Forum menu
It doesn't take a genius or the CIA to kidnap every white person you see until you have a few dozen Americans and Brits, then look up the Nato conference date on your mobile phone.
Well perhaps it isn't quite as easy as it seems it should be, if that was their intention, as jivebunny claims, then they failed miserably - none of the beheadings coincided with the NATO conference.
This chap has help murder three innocent people. He should be executed in the same way Nazi killers were executed for the holocaust.
after a conviction following a full criminal trial before a duly constituted international tribunal?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials
I think jivehoneys point is that the cia/nato/they organised it all as an excuse for another jolly good adventure in the sand and to keep the arms manufacturers happy etc. Which is only slightly more bonkers than some of the kill him and all his family posts.
These are not conflicts that can be won, killing the people doing this won't get rid of their ideas. Bombing them from a great height will only fuel their propaganda. Be prepared for a lot of videos of dead children being linked to air strikes, the media aware angle is one of the most worrying parts for me.
Now everyone knows I like a good cut and paste but even i draw the line at quoting myself and replying
OK, maybe I'm too lazy to do the research myself at the mo and I'm nagging like a 6 year old so someone else will do it for me; extra points if you do actually manage to restrain and question Jihadi John
Why choose selective pieces to quote
Because what I quoted, was the bit that was relevant to the question I asked you.
whilst avoiding other questions?
Nobody has asked me any questions.
Point out where they have and I'll gladly answer them.
Maybe if you were genuinely interested you'd research these matters for yourself and come up with your own conclusions..
And where do you get the idea I haven't?
That way you'd be better informed, without excessive bias from my perspective.
You're just going to have to trust me on this.
Your perspective, doesn't have any effect at all, on what I think about anything.
..Unless you need to be told what to think?
What have a I said about this subject that would lead you believe that ?
Quote please.
PS.
You didn't answer my question.
Why hide behind sarcasm.
Why not just make your point ? Accuse away.
OK, maybe I'm too lazy to do the research .....
I suspect that's probably true. It took me several seconds to figure out that the NATO Conference occurred on 4/5 Sept and that no one was executed on those two days.
Well, 10,000 up votes for "bomb them all" and 200 down votes on the Daily Heils comments section.
I'm glad the British are finally showing their sense of proportionality, like those same Daily Mailers ask of Israelis. Keep calm and carry on hey.
I'm not going to think about this anymore, waste of my time, I'm going to switch off my brain and get my fill of nihilist humour from "It's always sunny in Philly". ****ing stupid humans.
[img] http://pl.memgenerator.pl/mem-image/morons-everywhere-pl-ffffff [/img]
It took me several seconds to figure out that the NATO Conference occurred on 4/5 Sept and that no one was executed on those two days.
Fair point but you wouldn't expect it to happen on those days themselves as the conference delegates would be busy negotiating; the scene has to be set beforehand, the threat level raised for ample dramatic effect.
Lets get this down to basics:
Do the government have a history of lying?
Are there links between the media and government?
Which is more profitable, War or Peace?
Who profits from war?
Do you have a history of coming up with conspiracy theories ?
Peace. Wars have this magical propensity for stuffing up world trade.
Peace. Wars have this propensity to stuff up world trade.
I like that theory, just wish world leaders shared your viewpoint
These are not conflicts that can be won, killing the people doing this won't get rid of their ideas.
It will stop them from killing the innocent people they were on their way to kill when the got bombed.
Bombs have big blast radiuses. Bombs should only be used in an actual full on shooting match to protect your own soldiers and civilians, not for targeted killings in residential areas.
It's like hitting a wasp on a hornets nest with a jack hammer.
Use smaller bombs.
Do you have a history of coming up with conspiracy theories ?
I have a history of questioning the system and exposing a large number of truths that are generally hidden from mass media...
When you think about it, our understanding of all the most intrinsic factors of our existence and surroundings are conspiracy theory:
Researched facts, pieced together with conjecture
Small bombs the size of grenades will not be accurate enough, less mass means they tend to disperse more over long distances. You want to kill people with no causalities then you have to get up close and personal. It's that simple.
Bombing will achieve not one military objective outside of maybe protecting kurds etc. People over estimate just how "awesome" military hardware is.
chip - Member
These are not conflicts that can be won, killing the people doing this won't get rid of their ideas.
It will stop them from killing the innocent people they were on their way to kill when the got bombed.
and one fighter becomes a martyr and 10 more take his place.
Bomb them when they are trying to take a city whilst working with the people on the ground to defend that city.
Stopping them taking a city easier from the skies while they are meeting resistance from with in.
Once a city has fallen then you have to take it back on the ground.
and one fighter becomes a martyr and 10 more take his place.
Kill them too.
They don't always operate like that though, they use a mix of conventional and insurgent tactics. How can you bomb an army that slowly filters into a city unbeknownst to the security services? An army like ISIS will do their utmost best never to be caught out in the open.
And then where does the edge of a city start? Where do you draw the lines as to where the bombs fall. "Oh, they've crossed the ring road! Can't drop the bombs now!" No, the bombs carry on falling and children and women start dying.
That's what the public and politicians don't get, they have completely unrealistic expectations of what the military can do. Force needs to be used, with careful thought about your objectives and the potential outcomes.
Bomb all the ones you can while you can.
Less of them left to infiltrate the cities.
So you think we can tell the difference between pick up trucks full of terrorists and pick up trucks full of women and children now? So much surveillance and human based intel has to go into doing that and then by that time, all the others have slowly seeped into your city. The old adage that the bomber always get's through rings as true today as it did during world war 2.
To give you an idea of how hard this is, the Israelis actually have a reasonably decent insurgent to civilian ratio and look at the issues even that caused!
I have a history of questioning the system [b]and exposing a large number of truths that are generally hidden from mass media[/b]...
Examples please.
I would hit the ones with the 50 cal guns bolted in the back and surrounding vehicles .
Maybe the tanks and the hummers too.
It's my hunch they are not families out for a picnic.
And then they change their tactics and retreat into the shadows.
I support limited strikes to support the kurds but that's it, as we don't have credible resources, defined long term objectives and political will to back a larger campaign up. Bombing Syria and Iraq into the stone age, is IMO a completely idiotic idea that's barely worth my time thinking about if it wasn't for the fact that so many people seem to support it.
Bomb them when they are trying to take a city whilst working with the people on the ground to defend that city.
Stopping them taking a city easier from the skies while they are meeting resistance from with in.Once a city has fallen then you have to take it back on the ground.
[img] 
[/img]
Everyone except Generals Keitel, Jodl, Krebs, and Burgdorf, leave the room.
Researched [s]facts[/s] theories, pieced together with conjecture
FTFY.
There's a more interesting discussion to be had rather than some torture porn circle jerk. Sorry.
quite. I see someone also managed to squeeze in a bit of their male prison rape fantasy into the discussion. this thread really is an insight into the minds of some posters.
[quote=chip]Kill them too.
[url= http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Project_Insight ]What we need is a way of targeting all of our enemies and eliminating anyone who disagrees with us[/url]
or perhaps
[url= http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181689/ ]A way of working out who will do bad things and getting rid of them before they do.[/url]
It doesn't take a genius or the CIA
ISWYDT
I have a history of questioning the system and exposing a large number of truths that are generally hidden from mass media...Examples please.
From day 1, I told you there was something dodgy about Lee Rigby:
Same with Max Clifford; was posting about him way before he got arrested
Given you the lowdown on Rupert Murdoch's links to Rothschilds, Dick Cheney (thus Halliburton, who seem to do quite well out of the war business) and Oil & Gas in Israel
And most important of all, I keep banging on about child trafficking from care homes across the UK and further afield, involving members of the political elite and including the very murky case of Jimmy Savile on Jersey, the worlds wealthiest tax haven which is under the authority of the Queen.
So Mr Glover, what have you brought to the table of late?
Well, this a seriously weird thread. How many of you posting about what you'd do to him have served in the forces? I can understand this, to a degree, from someone who has actually been there / done that, but from somebody that hasn't? Just adolescent ****. Without wanting to get into jivehoneyjive territory, I have doubts that this guy is the one actually carrying out the beheadings - I tend to think he's just the poster boy for IS, a very good attempt to create a bogeyman that's more scarey because he's one of us. Then again, that's immaterial, he's still involved in this shit, so I suppose the next question would be what to do with him if he's ever identified and captured alive. In my opinion, he's too far gone now, too radicalised and beyond any form of rehabilitation. I suppose that whatever happens to him, it needs to be done with the minimum amount of publicity - he's obviously prepared to go to horrendous lengths for his ideology, which I would imagine includes dying for his cause, so it would be playing into IS' hands to make a martyr of him. As far as torture is concerned, would that bring back any of the people that have been killed? Don't get me wrong, I feel no sympathy for this guy whatsoever, I just know I wouldn't be capable of torturing someone. I suppose (and also apologise for rambling on) that my response to the original post would be that I hope he's found and stopped, by whatever means necessary, and if that includes killing him, then fair enough - I just can't get into all this bum him to death nonsense that's being posted.
+1 Mitch.
I understand that these people want to be martyrs.
Well - good luck with that.
Seriously. 😀
.
What we should do is the very worst we can within our system. Trace him, detain him, arrest him give him a fair trial and if/when guilty sentence him to a whole life tariff . During that process interrogate him so as to obtain hard intelligence about associates and activities and soft about background motives opinions.
It is amusing that those who want the worst for him are dismissed as liberal hand wringers while those who want to give him the martyrs death, he no doubt boasts of craving, see their stance as heroic and practical.
jj most probably spent ages on the internet bragging about the riotous justice he would bring to those who had in his eyes attacked his people . just as on here the "hard men" fantasise about jj being killed or raped or his family rounded up (WTF) or even everyone who practices the religion he claims to follow being collectively punished.
What we should do is address the problem at home, that condones extremism, tolerates ghettoisation of large tracts of our cities and brings festering resentment.
You could even argue that we are breeding an entire legion of fifth columnists if we are indeed 'at war against terror' which we're not really.
This misguided idiot would not be acting the way he is without assuming an audience and probably considering himself a rockstar of barbarism against the 'infidel' when in point of fact he's a coward who won't even show his face and can only fight defenceless care workers and journo's, not exactly a warrior of the first order.
There is only one course of action against violence at this level and it isn't by appeasement, what was it Churchill said about appeasement? Feeding a crocodile in the hope he won't eat you? That is what has being going on for so long, on top of all the idiotic errors in foreign policy concerning the Middle East.
It's almost got to the state where if they kill one of ours we should then line up ten of theirs (Hate preaching Mullahs) in orange with meat cleavers at their necks then challenge them to kill one more, that is the only level you can appeal to these sort of medieval butchers.
Or the obvious nuke it from orbit solution to the middle east.
I'd like to hear 'Uncle' TomW1987 and Junkyard boys solution to the issue. Because so far left leaning liberal views and tolerance hasn't exactly helped things back here has it?
Me, I'd rid the country of Mosques, make the religion illegal along with wearing the clothing that freely identifies 'them' as a group separate to the rest of us and force assimilation into the UK way of things, or don't and 'don't' carries the option of a one way fare anywhere they wish but here.
We should have no place for a mysogynistic homophobic culture within our midst, never mind an audience that claps for the wrong side in a cricket match and this latest example is way beyond mysogyny and homophobia, treason is actually what's going on as is everyone who supports them.
What would I do? Drop him with a single shot, bury the body alongside a pig and tell no one.
Me, I'd rid the country of Mosques, make the religion illegal along with wearing the clothing that freely identifies 'them' as a group separate to the rest of us and force assimilation into the UK way of things, or don't and 'don't' carries the option of a one way fare anywhere they wish but here.
How does that work?
force assimilation into the UK way of things
You mean freedom of speech, freedom of worship, the freedom to wear whatever clothes you like?
I am all for some direct action against ISIS but that just sounds like EDL nonsense.
FWIW I would suggest that as soon as any of their vehicles move, tanks, humvees etc, they are hit by drones, apaches etc. If you can confirm a large group in one place, a fuel air bomb would be handy.
gobuchul - Member
How does that work?force assimilation into the UK way of things
You mean freedom of speech, freedom of worship, the freedom to wear whatever clothes you like?
Pretty much, freedom of speech? That went long ago, brought about exactly in the quest to placate religious minorities.
It's England, you want to come here and be religious? Use one of the ones we already have, sorry Islam is now illegal, it's a violent and aggressive belief system and it's no longer tolerated here, you had your chance.
The Last war if you were German or Japanese you went to internment camps, I'm not even suggesting that. I'm suggesting the removal of the root cause of all this, Islamic religious fervour. Not exactly rocket science to simply get rid of it.
jivehoneyjive - MemberFrom day 1, I told you there was something dodgy about Lee Rigby
You haven't got a photo of him with Jimmy Savile have you?
Has rosaatease actually broken the law with his rantings yet? Coz I'm not sure I'd be wanting that kind of islamaphobic bs on my website.
"has rosaatease actually broken the law with his rantings yet?"
a few laws of logic and common sense clearly broken.
If the laws of logic and common sense were legally enforcible, I'd be going down for a long time with no parole!
"Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
Hatred against persons on religious grounds
Meaning of “religious hatred”
29A
Meaning of “religious hatred”
.
In this Part “religious hatred” means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.
Acts intended to stir up religious hatred
29B
Use of words or behaviour or display of written material
.
(1)
A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
.
(2)
An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the written material is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and are not heard or seen except by other persons in that or another dwelling.
.
(3)
A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing an offence under this section.
.
(4)
In proceedings for an offence under this section it is a defence for the accused to prove that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the written material displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling.
.
(5)
This section does not apply to words or behaviour used, or written material displayed, solely for the purpose of being included in a programme service."
So close but no crime imho.