When you think about it, the traditional labour movement should be anti-immigration. After all it's the working man that suffers the most by an influx of cheap skilled and semi-skilled labour, and also the strain it puts on public services. But as political heavyweight Bez put it on the Sunday Politics the other day, the Labour party no longer supports working class people.
French goverment step down, Far right gains!
- Thread starter Rofflay
- Start date
Always amusing to get personal abuse by lefties who never contribute any opinions themselves to a thread, consider yourself another Magnolia cloneyou didn't even understand the post, laughable.
At least Elmarko consistently tries to address the point made and not the person.
.
With respect, it wasn't worth addressing. It was /that/ stupid.
Honestly?.
Again, it's almost too ridiculous to address.
There have been so many instances of social upheaval and disruption (2 dramatic world wars, economic policy shift, foreign policy shifts, economic collapse, welfare disruption, blah blah) in the last 100 years that it's not even worth talking to you. Your issue is with Muslims; and it's an issue that has little to do with the actions of a small small minority, who certainly don't represent the billion or so who practice the religion. Don't get me wrong, I have no time for religion; but you can't condemn an entire religion on the back of a nutter who murdered someone on a London highstreet. And you can't suggest we shut off the borders and endanger not only our economic outlook, but our NHS, our service industry, our ever increasing pension deficit etcetc, on the basis of your own small minded xenophobia.
Why don't you move to another country?.
Could you define exactly what you mean by 'putting the milk in last' (I assume you mean the whole tea/milk order implying it's for spurious reasons)
It's a common practice in many undeveloped country's.
You seem to be missing out the word "two" or "a minority" - by wording a statement like this.
"Given that British born Muslims do the same then" - it implies a frequency far higher than reality (which makes the entire argument sound absurd).
The entire IRA problem has routes in our national religion, which has resulted in far more deaths than any Islamic threat.
I'm failing to see your point.
Is it that because a very small minority of Muslims kill in the name of a religion we should close the doors?, when you see a Muslim on the news for murder is it because they are Muslim?.
Do you apply this same logic to paedophiles (in that due to seeing so many white old men in the news recently all while old men are paedophiles?) - or does this method of generalisations only apply to social groups you do not belong to?.
Last edited:
Why do u always blame labour? I'm not a labour voter
Actually it's he boom/bust nature of a broken capitalist system that's causing all the problems, pension benefits are the majority of the benefits bill by a long long way
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,371
- Location
- Northumberland
I'd vote for this, you running anywhere?
If we were to significantly reduce unskilled immigration I would expect more of these jobs to become available, the two would have to go hand in hand. One without the other would cause issues IMO.
Why do u always blame labour? I'm not a labour voter
I know, we establish you and a few other on here are out an out communists back in the last election
QED
You appear to have misunderstood all of my post,
This is not my problem, and it would save time if you just read the exchanges with Elmarko rather than just adding +1
The stupid reasons Muslims give for their 400 variations of the same religion being different from each other.
They are all on the same trivial level of whether one puts the milk in first or last.
I'll post another map and overlay "hacking" with "Muslims"
I suspect they will match perfectly.
Nothing to do with religion, just a land grab.
Besides, you can rationalise with a nationalist terror group, and we did, we have a sort of peace.
You will never reach a compromise with Islam because that is not what they want.
A bit late now we are breeding our own terrorists. And precious little else is doable that doesn't contradict human rights or EU rulings.
This is purely to counter the BS that we are being culturally enriched by such a group.
Didn't people demonise all catholic priests because a minority were abusers.
Same with 70's presenters.
The basis is the same, they were all in a situation that creates risk.
The Muslim community with its own unsupervised faith schools and bacwards culture create risk.
Stop being a risk group and people can stop generalising
I'm behaving no differently to MI5 am I?
Last edited:
I think that was more about the complicity of the Catholic Church itself. The organisation actively protected known abusers and allowed the abuse to continue.
To be fair, pretty sure the Muslim community protects its own too. Hence you know, o b l being found pretty much next door to one of Pakistan's most important military sites!
Although perhaps they are just THAT incompetent
I still see little difference when looking at our own history with the hundreds of different variations of Christianity.
I doubt it's that simple, correlation does not imply causation.
But much of the justification behind Islamic terrorism is the support of the Jewish state of Israel's illegal land grab against the Palestinians by the USA (with us being seen as targets due to our allied status & wars in Iraq/Afghanistan) - this is cited as the main motivation for a vast majority of terrorist attacks, not because they just hate our way of life.
The core motivations are not that dissimilar, just you add in even more religious extremism & you get people willing to suicide bomb (which exasperates the problem).
You are presenting a fallacy of false choices, in that our only choice is to do absolutely nothing - or adopt extreme right wing ideologies to kick them out/close the doors.
We could re-evaluate our foreign policy, the USA could stop using it's Veto in the UN security council in every single vote - we could work on integration better, create a UK constitution/bill of rights to protect individuals against the acts of extremism (to prevent any cultural regression regarding women's/children's/homosexuals rights).
There are plenty of things we can do
The Catholic church as an organisation shielded paedophiles.
Islam doesn't have a formal structure, but a myriad of different organisation levels of which are not always connected without any specific leader.
I agree that faith schools can be problematic & that they present a risk for extremism (due to the lack of supervision, regulation) - but we have this problem domestic with evolution denying Christian schools also (so it's not a problem isolated to Islam regarding religious indoctrination).
Indeed, something many forget.
The same as not all right wing people are homophobic or even anti-immigrant at all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
I can just picture Ed Milliband 
.
"Demonstrators are trying to get at the Front representatives and starting fights"
Interesting that it's the left going and attacking the right. Whether you agree with them or not, they're democratically elected.
."Demonstrators are trying to get at the Front representatives and starting fights"
Interesting that it's the left going and attacking the right. Whether you agree with them or not, they're democratically elected.
I lovely reposte hindered only by the fact that I'm not Left Wing. You seem to be suffering from the usual delusion of Right-Wingers: that anyone to the Left of you must be Left Wing. It Does Not Follow - The Fallacy of the Excluded Middle etc. If you are far out the Right then the are whole chunks of the Centre and even Right which are more Left-Wing than you.
*** Refrain from making personal remarks *** I'm happy to agree that being against immigration is not the same thing as being a bigot. Trouble is, most of the people who are against immigration also happen to be bigots.
** posted edited as above **
I wonder if 30 million odd Europeans flocked over to North Africa tomorrow would bigotry appear there as well towards Europeans? The kind of bigotry you want to so desperatly label is a natural human reaction to outsiders and overcrowding. The difference between me and you is though, I react early where as your own so called bigotry would probably not appear until the mass of bodies has become so great people are falling off the cliffs of dover
I wonder if 30 million odd Europeans flocked over to North Africa tomorrow would bigotry appear there as well towards Europeans? The kind of bigotry you want to so desperatly label is a natural human reaction to outsiders and overcrowding. The difference between me and you is though, I react early where as your own so called bigotry would probably not appear until the mass of bodies has become so great people are falling off the cliffs of dover
Last edited:
You appear to have misunderstood that I was rejecting Efours statement?
What do you think happened after 9/11?
You think people sat around and thought up what would be the most politically correct way of finding Bin Laden, or do you think they put every Muslim they could find under suspicion until they could start linking who was talking to who.
You were all suspects, you were all treated as the enemy by the security services.
And thank god MI5 don't have to pussy around and be "sensitive about the community", unlike our new politically correct police force, who couldn't catch a rape gang if all their mugshots were printed in Hello magazine along with a signed confession.
Then when the UK bombings started, what do you think ordinary people thought of you then? Did they rationalise that only a few extremists were behind this or did they look at this unknown and secretive group and generalise that any one of them could be a terrorist?
That Brazilian guy got shot by police for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I can't work out if you are just naive or moaning about the butthurt.
/
What do you think happened after 9/11?
You think people sat around and thought up what would be the most politically correct way of finding Bin Laden, or do you think they put every Muslim they could find under suspicion until they could start linking who was talking to who.
You were all suspects, you were all treated as the enemy by the security services.
And thank god MI5 don't have to pussy around and be "sensitive about the community", unlike our new politically correct police force, who couldn't catch a rape gang if all their mugshots were printed in Hello magazine along with a signed confession.
Then when the UK bombings started, what do you think ordinary people thought of you then? Did they rationalise that only a few extremists were behind this or did they look at this unknown and secretive group and generalise that any one of them could be a terrorist?
That Brazilian guy got shot by police for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I can't work out if you are just naive or moaning about the butthurt.
/
Last edited:
Give quiche a chance?