Home › Forums › Chat Forum › "Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris
- This topic has 1,799 replies, 156 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by Drac.
-
"Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris
-
jambalayaFree Member
Choudhray linked to Sharia4Belgium
Belgian prosecutors have linked the British hate preacher Anjem Choudary to Fouad Belkacem, the leader of a now-disbanded extremist group, Sharia4Belgium, which was established under Choudary’s guidance to campaign for sharia law in that country.
jambalayaFree Member@Donk – its a good question and always difficult ground when you have people fighting against a government. The justification for the West looking to get involved in Syria was the amount of civilians being targeted by barrel bombs and even chemical weapons by the Assad government. There were 200,000 deaths mostly civilian. Yes the Free Syrian Army / IS dynamic was crucial. IS made a point of attacking the FSA and not Assad in order to gain control. Have a look through ViceNews if you wish – some excellent written reports and videos including some coverage of the loose alliances / agreements of convenience between different groups
CougarFull Memberthe title of shoe bomber had been taken so this lad decided he’d stuff the explosives into his pants and try and blow up a plane that way.
Did he misunderstand the concept of planting a bomb in the cockpit?
jambalayaFree Member@jive, its sometimes necessary to talk to bad people to try and talk them out of their current behaviour.
D0NKFull Memberits a good question and always difficult ground when you have people fighting against a government
ok, it’s just your “some serious questions need to be asked” comment made you sound (to me) more confident. If some UK citizens had been fighting for the plucky underdogs the UK were supporting presumably we would then let them back into the country. If the UK switch sides halfway through the conflict I personally think UK borders would still be on dodgy ground denying them entry afterwards.
<edit> although there may well be other factors of course
jivehoneyjiveFree Memberits sometimes necessary to talk to bad people to try and talk them out of their current behaviour.
Indeed:
somafunkFull MemberAs per talking to bad people : we did it in Ireland with success.
I can see no way forward for the currently increasing amount of radical Islamic conflicts with regard to our ineffective aggressive/offensive tactics other than at some point we are going to have to admit defeat and move onto an attempt for sit down talks with all the Muslim clerics of all the various factions, this is going to take a sea-change in our current handling protocol and will necessitate full co-operation from all the Muslim leadership throughout the world otherwise we are going to mire ourselves in conflicts where we cannot possibly succeed at, where the outcome is guaranteed to escalate.
binnersFull MemberD0NK – Dave just wanted a war. He wasn’t fussy about where, or with who. Tony had all his. I want one too!
When you’ve written your own Churchillian narrative, where you’re the bold leader, fearlessly sending the troops into battle, then any old chance to send in the bombers will do. Best not to look at the detail too closely. Just have a look and see who sits where in your simplistic good guys/bad guys worldview
ninfanFree Memberat some point we are going to have to admit defeat and move onto an attempt for sit down talks with all the Muslim clerics of all the various factions, this is going to take a sea-change in our current handling protocol and will necessitate full co-operation from all the Muslim leadership throughout the world
Given that the various factions of Muslims are so disparate that they have as yet been unable to strike enough common ground between themselves as to get along without killing each other in various forms of holy jihad, what makes you think that they could strike a deal with ourselves that kept them all happy?
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberGiven that the various factions of Muslims are so disparate that they have as yet been unable to strike enough common ground between themselves as to get along without killing each other in various forms of holy jihad, what makes you think that we could strike a deal with ourselves that kept them all happy?
What if our agents were stirring tensions and supplying the weapons in the 1st place?
Seems to have been the modus operandi over several decades, leading to escalation (and profit for ex Prime Ministers and Presidents)
It’s almost as if the media are complicit in the propaganda campaign…
ninfanFree MemberWhat if our agents were stirring the tensions and supplying the weapons in the 1st place?
Given the Suunis and Shiites have been at each other’s throats since around 680 AD without achieving a lasting reconciliation, I reckon that your theory might need a little work.
somafunkFull MemberIt’s the only option available to us as bombing the shite out them is only going to make the problem worse and drive more muslims into the hands of groups such as IS, Al Qaeda etc , it is in the best interests of the various clerics (and for the future of islam) to have this discussion as well. It won’t be easy and may take years n’ years to get them all round the table without all immediately breaking into verbal war but until we can engender such a situation amongst the various factions them we (as the west) need to open a dialogue with such extremists in the first instance, then the Clerics need to step up and get their house/religion in order.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberSo where do they get their weapons from in this day and age?
somafunkFull Memberjive : lay off the repeated postings eh?, we are all aware (or at least those of us who have an interest in the middle east) of what the west has done to stir up tensions in the past but for gawks sake just shut the **** up for a while…..please!…..it’s getting very tiresome.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberWe agree somafunk, the solution is in negotiation…
Very unlikey it is merely in the past though, simply that those operations have become declassified…
ninfanFree MemberSo where do they get their weapons from in this day and age?
Presumably those big western, new world order, Jewish controlled arms manufacturers who made and distributed a hundred million AK47s ?
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberPresumably those big western, new world order, Jewish controlled arms manufacturers who made and distributed a hundred million AK47s ?
The West supplied AK47s during Operation Cyclone, so as to avoid suspicion of involvement…
JunkyardFree MemberDont engage then as he thrives on a reply even when you reply is to say shut up I wont talk to you
you are just feeding the troll with any response [ even this one]
somafunkFull MemberI’m glad you didn’t take mortal offence at me telling you to stfu but now and again you do have a annoying habit of harping on about western governments involvement and meddling, which i fully agree is very much partly to blame for the current situation but we all know of that and have moved on (and yeas i’m aware it is still ongoing vis a vis the arms deals etc..etc but that is for us to get our house in order, pressurise our elected officials to do something about arms exports etc.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberNo need to engage, just read:
In the 1980s while at Langley, Avrakotos led Operation Cyclone, the largest covert operation in the CIA’s history. Through intermediaries, mostly Zia ul-Haq’s ISI in Pakistan, the CIA-armed Afghanistan’s Mujahideen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Avrakotos eventually met congressman Charlie Wilson of Texas’s 2nd congressional district. Together they collaborated to massively increase funding for the rebels, and together helped persuade officials from Egypt, Pakistan, China, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere to increase support for the cause. Avrakotos also plucked Michael G. Vickers from obscurity in the CIA’s paramilitary group to revamp the strategy for the Mujahideen. Vickers urged them to drop the Enfield Rifle in favor of a mix of weapons like the AK-47, and to introduce new tactics, training, and logistics.[2]
jivehoneyjiveFree Memberbut we all know of that and have moved on
That is the problem, the continued belief that the same methods are not continuing, in the face of a vast body of evidence to the contrary
ninfanFree MemberThe West supplied AK47s during Operation Cyclone, so as to avoid suspicion of involvement…
Like they also supplied Stingers? Because that, like, totally, didn’t raise any suspicion of western involvement, did it?
I do love it when you manage to spanner your own conspiracy theories into the distance JHJ…
Vickers urged them to drop the Enfield Rifle in favor of a mix of weapons like the AK-47.
Can’t imagine any reason that he might recommend the fully automatic weapon of choice of guerrilla fighters worldwide, the weapon that brought the U.S. army to its knees in Vietnam, with ammo easily available the region over, gainst the pre ww1 designed bolt action Enfield, which (despite being the best battle rifle of its day), would totally prove western involvement, given the millions churned out over the decades by the ishapore rifle factory just over the border…
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberDid they (we) supply the AK47s?
Yep
You can attempt to polarize the situation to your own ends, but the facts remain…
somafunkFull MemberAbsolutely nothing new or unknown in what you posted ^, i went out to Pakistan and onto Afghanistan with my Aunt in 1988 aged 16 (she’s an artist and took off on a scooter through Europe in the early 70’s and ended up exploring both countries) to re-visit friends she had made in her 6 years out there, i saw first hand the amount of weaponry lying about in market places, rocket launchers available for a few $$, thousands and thousands of AK47’s and mountains of ammo that the local kids were sliding up and down on, russian tanks lying around at entrances to villages and entire areas littered with tens of thousands of indiscriminately laid land mines, quite often in the most fertile areas – quite an eye opener talking to the families we stayed with and their experiences of living through a western/russian war by proxy so leave out all your repeated posts, they offer nothing to the argument.
ninfanFree MemberThe current situation is a legacy of that…
Eh, I thought it was a highly organised conspiracy false flag to keep us all under control, not some Lilly livered legacy situation whereby government actions in the past had remarkably complex and anarchic long term effects into the future, and the long term geopolitical effects of the end of the Cold War were still being played out.
Which is it JHJ, conspiracy or chaos?
jambalayaFree MemberSo where do they get their weapons from in this day and age?
From a market in Belgium ?
JJ how about this famous picture with Arafat and Rabin shaking hands with Clinton. Another peace process that was derailed. Hamas fought against the PLA as it did not want to honour the subsequent Stockholm agreement, another peace negotiation which came to nothing.
EDIT, in fact you can kick off the whole Araft was poisoned conspiracy theory, ended when they dug up his body and independent labs proved he wasn’t poised but.
EDIT 2; You cannot re caption photos from the past to suit your view of the present
nealgloverFree MemberYou can attempt to polarize the situation to your own ends
If that is the case, why did you totally misrepresent the CIA “undercover bomber” victory, and try and make out it was something entirely different.
(You ignored it before, but this seems a good time to bring it up again)
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberIf that is the case, why did you totally misrepresent the CIA “undercover bomber” victory, and try and make out it was something entirely different.
(You ignored it before, but this seems a good time to bring it up again)
As we’ve seen from the Pakistani drone strike story, once the Pentagon spin doctors get their teeth into a story, things can evolve[/url]
Anyway, back to matters at hand, we’ll have to see how the latest situation develops…
jambalayaFree MemberSupposedly not terrorist related, either protesting a relationship breakup or an armed robbery ..
DrJFull MemberSupposedly not terrorist related, either protesting a relationship breakup or an armed robbery ..
High risk strategy in current circumstances. Likely to end up “neutralized” just to be on the safe side.
nealgloverFree Memberdid I misrepresent it
Yes.
You did.
Completely misrepresented it. And you know you did.
Your own link, in the post where you misrepresented it, showed exactly that.
Anyway, back to matters at hand
Translates to…..
“Quick, change the subject…!
I’ve been caught talking shit again.”
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberYou’re a funny sort Mr Glover
Seems the gunman has given himself up and hostages have been freed…
MrWoppitFree MemberFormerly interesting thread about world news event, becomes a haven for idiotic bedroom-based conspiracy halfwits. Probably accompanied by a box of Kleenex.
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberBlimey Woppit, we didn’t need that much insight into your dealings!!
D0NKFull MemberBlimey Woppit, we didn’t need that much insight into your dealings!!
is that a variation on the incredibly cerebral “I know you are, but what am I” retort?
But then again, I guess….
he started it!
The topic ‘"Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris’ is closed to new replies.