Home
Gallery
Search
Register
Log in
About Us & RulesScam Harris
+5
Victorismyhero
veya_victaous
eddie
Tommy Monk
Fuzzy Zack
9 posters
NewsFix :: Politics :: Politics - World
Page 3 of 3
Page 3 of 3 • 
1, 2, 3
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 10:57 am
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Didge wrote:
Talk about paranoid, I am just pointing out you are the worst apologist of Islam and its terrorism, that is a fact where daily you feed the forum your conspiracy bullshit thinking anyonegives a fuck lol
Like I say little brat, run off and play with your dolls
Well of course you think I'm the worst. You don't know any other Muslims. Lol!
I know Muslims who are not extremists or apologists of extremists lol
But this again is about the limit of your ability to debate ha ha
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 11:01 am
Eh, why would they want to come on a forum if they do not do such things?
lol what a daft request ha ha
lol what a daft request ha ha
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 11:09 am
lol I really am not concerned what a little runt believes
You are that insignificant ha ha
You are that insignificant ha ha
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:02 pm
Didge wrote:More regressive lefties making excuses for people expressing views and then being called bigots.
Its the only way regressive lefties know how to deal with anything and they are the biggest part of the problem when they refuse to recognise than it is in the tens of millions that holds these Islamic views, but they just want to continue to bury their heads in the sands with idiots views like homicide for example which does not understand for a single second that now there is no denying most terrorism is now Islamic terrorism.
No the true Progressive sees that This New Atheist Movement is Not Progress at all... just more of the same old shit
Blaming 10's of million for the actions of a few, Saying Look at this HUGE homogeneous group that we don't need to consider 'humans' and extend our moral ethos to.
those that hold those sort of Islamic views are a problem but so are westerns that think everyone just need to be like them.
that is the real problem People that think everything will be good if every just believes the same thing they do.
And the Islamic terrorism is no where near the highest, westerners like to make graphs that exclude what we decide is justified to bring them freedom by blowing up families..... but seriously
Our Children don't fear clear blue skies because of the flying robots too high to see that drop bombs on their homes.
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:10 pm
What new athiest movement?
Athiesm has been around for centuries even going back as far as the greeks, which nothing new today has not been said before in the past.
That is your first fundemental mistake.
The second is your inability to recognise problems within faiths like with the abrahamic faiths, which teach a religious racism which places believers above non-believers with a view that they will suffer enternal torture.
They also teach some of the worst forms of discrmination to women, homosexuals etc.
This is all ignored by the regressive lefties, because they have the most idiotic view that if they say something that it is dsicrminating against a believer. Well religions are just beliefs, just like Nazism is a belief and deserves no special respect does it? So why place the same respect to beliefs like religions?
None deserve the,m because they are based on myths and no evidence and even more when they effect the well being and equality of others, those who do not say anything forego their liberal values.
Its that simple which you seem to fail to grasp veya
Yes islamic terrorism is by far highest by a long shot
Anyway this again is a circular argument which if you fail to grasp the first time, then its pointless trying to explain to you again
Athiesm has been around for centuries even going back as far as the greeks, which nothing new today has not been said before in the past.
That is your first fundemental mistake.
The second is your inability to recognise problems within faiths like with the abrahamic faiths, which teach a religious racism which places believers above non-believers with a view that they will suffer enternal torture.
They also teach some of the worst forms of discrmination to women, homosexuals etc.
This is all ignored by the regressive lefties, because they have the most idiotic view that if they say something that it is dsicrminating against a believer. Well religions are just beliefs, just like Nazism is a belief and deserves no special respect does it? So why place the same respect to beliefs like religions?
None deserve the,m because they are based on myths and no evidence and even more when they effect the well being and equality of others, those who do not say anything forego their liberal values.
Its that simple which you seem to fail to grasp veya
Yes islamic terrorism is by far highest by a long shot
Anyway this again is a circular argument which if you fail to grasp the first time, then its pointless trying to explain to you again
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:21 pm
'new atheism' doesn't even refer to all atheist today
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
it is specifically the version preached by the likes Sam and Dawkins
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
it is specifically the version preached by the likes Sam and Dawkins
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:23 pm
New Athiesm is just a term coined Veya, if you look at athiest views in the past there is no difference.
Have a read:
Whenever anyone speaks of “new atheists”, my stomach churns. It’s hard not to think of a clique of educated white men of a certain age congratulating themselves on their intellectual superiority over the benighted fools around them. The “newness” of these atheists neatly captures the Whiggish conception of history that Richard Dawkins in particular has espoused, imagined in terms of progress out of a primitive, superstitious past towards a glisteningly rational future. You don’t have to scratch the surface very hard to expose the western-centredness of this kind of discourse.
The “new atheism” shtick has also been embraced by its opponents. For many on the religious side of the fence, atheism is not a triumph of the modern West but a symptom of its pathological decadence, its slide from pious observance into secular, mechanized, capitalized doubt. In other words, it suits both sides to promote the fiction that atheism is something invented in recent times by the white West.
Atheism is certainly not limited to the white West – as the murder of four Bangladeshi bloggers in 2015 has brutally reminded us. Of course, some will see this as another sign (whether benign or diabolical) of the spread of western influence throughout our interconnected world. But this doesn’t tell the whole story. What campaigners like Ayaan Hirsi Ali have emphasised is that the dissidents have been there all along; web-based communication has simply given them new opportunities for expression and wider audiences.
Nor is atheism limited to modernity. I am often reminded, when I read of “new” atheism, of the words of the Athenian stranger in Plato’s final work, The Laws. Plato was deeply hostile to atheism, and presents his Athenian legislating against those who disbelieve in gods, in their ability to affect our world, or in the efficacy of religious institutions. Turning to address an imaginary young atheist, he expostulates that “You and your friends are not the first to have held this view about the gods! There are always those who suffer from this illness, in greater or lesser numbers.” Atheism is not of course an “illness,” but I do think that Plato was basically right, in that across all cultures and all time there have been those – in greater or lesser numbers – who have disbelieved in gods.
My own area of expertise is in the culture and thought of ancient Greece. But mine is not a Greece that slots in neatly at the beginning of a Euramerican story of the rise of western rationality. The Greeks weren’t “western” in any meaningful sense: they had much more in common with their near-neighbors in what we now call Turkey, Egypt, and Syria, Iraq and Iran than Germany, France, Spain or Britain. Of course the modern West has often claimed them as ancestors, but we would do well to remember their influence on the medieval Muslim intellectual tradition, as well as other middle-eastern peoples from the Druze to the Yazidi (as Gerard Russell’s recent book has argued).
The Greeks offer (along with the Chinese) our best opportunity to test just how “modern” our ideas are, because they are by some distance the best-attested ancient culture: not only do we have huge amounts of incredibly diverse text, archaeology, art, inscription and so forth, from over 1,000 years of antiquity, and thousands of square miles; but that material can also, often, be located in relatively precise date-ranges and geographical contexts.
When you scour the Greek material for signs of atheism, as I have done, you uncover an extraordinarily rich mosaic of people and ideas. The word atheos is Greek, and seems to have first been used in our sense in the fifth century BCE, in Classical Athens. The roots of the idea, however, lie earlier. The first Greek philosophers, known as the Presocratics (sixth-fifth century BCE), further challenged conventional divine privilege. Xenophanes of Colophon famously ridiculed the anthropomorphic projections of human religion: if every different ethnic society imagines the gods look like them, how can they all be right? If cows and horses had hands, they would depict gods as cows and horses … Most Presocratics gave some sort of role for the gods, but usually only in the sense of “nature,” the force that animates organic growth and the motions of the stars. At least one, however, Hippo of Samos, went all the way and argued for an entirely material world without any deity.
In fifth-century Athens, some of the itinerant travellers known as “sophists” attacked belief in the divine. Protagoras pointed out that you cannot claim to know anything at all about the gods, as they lie (if they exist) beyond the realm of perception. Democritus of Abdera said that conventional religion emerged from primitive people’s fear of natural phenomena like lightning, the physical nature of which they didn’t understand. Prodicus of Ceos claimed that what we now call gods were originally just names for things that are needed for human life, like bread (Demeter) and wine (Dionysus). One author who may be the tyrant Critias argues that religion was the invention of a cunning politician who wanted to persuade a lawless populace that they were being watched by gods, and would be punished.
The enemies of such theorists gave them the name atheos, or “godless.” At some point in the fifth century, however, the word seems to have been reappropriated as a positive term. My own view is that the key figure here was Diagoras of Melos, antiquity’s premier celebrity atheist, but unfortunately a rather shadowy figure now. (He seems to have had a better sense of humor than many of his modern peers. According to a story sometimes told about him, when a friend showed him all of the temple dedications put up by those who had survived storms at sea after praying, he replied: “How many more dedications there would be if those who hadn’t survived put them up too!”) Diagoras, I think, probably imagined himself as a latter-day Bellerophon, soaring up into the heavens to besiege the gates of Olympus, but using philosophical arguments to disprove their existence rather than the flying horse Pegasus. He probably gave center stage to what we now call the “argument from evil”: if the gods are all-powerful and benevolent, why does wickedness go unpunished?
Over time, Greek thinkers developed a huge stock of atheist arguments, even if their nature changed in response to new political circumstances. But how exceptional were the Greeks in this respect? When assessing ancient cultures we are always dealing with what Martin Bernal used to call “competitive plausibilities” rather than certainties. My own view is that Greek atheists benefited from an absence of sacred scripture, and from the relatively circumscribed power of the priesthood. Religious doctrine and dogma were thus not systematically enforced, at least until the Roman period. Discussions with colleagues in Egyptian, Israelite and indeed Chinese studies, however, have persuaded me that similar anxieties about the existence and influence of the gods were probably widespread across the ancient world, even if the evidence is often sparser.
Atheism certainly varies in nature and intensity across time and space, and also (as Plato reminds us) in the “greater or lesser numbers” of its adherents. But it is always there, in some guise; and the sooner we stop fooling ourselves that it is “new,” the better.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161157
Have a read:
Whenever anyone speaks of “new atheists”, my stomach churns. It’s hard not to think of a clique of educated white men of a certain age congratulating themselves on their intellectual superiority over the benighted fools around them. The “newness” of these atheists neatly captures the Whiggish conception of history that Richard Dawkins in particular has espoused, imagined in terms of progress out of a primitive, superstitious past towards a glisteningly rational future. You don’t have to scratch the surface very hard to expose the western-centredness of this kind of discourse.
The “new atheism” shtick has also been embraced by its opponents. For many on the religious side of the fence, atheism is not a triumph of the modern West but a symptom of its pathological decadence, its slide from pious observance into secular, mechanized, capitalized doubt. In other words, it suits both sides to promote the fiction that atheism is something invented in recent times by the white West.
Atheism is certainly not limited to the white West – as the murder of four Bangladeshi bloggers in 2015 has brutally reminded us. Of course, some will see this as another sign (whether benign or diabolical) of the spread of western influence throughout our interconnected world. But this doesn’t tell the whole story. What campaigners like Ayaan Hirsi Ali have emphasised is that the dissidents have been there all along; web-based communication has simply given them new opportunities for expression and wider audiences.
Nor is atheism limited to modernity. I am often reminded, when I read of “new” atheism, of the words of the Athenian stranger in Plato’s final work, The Laws. Plato was deeply hostile to atheism, and presents his Athenian legislating against those who disbelieve in gods, in their ability to affect our world, or in the efficacy of religious institutions. Turning to address an imaginary young atheist, he expostulates that “You and your friends are not the first to have held this view about the gods! There are always those who suffer from this illness, in greater or lesser numbers.” Atheism is not of course an “illness,” but I do think that Plato was basically right, in that across all cultures and all time there have been those – in greater or lesser numbers – who have disbelieved in gods.
My own area of expertise is in the culture and thought of ancient Greece. But mine is not a Greece that slots in neatly at the beginning of a Euramerican story of the rise of western rationality. The Greeks weren’t “western” in any meaningful sense: they had much more in common with their near-neighbors in what we now call Turkey, Egypt, and Syria, Iraq and Iran than Germany, France, Spain or Britain. Of course the modern West has often claimed them as ancestors, but we would do well to remember their influence on the medieval Muslim intellectual tradition, as well as other middle-eastern peoples from the Druze to the Yazidi (as Gerard Russell’s recent book has argued).
The Greeks offer (along with the Chinese) our best opportunity to test just how “modern” our ideas are, because they are by some distance the best-attested ancient culture: not only do we have huge amounts of incredibly diverse text, archaeology, art, inscription and so forth, from over 1,000 years of antiquity, and thousands of square miles; but that material can also, often, be located in relatively precise date-ranges and geographical contexts.
When you scour the Greek material for signs of atheism, as I have done, you uncover an extraordinarily rich mosaic of people and ideas. The word atheos is Greek, and seems to have first been used in our sense in the fifth century BCE, in Classical Athens. The roots of the idea, however, lie earlier. The first Greek philosophers, known as the Presocratics (sixth-fifth century BCE), further challenged conventional divine privilege. Xenophanes of Colophon famously ridiculed the anthropomorphic projections of human religion: if every different ethnic society imagines the gods look like them, how can they all be right? If cows and horses had hands, they would depict gods as cows and horses … Most Presocratics gave some sort of role for the gods, but usually only in the sense of “nature,” the force that animates organic growth and the motions of the stars. At least one, however, Hippo of Samos, went all the way and argued for an entirely material world without any deity.
In fifth-century Athens, some of the itinerant travellers known as “sophists” attacked belief in the divine. Protagoras pointed out that you cannot claim to know anything at all about the gods, as they lie (if they exist) beyond the realm of perception. Democritus of Abdera said that conventional religion emerged from primitive people’s fear of natural phenomena like lightning, the physical nature of which they didn’t understand. Prodicus of Ceos claimed that what we now call gods were originally just names for things that are needed for human life, like bread (Demeter) and wine (Dionysus). One author who may be the tyrant Critias argues that religion was the invention of a cunning politician who wanted to persuade a lawless populace that they were being watched by gods, and would be punished.
The enemies of such theorists gave them the name atheos, or “godless.” At some point in the fifth century, however, the word seems to have been reappropriated as a positive term. My own view is that the key figure here was Diagoras of Melos, antiquity’s premier celebrity atheist, but unfortunately a rather shadowy figure now. (He seems to have had a better sense of humor than many of his modern peers. According to a story sometimes told about him, when a friend showed him all of the temple dedications put up by those who had survived storms at sea after praying, he replied: “How many more dedications there would be if those who hadn’t survived put them up too!”) Diagoras, I think, probably imagined himself as a latter-day Bellerophon, soaring up into the heavens to besiege the gates of Olympus, but using philosophical arguments to disprove their existence rather than the flying horse Pegasus. He probably gave center stage to what we now call the “argument from evil”: if the gods are all-powerful and benevolent, why does wickedness go unpunished?
Over time, Greek thinkers developed a huge stock of atheist arguments, even if their nature changed in response to new political circumstances. But how exceptional were the Greeks in this respect? When assessing ancient cultures we are always dealing with what Martin Bernal used to call “competitive plausibilities” rather than certainties. My own view is that Greek atheists benefited from an absence of sacred scripture, and from the relatively circumscribed power of the priesthood. Religious doctrine and dogma were thus not systematically enforced, at least until the Roman period. Discussions with colleagues in Egyptian, Israelite and indeed Chinese studies, however, have persuaded me that similar anxieties about the existence and influence of the gods were probably widespread across the ancient world, even if the evidence is often sparser.
Atheism certainly varies in nature and intensity across time and space, and also (as Plato reminds us) in the “greater or lesser numbers” of its adherents. But it is always there, in some guise; and the sooner we stop fooling ourselves that it is “new,” the better.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161157
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:35 pm
Correct, much like Tommy or ISIS it is very hard to convince people with the hearts set on hating another not to.Didge wrote:What new athiest movement?
Athiesm has been around for centuries even going back as far as the greeks, which nothing new today has not been said before in the past.
That is your first fundemental mistake.
The second is your inability to recognise problems within faiths like with the abrahamic faiths, which teach a religious racism which places believers above non-believers with a view that they will suffer enternal torture.
They also teach some of the worst forms of discrmination to women, homosexuals etc.
This is all ignored by the regressive lefties, because they have the most idiotic view that if they say something that it is dsicrminating against a believer. Well religions are just beliefs, just like Nazism is a belief and deserves no special respect does it? So why place the same respect to beliefs like religions?
None deserve the,m because they are based on myths and no evidence and even more when they effect the well being and equality of others, those who do not say anything forego their liberal values.
SO because they don't give the same freedoms we do we should kill them... because it will make them more free
I ask the same Question I asked Les, IF someone is robbing your neighbor does it make it ok for you to rob them too?
If you answer 'No' then you agree there is no relevance to any of your points above.
it has nothing to do with religions because you are showing that a man without religion can be just as thoughtless.
you and the new atheists want to fight religion and just like fundamentalist Islam don't actually care about the innocents that will be crushed under foot.
Its that simple which you seem to fail to grasp veya
Yes islamic terrorism is by far highest by a long shot NOT BY NUMBERS OF DEATHS OR IMPACT TO SOCIETY OR IMPACT TO CHILD PSYCHOLOGY.... sorry not even close 100,000's compared to 1000's a few dudes blowing them selves up with home made explosive compare to semi autonomous flying robots with military grade explosive munitions.... If you wont accept the failing of your side WHY do you expect Muslims too?
Anyway this again is a circular argument which if you fail to grasp the first time, then its pointless trying to explain to you again
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:37 pm
there is clearly a difference between the Atheism preached by you and to a lesser extent les and that which Ben follows
And it is not the Atheism of Plato or Mathematics either. they look for answers, 'new atheist' look to blame someone for man being a selfish greedy monkey
And it is not the Atheism of Plato or Mathematics either. they look for answers, 'new atheist' look to blame someone for man being a selfish greedy monkey
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Thu Nov 26, 2015 9:44 pm
Yes islamic terrorism by numbers and deaths has killed far more than any other terrorist affiliated religious or political group and by a a very long shot. If you claim otherwise, its up to you to provide the evidence Veya.
Second, who said anything about killing people because of their religious beliefs? I said speaking out why they are wrong, so do not invent gibberish Veya I have not stated. I am talking about the 3 abrahamic faiths, not ISIS which is just a very extreme version of Islam, which we need to stop more because of the fact people are suffering under them. So stop again inventing things not said to you.
Your view on someone robbing you makes no logical sense as based on what context of speaking out agains bad beliefs? It has no relevance.
Wars are a different view point all together, where some people are being oppressed, which the moral and ethical thing to do as humans would be to help those humans., So maybe you can point out what relevance does a robber have to speaking out on poor bad beliefs? Are you saying we should not speak out against racism? That is a belief? How about homophobia? That is a belief also. So again you are just making things up which I never even said, when the poiunt is speaking out against bad beliefs, of which in the abrahamic faiths, there is bad discrminating beliefs and to not speak out on them foregoes liberal values
So its time you started looking at religions for what they are, just beliefs, like many things are beliefs. Communism is a belief, so is Conservatism, so is Liberalism, so is nazism. Fundementally religions are belief and are not beyond criticism, espcially when they teach views at odds with the well being and equality of others.
Now if you fail to grasp this again and invent things not said, do not be surpirsed if I do not even bother to answer Veya, because it gets tedious when you invent things not stated..
Cheers and have a good one
Second, who said anything about killing people because of their religious beliefs? I said speaking out why they are wrong, so do not invent gibberish Veya I have not stated. I am talking about the 3 abrahamic faiths, not ISIS which is just a very extreme version of Islam, which we need to stop more because of the fact people are suffering under them. So stop again inventing things not said to you.
Your view on someone robbing you makes no logical sense as based on what context of speaking out agains bad beliefs? It has no relevance.
Wars are a different view point all together, where some people are being oppressed, which the moral and ethical thing to do as humans would be to help those humans., So maybe you can point out what relevance does a robber have to speaking out on poor bad beliefs? Are you saying we should not speak out against racism? That is a belief? How about homophobia? That is a belief also. So again you are just making things up which I never even said, when the poiunt is speaking out against bad beliefs, of which in the abrahamic faiths, there is bad discrminating beliefs and to not speak out on them foregoes liberal values
So its time you started looking at religions for what they are, just beliefs, like many things are beliefs. Communism is a belief, so is Conservatism, so is Liberalism, so is nazism. Fundementally religions are belief and are not beyond criticism, espcially when they teach views at odds with the well being and equality of others.
Now if you fail to grasp this again and invent things not said, do not be surpirsed if I do not even bother to answer Veya, because it gets tedious when you invent things not stated..
Cheers and have a good one
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 26, 2015 10:42 pm
How am I 'hating' by pointing out terrorist atrocities, potential threats to our national security and truth about crime...!?
Tommy Monk- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 26319
Join date : 2014-02-12
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 10:59 pm
you tooDidge wrote:Yes islamic terrorism by numbers and deaths has killed far more than any other terrorist affiliated religious or political group and by a a very long shot. If you claim otherwise, its up to you to provide the evidence Veya.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
the Iraq Body Count project found 174,000 Iraqis reported killed between 2003 and 2013, with between 112,000-123,000 of those killed being civilian noncombatants.
let alone Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Drones are DESIGNED to cause Terror, thus using them makes you a terrorist By definition.
Second, who said anything about killing people because of their religious beliefs? I said speaking out why they are wrong, so do not invent gibberish Veya I have not stated. I am talking about the 3 abrahamic faiths, not ISIS which is just a very extreme version of Islam, which we need to stop more because of the fact people are suffering under them. So stop again inventing things not said to you.
So what is your solution? your arguments will not covert anyone and are offensive to anyone that is not already a in your camp so what option do you have since you are not trying to negotiate? only one left .... kill them
Your view on someone robbing you makes no logical sense as based on what context of speaking out agains bad beliefs? It has no relevance.
Wars are a different view point all together, where some people are being oppressed, which the moral and ethical thing to do as humans would be to help those humans., So maybe you can point out what relevance does a robber have to speaking out on poor bad beliefs? Are you saying we should not speak out against racism? That is a belief? How about homophobia? That is a belief also. So again you are just making things up which I never even said, when the poiunt is speaking out against bad beliefs, of which in the abrahamic faiths, there is bad discrminating beliefs and to not speak out on them foregoes liberal values
You speak of values than want to commit the same crime thus you have no values that you are not willing to throw away when you perceive as a threat, Muslims justifiably perceive the west as a threat thus BY your own standards they do not require commit to any stated values. you and a Muslim are the same species of ape thus it is unreasonable to expect the same species of ape to behave differently int he same situation.
So its time you started looking at religions for what they are, just beliefs, like many things are beliefs. Communism is a belief, so is Conservatism, so is Liberalism, so is nazism. Fundementally religions are belief and are not beyond criticism, espcially when they teach views at odds with the well being and equality of others.
irrelevant, You have just got beliefs too, until you accept that you have the exact same fault as Abrahamism.
Now if you fail to grasp this again and invent things not said, do not be surpirsed if I do not even bother to answer Veya, because it gets tedious when you invent things not stated..
You need to work your propositions through to their logical conclusions, You have not answered anything just repeated the same tedious dogmatic drivel of a 'new atheist' fundamentalist.
Yes religions are to be dealt with but over time through education, logic and reason, NOT WARFARE.
ISIS is to be dealt with now separately through warfare or what ever means necessary.
Thus the 2 should not be equated as they have to be dealt with separately.
Cheers and have a good one
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 11:10 pm
Tommy Monk wrote:
How am I 'hating' by pointing out terrorist atrocities, potential threats to our national security and truth about crime...!?
and who do you put ALL the blame on?
regardless of how many times it is pointed out that your claim is patently untrue.
I probably should have said not you as there is a lot worse on here even
But....
you look for reasons to hate the group you already hate for no good reason.
you disregard and deny the numerous reason to not hate them to work together and to get along.
You say the world will be better if only THEY weren't here... you look to blame others for the faults in you world, rather than working with what is good to make it better. Just like Sam Harris and Didge....
You have even claimed that multicultural societies cannot work even though they do and their is plenty of examples of them working around the world but just because the UK have not been able to deal with basic issues you feel that it CANT work and you need to hate and get rid of the migrants if they also Muslim it is even worse. why have you never asked Why it is failing in the UK but not elsewhere? maybe the fault lies in your own society and traditions..
If we are free to complain and point out the faults in Other cultures and traditions and expect them to change, then the same applies to the UK.
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 26, 2015 11:36 pm
So how am I 'hating' by pointing out terrorist atrocities, potential threats to our national security and truth about crime...!?
Tommy Monk- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 26319
Join date : 2014-02-12
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Thu Nov 26, 2015 11:55 pm
Tommy Monk wrote:So how am I 'hating' by pointing out terrorist atrocities, potential threats to our national security and truth about crime...!?
how are you not?
By repeating lies and hate speech
You say Vote Ukip they only have hate policies
So how in your mind do you not promote hatred?
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 2:13 am
For fuck sake
The Iraq war is not terrorism Veya
Most of the deaths were killed were by insurgents again through terrorism by Islamic fundementalists
And you wonder why I DO NOT TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY.
Hene islamic terrorism is by far the largest and by far the most deaslist terrorism in terms of attacks and body counts.
The rest of your post was just gibberish like I said that if you posted nonsense I am not even going to bother continuing the debate
The Iraq war is not terrorism Veya
Most of the deaths were killed were by insurgents again through terrorism by Islamic fundementalists
And you wonder why I DO NOT TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY.
Hene islamic terrorism is by far the largest and by far the most deaslist terrorism in terms of attacks and body counts.
The rest of your post was just gibberish like I said that if you posted nonsense I am not even going to bother continuing the debate
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:08 am
Iraq war is terrorism. Just because it wasn't targeting you does not make it not terrorism.
By Rights ISIS are fighting a civil war. if you want to say Western forces in the Iraq war are not then ISIS is even less.
Those are number of Civilian death the US MILITARY thinks it caused. And Again you know you have NO Valid Point which is why you keep trying to justify the western crimes by saying"but But but these others did too".. Did that work as kid didge? I thought most people learned as a toddler that is not justification for your actions. IF we don't Accept that Rubbish from a naughty toddler WHY THE FUCK do you think it is acceptable for Professionals when referring to Killing Children.
no one takes you serious because of for are A Fundamentalist. Who clearly cannot accept that WESTERNERS have killed 100's of Muslims for every Westerner killed by an Islamic terrorist.
No Debate can take place Until YOU ACCEPT THE truth. YOU have no place telling Muslims Anything about the dangers of Fundamentalism because you ARE an example of a Fundamentalist.
Even Tommy has pointed out You are posting things You would call him a bigot racsit for posting IF he had.
this is discussion exactly Like Trying to convince any Fundamentalist That they cannot put all the blame onto others and leave themselves blame less. You have to take responsibility FOR YOU. You are not responsible for them. YOU have NO RIGHT to enforce your dogmatic beliefs upon others. By Doing so You make yourself Little better than those you preach hate against.
YOU CANNOT BLAME 1.7 billion people... End of Story... You can Make NO JUSTIFICATION to makes that acceptable. It is the definition of bigotry and discrimination.
By Rights ISIS are fighting a civil war. if you want to say Western forces in the Iraq war are not then ISIS is even less.
Those are number of Civilian death the US MILITARY thinks it caused. And Again you know you have NO Valid Point which is why you keep trying to justify the western crimes by saying"but But but these others did too".. Did that work as kid didge? I thought most people learned as a toddler that is not justification for your actions. IF we don't Accept that Rubbish from a naughty toddler WHY THE FUCK do you think it is acceptable for Professionals when referring to Killing Children.
no one takes you serious because of for are A Fundamentalist. Who clearly cannot accept that WESTERNERS have killed 100's of Muslims for every Westerner killed by an Islamic terrorist.
No Debate can take place Until YOU ACCEPT THE truth. YOU have no place telling Muslims Anything about the dangers of Fundamentalism because you ARE an example of a Fundamentalist.
Even Tommy has pointed out You are posting things You would call him a bigot racsit for posting IF he had.
this is discussion exactly Like Trying to convince any Fundamentalist That they cannot put all the blame onto others and leave themselves blame less. You have to take responsibility FOR YOU. You are not responsible for them. YOU have NO RIGHT to enforce your dogmatic beliefs upon others. By Doing so You make yourself Little better than those you preach hate against.
YOU CANNOT BLAME 1.7 billion people... End of Story... You can Make NO JUSTIFICATION to makes that acceptable. It is the definition of bigotry and discrimination.
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:09 am
“You roll into Baghdad, and every single big apartment building is blown up by artillery and airplanes bombing. You cannot meet someone in Iraq who has not lost a family member. Can you imagine what we would have done in America if after 9/11, everybody in America lost a family member? We’d be in the streets with weapons.”
– Darrel Anderson, Iraq Veteran“I was ordered multiple times by commissioned officers, and non-commissioned officers to shoot civilians if their presence made me feel uncomfortable. The primary loyalty is not to democracy, or to the flag, or to America, or to the Iraqi people or to the rule of law. It is to each other’s safety at the expense of everything else.
– Jason Lemieux, Former Marine Sgt. & Infantryman“I tried hard to be proud of my service but all I could feel was shame. The racism could no longer mask the reality of the occupation. These were people, these were human beings. I’ve since been plagued by guilt anytime I see an elderly man, like the one who couldn’t walk, who we rolled onto a stretcher and told the Iraqi police to take him away. I feel guilt anytime I see a mother with her children, like the one who cried hysterically, and screamed we were worse than Saddam as we forced her from her home. I feel guilt anytime I see a young girl, like the one I grabbed by the arm and dragged into the street. We were told we were fighting terrorists. The real terrorist was me, and the real terrorism is this occupation.”
-Mike Prysner, Iraq Veteran“When I was in Iraq I saw the devastation that the invasion had made out upon the Iraqi people. I saw and at times participated in the dehumanization and degradation of the Iraqi people. By robbing others of their inherent dignity, by denying them respect, and by treating them as a less-than-human other, we ultimately robbed ourselves of our own humanity and compassion.”
– Kelly Dougherty, Iraq Veteran“Funding the war is killing the troops. If you think about it, it’s really really blatantly obvious – and it’s really stupid that we have to say this.”
– Adam Kokesh, Iraq Veteran“When I joined the military I raised my hand and said that I’d protect the constitution of the United States and its people, and against foreign and domestic enemies. But guess what? I did not raise my hand to protect private companies like KBR, and put my life on the line so we can make a buck. When are we going to realize, the people fighting in Iraq that are fighting against us – they’re not terrorists – they’re soldiers. What would we do if somebody invaded us? I know I would pick up my weapon and fight against them. What the hell do we call them? Terrorists!? These people want their country back. Let’s give them their country back!”
– Iraq Veteran Against the War
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/07/30/the-war-you-dont-see-can-the-us-military-be-seen-as-terrorists/
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:13 am
I want to Know
HOW Anyone can think
the WEST is justified in it's response because of Paris
Yet Muslims are not Justified n their response to a Decade of such attacks by the west.
Just explain why the apes from the middle east have such a huge capacity to accept their families and friends being murdered, Yet the Apes from Europe think killing 100 middle eastern apes for every one European ape killed is Fair?
HOW Anyone can think
the WEST is justified in it's response because of Paris
Yet Muslims are not Justified n their response to a Decade of such attacks by the west.
Just explain why the apes from the middle east have such a huge capacity to accept their families and friends being murdered, Yet the Apes from Europe think killing 100 middle eastern apes for every one European ape killed is Fair?
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Eilzel Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:58 am
veya_victaous wrote:I want to Know
HOW Anyone can think
the WEST is justified in it's response because of Paris
Yet Muslims are not Justified n their response to a Decade of such attacks by the west.
Just explain why the apes from the middle east have such a huge capacity to accept their families and friends being murdered, Yet the Apes from Europe think killing 100 middle eastern apes for every one European ape killed is Fair?
1. Don't generally refer to all Muslims as though all are responsible. All Muslims aren't responsible for terrorists attacks like that in Paris. A minority of extremists are. And they are not justified because they TARGETED civilians.
2. They don't accept it. That's why there is war in Syria and Iraq with multiple groups fighting each other.
3. It isn't maths veya. No one is sitting in the White House or Elysee Palace totting up death counts. The attacks in the west are terrorists attacks AIMED at killing innocent people who had nothing to do with the bombings in the ME. Civilian deaths due to western bombing are not intended to kill civilians. Collateral is not good, and it isn't acceptable. But killing civilians indirectly due to bombing of a facility used by and occupied by terrorists is not the same as intentionally going into a restaurant, concern hall etc and shooting innocent people.
Stop simplifying things- it isn't helpful.
Eilzel- Speaker of the House
- Posts : 8905
Join date : 2013-12-12
Age : 39
Location : Manchester
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:05 am
DIDGE IS Clearly Blaming All Islam.
1. Our Troops HAVE Also Targeted Civilians, by their own confessions
2. Then WHY do you think blowing up more of them will make it better? So You already Know they are pissed off at us for Killing their families and friends and You want to go kill more? and then Don't expect them to kill more westerners in response?
3. 'collateral Damage' is a new term invented by the west to try and dehumanize the People we are murdering, If we apply it to Islamic forces most individuals in the WTC were collateral damage as there were justifiable targets in there.
Stop Simplifying ONLY ONE SIDE that is Your side.
Cause it is making it worse !!!
Our Soldiers ARE TERRORISTS too, they are not fighting in defense.
wearing Green doesn't magically make you not a terrorist.
ONLY ONE SIDE has caused large scale Psychological damage to millions of children, that they have come to fear something that is traditionally a symbols of freedom. We turned Clear Blue Skies into something to fear, it is now an Epidemic among Pakistani and Afghan children. The generation WE FUCKED UP is the one now being recruited by ISIS.
ISLAM is no more to blame then Capitalism. Stop trying to incite some religious War for what was clearly started by Western greed.
1. Our Troops HAVE Also Targeted Civilians, by their own confessions
2. Then WHY do you think blowing up more of them will make it better? So You already Know they are pissed off at us for Killing their families and friends and You want to go kill more? and then Don't expect them to kill more westerners in response?
3. 'collateral Damage' is a new term invented by the west to try and dehumanize the People we are murdering, If we apply it to Islamic forces most individuals in the WTC were collateral damage as there were justifiable targets in there.
Stop Simplifying ONLY ONE SIDE that is Your side.
Cause it is making it worse !!!
Our Soldiers ARE TERRORISTS too, they are not fighting in defense.
wearing Green doesn't magically make you not a terrorist.
ONLY ONE SIDE has caused large scale Psychological damage to millions of children, that they have come to fear something that is traditionally a symbols of freedom. We turned Clear Blue Skies into something to fear, it is now an Epidemic among Pakistani and Afghan children. The generation WE FUCKED UP is the one now being recruited by ISIS.
ISLAM is no more to blame then Capitalism. Stop trying to incite some religious War for what was clearly started by Western greed.
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Re: Scam Harris
by Eilzel Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:33 am
Whether religion is the root cause or not, it is ridiculous to think it has no part. It has a huge part. It unites terrorists or sympathisers from as far apart as Iran, China, Thailand, Libya, France, Turkey and the US and UK. There is no link between such people other than their religion. Either the religion impels them, justifys their actions or leads them to see an attack on one as an attack on all. How does a man born and raised in the UK become a savage terrorist? His situation? Why does the same situation not lead hundreds of non Muslims to terrorism? What is the difference?
Eilzel- Speaker of the House
- Posts : 8905
Join date : 2013-12-12
Age : 39
Location : Manchester
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 6:12 am
Sorry again for the third time on this thread Veya makes unfounded accusations and invents things I have not said
He does not understand the word terrorism and what it means and now claims I blame all Islam, which is nonsense, when political and social issues play a part.
The deliberate targeting of civillians by soldiers is called a war crime, where again they were few and far between, so again that is not terrorism and you do not understand terminology Veya. What ever people think of the wrong policies used to go to war with Iraq, it did fundementally remove a genocidal tyrant from power. I fail to see how that is cause to them for the insugencies to happen when many celebrated his fall. What kicked off the insurgencies was all hatred which went back years and were founded by both the Saudis and the Iranians to gain supremacy within Iraq. Such benegance went bak to the first Iraq war where an uprising by Hias and Kurds was put down with butchery by Saddam, where up to 200,000 were murdereed or lost their lives. So how about actually looking at the real history and not the one you have invented to make the worst apologist argument for Islam.
This is why I cannot take you seriously veya everytime you say things I have not said. Islam plays the fundemental part in the part of Islamic terrorism, but not all of it. Of that there is no question as again where was all the Iraqi Yazidi and Christians committing terrorism from being freed from Saddam? Where was the global terrorism from them? If it was about occupation or claims as you make daftly to terrorism? Where is all the Syrian Christian or Druze suicide bombers? Where are all these suicide attacks from them? There are none, so fundementally Islam is aplaying a part of a false narative claiming greivances to Muslims.
For fuck sake, this is why I have no time or even the patients to debate regressives lefties, they are clueless.
Agaian the Iraq war was not terrorism and it is that kind of stupid narative that the islamic extremists believe, where again most of the killings was done by insurgents, from both sunni and shia extremists through again Islamic terrorism.
Get your facts straight and understand your views are apologist views that play into the narative of Islamic extremism
All of which had nothhing to do with my original points on the criticism of religion, which you invented and added all this aspects on terrorism when you still cannot grasps that beliefs that effect people should be criticised as they effect the well b eing and equality of others. What you are effectivelly saying is we should respect all beliefs, including racism, homophobia, antisemitism etc
Sorry that is completele gibberish
He does not understand the word terrorism and what it means and now claims I blame all Islam, which is nonsense, when political and social issues play a part.
The deliberate targeting of civillians by soldiers is called a war crime, where again they were few and far between, so again that is not terrorism and you do not understand terminology Veya. What ever people think of the wrong policies used to go to war with Iraq, it did fundementally remove a genocidal tyrant from power. I fail to see how that is cause to them for the insugencies to happen when many celebrated his fall. What kicked off the insurgencies was all hatred which went back years and were founded by both the Saudis and the Iranians to gain supremacy within Iraq. Such benegance went bak to the first Iraq war where an uprising by Hias and Kurds was put down with butchery by Saddam, where up to 200,000 were murdereed or lost their lives. So how about actually looking at the real history and not the one you have invented to make the worst apologist argument for Islam.
This is why I cannot take you seriously veya everytime you say things I have not said. Islam plays the fundemental part in the part of Islamic terrorism, but not all of it. Of that there is no question as again where was all the Iraqi Yazidi and Christians committing terrorism from being freed from Saddam? Where was the global terrorism from them? If it was about occupation or claims as you make daftly to terrorism? Where is all the Syrian Christian or Druze suicide bombers? Where are all these suicide attacks from them? There are none, so fundementally Islam is aplaying a part of a false narative claiming greivances to Muslims.
For fuck sake, this is why I have no time or even the patients to debate regressives lefties, they are clueless.
Agaian the Iraq war was not terrorism and it is that kind of stupid narative that the islamic extremists believe, where again most of the killings was done by insurgents, from both sunni and shia extremists through again Islamic terrorism.
Get your facts straight and understand your views are apologist views that play into the narative of Islamic extremism
All of which had nothhing to do with my original points on the criticism of religion, which you invented and added all this aspects on terrorism when you still cannot grasps that beliefs that effect people should be criticised as they effect the well b eing and equality of others. What you are effectivelly saying is we should respect all beliefs, including racism, homophobia, antisemitism etc
Sorry that is completele gibberish
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Raggamuffin Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:27 am
Didge wrote:And yest speaks honestly unlike the regressives that slander him at any opportunity.
I may not agree with his view, but can totally understand why many would prefer based on the fact now the vast amount of terrorism is committed by Muslims.
Its a no brainer.
Maybe you can show me any other religion which is in conflict with just about every other faith committing terrorism around the world?
Do you now have more understanding of the decision by the Slovakia Government to only accept Christian refugees?
Raggamuffin- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 33746
Join date : 2014-02-10
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:37 am
Raggamuffin wrote:Didge wrote:And yest speaks honestly unlike the regressives that slander him at any opportunity.
I may not agree with his view, but can totally understand why many would prefer based on the fact now the vast amount of terrorism is committed by Muslims.
Its a no brainer.
Maybe you can show me any other religion which is in conflict with just about every other faith committing terrorism around the world?
Do you now have more understanding of the decision by the Slovakia Government to only accept Christian refugees?
I can understand their stance, but do not agree with their view.
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Raggamuffin Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:41 am
Didge wrote:Raggamuffin wrote:
Do you now have more understanding of the decision by the Slovakia Government to only accept Christian refugees?
I can understand their stance, but do not agree with their view.
At least you understand it now - you didn't before.
Raggamuffin- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 33746
Join date : 2014-02-10
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:52 am
I always understood there view, again my view was they were wrong to take such a stance and that view still remians the same, so stop being as per usual stupid
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Raggamuffin Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:59 am
Didge wrote:I always understood there view, again my view was they were wrong to take such a stance and that view still remians the same, so stop being as per usual stupid
But you seem much more sympathetic to the same view from Sam Harris.
Raggamuffin- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 33746
Join date : 2014-02-10
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:01 am
Raggamuffin wrote:Didge wrote:I always understood there view, again my view was they were wrong to take such a stance and that view still remians the same, so stop being as per usual stupid
But you seem much more sympathetic to the same view from Sam Harris.
Speculative gibberish
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Raggamuffin Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:06 am
Didge wrote:Raggamuffin wrote:
But you seem much more sympathetic to the same view from Sam Harris.
Speculative gibberish
I see it's going to be another day of you being aggressive and truculent. How lovely.
Raggamuffin- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 33746
Join date : 2014-02-10
Re: Scam Harris
by Guest Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:20 am
So according to rags saying "speculative gibberish" is being aggrsive being as she has absolutely no qualifications on the matter of understanding humans emotions..
One moment
One moment
Guest- Guest
Re: Scam Harris
by Tommy Monk Fri Nov 27, 2015 3:49 pm
veya_victaous wrote:Tommy Monk wrote:So how am I 'hating' by pointing out terrorist atrocities, potential threats to our national security and truth about crime...!?
how are you not?
By repeating lies and hate speech
You say Vote Ukip they only have hate policies
So how in your mind do you not promote hatred?
I don't repeat lies or hate speech... and UKIP are proposing a return of democracy and control of our country and borders to the British people... that is right and admirable, not racist policy at all!!!
I see you obviously don't support democracy and prefer dictatorships...
Tommy Monk- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 26319
Join date : 2014-02-12
Re: Scam Harris
by Tommy Monk Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:09 pm
veya_victaous wrote:DIDGE IS Clearly Blaming All Islam.
1. Our Troops HAVE Also Targeted Civilians, by their own confessions
2. Then WHY do you think blowing up more of them will make it better? So You already Know they are pissed off at us for Killing their families and friends and You want to go kill more? and then Don't expect them to kill more westerners in response?
3. 'collateral Damage' is a new term invented by the west to try and dehumanize the People we are murdering, If we apply it to Islamic forces most individuals in the WTC were collateral damage as there were justifiable targets in there.
Stop Simplifying ONLY ONE SIDE that is Your side.
Cause it is making it worse !!!
Our Soldiers ARE TERRORISTS too, they are not fighting in defense.
wearing Green doesn't magically make you not a terrorist.
ONLY ONE SIDE has caused large scale Psychological damage to millions of children, that they have come to fear something that is traditionally a symbols of freedom. We turned Clear Blue Skies into something to fear, it is now an Epidemic among Pakistani and Afghan children. The generation WE FUCKED UP is the one now being recruited by ISIS.
ISLAM is no more to blame then Capitalism. Stop trying to incite some religious War for what was clearly started by Western greed.
It is you who needs to stop with the simplified and one sided arguments...
And here's another shot of reality for everyone from Pat Condell...
Tommy Monk- Forum Detective ????♀️
- Posts : 26319
Join date : 2014-02-12
Re: Scam Harris
by eddie Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:05 am
Fuzzy Zack wrote:Guest?
Has Didge done another runner?
Yes see site news
eddie- King of Beards. Keeper of the Whip. Top Chef. BEES!!!!!! Mushroom muncher. Spider aficionado!
- Posts : 43129
Join date : 2013-07-28
Age : 25
Location : England
Re: Scam Harris
by veya_victaous Mon Nov 30, 2015 12:07 am
@Tm
Your funny
Say you don't promote lies and hate speech and then post A you tube video of a Hate Monger Famous for the complete fabrication of information.
veya_victaous- The Mod Loki, Minister of Chaos & Candy, Emperor of the Southern Realms, Captain Kangaroo
- Posts : 19114
Join date : 2013-01-23
Age : 41
Location : Australia
Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Similar topics» SCAM
» Immigration SCAM Or Not.
» CHANGE.ORG is a SCAM
» Sam Cam On Glam Scam And WE Are Paying.
» WARNING SCAM ON PAYPAL
» Immigration SCAM Or Not.
» CHANGE.ORG is a SCAM
» Sam Cam On Glam Scam And WE Are Paying.
» WARNING SCAM ON PAYPAL
NewsFix :: Politics :: Politics - World
Page 3 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
» TOTAL MADNESS Great British Railway Journeys among shows flagged by counter terror scheme ‘for encouraging far-right sympathies
» Interesting COVID figures
» HAPPY CHRISTMAS.
» The Fight Over Climate Change is Over (The Greenies Won!)
» Trump supporter murders wife, kills family dog, shoots daughter
» Quill
» Algerian Woman under investigation for torture and murder of French girl, 12, whose body was found in plastic case in Paris
» Wind turbines cool down the Earth (edited with better video link)
» Saying goodbye to our Queen.
» PHEW.
» And here's some more enrichment...
» John F Kennedy Assassination
» Where is everyone lately...?
» London violence over the weekend...
» Why should anyone believe anything that Mo Farah says...!?
» Liverpool Labour defends mayor role poll after turnout was only 3% and they say they will push ahead with the option that was least preferred!!!
» Labour leader Keir Stammer can't answer the simple question of whether a woman has a penis or not...
» More evidence of remoaners still trying to overturn Brexit... and this is a conservative MP who should be drummed out of the party and out of parliament!
» R Kelly 30 years, Ghislaine Maxwell 20 years... but here in UK...