The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[Niall_Quinn]

Can he do one on Wenger?

[Niall_Quinn]

Amber Cunt demonstrates why it is such a terrible idea to be a total pussy and allow the pigs in so-called authority to invade everyone's privacy. Nothing to hide? How do YOU know? You won't be the one deciding.

[Letters]

So you think Islamic terrorism is "a problem".
But you don't think any action should be taken to stop people, say, repeatedly watching videos on how to make bombs?

[Niall_Quinn]

So you think Islamic terrorism is "a problem".
But you don't think any action should be taken to stop people, say, repeatedly watching videos on how to make bombs?

Are you really so obtuse? Or is it an act?

Might I ask? How is it they will KNOW when "extremist" material has been viewed? Even down to how many times it has been viewed? And you get it will be them deciding what's acceptable and what's extreme? You realise, I don't suppose, it's Amber Cunt and her mates who make the most bombs and kill the most people? Do you at least get that bit?

How far are you willing to go in handing over your autonomy so you can be protected from bombs by the bomb makers in chief?

[GP]

Amber Rudd is a fucking idiot.

[Letters]

How far are you willing to go in handing over your autonomy so you can be protected from bombs by the bomb makers in chief?

That is a good question. But this is where you are unable to think in shades of grey. You show that on here repeatedly.
You think surveillance is a "bad" thing, with some justification.
You think Islamic terrorism is a "bad" thing, which I think we'd all agree with. Well, maybe not Cripps.
But you are completely unable to see that the first bad thing can potentially mitigate the second bad thing and could potentially mean things being better overall.

In an ideal world there would be no need for any surveillance, we wouldn't need to lock our doors either or have weapons.
But we don't live in an ideal world and sometimes one bad thing is needed to help prevent another bad thing.

It is concerning that this sort of thing is being considered and there are lots of grey areas here but the answer to the question "where is the line" is "somewhere". Somewhere there's a line. I'm not saying I know where that is but I would suggest that anyone who repeatedly watches videos about bomb making for dummies is probably someone to keep an eye on.

[Niall_Quinn]

But this is where you are unable to think in shades of grey

OMFG

And Jesus said unto the children, know that two wrongs maketh right.

Very close on giving up on you dude. It seems hopeless.

The "grey" is where the whole issue resides. Of course those known to be engaged in the planning and execution of terror activities should be monitored and acted against at the first opportunity. That's why I want politicians locked up, as a basic measure. And if there are any genuine Islamic terrorists out there who aren't on the payroll of the SIS or MI5 then lock them up too. Who has a problem with that? Lock the fuckers up as all of them are a clear threat to life.

So why isn't that what the proposed law states/ Why does it talk about right wing extremists? Is that what bomb making Islamic terrorists are? I thought they were religious fanatics?

What does "right wing extremist" mean then? Any idea? Because the terrorists in Westminster aren't saying. Doesn't that worry you at all? Considering it is left wing nuts who are trying to make YOUR way of life illegal, or haven't you noticed? Or would your own religion be dispensable if the word came down from Amber Rudd?

The grey areas

You crack me up.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

What is the difference between religious and right wing extremists?

Both think liberal democracy and secularism are degenerative, both fantasise about idealised fascistic societies.

Both are largely made up of maladjusted retards

When you’re run over or shot, or stabbed or blown up. The distinction tends to be unimportant

[Niall_Quinn]

What is the difference between religious and right wing extremists?

Both think liberal democracy and secularism are degenerative, both fantasise about idealised fascistic societies.

Both are largely made up of maladjusted retards

When you’re run over or shot, or stabbed or blown up. The distinction tends to be unimportant

Religious extremists fantasise about fascistic societies? Since when? What's your definition of fascism?

[Niall_Quinn]

And by liberal democracy, what do you mean? Democracy is the agreement between the many to suppress the liberty and choice of the few. Liberal, in its true sense, is tolerance of diverse opinions and behaviours, provided those opinions and behaviours don't cause harm to others. You can't have a liberal democracy, unless you are using the modern day definition of liberal, which ironically is very close to fascism in a practical sense.