Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

Who's voting Bruv next time ?

[Geoff Parkstone]

The figure last October was actually 75% Islamic terrorists and 25% far right. Infinitely too high on both counts but probably explained by the fact that there are far more Islamic extremists in the world than far right nutcases.

I?m not one for ?battering? eyelids but it seems simplistic to suggest that followers of Islam have some sort of monopoly where sectarian violence is concerned. Suspect there were quite a few bullets/bombs and car ramming cases in Ireland.

I agree, we all have every right to be angry, and to call out cover ups, but your repeated hyperbole and prejudice helps no one.

Not sure how percentages can be "infinitely too high on both counts". A percentage is merely the proportion of the whole that a particular attribute represents. Thus by definition the sum of said percentages will always total 100% regardless of the number of incidents involved eg if there were 4 total incidents then 3 would be Islamic using your 75/25 hypothesis: the same split would apply if 4000 total incidents of which 3000 Islamic.

[Andy_Faber]

Not sure how percentages can be "infinitely too high on both counts". A percentage is merely the proportion of the whole that a particular attribute represents. Thus by definition the sum of said percentages will always total 100% regardless of the number of incidents involved eg if there were 4 total incidents then 3 would be Islamic using your 75/25 hypothesis: the same split would apply if 4000 total incidents of which 3000 Islamic.

that was sort of my point. And that's either because the originator (in this case because you wrote it rA, but I'm trying not to single you out, I'm trying to make a more general point because this comes up ALL the time) is being lazy in use of the word 'infinitely', OR because the originator is attempting to apportion blame/responsibility equally at the 75% and the 25% which is either (again) laziness regarding basic understanding of quantity impacts, OR a desire to underplay those impacts despite understanding them.. If you're making a purely arithmetical point GP, sorry

[ramAnag]

that was sort of my point. And that's either because the originator (in this case because you wrote it rA, but I'm trying not to single you out, I'm trying to make a more general point because this comes up ALL the time) is being lazy in use of the word 'infinitely', OR because the originator is attempting to apportion blame/responsibility equally at the 75% and the 25% which is either (again) laziness regarding basic understanding of quantity impacts, OR a desire to underplay those impacts despite understanding them.. If you're making a purely arithmetical point GP, sorry

Really can’t be bothered to enter into the minutiae of GP’s arithmetic which helps not one jot. The point was that if MI5 are spending so much of their time watching out for Islamic extremists and right wing extremists it’s a sad state of affairs, especially at a time when both Russia and China also pose greater threats to our security than has been the case for a while.

I genuinely don’t understand your other point, AF. 1) I’m not the originator, the DG of MI5 is, that’s where the description of the 75%-25% split originated and I’m struggling to think of anyone better informed. 2) I only referenced the split and quoted Sir Ken because, yet again TTR tried to slip through another lie/exaggeration by saying that 95% of MI5’s watchlist was taken up with followers of Islam.

That isn’t true, according not to me but to someone who should know. The truth is that 75% of their watchlist is concerned with Islamic extremists and if we’re just going to accept such huge inaccuracies/exaggerations as having any credibility then it calls into question the validity of any debate on here.

[Andy_Faber]

Really can’t be bothered to enter into the minutiae of GP’s arithmetic which helps not one jot.

I have to share the lol at that bit of Abbotism

The point was that if MI5 are spending so much of their time watching out for Islamic extremists and right wing extremists it’s a sad state of affairs, especially at a time when both Russia and China also pose greater threats to our security than has been the case for a while.

That's MI6

If you read back carefully, I was SUPPORTING you by accepting the 75% figure, albeit the originator of that is almost certainly generalising, there is an 'other' category he has missed.

[ramAnag]

Andy, as regards post 2395 and your accusation of ‘Abbotism’. I do actually know very little about MI5 and MI6. Quite willing to accept that, but so, it seems, should you.
You’re right, M16 concerns itself with activities abroad but, to quote Sir Ken McCallum again, ‘MI5 (that’s 5!) has a hell of a job on its hands because Russian intelligence has been on a mission to generate sustained mayhem on British and European streets.
Maybe not such an lol then, well not at me anyway.
I’ll give the other matter some thought and get back to you.

[Trickytreesreds]

yet the hyperbole from the PM, is that being angry and wanting answers , is far right extremism? That is cowardice and covering up.

The authoritys failed massively, and these children were sacrificed for votes from an ethnic monority. Lets make that perfectly clear.
The scary thing is, that population of ethnic voters is growing fast, so how much appeasement and cover ups will continue.

Starmer has to be one of the biggest weasels ever in British politics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLryzAZu-YA talk tv nails it

[Geoff Parkstone]

The minutiae!! LOL. It's a fundamental that percentage points add up to 100. Would you be happier or feel safer if terrorist threats came from 10 sources of 10% probability each? No - it's the quantum of the threat, not the distribution that "scares".

Anyway, we all know that whenever you recognize your own mistake you disengage, rather than admit to it, so no surprise here. At least you've recognized it 😃

[ramAnag]

The minutiae!! LOL. It's a fundamental that percentage points add up to 100. Would you be happier or feel safer if terrorist threats came from 10 sources of 10% probability each? No - it's the quantum of the threat, not the distribution that "scares".

Anyway, we all know that whenever you recognize your own mistake you disengage, rather than admit to it, so no surprise here. At least you've recognized it ��

I’m not getting involved in another spat GP, and neither am I disengaging.
I understand your point about percentage points entirely but it gets us nowhere.
I’ve made two points on here, both of which are based on MI5’s own explanation. One is that they spend roughly 75% of their time being concerned with Islamic extremists and 25% of their time watching right wing extremists. It seems a tad simplistic to me but I’m not going to argue with the head of MI5.
The second is that Tricky has described a 20% increase as part of his argument so, unless it’s challenged people just accept that 95% of MI5’s time is spent on Islamic extremism and that isn’t true.
I know it’s only a tin pot forum that few take any notice of, but it’s also the thin end of the wedge and perhaps it is only because people no longer challenge nonsense passed off as fact that people like Musk, Trump and Farage are allowed to get away with as much as they do.

[Trickytreesreds]

So the issue gets mentioned in parliament and the Labour party boo, heckle , scream far right, shut up and move on, show yet again, how poliiticians care jack squat about justice and whats right. They really are a party of low lifes, who have dragged this into the gutter.
I wonder how they'd have felt had it been one of their daughters?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUWwPJK9Zg