Lowest Of The Lows...

[bazwillrun]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3335820/Outrage-Red-Ken-says-7-7-bombers-died-beliefs.html

He is utter filth and him and cor bin laden are no more than traitors....lets hope people like these two never ever get the chance to weild real power in this country, ever..both friends of the terrorists

and just to add salt in the wounds another totally unbiased bbc leftie rent a mob for the occasion...

[andy-hughes]

tambourine - //Andy how is it fact? Where did the 7/7 terrorists state this fact - link please //

The essential ingredient of terrorism is to ensure that the entire world knows that you carried out the act, and therefore there will no doubt be news footage somewhere of IS claiming responsibility for these murders.

http://www.dudleynews.co.uk/news/12875258.Terrorists_responsible_for_7_7_bombings_attended_lecture_in_Dudley/?ref=rl

Here you go.

[tamborine]

The only fact is KL opinion. That does NOT constitute factual evidence of the cause for the 7/7 terrorists.

[Baldric]

Oh Dear, it would appear Terrorism has more friends in this Country than I imagined!

[Retrochic]

ANDY " I refer you to my previous post - stating a fact is not the same as offering approval."

But he wasn't stating it as just a fact was he? He was justifying his decision not to support the Government on sending in the RAF to Syria

I suppose Liningstone was giving sensible medical advice to Kevan Jones when he proclaimed he was ‘obviously very depressed and disturbed’ and ‘might need some psychiatric help’.

[andy-hughes]

tambourine - //The only fact is KL opinion. That does NOT constitute factual evidence of the cause for the 7/7 terrorists. //

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ....

[Togo]

//That said, if bombing in Syria is sanctioned, history will show David Cameron's name writ large as the person responsible for any backlash that can be attributed to that action.//

Typical. Blame Cameron in advance for something that hasn't even happened and may not even happen. But bend over backwards to justify and condone Blair's illegal invasion and lies before and after the event. Free speech my foot. Free speech only for they who hold opinions that you find agreeable.

[andy-hughes]

Retrochic - //But he wasn't stating it as just a fact was he? He was justifying his decision not to support the Government on sending in the RAF to Syria //

I didn't see the programme, I have only seen the section where Mr Livingstone made his observation, and on that basis, I stand by my assertion that he was stating a fact, I am not aware, based on what I have seen, that he used the fact to back his own actions in opposition - but I can understand that a fuller viewing may alter that viewpoint.

//I suppose Liningstone was giving sensible medical advice to Kevan Jones when he proclaimed he was ‘obviously very depressed and disturbed’ and ‘might need some psychiatric help’. //

That is a separate issue, but Mr Livingstone will find no support from me for that disgusting slur on a fellow MP's mental health.

[Retrochic]

"If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ...."

its an undercover swan.......

[tamborine]

Andy, no mention of Iraq in your link. More like info about terrorists being islam radicalised

[andy-hughes]

Togo - ////That said, if bombing in Syria is sanctioned, history will show David Cameron's name writ large as the person responsible for any backlash that can be attributed to that action.//

Typical. Blame Cameron in advance for something that hasn't even happened and may not even happen. //

I am not 'blaming' anyone - I am simply providing a possible scenario for how history may judge Mr Cameron, that is not the same as me personally assuming I have sight of the future.

//But bend over backwards to justify and condone Blair's illegal invasion and lies before and after the event.//

Since that statement follows my quote, do I assume that you believe I justify and condone Blair's (government's - to be fair) illegal invasion? I have suggested nothing of the kind - because that is not my view.

//Free speech my foot. Free speech only for they who hold opinions that you find agreeable. //

Again - if that is aimed at me, that is also false - how could I debate on here on a daily basis if I did not support the concept of free speech?

[Retrochic]

andy -if you did not see the programme how on earth can you make a judgement as to the meaning or context behind his words? One cannot cherry pick a sentence then give it connotation to suit your own argument.

[Baldric]

Togo @ 10:03,
They're never knowingly wrong in their opinion, and when they are they will 'Sceem and screem and screem' until everyone gets 'sick' of hearing it, then they will declare victory!

[Togo]

//If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck .... //

And Livingstone calls it a noble and admirable Swan, fools and charlatans will believe and justify his deranged false interpretation.

[andy-hughes]

Togo - //And Livingstone calls it a noble and admirable Swan, fools and charlatans will believe and justify his deranged false interpretation. //

I am in agreement with retrochic - I am on thin ice as far as commenting on a programme when I have only seen a section of it, but to the best of my knowledge of hearing KL speak about terrorism, I do not recall him extolling it in anything like the glowing terms you describe - indeed I do not recall him extolling it per se at all.

[Baldric]

/// how could I debate on here on a daily basis if I did not support the concept of free speech?///

I think my 10:10 post goes someway to answering that.

[Svejk]

Lucky he's not the
Mayor any more. He'd be erecting a memorial to the terrorists. ( who bravely gave their lives for their beliefs)

[jackthehat]

I've sat on the sidelines of this thread as I didn't see the programme and thus can't accurately comment.

However, reading through the comments left by others who did fully, or in part, it is once more apparent that the digs at andy are gathering apace.

Why don't you (and you know full well who you are) try and stick to answering the topic? By all means challenge andy, but on what he says and NOT how he says it or the length of his answers or his perceived special treatment and abuse of his powers because he's a Moderator.

It is getting beyond tedious.....

[Hypognosis]

There is a difference between sympathy and empathy.

The ability to picture what your enemy is thinking and what is motivating them to act against you is vital in trying to predict their actions.

In order to discuss or debate your opinion of what our enemy is thinking, with fellow thinkers and strategists, you have to say it out loud. Which is what he did. That is not expressing 'sympathy'.

Note: I am not saying this to support Ken, particularly and, if he ever did express support for terrorism I'd waste no time joining the pile-on. Instead I'm just making the (pedantic) point about sympathy versus empathy.

[jackthehat]

I thought things like that were beneath your consideration, baz.......you spent a great deal of your time on here laughing.....or at least you regularly tell us you do.

andy has no greater, or lesser, entitlement to post on here as he sees fit.....or than you.