BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 10:02 AM

Thanks, Keith. Still a very pertinent point to our other discussion about relying on the press. Here we have a perfect example. You said one thing and was corrected, so you revised the post. That is exactly what happens when the media is pulled up by offcom. However, by that point in time the damage has been done. A revision or apology on in column 6, page 11, does not get noticed but satisfies the law. And people still believe that the article lists all the places where real persecution exists. They do not read the retraction.

BTW - Even your revision is a spin. Just because it does not list Europe or the Americas does not mean that persecution is not occurring there. They just want to draw your attention to the places they list for an agenda that we can only guess at. As I have said before, do not rely on the media for anything.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 09:19 AM

Jim, the shooting of Jews in France was by an Islamist.
re the Jews shot in Brussels, "29-year-old French citizen Mehdi Nemmouche captured Friday in Marseille, said to have ties to Syrian jihadists.

Thanks Dave.
I revise the post.

Jim, that New Statesman link that YOU provided listed a number of places that were felt relevant to the discussion about persecution.
It most definitely did not include Europe or the Americas.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 08:54 AM

The writer of that piece did list a number of places that he felt relevant to the discussion.

But that is not what you said, Keith. Your exact phrase, to save you paging back, was lists all the places where real persecution exists.

Not being pedantic or trying to nitpick in any way but when you say one thing and then change it, how can we hope to follow your argument?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 08:05 AM

"Not Europe"
The present swing to the right has been engineered by playing on innate Xenophobia, largely aimed at Muslims
The problem, of course, is that once the extremists get a toe-hold, their extremism has no particular sectarian or racial barriers - anybody whose face doesn't fit
Not counting Farrago, the extremist right (no dispute that all this shit is right-wing generated, though Mm Le Penn is insisting that they are "radical" and not extremist) has made significant gains in 12 European countries.
She is now ferreting away trying to unite those groupings into a single entity - good days ahead, if she does.
Jim Carroll
This from today's Sunday Times, from European Belgium.
FEARFUL JEWS BEGIN EXODUS FROM EUROPE
The Brussels killings are an extreme example of anti-semitism driving thousands to Israel, the UK and US
Sojan Pancevski BRUSSELS Inna Lazareva TEL AVIV

DELPHINE ANKAOUA never dreamt she would feel com¬pelled to leave her chic home in the leafy Neuilly-sur-Seine suburb of Paris.
But when her neighbours of 10 years asked Ankaoua to remove the mezuzah, a small box containing a piece of Jewish religious text, from the front door of her flat, she and her family decided it was time to leave the country — and move to Israel.
"We were absolutely shocked," said Ankaoua, 39, who had long encouraged her sons to wear baseball caps over their kippas (skull caps) to disguise their origins. "We tried phoning an organisation that helps Jews combat anti-semitism, and they told us just to take off the mezuzah."
Any doubts about her decision were dispelled two weeks before Ankaoua and her husband were due to leave when their seven-year-old son was told he could not play in the garden because he was Jewish.
"At that point I just said: 'Merci, la France! Au revoir!'," she said. "It made it so much easier for me to say goodbye to my country."
From her new home in Jerusalem, Ankaoua works for the Israeli government, helping other European Jews driven to emigrate by what they perceive as an increasingly hostile atmosphere.
The extreme form such hostility can take was high¬lighted by last weekend's killings of four visitors and staff of the Jewish Museum in Brussels in an apparent Antisemitic attack
Despite an international outcry, the Belgian police have yet to catch the perpetrator.
Figures compiled by the Israeli government say the exodus is most pronounced from France, home to more than 500,000 Jews, and Belgium, which has a 42,000-strong Jewish commu¬nity. The number of French Jews moving to Israel doubled to 3,374 in 2013, after the killing in Toulouse the previous year by a French-Algerian anti-Semite of seven people, including three stu¬dents at a Jewish school.
This year it could hit 5,000: by the end of April, 1,499 had already made the journey.
The secretary-general of the World Jewish Congress, Serge Cwajgenbaum, said many more were moving to Britain, America and Canada. "Jews are questioning their future not only in France but in Europe at large because they fear for their safety."
The EU's racism watchdog found France, Belgium and Hungary were the worst countries in terms of perceived anti-semitism, according to a study conducted among Jewish minorities.
Nearly half the respondents expressed concern about falling victim to verbal attacks, while more than 33% feared physical assault. A quarter said they avoided Jewish sites or events because they felt unsafe.
A surge in support for far-right parties in elections to the European parliament, such as the National Front in France, has added to concerns.
"When openly anti-semitic, neo-Nazi political parties gained a foothold in national parliaments and regional councils, and now in the European Parliament itself, more alarm bells should be raised", wrote David Harris, director of pressure group, the America Jewish Committee.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 07:44 AM

more to do with making tenuous links with decent law abiding citizens over here.

The title excludes decent law abiding citizens.
Our security services say there are thousands of radicalised Islamists who do live here though.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 07:27 AM

Sez you what it has "more to do with"; but it's no sort of law of nature that you have to be right about that. Islamist radicalism is a demonstrable threat to the current commonweal, or none of the things from 9/11 to the caning of the unmarried mother in Nigeria to the murder of Fusilier Rigby would have happened. If we are not to single out any sort of specified entity for any sort of comment, than what is the point of this forum at all? And you really don't know what Mr Patel's nephew thinks, you know. All v well being sarcastic about the comment; but the 9/11 guys & the Rigby killers et al were all somebody's nephews at that.

Sorry, Ian; but I honestly think you are long overdue to log on to Confused.com . You really do seem to have lost the plot here.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 07:11 AM

Did you get around to checking on the nephew of the corner shop owner Michael?

It's just that the word reactionary crept up again.

By the way, I did read the thread title. I am not interested in threads designed to point at people for being different. It's got fuck all to do with foreign abhorrent cultures and more to do with making tenuous links with decent law abiding citizens over here. Your addition to that puerile agenda was most unwelcome.

By the way, following on from Jim's expose of radical Christianist hate in Northern Ireland, an excellent photo of a woman outside Stormont with a banner saying "I am a Muslim Consultant Surgeon. I am here to do Mr Robinson's shopping"

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 07:08 AM

Shaw doesn't take kindly to being called out for the shite he spews. He once sent me a threatening PM for doing so that had me quaking in my boots (not really - having a good laugh at his expense more like it). Anyway - be warned.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 06:50 AM

Thank you, bobad. Actually, I don't generally find Steve 'vile'; I often find him quite a reasonable person, which is why I was so taken aback by his last lot of animadversions. As I said a post or two back, to Keith at 0411 am, I can't imagine what brought it on, & hope he may now regret it. Not holding breath, tho.

Best

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 06:40 AM

That must have been some real putrid verbal diarrhea that Shaw spewed out to merit those responses from MtheGM. I long ago ceased reading anything emanating from that vile person but do quite enjoy Mike's counter punches - do keep it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 06:08 AM

"It most definitely did not include Europe or the Americas."
So ******* what?
You have just been given the situation in America and Britain - who o earth is puttig national boundaries on religious persecution, certainly not me.
Here'e a further example of the British brand from this moring's Sunday Times
I think Mike shrugged it off as "Peter Robinson agreeing with some other Irishman", and nothing to do with Britain.
Jim Carroll

BIBLE BASHER WHO LACKS FAITH IN COMMUNITY SPIRIT
The Metropolitan Tabernacle preacher's verbal attack on Muslims and sharia law from his Belfast pulpit has caused disquiet not just in Northern Ireland but around the world

Not many live shows at the Odyssey Arena in Belfast offer a religious 1 experience, but then not many shows are like those hosted by Metropolitan Tabernacle church. In 2011, a 7,000 -strong audience saw a line-up that included choirs and drama teams. The headline act was Pastor James McConnell who told the gathering that recent natural disasters were a sign of the second coming, as prophesied in the Bible.
This veteran grey- haired preacher describes himself as a simple man, but at Pentecostal rallies he is more like a rock star. In 2005, he drew a full house of14,000 to the Odyssey. Five years later 12,000 people listened to his sermon at a rally in Ravenhill rugby ground. Thefollowingyear, he preached to 1,000 people in predominately Catholic west Belfast.
His place of weekly worship, Whitewell Metropolitan Tabernacle on Belfast's Shore Road, cost £5m (€6.14m) to build 20 years ago and is more like a concert venue than a church. Visitors are greeted with a golden double staircase, glittering chandeliers and a waterfall in the foyer. This is religion Las Vegas-style. At a time when Sunday congregations are dwindling elsewhere, McConnell is clearly doing something right. The east Belfast-born firebrand, who has been preaching since the age of 13, built this place up from an Orange Hall with 10 worshippers to a hand-clapping arena that routinely attracts 2,000.
Two Sundays ago McConneU's congregation heard him make remarks about Muslims that would ignite a controversy that would be reported around ' the world. The pastor described Islam as " heathen" and "satanic". "People say there are good Muslims in Britain — that may be so — but I don't trust them," he roared from the pulpit.
Khalid Anis of the Islamic Society of Britain challenged McConnell about his remarks on the BBC's Nolan Show last Wednesday. "I was disturbed that, in a country where there has been so much sectarian strife, a religious leader seems to be making the same mistake about stereotyping and tarring a whole community because of ignorance," he said. Before the debate, Anis expected a "huanced discussion about sharia law and the role it played within Muslim communities. It quickly became apparent [McConnell] had no understanding about what sharia means to British Muslims"
A number of political figures came out in support of McConnell. These included Edwin Poots, the DUP health minister, and Sammy Wilson, another MLA from the party. Peter Robinson, Northern Ireland's first minister, agreed he would not trust Muslims involved in violence, or devotees of sharia law, although he would "trustthemtogototheshops" for him. "Trust isn't a matter of ahatecrime," Robinson reasoned. "If it is, I'm going to ask the police to take action against people who don't trust politicians."
Robinson and his wife Iris have worshipped at McConneU's church for years, and their daughter Rebekah was married at his Shore Road venue in 2003. When Iris Robinson was revealed to be having an affair-with a 19 -year-old, McConnell , publicly came to the couple's support, saying: "I think Iris can begin again in another way, not in politics, where she can help a lot of people."
Peter Robinson may have spoken out of spiritual solidarity with his pastor, but the province's Muslims were offended. "I find it despicable and totally unacceptable," said Anis. "The 3,000 or so Muslims in Northern Ireland look up to him, as do other minority communities. He has since backtracked, but I don't think that's enough. He's doing the political thing now, as far as I can see."
Some Christians justified McConnell's sermon on the basis of freedom of speech. Michael Wardlow, head of Northern Ireland's Equality Commission, was having none of it, however. "It's perfectly OK for people within faith traditions to have a robust dialogue around faith, even criticise other faiths, but freedom of speech has limitations," he said. "In evangelical, more right-wing churches, you do get more extreme language. [But] not only did he say all Muslims cannot be trusted, he said they can't be trusted because of sharia law. Two things were happening: negative stereotyping, and he was perpetuating perceptions that are not factually correct."
Race-hate crimes are on the rise in Northern Ireland, with a 43 % increase in attacks on ethnic minorities over the past year. Two racist attacks are reported every day. Last week Anna Lo, an Alliance MLA, announced her intention to leave politics because of racist abuse. "To support a lunatic who makes remarks like that is adding fuel to the flames in Northern Ireland," Lo said about Robinson's support for McConnell.
Despite his apparently antiquated beliefs, the pastor leads a relatively progressive church. The venue streams its services online, some preachers read scripture from iPads, and McConnell invites everyone including Catholics to attend. In 2010, he condemned fundamentalist preachers in America for burning copies of the Koran on the anniversary of 9/11. "I think it's not just disrespectful but stupid," he said.
The pastor has been married to Margaret since he was 22, and has two daughters. His background suggests triumph in the face of adversity. James McConnell was born May 15,1938, in east Belfast. At the age of seven his mother died, and he was orphaned at 13 when his father also passed away. "My sister was very ill with tuberculosis and our home was wiped out by the disease," he once said. "I went to live with my grandparents; my grandfather was a godly man and at the age of 7 Vi1 gave my life to Christ."
At 14, McConnell left school and started working in a Belfast shipyard as an office clerk. He was ordained to the Christian ministry when he was 17 and founded the Whitewell church two years later. By the time he set up the Metropolitan Tabernacle in 1994, he was one of Europe's most notable evangelical preachers. Despite his Jimmy Swaggart style of mega-church preaching, he has largely avoided scandal until now.
Accordingto company accounts from 2009, the church's annual operating costs are about £1.2m.
McConnell reportedly takes a modest £25,000 salary. He has been involved in a number of charitable ventures, but not all have worked out. In 2009, he said he "took a hammer" to a Romanian children's home funded by his congregation to stop it falling into the hands of a "paedophile ring" connected to the Romanian government. The Romanian embassy rejected the allegations.
Spouting fire and brimstone from the pulpit may not have been good for his health. In 2011, he underwent triple heart-bypass surgery. It was reportedly only the second time in 54 years he had not held his services — and he was back preaching two weeks later. Last year, he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and underwent chemotherapy. During his Slightly befuddled performance on the Nolan Show, he continually pronounced sharia as "sharara". "He can't even pronounce the word," complained Anis. "I don't know what's driving him, quite honestly."
On Thursday, Robinson apologised for his comments, which local Muslim leaders accepted. However, some Muslim doctors have questioned his continuing suitability as first minister, and particularly his health minister's support for McConnell. SaminaDornan, a consultant gynaecologist and obstetrician at Belfast's Royal Victoria Hospital, said: "I love living here, I am so proud to be here, but I have never been so embarrassed in my life to be from Northern Ireland."
No apologies have been forthcoming from McConnell himself. Last week, he was back on stage at Metropolitan Tabernacle, labelling Barack Obama a "patchwork quilt" who "doesn't know" if he's Christian or Muslim. "Nobody is going to close my mouth — Islam is dangerous," he said.
Still, Anis is hoping that there is a way forward through dialogue. "I told him [after the Nolan Show] the Belfast Muslim community is extending an invitation to come and sit with them. Nothing happens by talking hateful language."
You'd think Northern Ireland might have realised that by now.
Sunday Times 1.6.2014

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 05:39 AM

Michael is just amazingly reactionary and sees criminal association with one religion whilst ignoring the failings if others.
.,,.,
No, I don't. They are all bollocks to me & replete with 'failings'. But the 'one' you accuse me of concentrating on happens to be the 'one' that this thread is about, doesn't it? So it wouldn't be particularly germane to go off at them all. Cast eyes ½" upwards and read the thread title, sillipooze.

But this 'one' happens nevertheless to have a lot more 'failings' than the others, at that, doesn't it? Or can you after all name a sovereign state run by any other system where, in this current Year Of Grace, young women are publicly caned 100 strokes on their bare buttocks [N Nigeria 2001], or buried up to their necks & stoned to death for sleeping with husbands they have legally married but the sharia court won't recognise, or hanged for maintaining the religion into which they were brought up? But objedction to such practices is "reactionary", is it? How so, pray?

I'm surprised BTW at you falling back on such a pathetic lefty boo-word as "reactionary". Why, I shall be an "imperialist running-dog" of something-or-other in a minute, I daresay.

"reactionary": let me roll it round the mouth. "reactionary"; "reactionary"...

Reminds me of my bro-in-law's Communist-party-member brother back in the 1940s. "Reactionary" --

Ah, sweet!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 05:31 AM

The writer of that piece did list a number of places that he felt relevant to the discussion.
He certainly did not mention Ireland's abortion laws.
I was pointing out that Jim's own link was not describing the kinds of persecution that Jim includes.

He is quite entitled to define anything he wants as persecution, but the piece he links to did not.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 05:22 AM

You see, Keith, going to a point I mentioned elsewhere, it is statements like 'lists all the places where real persecution exists' that let down your arguments. The New Statesman does not list 'all the places'. Granted, it provides a list that shows some places where persecution exists but I am as sure as I can be that persecution exists in other places as well. And what is 'real persecution' anyway? Is there such a thing as surreal persecution? Remember what I was saying? The media are not telling lies. But they are only telling part of the story.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 05:12 AM

Jim, that New Statesman link that YOU provided lists all the places where real persecution exists.
It most definitely did not include Europe or the Americas.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 04:35 AM

The persecution of Catholics in Northern Ireland led to over a decade of bloody warfare not so long ago - that persecution has been a part of life for the minority third since 1922.
The 'Troubles' actually started when Civil Rights marches were deliberately directed by police through mobs of stone-throwing Loyalists.
Members of my family were driven out of Derry in the 1950s after having their house burned around their ears in one of the regular sectarian bloodlettings.
Even today, in still Catholic Ireland, if I wished for a child of mine to receive a non-denominational education, I would have to drive 20 miles to the nearest school - permanently full, so you'd better make that 40 miles.
We've been through discussions on pregnancy termination to the point of allowing women to die rather than being given life-saving operations, or the State being implicated in continuing to cover up facts about clerical child abuse.
Much of the violence against Muslims and Roma taking place in Europe today is condoned or not acted on by the authorities - illicit maybe, ignored certainly - they coined the phrase 'institutional racism/culturalism' to cover it when it was revealed in Britain.
None of this would, I am sure, register on your sliding scale of persecution, of course.
The disturbing rise of fundamentalism in the world today is a continuation of what has always happened when religion has combined with politics, it's only the ingredients of that that are different.
On the subject of this thread, I would suggest that the persecution of Muslims by the Israeli regime, with its massacres, regular military incursions, checkpoints and daily humiliation must be a front-runner in the Religious Persecution stakes, but I have no doubt that you regard that as Antisemitism on my part.
As far as I am concern, they call all go to their own chosen Hell in their own particular handcart.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 04:29 AM

Speaking as a contemptible little louse, I fail to see what personal history has to do with it.

None of us experienced any of what we write about. Michael is just amazingly reactionary and sees criminal association with one religion whilst ignoring the failings if others. Keith just likes people to think he is clever.

Both disappointing. Luckily, both disappointed.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 04:11 AM

BTW -- meant to say thank you, Keith, for your last post. I should like to think that Steve posted his last one in heat, and perhaps regretted having done so after clicking on 'submit', as I am sure we have all done from time to time. I wonder... Seriously, I do generally regard him as a rational and reasonable forum member, and can't avoid thinking he departed from his normal standards for once this time. I should certainly prefer to think so.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 03:58 AM

With respect, Jim, and I hope without heated controversy: I honestly think you are confusing the concept of "persecution", which means the systematic maltreatment of a community by means legally recognised by the licit authorities where it occurs -- as is the case with some Christians in some places at present, though not of course exclusively so -- with illicit violence, not authoritatively approved, to which some minorities are subjected by dissident elements within the societies where they live. It is this latter abuse that you seem to be addressing in the examples given in your last post. They are most regrettable and deplorable abuses indeed; but they do not IMO constitute "persecution" in the sense I urge here, and which seems to me to be the meaning of that referred to in the post to which you are responding. True "persecution" is done by, or with the approval of, governments; not by insufficiently controlled mob-rule.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 03:43 AM

"There is no religious persecution in Europe or USA where most Christians are."
Of course there is religious persecution in Europe and America
It has recently been announced that there has been an increase in the vandalising of Jewish cemeteries and attacks on Jews in Europe, I belive a number of people were gunned down in a Jewish museum recently. Incidents like this are set to accelerate now that that nice Mr Farrago's friends, Penn, Wilders, Soini, Kjaersgaard, Bossi... et al, have gained a toe-hold.
None in Britain - ask the Muslims who have turned up for worship to find some kind soul has poured petrol through the letter-box of their mosque, or the continued victims of 'Paki bashing', or Asian shopkeepers who have to put reinforcements over the fronts of their shops (one of them got kicked to death and was set on fire not to long ago).
Inter-religious persecution and disturbance is a fact of life in many countries - we're about to experience another bout of it up North from here in another few weeks.
Since 9/11, Muslims have become the most persecutes section of American society, all Muslims being blamed for the behaviour of a handful of fanatical nutcases.
Religious persecution, like the poor, has always been with us; it seems that it only becomes a problem to some people when Christians are on the receiving end.
Some of us regard all religious persecution as evil and the possibility of any church gaining political influence a permanent Damocles sword hanging over all of us - with people like yourself, it only becomes so when your own little boat is rocked.
You have the article - deal with the statements - "shite" does't hack it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 03:18 AM

Steve, why can you not disagree with a polite and reasonable post in the same way?
Why must you be so abusive and offensive?
And how can you possibly know more about anti-Semitism than a Jew, especially a Jew who remembers Mosely's Blackshirts marching through his home city, lived through the holocaust losing family members, and made his way in institutions like the British Army?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 02:56 AM

And to indulge just for a moment in your sort of vocabulary, which as a rule I have avoided on this forum for the past 5 years as both discourteous & counterproductive, but the alliteration seems appropriate this time around --

I may be occasionally a bit breathless after walking, and a bit arthritic now & then

but really for 3-score-&- 22

I am not all that fucking 'frail'.

Now, then; remind us: what was anybody saying about Islamic radicalism...?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Saint Musket
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 02:43 AM

{sniff} {sniff}

Here, can you smell bullshit?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 02:18 AM

"Fool", you observe. Much better word than "Twat". Take heed, & learn, my good fellow. I flatter myself that, here from the security of my own home [not "a Home", note], I can bite just as hard as you if need arises, tho fewer of my original teeth survive probably. I could match your pathetically abusive efforts in rational exchange any day of the week, & you better believe it, Sonny Jim!. So watch out for your own metaphorical 'jugular', you silly little chap.You are, after all, not such a bad old thing at that -- as I might have observed previously, but poor pathetic old survivals like me must be indulged to the extent of the occasional otiose repetition, or what a sad old world this would be for lively young things like S. Shaw Esq to come to eventual maturity in, to be sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 01:45 AM

And here is a bit of intentionally patronising, but obviously much-needed, advice for you, Mr Shaw. The use of such phraseology as "gobshite" and "arsehole" [with or without a factual addition like 'rightwing' which I see no objection to tho clearly intended as some sort of insult unworthy of an intellect generally of the quality of yours] is entirely counterproductive, and detracts from whatever merit the argument in which such appear might possess [nil, pretty well, in this instance, but as a general principle, you understand]: along with such idiotically hyperbolical threats as 'going for the jugular' [arrgghhh!; I would be quaking in my boots, if I wore boots!]. But you refrain because of my advanced age, do you: otherwise my jugular would be severed by your dentures, would it? Now who's being "patronising", you stupid young fool? Behave yourself.

In earnest, now: you would really do much better to forswear such locutions for the future, my good man.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 01:16 AM

Oh, diddums-widdums, Steve. What a splenetic outburst. Quite uncharacteristic. What can have rattled the old cage to such an extent? Not like you at all. Why, somebody who can be so very rude and offensive with no provocation whatsoever deserves to be "patronised", you know [which you weren't, but let that pass].

Unless there is some physical cause, perhaps? Sounded to my experience like the effect of some sort of niggling painful disability which can have that sort of deleterious effect on the temper -- do you suffer from anything like gastric ulcers, say, or something of that nature? If not sure, I should get it checked if I were you. There must be something amiss for you to come over so exceptionally rude & aggressive without the slightest cause. Really quite unacceptable. But I shall overlook it. You are clearly not yourself for some reason.

There there...

Best regards, as ever

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 12:58 AM

Delete USA and insert North and South America.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 12:33 AM

Jim, your man goes on to claim that "It's almost certainly not the case that Christians are the most "persecuted" religious group in proportion to their numbers."

He is agreeing that it is the most persecuted, but only because it is the biggest.

Shite!!
There is no religious persecution in Europe or USA where most Christians are.
Christianity is very far from the biggest religion in the places where persecution happens, so proportionally they actually suffer very much MORE than other religions.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 12:32 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jun 14 - 12:19 AM

WHOSE calculations, FW - yours? Lets see the EVIDENCE for this preposterous claim.

Not mine Greg. That was a quote from yesterday's Times.
Here are a few more people who make the "preposterous claim" (taken from Jim's link)
"In a rare theological intervention at a Downing Street reception yesterday, David Cameron made the eye-catching suggestion that Christians were the most persecuted religious group in the world today.
The PM is not the first prominent figure to make such a claim. Pope Benedict XVI said it during his New Year message in 2011, Angela Merkel made similar remarks during a visit to a church in November 2012, and late last year Prince Charles spoke of "intimidation, false accusation and organised persecution to the Christian communities in the Middle East at the present time."

Tragic news reports seem to bear this out. The destruction of ancient Christian communities in their homelands in Iraq, Syria and other parts of the Middle East, described by Tom Holland as "a crime against civilisation as well as against humanity", has been one of the most depressing consequences of the recent turmoil. Sometimes, direct religious persecution seems to be involved, as in this week's murder of Dutch priest Frans van der Lugt in the besieged town of Homs. Meanwhile, in Pakistan yet another absurd blasphemy prosecution came to light, this time of a Christian couple sentenced to death (and a fine!) for allegedly sending text messages deemed to be offensive to Islam.

And let's not forget North Korea, officially the worst country in the world to be a Christian, where a few weeks ago 33 Baptist missionaries are said to have been sentenced to death on the personal orders of Kim Jong-Un.

The persecution of Christians has been the subject of some recent books. The US Catholic journalist John Allen entitled his The Global War on Christians, maintaining that Christians as a whole were "indisputably ... the most persecuted religious body on the planet". Writing in the Spectator, Allen commented that,

the world is witnessing the rise of an entire new generation of Christian martyrs. The carnage is occurring on such a vast scale that it represents not only the most dramatic Christian story of our time, but arguably the premier human rights challenge of this era as well."

In slightly less apocalyptic vein, British author Rupert Shortt in his recent book Christianophobia: A faith under attack catalogues violent targeting of Christians from Nigeria to the far east as well as less lethal but clear human rights abuses and intimidation. In an interview with Alan Johnson, Shortt said that "in a vast belt of land from Morocco to Pakistan there is scarcely a single country in which Christians can worship entirely without harassment".

"Rather more rigorous data has been assembled by the Pew Research Forum in a report produced earlier this year. Pew found that official "restriction on religion" (a more objective term than "persecution") was at the highest level for six years, as was the "social harassment" of members of religious communities. And Christians, indeed, were the most affected group. Christians faced harassment in no fewer than 151 countries worldwide – and not just in the Middle East, China or North Korea."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 May 14 - 07:49 PM

You mean well, Steve.

No I don't, and I don't need a pompous, right-wing arsehole like you to patronise me, thanks.   

You're a well-meaning old thing yourself, Steve, in general.

You just said that. Have you forgotten? Are you in a home yet? Twat.

But, be well advised -- stay out of this one. It's an area I really do know a lot more about than you do, and you are liable just to make a rather unsavoury sort of fool of yourself.

I need "advice" from a gobshite like you like I need a second arsehole. And never assume that, from your extremely limited transactions with me, you know more than me about anything on the planet. That is dangerous ground, dear fellow, for you to tread, as a number of people on this forum have already gleaned. I could go for your jugular ever more, but you're very old and I really don't need to be upsetting you. Best that you just sod off, leave me 'n' Jim alone (we bite hard, and you're frail) and get on with your arch-Tory, Islamophobe dreams.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 May 14 - 07:35 PM

Look at who's coming to the defense of the antisemite Carroll - that is rich, rich indeed!

Attempted smear noted. But, more important than that, you show yourself to be a minnow. Prove that I'm what you imply I am, you scurrilous little shitbag. And, while you're at it, you unreconstructed extreme right-wing shitferbrains, consider whether, just for once in your useless little life, you might actually make a post that actually has some serious content. High on snide, vacuous on substance, that's you through and through. Can't think why I've never said it before. You haven't got one single fair-minded idea in what passes for your brain. There are plenty of you around, unfortunately. Go on, prove that I'm what you imply I am. Alternatively, let's all have a bloody good laugh at your next pointless one-liner. Scum.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 May 14 - 02:03 PM

CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION
"It's almost certainly not the case that Christians are the most "persecuted" religious group in proportion to their numbers. Rather, they suffer along with other minority groups from, to take the most obvious example, the increasing prominence and, in some countries, power of strains of Islam that are uncomfortable with the very notion of religious pluralism. So, to an equal or even greater extent, are Muslims belonging to minority sects, such as the Shia in Saudi Arabia or the Ahmadi in Pakistan. Persecution against the Ahmadis, a sect not regarded by some orthodox as Muslim at all, has spread even to Britain, where recently a local newspaper in Luton was prevailed upon to apologise for the "hurt feelings" of Muslims after it carried an advertisement from the Ahmadi community.
If Christians are persecuted in many parts of the world, so are Muslims, Hindus, atheists, Buddhists and Jews. If Christians are persecutors in other (or sometimes the same) parts of the world: as are Muslims, Hindus, atheists, Buddhists and Jews. The fact that such a list of persecutors can include Buddhists, probably the faith least renowned for its zeal or intolerance, is a strong indication that by and large we are dealing with group rivalries, hatred of minorities, political struggles and only rarely a persecution based in the specifics of Christian theology."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 31 May 14 - 01:32 PM

Christianity is by most calculations the most persecuted religion of modern times.

WHOSE calculations, FW - yours? Lets see the EVIDENCE for this preposterous claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 May 14 - 01:27 PM

You have been presented with a series of Israeli atrocities carried out in the name of the Jewish people - you have ignored them all.
You have made quite clear that you regard all criticism of Israel as Antisemitic
What have you asked that I haven't replied to?
I have always made a point of responding to all questions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 May 14 - 05:10 AM

"No answers" to what?

I am the one waiting for some answers to some questions I have asked. Can't find any questions you have asked that require any answers. If there are any, please repeat them. Meanwhile, here are mine again, to which some answers would be appreciated --

I ask yet again if anyone can point to any other contemporary faith which induces so perverse a concept of "honour" in any of its adherents, or whose followers, in so many jurisdictions where they have gained power, use its tenets to justify such excesses of governmental forensic "justice".

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 May 14 - 04:25 AM

"Till then I'll call you what I like, you pompous little prig."
Schoolyard names and no answers again Mike.
And I will continue to regard you as a despicable hypocrite until you and provide some and stop defending Israeli atrocities from behind your 'wall of the dead'
What a ***** team!!!
Islamic Society - Jewish State - both lead to ethnic cleansing in the hands of zealots and extremists - whence the difference?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 31 May 14 - 04:12 AM

Neither dare they speak out for the Muslims in peril after it took the murder of a couple of thousand of them in order to deliver India a new President.

The rise of using Islam as a tool for murderous intent is wrong. Yet substitute the word religion for Islam and religious hypocrites start defending religion.

There again, western media work on the basis of a bloke in London having empathy with a bloke in Africa on the basis of praying to the same delusion whilst seeing another bloke in Africa as being inferior because his delusion is slightly different.

Seen through the eyes of the other delusion, the first delusion doesn't have the answers.

Rational people meanwhile are called everything from a pig to a dog for refusing to play the persecution game. People who are seen as Christian by others, not necessarily Christians. It is easy to denounce medieval atrocity as being an aspect of one delusion regardless whilst claiming a moral high ground for another.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:50 AM

The Times today.

"Across the globe, in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, Christians are being bullied, arrested, jailed, expelled and executed. Christianity is by most calculations the most persecuted religion of modern times. Yet Western politicians until now have been reluctant to speak out in support of Christians in peril.

The savage treatment of Meriam Ibrahim, sentenced to hang because she refused to renounce her Christian faith, has highlighted the miserable plight of those living under the regime of President Omar al-Bashir. The president has stated that he wants a "purely Islamic society" and many Christians, some of them denied food aid....."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:43 AM

Then stop being one. Till then I'll call you what I like, you pompous little prig.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:36 AM

"One of the most irritatingly insidious forms of antisemitism is throwing up their origins at Jews"
And one of the most despicable defences of atrocities carried out by regimes claiming to act on behalf of the Jewish people is to point to the death toll of the Holocaust and say "If you critisise them you are an Antisemite".
Israel is now a persecutor of the Muslim people, stealing their land, slaughtering, starving, ghettoising and humiliating their people.
You have paid lip-service to being opposed to this while at the same time you have stayed silent on a massive massacre of refugees, you have ignored the chemical warfare, the Berlin-like wall, the attempts to starve an entire, largely impoverished people into submission, the attempted ethnic cleansing of a nomadic people, the Warsaw Ghetto like checkpoints, the destruction of homes, the bombing of hospitals and schools, children being used as human shields..... you have refused to even acknowledge statements by Israeli soldiers and security service officers.
Your 'opposition' to Israeli expansionist terrorism appears to amount to the cutting down of a few olive trees and six broken cameras - no more than mealy-mouthed lip - service.
When my mother-in-law-to-be (didn't happen) showed me her tattoo all those years ago and told me, "Never again - not to anybody" she left me with something that stuck with me for the rest of my life.
I first met her and her daughter through their activities in the South African Anti-Apartheid Movement protests... I have no doubt where they would be today in connection with Israeli Anti-Apartheid protests. Certainly on the opposite side of Israel's Berlin Wall, to you, BooBoo, Keith the Moron - and all the other 'principled and honest human beings' now defending Israel's right to act exactly like the former persecutors of the Jewish people.
Don't you dare call me an Antisemite, you appalling cowardly, hypocrite.         
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:33 AM

How you could have the gall to post that after my just preceding thread, Ian, is quite beyond me.

You contemptible little louse.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:27 AM

Try folding the tin foil first. It makes it twice as thick and doubles the chances of preventing harmful rays from reaching your head Michael.

The transmitters are disguised in mosque minarettes so check to see how close you live to a mosque. Don't actually get within 600 yds of one though. You don't need to be quite so brave.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 May 14 - 03:16 AM

I am perfectly well aware that I could just as easily have been born in 1932 in Warsaw as in London; in which case I should not be sitting here posting this. The consideration is a constant leitmotiv to my entire existence. It needs no patronising persons revelling in the security of their unshakeable Waspery to remind me of the fact, thank you.

A little empathy would not come amiss on occasion.

So, sorry: I say it again. Jim is an antisemite. He thinks he isn't but he is. I daresay he would rather not be; in which case he would do well to get his brain in gear before his fingers start automatically typing "Nazi" and "persecuted" and so on yet again.

And I say again: Islam is, for reasons I have rubricated countless times with no semblance of any rational response, but mere irrelevant abuse or facetiousness [I mean you, Musket], a Weltanschauung which needs constant vigilance on the part of the rest of the world [just look at responses to the ongoings in Sudan at this instant] if its potential for ubiquitous mischief is to be contained.

Which is what this thread is supposed to be about.

So how about some rational responses, please: without engagement of these factitious instamatic racism-spotters which snarl up so much of the baggage of so many of you?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 May 14 - 12:45 AM

You mean well, Steve. But these antennæ of yours are not of the most sensitive. One of the most irritatingly insidious forms of antisemitism is throwing up their origins at Jews, telling them they should 'know better' then to do such-and-such or say so-&-so or have views on this'n'that, because of their ethnic history. It's something Jim does all the time. I gave some reasoned argument; asked some very specific questions. He declined to address or answer them; instead introducing the 1930s Nazis into the equation and reminding me I was a member of a 'persecuted race'; as if I was ever likely to forget. You're a well-meaning old thing yourself, Steve, in general. But, be well advised -- stay out of this one. It's an area I really do know a lot more about than you do, and you are liable just to make a rather unsavoury sort of fool of yourself.

Best regards

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 30 May 14 - 08:35 PM

Look at who's coming to the defense of the antisemite Carroll - that is rich, rich indeed!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 14 - 07:25 PM

Sorry, Jim; but you are an antisemite. You think you're not but you are.

You come across generally as a respectable old duffer, but I take serious exception to this. I have not, in all the time I've managed to stick with Keith-Jim threads, detected one iota of antisemitism from Jim, and my antennae are constantly all a-bristle. This remark, unfortunately, marks you out as that thing I really hoped you weren't: a silly old fool. Get a grip, Michael. Preferably by taking a holiday from threads like this one. I know how to do that. Watch and learn.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 30 May 14 - 01:52 PM

I recall a couple of years ago someone saying at a folk club I was at that Muslims can't stand the idea of music and want it banning. Councils will be telling shops to get rid of Muzak in case it offends yadda yadda.

A few nights later, at a Richard Thompson concert......
I
Incidentally, I'm just wiating for the taxi. Four couples meeting up for a drink and meal. One of the couples are Muslim so soft drinks and vegetarian for them as the pub doesn't do halal. Just another night in multicultural UK.

Meanwhile, idiots with placards saying Jesus this that and the other will be, as ever, picketing the out of town shopping mall a few miles away as they open on a Sunday.

I'd wear tin foil on my head as well if I were you Michael, just to cover all bogey men...

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 May 14 - 01:48 PM

"Jim; but you are an antisemite. "
The old get out - scramble behind the piles of dead to excuse your echoing the very thing that killed them.
Been there - done that - have long established that those who attribute crimes committed in the names of the Jewish people are the Antisemites.
Pathetic!!
Jim carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 May 14 - 01:37 PM

Sorry, Jim; but you are an antisemite. You think you're not but you are. I push you into an intellectual corner, like your dire & drastic constant confusion between race & religion for instance; and what pours out but the old refs to Nazis, and reminders about being a member of a "persecuted race"...? Well, how luvly to be a Wasp like you, so dashed superiah to us lesser breeds, wot wot...

When Dustin Hoffman went all Method & prepared for Marathon Man by running all round Central Park & staying awake for 36 hours, Laurence Olivier said "Have you thought of trying acting, dear boy?"

So, never mind the Nazis & the "persecuted races", Jim. Have you thought of trying arguing, dear boy?

All this constant recession to race & origin-throwing & reminders of the Nazis ~~ really a bit contemptible, you know. I'd afraid the yah·boo·sux are just a teeny dose of own medicine.

You think they're not, but they are...

~M~