| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" 16:54 - Aug 4 with 4480 views | Zx1988 |
Then call it f**king terrorism.
Stop mincing about with calling it 'thuggery'; call it out as terrorism and use the appropriate powers to stop it. |  |
| |  |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:13 - Aug 4 with 3982 views | redrickstuhaart |
Its not terrorism though is it? Its far riot rioting. | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:16 - Aug 4 with 3962 views | DarkBrandon |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:13 - Aug 4 by redrickstuhaart |
Its not terrorism though is it? Its far riot rioting. |
Yes. It isn’t terrorism. |  | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:21 - Aug 4 with 3910 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:16 - Aug 4 by DarkBrandon |
Yes. It isn’t terrorism. |
Agreed. It is rioting and that is just as serious a crime.
Those behind orchestrating it should be dealt with under incitement and hate-preaching legislation. |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:22 - Aug 4 with 3908 views | Zx1988 |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:13 - Aug 4 by redrickstuhaart |
Its not terrorism though is it? Its far riot rioting. |
The actions in Rotherham certainly seem to fit the CPS definition:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism
"The use or threat must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
The specific actions included are:
1) serious violence against a person;
2) serious damage to property;
3) endangering a person's life (other than that of the person committing the action);
4) creating a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; and
5) action designed to seriously interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system."
If setting fire to a migrant hotel, in order to try and progress SYL and Co's ideology, doesn't fulfil 1-3, I'd struggle to understand what does. [Post edited 4 Aug 2024 17:26]
| |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:27 - Aug 4 with 3851 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:22 - Aug 4 by Zx1988 |
The actions in Rotherham certainly seem to fit the CPS definition:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism
"The use or threat must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
The specific actions included are:
1) serious violence against a person;
2) serious damage to property;
3) endangering a person's life (other than that of the person committing the action);
4) creating a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; and
5) action designed to seriously interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system."
If setting fire to a migrant hotel, in order to try and progress SYL and Co's ideology, doesn't fulfil 1-3, I'd struggle to understand what does. [Post edited 4 Aug 2024 17:26]
|
Youa re trying to make something of nothing.
It is being taken as seriously as appropriate. I don't know why you are looking for things to criticise. | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:12 - Aug 4 with 3683 views | factual_blue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:21 - Aug 4 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Agreed. It is rioting and that is just as serious a crime.
Those behind orchestrating it should be dealt with under incitement and hate-preaching legislation. |
Terrorism implies a level of planning and strategy that is, fortunately, way beyond this bunch of morons. |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:19 - Aug 4 with 3656 views | urbanpenguin |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 17:13 - Aug 4 by redrickstuhaart |
Its not terrorism though is it? Its far riot rioting. |
I think it is terrorism.
It's targeted against a people or perceived class of people, it's organised, and it's an existential risk. It inflicts terror. It is terrorism - granted it's not Bin Laden, it's Robinson, but it's terrorism and designed to inflict terror as much as damage. |  | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:38 - Aug 4 with 3569 views | DarkBrandon |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:19 - Aug 4 by urbanpenguin |
I think it is terrorism.
It's targeted against a people or perceived class of people, it's organised, and it's an existential risk. It inflicts terror. It is terrorism - granted it's not Bin Laden, it's Robinson, but it's terrorism and designed to inflict terror as much as damage. |
What are their demands?
Bin Laden wanted the US out of Saudi
The IRA wanted the British out of Ulster
This lot just read some made up stories on twitter about who committed a murder and decided to intimidate a minority population.
Being racially aggravated doesn’t make it terrorism | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:41 - Aug 4 with 3541 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:12 - Aug 4 by factual_blue |
Terrorism implies a level of planning and strategy that is, fortunately, way beyond this bunch of morons. |
Suspect many involved hadn’t given any thought protesting a few days ago and are just joining in for the fun of it.
We are spending a fortune on artificial intelligence, should be looking for a cure for natural stupidity. |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:59 - Aug 4 with 3461 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:38 - Aug 4 by DarkBrandon |
What are their demands?
Bin Laden wanted the US out of Saudi
The IRA wanted the British out of Ulster
This lot just read some made up stories on twitter about who committed a murder and decided to intimidate a minority population.
Being racially aggravated doesn’t make it terrorism |
I agree. But more importantly, it doesnt matter. Whya re people who agree its awful and think it should be dealt with robustly, arguing about definitions and trying to score some cheap point? | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 20:32 - Aug 4 with 3362 views | lazyblue |
Can’t get my head round how idiots want to destroy the towns they live in and do whatever they can to hurt the police . | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 20:48 - Aug 4 with 3295 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 20:32 - Aug 4 by lazyblue |
Can’t get my head round how idiots want to destroy the towns they live in and do whatever they can to hurt the police . |
Doubt they live locally. There is also the added problem of a second group protesting agsinst the first. Can add Weymouth to the list now.
https://www.dorsetecho.co.uk/news/24496733.live-updates-anti-immigrant-protest-w | |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 21:04 - Aug 4 with 3244 views | lowhouseblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:19 - Aug 4 by urbanpenguin |
I think it is terrorism.
It's targeted against a people or perceived class of people, it's organised, and it's an existential risk. It inflicts terror. It is terrorism - granted it's not Bin Laden, it's Robinson, but it's terrorism and designed to inflict terror as much as damage. |
it's no different from any political demonstration that ends in street violence and damage to property. you are at risk of labelling everything from eg. the poll tax demos to the student fee demos (both of which involved greater violence) as terrorism - which would be dangerous. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 21:25 - Aug 4 with 3148 views | tcblue |
He (Starmer) was Director of Public Prosecutions during, and crucially, after the 2011 riots.
Some of those rioters in 2011 didn't get their prison term until 2012 because he was having his team pore over the videos extensively.
This isn't going to end well for the Gammonists. | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 22:53 - Aug 4 with 3044 views | urbanpenguin |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:38 - Aug 4 by DarkBrandon |
What are their demands?
Bin Laden wanted the US out of Saudi
The IRA wanted the British out of Ulster
This lot just read some made up stories on twitter about who committed a murder and decided to intimidate a minority population.
Being racially aggravated doesn’t make it terrorism |
they want "their country back" and to kick non-white people out.
they are nonsensical and garbage, but they do demand things. | | | |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 23:24 - Aug 4 with 2941 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:41 - Aug 4 by Pinewoodblue |
Suspect many involved hadn’t given any thought protesting a few days ago and are just joining in for the fun of it.
We are spending a fortune on artificial intelligence, should be looking for a cure for natural stupidity. |
That joining in part of it is probably what makes it a mob rioting, rather than it all being an act of terrorism. I’d be having a close look at the organisers though. There’s a strong case for classifying some of these groups as terrorist organisations. Some have been in the past, and the people involved just move on a set up another one. |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 11:45 - Aug 5 with 2602 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 22:53 - Aug 4 by urbanpenguin |
they want "their country back" and to kick non-white people out.
they are nonsensical and garbage, but they do demand things. |
I once had a head of department who used to say "I have no problem with immigrants but do wish we could nominate someone to go the opposite way for each one that comes in."
Perhaps we could find a remote island somewhere for those racists to "have their country back" and not allow anyone other than them to go there. | |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 12:01 - Aug 5 with 2551 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 11:45 - Aug 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I once had a head of department who used to say "I have no problem with immigrants but do wish we could nominate someone to go the opposite way for each one that comes in."
Perhaps we could find a remote island somewhere for those racists to "have their country back" and not allow anyone other than them to go there. |
Didn't we try that with Australia? All that happened is they ended up being better than us at sport. | |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 01:40 - Aug 6 with 2374 views | LuciBlue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:12 - Aug 4 by factual_blue |
Terrorism implies a level of planning and strategy that is, fortunately, way beyond this bunch of morons. |
You need to make your mind up.
Either the riots occurring are being organised by the 'far right' or they're so moronic they can't organise themselves.
Any violence or protest that promotes terror is terrorism. |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:19 - Aug 6 with 2221 views | Zx1988 |
"Ex-police chief likens riots to terrorism"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9eex9qj4xo
"He told the BBC: “I think we have seen serious acts of violence designed to cause terror to a section of our community."
Mr Basu said “people should look very carefully” at the legal definition of terrorism when considering some of the violence and actions seen since last week." [Post edited 6 Aug 2024 8:20]
| |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:38 - Aug 6 with 2165 views | bournemouthblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:19 - Aug 6 by Zx1988 |
"Ex-police chief likens riots to terrorism"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9eex9qj4xo
"He told the BBC: “I think we have seen serious acts of violence designed to cause terror to a section of our community."
Mr Basu said “people should look very carefully” at the legal definition of terrorism when considering some of the violence and actions seen since last week." [Post edited 6 Aug 2024 8:20]
|
An expert was suggesting some elements have crossed the boundaries into terrorism
Trying to burn down a hotel with asylum seekers in it, would tick that box presumably
I still can't get my head around the mosque attacks when the stabbings they think they are avenging, have no connection to islam
I do wonder if this overt attack on Muslims and asylum seekers will backfire in the long run, encouraging the quieter minority to unite against the looney right |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:52 - Aug 6 with 2102 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:38 - Aug 4 by DarkBrandon |
What are their demands?
Bin Laden wanted the US out of Saudi
The IRA wanted the British out of Ulster
This lot just read some made up stories on twitter about who committed a murder and decided to intimidate a minority population.
Being racially aggravated doesn’t make it terrorism |
They want the sausage rolls out of Greggs and into their tum tums. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:54 - Aug 6 with 2076 views | blueasfook |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 12:01 - Aug 5 by Swansea_Blue |
Didn't we try that with Australia? All that happened is they ended up being better than us at sport. |
Except football |  |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 09:21 - Aug 6 with 2000 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 08:54 - Aug 6 by blueasfook |
Except football |
Didn't they invent their own rules to bypass that?
I expect that, given time, they will manage it at proper football too! | |
| |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 09:33 - Aug 6 with 1958 views | NthQldITFC |
| Starmer - "Won't shy away from calling it what it is" on 19:19 - Aug 4 by urbanpenguin |
I think it is terrorism.
It's targeted against a people or perceived class of people, it's organised, and it's an existential risk. It inflicts terror. It is terrorism - granted it's not Bin Laden, it's Robinson, but it's terrorism and designed to inflict terror as much as damage. |
I'd tentatively agree that there's an element of terrorism to it, in the intent of those who arrange the 'protests' and the high profile public figures who endorse and openly or tacitly encourage them. The dickheads on the street mostly, no. As you say it's targeted against specific groups, indeed often against a specific group constrained by a building or location. That causes terror directly, but also is causing terror amongst similar groups who are not directly targeted at the moment. For me, that's the true meaning of the word terrorism, but perhaps only applicable as I say to the 'leaders' and sponsors of the mob. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
