Liverpool

[Nudga]

Well.i actually thought that it COULD be an islamist terrorist attack simply because it's happened before and it was the perfect place and time to do such a thing.
Difference is I didn't jump in online or in real life until the details were made public.

Doesn't make me right wing or racist for thinking it could possibly have been a terrorist attack. 

I always have the memory of my brother being in London when the 7/7 attacks happened and I couldn't get hold of him for hours and hours. I did fear the worst.

Surely there's that bit of doubt that's in your mind when stuff like this happens?

[ravenrover]

My 1st thoughts, it was a crazy Everton fan!
When you see the footage it looks more and more to me like road rage, after people attacked his car, that got out of control.
Mindst you I see it beginning as A white man under the influence of drugs drove into a crowd
Then the headline He is a lovely bloke,I can't believe it
He's a business man lives in a detached house.
Today it's ex Marine Commando appears in court
Wonder what all the headlines would have been if he wasn't white

[BillyStubbsTears]

Well.i actually thought that it COULD be an islamist terrorist attack simply because it's happened before and it was the perfect place and time to do such a thing.
Difference is I didn't jump in online or in real life until the details were made public.

Doesn't make me right wing or racist for thinking it could possibly have been a terrorist attack. 

I always have the memory of my brother being in London when the 7/7 attacks happened and I couldn't get hold of him for hours and hours. I did fear the worst.

Surely there's that bit of doubt that's in your mind when stuff like this happens?

Nudga.

I don't think anyone would be branded racist for their thoughts of what MIGHT have been the background to either attack.

The truly weird thing is how anyone could watch what went on in the days after the Southport attack and not condemn that without any excuses.

While we are at it, it's telling that Farage beat the drum of two tier policing for days after the Southport attack. This time, he was straight on Twitter saying how he was "horrified" by the Liverpool attack. Until it was clear the perpetrator was white and middle class. After that, not a whisper. I assume he's not horrified any more.

[Bentley Bullet]

Well.i actually thought that it COULD be an islamist terrorist attack simply because it's happened before and it was the perfect place and time to do such a thing.
Difference is I didn't jump in online or in real life until the details were made public.

Doesn't make me right wing or racist for thinking it could possibly have been a terrorist attack. 

I always have the memory of my brother being in London when the 7/7 attacks happened and I couldn't get hold of him for hours and hours. I did fear the worst.

Surely there's that bit of doubt that's in your mind when stuff like this happens?

Nudga.

I don't think anyone would be branded racist for their thoughts of what MIGHT have been the background to either attack.

The truly weird thing is how anyone could watch what went on in the days after the Southport attack and not condemn that without any excuses.

While we are at it, it's telling that Farage beat the drum of two tier policing for days after the Southport attack. This time, he was straight on Twitter saying how he was "horrified" by the Liverpool attack. Until it was clear the perpetrator was white and middle class. After that, not a whisper. I assume he's not horrified any more.

That last paragraph is absolute b*llocks and you should be ashamed of yourself for politicising such an event.

I somewhat doubt you will be, though.

[Bentley Bullet]

Once again, BST fails to understand. According to your theory, the Liverpool fans who attacked the driver and his car wouldn't have done so had he been white, the problem with that being that he was!

Now, be a man for once and address my post....

1) Do YOU think the problem is that many people are questioning whether the authorities would have immediately given the details of the driver had he NOT been White.

I think you're a bit confused bullet with two different situations. In Southport there was no crowd in the vicinity and the crwhen

2) Do you think the authorities would have immediately given details of the driver had he NOT been white?

You are confusing two separate and individual situations, Southport the mob was called up and urged on by those on social media jumping to conclusions that they wanted, whereas in Liverpool the crowd was already there and wanted instant 'justice'

I think BB will realise when he calms down how utter stupid he is being here in his childish attempt to try to justify the unjustifiable. He's utterly missed the point.

Had ANYONE been able to attack the Southport murderer, they would have been well within their rights to do so and should have been applauded for doing so. Even if, by doing so, they'd killed him.

Similarly, the crowd in Liverpool were absolutely within their rights to attack the driver to prevent him from causing any more harm.

So why he brings that into the discussion is anyone's guess.

The point is NOT who did or didn't attack the perpetrators of these offences.

The point is that knuckledraggers last year decided to attack mosques and asylum seekers' hotels, after a non-Muslim, non-immigrant murdered those poor kids.

If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this, he'd realise that a more logical analogy would have been if the response to a business owner driving a car over kids and pensioners in Liverpool would have been for knuckledraggers in Bristol to attack unemployed cyclists.

The point is, had the Southport madman been attacked before he got to murdering those kids, you and your ilk would have suggested they were racist and wouldn't have attacked him had he been white British, instead of applauding them.

A good reason why your claim that people are well within their rights to take the law into their own hands is b*llocks is that in the Liverpool incident, it might well turn out that public intervention actually resulted in more casualties.

Oh, and WTF is the quote "If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this", all about?

Since when have you considered a handful of your disciples being "us all?"

Silly sausage.

[drfchound]

Once again, BST fails to understand. According to your theory, the Liverpool fans who attacked the driver and his car wouldn't have done so had he been white, the problem with that being that he was!

Now, be a man for once and address my post....

1) Do YOU think the problem is that many people are questioning whether the authorities would have immediately given the details of the driver had he NOT been White.

I think you're a bit confused bullet with two different situations. In Southport there was no crowd in the vicinity and the crwhen

2) Do you think the authorities would have immediately given details of the driver had he NOT been white?

You are confusing two separate and individual situations, Southport the mob was called up and urged on by those on social media jumping to conclusions that they wanted, whereas in Liverpool the crowd was already there and wanted instant 'justice'

I think BB will realise when he calms down how utter stupid he is being here in his childish attempt to try to justify the unjustifiable. He's utterly missed the point.

Had ANYONE been able to attack the Southport murderer, they would have been well within their rights to do so and should have been applauded for doing so. Even if, by doing so, they'd killed him.

Similarly, the crowd in Liverpool were absolutely within their rights to attack the driver to prevent him from causing any more harm.

So why he brings that into the discussion is anyone's guess.

The point is NOT who did or didn't attack the perpetrators of these offences.

The point is that knuckledraggers last year decided to attack mosques and asylum seekers' hotels, after a non-Muslim, non-immigrant murdered those poor kids.

If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this, he'd realise that a more logical analogy would have been if the response to a business owner driving a car over kids and pensioners in Liverpool would have been for knuckledraggers in Bristol to attack unemployed cyclists.

The point is, had the Southport madman been attacked before he got to murdering those kids, you and your ilk would have suggested they were racist and wouldn't have attacked him had he been white British, instead of applauding them.

A good reason why your claim that people are well within their rights to take the law into their own hands is b*llocks is that in the Liverpool incident, it might well turn out that public intervention actually resulted in more casualties.

Oh, and WTF is the quote "If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this", all about?

Since when have you considered a handful of your disciples being "us all?"

Silly sausage.

It’s just another of his condescending comments BB.
I was also astonished by that comment about people taking things into their own hands with possible attacks on the Southport killer.
As much as I abhor what that t**t did, we should always allow the law to take its course.

[SydneyRover]

Once again, BST fails to understand. According to your theory, the Liverpool fans who attacked the driver and his car wouldn't have done so had he been white, the problem with that being that he was!

Now, be a man for once and address my post....

1) Do YOU think the problem is that many people are questioning whether the authorities would have immediately given the details of the driver had he NOT been White.

I think you're a bit confused bullet with two different situations. In Southport there was no crowd in the vicinity and the crwhen

2) Do you think the authorities would have immediately given details of the driver had he NOT been white?

You are confusing two separate and individual situations, Southport the mob was called up and urged on by those on social media jumping to conclusions that they wanted, whereas in Liverpool the crowd was already there and wanted instant 'justice'

I think BB will realise when he calms down how utter stupid he is being here in his childish attempt to try to justify the unjustifiable. He's utterly missed the point.

Had ANYONE been able to attack the Southport murderer, they would have been well within their rights to do so and should have been applauded for doing so. Even if, by doing so, they'd killed him.

Similarly, the crowd in Liverpool were absolutely within their rights to attack the driver to prevent him from causing any more harm.

So why he brings that into the discussion is anyone's guess.

The point is NOT who did or didn't attack the perpetrators of these offences.

The point is that knuckledraggers last year decided to attack mosques and asylum seekers' hotels, after a non-Muslim, non-immigrant murdered those poor kids.

If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this, he'd realise that a more logical analogy would have been if the response to a business owner driving a car over kids and pensioners in Liverpool would have been for knuckledraggers in Bristol to attack unemployed cyclists.

The point is, had the Southport madman been attacked before he got to murdering those kids, you and your ilk would have suggested they were racist and wouldn't have attacked him had he been white British, instead of applauding them.

A good reason why your claim that people are well within their rights to take the law into their own hands is b*llocks is that in the Liverpool incident, it might well turn out that public intervention actually resulted in more casualties.

Oh, and WTF is the quote "If BB surprises us all and actually applies his brain to this", all about?

Since when have you considered a handful of your disciples being "us all?"

Silly sausage.

But he wasn't was he silly bugle?

[TonySoprano]

A psychiatrist on the radio summed this up perfectly for me.

We live in an age where some members of society base their response to a crime based not on the victim’s nor the atrocity itself but rather on who the perpetrators are.

For example, the response is different if the crime is committed by a 53 year old ‘native’ white man as opposed to a 25 year old Asian man who’s lived in the UK for 2 years. It feeds their own individual value system.

When we see politicians behave in this manner (as we did last year) it ‘authenticates’ this view and empowers others to share it. Whether they have the correct facts or not.

He also said that you could read into the contents of people’s immediate reaction to a crime or atrocity. For example, you get those people whose first instinct are thoughts for the victims. On the other end of the scale are those whose first reaction is ‘I bet I know the kind of person who did it’.

Something to do with natural empathy apparently…or not as the case may be.

There's definitely a two tier justice system under starmer, just not the one your thinking.

You're in such a hole spouting this rubbish Tony, I can see the headlines now 'July 10 2024 Starmer first week in office sends memo to all UK police officers and judges in the UK, implement the Two Tier Plan .............. NOW'

Oh, it goes much deeper than anything the current government are doing.

[TonySoprano]

  Compare that statement who is responsible with the time taken over the Southport incident. Why the difference?

Well, when the next one happens, and they don't release the ethnicity of the culprit straight away, we will know who's done it.

Why do some people want to know the ethnicity of criminals? Isn't them being a criminal enough? Or are they more bothered about race than crime?

It's all about a much much bigger picture

Go on, explain.

Bump, still waiting..

Don't need to explain anything to you

Why not, explain something to the whole forum.?

You made a vague statement with no clear meaning nor back up.  I challenged you on what you meant.

You either can’t say because you don’t know, I’m which case it was dumb to say in the first place.  Or you don’t want to say because you know it might expose you.

I genuinely have no idea which, but f you don’t explain your statements, folks might do exactly what you are seeking to do and jump to conclusions..

If you say so, but I would suggest you open your eyes, take a step back and really look at what's going on.

No, you tell me what you think is going on..

What I can see is a bigger picture where some individuals want to put the blame on certain sections of society, without proof, to further their own motives.

Answer me this: if the police hadn’t revealed the driver’s ethnicity, what would you have assumed it was, based in your “knowledge” of the bigger picture.

Don’t come back with some drivel, just answer the f**king question.

 it's about TPTB protetecting and covering up the crimes of a certain section of their society, and prosecuting another section of society when they get rightfully angry about this.
Ask your self why this is

Let's investigate this a bit further.

The Southport atrocity was carried out by a British born non-Muslim.

The "rightful anger" you speak of involved attacking mosques and trying to commit mass murder against recent immigrants.


Do you want to walk us through your logic here?

We're talking about the Liverpool incident. 

[TonySoprano]

A psychiatrist on the radio summed this up perfectly for me.

We live in an age where some members of society base their response to a crime based not on the victim’s nor the atrocity itself but rather on who the perpetrators are.

For example, the response is different if the crime is committed by a 53 year old ‘native’ white man as opposed to a 25 year old Asian man who’s lived in the UK for 2 years. It feeds their own individual value system.

When we see politicians behave in this manner (as we did last year) it ‘authenticates’ this view and empowers others to share it. Whether they have the correct facts or not.

He also said that you could read into the contents of people’s immediate reaction to a crime or atrocity. For example, you get those people whose first instinct are thoughts for the victims. On the other end of the scale are those whose first reaction is ‘I bet I know the kind of person who did it’.

Something to do with natural empathy apparently…or not as the case may be.

There's definitely a two tier justice system under starmer, just not the one your thinking.

Which part of the psychiatrists view do you disagree with? Which bracket of his explanation do you feel that you fall into?

Let's have a look at the psychiatrist, which radio station was he on? Who was interviewing him, and where does he get his funding from ?

Ah….so you’re going down the conspiracy theory route with this?

That tends to happen when someone is uncomfortable answering the question!

With all due respect, on this specific subject I’m more likely to trust the views of a qualified professional than I am of you or anyone else on here.

However, feel free to challenge the view expressed by the psychiatrist. if it helps let’s pretend that it’s my view rather than that if someone who actually does this for a living.

I'd suggest you take off your blinkers

[TonySoprano]

TS, answer me, in clear unambiguous terms, which ethnicity would you have assumed the perpetrator in Liverpool to be, had the police not revealed it.

It’s a simple question, especially when you claimed everyone would have known.

I don’t, and I wouldn’t.  I did for a split second think it might have been a disgruntled Man Utd fan with some “problems” which tipped him (or her) over the edge to do this.  But then I thought why would that be.  But nowt about ethnic background.

So, which is it.?  Or are you too chicken to air your predjudices.?

How many times do you need to be asked before you give a straight answer.?

I haven't claimed that everyone would have known.
Your confirmation bias has just assumed I did to suit your agenda

[IDM]

Someone has a short memory.

  Compare that statement who is responsible with the time taken over the Southport incident. Why the difference?

Well, when the next one happens, and they don't release the ethnicity of the culprit straight away, we will know who's done it.

And yet still not answering my question..

I’m not the one with an agenda here, it’s you, and you won’t explain it when challenged.

In that case, why don’t you just f**k off and don’t come back.?

[BillyStubbsTears]

  Compare that statement who is responsible with the time taken over the Southport incident. Why the difference?

Well, when the next one happens, and they don't release the ethnicity of the culprit straight away, we will know who's done it.

Why do some people want to know the ethnicity of criminals? Isn't them being a criminal enough? Or are they more bothered about race than crime?

It's all about a much much bigger picture

Go on, explain.

Bump, still waiting..

Don't need to explain anything to you

Why not, explain something to the whole forum.?

You made a vague statement with no clear meaning nor back up.  I challenged you on what you meant.

You either can’t say because you don’t know, I’m which case it was dumb to say in the first place.  Or you don’t want to say because you know it might expose you.

I genuinely have no idea which, but f you don’t explain your statements, folks might do exactly what you are seeking to do and jump to conclusions..

If you say so, but I would suggest you open your eyes, take a step back and really look at what's going on.

No, you tell me what you think is going on..

What I can see is a bigger picture where some individuals want to put the blame on certain sections of society, without proof, to further their own motives.

Answer me this: if the police hadn’t revealed the driver’s ethnicity, what would you have assumed it was, based in your “knowledge” of the bigger picture.

Don’t come back with some drivel, just answer the f**king question.

 it's about TPTB protetecting and covering up the crimes of a certain section of their society, and prosecuting another section of society when they get rightfully angry about this.
Ask your self why this is

Let's investigate this a bit further.

The Southport atrocity was carried out by a British born non-Muslim.

The "rightful anger" you speak of involved attacking mosques and trying to commit mass murder against recent immigrants.


Do you want to walk us through your logic here?

We're talking about the Liverpool incident. 

No. You are not. Your previous post was nothing to do with the Liverpool incident.

What is it about you? Full of angry certainty that you have an insight into what is happening. But when you are asked to be specific, you're as coy as a little girl.

Why not simply say what you actually think. In clear, unambiguous words?

[Stocksbridge Owl]

A psychiatrist on the radio summed this up perfectly for me.

We live in an age where some members of society base their response to a crime based not on the victim’s nor the atrocity itself but rather on who the perpetrators are.

For example, the response is different if the crime is committed by a 53 year old ‘native’ white man as opposed to a 25 year old Asian man who’s lived in the UK for 2 years. It feeds their own individual value system.

When we see politicians behave in this manner (as we did last year) it ‘authenticates’ this view and empowers others to share it. Whether they have the correct facts or not.

He also said that you could read into the contents of people’s immediate reaction to a crime or atrocity. For example, you get those people whose first instinct are thoughts for the victims. On the other end of the scale are those whose first reaction is ‘I bet I know the kind of person who did it’.

Something to do with natural empathy apparently…or not as the case may be.

There's definitely a two tier justice system under starmer, just not the one your thinking.

Which part of the psychiatrists view do you disagree with? Which bracket of his explanation do you feel that you fall into?

Let's have a look at the psychiatrist, which radio station was he on? Who was interviewing him, and where does he get his funding from ?

Ah….so you’re going down the conspiracy theory route with this?

That tends to happen when someone is uncomfortable answering the question!

With all due respect, on this specific subject I’m more likely to trust the views of a qualified professional than I am of you or anyone else on here.

However, feel free to challenge the view expressed by the psychiatrist. if it helps let’s pretend that it’s my view rather than that if someone who actually does this for a living.

I'd suggest you take off your blinkers

Yep, classic conspiracy theory lunacy “I’m angry but can’t give evidence why”.

[TonySoprano]

Still no one to coherently discuss it with me like an adult.
Just the usual suspects that resort to swearing and name calling .

[BillyStubbsTears]

Still no one to coherently discuss it with me like an adult.
Just the usual suspects that resort to swearing and name calling .

I'm neither swearing nor name calling. I've asked you to explain what this "rightful anger" is that you brought up, and how it pertains to this discussion.

The fact that you refuse to do so speaks louder than any of your words.

[TonySoprano]

Still no one to coherently discuss it with me like an adult.
Just the usual suspects that resort to swearing and name calling .

I'm neither swearing nor name calling. I've asked you to explain what this "rightful anger" is that you brought up, and how it pertains to this discussion.

The fact that you refuse to do so speaks louder than any of your words.

I've already explained, but for some reason, I'm hounded further.
It's like you want me to say something controversial, just you you can attack me further.
But I'm not going to, I've said my piece, and it's triggered the usual xtreme leftists on here which was predictable to be honest.

[IDM]

You haven’t clarified anything, that’s the point.  And despite repeated asking you still refuse to do so.  That’s why folks react angrily to you.

I’m not left wing extremist.

I ask again TS:  had the police not revealed the ethnicity of the perpetrator in Liverpool, what would you have said it was.?

How on earth that’s not engaging in an adult way is beyond me.  It’s a clear question repeatedly asked but never answered.

[BillyStubbsTears]

TS

No. You haven't.


You haven't explained ANYTHING on what you mean by this "righteous anger".

I really don't understand why you are so coy in doing so. You clearly feel it very passionately. YOU brought up the concept. Yet when asked what you mean by it, you clam up.

And now YOU are throwing insults around,  responding to my post by going on about "triggered xtreme (sic) leftists" who are "hounding" you.

Really? Are you really that sensitive that you call an invitation to discuss something you passionately believe, "hounding" you? Isn't that how liberal snowflakes are meant to behave?

[IDM]

More than a week later, and TS has still not clarified which ethnicity he would say “we” would know had committed the events in Liverpool, had the police not already done so.

Blaming an ethnic group for crimes, without evidence, is what he would have done, according to his claim.  How sad we still have that attitude in our society.