RugbyRebels

rowan wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Is all this "ISIS is/isn't real" talk particularly relevant for a thread on Donald Trump?

It's not like it's not beeing gone into before... repeatedly.

The guy who claims he's going to 'wipe them out,' you mean?

Why are you picking fights? Most people on here broadly agree with you, but you seem determined to ram redundant detail down everyones throat, like a mastaerbating baboon.

rowan wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

rowan wrote:
So Islamophobia is also a myth then? That's basically what we're talking about, the ongoing demonization of a religion and its comunity at a time when mostly Christian nations are waging war on Muslim nations. It needs to be viewed in this context.

There is no organization that refers to itself as ISIS, no. That's why the media started using the Arabic acronym 'Daesh,' but even they don't claim the terrorists this is applied to are using it themselves.

What it amounts to is the re-branding of Al Qaeda, a blanket term meaning 'the base' (or 'the toilet' in Arabic slang), that was applied arbitrarily to mercenaries and Saudi-backed Jihadist warriors involved in the conflicts America has created across the Middle East. This is designed to smokescreen Washington's imperialist designs on the region, along with the role of staunched ally Saudi itself.

&, again, what possible motive could ISIS have for attacking Sunni-Islam majority Turkey? The Jihadists are fighting for Sunni Islamic ascendancy. There hasn't even been a claim of responsibility reported for most of them.

No we are not. We are talking about reality. Islamophobia aside (and who knows how much that is an influence in Trump's administration) there is a clear threat from Islamic fundamentalism, as witnesses on numerous occasions just in Europe. ISIS does exist and is trying to recruit or influence via social media.

Trump's response to the problem is bone headed and likely to cause greater problems. But denying that none of this exists is just total ignorance of the facts. This isn't just a conversation about Turkey, there is plenty of evidence for ISIS inspiration in the rest of Europe.

Sure, the fundamentalism has emerged out of Islamophobia, which you've just dismissed as a factor.

I'm not denying any of this exists. There are certainly Saudi-backed Jihadists and NATO-backed mercenaries involved in this, and they have undoubtedly formed into various factions with a leadership hierarchy. All I'm suggesting is that there is no major terrorist organization, calling itself ISIS or Daesh or anything else, which plans and executes attacks of diverse descriptions all over the world, using lone wolves or small groups of individuals from a wide variety of locations and backgrounds. And neither are rebel groups fighting against American imperialism, or those fighting for control over territories where the leadership has been removed or destroyed, doing so under the 'ISIS/Daesh' umbrella either.

'Im not denying anything exists which suits my world view of Nato being responsible for everything'. I think you need to see past your own propaganda.

morepork wrote:

rowan wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Is all this "ISIS is/isn't real" talk particularly relevant for a thread on Donald Trump?

It's not like it's not beeing gone into before... repeatedly.

The guy who claims he's going to 'wipe them out,' you mean?

Why are you picking fights? Most people on here broadly agree with you, but you seem determined to ram redundant detail down everyones throat, like a mastaerbating baboon.

I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people on the board don't agree with Rowan, broadly or otherwise. Whether on ISIS, Trump, Syria, the size of Ireland...

I don't often comment on any middle eastern issues blah blah.

Doesn't stop you butting into such discussions, however.

So who's the hypocrite here?

Why are you picking fights? Most people on here broadly agree with you

Is the below comment (from Sandy) picking a fight or broadly agreeing . . .

Do some research into the attacks and see how the attackers were radicalised and inspired. ISIS makes heavy use of social media for this purpose. And for the record, mic of the media here talks about ISIS inspired rather than organised attacks.

My response was . .

Again the condescencion. I live in the region and read the press in the local language. Do some research yourself. Talking to me about ISIS, you might as well be talking about Santa. It's absurd to think they are responsible for every mass murder by a Muslim abroad when the West has been bombing 7 Muslim countries for the past 8 years under Obama. The propaganda industry labels them ISIS-inspired - which means exactly diddly-squat. The bombing and destruction of their homelands is all the inspiration they need, evidently.

So who's the hypocrite here?


I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people on the board don't agree with Rowan

I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people in the Middle East would. That's because I live here, talk to the locals every day, speaking their language and read the local press. So you think ISIS has been attacking Sunni majority Turkey when they have a pro-Sunni agenda? If you came here and spouted that nonsense you'd been laughed out of town.

So who's the hypocrite here?

Anyway, a lot of diversion tactics going on here, so I suggest we get back to the discussion. The point I originally made, that got everybody so angrified, was simply that the terrorist attacks in Europe and North America are not being carried out by ISIS-affiliated/trained/inspired operatives from a multitude of different countries (often born in the one they attack, in fact) by such basic methods as driving trucks into crowds, attacking people with machetes and the standard American technique of simply gunning 'em down.

They are being carried out by individuals and small groups of individuals radicalized by the West's bombing and destruction of a vast swathe of the Middle East - leading to millions of deaths, the destruction of entire nations, and a refugee tidal wave into Europe. The problem that you have with this vastly more plausible explanation is that it involves accountability on the part of the West.

The convenience of applying tags to the Jihadists and mercenaries, as if they were pop groups or football teams, is that it provides a pretext for NATO intevention anywhere they like. We've just had the US, Britain, France and Turkey all bombing within Syria's borders - without an invite from Damascus and therefore illegally - under the pretext of 'fighting ISIS. Guess what, theyre 'fighting ISIS' in Iraq too, and also in Libya where the battle continues to fill the void left by Gaddafi's murder. Yes, they're bombing all these countries to liberate them from 'ISIS' and keeping us safe, not to remove unco-operative leaders and gain control of their natural resources. That millions are killed in the process is a shame, but you can blame Putin for that...

I thought we had all agreed WiW is the hypocrite here.

rowan wrote:
So who's the hypocrite here?





So who's the hypocrite here?

I never get tired of this phrase. The rolly-eyes thing just makes it more poignant.

Mellsblue wrote:I thought we had all agreed WiW is the hypocrite here.

Fake news!

Anyone know what Trump's been up to today? Anyone care?

Which Tyler wrote:Anyone know what Trump's been up to today? Anyone care?

Just making an oafish thundercunt of himself explaining the finer points of the legal system which is challenging him:

“It’s sad, I think it’s a sad day. I think our security is at risk today. And it will be at risk until such time as we are entitled and get what we are entitled to as citizens of this country,” Trump said. “It was done for the security of our nation. The security of our citizens. So that people come in who aren’t going to do us harm. And that’s why it was done. And it couldn’t have been written any more precisely. It’s not like, ‘Oh gee, we wish it were written better.’ It’s written beautifully.”

“You could be a lawyer, or you don’t have to be a lawyer. If you were a good student in high school or a bad student in high school, you can understand this, and it’s really incredible to me that we have a court case that’s going on so long,” Trump told his audience. “I was a good student. I understand things. I comprehend very well, OK? Better than, I think, almost anybody. And I want to tell you, I listened to a bunch of stuff last night on television that was disgraceful. It was disgraceful because what I just read to you is what we have. And it just can’t be written any plainer or better and for us to be going through this.”

Apologies for the technical legal language, but when you comprehend better than almost anybody, then, gee, you are entitled.


What a total fuckwit.

Which Tyler wrote:Anyone know what Trump's been up to today? Anyone care?

He has been busy being the greatest president ever.

His duties today have included tweeting that 16 fake news stories on him have been published since he became the greatest president ever.

He has tweeted his disapproval of the way Nordstrom treated his daughter. The daughter of the greatest president ever.

He tweeted his thanks to the police chiefs and sheriffs and tells them they have a friend in the White House. It's a shame the greatest president ever doesn't feel the same way about judges.

He has also tweeted his frustration that the US will never have the security and safety to which they're entitled if he doesn't win the court case....but he so obviously should win as he's the greatest president ever.

Not an easy job being the greatest president ever.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Back the frickin truck up...

An organisation cannot be considered to exist if we cant name its press officer?

Oh

This had me pretty excited until I googled HMRC press officer and found out that organisation does in fact exist.

rowan wrote:
I don't often comment on any middle eastern issues blah blah.

Doesn't stop you butting into such discussions, however.

So who's the hypocrite here?

Why are you picking fights? Most people on here broadly agree with you

Is the below comment (from Sandy) picking a fight or broadly agreeing . . .

Do some research into the attacks and see how the attackers were radicalised and inspired. ISIS makes heavy use of social media for this purpose. And for the record, mic of the media here talks about ISIS inspired rather than organised attacks.

My response was . .

Again the condescencion. I live in the region and read the press in the local language. Do some research yourself. Talking to me about ISIS, you might as well be talking about Santa. It's absurd to think they are responsible for every mass murder by a Muslim abroad when the West has been bombing 7 Muslim countries for the past 8 years under Obama. The propaganda industry labels them ISIS-inspired - which means exactly diddly-squat. The bombing and destruction of their homelands is all the inspiration they need, evidently.

So who's the hypocrite here?


I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people on the board don't agree with Rowan

I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people in the Middle East would. That's because I live here, talk to the locals every day, speaking their language and read the local press. So you think ISIS has been attacking Sunni majority Turkey when they have a pro-Sunni agenda? If you came here and spouted that nonsense you'd been laughed out of town.

So who's the hypocrite here?

Anyway, a lot of diversion tactics going on here, so I suggest we get back to the discussion. The point I originally made, that got everybody so angrified, was simply that the terrorist attacks in Europe and North America are not being carried out by ISIS-affiliated/trained/inspired operatives from a multitude of different countries (often born in the one they attack, in fact) by such basic methods as driving trucks into crowds, attacking people with machetes and the standard American technique of simply gunning 'em down.

They are being carried out by individuals and small groups of individuals radicalized by the West's bombing and destruction of a vast swathe of the Middle East - leading to millions of deaths, the destruction of entire nations, and a refugee tidal wave into Europe. The problem that you have with this vastly more plausible explanation is that it involves accountability on the part of the West.

The convenience of applying tags to the Jihadists and mercenaries, as if they were pop groups or football teams, is that it provides a pretext for NATO intevention anywhere they like. We've just had the US, Britain, France and Turkey all bombing within Syria's borders - without an invite from Damascus and therefore illegally - under the pretext of 'fighting ISIS. Guess what, theyre 'fighting ISIS' in Iraq too, and also in Libya where the battle continues to fill the void left by Gaddafi's murder. Yes, they're bombing all these countries to liberate them from 'ISIS' and keeping us safe, not to remove unco-operative leaders and gain control of their natural resources. That millions are killed in the process is a shame, but you can blame Putin for that...

2 things.

1). Do you actually know what hypocrite means?

2). Amnesty international. You have spent 2 days trying to either ignore the report on Assad's regime killing political opponents or to discredit amnesty international.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... ys-amnesty

Your last paragraph above seems to suggest that nato interventions in Syria are illegal without Assad's invitation. I would think that anyone interested in the plight of the Syrian people might be interested in the reported murder or 13000 of them. You only seem to care if the blame can be pinned on the west.

Please refer to point 1.

Donny osmond wrote:Back the frickin truck up...

An organisation cannot be considered to exist if we cant name its press officer?

where else would a trained journalist verify their ramblings?

rowan wrote: I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people in the Middle East would. That's because I live here, talk to the locals every day, speaking their language and read the local press. So you think ISIS has been attacking Sunni majority Turkey when they have a pro-Sunni agenda? If you came here and spouted that nonsense you'd been laughed out of town.

So who's the hypocrite here?

That's quite a specific point you're choosing to contest about ISIS attacking Turkey, I'm not off the top of my sold I'll have ever made the point you're countering either. For what it's worth I don't think the people of the Middle East will speak with one voice, so some will agree with you and some not, and there are a lot of problems in the Middle East even before the actions of the west are considered, or put another way of the west vanished tomorrow it wouldn't mean peace in the Middle East as they're fighting for lots of reason only some of which are actions or perceived actions of the west.

Digby wrote:

rowan wrote: I'd go out on a limb and suggest most people in the Middle East would. That's because I live here, talk to the locals every day, speaking their language and read the local press. So you think ISIS has been attacking Sunni majority Turkey when they have a pro-Sunni agenda? If you came here and spouted that nonsense you'd been laughed out of town.

So who's the hypocrite here?

That's quite a specific point you're choosing to contest about ISIS attacking Turkey, I'm not off the top of my sold I'll have ever made the point you're countering either. For what it's worth I don't think the people of the Middle East will speak with one voice, so some will agree with you and some not, and there are a lot of problems in the Middle East even before the actions of the west are considered, or put another way of the west vanished tomorrow it wouldn't mean peace in the Middle East as they're fighting for lots of reason only some of which are actions or perceived actions of the west.

Right, self-appointed expert on all things Middle Eastern, tell us what the people of this region are fighting over which is not the result, directly or indirectly, of the West. I'd be interested in your views on this.

Meanwhile, Turkey - according to the mainsteam media's propaganda - has been one of the primary targets for ISIS attacks, so this is a very useful case study. Again, why on earth would ISIS attack a Sunni Muslim stronghold? Why hasn't it officially claimed most of the attacks attributed to it. Concidentally, Turkey is still actively bombing people in Syria, and has reacted angrily to American support for Kurdish militants who were to the fore in fighting so-called ISIS (Saudi's Jihadis & America's mercenaries). It's a ridiculous notion that falls apart under scrutiny and thereby begins to unravel the entire 'ISIS' narrative...

There have been conflicts across the Middle East going back centuries, which we can still see now with the Kurds or the still more obvious problems which manifest between Sunnis and Shias, and of course a lot of people just want to grab whatever power they can in their area and then grow that power base as happens everywhere.

Certainly people being radicalised because of the actions of the West is a real thing, so too people being radicalised because of what they're told about the west even if it's not true or is based on some questionable moral assertions, but it's nowhere near the only problem

Digby wrote:There have been conflicts across the Middle East going back centuries, which we can still see now with the Kurds or the still more obvious problems which manifest between Sunnis and Shias, and of course a lot of people just want to grab whatever power they can in their area and then grow that power base as happens everywhere.

Certainly people being radicalised because of the actions of the West is a real thing, so too people being radicalised because of what they're told about the west even if it's not true or is based on some questionable moral assertions, but it's nowhere near the only problem

But you do understand the drawing up of borders by the British and the French almost a century ago created many of these conflicts and revived many others which had been long dormant. Ever heard of the Pax Ottomanica? What is going on today is very much the result of British and French imperialist greed and arrogance.

Trump has arrived at just the right time, too much liberality in politics at the moment, we need people like him to turn the tide. Nationalism is not a bad thing, and in these uncertain times nationalism can stem the tide of radical islam, because from where I'm sitting nothing else will.

We need another Trump in Europe, perhaps wins for Le Pen and Geert Wilders will bring the change in Europe that it desperately needs.

I smell bullshit...

I like Trump and I'm not afraid to say it, I also like the travel ban he put in place, hopefully common sense prevails, and the ridiculous order to suspend the ban is lifted.

What we are seeing in America, and other countries is the biggest, longest lasting hissy fit of all time, by people who wanted Clinton as president, or if the truth was known they couldn't care less about Clinton, they just wanted a woman as president.

Lord Lucan wrote:I like Trump and I'm not afraid to say it, I also like the travel ban he put in place, hopefully common sense prevails, and the ridiculous order to suspend the ban is lifted.

What we are seeing in America, and other countries is the biggest, longest lasting hissy fit of all time, by people who wanted Clinton as president, or if the truth was known they couldn't care less about Clinton, they just wanted a woman as president.

Who, or what is this 'Clinton' you talk about?

This is more like it

Good news for Arizona. They've won the 7nm chip production facility. Well done.

WaspInWales wrote:

Lord Lucan wrote:I like Trump and I'm not afraid to say it, I also like the travel ban he put in place, hopefully common sense prevails, and the ridiculous order to suspend the ban is lifted.

What we are seeing in America, and other countries is the biggest, longest lasting hissy fit of all time, by people who wanted Clinton as president, or if the truth was known they couldn't care less about Clinton, they just wanted a woman as president.

Who, or what is this 'Clinton' you talk about?

Yer wan that's married to a sexual predator, armed jihadists, hangs out with celebrity libtards, and failed to become the first female president of the USA.

Vengeful Glutton wrote:Good news for Arizona. They've won the 7nm chip production facility. Well done.

They'll need Mexican labour to build that.