To be fair to the OP, his description was correct. The whole point of him going into detail about his weight, gender, skin colour and even beard was to say he knows exactly who the person was, not as a xenophobic response. I truly believe he would have said 'short, thin, blonde, white woman with a mole' if that would have been the person instead. Where his post was ridiculous is that he doesn't see the need for forensics.
I think some people make the mistake of typing online the same things they say in all innocence to their family and friends at home and in the pub. They ought to realise by now that their words will be picked apart by annoying little pricks, who think their role in life is to patrol the internet and challenge the politically incorrect.
No doubt the BBC would as well, but that's just omitting relevant information in the name of political correctness. "Middle-aged man from Kent" - BBC/ Swedish press/ German press version
Well said JD, I thought exactly the same. I thought some of the outrage about his post was, urm, outrageous but it didn't really surprise me.
By gum, I've stirred up a bit of a rat's nest here. To put your happy clappy pc minds at rest, that is those who chose to interpret my "comments" as such, as i did actually say I was not trying to be frivolous, I am not stupid, I watch University Challenge every week and get loads of questions right, I am not racist, although by saying that some of you will say that I am simply by my having said that I am not, I was making the observation that it was blinking obvious who had committed the outrage and what he had done, to whom and where. I just wondered why there was so much effort being put into the forensic side of things afterwards. What else was there to be found, they'd got their man, they knew what had happened, what was left? I was puzzled to see experts still on hands and knees looking for.... what? And yes, he was brown, big and had a beard. I'm big, fat, quite ugly and according to my wife, useless. There. Happy now?
It does allow freedom of speech. You (and others) are allowed to say what you like. Then, because we allow it, anyone can respond to what you said in whatever way they see fit. No-one is barred from criticising you if they disagree. No-one is barred from congratulating you or concurring if they agree.
They can find a lot more out from forensics than just the old 'whodunnit', especially in a case where the perpetrator died. It's about finding any other connections, determining the mental state of the attacker, motives etc. etc. Amazing what they can do with police forensic work these days
To be fair someone posting about freedom of speech usually happens about 5 pages in. Any chance you delete and come back later?
Why would someone posting on a board regularly featuring racist, xenophobic and sexist drivel bang on about freedom of speech?
Isn't there a point where your you just park personal prejudices and just let people grieve and move forwards.
Please enlighten me as to what my " abhorrent neanderthal views" are using facts and evidence rather than your distorted opinions of what you think they might be based on incorrect assumptions. I cannot work out whether or not you are a troll, cannot debate rationally due to ideological constraints or are just a bit thick given you cannot distinguish between someone who is genuinely racist or those of us simply concerned about the adverse impact that mass migration of the type we see currently has on societal cohesion. Perhaps it is a combination of all three. I have lost patience since you rapidly resort to insulting people (not just me) you disagree with indicating a basic lack of intelligence in articulating your POV. (Perhaps it explains why your inbox may be full of abuse )
Good point! However, where did the regularly used term ' British Asian' come from? An oxymoron surely. You are either British or Asian.
It does occur to me that we tend to overreact in these situations. 4 people are dead and several badly injured, I feel sympathy for these people and their loved ones and revulsion at the mentality of the perpetrator. However, the last thing we should be doing is spending massive amounts of time and money going over it all to the nth extent. This is precisely what the terrorists want, without the publicity they wouldn't have the incentive to carry out these acts.
British - nationality Asian - ethnicity British Asian makes just as much sense as British White Caucasian or American Afro-Caribbean.
From a quick look at the scene and then chucking everything in a bin can you tell me whether the ****** went down to the local track and bought the knives himself? Or was it his own knives from his kitchen? If not then who supplied him with them? From a passing glance were the injuries made in such a way that they were likely to be from an untrained man who has gone bat **** crazy and took a wild swing? Or were they the skilled actions of a man who had undergone training? If so were they strikes that had signatures of previous unsolved attacks or of a particular training school? Without doing any forensics and just looking for a second could you tell whether the car was driven in such a way that would suggest it was aimed deliberately at certain people who were targeted? Or was it just randomly attempting to kill as many people as possible? Had any associates been in the vehicle with him? Personally i would not be able to answer any of those questions without using forensics and examining further but maybe you can. Also personally I'm quite keen on discovering whether this was the random acts of a mad man in which case the threat is now gone for good. Or whether it was a planned and co-ordinated attack which means the threat is still there. If you are just happy to say that the front man is dead so jobs a good un then fair play.