[Closed] Driver kills multiple cyclists tonight in New York

Thank Christ I live nowhere near a city or town likely to be attacked next, you couldn't pay me enough to live somewhere like London at the moment

It must be quite horrible to be so paranoid all the time !

The Las Vegas attack, for some Americans, typically those on the left, represented the terrorism of unchecked gun laws.

Classifying the Las Vegas attack as terrorism might mean classifying guns as national threats requiring a response. The right would see this as an attempt to tar all gun owners and conservatives.

Attacks like the one in New York, led by a man from Uzbekistan who shouted “Allahu akbar,” are seen by many on the right as stemming from the wider threat of uncontrolled Muslim immigration. If it is an act of terrorism, as Mayor Bill de Blasio and others have defined it, then the attacker cannot be dismissed as a disturbed loner.

More than 16 years after the Sept. 11 attacks, many Americans, particularly on the left, are questioning the readiness with which lone Muslims are defined as terrorists while lone non-Muslims are deemed “mass shooters.”

Even if the label fits in individual cases, they say, the inconsistency suggests a tendency to see Muslims as part of a hostile fifth column and white male killers as exceptions.

You should check out the statistics of the 100s of things more likely to kill you than terrorism then even in central London

Citation or else nonsense.

Deviant has more feelings on his side against Muslims. No matter how you spin 'statistics' they don't beat real-life threats and feelings of threats.

If you (for instance) as a cyclist in your town were (say) 15x times more likely to die on yr bike than be killed by an Islamaniacal terrorist- would you stop riding your bike? Or would you just move to somewhere with a smaller/non-existent Muslim population?

Malvern Rider - Member

If you (for instance) as a cyclist in your town were (say) 15x times more likely to die on yr bike than be killed by an Islamaniacal terrorist- would you stop riding your bike? Or would you just move to somewhere with a smaller/non-existent Muslim population?

I'd be amazed if I'm not at least 15 times more likely to die on my bike than be killed by a terrorist. I'll neither stop riding, or move, because the actual risk of either is small whereas the risk of having your life impacted by a change of behaviour is 100%

(essentially the odds of being killed by a terrorist are 1% of **** all, and no matter where you go in the UK it's 1% of **** all, + or - .1%. And you're roughly as likely to die of falling out of a window as you are to die while cycling)

Malvern Rider - Member

Deviant has more feelings on his side against Muslims. No matter how you spin 'statistics' they don't beat real-life threats and feelings of threats.

Statistics [i]are[/i] real life threats- that's how they work, you take the real life things and add them up. Feelings of threats are sadly not very connected to actual threats- fear of crime often rises as crime falls for instance. Obviously we have to deal with the real threats before the perceived ones, otherwise we'll go around striving to make people feel safer, while actually making them less safe. Fear of crime is generally best tackled with reason rather than police.

Or as the man said, fear of zombies is at an all time high but we don't demand that the government has an initiative to urgently tackle the zombie outbreak.

The actual incidence of being killed by a terrorist today is lower than at any time in the 70s and 80s and much of the 90s. But people are way more scared of terrorism than they were then. Comes a point where you have to say, get real. Be scared of the bloomin flu, which kills 350 times more people in an average year than terrorism.

[img] [/img]

Stats are older from 2009 but still relevant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain#2010s
Total terrorism deaths in the UK since 2010 was 38

In contrast back in 2014
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
The UK recorded 594 Murders - 15x the terrorism deaths in 7 years
In 2016 125 Cyclists were killed 3.2x the terrorism deaths in 7 years
https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/casebook/cycling-fatalities-2016/
Rough maths has that at 23x more likely

If you (for instance) as a cyclist in your town were (say) 15x times more likely to die on yr bike than be killed by an Islamaniacal terrorist- would you stop riding your bike? Or would you just move to somewhere with a smaller/non-existent Muslim population?

Deviant has more feelings on his side against Muslims. No matter how you spin 'statistics' they don't beat real-life threats and feelings of threats.

For the US Perspective take a scroll through this list and tell me which groups we should be most fearful of
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255a.html

being sucked in by media reports and some of the hyper active anti islam BS doesn't help either.

Thanks for the graphs etc. Probably lefty apologist cookery. TBH I'd prefer to be 'sucked in' by Deviant and ilk, because he/she confirms my fears and prejudices while 'statistics' are just numbers and 'damned lies' (as the man said). Better safe than sorry. I hope another terrorist attack doesn't once again prove you wrong. Apologist-'statistics' can change very quickly. Like the widths of goal-posts. Even if in a given area there are X1000 more muggings, drunken assaults, rapes, knife attacks etc etc than there are Islamaniac terrorisms - NONE of those 'threats' compare to the vileness and certainty of a terrorism attack. Not now. Not ever. So statistics be damned. Real life trumps all fake news.

. Not now. Not ever. So statistics be damned. Real life trumps all fake news.

So we dont treat Cancer because more people are dying of Heart Disease?

Terrorism by default is supposed to create disproportionate fear.

Wilburt we make priorities, the fear of terrorism is far greater than the hance of it happening full stop. The more you change the more it impacts. Some of the crap proposed will not help anything and alienate more moderates and push people to feel persecuted. The stats show what the likelihood is you can either work with that or run from it, the UK and most western nations spend disproportionately on terrorism compared to illness and other causes of death. Look at the US this week proposing extreme vetting and visa overhaul plus sending the guy to Guantanamo. Compare that to the massive action taken on gun control when a guy massacred 59 people from the comfort of his hotel room.

That's the discrepancy that irks me mike.

Las. Vegas massacre: it's still "too soon" to talk about gun control.

New York; immediate action to increase the extreme vetting procedures despite no indication that would have prevented it.

So we dont treat Cancer because more people are dying of Heart Disease?

@wilburt you are wasting your time. Their ridiculous argument gets rolled out on here pretty much everytime there is a terrorist attack.

No such thing as race eh ? That’s just a massive facepalm and a great example of why students should pay for tuition, if they want to part with cash to listen to that then good luck to them.

How many people have died in terrorist attacks in the US this year? Are you counting the white guys shooting people in that?

Their ridiculous argument

A couple of posts up you have someone on "your side" saying that facts are just fake news and it is feelings that really matter.

I prefer objective rationality thanks.

I want to know why the BBC keep referring to the driver as "the accused" as if there's any doubt that he's guilty.

You are innocent until proven guilty by a court. Be thankful of that

Malvern Rider - Member

TBH I'd prefer to be 'sucked in' by Deviant and ilk, because he/she confirms my fears and prejudices

I feel a bit like I've been duped by a clever troll here? If so, good work!

If not, [i]terrible[/i] work.

My faith in the trolling ability has been knocked in this place, some are just obvious but far too many actually mean what they say it seems.

Poe's law almost invoked. PS I'm not a bad person

No such thing as race eh ? That’s just a massive facepalm and a great example of why students should pay for tuition, if they want to part with cash to listen to that then good luck to them.

Eh? Do you get a different genetics course from a private university? Money may buy you many things - yachts and such - but I think the laws of biology work the same for the rich.

, it's a religion FFS and its fair game, racism isn't but they're different and the only people who can't see that are those trying to stifle debate.

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?
(I'm NOT suggesting race should be fair game, just in case someone jumps to the wrong conclusion)

Because religion is just an idea, it can be wrong and probably is (unless they are all true) so is open to challenge, ridicule or dismissal.

Mike, I think everyone gets the gun crime point, so yes reaction should be proportionate.

What would your suggesrion be to address the problem of Extreme Islamic Terrorism?

What would your suggesrion be to address the problem of Extreme Islamic Terrorism?

Can you answer the question or just make smart arsed whataboutery remarks?

What's whataboutery about it? You're wasting your time worrying about Extreme Islamic Terrorism, despite what the papers want you to think, there's a shiteload of other things far more likely to kill you.

Actually, to directly address the question, I'd cease all UK military operations not related to intelligence in the Middle East and launch a huge humanitarian and education drive.

1)Stop selling weapons to and or bombing far away countries.
2) Stop SA investing money in the spread of Islam in the west and stop doing business with them until they sort their human rights out.
3) Regulate what happens in Islamic churches and schools, hint of extremism shut them down.
4) Remove driving licences from criminals, this a more general suggestion. 5yr bans for all convicted nutters whether its a driving related offence or not.
5) (edit add)Licence internet users.

You mean like my first suggestion two pages ago?

It was called "Bold and Shouty" by another poster btw.

If you'd have stopped at your first point you could call it sensible, but the rest are a mix of 6th Form shouty and scary Police-State.

Your anti-Islamic guff is a bit shouty, yes, especially given the negligable risk terrorism poses to us in our ivory towers in the west. Agree with your point 1, point 2.1 is a bit woolly (how are you going to put the request to the Saudis?) although I agree with 2.2, but the rest is mildly hysterical nonsense. So not really like your suggestion, no.

4) Remove driving licences from criminals, this a more general suggestion. 5yr bans for all convicted nutters whether its a driving related offence or not.
5) (edit add)Licence internet users.

Regards #4, why?

As for #5, that's just mental.

I actually think 5 is the most likely.

Much of the disinformation voices on this thread are complaning about is spread by bot net users presenting themselves as individuals but likely to be code paid for by political movements.

Bots are used by all UK political parties and Russian propaganda reached 126 million US voters before they voted in Trump.

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

If we get rid of the bots, d'you think it'll stop your irrational fear of Islam? 🙂

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

Basically one chooses ones religion and it may be right or wrong but one does not chooses once race and it cannot be right or wrong.
You can challenge me for being a vegan - its a choice/opinion - being white was not a choice.

All opinions can be "fair game" basically

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

I dont do FB or twitter so , unless they are on here, they did not get to me.

Much of the disinformation voices on this thread are complaning about is spread by bot net users

so not in Mosques? Your point #3 seems to suggest that it's radical preachers.

But either way, both of these things are pretty much anathema to an open and free society, and introducing them would be a victory for terrorism, no?

If you think that isnt reason enough to validate web users as human I doubt theres much else I could say.

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

To answer that question we'd really have to have a clear definition of "race". Do you have one?

Race and religion are different, that's obvious, but can you explain why you think religion is "fair game" whereas race isn't?

'Fair game' can be defined as:

'acceptable to criticize'.

Does it now make sense in the context of your inquiry?

Also - what DrJ said.

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

You could say how on earth it would be achieved and by whom?

If zwift can validate I'm a real person and my race results are genuine power (or lack of) I suspect Twitterbook etc could validate its users are real people or not.

It doesn't even have to be compulsory, a voluntary scheme would be sufficient to undermine everyone/thing else.

so not in Mosques? Your point #3 seems to suggest that it's radical preachers.

Your not really getting it nick, its not entirely one side or another, its a range of contributory factors. I'm capable of seeing that.

Are you?

'Negligible risk' and 'irrational fear' are two excellent examples of the mental disconnect afflicting many folk like Pondo. Yey, let's ignore the ever growing shitstorm cos it doesn't exist.

I always like to get my lectures on mental disconnect and race relations from brietbart reading trump fans. IF you cannot trust their moral compass about the ensuing shitstorm - is a it a threat to our very way of life- then whose can you trust. Are you still saying black lives matter is racist?

PS missed you when the white dude shot all those fok for some reason that thread passed you buy unlike any thread with a Muslim angle- though to be fair you did praise nigel for attacking the "jewsih lobby" so you are at least reaching out with your bigotry.

'Negligible risk' and 'irrational fear' are two excellent examples of the mental disconnect afflicting many folk like Pondo. Yey, let's ignore the ever growing shitstorm cos it doesn't exist.

especially given the negligable risk terrorism poses to us in our ivory towers in the west.

My view is without the extensive anti-terorrism efforts of the police and intelligence services there would be a very significant increase in actual attacks with comensurate increase in the dead and injured. This is not to mention the scenario where “we” took action against IS in Iraq and Syria in particular.

Also fwiw I do not agree with the view that we face a neglible risk from terrorism (be that Islamic Jihadist today or Irish Catholic in the past)

pondo I could post up quite a long list of Jihadist terrorist attacks in Europe and/or targetting Europeans in the past 5 years. As for the IS their whole strategy is based upon eliminating terrorst attacks on their own soilmas their number 1 priority. Vast majority of US gun deaths are suicides or inter gang/criminal violence. I am sure if you made a list of terrorist related deaths in US including 9-11 Al-Q) and Oklahoma/Church (ie right wing extremist) it would be similar (larger) than total school shootings for example.

Don't just speculate, do the math. And we're not just looking at school shootings, BTW - my argument relates to US gun deaths vs US deaths from terrorism. Go on - you tell me.

Edit - d'you know what, I'll even let you take out suicides.

its a range of contributory factors. I'm capable of seeing that.

well, there are already laws in place to stop incitement of violence, religious and race hatred and so on; and mosques, churches, and gurdwaras, synagogues and everything else is covered, so we don't need 3.

The internet is vastly hugely massively used by machine to machine, and that is only going to get biggerer and biggerer. There's is no practical method you could apply (without it being a massive intrusion on everyone) to identify just humans, and nor would you need, or want to. Islamist propoganda is teeny by any measurable method. What's required is education, not restriction or prohibition.

So that's 5 taken care of.

There are no simple methods of getting rid of any Terrorism, it takes empathy, and a willingness to compromise, and politicians brave enough to bring people around to that POV when violence and rhetoric are vastly more popular and easy.

All terrorism that there has ever been is finally resolved by talking, and every time we go through this ridiculous dance of politicians wanting to be seen to be strong. Pointless and expensive wars that achieve nothing other than a steady supply of bodybags and atrocities, and eventually state-mate and talks...This will be no different, the only thing that ever changes is how long it takes to realise it.

pondo I could post up quite a long list of Jihadist terrorist attacks in Europe and/or targetting Europeans in the past 5 years.

Look let's not be all pc liberal about it. There's a problem in the western world and there is a very high chance the name of involved will be Muhammad. Come at me.

30,000 jihadis in the UK, only the top 10% are monitored 24/7 at a cost of £9 billion pa, none of the most recent attacks were carried out by those 10% and how many impending attacks on the UK have been thwarted? Those deniers insisting the sky ain't blue are frankly delusional.

list the birth place and place of residence of the people involved

Islamic Jihadi terrorists can have a passport from many countries the UK included.

Terrorism is THE major domestic security threat we face in the UK and is a very significant risk abroad for UK citizens too. That’s why Tourism numbers to Egypt and Tunisia have collapsed

@pondo Gang violence, criminals shooting each other, suicides etc .... a very significant number of Americans understand they dominate the shooting fatalities. You (and Mike) are going to convince precisely no one with the facetious “numbers” argument.

Mike there was a big BBC focus piece this week on gun and knife crime in the UK. I don’t know many people who think that’s a more serious problem than Islamic Jihadi terrorists. Certainly not me.

So no-one's prepared to post numbers, then. Shall I find some for you?

Mike there was a big BBC focus piece this week on gun and knife crime in the UK. I don’t know many people who think that’s a more serious problem than Islamic Jihadi terrorists. Certainly not me.

So you choose to live in fear of something that is very unlikely to happen?

Had a talk yesterday from an air ambulance doctor, amazing stuff, he'd been at London bridge and Westminster attacks.

Didnt discuss details of that much, more focused on reducing deaths from knife crime (shockingly poor survival rate) and cyclists with crushed pelvis under back of lorries.
Trying out new techniques for improving survival- a neck clamp for knife wounds and stents for keeping hearts going if run over (both of which could've been applicable to those terrorist attacks.)

Unfortunately for you lot he was asian, possibly muslim, so mostly to be feared or something, whatever your point actually is? ( Tho not called Mohammed)

kimbers - Member

Had a talk yesterday from an air ambulance doctor, amazing stuff, he'd been at London bridge and Westminster attacks.

Wow that's incredible. What are the chances that you'd even meet someone who was involved in two terror attacks. I mean, the chances of being involved in one is so astonishingly small that you could probably live your life and never meet anyone ever affected by terrorism. Right?

Honestly, you mock the Americans for their "thoughts and prayers" approach to gun violence and then you do the exact same thing with "it's statistically so unlikely..." every time there's an islamist terror attack. Both are equally worthless arguments that involve putting your head in the sand and refusing to discuss the issue.

Let's discuss it, then - Farage was on the radio after the NY attack saying it's the duty of the president to protect the nation. What would reduce deaths more, imposing UK-style gun laws or banning muslims from entering the country? Discuss.

Wow that's incredible. What are the chances that you'd even meet someone who was involved in two terror attacks. I mean, the chances of being involved in one is so astonishingly small that you could probably live your life and never meet anyone ever affected by terrorism. Right?

Unless it's your job to be a first responder at terrorism attacks??

No one is denying that there hasn't been a surge of islamic terrorism attacks ever since we invaded Iraq and it's certainly been fueled by the rise and fall of IS in Syria, Iraq, Libya. Not to mention disenfranchisement seen amongst the poorest ever since the banking crisis that we've never recovered from.

Hating on Islam isnt going to fix it and so far that's about all this thread has mustered, I'm all for better monitoring of suspected terrorists, of course thats been made harder by austerity slashing police effectiveness, just as May was warned.

I cycle through London every day, it's not nutters with knives that worry me, it's trucks turning left, imho that's a healthy fear to have as opposed to be being cowed by terrorists!

pondo - Member

Let's discuss it, then - [b]Farage, the president, gun laws, banning muslims[/b]

Amazing. Such a subtle slight of hand I almost didn't notice it 🙄

Hating on Islam isnt going to fix it and so far that's about all this thread has mustered,

Please point out the hatred? Unless you're confusing criticism with hatred? Does criticism = hatred? Are we not allowed to be critical of beliefs or belief systems? Or is that now racist since there's no such thing as race there's only cultural diversity so to be critical of the belief system of a group of people who celebrate a certain culture is to be xenophobic and therefor racist? Sound about right?

This unswerving defense of an ideology that obviously has problems is IMO just as bad (and unhelpful) as a far right standpoint.

Surely your capable of taking something other than a binary position?

TBH I'm coming to the conclusion that the only thing that will resolve this is a few generations to die off in time and younger people who wont give a **** about Allah or what your Gran did in the war to come to power.

Can be as critical of Islam as any other religion as you like, infact please do, claiming that something like trump's Muslim ban or even his extreme vetting on entry of someone like this seems not to work.
He appears to have become radicalised after entering the states, I wonder what could've helped convince a guy who'd lived and worked peacefully in the US for the last 6 years that America was the enemy of Islam??
[img] [/img]

oh look , lets bring trump into it. any excuse

Amazing. Such a subtle slight of hand I almost didn't notice it 

This unswerving defense of an ideology that obviously has problems is IMO just as bad (and unhelpful) as a far right standpoint.

rmacattack - Member
oh look , lets bring trump into it. any excuse

Erm yeah, lets bring Trump into a debate about an Islamic Terror attack in America ?

but it was happening under bush and barack as well.

Well whoever said that it was not looks pretty foolish now - who was it ?

This unswerving defense of an ideology that obviously has problems is IMO just as bad (and unhelpful) as a far right standpoint.
Surely your capable of taking something other than a binary position?

30,000 jihadis in the UK,

Potential jihadhis and its 23,000 as I know you care about facts - Oh what about the right wing folk on trial currently for trying to murder an MP - any comment on the real threat these folk and their brethren pose to us all or do you want to deny the sky is blue?

We mainly agree its a problem some think demonising them all wont hep - its possibly because we know what happened in the troubles when we tried this approach rather than because we dont think its a problem

Some think the way to beat extremism is with state sanctioned extremism - those folk have learnt nothing from history ,have very very questionable motives and dont have great insights into complex issues

Here's a microcosm of how this debate goes everytime one of those harmless islamists commits one of those statistically irrelevant mass murders.

jimjam - Member

Both are equally worthless arguments that involve putting your head in the sand and refusing to discuss the issue.

pondo - Member

Let's discuss it, then - Farage, Trump, gun laws, banning muslims

pondo - Member

Frame it however you want, then.

pondo - Member

This unswerving defense of an ideology that obviously has problems is IMO just as bad (and unhelpful) as a far right standpoint.

Edit - D'you know what, can't be arsed. You crack on with your [b]Daily Heilism,[/b] and much good may it do you.

Everyone's a nazi if they try discuss islam.

junkyark

30,000 jihadis in the UK,

Potential jihadhis and its 23,000

Is that all? Nothing to worry about there then. I mean the IRA had 300 - 450 members in their active service units during the 80s and it's not like they got up to much.

So jambalaya won't lower himself to evidence then, normal service resumed. It's a shame when the facts don't match your ideology.

mikewsmith - Member

So jambalaya won't lower himself to evidence then,

What's the point in evidence when it's statically irrelevant?

Well that is one way of looking at it... Perhaps if you use evidence it's hard to back up your position on being racist and an islamaphobe while proposing laws that would make zero difference.

Everyone's a nazi if they try discuss islam.

Or do I have the wrong end of the stick?

pondo - Member

Not particularly, but if you think Islam is the key (or even A key) threat to people in the states, then you are misguided, pure and simple. I've asked if you want to discuss it, do please explain why islam is a bigger threat to the US than their own gun laws. Or do I have the wrong end of the stick?

Just remember for a second that Islamists flew jet liners into buildings killing 3000 people and injuring 6000 more. That has sent us all into the spiral which we are in today. Yes, we can play the blame game about foreign policy and western imperialism but you can go back 1000 years doing that and accomplish nothing. The point is that one act of terrorism can shift world politics and the reality of daily life for almost everyone on the planet.

Terrorism can do that because the response to terrorism isn't directly and logically proportional to the amount of death and destruction caused by a terrorist act. See also political assassinations.

Premeditated murder carries stiffer sentences than manslaughter. If someone straps a bomb to himself and goes to a concert and blows up himself and 22 young women and girls in act of religious piety and holiness, and a bus driver has a stroke at the wheel and plunges himself and 22 young girls off a cliff they are not equally evil acts.

The bus driver might have been a good person and he never intended to hurt or injure one person in his life. The terrorist is not. There isn't a secret cabal of bus drivers plotting to give themselves strokes at inopportune moments - but there are secret groups of people plotting to cause the maximum amount of suffering, murder and death to men women and children because they live free, secular, liberal lives.

Intentions matter. That is part of our culture. That's also why all acts of violence aren't terrorism. Fred West wasn't a terrorist. Andrei Chikatilo wasn't a terrorist.

You have to acknowledge these facts, not try to obfuscate them.

Was anyone trying to ignore the IRA when they were bombing Britain? Were people sitting on buses or at work discussing how it was a complete statistical impossibility that you'd die in an IRA bomb and therefore it's not really even worth worrying about?

I spent most of my childhood and adult life in Northern Ireland never once did I hear anything remotely like this. This numerical pragmatism toward terrorism only seems to work with one form of terror.

@pondo Gang violence, criminals shooting each other, suicides etc .... a very significant number of Americans understand they dominate the shooting fatalities. You (and Mike) are going to convince precisely no one with the facetious “numbers” argument.

Mike there was a big BBC focus piece this week on gun and knife crime in the UK. I don’t know many people who think that’s a more serious problem than Islamic Jihadi terrorists. Certainly not me.

Knife crime is probably not a problem in the yacht-owning suburbs, but in the city it is certainly a bigger problem than bearded nutters. But don't let the facts start getting in your way.

the response to terrorism isn't directly and logically proportional to the amount of death and destruction caused by a terrorist act.

Interesting. Using your reference of 9/11, what instead (IYO) would have been the 'logically proportional' response to that act of terrorism/those terrorists?

Malvern Rider - Member

the response to terrorism isn't directly and logically proportional to the amount of death and destruction caused by a terrorist act.

Interesting. Using your reference of 9/11, what instead (IYO) would have been the 'logically proportional' response to that act of terrorism/those terrorists?

Well that's a real captain hindsight question but obviously going to war in Afghanistan was a bad move, launching another war in Iraq under false pretenses was also a bad idea. Probably some kind of targeted assassinations of key figures in Al Quaeda and the Saudi royal family, along with measures to undermine or counterfund SA's Wahhabi propaganda campaigns in ****stan, Afghanistan, Africa.....

The problem is that America was attacked in a public and painful way and that required action to appear that justice/vengeance was done. No government could tolerate that being done to them without being seen to act in kind.

Regardless of what I say they should have done, it's obvious they over reacted.