LeazesMag 0 Posted June 18, 2006 Author Share Posted June 18, 2006 Oh no, the 'editing posts' paranoid ramblings again. 150323[/snapback] surely people who want a debate, don't edit people's posts though ? 150326[/snapback] THEY AREN'T EDITING YOUR POSTS YOU CRAZY OLD MAN. 150328[/snapback] Of course he has you daft shite. I'm 51. The same as Glenn Roeder. And look as young as he does. OK. Now, Rob is old 150334[/snapback] Resorting to insults, it's true what the say about old people having worse manners. They're not editing your posts, they're deliberately misquoting you for comedic effect. There's a difference. 150337[/snapback] It does kind of reduce the effect when the original post remains in tact and about one space above the "editted" post and is clearly meant as a joke. Now if Moderators edit an original post and you can't see that its happened that is wrong. 150339[/snapback] Whats this all about then ? http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=6536 150347[/snapback] Thats what i said. If they edit an original post which you can't tell has been editted thats wrong. What people on here have done is quote a post and change it for a joke which is made clear by the fact the original post remains in tact as it was written for all to see. 150355[/snapback] No mate, I'm sorry, but you can't claim to be running a sensible message board for adults, and be up for debates, when you change or clip people's posts. It's piss poor and pathetic. 150360[/snapback] If that's the way you think and you don't like it here then why do you post here? 150372[/snapback] Well - if you don't like this thread, why are you bothering to post in it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 "eerr....because people more concerned about the terrorists "rights" than the victims happen to have got into government perhaps ???" No it is because they are concerned about how new radical legislation will also affect the privacy of you and me. Do you actually beleive MP's walk in to the commons fussed about terrorists rights? 150366[/snapback] How do you think the Human Rights Act got through in its present format ? They are concerned about the privacy of you and me, of course. The phrase "you and me" includes ALL people, including unidentified terrorists. MP's will have their own views on this, just like me and you. You put freedom before security, I put security before freedom, because I think there is no real freedom if there is inadequate security. The Bill is to help the security services identify these terrorists, not become a police state as you claim. Some MP's will also be very much aware of the fact that these terrorists would very much like to blow them up while they are walking into the very building you mention. Being closer to this sort of thing rather than just read about it would tend to have a sobering effect on your view of it, although some may naively believe it won't happen to them. 150377[/snapback] See this is where you seem clueless, The Euro high court has supremacy on all matters of Human rights and immigaration legislation....Did you not know that? And we are signatories to this. In fact we have already been warned about our new anti-terrror legislative plans. And if it gets tested and thrown out of the Euro court we're back to square one. Do you actually know anything at all about this issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 (edited) Where did I say I didn't like this thread? It's very entertaining seeing a deluded bigot being made to look like an idiot time and time again. Edited June 18, 2006 by luckyluke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 No Bridget, I haven't said anything about myself. And I am not going to. If Renton hadn't started insulting me just because he disagreed with me, and harping on about his "qualifications" I think its fair to say, that I wouldn't have mentioned them either. Draw your own conclusions. 150341[/snapback] LEAZES, IVE HAD ENOUGH MATE, FOR THE LAST TIME, HE HASNT HARPED ON ABOUT HIS QUALIFICATIONS, YOU HAVE. YOU ARE OBSESSED WITH RENTONS QUALIFICATIONS NOT HIM. EITHER FIND ME THE POSTS WHERE HE GOES ON ABOUT IT OR DROP IT, I WAS HAPPY TO ENJOY A DEBATE BUT YOU'RE A FOOL AND I CANT BE ARSED ANYMORE. GO ON BLEAT ABOUT HOW THATS NOT THE ACTIONS OF A SENSIBLE ADMIN BUT YOU DO IT ALL THE TIME. YOU CANNOT DEBATE, YOU ARE NOT CAPABLE OF IT. YOU LIKE TO PRETEND THAT BY NOT TELLING US WHAT YOU DO FOR A LIVING THAT SOME PEOPLE WILL THINK YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE, WELL I'LL BET YOU DONT, 10 YEARS AS A STANDARD CANNON FODDER SOLDIER DOESNT QUALIFY YOU TO TALK ON TERRORISM, WHAT IT DOES IS GIVE YOU A DIFFERENT VIEW, THATS WHAT DEBATES ABOUT, DIFFERENT VIEWS. YOU HOWEVER CANT SEE THAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 If you're going to write in a larger font you could at least punctuate it properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 If you're going to write in a larger font you could at least punctuate it properly. 150384[/snapback] gan.fooooook;yasel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke 2 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 That's better, I appreciate the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 If you're going to write in a larger font you could at least punctuate it properly. 150384[/snapback] gan.fooooook;yasel 150386[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22064 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I was going to answer Leazes' last post, but I don't think I could do any better than Peasepud (which for obvious reasons I'll not quote). Leazes is probably in the pub now with his buddies, proving he has a life. Everyone hide under their beds when he comes back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 18, 2006 Author Share Posted June 18, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indigo 0 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 "eerr....because people more concerned about the terrorists "rights" than the victims happen to have got into government perhaps ???" No it is because they are concerned about how new radical legislation will also affect the privacy of you and me. Do you actually beleive MP's walk in to the commons fussed about terrorists rights? 150366[/snapback] How do you think the Human Rights Act got through in its present format ? They are concerned about the privacy of you and me, of course. The phrase "you and me" includes ALL people, including unidentified terrorists. MP's will have their own views on this, just like me and you. You put freedom before security, I put security before freedom, because I think there is no real freedom if there is inadequate security. The Bill is to help the security services identify these terrorists, not become a police state as you claim. Some MP's will also be very much aware of the fact that these terrorists would very much like to blow them up while they are walking into the very building you mention. Being closer to this sort of thing rather than just read about it would tend to have a sobering effect on your view of it, although some may naively believe it won't happen to them. 150377[/snapback] Alright lads, mind if I join in? I'm going to anyway, just though I'd be polite about it though. Some questions for LM: How much do you actually know about the Human Rights Act, "in it's present format" or otherwise LM? Have you read it? Would you prefer we had no Human Rights? I quite like having Human Rights, myself. How much first-hand experience of terrorism do you have? How much of that is "Islamic" terrorism? Personally I have none, zero, fuck-all, just like almost everyone else in this country. Of those that do, nearly all of them only have experience of "Irish" terrorism. So for me terrorism is a tiny insignificant little issue because it's highly likely that it is NEVER going to affect me in any way!!! Actually that's not entirely true, is it, because it is going to affect me, isn't it. Some people with highly dubious motives are going to use it as an excuse to do what they've always really wanted to do and remove some of my Human Rights. The very same Human Rights, that I actually quite like, and they've managed to con people like you into thinking they're protecting. That's the ACTUAL threat from terrorism, not getting blown-up, poisoned, or shot - well not by the terrorists, anyway - the threat to our way of life, the threat posed by "OUR" government and their dubiously motivated mates. What do you reckon? PS: If you think security is more desirable than freedom, you'd be pretty safe from a terrorist in prison, why not get yourself locked-up? Protective custody and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22064 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 "eerr....because people more concerned about the terrorists "rights" than the victims happen to have got into government perhaps ???" No it is because they are concerned about how new radical legislation will also affect the privacy of you and me. Do you actually beleive MP's walk in to the commons fussed about terrorists rights? 150366[/snapback] How do you think the Human Rights Act got through in its present format ? They are concerned about the privacy of you and me, of course. The phrase "you and me" includes ALL people, including unidentified terrorists. MP's will have their own views on this, just like me and you. You put freedom before security, I put security before freedom, because I think there is no real freedom if there is inadequate security. The Bill is to help the security services identify these terrorists, not become a police state as you claim. Some MP's will also be very much aware of the fact that these terrorists would very much like to blow them up while they are walking into the very building you mention. Being closer to this sort of thing rather than just read about it would tend to have a sobering effect on your view of it, although some may naively believe it won't happen to them. 150377[/snapback] Alright lads, mind if I join in? I'm going to anyway, just though I'd be polite about it though. Some questions for LM: How much do you actually know about the Human Rights Act, "in it's present format" or otherwise LM? Have you read it? Would you prefer we had no Human Rights? I quite like having Human Rights, myself. How much first-hand experience of terrorism do you have? How much of that is "Islamic" terrorism? Personally I have none, zero, fuck-all, just like almost everyone else in this country. Of those that do, nearly all of them only have experience of "Irish" terrorism. So for me terrorism is a tiny insignificant little issue because it's highly likely that it is NEVER going to affect me in any way!!! Actually that's not entirely true, is it, because it is going to affect me, isn't it. Some people with highly dubious motives are going to use it as an excuse to do what they've always really wanted to do and remove some of my Human Rights. The very same Human Rights, that I actually quite like, and they've managed to con people like you into thinking they're protecting. That's the ACTUAL threat from terrorism, not getting blown-up, poisoned, or shot - well not by the terrorists, anyway - the threat to our way of life, the threat posed by "OUR" government and their dubiously motivated mates. What do you reckon? PS: If you think security is more desirable than freedom, you'd be pretty safe from a terrorist in prison, why not get yourself locked-up? Protective custody and all that. 150421[/snapback] Oh no! Another loony lefty sandal wearing beardy weirdy fancy Dan know nowt do-gooder! Good post btw, I agree with your sentiments entirely. Can we swop Leazes Mag for your (N-O's) much more reasoned poster, NE5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 "eerr....because people more concerned about the terrorists "rights" than the victims happen to have got into government perhaps ???" No it is because they are concerned about how new radical legislation will also affect the privacy of you and me. Do you actually beleive MP's walk in to the commons fussed about terrorists rights? 150366[/snapback] How do you think the Human Rights Act got through in its present format ? They are concerned about the privacy of you and me, of course. The phrase "you and me" includes ALL people, including unidentified terrorists. MP's will have their own views on this, just like me and you. You put freedom before security, I put security before freedom, because I think there is no real freedom if there is inadequate security. The Bill is to help the security services identify these terrorists, not become a police state as you claim. Some MP's will also be very much aware of the fact that these terrorists would very much like to blow them up while they are walking into the very building you mention. Being closer to this sort of thing rather than just read about it would tend to have a sobering effect on your view of it, although some may naively believe it won't happen to them. 150377[/snapback] Alright lads, mind if I join in? I'm going to anyway, just though I'd be polite about it though. Some questions for LM: How much do you actually know about the Human Rights Act, "in it's present format" or otherwise LM? Have you read it? Would you prefer we had no Human Rights? I quite like having Human Rights, myself. How much first-hand experience of terrorism do you have? How much of that is "Islamic" terrorism? Personally I have none, zero, fuck-all, just like almost everyone else in this country. Of those that do, nearly all of them only have experience of "Irish" terrorism. So for me terrorism is a tiny insignificant little issue because it's highly likely that it is NEVER going to affect me in any way!!! Actually that's not entirely true, is it, because it is going to affect me, isn't it. Some people with highly dubious motives are going to use it as an excuse to do what they've always really wanted to do and remove some of my Human Rights. The very same Human Rights, that I actually quite like, and they've managed to con people like you into thinking they're protecting. That's the ACTUAL threat from terrorism, not getting blown-up, poisoned, or shot - well not by the terrorists, anyway - the threat to our way of life, the threat posed by "OUR" government and their dubiously motivated mates. What do you reckon? PS: If you think security is more desirable than freedom, you'd be pretty safe from a terrorist in prison, why not get yourself locked-up? Protective custody and all that. 150421[/snapback] Oh no! Another loony lefty sandal wearing beardy weirdy fancy Dan know nowt do-gooder! Good post btw, I agree with your sentiments entirely. Can we swop Leazes Mag for your (N-O's) much more reasoned poster, NE5? 150433[/snapback] Indigo, Looks like you took the time to actually think through that post. I was just toying with him like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indigo 0 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Oh no! Another loony lefty sandal wearing beardy weirdy fancy Dan know nowt do-gooder! Good post btw, I agree with your sentiments entirely. Can we swop Leazes Mag for your (N-O's) much more reasoned poster, NE5? 150433[/snapback] Loony lefty, beardy weirdy, fancy Dan, know nowt do-gooder, No. 21544154118-4541/124 reporting for duty, Sir!!! I burned my sandals as a protest against the repression of the Sandal making peasants of Bukina Faso and Street, a couple of years ago, I'm afraid. Leez... I mean NE5 doesn't do "General Chat", only specific chat, specifically about Freddy Shepherd usually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indigo 0 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Indigo, Looks like you took the time to actually think through that post. I was just toying with him like. 150436[/snapback] Alright Parks I just kind of opened my mouth and spewed forth onto my keyboard really - metaphorically speaking of course. I noticed that you'd obviously not thought about what you were saying to your usual extent, it was nowhere near as esoteric as normal. Having fun over here, by the way? I'm going to have to look in here more often, if threads like this are the norm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 4166 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I would expect the irony of it will be lost on the arsehole. 150302[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Leazes mate, if you think my replies have become 'glib' in this thread, that's probably because I gave up trying to debate this point with you some time ago. Quite frankly, I'm amazed others are still trying to do so given the abuse you hurl at anyone who disagrees with you (or even people who have attempted to make light of the subject) and your general pig-headedness. 149551[/snapback] who said THIS thread !!! For your info, Alex, once again, Renton started the abuse. 149562[/snapback] I give up tbh. You've abused practically everyone on this thread who disagreed with you, not just Renton (a common trait when you lose your blob on any matter). I noticed that while I was still trying to debate with you on this matter you said you didn't have time for several of my questions. You had time to put words into the mouths of others and accuse people of not answering your questions though of course. 149568[/snapback] For your info Alex, again, Renton started the abuse. 149799[/snapback] Congratulations of completely missing the point again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Leazes 'hasn't got time' to answer certain questions put to him on here. I don't mean the BNP membership ones etc., just questions about this thread in general. Yet he's had time to make more of the posts in this thread than anyone else, with ease. Think about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 This is the thread that never ends.. ..it just goes on and on my friends... ..some people...started posting here not knowing what it was.. ..and they'll continue posting here forever just because.. ..this is the thread that never ends..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22064 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Leazes 'hasn't got time' to answer certain questions put to him on here. I don't mean the BNP membership ones etc., just questions about this thread in general. Yet he's had time to make more of the posts in this thread than anyone else, with ease. Think about it 150541[/snapback] 188 posts so far, which is exactly double what I have made at this exact moment in time (I'm in second). Number of questions directly answered in this time? Probably less than 5, I reckon. Still, it's along way off the Shepherd postathon with NE5 on N-O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/ixuknews.html Terror tip 'by man with IQ of just 69' A man with an IQ of just 69 is believed to be the trigger behind the terrorism raid in east London two weeks ago, it was reported last night. Mohammed Abu Bakr Mansha, 22, was a childhood friend of the two brothers arrested in a dawn swoop by police in Forest Gate. In January the former waiter was jailed for six years for terrorist offences. During the trial he was described as an "utter incompetent". Mansha was visited by friends of brothers Mohammed Abdul Kahar, 23, and Abul Koyair, 20, soon after his incarceration at Belmarsh, south-east London, according to a report in the Sunday Mirror. The meeting prompted a surveillance operation on the men by the security services. According to a friend of the brothers, who spoke to the newspaper but was not named, they laughed at constantly being followed. The source said: "It was so obvious we treated it as a joke." The police then launched Operation Volga, the botched operation that led to Mr Kahar's shooting. The brothers were released without charge seven days later. Friends of the men believe Mansha was the trigger for the operation. His lawyer, Sara O'Keefe, disclosed how her client was moved just before the raid from high-security category A Belmarsh to a softer category B jail. Mansha, serving six years for possessing the old address of an Army war hero, is appealing against his sentence. His trial revealed him to be educationally subnormal. His IQ would make his evidence unreliable in a US court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22064 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 It would appear, in this case at least, that a lack of intelligence, and not a lack of anti-terrorism legislation, is to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 It would appear, in this case at least, that a lack of intelligence, and not a lack of anti-terrorism legislation, is to blame. 150571[/snapback] What is your knowledge/experience of British intelligence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22064 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 It would appear, in this case at least, that a lack of intelligence, and not a lack of anti-terrorism legislation, is to blame. 150571[/snapback] What is your knowledge/experience of British intelligence? 150573[/snapback] Don't. Seriously, don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 Mansha, serving six years for possessing the old address of an Army war hero, is appealing against his sentence. His trial revealed him to be educationally subnormal. His IQ would make his evidence unreliable in a US court. 150562[/snapback] eh? wtf is that like? so because he lives at an address an old war hero used to, he gets locked up? and Leazes says we should tighten security? 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