Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's getting to the point where Stabbings are no longer News-worthy.


People are no longer shocked by such news.


The Government knows that while the people are fighting each other, they are not fighting the Government.

This makes the people divided and weak.. and that suits all Governments.


It's all very very sad.


DulwichFox

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's getting to the point where Stabbings are no

> longer News-worthy.

>

> People are no longer shocked by such news.

>

> The Government knows that while the people are

> fighting each other, they are not fighting the

> Government.

> This makes the people divided and weak.. and

> that suits all Governments.

>

> It's all very very sad.

>

> DulwichFox


No argument with your first point but do you really mean the second part - that the Government is in some way allowing or wanting people to kill each other over trifles?

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DulwichFox Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's getting to the point where Stabbings are

> no

> > longer News-worthy.

> >

> > People are no longer shocked by such news.

> >

> > The Government knows that while the people

> are

> > fighting each other, they are not fighting the

> > Government.

> > This makes the people divided and weak.. and

> > that suits all Governments.

> >

> > It's all very very sad.

> >

> > DulwichFox

>

> No argument with your first point but do you

> really mean the second part - that the Government

> is in some way allowing or wanting people to kill

> each other over trifles?


I reckon it comes down to language, Fox didn't say they want it, but it can suit them - just as George W. doubtless didn't "want" 9/11 (unless you believe the tinfoil hat merchants) but it did suit his agenda of massively boosting defence spending and taking revenge for daddy's defeat in Iraq.

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Frankly I'm not sure Theresa May gives much

> thought to people at all. I think she's more a

> policies and process person.


And what, pray. do you expect her to do?


There was a shooting in Deptford as well

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6424923/london-shooting-man-machine-gun-brent-stabbing-deptford/

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Frankly I'm not sure Theresa May gives much

> > thought to people at all. I think she's more a

> > policies and process person.

>

> And what, pray. do you expect her to do?


Reinstating the ?600m of cuts she's imposed on the Met as Home Secretary and PM might be a good start.

violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can be controlled, most often by cash funding. unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used to determine the best confidence scenario & provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat tails take the form of dead young men these days. the accceptable output of a risk model that has accepted a certain level of fatality as part of the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity programme. these dead young men are the direct result of cold number crunching.

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can

> be controlled, most often by cash funding.

> unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing

> problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most

> costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used

> to determine the best confidence scenario &

> provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat

> tails take the form of dead young men these days.

> the accceptable output of a risk model that has

> accepted a certain level of fatality as part of

> the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level

> of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity

> programme. these dead young men are the direct

> result of cold number crunching.


Truth.

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> violent crime cannot be totally removed but it can

> be controlled, most often by cash funding.

> unfortunately , this is an exponetial costing

> problem - the fat tails are the hardest and most

> costly to cover, so tolerance risk models are used

> to determine the best confidence scenario &

> provide some kind of acceptable balance. These fat

> tails take the form of dead young men these days.

> the accceptable output of a risk model that has

> accepted a certain level of fatality as part of

> the cost cutting. the UKG has accepted this level

> of slaughter as part of its never ending austerity

> programme. these dead young men are the direct

> result of cold number crunching.


But the government denies there being any links whatsoever between for instance benefit cuts and suicides (which to most people would seem a sensible link) - so either they know they are using statistical methods and lying or they don't know what they're doing.


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/13/suicides-of-benefit-claimants-reveal-dwp-flaws-says-inquiry

I was waiting at the lights on my bike on the OKR, next to the taped off area. While i was there (a minute or so) two people separately ducked under the tape and walked across the crime scene; despite the presence of a SOCO in white overalls doing the necessary. The two police on guard went ape and took their names; despite protests from both that they'd done nothing wrong.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course no government will admit it's policies

> kill people - would be political suicide..


of course, but it is all about what is politically tolerable. As much as the headline grabbing incidents are bad news for all involved, it does - rightly or wrongly - lead to the question about how communities( and their members) are ranked and the loading involved in making these economic decisions- if people were being shanked and shot on a daily basis in Chelsea, the situation & outcomes would likely be far different

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm fairly sure everyone engaged with this topic will have received this email yesterday, but just in case... "To whom it may concern, We are reaching out to invite you to our upcoming Residents & Stakeholder Drop In Sessions for Gala 2026. We are hosting two drop-in style sessions (one virtual, and one in person) to facilitate more in depth conversations, allowing us to run through our plans for 2026 and to discuss how we are going to address your feedback. We look forward to meeting you in person or online and discussing our event plans for both Gala and On The Rye Festival in more detail. Evening Session (IN PERSON): Time: 6:30 PM - 8:00 PM Date: Wednesday 11th February Location: Watson's General Telegraph Lunchtime Session (VIRTUAL MEETING): Time: 12:00 PM - 2:00 PM Date: Friday 13th February We are offering 15 minute slots to speak directly with us in a virtual meeting. Please confirm your availability within this drop in period and we will confirm a time with you. You will then be sent a link directly to join the virtual session. If you would like to attend, please respond with: Your name: Your address: If you will be attending the virtual or in person meeting: Your availability for a meeting time online (if applicable): If you have any access needs so we can accommodate: We really appreciate your feedback and taking the time to attend our engagement meetings. Yours sincerely, Community Team | GALA Festival"
    • Many thanks to the woman who looked after our old deaf Miniature Schnauzer who got separated from us in the park this morning. And thank you to the man who alerted us . My husband is very relieved and grateful. If any one knows who these people are please say thank you as he didn't get their names. 
    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...