NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey, any hostage will do, right?
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3279058,00.html

According to local police in Beirut, Hizbullah operatives kidnapped two foreign journalists in the center of the city Thursday.


No further details are available at this time. (AFP)

I'll get over to an AFP site and look around.

Wouldn't want to be an unescorted Westerner now...

Funny, none of the Hezbollah apologists we have here has commented yet.

I guess they only defend them if the target is a Jew.

Funny, none of the Hezbollah apologists we have here has commented yet.

I guess they only defend them if the target is a Jew.Oh, please. Maybe you should wait until the "No further details are available at this time" is no longer valid before jumping to any conclusions...

Oh, please. Maybe you should wait until the "No further details are available at this time" is no longer valid before jumping to any conclusions...
Yes, let's wait to see if the story is confirmed, and if so, who they kidnapped.

Yes, let's wait to see if the story is confirmed, and if so, who they kidnapped.Good idea :)

Funny, none of the Hezbollah apologists we have here has commented yet.

I guess they only defend them if the target is a Jew.
What have I said about this sort of thing? Do not stifle debate.

Hezbollah is certainly not getting any points for intellegence. Not once has a western power actually bargained for the return of a hostage from groups labeled terrorists. Why is that going to change now?

Hezbollah is certainly not getting any points for intellegence. Not once has a western power actually bargained for the return of a hostage from groups labeled terrorists. Why is that going to change now?

You will notice that never stops any Arab or Muslim extremist group from taking hostages and making demands.

It seems to be part and parcel of the core of their way of doing business.

You will notice that never stops any Arab or Muslim extremist group from taking hostages and making demands.

It seems to be part and parcel of the core of their way of doing business.

And of course, terrorists of other religions have never taken hostages. :rolleyes:

And of course, terrorists of other religions have never taken hostages. :rolleyes:

Care to cite any examples of US Christians taking hostages overseas?

Care to cite any examples of US Christians taking hostages overseas?

What? Where did I mention US christians?

Care to cite any examples of US Christians taking hostages overseas?
Taking hostages overseas? You mean capturing people within the country? I'm pretty sure it would take me less than 5 minutes to find a news article about a current kidnapping in the US..

I always love this. In the Anti-US threads, whenever it is said "well, it happens here to", the person is attacked. But in other threads, the "well, these people do it to" defense is considered perfectly valid by those same people who did the previous attacks.

Hypocrisy, thy name is NS General.

I always love this. In the Anti-US threads, whenever it is said "well, it happens here to", the person is attacked. But in other threads, the "well, these people do it to" defense is considered perfectly valid by those same people who did the previous attacks.

Hypocrisy, thy name is NS General.
Fair enough, let me take 30 seconds to find an example of a different terrorist group taking hostages.

Actually, his question entirely favors my statement as it involved US Christians since Kimchi can't but harp on how he hates Muslims. Kimchi completely warped the question to his own intentions making up bullshit which was not related to the question being rebutted.

Taking hostages overseas? You mean capturing people within the country? I'm pretty sure it would take me less than 5 minutes to find a news article about a current kidnapping in the US..

No, I mean US Christians hijacking an airliner outside the US, or US Christians seizing a building full of innocent civilians outside the US. Especially, US Christians executing hostages on television. Running websites where they show themselves executing their hostages on the Internet.

"No further details are available at this time"

That's the best part. :)

No, I mean US Christians hijacking an airliner outside the US, or US Christians seizing a building full of innocent civilians outside the US. Especially, US Christians executing hostages on television. Running websites where they show themselves executing their hostages on the Internet.

You know, like al-Qaeda. People who left their home country to pillage and kill in the name of Islam.

Find me a US Christian group that flew airliners into a building, or blew up the Indian Parliament. A US Christian group that blows up subways.

No, I mean US Christians hijacking an airliner outside the US, or US Christians seizing a building full of innocent civilians outside the US. Especially, US Christians executing hostages on television. Running websites where they show themselves executing their hostages on the Internet.
Holy shit, I was right about Kimchi's statement, how unusual :rolleyes:.
That has two things to do with Hezbollah kidnapping foreign journalists in "their" own country: jack and squat, and jack just left.

Leave it to Kimchi to simultaneously go off-topic, warp words, confuse the issue, and slander Muslims.

Holy shit, I was right about Kimchi's statement, how unusual :rolleyes:.
That has two things to do with Hezbollah kidnapping foreign journalists in "their" own country: jack and squat, and jack just left.

If you bothered to read the post, I said that it was part and parcel of how Arab and Muslim extremists work.

Find me a US Christian group that kidnaps journalists - even in the US - recent news (since Hez is doing this now).

It's also not slander if it's true. 90 percent of violent terrorist acts today are committed by Muslims.

If you bothered to read the post, I said that it was part and parcel of how Arab and Muslim extremists work.
If you bothered to read the post you quoted you would know it was specifically talking about other religions' terrorists kidnapping people. No mention of religion or country, I can cite whatever the fuck I want in response to your question.

It's also not slander if it's true. 90 percent of violent terrorist acts today are committed by Muslims.
I'd venture a guess that it is more around 95%.

It's also not slander if it's true. 90 percent of violent terrorist acts today are committed by Muslims.

No it's not, but you seem to take great pleasure in implying that only muslims do these things.

It's also not slander if it's true. 90 percent of violent terrorist acts today are committed by Muslims.
I'd venture a guess that it is more around 95%.

Hmm, one has already advocated genocide against Muslims through forced attrition. And the other is a standard anti-Muslim, pro-Israel partisan hack. Why should you care about their statistics? You shouldn't.

No it's not, but you seem to take great pleasure in implying that only muslims do these things.
Notice I said 90 percent.

And if you're dealing with an Arab or Muslim group of extremists, kidnapping and killing of hostages will be one of their first options.

Hmm, one has already advocated genocide against Muslims through forced attrition. And the other is anti-Muslim, pro-Israel biased partisan hack. Why should you care about their statistics? You shouldn't.

Why should you care about the truth? :eek:

No it's not, but you seem to take great pleasure in implying that only muslims do these things.
He has previously advocated genocide of Muslims through attrition by biologically sterilizing all Muslims. He implies only Muslims do it because he is pure anti-Muslim with no differentiation thrown in.

Why should you care about the truth?
I'm sorry, I don't recognize racist hacks' opinions as truth.

Hmm, one has already advocated genocide against Muslims through forced attrition. And the other is a standard anti-Muslim, pro-Israel partisan hack. Why should you care about their statistics? You shouldn't.
Are you retarded? 95% or more of all terrorist attacks today are committed by Islamofascists. If you say otherwise, then prove it. ETA or the IRA haven't really been to active.

He has previously advocated genocide of Muslims through attrition by biologically sterilizing all Muslims. He implies only Muslims do it because he is pure anti-Muslim with no differentiation thrown in.


I'm sorry, I don't recognize racist hacks' opinions as truth.
Regardless of his personal opinions, he is speaking the truth. If you can't see otherwise, then your head is clearly buried in sand.

If you say otherwise, then prove it.
You made the positive assertion, you have to prove it. Especially since you included a figure. If you provide a figure, you definatively have to back it up. If you can't, you are full of shit. Welcome to Intro to Debating, 101.

He implies only Muslims do it because he is pure anti-Muslim with no differentiation thrown in.

Sorry, I never implied that "only Muslims do it".

Just that they do it the most these days.

This site's editorials are biased, but regardless of that fact, this list is the truth.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm

Now show me other terrorist attacks during this period by non-Muslims that equal 5% of the attacks on this list.

Sorry, I never implied that "only Muslims do it".
Truth by omission, eh?

Here's some data:

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/45323.pdf

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/Apr/27-320736.html

Hey, any hostage will do, right?
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3279058,00.html



I'll get over to an AFP site and look around.

Wouldn't want to be an unescorted Westerner now...

Hezbollah really should be destroyed.

Truth by omission, eh?
Nope. You just can't be bothered to read - you automatically assume racism as well.

Islam is not a race. It is a belief system.

While the majority of Muslims are not terrorists, today, a majority of terrorists are Muslim.

And don't say that their religion has nothing to do with making them do what they do. It has everything to do with it.

Here's some data:

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/45323.pdf

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive/2005/Apr/27-320736.html

No US Christian groups in that list? I wonder why...

Nope. You just can't be bothered to read - you automatically assume racism as well.

Islam is not a race. It is a belief system.

While the majority of Muslims are not terrorists, today, a majority of terrorists are Muslim.

And don't say that their religion has nothing to do with making them do what they do. It has everything to do with it.The first rule a liberal has when arguing is to "Not let the facts get in the way of their argument"

This site's editorials are biased, but regardless of that fact, this list is the truth.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm

Now show me other terrorist attacks during this period by non-Muslims that equal 5% of the attacks on this list.

That list is pretty much every crime they could find commited by people who are supposed to be muslims, most of them arn't even terrorist attacks.

Hezbollah is certainly not getting any points for intellegence. Not once has a western power actually bargained for the return of a hostage from groups labeled terrorists. Why is that going to change now?

This isn't entirely accurate. Italy negotiated the release of one of their people who was kidnapped in Iraq.

Nope. You just can't be bothered to read - you automatically assume racism as well.
Of some one who has advocated genodice through attrition? Yes.

Islam is not a race. It is a belief system.
I can't think of a better word than racism (if you know one that applies to religions, tell me), especially with the equation that all Arabs are Muslims.

The first rule a liberal has when arguing is to "Not let the facts get in the way of their argument"
Even when your own country is attacked by Islamic extremists who publish their beliefs and why they want to kill you.

This site's editorials are biased, but regardless of that fact, this list is the truth.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm

Now show me other terrorist attacks during this period by non-Muslims that equal 5% of the attacks on this list.
The list isn't any good - the definition of "terror attacks" it is using is far too wide.

That list is pretty much every crime they could find commited by people who are supposed to be muslims, most of them arn't even terrorist attacks.
kidnapping and beheadings are activities carried out by terrorist groups.

The first rule a liberal has when arguing is to "Not let the facts get in the way of their argument"
Facts? What facts? I see none provided by you or Kimchi.

kidnapping and beheadings are activities carried out by terrorist groups.
The sky is blue, the sky is blue!

Facts? What facts? I see none provided by you or Kimchi.
We have provided facts. You are just too damn lazy to click on a fucking link.

The first rule a liberal has when arguing is to "Not let the facts get in the way of their argument"
Ah. right. It was "sweeping generalizations day" again already. Nevermind then.

Funny, none of the Hezbollah apologists we have here has commented yet.

I guess they only defend them if the target is a Jew.

Maybe because noone is a Hezbollah apologist.

Funny how everything in the mind of idiots is black and white.

We have provided facts. You are just too damn lazy to click on a fucking link.
You mean that bullshit anti-Islam one you provided after the fact? No, try again. They obviously got that info from somewhere, pull it.

You mean that bullshit anti-Islam one you provided after the fact? No, try again. They obviously got that info from somewhere, pull it.
Anti-Islam or not, the link I gave you is fact. You just choose to believe the facts that are convenient to your argument. It's a shame that your biases lead to you closing your brain down to any arguments which might educate you.

No US Christian groups in that list? I wonder why...
Wonder no more. It's the US state department Foreign Terrorist Organizations list...

Wonder no more. It's the US state department Foreign Terrorist Organizations list...
Let's go to a European site, and look for US Christian terrorist organizations operating internationally...

Anti-Islam or not, the link I gave you is fact.
Biased fact can easily stray from pertinent fact.

You just choose to believe the facts that are convenient to your argument.
You mean the fact that "Why should anyone believe the opinions of an anti-Muslim hack and a pro-genocidal jackboot?"

Maybe because noone is a Hezbollah apologist.

Funny how everything in the mind of idiots is black and white.
Actually, Pantless appears to be a Hezbollah sympathizer. Not sure about the apologist part, but Pantless sure believes that Israel had no right to shoot back at all.

I can't think of a better word than racism (if you know one that applies to religions, tell me), especially with the equation that all Arabs are Muslims.

Bigotry, ignorance, islamophobia, hate...

Actually, Pantless appears to be a Hezbollah sympathizer. Not sure about the apologist part, but Pantless sure believes that Israel had no right to shoot back at all.
That does it, you are both getting hosed right now.

Biased fact can easily stray from pertinent fact.


You mean the fact that "Why should anyone believe the opinions of an anti-Muslim hack and a pro-genocidal jackboot?"
The fact is that the events listed HAVE occured. There is no opinion in a list of actual terrorist attacks that have occured. I didn't link you to an article which could hold bias. I linked you to a compiled list that is 100% fact.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm

Look at it. This is far from opinion.

Let's go to a European site, and look for US Christian terrorist organizations operating internationally...
You probably won't find many - perhaps Army of God and... ack, I can't remember the name, an animal rights group...

You probably won't find many - perhaps Army of God and... ack, I can't remember the name, an animal rights group...
Worth looking for.

You probably won't find many - perhaps Army of God and... ack, I can't remember the name, an animal rights group...
The only ones on the list might be some extreme animal rights groups. I'm surprised I didn't even think of that.

That does it, you are both getting hosed right now.
What, after calling me names, and telling me what I think?

The only ones on the list might be some extreme animal rights groups. I'm surprised I didn't even think of that.

Like ALF and ELF?

Like ALF and ELF?
They might be on the list. The only other Western Hemisphere one in my mind would be the FARC.

What, after calling me names, and telling me what I think?
Do you deny you have previously advocated the genocide of all Muslims through attrition by covert biological sterilization?

If I have to get a couple day ban for calling you a jackboot and the other guy a hack, so be it.

Do you deny you have previously advocated the genocide of all Muslims through attrition by covert biological sterilization?

If I have to get a couple day ban for calling you a jackboot and the other guy a hack, so be it.

I merely postulated it as a possible solution. Not that I vehemently advocate it, or actually believe it's possible.

They might be on the list. The only other Western Hemisphere one in my mind would be the FARC.

Well it does seem like the majority of violent terrorist organizations are in the Middle East and thereabouts, no? I mean Al Queda, Hezbollah, Israel...

I merely postulated it as a possible solution. Not that I vehemently advocate it, or actually believe it's possible.
You postulate genocide as a solution? I think I have made my point.

Well it does seem like the majority of violent terrorist organizations are in the Middle East and thereabouts, no? I mean Al Queda, Hezbollah, Israel...
Actually the more I think of it, is FARC a terrorist group or are they just a cartel? I personally think they are a terrorist group. What are they on the State Department list?

I wonder what the Swiss did (besides not being under Sharia law) that pissed these guys off:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071901795.html

For years, even after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, Swiss officials assumed that their country was one of the last places Islamic radicals would look to attack. Long considered a slice of neutral territory in a world full of conflicts, Switzerland trades on its status as home to the International Committee of the Red Cross and other diplomatic institutions.

As the global jihad movement becomes more decentralized and fragmented, however, Swiss security officials are warning that their country could become a target.

In an intelligence report completed in May, the Swiss Federal Police reversed previous assessments that the domestic risk of terrorism was nearly nonexistent. The report concluded that Switzerland had become "a jihadi field of operation" and predicted that terrorist attacks were "an increasing possibility."

"It would be dishonest to say that these groups are ready to act in Europe but that Switzerland is an island and that these groups could not be active in Switzerland, too," Jean-Luc Vez, director of the federal police, said in an interview here in the Swiss capital. "It is very, very important for us to say this to the Swiss politicians and the Swiss people."

Apparently, the leaders of a completely neutral nation think that radical Islam is a threat, just as I do.

You don't seem to, however.

You postulate genocide as a solution? I think I have made my point.
I think I've made my point on terrorist attacks with your ignoring of my link. It's nothing but fact.

The only ones on the list might be some extreme animal rights groups. I'm surprised I didn't even think of that.
No, this one was a self-proclaimed Christian animal rights group. I'll do some searching.

If you go beyond the religious aspect, you may find a couple more, like the KKK, Aryan Nations and the United Freedom Front...

You postulate genocide as a solution? I think I have made my point.
There's a significant difference between postulating, and actually doing it. Additionally, the mods reviewed that thread.

But, IIRC, Tactical Grace asked that "we not stifle debate". Saying that no one should listen to me is certainly stifling debate.

I'm merely pointing out over and over again that you are wrong about radical Islam.

Well it does seem like the majority of violent terrorist organizations are in the Middle East and thereabouts, no? I mean Al Queda, Hezbollah, Israel...

Israel isn't a terrorist organization but Hamas, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade.

No, this one was a self-proclaimed Christian animal rights group. I'll do some searching.

If you go beyond the religious aspect, you may find a couple more, like the KKK, Aryan Nations and the United Freedom Front...

The question is, how many of those have done something comparable to current radical Islamic terrorist groups. And in what proportion are these acts, to the proportion of acts committed by radical Islamic groups.

I would bet that they are hardly comparable.

Israel isn't a terrorist organization

Many people beg to differ.

Israel isn't a terrorist organization

Oh, depending on the definition, I suppose...

Might have to qualify it as Israel ACTS like a terrorist organization.

The hostages were released.

You know that link to the terrorist could be used to prove a point that America's actions in the middle east only caused more death in the middle east...

Just a thought

The hostages were released.

Good to know that Hezbollah releases hostages while Israel still keeps 9,000 of them.

According to the Ramallah-based Mandela Institute for Human Rights, there are 9,600 Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails and detention centers, among them 130 Palestinian women. Defense for Children International puts the number of Palestinian children in Israeli custody at 388.

According to a recent poll by the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center (JMCC), 69 percent of Palestinians insist on an exchange for Shalit's release. The high support for a prisoner exchange stems from the sensitivity of the prisoner issue within Palestinian society. The vast majority of Palestinians have been directly or indirectly affected by Israel's policy of arbitrary or blanket arrests and hold deep resentment for political violations of their leaders' authority and autonomy.

Israel's imprisonment and detention of Palestinians is an example of its failure to abide by international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention. Administrative detentions, imprisonment without due process and imprisonment inside Israel are both illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Furthermore, Palestinian prisoners are routinely tortured by Israel and held in detention centers and prisons that do not meet the minimum international standards and are routinely denied visitation rights by their legal representation and family members. The vast majority of Palestinian prisoners are held without trial. According to Amnesty International, the trials that do take place often fall short of international fair trial standards.

Israel's failure to release Palestinian political prisoners and its continued arbitrary arrest of Palestinian civilians serves only to highlight Israel's belief that it is above the law and that the Palestinians are beneath it.

Just backing it up.

ahh the benefits of faith-based organizations

Apparently, the leaders of a completely neutral nation think that radical Islam is a threat, just as I do.

Radical Islam? Yes.
Islam? No.

There is a difference. Any more news on the journalists? Sounds typical of the region.....

Part of me hopes they're from SKY, but then the other part feels that we'll never hear the end of it : "From the Viper's nest"

Edit: Never mind. Released supposedly.

The hostages were released.

linky please

Many people beg to differ.

And these wouldn't happen to be muslim terror groups would they?

Radical Islam? Yes.
Islam? No.

There is a difference.

Yes, and I've noted the difference before.

And these wouldn't happen to be muslim terror groups would they?

Most people here arent part of muslim terror groups.

But, IIRC, Tactical Grace asked that "we not stifle debate".
"By accusing anyone who opposes Israel of anti-semitism."
Or similiarly, terrorist sympathizing. Like yourself.

They might be on the list. The only other Western Hemisphere one in my mind would be the FARC.
...and ELN, AUC, maybe Front de libération du Québec...

The hostages were released.

really?

hoorah!

Good to know that Hezbollah releases hostages while Israel still keeps 9,000 of them.



Just backing it up.

They have hostages? Yea right. Like I'm actually going to believe something from 1) Ramallah and 2) a muslim.

Now do you have a non biased source?

Like I'm actually going to believe something from... a muslim.


How open of you. :rolleyes:

They have hostages? Yea right. Like I'm actually going to believe something from 1) Ramallah and 2) a muslim.

Now do you have a non biased source?

Well if you define non-biased as "american based who covers up the actual amount of israel atrocities"

No.

The question is, how many of those have done something comparable to current radical Islamic terrorist groups. And in what proportion are these acts, to the proportion of acts committed by radical Islamic groups.

I would bet that they are hardly comparable.
They probably aren't - but we're talking worlds of difference here anyway, in setting, situation, goals, equipment, enemies...

If you include FARC and those groups, it is a different picture again...

Well if you define non-biased as "american based who covers up the actual amount of israel atrocities"

No.

Give us a source or your argument holds no ground.

The fact is that the events listed HAVE occured. There is no opinion in a list of actual terrorist attacks that have occured. I didn't link you to an article which could hold bias. I linked you to a compiled list that is 100% fact.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm

Look at it. This is far from opinion.

From your link:

1.Local Taliban shoot a rival religious leader to death. (Pakistan)
2.Six bodies are found dumped in a house and Jihadi terrorists elsewhere gun down an Imam. (Iraq)
3. Shouting "Allah akbar," executioners shoot a man to death in a public square. (Pakistan)
4. A 15-year-old girl is among two people kidnapped and murdered by radical Muslims. (Iraq)
5. In separate attacks, Jihadis kill eight civilians including a baker, and electrical worker, a garbage collector and a university professor. (Iraq)

Let's look at them, shall we? Now, assuming these events actually happened and were perpetrated by Islamic extremists, can they be considered terrorist attacks?
1. There is no such thing as a local Taliban in Pakistan. The Taliban are from Afghanistan. Is the shooting of a religious leader an act of terrorism? I don't think so, and the website does not try to explain.
2. Six bodies are found in Baghdad. What a surprise. It can only be Muslim terrorists. Nothing else is happening in Iraq. I suppose it's because an imam was killed by someone else that day. This is a murder and some unrelated corpses. Not terrorism.
3. Are these state funded executioners? If so, then this is a state carrying out a legal death penalty. Again, not terrorism.
4. Unfortunately, many young women are raped and murdered every day. It is an atrocity no matter who the perpetrator is, but it is not terrorism. Way to milk a tragedy for political gain.
5. This one might actually be a terrorist attack, but we have no way of knowing as the site has no corroborating information.

I suggest linking to a better site to strengthen your argument.

Give us a source or your argument holds no ground.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/prisoners.html

http://www.mandela-palestine.org/

http://www.counterpunch.org/assad07142006.html

I DID provide a link, but the sources I provided are obviously false because Corneliu says they are muslim.

P.S. That was a little racist dont you think: "Im not gonna believe anything from a muslim"?

P.S. That was a little racist dont you think: "Im not gonna believe anything from a muslim"?

I've heard the same thing said many times about Christians.

I've heard the same thing said many times about Christians.

Point being?

Point being?

I don't think it is racist, it's not to do with the race but to do with the religion. People who are muslim will be a bit biased.

But yeah maybe it was a bit insensitive.

I've heard the same thing said many times about Christians.
I haven't. I don't disregard people's views on politics or history because of their faith.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/prisoners.html

http://www.mandela-palestine.org/

http://www.counterpunch.org/assad07142006.html

I DID provide a link, but the sources I provided are obviously false because Corneliu says they are muslim.

P.S. That was a little racist dont you think: "Im not gonna believe anything from a muslim"?

Btw, how do you know that those people don't deserve to be in prison?

Deep Kimchi has been forum-banned for one day for flamebaiting, IDF has been forum-banned for 10 days for trolling, flaming and flamebaiting.

A couple of frustrated comments aside, Teh_pantless_hero (sorry, I can't type that without laughing) has shown reasonable restraint here considering what was thrown at him. People may not necessarily agree with his opinions, or anyone else's for that matter, but that does not entitle anyone to insinuate connections to terrorist organisations or criticise the quality of somebody's brain. :rolleyes:

We have provided facts. You are just too damn lazy to click on a fucking link.
Anti-Islam or not, the link I gave you is fact. You just choose to believe the facts that are convenient to your argument. It's a shame that your biases lead to you closing your brain down to any arguments which might educate you.
(And the link in question, represented as fact, is trolling)

Not to mention...

The first rule a liberal has when arguing is to "Not let the facts get in the way of their argument"

And all this after my advisory post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11406447&postcount=6)?

Bitching someone out and accusing them of terrorist sympathies because they refuse to accept a source, the domain name of which is in itself a xenophobic slur, is not an acceptable debate tactic.

Btw, how do you know that those people don't deserve to be in prison?

You don't but I'm curious what the 342 juveniles did.

And the thread can die too, as it has been flamebait since the first page.