Police: London stabbings that killed US woman not terrorism

[Steely Dan]

If the accused is mentally ill surely he will be assessed to determine whether or not he is fit to stand trial. For both the accused and the victims I sincerely hope he does stand trial, though in so doing his testimony may prove very embarrassing for the authorities.

 

i guess by the time this does come to trial the attention of the public may well have moved on to a growing list of more recent terrorist attacks.

[FinChin67]

27 minutes ago, Steely Dan said:

If the accused is mentally ill surely he will be assessed to determine whether or not he is fit to stand trial. For both the accused and the victims I sincerely hope he does stand trial, though in so doing his testimony may prove very embarrassing for the authorities.

 

i guess by the time this does come to trial the attention of the public may well have moved on to a growing list of more recent terrorist attacks.

Playing this "mentally ill" card may not work so well in courts as it works in media.. However now when the PC and other leftist idiots are in charge things might have changed.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/mentally_disordered_offenders/

In the United Kingdom, Ireland, and the United States, use of the defense is rare;[3] however, since the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991,[4] insanity pleas have steadily increased in the UK.[5] Mitigating factors, including things not eligible for the insanity defense such as intoxication[6] (or, more frequently, diminished capacity), may lead to reduced charges or reduced sentences.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, FinChin67 said:

Playing this "mentally ill" card may not work so well in courts as it works in media.. However now when the PC and other leftist idiots are in charge things might have changed.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/mentally_disordered_offenders/

In the United Kingdom, Ireland, and the United States, use of the defense is rare;[3] however, since the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991,[4] insanity pleas have steadily increased in the UK.[5] Mitigating factors, including things not eligible for the insanity defense such as intoxication[6] (or, more frequently, diminished capacity), may lead to reduced charges or reduced sentences.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

 

We have had a Cente Right government for... the past 6 years?

 

Your post contains a liberal smattering of 'may' and 'might' - but nothing concrete to confirm your assertions. If the 1991 act is having an effect on charges and sentencing, surely 26 years is sufficiently long to be able to demonstrate that?

[FinChin67]

1 hour ago, MissAndry said:

Can't remember any time I ever thought a Russian might stab/shoot/drive over me in a London/EU street

In Finland there is a very large Russian population which is also the largest group of foreigners in Finland.

However, we all know who are responsible for most of the crimes... Like rape is 13x the average among Africans (all muslims). Yes, all muslims because if there is christian among them in refugee centre they try to kill them. Very few of those made it to Finland except the ones airlifted.

[FinChin67]

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

We have had a Cente Right government for... the past 6 years?

 

Your post contains a liberal smattering of 'may' and 'might' - but nothing concrete to confirm your assertions. If the 1991 act is having an effect on charges and sentencing, surely 26 years is sufficiently long to be able to demonstrate that?

Your "Center right" government seems to be closer to commies like the one in Finland. Only idiots are letting war criminals and others cross the borders without any checks.

Can you tell me  are the muslims getting off easier when they plead insanity?

If yes then it might be wise to change the definition of "allahu akbar" to "I'm an idiot" instead of god is great. Will have a great reception among muslims?

[Scott]

Please stay on topic and stop with the inflammatory remarks.  

 

[RuamRudy]

4 hours ago, FinChin67 said:

Your "Center right" government seems to be closer to commies like the one in Finland. Only idiots are letting war criminals and others cross the borders without any checks.

Can you tell me  are the muslims getting off easier when they plead insanity?

If yes then it might be wise to change the definition of "allahu akbar" to "I'm an idiot" instead of god is great. Will have a great reception among muslims?

 

Cameron was a commie? You either don't know anything about British politics or you are to the right of Thatcher.

[FinChin67]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Cameron was a commie? You either don't know anything about British politics or you are to the right of Thatcher.

According to political compass: Economic Left/Right: 4.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.87

[neverdie]

9 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

Over the top post. Wishing members who disagree with your & others interpretation of this attack are the next victims of murderous individuals -  I suggest a good idea to withdraw the comment

 

You can suggest whatever you want as much as you want, just as people who disagree with me or any of us for that

matter are entitled to do so.

 

What you need to understand is what I am saying and I will put it in simple terms for you.

 

1. There will be further terrorist attacks, I guarantee it.  No doubt some of these attacks will be excused as something their not. I will point out that I ultimately agree that ANY EXTREMIST, has something wrong with them 'mentally speaking', but that's a side issue to the real issue IMO.

 

2. If folk must die in these terrorist attack let it be folk that either support, sugar coat or perhaps twist reality to make it something that it's not.  I don't see what's unfair about that.

 

That ends what I'm saying and let me make it clear to you, I don't wish death upon anyone.

 

Nothing withdrawn.

 

 

 

[manarak]

On 5.8.2016 at 0:03 PM, GuestHouse said:

Given that a stated aim of Islamist Terrorism is to divide societies by spreading fear and distrust - it seems your posts on anything relating to 'Islamism', 'Islam' or 'Muslims' also promote the ISIS agenda. 

 

there is again something disturbing in the reporting.

several media quote the neighbor, Mr. Parmjit Singh.

 

While the Guardian and IBT quote Singh to report that Zakaria Bulhan is "quiet, pleasant, polite", other media quote THE SAME NEIGHBOR who was saying to the media that Bulhan is a "devout Muslim" and that the mental illness story is "a scapegoat".

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/05/russell-square-knife-attack-suspect-a-polite-and-pleasant-boy

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/05/zakaria-bulham-charged-russell-square-stabbings-london

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1557335/first-picture-of-teen-arrested-over-murder-of-woman-64-in-russell-square/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3725136/Russell-Square-knifeman-stabbed-American-tourist-death-devastated-husband-tried-kill-THREE-times-year.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-work-with-mental-health-hospital-as-they-quiz-teenager-over-russell-square-knife-bloodbath-a3312801.html

 

I am saddened that some pieces of truth seem to MUST come from the gutter press because the press with better reputation chooses to manipulate the news by sweeping under the carpet some aspects the media's editors estimate unhelpful to their political agenda.

 

My opinion is that using lies and half-truths to avoid dividing the country is not the right way, because the first divide will appear in news reports.

The best way to avoid a divide in the first place is to command all institutions including the police and the press to report the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth.

Only when everyone has the same facts should we worry about divides.

 

[manarak]

7 hours ago, GuestHouse said:

...the thread is centred on an vicious, unprovoked knife attack that has resulted in one death and several serious injuries. The attacker, a Muslim, also and immigrant, is according to police reports mentally ill. 

He was arrested at the scene, and charged on Friday morning, his name, nationality, religion and immigration status were released to the media soon after he was charged. He presented to the magistrates court on charges of murder, GBH &c., He has been remanded in custody pending trial and shall appear at the Old Bailey in open court on Wednesday* of this week. (I'm not entirely sure if it is Wednesday but that is the last report I read.  

 

He has not been charged with terrorism or terrorist retaliated offences. The police have explicitly stated they see no connection to terrorism in these attacks...

 

yes, for the moment there seems to be no terrorist link.

 

still, the crimes were committed by a mentally ill, crazed devout muslim whose actions may well have been inspired by islamic terrorism, but not organized by terrorists.

 

and here an important question appears: does a murderer need to be sane and member of a terrorist organisation to be classified as a terrorist?

 

according to wikipedia, no common definition of terrorism could be agreed upon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

 

the united nations define it as follows:

Quote

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them

 

so it appears that using the above definition, the stabbings by Zakaria Bulhan may have been terrorism indeed, even if he is mentally ill and is inspired by his devout Islam and media reports on ISIS...

 

 

Edited August 8, 2016 by manarak

[7by7]

12 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Certain posters do it on almost every thread concerning Islamic terrorism. They spend their days trying to excuse or justify the bad guy's actions and delight in distorting the situations and coming up with false equivalence to get their hero's off the hook.

 

1) No one has, as far as I know, ever made any attempt to excuse or justify any terrorist attack in any post on Thai Visa. A couple of times a member has attempted to explain possible motivatio0ns, but no one has ever tried to excuse or justify. 

 

You, and others, have made this accusation many times before, but whenever asked to provide even one post which excuses or justifies terrorism not one of you has ever done so.

 

Will you now justify your accusation by producing such a post? I doubt it.

 

2) It is the Ministry of Truth, of which if not a member you are definitely a fan, which distorts the information; regularly ignoring facts which destroy their argument and when they can't ignore them making the 'excuse and justify' remarks which you repeat above.

 

Facts like Bulhan having a history of mental illness, that he attended a clinic near Russell square (which probably explains why he was in the area), that as well as researching Islam he also researched Anders Brevick.

 

3) My heroes in this war on terror are the police and security services working day and night to protect us from the threat. Often they succeed in preventing attacks, though just as often we don't find out about that for obvious reasons. Sometimes, sadly, they don't.

 

Saying that anyone here considers the terrorists to be heroes is a new low, even for you and those who liked your post.

 

[RuamRudy]

6 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

yes, for the moment there seems to be no terrorist link.

 

still, the crimes were committed by a mentally ill, crazed devout muslim whose actions may well have been inspired by islamic terrorism, but not organized by terrorists.

 

and here an important question appears: does a murderer need to be sane and member of a terrorist organisation to be classified as a terrorist?

 

according to wikipedia, no common definition of terrorism could be agreed upon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

 

the united nations define it as follows:

 

so it appears that using the above definition, the stabbings by Zakaria Bulhan may have been terrorism indeed, even if he is mentally ill and is inspired by his devout Islam and media reports on ISIS...

 

 

 

He may well indeed have been inspired by Islamic terrorism, but he may have been inspired by the Tellytubbies for all you or I know.

 

The police are more familiar with the nuances of the incident than you are, and they see no evidence of a link. Why can you not believe them?

[7by7]

48 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

My opinion is that using lies and half-truths to avoid dividing the country is not the right way, because the first divide will appear in news reports.

 The police and authorities do not use lies and half truths; they release the facts as known at the time. When and if further facts become known to them they release those; as is evident in this case.

 

Unless, for legal reasons, they cannot release those facts at the time; such as not naming a suspect until that suspect is charged, or releasing information may jeopardise the effectiveness of their operations or even put those carrying out those operations in danger.

 

How the press decide to use that information is beyond the control of the police or authorities. Indeed many of the less responsible media are the ones who regularly produce lies and half truths.

 

Quote

The best way to avoid a divide in the first place is to command all institutions including the police and the press to report the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth.

Only when everyone has the same facts should we worry about divides.

Agreed; unfortunately the police and other authorities do, as said, release the truth but there are those, including many members here, who refuse to accept the truth and ignore the facts because they contradict their prejudices.

 

In the vast majority of cases it is the mouthpieces of the Ministry of Truth who use half truths, ignore facts and even lie, not the authorities.

 

This topic is a prime example of that.

[7by7]

9 hours ago, yogi100 said:

 

In London most street crime consists of black violent crime are directed at other blacks. it rarely involves Muslims nor white people.

 

That's because there are few elderly white folk left in the city for them to mug. It's an actual fact, nothing to do with race cards.

 

See it you know what ethnic group is responsible for most gun crime in the same city? We'll see if YOU can answer this simple question without playing any race cards.

 Really, you are really saying that black people only attack other black people because there are no white people for them to attack!!!!!!!!

 

You should check your facts; in every London borough the majority population group is white.

[manarak]

44 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

He may well indeed have been inspired by Islamic terrorism, but he may have been inspired by the Tellytubbies for all you or I know.

 

The police are more familiar with the nuances of the incident than you are, and they see no evidence of a link. Why can you not believe them?

 

you seem to have missed my point:

even if the murderer is a madman without any links to terrorist organizations, his crimes may still be classified as terrorism.

 

the fact that the media don't all report the same story doesn't make it easier for you and I to understand... wouldn't you like, as I would like, that all the media report the same story when quoting the same source?

Edited August 8, 2016 by manarak

[7by7]

8 hours ago, yogi100 said:

 

Are you (7by7) trying to claim that by some remarkable coincidence you just happened to be in Aldershot the other day asking various off duty squaddies what they thought about orders regarding the wearing of uniforms in public.

 

I think you're talking bullshit. You were doing nothing of the kind the other day!

 

And you can buy the sausages you mentioned yourself in any British supermarket. If you do not want ones containing pork you'll need to use any halal butchers that now abound in many of our high streets.

 

I am not trying to claim anything; I am stating a fact.

 

I am regularly in Aldershot for a variety of reasons, some work related, some not.

 

As anyone who ever is in Aldershot, resident or visitor, can tell you, there are always off duty squaddies about in uniform; at least during the day.

 

I did not say I spoke to anyone about orders regarding the wearing of uniforms in public, off duty or on; because I didn't.

 

What sausages? I don't recall mentioning sausages. But this morning I did have a bacon sandwich; proper bacon, from a pig.

[ClutchClark]

51 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

He may well indeed have been inspired by Islamic terrorism, but he may have been inspired by the Tellytubbies for all you or I know.

 

The police are more familiar with the nuances of the incident than you are, and they see no evidence of a link. Why can you not believe them?

 

Thats what we are saying, this Somali was very likely inspired by violent Jihadists:

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/mohammed-emwazi-jihadi-john-isis-5305807

 

Islamic State executioner Jihadi John watches Teletubbies and Game of Thrones, it has been claimed.

Freed French hostage Nicolas Henin revealed Kuwaiti-born Briton Mohammed Emwazi and his jihadi cronies would spend hours watching television.

He said: “ They watched everything, from Teletubbies to Game of Thrones.

Edited August 8, 2016 by ClutchClark

[7by7]

8 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

<snip>

fact that the media don't all report the same story doesn't make it easier for you and I to understand... wouldn't you like, as I would like, that all the media report the same story when quoting the same source?

 

In an ideal world that is what would happen; but unfortunately even the mainstream media outlets often put their own political spin on things.

 

You can read the same story in, say, the Guardian and the Mail and easily think they were talking about completely different events.

[RuamRudy]

11 minutes ago, manarak said:

 

you seem to have missed my point:

even if the murderer is a madman without any links to terrorist organizations, his crimes may still be classified as terrorism.

 

the fact that the media don't all report the same story doesn't make it easier for you and I to understand... wouldn't you like, as I would like, that all the media report the same story when quoting the same source?

 

In that case, each and every attack on another person can be classified as terrorism. It does, however, water it down somewhat...

[yogi100]

27 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 The police and authorities do not use lies and half truths; they release the facts as known at the time. When and if further facts become known to them they release those; as is evident in this case.

 

Unless, for legal reasons, they cannot release those facts at the time; such as not naming a suspect until that suspect is charged, or releasing information may jeopardise the effectiveness of their operations or even put those carrying out those operations in danger.

 

How the press decide to use that information is beyond the control of the police or authorities. Indeed many of the less responsible media are the ones who regularly produce lies and half truths.

 

Agreed; unfortunately the police and other authorities do, as said, release the truth but there are those, including many members here, who refuse to accept the truth and ignore the facts because they contradict their prejudices.

 

In the vast majority of cases it is the mouthpieces of the Ministry of Truth who use half truths, ignore facts and even lie, not the authorities.

 

This topic is a prime example of that.

 

 "The police and authorities do not use lies and half truths;"

 

Then how was it that Muslim paedophile grooming gangs were able to get away with their disgusting antics for years with well over 1000 young vulnerable white girls up in Rochdale and Rotherham etc.

 

When the leader of the BNP brought events in Rochdale to the public's attention he was arrested and charged with causing racial disharmony. Had a jury not found him not guilty he'd have been sent to prison.

 

Other member of the public were threatened with arrest when they exposed the Rotherham scandal. Your precious police and authorities were hand in hand covering up these dreadful and shameful goings on. Just like they did with the immigrant sex gangs in Derby, Oxford, Bristol, Telford, Banbury, Peterborough, Aylesbury and Keighley.

 

They also tried to cover up the misdeeds of Jeremy Thorpe, Cyril Smith, Jimmy Savile and are still doing so with Greville Janner and his posh chums.

 

Surely it must have occurred to you that PC Plod and those in authority are not the knights in shining armour you once thought they were. Surely no one can be that naive any more. They're just as crooked as the likes of 'Sir' Phillip Green and Robert Maxwell.

[JetsetBkk]

15 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Certain posters do it on almost every thread

 

I would NEVER do that.

 

Actually, if you drag your mouse over some text in a post and then release the mouse, a pop-up link appears labelled "Quote this". 

 

So I hardly think it's against the rules. 

 

[yogi100]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Really, you are really saying that black people only attack other black people because there are no white people for them to attack!!!!!!!!

 

You should check your facts; in every London borough the majority population group is white.

You just read my post and you know exactly what I'm saying so do not try and be smart by putting your own interpretation on it by trying to tell me what I'm saying when I've just written it.

 

And you've been believing what the authorities tell you again!

 

If you are so sure of 'your facts' you and I can conduct an experiment in the form of a wager and you can make yourself a good deal of cash if you've that much faith in whatever statistical organisation you've looked up on the internet. We can conduct our own surveys on bus journeys through Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham, Tower Hamlets and Newham.

 

For every white person we see in each borough I'll give you a pound and for every non white person we see you give me a pound. Are you up for it?

 

I strongly advise you to do some more research before you decide to take me up on this wager if only for the sake of your finances.

Edited August 8, 2016 by yogi100
addition

[MissAndry]

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Really, you are really saying that black people only attack other black people because there are no white people for them to attack!!!!!!!!

 

You should check your facts; in every London borough the majority population group is white.

 

In my apartment block, 15 flats, 2 occupied by white English people. It seems about normal for Queensway. None of the other occupants are black (too expensive for most black people), but I wouldn't call many of the others  white. Mainly Arab (quite a lot of Persians), Mexican, South American ........... so it would depend on who the Boroughs count as 'white'. Also when I walk around Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens, I meet hardly any white people and even less black people, but plenty of orientals and shades of brown.

 

I certainly don't think of Arabs as 'black', and they count for most of the Muslims in the EU.

Edited August 8, 2016 by MissAndry

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.  

[Neurath]

Explanation is not justification (something blindingly obvious with causal explanation - the spark caused the fire, but it didn't justify it). Sadly though, the less one likes an explanation - particularly on matters social or cultural - the more likely one is to think it an egregious and illegitimate justification. 

 

There are hundreds of posts proving my point - unfortunately they have been deleted.My lack of evidence is therefore evidence enough.

[Ulysses G.]

36 minutes ago, Neurath said:

Explanation is not justification

 

Actually it IS. They are synonyms and no one said all the posts have been deleted except you. So much for your argument.

Edited August 8, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Neurath]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Actually it IS. They are synonyms and no one said all the posts have been deleted except you. So much for your argument.

No they are not - that is, explanation is not the same thing as justification and both everyday use and technical use of the terms shows this very clearly. Take for example someone who has been hypnotized on stage. They are hypnotized and told to punch their mother in face. The explanation for the punch is that the person was hypnotized to behave in a certain way. This does not justify that behavior, it only explains it. Justification is sometimes explanation, but not all explanations are justifications.  I might explain someone's actions - say Dylann Roof's - by saying that he was mentally ill, but his mental illness doesn't justify his shooting of people in that Charleston Church. 

 

Just imagine the mess we would be in if any explanation for behavior was taken as justification for that behavior. For a start, the judicial system would come to a halt.

[Ulysses G.]

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

32 minutes ago, Neurath said:

No they are not -

 

Nonsense.They are SYNONYMS Many words have numerous meanings. Your cheery picked illustration is only one of them. 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Neurath]

OK, I can see that we'll get nowhere here. So I'll leave you with it and let the exchange stand for others to consider. All the best. N