Bombing Raqqa must feel good and like I said earlier, who can blame the French for doing so.
Re. the Islamists living in France, they need to deport about 100,000 after shooting 400-500 of them to set an example, then take it from there IMO
If, and it's a big IF, they take my advice I reckon other European countries will follow suit and it will result in the eradication of this menace from Our society for ever. Here's hoping eh
Disgusting tbh.
He referred to Islamists, not law abiding muslims, there is a big difference. Islamists (radicalised extremists) are our enemy. Kill them before they kill us. I'd be surprised if there were 100,000 of them living in France, but it is highly likely that there would be 400 -500 of them.
Disgusting tbh
Kill the enemy, disgusting concept eh Chizz!
Calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting, yes. It's happened before in Europe. It didn't end well then, either.
Really need to know why my post is very inappropriate and disgusting before I go a bed?
Because you're not allowed an opinion on here/in Britain anymore.
Nonsense. There's plenty of opinions allowed from right across the political spectrum on here and elsewhere. You and others are more than welcome to hold and express your opinions, no ones tried to stop that.
But if that opinion is based on the view that the solution is a course of action that amounts to the state sponsored genocide of a group of people then expect to get challenged on it.
The killing without trial or expelling of a group of people due to their belief system, regardless of whether they intend to act upon those beliefs (if I'm reading the post right) because we find those values abhorrent is never going to be the solution and could only lead to strengthening of those wishing to do us harm ultimately.
Bombing Raqqa must feel good and like I said earlier, who can blame the French for doing so.
Re. the Islamists living in France, they need to deport about 100,000 after shooting 400-500 of them to set an example, then take it from there IMO
If, and it's a big IF, they take my advice I reckon other European countries will follow suit and it will result in the eradication of this menace from Our society for ever. Here's hoping eh
Disgusting tbh.
He referred to Islamists, not law abiding muslims, there is a big difference. Islamists (radicalised extremists) are our enemy. Kill them before they kill us. I'd be surprised if there were 100,000 of them living in France, but it is highly likely that there would be 400 -500 of them.
Disgusting tbh
Kill the enemy, disgusting concept eh Chizz!
Calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting, yes. It's happened before in Europe. It didn't end well then, either.
Classic Chizz wind-up tactics.
This guys worse than Colin.
What part of chizz's post in anyway WUM like?
It appears he has an unfortunate habit (its not just this thread) of only part understanding , or should i say selectively understanding, someones point. A bit like yourself actually.
Really need to know why my post is very inappropriate and disgusting before I go a bed?
Because you're not allowed an opinion on here/in Britain anymore.
Nonsense. There's plenty of opinions allowed from right across the political spectrum on here and elsewhere. You and others are more than welcome to hold and express your opinions, no ones tried to stop that.
But if that opinion is based on the view that the solution is a course of action that amounts to the state sponsored genocide of a group of people then expect to get challenged on it.
The killing without trial or expelling of a group of people due to their belief system, regardless of whether they intend to act upon those beliefs (if I'm reading the post right) because we find those values abhorrent is never going to be the solution and could only lead to strengthening of those wishing to do us harm ultimately.
My point is that if you don't agree with some people on here, your opinions don't count or are flagged as racist etc. more than once have I seen a poster jump the gun when referring to another post, before having to apologise. My comment was also aimed at being a little tongue in cheek.
Bombing Raqqa must feel good and like I said earlier, who can blame the French for doing so.
Re. the Islamists living in France, they need to deport about 100,000 after shooting 400-500 of them to set an example, then take it from there IMO
If, and it's a big IF, they take my advice I reckon other European countries will follow suit and it will result in the eradication of this menace from Our society for ever. Here's hoping eh
Disgusting tbh.
He referred to Islamists, not law abiding muslims, there is a big difference. Islamists (radicalised extremists) are our enemy. Kill them before they kill us. I'd be surprised if there were 100,000 of them living in France, but it is highly likely that there would be 400 -500 of them.
Disgusting tbh
Kill the enemy, disgusting concept eh Chizz!
Calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting, yes. It's happened before in Europe. It didn't end well then, either.
Classic Chizz wind-up tactics.
This guys worse than Colin.
What part of chizz's post in anyway WUM like?
It appears he has an unfortunate habit (its not just this thread) of only part understanding , or should i say selectively understanding, someones point. A bit like yourself actually.
I don't even know why i'm biting.
That all depends whether you feel not coming round to someone's way of thonking means they don't understand. I understand completely as did chizz by the looks of it we just never explained our reasons of disapproval quite as eloquently as Bournemouth did above.
Regardless of which opinions I agree with (and I am just as guilty as misinterpreting posts as anyone) it saddens me to see our society at loggerheads after such a tragic incident.
I am no expert in conflict, but when you are under siege from an evil enemy and they see all of this infighting, they will feel half the battle is already won.
The next step will be to create division between normal, everyday British citizens of various faiths. If we are not careful, we will play right into their hands.
Bombing Raqqa must feel good and like I said earlier, who can blame the French for doing so.
Re. the Islamists living in France, they need to deport about 100,000 after shooting 400-500 of them to set an example, then take it from there IMO
If, and it's a big IF, they take my advice I reckon other European countries will follow suit and it will result in the eradication of this menace from Our society for ever. Here's hoping eh
Disgusting tbh.
He referred to Islamists, not law abiding muslims, there is a big difference. Islamists (radicalised extremists) are our enemy. Kill them before they kill us. I'd be surprised if there were 100,000 of them living in France, but it is highly likely that there would be 400 -500 of them.
Disgusting tbh
Kill the enemy, disgusting concept eh Chizz!
Calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting, yes. It's happened before in Europe. It didn't end well then, either.
Classic Chizz wind-up tactics.
This guys worse than Colin.
What part of chizz's post in anyway WUM like?
It appears he has an unfortunate habit (its not just this thread) of only part understanding , or should i say selectively understanding, someones point. A bit like yourself actually.
I don't even know why i'm biting.
Would you agree though, that "calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting"?
PS I do not have a daughter even though I would like to have one.
Well that's really odd because PaddyP17 claims that Seth (who was at the meeting and who apologised to Katrien) is her Dad. Perhaps there are two Seth's on CL
PaddyP17 Member November 11 Said I'd provide a writeup ladies and gents. Seth's not home yet, but here it is anyway, based on the fairly comprehensive tweets:
We're fucked.
and
PaddyP17 Member November 11
Hartleypete said:
1) because I can not see what they bring to the table, might be wrong but that's my opinion.
2) no why where you?
3) why make such an assumption.
1) Okay fine. Can't swing anyone on that.
2) My dad was, and will be providing an update with my assistance in I presume "a bit" when he gets back home.
3) Have been following the tweets and this page. Have also seen the questions the "consortium" (for want of a better word) had drafted. Haven't seen any questions, other than inane ones, quoted in the vast majority of the tweets.
PaddyP17 said --
Oh fucking lol this is truly excellent. I love how this evidence all explicitly states my gender.
Except oh wait. It doesn't. Just like all this stuff you want to claim is "evidence" to perpetrate your point isn't actually evidence at all.
My name is Paddy. Which, believe it or not, is a derivative of Patrick, which (unless there is some really really weird joke being played on me and the legions of other people called Patrick) is a male name...
What makes me seem female? I mean, statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of football followers and forum posters are male, so, ah... I'm intrigued.
PaddyP17 Member November 1 How is this anything other than a 14-year-long miscarriage of justice? Proper process simply has not been observed.
I'm a young good for nothing student type bleeding heart left wing radical anarcho-feminist environmentalist type though to you, aren't I? So please do what you seem to have been doing for the last 120 posts and discredit me based on the fact I voted Green (there, I said it).
QA said --
Not too many blokes refer to themselves as being feminists though, do they? Anyway your gender is of no relevance to me, I just don't tolerate dishonesty and being mislead very well. What it does reveal however, is that half the Lefty hit squad (Seth Plumb and Paddy) on this particular thread -
For gender to have no relevance to you, you went to a lot of trouble dragging 'evidence' in from the meeting thread. We are not a tag team, nor are our political views responsible for Paris any more than Nigel Farage's views responsible for Utoya.
It's no problem for me to drag up facts (evidence), as I always try to remember what I read and where I read it. And if I suspect that I'm being lied to, I don't like it. Whether you have a feminist son, or a daughter pretending to be a bloke doesn't bother me in the slightest. What does bother me though, is dishonesty.
PS I do not have a daughter even though I would like to have one.
Well that's really odd because PaddyP17 claims that Seth (who was at the meeting and who apologised to Katrien) is her Dad. Perhaps there are two Seth's on CL
PaddyP17 Member November 11 Said I'd provide a writeup ladies and gents. Seth's not home yet, but here it is anyway, based on the fairly comprehensive tweets:
We're fucked.
and
PaddyP17 Member November 11
Hartleypete said:
1) because I can not see what they bring to the table, might be wrong but that's my opinion.
2) no why where you?
3) why make such an assumption.
1) Okay fine. Can't swing anyone on that.
2) My dad was, and will be providing an update with my assistance in I presume "a bit" when he gets back home.
3) Have been following the tweets and this page. Have also seen the questions the "consortium" (for want of a better word) had drafted. Haven't seen any questions, other than inane ones, quoted in the vast majority of the tweets.
PaddyP17 said --
Oh fucking lol this is truly excellent. I love how this evidence all explicitly states my gender.
Except oh wait. It doesn't. Just like all this stuff you want to claim is "evidence" to perpetrate your point isn't actually evidence at all.
My name is Paddy. Which, believe it or not, is a derivative of Patrick, which (unless there is some really really weird joke being played on me and the legions of other people called Patrick) is a male name...
What makes me seem female? I mean, statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of football followers and forum posters are male, so, ah... I'm intrigued.
PaddyP17 Member November 1 How is this anything other than a 14-year-long miscarriage of justice? Proper process simply has not been observed.
I'm a young good for nothing student type bleeding heart left wing radical anarcho-feminist environmentalist type though to you, aren't I? So please do what you seem to have been doing for the last 120 posts and discredit me based on the fact I voted Green (there, I said it).
QA said --
Not too many blokes refer to themselves as being feminists though, do they? Anyway your gender is of no relevance to me, I just don't tolerate dishonesty and being mislead very well. What it does reveal however, is that half the Lefty hit squad (Seth Plumb and Paddy) on this particular thread -
P.S. If you have been the victim of dishonesty, or been misled, it has not been done by Paddy or me. More mis read than mis led. If you highlighted the whole sentence where the word feminist is being used, and did not ignore the last few words plus the punctuation you might realise where you got it wrong. You describe what Paddy and I wrote on the Guantanamo thread as chilling, and invoked that thread and it's contributors in this dreadful thread about Paris. Those who say that imprisonment without trial is wrong, be they left right or centre, are not the cause of Paris, nor do their attitudes provide a platform for terrorism. It seems you are angry as many of us are, but to attack Paddy and I for somehow creating conditions that led to Paris is as absurd as blaming your Muslim partner.
I read it very well, and came to the the very logical conclusion that no male would deliberately try to mislead somebody else into thinking that they were a female poster. Why would he need to do that, there is absolutely no reason to do so. I have attacked nobody, if anybody has been rude and used inflammatory language, it is Paddy. All the other points you have raised, I have addressed within your previous post.
Really need to know why my post is very inappropriate and disgusting before I go a bed?
You're talking about committing mass massacre sound familiar?
Mass massacre?
I'm talking about fighting fire with fire and not pussy foot around, this is a war after all
I not quite sure if your crass posts are trolling but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Stig said how would you select this 400-500 people. I'm ignoring the offensive raffle ticket response so perhaps you could answer for me ? Once selected are you considering putting these people on trial or just shooting them ? The questions go on and on.
My advice would be to engage your brain before posting unless you really are just a troll.
Bombing Raqqa must feel good and like I said earlier, who can blame the French for doing so.
Re. the Islamists living in France, they need to deport about 100,000 after shooting 400-500 of them to set an example, then take it from there IMO
If, and it's a big IF, they take my advice I reckon other European countries will follow suit and it will result in the eradication of this menace from Our society for ever. Here's hoping eh
Disgusting tbh.
He referred to Islamists, not law abiding muslims, there is a big difference. Islamists (radicalised extremists) are our enemy. Kill them before they kill us. I'd be surprised if there were 100,000 of them living in France, but it is highly likely that there would be 400 -500 of them.
Disgusting tbh
Kill the enemy, disgusting concept eh Chizz!
Calling for the extra-judicial round-up and murder of a group people, based on their religion and/or beliefs is disgusting, yes. It's happened before in Europe. It didn't end well then, either.
Classic Chizz wind-up tactics.
This guys worse than Colin.
What part of chizz's post in anyway WUM like?
It appears he has an unfortunate habit (its not just this thread) of only part understanding , or should i say selectively understanding, someones point. A bit like yourself actually.
I don't even know why i'm biting.
Ok, going to steal part of your response here, I don't know why I'm biting.
Could you explain which part is the WUM part, it's possible I've missed it.
Now onto the other posts.
First is the "if they take my advice..." Made me laugh, do you have the ear of world leaders then? Could you ask about my taxes and why corporations are allowed to avoid tax? *sarcasm over*
Onto the more serious stuff. Rounding up, and killing, people to set an example is just plain wrong. There are many examples of this policy being wrong and I won't go through them all.
Also, how will you identify who is Islamist and who is Muslim? Will you make them recite parts of the Quran? I think IS did this before executing people.
Now I'm not saying we don't fight them, we must fight them, but what was proposed in this original post isn't fighting, it's murder. You are no better than your enemy if you do this and more than likely you will strengthen your enemy.
To beat them we have to be better than them. Which means, as much as some will hate it, there is no punishment without a fair trial. We fight them on the battlefield but we don't turn into lynch mobs on our own streets. We must not become what they want us to become.
France has confirmed that they have made 150 raids in the last 24 hours on suspected terrorists. Difficult to believe that these "leads" have suddenly manifested themselves - and that in itself raises the same serious questions.
France is currently under a state of emergency. Amongst other things it means that warrants are no longer needed to search apartments, meaning they will be hitting a large number of known extremists.
I understand that but this is what was said immediately after the Charlie Hebdo attacks back in January:
France's prime minister on Friday acknowledged "failings" in intelligence that led to a three-day spree of horror and at least 20 people dead, though security experts noted the difficulties in preventing attacks when potential terrorists number in the thousands on official watch lists.
There has been mounting criticism of French police and intelligence agents for not intervening before Wednesday's attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper. One of the chief suspects had been convicted on terrorism charges and the other is believed to have linked up with Al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were on the U.S. no-fly list, according to a senior U.S. official, because of their links to terrorist movements.
"There was a failing, of course," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on BFM television. "That's why we have to analyze what happened." (AP)
My point is this. French Intelligence knew about the Hebdo attackers. From what we have learned so far they also knew about some of those involved in this one. They also let through the border from France to Belgium at least one (and probably three) of these attackers. That is a major security failure and it is an ongoing one with France.
Although I have no issue with attacking these jihadi death-cult nutbars, bombing and killing isn't going to stop this. The only thing that will is the reformation of Islam. It needs to resolve whether barbaric, medieval views or modern, pluralist tolerance will prevail. The christian reformation took hundreds of years and cost millions of lives so I expect this will be a vile and bloody struggle that will last for generations too.
Although I have no issue with attacking these jihadi death-cult nutbars, bombing and killing isn't going to stop this. The only thing that will is the reformation of Islam. It needs to resolve whether barbaric, medieval views or modern, pluralist tolerance will prevail. The christian reformation took hundreds of years and cost millions of lives so I expect this will be a vile and bloody struggle that will last for generations too.
Although I have no issue with attacking these jihadi death-cult nutbars, bombing and killing isn't going to stop this. The only thing that will is the reformation of Islam. It needs to resolve whether barbaric, medieval views or modern, pluralist tolerance will prevail. The christian reformation took hundreds of years and cost millions of lives so I expect this will be a vile and bloody struggle that will last for generations too.
While I agree with you about religious reformation on principle, I suspect that in practice this has in fact happened for a lot of Muslims. I teach a rich Muslim kid from a Saudi family and he's into Katy Perry, Shakira, Taylor Swift etc, while the dad/patriarch is a tattooed guy in a Kings Of Leon hoodie. Not that they are representative - money and education distorts - but they are probably expected by familial association to be highly traditional in their lifestyles; they simply aren't. The same goes for other Muslim clients I've had and the universally pleasant Muslim cricket teammates I have.
The important thing is to ensure that reformation of a sort permeates to the global Muslim working classes - not even reformation so much as education, interfaith dialogue, a softening of views. I'm aware that in some countries (not so much the UK) this may prove a steep challenge.
Another dimension to this is that the funding and support of terrorism is usually provided not by the working classes themselves but educated men in search of greater power and influence - men for whom religious reform would do little, as their ultimate goal is tangential to their devout faith. These men must be dealt with as gangsters and criminals.
France has confirmed that they have made 150 raids in the last 24 hours on suspected terrorists. Difficult to believe that these "leads" have suddenly manifested themselves - and that in itself raises the same serious questions.
France is currently under a state of emergency. Amongst other things it means that warrants are no longer needed to search apartments, meaning they will be hitting a large number of known extremists.
I understand that but this is what was said immediately after the Charlie Hebdo attacks back in January:
France's prime minister on Friday acknowledged "failings" in intelligence that led to a three-day spree of horror and at least 20 people dead, though security experts noted the difficulties in preventing attacks when potential terrorists number in the thousands on official watch lists.
There has been mounting criticism of French police and intelligence agents for not intervening before Wednesday's attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper. One of the chief suspects had been convicted on terrorism charges and the other is believed to have linked up with Al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were on the U.S. no-fly list, according to a senior U.S. official, because of their links to terrorist movements.
"There was a failing, of course," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on BFM television. "That's why we have to analyze what happened." (AP)
My point is this. French Intelligence knew about the Hebdo attackers. From what we have learned so far they also knew about some of those involved in this one. They also let through the border from France to Belgium at least one (and probably three) of these attackers. That is a major security failure and it is an ongoing one with France.
It's what happens when a society is too frightened and too politically correct to lock up suspected terrorists. Until we grow some balls and get tough on these bastards, we will continue to be sitting ducks.
France has confirmed that they have made 150 raids in the last 24 hours on suspected terrorists. Difficult to believe that these "leads" have suddenly manifested themselves - and that in itself raises the same serious questions.
France is currently under a state of emergency. Amongst other things it means that warrants are no longer needed to search apartments, meaning they will be hitting a large number of known extremists.
I understand that but this is what was said immediately after the Charlie Hebdo attacks back in January:
France's prime minister on Friday acknowledged "failings" in intelligence that led to a three-day spree of horror and at least 20 people dead, though security experts noted the difficulties in preventing attacks when potential terrorists number in the thousands on official watch lists.
There has been mounting criticism of French police and intelligence agents for not intervening before Wednesday's attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper. One of the chief suspects had been convicted on terrorism charges and the other is believed to have linked up with Al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were on the U.S. no-fly list, according to a senior U.S. official, because of their links to terrorist movements.
"There was a failing, of course," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on BFM television. "That's why we have to analyze what happened." (AP)
My point is this. French Intelligence knew about the Hebdo attackers. From what we have learned so far they also knew about some of those involved in this one. They also let through the border from France to Belgium at least one (and probably three) of these attackers. That is a major security failure and it is an ongoing one with France.
It's what happens when a society is too frightened and too politically correct to lock up suspected terrorists. Until we grow some balls and get tough on these bastards, we will continue to be sitting ducks.
Perhaps so but I was being more critical of the French Secret Service. From the article I posted previously it appears that not all elements of the body are "singing from the same hymn book".
How difficult would it be, for example, to have a list of known activists readily available to border Police so, when something happens like this and one or more of those are seeking to leave the country within a matter of hours of such an attack, they are not held until such time as they can be cleared?
Rather than rounding up people for firing squads how about stopping the appeasement of militant/conservative Islam that pervades our society. The left and right in this country use the Islamists as a political football to score points off each other rather than uniting to attack it.
I just cant believe that deep down the terrorists are doing this in the name of religion.
Like many, they use religion to justify their own beliefs and desires. You search hard enough in any major religious text then you'll find something that backs up your own desires, as long as you're willing to that literally what was meant figuratively and vice versa. Christians did it to validate slavery and still do to to try to justify racism and homophobia. Much like the troubles between protestants and catholics, Muslims use minor disagreements on interpretation of religious text to cause division and bloodshed. The difference being that Sunnis and Shiites are far closer in belief than Catholics and Protestants, but seemingly hate each other far more. As has been stated on this thread many times, ISIS are killing hundreds of westerners a year, but they are killing 1000s of muslims a week, over (from an outside perspective at least) minor theological differences.
They are partaking in a genocide of shiites, killing all who won't convert. The mainstream press seems unwilling to cover it in sufficient detail, lumping both sides of the conflict into the big pot marked "muslim". We didn't call the IRA Christain terrorists, we understood the sectarian nature of the conflict. We need to do the same in the middle east to have any chance of understanding what the hell is going on, why there are refugees, why some countries help whilst other don't, etc.
People on this thread keep pulling out ridiculous numbers, without doing any basic sanity checks into any of them. So there's 6 million muslims in France. How many Shia, how many Sunni? Nobody on here has even addresses that basic question. Shiites aren't going to be supporting ISIS in just the same way there weren't any protestant IRA members.
France has confirmed that they have made 150 raids in the last 24 hours on suspected terrorists. Difficult to believe that these "leads" have suddenly manifested themselves - and that in itself raises the same serious questions.
France is currently under a state of emergency. Amongst other things it means that warrants are no longer needed to search apartments, meaning they will be hitting a large number of known extremists.
I understand that but this is what was said immediately after the Charlie Hebdo attacks back in January:
France's prime minister on Friday acknowledged "failings" in intelligence that led to a three-day spree of horror and at least 20 people dead, though security experts noted the difficulties in preventing attacks when potential terrorists number in the thousands on official watch lists.
There has been mounting criticism of French police and intelligence agents for not intervening before Wednesday's attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper. One of the chief suspects had been convicted on terrorism charges and the other is believed to have linked up with Al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were on the U.S. no-fly list, according to a senior U.S. official, because of their links to terrorist movements.
"There was a failing, of course," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on BFM television. "That's why we have to analyze what happened." (AP)
My point is this. French Intelligence knew about the Hebdo attackers. From what we have learned so far they also knew about some of those involved in this one. They also let through the border from France to Belgium at least one (and probably three) of these attackers. That is a major security failure and it is an ongoing one with France.
It's what happens when a society is too frightened and too politically correct to lock up suspected terrorists. Until we grow some balls and get tough on these bastards, we will continue to be sitting ducks.
Perhaps so but I was being more critical of the French Secret Service. From the article I posted previously it appears that not all elements of the body are "singing from the same hymn book".
How difficult would it be, for example, to have a list of known activists readily available to border Police so, when something happens like this and one or more of those are seeking to leave the country within a matter of hours of such an attack, they are not held until such time as they can be cleared?
British security services prevented attack in the UK last month - taking it to seven this year, Number 10 says http://bbc.in/1lr3PgA
Really need to know why my post is very inappropriate and disgusting before I go a bed?
You're talking about committing mass massacre sound familiar?
Mass massacre?
I'm talking about fighting fire with fire and not pussy foot around, this is a war after all
I not quite sure if your crass posts are trolling but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Stig said how would you select this 400-500 people. I'm ignoring the offensive raffle ticket response so perhaps you could answer for me ? Once selected are you considering putting these people on trial or just shooting them ? The questions go on and on.
My advice would be to engage your brain before posting unless you really are just a troll.
I think a lot of people are underestimating the shit we're in, SHG. If/when the shit hits the fan, we will be facing an enemy that are already living amongst us and who will be quite happy to blow themselves up and shoot innocent men, women and children for their fucked up cause. They're not the most diplomatic of people eiither and don't give two hoots how nice you.are to them (aid worker/converts getting beheaded as I've already said). If you've got any better ideas on how to tackle this problem prey tell.
i admit my comment about having a raffle was a crass one and for that i do apologise, but the hair splitting and being contrary for the sake if it from some quarters on here ain't gonna make the problem go away either
Comments
But if that opinion is based on the view that the solution is a course of action that amounts to the state sponsored genocide of a group of people then expect to get challenged on it.
The killing without trial or expelling of a group of people due to their belief system, regardless of whether they intend to act upon those beliefs (if I'm reading the post right) because we find those values abhorrent is never going to be the solution and could only lead to strengthening of those wishing to do us harm ultimately.
I don't even know why i'm biting.
My comment was also aimed at being a little tongue in cheek.
I am no expert in conflict, but when you are under siege from an evil enemy and they see all of this infighting, they will feel half the battle is already won.
The next step will be to create division between normal, everyday British citizens of various faiths. If we are not careful, we will play right into their hands.
PaddyP17 said --
Oh fucking lol this is truly excellent. I love how this evidence all explicitly states my gender.
Except oh wait. It doesn't. Just like all this stuff you want to claim is "evidence" to perpetrate your point isn't actually evidence at all.
My name is Paddy. Which, believe it or not, is a derivative of Patrick, which (unless there is some really really weird joke being played on me and the legions of other people called Patrick) is a male name...
What makes me seem female? I mean, statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of football followers and forum posters are male, so, ah... I'm intrigued.
PaddyP17 Member
November 1
How is this anything other than a 14-year-long miscarriage of justice? Proper process simply has not been observed.
I'm a young good for nothing student type bleeding heart left wing radical anarcho-feminist environmentalist type though to you, aren't I? So please do what you seem to have been doing for the last 120 posts and discredit me based on the fact I voted Green (there, I said it).
QA said --
Not too many blokes refer to themselves as being feminists though, do they?
Anyway your gender is of no relevance to me, I just don't tolerate dishonesty and being mislead very well. What it does reveal however, is that half the Lefty hit squad (Seth Plumb and Paddy) on this particular thread -
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/69688/shaker-aamer-released/p4
were actually a father/son or daughter tag team.
See
Seth responds.
For gender to have no relevance to you, you went to a lot of trouble dragging 'evidence' in from the meeting thread.
We are not a tag team, nor are our political views responsible for Paris any more than Nigel Farage's views responsible for Utoya.
It's no problem for me to drag up facts (evidence), as I always try to remember what I read and where I read it. And if I suspect that I'm being lied to, I don't like it. Whether you have a feminist son, or a daughter pretending to be a bloke doesn't bother me in the slightest. What does bother me though, is dishonesty.
PaddyP17 said --
Oh fucking lol this is truly excellent. I love how this evidence all explicitly states my gender.
Except oh wait. It doesn't. Just like all this stuff you want to claim is "evidence" to perpetrate your point isn't actually evidence at all.
My name is Paddy. Which, believe it or not, is a derivative of Patrick, which (unless there is some really really weird joke being played on me and the legions of other people called Patrick) is a male name...
What makes me seem female? I mean, statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of football followers and forum posters are male, so, ah... I'm intrigued.
PaddyP17 Member
November 1
How is this anything other than a 14-year-long miscarriage of justice? Proper process simply has not been observed.
I'm a young good for nothing student type bleeding heart left wing radical anarcho-feminist environmentalist type though to you, aren't I? So please do what you seem to have been doing for the last 120 posts and discredit me based on the fact I voted Green (there, I said it).
QA said --
Not too many blokes refer to themselves as being feminists though, do they?
Anyway your gender is of no relevance to me, I just don't tolerate dishonesty and being mislead very well. What it does reveal however, is that half the Lefty hit squad (Seth Plumb and Paddy) on this particular thread -
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/69688/shaker-aamer-released/p4
were actually a father/son or daughter tag team.
Seth writes:
P.S.
If you have been the victim of dishonesty, or been misled, it has not been done by Paddy or me. More mis read than mis led. If you highlighted the whole sentence where the word feminist is being used, and did not ignore the last few words plus the punctuation you might realise where you got it wrong.
You describe what Paddy and I wrote on the Guantanamo thread as chilling, and invoked that thread and it's contributors in this dreadful thread about Paris.
Those who say that imprisonment without trial is wrong, be they left right or centre, are not the cause of Paris, nor do their attitudes provide a platform for terrorism.
It seems you are angry as many of us are, but to attack Paddy and I for somehow creating conditions that led to Paris is as absurd as blaming your Muslim partner.
I read it very well, and came to the the very logical conclusion that no male would deliberately try to mislead somebody else into thinking that they were a female poster. Why would he need to do that, there is absolutely no reason to do so. I have attacked nobody, if anybody has been rude and used inflammatory language, it is Paddy. All the other points you have raised, I have addressed within your previous post.
Nobody tried to mislead you into thinking Paddy was female, it simply isn't there.
Males can be feminists.
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/69688/shaker-aamer-released/p1
But it's really not worth others getting involved. Far better to concentrate on exterminating the filth.
Stig said how would you select this 400-500 people. I'm ignoring the offensive raffle ticket response so perhaps you could answer for me ? Once selected are you considering putting these people on trial or just shooting them ? The questions go on and on.
My advice would be to engage your brain before posting unless you really are just a troll.
Could you explain which part is the WUM part, it's possible I've missed it.
Now onto the other posts.
First is the "if they take my advice..." Made me laugh, do you have the ear of world leaders then? Could you ask about my taxes and why corporations are allowed to avoid tax? *sarcasm over*
Onto the more serious stuff. Rounding up, and killing, people to set an example is just plain wrong. There are many examples of this policy being wrong and I won't go through them all.
Also, how will you identify who is Islamist and who is Muslim? Will you make them recite parts of the Quran? I think IS did this before executing people.
Now I'm not saying we don't fight them, we must fight them, but what was proposed in this original post isn't fighting, it's murder. You are no better than your enemy if you do this and more than likely you will strengthen your enemy.
To beat them we have to be better than them. Which means, as much as some will hate it, there is no punishment without a fair trial. We fight them on the battlefield but we don't turn into lynch mobs on our own streets. We must not become what they want us to become.
France's prime minister on Friday acknowledged "failings" in intelligence that led to a three-day spree of horror and at least 20 people dead, though security experts noted the difficulties in preventing attacks when potential terrorists number in the thousands on official watch lists.
There has been mounting criticism of French police and intelligence agents for not intervening before Wednesday's attack on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper. One of the chief suspects had been convicted on terrorism charges and the other is believed to have linked up with Al-Qaida forces while in Yemen. Both were on the U.S. no-fly list, according to a senior U.S. official, because of their links to terrorist movements.
"There was a failing, of course," French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said on BFM television. "That's why we have to analyze what happened." (AP)
My point is this. French Intelligence knew about the Hebdo attackers. From what we have learned so far they also knew about some of those involved in this one. They also let through the border from France to Belgium at least one (and probably three) of these attackers. That is a major security failure and it is an ongoing one with France.
The important thing is to ensure that reformation of a sort permeates to the global Muslim working classes - not even reformation so much as education, interfaith dialogue, a softening of views. I'm aware that in some countries (not so much the UK) this may prove a steep challenge.
Another dimension to this is that the funding and support of terrorism is usually provided not by the working classes themselves but educated men in search of greater power and influence - men for whom religious reform would do little, as their ultimate goal is tangential to their devout faith. These men must be dealt with as gangsters and criminals.
How difficult would it be, for example, to have a list of known activists readily available to border Police so, when something happens like this and one or more of those are seeking to leave the country within a matter of hours of such an attack, they are not held until such time as they can be cleared?
They are partaking in a genocide of shiites, killing all who won't convert. The mainstream press seems unwilling to cover it in sufficient detail, lumping both sides of the conflict into the big pot marked "muslim". We didn't call the IRA Christain terrorists, we understood the sectarian nature of the conflict. We need to do the same in the middle east to have any chance of understanding what the hell is going on, why there are refugees, why some countries help whilst other don't, etc.
People on this thread keep pulling out ridiculous numbers, without doing any basic sanity checks into any of them. So there's 6 million muslims in France. How many Shia, how many Sunni? Nobody on here has even addresses that basic question. Shiites aren't going to be supporting ISIS in just the same way there weren't any protestant IRA members.
i admit my comment about having a raffle was a crass one and for that i do apologise, but the hair splitting and being contrary for the sake if it from some quarters on here ain't gonna make the problem go away either
Over to you