• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

Paris terrorist attacks

mister said:
Im an ex Christian and can say the bible, especially the OT, isnt "mostly nice with a few idiotic bits and lots of stuff that was of its time" These religious books are enablers, all the Abrihamic religions are death cults because they live to die and most don't give a fuck about this world and cannot wait to get to heaven. Most Americans don't believe in climate change, they think God controls the weather. All these books subjugate women and are easily "taken out of context" to suit ones agenda
Click to expand...

Well i thought about saying something about the old testament (though some of it's sort of OK (jeremiah)) and judaism interprets it quite differently than christianity (more nuanced generally) so i left it. The gospels fit my description quite well i think, and most of the rest of the NT (being horrible to women was part of the 'of its time' stuff i'm afraid). I don't consider the heart of christianity (love your neighbour/enemy, turn the other cheek, do unto others) as a death cult.

"Do you even science? Steven Hawking's is most definitely an Atheist"

Yes, i was saying that most of the people who are atheists aren't scientists and they take stuff like the big bang on faith - not saying i don't agree with the scientific approach (i definitely do), just that there's a bit of hypocrisy involved with the average lay atheist. Agnostic is just a much more intellectually honest position: the athiest is claiming to themself universal knowledge of a similar level to the average religious person (i know there is no god=i know there is a god; true science wouldn't make such absolute claims imv). Also the god that most athiests know doesn't exist is usually a simplistic abrahamic strawman that's easy to pooh-pooh: most don't bother taking apart more sophisticated conceptions of god.
 
StoneHappyMonday said:
I was defending you, drunkenly you then started swearing at me. You work it out.

Press TV has a range of presenters. You pick on Galloway I could say Derek Conway, former Conservative MP or Lembit Opik, former Liberal Democrat MP. Yes, they have some odious people on there but they also have more female interviewers (not plastic newsreaders, serious interviewers) than any other channel I've seen.

And they generally report a wider range of news from more countries than I see on any other channel.

Go back and look at your posts, where you call me fucked up (oh the irony) and say I'm using words like 'fact' when I'm not.

Yeah. You were struggling. Remind me not to try backing you up again in a hurry.
Click to expand...

Like I have said I was struggling - I would argue over a few things, Press TV is not one of them. I mentioned Galloway as he 'covered' quite a bit of the unrest in the area -I do not know any other reporter, I have seen first hand the lies and utter filth that they mention as 'facts' (the point I was trying to make). The coverage and they way they have their agenda on the way stories are shown (same as most other media sites) that I have witnessed first hand is utterly sickening (or fucked up). Sorry you took my rambling post to be a personal attack on you, certainly wasn't meant that way.
 
NSFW:
tumblr_mg0gw8ro7W1qbogk6o1_500.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bearlove said:
Like I have said I was struggling - I would argue over a few things, Press TV is not one of them. I mentioned Galloway as he 'covered' quite a bit of the unrest in the area -I do not know any other reporter, I have seen first hand the lies and utter filth that they mention as 'facts' (the point I was trying to make). The coverage and they way they have their agenda on the way stories are shown (same as most other media sites) that I have witnessed first hand is utterly sickening (or fucked up). Sorry you took my rambling post to be a personal attack on you, certainly wasn't meant that way.
Click to expand...

To cut in, i quite like press tv - that's not to say i like the iranian regime particularly. They're a state broadcatser and so inherently biased (though individual programs/contributors should be judged in thjeir own right), but each state broadcaster has value inasmuch as they cover the stuff the biases of the other state broadcasters won't cover - so by surfing between bbc RT aljazeera and press tv you can deduce quite a bit of news. Personally i don't think press tv is any worse as a state broadcaster than the Big Brother Corporation, except the bbc's biases are more subtle and arguably more damaging (because more people believe their bullshit).

Speaking of which this interview/rant from Ken o'Keefe on PressTV is quite good: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=123_1447792110#tOxpgmogGDtw5JVS.99

That's not to say i believe everything he says, but it's nice to have a bit of 'balance'

On a slightly more credible note, here's an article on ISIS from the excellent Nafeez Ahmed: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/11/17/isis-wants-destroy-grey-zone-heres-how-we-defend-it

As if to confirm my previous comment about the biggest threat being our own governments, check out this article about what France is going to do (yes the source is ultra-lefty, but nonetheless): http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/11/17/pari-n17.html

In a speech Monday to both houses of parliament meeting in Versailles, French President François Hollande made clear that in response to the terrorist attacks carried out on Friday by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), he intends to carry through a sweeping assault on democratic rights. Hollande’s speech marked a major step toward the imposition of authoritarian forms of rule in France.

The measures proposed by Hollande would give the president the right to exercise arbitrary powers, transfer public authority from civilian institutions to the military and suspend basic democratic rights. The French Republic, if not formally dissolved, would function in a manner that flagrantly violates democratic principles.

Hollande already imposed a state of emergency across the country over the weekend. Now, he is proposing a rewriting of the French constitution to modify the different juridical “states of exception” that exist under French law. Within three months, he aims to have assembled a legal arsenal allowing him to govern France under a permanent state of emergency.
...
The state of emergency, under the terms of a 1955 law, allows the state to impose curfews, take “all measures to control the press and the radio,” carry out arbitrary searches and seizures in individual residences, ban meetings and organize military tribunals.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Vurtual said:
Well i thought about saying something about the old testament (though some of it's sort of OK (jeremiah)) and judaism interprets it quite differently than christianity (more nuanced generally) so i left it. The gospels fit my description quite well i think, and most of the rest of the NT (being horrible to women was part of the 'of its time' stuff i'm afraid). I don't consider the heart of christianity (love your neighbour/enemy, turn the other cheek, do unto others) as a death cult.

"Do you even science? Steven Hawking's is most definitely an Atheist"

Yes, i was saying that most of the people who are atheists aren't scientists and they take stuff like the big bang on faith - not saying i don't agree with the scientific approach (i definitely do), just that there's a bit of hypocrisy involved with the average lay atheist. Agnostic is just a much more intellectually honest position: the athiest is claiming to themself universal knowledge of a similar level to the average religious person (i know there is no god=i know there is a god; true science wouldn't make such absolute claims imv). Also the god that most athiests know doesn't exist is usually a simplistic abrahamic strawman that's easy to pooh-pooh: most don't bother taking apart more sophisticated conceptions of god.
Click to expand...

Fair points.

If there is a god, I wish he/she/it would hurry up and bring peace, beer and real Mephedrone


*EDIT. and real MDMA with all the love and no horrible comedown, please god, remove the comedown.

And smite Avici (dont care if I spelt the cunts name wrong), Tiesto and all those other shit DJ's
 
I suppose i shouldnt be too surprised that some members of a community of drug users would take the very minority position of empathasing with ISIS. I am part of that community myself and share other minority viewpoints, but that definitely isnt one of them. How much empathy would you feel for them if your nearest and dearest had been among the slaughtered in Paris last Friday? Of course there is a reason they do what they do. It will take a long time for that story to be told, or for most people to be ready to listen to it. It took 60 years since WWII ended for a major Hollywood film to tell the story from a point of view sympathetic to the Nazis at the death camps. It was very moving. The Reader. With Kate Winslett. Most people do not want to hear ISIS's story. They are not ready following such atrocities.

But right now im very happy to see all petty differences between countries being dropped, russia allying itself with france, and everyone uniting with the common goal of destroying ISIS. It must be done. Their ultimate goal is to bring about the end of the world. How can anyone sympathise with that? They need to be destroyed before their wave of destruction wipes out hundreds more innocent people. They aren't the brave soldiers they delusionally believe themselves to be, gunning down defenceless civilians out enjoying themselves on a friday night.
 
mydrugbuddy said:
I suppose i shouldnt be too surprised that some members of a community of drug users would take the very minority position of empathasing with ISIS. I am part of that community myself and share other minority viewpoints, but that definitely isnt one of them. How much empathy would you feel for them if your nearest and dearest had been among the slaughtered in Paris last Friday? Of course there is a reason they do what they do. It will take a long time for that story to be told, or for most people to be ready to listen to it. It took 60 years since WWII ended for a major Hollywood film to tell the story from a point of view sympathetic to the Nazis at the death camps. It was very moving. The Reader. With Kate Winslett. Most people do not want to hear ISIS's story. They are not ready following such atrocities.

But right now im very happy to see all petty differences between countries being dropped, russia allying itself with france, and everyone uniting with the common goal of destroying ISIS. It must be done. Their ultimate goal is to bring about the end of the world. How can anyone sympathise with that? They need to be destroyed before their wave of destruction wipes out hundreds more innocent people. They aren't the brave soldiers they delusionally believe themselves to be, gunning down defenceless civilians out enjoying themselves on a friday night.
Click to expand...

Hear, Hear!!
 
Vurtual said:
To cut in, i quite like press tv - that's not to say i like the iranian regime particularly. They're a state broadcatser and so inherently biased (though individual programs/contributors should be judged in thjeir own right), but each state broadcaster has value inasmuch as they cover the stuff the biases of the other state broadcasters won't cover - so by surfing between bbc RT aljazeera and press tv you can deduce quite a bit of news.
Click to expand...

My view on this matter - BBC, Russia Today, Aljazeera, Press TV, Euronews, CNN, Fox etc all have a personal interest on what news they cover and they way they cover it. From my personal (and limited) experience - most News networks will put a spin on a lot of stories to suit their agenda, Press TV will simply make up 'news' completely fake / false and based on their political views. They are never going to be 'impartial' when reporting something from Saudi Arabia etc.
 
mydrugbuddy said:
I suppose i shouldnt be too surprised that some members of a community of drug users would take the very minority position of empathasing with ISIS. I am part of that community myself and share other minority viewpoints, but that definitely isnt one of them. How much empathy would you feel for them if your nearest and dearest had been among the slaughtered in Paris last Friday? Of course there is a reason they do what they do. It will take a long time for that story to be told, or for most people to be ready to listen to it. It took 60 years since WWII ended for a major Hollywood film to tell the story from a point of view sympathetic to the Nazis at the death camps. It was very moving. The Reader. With Kate Winslett. Most people do not want to hear ISIS's story. They are not ready following such atrocities.

But right now im very happy to see all petty differences between countries being dropped, russia allying itself with france, and everyone uniting with the common goal of destroying ISIS. It must be done. Their ultimate goal is to bring about the end of the world. How can anyone sympathise with that? They need to be destroyed before their wave of destruction wipes out hundreds more innocent people. They aren't the brave soldiers they delusionally believe themselves to be, gunning down defenceless civilians out enjoying themselves on a friday night.
Click to expand...

They created a beast - let it loose, funded it, give it a name and now they want it back in the cage as they are done with it.
 
Bearlove said:
They created a beast - let it loose, funded it, give it a name and now they want it back in the cage as they are done with it.
Click to expand...

Yeppers.

Best thing we can do is refuse to be intimidated by these dickheads and carry on living free, creative and caring lives with our likeminded friends.
 
The dictionary definition of empathy is: "The ability to identify with or understand another's situation or feelings". I feel no more empathy for these 'people' than I do for the likes of Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. If I did, I would be very concerned...
 
BlindHelperMonkey said:
the majority of muslims in uk are extremist deobandi
same sect as the taliban
wahabiists support & approve of deobandis
Click to expand...

I'd remove it but I'll let you look silly :p

I've worked in the middle east a fair bit and to be perfectly honest I feel sorry for the ones who follow legitimate Islam.. it's such a sheltered life.

What Bob said also.. hate, guns and bombs caused this, I'd quote Einstein but you know the one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top