Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Mass stabbing at Southport Kids’ Club 29/7/24

You think the PM and Home Secretary weren’t informed he had an Al Qaeda training manual and ricin? Don’t be silly.

And no, motive hasn’t been established. But pretending there’s no link between these facts and him going to stab a load of little girls seems a bit futile.
The link is most likely that he was looking at how to harm people. Do you think that most people who consult the "Anarchist's Cook Book" are actually anarchists?
 
The law does seem a bit weird. Maybe I'm watching old news here. But apparently this can't be considered as a 'terrorist' offence because there was no 'motive'

He had Al Qadea's guidebook to how to commit jihad in his bedroom. What am I missing?
 
The law does seem a bit weird. Maybe I'm watching old news here. But apparently this can't be considered as a 'terrorist' offence because there was no 'motive'

He had Al Qadea's guidebook to how to commit jihad in his bedroom. What am I missing?

I think the issue is whether or not terror as a motive can be established in a court of law in a mannner that would satisfy the court.

In the court of public opinion I suspect matters will be a good deal more clear cut.
 
How about possession of ricin + possession of Al Qaeda training manual + stabbing a load of little girls in a Taylor Swift dance class?
The Anarchist Cookbook was consulted by the two killers at Columbine High School in the USA in 1999. Their bombs failed to go off, and they then murdered twelve school children and one teacher using guns. Were they terrorists? Were they using violence with the aim of changing the political dispensation in their country?

If someone wants to commit mass murder, how would they go about it? Would they not consult documents that explain how to do so? Would they not try to acquire the means to do so?

Or do people who want to commit ordinary mass murder have a moral objection to consulting documents produced by terrorist organisations?
 
why would starmer and cooper cover it up :hmm:
Because they trying to stop mass riots and civil unrest?
The Anarchist Cookbook was consulted by the two killers at Columbine High School in the USA in 1999. Their bombs failed to go off, and they then murdered twelve school children and one teacher using guns. Were they terrorists? Were they using violence with the aim of changing the political dispensation in their country?

If someone wants to commit mass murder, how would they go about it? Would they not consult documents that explain how to do so? Would they not try to acquire the means to do so?

Or do people who want to commit ordinary mass murder have a moral objection to consulting documents produced by terrorist organisations?
maybe go and research ricin and come back to me.
 
I know what ricin is. What is the point that you are failing to make?
Because it’s incredibly potent. It’s regulated as a weapon at the same level as sarin. This kid could have wiped out most of Southport.

Do you not think counter terrorism were involved? Of course they were. Of course Starmer and Cooper would have been told.

Do you honestly think this was dealt with as a little local incident? Good grief.

ETA I’ve never voted anything other than labour in 40 years of being able to vote Ax^ just fyi
 
Hmm.

PTK is right about ricin not equalling terrorism. And the man has 3 murder charges and 10 attempted murder charges which don't need complicating with terrorism having to be proved as a motive.

But ricin is used in individual murder and could easily be argued out of court as 'terrorism' if not actually used (and this wasn't).

And you might only get 37 months for it in America so it's hardly 'wipe out Southport' territory.



I do, however, think Starmer and Cooper would have been informed and of course care could be taken when that information gets released.
 
Last edited:
Why would Starmer or Cooper "reveal" that it was a "terrorist attack" when the police are not categorising it as a terrorist attack?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ax^
Back
Top Bottom