to try to combat terrorism. :clap:
He always gets in inside 24 hours. In the world of appeasers, Jenkins is a true giant.
to try to combat terrorism. :clap:
He always gets in inside 24 hours. In the world of appeasers, Jenkins is a true giant.
One wonders how he would respond to a modern version of the old "What would you do if an enemy solider was raping your sister?" conchy question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Presumably, he'd stand there and let him for fear of stirring up Islamophobia otherwise. Pathetic old ****.
Did you get as far as the final sentence? That, to me, is a pretty thinly veiled way of saying "we had it coming"Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
461 Europeans have been murdered by Islamic terror since 2016. But we should just sit tight and not even put up barriers to protect ourselves because that's 'terrorising' our cities to his mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
I really would love to kick that man squarely in the gonads.
That appalling woman Yasmin Alibhai-Brown was wringing her hands about it yesterday with the words 'What have Catalonians ever done to muslims?', thus clearly suggesting that the rest of us basically deserved it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
We must not change our way of life. 'that's what they want'Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
From all these events there has been one weird bloke who wanted revenge and tried to attack the mosque and only succeeded to kill a bloke who was conveniently already dying.
That story stinks.
However relevant or not-relevant the approx one-to-two million deaths in Muslim countries resulting from recent conflicts initiated by US-UK-France and some other NATO outlets may be in this discussion, the above could equally be making the point that the 'revenge on crusaders' argument sometimes made by IS/AQ and their ilk is utterly specious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Hmm but I was a told it's nothing to do with Islam.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
But they don't make that argument. In Dabiq they made it clear that they would still kill us regardless of our foreign policy. They don't kill us because of what we do, they kill us because we exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
The only people who actually think ISIS attack us because of our foreign policies are western-based lefties keen to excuse muslim extremism and condemn western nations.
I hadn't made it that far because of the nausea indiuced by the first couple of paragraphs, but now you've prompted me to read it, I've got rage to go with my sickness. Thanks a bunch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I've not read the article, but I agree with that part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I had no issue with the article at all until the last paragraph.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
At which point I wanted to repeatedly punch Simon in the face. Appalling c*nt.
Oh, we had it coming, but not for the reasons he's suggesting. We had it coming in the same way that a host who invites every scumbag for miles around to his party has it coming when they steal everything he owns and trash the place.Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Well they weren't really targeting Catalonians, just the barbaric touristsQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Unfortunately, a speeding van is not really a precision weaponQuote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
It's the 'poor man's guided missile' apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Yes. The idiocy in that article was so general that I missed quite how stupid that analogy was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I don't know the fellow, but be aware that "enemy" may hold a different meaning to him than it does for you. Not to mention "raping".Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I have no idea who the bloke is but the article veers between stupid and pointless, frequently embracing both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Who gives a **** if we have to put up a few barriers?
This statue stuff in America is annoying the **** out of me as well, not least because I have ended up agreeing with Donald ****ing Trump......
Christ! What do you agree with Donald Trump about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Tearing down statues.Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Well this is sort of the thing with the polarisation of US politics. After a while, almost any sane human being is forced into a situation where they have to either agree with Donald Trump or tacitly endorse the lunacy that is rife among his opponents. It's how he won the election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I'm not sure. Practically everyone's had lunatic Left sympathies at some stage in their life, haven't they. Perhaps that's the trouble; had everyone always been as staunch as they now claim, we wouldn't be where we are now? After all, the Left has always struggled politically, electorally, over a longer period of time so, to alleviate this, it's always really been about the culture (education, the media etc.), for them. That's long been their battlefield of choice, so to speak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Do these dickheads think they can just erase the most momentous period of their country's history? And that getting rid of a few statues of soldiers is going to do that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
I find it utterly bewildering....
I suppose it's the difference between an actual book and its online or digital counterpart; one of them can be re-edited or even erased completely. Maybe it's also why Hollywood is busy re-making many of its old hits?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
One of the points argued is that these statues were not put up just after the civil war but either in the 20s or 60s - the latter in opposition to the civil rights movement. Also, that no-one complains when statues of Lenin and co are removed in the former USSR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I'm not really on any side here, btw. Though by a coincidence I got a book on London statues and monuments for my birthday this week. I might go and pull a few down if I disagreed with something they did.
Oh, and I also read some remarkably racist quotes from Abraham Lincoln which somewhat deflates the virtue balloon of the Unionist side.
Nobody's perfect, are they. But maybe the point is that nobody dares say that about Martin Luther King, for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I fúcking haven't, I can assure you.Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
MLK was no fan of battymen, I understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Yeah, I think you have. Anyway, you certainly do now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
No reason why he should've been, of course, but I take your point completely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
But you believe in equal rights for women and gays, Sir C! That makes you a raving pinko in redg's book, I imagine. Pwopah old-school conservative is redg.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
EDIT: You probably don't even believe in God!
:-( You can't say dem fings, r.Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Well yes I do, but I accept that birds can't be as good at some things as men because they don't have the same physical strength or ability to throw. Also, in some circumstances they can become all emotional about shít. So having chicks on the front line, for example, would be a step too far for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I'm all over the bumders, as you know, but I'm not really happy about gay marriage. Adam and Eve, innit. Not Adam and Steve.
As for God, I remain agnostic. Or I think so, anyway.
None of these opinions is leftist or rightist, is it? Surely they're just... common sense?
In fairness, it's not me whining about being suicide-bombed or white-vanned in the streets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Are you agnostic about the existence of Zeus and Thor as well? What about the fairies at the bottom of your garden?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
don't think it is PC to call them fairies anymore mQuote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Sure. But the context here is "rightists" believing these things go without saying and "leftists" thinking that these are terrible anomalies and injustices that need to be wiped from history regardless of any common sense aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Essentially, it's the singer that's important here, rather than the song.
You are questioning my agnosticism on logical grounds there, aren't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
You do appreciate how fúcking stupid that is, don't you?
What, being illogical? Yes I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
So stop being stupid and just tell people you don't believe in God ('atheist' being as redundant a term as 'agnostic')