CB Fry

No one thinks this. No one has said anything like this on this thread. No one. At all. You're a mentalist, a fantasist, or more likely, just full of it.

I should have said you and others. In fairness it was Chapel End and SOG doing most of the second world war references. And Chapel End again on the odd Mexico stuff too. Fair cop. Apologies. Happily stand by my points just with a slightly wider net of dinlows.

Why have you put genocide in quotation marks? Personally I think it is okay to make remarks addressed at certain people on this thread - hello you - whose reaction to multiple atrocities carried out by Islamic extremist terrorists is to scuttle off to the four corners of the Internet desperately trawling for horrible things Christians have done, and end up blathering about Bosnian genocide, the second world war (both sides), Mexican drug cartels and Brevik, as if this dissapates the Islamic nature of these atrocities and you can fluff it all up as us all being the same after all. Except Christians are, like, probably worse when you think about it and stuff. The events in Lahore at dispicable and proof again of what is becoming the defining issues if our age. It's multinational, multi-facted and has no obvious resolution but is unequivocally linked to a religious imperialism/zealotry and is unique in its scale, breadth and impact. But not for you though. Get yourself back on Google and starting finding more evidence that British soldiers sang church hymns before they climbed in their Lancasters and bombed Dresden. Just the same. Just the same. Damed Christians.

My money is on the Mexicans.

And still using the death of thousands of people to try and smug it up on a football forum. Terrorism is different to state genocide. Keep creating arguments in your head, won't you.

By resources you mean they would need to be running the countries. They're not, they won't be, it isn't genocide, it isn't comparable to Srebrencia.

What happened in Brussels was not genocide. Or Paris. Or London.

You can compare them if you like, but they're not comparable. Srebrenica was state-controlled and directed genocide, the event in the title of this thread and the subsequent connected events is not that, in any way whatsoever. If there is evidence, reporting, official statements or videos from IS that the events in the title of this thread and the subsequent related events are directly connected to those events in the balkans during mid nineties then please do put them up here. Otherwise you are just participating in ham-fisted and utterly contemptible meaningless comparisons. Just gratuitous ticking off a "Hey look, this is, like, Christian terrorism" on your Christian Terrorism bingo card. Several thousand Muslims did not die so you could smug it up on a football forum. Beneath contempt.

What has happened in Brussels, London and Paris and all those other places was not a fu cking genocide. To me that is pretty obvious. Not to you though. Comparing it to Srebrenica is contemptible.

How on earth is the horrific genocide at Srebanica remotely comparable to people walking into Concert Halls, Metro Stations and Airports machine gunning/nail bombing people. Even using it in this context is pretty effing contemptible on your part. It's a common theme on this thread of course, the desperate trawling of history for "Christian Terrorism" but fail to see how it is anything other that utterly facile and pointless whataboutery signifying absolutely nothing. I'm sure some bright spark on here will be back to that world famous "religious" war World War Two any post now. Apparently some British Soldiers in Ypres had Bibles, you know. Just like them lads from Leeds on 7/7. Indistinguishable. Just the same. All them religions, eh? What are they like?

Our stadium is expandable. Not sure what proof you want but it was said at the time we opened it/built it 15 odd years ago.

Even you can't be thick enough to think that anyone on this thread thinks or even suggests that all Muslims are terrorists. I know you love it, because it gives you the fish-in-a--barrel easy win for you to grandstand against an entirely fictional standpoint but for Allah's sake give it a flamin' rest. So this is it. Here's your recognition. Have a fu cking medal. Not all Muslims are terrorists. Well done. Jolly well done. What insight. What a brave position to take against all of no one that thinks that on here. So brave. You're so much more gooderer and superior to everyone else it's untrue. I've let the PM know and he's sending a car round in the morning. Your groundbreaking insight is wasted on this football forum when there are far knottier geopolitical challenges for you take on. Get out there and change minds.

I'm glad you asked that. Odd.

What was wrong with what he said? The only way he is going to manage in the top flight again is if he gets a club promoted to it. No existing Prem club is going to appoint him. He's mid table League One. Not sure why you think that is in any way strange - there's loads of managers like that - Mick Mccarthy say, or Malkay McKay or Tony Mowbray etc.

Except you did mean it. I don't need to dig the thread up but you were getting jolly upset at anyone saying we were too good to go down, and backed that up with two steaming piles of horses hit, one about how Newcastle can definitely finish above us because you thought we might only win one more game (this was January FFS) and another about how 40 points won't be enough this season, and I believe you went to 42 not being enough. You said that sh ite, and looked like a plum then. And you now blathering that how dare anyone say we can't finish fourth makes that rant look even more pathetic. Nice try. Nice try.

You tried that the other day and no one believed you then either.

Whatever. This is the truth:

Nah, just some sap drooling over Anne Widdecombe.

If they don't play the Belgian national anthem before kick off there's going to be hell to pay.

...and out he slithers.

Except you've made lots of optimistic predictions about trade, with the old "The bosses of BMW and Mercedes will be banging on Merkel's door" routine more than once. You'll merrily rubbish huge tomes of analysis covering lots of financial scenarios ("it says 'could'!! it says might!!') while simultaneously creaming yourself over will-this-do rent a column articles by Anne Widdecombe.

...

No confusion at all, apart from the fact that "sovereignty" is a far more nebulous proposition than, like, economy and prosperity and jobs and stuff. I thought you would find it hard to reprise your jolly funny "you can't predict anything" routine in the face of articles that you happen to agree with. Oh well, tomorrow there will be a different article in a different newspaper from a different source and you can get back to highlighting every "could" "might" and "maybe" in that instead. Looking forward to that already.

Funny. That articles has lots of "coulds" , "might be", "might", "may" and all about predictions of things that might or may happen. Yesterday you were getting jolly upset about reports like that and concluded that absolutely no one can predict anything about anything that could ever happen were we to stay or leave on any part because no one can ever predict anything that can happen in the future. So I expect you to dismiss this much like any other report that dares to predict the future, right?

I think the general consensus yesterday from the experts I was listening to is that the Belgian police are effing useless.