Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Hate preacher Choudary in fresh vile rant


Commander CMG
 Share

Recommended Posts

Geez, is this all you were alluding to?? I knew I shouldn't have wasted my time in googling the answer. Put simply, I'm not trying to portray Islamic extremists as a bunch of choir boys or deny Choudary's responsibilities, I'm pointing out that Right Wing extremists aren't the solution. This seems to be an issue with some posters who prefer a bunch of extremists who are loyal to an ideological political movement with a history of racial genocide, authoritarian and totalitarian rule just purely because,......maybe because they represent the white supremacy (me thinks).

lol no it wasnt all I was alluding to at all, however I wanted to use a smaller example to clarify your meaning of responsible. It seems that if all you did was google the definition then it isnt the answer I was looking for. I was looking to pinpoint what YOU meant by responsible not what google thinks....google didnt ask the original question that contained the word 'responsible'.

As for posters here, I dont think you are correct and it seems you are making the mistake the media does that IMO perpetuates the problem. Anyone who takes what is deemed an extreme view on a particular aspect is thrown into the 'white supremacy' grouping. This is exactly what posters like Freetoroam have been trying to say.

what was the answer to the Lee Rigby question?

let me pose another question to you.

the extremist who has been brainwashed into carrying out atrocities in the name of Islam

the soldier carrying out his duties during conflict

the extreme preacher who managed to brainwash the above

the government who ordered teh soldiers

do you view any of the above as innocent?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just missed the point again. The figures I showed you portrayed far Right Wing Party's in Europe gaining popularity. These figures weren't estimations from the media, but based on seats in their Parliaments. So they were voted in by their electorate constituents.

So as an example, if you, as a voter, voted for a political Right Wing Party because of their philosophy towards immigrants, Muslims etc., then you voted for the ideology that Party represents and everything that comes with it. You can't just pick and choose parts of their agenda, manifesto etc. You get the whole package.

I just don't believe voting in political extremists are the answer in fixing Islamic nutjobs such as Choudary.

No you miss the point...TODAY, forget Hitler and Stalin, TODAY some people have had enough and are aware of what will happen if we do not protest now about the uprising of the islamic faith in our countries.

You are doing exactly what the media have done, classed them all as political extreme parties. In England as soon as a party comes along and says they do not want the radical muslims here, they are classed as extreme right, not everyone voting for these parties TODAY are white thugs with doc martins and shaved heads with NF scrawled across their foreheads, today the voters are white, black, indians and who ever is not in favour of the rise of islam here.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol no it wasnt all I was alluding to at all, however I wanted to use a smaller example to clarify your meaning of responsible. It seems that if all you did was google the definition then it isnt the answer I was looking for. I was looking to pinpoint what YOU meant by responsible not what google thinks....google didnt ask the original question that contained the word 'responsible'.

As for posters here, I dont think you are correct and it seems you are making the mistake the media does that IMO perpetuates the problem. Anyone who takes what is deemed an extreme view on a particular aspect is thrown into the 'white supremacy' grouping. This is exactly what posters like Freetoroam have been trying to say.

what was the answer to the Lee Rigby question?

let me pose another question to you.

the extremist who has been brainwashed into carrying out atrocities in the name of Islam

the soldier carrying out his duties during conflict

the extreme preacher who managed to brainwash the above

the government who ordered teh soldiers

do you view any of the above as innocent?

Just posted my post then saw yours. WELL SAID. :tu:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously for you the God factor is an issue. Not for me. They are not my "buddies" and your attempt to align my posts in favor of Islamic extremists is laughable, deceitful and contaminated by your biased religious feelings. Then again who cares. I've provided you with facts, you've come back with......what exactly? Pakistan has "the" bomb??? :lol:. Iran is trying to get "the" bomb (not true, but anyway for argument sake lets say it is true). So what, Israel has more military might alone than the whole lot of them (I believe you're talking about the Islamic Nations, i.e. my buddies) put together.

Anyway, going back to the basic question without diverting into innuendos. The question was:

Answer?

That "god factor" you so casually ignore IS the issue. You have attempted to make some moral equivalence and by calling everyone evil but some more evil than others you act as if there is no real problem. Amazing... and save all of us the trouble of spouting facts and figures for the dead, maimed and dispossessed of 2 world wars and every other "sin" you feel the west is guilty of - it's boring.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geez, is this all you were alluding to?? I knew I shouldn't have wasted my time in googling the answer. Put simply, I'm not trying to portray Islamic extremists as a bunch of choir boys or deny Choudary's responsibilities, I'm pointing out that Right Wing extremists aren't the solution. This seems to be an issue with some posters who prefer a bunch of extremists who are loyal to an ideological political movement with a history of racial genocide, authoritarian and totalitarian rule just purely because,......maybe because they represent the white supremacy (me thinks).

You got me! I have Klan Robes in the back of my closet :w00t: I actually remember some Klan gatherings for recruitment when I was a child. I was poor and living in a semi rural area of south Alabama and it wasn't unusual for their to be such gatherings - complete with cross burnings on a Saturday night in the summer. But even poor and from a scarcely educated family, I knew right from wrong and was disgusted by people like that. But as is usual with folks from your political persuasion, a label MUST be attached at some point. Sorry to disappoint but the only "clan" I ever belonged to was the clan McNeil :)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got me! I have Klan Robes in the back of my closet :w00t: I actually remember some Klan gatherings for recruitment when I was a child. I was poor and living in a semi rural area of south Alabama and it wasn't unusual for their to be such gatherings - complete with cross burnings on a Saturday night in the summer. But even poor and from a scarcely educated family, I knew right from wrong and was disgusted by people like that. But as is usual with folks from your political persuasion, a label MUST be attached at some point. Sorry to disappoint but the only "clan" I ever belonged to was the clan McNeil :)

and that right there is the golden nugget.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black Red Devil in his previous posts seems to be eluding to the recent rise in popularity of right wing parties & the emergence of the Nazis in a previous time.

I see where he's coming from with this analogy but I see it in a slightly different way in that i see the rise of radical Islam today as being the equivalent to the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s, in which case to paraphrase an often used quote :-

....'All it takes for evil to succeed is that moderate muslims to do nothing' .......& they seem to be doing very little at the moment.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it in a slightly different way in that i see the rise of radical Islam today as being the equivalent to the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s,

this.

completely.

one day all the supposed 'liberals' will realise they're on the wrong side of the debate and their obsession with race has skewed their views.

race is nothing to me...this is an idealological battle...race is irrelevant other than where normally sane (i'm feeling charitable today) people cannot recognise things for what they are because their imagination only reaches as far as someones skin colour.

opposition to islamism...to political islam generally is a statement of liberal western values.

i find it hilarious that 'liberals' cannot see this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is little wonder you tend to blame victims for being "in the way of a terrorists bomb".

I find your attitude towards victims in general disturbing.

your tendency to lie to make yourself pretty is worse than disturbing ... free speech ? it means one can lie ?

you are a liar and you think no ones sees it because you pretend nobody sees it which is the worse kind of liar there is, yes i repeat ... you are a liar because you LIE

you twist words ... you worm thoughts ... you manipulate with vile intent ... how many times is it now that I have to requote my posts to prove your lies now ?

time stamps are there for a reason ...

you don't care about 'victims' ... you only care about perpetuating lies and for the reasons in your hatred filled existence and you are using these victims to justify your reasons for continuing the lies ....

'If you are not with us ... you are against us ... if you are not with us ... you are with them'

now is it also ....

"If you are not in likeness like us ... do it like us ... be it like us ... say it like us ... you are them" ?

'think' like us 'hate' like us 'break laws' like us too ? or is it 'do' as we say 'do' as we want or you are not us ? 'good' enough for us ?

should they all be apostates to their faith to be good enough to be like us ?

would that not make 'fascists' of us ?

~

where in my post that you quoted says that there I 'blame victims' ? Stop with your lies, again ... cease your lies ...

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I intend to fight for the truth. I suggest that not only is this not un-American, but it is the most American thing we can do--because if the truth does not endure, then our country will not endure.

guess who ? link

I am not American but since I am addressing an American's point of view, I think the statement is apt.

first of all // do NOT contribute to the wrong ... giving power to the people who do wrong is worse

and the moderates are not doing NOTHING ... they are just not doing what many wants the moderates to do ... that is adding to the wrong

but that is exactly what, that is not, what moderates do, Christians AND Muslims

if one wants to bring a god into all this then think :

400691_10152839141630475_315059086_n.jpg

Why did Osama bin Laden declare a jihad against the US government?

Notice how the reporter tries to steer bin Laden's grievances towards fixating on the US presence in Saudi Arabia, note the reporter's second question too.

BIN LADIN: We declared jihad against the US government, because the US government is unjust, criminal and tyrannical. It has committed acts that are extremely unjust, hideous and criminal whether directly or through its support of the Israeli occupation of the Prophet's Night Travel Land (Palestine). And we believe the US is directly responsible for those who were killed in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq. The mention of the US reminds us before everything else of those innocent children who were dismembered, their heads and arms cut off in the recent explosion that took place in Qana (in Lebanon). This US government abandoned even humanitarian feelings by these hideous crimes. It transgressed all bounds and behaved in a way not witnessed before by any power or any imperialist power in the world. They should have been considerate that the qibla (Mecca) of the Muslims upheaves the emotion of the entire Muslim World. Due to its subordination to the Jews the arrogance and haughtiness of the US regime has reached, to the extent that they occupied the qibla of the Muslims (Arabia) who are more than a billion in the world today. For this and other acts of aggression and injustice, we have declared jihad against the US, because in our religion it is our duty to make jihad so that God's word is the one exalted to the heights and so that we drive the Americans away from all Muslim countries. As for what you asked whether jihad is directed against US soldiers, the civilians in the land of the Two Holy Places (Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina) or against the civilians in America, we have focused our declaration on striking at the soldiers in the country of The Two Holy Places. The country of the Two Holy Places has in our religion a peculiarity of its own over the other Muslim countries. In our religion, it is not permissible for any non-Muslim to stay in our country. Therefore, even though American civilians are not targeted in our plan, they must leave. We do not guarantee their safety, because we are in a society of more than a billion Muslims. A reaction might take place as a result of US government's hitting Muslim civilians and executing more than 600 thousand Muslim children in Iraq by preventing food and medicine from reaching them. So, the US is responsible for any reaction, because it extended its war against troops to civilians. This is what we say. As for what you asked regarding the American people, they are not exonerated from responsibility, because they chose this government and voted for it despite their knowledge of its crimes in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and in other places and its support of its agent regimes who filled our prisons with our best children and scholars. We ask that may God release them.

BIN LADIN: The cause of the reaction must be sought and the act that has triggered this reaction must be eliminated. The reaction came as a result of the US aggressive policy towards the entire Muslim world and not just towards the Arabian peninsula. So if the cause that has called for this act comes to an end, this act, in turn, will come to an end. So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.

http://www.ishipress.com/osamaint.htm

link

Enough of the lies ... enough of the martyrs ... enough for more martyrs ....

and this is the FOURTH time I have linked this :

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Attacker's quote as it appeared in the Telegraph

“We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. Your people will never be safe. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying by British soldiers every day."

“We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don’t care about you."

"Do you think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think your politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we, so you can all live in peace.

Text in bold is what is often omitted in mainstream media's reporting. See link for source: Woolwich attack: terrorist proclaimed 'an eye for an eye' after attack

link

Does the media manipulated the facts just to sell papers ? Or is the purpose to manipulate and fiddle with your minds ?

Free speech equates lies ? When did that happen ?

You listen to one liar that you like and you run all the way pointing to hell for the rest that you think is them ?

Didn't little Adolf suggested much of the same and alike 'final solution' ?

~edit : added news link

~

Edited by third_eye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this.

completely.

one day all the supposed 'liberals' will realise they're on the wrong side of the debate and their obsession with race has skewed their views.

race is nothing to me...this is an idealological battle...race is irrelevant other than where normally sane (i'm feeling charitable today) people cannot recognise things for what they are because their imagination only reaches as far as someones skin colour.

opposition to islamism...to political islam generally is a statement of liberal western values.

i find it hilarious that 'liberals' cannot see this.

And besides, Islam isn't a race. It's a regressive, backward, totalitarian belief system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "god factor" you so casually ignore IS the issue. You have attempted to make some moral equivalence and by calling everyone evil but some more evil than others you act as if there is no real problem. Amazing... and save all of us the trouble of spouting facts and figures for the dead, maimed and dispossessed of 2 world wars and every other "sin" you feel the west is guilty of - it's boring.

Not the West. The Right Wing extremists, or if you wish, all extremists (including left as well). But, getting back to the far, far right which is on the rise,

The terms far right, or extreme right, describe the broad range of political groups and ideologies usually taken to be further to the right of the mainstream center-right on the traditional left-right spectrum. Far right politics commonly involves support for strong inequality and social hierarchy, elements of social conservatism and opposition to most forms of liberalism and socialism. Both terms are also used to describe Nazi and fascist movements, and other groups who hold extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, religious fundamentalist or reactionary views.[1] The most extreme right-wing movements have pursued oppression and genocide against groups of people on the basis of their alleged inferiority

My link

Just to make you feel more at home, I'm sure you'll find Zionism fits into the description there somewhere.

Edited by Black Red Devil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol no it wasnt all I was alluding to at all, however I wanted to use a smaller example to clarify your meaning of responsible. It seems that if all you did was google the definition then it isnt the answer I was looking for. I was looking to pinpoint what YOU meant by responsible not what google thinks....google didnt ask the original question that contained the word 'responsible'.

As for posters here, I dont think you are correct and it seems you are making the mistake the media does that IMO perpetuates the problem. Anyone who takes what is deemed an extreme view on a particular aspect is thrown into the 'white supremacy' grouping. This is exactly what posters like Freetoroam have been trying to say.

what was the answer to the Lee Rigby question?

let me pose another question to you.

the extremist who has been brainwashed into carrying out atrocities in the name of Islam

the soldier carrying out his duties during conflict

the extreme preacher who managed to brainwash the above

the government who ordered teh soldiers

do you view any of the above as innocent?

I don't expect you to have read all my posts but at least the ones you are referring to, I do. Without wanting to sound offensive but it's either one of the two, or you're trying to twist what I'm saying or you're obtuse. I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, I don't condone Islamic extremism or the likes of Choudary. I believe Political extremism isn't the answer. Hopefully that answers all your questions?

:yes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Black Red Devil in his previous posts seems to be eluding to the recent rise in popularity of right wing parties & the emergence of the Nazis in a previous time.

I see where he's coming from with this analogy but I see it in a slightly different way in that i see the rise of radical Islam today as being the equivalent to the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s, in which case to paraphrase an often used quote :-

....'All it takes for evil to succeed is that moderate muslims to do nothing' .......& they seem to be doing very little at the moment.

That's fine and I agree that moderate muslims should be more active and radicalism is sweeping away the Middle East, even though I don't believe it's all their doing (but that's a discussion for another thread). If they had the chance, I believe radical Islamic fanatics WOULD be morally capable of conducting genocide. Have they got the power to do so is the golden question?

Not a fat chance IMO. EVER. The West is so far in front it dictates who and what happens in this world.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's fine and I agree that moderate muslims should be more active and radicalism is sweeping away the Middle East, even though I don't believe it's all their doing (but that's a discussion for another thread). If they had the chance, I believe radical Islamic fanatics WOULD be morally capable of conducting genocide. Have they got the power to do so is the golden question?

Not a fat chance IMO. EVER. The West is so far in front it dictates who and what happens in this world.

Agreed, but 9/11 is a taste to what they can do what they will do, & god forbid they ever get hold of a nuke.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't expect you to have read all my posts but at least the ones you are referring to, I do. Without wanting to sound offensive but it's either one of the two, or you're trying to twist what I'm saying or you're obtuse. I'll repeat for the umpteenth time, I don't condone Islamic extremism or the likes of Choudary. I believe Political extremism isn't the answer. Hopefully that answers all your questions?

:yes:

firstly I have never said you condone Islamic extremism.

Secondly, what exactly have I twisted? I simply asked you to confirm what you meant by 'responsible' to which you gave me a google definition, I asked for clarification on your interpretation of the word in the context of your original question.

So please do kindly show me where I have twisted what you have said? (good luck on that one by the way)

Lastly it would have been nice to have had some answers to the questions but you seem to have avoided them two or three times now. The last question regarding innocence worries me as I would hate to think you put any blame on people like Lee Rigby and if you do then I can understand your reluctance to answer the questions.

I agree political extremism isnt the answer however I am struggling to see who is adopting a middle ground here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

firstly I have never said you condone Islamic extremism.

Secondly, what exactly have I twisted? I simply asked you to confirm what you meant by 'responsible' to which you gave me a google definition, I asked for clarification on your interpretation of the word in the context of your original question.

So please do kindly show me where I have twisted what you have said? (good luck on that one by the way)

Lastly it would have been nice to have had some answers to the questions but you seem to have avoided them two or three times now. The last question regarding innocence worries me as I would hate to think you put any blame on people like Lee Rigby and if you do then I can understand your reluctance to answer the questions.

I agree political extremism isnt the answer however I am struggling to see who is adopting a middle ground here?

OK, it appears that I'll need to spell things out slowly for you so here it goes:

The reason I copied and pasted "responsible for you was more tongue in cheek because I was absolutely dumbfounded on how many interpretations of "responsible" you expected to find, especially in the context of what is being discussed and after what I posted.

In post 75 (the post after your post 74 question) I said,

Put simply, I'm not trying to portray Islamic extremists as a bunch of choir boys or deny Choudary's responsibilities, I'm pointing out that Right Wing extremists aren't the solution.

Yet, you keep on insisting I'm avoiding the question. :blink:

I know fully well what you were attempting to achieve when I mentioned you were trying to twist what I was saying, in fact you've just expressed it in the above post:

as I would hate to think you put any blame on people like Lee Rigby and if you do then I can understand your reluctance to answer the questions.

Now, now....naughty and deceitful move on your behalf :no:

Also, there is no middle ground with extremists. It's "my way or the highway" as far as their ideological outlook on the world goes.

Now, my first question.

the government who ordered teh soldiers

do you view any of the above as innocent?

Second question:

One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?

Edited by Black Red Devil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's a difference between us telling our pollies "not in my damn name" and brutally mrdering someone because you felt offended by something that's happening on the other side of the world.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

your tendency to lie to make yourself pretty is worse than disturbing ... free speech ? it means one can lie ?

you are a liar and you think no ones sees it because you pretend nobody sees it which is the worse kind of liar there is, yes i repeat ... you are a liar because you LIE

you twist words ... you worm thoughts ... you manipulate with vile intent ... how many times is it now that I have to requote my posts to prove your lies now ?

time stamps are there for a reason ...

you don't care about 'victims' ... you only care about perpetuating lies and for the reasons in your hatred filled existence and you are using these victims to justify your reasons for continuing the lies ....

where in my post that you quoted says that there I 'blame victims' ? Stop with your lies, again ... cease your lies ...

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Make myself pretty? WTF?

In the other thread where you accused Aussie tourists of being pedophiles and saying they made the situation bad and killed each other, and that the attack was deserved because of bad behaviour, and that you do not want them around even though your country invited them. Choudary would be proud of you.

You are much worse than a liar, and a hypocrite too boot.

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make myself pretty? WTF?

In the other thread where you accused Aussie tourists of being pedophiles and saying they made the situation bad and killed each other, and that the attack was deserved because of bad behaviour, and that you do not want them around even though your country invited them. Choudary would be proud of you.

You are much worse than a liar, and a hypocrite too boot.

431444_199760093455346_106861425_n.jpg

yes you are ... proven liar too ... I've proven your lies on more than one occasion.

Oh ... I'm sure you know Choudary very well ... you two are two of a kind, a regular Bobbsey twins.

I am tired of your lying ... Ignore my posts and I will ignore yours.

I am saying this one last time ... cease your lies or I will request moderator intervention.

~

Edited by third_eye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, it appears that I'll need to spell things out slowly for you so here it goes:

The reason I copied and pasted "responsible for you was more tongue in cheek because I was absolutely dumbfounded on how many interpretations of "responsible" you expected to find, especially in the context of what is being discussed and after what I posted.

In post 75 (the post after your post 74 question) I said,

Put simply, I'm not trying to portray Islamic extremists as a bunch of choir boys or deny Choudary's responsibilities, I'm pointing out that Right Wing extremists aren't the solution.

Yet, you keep on insisting I'm avoiding the question. :blink:

you did avoid the question, the question was on Lee Rigby, the question posed was an attempt to try and see how you aportion responsibilty, instead you use google to define the word and then ignore the question.

I know fully well what you were attempting to achieve when I mentioned you were trying to twist what I was saying, in fact you've just expressed it in the above post:

as I would hate to think you put any blame on people like Lee Rigby and if you do then I can understand your reluctance to answer the questions.

Now, now....naughty and deceitful move on your behalf :no:

I asked you to show me where I had twisted your words and you failed....the fact that I made this post after doesnt quite suffice now does it...so please do go back and show me where I twisted your words....again I wish you luck

Also, there is no middle ground with extremists. It's "my way or the highway" as far as their ideological outlook on the world goes.

I agree

Now, my first question.

Second question:

One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?

unsure of your first question??? as I only see one.

I cant answer the above based on a premise you have put forth....maybe I should fix the sentence for you

One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering (THEY BELIEVE) the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?

if I am to hold the government responsible then by default are we to say Lee Rigby is innocent?

again I ask you to answer the question with the four examples given to show me who is responsible by your (googles) definition.

also in your above example what would make it justified?>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put simply, I'm not trying to portray Islamic extremists as a bunch of choir boys or deny Choudary's responsibilities, I'm pointing out that Right Wing extremists aren't the solution.

And we are pointing out that not everyone is extreme right wing because they want this problem sorted, you do not seem to grasping that! There are far more NON EXTREME RIGHT WING people out there who want to see the back of radical muslims in the west.....what part of that do you not understand?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?"

If that figure is true (which i seriously doubt) I think you'll find the majority of those deaths were caused by fellow muslims.

http://www.reuters.c...E95004P20130601

http://www.guardian....eath-toll-years

http://www.trust.org/item/20130610234142-k9h6r

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you did avoid the question, the question was on Lee Rigby, the question posed was an attempt to try and see how you aportion responsibilty, instead you use google to define the word and then ignore the question.

I asked you to show me where I had twisted your words and you failed....the fact that I made this post after doesnt quite suffice now does it...so please do go back and show me where I twisted your words....again I wish you luck

I agree

unsure of your first question??? as I only see one.

I cant answer the above based on a premise you have put forth....maybe I should fix the sentence for you

One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering (THEY BELIEVE) the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?

if I am to hold the government responsible then by default are we to say Lee Rigby is innocent?

again I ask you to answer the question with the four examples given to show me who is responsible by your (googles) definition.

also in your above example what would make it justified?>

:lol:, you're a joke. No, you don't answer a question with a question. You keep on insisting on a point I've already answered you and then you fail to answer my questions by insisting on the same question!! I can see this is going nowhere.

Bye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"One million deaths in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, do you hold Tony Blair and the British Govt responsible in any way and do you think Arabs and muslims in general may have a problem with this, considering the reasons for the invasion were unjustified?"

If that figure is true (which i seriously doubt) I think you'll find the majority of those deaths were caused by fellow muslims.

http://www.reuters.c...E95004P20130601

http://www.guardian....eath-toll-years

http://www.trust.org...610234142-k9h6r

Caused by the invasion. No invasion, no deaths due to the conflict. Correct? Before the invasion there were no "militants" in Iraq. After, there were plenty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.