Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) We've turned the CIA over a fair few times namely in Bosnia and we came out even against the old KGB who had the biggest network in the world for a fair few decades. We led the way in recruiting Muslims two decades ago. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2415 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I don't think you'll find many people at all who support violence against Middle East civilians. Even if that violence is accidental and the result of war. On the other hand, you'll find plenty of Muslims who support the open and deliberate murder of Western civilians by means of terrorism. I think the attempt by HF to equate one with the other is a pathetic attempt to understate the role that religious doctrine plays in shaping the views of those from one side of the conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 We've turned the CIA over a fair few times namely in Bosnia and we came out even against the old KGB who had the biggest network in the world for a fair few decades. We led the way in recruiting Muslims two decades ago. I'm sure you'll have read this one before... http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/entries/3662a707-0af9-3149-963f-47bea720b460 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) Some of those stories man. Old days though...There was a bit too much public school in the mix. If you want a comparison look at the North London mosque stuff....Everyone giving away UK passports or offering weapons training was basically Mi5. There isn't a mosque or a madrasa in Pakistan that isn't 'ours'. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17783 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I don't think you'll find many people at all who support violence against Middle East civilians. Even if that violence is accidental and the result of war. On the other hand, you'll find plenty of Muslims who support the open and deliberate murder of Western civilians by means of terrorism. I think the attempt by HF to equate one with the other is a pathetic attempt to understate the role that religious doctrine plays in shaping the views of those from one side of the conflict. I'd agree with this. I've found this thread interesting, wondering what MF's issues are with it, besides the lack of tit photos, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I don't think you'll find many people at all who support violence against Middle East civilians. Even if that violence is accidental and the result of war. Really? I frequently hear "Turn the whole fkin place to glass" Here's a few from the last few hours... https://twitter.com/EntropicDissent/status/665966627289210880 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) Ha ha you gimps. Welcome to Eurasia. Asymmetric up your arse. Tell me you didn't see it coming. You think they were just going to sit tight and let us take the piss with our pensions and hospitals and 'rights'. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2415 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Really? I frequently hear "Turn the whole fkin place to glass" Here's a few from the last few hours... https://twitter.com/EntropicDissent/status/665966627289210880 From twitter? Really? I said not 'many'. Not 'none'. There is a difference. Nice attempt to misrepresent my argument by using the tweets of sociopaths from twitter though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) It's a weird one cause TTL and HF are both right. But I always thought opinions were manufactured, I mean why else spend billions on media conglomerates? I honesty hand to heart can't say that I can trust my own opinions as my own and will always search the old data bank for what happened and when...Why I think this and why that? And all those times I was wrong. The news we get is such a narrow band of light and gone through various filters and as companies take over others this gets worse year by year. They used to say history will tell but now they rewrite it don't they? Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 From twitter? Really? I said not 'many'. Not 'none'. There is a difference. Nice attempt to misrepresent my argument by using the tweets of sociopaths from twitter though. What is the difference please? Genuinely not following you. Clearly the support for violence against innocent people is what makes someone sociopathic. It doesn't make sense to me that you say loads of muslims are like that, but not many from other groups...but then dismiss the abundant number of non-muslims expressing those hideous view as distinct from that. These ARE the corresponding examples on the other side, aren't they? I think the difference is that we see any muslim expressing these repellent views as a potential terrorist. With the might of the multi-trillion westerm military complex pointed the other way, non-muslims expressing such views offer no such concern. If you want a more mainstream look at the western apologists for violence in the middle east than Twitter, just look at reaction to the Kunduz hospital strike a few weeks back. A sustained apache helicopter attack on a hospital full of citizens greeted throughout the mainstream media with justification (they were harbouring the enemy) excuses (it was all just an accident) and resignation to it being an intentional attack (ah well, the fog of war eh). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) Muslims aren't the enemy. They are being used and told as many lies as we're told. Looking at a multi-cultural country like the UK when it was working and it generally has for ages I was always happy to explain to nonplussed Germans how it worked...How it was a black and brown man would say he was English and so on...They had the blood laws here that were only abolished a few years back..It was murder to get a German passport for the Turks and Afghans...They were genuinely stunned that we gave them out for simply being born in the UK. This battle the Muslim community are facing is our battle and if there is one nation on earth that can make it right its England. Even if we have to go into every Muslim household and read them Kipling. Germany is not a multi-cultural country, nor is America or France or Australia what we have taken for granted for ages is in danger. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5911 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Eye for an eye, bomb for a bomb http://risenews.net/2015/11/france-stirkes-back-isis-under-fire-in-syria-as-french-planes-rock-terrorist-hq/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2415 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 What is the difference please? Genuinely not following you. Clearly the support for violence against innocent people is what makes someone sociopathic. It doesn't make sense to me that you say loads of muslims are like that, but not many from other groups...but then dismiss the abundant number of non-muslims expressing those hideous view as distinct from that. These ARE the corresponding examples on the other side, aren't they? I think the difference is that we see any muslim expressing these repellent views as a potential terrorist. With the might of the multi-trillion westerm military complex pointed the other way, non-muslims expressing such views offer no such concern. If you want a more mainstream look at the western apologists for violence in the middle east than Twitter, just look at reaction to the Kunduz hospital strike a few weeks back. A sustained apache helicopter attack on a hospital full of citizens greeted throughout the mainstream media with justification (they were harbouring the enemy) excuses (it was all just an accident) and resignation to it being an intentional attack (ah well, the fog of war eh). What's the difference between 'none' and 'not many'? Are you fucking serious? I'm starting to think you are being wilfully ignorant. Just like the last time I attempted to engage with you. The 'genuinely not following' came up last time after continued attempts on my part to make my argument as simple as possible. Renton understands it. Parky understands it. Probably everyone else understands my position. Perhaps the issue is not the lack of clarity in my argument? I don't want to accuse you of deliberately misconstruing what I'm saying, but it's becoming quite clear that that is exactly what you're doing. What the difference between 'none' and 'not many'? Wow. 'Abundant number of non-muslims'? From your database of tweets, huh? Fuck sake mate. Get a grip. Are you suggesting the West are deliberately targeting Middle Eastern civilians? I suppose Facebook is rife with support for that one, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 38768 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I'd agree with this. I've found this thread interesting, wondering what MF's issues are with it, besides the lack of tit photos, obviously. Just my usual high brow stuff, calling you lot out for indiscriminately calling innocent people cunts, or something. Can't remember I do like me some Arab tittays, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2415 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Eye for an eye, bomb for a bomb http://risenews.net/2015/11/france-stirkes-back-isis-under-fire-in-syria-as-french-planes-rock-terrorist-hq/ Here's another one trying to equate military aggression against an enemy with wanton violence against civilians. Preemtive Anti 'You're A Racist' Disclaimer: I don't agree with violence of any kind, but that doesn't inhibit my ability to delineate between different kinds of violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19825 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 You're spot on toonotl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 French proper airstrikes on Raqqa (at last). http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/15/middleeast/france-announces-raqqa-airstrikes-on-isis/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34467 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) This is what the terrorists want. A schism in the Toontastic fabric. Edited November 15, 2015 by Gemmill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19825 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 France has to retaliate, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 19825 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 This is what the terrorists want. A schism in the Toontastic fabric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) On Raqqa yes. Isis have held it for ages and all their barbarity goes on there as routine. Slavery, child prostitution, women are whipped regularly for small indiscretions etc.. barbarity, executions and so on..While stupid cunts go around quoting some bit of the Koran they memorized in Tunisia or Pakistan or perhaps the Cuacases. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 4964 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Here's another one trying to equate military aggression against an enemy with wanton violence against civilians. Preemtive Anti 'You're A Racist' Disclaimer: I don't agree with violence of any kind, but that doesn't inhibit my ability to delineate between different kinds of violence. Yes but, you're aware that our strikes hit civilians as well, right? We will have killed far more Arab civilians than ISIS have killed ours. The US blew up a Red Cross hospital earlier this year ffs... The fact that our military are choosing military targets who happen to be based in civilian areas does make it more difficult, but make no mistake that our governments have weighed it up and decided that civilian deaths on their side are firstly inevitable, and secondly worth it. If we retaliate to this, again, what is the consequence likely to be? Do you think that it will be more or less likely to result in another massacre in one of our capital cities in a few months time? It's a cycle of utter stupidity, the cost of which is borne by civilians on both sides. At the same time, as Gloom has said, France HAs to retaliate. It's cizitenry will demand no less, even if it only leads to more pain - which it will. Such a sad state of affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 What's the difference between 'none' and 'not many'? Are you fucking serious? I'm starting to think you are being wilfully ignorant. Just like the last time I attempted to engage with you. The 'genuinely not following' came up last time after continued attempts on my part to make my argument as simple as possible. Renton understands it. Parky understands it. Probably everyone else understands my position. Perhaps the issue is not the lack of clarity in my argument? I don't want to accuse you of deliberately misconstruing what I'm saying, but it's becoming quite clear that that is exactly what you're doing. What the difference between 'none' and 'not many'? Wow. 'Abundant number of non-muslims'? From your database of tweets, huh? Fuck sake mate. Get a grip. Are you suggesting the West are deliberately targeting Middle Eastern civilians? I suppose Facebook is rife with support for that one, huh? I thought you were differentiating between muslims that support violence (dangerous because of their religion) and non-muslims (just sociopaths on Twitter). If that's not the case and you're just comparing numbers, How are you quantifying that? Gut feeling? Renton has provided numbers about the (larrge) minority of muslims sympathising earlier, The only numbers I can find that might provide some indication on non-muslims are that a two thirds majority of UK/US public support drone attacks that we know kill innocent civilians in 90% of fatalities. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-air-strikes-on-syria-public-back-bombing-campaign-by-margin-of-two-to-one-says-poll-10428064.html Happy to be shown a more indicative poll than that though, as it's clearly not representing exactly what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 3997 Posted November 15, 2015 Author Share Posted November 15, 2015 The views of everyone who has discussed Paris in the Taxi since Thursday ranges from close the borders, nuke em, send them home etc etc. All age ranges / average working class. I guess all the lefties are using Uber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now