Thread: The Guardian reporting Sally Jones (ISIS

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

The horror that the victim faced in his last minutes of life is unimaginable. Maybe one needs to contemplate that when pondering the morality of this childs Death.

This is exactly the way I feel.

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

How would you like to spend the last minute of your life waiting for someone to blow your brains out knowing there is nothing you can do about it and you are totally helpless. The horror that the victim faced in his last minutes of life is unimaginable. Maybe one needs to contemplate that when pondering the morality of this childs Death.

Nail....meet hammer

Err, the boy was merely sitting in a vehicle with his mother when he was murdered. I don't believe he was in the act of summarily executing an opponent at the time. But, for you enraged sanctimonious of TD wetting yourselves in a frenzy of outrage, please ask yourselves what is the difference in a 12 year old boy executing his enemy by a bullet in the brain, a la Chinese or as it was few years ago in Texas, and an American sitting in his armchair in Arizona pressing a button unleashing a missile not known for its surgical application - neither involves a judicial element of any kind.

Personally speaking, the American/British axis of evil was the cause of every death in the region between 2003 and now, and it really is about time the West faced up to it and accepted the consequences.

Originally Posted by redhaze

How do you know he wasn't viewed as part of the package?

The same way you know or assume he must have been part of the package, since according to you he wasn't collateral damage! So, was he?

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Err, the boy was merely sitting in a vehicle with his mother when he was murdered. I don't believe he was in the act of summarily executing an opponent at the time.

He was an evil little bastard who got just what was coming to him. Murdered? Please, that's just laughable.

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Personally speaking, the American/British axis of evil was the cause of every death in the region between 2003 and now, and it really is about time the West faced up to it and accepted the consequences.

Oh they most certainly caused a lot of needless deaths. Hundereds of thousands in fact. No argument there.

To think this region was roses and sunshine, or in your words "the Americans/British axis of evil was the cause of every death in the region since 2003" is so laughable and ridiculous its almost not even worth commenting on.

Originally Posted by jabir

The same way you know or assume he must have been part of the package, since according to you he wasn't collateral damage! So, was he?

Collateral damage implies innocence. Whether he was hit intentionally or not he most certainly was not collateral damage.

Originally Posted by taxexile

he was not an innocent, he was a combatant, an active member of an enemy militia and in a war zone.

he was a legitimate target.

That's actually a fair argument, but for the sake of past, current and future events try looking at your own argument from a different perspective:

Since jihadists view non-Muslims guilty of the greatest crime of all, that of rejecting Allah, and the very existence of non-Muslims as aggression against Islam, and since Sharia divides the world into two very clear zones, the House of Islam (peace and submission) and the House of War (under non-Muslim rule/occupation), are jihadists categorically wrong to view what westerners call 'innocent' civilians, as combatants?


It's easy to get lost on tangents, but keep in mind that what you may believe is outranked by what they believe, since it is they that target unbelievers for the crime of disbelief, and they do so in the cause of their faith.


The difficulty in grasping these (Sharia) concepts is based not on a failure to understand the actual words per se, but on an inability to accept that what is stated is actually meant, with all of its ramifications. - Stephen Collins Coughlin, TO OUR GREAT DETRIMENT: IGNORING WHAT EXTREMISTS SAY ABOUT JIHAD, Military Intelligence, USAR NDIC Class 2007

Originally Posted by jabir

are jihadists categorically wrong to view what westerners call 'innocent' civilians, as combatants?

Yes. Totally.

Originally Posted by jabir

It's easy to get lost on tangents, but keep in mind that what you may believe is outranked by what they believe, since it is they that target unbelievers for the crime of disbelief, and they do so in the cause of their faith.

Beliefs based on bullshit religious nonsense doesn't outrank anything. Not sure what you are on about with that

Originally Posted by jabir

The difficulty in grasping these (Sharia) concepts

is because its all extremist bullshit

Originally Posted by Thai3

Anyone believing in Jihad, or involved in it is a legitimate target for extermination, it's good against evil.

In that case you need to exterminate hundreds of millions of people across the world, and millions of Muslim men, women and children that are citizens of the west who would rather live under Sharia. I suggest you wise up on wanting to kill so many people simply because you do not understand their beliefs, it leads to nasty things.

Note for the clueless: There can be no Islam without Sharia, and no Sharia without jihad since one is the essence of the other.

it's good against evil

It's also subjective; what you call evil may well believe it is good and that you are evil.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

...I feel sorry for his dad. To have your child kidnapped, taken far away, brainwashed into becoming a sadistic murderer, and then killed is a nightmare almost beyond belief.

Agreed!

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

...Spare a thought for the victim before you wonder about the rights of this evil little Bastard. How would you like to spend the last minute of your life waiting for someone to blow your brains out knowing there is nothing you can do about it and you are totally helpless. The horror that the victim faced in his last minutes of life is unimaginable. Maybe one needs to contemplate that when pondering the morality of this childs Death.

Dostoevsky (Nausea?) gives a lengthy, vivid and scary account of the victim's thoughts with head on the block, during the half second or so after hearing the guillotine blade released. Definitely worth a read.

You are referring to Dostoevsky writing about the Decembrists I think in 1805, they were shot not beheaded

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Err, the boy was merely sitting in a vehicle with his mother when he was murdered. I don't believe he was in the act of summarily executing an opponent at the time. But, for you enraged sanctimonious of TD wetting yourselves in a frenzy of outrage, please ask yourselves what is the difference in a 12 year old boy executing his enemy by a bullet in the brain, a la Chinese or as it was few years ago in Texas, and an American sitting in his armchair in Arizona pressing a button unleashing a missile not known for its surgical application - neither involves a judicial element of any kind.

Personally speaking, the American/British axis of evil was the cause of every death in the region between 2003 and now, and it really is about time the West faced up to it and accepted the consequences.

Couldn't agree more, against posters like Thai3justifying mass slaughter on the basis that his side is obviously the good side otherwise he wouldn't be part of it, and those opposed must therefore be evil and ripe for extermination.

Talking to Americans and to the British lower end on ethical matters in the context of modern history and the human condition is really quite futile not least because their idiocy and ingrained prejudices prevent any meaningful education. They are the masses, the bedrock of lumpen humanity and the malleable clay with which their betters mould them into compliant drones eager to act out their role in a society most are quite simply too stupid to understand.

Originally Posted by redhaze

...Beliefs based on bullshit religious nonsense doesn't outrank anything. Not sure what you are on about with that is because its all extremist bullshit

I'm no extremist, just promoting the fact that not everything works how many people with different beliefs would like it to. But throughout known history some people have been prepared to give everything including their lives toward imposing their beliefs on others; nothing has changed.

If religious 'extremists' target what you call innocents and they view as aggressors, you can intellectualise all you want but that won't persuade them. Best you can do, very best, and only as a start, is try to understand whatever it is that motivates them; and if you fail in that, or worse, dismiss the idea since you already know everything you need to know, you can go no further in defeating them and especially not their beliefs.

Originally Posted by Thai3

You are referring to Dostoevsky writing about the Decembrists I think in 1805, they were shot not beheaded

Gosh, try again.

The kid was a victim of his environment. His peer group were sadistic mass killers so it was inevitable he would become one himself. Could we have saved him and could he have been integrated back into society? Child combatants in Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Liberia who also carried out unspeakable atrocities have put down their weapons and returned to school becoming normal kids again with the help of the UN. Only time will tell what sort of adults they will become.

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

Talking to Americans and to the British lower end on ethical matters in the context of modern history and the human condition is really quite futile not least because their idiocy and ingrained prejudices prevent any meaningful education. They are the masses, the bedrock of lumpen humanity and the malleable clay with which their betters mould them into compliant drones eager to act out their role in a society most are quite simply too stupid to understand.

Defending murders, rapists, and mysogonists isn't nearly as enlightened as you appear to think it is

Originally Posted by Scottish Gary

Child combatants in Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Liberia who also carried out unspeakable atrocities have put down their weapons and returned to school becoming normal kids again with the help of the UN. Only time will tell what sort of adults they will become.

Good post and fair play. You're right, he was both a murderer and a victim at the same time.

That mom was a real piece of shit. And judging by those pictures, she isn't the only one. Pretty pathetic that posters here would defend, explain, or try to rationlize this as something that is ok. No, sorry but its not ok. There is no excuse and no belief system worth explaining or having empathy towards that does that to children period.

^^Indeed, well said. Child combatants were just grist to the mill of African slaughter and were coerced into actions by their adult captors. Reading the comments from the usual TD baying pack suggests that in the scheme of things they are probably more intellectually challenged than a recently decapitated Hottentot retard.

Originally Posted by Seekingasylum

in the scheme of things they are probably more intellectually challenged than a recently decapitated Hottentot retard.

Nah, its just that your beliefs involve defending the indefensible. Its hard to find agreement or common ground when you'll defend anything no matter how heinous up to and including having children execute innocent people.

But go ahead and continue to convince yourself you're not finding common due to how awesome and smart you are LMAO

^ Don't let genticles get you wound up. He has a penchant for stuffing sausages down his pants and riding the skytrain.

Has there been one mention so far of the culpability of this sally jones, in putting her child in such harms way? Jonees, was a combatant- her child, not so. She was a legitimate target. It's a great shame about the kid.

Originally Posted by redhaze

Are you making an argument for or against killing people here? Your post reads like a pretty good case of why blowing these people up is actually preferable to capturing them. I feel like that proves my point not yours.

That is the problem with "jabir". There's the image he wants to present to us and there is the real person's views behind the facade of "jabir". They have opposite views so it's sometimes difficult for him to post in a way that will fit both the real person's views and what he thinks we would expect of "jabir-the-fake-muslim". It's his way of hiding the fact that he doesn't like Islam or Muslims. He is playing a part, half-way between devil's advocate and a troll, perhaps.

My give-a-fuck meter is in the negative in regards to the little kid meeting the business end of a predator drone strike.

You mean it's similar to what I do on another forum , I am an ex Israelie IDF Jew, when commenting on Israel threads.