The coroner has criticised people who took photographs of the carnage and posted them on the internet. Why? Surely we are entitled to see pictures that show the true horror of the attack. Could it be that that the elite don't want the rest of us to see the results of terrorism, for fear we might become annoyed and rise up against the terrorists and those who support them?
Bill
Bill Wright wrote in news:pp2fna$u4b$1 @gioia.aioe.org:
There is a strange mentality with camera phones. Even if something is being professionally videoed for TV people will still take video on their phone. Sigh - Remember decising whet to take 20 or a 36 exposure film on holiday?
Perhaps you could summarise the reasons the coroner gave?
NO I think its more likely that it is rather in bad taste. After all a loved one might have recognised somebody before the authorities contacted them. Brian
Sadly also many news organisations ask if anyone took any pictures and if they are not yet on the internet, have been known to pay for them too. to me this is bad taste and blatantly wrong, yet many papers still do it, particularly regional ones. Brian
Exactly! Another OT turd from Bill in this ng which he treats as his personal sewer, and a depressingly hypocritical one at that - he criticises the coroner, giving supposed reasons for his behaviour that come from Bill himself and are unlikely to be true in actual fact, claiming that we should be entitled to see the full horror of the attack, in other words that we should not be censored, but prevents us from coming to a rational assessment of the coroner's decision, in other words censors us, by failing to link to or otherwise make available to us any relevant information. Either he is cynically trying to manipulate our opinions, or else he is so stupid as to be blissfully unaware of his own hypocrisy.
Having that sort of thing published is exactly what the terrorists want! The clue is the terror in terrorist.
You are over 300 times more likely to be killed by a car, being driven by a non-terrorist, in any given year, in the UK, but the terrorists want you over emphasise the relatively small risk that they pose in terms of vehicle deaths.
I don't get why people video concerts with their phones when they are being professionally recorded and broadcast at much better quality which they can record.
Terrorism is a deliberate act. The others are accidents.
Unless action is taken, terrorist acts will become ever more outrageous. Until we end up like Iran, Saudi Arabia or Sudan.
+1
Ouch!...but let the people and you speak freely.
terrorism, for
outrageous.
"We" is latvia, lithuania, poland, ukraine, estonia..etc. The gutter genes of eastern Europe like harry the genetic settler scum bastard race.
If you are +1, Harry, perhaps you could find out what the coroner actually said.
Bad taste! Half the things on the telly are in bad taste! And anyway who is the arbiter of it?
Bill
What a fantastically complicated load of old cobblers!
Bill
Why is it on a the telly then?
Bill
Why is it on the telly then?
Because it helps us assess the true situation re the terrorists and those who support them. So we aren't kept in the dark. We face a national threat. The public needs to understand that.
Bill
I note that you have no rational reason either for the original OT turd or the above.
e.g. seeing Diane Abbott.
Probably Diane Abbott.
How do you know I have no rational reason? Do you imagine I have nothing better to do than to set out all my thoughts just for you? Your function as far as I'm concerned is to have the piss taken for the amusement of all, no more than that.
Bill
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required