European Terror Attacks

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Think we all "get" that, was just so obvious it didn't need saying

not judging by some of the posts in this thread.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by martyh

not judging by some of the posts in this thread.

Indeed. One poster in particular stands out.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Indeed. One poster in particular stands out.

You're the main one that doesn't get it

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You'll have to tell me where it says that.

I haven't read the whole thing, but I've looked in the sections where I thought it might be and can't find it.

Ah sorry - the good stuff is in the consultation document attached.

Nurseries being required to monitor for risk of terrorism in their kids is a highlight.

---------- Post added at 17:09 ---------- Previous post was at 17:02 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

You're the main one that doesn't get it

The stupid and the powerful both have one characteristic in common - they alter the facts to suit their opinions.

At no point have I advocated breaking the law, even though I don't agree with it, so

Do remember to remove your head from there first if you wish to shove the above animated finger up your hindmost orifice.

Have a great day!

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The stupid and the powerful both have one characteristic in common - they alter the facts to suit their opinions.

At no point have I advocated breaking the law, even though I don't agree with it, so

Do remember to remove your head from there first if you wish to shove the above animated finger up your hindmost orifice.

Have a great day!

Nobody has said you advocate breaking the law ,i have just said that you simply do not get it and the majority of your posts backs that up

And that post says it all really ,you lost the argument so resort to insults

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by martyh

Nobody has said you advocate breaking the law ,i have just said that you simply do not get it and the majority of your posts backs that up

And that post says it all really ,you lost the argument so resort to insults

I wasn't aware there was an argument to be had given that you haven't actually offered one with any kind of clarity at any point. The total lack of agreement from anyone with what you've said implies that any argument you did have was a fairly weak one.

I think the general gist of what you're saying is that the cartoons shouldn't be republished because of either 1) The repercussions and/or 2) It offends religious sensibilities.

Now if it's the first one there is no logic in this behaviour and, hence, cause and effect are somewhat broken. These nutjobs will always find an excuse. In the case of smaller news organisations it's also projecting cowardice onto them. While I see the point that large news organisations may be vulnerable smaller publications should, in the UK, not be.

If it's the second you're being an illiberal sycophant who appears more concerned with the obsessions of Koran literalists within a couple of flavours of Islam than basic human rights.

Both views are an insult to way more than just me. Contemptible.

EDIT: Incidentally something that's noteworthy is your lack of condemnation of the actions of the terrorists beyond that it was 'way OTT'. Quite the opposite actually, your opinion appears to be that Charlie Hebdo's staff, for want of a better phrase, 'had it coming'.

To borrow a phrase from you 'What a piece of work...'

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Do remember to remove your head from there first if you wish to shove the above animated finger up your hindmost orifice.

Have a great day!

Freedom of speech at its best

There are some in this thread that would be at the front of the line to get their white feathers

[Derek]

Calm down and try and keep it civil

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Derek

Calm down and try and keep it civil

Sorry Boss!

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Sorry Boss!

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I think the general gist of what you're saying is that the cartoons shouldn't be republished because of either 1) The repercussions and/or 2) It offends religious sensibilities.

Now if it's the first one there is no logic in this behaviour and, hence, cause and effect are somewhat broken. These nutjobs will always find an excuse. In the case of smaller news organisations it's also projecting cowardice onto them. While I see the point that large news organisations may be vulnerable smaller publications should, in the UK, not be.

If it's the second you're being an illiberal sycophant who appears more concerned with the obsessions of Koran literalists within a couple of flavours of Islam than basic human rights.

Both views are an insult to way more than just me. Contemptible.

I've not seen him say anything like that. What I'm reading is "have your freedom of speech but accept that it will likely cause a reaction".

I don't see marty sticking up for Islamic nutters, being an apologist for them or saying anything that appears sympathetic to their 'cause'.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

, your opinion appears to be that Charlie Hebdo's staff, for want of a better phrase, 'had it coming'.

To borrow a phrase from you 'What a piece of work...'

That right there shows that you have totally and utterly missed the whole point of what I have been trying to get through to you so i'm going to leave you to fester in your own little cess pit of hatred for everything that doesn't meet your approval.

Incidentally something that's noteworthy is your lack of condemnation of the actions of the terrorists beyond that it was 'way OTT'.

So, must i right everything i feel just for your benefit ? are you that important? incase it has escaped your notice i don't spend every waking moment on this forum like you condeming and insulting eveything from religion to politicians .The only reason i stayed in this thread after my initial comment on the BBCs decision to not republish the cartoons was your insistance that our press where cowards and since they appeared to have the same view as me i took your remark personally

---------- Post added at 18:26 ---------- Previous post was at 18:21 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Freedom of speech at its best

There are some in this thread that would be at the front of the line to get their white feathers

That's a particularly distastful comment ,even for you

---------- Post added at 18:30 ---------- Previous post was at 18:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

I've not seen him say anything like that. What I'm reading is "have your freedom of speech but accept that it will likely cause a reaction".

I don't see marty sticking up for Islamic nutters, being an apologist for them or saying anything that appears sympathetic to their 'cause'.

Thank you Russ ,at least someone is bothering to read the posts properly

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by martyh

That's a particularly distastful comment ,even for you[COLOR="Silver"]

Just exercising freedom of speech

Originally Posted by Sirius

Just exercising freedom of speech

Just because you can, doesn't mean you have to....

[Osem]

All this disagreement yet still no beheadings...

I listened to a young Muslim who called into LBC this morning. Not in connection with this matter, I'll grant you, but in connection with the case of a Christian health visitor who's been disciplined for supposedly 'bullying' a Muslim. Something he felt was ridiculous. He spoke for a good while and talked a lot of common sense which at his age I don't suppose I had. I just wish the media would give more 'airtime' to people like him instead of fixating on the extremists which, let's face it, can be found amongst all communities.