Apart from the trump thingI like what you have said.
Summed up what most people with an opinion have failed to notice by not being able to read between the lines due to the media and (anti)social media hype around it all. We would rather talk about some twat on a video offering out Danny dyer for having (for a change) quite a sensible opinion (if you actually see the whole interview in context rather than taking a snippet like the daily rags have) that look at the facts for what they are.
But this thread is gold. So many conversations blended into something which has gone quite off topic, not the only thread like this on here either at the mo.
And so many comments I really want to jump on and things I want to challenge but this is not really the place and frankly I cannot be bothered
At least I am kept amused at work reading everyones comments!.
I can explain the trump thing, it's not about the man, it's about the President. I've placed a very big bet (life savings big) on the outcome of something currently going through the US political system, which ultimately comes down to a decision to be made by donald trump. As a man, he's garbage, but as a President (who admitedly takes credit for things Obama did - and constantly attacks minorities and womens rights on behalf of Pence) of their administration he doesn't get a fair shake.
Okay, so she said she joined ISIS, where's the proof that she's not mistaken?
I'm not trying to poke holes in your position, in our society, proof (in terms of crime and punishment) is and should be down to the Courts of Law.
If I told you I murdered someone would that be good enough for you? It shouldn't be, but based on your words I'd have to presume it would be. That is (I'm not taking the mick) when I ask that where is the proof that the organisation she claims she joined was in fact the prohibited terrorist one she says she joined?
FYI, you might say "well here it is", but I'm not a court of law so I really don't care whether such proof exists I only care whether the courts will accept it as fact - as I've made clear I'm all for appropriate punishment.
This girl is evidently lacking wit... but she hasn't said she is guilty of a crime.
The specifics of the law don't really matter. Can you agree that a certain standard of proof should be required before punishment and someone saying they [believe they] did something isn't enough? Remember "I did it" =/= (does not equal) "I plead guilty".
I should have read your post(s) before I replied.? So succinct.
I'm just waiting for the political fireworks [in Britain] when she sneaks into Turkey (or the EU) and can't be deported because she's stateless. Or even better, is deported to Britain aha. ?
Last edited by a moderator:
