Jump to content

Politics


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

You did when your first thoughts on the Paris atrocities, while it was happening, was to blame Cameron.

Out of curiosity, how does that make him an apologist for islamist terrorism? he would of had to of blamed the people who were killed to be an apologist I would of thought?

 

Personally I think the situation is a little more complex than just western intervention being responsible, the roots of ISIS can be found as far back as the Iraqi/Saddam Fedayeen, who were throwing homosexuals off buildings and chopping womens heads off back in the early 90's.

 

What i've found interesting is those that appear to see themselves to the left on here, who have stated that the deaths of working class Syrians are morally justified.

 

I suppose in a country that considers an old-school Social Democrat like Corbyn to be hard left, I shouldn't be surprised by such things :lol:

Edited by RedfernMag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to your first question is, it doesn't. Not once did I absolve the terrorists of blame, I said that instead of blaming Islam/Muslims as a whole (as many have now done) I blamed the fuckwits in charge who insisted on invading/bombing the Middle East (which they are now doing more of)

 

He already knows that though ;)

Edited by StraightEdgeWizard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to your first question is, it doesn't. Not once did I absolve the terrorists of blame, I said that instead of blaming Islam/Muslims as a whole (as many have now done) I blamed the fuckwits in charge who insisted on invading/bombing the Middle East (which they are now doing more of)

 

He already knows that though ;)

And show me where I have said I hate Muslims? There's a massive difference between that and having major concerns over the religion. But it's easy to say that and play the racist card isn't it? Not aware a single person has supported the deaths of Syrian civilians either Redfern Mag, unless you are alluding to the differences in direct terrorism and collateral damage.

 

Ftr, I'm against the proposed actions in Syria. But as usual, Corbyn has ha handled if in a cack handed manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to your first question is, it doesn't. Not once did I absolve the terrorists of blame, I said that instead of blaming Islam/Muslims as a whole (as many have now done) I blamed the fuckwits in charge who insisted on invading/bombing the Middle East (which they are now doing more of)

 

He already knows that though ;)

I don't think anyone in this entire thread has blamed all Muslims for the terrorist attacks in Paris. Perhaps you can point to a quote that suggests otherwise.

 

I have repeatedly said that the blame lies squarely with radicalisation. The terrorists were mainly inspired by a fucked up take on a particularly fucked up religion. That's the root cause behind people blowing themselves up to murder civilians. And while western actions in the Middle East may have swelled their number, it isn't the main thing behind the Paris massacre. It's the ideology, which is a religious form of fascism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And show me where I have said I hate Muslims? There's a massive difference between that and having major concerns over the religion. But it's easy to say that and play the racist card isn't it? Not aware a single person has supported the deaths of Syrian civilians either Redfern Mag, unless you are alluding to the differences in direct terrorism and collateral damage.

 

Ftr, I'm against the proposed actions in Syria. But as usual, Corbyn has ha handled if in a cack handed manner.

 

 

StraightEdgeWizard, on 14 Nov 2015 - 1:18 PM, said:snapback.png

And your starting an argument over a Facebook post you haven't even seen.

 

''Some definitions of racism also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes.''

 

He's definitely a racist. I know you lost your last row with Gemmil but I'm not going to get into another one on here with you

So by disliking a particular religion or religions, you're racist? Count me as a racist then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, since KCG has bought it up again, is it worth having a debate on this? Who on here thinks that disliking a religion (in this case a very regressive one) makes you a racist? J69 and KCG seem to think it does, any other takers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, since KCG has bought it up again, is it worth having a debate on this? Who on here thinks that disliking a religion (in this case a very regressive one) makes you a racist? J69 and KCG seem to think it does, any other takers?

 

 

I don't think it makes you racist, I think it makes you a wanker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Good comeback, wiity quick, incisive, have you ever thought of doing stand up?

Maybe you can help me out, cockknocker.

 

Someone said you're a mature student. I'm calling bullshit on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

It does not seem atheism confirms any sign of intelligence however.

The correlation worldwide between education and religiosity would suggest otherwise.

 

The US is a bit of an exception overall admittedly but within the country the correlation applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, Osborne's 3% stamp duty premium, which on paper is a good idea to dissuade landlords from buying up all shared property and allow FTBs instead to buy homes....

 

Well a Treasury spokesperson has admitted that limited companies with portfolios of 15 properties or more are exempt from the increased stamp duty. So the wealthier you are as a property developer, the better positioned you are to keep buying up property. You could not make this lot up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, Osborne's 3% stamp duty premium, which on paper is a good idea to dissuade landlords from buying up all shared property and allow FTBs instead to buy homes....

 

Well a Treasury spokesperson has admitted that limited companies with portfolios of 15 properties or more are exempt from the increased stamp duty. So the wealthier you are as a property developer, the better positioned you are to keep buying up property. You could not make this lot up.

Expect that news to be all over nowhere.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.