Russell Brand claims the Media &amp; the West are responsible for Paris Terror

Original post by Catholic_

Islam is at war with mankind yet you're finding a reason to justify terrorism. You can't reason with hate sympathizers like yourself. Nor with somebody who refuses to realize that Islamist murders occur in Nigeria, Indonesia, Thailand, Afghanistan, Pakistan & all over the Muslim world.

Then again, i'm sure the citizens of those nations did something to upset Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, Hamas & ISIS.

I did not justify terrorism so allow the pathetic ad hominem attacks. Totally ignore the rest of the points made though to continue on with your hatred of a religion because it disagrees with yours. Fancy a chat about the IRA bombings?

Reply 43

Catholic_

OP

12

Original post by Messiah Complex

I did not justify terrorism so allow the pathetic ad hominem attacks. Totally ignore the rest of the points made though to continue on with your hatred of a religion because it disagrees with yours. Fancy a chat about the IRA bombings?

I would fancy a chat if the IRA were active or held any influence on current events. Nope, don't think they're.

Since they're not, I'll just suggest you're equalizing or deflecting. You aren't very comfortable condeming Islamism or even speaking on it. You seem very dismissive. Oh, and now I 'hate Islam as it disagrees with yours'.

Are you feeling alright?

Reply 44

Original post by Catholic_

I would fancy a chat if the IRA were active or held any influence on current events. Nope, don't think they're.

Since they're not, I'll just suggest you're equalizing or deflecting. You aren't very comfortable condeming Islamism or even speaking on it. You seem very dismissive. Oh, and now I 'hate Islam as it disagrees with yours'.

Are you feeling alright?

I'm not religious at all so your claim is dumbfounded. I'm also perfectly fine and the only person doing deflecting here is you. The IRA are not active and that is true but its somewhat hypocritical that you are happy to condemn people for killing in the name of Islam but refuse to be drawn on the historical links to deaths that occurred in the name of your religion. Pretty absurd really but probably goes to explain why you think that Islam is to blame as a whole rather than the extremist individuals themselves. Also, don't see anyone justifying the terrorist actions at all and even Brand put this in writing for you to read in the video (which you probably didn't watch) so people like yourself, who wish to bend his language to suit their own underlying motives couldn't do so.

Hilariously, you still have done so. He says terrorism is wrong but he is right that we do not help ourselves by droning their countries to oblivion and involving ourselves of their issues. The real problem is, that the Western world is so arrogant and up its own arse that it think its can police and govern the rest of the world and is intolerant of many Islamic practices because of its alleged liberal way of life in the west, although the true authoritarian nature of Western governments is starting to shine through quite nicely and has done so for the last decade - most notably since the big boom in social media.

So the Western governments want to go around the world playing daddy and enforcing their liberal way of life on others, placing leaders into power who do as they're told until they no longer listen only to be ousted when it suits. Its the same song and dance over and over again yet people like you routinely fall for it. You are turned against your own people on your own level in a divide and conquer mechanism from the top and you're too foolish to even see it. When the sheep are laid to slaughter by those in power, they only have themselves to blame for their acceptance in being shepherded. The dumb, easily led Western public who believe any crap spouted by the media will get everything they deserve. Controlling the masses has always been easy as the majority of people allow themselves to be brainwashed and manipulated.

Reply 45

Ganhad

2

Original post by Afghan Warrior

What I love about you is that you are so silly. I'm not afghan you tool

Posted from TSR Mobile

im a silly billy :colondollar:

. but my point stand russels is a brick and taliban gangster are good to be dead.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 46

Trupac

5

Original post by young_guns

By the way, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula did not form in response to the American invasion of Iraq, it predated it

Al Qaeda was supported and funded by the CIA and Pakistani inteligence to fight against the soviet invasion of afghanistan in the 80's. The west along with US also supported the so called 'moderate' rebels in Syria to overthrow the assad regime and these moderates later turned into the ISIS. And yet our politicians still haven't learnt anything and will train some more moderates this year (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/16/us/syria-rebel-training/) because giving guns to these backward savages makes perfect sense. Moreover our politicians also bow down to Saudia Arabia which not only is a medieval ****hole but is also funding terror all over the globe. Political class has served us very well indeed.

Reply 47

Trupac

5

Original post by Catholic_

Islam is at war with mankind yet you're finding a reason to justify terrorism. You can't reason with hate sympathizers like yourself. Nor with somebody who refuses to realize that Islamist murders occur in Nigeria, Indonesia, Thailand, Afghanistan, Pakistan & all over the Muslim world.

Then again, i'm sure the citizens of those nations did something to upset Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, Hamas & ISIS.

Most of the western worlds hatred of Islam and muslims started after 9/11 in which sadly 3000 innocent Americans were killed.Imagine then how much hatred the muslim world has towards the west after:
1) the invasion of over 12 muslims countries since 1980.
2)Iraq and afghanistan war in which over 1000,000 civilians were killed.
3)Supporting the establishment and expansion of the brutal regime Israel, that just last year killed 2500 Palestinians(mostly women and children)
4)Propping up and supporting harsh dictators in the muslim world and when they are finally overthrown, supporting the military coupes of the democratically elected governments.Only last year free syrian army was given training/weapons to overthrow Assad.
5)Countless drone attacks in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen in which usually one terrorist 'suspect' is killed and the rest are innocent civilians.

Reply 48

young_guns

1

Original post by Trupac

Al Qaeda was supported and funded by the CIA and Pakistani inteligence to fight against the soviet invasion of afghanistan in the 80's.

Nope. Al Qaeda in its present form wasn't even known until the 1990s and as an organisation it was only created as the Soviets were pulling out of Afghanistan.

Bin Laden fought in Afghanistan under Abdullah Azzam within the aegis of a Pakistani organisation called Maktab al-Khidamat, which was a co-ordinating branch for the Saudi, Pakistani and US funding to the mujahideen.

To claim the US supported and funded al Qaeda is to fundamentally misunderstand and get wrong the history of the organisation.

The west along with US also supported the so called 'moderate' rebels in Syria to overthrow the assad regime and these moderates later turned into the ISIS.

Did they turn into ISIS? Or is it that ISIS was always a separate organisation to the moderates?

And yet our politicians still haven't learnt anything and will train some more moderates this year (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/16/us/syria-rebel-training/) because giving guns to these backward savages makes perfect sense.

Backward savages... racist much? That article talks about training moderates, presumably the Free Syrian Army. You do know they are enemies of ISIS?

And what does all of this have to do with the Kouachi brothers who were not part of ISIS but of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula? How do you twist that around to blame America or Britain?

And what does our foreign policy have to do with murdering journalists and cartoonists in cold blood?

Reply 49

Observatory

Original post by Messiah Complex

*******s. The truth is so many Brits think this country is the greatest place ever and are so arrogant its unreal. Other countries like Germany just laugh at us as do some of the countries in Asia as well. The Russians, due to the fact I speak the language, routinely refer to us as 'a non country protected by America' during their talks.

I'm not sure if you're talking here about living standards, civil liberty, or just military power - or mixing them up as you find convenient. Germans don't live better and are not freer than Brits; they don't live worse either, but then Germans substantially share our values. Britain is not in opposition to Germany. The same is true of America: we don't take the same stance as them on most issues because we are being threatened but because we actually agree; we are almost the same people.

Russia on the other hand is a third world country with fake democracy and government by gangsters. It also has a lot of weapons as a legacy from the Soviet era, but I don't think Brand's argument is for mass armament. Even then, Russia's ability to project its power against the UK is minimal.

Russell Brand is right.

1) Promoting peace through intervention/war is idiotic
2) His stance on drug policy is correct as proven elsewhere in the world
3) He is correct on inequality is correct and in terms of cost of living x wages the UK is one of the most unequal places in the EU
4) His stance on tax avoidance is right

So again, whats the nonsense he's spouting here? Sorry if the truth hurts but he is 100% right and we know the politicians wont do anything because of their vested interests.

Yet Brand is here defending people who are using violence, and not even for some arguably noble aim like bringing a country into liberal democracy (or even socialism), but rather to enforce theocratic laws that are rejected by the society as a whole. There's no consistent commitment to peace here: there are vicious attacks on any military action performed by the West, and snivelling apologia for military action performed by pretty much anyone else. The guiding principle of this ideology is neither peace nor justice but suicide.

Reply 50

Guybrush Sheepgood

15

Hello OP,

Congratulations on your supremely misleading title. I've just watched the video and at no point did Russell Brand claim the Media & the West are responsible for Paris Terror. What he actually said was that the situation was beneficial to Western politicians and the media, and that Western intervention into Muslim countries has exacerbated the issues of Terror for Western civilians, which it has. Indeed, specifically what Russell said was:

Don't support foreign violence in Muslim countries
Don't support CIA torture in Guantanamo and other similar institutions
Don't be fearful and suspicious of people that are different from you
Practice loving tolerance towards your fellow human beings and a continued suspicion of media and politicians who have their own ends since the media benefits from wars in foreign countries, the politicians are always looking to make capital and augment their own power - this is helpful to their political ends and their image since we are all distracted by the humanity of the situation
What can we, at a personal level, as human beings that are all connected to one another - what can we do?
There are violent people on both sides of the ideologies and they are exacerbating the situation
We have to love life more and love freedom and democracy more and love one another more

Reply 51

Original post by Observatory

I'm not sure if you're talking here about living standards, civil liberty, or just military power - or mixing them up as you find convenient. Germans don't live better and are not freer than Brits; they don't live worse either, but then Germans substantially share our values. Britain is not in opposition to Germany. The same is true of America: we don't take the same stance as them on most issues because we are being threatened but because we actually agree; we are almost the same people.

Nobody said they were freer. What I was saying is that the British know no bounds when it comes to being arrogant and thinking the world shines out of Britain's arse. They are wrong.

Russia on the other hand is a third world country with fake democracy and government by gangsters. It also has a lot of weapons as a legacy from the Soviet era, but I don't think Brand's argument is for mass armament. Even then, Russia's ability to project its power against the UK is minimal.

And here is a perfect example of it. Russia is not a third world country at all. You have never been there, I have. You listen to the media and think you know everything when in fact you are wrong. Delusional sheep.

Yet Brand is here defending people who are using violence, and not even for some arguably noble aim like bringing a country into liberal democracy (or even socialism), but rather to enforce theocratic laws that are rejected by the society as a whole. There's no consistent commitment to peace here: there are vicious attacks on any military action performed by the West, and snivelling apologia for military action performed by pretty much anyone else. The guiding principle of this ideology is neither peace nor justice but suicide.

No he's not defending people are violent. What part of 'all violence is wrong' and 'all terrorism is wrong' are you too thick to understand? He even wrote it down for you, idiot.

Reply 52

Observatory

Original post by Messiah Complex

Nobody said they were freer. What I was saying is that the British know no bounds when it comes to being arrogant and thinking the world shines out of Britain's arse. They are wrong.

That is not clear. There are only a handful of free, prosperous countries that are not either originated by or substantially influenced (for instance via military conquest) by Britain and its off-shoots. Germany which you cite is almost an Anglo-American colony with an American constitution and an English-speaking population. The Russian-dominated part of Germany was not so successful.

And here is a perfect example of it. Russia is not a third world country at all. You have never been there, I have. You listen to the media and think you know everything when in fact you are wrong. Delusional sheep.

Russia's level of economic development is comparable to that of countries like Malaysia; Brits have absolutely no reason to be jealous of Russia or the people who live there.

No he's not defending people are violent. What part of 'all violence is wrong' and 'all terrorism is wrong' are you too thick to understand? He even wrote it down for you, idiot.

All the violence is wrong, but some violence is wronger than others.

Reply 53

Original post by Observatory

That is not clear. There are only a handful of free, prosperous countries that are not either originated by or substantially influenced (for instance via military conquest) by Britain and its off-shoots. Germany which you cite is almost an Anglo-American colony with an American constitution and an English-speaking population. The Russian-dominated part of Germany was not so successful.

Still doesn't give Britain the right to be so arrogant. You do realise you can be great and humble right? The problem is Britain is arrogant about so much which is why so many countries hate us around the world. Further delude yourself all you wish.

Russia's level of economic development is comparable to that of countries like Malaysia; Brits have absolutely no reason to be jealous of Russia or the people who live there.

Yes, because economic development is everything, isn't it? Again, have you ever been to Russia or do you just listen to nonsense put forward by the tabloids and think its 100% true? I take it you have not been to Russia and are talking out of your backside.

All the violence is wrong, but some violence is wronger than others.

In your opinion. The only person trying to justify violence here is you.

Reply 54

Observatory

Original post by Messiah Complex

Still doesn't give Britain the right to be so arrogant. You do realise you can be great and humble right? The problem is Britain is arrogant about so much which is why so many countries hate us around the world. Further delude yourself all you wish.

First I have not, in my own travels, experienced this apparent hatred of Britain. I actually have met more than one person who told me he wished his country was a British colony, because he thought the British would enforce the law more fairly than the native government.

Second, I think Britain has actually very little of the sort of bald-faced nationalism you see in places like Russia or religious Chauvinism you see in the Middle East. British people think that their institutions are better than those of much of the rest of the world because there's a lot of convincing evidence that it is true. Their preferred outcome is that other countries also adopt those good institutions, not that they be enslaved or destroyed.

Yes, because economic development is everything, isn't it? Again, have you ever been to Russia or do you just listen to nonsense put forward by the tabloids and think its 100% true? I take it you have not been to Russia and are talking out of your backside.

I've not been to Russia, but have been to other middle income Slavic countries, include those not in the EU. Yes, they have streets, cars, restaurants. Life goes there, you can raise a family, you probably won't die of a curable disease. But any advantage of living there over living here? None that I could see, and most things were worse.

In your opinion. The only person trying to justify violence here is you.

It's intended as a parody of what Brand is saying. Brand says that violence is bad... now this violence was all the terrorists' enemies fault, not their own... but remember kids, violence is bad.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 55

Trupac

5

Original post by young_guns

And what does all of this have to do with the Kouachi brothers who were not part of ISIS but of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula? How do you twist that around to blame America or Britain?

And what does our foreign policy have to do with murdering journalists and cartoonists in cold blood?

The western foreign policy has been akin to firefighters taking flame throwers to fight a fire. Any person with as much as half a brain cell will be able to work out that arming rebel groups in these unstable regions is never a good idea because sooner or later they turn into yet another terrorist group or those weapons end up into the hands of terrorists. The kouachi brothers got trained in Yemen, which is another place that received specialist 'counter terrorism' training form the US.

There is a reason that these braindead terrorists are evolving and their attacks getting more sophisticated and advanced by the day. Moreover, why the so called 'war on terror' has only perpetuated Islamic extremism? why the extremists have grown in number and are stronger than ever? Surely something is wrong other than Islam itself being a flawed religion like all other religions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10283758/First-Syria-rebels-armed-and-trained-by-CIA-on-way-to-battlefield.html Last three lines.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 56

the bear