Current Affairs Stabbing incident in Southport

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well that’s kind of the opposite to what happened here. This was a terrorist incident, but there has been a concerted effort to deny this.
Being charged with terrorism offences is not the same as a terrorist incident.

Latest info from Merseyside Police confirms this has NOT been declared a terrorist incident:


That doesn't mean it wasn't a terrorist incident of course. But by you declaring that it is you're effectively spreading misinformation, and that really hasn't proven to have been helpful throughout all of this.

Get your facts right lads.
 
Being charged with terrorism offences is not the same as a terrorist incident.

Latest info from Merseyside Police confirms this has NOT been declared a terrorist incident:


That doesn't mean it wasn't a terrorist incident of course. But by you declaring that it is you're effectively spreading misinformation, and that really hasn't proven to have been helpful throughout all of this.

Get your facts right lads.

I saw this earlier today and It makes no sense to me.

Al Qaeda terror manual & Ricin

= not a terror attack.
 
Being charged with terrorism offences is not the same as a terrorist incident.

Latest info from Merseyside Police confirms this has NOT been declared a terrorist incident:


That doesn't mean it wasn't a terrorist incident of course. But by you declaring that it is you're effectively spreading misinformation, and that really hasn't proven to have been helpful throughout all of this.

Get your facts right lads.
I don't think this was a terrorist incident. My entire point is that the term is basically used a propaganda tool.
 
I just think we’re going to have to wait and see the evidence . I get people here speculating but for those in positions of political responsibility whilst knowing how little the cps/police , and by extension the government, can say to politicise it especially after what we saw a few months ago feels particularly shabby .

The AQ manual is effectively a modern version of the anarchists cookbook it doesn’t mean he’s a jihadist , although it doesn’t mean he isn’t . As I say it’s wait and see as the evidence will be presented to a court the way it’s happened in this country for centuries.
 
Being charged with terrorism offences is not the same as a terrorist incident.

Latest info from Merseyside Police confirms this has NOT been declared a terrorist incident:


That doesn't mean it wasn't a terrorist incident of course. But by you declaring that it is you're effectively spreading misinformation, and that really hasn't proven to have been helpful throughout all of this.

Get your facts right lads.

You have to be really obtuse to not recognise this as a terror attack. The idea that the police and the CPS are the gatekeepers of truth, and that disagreeing with them makes you a purveyor of misinformation is actually really alarming.

Government agencies lie all the time. You’re really quite naive if you are relying on them to provide instructions on what’s true and what is not.
 
To be factually correct, it’s analysis of a terror manual, believed to be by the US military.

May I ask where this claim has come from, because it’s got an awfully strange title for something that was authored by the US military: Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual.

I find it hard to believe that the US would be referring to themselves as tyrants. I also don’t think it would be illegal to own an analysis of a terror manual authored and published by the US government.

I think he’s been found in possession of a terrorist training manual, which is what he’s been charged with, and is what’s being widely reported.
 
You have to be really obtuse to not recognise this as a terror attack. The idea that the police and the CPS are the gatekeepers of truth, and that disagreeing with them makes you a purveyor of misinformation is actually really alarming.

Government agencies lie all the time. You’re really quite naive if you are relying on them to provide instructions on what’s true and what is not.
Government Agencies do not lie all the time. That would mean everything they said was a lie. Of course, they have lied, and on occasions in the future, will lie again but it’s a huge leap of bad faith to state (not even imply) that Government agencies “lie all the time”. There is a genuine question as to who can be relied upon for truthful news, especially as it breaks immediately these days. People simply believe what sits with their world view.
 
Government Agencies do not lie all the time. That would mean everything they said was a lie. Of course, they have lied, and on occasions in the future, will lie again but it’s a huge leap of bad faith to state (not even imply) that Government agencies “lie all the time”. There is a genuine question as to who can be relied upon for truthful news, especially as it breaks immediately these days. People simply believe what sits with their world view.

Okay, my words were slightly incorrect as I don’t believe that there is a government agency that only engages in nothing but lies.

However the question that you pose about who can be relied upon for truthful news definitely doesn’t exclude government agencies, and the idea that we can only rely on them for the truth is alarming.

Government agencies go to great lengths to suppress the truth, and this case is just one of many that demonstrates that.
 
Okay, my words were slightly incorrect as I don’t believe that there is a government agency that only engages in nothing but lies.

However the question that you pose about who can be relied upon for truthful news definitely doesn’t exclude government agencies, and the idea that we can only rely on them for the truth is alarming.

Government agencies go to great lengths to suppress the truth, and this case is just one of many that demonstrates that.

Does it?

The truth has come out, hasn't it?

Isn't it best to the the police conduct their investigations before proclaiming anything?
 
Okay, my words were slightly incorrect as I don’t believe that there is a government agency that only engages in nothing but lies.

However the question that you pose about who can be relied upon for truthful news definitely doesn’t exclude government agencies, and the idea that we can only rely on them for the truth is alarming.

Government agencies go to great lengths to suppress the truth, and this case is just one of many that demonstrates that.
Mate just face it, you've learnt something today - charged with terror offences isn't the same as a terrorist incident. You're just doubling down on your entrenched position, it's unnecessary and ill-informed.

It may well end up being declared a terrorist incident, but until it is just stop banging your drum and declaring absolutes.Just look at the facts we know, because that's all we have.
 
Does it?

The truth has come out, hasn't it?

Isn't it best to the the police conduct their investigations before proclaiming anything?

The world’s never been like that; nobody waited for the outcome of a trial to describe the arena bombings as a terrorist attack because it was obvious to everyone.

Nobody waited to describe the London Bridge stabbings as a terrorist attack as it was obvious to everyone.

Nobody waited to describe the attempt to blow up Liverpool Women’s Hospital as a terror attack despite there supposedly being ‘no discernible motive’ because it was obvious to everybody, and nobody needed the CPS to tell them what to think.

And yes, this is another case of evidence being suppressed, and the government trying their hardest to hide away from the reality.

The continued insistence that we aren’t quite sure whether he’s a terrorist or not when he’s been found with an Al-Qaeda training manual and was producing a chemical warfare agent at his address is patently ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top