Fair enough.I just meant all religious texts are to blame IMHO for most if not all of the worlds ills. That and Oil/greed.
Yep, I remember one particular poster regularly saying how evil Biden was and rarely mentioning Trump, which amounted to tacit support for him. I wonder if he’s got what he wanted now.Nope, Israel are absolute cunts. I simply don’t like cunts damaging UK armed forces property. You think everything is black and white. You’ll also remember me saying that if cunts decided not to vote and got Trump, Israel would be given free rein and they’d regret it. They did the fuck about and now they’re finding out.
I wasn't specifically refering to Ireland I was just using examples of terror groups of those eras in the UK.Fair enough.
I won’t go into the history of Ireland and it’s place in European religious wars, suffice to say, my substantive point regarding how conflict was dealt with is what I am comparing to the situation in Palestine.
Attacking the defensive capabilities of a country I would say yes it’s not like they broke office windows
I actually think it’s shocking and shows how cut back our armed forces areYou talk of reducing defensive capabilities but overlook the irony of two strangers breaking into a military compound unimpeded, wandering over to an aircraft and spray painting it. If defence starts at home then they're hardly doing a confidence-filling job, are they?
Not that I agree with what these little knobheads did, they're just an irritant like the JSO wankers. We don't need acts of vandalism to highlight genocide in Gaza when there's enough evidence out there anyway.
Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants or property to achieve political or ideological aims. The term is used in this regard primarily to refer to intentional violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants or property.What is your definition of terrorism?
I get that, but the substantive point is the same.I wasn't specifically refering to Ireland I was just using examples of terror groups of those eras in the UK.
Two thingsWhat is your definition of terrorism?
I wasnt suggesting our military is fair game, if you've construed that I apologise. My point was it's pretty alarming they were able to get in unopposed.I actually think it’s shocking and shows how cut back our armed forces are
The problem is any fanatical idiot that is easily swayed will now think about further attacks.
Any one thinking that our armed forces is fare game should be told to fuck off out of this country
We are not Isreal we are not attacking Palestine so those looking to point score think before you speak.
This is what I find most shocking and appalling of this whole issue. In the 70s 80s and 90s had you been throwing around leaflets and support for PIRA and RIRA or Libyan terrorists or then Al Qaeda etc you'd have been lynched. Whats is the real difference between Hamas and those we feared and dispised then? Is it because those groups actually brought it home to our shores and you can feel the hate - literally - in the form of bombs and terror attacks and plane bombings. AS that IS what Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and the Houthis etc do. Is it because its mainly to Israel that they do it that makes it ok and you can support them? Believe me when I say if these people were on our borders we'd need iron dome etc
Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of violence against non-combatants or property to achieve political or ideological aims. The term is used in this regard primarily to refer to intentional violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants or property.
Seems to fit. They damaged MOD property (they didn’t vandalise it, they took the engines out of immediate service) with the goal of achieving political aims.
No wasn’t saying you was was towards others but I never worded it wellI wasnt suggesting our military is fair game, if you've construed that I apologise. My point was it's pretty alarming they were able to get in unopposed.
In the Brize Norton case, you'd have to prove the serious damage was intended to influence the government. The defence would be that they'd given up on trying to influence the government and that was not the intent. For a terrorism offence to be committed, the conduct and relevant mental element must be proven for a specific offence under one of the Terrorism Acts.At the time of the Southport murders I seem to recall that many posters of a left-wing persuasion on here boasted an apparently perfect knowledge of the definition of terrorism in UK law, such that those heinous acts shouldn’t be categorised as such.
Now their knowledge of the matter appears challenged and patchy, even though the serious damage of property in order to promote a political cause clearly falls under the UK’s definition of terrorism. The damage of property to advance racial, religious or ideological causes also falls under the definition of terrorism, all factors potentially on display in this particular incident.
I assume this frankly surprising lack of knowledge is just a simple error on their part, perhaps a bit forgetfulness, and they agree that the law should apply equally to all.
We might be in agreement if you're including genocide in what is apparently acceptable.1000% this.
People talk about the Overton window shifting. It hasn’t, it’s been shattered.
We’ve got far right fuckwits advocating for drowning refugees and spouting conspiracy shite on one side, and far left fuckwits literally promoting Islamic terrorist groups and sabotaging the RAF on the other side.
The world has lost its mind and all sense of what is and is not acceptable.
At the time of the Southport murders I seem to recall that many posters of a left-wing persuasion on here boasted an apparently perfect knowledge of the definition of terrorism in UK law, such that those heinous acts shouldn’t be categorised as such.
Now their knowledge of the matter appears challenged and patchy, even though the serious damage of property in order to promote a political cause clearly falls under the UK’s definition of terrorism. The damage of property to advance racial, religious or ideological causes also falls under the definition of terrorism, all factors potentially on display in this particular incident.
I assume this frankly surprising lack of knowledge is just a simple error on their part, perhaps a bit forgetfulness, and they agree that the law should apply equally to all.
Define genocide....We might be in agreement if you're including genocide in what is apparently acceptable.
No it didn’t start there ffs.I have every sympathy for innocent people who are suffering in Gaza.
But breaking into an RAF base and sabotaging British security assets is an act of terrorism and will do nothing to help anyone. It only serves to weaken our own security.
And let’s remember how this started in the first place, with the murder, slaughter, kidnap and rape of innocent people by a medieval terrorist cult on October 7 who’ve used their own people as human shields for decades in Gaza.
Funny how the Gaza rent-a-mob bandwagon hoppers love to scream about Israel as it’s a convenient mask for their deeply antisemitic views but never called out Hamas for what they are.
Fair enough. We know where you lie with this.Define genocide....
October 7th?
Israeli's in Gaza
Iran against Israel?
Israel against Iran.....
For me it's all of the above and I condemn it all in equal measure, there is no correct or acceptable genocide it has been around for centuries. This latest chapter in Gaza can be clearly attributed to the genocidal attacks that took place on October 7th and the people that orchestrated it should have realised what they were letting their own people in for - no point crying now and telling the world how hard done by they are.
Two things
One creating fear to intimidate or to attack people
Two attacks n the security of a country
And before you ask no I don’t support Israel in them attacking innocent people