Last year there was a thread on here called 'I'm not racist but..'

I was reminded of this recently by some comments (both on here and in the media generally). It seems some people have to have a 'but' when talking about the recent terrorism.

I am interested in people's opinions on this and in particular how they feel about such statements in relation to the one on racism.

Could you give us an example Sid?

I don't condone terrorism BUT I feel that the British should not have taken Ireland as their own.

How's that?

i dont mind other peoples opinions but they're not right.

does that count

I'm not gay but my boyfriend is.

Originally posted by alchresearch
I don't condone terrorism BUT I feel that the British should not have taken Ireland as their own.

How's that?

:clap: :clap:

Been saying this since '82.

I don't condone terrorism but........ Nelson Mandela may have had a bit of point

Originally posted by JFKvsNixon
I don't condone terrorism but........ Nelson Mandela may have had a bit of point
I think Steve Biko had a better one...

...and Ghandi definitely did.

:)

I don't condone terrorism but..... one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist.

Originally posted by goose
I don't condone terrorism but..... one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist.

Ok but how are "our man's" terrorists fighting for freedom when they believe in and aspire towards imposing the EXACT opposite of freedom, i.e. an Islamic dictatorship?

I used to be a werewolf but I'm alright nooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Originally posted by t020
Ok but how are "our man's" terrorists fighting for freedom when they believe in and aspire towards imposing the EXACT opposite of freedom, i.e. an Islamic dictatorship?

Islamic dictatorship....Hmmmm, interesting choice of words.

If the people want an Islamic state, but a foreign power prevents them from having one, that's hardly democratic, isn't it.

And if, for example, the Iraqi people want US and British soliders out of Iraq, shouldn't they leave?

Yes, Freedom...

Originally posted by alchresearch
I don't condone terrorism BUT I feel that the British should not have taken Ireland as their own.

How's that?

suppose the dutch shouldn't have taken south africa either then the world would have a few more millions to feed

I don't condone illegitimate invasions but shoot em all lads, bring their heads home in a bin bag - do I win a prize?

Originally posted by Abdul
Islamic dictatorship....Hmmmm, interesting choice of words.

If the people want an Islamic state, but a foreign power prevents them from having one, that's hardly democratic, isn't it.

And if, for example, the Iraqi people want US and British soliders out of Iraq, shouldn't they leave?

Yes, Freedom...

a) "The people" wanting the Islamic state are in a very, very small minority (unless, as a Muslim, you know otherwise, of course???) so it is democratic to uphold our democracy and freedom. Terrorists trying to impose a dictatorship on us can surely not be anyone's freedom fighters since they are fighting for the complete opposite, by definition.

b) It's my understanding that the majority of Iraqi people want to live under a democracy but insurgents and Saddam loyalists (terrorists, George Galloway, etc) would prefer otherwise. Until stability is ensured then it's not really practical for US and UK forces to leave.

I edon't condone terrorism but some terrorists now seem to be gods (ie Neson Mandella) one person's terrorist is anothers freedomn fighter.

Originally posted by robbie
I edon't condone terrorism but some terrorists now seem to be gods (ie Neson Mandella) one person's terrorist is anothers freedomn fighter. mandella was a convicted terrorist so was macarious(sp) in greece, anachim begin(sp) was the same in 1948 in israel,a land that britain provided for the jews with the balfour agreement they all ended up as leaders of their country,whats next? gerry addams for president of ireland?

the british government condem them one day for bieng terrorists,then adore them for bieng leaders of their country,it doesnt make sense, but it,s all politics,and its all rubbish,found guilty of bombing people they should have had the same fate, death by judicial execution

I don't condone terrorism but... it worked for the Israelis, didn't it?

I dont condone terrorism, BUT Nelson Mandela is a bloody nice guy.

I dont condone terrorism BUT these recent "terrorists" are not terrorists in the traditional sense

The age old idea of terrorism was to cause disruption with few deaths.

These current "terrorists" are mass murderers, and the distinction should be made more often.

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
I dont condone terrorism BUT these recent "terrorists" are not terrorists in the traditional sense

The age old idea of terrorism was to cause disruption with few deaths.

These current "terrorists" are mass murderers, and the distinction should be made more often.

Eniskillen? Omagh? King David Hotel? Srebrenica?

And who are "these current 'terrorists'" ?

the idea of terrorism is to push a political agenda through the use of terror.

thats an entirely different thing from mass murder

the islamic terrorists dont seem to have an agenda at all.
as far as I can see there is no centralised body, theres no "official" side to their work.

what act of "terrorism" has killed 3000 people? what agenda were they trying to push other than "haha look lots of your people are dead".

...but i feel they had no other choice -
we are all terrorists - it's just a question of degree and perception
give me what i demand or else i will kill you -
uk - iraq - disarm or i'll kill you - many people killed
palestine - israel - give our land back or i'll kill you - many die
what's the difference between a soldier giving his life for the cause of the uk governement and a suicide bomber giving his life for his cause
soldiers kill and so do suicide bombers -

to me there is no difference - they are all terrorists until there's a valid justifcation for the action supported by concrete evidence

careful people, with this new free speech law being passed we could all be charged with the heinous crime of "CONDONING TERRORISM"

Originally posted by Carl_Malibu
I dont condone terrorism BUT these recent "terrorists" are not terrorists in the traditional sense
I dunno, terrorists these days, they don't even know they're born!

Just like, I suppose, gangsters these days aren't like those nice cuddly Krays.

And world leaders these days don't seem too bothered about the number of civilian casualties when they go out liberating countries.

Etc etc etc. Those nice friendly terrorists of our youth are gone, we're just going to have to learn to live with it.