hypochondriac

I wouldn't worry about it then if that's the case.

He didn't say that religion was the only reason, simply that it is a central part of the creation of IS. Which it is.

You know you've been made to look a fool when not only do you have to put people on ignore, you have to advertise that fact to the rest of the forum. Soggy may pretend he has no idea what you are talking about whelk but he knows. He knows.

Are you suggesting that stewards at saints should receive anti terrorism training?

And no one has argued that. Ever.

I really don't think that's why people take offence at your posts. I would imagine there are quite a few people who would challenge your assertion that the problem other posters have with you is because you tend to argue based on evidence.

that genuinely made me laugh. You just proved his point!

I don't want to speak for whelk but the attitude, general superior tone of your posts and the hypocrisy is pretty objectionable.

But rich considering how disgusting everyone was for wanting to debate anything when this started. You seem happy to roll around in the mud now though.

So you didn't try to claim that posters were saying Islam has the potential to be more violent than Christianity?

What relevance do the Crusades have when discussing the problem of violence within Islam in 2015?

I really don't understand what their position is. They are desperately trying to twist thing to suit their agendas (everyone else thinks Muslims are evil, everyone else thinks Islam is a violent evil religion compared to pure and wholesome Christianity.) and then- amusingly - CEC thinks that the majority of responses on here are in fact disagreeing with the alternate viewpoint and by implication agreeing with him! You really couldn't make it up (unless you are soggy, in which case you make it up whenever you feel like it.) Whelk has it spot on.

A huge amount of yours and soggys responses are misrepresentations of what I have said so it's not much of a surprise that I would think that- it's true. As far as I'm aware I answer the majority of questions posed on here except when I don't feel it's relevant to the discussion.

Seems incredibly clear to me my friend. I'd you're struggling to understand again then I'd just move on. Maybe you simply are not cut out for this type of thing.

Well the record doesn't show that, it mostly shows a couple of disagreements and then a load of posts from yourself and soggy that a number of people have disagreed with and replied to (and quite a few saying soggy had made stuff up.) then a load of stuff where you went all round the houses bringing up irrelevant Christian atrocities that everyone already knows about, had never denied and thus served no purpose. I have no other points to make at this time that I haven't already written on here. Most of my posts have been to counter the bizarre rantings from yourself and soggy and trying to clarify for you what was actually being said by posters rather than what you imagined had been said. I'll stick to that thanks (it's an important job to ensure you both get called out on it) and continue to comment as I see fit whilst this story continues.

And that's fine but I don't really blame the club for taking it off you. If I had to bring my laptop for any reason at the moment then I would expect not to be allowed to take it inside.

Tbf I would have thought given the current climate that it was common sense not to bring a laptop to the footie.

Complete bilge from yourself as always. I've been consistent on here and there hasn't been much disagreement save from yourself and soggy. I can see a number of posters taking issue with much of what you and soggy post, and the one that interests me most is from verbal- someone who is clearly much more informed on the issue than anyone else on here. You occasionally make a pompous point that I can almost agree with but then you ruin it by inventing things like people have said like Islam has the potential to be more violent than Christianity. What a shame. I note you don't make the same request of soggy to elaborate on what he stands for. As fan the Flames says above it appears that once he loses an argument he either slightly changes what he is saying, makes things up or simply repeats himself. Just know that you're currently on the side of a man who claims that the West is supportive of the clan more than the burka Ffs. I'm glad you agree with me though. Islam has a greater violence problem at the moment than other religions. It only took days of posting to get there...

Clearly stuff like that is idiotic. Peaceful Muslims should be able to practice their religion in peace. Freedom in the West is the main value worth fighting for. Not sure what it has to do with Batman's point. The ineptitude from Merkel has done a lot of this.

*waits for response of "but but what about brievik and all that Christian stuff in Africa???" as if that is remotely comparable or proves that Christianity has the same level of problem at the current time.

I just threw it in the bin so I didn't have to worry about it.

It appears to be only yourself and soggy who are feigning ignorance. Well I say feigning, I assume you are but it's probable that soggy has no idea what's going on. What has any of what you posted above got to do with your claims that people have been saying that Islam has the potential to be as violent as Christianity. Clearly they have the potential to be as violent as each other but Islam has a much greater problem with violence at the current time. It's been repeated on here a whole bunch of times now, I'm surprised that you sound so confused.

Who has ever said that? You just completely made it up!

Exactly this. Soggy isn't too good with nuance though so it doesn't surprise me he struggles with this line of thinking.

I certainly think it's more relatable considering it is basically our own lifestyle and France are our neighbours.