Real Christians...following their "guide book"

First topic message reminder :


Parents Charged With Killing Son In Church

A teenager is killed and his brother is seriously hurt in a so-called "counselling session" aimed at getting them to confess sins.

19:03, UK, Wednesday 14 October 2015
Bruce Leonard and his wife Deborah Leonard are charged in the beating death of their 19-year-old son



A couple have been charged with fatally beating their 19-year-old son in an apparent "counselling session" at a church in central New York

Bruce Leonard, 65, and 59-year-old Deborah Leonard are charged with first-degree manslaughter in the death of their son Lucas.

Four other members of the Word of Life Church in New Hartford were charged with assault for the attack that also left Lucas' younger brother, Christopher, seriously injured.

Authorities said the beatings were part of what parishioners referred to as a "counselling session".
David Morey, 26, of Utica Linda Morey, 54, are charged with felony second-degree assault

David Morey, 26, and Linda Morey, 54, pleaded not guilty to assault

New Hartford Police Chief Michael Inserra said the teens were subjected to hours of physical punishment "in hopes that each would confess to prior sins and ask for forgiveness".

Investigators are still looking into what the supposed sins were, Chief Inserra said.

Officers responded to the church at about 12.30pm on Monday after family members brought Lucas to hospital, where he was pronounced dead.
Sarah Ferguson, 33 and Joseph Irwin, 26, are charged with felony second-degree assault

Sarah Ferguson, 33, and Joseph Irwin, 26, were also charged

State and local officials cordoned off the church and began interviewing parishioners.

Several children found inside were turned over to child welfare officials, police said.

Authorities said Lucas and Christopher suffered injuries to their abdomens, genitals, backs and thighs.

Christopher, 17, remains in hospital in serious condition, Chief Inserra told a news conference on Wednesday.

The teens' parents pleaded not guilty at their arraignment on Tuesday and are being held in Oneida County Jail in lieu of $100,000 bail each.

Lawyers for the couple declined to comment on the case.

David Morey, 26, Linda Morey, 54, Sarah Ferguson, 33 and Joseph Irwin, 26, were ordered held on $50,000 bail. All four pleaded not guilty to a felony count of second-degree assault.


from "http://news.sky.com/story/1569536/parents-charged-with-killing-son-in-church"



If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21

He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15

He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

VOD was missing the point on that one.

As far as 'white trash'...it's  perfectly apt description.  Would you rather I call them trailer park tramps?

so what about nigga??

i assume you feel its fair game to use it??

Considering you have always thought it was and is fair game to use nig-ger. It then makes me laugh how Quill is playing you at your own game and easily getting the better of you here. Your intent when you use is to annoy and wind up posters, of which his intent using W-T is the same here.
So why are you trying to seek his approval for something you already use and advocate using?

Are you saying Quill is now the standard to use or bench mark on any deciding issues?
Are you trying to claim then, two wrongs somehow make a right?

what???

lol, does your own flawed reasoning now confuse you when faced in reverse lol.

you incoherent waffle confuses me walter

smelly-bandit wrote:you incoherent waffle confuses me walter

Your deflections are priceless when you know you have just dug a hole for yourself.

victorismyhero wrote:I used the term astoundingly as implied sarcasm Raggs...for the lesser mortals here

we may sometimes disagree strongly on things....that doesnt mean I disrespect you OR that I deny your clearly good standard of education...


the same with smelly, doubless there is much he and I would disagree on as well as agree on....that doesnt detract from his clearly educated use of english

I wouldnt describe either of you as thick....that wont stop me calling you "dumbell" to wind you up...  

Erm excuse me? My command of English is pretty good, thank you!

sure walter, im deflecting

whatever you need

smelly-bandit wrote:sure walter, im deflecting

whatever you need

A hippocrocopig?

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:sure walter, im deflecting

whatever you need

A hippocrocopig?

I like that ha ha ha

Also the Dalek fails to see many things.
The same failed reasoning, its like smelly trying to argue with himself lol

I mean no disrespect to Quill either, but I disagree with his view to use such a racial terminology that is an abusive term that deems people as inferior. Though its funny seeing the dalek seeking parity and clarity based off him also doing wrong.

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:sure walter, im deflecting

whatever you need

A hippocrocopig?

yes

its a term used to describe a female of such ugliness that it is impossible to use just one advective to desrcibe the horror hence "hippocrocopig" a creature possesed of the most uncomplementing features of the hippo, the crocodile and the noble pig.

if you are ever in plymouth stay away from union street on the weekends unless you fancy a dust up, specifically a place called "jesters" affectionately refered to as "big J's" or more realistically the "starwars bar" by the local marines due to the large amount of hippocrocopigs oinking around there

however if you wish to see hippocrocopigs in their natural environment then jesters is the place to go.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I keep making that same point...over and over, but they don't get it.

Adjectives are not argument.  I think they've lost their sense of thinking, so all they have remaining are epithets.

how would you know what an argumnet is??

we have yet to see one from you

That's theoretical waffling.

You see arguments every day from me. 'A is B' is an argument. 'A is a fuzzy, leftie, ugly, bad guy' is a string of adjectives hung together.

One can affect you; the other just shows the speaker is hurt, and childishly wants to strike out.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

VOD was missing the point on that one.

As far as 'white trash'...it's  perfectly apt description.  Would you rather I call them trailer park tramps?

so what about nigga??

i assume you feel its fair game to use it??

There's no such thing as 'fair' when it comes to race, smells. Racism is about power; so when you ask about a specific tag, you've got to ask who has power.

You are talking about labels. By definition, a person who has power cannot be labeled derogatorily. Call him any label and it's a compliment, by simple virtue of the fact that you have just referred to his power.

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:

A hippocrocopig?

I like that ha ha ha

Also the Dalek fails to see many things.
The same failed reasoning, its like smelly trying to argue with himself lol

I mean no disrespect to Quill either, but I disagree with his view to use such a racial terminology that is an abusive term that deems people as inferior. Though its funny seeing the dalek seeking parity and clarity based off him also doing wrong.

Hello didge.  Welcome to the asylum...at least that's the way it felt without your participation.  Where have you been?

I know that you do not agree with my perspective on racism, but mine is based on experience, not definitional precision.  Let me try to clear it up.

Any race can be subject to racism in an abstract sense.  But that's just words...definitional.  I don't say that racism against whites cannot happen theoretically.  But things don't happen theoretically; they happen in real life.  Modernly, in real life, whites have been in a privileged position, not in the disadvantaged position.  Over time, real life is history, and this is what I mean, that historically blacks have been the target of discrimination.

Thus, in this historical setting you cannot speak both truthfully and disparagingly about white people being discriminated, because they have not been in the undervalued role.  To refer to them in any way that truthfully (i.e., in fact) characterizes them, is to compliment them. Any description of them that is truthful, in fact compliments them. Ergo: they cannot be the object of discrimination.

Original Quill wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:



I like that ha ha ha

Also the Dalek fails to see many things.
The same failed reasoning, its like smelly trying to argue with himself lol

I mean no disrespect to Quill either, but I disagree with his view to use such a racial terminology that is an abusive term that deems people as inferior. Though its funny seeing the dalek seeking parity and clarity based off him also doing wrong.

Hello didge.  Welcome to the asylum...at least that's the way it felt without your participation.  Where have you been?

I know that you do not agree with my perspective on racism, but mine is based on experience, not definitional precision.  Let me try to clear it up.

I don't say that racism against whites cannot happen theoretically.  But things don't happen theoretically; they happen in real life.  Modernly, in real life, whites have been in a privileged position, not in the disadvantaged position.  Over time, real life is history, and this is what I mean that historically blacks have been the target of discrimination.

Thus, in this historical setting you cannot speak both truthfully and disparagingly about white people, because they have not been in the undervalued role.  To refer to them, in any way that truthfully characterizes them, is to compliment them.

Hi Quill


Very good thanks and you?

The reason I think we differ is the history is different of the racism in each country and why to me the Uk is ahead of the US in progressing in that aspect. Though as seen you see some Brits who are very anti regulations that help combat discrmination.

I get your point that the US has been built on a White Middle Class society, it has been engineered that way, which is why I understand why you would see this as the main reason that there is many problems still existing in the US today. White ethnic groups like the Irish, the Italians etc, have suffered white racism, where they were denied basically white status. I think there is certainly individual white racism, but not collective white racism in the US. We certainly are seeing racism in reverses in Zimbawe and aspects of South Africa. That was always going to be a problem and will still be one, for decades to come. It will take a couple of generations to move past the resentment. Though racism against whites is alive and well there

I still think any racial lanuage against whites is a self defeating point, as it was many white people that also helped bring about change in the US, though there is still a long way to balance out white privalidge.

I see your point, and I think it is most valid.  But to what extent are we now not moving over into general 'unfairness' as opposed to racism.

Lots of studies have been done; let me see if I can characterize them:

America has seen wave after wave of different ethnic populations immigrating onto our shores.  A pattern has been recognized.  With each wave, a tendency to look down upon each group is the initial greeting.  There has been discrimination...Irish, Italian, German, Swedes, etc.  Eventually, however, they melt into the general population already here...thus, we call it the melting pot thesis.  That kind of racism has been self-correcting.

In this sense there have been injustices against ethnicities--whites among them-- that we might call racism.   But we might equally recognize this as a general xenophobia, where racial characteristics play only a secondary role.  That's why I think we are talking about a blending of ideas between what you call white racism, and I call general 'unfairness' or simply, social adjustment.

But blacks in America have never been permitted to melt in the melting pot.  Because of the history of looking down on them due to slavery, and segregation, and on, they have been set aside and treated as almost a different species, beyond race. They have been blocked from melting in.  That collective, long-lasting--that is to say, historical--intransigence is what I call racism.  The normal pattern of transition from 'new and rejected', to 'accepted', has never been permitted to happen with blacks.

So maybe we are talking about a kind of passing racism, versus a permanent racism.  But once again, we are back to needless talk about definitions.  What is needed are remedial measures designed to combat the more permanent racism.  Maybe that's a better, more direct way to look at it.

smelly-bandit wrote:

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:sure walter, im deflecting

whatever you need

A hippocrocopig?

yes

its a term used to describe a female of such ugliness that it is impossible to use just one advective to desrcibe the horror hence  "hippocrocopig" a creature possesed of the most uncomplementing features of the hippo, the crocodile and the noble pig.

if you are ever in plymouth  stay away from union street on the weekends unless you fancy a dust up, specifically a place called "jesters" affectionately refered to as "big J's" or more realistically the "starwars bar" by the local marines due to the large amount of hippocrocopigs oinking around there

however if  you wish to see hippocrocopigs in their natural environment then jesters is the place to go.

I think I'll give it a miss.

probably for the best eddie....


you might meet smelly's last................ermmmmmm escort....................


Jabba the slut

victorismyhero wrote:probably for the best eddie....


you might meet smelly's last................ermmmmmm escort....................


Jabba the slut

Hahahahahaha he's gonna kill you

eddie wrote:

victorismyhero wrote:probably for the best eddie....


you might meet smelly's last................ermmmmmm escort....................


Jabba the slut

Hahahahahaha he's gonna kill you

...............

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Quill doesn't notice that kind of thing as a rule - when it's directed at anyone white and Christian.

Besides, he uses the term "white trash", so he's not in a position to say anything really.

VOD was missing the point on that one.

As far as 'white trash'...it's  perfectly apt description.  Would you rather I call them trailer park tramps?

At least you would be including people of all races then, although your assumption that everyone who lives in a trailer park is a "tramp" is a bit bigoted.

Urban Dictionary wrote:Trailer Park Trash

People who look scuzzy, who have rotted teeth, who drink malt liquor as their preferred beverage of choice, and who could make it in this world if their weren't so inclined to be so lazy. They are normally quite bitter about said laziness, and are seemingly oblivious to the fact that it's their own fault.

Imagine someone who is on drugs, who doesn't shower, and says things that would indicate that the person is indeed a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

Chris Haviland works for UPS as a dirty janitor who never showers, has a mostashe from the old west days, and says things that never makes sense. Also has a lot of anger over his self-imposed misery.

It's more up-to-date than white trash.

A mother and father whipped their 19-year-old son to death with an electrical cord during an all-night spiritual counseling session triggered by his desire to leave their church, a a New York court has heard.

Lucas Leonard was subjected to a 12-hour ordeal by his parents, sister and fellow church members at the Word of Life Christian church in New Hartford, New York, on Sunday, police and witnesses alleged.

His 17-year-old brother Christopher was also beaten and was admitted to hospital in a serious condition.

From The Guardian

Duplicate thread. You posted in the other one.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11952-real-christians-following-their-guide-book

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

so what about nigga??

i assume you feel its fair game to use it??

There's no such thing as 'fair' when it comes to race, smells. Racism is about power; so when you ask about a specific tag, you've got to ask who has power.

"To understand who rules over you, figure out who you are forbidden to criticize." ~ Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

Raggamuffin wrote:Duplicate thread. You posted in the other one.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11952-real-christians-following-their-guide-book

Sorry didn't realise it was already posted

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Duplicate thread. You posted in the other one.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11952-real-christians-following-their-guide-book

Sorry didn't realise it was already posted

No worries - I've done it before lol

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Duplicate thread. You posted in the other one.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11952-real-christians-following-their-guide-book

Sorry didn't realise it was already posted

I blame Victor for his silly thread title.

Raggamuffin wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Duplicate thread. You posted in the other one.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11952-real-christians-following-their-guide-book

Sorry didn't realise it was already posted

I blame Victor for his silly thread title.

I can't change it rags. He'll start huffing and puffing

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I blame Victor for his silly thread title.

I can't change it rags. He'll start huffing and puffing

I know - plus he's got a gun.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I blame Victor for his silly thread title.

I can't change it rags. He'll start huffing and puffing

I'l huff and I'll puff.....
and I'll BLOW your beard off.......

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:

I can't change it rags. He'll start huffing and puffing

I know - plus he's got a gun.

My mind is FAR more dangerous.......

victorismyhero wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I know - plus he's got a gun.

My mind is FAR more dangerous.......

I'll bet

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

how would you know what an argumnet is??

we have yet to see one from you

That's theoretical waffling.  

You see arguments every day from me.  'A is B' is an argument.  'A is a fuzzy, leftie, ugly, bad guy' is a string of adjectives hung together.

One can affect you; the other just shows the speaker is hurt, and childishly wants to strike out.

A is B is a statement or an opinion its not an argument.

That's your problem quill, far too often you present your opinion as fact and declare your statements to be arguments.

I have yet to hear you EXPLAIN why, A is B.

Now that would be an argument, you may want to try it sometime, I won't hold my breath

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's theoretical waffling.  

You see arguments every day from me.  'A is B' is an argument.  'A is a fuzzy, leftie, ugly, bad guy' is a string of adjectives hung together.

One can affect you; the other just shows the speaker is hurt, and childishly wants to strike out.

A is B is a statement or an opinion its not an argument.

That's your problem quill, far too often you present your opinion as fact and declare your statements to be arguments.

I have yet to hear you EXPLAIN why, A is B.

Now that would be an argument, you may want to try it sometime, I won't hold my breath

'A' leads to 'B' shows two elements and a relationship between them.  It is a template for a proposition or claim.  It is proper way to build an argument...you are saying or arguing something about the real world.

On the other hand, when you state nonsense like ...you yellow-bellied, blood-sucking lefty..., which is the kind of stuff you do so often smells, you're just cursing, and at best branding someone you are arguing with.  You are not saying something about the real world.

An adjective is a word that modifies a noun.  It's a word that adds a color or character according to the speaker's opinion.  E.g.= I have a warm coat.  The coat is the noun, and 'warm' is the modifying adjective...the way I feel about my coat.  Now, 2nd e.g. = you lefties are ignorant people.  The noun is 'people' and the modifier is 'ignorant'.  But again, you are just stating your subjective opinion.

In both cases you are just stating your subjectivity.  Who cares?  You are not saying anything about the real world, so you can't be making an argument.  You're just throwing about adjectives, and being impotent (read as: 'dickless') about the real world.

If you were to say give everyone a warm coat and they will work, you are finally stating an argument...a proposition.  You are saying 'A' (warm coat) is 'B' (leads to everyone working productively)...an argument.  You don't make arguments; you just make cat-calls.

Now we all use adjectives to color our arguments.  But dude, that's all you got. Conservatives fill their sentences with only adjectives.  It's like having the paint, with no surface to apply it on. Ya got no stuff.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

A is B is a statement or an opinion its not an argument.

That's your problem quill, far too often you present your opinion as fact and declare your statements to be arguments.

I have yet to hear you EXPLAIN why, A is B.

Now that would be an argument, you may want to try it sometime, I won't hold my breath

'A' leads to 'B' shows two elements and a relationship between them.  It is a template for a proposition or claim.  It is proper way to build an argument...you are saying or arguing something about the real world.

On the other hand, when you state nonsense like ...you yellow-bellied, blood-sucking lefty..., which is the kind of stuff you do so often smells, you're just cursing, and at best branding someone you are arguing with.  You are not saying something about the real world.

An adjective is a word that modifies a noun.  It's a word that adds a color or character according to the speaker's opinion.  E.g.= I have a warm coat.  The coat is the noun, and 'warm' is the modifying adjective...the way I feel about my coat.  Now, 2nd e.g. = you lefties are ignorant people.  The noun is 'people' and the modifier is 'ignorant'.  But again, you are just stating your subjective opinion.

In both cases you are just stating your subjectivity.  Who cares?  You are not saying anything about the real world, so you can't be making an argument.  You're just throwing about adjectives, and being impotent (read as: 'dickless') about the real world.

If you were to say give everyone a warm coat and they will work, you are finally stating an argument...a proposition.  You are saying 'A' (warm coat) is 'B' (leads to everyone working productively)...an argument.  You don't make arguments; you just make cat-calls.

Now we all use adjectives to color our arguments.  But dude, that's all you got.  Conservatives fill their sentences with only adjectives.  It's like having the paint, with no surface to apply it on.  Ya got no stuff.

the real world??

what would you know about that quill??

let be honest, you live your life through books and google,and when faced with the real world your default response is "i doubt that" or some other kind of dismissal of reality because thats not what it says in your books, that is exactly what your arguments are based on - denial and dimissal.

you doubt that people are being killed with any great frequency in syria.

you dont understand the concept of proxy warfare and dismissed the fact that the US are funding and helping ISIS despite being shown evidence

you completely deny the negativie consequences of the immigrant crisis in europe despite once again being shown multiple events and incidents where europeans specifcally germans are having their world turned upside down because of the crisis

you dont say A is B

you say "I dont understand A therefore i feel that A doesnt exists or that it is irrelevant, therefore only B matters"

B in your world translates to "the republicans did it"

If I were to say give everyone a warm coat and they will work,I would be saying 'A' (warm coat) is 'B' (leads to everyone working productively)...an argument.

your response would be "if the republicans didnt steal the warm coats in the first place we wouldnt need to give everyone one"

youre a one track record and no matter what you say,no matter how wicked youre web, the weave always leads back to one thing - the republicans , who you see are the creator of all the worlds woes.

Nothing funnier than a person exaggerating the refugee crisis, which that poster is misleading people over his own fears, of which is Islam taking over in Europe. A remote chance of happening, even more so where in the west it is non-belief that is the fastest growing. So some news articles showing some problems out of the hundreds of thousands of refugees, is being used disingenuously to make not only all refugees culpable for these minor incidents, but also used to create a further fear. One of Islam, fearing the refugees as Muslims. The argument seeks to delegitimize Muslims as humans. Which is odd as this kind of argument is used by some of the left to delegitimize Israel and its people. So a fear is based off Islam, with a view to Muslims are invading, even though this seems odd. For one many religious minorities have fled the Middle East and just looking at the Syrian conflict where 9 million have been displaced, the vast majority of these refugees are in surrounding nations and not Europe.

So the intent here is to instill a fear of Islam, which is promoted with a view to fear Muslims, hence the poor incorrect claim to say invasions. To then based off the fear of Muslims, to associate a fear of refugees. ISIS is being used as the reason to fear Islam, though many refugees have fled ISIS. Which just further shows why the Dalek gets so hysterical over promoting his prejudice. You are never going to resolve problems by ostracizing people, making them all culpable. That just further seeks to divide societies and cause conflict.

Hate based off an exaggerated fear, is not a rational argument.

Didge, do you think that Isis and groups like these, are trying to take over the world?

eddie wrote:Didge, do you think that Isis and groups like these, are trying to take over the world?

Not concerned over whether they wish to or not. What is only of concern is where there is a genuine threat, like there is in Syria and Iraq.
I do not see refugees as a threat, with the view of Islam taking over. That is just plain absurd, basing a prejudice view to turn people not only against Muslims but also refugees.

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge, do you think that Isis and groups like these, are trying to take over the world?

Not concerned over whether they wish to or not. What is only of concern is where there is a genuine threat, like there is in Syria and Iraq.
I do not see refugees as a threat, with the view of Islam taking over. That is just plain absurd, basing a prejudice view to turn people not only against Muslims but also refugees.

Firstly I am not quite sure how you can NOT be concerned?
Secondly, I don't think people being concerned means they are prejudiced against Muslims or refugees.

eddie wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Not concerned over whether they wish to or not. What is only of concern is where there is a genuine threat, like there is in Syria and Iraq.
I do not see refugees as a threat, with the view of Islam taking over. That is just plain absurd, basing a prejudice view to turn people not only against Muslims but also refugees.

Firstly I am not quite sure how you can NOT be concerned?
Secondly, I don't think people being concerned means they are prejudiced against Muslims or refugees.

Firstly its very simple. What is the probability and feasibility, a couple of hundred thousand ISIS members could take over the world?
That you need to reason that they stand any chance of doing so.

Second as seen ISIS are a extremist group of Muslims. The fear of Islam is highlighted off the actions of ISIS. A view to Islam taking over Europe through claiming refugees are invading, with an unfounded view to a minority group taking over. A fear is generated around Islam based off ISIS. This is then used to fear Muslims, of which is then used to fear refugees coming here.

A couple of hundred thousand.
Which can then turn into few hundred thousand and then a million then a few million.
How many Nazis were there to start with?
Did anyone think they'd go as far as they did?

I think you're being naive out of real naivety or because it doesn't suit your blinkered arguments regarding racism.

Thanks for the answers anyway.

eddie wrote:A couple of hundred thousand.
Which can then turn into  few hundred thousand and then a million then a few million.
How many Nazis were there to start with?
Did anyone think they'd go as far as they did?

I think you're being naive out of real naivety or because it doesn't suit your blinkered arguments regarding racism.

Thanks for the answers anyway.

First point, you then have to work out then also the feasibility and probability, if ISIS could end up drawing in tens of millions of support, which so far has not happened. The Nazi's were floundering in the 1929 elections, then the Wall Street crash happened, sending countless people around the world into poverty and the Nazi's capitalized on this. So this one event, helped spiral support for the Nazi's where people were very desperate with the living conditions they were facing.

Second point, is just an opinion not backed up with any reason and also failing to work out the probability and feasibility of ISIS taking over the world. You basically avoided even attempting to work it out. My guess as doing so would show how your fears of ISIS being able to take over the world are unfounded. They now face a strong coalition of Russia, Iran and Iraq.

ah yes the usual leftwing compassion

"bring the immigrants over here.................just make sure you dont settle them within a 100 mile radius of where i live"

Swiss authorities have charged four Iraqi nationals with planning a terrorist attack in Europe on behalf of the Islamic State group.

Though details of the planned attack were sketchy, Switzerland’s attorney general confirmed on Friday that IS “was to claim responsibility (for) these plans if successful”.

The four Iraqis, ranging in ages from 29 to 34, face charges of participating in or supporting a criminal organisation and preparing a terrorist attack. They also are accused of multiple counts of depicting violence and illegally staying in the country.

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/terror-cell_four-iraqis-charged-in-alleged-swiss-isis-cell/41723398

thats right the refugees pose no threat to us at all

Another invented fabrication from the Dalek on living near immigrants, when shown his reasoning is based off prejudice and fear.

another incoherent sentence from walter

Another feeble deflection from the dalek.

I guess he knows his arguments were poor.

On that note, have a good day everyone, catch you later.