|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On March 23 2017 08:27 LegalLord wrote:
Have there been any other terrorist attacks in Britain since the current refugee wave? I certainly could name a few other attacks but they mostly don't seem to be in the past two years...
No. These refugees are, broadly speaking, unable to enter the UK. There have been a few incidents with the small number of refugees we have taken directly from the camps, but nothing terrorism related as far as I can remember.
|
On March 23 2017 08:37 SoSexy wrote:
I didn't say that, dangermouse, but if you like to portray me this way, go on.
You do realise that within the post you replied to has the quotes of you doing exactly what I am describing.
I live 15km from Westminster. Someone living thousands of km away wishes that my government becomes akin to Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia in terms of freedom. To have mass surveillance and "disappearing" people. The reason given is that it is better than the current intelligence and rule of law as it is now. For the sake of feeling unsafe to a random attack 1000 km away. Madness.
_____
Not sure why legalord is trying to connect refugees with terrorist attacks since the attacker is British born and UK is not part of the Schengen Zone.
|
On March 23 2017 07:01 SoSexy wrote:
You should learn how to read between lines.
What is the difference between what you are proposing, and what the romans did to attempt to stop the spread of christianism (another religion which praises martyrdom) ? How well did it work out ? How did the christians countered it? Can we relate those problems to modern times ? If so, How would you fix them?
Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, just giving you some space to allow you to read between your own lines a little bit. Other than nothing short of a full genocide or expulsion of any of islamists, i don't see how what you propose would fix anything, by killing the messenger after he has delivered the message, you are just giving him martyrdom to validate his narrative as oppression by the western devils attacking their religion. People who lives in areas with high unemployment, hard times to live day to day added up with the daily state oppression is just fueling further the conflict (which you might think is long overdue as some battle that must be fought sooner rather than later ?).
|
On March 23 2017 20:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2017 08:37 SoSexy wrote:
I didn't say that, dangermouse, but if you like to portray me this way, go on. You do realise that within the post you replied to has the quotes of you doing exactly what I am describing. I live 15km from Westminster. Someone living thousands of km away wishes that my government becomes akin to Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia in terms of freedom. To have mass surveillance and "disappearing" people. The reason given is that it is better than the current intelligence and rule of law as it is now. For the sake of feeling unsafe to a random attack 1000 km away. Madness. _____ Not sure why legalord is trying to connect refugees with terrorist attacks since the attacker is British born and UK is not part of the Schengen Zone.
First, I say what I want. If you get triggered, I don't care at all.How many times do I have to repeat myself? I said that the current prevention system is not good. I stand by it. Have we arrived to the point where one cannot criticize anything because you people get triggered? You are an hypocrite. You care about someone on a watch list being imprisoned - I care more about the people who died yesterday. If imprisoning 2-3 assholes can save the life of someone who is innocent I will ALWAYS do it.
|
On March 23 2017 20:40 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2017 07:01 SoSexy wrote:
You should learn how to read between lines. What is the difference between what you are proposing, and what the romans did to attempt to stop the spread of christianism (another religion which praises martyrdom) ? How well did it work out ? How did the christians countered it? Can we relate those problems to modern times ? If so, How would you fix them? Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, just giving you some space to allow you to read between your own lines a little bit. Other than nothing short of a full genocide or expulsion of any of islamists, i don't see how what you propose would fix anything, by killing the messenger after he has delivered the message, you are just giving him martyrdom to validate his narrative as oppression by the western devils attacking their religion. People who lives in areas with high unemployment, hard times to live day to day added up with the daily state oppression is just fueling further the conflict (which you might think is long overdue as some battle that must be fought sooner rather than later ?).
I won't even reply to such a profound ignorance of 1) christianism 2) isis ideology 3) history. Christians during the romans compared to islamism today is such a stupid comparison; I hope you see it by yourself.
|
On March 23 2017 21:13 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2017 20:40 Godwrath wrote:On March 23 2017 07:01 SoSexy wrote:
You should learn how to read between lines. What is the difference between what you are proposing, and what the romans did to attempt to stop the spread of christianism (another religion which praises martyrdom) ? How well did it work out ? How did the christians countered it? Can we relate those problems to modern times ? If so, How would you fix them? Not trying to be sarcastic or anything, just giving you some space to allow you to read between your own lines a little bit. Other than nothing short of a full genocide or expulsion of any of islamists, i don't see how what you propose would fix anything, by killing the messenger after he has delivered the message, you are just giving him martyrdom to validate his narrative as oppression by the western devils attacking their religion. People who lives in areas with high unemployment, hard times to live day to day added up with the daily state oppression is just fueling further the conflict (which you might think is long overdue as some battle that must be fought sooner rather than later ?). I won't even reply to such a profound ignorance of 1) christianism 2) isis ideology 3) history. Christians during the romans compared to islamism today is such a stupid comparison; I hope you see it by yourself.
Oh i see, and i see where the the analogy work aswell. Problem is that you don't see where what you propose leads to because you are being completely short-sighted and just want to feel more secure by harshening a system which does not work to prevent this kind of terrorist attacks anyways, neither it would put a halt into the spread on radicalization.
I mean, you can't really get any dumber than thinking that increasing the punishments on leaflets to people who already delivered the message will do anything to stop a message which already sailed, can you ?
|
Terrorists threaten our freedom and democracy.
Clearly the solution is to dispose of our freedom and democracy so they have nothing to threaten!
|
On March 23 2017 21:11 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2017 20:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 23 2017 08:37 SoSexy wrote:
I didn't say that, dangermouse, but if you like to portray me this way, go on. You do realise that within the post you replied to has the quotes of you doing exactly what I am describing. I live 15km from Westminster. Someone living thousands of km away wishes that my government becomes akin to Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia in terms of freedom. To have mass surveillance and "disappearing" people. The reason given is that it is better than the current intelligence and rule of law as it is now. For the sake of feeling unsafe to a random attack 1000 km away. Madness. _____ Not sure why legalord is trying to connect refugees with terrorist attacks since the attacker is British born and UK is not part of the Schengen Zone. First, I say what I want. If you get triggered, I don't care at all. So you can say 'madness' to your sister or to your friends.How many times do I have to repeat myself? I said that the current prevention system is not good. I stand by it. Have we arrived to the point where one cannot criticize anything because you people get triggered? You are an hypocrite. You care about someone on a watch list being imprisoned - I care more about the people who died yesterday. If imprisoning 2-3 assholes can save the life of someone who is innocent I will ALWAYS do it.
Sorry I don't understand your use of the slang "triggered". So it probably doesn't have the effect you are looking for. You appear to be asking not to be criticised on the basis that the act of criticism causes you negative feelings.
I'll be honest as someone living in London. I think our security services are doing a good job. At work the general attitude is one of nonchalance. The question is not imprisoning "2-3 assholes" (are you 5 or something? Last time I looked being an "asshole" is not a criminal offence), but that you are asking for a totalitarian state and upending the rule of law. The attacker was not part of the “current intelligence picture”. You are asking for mass state surveillance. You are asking for mass imprisonment without trail under no basis. I care about the rule of law and hard won freedoms and rights. You do not. Who determines the "assholes"?
This is not the first time Westminster has been bombed. This is not the first time someone has attempted to kill MPs. Somehow this doesn't matter to you till now, a person living thousands of kilometers away.
|
Posting in this forum is like visiting the kindergarten - same formulas repeated and the occasional insult to show who's the cool kid. Dangerous, another TOTAL misrepresentation of my views (probably to satisfy yours?). You people cannot continue a discussion without insulting and I have no interest in that.
|
On March 23 2017 21:11 SoSexy wrote:
If imprisoning 2-3 assholes can save the life of someone who is innocent I will ALWAYS do it.
On March 23 2017 21:33 SoSexy wrote:
Posting in this forum is like visiting the kindergarten - same formulas repeated and the occasional insult.
Ironic, no?
|
Am I wrong? Did you not agree with Kwarks summation of your views? Are you not asking for UK, a country that you don't live in, to become a totalitarian state? That apparently our overbearing intelligence service is not strong enough. Apparently the alternative is to become the KBG. Because we got to imprison "assholes" am I right? You seem unaware that this is a forum and as such we have immediate access to your posts as part of the conversation.
|
|
|
So the alternatives are becoming the KGB or letting people die to these attacks. And I thought that there could be a middle ground :/ at what point are you on the standard procedure?
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
5. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
6. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
7. Repeat.
|
Like I said, you appear to be unaware that this is a forum and as such we have immediate access to your posts as part of the conversation.
On March 23 2017 21:47 SoSexy wrote:
So the alternatives are becoming the KGB or letting people die to these attacks. And I thought that there could be a middle.
On March 23 2017 06:50 SoSexy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2017 06:47 KwarK wrote:On March 23 2017 06:41 SoSexy wrote:On March 23 2017 06:37 KwarK wrote:On March 23 2017 06:33 SoSexy wrote:On March 23 2017 05:57 KwarK wrote:On March 23 2017 05:51 SoSexy wrote:
I ask for harsher measures on watch list individuals. You want me to write the procedure that police should use point by point? I do not know that - but I know that my request is far from irrational, due to the age we live in. Okay, let's scrap the police procedure. We don't need to specifically name the law he was breaking by handing out leaflets and we can probably not worry about convicting him, we'll just have a secret trial without a jury. I won't ask you to come up with the specifics for that, it'd obviously be too much to ask for you to explain which law he had actually broken. How is it we stop the leaflet guy from ever getting in a position that could harm another person? Never driving a car. Never in a position to push someone into traffic. Never working in a kitchen. Never allowed near sharp objects. Or blunt objects for that matter. Can you at least give us an idea of that? Once we've established that the police are allowed to stop these people, how are we stopping them? Imprisoning if national, expulsion if not. Special prisons in remote areas should work well. Well, life imprisonment for leaflets would stop them from committing both terror attacks and leaflet campaigns. But what if they choose to stop leaflets and just do the terror attacks? We'd need to make a few more things illegal too. No, that's a slippery slope. The system is already there - it just needs to be fine tuned and it would work fine if people stopped underestimating the problem. If you are interested in the psychology of terrorists, check out Majid Nawaz - he was a terrorist in Egypt and now runs a foundation against islamic extremism. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, your response to this attack is to argue that the British government should introduce new laws to make the distribution of anti-government leaflets punishable by lifetime imprisonment without appeal in the hope that potential terrorists will make the mistake of spreading leaflets before they attack, thus allowing them to be stopped by this new law. You acknowledge the risk that a potential terrorist might do something other than distribute leaflets before their attack but think that a life sentence for leaflets, and only leaflets, is appropriate because you don't want to stray too far down the slippery slope. That about right? Not sure about right, but if the other option is doing nothing, sign me up for it.
And no, we aren't letting people die to these attacks. There is already strong intelligence service. You cannot stop people from driving cars and buying kitchen knives. They are important tools of life. What will I cut food with? A fork? But lets go through your list anyways.
At what point are you on the standard procedure? - Procedure for what exactly? A procedure cannot exist in and of itself. A procedure for a procedure would be nonsense.
1. This has nothing to do with Islam. - I don't know where you got this idea from. Did I mention this anywhere?
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'. - Did I ever mention either of this? I don't know if he is mentally ill, but no information has been given to say whether he is or isn't. He is a "lone wolf". He is using a hired car and a kitchen knife. He appears to be operating alone and if there is support, it's got to be minimal if that's all he can muster.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots. - It's obvious that you aren't talking with me or other posters, but with some sort of imaginary boogeyman.
4. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country. - I don't use Facebook. I have an account, but the last time I changed or added information was about 5 years ago. Is changing your profile to a flag even possible? Last time I looked facebook didn't even let me change my name.
5. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march. - I've never done any of those things. Ok, I lie; I've lit candles before; it sets a romantic mood in the dining room and in the bedroom.
6. Wait for the next slaughter to happen. - As opposed to? I don't intend to hold any position of responsibilty in the government, nor do I work for MI5.
At this point, I have to ask. WHO are you talking to? Why do you believe that UK's intelligence service and the whole government apparatus is doing nothing? Why are you so emotionally invested? I am living 15km from Westminster, so obviously I am emotionally invested.
|
On March 23 2017 21:47 SoSexy wrote:
So the alternatives are becoming the KGB or letting people die to these attacks. And I thought that there could be a middle ground :/ at what point are you on the standard procedure?
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
5. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
6. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
7. Repeat.
Let me ask you something. Let's suppose the media gave a proportional amount of daily coverage corresponding to how likely you are to die from something.
They would spend roughly:
- 30% on cancer (7 hours of airtime)
- 25% on heart disease or strokes (6 hours of airtime)
- 14% on respiratory disease (3.5 hours of airtime)
moving along...
- .00001% on terrorism (less than one second)
Or in pretty infographic:
+ Show Spoiler +
Terrorism wouldn't even be visible to the human eye.
So why do I bring this up? Am I saying that we should ignore terrorism and crazy people going postal? Not at all. Merely that we should be rational and address each problem according to how much resources it requires. Spending more money, effort, outrage, energy, etc. on surveillance and policing to stop 0.00001% of deaths than on preventable conditions causing 99% of deaths makes no sense at all. Certainly it's not worth giving up our freedom and human rights, submitting to an all-powerful and unstoppable government under the justification that it would keep us safe.
|
@LightSpectra
You're forgetting that many of those causes do not end your life very prematurely and violently. While the number of deaths from terrorist attacks would still be insignificant compared to deaths from transport accident, you have to keep the former in mind.
|
On March 24 2017 06:29 maybenexttime wrote:
@LightSpectra
You're forgetting that many of those causes do not end your life very prematurely and violently. While the number of deaths from terrorist attacks would still be insignificant compared to deaths from transport accident, you have to keep the former in mind.
Yea pretty much, this is the argument the gun nuts make in the gun thread, comparing natural deaths to being violently murdered, doesn't really work imo.
|
United States42771 Posts
On March 23 2017 21:26 LightSpectra wrote:
Terrorists threaten our freedom and democracy.
Clearly the solution is to dispose of our freedom and democracy so they have nothing to threaten!
This is genuinely what they believe. It's a disgrace to the memory of anyone who has died for our values.
Sometimes having freedom means that you get hurt. That's the reality of it. I ask that those who value freedom accept the risk that they may one day be asked to pay for it. Cowards like SoSexy would rather strip everyone of their freedoms if it'd let them feel more safe.
At a certain point he's basically on the same team as the terrorists. Their plan isn't to somehow kill every single person in Britain, a handful at a time. It's to make us sufficiently scared that we forget who we are and why our values matter. Yesterday's attacker was doing part 1 of that plan. SoSexy is doing part 2.
|
I disagree with you, so I'm bringing an alternative perspective to the thread.
You disagree with me, so you are triggered and this is kindergarten.
Welcome to the far right's mind.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Arguably the social effect of terrorism is more important than actual deaths. People are rightfully frightened by terror attacks and public safety takes a nosedive. Yes, it does reduce casualties via risk management but treating terrorism as "you are about as likely to die in a terrorist attack than be struck by lightning" shouldn't be so dismissive.
Terrorists kill 100 children at a school? The death count isn't that big in the grand scheme of things. But the effect in general on the perception of safety of children at school is rightfully changed. And rightfully so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic3.businessinsider.com%2Fimage%2F54dcf19deab8ea1c7b8b4568-1200-1022%2Fscreen%2520shot%25202015-02-12%2520at%25201.19.30%2520pm.png&f=1)
