Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED
-
@Renauda said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Not likely political terrorism; most likely psychotic terrorism.
We'll find out soon enough, but the claims that it was definitely not terrorism are overstated and motivated. The fact that it was two people coordinating the attack, shades the likelihood slightly towards a social/political motivation. But it could be anything.
The fact that it was two people coordinating the attack, shades the likelihood slightly towards a social/political motivation.
Initially, they thought two. My understanding is that the older of the two was released after questioning. Seems now to be only one suspect.
Elbows up!
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@Renauda said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Not likely political terrorism; most likely psychotic terrorism.
We'll find out soon enough, but the claims that it was definitely not terrorism are overstated and motivated. The fact that it was two people coordinating the attack, shades the likelihood slightly towards a social/political motivation. But it could be anything.
I think they most likely made the early call partly because of what happened after the children were murdered in Southport last year. Temperatures are running high with regard to illegal immigration at the moment, particularly from Islamic countries, and based on what I saw on Facebook this morning people are all too ready to ready to jump to conclusions.
Too bad it backfires and ends up making the problem worse. Now the masses think they have a problem with immigrants, and that the authorities are in the bag for the immigrants. The authorities need to stop overestimating their ability to shape reality with their chosen messaging. But old habits die hard. A simple "I don't know" here would have been better for everybody, unless anybody thinks these blatantly baseless and motivated conclusions are convincing to anybody.
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Too bad it backfires and ends up making the problem worse.
Does it? The guy isn't an immigrant.
And they're not making matters worse, based on what happened last year. There's not been a repeat of the rioting that occurred after the Southport attack.
I was only joking
-
The fact that it was two people coordinating the attack, shades the likelihood slightly towards a social/political motivation.
Initially, they thought two. My understanding is that the older of the two was released after questioning. Seems now to be only one suspect.
@Renauda said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
The fact that it was two people coordinating the attack, shades the likelihood slightly towards a social/political motivation.
Initially, they thought two. My understanding is that the older of the two was released after questioning. Seems now to be only one suspect.
That would shade the likelihoods towards a crazy person.
-
Also, the police response didn't cause the 2024 riots. That was down to people with an agenda posting rubbish online. I won't flatter them by calling them 'conservatives'.
-
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Too bad it backfires and ends up making the problem worse.
Does it? The guy isn't an immigrant.
And they're not making matters worse, based on what happened last year. There's not been a repeat of the rioting that occurred after the Southport attack.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Too bad it backfires and ends up making the problem worse.
Does it? The guy isn't an immigrant.
Not technically. But that technicality won't matter much if, as a thought experiment, the natural born Brit happened to identify with his (presumably immigrant) parents' culture, and held a grudge against his native country over those sympathies. That's just a thought experiment, and not likely to be true. But it's possible, and it would be a situation where that technicality of where he was born, would become irrelevant to the immigration discussion.
And they're not making matters worse, based on what happened last year. There's not been a repeat of the rioting that occurred after the Southport attack.
I'm not sure that the absence of boiled over tensions over a span of months proves anything about the amount of underlying tension. But I am pretty sure that motivated conclusions from the authorities are not good for trust in authorities. Not in the moment, and definitely not in hindsight in the common case where those conclusions were wrong. I recall Bill Gates' recent about-face on the existential nature of the climate threat. That's a big deal, considering the cultural forces of authority and expertise that have pushed all their chips in on that issue for decades now.
-
So when a black guy does this, he's failed to assimilate or identifies with his parents culture.
When a white guy does it presumably it's because he's mentally ill?
I was only joking
-
So when a black guy does this, he's failed to assimilate or identifies with his parents culture.
When a white guy does it presumably it's because he's mentally ill?
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
So when a black guy does this, he's failed to assimilate or identifies with his parents culture.
Seems inevitable that this sort of thinking will be the opposite side of the coin, when, for political dominance, one side fixates on the idea of skin color essentialism, where skin color leads to life experiences so different that they cannot be fundamentally communicated or understood from one skin color to the next. Please don't act surprised when that idea has some downside.
When a white guy does it presumably it's because he's mentally ill?
Pretty sure white people have the opportunity to be seen as tribally aligned to other cultures. Jews in particular can be seen that way very easily.
But again, in this case it's likely to be a lone crazy person.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
So when a black guy does this, he's failed to assimilate or identifies with his parents culture.
Seems inevitable that this sort of thinking will be the opposite side of the coin, when, for political dominance, one side fixates on the idea of skin color essentialism, where skin color leads to life experiences so different that they cannot be fundamentally communicated or understood from one skin color to the next. Please don't act surprised when that idea has some downside.
When a white guy does it presumably it's because he's mentally ill?
Pretty sure white people have the opportunity to be seen as tribally aligned to other cultures. Jews in particular can be seen that way very easily.
But again, in this case it's likely to be a lone crazy person.
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Seems inevitable that this sort of thinking will be the opposite side of the coin, when, for political dominance, one side fixates on the idea of skin color essentialism, where skin color leads to life experiences so different that they cannot be fundamentally communicated or understood from one skin color to the next. Please don't act surprised when that idea has some downside.
Ah, so it's the left's fault all those people I saw on Facebook are racist. Got it.
-
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Seems inevitable that this sort of thinking will be the opposite side of the coin, when, for political dominance, one side fixates on the idea of skin color essentialism, where skin color leads to life experiences so different that they cannot be fundamentally communicated or understood from one skin color to the next. Please don't act surprised when that idea has some downside.
Ah, so it's the left's fault all those people I saw on Facebook are racist. Got it.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
Seems inevitable that this sort of thinking will be the opposite side of the coin, when, for political dominance, one side fixates on the idea of skin color essentialism, where skin color leads to life experiences so different that they cannot be fundamentally communicated or understood from one skin color to the next. Please don't act surprised when that idea has some downside.
Ah, so it's the left's fault all those people I saw on Facebook are racist. Got it.
It’s hardly a novel theory that there is rational pushback on race essentialism, and the way i framed it is hardly illogical. I do take full responsibility for the Facebook randos you read. I am sorry for their racism.
-
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
We've been told over and over again that one side is inherently better than the other. It's just so freaking weird that people on both sides think it's their group.
Oddly enough, this attack is almost certainly not terrorism. So the whole point of the thread is criticising the police for actually being right.
I was only joking
-
I haven’t followed - were they really ‘right’? Or just lucky?
IOW did they jump the gun and infer motive or its lack from some demographic trait, after which events were kind enough to confirm their prejudgment? Or did they have the facts first?
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
Obviously a negative aspect of an idea presupposes the idea. I am giving context for the pushback, not claiming it’s any more coherent than the original idea shared by both sides.
But that said, culture is obviously a huge thing, and culture is a social invention which does exist even if it’s based on invented ideas.
-
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
We've been told over and over again that one side is inherently better than the other. It's just so freaking weird that people on both sides think it's their group.
Oddly enough, this attack is almost certainly not terrorism. So the whole point of the thread is criticising the police for actually being right.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
We've been t and over again that one side is inherently than the other. It's just so freaking weird that people on both sides think it's their group.
Stipulated that you’re above that sort of thing while 99% of your rhetoric is directed against one side.
Oddly enough, this attack is almost certainly not terrorism. So the whole point of the thread is criticising the police for actually being right.
I was pushing back against the certainty, which deserved and deserves pushback given the information at the time, presumably still memorialized at my original link. A strong conclusion without a factual basis, but with obvious social engineering motivations. Motivations that you strongly resonate with and which you will therefore never push back against.
Education is extremely important.
-
I haven’t followed - were they really ‘right’? Or just lucky?
IOW did they jump the gun and infer motive or its lack from some demographic trait, after which events were kind enough to confirm their prejudgment? Or did they have the facts first?
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
I haven’t followed - were they really ‘right’? Or just lucky?
I'm not sure. It's easy enough to make mistakes when it comes to terrorism. I remember some people claiming that the IRA bombing of pubs in Birmingham and the shooting of construction workers in the knees in Northern Ireland was part of a virtuous war against tyranny. Obviously, they couldn't be terrorist attacks since all terrorists are muslims.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
@jon-nyc said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
What you’re describing isn’t pushback on racial essentialism it’s just a different flavor of it. Responding in kind.
We've been t and over again that one side is inherently than the other. It's just so freaking weird that people on both sides think it's their group.
Stipulated that you’re above that sort of thing while 99% of your rhetoric is directed against one side.
Oddly enough, this attack is almost certainly not terrorism. So the whole point of the thread is criticising the police for actually being right.
I was pushing back against the certainty, which deserved and deserves pushback given the information at the time, presumably still memorialized at my original link. A strong conclusion without a factual basis, but with obvious social engineering motivations. Motivations that you strongly resonate with and which you will therefore never push back against.
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
I was pushing back against the certainty, which deserved and deserves pushback given the information at the time, presumably still memorialized at my original link. A strong conclusion without a factual basis, but with obvious social engineering motivations. Motivations that you strongly resonate with and which you will therefore never push back against.
Right, and when those little girls were killed in Southport last year, a whole shit ton of people jumped to the erroneous conclusion that it was an Islamist terrorist attack. A similarly strong conclusion without a factual basis, but with obvious social engineering motivations. I don't recall many conservatives pushing back at that time.
So, where does that leave us?
-
I guess it leaves us with weighing randos on Facebook against official statements coming from the authorities and propagated by mainstream news.
@Horace said in Definitely 100% totally not terrorism, QED:
I guess it leaves us with weighing randos on Facebook against official statements coming from the authorities and propagated by mainstream news.
A number of public figures, including Nigel Farage, claimed there was a cover-up regarding the identity of the killer as they delayed providing details. Farage then went on to blame this for the riots.
Are Farage, "Tommy Robinson" (not his real name), Andrew Tate and Laurence Fox considered to be "randos"?
It seems to me that the police are damned when they do and damned when they don't.
