Once again...

[Jonas]

Our deepest sympathies and prayers for our cousins in London and the UK.

[CharlesHarris]

Prayers for this terrible tragedy.

A question someone may have the answer for, which might or might not be related, but what is the policy of the UK govt, relating to those who leave and go to places like Syria, etc., who may have gone to terrorist training camps, fought for ISIS, etc. and then return.

Understand the security services cannot watch them all or arrest those who have not (so far as we know) committed any crime in the UK, but if they leave to serve as a mercenary fighter, not a NATO or UK ally, then why are they allowed back in the first place?

I know that France is considering legislation which would revoke citizenship of such people.

In the US Trump blusters about something similar, but I don't see it happening. While we have a few going over and coming back the numbers percentage wise are nothing like your experience, so this is a place where America is watching and hoping to learn. An unhappy state of affairs...

[sethorly]

I'm pretty sure that the unofficial position is to try to kill them before they leave Syria. My best understanding is that a country can't just say, "You're returning from Syria so you're a jihadi so you're going to prison," as that would require evidence, which is almost impossible to get. They'd just say they were a medic or something like that.

As we ought to all know by now, the link between Boko Haram, Jahbat Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Europe's homegrown terrorists is that they are all part of the sub-group of Islam known as Salafism. Islam has 2 big groups who like to kill each other, Shia and Sunni. Sunnis are split into many many different groups, one of which is Salafism. Incidentally, the Taliban are Deobandi, not Salafist, and would probably just melt back into the hills peacefully if left alone (but we shouldn't do that as they grow poppies so they need incinerating). Furthermore, Israel is fighting Shia terrorists, not Sunni terrorists (ISIS, part of Salafism and therefore Sunni, apologised recently to Israel for attacking an Israeli position by mistake).

So, what is Salafism, for everyone needs to know that or we will never get rid of these explosive events and the next time could be your child? Salafis follow the 5 pillars of Islam, but then their most important creed is "al wara wal bara", which basically translates as "hate who Allah hates, and he hates everyone who isn't a Salafi". That's why the biggest victims of terror are Muslims, because Salafis want to kill all the other sub-groups including other Sunnis. So to be clear, you have a group of Muslims, 15% of the worldwide Muslim population (the figure is anus-tighteningly scary), who believe it is their religious duty to hate. And of course they want to Islamise the entire world, through the minor jihad of violence if necessary. Not all Salafis are violent, but neither were all Nazis violent - hopefully you can see how the creed central to their beliefs bends someone to violence through hated.

The 600 odd Muslims who went to fight for ISIS and who have returned to the UK, and the (at the very least - it's probably far greater now) 3,000 other Muslims on MI5's watchlist are just the violent tip of the significantly growing Salafi iceberg crashing into the UK and Europe through migration and significantly increased reproduction. Salafism is spread through the internet but also through mosques financed by those who spread Salafism - Saudi Arabia. And here we have a problem, because Trump just kissed their arses in return for a 500bn arms deal. So we can't go after the country spreading this menace, this cancer within Islam, because we'd ruin all our nice arms trade deals. And to speculate, I think Russia and the US (and UK) are quite happy to keep certain Middle Eastern conflicts going so that Muslims cull Muslims (Russia supports Shias, West supports Sunnis) and so that both power blocks can profit from arms sales.

To defeat this terrorism we need to be clear about what we are fighting (the religiously inspired violent Salafis and the Salafi ideology). Gradually I think we're getting there, as increasingly people are beginning to realise (probably with horror) that there is indeed a link between Islam and violence and terror.

Robert Fisk from the Independent knows all this, as does Maajid Nawaz of the UK (Muslim) organisation Quilliam that seeks to fight Islamic extremism.

One other point I'd make - you saw those Muslims with the banner promoting peace near the ITV journalist reporting on Manchester, and the young muslimas holding candles and hands across Tower Bridge after that attack, and you see these fb reports of Muslims gathering to protest terrorism - they are either Shia muslims (who of course would protest against the Sunni Salafist terrorists as they're fighting against each other in Syria and all over the Middle East), or Ahmadiyya Muslims (who are hated by every other Muslim, and whose version of Islam is banned on penalty of death in Pakistan - the Glasgow shopkeeper who wished his customers Happy Easter and got stabbed to death for it was Ahmadiyya).

So, those who say this is nothing to do with Islam are wrong. And those who say it is all Muslims that are the problem are wrong. It may be that those who say Islam is to blame are correct, but for reasons I won't go into now.

Thank you Americans for your thoughts, they are meaningful regardless of what people say about words being useless. Westerners need to stick together and fight for our hard-won (and, fuck it, superior) culture.

[MaryN]

I have just about had it with Muslims in general. I don't care a f**k if they are sunni, shiite or just plain shit. My personal desire is to round the whole worthless bunch up and drop them into the Atlantic from 30,000 feet up (minus parachutes). But that is just my wishful thinking!

[Phil]

Thanks to our American friends for your kind thoughts re our jihadi attacks.

And Thank you sethorly re your info on our own problems here in the UK.

[CharlesHarris]

Is there any public discussion about off-duty police carrying weapons when in plainclothes, which is the usual practice in the US. If serving military could legally carry weapons when off duty in plainclothes this would also be a force multiplier.

The same would be true for recently retired military or police. All quite common in the US and while less common elsewhere, there are one or two EU countries who have similar discreet practices for selected personnel who are screened, selected, trained and given credentials to do so.

In the US a concealed carry permit generally requires an FBI and state police fingerprint and background check, and for the recipient to complete a training course and qualify with the weapon, much to the same degree that armed private security guards at banks, hotels, airports, etc. are trained.

My understanding is that police in the UK are not routinely trained and qualified with firearms, as in the US and that only certain specialized officers are assigned to armed response. Maybe that needs to change first, but it would require a huge investment in both training, equipment, attitude adjustment and the political will.

My suggestion would be for your PM to ask President Trump so send 100 each of your career police to attend the US Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, and another 100 to the FBI National Academy. Your police organizations could sort out and use those US methods which appear to have the most promise, and assign those personnel to form a training cadre to start immediately with new academy classes and career officers recycling cycled back for inservice training.

Your government could also encourage serving military personnel, experienced NCOs with combat experience in Iraq or Afghanistan to take early retirement and laterally transfer into the police and MI5 to work directly in counter-terrorism at home. This approach has been going on in a continuing basis in the US since 9/11 and has been highly successful.

[harrypalmer]

These people are NOT Muslims FFS.

[Straight Shooter]

Quite right Harry ....a terrorist is a terrorist ....terrorism does not recognise colour,religion or any other boundary .....a soldier faces a known enemy and carry out their orders the enemy does the same on the battle field....seems fair ...you know where you stand ......terror can be applied by anyone at anytime ....anyone seen a policeman on the beat lately ? and no i do not mean the pretend ones ...or the cardboard ones in the shops .

[Skean Dhude]

Jonas,

Thanks for the prayers and sympathy but they don't seem to be doing much.

Send guns instead. I have a feeling they will be much more effective.

[Straight Shooter]

BTW Mary 30,000 feet seems over the top ....you do not need to over engineer the method for god sake 5000 feet would get the job done ...more efficient ,less time and best of all ......less fuel.....house keeping girl ....good house keeping ....get with the program ! .