[Closed] Driver kills multiple cyclists tonight in New York

So we dont treat Cancer because more people are dying of Heart Disease?

@wilburt you are wasting your time. Their ridiculous argument gets rolled out on here pretty much everytime there is a terrorist attack.

No such thing as race eh ? That’s just a massive facepalm and a great example of why students should pay for tuition, if they want to part with cash to listen to that then good luck to them.

How many people have died in terrorist attacks in the US this year? Are you counting the white guys shooting people in that?

Their ridiculous argument

A couple of posts up you have someone on "your side" saying that facts are just fake news and it is feelings that really matter.

I prefer objective rationality thanks.

I want to know why the BBC keep referring to the driver as "the accused" as if there's any doubt that he's guilty.

You are innocent until proven guilty by a court. Be thankful of that

Malvern Rider - Member

TBH I'd prefer to be 'sucked in' by Deviant and ilk, because he/she confirms my fears and prejudices

I feel a bit like I've been duped by a clever troll here? If so, good work!

If not, [i]terrible[/i] work.

My faith in the trolling ability has been knocked in this place, some are just obvious but far too many actually mean what they say it seems.

Poe's law almost invoked. PS I'm not a bad person

No such thing as race eh ? That’s just a massive facepalm and a great example of why students should pay for tuition, if they want to part with cash to listen to that then good luck to them.

Eh? Do you get a different genetics course from a private university? Money may buy you many things - yachts and such - but I think the laws of biology work the same for the rich.

, it's a religion FFS and its fair game, racism isn't but they're different and the only people who can't see that are those trying to stifle debate.

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?
(I'm NOT suggesting race should be fair game, just in case someone jumps to the wrong conclusion)

Because religion is just an idea, it can be wrong and probably is (unless they are all true) so is open to challenge, ridicule or dismissal.

Mike, I think everyone gets the gun crime point, so yes reaction should be proportionate.

What would your suggesrion be to address the problem of Extreme Islamic Terrorism?

What would your suggesrion be to address the problem of Extreme Islamic Terrorism?

Can you answer the question or just make smart arsed whataboutery remarks?

What's whataboutery about it? You're wasting your time worrying about Extreme Islamic Terrorism, despite what the papers want you to think, there's a shiteload of other things far more likely to kill you.

Actually, to directly address the question, I'd cease all UK military operations not related to intelligence in the Middle East and launch a huge humanitarian and education drive.

1)Stop selling weapons to and or bombing far away countries.
2) Stop SA investing money in the spread of Islam in the west and stop doing business with them until they sort their human rights out.
3) Regulate what happens in Islamic churches and schools, hint of extremism shut them down.
4) Remove driving licences from criminals, this a more general suggestion. 5yr bans for all convicted nutters whether its a driving related offence or not.
5) (edit add)Licence internet users.

You mean like my first suggestion two pages ago?

It was called "Bold and Shouty" by another poster btw.

If you'd have stopped at your first point you could call it sensible, but the rest are a mix of 6th Form shouty and scary Police-State.

Your anti-Islamic guff is a bit shouty, yes, especially given the negligable risk terrorism poses to us in our ivory towers in the west. Agree with your point 1, point 2.1 is a bit woolly (how are you going to put the request to the Saudis?) although I agree with 2.2, but the rest is mildly hysterical nonsense. So not really like your suggestion, no.

4) Remove driving licences from criminals, this a more general suggestion. 5yr bans for all convicted nutters whether its a driving related offence or not.
5) (edit add)Licence internet users.

Regards #4, why?

As for #5, that's just mental.

I actually think 5 is the most likely.

Much of the disinformation voices on this thread are complaning about is spread by bot net users presenting themselves as individuals but likely to be code paid for by political movements.

Bots are used by all UK political parties and Russian propaganda reached 126 million US voters before they voted in Trump.

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

If we get rid of the bots, d'you think it'll stop your irrational fear of Islam? 🙂

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

Basically one chooses ones religion and it may be right or wrong but one does not chooses once race and it cannot be right or wrong.
You can challenge me for being a vegan - its a choice/opinion - being white was not a choice.

All opinions can be "fair game" basically

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

I dont do FB or twitter so , unless they are on here, they did not get to me.

Much of the disinformation voices on this thread are complaning about is spread by bot net users

so not in Mosques? Your point #3 seems to suggest that it's radical preachers.

But either way, both of these things are pretty much anathema to an open and free society, and introducing them would be a victory for terrorism, no?

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

To answer that question we'd really have to have a clear definition of "race". Do you have one?

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

'Fair game' can be defined as:

'acceptable to criticize'.

Does it now make sense in the context of your inquiry?

Also - what DrJ said.

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

If zwift can validate I'm a real person and my race results are genuine power (or lack of) I suspect Twitterbook etc could validate its users are real people or not.

It doesn't even have to be compulsory, a voluntary scheme would be sufficient to undermine everyone/thing else.

so not in Mosques? Your point #3 seems to suggest that it's radical preachers.

Your not really getting it nick, its not entirely one side or another, its a range of contributory factors. I'm capable of seeing that.

Are you?

'Negligible risk' and 'irrational fear' are two excellent examples of the mental disconnect afflicting many folk like Pondo. Yey, let's ignore the ever growing shitstorm cos it doesn't exist.

I always like to get my lectures on mental disconnect and race relations from brietbart reading trump fans. IF you cannot trust their moral compass about the ensuing shitstorm - is a it a threat to our very way of life- then whose can you trust. Are you still saying black lives matter is racist?

PS missed you when the white dude shot all those fok for some reason that thread passed you buy unlike any thread with a Muslim angle- though to be fair you did praise nigel for attacking the "jewsih lobby" so you are at least reaching out with your bigotry.

'Negligible risk' and 'irrational fear' are two excellent examples of the mental disconnect afflicting many folk like Pondo. Yey, let's ignore the ever growing shitstorm cos it doesn't exist.

especially given the negligable risk terrorism poses to us in our ivory towers in the west.

My view is without the extensive anti-terorrism efforts of the police and intelligence services there would be a very significant increase in actual attacks with comensurate increase in the dead and injured. This is not to mention the scenario where “we” took action against IS in Iraq and Syria in particular.

Also fwiw I do not agree with the view that we face a neglible risk from terrorism (be that Islamic Jihadist today or Irish Catholic in the past)

pondo I could post up quite a long list of Jihadist terrorist attacks in Europe and/or targetting Europeans in the past 5 years. As for the IS their whole strategy is based upon eliminating terrorst attacks on their own soilmas their number 1 priority. Vast majority of US gun deaths are suicides or inter gang/criminal violence. I am sure if you made a list of terrorist related deaths in US including 9-11 Al-Q) and Oklahoma/Church (ie right wing extremist) it would be similar (larger) than total school shootings for example.

Don't just speculate, do the math. And we're not just looking at school shootings, BTW - my argument relates to US gun deaths vs US deaths from terrorism. Go on - you tell me.

Edit - d'you know what, I'll even let you take out suicides.

its a range of contributory factors. I'm capable of seeing that.

well, there are already laws in place to stop incitement of violence, religious and race hatred and so on; and mosques, churches, and gurdwaras, synagogues and everything else is covered, so we don't need 3.

The internet is vastly hugely massively used by machine to machine, and that is only going to get biggerer and biggerer. There's is no practical method you could apply (without it being a massive intrusion on everyone) to identify just humans, and nor would you need, or want to. Islamist propoganda is teeny by any measurable method. What's required is education, not restriction or prohibition.

So that's 5 taken care of.

There are no simple methods of getting rid of any Terrorism, it takes empathy, and a willingness to compromise, and politicians brave enough to bring people around to that POV when violence and rhetoric are vastly more popular and easy.

All terrorism that there has ever been is finally resolved by talking, and every time we go through this ridiculous dance of politicians wanting to be seen to be strong. Pointless and expensive wars that achieve nothing other than a steady supply of bodybags and atrocities, and eventually state-mate and talks...This will be no different, the only thing that ever changes is how long it takes to realise it.

pondo I could post up quite a long list of Jihadist terrorist attacks in Europe and/or targetting Europeans in the past 5 years.

Look let's not be all pc liberal about it. There's a problem in the western world and there is a very high chance the name of involved will be Muhammad. Come at me.

30,000 jihadis in the UK, only the top 10% are monitored 24/7 at a cost of £9 billion pa, none of the most recent attacks were carried out by those 10% and how many impending attacks on the UK have been thwarted? Those deniers insisting the sky ain't blue are frankly delusional.

list the birth place and place of residence of the people involved

Islamic Jihadi terrorists can have a passport from many countries the UK included.

Terrorism is THE major domestic security threat we face in the UK and is a very significant risk abroad for UK citizens too. That’s why Tourism numbers to Egypt and Tunisia have collapsed

@pondo Gang violence, criminals shooting each other, suicides etc .... a very significant number of Americans understand they dominate the shooting fatalities. You (and Mike) are going to convince precisely no one with the facetious “numbers” argument.

Mike there was a big BBC focus piece this week on gun and knife crime in the UK. I don’t know many people who think that’s a more serious problem than Islamic Jihadi terrorists. Certainly not me.

So no-one's prepared to post numbers, then. Shall I find some for you?

Mike there was a big BBC focus piece this week on gun and knife crime in the UK. I don’t know many people who think that’s a more serious problem than Islamic Jihadi terrorists. Certainly not me.

So you choose to live in fear of something that is very unlikely to happen?

Had a talk yesterday from an air ambulance doctor, amazing stuff, he'd been at London bridge and Westminster attacks.

Didnt discuss details of that much, more focused on reducing deaths from knife crime (shockingly poor survival rate) and cyclists with crushed pelvis under back of lorries.
Trying out new techniques for improving survival- a neck clamp for knife wounds and stents for keeping hearts going if run over (both of which could've been applicable to those terrorist attacks.)

Unfortunately for you lot he was asian, possibly muslim, so mostly to be feared or something, whatever your point actually is? ( Tho not called Mohammed)

kimbers - Member

Had a talk yesterday from an air ambulance doctor, amazing stuff, he'd been at London bridge and Westminster attacks.

Wow that's incredible. What are the chances that you'd even meet someone who was involved in two terror attacks. I mean, the chances of being involved in one is so astonishingly small that you could probably live your life and never meet anyone ever affected by terrorism. Right?

Honestly, you mock the Americans for their "thoughts and prayers" approach to gun violence and then you do the exact same thing with "it's statistically so unlikely..." every time there's an islamist terror attack. Both are equally worthless arguments that involve putting your head in the sand and refusing to discuss the issue.

Let's discuss it, then - Farage was on the radio after the NY attack saying it's the duty of the president to protect the nation. What would reduce deaths more, imposing UK-style gun laws or banning muslims from entering the country? Discuss.

Wow that's incredible. What are the chances that you'd even meet someone who was involved in two terror attacks. I mean, the chances of being involved in one is so astonishingly small that you could probably live your life and never meet anyone ever affected by terrorism. Right?

Unless it's your job to be a first responder at terrorism attacks??

No one is denying that there hasn't been a surge of islamic terrorism attacks ever since we invaded Iraq and it's certainly been fueled by the rise and fall of IS in Syria, Iraq, Libya. Not to mention disenfranchisement seen amongst the poorest ever since the banking crisis that we've never recovered from.

Hating on Islam isnt going to fix it and so far that's about all this thread has mustered, I'm all for better monitoring of suspected terrorists, of course thats been made harder by austerity slashing police effectiveness, just as May was warned.

I cycle through London every day, it's not nutters with knives that worry me, it's trucks turning left, imho that's a healthy fear to have as opposed to be being cowed by terrorists!