four people involved in the two incidents above are Americans born and bred

Yes, so what's your point?

but unless you are wilfully ignorant, that shouldn't surprise you, because as any thinking person is aware, Muslims can be natives of the non-Muslim nations in which they live; and as any thinking person is also aware, converts to Islam who have no previous family or cultural links with the religion can become radicalized with the best of them. *

Of course, they can, but it doesn't happen overnight, it's usually a slow progression and regardless domestic or foreign, there is a pattern and a lead-up, so if any individual is flagged, then they should be watched closely.

The four people responsible for these two attacks fit one or other of those descriptions, and they are all Americans. They chose to disregard the notion that terrorism-inclined Muslims would be too afraid to mess with Texans. They could have chosen a state with a limper stance on gun ownership, but the fact remains that Texas has been victim of a couple of terrorist attacks while most states haven't suffered any at all.

Yeah, but not as much as the liberal States and by the way, where are all of these extremists you mentioned that caused the mayhem?

By the way, if you and likeminded posters from your country ever wonder why British people on JT (and everywhere else no doubt) are so resistant to your prolific ranting on how to deal with terrorism in the UK, consider that preceding 9/11, Britain had already been through 30 years of terrorism, overwhelmingly carried out by Irish republican groups who received crucial support and funding from sympathisers in the United States. 

I am very well of that, my mom is from Europe.

We move on but we don't forget. There was farmore terrorism in London and other English cities then than there is now, let alone what was going on in Northern Ireland itself. 

This is very different.

As a nation, we quickly get on with our lives after each of these incidents, because we've had a lot of practice. But when we get lectured by post-9/11 experts about our weakness in the face of terrorism, our none-too-deeply buried memory of who was paying for the bombs exploding in our streets and buildings over those three decades tends to resurface.

So what you are saying to me is, Brits are allowed to criticize the US or even Americans, but Americans are NOT allowed to criticize the UK or British people? Hmmm....interesting.

The "root cause" is human nature. Humans enjoy anger and inflicting pain. "Homo hominis lupus est". How are you going to eradicate that? Remember that God is dead and the only replacement is ... man.

Since we're doing selective interpretations (much like the terrorists, alas), you could say the same about Christianity. If it fits into your narrative, that is.

But the difference is, there isn't a growing wave of radical extremism worldwide within the Christian religion, sure you do have some loons here are there, but what the violence that has been taking place of some people that hijacked the Islamic religion and have interpret it as the real true incarnate and embodiment of what the real meaning of Islam is and how Sharia shall be the absolute law over everything is very alarming.

Blacklabel,

I have never heard a TV reporter live on the scene of a terrorist attack tell the representative she was interviewing that she cant wait to break the fast of Ramadan with him later tonight

Neither have I. But if I did, it would bother me exactly as much as if a reporter wished Merry Christmas to someone she was interviewing. Honestly, who cares?

It was like a TV commercial for converting to Islam rather than news coverage

Sounds like you have some serious ants in your pants about news coverage of Islam - if they don't condemn it, you think they're trying to convert us to it. What a paranoid pile of tosh.

No, I know what I saw and heard and was well aware of what was being pushed out to me.

Sensitivity and respect in the light of senseless mayhem? I can see why that might fog some thought patterns out there.

Not just my opinion, bass. Even wikipedia has banned the Mail as a source, because of its reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication.

Why on Earth would I care what Wikipedia a site where anyone can say anything they want? Good for them.

Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as 'unreliable' source | Technology | The Guardian

Ok, that's nice, I don't travel THAT in that swamp, so who cares.

Then why even suggest it?

Because I can.

Oh bass, bass, there are none so blind....

The Orlando nightclub shooting, 49 dead and 58 wounded.

The San Bernardino shooting, 14 dead and 17 wounded.

The Boston Marathon bombing, 3 dead and several hundred injured.

Funny how you mentioned all the leftist of liberal cities. Maybe Katy Perry has all the answers, as to how best combat radical extremism. I don't know, she's smart as most millennials are. Love and hugs should suffice. Anyway, what attack is this now, the fourth in how many weeks? 11? As I said, it seems like radical extremism is slowly taking hold on it, sad, but as I said, won't happen where I live.

Let's not even mention all the school shootups.

You guys going to ban Trucks now and knives?

If there's one country we don't need telling us how to avoid violence, it's America with its Second Amendment radicalism, thank you very much.

Yeah, but you can't stop us from commenting, just like we can't stop you guys from commenting. That's life. And yes, thank God for our Second Amendment.

Why are you so hung up on this point which you have posted six comments about and same angle?

Because it seemed to be the primary concern of everyone interviewed that this attack must be identified in a specific way. The narrative had to be about the peacefulness of their religion and the fact that it was the result of the daily persecution these people face due to Islamophobia.

I have learned to notice when something is important to someone and try to identify why that might be to get to know more about them.

Or maybe your filter lens and eventual commentary is akin to conversion to your way of thinking. Myopic..

No, I know what I saw and heard and was well aware of what was being pushed out to me.

If there's one country we don't need telling us how to avoid violence, it's America with its Second Amendment radicalism, thank you very much.

Cleo, that's b/c it's not about avoiding violence. This kind of coded language, however garbled here, is about just the opposite, glorifying it. That the only possible reaction as a country to such horrific acts is more violence. In their fantasy world, a few good militiaman can step in and do the job Trump is too handcuffed by petty annoyances like democracy to do himself. Like the neocons post 9/11, these patriots see terrorism, in abstract terms, as an opportunity to remake society. I think what really pisses them off about London is how poised Brits are in the wake of repeated attacks, lone Welshmen notw/standing. What a waste they think, if only that would happen here at home, we'd show those Euro-pansies how to deal with things properly. You know, internment camps, pogroms...

It was like a TV commercial for converting to Islam rather than news coverage.

Or maybe your filter lens and eventual commentary is akin to conversion to your way of thinking. Myopic...

Those who claim London has ghettos suggests they just don't understand London at all.

London has no muslim areas any more than it has other ethnic areas. The whole city is very diverse and multi-ethnic. There were poor muslim tenants in that tower block just as there are extremely wealthy muslim (Arab) residents two miles away in some of the most expensive homes in London.

You might find slightly higher concentrations of muslims in areas around mosques and the suchlike, but London is not in any sense segregated.

Yes, there are wealthier areas and less wealthy areas but they are all shovelled in next to each other as well.

Blacklabel, well said!

What does that even mean? What on earth is a "pro-Muslim agenda"? Is that just what you call anything that isn't anti-Muslim?

I have never heard a TV reporter live on the scene of a terrorist attack tell the representative she was interviewing that she cant wait to break the fast of Ramadan with him later tonight. It was like look at me and my virtue signaling about my nice guy friend who I am open minded enough to be eating with later.

Islam is the religion of peace repeated over and over. Repeated claims of they could have killed the attacker but didnt as a way to prove their peaceful nature. But, one man got frustrated and kicked the police van, we are so sorry for that. Shock that this could happen during the time of Ramadan like that period of time would be exempt, despite numerous attacks on non-Muslims by Muslims happening during the same time period.

It was like a TV commercial for converting to Islam rather than news coverage.

@blacklabel

In all the other cases, it was more just you have to wait until we are ready to tell you.

That is true in all cases including this one. As has been pointed out to you, they were able to tell us much faster because the attacker was arrested at the scene, alive and talking.

But last night they were actively pushing a pro-Muslim agenda

What does that even mean? What on earth is a "pro-Muslim agenda"? Is that just what you call anything that isn't anti-Muslim?

But when it is Islamic terrorists, it is presented as though any emotion or discourse is not allowed.

Nonsense. I have never seen this. Emotion and discourse are exactly what followed the recent Islamist attacks.

We have to stoically just accept it as part of daily life in a big city and unite through song, candles and Facebook posts for prayer.

No we don't, and no one says we do. Before you start banging on about Khan's comments and taking them out of context, I'd better preempt you by pointing out what he was actually saying - not that we just have to accept it, but that we must be realistic about the likelihood and therefore be vigilant and prepared.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/19/europe/london-finsbury-park-attack-muslims-react/index.html

Many local residents were angered that the media took longer to use the word "terror attack" to describe what had happened here than it had two weeks ago, when three Muslim men rammed a van into crowds of people on London Bridge.

In a statement issued around six hours after the incident, Finsbury Park Mosque condemned the "heinous" act and said they were "extremely unhappy with the mainstream media not reporting this as a terrorist attack."

Some of the reactions in this article make me wonder. Lady says she is sick and tired of terror. Well so am I.

I just hope this lady is out denouncing Radical Islamic Terrorism when it happens too.

Guess you don't have to be Muslim to be a terrorist .so much of freedom and democracy!!

I know exactly what you meant; that's why I called you out on it.

And as you can see, that is exactly what I meant as I confirmed it.

Did they make that demand? Before the media had called it that? When? Where? Or did you just make that up / read it on Breitbart?

Every person/representative from the Muslim community who was interviewed on CNN international from 1am-4am this morning. They stated they were angry due to the delay in calling this a terrorist incident. CNN, other media and the government were tripping over themselves with apologies and explanations as to why it took sooo long (6 hours is long?)

All the rest of what you said is ok. Just saying that the media and government were bending over backwards to respond to the Muslim community demands. In all the other cases, it was more just you have to wait until we are ready to tell you. But last night they were actively pushing a pro-Muslim agenda. The interview lady even told one of the people she interviewed that she couldnt wait to break the Ramadan fast with him later in the evening. TV just kept repeating over and over how the response to this incident is is just another example of how peaceful Islam is.

But when it is Islamic terrorists, it is presented as though any emotion or discourse is not allowed. We have to stoically just accept it as part of daily life in a big city and unite through song, candles and Facebook posts for prayer.

FNC on steroids?? What on Earth are you talking about? If you think so, you are entitled to your opinion.

Not just my opinion, bass. Even wikipedia has banned the Mail as a source, because of its reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication.

Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as 'unreliable' source | Technology | The Guardian

it's NOT my country, so I could care less

Then why even suggest it?

what happened there wouldn't happen where I live

Oh bass, bass, there are none so blind....

The Orlando nightclub shooting, 49 dead and 58 wounded.

The San Bernardino shooting, 14 dead and 17 wounded.

The Boston Marathon bombing, 3 dead and several hundred injured.

Let's not even mention all the school shootups.

If there's one country we don't need telling us how to avoid violence, it's America with its Second Amendment radicalism, thank you very much.

 I wasn't talking about Osborne, I was talking about the problems with radical Islam, don't change the subject.

Erm, reread the article bass, the subject is the attack on Muslims at a London mosque by a Welshman. It's your rants about radical Islam that are off topic.

I don't need to, I was just stating my opinion

No bass it is not just your opinion, either there are these ghettos or there are not. Or are you admitting that everything you write is simply pulled out of your nether regions, with no basis whatsoever in reality? I'll buy that, it makes sense.

as long as MY COUNTRY doesn't do away with them, I'm good. Because what happened there wouldn't happen where I live

It did happen in your country, very recently, with guns, and more people were killed by that one shooter than by the combined efforts of all the terror attacks in the UK this year. Before you protest that that was Florida, not Texas, your point was clearly about YOUR COUNTRY, which includes both Florida and Texas, with largely the same gun laws in each.

As for UK "ghettos", really what are you on about?

( A tip for you, bass - don't cite the Daily Mail if you want people to take you seriously. It's a rabble rag, like Fox News on steroids.)

FNC on steroids?? What on Earth are you talking about? If you think so, you are entitled to your opinion.

No. The UK police neither want more need more firepower. Most people, I suspect, would prefer to see less, not more.

Hey, it's NOT my country, so I could care less, as long as MY COUNTRY doesn't do away with them, I'm good. Because what happened there wouldn't happen where I live. I have enough guns.

Anyway, you are missing the point, I wasn't talking about Osborne, I was talking about the problems with radical Islam, don't change the subject.

You still haven't explained where these ghettos are.

I don't need to, I was just stating my opinion and if you don't agree, it's ok. I'm fine with that and I'm fine where I'm at. I wish the Brits all the luck in battling the Islamic extremists.

As far as Obsborne is concerned as I have said before, it was a totally a horrendous act that should be condemned, NO excuse for what the man did, however, the guy is not of the out of control problem that is taking hold of London recently.

@blacklabel

My meaning of the word responded was not a police response or a security response. It was a verbal or written response that suited the narrative Muslims wanted to push.

I know exactly what you meant; that's why I called you out on it.

The Muslim community demanded it be called a terrorist attack. The media and government immediately responded to that by calling it such.

Did they make that demand? Before the media had called it that? When? Where? Or did you just make that up / read it on Breitbart?

The community then demanded that the media and government tell the story of how the attacker was not harmed and that is the true Islam.

What? Should they have lied and reported that he was harmed even though he wasn't? What are you even talking about? He wasn't harmed, that's a fact, and their job is to report facts.

Then it was Islamaphobia, which the government and media then started pushing too.

Given that the attacker said he wanted to kill all Muslims, this is not an unreasonable thing to call it.

All the other attacks, the ethnicity and name and anything else about the attacker was withheld for a couple of days to not impede the investigation. This attack, it was announced within 6 hours the name of the guy, the fact that he is white, his age, his hometown, and that it was a terrorist attack.

It's a much quicker task to identify someone when they are alive and talking. This really isn't a difficult point to grasp, so it seems to me you have intentionally not done so.

Otherwise they would have withheld all info like they always do until they raided his home and checked his associaterwise they would have withheld all info like they always do until they raided his home and checked his associates

Disingenuous again; they did raid his home and check his associates. You're criticising non-existent sequences of events.

As long as the U.K. Allows these ghettos to flourish and refuses to take a hardline against radical Islam, it's going to get worse

You still haven't explained where these ghettos are. Finsbury Park, the area around the FP Mosque, might not be upmarket Mayfair, but it's not a ghetto either.

You also haven't explained how taking a 'hardline against radical Islam' would have stopped this disturbed Welshman from flipping his lid.

Or are you suggesting that the people he hit deserved the attack because they were Muslims coming out of a mosque? If so you're skating very close to the twisted rationale of the monsters who did 9/11.

@Cleo

No! Not in the slightest. There is no justification for this type of atrocity. I apologize if you read my comments to infer that opinion .

However, what is the sentiment and what is the mood of the population in the UK?

What is the normal person in the street supposed to think when every single month there is a case of slaughter being associated with radical extremist Islam?

The theory of dialectics goes some way to explain the current situation. Please refer to that theory for a better understanding of the situation

"Allows these ghettos to flourish and refuses to take a hardline against radical Islam, it's going to get worse. But that's on them, so I just say good luck.

I thank god we don't have to worry about that ever happening in the US."

Thank god it never happened!? WTF!? Are we talking about the same US that had 9/11 and the marathon bombings and also as I recall a shooter here and there that was radicalized!? (Not to be confused with any number of shootings carried out much more easily and deadlier because of our lax gun laws against our school children mind you...)

The difference between this event, and the other two that happened in London and the third in Manchester, is that none of the attackers survived and were killed or died at the scene but Darren Osborne was quickly captured and handed over to the police, without a beating. There were two other reported running away from the van but I've read no further news on that point.

Fair point. But by doing this, it shows the media and government doesnt really believe its terrorism. Otherwise they would have withheld all info like they always do until they raided his home and checked his associates.

Ghetto means a run down area of a city occupied by a minority group. The Daily Mail is a sort of right wing trash gutter press but with a good sports page.

Oh, I know better than a lot of people, so I don't need the explanation. I grew up half of my life in Europe, I know it all too well.

You know it tickles me when Europeans think they know everything about the US, when the US criticizes the Europeans, they know nothing. I could care less what anyone thinks or tries to make this a politically correct topic. As long as the U.K. Allows these ghettos to flourish and refuses to take a hardline against radical Islam, it's going to get worse. But that's on them, so I just say good luck.

I thank god we don't have to worry about that ever happening in the US.

Not all immigrants are muslim and not all muslim are immigrants. The muslim population of the UK is less than 5% of the total. The number of non muslim immigrant groups are higher.

Of course, but in my ideal world, we would completely stop labelling people as a Muslims or Christians, Blacks or Whites, Left or Right, or any other label that divides our communities. We need to go back to focusing only on the individual ideas people hold. There can be no protection for bad ideas just because they are the ideas of a larger religious, ethnic or racial group. Does someone applying for a job at my company think violence against innocent people is OK, or that women are inferior to men because of their religion? If the topic comes up, I should be allowed to ask them directly and toss their CV in the bin if they answer yes. Does someone visiting our country wish to overturn democracy, abolish our right to publish cartoons and outlaw homosexuality? Why not require them to tick a few boxes on their arrival card at immigration and deny them entry if they answer yes? The law cannot prevent people from holding these ideas in their minds, but it should never protect people from the negative consequences of holding bad ideas.

they should do more surveillance of mosques

How would that have stopped Darren Osborne? He's probably never set foot in a mosque in his life.

the ghettos,

What ghettos?

( A tip for you, bass - don't cite the Daily Mail if you want people to take you seriously. It's a rabble rag, like Fox News on steroids.)

give the police more fire power,

No. The UK police neither want more need more firepower. Most people, I suspect, would prefer to see less, not more.

increase wiretapping on suspected radicals,*

How would that have stopped Darren Osborne? He wasn't suspected of anything before he drove into a group of innocent people.

any illegals should serve a lengthier prison sentence and then deported

How would that have stopped Darren Osborne? He wasn't an 'illegal'. And where would you deport him to? The non-existent 'ghettos' of Weston-super-Mare in Somerset where he grew up, or the nonexistent 'ghettos' of Cardiff in deepest darkest Wales where he lived?

The Finsbury Park mosque attack is a response to this

kurisupisu - I find your 'explanation' of this attack very chilling. It reads as if you are justifying the actions/motives of the attacker. There is no justification - unless you subscribe to the radical 'it's OK to kill non-believers' line of thought that motivates all the other attacks we have seen in recent years, from 9/11 on.

It doesn't matter who the attackers are or who the victims are. It is wrong to attempt to hurt a person or group of people simply because you perceive them to 'belong' to some nebulous group you may not approve of, whether that group is defined in terms of religion, race, sexual orientation, nationality or whatever.

Were you also very alarmed when the media and government responded immediately to the attack last week in Borough Market? If not, why not?

My meaning of the word responded was not a police response or a security response. It was a verbal or written response that suited the narrative Muslims wanted to push.

The Muslim community demanded it be called a terrorist attack. The media and government immediately responded to that by calling it such. The community then demanded that the media and government tell the story of how the attacker was not harmed and that is the true Islam. The media and government immediately responded by pushing that narrative too. Then it was Islamaphobia, which the government and media then started pushing too.

All the other attacks, the ethnicity and name and anything else about the attacker was withheld for a couple of days to not impede the investigation. This attack, it was announced within 6 hours the name of the guy, the fact that he is white, his age, his hometown, and that it was a terrorist attack. What happened to withholding that while the incident is still being investigated?

*'any law promulgated by any foreign prince or supernatural deity.' *Sorry

"Yeah, but you're not hearing that in ANY heavily Muslim community in the States, even areas where there are known possible hotbeds of radicals because they know a lot of people have guns and the retaliation would be swift and severe."

I know you are severely one sided on most things, but lets be realistic. If Daesh and their ilk are fighting whole professionally trained and well equipped militaries from around the world at once, not to include a suicide bomber is just that, a walking or bomb driving suicidal person ready to die, even if every single person in America could be armed, it would not stop the bomb from going off.

It also would not stop someone driving into people, shooting and or stabbing people, although in those situations the attacker could be potentiality stopped quicker. 

Or these untrained civilians who are carrying their toys could make things potentially worse and blindly firing killing innocent people in the process.

But if the attackers are ready to die, you, nor anyone else possibly carrying a side arm is going to worry them. In fact if they were being tactical you gun carries would be the first to be targeted, if strictly in a gun battle scenario, with occasional sweeping the grounds for innocence to keep ordinary people feeling terrorised. But it would depend on the situation and purpose of attack.

"any illegals should serve a lengthier prison sentence and then deported."

Why not simply deport them and save the American tax payers. Or was this for more serious crimes than just being an illegal?

@blacklabel

I was just very alarmed how the media and government seemed to just immediately respond

Were you also very alarmed when the media and government responded immediately to the attack last week in Borough Market? If not, why not?

maybe not but there are no Ghettos in the UK.

Uh-huh....That would be like saying, Trump is a Brunette.

You are probably right that Americans are better at killing each other from gunshot than any terrorist, domestic or foreign, even including the 9/11.

Seems like the U.K. Should start to outlaw trucks and knives, maybe that will be a good start to curb the violence.

Ultimately, the solution will involve removing religion as a protected class from human rights legislation. There is no reason for it to be there alongside race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation. Ideas that support violence should never be protected by our laws.

If Darren Osborne had publicly called on people to terrorise all Muslims or promoted a book that called for the same, he would rightly have been arrested for inciting violence. If he was non-British and had shown up at the airport and announced to a border agent that he believed all democratic governments should be overthrown in favour of a non-democratic global neo-nazi facist state, he would rightly (and legally) be denied entry into Britain.

Yet, someone holding similar ideas about other groups of people, or those who promote a book that calls for unbelievers to be terrorised and killed, and who freely annouce their anti-democratic ambitions for the future can live and travel without fear of any consequences simply because our laws protect harmful speech, publications and ideas as long as they happen to deal with the afterlife. It's absurd.

I was just very alarmed how the media and government seemed to just immediately respond that every demand of the Muslim community. But when it was the other way around it was just part and parcel of living in a big city and pretty much have to get used to it.

the one CNN lady even asked the guy directly what the media could they do for his religion to help them overcome the hatred against them, is that what the media does now? Tell me that it's the religion of peace today that's persecuted and must live in fear of the threat of terrorism?

The security forces are doing all of what you are suggesting and more. "Ghettos" very American?

I don't believe in political correctness.

There are thousands of highly armed police on the streets and in London there are at least two units of the SAS. There's a 24/7 watchlist of 3,000. Radicals are imprisoned and radical mosques raided.

Thats not enough and that's not what I said, there is another rudimentary factor and that's to isolate, target and infiltrate the internet, web sites and the mosques, they need to go more internally.

*Maybe you missed it, but in the last terrorist attack with three guys in a van stabbing people, hundreds of armed police and the SAS were there within minutes and the terrorists were shot dead eight minutes following the emergency calls.*

I get it, but that wasn't my point, so we don't need to go over that part.

As for deporting people, that can't happen if they are British born like the first terrorist attack this year on the Westminster Bridge. The Manchester bomber was also born in Britain.

I never said that about Native born people, I was talking about foreign nationals and as far as on the domestic side, they should receive harsher and lengthier prison sentences

The current terrorist is also born in Wales and white and nothing more than a drunk hater but now the London mosques will have police protection taking them away from other places.

Well, that would apply to non-Muslims as we..

so if the solution is not politically correct "its probably not the right way to go about it." ?

Yep, probably.

Plenty of armchair muslim-haters who think they know the right thing to do. They don't.

@strangerland, so if the solution is not politically correct "its probably not the right way to go about it." ? Hopeless.

I can't say-it wouldn't be politically correct......

Your original idea that the root of the problem needs to be dealt with is correct. But your answer above shows that whatever you think the implementation of that should be is probably not the right way to go about it.

@Strangerland

I can't say-it wouldn't be politically correct......

kurisipisu, that wouldnt be politically correct.

What would be? What does 'addressing the root cause of the problem' refer to? How does one 'address' the 'root cause' of the problem?

kurisipisu, that wouldnt be politically correct.

If there are so many potential terrorist attacks (13,000) then why isn't the root cause of the problem not being addressed ?

so you have no ideas which additional "aggressive measures" can be taken? Why not just say so then?

Sorry, I have to work to pay bills, now I have time to reply. I have always said, they should do more surveillance of mosques, the ghettos, give the police more fire power, increase wiretapping on suspected radicals, any illegals should serve a lengthier prison sentence and then deported.

according to the British security forces they have been able to thwart more than 13,000 possible terrorist attacks so it would be incorrect to state they are not definitely working. 

If they are working, then they are doing a horrible job. How many attacks now in how many weeks?

Like all the countries, suffering various terrorist attacks they will be unable to stop them 100% even and including America.

Yeah, but you're not hearing that in ANY heavily Muslim community in the States, even areas where there are known possible hotbeds of radicals because they know a lot of people have guns and the retaliation would be swift and severe.

Btw, the IS magazine Dabiq is available (all issues) online. I read it. I dont recall what Robert Fisk is purported to have stated being mentioned in the magazine.

The line that terrorists seek to sow division is a chimera.

Attillathehungry, Excellent points and correct.

As for the support for Islamist ideas, we can quibble about the numbers, but the fact remains that a distressingly large number of British Muslims support Islamist ideas.

We can quibble, or we can reference the survey correctly, rather than pull numbers out of the ether.

Why is CNN and all the government people falling all over themselves to call it a horrific act of terrorism? Wouldn't it just be a lone wolf hate crime? Muslims interviewed on tv were insistent it be called terrorism and were angered that it took so long (a few hours?) for that to be officially announced.

This could be a lone wolf attack, the perp could well have mental health issues. But it's still an act of terror. Wouldn't it be fair to say most of those who engage in terrorism aren't the most mentally stable of people?

Why is CNN and all the government people falling all over themselves to call it a horrific act of terrorism? Wouldn't it just be a lone wolf hate crime? Muslims interviewed on tv were insistent it be called terrorism and were angered that it took so long (a few hours?) for that to be officially announced.

The attacker has been named as 47 year old Darren Osborne from Cardiff. A former neighbour is quoted as saying "He had lived on the estate for a few years. He's always been a complete c*** but this is really surprising"

Yeah they were really quick to identify this as a terror attack, had it determined and announced within the hour along with race and age of the attacker. New commission to deal with Islamaphobia should be in place by tomorrow.

BBah it's nothing but idiot versus idiot except the fundies have "god" on their side.

IIve said it before - the government justify listening and recording and storing every single communication you make on the grounds of protection - and they KNOW who the majority of the wannabees are - yet they fail at almost every step. All those known to security services need rounding up and holding in isolation without trial. They hate our free and open society so let's remove them from it, they don't deserve rights.

TThe same applies to right-wing nuts or whatever label this particular idiot subscribes to. Like the Jo Cox murdering coward, they are terrorists too....

Luddite's first comment pretty much nailed another thing I was thinking about. Either you have the retaliation by random members of the general public, or you have extremists trying to frame each other to instigate more negative perception of their "enemies".

I predicted this was going to happen.  The ineptitude of a overly-PC government not protecting it's citizens from a hostile anti-democratic ideology,  putting the comfort of Islamic ideological values over their own in hopes that they'll "integrate" into the local society (news flash, that doesn't work) , is resulting in vigilantism, and societal self-"Justified" retaliation against the problem.   Have to identify the problem before you can deal with it.  I don't this situation at all... but I predicted that if the country's leaders don't get their heads out of the PC realm, its all going to go downhill from there.

except you haven't actually stated what additional aggressive measures could be taken that are not already being made?

Well, it's not enough and it's definitely not working.

The attackers or the one who was captured has no history of right wing extremism but could have mental issues. He said to those who captured him, he wanted to just kill Muslims.

So it's the old "basket case" excuse again, eh?

There are Christian churches in Muslim countries.

Not many and you'd better keep a very low profile.

and "moderators", delete my post and I will keep reposting it until you allow free speech on this so called news website.

Apparantly, you didn't read the posting rules, before blowing up, you might want to do that first. Remember, the Mods always have the last say just to let you know.

We should all keep calm; this is just part of living in a big city.

While you're saying it with sarcasm. The message is actually correct.

We should all keep calm; this is just part of living in a big city. The mayor of London said so himself.

Just what aggressive measures are you suggesting would work and I'm guessing you mean more for the Jihadist attacks on the London Bridges and bombing in Manchester than this attack probably by three white haters or right wing extremists.

Gee, so how many Whites worldwide are committing acts in the name of Jesus? How many radical extremist Christians have be murdering people on a massive scale? That's not condemning Muslims, we all know the majority of Muslims don't act or think like this. We are talking about the radical Islamists. So yes, all the resources should be used to minimize the attacks from these homegrown terrorists.

(It) found that 31% believed the US government was behind the 9/11 terror attacks with a further 7% blaming the Jews and only 4% saying al-Qaida was responsible.

What!!?? That 39% has to be "Alex Jones" followers. Who writes this crap? What a bunch of garbage.

As for this tragedy, I feel bad for the injured, heartfelt sympathy and it's a terrible thing and just not too long ago there was another attack, I wonder what the Londoners will do now? Carry on until the next attacks or take aggressive measures.

Radical mosque it is....

This attack did not take place outside the Finsbury Park Mosque.

Here the is vehicle just before the outrageous attack :

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/08556ee15346110fea2b9c7a7e41c3f21ba03c6ecf11ce42b1722084a517ab8d.png

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10841236/Abu-Hamza-trial-The-hate-preacher-of-Finsbury-Park-who-tried-to-plead-he-was-a-friend-of-the-West.html

Radical mosque it is....

Jesus christ. Stop calling it "Islamophobia." It's an act of terrorism. If they intend to keep calling it that they might as well start calling the other terrorist attacks "an act of Westophobia." We should not differentiate these attacks. They are all TERROR attacks against free people.

more rubbish from this fascist mouthpiece : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10841236/Abu-Hamza-trial-The-hate-preacher-of-Finsbury-Park-who-tried-to-plead-he-was-a-friend-of-the-West.html

.People should not jump to conclusions : white anglican lorry drivers are for the most part law-abiding, peace loving individuals...

Muslims congregating in a radical mosque being targeted, this is really terrible and so unexpected...

It's not a radical mosque. Why do you say it is?

Muslims congregating in a radical mosque being targeted, this is really terrible and so unexpected...

Taj, as you said, I was narrowing the focus to Islamic terror. It is different from the others in many signiicant ways, not the least of which is its global ambitions. The other groups you mentioned had very limited scope by comparison, and tended to be narrow in focus.

As for the support for Islamist ideas, we can quibble about the numbers, but the fact remains that a distressingly large number of British Muslims support Islamist ideas.

It's all conjecture until the identity of the driver is divulged and he has been interviewed by the Met.

I am waiting for this to occur so I don't have an opinion yet...,,

Why are people trying to rationalise this with military thinking? It's clearly a nutter, like all terrorists, in this case an anti-Islamic one. Probably a member of the English Defence League or some other extreme right wing loony outfit.

M3M3M3, I'm suprised you find that Robert Fisk story to be 'amazing'. It seems like common sense that the goal of ISIS/Daesh is to make Muslims peacefully coexisting in the west, unable to continue living that way, ie: to make them feel the need to rise up against oppression/hatred. What else would be their purpose?

To AttillatheHungry, you write very confidently about "the purpose of terrorism", but it seems your experience of "terrorism" is pretty limited. Perhaps you are young. You don't remember the IRA bombings of London. Didn't live through or experienceETA separatists campaigns in Spain. Tamil separatists in Sri Lanka. Etc., Etc. Missed the committed kidnapping campaigns of the FARC in Columbia. Weren't here in Tokyo for the Sarin, VX, and hydrogen cyanide attacks. There have been many terrorists of many stripes over the decades.

"The purpose of terrorism", you later narrowed to one particular flavour, and even there, I doubt that you have any evidence to back up what you write.

Thanks for the reply Aly. I'll have a look. I don't really doubt that Robert Fisk said this, but I'm extremely skeptical that it was literally spelled out in the Dabiq magazine as he claims. This ISIS magazine is widely distributed on the internet and much has been written about it, but I've never heard of this ISIS plot to spread Islamophobia to make life unbearable for western Muslims until today. If it is actually written in there, I would have expected someone in addition to Robert Fisk to cover such an amazing story. This is why I'm a bit skeptical.

While the terrorists may be a minority, those who support them may not be. Nearly half of Muslims in the UK support Sharia law, think 9/11 was a Jewish/US conspiracy, more than half think that being gay should be illegal...

I think the ship has sailed.

Actually, 23% of those polled were in favor of sharia law. Whilst cause for concern; it's not the "half of Muslims in the UK" you claimed.

From The Guardian

ICM conducted face-to-face, at-home interviews with a representative sample of 1,000 Muslims across the UK between 25 April and 31 May 2015. A control sample of 1,008 people representative of the country as a whole were interviewed over the phone to provide a comparison.

As for your figures regarding September 11th? Also from The Guardian

(It) found that 31% believed the US government was behind the 9/11 terror attacks with a further 7% blaming the Jews and only 4% saying al-Qaida was responsible.

That's not quite the same as saying "half". Is it?

That sounds interesting. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the article you are talking about despite doing quite a bit of Googling. Can you provide a link?

M3M3M3- I didn't google it when I found it. It was on one of his lectures on Youtube. It wasn't easy to find. I can try to find it again but it will take some time. I won't have the time nor energy today. (Mondays are my worst days)  

Just type in Robert Fisk full and you will get a few lectures to listen to. But asides from what he says about IS's magazine, his lectures are amazing to listen to. He's been in Rakkah, has interviewed Bin Laden, and has ALOT of stories to talk about. As someone who has spent a considerable part of his life in the ME, I can tell you this guy knows what he's talking about. I do definitely recommend listening to his speeches.

But if you want to find what he says about IS by yourself, search Youtube, not google. More narrow search.

While the terrorists may be a minority, those who support them may not be.

Time to put together thought police. Can't be having the people thinking bad thoughts.

Hmmm. Apparently, on ITV it's being claimed that the driver was blowing kisses and giving victory signs from the back of the police van.

Heretic;

While the terrorists may be a minority, those who support them may not be. Nearly half of Muslims in the UK support Sharia law, think 9/11 was a Jewish/US conspiracy, more than half think that being gay should be illegal...

I think the ship has sailed.

White van man on a rampage. Makes the notion of living in London ever less appealing.

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it, mind. Every city has its plus and negatives.

Surprised Trump hasn't tweeted about this yet

He won't. The victims are the wrong religion.

White van man on a rampage.  Makes the notion of living in London ever less appealing.

Surprised Trump hasn't tweeted about this yet

He's usually quick about anything terrorist-looking, like that Philippine casino incident

Maybe he's learning

It has existed for the past 30 years, since Europe started the wholesale importation of people who do not share their values. The more of such people you import, the more division is created. No need for terrorism to do so. Rather, terrorism is the result of division that already exists.

Ah. It took several posts but eventually, the core message was revealed. And how delightfully kipperish in its outlook.

Luckily, the terrorists (whoever they are and whatever ideology they use as an excuse) are and always will be in the minority.

Londoners together. No matter what.

Maybe unpopular, but I agree WilliB.

Beliefs and ideas inform actions, it would be disingenuous for people to claim this was a case of "islamophobia" or an attack on one set of ideas from another while simultaneously suggesting that other attacks can't "possibly" be related to a set of beliefs the attackers hold above all else.

It would be wrong to say all believers of one faith all act the same or that even people who hold an unfavorable view about a particular faith are all the same either, but to remove it from the conversation is to ignore the very things that drive us past our humanity and do harm to others, misinformed or not, peoples actions are informed by what they believe.

People can say all they like none of these people that commit these terrible acts are representatives or representatives of the "true" meaning of any set of beliefs on any side but who is the judge of that.. look up no true scotsman fallacy.

These people attending their chosen group to associate with should be free to do so without worry for their lives, just as those in all the attacks that have gone on recently, a terrible and cowardly action, though I fear only the beginning,

"Not throughout the world. They want to establish a caliphate in the middle east. They don't care about the rest of the world. They commit terrorism in the west so that we end up hating western muslims and driving them outof the west and straight to the bosom of IS.

That's what they have said they want."

Although I agree with what you said about sowing seeds of discourse for Mulims around the world, Daesh wont stop until the entire world is one big hell hole.

I am not saying what you posted is not true, possibly from one of the Daesh themselves, but the Taliban are the ones from my understanding that want every last American (or possibly just non-believers) out of the Middle East. As far as I know they are the ones not concerned with the rest of the world. But as I said, attitudes and ideas change.

Let the propagand slugfest begin. Every single islamist terror attack is dismissed by the politicians and media as "deranged individual", "gun problem", "workplace incident", or whatever... anything but mentioning any ideology. But now, we hear no end about about the evils of "islamophobia". A wet dream for the biased media.

I am appalled by any terrorist attack. But the double standard of the politicians and media are truly a sight to behold.

".... thereby making their lives unbearable there and forcing them to immigrate to the caliphate."

That nice little theory doesn't explain all the Islamist terror against the West (as well as Asia, Africa...and everywhere) BEFORE that caliphate existed, like, um 9/11.

IS and all the other groups don't have a single strategy. They are devout fundamentalists, whose strict and literal interpretation of Islamic scriptures tells them to kill the infidel "wherever you find them."

Robert Fisk of the Guardian spoke about this exact topic. He got his hands on a copy of IS's magazine Dabeek. According to Fisk, In the magazine it clearly states that IS's goal is to create terrorism in the west so as to sow as much hatred of muslims living in the west as possible, thereby making their lives unbearable there and forcing them to immigrate to the caliphate. 

That sounds interesting. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the article you are talking about despite doing quite a bit of Googling. Can you provide a link?

Dogmatic Ideology to the point where you are prepared to take the life of others is the issue.

Sometime it take the name of a religion, sometimes political systems, sometimes groups with the specific aim against another specific group or race.. I don't really care what its called but where is the humanity in it all..

I hope its not a sign of things to come, and sadly the total opposite of what is required to have a civil society, and make it much harder to talk about the very real issues that do exist with some followers of religion.

I always here the same old shibboleth: that terrorists are trying to "sow division" within communities. There is no evidence of this.

Yes there is. Robert Fisk of the Guardian spoke about this exact topic. He got his hands on a copy of IS's magazine Dabeek.  According to Fisk, In the magazine it clearly states that IS's goal is to create terrorism in the west so as to sow as much hatred of muslims living in the west as possible, thereby making their lives unbearable there and forcing them to immigrate to the caliphate.  

That's their plan and that's what they are trying to do.

The purpose of terrorism, at least of the ISIS/Islamic variety, is to create conditions necessary to enforce Shraria law throughout the world. To establish a Caliphate.

Not throughout the world. They want to establish a caliphate in the middle east. They don't care about the rest of the world. They commit terrorism in the west so that we end up hating western muslims and driving them out of the west and straight to the bosom of IS.

That's what they have said they want.

White hatred and Islamophobia.

Would you care to define 'White hatred'? Do you think the Westminster bridge attack was 'black hatred' or the London bridge attack 'Arab hatred'? What does race have to do with any of these events?

Met Police confirm one fatality, a man pronounced dead at the scene. Eight people taken to hospital.

IS wants obedience to create its caliphate. It attempts to gain this obedience by sowing division between Muslims that agree with it and everyone else, including Muslims, that disagree with IS. Once the IS believers are divided from the non-IS believers, the non-IS believers have the choice of dying or converting.

For all we know, this could have been an accident.

The Finsbury Park Mosque has long been in the nationalists' sights. It was formerly run by an imam convicted, among other things, of race hatred. Funded by the Saudis, US intelligence called the mosque a “save haven” for terrorists, and before a police roundup of members of the congregation, youths learned such useful skills in its basement as field stripping Ak-47s.

This latest incident is a case of hatred begetting hatred.

Takeda, guess you did't read where I wrote "at least of the ISIS/Islamic variety". Plus, the race of the suspect is irrelevant to the topic of religion. It may be that he was anti Muslim. However, it is not due to his race. There are thousands of white people who embrace Islam. You are being racist to suggest that his skin colour is relevant.

The purpose of terrorism, at least of the ISIS/Islamic variety, is to create conditions necessary to enforce Shraria law throughout the world. To establish a Caliphate.

If the people opposing them are unified, that is pretty much impossible. Through sowing division, they cause some of the other side to act irrationally, such as condemning all Muslims for the actions of a few. When that happens, it makes it easier for the terrorists to recruit more members to their side, from those who are disaffected by the panicked actions of those whom the terrorists are fighting.

While a small number actually want to participate in such acts, a rather larger number support the general aims and goals.

And that number grows everytime someone burns down a Mosque, or condemns all Muslims online.

Again, who is this division supposed to divide exactly?

Us.

The purpose of terrorism, at least of the ISIS/Islamic variety, is to create conditions necessary to enforce Shraria law throughout the world. To establish a Caliphate.

guess you disn't read where the suspect is a white guy and the victims appear to be Muslim/Arab?

The purpose of terrorism, at least of the ISIS/Islamic variety, is to create conditions necessary to enforce Shraria law throughout the world. To establish a Caliphate. They don't give a crap about creating division. They want to create obediance, if necessary through slaughter and barbarism. Polls of Muslims living in Europe show this to be true. While a small number actually want to participate in such acts, a rather larger number support the general aims and goals. They are what Bill Maher called "big fans" of the terrorists.

Again, who is this division supposed to divide exactly?

Terror and fear don't create division.

Do you not read the internet after terrorist attacks? Because that comment is clearly ignoring reality.

They create obediance.

Really? So you're obedient to the terrorists after their attacks? Can you please quote some of your comments which reflect this obedience, as I don't ever recall you saying anything obedient on a story about a terrorist attack.

Terror and fear don't create division. They create obediance.

By the way, in all this division sowing, precisely who do the terrorists want to sow division between? The division exists already. It has existed for the past 30 years, since Europe started the wholesale importation of people who do not share their values. The more of such people you import, the more division is created. No need for terrorism to do so. Rather, terrorism is the result of division that already exists.

London is already a divided city. So are many of the large cities of Europe. There is no need to sow division where it already exists.

So what, you think that the terrorists are going to say 'oh, there's already division. We don't need to create anymore!'

Pretty faulty logic there.

Most terror attacks are not meant to do anything of the sort. They are to sow terror. Fear.

Which creates division.

London is already a divided city. So are many of the large cities of Europe. There is no need to sow division where it already exists.

As for military strategy, I did do a stint in the armed forces, including a bit of training in insurgency techniques. Most terror attacks are not meant to do anything of the sort. They are to sow terror. Fear. To create compliance amonst the terrorized. To facilitate the eventual imposition of a medieval system. Not to create division.

Terrorists have no religion no faith and may be no soul.

I always here the same old shibboleth: that terrorists are trying to "sow division" within communities. There is no evidence of this. It is a convenient leftist trope that fits with the whole multi-cultural narrative. The division is already there, between those who want a world where women and gays are second class citizens at best, and those who want a world of freedom and human rights. Terrorists want to rule a kingdom of corpses.

Not a Londoner then.

There is no evidence of this.

Then you don't know much about military strategy. When the opposing force is stronger, the best way to defeat them is to get them to fight inwardly, weakening their position overall. Do you really think terrorists believe they can kill everyone with bombings and knife/gun attacks? Not a chance. Their goal is to create terror which then causes their opponents to act irrationally, sowing discord, and weakening their own position.

Which is exactly what they have been able to do, thanks to the panicked reactions of those who fall victim to it.

Makes me wonder if this was a revenge attack against Muslims in general from the other attack on Londoners claimed by Daesh. If it is, it was pointless. Attack Daesh directly, not innocent people.

This is all just speculation however, since besides a "white van" and "a man/he" while others just simply say "a person" there was not much else. Hope the people that were hit are alright though.

I always here the same old shibboleth: that terrorists are trying to "sow division" within communities. There is no evidence of this. It is a convenient leftist trope that fits with the whole multi-cultural narrative. The division is already there, between those who want a world where women and gays are second class citizens at best, and those who want a world of freedom and human rights. Terrorists want to rule a kingdom of corpses.

A few months back a racist Trump fan up in Quebec killed 7 people at a mosque. None of the Alt-Right/GOP types ever mentioned it. That is who they are.

For anyone, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Tree worshiper, if you feel that two wrongs = a right, you are not a good adherent of your faith.  

I, frankly, do not want to stoop to the level of a jihadist. Just sayin. . .

Felipe - yes, it is. I'm old enough to remember the hijackings and bombings of the '70s and '80s. It probably feels like more due to the Internet, which has had two psychological effects:

More people are aware of these tragedies in real time, rather than having to read about them the next day in the paper;

People comment on and share news, which gives them a feeling of stake in the events.

Despite all the violence and idiocy, I'm still an optimist: The world is a much better place now than it was when I was born in 1965. All we can do is to keep striving to make it better.

More terror. Whoever did this is trying to turn different parts of the community against each other.

It appears the attacker was detained by the public and handed over to police. Good.