Massacre in Paris...

Anyone who defends this attack, or attacks like it, should be in prison regardless of their faith.

The founder of Charlie Hebdo put it better than anyone. He said "I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees".

It's up to us, the survivors, to draw and enforce the distinction between satire and hate speech. The cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo satirized everyone- Muslims, Jews, Catholics, the entire human race. That's satire. But approving an atrocity is NOT freedom of speech and ought to be punished.

Mainstream Islam brands fundamentalist Islamic zealots as terrorists, too. But they don't do anything about it, which is why we are where we are this day. And why twelve innocents are now going cold into their graves. It's disgusting.

We are all Charlie, or we are not. I've made my choice.
 
both terrorists are surrounded by RAID and GIGN (french SWAT) and 5 helicopters are flying over them.

they are in a small printing company (10 miles from my parents home), at least 1 hostage.

only 2 issues surrendeder or die...

RAID and GIGN try to save the hostage
 

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
Concise Jim. Neat.
Thiery B - I often stay at Dolce Chantilly which is also quite close
to the Killing fields - whoops 'Scene of Action'.
Let the Jihadists have their wish and they will see as many or all the virgins tonight.
This one hostage might take another ten fatalities to free her plus
of course the Jihadists so GIGN, get on with it.
 

David Morton

Lifetime Supporter
Concise Jim. Neat.
Thiery B - I often stay at Dolce Chantilly which is also quite close
to the Killing fields - whoops 'Scene of Action'.
Let them have their wish and they will see all the virgins tonight.
This one hostage might take another ten fatalities plus the Jihadists so get on with it.

Nous sommes Charlie
 
YES !!!!!

Charlie est vengé !!!!

- Damartin en Goël, GIGN Assault : 2 terrorists KILLED !!! 1 Hostage free without injury

- Paris, RAID Assault : 1 terrorist neutralized !!! 10 Hostages free without injury


2 RAID team member injured.
 

Howard Jones

Supporter
Larry I do have a honest question for you. Do you think that IF my proposal was to become reality it would have the effect we all hope it would have? That the ISIS types would be destroyed in mass and that future ISIS types would think twice before they declared war on civilization.

I'm not naïve enough to believe that we can completely eliminate evil in this world but maybe if the good guys would just stop being wenies and destroy evil as quickly and relentlessly as possible, maybe just maybe, we might save some innocent lives.

Now I do know that the current leadership won't do what I propose. Nor will most of the rest of the western European leaders. At least not yet. The oblivious question is what will it take? Or better put, how many dead will it take. Dozens, hundreds, thousands?
 

Terry Oxandale

Skinny Man
Supporter
Not being discussed in this valid argument of putting the vermin down hard, is the fact that we also need to leave that area of the world alone. Any time one sticks his nose in other's business (for generations of time), the reasonable expectation is that the nose will be bloodied a bit. For some reason we refuse to accept that as a principle, and something we wouldn't hesitate to do if the roles were flipped. As bad as this situation is, I have a hard time believing it has happened in a vacuum of Western influence.
 
Last edited:

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Larry I do have a honest question for you. Do you think that IF my proposal was to become reality ("Picture a joint NATO declaration of war on ISIS with a stated goal of unconditional surrender, complete destruction of their war making capability and trial and execution of their leadership.") it would have the effect we all hope it would have? That the ISIS types would be destroyed in mass and that future ISIS types would think twice before they declared war on civilization.

'Short answer: I doubt NATO would get off its collective BUTT. Look at its "response" to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Crimea just as one example. It's an "alliance" in name ony 'far as I'm concerned...and a gutless one at that. Far too many countries (the U.S. included) sweat the possible geo-political/economic 'consequences' of taking forceful counter measures against terrorists and the countries that support them faaaaaaaar more than they fear any terrorist threat, evidently.

When ISIS was streaming en masse down out of Syria headed for Iraq...what did Obama (or anybody ELSE) do about it? Nothing. That whole convoy could have been wiped out from the air. 'No question about it. There was NOWHERE for 'em to hide. But, no. They were allowed to just do their thing. NOW look where we are.

'Just my take on it... :shifty:
 
The ONLY response to ANY terrorist (or group) is to stomp them like a cockroach!
Quickly, hard and merciless. I could go on, but I'm a WOGG nonetheless.
 

Howard Jones

Supporter
Well Larry I thing we agree on quite a bit. BOB will never attack his Muslim brothers, and nobody else can do much about these things on a global scale without US leadership.

By the way a Al Qaeda related group in Yemen has claimed this was done at their direction. As far as I am concerned we spend way too much time trying to sort out exactly which faction of the extremist Muslims did what. I say wipe em all out without worrying about what they what to call themselves.
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
...we spend way too much time trying to sort out exactly which faction of the extremist Muslims did what.
In the end, it's a distinction without a difference anyway...and therefore a completely meaningless, useless, purposeless waste of time debating.

All of them want all of US dead no matter to which faction they belong...and they should be dealt with in the same way.
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
Not being discussed in this valid argument of putting the vermin down hard, is the fact that we also need to leave that area of the world alone. Any time one sticks his nose in other's business (for generations of time), the reasonable expectation is that the nose will be bloodied a bit. For some reason we refuse to accept that as a principle, and something we wouldn't hesitate to do if the roles were flipped. As bad as this situation is, I have a hard time believing it has happened in a vacuum of Western influence.
Agreed but turn it to glass, then leave it alone!
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Not being discussed in this valid argument of putting the vermin down hard, is the fact that we also need to leave that area of the world alone. Any time one sticks his nose in other's business (for generations of time), the reasonable expectation is that the nose will be bloodied a bit. For some reason we refuse to accept that as a principle...
If we (the West) hadn't ever 'stuck our noses' into the area, it would still be just a vast desert, and a vast desert only, would it not? Prior to oil being discovered there (in about 1950?), I don't believe the area had any wealth of any kind, did it? So, there's no question the area has benefited by 'our' presence, has it not? Plainly put, on many occasions post-1950, the West has "stuck (its) nose in" when it thought it needed to protect its H-U-G-E $$$ investment and its energy supply. Of course, these days that reality (like so much of reality in general) is not at all "P.C." as far as the Left is concerned, and they L-O-V-E to make an issue of it at every opportunity. But, regardless, that doesn't change the dictates of reality one darned bit.

That said, I DO 'get' your point...and I DO agree with it to a great extent. However, today's 'real world' often dictates we do otherwise in many situations.

Sad, but true...:uneasy:
 
Once you've stuck your nose into someone else's business, it's very hard to unstick it. Seems like your nose gets stuck there, and you can't get it out.
 
Top