BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 09:12 AM

"His race and religion were immaterial to his madness and his crime.. " as was Timothy McVeigh's, Hitler's, Jim Jones'.....????? (not forgetting Ake's and yours.
You reopened this thread to score points - sorry - another windmill you didn't manage to tilt
Byeeee!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 04:10 AM

It was YOU Jim who tried to use this crime to push an agenda of race and religion.
You were wrong.
It was just a random madman.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 04:03 AM

"These killings were done by a white, Christian, Fascist thug protesting against the multiculturalism you appear to be objecting to" - the fact that he was also insane is immaterial.

The fact that he was insane was NOT immaterial!
That was the reason he did it !
His race and religion were immaterial to his madness and his crime..

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Dec 11 - 03:36 AM

"Our judgement was correct"
Then you'll be able to point out where I claimed that Breivik was sane, won't you?
As I said, "These killings were done by a white, Christian, Fascist thug protesting against the multiculturalism you appear to be objecting to" - the fact that he was also insane is immaterial.
There have been plenty of facists in the past and present who have been every bit as insane as Breivik, and I am sure there are plenty more to come. The fact that he got support for his anti-multiculturist message from at least two members of this forum during the discussion(our homophobic friend, who, having quoted (as an "expert witness", maybe?) you appear to now be desperately ignoring, and someone who suggested we should have listened to Enoch Powell and his "Rivers of Blood" in the first place) is enough evidence for me that there are plenty of potential Breiviks out there for to take no chances.
Every argument I have with you seems to bring you a goose-step further out of your extremist closet; violent, sectarian marches, aids-suffering immigrants not receiving treatment, wartime British Establishment facists (Sir Oswald Mosely, Lord Rothermere, the Windsors) = harmless cranks, all male Pakistanis = potential perverts, gypsies = slavers, Zionist war crime - 100% supported by you....
You really are a squalid, trying to score points from the deaths of (how many was the final death-toll?) young people.
Nearly there - keep goose-stepping
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 04:03 PM

don't you think it somewhat unpleasantly and smugly small-minded to attempt to score points on the basis of knowledge that none of us had at the time?

No.
You were determined to use the incident to push your own Leftist agenda.
We were able to put it in perspective and correctly assessed that it was a random act of madness.

Our judgement was correct.
Yours was agenda driven, and wrong.
Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 03:43 PM

"You tried to use this case as evidence that the risk from racist and right wing extremists"
I believe that there is a dangers from right-wing extremists - your own attempts to denigrate a whole cultural group is proof that ther are a few around who would brand a whole people perverts.
As mad as this man was, he still got support from Ake - you seem to wish to airbrush that one out or are you claiming him to be another random madman.
Do you believe Hitler to have been mad - did he manage to get a few followers behind him?
And most of all - don't you think it somewhat unpleasantly and smugly small-minded to attempt to score points on the basis of knowledge that none of us had at the time?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 03:06 PM

Jim, delusional insanity can result in any number of obsessions, fears and loathings.
It is random.
Nothing meaningful can be inferred from it.

You tried to use this case as evidence that the risk from racist and right wing extremists is greater than it actually is.
Some of us tried to tell you that this was just a random madman.

We were right.
Jim Carroll was wrong.
Again.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM

He was certainly a christian. That does not preclude his being mentally ill, but his being mentally ill doesn't make him immune to fundamentalist ideology, christian or otherwise. Likely the opposite.

Some would hold that any belief in the supernatural is a form of mental illness, anyway.

This was certainly a massacre perpetrated by a
white
male
Christian
opposed to multiculturalism
especially to the (perceived) growing influence of islam in his region of the world.

Why act as if, just because he is also crazy, he wasn't a christian or a fundie or opposed to islam, among other things? It still puts him in the same boat as the islamic terrorists - same god, same reasoning, same methods. Only the other terrorist moslems don't call each other crazy when they do stuff like this, but martyrs.

I m sure there are christians who would consider this guy a martyr for their cause against islam had he died, even though he didn't kill moslems to make his point.

He and Tim McVeigh, though, are far, far outweighed by the islamofundies perpetrating terrorist acts... so let's not try to catch up.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM

"WRONG."
Why - hatred of Musilims, is to my mind the sign that somebody is unhinged
The suggestion that all Muslim Pakistanis.... etc is the sign that somebody is seriously unhinged.
The idea that somebody's colour, religion, nationality... makes them somehow superior to anybody without those attributes makes holder of those ideas somewhat psychotic
Why on earth should this prevent the individual, no matter how unhinged, from attempting to organise support for his or her beliefs - Hitler was reckoned mad by many, but he rallied Germany behind him?
The guy actually got support from this thread.
From your own example
"We now need to tackle the failed notion of "multiculturalism" along with many other social idiocies"
Akeneaton, no less
Jim Carroll
PS As I said, I believe that your own views on Pakistani males makes you not a little unhinged, if it is of any comfort - though you appear to have neither the bottle nor the initiative to do anything about it - thankfully

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 02:47 PM

A non-sequitur Paul, and I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 02:22 PM

Keith grasping at straws so he can go on hating Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 11:07 AM

Jim,"This massacre, however insanely executed, was an attempt to rally support for a racist backlash in Norway" WRONG.

Jim,"the actions of a Moslem hater." WRONG.

Jim,"the murder of 90odd people by a fundamentalist Christian " WRONG

Akeneaton. "Jim.. I have already stated that I think the guy was unhinged." RIGHT.

Akeneaton, "The crimes in Norway were the actions of a madman it proves nothing politically...." RIGHT

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 04:04 AM

Arent all Facists mentally ill?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 11 - 03:42 AM

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2011/1130/1224308333816.html

"These killings were done by a white, Christian, Fascist thug protesting against the multiculturalism you appear to be objecting to"

No Jim.
He was just mentally ill.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 11 - 06:24 AM

"I meant my pointing out Keith's racism "

I am no racist, and you have done no such thing.
I wish you were not allowed to smear other members like this.

You should confine yourself to responding to posts, not using them, with convoluted and dishonest argument, to somehow prove that other members are bad people!

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 11 - 05:57 AM

"I thought I knew what FINIS meant but apparently not. "
I meant my pointing out Keith's racism was FINIS - done and dusted as far as I'm concerned.
Why; do you object to my offering an opinion on appeasement or other aspects of racism on this thread - you seem to be making the point pretty well yourself.
BTW - Today's Times carries an interesting report on the British nutter who apparently likes dressing up in Knights Templar uniform and is claiming to have inspired these killings - it seems we breed our own.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Musket
Date: 29 Jul 11 - 04:17 AM

I thought I knew what FINIS meant but apparently not.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 11 - 03:45 AM

"Suppression of debate is the worst form of bigotry"
It has been suggested here - can't remember by who - that:
"he appears to be an extreme Nationalist who has been driven over the edge by the policies of the Norwegian govt....."
"As western economies worsen and living standards, pension rights, public services come under further attack,expect to see a backlash against the policies pursued by goverments in Western Europe over the last couple of decades.
Perhaps we may yet see Mr Powells "rivers of blood".....I certainly hope not, but action needs to be taken now to reverse some of the policies which have created the "time bomb"....."
and
"Over the past few years there has been a rise in Scandinavian Nationalism..... they have a powerful sense of their history and culture. Lately the massive influx of Muslim immigrants has caused much disquiet amongst Danes, Swedes and Norwegians.
These immigrants have been encouraged into Scandinavia for the same reasons that they were encouraged into the UK....purely economic...cheap labour...nothing to do with equality or democracy
but like most government policy, it has caused more problems than it solved."
Before the enormity of the massacre had been realised it was being suggested that the killer appeared to have genuine grievences which should be addressed, that government policy was partially to blame and that something should be done about all those Muslim immigrants flooding into Norway.
It was also suggested that:
"These are the actions which often occur when a people lose their voice, or are unable to make their feelings known."
So it appears that a lack of freedom of speech for racists also played a part in the massacre.
These statements are ones of appeasment to an extreme act of racism, of pandering to the views of someone who has carried out a massacre of mainly young people, the largest since WW2, of shifting the blame away from the perpetrator's twisted racist views and actions, first to the government and later to "the massive influx of Muslim immigrants" flooding into Norway.
It implies that countries that have laws against the incitement of race hatred should scrap them for fear that some other racist nutters should carry out other massacres.
The Norwegian government has shown dignity, wisdom and courage in declaring it is not prepared to surrender its freedoms to such acts.
The killer was hoping to be granted "freedom of speech" by being allowed to use his appearence in court as a platform, even a rallying call to other racists - the court denied his "right to it" - long may that continue to be the case.
Granting "freedom of speech" to racists is removing their victims' freedoms to live ther lives unterrorised - a racist's charter - is that what is being proposed here?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Jul 11 - 01:08 AM

The only stability here is that it is the same danger, that of fundamentalism, not some new scary ideology, that committed this atrocity.

Was McVeigh a fundie too?

Suppression of debate is hardly the worst form of bigotry. Try suppression of life.

And I gather he did act alone, for a while they were talking "cells" and associates.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 05:22 PM

"Ake has not only suggested that the killer had grounds for his acts, but also that his demands need to be addressed - like minds, what!!"
I have read all these threads and have seen no one support or condone the crime committed by this man....everyone has condemned it and I must say that you should be warned by admin for suggesting otherwise

Do you really not understand the difference between racism and open debate?...Is any discussion of immigration considered racist by you?

I dont think you are a fool Jim....so why are you so determined to portray yourself as one?

Suppression of debate is the worst form of bigotry

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 05:14 PM

Colbert?

I've noticed commentators drawing an odd distinction between terrorism and mass murder, as if it weren't possible for an act to be properly described under both headings at the same time.

The same goes for the suggestion that there is some inconsistency between saying that the perpetrator is deranged, and that they have political or quasi-political motives.

It seems a mistake to insist on either/or distinctions here, when both/and fits the circumstances better.

And there has also been suggestions that "terrorism" implies awider organisation, and should not be applied to the actions of an individual.

This horrible episode falls pretty evidently into all those categories. It involved the killing of innocent people with the aim of achieving political ends, the essential definition of terrorism, whether by governments, organisations or individuals. (And of course there have been many acts of terrorism carried out by lone individuals.)

The man responsible was operating on a political agenda, but at the same time it seems pretty clear that a personal psychological disturbance was involved. (This is of course not uncommon among organisational terrorists as well - as it is among people who do all kinds of things, burglars, musicians,politicians, artists.)

Somehow there appears to be a tendency to feel that it is dangerous to treat events like this under multiple labels, and necessary to tie them up into a separate category - pathological or political, murder or politics. But that's not the way it is sometimes. Perhaps hardly ever.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 05:12 PM

I believe the weather forecast Jim, but it is not my opinion.
It is the considered opinion of experts, so why would I not believe?

Many assumed Islamic terror in the first hours.
"All the hallmarks" was a phrase often used.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 04:08 PM

Colbert had a funny reaction to initially blaming it on Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 04:03 PM

Why not do that Jack?

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 04:03 PM

Keith said:
"It was not my opinion......."
Keith said:
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency....."
Stop telling lies and stop acuusing others of telling lies.
Jack:
"Have we officially reached more posts....."
This massacre, however insanely executed, was an attempt to rally support for a racist backlash in Norway - a "revolution" against "multiculturalism and immigration", as has been suggested in Norway, in the press, (and to some degree supported by some contributors to this thread).
Some of us got a bellyful of Keith's attacking British Pakistanis on a previous thread, and it is my belief that if he was let he would have no hesitation in using this thread in the same way (his linking the behaviour of a massacre by a fascist killer with Muslims was an indication of that IMO).
I have said what I have to say on his behaviour and his own words are enough for people to make up their own minds as far as I'm concerned.
In my opinion, the Norwegian massacre is the inevitable direction for all racism to take when unopposed.
Have said what I want to on this particular aspect
FINIS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 03:22 PM

Have we officially reached more posts about Lox and Keith than about Norway? I take it that getting back to the topic under discussion is not an option?

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 03:11 PM

Generalisations or speculations about the impact of national cultures on the behaviour of people - as for example in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn - may be mistaken, but it seems inappropriate to assume that they are "racist".

However Keith's suggestion that PMs might be a better way of discussing this makes sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 02:30 PM

It was not my opinion.
I had no knowledge or experience to form such an opinion.

The opinion was expressed, in all the national media, by five respected national figures, three of whom were Pakistani themselves and well known as defenders of their community AGAINST racism and prejudice.
My crime was to believe them.
I even stated that I would reconsider if anyone put forward a different explanation.
No-one did (or do you know of one Jim?)

That post was made early in February.
Why are you constantly trying to attack me with these false accusations Jim?
This is a serious discussion about a serious issue.
If you must do it, use pm. I will reply by same method.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 02:14 PM

Couldn't give a toss about the 'context'
You stated as a personl belief that British Pakistanis were culturally disposed to "the grooming and abuse of underage girls."
Is it not racist, is it not repulsive (to Pakistanis and to non racists), did you or did you not put it forward as your opinion - which of these statements is untrue???
I couldn't give a shit whether you believe marriage practices are to blame - it is classic racist stereotyping on your part and th fact that you also said that "all British Pakistanis" are effected in this way makes aimed at "all Pakistanis".
You have put it forward as your opinion, you have denied making such a statement, you have pleaded neutrality based on your ignorance, you have hidden behind the words of others to defend your belief in it, you are now confirming that belief.
You have made a repulsively racist statement - stop calling people who point this out to you liars - you have just confirmed they are telling the truth, it is your own self-confessed opinion, nobody cares who else shares your view - it is your racist view.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 01:41 PM

The suggestion was that the very restrictve marriage practices were to blame.
Men were forced to marry very late and were not allowed any relationships outside marriage.
The frequently unhappy arranged cousin marriages were also implicated.
I knew nothing about any of that.
The suggestions came from people with first hand knowledge and experience, and most were part of and had grown up in that community.
Why would I not believe them?
They are anti-racists so it can not be racist to accept their informed opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 01:29 PM

This was the context.
I have admitted to knowing nothing about the culture, and could not form such an opinion myself.
That opinion was expressed by eminent national figures, most of whom were actually members of that culture.
I reported that opinion in the thread, and was asked if I believed it.
Here is my whole reply, which contains no racist statements.
Remember, the suggestion was not mine but that of famously ANTI-RACIST Pakistani people.

It is my opinion that it is a reasonable suggestion.
The over representation is a fact that requires an explanation.
Something is predisposing them, and it is more likely to be something sexual in the culture than your alternative list. (wild generalisations?)

If it did give rise to just a slight predisposition, then only a tiny minority would succumb.
And that is exactly what is found.

It is consistent with the facts, self consistent, contains no logical flaws, and no alternative yet suggested.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 01:04 PM

"I have never expressed a "repulsively racist idea," or you would be able to produce it."

I don't know who said this but on the face of it, it is true. The key is the use of the word "repulsively" nearly no one is repulsed by their own ideas. On the other hand, the use of the qualifier "repulsively" provided a strong indication that the speaker has expressed racist ideas which they do not consider to be repulsive.

Since most people who would use the word racist in any sentence which does not include a denial of racism would consider any racist remark repulsive, the quoted statement, from that point of view is also untrue on the face of it.

I can't imagine anyone but a racist making that statement. But maybe that is simply a limitation of my imagination.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 11 - 12:51 PM

"I have never expressed a "repulsively racist idea," or you would be able to produce it."
You were asked did you believe that "their (British Pakistani) culture inspires a slight predisposition to the grooming and abuse of underage girls. Can you confirm that that is your opinion of British Pakistanis?", you replied "It is my opinion that it is a reasonable suggestion".
That is a repulsively racist idea - it is racist - most people I know find it repulsive - you supported it as a reasonable idea - you have expressed a repulsively racist idea.These are direct quotes from you- what's your problem?
Here you have attempted to link the massacre with Muslims - business as usual.
Ake has not only suggested that the killer had grounds for his acts, but also that his demands need to be addressed - like minds, what!!
"I only know of one other person who does that."
Something I occasionally do. I hope you're not suggesting I have been posting under a false name - I only know one person who does that - you - I've been out of reach for a few days, celebrating.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 09:18 AM

But put "Nope" in Lyrics Search for forum and you get several thousand posts using the word by a whole range of people...

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 09:08 AM

English Martyr, you began your reply with "Nope."
I only know of one other person who does that.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:05 AM

--"where e.g. the LibDems and the Labour parties have demonstrated immigration as a mainstream issue?"-- was what you wrote, E Martyr ~~ nothing about an 'anti-immigration policy' ~~ and that was what I demonstrated. If you choose now to shift your ground, that is your choice & not my problem. I am sure readers of this post will know how to evaluate such opportunistic evasiveness...

And anyway, how, for that matter, would you interpret

"we will see rising levels of employment, skills and wages not more immigration."{Labour ~ my emphasis
"immediately reintroduce entry and exit checks. Our National Border Force would have the power of arrest." {LibDems}

as other than statements against uncontrolled immigration?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:04 AM

Once again, with no expectation that the information will be taken on board, I point out that the amount of benefit overpaid in the UK is overwhelmingly made up of accidental overpayments made by the authorities and subsequently reclaimed. And it is greatly outnumbered by the amount of benefit to which people are entitled which they do not claim.

The benefits system does need adjustment and improvement, and it can have perverse effects, for example by penalising people on benefit when they seek to do more than a minimum amount of voluntary work. But sounding off about "scroungers" and "benefit cheats" and "workshy" misses the point.

Quite what all this has to do with a multiple child killer in Norway is not too easy to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:00 AM

We are not to name those organisations in the forum.
Here is a thread about UK immigration.
thread.cfm?threadid=124011&messages=472&page=1&desc=yes
Here is a post.


01 Jul 11 - 05:53 AM

Almost half a million people were added to the UK population last year – the highest level since 1962 and the start of the last baby boom, figures revealed yesterday.

New migrants accounted for almost half the increase while the number of births hit a 20 year high.

However, the increase in children was also partly down to a rise in migrant mothers meaning immigration had both a direct and indirect impact on population growth, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS)

The trend means enough people to fill the city of Manchester were added to the country last year and, if it that rate continues, the population will hit the 70 million mark by 2026.

The growing figures are a fresh headache for the Government which has pledged to slash immigration.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8608777/UK-population-growing-at-fastest-rate-for-50-years.html

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: GUEST,English Martyr
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 06:44 AM

"Satisfied, English Martyr?"

Nope. Not in the least satisfied by your response. It does not offer a defence that the major UK parties have adopted an anti-immigration platform as a main stream (sic) policy position. Nor does it even suggest that recent levels of immigration are "unprecedented" as Keith A of Hertford has stated above. That particular canard is regularly wheeled out by the extreme right. You know, those people who espouse virulent racist viewpoints.

The reality is that mainstream parties have had to address the fact that , as Ian Mather points out, there was/ is a serious flaw in the benefits system, how it is managed and how points are awarded etc. I do not believe anyone has argued that there is a need to stop the abuse of the benefits system be that by indigenous people or by people coming t his country legally or illegally. However, there is a major leap from that position to one where the blame for society's problems can be laid at the door of immigrants.

To reiterate, recent levels of immigration are not "unprecedented" as claimed. Compare the statement from the Labour 2010 manifesto ... "..Net inward migration to Britain as measured by the Office for National Statistics has fallen for the last three years....".   What the Lib Dems and Labour are saying is that there needs to be a managed process which will ensure that those coming in have the skills necessary to plug gaps in the areas of economic activity where we are currently lacking and that a system should be put in place which ensures that immigration is managed in a way which promotes integration. As opposed to creating the spectre of a bogeyman sub-set within our society.

To nail another piece of disinformation , the overwhelming majority of benefits disbursed go to indigenous people. This is clearly recorded by the Office of National Statistics. Of course, it does not sit comfortably with the anti-immigration, racist brigade to acknowledge that fact but it is clearly recorded.

By all means put forward your points of view, however selective your supporting thesis. But please be mindful that the ONLY people arguing that recent levels of immigration are "unprecedented", that all parties have adopted this as a major policy platform issue (i.e. immigration, period, as opposed to a managed immigration system ) are members of right-wing extremist groupings and/ or their followers

Please do not misrepresent the position of the major parties. It is dissembling of the highest order and using this thread to insinuate anti-immigration arguments is unaccepatable. In short, doing so merely continues the Oslo psychopath's message. But then I am confident that there are those who will wish to do precisely that, regardless of the medium.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 06:29 AM

That is my experience too Ian.
Our schools are producing large numbers of unemployable youth, and employers understandably take on the cheapest and best available, but this situation is unsustainable.
There is a thread, "UK immigration too high?" or a new one could be started.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 05:52 AM

Yes, we do have an immediate (rather than chronic) issue with immigration. I doubt anybody thinks we have the space and resource for unchecked immigration.

However, despite the huge numbers over recent years, many come with a work ethic, which makes them contributors rather than recipients of what our society can offer. Many reading will be old enough to recall when we didn't have enough people for all the jobs and encouraged a mass immigration from The West Indies, mainly to carry out the jobs others wouldn't do. Now, it is a little too far in the other direction.

Immigration is an issue for political parties, but I would contend it is less of a problem for each individual community. I suppose with both my wife and I being involved in healthcare, our experiences reflect our "circle" of friends, but a BBQ we are hosting next weekend has, to my knowledge families originating from at least seven different countries. And you know what? They are all British, pay huge amounts of tax and contribute to their chosen place of residence.

Funny that where I used to live, I would walk into town and see where the social services and social security budget is spent. Their party piece being able to push a push chair and light a fag at the same time. The only area free of them is the area around the job centre.

If I were prejudiced enough to value people by where they were born and how they look, these would be my fellow citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 05:08 AM

--Care to show where e.g. the LibDems and the Labour parties have demonstrated immigration as a mainstream issue?--

From the Lib·Dem manifesto -

"But since the Tories and Labour abolished exit checks in the 1990s, we have no way of knowing how many illegal immigrants live here.
Liberal Democrats want an immigration system that works. A system that is firm but fair, which plans for the effects of managed legal migration and promotes integration. We believe in the benefits that immigration has brought this country but we do not believe our borders should be a soft touch.
Liberal Democrats would take control of our borders and immediately reintroduce entry and exit checks. Our National Border Force would have the power of arrest."
,,,,,,

From 2010 Labour manifesto--

"Controlled migration brings undoubted benefits to our country but we also recognise people's legitimate concerns about the impact it can have on communities. Net inward migration to Britain as measured by the Office for National Statistics has fallen for the last three years. We are delivering the biggest changes to our immigration, citizenship and border security systems for decades – we are bringing in a new Australian-style points-based immigration system which allows us to be more selective so that only those with the skills that we need to build a stronger economy can come here, and to ensure that as growth returns, we will see rising levels of employment, skills and wages not more immigration."

Satisfied, English Martyr?

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: GUEST,English Martyr
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:38 AM

" the recent unprecedented levels of migration have become a main stream (sic) issue for all the political parties"

Not so. Care to show where e.g. the LibDems and the Labour parties have demonstrated immigration as a mainstream issue?

I believe you will find that, in the UK, the issue of immigration is a hobby horse of the far-right parties such as UKIP, EDL, BNP, etc.

As you live in the UK I am sure you will know this to be the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:26 AM

If you live in the UK I am surprised that you are not aware that the recent unprecedented levels of migration have become a main stream issue for all the political parties, but this thread is not the place to discuss it.
Breivik committed an inconceivably horrific act of mass murder, as others have before him.
Each were driven by some issue or other.
Rational concern and debate about serious issues has nothing to do with an individual going bezerk because he supported one side or the other, and they should never become part of the debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Musket
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:12 AM

I got as far as "leaders of Islam" and remembered something about false idols, or to put it another way, there are no leaders of Islam, no equivalent to the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury.

Just to give Akenaton the benefit of the doubt, I struggled on till I came to the bit about economic migrants being a new phenomenon, then smiled, shut down the computer and went as ever to the pub where the illogical spouting of bollocks at least has benefit of making you realise what the Daily M*il has been printing that morning...

I know this is an international site, so sometimes you have to point out where you live in case the other person thinks you mean where they live. I live in The UK, where do you live Akenaton? Other than in your own head? If you ever visit The UK, you will see how a melting pot over the millennia gives us a multicultural society that works, and for the vast majority, works well.

Sorry, but this pure hate and twisting of facts is rather nauseating.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Lox
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 12:17 AM

Psychopathic White Supremacists have been murdering people in vast numbers for hundreds of years.

Why should this ones actions suddenly be 'explainable' by bad immigration policies?


Interestingly, that 'explanation' has been doing the rounds for longer than I can remember too.


But if you repackage it as somehow 'insightful', and if you have a blind spot the size of australia, you can pretend that history is taking a new twist.


It worries me that this guy may become a bit of a folk hero among the extreme right and there may be copycat attacks.


Anyone who doubts how tough the struggle against right wing ideas is should check this out.


Muslamic Ray Guns ...

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 11:08 PM

"I asked well, who bombs Americans?" Strange how it appears that Timothy McVeigh seems to have drifted out of the consciousness of Mrrzy - and many others.

McGrath, dear, I asked that question in 1993. In 1993, 1995 hadn't happened yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 05:18 PM

Greg, Matty Potempkin did a great version of carefully taught and it ain;t nessisarily so.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 05:14 PM

Multiculturalism is a word that means different things in different mouths, and that is as true when people are saying they are in favour as when they say they are opposed.

It can be used to mean a society in which people from different backgrounds and cultures mix with each other while holding on to all kinds of differences bases in their different origins - differences in dress, language, food, music.

And it can be used to mean a society in which people from different backgrounds and cultures live in such a way that they avoid contact with each other.

The confusion arises when people throw the word around without defining what they mean by it. Sometimes this is intentional, not always.

Subject: RE: BS: Non-Islamic Terrorist in Norway?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jul 11 - 04:05 PM

Interesting solution Ian....in fact, so original that I suggest that you mosey over to Egypt, Pakistan, Nigeria, Ivory Coast etc and explain it to the Christians who are being killed and mutilated daily by Muslims.

There is no doubt in my mind that the rulers of Islam are well aware that the battle against "Western values" is a battle to the death, for capitulation and the adoption of those values of so called democracy and equality will see the end of their religion, just as they will, in all probability, destroy the Christian religion.

Multiculturalism has never worked, because cultures need lots of time to evolve.....your old red herring that the UK has always been "multicultural" does not work....it took many hundreds perhaps thousands of years, for the races to evolve into what is now the UK.
Pakistanis Indians, Eastern Europeans, have been transplanted here and in Scandinavia, in the space of a decade....there has been no evolution.....they are economic migrants,pure and simple

Blame lies on the policies of successive "liberal" governments.