EDL (English Defence League)

[Finnegan]

That Trevor bloke sounds like an agent to me. Wouldn't be surprised.

lol The Great El Empty, Spook Catcher.

[FoxyPV]

Can kinda understand some of this stuff when i see stuff like this : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3201032/Terror-fanatic-freed-from-jail.html

How much do you wanna kill this cvnt?

He has some substance - the army are murdering people abroad under the guise of the war on terror or fighting for democracy or some other bollocks.

However, I'd rather focus on the sex offenders et al who have been let loose on the general public.

Empty = Legend!

[Zingari]

agree with Empty

Trev Brookes is the new Tim Osman

[breadandcheese]

He has some substance - the army are murdering people abroad under the guise of the war on terror or fighting for democracy or some other bollocks.

Bit emotive isn't it? I especially like how you judge the army guilty of murder with no evidence at all. Quite frankly, it's the type of false statement that is unhelpful and wrong; the sort of rubbish that is repeated by extremist groups to inflame and radicalise people.

As far as I'm aware and according to the rules of engagement of the British army, it is illegal to engage in the targeted killing of civilians.

[Zingari]

Bit emotive isn't it? I especially like how you judge the army guilty of murder with no evidence at all. Quite frankly, it's the type of false statement that is unhelpful and wrong; the sort of rubbish that is repeated by extremist groups to inflame and radicalise people.

As far as I'm aware and according to the rules of engagement of the British army, it is illegal to engage in the targeted killing of civilians.

I agree to a point , but being a little bit in tune with global tyranny theory , I think what Foxy is saying is more to do with the army being manipulated into phoney wars by globalist propaganda ,

Not that the army or soldiers themselves are guilty of the crimes .

But it's perhaps better for me to let him explain himself

[breadandcheese]

I agree to a point , but being a little bit in tune with global tyranny theory , I think what Foxy is saying is more to do with the army being manipulated into phoney wars by globalist propaganda ,

Not that the army or soldiers themselves are guilty of the crimes .

But it's perhaps better for me to let him explain himself

Possibly, but I hate emotive phrases being used like that, as it implies some sort of moral distinction. Ironically, this moral distinction is often used as a way of drawing some moral equivalence between the army/Bush/Blair and the Taliban/Al Qaeda. Let's be clear, there is no moral equivalence between them, and it is this point that should be raised as often as possible.

Whilst mistakes have been made and civilians have been killed, there has never been a deliberate intention to do so. This is in stark contrast to the Taliban/Al Qaeda whose military tactics include sending car bombs into markets, with the deliberate intention of killing civilians to show that our army cannot guarantee their security. This is not to say that we should walk around with a moral superiority (obviously we shouldn't as Bush and Blair have a lot of questions to answers) but I do find it frustrating that this is forgotten with emotive language being used that helps radical and extremist groups.

The phrase of the army murdering troops abroad, is in my eyes the same (albeit the opposite end of the spectrum) to those idiots in the EDL. It's a volatile statement that provokes and incites.

[Zingari]

Possibly, but I hate emotive phrases being used like that, as it implies some sort of moral distinction. Ironically, this moral distinction is often used as a way of drawing some moral equivalence between the army/Bush/Blair and the Taliban/Al Qaeda. Let's be clear, there is no moral equivalence between them, and it is this point that should be raised as often as possible.

Whilst mistakes have been made and civilians have been killed, there has never been a deliberate intention to do so. This is in stark contrast to the Taliban/Al Qaeda whose military tactics include sending car bombs into markets, with the deliberate intention of killing civilians to show that our army cannot guarantee their security. This is not to say that we should walk around with a moral superiority (obviously we shouldn't as Bush and Blair have a lot of questions to answers) but I do find it frustrating that this is forgotten with emotive language being used that helps radical and extremist groups.

The phrase of the army murdering troops abroad, is in my eyes the same (albeit the opposite end of the spectrum) to those idiots in the EDL. It's a volatile statement that provokes and incites.

Yes I take on board what you are saying , and do not disagree with the sentiment , but once someone "buys into" the whole global conspiracy theory ( New World Order etc), the distinctions become less clear , and the armed forces become nothing more than pawns in the black and white global chess game .

Zbigniew Brzezinski, in his book called it the "Grand Chessboard"

(a very good read if you wish to see first hand how the minds of monsters work as he doesn't even try to justify himself or the powerful elite )

In this the Taliban / al queda etc etc become nothing more than manufactured nightmares by the globalists etc etc

but it's a massive subject to take on on this forum

clck here to read a few of his ideas on how the world should be run

http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

[Finnegan]

Just out of interest - and purely playing devils advocate - if you are, effectively, a micro-power; how would you take on the might of NATO in armed conflict without resorting to geurilla, shock and terror tactics?

[Trav Le Bleu]

Just out of interest - and purely playing devils advocate - if you are, effectively, a micro-power; how would you take on the might of NATO in armed conflict without resorting to geurilla, shock and terror tactics?

CYBER WAR!

[Dr The Singh]

Just out of interest - and purely playing devils advocate - if you are, effectively, a micro-power; how would you take on the might of NATO in armed conflict without resorting to geurilla, shock and terror tactics?

Nothing wrong with any of the other tactics other then the one highlighted, unnecessary and the intent of killing civilians is totally unacceptable. Many micro powers have used gueralli tactics, targetting only security forces etc!!

[Zingari]

Just out of interest - and purely playing devils advocate - if you are, effectively, a micro-power; how would you take on the might of NATO in armed conflict without resorting to geurilla, shock and terror tactics?

I'd contact someone like , Superman , The Green Lantern or Captain America and try to appeal to their lantern jawed concern for humanity

terrorism doesn't always need to be the answer

[Dr The Singh]

I'd contact someone like , Superman , The Green Lantern or Captain America and try to appeal to their lantern jawed concern for humanity

terrorism doesn't always need to be the answer

This guy, is who we need:

]http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7KrKO1reDCrqwHFkW_yUQdKpBj2mQb8Bd4Bx44WVd731tpLs&t=1&h=144&w=257&usg=__9xLvSMPw8llr0svPs79ppO4dCos=

[Zingari]

This guy, is who we need:

]http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7KrKO1reDCrqwHFkW_yUQdKpBj2mQb8Bd4Bx44WVd731tpLs&t=1&h=144&w=257&usg=__9xLvSMPw8llr0svPs79ppO4dCos=

couldn't you and me bake all the cakes for the next NATO conference and poison all the world's military leaders , thereby creating a power vacuum for us to effectively fill , and then run the world using only cakes of mass destruction to keep the masses in order ?

a benign world dictatorship

[Houdini Logic]

Can kinda understand some of this stuff when i see stuff like this : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3201032/Terror-fanatic-freed-from-jail.html

How much do you wanna kill this cvnt?

I'd rather kill this cunt

[breadandcheese]

Nothing wrong with any of the other tactics other then the one highlighted, unnecessary and the intent of killing civilians is totally unacceptable. Many micro powers have used gueralli tactics, targetting only security forces etc!!

Absolutely agree.

I don't think it is possible in any shape or form to argue that the use of car bombs in crowded civilian markets by the Taliban, Al Qaeda or insurgent forces in Iraq are in any way legitimate forms of fighting Western forces.

[BoneDog]

I'd rather kill this cunt

What's Ian Hislop done to upset you?

[Zingari]

What's Ian Hislop done to upset you?

i thought the same thing , it must be the hair transplant

[Finnegan]

Absolutely agree.

I don't think it is possible in any shape or form to argue that the use of car bombs in crowded civilian markets by the Taliban, Al Qaeda or insurgent forces in Iraq are in any way legitimate forms of fighting Western forces.

So what is?

[Guest]

Can kinda understand some of this stuff when i see stuff like this : http://www.thesun.co...-from-jail.html

How much do you wanna kill this cvnt?

Love the comments section "send him back to his own country" - he was born in Hackney!

[BoneDog]

Possibly, but I hate emotive phrases being used like that, as it implies some sort of moral distinction. Ironically, this moral distinction is often used as a way of drawing some moral equivalence between the army/Bush/Blair and the Taliban/Al Qaeda. Let's be clear, there is no moral equivalence between them, and it is this point that should be raised as often as possible.

Whilst mistakes have been made and civilians have been killed, there has never been a deliberate intention to do so. This is in stark contrast to the Taliban/Al Qaeda whose military tactics include sending car bombs into markets, with the deliberate intention of killing civilians to show that our army cannot guarantee their security. This is not to say that we should walk around with a moral superiority (obviously we shouldn't as Bush and Blair have a lot of questions to answers) but I do find it frustrating that this is forgotten with emotive language being used that helps radical and extremist groups.

The phrase of the army murdering troops abroad, is in my eyes the same (albeit the opposite end of the spectrum) to those idiots in the EDL. It's a volatile statement that provokes and incites.

I don't agree with the highlighted part because it is simply not true. Never?! There are too many incidents to mention that prove it is not true.

I'm starting to wonder if you work for the establishments propaganda department.

[BoneDog]

i thought the same thing , it must be the hair transplant

I just looked at pictures of Hislop and wondered where his hair came from!

[Finnegan]

Mission for you, Empty. Using the most credible / unbiased sources you can, find figures for middle-eastern civilian deaths as a result of the 'war on terror' compared with western ones as a result of Islamic exremism (and, yes, include 9 11 as if the CIA didn't do it, there's a good lad.)

[Zingari]

Mission for you, Empty. Using the most credible / unbiased sources you can, find figures for middle-eastern civilian deaths as a result of the 'war on terror' compared with western ones as a result of Islamic exremism (and, yes, include 9 11 as if the CIA didn't do it, there's a good lad.)

not sure what you trying to imply here but middle eastern civilian deaths caused by the war on terror would far exceed those of westerners killed by terrorism , there has been about 45,000 civilians killed in Iraq alone.

i doubt very much if anyone believes that more westerners have been killed by terrorism than innocent middle eastern civilians by the war on terror

[Houdini Logic]

Possibly, but I hate emotive phrases being used like that, as it implies some sort of moral distinction. Ironically, this moral distinction is often used as a way of drawing some moral equivalence between the army/Bush/Blair and the Taliban/Al Qaeda. Let's be clear, there is no moral equivalence between them, and it is this point that should be raised as often as possible.

Whilst mistakes have been made and civilians have been killed, there has never been a deliberate intention to do so. This is in stark contrast to the Taliban/Al Qaeda whose military tactics include sending car bombs into markets, with the deliberate intention of killing civilians to show that our army cannot guarantee their security. This is not to say that we should walk around with a moral superiority (obviously we shouldn't as Bush and Blair have a lot of questions to answers) but I do find it frustrating that this is forgotten with emotive language being used that helps radical and extremist groups.

The phrase of the army murdering troops abroad, is in my eyes the same (albeit the opposite end of the spectrum) to those idiots in the EDL. It's a volatile statement that provokes and incites.

It's more than that - even if you dont intend to kill civilians, you need to realise that in war you definitely are going to

[Finnegan]

not sure what you trying to imply here but middle eastern civilian deaths caused by the war on terror would far exceed those of westerners killed by terrorism , there has been about 45,000 civilians killed in Iraq alone.

i doubt very much if anyone believes that more westerners have been killed by terrorism than innocent middle eastern civilians by the war on terror

Exactly.