Katie Hopkins

[notanothernamechangebabes]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4340290/Truth-t-like-says-KATIE-HOPKINS.html

AIBU to think Katie Hopkins is straying closer and closer to the line that separates legitimate "right wing" politics, and unacceptable "far right" extremism?

I find this article a) utterly incoherent in its argument and b) utterly abhorrent in its content....

Yesterday's attack is deeply deeply saddening- we live in London and we're heartbroken that this has happened again- but I actually find Katie's bile almost as saddening and troubling- as I fear these are views held by many many more people... sure these are just words, and yesterday saw vile, violent actions... but those actions would have begun with words of hate and anger too...

The reason the Hindus and Sikhs aren't involved in terrorism is partly because in many cases their first generation were better educated, social mobility is declining your more likely to stay in the same socio economic group as you parents. And also partly because the "unreconstructed colonialist's " feel compelled to invade Muslim countries for in many cases (Iraq) no good reason.

BTW, the Terrorism Act of 2000

"Section 41 of the Act provided the police with the power to arrest and detain a person without charge for up to 48 hours if they were suspected of being a terrorist.[13] This period of detention could be extended to up to seven days if the police can persuade a judge that it is necessary for further questioning.[14]"

"This was a break from ordinary criminal law where suspects had to be charged within 24 hours of detention or be released. This period was later extended to 14 days by the Criminal Justice Act 2003,[15] and to 28 days by the Terrorism Act 2006."

ATM people can be arrested just as long as they are suspects of involvement with Terrorism.

I believe Sadiq Khan is an atheist largely because I hope he is because I don't really like or trust overly religious people of any stripe and I quite like him.

I don't want someone like George Bush who decides to do something crazy because they had a chat with god and he told them to do it.

I wasn't solely blaming the far right and the media for radicalisation, although my post was poorly written so it probably seemed like it. What I meant was that everyone is quick to demand actions from Muslim leaders, to demand responses and change from within the Muslim community without thinking for a second how it could possibly be anyone else's fault as well. Which in itself is ignorant. The people who are radicalised are already marginalised and angry, which is why they're easy targets.

Anyway, i am out. I am beyond offended at your views, Lweji. You are an apologist, without any doubt.

Please come and tell those directly injured, or the families of those killed, that the man who killed their family member, a member of a death cult, just happened to be muslim, and had issues and a violent past. Please tell them he had no political or religious message. Oh wait, you just did.

To be fair to Muslim leaders they do seem to have had a good well organised response to this

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-muslim-leaders-condemn-cowardly-london-attack/ar-BByDM0o?li=AA59G2&ocid=spartandhp

Lweji, I am not engaging any further with a GF terrorist apologise. Have a nice day.

An apologist for what?

Did I say that ISIS had no violent agenda? That they were justified in wanting people dead, or in taking advantage of this man to spread their message of terror?

Did I say that this poor man should be pitied because society failed him?

How am I an apologist?

But, in London one man killed a few people and injured several. Someone who clearly had his own issues. He doesn't seem to have left a religious or political message. He happened to be Muslim and had a violent past.

He just happened to follow the EXACT ADVICE GIVEN BY ISIS ON HOW TO KILL THE NON-BELIEVERS AND THE EXACT PATTERN THAT WAS FOLLOWED IN FRANCE AND GERMANY AND COULD HAVE HAPPENED IN BELGIUM YESTERDAY, more like!

He just happened to follow an extreme path after being converted in prison. Who do you think inspired him? Do you think it's just a coincidence that british prisons have a problem with radicalisation and that is where he converted?! Or don't you think it matters because white people in that prison did awful things too?

It's terrible for muslims that a small percentage of their number thinks this way. But unless the parents and the lovers and the imams make it crystal clear that it's wrong, nobody else is going to have a chance of doing that.

I've been abused in certain parts of London and Yorkshire for being white. I've seen the problems my family have faced - my grandma was the only white person left on her street and whilst most of her neighbours were delightful, some despised her for that. When I was 8 months pregnant, I tried to sit down in a shopping centre; a group of fully veiled women quite deliberately moved so that I couldn't sit near them. This shit happens; it's real; and I don't give a fuck if you're Tommy Robinson or a lady who disapproves of another lady in a short sleeved shirt - everyone has to work on tolerating others.

By pretending there isn't a problem, you make it worse.

Exact advice from ISIS on how to kill non-believers?

It doesn't appear that he discriminated between believers and non-believers.. just drove a car into pedestrians.

Please come and tell those directly injured, or the families of those killed, that the man who killed their family member, a member of a death cult, just happened to be muslim, and had issues and a violent past. Please tell them he had no political or religious message.

Do explain what difference does it make for the families.

This biography might help:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/24/khalid-masood-everything-know-london-attacker/

The truth is that at this point there is no clear evidence if he was acting alone or as part of a big plan. IMO, he wasn't part of a big ISIS plan because he could have caused much more damage and there are no reports of him leaving political or religious messages, before or during the attacks.
But, it is possible that ISIS have been encouraging these lone wolves to act, as it's easier to escape intelligence surveillance. I think we need to wait and see what the police find out.

It's disgusting to call Lweji a terrorist apologist

It's not "possible" that they have been encouraging solo efforts from supporters, it's well known.

Here is the quote.

It's not "possible" that they have been encouraging solo efforts from supporters, it's well known.

Yes, sorry, I meant to say specifically in relation to this event.

any hows my point about KH's article is she's pointing out the obvious in an unpleasant manner as if the British people and politician's aren't very well aware of the problem and taking steps to protect ourselves

Gromit under the anti-terrorism acts NO evidence is required. Just suspicion - go ask those who have been arrested for just being relatives

Facts facts lies and assumptions

Lweji cross post thank you

As predicted discussions about the broader issues of Deash inspired terrorism can't be had as someone is always called an apologist

'The freaks are out tonight'

It is a problem with any violent extremist group. Be it white supremacist, radical islamist, or whatever. People are encouraged to be violent, and it will be those who already have violent tendencies who will respond. Some will feel justified in using religion, others politics, others personal motives; whatever works for them.

I think that if we are to address mass violence phenomena we need to look deeper than a Muslim issue. Extremist Islam is part of wider problem.

BTW, earlier, people were criticising the high number Muslims who thought homosexuality shouldn't be legal (about 50%)

This is a Gallup poll from the US, from as recently as 2003 (quick google):
35% thought it should not be legal, after being as high as 57% in the 80s (not that long ago)!
43% thought it wasn't an acceptable life style.

www.gallup.com/poll/8413/six-americans-say-homosexual-relations-should-recognized-legal.aspx

And on acceptance of homosexuality, as of 2014:
the average for all Christians is about 54%, which means that almost half don't accept.

www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/18/most-u-s-christian-groups-grow-more-accepting-of-homosexuality/

Extreme Presbyterians can be champion shunners, it's true.

I don't think mass American immigration would be a good idea either

So insinuating that anyone who can identify with some of what KH wrote, must not have a balanced viewpoint on life in the UK, serves what purpose exactly?

The article is neither balanced nor informed, so it isn't possible to share KH's view on the attack/London/multiculturalism and also have a balanced and informed view.

In some ways the only things that suprise me about the last two terrorist attacks in the UK - this one and Jo Cox last year is the age of the men involved

It is quite 'normal' for some disaffected young men to go through a radical stage from their teens into late twenties etc

These were both men in their 50's. Both full of hatred and twisted vindications. I am assuming that both sort out 'faction' from perhaps internet sources to validate their views. How many other bitter twisted middle aged men are out there?

Imjustapoorboy the thing they both have in common is that their both second generation baby boomers who are a generation who have been royally stiffed.

If you were born in 1963 then you were 16 in 1979 when Mrs Thatcher was elected so if you vote labour then you didn't have a labour Government until 97.