Reply With QuoteThe people responsible for the riots are the tosspots who incited it, and their idiot disciples who carried out their instructions to a tee.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Just listened to Starmer's weasel words on the BBC news earlier about this case. The police were prevented from rapidly giving out more information on the killer in case it meant he would not receive a fair trial. If they had been allowed to explain that he was not an illegal immigrant but born and raised in the UK, this could have prevented the subsequent riots. When they did release the info, it was too late.
The bloke was caught red-handed (literally, with blood on his hands) . This is part of the media report at the time:
The first police officer arrived to find Rudakubana at the top of the stairs holding a large, bloodied kitchen knife, which he dropped. He was standing over the body of Bebe King. Police then found little Elsie's body inside the building. Police found Ms Liddle and a girl she had protected hiding in the toilets, both crying in fear.
Even if the guy had pleaded not guilty at the trial, how on earth could any jury acquit him with the weight of such evidence against him? It wouldn't matter a tinker's cuss if they already knew where he was born!
As Charles Dicken's character Sam Weller famously said “then the law is an ass”. The law regarding contempt needs serious revision!
The people responsible for the riots are the tosspots who incited it, and their idiot disciples who carried out their instructions to a tee.
Sure, people have to responsible for their actions however angry they may be. That's true.Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
But it doesn't mean we can't try and understand what happened. There has been several terrorist (and non terrorist) incidents leading to children's deaths in this country that did not lead to riots. So what happened here?
I remember reading at the time that apparently it was "well known" there was more to this story at the time and that the govt were withholding information. That now seems to be true. Even if there are valid reasons for that, that needs to be balanced with anger that the truth on this awful event wasn't told at the time.
It does strike rather of Starmer being a lawyer first, leader second.
That said, I think his speech today was good, especially highlighting the issues of isolation within society which is a huge social concern of mine.
It also gave the opportunist like Farage to stick his thoughts of a coverup.
Isn't that what did happen though? The govt have admitted they knew more at the time.
One thing is for sure. It probably won't happen again.
I just don't think a mob should be given the out of 'well geez, if you had told me that...'. If their reaction to 3 little girls getting murdered is to automatically assume it's a Muslim if they arent told otherwise, then that's a them problem. There seems to be a desperation from a certain part of society to find anything they can to justify or excuse the riots.
The prime minister is told things every day that affect us, we don't get to know the vast majority of them at the time or maybe ever. Governments actively try and prevent panic and they don't change that approach to appease a bunch of twats. I really don't get the calls today saying the government should have told everyone at the time of arrest that he made ricin, if anything that implies that he is part of some kind of sophisticated terror cell (my immediate assumption would be that making ricin is hard) and caused more panic, more disorder.
I'd agree though, it's one to learn from. It feels like the signs were there, obviously hindsight is doing a lot of heavy lifting. He appears to be the equivalent of a school shooter in the USA to me, psychology, early warning signs missed, there's loads of things to study.
One thing he doesn't appear to me to be is an ideologically driven terrorist, he seemed to be scouring different platforms and sources for anything that would give him a better idea of how to kill innocent people, the translation that the media keep referring to as an 'al Qaeda handbook' could be bought at bookshops in the UK and it looks like it was produced by the CIA (don't want to do too much googling of that!), maybe there is a lesson not to publish things like that in the future, even if it was for academic purposes.
It might have but I think it is probably wiser not to pick and choose cases where you drip feed details. If something happens in the future and you can't reveal that detail for some reason, people will assume he or she is foreign born and you might actually end up creating more problems down the line than you solved by revealing it.
I also think making any kind of guess around how the rioters would or wouldn't have acted with further information is probably dangerous, there were a lot of incidents that were just egregious violence and bigotry. Of course anybody who served to incite violence, fan the flames with gossip or actively participated in the riots will say they would have acted differently, it makes them feel less culpable and is an attempt to shift the blame.
Sure, the riots were wrong and they were inexcusable. As someone who abhors violence at every level I will always think that. There is no justification.
But at the same time, it's reasonable and indeed wise to understand why they happen. That's no different to having an interest in psychology and studying serial killers. Understanding it doesn't mean justifying it.
In this case, it was widely reported that information was withheld (and it was) and that will understandably raise questions that some will take to the extremes of violence. There are lessons to be learned there.
I agree with you, this case feels more like the issue of US shooters. Loners, angry, misunderstood, frustrated, violent, antipathy to fellow humans etc. Sure he had an Al Qaeda manual but that doesn't mean he adheres to their ideology any more than someone having an SAS survival guide means they are doing whatever they do in the name of the British state. That said..there may be a link and we shouldn't be afraid of that. Radical islam is a huge problem in the country.
What I did like by Starmer yesterday is what I hope will drive more conversations about interaction. I view it like I view steps. We all understand "getting our steps in" is healthy, and for me "getting our interactions in" is too. Nearly everything has been moving in the wrong direction on that for a decade or two; internet, lack of physical interactions, working from home, even tapping cards instead of saying thanks and handing over change. All these things matter and I think there needs to be a lot more conversations about this.
Some people will use guns, some knives, but the root causes are more complex; wanting to do it in the first place.
interestingly at least some of his motive was a hatred of white people, including calling for a white genocide
Posting Permissions