BS: Unarmed soldier killed, (London-May 2013)

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 04:20 AM

Jim, some posts of mine you missed. Note the dates.

On 21st June 1.29pm I suggested that the thousands of Islamists might constitute ONE community.

22ns June 3.11pm "Jim, you deny that the thousands of radical extremist Muslims in UK constitute a community. (SINGULAR!)
Good.
It means no-one can be in any doubt that you are a complete arse."

23rd June 4.56am
"Jim, there are thousands of Islamists not communities."

(Is that not unequivocal enough?)

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 04:08 AM

Your last point here, Jim, reminds me of the story in the very first of Richmal Crompton's William books, Just William, 1922. William's teacher tells his class that "Two negatives make an affirmative", ie that if you use "no" and "not" in the same sentence, you mean "yes" ~~ "If you say 'there's not no sugar in the bowl', it means there is." So when William asks his father if he can have a party while his parents are away, and his father replies, "No, you can not", William takes this for permission and has a party. The story ends with William complaining to his friend thru the window of his bedroom, whither he has been banished, that he can't come out to play, 'because my father doesn't understand English grammar, that's why'.

Your quoting of Keith's happening to use he word 'thousand' in the same sentence as the word 'community', but not linked ...

Geddit, William Carroll?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 03:59 AM

Jim, yesterday you reverted to faking a quote of mine again.

You are making an unsubstantiated claim that there is not a single group of Islamists who constitute a community in this country.

I say that with thousands of known Islamists, there must be.

I have quoted "thousands of Islamists" enough times so that anyone should know which thousands I refer to.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 03:40 AM

"I have never put "thousands" and "communities" in the same sentence."
Stop this nonsensical lying and distortion Keith.
It doesn't matter a toss what you put in one sentence - until it was pointed out to you how logistically stupid your claims were, you argued that there were "many" and 'thousands" - you even went as far as claiming that MI5 "knew about them" - they have never made such a claim - you deliberately lied as you are lying here.
There are no "Islamic communities" in Britain - the MI5's seven year old figure of 2,000 SUSPECTS (not guilty of anything until proven by British law) are a totally unknown factor and are almost certainly made up of possible Islamists, family members and close associates. The fact that they have never at any time been acted on probably puts the figure in the hundreds rather than thousands.
If you are set on smearing an entire community via their religion, at least use a bit of common sense.
"Islamism is a religious political ideology."
That can be said of any religion.
The Christian church in Ireland has had a devastating effect on Irish politics - it is at present pulling out all the stops to influence a forthcoming act on pregnancy termination.
Over the last 90 odd years it has been instrumental in maintaining a sectarian state in Ireland.
Historically this has always been the case; the Pope blessed Mussolini's bombs that were dropped on The Abyssinian (Ethiopian) people.
Pope Pius XII ("Hitler's Pope") befriended the Nazis and stood by silently while while millions of Jews were sent to the gas-chambers.
The Christian Church backed some of the worst mass murderers in history; Batista, Pinochet, Franco........
Any church with influence "is a religious political ideology."
Jim Carroll

21 Jun 13 - 03:18 AM
"It has nothing to do with ordinary Muslim communities in Britain.
It has everything to do with ordinary Islamist communities, here and elsewhere.

21 Jun 13 - 05:08 AM
I said:   
"there are no identifiable "Islamist communities" in Britain"
You replied:
"Yes there are. MI5 and the police are aware of many."

I challenged you by quoting a previous statement (21 Jun 13 - 10:42 AM):
"MI5 knows of "thousands."
You replied:
"What is the lower limit for a community Jim?"

As for your never putting thousands and community in one sentence
21 Jun 13 - 11:41 AM
"We know there are at least thousands of Islamists and a community can be less than a hundred." (21 Jun 13 - 11:41 AM)

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: GUEST,Atheist fundamentalist
Date: 25 Jun 13 - 01:51 AM

The religion of peace.

Sheik Taj el-Dene Elhilaly's comments in a Ramadan sermon in a Sydney mosque have stirred a furor in the country with even Prime Minister John Howard weighing in with condemnation.
The cleric also said the judge in the case, who sentenced the rapists, had "no mercy."
"But the problem, but the problem all began with who?" he said, referring to the women victims – whom he said were "weapons used by Satan."
The victims of the vicious gang rapes are leading the national outcry – with some calling for deportation of the sheik. In a Sydney Daily Telegraph online poll, 84 percent of people said the Egyptian-born sheik should be deported.
"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?" the sheik said in his sermon. "The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."
A 16-year-old girl, whose gang rape investigation was the subject of a secret police report, issued an open letter yesterday.
"You are a sad person who has no understanding of what really happens when these people inflict harm and degrading acts upon me or any other young girl," she said.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2006/10/38561/#3pThXBoAmK9m6TMf.99

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 05:10 PM

"Are you really stupid enough to believe that the presence of our troops in their country shooting Muslims ... has no bearing on terrorist acts in Britain?"
.,,.,.

Oh, aye ~~ it has a bearing right enuff, Don. It furnishes them with a luvverly excuse for indulging their fave headlopping hobby.

And

er

That's it!

(Please see my post of 23 june 4.43 am)

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:35 PM


1. Opinion not fact, unless you are telepathic!

It is my opinion that accusing us of the indiscriminate killing of Muslims anywhere is bollocks, as I have stated all along.
If you or anyone want to defend that slander, good luck.

Islamism is a religious political ideology.
It is opposed to our system and seeks to impose religion in its place.
It is religion.
It is (anti) political.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 03:52 PM

No hard feelings at all, Jim. Never have and never will be one to bear grudges. Lets put it down to a series of unfortunate misunderstandings. I am as passionate about fair play as anyone and am firmly behind you when you say that the ordinary Moslem on the street is getting a rough deal. The only thing we were in dispute over, and it is stupid when you think about it, was interpreting other peoples intentions! I will be the first to admit that I can often see both sides and often many more, which can come across as indecisiveness. But rest assured it does put me poles apart (pun intended - Polish remember :-) ) from ANY extreme views. Fair play for all is my one big wish.

Going a little further into the family history you will have figured out I am not truly half Polish, but quarter Polish and quarter Russian. To make matters worse the remainder is not all English Either - My English Grandfathers mother was Irish and my English Grandmothers mother was Welsh! Not quite sure what that makes me apart from what I have always described as a true Englishman - Bits of everything! Nor am I sure what our mutual opposition on the right wing would make of that :-)

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 03:11 PM

""Don, the religious motivation is also political in that it seeks to replace normal politics and law with Sharia.
I only reject the "Islam as victim" motivation.""

Nice swerve.

This you have believed for what? The last twelve hours?....24?

But you still haven't answered the actual questions.

1. How long have you had this power to read peoples' thoughts?
2. Are you really stupid enough to believe that the presence of our troops in their country shooting Muslims (the numbers are YOUR red herring. They are killing any who resist their presence with arms) has no bearing on terrorist acts in Britain?

Come on Keith. You are the self proclaimed mind reader.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: bobad
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 02:49 PM

Forhttp://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2013/06/201361091619207870.html anyone who wishes to take a time out from the bickering and mudslinging that this thread has become and actually listen to Irshad Manji, a reform Muslim and someone for whom I have much respect and admiration, in discussion/debate with the host of "Head to Head" Mehdi Hasan at the Oxford union.

And joining the discussion are: Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra who was elected as an assistant secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain in 2008 and who is also the chair of the Inter Faith Relations Committee, and serves as an imam and scholar in Leicester; Halla Diyab, an award-winning Syrian writer, filmmaker, broadcaster and women's rights activist, and the author of controversial TV dramas such as Beautiful Maidens and Your Rightful Disposal; and Myriam Francois-Cerrah, an academic and journalist focusing on Islamic movements and political culture.

The discussion covers much of the same ground that is in contention on this thread. Give it a listen - you may learn something.

What is wrong with Islam today"

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 02:26 PM

Where are we now - one minute you were referring to "thousands of communities of Islamists known to MI5"

Not any minute Jim.
it is not true.
I have never put "thousands" and "communities" in the same sentence.
As soon as you made your misinterpretation I made clear that I never meant thousands of communities.
You are being dishonest again.

Don, the religious motivation is also political in that it seeks to replace normal politics and law with Sharia.
I only reject the "Islam as victim" motivation.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 02:20 PM

which produced them

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 02:17 PM

""What comments Don?
He swore by Allah and praised Him.
That is what Muslims do, and his religion is not disputed.
The strongest comment I have ever made is that "it could be argued" that the motive was purely religious.
It could be argued Don.""

Do you even read what you post?

""It is propaganda.
He was grandstanding, not setting out his deeply held beliefs.""""

1. Opinion not fact, unless you are telepathic!
2. Indisputably dismissing that there was any political motive with respect to Western actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also:

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 May 13 - 09:38 AM

"Jim, you objected to the suggestion that it was a crime of religion.
My point was that it is pretty much universally accepted as such, as now is the attack in Paris.""

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 May 13 - 10:36 AM

attempt to pin these crimes as belonging to this or that particular brand of religion
""We don't.
The perps. and their supporters do.
Why should we not believe them?""

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 May 13 - 12:55 PM

Why not Keith - you get away with it
An individual like me might believably be deranged, but you can not dismiss a vast global movement as all afflicted.
You would have to be, er, a nutter Jim.

""They are acting on deeply held religious belief.
They believe they are doing the will of Allah, and expect to be rewarded by Allah.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 May 13 - 04:08 PM

Are you claiming that all Muslims are terrorists
No.
- or are you claiming that active Muslim organisations are only involved in what they do because of religious conviction.
""No.

Am I claiming that active Islamist organisations are only involved in what they do because of religious conviction?
Yes. They say so.
Why should we heed you and ignore them Jim?""

Not one instance of ""It could be argued"" in that lot. I have emphasised what you actually said, making clear your real position.

Lies are that simple to expose! Why do you keep doing it?

And what is the mindset which drives your pathological need to place the responsibility for such terrorist acts solely and entirely upon the religion of Islam and deny that the presence of foreign soldiers in Muslim countries has any bearing on the matter.

I have no less loathing for the acts and the perpetrators than you, but I am at least honest about the part that ill advised military adventures during the last decade have at the very least played a consideable role in sparking off the hatred which them.

This fact, for some reason best known to yourself, you simply will not acknowledge, as witness the above comments from you, ALL direct quotes, timed and dated.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 01:52 PM

"Jim, there must be at least a few communities among thousands of individuals"
Where are we now - one minute you were referring to "thousands of communities of Islamists known to MI5"
You defended this several times when challenged.
You justified your claim by defining "community"
When the simple(il)logistics of this nonsensical statement was pointed out you changed your plea to "I didn't mean communities" - after having repeated your claim several times and attempting to justify it by picking a definition that suited your original claim.
Now we seem to be back to "Islamist communities"
You are, as in numerous other cases, becoming an embarrassment.
I suggest you leave this and hope it disappears.
Mike
I think you are right - I was confusing it with 'Union Woman' - Which Side' was made by Florence Reece in 1931.
I was confused by the tune, which I never recognised as being the same
Dave
Take your word on Billy Bragg - not particularly fond of his singing so nothing stuck in my memory about his particular rendition.
In fact I don't recall hearing the song much since the early 1960s - half a century ago (jeeze - am I really that old?)
Was fascinated by your family background.
I was brought up in a somewhat confused, left-wing - Irish Catholic - anti Fascist household in Liverpool.
My grandmother was a mixture of all of three and was arrested for throwing a stone at a Blackshirt rally which hit one of the thugs. She always claimed that the stone "was guided by the hand of God"
"Anything else will just be retreading old ground."
Couldn't agree more - not too many hard feelings I hope?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 12:20 PM

Actually, Jim: following that drift a little way. I remember Peggy Seeger would sing "Which side...?" with no 'boy', I am pretty sure. I am not sure Aunt Molly actually did sing it; she sang a song called "I Am A Union Woman" which used the same tune. Did she also sing "Which side"? I have not been able to trace any ref to her doing so ~~ which I appreciate proves nothing.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 10:42 AM

Jim, there must be at least a few communities among thousands of individuals.

Obviously less communities than individuals, so obviously not thousands.

Some though, unless you have evidence to the contrary.
Do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 10:34 AM

Well, I am not arguing the point about MI5 which is the one in question so your summary above is incorrect. I cannot argue that one, I have no information one way or another so I am just watching the "Yes it is, no it isn't between you and Keith." I can argue about teh overall concept and have done so but I was referring to this specific issue.

Billy Bragg lyrics - Not milking anything. You said that you believed he sang "Which side are you on, boy?" I pointed out he did not. Pedantic maybe but still correct.

Genocide. I would not be here if it was not for WW2. I am half Polish if you did not know. My Father is from Białystok which housed a huge Jewish Ghetto and now, coincidentally, is home to 2000 Muslims, mainly Tartars. Coincidence because my Grandfather was a Cossack from the banks of the Kuban river who was victim of the Stalinist deportations. His ancestors would have killed both Tartar and Jew yet during WW2 he risked life and limb to assist the Jewish population.

BTW, The only reason I mention this is so you know a little more about me. No intention of saying I know more than anyone else. Just that I am aware and have experience of racial issues. Imagine what it was like to have a foreign name (It used to be Polakow) in a Salford School in the late 50s?

Now, unless you have any specifics you wish me to address, I believe all has been asked, answered, said and put to bed. Anything else will just be retreading old ground.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 10:01 AM

"Then who else is arguing that point?"
You - Mike - Don
This is a long standing argument about racism and cultural hatred - the fact that we continue to argue about it is, as far as I'm concerned, an indication that we consider it important, whatever side we take.
I make no apologies for my considering it so - during my lifetime millions of human beings were herded into extermination camps.
Throughout my lifetime genocide has lurked just below the surface, occasionally coming to the surface.
The first result of this killing was to bring the brain-deads onto the streets in their thousands spouting their bile against communities of largely harmless human beings.
As far as I'm concerned, much of this argument is a continuation of that, if you don't think so leave us to it.   
In my experience Britain has a race problem.
Last night the Stephen Lawrence murder hit that fan again, drawing attention to the institution racism still apparently still alive and kicking in the British police force.
If it doesn't bother you, it bothers me - sorry, probably a result of poor upbringing.
"Which side are you on, boys?"
Sorry - don't get your point - if you were referring to the use of the plural, rather than the singular - I used the song to address an individual, namely you - you really aren't still trying to milk this - the cow's run dry Dave.
"How can you deny the existence of a single community"
Make up your mind Keith - are there Islamist communities or are there
a number of Islamists spread over the communities in Britain - you claimed thousands and went to the trouble of defining what you meant by "community" to make your case?
Stop wriggling, you've been caught telling your porkies again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 09:48 AM

That's on one of Billy's earlier albums, great song. I was wondering if it was the same song that Jim mentioned, or whether it's one of Billy's own, maybe borrowing from an earlier source?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 09:36 AM

"It is an argument between you and Keith "
No it is not

Then who else is arguing that point?

You fail to respond to the fact that my accusations are addressed to specific and continuing lies - what should I call somebody who persists in this practice.

Sorry, but I must be a bit slow today. I don't understand that at all. Do you have something specific you want me to answer?

I said that anybody who would carry out such a killing, for religious, or any other reason, must be insane.

That's fine. We agree on that then apart from I have never cherry picked on that one. I have stated quite clearly that one needs to accept all the statements made by the perps. or none at all - Not just one or the other.

Out of idle curiosity and due to a slow day at the ranch I looked up Billy Braggs Lyric

Which side are you on, boys?
Which side are you on?

So, everyone makes mistakes, Jim. Even you :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 09:32 AM

it is a total rejection of the claim that there are any "Islamist communities" in Britain,

How can you deny the existance of a single community when there are thousands of individuals?
Anything to support that claim?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 08:57 AM

"It is an argument between you and Keith "
No it is not - it is a total rejection of the claim that there are any "Islamist communities" in Britain, one I would have made whoever made such a claim.
The fact that it is a lie is relevant as, to my knowledge Keith is the only member of this forum who consistently resorts to this practice.
"You have stated quite clearly that you believe the perpetrators were insane."
You fail to respond to the fact that my accusations are addressed to specific and continuing lies - what should I call somebody who persists in this practice.
No - I said that anybody who would carry out such a killing, for religious, or any other reason, must be insane. I also have taiken great pains to point out all the other possible reasons for such an act, carefully expunged from this discussion by those who would make it a religious killing - stop cherry-picking.
"'boy' does not appear in the DT version of the song"
Thank you Mike - it does in most of the versions I have heard - including that of Billy Bragg I seem to remember.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 08:01 AM

Thanks M - Don't have a repertoire big enough for a YouTube channel myself but you can find me performing on the https://www.youtube.com/user/SwintonFolkClub channel, here and in a few other clips. Funnily enough we have a least three things in common - Guitar, Anglo-Concertina and a beard :-) I also do unaccomplished (damn that spulling chocker...) singing but that would have made four and it isn't as effective!

Shame more people do not concentrate more on similarities than differences isn't it? Now we have had a light interlude should we get back to the hostilities :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 07:02 AM

Dave ~~ You might just be interested in my YouTube channel

http://www.youtube.com/user/mgmyer

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:30 AM

Fairy Nuff, M. I first noticed folk music in the mid 1970s and that was through Steeleye Span, Fairport Convention and, stretching a point, Jethro Tull. I do not have the experience of some of the more senior members here. I now enjoy a lot of traditional English music - Primarily pertaining to Morris and Social Dance and including the music of Messrs. Carthy, Kirkpatrick and Hutchins as well as new bands like Bellowhead. I enjoy the contemporary music of Richard Thompson and, more recently, Anthony John Clark. I have no interest in or intention of studying the work of Aunt Molly Jackson. If that does not fit in with your or Jim's views of what a 'folkie' should know then , as the bard said, tough shit :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:21 AM

DtG ~~ Not often I begin a post "In fairness to Jim": but feel I must point out that, as this is primarily a folk music forum, whatever %-ge of the population at large might be expected to have heard of Aunt Molly Jackson, and know the song "Which side are you on?", it was not unreasonable on his part to assume that a much higher proportion of denizens of this forum would have done so.

Mind you, that interpolated vocative 'boy' does not appear in the DT version of the song, which is attributed Florence Reese, 1946.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:20 AM


Piss off with your lying Keith - MI5 have never claimed there to be ANY "Islamist communities" let alone your "thousands"

Correct Jim.
Thousands of Islamists, not thousands of communities.
That is what I said
No lies.
I leave that to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:20 AM

BTW - before anyone asks, mine is a mere 97 posts prior to this one :-)

My views on the MI5 interchanges is not relevant - It is an argument between you and Keith and, for what it is worth, it is now down to nit-picking as to who said and meant what.

Aside from that do I have any more specific questions for me, Jim? Do you accept that I have given my opinion on everything you have asked for, albeit not in agreement with yours. Bear in mind I will not join anyone's 'gang' here. I gave that up when I left primary school and began to see that there are two sides to every argument.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:10 AM

I assume that you are not going to provide evidence for your insulting claim then? Ah well!!!

No need, Jim. Firstly it is not insulting, just factual. You have made over 120 posts in this thread - 12% from one person! Some going eh? You have used the term 'lie' or 'liar' in around 10% of those posts. Quite significant I think.

In fairness, I should point out that Keith has had 219 posts (nearly 22%) and used the term lie or liar around 15 times.

So, yes, I will apologise for saying you use the term extensively when it is only 10%. I reduce extensive to significant. But as just two members have added around a quarter of all the posts to just bitch about each other you will understand that other members will get bleary eyed.

As to the excuse for using 'boy'. I had no idea whatsoever who Aunt Molly Jackson was and I suspect that is true of 99.99% of the population. Even if I did know I would not have know the words for all of her songs. So your 'well know song' is only well known to folk music fans with an interest in pre-1960 American folk and a leaning to the left with particular reference to Union activism. Just one out of four on that score, I'm afraid. I do however accept that you felt that, for some reason, I should know and I am happy that no insult was intended. Thank you for that.

Just reading back again, I believe you have answered my other question, at least in part, too. You have stated quite clearly that you believe the perpetrators were insane. What you have not said is whether you believe ANY of their claims - IE, they were doing this an behalf of Islam and because of the actions of the British abroad. You seem to be saying that you believe that they were acting politically but not religiously. Please correct me if that is incorrect as carefully picking phrases from the mouth of a madman is not really a basis for sound argument is it?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 06:05 AM

Piss off with your lying Keith - MI5 have never claimed there to be ANY "Islamist communities" let alone your "thousands"
If they had, you would have produced their statement
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 05:40 AM


"there are no identifiable "Islamist communities" in Britain" (21 Jun 13 - 04:38 AM)
That was you Jim, and I disagree.
You might prefer to call them groups. organisations, followings, gangs, etc. but they exist.

"Yes there are. MI5 and the police are aware of many." (21 Jun 13 - 05:08 AM)
That was me.
It is a reasonable statement.

"No there aren't " (21 Jun 13 - 10:18 AM)
That was your unsupported and silly statement.

"MI5 knows of "thousands." What is the lower limit for a community Jim?"   (21 Jun 13 - 10:42 AM)

Yes, it knows of thousands of Islamists, so how many do you need for a community?

I have never linked the words "thousands" and "communities"

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 05:17 AM

"If you use a phrase often enough it is fair to describe it as a favourite."
I assume that you are not going to provide evidence for your insulting claim then? Ah well!!!
You have my statement on lying - justify yours.
"including you addressing me as 'boy'"
I quoted a well-known song which is why I put it in quotation marks. No insult whatever intended - I take it you are not aware of Aunt Molly Jackson?
I don't suppose you'd like to give an opinion on the exchange below - or the fact that MI5 has made no such claim?
Islamist "communities"
"No-one has claimed that Jim."
"there are no identifiable "Islamist communities" in Britain" (21 Jun 13 - 04:38 AM)
"Yes there are. MI5 and the police are aware of many." (21 Jun 13 - 05:08 AM)
"No there aren't " (21 Jun 13 - 10:18 AM)
"MI5 knows of "thousands." What is the lower limit for a community Jim?"   (21 Jun 13 - 10:42 AM)
"The term community has two distinct commutative meanings: 1) Community can refer to a usually small, social unit of any size that shares common values. The term can also refer to the national community or international community, and 2) in biology, a community is a group of interacting living organisms sharing a populated environment.
In human communities, intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks, and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.
Since the advent of the Internet, the concept of community has less geographical limitation, as people can now gather virtually in an online community and share common interests regardless of physical location. Prior to the internet, virtual communities (like social or academic organizations) were far more limited by the constraints of available communication and transportation technologies."
(22 Jun 13 - 10:21 AM )
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 05:15 AM

~~~"Yes I do believe there is a significant minority of Moslems who are a threat "
Then why have we not had a correspondingly "significant number" of incidents?
Jim Carroll~~~
.,,.
Well, Jim, I have already posted once the wiki extract below, which I make no apology for repeating, adding for you the question

HOW MANY IS SIGNIFICANT?

~~~Wikipedia article 'Terrorist Incidents In Great Britain' lists 17 incidents, either successful like 7/7, Glasgow Airport 2007, Exeter 2008, Woolwich 2013, or foiled by police intelligence & action, of unarguably Islamist provenance, since 2000.~~~

17 in 13 years seems a pretty *significant* # to me. How many would you have preferred?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:40 AM

You might start with his MI5 "thousands of Islamist communities" claim.

No-one has claimed that Jim.
Thousands of Islamists, not communities.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:38 AM

I resent your describing it as "a favourite tactic", it is a response to what I believe to be habitual lying - I really do thoink you owe a justification of this accusation.

If you use a phrase often enough it is fair to describe it as a favourite. How many people you use it on is an irrelevance. There are a lot of things that I resent too, Jim, including you addressing me as 'boy' and avoiding answering a simple question by repeated requests for me to answer yours, which I have every time. You seem to be conveniently ignoring that too.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:32 AM

Oh, and as to
I have neither ignored, not attempted to "rubbish" what you have said, I have disagree with it when I believe it to be wrong
Please point out where this is not the case.

I only have to go back 3 posts from your question to find your statement
You have yet to give a single opinion on the main issue here
If that is not an attempt to ignore or discredit what I have said over and over again I don't know what is.

We seem to be either living in different worlds or speaking a different language.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:30 AM

Being called a liar by Jim is like being called scruffy by Wurzel Gummidge.
If anyone reads any of my posts they will know how often I have to say, "that is a lie Jim" or "you just made that up Jim." and that you never even try t deny it.
You are a foolish, foolish man.
What do you think you gain by it?

And I do not lie Jim.
I would always rather lose the point.
It's just a thread on a forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:29 AM

Dave
Each time I have claimed Keith a liar I have specified exactly what lie I believe him to have told. - you have several examples here to prove me wrong without going to the dreaded "Muslim Prejudice"or "Homs Horror" threads. You might start with his MI5 "thousands of Islamist communities" claim.
I resent your describing it as "a favourite tactic", it is a response to what I believe to be habitual lying - I really do thoink you owe a justification of this accusation.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:24 AM

Then why have we not had a correspondingly "significant number" of incidents?

There are also a significant number of motorists who are threat but not all of them cause accidents, Jim. A threat is just a threat. Only a small proportion of threats turn into incidents. Thanks for, seemingly, accepting that I have indeed given an opinion. Why it has taken so long is beyond me and it still does not answer my points to you but I wait in hope.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 04:14 AM

"I simply asked whether you would that as an excuse for not responding to my question as your favourite tactic appears to be shouting 'liar'."
I have called Keith - nobody else, a liar because he openly tells lies, which he often does - show me where this has not been the case.
"but ignore or attempt to rubbish everything I have said,"
I have neither ignored, not attempted to "rubbish" what you have said, I have disagree with it when I believe it to be wrong
Please point out where this is not the case.
"Yes I do believe there is a significant minority of Moslems who are a threat "
Then why have we not had a correspondingly "significant number" of incidents?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 03:51 AM

You have yet to give a single opinion on the main issue here, which is whether the Muslim communities are a latent or actual threat to Britain.

Jim, I have said over and over again that "Muslim communities" are not a threat to Britain. In fact I have gone out of my way to point out that I believe the vast majority of Moslems, not just in Britain but worldwide, are ordinary, hard-working, peace loving people just like Christians, Atheists, Bush Baptists, Zorastrians and everyone else. Just look back to any of my posts in which I answer your questions and many others. You will see that this is patently true but I suspect you will, as always, just say I did no such thing.

The fact that you have not seen it, even though it is obvious, is a good indication that you do not read posts and, should anyone have the temerity to have the slightest disagreement with you - Yes I do believe there is a significant minority of Moslems who are a threat - then the blinkers come on and a bad case of dogma sets in. Yet another indication that you see what you want to see is the fact that I did not imply you said I was lying. I simply asked whether you would that as an excuse for not responding to my question as your favourite tactic appears to be shouting 'liar'. Often. What is more you addressing me as 'boy' indicates that you feel superior to me and, presumably, to others. Who those others are is anyone's guess.

All in all, Jim, having treated you with respect while you have done nothing but ignore or attempt to rubbish everything I have said, I feel that I am justified in surmising that you are simply a blinkered and very ignorant man. I will not, however, resort to attempted belittlement or petty name-calling as that seems to be the environment in which you thrive. I have, yet again, answered your question. You have not, yet again, answered mine or addressed the point that you are happy to treat me as your inferior. Until you do so I doubt very much if anything else you have to say will be of interest to me.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Jun 13 - 02:57 AM

"I have said exactly what I think, Jim and answered your questions."
You have yet to give a single opinion on the main issue here, which is whether the Muslim communities are a latent or actual threat to Britain .
The fact that you haven't led me to believe that you went along with our two sordid little crusaders here.
Where have you told us whether or not you believe the Muslim religion is a threat to Britain, or if this killing is religious or if it an accumulation of several factors.... or anything of substance really.
You even protested when you were asked to put your money where you mouth is, and we conceded that you had a right not to state your opinions if you chose not to.
Yet you demand answers from us.
You suggest I called you a liar - I didn't, yet you don't have the good grace to acknowledge that fact and leave it as a hanging suggestion.
These epic threads are echoes of what is happening on the streets of Britain today - crude, mindless, thuggish racism that incites persecution and violence targeting defenceless, and on the whole, docile people and would place them in the same position as other ethnic groups have been placed in the past - pick your side or don't expect to be taken seriously in these discussions.
Jim Carroll
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 05:32 PM

I have nothing more to say.
Their claim that Muslims are victims is false.
The killing was in furtherance of Islamism, which is the political ideology of enforcing rule by Sharia.
"God's laws not men's laws."
Religious ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 05:31 PM

1000

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 05:29 PM

Come off what, Don? It's all political, for crying out loud, isn't it? Islamism is [or claims to be] the explicitly [& aggressively] **political** arm of Islam, for crying our loud right back 2U. It uses pretence [in two senses] of religious motivation for political ends. That is just what it DOES, isn't it?

Exclaiming "Afghanistan" & "Allah" in the same garbled monologue -- you'd call that genuinely 'political' would you? Rather than an imposture of political motivation to excuse & justify their hobby of cutting people's heads off coz their prophet told them to.

As Keith has been perfectly coherently saying all along. Except for those none so deaf as won't hear.

So you 'come off it', eh!

Just listen to Jesus STILL weeping ~~ at your mulish, pigheaded obstinacy.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 05:13 PM

Jesus wept!

I am sure he did, Don. And I know just how he felt :-)

Can no-one put a stop to this? Someone said earlier 800 posts with nothing new. Whoever it was, they were right!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 05:09 PM


So if Keith says the guy was genuine in his religious comments,

What comments Don?
He swore by Allah and praised Him.
That is what Muslims do, and his religion is not disputed.
The strongest comment I have ever made is that "it could be argued" that the motive was purely religious.
It could be argued Don.

Islamists seek rule by the Sharia.
That is a political as well as a religious objective.
Islamism is a political ideology.
The politics of radical Islam, which is a religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 04:50 PM

""I think your arguments were misplaced, regarding Keith's never having acknowledged any political dimension.""

Come off it Mike.

I just posted a list of posts from him, none of which acknowledged any vestige of a political dimension, all of which emphasised the religious.

Add to that his recent response to the idea of a political dimension reproduced below:

""Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 07:21 AM

Don, I dismiss the stuff about Muslims being victims and being slaughtered by us because it is bollocks.
It is propaganda.
He was grandstanding, not setting out his deeply held beliefs.""

So Mike, did you skip that one on purpose, or just hope that I wouldn't notice it?

It does rather make arrant nonsense of your comment, quoted above, and vindicate my position.

So if Keith says the guy was genuine in his religious comments, but talking ""bollocks, and grandstanding"" about his political comments, we should believe Keith who, using telepathy, the latest addition to his many self professed talents, knows more about what he meant than the man himself?

Jesus wept!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 03:14 PM

I do not lie Jim.
I said there are thousands of Islamists, not Islamist communities, and I stand by that and produced hard evidence of it.

I have no idea how many communities that amounts to, and I do not care if instead of communities we call them groups, or organisations, or followings, or gangs,....

Now that is cleared up, what is your evidence of mental illness leading to the execution?

Your stuff about sniper rounds is just lies.
I have explained the truth, and you know the truth, but the truth can not be used to discredit me.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Jun 13 - 12:39 PM

I have said exactly what I think, Jim and answered your questions. You have not reciprocated which is not only rude but shows your contempt for other people. Maybe you are also too old to reason sensibly?

Look back just over 20 posts and you will find my unequivocal views on all the questions you posed. If you have problems understanding my responses I am quite happy to accept it is my fault and I will endeavor to clarify them again. You have not responded, to my question, do you believe the perpetrators to be insane. If so, can we believe anything they say, including the blame they are putting on Britsh action overseas.

I also brought you to task on calling me 'boy' and thereby indicating that you were addressing an inferior being. Is that that action of one who believes all men equal?

Waiting, but not holding my breath, for a sensible response.

Cheers

DtG