Savage Terrorist Attack in SE London

[Drummond]

I'm sure this is getting attention in the American media as well ... certainly, as you'd expect, the British media is being dominated by reports and discussion regarding this attack, committed against (.. it is thought ..) a soldier walking in the street fairly close to a military barracks in south-east London.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Woolwich-attack-Two-men-hack-soldier-wearing-Help-Heroes-T-shirt-death-machetes-suspected-terror-attack.html


Clutching a bloodied meat cleaver after executing a soldier on a crowded street, he delivers a chilling message of hate.

‘You people will never be safe,’ he declares in a clear south London accent. ‘An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.’

In broad daylight, he and an accomplice had just repeatedly stabbed and tried to behead an off-duty soldier in front of dozens of passers-by.

Throughout the frenzied attack they shouted ‘Allah Akbar’ – Arabic for ‘God is great’ – then demanded horrified witnesses film them as they ranted over the crumpled body.

The two black men in their 20s, waited calmly for armed police to arrive before charging at officers brandishing a rusty revolver, knives and meat cleavers.

When the old pistol was shot towards police it backfired and blew the thumb off one of the men.

Moments later they were cut down in a hail of bullets believed to be fired by a woman marksman. Last night both men were being treated in hospital for their wounds.

Before police arrived one of the killers was filmed giving his warped justification for the sickening attack: ‘We swear by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day'

... so, then. What we have here is a brazen, thoroughly savage attack committed by two 'people' against a man, thought as of now to have been a soldier in civilian clothes, this close by a military barracks. These 'people', according to an eyewitness account I've viewed on BBC News, were armed with a gun and three knives, one of which was a meat cleaver. They were intent not only on killing their victim, but actually tried to BEHEAD him, in broad daylight on a busy street, in view of passers-by, including children.

These scum didn't care about being caught ... only about committing their savagery, and seeing to it that it was recorded on camera and that their hate-message was broadcast.

So, the police arrived on the scene and arrested them (after first firing on them). They're both in custody. And this is all being investigated.

Speculation currently has it that the phraseology used was very similar to what can be found on Jihadist websites of Al Qaeda origin.

I won't be adding to this thread for several hours at least, given the lateness of the hour over here in the UK. However, I'm sure that opinions from certain forum members can be predicted.

... such as, 'These perpetrators cannot possibly be Islamic'.

Such as, 'These are people, they are human beings, whose human rights have to receive all possible attention at all times.'

Well ... I say that the truth speaks for itself, and thoroughly defies such conclusions. To try and BEHEAD an innocent victim, in broad daylight, on a busy street and in full view of any passers-by unfortunate enough to be in the locality, no matter HOW young ... I say there is NO POSSIBLE WAY that such murderous, callous, disgusting savagery can be said to have been caused by 'human beings' deserving that title.

They are subhuman scum.

I expect to see post after post on this thread, telling me how wrong-headed such an opinion must be. But those trying out such an argument cannot do so without totally defying the truth of this issue ... the sheer savagery involved, the utter contempt for human life demonstrated by the perpetrators, the equal contempt for anyone witnessing this, including innocent children. Imagine it, if you can ... the intent involved of making people witness a BEHEADING in a city street !

So, let's hear it from the terrorist defenders here !! These are 'human beings', whose 'human rights are all-important' .... yes ??

... OR ... let's, I suggest, finally instead recognise the TRUTH that's staring us in the face .....

[aboutime]

My condolences to you Sir Drummond, and to the families and the people of the U.K. for being the targets of those two SCUMBALLS who unfortunately...are still alive, and breathing.

If the people, and the Government of the U.K. push this aside as just another minor terror attack. There will be no end to how many more SICK, DISGUSTING individuals will surface to get their 15 minutes of fame by taking advantage of innocent people.

This is however. A sign of what is yet to come when TERRORISTS, and TERRORISM is treated as a Civil Offense that can only be solved in Courts of Law.
That is NO LONGER the acceptable method for such attacks. Yet...like you in the U.K. We have an absent Leadership that is driven by COWARDICE, and the need for POWER over the people at ALL COSTS.

I found myself wishing...as I happened across that video of the man with literally BLOOD ON HIS HANDS....that I had been there to place a well-aimed .45 Hollow Point projectile through his HATE FILLED, SCUM LADEN Eight pounds of HUMAN WASTE.

[Drummond]

My condolences to you Sir Drummond, and to the families and the people of the U.K. for being the targets of those two SCUMBALLS who unfortunately...are still alive, and breathing.

If the people, and the Government of the U.K. push this aside as just another minor terror attack. There will be no end to how many more SICK, DISGUSTING individuals will surface to get their 15 minutes of fame by taking advantage of innocent people.

This is however. A sign of what is yet to come when TERRORISTS, and TERRORISM is treated as a Civil Offense that can only be solved in Courts of Law.
That is NO LONGER the acceptable method for such attacks. Yet...like you in the U.K. We have an absent Leadership that is driven by COWARDICE, and the need for POWER over the people at ALL COSTS.

I found myself wishing...as I happened across that video of the man with literally BLOOD ON HIS HANDS....that I had been there to place a well-aimed .45 Hollow Point projectile through his HATE FILLED, SCUM LADEN Eight pounds of HUMAN WASTE.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Leaving this forum momentarily, for the night .. though I couldn't do so without thanking you for your post. Very appreciated.

Two galling realities on this side of the Pond are really hitting me at the moment. One, since we don't have the death penalty here: the worst this scum can expect is a long jail sentence. The other is the relative helplessness of ordinary citizens here. Thanks to our stringent gun laws, combined with having NO comparable Constitutionally-protected 'right to bear arms', the chance that anyone in the vicinity could've been armed and therefore capable of tackling these savages on remotely equal terms was always bound to be zero, or very nearly zero.

We see the result.

[aboutime]

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Leaving this forum momentarily, for the night .. though I couldn't do so without thanking you for your post. Very appreciated.

Two galling realities on this side of the Pond are really hitting me at the moment. One, since we don't have the death penalty here: the worst this scum can expect is a long jail sentence. The other is the relative helplessness of ordinary citizens here. Thanks to our stringent gun laws, combined with having NO comparable Constitutionally-protected 'right to bear arms', the chance that anyone in the vicinity could've been armed and therefore capable of tackling these savages on remotely equal terms was always bound to be zero, or very nearly zero.

We see the result.


God Bless! God Bless us all.

[jimnyc]

I don't have time right now or I would paste over here the many learned things in this article. A lot of it is shocking, but sadly not very surprising.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329470/Michael-Adebolajo-named-Woolwich-killers.html

[Marcus Aurelius]

I'm sure this is getting attention in the American media as well ... certainly, as you'd expect, the British media is being dominated by reports and discussion regarding this attack, committed against (.. it is thought ..) a soldier walking in the street fairly close to a military barracks in south-east London.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Woolwich-attack-Two-men-hack-soldier-wearing-Help-Heroes-T-shirt-death-machetes-suspected-terror-attack.html



... so, then. What we have here is a brazen, thoroughly savage attack committed by two 'people' against a man, thought as of now to have been a soldier in civilian clothes, this close by a military barracks. These 'people', according to an eyewitness account I've viewed on BBC News, were armed with a gun and three knives, one of which was a meat cleaver. They were intent not only on killing their victim, but actually tried to BEHEAD him, in broad daylight on a busy street, in view of passers-by, including children.

These scum didn't care about being caught ... only about committing their savagery, and seeing to it that it was recorded on camera and that their hate-message was broadcast.

So, the police arrived on the scene and arrested them (after first firing on them). They're both in custody. And this is all being investigated.

Speculation currently has it that the phraseology used was very similar to what can be found on Jihadist websites of Al Qaeda origin.

I won't be adding to this thread for several hours at least, given the lateness of the hour over here in the UK. However, I'm sure that opinions from certain forum members can be predicted.

... such as, 'These perpetrators cannot possibly be Islamic'.

Such as, 'These are people, they are human beings, whose human rights have to receive all possible attention at all times.'

Well ... I say that the truth speaks for itself, and thoroughly defies such conclusions. To try and BEHEAD an innocent victim, in broad daylight, on a busy street and in full view of any passers-by unfortunate enough to be in the locality, no matter HOW young ... I say there is NO POSSIBLE WAY that such murderous, callous, disgusting savagery can be said to have been caused by 'human beings' deserving that title.

They are subhuman scum.

I expect to see post after post on this thread, telling me how wrong-headed such an opinion must be. But those trying out such an argument cannot do so without totally defying the truth of this issue ... the sheer savagery involved, the utter contempt for human life demonstrated by the perpetrators, the equal contempt for anyone witnessing this, including innocent children. Imagine it, if you can ... the intent involved of making people witness a BEHEADING in a city street !

So, let's hear it from the terrorist defenders here !! These are 'human beings', whose 'human rights are all-important' .... yes ??

... OR ... let's, I suggest, finally instead recognise the TRUTH that's staring us in the face .....


Where is Jahil to claim 'they were not "really" Muslims'???

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Islam the religion of peace that so often inspires its followers to bloody murder. Hate to have to say it but that victim should have been armed. Now dead because he was not armed.
Another example of what will happen more often around the world because the world refuses to see Islam for what it truly is.
Britain will not address this problem in the correct manner. It has waited too long and given the damn scum to much power and control there. Nothing will save Britain except a total uprising and slaughter of ever muslim there. Tahat is never going to happen. So Britain becomes conquered and its people enslaved and murdered at the leisure of Islam. Sad but when people refuse to admit the truth and refuse to act they get the results that they refuse to admit are coming their way.
All muslims must be deported there , the radical one shot down like the murdering dogs that they are, just a simple truth that 99.9% of the world rejects out of hand. And because of that rejection the future will see many hundreds of millions die, murdered by Islam.
Yes, we too can "let the crocodile eat us last" but eat us it surely will.
All this while we have obama the "muslim in hiding" aiding them... Sickening...--Tyr

[jafar00]

This is a pretty sickening act. I hope they get the justice they deserve and rot in prison, and hell forever.

Now, it must be pointed out that this attack was in no way Islamic. It must also be pointed out that no "western" media has mentioned Islamic condemnation of this murder such as

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/05/201352362828813162.html

Some alternative sources report..


Aussie Muslims condemn London attackIn a statement, Muslims Australia president Hafez Kassem condemned the killing as unjustifiable.
"The attack on an unarmed civilian believed to be a member of the British military in Woolwich is a crime that is condemned and deplored by Australian Muslims," Mr Kassem said.
"My sympathies and condolences go to the victim's family and I strongly condemn the unjustifiable attack."
Islam condemned the use of violence, Muslims Australia's Keysar Trad said.
"It takes a sick and twisted mind to hack another person with a meat cleaver," he said.
"Islam condemns and deplores this violence, as do I, as does every Australian Muslim."

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/05/23/19/28/aussie-muslims-condemn-london-attack


Suhra Ahmed, of the Islamic Society of Britain, said: œThis is a horrific, unforgivable attack, the kind that should be purged from our society.”
A Muslim baker who lives near the scene of the killing was first to lay flowers there.
Ahmed Jama, 26, said: œScreaming ˜Allah-hu-Akbar™ and killing innocent people is nothing to do with Islam.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/muslims-roundly-condemn-london-attack-2658342.html

The EDL must also be a part of any investigation as there have been "revenge" terrorist acts on several mosques. One involving an "incendiary device". Painting this and other terror attacks as "Islamic" is only causing innocent people to be threatened. Is that in any way fair?

[Marcus Aurelius]

This is a pretty sickening act. I hope they get the justice they deserve and rot in prison, and hell forever.

Now, it must be pointed out that this attack was in no way Islamic. It must also be pointed out that no "western" media has mentioned Islamic condemnation of this murder such as

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/05/201352362828813162.html

Some alternative sources report..


http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/05/23/19/28/aussie-muslims-condemn-london-attack


http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/muslims-roundly-condemn-london-attack-2658342.html

The EDL must also be a part of any investigation as there have been "revenge" terrorist acts on several mosques. One involving an "incendiary device". Painting this and other terror attacks as "Islamic" is only causing innocent people to be threatened. Is that in any way fair?

Translation: They were not 'really' Islamic.

[jimnyc]

This is a pretty sickening act. I hope they get the justice they deserve and rot in prison, and hell forever.

Now, it must be pointed out that this attack was in no way Islamic.

It wasn't rooted in Islamic teachings, but again, they WERE Muslims and the DID use Islam and issues with Islam as their reasoning. Apparently the one guy was once a good bloke, when he was a Christian. They are saying that he turned radical and into a different person when he converted to Islam in 2003.

[Marcus Aurelius]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by jafar00 http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=640842#post640842)
This is a pretty sickening act. I hope they get the justice they deserve and rot in prison, and hell forever.

Now, it must be pointed out that this attack was in no way Islamic.


It wasn't rooted in Islamic teachings, but again, they WERE Muslims and the DID use Islam and issues with Islam as their reasoning. Apparently the one guy was once a good bloke, when he was a Christian. They are saying that he turned radical and into a different person when he converted to Islam in 2003.

yet, after going through Islamic teachings to convert to Islam, he did this... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[jimnyc]

I have no problem pointing towards "Muslims" or "Islam" with this, based on their own words and goals.

'You and your children will be next'

'The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers.'

‘We swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.
'We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

'I apologise that women have had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don't care about you.'

suspected Islamist terrorists - were “hacking” at the victim “like a piece of meat”.

shouting "Allahu Akbar"

and then this Islamic idiot:

Radical Preacher Anjem Choudary Blames 'Murdering' British Troops
Radical preacher Anjem Choudary has blamed the terrorist murder in Woolwich on David Cameron and Britain's actions in Afghanistan.

"I blame Cameron for his foreign policy against Islam & Muslims!

Choudary has previously courted controversy by imploring British muslms to bin their poppies on the eve of Remembrance Day (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/402005/20121106/anjem-choudary-twitter-poppy.htm), and claimed Islamic vigilantes are battling to rid London of 'evil' drunks and prostitutes. (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/427051/20130123/shariah-uk-muslims.htm)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Woolwich-attack-Two-men-hack-soldier-wearing-Help-Heroes-T-shirt-death-machetes-suspected-terror-attack.html#ixzz2U3GYiaM4
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4938197/shooting-in-woolwich-london.html
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/470241/20130522/woolwich-beheading-attack-anjem-choudary.htm

[MtnBiker]

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."



So, it had basis in islam for the attackers. And that is how islamic radicals have set up their front. Allow a few radicals to act independently then other muslims can say it doesn't have anything to do with islam. Not buying it.

[aboutime]

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."



So, it had basis in islam for the attackers. And that is how islamic radicals have set up their front. Allow a few radicals to act independently then other muslims can say it doesn't have anything to do with islam. Not buying it. <object type="cosymantecnisbfw" cotype="cs" id="SILOBFWOBJECTID" style="width: 0px; height: 0px; display: block;"></object>


As we have all seen here on DP with one, and perhaps another member. DENIAL is always the most reliable response.

[Drummond]

Islam the religion of peace that so often inspires its followers to bloody murder. Hate to have to say it but that victim should have been armed. Now dead because he was not armed.
Another example of what will happen more often around the world because the world refuses to see Islam for what it truly is.
Britain will not address this problem in the correct manner. It has waited too long and given the damn scum to much power and control there. Nothing will save Britain except a total uprising and slaughter of ever muslim there. Tahat is never going to happen. So Britain becomes conquered and its people enslaved and murdered at the leisure of Islam. Sad but when people refuse to admit the truth and refuse to act they get the results that they refuse to admit are coming their way.
All muslims must be deported there , the radical one shot down like the murdering dogs that they are, just a simple truth that 99.9% of the world rejects out of hand. And because of that rejection the future will see many hundreds of millions die, murdered by Islam.
Yes, we too can "let the crocodile eat us last" but eat us it surely will.
All this while we have obama the "muslim in hiding" aiding them... Sickening...--Tyr

:clap::clap:

Thanks, Tyr. There is a whole lot of truth in your posting.

A key problem is the 'anti-gun' culture that's existed for generations in the UK. The scum making this attack KNEW that the chance of being stopped in what they were doing, by a well-aimed bullet, were just about zero. I'm even guessing that a part of why they waited around for the police would've been their expectation of there being a high chance that even the arriving police wouldn't have been armed.

In this, they were proved wrong. The expansion of armed units has been being worked on for a number of years, and they are readily deployed, so long as the need for armed police is established.

But as for the ordinary citizen, nearly all of us remain 'disempowered'. The women who stood up to the murderous scum knew they had no real way of defending themselves, but they stood their ground regardless.

Unfortunately, Tyr, what you advocate will never come to pass. Check out media reports from the UK - you will see references, as always happens, to 'MUSLIM FANATICS' ... meaning that the attackers, though they claim to be representing Islam, will always be portrayed as outside of mainstream Muslim thinking.

There will be a great many here who will always, genuinely, believe this (led by the Left, obviously). There will be others who'll have their doubts, but will never admit to them from fear of being demonised as racist. A majority groundswell revolt against Islam, EVEN in the face of this butchery, is highly unlikely.

There will be heated debate .. for a while, then it'll end, and if there are no further such attacks in the coming weeks, everyone will settle back down to their usual docile state.

Until the next time. Etc.

There'll probably be a ramping-up of security measures, which will be publicised, and people will be satisfied that 'everything possible is being done'. And that'll be that.

I've spoken, repeatedly, about Anjem Choudary. Well ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329582/Michael-Adebolajo-How-Woolwich-suspect-obsessed-Islam-schoolboy.html


Anjem Choudary, the former leader of extremist group Al Muhajiroun, today admitted her knew Adebolajo and called him a 'pleasant, quiet guy'.

'I knew him as Mujahid. He attended our meetings and my lectures. I wouldn’t describe him as a member [of Al Muhajiroun]. There were lots of people who came to our activities who weren’t necessarily members,' he said today.

'He was a pleasant, quiet guy. He converted to Islam in about 2003. He was just a completely normal guy. He was interested in Islam, in memorising the Koran. He disappeared about two years ago. I don’t know what influences he has been under since then.'

Choudary suggested that it was possible the attack was motivated by British Government foreign policy in the Muslim world, and that this may not have been an isolated incident.

He said: 'We are a very politicised community. Some people are angered by draconian measures such as 'stop and search' and restrictions on free speech.
'There is a chance of more lone wolf attacks happening again due to these draconian measures.

'If you want to condemn anyone it's the British Government, this is one death but if you add up the number of people killed and tortured by the British government it is in the millions.'

You see the usual pattern. Identification of any 'militant' grouping as 'extremist' .. i.e, not 'mainstream' Islamic. And you also see what scum Choudary is, to use even THIS to score cheap political points for his cause.

Such, folks, IS THE SUBHUMANITY INVOLVED. Choudary would rather deflect blame for this savagery on the British Government, than the Muslim scum who COMMITTED the attack.

[Drummond]

As we have all seen here on DP with one, and perhaps another member. DENIAL is always the most reliable response.

The fiction of the so-called 'peaceful Islamic majority' must always be maintained. It will be, by Muslims who have much to lose if the tide were to ever turn against them.

And they will always be aided and abetted by the creatures of the Left.

[aboutime]

The fiction of the so-called 'peaceful Islamic majority' must always be maintained. It will be, by Muslims who have much to lose if the tide were to ever turn against them.

And they will always be aided and abetted by the creatures of the Left.


Sir Drummond. I just finished reading a report that stated how G.B. Soldiers...members of the military have been instructed NOT to proudly wear their Uniforms in public to avoid more attacks.
How familiar that sounds to me, and millions of other American veterans today.
During the Vietnam war. We learned the hard way about wearing our uniform home on weekends, or while on Port visits...HERE AT HOME.
We became targets for the radical groups who did everything they could to stop the war.
How sad our world has become when showing your Personal Pride, in representing your Own Nation...becomes nothing more than a cheap invitation to IDIOTS, and HATE FILLED, ARROGANT, IMBECILES who want attention, and don't care about violence as their only tool.

I do hope things will eventually change over there.
The World is becoming a HUGE CESS-POOL of illigitimate Crybabies full of Selfish hatred for everything they cannot control.
LIKE THEIR BOWELS...which I see as sharing their brainpower.

[Drummond]

It must also be pointed out that no "western" media has mentioned Islamic condemnation of this murder such as ....

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/05/201352362828813162.html

REFUTED. The BBC was quick to air the MCB's response. I saw it for myself !! The BBC's main television rival in the UK, ITV, did likewise.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630303


The Muslim Council of Britain said in a statement: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly. Our thoughts are with the victim and his family."

http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2013-05-22/muslim-council-of-britain-statement-on-machete-murder/


“This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly.
Our thoughts are with the victim and his family.We understand the victim is a serving member of the Armed Forces. Muslims have long served in this country's Armed Forces, proudly and with honour.

This attack on a member of the Armed Forces is dishonourable, and no cause justifies this murder. This action will no doubt heighten tensions on the streets of the United Kingdom.

We call on all our communities, Muslim and non-Muslim, to come together in solidarity to ensure the forces of hatred do not prevail.

– Muslim Council of Great Britain



The EDL must also be a part of any investigation as there have been "revenge" terrorist acts on several mosques. One involving an "incendiary device". Painting this and other terror attacks as "Islamic" is only causing innocent people to be threatened. Is that in any way fair?

But, Jafar, here's what you ignore, time and again ... TERRORISTS LAUNCHING SUCH ATTACKS, BE THEY IN LONDON, MADRID, BALI, PAKISTAN, ISRAEL ... THEY ALL SAY THEY COMMIT THEIR SAVAGERIES IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.

So how come YOU are right, and ALL OF THEM, ARE WRONG ?

Do you want to argue for the utter absurdity of claiming that NONE of these terrorists has ANY clue as to why they attack anybody ????

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. I just finished reading a report that stated how G.B. Soldiers...members of the military have been instructed NOT to proudly wear their Uniforms in public to avoid more attacks.
How familiar that sounds to me, and millions of other American veterans today.
During the Vietnam war. We learned the hard way about wearing our uniform home on weekends, or while on Port visits...HERE AT HOME.
We became targets for the radical groups who did everything they could to stop the war.
How sad our world has become when showing your Personal Pride, in representing your Own Nation...becomes nothing more than a cheap invitation to IDIOTS, and HATE FILLED, ARROGANT, IMBECILES who want attention, and don't care about violence as their only tool.

I do hope things will eventually change over there.
The World is becoming a HUGE CESS-POOL of illigitimate Crybabies full of Selfish hatred for everything they cannot control.
LIKE THEIR BOWELS...which I see as sharing their brainpower.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Brilliantly put - thank you.

If the parallel holds, though, things could go the other way. There's been a mood in Britain for quite some time that to fly the Union Jack is a 'Jingoistic' act, not to be encouraged.

We have our own instances of soldiers receiving bias against them just for wearing their uniforms. This report wasn't hard to find ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/5979319/Soldiers-attending-funeral-turned-away-from-bar-because-of-uniform.html


.. The three soldiers and one Royal Marine were refused entry to Phatz bar in Maidenhead, Berkshire, just hours after hundreds had gathered to pay tribute to Rifleman Daniel Hume at his funeral in the town.
The manager of the bar said he had refused the men entry after being told that 100 soldiers could be seeking entry.

Adrian Hume, the 22 year-old soldier's father, said: "I arrived (from the cremation) at 7pm and they had all been having a drink in Daniel's memory and were happy but behaving themselves.

"Later we decided to move to another venue. There were about 12 of us, with three soldiers in fatigues and a Royal Marine in his dress uniform. He looked immaculate.

"They arrived at the Phatz bar, which Daniel had been to on occasion when he was on home leave, before me.

"When I got there they appeared a bit upset. They said the guy on the door had told them 'you can all come in, apart from the squaddies'. He refused to let the four who wearing uniform into the bar - because they were wearing their uniform."

He said the soldiers were used to the situation, adding: "What stood out was the behaviour of the guys. The non-soldiers in the group were more upset about it but the soldiers all said: 'Don't worry about it - we get this all the time'.

"I just feel for the guys, the pride of them dealing with it with such dignity."

Rifleman Hume was killed on July 9 while on foot patrol with 4 Rifles at Nad e-Ali, in Afghanistan's Helmand province, just weeks into his first operational tour and only months after passing out as the best cadet at his training regiment.

Grant Page, manager at Phatz, said he turned the men away because he had been told that there were 100 soldiers who had been drinking all day and would be heading for his club.

"Knowing what these guys do for our country it saddens me that I had to do what I did. It's heartbreaking but I have to protect my customers' interests. It's a lose-lose situation for me."

A spokesman for the Royal British Legion described the bar's behaviour as "unacceptable."

"Members of the armed forces should be proud to wear their uniforms in public and pubs and businesses should be proud to have young men and women serving for their country as their customers," he said.

"These men had been at a funeral for a brave young man who gave his life for his country and it is a great pity that the bar thought they were not suitable customers given the sacrifice their friend had made.

[aboutime]

Right now. As disgusted as I feel about everything taking place here, and around the world related to Hatred.

I just wonder when we will all get the ANNOUNCEMENT....
"IT'S OVER!...THE METEOR IS COMING. NOTHING CAN STOP IT! BEND OVER AND KISS YOU ASS GOODBYE!"

[Drummond]

I have no problem pointing towards "Muslims" or "Islam" with this, based on their own words and goals.

'You and your children will be next'

'The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers.'

‘We swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone.
'We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

'I apologise that women have had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don't care about you.'

suspected Islamist terrorists - were “hacking” at the victim “like a piece of meat”.

shouting "Allahu Akbar"

and then this Islamic idiot:

Radical Preacher Anjem Choudary Blames 'Murdering' British Troops


Radical preacher Anjem Choudary has blamed the terrorist murder in Woolwich on David Cameron and Britain's actions in Afghanistan.

"I blame Cameron for his foreign policy against Islam & Muslims!

Choudary has previously courted controversy by imploring British muslms to bin their poppies on the eve of Remembrance Day (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/402005/20121106/anjem-choudary-twitter-poppy.htm), and claimed Islamic vigilantes are battling to rid London of 'evil' drunks and prostitutes. (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/427051/20130123/shariah-uk-muslims.htm)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Woolwich-attack-Two-men-hack-soldier-wearing-Help-Heroes-T-shirt-death-machetes-suspected-terror-attack.html#ixzz2U3GYiaM4
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4938197/shooting-in-woolwich-london.html
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/470241/20130522/woolwich-beheading-attack-anjem-choudary.htm

I've made the same basic point about Choudary. But whether or not he's an 'idiot', I wouldn't underestimate him. As I've posted before .. Choudary's given many interviews, not least to CNN, and to Sean Hannity on the Hannity and Colmes show, on Fox News.

He also tried to organise a pro-Muslim rally outside the White House.

Choudary is one of those 'I have fingers in many pies' figures ... advancing his cause whenever and wherever he can. He tried to have an outer London borough declared a Sharia controlled zone. And he also is a Sharia Court judge, which has to mean that his judgments carry weight in the Muslim world.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying: "This is a truly barbaric act that has no basis in Islam and we condemn this unreservedly."



So, it had basis in islam for the attackers. And that is how islamic radicals have set up their front. Allow a few radicals to act independently then other muslims can say it doesn't have anything to do with islam. Not buying it. <object style="width: 0px; height: 0px; display: block;" id="SILOBFWOBJECTID" type="cosymantecnisbfw" cotype="cs"></object>

Here are just a few of those exhortations for muslims to murder non-believers...
These prove that it is Islamic ti murder all infidels!! Nobody negated these in Islam, NOBODY!
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm


<tbody>
Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?






Summary Answer:
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.167) 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm), the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.191) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." The historical context (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-medina-persecution.htm) of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-mecca-tolerance.htm)). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-raid-caravans.htm) for loot.

Quran (3:56) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.056) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Quran (3:151) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.074) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Quran (4:76) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.076) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Quran (4:89) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Quran (4:95) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.095) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

Quran (4:104) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/005-qmt.php#005.033) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.012) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Quran (8:15) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.015) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Quran (8:39) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.039) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:293, also). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

Quran (8:57) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.057) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:59-60) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.059) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Quran (8:65) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.065) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

Quran (9:5) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.005) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

Quran (9:14) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.014) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."

Quran (9:20) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.020) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.029) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.


</tbody>

[jafar00]

But, Jafar, here's what you ignore, time and again ... TERRORISTS LAUNCHING SUCH ATTACKS, BE THEY IN LONDON, MADRID, BALI, PAKISTAN, ISRAEL ... THEY ALL SAY THEY COMMIT THEIR SAVAGERIES IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.

So how come YOU are right, and ALL OF THEM, ARE WRONG ?

Do you want to argue for the utter absurdity of claiming that NONE of these terrorists has ANY clue as to why they attack anybody ????

I am not the one who is right. Islam is. Just continue on with a closed mind and closed ears even when there are daily condemnations of terrorism, murder etc from Muslims. You will just become more bitter and twisted.

There is not word in the Qur'aan or in the Sunna that can support terrorism in any way shape or form. Sure you have hate sites who try to twist things like they are working as policy consultants for Al Qaeda but they are still lying whichever way you look at it.

I was once like you. I thought Muslims were violent and bent on world domination and wanted to convert me or kill me, but when I actually investigated and learned more, I found the opposite is the case.

[aboutime]

I am not the one who is right. Islam is. Just continue on with a closed mind and closed ears even when there are daily condemnations of terrorism, murder etc from Muslims. You will just become more bitter and twisted.

There is not word in the Qur'aan or in the Sunna that can support terrorism in any way shape or form. Sure you have hate sites who try to twist things like they are working as policy consultants for Al Qaeda but they are still lying whichever way you look at it.

I was once like you. I thought Muslims were violent and bent on world domination and wanted to convert me or kill me, but when I actually investigated and learned more, I found the opposite is the case.



jafar. You still haven't learned how DENIAL is just not your best attribute to defend anything here.

[Drummond]

I am not the one who is right. Islam is. Just continue on with a closed mind and closed ears even when there are daily condemnations of terrorism, murder etc from Muslims. You will just become more bitter and twisted.

There is not word in the Qur'aan or in the Sunna that can support terrorism in any way shape or form. Sure you have hate sites who try to twist things like they are working as policy consultants for Al Qaeda but they are still lying whichever way you look at it.

I was once like you. I thought Muslims were violent and bent on world domination and wanted to convert me or kill me, but when I actually investigated and learned more, I found the opposite is the case.

'Congratulations' on managing a total evasion of the points I made to you.

Jafar .. between them, Tyr and Aboutime have done a splendid job of answering you. Tyr's many Quran quotes in his above post do a better job than I ever could of exposing the savagery the Quran represents. Can it be any wonder that it serves as the inspiration, the guiding light, for so much terrorism in the world today ?

You will, of course, continue with your policy of denial. Wild horses could not drag you away from such an approach, could they ? Staring you in the face, Jafar, is the proof of where Islam leads its followers, as does the record of terrorism which remorselessly continues on. But it makes no difference to you.

I would ask you how many more people must die before you stop your denials, but why, based on your posts, would I think you EVER would ?

But I'm going to set you a challenge. You have said:


I thought Muslims were violent and bent on world domination and wanted to convert me or kill me, but when I actually investigated and learned more, I found the opposite is the case.

You just have to be describing - what else could this mean ?? - an act of conversion !!! So, it seems to me that your argument is self-defeating. Nonetheless, Jafar, I'd like you to explain how you ever came to the conclusion that you say you did. What were these 'investigations' of yours, and how did they 'persuade' you (in the face of a reality which the rest of us know about but which you deny) that Muslims 'weren't' violent, nor determined to achieve world domination ?

Remember, Jafar - there's 'nothing violent' about trying to hack a person's head off of his body with a meat cleaver in a busy city street, and 'Allahu Akbar' is a cry more normally associated with the politeness of giving up your seat for an elderly lady on public transport ... !! ...

[jafar00]

'Congratulations' on managing a total evasion of the points I made to you.

Jafar .. between them, Tyr and Aboutime have done a splendid job of answering you. Tyr's many Quran quotes in his above post do a better job than I ever could of exposing the savagery the Quran represents. Can it be any wonder that it serves as the inspiration, the guiding light, for so much terrorism in the world today ?

I haven't read their posts but I can guess they were a mixture of lies, diatribe, hate speech and a whole load of insulting me. I have no need of that.

[QUOTE=Drummond;641131]You will, of course, continue with your policy of denial. Wild horses could not drag you away from such an approach, could they ? Staring you in the face, Jafar, is the proof of where Islam leads its followers, as does the record of terrorism which remorselessly continues on. But it makes no difference to you.

Does the fact that Muslims and our leaders roundly condemn terrorism each time it happens mean anything to you? Does the fact that our religion does not support these acts of terror mean anything to you?


You just have to be describing - what else could this mean ?? - an act of conversion !!! So, it seems to me that your argument is self-defeating. Nonetheless, Jafar, I'd like you to explain how you ever came to the conclusion that you say you did. What were these 'investigations' of yours, and how did they 'persuade' you (in the face of a reality which the rest of us know about but which you deny) that Muslims 'weren't' violent, nor determined to achieve world domination ?

They threatened to chop my head off if I didn't convert and marry the Imam's sister. :poke:

Jokes aside, I was spiritually searching and empty inside with the weight of the world on my shoulders at the time. I visited the Mosque of my friends in 7 Sisters and started learning about Islam, Islamic history and about Islamic Mysticism, prayer, spirituality etc... I started to read the Qur'aan, asked lots of questions, sat with Muslims in the Mosque for quite a few months without becoming one of them until one day I realised that Islam could free me from the shackles of the dark path I was treading and bring me into the light. As soon as I pronounced the Shahada (declaration of faith), I felt a weight come off my shoulders and I began a journey of enlightenment and wonder.

Islam just made a helluva lot of sense to me. I wanted to jump in, grow a beard, wear a long shirt and a turban and pray 5 or more times a day, but one thing held me back. A Sheikh in the Mosque stopped me and asked me why I was making things hard on myself? He said that Islam should be like wearing comfortable clothes. Something that feels natural to me. If I dive in and try to be the Imam within a week, it will be like wearing a heavy coat. In time that approach would drag me down and I would eventually remove the coat and be lost, cold and without a coat. So I started light. Learned my prayers in Arabic and for about 6 months, I prayed only in the morning and after sundown when I got home from work. Eventually I found it easy to pray 5 times a day, eat halal, and work on improving my character.

I am not perfect but I at least try and be a man of good character, clean morals and of honesty and integrity and Islam helps me to do this.

Never have I considered putting a bomb vest on to blow myself up in the fruit and vegetable section of the local Tesco which is obviously what you think about Muslims and especially converts to Islam. Quite the opposite actually.


Remember, Jafar - there's 'nothing violent' about trying to hack a person's head off of his body with a meat cleaver in a busy city street, and 'Allahu Akbar' is a cry more normally associated with the politeness of giving up your seat for an elderly lady on public transport ... !! ...

Yelling Allahu Akbar as you commit a crime doesn't make it Islamic any more than taking your clothes off in the middle of the road and yelling "I am Jesus" makes that act a Christian one.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NosWzuTi-70

[taft2012]

Just continue on with a closed mind and closed ears even when there are daily condemnations of terrorism, murder etc from Muslims.

After my head gets lopped off in Allah's name, I'll be very comforted to know that some cleric (that none of the zanies listen to or care about) condemned the action. :rolleyes:

[Gaffer]

What I've seen concerning this incident. A pair of maniacal muslims killed a British soldier in the middle of a street. The muslims were shot then captured. The police took 20 minutes to arrive. Speculation about where they are from what mosque they attended. Where they got the kitchen utensils. All sort of reports about how the killing took place and people responses.


What I haven't seen. Any information on the soldier who was killed. Interviews with his family and friends. How long had he been in the military. Had he even ever been to afghan. Just a soldier who got killed, nothing to see here.

[Jeff]

Yet another video showing the truth of the so called religion of peace


http://conservativevideos.com/2013/05/new-steven-crowder-video-slams-quran/

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I have no problem pointing towards "Muslims" or "Islam" with this, based on their own words and goals.

'You and your children will be next'

'The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers.'

Radical Preacher Anjem Choudary Blames 'Murdering' British Troops



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That we and our children will be next is taught in all the mosques! That they will prevail by killing or converting every human on earth is taught too!
America needs to wake the hell up. And know that the 3000+ deaths on 9/11 was nothing compared to what the muslims did in nations they conquered . The pretty much executed 65 to 85 percent of the populations they gained control of and remember this it was the EXACT SAME KORAN THEN AS IT IS NOW EXCEPT FOR THE BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME THAT MOHAMMAD WAS MAKING IT UP AS HE WENT ALONG.

Check out the pure savagery they institute when they control a nation and then drop your damn false sense of they couldnt murder hundreds of millions for they unlike any before have actually already done that.--Tyr

[Marcus Aurelius]

Yelling Allahu Akbar as you commit a crime doesn't make it Islamic any more than taking your clothes off in the middle of the road and yelling "I am Jesus" makes that act a Christian one.



Let's see if you can answer this one...

How many terrorists yell 'Allahu, Akbar!' when they commit terrorist acts, vs. how many people take their clothes off and yell 'I am Jesus!'? Can you give us some numbers? Does one occur more frequently than the other? Less? About the same? Can you link to your source for your numbers?

No?

Thought not.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

[QUOTE=Drummond;641131]'Congratulations' on managing a total evasion of the points I made to you.

Jafar .. between them, Tyr and Aboutime have done a splendid job of answering you. Tyr's many Quran quotes in his above post do a better job than I ever could of exposing the savagery the Quran represents. Can it be any wonder that it serves as the inspiration, the guiding light, for so much terrorism in the world today ?

I haven't read their posts but I can guess they were a mixture of lies, diatribe, hate speech and a whole load of insulting me. I have no need of that.



Does the fact that Muslims and our leaders roundly condemn terrorism each time it happens mean anything to you? Does the fact that our religion does not support these acts of terror mean anything to you?



They threatened to chop my head off if I didn't convert and marry the Imam's sister. :poke:

Jokes aside, I was spiritually searching and empty inside with the weight of the world on my shoulders at the time. I visited the Mosque of my friends in 7 Sisters and started learning about Islam, Islamic history and about Islamic Mysticism, prayer, spirituality etc... I started to read the Qur'aan, asked lots of questions, sat with Muslims in the Mosque for quite a few months without becoming one of them until one day I realised that Islam could free me from the shackles of the dark path I was treading and bring me into the light. As soon as I pronounced the Shahada (declaration of faith), I felt a weight come off my shoulders and I began a journey of enlightenment and wonder.

Islam just made a helluva lot of sense to me. I wanted to jump in, grow a beard, wear a long shirt and a turban and pray 5 or more times a day, but one thing held me back. A Sheikh in the Mosque stopped me and asked me why I was making things hard on myself? He said that Islam should be like wearing comfortable clothes. Something that feels natural to me. If I dive in and try to be the Imam within a week, it will be like wearing a heavy coat. In time that approach would drag me down and I would eventually remove the coat and be lost, cold and without a coat. So I started light. Learned my prayers in Arabic and for about 6 months, I prayed only in the morning and after sundown when I got home from work. Eventually I found it easy to pray 5 times a day, eat halal, and work on improving my character.

I am not perfect but I at least try and be a man of good character, clean morals and of honesty and integrity and Islam helps me to do this.

Never have I considered putting a bomb vest on to blow myself up in the fruit and vegetable section of the local Tesco which is obviously what you think about Muslims and especially converts to Islam. Quite the opposite actually.



Yelling Allahu Akbar as you commit a crime doesn't make it Islamic any more than taking your clothes off in the middle of the road and yelling "I am Jesus" makes that act a Christian one.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NosWzuTi-70


Never have I considered putting a bomb vest on to blow myself up in the fruit and vegetable section of the local Tesco which is obviously what you think about Muslims and especially converts to Islam. Quite the opposite actually.

^^^^^ That is because you are not a true muslim. Just try harder and you'll get there. A day will come when an Imam will say to you," go slay Allah's enemies" and you will obey.-Tyr

[Drummond]

I haven't read their posts but I can guess they were a mixture of lies, diatribe, hate speech and a whole load of insulting me. I have no need of that.

Perhaps, instead, you have no need of Quranic verses ?? Because, Jafar, this is what Tyr posted !

Naturally I'll understand if you have no comment at all to make on the following, from Tyr (I hope and trust he'll not mind my reposting his material):-


The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.167) 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm), the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.191) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." The historical context (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-medina-persecution.htm) of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-mecca-tolerance.htm)). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-raid-caravans.htm) for loot.

Quran (3:56) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.056) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Quran (3:151) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/003-qmt.php#003.151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.074) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Quran (4:76) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.076) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Quran (4:89) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Quran (4:95) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.095) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly notreferring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

Quran (4:104) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

Quran (5:33) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/005-qmt.php#005.033) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.012) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Quran (8:15) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.015) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Quran (8:39) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.039) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:293, also). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

Quran (8:57) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.057) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Quran (8:59-60) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.059) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Quran (8:65) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/008-qmt.php#008.065) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

Quran (9:5) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.005) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

Quran (9:14) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.014) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."

Quran (9:20) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.020) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

Quran (9:29) (http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/009-qmt.php#009.029) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.
Any comments to offer, Jafar ?


Does the fact that Muslims and our leaders roundly condemn terrorism each time it happens mean anything to you? Does the fact that our religion does not support these acts of terror mean anything to you?

I well know that certain Muslim leaders go out of their way to distance themselves from association with terrorists and their acts. But, then .. aren't they just serving their own interests, and their people, by doing so ?

It would be odd indeed if the Muslim Council of Great Britain started declaring itself to be a PRO Jihadist outfit. The MCB wants to maintain its standing as a recognised authority in the UK, and it would quickly lose that if it started backtracking on its previous pronouncements. One needs only see what happened to Choudary's group once THEY started going too far, to understand that the MCB could never risk following - publicly, anyway - in their footsteps.

It's a question of power and authority. The MCB has to take reputable stances in public if it's going to retain either.

But here's the other side of the coin, Jafar - a Muslim cleric who takes the opposite view to the one you want to see prevail in forums like this one. Yes, he's not in the UK, so yes, he can speak more honestly, not having anything to lose ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-woolwich-killings-suspect-michael-adebolajo-was-inspired-by-cleric-banned-from-uk-after-urging-followers-to-behead-enemies-of-islam-8630125.html


One of the suspected killers who attempted to behead and disembowel a young soldier in the horrific Woolwich attack had listened to the preachings of a radical Muslim cleric banned from Britain over extremist activities, including alleged links to al-Qa’ida, The Independent has learnt.

The cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed has been secretly filmed stating that decapitation of the enemies of Islam was permitted. Today, in comments met with outrage, he told The Independent that he could understand the feeling of rage that had motivated the attackers and that what they had done could be justified under certain interpretations of Islam.

Michael Adebolajo, a British-Muslim convert of Nigerian origin who gave a video interview with a meat cleaver in his bloodied hands while the body of 25-year-old Drummer Lee Rigby lay on the street behind him, declared that he was fighting for “Almighty Allah”.

Last night the second suspect was understood to be Michael Adebowale, 22, of Greenwich.

Mr Bakri Muhammed, who now lives in Lebanon, told The Independent: “I saw the film and we could see that he [the suspect] was being very courageous.

“Under Islam this can be justified, he was not targeting civilians, he was taking on a military man in an operation. To people around here [in the Middle East] he is a hero for what he has done.”

Mr Bakri Muhammed said of the suspect: “I knew him as Michael when he came to the meetings and then he converted and he became known as Abdullah; I hear he then started calling himself Mujahid. He asked questions about religion, he was curious. He had first started coming when there was a lot of anger about the Iraq war and the war on terror. Whether I influenced him or not, I do not know. But he was a quiet boy, so something must have happened.”

In other developments, two new arrests were made: a man and a woman on suspicion of conspiracy to murder, following raids at six addresses in London and Lincoln.

Shocking footage also surfaced of the pair being shot by armed response officers from the Metropolitan Police.

A clip on the Daily Mirror's website shows one of the men charge at police and drop one of his knives before being gunned down.

His accomplice is seen raising his arm and aiming a handgun at officers before he too is downed, as eight shots ring out in total.

It also emerged that the two suspected killers of Drummer Rigby were already known to MI5 and, almost certainly, to counter-terrorism officers in the police. One of the men was stopped from travelling to Somalia to join the Islamist militia Al-Shabaab last year.

Security officials insisted that there had been no evidence that either of the two men were planning an imminent attack. Nor was there any evidence, they say, that they were discussing beheading. They point out that there were plenty of references to it in Islamist websites.

In 2007, following the conviction of a group British Pakistanis who had plotted to kidnap and behead a British soldier, a secret recording emerged of Mr Bakri Muhammed saying: “When you meet [Westerners], slice their own necks. And when you make the blood spill all over, and the enemy becomes so tired, now start to take from them prisoners. Then free them or exchange them until the war is finished.

“Verily they remind the sunnah of removing the head of the enemy. They remind the sunnah of slaughtering the enemy. They remind the sunnah of how to strike the neck of the enemy. They removed the head of the enemy. Use the sword and remove the head of the enemy.”

In another message, Mr Bakri Muhammed had said he hoped that “British Muslims who are in the Army over there” (Afghanistan) can be captured.

Mr Bakri Muhammed, who is Syrian-born, and has named one of his sons after Osama bin Laden, stated that he and his followers were not involved in violence while residing in the UK due to what had become known as the “covenant of security” under which Islamist organisations were allowed to carry out their activities, but desisted from taking armed action in the country which had given them refuge.

“But in this case obviously the covenant of security did not apply,” he said.

“Beheading is how criminals were executed under the laws; but that must happen with a Sharia court and decision by judges with criminals. On this occasion he was taking military action, not a legal one.”

Mr Bakri Muhammed had set up the organization Hizb ut-Tahrir in the UK, where he had claimed asylum in 1986, but split with them after doctrinal disagreements and set up the Al-Muhajiroun group which attracted hundreds of followers including Adebolajo. That was also wound up but at least a dozen of its members are thought to have become or affiliated to suicide bombers.

Mr Bakri Muhammed left London soon after the 2005 bombings because, he said, of constant harassment by the authorities ....

Do I really need to comment, Jafar ? I think not.
They threatened to chop my head off if I didn't convert and marry the Imam's sister. :poke:Were you a soldier at the time ?:death:

Jokes aside, I was spiritually searching and empty inside with the weight of the world on my shoulders at the time. I visited the Mosque of my friends in 7 Sisters and started learning about Islam, Islamic history and about Islamic Mysticism, prayer, spirituality etc... I started to read the Qur'aan, asked lots of questions, sat with Muslims in the Mosque for quite a few months without becoming one of them until one day I realised that Islam could free me from the shackles of the dark path I was treading and bring me into the light. As soon as I pronounced the Shahada (declaration of faith), I felt a weight come off my shoulders and I began a journey of enlightenment and wonder.

OK, thanks for that account.

But, why Islam ? Why not Christianity ?

.. Actually, I can think of one reason, for what little it's worth. I know the area you're talking about, and it has a large multicultural mix ... not least more than its fair share of mosques. I'm pretty sure that you'd have found it a lot easier to find a mosque there than a Christian church ... and many of the locals wouldn't have been happy at seeing you 'convert' to Christianity.

Seven Sisters .. if you mean the area, not the Seven Sisters Road, is in Tottenham, north London. It's around ONE mile away from the Bruce Grove area of Tottenham, which is where the UK riots of a couple of years ago first started.

And here is a link to a YouTube video. You'll see a spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahrir giving a recruitment speech just to one side of the 'crime scene' area in Tottenham, in the riot's aftermath. YES, Jafar, that's right ... in the very area you were 'converted', a major spokesman for Hizb ut-Tahrir, the very organisation that cleric Bakri founded, was busily trying to recruit people for his cause.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbfTNZBahZY


Islam just made a helluva lot of sense to me. I wanted to jump in, grow a beard, wear a long shirt and a turban and pray 5 or more times a day, but one thing held me back. A Sheikh in the Mosque stopped me and asked me why I was making things hard on myself? He said that Islam should be like wearing comfortable clothes. Something that feels natural to me. If I dive in and try to be the Imam within a week, it will be like wearing a heavy coat. In time that approach would drag me down and I would eventually remove the coat and be lost, cold and without a coat. So I started light. Learned my prayers in Arabic and for about 6 months, I prayed only in the morning and after sundown when I got home from work. Eventually I found it easy to pray 5 times a day, eat halal, and work on improving my character.

I am not perfect but I at least try and be a man of good character, clean morals and of honesty and integrity and Islam helps me to do this.

Sounds 'ideal', doesn't it ? Still, the YouTube video link shows what else could be found in the very area you were converted. The spokesman giving his speech has his home there !

How do you reconcile Bakri's teachings, and all that Hizb ut-Tahrir stands for, with the rosy picture you're trying to paint for us ?


Never have I considered putting a bomb vest on to blow myself up in the fruit and vegetable section of the local Tesco which is obviously what you think about Muslims and especially converts to Islam. Quite the opposite actually.

I'm glad, not least because if you're thinking about the Tesco in Tottenham High Road that's just yards away from Seven Sisters tube station, I used to shop there !!! So how about Aldi, at Bruce Grove ? Or how about going upmarket and visiting Waitrose, in Enfield Town ?

Jafar ... I understand how much you want to paint Islam as being something highly reputable. But the other side of the coin, the 'nasty' side of Islam, DOES exist, it IS determined to mete out savageries, and it even WAS, AND IS, ACTIVE IN THE VERY AREA YOU WERE CONVERTED IN !!!

.... and here's the thing. You have admitted, and repeatedly, to being a supporter of Hamas. Hamas bombs, and if it ever gets the chance, it KILLS its Israeli victims. I ask you to reconcile your refusal to rescind that support with the image-building you've indulged in, here.

What's more, Jafar, I've never known you to type a kind word for any Jew on this forum. Always, and characteristically of the racial hatreds Hamas and other Muslims indulge in, you yourself find excuses to further anti-Semitic propaganda agendas yourself.

How can this be squared with what you've declared for yourself, on this thread ?

And how do you really feel about Tesco, anyway ... WASN'T ITS ORIGINAL OWNER A JEW ? ISN'T IT STILL A JEWISH-OWNED SUPERMARKET CHAIN ??


Yelling Allahu Akbar as you commit a crime doesn't make it Islamic any more than taking your clothes off in the middle of the road and yelling "I am Jesus" makes that act a Christian one.

I can't better Marcus's reply on that one.

[Drummond]

What I haven't seen. Any information on the soldier who was killed. Interviews with his family and friends. How long had he been in the military. Had he even ever been to afghan. Just a soldier who got killed, nothing to see here.

That very information has been surfacing within the past 24 hours, Gaffer (.. by the way, I'm delighted you have returned !).

From what I've read in our newspapers, he was named Lee Rigby. 25 years old, and an Army 'veteran'. He'd served three tours of duty ... in Cyprus, Germany, and YES, he'd fought for a time in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.

As for when he was killed, our accounts say he was attacked on his way back to barracks after having just attended a 'Help for Heroes' event, for a pal of his who he'd served with in Afghanistan.

Quoting from an account in the Daily Star (British tabloid, but NOT to be confused with the 'Morning Star', Britain's Communist newspaper !!) ..


'Lee's heartbroken family, including his two year old son, Jack, were described as being 'in bits' after hearing of his horrific death.

Warrant Officer Ned Miller said, 'Riggers is what every battalion needs. He was one of the battalion's great characters - always smiling, always ready to brighten the mood with his fellow Fusiliers.

Lee, from Middleton, Gtr Manchester, signed up in his late teens before marrying Rebecca in her home town of Halifax, West Yorkshire, in 2007. The couple had since split up.

Lee's parents were yesterday at the home of Rebecca's parents with little Jack, comforting each other. The soldier's former brother in law said "They are still trying to get their heads around what has happened. It's still not sunk in. Rebecca's absolutely in bits." A tearful neighbour in Middleton said Lee had wanted to be in the Army 'since he was knee-high'.

After training as a machine-gunner, he proudly stood guard outside Buckingham Palace before being posted to Afghanistan in 2009.

Warrant Officer Miller said: 'He was readily identified while on parade by the huge smile on his face and how proud he was to be a member of the Drums. He would always stop for a chat just to tell me Manchester United would win the League again. My thoughts are with his family. They will always be part of the Fusilier family. Once a Fusilier: Always a Fusilier'.

At the time of the attack, Gaffer, he was working as an Army recruitment officer.

Gaffer, if you wish, I can do a bit more research. What's above has been copied from my copy of the Daily Star I bought earlier today.

[Drummond]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVhNHnr_ljA

[Drummond]

Be advised in advance .. this is not 'comfortable viewing'. I believe Lee's family didn't allow themselves enough time to grieve before facing up to public broadcasting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCHFU9isQ58

[aboutime]

Be advised in advance .. this is not 'comfortable viewing'. I believe Lee's family didn't allow themselves enough time to grieve before facing up to public broadcasting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCHFU9isQ58


Sir Drummond. Our condolences to all of you feeling the terrible pain of such hatred. I agree. It does appear the family didn't allow for enough private time before going out to an Uncaring, public opportunity to get their next 15 minutes of hatred exposed.

Every parent, brother, sister, son, and daughter living today who must be confronted with such dastardly, ugly, inhumanity as we have all seen, needs to remember this day in remembering 'There, but for the Grace of God...It could have been them!"

Our world has been permitted to make hatred rule, based on lies. While kindness, and honesty have been lost to the Selfish among us.

Please know. Many of us here in America feel your pain as if it were our own.
Only a Loving, Forgiving God can help us all.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. Our condolences to all of you feeling the terrible pain of such hatred. I agree. It does appear the family didn't allow for enough private time before going out to an Uncaring, public opportunity to get their next 15 minutes of hatred exposed.

Every parent, brother, sister, son, and daughter living today who must be confronted with such dastardly, ugly, inhumanity as we have all seen, needs to remember this day in remembering 'There, but for the Grace of God...It could have been them!"

Our world has been permitted to make hatred rule, based on lies. While kindness, and honesty have been lost to the Selfish among us.

Please know. Many of us here in America feel your pain as if it were our own.
Only a Loving, Forgiving God can help us all.

Aboutime. I just tried to send you a Reputation comment, but this site isn't allowing it.

But THANK YOU for your words. And likewise, my thanks to any of your compatriots who may want to identify with your sentiments. All very appreciated.

I can't do justice to what needs to be said, I don't think.

I am sure of one thing, though. Those who may still wish to see the creatures who exult in inflicting such savagery, and such pain, upon others, be viewable as 'human beings' ... I will not be as tolerant of them as I have been up to now.

Our scum enemy must be defeated. Justice, sheer humanity, demands nothing short of that. NO excusing them. NO seeing them through rose-tinted glasses. In the name of humanity, the protection of the innocent, such evil must meet its end.

[aboutime]

Aboutime. I just tried to send you a Reputation comment, but this site isn't allowing it.

But THANK YOU for your words. And likewise, my thanks to any of your compatriots who may want to identify with your sentiments. All very appreciated.

I can't do justice to what needs to be said, I don't think.

I am sure of one thing, though. Those who may still wish to see the creatures who exult in inflicting such savagery, and such pain, upon others, be viewable as 'human beings' ... I will not be as tolerant of them as I have been up to now.

Our scum enemy must be defeated. Justice, sheer humanity, demands nothing short of that. NO excusing them. NO seeing them through rose-tinted glasses. In the name of humanity, the protection of the innocent, such evil must meet its end.


Thank you Sir Drummond. But that's really not necessary. Just so you and others know. All of us share the same ideals, and wishes to be living in a free society without the SCUM OF THE EARTH who are instantly offended when identified as such. But then. They are their own, worst enemy. Let's keep it that way.
Here in the USA. We are about to observe (I despise saying Celebrate) our Memorial Day.
I know you in the U.K. have such a day as well. And it will be a much more somber one this year, considering
what just took place on Wednesday.
As I always proudly remind others about our five grandchildren...."Be sure to hug them, and tell them you love them...OFTEN".
I wish Americans, and you Brits would also Embrace doing that with our Veterans, and Military serving still today.
That may sound rather selfish of me...being a 30 year Navy veteran. But...I have survived two wars. One of which,
is remembered by veterans like me...as a terrible time to be in uniform.
And today. Your men, and women in Uniform must now face the same kinds of hatred...for proudly wearing their uniforms.
How sad is that?

[Drummond]

Thank you Sir Drummond. But that's really not necessary. Just so you and others know. All of us share the same ideals, and wishes to be living in a free society without the SCUM OF THE EARTH who are instantly offended when identified as such. But then. They are their own, worst enemy. Let's keep it that way.
Here in the USA. We are about to observe (I despise saying Celebrate) our Memorial Day.
I know you in the U.K. have such a day as well. And it will be a much more somber one this year, considering
what just took place on Wednesday.
As I always proudly remind others about our five grandchildren...."Be sure to hug them, and tell them you love them...OFTEN".
I wish Americans, and you Brits would also Embrace doing that with our Veterans, and Military serving still today.
That may sound rather selfish of me...being a 30 year Navy veteran. But...I have survived two wars. One of which,
is remembered by veterans like me...as a terrible time to be in uniform.
And today. Your men, and women in Uniform must now face the same kinds of hatred...for proudly wearing their uniforms.
How sad is that?

Immensely sad, Aboutime. I understand exactly what you're saying.

Nobody wants wars. To want them is madness. But there are times when you have to fight for what counts in this world. To stand up and be counted, and to never yield to the evil that would wish to break that spirit.

Such a debt is owed to those who HAVE stood against the world's evils and either survived their ordeal, or perished for the greater good. To those still serving, nothing less than respect and decency will do. Can there be a more heinous act than to gratuitously attack a military hero, and to NOT do so in honourable battle ?

Actually, I don't think we do have an equivalent to your Memorial Day, at least, not quite a calendar equivalent. The UK will have a holiday early next week, but that will be just a Spring Bank Holiday. We do have Remembrance Sunday, involving remembrance of war dead, where wreaths are laid on to cenotaphs ... but that won't be due until November, and I think your equivalent, unless I'm much mistaken, is Veterans Day ?

But still, Lee Rigby continues to dominate our news, and I'm sure that will continue for several more days. And perhaps our Bank Holiday will become one of reflection for what's just happened. Dare I hope, a turning-point in our thinking ?

I seriously doubt it, to be honest .. this'll all die down, no real lessons learned, and our Left will find a way of spinning reports so that no coherent conscious deliberation as to the real nature of the ideological menace we face will be perceived.

Political correctness will require it.

But maybe I'm wrong - here's hoping.

Signing off for the night -- my best wishes !

[fj1200]

nvm. Not the correct thread.

[Gaffer]

Be advised in advance .. this is not 'comfortable viewing'. I believe Lee's family didn't allow themselves enough time to grieve before facing up to public broadcasting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCHFU9isQ58

Thanks Drum, the media always tends to in-humanize the victim if they are in the military. Pisses me off no end when I see that. Good to see it is getting coverage. Hopefully the govt won't declare it work place violence so they can avoid paying any benefits.

[PostmodernProphet]

I don't know if this has already been addressed somewhere, but this woman has balls....



Woolwich Terror: Woman Confronts Attackershttp://news.sky.com/story/1094551/woolwich-terror-woman-confronts-attackers

Ingrid Loyau-Kennett, a mother-of-two and cub scout leader with training in first aid confronted the men, telling the pair to hand over their weapons and warning them: "You are going to lose."

[jafar00]

Perhaps, instead, you have no need of Quranic verses ?? Because, Jafar, this is what Tyr posted !

Naturally I'll understand if you have no comment at all to make on the following, from Tyr (I hope and trust he'll not mind my reposting his material):-


Any comments to offer, Jafar ?

2:191-193

These verses are about defensive warfare. Only fighting when attacked first and stopping the fight when they stop. "And slay them wherever ye find them" would be better translated as "Fight against them wherever they confront you" in today's English and is closer to the Arabic meaning. The revelation happened at the time of the treaty of Hudaybiyyah when the Muslims feared the same kind of persecution and attacks (nee terrorism) that drove them out of Mecca in the first place. I notice your "historical" link failed to mention that.

Likewise, the rest of what you reposted is misquoted, out of context or downright twisted out of original meaning obviously by someone who knows nothing about what they are talking about.


I well know that certain Muslim leaders go out of their way to distance themselves from association with terrorists and their acts. But, then .. aren't they just serving their own interests, and their people, by doing so ?

How is it self serving? There have been 150+ "revenge" attacks in the UK against Mosques and innocent Muslims in the wake of what those Nigerians did.

There have been many attacks on Muslims before that too like this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10033881/Racist-fear-in-Birmingham-murder-of-Muslim-grandfather.html . A 74y/o grandfather brutally stabbed to death on his way from from the Mosque. Isn't that also terrorism?

Thank God Australians are more reserved than the British, but if I was in the UK, I would be walking the street in fear of my life. All because of a murder that was portrayed as an act of Islam.

If you and others continue to promote your culture of hate, the blood of innocent people is and will be on your hands!


It would be odd indeed if the Muslim Council of Great Britain started declaring itself to be a PRO Jihadist outfit.

But the MCB is a pro jihad "outfit". But the not jihad as you erroneously believe it to be.

But here's the other side of the coin, Jafar - a Muslim cleric who takes the opposite view to the one you want to see prevail in forums like this one. Yes, he's not in the UK, so yes, he can speak more honestly, not having anything to lose ...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-woolwich-killings-suspect-michael-adebolajo-was-inspired-by-cleric-banned-from-uk-after-urging-followers-to-behead-enemies-of-islam-8630125.html
Do you think he speaks for Muslims? He was a nutcase and in that Muhajiroon bunch of morons. I was in the UK when they were around and I was warned about them by my Sheikh and others. It's good they were shut down.
OK, thanks for that account.

But, why Islam ? Why not Christianity ?

Too many contradictions. Like the one about the trinity. I grew up, despite going to Sunday school and church that Jesus (as) was a Prophet and quite separate from God. It was the only logical conclusion. I later found out that there was this complex, messed up trinity thing and it, and other things just turned me off. I am a logical thinker and Christianity just left me confused. Islam made perfect sense is really quite easy to understand.


.. Actually, I can think of one reason, for what little it's worth. I know the area you're talking about, and it has a large multicultural mix ... not least more than its fair share of mosques. I'm pretty sure that you'd have found it a lot easier to find a mosque there than a Christian church ... and many of the locals wouldn't have been happy at seeing you 'convert' to Christianity.

Actually the Mosque I went to was across the road from a Church in the old priory. Incidentally, the old statues and artworks inside were preserved but covered up, not destroyed. The Mosque is a place of goodness, peace and outreach to the community.


I'm glad, not least because if you're thinking about the Tesco in Tottenham High Road that's just yards away from Seven Sisters tube station, I used to shop there !!! So how about Aldi, at Bruce Grove ? Or how about going upmarket and visiting Waitrose, in Enfield Town ?

I used to use the tube to get to the Mosque. I sometimes also grabbed some of the greasy fish and chips near there. BTW, did you know that the fish and chips in Australia is so much better than the UK version? :p


Jafar ... I understand how much you want to paint Islam as being something highly reputable. But the other side of the coin, the 'nasty' side of Islam, DOES exist, it IS determined to mete out savageries, and it even WAS, AND IS, ACTIVE IN THE VERY AREA YOU WERE CONVERTED IN !!!

What you are talking about is Wahhabism which is far from Islam. At least you know there is one Mosque in the area actively combating the Wahhabis in a battle of spiritual proportions.


.... and here's the thing. You have admitted, and repeatedly, to being a supporter of Hamas. Hamas bombs, and if it ever gets the chance, it KILLS its Israeli victims. I ask you to reconcile your refusal to rescind that support with the image-building you've indulged in, here.

I have said a few times that I support Hamas only in their struggle against Israeli oppression and murder. Why do you keep asking? State sponsored terrorism is never right and should be resisted wherever it rears it's ugly head even if those resisting are a little off colour.


What's more, Jafar, I've never known you to type a kind word for any Jew on this forum. Always, and characteristically of the racial hatreds Hamas and other Muslims indulge in, you yourself find excuses to further anti-Semitic propaganda agendas yourself.

Oh, mean you've never seen...

Where did you get that I hate Jews? My lawyer is Jewish. I have Jewish (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35810-Iran-drafts-bill-to-block-Hormuz-for-Gulf-oil-tankers&p=563393#post563393) employees. (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35810-Iran-drafts-bill-to-block-Hormuz-for-Gulf-oil-tankers&p=563393#post563393)

or

Ok. This is how it is. I don't hate Jews. I even have a Jewishlawyer whom I pay considerable sums of money to for his services. We even buy each other lunch sometimes. I also have Jewish (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35810-Iran-drafts-bill-to-block-Hormuz-for-Gulf-oil-tankers&p=562637#post562637) employees. I even have a couple of Americans. (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35810-Iran-drafts-bill-to-block-Hormuz-for-Gulf-oil-tankers&p=562637#post562637)

or

my Jewishlawyer and I both have beards, both object to women parading in bikinis in the street in Manly, and both complain about the lack of Halal/Kosher options in Sydney. ;) (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?35786-Military-officer-killed&p=562632&highlight=jewish+lawyer#post562632)

I don't blame you for missing those comments. Especially as you keep missing Islamic condemnations for terrorist acts all the time. But I guess real information about Islam and what it stands for doesn't advance your far right agenda?


And how do you really feel about Tesco, anyway ... WASN'T ITS ORIGINAL OWNER A JEW ? ISN'T IT STILL A JEWISH-OWNED SUPERMARKET CHAIN ??

Whatever. I also used to get lunch at a Jewish Deli in the west end. Gaby's near Leicester Square station. Do you know it? Their salads were amazing and they have a famous beef sandwich which is pretty tasty too.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Perhaps, instead, you have no need of Quranic verses ?? Because, Jafar, this is what Tyr posted !

Naturally I'll understand if you have no comment at all to make on the following, from Tyr (I hope and trust he'll not mind my reposting his material):-


Any comments to offer, Jafar ?

As always feel free to repost any linked source I provide my good friend. I know that you will do so with the good and clear intent to further enlighten those reading the comments posted here.

Always enjoy your enlightened and trustworthy posts myself. Must admit to having learned a great deal from you and tons of knowledge gained on the Brit culture/politics and destruction being wrought over there by the Muslims and their lowlife Leftist allies!

Perhaps ask Jafar to post which Koranic verses were wrong? And detail how/why they were wrong in his opinion. --TYR

[Drummond]

I came across this in today's Sun newspaper (British tabloid).

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4953956/Anjem-Choudary-Lee-Rigby-will-burn-in-hellfire.html


HATE preacher Anjem Choudary has been filmed claiming murdered soldier Lee Rigby will “burn in hellfire”.

He also told followers that Michael Adebolajo, accused of killing Lee in Woolwich, South London, is “a nice man”.

Police have repeatedly failed to arrest Choudary over his inflammatory outbursts.

Vile Choudary told his followers Lee deserves no sympathy — but insisted those accused of his barbaric murder are martyrs.

The extremist preacher was caught on film claiming Drummer Lee, hacked to death in the street, would be tortured in hell for not being Muslim.

He added: “Allah said very clearly in the Koran ‘Don’t feel sorry for the non-Muslims.’

“So as an adult non-Muslim, whether he is part of the Army or not part of the Army, if he dies in a state of disbelief then he is going to go to the hellfire.

“That’s what I believe so I’m not going to feel sorry for non-Muslims"

“We invite them to embrace the message of Islam. If they don’t, then obviously if they die like that they’re going to the hellfires.”

Choudary, filmed speaking on Friday at his office near Walthamstow mosque in East London, refused to condemn Lee’s alleged killers.

He said: “As far as they are concerned I believe that they were doing what they believed to be Islamically correct.

“Only Allah can judge them in the hereafter for what they did in their life. In their eyes they are martyrs and what I say is Allah may accept them into paradise.
“I believe all Muslims will eventually go to paradise.”

Choudary also launched a disgraceful attack on Help for Heroes — the Armed Forces charity whose top Lee, 25, was wearing when he was singled out for attack in Woolwich, South London.

Choudary was also full of praise for Michael Adebolajo, 28, who along with Michael Adebowale, 22, is accused of murdering Lee.

The preacher, calling Adebolajo by his Muslim name Mujahid, said: “I knew him for a number of years. Mujahid was a very nice man in fact. He attended lectures, went to demonstrations. There is no difference between him and many others who attended our activities.”

Choudary, who ran outlawed extremist group al-Muhajiroun, has been repeatedly accused of encouraging impressionable young Muslims to become terrorists.

Despite numerous calls for his arrest, he remains at large.

I don't think I need add any comments ..

[aboutime]

I came across this in today's Sun newspaper (British tabloid).

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4953956/Anjem-Choudary-Lee-Rigby-will-burn-in-hellfire.html



I don't think I need add any comments ..


Sir Drummond. You are correct. No more comments needed.

Amazing how even over there in the U.K. Obama's Speech Writers are hard at work!

Can't wait to see the reactions to this kind of TRUTH.

[jimnyc]

Police have repeatedly failed to arrest Choudary over his inflammatory outbursts.

I believe Jafar is on record of being against 'full' freedom of speech, and that people should be arrested/punished/fine for insults and such. And outside of him, some Islamic areas will have you killed for blasphemy. In other words, unlike America, Muslims think there should be limitations, that you can't shouldn't just be able to insult people and get away with it. But when guys like this speak from their pedestals, those complaints go silent, and even worse, often the opposite happens and cockroaches like this are revered.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. You are correct. No more comments needed.

Amazing how even over there in the U.K. Obama's Speech Writers are hard at work!

Can't wait to see the reactions to this kind of TRUTH.

Well, Jafar's own reaction (should he offer one) will be all too predictable .. Choudary 'isn't an Islamist'.

That opinion will, of course, ignore Choudary's standing as a Sharia Court judge ...

It will also ignore the fact that Choudary's 'outlawed' group, referred to in the article, was once viewed by our authorities as a MAINSTREAM Muslim group. It was only outlawed once they threatened to hold a demonstration timed to coincide with a remembrance street procession, through Wootton Bassett, where the citizens regularly stood in the street as a mark of respect as coffins bearing killed British servicemen were taken to their resting places.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20743952


The coffins of 355 fallen military personnel passed through Wootton Bassett between spring 2007 and summer 2011. Close to RAF Lyneham where the bodies were repatriated, the High Street became a focal point for families and friends of the deceased.

The town has since been renamed Royal Wootton Bassett, in recognition of the respect and support it gave to the lost military personnel and their families.

As one of the guest editors of BBC Radio 4's Today programme, comedian Al Murray went to Wiltshire to meet some of those who played a part in the repatriation ceremonies - including 96-year-old Ken Scott.

The former Desert Rat collected dozens of the personal tributes left by service families. He says the moving scenes he witnessed in his town have left a lasting impression on how he views war.

[fj1200]

I came across this in today's Sun newspaper (British tabloid).

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4953956/Anjem-Choudary-Lee-Rigby-will-burn-in-hellfire.html


Police have repeatedly failed to arrest Choudary over his inflammatory outbursts.

I don't think I need add any comments ..

He's a dirtbag but what law has he broken?

[aboutime]

Well, Jafar's own reaction (should he offer one) will be all too predictable .. Choudary 'isn't an Islamist'.

That opinion will, of course, ignore Choudary's standing as a Sharia Court judge ...

It will also ignore the fact that Choudary's 'outlawed' group, referred to in the article, was once viewed by our authorities as a MAINSTREAM Muslim group. It was only outlawed once they threatened to hold a demonstration timed to coincide with a remembrance street procession, through Wootton Bassett, where the citizens regularly stood in the street as a mark of respect as coffins bearing killed British servicemen were taken to their resting places.


Sir Drummond. As you stated above. So to do many Americans who remain uninformed, and selfish also...seemingly, quietly, and hopefully also wish for our Constitutional law to be replaced with, or patterned upon Sharia Law...to appease the very same kind of people who have come here and APPLAUD the likes of Choudary...or Jafar.
Underlining what Obama's primary goal has been to appease, and never insult anyone of the Muslim, or Islamic faith.
Combine the fact that Obama claimed to be a Constitutional Lawyer...ACORN style, in Chicago, and his primary goals were hidden in convincing the Un, or Under educated class that Sharia types of Laws are far more Humanitarian..in beheading those who disagree. I just wonder...where it will end.
Meanwhile. Those who deny it, and praise Obama will accuse me, and others of Terror, and Racism to defend themselves.

[Drummond]

He's a dirtbag but what law has he broken?

He is, indeed, a Muslim dirtbag.

As for British law ... it's a grey area. Arguably, he could be prosecuted for incitement to violence, or for publicly supporting murder. The hatespeech legislation we have doesn't precisely address this sort of issue - it's more geared to cracking down on people inciting antisocial actions against others of an ethnic minority, or on religious grounds.

However ... since he means to approve of murder committed in the furtherance of a religion, and from that, to say that it's religiously defensible .. it can be argued that he is violating hatespeech legislation.

As I say, in this precise context, it's a grey area. No doubt Choudary's lawyers would think they could successfully defend Choudary if that ever went to court. And it may well be that our authorities want to take action against Choudary, but prefer to wait until they had a better case to prosecute him with.

[aboutime]

He is, indeed, a Muslim dirtbag.

As for British law ... it's a grey area. Arguably, he could be prosecuted for incitement to violence, or for publicly supporting murder. The hatespeech legislation we have doesn't precisely address this sort of issue - it's more geared to cracking down on people inciting antisocial actions against others of an ethnic minority, or on religious grounds.

However ... since he means to approve of murder committed in the furtherance of a religion, and from that, to say that it's religiously defensible .. it can be argued that he is violating hatespeech legislation.

As I say, in this precise context, it's a grey area. No doubt Choudary's lawyers would think they could successfully defend Choudary if that ever went to court. And it may well be that our authorities want to take action against Choudary, but prefer to wait until they had a better case to prosecute him with.


Sir Drummond. We should thank fj for proving our point.

By the way. Whenever I see any response, or post of 'fj'. I am merely reminded that 'fj' stands for "F'in Joke" in defending the Choudary's of the world.

[fj1200]

He is, indeed, a Muslim dirtbag.

As for British law ... it's a grey area.

I'm pretty sure Muslim isn't against the law but it would make an interesting test case.

[fj1200]

... defending the Choudary's of the world.


He's a dirtbag...

:dunno: Do you just type to hear the clicky-clacky of your keyboard?

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. As you stated above. So to do many Americans who remain uninformed, and selfish also...seemingly, quietly, and hopefully also wish for our Constitutional law to be replaced with, or patterned upon Sharia Law...to appease the very same kind of people who have come here and APPLAUD the likes of Choudary...or Jafar.
Underlining what Obama's primary goal has been to appease, and never insult anyone of the Muslim, or Islamic faith.
Combine the fact that Obama claimed to be a Constitutional Lawyer...ACORN style, in Chicago, and his primary goals were hidden in convincing the Un, or Under educated class that Sharia types of Laws are far more Humanitarian..in beheading those who disagree. I just wonder...where it will end.
Meanwhile. Those who deny it, and praise Obama will accuse me, and others of Terror, and Racism to defend themselves.

Choudary once intended to go to America and organise a pro-Sharia Muslim protest outside the White House. I'm not sure if it ever went ahead. But if it had, Obama could've invited him in for a nice, cozy chat ... Choudary, by the way, is also a qualified lawyer (or 'solicitor', as we'd say over here).

Playing the racism card is a very common tactic used by Muslims in particular to silence their opposition. Our Socialist Government tried to create such a climate of tolerance that to be seen to show ANY intolerance towards Muslims, or other minority faiths, automatically led the 'offender' open to a charge of racism.

[aboutime]

:dunno: Do you just type to hear the clicky-clacky of your keyboard?


Sure do. Look at how it got you to prove how everything I've been saying about you was TRUE.

[Drummond]

I'm pretty sure Muslim isn't against the law but it would make an interesting test case.

To the extent that your post has coherence, I think you've chosen to take my post out of context.

[fj1200]

To the extent that your post has coherence, I think you've chosen to take my post out of context.

To the extent that you need to make tangential comments in all of your posts, how did I take it out of context?

[fj1200]

Sure do. Look at how it got you to prove how everything I've been saying about you was TRUE.

I'm not sure what's worse, that you think your blather has merit or that your blather receives thanks.

[aboutime]

To the extent that you need to make tangential comments in all of your posts, how did I take it out of context?


Sir Drummond. Don't fall for the 'joke's trick. That's a typical Liberal kind of tactic used here more often than Obama's lies.

fj Must always ask another question, rather than tie himself down with any responsibility to answer your question first.

In other words. No answers will be forthcoming as long as the joke has control of the discussion.

I may be insane. But that's how I recognize everyone else around me who believes ONLY THEY are the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[fj1200]

fj Must always ask another question, rather than tie himself down with any responsibility to answer your question first.

He didn't ask a question. But I can see how you think questions and answers are "liberal tactics." :rolleyes:

[aboutime]

He didn't ask a question. But I can see how you think questions and answers are "liberal tactics." :rolleyes:


Liberally speaking. You are right on the mark.

[Drummond]

To the extent that you need to make tangential comments in all of your posts, how did I take it out of context?

With the ease that comes of much practice ?

Here's what you chose to ignore ...


Arguably, he could be prosecuted for incitement to violence, or for publicly supporting murder. The hatespeech legislation we have doesn't precisely address this sort of issue - it's more geared to cracking down on people inciting antisocial actions against others of an ethnic minority, or on religious grounds.

However ... since he means to approve of murder committed in the furtherance of a religion, and from that, to say that it's religiously defensible .. it can be argued that he is violating hatespeech legislation.

As I say, in this precise context, it's a grey area.

The items you chose to totally ignore - even though they had relevance to the case I was making - are as indicated.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. Don't fall for the 'joke's trick. That's a typical Liberal kind of tactic used here more often than Obama's lies.

fj Must always ask another question, rather than tie himself down with any responsibility to answer your question first.

In other words. No answers will be forthcoming as long as the joke has control of the discussion.

I may be insane. But that's how I recognize everyone else around me who believes ONLY THEY are the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Don't worry. I'm well aware that FJ isn't interested in serious, or even sensible, discussion.

As was the case in another thread, he has his ego to feed. He has his chance at proper discussion. Or, he can do the Leftie thing ...

[fj1200]

With the ease that comes of much practice ?

:facepalm99:


Here's what you chose to ignore ...

The items you chose to totally ignore - even though they had relevance to the case I was making - are as indicated.

I didn't ignore it; I chose not to post your whole post. You should stop trying to find ways to be offended. You called it a "grey area" and stated "arguably;" I agree; I think it would make a good test case.


Don't worry. I'm well aware that FJ isn't interested in serious, or even sensible, discussion.

As was the case in another thread, he has his ego to feed. He has his chance at proper discussion. Or, he can do the Leftie thing ...

:facepalm99: For criminy sake, I can't even ask a question without you knuckleheads getting all pissy.