Two British Medical Students Who Joined Isis Killed In Iraq.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-latest-british-medical-students-killed-iraq-sudan-ahmed-sami-khider-a7606466.html

[tamborine]

From above link

"Khider had started wearing a doctor's stethoscope in an ISIS film urging other Brit doctors to travel to Syria and Iraq to fight the West soon after he arrived in the region"

Too fight the WEST....thats you & me who gave this man succour, education & passport! Ungrateful turd is where he belongs - dead!!

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //My suggestion that President Trump - a racist every time he breathes in and out ...//

I disagree with you.

//happy to be 'spiteful' then//

Just as well.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //andy-hughes, //My suggestion that President Trump - a racist every time he breathes in and out ...//

I disagree with you.

//happy to be 'spiteful' then//

Just as well. //

There is no need to reiterate your view, I read and understood it (and of course disagreed with it!) the first time.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, ah, you understood what I said. Jolly good.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - Am I detecting 'last-wordism' here?

[Samjenko]

Avatar Image andy-hughes Sqad - //I don;t think, although I do not know that Trump has an association with a terrorist or any other violent and ruthless society. //

Please allow me to assist you on that point -

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/the-ku-klux-klan-officially-endorses-donald-trump-for-president-a7392801.html'

I notice a few anti-Trumpers on here pointing to this.
The only reason it's noteworthy is that the KKK always endorses the Democrat contender.
And why wouldn't they. They were set up as, and are, an arm of the Democrat party.
Hillary Clinton's mentor was a 'top man' in the KKK but we never mention that, naturally.

[Samjenko]

Back to the OP. I, along with most normal people, reserve my sympathy for the victims of IS, not the members.

[andy-hughes]

What political party founded the KKK?


Samjenko - never let facts get in the way of your support for President Trump -

From the web -

"Historians say the KKK consisted of a group of Southern whites after the Civil War who were Democrats. But there's no evidence the KKK was created by their political party. It should also be noted that the anti-black Democratic Party of the 1860s and 1870s bears no similarity to the party of today."

[andy-hughes]

Samjenko - //Back to the OP. I, along with most normal people, reserve my sympathy for the victims of IS, not the members. //

The point I raised is not connected to sympathy - but rather to rejoicing - there is no link between them.

[anotheoldgit]

/// This fall way below your usual high standard, ///

What high standard would that be Sqad, the ability to side track this thread into one about Trump and the Ku Klux Klan?

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //Naomi - Am I detecting 'last-wordism' here?//

That’s a puerile and overly-used tactic designed to silence the opposition. A poor offering in any discussion – not to mention bad form.

Samjenko, Reading Margaret Mitchell’s ‘Gone with the Wind’ many years ago induced me to investigate the origins of the KKK. Strange how often reading one thing leads us to further our education in another area.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //That’s a puerile and overly-used tactic designed to silence the opposition. //

Firstly, I don't regard you as 'the opposition', and secondly, I was perfectly confident that it would not prevent you from re-posting - and of course I have been proven correct in that confidence.

//A poor offering in any discussion – not to mention bad form. //

A word to the wise - this is the Answerbank in 2017, not Eaton in 1947!

[Mothman]

I'd normally want to come in on your side Andy, especially when the Trumpeteers start ganging up - as I think you normally include a degree of sense in your posts (I may not necessarily whole-heartedly agree with you, but can appreciate your view) - but when you post:

//As I see it, the irrationality lies in the presumption that joining ISIS is a one-way ticket to the commission of terrorist activities which result in the deaths of innocent people.

That is a presumption which, in my view, does not stand.//

I can't help but think "Really????"

ISIS has one, and only one, reason for existing - to form an Islamic caliphate which they then aim to extend throughout the world. Non-believers will be converted or killed, no other options available. These lads joined up, condoning the atrocities committed to date and signalling a willingness to commit, directly or indirectly, further acts of violence in the name of their particular branch of this religion.

They are no loss and got what they deserved, sometimes you need to accept that you can't defend the indefensible.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - //What high standard would that be Sqad, the ability to side track this thread into one about Trump and the Ku Klux Klan? //

I mentioned President Trump in an illustration to a point - the responsibility for any side-tracking lies fairly and squarely with your defenders and supporters.

I suggest you point your ire in their direction - at the risk of side-tracking your thread even further of course

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, I presume you mean Eton. No, the AnswerBank certainly isn't Eton - in any era. Far from it!

[tamborine]

AH to which eaton dost thou refer? If The Royal Borough, its Eton!

[jackthehat]

It's a shame that these two decided to turn their faces away from the good that they could have done and aligned themselves with a murderous band of barbarians.

Still, they'll be happy to have been fast-tracked to Allah and it is two less enemy combatants for 'the allies' to deal with.

[andy-hughes]

Mothman - thank you for your kind words - appreciated.

//They are no loss and got what they deserved, sometimes you need to accept that you can't defend the indefensible. //

I wish to be clear here - I am not for one minute defending the actions of ISIS in general, or of these two individuals in particular.

My initial point touches on a wider moral concept the 'rejoicing' about deaths of individuals.

In my view, to take pleasure in the death of another person diminishes the individual who holds that view - the circumstances are not the issue here, it is the reaction to the deaths that is a point I am raising.

That is not to say that I wish they had survived, quite possibly (but not certainly, my other point) to assist or participate in terrorism.

But I maintain that if you take pleasure and satisfaction in the death of one or more individuals, you forfeit the moral high ground when others do the same, based on their perception that the world is a better place without said individuals in it.

So, if ISIS and terrorism is the substance of the situation, you are not entitled to rejoice at the death of ISIS supporters, and then claim moral superiority when ISIS supporters rejoice in the deaths of innocent westerners.

I want to be very clear here - the circumstances - ISIS and western victims - are simply what has prompted my point, it could be any situation anywhere in history.

I believe that if you take pleasure in the death of someone, then you diminish yourself, and society as a whole, and you cannot then blame or complain if others do the same.

[nailit]

//In my view, to take pleasure in the death of another person diminishes the individual who holds that view//
Why does it?

[andy-hughes]

Tambo - //AH to which eaton dost thou refer? If The Royal Borough, its Eton! //

Well excuse me all to heck for a mis-spelling, I'll have a seriously stern word with myself and resolve to try never to do it again.

But while we're on the subject of speaking in flowery language from a bygone era, do you need to be told that this is the Answerbank in 2017, not Henry VIII's court in the 1540's?