Blasts in London

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Blasts in London

Visit the current forum | Forum Rules

Page 33 of 41 < 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 >

npn Crowborough 13 Jul 05 1.24pm
Quote RICKY at 13 Jul 2005 1:04pm Those clerics who preach all this hatred should be kicked out and sent back to the Middle East. In Watford they have asked for a second mosque to be built, I hope the council turn it down. Slate me for that if you want but I reckon the majority of the public would agree with me. I won't slate you for it, as I completely understand the sentiment, but I hope the pulic would not agree (at least when the anger has subsided a bit. I have no problem with building mosques, and the muslim community in general. What I WOULD like to see is any mosque consistently allowing the spouting of hatred (like Finsbury, for instance) shut down and torn down! And that should apply to any 'community' building, be it mosque, church, synagogue, or public bleeding library. You're dead right about the clerics though - sling the extremist hate-mongerers amongst them out immediately.

npn

Crowborough 13 Jul 05 1.24pm

Quote RICKY at 13 Jul 2005 1:04pm

Those clerics who preach all this hatred should be kicked out and sent back to the Middle East. In Watford they have asked for a second mosque to be built, I hope the council turn it down. Slate me for that if you want but I reckon the majority of the public would agree with me.

I won't slate you for it, as I completely understand the sentiment, but I hope the pulic would not agree (at least when the anger has subsided a bit.

I have no problem with building mosques, and the muslim community in general. What I WOULD like to see is any mosque consistently allowing the spouting of hatred (like Finsbury, for instance) shut down and torn down! And that should apply to any 'community' building, be it mosque, church, synagogue, or public bleeding library.

You're dead right about the clerics though - sling the extremist hate-mongerers amongst them out immediately.

cpfc-rjd Beckenham and the BBS 13 Jul 05 1.26pm
The lunatics who did this don't care about killing Muslims. They kill Muslims every day in Iraq. The fact that they are British IS important. It means that we cannot hope to defeat these scum by controlling our borders alone. We are faced with the enemy within. We now have citizens who are so warped and depraved that they are prepared to kill ordinary people. Theses animals and those who support or condone them have no place in our society. Reading the paper today with the profiles of the dead just makes me more and more angry. What a f***ing pointless waste of lives. I’m sick of this ‘let’s get on with our lives bollocks. Their loved ones can’t get on with their lives. "Her very Lowness with her head in a sling I'm truly sorry but it sounds like a wonderful thing" NEITHER LEFT OR RIGHT BUT OUT IN FRONT [Link]

cpfc-rjd

Beckenham and the BBS 13 Jul 05 1.26pm

The lunatics who did this don't care about killing Muslims. They kill Muslims every day in Iraq.

The fact that they are British IS important. It means that we cannot hope to defeat these scum by controlling our borders alone. We are faced with the enemy within. We now have citizens who are so warped and depraved that they are prepared to kill ordinary people. Theses animals and those who support or condone them have no place in our society.

Reading the paper today with the profiles of the dead just makes me more and more angry. What a f***ing pointless waste of lives. I’m sick of this ‘let’s get on with our lives bollocks. Their loved ones can’t get on with their lives.

"Her very Lowness with her head in a sling
I'm truly sorry but it sounds like a wonderful thing"

NEITHER LEFT OR RIGHT BUT OUT IN FRONT

[Link]

cpfc-rjd Beckenham and the BBS 13 Jul 05 1.33pm
I know it can be a pain in the arse to post long articles but this is exactly how I feel: Four pathetic young bombers ALICE MILES NOW THE real shock. The first suicide bombing to occur in Western Europe — and not one, but four of them. This takes terror in Britain into a new dimension. And yet, my instinct is the same as it was before learning that these were not just “ordinary” bombers, but suicides. And the instinct is even stronger now: do not glamorise them. I see four pathetic young men, feeble manifestations of confused masculinity, too spineless to negotiate the 21st century. Unemployed? Useless? Do something that makes you feel big. But anyone can make a bomb and take it on to the Tube. It is the work of an instant and of a deluded idiot. We should not glamorise them, and any who might follow them. We must not dignify them with fear. I see their poor mothers, too, wondering, as the parade of missing and dead filled our television screens, where their sons had got to. And I ask those mothers: why did you not know what was happening to your sons? I ask their fathers, too, and their community leaders who allow such bile to fester in communities impenetrable to outsiders and kept separate from mainstream British society: do you see what you have done? And then I ask my fellow commuters: are we afraid now? The aftermath of Thursday’s bombing showed London at its best and by God I was proud of it; proud of the calm and the silence and, above all, of people’s determination to cling to normality. I heard polite attempts to cancel appointments, apologies at missed meetings, efforts not to further inconvenience anyone. People were relentlessly practical. We left the tears and the panic to those out of town, or overseas; those irritating e-mails from people you hadn’t seen for years — are you OK? Is so-and-so all right? Do you think she was caught up in it? It was hysterical and it didn’t help. There has always been danger on the Underground. As someone who grew up in London, to me the Tube has long represented both freedom and threat. Freedom, because it led to everywhere. Threat, because there was always the flasher, the potential rapist or the mugger; at journey’s end, the IRA bomber. The difference since 9/11 has been the sense of danger from a bomb on the Tube itself. It lurks at the back of one’s mind on almost every journey. It lurked on July 6. It lurked yesterday. It will lurk again today. You calibrate the threat, and you make your choice. For most Londoners, that means getting on the Tube. Yesterday morning I watched, along with my fellow passengers, the comers and goers at each station. I checked sideways for packages on the floor. Occasionally people caught one another’s eye and smiled. No one but a nutter smiles on the Tube, as a rule; since July 7 we all do. Ruefully, perhaps, but a smile nonetheless. It makes me even prouder. Defeat us? You have united us. But today I imagine we shall stop smiling at one another. No more looking for reassurance in a stranger: do not look young and Asian on the Tube today. On Monday Tony Blair painted us ordinary Londoners as heroic: “Millions of people are coming to work with a steely determination that is genuinely remarkable.” It isn’t remarkable. Nobody feels remarkable. It is just life. It is ordinary. People have jobs and they must turn up for them. It is absolutely normal. And normality is what we need now. Normality shows that life goes on; most importantly, it reveals to other potential bombers that they cannot change anything this way. Yet normality is hard to carry on when those in authority keep raking through the rubble. The police leak details of hidden horrors; we are invited to imagine the scene underground at King’s Cross, in the sweat and the stench. Gruesome hints about the difficulty of identifying bodies spattered across track and tunnel are sharply illustrated by the collection of a toothbrush, for DNA, from a potential victim’s relative. A distraught mother seeking her missing son is given an entire page in the Daily Mail to bemoan “rivers of blood . . . death in the morning, people going to find their livelihood, death in the noontime in the highways and streets”. Mr Blair invites grim imaginings by telling MPs “the effect of a bomb is to make identification sometimes very, very hard and harrowing”. The Culture Secretary rushes to open a Garden of Remembrance. The Prime Minister announces a Europe-wide two-minute silence and the Queen promises to attend a memorial service. And all this risks glamorising the work of four pathetic young men, and recruiting others to their “cause”. The shock of the blasts tore lives apart, yes, but they were not, for most of us, our lives. We are not grieving, as the friends and families of the bereaved grieve. Nothing will ever fill for them the void left by July 7, 2005. Public mourning will not bring them back; public grieving belittles their grief. It is now clear that there is something constructive that the politicians can do. Forget the mourning, and tear into those Muslim ghettos instead. Force them to open up. Make the imams answer. Tell them to let their women speak, as they have been prevented from doing until now. We have done softly, softly. We have pandered to fears about religious hatred. We have listened with utmost sympathy to their concerns. No one should stigmatise any community, the police said yesterday. But those bombers have stigmatised the communities that made them, and we should spare a thought for the devastation wrought on those communities; but then we should insist that they cannot continue in a state of alienation from the rest of society. That is a challenge for them, and for all of us. They, too, must become ordinary. Edited by cpfc-rjd (13 Jul 2005 1:35pm) "Her very Lowness with her head in a sling I'm truly sorry but it sounds like a wonderful thing" NEITHER LEFT OR RIGHT BUT OUT IN FRONT [Link]

cpfc-rjd

Beckenham and the BBS 13 Jul 05 1.33pm

I know it can be a pain in the arse to post long articles but this is exactly how I feel:

Four pathetic young bombers
ALICE MILES

NOW THE real shock. The first suicide bombing to occur in Western Europe — and not one, but four of them. This takes terror in Britain into a new dimension.

And yet, my instinct is the same as it was before learning that these were not just “ordinary” bombers, but suicides. And the instinct is even stronger now: do not glamorise them. I see four pathetic young men, feeble manifestations of confused masculinity, too spineless to negotiate the 21st century. Unemployed? Useless? Do something that makes you feel big. But anyone can make a bomb and take it on to the Tube. It is the work of an instant and of a deluded idiot. We should not glamorise them, and any who might follow them. We must not dignify them with fear.

I see their poor mothers, too, wondering, as the parade of missing and dead filled our television screens, where their sons had got to. And I ask those mothers: why did you not know what was happening to your sons? I ask their fathers, too, and their community leaders who allow such bile to fester in communities impenetrable to outsiders and kept separate from mainstream British society: do you see what you have done?
And then I ask my fellow commuters: are we afraid now?

The aftermath of Thursday’s bombing showed London at its best and by God I was proud of it; proud of the calm and the silence and, above all, of people’s determination to cling to normality. I heard polite attempts to cancel appointments, apologies at missed meetings, efforts not to further inconvenience anyone. People were relentlessly practical. We left the tears and the panic to those out of town, or overseas; those irritating e-mails from people you hadn’t seen for years — are you OK? Is so-and-so all right? Do you think she was caught up in it? It was hysterical and it didn’t help.
There has always been danger on the Underground. As someone who grew up in London, to me the Tube has long represented both freedom and threat. Freedom, because it led to everywhere. Threat, because there was always the flasher, the potential rapist or the mugger; at journey’s end, the IRA bomber. The difference since 9/11 has been the sense of danger from a bomb on the Tube itself. It lurks at the back of one’s mind on almost every journey. It lurked on July 6. It lurked yesterday. It will lurk again today. You calibrate the threat, and you make your choice. For most Londoners, that means getting on the Tube.

Yesterday morning I watched, along with my fellow passengers, the comers and goers at each station. I checked sideways for packages on the floor. Occasionally people caught one another’s eye and smiled. No one but a nutter smiles on the Tube, as a rule; since July 7 we all do. Ruefully, perhaps, but a smile nonetheless. It makes me even prouder. Defeat us? You have united us. But today I imagine we shall stop smiling at one another. No more looking for reassurance in a stranger: do not look young and Asian on the Tube today.

On Monday Tony Blair painted us ordinary Londoners as heroic: “Millions of people are coming to work with a steely determination that is genuinely remarkable.” It isn’t remarkable. Nobody feels remarkable. It is just life. It is ordinary. People have jobs and they must turn up for them. It is absolutely normal.
And normality is what we need now. Normality shows that life goes on; most importantly, it reveals to other potential bombers that they cannot change anything this way.

Yet normality is hard to carry on when those in authority keep raking through the rubble. The police leak details of hidden horrors; we are invited to imagine the scene underground at King’s Cross, in the sweat and the stench. Gruesome hints about the difficulty of identifying bodies spattered across track and tunnel are sharply illustrated by the collection of a toothbrush, for DNA, from a potential victim’s relative. A distraught mother seeking her missing son is given an entire page in the Daily Mail to bemoan “rivers of blood . . . death in the morning, people going to find their livelihood, death in the noontime in the highways and streets”. Mr Blair invites grim imaginings by telling MPs “the effect of a bomb is to make identification sometimes very, very hard and harrowing”. The Culture Secretary rushes to open a Garden of Remembrance. The Prime Minister announces a Europe-wide two-minute silence and the Queen promises to attend a memorial service.

And all this risks glamorising the work of four pathetic young men, and recruiting others to their “cause”. The shock of the blasts tore lives apart, yes, but they were not, for most of us, our lives. We are not grieving, as the friends and families of the bereaved grieve. Nothing will ever fill for them the void left by July 7, 2005. Public mourning will not bring them back; public grieving belittles their grief.

It is now clear that there is something constructive that the politicians can do. Forget the mourning, and tear into those Muslim ghettos instead. Force them to open up. Make the imams answer. Tell them to let their women speak, as they have been prevented from doing until now. We have done softly, softly. We have pandered to fears about religious hatred. We have listened with utmost sympathy to their concerns.
No one should stigmatise any community, the police said yesterday. But those bombers have stigmatised the communities that made them, and we should spare a thought for the devastation wrought on those communities; but then we should insist that they cannot continue in a state of alienation from the rest of society. That is a challenge for them, and for all of us. They, too, must become ordinary.

Edited by cpfc-rjd (13 Jul 2005 1:35pm)

"Her very Lowness with her head in a sling
I'm truly sorry but it sounds like a wonderful thing"

NEITHER LEFT OR RIGHT BUT OUT IN FRONT

[Link]

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 1.51pm
I think Stef's post above is in the wrong thread? ;-) All the ones below that, however, make excellent points. Especially this: Quote if we are to defeat this extremist lunacy, we need to make sure that ALL the people in this country, regardless of ethnic origin, feel a part of the battle. We're all in this together Hear hear mate. Hear hear.

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 1.51pm

I think Stef's post above is in the wrong thread? ;-)

All the ones below that, however, make excellent points. Especially this:

Quote if we are to defeat this extremist lunacy, we need to make sure that ALL the people in this country, regardless of ethnic origin, feel a part of the battle. We're all in this together

Hear hear mate. Hear hear.

JollyStef 13 Jul 05 2.19pm
Quote halfmanhalfslug at 13 Jul 2005 1:51pm I think Stef's post above is in the wrong thread? ;-) No it's not, just something NickinOx said .. that's all Edited by JollyStef (13 Jul 2005 2:20pm) finished

JollyStef 13 Jul 05 2.19pm

Quote halfmanhalfslug at 13 Jul 2005 1:51pm

I think Stef's post above is in the wrong thread? ;-)

No it's not, just something NickinOx said .. that's all

Edited by JollyStef (13 Jul 2005 2:20pm)

finished

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 2.51pm
In no particular order. HMHS. 3. Regarding the figures. Independent academic studies were carried out in the USA and elsewhere for both the Afghan war and Iraq. I cannot remember the best one from the USA (it was a lesser known college), but a team of researchers went into Afghanistan to compile a count. A current count that is continuous and (criticised for being anti-American, though it seems fairly reasonable to me) is [Link] Thay are now claiming between 22787 and 25814 civilians have been killed. The figures given last year, at the time of the 100,000 report, were about 13-15,000 civilians killed (if I remember correctly). Considering the upsurge in violence since the middle of last year that sounds about right. 1. Regarding the Geneva conventions and the treatment of prisoners. I have made it quite clear that the prisiners should be treated humanely. The prisoner do fall into a hole in international law. Thus what should be done with them? If as is claimed on both sides this is a war, then the USA has the right to detain them for the duration. I agree that a number of prisoners have been incredibly poorly treated. However, the people we are discussing have never conformed to the laws of war, the Geneva convention, etc. It is also unlikely, given their consistent behaviour, that it will ever really matter to the hard core of them if we do treat their prisoners poorly or not. However, I think that you have a point if you are discussing moderate people who might shift to extremism. In that case, it is important to treat the prisoners humanely (all moral arguments aside) even if it is only from pure long-term self- interest. To go on to insinuate that they are innocent people being tortured without reason is stretching the point past logical common sense. Not that that would justify torture in my opinion. Innocent people like yourself are not that likely to end up in Abu-Ghraib or Guantanamo! Plus, American and British soldiers have already been convicted and jailed for the poor treatment of prisoners. If we are comparing like with like, then we would be seeing the same from the extremists. Thus there is a difference between the moral ground of the two sides and that difference needs to be further widened. So, again I ask what are we to do with them? 2. You brought up the UN, I just answered your point. If the UN is as bad as you say then why use its legitimacy as an argument? The UN was irrelevant well before Dubya, just look at Srebrenica in 1995! The USA cannot in any way be accused of engineering that, it was a UN and Dutch f*** up. Again, what should replace it, and who is going to provide the military power to back it up? Europe is the only place wealthy enough to do this, yet most European countries complain about American military power but are cutting their defence spending! How can Europe provide an alternative to American power when it is so hypocritical. 4. Regarding Saddam's support of terrorism. You claimed he had no links to terrorism, I pointed out he did. Regarding the point by Faraway: Cromwell's behaviour in Ireland, has been used as an excuse just as the Crusades have. Don't you think that is stretching ideas ridiculously far? We could easliy turn the rhetoric around and argue that christians were driven out of much of the Middle East, Turkey, North Africa, parts ofthe Southern Caucasus, parts of the Balkans and Spain until the Reconquista finished in 1492. Largely by muslims. How would that help either side and the argument is mostly redundant. Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 2:52pm)

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 2.51pm

In no particular order. HMHS.

3. Regarding the figures. Independent academic studies were carried out in the USA and elsewhere for both the Afghan war and Iraq. I cannot remember the best one from the USA (it was a lesser known college), but a team of researchers went into Afghanistan to compile a count. A current count that is continuous and (criticised for being anti-American, though it seems fairly reasonable to me) is [Link]

Thay are now claiming between 22787 and 25814 civilians have been killed. The figures given last year, at the time of the 100,000 report, were about 13-15,000 civilians killed (if I remember correctly). Considering the upsurge in violence since the middle of last year that sounds about right.

1. Regarding the Geneva conventions and the treatment of prisoners. I have made it quite clear that the prisiners should be treated humanely. The prisoner do fall into a hole in international law. Thus what should be done with them? If as is claimed on both sides this is a war, then the USA has the right to detain them for the duration.

I agree that a number of prisoners have been incredibly poorly treated. However, the people we are discussing have never conformed to the laws of war, the Geneva convention, etc. It is also unlikely, given their consistent behaviour, that it will ever really matter to the hard core of them if we do treat their prisoners poorly or not.
However, I think that you have a point if you are discussing moderate people who might shift to extremism. In that case, it is important to treat the prisoners humanely (all moral arguments aside) even if it is only from pure long-term self- interest.

To go on to insinuate that they are innocent people being tortured without reason is stretching the point past logical common sense. Not that that would justify torture in my opinion. Innocent people like yourself are not that likely to end up in Abu-Ghraib or Guantanamo!

Plus, American and British soldiers have already been convicted and jailed for the poor treatment of prisoners. If we are comparing like with like, then we would be seeing the same from the extremists. Thus there is a difference between the moral ground of the two sides and that difference needs to be further widened.

So, again I ask what are we to do with them?

2. You brought up the UN, I just answered your point. If the UN is as bad as you say then why use its legitimacy as an argument? The UN was irrelevant well before Dubya, just look at Srebrenica in 1995! The USA cannot in any way be accused of engineering that, it was a UN and Dutch f*** up.

Again, what should replace it, and who is going to provide the military power to back it up? Europe is the only place wealthy enough to do this, yet most European countries complain about American military power but are cutting their defence spending! How can Europe provide an alternative to American power when it is so hypocritical.

4. Regarding Saddam's support of terrorism. You claimed he had no links to terrorism, I pointed out he did.

Regarding the point by Faraway: Cromwell's behaviour in Ireland, has been used as an excuse just as the Crusades have. Don't you think that is stretching ideas ridiculously far? We could easliy turn the rhetoric around and argue that christians were driven out of much of the Middle East, Turkey, North Africa, parts ofthe Southern Caucasus, parts of the Balkans and Spain until the Reconquista finished in 1492. Largely by muslims. How would that help either side and the argument is mostly redundant.

Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 2:52pm)

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.00pm
Quote if we are to defeat this extremist lunacy, we need to make sure that ALL the people in this country, regardless of ethnic origin, feel a part of the battle. We're all in this together I think it is excellently put and I have made a point similar to this before (though not quite as well). It also means that communities new to Britain will probably have to reach further to join hands. That is a fact of life for more recent immigrants, as I have discovered after emigrating and living overseas and not just in the USA. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.00pm

Quote if we are to defeat this extremist lunacy, we need to make sure that ALL the people in this country, regardless of ethnic origin, feel a part of the battle. We're all in this together

I think it is excellently put and I have made a point similar to this before (though not quite as well). It also means that communities new to Britain will probably have to reach further to join hands. That is a fact of life for more recent immigrants, as I have discovered after emigrating and living overseas and not just in the USA.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 3.32pm
Apologies Stef, my error. Cheers NickinOX, great stuff. I suspected the Iraq Body Count site was the one you referred to, as it is basically the only organisation bothered to count the Iraqi dead! Just briefly, you are of course spot on that Al Q and chums aren't as nice as us as regards Geneva etc. Unarguably true. I don't have an answer to your question about what we do with them, all I can say is that I believe it's counterproductive in both the short and long term to sink to their level. Regarding the innocence or otherwise of Gitmo detainees, surely that's for the courts to decide? That's what we have due process for. Re the UN, that's the big question for the 21st century. What to replace it with. A world government might be a start... one with proper voting rights for all people, including those in Muslim dictatorships. Finally, your point about Cromwell. Bang on.

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 3.32pm

Apologies Stef, my error.

Cheers NickinOX, great stuff. I suspected the Iraq Body Count site was the one you referred to, as it is basically the only organisation bothered to count the Iraqi dead!

Just briefly, you are of course spot on that Al Q and chums aren't as nice as us as regards Geneva etc. Unarguably true. I don't have an answer to your question about what we do with them, all I can say is that I believe it's counterproductive in both the short and long term to sink to their level. Regarding the innocence or otherwise of Gitmo detainees, surely that's for the courts to decide? That's what we have due process for.

Re the UN, that's the big question for the 21st century. What to replace it with. A world government might be a start... one with proper voting rights for all people, including those in Muslim dictatorships.

Finally, your point about Cromwell. Bang on.

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.43pm
If they are illegal combatants (i.e. prisoners of war without a uniform, which the vast majority appear to be) then they do not need to be put on trial, they can be held until hostilities end and the situation is secure. Ergo, almost indefinitely. Not sure that is best either. As for a world government, nice idea but I do not think that it could work. At least not for a long, long time. National interests are still much too important for almost all states. I think that if the UN were reformed with set provisions for military force structure and expenditure put in place, it would be salvageable. However, the UN is corrupt and its internal mechanisms need a complete overhaul before anything useful will ever really come of it in terms of international security. The UN might learn a lot from the structure of NATO. Though that is only a genuine force because of the US logistic strength. Who knows. Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 3:50pm) If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.43pm

If they are illegal combatants (i.e. prisoners of war without a uniform, which the vast majority appear to be) then they do not need to be put on trial, they can be held until hostilities end and the situation is secure. Ergo, almost indefinitely. Not sure that is best either.

As for a world government, nice idea but I do not think that it could work. At least not for a long, long time. National interests are still much too important for almost all states.

I think that if the UN were reformed with set provisions for military force structure and expenditure put in place, it would be salvageable. However, the UN is corrupt and its internal mechanisms need a complete overhaul before anything useful will ever really come of it in terms of international security.

The UN might learn a lot from the structure of NATO. Though that is only a genuine force because of the US logistic strength. Who knows.

Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 3:50pm)

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 3.49pm
It's asking for trouble mate. Honestly. Just look at the effect Gitmo has in the Arab world - only Palestine is a bigger issue with them now. We (UK/US) made a major error there. Personally I blame Rummy, his decisions always were dodgy at best. It will take many many years to repair the West's image after these torture scandals, and a few trials of lowly soldiers won't be enough. It wouldn't be for me, if things were the other way around. We have to be SEEN to be even cleaner than we actually are. We have to give them no excuses. In the meantime if we continue to treat them as sub-human, then we can only expect to receive the same in return, right or wrong. I'm sure our own bible has something about eyes and teeth.

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 3.49pm

It's asking for trouble mate. Honestly. Just look at the effect Gitmo has in the Arab world - only Palestine is a bigger issue with them now.

We (UK/US) made a major error there. Personally I blame Rummy, his decisions always were dodgy at best.

It will take many many years to repair the West's image after these torture scandals, and a few trials of lowly soldiers won't be enough. It wouldn't be for me, if things were the other way around.

We have to be SEEN to be even cleaner than we actually are. We have to give them no excuses.

In the meantime if we continue to treat them as sub-human, then we can only expect to receive the same in return, right or wrong. I'm sure our own bible has something about eyes and teeth.

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.55pm
As I have said before, it is the moderates we need to please and the current situation is not helping. In that sense I would agree with you. But the extremists have to be dealt with and if they have been caught, then I can see no other way of dealing with them. If a viable alternative could be found it would do wonders for the western powers. The only real alternative is to return them to their home countries. However, there are two main problems with this: first they may well be let go, which is absolutely the last thing needed with the most extreme amongst them; or they will be tortured and murdered by their own governments. Not really an option either, even if it does appeal a bit. Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 4:40pm) If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 3.55pm

As I have said before, it is the moderates we need to please and the current situation is not helping. In that sense I would agree with you. But the extremists have to be dealt with and if they have been caught, then I can see no other way of dealing with them. If a viable alternative could be found it would do wonders for the western powers.

The only real alternative is to return them to their home countries. However, there are two main problems with this: first they may well be let go, which is absolutely the last thing needed with the most extreme amongst them; or they will be tortured and murdered by their own governments. Not really an option either, even if it does appeal a bit.

Edited by NickinOX (13 Jul 2005 4:40pm)

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

tome Inner Tantalus Time. 13 Jul 05 4.02pm
Quote laddo at 07 Jul 2005 6:55pm Some of the anti-muslim st is a disgrace. I'm angry, but not just with the terrorists. I'm angry that our government has put us in the firing line with attacking Iraq. I'm angry that Iraqi civilians have to live with this everyday due to the actions of our government. I'm angry that through days like this the Americans and other western governments will use this as an excuse to kill other innocent people. I'm angry that through people's anger the real issues aren't being addressed, and never will until people educate themselves. I'd love all those who have had a knee-jerk, anti-muslim reaction, to go to the Gaza Strip and see why some muslims are pissed off. The killing of innocent people of any race is a disgrace, and fundamentalist religious groups are evil. But our government have fuelled the flames of hatred and now we're living with the consequences. This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger. We cannot delude ourselves that our suffering is somehow more virtuous or deserving of sympathy that that caused by wanton destruction anywhere else in the world. Today, 39 women and children were believed to have been burnt to death in their village in Congo. Not that a lot of people would notice here. My point is not to denigrate the suffering in London, just to put it in perspective. We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against. A one and a two...**

tome

Inner Tantalus Time. 13 Jul 05 4.02pm

Quote laddo at 07 Jul 2005 6:55pm
Some of the anti-muslim s**t is a disgrace. I'm angry, but not just with the terrorists. I'm angry that our government has put us in the firing line with attacking Iraq. I'm angry that Iraqi civilians have to live with this everyday due to the actions of our government. I'm angry that through days like this the Americans and other western governments will use this as an excuse to kill other innocent people. I'm angry that through people's anger the real issues aren't being addressed, and never will until people educate themselves.

I'd love all those who have had a knee-jerk, anti-muslim reaction, to go to the Gaza Strip and see why some muslims are pissed off. The killing of innocent people of any race is a disgrace, and fundamentalist religious groups are evil. But our government have fuelled the flames of hatred and now we're living with the consequences.

This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger.

We cannot delude ourselves that our suffering is somehow more virtuous or deserving of sympathy that that caused by wanton destruction anywhere else in the world. Today, 39 women and children were believed to have been burnt to death in their village in Congo. Not that a lot of people would notice here. My point is not to denigrate the suffering in London, just to put it in perspective.

We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against.

A one and a two...

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.31pm
Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 4:02pm Quote laddo at 07 Jul 2005 6:55pm Some of the anti-muslim s**t is a disgrace. I'm angry, but not just with the terrorists. I'm angry that our government has put us in the firing line with attacking Iraq. I'm angry that Iraqi civilians have to live with this everyday due to the actions of our government. I'm angry that through days like this the Americans and other western governments will use this as an excuse to kill other innocent people. I'm angry that through people's anger the real issues aren't being addressed, and never will until people educate themselves. I'd love all those who have had a knee-jerk, anti-muslim reaction, to go to the Gaza Strip and see why some muslims are pissed off. The killing of innocent people of any race is a disgrace, and fundamentalist religious groups are evil. But our government have fuelled the flames of hatred and now we're living with the consequences. This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger. We cannot delude ourselves that our suffering is somehow more virtuous or deserving of sympathy that that caused by wanton destruction anywhere else in the world. Today, 39 women and children were believed to have been burnt to death in their village in Congo. Not that a lot of people would notice here. My point is not to denigrate the suffering in London, just to put it in perspective. We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against. Well if anyone is looking for posts to print off and pin up on the wall, these two are about as good as you'll get, imho. face up to your share of the blame you filthy terrorist sympathiser - Petealiator 8/7/2005 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality - Theodor Adorno

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.31pm

Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 4:02pm

This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger.

We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against.

Well if anyone is looking for posts to print off and pin up on the wall, these two are about as good as you'll get, imho.

face up to your share of the blame you filthy terrorist sympathiser - Petealiator 8/7/2005
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality - Theodor Adorno

Petealiator 1066 Country! 13 Jul 05 4.33pm
Just in case anyone believes that I'm really the sick, demented, homosexual, Hitler-worshipping, not really a man at all, weirdo he accuses me of being, here's the absolute basis of my political beliefs: I believe that multiculturalism on a small scale is no bad thing for any nation, it enriches the indigenous culture and adds depth to it, but if the scale is kept small, the indigenous culture and traditions are preserved and remain in tact, the indigenous people will feel no threat from the small communities and harmony will prevail. Or far better than ‘sticking together’ in small comunities, recreating their own way of life on British soil, would be if the small communities integrated with the indigenous population. Multiculturalism on such a massive scale as we have in Britain today, whole cities given over to non-indigenous people is wrong and it just does not work, and what we're seeing now along with the race riots (notably in Leeds) we've already had is merely adding weight to my belief. I am a nationalist, not a globalist, I don’t want to see the world turned into one big melting pot, I want all the (non-barbaric) nations and cultures of the world preserved and cherished so they can flourish. I believe the indigenous race of Britain is suffering the sickness of non-identity, there is no pride anymore in our young, most couldn’t even tell you who Lord Nelson was. I believe that multiculturalism on the scale as we have in Britain today does nothing but harm to all involved. There are no winners. What's the answer then? Aint got a clue (there's one for worm to quote and make a pithy little comment about), I suppose it's just too late, there is no answer, Britain is f***ed. If you think Thursday was bad, get used to it, we’re gonna see worse and we’re gonna see it more and more often. Happy days! Edited by Moose (19 Jul 2005 9:37am) My Rocksteady band... [Link] [Link] IT'S NOT SKA, IT'S ROCKSTEADY!

Petealiator

1066 Country! 13 Jul 05 4.33pm

Just in case anyone believes that I'm really the sick, demented, homosexual, Hitler-worshipping, not really a man at all, weirdo he accuses me of being, here's the absolute basis of my political beliefs:

I believe that multiculturalism on a small scale is no bad thing for any nation, it enriches the indigenous culture and adds depth to it, but if the scale is kept small, the indigenous culture and traditions are preserved and remain in tact, the indigenous people will feel no threat from the small communities and harmony will prevail. Or far better than ‘sticking together’ in small comunities, recreating their own way of life on British soil, would be if the small communities integrated with the indigenous population.
Multiculturalism on such a massive scale as we have in Britain today, whole cities given over to non-indigenous people is wrong and it just does not work, and what we're seeing now along with the race riots (notably in Leeds) we've already had is merely adding weight to my belief. I am a nationalist, not a globalist, I don’t want to see the world turned into one big melting pot, I want all the (non-barbaric) nations and cultures of the world preserved and cherished so they can flourish. I believe the indigenous race of Britain is suffering the sickness of non-identity, there is no pride anymore in our young, most couldn’t even tell you who Lord Nelson was. I believe that multiculturalism on the scale as we have in Britain today does nothing but harm to all involved. There are no winners.

What's the answer then? Aint got a clue (there's one for worm to quote and make a pithy little comment about), I suppose it's just too late, there is no answer, Britain is f***ed. If you think Thursday was bad, get used to it, we’re gonna see worse and we’re gonna see it more and more often. Happy days!

Edited by Moose (19 Jul 2005 9:37am)

My Rocksteady band...
[Link]
[Link]
IT'S NOT SKA, IT'S ROCKSTEADY!

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.50pm
Gosh. Quite a tirade for someone who doesn't care. Your beliefs are noted. But if you think "whole cities [have been] given over to non-indigenous people" you really ought to visit them first. What an utter load of bullsh!t. There's exaggeration, and then there's just talking sh!t. Way to cross the line Pete. FYI there is not one city in the UK which is less than 50% white. Not one. One question arises from the above, the rest not being worth responding to. Which nations and cultures are "non-barbaric" and which are barbaric, by your criteria? Off now to cry about not being invited for a drink. face up to your share of the blame you filthy terrorist sympathiser - Petealiator 8/7/2005 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality - Theodor Adorno

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.50pm

Gosh. Quite a tirade for someone who doesn't care.

Your beliefs are noted. But if you think "whole cities [have been] given over to non-indigenous people" you really ought to visit them first. What an utter load of bullsh!t. There's exaggeration, and then there's just talking sh!t. Way to cross the line Pete. FYI there is not one city in the UK which is less than 50% white. Not one.

One question arises from the above, the rest not being worth responding to. Which nations and cultures are "non-barbaric" and which are barbaric, by your criteria?

Off now to cry about not being invited for a drink.

Balham Burner 13 Jul 05 4.53pm
I believe that the UK is composed of 93% "white" people.

Balham Burner

13 Jul 05 4.53pm

I believe that the UK is composed of 93% "white" people.

eulalio Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.56pm
And yet some people have enormous difficulties dealing with that other 7% don't they. face up to your share of the blame you filthy terrorist sympathiser - Petealiator 8/7/2005 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality - Theodor Adorno

eulalio

Girls just wanna have Funt 13 Jul 05 4.56pm

And yet some people have enormous difficulties dealing with that other 7% don't they.

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 5.02pm
Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 4:02pm Quote laddo at 07 Jul 2005 6:55pm Some of the anti-muslim st is a disgrace. I'm angry, but not just with the terrorists. I'm angry that our government has put us in the firing line with attacking Iraq. I'm angry that Iraqi civilians have to live with this everyday due to the actions of our government. I'm angry that through days like this the Americans and other western governments will use this as an excuse to kill other innocent people. I'm angry that through people's anger the real issues aren't being addressed, and never will until people educate themselves. I'd love all those who have had a knee-jerk, anti-muslim reaction, to go to the Gaza Strip and see why some muslims are pissed off. The killing of innocent people of any race is a disgrace, and fundamentalist religious groups are evil. But our government have fuelled the flames of hatred and now we're living with the consequences. This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger. We cannot delude ourselves that our suffering is somehow more virtuous or deserving of sympathy that that caused by wanton destruction anywhere else in the world. Today, 39 women and children were believed to have been burnt to death in their village in Congo. Not that a lot of people would notice here. My point is not to denigrate the suffering in London, just to put it in perspective. We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against. If Iraq is the key point, how does he explain the 220 Kenyans and others murdered before 9/11. If you check the "would you kill them" topic, LADDO was unable to point out why Iraq made us vulnerable. Indeed, he was unable to provide valid coherent reasons for a number of things he said. We were in the firing line well before Iraq. The war in Iraq has indeed increased the risk, but it did not create it as has been stated in this quote. Thus the quote is either untruthful or only partially so. The world is a s*ty place, but it does not help when people try to remove the blame for terrorist attacks from non-state actors, who are illegitimate users of violence. That only serves to perpetuate the problem. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 5.02pm

Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 4:02pm

This is a top post, and the one which most closely resembles my own anger.

We must unite across border against the uttere senselessness of murder on such epic scales, whoever it's done by and against.

If Iraq is the key point, how does he explain the 220 Kenyans and others murdered before 9/11.

If you check the "would you kill them" topic, LADDO was unable to point out why Iraq made us vulnerable. Indeed, he was unable to provide valid coherent reasons for a number of things he said. We were in the firing line well before Iraq. The war in Iraq has indeed increased the risk, but it did not create it as has been stated in this quote. Thus the quote is either untruthful or only partially so.

The world is a s***ty place, but it does not help when people try to remove the blame for terrorist attacks from non-state actors, who are illegitimate users of violence. That only serves to perpetuate the problem.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

tome Inner Tantalus Time. 13 Jul 05 5.18pm
Whatever you make of halfmanhalfslug and Petealiator, they certainly stir things up. First up, Pete, I see where you coming from - the position of a cultural conservative. You appear to want to keep things as they were. However the idea that we can stop the advance of both people and cultures is a non - starter in my view. Cultures have never been static - they are just evolving faster now due to the increased mobility of people on a global scale. We cannot go back to the past, we cannot pause or rewind a process that remains ongoing. And rightly so, I think. Migration of all types adds massively to the experience of living in a reciever country. You seem worried about the 'swamping' and globalisation of this country by foreign elements - but surely it'd be a whole lot more uniform and stale if it wasn't for that? Diversity is to be celebrated. NickinOX, that doesn't detract from what he's said here. A degree of risk is inevitable in everything - the fact that we invaded Iraq in a manifestation of pre - emptive aggression creates a whole series of greater risks following and linked to the deaths and insurgency. Imagine you are an Iraqi. War always creates bitterness, and when you set about creating enemies, it's more likely that you will get attacked in return. Yes, it's still the fault of those that did it. But we'd significantly reduce the risk if we were to look at why it is that people wish to attack us. Look at it from their point of view. If I was a Palestinian, an Uzbek or a Saudi, I'd be pretty f*ing angry. A one and a two...**

tome

Inner Tantalus Time. 13 Jul 05 5.18pm

Whatever you make of halfmanhalfslug and Petealiator, they certainly stir things up.

First up, Pete, I see where you coming from - the position of a cultural conservative. You appear to want to keep things as they were. However the idea that we can stop the advance of both people and cultures is a non - starter in my view. Cultures have never been static - they are just evolving faster now due to the increased mobility of people on a global scale. We cannot go back to the past, we cannot pause or rewind a process that remains ongoing. And rightly so, I think. Migration of all types adds massively to the experience of living in a reciever country. You seem worried about the 'swamping' and globalisation of this country by foreign elements - but surely it'd be a whole lot more uniform and stale if it wasn't for that?

Diversity is to be celebrated.

NickinOX, that doesn't detract from what he's said here. A degree of risk is inevitable in everything - the fact that we invaded Iraq in a manifestation of pre - emptive aggression creates a whole series of greater risks following and linked to the deaths and insurgency. Imagine you are an Iraqi. War always creates bitterness, and when you set about creating enemies, it's more likely that you will get attacked in return.

Yes, it's still the fault of those that did it. But we'd significantly reduce the risk if we were to look at why it is that people wish to attack us. Look at it from their point of view. If I was a Palestinian, an Uzbek or a Saudi, I'd be pretty f***ing angry.

A one and a two...

NickinOX Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 5.27pm
Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 5:18pm NickinOX, that doesn't detract from what he's said here. A degree of risk is inevitable in everything - the fact that we invaded Iraq in a manifestation of pre - emptive aggression creates a whole series of greater risks following and linked to the deaths and insurgency. Imagine you are an Iraqi. War always creates bitterness, and when you set about creating enemies, it's more likely that you will get attacked in return. Yes, it's still the fault of those that did it. But we'd significantly reduce the risk if we were to look at why it is that people wish to attack us. Look at it from their point of view. If I was a Palestinian, an Uzbek or a Saudi, I'd be pretty f***ing angry. But, he claimed and you agreed, that Iraq put us in the firing line. That is not true, as we were already in the firing line. Though I do agree it did increase the risk. Any action we do take, will in all likelihood increase our risk in the short term. That makes complete sense. Thus the logic is we should take no action. Does that mean you think we should take no action? Personally, I think that would be suicide. If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

NickinOX

Sailing country. 13 Jul 05 5.27pm

Quote tome at 13 Jul 2005 5:18pm
NickinOX, that doesn't detract from what he's said here. A degree of risk is inevitable in everything - the fact that we invaded Iraq in a manifestation of pre - emptive aggression creates a whole series of greater risks following and linked to the deaths and insurgency. Imagine you are an Iraqi. War always creates bitterness, and when you set about creating enemies, it's more likely that you will get attacked in return.

But, he claimed and you agreed, that Iraq put us in the firing line. That is not true, as we were already in the firing line. Though I do agree it did increase the risk.

Any action we do take, will in all likelihood increase our risk in the short term. That makes complete sense. Thus the logic is we should take no action.

Does that mean you think we should take no action? Personally, I think that would be suicide.

If you come to a fork in the road, take it.

Page 33 of 41 < 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Blasts in London

Site Map