Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hands Sandon 
It's hardly old news and in light of what's happened it's certainly relevant.
How was it discredited? What was discredited?
It's old news because the link itself reads October of 2010. It was related to the Giffords shooting and attempting to link unrelated events back then (just as you are doing now for example.)
Hands, when you link to all these articles, especially older ones with no real news being reported but merely an attempt to paint parties with ominous tones, don't you ever think about what is really being said or alleged?
The article claims that an investigation uncovered "links." The proof of the links was that the organizations had somehow "made contact" with each other.
What does this really mean? Does it mean one guy in the EDL sent one guy in a tea party group an email? It notes that their website links to certain URL's.
Really talk about paranoia. Per your own reasoning you must be a terrorist threat! You've got deep "links" to "tea party elements". I mean you are a member of the same forum and thus must be in total agreement with them and are at the beck and call of whatever nefarious aims they are going to engage in. We know they are nefarious because we used the word nefarious even while not stating what they are, who they might effect or well any other details. NEFARIOUS THOUGH.
It's a pretty damn scary link when you think about it. They used the word linked. Contact was made for goodness sakes. Worse still someone was IN TOUCH! A website was RELAUNCHED.
Holy COW! How can this stand!!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hands Sandon 
"As Mehdi Hasan, editor of the New Statesman, has pointed out, figures compiled by Europol, the European police agency, suggest that the threat of Islamist terrorism is minimal compared with "ethno-nationalist" and "separatist" terrorism. According to Europol, in 2006,
one out of 498 documented terrorist attacks across Europe could be classed as "Islamist"; in 2007, the figure rose to just
four out of 583 - less than one per cent of the total. By contrast, 517 attacks across the continent were claimed by - or attributed to - nationalist or separatist terrorist groups, such as ETA in Spain."
~
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth...841769458.html
This link is laughable. It notes first that propaganda is violence. In otherwords certain parties can be arrested for speech or having engaged in speech and then having certain materials, say a knife or sword as noted in the article.
Why are all the "nationalists" arrested while the "Islamists" are not? Simple, because one type of speech is classified as hate and the other is not. Don't forget to note that one of the reason the number of attacks are so high though is because of leftist groups. They engage in all manner of actual violence, not threatened violence per Europol.