Soldato
Woolwich serious incident
- Thread starter Maccapacca
- Start date
Terror by definition yes I would say so, would you?
Terrorist no, some body mental and barbaric? Yes.
Man of Honour
Doubtful, that would mean that there were almost 3m illegal immigrants on top of the existing population and that they're all Muslim. It's a possibility but given you're essentially talking about damn near an extra 1/20 of the UK's population being an illegal immigrant and Muslim to go with those who are Muslim and legally here (immigrant or native) I think it's a trifle unlikely unless you've got a better source than a gut feeling?
Soldato
Last edited:
So stop voting for the 'men is suits'. Nowhere does it say you HAVE to vote and participate in a charade like that. Keep voting for them and you keep enabling them.
Soldato
I don't vote for them. But my lack of vote doesn't exactly make a difference.
Soldato
Vote for somebody else if enough do things will change, not voting is wrong.
Soldato
The former soldier who gives an impartial view, and not some money hungry chancer from a right wing think tank.
Soldato
Vote for who? There is no party that represents my views or has a good policy across the board (domestic policy is important too), and ultimately the chair will always be between the tories and labour. I can;t vote for something I don't believe in.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
The assertion that militant Islam would not vanish if we did not go to these places is like trying to blame the effect rather than the cause. In some parts of the world where there is that type of organisation it would still exist BUT it would not on the streets of the UK. 7/7 would not have happened, £billions wasted on security measures. Rights curtailed. The list goes on and on.
Soldato
It says it clear as day in the text. LOL
It is totally indisputable.
Go and argue with Allah about it, it's his words... not mine.
Some interesting images here. A false flag operation? who knows..
http://eyreinternational.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/londons-false-flag-even-more-pathetic-than-the-boston-bombing/
http://eyreinternational.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/londons-false-flag-even-more-pathetic-than-the-boston-bombing/
I know that link is a load of rubbish.
Soldato
How is blaming foreign policy impartial? LoL
Soldato
Stand for yourself in local elections, its quite possible others will share the same views of you.
Maccy said:
Haha, I assumed that it was all getting a little much for you after your outburst:
Soldato
They are both the same party. Members leave one and join the other constantly throughout the year. We are being taken for mugs, it's a rich pals club looking out for each other and nothing more.
The sooner people understand this the better.
You are not voting for Cameron, you are voting for the men who sit at his dinner table.
9/11 occurred before the US invaded Iraq/Afghanistan, as did the Embassy bombings in Africa, the attack on the USS Cole, the previous attempt to blow up the WTC. All the US did to deserve these attacks was to station some planes in a Muslim country... we had done similar and were also at risk.
The Boston bombing was carried out by a Chechen, this recent attack in London apparently by (seemingly) a Nigerian convert and (presumably) a Somalian.... at any rate neither of them were by people actually from Afghanistan or Iraq rather they were people who simply affiliated themselves with those people as a result of a shared core ideology. Iraq and Afghanistan might have served to anger some and increase the risk of attacks but radical Islam was there already and would still have been. Iraq was a farce tbh... though I don't think that an interventionist foreign policy should be dropped in general as a result of the existence of some radical loonies. That is the main issue - not the foreign policy but these radicals with their particular brand of Islam. In fact aside from Iraq I don't think intervention in Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, East Timor, Afghanistan, Libya and Mail was unwarranted.
Anyone who had any sensible knowledge about Islam would know the Qu'ran on its own can easily be taken out of context. Hence why the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) explicitly stated (with 100% authenticity) to "Hold to the Qu'ran and Sunnah and you will not be lead astray"
Why the sunnah aswell? Because the Sunnah (authentic sayings about the Life of the prophet Muhammad) put the qu'ran into CONTEXT. That is unlike any of the other scriptures out there - We muslims have context.
The context for your little out-of-context google research is actually during a period when the muslims were being severely persecuted, evicted from homes, being burned alive, >insert the most horiffic acts you can think of< by the tribes of the Mecca. After YEARS of persecution, Allah commanded them to finally go to war with them. An Islamic War is unlike your average war of today in this day and age.
There are rules of engagement which if not followed incurred severe penalties - i.e. No killing of women or children, livestock, destruction of the environment etc - UNLIKE what gets brushed under the carpet by our glorious governments in this day and age.
Seriously - Go read a book or something and take your uneducated view to the EDL facebook page where it belongs.
Soldato
I think there is actually a point to made that you can't see any blood anywhere except his hands (or at least from those images).
Seen some pretty nasty things in one of my old jobs...crime scene photos etc and there would be blood splatter all over him if they were really there 'butchering him'. Especially that guy in the beige coat!
I think the rest is BS though. Moving tent, I mean tardis, just lol.
