He looks like a good target for a mission in an North-African country
Supposedly there’s a second suspect who placed a bomb in a subway station. Luckily the police found the bomb before anybody could get hurt.
Many Russian Media outlets also published an incorrect image of the London attacker a few weeks ago so take this stuff with a pinch of salt I say.
Are we sure this isn’t an iPod photo of someone’s TV playing one of the games?
The Daily Heil has decided that attacking refugees is bad.
I wonder where someone could possibly get the hatred and resentment to do such an awful thing? Oh… That’s right.
It’s not just outside the UK though, considering the government allowed (even if MI5 asked so) people like Anjem Choudrey to be preaching and forcing hatred onto others for so long before charging him and imprisoned for a very short time. People have a right to be concerned not to fight and cause harm but to actually deal with the issue.
People just look at existing countries that have given the open arms approach and see how they have coped, and rose in crime related to migrants.
People love to use Germany or Sweden as examples of that, especially Germany - But so much of Germany’s supposed “migrant crime” problem is massively overexaggerated.
Everything’s exaggerated in media both left and right. It doesn’t change correlations however. Especially when there are threats we need to deal with inside out country first before everything else.
We’re not world police right?
What does any of this have to do with the fact an asylum seeker was brutally beaten half to death by a gang of about 20 people?
Literally fucking nothing.
That people are literally fighting back and taking there anger out (at the wrong thing). If the kid wasn’t an asylum seeker, you think he would be mobbed? A possibility. A lot of the general public tie asylums seekers, other races and other religion other than Christianity in the same boat. They see someone not from the country causing trouble so they blame everyone other than English people. Do we know if this 17 year old was doing something bad? We hear half of the story and like you said exaggerated.
Orrr this could be a one off attack. Just happened to be a asylum seekers, and media pulled that strings.
It’s being treated as a hate crime. That’s not the media pulling strings, that’s the police.
It’s really dangerous to start looking at racially motivated attacks like this and start cataloguing them as isolated one off incidents. We know there was a huge rise in hate crime after Brexit vote, enough for it to be a systemic problem - so I don’t see why anyone would be sceptical that this actually happened and was a racially motivated attack.
Hence why I link to the Daily Mail headlines, because they perpetuate that problem by pandering to people’s irrational prejudice. And then they have the audacity to act shocked when a serious hate crime against an asylum seeker happens.
Irrelevant and does not matter. Don’t try to slander a 17 year old victim of an attempted murder. That won’t go very well.
Ofcourse it is… or the police will be called racist or some other nonsense.
But you wrote off the actual death of British people as an isolated attack and no one should be any bothered basically, yet beating up one person is now the biggest issue. Sorry you don’t have your priorities in order mate. Beating someone up or killing them are totally different incidents. There is no factual evidence that that mob knew he was an asylum seeker.
Then it’s down to the people to not be led on by media which goes both ways for that fact. Papers want views that’s all.
It’s totally relevant. If that kid was attacking another person or stealing or doing something really bad and the people beat him up, despite if he was from here or Mars. It could be to anyone. I’m not condoning aggression, just stating how it is. After reading a few articles, they mention “bus stop” and “the brutal attack”. No context whatsoever. One says “found out he was an asylum seeker” How? Why?. There’s no context beforehand. What was going on, how did they approach? Nothing.
Then the actual irrelevant political correctness comes out. It’s going to be called a hate crime if the victim was other than white and British.
Glad he’s in stable condition.
…What the hell are you talking about? Are you seriously suggesting the police only investigating this as a hate crime so they don’t get called racist? What the fuck?
When the fuck did I do this? Oh, that’s right - I didn’t. Stop making shit up about me. I suggested that armed counter terrorist police being deployed On every street corner in London was a disproportionate response to a lone wolf killer. At no point did I trivialise the deaths of the victims. Get out of here with that bullshit.
Also why did you write British people in bold? Is violence against non British people less important to you?
Please learn how to fucking read. People have already been charged with both racially aggravated assault AND attempted murder. Or are you going to suggest that the police are just charging them with attempted murder and racially aggravated assault to be “politically correct”?
If the fact they are not white or non British was the reason for why they were attacked, then that is the textbook definition of a hate crime. It has absolutely nothing to do with “political correctness”.
Honestly you’re pissing me right the fuck off trying to justify this attack on a poor kid.
Always the case. Always a hate against something if it’s British people against anyone. The person I brought up earlier Anjem Chouldry, a well known hate preacher. With groups who openly hate on police government and people who don’t follow their way. Yet was never considered a hate crime, only charged on the ISIS connections. Why didn’t the terrorist attack get called a hate crime? No PC comes out instead.
But now why is this attack where no one died is treated in some view as worse? Just because a bunch of chavs beat up a kid doesn’t make it a hate crime. It works here then? I wrote [quote=“GTAJJ, post:222, topic:15464”]
actual death of British people
in bold FYI. Not just British don’t twist things.
Because it’s the judge/jury who decided that, yet a word from whoever doesn’t make anything. Nor am I going to believe a charge from a worded sentence until context has been shown and proof that because of his skin colour or whatever was the true source of the attack.
The attackers needed to brought to justice for the physical abuse they brought on the victim no matter what it is. That is certain. Assuming race was anything to be a part of it isn’t even been proved unless the attack admitted to it. If anyone mobbed a person, it’s going to be a hate crime?
Even if it was by people of their own colour, race or religion? No I don’t think so. Anyone can be a victim of hate crime. Anyone. Black white brown yellow green.
The politicians responses to incidents the recent days is the textbook definition of political correctness.
If you can’t have a proper discussion over this then don’t bother. If you think I’m justifying the attack, you need to reread what I wrote.
See, this is where you fucked up - And it is a big fuck up. Anjem Choudary is British. He’s from London. He is just as British as you or me, but just happens to be a dark skinned Muslim. What I gather form this is that you don’t seem to treat a Muslim person with middle eastern heritage as truly British.
Also I don’t know what you’re talking about since he’s currently doing 6 years in prison on terror charges and is well known for being a hate preacher. The reason it was so difficult to charge him was because of free speech - not because of some politically correct conspiracy theory which you seem to believe. Think of it as like Al Capone being jailed for his taxes and not the many other things he had actually done.
Terrorism already has a label. Terrorism is comitted for Political and ieological reasons and victims are usually random based on happenstance. The victims in London were of multiple ethnicities. White British, Romanian, Chinese, White American. The attack was inspired by a hateful ideology but the victims were not selected because of any particular skin colour, ethnic background or so on. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Weren’t you just previously lecturing me for apparently belittling the severity of crimes? Now you are trying to pass off a savage, sustained attack on a teenager as “some chavs beating up a kid”. The victim has a brain hemmorhage, fractured spine and is in Intensive Care in critical condition. He is lucky to be alive.
Ahhhhh. Now you care about context and proof! You want all terror attacks to immediately be declared hate crimes even though the perpetrator is deceased and we may never know his true feelings and motivations - But when the victim is a teenage asylum seeker you want correct procedure followed. Fucking hilarious.
So in your mind the only way to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that a hate crime is a hate crime is if the attacker themself admits to it? Then how do you expect this London terror attack to be declared a hate crime when the only suspect is dead and can’t possibly admit to it?
Wow - Are you fucking serious right now? Treating violence and attempted murder as deviant behaviour and publically speaking out against it when it happens = political correctness.
You really are a special case.
There’s been another chemical weapons attack in Syria. 58 dead, many more injured. Initial reports suggest it was fired from a jet and into medical clinics that were treating wounded people. The attack was on a rebel held area, likely carried out by the Syrian Government
This is why there are so many refugees from Syria FYI.
Hence I wrote
If it means they are forcing shit like Shira Law. No it isn’t British. You can practice any heritage or religion for all I care, hence why were free to do so. But if that “heritage” means rape, kill, be-headings, paedophilia. You damn right I’m not going to support it. Clearly you seem to do.
After how long has he converted people to fight for ISIS and the alike? He’s indirectly murdering people and creating killers and should be trailed as such. 6 years (with will be half as usual) for murders. While free speech is always needed, he is using the said freedom to force and demand people to be restricted of said freedoms (even though he smoked weed and drank). Just open your eyes to the things he was saying everywhere, it doesn’t take a genius to see alarm bells and to start investigating him and watching his actions. But no he gets a small sentence for being allegiance to an enemy of the state many years later after he’s converted god knows how many whether through trickery, lie, deception, will or forced.
Why does this not apply to the asylum seeker? What if it was just a bunch of lowlife chavs out to cause shit and thought the boy was an easy target to rob or whatever? Only because the victim was foreign, it immediately known as a hate crime. People get mobbed everyday and beaten up, people do it over football for fuck sake.
I’m paraphrasing you…
See how it sounds now? No one should be scared to walk the streets, that is certain. The kid can get back to his daily schedule one day and hopefully have a speedy and well recovery. The chavs got their charges and convictions and people move on. It’ll always be traumatic for the boy but he can eventually be strong and continue studying etc.
Meanwhile the 9 families of the victims on St Petersberg cannot continue on. They can cannot get back what they had the day before over time. People are gone. Dead. Can’t come back. No healing.
Facts > Feelings I’m afraid. I’m stating the double standards you’re trying to pull. You’re all for declaring the chavs a hate crime because victim was another colour yet same goes for the attacker to the victims on Westminster. But labels right?
How on earth do you know if it is a hate crime otherwise? As I said, the victim could have been any colour and been attacked. The victim could have been doing something? I’ve yet to read how they knew he was a foreigner asylum seeker. Because if you’re all for this too be a hate crime then surely same must apply to Westminster.
They talk about connecting and a few buzzwords of motivation holding hands freedom liberty, chuck in. Never actually doing anything. Calls the attacker Islamic but calls the attack not Islamic = Political Correctness. What a joke.
As I said I go by facts. I know people lost their lives unnecessarily and things need to change. I know that a person got mobbed and they were brought to justice.
Running around pretending things aren’t real doesn’t help I’m afraid.
Yes, because I pointed out that Anjem Choudary is in fact British, that means I must support Sharia Law. How the hell did you end up at that conclusion? Are you normally this jingoistic or are you just deliberately trying to take everything I say out of context?
Because much of what Anjem Choudhary was doing initially was not punishable by UK law. You’ll probably end up on a watch list for saying a lot of the shit he says - But nothing can really be done from a legal point of view to stop you given the grey area of free speech laws. Inciting violence, openly being a member of a banned group or giving people detailed instructions on how to get to Syria and join ISIS, however, is very much illegal. That’s what eventually caught up with Choudhary - He directly advocated violence and conspired to help British Muslims get to Syria to fight for ISIS. He may be a disgusting scumbag but he isn’t stupid - He knew exactly how far he could take his right to free speech in a public forum without getting arrested. nd guess what? Eventually he did get arrested, and now he is in jail for it. You’re acting like it’s some huge injustice he hasn’t been charged with thousands of murders (lol), but he’s literally in prison where he belongs.
It’s thought of as a hate crime because they asked him where he was from and subjected him to a prolonged, brutal and sustained attack because he was an asylum seeker. Not purely because he was foreign, but because there is evidence to suggest the attack was racially motivated. The person responsible for the London terror attack likely had a date and time for his attack pre-planned. He rented a car, a hotel, scouted the area beforehand - The people on the bridge were targets because they were there at the time. We cannot speculate too heavily on motive given there is limited information and the suspect is deceased, but it seems likely, as is the case with most terror attacks, to have been motivated by a hatred of democracy and “British values” - a more nebulous, sprawling topic and concept. That’s why his actions are classed as terrorism.
So this is a game of one upsmanship for you? It’s about “my pain and suffering is worse than your pain and suffering”? Because that’s what it seems like.
Please see above for examples of how they are different.
How can you genuinely say that with a straight face? You wanted there to be armed counter terrorist police on every street corner in London because of the actions of one, lone wolf attacker. Despite the fact he acted alone, despite the fact the UK’s terror threat level was not risen in the wake of the attack and despite the fact there was no intelligence to suggest another attack was imminent, you were dead serious. How does that suggest a rational, level headed response? That’s pure emotion. That’s caving into the fear terrorists want to perpetuate. That’s using an incredibly rare (yet extremely tragic) event to advocate a borderline authoritarian response. That is not rational, that is not putting facts before feelings - That’s putting your feelings (most notably fear and anger) first.
So far you’ve accused me of trivializing the deaths of terror attack victims, supporting sharia law, hating Britain and being “politically correct”. Any other stupid accusations you want to throw my way?
One of my good friends lost a direct relative in the 7/7 bombings, and this kind of evocative but disingenuous rhetoric doesn’t go down well with them.
London mayor Sadiq Khan also condemned the attack, saying hate crime “has no place in London, Britain or anywhere else”, while the Refugee Council said it was “disgusted” by the incident.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn also denounced the assault, saying: “Absolutely shocked at attack on young Kurdish asylum seeker, who came here searching for safety. I fervently hope he makes a full recovery.”
LONDON — The Kurdish-Iranian teenager was waiting with friends at a bus stop in south London when a gang of men and women in their 20s cornered him and asked him in aggressive tones where he was from.
When he replied that he was an asylum seeker, the police and news reports said, they chased him through the streets and finally caught him, throwing him to the ground and repeatedly punching and kicking him in the head, even as he screamed for help.