MP shot and stabbed

[Rhiannon]

I saw that. What was going through the mind of the D.Mail was Why take the rap for filling peoples heads with Right Wing shite when you can blame some hapless psychiatric social worker and slyly make the case for privatisation in the process?

Absolutely, Vlad. It's despicable.

Newsthump noticed too.

http://newsthump.com/2016/06/17/daily-mail-trying-hard-to-avoid-saying-thomas-mair-agreed-with-everything-they-write/

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Absolutely, Vlad. It's despicable.

Newsthump noticed too.

http://newsthump.com/2016/06/17/daily-mail-trying-hard-to-avoid-saying-thomas-mair-agreed-with-everything-they-write/

Spot on.

[Bubbles]

So if it is a Muslim committing an atrocity it = Radicalisation by Islam

If it's a white guy it = mental health issues.

Don't you just love the consistency of approach.

Some Muslims are white guys.

You can be radicalised by reading stuff on  political Islam or Nazi stuff.

Both can make someone have mental health issues, or can make their problems worse.

Anyway in this instance it depends if the attacker has a history of it and needed treatment for it.

The colour of his skin is irrelevant.

If someone has had treatment in the past it is relevant to look at it.


It appears both the killer of Jo Cox and the attacker in the Orlando gay club attack both had treatment for a mental illness of some sort prior to this.

 How relevant it is, needs to be determined.

[L.A.]

I was really impressed by the words spoken by Jo Cox's sister on the news last night. They weren't just moving, there was a great power and a dignity there.

They are obviously a very close and strong family.

[SusanDoris]

I was really impressed by the words spoken by Jo Cox's sister on the news last night. They weren't just moving, there was a great power and a dignity there.

They are obviously a very close and strong family.

Agreed. I was pleased to hear there was no mention of God and wonder whether anyone knows if Jo Cox was a believer or not. At a guess, I'd say the latter.

Just before 10:0 o'clock there was a young man talking about the death of his wife (killed by a car)  and how he told his two-year-old son his mother was dead. He did not use euphemisms like ;gone to heaven' or some such.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm ambivalent about the decisions by the main parties not to stand in the Batley and Spen by election as I feel voters should be given a chance to speak but it appears there will be a vote.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dead-murdered-labour-mp-batley-and-spen-by-election-bnp-politician-jack-buckby-a7089966.html

[L.A.]

I'm ambivalent about the decisions by the main parties not to stand in the Batley and Spen by election as I feel voters should be given a chance to speak but it appears there will be a vote.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dead-murdered-labour-mp-batley-and-spen-by-election-bnp-politician-jack-buckby-a7089966.html

I suppose the people of Batley and Spen would not have expected an election until 2020 so they are hardly missing-out on the normal democratic process, and under the circumstances, no other party would want to be seen to benefit from such a tragedy.

P.S. For some reason the link wouldn't come up before so I missed it's significance. I don't think that guy is going to be too popular.

[Nearly Sane]

I suppose the people of Batley and Spen would not have expected an election until 2020 so they are hardly missing-out on the normal democratic process, and under the circumstances, no other party would want to be seen to benefit from such a tragedy.

If Jo Cox had been hit by a car and killed, the normal political process would have been a by election. 


In addition the move was promoted by Grant Shapps less a day after her murder. Most political parties hadn't thought about it at all at that stage but were then chased by the media to match Shapps position. Given the speed and open declaring of it, it seems to me dpossible that it wasn't somehow calculated  to look good. In part,I dislike that I even think that.

[Nearly Sane]

Article by Jo Cox on foreign policy  has been republished


http://www.fabians.org.uk/archive-jo-cox-on-progressive-internationalism/

[L.A.]

If Jo Cox had been hit by a car and killed, the normal political process would have been a by election. 


In addition the move was promoted by Grant Shapps less a day after her murder. Most political parties hadn't thought about it at all at that stage but were then chased by the media to match Shapps position. Given the speed and open declaring of it, it seems to me dpossible that it wasn't somehow calculated  to look good. In part,I dislike that I even think that.

That's all very well, but who wants to be seen to benefit from a murder? . . .(apart from the likes of the BNP)

[Nearly Sane]

That's all very well, but who wants to be seen to benefit from a murder? . . .(apart from the likes of the BNP)

who would want to be seen to benefit from a tragic accident like an MP being killed by a car?

[L.A.]

who would want to be seen to benefit from a tragic accident like an MP being killed by a car?

These things sadly happen all the time and life goes on - murder is (thankfully) less commonplace and this one was particularly tragic.

[Nearly Sane]

These things sadly happen all the time and life goes on - murder is (thankfully) less commonplace and this one was particularly tragic.

why is it anymore tragic than if she had been hit by a car. Why is it anymore taking advantage of tragedy standing in a by election than had she died of a brain tumour?

[wigginhall]

I wonder if there's a kind of guilt being expressed here?  I mean, that politicians may feel that their campaigning has opened a Pandora's box of craziness, leading to Jo Cox's death.   I'm not saying that this is correct, but that people may unconsciously feel responsible for it. 

[L.A.]

why is it anymore tragic than if she had been hit by a car. Why is it anymore taking advantage of tragedy standing in a by election than had she died of a brain tumour?

That might be an interesting philosophical question but in our society it just is

[Nearly Sane]

That might be an interesting philosophical question but in our society it just is

That's a truism and if applied stops all discussion.

[Brownie]

My opinion is, if Jo Cox had been accidentally hit by a car and killed it would have been shocking and tragic, but an accident;   had she died of an illness it would have been tragic but natural.  She was killed by someone else which is truly shocking and frightening because it was deliberate and showed extreme hatred on the part of another person, very difficult to make sense of.

[Hope]

why is it anymore tragic than if she had been hit by a car. Why is it anymore taking advantage of tragedy standing in a by election than had she died of a brain tumour?

NS, I think the difference is the element of intentionality. 

[Nearly Sane]

NS, I think the difference is the element of intentionality.

How does that make it more tragic?

[jakswan]

I wonder if there's a kind of guilt being expressed here?  I mean, that politicians may feel that their campaigning has opened a Pandora's box of craziness, leading to Jo Cox's death.   I'm not saying that this is correct, but that people may unconsciously feel responsible for it.

Dunno do you think Muslims feel guilty for Islamic extremists? Personally I think that would be daft, any ideology that one might follow should not be judged by an extreme version of it.

From what I have heard of Jo Cox she was comfortable dealing with Tories as Labour and was not at all tribal, you should learn a lesson in this regard.

[Brownie]

To NS (I think): It was deliberate and showed extreme hatred on the part of another person, very difficult to make sense of.

Wigginhall, I agree.  We cannot judge an ideology by the actions of some extremists and it is so wrong that people do.  I would think most Muslims are horrified and, however misguided, feel guilty by association when terrorism is committed by other Muslims, but they are NOT guilty.  It's just a human reaction.  I can imagine I would feel like that in the same position.

[Nearly Sane]

My opinion is, if Jo Cox had been accidentally hit by a car and killed it would have been shocking and tragic, but an accident;   had she died of an illness it would have been tragic but natural.  She was killed by someone else which is truly shocking and frightening because it was deliberate and showed extreme hatred on the part of another person, very difficult to make sense of.

saying something accidental is an accident adds nothing. The question is why this should mean that in one case people standing in a by election would be taking advantage of a tradedy, yet not in the other case?

The best argument I can see in this case is not about trying to take advantage of tragedy but to be seen to present a united front against such acts of terror. And yet it seems in one sense to adapt for the terror rather than confronting it by acting as normal. Further
, my issue about how it was pursued might be seen as trying to gain kudos through being quickest to withdraw. As I said at the start of thus part of the thread, I'm ambivalent about this as an approach, not saying that it is wrong.

[Shaker]

How does that make it more tragic?

I'm afraid it does come across as though you're not grasping the concept of intentionality.

Dying of a brain tumour (or equivalent - car accident etc.) and being murdered in the street are both purely random occurrences, but the latter has an element of deliberate malice to it - somebody purposely ended a life.

[wigginhall]

Dunno do you think Muslims feel guilty for Islamic extremists? Personally I think that would be daft, any ideology that one might follow should not be judged by an extreme version of it.

From what I have heard of Jo Cox she was comfortable dealing with Tories as Labour and was not at all tribal, you should learn a lesson in this regard.

Moderator: content removed.   The day I take lessons from you about tribalism, is the day that hell freezes over.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm afraid it does come across as though you're not grasping the concept of intentionality.

Dying of a brain tumour (or equivalent - car accident etc.) and being murdered in the street are both purely random occurrences, but the latter has an element of deliberate malice to it - somebody purposely ended a life.

No, I'm not seeing why the intentionality makes a difference. Simply saying that something is different in one way doesn't make it qualitatively different in some other judgement. Given that had Jo Cox died in a car accident, or from a brain tumour would as everyone here agrees be tragic, why would standing in a by election in those circumstances not be taking advantage of tragedy, but in this case it is?