Australian mass killing.

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

LYB. Here is 'Doppler' C4 data / clip.

I haven't seen it refuted or de-bunked. Its primary evidence (not secondary or circumstantial which appear to be the rest) of the source of whatever object caused the problem. Until this can be adequately explained away then by any scientific view its some sort of sub-sonic munition, spent, misfired, or otherwise coming in from the general direction of the Israelis however inconvenient that conclusion may of been at the time.  Of course, without some ground forensics we can never be sure what it was. Perhaps it was some looping back / shot down failed Hamas missile, failed Israeli interceptor or worse. At best inconclusive.

For all the parties, events and new-stories rapidly moved on and the story became just one amongst many such incidents with the  almost casual bombing of Gaza.

  

Edited April 15 by Yellow Fever

[king canary 7,623]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Here is 'Doppler' C4 data / clip.

I haven't seen it refuted or de-bunked. Its primary evidence (not secondary or circumstantial which appear to be the rest) of the source of whatever object caused the problem. Until this can be adequately explained away then by any scientific view its some sort of sub-sonic munition, spent, misfired, or otherwise coming in from the general direction of the Israelis however inconvenient that conclusion may of been at the time.  Of course, without some ground forensics we can never be sure what it was. Perhaps it was some looping back / shot down failed Hamas missile, failed Israeli interceptor or worse. At best inconclusive.

For all the parties, events and new-stories rapidly moved on and the story became just one amongst many such incidents with the  almost casual bombing of Gaza.

  

Isn't there about 400 others threads on Israel/Palestine? 

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

Isn't there about 400 others threads on Israel/Palestine? 

Yes - meant for LYB as he came back to this whataboutery though I want to leave this particular incident in the past.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

Glad to see you're saying the quiet part out loud- basically 'I don't care if I can't blame a muslim.'

I blame the Immans that brainwashed him. Who do you blame, the priest for being there?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

4 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes - meant for LYB as he came back to this whataboutery though I want to leave this particular incident in the past.

Not whataboutery at all. You were waxing lyrical about the pitfalls of prejudgement, so I was highlighting an example of you prejudging something where you also  dug in hard against the suggesion of reserving judgement given the Israelis were refuting it, which actually they haven't done very often over events in this war, and only a handful of times in the past have they actually been found to be lying.

That doppler piece you're citing predates the HRW evaluation that concluded it most likely a faulty Hamas rocket I provided by a month, so will have been accounted for in the evaluation. You should bear in mind that just because it may not agree with what the IDF was suggesting doesn't mean the IDF was either lying or that it wasn't a Palestinian misfired rocket that hadn't been fired off from somewhere else nearby. I don't know what other evidence they used, but in summary they did conclude that it probably wasn't Israeli.

 

 

Edited April 15 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

15 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

I blame the Immans that brainwashed him. Who do you blame, the priest for being there?

Absolutely. The argument that people shouldn't be agitated about Islamic terrorism, which is the most frequent form of these events seems akin.to not bothering with road traffic safety because people don't just die on the roads.But having said that, it should be proportional. The fact that there are clearly issues in Islamic communities in Western countries that leads to ready radicalisation, and the fact that it's perfectly acceptable for everybody to demand that they get their houses in order, does not in any way amount to wishing anyone harm, or even not wanting them to be protected from harm, simply because they subscribe to Islam.

Everyone does need to get along when push comes to shove.

Edited April 15 by littleyellowbirdie

[king canary 7,623]

44 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

I blame the Immans that brainwashed him. Who do you blame, the priest for being there?

I don't know who I blame because, and I can't believe this needs saying after we went through this about 24 hours ago, we don't have enough information. All I know about the suspect is he's 15. All I know about the victim is he was a somewhat controversial priest in the Assyrian church. If the stabber turns out to be an islamic terrorist radicalised Immans then you may well be correct to blame them. It isn't a race to be the first to apportion blame though.

[king canary 7,623]

32 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Absolutely. The argument that people shouldn't be agitated about Islamic terrorism, which is the most frequent form of these events seems akin.to not bothering with road traffic safety because people don't just die on the roads.But having said that, it should be proportional. The fact that there are clearly issues in Islamic communities in Western countries that leads to ready radicalisation, and the fact that it's perfectly acceptable for everybody to demand that they get their houses in order, does not in any way amount to wishing anyone harm, or even not wanting them to be protected from harm, simply because they subscribe to Islam.

Everyone does need to get along when push comes to shove.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be agitated by islamic terrorist.

But people like RTB are clearly only agitated by incidents like this if they can blame a Muslim, which is no better than people who desperately want to turn a blind eye.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't know who I blame because, and I can't believe this needs saying after we went through this about 24 hours ago, we don't have enough information. All I know about the suspect is he's 15. All I know about the victim is he was a somewhat controversial priest in the Assyrian church. If the stabber turns out to be an islamic terrorist radicalised Immans then you may well be correct to blame them. It isn't a race to be the first to apportion blame though.

Yes, and why do we still know so little in comparison to what happened yesterday, where terrorism was ruled out comparatively quickly? It's notable that they're being a lot slower to comment.

[jhubs 11]

32 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Yes, and why do we still know so little in comparison to what happened yesterday, where terrorism was ruled out comparatively quickly? It's notable that they're being a lot slower to comment.

Because the guy from yesterday was already known to police and therefore they had access to his medical history and other info?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

3 minutes ago, king canary said:

I'm not saying people shouldn't be agitated by islamic terrorist.

But people like RTB are clearly only agitated by incidents like this if they can blame a Muslim, which is no better than people who desperately want to turn a blind eye.

Yes, agreed. I can only speak for why it agitates me, but it's actually less about the attacks and more about the unwillingness to allow open discussion of the underlying problems and the reluctance of politicians to really engage in the most important discussions for fear of stoking division, or maybe being accused of stoking division. There are some disturbingly permissive attitudes to some pretty extreme views that are all on the pathway to the sort of radicalisation that leads to the London Bridge attacks etc where there's still little evidence of much being addressed.

What people want when something happens is to see steps to ensure it doesn't happen again. With regard to the stabbing yesterday, nobody is going to hesitate to have a robust discussion about the state of the Australian mental health services and what could have been done better to prevent the guy becoming so deranged that he'd do what he did.

With regard to Islamic terrorism though, there has been some discussion about pathways to radicalisation, but the engagement from Islamic communities regarding seeking to tackle burgeoning extremism in their own midsts, it seems to me at least, has been pretty poor and less than pro-active.

There was an incident in 2015 where Eric Pickles wrote a letter on the subject of fighting radicalisation addressed to the Muslim community that was was met with a lot of umbrage. This response in the Guardian was especially interesting and made an especially interesting point; it argued that pretty much everything he was arguing was right, but he personally didn't have the capital to say it. The article's below

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/25/eric-pickles-letter-to-mosques-right-and-wrong

Personally, that article's view sums up what's wrong: In an open society, it should not matter a jot who's saying it if the arguments are fair, and actually arguing that people should be discouraged from talking because they're 'not the right person to be saying it' is inherently divisive. He was talking about exactly the problem that bothers me and many other people; the automatic reflex was to try and shut him down, presumably because he was a fat middle-aged white government minister. That's not right. There are so-called Muslim community leaders. I don't understand how that works, but if they're supposedly leaders then they should be stepping up, thinking and engaging constructiively rather than flouncing off in a huff because they take umbrage because someone wants to talk to them about why Islam in the UK keeps throwing up a relatively large number of radicals who are a danger to the public and, who more disturbingly were often born in the UK.

 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 15/04/2024 at 19:42, king canary said:

I'm not saying people shouldn't be agitated by islamic terrorist.

But people like RTB are clearly only agitated by incidents like this if they can blame a Muslim, which is no better than people who desperately want to turn a blind eye.

I'm agitated by facts. Like all woke people you wish to ignore the facts. I wouldn't give a monkey's if they really were a religion of peace. I would be agitated by Quakers and Buddhists if the facts showed Quakers and Buddhists were committing heinous crimes. But they are not. If you're not going to be guided by the facts but by your feelings then you are never going to arrive at a solution to the problem of heinous crime.

[Herman 9,793]

You're allergic to facts Rocky and that's me being very polite.

[Aggy 757]

51 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

I'm agitated by facts. Like all woke people you wish to ignore the facts. I wouldn't give a monkey's if they really were a religion of peace. I would be agitated by Quakers and Buddhists if the facts showed Quakers and Buddhists were committing heinous crimes. But they are not. If you're not going to be guided by the facts but by your feelings then you are never going to arrive at a solution to the problem of heinous crime.

Like the peaceful Buddhists in Sri Lanka and Myanmar in recent years? 

You and Broadstairs were agitated before you knew the “facts” simply because you saw the suspect didn’t have blonde hair and blue eyes. You stopped caring when you realised the “facts” were that he wasn’t a Muslim terrorist but some Australian bloke with a European surname and mental health issues. I am sure people will “draw their own conclusions” as to why…

 

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

8 hours ago, Aggy said:

Like the peaceful Buddhists in Sri Lanka and Myanmar in recent years? 

You and Broadstairs were agitated before you knew the “facts” simply because you saw the suspect didn’t have blonde hair and blue eyes. You stopped caring when you realised the “facts” were that he wasn’t a Muslim terrorist but some Australian bloke with a European surname and mental health issues. I am sure people will “draw their own conclusions” as to why…

 

Is that so?

The one photograph I saw was far too blurry to make out the colour of his hair or skin, lets alone his eyes. It was enough to reveal a machete type weapon (in this case a long hunting knife) which was an Al-Qaeda et al. recommended weapon of choice for extremists who are inspired to kill alone and also recalled memories of London Bridge, and those going back to Fusilier Lee Rigby's murder and other subsequent incidents. Those are not racist thoughts as has previously been stated,  and they are not remotely jumping to conclusions.

You seem to be the one doing that. 

Stopped caring? What's that supposed to mean? All should care about such appalling acts, whoever the perpetrator. I certainly never stopped caring. What gave you that idea?

How would you know so much about what goes on in my head, in any case?

What a load of nonsense. 

Edited April 17 by BroadstairsR

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

13 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Is that so?

The one photograph I saw was far too blurry to make out the colour of his eyes (??) or even of his hair or his skin colour. It was enough to reveal a machete type weapon (in this case a long hunting knife) which recalled memories of London Bridge and other such incidents, and those are not racist thoughts.

Whose jumping to conclusions now? 

Stopped caring? What's that supposed to mean. All should care about such appalling acts, whoever the perpetrator. I certainly never stopped caring. What gave you that idea?

Thinking about it, which is the worst sort of profiling anyway? Assuming an event was Islam related because a lot of seemingly random people got stabbed as in a lot of similar terror-related events we see reported, or assuming it wasn't Islam related because the perpetrator appeared to have an interest in sport and didn't have a big hooky nose and a turban?

As an aside, I read an interesting old article in the Guardian a little while back about a guy who'd been in the BNP when he was younger finishing up converting to Islam.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/24/religion.uk

Edited April 17 by littleyellowbirdie

[king canary 7,623]

4 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Is that so?

The one photograph I saw was far too blurry to make out the colour of his hair or skin, lets alone his eyes. It was enough to reveal a machete type weapon (in this case a long hunting knife) which was an Al-Qaeda et al. recommended weapon of choice for extremists who are inspired to kill alone and also recalled memories of London Bridge, and those going back to Fusilier Lee Rigby's murder and other subsequent incidents. Those are not racist thoughts as has previously been stated,  and they are not remotely jumping to conclusions.

You seem to be the one doing that. 

Stopped caring? What's that supposed to mean? All should care about such appalling acts, whoever the perpetrator. I certainly never stopped caring. What gave you that idea?

How would you know so much about what goes on in my head, in any case?

What a load of nonsense. 

You literally said 'draw your own conclusions' and now you're saying you weren't jumping to conclusions.

Just own it for gods sake. 

[king canary 7,623]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Thinking about it, which is the worst sort of profiling anyway? Assuming an event was Islam related because a lot of seemingly random people got stabbed as in a lot of similar terror-related events we see reported, or assuming it wasn't Islam related because the perpetrator appeared to have an interest in sport and didn't have a big hooky nose and a turban?

As an aside, I read an interesting old article in the Guardian a little while back about a guy who'd been in the BNP when he was younger finishing up converting to Islam.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/24/religion.uk

Good to have a contender for 'most disingenuous post of the year' in April.

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

13 minutes ago, king canary said:

You literally said 'draw your own conclusions' and now you're saying you weren't jumping to conclusions.

Just own it for gods sake. 

Suspicions based on previous events are not drawing conclusions.

Own up for what? Is there a crime involved here? Perhaps some perspective is needed.

Are you the one who called me a racist because of all this?

That sort of readily implied slur leads me to think of the boy crying wolf fable as it might easily detract from genuine racism.

Get yourself down to St. Margaret's Bay and beyond on a sunny day there. You'll then find out what real racism is as all sorts gather there waiting for the small boat landings, including some extremely nasty racist elements.

As it stands, ill-informed insult hurling like that amounts to a case of "all mouth and no trousers."

 

Edited April 17 by BroadstairsR

[king canary 7,623]

3 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Suspicions based on previous events are not drawing conclusions.

Own up for what? Is there a crime involved here? Perhaps some perspective is needed.

Are you the one who called me a racist because of all this?

That sort of readily implied slur leads me to think of the boy crying wolf fable as it might easily detract from genuine racism.

Get yourself down to St. Margaret's Bay and beyond on a sunny day there. You'll then find out what real racism is as all sorts gather there waiting for the small boat landings, including some extreme racist elements.

As it stands, ill-informed insult hurling like that amounts to a case of "all mouth and no trousers."

 

I like how your entire thing is 'I do some charity so I am above criticism.'

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

I like how your entire thing is 'I do some charity so I am above criticism.'

Weak.

My entire thing? 

Some charity? What do you know of anything except sitting on an internet forum making ignorant insults?

Change the record.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,562]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

Good to have a contender for 'most disingenuous post of the year' in April.

Even if it was it, would have been immediately knocked off the top spot by the avoidance of the legitimate question with this cheeky bit of deflection. 😉

[Aggy 757]

9 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Is that so?

 

Yes