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

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 10:18 AM

"Yes there are. MI5 and the police are aware of many."
No there aren't - you have been ably, by stretching a point to claim two thousand 'Islamists' - risks to national security nationwide. - how many "communities" can you make out of that number?
Tell us where they are or stop making things up.
"Not the majority of ordinary, decent British Muslims"
M and M has just scuppered that one with his ""Back to dear old Mandy R-D" ("they would say that, wouldn't they?") - no matter how many "decent British Muslims" there are, none of them are to be trusted - your running-mate just said so.
"Islamism is winning the cognitive war"
Hi Boo-Boo, broken it off with Yogi Bear have you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: bobad
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 09:16 AM

"Islamism is winning the cognitive war – thanks to manipulative and gullible journalists."

The Telegraph

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 05:08 AM

there are no identifiable "Islamist communities" in Britain

Yes there are. MI5 and the police are aware of many.

and no Muslim community would ever commit or condone such an act.
Not the majority of ordinary, decent British Muslims.
Apart from the public pronouncements, there were many who protested and showed their disgust spontaneously.
I remember those with placards saying "not in my name" after 7/7.

Only fool (you Jim) would deny that there is a significant minority who believe in Islamism.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 04:57 AM

What mask? I hide nothing of my opinions. They might not suit your stupid predictable doctrinaire jejune infantile notions. But they are there for all to see. Calling their expression 'mask-slipping' is typical of your complete inability to think any concept thru, but always to fall back on the nearest ill-thought-out insult to ☝.

So it wouldn't take a lot of effort to think of some googol of individuals with whom I should prefer a nice walk, thank you very much just the same.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 04:38 AM

"It has everything to do with ordinary Islamist communities, here and elsewhere."
No - it has everything to do with regimes who rule and absolutely control ordinary Islamist abroad - there are no identifiable "Islamist communities" in Britain and no Muslim community would ever commit or condone such an act.
Some of the states abroad who behave in such a way are among Britain's most profitable trading partners and political allies - did you not see 'Death of a Princess'?
This murder occurred on British soil - it was a frenzied attack by a madman, and is being described as such.
You are attempting to claim the killer was sane and you have selected one of the number of things he said in his rantings as proof that this was a religious act, while at the same time ignoring everything else - other than religion possibly being a part of his madness, it was not.
"Back to dear old Mandy R-D"
Your mask is slipping again
Go and play in the garden and we'll go for a nice walk later.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 03:26 AM

'The first statement by a Muslim cleric on the Woolwich murder was that it was "an insult to Islam"'
..,,.,.

Back to dear old Mandy R-D

Ho hum

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 03:18 AM

It has nothing to do with ordinary Muslim communities in Britain.
It has everything to do with ordinary Islamist communities, here and elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 03:11 AM

Sorry Dave - cross posted
What the **** was that all about Keith?
Seems you've had an M and M moment.
Having used this forum as a racist soapbox, you are now tuning it into a porn site.
What on earth has any of that vomit to do with ordinary Muslim communities in Britain - or anywhere else, for that matter?
We appear to back to your old argument that all Christians who commit terrorist crimes are mad and all Muslim ones are sane.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 03:02 AM

Whoops - premature ejaculation.
"the people who really wield the power have got us beaten. Again."
These hate-preachers wield no real power Dave - if they did their effect would be far more obvious than it is.
They skate on the edge of the law and take advantage of the discontent generated by the situation the Muslim British people find themselves in - Pakistanis are the poorest and the most discriminated against in Britain today.
The younger generation are not prepared to put up with it in the same way as the older ones have - they kick against what's happening to them and they break with their own culture.
The crimes committed by young Muslims are as offensive to traditional Muslims as they are to the rest of us. The first statement by a Muslim cleric on the Woolwich murder was that it was "an insult to Islam"; the sexual behaviour of the criminal minority is directly against the "no sex before marriage" Islamic practice, as is constantly being pointed out by the traditionalists.
These islands have had their own brand of militant imams all to ready to stir up hatred and take advantage of discontent that has nothing whatever to do with religion - take a look at the behaviour of Ian Paisley and his mob of fundamentalist preachers who have done so much to keep the people of Ireland divided with their sectarian bloodletting marches and their "Papist spawn-of-the-Devil" sermons. - We're just about to enter into the 'marching season' and they'll be out in force again establishing their supremacy - can't wait!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 03:01 AM

Beheading Video | Best Gore
www.bestgore.com/tag/beheading-video/‎
1 day ago – Young Man Beheaded, Two Women Executed by Ba'ath Party Brigades in Syria. This gallery contains 1 photo. For the n-th time – these ...
L335K1 • SICK - Beheading If you're somewhat squeamish,...
l335k1.tumblr.com/post/15608965297‎
SICK - Beheading. If you're somewhat squeamish, you'd be wise if you chose to pass this video up as it is exactly as brutal as the title suggests. It depicts the ...
Beheading Video - LiveLeak.com - Redefining the Media
www.liveleak.com/browse?q=beheading%20video‎
Belgian Wahhabis Filmed Themselves Beheading a Shiite Man in Syria. approved. A new video has surfaced filmed in Syria that shows a group of Wahhabi ...
SHOCK VIDEO: Woolwich Muslim fanatic's evil rant after beheading ...
www.thesun.co.uk/.../muslim-fanatics-evil-rant-after-beheading-soldier.htm...
May 23, 2013 – SHOCK VIDEO: WOOLWICH heroine tends a young soldier dying in the ... fanatic who tried to behead him crows: "We swear by almighty Allah!"
London Beheading Video Analysis - YouTube
► 12:36► 12:36
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjO-aeIDxac
May 29, 2013 - Uploaded by RevolutionNewz
Real News @ http://RevolutionNews.US — WOOLWICH FALSE FLAG EXPOSED STAGED EVENT... HOAX! No ...
LONDON BEHEADING TERROR VIDEO OF KILLER EMERGES ...
► 2:36► 2:36
www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0eMn7Go8gg
May 23, 2013 - Uploaded by JUNGLE SURFER
You need Adobe Flash Player to watch this video. Download it from Adobe. LONDON BEHEADING TERROR ...
WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC VIOLENCE - The beheading of convert ...
►►
www.mrctv.org/videos/warning-very-graphic-violence...
Aug 17, 2012
Via Raymond Ibrahim. Liberal talk show host Tawfiq Okasha recently appeared on "Egypt Today" airing a ...
More videos for beheading videos »
Beheading video - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beheading_video‎
Beheading video is a colloquial term in the U.S. used during the "War on Terror" for videos released by Islamist militant groups depicting interviews by hostages ...
Gruesome Video Shows Syrian Rebel Beheading Civilian Alex ...
www.infowars.com/gruesome-video-shows-syrian-rebel-beheading-civili...‎
Mar 21, 2013 – A gruesome YouTube video shows a member of the US-backed Free Syrian Army beheading a civilian in yet another example of how the west ...
Taped Beheadings Videos Continue To Appear on Facebook
newmediarockstars.com/.../taped-beheadings-videos-continue-to-appear-...‎
May 21, 2013 – The bizarre spectre of death has been lurking on Facebook lately as two gruesome videos have been haunting the inboxes and feeds of many ...
Ad related to beheading videos
Beheading Death Videos‎
death.webcrawler.com/
Search for Beheading Death Videos With 100's of Results at WebCrawler‎
Searches related to beheading videos
gruesome beheading videos
hostage beheading videos
taliban beheading videos
ogrish beheading videos
terrorist beheading videos
al qaeda beheading videos
nick berg beheading videos
saudi beheading videos
1        
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 02:56 AM

So hacking people to death on the streets of Hartford is 'normal' behaviour?

So simple, naive Jim does not know that beheading is not considered unusual or aberrant behaviour among jihadis?

You did not know that it is actually the preferred method of ridding the world of the wretched Kafir.
You did not know that they love to video the proceedings for future masturbatory pleasure and to inspire the young to join their cause.

You take us all for fools Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 02:56 AM

These hate-preachers wield no real power Dave

I know that, Jim. that is why I said the people who really wield the power. Those who pay the piper call the tune and the preachers are much more piper than payer!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 02:31 AM

"There is no suggestion that they were mad Jim. You are making that up."
So hacking people to death on the streets of Hartford is 'normal' behaviour?
Explains your manic hatred of ethnic minorities, I suppose - remind me never to go there.
No answers, no response to facts, no logic, nothing - as pointless as every other hate-thread you've dragged out to extinction.
"the people who really wield the power have got us beaten. Again."
These hate-preachers wield no real power Dave - if they did their effect would be they skate on the edge of the law and take advantage of the discontent generated

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jun 13 - 02:31 AM

"There is no suggestion that they were mad Jim. You are making that up."
So hacking people to death on the streets of Hartford is 'normal' behaviour?
Explains your manic hatred of ethnic minorities, I suppose - remind me never to go there.
No answers, no response to facts, no logic, nothing - as pointless as every other hate-thread you've dragged out to extinction.
"the people who really wield the power have got us beaten. Again."
These hate-preachers wield no real power Dave - if they did their effect would be they skate on the edge of the law and take advantage of the discontent generated

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 05:38 PM

Have you ever played that party game where you sit round in a circle, & one in the middle has to ask each person a question in turn; but the answerer always answers the question addressed to the previous person [the first question has to be answered just with some random answer]; and the unfortunate person in the middle, who is not in on the secret, has to work put what is going on? It's quite a fun game.

Don seems to be playing it. He has for some reason taken every time to answering the points he failed to grasp in my 3rd or 4th post back; without, tho, even bothering to read the ones in between.

Poor old Don. No wonder he has, as I said a bit back, completely lost the plot.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:24 PM

Don, I was suggesting that you and Jim are no more knowledgeable than Michael or me.
If we are not entitled to an opinion, why are you?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:22 PM

Not if he was a mad fanatic he wasn't

There is no suggestion that they were mad Jim.
You are making that up.

Their claim that we are killing lots of Muslims in their lands is an empty one.
Muslims are killing lots of Muslims.
We are not.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:15 PM

"Something you have yet to answer - if it was down to the religion they'd all be at it -"
.,,.

Can such a fatuous, foolish, irrational, illogical argument ever have disgraced a decent forum?

It proves that missionary actitvity can't be inspired by religion, doesn't it? ~~ or we'd all be out there with our collars back to front, busy converting people, wouldn't we?

Fatuous pathetic little booby.



So where do you want to meet after school, then? I'll be bringing my big brother and his mates, mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:53 PM

Fairy Nuff, Jim - But I was not using cherry picking in a bad sense anyway - Just demonstrating the point that selected quotes can always be found to back up one's points.

I gave up believing such 'proof' a long time ago which is why I was pleased to see the link to the full article by the Moslem, half-Pakistani lady who's name escapes me without going back up the thread (Old before my time...) I found it quite revealing that by picking selected passages from it both sides could prove opposite points. Paul Daniels could not have worked better magic!

On the point of 'sides' - and this is to all parties concerned - do we not think that we should not fight each other as this only demonstrates that the people who really wield the power have got us beaten. Again.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:37 PM

"Even though it is, yet again, cherry-picked. "
No it wasn't Dave - I selected all of those as examples of the fact that there were numerous interpretations of the term 'Jihad' - for your benefit if I remember rightly - please read what I wrote.
"If I had attempted to produce favourable quotes for a word that everyone knows has violent connotations I would have selected this one"
The opposite of "cherry picking" in fact - I picked them all at random.
Apart from that - for what it's worth, I agree entirely with your comments on "ordinary people like us", which is more or lest exactly what I have been fumbling to say.
"He was the killer, so he was in a good position to know why he did it."
Not if he was a mad fanatic he wasn't. He also claimed that it was what was happening to Muslims over the world that inspired him.
Are you saying that he knew why he did it when it suits your own nasty agenda, but he didn't when it doesn't - can't have it both ways Keith?
Something you have yet to answer - if it was down to the religion they'd all be at it - are they all suppressing their cultural implants, d'you think?
"Fatuous pathetic little booby"
Tiresomly juvenile little name-caller - I'll get you after school!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 11:13 AM

""Is that based on reading 5 pages out of hundreds and therefore worthless?
If so, why are you wasting everyone's time posting your worthless opinions based only on profound ignorance?""

You get more bloody ridiculous with each post.

I say you can't judge the 6236 plus verses Q'ran by 109 cherry picked verses which Mike and others are using.

You then ask if I'm judging by five or six pages.

HELL-O-OH!.. What do you use for a brain?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 05:29 AM

The Daily Telegraph. 23rd May 2013

"The setting was the Old Bailey in 2006, where four men were arrested for fighting with police and photographers as they turned out in support of a fanatic on trial for calling for British soldiers to be killed.
Among those led away in handcuffs that day, still arguing that he was within his rights to urge people to "behead those who insult Islam", was Michael "Mujahid" Adebolajo. Seven years on, Adebolajo, a British-born Muslim convert, is suspected of having answered the call to arms as one of two men who butchered Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich."

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 04:53 AM

Grow up, for ***** sake, you infantile little name-caller - you really can't take being shown up for what you have obviously been all along.
Your hissy-fits ring a little hollow coming from somebody who has accused those who criticise a terrorist state too severely (in your opinion) of being "Anti Semitic. or "Jew Baiting"
We certainly won't find out here as neither of you have the bottle to even tackle the idea that the reasons that were suggested right at the beginning of this thread (when there were some human beings around) might have some validity.
Your pathetic attempts to implicate me in something that is standard practice with you are just that - pathetic.
the world sat on its hands and watched while a murderous regime massacred hundreds of thousands of its civilians........

& on & on & on & on &...

And he has the gall to accuse anyone else of ranting.

Fatuous pathetic little booby

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 04:45 AM

None of you have come anywhere near to showing that this murder has the slightest to do with religion other than the rantings of a madman at the scene of the crime

He was the killer, so he was in a good position to know why he did it.
There is no evidence or even a suggestion that he or his accomplice are mad.
He now calls himself Mujaheid.

Also, the organisation he aspired to fight for said the killing "proclaimed Islam."

So Jim, you are wrong again.
There is every reason to infer that this killing and beheading were religious acts.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 04:18 AM

I like that, Jim -

"The best Jihad is the word of Justice in front of the oppressive Sultan"

Even though it is, yet again, cherry-picked. But seeing as everyone is at it, why not :-) I believe it goes a long way to say what I have been trying to say in this any many other threads. The enemy is never the ordinary people. They are like the rest of us. The enemy is the people who crave power and so send ordinary people to their deaths. On ALL sides.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 13 - 03:46 AM

"you slanderous little stinker..."
Grow up, for ***** sake, you infantile little name-caller - you really can't take being shown up for what you have obviously been all along.
Your hissy-fits ring a little hollow coming from somebody who has accused those who criticise a terrorist state too severely (in your opinion) of being "Anti Semitic. or "Jew Baiting"
None of you have come anywhere near to showing that this murder has the slightest to do with religion other than the rantings of a madman at the scene of the crime - hasn't stopped you from using the killing as yet another pop at docile British communities.
Why do tiny minorities of fanatics attack Britain and the US? - The Gulf War maybe, or invented weapons of mass destruction, or selling weapons to despots weeks after the 'Arab Spring' started in order to ensure a continued oil supply, or generations of racial or cultural abuse....... or maybe it might just be because the world sat on its hands and watched while a murderous regime massacred hundreds of thousands of its civilians - who knows?
We certainly won't find out here as neither of you have the bottle to even tackle the idea that the reasons that were suggested right at the beginning of this thread (when there were some human beings around) might have some validity.
Keith
Your pathetic attempts to implicate me in something that is standard practice with you are just that - pathetic.
If I had attempted to produce favourable quotes for a word that everyone knows has violent connotations I would have selected this one, which is just as likely to be the cause of young zealots going to fight abroad as any other (from the same link I gave).
As I said - I link all my quotes - you seldom do, only when you are forced to.
Jim Carroll

"The best of jihad
During the Arab Spring, many peaceful demonstrations in the Arab world faced violence and gunfire by their government's regime. The gunfire encouraged the protesters and led them to revolutions, based on their strong faith in what is called "the best of jihad". The best of jihad was encouraged by their prophet, Muhammad, saying:[23][24]
"The best Jihad is the word of Justice in front of the oppressive Sultan [ruler]."[25]
In a battlefield context, when jihad is used to denote warfare, Ibn Nuhaas cited the following hadith to explain the meaning of the "best Jihad":
Ibn Habbaan narrates: The Messenger of Allah was asked about the best jihad. He said: "The best jihad is the one in which your horse is slain and your blood is spilled."[26]
In a similarly worded Hadith to the one above, Ibn Nuhaas cited a hadith from Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, where it states that the highest kind of Jihad, is "The person who is killed whilst spilling the last of his blood."(Ahmed 4/144)[27]
It has also been reported that Muhammad considered performing hajj to be the best jihad for Muslim women.[28]

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 05:22 PM

No point continuing this dialogue I think, Don. You have to my mind completely lost the plot.

See you some time on some other thread.

Maybe.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:15 PM

So we are all too ignorant to be allowed to even have an opinion!
Why do you not tell Jim that his opinion is worthless too?
And what about your opinion Don.
Is that based on reading 5 pages out of hundreds and therefore worthless?
If so, why are you wasting everyone's time posting your worthless opinions based only on profound ignorance?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:28 PM

""Or indeed, Keith, as is the case, an inextricable mélange of both.

Got that now, Don?""

I got it long ago.

You haven't yet! You asked earlier whether a book critic would be prevented fom criticising one book more than another.

You obviously think that said critic would be justified in judging these books from reading five or six pages of each. Based on that, some heavyweights of the literary world whose prose takes a bit of getting into, would have been panned by you.

People like Dickens, Conan Doyle, Mary Shelley and Bram Stoker for example.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:51 AM

Or a purely political one...

Wheeeeeeeeeeee ~~~ we could go on like this for hoursnhoursnhoursn

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:42 AM

You could argue.
Or you could say that to replace all politics with religion is a purely religious objective.
That is what the Islamists intend, and the clue is in the name.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 06:37 AM

Or indeed, Keith, as is the case, an inextricable mélange of both.

Got that now, Don?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 06:25 AM

The stated aim of the Islamists is the establishment of Islamic governments, the overthrow of democracies, and eventually a global caliphate.
That is the objective behind all their attacks.

You could argue that is a political ideology, or an intention to replace politics with religious dogma.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 06:08 AM

I am not trying to extrapolate anything from anything, Don. I am simply expounding my perception of the nature of the religion professed by the whole of this demographic. What proportion of them believe in it, as the old French counting-out recitation puts it, un peu, assez, beaucoup, passionément, à la folie, pas du tout, I have no way of knowing, and do not even try to speculate. I simply think that its very nature does not bode well towards rendering its adherents likely to be congenial long-term close co-existers. That is the point I think you are failing to get..
.,,.

"He wants it to be entirely religious! Do you?" ~~~

Well, obviously not; or I wouldn't have posted what I did about the inextricability of the relig and the polit, would I? If that is what Keith said, then I obviously don't agree with that bit.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 06:01 AM

he was scathing when somebody mentioned reaction to Iraq and Afghanistan

Hundreds die daily in Iraq, but not killed by us.
Fewer in Afghanistan, but again not by us.
So, why do they really kill us?
Why do they kill Christian people and children (many school kids this week) in Nigeria?
Somalia?
Mali?

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 05:49 AM

""Don ~ You are not getting my point. I think I have made it clearly enough, but you just don't want to see it. So I won't go on about it. We know well enough what each other thinks.""

And you are not listening! You cannot extrapolate from one sixtieth to the whole and come up with a valid conclusion. In doing so, you mirror those we call radical, rabid, mad, and other epithets when they use the same method to recruit terrorists.


""Re this apparent self-contradiction you find in Keith's attitude, I don't see it as such. It is not a case of either it's all religiously motivated, or politically""

If you take a look at the early posts, that is exactly what Keith was saying.

Religious, NOT political. In fact he was scathing when somebody mentioned reaction to Iraq and Afghanistan, and dismissed it out of hand.

He wants it to be entirely religious! Do you?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 05:28 AM

And I'm committed to Arsenal FC, Cambridge University, Andy Murray, rare steak with freshly-made English mustard, Quintin Tarantino, Natural Greek yogurt with honey, fried eggs easy-over with unsmoked back bacon & mushrooms & rye toast...

so away with you with your

"as long as you don't have to actually commit yourself",

you slanderous little stinker...

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:54 AM

"Commit myself" to what, Jim? (I know I wasn't going to say more to you, but you are a very able provocateur, I'll give you that!)

I have "committed myself" to the conviction, giving reasons (which you may dismiss as a 'rant or a 'vicious diatribe', but a fat lot of support you got in your appeals for others to join you in denouncing them as such) that Islam is a faith mischievous in teaching and intent, whose presence in any numbers on the part of its adherents is likely to be detrimental to the interests of states where it is not the established system, and so such presence should be resisted.

This is a sincere and firmly held opinion, which I have made no attempt to conceal; and which contains no element reasonably defined as 'racist', except for the Brother-Paul-football analogues, whatever: it is just a matter of conflicting interests which will be exacerbated by too much close coexistence.

How much more 'commitment' do you want you mulish head-in-sand object, you!

Yeah yeah I know, mixed metaphor ~ it isn't mules who bury heads in sand. So sue me!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:54 AM

I was referring to Mike's saying he had nothing more to say to me
You may well have been referring to Mike in the original post but in this post you accuse me of the same.

And I also apologise for bring up something you had already apologised for. I was just so annoyed at your double standards.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:47 AM

I pointed out earlier that there were numerous definitions of the word
No. You did not.
and I produced the quotes that made my point
No. Only ones that gave the non- violent meaning.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:43 AM

"One law for Jim and one law for everyone else."
I was referring to Mike's saying he had nothing more to say to me
As much as I regret not being able to take part - and to respond to your reply to my points, we are under great pressure to finish the sound-clips and notes for a talk we are giving shortly, before this ******* computer gives up the ghost, which it is about to do.
Please don't make an issue of this.
"saying that I am an Islamophobe again"
I have apologised and explained my stance on this
"I have just trawled through your posts and it appears I owe you an apology - you have not actually taken a stance on this matter"
Please don't make an issue of this either.
"Don't know how some people can bear to be so predictable"
You too Mike - always there when needed - as long as you don't have to actually commit yourself (except when the mask slips, of course)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:40 AM

you have often doctored texts without providing either link or naming your source -
Outright lie Jim.
I never have and never would.

and you have faked your own postings
Once, in fun, and without deception.
It was obvious that it was me and not the lying "Guest"

MI5 classes Islamist attacks as "international terrorism" and says that the threat level is "unprecedented."
IRA and other domestic extremists come well below.
"Spying" was not even mentioned!
901.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:32 AM

... and do stop going on as if politics & religion were two entirely separate entities that could never causally co-exist in any situations. Can't you see that all the motivations, in NI, Islamic activism, and pretty well every other sort of interfaith controversy, constitute an inextricable mixture, tho maybe in differing proportions, of both. Do please stop being so tendentiously faux-naïf

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:19 AM

"Jim, you made a claim about the accepted meaning of Jihad, quoted the Wiki page in support of your claim, but ignored the bits that refuted your claim".
I pointed out earlier that there were numerous definitions of the word and I produced the quotes that made my point - we all know the generally accepted definition of the word "Jihad" - it's the one you constantly use to smear Muslims.
I linked the article as I always do (and which you deliberately (despite regular requests) constantly do not - you have often doctored texts without providing either link or naming your source - and you have faked your own postings - stop filling these discussions with snide accusations.
"The Irish troubles, as you concede"
I concede nothing - stop using loaded and misleading language.
I damn well know that the Irish troubles are to do with partition and,
just as the Muslim events, have nothing to do with religion, but rather the generations of abuse that Muslims (and all immigrants) have suffered in Britain at the hands of rightist thugs.
The MI5 report cited spying and increased IRA activity as being major problems, the DOMESTIC Muslim situation, which is what this is about, came way down the list.
Carry on hating
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:15 AM

Jim, you say Don't have time to get involved at present.

This, from you, when you said to me a couple of days back

You'll be going off in a huff next and saying you have nothing to say to me, and then coming back when you think the coast is clear

One law for Jim and one law for everyone else. And before you go off on one saying that I am an Islamophobe again this is just about common courtesy. It seems Ok for you to go off, presumably doing more important things, but if I do not post for a few days I have 'gone off in a huff'? Complete hypocrisy.

DtG.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:14 AM

I know.
I had quoted Straw in full anyway.
Later I quoted a something relevant to what was being discussed and Jim accused me of selective quoting.
It was not.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 04:10 AM

Jack Straw saying that "no racist conclusions...."
.,,.
Back to lovely little Miss Rice-Davies, ho·hum.

Don't know how some people can bear to be so predictable

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:52 AM

Jim, you made a claim about the accepted meaning of Jihad, quoted the Wiki page in support of your claim, but ignored the bits that refuted your claim.

The Irish troubles, as you concede, are about partition versus a United Ireland, not religion.
The Irish terror threat was rated below international terrorism, they have never tried for mass indiscriminate death anyway, and no attack ever linked to religion.
So, false comparisons Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:35 AM

Don't have time to get involved at present.
This seems to have reverted back to "evil religion" is the cause of it all and ignoring all the other factors connected with what is happening to the Muslim communities.
Surely all the mass rioting, the killing of infidels.... and all the other Muslim atrocities that are taking place on the streets of Britain today..... oh, I forgot; that's not happening, is it - wonder why, if the two and a half million Muslims are followers of such an "unacceptable" (to whom?) religion?
The only extensive 'religious' bloodletting to have taken place in these islands recently was Christian, when two brands of Christianity, Catholic and Protestant, tore each others heads off for over twenty years, both in Ireland and in mainland Britain.
As M15 has pointed out, that still remains one of the greater threats to British peace and security today, and this will continue to be the case.
Until somebody removes the "temporary" 90-year-old line that divides the two Irelands - the real cause of that particular slaughter, (and before Keith or his mates attempt to score points - no - I don't favour any particular side in this, I just recognise it to be the real problem)
This religious warfare has little or nothing to do with religion, just as the Woolwich killing has nothing to do with the Muslim religion.
"Richard, the piece was provided by Jim who selectively quoted so it appeared to support him."
Don't attempt to accuse me of one of your regular stunts - to the extent of doctoring whole paragraphs, as in the case of Jack Straw saying that "no racist conclusions...." (not forgetting your having been warned by the site administrators for fake posting in your own support under a false name - wan't that one dug up?)
I don't "select" anything to support my case and, unlike you, I link everything I quote.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Unarmed soldier killed, Woolwich (London)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:32 AM

One of the arguments boils down to what proportion of Moslems are criminals of one sort or another. Some seem to think the proportion is lower than everyone else and some believe it is higher. The truth is likely to be somewhere in the middle, is it not? Or, to put it another way, the same as everyone else.

Cheers

DtG