Rayvin

Yes, patriotism is a bizarre one. But maybe less so if you consider religion to be a tool of people who want to supercede the state in people's minds. Maybe religious fervour is just patriotism under another name - and so the similarities should be strong. Given that we all presumably agree that there is nothing in religion, anyway.

I think we're going to see the whole thing pushed underground, and that'll the effects will be worse than what we're already seeing...

I mean, the Japanese martyred themselves in WWII without any religious inclinations and driven entirely by patriotism, so we don't know what they would or wouldn't do in truth. I wouldn't even say what these terrorists have done is worse than what Hitler, Stalin or Mao managed at the height of their powers in terms of how 'twisted' they were, so clearly religion isn't all it takes for humanity to jump off the cliff as far as morality it concerned. I think the whole thing can be viewed as follows: ISIS at the top are motivated by their religion - they're trying to spread as widely as they can to fill the power vacuum left behind by Western meddling in the region. The latter point could be seen as both religious and political. ISIS recruit through attempting to appeal to the tribalistic (in the sense that we are all tribal beings) religious sentiments of all Muslims. This is clearly a religious factor. toonotl demonstrated a source from ISIS to support this observation. This message does not resonate with all Muslims. Therefore, we can conclude that religion on its own is not a sufficient motivator for someone to commit this kind of act. In fact, based on the very small proportion who do commit these acts, it would rationally be fair to say that religion on its own is far from sufficient. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider the additional factors. As Renton has set out quite clearly, we can't combat a religious ideology, we need to wait for them to modernise. But as I think HF sets out, we can combat the other factors. These factors appear to be social, mental health issues with respect of the individuals, and political factors. We can address these points without having to challenge the religion. Does that change the fact that the religion may still want to destroy us? No. ISIS will still want this. But we'll be limiting their message's appeal considerably.

Bloody hell, they really are banning everything on the sex front. This one affects me in no way, shape or form like, but it's a clear indicator of what the Tories think of sex.

I'm fairly sure the point that whole discussion arrived at was that all sides accepted that there were political motivations for terrorist attacks, with the only remaining point of disagreement being how influential religion is in these matters, with HF claiming that the people who commit these attacks are more susceptible to extremism because of other social factors. I actually think we all agree on these points, the only thing you guys aren't seeing eye to eye on is the religious aspect of this. You're really not that far apart.

I don't think that's incontrovertible proof yet tbh. I actually quite badly want this to be true but him tweeting that he wrote it proves nothing really.

Fuck you. But yeah, it does a bit...

You mean headset and so on? Yeah Will see you around! I'm on most nights.

I saw that article - is that true? How do you know it was trolling? That's hilarious if so Also, which newspaper sources do you value? Its give me a clear idea of your political alignments going forward.

I'll add ya in a bit. I'm not great either so don't worry.

As for Hull, two more games in January is not good for their Premier League survival hopes. They have the smallest squad in the Premier League, they have no centre forwards left, and have Mbokani out for three games for an absolute nonsense. The BBC here dismissing Hull's chances of winning the competition by just suggesting that all they've done here is force themselves to play an additional two games

If this doesn't scream "I was fucking terrified you guys were gonna get to the semis", I don't know what does.

He was good, agreed.

I think this suggests two things anyway - the spine of the team is more than good enough to survive in the PL. Up front perhaps not. Gayle maybe just having an off night, but he had some howlers in there. Goes without saying that Selz should be nowhere near the team when we're back in the big time.

3 pens saved. 29 shots, 5 on target. Pathetic. Other than that, we were a better team by far, which makes this all the more annoying.

Yeah, our finishing is pathetic. That's our problem right there.

Shelvey misses...

Says it all.

It's harsh that it's even come to this man, we're actually a greatly superior team in all but finishing and goalkeeping - on which we're probably about par with Hull.

I hope Hull get relegated for this.

Harsh this, we've been far superior. We just lack the cutting edge.

I fucking hate pens... have done ever since I cared about England.

Pens. Another chance for Selz to shine.

It's gonna be pens. We're getting chances, just totally incapable of getting them on target.

Even Gayle blasting them into space now...