Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on July 29, 2024, 02:34:43 PM
-
In Southport. Whatever the details, it's already a tragedy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cql8j2j0304o
-
Two dead children, others in a critical state. Desperately sad.
-
This is horrific.
Isn't the major problem now to ascertain why so many people, including apparently a large number of male adolescents, appear to think that it is acceptable to carry bladed weapons?
Are they, like guns in the USA, being characterised as means of protection? If so, protection from what? And how can something which is manifestly offensive be perceived as giving protection?
-
This is horrific.
Isn't the major problem now to ascertain why so many people, including apparently a large number of male adolescents, appear to think that it is acceptable to carry bladed weapons?
Are they, like guns in the USA, being characterised as means of protection? If so, protection from what? And how can something which is manifestly offensive be perceived as giving protection?
I'm not sure this is that connected with general knife carrying but knives will be seen as protection from other knives. It's not a new problem but the knives seem to be bigger than the razors that once were the calling card of gangs in my own city of Glasgow.
It's difficult to gain perspective on problems which are often highlighted in the media by anomalous cases. I'm not sure that there is always something to be learned from such cases.
-
So very tragic and terrible. :o The 17 year old lad who carried out this stabbing will be another sick character to add to all the others who have tainted the UK with their evil crimes! >:(
-
So very tragic and terrible. :o The 17 year old lad who carried out this stabbing will be another sick character to add to all the others who have tainted the UK with their evil crimes! >:(
Not sure what you mean by 'tainted the UK'. Scarred would seem more appropriate to me.
-
Are they, like guns in the USA, being characterised as means of protection? If so, protection from what? And how can something which is manifestly offensive be perceived as giving protection?
Guns in the USA are legal to carry. Knives in the UK are not, although, obviously they are easier to buy.
-
Sadly, a third child has died.
-
Guns in the USA are legal to carry. Knives in the UK are not, although, obviously they are easier to buy.
Yes. I'm well aware of this, but I was trying to establish the nature of the perceptions of the peple who carry them for "defence". To me, the best defence against a knife would be something like a dustbin lid not another knife. But then, what sort of mentality would see 10-year old children as a danger?
Is it not time for a Royal Commission (or something) into the influences on behaviour of adolescents?
-
Yes. I'm well aware of this, but I was trying to establish the nature of the perceptions of the peple who carry them for "defence". To me, the best defence against a knife would be something like a dustbin lid not another knife. But then, what sort of mentality would see 10-year old children as a danger?
Is it not time for a Royal Commission (or something) into the influences on behaviour of adolescents?
Given the speed of such things, it's going to be way out of date as soon as it's written.
-
And now violence against police. Sickening.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cevwgqz0x41t
-
And now violence against police. Sickening.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cevwgqz0x41t
Social media has been, even by its standards, a dark scary place since the murders. Filled with frothing anger, channelled by many into hatred of Muslims with no reason or evidence, leading to the attacks on the mosque, and violence against police, with no real concern for the children attacked.
-
As if those poor people in Southport haven't experienced one terrible trauma, last night a riot took place, which injured 39 police officers and damaged a mosque! It appears these anti- Muslim/anti-police evil protesters were looking for an excuse to riot and do harm and damage. The person who committed the first terrible crime was not a Muslim! I hope everyone who took place in that riot is arrested and faces the full force of the law! >:(
-
Lots of idiots of the racist part of the twitterati describing this thuggish criminality as taking back control and changing the narrative. Meanwhile Southport cleans up after the tragedy and this idiocy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c3gr5ljyz41t
-
Lots of idiots of the racist part of the twitterati describing this thuggish criminality as taking back control and changing the narrative. Meanwhile Southport cleans up after the tragedy and this idiocy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c3gr5ljyz41t
I got rid of my Twitter account a while ago.
-
One of the few things about this story that can be read without it being deeply depressing. Jonathan Hayes is definitely a hero imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2g6eegyddo
-
One of the few things about this story that can be read without it being deeply depressing. Jonathan Hayes is definitely a hero imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2g6eegyddo
I agree.
-
The ghastly Farage stirring the pot - how unusual:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/31/farage-accused-of-inciting-southport-violence-by-former-counter-terror-chief
-
The ghastly Farage stirring the pot - how unusual:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/31/farage-accused-of-inciting-southport-violence-by-former-counter-terror-chief
There are several people whom I would like to see take a one way trip to the far side of the universe, Farage being one of them.
-
More than 100 arrested in London after protests about the murders, and stabbings in Southport. I can't help thinking that were I the parent of a child murdered or injured in the attack that this would seem to be an insult. I get why people have inchoate anger thar is easily played upon by grifters stoking fears for profit and celebrity but struggle to understand why one would think that this was in any sense a fitting memorial.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4ng1254ndeo
-
I listen to the news on this, and see the rioting, read the comments on twitter about taking back 'our country', and feel the inchoate rage driving it. I hear Peter Finch as Howard Beale in Network screaming 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore'. I think the madness has grown since 1976. Times change ever quicker, increasing lack of certainty. The 1970s were characterised as the 'me decade', we now live in the 'who is me' 15 minutes.
The need to have a villain to hate has been abused many times in history by grifters, madmen, megalomaniacs, and now is no different. There's an episode of Buffy The Vampire Slayer where demons exploit the fictional murders of children to feed off the hatred caused by a witch hunt following those murders, and that plays in my head watching the manipulation that followed the tragic events in Southport.
The creation of the villains allows the mess of life, the dark depressing bits, to have some sense made of them. Hitler saw that and used it to indulge his own fuming hatred. Some just see a chance at celebrity, an opportunity to make their own small lives mean something. They tell stories of new world orders, and grand conspiracies which link everything since if you just join the dots you see the big picture that must be true. So the violence in Leeds, in Southend, and Manchester Airport, are all building to the murders of 3 girls at a Taylor Swift dance class. The shocking madness of what happened which is impossible to process is explained, and given meaning.
And my mind plays the imagined screams of those poor children.
-
The seventeen year old suspect has been named.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2yrg3pvpo
A judge has ruled that the circumstances are exceptional and the boy's anonymity was "allowing others up to mischief to continue to spread misinformation in a vacuum".
-
'Violent Southport protests reveal organising tactics of the far-right' - hmmm, I'm not sure that 'far right' is that useful a label, and part of the article echoes that. The people protesting are just angry about most things, and I think it creates its own problems in connecting that with the label 'far right'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cl4y0453nv5o
-
'Violent Southport protests reveal organising tactics of the far-right' - hmmm, I'm not sure that 'far right' is that useful a label, and part of the article echoes that. The people protesting are just angry about most things, and I think it creates its own problems in connecting that with the label 'far right'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cl4y0453nv5o
And with clashes in Bolton involving a large group of Muslim rioters, the problem of concentrating on a group that you call the far right rather than condemning the behaviours becomes apparent.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cervv8rz8mzo
-
I struggle to know what action is appropriate for those who tell deliberate lies as we're told here in social media, and then what for anyone who spreads the misinformation even if in part without thinking. Lots of people calling for arrests but it is not an easy balance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2ggn0x802o
-
I see Mr Musk is doing his best to calm the situation:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-slams-elon-musks-claims-civil-war-is-inevitable-in-uk-amid-far-right-riots_uk_66b0b575e4b0781f9246bbf4
-
I see Mr Musk is doing his best to calm the situation:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-slams-elon-musks-claims-civil-war-is-inevitable-in-uk-amid-far-right-riots_uk_66b0b575e4b0781f9246bbf4
What an evil man Musk is, I used to post on Twitter, but closed my account a few months ago and will never post on it again whilst Musk is the owner of it. >:(
-
I see Mr Musk is doing his best to calm the situation:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-slams-elon-musks-claims-civil-war-is-inevitable-in-uk-amid-far-right-riots_uk_66b0b575e4b0781f9246bbf4
Wouldn't expect anything less from Apartheid Clyde. He's pushing all the far right narratives. He should have his security clearance cancelled. The US should deport this Afrikaner scam artist.
-
'So, Home Secretary, what do you want for dinner tonight?'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2ggw5r067o
-
A pretty positive report from Mark Easton which feels needed after some of the madness
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czx66dkx3wlo
-
...
-
The ongoing Starmer v Musk spat. Perhaps like the Zuckerberg v Musk one, a cage fight might be proposed.
That the Online Safety Act might not be fully implemented till 2026 underlines that it's like Wile E Coyote trying to catch Roadrunner.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ydddy3qzgo
-
I see Mr Musk is doing his best to calm the situation:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-slams-elon-musks-claims-civil-war-is-inevitable-in-uk-amid-far-right-riots_uk_66b0b575e4b0781f9246bbf4
He's an ignorant buffoon.
-
Small bit of good news, all the surviving children from the murders and assaults are now out of hospital.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7033y4yxdyo
-
First sentencing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cy8497l7dx8t
-
Apparently the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen because of a lot of police, which didn't stop anti far right protests, and the first sentences handed out. Feels like bollocks to me as it over estimates the organisation involved so far, and the impact and speed of impact of sentencing. Also plays down 'rumoured'.
-
Apparently the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen because of a lot of police, which didn't stop anti far right protests, and the first sentences handed out. Feels like bollocks to me as it over estimates the organisation involved so far, and the impact and speed of impact of sentencing. Also plays down 'rumoured'.
I don't think this is bollocks at all.
The counter protests were always planned to be peaceful (unlike the far right riots) and hence while there was greater police presence why would this deter a peaceful gathering on the streets? A mob of extremists bent on voilence ... hmm ... well that's another matter. And I think the conviction and sentencing will have filtered down to those planning violence and given them serious pause for thought.
And of course finally - on the early nights the rioters had the streets to themselves to casue mayhem - now they'd face not just the police but counter demonstrations which would dwarf them in numbers.
Is this over? - well I hope so but this weekend will be key. The weather is expected to be dry and warm which isn't good - but let's hope that the threat of rapidly ending up with a long jail sentence will be enough to persuade the idiots that attacking mosques and lawyers offices isn't a smart thing to do.
-
I don't think this is bollocks at all.
The counter protests were always planned to be peaceful (unlike the far right riots) and hence while there was greater police presence why would this deter a peaceful gathering on the streets? A mob of extremists bent on voilence ... hmm ... well that's another matter. And I think the conviction and sentencing will have filtered down to those planning violence and given them serious pause for thought.
And of course finally - on the early nights the rioters had the streets to themselves to casue mayhem - now they'd face not just the police but counter demonstrations which would dwarf them in numbers.
Is this over? - well I hope so but this weekend will be key. The weather is expected to be dry and warm which isn't good - but let's hope that the threat of rapidly ending up with a long jail sentence will be enough to persuade the idiots that attacking mosques and lawyers offices isn't a smart thing to do.
Again, I think this overestimates the organisation of the violence, not least because it gives them the hindsight of the various counter protests, not all of which were non violent.
-
Again, I think this overestimates the organisation of the violence, not least because it gives them the hindsight of the various counter protests, not all of which were non violent.
There is also some ludicrous stuff being touted by some of the social mediocrities that it was an immensely cunning plan of the twats to take up police time, and not do anything. Both sides are overestimating the organisation of a bunch of thugs for their own reasons.
-
Again, I think this overestimates the organisation of the violence, not least because it gives them the hindsight of the various counter protests, not all of which were non violent.
I think 'organisation' is a very different thing on today's social media world than it once was. I think it is pretty clear that many of those involved in the riots (and indeed the counter protests) weren't local and therefore there must have been a level of organisation that informed them when and where to turn up to be involved. And given that the riots and protests have occurred up and down the country, far, far away from the site of the triggere event in Southport, then that suggests to me a level of coordination and organisation. Not via a recognised group perhaps, but then that isn't necessary anymore - all you need is a significant like minded online community.
-
... various counter protests, not all of which were non violent.
We are discussing why the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen last night (your words) and one of the reasons I think is the magnitude of the counter demonstrations last night. Are you saying that there was violence during those counter demonstrations last night - I've not seen any reports of violence from last night's events.
-
I think 'organisation' is a very different thing on today's social media world than it once was. I think it is pretty clear that many of those involved in the riots (and indeed the counter protests) weren't local and therefore there must have been a level of organisation that informed them when and where to turn up to be involved. And given that the riots and protests have occurred up and down the country, far, far away from the site of the triggere event in Southport, then that suggests to me a level of coordination and organisation. Not via a recognised group perhaps, but then that isn't necessary anymore - all you need is a significant like minded online community.
It is different but that doesn't mean you're not overestimating the organisation of a bunch of drunk thugs.
-
We are discussing why the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen last night (your words) and one of the reasons I think is the magnitude of the counter demonstrations last night. Are you saying that there was violence during those counter demonstrations last night - I've not seen any reports of violence from last night's events.
I had seen reports of violence in Croydon but that appears to have just been actual drunk thugs rather than protesting drunk thogs, so scrub that part of previous post.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/10-arrested-in-croydon-as-group-throw-bottles-and-emergency-worker-attacked-in-pure-anti-social-behaviour/ar-AA1or2lI
-
I think 'organisation' is a very different thing on today's social media world than it once was. I think it is pretty clear that many of those involved in the riots (and indeed the counter protests) weren't local and therefore there must have been a level of organisation that informed them when and where to turn up to be involved. And given that the riots and protests have occurred up and down the country, far, far away from the site of the triggere event in Southport, then that suggests to me a level of coordination and organisation. Not via a recognised group perhaps, but then that isn't necessary anymore - all you need is a significant like minded online community.
I would agree with you - phones belonging to young men were pinging at the gym yesterday and day before - they were receiving messages about how to be prepared and where to be in order to deal with potential violence on the streets from rioters and protecting the neighbourhood community / shops and where to show up for counter-demos etc. So to that extent there was organisation and mobilisation.
Meanwhile business owners were contacting their insurance companies to find out if they were covered for riot damage.
-
I had seen reports of violence in Croydon but that appears to have just been actual drunk thugs rather than protesting drunk thogs, so scrub that part of previous post.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/10-arrested-in-croydon-as-group-throw-bottles-and-emergency-worker-attacked-in-pure-anti-social-behaviour/ar-AA1or2lI
Err - so do you actaully have a point NS - note:
"The force said the arrests were not related to any protests, ..."
-
It is different but that doesn't mean you're not overestimating the organisation of a bunch of drunk thugs.
FFS NS - wake up. This isn't a bunch of people stumbling out of a pub at closing time pissed and having a fight or deciding on the spur of the moment to put a brick through the window of a a building across the road which just happened to be a mosque or the office of an immigration laywer.
Nope this is way more organised. Derek Drummond, who was sentenced to 3 years yesterday is from Liverpool. He decided to travel to Southport, some 20 miles away to take part in the distubances. That was both a deliberate decision on his part and was presumably triggered by information about planned disturbances and (likely) false information about the nature of the Southport attacker.
He didn't stumble out of a pub close to home and by some time-warp find himself in Southport confronting the police.
You are worryingly underestimating the levels of organisational ability that can be achieved via social media through groups of like minded people. Think flash-mob intent on violence, not drunken pissheads stumbling out of a pub.
-
Err - so do you actaully have a point NS - note:
"The force said the arrests were not related to any protests, ..."
Yes, that's what I said in the post you've just replied to, and where I say to scrub the bit in my previous post.
-
FFS NS - wake up. This isn't a bunch of people stumbling out of a pub at closing time pissed and having a fight or deciding on the spur of the moment to put a brick through the window of a a building across the road which just happened to be a mosque or the office of an immigration laywer.
Nope this is way more organised. Derek Drummond, who was sentenced to 3 years yesterday is from Liverpool. He decided to travel to Southport, some 20 miles away to take part in the distubances. That was both a deliberate decision on his part and was presumably triggered by information about planned disturbances and (likely) false information about the nature of the Southport attacker.
He didn't stumble out of a pub close to home and by some time-warp find himself in Southport confronting the police.
You are worryingly underestimating the levels of organisational ability that can be achieved via social media through groups of like minded people. Think flash-mob intent on violence, not drunken pissheads stumbling out of a pub.
This is the same type of villain creation that the racist numpties indulge in thinking there is some great WEF plan that's about getting rid of white people. That some eejot can get on a train to be a violent thug does not mean that it was a hugely organised set of violence.
-
I would agree with you - phones belonging to young men were pinging at the gym yesterday and day before - they were receiving messages about how to be prepared and where to be in order to deal with potential violence on the streets from rioters and protecting the neighbourhood community / shops and where to show up for counter-demos etc. So to that extent there was organisation and mobilisation.
Meanwhile business owners were contacting their insurance companies to find out if they were covered for riot damage.
Spot on - and the levels of organisation tend to be more 'organic' rather than associated with some formal 'organisation' but that doesn't make it any less effective. The combination of like minded people living within a social media echo chamber with 'influencers' amplifying messages that may (or may not) be entirely false along with someone simply providing information about a place is sufficient to generate a crowd at that place who may well be bent on violence.
It doesn't actually need someone to be as overt as saying let's burn down a mosque or immigration accommodation (and I suspect those manipulating the organisation would be smart enough to avoid this), merely to point out to their social media community that this hotel or that hotel in their local vicinity (and that may be tens of miles away) is housing asylum seekers. The rest is nod and wink stuff.
-
This is the same type of villain creation that the racist numpties indulge in thinking there is some great WEF plan that's about getting rid of white people. That some eejot can get on a train to be a violent thug does not mean that it was a hugely organised set of violence.
So if there is no 'organisation' who was releasing details of immigration lawyers to their online communities yesterday. Who was falsely reporting - and re-posting - incorrect claims that the Southport attacker was a muslim asylum seeker who'd arrived on a boat last year.
Poeple don't randomly decide to travel 20 miles on the offchance there might be a protest or a demonstration - nope they travel there because they know when and where those protests will be taking place. And that only happens with a level of organisation.
-
So if there is no 'organisation' who was releasing details of immigration lawyers to their online communities yesterday. Who was falsely reporting - and re-posting - incorrect claims that the Southport attacker was a muslim asylum seeker who'd arrived on a boat last year.
Poeple don't randomly decide to travel 20 miles on the offchance there might be a protest or a demonstration - nope they travel there because they know when and where those protests will be taking place. And that only happens with a level of organisation.
See my Reply 20 on this thread. That there are people manipulating others on this subject does mean that it's a regimented organisation as the remarks of the police chief implied. Drummond is just a random thug.
-
Spot on - and the levels of organisation tend to be more 'organic' rather than associated with some formal 'organisation' but that doesn't make it any less effective. The combination of like minded people living within a social media echo chamber with 'influencers' amplifying messages that may (or may not) be entirely false along with someone simply providing information about a place is sufficient to generate a crowd at that place who may well be bent on violence.
It doesn't actually need someone to be as overt as saying let's burn down a mosque or immigration accommodation (and I suspect those manipulating the organisation would be smart enough to avoid this), merely to point out to their social media community that this hotel or that hotel in their local vicinity (and that may be tens of miles away) is housing asylum seekers. The rest is nod and wink stuff.
I don't disagree with this, and yet I think the statement from the police chief implies something much more organised and therefore overestimates the organisation involved.
-
Drummond is just a random thug.
No he isn't or he wouldn't have travelled 20 miles from his home to commit his thuggery to join in with a bunch of others heading towards a mosque that I image he never even knew existed prior to the events. He did that as a deliberate decision, triggered by a level of on-line organisation and orchestration which is fuelling the disturbances and choreographing where they happen.
-
Apparently the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen because of a lot of police, which didn't stop anti far right protests, and the first sentences handed out. Feels like bollocks to me as it over estimates the organisation involved so far, and the impact and speed of impact of sentencing. Also plays down 'rumoured'.
Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.
On a lighter note, a nurse friend of mine said that A&E on Saturday in the BRI treated nine people with dog bites. Many of them were in handcuffs.
-
Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.
Indeed - I find NS's complacency about this rather worrying.
People do not 'randomly' find themselves marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away from where they live. That this happened suggests some significant organisation and orchestration of the events. That is also the case for the counter demonstrations too.
-
Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.
On a lighter note, a nurse friend of mine said that A&E on Saturday in the BRI treated nine people with dog bites. Many of them were in handcuffs.
Or person with interest in saying they did something well says they did something well. As already noted, there are those who are stoking up the violence who agree with the police chief, and say it was all part of a cunning plan. Which if they are as organised as the police chief implies means that they are correct and it was a giant feint that the police fell for.
-
Indeed - I find NS's complacency about this rather worrying.
People do not 'randomly' find themselves marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away from where they live. That this happened suggests some significant organisation and orchestration of the events. That is also the case for the counter demonstrations too.
I'm not complacent, indeed, I think the self congratulatory tone of the police chiefs remarks are dangerous because it doesn't take significant organisation to achieve this.
-
I'm not complacent, ...
I disagree - you seem to be implying that someone who lives in Liverpool just randomly finds themselves with hundreds of other people marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away without a level of organisation and orchestration of those events.
You won't see the social media, and neither will I becasue the algorithms wont push that stuff to us. But I have no doubt that for those of that mind set their social media would have been filled with amplification of messaging and false messaging and indication that if you want to be heard get to Southport, or Bristol or Newcastle etc - with indication of time and place.
Now perhaps you are in a different social media set - one where messaging about the counter demonstrations was being pushed towards you - I know I was, and would have easliy have been able to know when and where counterdemonstrations were planned. That's call organisation.
-
I disagree - you seem to be implying that someone who lives in Liverpool just randomly finds themselves with hundreds of other people marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away without a level of organisation and orchestration of those events.
You won't see the social media, and neither will I becasue the algorithms wont push that stuff to us. But I have no doubt that for those of that mind set their social media would have been filled with amplification of messaging and false messaging and indication that if you want to be heard get to Southport, or Bristol or Newcastle etc - with indication of time and place.
Now perhaps you are in a different social media set - one where messaging about the counter demonstrations was being pushed towards you - I know I was, and would have easliy have been able to know when and where counterdemonstrations were planned. That's call organisation.
I don't mean to imply that it was a random event, indeed I would ask you to read my reply 20 here as it's clear thar I don't think it's a random event. Also in the post thar you've just quotemined from I'm clearly disagreeing about the amount of organisation that it takes, not that it takes mo organisation. It is as you said in a post that I said I agreed with organic, not regimented.
I find it quite amazing that you know what social media I light see, and even more so because you are wrong. As ad_orientem notes on another thread, he uses X to try and keep an eye on the 'enemy'.
-
I find it quite amazing that you know what social media I light see, and even more so because you are wrong. As ad_orientem notes on another thread, he uses X to try and keep an eye on the 'enemy'.
Apologies if I presumed wrong about what gets pushed to you via social media. Although there remains a world of difference between getting stuff because you are 'keeping an eye on your enemy' and getting pushed stuff becasue it aligns with your actual views and opinions. But regardless of whether you are trying to keep an eye on your enemy, just becasue you haven't been pushed stuff about the Southport attacker being a muslim, aslym seeker that arrived on a boat doesn't mean others aren't. And just becasue you may not be receiving stuff orchestrating time and place of protest doesn't mean others aren't.
So my social media was sending me plenty of stuff yesterday that would have allowed me to find and join one of the counter demonstrations yesterday had I chosen to do so. Why would you not assume that those on the extreme right were not receiving organisaitonal content letting them know where and when their demonstrations would take place. It is pretty clear they would and they did - or otherwise why would a guy from Liverpool end up with hundreds of others (probably plenty of whom were also from miles away) marching on a mosque in Southport.
-
Apologies if I presumed wrong about what gets pushed to you via social media. Although there remains a world of difference between getting stuff because you are 'keeping an eye on your enemy' and getting pushed stuff becasue it aligns with your actual views and opinions. But regardless of whether you are trying to keep an eye on your enemy, just becasue you haven't been pushed stuff about the Southport attacker being a muslim, aslym seeker that arrived on a boat doesn't mean others aren't. And just becasue you may not be receiving stuff orchestrating time and place of protest doesn't mean others aren't.
So my social media was sending me plenty of stuff yesterday that would have allowed me to find and join one of the counter demonstrations yesterday had I chosen to do so. Why would you not assume that those on the extreme right were not receiving organisaitonal content letting them know where and when their demonstrations would take place. It is pretty clear they would and they did - or otherwise why would a guy from Liverpool end up with hundreds of others (probably plenty of whom were also from miles away) marching on a mosque in Southport.
Where have I said that there were no such posts, and that I didn't see them?
Again read reply 20, and I make clear that there is manipulation, and what I think the tragedy of this is. It would help if you did that rather than use your wonky mind reading.
-
I don't believe there's one big mastermind behind all this, but that's not to say that certain national (or even international) groups haven't been stocking fire, so to speak. At ground level, at least, from what I've seen on social media, any organisation has happened through already well established networks like football fans, for example, Football Fans Against Extremism. A rather laughable name, mostly old football hooligans who are also Tommy Robinson fans. Any organisation is probably more akin to that of the old football firms.
-
Or person with interest in saying they did something well says they did something well. As already noted, there are those who are stoking up the violence who agree with the police chief, and say it was all part of a cunning plan. Which if they are as organised as the police chief implies means that they are correct and it was a giant feint that the police fell for.
False dichotomy.
There's a spectrum between totally disorganised rabble and 5D chess playing super-villain.
-
I don't believe there's one big mastermind behind all this, but that's not to say that certain national (or even international) groups haven't been stocking fire, so to speak. At ground level, at least, from what I've seen on social media, any organisation has happened through already well established networks like football fans, for example, Football Fans Against Extremism. A rather laughable name, mostly old football hooligans who are also Tommy Robinson fans. Any organisation is probably more akin to that of the old football firms.
Yup that's about right. You don't need to have a formal organisation, with a membership ... and a regular newsletter! to achieve the same sort of organisation and orchestration of activity using a much more diffuse social media push, often via on-line groups such as the one you mentioned. My understanding is that the platform of choice for many of these activists is Telegram - which I don't use at all.
And AO, you will no doubt be aware that a lot of hooliganism back in the day had a fairly organised element to it - with hooligans from one club knowing full well when and where they'd be meeting up with hooligans from another club for a scrap.
-
False dichotomy.
There's a spectrum between totally disorganised rabble and 5D chess playing super-villain.
I agree, but I think that the police chief's comment did that though. I think it doesn't need to be anywhere as well organised as that implies to be dangerous.
-
I agree, but I think that the police chief's comment did that though. I think it doesn't need to be anywhere as well organised as that implies to be dangerous.
I don't think the police are implying some kind of super-organised structure run by a super villian. Actually a much more diffuse structure is both more effrective (and therefore more dangerous) not least becasue it is much harder to monitor and infiltrate by the police.
Traffic on Telegram in the UK surged in the hours leading up to the Southport disturbances. Were all those folk suddenly feeling the need to message each other more about the price of fish!!
-
I don't think the police are implying some kind of super-organised structure run by a super villian. Actually a much more diffuse structure is both more effrective (and therefore more dangerous) not least becasue it is much harder to monitor and infiltrate by the police.
Traffic on Telegram in the UK surged in the hours leading up to the Southport disturbances. Were all those folk suddenly feeling the need to message each other more about the price of fish!!
Has anyone suggested they were talking about fish? And, I've already covered that it's the lack of a need for any structure or real organisation that makes this sort of stuff dangerous, and harder to combat. Indeed that's what the post you replied to there is covering.
-
Has anyone suggested they were talking about fish? And, I've already covered that it's the lack of a need for any structure or real organisation that makes this sort of stuff dangerous, and harder to combat. Indeed that's what the post you replied to there is covering.
But your whole thesis seems to be that there wasn't much organisation and that the guy who was jailed for 3 years was just a random drunk thug. You are wrong on both counts.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/revealed-inside-far-telegram-messaging-070915614.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJaHaZwr7AuyFXpnr4730YKgymaQegJ09lU5-5jC9lGaxL-EPfmRkMQD6RpmzkpI7jN2F_vjJV6-GHQ3qFsJVR6YnznLz_C2UcHjQYMAsbRfDvFK-X_GmAVzSxVnHekG8B185IjMFqj2KVOuSdJf4hO0gIR40nlYBtmzC8-Hb8ZC
Note this:
"Following the killings, a broadcast channel on messaging app Telegram was set up, titled ‘Southport Wake Up’. It would remain open for nearly a week, amassing over 13,000 members.
The earliest messages in the channel were used to organise and mobilise the far-right rioters in Southport on 30 July who attacked a mosque. It remained open, sharing locations for rioters to mobilise over the weekend, with some of the plans resulting in widespread disorder and destruction of property."
Sounds pretty organised to me and if someone received this information, either directly or indirectly, and on that basis decided to travel 20 miles to take part in the riot, then that can hardly be described as some kind of random thuggery, can it NS.
-
But your whole thesis seems to be that there wasn't much organisation and that the guy who was jailed for 3 years was just a random drunk thug. You are wrong on both counts.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/revealed-inside-far-telegram-messaging-070915614.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJaHaZwr7AuyFXpnr4730YKgymaQegJ09lU5-5jC9lGaxL-EPfmRkMQD6RpmzkpI7jN2F_vjJV6-GHQ3qFsJVR6YnznLz_C2UcHjQYMAsbRfDvFK-X_GmAVzSxVnHekG8B185IjMFqj2KVOuSdJf4hO0gIR40nlYBtmzC8-Hb8ZC
Note this:
"Following the killings, a broadcast channel on messaging app Telegram was set up, titled ‘Southport Wake Up’. It would remain open for nearly a week, amassing over 13,000 members.
The earliest messages in the channel were used to organise and mobilise the far-right rioters in Southport on 30 July who attacked a mosque. It remained open, sharing locations for rioters to mobilise over the weekend, with some of the plans resulting in widespread disorder and destruction of property."
Sounds pretty organised to me and if someone received this information, either directly or indirectly, and on that basis decided to travel 20 miles to take part in the riot, then that can hardly be described as some kind of random thuggery, can it NS.
My whole thesis is that this doesn't need that much organisation. The rest you've just divined with your wonky mid reading and even when it's been pointed out that your mind reading is wrong, have just ignored. Again go and read my reply 20 on the thread, nd take the straw or fish back to where you got it from.
-
My whole thesis is that this doesn't need that much organisation. The rest you've just divined with your wonky mid reading and even when it's been pointed out that your mind reading is wrong, have just ignored. Again go and read my reply 20 on the thread, nd take the straw or fish back to where you got it from.
But if you are needing to orchestrate hundreds of people to travel considerable distances to turn up at a place and time in order to cause a disturbance, then that does take organisation and orchestration. And something like Telegram is a really effective way to do it as it has private groups, is encrypted and has never little monitoring and checking.
And what about your comment that someone deciding to travel 20 miles in order to join with hundreds of others to march on a mosque and committed serious violence was just a random thug.
-
But if you are needing to orchestrate hundreds of people to travel considerable distances to turn up at a place and time in order to cause a disturbance, then that does take organisation and orchestration. And something like Telegram is a really effective way to do it as it has private groups, is encrypted and has never little monitoring and checking.
And what about your comment that someone deciding to travel 20 miles in order to join with hundreds of others to march on a mosque and committed serious violence was just a random thug.
Because he was just a random thug who isn't part of a group, and probably follows Yaxley Lennon and similar on X. To help you out saying he's just a random thug doesn't mean he just turned up at random, though there were plenty of comments on X immediately after Southport from people saying they were going there, and this was before the misinformation about the murderer.
Again, as covered in reply 20 on here there is a lot of manipulation going on for a variety of reasons but we need to be careful not to just think of it as being addressed quickly. It's the very disparateness of it which makes it harder to deal with. The statement from the police chief seems to me to overestimate the organisation as I said at the start, that doesn't mean that say that there is no form of organisation.
-
As a long term republican, Republic seem to be a bunch of pricks here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj08430yervo
-
Because he was just a random thug who isn't part of a group,
Speculation - how do you know he isn't part of a group. And anyhow, what do you mean by a group. As I've mentioned before things have moved on from being a member of EDL or BNP to being a member of various private messaging/social media channels. Do you know for certain that he wasn't part of those groups NS?
and probably follows Yaxley Lennon and similar on X.
X isn't the media of choice for far right groups and their organisers - so he might indeed follow Yaxley Lennon, but may also be directly or indirectly linked to the Telegram channels that were key organisational routes for the rioting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Yaxley Lennon gave out the kind of organisation details that were being put out by others on Telegram.
To help you out saying he's just a random thug doesn't mean he just turned up at random, though there were plenty of comments on X immediately after Southport from people saying they were going there, and this was before the misinformation about the murderer.
Err so what you seem to be saying is that he didn't just stumble across a march heading for a mosque in Southport at random. And that he made a very conscious decision to travel a considerable distance to be part of that march - i.e. very deliberate, rather than, random decision making process.
So why don't you just drop the 'random' bit, which trivialises things - there was nothing random whatsoever about the events leading up to his decision to travel to Southport to join the riots.
So once we've dealt with your backtracking with are left with the conclusion that he was a thug rather than a random thug - wouldn't disagree with you there. But also I'd add that he was a thug whose thruggery was very clearly organised.
-
As a long term republican, Republic seem to be a bunch of pricks here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj08430yervo
I read this in the paper this morning and while I'm not sure a personal appearance is expected, he is the head of state - where else would the head of state be completely silent (regardless of whether they have executive role or ceremonial) in the face of a significant challenge to the fabric and social cohesion of a country. Surely it is the job of a head of state to be seen and heard in response to such events.
But sadly our head of state only does half a job.
-
Speculation - how do you know he isn't part of a group. And anyhow, what do you mean by a group. As I've mentioned before things have moved on from being a member of EDL or BNP to being a member of various private messaging/social media channels. Do you know for certain that he wasn't part of those groups NS?
X isn't the media of choice for far right groups and their organisers - so he might indeed follow Yaxley Lennon, but may also be directly or indirectly linked to the Telegram channels that were key organisational routes for the rioting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Yaxley Lennon gave out the kind of organisation details that were being put out by others on Telegram.
Err so what you seem to be saying is that he didn't just stumble across a march heading for a mosque in Southport at random. And that he made a very conscious decision to travel a considerable distance to be part of that march - i.e. very deliberate, rather than, random decision making process.
So why don't you just drop the 'random' bit, which trivialises things - there was nothing random whatsoever about the events leading up to his decision to travel to Southport to join the riots.
So once we've dealt with your backtracking with are left with the conclusion that he was a thug rather than a random thug - wouldn't disagree with you there. But also I'd add that he was a thug whose thruggery was very clearly organised.
I'm not dropping the random bit because I'm not making stuff up about what I said. Have you watched any of the footage of the riots and violence, it's obviously filled with people with inchoate rage manipulated by others, as my reply 20 on here said
I'm not trying for a last word here bit of you're going to go on about what I mean by random after it's been explained multiple times, I'll leave you to it. There's been a horrendous atrocity that has lead to frightening bouts of violence which we both condemn, and I think we are discussing how best to deal with that. And yet, and I say this because I cannot see how to avoid moving the discussion on properly without our, I feel as if you are caught in a pattern of behaviour related to previous disagreements, and that we rub one and other up the wrong way generally. I may, if course, be incorrect in that, but given what this is about I'm not going to indulge any further because I'm perfectly well aware that what I have just said about you applies to me as well.
Pax?
-
I read this in the paper this morning and while I'm not sure a personal appearance is expected, he is the head of state - where else would the head of state be completely silent (regardless of whether they have executive role or ceremonial) in the face of a significant challenge to the fabric and social cohesion of a country. Surely it is the job of a head of state to be seen and heard in response to such events.
But sadly our head of state only does half a job.
Don't disagree but I don't think the team 'cowardly absense' is any more than prickery in the situation.
-
Don't disagree but I don't think the team 'cowardly absense' is any more than prickery in the situation.
Yup - step too far, but I have long considered that our head of state is absent too often under circumstances where you'd expect a head of state (including ceremonial ones) to speak on behalf of the country and to be seen. The words needn't be poltical but if someone claims to be the head of state then surely it is their job to act as that 'head'.
I think the first time this really struck me was after 9/11 - I can't remember the full details but there was a key memorial ceremony in New York where many countries were represented to show their grief and support for the victims and their solidarity with the USA. Other coutries were represented by their heads of state - our head of state was absent - Blair was there, but he wasn't head of state. Sometimes the monarchy needs to recognise that it is wants to be credible as a head of state (rather than some kind of theme park ride) then you have to do the head of state-y stuff.
-
Yup - step too far, but I have long considered that our head of state is absent too often under circumstances where you'd expect a head of state (including ceremonial ones) to speak on behalf of the country and to be seen. The words needn't be poltical but if someone claims to be the head of state then surely it is their job to act as that 'head'.
I think the first time this really struck me was after 9/11 - I can't remember the full details but there was a key memorial ceremony in New York where many countries were represented to show their grief and support for the victims and their solidarity with the USA. Other coutries were represented by their heads of state - our head of state was absent - Blair was there, but he wasn't head of state. Sometimes the monarchy needs to recognise that it is wants to be credible as a head of state (rather than some kind of theme park ride) then you have to do the head of state-y stuff.
The problem being if you do 'head of state-y' stuff, it immediately makes the monarchy obviously too political to have its fairy tale bits.
It's a mass of contradictions, and a massive contradiction.i think I prefer the Irish approach generally, as both US and the French approaches don't work for me for reverse reasons to our's.
-
I'm not trying for a last word here bit of you're going to go on about what I mean by random after it's been explained multiple times, I'll leave you to it. There's been a horrendous atrocity that has lead to frightening bouts of violence which we both condemn, and I think we are discussing how best to deal with that. And yet, and I say this because I cannot see how to avoid moving the discussion on properly without our, I feel as if you are caught in a pattern of behaviour related to previous disagreements, and that we rub one and other up the wrong way generally. I may, if course, be incorrect in that, but given what this is about I'm not going to indulge any further because I'm perfectly well aware that what I have just said about you applies to me as well.
Sure we've had our run ins and sometimes that is a bit of good old fashioned to and fro debate.
But I genuinely feel you have trivialised the levels of organisation and the sub-culture that have driven the rioting. To dismiss the levels of organisation and even to use the word random in relation to someone who chose to travel 20 miles, march on a mosque and commit violoence against the police (and probably against those attending the mosque had the police not intervened) seems both naive and complacement to me. And he was one of hundreds (if not thousands who did the same over several nights up and down the country).
What we saw over the past few nights was organised and was not random. If we want to understand and prevent similar events occuring in the feature we need to recognise just that - they the events were organised and not random.
-
The problem being if you do 'head of state-y' stuff, it immediately makes the monarchy obviously too political to have its fairy tale bits.
Other countries manage it - including ones with monarchies.
-
Sure we've had our run ins and sometimes that is a bit of good old fashioned to and fro debate.
But I genuinely feel you have trivialised the levels of organisation and the sub-culture that have driven the rioting. To dismiss the levels of organisation and even to use the word random in relation to someone who chose to travel 20 miles, march on a mosque and commit violoence against the police (and probably against those attending the mosque had the police not intervened) seems both naive and complacement to me. And he was one of hundreds (if not thousands who did the same over several nights up and down the country).
What we saw over the past few nights was organised and was not random. If we want to understand and prevent similar events occuring in the feature we need to recognise just that - they the events were organised and not random.
And I genuinely think that you've overestimated the organisation, and that creates a problem in how you deal with it because it leads to trying to takes actions that won't work.
As already covered, It's my fear that this leads to the wrong strategy that is motivating here. So I don't see that's complacency.
-
Other countries manage it - including ones with monarchies.
And other countries also screw it up badly as the rest of my post covered.
-
On a lighter note, a nurse friend of mine said that A&E on Saturday in the BRI treated nine people with dog bites. Many of them were in handcuffs.
Went for a endoscopy a couple of years ago and I think it was prisoner appointment day!! Seemed everyone else waiting was in handcuffs with two prison security staff. I guess you need two in case one needs to go to the toilet!!
Anyway - long wait for everyone and watching the developing interaction between the prison staff and the prisoner was interesting. Started with virtuall no interaction - only the prison staff talking to each other, but I guess boredom took over from professionalism and the banter increased as the hours rolled by.
-
Good that he's been suspended but wtaf!
https://news.sky.com/story/kent-labour-councillor-ricky-jones-suspended-after-telling-walthamstow-protest-fascists-need-to-have-throats-cut-13193298
-
And I genuinely think that you've overestimated the organisation, and that creates a problem in how you deal with it because it leads to trying to takes actions that won't work.
As already covered, It's my fear that this leads to the wrong strategy that is motivating here. So I don't see that's complacency.
Quite the reverse - I think I (and it seems the police and other posters here) seem to understand these event were organised, using 2024 (rather than 2000 or 1980s) style organisation. And it is exactly that recognition that allows the police and others to prevent them now and in the future. You seems to be trivialising the levels of organisation as you seem to be using a benchmark from decades ago about what organisation looks like.
-
Went for a endoscopy a couple of years ago and I think it was prisoner appointment day!! Seemed everyone else waiting was in handcuffs with two prison security staff. I guess you need two in case one needs to go to the toilet!!
Anyway - long wait for everyone and watching the developing interaction between the prison staff and the prisoner was interesting. Started with virtuall no interaction - only the prison staff talking to each other, but I guess boredom took over from professionalism and the banter increased as the hours rolled by.
Doctor:
Can you fill that up for me?
Fletcher:
What, from here?
-
Quite the reverse - I think I (and it seems the police and other posters here) seem to understand these event were organised, using 2024 (rather than 2000 or 1980s) style organisation. And it is exactly that recognition that allows the police and others to prevent them now and in the future. You seems to be trivialising the levels of organisation as you seem to be using a benchmark from decades ago about what organisation looks like.
And I think it's the exact opposite. You're using the term 'trivialising' to imply that I don't think this is important or dangerous. I've made clear that I think the complete opposite in many posts including the one you've just replied to. The whole point is that it's easy, not that it's trivial.
-
And I think it's the exact opposite. You're using the term 'trivialising' to imply that I don't think this is important or dangerous. I've made clear that I think the complete opposite in many posts including the one you've just replied to. The whole point is that it's easy, not that it's trivial.
Yet at every turn you dismiss the level of organisation that went into organising the disturbances. Your go-to word being 'overestimating'. What do you want - every attendee to have been sent a little 'I marched on a mosque' badge and informed of the time and place in a monthly newsletter sent by post from a mailing list held by the membership secretary, a guy called John in Royston!!
-
The problem being if you do 'head of state-y' stuff, it immediately makes the monarchy obviously too political to have its fairy tale bits.
It's a mass of contradictions, and a massive contradiction.i think I prefer the Irish approach generally, as both US and the French approaches don't work for me for reverse reasons to our's.
Our head of state is supposed to be completely apolitical. If he started commenting on the situation with anything more than the usual platitudes he'd get into serious trouble. I do not blame him for his silence. In this country, it is the job of the prime minister to do the leading and the pulling together and so on.
-
Our head of state is supposed to be completely apolitical. If he started commenting on the situation with anything more than the usual platitudes he'd get into serious trouble. I do not blame him for his silence. In this country, it is the job of the prime minister to do the leading and the pulling together and so on.
Aren't the 'usual platitudes' by default political, even if like an old coin worn down with usage?
Political heads of govt have a problem uniting countries on most occasions because they are political.
-
Our head of state is supposed to be completely apolitical. If he started commenting on the situation with anything more than the usual platitudes he'd get into serious trouble.
But that is a bit of a movable feast isn't it. We often get platitudes when they are perhaps not needed, but words from the head of state when there is a threat to the social cohesion of the ... err ... state then words, even rather bland platitudes, are surely appropriate rather than silence.
I do not blame him for his silence. In this country, it is the job of the prime minister to do the leading and the pulling together and so on.
Now I know this is a UK issue, but (as with my example on 9/11) there are times when the head of state needs to lead the state - in times of great trauma to other countries for example. Their heads of state (even ceremonial ones) tend to do this for us, yet ours too often seems to consider themselves above this. I think that comes across as rather arrogant I'm afraid.
The role of the PM is different and where there are other countries where their is a political PM-style leader and a ceremonial head of state their heads of state still seem to do stuff that ours won't.
-
Aren't the 'usual platitudes' by default political, even if like an old coin worn down with usage?
Maybe. If so, it's a good thing he isn't saying anything, isn't it.
Political heads of govt have a problem uniting countries on most occasions because they are political.
In this country, in times of great crisis, they usually manage to do it. The prime example would be Churchill during WW2.
-
But that is a bit of a movable feast isn't it. We often get platitudes when they are perhaps not needed, but words from the head of state when there is a threat to the social cohesion of the ... err ... state then words, even rather bland platitudes, are surely appropriate rather than silence.
I don't think the social cohesion of the state is under threat.
Now I know this is a UK issue, but (as with my example on 9/11) there are times when the head of state needs to lead the state - in times of great trauma to other countries for example. Their heads of state (even ceremonial ones) tend to do this for us, yet ours too often seems to consider themselves above this. I think that comes across as rather arrogant I'm afraid.
The role of the PM is different and where there are other countries where their is a political PM-style leader and a ceremonial head of state their heads of state still seem to do stuff that ours won't.
When we have a genuine existential crisis, I'll remember that.
-
Maybe. If so, it's a good thing he isn't saying anything, isn't it.In this country, in times of great crisis, they usually manage to do it. The prime example would be Churchill during WW2.
See 'on most occasions'
-
I don't think the social cohesion of the state is under threat.
I think the last week has suggested just that - we've seen a pretty major threat to social cohesion. Let's hope that this is temporary.
When we have a genuine existential crisis, I'll remember that.
Is that comment in relation to 9/11? But it isn't just existential threats though is it. I think there is a mismatch on attendance at major state events. Look at which heads of state (inlcuding monarchs) attended the Queen's funeral and then ask yourself - did the Queen attend an equivalent funeral of a head of state (including a monarch) when they'd died. And the answer is typically, no.
-
I think the last week has suggested just that - we've seen a pretty major threat to social cohesion. Let's hope that this is temporary.
I don't agree. I think we have witnessed a relative few people getting angry and violent. The response has generally been overwhelming. Threats to the fabric of society are just rhetoric from the people who wish to torment trouble.
Is that comment in relation to 9/11? But it isn't just existential threats though is it. I think there is a mismatch on attendance at major state events. Look at which heads of state (inlcuding monarchs) attended the Queen's funeral and then ask yourself - did the Queen attend an equivalent funeral of a head of state (including a monarch) when they'd died. And the answer is typically, no.
The Queen was pretty elderly by the time she died and wasn't really able to travel, but she would normally send a representative (typically the Prince of Wales).
-
The BBC has a summary of sentences handed out so far.
I think the man ewho was done for possession of cocaine was probably even more stupid than the rest. He took a class A drug to somewhere where he knew there would be a high police presence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm23y7l01v8o
-
The Queen was pretty elderly by the time she died and wasn't really able to travel, but she would normally send a representative (typically the Prince of Wales).
She wasn't that old in 2001 - she was younger than Biden was when he attended her funeral in an official capacity as head of state.
But I think as a matter of (one sided) protocol, she (and I presume now Charles) do not attend the funerals of others in an official capacity, even if those 'others' are of equal status - i.e. also heads of state. So even though the presidents of USA, France, Germany etc, etc attended her funeral in an official capacity as head of state she wouldn't have attended theirs even if they had died in office and/or had a state funeral.
-
She wasn't that old in 2001 - she was younger than Biden was when he attended her funeral in an official capacity as head of state.
But I think as a matter of (one sided) protocol, she (and I presume now Charles) do not attend the funerals of others in an official capacity, even if those 'others' are of equal status - i.e. also heads of state. So even though the presidents of USA, France, Germany etc, etc attended her funeral in an official capacity as head of state she wouldn't have attended theirs had they died in office.
Not convinced 'she was younger than Biden when...' is the best of arguments generally
-
Good that he's been suspended but wtaf!
https://news.sky.com/story/kent-labour-councillor-ricky-jones-suspended-after-telling-walthamstow-protest-fascists-need-to-have-throats-cut-13193298
So anything from those claiming that the counter protests were OK?
-
White supremacy in action.
(https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/7000166b5d649424d0.jpg)
-
So anything from those claiming that the counter protests were OK?
No idea who that comment is aimed at.
Of course, those on both sides should be subject to the law equally - whether this relates to incitement to violence (either on-line or in person) or actual violence.
Have I ever suggested otherwise?
-
Very funny
https://x.com/DachshundColin/status/1821228651045601438
-
White supremacy in action.
(https://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/7000166b5d649424d0.jpg)
And in jail
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y3gqvey04o
-
Much reaction against sentencing for social media posts, though mainly from people who also wanted action against the ex Labour councillors words at the Walthamstow protest. Also when people were jailed for such during the 2011 riots, it tended be the reverse in general political stances speaking against and for such action.
Avoiding specific cases, I think it's too easy to ignore that this is an immensely difficult area, and that people constantly talk of free speech as an absolute but rarely, if ever mean it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy76dxkpjpjo
-
If you dare venture on Twitter (I'd advise against it) the posters on there who are against the prosecution of online posting are very confused about free speech claiming it doesn't exist. I have pointed out, though I fear made no impact, that there is free speech but there is no immunity from the consequences of that expression of free speech. It is a distinction that they sadly do not seem able to comprehend. #donotshoutfireinacrowdedtheatre
I also agree that it is an immensely difficult area to police, I do not envy the various agencies that have to deal with this issue.
-
If you dare venture on Twitter (I'd advise against it) the posters on there who are against the prosecution of online posting are very confused about free speech claiming it doesn't exist. I have pointed out, though I fear made no impact, that there is free speech but there is no immunity from the consequences of that expression of free speech. It is a distinction that they sadly do not seem able to comprehend. #donotshoutfireinacrowdedtheatre
I also agree that it is an immensely difficult area to police, I do not envy the various agencies that have to deal with this issue.
From an absolutist viewpoint, there should be no consequences for any form of speech, but I don't know anyone who actually subscribes to someone being able to go up to a five year old and tell them graphically how they are going to be raped, tortured and killed, and there being no consequences. And I'm quite glad I don''t.
-
From an absolutist viewpoint, there should be no consequences for any form of speech
What about people who call for specific individuals to be murdered? What about people who call for violence against specific groups? Should incitement to violence not be a crime?
-
Elon stocking the fire even more.
-
Elon stocking the fire even more.
What an evil so and so Musk is! >:(
-
It is enjoyable finding the most misguided posts on Twitter, and such a choice.
Anyways, I give you this:
-
What about people who call for specific individuals to be murdered? What about people who call for violence against specific groups? Should incitement to violence not be a crime?
I'm not justifying it. I'm explaining what it means, see rest of post that you edited out.
-
Interesting article in English by Finnish broadcaster YLE on the riots. It goes into foreign involvement on Telegram channels, including a Finnish neo-nazi.
https://yle.fi/a/74-20104291
-
What about people who call for specific individuals to be murdered? What about people who call for violence against specific groups? Should incitement to violence not be a crime?
Of course it should, and is, Free speech has its limits.
-
Of course it should, and is, Free speech has its limits.
I agree.
-
As a long term republican, Republic seem to be a bunch of pricks here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj08430yervo
Well he's turned up
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn876qxq263o
-
Pakistan charges man over Southport attack disinformation - interesting development. Would seem difficult to prove to me, but I have virtually no knowledge of the Pakistan legal system on this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c05je6yz0q1o
-
How sad this is.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7v51m128e5o
-
Southport murders accused facing terror charge - social media off on another spin
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c05zpdq0lzgo
-
Wasn't sure where to put this, but here seems as good a place as any.
The "false on-line rumours" were true. The alleged Southport child murderer has been charged with terrorism offences. Excuse the X account name.
https://x.com/StandUptoWoke/status/1851301587119194553
-
Wasn't sure where to put this, but here seems as good a place as any.
The "false on-line rumours" were true. The alleged Southport child murderer has been charged with terrorism offences. Excuse the X account name.
https://x.com/StandUptoWoke/status/1851301587119194553
Moderator note: moved from the Tommy Robinson
thread as this thread already going
-
Wasn't sure where to put this, but here seems as good a place as any.
The "false on-line rumours" were true. The alleged Southport child murderer has been charged with terrorism offences. Excuse the X account name.
https://x.com/StandUptoWoke/status/1851301587119194553
Well not the name, nor that the person had arrived on a boat in the last year.
-
Well not the name, nor that the person had arrived on a boat in the last year.
Spot on - the false messaging wasn’t about terrorism but claims about the name of the person involved, that he was an asylum speaker and had arrived on a small boat. Which is why the riots targeted places where asylum speakers were being housed.
None of those claims were correct and the recent announcement doesn’t change those facts one iota.
-
Wasn't sure where to put this, but here seems as good a place as any.
The "false on-line rumours" were true. The alleged Southport child murderer has been charged with terrorism offences. Excuse the X account name.
https://x.com/StandUptoWoke/status/1851301587119194553
That tweet is trying to gaslight us. The online rumours were that the murderer was an immigrant.
-
Spot on - the false messaging wasn’t about terrorism but claims about the name of the person involved, that he was an asylum speaker and had arrived on a small boat. Which is why the riots targeted places where asylum speakers were being housed.
None of those claims were correct and the recent announcement doesn’t change those facts one iota.
Though there was also a gotcha reaction at the time from some when the murderer was then said to be of a Christian background. So many people seem to want their hatred to be confirmed by this, and other tragic acts. Rather than a period for relection, and calm, they are turned into some sort of circus show.
I see that Robert Jenrick continues his campaign to be the Tories Farage-lite with his claims that the authorities were lying, but the concerns from Jonathan Hall show a much greater awareness of the concept of nuance.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/southport-row-continues-as-watchdog-urges-government-and-police-to-be-more-open/ar-AA1tbKlE
-
Though there was also a sortbof gotcha reaction at the time from some when the murderer was then said to be of a Christian background.
Maybe they were.
-
Maybe they were.
He may well have been but it's the eagerness to use that as some thing to be almost celebrated as confirming views immediately, just as the news yesterday was 'celebrated' by others, that seems the problem, as the rest of my post covered that I was raising.
-
Though there was also a gotcha reaction at the time from some when the murderer was then said to be of a Christian background.
I don't that calling out people for lying by providing factually correct information can ever be considered to be a 'gotcha'.
The lies were that the attacker was called Ali Al-Shakiri, that he was a muslim immigrant, an asylum seeker and had recently arrived on a small boat. Non of this was true.
He is a British citizen, born in Cardiff to Rwandan immigrants. Now the population of Rwanda is over 90% christian so it is a pretty good bet that he came from a christian background. But I can be even more confident as my niece was actually in the same class as him in primary school - a catholic school in Cardiff where the family were well known to the catholic community as they were regular worshippers at the same church my in-laws attend.
Now he might have converted to islam later (although I don't think we know that), but that still wouldn't change the fact that he was from a christian background.
Have we really got to the point where everyone is entitled to their own 'fact' that calling out lies with evidence is seen as 'gotcha'. If so, heaven help us.
-
I don't that calling out people for lying by providing factually correct information can ever be considered to be a 'gotcha'.
The lies were that the attacker was called Ali Al-Shakiri, that he was a muslim immigrant, an asylum seeker and had recently arrived on a small boat. Non of this was true.
He is a British citizen, born in Cardiff to Rwandan immigrants. Now the population of Rwanda is over 90% christian so it is a pretty good bet that he came from a christian background. But I can be even more confident as my niece was actually in the same class as him in primary school - a catholic school in Cardiff where the family were well known to the catholic community as they were regular worshippers at the same church my in-laws attend.
Now he might have converted to islam later (although I don't think we know that), but that still wouldn't change the fact that he was from a christian background.
Have we really got to the point where everyone is entitled to their own 'fact' that calling out lies with evidence is seen as 'gotcha'. If so, heaven help us.
You seem to be missing the point, helped by quotemining.
-
You seem to be missing the point, helped by quotemining.
What point am I missing.
You implied that the people stating the facts about the attacker were engaging in 'gotcha' and involved in some kind of circus show. They weren't - they were stating facts to call out liars. Your quote in full:
'Though there was also a gotcha reaction at the time from some when the murderer was then said to be of a Christian background. So many people seem to want their hatred to be confirmed by this, and other tragic acts. Rather than a period for relection, and calm, they are turned into some sort of circus show.'
The stuff about Jenrick is of no relevance as this is about recent events rather than the lying and stating of facts that occurred directly after the events.
-
What point am I missing.
You implied that the people stating the facts about the attacker were engaging in 'gotcha' and involved in some kind of circus show. They weren't - they were stating facts to call out liars. Your quote in full:
'Though there was also a gotcha reaction at the time from some when the murderer was then said to be of a Christian background. So many people seem to want their hatred to be confirmed by this, and other tragic acts. Rather than a period for relection, and calm, they are turned into some sort of circus show.'
The stuff about Jenrick is of no relevance as this is about recent events rather than the lying and stating of facts that occurred directly after the events.
Because it's not about lies. It's about people seeking things out to conform their hatred as the quote said some of those who spread the lies about the murderer being a muslim asylum seeker knew they were lying, but many didn't and spread the misinformation because they thought it true and confirmed their beliefs. When it was indicated that he was from a Christian background ot was seized on by those wanting it to be true so as to confirm their hatred of the first group.
And that's then been mirrored by the first group seizing on the latest actual information to say I told you so.
Meanwhile there are 3 murdered children.
-
Because it's not about lies. It's about people seeking things out to conform their hatred as the quote said some of those who spread the lies about the murderer being a muslim asylum seeker knew they were lying, but many didn't and spread the misinformation because they thought it true and confirmed their beliefs. When it was indicated that he was from a Christian background ot was seized on by those wanting it to be true so as to confirm their hatred of the first group.
And that's then been mirrored by the first group seizing on the latest actual information to say I told you so.
Meanwhile there are 3 murdered children.
I think you are spinning this in an excessively gotcha kind of way. I really doubt that many of those pointing out that the attacker had a Christian background were doing it as a way to confirm their hatred of the first group. Not that the first group isn't deserving of some contempt - which is not the same as hatred btw.
-
I think you are spinning this in an excessively gotcha kind of way. I really doubt that many of those pointing out that the attacker had a Christian background were doing it as a way to confirm their hatred of the first group. Not that the first group isn't deserving of some contempt - which is not the same as hatred btw.
I saw lots of tweets doing exactly that saying that it just showed how the right wing were full of dangerous liars that the latest facts to energe are seen by the first group as backing them up in an argument that is isn't really about what happened but whether what happened backs up their beliefs.
Say those who spread the misinformation about being an asylum seeker were right. Got their facts correct from the start. It's not going to justify the actions, it doesn't make the argument they think it does.
And neither did them getting it wrong make any difference to the overall arguments but too many taking the opposite position think it did.
And still three children have been murdered.
-
Because it's not about lies. It's about people seeking things out to conform their hatred as the quote said some of those who spread the lies about the murderer being a muslim asylum seeker knew they were lying, but many didn't and spread the misinformation because they thought it true and confirmed their beliefs. When it was indicated that he was from a Christian background ot was seized on by those wanting it to be true so as to confirm their hatred of the first group.
Sure people will conveniently use facts to push an agenda. But surely you can see the difference between using facts to push an agenda (even if there is no causal link) and using lies to push an agenda, where the starting point isn't true.
And that's then been mirrored by the first group seizing on the latest actual information to say I told you so.
Except they are still wrong as they were then - their claims were that the attacker was called Ali Al-Shakiri, that he was a muslim immigrant, an asylum seeker and had recently arrived on a small boat. None of this was true then and nothing that has come to light more recently has changed that. All those claims remain untrue. The nearest that might have been tweaked is whether he is muslim - he certainly wasn't growing up, but he might have converted more recently although I don't think there is any evidence to support this that has been released.
Meanwhile there are 3 murdered children.
And those children and their families deserve truth and justice. Lies about who the attacker was doesn't help them at all and the riots that kicked off following the murders can only have made their pain even worse.
-
I saw lots of tweets
How many is lots? Ten? a hundred? What percentage of the Twitter user base does it represent do you think?
Say those who spread the misinformation about being an asylum seeker were right.
Why? They were wrong.
And still three children have been murdered.
And it could have been even worse if the rioters had got to any of the asylum seeker hotels. The people who incited the riots deserve contempt and prison. The people who lied about the origins of the murderer deserve contempt and prison because they did things that caused people to incite riots.
-
Suspect pleads not guilty
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx234gx15o
-
Suspect pleads not guilty
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx234gx15o
He didn't though, the judge did on his behalf.
-
He didn't though, the judge did on his behalf.
That is him pleading effectively
-
That is him pleading effectively
He refused to plead. That's different from pleading not guilty.
-
This seems like a decent speech from Starmer. The much talked about revelations from the tragedy, don't, despite claims from Farage and others, seem to back up their narrative that there was a cover up at the time.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c9q7r4wpep0t