BREAKING: "Firearms incident" outside UK parliament

[OutHouse]

Wheres the defense for your racism and ignorance, calling a brown-skinned Asian a middle-easterner based solely on apperance? Idiot.

and there is the racism card.

go away troll.

 

[greatnoob]

and there is the racism card.

go away troll.

So calling an Asian a middle easterner (when it's so obvious he isn't) because of his darker skin colour isn't racist? Are you fucking retarded?

 

[justoh]

Oh I see you take the words of Trump Jr tweets more seriously than recorded history.

His tweet isn't relevant because that statement isn't relevant. Make sense?

 

[sdifox]

His tweet isn't relevant because that statement isn't relevant. Make sense?

You just repeated his tweet, which was proven wrong. Why is it not relevant?

 

[pmv]

Ironically enough, it's now being reported that the killer was Anglo-Nigerian. So neither 'Asian' nor 'Middle-eastern'. Who knows, though, that might yet turn out to be wrong as well.

It may be just a bad idea to use racial descriptors if it's at all possible to avoid doing so. It's so easy to get them wrong.

But everyone must know by now that first media reports on things like this are very likely to be wildly inaccurate.

My personal suspicion is that these things don't have as much to do with ideology (including 'religion') so much as the perpetrator's personal 'issues'. Messed-up people latch onto 'causes' to give their murderous actions a Very Important Meaning and thus make themselves feel significant. Now its Islamism, 50 years from now they'll find something else.

 

[justoh]

You jsut repeated his tweet, which was proven wrong. Why is it not relevant?

I wouldn't know where to start. You're misunderstanding because you can't think clearly.

For the record, trump tweets are one of the more likely things to go into recorded history. Make sense?

 

[WelshBloke]

In case the meaning is lost, Russia is mostly in Asia.

But the bits that the guys were born in that you referred to isn't.

I didn't look up the specific cities in which these individuals were born and raised, and I didn't want to imply that I had.

Maybe you should start looking things up before you post.

My point the whole time was that fixed borders are irrelevant to describing ethnicity and I think a country spanning most of the Europe and Asia continent supports my notion that saying "Asian" doesn't convey any useful amount of specificity.

OK. This still doesn't help your claim that Pakistanis are Middle Eastern. Ethnically they are still from the Indian subcontinent. Pakistan, India and Bangladesh were the same country not very long ago.

Yeah. I concede that's the way Brits perceive "Asian." So they can use it in that context and other Brits will understand.

Lol. Well I'm sure that the BBC and the population of Britain are thankful for your permission.

Just out of interest do you think that Pakistanis, Indians and Bangladeshi people think of themselves as Middle Eastern?

It still doesn't make much sense and there's no reason to claim that sort of use is superior/correct.

Apart from it being actually, technically correct you mean?

"Middle eastern" is not wrong.

 

[sdifox]

I wouldn't know where to start. You're misunderstanding because you can't think clearly.

For the record, trump tweets are one of the more likely things to go into recorded history. Make sense?

Nope. See this post for the links of recorded statements that proves Trump Jr wrong. That is the recorded history I was referring to.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...e-uk-parliament.2502110/page-10#post-38811168

 

[justoh]

Nope. See this post for the links of recorded statements that proves Trump Jr wrong. That is the recorded history I was referring to.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...e-uk-parliament.2502110/page-10#post-38811168

The recorded history is the history that is recorded. Trump's tweets are very likely to be recorded.

 

[sdifox]

The recorded history is the history that is recorded. Trump's tweets are very likely to be recorded.

And him being wrong does not concern you? Double down on stupid is what he did.

 

[WelshBloke]

The recorded history is the history that is recorded. Trump's tweets are very likely to be recorded.

You need to add "as factually and morally wrong" to the end of your sentence.

 

[justoh]

You need to add "as factually and morally wrong" to the end of your sentence.

Purpose? What makes history immoral?

 

[WelshBloke]

Purpose? What makes history immoral?

History is amoral, the people in history can be remembered as moral or immoral.

 

[justoh]

And him being wrong does not concern you? Double down on stupid is what he did.

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. I guess my point was that the tweet wasn't relevant to my tacit endorsement charge, since trump Jr's...- didn't even know there were two of them - tweet presumably didn't contain evidence of khan explicitly denouncing islam. Hope that clears things up.

 

[sdifox]

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. I guess my point was that the tweet wasn't relevant to my tacit endorsement charge, since trump Jr's...(didn't even know there were two of them) tweet presumably didn't contain evidence of khan explicitly denouncing islam. Hope that clears things up

Wait, you didn't know there is a Trump Jr? And did not know about his dumbass tweet?

I apologise for assuming you knew about his tweet and was just repeating it.

Here is the story if you care to read it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...icules-mayor-london-hours-westminster-attack/

 

[WelshBloke]

I guess my point was that the tweet wasn't relevant to my tacit endorsement charge,

Evidence of tacit endorsement of terrorism is incoming from you any minute right?

 

[justoh]

Evidence of tacit endorsement of terrorism is incoming from you any minute right?

Well done disrupting a discussion with another one of your obscure comments. I can't process that sentence.

 

[WelshBloke]

Well done disrupting a discussion with another one of your obscure comments. I can't process that sentence.

Maybe you could get an adult to explain it to you?

 

[Jaskalas]

Why should Khan denounce Islam?

 

[justoh]

Maybe you could get an adult to explain it to you?

You got me. I misread your post, assuming you wouldn't change my assertion, which was tacit endorsement of Islam, not terrorism. You tricked me. Well done. There's plenty of evidence showing him to condemn terrorism. Everyone condemns terrorism, even many of those who endorse it.

 

[justoh]

Why should Khan denounce Islam?

Exactly. Finally someone else who makes sense.

 

[WelshBloke]

Why should Khan denounce Islam?

This.

Being a terrorist is bad.
Being a Muslim is up to the individual. Its not my preferred bottle of beverage but each to his own.

 

[werepossum]

Got to love the media. A radical Muslim runs over a couple dozen people, murders a cop with knives, and is shot, and it's a "firearms incident".

 

[sdifox]

Got to love the media. A radical Muslim runs over a couple dozen people, murders a cop with knives, and is shot, and it's a "firearms incident".

No firearms incident means shots fired. Cops fired the shots but at the time the media only had firearms incident to go on.

 

[mikeymikec]

Got to love the media. A radical Muslim runs over a couple dozen people, murders a cop with knives, and is shot, and it's a "firearms incident".

I just went on the BBC site and they're referring to it as the "Westminster terror attack".

- edit - Westminster Police apparently were referring to it as a "firearms incident" shortly after the attack*. At least two UK news sites refer to it as the "Westminster terror attack".

* - as the discharging of firearms by British police is pretty rare and is "a big deal", it's not a surprise for them to initially refer to this as such. There's usually a pretty thorough investigation on every occasion that the police in this country have discharged firearms, and if it was found to be improper in some way, heads would likely roll.

I'm just wondering if this thread has covered every possible angle, declared the coverage (or official responses) of it to be incorrect in some way, only to find that it is actually correct and proper.