Originally posted by d000hg
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Woolwich Incident
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
But it says to fight them as they fight you - i.e. in self-defence. (that's what I understand from it anyway). then it says to not exceed the limits i.e. if they are doing something immoral then don't do the same back. Seems obvious to me?Originally posted by Old Hack View PostIt says not to exceed limits, but to kill them...
Can you see the point yet? Interpretation.Comment
-
If you read my earlier post I suggested the government had as part of the apology deal.It may also have been done to cover up the state of immigration.Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostWho is covering his immigration status up? The police speculated on his immigration status and lied about a whole lot more, trying to get themselves out of a situation where they fooked up and killed a man with no evidence to support doing so; they were clutching at straws when they should have had the basic decency and respect for the law to say 'oops it looks like we've made a dreadful mistake'. The people who tried to cover up what happened are in my books not much better than those two scumbags that killed the soldier in London yesterday, and instead of being promoted they should be rotting in prison having extra arses made for them in the showers every day, preferably by the two probably quite well endowed Nigerians who'll be going to prison shortly.
Your sentiments about the people who ran the cover up are similar to mine. The guy did not deserve to die, the policemen who shot him need removing from firearms duty as their conduct was below what would be expected but the majority of the distaste is the senior police officers who flat out lied.Comment
-
He uses the Agile method when it comes to creating religious doctrineOriginally posted by MyUserName View PostWhy? The original script was inspired by an a creature who knows everything, is everywhere and can do anything. What mistakes or omissions he could possibly have made?Coffee's for closersComment
-
Badoom - tsh!Originally posted by Spacecadet View PostHe uses the Agile method when it comes to creating religious doctrine
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spacecadet View PostHe uses the Agile method when it comes to creating religious doctrine

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Spacecadet again.Hard Brexit now!
#prayfornodealComment
-
So killing is not immoral?Originally posted by NorthWestPerm2Contr View PostBut it says to fight them as they fight you - i.e. in self-defence. (that's what I understand from it anyway) - THIS IS INTERPRETATION. then it says to not exceed the limits i.e. if they are doing something immoral then don't do the same back. Seems obvious to me?
"Fight in the cause of Allah, with those who fight with you" - Could this be fighting an argument? A fist fight? Knives, guns?
"And do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits" - what limits? What are the limits? Death, a punch, a slap? A simple lecture?
"And kill them wherever you find them" - Pretty clear cut here
",and drive them out from where they drove you out"
Interpretation.
I can see a lot of that being taken many ways. But killing them, is pretty clear cut, in it's own, or inclusively - Not, if they try and kill you, defend yourself, defend allah, and kill them. Simply, kill them where you find them.Comment
-
A strongly worded letter to The Times, as suggested by Mr Brigstocke.Originally posted by Old Hack View Post"And do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits" - what limits? What are the limits? Death, a punch, a slap? A simple lecture?
Marcus Brigstocke's '3 Abrahamic Faiths' Rant - YouTubeAnd what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
-
All I am saying, is that for many centuries, scholars have remained divided on the meaning of the quran, or Mohammeds words.
If scholars can argue for years, and still be at it, then Imams can most certainly interpret to their own end, and preach hatred. It's is why we have arrived to where we currently lie.Comment
-
Back on track MyUserName. Did you ask about amputees in this thread yet?Originally posted by MaryPoppinsI'd still not breastfeed a naziOriginally posted by vetranUrine is quite nourishingComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers

Comment