Ok Let's Do The Usual Dance.......

[ToraToraTora]

https://news.sky.com/story/at-least-two-dead-and-several-injured-after-car-drives-into-pedestrians-in-southwest-germany-12148078
I say TROP did it........

[royfromaus]

Was Shipman part of a group of GP's knocking people off?

You should tell the authorities about that immediately, china j.

[royfromaus]

I haven't done an about-face so there's nothing regarding that to discuss.

[Mamyalynne]

In response to a comment from Sunk, Tora gave his reasoning for the wording of the OP.

//sunk: "Why not just wait for the facts to be revealed? " - what and miss all the fun? I love watching the handwringers getting all in a lather as they desperately hope it won't be the fluffy bunny muslims whilst at the same time knowing it almost certainly is.//


That is what stinks.

[andy-hughes]

roy - // I haven't done an about-face so there's nothing regarding that to discuss. //

I have pointed out that you have - and how you have done it, but you want to pretend you didn't, then carry on.

Not being willing to acknowledge your mistakes doesn't really enhance your reputation for future debates, but that's your call.

[Chinajan]

You're wrong Andy Hughes. IN MY VIEW.

Kindly limit your reply to twelve paragraphs.

[royfromaus]

Why does the amazing andy hughes think he knows what goes on in my head better than I do?

[naomi24]

Atheist,//please think about your words.//

No - YOU think about my words. "Any single person who has any connection whatsoever to terrorism" does not equate to any person who has any connection to a terrorist. ‘Terrorism’ is an act. A ‘terrorist’ is a person, and the people around a terrorist, if they are not involved in his acts of terrorism cannot and should not be tarred with the same brush - so no, family members not involved in acts of terrorism would not be locked up. I trust you understand that now.

Pixie, //naomi means "terrorists", but uses words like "Islam" or "muslim" instead.//

Of course I do, because I say what I mean - and Sajid Javid doesn’t mince his words either. See my link at 11.54.

I’ve nothing further to add.

[andy-hughes]

roy - // Why does the amazing andy hughes think he knows what goes on in my head better than I do? //

I have no idea what goes on in your head - only what goes through your keyboard and onto this site.

I confine myself to commenting on that - with the occasional reasonable supposition.

I'd hardly equate that with knowing what goes on in your head.

And don't imagine for a moment that I'd want to know either! Based on what you say on here, there's not a lot to get excited about!!

But you are doing a good job of distracting from talking about your change of view ...

[andy-hughes]

Chinajan - // You're wrong Andy Hughes. IN MY VIEW.

Kindly limit your reply to twelve paragraphs. //

Then we each think the other is wrong - even though one of us actually is!!

Three paragraphs do you?

[Atheist]

Naomi; I think you are losing the plot in your efforts to defend yourself. I believe that you wrote your earlier post in the heat of the moment, but now you have had time to reflect you should acknowledge that you expressed yourself badly. If not, then I understand you better than I thought I did.

[Mozz71]

Mamya, and that is also the perfect example of the trolling I spoke about and which Andy didn't see.

[andy-hughes]

Mozz - // Mamya, and that is also the perfect example of the trolling I spoke about and which Andy didn't see. //

I think the term 'trolling' has different meanings to different people.

In this instance of the thread we are discussing, I don;t believe it was 'trolling' in the sense that contravenes Site Rules - I would have removed it if i did.

Apparently the Editorial Team and all the other Moderators agree, because the thread is still there, despite ample opportunities for its deletion.

[royfromaus]

andy using the tried and tested method of boring people into submission.

I haven't changed my view on anything on this thread.

[naomi24]

Atheist, I've answered your question but as I said earlier I can't be held responsible for your inability to rationalise.

[Atheist]

Thanks, Naomi. I understand you.

[andy-hughes]

Roy ok, if you say so ...

[naomi24]

Chinajan, a shareholder's privileges perhaps. Just a thought.

[Chinajan]

Interesting thought

[Zacs-Master]

Shareholder? Last time I looked at ABs finances, there wasn’t much chance of any dividends!