Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 Apr 14 - 01:45 AM "Lefty" is not a term of abuse. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 25 Apr 14 - 01:23 AM ... and yet whenever I express all this, Carroll has the bloody all-fire intolerable impertinence to dismiss it as 'lip-service'. What the hell does he think he knows, the insufferable self-righteous little lefty prig! |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 25 Apr 14 - 12:48 AM I would add for emphasis, in that last bit "frustration and acute sense of betrayal" |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 25 Apr 14 - 12:41 AM michaelr: In my youth, young Jews would join explicitly Zionist youth movements with grandiloquent Hebrew names (Habonim = The Builders; Hashomer Hatzair = the Young Watchman, Mizrahi - Eastward, &c): sort of scout movements with camps & Hebrew singing & dancing & so on; to emphasise Jewish identity and work tirelessly for the Zionist aspiration of a modern state for Jews in their historic biblical homeland, in their different ways [they had political variations]. We envisioned a state which would bring the modern world to the Mid-East, at peace with its Arab neighbours, governed by enlightened governments, the whole state being run on the sort of benevolent share-&-share-alike characteristic of the kibbutz movement, by then some ½-C old, the socialist basis of the then Israeli commonweal -- wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz And look what we have now. Totalitarians oppressive of their minorities, in a constant state of war with their neighbours, establishing settlements with pure perversity in land which means further friction when there is plenty of land elsewhere [the Negev hardly settled as yet], which involves destroying the resources & livelihoods of the unfortunate displaced minority populations of ordinary people just trying to live their lives --- I could go on. The frustration induced by this bloody-minded awkwardness & intransigence & aggression constitutes, as I say, one of the greatest disappointments of my entire life. Hope that clear. ~Michael~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,michaelr Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:08 PM "the betrayal of all my generation's hopes and aspirations by the present administration of the State of Israel" Michael, would you please explain what you mean? |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:41 PM Is the UN Envoy an Islamophobe in your opinion? (Just asking. Not arguing) Depends on whether you take into consideration the numbers of killed Muslims he's directly responsible for. If you do, then he is, and I'd agree. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Richard Bridge Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:36 PM More probably, if defamatory, to be libellous than slanderous. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,# Date: 24 Apr 14 - 05:27 PM Room full of arguers and no one corrects that number? Pfffft. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,# Date: 24 Apr 14 - 05:04 PM Gee, personal attacks and it's not yet 40 posts into the thread. What a surprise. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 04:27 PM ... and lazily assertive too: "can't be arsed" to do anything to answer the stupid bloody questions that you ask, can't you. Ohhh diddiwiddiwiddums den!. You really are beneath contempt. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 04:22 PM No I bloody did NOT: "24 Apr 14 - 09:57 AM Cocked up there rather, didn't you, Jim? Glad you noticed your own booboo before it had to be pointed out to you. No pun intended in first word of this post, but I am opposed to Gentl Mutltn for both sexes also." Be ashamed, you nasty slanderous little swine, Carroll. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 03:03 PM Really can't be arsed Mike - your volcano squatting says everything that needs to be said as does Ms Ali's "war" on Islam ". Notice that you ignored Ms Ali's comments on Jewish genital mutilation (or should that be multlation - give you something to talk about) though (or should that be tough?) Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Greg F. Date: 24 Apr 14 - 02:01 PM So you dismiss it? No, Keith- we dismiss YOU. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 01:56 PM Oh, come on Jim, anyone would draw attention & say haha -- 'gloat' if you must; that's a bit of disingenuous capital-making a bit desperate even for you!. "Still don't get your point - sorry. Jimmm Carolll". What 'point' don't you get, Jim? Can't see how I could spell out my position more clearly. It was laid out in full in two posts on a sometime thread [the Unarmed soldier one, IIRC -- yes; have just checked, 10 & 12 June 2013]. If I haven't made my 'point' sufficiently clearly for you, then turn those up. With dreary predictability, you called them 'racist' I seem to remember; but of course they are not: make much same point as Ms Hirsi Ali's conclusion, in fact. ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 01:54 PM Can't remember any UN ambassador declaring war on Islam as the lady did Just answering - not arguing "The interview in which Ms Hirsi Ali called for a "war" on Islam came in 2007" No need to really Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Stringsinger Date: 24 Apr 14 - 11:49 AM " it was religious fanatics wot dunnit, not the Muslim peopel as a whole " This would characterize and include Saudi Arabia with King Abdullah's support. The same fanaticism could be applied to Christianity as well. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 11:43 AM Is the UN Envoy an Islamophobe in your opinion? (Just asking. Not arguing) |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 11:38 AM Some figures from Antisemitic Gallup Islamophobia league Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 11:08 AM "Cocked up there rather, didn't you, Jim?" Don't gloat Mike - it doesn't become even you. I'd looked her up when you mentioned her first, time time ago and mis-read her profile then, but realised that my interpretation didn't make sense, so I took the trouble to re-read it. I'm not really surprised that you don't hesitate to make political capital from it, even though I corrected my mistake - I might have been in the past, but not now Perhaps a couple of typooss might help you make your case. I go along with what much of she says, but I find her Islamophobic tone far more likely to antagonise that to convert and can see why her doctorate has been revoked. Still don't get your point - sorry. Jimmm Carolll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 11:04 AM Daily Telegraph this week. "Khalid Mahmood, the (Muslim) Labour MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, said the allegations of a plot were credible. "There is most definitely a plot by a small group of individuals and the plot actually affects the majority of the Muslim community in Birmingham," he said." "The alleged plot by Islamic radicals to take control of a series of schools in Birmingham is the product of a little-understood power struggle between Muslim denominations, Mr Straw, the MP for Blackburn said." "An anti-Semitic preacher who sympathises with Al-Qaeda was invited to address students at Park View school, Department for Education inspectors found. At least six of the 18 schools said to be involved in the plot will be failed by Ofsted, a measure which normally leads to them being placed in special measures and their leadership team replaced." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10778465/Muslims-must-accept-Britains-Christian-values-says-former-Home-Secretary.html |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 10:49 AM So you dismiss it? |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Apr 14 - 10:29 AM Apropos of the hoax, obviously all the politicos, school inspectors and sundry anti-Muslims are gonna throw their hands in the air and admit they've been duped, aren't they? Yeah, That's what'll happen. Yeah. Sure thing. Alternatively, it'll all just....quietly....fade....away.... |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 09:57 AM Cocked up there rather, didn't you, Jim? Glad you noticed your own booboo before it had to be pointed out to you. No pun intended in first word of this post, but I am opposed to Gentl Mutltn for both sexes also. Had read that Economist piece before. Thoroughly equivocal and evasive & fence·sitting in tone IMO. So do you think Brandeis was right to have withdrawn their offer of an Hon Degree over something she had said 6 years before they offered it in the first place, which they must have known about if they had done the most minimal research into their putative candidate? If not, then, why dear me, who could possibly have got at them to change their minds, I wonder? ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,# Date: 24 Apr 14 - 09:42 AM http://rt.com/news/radical-islam-uk-schools-678/ The story is over six weeks old. Does anyone know what the national school authorities--if indeed anyone's aware who that is--have done so far? |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Greg F. Date: 24 Apr 14 - 09:38 AM Seems like the Birmingham schools "infiltration" is a hoax. DAMN! Imagine my surprise....... |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 09:08 AM Putting Ms Ali in context - from the "Antisemitic" Economist Jim Carroll Ayaan Hirsi Ali Enlightened intolerance Apr 16th 2014, 16:08 by M.S. Timekeeper EARLIER this month Brandeis University rescinded its offer of an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born women's rights activist, saying its officials had not been fully aware of some her more scathing remarks on Islam. Conservatives have accused Brandeis of muzzling Ms Hirsi Ali and bowing to Muslim pressure groups. Liberals have wondered how the university could possibly have overlooked Ms Hirsi Ali's condemnations, not just of radical Islam, but of Islam as such. At the risk of coming off as a postmodern multi-culti squish, it seems to me that this discussion suffers from a lack of cultural context—but not the cultural context you're thinking of. The way Ms Hirsi Ali talks about Islam strikes American liberals as strangely intolerant, but it has its roots in the prevailing discourse on religious freedom and Islam in the country where Ms Hirsi Ali first began seriously tackling these issues: the Netherlands. As Ms Hirsi Ali noted in an interview on Fox News, the most-cited of her objectionable statements on Islam came in a 2007 interview with Reason magazine. In that interview she said it was necessary to "defeat" Islam and that "we are at war with Islam", including in the military sense of the word. In another 2007 interview, with the London Evening Standard, she called Islam "the new fascism" and "a destructive, nihilistic cult of death". Characterising an entire religion in this way is considered entirely beyond the pale in educated American society; while some small right-wing or evangelical Christian organisations demonise Islam as an enemy, mainstream conservatives, and for that matter neoconservatives, characterise only radical Islam as a threat. Actually, bigotry against Muslims in America is common enough, but the public expression of such prejudice by figures of authority is taboo. Wholesale condemnations of existing religions just aren't done in American politics. Once-open prejudices against Catholics and Jews were gradually wrung out of the public sphere in a process that started in the 1940s and was essentially wrapped up by the 1970s. The explicit consensus in America is ecumenical and strongly pro-religious, and Americans generally sense that when they single out one faith and aggressively criticise its spiritual content, they're violating a national ethical code. This is not quite the case in the Netherlands, where Ms Hirsi Ali developed her feminist critique of Islam and served as an MP for the centre-right Liberal party. To recap her story: Ms Hirsi Ali came to the Netherlands in 1992, fleeing an arranged marriage in Kenya. She was granted refugee status and ultimately a Dutch passport, and earned a master's degree that led her into outreach work with Muslim immigrant women, initially in affiliation with the Labour party. Her politics shifted steadily rightward, due in part to the repression of women she saw in immigrant communities and in part to the September 11th attacks. In 2004 she made a deliberately provocative, rather surreal short film decrying Muslim oppression of women with the bomb-throwing TV director and personality Theo van Gogh; in response, a young Muslim extremist murdered Mr van Gogh. With her extraordinary charisma and impressively elegant Dutch, Ms Hirsi Ali was ultimately invited to run for parliament by the centre-right Liberals, and served from 2003 until 2006, when a scandal over her immigration status (she admitted to having concealed her name and lied about other details) led the hard-line interior minister to revoke her Dutch passport. She moved to America shortly thereafter, taking a job at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. (The affair, incidentally, precipitated the fall of the Dutch government.) Returning to the theme: while the way Ms Hirsi Ali talks about Islam sounds extreme to the American ear, it doesn't sound as extreme to the Dutch ear. To take the most obvious example, Geert Wilders, the leader of the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV), has been calling for banning the Koran since 2007. To legitimate this sort of language, Mr Wilders has advanced the novel claim that Islam is not a religion at all, but a totalitarian ideology. Of course, Mr Wilders leads the farthest-right party in the Dutch political landscape, one with which most Dutch parties have refused to cooperate. Nevertheless, most Dutch citizens don't see Mr Wilders' PVV as an extreme-right party. This is incomprehensible to Americans: a party that calls for banning the Koran and terms Islam a totalitarian ideology seems by definition extreme-right in an American context. Yet intelligent, tolerant mainstream Dutch and Americans can go back and forth on this question in utter bafflement. And Mr Wilders doesn't exist in a vacuum. He launched the PVV in 2006, after dropping out of the Liberal party just when Ms Hirsi Ali was becoming one of its biggest stars. A few years earlier, Pim Fortuyn, the flamboyantly gay populist politician, had blazed the trail for such language by terming Islam a "backward religion". Beginning with Mr Fortuyn's rise in 2001, Dutch politics was seized by an impulse to cast off "politically correct" taboos on negative characterisations of (mainly Muslim) immigrants, and to "name the real problems" of crime, failure to integrate, and suppression of the rights of women and gays among immigrant communities. Ms Hirsi Ali's sharp anti-Muslim language did not spring out of nowhere; she was part of this broader shift in Dutch politics and political language. At a deeper level, while the Netherlands has long been renowned for, or even defined by, its religious tolerance, the Dutch variety of tolerance is not the same as the American one. For example, I've repeatedly encountered non-religious Dutch who see no difference between a religion and a belief or opinion, and feel that religions therefore don't deserve any kind of special consideration, be it in terms of schooling, of exemptions from public rules and duties, or of conversational deference or respect. That view may be shared in certain emphatically atheist quarters in America, but it seems much more widespread in the Netherlands. To some extent this may be rooted in the much lower level of Dutch religiosity; 21% of Dutch believe in God, against 61% of Americans, and Dutch religiosity declined markedly from 1991-2008. And while Americans who do not actually go to church often nevertheless identify with some denomination on a family basis, Dutch who do not believe or worship tend to describe themselves simply as having no religion. One sometimes gets the sense that non-religious Dutch are so alienated from religious tradition that they lack empathetic understanding of what belonging to a faith is like. But then, the bargains entailed in the Dutch tradition of religious tolerance have always worked differently than those in America. From the late 19th century to the 1960s, the Dutch hewed to a social system called "pillarisation", in which the country's Protestant and Catholic communities lived, studied and voted in largely segregated blocs, each with their own schools, newspapers, and political parties. The socialist movement formed a third, non-religious bloc. The blocs were often openly disdainful of each other, and it's not surprising that the Dutch tend to be more willing than Americans to bluntly criticise the substance of others' religions, just as they might criticise a political ideology. Even in the 17th century, when the Netherlands became a haven for religious refugees from the 30 Years' War and the Inquisition, tolerance was largely seen as a pragmatic virtue, good for business, so long as those with alien faiths kept their houses of worship out of sight. One might look even further back: many of the Netherlands' firmest critics of religion belong to the country's strong Humanist movement, which traces its roots to the atheistic or pan-theistic philosophy of that greatest apostate of Amsterdam's Jewish community, Baruch Spinoza. The intellectual historian Jonathan Israel makes Spinoza the model for what he terms the "radical" wing of the European Enlightenment, which totally rejected religious authority, in contrast to more moderate figures such as Descartes; and one can hear some echoes of Spinoza in Ms Hirsi Ali's uncompromising turn away from, and finally complete rejection of, her native Islam. The interview in which Ms Hirsi Ali called for a "war" on Islam came in 2007, just a year after she had left the Netherlands. In deciding to rescind its offer of an honorary degree to her, Brandeis was in part drawing a line between the kind of discourse on religion that is acceptable in mainstream American intellectual life, and the kind that has arisen over the past decade and a half in the Netherlands. The university was not silencing Ms Hirsi Ali; it still invited her to come to the university to "engage in a dialogue". As Isaac Chotiner puts it, the "controversy isn't about shunning someone from polite society. It is about giving a person an honorary degree." Asking Ms Hirsi Ali to speak to students at Brandeis is a great idea; giving her an honorary degree as part of graduation ceremonies suggests that Brandeis thinks calling for a war on Islam is an acceptable statement within the bounds of normal political and social discourse. The fact that such statements are not welcomed in American public discourse is one reason why the American model of integration and tolerance works better than the Dutch model, and why the Netherlands continues to be wracked by tensions over Islam and integration—years after those tensions forced Ms Hirsi Ali herself to leave. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 09:03 AM Apologies - misread her profile - she does not support genital mutilation, but she does condemn it as practiced by Muslims and Jews alike Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 08:55 AM "Hirsi Ali characterizes Islam as "the new fascism":" She also is a strong supporter of religious genital mutilation - sorry - don't get your point. You can always find a supporter for your case and use it to make your argument if you ignore the facts. Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 08:46 AM I should be interested in some takes on Aayan Hirsi Ali. In particular, in view of his constant repetitions of how Islam is all peacefulness & sweetness & light and it must have been just accidents that befell the Towers & Rigby & the Dutch director Van Gogh & such, from Mr Carroll; especially in re trhe last 5 lines quoted below. (This is a born Muslim woman, remember). extracts from her wikipedia entry Ayaan Hirsi Al (born 13 November 1969) is a Somali-born American (formerly Dutch) women's rights and atheist activist, writer and politician who is known for her views critical of female genital mutilation and Islam. She wrote the screenplay for Theo van Gogh's movie Submission, after which she and the director both received death threats. He was assassinated. On Palestinians: "I have visited the Palestinian quarters in Jerusalem. Their side is dilapidated, for which they blame the Israelis. In private, however, I met a young Palestinian who spoke excellent English. There were no cameras and no notebooks. He said the situation was partly their own fault, with much of the money sent from abroad to build Palestine being stolen by corrupt leaders". In an interview in the London Evening Standard, Hirsi Ali characterizes Islam as "the new fascism": "Just like Nazism started with Hitler's vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate — a society ruled by Sharia law – in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to death, homosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killed. Sharia law is as inimical to liberal democracy as Nazism." In this interview, she also made it clear that in her opinion it is not "a fringe group of radical Muslims who've hijacked Islam and that the majority of Muslims are moderate. [...] Violence is inherent in Islam – it's a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimates murder." ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 08:34 AM Steve, all I can find are a few individuals who claim it is a hoax. I think the authorities are still taking it seriously, some schools have been put in special measures over it, and the police investigation continues. It is a bit premature to state "Seems like the Birmingham schools "infiltration" is a hoax." but let us hope you are proved right. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:57 AM By far the biggest threat to peace and stability came from Bush and Blair. Millions killed or maimed, millions impoverished, millions radicalised, millions now living in insecurity, and all based on their lies. Turned out to be somewhat more than just a threat, actually, millions would say. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:51 AM It's all over the news. Just google Birmingham schools hoax. Do bear in mind that my post reflected the current state of play in that I used the word "seems". |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:37 AM who doesn't have anybody praying for you I'm beyond redemption already, Jim! D. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:34 AM "The threat is radicalism from any quarter. " Absolutely Dave - it's been my argument all along Religion (any religion) and politics is a toxic mix and any religious organisation that gains a toe-hold in the running of a country or any of its temporal institutions, will invariably exploit that influence for their own purpose. Following the clerical abuse revelations here in Ireland, there is now a fascinating battle taking place over what influence the Church should continue to have over the education system. One person's 'radicalism' is often another's 'devoutness'. No child should ever be taught to look down on those of other faiths - many, even most are by their various religions - Christianity being a 'front runner' in the "forgivness" stakes. I was told here not long ago that I was being "prayed for" for my being a sinner - gives one a warm feeling, does't it (or maybe you are one of the unluck ones who doesn't have anybody praying for you) Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:19 AM Returning to the speech, how can we be sure that the UN Middle East Peace Envoy is completely wrong and there is no threat to peace and stability? What reassurance would yo give to the people of Nigeria say? |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Apr 14 - 07:16 AM It is a relief to hear that the Birmingham story was a hoax, but I cannot find anything about it. Can you share your news with us Steve? |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:57 AM I don't think anyone has said that Muslims are a threat, Jim. The threat is radicalism from any quarter. D. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:44 AM Seems like the Birmingham schools "infiltration" is a hoax. Ho hum. Good letter in today's Grauniad that points out that Blair would have been arrested had his statement about uniting with Russia against militant Islam been turned around and made by an Islamist urging a united Islam to fight western extremists. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:33 AM Sorry - correction - wrote it rather emotionally, I'm afraid Should read "Must dig out some old Folk Reviews" Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:30 AM " Time will tell, is all. But if you deny the possibility of such a volcano, threat" Of course I deny it - Muslims living in Britain are identifies as the most law abiding and industrious group entering the country - stated over and over again by the powers that be, who have all recognised, or at least, paid lip-service to their contribution to British society. Personally, if I had the (totally unwanted) choice of choosing my neighbour - if it came down to you (who I have never met) or any of the many Muslims I have met - no competition. But dig out some old Folk Reviews I have been intending to burn for some time now Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Apr 14 - 06:11 AM Well, there might be a volcano or there might not. I shan't know, nor will my descendants as I am childless. Time will tell, is all. But if you deny the possibility of such a volcano, threat, whevs, it seems obvious to me you are living in a fool's paradise. I genuinely hope you are the one who is right. But I doubt it. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Apr 14 - 03:03 AM "I am not "proposing" anything, Jim" And you're "not" doing it very well Mike, just stirring up hate and suspicion by inviting people to share your own private "volcano" Jim Carroll "as on the arms of my first cousins once removed from Bucharest, you mean" Don't know that one Mike - I do remember the one on the arm of my girl friend's mother though She used to show it to people in the hope that it would never happen again. Small chance, it would appear. Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 23 Apr 14 - 05:22 PM For clarity, that should have been "first-cousins-once-removed"; ie my father's first-cousins, not my own first-cousins who on one occasion got taken off somewhere -- altho, as you will gather, some of these did! One of them survived. My grandmother got a letter from her in Roumanian in late-1945. Never knew exactly what happened to the others. ~M~ |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: MGM·Lion Date: 23 Apr 14 - 05:16 PM I am not "proposing" anything, Jim. Not my job to propose. Simply pointing out an intractable problem with which we are saddled, and to which there may well be no solution to be 'proposed'. One can never start anywhere but here. I am, however, I freely admit, pessimistic about the future, glad that I shall not be around when this particular brood of chickens comes home to roost; and that I have no children to fret about. Meanwhile, congratulations on the crack about numbers tattooed on arms (as on the arms of my first cousins once removed from Bucharest, you mean?). Of a cheapness which few but the egregious Carroll could have achieved. Well done again! And you call me a bigot. Well a good laugh to go to bed on is always something to appreciate. ~M~ |
Subject: ADD: Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues (Dylan) From: Greg F. Date: 23 Apr 14 - 05:06 PM So what, Greg? Are these the only factors to be considered? So what, ~M~? So all this hysteria is based on a single anonymous letter, no facts, no verification, no documentation, no nothing. Seems to me that ol' Tailgunner Joe McCarthy had more evidence of his nefarious and dastardly Commie plots. Thus, I think its a good place to enter the following: simply read "Muslim" for "Commie", "Communist" and "Reds": Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues by Bob Dylan Well, I was feelin' sad and feelin' blue I didn't know what in the world I wus gonna do Them Communists they wus comin' around They wus in the air They wus on the ground They wouldn't gimme no peace . . . So I run down most hurriedly And joined up with the John Birch Society I got me a secret membership card And started off a-walkin' down the road Yee-hoo, I'm a real John Bircher now! Look out you Commies! Now we all agree with Hitler's views Although he killed six million Jews It don't matter too much that he was a Fascist At least you can't say he was a Communist! That's to say like if you got a cold you take a shot of malaria Well, I wus lookin' everywhere for them gol-darned Reds I got up in the mornin' 'n' looked under my bed Looked in the sink, behind the door Looked in the glove compartment of my car Couldn't find 'em . . . I wus lookin' high an' low for them Reds everywhere I wus lookin' in the sink an' underneath the chair I looked way up my chimney hole I even looked deep down inside my toilet bowl They got away . . . Well, I wus sittin' home alone an' started to sweat Figured they wus in my T.V. set Peeked behind the picture frame Got a shock from my feet, hittin' right up in the brain Them Reds caused it! I know they did . . . them hard-core ones Well, I quit my job so I could work all alone Then I changed my name to Sherlock Holmes Followed some clues from my detective bag And discovered they wus red stripes on the American flag! That ol' Betsy Ross . . . Well, I investigated all the books in the library Ninety percent of 'em gotta be burned away I investigated all the people that I knowed Ninety-eight percent of them gotta go The other two percent are fellow Birchers . . . just like me Now Eisenhower, he's a Russian spy Lincoln, Jefferson and that Roosevelt guy To my knowledge there's just one man That's really a true American: George Lincoln Rockwell I know for a fact he hates Commies cus he picketed the movie Exodus Well, I fin'ly started thinkin' straight When I run outa things to investigate Couldn't imagine doin' anything else So now I'm sittin' home investigatin' myself! Hope I don't find out anything . . . hmm, great God! Copyright © 1970 by Special Rider Music; renewed 1998 by Special Rider Music |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,Musket Date: 23 Apr 14 - 04:58 PM Radicalisation is ugly. It is wrong and it is dangerous. It is not a product of Islam. It is a product of politics. What you can't get by the ballot box, get by telling thugs they are doing God's work. The problem as ever is that many people are shallow enough to believe what they are told if they are also told God wants them to do it too. Witness the so called jihad. Also note the Anglican Church in Uganda supporting death sentence for being gay. Voltaire yet again. Those that can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. There are over 65 million people in The UK. Less than a million go to church , yet our Prime Minister wants to piss off non Christians even more. Rational people can and will ignore the cynical political posturing but other people with a different imaginary friend will feel isolated and threatened. Well done Cameron. You and your tambourine rattling idiots show the ugly side of religion, regardless of flavour. Make no mistake, Bliar's intervention was planned to pounce on Cameron's Jesus kick. Party politics are nothing when it comes to trying to drag us back to a superstitious dark age. Fuck 'em. All of 'em. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Apr 14 - 03:44 PM The mentally ill in positions of influence and power. They always have been, Richard. Anyone who thinks that they can run a country and govern people cannot be mentally stable. A better idea would be to vote for who you would think best suited to perform these tasks. If they don't want to do it, all the better! Back to the thread. It does say Islamic radicalism. Just a hint for those who think it is anti Islam. I don't believe it is. It is anti radicalism. I think Brian could have as easily started a thread about Christian radicalism or Communist radicalism. They are all as bad as each other. He would have got the same reaction. But probably from different people. Just my opinion of course. DtG |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Richard Bridge Date: 23 Apr 14 - 03:25 PM Given the proximity in time of Camermoron's sudden addiction to bible-thumping to B.Liar's attempts to rustle up a new crusade, I'd say the Xtian fundagelical right-wing loonies and megalomaniacs are on the march in the UK. Worrying. The mentally ill in positions of influence and power. |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Apr 14 - 03:04 PM "But an entire ideology as widely interpreted by those agreed by adherents to be authorised to do so might just be a different matter" As democratic as that huh? What exactly are you proposing - that we should ship them all back, like your old matey Eunuch suggested - or nowadays, Marine's new beau, Farrago? Ot maybe tattoo a number on their arms - that should do it, don'cha think. You're a bigot Mike - and one that should know better. Jim Carroll |
Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . . From: GUEST,# Date: 23 Apr 14 - 02:52 PM First God made idiots. That was for practice. Then it made school boards. Mark Twain |