Another Tunisian Attack - Sousse
Discussion
PoleDriver said:
blindswelledrat said:
Is that because you've got a black friend by any chance?
Yes, and it is just by chance, I didn't pick them as friends because they are black/brown/yellow but because we had interests in common and decided we quite liked each other's company!
I was actually joking. I didn't think for a moment you were really going to use the 'black friend defence'. Amazing.poledriver said:
What I may not have made clear in the original post of a few days ago is that this was just referring to the muslims she had encountered. I did not include nationalities as that was not irrelevant, as we all know that muslims are not of a specific nationality! Had I aimed my remark at a particular race/nationality that would have been racist, but that is not where I am coming from.
!
:biglaugh again. Following the black-friend defence with the islam-is-not-a-race defence.!
You realise black skin isn't actually a 'race' right? Are you genuinely arguing that if I call a black person the n-word, that is not racist because black is not a race? It'' straight from the NF get-out-of-jail free book.
It genuinely tickles me that you hone in on those two things as a get-out to racism accusations without even bothering to analyse what you have said and why people might think you are racist.
Ali G said:
OpulentBob said:
Yes, but that happened 400 years ago, and the only people still holding on to that fight are a handful of idiots across the Irish Sea - who are just as backwards and brainwashed as the ISIS lot. We've managed to get rid of that somewhat retarded point of view as the older generation(s) has died out, and in another generation or so will hopefully be all but a memory.
A LOT has changed since then, the world has got smaller, we have discovered it's no longer flat, there is no man with a beard on a cloud, or an elephant-headed chappie with 4 arms, you know, basic stuff like that. What was acceptable 2000 years ago (Christians to the lions, then the Christian crusades etc) is quite obviously nothing to be held up as some sort of jutifiable beacon, yet the same old tripe gets trotted out every time someone wants to deflect attention or blame.
Why divert the attention from the idiots who, in the name of Islam (as that is what they have admitted), go around killing innocent people on a beach just because they are white and western?
I say that as a non-religious guy working in a non-christian country with an office full of non-christian colleagues and friends. I mentioned these killings yesterday and the only person willing to put forward an opinion was a Hindu. All the muslim guys just put their heads down and didn't say a word - and it's not like I never speak to them, they're all what I consider mates, we see each other on weekends, I see their families, their kids etc. But not a single one would say anything against the attacks - maybe it was peer pressure, I don't know. But it was a bit disappointing, really.
Indeed - and the Irish tards who bombed, maimed and killed their way across the UK in the name of 'whatever' may have precisely the same screwed up sense of perverted ideology 'in the name of religion' which in their bonkers mindset engenders 'righteousness' as do the Shiits and Scuunts.A LOT has changed since then, the world has got smaller, we have discovered it's no longer flat, there is no man with a beard on a cloud, or an elephant-headed chappie with 4 arms, you know, basic stuff like that. What was acceptable 2000 years ago (Christians to the lions, then the Christian crusades etc) is quite obviously nothing to be held up as some sort of jutifiable beacon, yet the same old tripe gets trotted out every time someone wants to deflect attention or blame.
Why divert the attention from the idiots who, in the name of Islam (as that is what they have admitted), go around killing innocent people on a beach just because they are white and western?
I say that as a non-religious guy working in a non-christian country with an office full of non-christian colleagues and friends. I mentioned these killings yesterday and the only person willing to put forward an opinion was a Hindu. All the muslim guys just put their heads down and didn't say a word - and it's not like I never speak to them, they're all what I consider mates, we see each other on weekends, I see their families, their kids etc. But not a single one would say anything against the attacks - maybe it was peer pressure, I don't know. But it was a bit disappointing, really.
I may be wrong - but I am lead to believe that there may have been no cruise missiles launched at Dublin or Belfast.
(Joke, before BSR or TTwiggy start on me)
blindswelledrat said:
I cant speak for the hotel workers whose minds you are clearly inside, but I can say that if a maniac was coming at me with a gun my first thought wouldn't be "Hmmm, I must protect these English people or my job as a hotel waiter might be at risk".
Ridiculous to suggest their motivations were the maintenance of their low-paid jobs and I would love to see you in the same situation.
I'm glad you said that. It's sickening to see some try to portray these selfless acts as a negative thing. One Muslim (a few Muslims) killed many, but many more Muslims likely saved lives that day. Ridiculous to suggest their motivations were the maintenance of their low-paid jobs and I would love to see you in the same situation.
blindswelledrat said:
:biglaugh again. Following the black-friend defence with the islam-is-not-a-race defence.
You realise black skin isn't actually a 'race' right? Are you genuinely arguing that if I call a black person the n-word, that is not racist because black is not a race? It'' straight from the NF get-out-of-jail free book.
It genuinely tickles me that you hone in on those two things as a get-out to racism accusations without even bothering to analyse what you have said and why people might think you are racist.
You have well and truly captured the moral high ground. Perhaps you could now calm down a bit and bask in your righteousness, rather than bore everyone else to death.You realise black skin isn't actually a 'race' right? Are you genuinely arguing that if I call a black person the n-word, that is not racist because black is not a race? It'' straight from the NF get-out-of-jail free book.
It genuinely tickles me that you hone in on those two things as a get-out to racism accusations without even bothering to analyse what you have said and why people might think you are racist.
OpulentBob said:
Ali G said:
OpulentBob said:
Yes, but that happened 400 years ago, and the only people still holding on to that fight are a handful of idiots across the Irish Sea - who are just as backwards and brainwashed as the ISIS lot. We've managed to get rid of that somewhat retarded point of view as the older generation(s) has died out, and in another generation or so will hopefully be all but a memory.
A LOT has changed since then, the world has got smaller, we have discovered it's no longer flat, there is no man with a beard on a cloud, or an elephant-headed chappie with 4 arms, you know, basic stuff like that. What was acceptable 2000 years ago (Christians to the lions, then the Christian crusades etc) is quite obviously nothing to be held up as some sort of jutifiable beacon, yet the same old tripe gets trotted out every time someone wants to deflect attention or blame.
Why divert the attention from the idiots who, in the name of Islam (as that is what they have admitted), go around killing innocent people on a beach just because they are white and western?
I say that as a non-religious guy working in a non-christian country with an office full of non-christian colleagues and friends. I mentioned these killings yesterday and the only person willing to put forward an opinion was a Hindu. All the muslim guys just put their heads down and didn't say a word - and it's not like I never speak to them, they're all what I consider mates, we see each other on weekends, I see their families, their kids etc. But not a single one would say anything against the attacks - maybe it was peer pressure, I don't know. But it was a bit disappointing, really.
Indeed - and the Irish tards who bombed, maimed and killed their way across the UK in the name of 'whatever' may have precisely the same screwed up sense of perverted ideology 'in the name of religion' which in their bonkers mindset engenders 'righteousness' as do the Shiits and Scuunts.A LOT has changed since then, the world has got smaller, we have discovered it's no longer flat, there is no man with a beard on a cloud, or an elephant-headed chappie with 4 arms, you know, basic stuff like that. What was acceptable 2000 years ago (Christians to the lions, then the Christian crusades etc) is quite obviously nothing to be held up as some sort of jutifiable beacon, yet the same old tripe gets trotted out every time someone wants to deflect attention or blame.
Why divert the attention from the idiots who, in the name of Islam (as that is what they have admitted), go around killing innocent people on a beach just because they are white and western?
I say that as a non-religious guy working in a non-christian country with an office full of non-christian colleagues and friends. I mentioned these killings yesterday and the only person willing to put forward an opinion was a Hindu. All the muslim guys just put their heads down and didn't say a word - and it's not like I never speak to them, they're all what I consider mates, we see each other on weekends, I see their families, their kids etc. But not a single one would say anything against the attacks - maybe it was peer pressure, I don't know. But it was a bit disappointing, really.
I may be wrong - but I am lead to believe that there may have been no cruise missiles launched at Dublin or Belfast.
(Joke, before BSR or TTwiggy start on me)
Guam said:
Ali G said:
Perhaps, once we can understand the feuds and persecution which took place on these Isles between Catholic and Protestant under the name of 'Christianity' - and how they were resolved (
) - then we may be able to dispense good guidance to those who have religious differences yet unresolved.
The 'gun' appears not to be the best choice (there will always be someone who holds a bigger, more effective weapon.)
Once again the nonsense about NI being about religion, go do some research talk to those who were out there.) - then we may be able to dispense good guidance to those who have religious differences yet unresolved.The 'gun' appears not to be the best choice (there will always be someone who holds a bigger, more effective weapon.)
You will find it was about criminal gangs who just happened to be from those communities.
It was about protection money, drugs, prostitution etc etc etc.
Nothing to do with Religion in the main!
[OT]
And re NI - I bow to your superior wisdom - O Great One (not)
Check out Glasgow for sectarian troubles in miniature.
[/OT]
Some of the people on this thread really need to sort their lives out.
You seem to be forgetting that 30 people who have friends and families in this country who may browse this site, have died in most brutal way just because they went on a nice holiday and all some posters on here want to do is scream in each others virtual faces about how their opinion on the religious idiots who did it is the right one.
Sickening. Get a grip.
You seem to be forgetting that 30 people who have friends and families in this country who may browse this site, have died in most brutal way just because they went on a nice holiday and all some posters on here want to do is scream in each others virtual faces about how their opinion on the religious idiots who did it is the right one.
Sickening. Get a grip.
whats sickening is that there is only one religion is causing casualities like this and has done it for years and years and still some have the nerve to come in here and tell us that uh-ah yes religion in general is a bad thing and terror has no religion. Do they take us for idiots? I`ll adress the problem - its Islam.
The Hypno-Toad said:
Some of the people on this thread really need to sort their lives out.
You seem to be forgetting that 30 people who have friends and families in this country who may browse this site, have died in most brutal way just because they went on a nice holiday and all some posters on here want to do is scream in each others virtual faces about how their opinion on the religious idiots who did it is the right one.
Sickening. Get a grip.
10/10 on pomposity scale.You seem to be forgetting that 30 people who have friends and families in this country who may browse this site, have died in most brutal way just because they went on a nice holiday and all some posters on here want to do is scream in each others virtual faces about how their opinion on the religious idiots who did it is the right one.
Sickening. Get a grip.
Well done sir!
Ali G said:
[OT]
Check out Glasgow for sectarian troubles in miniature.
[/OT]
.
If I may just dip in to this part of your argument for a moment. The Glasgow sectarian troubles are a microcosm of the Irish troubles with the same root cause - politics. Glasgow had a huge influx of Irish in the 19th century and whilst the indigenous Scotts hated the English, they hated the Irish more for the time honoured "comin' over here takin' our jobs/women etc". The football team/religion identifier was just a way of finding out if you were Irish or Scottish. The violence was not fueled by heated debate about ecumenical matters, pretty much like NI, it was about money, power and ethnicity. Check out Glasgow for sectarian troubles in miniature.
[/OT]
.
I would suggest that this is different to how religion is being used by the Islamic radicals, but the ends are largely the same - the acquisition of power.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff