Jump to content

Utterly Disgusted - Journalistic Cowards


brown dog

Recommended Posts

For all the journalist tough talk about defending the 'freedom of speech' following the latest 'religion of peace' atrocity; this is the reality of the courage and honour of the gutless press bastards:

 

Read this

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/some-outlets-are-censoring-charlie-hebdos-satirical-cartoons?utm_term=.rbkmx0WEB#.tiYqPKgNo

 

 

 

DISHONOURABLE COWARDS!

 

telegraph_zpsbd09e199.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

RIP to all those souls that lost their lives today . Bunch of cowards that showed their murderous souls today obviously backed up by another bunch of two faced cowards .

 

Je suis Charlie !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we need to get used to this, I suspect that within 100 years the UK will be another muslim state and sharia law will be practised as the norm because we are run by a bunch of spineless PC cowards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just listened to BBC Radio 4's reports and discussions on this. As well as some woman who (I think) was some sort of apologist for these downtrodden racially and religiously abused types (I think because she spoke in a near indecipherable jargon and some langauage that superficially sounded like English but clearly wasn't), I was grimly amused to hear the perpetrators described as 'criminals' and 'murderers' by reporters.

 

Aren't these the same types usually described as 'militants', 'insurgents', 'Jihadists', even 'freedom fighters' when they limit their attacks to the armed forces, police, politicians, and most of all ordinary members of the public? Surely, they've not crossed some ethical line by deliberately targeting journalists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... crossed some ethical line by deliberately targeting journalists?

I swore I wouldn't go political on this forum but here it is....

 

If there was a line to be crossed by this I would think them sawing Danny Pearls head off in Pakistan would have been it. Fact is, political correctness (and the progressive/moral equivalent crowd) will eventually lead to downfall off all of our once great countries. I don't presume to know how it is in the UK, but we are losing our national identity here. We are pissing away the ruggedness, drive and fortitude that built this country, which I served and still love, warts and all.

 

It's not too late to stop the madness. We should start by calling things as they are, regardless if someone gets their feeling hurt. Stop with participation trophies and let's get back to raising little boys to be men,and let us let men take care of business when the need arises.

 

It sucks that France got hit, but I would suspect this kind of stuff is going to continue until the point that all the western countries will have Israeli style security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are offended by political correctness and rightly so. But publishing images of the Prophet is one of those things that will offend even moderate, peaceful Muslims. I'm all for freedom of speech, but I genuinely don't understand what is gained by the media setting out to be deliberately offensive to a religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are offended by political correctness and rightly so. But publishing images of the Prophet is one of those things that will offend even moderate, peaceful Muslims. I'm all for freedom of speech, but I genuinely don't understand what is gained by the media setting out to be deliberately offensive to a religion.

 

Not publishing something because someone may be 'offended'?!?

.......that's a description of the end of the right to free speech, the end to one of the cornerstones of democracy.

 

 

 

Do a compare and contrast to how they -our media - treat the religions (such as Christianity) that don't terrify the crap out of them.

 

The media freely and frequently offend everyone (except, it seems, those who might hurt them.). That's what 'free speech' is.

 

2525583-stephen-fry-on-being-offended_zp

 

 

 

Whilst I'm on one, I suspect that this is the reason that UKIP focus on demonising hard-working eastern europeans - people who who don't terrify them, who won't answer their rhetoric with bullets, knives, and trucks......, yet never seem to address -or even mention- 'the scary problem'.

 

Stephen Fry for PM!

 

quote-if-i-had-a-large-amount-of-money-i

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The media are deliberately offensive to almost anything they want to be and may just print a little apology after when forced to , so be it . Are we now to say that's ok for most but cannot touch certain taboo areas because they may be more morally offended than others ? Or cannot touch that area because they won't complain but will answer with violence ? You want to live in a modern civil society with other people , be civil . If you don't and can't , then move else where and live in another world with out morals , but don't bring that immoral world to us . I am deeply offended when the press describe us as potential gun toting killers because we enjoy a sport , but we deal with it in a civil way . That's freedom of speech , but the moment you allow these tossers to dictate what's acceptable , we loose . About time the gloves came off somewhere up the ladder , it's getting to be a farce now .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Busy year ahead for many

 

Bloomin wants to be - let's hope it's busy 'and successful'.

 

 

 

Quite struck, yet again, by the differing rhetoric between Cameron, Merkel and Obama. Only Obama managed to use the words 'anti-terrorist' in describing the way forward. The other two were all about 'not being scared', 'freedom of speech' (which the press have spinelessly given away already) and commiserating. Nothing strong.

 

What Would Churchill Have Said?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many people decrying these despicable murders.....an attack on freedom of speech.....were also calling for the arrest of that woman from the apprentice who made the comments about the Glaswegian Ebola bomb, and also the person who was arrested for texting the joke about the Glasgow dustbin lorry accident.

 

Freedom of speech is fine when it suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are offended by political correctness and rightly so. But publishing images of the Prophet is one of those things that will offend even moderate, peaceful Muslims. I'm all for freedom of speech, but I genuinely don't understand what is gained by the media setting out to be deliberately offensive to a religion.

 

so, their desecration of christian monuments, defiling of christian minorities in Syria and elsewhere, their blatant disregard of any of Christian traditions which 'offend their cultural sensitivities' is OK, but god forbid anyone insulted theirs???

Get real!

 

I wish we all got a copy of the cartoon and, on a given moment, all published it on our social media pages etc. That will give them enough targets!

 

On the subject of the papers not publishing the full (unpixelated) picture of the cartoon however, there is a moral, real issue: were I the editor that decided to publish this and it led to the death of some of my staff who did not want it to happen, where would I stand on the moral high ground? Publishing it on my own Facebook page is the right thing to do....

 

best wishes

 

Finman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all it takes for evil to flourish is good men to stand by and do nothing.

 

there is no such thing as freedom of speech at any level today , say something the admin or mods don't like on facebook for example and your comment is deleted and your blocked , better than being machine gunned at your desk right enough but still stifling freedom of speech !

 

this muslim issue will not go away by turning the other cheek ! a strong and robust response is required sooner rather than later.

 

something will have to be done at some point the only variable is how many innocents have to die before we are spurred into action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stacka

 

What Would Churchill Have Said?!

What would have Maggy have said!

 

I'm hearing reports that a seconded shooting has happened in France.....same MO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would have Maggy have said!

 

I'm hearing reports that a seconded shooting has happened in France.....same MO

What would Maggie say?

Maggie would say "we do not talk to terrorists" (while sending her Govt envoys to talk to them)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would have Maggy have said!

 

I'm hearing reports that a seconded shooting has happened in France.....same MO

What would Maggie say?

Maggie would say "we do not talk to terrorists" (while sending her Govt envoys to talk to them)

 

 

probably 'lets start negotiations' having already sent a task force !

There's a cloud up in Cuckoo land with your name on it. ;)

 

30,000 troops in N Ireland had very little effect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would Maggie say?

Maggie would say "we do not talk to terrorists" (while sending her Govt envoys to talk to them)

 

There's a cloud up in Cuckoo land with your name on it. ;)

 

30,000 troops in N Ireland had very little effect

 

Maggie was still negotiating (buying time) during the falklands having already sent a task force to re-take the islands , cuckoo x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps you could tell me where the Jihaddi Islands are then

 

do you have an issue with me ? (if you do by the way then may I respectfully suggest that PM is a better media)

 

somebody asked what Maggie would do and I made reference to her handling of the falklands conflict.

 

I'm pretty certain I could research and find jihadi (if you mean islamic?) islands but I'm unsure what relevance that would have to this discussion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laugh when I hear people say Islam is a religion of peace

 

 

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

 

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

 

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

 

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

 

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

 

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

 

Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah"

 

Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

 

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

 

Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

 

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

 

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

 

Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

 

Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

 

Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

 

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

 

Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

 

Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

 

Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

 

Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims.

 

Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

 

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

 

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

 

Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

 

Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).

 

Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

 

Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."

 

Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?

 

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

 

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

 

Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)

 

Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

 

Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

 

Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.

 

Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.

 

Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"

 

Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

 

Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.

 

Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

 

Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.

 

Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UKV Principles:

 

Posts - All 'discussions' to be as you would be chatting with a shooting acquaintance over a single post-shoot pint.

 

Pics - If you couldn't get it developed on the high street, don't post it.

 

Politics -Post nothing that would bring shooting sports or the site into disrepute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


blackrifle.png

jr_firearms_200.gif

valkyrie 200.jpg

tab 200.jpg

Northallerton NSAC shooting.jpg

RifleMags_200x100.jpg

dolphin button4 (200x100).jpg

CASEPREP_FINAL_YELLOW_hi_res__200_.jpg

rovicom200.jpg

Lumensmini.png

CALTON MOOR RANGE (2) (200x135).jpg

bradley1 200.jpg

IMG-20230320-WA0011.jpg

NVstore200.jpg



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy