A Society Of Cowards

[BigTone]

Yes, or no?!

 

The offer is on the table - and so could you be.

 

A straight question deserves a straight answer??

 

Speak soon, sweet-pea. 

 

 

xxxx

 

 

TFR

 

Ah bless

[...]

FFS BigTone - just say no, will you?

 

This was supposed to be a OTIB version of Deliverance, but you seem to be playing me along like a 'hog-boy'.

 

This is disgusting and humiliating for both of us, so if you don't say 'no' soon, I'll have to withdraw my offer.

 

Jesus!

 

[BigTone]

FFS BigTone - just say no, will you?

 

This was supposed to be a OTIB version of Deliverance, but you seem to be playing me along like a 'hog-boy'.

 

This is disgusting and humiliating for both of us, so if you don't say 'no' soon, I'll have to withdraw my offer.

 

Jesus!

 

Now, Now Petal, watch your temper

Let me talk to your carers first to make sure you are allowed access to the outside world before I commit myself.

Ah bless I have my own little stalker.   

[Red-Robbo]

[Red-Robbo]

No, I doubt very much that you are.  I've noticed for example that responses to videos posted on youtube and facebook are becoming increasingly more hostile than they were even a year or two ago, hostile in the direction of the perpetrators I mean, you know, the groomers, the ones claiming school kids should change their diet to hallal or not be allowed to eat pork for lunch, the permanently offended ones.  

 

(Speaking of offense - recently I was having a peaceful debate with a Muslim about science and religion and it was gate-crashed by one of his brothers who said that for ignoring my invitation to Islam I was a pig, should be beheaded, and will be tortured in hell in fire and oil by his god for ever: obviously his reaction has nothing to do with Islam, although he was quoting from his religious book.)

 

Pat makes a good point in this video. Recently a top judge stated that the Church should be shouting and complaining as loudly as the followers of a certain other permanently offended religion if they (the Christians) are going to have their voices heard.  She suggested they complain, write, protest, demonstrate against every single thing they found offended them or their religion, just like the believers from the other religion do. This wasn't Nick Griffin btw, this was a High Court judge.  I'm not at all religious but I agree with that judge. What's good for one religion should be good for another.  Obviously there aren't any countries out there that will invest heavily in Christian schools, new churches, 'community centers', paid 'teachers' or that will provide easy finance for starting a business and the like, as Saudi Arabia and Qatar does, so the Christians already have one hand tied behind their back compared with the others, but they should least have a go.

 

Not all Pat's videos are perfect but I find them very entertaining and I'd take an imperfect guy telling it like it is over cowed silence and god-damned political correctness any day of the week.  I don't know and I don't care if he is sponsored (and does it actually matter given the level of funding a certain religion receives?), at least he is speaking the truth.  Someone has to. Not even feminists, who can be very vocal, have spoken out about the imported practices of some followers of a certain religion, despite the fact that womens' rights are set back a hundred years or more due to those tribal laws. I guess the whole topic is too hot for them.

 

I was cheered recently by reading about the French organisation Gneration Identaire  To everyone who thinks there are no problems in Western society due to ... erm ... over representation of a certain religion (8% in France now isn't it?) , maybe you could watch young French people doing semi-military training in order to defend their communities.  Not that percentages of population have anything to do with it of course, it's just that there is a massive correlation between muslim immigration and crime and rape, or something.  And it will be around 8% in the UK in the not too distant future.

 

 

 

Here's a video from Nick Griffin, which might be a bit fringey for some people (I don't agree with all of the BNP's policies). If you strip-out the conspiracy stuff he does make some good points.

 

 

 

 

So, to get back to the original point of this thread, and to make my first contribution to the Islamification debate, my question to you Rads would be "what should be done"?

 

I heartily agree that Islamic radicalisation is one of the biggest dangers World peace faces - and it's a growing threat and it is insidiously increasing its grip not only on places that had a tradition of moderation (that Brunei article you posted was interesting, you could add Malaysia, Indonesia, the Maldives and east and central Africa here) but also on majority non-Muslim places.

 

A lot of this (and other similar) threads seems to be taken up in sort of arguing with the forum's only (visible) Muslim that his religion is shit and illogical and preaches violence, but as others have pointed out, you could pick "Holy texts" from the rest of the World's religions and find horrendous exhortations to violence as well as plenty that makes no sort of sense whatsoever.

 

Seeing as we're not going to be able to talk the 1.5 billion Mulims out of their beliefs, what is to be done to discourage those who would try to impose the most extreme reading of that religion on others and those who seek to conquer and dominate (and kill sometimes!) non-believers?

 

PS: excuse spelling and punctuation - I'm battling manflu and am functioning on one cylinder!

[Mr Mosquito]

 

It's a fact that most of Ireland's Protestants (north and south of the border) were imported from England and Scotland in an attempt to keep the island loyal, increase agricultural productivity and accelerate urbanisation and to dilute the gaelic culture of the place. At one time, the population of what is now the Republic was more than 30% Protestant, but demographics (the Catholic Church has always encouraged adherents to have large families) and a higher rate of emigration has reduced that to around 5% today.

 

......same with regard to modern day England, the Islamists encourage adherents to have large families. The massive emigration of indigenous English from English cities (both Protestant and Catholic) means that many English cities will soon be Muslim dominated. The only counter to this Islamization has been the import of Polish Eastern European Unionists who are mainly Catholic. Say goodbye to Christian festivals such as Christmas and Easter if this rate of Islamization continues.

[BigTone]

......same with regard to modern day England, the Islamists encourage adherents to have large families. The massive emigration of indigenous English from English cities (both Protestant and Catholic) means that many English cities will soon be Muslim dominated. The only counter to this Islamization has been the import of Polish Eastern European Unionists who are mainly Catholic. Say goodbye to Christian festivals such as Christmas and Easter if this rate of Islamization continues.

 

Happy Easter

[Red-Robbo]

......same with regard to modern day England, the Islamists encourage adherents to have large families. The massive emigration of indigenous English from English cities (both Protestant and Catholic) means that many English cities will soon be Muslim dominated. The only counter to this Islamization has been the import of Polish Eastern European Unionists who are mainly Catholic. Say goodbye to Christian festivals such as Christmas and Easter if this rate of Islamization continues.

 

 

I think that's something of a bleak picture, with less than 5% of the country Muslim. As secularisation kicks in, the birth rate will slow and become more atuned to the indigenous population.

 

My initial question to Rads could be expressed as how do we get there? I think it will be a slow but inevitable process, providing we don't expose the country to another huge wave of immigration from Muslim countries. (By allowing lots of Syrian refugees in, for example, as Nigel Farage has called for!)

[Mr Mosquito]

In touch with the real issues eh Robbo?

Let us know how that works out.

 

The best of Pat Condell follows in the Youtube video below. At 3 minutes 20 seconds he speaks of "a middle class leftwing p r i c k ocracy". Quality, sheer quality.......  .......

 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Apparently now it's not even PC to call Britain a christian country anymore.

[Red-Robbo]

In touch with the real issues eh Robbo?

Let us know how that works out.

I don't think it's a quick process, but then neither would the "Islamification" of Britain be.

In the meantime, how to combat the spread of radicalisation?

Any ideas from Australia, where doubtless you're in touch with the UK issues much more than I could be...

[Red-Robbo]

http://www.demotix.com/news/4503317/anti-muslim-britain-first-and-edl-protest-london#media-4503207

You could probably arrest Choudary and his black flag flying idiots.

Without the Islamists, you wouldn't have the other bunch.

Same old faces on both sides.

Well it's something that I'd have no problem with. An Asbo against organising or participating in events that would break the peace would see him either banged up or deprived of the oxygen of publicity which he so craves.

Obviously, it would help if the media stops interviewing the tvat. When you consider that his various groups have had at most a few hundred adherents, nothing justifies bigging him up as some sort of "alternative voice". There are book clubs with bigger memberships.

[Davros]

The best of Pat Condell follows in the Youtube video below. At 3 minutes 20 seconds he speaks of "a middle class leftwing p r i c k ocracy". Quality, sheer quality.......  .......

 

Well I'm Middle-Right wing and think he's an idiot... he makes money from his thoughts, think about that?   Most of what he says is untrue or sweeping generalisation.

 

Why dont you buy his book?  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Godless-Free-Pat-Condell/dp/1445223155/ I'm sure he needs the money there are not enough drones following him on the interwebs.

[Davros]

[Mr Mosquito]

[Red-Robbo]

[Davros]

Not shown anywhere, Gobbler! It's the first time I've ever seen this guy. Why is he so sweaty?

UKIP don't need that dribblers support

[Mr Mosquito]

Not shown anywhere, Gobbler! It's the first time I've ever seen this guy. Why is he so sweaty?

 

You mean that the BBC news and views agency propagandists have their middle class 'politically correct' heads stuck so far up their own arses they don't know of the emerging stars on Youtube?

[Red-Robbo]

You mean that the BBC news and views agency propagandists have their middle class 'politically correct' heads stuck so far up their own arses they don't know of the emerging stars on Youtube?

I have no idea of what the BBC news and Views propagandists would make of him Gobbler, but having viewed the first video my personal view is that he's rehashing some rather over-familiar themes whilst looking rather like a paedo who is about to burst with some sort of repressed rage.

It says on Wikipedia that he's a stand -up comedian. Maybe it's all a big post-modern joke which you don't get. Sort of like The Pub Landlord, but in this case The Rant Late Middle-Aged Saloon Bar Bore?

[Mr Mosquito]

I have no idea of what the BBC news and Views propagandists would make of him Gobbler, but having viewed the first video my personal view is that he's rehashing some rather over-familiar themes whilst looking rather like a paedo who is about to burst with some sort of repressed rage.

It says on Wikipedia that he's a stand -up comedian. Maybe it's all a big post-modern joke which you don't get. Sort of like The Pub Landlord, but in this case The Rant Late Middle-Aged Saloon Bar Bore?

 

Well, at times, I'm the bar room gobshite that would make Herr Martin Bormann blush. Pat Condell makes a lot of sense to me unlike the various Lib-Lab-Con 'politically correct' bullshit merchants whose views the BBC constantly ram down our throats.

[Red-Robbo]

Well, at times, I'm the bar room gobshite that would make Herr Martin Bormann blush. Pat Condell makes a lot of sense to me unlike the various Lib-Lab-Con 'politically correct' bullshit merchants whose views the BBC constantly ram down our throats.

It's not so much the message, Gobby, it's the delivery: Sort of Dr Goebbels crossed with Jim Bowen.

Also if we accept we have become a society of cowards, what are we to do about it? It's no good being all exasperated about Britain as it is now, if you have no alternative to offer other than "I liked the old days".

That's why I joined this thread. I was seeking any answers people had to the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.

We've had the arrest of the gobshyte Choudhary suggested, which would be nice, but let's face it, it's a huge global phenomenon.

[Mr Mosquito]

It's not so much the message, Gobby, it's the delivery: Sort of Dr Goebbels crossed with Jim Bowen.

Also if we accept we have become a society of cowards, what are we to do about it? It's no good being all exasperated about Britain as it is now, if you have no alternative to offer other than "I liked the old days".

That's why I joined this thread. I was seeking any answers people had to the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.

We've had the arrest of the gobshyte Choudhary suggested, which would be nice, but let's face it, it's a huge global phenomenon.

 

Pat Condell is offering an alternative. He's endorsing UKIP - the political party that'll definately take us out of the EU. It's the EU and its associated human rights lawyers that protect foreign criminals, foreign terrorists and serial criminals from being deported or executed. 

[Red-Robbo]

Pat Condell is offering an alternative. He's endorsing UKIP - the political party that'll definately take us out of the EU. It's the EU and its associated human rights lawyers that protect foreign criminals, foreign terrorists and serial criminals from being deported or executed.

How do you reckon the EU stops executions then? Some members have the death penalty.

Also isn't the "human rights act" tied into the European Convention on Human Rights and the court it runs in the Hague?

That has nothing to do with the EU. Russia and other non-EU states are signatories.

I'm not trying to piss on your Ukip chips here, Rg, but you need to realise that some things you deplore are not to do with the EU.

[chipdawg]

I'll give it a go - but I'll give it 10 minutes before someone with an IQ of 4 starts yelling "Racist" about a religion...

Promote secularism. Give no more funding to one group than another.

Apply the laws of the UK equally. Robbo, you can't chase Police around London, so why should Islamists be allowed to?

The black Flag is a declaration of war - apply the treason act.

Ramp up the immigration controls, checks and balances. It is stupidity beyond belief that people (of any race or religion) can come here 30 years ago and still not speak English.

No benefits for 1 year - period. No work, no benefits - go home.

If you have more than 2 children - you pay for every single cost. No benefits for having 8 kids. That is stupidity in the extreme - not enough kids on the planet already??

Any affiliation with an Islamist group - the law acts. If you are English - off you go to jail (with strict segregation - Islamism is rampant in some jails) - if you are foreign, instant deportation.

Commit a crime as a foreigner - goodbye as well.

No more immigration for 5 years and root out illegals in that time.

After 5 years - Immigration on a needs only basis.

Lastly - leave the EU.

There you go Robbo, that should keep our resident lefties on 'simmer' for a while.....

Promote secularism. Give no more funding to one group than another--- can't disagree with that, though it appears that our PM, Attorney General and several front bench MPs disagree with you

Apply the laws of the UK equally.---- again, can't disagree though I'd appreciate some guidance as to where this doesn't happen. Certainly not saying it doesn't, just that I'm not aware of such examples

The black Flag is a declaration of war - apply the treason act.--- I don't think that waving a flag constitutes a declaration of war in international or British law, so by making it such aren't you giving Islamic doctrine increased credence, in contradiction of your earlier points?

Ramp up the immigration controls, checks and balances. It is stupidity beyond belief that people (of any race or religion) can come here 30 years ago and still not speak English.--- Immigration controls have been ramped up in recent years, to the point that the government have been criticised for hampering investment and mutually benefit education opportunities. Obviously those that come from Europe could only be stopped via your final point, though I've never met an Eastern European working over here that didn't speak English. Agree on the English point though; I don't think its unreasonable that a condition of a visa, asylum, etc. would be to undertake English lessons, but for me they'd have to be at the expense of the tax payer

No benefits for 1 year - period. No work, no benefits - go home--- I would personally do it the other way round. Once you have perhaps 6 months of tax contribution (or a year) in the last year, you become eligible to benefits but that's applied to the entire population. That way there could be no accusations of EU benefit tourism either

If you have more than 2 children - you pay for every single cost. No benefits for having 8 kids. That is stupidity in the extreme - not enough kids on the planet already?? --- I'm all for stopping the apparent culture (though one I've never seen scientific confirmation of) of having children simply for the benefits, but introducing policies akin to those of Communist China in the 1980s is a bit extreme for my tastes

Any affiliation with an Islamist group - the law acts. If you are English - off you go to jail (with strict segregation - Islamism is rampant in some jails) - if you are foreign, instant deportation.

Commit a crime as a foreigner - goodbye as well--- this is already the law. Whether all groups that should be marked as 'Islamist' are labelled so and whether the law is always applied is a different matter. I still don't believe that we should deport people who would face torture or death upon return to their own country, unless the evidence that they committed a crime in that land is overwhelming, in which case we shouldn't be judging another countries legal methodology. But if an asylum seeker gets in a punch up or steals a few tins of beans do you really think they should be sent to face death? And what about their families? Should the children suffer for the sins of the father, so to speak?

No more immigration for 5 years and root out illegals in that time. After 5 years - Immigration on a needs only basis --- I personally think that zero immigration would be immensely damaging to the economy, but that's just contrasting opinions. Again, there is only a 'needs' or human rights basis for being here anyway, unless you're EU which is entirely different argument. Can't really argue with trying to get rid of those that don't have a right to be here

Lastly - leave the EU --- that's a whole discussion in itself, that's being had in different thread so I'll not continue it here

So that's my 'leftie' views having had a good simmer. Nice to see we don't disagree on everything, even if our starting points are very different

[Red-Robbo]

I'll give it a go - but I'll give it 10 minutes before someone with an IQ of 4 starts yelling "Racist" about a religion...

 

Promote secularism. Give no more funding to one group than another.

Apply the laws of the UK equally. Robbo, you can't chase Police around London, so why should Islamists be allowed to?

The black Flag is a declaration of war - apply the treason act.

Ramp up the immigration controls, checks and balances.  It is stupidity beyond belief that people (of any race or religion) can come here 30 years ago and still not speak English.

No benefits for 1 year - period. No work, no benefits - go home.

If you have more than 2 children - you pay for every single cost. No benefits for having 8 kids. That is stupidity in the extreme - not enough kids on the planet already??

Any affiliation with an Islamist group - the law acts. If you are English - off you go to jail (with strict segregation - Islamism is rampant in some jails) - if you are foreign, instant deportation.

Commit a crime as a foreigner - goodbye as well.

No more immigration for 5 years and root out illegals in that time.

After 5 years - Immigration on a needs only basis.

Lastly - leave the EU.

 

There you go Robbo, that should keep our resident lefties on 'simmer' for a while.....  

 

 

Nothing racist in that lot, SX. I'm sure, you won't give a toss what I think, but FWIW I think there are some reasonable ideas - if a little overstated at times - and a bit on the authoritarian side. We don't want to get into some sort of Maoist jailings for "thought crimes" no matter how effing stupid the thoughts are!! 

 

Thoroughly approve of the first two; religious schools that promote only one faith or impose one faith's tenets on children who are not of that faith should never get any sort of state help. That includes all Islamic schools and most Catholic ones. I confess my daughters go to a CofE school, but the religion element of that is within the national curriculum and anything extra is optional - even for us nominal CofE families! The law should indeed be applied evenly and where I suspect I heartedly agree with you is that it is the cancer of political correctness and fear of the evil "R word" that seems to paralyse the police and other institutions.

 

Immigration controls, benefit qualification periods and deportation of foreign criminals - agree 100%. However I reckon any more children after 3 would be the cut-off point. (Speaking as a dad of three  ).

 

I'm not sure about zero immigration for five years though. If one of my kids needed to see a cancer specialist, I wouldn't care if he'd moved here from Tunisia three years ago - just whether he was good. A points based approach like your adopted homeland would be sensible IMO. And a much greater period of qualification for both a British passport and even longer for British citizenship.

 

Black flags: Flags are flags aren't they?  Provided it doesn't carry offensive messages, I'd not see the point in invoking a draconian penalty on some divot flapping some fabric around. Plus it might be counter-productive mightn't it? Islamists love a good "martyr" don't they.  

 

As CD says, quite a few Islamic groups are banned already, but maybe more could be done. Trouble is, they just pop up under other names with the same ****wits in them. Tackling the errant behaviour of the members of such extremist groups in a more timely and robust fashion, might be more productive.

 

As for the EU, as I've already admitted I'm not sure of all the pro- and anti- arguments. I need to do some more reading. Would it help to tackle religious extremism though, even if there is an economic case for withdrawal?

 

The biggest problem though is we have 2.9 million people from Muslim backgrounds within the UK already who are going nowhere. Most are moderate, a fair few not in the slightest bit religious, but there is a growth of intolerance within these communities and while their are degrees of extremism, it's quite depressing when you see the numbers who seem to take positions that ghettoise themselves within British society. The answer to facing down jihadist thought and the gradual road there, must come from within the Muslim communities themselves.

 

I probably have little more in the way of answers than Pat Condell (although at least I don't look as if I'm about to die of apoplexy when I discuss these issues). The problem with Islamism is it's a worldwide phenomenon and we live in a global village. We can't really isolate the UK from it.

[Mr Mosquito]

How do you reckon the EU stops executions then? Some members have the death penalty.

Also isn't the "human rights act" tied into the European Convention on Human Rights and the court it runs in the Hague?

That has nothing to do with the EU. Russia and other non-EU states are signatories.

I'm not trying to piss on your Ukip chips here, Rg, but you need to realise that some things you deplore are not to do with the EU.

 

Indeed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) is not related to the European Court of Human Rights. However, all EU states are members of the Council of Europe and have signed the Convention on Human Rights. The ECJ refers to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and treats the Convention on Human Rights as though it was part of the EU's legal system, since it forms part of the legal principles of the EU member states. So, sorry to piss all over your pro EU propaganda but the EU has everything to do with the European Court of Human Rights.

[Red-Robbo]

Indeed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) is not related to the European Court of Human Rights. However, all EU states are members of the Council of Europe and have signed the Convention on Human Rights. The ECJ refers to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and treats the Convention on Human Rights as though it was part of the EU's legal system, since it forms part of the legal principles of the EU member states. So, sorry to piss all over your pro EU propaganda but the EU has everything to do with the European Court of Human Rights.

How is that "propoganda" you twerp! EU and non-EU members are signatories of the ECHR so coming out of the EU does not mean you would not have cases referred to the European Court of Human Rights.

[Paddy31]

Indeed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) is not related to the European Court of Human Rights. However, all EU states are members of the Council of Europe and have signed the Convention on Human Rights. The ECJ refers to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and treats the Convention on Human Rights as though it was part of the EU's legal system, since it forms part of the legal principles of the EU member states. So, sorry to piss all over your pro EU propaganda but the EU has everything to do with the European Court of Human Rights.

It seems that the facts don't fit your perspective.

 

The European Convention on Human Rights (and by extension the European Court of Human Rights) applies to all 47 member of the Council of Europe. The EU is not a member of the Council of Europe, but all EU member states are.

 

The ECHR was drafted in 1950. The EEC (as it was then) was founded by the treaty of Paris in 1952.

 

If we leave the EU, we will still be member of the Council of Europe, and as such, we will still be subject to the European Convention on Human Rights.

[Mr Mosquito]

It seems that the facts don't fit your perspective.

 

The European Convention on Human Rights (and by extension the European Court of Human Rights) applies to all 47 member of the Council of Europe. The EU is not a member of the Council of Europe, but all EU member states are.

 

The ECHR was drafted in 1950. The EEC (as it was then) was founded by the treaty of Paris in 1952.

 

If we leave the EU, we will still be member of the Council of Europe, and as such, we will still be subject to the European Convention on Human Rights.

 

That's a superb diagram.

[Mr Mosquito]

The EEC (as it was then) was founded by the treaty of Paris in 1952.

 

 

 

Actually, the European Union project (as it is now) was founded in the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'. In other words: the Fourth Reich.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1179902/Revealed-The-secret-report-shows-Nazis-planned-Fourth-Reich--EU.html#ixzz2zqHobDB4