Go ![]() | New ![]() | Find ![]() | Notify ![]() | Tools ![]() | Reply ![]() | ![]() |
half-genius, half-wit |
Whereas the killing of politicians in the US seems to be quite a commonplace affair - three presidents - a gentleman who might have been president some day and various others whose ideas find fatal antipathy from one group or another - Martin Luther King comes to mind - it is an incredibly rare occurrence here in UK, in spite of the commonly-held view that the UK barely operates at a level higher than a bunch of medieval anachronisms. Naturally, then, here the murder of one of the kindest of men to walk the earth, much-loved by his constituents, and deeply respected by all who knew him from ALL sections of the political spectrum is viewed with horror by most, although there is no doubt that a certain element of the population would applaud it. That element is usually those who have fled their own country, most often leaving their wife/wives and children behind, and begged entry in the UK as a new safe haven in which to live without fear of oppressions and mayhem. This permission having been granted, and the host nation having welcomed them with open arms, even to the extent of giving them citizenship, they somehow feel it necessary, by way of saying 'thank you UK', to murder a prominent member of the very organisation that allowed him into the country in the first instance. Your posit about it being a 'random' event holds no water. You don't just amble up to a politician here in UK, in his closed-session, literally one-to-one interview period - called a 'surgery' here' - just like you can't just mosey in to see your Senator. Visits are orchestrated and arranged, and monitored by his staff, although, on this occasion, not closely enough. The verbal interchange between an MP and his constituent are as private and confidential as they can be - just like in a doctor's surgery. Lacking your habits of carrying a defensive firearm with which to blow the MF into oblivion, there was little or nothing that could be done to defend him. No doubt more will come to light in the days to come. | |||
|
half-genius, half-wit |
Meanwhile, here in the 'savage landscape' of the UK, the last black person dangled off a tree and set light to, was, uh........never. ...and the city of Portland OR, yesterday 'celebrated' its one thousandth shooting since the beginning of the year. 'Pot, kettle, non-white' - just join 'em up. | |||
|
Savor the limelight |
Epic rant. For a simple comment you called a man ignorant and then went on to prove his comment to be true. In the eyes of the Essex police, it would seem any religion is the wrong religion and therefore denying a dying man his religious freedom is acceptable. | |||
|
SIGforum's Berlin Correspondent ![]() |
Then there was the Labour MP who survived being stabbed by an al-Qaeda-inspired student of Bangladeshi descent in 2010 because he had voted for intervention in Iraq. And the certified nutbag who attacked a Liberal MP with a Samurai sword in 2000, killing the latter's office manager. It used to be that such attacks by individuals (rather than organized terrorists) were pretty much the reserve of John Hinckley-type nutballs in Europe. That was certainly true for the two major incidents in Germany in the 90s, both non-fatal but putting then-interior minister Wolfgang Schäuble in a wheelchair after being shot in the spine. Lately there seems to be a disturbing perspective of political polarization and popular hostility to elected and unelected representatives of the state becoming a motive though. Two years ago a German district president was shot dead over a YouTube clip of a townhall meeting during the 2015 refugee crisis which was making the rounds on the net again. Unfortunately the UK is probably just a little further ahead in a trend all Western democracies are seeing. | |||
|
half-genius, half-wit |
Dear Mr Trapper189 - you wrote
Please note that these words are NOT from me - but are a quote from Breitbart - hence the use of the words 'quote - Quote - Essex Police’s excuse is all too typical of the mix of officiousness, insensitivity, and “computer says no” bureaucratic intransigence which characterises our modern police. Here is the official statement provided to Breitbart London by Essex Police: As with any police incident, it is of the utmost importance that we preserve the integrity of a crime scene and allow emergency services to tend to those in need. A cordon is put in place to secure and prevent contamination of the area. Access into a scene is at the discretion of the investigating officers. This is a fundamental part of any investigation to ensure the best possible chance of securing justice for any victim and their family. A cordon can also be used to restrict an area for emergency services to administer potentially life-saving medical treatment, in as much privacy as possible and to allow officers to confirm that an area is safe to enter. Yeah, we get all that. You’re the police and everything you do is right even when it’s wrong because you’re the police. But where does that leave the broader fabric that you, the police, are there supposedly to protect? Sir David Amess was a devout Roman Catholic. As Roman Catholic convert (and former Chaplain to the Queen) Gavin Ashenden explains: Last Rites are crucial for faithful Catholics because these are the final prayers and blessings the dying will receive before going to heaven. The administration of the Last Rites is a final cleansing, which prepares the dying to enter heaven rather than hell, as they have denounced their sinful nature. This may seem so much irrelevant frippery to a non-believer. But to a practising Catholic it is absolutely key. We live, or used to live, in a society which protected and indeed cherished freedom of religious expression. In war and peace there are countless examples of priests putting themselves in the way of danger in order to reach the dying faithful at their moment of need. What Essex Police are doing here is declaring that their bureaucratic procedure should take precedence over this because, effectively, as far as they are concerned, such articles of faith have no place in the modern world. And it’s really no excuse, as some of the police’s defenders on social media are saying, that the extreme circumstances of cordoning a murder scene somehow justify denying a priest access to a dying believer, any more than they would justify denying access to paramedics. Death is always an extreme circumstance. That is the point.'[/QUOTE] | |||
|
Member |
People think the police are there to "protect." It even says that on police car doors. In fact, they do not and cannot "protect" you, and the courts have ruled they have no duty to do so. They respond to incidents, gather data, and make reports. That's about it, folks. I thank our British and German members. Your insight is quite valuable to me. I've been interested in the British criminal justice system for several years and keep learning tidbits. | |||
|
Freethinker |
I could comment at length about holding and expressing strong opinions about things one doesn’t understand or even know the slightest about, but I’ll just say that in looking at judicial systems and police practices as a whole, no one in this country today is justified in criticizing what happens anywhere else in the world. Whether the police are armed and who their policies permit to enter crime scenes are the tiniest zits compared to the festering boils of corruption, incompetence, and insane enforcement policies at all levels that American society must endure today. This country is careening on the road to third-, if not fourth-worldism, and what’s happening to law enforcement and the judicial system in general is just one part of what’s behind the wheel. So yes: Pot, meet kettle. ► 6.0/94.0 I can tell at sight a Chassepot rifle from a javelin. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
![]() | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|