Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 "I'm afraid I was very, very drunk..." 145786[/snapback] is that your toyboy ? 145787[/snapback] Another prejudice emerges. Leazes isn't a right winger by the way, far from it. I wonder if he meant to put that in the football forum. 145791[/snapback] I don't think its prejudiced to make a comment about willy wooftas Alex. 145797[/snapback] I'm sure Meenzer wasn't too bothered about your comment tbh, it's not really the issue here after all. I still find your assertion you aren't right wing hilarious. Almost as funny/ironic as your giving out curry recipes on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Leazes, do you still consider a successful suicide bomber a threat? I'm just wondering whether we should be looking to shackle them prior to deportation. Assuming we can locate their arms. 145788[/snapback] Amazing you say I don't read Gem. Show me where I said "suicide" bomber 145794[/snapback] You responded to where Spongebob wrote suicide bomber. You didn't actually write suicide bomber. That doesn't mean it wasn't the biggest whoosh ever 145796[/snapback] My question is not however specifically aimed at "suicide" bombers. Can Renton - and you - answer or not ? 145800[/snapback] Answer what? I'll do you a deal by the way, I'll answer if you do (if I can). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Leazes definitely wasn't taking the piss, although I fully expect him to refute that claim when he shows up. Proof if proof were needed that he simply doesn't properly read what others write before jumping in with both feet 145773[/snapback] He's shown he can't even read or comprehend a simple sentence, even when it is pointed out to him in bold. What a complete spanner! Cue: tut tut, insults from one so intelligent etc, ad nauseum. 145783[/snapback] But what I DO do Renton, is answer questions. Like you haven't done here : And - I didn't say suicide bomber. Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? So, please explain how your methods of appeasement ie showing weakness, have contained and/or stopped the bombing of innocent civilians in the UK by terrorists/people who should not be here ? Pretty straightforward questions, for an intelligent guy like you who has all the answers ....... and, yes - tut tut such insults from an "intelligent" guy ... shame I have to keep asking though eh 145785[/snapback] Thing is Leazes, I do answer questions. Anyone who has read these threads will be perfectly aware of who ducks questions - and it isn't me. But I give up, there's no point in arguing with someone who simply hasn't got the ability or inclination to read other people's comments, and makes constant assumptions on what they think. Also, it's hard to answer you because you don't make sense. What do you mean by my methods of appeasement for instance, what assumptions are you making on my views, again? And where have I ever said I have all the answers? Personally though, I think you have shown yourself to be a complete fool on these threads, if you had more sense, you'd just give it up. If you ask a sensible question, I'll consider responding to it (something you never do), but otherwise, your welcome to continue your half-witted rants - they're strangely amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 (edited) Howay then Leazes, what's the question I'm meant to be answering then? Do I have to guess what it is or are you still making it up? Edited June 7, 2006 by alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I think he means me. I mentioned he freely throws insults about and then decides to get on his high horse whenever it comes back. He's still doing it too 145497[/snapback] OK.....if it was you, then I apologise to luckyluke for mixing the 2 of you up But - have you looked at who started the abuse yet, or are you just going to continue proving you don't read the posts properly 145558[/snapback] Leazes is my friend! How jealous are you lot? Leazes ol' buddy, if you continue to fail to debate properly (ie not reading posts, posting irrelevent stock phrases, not answering people's questions) then people will inevitably get frustrated and start insulting you. Sorry me old mucker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Btw, I'd love to know how the threat of execution is a deterrent to a suicide bomber. Care to enlighten me Leazes (see, that is a simple straight forward question you should be able to answer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Leazes definitely wasn't taking the piss, although I fully expect him to refute that claim when he shows up. Proof if proof were needed that he simply doesn't properly read what others write before jumping in with both feet 145773[/snapback] He's shown he can't even read or comprehend a simple sentence, even when it is pointed out to him in bold. What a complete spanner! Cue: tut tut, insults from one so intelligent etc, ad nauseum. 145783[/snapback] But what I DO do Renton, is answer questions. Like you haven't done here : And - I didn't say suicide bomber. Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? So, please explain how your methods of appeasement ie showing weakness, have contained and/or stopped the bombing of innocent civilians in the UK by terrorists/people who should not be here ? Pretty straightforward questions, for an intelligent guy like you who has all the answers ....... and, yes - tut tut such insults from an "intelligent" guy ... shame I have to keep asking though eh 145785[/snapback] Thing is Leazes, I do answer questions. Anyone who has read these threads will be perfectly aware of who ducks questions - and it isn't me. But I give up, there's no point in arguing with someone who simply hasn't got the ability or inclination to read other people's comments, and makes constant assumptions on what they think. Also, it's hard to answer you because you don't make sense. What do you mean by my methods of appeasement for instance, what assumptions are you making on my views, again? And where have I ever said I have all the answers? Personally though, I think you have shown yourself to be a complete fool on these threads, if you had more sense, you'd just give it up. If you ask a sensible question , I'll consider responding to it (something you never do), but otherwise, your welcome to continue your half-witted rants - they're strangely amusing. 145807[/snapback] errrr....the methods you clearly agree with ie those of appeasement, allowing our borders to remain open to more terrorists getting in unchecked or by the back door....this problem has been growing for the last decade and more. Agreed or not ? I am providing an answer, tightening up of the immigration system, to the point of allowing virtually no one else in if need be. What is yours ? And what do you think we should do to them when they are caught ? See the bold. Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 (edited) Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Btw, I'd love to know how the threat of execution is a deterrent to a suicide bomber. Care to enlighten me Leazes (see, that is a simple straight forward question you should be able to answer). 145816[/snapback] Thats a fair point, if you are talking about suicide bombers. But I wasn't, I was talking about any terrorist. See, Renton. Thats called an answer. I will go further, although you might not agree. Suicide bombers may be happy to give up their lives for the love of Allah in the way they choose, but a long lingering torturous one *, or even one in a manner they don't choose instead, might not be quite so attractive. *EDIT. Read to mean "prison sentence".....I haven't got time..... Edited June 7, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. 145820[/snapback] Just read that again. Especially the bit in bold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Leazes definitely wasn't taking the piss, although I fully expect him to refute that claim when he shows up. Proof if proof were needed that he simply doesn't properly read what others write before jumping in with both feet 145773[/snapback] He's shown he can't even read or comprehend a simple sentence, even when it is pointed out to him in bold. What a complete spanner! Cue: tut tut, insults from one so intelligent etc, ad nauseum. 145783[/snapback] But what I DO do Renton, is answer questions. Like you haven't done here : And - I didn't say suicide bomber. Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? So, please explain how your methods of appeasement ie showing weakness, have contained and/or stopped the bombing of innocent civilians in the UK by terrorists/people who should not be here ? Pretty straightforward questions, for an intelligent guy like you who has all the answers ....... and, yes - tut tut such insults from an "intelligent" guy ... shame I have to keep asking though eh 145785[/snapback] Thing is Leazes, I do answer questions. Anyone who has read these threads will be perfectly aware of who ducks questions - and it isn't me. But I give up, there's no point in arguing with someone who simply hasn't got the ability or inclination to read other people's comments, and makes constant assumptions on what they think. Also, it's hard to answer you because you don't make sense. What do you mean by my methods of appeasement for instance, what assumptions are you making on my views, again? And where have I ever said I have all the answers? Personally though, I think you have shown yourself to be a complete fool on these threads, if you had more sense, you'd just give it up. If you ask a sensible question , I'll consider responding to it (something you never do), but otherwise, your welcome to continue your half-witted rants - they're strangely amusing. 145807[/snapback] errrr....the methods you clearly agree with ie those of appeasement, allowing our borders to remain open to more terrorists getting in unchecked or by the back door....this problem has been growing for the last decade and more. Agreed or not ? I am providing an answer, tightening up of the immigration system, to the point of allowing virtually no one else in if need be. What is yours ? And what do you think we should do to them when they are caught ? See the bold. Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. 145820[/snapback] Please point out anywhere in the history of toontastic where I have advocated having an open-door immigration policy. You can't because I have never said it. Go on, prove me wrong. What a joke it is trying to discuss anything with a man who randomly makes stuff up. I take it your completely closed door policy extends to all countries, including EU countires, the US, Australia etc? Or is it just for people from Africa or the Middle East? Please answer, it's a straight forward question. Of course, you're not right wing, are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. 145820[/snapback] Just read that again. Especially the bit in bold 145824[/snapback] No. You're wrong Alex, I was prepared to discuss it like an adult, but clearly Renton wasn't able to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. 145820[/snapback] Just read that again. Especially the bit in bold 145824[/snapback] No. You're wrong Alex, I was prepared to discuss it like an adult, but clearly Renton wasn't able to. 145826[/snapback] I'm wrong am I? But Renton's the patronising one Btw, I'm still waiting for you to give me that question. Remember though, the deal is you have to answer it too or I'm not playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Btw, I'd love to know how the threat of execution is a deterrent to a suicide bomber. Care to enlighten me Leazes (see, that is a simple straight forward question you should be able to answer). 145816[/snapback] Thats a fair point, if you are talking about suicide bombers. But I wasn't, I was talking about any terrorist. See, Renton. Thats called an answer. I will go further, although you might not agree. Suicide bombers may be happy to give up their lives for the love of Allah in the way they choose, but a long lingering torturous one *, or even one in a manner they don't choose instead, might not be quite so attractive. *EDIT. Read to mean "prison sentence".....I haven't got time..... 145823[/snapback] I was under the impression that the main problem was from suicide bombers like, maybe they just cocked up badly on 7/7. And now I'm confused. Are you suggesting they get a life prison sentence (which I would advocate), or they are they are executed? Which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Another question to Leazes. You reckon "not letting them in" is the answer, yet so far nearly all the attacks or failed attacks in Europe have been committed by residents. So how is this going to help? Fair enough you want to execute them or imprison them if they are caught before they carry out an act (I appreciate you are confused which is the best option), but this is proving somewhat difficult unfortunately as to my knowledge our intelligence services haven't managed to correctly identify a would-be suicide bomber yet, is it not? I wish you'd just come out the closet and admit you are a card holding BNP member tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckypierre 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 (edited) Against my better judgement Im going to actually try and chip in. No doubt most of it will be misunderstood and I'll be labelled a wishy washy leftie whatever. Theres very little we can do against terrorism. There very little anyone has ever been able to do. Its not new, the threat didnt suddenly arise because of some pissed off Muslims. Surely you can see how ridiculous you'e being when you say things were better twenty, thirty years ago when the IRA campaign was at its height!! Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Different issue from terrorism. Immigration and terrorism arent connected, no matter what the Sun and the Mail might say. As has already been pointed the July 7th bombings were by UK citizens. Your suggestion for deportation wouldnt have solved that would it? It wouldnt have stopped the IRA. All you can do is remain vigilent and depend on intelligence . If a terrorist is good at what he does theres not an awful lot you can do. By the time you know about it its too late. Carlos the Jackal was actually a rubbish terrorist but how long did it take to stop him? Twenty years? The Russians and the Israelis have taken as strong an approach to it as you can but they still havent stopped it. How long have ETA been going? Since the 50's? Spain havent managed to solve that one in 50 years. The thing is with terrorists, unless they make a msitake, you dont really know they are one until its too late. We cant hunt down terrorists and deport them or lock them up because we dont know who they are. If we tighten our immigration it doesnt mean a terrorist couldnt come into the country under the cover of being on holiday or they might be citizens of another EU country. The most powerful nation in the world has been after the most famous terrorist in the world for years and they cant find him! To tackle terrorism your way you'd have to completely close borders, ban travel and place every civilain under surveillance. Place all Arabs and Muslims under suspicion? But some of the july 7th bombers were of Afro/Carribean origin. Suspecting everyone who was Irish in the 70's and 80's didnt stop the IRA and their American members slipped completely through the net. Like it or not terrorists dont stop until they either get what they want or the reason for wanting it is removed. This has bugger all to do with appeasement and everything to do with reality. Edited June 7, 2006 by luckypierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Against my better judgement Im going to actually try and chip in. No doubt most of it will be misunderstood and I'll be labelled a wishy washy leftie whatever. Theres very little we can do against terrorism. There very little anyone has ever been able to do. Its not new, the threat didnt suddenly arise because of some pissed off Muslims. Surely you can see how ridiculous you'e being when you say things were better twenty, thirty yeasrs ago when the IRA campaign was at its height!! Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Different issue from terrorism. Immigration and terrorism arent connected, no matter what the Sun and the Mail might say. As has already been pointed the July 7th bombings were by UK citizens. Your suggestion for deportation wouldnt have solved that would it? It wouldnt have stopped the IRA. All you can do is remain vigilent and depend on intelligence . If a terrorist is good at what he does theres not an awful lot you can do. By the time you no about it its too late. Carlos the Jackal was actually a rubbish terrorist but how long did it take to stop him? Twenty years? The Russians and the Israelis have taken as strong an approach to it a you can but they still havent stopped it. How long have ETA been going? Since the 50's? Spain havent managed to solve that one in 50 years. The thing is with terrorists, unless the make a msitake, you dont really know they are one until its too late. We cant hunt down terrorsits and deport them and lock them up because we dont know who they are. If we tighten our immigration it doesnt mean a terrorist couldnt come into the country under the cover of being on holiday or they might be citizens of another EU country. The most powerful nation in the world has been after the most famous terrorist in the world for years and they cant find him! To tackle terrorism your way you'd have to completely close borders, ban travel and place every civilain under surveillance. Place all Arabs and Muslims under suspicion? But some of the july 7th bombers were of Afro/Carribean origin. Suspecting everyone who was Irish in the 70's and 80's didnt stop the IRA and their American members slipped completely through the net. Like it or not terrorists dont stop until they either get what they want or the reason for wanting it is removed. This has bugger all to do with appeasement and everything to do with reality. 145874[/snapback] Typical naive post from a know-nothing do-gooder. Did your fancy Dan lecturer tell you that? You want to try living in the REAL world like me etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Quality post like LP, some good points made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17848 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Quality post like LP, some good points made. 145883[/snapback] I was about to say it will be interesting to see how Leazes will respond, but no, it won't. I agree it was a good and somewhat depressing post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 1 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Quality post like LP, some good points made. 145883[/snapback] I thought that said LM (ie Leazes Mag) and had a minor heart attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Btw, I'd love to know how the threat of execution is a deterrent to a suicide bomber. Care to enlighten me Leazes (see, that is a simple straight forward question you should be able to answer). 145816[/snapback] eerr..no. I realise it might not deter all of them. But if it just deters one , then it is justified. Correct ? It would certainly deter some other terrorists. Correct or not ? And the questions was - what is YOUR alternative - as you don't agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 (edited) Leazes definitely wasn't taking the piss, although I fully expect him to refute that claim when he shows up. Proof if proof were needed that he simply doesn't properly read what others write before jumping in with both feet 145773[/snapback] He's shown he can't even read or comprehend a simple sentence, even when it is pointed out to him in bold. What a complete spanner! Cue: tut tut, insults from one so intelligent etc, ad nauseum. 145783[/snapback] But what I DO do Renton, is answer questions. Like you haven't done here : And - I didn't say suicide bomber. Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? So, please explain how your methods of appeasement ie showing weakness, have contained and/or stopped the bombing of innocent civilians in the UK by terrorists/people who should not be here ? Pretty straightforward questions, for an intelligent guy like you who has all the answers ....... and, yes - tut tut such insults from an "intelligent" guy ... shame I have to keep asking though eh 145785[/snapback] Thing is Leazes, I do answer questions. Anyone who has read these threads will be perfectly aware of who ducks questions - and it isn't me. But I give up, there's no point in arguing with someone who simply hasn't got the ability or inclination to read other people's comments, and makes constant assumptions on what they think. Also, it's hard to answer you because you don't make sense. What do you mean by my methods of appeasement for instance, what assumptions are you making on my views, again? And where have I ever said I have all the answers? Personally though, I think you have shown yourself to be a complete fool on these threads, if you had more sense, you'd just give it up. If you ask a sensible question , I'll consider responding to it (something you never do), but otherwise, your welcome to continue your half-witted rants - they're strangely amusing. 145807[/snapback] errrr....the methods you clearly agree with ie those of appeasement, allowing our borders to remain open to more terrorists getting in unchecked or by the back door....this problem has been growing for the last decade and more. Agreed or not ? I am providing an answer, tightening up of the immigration system, to the point of allowing virtually no one else in if need be. What is yours ? And what do you think we should do to them when they are caught ? See the bold. Your patronising knows no bounds, one day you will realise you are wrong son, in the meantime you could answer like an adult instead of beginning the daft jibes again. 145820[/snapback] Please point out anywhere in the history of toontastic where I have advocated having an open-door immigration policy. You can't because I have never said it. Go on, prove me wrong. What a joke it is trying to discuss anything with a man who randomly makes stuff up. I take it your completely closed door policy extends to all countries, including EU countires, the US, Australia etc? Or is it just for people from Africa or the Middle East? Please answer, it's a straight forward question. Of course, you're not right wing, are you? 145825[/snapback] Wierd, but I think its a joke trying to debate someone who doesn't answer straightforward questions, despite him thinking he has all the answers. As you are aware, being a clever boy, we can't close the door to EU countries. My point is that far more stringent measures are needed, and do gooders who think we have a duty to care for the world and give everyone a home who "says" they are an asylum seeker/refugee, are holding that door open too far. If you cannot see how these measures have increased the problem for the security services to combat terrorism in the last decade and more, you really are blind. Once again. How would you combat this problem. Edited June 7, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Deporting someone who shouldn't be here, and making sure they don't get back, or deservedly executing them if we can't deport them - until the rest understand what will happen to them if they are caught bombing innocent Britons, 2 year old children or anyone indiscriminately, on British soil, is guaranteed to stop them re-offending. Correct or not ? Btw, I'd love to know how the threat of execution is a deterrent to a suicide bomber. Care to enlighten me Leazes (see, that is a simple straight forward question you should be able to answer). 145816[/snapback] Thats a fair point, if you are talking about suicide bombers. But I wasn't, I was talking about any terrorist. See, Renton. Thats called an answer. I will go further, although you might not agree. Suicide bombers may be happy to give up their lives for the love of Allah in the way they choose, but a long lingering torturous one *, or even one in a manner they don't choose instead, might not be quite so attractive. *EDIT. Read to mean "prison sentence".....I haven't got time..... 145823[/snapback] I was under the impression that the main problem was from suicide bombers like, maybe they just cocked up badly on 7/7. you should try reading the post then And now I'm confused. Are you suggesting they get a life prison sentence (which I would advocate), or they are they are executed? Which is it? 145830[/snapback] I think its quite clear. I plainly said if they shouldn't be here, then they are out. [What do you think of the airline hijackers who have been allowed to stay in the country BTW] If they are UK citizens, then a long sentence of utter misery as an example to others, if they are caught. If they are caught after killing innocent civilians, then the death penalty, after a short time on our own version of death row complete with breaking rocks for 16 hours a day and wiping their arse with a nail. Also as an example. What is YOUR alternative ? And even for someone of limited intelligence, I don't think I could be much plainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Funny that LP shoukd draw comparisons between whats going on now to the IRA campaign. My mams side were Northern Irish and she reckons all her family plus all the other Catholic families round our way were openly giving money to the local priest to pass on to the IRA. Scary stuff, but people were led by their religious beliefs into backing an organisation despite the fact that innocent and fellow UK citizens would be killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Another question to Leazes. You reckon "not letting them in" is the answer, yet so far nearly all the attacks or failed attacks in Europe have been committed by residents. So how is this going to help? Fair enough you want to execute them or imprison them if they are caught before they carry out an act (I appreciate you are confused which is the best option), but this is proving somewhat difficult unfortunately as to my knowledge our intelligence services haven't managed to correctly identify a would-be suicide bomber yet, is it not? I wish you'd just come out the closet and admit you are a card holding BNP member tbh. 145835[/snapback] I wish you would come out of the closet and admit you are an asylum seeking terrorist infiltrator !!! Question answered previous post. What is YOUR alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Against my better judgement Im going to actually try and chip in. No doubt most of it will be misunderstood and I'll be labelled a wishy washy leftie whatever. .......... 145874[/snapback] I'll answer this later. Busy. I don't dodge questions like Renton, and Alex particularly. Some good points. 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