Kevin Carr's Gloves 4067 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 "You're being blinkered here Rob. Islam has been going for 1505 years it isn't going to fade away. Plus you have said that anti vivisectionists are the most violent you have seen. They didnt blow up people on public transport." The A-V's have attacked people, sent bombs through the post, set fire to peoples cars and houses, dug up their dead relatives and stolen the bodies........ 6 of one IMHO 97396[/snapback] Just so we're clear, are you trying to compare the actions of a few misfits, like the pro-life killings, to events like 9-11, 7-7? 97400[/snapback] there were only 12 -15 people responsible for 9-11 and 4 for 7-7 you can't balmae everyone in Britain for the AV's - or can you???? 97404[/snapback] How many people have the AV's killed? Where do you get your figures from on the 7-7 bombers. How do you know who trained them gave them money supplied info and planning? Plus the 9-11 boys were members of AL Quaeda of which there are way more than 12-15 members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Author Share Posted February 19, 2006 "You're being blinkered here Rob. Islam has been going for 1505 years it isn't going to fade away. Plus you have said that anti vivisectionists are the most violent you have seen. They didnt blow up people on public transport." The A-V's have attacked people, sent bombs through the post, set fire to peoples cars and houses, dug up their dead relatives and stolen the bodies........ 6 of one IMHO 97396[/snapback] Just so we're clear, are you trying to compare the actions of a few misfits, like the pro-life killings, to events like 9-11, 7-7? 97400[/snapback] there were only 12 -15 people responsible for 9-11 and 4 for 7-7 you can't balmae everyone in Britain for the AV's - or can you???? 97404[/snapback] probably your most blinkered post ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 "You're being blinkered here Rob. Islam has been going for 1505 years it isn't going to fade away. Plus you have said that anti vivisectionists are the most violent you have seen. They didnt blow up people on public transport." The A-V's have attacked people, sent bombs through the post, set fire to peoples cars and houses, dug up their dead relatives and stolen the bodies........ 6 of one IMHO 97396[/snapback] Even from you, I can barely believe what I'm reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themags 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 40% of British Muslims want Sharia Law in UK http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...MC-new_19022006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Well how many are there? Oh yeah - all them Moslems - I forgot................. The point is that is is a very very very small number of people who were genuinly involved in the terrorist attacks - although most of you lot will stick the blame on a whole religion, a complete country Put your blind acceptance of the Sun and the Daily Mail's views away and THINK for once Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Well how many are there? Oh yeah - all them Moslems - I forgot................. The point is that is is a very very very small number of people who were genuinly involved in the terrorist attacks - although most of you lot will stick the blame on a whole religion, a complete country Put your blind acceptance of the Sun and the Daily Mail's views away and THINK for once 97487[/snapback] I often wondered why you stuck to incessantly arguing the same points with Leazes, now I know it's because you're up to no better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Well how many are there? Oh yeah - all them Moslems - I forgot................. The point is that is is a very very very small number of people who were genuinly involved in the terrorist attacks - although most of you lot will stick the blame on a whole religion, a complete country Put your blind acceptance of the Sun and the Daily Mail's views away and THINK for once 97487[/snapback] Head in sand time. Has to be said, you're a blind fool, Rob. Sorry like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Author Share Posted February 19, 2006 (edited) Well how many are there? Oh yeah - all them Moslems - I forgot................. The point is that is is a very very very small number of people who were genuinly involved in the terrorist attacks - although most of you lot will stick the blame on a whole religion, a complete country Put your blind acceptance of the Sun and the Daily Mail's views away and THINK for once 97487[/snapback] Head in sand time. Has to be said, you're a blind fool, Rob. Sorry like. 97537[/snapback] Precisely, his excuse for doing nothing [until they bother him] is there is too few of them among too many to have a chance of getting the right people, or getting them at all, or if you do someone else will come along and perform the same actions so whats the point .... quite amazing Edited February 19, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 well I agree with Rob. I totally disagree with the way these protests are being carried out, the "behead non believers" banners, men dressed as suicide bombers etc but at the end of the day its a very small majority of muslims that think that way. What Rob means (I think) is that a good percentage of Animal Liberation protesters will carry out acts of violence or intimidation compared to a smaller percentage of muslims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Author Share Posted February 19, 2006 well I agree with Rob. I totally disagree with the way these protests are being carried out, the "behead non believers" banners, men dressed as suicide bombers etc but at the end of the day its a very small majority of muslims that think that way. What Rob means (I think) is that a good percentage of Animal Liberation protesters will carry out acts of violence or intimidation compared to a smaller percentage of muslims. 97557[/snapback] but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting ..... or stop saying they don't like it Big difference, this is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it Chocchip made a good post in the other thread about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 well I agree with Rob. I totally disagree with the way these protests are being carried out, the "behead non believers" banners, men dressed as suicide bombers etc but at the end of the day its a very small majority of muslims that think that way. What Rob means (I think) is that a good percentage of Animal Liberation protesters will carry out acts of violence or intimidation compared to a smaller percentage of muslims. 97557[/snapback] but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting ..... or stop saying they don't like it Big difference, this is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it Chocchip made a good post in the other thread about it 97616[/snapback] However this lot believe that anyone attached to Oxford Uni is a legitimate target for violence or terror regardless of their views, status etc. Animal Rights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 well I agree with Rob. I totally disagree with the way these protests are being carried out, the "behead non believers" banners, men dressed as suicide bombers etc but at the end of the day its a very small majority of muslims that think that way. What Rob means (I think) is that a good percentage of Animal Liberation protesters will carry out acts of violence or intimidation compared to a smaller percentage of muslims. 97557[/snapback] Except I never mentioned or even implied all muslims or some muslims, only an idiot would generalise in that manner, I was talking only about the people who are pushing the boundaries of free speech; Rob seemingly can't form a coherent opinion about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Author Share Posted February 19, 2006 (edited) well I agree with Rob. I totally disagree with the way these protests are being carried out, the "behead non believers" banners, men dressed as suicide bombers etc but at the end of the day its a very small majority of muslims that think that way. What Rob means (I think) is that a good percentage of Animal Liberation protesters will carry out acts of violence or intimidation compared to a smaller percentage of muslims. 97557[/snapback] but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting ..... or stop saying they don't like it Big difference, this is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it Chocchip made a good post in the other thread about it 97616[/snapback] However this lot believe that anyone attached to Oxford Uni is a legitimate target for violence or terror regardless of their views, status etc. Animal Rights 97622[/snapback] 2 Big differences PP " but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting " "This is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it" Edited February 19, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 2 Big differences PP " but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting " "This is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it" 97639[/snapback] Again I agree however the motive is irrelevant, if a person is willing to kill or maim another because of their beliefs then thats terrorism, in the case of the story I linked, these Animal Rights people are willing to kill or maim young people not because of what they believe but because they are somehow linked to an organisation that has a small part of it involved in something these people disagree with. To hate someone enough to want to kill them because they are different to you is a terrible thing, to do it because they have a link to someone or thing you disagree with is even worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheMan 0 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 40% of British Muslims want Sharia Law in UK http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...MC-new_19022006 97484[/snapback] To steal a reply from the SMB: 'How many Western people living in strict Muslim countries want to be able to alcohol?' More than 40% I imagine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4446 Posted February 19, 2006 Share Posted February 19, 2006 Sky's report on that poll had an interesting figure that the Telegraph didn't use (online at least). 91% said they felt "loyal" to the UK - how many "white anglo-saxon pseudo-christians" would say that? - I don't think I'd agree to that phrase for a start. That doesn't imply betrayal or anything but "loyal" is certainly too strong a word for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 4067 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 2 Big differences PP " but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting " "This is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it" 97639[/snapback] Again I agree however the motive is irrelevant, if a person is willing to kill or maim another because of their beliefs then thats terrorism, in the case of the story I linked, these Animal Rights people are willing to kill or maim young people not because of what they believe but because they are somehow linked to an organisation that has a small part of it involved in something these people disagree with. To hate someone enough to want to kill them because they are different to you is a terrible thing, to do it because they have a link to someone or thing you disagree with is even worse. 97674[/snapback] And how many have they killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Thanks for the support lads - sometimes I think I'm the only one on here fighting the Daily Mail waving fascists Into a rousing chorus of "We will overcome" (but only in a non-violent, respectful and generous way of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2006 Author Share Posted February 20, 2006 Thanks for the support lads - sometimes I think I'm the only one on here fighting the Daily Mail waving fascists Into a rousing chorus of "We will overcome" (but only in a non-violent, respectful and generous way of course) 97794[/snapback] shows the limitations of your thinking if you appear to think you should blindly follow a particular newspaper, or faith as per comments and questions you have asked on those lines, rather than make a decision and form an opinion of your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted February 20, 2006 Author Share Posted February 20, 2006 Sky's report on that poll had an interesting figure that the Telegraph didn't use (online at least). 91% said they felt "loyal" to the UK - how many "white anglo-saxon pseudo-christians" would say that? - I don't think I'd agree to that phrase for a start. That doesn't imply betrayal or anything but "loyal" is certainly too strong a word for me. 97701[/snapback] If it came to the crunch, 91% is very high. In any case, 9% that don't is quite a few Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Thanks for the support lads - sometimes I think I'm the only one on here fighting the Daily Mail waving fascists Into a rousing chorus of "We will overcome" (but only in a non-violent, respectful and generous way of course) 97794[/snapback] shows the limitations of your thinking if you appear to think you should blindly follow a particular newspaper, or faith as per comments and questions you have asked on those lines, rather than make a decision and form an opinion of your own. 97806[/snapback] Sorry - I forgot - you only follow a LEADER who will put Britain back on the right track and get rid of...... etc etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 (edited) Thanks for the support lads - sometimes I think I'm the only one on here fighting the Daily Mail waving fascists Into a rousing chorus of "We will overcome" (but only in a non-violent, respectful and generous way of course) 97794[/snapback] So, anyone who disagrees with you is a Daily Mail waving fascist? Remind you of anyone? I know of at least 2 sensible leftists on this board who think you've lost the plot. Edited February 20, 2006 by DotBum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22392 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 2 Big differences PP " but the fox hunting protesters aren't attempting to make people that disagree with them go fox hunting " "This is also about freedom of speech and erosion of things we have that half the world would kill for...except they are prepared to kill to remove it" 97639[/snapback] Again I agree however the motive is irrelevant, if a person is willing to kill or maim another because of their beliefs then thats terrorism, in the case of the story I linked, these Animal Rights people are willing to kill or maim young people not because of what they believe but because they are somehow linked to an organisation that has a small part of it involved in something these people disagree with. To hate someone enough to want to kill them because they are different to you is a terrible thing, to do it because they have a link to someone or thing you disagree with is even worse. 97674[/snapback] I tend to agree with this. There are actually close similarities between animal rights extremists and islamic fundamentalists. Not least because they tend to be hypocrites. In the case of islamic fundamentalists, they are seemingly happy to abuse the freedom of speech they proclaim to hate. And how many animal rights activists avoid the use of ALL animal products or drugs that have been tested on animals - not many I bet. Both groups also want to fundamentally change the way we live against the majority's wishes. The amount of people each group have killed is fairly irrelevant when we are talking about individuals who are prepared to kill people for their cause. The animal rights activists try and justify their actions by targeting scientists (like myself if I had chosen a different career path), but increasingly they will target anyone who deals with scientists or the family of scientists. Al Queda etc of course will consider everyone a legitimate target. This makes them more dangerous (particularly as they are willing to kill themselves in the process), but on a moral level, I find both groups equally reprehensible. So to summarize, terrorists are scum no matter what the cause imo. In a civilised society the ends do not always justify the means, especially when the majority do not even support your ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 4183 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Personally speaking Ive had a lot more problems with animal rights nutters than any Muslims Ive met. In fact ive got 3 on the work force and nicer more hard working lads you would be pushed to meet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22392 Posted February 20, 2006 Share Posted February 20, 2006 Personally speaking Ive had a lot more problems with animal rights nutters than any Muslims Ive met. In fact ive got 3 on the work force and nicer more hard working lads you would be pushed to meet. 97867[/snapback] I'm not sure you can compare an "animal rights nutter" with your average Joe Muslim mind. Mind, many of the muslims that have since found to be terrorists who comitted mass murder appeared to be very nice chaps to those that knew them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now