Presumably the pretend terrorists should have shouted something more inclusive

[Monty92]

like “RSPB forever!" or some such?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/10/police-apologise-for-allahu-akbar-use-in-mock-manchester-attack

[Pat Vegas]

like “RSPB forever!" or some such?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/10/police-apologise-for-allahu-akbar-use-in-mock-manchester-attack

:hehe: If there is this style of attack everyone will be scared to do anything in case they do something racist.

[The Jorge]

like “RSPB forever!" or some such?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/10/police-apologise-for-allahu-akbar-use-in-mock-manchester-attack

#notallfilth

[7sisters]

like “RSPB forever!" or some such?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/10/police-apologise-for-allahu-akbar-use-in-mock-manchester-attack

Joke, isn't it. Would it be sensitive to suggest that's exactly what they should be shouting.. It would at last trigger a response to the unawares public that the nutters were in the building, so to speak.

[Monty92]

:hehe: If there is this style of attack everyone will be scared to do anything in case they do something racist.

No they wouldn't. As the saying goes, there's no such thing as a liberal rape victim.

[Pat Vegas]

you know these mock terror videos are just to prepare and scare the public for the impending conspiracy.

see also #Chemtrails #building #GeorgeBushstoleWTCgold. #pentagon #squard

[Monty92]

Joke, isn't it. Would it be sensitive to suggest that's exactly what they should be shouting.. It would at last trigger a response to the unawares public that the nutters were in the building, so to speak.

To be fair, I'm not really sure what it added to the exercise, but anyone *actually* offended by it, or concerned about it offending muslims, is a ****ing retard *cough* Jorge* *cough*

[Pat Vegas]

To be fair, I'm not really sure what it added to the exercise, but anyone *actually* offended by it, or concerned about it offending muslims, is a ****ing retard *cough* Jorge* *cough*

Actually Monty you are right. If usually it's nothing to do with Islam. They were also shouting it in a Nothing to do with Islam manner for sake of training purposes therefore nobody should be offended apart from actual ISIS nutters.

[The Jorge]

To be fair, I'm not really sure what it added to the exercise, but anyone *actually* offended by it, or concerned about it offending muslims, is a ****ing retard *cough* Jorge* *cough*

In fairness, it's less offensive than shooting them six times in the head on a packed tube train.

Paradise is too good for 'em *grumblegrumble*

[Monty92]

Actually Monty you are right. If usually it's nothing to do with Islam. They were also shouting it in a Nothing to do with Islam manner for sake of training purposes therefore nobody should be offended apart from actual ISIS nutters.

A very clever and nuanced point. If, as it is claimed, these attacks are nothing to do with Islam, then repeating a mantra (that is nothing to do with Islam) that these entirely non-Islamic inspired terrorists shout EVERY SINGLE TIME they go on one of their secular murderous rampages has nothing to do with Islam either. So what's the problem?

[Monty92]

In fairness, it's less offensive than shooting them six times in the head on a packed tube train.

Paradise is too good for 'em *grumblegrumble*

Always found it pretty rich for his family to moan about our police. Brazilian coppers kill about 50 ****ing citizens a day!

They are also rubbish at helping tourists who accidently **** people of the wrong sex :-(

[redgunamo]

Always found it pretty rich for his family to moan about our police. Brazilian coppers kill about 50 ****ing citizens a day!

They are also rubbish at helping tourists who accidently **** people of the wrong sex :-(

Agreed. I said so at the time.

[The Jorge]

Always found it pretty rich for his family to moan about our police. Brazilian coppers kill about 50 ****ing citizens a day!

They are also rubbish at helping tourists who accidently **** people of the wrong sex :-(

yeah, they should think theirselves lucky that the met had the good grace to shoot him really :rolleyes:

[redgunamo]

yeah, they should think theirselves lucky that the met had the good grace to shoot him really :rolleyes:

Now, nobody likes to be shot but surely you'd rather the Met did it than the Pee-merge?

[Monty92]

yeah, they should think theirselves lucky that the met had the good grace to shoot him really :rolleyes:

Have you ever considered redirecting some of your contempt for police incompetence towards murderous religious fantaticism?

[The Jorge]

Have you ever considered redirecting some of your contempt for police incompetence towards murderous religious fantaticism?

No, mostly as religious fanaticism has had very little impact on my life whereas the perfidy of the filth has.

[Luis Anaconda]

yeah, they should think theirselves lucky that the met had the good grace to shoot him really :rolleyes:

:nod: Particularly as they have a terrible strike rate

[Monty92]

No, mostly as religious fanaticism has had very little impact on my life whereas the perfidy of the filth has.

So the rule is we should only moan about stuff that directly affects us? What's the thinking there, exactly?

[redgunamo]

:nod: Particularly as they have a terrible strike rate

Still better than Giroud #1teaminlondon

[The Jorge]

So the rule is we should only moan about stuff that directly affects us? What's the thinking there, exactly?

The thinking would be not to let yourself be told who the bogeyman is, let alone believe the people telling you

[redgunamo]

So the rule is we should only moan about stuff that directly affects us? What's the thinking there, exactly?

It's that you only banter off those you don't like. Rather admirable really.

[redgunamo]

The thinking would be not to let yourself be told who the bogeyman is, let alone believe the people telling you

:nod: Even íf they're right. *Especially* if they're right.

[Ash]

As we learn from The Tunnel, terrorism is carried out by disgruntled ex-police officers and millitant atheists. And as the script-writers are at pains to point out, anyone who suggests that there could be any link between Islamism and Terrorism is basically the same as 1980's paki-bashers.

[Monty92]

The thinking would be not to let yourself be told who the bogeyman is, let alone believe the people telling you

I think you (conveniently) think I think the bogeyman is not who I actually think the bogeyman is.

[The Jorge]

I think you (conveniently) think I think the bogeyman is not who I actually think the bogeyman is.

Who is the bogeyman, man?

[Monty92]

Who is the bogeyman, man?

The bogeyman doesn't exist, Jorge. That's the point.

Saying that, I do think anyone who would draw a moral equivalence between, say, the extra-judicial assasination of Osama Bin Laden and the murder of Lee Rigby, is, on balance, a net contributor to the world's problems.

[The Jorge]

The bogeyman doesn't exist, Jorge. That's the point.

Saying that, I do think anyone who would draw a moral equivalence between, say, the extra-judicial assasination of Osama Bin Laden and the murder of Lee Rigby, is, on balance, a net contributor to the world's problems.

Are they not both murders?

[Monty92]

Are they not both murders?

I prefer assassination. As should you, if you were being remotely intellectually honest.

[The Jorge]

I prefer assassination. As should you, if you were being remotely intellectually honest.

I'm not entirely sure what the difference is, or why I'm being intellectually dishonest.

Both were political, though I dont see why that really makes a difference to whether they were murders or not.

Mind you, you're finding enough liguistic equivalence to suggest there may be a moral one.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Jorge you are either an utter fool or an utter ****.

I don't wish ill or anyone but I do honestly wonder whether your moral equivalence would survive, say, your child being sliced up in front of you by a religious fanatic.

[Monty92]

I'm not entirely sure what the difference is, or why I'm being intellectually dishonest.

Both were political, though I dont see why that really makes a difference to whether they were murders or not.

Mind you, you're finding enough liguistic equivalence to suggest there may be a moral one.

You're being intellectually dishonest because you don't - can't - disapprove of the killing of Bin Laden and you do - must - disapprove of the killing of Lee Rigby. Thought experiments around moral relativism/equivalence can be a worthy and interesting exercise, but in this case - as you well know - it simply doesn't work.

[The Jorge]

You're being intellectually dishonest because you don't - can't - disapprove of the killing of Bin Laden and you do - must - disapprove of the killing of Lee Rigby. Thought experiments around moral relativism/equivalence can be a worthy and interesting exercise, but in this case - as you well know - it simply doesn't work.

No, you're saying I'm being intellectually dishonest becasuse you cant work out why I dont approve of killing someone, anyone.

[Monty92]

No, you're saying I'm being intellectually dishonest becasuse you cant work out why I dont approve of killing someone, anyone.

But you do approve of killing murderous terrorists who pose a continued threat. You must.

[The Jorge]

But you do approve of killing murderous terrorists who pose a continued threat. You must.

I don't understand why I must. And I also don't understand why we're somehow any better than them if we do.

[Herr Floyd]

like “RSPB forever!" or some such?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/10/police-apologise-for-allahu-akbar-use-in-mock-manchester-attack

Get out while you can Monty mate. You wont get any protection from the leaders in this Country. For your childs sake get out while you still can. Jorge would happily watch your family get chopped up in the street by the 'you know who's' and shout down anyone who would dare criticise.