[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Dezzy, she didnt call you a sexist *******

She called you a patronizing t*** because you said that she was just influenced by the media...


And can this bickering stop please?

oh okay I apologise for mixing it up but still, she did accuse me of sexism I remember because I did a post saying that it's a card she relies on too often.

All I want is for her to try to answer my point since she's attacked me for more then I her in this thread.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

oh okay I apologise for mixing it up but still, she did accuse me of sexism I remember because I did a post saying that it's a card she relies on too often.

All I want is for her to try to answer my point since she's attacked me for more then I her in this thread.

Ask James to put the post back then - I made my reply - people would have read it and part of it was in another's post - so stop trying to imply I didn't and therefore couldn't respond to your post!

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

Ask James to put the post back then - I made my reply - people would have read it and part of it was in another's post - so stop trying to imply I didn't and therefore couldn't respond to your post!

I'm not denying it's existence I just wanna know what it is so I can continue the debate. Here's my original statement that you branded nonsense in the last post. At least summarise your previous arguments so you can defend your recent remarks that I'm deluded and don't know what I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Dezzy

The only reason why it seems Muslims are behind every attack is because the media aren't giving much focus to many other attacks by non-Muslims as it doesn't fit into their image of terrorism that they want to portray. The face of Terrorism used to be the IRA and then in America in the 90's it was white supremacists. Nowadays the posterchild for Terrorism is Islam, I think it was last year when a white supremacist suicide bomber bombed a street in America but it got nearly no press coverage since it didn't fit in with the current image of terrorism. The only reason this attack's recieved so much attention is because people probably thought it was a Muslim Extremist behind it at first.

The media plays most people like fools, they'll focus on terrifying the public into buying Newspapers or watching the news to get the next piece of the story. Look at Swine Flu and Bird Flu, we were all meant to be dead by now The media relies on narrative and worst possible scenarios to keep the public interested and most people fall hook line and sinker for it.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

Ask James to put the post back then - I made my reply - people would have read it and part of it was in another's post - so stop trying to imply I didn't and therefore couldn't respond to your post!

You havent responded to my post asking you to define "recent" and "terrorism" could you also define what you mean by "recent attacks that affect us ".

You see those are very subjective terms. the pilot flying into the tax office could be classed as a domestic terrorist attack, (whether he was or wasnt part of a larger group). He intended to produce terror in those he considered his enemy.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I'm not denying it's existence I just wanna know what it is so I can continue the debate. Here's my original statement that you branded nonsense in the last post. At least summarise your previous arguments so you can defend your recent remarks that I'm deluded and don't know what I'm talking about.

That wasn't the one I responded to - yours was deleted as well!

I am not re-writing it again - it's clearly not as important to me as it is to you!

Maybe James can U2U to you - ask him!

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

That wasn't the one I responded to - yours was deleted as well!

I am not re-writing it again - it's clearly not as important to me as it is to you!

Maybe James can U2U to you - ask him!

Well that's the post I've always referred to so perhaps it's best if you delete those posts calling me deluded and such if you misunderstood me.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Shasown

You havent responded to my post asking you to define "recent" and "terrorism" could you also define what you mean by "recent attacks that affect us ".

You see those are very subjective terms. the pilot flying into the tax office could be classed as a domestic terrorist attack, (whether he was or wasnt part of a larger group). He intended to produce terror in those he considered his enemy.

Just had to read the Daily Mail first before I could respond - as apparently that is where my opinions come from!

I don't doubt any of the information you have given - but my primary concern, as seems to be that of most ordinary Brits, understandably, is the more recent attacks on Britain, America and our forces in Afghanistan etc in the last few years - going back to 9/11.

They are Muslin attacks and they are what affect us most at this point in time - and we are all well aware that the situation is going to continue, and may well get worse - and that is why many, including myself, have the views we have - not because of what we read in the Daily Mail.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well that's the post I've always referred to so perhaps it's best if you delete those posts calling me deluded and such if you misunderstood me.

I didn't misunderstand you - they were all linked! You did rather arrogantly try to imply that anyone who disagrees with you on this - has no mind of their own and has just been influenced by the media. Yes dear. You, of course, are far too well informed and in the know to have fallen for it like the rest of us gullible idiots!

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

Just had to read the Daily Mail first before I could respond - as apparently that is where my opinions come from!

I don't doubt any of the information you have given - but my primary concern, as seems to be that of most ordinary Brits, understandably, is the more recent attacks on Britain, America and our forces in Afghanistan etc in the last few years - going back to 9/11.

They are Muslin attacks and they are what affect us most at this point in time - and we are all well aware that the situation is going to continue, and may well get worse - and that is why many, including myself, have the views we have - not because of what we read in the Daily Mail.

Thats understandable, as most of the current terrorist attacks that do affect us or are publicised seem to be perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists.

Incidentally a larger proportion of the intelligence budget allocated to MI5 is spent on non-Islamic intelligence operations. there are still ongoing operations against Provisional splinter groups such as the Real IRA and Continuity IRA.

The reasons for this primarily are, domestic terrorism generally does not meet with the same international co-operation as international terrorism. there is also the amount of resources available. For example because certain groups do have training camps on or near operational areas for the armed forces, special forces can be tasked to act in an intelligence operation with less red tape than on a domestic operation.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

I didn't misunderstand you - they were all linked! You did rather arrogantly try to imply that anyone who disagrees with you on this - has no mind of their own and has just been influenced by the media. Yes dear. You, of course, are far too well informed and in the know to have fallen for it like the rest of us gullible idiots!

Oh dear, once again you misunderstand which is alarmingly is becoming a regular occurence. The reason I said that you were a Daily Mail sheep was not because I didn't agree with you it's because most of your opinions are shared with the sheep and that you fit right into a demographic, Parents are (but of course not always) affected most by moral panics and media related hysteria because newspapers and other media formats tend to prey on the parent's primal urge to protect their children. That is all, I profiled what I knew of you and that is what my conclusions came to.

Also unlike you who brands everyone that disagrees with her sexist or an ignorant girl I haven't called anyone on this topic or anywhere else a Daily mail sheep. Only You. So get your facts right.

Ironically all through today when we've been arguing you could have prevented all of this by simply just trying to counter argue my original day yet you spent the whole day branding me arrogant and deluded amongst other things, in that time you could have just done a small summary of your counterpoint that got deleted but you've chosen to keep this hostile while I've done my best to keep my composure unlike you.

Finally I AM too informed to be taken in by most media techniques, I've studied it for years and have qualifications in the matter, I'm not saying I'm perfect and I never have but I know enough not to take everything I see and read at face value as well as the techniques they use to create a successful story. At the end of the day if a person knows where to look for traps then they're not as likely to get caught in one and this rings true for media techniques amongst things in life.

Now you have 3 choices;

1. Simply do not reply and end the matter here.
2. Argue my point on Media narratives and Hysteria and then we can bring it back to being a debate.
3. Insult me and start this sorry repetitive matter all over again.

Your choice.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Oh dear, once again you misunderstand which is alarmingly is becoming a regular occurence. The reason I said that you were a Daily Mail sheep was not because I didn't agree with you it's because most of your opinions are shared with the sheep and that you fit right into a demographic, Parents are (but of course not always) affected most by moral panics and media related hysteria because newspapers and other media formats tend to prey on the parent's primal urge to protect their children. That is all, I profiled what I knew of you and that is what my conclusions came to.

Also unlike you who brands everyone that disagrees with her sexist or an ignorant girl I haven't called anyone on this topic or anywhere else a Daily mail sheep. Only You. So get your facts right.

Ironically all through today when we've been arguing you could have prevented all of this by simply just trying to counter argue my original day yet you spent the whole day branding me arrogant and deluded amongst other things, in that time you could have just done a small summary of your counterpoint that got deleted but you've chosen to keep this hostile while I've done my best to keep my composure unlike you.

Finally I AM too informed to be taken in by most media techniques, I've studied it for years and have qualifications in the matter, I'm not saying I'm perfect and I never have but I know enough not to take everything I see and read at face value as well as the techniques they use to create a successful story. At the end of the day if a person knows where to look for traps then they're not as likely to get caught in one and this rings true for media techniques amongst things in life.

Now you have 3 choices;

1. Simply do not reply and end the matter here.
2. Argue my point on Media narratives and Hysteria and then we can bring it back to being a debate.
3. Insult me and start this sorry repetitive matter all over again.

Your choice.

As I said before - you have far too high an opinion of yourself - and the arguments you present simply do not back up that inflated opinion. You are totally transparent - in your pathetic attempts to constantly undermine my self-confidence and create self-doubt by constant put-down remarks such as embarrassing and misunderstand - when such remarks are clearly more appropriate and applicable to you. I don't misunderstand my dear - you just speak a load of incoherrent twaddle!

What points exactly do you think you made so eloquently! That everyone barr you is taken in by media hype (particularly us gullible, over-protective parents) - bully for you! Well you fit into your own little demographic - of those that like blowing their own trumpet -and spout nought but utter bull****e!

I argued my point in the deleted post - not that there was much to argue - as I said before - ask James to send it to you, if it is so important to you - me thinks you are getting a bit hysterical about this!

Your opinions mean little to me as your arguments have no substance, just opinionated drivel. You harp on about facts - when you produce none yourself - just repeatedly tell us how well informed and well qualified on the subject you are! Really!

Definition of facts:

"Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact - your suposition that I read the Daily Mail is not!

b. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case." - You have failed to prove that you are an expert on the subject!

10/10 for effort - but, in the end, your comments are simply opinion - nothing more.

We are all aware of media hype - do you really think that knowledge is exclusive to you, with all your qualifications on the subject? But believe it or not - some of us are able to form our own opinions regardless!

As for your immature 3 choices - I wonder - which have I made!

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

As I said before - you have far too high an opinion of yourself - and the arguments you present simply do not back up that inflated opinion. You are totally transparent - in your pathetic attempts to constantly undermine my self-confidence and create self-doubt by constant put-down remarks such as embarrassing and misunderstand - when such remarks are clearly more appropriate and applicable to you. I don't misunderstand my dear - you just speak a load of incoherrent twaddle!

What points exactly do you think you made so eloquently! That everyone barr you is taken in by media hype (particularly us gullible, over-protective parents) - bully for you! Well you fit into your own little demographic - of those that like blowing their own trumpet -and spout nought but utter bull****e!

I argued my point in the deleted post - not that there was much to argue - as I said before - ask James to send it to you, if it is so important to you - me thinks you are getting a bit hysterical about this!

Your opinions mean little to me as your arguments have no substance, just opinionated drivel. You harp on about facts - when you produce none yourself - just repeatedly tell us how well informed and well qualified on the subject you are! Really!

Definition of facts:

"Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact - your suposition that I read the Daily Mail is not!

b. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case." - You have failed to prove that you are an expert on the subject!

10/10 for effort - but, in the end, your comments are simply opinion - nothing more.

We are all aware of media hype - do you really think that knowledge is exclusive to you, with all your qualifications on the subject? But believe it or not - some of us are able to form our own opinions regardless!

As for your immature 3 choices - I wonder - which have I made!

I don't have an inflated opinion of myself it's just I know more about the subject then you and it offends me when you disregard any points I made to just call me arrogant and transparent, how about stick to the points I made instead of getting so personal by insulting me constantly. If you're not gonna bother debating this properly do not reply to me because I'm sick of your dirty tactics, you do nothing but call me a tw*t, arrogant, sexist, transparent yet you've made no valid point in this topic for a day at the least. All you've done is been completely insulting and immature.

You're saying I'm the one throwing out the insults constantly? Look at your posts! You've done nothing but insult me constantly. It's tiresome really.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten what I wrote in brackets when it came to my points about parents, you should read my posts before you throw out the insults. Parents ARE more likely to be swayed by the media I've said why in my previous post so I'm not gonna repeat it, just read it. I'd say my points are well presented, If you think it's incoherent then it's your problem because it's written very clearly.

I'm starting to think you've not really read my posts as I said I don't know everything about media but I don't take anything it presents at face value. I'm not saying everyone is an idiot as I'm not perfect myself but as with the part about the parents you've CONVENIENTLY forgot that point.

At the end of the day my posts have been more informative then yours for a while. You never address my points only try to insult me, I was very kind in my last post considering, throughout this topic the worst I've called you was a sheep while you've attacked me, my education and everything I've tried to put points across but you've only been concerned with attacking me. Which makes your point about me being hysterical hilarious considering you've constantly been attacking both me and the exclamation mark button.

I've never stated any of my opinion as fact, I've simply stated what I know so you can forget about trying to put words in my mouth. Finally, I never tried to make out that I'm the sole person who is 'immune' to the media, I've just been saying what I was taught for 3 years. Now are you gonna insult me again or are we going to to debate this? I'm tired of the arguing so don't bother replying to me if you're just gonna insult me again.

If you want to debate this properly, here's my two main posts with the important points highlighted.

Originally Posted by Dezzy

The only reason why it seems Muslims are behind every attack is because the media aren't giving much focus to many other attacks by non-Muslims as it doesn't fit into their image of terrorism that they want to portray. The face of Terrorism used to be the IRA and then in America in the 90's it was white supremacists. Nowadays the posterchild for Terrorism is Islam, I think it was last year when a white supremacist suicide bomber bombed a street in America but it got nearly no press coverage since it didn't fit in with the current image of terrorism. The only reason this attack's recieved so much attention is because people probably thought it was a Muslim Extremist behind it at first.

The media plays most people like fools, they'll focus on terrifying the public into buying Newspapers or watching the news to get the next piece of the story. Look at Swine Flu and Bird Flu, we were all meant to be dead by now The media relies on narrative and worst possible scenarios to keep the public interested and most people fall hook line and sinker for it.

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Oh dear, once again you misunderstand which is alarmingly is becoming a regular occurence. The reason I said that you were a Daily Mail sheep was not because I didn't agree with you it's because most of your opinions are shared with the sheep and that you fit right into a demographic, Parents are (but of course not always) affected most by moral panics and media related hysteria because newspapers and other media formats tend to prey on the parent's primal urge to protect their children. That is all, I profiled what I knew of you and that is what my conclusions came to.

Also unlike you who brands everyone that disagrees with her sexist or an ignorant girl I haven't called anyone on this topic or anywhere else a Daily mail sheep. Only You. So get your facts right.

Ironically all through today when we've been arguing you could have prevented all of this by simply just trying to counter argue my original day yet you spent the whole day branding me arrogant and deluded amongst other things, in that time you could have just done a small summary of your counterpoint that got deleted but you've chosen to keep this hostile while I've done my best to keep my composure unlike you.

Finally I AM too informed to be taken in by most media techniques, I've studied it for years and have qualifications in the matter, I'm not saying I'm perfect and I never have but I know enough not to take everything I see and read at face value as well as the techniques they use to create a successful story. At the end of the day if a person knows where to look for traps then they're not as likely to get caught in one and this rings true for media techniques amongst things in life.

Now you have 3 choices;

1. Simply do not reply and end the matter here.
2. Argue my point on Media narratives and Hysteria and then we can bring it back to being a debate.
3. Insult me and start this sorry repetitive matter all over again.

Your choice.

[WOMBAI]

On your first highlighted point - to be honest - I think I more or less covered that in a post to Shasown - when I said that I am most concerned, like many others, with recent events going back to 9/11 in Britain, America and Afghanistan - I am not taking about history - no I don't know enough about that - I am talking now - and how the terrorism threat from Muslims is affecting us now - and hence my opinions - not from the Daily Mail - that was quite offensive you know. You feel I have insulted you, I feel you have insulted me - tit for tat I guess.

Of course there is a lot of media hype - but these things still occured and the threat is still there - that is not just hype. I do have some issues with the Muslim religion - and have never made any secret of that - but that is with the religion - not a race issue - and I am sick of people trying to win an argument by implying I am racist. I am not.

I certainly don't consider myself a hysterical person - and feel your suggestion of that was unfounded - so of course I was likely to hit back at that. I feel I am entitled to express my opinions, without the constant criticism I receive from some when I do. If people don't agree with my opinions - fine - but I will express them - popular or not - and will defend myself against unecessary accusations of racism. People do need to distinguish between race and religion - I am talking generally here, not necessarily about you.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

On your first highlighted point - to be honest - I think I more or less covered that in a post to Shasown - when I said that I am most concerned, like many others, with recent events going back to 9/11 in Britain, America and Afghanistan - I am not taking about history - no I don't know enough about that - I am talking now - and how the terrorism threat from Muslims is affecting us now - and hence my opinions - not from the Daily Mail - that was quite offensive you know. You feel I have insulted you, I feel you have insulted me - tit for tat I guess.

Of course there is a lot of media hype - but these things still occured and the threat is still there - that is not just hype. I do have some issues with the Muslim religion - and have never made any secret of that - but that is with the religion - not a race issue - and I am sick of people trying to win an argument by implying I am racist. I am not.

I certainly don't consider myself a hysterical person - and feel your suggestion of that was unfounded - so of course I was likely to hit back at that. I feel I am entitled to express my opinions, without the constant criticism I receive from some when I do. If people don't agree with my opinions - fine - but I will express them - popular or not - and will defend myself against unecessary accusations of racism. People do need to distinguish between race and religion - I am talking generally here, not necessarily about you.

I do agree that on the scale of terrorist threats, Al Queda and Islamic extremists do rank high but terrorism exists in many forms, The afforementioned only gets the most coverage because it's the posterchild. Which is surprising as we do have the potential for trouble closer to home with the resurgance of the IRA but that will not got much coverage due to the fact it doesn't bode well with the carefully built image of terrorism that the media has created.

Look at the American Man at the heart of thread, he's not really been considered a terrorist although his methods are similar to one, would it have been different if it was a muslim flying that plane? Definitely but like my example of the White Supramist last year (which wasn't covered much), They weren't covered or treated like terrorists because they weren't Al Queda or Extremists and thus the media wasn't interested in branding them so.

It's nothing new though back in the 80's and 90's then the UK and America had the threat of the IRA and radical White Supramicists respectively, Al Queda threats were put on the back burner. The best way to think of it is that the media works almost in fads, When it comes to Terrorism Islamic extremism is the 'in' thing, if there's an attack by another group then they'd become the new major threat.

I've never called you racist but I agree with you that it's a card that shouldn't be used in this instant as religion is not race exclusive and I don't really believe you are a racist anyway.

[Shasown]

Did anyone hear a loud bang in Newry last night?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Did anyone hear a loud bang in Newry last night?

Yes but No Deaths.


It is all about the number that Die.



Like in the Illegal Invasion of Iraq
all those Public people murdered in Cold blood
by Carpet Bombing from Evil GW.Bush.
Backed by Evil New Labour.

[ILoveTRW]

this story says everything about the modern day media. The fact that this was not reported outside of texas is absolutely outstanding. This would of been reported every where if the guy was a Muslim

<3 Austin btw

[setanta]

Originally Posted by ILoveDC

this story says everything about the modern day media. The fact that this was not reported outside of texas is absolutely outstanding. This would of been reported every where if the guy was a Muslim

<3 Austin btw

That's not a bad old point you've brought up to be fair.