Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 Just now, leicsmac said: Arguments regarding the definition of murderers aside (though I'd agree in this case, I'd also say when you have something like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict going on the term is subjective depending on who you ask and what the situation is), However complex, surely no one could seriously argue that what the Black September did was anything but murder in its purest most brutal form? Soon as you deliberately target the innocent it's unjustified, whatever the situation. No attempt should be made to justify it. They were athletes. Just now, Strokes said: What would be the point? There is nobody that hasn’t already made their minds up. Has he even actually came out and said he doesn't want the support of these people? If he has I can't find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 6 minutes ago, Strokes said: What would be the point? There is nobody that hasn’t already made their minds up. That's a really good point, tbf. Everyone has picked a side of the fence. 3 minutes ago, MattP said: However complex, surely no one could seriously argue that what the Black September did was anything but murder in its purest most brutal form? Soon as you deliberately target the innocent it's unjustified, whatever the situation. No attempt should be made to justify it. They were athletes. Has he even actually came out and said he doesn't want the support of these people? If he has I can't find it. 1 I agree, and maybe the same should be applied to every instance where a civilian is killed by a soldier in cold blood during a military action? But it isn't - not on any side of any conflict. Point above about despairing of finding any adults in international politics still applies, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 6 minutes ago, leicsmac said: I agree, and maybe the same should be applied to every instance where a civilian is killed by a soldier in cold blood during a military action? But it isn't - not on any side of any conflict. It is isn't it? If they intended to kill them it should be. We even had a marine sent to prison for putting one out of his misery who was mortally wounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 12 minutes ago, MattP said: It is isn't it? If they intended to kill them it should be. We even had a marine sent to prison for putting one out of his misery who was mortally wounded. Consider me a cynic but I don't think all or even most of the instances of this happening in any military of any nation are answered for and I'd bet that a great many most folks don't even know about. It's like you've said on here in the past - there aren't really any rules to war, not when the bullets start flying, the ground starts exploding and the bodies start falling around you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 3 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Consider me a cynic but I don't think all or even most of the instances of this happening in any military of any nation are answered for and I'd bet that a great many most folks don't even know about. It's like you've said on here in the past - there aren't really any rules to war, not when the bullets start flying, the ground starts exploding and the bodies start falling around you. Well fortunately we were talking about the Olympic games here rather than a war zone. And that's why there should be no attempt at justification or muddying the waters of this specific case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 1 minute ago, MattP said: Well fortunately we were talking about the Olympic games here rather than a war zone. And that's why there should be no attempt at justification or muddying the waters of this specific case. There is no justification. They murdered civilians in cold blood, that's a matter of record. But oddly enough there's no one "side" in any conflict, anywhere, ever, that has a monopoly on unjustifiable acts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 7 hours ago, Voll Blau said: What a wonderful endorsement... http://uk.businessinsider.com/bnp-backs-boris-johnson-britain-trump-burqa-muslim-women-2018-8 Reported spike in attacks against women in Muslim headwear since his comments too, according to that report. But "it's all about starting a debate" though, so that's alright. He's also been endorsed by prominent Muslim figures who refuse to 'tow the party line' taken by the self-proclaimed and unrepresentative MCB. And as Strokes pointed out, the KKK endorsed Corbyn. Clinton was endorsed by Lady ****ing Gaga. Doesn't really prove anything. As for the 'reported spike in attacks against women in Muslim headwear since his comments'... Any physical attack is disgraceful and should not be condoned by anyone. But these figures come from TellMAMA. TellMAMA is notorious for having lost their government funding because they were found to be doping their figures of "attacks" with online comments. Even in this article https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/boris-johnson-burqa-muslim-women-veil-attacks-islamophobia-letterboxes-rise-a8488651.html they admit: Quote At least four women have been called “letterboxes” in public since Mr Johnson ignited a row over Islamophobia with an article published in the Daily Telegraph on 5 August. FOUR. That's a spike? FOUR? Even the 'hate crime' incident they refer to, Quote “Over the weekend, I went on a trip with a group of women and a male passenger allowed us to board the train first,” she wrote in The Independent. “One of the women was wearing a niqab and she was the last one to get on the train. The man laughed and said: ‘Hold on, you forgot the letterbox.’ That's a hate crime now? Really? I mean that is thoroughly unpleasant. But a crime it is not. I've been called far worse in public. As I've been saying, these hate crime laws are utterly useless and only opens it up to abuse by people with an agenda, like TellMAMA. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 TellMAMA have been caught lying time and time again, no one should take anything they say or claim seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 11 minutes ago, MattP said: TellMAMA have been caught lying time and time again, no one should take anything they say or claim seriously. It's almost like they have something to gain from making shit up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 8 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said: It's almost like they have something to gain from making shit up. How did practically every political organisation on the planet in recorded history get into power? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 2 minutes ago, leicsmac said: How did practically every political organisation on the planet in recorded history get into power? And religions... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 I think this one is going to run a bit, he's now got into an argument with Netanyahu on Twitter and that's not good, he's managed to brush these things off by just ignoring them in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 13 August 2018 Author Share Posted 13 August 2018 8 minutes ago, MattP said: I think this one is going to run a bit, he's now got into an argument with Netanyahu on Twitter and that's not good, he's managed to brush these things off by just ignoring them in the past. I could see this being the end of him as leader... already mirred in anti-sensitise controversy, as you say this will run further still and with parliament off for the summer there’s not much to shift the political agenda. Wonder if he’ll make the reporters congregated outside his door cups of tea tomorrow? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wortho Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 Well Corbyn has been known for his support of terrorists or freedom fighters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: I could see this being the end of him as leader... already mirred in anti-sensitise controversy, as you say this will run further still and with parliament off for the summer there’s not much to shift the political agenda. Wonder if he’ll make the reporters congregated outside his door cups of tea tomorrow? I'm still struggling to come to terms with it all. So far we have that in 2014 Corbyn wrote in the Morning Star that a wreath was laid at the graves of the Munich terrorists. In 2016 he said the wreath was for civilians killed in the bombing of the PLO HQ. On Friday they again denied he was there before the story came out again. Then photographs showed him laying a wreath and joining in prayer. This morning he was there, but couldn’t remember if he participated or not. Then we get a interview from 2017 saying he did lay a wreath, this evening it’s all a smear again so he attacks Netanyahu to deflect. And to his supporters, all of these things are simultaneously true and false at the same time. This is what a cult looks like. I want him to stay because of Brexit but he's now bringing his country and our parliament as well as his party into disrepute and that can't be allowed to happen. Edited 13 August 2018 by MattP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 10 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Wonder if he’ll make the reporters congregated outside his door cups of tea tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 17 minutes ago, MattP said: I'm still struggling to come to terms with it all. So far we have that in 2014 Corbyn wrote in the Morning Star that a wreath was laid at the graves of the Munich terrorists. In 2016 he said the wreath was for civilians killed in the bombing of the PLO HQ. On Friday they again denied he was there before the story came out again. Then photographs showed him laying a wreath and joining in prayer. This morning he was there, but couldn’t remember if he participated or not. Then we get a interview from 2017 saying he did lay a wreath, this evening it’s all a smear again so he attacks Netanyahu to deflect. And to his supporters, all of these things are simultaneously true and false at the same time. This is what a cult looks like. I want him to stay because of Brexit but he's now bringing his country and our parliament as well as his party into disrepute and that can't be allowed to happen. I just wonder why all of this is resurfacing now. I can't help thinking that this a good time for the remainers to get rid of him. If they get their second referendum to have a pro remain leader could swing the vote for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopfkino Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 Check out the WeStandWithCorbyn hashtag on Twitter. Crazy bunch of cults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 3 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: He's had all day to try and come up a defence for the guy and all he can throw up is a bit more "whataboutisms". Tells you all you need to know. Can anyone explain how criticism of Israel foreign policy is in any way an excuse for what Corbyn has done anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 13 August 2018 Share Posted 13 August 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, MattP said: I'm still struggling to come to terms with it all. Edited 13 August 2018 by lifted*fox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breadandcheese Posted 14 August 2018 Share Posted 14 August 2018 9 hours ago, MattP said: I think this one is going to run a bit, he's now got into an argument with Netanyahu on Twitter and that's not good, he's managed to brush these things off by just ignoring them in the past. Jeremy Corbyn reaching out to Netanyahu in the pursuit of peace for absolutely everyone, everywhere. It could be argued that it's the Trump play. Create an argument that his supporters will rally around regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 14 August 2018 Share Posted 14 August 2018 18 minutes ago, breadandcheese said: Jeremy Corbyn reaching out to Netanyahu in the pursuit of peace for absolutely everyone, everywhere. It could be argued that it's the Trump play. Create an argument that his supporters will rally around regardless. Soon as I saw the tweet I thought there he is again chasing peace. He's always been a bit of a left-wing Trump but he now seems to be going all out. It does work with the base though, some of them still think he's telling the truth despite video evidence he's not. It's so similar to the States it's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggus Posted 14 August 2018 Share Posted 14 August 2018 10 hours ago, MattP said: I'm still struggling to come to terms with it all. So far we have that in 2014 Corbyn wrote in the Morning Star that a wreath was laid at the graves of the Munich terrorists. In 2016 he said the wreath was for civilians killed in the bombing of the PLO HQ. On Friday they again denied he was there before the story came out again. Then photographs showed him laying a wreath and joining in prayer. This morning he was there, but couldn’t remember if he participated or not. Then we get a interview from 2017 saying he did lay a wreath, this evening it’s all a smear again so he attacks Netanyahu to deflect. And to his supporters, all of these things are simultaneously true and false at the same time. This is what a cult looks like. I want him to stay because of Brexit but he's now bringing his country and our parliament as well as his party into disrepute and that can't be allowed to happen. And to his supporters, all of these things are simultaneously true and false at the same time. This is what a cult looks like. reminds me of...... Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.[1] It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a cat that may be simultaneously both alive and dead,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung(entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 14 August 2018 Share Posted 14 August 2018 5 minutes ago, Biggus said: And to his supporters, all of these things are simultaneously true and false at the same time. This is what a cult looks like. reminds me of...... Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.[1] It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a cat that may be simultaneously both alive and dead,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung(entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment. A bit like how I totally understood all of that and actually did not understand any of it? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts