A couple of points, why would anyone carry their passport with them, do you not think this is what they want you to believe so that you continue to live in fear
Not so sure St. Paul would be at their holy gates.
Maybe they used it if they came through Belgium, who knows? and i know your were tryiong to be a smart i don't think St Paul and pearly gates are big in the QuranYep always need a passport with your suicide best, st Paul is a **** on the gate otherwise.
He is, guy's a grafter.
Getting overtime in working 2 jobs, hats off to the fella.
The point that the secular direction of travel of the West is challenging to people of religion is well made. However this doesn't mean that this direction of travel is wrong, and the fact that some people have embraced extremism and are prepared to carry out heinous acts because they feel that their beliefs are under threat, should strengthen the resolve of the secular world to stand up for values such as freedom of speech, the treatment of women and equal rights for homosexuals, not weaken it.Earlier in this thread I posted a quote from Karen Armstrong directly addressing those with your point of view. Here it is again with apologies for those who have already seen it:
"After a bumpy beginning, secularism has undoubtedly been valuable to the west, but we would be wrong to regard it as a universal law. It emerged as a particular and unique feature of the historical process in Europe; it was an evolutionary adaptation to a very specific set of circumstances. In a different environment, modernity may well take other forms. Many secular thinkers now regard “religion” as inherently belligerent and intolerant, and an irrational, backward and violent “other” to the peaceable and humane liberal state – an attitude with an unfortunate echo of the colonialist view of indigenous peoples as hopelessly “primitive”, mired in their benighted religious beliefs. There are consequences to our failure to understand that our secularism, and its understanding of the role of religion, is exceptional. When secularisation has been applied by force, it has provoked a fundamentalist reaction – and history shows that fundamentalist movements which come under attack invariably grow even more extreme. The fruits of this error are on display across the Middle East: when we look with horror upon the travesty of Isis, we would be wise to acknowledge that its barbaric violence may be, at least in part, the offspring of policies guided by our disdain. "
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/25/-sp-karen-armstrong-religious-violence-myth-secular
It is a sobering thought that without the creation of the internet Isis would probably not be the monster it is.
Here's where your opinion ain't worth jack-shit. Actually figures from the UNHCR (http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php) show that there are slightly more women (50.2%) than men. The largest single demographic is Females aged 18-59. Over 50% of the refugees in total are children under 17.Just wanted to point out that I said this back in September, along with many others including Damocles, and we were basically shot down for this general opinion:
"Seeing a lot of pictures of these refugees flooding into Europe. I'm not for one second suggesting that they are ISIS agents but my question is this - how come there are so many men in these pictures on their own? I do not want to believe that ISIS will use this crisis to get their soldiers into Europe but surely these men would be fleeing with their families not without them??? Apparently men make up 75% of the refugees."
It has now emerged that Syrian passports have been found and that several of the terrorists came through Greece as 'Syrian refugees'.
Tory austerity for you.
Well said, mate.The point that the secular direction of travel of the West is challenging to people of religion is well made. However this doesn't mean that this direction of travel is wrong, and the fact that some people have embraced extremism and are prepared to carry out heinous acts because they feel that their beliefs are under threat, should strengthen the resolve of the secular world to stand up for values such as freedom of speech, the treatment of women and equal rights for homosexuals, not weaken it.
How about fascists, or fascists funded by Saudi Arabia?Why are there so many names? ISIS, IS, ISIL? The French ambassador said Deauc(totally incorrect spelling). Can blue moon come up with a true and fitting name for these cunts?
derek fazackerley.You have a depressingly low opinion of human nature. If you are doing good deeds because you fear burning in hell I'd question whether you're actually a good person. Most people are perfectly capable of understanding right and wrong, and behaving accordingly, without trying to curry favour with some vengeful deity.
I find myself more torn on this than any other subject.
On the one hand, I fully recognise that western meddling in the Muslim world, most especially the Middle East, has brought about this state of affairs as much as any other factor, but I also appreciate that you are dealing with an enemy whose mindset is so different from what we've conventionally faced that there is simply no negotiating with them: quite simply they want our civilisation wiped off the face of the earth and nothing less will suffice.
I fear it's going to take a concerted effort of troops on the ground to respond in any meaningful way to this attack on our way of life, but I recognise that that won't present any form of panacea, but doing nothing is the greater of the two evils.
Hugely difficult times ahead for humanity in the next few decades.
The amount of countries they are attacking Could lead to a large scale global assault on Isis. I think everyone's getting Pretty fucking sick of them
Is WW3 on the cards ...
But there are troops on the ground. The problem (from an ISIS point of view) is that they're Iraqi troops and that doesn't suit their agenda as they can't present that as the West vs Islam. They're doing a slow but steady job. And you've already correctly identified that throwing Western armies into these conflicts has been a large part of the problem.I find myself more torn on this than any other subject.
On the one hand, I fully recognise that western meddling in the Muslim world, most especially the Middle East, has brought about this state of affairs as much as any other factor, but I also appreciate that you are dealing with an enemy whose mindset is so different from what we've conventionally faced that there is simply no negotiating with them: quite simply they want our civilisation wiped off the face of the earth and nothing less will suffice.
I fear it's going to take a concerted effort of troops on the ground to respond in any meaningful way to this attack on our way of life, but I recognise that that won't present any form of panacea, but doing nothing is the greater of the two evils.
Hugely difficult times ahead for humanity in the next few decades.