Paris attacks news coverage (MERGED)

[Esmond Million's Bung]

1 minute ago, Aizoon said:

Thanks. This looks to be the relevant bit:

The second part of the Act provides that temporary emergency regulations are normally made by the Queen through Order in Council or by a Minister of the Crown if arranging for an Order in Council would not be possible without serious delay. Such regulations are limited in duration to 30 days,^[10] unless Parliament votes to extend this period before it expires.

So 30 days without the will of parliament and longer only with the will parliament then?.

[Aizoon]

4 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

So 30 days without the will of parliament and longer only with the will parliament then?.

Looks like it. Unless those emergency powers have a self-extending clause, which is not beyond credence.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

1 minute ago, Aizoon said:

Looks like it. Unless those emergency powers have a self-extending clause, which is not beyond credence.

in France the emergency powers per se are in the main controlled by central government, but these powers are also devolved whereby local governments/councils, can impose their own curfews and the like if they feel the need.

 

[AshtonGreat]

Incidents like this always seem to bring out the liberal mafia - the pillocks who shout down anyone with a different opinion to them as being 'thick', 'ignorant' or a 'knuckle-dragger'. They're all over social media - I was reading a thread on Facebook where at least three people said 'A friend of mine shared a petition to close the UK borders. They're no longer a friend.' Literally three people said this. Of course, the natural reaction would be to say 'Like they would give a shit, you shallow, narrow-minded numpty.' While I haven't made my mind up what the best measure to take is, I do believe that some of these idealists could be dangerous.

['Orns]

4 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

Incidents like this always seem to bring out the liberal mafia - the pillocks who shout down anyone with a different opinion to them as being 'thick', 'ignorant' or a 'knuckle-dragger'. They're all over social media - I was reading a thread on Facebook where at least three people said 'A friend of mine shared a petition to close the UK borders. They're no longer a friend.' Literally three people said this. Of course, the natural reaction would be to say 'Like they would give a shit, you shallow, narrow-minded numpty.' While I haven't made my mind up what the best measure to take is, I do believe that some of these idealists could be dangerous.

I have friends who one minute are sharing pictures about banning the burqa, then in the next are sharing posts about how not all Muslims are bad.....I'm not sure half of them know what they are talking about

[Kid in the Riot]

59 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

Incidents like this always seem to bring out the liberal mafia - the pillocks who shout down anyone with a different opinion to them as being 'thick', 'ignorant' or a 'knuckle-dragger'. They're all over social media - I was reading a thread on Facebook where at least three people said 'A friend of mine shared a petition to close the UK borders. They're no longer a friend.' Literally three people said this. Of course, the natural reaction would be to say 'Like they would give a shit, you shallow, narrow-minded numpty.' While I haven't made my mind up what the best measure to take is, I do believe that some of these idealists could be dangerous.

We should of course be sticking together but far more unhelpful than what you quote above is @Big Brother mates Front Nationale who disgraced themselves over the weekend: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319423/Far-right-demonstrators-storm-candlelit-vigil-held-Paris-victims-chanting-Muslims-Throw-Islamists-National-leader-claims-French-no-longer-safe.html

Now that kind of behaviour really is divisive and plays into the hands of IS...

[Esmond Million's Bung]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

We should of course be sticking together but far more unhelpful than what you quote above is @Big Brother mates Front Nationale who disgraced themselves over the weekend: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319423/Far-right-demonstrators-storm-candlelit-vigil-held-Paris-victims-chanting-Muslims-Throw-Islamists-National-leader-claims-French-no-longer-safe.html

Now that kind of behaviour really is divisive and plays into the hands of IS...

and just for balance and no other reason, is this from the same paper in any way helpful?.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319941/Radical-panellists-event-demand-establishment-Islamic-State.html

[AshtonGreat]

7 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

and just for balance and no other reason, is this from the same paper in any way helpful?.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319941/Radical-panellists-event-demand-establishment-Islamic-State.html

I read that article yesterday and while it didn't make for comfortable reading, I suppose it would be easy for a newspaper to find a meeting where the attendees views are radical - in the same way that if you wanted to find a far-right group who wanted to ban all non-English people from the UK, you could. It's safe to say that the Daily Mail has an agenda, in the same way that most lefties on my FB page quote stuff from the Independent and the Guardian, which is equally transparent.

KITR, the highlighted sabotage of the candlelit vigil was indeed a very unsavoury incident.

[Kid in the Riot]

6 minutes ago, Big Brother said:

From the Telegraph:

Islamic State cannot be defeated with kindness. It's time to kill or be killed

Quote "The gunmen of Isil cannot – and will not – be defeated through talking, persuasion or understanding. There are no compromises to be offered.
There is, quite simply, nothing to negotiate.
The cold, hard facts are these: the Islamists hate us and their aim is to kill us.
They hate our way of life, our values, our culture, our civilisation.

There is nothing we can do to appease them or persuade them to stop their killing spree – whether that murder takes places in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon or on the streets of Paris.
There is nothing we can do – whether it is changing our foreign policy by withdrawing troops or warplanes from the Middle East or ending the Israel-Palestine conflict or anything else – that will make them change their minds.
The terrorists and their willingness and ability to use violence against us will only be defeated by one thing: our own willingness and ability to use violence against them.
History is littered with lessons that tell us that, contrary to the lament of the dove, war is actually good for quite a lot of things: mostly, defeating those who would wish us harm.
Our politicians can wring their hands and deliver fine, uplifting speeches as much as they want. The whole world can light up in the tricoleur and we can invent hashtags and change our Facebook or Twitter avatars until the end of time: it is all utterly pointless unless it is backed up by force."

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11998324/Islamists-hate-us-and-their-aim-is-to-kill-us.-We-have-a-choice-kill-or-be-killed.-Which-is-it-to-be.html

I entirely agree to be honest and I fully expect us to be mobbing up with USA and France in good time. You can't have any meaningful negotiation or reason with a group of people, the majority of which it seems, are willing to blow themselves up in the name of a god.

Doesn't excuse the twattish actions of Front Nationale though. Nationalists who are happy to piss on the memory of their dead countrymen? Then run away. No, thanks.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

11 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

I read that article yesterday and while it didn't make for comfortable reading, I suppose it would be easy for a newspaper to find a meeting where the attendees views are radical - in the same way that if you wanted to find a far-right group who wanted to ban all non-English people from the UK, you could. It's safe to say that the Daily Mail has an agenda, in the same way that most lefties on my FB page quote stuff from the Independent and the Guardian, which is equally transparent.

KITR, the highlighted sabotage of the candlelit vigil was indeed a very unsavoury incident.

An interesting reply, the highlighted portion was exactly my point, however the last sentence shows exactly how a story can be spun, KITR saw it as the far right desecrating a candle light vigil, me I saw it as a far right group attempting to whip up racial hatred and receiving short shrift from more intelligent people, who could quite easily given the circumstances of the attack joined in with them.

[AshtonGreat]

6 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

An interesting reply, the highlighted portion was exactly my point, however the last sentence shows exactly how a story can be spun, KITR saw it as the far right desecrating a candle light vigil, me I saw it as a far right group attempting to whip up racial hatred and receiving short shrift from more intelligent people, who could quite easily given the circumstances of the attack joined in with them.

The irony is that the perpetrators of the vigil sabotage are extremists, just like the people who carried out the initial attacks. Their ideologies are on the same level, even if one is seemingly far more violent than the other. 

I'm also not comfortable with the far-left liberal idea that anyone and everyone should be allowed in the UK, or that raising placards saying 'We all stand together' is going to defeat terrorists.

Sadly, common sense, which sits somewhere in the middle, does not seem to be prevailing right now. 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

20 minutes ago, AshtonGreat said:

The irony is that the perpetrators of the vigil sabotage are extremists, just like the people who carried out the initial attacks. Their ideologies are on the same level, even if one is seemingly far more violent than the other. 

I'm also not comfortable with the far-left liberal idea that anyone and everyone should be allowed in the UK, or that raising placards saying 'We all stand together' is going to defeat terrorists.

Sadly, common sense, which sits somewhere in the middle, does not seem to be prevailing right now. 

My point is KITR sees that story as a negative and I see it as positive because they didn't prevail in circumstances where they might have expected to have garnered support on the night.

What about this?, yet again Corbyn comes out with another piece of utter nonsense to follow his jihadi John nonsense, what on earth does he suggest? just leave them to get on with it until they run out of bullets?, I suggest we give him a bullet proof vest and push him into where the atrocity is ongoing and let him negotiate. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3320764/Corbyn-not-happy-special-forces-given-orders-shoot-kill-terrorists-Britain-s-streets.html

[PHILINFRANCE]

4 hours ago, Aizoon said:

Or even Corsica. Friendly and very beautiful. Think a French Ireland.

Yes, of course, but no Euro games (or hedgehogs!).

[Aizoon]

14 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Yes, of course, but no Euro games (or hedgehogs!).

Aucun d'hérissons en la Corse? C'est impossible!

[PHILINFRANCE]

31 minutes ago, Aizoon said:

Aucun d'hérissons en la Corse? C'est impossible!

Absolument.

Horace, or U Ricciu, as he is known in Corsica, used to be considered quite a delicacy; roadkill rather than hunted, covered in clay and cooked in the oven.

Apparently, once cooked, the spines and the skin come off easily, leaving just the meat – but I expect you knew that already!

[Aizoon]

9 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Absolument.

Horace, or U Ricciu, as he is known in Corsica, used to be considered quite a delicacy; roadkill rather than hunted, covered in clay and cooked in the oven.

 

Apparently, once cooked, the spines and the skin come off easily, leaving just the meat – but I expect you knew that already!

 

Ah well, if it's roadkill; Horace is quite relaxed about these things, I imagine that a Corsican Ricciu hunt would be quite a thing to see I believe his distant ancestor, Horatio Hedgehog, once visited the island with his master, Lord Nelson. I hadn't realised, though, that Horatio is derived from U Ricciu, but now you say it...

Marginally more seriously, I can't imagine Corsicans putting up with Islamic terrorism in their midst. I hope not, we're going there next September.

[The Batman]

1 hour ago, AshtonGreat said:

The irony is that the perpetrators of the vigil sabotage are extremists, just like the people who carried out the initial attacks. Their ideologies are on the same level, even if one is seemingly far more violent than the other. 

I'm also not comfortable with the far-left liberal idea that anyone and everyone should be allowed in the UK, or that raising placards saying 'We all stand together' is going to defeat terrorists.

Sadly, common sense, which sits somewhere in the middle, does not seem to be prevailing right now. 

The far left liberals don't like the Jews very much. Anti-semitism flows through it. Ask them to condemn the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah against the Jewish. If they got their way and Israel was wiped off the face of the earth, I bet they won't want them coming here. 

[AshtonGreat]

15 minutes ago, The Batman said:

The far left liberals don't like the Jews very much. Anti-semitism flows through it. Ask them to condemn the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah against the Jewish. If they got their way and Israel was wiped off the face of the earth, I bet they won't want them coming here. 

Funnily enough, the same liberal FB friends I mentioned earlier have recently posted about how evil Israel are for bombing Palestinian children, conveniently forgetting that the same is true the other way around

[And Its Smith]

http://www.mcb.org.uk/a-statement-of-solidarity-from-british-muslim-communities/

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3320647/French-interior-minister-calls-dissolution-mosques-hate-preached-new-anti-terror-measures-following-Paris-attacks.html

[cityexile]

1 hour ago, The Batman said:

The far left liberals don't like the Jews very much. Anti-semitism flows through it. Ask them to condemn the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah against the Jewish. If they got their way and Israel was wiped off the face of the earth, I bet they won't want them coming here. 

I most definitely do not recognise that statement, being most certainly on the left, although 'far' is a stretch. Far left liberal is also a contradiction in terms. Historically, it was always 'the left' that was more inclined to accept Judism than the far right. Other than the obvious during WW2, it was the right leaning aristotocracy here that had a good dose of anti-semitism. That is rather different from believing Israels foreign policy is always very helpful.

Ironically, I have found the best article recently to have been by a normally right wing writer in the Mail. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3318980/PETER-HITCHENS-Really-want-beat-terror-calm-THINK.html

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Not only his Jihadi John nonsense, being against shoot to kill terrorists in an 'ongoing atrocity' nonsense, Corbyn is now saying that he may not allow his party a free vote on any vote for British air strikes, democracy eh?.

[chipdawg]

3 hours ago, Big Brother said:

From the Telegraph:

Islamic State cannot be defeated with kindness. It's time to kill or be killed

Quote "The gunmen of Isil cannot – and will not – be defeated through talking, persuasion or understanding. There are no compromises to be offered.
There is, quite simply, nothing to negotiate.
The cold, hard facts are these: the Islamists hate us and their aim is to kill us.
They hate our way of life, our values, our culture, our civilisation.

There is nothing we can do to appease them or persuade them to stop their killing spree – whether that murder takes places in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon or on the streets of Paris.
There is nothing we can do – whether it is changing our foreign policy by withdrawing troops or warplanes from the Middle East or ending the Israel-Palestine conflict or anything else – that will make them change their minds.
The terrorists and their willingness and ability to use violence against us will only be defeated by one thing: our own willingness and ability to use violence against them.
History is littered with lessons that tell us that, contrary to the lament of the dove, war is actually good for quite a lot of things: mostly, defeating those who would wish us harm.
Our politicians can wring their hands and deliver fine, uplifting speeches as much as they want. The whole world can light up in the tricoleur and we can invent hashtags and change our Facebook or Twitter avatars until the end of time: it is all utterly pointless unless it is backed up by force."

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11998324/Islamists-hate-us-and-their-aim-is-to-kill-us.-We-have-a-choice-kill-or-be-killed.-Which-is-it-to-be.html

 

I have to say, my opinion on that has flipped the other way. I'd always felt that boots on the ground was an inevitability, that there was no other language they'd understand than force. While I think that's still true to an extent, what Paris made apparent is that no matter how many bombs we drop on Raqqa, as long as the ideology exists and they can broadcast it then IS will be a threat to us. I suspect Anonymous' declaration of war on Islamic State will cause more problems in the short term than France's because the whole thing relies much more on PR then guns. Personally I think the only way we'll defeat them is to take away the reasons that people join them- the alienation, the lack opportunity, the poverty- which is easier said that done, would be expensive and time consuming and many would argue is not our responsibility. But I just feel that investing the money we might spend on bombs and planes in those societies most affected by their actions is the only way to beat them 

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy to see them bombed 24/7 and I hope as many of them as possible die a painful fiery death, but ultimately I don't think that will win the 'war' with ISIS 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

5 minutes ago, chipdawg said:

I have to say, my opinion on that has flipped the other way. I'd always felt that boots on the ground was an inevitability, that there was no other language they'd understand than force. While I think that's still true to an extent, what Paris made apparent is that no matter how many bombs we drop on Raqqa, as long as the ideology exists and they can broadcast it then IS will be a threat to us. I suspect Anonymous' declaration of war on Islamic State will cause more problems in the short term than France's because the whole thing relies much more on PR then guns. Personally I think the only way we'll defeat them is to take away the reasons that people join them- the alienation, the lack opportunity, the poverty- which is easier said that done, would be expensive and time consuming and many would argue is not our responsibility. But I just feel that investing the money we might spend on bombs and planes in those societies most affected by their actions is the only way to beat them 

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy to see them bombed 24/7 and I hope as many of them as possible die a painful fiery death, but ultimately I don't think that will win the 'war' with ISIS 

What you suggest can only be done on home soil, be it the UK, France, Belgium etc. and needs to be fully co ordinated with the Muslim councils of said countries, Isis in Syria and Iraq are a lost cause, if it's true that Putin is going to send 150,000 troops that is good news, Putin is the only one who can bring Iran and Syria itself together to fight Isis and once Syria is purged of Isis, if further rumours are true Assad can be removed and replaced in free elections.

 

[chipdawg]

7 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

What you suggest can only be done on home soil, be it the UK, France, Belgium etc. and needs to be fully co ordinated with the Muslim councils of said countries, Isis in Syria and Iraq are a lost cause, if it's true that Putin is going to send 150,000 troops that is good news, Putin is the only one who can bring Iran and Syria itself together to fight Isis and once Syria is purged of Isis, if further rumours are true Assad can be removed and replaced in free elections.

 

Obviously we would start at home but we would have to invest in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North & Sub-Saharan  Africa, etc. too. And not 'invest to make a profit', invest for altruistic reasons. It won't happen, but there you go

To be honest, I think Putin faces the same problem we would; white faces in army uniforms gives the IS propaganda machine exactly the image it wants. I think Iran is probably the only power who could stop IS militarily for the reasons I've said before, but that would bring its own problems to the region. But then again, it certainly ain't going to be solved through chat on an Internet forum I guess

[The Batman]

1 hour ago, cityexile said:

I most definitely do not recognise that statement, being most certainly on the left, although 'far' is a stretch. Far left liberal is also a contradiction in terms. Historically, it was always 'the left' that was more inclined to accept Judism than the far right. Other than the obvious during WW2, it was the right leaning aristotocracy here that had a good dose of anti-semitism. That is rather different from believing Israels foreign policy is always very helpful.

Ironically, I have found the best article recently to have been by a normally right wing writer in the Mail. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3318980/PETER-HITCHENS-Really-want-beat-terror-calm-THINK.html

What you recognise and what I've witnessed are 2 different things. When working for my university, I spent a year with many people who would think Lenin and corbyn were like Mussolini. For them, they don't see the difference between being critical of Israel and blatant hatred of Jewish people. 

I gave up with it all when I went to the national union of student's annual conference (nus said earlier this year Isis was nothing to do with Islam but criticising Isis was islamophobic) where a great number of people were spouting a lot of anti-Semitic bile and despite me bringing it up asking how they could get away with it, it was ignored and I was accused of being racist against them. But here is the thing, had I said what they were saying, the police would have been called and I'd probably still be in jail.

Do you condemn Hamas and Hezbollah's attacks against Jewish people??

[Esmond Million's Bung]

2 minutes ago, chipdawg said:

Obviously we would start at home but we would have to invest in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North & Sub-Saharan  Africa, etc. too. And not 'invest to make a profit', invest for altruistic reasons. It won't happen, but there you go

To be honest, I think Putin faces the same problem we would; white faces in army uniforms gives the IS propaganda machine exactly the image it wants. I think Iran is probably the only power who could stop IS militarily for the reasons I've said before, but that would bring its own problems to the region. But then again, it certainly ain't going to be solved through chat on an Internet forum I guess

Putin has said that he doesn't believe that Iran has the capability.

[chipdawg]

6 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Putin has said that he doesn't believe that Iran has the capability.

Well he would certainly be better placed to make that judgement than I. I just think Russian intervention creates the same issues that any other western nation would. Don't get me wrong, I hope Russia goes in and ***** them completely, I' just not sure it's the answer

[Portland Bill]

39 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

What you suggest can only be done on home soil, be it the UK, France, Belgium etc. and needs to be fully co ordinated with the Muslim councils of said countries, Isis in Syria and Iraq are a lost cause, if it's true that Putin is going to send 150,000 troops that is good news, Putin is the only one who can bring Iran and Syria itself together to fight Isis and once Syria is purged of Isis, if further rumours are true Assad can be removed and replaced in free elections.

 

150k Russian troops, bloody hell. Crimea and Ukraine have obviously been forgotten by everyone already!

Are they going to go into Lybia and Algeria as well? after all, that is where the majority of Isis are being recruited. What about Saudi? aren't they helping with the supply and payment of weapons?

 Blair ( rightly) got,and still gets slaughtered for Iraq, we all know that was the start of all of this, and now you are happy that Russia may well carry it on.

If the Russians do go in to Syria and Iraq, then I just don't know where this is going to end, the whole of the Middle East and North Africa is going to end up in one huge battleground.

 

 

 

 

 

[Portland Bill]

1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Not only his Jihadi John nonsense, being against shoot to kill terrorists in an 'ongoing atrocity' nonsense, Corbyn is now saying that he may not allow his party a free vote on any vote for British air strikes, democracy eh?.

He also has support from some Tory mp's. I'm open minded on the shoot to kill policy, but I do remember the last time we had this, it ended up with a totally innocent Brazilian man getting shot dead in London.