You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Topic
July 11 2020 2.49am

Why is this a BBC top story? (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 149 of 152 < 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 >

Topic Locked

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Mar 20 3.20pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Nicholas91

Thank you for the response.

I do agree with some of what you are saying and also I understand where you are coming from with your points.

I have highlighted in bold where I see some problems however.

Essentially, a lot of what I think you are expressing, whilst hypothetically valid in it's aspirations as an ideology, is folly.

The reliance on people to change their culture regarding an assortment on things ranging from treatment of others who are different, abiding by laws of a foreign land and most pertinently women will always be difficult and in this instance almost guaranteed as impossible.

For some context, I have a a few people of eastern/asian and islamic heritage, who sit in categories between colleagues and mates, in my life who I have quite openly discussed things of this sort with. I am no expert myself but would consider that somewhat close to the horses mouth. Almost all are children of immigrants if not immigrated young themselves.

I would certainly describe each of them as about as much of a Muslim as I am, hence why I have a relationship with them. I met one the other day who was eating a combined bacon and sausage baguette and had a roll up behind his ear as he was waiting for me. He's also a Reading FC season ticket holder despite being from East London (I can't remember why). They routinely mock their elders in their beliefs but more importantly attitudes towards the western world.

From my discussions with them, I would be quite sure in saying that true adherence to their religion, which is virtually a prerequisite of membership, does not provide any wiggle room to adapt to our society - hence why they do not do it almost to the point of abandoning it in all but name. I would add that they are all male as I have learned that any female who would attempt to do so would risk serious if not fatal consequences.

Therefore in essence, I would suggest it is perhaps even more offensive to take a stance of 'I will not persecute you because of your religion and respect what you believe but.... you will have to change some elements of it to fit in'. This is something I find quite ludicrous about current policy.

I respect your stance but I would argue it had no application whatsoever in a practical reality. I have opened up this conversation as I accept I will never have a 100% sure answer on this or any other problem so am open to any counter arguments but have never really found anything to change my mind.

I don't really understand the conclusion of your story. Are these "colleagues/mates" following their religion because they have no choice (in which case their behaviour seems a little odd) or have they effectively abandoned it?

I fully understand we have a mountain to climb but as I don't see any practical alternative then doing things which add to the problem, rather than not doing them in the hope they might begin to help solve them, doesn't seem wise. That's really all I have been arguing. Not that I have a magic wand. Just that some things make it worse.

Every journey starts with one step and may take millions to reach the final destination.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 05 Mar 20 3.28pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

What I stated from the Pew data won't be inaccurate....Islam will overtake Christianity this century and that this is the direction of travel.

I referred to Pew data and this lying 'one nation conservative' posts links to give a leftist and Islamic interpretation of that data.....as if that's some kind of response.....When I point out that projections relating to the UK are likely to be proven as underestimates he then concedes that they may be inaccurate due to age...? So what was the point of presenting these links from the left and Islamic views when you don't even have faith in them.

Well, when that census data is released next year they will be proven to be underestimates and I'm going to rinse you yet again.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Mar 20 3.35pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

There is a difference between deselecting people on religious grounds and selecting people who the government deems suitable for British citizenship.

Just how do you think the government are going to make that judgement?

No conventions need to be breached. Britain as a sovereign nation can deny entry to anyone it likes.

We could very easily fall foul of international conventions if we deselect because of religious belief. Should be do so then the "sovereign nation" trumpeting might well be playing some pretty off notes.

We need to lead by example rather than kowtow to other countries with equally stupid immigration policy.

Oh we won't be "kow towing" to Johnny Foreigner. No chance of that at the moment. Our proud ship would quietly sink out of sight with the Union flag fluttering rather than accept any lifeboats manned by "others". Don't you worry.

Again you are more interested in protecting your precious ideals as are too many politicians and assorted apologists.

I am not the slightest interested in protecting any ideals. I just seek actual solutions that can work.

I present a practical solution that is just that. Nothing to do with race or religion but simply about probability and facts.

It isn't. It's impractical. It's counter productive and unrealistic jingoism.

People like you will keep telling us it can't be done and meanwhile, these kinds of criminality and anti Western attitudes will multiply in Western countries.

That's simply because these type of suggestions have been made for generations but have never ever even been tried. Why is that? It's because in today's interconnected and interdependent world they are completely unrealistic. It won't happen. So we need to get real and find something that will.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Mar 20 3.48pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

The poster who has been "rinsed" so many times on here that he really ought to be squeaky clean by now has the temerity to suggest he will do it "again"! The next time would be the first time!

Forecasts based on research will always need updating. There is nothing revolutionary or controversial in that. Things change. That's the nature of life.

What does it matter if the number adhering to one religion outnumber those adhering to another? Christianity is currently in decline as the western world rejects it and their fertility has also declined. Islam is growing as the fertility of the developing world, which has a greater proportion of Muslims than in the west, is still higher.

There will be such ebbs and flows. If the developing world develop there will be others.

The upcoming census will provide data but it won't provide that much real insight into what lies ahead because events change things and we don't yet know what they will be.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Nicholas91's Profile Nicholas91 Flag Kent 05 Mar 20 3.49pm Send a Private Message to Nicholas91 Add Nicholas91 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I don't really understand the conclusion of your story. Are these "colleagues/mates" following their religion because they have no choice (in which case their behaviour seems a little odd) or have they effectively abandoned it?

I fully understand we have a mountain to climb but as I don't see any practical alternative then doing things which add to the problem, rather than not doing them in the hope they might begin to help solve them, doesn't seem wise. That's really all I have been arguing. Not that I have a magic wand. Just that some things make it worse.

Every journey starts with one step and may take millions to reach the final destination.

So for clarity, I was suggesting that as they had grown up fully immersed in that culture so they would have far greater insight than you or I and hence I am using them as a source, albeit not a definitive one. I was also stating that yes, they have abandoned it in all but name (probably for parents' etc. sake) and that is why I have an association with them.

I do understand what you are saying/where you are coming from and perhaps I was not clear in my mission to begin with.

I do not believe that I have a solution either, without being brutal and inevitably incurring some sort of Nazi, final solution comparison which would probably be wholly inaccurate and unfair. I am just suggesting that this ideology is not compatible with modern life as I would infer most are aspiring to live it, and certainly isn't compatible with what I will term as 'traditional British values and customs'.

Therefore, I am suggesting that yes, there are arguments against assigning the label of 'Islamic' to the perpetrators of these crimes (you have articulated) but there are equally, if not to a greater extent, arguments to suggest that the label is totally accurate as the contributory cultural and societal factors behind the crimes can be quite clearly linked to the ideology of the perpetrators.

In any event, the ideology very much seems to be one that directly clashes with both modern and historical British society and these crimes are merely serving as a gruesome and horrific example of this. Therefore the label may be just in articulating a massive societal problem and juncture we have reached. I would argue that the religion is very much on trial, with these crimes a damning piece of evidence.

As mentioned in my previous post, I think it more ridiculous to say that it is fine to practice your religion so long as you modify it appropriately to fit in with the rest of society. I would argue that those who categorise themselves as Muslims, but who 'get along' have done this to what is probably an unacceptable degree and perhaps not practising the religion at all just retaining the moniker.

 


Here's to you the famous red and blue.....

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View ASCPFC's Profile ASCPFC Flag Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 05 Mar 20 4.57pm Send a Private Message to ASCPFC Add ASCPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Nicholas91

So for clarity, I was suggesting that as they had grown up fully immersed in that culture so they would have far greater insight than you or I and hence I am using them as a source, albeit not a definitive one. I was also stating that yes, they have abandoned it in all but name (probably for parents' etc. sake) and that is why I have an association with them.

I do understand what you are saying/where you are coming from and perhaps I was not clear in my mission to begin with.

I do not believe that I have a solution either, without being brutal and inevitably incurring some sort of Nazi, final solution comparison which would probably be wholly inaccurate and unfair. I am just suggesting that this ideology is not compatible with modern life as I would infer most are aspiring to live it, and certainly isn't compatible with what I will term as 'traditional British values and customs'.

Therefore, I am suggesting that yes, there are arguments against assigning the label of 'Islamic' to the perpetrators of these crimes (you have articulated) but there are equally, if not to a greater extent, arguments to suggest that the label is totally accurate as the contributory cultural and societal factors behind the crimes can be quite clearly linked to the ideology of the perpetrators.

In any event, the ideology very much seems to be one that directly clashes with both modern and historical British society and these crimes are merely serving as a gruesome and horrific example of this. Therefore the label may be just in articulating a massive societal problem and juncture we have reached. I would argue that the religion is very much on trial, with these crimes a damning piece of evidence.

As mentioned in my previous post, I think it more ridiculous to say that it is fine to practice your religion so long as you modify it appropriately to fit in with the rest of society. I would argue that those who categorise themselves as Muslims, but who 'get along' have done this to what is probably an unacceptable degree and perhaps not practising the religion at all just retaining the moniker.

A very good post and close to my experience. However, don't hold your breath when you introduce any balanced debate.
Your previous post about women who leave Islam behind is interesting. The women are still the men's property: I always have to think - why do we allow this in a country where women fought and died for equality to men? It is always the people apologising for Islam who seem to think this is fine. Perhaps it would be fine by them if blokes just start beating their missus again when she burns the chapattis.
I too am friends with plenty of Muslims - like you, the ones who will go to the pub with me. Is there any point in trying to be friends with hard line Muslims? Let's face it, to them I am evil and they are not welcome by me either.
Their views are not compatible with British values and likely never will be. They live in their own communities and we are the Kaffirs. I frankly, do not see the point of importing more of these to continue to ghettoise certain areas and towns and cities. Why anyone would is beyond me.

 


Red and Blue Army!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 05 Mar 20 6.12pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
We could very easily fall foul of international conventions if we deselect because of religious belief. Should be do so then the "sovereign nation" trumpeting might well be playing some pretty off notes.

It isn't. It's impractical. It's counter productive and unrealistic jingoism.



I have already said that selection of candidates for citizenship is a matter for a sovereign government. I know you want us to be governed by foreign powers but that ship has sailed. I don't accept your excuses for inaction.

You seriously think that wishing to protect British citizens from harm, in this case, the mass rape of young girls, is jingoistic?
Or like most of your type, do you just wish to stereotype people with deep reservations about our immigration policy?

To me, you sound like a dithering old man who is playing his proverbial fiddle while the city burns.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Mar 20 7.15pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Nicholas91

So for clarity, I was suggesting that as they had grown up fully immersed in that culture so they would have far greater insight than you or I and hence I am using them as a source, albeit not a definitive one. I was also stating that yes, they have abandoned it in all but name (probably for parents' etc. sake) and that is why I have an association with them.

I do understand what you are saying/where you are coming from and perhaps I was not clear in my mission to begin with.

I do not believe that I have a solution either, without being brutal and inevitably incurring some sort of Nazi, final solution comparison which would probably be wholly inaccurate and unfair. I am just suggesting that this ideology is not compatible with modern life as I would infer most are aspiring to live it, and certainly isn't compatible with what I will term as 'traditional British values and customs'.

Therefore, I am suggesting that yes, there are arguments against assigning the label of 'Islamic' to the perpetrators of these crimes (you have articulated) but there are equally, if not to a greater extent, arguments to suggest that the label is totally accurate as the contributory cultural and societal factors behind the crimes can be quite clearly linked to the ideology of the perpetrators.

In any event, the ideology very much seems to be one that directly clashes with both modern and historical British society and these crimes are merely serving as a gruesome and horrific example of this. Therefore the label may be just in articulating a massive societal problem and juncture we have reached. I would argue that the religion is very much on trial, with these crimes a damning piece of evidence.

As mentioned in my previous post, I think it more ridiculous to say that it is fine to practice your religion so long as you modify it appropriately to fit in with the rest of society. I would argue that those who categorise themselves as Muslims, but who 'get along' have done this to what is probably an unacceptable degree and perhaps not practising the religion at all just retaining the moniker.

We are largely on the same page.

I have no sympathies for Islam either, despite the frequent attempt by the Islamophobes to suggest the opposite. I regard all religious belief as past it's time and an encumbrance to a peaceful world. Those who try to justify criminal activity because of a belief need to be stopped and we must insist that teaching that supports it ceases too. I would close all faith based schools and teach British values to all children. No compromises. No home schooling for religious reasons.

Demanding that all religious leaders acknowledge the need to adhere to British values and join us in trying to eradicate evil seems sensible to me. There must be ways to apply pressure to achieve this.

Putting Islam "on trial" by demanding that it's teachers comply with our expectations (alongside those of every other religion) is fine with me.

My primary focus in these long exchanges is whether continuing to describe the criminal grooming gangs as "Muslim", "Asian" or "Islamic" is actually beneficial to making things better. It certainly helps the Islamophobes feel better but does it help the victims of the crimes or the Police who are trying to find the criminals and bring them to justice? Just because something might be true doesn't mean it is wise to keep on bringing it up.

My view is unless a positive impact can be proved then we ought not do it, even if not to do so has a marginal effect.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Forest Hillbilly's Profile Forest Hillbilly Flag in a hidey-hole 05 Mar 20 7.27pm Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly Add Forest Hillbilly as a friend

So because the (non-white) criminals targeted white girls, there was no racist aspect added to the sentences ?

It just seems odd, to me.

Edited by Forest Hillbilly (05 Mar 2020 7.28pm)

 


,.,.,..,

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Mar 20 7.30pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger


I have already said that selection of candidates for citizenship is a matter for a sovereign government.

Obviously, but there have to be rules and religious belief cannot be one of them unless we want to attract the attention, and ridicule, of the whole world. We want to be leaders and not the targets of scorn. Of course past behaviour will be a factor so anyone who has transgressed on their route to citizenship can be refused. As they are now. People though can be cunning and become sleepers so this isn't a substitute for the need to change behaviour.

I know you want us to be governed by foreign powers but that ship has sailed. I don't accept your excuses for inaction.

Don't be so ridiculous. We never were, and were never going to be "governed by foreign powers". The EU is a partnership of equals.

You seriously think that wishing to protect British citizens from harm, in this case, the mass rape of young girls, is jingoistic?

As what you are proposing won't happen it's irrelevant but even if it did it wouldn't protect anyone from harm because it wouldn't work. It's the thinking behind it which is jingoistic.

Or like most of your type, do you just wish to stereotype people with deep reservations about our immigration policy?

You stereotype yourself without any help from me.

To me, you sound like a dithering old man who is playing his proverbial fiddle while the city burns.

I am 75 years young, so probably more than half way on life's journey, but I am working on disproving that. I don't sit around watching things just happen. I am pretty active I can assure you! No need to worry on my behalf.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 05 Mar 20 7.48pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Obviously, but there have to be rules and religious belief cannot be one of them unless we want to attract the attention, and ridicule, of the whole world. We want to be leaders and not the targets of scorn. Of course past behaviour will be a factor so anyone who has transgressed on their route to citizenship can be refused. As they are now. People though can be cunning and become sleepers so this isn't a substitute for the need to change behaviour.

Don't be so ridiculous. We never were, and were never going to be "governed by foreign powers". The EU is a partnership of equals.

A.

Or like most of your type, do you just wish to stereotype people with deep reservations about our immigration policy?

You stereotype yourself without any help from me.

I am 75 years young, so probably more than half way on life's journey, but I am working on disproving that. I don't sit around watching things just happen. I am pretty active I can assure you! No need to worry on my behalf.


You are a disingenuous old apologist and you can argue round in circles as much as you like.
You would rather sit around a table with a load of other dithering old men finding ways to avoid doing anything about our growing immigration crime crisis than take some positive action.

You are an appeaser. The Neville Chamberlin of HOL.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 05 Mar 20 7.58pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We are largely on the same page.

I have no sympathies for Islam either, despite the frequent attempt by the Islamophobes to suggest the opposite. I regard all religious belief as past it's time and an encumbrance to a peaceful world. Those who try to justify criminal activity because of a belief need to be stopped and we must insist that teaching that supports it ceases too. I would close all faith based schools and teach British values to all children. No compromises. No home schooling for religious reasons.

Demanding that all religious leaders acknowledge the need to adhere to British values and join us in trying to eradicate evil seems sensible to me. There must be ways to apply pressure to achieve this.

Putting Islam "on trial" by demanding that it's teachers comply with our expectations (alongside those of every other religion) is fine with me.

My primary focus in these long exchanges is whether continuing to describe the criminal grooming gangs as "Muslim", "Asian" or "Islamic" is actually beneficial to making things better. It certainly helps the Islamophobes feel better but does it help the victims of the crimes or the Police who are trying to find the criminals and bring them to justice? Just because something might be true doesn't mean it is wise to keep on bringing it up.

My view is unless a positive impact can be proved then we ought not do it, even if not to do so has a marginal effect.

Might be true.
Ffs they are asian grooming gangs.
Have you read the news reports on the convictions with names and pictures.
Doesnt need Poirot to see a connection.
Clearly you cannot bring yourself to admit that is the case.
You can fool some of the people some of the time........ etc etc.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post

Topic Locked

Page 149 of 152 < 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Topic