Terrorism

[Park Life 70]

tl;dr Parky is still terrified of women

 

There was a thing called the women's movement, you can go back a hundred years....For want of a better term it was 'grass roots'. That's long gone. It was colonized by Capitalism and turned into a 'lifestyle product/choice'...Catchphrases, branding, signs, cod ideologies, faux outrage...Product placement...Facade.

 

This is not a feminist..This is pure articfice...Although along with Oprah Winfrey and startlingly Beyonce she will be found in many lists of modern feminists. These are actors and entertainers playing the role of feminists in the best tradition of the 'hyper real'.

 

Edited November 3, 2016 by Park Life

[Rayvin 4964]

Hard to argue with Parky on this point tbf. All it seems to do these days is instill victim complexes and make everyone really angry at each other.

 

Although I get all my feminism from the Guardian, so what I see may not be representative.

[Renton 17784]

Definitely not a feminist, notice the lack of axillary hair for one.

 

Western women don't have complete equality yet but it's great that they've come such a long way under post enlightenment western culture. It takes a special type of idiot to not notice this hasn't happened in Islamic majority countries yet. Why? They haven't had their enlightenment yet.

 

I recall NJS always hoped that they would some how become "corrupted" and therefore democracy and the niceties of near equality would ensue. I'm of the belief that this was the intention of European governments and Obama during the Arab spring. But it's all gone hugely tits up and nobody has a plan B. As a result certain liberal types have decided to turn their attacks on the "mother" countries of democracy rather than the root cause 9f these failed or failing Islamic states. Imo like.

 

Ask yourself a question. Even if there was no war, where would you like to live most? Then ask that from a female perspective, or a gay perspective. Then get back to slagging off Obama.

[Dr Gloom 19826]

Yeah, we should pay the airfares for the home grown terrorists so they can all move to syria of wherever and see how much fun it is living in the caliphate.

[Rayvin 4964]

Sigh...

 

And around we go again...

 

Just because the West is 'better' than these other countries, doesn't mean it isn't something that could be drastically improved, or that it is above criticism. In fact, I would argue that the West is as good as it is despite the way we're run. Agree on the lack of a ME enlightenment.

[Renton 17784]

Sigh...

 

And around we go again...

 

Just because the West is 'better' than these other countries, doesn't mean it isn't something that could be drastically improved, or that it is above criticism. In fact, I would argue that the West is as good as it is despite the way we're run. Agree on the lack of a ME enlightenment.

Or maybe we're not run as bad as you make out?

 

I asked you a straight question yesterday which I don't think you or HF answered. To summarise, do you think Obama and Clinton are misguided, or do you think they are genuinely evil? Or possibly there's a third answer, geopolitics is much more complicated than Parky and HF's cut and pastes, and we aren't informed enough to answer either question (and possibly not intelligent enough to even understand it)?

 

I go for the latter, so look at the outcomes. They are indisputably better in our side of the world. If the world is to become a better place, we should be the role model, as imperfect as that model is.

[Rayvin 4964]

This article, which I've posted previously, sums up my view. They are actors in the perpetuation of a failing system. I have no strong feelings on either of them beyond the system they represent:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

 

If I had to choose between all three options, I'd say it's mostly 1 with a slight tendency towards 2 insofar as they know what they're doing, and they do it to remain in the position they're in. I wouldn't go so far as to say they're evil. Just complicit.

 

Our model isn't going to last if it continues to fail.

[Rayvin 4964]

Also, the things we like about the West - liberalism, tolerance and free thought, can all be achieved without the nonsense we get at government level. Our culture predates Neoliberalism.

[toonotl 2416]

The US and UK claim their motives for intervening in the middle east are to stop evil doers like Saddam.  Is that the reality?  Or is that an excuse that can be used to garner support among their population for sending their young men and women to die in order to protect our own interests?

 

Do you not think ISIS take a similar approach to convincing people to kill themselves?  Try to convince idiots that it's a just and noble holy cause, when they obviously know it's polictical power wrangling.

 

(1) You are claiming you can read minds.

(2) You are claiming this power gives you the ability to know the inner workings of people's subconscious minds (whom you've never met).

(3) You literally won't accept primary sources as evidence because you deny the producer of the primary source knows their own motivations as well as you know their motivations.

 

Wow. Just wow. This conversation is totally pointless. I've never come across someone this attached to their ideology as to deny reality so pitifully. This is pathetic. You are pathetic.

 

They have said what their motivations are for anyone with a brain to listen. And you look a fool. Again. I can't explain things to you any other way so you'll understand. I think it's simply that I'm not smart enough to understand how stupid you are. 

[toonotl 2416]

Unless of course that's exactly what ISIS want you to think. 

 

Dafiq is produced for ISIS members.

 

I'm not making any claims without evidence here so I'll excuse myself from discussing 'what ifs', or attempting to engage in Leftist mind-reading.

[Happy Face 29]

No, I base my view on what suicide bombers have said their motivations were (I can provide links if you like) and what the pentagon (a source I quoted) says motivates muslim animosity.

 

Religious extremism is a powerful recruiting too, not the only one and I don't think the primary one.

 

Nice rant though, no matter how untrue.

[Renton 17784]

(1) You are claiming you can read minds.

(2) You are claiming this power gives you the ability to know the inner workings of people's subconscious minds (whom you've never met).

(3) You literally won't accept primary sources as evidence because you deny the producer of the primary source knows their own motivations as well as you know their motivations.

 

Wow. Just wow. This conversation is totally pointless. I've never come across someone this attached to their ideology as to deny reality so pitifully. This is pathetic. You are pathetic.

 

They have said what their motivations are for anyone with a brain to listen. And you look a fool. Again. I can't explain things to you any other way so you'll understand. I think it's simply that I'm not smart enough to understand how stupid you are.

I'm absolutely sure HF is just playing extreme devil's advocate out of boredom or sleep deprivation nowadays. He lives less than a mile from me, you probably 12,000, but am sure we'd all get along at Brown's. Have you been called a racist yet or threatened with implied expulsion from TT like Stevie and Leazes mag? Just saying, that's the risk when you talk against the flock. Edited November 3, 2016 by Renton

[Rayvin 4964]

I'm absolutely sure HF is just playing extreme devil's advocate out of boredom or sleep deprivation nowadays. He lives less than a mile from me, you probably 12,000, but am sure we'd all get along at Brown's. Have you been called a racist yet or threatened with implied expulsion front TT like Stevie and Leazes mag? Just saying, that's the risk when you talk against the flock.

 

If it was that big a risk, Parky would have been exiled years ago.

 

Also, you're supposed to be one of the main protagonists in the expulsion of Leazes

[Renton 17784]

No, I base my view on what suicide bombers have said their motivations were (I can provide links if you like) and what the pentagon (a source I quoted) says motivates muslim animosity.

 

Religious extremism is a powerful recruiting too, not the only one and I don't think the primary one.

 

Nice rant though, no matter how untrue.

If you can't understand the primary motive for suicide bombers is to reap rewards in heaven then you are an idiot HF. Not a rant, an obvious fact. One that you repeatedly ignore.

[Rayvin 4964]

I think his point was more about the potential unseen motives of those leading it, and the extenuating circumstances (personal, economic, and geopolitical) that might make the attackers more susceptible to brainwashing. I don't agree with him on the first bit as I think that they're probably zealots all the way to the top, but it's impossible to know for sure. 

 

On the latter bit, I think he has a point - otherwise, as has been said repeatedly to no answer, they'd all be doing it.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Rayvin

[Happy Face 29]

If you can't understand the primary motive for suicide bombers is to reap rewards in heaven then you are an idiot HF. Not a rant, an obvious fact. One that you repeatedly ignore.

 

I repeatedly ignore it.... but stated 3 posts earlier that it is a factor

 

ISIS statement on Paris attacks 

 

Let France and those who walk in its path know that they will remain on the top of the list of targets of the Islamic State, and that the smell of death will never leave their noses as long as they lead the convoy of the Crusader campaign.

 

The devils advocate twats.  They know it's all religious shite.

[Renton 17784]

If it was that big a risk, Parky would have been exiled years ago.

 

Also, you're supposed to be one of the main protagonists in the expulsion of Leazes

Leazes mag, and his comrades like HTL, were truly obnoxious bigots. I fought him for years. Part in jest but part in seriousness for some I've become their replacements, mainly because of my dislike of Islamic doctrine and it's influence on our culture. That's my opinion.

[toonotl 2416]

This is certainly a cause. We could, arguably, solve all of our terrorism problems by turfing all Muslims out of Europe and locking the door.

 

If, for some reason or another, that proves to be unfeasible, then I guess we're left to just look at which of our actions seem to make the problems worse (destabilising sovereign nations and creating power vacuums that nutjobs can fill, for instance) and try to reign them in a bit.

 

Why is this logic so fucking hard for people. Neither HF or myself are saying that we hate the West. I love the West. I would argue we have the most advanced culture on the planet, based on my subjective interpretations. However, we're fucking terrible when it comes to meddling in other countries affairs. And we expect that this isn't going to somehow have an effect on us on the home front, like the two things are entirely unrelated? As if.

 

So the immigration of violent Islamists in to Europe would explain the rise of Islamist terrorism in Europe in the past twenty years.

 

But you said:

I mean, it's not like we've been fending off terrorism in this country for the centuries that Islam has been in place, is it? It's very much only in the last 20 years, isn't it?

 

So could we solve our terrorist problems in Europe by keeping the terrorists out or not? I thought terrorism in Europe was the result of Western interventionism in the Middle East that has forced the Religion of Peace, after centuries of getting on with each other like a house (or country) on fire, to take it upon themselves to attack people in Europe?

 

Mate. I think you're a good dude, but people need to take responsibility for their own actions. The Islamists attack the West because of religious reasons. They've said that's why. I like to take people at their word. Maybe you could do the same. ISIS/Al Qaeda/Whatever. They're all the same.

 

If Islam is not to blame for Islamic terrorism, answer this question: what does ISIS do that Mohammed didn't do or have done himself? Mohammed was a rapist. Mohammed was a violent warlord. Mohammed was a crazy person who believed a voice in his head wanted him to conquer the world for him. Mohammed was closer to ISIS than any Muslim would ever admit, but that doesn't change the truth: Mohammed was a terrible person. 

 

I'm not really interested in discussing the obfuscated details of who caused what with regards to the West's intervention in the Middle East. Some has been positive: the removal of Saddam. Some has been negative: the arse-licking of the Saudis. But at the end of the day: Islam was founded by a violent, child raping, warlord and ISIS is the manifestation of that above all else. 

 

To finish. What would happen to me in a Muslim country if I said these things?

 

The answer is the problem with Islam.

[Renton 17784]

I repeatedly ignore it.... but stated 3 posts earlier that it is a factor

 

ISIS statement on Paris attacks

 

 

 

Let France and those who walk in its path know that they will remain on the top of the list of targets of the Islamic State, and that the smell of death will never leave their noses as long as they lead the convoy of the Crusader campaign.

The devils advocate twats. They know it's all religious shite.

Whilst completely ignoring toonotl's primary source quotes and the fucking obvious personal motivations for these suicide bombers. Jesus wept. Edited November 3, 2016 by Renton

[Rayvin 4964]

Leazes mag, and his comrades like HTL, were truly obnoxious bigots. I fought him for years. Part in jest but part in seriousness for some I've become their replacements, mainly because of my dislike of Islamic doctrine and it's influence on our culture. That's my opinion.

 

Here man, no one sees you like that I'm sure. If I've implied that in any way in my posts then, and knowing full well Gemmill will take the piss out of me for it, I apologise.

 

I agree with a lot of your views on Islam, as I've said in this thread (which I hope is clear). Literally the only thing you and I seem to disagree on in this respect, is that I think we reap what we sow with Islam to a degree in terms of our repeated destabilizing actions in their countries - and you think they'd be attacking us anyway because they're called to do so.

 

You're absolutely right to put your opinion down on here, and I'm personally grateful that you do. I find it allows me to challenge my views

 

I also appreciate how you don't say you're not smart enough to appreciate how stupid I am

[Rayvin 4964]

So the immigration of violent Islamists in to Europe would explain the rise of Islamist terrorism in Europe in the past twenty years.

 

But you said:

I mean, it's not like we've been fending off terrorism in this country for the centuries that Islam has been in place, is it? It's very much only in the last 20 years, isn't it?

 

So could we solve our terrorist problems in Europe by keeping the terrorists out or not? I thought terrorism in Europe was the result of Western interventionism in the Middle East that has forced the Religion of Peace, after centuries of getting on with each other like a house (or country) on fire, to take it upon themselves to attack people in Europe?

 

Mate. I think you're a good dude, but people need to take responsibility for their own actions. The Islamists attack the West because of religious reasons. They've said that's why. I like to take people at their word. Maybe you could do the same. ISIS/Al Qaeda/Whatever. They're all the same.

 

If Islam is not to blame for Islamic terrorism, answer this question: what does ISIS do that Mohammed didn't do or have done himself? Mohammed was a rapist. Mohammed was a violent warlord. Mohammed was a crazy person who believed a voice in his head wanted him to conquer the world for him. Mohammed was closer to ISIS than any Muslim would ever admit, but that doesn't change the truth: Mohammed was a terrible person. 

 

I'm not really interested in discussing the obfuscated details of who caused what with regards to the West's intervention in the Middle East. Some has been positive: the removal of Saddam. Some has been negative: the arse-licking of the Saudis. But at the end of the day: Islam was founded by a violent, child raping, warlord and ISIS is the manifestation of that above all else. 

 

To finish. What would happen to me in a Muslim country if I said these things?

 

The answer is the problem with Islam.

 

I actually don't disagree with any of this, seriously. I've said in a few posts that I can totally see Islam for what it is, and that I think the left handles it really poorly (and hypocritically).

 

My central point, which does appear to be supported to a degree, is that we make ourselves bigger targets through meddling. I sort of wonder if, were we not meddling, we would have to take in as many immigrants as we do. We destabilised Syria, so we get immigrants. We overthrew Saddam, left a power vacuum, and get more immigrants, as ISIS surges forward with no power structures to keep it down. Yes Islam is entirely responsible for its ideology and for the actions they take. Entirely. But we are responsible for making it easier for them to do what they do. Maybe that's how I should argue this in future.

[Happy Face 29]

Whilst completely ignoring toonotl's primary source quotes and the fucking obvious personal motivations for these suicide bombers. Jesus wept.

 

I didn't ignore Toonotls source I said it's one of the best methods of recruiting people.  The way I see it, it's more about convincing them that their religion should not be a barrier to them engaging in a fight that they already feel motivated to wage.

 

Funnily though, you've ignored the ISIS statement I quoted.

 

Have a read of these examples too....

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/24/boston-terrorism-motives-us-violence

[toonotl 2416]

Or maybe we're not run as bad as you make out?

 

I asked you a straight question yesterday which I don't think you or HF answered. To summarise, do you think Obama and Clinton are misguided, or do you think they are genuinely evil? Or possibly there's a third answer, geopolitics is much more complicated than Parky and HF's cut and pastes, and we aren't informed enough to answer either question (and possibly not intelligent enough to even understand it)?

 

I go for the latter, so look at the outcomes. They are indisputably better in our side of the world. If the world is to become a better place, we should be the role model, as imperfect as that model is.

 

Spot on. Nobody is claiming absolutes, except maybe those criticising the West.

[Park Life 70]

I feel like a Klingon Warbird itching to de-cloak in the midst of the half asleep Federation fleet.

[toonotl 2416]

I'm absolutely sure HF is just playing extreme devil's advocate out of boredom or sleep deprivation nowadays. He lives less than a mile from me, you probably 12,000, but am sure we'd all get along at Brown's. Have you been called a racist yet or threatened with implied expulsion from TT like Stevie and Leazes mag? Just saying, that's the risk when you talk against the flock.

 

There's some sort of deprivation going on that's for sure.

 

The so-called accountant has been calling me a hick from his ivory tower. I don't care though. I'll take to twitter if I have to. If the big babies of Toontastic can't handle the truth, I'll go elsewhere.