Knife Attack London

Butters1979

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Who is we?

Who attacked the twin towers?

No I don't sympathise with these attackers I just don't swallow the rhetoric that is being fed to guillabe fools by main stream media that our way of life is about to disappear and there are terrorists on every corner waiting to behead us all.

We as in the people they are attacking. Anyone western. Anyone not Muslim.
Muslims attacked the twin towers.

You are suggesting these attacks are a reaction to drone strikes 'by the west'. Essentially legitimising them and sympathising with them. I say this all started long before that. Again who was the west bombing before 9/11 or Lockerby?

Little CuChulainn

conorhal wrote: »

They have identified themselves, repeatedly, so it's not that hard to see which ones the compatability problems come with. Common sense dictates that if you see a problem, you don't exacerbate it.
Your personal experience wiht 'plenty of Muslims' has no relevence to the basic fact that not one country Europe has succesfully integrated significant Muslim populations so we shouldn't import a problem we don't have, yet. I've already posted the Prime Time special on the Clonskeagh mosque, the problem if segregation and extremisim may be in it's infancy here but that's no excuse to ignore it and repeat the same mistakes that other European countries have made.

How many other mosques and schools are there in Ireland that have no issues and want to help tackle radicalisation?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/irish-muslim-groups-wants-talks-with-the-government-34908943.html

jackofalltrades

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Do you even know what a refugee is? German born with far right inspiration. The Munich shooter was following a man who had your kind of ideology.
The knife attack had nothing to do with immigration. The suicide bomber should have been deported but wasn't. The only one you can blame on open immigration is the axe attack.
Even the guy in Nice was in the country over a decade.

Attacks carried out by migrants and their children have everything to do with our migration and integration policies.
If it can be show that these policies contributed to the attacks.

Nobody is suggesting allowing uncontrolled immigration.

Pretty sure Angela Merkel did just that.

How do you identify those cultures.

By studying how existing cultures integrate.

Butters1979

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Sorry, misread your post. I don't disagree we have a right to deny entry. But I also think we have an obligation to provide shelter to those that need it, as so many have done to the Irish in the past.



I'm simply asking why you think religious terrorism is somehow different to nationalist terrorism. You haven't provided an answer.

I don't think we have an obligation of any sort. If you want to help them that's what we have foreign aid for. Donate you're own money. Instead you want to take your money and my money and give it to immigrants so they can live here.

Widdershins

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'm simply asking why you think religious terrorism is somehow different to nationalist terrorism. You haven't provided an answer.

Please re read the posts in question because you have gone astray somewhere .

Butters1979

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

How many other mosques and schools are there in Ireland that have no issues and want to help tackle radicalisation?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/irish-muslim-groups-wants-talks-with-the-government-34908943.html

Are we supposed to be grateful for that? That would be the minimum to expect from any religion. You think they're some sort of heroes for saying 'don't kill people'?

testaccount123

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

How many other mosques and schools are there in Ireland that have no issues and want to help tackle radicalisation?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/irish-muslim-groups-wants-talks-with-the-government-34908943.html

We dont need ANY radical mosques in Ireland. Saying 'sure let them come, most of them wont kill us' is unbelievable.

Butters1979

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So a 5 year old turns up at the border with his mother and you would interview him and if he didn't answer your questions you would send him back to a war zone?

Good god follow the post. I'm saying interviewing is pointless. It won't screen anyone dangerous. I wouldn't even interview them.

And what war torn country, besides the Ukraine, does the EU border?

conorhal

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

How many other mosques and schools are there in Ireland that have no issues and want to help tackle radicalisation?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/irish-muslim-groups-wants-talks-with-the-government-34908943.html

Let me ask you this, how many are there that do have issues and promote radicalisation? Is that number higher and does it represent an issue that must be addressed? (I expect no answer of course)

Dr Al-Qadri is the leader of a small mosque representing a minor sect.
You whataboutery reminds me of this article that desperately attempted to virtue signal how 'not all muslims have a problem with homosexuality':
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20547335
The article was widely reported on but fails badly to convince when you consider this gay friendly mosque is hosted in a small jewish prayer room who's location, for obvious reasons, is secret and the spokesman for the Grand Mosque of Paris condemned it's opening.

You don't seem to get the hypocracy of pointing at a minority and suggesting it's and example of a broader truth and then lambasting other for doing the same simply because when they do so it runs counter to your argument.

We are already selective about who we let into this country.
If you are from Australia, Bolivia or Trinidad and Tobago for example you don't need a visa to enter Ireland? The reason is obvious, you aren't likely to cause Ireland a problem. There is a list of nations however that you do require a visa for. Becaue you might. This is what you call a sensible precaution. The same common sense should be applied more broadly.

Alive1

Butters1979 wrote: »

We as in the people they are attacking. Anyone western. Anyone not Muslim.

More Islamaphobic lies spread by those whosee hatred blinds them to facts.
The greatest losses of life suffered from ISIS has been against Muslims.

Butters1979

Alive1 wrote: »

More Islamaphobic lies spread by those whosee hatred blinds them to facts.
The greatest losses of life suffered from ISIS has been against Muslims.

Because of a civil war. Is your point that because they are also killing Muslims, we should accept them killing us?

Also I'm referring to the attacks in Europe, In which they are specifically targeting westerners. Which you seem to seem to sympathise with.

Alive1

Isnt it amazing how those with an agenda of scaremongering have managed to turn a thread about a random act of violence , tragic though it is, into an opportunity to spread anti Islam fear and hatred.
If it rained on the Sunday of the All Ireland Final some people would find a way to blame Muslims for the weather!

Boom_Bap

MOD
Stop turning this into a thread on immigration.

Alive1

Butters1979 wrote: »

Which you seem to seem to sympathise with.

Please supply a single shread of evidence for that slur, or withdraw it.

Little CuChulainn

Alive1 wrote: »

Please supply a single shread of evidence for that slur, or withdraw it.

Unfortunately, a lot of people consider you to be a terrorist sympathizer if you don't condemn an entire religion and people from religious areas, be they religious or not, following an act of violence. This only applies to Muslims of course. When someone like Anders Breivik, a far right, Christian, european man commits an act of mass murder, it's nothing to do with his religion, nationality or political leaning.

Mental illness is behind many of these lone wolf attacks, as it was for Anders and the offender in London. People are so determined to ring fence terrorists as being from a defined group because it is less scary if you can define the enemy. Unfortunately this defined group keeps getting bigger and bigger until half the world is the enemy.

As long as people keep the focus on the Muslim faith as the bad guy, the real dangers will continue to be ignored and we will see no lull in these attacks.

Might I ask why Muslims and/or the Islam religion is still being discussed here when, by all we know, it is completely off topic?

Little CuChulainn

Deleted User wrote: »

Might I ask why Muslims and/or the Islam religion is still being discussed here when, by all we know, it is completely off topic?

People think governments and police forces are conspiring to cover up muslim links to these attacks.

Samaris

Butters1979 wrote: »

What's your point exactly? Bad stuff happens already so we just just accept even more? Why is it every time something like this happens people try to distract from it with weird crap like this. It's excusing it. It's belittling it and anyone who does that condones it. Innocent people are getting attacked and you're doing everything you can to talk it down and act like its something we should just accept. You're a disgrace.

Butters1979 wrote: »

Also I'm referring to the attacks in Europe, In which they are specifically targeting westerners. Which you seem to seem to sympathise with.

Butters1979 wrote: »

Answer the question. Who were we bombing when that happened. You sympathise with these attacks don't you?

Unsure how to make this any more clear. Disagreeing with -your- points does not equal sympathising with Islamic terrorism. No-one here (that I have seen) supports Islamic terrorism. They seek to -understand- it, but that is not the same thing as wanting it to happen or sympathising with it.

Widdershins

There is still doubt in my mind that this was not a terrorist attack. If so the truth will out.
He was a Norwegian of Somali origin. Who they are now saying was just ''mentally ill''because they don't want to alarm the public. The majority of Somalis are Muslim, he was wielding a knife in part of the most popular and populous tourist destinations in London with intent to cause maximum harm. And all terrorists are ''mentally ill'' anyway. It's peak tourist season, it doesn't serve the country's best interests to scare the nation so they have put a blanket ban on the media, by saying he was just a madman.

Just as the media didn't disclose until a couple of weeks later that the French priest who ''had his throat slit'', was, infact beheaded. Just as the media didn't disclose until MONTHS after that out of all those French people who died in that concert hall, many of them had been beheaded, disembowelled and had had their genitalia cut off and stuffed in their mouths.

Widdershins

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

People think governments and police forces are conspiring to cover up muslim links to these attacks.

Why wouldn't they . I heard a journalist admit on Newstalk that she thought it acceptable to contain ''inflammatory '' facts to try to prevent a backlash .

As well as at least one police whistleblower telling us the police werecovering up deficiencies in the response to attacks (Nice) .

Alive1

Widdershins wrote: »

Just as the media didn't disclose until a couple of weeks later that the French priest who ''had his throat slit'', was, infact beheaded. Just as the media didn't disclose until MONTHS after that out of all those French people who died in that concert hall, many of them had been beheaded, disembowelled and had had their genitalia cut off and stuffed in their mouths.

It is less than two weeks since the Priest was Killed.
Not one single survivor of the Bataclan massacre has confirmed your second lie, nor have the Police, the victims families, coroners or undertakers.
I call Rabid Islamophobia and hate speech on your post!

Widdershins

Alive1 wrote: »

It is less than two weeks since the Priest was Killed.
Not one single survivor of the Bataclan massacre has confirmed your second lie, nor have the Police, the victims families, coroners or undertakers.
I call Rabid Islamophobia and hate speech on your post!

You can call whatever you want pet. No hatred anywhere in my post .It was the father of a bataclan victim who broke the story . the police tried to explain it as blast injuries .
After trauma like that people can bury memories .

I sincerely doubt that the UK, who suffered terrorist attacks by the IRA or extremists on 7/7, would be lying about it being a terror attack. There hasn't been any evidence that it was, so until then it looks like it is just straight up murder.

Alive1

Widdershins wrote: »

You can call whatever you want pet. No hatred anywhere in my post .It was the father of a bataclan victim who broke the story . the police tried to explain it as blast injuries .
After trauma like that people can bury memories .

Bull**** hate speech

Timberrrrrrrr

Butters1979 wrote: »

Good god follow the post. I'm saying interviewing is pointless. It won't screen anyone dangerous. I wouldn't even interview them.

And what war torn country, besides the Ukraine, does the EU border?

Son what do we do with the 5 year old refugee and his mother that makes it to Ireland and asks for asylum?

Widdershins

Alive1 wrote: »

Bull**** hate speech

If you say so .

Timberrrrrrrr

conorhal wrote: »

Let me ask you this, how many are there that do have issues and promote radicalisation? Is that number higher and does it represent an issue that must be addressed? (I expect no answer of course)

Dr Al-Qadri is the leader of a small mosque representing a minor sect.
You whataboutery reminds me of this article that desperately attempted to virtue signal how 'not all muslims have a problem with homosexuality':
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20547335
The article was widely reported on but fails badly to convince when you consider this gay friendly mosque is hosted in a small jewish prayer room who's location, for obvious reasons, is secret and the spokesman for the Grand Mosque of Paris condemned it's opening.

You don't seem to get the hypocracy of pointing at a minority and suggesting it's and example of a broader truth and then lambasting other for doing the same simply because when they do so it runs counter to your argument.

We are already selective about who we let into this country.
If you are from Australia, Bolivia or Trinidad and Tobago for example you don't need a visa to enter Ireland? The reason is obvious, you aren't likely to cause Ireland a problem. There is a list of nations however that you do require a visa for. Becaue you might. This is what you call a sensible precaution. The same common sense should be applied more broadly.

What problems are china, Cuba, Faroe islands, greenland, Indian, Jamaican, Korean, Madagascar, Nepal, Togo, Ukraine Vietnam and a host of other countries citizens going to cause seeing as they all require visas to enter Ireland?

Timberrrrrrrr

Butters1979 wrote: »

Because of a civil war. Is your point that because they are also killing Muslims, we should accept them killing us?

Also I'm referring to the attacks in Europe, In which they are specifically targeting westerners. Which you seem to seem to sympathise with.

Ah would you stop with this bullsh/the for once and for all? Show one single post whereview anyone has ever "sympathized" with these attackers.

conorhal

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

What problems are china, Cuba, Faroe islands, greenland, Indian, Jamaican, Korean, Madagascar, Nepal, Togo, Ukraine Vietnam and a host of other countries citizens going to cause seeing as they all require visas to enter Ireland?

Uh, the lack of a reciprocal arrangement and the fact that several of those on that list are countries with record of high instances of illegal immigration, particularly India and Ukraine. Are you suggeting we should have visa free travel with countries like Nigeria for example, from which you also require a visa?

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

There is still doubt in my mind that this was not a terrorist attack. If so the truth will out.
He was a Norwegian of Somali origin. Who they are now saying was just ''mentally ill''because they don't want to alarm the public. The majority of Somalis are Muslim, he was wielding a knife in part of the most popular and populous tourist destinations in London with intent to cause maximum harm. And all terrorists are ''mentally ill'' anyway. It's peak tourist season, it doesn't serve the country's best interests to scare the nation so they have put a blanket ban on the media, by saying he was just a madman.

Just as the media didn't disclose until a couple of weeks later that the French priest who ''had his throat slit'', was, infact beheaded. Just as the media didn't disclose until MONTHS after that out of all those French people who died in that concert hall, many of them had been beheaded, disembowelled and had had their genitalia cut off and stuffed in their mouths.

Erm

You do know that this is untrue right?

This is what's so funny, ye lads swallow anything the Daily Mail spews out and run with it as fact :pac:

Butters1979

Alive1 wrote: »

Please supply a single shread of evidence for that slur, or withdraw it.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Ah would you stop with this bullsh/the for once and for all? Show one single post whereview anyone has ever "sympathized" with these attackers.

Every time someone talks about 'drone bombings' they are essentially trying to give justification to what they do. It's sympathising with them.

Timberrrrrrrr

conorhal wrote: »

Uh, the lack of a reciprocal arrangement and the fact that several of those on that list are countries with record of high instances of illegal immigration, particularly India and Ukraine. Are you suggeting we should have visa free travel with countries like Nigeria for example, from which you also require a visa?

Nope but then I don't see the issue with Faroe islands, as you said it's because of travel agreements that certain countries don't need a visa, have seen more trouble from AustralIan in Dublin city center than any Muslims, care to explain?

Timberrrrrrrr

Butters1979 wrote: »

Every time someone talks about 'drone bombings' they are essentially trying to give justification to what they do. It's sympathising with them.

No

Suicide bomber blows up 10 civilians = terrorist attack

Drone blows up 10 civilians = terrorist attack

But yeah the drone is operated by the good guys right so it's OK?

I don't sympathise with anyone who kills innocent civilians

conorhal

Widdershins wrote: »

Why wouldn't they . I heard a journalist admit on Newstalk that she thought it acceptable to contain ''inflammatory '' facts to try to prevent a backlash .

As well as at least one police whistleblower telling us the police werecovering up deficiencies in the response to attacks (Nice) .

There is evidence to back up the suggestion that there is a policy of under reporting being attempted.
There has been a flurry of articles in the wake of the latest attacks as the media wrings it hands about reporting on terrorism:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/01/relegate-terrorists-to-obscurity-of-their-infamy-publicity--jihadis-glory-banalising-evil

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/27/leading-french-media-pledge-to-ban-identifying-attackers-to-stop/

The premise is that 'they will stop commiting atrocities if we stop reporting on it' which is flawed, and you have to suspect that what they really mean is that we don't want the people to know the truth because it's uncomfortable and runs counter to our happy clappy multicultural agenda.

The presentation to the public of these attacks would embarrass Soviet Era Pravda for their political, agenda driven reporting, and the same goes for policing which has never been more political either.

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Erm

You do know that this is untrue right?

This is what's so funny, ye lads swallow anything the Daily Mail spews out and run with it as fact :pac:

I don't read the daily mail. It appears to be true . There is online coverage of an inquest in which first responders, survivors and victims relatives brought it to light. Someone tried to dismiss it as blast injuries but certain things could not be explained by that. The father of one such victim was told,by the forensic institute in Paris, who would be highly qualified to say, the details of what happened to his son . Isis , who perpetrated the killings at the bataclan , have a propensity and record for such acts. I'm glad you find it funny. I don't .

conorhal

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Nope but then I don't see the issue with Faroe islands, as you said it's because of travel agreements that certain countries don't need a visa, have seen more trouble from AustralIan in Dublin city center than any Muslims, care to explain?

Yeah, we have a reall problem with Austrailian visa overstayers cluttering up our asylum system and filling our jail cells. :rolleyes: When we do I suggest that Aussies might find their visa requirement get a bit more restrictive.

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

I don't read the daily mail. It appears to be true . There is online coverage of an inquest in which first responders, survivors and victims relatives brought it to light. Someone tried to dismiss it as blast injuries but certain things could not be explained by that. Isis , who perpetrated the killings at the bataclan , have a propensity and record for such acts. I'm glad you find it funny. I don't .

Maybe read up on it then


http://www.snopes.com/france-covered-up-bataclan-victims/

As the world reacted in grief and horror to the Nice trgaedy, both Fox News and Britain's Daily Mail newspaper published articles reporting that France affirmatively covered up unspeakable acts of torture that occurred at the Bataclan on the night of the November 2015 attacks

Both outlets single-sourced their claims from a 15 July 2016 article published by the HeatStreet web site. That outlet chose the hours after the Nice attack to dredge up old claims from an inquiry that occurred in March 2016, with the only marginal relevance to the claims being another outbreak of carnage and a frightened public.

Mr President Fenech For the information of the inquiry, Mr. PT, can you tell us how you learned that there had been acts of barbarism within the Bataclan: beheadings, evisceration, enucleations?

MTP After the assault, we were with colleagues at the passage Saint-Pierre Amelot when I saw tears streaming out of the eyes of an investigator who went to vomit. He told us what he had seen. I did not know this colleague, but he was so shocked that it went to see it myself, naturally.

Alain Marsaud. Acts of torture happened on the second floor?

MTP I think, as I entered at the ground floor I saw there no such thing had occurred, only people hit by bullets.

Even if the French government hadn't made public their findings about torture and evisceration at the Bataclan prior to the attacks in Nice, the post-Bastille Day attack rumor operated on the assumption such a coverup was even possible. By all accounts, 89 people died at the Bataclan on 13 November 2015, while another 200 were wounded but survived, and many more escaped unscathed. Contemporaneous reports estimated that 1,000 people were in attendance at the Bataclan on 13 November 2015 with 700 of them were physically unharmed. Had the French government opted to cover up acts of torture and emasculation at the venue, there was nothing stopping the vast majority of surviving witnesses from sharing their stories. None did.

Timberrrrrrrr

conorhal wrote: »

Yeah, we have a reall problem with Austrailian visa overstayers cluttering up our asylum system and filling our jail cells. :rolleyes: When we do I suggest that Aussies might find their visa requirement get a bit more restrictive.

More of an issue with them assaulting people. I would say the police have to deal with more drunken Aussies on a weekend than they do Muslims in a month.

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Maybe read up on it then


http://www.snopes.com/france-covered-up-bataclan-victims/

Read the inquiry. It was said to have happened on the second floor . Nevermind the daily mail. Those who brought it to light , the father especially , did not profit . Another poster just shared a couple of things about cover ups and the justification for them so you might give it sɮsome thought .

I'm going to leave it here . I'm not happy to take part in picking over the issue for the thread .

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

Read the inquiry. It was said to have happened on the second floor . Nevermind the daily mail. Those who brought it to light , the father especially , did not profit . Another poster just shared a couple of things about cover ups and the justification for them so you might give it sɮsome thought .

I'm going to leave it here . I'm not happy to take part in picking over the issue for the thread .

If your going to post lies then expect them to be rebuked.

conorhal

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

More of an issue with them assaulting people. I would say the police have to deal with more drunken Aussies on a weekend than they do Muslims in a month.

Evidence for which?

#notallaussies



.

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If your going to post lies then expect them to be rebuked.

I posted no lies and if you think you succeeded, yay for you . Considering the issue I think point scoring should be the last thing on anyone's mind . My thoughts are with the father and everyone who took it to the inquiry. Maybe let the coroners know Snopes knows more about it than them.

LuckyRoche

Widdershins wrote: »

There is still doubt in my mind that this was not a terrorist attack. If so the truth will out.
He was a Norwegian of Somali origin. Who they are now saying was just ''mentally ill''because they don't want to alarm the public. The majority of Somalis are Muslim, he was wielding a knife in part of the most popular and populous tourist destinations in London with intent to cause maximum harm. And all terrorists are ''mentally ill'' anyway. It's peak tourist season, it doesn't serve the country's best interests to scare the nation so they have put a blanket ban on the media, by saying he was just a madman.

Just as the media didn't disclose until a couple of weeks later that the French priest who ''had his throat slit'', was, infact beheaded. Just as the media didn't disclose until MONTHS after that out of all those French people who died in that concert hall, many of them had been beheaded, disembowelled and had had their genitalia cut off and stuffed in their mouths.

Don't forget the Cologne cover up.

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

I posted no lies and if you think you succeeded, yay for you . Considering the issue I think point scoring should be the last thing on anyone's mind . My thoughts are with the father and everyone who took it to the inquiry. Maybe let the coroners know Snopes knows more about it than them.

Which coroners? You have a link to a French coroner saying the victims were toured?

Mr. President. Following the November attacks, he was referred to the commission of barbaric acts.

François Molins. It's a rumor. Forensic doctors were categorical: there was no act of barbarism, no use, including knives. According to a witness, the testicles of a victim were cut off, but no findings have corroborated it.[/quite]

jackofalltrades

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

More of an issue with them assaulting people. I would say the police have to deal with more drunken Aussies on a weekend than they do Muslims in a month.

The Garda have 40+ members of ISIL under constant surveillance.
I think it's fair to say that policing drunken Australians is less of a problem for the Gardí.

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Which coroners? You have a link to a French coroner saying the victims were toured?

Mr. President. Following the November attacks, he was referred to the commission of barbaric acts.

François Molins. It's a rumor. Forensic doctors were categorical: there was no act of barbarism, no use, including knives. According to a witness, the testicles of a victim were cut off, but no findings have corroborated it.[/quite]

No findings have corroborated it? That is blatant nonsense since they attempted to explain away exactly those injuries. Other witnesses saw evidence of exactly what was described in the inquiry . Your link contained a statement about the 1st floor when witnesses at the inquiry were describing what happened on the 2nd.
Then there is the coroner who told the father what had happened . The use of the term ''dredged'' the inquiry up shows how much they would have preferred it to stay buried.It comes down to who you choose to believe . Many police , witness , victims, families of victims ,the french forensic institute who broke the news to the father , all are liars because you say so and snopes doesn't have the information .
i find that sickening and wish to leave the subject now . If you wouldn't mind refraining from attacking my post again .

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Which coroners? You have a link to a French coroner saying the victims were toured?



No findings have corroborated it? That is blatant nonsense since they attempted to explain away exactly those injuries. Other witnesses saw evidence of exactly what was described in the inquiry . Your link contained a statement about the 1st floor when witnesses at the inquiry were describing what happened on the 2nd.
Then there is the coroner who told the father what had happened . The use of the term ''dredged'' the inquiry up shows how much they would have preferred it to stay buried.It comes down to who you choose to believe . Many police , witness , victims, families of victims ,the french forensic institute who broke the news to the father , all are liars because you say so and snopes doesn't have the information .
i find that sickening and wish to leave the subject now . If you wouldn't mind refraining from attacking my post again .

If all that evidence is out there then you will have no problem linking us to this evidence to read for ourselves?

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Widdershins wrote: »

If all that evidence is out there then you will have no problem linking us to this evidence to read for ourselves?

It is all in the transcript of the inquiry which you must have ignored already when looking for snopes.

Timberrrrrrrr

Widdershins wrote: »

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

It is all in the transcript of the inquiry which you must have ignored already when looking for snopes.

So provide links and quotes for this, I would take snopes over the daily mail any day.

Widdershins

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Widdershins wrote: »

So provide links and quotes for this, I would take snopes over the daily mail any day.

The Daily Mail is irrelevant .
Heat Street only translated the inquiry and your ''rebuttal '' described it as having ''dredged up''. How tasteless of them to ''dredge'' it up. Better to brush it under the carpet. In keeping with the policy of keeping quiet lest we inflame racism or glorify terrorism or encourage copycats . Therefore why waste my time providing a link to it since you ignored it in favour of a snopes article attempting to rubbish it.

I'm happy to agree to disagree with you if that is required for you to refrain from accusing me (and all involved ) of lying, thereby leaving little option but to reply and drag the thread out forever .