threegee

I’m not really sure to which of my many previous, as yet unanswered, questions you refer. Please repeat the question. However, I’m quite happy to accommodate your trying again with the following. I agree, the answers are important and I’ve already responded to this part of your enquiry (see above). Your responses overlap mine which only results in confusion Go a little more slowly. And - if you don't get a reply on a particular thread then - bump that thread. No they were not suicide bombers and perhaps they didn’t use machine guns (I personally don’t know) but they did have other methods of killing and torturing innocent people (this I do personally know). So let’s call a spade a spade shall we. It is killing we are talking about not the methods used. Well, we are getting somewhere. The IRA used measured violence to create political pressure. They make mistakes, and admit to, even apologise for those mistakes. Their objective isn't the genocide of any people. Go tell that to anybody working in the casualty departments of the major hospitals at the time! Believe me, it was the not knowing that it was about to happen which caused the most disruption. Though I do remember one warning about a planned attack in London and when all resources were nicely concentrated in London they detonated a bomb in … Manchester, I believe it was. Didn’t greatly reduce the number of casualties that warning! And another warning issued 90 minutes before the bomb detonated. What good was that? How long do you think it takes to get a bomb squad in place? Once in place, how long does it take to find and defuse the bomb? That warning didn’t reduce the number of casualties either. No, I won't do that because it would be crass. If you saying that what we are facing through the scourge of Islam is in any way on a similar scale to our own past local difficulties you are totally deluded. The IRA, as far as my memory serves me, had one purpose – the reunification of Ireland. Good, and to do that they had to take all the people's of that Island with them. In their own way they saw this as possible. They weren't aiming for total world domination, and slaughter on a previously unimaginable scale. At some point in their agenda was an element of compromise, and their territorial ambitions were piffling. IS, to whom I think you refer when speaking of Islamic terrorism, would also appear to have only one purpose – the reunification of Islam, by establishing a new Islamic caliphate across the middle east. At least that’s how I’ve understood it. Perhaps you have understood something else? No its not just IS, that's a front. It's there in the Quaran, 97 times if I remember correctly, and it's world domination. Perhaps you have missed something? “Behind every IRA terrorist stood thousands on republicans from whom the terrorists were drawn, most of these people made no bones about their support- they sheltered the terrorists. Are you saying that this is an entirely different phenomenon here??” I’m not really sure what you mean here. I think that behind the IS terrorists there are supporters, maybe not thousands behind each one but supporters never the less. I haven’t seen anything in news reports or media which would make me believe that IS terrorists are not sheltered by their supporters. If you could clarify your question maybe I can give you a more substantial answer. I mean that the entire catholic community there was behind the IRA - some more and some less, but when it came to the crunch there would be no doubt as to exactly where they would all take their cue from - it was right there in the voting records. This "none of my business" doesn't wash with most people. Our country and entire continent need to hear a lot more than "none of my business" if we are to truly believe we don't now have a houseful of sleeping vipers. Anyone who follows the Quaran has to face up to issues that this raises; this is not OUR problem it is THEIR problem, and this needs to be made plain. The longer this is delayed the more the extremists will take encouragement from what they see as our terminal stupidity. Or, as The Guardian puts it: ..and, you know what? I think that in many cases they could be dead right!

Most of my harmless muslim friends didn’t choose to come to a (nominally Christian) Europe. They were born in Europe as were most of their harmless parents. Some of my muslim colleagues, also harmless, did choose to come to a (nominally Christian) Europe. They’d heard that Britain was a democracy that there were equal rights for men and women and that the Brits were a friendly race. So.. they continue to practise a belief set where there is anything but "equal rights for men and women", and set up courts which impose a law which is anything but democratically derived? For some of those who did come to Europe it was a case of any port in a storm. They fled from war and oppression and were placed in Europe as refugees. They didn’t ask to come to Europe. They only asked to be taken to a place of safety. There goes that some again! And did they really? The compass has eight principal directions and Europe is only one, and are you sure that it wasn't them actually doing the persecution (of Christians). Why can't the oil-rich Muslin nations do something for them - they have the space, they have the money, and Arab hospitality is legendary. And, why don't the persecuted Christians in those regions come here in volume? They choose to stick it out for better times - well those who have survived Islamic persecution. Yes, some of them are brilliant: the ones who have confronted the scourge of Islam. http://ex-muslim.org.uk/ Some of them were fleeing from Islamic fundamentalists who were deemed, by the majority of harmless muslims, to be anything but harmless. They couldn’t, and still don’t, accept the fundamentalist interpretation of the holy book. Much the same way as I (and I suspect you) don't accept the Jehovah's Witness interpretation of the Christian holy book. I can see exactly where Jehovah's Witness are coming from, and I haven't noticed them ghettoising in our cities or altering or architecture, or setting up a parallel justice system, or any terrorist acts in the name of Christ. In fact I'm open to persuasion on this Armageddon thing of theirs; maybe Armageddon starts around Dabiq? A couple of them came because they were invited by the British Government in 1947. Now there’s a surprise! A couple of them was never a problem. In fact 30,000 immigrants per year wasn't too much of a problem. This is twenty times that and more, and it threatens our culture. And, on this score, I'm not even singling out the scourge of Islam: these levels of immigration are truly crazy! In all cases they, like me, couldn’t give a jot about what religion other people have. They, like me, know that everybody in Britain has the right to choose and follow their own belief. The law says so. Which law would you be talking about there? We aren't talking about a religion as we've come to know religion; we are talking about a medieval belief set that doesn't broker any dissent. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1023001/pg1 Even culture hasn’t been a problem. They accept us as we are – warts and all. They respect our culture and, like me and most other immigrants, they adopt those bits of it which suit and stay away from those bits that don’t. The key words there are "hasn't been".. well if you ignore the few minor misunderstandings like Brussels. So they are going to stop building shining monstrosities in our cities and do what other religions do? That's great, and it's really nice that they accept us in our own country! Supplementary questions: Why did you choose to go to a (predominantly) Catholic Italy? What is so special about Italy to you that you had to go to such trouble and expense compared with settling in one of the other countries who share your religious beliefs, closer to where you come from and with a similar climate/culture? (I’m thinking first and foremost of Northern Ireland but I could stretch it to Byker or Blagdon). This is easy, and in fact I get asked this all the time! And, as far as I know, no one has been arrested for asking me. It's the climate, the food, and the health aspects. But underlying this is the fact that I can relate to the locals Romano-Judaic belief set. I'm not a churchgoer (and neither are many here), but if the community were in any way threatened I'd be there in a local church showing my support, and indeed I do modestly help the local church charities. Of course the reverse question is also valid: why would anyone want to move to the UK climate if it wasn't on purely economic grounds, as there are those other points-of-the-compass? Why make a tiny crowded island any more crowded? Our own civilisation broke out of here for more living space, and generally did rather well by that.

The answer (from a random hijab in the street) has already been supplied to the man who ended up being arrested for asking the question. The answer is a standard "nothing to do with me". Technically and legally it's a faultless answer, because it is all to do with my mindset and the people I slavishly obey (including my father/husband). It's perfectly managed duplicity! Mosque leader who condemned Brussels attacks sent messages calling extremist ‘true Muslim’ Duplicitous Dave - who is off on a solo trip to Lanzarotte (after heading up a publicity campaign urging us proles to holiday in flood-torn Northern England) has gone for some thinking time, away from the family and the unprecedented revolt in his party - must be eating his heart out at how easily it comes to the religion of peace. Odds on that George had better watch his back, as Dave has a long record of throwing his friends to the wolves in a most un-eatonian fashion.

I regularly failed my English Language because I spent a lot of time standing in the corridor having been thrown out of class. Though, what really gutted the English master was that I was the only one in the form who got anywhere near top marks in GCE Literature without turning in any class (or homework) that he in any way rated. I think he thought I must have had pre-exam tuition, but the reality was I actually enjoyed many of the set books and studied them in MY way; whereas the rest of the kids looked on them as a chore - because he was such a p'poor teacher, and taught by prescription and wrote! I will skip the first question because you've worn me down, and I'm not prepared to wade through the above to examine the possibility of my quoting you out of context. BUT - in true Paxo fashion - I'm going to try again on: Now, the answers to these questions are actually important, so let's skip the obfuscation this time. And, if I've failed to answer any of your questions on other threads, then simply link me to the tread and I will answer there - no more waiting! And... the Sky link (which certainly doesn't look like a load of rubbish): http://news.sky.com/story/1656777/is-documents-identify-thousands-of-jihadis

OK thanks for the extensive syntactical analysis, but how about expending a lot lot less time in actually answering my questions - thus not massively obfuscating. This tiny majority of radicalised Muslims of yours now seems to be in the tens of thousands (Sky is claiming to have received a USB stick with the detailed ISIL database. It's understandable why Sky should come up with this intelligence as Europol is currently far too busy trying to sell the mythical security benefits of being in the EU to actually do anything positive, or indeed even read the warning about the named individual Turkey sent). Of course this database doesn't include the up-and-coming ones, like those school classes cheering at news of the Brussels slaughter - they haven't been cheering in your classes, I hope? Funny that the guy who tweeted this observation was visited by the police and told to keep his mouth shut; I wonder what the authorities were fearing?!

Worth a mention I think, as it illustrates that our antipodean cousins are just as unimpressed by the so-called "progressive" politicos they elected as many of us are ours. Making a statement with your nation's symbol should be approached with great caution, as it's a bit permanent (unless you relish spectacular and damaging climb-downs), and may not quite make the statement you intended. The referendum angle on this is that we could view it as an invitation to renew traditional ties. Now that WOULD be a really nice 90th birthday present for Her Mag - but, I suspect, not so valued a present as a decisive OUT vote.

Oh, I think they are! There's a lot of "Ad Hominen" stuff going the rounds at the moment because the Remain side have very transparent arguments. We don't have a resident troll here, so it's a bit disappointing to find that you aren't actually one. Being the world language has its price, but we've always been proud of raiding other languages; so why is a tiny bit of help from our transatlantic cousins that bad? Maybe you should start your own thread on this? I don't like certain Victorianisms, but maybe that's because they are German. The "end of" was a logical end of, not a grammatical or textual one, and certainly not an attempt to shut down debate. It would have taken a whole sentence to convey another way, and I'm a lazy typist. Sorry if this upset you.

Question to CL: If the things like clothing and religion are "silly and subjective" then why are they such an enormously big deal to Muslims? Supplementary questions: Why did your harmless Muslim friends choose to come to a (nominally Christian) Europe? What is so special about Europe to them that they had to go to such trouble and expense compared with settling in one of the many Muslim countries closer to where they came and with a similar climate/culture? You mention the IRA, though the IRA were not suicide bombers and generally warned about bombs in order to create maximum disruption and reduce casualties, and certainly didn't machine gun innocent people. The IRA had a clearly stated purpose to their bombing (a point at which they were pledged to stop) and were operating on "home territory"; what is the clearly stated purpose of Islamic terrorism on "away" territory? Behind every IRA terrorist stood thousands on republicans from whom the terrorists were drawn, most of these people made no bones about their support - they sheltered the terrorists. Are you telling us that this is an entirely different phenomenon here?

It gets worse than that moe! Croydon man arrested after confronting Muslim woman and telling her to 'explain Brussels' Some of the current slanted BBC output makes my blood boil, but just occasional they lose control, and it can get interesting - like tonight's Moral Maze where they took a really unexpected broadside!

My point is made by saying that he won't mention his father-in-law. Please tell me how I'm meant to put that argument without mention of said father-in-law, and why I'd need to obfuscate anyway? There are many skeleton's in Juckner's cupboard, but I'm not going to repeat them here as if you are interested enough you can research them for yourself. He's an archetypal eurocrat who couldn't run a successful whelk stall, and matters don't end there, yet he wants to tell us how to run our country. Yes, I find your frequent pernicktyness irritating too, happy? No one forces you to debate here, but when you lapse into personal attacks - as you so often do - then it tends to indicate that you've lost the argument. This is sad because you do sometimes make a good on-topic point, and your contributions are valued.

The marriage was a personal choice, and we tend to group with like-minded people, but actually you entirely miss the point. I'm not saying he is necessarily tainted by his relations, I'm saying that his refusal to come clean on the matter raises very serious issues. This is a man who is bidding to control the armed forces of a newly created superstate, not someone who is applying for a licence to run a hot dog stand! The rest of this discussion is starting to sound like Mr Corbyn wanting to have a cup of tea with Islamic State to sort out the tiny few misunderstandings. Always amazing how the bleeding heart left is so ready to label and condemn ideologies that they don't accept should have any place in the world, but so ready to make excuses for fashion-of-the-decade ones. We are seeing this moral wrong-headedness today in an underlying anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. CL, the Quaran is entirely incompatible with the modern world - end of! Saying that it is a matter of shade or interpretation is hokum. It's not a story book from a bygone age to be interpreted to provide moral guidance like The Bible, it's a manual for life and it does not accept that there can be any other view. It repeatedly urges followers to violence to enforce this. That there are two sects that are slaughtering each other - to most reasonable people - would tend to show the inherent intolerance, and not offer a good Muslim bad Muslim dichotomy.

A good question. Try though we may we are all part of our history. I will avoid quoting the Bible, but we are all part of our genetic and cultural make-up. To deny this is to deny our very existence. Juncker needs to fully fess up to the deeds of his forebears and associates not try to conceal them. I'm not talking about the current fad for apologising, grovelling, rewriting history, and reparations/restitution as evidenced in the current Cambridge student lunacy. I'm talking about simple intellectual honesty, and placing things in historic context. If Junker won't acknowledge his Nazi heritage then he's not a rounded human, and can't be trusted in any position of power.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/654528/Terrorism-fears-after-explosion-Brussels-airport I think Mrs threegee is in for an interesting flight tomorrow. If the estimates of the number of terrorist already in Europe are only partly correct we are in for terrible times. These times won't be over until Germany comes to its senses and stops being controlled by Frau Merkel's massive guilt complex. The recent elections offered some hope here, but one has to wonder about Frauke Petry too, she certainly frightens the German left. If we really had any of that mythical influence stuff in Brussels we'd be putting our foot down about issuing fast track visas to 77 million Turkish Muslims as part of Turkey's blackmail deal. But - like everything else EU - Dave is going along with it. And, as for Dave's worthless promise that UK funds wouldn't be used: well... £500M of our money says he lied again!

Last year Herr Juncker (the guy who refuses to discuss what his father-in-law did in the war) called for an EU Army so's he could have a pop at Vladimir. Our politicos assured us that no such force was being contemplated and that the UK would resist any such calls (yes, we have so much of that mythical influence stuff in Brussels). But, um... hang on, what's this? Mali hotel attack: Gunmen 'storm EU military training base in Bamako' So, there are six hundred besieged EU military personnel in Mali? Well, Herr Junker better send some more then; a thousand. maybe two thousand! But, hang on again, the EU doesn't have an army, how could this even be possible? In the wonderfully democratic EU our representatives must have had a vote on this, no?! Our own PM was stymied in his military ambitions quite recently by democratic process, so how could something like this be being done in our name, and without our knowledge? A cynic might claim that this is the usual salami-slicing EU commission tactics at work here, and before we know it we'll be considered to have agreed to a military force - one only answerable to Brussels - on British soil. But, sleep soundly in your beds my friends as there's no way we could unwittingly be dragged into a nuclear war with Russia over matters (like Ukraine) which are none of our concern. That's because no government of ours would allow Herr Juncker control of OUR nuclear weapons - would they?! I'm sure we have Dave's cast iron promise on this one too, call-me-Dave's not at all like that other lying PM we had: "remote and unmanageable workings of the Community" - whatever could those anonymous civil servants have meant all those years ago?

Tony, sadly you never seem to read what is written: I don't support Boris, and I'm not even a Tory voter. But at least he's one of a select group of establishment politicos who aren't actually trying to sell their country to The Fourth Reich, or to completely Islamise it. He's by far the least of the current evils from establishment parties - the sort you blindly support! I'm not in Bedlington, but where I am I can tell you that there are a lot more on the way to you, and it's not just Syria, it's most of Africa and the Middle East. Most of them are decent people who are only trying to better themselves and their families, but a significant proportion of them spell major trouble for Europe. Whatever they are, our small island can't even cope right now. The numbers are ever growing, and our own rulers are clueless and naive. Send me some visiting cards and I will hand them out for you. Enjoy the future: it has magnificent minarets, and women are hardly even second class citizens! Give my regards to comrade Len, and tell him that if he manages to stay awake at the next LPC he might discover that he supports the entirely the wrong party to further the interests of his members and his country.

In Bedlington no one gets a statue except for laying a sewer - and even then they sideline it!

I'm not the near sole beneficiary of a government tax; I don't have a statutory obligation to be impartial; I'm not a former state monopoly, and I don't pretend to be politically neutral. The real problem with the BBC is that it's totally lost in an increasingly commercial world. The extent to which they are lost is vividly illustrated by Lord Hall's current moan that "We can't win against deep pockets of Netflix". Has Lord Hall even considered that the BBC shouldn't ever be in the same market as Netflix? How about "Nation shall deliver Hollywood movies unto nation." Lord Hall?

No, I'm not talking about the EU, I'm talking about the BBC's undertaking to be good during the referendum campaign, and give fair voice to both sides. This time it's not the "Fruitcakes and Swivel-eyed Loonies" complaining, it's Labour Grassroots Out. Well, what took you so long to notice Kate, Ronnie, etc?! It's entirely unhealthy to have our publicly funded state broadcaster using a minority interest, dwindling circulation, left-of-center, newspaper as a recruitment ground, and manual for its political direction. When the BBC starts spreading its recruitment advertising revenue across the entire press spectrum we'll of have a positive indication that the British public can consider holding the BBC in the universal respect it once earned. Just at the moment, it remains the mouthpiece of an unholy alliance of Blairite socialist and international big-business interests, and has little right to use the British moniker. A declaration that it will not accept any more money laundered through the EU graft machine would also go a long way to restoring confidence.

You can sum that up in one word: post-democracy. And, all the above is designed to make the EU as obscure as possible, so that even those who try to understand what is going on simply give up, and delegate the whole thing to the elites, who - it almost goes without saying - are ...ahem... always looking after our best interests and not their own. They were able to get this far by stealth, downright lies, and salami-slicing at our democracy. But, the main strategy is exploiting the generation gap by presenting their post-democracy to newer generations as the status quo; desirable, and inevitable. Older folk know a Europe without the EU, and it was a Europe that was heading toward a genuinely competitive cooperation and friendship with EFTA, and under the NATO security umbrella. A Europe that had learned that one nation should not be permitted to dominate, and that we should keep out of each other's politics. We had no desire to replicate the top-down diktat driven Soviet Union, but this is exactly where we are now arriving at by stealth. EFTA is still there, due to the tenacity of level-headed Europeans who and still waiting for us to rejoin, and once again lead it as a genuine free trade area, not a politically driven cartel pandering to international corporations, and depressing wages by moving people around to remove the bargaining power of local peoples. The elites won't even mention EFTA, because they want no alternative to their post-democracy ever considered. When you mention EFTA they laugh and say it is small beer and doesn't suit a nation with so large an economy as ours (the 5th largest in the world), but the very same people will denigrate that large economy when you suggest we can once again stand on our own feet in the world. All paths lead to the EU, and the solution to an obviously failing EU is more EU - just like the solution to the failing Soviet Union was always one more push to reach nirvana. Like the Soviet Union the EU will collapse under the weight of its own economic and political drag, but likely not before a lot of blood has been shed. If we are dumb enough to stay in, then, at best it will be an entirely wasted generation until a generation comes along that has more sense than this one. A clean break now will not only be good for us, but it will be good for the rest of Europe, as it will set the example they desperately need. That's not something I just made up, I can see this first hand where I live, and believe me when I say they've had quite enough of the EU too!

http://www.saynotoeu.com/live?utm_campaign=stream_bath&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ukip From right in the heart of Torydom, and not a single murmur of support for Call-Me-Dave. If you watch nothing else the bit about the EU Tampon Tax @25:10 is worth a giggle!

...search a desk for forgotten items?

Here's some more political sleight of hand: You know that much vaunted Budget Responsibility and National Audit Act 2011 and how we were going to be totally financially responsible from now on? Well, goodness, no one ever told us that the Chancellor is allowed to abandon it because of "lower than expected growth", did they? And... at its first real test, guess what?! This is the Tory analogue of Gordon Brown's entirely unforeseen "global problem". But, at least Gordon didn't waste acres of bureaucrat, lawyer, and parliamentary time setting up his pretence. No, Gordon was simply an economics lecturer from a second-rate polytechnic practising self-delusion; this lot are posh boys playing games with the future of our Country.

With great power comes great responsibility! (It's only in a backup set, and the time to retrieve it would be quite significant, and likely best applied to other improvements. But... it's not much of a job to take a snapshot of the backup set to stop it being automatically overwritten in a few days.)

The tickets for the Circus and that bread is on a credit card that we'll never be able to repay. What's more (and unlike an actual credit card) the final bill with accumulated interest and other charges will be presented to our grandchildren and their children to pay. Visit Malcolm's link, if you dare, to see the size of the demand today! Enjoy your circus, but appreciate that when someone reads your posts a generation or two hence (and advanced search technology will ensure that they are easily found) they aren't going to go down too well. Blaming other people (the Labour way) will not contribute a penny to the bill, and this Tory government is actually no better because it is playing Tony Blair / Gordon Brown's game from only a slightly different angle. Tiny Norway has shown us the way to put our affairs in order and neuter our politicos. We need to take a few lessons from those very wise people and - for a very good start - tell the EU apparatchiks to get out of our hair (and our fishing grounds). That's not "isolationism", it's squarely facing up to world markets, and not trying to hide under the skirts of a doomed cartel. Come on UK, and wake up England!

The thing is due to leaks everyone now knows that he was about to make a massive attack on pensions. He was persuaded that this would not be a good idea before the referendum, so we know this isn't really a full budget. Once again politics is being put before the national interest, and the public are being treated as fools. Supposing you were shareholders in a company and two posh boys from Eaton turned up and said we apply for the jobs of MD & Finance Director. You ask them what business experience they have had, and they say oh, that's all old thinking, we've never had one of those business job things, but we've both done this great uni course on politics and economics, and so we know it all. Besides, we know loads of people on the same course, and there's our other posh school friends too, who we'll place in all the key company positions. It will all work out fine, and we'll all have a absolutely ripping time - you can take our word for that. Then, for lack of real and experienced applicants, the other shareholders appoint them to run the company. The only sane thing to do would be to ring a broker and tell him to sell all your shares as fast as possible and for anything he can get! Is it any wonder that Donald Trump is now getting huge support, and US voters are rejecting candidates approved of by the Republican Party? If a party here were to select any business leader with a decent track record they'd get elected by a landslide. They wouldn't of course, because he'd ignore all their pet theories, would refuse to appoint any of their chummies, and all that party's political hacks and hangers-on would get the sack.