BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 May 14 - 03:08 PM

Didn't realize Procul Harum had relocated to Africa. Will they be releasing a new CD any time soon, FW?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 14 - 03:32 PM

The oldest ongoing holy war n the world
Jim Carroll

PENAL LAWS - REPEALED 1920
RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION IN THE UK
18TH AND 19TH CENTURY IRELAND
The division of Ireland
Throughout the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century more and more Irish groups began fighting for their independence. But the Protestants who lived in the northern part of the island wanted to stay with Great Britain.
in 1922 the island was divided. Six, mostly protestant, counties in the north stayed a part of the UK. The rest of the island , mostly Catholic, became the Irish Free State and an independent republic in 1949.
Up to 1972 Northern Ireland was allowed to rule itself . During this time the Catholics, who lived in the Protestant province had no easy life. They did not have the same rights and opportunities that the Protestants had. They were discriminated against in all aspects of life. They barely found jobs, got less money from the government and were often harassed by the police.
The Troubles
In the late 1960s riots broke out between Protestants and Catholics in Belfast and Londonderry. The violent decades that followed became known as "the Troubles".
At the beginning of the 1970s The British government sent soldiers to Northern Ireland to restore peace and decided to rule Northern Ireland directly from London.
Events escalated when 13 unarmed demonstrators were shot during a protest march in the streets of Londonderry on January 31, 1972. The incident became known as "Bloody Sunday".
Both religious groups started to build up paramilitary organizations. On the Catholic side the Irish Republican Army (IRA) carried out attacks on Protestants in the North. It wanted to force the British out of Northern Ireland and create a single Catholic state on the island. On the Protestant side the Ulster Defence Association and others terrorized the Catholic population living in Ulster.
In the 1980s the IRA started attacking the British in England. They planted bombs in London, kidnapped and killed high-ranking officials. Activists were arrested and thrown into prison. During the 80s some of them died during hunger strikes.
In the 1990s the British government started working on a peaceful solution to end the Troubles. In over 30 years of violence over 3,000 people were killed in the conflict.
The peace process
As time went on both sides realized that violence could not lead to a solution in the conflict. The British and Irish governments tried to get political and paramilitary sides to the conference table. In addition, the IRA promised to end all violent activities. Finally, talks ended in a historic agreement signed on Good Friday 1998.
NORTHERN IRELANDS HOLY WAR
1960S

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 14 - 03:34 PM

Keith, do you not fancy changing your name? Gender reassignment not required.

Keithy and Jim


:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 May 14 - 04:18 PM

The war in Ireland was about home rule not religion.
Sinn Fein is quite clear about that, and I will say no more about it.

Greg, that was so funny about 1500 people murdered since January and 200 schoolgirls dragged away to be raped and sold.
People take that kind of shit too seriously right?
Just human misery and despair.
Laugh it up!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 May 14 - 05:22 PM

Must say, Greg, with all moderation, that I think your levity (03.08 pm) was a little misplaced on this occasion.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 May 14 - 10:05 PM

Oh, and ~M~, see if you can get thru FW Keith's skull the number of innocent civiliand blown off the face of the earth by U.S. drone strikes, for a start.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 14 - 02:23 AM

Are you ****** mad - generation after generation of Ireish people fighting a nationalist cause/
The buzz word throughout all the Irish struggles was "freedom" - a major part of which was religious freedom.
Anti-Catholic Britain imposed the Protestant religion on Ireland from the time of Elizabeth I.
The religion was forced underground and was forbidden to be practiced under the threat of death and a price was put on a priest's head.
Fanatical Protestant armies destroyed churches and slaughtered parishioners and clergymen.
The Penal Laws prohibited Catholics from owning land and holding public office - they were stopped from teaching it and the native language.
Right into the 20th century, laws on property ownership were a major part of national oppression.
When the country was partitioned, religion became a barrier int taking part in the running of the northern counties - much of the disturbance there was religion based - the Penal Laws were not actually repealed until 1922.
Obtaining employment, running businesses and holding political office was a matter of what religion you were - the National struggle in Ireland was inextricably linked with religious freedom - all this was a cause of on-running violence and oppression in the North, long after the establishment the 26 County Republic.
The history of British laws in Ireland forbidding Catholics to buy land meant that they were the poorest section of the population
With the setting up of the partitioned North, the laws imposing a minimum property qualification meant it was largely the Protestants who could vote
1969 RIOTS
The Troubles that began in the 60s was a continuation of what had gone before and the oppression that was being resisted by the Civil Rights Movement was as much a religious as an economic one - when religion is used to facilitate oppression, that is inevitable
You talked about "every dog in the street" knowing..." ask anybody what the Irish problem is and they will say "Catholic versus Protestant".
The violently aggressive marches that are about to take place are religion based.
Even in my own experience as an apprentice in 1960s Liverpool, my employment on the docks during times when work was slack, depended on what religion I could claim to be - if the Catholic firms had work - I worked, if the opposite was the case, I didn't - right up to forty odd years ago.
In the North of Ireland and in Cities like Glasgow and Liverpool, that remained the case until even more recently.
When it comes to religious oppression - the Muslim religion are totally new kids on the block - Christianity has a track record of religious oppression that can not hope to surpass.
If you want to see religious fanaticism at its most extreme - take a look in the mirror.
You are now into your 'Islam is the only oppressor mode' and no other religion counts - sick-sick-sick.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 06 May 14 - 02:57 AM

Keith says paramilitaries don't go to church. Funny how on one side they went to mass in order to reflect their community and on the other they kept voting Rev Ian Paisley to fan flames.

No. Paramilitaries don't go to church Keith. Just normal people like you eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 May 14 - 03:59 AM

Oh, I see that Boko Haram has now been allowed a mention. Many Nigerians are I gather concerned that the funding it has, which enables it to have in many cases better weaponry than Nigerian government forces, could only come from Western sources with an interest in destabilising Nigeria - in order the more completely to control Nigerian oil and other resources. John Kerry is openly lusting after Nigerian resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 03:59 AM

Yes Musket.

Jim, the IRA was fighting for a united Ireland, not a war against Protestantism.

From "The History Of Sinn Fein and Irish Republicanism." on the SF site I linked to yesterday.

"We are dedicated to the reunification of our Country through political representation and through the election of our members by the people, and for the people of this Island regardless of race or creed.

Modern Irish Republicans trace their political origins to the movement of the United Irishmen (and women, lets be politically correct here as women fought in these battles too!)of the 1790's. The United Irishmen took their inspiration from the French Revolution and fought to break the political connection between Ireland and Britain, believing that only an independent Ireland could guarantee equality and prosperity for the Irish people.
Most leading figures of the United Irishmen were Presbyterians and a key part of their programme was unity between Irish people of all religions and none in the cause of liberty."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 06 May 14 - 05:37 AM

Fascinating reading how Keith feels religion has no bearing in Northern Ireland but blames a religion where Muslim people are in fights for land, power and influence.

Tell me, do you think that Christianity is above all that? Don't you think that Islam is exactly the same? Aren't both variants of imaginary friend a front to get ignorant peasants to do the fighting for those who gain from it?

Do you think Christians have some moral higher ground than Muslims?

Where do decent respectable rational people who don't believe in any of that nonsense fit in your ranking system?

True to fucking form.

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 14 - 05:51 AM

"Jim, the IRA was fighting for a united Ireland, not a war against Protestantism."
Same thing
Protestantism enforced laws excluding Catholics from having any influence in Northern Ireland theirs was a holy war
It was no different in any way to what is now happening in Muslim countries, or in Israel, for that matter, those in charge are using religion to gain and hold office.
In both cases, it is power that is the driving force, not religion.
The Zealots, in both cases, may take their religion to extremes, but in the end, it is wealth and influence which is the driving force.
Your fanatical hatred of Muslims is beyond belief
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 06 May 14 - 05:58 AM

"I think that it was just convenient but not accurate to label the communities Catholic and Protestant."

Every city in Northern Ireland is divided into Catholic (i.e. Christian) areas, and protestant (i.e. Christian) areas. During the troubles, people died for just being in the wrong place, and youngsters were beaten up for falling for someone of the other faith.

Abuse was screamed at small children who had the misfortune to go to school by crossing the opposing side's territory. Orange parades had to be stopped by police action from being used to aggravate the Catholics by marching through their areas.

How much hard evidence do you need for the sectarian division in that country?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 06:24 AM

Richard, I have been referring to the situation in Nigeria throughout this thread, but despite the title certain people insisted on talking about drones and Ireland instead of "Islamic Radicalism"!

You are being very gullible to believe the propaganda that Boko Haram, like everything bad in the world, is the fault of the evil West.

Al Jazeera two weeks ago,
" The movement has established supply routes and funding sources. Caches of recovered Boko Haram weapons have been traced to Libya, and Ansaru, at least, has established links with AQIM and Al-Shabab. "
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/23/boko-haram-s-rootsinnigerialongpredatethealqaedaera.html

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 May 14 - 07:41 AM

Keith - I merely report what some Nigerian contacts say. And where are the helicopters coming from? Where the weaponry that is more modern and costly than that of the army? Can ALL that money be coming from bank robberies, blackmail, and nomads? It may not be impossible, but it is implausible.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:16 AM

The Ku Klux Klan are strongly Christian. So are most black people in the U.S.

Abortion clinic bombers are strongly Christian. So are many health care workers and patients.

People who kill gay people almost all self-identify as Christian. Many, many gay people are Christian.

The majority of religious attacks in the U.S. are Christians attacking Jews. Is that close enough to Christian on Christian? No Muslims there.

They all claim to be doing their terrorist acts in order to save or protect Christianity.

John P

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:33 AM

Looks like naughty people get to go to church after all Keith.

Possibly to get justification for their deeds from sanctimonious bigots eh?

The pulpit of a church, just like the raised dais in a mosque can be a pretty powerful place to feed ideas.

I'd possibly take the opportunity to have a good long think if I were you Keith. And this time, don't just rearrange your prejudices.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:39 AM

Surely the more moronic Islamists also favour the death penalty for homosexualtiy, don't they? Just saying.

PS - although those Islamists from Boko Haram who denounce the idea that the world is round as "Unislamic" must surely be amongst the dimmest of dimshits.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:40 AM

I have no prejudice Musket.
You were wrong about paramilitaries mostly being church-goers.
The Irish troubles were about rule by Dublin or London, not religion.
Look at the murals.

May we return to the subject now?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 May 14 - 12:24 PM

How much hard evidence do you need for the sectarian division in that country?

Hard evidence of any sort relating to any topic has never been known to have any effect whatsoever on FW Keith- no point confusing him with the facts.

I'm surprised you haven't realized that, Troubadour.

That pig ain't ever gonna sing.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 12:57 PM

Greg, everyone else has always known about the sectarian divide.
Your ignorance amazes me yet again.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 14 - 01:03 PM

The Irish troubles were about rule by Dublin or London, not religion."
By making the six counties a Protestant dominated sectarian state - they became a struggle between Catholic (the oppressed minority) and Protestants (the oppressor majority)
That is no different a situation than any other (Holy War)
GUEST,LK867 makes the point perfectly "he" had no trouble with anybody else's religion - which does not alter in any way, that if he fought for National independence, he would be fighting Protestants.
If Ireland was not a sectarian war, then neither is what is happening in the world today.

"This article considers the claim that the conflict in Northern Ireland was irreducibly religious. After a brief account of the history of the Northern Ireland conflict, the different arguments and counter arguments that bear on the role of religion in causing and sustaining the conflict are considered. An examination of the relationship of Islam to terrorism and the events of 9/11 provides a comparative perspective that is used both to identify similarities and differences between the situation in Ireland and elsewhere and to distinguish and discriminate between different ways in which religious sanction is given to violence. The implications of our findings are then explored with regard to our understanding of the Northern Ireland conflict and with regard to our understanding of the nature of religion more generally."
Taylor and Francis

YOUR FAVOURITE HISTORIAN

I have made a point of asking ever Muslim I have talked to how they feel about other religions - they have all, without exception given similar answers to that given by GUEST,LK867.
You can't have it both ways - is what is happening in the Islam is a holy war - then so was Ireland
If Ireland was not a religious conflict, then there is no religious threat from Islam -take your pick
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 03:10 PM

In Syria, thousands of Muslims have gone on Jihad, including hundreds from Britain.
Jihad in this context means holy war.
Sunnis flock to Syria and Iraq to wage Jihad against Sunnis.
Shia Muslims from Iran and Hezbollah are waging Jihad against the Sunni majority in Syria.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 14 - 03:28 PM

"Sunnis flock to Syria and Iraq to wage Jihad against Shia."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:15 PM

Hard to believe we're back to the subject of the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 May 14 - 08:22 PM

Sunnis flock to Syria and Iraq to wage Jihad against Shia

Gee, FW, I seem to remember the U.S. and Britain flocking to Iraq and Afghanistan to wage war on Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 06 May 14 - 10:13 PM

And don't forget the crusades.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 06:24 AM

"must dig out some old Folk Reviews I have been intending to burn for some time now"
.,,.,.
Just come across this from Jim a few days back whose significance I didn't quite appreciate at the time. But do just consider, Jim, whose practice it has ever been to burn the works of those whose opinions they do not share.

& reflect!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 14 - 07:37 AM

It was an ironic comment Mike - I've never burned printed material in my life, whether I disagreed with it or not - it goes against my principles as much as I am sure it does yours.
It saddens and upsets me that we don't seem to be able to discuss our differences rationally and without abuse - but that is not solely my fault - you have to take your share in that one.
Of course I wouldn't dream of burning any of our collection of Folk Mags - I've digitised and archived most of the stuff that interests me and they are all bequeathed to I.T.M.C. when we join the Choir Invisible - happy to let you have copies of anything you might be interested in - remember those articles by Fred Dallas and the mysterious 'Speedwell'?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 14 - 07:47 AM

"Sunnis flock to Syria and Iraq to wage Jihad against Shia."
This is an appalling distortion of the situation in Syria
Vlunteers cross the border into Syria to oppose Assad simply because the U.N. and the rest of the world has stood by and watch him slaughtering his own people - Britain's role has been to oppose intervention and sell Assad the wherewithal to make chemical weapons and riot control equipment to quell opposition.
It has nothing to do with religion - it is a continuation of the Arab Spring protests.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: bobad
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:00 AM

Great to see world finally on to Boko Haram/Brunei Sharia - and media/govt/people, make sure you keep pretending the central problem isn't Islam.

    -Bill Maher

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:16 AM

I got the hyperbolical irony, Jim; my reply likewise ironic -- tho with just maybe a soupçon of Socratic 'know thyself' as undertone! I agree that we are often too mutually abusive, & have been trying to tone down that aspect of our discourse; as, it is my impression, have you likewise. A tendency to be welcomed & persisted in, yes? Would you take it amiss if I suggested that your posts addressed to others might sometimes be more effective if less animadvertive? As I have recently repeated, I determined several years ago that my posts would contain no usages that could have offended even Terence Rattigan's 'Aunt Edna'; and I have never regretted this.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:30 AM

Sorry Mike Missed some of that - that Secondary Modern education again - and I ever really got on with Terence Rattigan.
Must try harder.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:44 AM

Sunnis flock to Syria to fight against the government, and Shia to fight for it.
It started as a rising against the government, but it became a holy war between the sects.

The rebels almost had Damascus before Hezbollah, now they have lost even Homs.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:45 AM

I'm not a great Rattigan admirer in general, much prefer Coward; tho I think The Browning Version a very good play & Harlequinade one of best-ever comedies. But it was just that he invented an archetypal "Aunt Edna", a lady matinée-goer, whom he made it his endeavour never to risk offending as a matter of policy.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 14 - 08:59 AM

It is a fight for control of Syria between pro and anti Assad forces.
It should have been one carried out by the UN - Britain was oe of those who opposed intervention when he was in the process of committing war crimes
It seems from the news today that Britain has been guaranteed Syria as an arms customer for the foreseeable future
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 May 14 - 09:16 AM

You betcha, FW Keith - the source of all the world's problems: them flockin' Muslims again!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 10:01 AM

Nobody sez ALL of them, Greg. But if you deny that they are active in the promulgation of a fairish number of them, then you are even more of an idiotic ostrich than I thought.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 14 - 10:03 AM

"Gee, FW, I seem to remember the U.S. and Britain flocking to Iraq and Afghanistan to wage war on Muslims." - GregF

Did you?? I remember a series of indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets by an international terrorist group whose leader demanded that the entire population of the USA convert to Islam, shred their Constitution and their Bill of Rights and live in accordance with strict Sharia Law (Refer to and read the Fatwas issued by Osama bin Laden in 1996 and in 1998). That attack falling inside the geographic area defined by Article 6 of the NATO Charter meant that Article 5 of the same charter could be invoked - hence in October 2001 a handful of US Special Advisers backed up by Special Forces Units from NATO assisted the Northern Alliance in running the Taleban and their Al-Qaeda "Guests" out of Afghanistan and over the border into Pakistan the country in which both were created (As far as I know the Taleban leadership continue to hide out there to this day).

While the forces of several nations (For several read 49) are present inside Afghanistan I do not believe that they went there to wage war on Muslims per se - they went there to fight alongside Afghans who happen to be Muslims (Let us call them the ANSF) who represent the security forces and police forces of a democratically elected and internationally recognised Government of an Islamic (Muslim) Republic against certain insurgent elements who are also Muslims.

In Iraq IIRC it was the secular national socialist (Nazi) Ba'athist regime of Saddam Hussein who refused to conform to the terms and conditions of the ceasefire agreement his own generals signed to suspend hostilities in March 1991. As those terms and conditions were not complied with ANY of the original combatant powers could deem the ceasefire as having been violated and would therefore be at liberty to resume hostilities to enforce compliance - so - nothing whatsoever to do with killing Muslims at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 07 May 14 - 10:40 AM

"Some would argue this is not the "real" Islam. Does it really matter what real Islam is when its true followers cannot stand against those who use religion to commit genocide?"

from this article.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 May 14 - 10:56 AM

T-bird, I ain't going to go around with you on this yet again. The American invasion of Iraq was founded on falsified BuShite intelligence and outright lies & eagerly championed by your U.S. lapdog Prime Minister.

While the forces of several nations (For several read 49) are present inside Afghanistan

Yep- and they've produced absolutely nothing except piles of dead Muslims on both sides- strike that- they've also accomplished the waste of untold billions of dollars..

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 May 14 - 10:58 AM

they are active in the promulgation of a fairish number of them

Uh-huh, ~M~, Which could also be said of the U.S & a host of other so-called "Christian"[sic] nations.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 11:37 AM

But surely, Jim, the degree of toxicity of the mix will depend on the particular demands made by its precepts and injunctions on the particular religion's followers. We have been into all this. Ms Hirsi Ali [& I follow her here] believes these to be more aggressively based in Islam than in others. Which is, as they say, where we came in, is it not?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 11:39 AM

The post of Jim's to which I was replying there appears to have vanished. What is going on?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 11:43 AM

Sorry - scrub that. I was getting confused with the Gerry Adams thread!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 14 - 11:48 AM

Good job I don't go and punch our local vicar on the nose in retaliation for those Christian militants in Uganda then.

zzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 14 - 11:57 AM

Well, I don't know, Ian. What they say about "adding to the gaiety of nations"?

〠~M~〠

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 14 - 12:54 PM

"Which is, as they say, where we came in, is it not?"
Just responded to this on the Gerry Adams thread -as my mother used to say To quote my mother (at the risk of having her accused of being a tom by Terminus again) "You don't boil cabbages twice" .
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 14 - 02:19 PM

Today.
In a speech to parliament Mr Cameron earlier condemned the kidnapping as "an act of pure evil."

He said: "This is not just a Nigerian issue; it is a global issue.

"There are extreme Islamists around our world who are against education, against progress, against equality and we must fight them and take them on wherever they are."

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 14 - 02:25 PM

Jim,
It should have been one carried out by the UN - Britain was one of those who opposed intervention when he was in the process of committing war crimes
Britain was against military intervention then.
You were in favour of again sending Western troops into an Arab land.
You recently described yourself as a pacifist!

When the British and US governments wanted to intervene over chemical weapons, you and I were the only backers here.
All your mates lined up with UKIP and the Tea Party opposing it.