[user104658]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Since most of these crimes in the last few years have been due to Islamic terrorism, it's not a big stretch that is what people think it is when it first happens.

Its not a big stretch but it is a prejudiced one, as I mansplained above.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Its not a big stretch but it is a prejudiced one, as I mansplained above.

As are any posts assuming it must be right wing terrorists if not Islamic. Any assumptions must be prejudice in that case - all or nothing!

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

As are any posts assuming it must be right wing terrorists if not Islamic. Any assumptions must be prejudice in that case - all or nothing!

Correct brillo; any assertion made made based on suppositions / guesswork in an absence of evidence.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Its not a big stretch but it is a prejudiced one, as I mansplained above.

given there has been a history of islamic terrorists using this method to kill people in Germany, its hardly prejudiced to think that it could be the same again.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

given there has been a history of islamic terrorists using this method to kill people in Germany, its hardly prejudiced to think that it could be the same again.

Again, as I explained above, all prejudice means is making an assumption before being in possession of the facts. So it is literally, etymologically, prejudice. It is a pre judgement before the facts were known.

Unless you're claiming that either;

1) it was not an assumption or supposition

Or,

2) the facts were known


... Then you can't possibly claim that it's "hardly" prejudiced. It is definitively prejudice.

[Ammi]

...this is the only information I can find about the two who lost their lives...


The victims were a 51-year-old woman from near Lueneburg, in the north of the country, and a 65-year-old man from Borken, near Muenster. Some 20 others were injured.

[Ammi]

...something I had noticed with this attack when it happened...was that ‘Islamic’ was referred to in the media and reporting...even though it was reported ‘no evidence that....’..etc...it’s still a reference, so I just think it’s inevitable with such reporting that links will be as they e been in the thread...awful reporting by the medias I think...

...and even now, references are still being made in the media...

‘He said there was no evidence linking the suspect to Islamist militancy, and that he was not a refugee.’

...he was someone who was mentally ill, was known to the police...there are things that are known now...why still the words ‘Islamist’ and ‘refugee’, even in the context they’re being used to say that he wasn’t...for me I think...obviously it would associate and link because surely it’s intended to...

[Cherie]

Back to the issue in hand, it is only human nature to automatically assume terrorism when this happens given the state of the world at the moment. I don't see an issue with that, I agree with TS it probably best to wait before airing those views as it isn't helpful.