|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 2, 2024 9:52:56 GMT
After us witnessing the racist violent attacks in this country from the Pro-Palestine Hamas terrorist group, that not ONCE Starmer/Police have condemned, openly marching through our streets with their antisemitic racist chants while the police backed off and left them to it ..... and Starmer denies two tier policing,, the more he says it the more angry decent law abiding citizens are feeling.
|
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Aug 2, 2024 10:12:38 GMT
One report said that Starmer got the room wrong, which is correct. The real issue was the girls, he should have started by saying that he shared the revulsion of the protestors, and that circumstances leading up to the atrocity will be addressed.
To him, its an issue not an atrocity, an item on a list. That shows that he has no empathy, no intuitive feeling, even if he was told to say what he did, he had no objection.
If there is a report, a forensic assessment, dont believe it, it will be edited.
If the attacks were racist will it say that?
No.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 2, 2024 10:18:31 GMT
Starmer is an appeasing coward and a slave to his party’s identity politics.
Bending the knee was a very big clue.
Now we proof.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 2, 2024 10:25:44 GMT
"Those at the head of Labour seem singularly incapable of doing that" Yeah the GE was a real disaster for them wasn't it? It's the right who are out of touch, that's why they lost. And you seem to share that incapability. The election was an indicative snapshot of what the country wanted at a particular point. The idea of being a statesman is to assess the information you have and come up with a general direction that works in some ways for all. After all the left has been telling us for years that once you are voted into power you represent all your constituents even those you may actively dislike. Starmer has taken lessons from recent events and come to the conclusion that 'the far right' (and no one can define who they are) are the danger and must be watched and suppressed. The rest of us have seen recent events and come to different conclusions that two tier policing is in operation, that anger from anyone white will be suppressed, that anger from Muslims will be appeased with 'community leaders' cossetted, Muslims can violently attack police with impunity and riots from ethnic minorities will be tolerated. What other lessons can be taken? So you're angry that the PM has a different viewpoint to you? Well that's democracy, people don't always vote the way you want them to. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 2, 2024 10:27:07 GMT
And you seem to share that incapability. The election was an indicative snapshot of what the country wanted at a particular point. The idea of being a statesman is to assess the information you have and come up with a general direction that works in some ways for all. After all the left has been telling us for years that once you are voted into power you represent all your constituents even those you may actively dislike. Starmer has taken lessons from recent events and come to the conclusion that 'the far right' (and no one can define who they are) are the danger and must be watched and suppressed. The rest of us have seen recent events and come to different conclusions that two tier policing is in operation, that anger from anyone white will be suppressed, that anger from Muslims will be appeased with 'community leaders' cossetted, Muslims can violently attack police with impunity and riots from ethnic minorities will be tolerated. What other lessons can be taken? So you're angry that the PM has a different viewpoint to you? Well that's democracy, people don't always vote the way you want them to. Like Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 2, 2024 10:39:33 GMT
What happened at Manchester Airport was not clear cut or straight foreward - whereas what happened in Southport was. In Southport it was a clear case of unprovoked and cold blooded murder upon innocent children In the case of Manchester Airport it was a case of young men attacking police officers, which in itself is wrong, and the police had every right to defend themselves and to arrest the assailants. HOWEVER, to then kick one of the assailants in the head, and stamp on his head after been tasered and subdued, laid face down on the floor was way beyond defence, and was unacceptable behaviour from a police officer. The unanswered question with regards to the Manchester incident is WHY ? Apparently it related to some kind of incident on the flight, but to date, no one seems to know what the incident was all about. Sorry dont see the relevance. the family got into a spat on the flight and continued it when they got off - then the Police turned up and the family attacked them. What relevance to the attack on the Police was the families spat on the flight?. It is irrelevant what the difference of opinion on the flight was, the violent attack on the Police was the only thing that mattered. What happened on the flight was no excuse.Of course its relevant ... Neither you nor I, know what this "spat" was all about, therefore there are unanswered questions. What I will concede is that if it was a clear cut case of young men, perhaps drunk, simply causing trouble on a flight, or fighting, or assaulting other passengers, then they will clearly be in the wrong. But something seems a tad suspicious, according to people who know this family, they are respectable and hard working, and some family members are police officers. WHY do we not know any details of what the altercation or spat, or disturbance on the flight was all about ? |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 2, 2024 10:44:57 GMT
As Merseyside Police have stated that they are not looking for anyone else in the case of the Southport murders, I rather think it does not require Sherlock Holmes to work out who did it. The only matter which is unresolved is why, and on what charge will he eventually be found guilty of, murder, manslaughter, murder on the grounds of diminished responsibility. ? In the case of Manchester Airport, there are unanswered questions, and I would not care to speculate what the final outcome might be, except to say that the lens does not lie. The lens does not lie? Clearly it does and has shown to do so on more than one occasion,the fact Merseyside police are looking for no one else is irrelevant to how the law in this country operates that you're innocent till proven guilty and why someone could easily point that you are denying the chance of a fair trial. Also and again like TTL you are making the assumption that the person on the floor was incapacitated by the taser and of no threat to the officers especially taking in to account the full footage of what occurred before. According to the video and stills from every angle, the suspect WAS laid on the floor, he WAS face down, sorry but I am afraid this bit is not in dispute, and neither is the fact that a police officer kicked the suspect in the head. You are attempting to say that day is night, or that black is white. The sole man ( laid faced down on the floor ) was surrounded by police officers, the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 2, 2024 10:51:30 GMT
Sorry dont see the relevance. the family got into a spat on the flight and continued it when they got off - then the Police turned up and the family attacked them. What relevance to the attack on the Police was the families spat on the flight?. It is irrelevant what the difference of opinion on the flight was, the violent attack on the Police was the only thing that mattered. What happened on the flight was no excuse.Of course its relevant ... Neither you nor I, know what this "spat" was all about, therefore there are unanswered questions. What I will concede is that if it was a clear cut case of young men, perhaps drunk, simply causing trouble on a flight, or fighting, or assaulting other passengers, then they will clearly be in the wrong. But something seems a tad suspicious, according to people who know this family, they are respectable and hard working, and some family members are police officers. WHY do we not know any details of what the altercation or spat, or disturbance on the flight was all about ?
what would the disturbance have to be about to excuse the attacks on the Police? - bearing in mind the Police were not on the flight. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 2, 2024 10:53:20 GMT
The lens does not lie? Clearly it does and has shown to do so on more than one occasion,the fact Merseyside police are looking for no one else is irrelevant to how the law in this country operates that you're innocent till proven guilty and why someone could easily point that you are denying the chance of a fair trial. Also and again like TTL you are making the assumption that the person on the floor was incapacitated by the taser and of no threat to the officers especially taking in to account the full footage of what occurred before. According to the video and stills from every angle, the suspect WAS laid on the floor, he WAS face down, sorry but I am afraid this bit is not in dispute, and neither is the fact that a police officer kicked the suspect in the head. You are attempting to say that day is night, or that black is white. The sole man ( laid faced down on the floor ) was surrounded by police officers, the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head. Not if the police suspected or feared that the thug would try to grab them. They had already attacked the police and apparently tried to take weapons . Neutralise the thug first , then cuff him. This attack was in an international airport with armed officers , not a back alley. It could have been a diversion for a terrorist attack. People like you would hide behind the police if a major incident occurred and stab the police in the back when they need the benefit of the doubt . Tbh it makes me sick to my stomach. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Aug 2, 2024 11:01:17 GMT
Of course its relevant ... Neither you nor I, know what this "spat" was all about, therefore there are unanswered questions. What I will concede is that if it was a clear cut case of young men, perhaps drunk, simply causing trouble on a flight, or fighting, or assaulting other passengers, then they will clearly be in the wrong. But something seems a tad suspicious, according to people who know this family, they are respectable and hard working, and some family members are police officers. WHY do we not know any details of what the altercation or spat, or disturbance on the flight was all about ?
what would the disturbance have to be about to excuse the attacks on the Police? - bearing in mind the Police were not on the flight. It seems twitchy thinks it's okay to lay into the police so long as there is an excuse for it and the people doing it are not white. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Aug 2, 2024 11:02:03 GMT
The lens does not lie? Clearly it does and has shown to do so on more than one occasion,the fact Merseyside police are looking for no one else is irrelevant to how the law in this country operates that you're innocent till proven guilty and why someone could easily point that you are denying the chance of a fair trial. Also and again like TTL you are making the assumption that the person on the floor was incapacitated by the taser and of no threat to the officers especially taking in to account the full footage of what occurred before. According to the video and stills from every angle, the suspect WAS laid on the floor, he WAS face down, sorry but I am afraid this bit is not in dispute, and neither is the fact that a police officer kicked the suspect in the head. You are attempting to say that day is night, or that black is white. The sole man ( laid faced down on the floor ) was surrounded by police officers, the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head. His actions(the police officer are the subject of an investigation) you are clearly unable to state why you have decided the police officer is guilty and also the person charged in Southport too when you ignore the point made to you regarding this. In your reply to Pacifico you say this So wasn’t the assault on the officers prior to this clear cut enough for you and that you invent unanswered questions because you decide they are a decent and respectable family,have you delved far enough to decide whether the police officer comes from a decent and respectable family…..that’ll be a no because on your logic that makes him an innocent so it’s you engaging in double standards isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 2, 2024 11:04:26 GMT
According to the video and stills from every angle, the suspect WAS laid on the floor, he WAS face down, sorry but I am afraid this bit is not in dispute, and neither is the fact that a police officer kicked the suspect in the head. You are attempting to say that day is night, or that black is white. The sole man ( laid faced down on the floor ) was surrounded by police officers, the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head. Not if the police suspected or feared that the thug would try to grab them. They had already attacked the police and apparently tried to take weapons . Neutralise the thug first , then cuff him. This attack was in an international airport with armed officers , not a back alley. It could have been a diversion for a terrorist attack. People like you would hide behind the police if a major incident occurred and stab the police in the back when they need the benefit of the doubt . Tbh it makes me sick to my stomach. You have no idea have you You have not read my post, or if you have, you conveniently ignore this bit " the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head." How can a stunned ( Tasered ) man, laid on the floor, faced down, surrounded by police officers, pose a real or substantial threat. ? Me thinks you post nonsense |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 2, 2024 11:09:16 GMT
The lens does not lie? Clearly it does and has shown to do so on more than one occasion,the fact Merseyside police are looking for no one else is irrelevant to how the law in this country operates that you're innocent till proven guilty and why someone could easily point that you are denying the chance of a fair trial. Also and again like TTL you are making the assumption that the person on the floor was incapacitated by the taser and of no threat to the officers especially taking in to account the full footage of what occurred before. According to the video and stills from every angle, the suspect WAS laid on the floor, he WAS face down, sorry but I am afraid this bit is not in dispute, and neither is the fact that a police officer kicked the suspect in the head. You are attempting to say that day is night, or that black is white. The sole man ( laid faced down on the floor ) was surrounded by police officers, the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head. The man was face down and was on the floor but before the kick, which was about one and half seconds after some control of the situation was gained by police, he lifted his head and seemed intent to rise, the kick and stamp was to discourage that and protect fellow officers who were in the process of recovery. The correct thing to do as an armed officer was to gain complete control of a situation in which two violent men had to be overcome for the safety of themselves and the public. If this officer is hung out to dry then expect resisting arrest to be an ever present risk for all police. Considering the force used against them it was proportionate and the lesson should be do not resist arrest. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 2, 2024 11:11:28 GMT
Not if the police suspected or feared that the thug would try to grab them. They had already attacked the police and apparently tried to take weapons . Neutralise the thug first , then cuff him. This attack was in an international airport with armed officers , not a back alley. It could have been a diversion for a terrorist attack. People like you would hide behind the police if a major incident occurred and stab the police in the back when they need the benefit of the doubt . Tbh it makes me sick to my stomach. You have no idea have you You have not read my post, or if you have, you conveniently ignore this bit " the correct thing to then do would have been to handcuff the suspect NOT kick him in the head." How can a stunned ( Tasered ) man, laid on the floor, faced down, surrounded by police officers, pose a real or substantial threat. ? Me thinks you post nonsense Becasue the video shows he lifted his head and was obviously not stunned and tasered sufficiently |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 2, 2024 11:12:17 GMT
So when this incident goes to court, do you think the bench or jury will be satisfied if the prosecuting counsel simply states "the police officers approached the defendants after AN INCIDENT on board the flight". ?
Do you not think that the panel, the bench or the jury will want to know how it all started ?, will the court want know the details of what precisely happened on the plane. ?
Have you ever heard of the word "circumstances" or the phrase "Extenuating Circumstances" ?
I refuse to pass judgement until I know all the details, but those with Tunnel Vision can ONLY see some young men attacking police officers, and are not interested in any other detail leading to that.
|
|
