I see my Government are listening to me at last: "The British and Irish governments have called in their Israeli ambassadors over the use of fake passports by the alleged killers of a Hamas commander".
Search
Search results: 6,776 found, showing up to 50
I didn't even rate Lehman (though he's better than the goons we have now), I'd argue we have to go back as far as Seaman.Gooners wrote:
we haven't had a solid goalkeeper since Lehman. without one no wonder our defence is always so nervy mannone, fabianski, almunia are all garbage, we need to get a solid goalkeeper
The ref sprinted into the box to intervene, failed to adequately signal the fact that he had given an indirect-free kick, demanded the ball from Fabianski so as he could give it straight to the Porto player for the quick free quick, obstructed Campbell from getting in the way to defend, and didn't play to the whistle. The man is a fucking ass clown who shouldn't be allowed to ref kiddies' 5-a-side. How this man can still go the world cup after the Henry handball and tonight's performance is beyond me.CameronPoe wrote:
They gave the goal to Varela. Ref was a disgrace. He interfered with play by obstructing Campbell getting at the ball. Fabianski is a joke.
PS: Fabianski is a fucking disgrace (and so is Almunia). Wenger needs to pull his finger out and buy Neuer, Lloris, Sorenson, Harte, or someone of that calibre.
I would disagree that every country has countless human rights abuses and certainly not all on the same scale. Are you claiming that sending weapons to Israel is no different to sending weapons to say Switzerland or Liechtenstein? Just out of curiosity what would your opinion be of weapons being given to Zimbabwe (a sovereign nation with similar accusations of human rights abuses)?Cybargs wrote:
Moar like jewish lobbiest tbh. And holocaust.Mekstizzle wrote:
The only reason Israel is an ally is because of all the oil in the ME
Rui: Every country has countless human rights abuse. Once they start strapping bombs to kids then give me a call. Not exactly their fucking fault they have to drop warning letters in a city before the level it. Hey, at least they're giving people warnings.
Also, the Palestinians can't leave when bombings start, they're stuck in the ghetto that the Israeli regime (and Egyptians) have created for them. They don't even have full control over their own power or water.
The closest thing we've ever had to 'truth' (empirical truth) is peer-reviewed academic journals and papers... and now even these are being second-guessed and dismissed as though they were no better than blogs. The climate-gate scandal is an example of this... 100s of people dismissing scientific documents because of soundbites they've heard in the news. How many people have taken the time to read through the data to see where the discrepancies lie? Not many, we just hear a bit here and there and then argue on a forum about it as though we have the slightest fucking clue.Ticia wrote:
When did this truth you speak of ever existed?Braddock wrote:
...A Film About How All Of Us Have Become Richard Nixon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxV3_bG1EHA]
Some of you may have seen this short film by Adam Curtis on Newswipe recently. I found it incredibly depressing because it rings very true. People often talk about how we are in danger of sliding into a 1984 style society when the reality is we're already there. Mass media and technology has ironically made us more ignorant because where before we had no expert knowledge or frame of reference on complex issues, we now have the illusion of being 'well-informed'. These 'well-informed' people then go off and write blogs that other 'well-informed' people use to inform their own opinions, and now even newspapers will base entire stories on these 'well-informed' blogs, which go on to form the opinions of the people writing the blogs in the first place... a self-fulfilling cycle of bullshit. A quick glance through the D&ST section here will give you an idea as to the extent of the problem. As access to more and more information from around the world has increased we have apparently become more and more self-obsessed, we delude ourselves that our opinions matter and that we are all an authority on the latest hot topic. Truth no longer exists, instead it has been replaced with an 'accepted narrative' of what happened.
If there was a time most were ignorant now we only have access to information through the media (TV,newspapers,web and so on),the mass media controlled by the propaganda model that Chomsky and Herman talked about more than 20 years ago. This is the world we've always known.
Or worse still (much worse), the academics themselves are indeed discarding their professional practice and embracing the fallacious approach taken by the mass media in order to sell an agenda.
You don't know me well enough John, I've always been a cynical, embittered curmudgeon!JohnG@lt wrote:
Braddock you seem to have lost a bit of your idealism all of a sudden. You just now realized that you're one of 6,000,000,000 voices on this planet? If anyone is self-obsessed it's the man naive enough to think he will have an impact on the world and try to change it.
First you lose your belief in democracy, and now you find out that you're insignificant to the world? Rough two days
I do however, think there has been a significant shift in the way the power structures of the world do business in the last 15 to 20 years. Remember when talking about the 'new world order' used to mean you were a conspiracy theorist quack? Now they don't even bother to hide such things... and elected officials seem more brazen than ever when it comes to ignoring the voice of the people who elected them. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that big private companies and multinationals are the de facto rulers of many nations these days. The biggest impact Globalisation has had on the world as we know it, aside from the obvious cultural and day-to-day economic effects, is that it has effectively removed the notion of borders and discrete countries when it comes to private businesses.
...A Film About How All Of Us Have Become Richard Nixon.
Some of you may have seen this short film by Adam Curtis on Newswipe recently. I found it incredibly depressing because it rings very true. People often talk about how we are in danger of sliding into a 1984 style society when the reality is we're already there. Mass media and technology has ironically made us more ignorant because where before we had no expert knowledge or frame of reference on complex issues, we now have the illusion of being 'well-informed'. These 'well-informed' people then go off and write blogs that other 'well-informed' people use to inform their own opinions, and now even newspapers will base entire stories on these 'well-informed' blogs, which go on to form the opinions of the people writing the blogs in the first place... a self-fulfilling cycle of bullshit. A quick glance through the D&ST section here will give you an idea as to the extent of the problem. As access to more and more information from around the world has increased we have apparently become more and more self-obsessed, we delude ourselves that our opinions matter and that we are all an authority on the latest hot topic. Truth no longer exists, instead it has been replaced with an 'accepted narrative' of what happened.
Some of you may have seen this short film by Adam Curtis on Newswipe recently. I found it incredibly depressing because it rings very true. People often talk about how we are in danger of sliding into a 1984 style society when the reality is we're already there. Mass media and technology has ironically made us more ignorant because where before we had no expert knowledge or frame of reference on complex issues, we now have the illusion of being 'well-informed'. These 'well-informed' people then go off and write blogs that other 'well-informed' people use to inform their own opinions, and now even newspapers will base entire stories on these 'well-informed' blogs, which go on to form the opinions of the people writing the blogs in the first place... a self-fulfilling cycle of bullshit. A quick glance through the D&ST section here will give you an idea as to the extent of the problem. As access to more and more information from around the world has increased we have apparently become more and more self-obsessed, we delude ourselves that our opinions matter and that we are all an authority on the latest hot topic. Truth no longer exists, instead it has been replaced with an 'accepted narrative' of what happened.
That's a good point. People too often allow subjectivity to creep into the Israel/Palestine debate. Yes, this man was probably trying to procure weapons for the Palestinians to use against the Israelis but, as you point out, the Israelis receive weapons from the US which they use against the Palestinians. The two are the exact same at the end of the day.Dilbert_X wrote:
So giving Israel free weapons is also an act of war?ATG wrote:
Main difference, if it hasn't been pointed out, is that he was trying to buy arms to be most certainly used against Israel; an act of war.
Says the English yob who can't even punctuate or capitalise his sentences properly.11 Bravo wrote:
nah....you come from the land of IRA...so you a savage also.Braddock wrote:
You lot can count yourselves among the savages if you like... I'd like to consider myself out, thank you very much.11 Bravo wrote:
aye
The one good thing we have here is the Senate, where a recognised academic qualification is needed to vote in elections. Some regard this to be undemocratic but it's not, if you want an academic qualification get off your ass and get yourself one, no one is stopping you. If you can't get one, well... I guess you don't deserve a Senate vote. It's nowhere near perfect but it's the closest thing we have to a Timocracy.JohnG@lt wrote:
Democracy is hardly the ideal system you seem to think it is. You think you have no voice now? Democracy is pure Tyranny of the Majority. Mob rule. The only difference between a Totalitarian system and Democracy is that you get a million little Hitlers instead of one big one. I'll pass. I prefer my Republic.Braddock wrote:
Not since ancient Greece has it been true democracy... but it has been getting progressively worse in the last century. Nowadays you have small numbers of broad parties that don't reflect the actual political complexity of the social landscape, who ride to power on the back of campaign funding solicited from lobby groups and private sector interest groups, and who (once elected) completely ignore the opinions and desires of the masses whenever it suits them.JohnG@lt wrote:
Braddock, it's never been any different than it is today really. We in Western Society have a penchant for revering some ideal political past that never truly existed.
Mass media, instead of making things better, is seemingly making things worse. Instead of being up in arms about the reality we're now confronted with we are more concerned about how big our arses look in the mirror and who will win America's next top model. Now and again we might rant on a forum or on our respective blogs and labour under the illusion that our opinions actually mean something*.
*Yes, I did watch Charlie Brooker's Newswipe this evening!
You lot can count yourselves among the savages if you like... I'd like to consider myself out, thank you very much.11 Bravo wrote:
ayeATG wrote:
Savages mock civilized methods.
Hahahahahahahahah Awesome!
In the end, that black guy got what he deserved... he went looking for trouble and he got his ass kicked! The white guy moved away and the black guy kept looking for it. Now, we don't know what was said before the video starts but there appears to be more racism coming from the black guy (and his annoying bitch) than there is from the white guy, and to be honest he refrains from overtly racist comments even when trouble is flaring (he even points out he "aint prejudiced"). I think the black guy just thought he could act the big man but got found out.
Why would you pick on a big old guy who clearly looks like he can pack a punch. Idiot.
In the end, that black guy got what he deserved... he went looking for trouble and he got his ass kicked! The white guy moved away and the black guy kept looking for it. Now, we don't know what was said before the video starts but there appears to be more racism coming from the black guy (and his annoying bitch) than there is from the white guy, and to be honest he refrains from overtly racist comments even when trouble is flaring (he even points out he "aint prejudiced"). I think the black guy just thought he could act the big man but got found out.
Why would you pick on a big old guy who clearly looks like he can pack a punch. Idiot.
And we invade other countries because they "deserve" this system of Government too apparently, it's pretty laughable really.Braddock wrote:
Not since ancient Greece has it been true democracy... but it has been getting progressively worse in the last century. Nowadays you have small numbers of broad parties that don't reflect the actual political complexity of the social landscape, who ride to power on the back of campaign funding solicited from lobby groups and private sector interest groups, and who (once elected) completely ignore the opinions and desires of the masses whenever it suits them.JohnG@lt wrote:
Braddock, it's never been any different than it is today really. We in Western Society have a penchant for revering some ideal political past that never truly existed.
Mass media, instead of making things better, is seemingly making things worse. Instead of being up in arms about the reality we're now confronted with we are more concerned about how big our arses look in the mirror and who will win America's next top model. Now and again we might rant on a forum or on our respective blogs and labour under the illusion that our opinions actually mean anything*.
*Yes, I did watch Charlie Brooker's Newswipe this evening!
Not since ancient Greece has it been true democracy... but it has been getting progressively worse in the last century. Nowadays you have small numbers of broad parties that don't reflect the actual political complexity of the social landscape, who ride to power on the back of campaign funding solicited from lobby groups and private sector interest groups, and who (once elected) completely ignore the opinions and desires of the masses whenever it suits them.JohnG@lt wrote:
Braddock, it's never been any different than it is today really. We in Western Society have a penchant for revering some ideal political past that never truly existed.
Mass media, instead of making things better, is seemingly making things worse. Instead of being up in arms about the reality we're now confronted with we are more concerned about how big our arses look in the mirror and who will win America's next top model. Now and again we might rant on a forum or on our respective blogs and labour under the illusion that our opinions actually mean something*.
*Yes, I did watch Charlie Brooker's Newswipe this evening!
The fact that no one has found any alternative sources for this particular story does not bode well for its validity. I haven't looked myself so maybe there are alternative sources, but so far all we have is a FOX blog piece basing opinion on a Daily Mail article... about as flimsy a position as it gets.DBBrinson1 wrote:
Ok, well you've all bashed the source well. Now can someone tell me if this person is living there an collecting that kinda of assistance...
Democracy doesn't work anymore. What we have now in most Western countries is the illusion of democracy.
The kind of change American politics (and Western politics in general) requires is simply not possible anymore, little old Ireland is no different. if you want to make a change you first have to get elected, if you can win over your constituents and get the requisite votes then bingo, you're in... but if you want to have any influence, or want the tantalising possibility of a cabinet position, then you have to get into bed with one of the major parties. Once you're in you have to respect the party structure and tow the party line, or face being made a political pariah... slowly, the fire in your belly is dampened as you deal with political reality. If you manage to rise to the heights of a cabinet position then you've probably had to promise a few favours to people on the way up, favours that will be called in at some stage... favours that may hamstring the 'change' you dreamed of implementing. Once you're in your cabinet position you soon realise that you have to keep the civil service, major players in the private sector, and/or lobby groups on side or risk their plotting against you... slowly you realise that not all the political ideologies you started out with are compatible with you surviving in the business of politics. You soften your stance. You make compromises. You rationalise and justify your actions to yourself. You start thinking about the 'greater good' and the 'bigger picture'... until one day you're just like all of the others. And all this happens while people in the opposition and in the media pore over your every move hoping and praying for you to slip up.
Government is not a place for ideological people anymore. Just look at George Lee, the so-called 'rising star' of Irish politics who quit his Government position this week because he wasn't part of the old boys' network of Irish politics.
The kind of change American politics (and Western politics in general) requires is simply not possible anymore, little old Ireland is no different. if you want to make a change you first have to get elected, if you can win over your constituents and get the requisite votes then bingo, you're in... but if you want to have any influence, or want the tantalising possibility of a cabinet position, then you have to get into bed with one of the major parties. Once you're in you have to respect the party structure and tow the party line, or face being made a political pariah... slowly, the fire in your belly is dampened as you deal with political reality. If you manage to rise to the heights of a cabinet position then you've probably had to promise a few favours to people on the way up, favours that will be called in at some stage... favours that may hamstring the 'change' you dreamed of implementing. Once you're in your cabinet position you soon realise that you have to keep the civil service, major players in the private sector, and/or lobby groups on side or risk their plotting against you... slowly you realise that not all the political ideologies you started out with are compatible with you surviving in the business of politics. You soften your stance. You make compromises. You rationalise and justify your actions to yourself. You start thinking about the 'greater good' and the 'bigger picture'... until one day you're just like all of the others. And all this happens while people in the opposition and in the media pore over your every move hoping and praying for you to slip up.
Government is not a place for ideological people anymore. Just look at George Lee, the so-called 'rising star' of Irish politics who quit his Government position this week because he wasn't part of the old boys' network of Irish politics.
Good point. The tactics employed here are infinitely better than bombing civilian areas in the Gaza strip when taken in the context of their own domestic situation but in a wider context they're merely proving to the International community that they're not in line with the civilised Western nations they so desperately try to emulate. The biggest issue here is the huge slap in the face they've given to amicable nations by forging their International documents (didn't even have the decency to get the right amount of digits on the Irish passport numbers!). They're quite happy to stir up shit between countries by effectively framing them when they break International laws.CameronPoe wrote:
zomg israel
On a serious note: Expect nothing less. They'll insult nations with whom they have amicable trading relations just to kill a man. Just look at how shit they've recently been treating the country that bankrolls their asses: the USA. While I agree with their tactic on this one, I must say i find their execution of it terrible on many levels. Israel is a wannabe modern western nation with so many flaws, hypocrisies, challenges and contradictions that they're ambition is frankly laughable.
I know where he lives though... and it's not on Israeli soil. Perhaps our Government could send some guys with Irish passports to chat to him in his home, in his room?FEOS wrote:
If he's the Israeli ambassador, then he's on Israeli soil...technically.Braddock wrote:
Obviously, but he's the only guy available for us to shout at on Irish soil! I would expel the Israeli ambassador (at least temporarily and in a very public manner!) as punishment for Israel insulting us on the world stage in this way.Cybargs wrote:
I doubt the Israeli Ambassador has the security clearance to know shit like this.
Doesn't quite add up. Russian mob are out to make money, not kill would-be-customers who have powerful connections, thereby scaring away potential future business in a profitable region of the arms-trading world.Cybargs wrote:
I don't think electrocution is mossad style... Seems like the bloke was tortured before they offed him. Me thinks it be the ruskies.mafia996630 wrote:
"He told reporters that six members of the alleged assassination team held British passports, three held Irish passports, and one each from France and Germany. A leading suspect, who carried a French passport, left Dubai for Munich via Qatar after the killing, Tamim added.
Police released the suspects' photos, names, nationalities and details from their passports, which authorities said were not fake.
"Israel carries out a lot of assassinations in many countries, even in countries it is allied to," Tamim said, adding that Mabhouh may have been killed by electrocution.
""
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1150127.html
That's isreal for you.
Unless it was an arms deal that went spectacularly awry... I don't know, I just don't buy it.
That is possible. If I were an International arms dealer though I would be very wary of killing anyone affiliated with an International terror group, but it's still entirely possible. They also could have been freelance murderers doing contract work for Mossad.Cybargs wrote:
Mossad wouldn't send 11 dudes to off one guy. Seems more like a gang killing with that many people involved... Heh they did find out Hamas was trying to buy weapons. Me thinks it was a business deal that went bad.Braddock wrote:
IF it turns out to be Mossad, of course.Braddock wrote:
Obviously, but he's the only guy available for us to shout at on Irish soil! I would expel the Israeli ambassador (at least temporarily and in a very public manner!) as punishment for Israel insulting us on the world stage in this way.
They would probably work better controlled at a State level within a more general national framework. One of the major problems with implementing social change on a huge scale is that you're effectively trying to apply a broad set of rules and principles to a variety of diverse socio-economic areas, each with their own foibles... like trying to paint a postage stamp with a paint roller. The devil is in the detail as they say.LividBovine wrote:
I agree on those basic principles. I think we may differ in the level of the social cohesion though. Also in the US I would like to see most welfare/social programs being implemented, or not, on the state level instead of national.Braddock wrote:
The same could be said of unfettered Capitalism though... people abuse the system and exploit it until it all comes tumbling down. Moderation is the key, social programs should bolster society, not act as the foundation itself. A healthy society needs the right mix of competition, ambition and social cohesion.LividBovine wrote:
While the frequency of this type of event is probably very low, the fact that it is possible is more the point innit. At least the point I am taking from this is it is more common to have waste, fraud, and abuse in larger social programs.
The major problem with most subsidy programs is that people learn to expect a certain level of living from that program and eventually lose a lot of self motivation to provide for themselves. As has been said here before, welfare should be uncomfortable enough for people to want to get off it. This is a great example of that not being the case.
All three.
IF it turns out to be Mossad, of course.Braddock wrote:
Obviously, but he's the only guy available for us to shout at on Irish soil! I would expel the Israeli ambassador (at least temporarily and in a very public manner!) as punishment for Israel insulting us on the world stage in this way.Cybargs wrote:
I doubt the Israeli Ambassador has the security clearance to know shit like this.
Obviously, but he's the only guy available for us to shout at on Irish soil! I would expel the Israeli ambassador (at least temporarily and in a very public manner!) as punishment for Israel insulting us on the world stage in this way.Cybargs wrote:
I doubt the Israeli Ambassador has the security clearance to know shit like this.
The same could be said of unfettered Capitalism though... people abuse the system and exploit it until it all comes tumbling down. Moderation is the key, social programs should bolster society, not act as the foundation itself. A healthy society needs the right mix of competition, ambition and social cohesion.LividBovine wrote:
While the frequency of this type of event is probably very low, the fact that it is possible is more the point innit. At least the point I am taking from this is it is more common to have waste, fraud, and abuse in larger social programs.ruisleipa wrote:
Useless dribble.
Dilbert - not unusual for the UK??? prove it.
The major problem with most subsidy programs is that people learn to expect a certain level of living from that program and eventually lose a lot of self motivation to provide for themselves. As has been said here before, welfare should be uncomfortable enough for people to want to get off it. This is a great example of that not being the case.
Police in Dubai are to issue arrest warrants for 11 "agents with European passports" suspected of assassinating a top Hamas official last month. Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was murdered in his hotel room in Dubai on 20 January. Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement, said he was in Dubai to buy weapons for the organisation and accused Israeli agents of killing him. Dubai's police chief said six of the suspects had British passports, three were Irish, one French and one German. The Britons were named as James Leonard Clarke, Stephen Daniel Hodes, Paul John Keeley, Michael Lawrence Barney, Jonathan Lewis Graham and Melvyn Adam Milliner. One of the group was a woman with Irish papers in the name of Gail Folliard. The other Irish suspects were named as Kevin Daveron and Evan Dennings.
Curiouser and curiouser... either the people were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting privately for financial gain; they were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting under the cognisance of said countries' intelligence agencies; they were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting under their own cognisance out of an ideological affiliation with the Israeli regime; or they were Mossad agents pretending to be from the countries listed on their passports.
Now I won't jump to conclusions just yet but... If it turns out these murderers were indeed Mossad then I want the Irish Government to haul the Israeli ambassador in and ask him some serious fucking questions about why his country think they can prance around the globe murdering people on an Irish passport.
Curiouser and curiouser... either the people were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting privately for financial gain; they were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting under the cognisance of said countries' intelligence agencies; they were from the actual countries listed on their passports and were acting under their own cognisance out of an ideological affiliation with the Israeli regime; or they were Mossad agents pretending to be from the countries listed on their passports.
Now I won't jump to conclusions just yet but... If it turns out these murderers were indeed Mossad then I want the Irish Government to haul the Israeli ambassador in and ask him some serious fucking questions about why his country think they can prance around the globe murdering people on an Irish passport.
Firstly, the Daily Mail is literally not worth the paper it's written on. We criticize a lot of news sources in this forum but the Mail is definitely one of the worst, so as others have said, take the article with a large pinch of salt.
That being said, council housing is something that exists in many Socialist countries and is a concept that has never sat well with me personally. I applaud and accept the concept of jobseekers' allowance and disability allowance but the idea that the council owes you a place to live, and indeed that irresponsible family planning can fast-track this process, is bang out of order. If you can't afford to put a roof over your own head then the last thing you should be doing is having children. In Ireland council housing is generally not of the highest quality and not something one would aspire to in terms of lifestyle. You do get scroungers that have children just to qualify for council housing but they're the European equivalent of white trash.
I would imagine that the cases cited here are extreme examples of recipients identifying and exploiting loopholes in some way.
That being said, council housing is something that exists in many Socialist countries and is a concept that has never sat well with me personally. I applaud and accept the concept of jobseekers' allowance and disability allowance but the idea that the council owes you a place to live, and indeed that irresponsible family planning can fast-track this process, is bang out of order. If you can't afford to put a roof over your own head then the last thing you should be doing is having children. In Ireland council housing is generally not of the highest quality and not something one would aspire to in terms of lifestyle. You do get scroungers that have children just to qualify for council housing but they're the European equivalent of white trash.
I would imagine that the cases cited here are extreme examples of recipients identifying and exploiting loopholes in some way.
• Jesus Christ (seemed like a nice guy)
• Ismail Khan (invincible badass)
• Rasputin (an evil version of Derren Brown)
• Leonardo Da Vinci (genius)
• Che Guevara (world-famous Irish/Argentinian revolutionary who pisses Americans off no end)
• Ismail Khan (invincible badass)
• Rasputin (an evil version of Derren Brown)
• Leonardo Da Vinci (genius)
• Che Guevara (world-famous Irish/Argentinian revolutionary who pisses Americans off no end)
I've heard Roland Emmerich is making a movie about it.
I know people who struggle with their weight even though they try to eat right and do as much exercise as their day to day lifer allows and I personally believe that some people are unlucky and just have very slow metabolisms. But in general I have little sympathy for self-inflicted obesity. If you take up two seats on a plane then you should pay for two seats, if your morbidly obese then my health insurance shouldn't go up as a result. Eat right and do some exercise for God's sake.
On a related note, I can't understand men who get plastic surgery such as peck implants either. Just do some fucking push-ups man.
On a related note, I can't understand men who get plastic surgery such as peck implants either. Just do some fucking push-ups man.
Holloway is in Europe. Stop trying to pretend you're not from Europe.11 Bravo wrote:
yes. they were cleared of all charges. well done sir. you win the stupid uninformed euro award.ruisleipa wrote:
religion of peace?
What the fuck are you on about then? Religious profiling... how's that going to work?11 Bravo wrote:
i didnt say racial profiling. fuck off man. you are just trying to get me going, and i aint gonna play your game. go dick around with droozorz or something.Braddock wrote:
Talk me through your genius security plan... how exactly would your racial profiling system work?11 Bravo wrote:
idc about one persons experience. it works. plain and simple. for a jew airline to not have any issues is amazing. hands down.
Talk me through your genius security plan... how exactly would your racial profiling system work?11 Bravo wrote:
idc about one persons experience. it works. plain and simple. for a jew airline to not have any issues is amazing. hands down.Braddock wrote:
My brother must have imagined the hours of questioning before he got on that El Al flight then.11 Bravo wrote:
thats not what they do. wow you get on your soapbox about me generalizing. pffftt.
My brother must have imagined the hours of questioning before he got on that El Al flight then.11 Bravo wrote:
thats not what they do. wow you get on your soapbox about me generalizing. pffftt.Braddock wrote:
You mean where they let Jews in nice and quick but treat Westerners like terror suspects? Perhaps you'd feel at home in the Muslim queue when they implement your security policies in that case.11 Bravo wrote:
scoozie....... i prefer the el al airlines approach.
You know what would have prevented those two attacks?Cybargs wrote:
At least they didn't kill 3000 people by ramming planes into 2 buildings.Braddock wrote:
You're burying your head in the sand of a false solution. For the amount of trouble and division you would cause with racial profiling (including the propaganda boon it would offer radical clerics and preachers) you would get little actual benefit in terms of security. Serious terrorists are not going to go through airports wearing full Islamic dress, displaying copies of the Koran, yelling "Allah Ooooooh Akhbar"... superficial security measures will do nothing except give regular Muslims a hard time. And while you're busy patting down every Tom, Dick, and Mohammed some other extremist will slip through and score a terrorist touchdown triggering another fresh round of recriminations and knee-jerk reactions.11 Bravo wrote:
you take things way too far. that does not equal that at all. simple fact is go look at notable aircraft hijackings from 1980 on. i dont make this shit up. it is what it is. to deny it is to bury your head in the sand.
Solution = stringent security measures for one and all.
How would you like it if all International airlines implemented strict security checks on all English travellers because of the trouble drunken English hooligans so frequently cause on planes?
You mean where they let Jews in nice and quick but treat Westerners like terror suspects? Perhaps you'd feel at home in the Muslim queue when they implement your security policies in that case.11 Bravo wrote:
scoozie....... i prefer the el al airlines approach.Braddock wrote:
You're burying your head in the sand of a false solution. For the amount of trouble and division you would cause with racial profiling (including the propaganda boon it would offer radical clerics and preachers) you would get little actual benefit in terms of security. Serious terrorists are not going to go through airports wearing full Islamic dress, displaying copies of the Koran, yelling "Allah Ooooooh Akhbar"... superficial security measures will do nothing except give regular Muslims a hard time. And while you're busy patting down every Tom, Dick, and Mohammed some other extremist will slip through and score a terrorist touchdown triggering another fresh round of recriminations and knee-jerk reactions.11 Bravo wrote:
you take things way too far. that does not equal that at all. simple fact is go look at notable aircraft hijackings from 1980 on. i dont make this shit up. it is what it is. to deny it is to bury your head in the sand.
Solution = stringent security measures for one and all.
How would you like it if all International airlines implemented strict security checks on all English travellers because of the trouble drunken English hooligans so frequently cause on planes?
You're burying your head in the sand of a false solution. For the amount of trouble and division you would cause with racial profiling (including the propaganda boon it would offer radical clerics and preachers) you would get little actual benefit in terms of security. Serious terrorists are not going to go through airports wearing full Islamic dress, displaying copies of the Koran, yelling "Allah Ooooooh Akhbar"... superficial security measures will do nothing except give regular Muslims a hard time. And while you're busy patting down every Tom, Dick, and Mohammed some other extremist will slip through and score a terrorist touchdown triggering another fresh round of recriminations and knee-jerk reactions.11 Bravo wrote:
you take things way too far. that does not equal that at all. simple fact is go look at notable aircraft hijackings from 1980 on. i dont make this shit up. it is what it is. to deny it is to bury your head in the sand.Braddock wrote:
How many Arabs and Muslims have carried out hijackings? How many Arabs and Muslims are there in the world? Now take those two figures and work out the percentage of Arabs and Muslims who "love doing hijackings and such"... you have such a stupid way of thinking it defies logic. It's the equivalent of hating all Americans because of the actions of George Bush.11 Bravo wrote:
blah blah brad. its well known arabs and muslims love doing hijackings and such. have you been asleep since the 70's?
Anyone can hijack a plane... anyone. As long as it's fashionable to attack planes you simply have to implement stringent security measures against everyone who gets on a plane. Singling out people by race and religion only serves to polarize society with little net benefit in terms of security.
Solution = stringent security measures for one and all.
How would you like it if all International airlines implemented strict security checks on all English travellers because of the trouble drunken English hooligans so frequently cause on planes?
How many Arabs and Muslims have carried out hijackings? How many Arabs and Muslims are there in the world? Now take those two figures and work out the percentage of Arabs and Muslims who "love doing hijackings and such"... you have such a stupid way of thinking it defies logic. It's the equivalent of hating all Americans because of the actions of George Bush.11 Bravo wrote:
blah blah brad. its well known arabs and muslims love doing hijackings and such. have you been asleep since the 70's?
Anyone can hijack a plane... anyone. As long as it's fashionable to attack planes you simply have to implement stringent security measures against everyone who gets on a plane. Singling out people by race and religion only serves to polarize society with little net benefit in terms of security.
Do you think anyone will believe the US if they started saying Bin Laden was hiding in Iran after the failure to locate Iraqi WMDs or Bin Laden's Afghani hideway? It would be a case of 'boy who cried wolf' syndrome.rdx-fx wrote:
We may leave... Once the political power structure of the middle east shifts in a large way.
It's folly to expect western democracy to work in the middle east - their culture just doesn't function that way.
Unfortunately, THE largest blocks to a manageable, relatively peaceful, middle east are our "allies" in the region - Pakistan, India, and (especially) Saudi Arabia.
I am just waiting for Bin Laden to pop his head up as an advisor to Iran.
Iran has been playing their little games very much like they're borrowing from Bin Laden's play book. With a touch of North Korean thrown in for 'flava'.
If that happens, then it's time for a rousing game of whack-a-mole, with the gloves off this time.
(Edit: no, I'm not forgetting Israel. That's a whole 'nother steaming pile of shit to deal with.)
Also, why would you bundle India in with those other countries? Besides the tense border with their Pakistani neighbours they're not exactly up to much mischief. Poverty and pollution are the biggest problems in that country not terror.
So Timothy McVeigh would slip through your system with no problems?rdx-fx wrote:
Internment and 'guilty until proven innocent' based only on ethnicity is a touch overboard.Braddock wrote:
No, they should not get a pass on the scanners. If they don't like the security measures they'll just have to make other travel arrangements.
However, racial and religious profiling for security purposes is bang out of order. The British subjected the Irish to internment and a policy of 'guilty until proven innocent' during the troubles and it's a fucking disgusting way for any supposedly civilised nation to behave. It's no different to a suicide bomber regarding all Westerners as 'infidels' who deserve to be attacked. Every individual is unique, you have to apply security measures to everyone evenly.
A bit different than giving people some extra scrutiny at the airport based on their ethnicity.
Be polite, be professional, but be thorough.
The first 99,999 through the screening process are perfectly innocent and peaceful.
Hell, they very well may be fleeing the same jackass jihadis that are being screened for.
But, you must catch that 100,000th one through the screening process - he's the whole reason you wasted your time on the first 99,999.
Not even a matter of their skin tone, either. More than a few western converts to radical Islam too.
Screening based on actually paying attention to the names on the magic watch lists, or last few stamps on their passport, or behavioral profiling, or, or...
It's quite simple, you have effective security measure that apply to everyone evenly... anyone can carry out a terror attack. Singling out people simply because of the way they dress, the colour of their skin, the way they spell their name, or because of their religion is ultimately ineffective. It reminds me of when I used to work security in the Irish high court, we used to screen bags with an x-ray machine and confiscate scissors and sharp objects but never turned on the walk-through metal detectors because the court staff found them annoying... so we were being extra thorough with all the bags but it was fucking pointless because absolutely anyone could carry a machete or a shotgun through the metal detectors.
Your racial profiling would be the equivalent of x-raying the bags while letting everyone else through the inactive metal detectors. You screen everyone and check everything or just don't bother.
When you defeat 'terror' I presume. Best of luck with that btw.
No, they should not get a pass on the scanners. If they don't like the security measures they'll just have to make other travel arrangements.rdx-fx wrote:
Since airline travel is a convenience and not a right, and airline safety measures are offensive to your religious preferences..
Take a damn boat instead.
Until Islam goes back to a more moderate interpretation of their Quaran, I'm thinking the simple act of TWI (Travelling While Islamic) should be enough to warrant additional security screening.
If the shoe-bomb fits... or the explosive underwear.. or 9/11 hijacker..
No, being Islamic doesn't get you a pass on the body scanners - it gets you put at the front of the line to go through said body scanner.
Don't like it? Then tell your 'brothers' to stop attacking civilians in their 'holy' war.
Saying "oh, that's horrible" to the cameras, while snickering in your sleeve everytime a westerner dies in a jihadi attack, just isn't enough anymore.
However, racial and religious profiling for security purposes is bang out of order. The British subjected the Irish to internment and a policy of 'guilty until proven innocent' during the troubles and it's a fucking disgusting way for any supposedly civilised nation to behave. It's no different to a suicide bomber regarding all Westerners as 'infidels' who deserve to be attacked. Every individual is unique, you have to apply security measures to everyone evenly.
Russia will qualify from our group as long as Hiddink and Arshavin are on the scene. The Russian goalkeeper Akinfeev is also really good.CameronPoe wrote:
Winrars:.Sup wrote:
Group A: Germany, Turkey, Austria, Belgium, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan
Group B: Russia, Slovakia, Republic of Ireland, Macedonia, Armenia, Andorra
Group C: Italy, Serbia, Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Estonia, Faroe Islands
Group D: France, Romania, Bosnia Herzegovina, Belarus, Albania, Luxembourg
Group E: Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Hungary, Moldova, San Marino
Group F: Croatia, Greece, Israel, Latvia, Georgia, Malta
Group G: England, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Wales, Montenegro
Group H: Portugal, Denmark, Norway, Cyprus, Iceland
Group I: Spain, Czech Republic, Scotland, Lithuania, Liechtenstein
A - Germany, Turkey
B - Slovakia, Republic of Ireland
C - Serbia, Italy
D - Bosnia & Hercegovina, France
E - Netherlands, Hungary
F - Croatia, Israel
G - England, Montenegro
H - Portugal, Cyprus
I - Spain, Czech Republic
New Orleans FTW... I just want Pat Robertson to have to deal with the fact that deals with Devil sometimes pay off.