Lbm Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Let's guess Imi's reply, .....BBC propoganda instigated by the current UK Government, all lies ? I wouldn't say that...ok yes I would I feel Morpheus twitching in one of his homemade bespoke wooden cabinets too. I do hope he hasn't locked himself in. You know, accidentally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny g Posted October 24, 2011 Author Share Posted October 24, 2011 No Oil = No list, easy jail out card. Wonder what they really do with our taxes.... Handouts for immigrants takes a huge part - and paying for conflicts in oil-rich countries Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Handouts for immigrants takes a huge part Ra..... Ooh, must resist:rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupraStar 3000 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Not sure if its been said already but now a video has been released showing Gaddafi being sodomized! Oh well,... if it was good enough for King Richard II and Vlad the Impaler etc,.. NWS so I wont add the link. Just google it yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Not sure if its been said already but now a video has been released showing Gaddafi being sodomized! Oh well,... if it was good enough for King Richard II and Vlad the Impaler etc,.. NWS so I wont add the link. Just google it yourself. Doesn't look like a pleasant way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty71 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Let's guess Imi's reply, .....BBC propoganda instigated by the current UK Government, all lies ? The BBC nowadays is hardly impartial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Handouts for immigrants takes a huge part - and paying for conflicts in oil-rich countries Invasions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Invasions and lets not forget supporting terrorism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Oh my heart bleeds for Gadaffi. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Trafford Centre. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Warwick bombing including 12yr old Tim Parry. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in Northern Ireland by supplying arms and explosives to the same Republican terrorists as caused the above atrocities. (I was born & grew up in N.I. although I now live in England.) Every time I think of the kids in Omagh on a school day out from Donegal with Spanish kids who they were hosting on a holiday. Having spoken to officers involved in the subsequent investigation I know that some of these children were sitting on the edge of the footpath just a few yards from the car containing the explosives. They were chatting and eating lunch - the post mortems suggested they were having a KFC. It was a nice day in the school holidays and these were just kids enjoying a treat on a day out. Have you got kids, Imi? This is the sort of event Gadaffi liked to sponsor - but he was essentially a good chap, right? What sort of deluded world do you live in? Go give your kids to some paedophile for the weekend. Just because he gives the kids sweets and makes them happy on one day does not make it right for him to rape them and throw their bodies in a wheelie bin the next. Gadaffi may well have provided all sorts of sweeteners to keep a lid on rebellion for decades, but he was a murdering twisted f*%k and I won't be shedding a tear no matter what they did to him before he died. Yes - it would have been preferable for him to have stood trial at the Hague, but the end result will do for me. The main thing is that his tyranny is over and nobody else will die at his hand ever again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Oh my heart bleeds for Gadaffi. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Trafford Centre. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Warwick bombing including 12yr old Tim Parry. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in Northern Ireland by supplying arms and explosives to the same Republican terrorists as caused the above atrocities. (I was born & grew up in N.I. although I now live in England.) Every time I think of the kids in Omagh on a school day out from Donegal with Spanish kids who they were hosting on a holiday. Having spoken to officers involved in the subsequent investigation I know that some of these children were sitting on the edge of the footpath just a few yards from the car containing the explosives. They were chatting and eating lunch - the post mortems suggested they were having a KFC. It was a nice day in the school holidays and these were just kids enjoying a treat on a day out. Have you got kids, Imi? This is the sort of event Gadaffi liked to sponsor - but he was essentially a good chap, right? What sort of deluded world do you live in? Go give your kids to some paedophile for the weekend. Just because he gives the kids sweets and makes them happy on one day does not make it right for him to rape them and throw their bodies in a wheelie bin the next. Gadaffi may well have provided all sorts of sweeteners to keep a lid on rebellion for decades, but he was a murdering twisted f*%k and I won't be shedding a tear no matter what they did to him before he died. Yes - it would have been preferable for him to have stood trial at the Hague, but the end result will do for me. The main thing is that his tyranny is over and nobody else will die at his hand ever again. Yeah but did you see how cheap petrol is in Libya?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Oh my heart bleeds for Gadaffi. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Trafford Centre. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in the Warwick bombing including 12yr old Tim Parry. Every time I think of the people he helped kill and maim in Northern Ireland by supplying arms and explosives to the same Republican terrorists as caused the above atrocities. (I was born & grew up in N.I. although I now live in England.) Every time I think of the kids in Omagh on a school day out from Donegal with Spanish kids who they were hosting on a holiday. Having spoken to officers involved in the subsequent investigation I know that some of these children were sitting on the edge of the footpath just a few yards from the car containing the explosives. They were chatting and eating lunch - the post mortems suggested they were having a KFC. It was a nice day in the school holidays and these were just kids enjoying a treat on a day out. Have you got kids, Imi? This is the sort of event Gadaffi liked to sponsor - but he was essentially a good chap, right? What sort of deluded world do you live in? Go give your kids to some paedophile for the weekend. Just because he gives the kids sweets and makes them happy on one day does not make it right for him to rape them and throw their bodies in a wheelie bin the next. Gadaffi may well have provided all sorts of sweeteners to keep a lid on rebellion for decades, but he was a murdering twisted f*%k and I won't be shedding a tear no matter what they did to him before he died. Yes - it would have been preferable for him to have stood trial at the Hague, but the end result will do for me. The main thing is that his tyranny is over and nobody else will die at his hand ever again. i don't think imi was making gadaffi look like a good guy. He did bring a lot of positive change to Libya and africa as a whole. FYI, lets not overlook the state sponsored terrorism which exists in palestine, iraq, afghanistan and many many other places where we - the UK and amercian and her cronies are attempting to colonise/exploit. Hiroshima/Nagasaki was terrorism on a MASSIVE scale - does your heart bleed for those kids who were vaporised in an instant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 How can Hiroshima and Nagasaki be considered terrorism? FFS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 How can Hiroshima and Nagasaki be considered terrorism? FFS. Relax Gaz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Relax Gaz I'm perfectly relaxed, but that statement is laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I don't condone innocents being killed/murdered anywhere in the world. If the subject of the thread had been "state sponsored terrorism throughout the world at any point in the history of civilisation", then yes of course I'd have commented on those places too. However, that not being the case, I commented only on the topic in hand. (And who/where is "amercian"? Is that in the west country somewhere??) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 How can Hiroshima and Nagasaki be considered terrorism? FFS. laughable? are you serious? :-D see it's precisely this type of thinking which has got us to where we are today... bombing a civilian population isn't terrorism to you? or is it ONLY terrorism when it happens to us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I don't condone innocents being killed/murdered anywhere in the world. If the subject of the thread had been "state sponsored terrorism throughout the world at any point in the history of civilisation", then yes of course I'd have commented on those places too. However, that not being the case, I commented only on the topic in hand. (And who/where is "amercian"? Is that in the west country somewhere??) i'm pretty sure it's a 53rd state Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I'm perfectly relaxed, but that statement is laughable. Whilst I disagree with what he's said, the statement isn't that laughable. It could be argued that the USA deployed the atomic bomb to terrify the Japanese in order to effectively stop the war and halt any reprisals. I understand that this wouldn't really fall under the general definition of terrorism we have today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guigsy Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I'm perfectly relaxed, but that statement is laughable. I agree. It's a comment someone who doesn't know anything about ww2 history would say. It effectively ended the pacific conflict. Churchill did seriously contemplate gassing the Germans on a massive scale iirc. So were Not much better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guigsy Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Whilst I disagree with what he's said, the statement isn't that laughable. It could be argued that the USA deployed the atomic bomb to terrify the Japanese in order to effectively stop the war and halt any reprisals. I understand that this wouldn't really fall under the general definition of terrorism we have today. Under that definition every country in every war is guilty of terrorism then. That's why it's not terrorism... It's war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I agree. It's a comment someone who doesn't know anything about ww2 history would say. It effectively ended the pacific conflict. Churchill did seriously contemplate gassing the Germans on a massive scale iirc. So were Not much better Oi forget all this nonsense, you need to tell me why driving a Polo is dispicable and renders one impossible from 'getting any'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I agree. It's a comment someone who doesn't know anything about ww2 history would say. It effectively ended the pacific conflict. Churchill did seriously contemplate gassing the Germans on a massive scale iirc. So were Not much better .... so, you're basically saying the end justifies the means? how would you feel being on the receiving end? how can you value your own life yet show contempt for someone elses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 laughable? are you serious? :-D see it's precisely this type of thinking which has got us to where we are today... bombing a civilian population isn't terrorism to you? or is it ONLY terrorism when it happens to us? Erm... it was a war. The Japanese weren't exactly innocent parties either lol. They did some things to the Chinese that send shivers down my spine. I suppose it depends on your definition of terrorism, but I don't class atrocities like this as such. For me terrorism is the act of attacking innocent civilians outside of a wartime situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Under that definition every country in every war is guilty of terrorism then. That's why it's not terrorism... It's war *puts on loony hat* .... because we are "at war" with al-ciaqda, what would a mushroom cloud over europe or the states in your view be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Erm... it was a war. The Japanese weren't exactly innocent parties either lol. I suppose it depends on your definition of terrorism, but I don't class atrocities like this as such. For me terrorism is the act of attacking innocent civilians outside of a wartime situation. well that may well be your definition but the proper definition according to the dictionary is ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA noun 1.the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2.the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3.a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. .... it doesn't mention anything about use of violence on a civi population during peacetime or war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.