You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Forest Hill stabbing
November 23 2024 1.15pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Forest Hill stabbing

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 21 of 36 < 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 >

  

jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 16 Dec 16 12.48pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

That really is not true. There is a clearly defined organisation that has encouraged attacks by Muslims who's very strength is to radicalise individuals for the benefit of their cause.There are multiple examples of this which has cost hundreds of lives in Europe. You know this full well, and yet you deliberately try blur the truth to imply that there is some sort of an equal islamaphobic organisation,which is drivel.

I think there is a parallel between how IS calls for attacks and how the tabloid media operates, in that they both feed into the language of justified violence (to different degrees), and can have a profound impact on certain, possibly vulnerable, people.

There is definitely a difference between attacks perpetrated by IS and its members, and those 'done in its name' by the 'inspired', typically the first involves multiple, planned and calculated individuals, that are resourced towards a strategic outcome (such as the Paris attacks or the Charlie Hebdo attack), and more 'chaotic' spontaneous attacks such as Bastille Day and the shooting spree in the US.

These latter attacks seem more like the result of 'psychiatric pressure' than real planned conspiracies of terror, and often have a personalised element (typically seen when people engage in spree shootings).

The first, are terrorists attacks, but the latter typically are claimed after the event, more as a matter of convenience. Something like the Paris attacks was orchestrated specifically towards a political goal and backed to succeed by IS affilates, where as the 'Muslim Spree Shootings' in the US, typically is self funded, by people who at best have periphery connection to Islamist groups and no really adherence to their agenda, political aims or objectives.

The media does tend to blur this difference, for convenience, whilst being rather focused when its more of a domestic issue. Especially tabloids who arguably have a large demographic market that crosses into some of those right wing factions.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 12.50pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset

Can we clarify that, to you, if a Muslim commits a crime it's because they are a terrorist. But if a non Muslim commits a similar crime they are a Barking lone wolf

Crime?

What stealing a Bycicle?

As usual you are blurring because you know your argument is twaddle. Repeating it over and over does not make it any less stupid.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 1.06pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I think there is a parallel between how IS calls for attacks and how the tabloid media operates, in that they both feed into the language of justified violence (to different degrees), and can have a profound impact on certain, possibly vulnerable, people.

There is definitely a difference between attacks perpetrated by IS and its members, and those 'done in its name' by the 'inspired', typically the first involves multiple, planned and calculated individuals, that are resourced towards a strategic outcome (such as the Paris attacks or the Charlie Hebdo attack), and more 'chaotic' spontaneous attacks such as Bastille Day and the shooting spree in the US.

These latter attacks seem more like the result of 'psychiatric pressure' than real planned conspiracies of terror, and often have a personalised element (typically seen when people engage in spree shootings).

The first, are terrorists attacks, but the latter typically are claimed after the event, more as a matter of convenience. Something like the Paris attacks was orchestrated specifically towards a political goal and backed to succeed by IS affilates, where as the 'Muslim Spree Shootings' in the US, typically is self funded, by people who at best have periphery connection to Islamist groups and no really adherence to their agenda, political aims or objectives.

The media does tend to blur this difference, for convenience, whilst being rather focused when its more of a domestic issue. Especially tabloids who arguably have a large demographic market that crosses into some of those right wing factions.


I'm not sue you can know the causative factor for an attack by an individual as opposed to a potentially organised attack. The latter might or might not be directly orchestrated by a central command but it is very fact that radical influence needs no traditional organisation that makes it so dangerous. When two local men cut the head off a local priest, are they unstable or acting for the perceived cause? How do you decide, and what does it actually matter? The result is the same.
In the end we are now at risk from attacks by radicalised Muslims and that is what the majority concern themselves with. I see no point in indulging in a self loathing session and somehow blame ourselves for the situation and perpetuating the idea of a far right uprising like Gusset or Legal who seem to have a warped sense of the big picture.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 16 Dec 16 1.27pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Crime?

What stealing a Bycicle?

As usual you are blurring because you know your argument is twaddle. Repeating it over and over does not make it any less stupid.

very droll, you know exactly why I meant.

I'll couch the question (you haven't really answered yet) in a different way.

How is shouting 'I want to kill a Muslim' before stabbing someone not connected to Islamaphobia?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 16 Dec 16 1.34pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

This is a chicken and egg argument which has no validity.
There is no doubt that our global policy over decades might have caused resentment in certain regions but the current era of Islamic radicalism is about Saudi Arabian influence the conflict in Iraq. It has nothing to do with anyone's attitude toward Muslims. That is an apologists argument. Resentment toward Islam is a result of the perceived threat it poses and a dislike of it's attitude toward western values.


Do you not think seeing (often based on no evidence) headlines about Muslims all of the time would have an effect on the muslim population. Bare in mind, a lot of people will just parrot what they read without questioning it, so they then become anti muslim (based on the fact ISIS are c***s- which thy are - and start treating them as second class citizens. This won't help integration will it? In fact wouldn't that make some people turn against the host country.

Imagine if newspapers on the costa's started printing 'Brits are c***s' type headlines. Would the ex pats feel comfortable with this and view their hosts in the same way?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 1.40pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset

very droll, you know exactly why I meant.

I'll couch the question (you haven't really answered yet) in a different way.

How is shouting 'I want to kill a Muslim' before stabbing someone not connected to Islamaphobia?

I have answered you.
Until the mental health of the culprit is established, the question cannot be reasonably answered.
Your daft habit of asking questions you already know the answers to, reveals your motivations.

BTW, you did not answer my previous question.

Let me ask you what positives you think will come from huge over population and within that eventuality, further division created by the continuing increase in the numbers of foreign nationals and their future children to the existing population?

Don't say there will be a financial one because that is laughable, not to mention unsustainable in the long term.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (16 Dec 2016 1.49pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 1.42pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset


Do you not think seeing (often based on no evidence) headlines about Muslims all of the time would have an effect on the muslim population. Bare in mind, a lot of people will just parrot what they read without questioning it, so they then become anti muslim (based on the fact ISIS are c***s- which thy are - and start treating them as second class citizens. This won't help integration will it? In fact wouldn't that make some people turn against the host country.

Imagine if newspapers on the costa's started printing 'Brits are c***s' type headlines. Would the ex pats feel comfortable with this and view their hosts in the same way?

More chicken and egg apologist nonsense with a nice dose of exaggeration.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 16 Dec 16 2.46pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I have answered you.
Until the mental health of the culprit is established, the question cannot be reasonably answered.
Your daft habit of asking questions you already know the answers to, reveals your motivations.

BTW, you did not answer my previous question.

Let me ask you what positives you think will come from huge over population and within that eventuality, further division created by the continuing increase in the numbers of foreign nationals and their future children to the existing population?

Don't say there will be a financial one because that is laughable, not to mention unsustainable in the long term.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (16 Dec 2016 1.49pm)

There will be problems for the whole planet with regards to migration with rising sea waters, displacement through war, and some places becoming uninhabitable because of climate changes.

To help against divisions, let's not be so ignorant about people who just want somewhere safe to live and work to pay their way.

Your Enoch Powellesque rants are great examples of catastrophising. Blimey you'd think the papers were using fear of others scaremongering to help keep the divisions and suspicion of others. In no way does it exacerbate the problem.

I thought you lot were happy with Brexit, we're taking our country back type no more foreigners new Dawn we've entered. Why are you still going on about mass overpopulation. If you were Lebanese, you might have a point as their population has gone through the roof.

Where are your figures / forecasts for future uncontrolled immigration (despite UK border patrols being pretty tight) or is your argument based on a hunch formed by completely dismissing one side of the argument because it doesn't fit your worldview.

Edited by nickgusset (16 Dec 2016 2.52pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 16 Dec 16 2.49pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

More chicken and egg apologist nonsense with a nice dose of exaggeration.

Great use of abstract nouns rather than unpicking the argument. I'll have a go...

Spouting third reichist superior race guff with no hint of reason.


Easy innit.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 3.20pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset

There will be problems for the whole planet with regards to migration with rising sea waters, displacement through war, and some places becoming uninhabitable because of climate changes.

To help against divisions, let's not be so ignorant about people who just want somewhere safe to live and work to pay their way.

Your Enoch Powellesque rants are great examples of catastrophising. Blimey you'd think the papers were using fear of others scaremongering to help keep the divisions and suspicion of others. In no way does it exacerbate the problem.

I thought you lot were happy with Brexit, we're taking our country back type no more foreigners new Dawn we've entered. Why are you still going on about mass overpopulation. If you were Lebanese, you might have a point as their population has gone through the roof.

Where are your figures / forecasts for future uncontrolled immigration (despite UK border patrols being pretty tight) or is your argument based on a hunch formed by completely dismissing one side of the argument because it doesn't fit your worldview.

Edited by nickgusset (16 Dec 2016 2.52pm)

You know the issues but you seem blind to the consequences of those issues. The current levels of migration will be tiny compared to the future. We have to have a policy to avoid the potential disaster coming out way. You talk about it like it is only a possibility, but it will happen Britain has finite resources.

And your protestations about ignorance are laughable in the grand scheme. Humans are humans, that doesnt change. When we are pressured by environmental factors, we react instinctively to protect what we have. That will never change. More pressure on resources will only mean more friction. Your desire to see a hippy dippy world of love and hand holding is a fantasy, as it always has been.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 16 Dec 16 3.22pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset

Great use of abstract nouns rather than unpicking the argument. I'll have a go...

Spouting third reichist superior race guff with no hint of reason.


Easy innit.

I'd invite you to provide an example of this by me anywhere on this site.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 16 Dec 16 3.24pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I have answered you.
Until the mental health of the culprit is established, the question cannot be reasonably answered.
Your daft habit of asking questions you already know the answers to, reveals your motivations.

BTW, you did not answer my previous question.

Let me ask you what positives you think will come from huge over population and within that eventuality, further division created by the continuing increase in the numbers of foreign nationals and their future children to the existing population?

Don't say there will be a financial one because that is laughable, not to mention unsustainable in the long term.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (16 Dec 2016 1.49pm)


Being mentally ill doesn't exclude you from being influenced by media. If anything it probably makes you more susceptible to influence. Whilst people who end up going mental and stabbing someone may be mentally unstable and irrational, that isn't to say that they are devoid of reason, its just that their reasoning may not make sense objectively.

Even when you look a spree shooters, you tend to find that there are patterns to who they shoot, and people they choose not to shoot. The mentally ill are capable of reasoning, its just distorted significantly from how normal reasoning works.

If someone went out and stabbed people they thought were Muslims, you could probably expect to find some kind of association to anti-muslim extremism or an unhealthy obsession with issues around the media and Islam.

Like that guy who thought killing someone was on the orders of the Queen of the Damned. Turns out he did have a very unhealthy fixation with that crap movie, watching it hundreds of times.

He was always likely to become a threat, its just the illness tends to focus around a kind of fetish. A lot of terrorists are probably the same if they're not part of a group.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 21 of 36 < 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Forest Hill stabbing