Crime Six Dead and at least Eleven, including a nine-month-old baby, Injured after Mass Stabbing in Sydney Shopping Centre. Suspect shot dead by police.

[Anewt]

Different story but the same type of cover up.

?

Guy was white.... ?

 

[Ruprecht]

It's honestly hard to tell the difference between trolls and dribbling cretins. Some crossover obviously.

 

[spamking]

You jumped into the conversation to argue against someone who was criticizing the bigotry. Like I said no one here got criticized for making an educated guess but when folks started conjuring up conspiracy theories that the authorities were trying to cover up his identify and started reading his sports jersey as Arabic then yeah at some point someone's going to point out the obvious. Why is that a problem for you?

I asked if it was bigotry or playing the odds of who did what based on historical events. I then asked if it was understood what that original assumption was based on and why. The only person folks could say I've argued with is YOU. I most definitely didn't endorse maligning anyone or pushing a conspiracy theory so shove that right on out of your head. How can you read what I asked and immediately assume I had a problem with anything other than playing dumb about where an initial assumption might come from when something like this happens? The only problem I'm seeing here is you decided to chastise me based on your misinterpretation of what I said and continued to do so after I clarified where I was coming from.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I asked if it was bigotry or playing the odds of who did what based on historical events. I then asked if it was understood what that original assumption was based on and why. The only person folks could say I've argued with is YOU. I most definitely didn't endorse maligning anyone or pushing a conspiracy theory so shove that right on out of your head. How can you read what I asked and immediately assume I had a problem with anything other than playing dumb about where an initial assumption might come from when something like this happens? The only problem I'm seeing here is you decided to chastise me based on your misinterpretation of what I said and continued to do so after I clarified where I was coming from.

It certainly comes off as bigotry when posters insist that its a Muslim terrorist based off wild assumptions and against the evidence that's coming out, how is that hard for you to understand? Again posters here weren't just "playing the odds", they were virtually certain that it was another Islamist attack and even when proved wrong many refused to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with what they said.

If you want to come in here and take the gamble that your prejudiced assumption is right then you have to eat crow when you're wrong, why does that bother you?

 

[Ruprecht]

It certainly comes off as bigotry when posters insist that its a Muslim terrorist based off wild assumptions and against the evidence that's coming out, how is that hard for you to understand? Again posters here weren't just "playing the odds", they were virtually certain that it was another Islamist attack and even when proved wrong many refused to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with what they said.

If you want to come in here and take the gamble that your prejudiced assumption is right then you have to eat crow when you're wrong, why does that bother you?

8 posts in I said that police had unofficially identified the attacker and didn't think it was ideological, and the information was over an hour old at that stage.
Almost all the assertions made in this thread about it being islamic terrorism were made after my post, and certainly after the police announcement.
The fact that people can struggle so much with processing information in the information age is a genuine concern.
Especially when the ability for anyone to generate believable, but fake, footage and audio with a simple text prompt is right around the corner.
I guess they've decided to give up and choose their own reality.
People are still posting along those lines even now we have the guys life history exposed, although presumably they are either trolling or otherwise mentally handicapped.

 

[spamking]

It certainly comes off as bigotry when posters insist that its a Muslim terrorist based off wild assumptions and against the evidence that's coming out, how is that hard for you to understand? Again posters here weren't just "playing the odds", they were virtually certain that it was another Islamist attack and even when proved wrong many refused to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with what they said.

Sigh. What is wrong with you? Why do you keep asking me questions implying something I'm not saying and then asking ME how it's hard for me to understand? You don't even understand anything I've said in this thread.

Since you seemed to have chosen to purposefully twist what I've said I'll share something you should've read already just in case you still want to play this game.

This is my post . . . #364 in this thread.

I'm simply saying that regardless of where it happened you can't blame people for their initial reaction to something like this. If additional information refutes their initial thoughts and they still push the narrative, it shows their bias.

So . . . having just read that . . . . how in the world does you asking me the question below make sense?

If you want to come in here and take the gamble that your prejudiced assumption is right then you have to eat crow when you're wrong, why does that bother you?

What have I posted that makes you think people needing to eat crow bothers me?

 

[spamking]

8 posts in I said that police had unofficially identified the attacker and didn't think it was ideological, and the information was over an hour old at that stage.
Almost all the assertions made in this thread about it being islamic terrorism were made after my post, and certainly after the police announcement.
The fact that people can struggle so much with processing information in the information age is a genuine concern.
Especially when the ability for anyone to generate believable, but fake, footage and audio with a simple text prompt is right around the corner.
I guess they've decided to give up and choose their own reality.
People are still posting along those lines even now we have the guys life history exposed, although presumably they are either trolling or otherwise mentally handicapped.

People in this thread are struggling in many different aspects.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Sigh. What is wrong with you? Why do you keep asking me questions implying something I'm not saying and then asking ME how it's hard for me to understand? You don't even understand anything I've said in this thread.

Since you seemed to have chosen to purposefully twist what I've said I'll share something you should've read already just in case you still want to play this game.

This is my post . . . #364 in this thread.



So . . . having just read that . . . . how in the world does you asking me the question below make sense?

The 8th post ITT mentioned that he was identified and that it wasn't ideological, if posters want to insist that the attacker must be Muslim and start making wild claimed like reading Arabic out of a sports jersey then don't you see how from my POV that comes off as a little misguided and prejudiced?

What have I posted that makes you think people needing to eat crow bothers me?

After it was confirmed that the guy was not Muslim the goofballs who were so sure that he was were being called out for their bad takes. You then jump in to say that actually they were perfectly reasonable. That's the timeline of the thread and it hints at which side you're arguing from.

 

[Ruprecht]

People in this thread are struggling in many different aspects.

Eh, you're talking at crossed points.
If you come into this thread and post about how it's not bigotry to make assumptions based on history and current political circumstances, you understand how in the context of posting here that comes across as apologism for posts made in this thread? Rather than discussion of some other theoretical group somewhere else or just the broader situation.

 

[blaseblase]

I saw them on the news last night, geez I felt bad for them. They had no idea what to do with their son clearly, really at their wit's end.

Seems like they could have taught him social skills and how to talk to women.

 

[ObsoleteSoul]

Seems like they could have taught him social skills and how to talk to women.

have you never come across a person that is mentally unwell where that isn’t really an option? Plenty out there.

 

[Ruprecht]

Seems like they could have taught him social skills and how to talk to women.

He should have stuck with the girl from his hometown. She said she didn't even realise he had mental health issues.
Sounds like it was downhill after he moved to Brisbane and ended up on the streets.

 

[TankAbbott4Eva]

Seems like they could have taught him social skills and how to talk to women.

It's not that easy my man, especially with this fella I reckon

 

[Copper Burner]

Eh, you're talking at crossed points.
If you come into this thread and post about how it's not bigotry to make assumptions based on history and current political circumstances, you understand how in the context of posting here that comes across as apologism for posts made in this thread? Rather than discussion of some other theoretical group somewhere else or just the broader situation.

As soon as the story broke, it was reasonable to assume that this was more than likely Islamic terror. Numbers don't lie, it happens all the time there. People aren't dumb. You shouldn't hate on people thinking rationally and using logic.

What should be more concerning is that everyone automatically thinks that it was a Muslim. Try getting to the root problem and fixing that. I suppose it's easier to just call people bigots amirite?

 

[Ruprecht]

As soon as the story broke, it was reasonable to assume that this was more than likely Islamic terror. Numbers don't lie, it happens all the time there. People aren't dumb. You shouldn't hate on people thinking rationally and using logic.

What should be more concerning is that everyone automatically thinks that it was a Muslim. Try getting to the root problem and fixing that. I suppose it's easier to just call people bigots amirite?

Read the other posts.

 

[Natural Order]

Societies that allow clear schizophrenics unfettered access to public life will unfortunately see these incidents. There's really nothing you can do to stop them from happening.

 

[spamking]

Eh, you're talking at crossed points.
If you come into this thread and post about how it's not bigotry to make assumptions based on history and current political circumstances, you understand how in the context of posting here that comes across as apologism for posts made in this thread? Rather than discussion of some other theoretical group somewhere else or just the broader situation.

You're free to think that, but you're wrong . . .

 

[spamking]

The 8th post ITT mentioned that he was identified and that it wasn't ideological, if posters want to insist that the attacker must be Muslim and start making wild claimed like reading Arabic out of a sports jersey then don't you see how from my POV that comes off as a little misguided and prejudiced?

After it was confirmed that the guy was not Muslim the goofballs who were so sure that he was were being called out for their bad takes. You then jump in to say that actually they were perfectly reasonable. That's the timeline of the thread and it hints at which side you're arguing from.

I've already addressed this . . . you're refusing to do anything but continue to push that I've done something I haven't.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I've already addressed this . . . you're refusing to do anything but continue to push that I've done something I haven't.

So what exactly is your point here? You seem uninterested in dealing with the reality of what this thread quickly devolved into to defend some hypothetically reasonable posts.

 

[chardog]

It certainly comes off as bigotry when posters insist that its a Muslim terrorist based off wild assumptions and against the evidence that's coming out, how is that hard for you to understand? Again posters here weren't just "playing the odds", they were virtually certain that it was another Islamist attack and even when proved wrong many refused to acknowledge that there was anything wrong with what they said.

If you want to come in here and take the gamble that your prejudiced assumption is right then you have to eat crow when you're wrong, why does that bother you?

I dont see it all that unreasonable, havent followed this story, but aus has a huge population of "Asians", if someone said the perp was "Asian" or "white", it would be plausible either way.