Southport stabbings

[Section_31]

Jenrick is an absolutely horrendous individual. 

[TheHowieLama]

5 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Do you agree with them?

 

Personally I see "terrorism" as being directly connected to a cause/ideology.

Right now, I think this guy is a murderer as has been stated. He probably thought of himself as a terrorist if that helps.

[Section_31]

The discussion should be moot, what people seem to be saying is 'if we'd have known it was terrorism then we'd have been justified in smashing up town centres and trying to burn innocent people to death, and all those who subsequently did have been wrongfully convicted."

 

That's not how the law, or indeed society works (or should). 

 

The fact we're having such discussions at all shows you how far we've fallen. 

[Jack the Sipper]

7 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Personally I see "terrorism" as being directly connected to a cause/ideology.

Right now, I think this guy is a murderer as has been stated. He probably thought of himself as a terrorist if that helps.

 

Er, no, not really.

[TheHowieLama]

3 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The discussion should be moot, what people seem to be saying is 'if we'd have known it was terrorism then we'd have been justified in smashing up town centres and trying to burn innocent people to death, and all those who subsequently did have been wrongfully convicted."

 

That's not how the law, or indeed society works (or should). 

 

The fact we're having such discussions at all shows you how far we've fallen. 

 

No one on here is saying that.

 

Right now the biggest issue in "society" is trust. This incident gets to the core of that. Who you can and should trust and why.

That is a fruitful discussion.

 

[Jack the Sipper]

7 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The discussion should be moot, what people seem to be saying is 'if we'd have known it was terrorism then we'd have been justified in smashing up town centres and trying to burn innocent people to death, and all those who subsequently did have been wrongfully convicted."

 

That's not how the law, or indeed society works (or should). 

 

The fact we're having such discussions at all shows you how far we've fallen. 

 

The discussion as to whether he is a terrorist or not? The discussion about what may have motivated him to kill children? the discussion about whether the police should have said it was not terror-related from the off?

[No2]

I don't get the British and American fascination with Terrorism. Guy shoots Trump in the ear,  Terrorism or not he was still shot in the ear. Same with the 3 kids, how many fucks will their family give if their murderer is classified as a terrorist?

 

This guy was born in the UK, he's British. What does labelling him a terrorist today or on the day of the event change?

[TheHowieLama]

I don't have much background on either of these cases bt what was it that deemed Callum Parslow's killing of the asylum fella a terrorist incident and was it from the off or afterwards? Or the Ali Ahid fella, was it just because he said it was a terrorist attack?

[HazelyCosmicJove]

1 hour ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

It's still a fact that, legally, the murders were not a terrorist incident; that's why the police said they weren't.

Chicken or egg?

"the murders were not a terrorist incident; that's why the police said they weren't"

or

the police said they weren't, that's why the murders were not a terrorist incident;?

How are they deciding? I suspect that there are no hard and fast criteria, probably a subjective decision by a high ranking officer.

[Mook]

44 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The discussion should be moot, what people seem to be saying is 'if we'd have known it was terrorism then we'd have been justified in smashing up town centres and trying to burn innocent people to death, and all those who subsequently did have been wrongfully convicted."

 

That's not how the law, or indeed society works (or should). 

 

The fact we're having such discussions at all shows you how far we've fallen. 

 

I don't think shutting the conversation down or saying it is 'moot' is the way forward here.

 

As far as I can see, the debate on here is pretty considered and well thought out generally & no one is even remotely saying the rioting was justified. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

Jenrick is an absolutely horrendous individual. 

I don’t know much about him, but every single time I hear anything about him, see him speak, or read about him he appears to be a massive, massive cunt. 

[Strontium]

51 minutes ago, No2 said:

I don't get the British and American fascination with Terrorism.

 

Spoken like someone who's never had to worry about it. 

[Arniepie]

6 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Blows my mind this discussion.

 

So what are people saying? If he turns out to be a terrorist then the violence was justified? 

 

The rioters are domestic terrorists as far as I'm concerned, being egged on by fucking Moscow. Fuck all of them, their friends, families and fucking pets.

presumably if the maniac was white,the gammons would have been happy?

[Arniepie]

25 minutes ago, Mook said:

 

I don't think shutting the conversation down or saying it is 'moot' is the way forward here.

 

As far as I can see, the debate on here is pretty considered and well thought out generally & no one is even remotely saying the rioting was justified. 

on here there isnt..because its not full of thick racist cunts

 

but thats exacty what the likes of farage is implying and plenty are agreeing.

[Section_31]

3 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

on here there isnt..because its not full of thick racist cunts

 

but thats exacty what the likes of farage is implying and plenty are agreeing.

 

Word.

 

Calls for Starmer and Cooper to resign, Jenrick (would be future prime minister) 'government needs to come clean'. 

 

Political prisoners and so forth. 

[Jack the Sipper]

Debating if the cunt that killed children is a terrorist isn’t agreeing with Farage or justifying rioting and suggesting that it is or that discussion about what the police have said should not take place because others elsewhere are making capital from it is fucking disturbing.

[Arniepie]

14 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

Debating if the cunt that killed children is a terrorist isn’t agreeing with Farage or justifying rioting and suggesting that it is or that discussion about what the police have said should not take place because others elsewhere are making capital from it is fucking disturbing.

no one has on here.

[Creator Supreme]

1 hour ago, No2 said:

I don't get the British and American fascination with Terrorism. Guy shoots Trump in the ear,  Terrorism or not he was still shot in the ear. Same with the 3 kids, how many fucks will their family give if their murderer is classified as a terrorist?

 

This guy was born in the UK, he's British. What does labelling him a terrorist today or on the day of the event change?

On the fucking nose!

 

It's nothing more than fear mongering and providing the racists with ammunition if they label him a terrorist.

[No2]

1 hour ago, Strontium said:

 

Spoken like someone who's never had to worry about it. 

My outlook on life is generally not to worry about events that are unlikely to happen. Since 2001 around 100 people have been killed in terrorism incidents in the UK. It's relationship with the news cycle doesn't correlate with the facts.

[Mook]

If people are going about murdering in the name of some higher goal, then I think establishing that they are connected and discussing the problem is productive.

 

The constant shouts of 'Racist' every time this stuff is brought up are as unhelpful as the 'Send them back' stuff.

[SasaS]

2 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

the perception is out there

 

The facts are out there.

 

TBH this guy was too much of a loser to be in any organized terrorist cell. Like most of the white lone wolfs.

Terrorism isn't for idiots.

 

It's guys like this that give terrorism a bad name.

[TheHowieLama]

33 minutes ago, No2 said:

My outlook on life is generally not to worry about events that are unlikely to happen. Since 2001 around 100 people have been killed in terrorism incidents in the UK. It's relationship with the news cycle doesn't correlate with the facts.

There is a slight chance he may have been referring to "that terrorism" that isn't happening on the UK soil.

[TheHowieLama]

23 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

It's guys like this that give terrorism a bad name.

 

Agreed, it's embarrassing.

 

The equivalent of a guy in a food truck thinking he is a chef.

[No2]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

There is a slight chance he may have been referring to "that terrorism" that isn't happening on the UK soil.

Why would he? I specifically said the UK and US, terrorism and the fear of it is a different ball game in other parts of the world.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, No2 said:

Why would he? I specifically said the UK and US, terrorism and the fear of it is a different ball game in other parts of the world.

 

Probably cuz that's how he feels. Can get a little skittish.