[Closed] "Muslim" terrorists attack French magazine in Paris

You're a funny sort Mr Glover

I suppose on some of the "truth" forums you must spend time on, pointing out fantasist bullshit would be considered "funny" behaviour.

In the real world though, it's considered to be fairly normal.

He's not Mr Glover anyway. His name is Neal Giacomo Lover!

Sometimes it feels as if:

Rollicking good subject matter:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Err, oh, no, don't know what you mean, that never happened:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

But with Drones and Private military contractors filling the pockets of MPs...

I suppose on some of the "truth" forums you must spend time on, pointing out fantasist bullshit would be considered "funny" behaviour.

In the real world though, it's considered to be fairly normal.

It is very noticeable on all these threads though, that you never seem interested in engaging with any of the actual key issues, just in picking up on largely irrelevant points and pedantically arguing about them ad nauseum.

JHJ derailing these threads gets boring admittedly - there's really no point arguing with him and I can't work out why so many people bother.

Grum have you read neals first post on this page have you seen JHJ retorts?

That is what happens when you do engage him rational
Its pointless as it ends up with him changing tact via "humour" and ad homs

I do agree its best to just stop responding as the result is inevitable as it s predictable and boring

It is very noticeable on all these threads though, that you never seem interested in engaging with any of the actual key issues

Ive read a lot more than I've posted in this thread that's for sure.

And it would have been very interesting other than the usual repetitive bullshit peddler jivey.

just in picking up on largely irrelevant points

It was relevant enough for him to copy and paste it from ickebullshit.com.
So it's relevant enough for me to comment on.

At what point do these "points" that he make become irrelevant ?

Is it once they are called out as bullshit.

Or are they are irrelevant by default ?

I did ask him the same question when he said the same thing to me.
Oddly he declined to answer.

.
In the interest of harmony I'll offer a deal.

If jivey stops posting total bullshit.

I'll stop pointing it out.

Can't say fairer than that.

I tend towards JHJs world view but I have to agree with JY.. In fact I'm starting to wonder if JHJ may be a secret services psy-ops plant, sent to discredit alternative ideas

jive you did misrepresent CIA "undercover bomber" victory and your link confirms you misrepresented it .. do you ever actually read your links ?

The concerning part is sometimes with your conspiracy theories you come dangerously close to hitting actual nails but you swerve away into lala land again . There are some massive injustices in global politics and its interface with private corporations just look at how rebuilding aid for the third world and middle east flows straight back into western companies as damages for loss of profits or vulture fund debt repayment . But there is not some massive global pedo arms dealer lizard conspiracy .

AK47s were a better switch for Afganistan over lee enfields as they are easy to get hold of (manufactured world wide) very cheep easy to make repairs to very very reliable very effective and dangerous even in untrained hands . Also eases the resupply problem if you use the same ammo as the squaddies you are slaughtering , every time you successfully fire a bullet you stand to get at least 50 fresh ones back.

jive you also misrepresent the drone strike . At no point is there any conclusive evidence of a drone strike "all any body could say is there had been a drone strike " so who said that ? how did they know? did they see a drone ? The us never said there was a drone in the area .
Your Link:-
"There are at least three different versions of the same CNN article regarding the ****stani girls injured/killed by the U.S. drone strike in Swat. Interestingly, each version of the CNN article progressively distances the alleged drone strike from the girls that were injured/killed.

Original:

“All anyone could say is that there had been a U.S. drone attack. The girls were likely hurt in the strike.”

First Revision:

“All anyone could say is that there had been a U.S. drone attack, though it’s not known how the three girls were injured.”

Second Revision:

“All anyone could say is that there had been a U.S. drone attack, though U.S. officials say that drones have never struck targets in Swat.”
Not exactly "As we've seen from the ****stani drone strike story, once the Pentagon spin doctors get their teeth into a story, things can evolve" the facts in the cnn quotes never change . The story may contain different nuances as more info becomes available but what story based on information does not.

[img] [/img]

"As we've seen from the ****stani drone strike story, once the Pentagon spin doctors get their teeth into a story, things can evolve"

The massive irony being, that the person who criticises government spin doctors twisting things to suit themselves, is the same person who posted.....

[b]"..underwear bomber linked to CIA" [/b]

When the actual story was....

[b]"CIA man working undercover foils terrorist plan to blow up passenger jet" [/b]

How he can criticise "spin" after that, without expecting to look like a complete tool, I've no idea. 🙄

I've formed the opinion that jhj is in need of medication for his special needs. A lot like a similar banhammered antecedent already mentioned earlier in the thread by Cougar.

He can't help it and may soon end up with just his own FB page to which nobody (except me, 'cause I'm morbidly interested in it) pays attention...
...

Given the serious nature of this thread and the events that lead to it the last couple of days have provided light relief.

Charlie Ebdo was sold out before I could get a copy, huge queue at the bookshop where one guy had been there since midnight. Have had sight of a copy though 😐

What everyone seems to be leaving out of the equation is the precedent repeatedly set by governments, who hold press conferences, after days of tweaking the story to suit their perspective:

for example, from the

Did I misrepresent it?

[url= http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/05/16/why-the-underwear-bomber-leak-infuriated-the-obama-administration/ ]link[/url], we have

Those chants were heard this week, as it was revealed that Department of Justice prosecutors had seized two months’ worth of records from 20 office, home and cell phone lines used by Associated Press journalists in their investigation into the Yemen underwear-bomber leaks.

In addition to being a questionable take on the 'Free Speech' mantra which seems to have been attached to this incident, it appears to suggest that what is published may not be the whole story, especially since:

The AP story that has so infuriated the government described the breakup of an al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula plot to place an underwear bomber on board a U.S.-bound airliner. Published on the afternoon of May 7, 2012, the story patted itself on the back for having heeded the White House and CIA requests to not publish the previous week, when the AP first learned of the operation. The AP states in the article that it published only after being told by “officials” that the original “concerns were allayed.”

Now of course, I could be wrong, but given repeated instances such as:

Questioning the credibility of what is authorized by government press officers is reasonable.

Yes you misrepresented both stories . Do you honestly believe a free and open society demands we publish in news the details of a currently active agent working in a terrorist cell in a foriegn land?
Justify your assertion that Pentagon spin drs got their teeth into the drone story.

On second thoughts don't as you only link to yet another website or you tube video.

I already have, the precedent set...

We all know high level politicians lie (and we all know they profit from war)

Justify this image:

[img] [/img]

I could be wrong

Yes. You are.

Look at my last post to see how you are guilty of "spin"

You totally misrepresented the story.

Enough please stop encouraging him.

Are the people challenging this drivel really the cause of the problem/issue we have here?

I doubt he will stop even if folk stop replying though, in the face of hammer inaction, it is the route I have chosen.

Back to the original topic for this thread please.

My head hurts reading some of the information provided as I only have 4GB RAM and a slow 2.4Ghz processor.

🙄

Dear mods. Please ban JHJ, he is far more painful than TJ ever was. Thank you.

Enough please stop encouraging him.

So he's free to post a load of old crap, but nobody is allowed to point out that it's a load of old crap.

Do we have to pretend it's true ?

So, moving on, who's got something new to add...

clean slate n that

michaelbowden - Member

Dear mods. Please ban JHJ, he is far more painful than TJ ever was. Thank you.

No banning please as I like active forum.

I like TJ as he funny.

Wonder what he's up to nowadays. 😛

TJ if you still frequent STW but not posting ... you good man. 😀

Don't ban people if they are not abusive or unlawful in their posts . On the other hand I feel I have descended into troll feeding or poking on this thread which started on a tragic story where real people have died and been traumatised so for my own part I'm out.

jivehoneyjive - Member
So, moving on, who's got something new to add...

clean slate n that

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaetc

😉

Don't ban people if they are not abusive or unlawful in their posts . On the other hand I feel I have descended into troll feeding or poking on this thread which started on a tragic story where real people have died and been traumatised so for my own part I'm out.

Agreed

TBH his(hers)(it's) posts are quite easy to ignore. Especially as many are cheap shot memes.

Oldie but a goodie

One comment made on the video and we hear it often is Muskims questioning why apt hey are asked to denounce these sorts of terrorists acts as surely it's obvious they would. Well actually it's nit obvious, there appears to me to be a significant minority who make suportive remarks of varying degrees, so condemnation isn't obvious. We've had numerous people say the magazine should expect a strong response and more extreme Imams calling for capital punishment for the most recent CH issue for example.

Like the pope.

pope:
The pope pointed to his aide as he said “If my good friend Dr Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch. It’s normal. It’s normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”

He's wrong on both counts, you can insult a faith(whatever that is) and you can't punch people for calling you mum a nasty word. What a plonker.

Indeed jesus told him to turn the other cheek

On his broader point the issue is we all know if you insult folk violence is a possibility

get off the phone you muppet

Turning up at weddings calling the bride a fat slag

Abusing random strangers in the street
Calling folks Mum
etc

All of these would result in you getting hit without to many trials as folk dont like being insulted or provoked as the pope said.

Whether this is right or wrong is a different debate to whether it will happen

Peaceful Muslims around the world supporting free speech and condemning murder.

http://rt.com/news/223515-niger-charlie-protest-killed/

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/dec/19/football-violence-view-around-world ]Lucky they weren't football fans!![/url]

Lucky who weren't football fans ?

Lucky in what way ?

(Did you post on the wrong thread )

Neal please stop feeding him FFS PLEASE

JHJ - Can you go out and ride your bike, just for a little while?

And.....