Has him upstairs done us a favour?

Any piece of glass has the potential to be used as a window.

 

Andy Bonwick wrote

Glass? The last time I stubbed a fag out on one it melted.

 

I rather think those who go "all the way" meet fairly closely the formal
definition of psychopaths.

Any British Muslim identification with the perceived oppression of their Arab
co-religionists is as ludicrous as a devout Church of England member
pondering signing up with a Croatian militia for a spot of Bosnian-bashing.

 

Well quite, but I'm always wary of the armed wing of the Anglican church.
As that's the MOD I probably have good reason.

I think a better parallel is the fundamental Christians in the US joining
up to do God's work, rather than the happy clappy sensible jumpers
brigade here.

 

Well, there's always

http://www.churcharmy.org.uk/

That's certainly a fair point, although I think the situation with
disaffected British Muslims[1] is different.

I'd probably feel pretty confused about things if I lived in a decaying town
with no prospects, in a community which interacted in only a limited way with
other communities[2], with community leaders who hold and to some extent
propagate staggeringly old-fashioned cultural values, surrounded by
not-the-sharpest-tool-in-the-box whiteys who treated me with suspicion at
best and shit through the letterbox at worst.

But even in the face of all that, the life-choice would be mine and mine
alone.

Of course, right-wing Christians in the US have none of these challenges to
face, so quite what the **** their excuse for this is is anyone's guess.

[1] and I'm making a fairly sweeping assumption that we're talking largely
about disaffected British Muslim youths and twentysomethings in Burnley and
Luton

[2] pretty much par for the course up North, which makes the whole thing so
much more bewildering for people who live in the lovely multicultural south

 

For some odd reason I was musing on this subject earlier today.

While I understand this point I fail to see why young *British* Muslims
may reach an independent conclusion that they need to blow up people
here because of something happening elsewhere in the world. If you
accept they have been brainwashed / persuaded etc etc to accept a
particular belief then we are simply talking about people being turned
into automatons to carry out the wishes of others.

As Bear has said - if they don't want a life in Britain and wish to
defend Iraq or Afghanistan then "bye bye". They have no right to kill
people here.

I think the real comment here is that there is *a* view that the above
is happening. There is a wide range of opinion as to what is really
going on, what the motives are and what the peoples of the affected
countries actually want. You seem to be accepting that the people of
Iraq, Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan and wherever else all wish to live in
religious dictatorships with widespread suppression of freedom. I seem
to recall the Iraqis cheering when they knew Saddam had been toppled -
was that because they were begging to be subjugated to Al Qadea rule
instead? What is wrong with people desiring freedom from oppression and
wanting to express their wishes via a democratic process? You, of all
people, would surely endorse such a thing?

Yes - "seen as". Not actually at war. I could wander round believing
everyone else was an alien from outer space. It wouldn't make it true.
We can all perceive the world how we like and then decide to carry out
unacceptable actions as a consequence. That does not make it right.

Well we are not at war as far as I am concerned. There is no
justification for blowing people up on the London Underground or
anywhere else for that matter based on some perverted interpretation of
territorial or religious believes.

Having just read a book on Auschwitz and read far too much about the
Nazis' final solution while in Berlin last week I see far too close a
link between what Al Qaeda and other Muslim fanatics believe in and that
of Nazism. Don't they believe in the total extermination of all non
Muslims? Isn't that the same as wishing to kill all Jews?

To the extent that radical Muslims have declared that as their desired
wish then that is fine as that is within the concept of free speech. I
do have a severe problem with the various law changes being proposed to
reduce our right to free speech.

However it becomes unacceptable when they start destabalising countries
and murdering innocent people - often Muslims - in order to achieve
their ends. Are you saying we should simply step back and not protect
those under attack including ourselves?

Possibly. To be completely honest my thoughts on this matter have been
severely tested having read about the horrendous actions of the Nazis
and what their victims were forced to do to survive. The liberators
(Britain and Russia) don't come out very well either. It seems it is
all too easy for us to become depraved and to act out of sheer
selfishness when circumstances require it. I hope I am never placed in
a position where I am put to this particular test.

So what is your answer then? I don't believe that withdrawing from the
Middle East and Asia will make the slightest bit of difference to the
more radical elements of the Muslim faith.

They will come anyway. They wish to crush the West and kill all non
believers. You can neither reason with nor ignore such a threat. You
are also perpetuating the myth that the people we are talking about live
in free, open and democratic societies. They do not.

 

Bollocks. I mean, I see the point, but bollocks. They love it, the
'rabs. They like nothing more than whiling away a carefree afternoon
at Starbucks. All they drive is Chevrolets. They wear 50 Cent
T-shirts with Gucci sunglasses.

 

They may well do - and probably "Arab Nations" was a sweeping
generalisation too far - but the *view* portrayed is the big and nasty US
is imposing its degenerate, exploitative and corrupting will on countries
and communities that don't wish it.

Or perhaps more accurately groups of people see the big and nasty US
imposing its degenerate, exploitative and corrupting will and they don't
wish it.

 

Paul Corfield wrote:

You have definite ideas of being British both culturally and
historically; although you have a good idea of the difficulties of
'fitting in' (I'm being extremely presumptuous here) there is a real
sense of dislocation and an alienating environment (see simonk's points)
that you and I don't have experience of.

The concept of nationality doesn't exist if you firmly believe that the
Nation in question is wrong and needs stopping. In my more strident
'enemy within' days I would have gladly taken what may be seen as a
treacherous line based on principle. If I'm honest, in the right
circumstances, I still would.

If you are at 'war', are there new rules that don't allow you to attack
the (perceived) aggressor on their own land?

....and we as a nation have the right to kill there?

The West presumes that they want the 'White man's freedom and democracy'
with our own secret recipe special sauce.

We are seen to be imposing its values and culture on others and the sight
of Starbucks and Chevrolets replacing centuries of culture will provoke
an unfavourable reaction in many.

It is easy for us to be caught up in the mythology of our own democracies
and political structures but we may want to examine more closely what
exactly we're doing and why. Perhaps finding out what others want.

You recall it because that was what we saw on the television but lets
accept that interpretation as un-tainted and correct. There was joy at
the fall of a brutal dictatorship yes, but not at becoming a puppet
state, a colony if you wish, of a foreign power.

There is nothing wrong in self determination but it seems that we (as the
West) have a very strange take on it.

Lets not run away with the idea that our actions in Iraq are solely based
on bringing 'freedom' to people.

Hence the quite deliberate choice of words. It's very easy to portray
the actions of the West as predatory and exploitative because in essence
they are; it takes very little effort to magnify the effect and propose a
destabilising solution that have those with no attractive future readily
subscribing to.

It doesn't have to be true for people to believe it and by whose
definition do we determine "unacceptable"?

I can see that working as a solution:

<loudhailer>: "You are not at war because Paul says you're not and he
thinks you have a perverted interpretation of territorial or religious
beliefs".

Terr'ists: "Oh, sorry. Won't happen again."

Headmasterly voice: "It's always the same boys"


We also do perverted interpretation of religion ourselves quite nicely.

The comparison to the Nazis is an attractive one and can be readily
applied to most unpleasant countries but is ultimately unhelpful as it
tends to lead to somewhat hysterical and disjointed thinking.

We know mass extermination is not nice but is not exactly the point of
why young British born citizens are taking up arms against their own
country.

Quite. Then perhaps we should be a little more honest about our
intentions in Iraq. It's not about democracy or freedom, no matter how
many times we say it.

We must also be careful by what we mean by freedom and democracy as the
two are, strictly speaking, incompatible.

Not wishing to sound like a scratched record it's purely about economic
control and protecting influence.

If we were worried about 'Mad Mullahs' and defending ourselves from their
poison we'd be dealing with the countries that allow them to propagate -
and that's not Iraq.

If we were honest about free, open democratic societies we'd be sorting
out the North Korea's of this world and wouldn't be destabilising other
countries not to our liking.

Perhaps if we weren't mired in so much hypocrisy and double standards
there wouldn't be such a willing audience for the poisonous views?

 

That's the view, and I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that the
arabs are doing precious little to resist the values, economics and
culture of the West. They love it, in fact. The sappy cunts.

That's more like it.

 

Its a religious fang. God talks to them as well as Dubyha, then he has
a jolly good laugh.

 

big snip


The fanatics within many of the eastern faiths have been blowing people
up for years , if it wasn't about religion it was over land or politics

we just never paid much attention to the issues until 9/11 and July this
year

They have realised that acts of atrocity get there issues aired worldwide

 

"Wolfie Smith Syndrome"

 

"the eastern" is a little superfluous, isn't it?

In fact, "within many of the eastern faiths" is, imo.
--
| ___ Salad Dodger
|/ \
_/_____\_ GL1500SE-V/CBR1100XX-X/CBX1000Z
|_\_____/_| ..78875.../...19870.../..31251.
(>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 YTC#4
|__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 two#11
\ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4
\|^|/ ANORAK#17 IbB#4 PM#5 WG*
'^' RBR 2005: Abandoned - Bronze Award.

 

not really , most all faiths that are now in conflict originated in the
middle east / east including many of the religions practiced within the
western civilization including Christianity in its varying formats

faiths originating from other areas do not appear to cause any problems at
all

 

But not enough allegiance to want to live there? I wonder why that is.

I don't think they have a right to be there let alone kill people. Do
you think the bombings wouldn't have happened if British troops had
never gone into Iraq?

 

Possibly not, but the probability of them happening would have been much
less.
--

Cheers!
Fr Jack
90 CB450DX (The Moped)
FRJACKUKRM AT GMAIL DOT COM
skype: fr.jack (without the dot)
We'll open up your eyes,
just to check that you're asleep, again

 

Personally I don't think religion or Iraq are the main reasons for the
nutters bombing London. I believe that it's more a fucked up mixture
of plain old jealousy along with a dose of wanting to 'belong' to
something for the first time in their lives.

 

"Briefly"

'Hog

 

You think most Arabs in Saudi, Kuwait etc. are in poverty?

'Hog