BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Seaham cemetry
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:10 AM

I fail to see how normal people are debating with these bigoted old men with no concept whatsoever of whom or what they address.

I saw active service in Iraq, Afghanistan and over a couple of neighbouring borders. I, as many others went wondering the degree to which we could relate village tribal law with the mindsets of the student doctors we trained with back in England from these countries.

Not one bit.

Just because an ill educated old man invokes the Q'ran to justify his judgement is no different to calling a Church of England vicar for a mass murderer in Alabama who says Jesus told him to go on a killing spree.

The governments of some of these countries, whilst attempting to show themselves in control, are not. Sadly, some use the lawlessness of regions as a bargaining tool for western support in propping up their own regime.

Out of interest, there is nothing new in many of these atrocities, just heightened awareness. Not a bad thing in itself but it does tend to feed Col Bigot Retd and members of his bridge club.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:22 AM

Oh dear Michael, you repeated it just up the page and started it on this thread for that matter. Your diatribe earlier today is there for everyone to laugh at for that matter.

Ask nurse. She will help you look for it.

Best regards, may your continence pads never leak and all that,

Musket

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:31 AM

Keith as ever sees items he agrees with as stronger in evidence base than anything that offends his stupidity.

Care to give an example of this latest accusation you have made up?
Of course not!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:38 AM

I am fortunate in remaining perfectly continent, thank you. But if I weren't, then drawing attention to the fact is just the sort of brilliant argument to appeal to your o-so-amusing mindset, eh Ian? I am sure that any elderly Mudcatters reading this, who do perhaps have the misfortune of having lost continence with old age, must be most delightedly diverted by your incomparable wit.

Oh, you really are a nasty, contemptible little specimen of uselessness. A really dismal little pain in the arse ~~ & I stress that LITTLE.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:42 AM

Rejoin if you like. Or not. Up to you --

but I hereby announce that no more answers will be forthcoming from me to your pathetically petty provocations.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:56 AM

Book distributed at City of Toronto's "Doors Open" festival calls for Muslims to wage a Jihad against non-Muslims.

Claims, "Jihad is as much a primary duty of the Muslims concerned as are daily prayers or fasting. One who shirks it is a sinner. His very claim to being a Muslim is doubtful."

Doors open for Muslim Brotherhood?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 08:04 AM

Prejudiced abuse and mocking of age, infirmity and disability should be dealt with as forcefully as racism,IMO, FWIW.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 08:25 AM

Eyup Michael,

Just for you, I found your original diatribe and stereotyping discrimination.




Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MtheGM - PM
Date: 18 May 14 - 09:34 AM

... and what do you know of the thoughts and actions of your nice GP's young nephew, eh? The killers of Mr Rigby were some nice person's nephews, I expect...




And then you have the gall to try to invoke moral authority due to distant relatives being European Jews. If I were you, I'd play along with the ga ga excuse. It may increase your credibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 08:29 AM

"Care to give an example of this latest accusation you have made up?"
Take any of your carefully selected "historian", or "experts" - you might start with the obsucure idealistic Australian sect who told you it was OK to sell arms and riot control equipment to Assad.
Plenty of others to choose from.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 08:58 AM

Book distributed at City of Toronto's "Doors Open" festival calls for Muslims to wage a Jihad against non-Muslims.

Yup, Boo- just like The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion represent all Christians.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:01 AM

I'd add homophobia to the list, but I wouldn't want to incriminate you Keith. Your support of your pet worm does that admirably. Not to mention your membership of a homophobic religion.... Kicked the misogynists out yet?

The brass neck gall of it....

In the real world, The Equality Act and it's predecessors define race, ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation. Age has a few provisos. Not least of all not to take their views seriously. The older they get, the dafter they get. Mind you, there's one or two on this thread for whom keyboard access restrictions would feature in a best interest meeting..

By challenging and ridiculing Michael, I am treating him as an equal. What's your excuse?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:02 AM

Take any of your carefully selected "historian", or "experts"

So Jim, name one historian I have cited who was not an eminent, professional historian, or one person I have cited as an expert who was not.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:18 AM

Could someone define eminent, professional and expert for the rest of us?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:48 AM

"Yup, Boo- just like The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion represent all Christians."

Another one of your false equivalences Greg - nice try but this one isn't even close - you're losing your touch. Look up Sayyid Mawdudi, Jamaat-e-Islami and the Muslim Brotherhood - you might just learn something that will enable you to make an intelligent post instead of the reflexive "whataboutery" of which you are so fond.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:51 AM

"Could someone define eminent, professional and expert for the rest of us?"

Eminent--anyone who supports a given argument
Professional--see eminent
Expert--see professional

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 10:00 AM

What's little Michael?

Size 13 shoes, 6'4", beer gut to be proud of and a humongous great willy. My new car doesn't fit in the garage either for that matter.

You see, when people start saying horrible things about others, picking on one aspect, in the example of a GP or corner shop owner, his or her Islamic faith, I start thinking.. What trait of theirs can I pick on and have a pop at in order for them to see how it feels? You seem to be a touchy bugger who enjoys giving it out. Even light hearted comments about cooking sherry hit a nerve. And still you dole it out with absurd hatred and fear of local citizens on the basis of something you read about in a newspaper happening half way around the world. Instead of wondering what can ,be done about it, you join in the crass game of defying anyone with a dark skin to condemn it publicly or be associated.

Your refusing to acknowledge me as a result is fine, but then you wonder when young Muslims refuse to integrate in your cosy Alan Bennett world.

You are almost as sad as our resident corporal sign writer from Oswestry.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 10:15 AM

So Musket, when you spoke disparagingly of "little people of no consequence" you were referring to their stature?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 10:51 AM

"So Jim, name one historian I have cited who was not an eminent, professional historian, or one person I have cited as an expert who was not."
The Australian tree-huggers association, or whatever they call themselves, who told you it was OK to sell weapons and rit control gear to Assad
The team of "experts" who you claim said that "All male Pakistanis were implanted to have it off with underage girls" - still never produced
The Daily Mail Journalist who said World War One was a glorious enterprise to which a generation of young men went willingly to be slaughtered in the mud.
The Muslim Watch thread which you dedicated yourself to claiming that their masses of racist propaganda was true beyond all doubt.
Not forgetting Christine Kenneally, who you swore, supported your view of The Irish Famine, but turned out to be saying exactly the opposite.
to name a few.
Have you ever though of entering your writings for the Booker Prize for fiction - I'm sure you'd do well
All together now, "lies, all lies I tell you"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 10:55 AM

"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?"

I can't argue with more than the detail of that, any more than you can logically claim that Western interventionism has had any less of an horrific effect upon their countries, from the 1920s right up to now. Of course there have been many other instances since the birth of Christianity, of Islam being (unsuccessfully) targetted for extermination.

If you constantly visit upon others, invasions, pogroms and actions which lead to their deaths in thousands, what do you expect might be the result?

"Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." (Bible: Galatians VI)

The atheist philosopher George Santayana wrote: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." (The Life of Reason (1905-1906)).

That much misattributed quote is something that every Western and every Christian nation should examine in its every detail and nuance, before deciding to let the world look after itself, back off and mind its own cabbage patch, so as not to invite further hostility.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:04 AM

Jim, I do not remember the tree huggers but I certainly would never describe such folk as expert on anything.

The Pakistanis you referred to I do regard as experts on their own culture.
They blamed the offending on aspects of it.

I have never put up any daily mail journalist as an expert on anything.

I have never used any "Muslim Watch" site, but the list you claim came from there contained no errors that any of us including YOU could find.

Christine Kinealy is an eminent historian who we both quoted.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:18 AM

"Prejudiced abuse and mocking of age, infirmity and disability should be dealt with as forcefully as racism,IMO, FWIW."

i.e. ignored?

No change required then.

To refer to your own comments about persecution, apples & pomegranates.

You guys do love to fawn on the ones with brains, don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:38 AM

Editorial Policy.
" We don't allow hate, racism, stalking or other intimidation, or personal threats or attacks."

I wish it covered mocking people for their age and infirmity.
Allowing it does not make our forum a nicer place.
It probably never occurred to the administrators that anyone would do such a thing.
Such things never used to be said.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:40 AM

Keith
You produced an obscure group of idealists in order to back up your claim that it was permissible to sell Assad riot equipment and arms - you have a very convenient short memory.
"The Pakistanis you referred to I do regard as experts on their own culture."
You have never produced a single statement resembling your obscene suggestion, and you never will - feel free to do so now.
You even went as far to debasing the country you claim to love by suggesting that British laws would allow such a horrendously racist statement from a public figure.
"I have never put up any daily mail journalist as an expert on anything."
Max Hastings is a non qualified 'Historian' who writes for the Daily Mail
You dismissed all information give to you and insisted he was the "expert" we should accept for no other reason that you claimed (not having read anything he had written) that he supported your jingoism.
"I have never used any "Muslim Watch" site, "
You strenuously defended three pages of invention by Muslim Watch (hundreds of unqualified claims) put up by Boo Boo
"Christine Kinealy is an eminent historian who we both quoted."
You quoted her as saying Britain was not to blame for the outcome of the Famine - as with your 'Muslim implant' claim - it was your own invention.
You developed a technique of hiding behind 'experts' and have consistently admitted that you have ever read any of them, or any others on any of the subjects you have pontificated on.
Next
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:49 AM

Jim, Max Hastings is regarded as an eminent historian by such as BBC, Guardian, other historians, so you view of him does not count for much.
He was only one of many historians I referred to anyway.

The Pakistanis you referred to I do regard as experts on their own culture.

You strenuously defended three pages of invention by Muslim Watch (hundreds of unqualified claims) put up by Boo Boo

Completely untrue.
I said I did not trust it and took the trouble to check the entries.
I was just being honest that I could not find a single fault.
Nor could anyone else including YOU Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 11:59 AM

And here we are once again.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 12:45 PM

I wish it covered mocking people for their age and infirmity.

What about mocking people for their stupidity and idiocy?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 01:49 PM

"The Pakistanis you referred to I do regard as experts on their own culture."
I never referred to any Pakistani - in three years you have not produced one single person making a claim culturally smearing an entire culture.
Have anybody holding office or in the public eye done so, they would be facing charges of incitement to racily hatred - or are you still claiming that Britain has no laws protecting ethnic minorities from racial abuse - is it so racially extreme without the help of the BNP and Ukip?
Still no evidence - no links - no statements - nothing other than your disgusting claim - lies, total lies.
You are still free to provide statements and links, of course - I look forward to the humiliation
"Max Hastings is regarded as an eminent historian"
That might have been acceptable if you had, in your turn not dismissed all those giving a different opinion as "not a qualified historian" as you have persistently done on that and every other thread.
Hist on your own petard somewhat, I'd say.
MAX HASTING IS A DAILY MAIL JOURNALIST AND YOU HAVE JUST LIED (AGAIN) WHEN YOU WROTE "I have never put up any daily mail journalist as an expert on anything."
I repeat, Max Hasting is a Daily Mail journalist - he has no qualifications as a historian.
"Completely untrue."
No it isn't - you claimed to have checked most of them, - you hadn't, and you defended them as true.
More lies - what did I say?
This wouldn't be half the fun it is if you weren't so arrogant, so dishonest and you didn't try to make each subject a point-winning competition.
Your declarations of infallibility and your repeated prat-falls are nearly a substitute for your nausing up thread aftre thread, ther way you do.
Keep it up - it's the nearest thing I'll ever come to a blood-sport.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 02:59 PM

Sincere apologies Keith – one "expert" does back up your claim.
UNDERAGE SEX SLAVERY IN BRITAIN

GAVIN BOBY
Have a good night - say a prayer for us all
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 03:26 PM

http://www.maxhastings.com/category/books/

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 04:08 PM

Jim, once again you have made me the subject of the thread, reopening long dead discussions.
You are obsessed.
Discuss the issues not me please.

All your claims are false and I would be happy to rubbish them by pm, or if you must, on a dedicated thread that all normal people can avoid.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,For info
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 05:32 PM

By Dr. Arieh Eldad an M.D. at Hadassah Hospital in Israel


I was instrumental in establishing the "Israeli National Skin Bank", which
is the largest in the world. The National Skin Bank stores skin for every
day needs as well as for war time or mass casualty situations.

This skin bank is hosted at the Hadassah Ein Kerem University hospital in
Jerusalem where I was the Chairman of plastic surgery.

This is how I was asked to supply skin for an Arab woman from Gaza , who
was hospitalized in Soroka Hospital in Beersheva, after her family burned
her.

Usually, such atrocities happen among Arab families when the women are
suspected of having an affair.

We supplied all the needed Homografts for her treatment. She was
successfully treated by my friend and colleague, Prof. Lior Rosenberg and
discharged to return to Gaza .

She was invited for regular follow-up visits to the outpatient clinic in
Beersheva.

One day she was caught at a border crossing wearing a suicide belt.
She meant to explode herself in the outpatient clinic of the hospital where
they saved her life.

It seems that her family promised her that if she did that, they would
forgive her.

This is only one example of the war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of
Israel . It is not a territorial conflict. This is a civilizational
conflict, or rather a war between civilization & barbarism.
I have never written before asking everyone to please forward onwards so
that as many as possible can understand radical Islam and what awaits
the world if it is not stopped.

Dr Arieh Eldad

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 06:26 PM

Islamism in Birmingham schools.
"One of the schools concerned, Adderley, has released an official statement confirming that its head, a moderate Muslim, and other heads have been subjected to "malicious and targeted campaigns to remove them." Given all this, there can't really now be any dispute that a plot exists.

But the Beeb's(BBC) record on the story has been mixed. It has done some real reporting on it – that is, making the effort, like us, to gather actual evidence of its own. But on other occasions it's been too ready to take at face value the obviously self-serving denials of obviously interested parties – such as governors of the schools concerned, or in this case Birmingham City Council.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100270920/islamism-in-birmingham-schools-how-the-bbc-is-selectively-reporting-the-trojan-horse-plot/

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 06:40 PM

Max Hastings is regarded as a bit of a cunt by one professor.

Kind of blows a hole in your priggish crap, doesn't it?

He writes as if he is being paid per word rather than by fact.

Luckily Keith, as far as those charged with dealing with reality are concerned, your day dreams and impressionable faith in fools put you firmly in the camp of your little people as you call them.

What ho !

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:25 PM

I only come here once a day as I have a life, so it takes me a while to catch up (I must be mad). So five points.

(1) There is no Birmingham plot. Keith appears to be the only person on the planet who still thinks so, but that is because it suits his purpose for there to have been a plot.

(2) Very entertaining, Michael. I can't make my mind up whether (a) you've lost it, (b) you are indulging in some warped sort of humour, or (c), you have made a complete twat of yourself in front of everyone without realising it. You do sound very upset (all those posts with afterthought after afterthought...), but, if so, that's your own doing. Take a break.

(3) I am 62 years 11 months 18 days and 15 and a half hours old. Paypal me thirty quid for a bottle of Talisker on my birthday, y'all (preferably individually, not collectively, you tight gits), on June 15, please.

(4) You do not have to have been a victim of the vile persecution of the Jews, or be in the family of such victims, to get your head around what antisemitism means. Why I should have to make this elementary point to allegedly sentient grown-ups is utterly beyond me.

(5) The word "holocaust" is increasingly, and rightly, becoming almost exclusively associated with that horrible phase of history, and the only correct rendering of the term in that context is "the Holocaust".    To omit the capital H is regarded as a serious insult, and carelessness is simply no excuse. Speaks volumes about your pretentious and sanctimonious nonsense on this and just about every other topic, Keith, that you should respond with your lame-duck excuses.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 07:37 PM

Well, Doctor Eldad, persuade your blinkered administration to negotiate with the newly-united Palestinian factions instead of going down the depressingly-predictable path of "not talking to anyone with Hamas on board". One day you will talk whether you like it or not, and the sooner you start the fewer of your citizens, not to speak of the citizens of Gaza and the West Bank, will be killed or hurt. Your government will always find a way of not talking, because they don't have to, thanks to US bankrolling of your military. Quite a few of us in the west hope against hope that that invidious situation will not go on forever. Your people and the people in the occupied territories all deserve peace, prosperity and security, so do try to stop arguing against it.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 02 Jun 14 - 09:12 PM

http://www.snopes.com/politics/israel/eldad.asp

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 12:51 AM

Dearest little Stevie: oh, welcome back. I began to think you had gone away, young fellow, leaving me bereft of all those good guffaws you had been affording me. But you were just off getting on with this gr8 'life' of yours. Well, enjoy. & thanks for latest lot of laughs.

But enuff awready. No more of your posts will be read by me. As I said above to that other sillibugga

"Rejoin if you like. Or not. Up to you --

but I hereby announce that no more answers will be forthcoming from me to your pathetically petty provocations."

So adieu; with best regards, natch --

~M~

Oh: nearly forgot. Happy 63-years-young in 12 days time. But no malt from me, I fear. I gave up all alcohol 12 years ago, & life really is much nicer without, so I don't propose to encourage any young person in bibulous ways. So if you have any sense, you will seize tho occasion to do likewise & celebrate the occasion with sparkling mineral water: really much nicer...

Teeheeheehee: in my dreams, you compulsive young toper you...

Now -- back once more to those Islamic Rads, yes???

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 02:35 AM

"Max Hastings is regarded as an eminent historian" [Keith]

That might have been acceptable if you had, in your turn not dismissed all those giving a different opinion as "not a qualified historian" as you have persistently done on that and every other thread.
Hist on your own petard somewhat, I'd say.

MAX HASTING IS A DAILY MAIL JOURNALIST AND YOU HAVE JUST LIED (AGAIN) WHEN YOU WROTE "I have never put up any daily mail journalist as an expert on anything."

I repeat, Max Hasting is a Daily Mail journalist - he has no qualifications as a historian." - Christmas

A few of points with regard to the above:

1: Sir Max Hastings IS regarded as being an eminent (albeit unqualified) historian, evidenced by the awards and reviews his work has received from eminent qualified historians and by the fact that those same eminent qualified historians invited him to become a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society.

2: I do not believe that Keith did dismiss "all those giving a different opinion as "not a qualified historian"[sic]". I believe that on the "Potato Blight" Thread he dismissed quite correctly some of those you put up as "qualified historians" (Tim Pat Coogan and John Mitchel being but two of them - neither of course are considered by "qualified historians" as being either eminent or "qualified").

3: Sir Max Hastings is NOT a Daily Mail journalist - before leaping to contradict that statement I would direct you to look up the difference between being a journalist and a columnist.

As for this from Musket

"Max Hastings is regarded as a bit of a cunt by one professor.

Kind of blows a hole in your priggish crap, doesn't it?"

Kind of demonstrates your total lack of perspective, while at the same time making a complete and utter c**t of yourself Ian (LIOL & Bar).

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 03:04 AM

"Size 13 shoes, 6'4", beer gut to be proud of and a humongous great willy." - {description of Musket by himself}"

On the "willy" thing - if the rest is true how do you know? When was the last time you saw it?

Are you paid by the word Ian - must be as your self-penned description could have been shortened to either of the following - BFF or more appropriately BFC.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 03:20 AM

I'd look up the word irony if I were you Terribleus.

There aren't many (any?) ways of drilling reason into Keith's thick skull and my hypothetical one professor reflects Keith's continual habit of saying subjective opinion is undeniable truth.

It's his infantile immature stupidity I was getting at, not any opinion on Max Hastings. For the record Hastings is a revisionist who writes history to suit his views in the same way he did as a newspaper editor. It reads well and I can see how shallow fools are impressed with it but his prolific output doesn't reflect thougt out reasoning in my humble opinion. He begins with a hypothesis and sets out to justify it. Not objective history accounting in my book.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 03:53 AM

Tell Mr Shaw exactly what any, blinkered or otherwise, Israeli Administration has "to negotiate with the newly-united Palestinian factions? Recognition of the State of Israel's right to exist perhaps? Recognition of the right of the citizens of the State of Israel to life their lives in peace free from threat of attack?

Perhaps Mr. Shaw you could give us the Hamas view point on those issues.

1: "Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors."

2: "Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah's promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said:

The time(16) will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry:

0 Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad(17), which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim)(18). - excerpt from Article 7 of Hamas Charter 1988

3: "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organization or the aggregate of all organizations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day or Resurrection. Who can presume to speak for all Islamic generations to the Day of Resurrection? This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari'a(20), and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection." - excerpt from Article 11 of Hamas Charter 1988

Comment: As it would appear to be perfectly acceptable in the minds of Hamas for Islam to take land by force, then they can hardly deny the same right to others - True?? - They could of course just be proven hypocrites.

4: "[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement [Referring to HAMAS here Steve]. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: "Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware."

5: "There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time(27), an exercise in futility."

So tell me Steve what are they going to negotiate?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:07 AM

Most people either have one or are one.

It's ruddy huge. It's party piece is to pop up when at the table and nick a bun just like an elephant. It's that happens next that makes my eyes water. The beer belly could do with developing to be fair. It just isn't big enough.

Still, better than being a bit of a cock eh?

Don't get me too excited, I tend to pass out.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:09 AM

"Sir Max Hastings IS regarded as being an eminent (albeit unqualified) historian"
Read what I have written
Keith has always rejected historians, who don't agree with him no matter how "well regarded" they are, yet holds up a Daily Mail journalist to make his case - can't have it both ways Terrytoon.
From Max Hastings' own C.V.
"Sir Max Hastings is an author, journalist and broadcaster whose work has appeared in every British national newspaper."
He appears not to know the difference between journalist and columnist as he describes himself as the former - nowhere does he claim to be a historian, no matter how others regard him.
I really don't care what you "believe"; you never offer anything more than flag-waving, bar-room type wannabe-militaristic opinions anyway.
I didn't and never do base my arguments on the 'reputation' of "historians" no matter how "eminent", I base my opinions on what I have read of their work.
In the case of the Famine, I presented series of facts - ethnic cleansing, "act of God", militarily defended full warehouses, food shipped out of Ireland throughout the starvation period, half a century of mass evictions, enforced emigration, inbuilt British hatred of the Irish.... you both chose not to respond to any of them with facts of your own - in most instances you both ignored them completely in spite of my requests for you to respond.
By the way - Coogan is regarded as a distinguished historian by many, though I have never made any great claims on his qualifications
I have never quoted Mitchel in anything I have written, other than to condemn his support for slavery in the American Civil War in an album note.
I have no knowledge of his reliability as a historian, never having read anything he has written on the subject.
As far as Keith, and, as far as I can judge, you are concerned, the "eminence" of whichever historian is of little import to either of you, he persistently admits he has never read a book on the subjects he fantasises about and relies entirely on cut-'n-pastes he hastily gathered after having made his jingoistic and flag-wagging Little Englander statements: you appear to be no different.
"Dr Arieh Eldad"
Was interested to read what you wrote - not unlike the Jehovah's Witnesses who staunchly refuse essential blood for life-saving operations, without family forgiveness - wonder if this falls within your description of "barbarism"?
Funny thing religion, which is why I don't subscribe to it.
Was fascinated by your summing up Israel's stance as a holy war "against barbarism" though - puts it all in proportion.
"Jim, once again you have made......"
No Keith, you have made it about you with your fanatical Islamophobic rantings.
And once again you duck out - showing that your "experts" and "historians" are basically figments of your own imagination created to win 'glittering prizes'.
No examples of 'cultural implants' again - other than those I provided
from extremist sites expressing views similar to your own - must dig out some more; it helps put you in context.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,for info
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:20 AM

You waste your breath responding to Dr Eldad. His was a piece I copied from online, deemed to be authentic -- see the snopes comment which folowed. He is not himself a contributor to this foolish introspective forum and probably blssfully unaware of its very existence.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:21 AM

Keith has always rejected historians, who don't agree with him no matter how "well regarded"

Completely untrue, I reject none.
On WW1 there are no living historians who did disagree with me.

Musket, there is no historian who disparages Hastings like that, unless you are having delusions of historical importance again.

Steve, I have no opinion on whether the plot is real or not, but Andrew Gilligan in that Telegraph piece clearly does.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:31 AM

Wow Musket!! You've outdone yourself on Sir Max - The Royal Historical Society are according to you: "shallow fools......impressed with.....his prolific output".

You could, judged upon your own contributions to this forum, be rightly accused of many things Musket, but knowing anything about history isn't one of them. Oh, and on Sir Max Hastings, like Carroll, you too should look up the difference between a Journalist/Reporter and an Editor/Columnist.

While I disagree strongly with many of Hastings comments and much of his work - On the First World War he was bang on - and both yourself and Carroll were ripped to shit on the Christmas Truce Thread on the three key metrics for success introduced by Keith.

By the by Musket you are far from objective yourself and as I stated previously you seem to suffer from a chronic lack of perspective on just about every subject you select for "discussion".

Keith on the other hand does clearly identify the sources he quotes and introduces and in so doing clearly states that they are THEIR opinions NOT necessarily his. Unfortunately all you and Carroll ever do is read who posted and then launch into attacking the poster NOT the points introduced by him - the pair of you even have to resort to inventing things said by him to attack him on - It really is rather pathetic and frankly boring, apart from that it is completely pointless and spoils any thread where the pair of you indulge yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:46 AM

Hey "legend"

" GUEST,Musket - Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:07 AM"

Did it really take you over one hour to come up with that response??

Pathetic ain't the word for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,for info
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 04:48 AM

Moreover if Mr Carol had read the Snopes piece as he should have done beofre rushing so stupidly to contradict Dr Eldaad he would know that the bits at the end of Eldad's piece were not his own but added on before posting by some ill wishing third party. Carol is in too much of a hurry to be a reliable comentater it would seem.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 05:27 AM

Awww shucks Christmas I'll spell it out for you as you obviously have not bothered to read Sir Max's CV only the key words from it.

The career path of Sir Max Hastings:

1967 to 1982 - Journalist/Reporter - Foreign Correspondent working for both the BBC and the Evening Standard, awarded "Journalist of the year" in 1982

1980 - Historical Author Won the Somerset Maugham Award for non-fiction for book "Bomber Command". He also won the Yorkshire Post Book of the Year prize for both his historical works "Overlord" and "The Battle for the Falklands".

1982 to 1996 - Editor then Editor-in-Chief Daily Telegraph awarded Editor of the Year in 1988.

1996 to 2002 - Editor Evening Standard after which he retired.

2002 - Knighted (A means by which merit in terms of achievement, or service can be officially recognised)

2002 to 2007 - President of the Campaign to Protect Rural England

2010 - Received the Royal United Services Institute's Westminster Medal for his "lifelong contribution to military literature".

2012 - Awarded the Pritzker Military Library Literature Award, a "lifetime achievement award for military writing".

Enrolled as a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and enrolled as a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society.

In retirement Sir Max Hastings has worked occasionally as a COLUMNIST for the Daily Mail as well as for The Guardian, The Sunday Times and the New York Review of Books.

Now if you can read and understand all of that you will now know that counter to what you repeatedly claim:

Sir Max Hastings HAS NEVER worked for the Daily Mail as a JOURNALIST

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Jun 14 - 05:50 AM

As a Life Associate of the Freelance division of the Institute of Journalists, I feel qualified to contribute to this ill-tempered and ill-informed exchange. Anyone who writes for the press regularly and professionally, whether as a full or part-time occupation, in any capacity and not just that of 'reporter' [which I have never worked as -- I was exclusively a critic and feature writer] is a Journalist. What on earth makes either of you imagine that "journalist" is exclusively synonymous with "reporter"? The term "journalist" certainly subsumes "reporter", but not exclusively: it means that everyone who contributes, or processes [eg the editor, department editors, subeditors &c] written copy to the press. Any one of them will be a Journalist, qualified for membership of the NUJ if full-time, or the IoJ if part-time but with other commitments (my erstwhile situation). Just remember what the "J" stands for in those abbreviations, and stop being so silly as to argue that anyone is not a "journalist", but is only a "columnist". A columnist is a journalist. So Sir Max is, at that, currently a Daily Mail journalist; even if not employed fulltime on the paper as a reporter.

This was a silly piece of drift. Take my {longtime IoJ-member's} word for it, you would both do well do drop it.

~M~
Freelance Associate, Institute of Journalists