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 - 24th November 2015 at 14:00
CH
Your comment could, equally, apply to the supporters and believers in ISIL/Islam. “Public statements of thousands of Muslims”. I’ve seen a handful. I have not seen or heard of ‘thousands’. How on earth did you manage to count them all.
I haven’t been able and my sources of information are the same as yours.
A full page advert signed no doubt by a dozen or perhaps two dozen prominent Moslems. You think that this is evidence enough to convince us all that we can sleep soundly in our beds ?
Here’s some evidence: Hundreds decamping from this country to Turkey and thence Syria to take up arms. You’d probably argue that they’re travelling on a package holiday.
Hundreds of followers, up and down the country, occupying the streets around mosques to listen to their imams preaching their litanies of hate. The banners held aloft by these same followers announcing to the TV cameras the birth of the caliphate and the establishment of sharia.
The countrywide opposition to the promotion of homosexuality and equal rights connected to the emancipation of women. All of these eagerly promoted and evangelized by these same followers.
The evidence is there if you want to see it.
I believe you have grandchildren as do I. What kind of future do they face ? One thing is certain, we can’t improve matters by sticking our collective heads in the sand.
When we weigh the ‘evidence’ both for and against, it is apparent that there are disturbing changes happening in our society. We have to deal with these matters and we cannot do that by refusing to face reality. In that particular respect both you and CD are culpable.
By: Meddle - 24th November 2015 at 13:47
Because unlike some, I don’t wear blinkers.
Funniest thing I’ve read this week. :highly_amused:
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 13:28
“great deal of evidence”
What is it? Where is it?
Really John, I scarcely believe this bizarre blinkered view you appear to have adopted. Unless you are playing some oddly inspired form of devil’s advocacy.
From the public statements, official and unofficial, of thousands of Muslims, both individuals and those representing groups decrying and disowning the perpetrators of the terrorism. You must have missed the full page advertisement in your favourite daily newspaper a few days ago as but one example among many.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 13:24
CD
The substance of your summary is one that reduces the matter in question to one that is puerile, infantile and without any merit save as a source of wry amusement.
I’d like you to justify that summary to the relatives and loved ones of the 130 murdered souls.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 13:20
I am still waiting to read evidence which supports your naive contention that supporters of Daesh (ISIL) and followers of Islam are mutually inclusive. There is of course a great deal of evidence for the opposite contention.
“great deal of evidence”
What is it? Where is it?
By: Creaking Door - 24th November 2015 at 12:36
On your account, there is no problem of any kind, certainly not of any kind that would result in the callous murder of 130 souls on the streets of Paris…
Earlier in this thread you scolded me for selectively quoting you and here you are trying to put words into my mouth!
Please, I’ll be happy to discuss this topic, one that you clearly feel very strongly about, but I’m not going to do so if I have to fight against you wilfully misunderstanding me; so let’s give it a try shall we?
Ask yourself this: by conflating the views of ‘ISIS’ with the views of the general Muslim population of the United Kingdom you are probably doing exactly what ‘ISIS’ want you to do; nothing will do ‘ISIS’ more good that an attempt to crush their caliphate by military force or a general persecution of non-extreme Muslims worldwide, nothing!
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 12:10
I am still waiting to read evidence which supports your naive contention that supporters of Daesh (ISIL) and followers of Islam are mutually inclusive. There is of course a great deal of evidence for the opposite contention.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 11:38
Ah, that clarifies a question in my mind – she was clearly not a hardened female journalist, whom I couldn’t see breaking down in tears. It is a pity that on occasion TV programmes seek to create the impression that problems, of any sort, are far worse than they actually are. I suppose it’s a function of 21st century journalism, but not one with which I have any sympathy.
…”seek to create the impression that problems of any sort, are far worse than they actually are”.
130 murdered souls in Paris would agree with your TV program makers.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 11:37
So let’s read your summary, John.
By: John Green - 24th November 2015 at 11:28
It will be difficult to give a completely objective view of the programme but I’ll try my best.
In all honestly the whole thing was rather pathetic; it centred on an undercover reporter, who was herself a Muslim, making contact with other Muslim women who had been spouting nonsense in support of ‘ISIS’ on Twitter. Over the course of a year the undercover reporter gained the confidence of the other Muslim women, and after being encouraged to travel to Syria to join ‘ISIS’, she was invited to attend some prayer meetings for Muslim women.
These prayer meetings were very small and the ones she attended, with a hidden camera, consisted of one of only seven, and one of only twenty other Muslim women, with seemingly an equal number of badly behaved young children; it was like ‘ISIS’ childcare! At each meeting a woman spouted more nonsense in support of ‘ISIS’ and eventually, before a third meeting, the undercover reporter was cornered and was asked if her bag could be examined (presumably for a hidden camera); when she refused she was asked to leave, which she did so (in tears).
The documentary tried to make the sending of e-mails, texts and the posting of opinion on Twitter sound as sinister as possible but in reality all this did was to emphasise how little there was, of any substance, behind this group of Muslim women; yes, they held extreme views, yes, they did speak in support of ‘ISIS’, but their numbers were tiny and their influence, frankly, negligible.
CD
Your summary is very re-assuring. There clearly isn’t a problem. Most of us will now sleep easier. There is quite patently no connection between ISIS/ISIL and the religion of Islam. The women shown were not preaching an illiterate torrent of hate towards the society that has nurtured them and continues to fund their divisive activities with taxpayers cash.
On your account, there is no problem of any kind, certainly not of any kind that would result in the callous murder of 130 souls on the streets of Paris. Driven by your very sound and realistic appraisal. what is needed from us all is yet more tolerance and understanding of the almost fearful pressures under which these innocent and much put upon Islamic ladies go about their daily lives.
It behoves us all to show more compassion and understanding to our Islamic bretheren so that when eventually they have exhausted their desire to impose their way of life – even tho’ some might suffer along the way – the benefits of Sharia and the world wide caliphate will be our shared inheritance.
You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 11:28
Ah, that clarifies a question in my mind – she was clearly not a hardened female journalist, whom I couldn’t see breaking down in tears. It is a pity that on occasion TV programmes seek to create the impression that problems, of any sort, are far worse than they actually are. I suppose it’s a function of 21st century journalism, but not one with which I have any sympathy.
By: Creaking Door - 24th November 2015 at 11:15
Yes, although there was no violence or threats, and she was asked to leave, it was clearly a traumatic experience for her; they called her a ‘spy’ but that was really the extent of the verbal abuse. I suppose during the initial demands to search her bag she was cornered in a small kitchen area and her exit blocked while she was questioned.
Although her identity was never revealed, she wore a full niqab / burka throughout the programme, she came across as quite a young and fragile individual so she should be admired for going alone into these meetings without really knowing what she was letting herself in for.
Afterwards her Twitter account was bombarded with hate-mail but nothing more threatening than the usual cyber-bullying; again an indication of the almost complete impotency of the groups she was investigating.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 10:56
Thank you, CD. It bears out my sense of the situation based on little but local personal experience. No doubt the TV company were trying to make more of the situation than there was. Why did the reporter leave in tears? Because she’d been rumbled?
By: Creaking Door - 24th November 2015 at 10:39
It will be difficult to give a completely objective view of the programme but I’ll try my best.
In all honestly the whole thing was rather pathetic; it centred on an undercover reporter, who was herself a Muslim, making contact with other Muslim women who had been spouting nonsense in support of ‘ISIS’ on Twitter. Over the course of a year the undercover reporter gained the confidence of the other Muslim women, and after being encouraged to travel to Syria to join ‘ISIS’, she was invited to attend some prayer meetings for Muslim women.
These prayer meetings were very small and the ones she attended, with a hidden camera, consisted of one of only seven, and one of only twenty other Muslim women, with seemingly an equal number of badly behaved young children; it was like ‘ISIS’ childcare! At each meeting a woman spouted more nonsense in support of ‘ISIS’ and eventually, before a third meeting, the undercover reporter was cornered and was asked if her bag could be examined (presumably for a hidden camera); when she refused she was asked to leave, which she did so (in tears).
The documentary tried to make the sending of e-mails, texts and the posting of opinion on Twitter sound as sinister as possible but in reality all this did was to emphasise how little there was, of any substance, behind this group of Muslim women; yes, they held extreme views, yes, they did speak in support of ‘ISIS’, but their numbers were tiny and their influence, frankly, negligible.
By: charliehunt - 24th November 2015 at 05:59
Could those of us who didn’t watch it be given the benefit of an objective review of the programme?
By: Creaking Door - 23rd November 2015 at 23:35
So, with your ‘unblinkered’ eyes, what was your conclusion after watching the programme?
I watched it too, but I don’t suppose you’ll be interested in my blinkered views if they’re not the same as yours.
By: John Green - 23rd November 2015 at 22:48
Because unlike some, I don’t wear blinkers.
By: Creaking Door - 23rd November 2015 at 20:09
Why don’t we all suspend all opinions until we’ve seen the program.
Wasn’t going to watch it myself but I’m sure a programme titled ‘ISIS: British Women Supporters Unveiled’ will prove conclusively that 100% of British women who support ‘ISIS’…er…support ‘ISIS’!
However, I doubt it will give us any idea how many British Muslim women support ‘ISIS’…
…unless your preconceived idea is that it ‘amounts to the same thing’…..in which case, why watch the programme?
By: silver fox - 23rd November 2015 at 20:08
And I thought the implication was that the taxpayer didn’t pay for the public utilities…
…maybe I got the wrong end of the stick?
Yes, if any operation, business or organisation is state owned and run, then I expect the taxpayer to fund investment, however with a private “run for profit” business, I do not expect the taxpayer to fund investment and the operators take the profits.
Remember many of the power stations are still very much the ones built and funded by the taxpayer originally.
By: charliehunt - 23rd November 2015 at 19:49
John – Why should the programme be any more representative than my acquaintanceship with Muslims working and living here for many years?
I await your review of it later but the title hardly inspires an evenhanded presentation does it?
Sign In
March 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm