A BIT OFF TOPIC ... BUT .. Last November I started a post about poppy sellers in Manchester being attacked with flammable objects, and what I regarded as hostile behaviour aimed at me, a poppy wearer, by young(ish) asians in a major shopping centre (Meadowhall, Sheffield) and in particular at two young poppy sellers in Rotherham who were being overtly threatened by a gang of Asian youths .. I received support and equal ridicule over this post, however, it's now been 'sunk' .. perhaps it was lucky I was just wearing a poppy and was not wrapped in the Union Jack or the flag of St George
What I've learnt from this thread: Chizz and Leuth are both terrorist sympathisers. Probably the type of people that cycle their bike to work with a camera on top and submit videos to pages like 'britains dangerous drivers' but then at the same time run red lights and blame everyone else.
Also did someone really try to challenge my old man on world war knowledge Ffs stop the world I want to get off
I'm simply concerned with the notion that on the one hand we need to clamp down on expressions of Islamism with bans and zero-tolerance policies, but on the other, we shouldn't mock or deride their proponents, because that will end up with more people getting blown up. I'd have thought the former would be a greater boon to radicalisation.
It seems to me that many in this thread are very greatly afraid of this enemy, and in their fear, would prefer to have the baby out with the bathwater and remove all trace of the problem from visible society.
The problem won't go away like that.
No, dude... we need to clamp down on expressions of extremism. This is NOT about a flag that is pro-Islam. People of all faiths should be allowed to express that faith within logical and reasonable bounds. ISIS on the other hand is a radical and extreme terrorist organisation. THAT'S why this flag needs to be banned.
We should absolutely make it clear that if you are willing to be part of this society, then society is open to you. Muslim, Christian, atheist, none of the above... as long as your views are reasonable then by all means express them. But if your views are that all non-believers should be shot, stabbed or blown up then there is no place for you here. Fighting ISIS is not the same as fighting Islam.
Self-righteous cyclists piss me off as much as they do you, pal!
Think of me as one of the irritating people off the telly who clog up all the news debates with even-handedness.
Your version of even handedness seems pretty one sided though. He could have been asked to take off the flag under incitement. It's even handed to react to all anti social behaviour the same way - as such stooping the act or actor from adversely affecting society.
What you are singularly failing to see (or probably can see, but are enjoying taking a contrary for the sake of it - perhaps because you feel educationally superior to others) is that mocking/ridiculing/ignoring this phenomena is perhaps the most dangerous thing we can do. This is an apocalyptic movement, it doesn't stop until the world ends.
Although with comments like 'I'll take this'...I'm probably wasting my time trying to engage.
I'm simply concerned with the notion that on the one hand we need to clamp down on expressions of Islamism with bans and zero-tolerance policies, but on the other, we shouldn't mock or deride their proponents, because that will end up with more people getting blown up. I'd have thought the former would be a greater boon to radicalisation.
It seems to me that many in this thread are very greatly afraid of this enemy, and in their fear, would prefer to have the baby out with the bathwater and remove all trace of the problem from visible society.
The problem won't go away like that.
No, dude... we need to clamp down on expressions of extremism. This is NOT about a flag that is pro-Islam. People of all faiths should be allowed to express that faith within logical and reasonable bounds. ISIS on the other hand is a radical and extreme terrorist organisation. THAT'S why this flag needs to be banned.
We should absolutely make it clear that if you are willing to be part of this society, then society is open to you. Muslim, Christian, atheist, none of the above... as long as your views are reasonable then by all means express them. But if your views are that all non-believers should be shot, stabbed or blown up then there is no place for you here. Fighting ISIS is not the same as fighting Islam.
Self-righteous cyclists piss me off as much as they do you, pal!
Think of me as one of the irritating people off the telly who clog up all the news debates with even-handedness.
Your version of even handedness seems pretty one sided though. He could have been asked to take off the flag under incitement. It's even handed to react to all anti social behaviour the same way - as such stooping the act or actor from adversely affecting society.
What you are singularly failing to see (or probably can see, but are enjoying taking a contrary for the sake of it - perhaps because you feel educationally superior to others) is that mocking/ridiculing/ignoring this phenomena is perhaps the most dangerous thing we can do. This is an apocalyptic movement, it doesn't stop until the world ends.
Although with comments like 'I'll take this'...I'm probably wasting my time trying to engage.
It is a very dangerous movement and I'm sure NATO is coming up with twenty strategies a minute to quell it.
I don't get it. I just wanted to answer the point that was being made. Chizz could have answered it too, if he wished. I was acknowledging that the point was made to him, and thus I was butting in a bit. Would have been ruder if I hadn't.
A muslim man can wander round London prominently displaying the flag of a terrorist organisation yet a Christian baker is taken to court for not icing a cake with a slogan promoting homosexuality something completely contrary to his religious beliefs.
If I was more of a betting man I would wager that Chizz and Leuth would condemn the baker as the devil incarnate just as vigorously as they are defending the terrorist sympathiser muslim man.
I don't get it. I just wanted to answer the point that was being made. Chizz could have answered it too, if he wished. I was acknowledging that the point was made to him, and thus I was butting in a bit. Would have been ruder if I hadn't.
No, you made it your business to respond like you were batting away peasants.
I don't get it. I just wanted to answer the point that was being made. Chizz could have answered it too, if he wished. I was acknowledging that the point was made to him, and thus I was butting in a bit. Would have been ruder if I hadn't.
No, you made it your business to respond like you were batting away peasants.
Much more of the hysterical Islamophobia and I might start actually doing this
Self-righteous cyclists piss me off as much as they do you, pal!
Think of me as one of the irritating people off the telly who clog up all the news debates with even-handedness.
Your version of even handedness seems pretty one sided though. He could have been asked to take off the flag under incitement. It's even handed to react to all anti social behaviour the same way - as such stooping the act or actor from adversely affecting society.
What you are singularly failing to see (or probably can see, but are enjoying taking a contrary for the sake of it - perhaps because you feel educationally superior to others) is that mocking/ridiculing/ignoring this phenomena is perhaps the most dangerous thing we can do. This is an apocalyptic movement, it doesn't stop until the world ends.
Although with comments like 'I'll take this'...I'm probably wasting my time trying to engage.
It is a very dangerous movement and I'm sure NATO is coming up with twenty strategies a minute to quell it.
I'm simply talking about this individual case.
You can't see how showing support for this organisation and incitement are linked then? You think support for Isis in this case is isolated? You haven't made any links to anything other than this isolated case on this thread?
Comments
It's not perfect but I did enjoy how the film Four Lions dealt with this topic.
Chizz and Leuth are both terrorist sympathisers.
Probably the type of people that cycle their bike to work with a camera on top and submit videos to pages like 'britains dangerous drivers' but then at the same time run red lights and blame everyone else.
Also did someone really try to challenge my old man on world war knowledge Ffs stop the world I want to get off
Think of me as one of the irritating people off the telly who clog up all the news debates with even-handedness.
We should absolutely make it clear that if you are willing to be part of this society, then society is open to you. Muslim, Christian, atheist, none of the above... as long as your views are reasonable then by all means express them. But if your views are that all non-believers should be shot, stabbed or blown up then there is no place for you here. Fighting ISIS is not the same as fighting Islam.
What you are singularly failing to see (or probably can see, but are enjoying taking a contrary for the sake of it - perhaps because you feel educationally superior to others) is that mocking/ridiculing/ignoring this phenomena is perhaps the most dangerous thing we can do. This is an apocalyptic movement, it doesn't stop until the world ends.
Although with comments like 'I'll take this'...I'm probably wasting my time trying to engage.
I'm simply talking about this individual case.
I still cant get over it.
A muslim man can wander round London prominently displaying the flag of a terrorist organisation yet a Christian baker is taken to court for not icing a cake with a slogan promoting homosexuality something completely contrary to his religious beliefs.
If I was more of a betting man I would wager that Chizz and Leuth would condemn the baker as the devil incarnate just as vigorously as they are defending the
terrorist sympathisermuslim man.Up for debate, unless challenged then. Shame.