Football matches an easy target?

[A Load of Squit 5,201]

A little research for you;67% of the population in Bradford describe themselves as White British.Pamela Geller is a american version of Katie Hopkins.Gatestone Institute have been described as ''anti muslim''.Most of your statements are like your sources, very dodgy, probably not true and dubious.

[FenwayFrank 2,461]

That Stacey Dooley is a bit nice though

[Gainer the Gopher 0]

British Intel have stopped 7 of these intended attacks in the last 6 months. It''s good to know they are so good at their jobs but disconcerting that so many plots are being attempted.

There has to be at least some help coming from within the bad guys'' communities.

[Prince of Darkness 0]

[quote user="FenwayFrank"]That Stacey Dooley is a bit nice though[/quote]

Minging munter

[morty 0]

America has struck at the financial heart of the ISIS machine, destroying over 100 fuel tankers used to transport oil that makes the organisation $40 million per month.Leaflets were dropped prior to the raid, warning the tanker drivers to get the hell out, then strafing runs nearby to make sure they had the message, before the A10 and spectres destroyed the tankers.What else did ISIS think was going to happen!!??

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Morty, as I am sure you suspect, I guess they thought that after the beheadings and Paris etc, they thought we would all put our hands in the air and get our tummys tickled. They have NO idea, nor appreciation, of what the rest of the World is about regarding this. Their blind fanatisicism could well have contributed to this mindset, and ultimately could work against them. They are not stupid, themselves, but there is a LOT more to come from the Western World. This (from our side) is just the tip of the iceberg

[Crabbycanary3 994]

As a follow on, I have always thought that a leaflet drop in certain circumstances would create doubt and mistrust amongst certain receivers, and as we all know with leaflets, you only need a small percentage to start working................

[Van wink 2,994]

Crabbycanary3 wrote the following post at 17/11/2015 9:12 AM:

Morty, as I am sure you suspect, I guess they thought that after the beheadings and Paris etc, they thought we would all put our hands in the air and get our tummys tickled. "

You surely can''t be serious Crabby, do you really think that''s what ISIS believed would happen.

They knew exactly what would happen, they want to escalate the war in the Middle East, encourage Western troops to fight on the ground and further polarise western society so that Muslims and non Muslims are at each other''s throats. Civil war and the break down of our "immoral" society is what they are trying to provoke.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Semi Serious VW. It(the ISIS mission) is eventually to get us to become the ''second class'' citizens of the World, and eventually snuff us out.

This is far more than ''my brother is bigger than yours'', but ultimately they want us to implode, whether by certain tactics or other means.

[TCCANARY 263]

I would wager that as the events were taking place in Paris that ISIS were moving out of Raqqa.

Morty''s post about the oil convoy also highlights that someone will not be getting a supply of oil from ISIS and will have to get it from somewhere else, this could have an effect on the price of oil.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Who is buying the oil from ISIS?

[hogesar 9,717]

One thing I can definitely deduct from the last couple days is that Jeremy Corbyn is a complete fucking tool.

[morty 0]

[quote user="TCCANARY"]I would wager that as the events were taking place in Paris that ISIS were moving out of Raqqa.

Morty''s post about the oil convoy also highlights that someone will not be getting a supply of oil from ISIS and will have to get it from somewhere else, this could have an effect on the price of oil.[/quote]Not very likely, the amount they produce and control is too insignificant to have much of an effect.Saudia Arabia and OPEC have massive reserves and still very much control the market price. There are full tankers, sailing around at sea, waiting on price changes.

[TCCANARY 263]

Thanks Morty.

Do you have any idea who buys the oil from ISIS?

Does anyone know why this revenue has been allowed to continue, has there previously been attempts to stop it?

[morty 0]

[quote user="TCCANARY"]Thanks Morty.

Do you have any idea who buys the oil from ISIS?

Does anyone know why this revenue has been allowed to continue, has there previously been attempts to stop it?[/quote]I shouldn''t imagine it comes in big barrels with "ISIS dirty Muslim terrorist oil" branded on it.There will be hundreds of smaller oil producers all over the middle east who sell their oil onto third parties without too many questions asked.Even if questions are asked, oil is oil, business is business.

[mrs miggins 0]

Fantastic news that they (U.S. government) are turning their attention to how ISIS make their money (oil). I''m not going to say that Jeremy Corbyn has made a difference in any way on this issue, just simply that he has been going on about this from the start. I know its not him the government are listening to, but I''m just making the case that he''s not a complete looney that some think he is.

Hopefully we''ll see more interventions on ISIS supply lines.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="TCCANARY"]Thanks Morty. Do you have any idea who buys the oil from ISIS? Does anyone know why this revenue has been allowed to continue, has there previously been attempts to stop it?[/quote]

I shouldn''t imagine it comes in big barrels with "ISIS dirty Muslim terrorist oil" branded on it.

There will be hundreds of smaller oil producers all over the middle east who sell their oil onto third parties without too many questions asked.

Even if questions are asked, oil is oil, business is business.


[/quote]

 

Thanks again Morty. That last line sounds like the sort of thing that JR would''ve said in Dallas.

 

 

[hogesar 9,717]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]Fantastic news that they (U.S. government) are turning their attention to how ISIS make their money (oil). I''m not going to say that Jeremy Corbyn has made a difference in any way on this issue, just simply that he has been going on about this from the start. I know its not him the government are listening to, but I''m just making the case that he''s not a complete looney that some think he is.

Hopefully we''ll see more interventions on ISIS supply lines.[/quote]

He is a complete idiot. Yes he''s right about that, but he''s hardly the only person been saying that? My issues are, strangely enough, with all the fuck stupid things Corbyn has come out with which demonstrate he has nothing close to the slightest clue on how to deal with terrorism on any scale. He probably wants to send flowers to them.

[Jerzy Krukowski 5]

and every time this kind of far right drivel spews forth from the BNP/UKIP/EDL it furthers *exactly* the same aims that ISIL have: division, social breakdown, intolerance.

Most Muslims in the UK are Scottish, Welsh and English. They might have some cultural differences that you fen gibbons find scary, get over it.

[TCCANARY 263]

Hasn''t Mr Corbyn spent a lot of his political career engaging with terrorists, I would imagine that this experience means that he does have a clue how to deal with them.

[mrs miggins 0]

hogesar wrote the following post at 17/11/2015 11:51 AM:He is a complete idiot. Yes he''s right about that, but he''s hardly the only person been saying that? My issues are, strangely enough, with all the *** stupid things Corbyn has come out with which demonstrate he has nothing close to the slightest clue on how to deal with terrorism on any scale. He probably wants to send flowers to them.

-----------------------------

I wouldn''t say he''s a complete idiot, what I think he needs to do is stop expecting people to think that when he''s talking about ISIS he doesn''t need to make the point that they are the ones to blame, because he thinks that''s obvious (because it is, but as a leader you have to state the obvious for the thick people out there).

I saw him talking on the news yesterday about it. The question was; ''who''s to blame for this'' (the attack) and he nearly forgot that he had to mention the actual attackers, he always seems to want to go straight to the solution (examples of what he said are to intervene in ISIS supply lines, political solution to overthrow Assad and to create a government in Syria to help deal with ISIS).

He''s certainly got a lot to do to convince people that he''s even electable. If the election was tomorrow he''s lose by a landslide thats for sure. But opinions change.

On the subject of ISIS oil, this has some good info (if anyones interested)

http://ig.ft.com/sites/2015/isis-oil/

[Van wink 2,994]

Why has it taken so long to start hitting ISIS oil revenue?

They must have other revenue streams, why have we not been hitting those?

How is it that the French can hit a training camp after the tragedy, if they knew it was there why wasn''t it hit before

Nobody in the West has really taken ISIS seriously despite it being used as a reason to try and push through laws which some say (not myself) overly impinge on civil liberty.

We perhaps should look at the way we have responded to this threat a bit more critically.

[mrs miggins 0]

mrs miggins wrote the following post at 17/11/2015 12:09 PM:

hogesar wrote the following post at 17/11/2015 11:51 AM:He is a complete idiot. Yes he''s right about that, but he''s hardly the only person been saying that? My issues are, strangely enough, with all the *** stupid things Corbyn has come out with which demonstrate he has nothing close to the slightest clue on how to deal with terrorism on any scale. He probably wants to send flowers to them.

-----------------------------

I wouldn''t say he''s a complete idiot, what I think he needs to do is stop expecting people to think that when he''s talking about ISIS he doesn''t need to make the point that they are the ones to blame, because he thinks that''s obvious (because it is, but as a leader you have to state the obvious for the thick people out there).

I saw him talking on the news yesterday about it. The question was; ''who''s to blame for this'' (the attack) and he nearly forgot that he had to mention the actual attackers, he always seems to want to go straight to the solution (examples of what he said are to intervene in ISIS supply lines, political solution to overthrow Assad and to create a government in Syria to help deal with ISIS).

He''s certainly got a lot to do to convince people that he''s even electable. If the election was tomorrow he''s lose by a landslide thats for sure. But opinions change.

---------------------

Prime example. Link to a section where JC seems to have caused outrage by simply not elaborating and saying the obvious. Instead of saying "there are various degrees of doing things" it would be much simpler if he just said; "If we had a situation like the Paris attacks, then shoot to kill is perfectly necessary obviously."

Will he learn though.

[mrs miggins 0]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34840708#?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=bbcnews

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Vanwink, there will be more of strategy behind this than us Johnny on the streets realise. They will be monitoring these training camps etc and will be looking to see if they can get more (bigger) leads from these, but without compromising more attacks.

Certain ''lone'' strikes, are operated by smaller cells, so, at times it will be very difficult to completely cover all threats.

[Van wink 2,994]

He has to learn he is not speaking only to his devotees who love his left wing view of the world but to the British public as a whole.

I seriously don''t think he is going to get a chance with the press, they are going to scrutinise his every word and he ain''t clever enough IMO to play the game.

[Herman 9,817]

What Corbyn desperately needs is a media manager/coach. Not a lot of what he says is wrong but is said badly. He''s making it far too easy for the media to twist and far too easy for the headline readers to misinterpret. Wise up Jeremy or Ricardo will be right.

Good post btw Vanwink.

[Van wink 2,994]

Crabbycanary3 wrote the following post at 17/11/2015 1:16 PM:

Vanwink, there will be more of strategy behind this than us Johnny on the streets realise. They will be monitoring these training camps etc and will be looking to see if they can get more (bigger) leads from these, but without compromising more attacks.

I accept that there is a bigger picture and maybe bigger fish to catch, but really we need to be wiping out as many of these vermin as we can as quickly as possible, the ground troops and the leaders ASAP.

[hogesar 9,717]

[quote user="Herman "]What Corbyn desperately needs is a media manager/coach. Not a lot of what he says is wrong but is said badly. He''s making it far too easy for the media to twist and far too easy for the headline readers to misinterpret. Wise up Jeremy or Ricardo will be right.

Good post btw Vanwink.[/quote]

I''m not Labour.

Corbyn doesn''t even have control over his own party, or any solidarity. He says something, and Labour MP''s are quick to distance themselves. For somebody like me who doesn''t agree with pretty much anything he says, it makes it way too easy for me to ridicule anything he has to say.

[TCCANARY 263]

The chief of the Met police says we don''t have a shoot to kill policy so what''s the problem?

"Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, who wants to double the number of armed officers in London, denied the force operated a shoot to kill policy.

I don''t know what he means by shoot to kill. The law says that the police and anybody else can use reasonable force. Reasonable force to do one of two or three things.

First of all to stop a crime. Secondly to arrest somebody who is putting somebody in danger.

Now stop them might mean killing them. But we don''t have a shoot to kill them policy.

– SIR BERNARD HOGAN-HOWE, METROPOLITAN POLICE COMMISSIONER

Last updated Tue 17 Nov 2015"