Why are we not bombing the fuck out of this lot with the yanks? I can understand why the Commons voted against not to get involved with the Syria thing. But this is different. If anyone needs blasting to fuck it's these cunts.

anti war sentiment has come from the left. And with the benefit of hindsight - I think the 'stop the war' crowd were right all along. We're in a shitty state - and that's got very little to do with the left who haven't been in a realistic position to affect anything for a long, long time.

 

Stop The War are not opposed to wars. They are supporters of the other side. You only nee to look at the current Labour leader. What the left could have done after the Iraq war was support the progressive forces, but what they instead did was support or excuse the murderers , sectarians and beheaders of the 'resistance,' because if something is anti-American it must be a good thing.

 

Nor is failing to intervene stopping a war. It is either ignoring one that is already going on or condemning the victims to genocide, usually.  Perhaps when we don't intervene the left feels all happy about itself but it does not mean that nothing happens. It means something else happens which in Syria's case at least, might be much worse.  And Iraq after the war was a fuck up, clearly. But who is brave enough to argue that it would look better today if the regime had been left in place? 

 

The left's record on practically every conflict since Suez is shameful. They should not be so smug.

Edited July 25, 20169 yr by Maggie Tate

Smiffs - if that's what you believe then you need to read more left wing literature. Some of the loudest voices advocating women's rights under oppressive regimes come from the left - they just don't get the airtime. On the flip side your lot (I'm calling them that for sake of argument) throw their lot in with regimes like the Saudi's - something the majority of the left have been arguing against - again - for as long as I can remember.

 

In my eyes - the problems we have now are caused by a combination of our overly aggressive foreign policy and a tendency to take an overly liberal approach domestically - and by the way - I don't count liberalism as an exclusively left wing preserve.

 

And I'm not suggesting there isn't a culture within Islam which is bent on domination and subjugation of everybody else. There has been for hundreds of years. What I am saying is that we are partly responsible for creating the conditions for that mentality to thrive - and we don't seem to learn from our mistakes.

Smiffs - if that's what you believe then you need to read more left wing literature. Some of the loudest voices advocating women's rights under oppressive regimes come from the left - they just don't get the airtime. On the flip side your lot (I'm calling them that for sake of argument) throw their lot in with regimes like the Saudi's - something the majority of the left have been arguing against - again - for as long as I can remember.

In my eyes - the problems we have now are caused by a combination of our overly aggressive foreign policy and a tendency to take an overly liberal approach domestically - and by the way - I don't count liberalism as an exclusively left wing preserve.

And I'm not suggesting there isn't a culture within Islam which is bent on domination and subjugation of everybody else. There has been for hundreds of years. What I am saying is that we are partly responsible for creating the conditions for that mentality to thrive - and we don't seem to learn from our mistakes.

I think we can safely agree on the culture within Islam.........and the wealth accrued by the Saudis aligned with their radical preaching is arguably also currently the greatest threat to mankind.

Saudi money has just opened a centre in Preston, not sure if it's a Wahhabi madrass but will have a rummage around the news channels.

Smiffs - if that's what you believe then you need to read more left wing literature. Some of the loudest voices advocating women's rights under oppressive regimes come from the left - they just don't get the airtime. On the flip side your lot (I'm calling them that for sake of argument) throw their lot in with regimes like the Saudi's - something the majority of the left have been arguing against - again - for as long as I can remember.

 

In my eyes - the problems we have now are caused by a combination of our overly aggressive foreign policy and a tendency to take an overly liberal approach domestically - and by the way - I don't count liberalism as an exclusively left wing preserve.

 

And I'm not suggesting there isn't a culture within Islam which is bent on domination and subjugation of everybody else. There has been for hundreds of years. What I am saying is that we are partly responsible for creating the conditions for that mentality to thrive - and we don't seem to learn from our mistakes.

 

Yet their silence is deafening when it comes those oppressive practices such as the Bhurka, Hijab, forced and under aged marriage and general misogyny etc forced upon British Muslim women by their men.

Yet their silence is deafening when it comes those oppressive practices such as the Bhurka, Hijab, forced and under aged marriage and general misogyny etc forced upon British Muslim women by their men.

Now you're just talking bollocks. When was the last time you heard anybody defending someone's right to force an under age child to get married.

 

As for the burkha and the hijab - isn't the prevailing attitude on the left that it's a woman's prerogative to wear whatever the fuck she wants? Nobody has got the right to force her to wear one or to take it off.

Smiffs - if that's what you believe then you need to read more left wing literature. Some of the loudest voices advocating women's rights under oppressive regimes come from the left - they just don't get the airtime. On the flip side your lot (I'm calling them that for sake of argument) throw their lot in with regimes like the Saudi's - something the majority of the left have been arguing against - again - for as long as I can remember.

 

In my eyes - the problems we have now are caused by a combination of our overly aggressive foreign policy and a tendency to take an overly liberal approach domestically - and by the way - I don't count liberalism as an exclusively left wing preserve.

 

And I'm not suggesting there isn't a culture within Islam which is bent on domination and subjugation of everybody else. There has been for hundreds of years. What I am saying is that we are partly responsible for creating the conditions for that mentality to thrive - and we don't seem to learn from our mistakes.

 

I don't excuse globalism and neo cons from any diagnosis, but this is a peculiarly Islamic problem and to talk about the environment is to excuse that.

I don't excuse globalism and neo cons from any diagnosis, but this is a peculiarly Islamic problem and to talk about the environment is to excuse that.

You can't make an excuse for something inexcusable. You can try to explain it though.

Kent...the loudest voices thing...once in a whole when I want to get angry I go on the socialist worker website. Arguably about as left as one could get?

 

It's pretty much silent in the respect of condemning the stoneage practices we discuss. Deafening in fact. Daily rants about the evil capitalist west though (written on an ipad with the billion dollar Internet used as a vehicle to deliver said same message...Google searches 'irony').

 

I did read on about a bomb in Iraq killing 200 Muslims was the west's fault for getting rid of a genocidal maniac dictator and replacing him with democracy though.

 

Whilst Blair has blood on his hands no doubt, I struggled understanding the logic in that one.

Kent...the loudest voices thing...once in a whole when I want to get angry I go on the socialist worker website. Arguably about as left as one could get?

 

It's pretty much silent in the respect of condemning the stoneage practices we discuss. Deafening in fact. Daily rants about the evil capitalist west though (written on an ipad with the billion dollar Internet used as a vehicle to deliver said same message...Google searches 'irony').

 

I did read on about a bomb in Iraq killing 200 Muslims was the west's fault for getting rid of a genocidal maniac dictator and replacing him with democracy though.

 

Whilst Blair has blood on his hands no doubt, I struggled understanding the logic in that one.

Who actually reads the Socialist Worker though? Nationally about 8,000 copies get sold a week. Honest to God I don't think I know a single person who buys it - and I know a fair few who would say they were left of centre. I can't defend it - because I don't read it. I'd imagine the type of person who is a subscriber isn't interested in being challenged and likes to exist in an echo chamber.

 

As for condemning stuff goes - I'm not sure I'd write an editorial condemning a mass murder if I ran a newspaper. I'd assume everybody was singing from the same hymn sheet on whether driving a truck into a group full of people was right or wrong.

Perhaps another one:

 

Guardian:

"Two men 'neutralised' after taking hostages in Normandy church – French media"

I right for The Socialist Worker, or at least I'd like to, and I don't use an ipad, I use a Cuban PC and the dark web to right my stuff...

I right for The Socialist Worker, or at least I'd like to, and I don't use an ipad, I use a Cuban PC and the dark web to right my stuff...

 

Are all the components fair trade?

Fair Trade is the construct of white 'aspirational' yuppie scum who want to continue to consume without guilt by virtue of sweeping a couple of extra crumbs from their overladen tables. It also assuages their self-loathing due to their ingrained racism and perpetuates the long held view of the colonialist - that of the 'happy sambo' archetype, content with their lot and amenable to exploitation.

 

So, no.

Edited July 26, 20169 yr by Youri McAnespie

FFS The French priest apparently had his head chopped off.

FFS The French priest apparently had his head chopped off.

Rayguns again or just a mentalist?

Rayguns again or just a mentalist?

 

Mentalist Raygun I believe is the correct terminology

Rayguns again or just a mentalist?

Depends on what media source you read. Says 2 armed men on bbc in the telegraph says they shouted Daish as they slit his throat sky saying they were shouting Allah Akhbar wonder how long it'll take bbc to decide who it was.

Edited July 26, 20169 yr by Mounts Kipper

Anti terrorist squad dealing with it and at least 1 was known to them.

Have I watched too many films or is it madness to think sleeper cells are all waking up now?

If so then I don't think it's unreasonable to lock up every cunt 'known to them' before they kill anyone else.

I'm an atheist but killing a man of a cloth, well there's something rather chilling about what it represents.

By contrast the weak sit there and point out the errors of those actions whilst offering fuck all in return. Its easy for them to say 'reap what you sew', pissing and whining about human rights. What about the human rights of gay people in Muslim areas who are 'cured' by stoning or being thrown from a building? Or women not allowed to drive, vote, show a bit of ankle, flogged for enjoying the luxury of being gang raped?

 

to be fair, that could equally be a statement about the right. half the time its someone like bolty pointing out the errors of "our" ways and for not taking assertive action earlier, or something

 

all depends on when you think the seeds were sown as well

 

been reading few viewpoints that reckon many of the problems, particularly in France, can be traced back to the time of colonialism (when people thought such countries were great, no doubt) 

 

or it could go back to 80s or 00s war in afghanistan, or the 90s / 00s in iraq, or for letting in refugees now who are fleeing someone elses war

 

fuck knows though am pretty sure its not a recent thing though, and nowt do with left or right as such

Have I watched too many films or is it madness to think sleeper cells are all waking up now?

The horrible truth is that I don't think they're as organised as that. ISIS are relying on sympathisers who've probably never had any contact with them to carry out murder in their name.

 

As someone who thinks our foreign policy has been a contributory factor it leaves me in a very difficult position. It serves ISIS interests to provoke public opinion in the West into demanding that we wipe them out. From what I've read this will be one of their primary objectives because they believe in the Quranic prophesy about armageddon and want to bring about the conditions that Muslims might recognise as being 'pre-ordained'. Scary stuff.

Anti terrorist squad dealing with it and at least 1 was known to them.

Have I watched too many films or is it madness to think sleeper cells are all waking up now?

If so then I don't think it's unreasonable to lock up every cunt 'known to them' before they kill anyone else.

I'm an atheist but killing a man of a cloth, well there's something rather chilling about what it represents.

 

Would think there would be laws against locking them up before any crime committed but any connection to Islamic extremism should be a crime that carries a sentence of imprisonment.

Would think there would be laws against locking them up before any crime committed but any connection to Islamic extremism should be a crime that carries a sentence of imprisonment.

I think most of us would be happy enough with that to an extent. I suppose it would depend of your definition of involvement though. Is that looking at ISIS et al online? Or actually making contact? Or actually plotting something?

 

It also means the rest of us acquiescing in giving up the freedoms we currently enjoy to make it possible.

 

The devil would be in the detail as always.....

Would think there would be laws against locking them up before any crime committed but any connection to Islamic extremism should be a crime that carries a sentence of imprisonment.

 

Internment of all of them, it's the only answer

 

 

 

 

 

by the way, I'm not being serious, but somebody will no doubt say it soon enough

Edited July 26, 20169 yr by Sweep

Nuke them, all of them...

 

As that'll never happen I'm going to start the ball rolling slow, by budding a few front windows round my way toneet, and residing very close to, if not in the Pakistani Bel Air of Bolton I'm spoiled for choice for potential targets.

Wasn't it Blair and the Labour Party who took us into Afghanistan and Iraq that was the catalyst for the current shitstorm?

 

but george bush's endless troop surges kind of stablized 'em.

 

I thought blair kinda got involved in the War on Terror to stop the Noraid shit. maybe it were a nato thing.

 

This "now" might be to do with various portions of al qaeda falling out with itself.