BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 17 - 08:40 PM

I was very impressed by the way Gina Miller, who prevailed against control-freak Theresa May in the Supreme Court, acquitted herself against the bullying Andrew Neil on This Week earlier this evening. She's hardly my kind of leftie but she emerged from his onslaught with smiling and serene dignity and made him look like the bitter, right-wing, bad-tempered buffoon that he truly is. He tried to treat her like a bog-standard party apparatchik and she cut right through it. Good for her, say I.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 02:56 PM

Who the f*** was a team leader.

I have said on many, many occasions the "team" you believe exists is a figment of your imagination.

I admit to knowing Dave, we have met on a few occasions, I'll accept that I have enjoyed his company.

I have met Steve once, and again I enjoyed his company.

Jim I have never met, nor any of the other people you presume are in a "gang"

You really should grow up.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 02:55 PM

WTF are you on about, ake? Been listening to your 'team leader' Trump and coming up with alternative truth again?

Oh - Four nun dead!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 11:57 AM

They've never really regained their equilibrium since the sad passing of their "team leaders" Teribus!

The odds of 5 to 2 seems very unfair...they really come into bloom at about 10 to 1......the 1 being very important to these guys...they just love equality.....:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 11:42 AM

Examples of squealing then please Teribus or are we to take it that this statement is yet another feeble attempt to divert attention from your cock up?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 09:38 AM

Nothing better than a biter bit Gnome, you and your pals have been engaged in it for years - yet you squeal like stuck pigs when the same treatment is doled out to you - Enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 07:08 AM

"I'm replying to this on the Labour thread right now. Zoom zoom..."
So should we all
Sorry Stu - I tried to stop it then got sucked in
Unforgivable
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 07:00 AM

So, Teribus, you will happily admit that you will tar everyone in a particular Mudcat demographic with the same brush regardless of whether they were involved in whatever you were talking about or not. I suppose that Mudcat is a microcosm of the outside world and you and your ilk will also happily tar whole sections of the human race based on the actions of a few. Thank you for providing further evidence of how your mind works. Not that we really needed any more.

As to spluttering indignation well, no spluttering here, I leave that to you. Yes, maybe indignant could work but you have just confirmed that is was righteously so, well done :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 06:45 AM

With regard to acceptance of the officially adopted definition of anti-Semitism - YES Gnome I did. I tend to include the entire "pack" so as none of you feel left out of anything. Love to see you spluttering with indignation.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 05:57 AM

Sorry Gnome didn't know that you could not read or understand plain English.

Of course I can, Teribus. It seems to be you having difficulties with comprehension. Did you or did you not bring me into the argument by stating "Exists now in law. Shaw's, Raggy's Gnome's, Greg F's or indeed anyone else's opinions are irrelevant."

A simple yes or no will do.

DtG

(Sorry to use bold to highlight something but it seems that is what some people need :-) )

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 05:15 AM

I'm replying to this on the Labour thread right now. Zoom zoom...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 04:49 AM

Pathetic. Another thread ruined. This behaviour is ruining the BS section.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Apr 17 - 04:35 AM

"I pointed out that courtesy"
Then you and not Dave did introduce it into the discussion - apology accepted
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:33 PM

Sorry Gnome didn't know that you could not read or understand plain English.

Some thought Spicer should resign, lose his job. I pointed out that courtesy of Shami Chakrabarti if he were a member of the Labour Party all he would have to do was offer a simple apology, admit his error and then he could continue his career as if nothing had happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 03:36 PM

Still no explanation as to why you brought it up on this thread or why you brought me into it then, Teribus? Thought not.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 03:03 PM

"Fortunately Jom that is not how the law works,"
Fortunately my little Seig heiler, that is not how language works
No law-making body has a right to redefine a word that has been long established (despite the fact that it was discriminatery from its inception in 1897 by Germany to apply only to Jews - the term Semites also includes Arabs)
The day lawmakers and politicians have the rightt to re-write the dictionary, that will be the day when fascists such as yourself rule the world.
Words manipulated by self-interested bodies become coparable to the old saying, "a camel is a horse designed by a committee
All immaterial anyway - as Israel chooses to constantly breach a section of the definition, that definition becomes invalid and unworkable, so we fall back on that long established one.
God save us from a world where ethnic censers tell us what words mean
"Fortunately Jom "
You will never learn that your childish belligerence only serves to draw attention to your stupidly ignorant nature
Keep it up - it saves em ahving to point it out too often
Carry on Cookie
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 02:40 PM

Fortunately Jom that is not how the law works, they have to be a bit more detailed and cover it more than a broad-brush generalisation.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 12:35 PM

"think that they and they alone can decide what is anti-Semitic and what isn't."
We just have to look in the dictionary - it's there in black and white - no mention of criticising Israel
Get someone to read it out for you Discrimination against and denigration of THE JEWISH PEOPLE
Everything else is political self interest
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 12:20 PM

Talking about the definition Gnome, as you know very well - pleased to hear that you know it [The Definition] exists, puts you one ahead of your pals, who for some misguided reason seem to think that they and they alone can decide what is anti-Semitic and what isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 12:04 PM

"But I didn't raise it! Honest!"
I don't suggest for one minute that you did Dave
These people aren't known for their truthfulness - they always try to blame someone else when they're caught out
Doen't change the fact that we shouldn't be here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 08:56 AM

But I didn't raise it! Honest!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 08:13 AM

Antisemistm no longer has a workable definition - how can it if even the main signatory to the last one refuses to adhere to it?
Even Eric Pickles makes this point in his definition of Antisemitism
However
Antisemistm no longer has a workable definition - how can it if even the main signatory to the last one refuses to adhere to it?
"Dave raised it, for reasons only known to Dave!"
You mean "he hit me first sir"
Grow up Keith – you are all equally to blame
It is totally unfair to swamp yet another thread with our arguments when there is a perfectly good one on the go.
For crying out loud - move this discussion to where it belongs - it is not even thread drift - it is a hostile takeover
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 07:59 AM

Anti-Semitism Definition:
Exists now in law. Shaw's, Raggy's Gnome's, Greg F's or indeed anyone else's opinions are irrelevant.

You also said that Teribus. My opinion is and always has been that there is antisemitism everywhere. I have never denied it exists in the Labour party so I wondered WTF you were on about.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 06:41 AM

That should of course be "following"

Steve Shaw then took up the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 06:38 AM

Got to the labour party and anti-Semitism because of the flowing post of mine:

Now if Spicer was a member of the Labour Party, under the arrangements arrived at by Labour's NEC courtesy of the Chakrabarti "Whitewash", he would face suspension, not expulsion, until he apologised after which he would be fully reinstated.

In answer to those demanding that Spicer be forced to resign.

I stand by what I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 05:09 AM

I posted the question before Jim! So he was the +1 Stu.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 10:39 AM

...And considering that you whinge on about about people going off-topic, WTF has this got to do with this thread anyway?

DtG

Makes you number 3 or 4 I think. Patrick McGoohan was number 6...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:59 AM

"Why has this been taken over to discuss The nonsense about the Labour Party when there is another on the same subject?"

+1

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:41 AM

Jim, Iains - Ask Teribus.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:37 AM

There's certainly been a load of nonsense said about the Labour Party here, I'll agree with you that much.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:33 AM

Why has this been taken over to discuss The nonsense about the Labour Party when there is another on the same subject?

Good point, Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:26 AM

Comparing two different surveys that asked completely different questions Gnome. As usual you are attempting to compare apples to oranges and not getting away with it.

And which 2 different surveys are those then, Teribus? Do any of them say that Labour supporters are more likely to be antisemitic than UKIP supporters for instance?

Keith Dave raised it, for reasons only known to Dave! Again, untrue. My first mention of this was 12 Apr 17 - 10:39 AM Which was in response to a post by Teribus at 08:23AM the same day. Do you think that people cannot read or something? The exchange is even on this page!

The rumps sound good, Steve. Didn't know they had bones! :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:08 AM

Anyway, Andrew Neil is a wazzock. I'm doing The Rumps today. Pick the bones out of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 04:00 AM

Jim,
Why has this been taken over to discuss The nonsense about Lanbour Party when there is another on the same subject

Dave raised it, for reasons only known to Dave!

Dave,
Keith, would you like to tell us why there were no Jews in the Nazi party?

No. Everyone already knows, silly!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 03:49 AM

Comparing two different surveys that asked completely different questions Gnome. As usual you are attempting to compare apples to oranges and not getting away with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 03:08 AM

Yes, OK, Teribus, not twice as likely but the survey found that one in four (25%) Britons believed that Jews chase money more than other British people, a figure which rose to 39% of those participants who identified themselves as UKIP voters. So, more than 50% more likely. Still a damn site more than anyone else. As I revisited the survey I also spotted the related crime figures. I suggest you have look at them and note the prevalence of right wing fanatics amongst those who have been successfully prosecuted.

I also suggest you look up recently published government paper, produced by a multi party committee, which gives this statement -

This report focuses to some extent on the Labour Party, because it has been the main source of recent allegations of antisemitism associated with political parties. It should be emphasised that the majority of antisemitic abuse and crime has historically been, and continues to be, committed by individuals associated with (or motivated by) far-right wing parties and political activity. Although there is little reliable or representative data
on contemporary sources of antisemitism, CST figures suggest that around three-quarters of all politically-motivated antisemitic incidents come from far-right sources.

However, the fact that incidents of antisemitism—particularly online—have made their way into a major political party is a new and deplorable phenomenon, and one which has not recently affected the mainstream right wing of British politics. It is particularly shocking that it should affect a party whose founding principles are based on equality.

I have not taken to emboldening the passages I wish to draw attention to as some have but I suggest you read and understand the last sentence of the first paragraph.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 02:53 AM

Why has this been taken over to discuss The nonsense about Lanbour Party when there is another on the same subject
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 17 - 01:30 AM

"So, Teribus, can anyone tell us how may of these expectations are met?"

Well according to all the reports in the press, the complaints made, the resignation of the co-chairman of the OULC, two inquiries commissioned by Labour's NEC, the suspensions - I'd guess quite a few Gnome. It is not my fault, or Keith A's, that you choose to discount and ignore them. You doing that does not alter the fact that they are all there on record.

UKIP were far from being twice as anti-Semitic as any other party - at least not in the CAA survey.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 03:35 PM

87% of people doing the lottery expect to win.

13% do not but still do it anyway.

62% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

So, Teribus, can anyone tell us how may of these expectations are met? Thought not. Will anyone tell us why the survey I linked to said that UKIP members were twice as prone to racism as any other party? Thought not. Keith, would you like to tell us why there were no Jews in the Nazi party? Thought not.


DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 02:12 PM

87% of Jews expect to encounter anti-Semitism in the Labour Party
13% of Jews expect to encounter it in the Conservative Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:54 PM

There were no Jews in the Nazi Party to complain about its anti-Semitism Dave.
There are lots of Jews in UK parties, but only those in Labour complain about anti-Semitism.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:50 PM

It must be worse in the Labour party because the other parties have not made any complaints while Labour Party members have made lots and continue to do so.

How many more times?

By that measure the Nazi party in 1930s Germany must have been a paragon of virtue as I guess they received fewer complaints that anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:42 PM

Dave,
That it must be worse in the Labour party because the other parties have not received as many complaints?

It must be worse in the Labour party because the other parties have not made any complaints while Labour Party members have made lots and continue to do so.

See the relevant thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:26 PM

...and still fuck all to do with this thread. May as well discuss food, drink and holidays...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:24 PM

What proof is that then, Keith? That it must be worse in the Labour party because the other parties have not received as many complaints? By that measure the Nazi party in 1930s Germany must have been a paragon of virtue as I guess they received fewer complaints that anyone.

You are going purely off what other people say. Again. You have provided no evidence that a Labour supporter is more likely to be antisemitic while I have linked a survey which found that UKIP supporters are more likely to be antisemitic than anyone else.

Zero for effort and no cigar.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:18 PM

Dave,
No one has yet provided proof of it being worse in the Labour party than anywhere else.

I have, on the Labour Party thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:11 PM

Lifted straight from the Chakrabarti Reports Recommendations:

12. I recommend consideration of a greater range of NCC sanctions short of suspension and expulsion.

13. I do not recommend lifetime bans from the Labour Party and recommend time limits on the bringing of disciplinary charges.

The other thing is that no incidence of racist/anti-Semitic behaviour that predates the acceptance of this report can be brought to the attention of Labour's NEC for disciplinary action.

Chakrabarti "Whitewash".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 10:39 AM

Anti-Semitism Definition:
Exists now in law. Shaw's, Raggy's Gnome's, Greg F's or indeed anyone else's opinions are irrelevant.

WTF has it got to do with me? I have always accepted that there is antisemitism everywhere. No one has yet provided proof of it being worse in the Labour party than anywhere else. And considering that you whinge on about about people going off-topic, WTF has this got to do with this thread anyway?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 10:37 AM

don't agree with your opinions on this Teribus, there are far too many negatives as far as Russia is concerned and far too few positives.
The regime does not require chemicals to win or even shorten the war.

The perception that President Assad authorised the attack has turned world opinion against him.....when even the US were saying that there was no way forward without him.
The attack achieved nothing militarily, eighty women and children killed, the Americans killed over a hundred in Mosel with one drone strike.
"People saw planes dropping bombs containing Sarin gas"....and how did they know the bombs contained Sarin?.....both the regime and Russia have stated that an attack took place(using conventional weapons) and one of these rockets/bombs struck a cache of gas which the Russians say had been deliberately left to provide the conclusion we see before us; the planes would in that case still be seen dropping bombs, but the gas would not have been contained within them.

To say that Assad gassed women and children because he "thought he could get away with it", does not make good military sense and if the Russians were involved they were bound to take into account world opinion in the aftermath.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 09:55 AM

"Very embarrassing for Russia whose anti-missile Growler system failed to intercept any of the US Tomahawks even although they had prior warning and knew what their target was."

Given the fact Trump's team and the Russians talk and have done for some time it must be possible the Growlers were turned off; Russian bluster since the attack has a hollow ring to it, they just need to be seen to be making some noise.

It would be funny that Boris cancelled his trip to Moscow and then failed to convince the G7 to do anything about Russia if it didn't mean we had such a prat as Foreign Secretary and the Brexiteers had rendered us irrelevant internationally with their nationalistic ranting for the last couple of years. So much for taking back control: when Tillerson whistled, BoJo came running and did his bidding like a good little servant. Well done Brexitwats!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 09:11 AM

Oh no you don't, Teribus. You suggested that blatant Holocaust deniers in the Labour Party wouldn't be expelled. You have no grounds for saying that and you have no grounds for suggesting that the party harbours Holocaust deniers. It was a stupid post and I think you know it.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 09:07 AM

Anyone any good with a paint brush and roller. I have to decorate the hall, landing, stairs, bathroom and one bedroom before Wednesday when the carpet fitters arrive !!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 08:23 AM

Syrian Chemical Attack:

Undoubtedly carried out by Assad's forces with the collusion, and therefore, prior knowledge of the Russians. Nobody was supposed to know about it. Russian drones monitored where the injured were being taken and then that hospital was then subjected to attack in an attempt to destroy all evidence.

Why would they do it? Two reasons as far as Putin and the Assad regime goes:

1: Because they thought that they'd get away with it and that US reaction would be similar to that of the Obama Administration in 2012

2: It would seriously intimidate the rebels and might shorten resistance in the area.

Syrian Chemical Attack - the US response:

The US gave Russia advanced warning of their intended strike, that allowed the Russians and Assad sufficient time to move anything from the declared target area. The strike was a warning and only a warning, it was not meant to "destroy" anything, it was meant to provide a demonstration of what might follow any further use of chemical weapons. In that I believe that President Trump got his message home, but to confirm that we will have to wait and see. Very embarrassing for Russia whose anti-missile Growler system failed to intercept any of the US Tomahawks even although they had prior warning and knew what their target was.

Anti-Semitism Definition:
Exists now in law. Shaw's, Raggy's Gnome's, Greg F's or indeed anyone else's opinions are irrelevant.

As recommended by Chakrabarti - No-one who is a member of the Labour party can be banned from the Party for life for expressing any racist views (Includes anti-Semitism) - doubt that read her report and her conclusions all adopted by Labour's NEC.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 07:57 AM

Pretty stupid post, Teribus. No-one in the Labour Party to my knowledge has denied the Holocaust, to my mind one of the most disgusting hate crimes there is. Why don't you wait until you have something to say before you post?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 07:17 AM

"I am waiting to hear some evidence that the Assad regime used chemical weapons for no apparent purpose other than to bring down world opinion against them."

Given there are eyewitness accounts of Syrian jets dropping the bombs with gas in, including a report by a Channel 4 News reporter I would suggest the onus is on you to prove who else might have done it, given none of the opposition figures (including ISIS) have aircraft.

As for why, Assad misjudged, plain and simple. He's got the Russians backing him and he calculated without Trump's idiocy, unpredictability and astonishing hypocrisy; Trump has repeatedly tweeted against the US getting involved in Syria, condemned Obama when he looked like he might get the US involved and even last week was saying it was sod all to do with them.

It's not the US strike that's disturbing, it's having a total fucking idiot in charge of the US military.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 04:06 AM

Or as someone else has eloquently stated:-

"It doesn't take a military analyst to grasp that the American attack on a remote Syrian airfield contradicts every possible military rationale. If America really believed that Assad possessed a WMD stockpile and kept it in al-Shayrat airbase, launching a missile attack that could lead to a release of lethal agents into the air would be the last thing it would do. If America was determined to 'neutralise' Assad's alleged 'WMD ability' it would deploy special forces or diplomacy. No one defuses WMD with explosives, bombs or cruise missiles. It is simply unheard of."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 03:10 AM

Greg, I am waiting to hear some evidence that the Assad regime used chemical weapons for no apparent purpose other than to bring down world opinion against them.

As far a I am concerned this course of action makes no sense at all, as the war in Syria against Islamic terrorist was virtually won.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Apr 17 - 01:46 AM

Now if Spicer was a member of the Labour Party, under the arrangements arrived at by Labour's NEC courtesy of the Chakrabarti "Whitewash", he would face suspension, not expulsion, until he apologised after which he would be fully reinstated.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Apr 17 - 08:10 PM

Spicer's no worse than all the rest of the clowns in the Trump clown car, Bo.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 11 Apr 17 - 06:47 PM

Statement from Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect:

"On Passover no less, Sean Spicer has engaged in Holocaust denial, the most offensive of fake news imaginable, by denying Hitler gassed millions of Jews to death. Spicer's statement is the most evil slur upon a group of people we have ever heard from a White House press secretary. Spicer now lacks the integrity to serve as White House press secretary, and President Trump must fire him at once."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Apr 17 - 06:36 PM

Hey Ake! How about your hero Twitler's boy Spicer, eh? What a guy!
Didja know that Hitler didn't use chemical weapons?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Apr 17 - 09:01 AM

Haven't christened it yet. He'll have to wait.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Apr 17 - 08:14 AM

Because he probably wants to know what you will be having for tea tonight Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Apr 17 - 05:37 PM

Good sentiment in your first sentence, Bonzo. Then you threw the baby out with the bathwater. Why do you do that?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 10 Apr 17 - 05:18 PM

From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has concluded Russia knew in advance of Syria's chemical weapons attack last week, a senior U.S. official said Monday.

The official said a drone operated by Russians was flying over a hospital as victims of the attack were rushing to get treatment. Hours after the drone left, a Russian-made fighter jet bombed the hospital in what American officials believe was an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons.

The official said the presence of the surveillance drone over the hospital couldn't have been a coincidence, and that Russia must have known the chemical weapons attack was coming and that victims were seeking treatment.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Apr 17 - 10:53 AM

And quite rightly, almost a state funeral for PC Keith Palmer. It's good to know that raghead scum who murdered him was terminated immediately!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Apr 17 - 01:48 AM

"Good heavens Jom, Libya has never, ever been under Ba'ath Party rule"

Arrogant Jom?? Not one bit of it. The above is an example of something you seem mentally programmed not to accept in any shape or form. A simple statement of FACT that directly contradicts and proves false the erroneous information you try to inject into any discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Apr 17 - 04:48 PM

Not entirely Greg

Just give him and his crew time, Ake, just give 'em time.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Apr 17 - 01:53 PM

Not entirely Greg but this attack on Syria without proper investigation strikes me as political opportunism, and in direct opposition to his declared Foreign Policy.

You will have observed that I am not confined by Party loyalties or political ideologies...everything I say on this forum I think hard about and try to deliver sincerely, even when disappointed.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Apr 17 - 10:39 AM

the American public would have been as well voting for the proven warmonger Clinton.

Gee, Ake, is your buddy Emperor Twitler starting to disrobe?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Apr 17 - 03:57 AM

Regardless of the historical aspect, the problem is that we now seem determined to remove the Syrian government, without whom Syria would now be an ISIS stronghold. No one in power in the West had the desire to get troops involved, presumably because all previous interventions in the ME and NA had ended not only in disaster for the countries involved but poor political ratings for the representatives of the intervening governments.

The veracity of Syrian government involvement in the gassing is yet to be established and there is no sensible or military reason that they should be.
The rhetoric is beginning to look remarkably similar to the lead up into Iraq......lies distortions and exaggerations.

As I said earlier President Trump's "about face" is disappointing and I think opportunistic......the American public would have been as well voting for the proven warmonger Clinton.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Apr 17 - 03:24 AM

"Good heavens Jom, Libya has never, ever been under Ba'ath Party rule"
Should have been "influence" not rule of course.
Would apologise if you had not posted your correction in such a typically arrogant manner
Jim Carroll

"The Regional Branch was founded in the 1950s[103] by Amr Taher Deghayes.[104] Ba'athism was a major political force in Libya following the establishment of the United Arab Republic. Many intellectuals were attracted to Ba'athist ideology during the later years of the Kingdom of Libya. However, with help from Nasserist propaganda, several Ba'athists changed affiliation and became Nasserists instead.[105] The growth of these pan-Arab ideologies concerned the government, which led to the incarceration of several Nasserist and Ba'athist military officers in the early sixties.[106] The Ba'athist were accused of working to overthrow "the political, economic and social system" of the Kingdom; the sentences ranged from everything to eight months to two years.[107] By 1964, the Libyan Regional Branch had only managed to establish one-level below the Regional Command, the branch-level.[108] Syrian specialist John Devlin estimated that the Libyan Regional Branch had been 50 and 150 members in 1964.[108]

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 11:16 PM

"under Baath Party rule Libya adopted certain socialist measures which brought improvements that upset the West" - Jom

Good heavens Jom, Libya has never, ever been under Ba'ath Party rule. The only two Arab countries that have experienced the benefits of such a democidal regime have been Iraq and Syria.

By the way, when have I ever evinced support for Assad? Jim Carroll "made-up-shit", another Jim Carroll lie, I knew it wouldn't take very long for a new one to come tumbling out - you just can't seem to help yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 07:00 PM

I neither praise the Baath party, nor do I admire it (You were the one who supported Assad, not me)
I said that under Baath Party rule Libya adopted certain socialist measures which brought improvements that upset the West
Please do not distort what I said – it really is not nice and it's become a permanent feature of your contributions
Take your hiding like a man, if that's not too much to ask for
Having had your arse kicked (once again) on your inventing "lies" I have told (which appear to be consisting of anything I have disagreed with you on which automatically become "lies" (thereby hangs a meglomania) you seem bent on seeking revenge
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 06:01 PM

The Ba'ath Party that Carroll seems so keen on based on two previous regimes - The German Nazi Party (National Socialists) and Stalin's version of communism - they adopted the worst characteristics of each - and Jom applauds them for it. I am not surprised at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 05:19 PM

I would be interested to see your additional thoughts, whenever you get the opportunity to continue.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 03:16 PM

"Apologies Jim. attached the wrong link first time around and hit send before finishing."
No problem Iains - I managed to trace the article from the wording
"The problem is that financial and political considerations give no place for humanitarian concerns."
Can't argue with that, but it makes my point.
If a system of government cannot cater for all those it covers it has outlivd its usefulness.
The problem with the Third World is that it has become a source of exploitation for the wealthier ones so the latter fights to oppose any changes that threaten its own financial interests, hence the constant interference in policies that threaten those interests - oil being the major one at present, but plenty more on the way
All major wars are tracable back to this situation, including World War One - a battle between Empires for either protection or expansion of Colonies
The system has reached a point where it can no longer expand without resistance from the exploited groups
In my opinion, that is rapidly becoming teh case with Britain and America - Isolationist policies and massive increases in gaps between haves and have nots
Sorry
Not going to be able to continue this - off to Dublin tomorrow
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 01:25 PM

Apologies Jim. attached the wrong link first time around and hit send before finishing.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 01:24 PM

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/170/41931.html

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 01:13 PM

Well Jim, for once we actually have some common ground. You make some points I do not dispute.
The problem is that financial and political considerations give no place for humanitarian concerns.In fact the former two tend to militate against it. The link is quite old, but illustrates the point well

https://www.globalpolicy.org/un-reform.html

The globalists seem unconcerned by the human cost of their actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 10:54 AM

Can't open your link, but it wasn't
Qaddafi, for all his weaknesses, introduced progressive measures and was met with resistance - he eventually became a liability.
The West would not accept progressive policies that did not suit their own interests and brutally suppressed them
They opposed Nasser's nationalising of the Suez Canal, they engineered a coup to remove Nkrumah in the former Gold Coast, (Ghana) and they almost certainly engineered the assasination of Patrice Lumumba in The Congo - that's how it worked - if your face didn't suit Western interests, you went and it didn't matter what yuour replacement's human rights attitude was - Papa Doc Duvalier, in Haiti, Hitler-loving Marshal Kee in South Vietnam, the Contras in El Salvador... all "monsters, but our monsters".
I've recommended a book before - I doubt if you took may advice, and you won't now, but I suggest 'Listen Yankee', by American sociologist, C Write Mills   
He describes how America's opposition to social reforms in Cuba turned a social revolt into a revolution.
These poorer countries need to find their own salvation
Finally gt to open your link to the opinion (only) of American establishment writer's Ellen Brown - opinion only
It is interesting to have quoted something from 'The Ecologist' founded by teh son of notorious billionaire, Jimmy Goldsmith.
Tnat't the place everybody should go for unbiased political opinion !
and you call me naively uncritical!!!
Libya's decline and downfall came long, long before Hilary Clinton and the American election   
What the writer describes is the corpse of a country with principles, not why it died
We could have helped the Libyan protesters achieve a fairer system - instead, we profited on their problems and were quite happy to see Qaddafi's son step into his shoes and continue the dynasty.
All of these states need to be examined in historical context if we are to understand them - in the meantime, a humanitarian stance has fo fill the gap.
We owe these countries far more than they owe us.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 10:12 AM

Jim it was a bit more than socialist policies led to Gadaffi's downfall.
It was more about the munee.


http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987399/why_qaddafi_had_to_go_african_gold_oil_and_the_challenge_to_monetary_impe

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 09:31 AM

Sod his ill manners - let's give it a whirlLibya's progress came though the adoption of SOCIALIST POLICIES by the Baath Perty
It was when the west opposed those policies, describing them as oppressive, that things began to go wrong
The West and it's "safe pair of hands" policies have much to answer for
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 09:10 AM

"Jim, multiculturalism was failing even while I was a member of the Communist Party, "
So - Britain has never lost its Empire mentality and has refused to take responsibility for the damage that Empire did and has left in its wake
People come he re and settle and are rejected and smeared by bigots like you and are criticised for keeping to their own communities
You may pay lip service to detesting Powell but you carry his message perfectly
You and yours are the problem - not the immigrants
Views like yours get petrol poured through letter boxes
You now have an equally ignorant running mate who makes pronouncements and refuses to respond with decent and respectful argument - a waste of time replying - I can go to any ill brought up moron to be partonised and insulted
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 08:52 AM

Jim, multiculturalism was failing even while I was a member of the Communist Party, I attended demos all over Scotland in solidarity with immigrants. It was the time of Civil Rights in America, which I had come to understand and support mainly through blues and US Folk music. I detested Powell, but the man was eventually proved correct many years after his death; he saw into the future and recognised the policy of multiculturalism for what it was....a recipe for disaster.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 07:16 AM

"A removal of dictatorships is the first giant step for mankind - what happens following that in terms of international co-operation, humanitarian aid, the winning of hearts and minds and encouragement to establish democratic systems"

Having seen what has happened in Libya and Iraq, and what many would wish on Syria, I think we are better off leaving well alone.
Libya once a successful country with excellent health care and education now sent back to the stone age and run by local warlords.
Iraq attacked on the scam of supposed weapons of mass destruction and vast chunks of its infrastructure destroyed, depleted uranium nano particles wreaking havoc in the ubiquitous war zones and many vital medicines with held due to sanctions.
Syria, a onetime secular society with Christians, Jews and Muslims living in peaceful coexistance. Now with a high percentage of its population refugees.

I cannot see in any of these three examples humanitarian aid and the winning of hearts and minds, let alone the rest of the mindless recitation.
I just see an endless tragedy while those responsible continue to practise their endless propaganda and play with ever more deadly toys in their big sandbox and care not a whit for the human suffering they cause.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 06:45 AM

"Tell that to the head and hand chopping, Homosexual executing, women enslaving, pilot roasting democrats of Libya and Iraq, "
That is utter racist bollocks Ake
The people of these countries do not do that the fanatics they need to get rid themselves of do.
You say multiculturalism has failed - if it has it's because of screaming fanatical bigots like you who don't want foreigners to foul up our 'green and pleasant land'
I take pleasure in reminding you - and anybody else around that you stated that mass-murdering racist bigot Anders Breivik "was saying something worth listening to"
You seem very selective in your choice of which killer is "worth listening to" and which is not.
On an earlier point
The wealth West is already is already imposing its values on Third World Countries by leeching from the oppression and injustice that his happening to the poorest people on the planet
We need dictatorships to exist so we can fill our cars with cheap petrol and fill our shops with slave-manufactured goods.
As Voltaire might have said - 'if oppressive dictatorships did not exist we would have to invent them'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 06:29 AM

"A removal of dictatorships is the first giant step for mankind - what happens following that in terms of international co-operation, humanitarian aid, the winning of hearts and minds and encouragement to establish democratic systems"


Tell that to the head and hand chopping, Homosexual executing, women enslaving, pilot roasting democrats of Libya and Iraq, your whole world vision is based on myth......these people hate us with a vengeance and they will probably succeed in their goal of world domination.......they will have been ably assisted by you and your kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 04:33 AM

"Jim the removal of dictatorships in the middle East has not brought democracy, i"
Can we add support for dictatorships to your growing list Ake?
You really are coming out of your closet with giant strides, aren't you?
A removal of dictatorships is the first giant step for mankind - what happens following that in terms of international co-operation, humanitarian aid, the winning of hearts and minds and encouragement to establish democratic systems will govern what happens in the future and will decide whether or not this planet has a future
We've established and supported far too many dictatorships out of self-interest and pursuit of profit - that's why the world we've left to our children is so obscenely ***** up.
Who on earth talks about "Western Democracy being transplanted" - that is what happened when the world was divided into Empires - only it wasn't transplanted - it was imposed.
Each nation must be allowed and assisted to shape its own destiny and plan its own future - hopefully it will be a better one that we bequeathed to them.
The Arab Spring that you pour such contempt on was a perfect example of an opportunity lost - people who had had enough demanding a better life for themselves free of the despots you apparently support.
We could have actively helped them to develop decent societies - instead we alienated them with a mixture of half-hearted gesture-politics and a self interest - we created a situation in Libya that both sides were fighting each other with weapons sold by The British - Briatin was training Qdaffi's son to take his place when he joined the Choir Invisibule - utter inhuman madness.
The eve of The Arab Spring was marked by a massive Arms Fair in London, opened by David Cameron, aimed at selling instruments of destruction and oppression to the despots the poor of the Middle East were trying to did themselves of.
We fill our shops with goods manufactured in the most oppressive despotic regimes under the worst conditions in the world, while at the same time, exiting Europe in order to stop the immigration of the people seeking a better life here
What message is that sending out to the world "Bear your chains with fortitude - we-re not interested" is the one I'm getting
Is it any wonder they are turning to their own fanatics for support.
It is not an act of humanity that we should involve ourselves in assisting these people to better their lot - it is a matter of self interest
"Only an idiot" refuses to see that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 04:03 AM

Jim the removal of dictatorships in the middle East has not brought democracy, it has brought fanaticism, lawlessness and chaos.0

"Democracy" if it is ever to come about will have to slowly evolve especially in countries with Muslim cultures.

Only an idiot would refuse to accept the evidence and think that Western "democracy" can be transplanted.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 04:02 AM

Jim,
I HAVE NEVER AT ANY TIME PROPOSED INVADING ANYWHERE -M YOU ACCUSED ME OF DOING SO - ONCE MORE YOU LIED

On the Homs thread you advocated military intervention to protect civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 03:52 AM

As I have said, I do not believe that the Assad regime was responsible for the gas attack, there is absolutely no logic in such an attack from President Assad's point of view, he leads the fight against terrorism in Syria and must have known that such an act would bring down the wrath of the world on his head.......to no military purpose. It is so suicidal as to be completely unbelievable.

If the regime was mad enough to make such an idiotic decision, it blows out of the water the "liberal" view that President Trump is in the pocket of President Putin.

I think that on one point Jim is correct and that President Trump acted opportunistically and I must say dangerously in ordering the air strikes on Syria, without UN authorisation or waiting to hear the results of an enquiry into the incident.

This is a disappointment to me, but a portion of the blame must fall on the Democrats and "liberals" who have obstructed and frustrated every policy he has tried to introduce.......They are now , like Jim, left in a quandary, their conspiracy theories in tatters.
He no doubt thought that it was worth the risk to gain some domestic gravitas.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 03:52 AM

Here is a post of mine from around the time of the first Sarin Attack in Syria and Obama's "Red Line" fiasco:

Subject: RE: BS: Did CIA lunch the Sarin missile in Syria
From: Teribus - PM
Date: 05 Sep 13 - 11:35 AM

To address Donuel's post

1: Your proposed solution would be more effective were it put in the following terms to the President of Syria and all his international supporters:

The current crisis in Syria is entirely of your making, the use of chemical weapons was a "red line" that has been crossed - we do not care who crossed it - Should there be a repetition, we WILL hold you responsible, these weapons are "yours", you have elected that Syria is not a signatory of the International Chemical Weapons Convention, the only reason they are available for use inside Syria. Any strike will be directed at yourself and the leadership of the ruling Ba'ath party in Syria - this we hope will act as a suitable incentive for you, your ministers and military commanders to ensure that no further chemical weapons are used.

The President of the USA has fired a warning shot - it was only a warning shot - he gave notice and Assad and whatever Russians were about were given time to get themselves and whatever stuff they wanted out of harms way. Those US Tomahawk missiles survived passing through a Russian supplied anti-missile defence system and struck their targets with a 100% success rate. President Trump should now tell the Assad regime precisely what I suggested Obama should have done in 2013:

Any future strike will be directed at yourself and the leadership of the ruling Ba'ath party in Syria - this we hope will act as a suitable incentive for you, your ministers and military commanders to ensure that no further chemical weapons are used.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 03:28 AM

"Perhaps you should look at the facts. "
"The facts", in this particular case, are quite likely to be that those closest to the worst world leader in over the last half century have told the president that, instead of ignoring the war crimes being committed by Russia and Syria, it might be a great photo-opportunity for him to clean up his image and appear as a sentient human being for a change.
Assad should have been arrested and placed in front of a War Crimes Tribunal by the U.N. at the time he was slaughtering civilians in Homs - he might have been had Russia and China used their veto to prevent that happening.
His viciously murderous activities prior to that should have been investigated at the time of the AMNESTY REPORT in 2009
They weren't, - he was considered too valuable an asset to the West - "a safe pair of hands" in the Middle East, so we did nothing and ignored the mass murder and torture that was going on.
The end result has been that Western inaction has provided a perfect breeding ground for fanatics like Isis and we have become part of the slaughter.
Now Assad - a proven mass murderer, whatever he does and will continue to do, is one of our friends - and one of our most imaginatively horrific creations - Mary Shelly, eat your heart out.
A perfect example of political opportunism and national self-interest gone as toxic as the weapons that are being used.
The least that should come out of this bloody fiasco is that The United Nations should review its policy of allowing its most powerful Nation States to use its influence by blocking natural justice and humanity with vetoes - it happens far too often
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 08 Apr 17 - 03:18 AM

Greg F

Piquant=pleasantly stimulating or exciting to the mind.

What on earth are you babbling on about?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 04:09 PM

Greg F : Perhaps you should look at the facts.

As facts are irrelevant to your world view as well as to those who you champion this reference is something piquant - if not just downright ignrant bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 02:03 PM

have been in favour of the proposed intervention.
YPretty well proven as is every other act of terror of this murderous regime
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 01:42 PM

Greg F
Perhaps you should look at the facts. An illegal airstrike has occurred on a sovereign nation on the basis of as yet unfounded allegations.
Had unequivocal evidence been presented to justify a strike, it would be difficult to argue against the merits of the action.
However that is not the case. Also according to some reports over half the missiles did not impact on the target. For all the talk the damage appears relatively minor,apart from the murdered casualties.
Also telling the Russians before carrying out the strike must inevitably have vastly diminished the potential impact. So a person could legitimately ask:- what was the point of it all? It seems the first major action of the President on the world stage was that of a clown in a 5 ring circus. Poorly planned, poorly executed with the result of racking up tensions in an already unstable part of the world, and giving Putin an open invitation to beef up the syrian air defences.

Perhaps you think that was a win win result- I think it was a shambles!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 01:15 PM

"You have been in favour of an actual, boots on the ground invasion."
No Keith - I asked when I used the word - not you
You appear to be admitting that I didn't but you accused me of doing so, which is what I said
Obama's proposal came late - after the horse had bolted - Britain voted against intervention when the citizens of Homs were being slaughtered - you agreed with them and proposed that they should send riot control equipment to get the protestors off the streets.
Up to this time, you called me a fascist for suggesting "invasion"
I HAVE NEVER AT ANY TIME PROPOSED INVADING ANYWHERE -M YOU ACCUSED ME OF DOING SO - ONCE MORE YOU LIED
- you are a serial liar and have been for a long time - now - once again - whenever have I ever suggesting invading anywhere
Now will do nicely
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 12:48 PM

Is it the president calling the shots or deep state?

Deep state, Iains ?

I can see you're right up there with Flynn and the pizza parlor sex ring.

You need to stop listening to Alex Jones.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 11:45 AM

Jim, I can not remember if you used the word "invade" but you did demand that Western troops intervene in Syria.

Here is what I said AT THE TIME,

Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 10 Sep 13 - 02:27 PM

Jim, I have been arguing all along that Obama's proposed intervention, despite uncertainty of outcome, was less harmful than doing nothing.
I have been in favour of the proposed intervention.
You have been in favour of an actual, boots on the ground invasion.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 11:30 AM

For the sake of accuracy Keith - could you please link me to where I suggested "invading" anywhere
I seem to remember you lied about my having done so at the time
Perhaps you can prove me wrong
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 10:38 AM

"You and I were alone on Mudcat supporting a punishment strike against Assad for his use of chemical weapons, as I said."
You lied - as I said and your posts proved - you opposed intervention and you suggested that sending riot control equipment to Assad was preferable
Sorry Keith - you have your own statements - you're not going to lie your way out of this one and you would be stupid to try
But feel free - all grist to the mill
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 09:45 AM

"I think the less brain dead would call it evidence."

Brilliant reply, cuts to the quick whilst displaying a soupçon of erudition and wit.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 09:28 AM

Jim,
Yo have been presented with a list of your statements opposing intervention

You and I were alone on Mudcat supporting a punishment strike against Assad for his use of chemical weapons, as I said.

You had also advocated Western ground troops invading another troubled Muslim country, this time Syria.
You were completely alone in that.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 09:23 AM

Unproven? According to whose and what criteria?
I think the less brain dead would call it evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 09:00 AM

"and now cruise missiles launched on the basis of unproven allegations!"

Unproven? According to whose and what criteria?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 08:12 AM

I'll be less kind than Stu. Iains: you are in cloud cuckoo land.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 08:03 AM

Donald the braindead said something four years ago - he is now saying the opposite"
Back in 2013, a much wiser Donald Trump tweeted the following"
Trump is a vicious moron - it would be a charity to suggest he has a mind to change
Your point is?
America has now fired on Homs air base - to date 9 civilians ahve been killed

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 07:52 AM

Stu

Back in 2013, a much wiser Donald Trump tweeted the following
AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA – IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!

and now cruise missiles launched on the basis of unproven allegations!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 07:42 AM

" Trump has fired off the hip on a whim with no proof whatsoever, despite all the warbling to the contrary."

Remarkable. I wonder what your motivation for posting this comment is?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 07:00 AM

This, from this morning's Irish Times - taken from The New York Times
All lies or what Iain and Ake , or what?
Jim Carroll

THE MANY WAYS ASSAD HAS KILLED HIS OWN PEOPLE
Russell Goldman

REGIME'S METHODS RANGE FROM CHEMICAL WEAPONS TO MASS STARVATION
In six years of war, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria has overseen a campaign of carnage, turning an enormous cache of deadly weapons against the very people they were presumably stockpiled to protect. In a campaign to crush rebels and jihadis, Assad and his allies have relied on tactics that go far beyond the norms of modern warfare to kill many thousands of Syrians. Here are the ways they have done it.

CHEMICAL WEAPONS
In the latest attack on civilians, more than 100 people, including children, were believed to have been killed by chemical weapons in a rebel-held town in Idlib province on Tuesday. A doctor there said the victims' pupils were reduced to pin- hole-size dots, a characteristic of nerve agents and other banned toxic substances.
The United States put the blame for the attack on the Syrian government and its patrons, Russia and Iran, and suggested that the salvo was a war crime. While the attack was among the deadliest uses of chemical weapons in Syria in years, it was far from an isolated case.
During the war, the Assad government has been accused
of regularly using chlorine gas, which is less deadly than the agent used on Tuesday and is legal in its commercial form.
According to the Violations Documentation Centre, a Syrian local monitoring group that compiles data on human rights breaches, more than 1,100 Syri¬ans have been killed in chemical weapons and gas attacks.
There are reports that the Islamic State terror group, also known as Isis, has used mustard agent in northern Syria.

SIEGE TACTICS AND STARVATION
In a war that has involved some of the modem world's most dan¬gerous weapons, Assad and his allies have also used an ancient tactic to devastating effect: siege warfare.
Last year, government troops brought the rebel-held districts of Aleppo, Syria's largest city before the war, to their knees, besieging them for months. Hundreds of thousands of people there and in other besieged cities risked starving to death, and many hundreds succumbed to the stranglehold that forces loyal to As¬sad had on the city's food supply-
In September 2016, after the Assad government agreed to allow international aid convoys to enter Aleppo, Russian or Syrian warplanes attacked the trucks, killing about 20 people and leading to a suspension in aid.
A month earlier, the rebel-controlled city of Daraya, after four years of siege and bombings, struck a deal to surrender to the government.
Rebel forces and Islamic State have also besieged government-controlled areas on a smaller scale.

MASS EXECUTIONS AND TORTURE
The Syrian government has summarily executed 5,000-13,000 people in mass hangings in just one of its many prisons since the start of the six-year-old uprising against As¬sad, Amnesty International said in a report in February. Inmates are kept under conditions so dismal - including regular, severe beatings and deprivation of food, water, medicine and basic sanitation - that they amount to deliberate extermination, defined under international law as a crime against humanity, the report said.

BARREL BOMBS AND TARGETING OF HOSPITALS
Syrian and Russian warplanes have bombed civilian targets and population centres, hitting mosques, schools and markets. Government forces have struck rebel-held areas with barrel bombs, large containers filled with explosive material and shrapnel. Air strikes have also targeted hospitals.
According to the Physicians for Human Rights, more than 300 hospitals have been attacked, a phenomenon the Unit¬ed Nations has likened to a "weapon of war". Rebels have also shelled civilian areas, but their weapons are less powerful.

SCUD MISSILES
More than 38,000 people have been killed in shelling attacks and explosions, according to the Violations Documentation Centre. Among the deadliest weapons deployed against civilians were Scud missiles, aimed at rebel-held areas in the early years of the war.
Scores of people were killed in explosions and buried under rubble when their homes were hit.
New York Times

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 06:10 AM

Greg F. It it OOOPS!! yet?
Probably is for several reasons.
1) Trump has fired off the hip on a whim with no proof whatsoever, despite all the warblings to the contrary.
2)Russia was warned, therefore syria was warned, so all valuable assets were removed from the line of fire.
3) This is a complete about face in policy over the space of several days.
4) Is it the president calling the shots or deep state?
5) To crater a runway in Homs to make a point is a bit extreme in my view/

The stakes have been raised significantly with the possibility things could escalate with both Russia and China getting involved.

Dangerous times ahead. This is definitely more serious than a oops moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 05:06 AM

Away from Keith's lying - back to the topic
According to this morning's Times -Trump is considering airstrikes against Assad's forces following the chemical attack
I was joking when I suggested he might consider using chemical weapons against Assad - now, given the man - I'm not so sure
A crazy, crazy world these monsters have made for us
What did you say about a Clinton victory risking plunging the world into war Ake?
Tell me again!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 04:28 AM

"
That was a fact."
Yo have been presented with a list of your statements opposing intervention and supporting selling equipment to Assad
You are now lying withing half a doxen postings of that list
You are insane
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 04:09 AM

No, still wrong Keith. Only you and Jim said anything on an insignificant folk music forum that few people see and even fewer take any notice of. Millions of people supported intervention.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Apr 17 - 03:41 AM

Steve,
I said, "Only two people on Mudcat supported intervention back then.
Jim Carroll and me. "

That was a fact.

Your reply, "You don't know that, Keith. I for one didn't say. " was plain stupid Steve.
Was I expected to name every Mudcat person who had not bothered to contribute or express a view?

The fact remains that only two people on Mudcat supported intervention back then.
Jim Carroll and me, but Steve Shaw and about a thousand others said nothing about it at all.
OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 08:53 PM

"I'm beginning to think that your hate campaign"
Obama's of curse
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 08:07 PM

"Jim, if we had intervened earlier, there is no doubt that Syria would now be under the full control of ISIS."
If we had intervened earlier Isis would not exist as a serious force.
Young Muslims were appalled t what was happening in Syria and they voluteered to fight Assad in their thousands, the West washed its hab=nds of the conflict and Isis stepped into the gap.
Assad's henchmen were deserting his ranks and begging Britain to put pressure on the regime as he had some respect for our leadership and political traditions, particularly because of his English wife - they did sweet fuck all
They suggested Britain confiscate the millions-worth of property and assets he haeld in London - nothing
Assad's gofer brother-in-law moved in and out of London freely throughout teh massacres in Homs
You really are talking shite Ake and asking you to substantiate it in any way is a total waste of time - but there you go - the floor is yours - explain yourself - one-two- three
Now, here you are supporting Assad in the same way you did Brievik and Trump and the enforced wearing of identification insignia for refugees.
A really keeper of the flame for extremest right-wing politics.
Wasn't it a shame about Wilders - let's home LePen has better luck eh!!
I'm beginning to think that your hate campaign has something to do with his colour - a darkie who doesn't know his place
You really are a piece of work
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 07:53 PM

By the way, Dave, well done for getting my two favourite wines put on special at Morrisons, Torres Viña Sol at two for a tenner and the much-revered Signature Nero d'Avola down to a fiver. You're a mind-reader and genius, Dave!

Er, it was you, I presume...?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:13 PM

"Come on Steve, don't beat about the bush. Tell us what you really think."

Well, Dave, what a bloody arsehole he is. Can you BELIEVE that post! Yesterday I was getting a bollocking from the vacuous Iains for posting too much and today I'm getting it in the neck for not posting to some thread or other that Keith was doing his usual w*anking in. Jesus wept, Mudcat is the love of my life (😆) but it's not my career. He's posted masses of utter idiocy in his time but that takes the bloody biscuit. Twattitudiness of the highest order!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:03 PM

Hey Iains, Ake, Bo & Co:

It it OOOPS!! yet?


Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Thursday that there is "no doubt" Syrian President Bashar Assad is responsible for the suspected chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of people, including children, earlier this week.

"There is no doubt in our minds and the information that we have supports that Syria and the Syrian regime under the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad are responsible for this attack," Tillerson said in a press briefing at Palm Beach International Airport. "And furthermore, I think it is very important that the Russian government consider very carefully their continued support for the Assad regime."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:55 PM

Come on Steve, don't beat about the bush. Tell us what you really think.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:27 PM

Steve,
"You don't know that, Keith. I for one didn't say."

So you had no strong views either way.
It was a lively and vigorous debate. You had nothing to contribute.

What a bloody prick you are. I post or not post whenever I want, and you do not get to jump to conclusions about my views from that. It's lucky for you that I don't tell you what I really think about you a damn sight more often than I do, you arrogant little turd. If I were you I wouldn't read anything at all into the fact that I hold back. Incidentally, I can absolutely assure you that any debate here that you're involved in is the very opposite of lively and vigorous. You see to that with your tedious, repetitive, hectoring bigotry. You really do fancy yourself, don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:04 PM

Jim, if we had intervened earlier, there is no doubt that Syria would now be under the full control of ISIS.
We could only have provided air support to the terrorists, Assad's army would have been blown to pieces and who was going to volunteer to go in on the ground and oppose the Islamist psychopaths?

Not Obama after the US experience in Iraq, certainly not the UK, the population were deeply opposed to any further foreign intervention.

The removal of Assad and his army would have been an absolute gift to the Islamic State.

Everybody knows this truth but words come easy.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 04:52 PM

"Only two people on Mudcat supported intervention back then.
Jim Carroll and me."
You are a detestable lying prick
Not only did you oppose intervention, but at the time Assad was massacring his people you supported sending Assad riot control equipment to quell the protests

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 08 Mar 12 - 08:16 AM
Me
"your proposal that Britain could sell Assad anti-riot gear to keep his people in line"
You
"Non-lethal equipment does not keep people in line.
Demonstrators live to continue the struggle.
Their cause gets global coverage and gains support.
You prefer lethal bullets be used to kill and demoralise them.
Hospitals trawled for survivors and protest suppressed.
You are a fascist Jim."

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror (Syria, 2012)
From: GUEST,keith A - PM
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:14 AM

You have been opposing the use of military intervention from the beginning
This is true.
I still believe invasion should be a last resort.
You and your new mates Israel and Saudi were well to the Right of me on that, wanting it from the start.
You old fascist you.

Not only that, but you condoned Britain selling Assad sniper rifles at the time his men were cutting down the citizens of Homs
Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Feb 12 - 09:21 AM
You have clearly been searching vigorously, but all you have come up with is some sniper rifles.


You proposed that it was fine for Britain to supply to a monster that had filled his torture chambers with victims, them murdered them by the thousands when his torturers had finished with them

Subject: RE: BS: Homs horror
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Feb 12 - 03:15 PM
"Even liberal democracies have to deal with riots.
Non-lethal crowd control techniques are preferrable to live rounds.
If only Syria would restrict its security forces to using tear gas and water.
It would not be such a crime to supply such things, compared to what Russia and China supplies."

Where, in all this, is your support for intervention?

Your support for intervention was describes as an invasion of soveriegn territory

Me
"Even on humanitarian grounds alone they should have taken steps to at least defend the civilians"
You
"Arab league and UN officials have tried and failed.
They idea that Britain should mount an invasion is ludicrous.
You are ludicrous."

Me
"You have been opposing the use of military intervention from the beginning"

You
This is true.
I still believe invasion should be a last resort.
You and your new mates Israel and Saudi were well to the Right of me on that, wanting it from the start.
You old fascist you.
Arab league and UN officials have tried and failed.
They idea that Britain should mount an invasion is ludicrous.
You are ludicrous.

Where is the "Jim Carroll and me" in all this?
You are a lying piece of shit Keith – far from opposing Assad, you propsed selling him equipment in order to enable him quash the protests.

Never associate me with your sick opinions again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 04:04 PM

How would anyone know that chemicals were being dropped from planes?

There were eye witnesses and by the pattern of saturation the gas could not have been delivered in any other way, ake and Iains. Are you competing for village idiot of the year or what?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 03:23 PM

Greg F
I suppose you swallow Alice in Wonderland hook, line and sinker also.
How sad!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 02:48 PM

whatever the mainstream media feeds you.

What the "mainstream media" (which is just that) can document and/or provide evidence for and be generally reliable.

As opposed to what Breibart and the total bullshit factories invent and lie about and you swallow wholesale.

Gotcha, Iains troika.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 02:47 PM

"How would anyone know that chemicals were being dropped from planes?"

It's a flippin' mystery Ake! How does anyone know Blue Whales exist because after all, I've never seen one.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 01:54 PM

dtheg
"Where is the evidence it was the rebels, Iains? Where did they get the planes to drop it from for a start? You keep asking for evidence that it was Assad but seem very reticent about providing anything to the contrary. Why is that?"
As yet no one has definitive evidence to substantiate any view, As I have already stated. Even your tenuous grasp of reality must surely realise that for Assad to use a banned nerve gas on his own people would be an act of extreme stupidity and hence would seem an unlikely scenario
Every time Assad is making progress something like this happens to get the pot boiling again. But you just carry on believing whatever the mainstream media feeds you.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 01:16 PM

Steve,
You don't know that, Keith. I for one didn't say.

So you had no strong views either way.
It was a lively and vigorous debate. You had nothing to contribute.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 12:57 PM

"The regime version is that they were striking an ISIS arms cache and it subsequently turned out that chemicals were in that cache."
Contrary to Assad's claims that the chemical attacks came from Isis stores exploding, he ambassador almost immediately confirmed that they were they were dropped from planes.
I should have thought that survivors from such an attack would have been aware of where the chemicals were coming from - planes in the sky - missiles dropping - bang - burns - whee, bust be raining!!
For christ's sake Ake - why are you defending these monsters - weren't Trump and Coulter enough for you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 12:14 PM

How would anyone know that chemicals were being dropped from planes?

The regime version is that they were striking an ISIS arms cache and it subsequently turned out that chemicals were in that cache. How these chemicals got there and who planted them would seem obvious.
To any onlooker it would look as if the planes were dropping chemical weapons, but to do so at this juncture, when the war is virtually won and when mainly women and children are affected, would be a supreme act of idiocy.....President Assad does not seem to be any sort of idiot to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 11:57 AM

"If you have any information, give it""
I have done over and over again - go dig out Homs Horror
You already know this - you have attempted to smear Amnesty for producing such evidence as far back as ten years ago,
You only have to dig out reports of the systematic massacre of civilians at Homs - BBC television has had a field-day producing on the spot reports
The world condemned Assad for using chemicals - you have been given reports on this thread covering this
Britain was included in the condemnation for selling chemicals capable of making such weapons
You must have been visiting your folks on the Planet Zog when this was in the news.
This is a HANDY ENOUGH SUMMING UP OF Assad's behaviour down the years, one of many going back several decades.
Rather than demand evidence, I think it's time your responded with your own, don't you?
It's not my practice to denigrate young people, but conversing with you is rapidly becoming like trying to hold a conversation with a child with severe learning difficulties.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 11:45 AM

Where is the evidence it was the rebels, Iains? Where did they get the planes to drop it from for a start? You keep asking for evidence that it was Assad but seem very reticent about providing anything to the contrary. Why is that?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 10:37 AM

"Everybody knows who is responsible - they have records of war crimes as long as your arm
If you have any information, give it"
Come on Jim where is the evidence?

Many many allegations no evidence.
You know what they say:- If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.
You Jim, are a fine example
I cannot prove the allegations one way or the other-conversely neither can you.
This does not fit your agenda so you resort to the usual bluster and insults.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 10:24 AM

"Only two people on Mudcat supported intervention back then.
Jim Carroll and me."
Don't you dare associate any of your racist views with mine
You suppotrded selling "only a few sniper rifles" tohim at a time Assads snipers were trying to kill mothers and children with one bullet, said it was ok to sell him riot control equipment so he could neutralise the Arab Spring protests and appeased the sale of chemicals capable of manufacturing these filthy weapons.
You also called me a fascist when I suggested that the west should intervene to stop the Homs slaughter
Please be good enough to keep your filthy views to yourself
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 08:51 AM

Hey Iains, Ake, Bo & Co:

It it OOOPS!! yet?   Even Twitler gets it- you can't mean to say you three are dumber than HE is???

Syria chemical attack has changed my view of Assad, says Trump
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/05/syria-chemical-gas-attack-donald-trump-nikki-haley-assad

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 08:41 AM

You don't know that, Keith. I for one didn't say.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 08:40 AM

And, of course, Lieberman is a TOTALLY unbiased source! However...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 07:40 AM

If only Obama had intervened as promised when they first crossed his red line on gas use.
Only two people on Mudcat supported intervention back then.
Jim Carroll and me.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 07:29 AM

Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Thursday morning that Syrian President Bashar Assad ordered the chemical attack in northwestern Syria, which killed up to 100 people, many of them children, and injured hundreds of others.

Lieberman told Yedioth Ahronoth that Syrian planes carried out the two chemical attacks, which were "directly ordered and planned by Syrian President Bashar Assad." He stressed he was "100 percent certain." The defense minister said he did not know if Russia was involved in the attack.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:55 AM

"...but to suggest that this particular atrocity was committed by either Russia or the Assad regime is to suspend logic."

The gas was dropped from aeroplanes, which the opposition don't have; this was reported by an eye-witness in a film shown on Channel 4 news. Only Assad or Russia could have done this, and the consensus is it was Assad.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:27 AM

"Russia or the Assad regime is to suspend logic."
Why - they've done it before
Your buddy, Don the Don, blames them =both and threatens action
Knowing his mentality - he'll probably drop chemical weapons on them
"Well Shaw if you followed the thread i"
And if you proodeed an argument rahen than blustering ill mannered bull-shit you wish gain a little credibility
Quooting one of the accused as an argument - and you call us naive and believing everything we read!!!
Chuckle - chuckle
Everybody knows who is responsible - they have records of war crimes as long as your arm
If you have any information, give it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:14 AM

We have seen no evidence of who used chemicals in the last three years but to suggest that this particular atrocity was committed by either Russia or the Assad regime is to suspend logic.

Who had most to gain from this disgraceful act?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:12 AM

Well Shaw if you followed the thread instead of jumping in you would see the argument all along is lack of evidence and how the MSM is accusing Assad of being the devil incarnate without any facts to substantiate the allegations. And you are the last person I would dream of paying any attention to. I suggest you go back to your weeds and wine and let the more clued up continue the conversation.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 06:03 AM

"Given narratives" don't mean a fig. What matters is evidence. That's also how you assess the "neutrality" of sources, not whether they write in laid-back English. Try it some time.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:47 AM

Jim yes indeed. Why not? That is not the only website querying the syria narrative. Surely even you can see that it all falls together extremely conveniently to make Assad the badman. I have found RT generally gives a neutral coverage. As yet still no evidence to suggest Assad scored an own goal with suspected sarin. Not that this would be apparent to read the Guardien, NYT, daily wail and other MSM sources.
Surely even you must recognise the given narrative is flawed?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:12 AM

A   link to a Russian website Iaians
Surely not!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 05:07 AM

An alternative view:-
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/383524-syria-idlib-chemical-attack-rebels/

Sarin is dangerous through ingestion, inhalation, skin contact, or eye contact. The CDC recommends the following PPE."GENERAL INFORMATION: First Responders should use a NIOSH-certified Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear (CBRN) Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) with a Level A protective suit when entering an area with an unknown contaminant or when entering an area where the concentration of the contaminant is unknown. Level A protection should be used until monitoring results confirm the contaminant and the concentration of the contaminant."
Contrast the above with the carefully stage managed photographs smeared all over the MSM of people wearing white paper coveralls, and photos of a supposed doctor busy tweeting with no PPE. Now today we finally have a few photos of people in bright yellow CBRN suits.
Seems to me the scriptwriters lost the plot for a while.
Also bear in mind their is an international conference on the future of Syria occurring very shortly. Is someone trying to stage manage the agenda
I detect more than a whiff of conspiracy behind all this seemingly contrived affair.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 17 - 04:02 AM

Hey Greg. If Trump backs off demands to replace Assad it has to be a really dumb move to gas your own people 5 minutes later. Are you gullible enough to believe that as a narrative, as presented by the MSM.
As yet no evidence produced anywhere. The initial staged pictures show people wearing white paper PPE. That's a really good defence against sarin, about as effective as a chocolate fireguard. It has taken 3 days for staged photos of people wearing CBR suits to arrive on scene.
The rebels have previous history of using chemical weapons.
Still you go ahead and believe the presented fairy stories and wait for WW£ to occur when America collides with Russia in Syria. Deep state must be laughing themselves silly at how easily people are duped.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 11:15 AM

"It has a proper scientific cause, Jim! Well, psychological anyway."
If he continues to behave in the insulting way he is I shall ask a forum fairy to sprinkle him with her fairy dust and make him disappear
THer must be a rule about cowardly trolls deliberately fucking up threads - if there isn't, there should be
It's not as if he actually says anything - any mindless prick can call names and run away - the schoolyard is full of them
He's not exactly the brightest buckle on thee straitjacket, is he?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 10:59 AM

Hey Iains, Ake, Bo & Co:

It it OOOPS!! yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 08:26 AM

It has a proper scientific cause, Jim! Well, psychological anyway.

Dunning–Kruger effect

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 08:15 AM

"Jim I inhabit a planet that takes nothing at face value. Suggest you do the same!"
Then offer an argument instead of insults, you stupidly arrogant little man
Yu have had the arguments - you offer nothing but unqualified dismissals
I ask, as as i did on the other thread, why are ignorant people such as yourself invariably arrogantly stupid.
It must be difficult to talk down to people from the mental hole in the ground you obviously occupy
Trollism such as your own really doesn't help these discussions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 07:18 AM

No you weren't, Iains. You were getting pretentious and you cocked up. It's the most amusing form of cocking up known to humanity, so congrats. Jim just types fast.


Who is Bono, Dave? Why, God, of course!

Or is that Bill Shankly...🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 06:41 AM

merely doing a Jim. You have a problem with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 05:58 AM

Ahhhhh - That was the problem then Steve! I assumed qui - as in French 'who' and that made the question "who is Bono?"

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 05:44 AM

"Qui bono?"

Coooeee, don't use Latin constructions until you've looked 'em up!

Or should that be cui...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 05:19 AM

Jim I inhabit a planet that takes nothing at face value. Suggest you do the same!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 04:55 AM

"Chemical weapons have been attributed to Assad previously. As yet proof is still lacking."
How stupid is this Iains?
Not only has Syria owned up to using chemical weapons, but on the basis of that admission they undertook to dismantle its stockpile - they even demanded that the U..N. pay the costs for removing them
What particular planet do you inhabit exactly
SYRIA'S CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 04:41 AM

So, if my car is stolen and torched, IE moved and tampered with, no one will know it was ever my car? And you think that I am being naive?

I never read newspapers and never believe anything without reference to multiple sources.

And what have U2 got to do with it anyway?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 04:11 AM

If they are moved or tampered with their provenance is not known.
If Isis is losing they need a distraction. Chemical weapons have been attributed to Assad previously. As yet proof is still lacking.
It is possible he used chemical weapons but seems highly unlikely.
Useful to ask qui bono.
I suppose if a newspaper said the moon was made of green cheese you would be gullible enough to believe that as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 04:05 AM

Have you Iains? What is so difficult to understand about "what do you think the government were doing with them?"

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 03:59 AM

Dthe G

many of the munitions and their fragments had been moved or otherwise tampered with."

Problems of comprehension again?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 03:31 AM

Errr, Iains. If the rebels have "captured significant stockpiles of government weaponry" and that included chemical weapons, what do you think the government were doing with them? Providing humanitarian aid? Hoisted by your own petard is the phrase that springs to mind.

What is the 'official stance' on Kennedy and 9/11? What have they to do with Syria?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Apr 17 - 03:22 AM

Even
TRUMP is blaming Assad for the chemical attack
Bit of a divided loyalties dilemma for Ake, our resident Trumpeter, I would have thought!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 07:24 PM

It's pretty obvious from the information available to this point who is responsible for the chemical attack.

Obama drew a red line regarding the use of chemical weapons by Assad in 2012. That line was crossed several times since then. Too bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 07:07 PM

Who is that keeps going on about it?

Who is it that is trying to make an issue out of it? I'm
just defending myself from your lies and misrepresentations - keep it up and I will too.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 04:59 PM

I suggest you read the report in its entirety.

From the report:-"Two caveats are probably worth mentioning: The Syrian rebels have captured significant stockpiles of government weaponry throughout this conflict and as the inspectors' report notes many of the munitions and their fragments had been moved or otherwise tampered with."

I suppose you subscribe to the official stance on 9/11 and the assassination of President Kennedy as well, and also believe it is the Russians and Syrians targeting infrastructure and not the illegal coalition forces.

I find it hard to come up with firm conclusions on any assertions made about the war in Syria. Truth is the first casualty of war.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 04:42 PM

Iains. This report from 3 years ago concludes that the Assad regime uses chemical weapons against its enemies. I suggest you acquaint yourself with some background information before you start telling people there is not a shred of evidence.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 04:37 PM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Gnomie!

Another perfect example of having lost the plot. Not that we needed any more evidence.

So, poobad, what wriggling is going on and by whom? Who was it that first mentioned 72 virgins again? Who is that keeps going on about it?

Carry on. You are making a grand job of trying to take over ake's job as village idiot.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 03:30 PM

Maybe we should wait for verification instead of jumping to conclusions without a shred of evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 02:58 PM

Come on Greg, be fair there is no evidence that the gas was dropped from Russian planes
THere is every reason to believe they ahve
Syrian and Russian planes have been bombing civilian areas indiscriminately for soeme time Allepo being a primne example
Isis don't have the capacty to drop gas
Assad has claimed that the cemcals came from a strike on a rebel supply dump, but his ambassador didn't stick to the script and said it was from an air strike
Maybe we should believe Assad because he was elected and trained as a doctor!!!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 02:08 PM

Greg F Whats up? Can't you handle someone querying your false news narrative? And you claim to be a sentient being?
Sentient=able to perceive or feel things.
But you sure as hell cannot think apparently!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 01:53 PM

Come on Greg, be fair there is no evidence that the gas was dropped from Russian planes or that the regime ordered the use of chemicals.
There are any number of possibilities, some much more likely than others......as I mentioned earlier which side has the most to win or lose from such action?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 01:46 PM

Ians: piss off back to your fact-averse, alternative reality universe & leave the sentient beings alone, Eh?

Or, as W.C. Fields had it: "G'way, kid - ya bother me."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 01:24 PM

Greg F Oh it was in the NYT therefore it must be correct. You're aving a larf aren'nt you?
I suppose the white helmets witnessed it.

IF I am supposed to believe it because it is in the NYT I suppose I must believe in father christmas and the tooth fairy as well.
What planet are you on?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 01:18 PM

"My point is Jim, and you are being deliberately obtuse, is that Assad is not a dictator and not stupid."
Assad kills his opponents, used chemical weapons on his people (two attacks since he "surrendered his stockpile" (not) crushed peaceful protests... with armed force and turned his simpers on the peole of Homs - or anybody who opposed his rule
He is a dictator
he is also prone to thuggish behaviour - making him stupid.
The fact that he was elected is immaterial and the fact that he trained as a doctor if as ludicrous a point as you could possibly make.
Idiocy to use chemicals on children - he has been doing this for nearly five years - sarin being among the first
Iaian is certainly right Ake - almost as right as you, who, if you were any more to the right you would meet yourself coming back, are.
What is it with you nutty right wing extremists - can't you get anybody to read the papers for you?
If Assad had been removed from power earlier Isis would still be a quaint, unheard of little sect
Isis cut their teeth in the gap left by the left's inaction
But thanks for adding "Assad supporter" to your ever expanding C,V.
Are you people for real!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 01:10 PM

Ians Ake & Co: Ooops!

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/world/middleeast/syria-gas-attack.html

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 12:56 PM

My point is Jim, and you are being deliberately obtuse, is that Assad is not a dictator and not stupid.
Your previous statement was that he was a brutish dictator and not too bright. Wrong on all counts! Do you get it this time around?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 12:35 PM

Iains is perfectly correct, although it appears that gas has been used, it would be absolute idiocy for the regime which is winning the war to target children and civilians.....what on earth would they have to gain?
There is as yet no evidence on who used the chemical weapons, but if IIRC President Assad gave up all his chemicals many years ago supervised by the UN.
It seems much more likely that this is a desperate last throw of the dice by a defeated Islamist grouping. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain and are mad enough to attempt such an atrocity.

If Assad had been removed from power earlier, Syria would now be an ISIS stronghold, with Jihadists ready to strike at a moments notice.

In saying that, the only way these lunatics are going to be defeated is by the mass of Islam rising against them, putting their house and their religion in order.....unfortunately there is little chance of that happening any time soon, without doubt the Muslim faithful look after their soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 12:10 PM

Oy !!! Put those bloody goalposts down.

And what do you think has made them waste all this bandwidth over this issue?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 12:04 PM

"Strange I thought Assad won an election with a huge majority."
So wqas the Nazi Perty in Germany
"He also trained as a doctor and took a post graduate course in ophthalmology in London. "
Wasn't Mengele a doctor?
And Doctor Crippen
DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS LOT WERE !!
Your point is.........?
Are you out of your mind?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:58 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad - PM
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 12:17 PM

Aha, so now the question changes from:

how do you know that the killer believed that he would have access to 72 virgins?

to

did you mention the 72 virgins with regard to the Westminster killer?

Yes, I obviously did mention that as you have so keenly observed but the only one's who have mentioned anything about the jihadist believing that he would be rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise seem to be you and the Gnome.

Funny that.

Caught out in another lie eh, Shaw. It's becoming a habit with you - you must be more careful not to get yourself hung out to dry so obviously.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:58 AM

Oy !!! Put those bloody goalposts down.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:50 AM

So, are you all still trying to deny that one of the motivators for jihadist martyrs is the heavenly reward of 72 virgins? If so I can provide you with more examples, there is no shortage.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:48 AM

Yes Jim you do live in a backwater with an outlook to match. As yet there is no proof of an airstrike delivering chemical weapons. There would appear to be an airstrike subsequently. It could be the initial airstrike, if it occurred, struck a chemical weapons factory run by Isis. You are far to ready to believe whatever suits your interpretation.
How about keeping an open mind until independant proof is provided.(and not by the discredited white helmets)

"Dictators tend to be brutish not bright"

Strange I thought Assad won an election with a huge majority.
He also trained as a doctor and took a post graduate course in ophthalmology in London.
It is hard to train as a doctor if verging on the moronical.

Perhaps a little fact checking is in order.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:43 AM

Unbelievable. All it needs now is for Teribus to pop along to tell us that bobad was only speaking generally or merely making a passing reference!

Shall I have another go, lads?

Ahem.

WHEATCROFT!!


Oops, wrong thread! I don't care! Wheeee!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:39 AM

Raggytash.....lol!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:25 AM

It's a tactic picked up from one of his cohort, if they deny typing something often enough they believe that they did not type it even when you reproduce the quote complete with time and date.

Simples!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:22 AM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Gnomie!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:22 AM

"What is missing is proof of what happened and who caused it to happen."
Why shouldn't it have happened
Assad has been using chemicals and massacring his own people for several years now - before that he was filling his prisons with torture victims and "disappearing" for several decades.
We actually watched his performance at Homs, where his snipers were competing with each other to see whether they could hit a woman and the child she was carrying with one bullet
Russia and China combined forces to prevent any U.N. action being taken to stop him and "decent, democratic" Britain voted in Parliament not to get involved, allowing Isis to fill the vacuum
Every death that has taken place since at the haands of Isis can be traced directly back to those event.
This latest atrocity was an air attack - I wasn't aware that Isis has air power capable of delivering chemical weapons, but we do live in a backwater on the west coast of Ireland, so we may have missed something - correct me if I have it wrong
Whatever the outcome of this shitty war, the people of Syria will be the losers
I hope Isis will be crushed, but monsters like Assad and "free Russia" will emerge as heroes of the piece and forget that it was them, and the inaction of the West that helped empower the fanatics in the first place
Stupid for Assad to use chemicals - been there, done that, don't you remember the reports, and Britain sold him material capable of assisting the making of the weapons he was using
Dictators tend to be brutish rather than bright
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:18 AM

But it is always you that starts the 72 virgins conversation poobad. it is all there in black and white. Or whatever colour your browser displays it in. Even you cannot deny that surely.

Oh, hang on...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 11:02 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad - PM
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 06:07 AM

[Teribus]: he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims.

Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:57 AM

Jim it may well have happened. What is missing is proof of what happened and who caused it to happen. There are many different groups fighting in Syria including illegal coalition troops. All of them have an agenda to follow and truth is generally the first thing to suffer along with many innocent civilians.
Where was the outcry when chemical weapons were used during the Iran/Iraq war, and who was turning a blind eye, knowing full well it was occurring?
It would be the height of stupidity for Assad to use chemical weapons against his own people and that to me makes the scenario that he is the guilty party seem most unlikely. However it suits many factions to make it appear Assad or his Russian allies are guilty.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:57 AM

No lies or misrepresentations from me.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:17 PM

So, did he believe that 72 virgins were waiting for him then, poobad? I believe that was the question.

DtG

As you have learned by now I never said what you claimed I did. That is you lying and misrepresenting, all to impress your mentor, the master of lies and misrepresentations.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:21 AM

"Where does Russia or the Syrian government enter the equation?"
Go ask the feller ho said so on the one o'clock news Iains at he said
He may be lying of course
There doesn't appear to be any doubt of that it happened from the number of chemically burned children stat starred in the news item
Waddya think - false news maybe!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:19 AM

http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/un-if-confirmed-chemical-attacks-in-mosul-a-war-crime/

terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq have a track record for using chemical weapons however.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:10 AM

Jim
Anybody care to speculate on the motivation of the just reported chemical attack by Russian planes supporting Assad, on civilians in Syria?

In the interests of accuracy multiple news sources quote a suspected "chemical attack"
As yet no proof has been provided to state if it was a chemical attack or if it was, who delivered it.

Where does Russia or the Syrian government enter the equation?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:03 AM

Hey - It's you that keeps bringing up the 72 virgins thing. No lies or misrepresentations from me.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 10:01 AM

You really do have a fetish for lying and misrepresenting don't you Gnomeskull?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 09:43 AM

You really do have a fetish for these 72 virgins don't you poobad?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 08:35 AM

"Let me see - it's all about Israel - right Carroll?"
Your guess is as good as mine Bobad - if you insist, I suppose it must be
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 08:19 AM

Anybody care to speculate on the motivation of the just reported chemical attack by Russian planes supporting Assad, on civilians in Syria?

Let me see - it's all about Israel - right Carroll?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 08:14 AM

Failed jihadi suicide bombers tell of the rewards they missed out on: 72 virgins in heaven

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 08:09 AM

"Anyone care to speculate on the motivation of the St. Petersburg bomber?"
Anybody care to speculate on the motivation of the just reported chemical attack by Russian planes supporting Assad, on civilians in Syria?
Wonder if Andrew Neil wil "slam" that one?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 05:12 AM

Sod off, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 04:43 AM

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 17 - 04:15 AM

Anyone care to speculate on the motivation of the St. Petersburg bomber?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 03 Apr 17 - 07:00 AM

Pakistani Islamist Jihad for 72 Virgins

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Apr 17 - 06:36 AM

How to spot a terrorist

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Apr 17 - 02:26 AM

"The only advantage of a female virgin, let alone 72 of them, is if you have a 2 inch penis." - Donuel

We'll just have to take your word for that I suppose - based on personal experience Donuel?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 09:53 PM

Say goodnight to the folks, Gracie...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 09:40 PM

You're losing it, take a break.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 08:26 PM

You have totally screwed up. Caught lying. Forgot that you mentioned the virgins. Pretended you hadn't marked the bloke as a Muslim. You're a fool. What kind of a man are you? We are on your case, pal. Your credibility is totally shot. Just read your own posts in this thread over the last couple of days. I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't have the balls to do it. You should be ashamed of yourself. Nighty night!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 08:15 PM

Still haven't figured it yet, I see. Well, keep working at it, not everyone has the same ability.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 07:24 PM

You couldn't help a frog out of a shallow pond. You're totally bonkers. I'm still waiting to hear about what religion apart from Islam has the expectation of 72 virgins in paradise. My God, how you've screwed up !

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 07:13 PM

Have you educated yourself on the difference between Muslims and Islamists yet Shaw? If you need help don't hesitate to ask I'm always willing to help lead the uninformed out of the darkness of ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:36 PM

Go away, bobad, you bloody idiot. Just go through your posts of the last couple of days. You've made a complete arse of yourself. Have fun with the rest of your life.

Sounds good to me, Dave. We had to push the boat out as we had offspring, partner and good friend round. Cracking good do it was. Eeee, lad!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:20 PM

Where I said that I don't know any jihadists I should have added but I know several Muslims who are committed to, at great risk to themselves, fighting against extremism and radicalization in their religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:07 PM

How many do you know?

I see you're learning to misrepresent, lie and obfuscate from the master.

Did I say I knew any?

For your edification here are some ways to hear about things: one can hear about things from the written word, there is also the recorded word and nowadays there are a multitude of videos available to inform yourself. You should try it sometime.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 03:26 PM

Funnily enough, Steve, lamb at Gnome towers too. Little tiny piece though but very nice all the same. Served with dauphinoise spuds and cauliflower cheese. Cheat ones ready done by Morrison's!

Cheers

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 03:18 PM

You're barking bloody mad, bobad, I know that much. A right bloody unhappy mess. Roast lamb tonight, Dave, shoulder on the bone, in the oven for nine hours at 120, whacked up for the last twenty minutes as we all lust after the skin. Roast spuds, Mrs Steve's gravy (no bloody Bisto in our house), cauliflower, purple sprouting, carrots and mint sauce natch. Beat that. No wonder these foreigners are so bloody miserable!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 03:18 PM

So it is jihadists that you heard it from? Interesting. How many do you know? Anyway, seeing as you are so acceptant, I just happen to have a business proposition for you. There is this Nigerian prince who died intestate. He left £40,000,000 in a bank account...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 01:47 PM

Well, I have heard it from jihadists so if that's what they believe who am I to say they are wrong to believe it. I respect everyone's beliefs whether I accept them or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 01:42 PM

And you really believe that do you?

You are even dafter than I thought.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 01:41 PM

It was me saying that he would be rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise.

What don't you understand about that?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 01:36 PM

Ah, OK. So if your comment about 72 versions was not a reference to him thinking about them, what was it a reference to? Was you thinking about 72 virgins? Just what was it a reference to? I must say that the comment was rather out of place so it is little wonder that some may not understand it. As you seem to think I suffer from lack of comprehension maybe you can enlighten me. If it is at all possible to explain your rather curious thought processes that is.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 12:46 PM

Gnomie seems to suffer from the same lack of comprehension as Shaw, or is he just playing Shaw's game of misrepresentation and lies?

So me saying Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise. to you means he was thinking about his 72 virgins.?

I think both you and Shaw would benefit from a remedial course in reading comprehension.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 12:27 PM

Show me where I said he was thinking about his 72 virgins. You cannot because I did not say that. You are a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad - PM
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 06:07 AM

he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims.

Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise.

Funny old world isn't it poobad. Normal people tend to remember what went on more than 10 minutes ago.

Teribus - Again to both Shaw and our little fat gnome I would recommend that you take heed of bobad's good advice and then you would know why Khalid Masood having acted as he did would believe implicitly in the promises detailed in the Hadith.


So, how does this prove that Masood was thinking of 72 virgins when he mowed all those people down and stabbed a policeman? Simple enough question.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 12:17 PM

Aha, so now the question changes from:

how do you know that the killer believed that he would have access to 72 virgins?

to

did you mention the 72 virgins with regard to the Westminster killer?

Yes, I obviously did mention that as you have so keenly observed but the only one's who have mentioned anything about the jihadist believing that he would be rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise seem to be you and the Gnome.

Funny that.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 11:57 AM

I've merely reproduced your post. Tell me again - did you mention the 72 virgins with regard to the Westminster killer?   Seems that you did!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 11:34 AM

Lack of comprehension Shaw?

Nah, more likely your usual gambit to misrepresent and lie, right?

BTW, have you yet learned the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 11:29 AM

Yesterday, 6.07 am:

Bobad quoting Teribus:
"he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims."

Bobad:
"Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise."

Short memory, bobad! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 11:19 AM

Abdul would avoid the humiliation of comparison.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 11:15 AM

The only advantage of a female virgin, let alone 72 of them, is if you have a 2 inch penis.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 09:07 AM

Show me where I said he was thinking about his 72 virgins. You cannot because I did not say that. You are a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 09:02 AM

You mentioned his 72 virgins, you idiot. Perhaps you know of another religion apart from Islam that the rest of us have never heard of that teaches about 72 virgins. Now answer the questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 08:21 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:05 PM

You haven't "shown" anything, I've neither deflected nor wriggled, I'm really focused here, and I ask you again. What did you mean by your 72 virgins reference with regard to the Westminster killer? Do you know that that was in his head? That's what you said. So explain yourself. How did you know that's what he was thinking? Or were you indulging in the well-known "72 virgins" Muslim stereotype? We know how you hate stereotypes, you know, about Jews conspiring to run the world, etc. You even have a go at us when that isn't what we think at all. But here you are, indulging in a stereotype regarding the people you clearly hate so much, Muslims. What have you got to say about that? Or are you going to tell us now that you suddenly love Muslims after all? Do you think that every Muslim man thinks he's going to get 72 virgins when he arrives in paradise?   Do you think that the Westminster killer thought that? If so, how do you know? Can you read this or is it too long for you? Can you answer straight questions? There's always a first time, and we're here waiting to forgive you... 😂

You will note that I have not used the word Muslim in describing Masood, I have called the man what he has been described as by authorities, a jihadist. Shaw, on the other hand is making a linkage between Muslims and jihadists. He would call that "Islamophobia".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 08:17 AM

They're at it again.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 08:05 AM

So still no answer from poobad.

I can't answer a question about something that doesn't exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 07:57 AM

He seemed to be asserting that the Westminster killer was thinking of his 72 virgins.

That's a lie Shaw. If it isn't produce the quote.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 07:09 AM

Again to both Shaw and our little fat gnome I would recommend that you take heed of bobad's good advice and then you would know why Khalid Masood having acted as he did would believe implicitly in the promises detailed in the Hadith.

Pleased to see that Abu Hamza's son stripped of his British Passport will not be able to return to the UK after his spell fighting in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 06:56 AM

"...how come you never answered the one from bobad related to this supposed leverage Jews exert that enables them to control the government of the most powerful nation on the planet?"

Did he really ask me that as a question? When? I have said nothing about "Jews" exerting leverage on anyone. I have stated the fact that pro-Israel lobby groups, in particular but not exclusively AIPAC in America, do exert influence on politicians. Though they are unelected, they have good access to politicians and can help to fund campaigns, withdraw funding and brief against politicians. This may all depend on the politician taking a favourable stance towards Israel. Now these lobby groups are by no means exclusively Jewish. Labour Friends Of Israel is a lobby group containing many members who are not Jews. Many members of AIPAC are non-Jewish business people. Look it up. As you are nit-picking over Islam/Islamic/Muslim, perhaps you'd like to clear your own head first as to the difference between "pro-Israel lobby group" and "Jew." You will never in your little life catch me saying that Jews exert leverage, control the media, conspire to run big corporations, etc. Why not? Because it isn't true, I've always known it isn't true, and I find such assertions to be objectionable. Antisemitic, in fact. Clear enough for you?   

By the way, I have nothing against lobby groups in principle. But there is no doubt that a few overstep what should be their remit, which is simply to put their case persuasively to those in power. No blackmail, no threats, no baksheesh. Do you doubt that the NRA oversteps its remit?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 06:13 AM

Cor, Teribus knows the name of a folk song! And here's me, going from his posting record, thinking that he only comes here to be bad-tempered below the line!

I asked bobad a string of questions. He has evaded every single one. He seemed to be asserting that the Westminster killer was thinking of his 72 virgins. How did bobad know that? Can you tell us, Teribus? So you found it in the good book. Good for you. The bible says that Methuselah lived to 963 years old. And somebody or other got turned into a pillar of salt. Do you think every Christian believes that, Teribus? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:54 AM

So then, Teribus, how does the difference between Islam and Islamism explain the 72 virgins comment made by poobad? IE

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad - PM
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 06:07 AM

he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims.

Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise.

And, nah, I tried a shanty group. It was quite enjoyable but more suited to people used to being told what to do by a leader. I take it you are in one?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:20 AM

"Shame for us atheists that have nothing to think about." - Gnome

Never thought of that before Gnome although it should have been obvious by the content of what you and your pals post, which seems these days to centre around your next meal - ever thought of joining a Shanty group Gnome? You could give 'em all lessons on "Rolling Home".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 05:13 AM

"Massood must have been thinking about the 72 virgins because that is what Hadith number 2,516 says and all Muslim are thinking about that all the time." - A Gnome

Massood? Thought it was Masood but nevertheless, perhaps you should heed bobad's advice and acquaint yourself on the difference between "Islam" and "Islamism" - had you already done that, or had already been aware of the distinctions you would never have posted the utter tripe quoted above.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 04:02 AM

So still no answer from poobad. I suppose you have answered for him though, Teribus. Massood must have been thinking about the 72 virgins because that is what Hadith number 2,516 says and all Muslim are thinking about that all the time. Just like all Christians are thinking about the acts of the Apostles and all Jews are thinking about the book of psalms all the time. Shame for us atheists that have nothing to think about.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 03:24 AM

By the way Shaw, on the ability, or inability to answer straight questions, how come you never answered the one from bobad related to this supposed leverage Jews exert that enables them to control the government of the most powerful nation on the planet?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 17 - 03:20 AM

Well Shaw in your parlance it could have been 72 sardines.

But seriously though folks, what is stereotypical about the claim? It is stated in Hadith number 2,516 in the collection known as the Sunan al-Tirmihdi which reads:

"The least [reward] for the people of heaven is 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome of pearls, aquamarine and ruby."

So tell me Shaw as an expert on Islamism which of the Hadith are to be believed and which discounted?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:16 PM

Muslim stereotype?

Again, it is obvious that you are ignorant about the difference between Islam and Islamism. I suggest you try to learn that because you're looking like a fool. Masood was a radicalized jihadi - look up what that means too while you're at it.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:09 PM

As for McGrath trying to twist what is a perfectly clear statement stating that he was radicalized, here's another quote from Joshi that he can have a go at:

"Masood is not atypical in being a British-born convert with a criminal record. He was slightly more unusual in being older, but we do not know how long ago "Masood is not atypical in being a British-born convert with a criminal record. He was slightly more unusual in being older, but we do not know how long ago he was radicalized," Joshi told Reuters.

"If it was in prison, this would be a common pathway. Given the diversity of Islamist extremists, Masood doesn't look too unusual.



Note: he was radicalized Clear enough for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:05 PM

You haven't "shown" anything, I've neither deflected nor wriggled, I'm really focused here, and I ask you again. What did you mean by your 72 virgins reference with regard to the Westminster killer? Do you know that that was in his head? That's what you said. So explain yourself. How did you know that's what he was thinking? Or were you indulging in the well-known "72 virgins" Muslim stereotype? We know how you hate stereotypes, you know, about Jews conspiring to run the world, etc. You even have a go at us when that isn't what we think at all. But here you are, indulging in a stereotype regarding the people you clearly hate so much, Muslims. What have you got to say about that? Or are you going to tell us now that you suddenly love Muslims after all? Do you think that every Muslim man thinks he's going to get 72 virgins when he arrives in paradise?   Do you think that the Westminster killer thought that? If so, how do you know? Can you read this or is it too long for you? Can you answer straight questions? There's always a first time, and we're here waiting to forgive you... 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 07:24 PM

Deflect, deflect, deflect Shaw. I showed you to be wrong again so you're trying to deflect like you always do. Have you learned the difference between Islam and Islamism yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 07:22 PM

As such, there are so many things that we will never know. But isn't it amazing how these clever people here seem to know exactly what was in his mind. The expectation that he was about to have fun with 72 virgins, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 07:14 PM

5. Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the security thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, said: "We have always known that it is exceptionally hard to understand who will become a terrorist. Masood is unusual in that only a minority become radicalised over the age of 30. His criminal record is unsurprising, as some studies show that a significant proportion of jihadists have had prior convictions."

Actually that isn't confirmation that Joshi is sure that Masood had been "radicalised". He is saying it would be an unusual example of the process, given the age at which it is hypothised to have happened.

It would clearly have been much easier to have sorted out this if the NHS workers had succeeded in preventing his death. And it would clearly be useful for the security agency to have that kind of information. For future planning.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 07:00 PM

Well, Teribus, you know me. I don't speak for anyone else. I note that you hold back from supporting bobad's stereotyping of Islam. Good for you. Bobad, how do you know that the killer believed that he would have access to 72 virgins? You've been asked this question several times after you mentioned it in what seemed to be a rather triumphalist manner. You are the first person here to pounce on what you see as anti-Jewish stereotyping. Well I'm pouncing on your blatant use of the stereotyping of Muslims. Stop flapping around and bloody well explain yourself. You're in here with the big boys now, pal. We're not as stupid as you seem to think. So what did you mean exactly by your 72 virgins remark? Do you or do you not know that that is what the killer believed? What's the matter here? Cat got your tongue?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 06:28 PM

" if he was a jihadist, it wasn's justice, it was a reward for him, a merciful end" - MGOH

The first instance of stereotyping Shaw?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 05:27 PM

Ask a grown up about it.

then, poobad?

That wouldn't be you then, would it big boy.....lol


You really should stick to posting your inanities, Shaw doesn't need your help, he's doing a crack up job at making a fool of himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:55 PM

Sorry but I don't see that question - maybe you need your eyes checked.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:53 PM

So, did he believe that 72 virgins were waiting for him then, poobad? I believe that was the question.

I didn't ask. Someone else did earler. You don't really have the hang of this discussion thing do you? Ask a grown up about it.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:36 PM

Why do you ask me that by the way?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:34 PM

Haven't you some fish to fry Gnomeskull?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:32 PM

So, did he believe that 72 virgins were waiting for him then, poobad? I believe that was the question.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:25 PM

Haven't you some fish to fry Gnomeskull?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:24 PM

So, did he believe that 72 virgins were waiting for him then, poobad? I believe that was the question.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:22 PM

Haven't you some fish to fry Gnomeskull?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:18 PM

Yiu are, after all, indulging in Islamic stereotyping

Still haven't figured out the difference between Islam and Islamism I see. Keep studying and it may come to you one day.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 04:17 PM

So, did he believe that 72 virgins were waiting for him then, poobad? I believe that was the question.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 03:59 PM

Twisting again eh Shaw.

Here are the relevant facts for your consideration:

1. the Met clearly stated that he had been radicalized.

2. Scotland Yard linked him to jihad.

3. His mother said his beliefs led him to committing this atrocity.

4. Neil Basu, senior national coordinator for UK counter-terrorism policing said: "Whilst I have found no evidence of an association with Islamic State or al-Qaida, there is clearly an interest in jihad."

5. Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the security thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, said: "We have always known that it is exceptionally hard to understand who will become a terrorist. Masood is unusual in that only a minority become radicalised over the age of 30. His criminal record is unsurprising, as some studies show that a significant proportion of jihadists have had prior convictions."


These are the people who have linked him to radicalization and jihadism. According to you they must all be Islamophobes. You are a bigot and a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 03:27 PM

You are surmising that the killer believed in the seventy-two virgins. How do you know that? Is that in writing somewhere, or do you believe that every Muslim believes that? It's just an Islamic stereotype. And in what way have I been an apologist for him? Show me a post in which I've defended his actions. That's what apologists do, and I haven't done it, not once. And how do you conclude that he was a true jihadist and not just a madman or someone who was mentally ill? You accuse me of knowing everything. It seems that you know so much about him that you are able to rush to these certainties. More than the Metropolitian Police, more than the intelligence people. Perhaps you were his flatmate once or something. Answer the questions I've asked in this post and show us that you're not just just a rather nasty, vindictive, bitter, twisted and bigoted man. Yiu are, after all, indulging in Islamic stereotyping. Guess what would happen if I stooped that low and indulged in Jewish stereotypes. You're a bit of a hypocrite, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:47 AM

Shaw, once again claiming to know better than Scotland Yard, the Met and the terrorist's own mother. Here's another expert who obviously doesn't know as much as Shaw:

Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the security thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, said: "We have always known that it is exceptionally hard to understand who will become a terrorist. Masood is unusual in that only a minority become radicalised over the age of 30. His criminal record is unsurprising, as some studies show that a significant proportion of jihadists have had prior convictions."

Being an apologist for a jihadi terrorist what does that make you?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:30 AM

Little i's I love you...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 08:29 AM

Interesting that you should Indulge in a stereotype of Islam without having a clue as to whether that's what the killer believed. That makes you...what?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 07:02 AM

Well bobad believe it or not there once was a time in my life when I believed in Father Christmas.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 06:07 AM

he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims.

Not to mention the pleasure of 72 virgins in paradise.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 05:02 AM

"Khalid Masood is better off dead and gone" - well said.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 17 - 02:18 AM

1: "The fact that this man was killed was not a case of "summary justice".

I have never said it was "summary justice", nor have I ever supported "Summary Justice".

2: "If the NHS had succeeded in their efforts to prevent him dying, that would have been a better outcome."

This is where we will just have to agree to disagree - looking at it from all perspectives Khalid Masood is better off dead and gone.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 10:21 PM

It is of course possible for it to be determined in advance that a person is insane and not fit to stand trial, Teribus, but it is also quite possible in a trial for the grounds of a successful defence to be that the defendant is not guilty by reason of insanity.

The fact that this man was killed was not a case of "summary justice". He wasn't being punished for his actions, he was being prevented from causing further harm. If the NHS had succeeded in their efforts to prevent him dying, that would have been a better outcome.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 09:38 PM

Well let's see Kevin:

1: So the NHS workers who tried to keep him alive were wasting NHS resources?

The Paramedics responding to the incident were doing their job. In the case of Khalid Masood it was a wasted effort - he died at the scene of the incident.

2: IF - "he wasn't responsible for his actions by reason of insanity." - there would have been NO TRIAL Kevin, I would have thought that as an experienced journalist you would have known that.

3: "As for the possibility that if he had lived, and had turned out to be involved in a jihadist cell, other lives might have been saved in the future, not worth considering that."

Lots of "ifs" and "mights" there Kevin. Fortunately at the time the armed policemen at the scene were more interested in protecting the public and themselves from someone obviously intent on doing harm. Perhaps the Security Guards and Police down in Tunisia read the McGrath of Harlow procedure on the advantages of keeping a terrorist gunman alive - how many lives did he take again Kevin?

4: Save the cash, and avoid any possibility of anything that he might have experienced as a punishment.

More interested in protecting the public Kevin than in worrying what Masood might have experienced - he now gets to share the experience of his innocent victims.

By the way Gnome is it possible for someone who is not English to be a "Little Englander"?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 07:00 PM

Little Englanders usually fail to see the big picture, Kevin. Sadly.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 04:25 PM

So the NHS workers who tried to keep him alive were wasting NHS resources? And risking further expenses from a trial and either imprisonment, or detention and treatment if it was determined he wasn't responsible for his actions by reason of insanity.

As for the possibility that if he had lived, and had turned out to be involved in a jihadist cell, other lives might have been saved in the future, not worth considering that.

Save the cash, and avoid any possibility of anything that he might have experienced as a punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 04:22 PM

"It was appropriate to shoot to kill in this case, as far as I can see."

Exactly - nothing "unfortunate about it" and how Masood viewed things is irrelevant and immaterial - which was precisely my point to MGOH. Thanks Pollack.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 01:57 PM

I absolutely agree with you Steve!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 01:35 PM

Justice comes way before saving taxpayer money

If you need to explain that, Steve, there's really no fookin' point, is there?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 12:48 PM

It's a point not worth making. Justice comes way before saving taxpayer money by avoiding court cases via short-cuts. It was appropriate to shoot to kill in this case, as far as I can see. I suppose he could been incapacitated instead, but I wouldn't have wanted to be in the position to make that judgement and I'm not making it in hindsight. Generally, justice is served better by holding perpetrators to account via judicial process. Money doesn't come into it. Yes he might conceivably killed more people had he not been taken out. The fact that he wasn't given the opportunity did indeed save the NHS money, but that is a completely cockeyed way of looking at it. He was stopped from ruining even more people's lives. That's all there is to it, really.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 12:32 PM

"But the principle of sparing the public the expense of judicial process that you seem to have adopted"

But Shaw, you steamimg great pollack, I have adopted no such principle, I have only stated what appears to be a cost saving in THIS PARTICULAR case because he was killed during the execution of his deliberate, planned and rehearsed attack (In which five people were killed by Khalid Masood) - on that subject I've just thought of another one - because Khalid Masood was killed in order to save human life the taxpayer is further saved the cost of his and his additional victims hospital and medical treatment - takes pressure off the NHS, I'd have thought that you'd be all for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 09:30 AM

The lynch-mob mentality is the one that harbours the notion that it's better to spare the public the "expense" of his trial and imprisonment. In this case I'm not in any way suggesting that the actions taken by the police were wrong. The exigencies of the situation demanded them as far as I can see. But the principle of sparing the public the expense of judicial process that you seem to have adopted is indeed one key tenet of the lynch mob mentality. That is not how we do things in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 08:58 AM

What "Lynch Mob" mentality? We are discussing a very specific case - perhaps you should stick to Haddock recipes.

"In the particular circumstances, it may have been entirely appropriate to kill him and I won't argue with that."

Great news Shaw that is exactly what I have said.

"But that is not a template for the way we should always deal with bad people."

Who has said that?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 05:50 AM

But suppose he was mentally ill? Your lynch-mob attitude is entirely at odds with the concept of justice we have in this country. In the particular circumstances, it may have been entirely appropriate to kill him and I won't argue with that. But that is not a template for the way we should always deal with bad people.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 17 - 02:21 AM

"Killing him was an unfortunate outcome of trying to stop him killing (o)ther people"

I fail to see what was "unfortunate" about it? As far as the rest of the population goes it by far more preferable that Khalid Masood was killed and that he can no longer pose a threat to any innocent member of the public, there is also the added bonus that the taxpayer does not have to bear the costs of his trial and incarceration had he survived.

As to how he would view it? I couldn't give a toss, he has been removed from the equation and will never hurt of kill anyone ever again.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 05:57 PM

It's an interesting article in the Guardian making an attempt to examine the lone wolf concept. It deserves to be treated with more respect than just to be used as a source of quotes to bolster a particular point of view.

There is tremendous amount of oversimplification in most stuff I've seen about these kind of issues in the media. As if there was always an either or - a perpetrator is part of a terrorist cell, or he's a completely solitary actor, he's motivated by a religious or political ideology, or he's mentally screwed up. But more often than not it's not either or, it's both and. The fact that someone's part of a cell doesn't necessarily mean they aren't mentally disturbed. The fact that someone is acting on their own doesn't mean they might not be ideologically motivated. And it doesn't in any way rule out being mentally disturbed.
..........
Talk about "summary justice" is particularly irrelevant in cases where there are reasons to suspect jihadist motives. Killing him was an unfortunate outcome of trying to stop him killing ther people, it was the last thing that was desired, and in fact every effort was made to keep him alive after he had been shot. Once he was dead it was impossible to find out what was going on - if he had any accoplices he took their names to the grave. As for justice - if he was a jihadist, it wasn's justice, it was a reward for him, a merciful end.. A trial and a life in prison would have been far more of a punishment, And I don't think he deserved a merciful reward.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 02:54 PM

It's an old ploy by the media but still seems to fool some.

White mass murderer = Lone wolf
Brown mass murderer = Terrorist
White nutter = disturbed
Brown nutter = Jihadist
Western government interference = Liberation
Eastern government interference = Repression

To paraphrase the folk song, when will we ever learn?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: mayomick
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 11:25 AM

Nobody seems to mind so long as the terrorists carry out their atrocities in Syria. Then they are heroes - even deserving of the Victoria Cross according to an article by the left-winger George Monbiot I saw featured in the Guardian in 2014 .

It's not just the left though. Many right-wing law and order types will turn themselves into limp-wrist humanitarians and Amnesty supporters to describe Syria's harsh response to such "inhuman shits" as "barbaric" and "dictatorial" in much the same way as Jim uses in support of the Syrian jihadis   The fact that these jihadists might resort to "chemical or even worse, biological terrorism" in Syria is not even considered remotely possible : only the Syrian government would cross the red line to use such weapons .

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 11:00 AM

Extreme left - extreme right = two sides of the same coin.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 10:54 AM

It's very important, actually. Right-wing anti-foreigner rhetoric in the referendum campaign led to a sharp increase in hate crime against EU citizens in the UK. The man who killed Jo Cox was influenced by far-right groups, as was Andres Breivik. Plenty more, even in your article. And, if Le Pen gains ascendancy in France, watch this space. It matters a lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 09:02 AM

"Right-wing", "Left-wing": who cares? To be a slave to perceived political labels is to miss the point entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 08:48 AM

From that link:

What research does show is that we may be more likely to find lone wolves among far-right extremists than among their jihadi counterparts.

("What research does show" is weasel words, but hey).

Just thought I'd mention it in case the length of the piece defeats anyone. He goes on to discuss Jo Cox's killer and some other far-right examples. If the word terrorism immediately evokes "Islam" in your mind, you need to examine your conscience.

The fact remains that we can't identify what the Westminster killer's motive was, or know whether he was mentally deranged at the time. Broad-brush analysis of the kind the article deals in is perfectly legitimate; individual cases have their own unique features.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 07:59 AM

But perhaps the most disquieting explanation for the ubiquity of the term is that it tells us something we want to believe. Yes, the terrorist threat now appears much more amorphous and unpredictable than ever before. At the same time, the idea that terrorists operate alone allows us to break the link between an act of violence and its ideological hinterland. It implies that the responsibility for an individual's violent extremism lies solely with the individual themselves.

The truth is much more disturbing. Terrorism is not something you do by yourself, it is highly social. People become interested in ideas, ideologies and activities, even appalling ones, because other people are interested in them.

The myth of the 'lone wolf' terrorist

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 06:03 AM

Summary justice? I'd have thought that he was killed in order to stop him from hurting other people. Any other kind of "summary justice" isn't justice at all. As yet we don't know why the bloke did what he did. I have yet to meet anyone who hasn't condemned him. We just need to be more careful than the knee-jerkers to condemn him for the right reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 05:57 AM

A real game-changer for me was a dish of lamb kleftico that I had in a restaurant by the marina in Latchi in Cyprus. Never eaten lamb so tender and flavoursome as that. It got me looking into slow cooking meat, and that's the only way I do it now for big hunks of beef, lamb or pork. I fancy having one of those wood-fired clay ovens in me garden but Mrs Steve has vetoed the notion up to now. We're having a whole shoulder of lamb on the bone this weekend. I just whack a couple of sprigs of rosemary on top, salt and pepper, and in it goes as soon as I get out of bed. Seven or eight hours min at 120⁰︎C. Tender as the driven snow, no shrinking! Maybe whack up the heat for the last twenty minutes to get the Maillard reaction and/or crisp up the crackling if it's a shoulder of pork.

Or a Greenhalgh's pie off Bury market...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Mr Red
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 05:51 AM

I see the old rivalries are surfacing.

There is this guy who drives a car along a footpath mowing down innocent people, and receives summary (justifiable) justice.

If you don't like the guy, condemn him. If you can't condemn him, allow those with more passion than you to vent. Gordoooon Bennet! Those that vent in this parish, can't you see the irony? Oh! sorry irony is....................

Oh whats's the use?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 05:18 AM

One of the best meals I had was in the Victoria Cafe in Fleetwood. Probably as much to do with the ambience of the Fylde Festival and the odd goings in in Fleetwood (a whole new story) but the steak pudding, chips, peas, gravy, bread and butter, and a pot of tea will remain in my memory forever :-) It ranks up there with Moules frite in Brussels, the sardines on the Costa del Sol and the fried chicken in Memphis any day.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 05:04 AM

Oh, give over, Bill. Go and get yourself a nice skinny latte made with those Italian coffee beans before the tariffs make 'em too expensive.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 04:52 AM

"there are things we discuss ad nauseam and round and round and round we go." - Shaw

Yes that does seem to be the norm, primarily due to the likes of Carroll and yourself when your contentions are being successfully countered you resort to rehashing old arguments from previous threads(2014 in your case and 2012 & 2011 in the case of Carroll). Thank God you were caught lying through your teeth on the matter that you accused another 'catter of doing exactly the same thing, so instead of dredging up old threads now you branch out to waste space with inanities. Still serves as a very good indication that you have run out of steam or substance on whatever the thread was about.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 04:49 AM

Bangers and mash! Macaroni!
Bangers and mash! Minestrone!
Give us a bash of the bangers and mash
Me muvver used to make.


Out of the depths, that one.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 04:32 AM

Well there are things we discuss ad nauseam and round and round and round we go. There are things we don't discuss enough. Fish and chips for example. Fish and chips, along with builder's tea ("if you're making one anyway, darlin', milk and five sugars for me, love") is what made Britain great and kept the Hun at bay (I read that in a history book whilst browsing the comedy section in Waterstones). Now that we have National Disaster no 1 (brexit) being organised by National Disaster no 2 (Theresa May) and National Comedy Champion 2017 (David Davis), we'll need fish, chips and a good brew more than ever. Every day I should think.


"What jihad for tea tonight, Dave?"

"Fish, chips and a brew, Steve. No more spag bol, Camembert or bratwurst for me wi' that shitty Chianti or Czech lager washin' it down! Huzzah, fellow Blimps!"

"...er, 'ang on a minute..."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Mar 17 - 03:18 AM

turning our attention from jihad to fish and chips

Jihaddock and Chihap maybe?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 11:13 PM

"But I suspect that some people do have considerably more interest in discussing the former, even if displaying such an interest in the subject could evidently in some circles open them to suspicion as potential jihadists." - MGOH

Not if those discussing Jihad then in comment post criticism of it and condemn it.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 09:39 PM

There's a lot to be said for turning our attention from jihad to fish and chips.

But I suspect that some people do have considerably more interest in discussing the former, even if displaying such an interest in the subject could evidently in some circles open them to suspicion as potential jihadists.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 05:25 PM

I fear that I detected veg oil in Rosie's Kitchen chips, Dave. However, they were crispy on the outside and creamy in the middle. That'll do me as long as I get a good sprinkle of Saxa 'n' Sarsons. I do like a good chunky fillet of fish with my chips, but the shoal of minnows we have chasing us on this forum wouldn't even make one tasty bite, even though we regularly have 'em for breakfast...

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 04:09 PM

You would think that people could come up with original insults wouldn't you, Steve? We get poobad mimicking your post about moderation. They do say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but in that case I think I would give it a miss. Teribus is still rambling on about you talking about more interesting things than most of his posts warrant and Iains trying to insinuate in a non too subtle manner that you are a Nazi. What happened to proper insults like we got in the old days? Still, at least they are good for the occasional laugh.

Are the chips in Bude cooked in vegetable oil or beef dripping BTW? These are the important things we need to know.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 10:12 AM

Blimey! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 09:46 AM

So Shaw, anyone that holds a view contrary to you is spouting nonsense and you will do anything possible to stop them posting. The sandal wearing lefty is showing his true colours of intolerance. I trust the moderators will take you to task for publicly stating such a position.
Should we address you as Fuehrer Shaw in future or just ignore your idiocy?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 07:59 AM

Will you please stop posting about others Shaw or else I will tell the mods on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 06:56 AM

Oh, I think that there are far better experts than me round here when it comes to that. In fact, Iains, I was rather hoping that he wouldn't respond. I'll do anything to reduce the amount of nonsense posted here by the likes of you, Keith, akenaton and Teribus. Perhaps you'd care to justify the insulting remark about chips and Bude at this point in this thread...?

On second thoughts, don't bother. I'd rather you didn't respond.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Iains
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 06:44 AM

So Shaw you think this forum is a place where you can demonstrate how to upset people. Rather a sorry item to boast about in my opinion. Have you nothing better to do in your retirement?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 05:56 AM

You're just jealous because you understand very little about anything (just demonstrating that you may have made aggressive and gratuitous rudeness your speciality, but that WE can do it back at you, more subtly if needs be, and make steam come out of your ears - watch this space, folks!)

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 01:41 AM

Bullshit - people reading a newspaper are showing an interest in the news.

Those who have posted to this thread have shown an interest in the opening post and subsequent comments made that have prompted them to respond themselves. Hell Kevin, you even get some twat wittering on about eating too many chips in Bude, exactly HTF does that demonstrate a interest in anything except himself?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 08:30 PM

Correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 08:10 PM

In one sense you could say everyone who has posted in this thread "has an interest in jahadist terrorism". And then go on to millions of people reading the front pages of the papers rather than turning to the sports or similar, or listening to new bulletins rather than switching over when they start.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 01:03 PM

Well I know that he killed the fellow in cold blood, but, like you, Teribus, I'm not privy to the medical evidence relating to his state of mind. I do think that allowing his outstanding military record to be used in mitigation for a crime in which he killed a defenceless man in cold blood was wrong. However, just like you, Teribus, I'm not sufficiently intimately acquainted with the details of the case to have strong feelings either way. I prefer to see objective justice done and to pass my commiserations on to the dead man's family and friends. I don't want to take Blackman's side simply because he's one of our boys and the victim was merely a Muslim in a distant land. But good luck to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 12:36 PM

I have no doubt some of the press will get this all wrong, but it is a better result than many were pressing for. He is still convicted of a crime, and that will be on his police records permanently (or however long these things are kept.). A message has been sent that anyone who breaks the Geneva Convention can expect a prison sentence. Then, balancing that, account has been taken of the circumstances by reducing the charge. No result will please everyone, but that seems a reasonable decision given my (limited) knowledge of the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 12:28 PM

Should of course be imminent release.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:37 AM

No Shaw, I am referring to the outcome of Royal Marine Sergeant Alexander Blackman's appeal. Immanent release due to time already served.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:23 AM

Neil Basu, senior national coordinator for UK counter-terrorism policing: "Whilst I have found no evidence of an association with Islamic State or al-Qaida, there is clearly an interest in jihad."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:02 AM

Guardian headline today,
"Westminster attacker Khalid Masood had interest in jihad, say police "
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/27/westminster-attacker-khalid-masood-not-directed-by-isis-met-police

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 10:59 AM

Steve,
When I corrected your statement, "The Met said he had not been radicalised in prison" by stating, "No. They said they had no evidence for it." You asked "How do you know?"

I was directly quoting Deputy Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, the senior national co-ordinator for UK counter-terrorism policing who stated, ""There is no evidence that Masood was radicalised in prison in 2003, as has been suggested."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 10:23 AM

he was never suspected of walking like a jihadist and was never heard talking like a jihadist.

Yeah, but more importantly, can he do both at the same time??

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 08:40 AM

You're going on a three-year world cruise with no internet access?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 08:33 AM

Great news today Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 05:49 AM

How do you know? How do you know whether they have evidence that he wasn't radicalised? Are you a senior member of the Met or a prison governor? Are you suggesting that he was radicalised without anyone noticing? What other conspiracy theories do you cling to? Maybe they know that he didn't mix with Islamists in prison or have any access to radicalising material. That would be good evidence that he wasn't radicalised. Unlike you and akenaton, they are sensible enough to know when a line of enquiry isn't worth pursuing and that the truth probably lies elsewhere, and they have publicly and unequivocally said so. I suggest that you adopt the approach and keep the dark insinuations to yourself. Of course, we know full well why you and akenaton like to cling to such things, don't we? "He was a Muslim, he did a bad thing, therefore he's an Islamic terrorist." You'd have made good lynch mob leaders, the pair of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:42 AM

The Met said he had not been radicalised in prison.

No. They said they had no evidence for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:24 AM

Well he was never suspected of walking like a jihadist and was never heard talking like a jihadist. All we have is a vague statement from people who didn't know him personally that he had a keen interest in jihad and had converted to Islam. There are millions of harmless people like that. In other words, we don't know why he did it. Even the people with the most intimate knowledge of this tragedy are saying that. And it's not "ect."

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stu
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:20 AM

"If it walks and talks like a Jihadist."

If it walks and talks like a alt-right-winger... etc!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 02:56 AM

If it walks and talks like a Jihadist.....ect!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:22 PM

There is no need to rush to judgement. Why not just wait a few days to allow a clearer understanding of what enquiries can discover?

So far there are no clear indications that this man was in any way linked with or directed by anyone else. The fact that "Isis" issued a claim that he was their "soldier" is meaningless in itself. It merely indicates that they are pleased with his actions.

That doesn't mean that the possibility doesn't exist that there was direction. As I said, wait and see. But there are plenty of cases of sad and disturbed doing terrible things, and pinning their actions to some political or religious issue that is in the media.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:02 PM

Anyway, move on. This is not the Steve 'n' boobs show. Let the world judge. Nighty night. Don't let the facts bite!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:38 PM

His mother didn't know him. The Met said he had not been radicalised in prison. They have not claimed that he had been radicalised in any other way either. They have actually said that we may never know why he did what he did. We do know that he was an unstable and unhappy man with a history of violence, with few friends, though not remotely in a jihadistic way. There is no link to al Qaeda or Isis. All you have is that he had converted to Islam. Ergo, you think that he was a terrorist BECAUSE he was a Muslim. You have absolutely nothing else. You decide for yourself what that makes you. I've already decided. I'll tell you what. You are behind the times, you are not up with the latest news and you are flailing. Get a grip or shut up.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:26 PM

BTW, your so called "facts" have absolutely nothing to do with an individual espousing the doctrine of jihad and acting upon it, totally and completely irrelevant.

Here are some relevant facts for your consideration:

1. the Met clearly stated that he had been radicalized.

2. Scotland Yard linked him to jihad.

3. His mother said his beliefs led him to committing this atrocity.

You're on thin ice on this one I'm afraid but I'm sure your little gang would love to hear more about your latest travels and gustatory indulgences.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:08 PM

What wine do you usually serve with your bullshit?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:56 PM

You're talking shite and you know it, desperado. Cut the hysterics and check the facts!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:38 PM

Shaw, stick to talking about your flowers and culinary snobbery with your little gang, you're out of your depth here and just pushing some bizarre apologist agenda.😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:30 PM

Christ almighty.

Do take time to check the latest facts. Everything I've said is the latest news, no spin from me. Jeez, I know you don't like it. You really want the bloke to have been an unreconstructed Islamist jihadist. We understand that. We know how you feel. We feel your pain even. We understand your need to deny. But do yourself a favour. Check out the latest news. Everything I've said is out there. Facts, not my opinion. It hurts, dammit. Hey, I'm only trying to stop you from making an even bigger arse of yourself. I'm your critical friend for chrissake! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:04 PM

your Islamophobic agenda

That's rich coming from a Jew hating anti-Semite.

Let's see now, the Met clearly said that he had been radicalized, Scotland Yard linked him to jihad, his mother said his beliefs led him to committing this atrocity but Shaw claims to know otherwise. Maybe he should go to the authorities and let them know that they have it all wrong. Maybe he thinks the "Israelis" are behind it all after all he told us that they have this uncanny power to exert control over governments.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 06:39 PM

Highly selective, boobs. He hadn't even seen his mother for twenty years. They were estranged. He had no links with any terror organisation. The Metropolitan Police are convinced that he had not been radicalised in prison. They are convinced that he acted alone and had not colluded with anyone else. He had criminal convictions for violence and was known to be be a loner who was unhappy with his identity. I know that you dearly want him to be an Islamist jihadist in order to fit your Islamophobic agenda. If you have more evidence about him than the Met, let's be having it. Otherwise, you are spouting nonsense. But don't let the facts get in the way of your prejudice. I invite you to check them out but I'm not holding my breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 02:20 PM

Khalid Masood, who killed four people in the Westminster attack, had a clear interest in jihad and his method echoed the rhetoric of Islamic State leaders, Scotland Yard has said.

The Met's comments came as Masood's mother, Janet Ajao, released a statement saying: "I do not condone his [Masood's] actions nor support the beliefs he held that led to him committing this atrocity."

The Guardian
Monday 27 March 2017 17.45 BS

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 02:07 PM

You are totally out of date, boobs. Quite literally, do try to keep up.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:40 PM

Police chiefs on Friday appealed for help from the public in finding out how the attacker — born Adrian Russell Ajao in the suburban English county of Kent — became radicalized.

In the hunt for clues, police made two "significant arrests" overnight, bringing the total in custody since Wednesday's attack to nine.

"Clearly a main line in our investigation is what led him to be radicalized," Metropolitan Police Acting Deputy Commissioner Mark Rowley told reporters. "Was it through influences in our community, influences from overseas or from online propaganda? Our investigation and arrests will help in that but the public appeal will make a real difference."

NBC News

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:05 PM

It may be a matter of opinion but it's a hell of a stretch. No links to extremist groups, no evidence of radicalisation, no evidence that he discussed his plan with anyone else. "He's a Muslim, he did a bad thing so he's a jihadist" simply doesn't wash. Plenty of evidence that he was disturbed and not happy in his own skin.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 12:50 PM

The BBC site reports: "But Deputy Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said that, while Masood "clearly had an interest in Jihad", police had so far found no evidence of an association with the group or al-Qaeda, or that he had discussed his plan with others."

So not ISIS or al-Qaeda if the reporting is accurate. It is surely a matter of opinion with no hard or fast line when someone "with an interest in Jihad" who carries acts like this can fairly be described as a "Jihadist". And, in my view, not a terribly significant debating point.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 12:41 PM

Well, you see, Teribus, Andrew Neil and you (who are in total agreement) appear to have jumped the gun. The killer was not on intelligence radar and there is no evidence that he was radicalised in prison. The idea that he was some kind of Islamic jihadist has basically bitten the dust. Seems to me that he was a demented and frustrated loner and that the atrocity was a one-off tragedy brought about by a man who had lost his mind. So easy to jump to premature conclusions, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 12:40 PM

Its "funny" that T-Bird knows bugger-all of he's talking about?

Tho true and predictable, I don't find it funny at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 10:59 AM

" I always thought that Greg F came from the bottom of the other side of the pond." :0)

Now that IS funny, bet even Greg had a little grin at that one!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 10:49 AM

I always thought that Greg F came from the bottom of the other side of the pond.

Yes, he does, he's one of them "self loathing" Americans 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 10:23 AM

Stating my opinion of the link in the OP Shaw, which I have every right to do - couldn't basically give a toss what you think about Andrew Neil, what he said, or anything else you express an opinion about.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:56 AM

And why would I be surprised that you'd agree with every word spoken by an arch-Tory anti-union failed right-wing newspaper-editing ex-Murdoch lackey playboy, Teribus? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:52 AM

Well 15 miles from Bude isn't Bude. Actually, I live four miles out and can see Widemouth Bay from my house. We've just got back from sitting in the sun outside Rosie's Kitchen overlooking Crooklets beach having a mug of tea and a basket of chips. Nirvana! I can take you to some real dumps fifteen miles from Bude. So specify or be damned!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:29 AM

Oddly enough, we were talking to folks who have lived 15 miles from Bude for the past 20 years, and are now moving back to Sussex, They have had enough of the lazy slow life in the far west of England!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 06:47 AM

"The wife & I have often thought of retiring to Cornwall - just so soon as we win the lottery, that is." - Greg F

Funny thing to say for someone who in another thread asks about how things are in Blighty? With his anti-Trump rantings and engagement with the domestic affairs of the US I always thought that Greg F came from the bottom of the other side of the pond.

Totally agree with everything Andrew Neil said. Khalid Masood, born as Adrian Elms, was to all intent and purpose a complete and utter total waste of space.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 08:22 PM

I can be in Mousehole in one hour fifteen, Greg. I can tell you of a couple of of places where good tunes can be had, too! It's a bit pricey down there. There are great places a bit nearer to Bude that are a tad more affordable. See you soon, Greg!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 08:08 PM

I know of Mousehole, Steve- was just the first near-homophone that came to mind. The wife & I have often thought of retiring to Cornwall - just so soon as we win the lottery, that is.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 07:19 PM

No-one in their right mind. Mousehole is a lovely Cornish village on a wonderful coastline. A bit touristy these days, but well worth a visit to see the Christmas lights in the harbour, or, even better, to go to see the ceremonial switching-on. Have a google!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 06:13 PM

Dunno. How many people from Mousehole would prefer live in Tunbridge Wells?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Stanron
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 06:02 PM

Greg F. wrote: Tunbridge Wells, Islamabad, Mosul - what's the difference?

How many people from Tunbridge Wells would prefer to live in Mosul?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 05:55 PM

Correct, Steve.
Royal Tunbridge Wells.
Big Phil
If you are a Yorkshireman, why dont you take heed of Yorkshire saying
See all, ear all, SAY NOWT. Eat all, sup all, pay nowt. An' if th'ivver does owt for nowt, allus do it for thissen.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 05:42 PM

Tunbridge Wells, Islamabad, Mosul - what's the difference?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 03:54 PM

You are aware, aken, that Tunbridge Wells was where Khalid Masood originally came from. He also lived in Rye as a child. Neither exactly the kind of places normally seen as hotbeds of jihadist terrorism.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 07:31 AM

As your post arrived simultaneously with mine, Dick, I'll work on the assumption that you didn't mean me.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 07:29 AM

What a load of hot air. I agree with Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 07:29 AM

I am from England, I am English and I am a Lancashire lad, among other things. I don't know whether we have the best police force or army in the world becauseI haven't been to all the countries in the world and observed their police and soldiers in action. Rather than digging people out in order to eliminate them, I think we should try to promote tolerance and understanding, be better global neighbours and choose our friends carefully. As I'm not a pacifist I agree that we may have to seek out and kill individuals who mean us harm. But this should be a last-ditch measure and we have to recognise that overly aggressive, preemptive measures might have the same outcome as cutting off the Lernaean Hydra's head

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Big Phil
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 06:39 AM

I am from GREAT Britain, I am English, and I am a Yorkshire man first and foremost.

I echo Mr Neil's words, do these sub human cretins know who we are and what we are capable of. We laugh at their pathetic attempts to scare us off the streets and disrupt our lives.

To quote loosely some one's words, we have the finest Police and Army in the world, we have special skills honed over many years, we will find you and we will eliminate you one by one if needs be.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 05:37 AM

"We are only discussing the raghead "
Thatk you for that racist comment Bozo - it goes a long way to underlining my point
Some people seem to be happy to make this a 'Muslim' thing, which was what I was responding to.
Some of you forum fairies are really getting out of hand in the way you attempt to interfere with the rights of posters
Your're not a forum fairy?
My mistake - kindly mind your own business
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 05:29 AM

raghead poundland jihadist johnnies

Gutter press rhetoric at it worst.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 05:23 AM

We are only discussing the raghead poundland jihadist johnnies in this thread, if it's all the same to you Jim Carroll.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 17 - 03:46 AM

" in their wars of imperialist conquest,"
In which case, the world would be full of people hating each other's religions, - murder and exploitation in the name of Christianity, being a front runner in this.
Start pinning the sins of States who have used religion as an excuse for hatred and none of us gets out of here alive.
As late as the early 20th century, 'gallant little Belgium' slaughtered up to ten million Congolese colonials in pursuit of rubber - are the descendants of the people of Leopold or the Christian Church who supported him in line for hatred because of those actions?
Britain built an Empire and exploited a large slice of the planet "with a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other".
Today's Jihadists are fanatics that the west have empowered by inaction and self-interest.
We stood by and watched Assad imprison, torture and murder his people and did nothing - we even voted in our parliament to do nothing - the result being that a tiny bunch of fanatics stepped into the gap, offered the opposition that wasn't forthcoming from the wealthy west and blossomed into a massive threat.
We sell weapons do despots who oppress their people and would rather see dead children carried out of the sea, than offer safety to those fleeing despotism which has been propped up by our arms and our support because "they may be monsters, but they are "our" monsters".   
We fill our shops with goods produced in lethal conditions for slave-level wages because they are cheap, and we sneer at "economic migrants" who try to better the lives of themselves and their families and describe them as a "threat to our way of life"
The wealthy 'Christian' west is very much in need of Dr Christian Barnard's pioneering surgery - we have become totally inured to compassion and humanity.
Islam is no more violent and threatening than any other religion - go look up 'The Evil Bible' if you want the quotes.
In the hands of fanatics, any religion is dangerous and it is at its most dangerous when it attempts to take the moral high ground
Christian terrorism has a track record that goes back centuries and challenges the worst of them, so let's not be too smug and "holier than thou".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 07:46 PM

Ake drew his line and I have drawn mine, with more caution.

As for Andrew, his argument is a rather facile one to make. In essence it was his own masterful version of "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Senoufou
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 07:26 PM

I have nothing against Muslims - I am married to one, and an immigrant at that. So I'm not Islamophobic.

But if a man deliberately mows down and kills several pedestrians then enters the outside area of the Houses of Parliament and knifes an unarmed policeman to death, it's obvious he will be stopped immediately by the Security forces at hand. And the safest way to stop such a dangerous individual is to shoot to kill. This would pertain in almost any country in the world. It wouldn't matter if he were mentally ill,a jihadist, a Jew, Christian, Muslim or Pagan, white, black, dressed as a pantomime horse or in a tutu. He would be shot, and rightly so.
I normally abhor guns, and do not like to think of our Police having to be armed. However, in this situation and location, it was in my opinion the right thing to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:54 PM

That goes for xenophobia of all sorts. Amazingly I too object to mass murderers but I do not need an armband to identify me as such.

My children's High School is in the national spot light now over an alleged rape of a 14 year old girl by a 16 year old illegal immigrant in the bathroom.

Fox News screams about the scourge of illegal aliens. Lawyers say there was a consensual act and others call for an end to a sanctuary Stat status.

I WITNESSED A ACTUAL FIST FIGHT in the strip mall when old White guys tell black people to get out of the country. I have seen a pick up truck driver intentionally try to hit a non Trump citizen and succeed. A new age of hate is a real, clear and present danger.

Even here I hear the glee of some who are thrilled the killer was shot dead. I am 'pleased' the situation was resolved but I unlike like some am not quite as pleased as some.

When 'kill the fucker' becomes the first and most favored action, we all face double jeopardy in cases of "friendly fire".

At a glance some of you may bear a resemblance to a Muslim. Who knows maybe you do have it comin. I have already had my share of "kill'em all and let God sort them out.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:42 PM

"We must wake up to the terror represented by these "Angry of Tunbridge Wells" fanatics. "

Boilerplate rhetoric?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:37 PM

Yes and how many countries were and still are under the control of Arab foreigners, none of whom were there at the invitation of the people of those countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:27 PM

We shouldn't forget that within living memory every single Muslim country in the world, apart from Saudi Arabia, was under the control of European foreigners. None of whom were there at the invitation of the people of those countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:26 PM

We shouldn't forget that within living memory every single Muslim country in the world, apart from Saudi Arabia, were under the control of European foreigners. None of whom were there at the invitation of the people of those countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: bobad
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 05:09 PM

Islamophobia is a very recent invention.

Lol........tell that to those who were subjugated by the Muslims in their wars of imperialist conquest, they had every right to be "Islamophobic".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 04:32 PM

This is something which we have never been called on to resist in the past

Absolutely - Islamophobia is a very recent invention.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 04:04 PM

We must wake up to the terror represented by these "Angry of Tunbridge Wells" fanatics.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 02:00 PM

I quite agree "D".

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 01:22 PM

I am pleased that jihadist Johnny was dealt with quietly, professionally and without any fuss.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 12:49 PM

I am reluctant to get into that discussion, ake, since it is not suitable for a public forum. All I will say is that it much harder than it sounds.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 12:25 PM

Mr McGrath.....I know that you know the fight against Islamic Terrorism bears no comparison to our war against "Mr Hitler" and the people who were "London born and bred" have long since packed up their pride and caught a bus to somewhere that they are not robbed by scum landlords and bored to death by the "cultural elite."

Islamic Terrorism does not require the sophisticated communication and coordination mentioned by "D", two or three individuals self infected with for example smallpox or similar infectious disease, should just about do the trick, followed up by numerous warnings of similar attacks all over London or any other large city.

It is simple and deathly effective.

This is something which we have never been called on to resist in the past, a new departure .....people who actually welcome death to advance their purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 11:52 AM

Boilerplate rhetoric.

Noel Coward's London pride, read at the end of the programme put it better. So does the Dad's Army theme song.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 10:09 AM

I acknowledge Andrew Neil's sharpness and his ability to see through bullshit, but he has a bullying manner with his political guests at times and his little opening polemics are tiresome and egotistical. One particular one, when Castro died, was quite nasty and was not balanced or challenged by the rest of the show's content. I thought the latest one was just a bit of a rant, frankly. Whilst not relevant to this discussion, it's worth mentioning (in my opinion) that he has worked for the Tories and is currently chairman of the group that owns the right-wing Daily Telegraph and The Spectator. Plenty of other right-wing associations during his career.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 09:48 AM

They are basically inhuman shits, not fit to breathe our air, and thank goodness that murdering poundland jihadist will not!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:49 AM

I don't know, ake. In so far as you can ascribe a 'will' to what is essentially a loose affiliation, the will is already there. As far as we can tell, the capability is not. Individuals acting alone with enough patience to fall off the monitoring are almost impossible to stop; anything like a significant biological or chemical attack requires communication and coordination that potentially exposes it to the security services. All of that could change, naturally, but I think Neil's approach of saying let's get things in perspective is the right one. Horrible and appalling as this is, it is tiny compared to many other things in Britain's past, as Andrew Neil's Luftwaffe comment indicates.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 03:41 AM

I thought Neil's little rant was a cliché ridden piece of self promotion, which was amazingly endorsed by the intellectual Portillo.

It did not address the underlying issues of terrorism and promoted the view that modern terrorism can be fought by turning the other cheek. A mere handful of Jihadists could destroy the operational structure of the UK in weeks, should they wish to do so.

Time to get serious I believe, and to start thinking of the possible rather than the probable, how to we react to chemical or even worse, biological terrorism?

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 02:54 AM

Unusually, the police already say it was.
They would not without evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 06:33 PM

Good speech and not knocking the sentiment but has it been confirmed that the attacker was indeed a jihadi yet? He was certainly a criminal with a long record of violence but as far as I know the motive has not yet been established. I think we should wait and see.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 06:10 PM

Amazing reference to "poundland jihadists" !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Senoufou
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 04:13 PM

That was an excellent speech he made. I was reminded of the spirit of the country just after WW2, and the attitude of my parents, both of whom were in the armed forces during the war. I don't think his style was too bombastic or radical, just sincere and heartfelt.
I don't believe for one minute that these terrorists will ever defeat us or make us quake in our boots.
My reaction to Andrew Neil is "Well said!"

Subject: BS: Andrew Neil slams jihadist!!!!!
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 02:48 PM

Andrew Neil slams jihadist johnny!!!