-
@JC Not really the point I'm making honestly.
Bloomberg news has written right in front of me on their ticker "Attacker assumed to be influenced by international terrorism " & "suspect Islamist-related terrorism".
Which means immediately the likes of ISIS etc have some justifiable right to claim / own etc.
-
@MajorRage Well as long as Bloomberg is correcting the Acting Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police...
I wonder if the perpetrator was known to police for his charitable acts before this awful accident?
-
@jegga said in Ferners in London:
Or it could be that these organisations seek out mentally ill/mentally weak people and get them to do their dirty work?
Sadly it'll be that on top of everything else that the swines in those organisations do...
-
@antipodean Still not the point.
Anyway, nothing else really to be commenting on until more facts come to hand. .
-
I think calling it a terrorist attack these days just means it was undertaken by an islamic extremist. The melbourne bourke st killer wasn't categorised as a terrorist even though in effect they both killed people and caused terror in much a similar way. To be fair when someone says terrorist I immediately think of islamic extremist so I'm happy with how they are labelling it. Kinda like an article about an unexpected death followed by a link to lifeline which means suicide because we aren't supposed to say exactly what it was.
Whether this guy was a lone nut or put up to it by other fuckheads will get investigated. I personally don't think a lone nut killing people in the name of allah should be differentiated from a group of nuts doing the same thing.
Just glad the fluffybunny is dead though and won't be a further waste on society.
-
@Rembrandt I do wonder if calling it a terrorist attack, even if there are no apparent links (at this stage) makes it easier for people to accept rather than some nutter went on a rampage and caused terror...
-
@taniwharugby I don't really buy the whole 'links with terrorism' thing. Isis arent a super organised bunch in the west, this is no doubt due to the inevitable trail they would end up leaving which intelligence would find. I think they primarily rely on finding sympathisers via social media. These sympathisers may band together and create groups which may then lead to recruitment to the group but not specifically isis. In my mind they're not linked to Isis but they are still islamic terrorists just by the fact that they are using a literal interpretation of the qu'ran to insight terror. No doubt isis will claim them and why not?, there is a good chance they inspired them. I don't think it very likely isis can send funds or weapons to the uk so this in effect is as isis as it gets.
Different media but they were very careful not to call the melbourne guy a terrorist and you're right that was much harder for people to accept. -
@MajorRage Yes, but it's like pointing out water is wet. Of course they're mentally ill, sane people don't do what they do.
-
-
Did I miss the memo where it was decided that if it is only 1 person it is no longer terrorism?
-
@MajorRage said in Ferners in London:
I clearly missed the memo where one guy doing it in Melbourne is reported very different to one guy doing it in London.
Because reasons.
Fucked up piston wristed gibbon upset with his Mrs.
Fucked up piston wristed gibbon wanting to strike a blow in the name of Islam.
Hmmm ... I wonder why they are reported differently. Maybe because they are different?
-
@booboo both situations have the same outcome. Both situations are caused by people who are fucked in the head.
One gets cast off as a yobbo whose a moron. The other will cause countless hours of increased anxiety across billions of people, upping of border controls, changes in the stance of the way certain people are viewed, and probably endorsement of some of the most vilified policies in the last 50 years in the largest superpower in the world.
All because of incidents which are pretty similar, with a similar victim count.
Because reasons.
-
@MajorRage said in Ferners in London:
@booboo both situations have the same outcome. Both situations are caused by people who are fucked in the head.
One gets cast off as a yobbo whose a moron. The other will cause countless hours of increased anxiety across billions of people, upping of border controls, changes in the stance of the way certain people are viewed, and probably endorsement of some of the most vilified policies in the last 50 years in the largest superpower in the world.
All because of incidents which are pretty similar, with a similar victim count.
Because reasons.
No because reasons matter.
Context matter.
What doesn't matter is how many attackers there are or the mental state. I assume basically everyone who muders a bunch of innocents is mentally ill.
-
The secret why one is considered terrorism is hidden in the definition of terrorism...
-
I think the original point I was trying to make has been well and truly lost ...
I just looked up the definition of terrorism, and I guess it makes the rest of you right, and me wrong.
So I'll concede on that front.
Still fucks me off though the way people are quick to jump on use of the word terrorism, KNOWING use of it creates such high anxiety in a large part of the world. I'd prefer people are pointed out as nutjobs. As ultimately, all terrorists (by definition of the world) are nutjobs.
Ferners in London