[quote]orion wrote:
The problem is that this is only true if your name is Ali or Muhammad, if that was also true for Sven or Björn the US would be scared shitless of blond and blue eyed people that talk funny…
[/quote]
True.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Since you are quoting statistics why don’t you provide a link so we can see the statistics that you are basing your statements on. I haven’t seen any news on American bombs exploding amongst civilian populations in Europe.
If you are talking about Iraq. Alqaeda sets bombs off that kill civilians just about every day.[/quote]
No. Not Iraq and not Europe. I was refering to a global scale. If you have any doubts that the US military machine (and its Zionist satellite) killed more people than Al-Qaeda, you really haven’t been paying much attention.
[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
1-Pack,
Glad you and no one else got hurt.
Will there come a day when Muslims, peaceful or not, will be rounded up and put into concentration camps, or deported? It seems to me that the extremists are simply pushing the Western Europeans to adopting continually harsher methods. For ex, the number of street cameras in London is up about 5 fold. The average Londoner gets photographed about 300 times per day (according to ABC news).
If a major terrorist act occurs, I can see such a thing happening.
Hi mate,
Thanks - like I said though Londoners are very very well used to dealing with terrorist threats after all these years. First question is always not ‘how many were killed?’ but ‘which stations are still open so I can get to work?’ ;). The Blitz spirit I believe it’s called.
With regards your question - In short, no. I can’t talk about the US but that day will NEVER happen in the UK. One of the greatest things about our country is that it is so cosmopolitan and that for the greater degree, we have overcome the majority (though sadly not all) of our racial and religious prejudices etc.
We are fully aware that Osama Bin Laden doesn’t(didn’t?) speak for all of Islam, not even the majority of it, in the same way that we don’t lock up every single teenager because of all the violent youth crime committed by the small minority.
One of the strange things here is that our government went to war against the wishes of majority of the public, who foresaw and predicted exactly the situation that has come to pass. So bizarre that the so-called ‘experts’ didn’t…
But now we have a new Prime Minister, who I am sure will want to gain popularity by distancing himself somewhat from that decision, regardless of the fact he was Chancellor at the time. Will be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of months - Just like it will be fascinating to see what changes transpire once Bush’s term finishes and the next administration tries to distance themselves from such a controversial issue.
By the way, the number of security cameras in the UK is firmly linked to the amount of money the Government makes from automated parking/driving/speeding violations which is a massive bone of contention here. A few years ago the figure that was bandied about was that we were photographed 500 times a day.
If anything that is a perfect example of governments using/manipulating current affairs to suit their agenda and to further chip away at people’s liberties - cheekily introducing a stealth tax at the same time.
On that subject of civil liberties - I’m all prepared to go to jail rather than have an I.D. card with bio info on it.
Dear UK Government,
‘FUCK YOU I’M NOT A CRIMINAL - YOU DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHERE I AM, WHAT I BOUGHT OR WHERE I AM GOING.’.
Sorry, just had to get that off my chest 
Oh my god, I’ve only been back a little while and have already responded to a few politics posts. Wondering how long I will last before my first argument. Or has everyone become ultra-polite since I was last around? Yeah… right… haha[/quote]
Lixy has raised our standards.
;D
[quote]lixy wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Since you are quoting statistics why don’t you provide a link so we can see the statistics that you are basing your statements on. I haven’t seen any news on American bombs exploding amongst civilian populations in Europe.
If you are talking about Iraq. Alqaeda sets bombs off that kill civilians just about every day.
No. Not Iraq and not Europe. I was refering to a global scale. If you have any doubts that the US military machine (and its Zionist satellite) killed more people than Al-Qaeda, you really haven’t been paying much attention.[/quote]
We’re murderers, all in the name of supporting a democratically elected gov’t in Iraq.
Now our evil aim is to drive explosive cars into Scottish airports.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
1packlondoner, before the Nazi’s came to power in Germany very few people would have thought the excesses that came to pass could have happened in such an educated advanced country. Certainly the Germans didn’t think it could happen.
If the attitude of people in Britain is “it couldn’t happen here” don’t be surprised if it does. The British people are human beings just like everyone else and therefore not immune.
There is no diplomatic solution to the war on islamic terror. The terrorists have set out extreme positions that are unnegotiable. They want all other religions eliminated and they want any muslim who does not follow their interpretation of the koran eliminated. They have made it a religious duty to do this.
Northern Ireland was nowhere as extreme as this. Although there was a religious divide, you didn’t see the Pope telling the faithful that the elimination of Britain and the extermination of the British people was their religious duty. Like you see with Hamas and Israel.
Once a religious fanatic makes it their religious duty to accomplish a goal or die trying there is only one solution. You have to kill them. [/quote]
Ok. I will say again. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. This is a multi-faith country run by a secular government. We do not/will not/cannot start ethnic cleansing here. And furthermore, if you read the diaries of jews from the era, the most sickening thing is that the German public was just as involved as the soldiers were. You will recall, that we were among the first to declare against what Germany was doing back in 1939.
As is too often, the phrase fundamentalist muslim become somehow transformed into just ‘muslims’ and the two things are very far apart, despite what the media might and administration might have us believe. I’m fairly sure there are just as many Christian wankers in the world as muslim ones. Please don’t don’t make me go and drag out the links to all the fundamentalist Christian organisations that want exactly the same but for their faith.
Not sure where you’re from mate, but Brits and Londoner’s especially don’t really take too kindly to the people that indrectly (directly in some cases) funded attacks in our city, telling them which was the more extreme conflict. There has been how many attacks on US soil in the last 200 years? It was a daily part of our lives for decades. Not starting a row, just giving perspective.
Oh forgot to say, you might not have seen the Pope say it, but you certainly had both the community leaders in Northern Ireland saying it, and still today have people like John McDonagh, chairman of the New York-based Irish Freedom Committee, who are vehemently opposed to the peace talks and disarmament treaties.
[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
Oh forgot to say, you might not have seen the Pope say it, but you certainly had both the community leaders in Northern Ireland saying it, and still today have people like John McDonagh, chairman of the New York-based Irish Freedom Committee, who are vehemently opposed to the peace talks and disarmament treaties.
[/quote]
Speaking as someone else who was 10 minutes from being blown up by the IRA, (and who just happens to be a blond blue-eyed bitch named Björn, Sifu;-) and being in full agreement with the quoted post, it would be foolish to extrapolate from the activities of the few to a general assumption.
Middle East terrorism was largely led by Christians in the beginning. I suggest you google Naif Hawatmeh of George Habash for more info. Suicide bombings for political purposes? Hindu Tamils. Assassination for political purposes.
It became fashionable with anarchists around 1875, and never lost its popularity. We have had Red Brigades (Italian and Japanese), fascists, Spanish xenophobic Nationalists(Basque, Catalan and Spanish) and every other bloody nationality/creed/political affiliation.
The moment we let fear dictate our response, we play into the hands of the extremists. The is nothing they love better than being oppressed, as otherwise they would lose their recruitment base. When people have hope in the future, they do not join loony groups in any numbers and the groups tend to die out.
The problem with many of the US posters on this group is that they see Muslims as something essentially alien. Here, he may well be your plumber or your boss. A bastard, perhaps, but probably not a terrorist.
Unfortunately there is political capital to be made from fear.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
France didn’t help with Iraq yet they have a lot of attacks. So you are wrong.[/quote]
France has not been hit by AQ or associated fundamentalist groups (or did I miss it?). They have had social unrest due to domestic issues unrelated to the WoT, namely immigration. This is an issue which affects many European countries and is not constrained to those who played an active role in the Iraq War.
I really don’t think the new generation of Islamic extremists cares much about which countries stood up to Hitler in WWII. I just can’t accept that argument at face value.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks.
If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks?
[quote]Tokoya wrote:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks.
If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks? [/quote]
Haha…
‘This is not a war on Islam’… Err so who is the last non-muslim country we went to war with? Erm, I think it was the Falkland Islands 25 years ago.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Sifu wrote:
France didn’t help with Iraq yet they have a lot of attacks. So you are wrong.
France has not been hit by AQ or associated fundamentalist groups (or did I miss it?). They have had social unrest due to domestic issues unrelated to the WoT, namely immigration. This is an issue which affects many European countries and is not constrained to those who played an active role in the Iraq War. [/quote]
Sifu showed a great deal of ignorance in that statement.
[quote]Tokoya wrote:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks.
If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks? [/quote]
It’s pretty simple; let me break it down for you.
imagine that American terrorists were targeting Europe ok?
America is predominantly a Christian nation (a very christian nation appart from certain areas like New York).
This American terrorists claim that they fight for their God.
European leaders would then invite christian representatives in their own nations to discuss with them the situation. (imagine if these european nations were, lets say, jewish). Inorder to get a better understanding of what what’s going on in the christian community and if there is any activity that is going on within the community that may be cause for concern (EU christians rallying with the American’s cause).
It makes a lot of sense if you ask me.
It’s not a war against Islam, it’s a war against terrorism which currently, is being dominated by muslim terrorists.
Think about it. Then post. In that order.
And this war on terror… How many non-muslim terrorist organisations are currently being targetted?
Sorry, just playing Devil’s advocate there.
To be honest I truly don’t think it is a ‘holy way’ against Islam, but that viewpoint is most certainly is not helped when supporters of these conflicts are doing so for reasons other than those which we were given for it starting.
And considering the denominatory make-up of the US, you would be crazy to suggest religion didn’t come into it. After all, didn’t God tell George Dubya to go to war? Or at least that’s what he said… Maybe he meant Rumsfeld.
[quote]swissrugby67 wrote:
Tokoya wrote:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks.
If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks?
It’s pretty simple; let me break it down for you.
imagine that American terrorists were targeting Europe ok?
America is predominantly a Christian nation (a very christian nation appart from certain areas like New York).
This American terrorists claim that they fight for their God.
European leaders would then invite christian representatives in their own nations to discuss with them the situation. (imagine if these european nations were, lets say, jewish). Inorder to get a better understanding of what what’s going on in the christian community and if there is any activity that is going on within the community that may be cause for concern (EU christians rallying with the American’s cause).
It makes a lot of sense if you ask me.
It’s not a war against Islam, it’s a war against terrorism which currently, is being dominated by muslim terrorists.
Think about it. Then post. In that order.
[/quote]
But he didn’t imply that it was a war against Islam. He’s pointing out that it does involve Islam. Now, I’m not sure Gordon Brown actually said the attacks “have nothing to do with Islam,” but if he did, that’s stupid. It’s a Jihad, after all.
[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
And this war on terror… How many non-muslim terrorist organisations are currently being targetted?
…[/quote]
I believe the US has taken steps to cooperate more with the British government to reduce support for the IRA and other like organizations.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I believe the US has taken steps to cooperate more with the British government to reduce support for the IRA and other like organizations.[/quote]
I hear ya Zap, but decades of funding for IRA terrorist activities from American individuals is totally inexcusable, and the revisionist sweeping under the carpet of it now we have a US-led ‘war on terror’ is equally offensive to those of us who dealt with the threat on a daily basis.
In fact it was Bill Clinton who helped us make great inroads in the Irish peace process, before Dubya essentially pulled out, saying it wasn’t THEIR problem.
This doesn’t change the fact that many Irish-American community leaders, many with well-known Sinn Fein/IRA links, are still vociferously stating their utter contempt for the peace talks, the new Northern Irish government, and the end to the ‘armed struggle’.
In what way is that different from radical muslim clerics preaching hate in the UK? In fact it’s worse because of the wealth and size of the demographic he is preaching to.
America has funded terrorists for decades, and not always against countries that they had issues with. They gave Jerry Adams a voice to start fundraising for Sinn Fein and the IRA in the US. Accept it. Many of its powerful and wealthy high-profile citizens still have very close ties to terrorist or former terrorist organisations and would have no problem with said actions starting again - against a country that is supposedly one of your biggest allies. It is an inconvenient truth, but no less a truth because of it.
Look, hopefully we are moving in the right direction. But we must NEVER forget what went before, and what is STILL going on. My country has done a hell of a lot that I am not proud of, but I would never try to sweep it under the carpet.
I know you wouldn’t think it, but I actually quite like America - in the same way I like women too, but they’re so far from being perfect it’s untrue. I just don’t like revisionist histories.
[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I believe the US has taken steps to cooperate more with the British government to reduce support for the IRA and other like organizations.
I hear ya Zap, but decades of funding for IRA terrorist activities from American individuals is totally inexcusable, and the revisionist sweeping under the carpet of it now we have a US-led ‘war on terror’ is equally offensive to those of us who dealt with the threat on a daily basis.
In fact it was Bill Clinton who helped us make great inroads in the Irish peace process, before Dubya essentially pulled out, saying it wasn’t THEIR problem.
This doesn’t change the fact that many Irish-American community leaders, many with well-known Sinn Fein/IRA links, are still vociferously stating their utter contempt for the peace talks, the new Northern Irish government, and the end to the ‘armed struggle’.
In what way is that different from radical muslim clerics preaching hate in the UK? In fact it’s worse because of the wealth and size of the demographic he is preaching to.
America has funded terrorists for decades, and not always against countries that they had issues with. They gave Jerry Adams a voice to start fundraising for Sinn Fein and the IRA in the US. Accept it. Many of its powerful and wealthy high-profile citizens still have very close ties to terrorist or former terrorist organisations and would have no problem with said actions starting again - against a country that is supposedly one of your biggest allies. It is an inconvenient truth, but no less a truth because of it.
Look, hopefully we are moving in the right direction. But we must NEVER forget what went before, and what is STILL going on. My country has done a hell of a lot that I am not proud of, but I would never try to sweep it under the carpet.
I know you wouldn’t think it, but I actually quite like America - in the same way I like women too, but they’re so far from being perfect it’s untrue. I just don’t like revisionist histories.
[/quote]
I share your disgust for the way so many private citizens have funded the IRA and how some of our government leaders were complicit.
Seeing Gerry Adams glad hand Bostonians on TV made me sick.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
But he didn’t imply that it was a war against Islam. He’s pointing out that it does involve Islam. Now, I’m not sure Gordon Brown actually said the attacks “have nothing to do with Islam,” but if he did, that’s stupid. It’s a Jihad, after all.
[/quote]
My mistake; Tokoya I apologize. My early morning haze obviously got the better of my reading ability.
[quote]swissrugby67 wrote:
Tokoya wrote:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam - but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks.
If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks?
It’s pretty simple; let me break it down for you.
imagine that American terrorists were targeting Europe ok?
America is predominantly a Christian nation (a very christian nation appart from certain areas like New York).
This American terrorists claim that they fight for their God.
European leaders would then invite christian representatives in their own nations to discuss with them the situation. (imagine if these european nations were, lets say, jewish). Inorder to get a better understanding of what what’s going on in the christian community and if there is any activity that is going on within the community that may be cause for concern (EU christians rallying with the American’s cause).
It makes a lot of sense if you ask me.
It’s not a war against Islam, it’s a war against terrorism which currently, is being dominated by muslim terrorists.
Think about it. Then post. In that order.
[/quote]
No need to “break it down” for me, as I think you missed my point.
It seemed puzzling, the comments that Prime Minister Gordon Brown made about the attacks having “nothing to do with Islam”… I believe the Prime Minister is in denial when he says that. A bit too worried about being politically correct.
Rather, the attacks have everything to do with a violent segment of adherents who are deeply devoted to it (Islam)- at least the elements of it which motivates them to espouse violence & terrorism.
[quote]swissrugby67 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
But he didn’t imply that it was a war against Islam. He’s pointing out that it does involve Islam. Now, I’m not sure Gordon Brown actually said the attacks “have nothing to do with Islam,” but if he did, that’s stupid. It’s a Jihad, after all.
My mistake; Tokoya I apologize. My early morning haze obviously got the better of my reading ability.
[/quote]
No worries / apology necessary at at all. I think we are on essentially the same page.