hypochondriac

I'm not sure you have.

Interesting first link there. "There are women who don't want to go shopping because there are 20 men in long Islamic dress shouting anti-British stuff and calling for a jihad and stirring up religious and racial hatred. Those are our town centres, and we want them back," Robinson, then still hiding his identity, told the BBC in 2009. "We want them back, not from the Muslims, but from the jihadist extremists that are operating in the Muslim communities. And the Muslim communities need to deal with their extremists." "I'm not far-right…I'm just opposed to Islam. I believe it's backward and it's fascist," he said in 2016. So according to that he's claiming not to be far right but opposed to Islam and he opposes calls for Jihad and women feeling intimidated in public. " He also pushed the common conspiracy theory that British police were refusing to prosecute sexual assault of children by Asian men because they were afraid of being seen as racist" Is that a conspiracy theory? I'm pretty sure it's an accepted fact at this point that police failed to act when they should for fear of being labelled as racist. Like I said, doesn't seem like a nice bloke but those actual quotes from him don't sound extremist even if you disagree.

Sounds like you have quite an interest in this Tommy Robinson character. You could almost say the go to person on the forum for Tommy Robinson knowledge.

Yes I've seen the links to some violence, no doubt he's been rather violent and made some idiotic statements that have landed him in jail. When you say 'clear link' between him and the Finsbury Park mosque attacker, what does that mean? He certainly doesn't seem like a particularly nice person but I was just wondering if there were concrete quotes or unambiguously racist statements anywhere? Don't worry if not, like I said I don't know a lot about him (or care to know much to be honest.)

I think I've mentioned previously I don't know an awful lot about Tommy Robinson but does someone have a link of what he's actually done? Was it nick Griffin levels of blatant racism or something else? I know recently he's been nicked for repeating false claims in contempt of court which seems very thick but not necessarily openly racist.

There's nothing particularly unique about the likes of MOTD and Wimbledon that couldn't be recreated on a non public service broadcaster. Just mandate that it has to be free to air if that's the issue. Agree I'd probably be a lot happier with that option. Bin off bbc pidgin too: https://www.bbc.com/pidgin

I wasn't talking about this issue. I don't blame Starmer personally for child rape gangs. The whole system and people who turned a blind eye in general are all culpable.

Not necessarily related but I wonder if Starmer's record as head of the CPS will come back to bite him at any point?

I would assume every decent person is.

Losing money? He has almost double the net worth of the second richest man on earth...

Appalling. Best not to make assumptions about the potential associates though just to be on the safe side. That would be unreasonable...

I never mentioned anything about it being merely a possibility. I said it was the most likely outcome statistically. Which it quite clearly is I don't see how that is controversial it's factually accurate. And I have no problem at all with 'slagging off a religion.' I resent that some fictional ideology has inspired nutters to kill innocent people and forced authorities around the world to erect bollards amongst many other security measures to try to prevent mass murder. I'd be much happier with that not happening. I hate other fictional ideologies that inspire evil like Scientology as well, it's just that that affects a much smaller group of people.

Indeed. You understand the point but the reason you think the assumption is unreasonable is because it involves a religion which is exactly why I tried to use an analogy for something mundane to try to make the point. If something happens very very frequently then it's not unreasonable to make an assumption that that is what will happen again. The only reason you have a problem with that statement regarding this issue is because it involves Islam.

How many nutters driving into Christmas markets killing innocent people have turned out to be someone other than an Islamist as a percentage do you think? Other than this recent German case which seems pretty suspect, I can't think of any.

You could have responded to the first part of my post if you didn't like the analogy. I'm not even trying to wind you up, I just genuinely don't understand how you could think that Christmas market attacks involving running people over is likely to be anything other than a radical Islamist. I think the fear of being accused of Islamaphobia does weird things to people's brains. What if the next three Christmas period attacks involving running people over turns out to be extreme Islamists? Is it still an unreasonable assumption to make that the next one will be the same thing? How is statistics a difficult concept?

Sigh. I thought I asked politely as well but you've just ignored my entire post. What a shame.

How terrible and depressing is it that these conversations even have to be had. Bollards of peace indeed.

But details were known. I'd appreciate a completely honest reply. When you hear around Christmas time that a potential terror attack has occurred that involves someone mowing down people in a car, are you honestly telling me hand on heart that it would be impossible for you to make an assumption that the perpetrator is likely an Islamist? Because I know you're not unintelligent. To butcher an analogy slightly: If you put your hand into a biscuit tin and pulled out a cookie 95% of the time, it would be a completely reasonable assumption that the next biscuit you take out is incredibly likely to be a cookie yes? Even if it turns out to be a digestive that you pull out next, your reasonable assumption is still not incorrect. How is this style of terror attack at this time of year any different?

It's not news. He's been posting memes and trolling journalists for a good few years now. When journalists contact him for comment they get a poop emoji as a reply.

Thanks. So according to that first link he's potentially someone mentally ill who isn't part of any particular group who chose to emulate a method of killing almost exclusively preserved for Islamist nutters. Doesn't sound like there was much that German authorities could have done to prevent it sadly other than erecting more festive bollards.

Last I heard this wasn't conclusive with significant contradictions on his social media postings. I haven't looked into it too much though so didn't know if there had been an update.

Probably worth highlighting this post from last week. I'm happy to make another amazing prediction that the next attack like this will also be an Islamist nutter. Just call me nostradamus.

Remember it's evil and prejudiced to hear about a car mowing down innocent people over the Christmas period and speculate that he perpetrator is statistically very likely to be an Islamist. Did we find out if this was the case for the bloke in Germany by the way?

Calling @sadoldgitto the thread.