600 Women Sexually Attacked-Grman Police Flood Streets

Blame put onto North African Migtants

German police officers will flood the streets of Cologne tonight after 600 women celebrating New Year's Eve were sexually assaulted in the city 12 months ago.
Around 1,800 officers will be deployed this evening - compared to just 140 in 2015 - following the wave of attacks last year.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4078686/German-police-flood-streets-Cologne-year-600-women-celebrating-New-Year-s-Eve-sexually-assaulted-wave-attacks-blamed-North-African-migrants.html#ixzz4URfnoyAp
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The truth must be wrong...

Cologne sex assaults: Muslim rape myths fit a neo-Nazi agenda
One newspaper said the EU referendum was about the safety and security of British women

Dark myths about sexual assaults in Cologne came into sharp focus last week when a female television journalist was attacked live on air. Esmeralda Labye, a reporter from Belgium, was covering the German city’s annual carnival when three men variously touched her breasts, kissed her and simulated intercourse behind her back. 
It followed claims of multiple sex crimes on women around the city’s station on New Year’s Eve, when refugees were blamed. This allowed conspiracy theorists to outline their most starkly racist fantasies, painting a picture of demonic brown-skinned Muslims fleeing war zones to defile white European womanhood. No need for court cases: marauding savages had planned everything on the Internet and were all guilty without trial.  




This time, however, Labye’s cameraman captured the absolute truth: footage shows white European males from overwhelmingly Christian Germany molesting her. Cologne was full of Caucasian drunks acting with the same kind of macho abandon which contributes to some half a million adults being sexually assaulted in England and Wales alone each year.



After the events of New Year’s Eve, one commentator specifically cited uneducated “youths from Afghanistan and Syria” as the culprits, expanding the global threat to one posed by “several hundred thousand young Muslim males”. More ambitiously still, the whole Cologne affair was linked to Brexit, as we were told by one newspaper: “The EU referendum is about nothing less than the safety and security of British women – and that means we must get out of Europe.”

On Friday, the Cologne prosecutor Ulrich Bremer in fact told me that, of the 59 suspects pinpointed so far, just four are from war-torn countries (Syria and Iraq), only 14 are in custody, and nobody has yet been charged. Nearly 600 hours of CCTV reveals very little, and there is no evidence whatsoever that the alleged attacks were planned in advance.
The refugee-as-rapist construct is the kind that has been used to demonise people throughout history. The idea is that you apply frightening characteristics to those you view as political enemies. In the 1930s Cologne’s Jews were described as 'Untermenschen' (inferior people) menacing European culture, before 11,000 were murdered during the Nazi Holocaust by “racially pure” Aryans, many of them beer-swilling Christians. 

Merging racism into a wider discussion about law and order, feminism and even the future of the EU project does not make it any less objectionable. Brown men are not inherently more misogynistic or brutal than white men, and Muslims are just as likely to be family-orientated, peaceful citizens as their counterparts from other religious and cultural heritages. 
Neo-Nazi groups such as Germany’s Pegida – an organisation becoming increasingly active in Britain – instead jump on the propaganda, using sacred half-truths about Cologne to spread hatred and violence. In their world, victims like Labye – white and blonde-haired – mean nothing if they are not prepared to scapegoat and lie in the cause of protecting European “civilisation” from the dark invaders.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/cologne-sex-assaults-Muslim-rape-myths-fit-a-neo-nazi-agenda-a6872566.html


Don't let the truth get in the way of your racist shit

sassy wrote:Cologne sex assaults: Muslim rape myths fit a neo-Nazi agenda
One newspaper said the EU referendum was about the safety and security of British women

Dark myths about sexual assaults in Cologne came into sharp focus last week when a female television journalist was attacked live on air. Esmeralda Labye, a reporter from Belgium, was covering the German city’s annual carnival when three men variously touched her breasts, kissed her and simulated intercourse behind her back. 
It followed claims of multiple sex crimes on women around the city’s station on New Year’s Eve, when refugees were blamed. This allowed conspiracy theorists to outline their most starkly racist fantasies, painting a picture of demonic brown-skinned Muslims fleeing war zones to defile white European womanhood. No need for court cases: marauding savages had planned everything on the Internet and were all guilty without trial.  




This time, however, Labye’s cameraman captured the absolute truth: footage shows white European males from overwhelmingly Christian Germany molesting her. Cologne was full of Caucasian drunks acting with the same kind of macho abandon which contributes to some half a million adults being sexually assaulted in England and Wales alone each year.



After the events of New Year’s Eve, one commentator specifically cited uneducated “youths from Afghanistan and Syria” as the culprits, expanding the global threat to one posed by “several hundred thousand young Muslim males”. More ambitiously still, the whole Cologne affair was linked to Brexit, as we were told by one newspaper: “The EU referendum is about nothing less than the safety and security of British women – and that means we must get out of Europe.”

On Friday, the Cologne prosecutor Ulrich Bremer in fact told me that, of the 59 suspects pinpointed so far, just four are from war-torn countries (Syria and Iraq), only 14 are in custody, and nobody has yet been charged. Nearly 600 hours of CCTV reveals very little, and there is no evidence whatsoever that the alleged attacks were planned in advance.
The refugee-as-rapist construct is the kind that has been used to demonise people throughout history. The idea is that you apply frightening characteristics to those you view as political enemies. In the 1930s Cologne’s Jews were described as 'Untermenschen' (inferior people) menacing European culture, before 11,000 were murdered during the Nazi Holocaust by “racially pure” Aryans, many of them beer-swilling Christians. 

Merging racism into a wider discussion about law and order, feminism and even the future of the EU project does not make it any less objectionable. Brown men are not inherently more misogynistic or brutal than white men, and Muslims are just as likely to be family-orientated, peaceful citizens as their counterparts from other religious and cultural heritages. 
Neo-Nazi groups such as Germany’s Pegida – an organisation becoming increasingly active in Britain – instead jump on the propaganda, using sacred half-truths about Cologne to spread hatred and violence. In their world, victims like Labye – white and blonde-haired – mean nothing if they are not prepared to scapegoat and lie in the cause of protecting European “civilisation” from the dark invaders.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/cologne-sex-assaults-Muslim-rape-myths-fit-a-neo-nazi-agenda-a6872566.html


Don't let the truth get in the way of your racist shit

Sasssy, you are so rude. this not MY racist sh** at all, it is a c/p from a newspaper as you know.

Your continued attacks without reason upon my good self is unwarranted therefore I feel entitled to ask for your immediate apology in writing.

Thank you.

The problem with your article sassy is that it was not an incident that happened on new years eve, as it was being filmed at a carnival event around a month after new years eve, and totally unrelated to the huge number of sex crimes that were reported on new years eve...!

TOMMY AND STORMEE up to their usual floppish alt.right/neo-nazi antics...

Claiming rumours and racist propaganda as some kind of spurious "news" and "facts"..


Now  I keenly await Raggs, syl and Nem's to dive in to back up Pte. Pain's usual rants, while claiming that all of Minor's and Tommy's critics are no less than a gang of "liberal" unwashed terrorist_supporting communist troll "arseholes", who also apparently all "hate England !", and are plotting to bring down the world as we know it.        

Flea keeper trolling again with his Wolfie waffle..



Here is an article about the incident sassquatch is talking about...


On New Year’s Eve, hundreds of women filed complaints of having been sexually assaulted in the city but RTBF’s News Director said this week’s incident was unrelated.

Jean-Pierre Jacqmi said: ‘For those who still have doubt after having seen the images, our journalistic analysis and testimony of our colleagues allows us to confirm that what happened in Cologne with our crew is not linked to the events that happened in the same city on December 31.’


Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2016/02/07/teenager-hands-himself-in-after-reporter-was-groped-live-on-air-5667564/#ixzz4UWGtBROJ

Is Sassy claiming that all the assaults were committed by European men?

No... sassy's article is about an incident that happened at a carnival in Cologne a month after new years eve...


There is a video of the 'incident'... and there is not a lot to it...

Tommy Monk wrote:No... sassy's article is about an incident that happened at a carnival in Cologne a month after new years eve...


There is a video of the 'incident'... and there is not a lot to it...

So it's not relevant to this topic then.

Not at all because it was nothing to do with what happened on new years eve.

According to this article, there were certainly a lot of police around in Cologne to try to prevent sexual assaults and robberies.

https://www.rt.com/news/372422-germany-cologne-africans-police/

Yes...


"...Last year, groups of men sexually assaulting and robbed as many as 600 women in the German city. The attackers were said to be mostly of North African and Arab appearance.

It later emerged that the attacks hadn’t been isolated to just Cologne, but had been taking place throughout the entire country..."

The second part I put in bold WAS THE POLICE STATEMENT ABOUT NEW YEARS DAY, learn to read.

After the events of New Year’s Eve, one commentator specifically cited uneducated “youths from Afghanistan and Syria” as the culprits, expanding the global threat to one posed by “several hundred thousand young Muslim males”. More ambitiously still, the whole Cologne affair was linked to Brexit, as we were told by one newspaper: “The EU referendum is about nothing less than the safety and security of British women – and that means we must get out of Europe.”

On Friday, the Cologne prosecutor Ulrich Bremer in fact told me that, of the 59 suspects pinpointed so far, just four are from war-torn countries (Syria and Iraq), only 14 are in custody, and nobody has yet been charged. Nearly 600 hours of CCTV reveals very little, and there is no evidence whatsoever that the alleged attacks were planned in advance.

Major wrote:Sasssy, you are so rude. this not MY racist sh** at all, it is a c/p from a newspaper as you know.

But you did say:

Major wrote:Blame put onto North African Migtants

You made that up…it’s nowhere in the Daily Mail article.  The article speaks only about suspicions as to appearances, and cites no one in particular...obvious smear tactic.  

(I have suspicions about the Nazi leanings of the Daily Mail...but don't quote me on that.  Just say: 'Authority notes Daily Mail looks like Nazis.')

Maj, you’re going to have to give up this habit of lying to support your prejudices.  It's unbecoming and completely destroys your credibility.

Original Quill wrote:

Major wrote:Sasssy, you are so rude. this not MY racist sh** at all, it is a c/p from a newspaper as you know.

But you did say:

Major wrote:Blame put onto North African Migtants

You made that up…it’s nowhere in the Daily Mail article.  The article speaks only about suspicions as to appearances, and cites no one in particular...obvious smear tactic.  

(I have suspicions about the Nazi leanings of the Daily Mail...but don't quote me on that.  Just say: 'Authority notes Daily Mail looks like Nazis.')

Maj, you’re going to have to give up this habit of lying to support your prejudices.  It's unbecoming and completely destroys your credibility.

You're splitting hairs a bit there. Saying that someone is of North African appearance is pretty much the same as calling therm North Africans in this context. There are other reports which do specifically mention North Africans.

German police said on Sunday they had prevented a repeat of the assaults and robberies suffered by hundreds of women in Cologne a year ago by screening 650 mostly North African men on New Year's Eve.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-idUSKBN14K0NX

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

But you did say:



You made that up…it’s nowhere in the Daily Mail article.  The article speaks only about suspicions as to appearances, and cites no one in particular...obvious smear tactic.  

(I have suspicions about the Nazi leanings of the Daily Mail...but don't quote me on that.  Just say: 'Authority notes Daily Mail looks like Nazis.')

Maj, you’re going to have to give up this habit of lying to support your prejudices.  It's unbecoming and completely destroys your credibility.

You're splitting hairs a bit there. Saying that someone is of North African appearance is pretty much the same as calling therm North Africans in this context. There are other reports which do specifically mention North Africans.

German police said on Sunday they had prevented a repeat of the assaults and robberies suffered by hundreds of women in Cologne a year ago by screening 650 mostly North African men on New Year's Eve.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-idUSKBN14K0NX

Splitting hairs?  Or different ways to lie?



No source? No spokesperson? Innuendos? Misplaced associations? Not to mention paralipsis.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You're splitting hairs a bit there. Saying that someone is of North African appearance is pretty much the same as calling therm North Africans in this context. There are other reports which do specifically mention North Africans.



http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-idUSKBN14K0NX

Splitting hairs?  Or different ways to lie?



No source?  No spokesperson?  Innuendos?  Misplaced associations?  Not to mention paralipsis.

I just gave a quote from another source. What is it with you? Just admit that you were splitting hairs and have done with it.

Raggamuffin wrote:...prevented a repeat of the assaults and robberies...screening 650 mostly North African men

Mostly? And, do you remember I included "innuendos" and "misplaced associations"?   Where is the connection between "preventing" and "screening"?

One could say I "prevented" Maj's lying by "screening" his article.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:...prevented a repeat of the assaults and robberies...screening 650 mostly North African men

Mostly?  And, do you remember I included "innuendos" and "misplaced associations"?   Where is the connection between "preventing" and "screening"?

One could say I "prevented" Maj's lying by "screening" his article.

I'm just quoting from the article Quill. You complained about what the Major said, but news sources are also talking about North African men, so he didn't lie. You are being disingenuous.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:



Mostly?  And, do you remember I included "innuendos" and "misplaced associations"?   Where is the connection between "preventing" and "screening"?

One could say I "prevented" Maj's lying by "screening" his article.

I'm just quoting from the article Quill. You complained about what the Major said, but news sources are also talking about North African men, so he didn't lie. You are being disingenuous.

You didn't even understand the article, much less can you read critically between the lines.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm just quoting from the article Quill. You complained about what the Major said, but news sources are also talking about North African men, so he didn't lie. You are being disingenuous.

You didn't even understand the article, much less can you read critically between the lines.

I understood it just fine. You don't seem to understand anything which is posted.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You didn't even understand the article, much less can you read critically between the lines.

I understood it just fine. You don't seem to understand anything which is posted.

That's your answer for everything, is it not? At some point you tune out, and put up the teflon.

Well...that's a conservative. Cease thinking all ye who enter these gates!

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I understood it just fine. You don't seem to understand anything which is posted.

That's your answer for everything, is it not?  At some point you tune out, and put up the teflon.

Well...that's a conservative.  Cease thinking all ye who enter these gates!

It's my answer to you, and it's correct. The Major said that North Africans were being blamed, and it's clear that that is indeed the case according to some news sites. Do you dispute that? If so, please explain why.

Quill tries to turn everything into a 'that's what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument... thus tuning out of actually having any real argument... and is very lazy...!

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's your answer for everything, is it not?  At some point you tune out, and put up the teflon.

Well...that's a conservative.  Cease thinking all ye who enter these gates!

It's my answer to you, and it's correct. The Major said that North Africans were being blamed, and it's clear that that is indeed the case according to some news sites. Do you dispute that? If so, please explain why.

Of course...I've already explained that. Maj misquotes, from questionable sources, who decline to identify themselves. They speak obliquely, as do your sources.

I've reduced this to the elementary level in my explanation. But if you didn't get it the first time, you will never get it. Why should I repeat myself endlessly?

Rather than repeat myself endlessly, trying to think of creative ways to restate it, it's much easier if I simply conclude that you are incapable of following the thought. You don't speak the language of reason.

It was big news a year ago when the cover up was going on about identities...


We haven't forgotten...!

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's my answer to you, and it's correct. The Major said that North Africans were being blamed, and it's clear that that is indeed the case according to some news sites. Do you dispute that? If so, please explain why.

Of course...I've already explained that.  Maj misquotes, from questionable sources, who decline to identify themselves.  They speak obliquely, as do your sources.

I've reduced this to the elementary level in my explanation.  But if you didn't get it the first time, you will never get it.  Why should I repeat myself endlessly?  

Rather than repeat myself endlessly, trying to think of creative ways to restate it, it's much easier if I simply conclude that you are incapable of following the thought.  You don't speak the language of reason.

He didn't misquote anything. You can't answer because you know I'm right, and you hate that - don't you? There are plenty of sources which you could find if you want, but you won't because they will prove you wrong.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Quill tries to turn everything into a 'that's what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument... thus tuning out of actually having any real argument... and is very lazy...!

Well thomas...isn't it? Conservatives don't get past labels, which is what you are engaged in right now.

Y'all don't comprehend the resolutive/composite method, which means you don't analyze. When you don't analyze, you can't create. If you can't create, you have no original thoughts...nothing new to communicate. So you dilly-dally your space and time away with labels, jingos and incurious half-thoughts, originated in someone else's mind. You've seen IT's posts.

When you've nailed the "what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument", why go beyond. I mean, how do you improve on perfection?

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Quill tries to turn everything into a 'that's what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument... thus tuning out of actually having any real argument... and is very lazy...!

Well thomas...isn't it?  Conservatives don't get past labels, which is what you are engaged in right now.  

Y'all don't comprehend the resolutive/composite method, which means you don't analyze.  When you don't analyze, you can't create.  If you can't create, you have no original thoughts...nothing new to communicate.  So you dilly-dally your space and time away with labels, jingos and incurious half-thoughts, originated in someone else's mind.  You've seen IT's posts.

When you've nailed the "what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument", why go beyond.  I mean, how do you improve on perfection?

That's pretty funny as you love to label people yourself.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Of course...I've already explained that.  Maj misquotes, from questionable sources, who decline to identify themselves.  They speak obliquely, as do your sources.

I've reduced this to the elementary level in my explanation.  But if you didn't get it the first time, you will never get it.  Why should I repeat myself endlessly?  

Rather than repeat myself endlessly, trying to think of creative ways to restate it, it's much easier if I simply conclude that you are incapable of following the thought.  You don't speak the language of reason.

He didn't misquote anything. You can't answer because you know I'm right, and you hate that - don't you? There are plenty of sources which you could find if you want, but you won't because they will prove you wrong.

Once someone enters the mindspace of that alt.right, all must cease communication with that person. In fact, I'm no longer speaking to you, but to all the understanding souls out there.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well thomas...isn't it?  Conservatives don't get past labels, which is what you are engaged in right now.  

Y'all don't comprehend the resolutive/composite method, which means you don't analyze.  When you don't analyze, you can't create.  If you can't create, you have no original thoughts...nothing new to communicate.  So you dilly-dally your space and time away with labels, jingos and incurious half-thoughts, originated in someone else's mind.  You've seen IT's posts.

When you've nailed the "what conservatives/right wing do' type of argument", why go beyond.  I mean, how do you improve on perfection?

That's pretty funny as you love to label people yourself.

Ah yes, but not as a substitute for reason.  Labels and jingles are a convenience, but they must relate to an underlying reason and truth. If they are the only thing one understands, that person has ceased all reason.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

He didn't misquote anything. You can't answer because you know I'm right, and you hate that - don't you? There are plenty of sources which you could find if you want, but you won't because they will prove you wrong.

Once someone enters the mindspace of that alt.right, all must cease communication with that person.  In fact, I'm no longer speaking to you, but to all the understanding souls out there.

Of course you're not speaking to me. That's because you hate being wrong, and you hate me being right.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Once someone enters the mindspace of that alt.right, all must cease communication with that person.  In fact, I'm no longer speaking to you, but to all the understanding souls out there.

Of course you're not speaking to me. That's because you hate being wrong, and you hate me being right.

There's no possibility of interaction between you and me. It's like confronting a robot that can only repeat a simple message...GO BACK, IMAGE DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Didn't I just delve into the importance of the resolutive/composite method? I was speaking to a blank wall in you, wasn't I? You have no understanding--not even the capacity to understand, because you have no intellectual imagination, nor contemplation of metaphors or linguistic devices.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Of course you're not speaking to me. That's because you hate being wrong, and you hate me being right.

There's no possibility of interaction between you and me.  It's like confronting a robot that can only repeat a simple message...GO BACK, IMAGE DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Didn't I just delve into the importance of the resolutive/composite method?  I was speaking to a blank wall in you, wasn't I?  You have no understanding--not even the capacity to understand, because you have no intellectual imagination, nor contemplation of metaphors or linguistic devices.

I agree - because you simply won't ever admit that you're mistaken or wrong, which you certainly are this time.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

There's no possibility of interaction between you and me.  It's like confronting a robot that can only repeat a simple message...GO BACK, IMAGE DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Didn't I just delve into the importance of the resolutive/composite method?  I was speaking to a blank wall in you, wasn't I?  You have no understanding--not even the capacity to understand, because you have no intellectual imagination, nor contemplation of metaphors or linguistic devices.

I agree - because you simply won't ever admit that you're mistaken or wrong, which you certainly are this time.

I am certainly not, this time. Moreover, I have explained it with great detail, which you have failed to do.

I can admit I'm wrong. Look at the dispute going on right now, up in the top, administrative section. I have said I might be wrong, and I'll step back.

But I don't see it as productive, or even expedient, to be artificial and say one is wrong when you are not. Maj made a complete mockery of the art of quoting, saying his article said what it clearly did not. This is a continual misstep in Alt.Right argument...one that leads to the independent and honest judgment that the Alt.Right has no respect for truth or honesty.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I agree - because you simply won't ever admit that you're mistaken or wrong, which you certainly are this time.

I am certainly not, this time.  Moreover, I have explained it with great detail, which you have failed to do.

I can admit I'm wrong.  Look at the dispute going on right now, up in the top, administrative section.  I have said I might be wrong, and I'll step back.  

But I don't see it as productive, or even expedient, to be artificial and say one is wrong when you are not.  Maj made a complete mockery of the art of quoting, saying his article said what it clearly did not.  This is a continual misstep in Alt.Right argument...one that leads to the independent and honest judgment that the Alt.Right has no respect for truth or honesty.

The Major wasn't quoting from the article though. That was obvious because of the typo.

Blame put onto North African Migtants

In fact, he didn't put the rest of his post in a quote box, which I would have done, but that's just me. The title of the Mail article does state that the blame was being put on North African migrants, so he's not lying.

German police flood the streets of Cologne a year after 600 women celebrating New Year's Eve were sexually assaulted in wave of attacks blamed on North African migrants

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I am certainly not, this time.  Moreover, I have explained it with great detail, which you have failed to do.

I can admit I'm wrong.  Look at the dispute going on right now, up in the top, administrative section.  I have said I might be wrong, and I'll step back.  

But I don't see it as productive, or even expedient, to be artificial and say one is wrong when you are not.  Maj made a complete mockery of the art of quoting, saying his article said what it clearly did not.  This is a continual misstep in Alt.Right argument...one that leads to the independent and honest judgment that the Alt.Right has no respect for truth or honesty.

The Major wasn't quoting from the article though. That was obvious because of the typo.

Blame put onto North African Migtants

In fact, he didn't put the rest of his post in a quote box, which I would have done, but that's just me. The title of the Mail article does state that the blame was being put on North African migrants, so he's not lying.

German police flood the streets of Cologne a year after 600 women celebrating New Year's Eve were sexually assaulted in wave of attacks blamed on North African migrants

Do you see how much dancing and happy-footing you are having to do to explain Major?  That is because he takes many, too many unjustified leaps of logic with his posts.

In jurisprudence, you have to identify yourself, and provide the foundation for how you know. If you've got a source who will identify him or herself, go with it.  Otherwise, a responsible journalist will leave it alone.

And a critical reader will know the difference.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

The Major wasn't quoting from the article though. That was obvious because of the typo.



In fact, he didn't put the rest of his post in a quote box, which I would have done, but that's just me. The title of the Mail article does state that the blame was being put on North African migrants, so he's not lying.

Do you see how much happy-footing you are having to do to explain Major?  That is because he takes many, many unjustified leaps of logic with his posts.

If you've got a source who will identify him or herself, go with it.  Otherwise, a responsible journalist will leave it alone.

And a critical reader will know the difference.

No, I'm having to explain in detail because you don't seem to get it. It's there in the title of the article! Now do you see?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Do you see how much happy-footing you are having to do to explain Major?  That is because he takes many, many unjustified leaps of logic with his posts.

If you've got a source who will identify him or herself, go with it.  Otherwise, a responsible journalist will leave it alone.

And a critical reader will know the difference.

No, I'm having to explain in detail because you don't seem to get it. It's there in the title of the article! Now do you see?

If it were that easy, we would have settled this by now.  Your answers are loaded with "yeah buts" and "I kin s'plain"...a clear indication that you're having difficulty defending Maj's nonsense.

He wouldn't be transposing verbs if he wasn't playing games. The fact that he provides no names as sources is a clear indication that he is bootstrapping.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, I'm having to explain in detail because you don't seem to get it. It's there in the title of the article! Now do you see?

If it were that easy, we would have settled this by now.  Your answers are loaded with "yeah buts" and "I kin s'plain"...a clear indication that you're having difficulty defending Maj's nonsense.

He wouldn't be transposing verbs if he wasn't playing games.  The fact that he provides no names as sources is a clear indication that he is bootstrapping.

It is that easy - it's you who's making it complicated, and I'm not going to sit here and let you patronise me in the way you've been doing.

You accused the Major of lying, and he didn't. That's how simple it is.

WHY does Ragg's keep referring to Stormee as "the Major", when he clearly is no such thing  ???

I don't believe that being an NCO in his school cadets unit actually qualifies anyone to call himself a "Major"..

I certainly can't imagine someone as thick and clueless as Stormee being promoted to an officers rank in the British Army.

IT's just his FORUM NAME, we don't think your a Wolf either !

nicko wrote:IT's just his FORUM NAME, we don't think your a Wolf either !

Some people take great pride in the uniform, and they are offended when someone falsely claims or accords a status that is undeserved.

And some people like to be pissy about everything simply to be pissy.

Seriously, the amount of childishness on this forum.

nicko wrote:

IT's just his FORUM NAME, we don't think your a Wolf either !

How about Raggamuffin's use of "the" in her reference to Major's name, turning it into a title/rank ???

And, it's not like she did it only once..
More like she is emphasing the rank, rather than simply using it as another label.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:IT's just his FORUM NAME, we don't think your a Wolf either !

Some people take great pride in the uniform, and they are offended when someone falsely claims or accords a status that is undeserved.

Why do you care? According to you they are all just baby killers.

Miffs2 wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Some people take great pride in the uniform, and they are offended when someone falsely claims or accords a status that is undeserved.

Why do you care? According to you they are all just baby killers.

Because I respect other people and the different feelings they might have about their own values and symbols.  

I am critical when I am down inside the debate, because speaking up for your own values and symbols is most important too.  For example, I might criticize those who carry out baby killing, but I don't criticize them when they respect the uniform.  To me, one is an issue of importance that I oppose, the other is something I can easily respect and accommodate.

As an aside, while I'm at it, I'm not against the military or an act of legitimate war.  I take great pride in what our boys did in defense of our lands when the Japanese attacked our homeland.  

But this idea of indiscriminately going around the world killing the babies of people who don't look like us, for reasons of their ideology, or their religion, or indeed their skin color, is unacceptable.   In that case, we are no different than the Japanese in 1941.  Indeed, to me what we did in Iraq--kidnapping, torture, rape, murder and running concentration camps--looks a lot like what Nazi Germany did during WWII.

Fighting pickup truck brigades like ISIS is like fighting the bubbles in a boiling pot.  You can prick the bubbles with a pin, one-by-one, but you're not getting to the underlying source of the problem...and you're sure not going to effect change by popping bubbles.  From my perch, it looks like you are seeking revenge, rather than solving any problems.  In our age, with all of our intelligence and technology, we seem to be reverting to rank tribalism.

I'm not opposed to legitimate warfare or strategic conflict for moral purposes.  All I ask for is a little intelligence in why, and how we go about it.  See, von Clausewitz, Carl, On War. (1832).