Offended by Islam?

[Hibbyradge]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxlO7DLC6p8&feature=share

[hibsbollah]

What a throbber.

[Allant1981]

He gets offended by a lot of things!!

[yeezus.]

I hate this guy. I'm an Atheist and I really wish Richard Dawkins would stop linking him on his website!

If anyone else hates him, the "Amazing Atheist" made a great video slating Condell and his views.

[Mon Dieu4]

im offended that i spent 6.37 mins of my life watching that total trumpet of a man

[hibsbollah]

I hate this guy. I'm an Atheist and I really wish Richard Dawkins would stop linking him on his website!

If anyone else hates him, the "Amazing Atheist" made a great video slating Condell and his views.

Dawkins doesnt really post links to that video does he?

[LeighLoyal]

Pat Condell holds all the aces on islam, top man.

[lapsedhibee]

Not really offended, but didn't really rate anything after Teaser And The Firecat.

[yeezus.]

Dawkins doesnt really post links to that video does he?

Unfortunately he does on his website yes :agree:

Also, I think he (Dawkins) came out with that "you can't say anything against Islam nowadays or you are called Islamophobic" line.

[Twa Cairpets]

When I first started to get into the philosophy of religion and atheism, Pat Condell was one of the guys who occasionally put forward some well put together ideas, primarily against the fundamental stupidities in Islam. There's loads of guys out there who debunk christian fundamentalism, fewer who do the same with Islam.

However, I stopped looking at his output a few years ago. I found his arguments went more into the realms of basic bigotry and "come over here, take our jobs" rhetoric, which did nothing to advance valid criticism of Islam and skewed the arguments unnecessarily.

I think it a massive own goal by Dawkins to tacitly endorse his views.



I hate this guy. I'm an Atheist and I really wish Richard Dawkins would stop linking him on his website!

If anyone else hates him, the "Amazing Atheist" made a great video slating Condell and his views.

I find Amazing Atheist pretty poor to. He has a bad track record for misogyny.

The best guys out there n YouTube for constructive atheism (in my view) are Potholer54, TheLivingDinosaur, WildwoodClaire1, ChristopherHitchslap (which is essentially Hitchens), Logicked, and the older stuff by Thunderf00t (before he turned into a misogynist too) and AraonRa. Matt Dillahunty is excellent too.

[Scouse Hibee]

I'm not offended by him at all, would have liked him at Liverpool but he chose Chelsea instead that's life.

[yeezus.]

When I first started to get into the philosophy of religion and atheism, Pat Condell was one of the guys who occasionally put forward some well put together ideas, primarily against the fundamental stupidities in Islam. There's loads of guys out there who debunk christian fundamentalism, fewer who do the same with Islam.

However, I stopped looking at his output a few years ago. I found his arguments went more into the realms of basic bigotry and "come over here, take our jobs" rhetoric, which did nothing to advance valid criticism of Islam and skewed the arguments unnecessarily.

I think it a massive own goal by Dawkins to tacitly endorse his views.



I find Amazing Atheist pretty poor to. He has a bad track record for misogyny.

The best guys out there n YouTube for constructive atheism (in my view) are Potholer54, TheLivingDinosaur, WildwoodClaire1, ChristopherHitchslap (which is essentially Hitchens), Logicked, and the older stuff by Thunderf00t (before he turned into a misogynist too) and AraonRa. Matt Dillahunty is excellent too.

:aok: cheers for the channels - I'll check them out. I was a great admirer of Christopher Hitchens!

[LeighLoyal]

When I first started to get into the philosophy of religion and atheism, Pat Condell was one of the guys who occasionally put forward some well put together ideas, primarily against the fundamental stupidities in Islam. There's loads of guys out there who debunk christian fundamentalism, fewer who do the same with Islam.

However, I stopped looking at his output a few years ago. I found his arguments went more into the realms of basic bigotry and "come over here, take our jobs" rhetoric, which did nothing to advance valid criticism of Islam and skewed the arguments unnecessarily.

I think it a massive own goal by Dawkins to tacitly endorse his views.



I find Amazing Atheist pretty poor to. He has a bad track record for misogyny.

The best guys out there n YouTube for constructive atheism (in my view) are Potholer54, TheLivingDinosaur, WildwoodClaire1, ChristopherHitchslap (which is essentially Hitchens), Logicked, and the older stuff by Thunderf00t (before he turned into a misogynist too) and AraonRa. Matt Dillahunty is excellent too.


Condell's basic critique of Islam is factually based, in my opinion, and a breath of fresh air compared to the collective head sanding we've seen from the political mainstream and media. That he strays into territory some atheist liberals find uncomfortable is niether here no there. If you can't accept freedom and democracy then don't come here.

[Twa Cairpets]

Condell's basic critique of Islam is factually based, in my opinion, and a breath of fresh air compared to the collective head sanding we've seen from the political mainstream and media. That he strays into territory some atheist liberals find uncomfortable is niether here no there. If you can't accept freedom and democracy then don't come here.

Like I said, some of his critique is valid. He doesn't help himself though when he paints (as he often does) himself as an intolerant bigot. It's a fine line, but scrutinising the belief - holding it up to ridicule, even - is better than ridiculing those who believe, for the most part.

It's nothing to do with him " straying into territory some atheist liberals find uncomfortable", it's to do with him reducing the effectiveness of his argument by being a twat. I stopped listening to him regularly because to me he couldn't disassociate the religion from the culture the religion existed in. I don't like religion, and I don't like it's influence on people or societies, and I object to religion of any type having an impact outside the private circle of the church/mosque/home. I don't believe any religion should have impact or influence on public life.

However, I do defend the right of people to exercise their religion in the country where they live. Your line "If you can't accept freedom and democracy then don't come here" seems to suggest that you believe everyone who is a muslim is a recent immigrant. Do you have issues with fundamentalist evangelists, or mormons - neither of these are "culturally British" but presumably you're ok with people holding those (equally as ludicrous as Islam) beliefs?

[yeezus.]

Condell's basic critique of Islam is factually based, in my opinion, and a breath of fresh air compared to the collective head sanding we've seen from the political mainstream and media. That he strays into territory some atheist liberals find uncomfortable is niether here no there. If you can't accept freedom and democracy then don't come here.

Christopher Hitchens would call this a "cheap point" I'm sure.

What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

[ancienthibby]

Christopher Hitchens would call this a "cheap point" I'm sure.

What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

[hibsbollah]

[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Yes, im sure this is required behaviour for a Muslim, laid down by scripture :rolleyes:

By your logic, devout Christians such as yourself and The Son of Sam, Jeffrey Dahmer and The Yorkshire Ripper should stop being serial killers.

[Speedy]

He's dull and kicked the arse out of it but he had a couple of good points in the first 60-90 seconds imo.

[yeezus.]

[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Does that apply to Islam / all Muslims?

[Twa Cairpets]

[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Yes, because that is what they all do, you know.
Every single one of them.
Ritual gang rape of good, white christian girls is a requirement, it's right there in the Qu'ran.

There's plenty in Islam that can be shown to be ludicrous without inventing crass, stupid and bigoted crap like this.

[Pete]

[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

These high profile cases have shocked many and I am angry how they have been allowed to happen by the authorities who were scared of being pulled up for fear of racial discrimination. I wouldn't be as miffed if the police didn't turn around and say, as recently as a couple of years ago, that the race or religion of the perpetrators was irrelevant....even after community leaders admitted there was a problem.

However, the problem isn't with Islam. It's with those who have been brought up a certain way and are choosing to reject it, adopt their own take on their "culture" within the Western world and act in an arrogant, criminal manner.
There are both simple and complex explanations as to why ethnic minority males adopt a gang-type mentality and act in a "them and us" fashion, especially in the UK. When things go to extremes it's easy to point to the fact that they are of a certain race or religion but there are other issues which have to be considered. This certainly isn't the normal way groups of Muslim young men behave!

These cases have nothing to do with colour and you certainly can't blame a religious practice. It's about opportunistic, messed-up, twisted individuals.

[ancienthibby]

Yes, im sure this is required behaviour for a Muslim, laid down by scripture :rolleyes:

By your logic, devout Christians such as yourself and The Son of Sam, Jeffrey Dahmer and The Yorkshire Ripper should stop being serial killers.


Well that's quite a cracker you've come up with, Mr. Bollah!

To my knowledge I have never been called a serial killer before, nor have I ever given any reason why that should be the case.

[hibsbollah]

[/B]

Well that's quite a cracker you've come up with, Mr. Bollah!

To my knowledge I have never been called a serial killer before, nor have I ever given any reason why that should be the case.

Thats what happens when you stereotype :agree:

[(((Fergus)))]

[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Those are the ones who like our system... or at least the loose aspect of our culture. They probably don't like our legal system.

[ancienthibby]

Thats what happens when you stereotype :agree:

Well done, Mr Bollah - another trite response.

What is your response to the innocent victims?

[CropleyWasGod]

Well done, Mr Bollah - another trite response.

What is your response to the innocent victims?

I wouldn't call it trite. It was, IMO, a direct response to your stereotyping all Muslims as kidnappers and groomers of under-age white girls.

[yeezus.]

Well done, Mr Bollah - another trite response.

What is your response to the innocent victims?

Also, remember to mention the victims of Islamophobic abuse as a result of the actions of a few people who happen to be Muslims.

[ancienthibby]

I wouldn't call it trite. It was, IMO, a direct response to your stereotyping all Muslims as kidnappers and groomers of under-age white girls.

With respect, Mr Croppers, I had no intent of stereotyping anyone or any section, because I was posting a plea for the victims. In any event the post that I referred to was in itself dealing with only a certain element of society.

[ancienthibby]

Also, remember to mention the victims of Islamophobic abuse as a result of the actions of a few people who happen to be Muslims.

Indeed, Stranraer.

The thrust of this thread is disturbing in that it seems to set Islamophobia or stereotyping as a greater concern than the sanctity of human life.

[marinello59]

With respect, Mr Croppers, I had no intent of stereotyping anyone or any section, because I was posting a plea for the victims. In any event the post that I referred to was in itself dealing with only a certain element of society.
Your comment didn't read like any sort if plea, it looked like a pretty standard broad stroke slur against all male Muslims. Of course you know that and are now throwing up a smokescreen.

[ancienthibby]

Your comment didn't read like any sort if plea, it looked like a pretty standard broad stroke slur against all male Muslims. Of course you know that and are now throwing up a smokescreen.

Utter garbage.

Read the posts again.

[marinello59]

What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

That looks like a group of Muslims to me.....no mention of criminal activity from Stranraer that I can see..


[/B]
Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

And you respond by implying that the whole group are indulging in unlawful sexual behaviour. Pretty vile stereotype to be honest


Utter garbage.

Read the posts again.

:confused:

[ancienthibby]

That looks like a group of Muslims to me.....no mention of criminal activity from Stranraer that I can see..



And you respond by implying that the whole group are indulging in unlawful sexual behaviour. Pretty vile stereotype to be honest



:confused:

I should feel so privileged that you are once again 'on my case'!

And now you have added the gift of mind-reading to your range of talents.

I said before and repeat here that what is being missed in this whole debate are the victims. Not stereotyping.

But you seem to rate 'pretty vile stereotyping' (as determined by your mind) above the utter brutality that is done all the time to innocent people, especially women and children.

[marinello59]

I should feel so privileged that you are once again 'on my case'!

And now you have added the gift of mind-reading to your range of talents.

I said before and repeat here that what is being missed in this whole debate are the victims. Not stereotyping.

But you seem to rate 'pretty vile stereotyping' (as determined by your mind) above the utter brutality that is done all the time to innocent people, especially women and children.

On your case? Geezus. I thought you like to debate things. Isn't that why you posted here? I'll bow out though, life is to short.
Your last comment is baffling though. More smoke I guess.

[ancienthibby]

On your case? Geezus. I thought you like to debate things. Isn't that why you posted here? I'll bow out though, life is to short.
Your last comment is baffling though. More smoke I guess.

Pretty sad that you want to bow out, Mr Marinello.

Though our respective positions are clear.

You favour claims of stereotyping.

I favour innocent victims, especially women and children where they are brutalised by gangs of men, or due to 'familial issues or beliefs'.

[Twa Cairpets]

Pretty sad that you want to bow out, Mr Marinello.

Though our respective positions are clear.

You favour claims of stereotyping.

I favour innocent victims, especially women and children where they are brutalised by gangs of men, or due to 'familial issues or beliefs'.

What utter guff.
You were the one who brought the subject up, therefore your defence of "Think about the victims" is utterly false, as you brought it up.

You then compound it with an entirely false dichotomy where the choice is to accuse you of stereotyping or being only concerned with the innocent.

I'd have a bit more time for your stance if you just admitted you dropped a bollock, that you posted what you actually think, and stuck by that view (distasteful and incorrect though it is). The clear implication of your post was that muslims are child rapists, and should be defined as nothing other than such when considering them.

[ancienthibby]

What utter guff.
You were the one who brought the subject up, therefore your defence of "Think about the victims" is utterly false, as you brought it up.

You then compound it with an entirely false dichotomy where the choice is to accuse you of stereotyping or being only concerned with the innocent.

I'd have a bit more time for your stance if you just admitted you dropped a bollock, that you posted what you actually think, and stuck by that view (distasteful and incorrect though it is). The clear implication of your post was that muslims are child rapists, and should be defined as nothing other than such when considering them.

What is it with thread that it has been overtaken by mind-readers?

It's been a tough job running your business today, eh TC??

Take a deep breath and go start again. (And, I am well aware of your reductio ad absuratum argument in your post last evening).

[Mibbes Aye]

What is it with thread that it has been overtaken by mind-readers?

It's been a tough job running your business today, eh TC??

Take a deep breath and go start again. (And, I am well aware of your reductio ad absuratum argument in your post last evening).

You made a stupid statement (and that's being very generous to you). You then try and avoid responsibility with some guff about victims etc. Then you start playing the man instead of the ball, above. You're making a fool of yourself. As I don't know you I've no idea whether you are better then that or not. It would be nice to think you were but there's little evidence yet.......

[Twa Cairpets]

What is it with thread that it has been overtaken by mind-readers?

It's been a tough job running your business today, eh TC??

Take a deep breath and go start again. (And, I am well aware of your reductio ad absuratum argument in your post last evening).

Don't give it with the self righteous world-weariness ancient.

Precisely what is mind reading about my post. You made a pratt of yourself with the original post which could only have been taken one way and you're desperately trying to dig yourself out of it. But go on then, humour me. Precisely what did you first post refer to. It was as stupid as saying all catholics are child molesters.

Im assuming you mean reducto ad absurdum - it wasn't an argument, therefore the charge of logical fallacy is moot. it was just taking the p!ss out of your crass post.

[ancienthibby]

Don't give it with the self righteous world-weariness ancient.

Precisely what is mind reading about my post. You made a pratt of yourself with the original post which could only have been taken one way and you're desperately trying to dig yourself out of it. But go on then, humour me. Precisely what did you first post refer to. It was as stupid as saying all catholics are child molesters.

There you go again, TC, making a complete pratt of yourself. No one on this thread has suggested that.

So you're firmly on the side of the stereotypers.

Your record stands intact.

[Twa Cairpets]

[/B]
There you go again, TC, making a complete pratt of yourself. No one on this thread has suggested that.

So you're firmly on the side of the stereotypers.

Your record stands intact.

Seriously? This is your response? I maybe should have said "It would be as stupid as saying all catholics are child molesters".

So now that's cleared up, any chance you want to answer the questions about your initial post?

[yeezus.]

That looks like a group of Muslims to me.....no mention of criminal activity from Stranraer that I can see..



And you respond by implying that the whole group are indulging in unlawful sexual behaviour. Pretty vile stereotype to be honest



:confused:

I didn't come across as I meant to there :rolleyes:

The point I was trying to make is that there are Muslims and non-Muslims who dislike our political system but the idea that they should leave is incredibly cheap!

Not an Islamophobic bone in my body - honest!

[marinello59]

I didn't come across as I meant to there :rolleyes:

The point I was trying to make is that there are Muslims and non-Muslims who dislike our political system but the idea that they should leave is incredibly cheap!

Not an Islamophobic bone in my body - honest!

I know, it wasn't me that misunderstood you. :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

[/B]
There you go again, TC, making a complete pratt of yourself. No one on this thread has suggested that.

So you're firmly on the side of the stereotypers.

Your record stands intact.

Okay, maybe I'll have another go at understanding you.

The question asked was:- What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

Your response was:-

Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Are you saying that you believe that that is normal Muslim practice?

[ancienthibby]

Okay, maybe I'll have another go at understanding you.

The question asked was:- What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

Your response was:-

Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

Are you saying that you believe that that is normal Muslim practice?

Let me be clear, Mr Croppers,

I abhor violence.

I abhor gratuitous violence.

I particularly abhor violence against innocents.

And I particularly abhor gratuitous violence against women and children.

Our new British society now seems to include these aspects as just part of the modern world.

Let me tell you where I come from.

Years ago I worked in Canada where I had clients in the fur trade, mostly run by Jewish immigrants and where they employed the best looking Canadian girls to be their models - and their mistresses. I was told this was fine because the Jewish wives considered the mistresses to be 'Gentile trash'.

That opened my eyes to a world of discrimination I had never experienced.

Now, in this modern world, I see the updated version of this. In certain countries and certain societies, the role of women is totally dehumanised where they are defined as inferior and are just playthings for men to inflict gratuitous violence upon them. Hence my original post.

And I can add the appalling story of the young Indian women raped continually to her death by about six men on a bus. (Even some of her intestines were pulled out by one of her rapists) And you may have noticed that, without any implication of blame, that a similar incident occurred in Glasgow two weeks ago.

Unfortunately, we seem to live in a world where certain people of any race or creed seem to believe that respect for human life is not worthwhile. In part, this is exemplified by the huge rise in recent years in knife crime from the home to the schoolyard to the street.

That's our sad society, I'm sorry to say.

Gratuitous violence is not confined to any part of society or race, but it has now become endemic in our society.

Ignoring it is not a solution.

[Big Ed]

Our new British society now seems to include these aspects as just part of the modern world.

At what period in our "old" British society were we free of rape, knife crime, discrimination and misogyny?

[ancienthibby]

At what period in our "old" British society were we free of rape, knife crime, discrimination and misogyny?

So that makes our current situation OK?

That's Big of you, Ed!

[marinello59]

Let me be clear, Mr Croppers,

I abhor violence.

I abhor gratuitous violence.

I particularly abhor violence against innocents.

And I particularly abhor gratuitous violence against women and children.

Our new British society now seems to include these aspects as just part of the modern world.

Let me tell you where I come from.

Years ago I worked in Canada where I had clients in the fur trade, mostly run by Jewish immigrants and where they employed the best looking Canadian girls to be their models - and their mistresses. I was told this was fine because the Jewish wives considered the mistresses to be 'Gentile trash'.

That opened my eyes to a world of discrimination I had never experienced.

Now, in this modern world, I see the updated version of this. In certain countries and certain societies, the role of women is totally dehumanised where they are defined as inferior and are just playthings for men to inflict gratuitous violence upon them. Hence my original post.

And I can add the appalling story of the young Indian women raped continually to her death by about six men on a bus. (Even some of her intestines were pulled out by one of her rapists) And you may have noticed that, without any implication of blame, that a similar incident occurred in Glasgow two weeks ago.

Unfortunately, we seem to live in a world where certain people of any race or creed seem to believe that respect for human life is not worthwhile. In part, this is exemplified by the huge rise in recent years in knife crime from the home to the schoolyard to the street.

That's our sad society, I'm sorry to say.

Gratuitous violence is not confined to any part of society or race, but it has now become endemic in our society.

Ignoring it is not a solution.

You haven't answered the question.

[ancienthibby]

You haven't answered the question.

Ah, PC Marinello on night duty on my case ONCE AGAIN.

Get a life PCM.

Oh, and it was not your question.

[marinello59]

Ah, PC Marinello on night duty on my case ONCE AGAIN.

Get a life PCM.

Oh, and it was not your question.

I bow to your superior debating skills. :bye:

[CropleyWasGod]

Ah, PC Marinello on night duty on my case ONCE AGAIN.

Get a life PCM.

Oh, and it was not your question.

You're right, it wasn't his question.

He's right, you didn't.

[Big Ed]

So that makes our current situation OK?

Did I say that? or even infer it?

No.

Glad that's cleared up.

Now, are you able to answer the original question or not?

[Twa Cairpets]

Let me be clear, Mr Croppers,

I abhor violence.

I abhor gratuitous violence.

I particularly abhor violence against innocents.

And I particularly abhor gratuitous violence against women and children.

Our new British society now seems to include these aspects as just part of the modern world.

Let me tell you where I come from.

Years ago I worked in Canada where I had clients in the fur trade, mostly run by Jewish immigrants and where they employed the best looking Canadian girls to be their models - and their mistresses. I was told this was fine because the Jewish wives considered the mistresses to be 'Gentile trash'.

That opened my eyes to a world of discrimination I had never experienced.

Now, in this modern world, I see the updated version of this. In certain countries and certain societies, the role of women is totally dehumanised where they are defined as inferior and are just playthings for men to inflict gratuitous violence upon them. Hence my original post.

And I can add the appalling story of the young Indian women raped continually to her death by about six men on a bus. (Even some of her intestines were pulled out by one of her rapists) And you may have noticed that, without any implication of blame, that a similar incident occurred in Glasgow two weeks ago.

Unfortunately, we seem to live in a world where certain people of any race or creed seem to believe that respect for human life is not worthwhile. In part, this is exemplified by the huge rise in recent years in knife crime from the home to the schoolyard to the street.

That's our sad society, I'm sorry to say.

Gratuitous violence is not confined to any part of society or race, but it has now become endemic in our society.

Ignoring it is not a solution.

I don't think anyone could disagree with being against misogynistic behaviour either as a culture, nation or religion. If you want to argue against Islamic practice, then fine: Use, for example, the practice of the objectification of women as property through the use of the burkha (thankfully not common in the UK). That's valid, that's arguable.

Don't come out with an example like you did, that is largely irrelevant to the religion of the perpetrators (or do nice christians not do evil things?). People of every race and religion do appalling things. To single one out and use it as being representative of the entire race/religion/culture is not doing you any favours - it just makes you look like a narrow minded bigot. Do you actually believe that muslims - a tenet of their faith - kidnap and groom adolescent girls for gang rape, as that is what you are clearly suggesting.

[allmodcons]

Let me be clear, Mr Croppers,

I abhor violence.

I abhor gratuitous violence.

I particularly abhor violence against innocents.

And I particularly abhor gratuitous violence against women and children.

Our new British society now seems to include these aspects as just part of the modern world.

Let me tell you where I come from.

Years ago I worked in Canada where I had clients in the fur trade, mostly run by Jewish immigrants and where they employed the best looking Canadian girls to be their models - and their mistresses. I was told this was fine because the Jewish wives considered the mistresses to be 'Gentile trash'.

That opened my eyes to a world of discrimination I had never experienced.

Now, in this modern world, I see the updated version of this. In certain countries and certain societies, the role of women is totally dehumanised where they are defined as inferior and are just playthings for men to inflict gratuitous violence upon them. Hence my original post.

And I can add the appalling story of the young Indian women raped continually to her death by about six men on a bus. (Even some of her intestines were pulled out by one of her rapists) And you may have noticed that, without any implication of blame, that a similar incident occurred in Glasgow two weeks ago.

Unfortunately, we seem to live in a world where certain people of any race or creed seem to believe that respect for human life is not worthwhile. In part, this is exemplified by the huge rise in recent years in knife crime from the home to the schoolyard to the street.

That's our sad society, I'm sorry to say.

Gratuitous violence is not confined to any part of society or race, but it has now become endemic in our society.

Ignoring it is not a solution.

I'm not sure you're first post on this thread did you any favours AH! It was, at best, a bit of a generalisation. That said, however, I can see where you are coming from.

Some of the ways in which women are treated in Islamic countries is beyond believe! Don't get me wrong, problems persist in all countries but places like Saudi, Kuwait, Pakistan and, of course, Afghanistan have horrendous records for the mistreatment of women. How we go about addressing the problem, I don't know. In accordance with Shari'a law for a woman to prove rape in Pakistan, for example, four adult males of "impeccable" character must witness the penetration. This, I presume, is the male mindset that so infuriates you?

[Twa Cairpets]

I'm not sure you're first post on this thread did you any favours AH! It was, at best, a bit of a generalisation. That said, however, I can see where you are coming from.

Some of the ways in which women are treated in Islamic countries is beyond believe! Don't get me wrong, problems persist in all countries but places like Saudi, Kuwait, Pakistan and, of course, Afghanistan have horrendous records for the mistreatment of women. How we go about addressing the problem, I don't know. In accordance with Shari'a law for a woman to prove rape in Pakistan, for example, four adult males of "impeccable" character must witness the penetration. This, I presume, is the male mindset that so infuriates you?

Excellent point, and it is the practices in countries where religious bigotry does shape societies attitudes that can be attacked, and rightly so. Follow an unevolving religion, and your development will be stunted - much though Christianity is cut from the same Abrahamic cloth, it has changed (eventually, and not as much as I'd like) its stance on the role of women in society. Islam by and large hasn't, especially in theocracies.

However, this isn't relevant to the very specific rubbish that ancient wrote, namely:


The question asked was:- What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?

Your response was:-

Maybe start by cancelling their utterly grotesque practices of kidnapping/grooming 13, 14, 15 year white girls to be gang raped!

That's nowt to do with Afghanistan or Pakistan.

[allmodcons]

Christopher Hitchens would call this a "cheap point" I'm sure.

What about the second, third or fourth generation Muslims in the UK who dislike our system? They have been "here" for decades, what do you propose they do?


That's nowt to do with Afghanistan or Pakistan.[/QUOTE]

To be clear, I'm playing Devils Advocate here, but what if they dislike our system and prefer to follow Shari'a.

[Twa Cairpets]

That's nowt to do with Afghanistan or Pakistan

To be clear, I'm playing Devils Advocate here, but what if they dislike our system and prefer to follow Shari'a.

Then if they break any of the laws within the country by doing so they should be prosecuted.

From what I know of Sharia, it's a pretty benighted way of living (certainly by our cultural standard)

There are lots of people with pretty unpalatable views. At the last election, more than 1/2 million people voted BNP. In a secular democracy, one of the downsides is the necessity to allow people to hold extreme views. As long as they are held within the law of the UK, then unpleasant though it may be, they need to be tolerated.

[--------]

I'm not sure you're first post on this thread did you any favours AH! It was, at best, a bit of a generalisation. That said, however, I can see where you are coming from.

Some of the ways in which women are treated in Islamic countries is beyond believe! Don't get me wrong, problems persist in all countries but places like Saudi, Kuwait, Pakistan and, of course, Afghanistan have horrendous records for the mistreatment of women. How we go about addressing the problem, I don't know. In accordance with Shari'a law for a woman to prove rape in Pakistan, for example, four adult males of "impeccable" character must witness the penetration. This, I presume, is the male mindset that so infuriates you?


Dunno about AH but it certainly infuriates me.

[marinello59]

Dunno about AH but it certainly infuriates me.

Is there anybody here who isn't infuriated by that? I doubt it, although AH seems to think questioning his opening post on here suggests otherwise.

[yeezus.]

That's nowt to do with Afghanistan or Pakistan.



Nothing to do with me is Muslims follow the Sharia.

[CropleyWasGod]

Nothing to do with me is Muslims follow the Sharia.

Even in a country where Sharia law is not the accepted legal system?

[yeezus.]

Even in a country where Sharia law is not the accepted legal system?

Please call it the Sharia. It literally means "law".

Yes.

[CropleyWasGod]

Please call it the Sharia. It literally means "law".

Yes.

So, in practical terms.....

Let's take the rape situation. Suppose a Muslim woman complains of rape in the UK, and her alleged attacker is a Muslim man. How would you reconcile the different levels of proof required by each legal system?

[yeezus.]

So, in practical terms.....

Let's take the rape situation. Suppose a Muslim woman complains of rape in the UK, and her alleged attacker is a Muslim man. How would you reconcile the different levels of proof required by each legal system?

Complains to who?

[allmodcons]

Excellent point, and it is the practices in countries where religious bigotry does shape societies attitudes that can be attacked, and rightly so. Follow an unevolving religion, and your development will be stunted - much though Christianity is cut from the same Abrahamic cloth, it has changed (eventually, and not as much as I'd like) its stance on the role of women in society. Islam by and large hasn't, especially in theocracies.

However, this isn't relevant to the very specific rubbish that ancient wrote, namely:



That's nowt to do with Afghanistan or Pakistan.


For the record, this quote came from Twa Cairpets in a response to one of my posts. It didn't come from me!

[CropleyWasGod]

Complains to who?

Fair question.

So, you're comfortable with her making a complaint within the Muslim community, and abiding by Sharia conventions? (AFAIK, Sharia prescribes the death penalty for rape.)

I can see the sense of that, even though the Sharia way is abhorrent to me.

Suppose she makes the complaint to the UK police, and the perpetrator is convicted. Under Sharia, if I understand it, she would be liable to punishment for committing adultery, if the rapist is not her husband. How does that sit with you?

FTR, I'm not being critical of your stance here, but genuinely intrigued. Clashes of culture fascinate me.

[allmodcons]

Fair question.

So, you're comfortable with her making a complaint within the Muslim community, and abiding by Sharia conventions?

I can see the sense of that, even though the Sharia way is abhorrent to me.

Suppose she makes the complaint to the UK police, and the perpetrator is convicted. Under Sharia, if I understand it, she would be liable to punishment for committing adultery. How does that sit with you?

FTR, I'm not being critical of your stance here, but genuinely intrigued. Clashes of culture fascinate me.


For me this is simple. If 'she' reports the offence to someone within the Muslim Community they should be obliged to report it to the Police. Sharia should never be upheld in this scenario. It would be like condoning a Catholic Bishop for failing to report cases of child abuse to the authorities!

[yeezus.]

Fair question.

So, you're comfortable with her making a complaint within the Muslim community, and abiding by Sharia conventions? (AFAIK, Sharia prescribes the death penalty for rape.)

I can see the sense of that, even though the Sharia way is abhorrent to me.

Suppose she makes the complaint to the UK police, and the perpetrator is convicted. Under Sharia, if I understand it, she would be liable to punishment for committing adultery, if the rapist is not her husband. How does that sit with you?

FTR, I'm not being critical of your stance here, but genuinely intrigued. Clashes of culture fascinate me.

If that woman has made the active choice to approach a Sharia court to resolve a problem then it is her choice. As for the punishment she would be liable for - that would be the choice of individual scholars involved in the court I assume.

By the way, when I first moved to Aberdeen back in 2009 I met a few Muslims at University and they recommended the Oxford Dictionary of Islam - if you are interested in Islam/arabic meanings etc. it is very useful - it also analyses Muslims attitudes towards different aspects of Western society.

[Betty Boop]

If that woman has made the active choice to approach a Sharia court to resolve a problem then it is her choice. As for the punishment she would be liable for - that would be the choice of individual scholars involved in the court I assume.

By the way, when I first moved to Aberdeen back in 2009 I met a few Muslims at University and they recommended the Oxford Dictionary of Islam - if you are interested in Islam/arabic meanings etc. it is very useful - it also analyses Muslims attitudes towards different aspects of Western society.

Muslim Arbitration Tribunals only deal with civil issues, mainly concerning property and financial disputes. The tribunals must consist of a scholar of Islamic law, and a registered solicitor or barrister, however MATs have no jurisdiction on criminal matters ie rape etc.

[Lucius Apuleius]

My opinion, the day we allow Sharia law (just to annoy Stranraer) to supersede the law in the UK is the day we are ******.

[ancienthibby]

You're right, it wasn't his question.

He's right, you didn't.

Well, Mr Croppers, that's your view and that's fine.

However, sometimes I am not tempted by the bait.:greengrin

What I did do, was to treat your post with respect by making my response considered and courteous.

And, in that response, I tried to broaden the debate, which was mired in a stereotypical mode, ignoring the victims.

[IndieHibby]

Well, Mr Croppers, that's your view and that's fine.

However, sometimes I am not tempted by the bait.:greengrin

What I did do, was to treat your post with respect by making my response considered and courteous.

And, in that response, I tried to broaden the debate, mired which wasin a stereotypical mode, ignoring the victims.

Your weaselling angers me. Regarding the quote in bold - it was you who made the original stereotype. Now that you've been asked to explain yourself, you complain that they debate "is mired in a stereotypical mode".

So you are trying to weasel out of it.

People would have more respect for you, and this would have ended long ago, if you had just said "sorry, I shouldn't have said what I said, it was a generalisation and it was unacceptable", to which people would probably have responded kindly.

But your ego cannot cope with that level of humility. In. My. Opinion.

[ancienthibby]

I'm not sure you're first post on this thread did you any favours AH! It was, at best, a bit of a generalisation. That said, however, I can see where you are coming from.

Some of the ways in which women are treated in Islamic countries is beyond believe! Don't get me wrong, problems persist in all countries but places like Saudi, Kuwait, Pakistan and, of course, Afghanistan have horrendous records for the mistreatment of women. How we go about addressing the problem, I don't know. In accordance with Shari'a law for a woman to prove rape in Pakistan, for example, four adult males of "impeccable" character must witness the penetration. This, I presume, is the male mindset that so infuriates you?

Mr AMC,

Glad you can see the real point!

The debate at the point I entered was sterile, in that there was no consideration being given to thge victims of some of the utterly repugnant things that human beings can do to other human beings.

So I launched a grenade.

And no I am not infuriated by other counties laws per se. I am infuriated in how low people, and especially men, can sink to so defile another human being, usually innocent women and children. And some people get hung about about so-called political correctness when all around us, extreme brutality is meted out to another human being.

This demeans us all, whatever our origins, ethnicity or beliefs.

[IndieHibby]

Well, Mr Croppers, that's your view and that's fine.

However, sometimes I am not tempted by the bait.:greengrin

What I did do, was to treat your post with respect by making my response considered and courteous.

And, in that response, I tried to broaden the debate, mired which wasin a stereotypical mode, ignoring the victims.

Your weaselling angers me. Regarding the quote in bold - it was you who made the original stereotype. Now that you've been asked to explain yourself, you complain that they debate "is mired in a stereotypical mode".

So you are trying to weasel out of it.

People would have more respect for you, and this would have ended long ago, if you had just said "sorry, I shouldn't have said what I said, it was a generalisation and it was unacceptable", to which people would probably have responded kindly.

But your ego cannot cope with that level of humility. In. My. Opinion.

[ancienthibby]

Dunno about AH but it certainly infuriates me.

Doddie,

It infuriates me when the utter brutal personal violence that goes on in this world is masked by sad claims of 'vile stereotyping' as we have seen on these boards.

I am so minded of the incident in India last year when a young female student was gang raped in a bus and some of her intestines were spilled out thanks to a metal implement used by one of her rapists.

That alone is where this debate should be!

[ancienthibby]

Your weaselling angers me. Regarding the quote in bold - it was you who made the original stereotype. Now that you've been asked to explain yourself, you complain that they debate "is mired in a stereotypical mode".

So you are trying to weasel out of it.

People would have more respect for you, and this would have ended long ago, if you had just said "sorry, I shouldn't have said what I said, it was a generalisation and it was unacceptable", to which people would probably have responded kindly.

But your ego cannot cope with that level of humility. In. My. Opinion.

Wrong.

It was another poster who imposed that view on my post.

And I live in an ego free environment! But you probably will not accept that given your post!

[marinello59]

Doddie,

It infuriates me when the utter brutal personal violence that goes on in this world is masked by sad claims of 'vile stereotyping' as we have seen on these boards.

I am so minded of the incident in India last year when a young female student was gang raped in a bus and some of her intestines were spilled out thanks to a metal implement used by one of her rapists.
That alone is where this debate should be!

Your convoluted attempts to justify or deny that your opening post (which IS vile stereotyping) on here does you no favours. In order to justify your slur on all male UK Muslims you start throwing out the most graphic and horrific cases that you can to justify your remark.
What's the main religion in India AH? Or does it not really matter what religion they are, all those dusky skinned Asians are the same to you. The thread was about feelings being expressed about Muslims though so suggesting that the debate should be somewhere else is odd to say the least. .
Nobody here is anything other than outraged by those violent incidents. How on earth could you think otherwise? Why does that mean that bigotry and intolerance towards others can't be discussed and condemned as well?
Please note I am merely debating the issues with you here. If you want to simply tell me to get a life etc etc it's probably best that you simply ignore me.

[ancienthibby]

Your convoluted attempts to justify or deny that your opening post (which IS vile stereotyping) on here does you no favours. In order to justify your slur on all male UK Muslims you start throwing out the most graphic and horrific cases that you can to justify your remark.
What's the main religion in India AH? Or does it not really matter what religion they are, all those dusky skinned Asians are the same to you. The thread was about feelings being expressed about Muslims though so suggesting that the debate should be somewhere else is odd to say the least. .
Nobody here is anything other than outraged by those violent incidents. How on earth could you think otherwise? Why does that mean that bigotry and intolerance towards others can't be discussed and condemned as well?
Please note I am merely debating the issues with you here. If you want to simply tell me to get a life etc etc it's probably best that you simply ignore me.

Happy to debate with you PCM and I will not be putting you on my ignore list!

And then, see the above line which I have highlighted, well I just never saw anyone else making your point. If I may say, you have come to that view quite belatedly.

The only person who recorded his outrage was Doddie.

So, how on earth could I think otherwise??

Well, because NO ONE posted otherwise until I lobbed the hand grenade.

[marinello59]

Happy to debate with you PCM and I will not be putting you on my ignore list!

And then, see the above line which I have highlighted, well I just never saw anyone else making your point. If I may say, you have come to that view quite belatedly.

The only person who recorded his outrage was Doddie.

So, how on earth could I think otherwise??

Well, because NO ONE posted otherwise until I lobbed the hand grenade.

What a bizarre statement. I questioned your suggestion that talking out against bigotry meant you somehow could not sympathise with violent attacks on innocents. (Post 34 when I said I found your comment baffling.) Twa Cairpets suggested your logic was wrong much more eloquently in Post 36. :confused: I would assume that the vast majority of people would find such attacks abhorrent without having to somehow prove it by expressing outrage on here. You seen to think differently. maybe you see yourself as the only person with any empathy at all?
Which hand grenade are you on about? The post where you suggested that UK male Muslims were all grooming young girls? Or the one were you revealed that the Canadian Jewish males were routinely taking advantage of Gentile women? Or where you justified your remarks about Muslims by graphically highlighting an outrageous attack carried out in a Hindu country? Or are you finally saying now you don't believe all young male Muslims are plotting to abuse young white girls and it was just an attention seeking ploy to enable you to go off at a tangent?

[Lucius Apuleius]

Good old Sharia Law. Just what we need for the UK:wink:

http://news.sky.com/story/1073634/sa...o-be-paralysed

[yeezus.]

Good old Sharia Law. Just what we need for the UK:wink:

http://news.sky.com/story/1073634/sa...o-be-paralysed

You have succeeded :thumbsup:

[hibs0666]

If you can't accept freedom and democracy then don't come here.

You don't do irony do you?

[CropleyWasGod]

Well, Mr Croppers, that's your view and that's fine.

However, sometimes I am not tempted by the bait.:greengrin

What I did do, was to treat your post with respect by making my response considered and courteous.

And, in that response, I tried to broaden the debate, which was mired in a stereotypical mode, ignoring the victims.

Yes, it was considered and courteous, but it didn't answer my question.

If you're not going to answer it, that's your choice. If that's the case, I'd rather you said so.

[Betty Boop]

Frank Gardiner returns to Saudi Arabia on BBC 2 fascinating.

[lord bunberry]

Frank Gardiner returns to Saudi Arabia on BBC 2 fascinating.

I thought the Saudi blogger who was speaking out against the Saudi royals was brave

[Betty Boop]

I thought the Saudi blogger who was speaking out against the Saudi royals was brave

:agree: Absolutely.

[yeezus.]

Frank Gardiner returns to Saudi Arabia on BBC 2 fascinating.

Thought it was brilliant - couldn't decide between that and trying to catch a clip of Morrissey on BBC1.

[LeighLoyal]

Time we went the French route and banned the full face veil. The fact that a convicted terrorist's wife accused of aiding her jihadist spouse can show up in a court room fully veiled, as happened yesterday, has to be a joke. Just because we're a democracy doesn't mean we have to a doormat for extremists hiding behind an effed up ideology masquerading as a religion.

[CropleyWasGod]

Time we went the French route and banned the full face veil. The fact that a convicted terrorist's wife accused of aiding her jihadist spouse can show up in a court room fully veiled, as happened yesterday, has to be a joke. Just because we're a democracy doesn't mean we have to a doormat for extremists hiding behind an effed up ideology masquerading as a religion.

... or it could be the ultimate expression of the maxim that one is innocent until proven guilty, and has the right to protect one's identity and limit one's public exposure.

:cb

[LeighLoyal]

... or it could be the ultimate expression of the maxim that one is innocent until proven guilty, and has the right to protect one's identity and limit one's public exposure.

:cb



You have the right to remain anonymous. That is a new one, Cropley. How did they even know it was this jihadi's wife in the room?

[CropleyWasGod]

You have the right to remain anonymous. That is a new one, Cropley.

I didn't say one did have that right. I merely put the suggestion out there for discussion.

Certain accusations, for example rape, don't always go away when the jury says "not guilty". One might put accusations of terrorism in that same bag. From that perspective, one might understand why an accused would want anonymity.

[--------]

I didn't say one did have that right. I merely put the suggestion out there for discussion.

Certain accusations, for example rape, don't always go away when the jury says "not guilty". One might put accusations of terrorism in that same bag. From that perspective, one might understand why an accused would want anonymity.


Supposing I declared myself to be a Jedi by religion and turned up wearing a Darth Vader mask - would that be allowed, you think? :cool2:

[hibs0666]

Time we went the French route and banned the full face veil. The fact that a convicted terrorist's wife accused of aiding her jihadist spouse can show up in a court room fully veiled, as happened yesterday, has to be a joke. Just because we're a democracy doesn't mean we have to a doormat for extremists hiding behind an effed up ideology masquerading as a religion.

Why do you not want to ban hoodies, peaked caps, snorkel jackets and balaclavas? Sunglasses obscure a full-facial view as well do they not? Don't you also want to ban children's face-masks just to make sure those mini-terrorists don't get away with it too? Do you want to do ban onesies too?

[CropleyWasGod]

Why do you not want to ban hoodies, peaked caps, snorkel jackets and balaclavas? Sunglasses obscure a full-facial view as well do they not? Don't you also want to ban children's face-masks just to make sure those mini-terrorists don't get away with it too? Do you want to do ban onesies too?

Yes please. :greengrin

[Betty Boop]

Thought it was brilliant - couldn't decide between that and trying to catch a clip of Morrissey on BBC1.


Yes it was excellent. I'm really looking forward to next week's programme Israel-Facing The Future with John Ware.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0zkt

[Twa Cairpets]

Time we went the French route and banned the full face veil. The fact that a convicted terrorist's wife accused of aiding her jihadist spouse can show up in a court room fully veiled, as happened yesterday, has to be a joke. Just because we're a democracy doesn't mean we have to a doormat for extremists hiding behind an effed up ideology masquerading as a religion.

Turns out she didn't wear the veil in court, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2306803/Salma-Kabal-Terrorists-wife-kept-plot-rival-9-11-secret-wanted-rekindle-romance-rival-9-11.html

[CropleyWasGod]

Supposing I declared myself to be a Jedi by religion and turned up wearing a Darth Vader mask - would that be allowed, you think? :cool2:

Did you do it, though?

[hibs0666]

Turns out she didn't wear the veil in court, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2306803/Salma-Kabal-Terrorists-wife-kept-plot-rival-9-11-secret-wanted-rekindle-romance-rival-9-11.html

Religious zealots tend to do that.

[Twa Cairpets]

I don't think anyone could disagree with being against misogynistic behaviour either as a culture, nation or religion. If you want to argue against Islamic practice, then fine: Use, for example, the practice of the objectification of women as property through the use of the burkha (thankfully not common in the UK). That's valid, that's arguable.

Don't come out with an example like you did, that is largely irrelevant to the religion of the perpetrators (or do nice christians not do evil things?). People of every race and religion do appalling things. To single one out and use it as being representative of the entire race/religion/culture is not doing you any favours - it just makes you look like a narrow minded bigot.Do you actually believe that muslims - as a tenet of their faith - kidnap and groom adolescent girls for gang rape, as that is what you are clearly suggesting.

Any chance of an answer then?

[hibsbollah]

Time we went the French route and banned the full face veil..

Yep, lets ban stuff. It could herald a golden dawn for us all :aok:

[(((Fergus)))]

The video fails because no one is really offended by "Islam" (i.e. the jihadi world domination cult), more bemused or indeed amused (when not reverently and studiously making apologies for it). Check these six plums/knuts who tried to bomb an EDL rally but a) turned up late and b) got nicked for having no insurance http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22344054

:lolyam:

It's not 100% laughs and jokes however as they *will* cause carnage every now and again, but mostly I just shake my head at their ridiculous combination of pseudo-piety and slapstick.

[hibsbollah]

The video fails because no one is really offended by "Islam" (i.e. the jihadi world domination cult), more bemused or indeed amused (when not reverently and studiously making apologies for it). Check these six plums/knuts who tried to bomb an EDL rally but a) turned up late and b) got nicked for having no insurance http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22344054

:lolyam:

It's not 100% laughs and jokes however as they *will* cause carnage every now and again, but mostly I just shake my head at their ridiculous combination of pseudo-piety and slapstick.

Its so Four Lions.

[Sylar]

Its so Four Lions.

Rubber dinghy rapids :agree:

[hibsbollah]

Rubber dinghy rapids :agree:

Jews invented spark plugs to control global traffic bro' :agree: