ChatterBank0 min ago
Where Is The Real Fault Here?
178 Answers
https:/
Could it possibly be our TROB approach to crime and non-punishment? Surely the savage should not have been out on the streets in the first place. Blaming the security services is like blaming the sheep dog for not rounding up all the sheep after you let them out.
Could it possibly be our TROB approach to crime and non-punishment? Surely the savage should not have been out on the streets in the first place. Blaming the security services is like blaming the sheep dog for not rounding up all the sheep after you let them out.
Answers
AH, if he killed because he was a psychopath you must concede that an awful lot of psychopaths adhere to Islam. Furthermore, Islam cannot be compared to any other religion and until apologists acknowledge that, the world is fighting this appalling philosophy with one hand tied behind its back. People like you do no one except Islamic extremists any favours...
17:22 Fri 28th May 2021
When did it all start, when did all these muslims start pouring into my country ?? We're being taken over slowly but surely and I am GLAD I won't be around to see the end results !!! And a-h you can come on and pontificate all you like, and anybody else for that matter, I don't give a toss - we've let too many of them in and allowed them to impose their culture onto ours to our detriment, and actions such as those of this scum are the tragic end result.
AH: "Mr Khan didn;t kill people because he is a Muslim, he killed them because he was a psychopath.
The two are actually mutually exclusive, although when you read the endless threads on here, it's difficult to keep that in mind." - rubbish, he may well be a more exuberant and enthusiastic devotee than many but he believes he is slaying the infidel in line with the wishes of Allah.
The two are actually mutually exclusive, although when you read the endless threads on here, it's difficult to keep that in mind." - rubbish, he may well be a more exuberant and enthusiastic devotee than many but he believes he is slaying the infidel in line with the wishes of Allah.
TTT - // ... apologists like AH. //
I am not, and never have been an 'apologist' for terrorists.
You have accused me of that several times now, and each time I deny it - because the evidence of my posts on the subject, and there are hundreds of them, bear no hint of 'apology' whatsoever.
Feel free to apologise for your unwarrented slur - I'm here most days.
I am not, and never have been an 'apologist' for terrorists.
You have accused me of that several times now, and each time I deny it - because the evidence of my posts on the subject, and there are hundreds of them, bear no hint of 'apology' whatsoever.
Feel free to apologise for your unwarrented slur - I'm here most days.
"Surely the savage should not have been out on the streets in the first place."
Under what legislation could his release have been prevented?
"Upon his release, Khan was assessed as being more dangerous than when he went into prison, and there was seen to be an imminent risk of him causing serious harm to the public.
While he was still an inmate, the security services launched a new covert investigation, which became a priority inquiry after intelligence was received that Khan would carry out an attack once he was freed.
But the intelligence was never shared with Khan's probation officer nor the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) panel that managed him in the community. MAPPA did not even know that Khan was being investigated by MI5 - one of whose officers often secretly attended the panel's meetings."
Are those in MI5 who were aware of the intelligence not responsible for their failing to inform others?
Under what legislation could his release have been prevented?
"Upon his release, Khan was assessed as being more dangerous than when he went into prison, and there was seen to be an imminent risk of him causing serious harm to the public.
While he was still an inmate, the security services launched a new covert investigation, which became a priority inquiry after intelligence was received that Khan would carry out an attack once he was freed.
But the intelligence was never shared with Khan's probation officer nor the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) panel that managed him in the community. MAPPA did not even know that Khan was being investigated by MI5 - one of whose officers often secretly attended the panel's meetings."
Are those in MI5 who were aware of the intelligence not responsible for their failing to inform others?
TTT - // AH: "Mr Khan didn;t kill people because he is a Muslim, he killed them because he was a psychopath.
The two are actually mutually exclusive, although when you read the endless threads on here, it's difficult to keep that in mind." - rubbish, he may well be a more exuberant and enthusiastic devotee than many but he believes he is slaying the infidel in line with the wishes of Allah. //
Whatever the reasons offered by the psychopath for his killing - be it this individual claiming it was 'Allah's will', or Peter Sutcliffe claiming it was 'God's voice' - the simple inescapable fact remains - murdering a complete stranger is the action of a psychopath.
The reason is not the issue - that is simply something for the individual to hang his behaviour on because, as i have pointed out many times, that's human nature, ensuring that we can think the best of ourselves.
It means he can look in the mirror and say "I'm doing God's / Allah's work ..." which makes him feel superior and self-righteous, rather than stating the truth which is "I want to kill complete strangers because I am a deeply disturbed and damaged human being with a possibly incurable psychosis governing my behaviour."
It's not Islam that makes extremists kill people, it's psychological damage, Islam is simply a convenient peg to hang it on for the perpetrators, and those who want to blame things on a nice simple aspect of another culture that they fear because they don't understand it.
The two are actually mutually exclusive, although when you read the endless threads on here, it's difficult to keep that in mind." - rubbish, he may well be a more exuberant and enthusiastic devotee than many but he believes he is slaying the infidel in line with the wishes of Allah. //
Whatever the reasons offered by the psychopath for his killing - be it this individual claiming it was 'Allah's will', or Peter Sutcliffe claiming it was 'God's voice' - the simple inescapable fact remains - murdering a complete stranger is the action of a psychopath.
The reason is not the issue - that is simply something for the individual to hang his behaviour on because, as i have pointed out many times, that's human nature, ensuring that we can think the best of ourselves.
It means he can look in the mirror and say "I'm doing God's / Allah's work ..." which makes him feel superior and self-righteous, rather than stating the truth which is "I want to kill complete strangers because I am a deeply disturbed and damaged human being with a possibly incurable psychosis governing my behaviour."
It's not Islam that makes extremists kill people, it's psychological damage, Islam is simply a convenient peg to hang it on for the perpetrators, and those who want to blame things on a nice simple aspect of another culture that they fear because they don't understand it.
TTT - // I'll apologise when you stop apologising for them, deal? //
Find me one post on any thread where I have apologised for the actions of a terrorist - not a Muslim terrorist, any terrorist will do, and I will apologise in big capital letters.
Hint - don't waste too much time looking for it - like your senses of perspective, reason, courtesy and education, it's not there.
Reply by all means, but my exchanges with you on this thread are concluded.
Find me one post on any thread where I have apologised for the actions of a terrorist - not a Muslim terrorist, any terrorist will do, and I will apologise in big capital letters.
Hint - don't waste too much time looking for it - like your senses of perspective, reason, courtesy and education, it's not there.
Reply by all means, but my exchanges with you on this thread are concluded.
douglas - // As opposed to a nice and simple 'psychological damage' label we suppose. //
Once again you are speaking for an unamed group of people who I assume have appointed you their spokesperson?
If you could clarify to whom you are addressing your post, and to what you are referring, I am sure the appropriate AB'er can respond, once they know who they are.
Once again you are speaking for an unamed group of people who I assume have appointed you their spokesperson?
If you could clarify to whom you are addressing your post, and to what you are referring, I am sure the appropriate AB'er can respond, once they know who they are.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News3 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.