|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 18, 2024 10:31:29 GMT
...Our Justice System DOES NOT dish out sentences at the behest of the government, and no matter which political party is in government, the law is the law, the justice system is independent of government... LOL!🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 18, 2024 10:35:26 GMT
Quote ..see video on this thread “We can cause riots and no one can stop us but today we’re going to be peaceful boys , there’s no point to smash them today but tomorrow, I’ll tell you boys , if we don’t get justice those motherfuckers are going to get it .”
The reality is that the authorities knew that the Muslims were going to riot the next day if they didn’t get what they wanted .
|
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 18, 2024 11:12:45 GMT
Quote ..see video on this thread “We can cause riots and no one can stop us but today we’re going to be peaceful boys , there’s no point to smash them today but tomorrow, I’ll tell you boys , if we don’t get justice those motherfuckers are going to get it .” The reality is that the authorities knew that the Muslims were going to riot the next day if they didn’t get what they wanted . So you are now saying that the police can see into the future, or have crystal balls ? "The authorities KNEW that the Muslims were going to riot the next day" - Is that correct |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Aug 18, 2024 11:22:03 GMT
Quote ..see video on this thread “We can cause riots and no one can stop us but today we’re going to be peaceful boys , there’s no point to smash them today but tomorrow, I’ll tell you boys , if we don’t get justice those motherfuckers are going to get it .” The reality is that the authorities knew that the Muslims were going to riot the next day if they didn’t get what they wanted . " The authorities KNEW that the Muslims were going to riot the next day" - Is that correct Is it terminal with you? There are numerous references and footage that was what was shouted by megaphone that if they didn’t get their justice that was what would happen. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 18, 2024 11:28:05 GMT
We now know more details ( but not all the details ) of what actually caused the Manchester Airport incident.
It seems that the incident on the aircraft whilst inflight was sparked after a male passenger racially abused the mother of the two men whom the police went to arrest in the airport, clearly the two men were angered at someone insulting their mother ( as anyone would be ).
If no attempt has been made to question the person who "racially abused" the mother of the arrested men, then why not ?, its a key question.
The man who was assaulted by a police officer was not only laid faced down on the ground, after having been tasered, but he also had a taser held pointing at him by a police officer. The excuse that the officers were worried that he may "grab their gun" is clearly a complete load of total nonsense.
I do not condone assaulting a police officer, but if these men were defending their mother from insults or abuse, then I understand their anger, especially if no attempt has been made to question the man who racially abused the mother.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 18, 2024 11:28:17 GMT
The riots were instrumental in doing away with the poll tax. Attacking police, property and premises with bricks and bottles was part of the battle against what you saw as injustice. Throwing an iron bar into a police car with officers sitting in it was also part of that process. Without the riots the poll tax may have persisted so the riots on one level worked. If one dishes out the harshest of sentences on a rioter at the behest of government that makes the legal system part of government yet it is meant to be separate and independent with each case being judged individually and not part of a whole. The law is supposed to be applied equally. I quote from a poll tax rioter For Chris Bambery, 54, the riot was the product of a decade of "cumulative anger" that had built up against Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government. "There was an immense sense of 'them and us' in the Thatcher years and we felt it was payback time," he says. We could apply exactly the same sense of injustice to the recent riots with years of accumulated anger at being ignored as regards the immigration situation despite being promised the opposite and indeed voting for the opposite time and again. The poll tax was the product of a government legally elected and operating its manifesto pledges. The immigration unrest is the product of many governments legally elected and ignoring their manifesto pledges. Now I know which is the bigger injustice do you? Our Justice System DOES NOT dish out sentences at the behest of the government, and no matter which political party is in government, the law is the law, the justice system is independent of government, the Crown Prosecution Service is also both independent and impartial, and the Attorney General has no influence during court proceedings. If you check back on what I stated, I stated that (quote) " I believe in civil disobedience in the name of a just cause" Civil Disobedience, does not include violence, vandalism, arson, common assault, attempted murder, racist attacks on people or property or looting. Civil Disobedience means refusal to co-operate - refusal to pay - refusal to move on - obstruction - otherwise known as "Peacefull Protest", without harming people or property. There is nothing fair or reasonable or Just in attacking innocent people simply because they are Muslims, and to attempt to suggest otherwise is tantamount to condoning assault upon innocent people. Of course our justice system did just that. You seem to have not heard Starmer say he would apply swift justice and substantive sentences. How can he do that if the justice system is independent. The quick answer is he can't but he did and it happened so the conclusion of 2+2 in this instance equals 4. In the poll tax civil disobedience came hand in hand with riots and it was the sum total that resulted in the end of the poll tax as clearly illustrated by the statements of those who were there and said the anger was real and justified. There were some people who were attacked because they were Muslim or BAME just as there were some people in Birmingham attacked because they were white. No one has said that is right it is always wrong. However the riots and demonstrations were largely against migrant hotels which was the focus of the anger in many instances. The Mosque was targeted because of information which is stated to be erroneous but so far the motive is 'unknown'. You have to put that into the perspective of 7/7. Manchester arena, Reading park, London Bridge, Westminster Bridge and a host of near misses. Not fair at all but then is it understandable if one is worried about one's loved ones? |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Aug 18, 2024 11:32:26 GMT
We now know more details ( but not all the details ) of what actually caused the Manchester Airport incident. It seems that the incident on the aircraft whilst inflight was sparked after a male passenger racially abused the mother of the two men whom the police went to arrest in the airport, clearly the two men were angered at someone insulting their mother ( as anyone would be ). If no attempt has been made to question the person who "racially abused" the mother of the arrested men, then why not ?, its a key question. The man who was assaulted by a police officer was not only laid faced down on the ground, after having been tasered, but he also had a taser held pointing at him by a police officer. The excuse that the officers were worried that he may "grab their gun" is clearly a complete load of total nonsense.I do not condone assaulting a police officer, but if these men were defending their mother from insults or abuse, then I understand their anger, especially if no attempt has been made to question the man who racially abused the mother. Is it,are tasers 100% effective and cannot someone still assault an officer after being tasered |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 18, 2024 11:37:37 GMT
We now know more details ( but not all the details ) of what actually caused the Manchester Airport incident. It seems that the incident on the aircraft whilst inflight was sparked after a male passenger racially abused the mother of the two men whom the police went to arrest in the airport, clearly the two men were angered at someone insulting their mother ( as anyone would be ). If no attempt has been made to question the person who "racially abused" the mother of the arrested men, then why not ?, its a key question. The man who was assaulted by a police officer was not only laid faced down on the ground, after having been tasered, but he also had a taser held pointing at him by a police officer. The excuse that the officers were worried that he may "grab their gun" is clearly a complete load of total nonsense. I do not condone assaulting a police officer, but if these men were defending their mother from insults or abuse, then I understand their anger, especially if no attempt has been made to question the man who racially abused the mother. The police were effecting an arrest and a man attacked them from behind resulting in a fight between police and suspects. Once they were making an arrest and a member of the public interferes he is breaking the law. Once both attack the police they are breaking the law. The police were concerned about being overpowered as they very nearly were and had to bring it to a swift, abrupt and effective conclusion. Perhaps they should have let blue shirt man get up as he seemed to try to rise by raising his head despite being told to stay down. I would think the most effective lesson is do not resist arrest. Questioning the man as regards the incident is not relevant, if they attacked him and a complaint was made they are at fault. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Aug 18, 2024 11:41:11 GMT
We now know more details ( but not all the details ) of what actually caused the Manchester Airport incident. It seems that the incident on the aircraft whilst inflight was sparked after a male passenger racially abused the mother of the two men whom the police went to arrest in the airport, clearly the two men were angered at someone insulting their mother ( as anyone would be ). If no attempt has been made to question the person who "racially abused" the mother of the arrested men, then why not ?, its a key question. The man who was assaulted by a police officer was not only laid faced down on the ground, after having been tasered, but he also had a taser held pointing at him by a police officer. The excuse that the officers were worried that he may "grab their gun" is clearly a complete load of total nonsense.I do not condone assaulting a police officer, but if these men were defending their mother from insults or abuse, then I understand their anger, especially if no attempt has been made to question the man who racially abused the mother. Is it,are tasers 100% effective and cannot someone still assault an officer after being tasered And for the benefit of the ill informed. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 18, 2024 11:50:50 GMT
Our Justice System DOES NOT dish out sentences at the behest of the government, and no matter which political party is in government, the law is the law, the justice system is independent of government, the Crown Prosecution Service is also both independent and impartial, and the Attorney General has no influence during court proceedings. If you check back on what I stated, I stated that (quote) " I believe in civil disobedience in the name of a just cause" Civil Disobedience, does not include violence, vandalism, arson, common assault, attempted murder, racist attacks on people or property or looting. Civil Disobedience means refusal to co-operate - refusal to pay - refusal to move on - obstruction - otherwise known as "Peacefull Protest", without harming people or property. There is nothing fair or reasonable or Just in attacking innocent people simply because they are Muslims, and to attempt to suggest otherwise is tantamount to condoning assault upon innocent people. Of course our justice system did just that. You seem to have not heard Starmer say he would apply swift justice and substantive sentences. How can he do that if the justice system is independent. The quick answer is he can't but he did and it happened so the conclusion of 2+2 in this instance equals 4. In the poll tax civil disobedience came hand in hand with riots and it was the sum total that resulted in the end of the poll tax as clearly illustrated by the statements of those who were there and said the anger was real and justified. There were some people who were attacked because they were Muslim or BAME just as there were some people in Birmingham attacked because they were white. No one has said that is right it is always wrong. However the riots and demonstrations were largely against migrant hotels which was the focus of the anger in many instances. The Mosque was targeted because of information which is stated to be erroneous but so far the motive is 'unknown'. You have to put that into the perspective of 7/7. Manchester arena, Reading park, London Bridge, Westminster Bridge and a host of near misses. Not fair at all but then is it understandable if one is worried about one's loved ones? Bullshit - the riots were largely against anyone who was Muslim, or appeared to be Muslim, the attacks here in the Northeast were mostly against Mosques, police stations, Asian owned shops and businesses, and even homes and cars belonging to Asian people. Mosques were attacked simply because they were Mosques, some were firebombed and attempts were made to set fire to several, including with people inside them as happened in Harlepool for instance. Starmer did not say tht "HE would apply swift justice" because it is outside his control, outside of his remmit, and is down to the Crown Prosecution Service. You are a fool, attempting to suggest that the rioting was mostly as a result of anger at migrant hotels, you are trying to give some sort of semblance of justification for the riots, but there is none. Islamic extremists and terrorists are thoroughly evil people, who do not represent the Muslim faith, or the vast majority of British Muslims, hence the phrase "Not In Our Name". I do not have to put the recent riots into perspective against Islamic terror attacks, because there is no connection, we cannot hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of extremists, just as we cannot hold all white people responsible for rioting in our streets. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 18, 2024 11:52:50 GMT
We now know more details ( but not all the details ) of what actually caused the Manchester Airport incident. It seems that the incident on the aircraft whilst inflight was sparked after a male passenger racially abused the mother of the two men whom the police went to arrest in the airport, clearly the two men were angered at someone insulting their mother ( as anyone would be ). If no attempt has been made to question the person who "racially abused" the mother of the arrested men, then why not ?, its a key question. The man who was assaulted by a police officer was not only laid faced down on the ground, after having been tasered, but he also had a taser held pointing at him by a police officer. The excuse that the officers were worried that he may "grab their gun" is clearly a complete load of total nonsense. I do not condone assaulting a police officer, but if these men were defending their mother from insults or abuse, then I understand their anger, especially if no attempt has been made to question the man who racially abused the mother. More of your usual racist bullshit fiddles. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Aug 18, 2024 11:57:57 GMT
Is it,are tasers 100% effective and cannot someone still assault an officer after being tasered And for the benefit of the ill informed. How can anyone who is laid faced down on the ground with a Taser aimed at him, grab a police gun ? ... and is the correct way to subdue or neutralise any potential threat to kick someon in the head, or to stamp on someones head - THE ANSWER IS NO, its assault, and I bet you any money that as much as it may annoy some people, that police officer will be charged, and will probably lose his job. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 18, 2024 12:12:50 GMT
Of course our justice system did just that. You seem to have not heard Starmer say he would apply swift justice and substantive sentences. How can he do that if the justice system is independent. The quick answer is he can't but he did and it happened so the conclusion of 2+2 in this instance equals 4. In the poll tax civil disobedience came hand in hand with riots and it was the sum total that resulted in the end of the poll tax as clearly illustrated by the statements of those who were there and said the anger was real and justified. There were some people who were attacked because they were Muslim or BAME just as there were some people in Birmingham attacked because they were white. No one has said that is right it is always wrong. However the riots and demonstrations were largely against migrant hotels which was the focus of the anger in many instances. The Mosque was targeted because of information which is stated to be erroneous but so far the motive is 'unknown'. You have to put that into the perspective of 7/7. Manchester arena, Reading park, London Bridge, Westminster Bridge and a host of near misses. Not fair at all but then is it understandable if one is worried about one's loved ones? Bullshit - the riots were largely against anyone who was Muslim, or appeared to be Muslim, the attacks here in the Northeast were mostly against Mosques, police stations, Asian owned shops and businesses, and even homes and cars belonging to Asian people. Mosques were attacked simply because they were Mosques, some were firebombed and attempts were made to set fire to several, including with people inside them as happened in Harlepool for instance. Starmer did not say tht "HE would apply swift justice" because it is outside his control, outside of his remmit, and is down to the Crown Prosecution Service. You are a fool, attempting to suggest that the rioting was mostly as a result of anger at migrant hotels, you are trying to give some sort of semblance of justification for the riots, but there is none. Islamic extremists and terrorists are thoroughly evil people, who do not represent the Muslim faith, or the vast majority of British Muslims, hence the phrase "Not In Our Name". I do not have to put the recent riots into perspective against Islamic terror attacks, because there is no connection, we cannot hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of extremists, just as we cannot hold all white people responsible for rioting in our streets. The riots were against migrant hotels in the main apart from the first night at Southport, there were other isolated incidents but illegal migrant hotels were the main focus. I also put into perspective why random killing and random knife attacks seems to arise almost invariably from Islamic sources, any suggestions as to why that is the case, would it have anything to do with what Islam says or is it just accidental? It is a question worth asking. If hatred of a group is being encouraged then that is not right and Islam encourages hatred that is as clear as the nose on your face. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 18, 2024 12:15:36 GMT
And for the benefit of the ill informed. How can anyone who is laid faced down on the ground with a Taser aimed at him, grab a police gun ? ... and is the correct way to subdue or neutralise any potential threat to kick someon in the head, or to stamp on someones head - THE ANSWER IS NO, its assault, and I bet you any money that as much as it may annoy some people, that police officer will be charged, and will probably lose his job. He can't but how do you keep him down when he has already shown his lack of control and raises his head as if to rise despite being told to stay down. All police know tasers are not always effective. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 18, 2024 12:24:38 GMT
...The riots were against migrant hotels in the main apart from the first night at Southport, there were other isolated incidents but illegal migrant hotels were the main focus. I also put into perspective why random killing and random knife attacks seems to arise almost invariably from Islamic sources, any suggestions as to why that is the case, would it have anything to do with what Islam says or is it just accidental? It is a question worth asking. If hatred of a group is being encouraged then that is not right and Islam encourages hatred that is as clear as the nose on your face. Ah well, according to fiddles Islamism is all down to the Israelis breeding hatred. The fact that Islamism exists everywhere that Islam does, even where there are no Israelis, seems to have gone straight over his head. I suspect that fiddles is antisemitic. |
|
