Defend what?
The Judge seemed to me to get it right.
The way the law is drafted it was not terrorism.
A terrifying and horrific crime, but according to law, not terrorism.
So what is there “to defend”?
Has his warped motive or ‘justification’ come out yet?
My money is on religion,.so it will NEVER officially be disclosed…for obvious (to many) reasons.
The rest of my money aint on The church of Scientology or Quakerism either.
Perfect logic.
If there is an enquiry which finds religion is a cause, you are correct.
If an enquiry finds religion is not a cause, it is because it has been hushed up and you are correct.
If there is no enquiry, it is because religion is a cause and the gov want it hushed up, so you are correct.
Such is the logic of conspiracists.
And religious fanatics. Not much difference in them really.
It looks like I was wrong about a deal for him pleading guilty in exchange for a relatively cushy sentence in Broadmoor after plsying the ‘mental health’ card.
Rest assured if I am proved wrong on this being religious motives, I will again readily admit it…
Admitting when wrong instead of digging deeper holes and looking ridiculously stupid.
You should try it sometime.
Good.
So hoe do you square that with your post:
My usual answer to you when you come out with all this trademark smart arsed sh…(you really must read stuff before posting.)
Answer…
2 syllables/3 Fs.
See if you are ‘smart’ enough to work that one out.
Cheers.
So, the same logic as your take on the law and small vs big operators?
That small operators should have less strict regulations than big operators?
But not that big operators have more strict regulations than small ones?
Brilliant. I think that if you can actually sell that then you should run for Parliament.
Wtf are you slavering about mate?
Edit;…
It’s coming back to me…
Did we have a trivial argument on something like this months… or even years ago ?
Dont answer btw…I DONT CARE !!
You really ought to get a f. Kin life mate seriously, you are an embarrasment.
No enquiry needed. Everyone knows religion was the reason. The same way everyone knows it was a terrorism attack. You and all the other wet leftys can dress it up any way you want but that does not alter what it really was.
You do remember then? 
When you were arguing in favour of two tier rules?
You really are a sad little man.
Do you catalogue all this stuff for future reference or spend hours trawling through old posts just so you can come out on top,.and prove yourself ‘right’ …or at least think you do.
You should go back to view all the crap you posted on a daily basis when the Tories (and Boris) were in power, then compare it with the very few posts you put on about the equally (if not more) inept govt that is in now, to quote your last phrase…‘‘One could say two tier’’.
Said it before say it again…you are the forum clown.
try finding a link where it gives an area of wales that Rudakubana came from.
he was from merseyside. not a welsh choir boy.
here is the rub…
year 9 he took a knife to school with him with the intent of stabbing people.
he attacked pupils with a hockey stick in a school assembly
week before the stabbings his father dragged him out of a cab where he planed to return to his old school and stab pupils. so his parents knew of his plans at least.
he then decides that he is going to a random place aprox 20 miles away to attack kids. he gets a cab that takes him to a specific place (no cab will take you just anywhere you have to give an address) that coincidentally is a place where lots of children are (just by chance you understand.) Then doesnt pay for the cab and the driver lets him walk over to a door try it and then go to another door and walk into the building all with out stopping him as he hasnt paid the fare.
Rudakubana is later found to have ricin under his bed and a copy of a terrorist training manual in his bedroom (that his parents didnt know about apparently.) possession of a biological weapon is covered by the biological weapons act of 1974 and possession of the training manual is covered by section 58 of the terrorism act 2000.
However of course it wasnt a act of terrorism despite being sentenced under the very act.
By the way before anyone tries to critque the source it was from the well known straight talking hold no punches honest right wing source the bbc
Here is the worrying thing. the judge messed up the sentancing and fumbled his words and only sentanced him to 51 days and 190 days.
Both. He’s definitely got a little black book where he writes down every argument and the date it occurred, just so he can bring it up 5 years later to “win” the argument.
Well apparently, although you have made this same suggestion multiple times, so it must bother you how I spend my time, you have never bothered reading my responses. By making the same rather silly suggestion about what I do someone is certainly looking even more of a clown than ever.
All one has to do is type into the search box a remembered phrase from a post, and the poster, and voila! Not hours of scrolling through a thread.
But of course, you commenting on me, or my posting style diverts attention from the content of the post and away from the issues at hand, so …
How do you square your insistence that you would admit it if you were to be proved wrong on there being a religious element to the killings, and your belief that if an enquiry were to find one it would be hushed up?
You cannot be proved wrong (in your view) in that belief because you already think an enquiry would be fixed. If an enquiry finds religious causes you are right, if it doesn’t find religious causes it is fixed.
Classic Conspiracy Theory.
@Newlion is still one up on you though. He doesn’t need an enquiry
Obviously he believes he is some sort of omniscient god himself.
120 times he stabbed one of those beautiful little girls, 80 times another…I mean, Jesus H man.!
Another managed to escape out of a door…he pulled her back in and butchered her.
He badly injured…was it 8 more?
When arrested he said ‘‘I’m glad those kids are dead’’
He then asked ‘How old was the youngest’, when told 6…he laughed!
^^^^^^^
Copied from Robroy’s post in the other thread.
The fact you still cannot just admit what we all know are the reasons why this absolute piece of scum did what he did after reading the above. Just read it for f***'s sake, the horrific brutality those innocent children had to endure and tell me that is not the action of a terrorist religious nut job? The Al-Qaeda manual, ricin found in his bedroom alone should be enough to tell you his motives. Yet in typical Franglais fashion there always has to be another answer. You are a total c**t I’m afraid 
YOU?
Bother me…? 
I dont give a flying ■■■■ about you mate or what you post, I just post stuff in the context of a forum.
I do know how to search for stuff you patronising prick…‘voila’ …I was making a point how riduculous you come across.
Are you REALLY that thick and incoherent that you can not understand the point I made?
Ok I’ll go with it, it seems others understand what I mean but I’ll explain to you as I would a 5 year old.
I strongly believe that true to form anything this lot considers sensitive or delicate from both a religion pov (namely anything Islamic) and a racial pov is side stepped, avoided, or blatantly covered up.
Because of clowns like you and your sort, everyone is walking on egg shells in fear of being accused of racism, or their latest buzz words…‘Far Right’.
So bearing that in mind imo the religious aspect, (or in this case perceived motive,) is avoided at all costs…
So this is the bit you pretend for effect not to understand…
Ok ya ready?
In the highly unlikely scenario of this govt being honest and coming out saying this was a ‘lone wolf’ terrorist attack based on radical Islam policy…
Which I strongly suspect it was.
With me so far?
I would be vindicated.
If it was proven that he was in fact just a welsh choir boy with no religious connections, who just had a bad day…
THEN …I would admit I was WRONG.
That is 10 mins of my life I will never get back.
Go and aggravate someone else.
Labour are either running scared of trump’s taxes or it’s the first step back into a eu dictatorship
first step are you serious. he is doing all he can to get us back in
The EU is not a dictatorship.
Why are some worried about the UK joining an EU Customs Zone?
The Leave Campaign were not clear that Brexit would involve the UK leaving the Custom Union. Before the referendum there was much talk of parallels with Norway or Switzerland, who are in the Customs Union.
It was only the stupid and unplanned Johnson agreement that moved the goalposts to where they are now.
And to be clear, just to remove any doubt, I really think Starmer is wrong here.
He should be pushing much much harder to get us back nearer the EU much quicker.
Brexit is a dead horse. Stop flogging it.