wiggyrichard

Cucumber, everything about it. Its smell, taste, touch i hate it all!

What the hell? That is utterly disgraceful! As if we don't fork out enough in taxes, they have a victim of crime tax as well. How do they justify that one Tamuff? I've no idea how they justify it considering, as you say, he's the victim and he pays his taxes. I think the reason is because the rozzers pass the bike to a private company to store it rather than actually being at the police station. However, its no excuse. They are talking about this very subject on Talkshite at the moment. It is a disgrace, i just cant see what possible reason they can give to justify the fee's?

What is Zork Stu? Right lets run through it, what can be typed into the computer? DOA - activates the dead ops arcade game. 3ARC UNLOCK - unlock additional zombie map 'Five' 3ARC INTEL - ? HELP - ? ZORK - ?

You don't have to at all. I didn't take any offence over it honestly. I'm immune to VT insults after the "religious threads"...I've just learned to duck and laugh!! Could you just answer my question Julie, a yes or no will be fine.

Yep i know what you mean mate, the whole goody two shoes morals thing doesnt wash with me and most of all doesnt impress.

double post

But if they are threatening and holding your loved one prisoner, your tellig me thatyou wouldnt do everything in your power to get them back? Even if that meant killing or torturing one of the captors?

In some threads, Yes. In the more "political" threads, No. There you go, a bit of diplomacy. :winkold: I can live with that 8)

I feel sorry for your children. Mine are just about adults anyhow so can speak for themselves. But I'll guarantee if you asked them would their Mum ever condone the torture of another human being in an attempt to protect them, then they'd say "No way" However if you asked them would Mum have ever taken action to protect us when we were little eg if someone broke in the house & tried to snatch them, then yes she would have, even if it meant bashing him or her over the head with something. Torturing someone in an attempt that they may have information that may well be unreliable is unacceptable. So you wouldnt torture someone to protect them, yet you would 'bash them over the head' and potentially kill them? :? So am i a bad or a good parent for doing anything (torture) and everything in my power to ensure my son is safe?

I still cant believe what im reading! I cant bring myself to type/say what i want to. Go on. Do it. I'm all for a banning of one of the "right wing/hawk/shallow thought" brigade. Im hurt Jon, wouldnt you miss me? :cry:

I still cant believe what im reading! I cant bring myself to type/say what i want to.

Because that is exactly what people have said, haven't they? :yawn: You keep going on about human rights etc. Mandela and Adams blah blah blah. So yes, that is what you and a couple of others have said Snowy. Dont be changing your mind now! :winkold:

You wouldnt heap pain and suffering onto someone who was holding information onto the whereabouts and the safe return of your own flesh and blood!?!? Julie, im sorry, but that is utter shite!

Try reading some of the other posts in the thread. Dont worry Neil, Snowy & Chindie think we should all sit round in a circle with the terrorists and talk it through over a cup of tea. I dont buy into this hypothetical bullshit, ive put you in a situation and asked how you would respond as Tamuff has and all that i hear is that its hypothetical. Step into the real world where it is nasty, dark and evil. The speaking nicely approach went out the window on the 11th September 2001.

It is arrogant because you are saying," I know how you would actually think in situation x regardless of what you believe or say." Your position about what you would do is not arrogant; your definite (you are sure) position about what I would do is. Fair enough mucka.

From Wiki

That wouldnt be terrorism tho Mike so all that you've just typed is a waste...twas beautiful tho mate. Twould be revenge would it not.

You may be 'sure' but that's an incredibly daft and arrogant position to take. How is it arrogant? Becuase i would do anything to protect my family? I just assume that any normal human being with 1oz of love and compasion would do the same. Obviously im wrong and peoples moral standings come first.

There wasnt an MP5 on MW2! :winkold: That'll be the UMP. There was. MP5K. Yes your right. I stand corrected. People actually used that thing? :?

it's what they did with Mandela and Adams :-) The difference is Mandela and Adams hadnt admitted they were directly responsible for killing thousands. :|

Grow up, Tony. He is right the Snowy and it happens all the time on the forum. Too many people try to pretend that they are of the upmost moral standing, well thats all good and well in the make believe world of an internet forum. People harp on about the terrorists still have human rights, well im sorry but after they planned to put innocent peoples lives at risk, they forfeit their right to a cup of coffee and a phone call. Its all good and well saying they are still a human being, but im sure that if they were withholding the location of your son or daughter who was being held at gun point your view on torture would soon change!

There wasnt an MP5 on MW2! :winkold: That'll be the UMP.

O'Neill had a great word for this. Filibustering I remember he used it in a post match interview and had me scurrying for the dictionary People who filibuster also have a tendency to bloviate. I know exactly what you mean Bri, i hate it when i bloviate! :?

Of course it matters. You seem to think that we've arrived at a state of affairs where there are terrorist threats and the issue is whether we can intercept them before they materialise, and that's all we have to think about. The situation is evolving every day. Things that we do now will contribute either to escalation or reduction of the threats we will face in the future. That's a matter of choice. We can't just turn off the tap overnight, but we can act now to reduce future threats, in the same way that in Northern Ireland, there are still threats, but recruitment and radicalisation are significantly reduced compared to say 15 years ago. Yes it is a factor in recruitment of terrorists. I would have thought that's beyond any serious doubt, listening to what the terrorists themselves say, looking at the recruitment material, and considering systematic studies of what leads to radicalisation. Why do you doubt it? Why do we torture in the first place? Many reasons. Some people just like to impose their will on others, and they tend to gravitate towards situations where they can exercise authoritarian control. In extreme situations, where they think they can get away with it, they will go as far as torture. Others get caught up in a situation, and go along with the prevailing culture - some of the people at Abu Ghraib, or those UK soldiers who may face war crimes prosecutions, may fall into this group. Maybe some of them actually act with good motives, thinking they might prevent some atrocity, and maybe they are either so caught up in the moment that they don't see the longer term impact, maybe they think it's beyond their pay grade to think strategically, maybe they just have no understanding and awareness of the effect of what they are doing. Then there is the institutionalised form of humiliation and torture, of which Guantanamo is probably the best example. A propaganda gift for people seeking to recruit terrorists - utterly self-defeating and stupid. By the way, the people who get tortured may or may not be planning to carry out threats against us. So let's not think "If they weren't guilty, we wouldn't do it to them". Are we not torturing people now to prevent future attacks? I dont know what some people expect? Maybe Obama should invite Bin Laden to tea so they can agree to disagree, brush it all under the carpet and let it all just blow over? So torturing a couple of 'brothers' gives them the right to murder 3000 innocent human beings? You walking a very very shakey line of almost saying that it is 'our' fault that 9/11 happened because we started the who affair? You also talk about maybe they didnt realise the long term effects and act with good motives, i think flying a couple of jets into some skyscrapers is pretty self explanitory.

That is THE biggest over reaction ever!