peasepud

Its time to end this LM, its been pointed out dozens of times that Renton did not once state his medical degree made him an expert but you insist on just ignoring the facts and posting the same drivel, I will state now that my knowledge of Inland Revenue Computer systems does not give me any qualification in debates such as this hwever your totally unstated experience also does not. You cant go on making statements and saying "you know nothing about my experience in national security" when you blatently dont have any (unless a two year stint as a Tesco security guard counts). For once and for all, Renton does not think his qualification makes him an expert on this subject. Renton did not abuse HTL however the reverse is true, both however apologised and forgot about it, stop bringing other peoples disagreements into your own. I was happy to debate this issue, you it seems are not.

Ahem....... No she's not due until the back end of July I think, whereas wor lass is due on the 14th June but could drop any day now! So did Smoothys missus have her sprog then?

what gets me is mine is one of the 3, I know my loo thats why I wont use it

Well I followed that link and read through to page 8, what I found read slightly different to that. Renton comes on and says "HTL advocated x,y and executing children iirc", 3 pages later HTL comes on and questions it where Renton replies with "I honestly thought you were amongst those advocating stringing up the Bulger killers who were children at the time, if Im wrong then sorry for any offence" Followed by HTL completely ignoring this and stating "from your posts I reckon your a paedophile" If you're going to use links as proof in arguments then you need to check their validity to your argument. That link clearly shows Renton have a valid query re HTL and child executions, HTL ignores it and abuses Renton with the paedo shite.

What colour hair does this Mark have ? 150139[/snapback] does he wear poncy shoes? eat chocolate by the barrowload?

dunno about a cop out, it was tongue in cheek but at the end of the day, the subject matter regardless of how jokey was too close to the edge. Implying someone fiddles with kiddies aint right.

As pointed out by TopLass.

so you think bestiality is worse than the alternative you previously put forward? is thats smoke I can smell?

little teensy people

I think that's rediculous, by the way. 150064[/snapback] sorry mate you were proving a point and I know how it was meant but it was in bad taste. If you'd made it "Leazes likes animals" then not so bad, but the kiddy bit well....bit too close.

see the ones Gemmill wears to the pissups

beleives that the way to cure a flu is to drown it in smoothies, milkshakes, water, mores smoothies and 16 of those little bottles where you have one a day but Ive already had 4 tonight.

I havent seen the bill but I dont have a problem with that, however we cant just keep upping the time allowed, at the end of the day the logic behind holding a suspect before charge is that there should have been some fairly good evidence in the first place to warrant them being nicked. Thats the country we live in a fair and honest one. In short though increasing the time seems a good thing to do. This is the bit that causes the main "discussions" and I think its the way in which you word these things, if you read the bits in bold it might make it easier to see why people have taken umbrage with this bit in the past. If you cant find them then you cant lock them up and stop them I have no problem with life imprisonment for terrorists, the death penalty is a more awkward one, if the crime can be proven 100% then yes but I feel 100% is always unlikely and in the case of Islamic terrorists thats not a deterrent its something to aim for, global stage for martyrdom and another 1000 recruits for the cause. So do we all but no matter what we do security wise, they will be there, like it or lump it the only way to remove Islamic terrorism is to remove the reason for it, make them see that the West is not a threat, that Christianity is not the devil and make the extremists realise theres no reason to hate. That cannot be done with a bullet, it would have to be over time and using much more subtle methods, hearts and minds is a very real thing. My question to you though is, do you think that stopping immigration would reduce terrorism in this country? I dont think so, as Ive said before I think it would do the opposite, would incur the wrath of normal muslims and convert yet more both here and abroad to extremism.

I have never claimed you arent up for the debate, I do however believe that when people disagree wih you and you have no further lines to follow then you resort to bringing in unrelated arguments to back up the case, Im happy to debate this issue as I quite enjoy it and am actually interested to know your real views, not the ones that appear to be (because frankly I dont believe you are a real racist, but thats the view that people are getting). I dont have a degree of any sort, went to a bog standard West End school (my familys originally from the same area as you if I remember correctly). However the HTL/ Renton one iirc was actually the other way round, HTL accused Renton of being a paedophile (I think) so you may want to rethink that one. There may have been points where Ive been having a dig at you in this however that wasnt the plan, it was to stop all the shite that was flying and sort the crap out which I think we have now done.

I was up for the debate, just needed the whole "left wing dogooders shite" to stop first. 150002[/snapback] Going by the remark that Dotbum has just made PP, you are accusing the wrong people of not debating - again. Is he one of your crowd on here ? 150014[/snapback] Not sure where the "crowd" comes from, I think if you mean I have some gang of people on here that follow my lead then Im sure every one of the feckers here would laugh at that I have however deleted the DotBum post, I hadnt noticed it as anything until you pointed it out however agreed it should go. I wasnt accusing anyone of not debating, I was saying that the whole thing had become a bitch fest, Im more than happy to debate the points put forward as long as it doesnt end in a "fuck of" slanging match.

I was up for the debate, just needed the whole "left wing dogooders shite" to stop first.

I agree, its a nice to have but enough resources to fight an ever growing unseen enemy would mean unlimited resources and as I pointed out in that post even then you could not guarantee to stop a bomb. The security services in this country have to be one of, if not, the best in the world however they can only act upon info they acquire. Heres a scenario for you, 15 year old Andrew Mohammed Jones, has a white father and a muslim mother, hes raised british, respect his country, elders all that but is also taught his mothers religion and therefore goes to mosque, while there hes taken in by teachings of radicals and decides to become a suicide bomber, one day as normal he walks out of mosque with his schoolbag over his shoulder but instead of heading to school walks into Eldon Square and detonates. Now tell me how the security services could have stopped that. But thats where intelligence fails, it starts out as something unusual, a name heard on a tapped phone call, three men buying a large amount of fertilizer, things like that start the ball in motion, in a lot of cases though these come to nothing, its proven to be totally innocent, the men have set up a gardening business, the name heard on suspected terrorist phone conversation was not part of their group, all these things raise some suspicion which our services have to follow up and 9/10 prove to be nothing out of the ordinary, once in a while one of these nothing out of the ordinary cases will go as far as a full police raid and a man getting injured to then prove they're innocent. Again, I agree if theres some kind of suspicion then the services must act and if someone is shot in a struggle then so be it. I know if the police raided my house at 4am with guns all over the place I sure as jack shit wouldnt put up a fight. If though, Leazes you go back to the first page of this thread thats all people were saying to you, Renton pointed out that raids like this had taken place in the past with no charges being brought. This depends on your definition of "shouldnt be here", there can only be one clear cut definiton of that, which to me is "someone who does not have permission from the British Government to live here" so that would mean illegal immigrants? yes? Then its very easy to list them, none, none of the 7/7 bombers were illegal immigrants. As has been pointed out none of them were immigrants, all were born here, all are British, which brings us onto the next bit though.. Again, agreed, but without sounding like a left wing do-gooder, would people really use the term supposedly "British" if these bombers had turned out to be Joe Bloggs and Frank Smith, a couple of heedcases from Lambeth? Again, who are these people though? there are a number of individuals within this country who are intent on killing in the name of Islam, this number is unknown but is probably somewhere in the high hundreds to a thousand (not that Im any kind of expert, its a guess). Reading back through the thread though, I dont see anyone who is advocating letting these people threaten us, what I do see is people questioning how we stop them, you came in at the very first post and said ..... Tongue in cheek, have a dig at the leftys statement, fair enough but you never clarified it, people asked if you were advocating the closure of our borders to any immigrants or to certain types/ religions. You never came back, again my personal view on this is it would be disasterous. The terrorists are here, they dont get imported like in Day of the Jackal, Osama isnt rigning up "Jihad 4U" and ordering 3 suicide bombers for London next Tuesday. These are individuals and groups of people who appear perfectly normal, living their day to day lives as they have done for many years here but who one day will get onto a bus, say a prayer and explode. Agreed, in fact as a statement its a damn good one apart from the "allow those who threaten us freedom" again, it depends what you mean by "threaten us" if you're referring to the likes of the scum that paraded through the streets with banners stating "behead non believers" and dressed up as suicide bombers then we cannot lock them up, they havent 'technically' threatened us, what they did do though is put themselves on the "radar" they are now logged with MI5, MI6 and a whole host of others, they're names are added to the trigger words at GCHQ and if they fart, it'll be smelt. If however your referring to the likes of that hook handed one eyed twat then yes, we did let him live here and be free but as someone pointed out he himself wasnt a threat, we probably gained huge amounts of intelligence from him, once he became useless then they found a reason and banged him up. So in a nutshell, my stance on this is that changing immigration laws will not stop or even reduce terrorism, a succesful terrorist blends in with the community and doesnt stand out, if you can talk the language and have integrated into local culture then your going to disappear. Appear new, in a country with a beard, quoting the Koran and refusing to speak to women while stating "death to non believers" and you'll have a dozen MI5 and immigration officals watching you scratch your arse.

pah you old fogies, get young n hip down wit da kidz in da hoooooooood.

I'll see your Jim Rosenthal and raise you Jeremy Kylle (or however you spell it) daytime "im an expert on anything from alcoholism to buggering rabbits" chat show host.

Have you lost your massive belly yet? 149484[/snapback] Its nearly gone I tells ya, you should try this diet would work wonders for you.

you and your fancy dan left wing theories, you want to try living in the real world mate Sound like nice blokes dont they? says it all in those two lines.

But you see thats where you are wrong, plain and simple. List the bombs planted and who planted them then give the reason(s) why they shouldnt have been here please note though use of "cos they will plant a bomb" dont count. As has been pointed out a thousand times so far these were long standing british citizens not immigrants, from what I remember all four of the 7/7 were 2nd or 3rd generation British citizens. As for lacking the resources, how? we've had this one as well, you can throw £100 million in every day but if they dont make a mistake and make someone suspicious then theres nothing you can do to detect them. Theres no *dark skinned men plotting radar* been developed yet. Believe it or not, these terrorists are actually canny bright like. Now Id prefer you didnt lump me in with the left wing do gooders, but then again Im sure Renton, SLP, Alex and everyone else on here that has disagreed with you would also like that. Im in no way a do gooder and frankly I hope that if we can identify and wipe out every definite terrorist then its done but I also know that the statement you made at the start of this very thread which everyone else disagreed with would be the most ridiculous thing this country or any other could do. It would be saying "we hate Islam , come and get us". except you wouldnt be saying Islam it would be "we hate Pakis..and chinks, wops, spicks and darkies" because yet again, as has been pointed out loads of times and you've ignored these are not just asian men believeing in this, Islam covers many races, creeds and colours. Sorry all for the use of certain phrases and terms, its to prove a point not personal choice.

balls maybe, legs sadly not therefore legging it not an option.

just shave it off and go as someone normal, you never know you might just score as well.

I used to think that you were actually Freddy Shepherd however Ive now come to the conclusion that your actually an aspiring politician and seeing as you havent even answered the first question properly yet then maybe it is for some new 3 lettered named party. You've refused to answer the questions here stating that you havent got time yet you go on that other forum thingy with Pilchard, wacky and the other one and make out that its a Poll we're running? strange, I cant seem to remember ever mentioning the word poll in it, in fact you'd be running a strange sort of howaythtoon type poll with only two respondents (sorry scratch that only Renton). So for the benefit of this thread and those who can be arsed to follow it anymore. And more importantly for the benefit of Renton who I think has been proven to NOT have strange fancy dan views, doesnt think we should give terrorists a cup of tea and slice of cake and hasnt once used a medical degree as a reason why he should now more about Security issues than you. So for those reasons, I'll copy and paste the "POLL" from Howaythetoon onto here so people can get a rough idea of your answers and compare them to what you've been saying. So then, I reckon Mr Leazes will make a fine politician, always ducking the questions and even denying their existence in some strange "what the fucks that???" kind of way! I bow down to you mate, you really are a star, comedy at its best. I think the outcome of this thread (which will be locked in an hour) now stands at RENTON 5 LEAZES NIL