Does anyone agree that there is a need for forum space to mention all those things that are of interest in the short term but, would not necessarily sustain a half a dozen or a dozen comments.
For example: Yesterday was the last day of the Six Nations rugby competition. Only of interest perhaps, to few on these Forums. I’d like to have placed a reminder but couldn’t find the last Six Nations subject, so didn’t bother.
Another example: Lord Neuburger, President of the Supreme Court mentioned that it was desirable that people should not be prevented from venting their often frustrated opinions on contentious issues for fear of condemnation. He thought that commentators who were opposed, were inhibited by the prospect of disapproval, from discussing rascism, homosexuality, ordination of females etc.
My Six Nations snippet was that it was a generally good result. Ireland won (by points difference) the Six Nations title from England. England won the Triple Crown and France was beaten ! Result.
By: John Green - 25th November 2015 at 19:25
There is today a piece in the D. Tel. which rather neatly illustrates the reluctance of the upholders of the law in this country to be seen acting robustly against the hate mongers.
An Asian gent has been sentenced to 40 years in jail by an American court. He was previously living in Britain and was suspected of plotting a bomb attack on a Manchester shopping mall.
The British CPS decided that there was insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction and he was not charged. He then either went to America voluntarily or was extradited and put on trial as member of a conspiracy to further the murderous ambitions of Al Quaeda.
The news of the sentence was applauded by a senior Manchester policeman.
Question: If the Americans could do it, why, apparently, couldn’t we ?
By: Creaking Door - 25th November 2015 at 19:16
You’re preaching to the choir, mate! 😉
By: trekbuster - 25th November 2015 at 19:00
The obvious answer is to ban all religious practice of any kind and become an entirely secular state
Except for the Jedi, of course
By: Creaking Door - 25th November 2015 at 16:45
We can do nothing to alter the perceptions and commitment of those here already but, for future incomers we must insist that they live our way of life, warts and all. When in Rome do as the Romans do. From that principle, there must be no deviation. No more scenes of Moslem followers occupying the streets around their mosques while the police stand by. No more hate banners held aloft for the TV cameras to convey their message to the world. No more sharia courts usurping the role of British justice…
Whilst I can broadly agree with your sentiments there are some issues I think. 🙂
How often is the cry of ‘freedom of speech’ heard on these forums? But free-speech that only allows freedom within certain ‘safe’ subjects isn’t really free-speech is it; if free-speech really is a ‘British’ value then it must be free for everybody with no exceptions. No exceptions! However, there are laws in this country that prohibit persecution on religious grounds; break those laws at your own risk, even if you’re standing outside a mosque.
Having said that sometimes it is just better to let these hate-preachers make fools of themselves because nobody, or almost nobody, is listening; they’re outside the mosque because those inside the mosque threw them out! 😉
I honestly believe that these hate-preachers want to get arrested, want the Police to break-up their street-sermons; then they can get onto the TV news (around the world) with footage to prove that the British establishment is anti-Islamic!
As for anybody in this country stating that they do not recognise the law-of-the-land or that they only recognise sharia-law, well, I’m afraid that in my opinion they can just ****-off somewhere that they do recognise the law-of-the-land!
And if that land happens to operate an unjust, barbaric, medieval, system of law that persecutes everything but a very narrow way of life, and tolerates very few personal freedoms, then my guess is that many of those that had the choice to live under that system, will live to regret it! Or maybe they’ll die regretting it!
Anyway, it was their choice!
By: TonyT - 25th November 2015 at 15:30
We can do nothing to alter the perceptions and commitment of those here already but, for future incomers we must insist that they live our way of life, warts and all. When in Rome do as the Romans do. From that principle, there must be no deviation. No more scenes of Moslem followers occupying the streets around their mosques while the police stand by. No more hate banners held aloft for the TV cameras to convey their message to the world. No more sharia courts usurping the role of British justice.
It should be the requirement of citizenship with the rider that if they do not conform to what is expected in the UK that citizenship will be revoked and they will be deported bank to whence they came.
I totally agree 110% with Hungary’s stance that they would only accept Christian Syrian refugees into their Country as they had no indigenous Muslim population, and because a Christian Syrian refugee would better intergrate into their culture ( we should have too, especially considering they are the most persecuted in Syria)
Sorry, but if you wish to wear a Burka, and live by Sharia law, go live in a Country where they are the norm, do not bring it here and try to force us to change to your way of life.
By: John Green - 25th November 2015 at 15:24
CD
The key word is UNKNOWN. The inference is clear.
By: John Green - 25th November 2015 at 15:21
CD
First things first. One thing at a time. Let the doubters admit that there IS a problem. Get the politicians to admit – they of course never will – that the admission to this country of large numbers of people with a hugely different political, cultural and religeous way of life that contrasted so completely with every aspect of the way that life was lived by the native population, was always likely to create social dislocation on a massive scale leading perhaps to problems almost too awful to even contemplate.
The truth is that there is no room on a small island for two competing monotheistic systems that have next to no common ground.
We can do nothing to alter the perceptions and commitment of those here already but, for future incomers we must insist that they live our way of life, warts and all. When in Rome do as the Romans do. From that principle, there must be no deviation. No more scenes of Moslem followers occupying the streets around their mosques while the police stand by. No more hate banners held aloft for the TV cameras to convey their message to the world. No more sharia courts usurping the role of British justice.
As for your comments about the Middle East military situation: I do not believe that the conflict can be managed with conventional forces; large armies, armour, manned aircraft etc. First rate intelligence, exploiting the adage that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ – and ally, infiltration, irregular or special forces, supplied by air, battlefield drones with their singular capacity for pin point strikes, should be sufficient to do the job.
As for post conflict pacification ? No chance. It seems to me that the Sunni/Shia head to head will continue till the end of time. Once any power or combination of powers enter this kind of conflict they must surely realise they are in for the long haul – the extremely long haul. Long term pacification might come about thru’ the emergence of a single authority supported by the military muscle of the West.
By: TonyT - 25th November 2015 at 13:23
His real name is soooo lame, I much prefer the one he fooled people with..
By: Creaking Door - 25th November 2015 at 01:21
We have to deal with these matters and we cannot do that by refusing to face reality…
Well, let’s assume that your ‘reality’ is actually correct…..so, how exactly do you propose to ‘deal’ with it?
How are you going to defeat ‘ISIS’ in Syria and Iraq? Bombing alone won’t do it; so is the United Kingdom, even as part of a larger coalition, going to invade these countries? What about President Assad in Syria? What about Russia’s support for the Assad regime?
And what about after you have defeated ‘ISIS’; what then? How do you administer Syria / Iraq so that something similar to ‘ISIS’ doesn’t spring-up in the power-vacuum you have created?
And what about the Muslim population of the United Kingdom, which you maintain are little different from the supporters, if not actually the fighters, of ‘ISIS’? For the record there are over two-and-a-half million Muslims in the United Kingdom. Surely you’re not going to allow this ‘army’ of potential suicide-bombers to remain, at large, in the United Kingdom? What do you intend to do with them? Arrest them? Lock them up indefinitely? Deport them?
By: Creaking Door - 25th November 2015 at 00:47
In the mean time, the D. Tel. to-day confirms that security sources in this country say that at least 800 travellers who were UNKNOWN to the security service have been to Syria and about half have returned…
Maybe this is not such a bad thing? I wonder what the average ‘soft’ westernised Islamic extremist makes of life in the ‘Islamic State’? I’m pretty sure the reality has little to recommend it; after all, some ‘disaffected’ youth from the United Kingdom is hardly likely to be enrolled as a high-ranking ‘officer’ within ‘ISIS’! I’ll bet living conditions are pretty grim too, even if you ignore the need to fight, and possibly die, for ‘ISIS’.
So maybe it is a good thing that these extremists return to the United Kingdom?
By: Creaking Door - 25th November 2015 at 00:20
The Govt. goes onto state that we should all be prepared for the possibility of chemical, biological and radiological attacks by ISIL/ISIS…
How does the government expect us to ‘prepare’ for such an attack? Ridiculous!
What is this ‘warning’ actually? Well, let’s see shall we. The government is about to have a vote in the House of Commons as to whether the United Kingdom should start bombing ‘ISIS’ in Syria (in addition to Iraq); this is a vote that they lost last time they tried it. So what better time after the shock of the Paris attacks? And just to make sure the government wins the vote it releases this new ‘warning’, in a pro-government newspaper, about new dangers we can expect from ‘ISIS’!
I’m not suggesting any government conspiracy; just a bit of obvious political opportunism. Does a ‘false warning’ matter? Not really; ‘ISIS’ do mean us harm and anyway, as I said, what could any of us do to protect ourselves from a chemical, biological or radiological attack? But it sounds properly scary, right?
It all smacks of that ‘warning’ that the New Labour government gave about Iraqi drone aircraft being able to launch a chemical attack against the United Kingdom (or our assets abroad) in ‘forty-five minutes’; that ‘warning’ being given just before Gulf War II was launched. Remember? Gulf War II that led to the power-vacuum in which ‘ISIS’ flourished.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 21:08
Thank you for the undeserved compliment. I don’t think that I’m at all intelligent. Perhaps it seems like that just by comparison.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 20:57
For an evidently intelligent man your ability to post tripe never ceases to amaze although it is usually only when your arguments have failed utterly to convince through lack of evidence and misrepresentation of your opponents’ arguments.
I’ll leave you and CD to continue the debate.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 20:43
“So, how many ? Twenty or so ?”
Tip of the iceberg – as you well know.
“Copy and paste?”
I don’t have to. The tenor of your statements and the clear inference is to softly placate and diminish the role and responsibility of those who want to damage and destroy Western liberal democracy. Let us all read, from you, a blunt condemnation
Re 471 Let that make my case. I run the risk of constantly repeating myself.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 18:06
So? How many? Twenty or so? Gosh that’s a really significant number and certainly proves your point, doesn’t it?!!!!
You are struggling to find a way of removing the blinkers but without much success from the evidence of your posts today. And still no retraction of the totally fallacious statement made earlier.
And please copy and paste my quote where you contend that I stated we should not be worried by the events of the past few weeks. You cannot because I didn’t.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 17:32
You clearly stated that British women who support Islam are the same thing as those who support ISIL. That is exaggeration and misrepresentation as well as being provocatively irresponsible.
There really is nothing to add.
Those featured in the TV program were Moslems and supporters of ISIL. Not much exaggeration there !
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 17:29
In the mean time, the D. Tel. to-day confirms that security sources in this country say that at least 800 travellers who were UNKNOWN to the security service have been to Syria and about half have returned.
The Govt. goes onto state that we should all be prepared for the possibility of chemical. biological and radiological attacks by ISIL/ISIS.
Yes, the more news we receive about these matters, the more I can see that CH and CD are absolutely correct and we shouldn’t be too worried and that this matter is greatly overstated.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 17:29
You clearly stated that British women who support Islam are the same thing as those who support ISIL. That is exaggeration and misrepresentation as well as being provocatively irresponsible.
There really is nothing to add.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 17:22
Exaggerating ?
The unfolding of future events will be the judge of that.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 16:26
Over exaggerating and falsifying a problem is as bad as ignoring it. Of that you are truly culpable.
Sign In
March 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm