BNP on Question Time ......

[EastleighSoulBoy]

True' date=' but Kind of glad we agree on an issue that is sadly way more important than football... Although deep down you know I am right about that to! ;-)[/quote']

 

No you're not! :cool:

 

Oh! maybe,

 

well, quite a few times actually.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

I was taught at a Catholic school and found the religion very contradictory even as a teenager with an enquiring mind. Let alone in later years as I realised that it was based on unquestioning devotion and obedience, as dictated in the 'Catholic cheat sheet' better known as the Catechism.

 

Some of the beliefs have to be seen to be believed!

 

http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=18959

 

Quote "The Times of London published a handy list of some Catholic beliefs Anglican converts would have to embrace. Social conservatives who are upset by the Anglican Church's acceptance of female priests and openly gay bishops are unlikely to have trouble adopting the Catholic beliefs that only men can become priests and that, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it, "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered" and "under no circumstances can they be approved."

 

This, from a religion which actively sought to hide the perverted treatment, by Catholic clergy, of young children in their care!

[aintforever]

He never said they were more or less the same. He said they had similarities.

 

"The Taliban are strictly religious". As opposed to the Catholics, who are just messing about?

 

"Islam is openly homophobic" - you criticise Muslims for this yet do not criticise the Catholics. Why's that?

 

In fact, virtually every single word of your post is ill informed and prejudice.

 

You cannot single out Islam whilst choosing to ignore other religions, because that would constitute discrimination.

 

"for whoever is not against us is for us" (Mark 9-40).

Does that mean anyone who is not a Christian? Are the Christians putting themselves up against everyone else? rather inflammatory.

 

Why does the Christian church make a stand against pop stars and lyrics that it sees as obsence?

Why do Christians believe that AIDS is God's punishment for being gay?

 

And before anyone says that Christians don't believe that - extremist, conservative Christians do. Maybe they aren't what most Christians are like, but similarly, not all Muslims are raving nutters who wish to stone everyone in sight.

 

"When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you may nations...then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy." Deuteronomy 7:1-2

Bloody nasty Christians

 

Genesis - Jacob's sons can't stand the idea of their sister marrying someone who is uncircumcised. (34:14)

Bloody intolerant Christians. Still, at least they're not stoning people to death eh?

 

I believe that the Swiss (b*stards that they are) didn't give women the vote until 1971. How backwards are they? Bet they're full of Muslims.

 

Anyway, I have forgotten the point I wanted to make. It was something about tolerance and not believing everything you read. It was something about recognising the good and the bad in all aspects of society and it was probably something about not being such a knob. Not that I'm calling anyone a knob, I'm not, because I don't want to be infracted. Nor do I want to be infracted for "copying and pasting" from the bible.

 

I agree with you that the Christian religion is also backward, sexist and homophobic. If a goverment was run and had laws based on the extreme parts of the Bible i would be equally opposed to it.

 

The Saudi Government views its interpretation of Islamic law as its sole source of guidance on human rights, it's laws - amputations and floggings etc, are based Sharia law - that is fact.

 

I know it's not politically correct to say it but fact is there is a really screwed up and backward side to Islam, the same could be said of other religions but, for whatever reason, the problem is not as bad as Islam IMO.

[JackFrost]

I agree with you that the Christian religion is also backward, sexist and homophobic. If a goverment was run and had laws based on the extreme parts of the Bible i would be equally opposed to it.

 

The Saudi Government views its interpretation of Islamic law as its sole source of guidance on human rights, it's laws - amputations and floggings etc, are based Sharia law - that is fact.

 

I know it's not politically correct to say it but fact is there is a really screwed up and backward side to Islam, the same could be said of other religions but, for whatever reason, the problem is not as bad as Islam IMO.

 

based on extreme 'Nick Griffin-style' interpretations of Sharia Law, interpretations that go against core principles of Islam itself,

 

Why? Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the vast majority of these vicious practises are only reported by the western press when 'someone is doing it in the honour of Allah' would it?

[aintforever]

based on extreme 'Nick Griffin-style' interpretations of Sharia Law, interpretations that go against core principles of Islam itself,

 

In your opinion, not that of the Saudi's, wether you agree with it or not that is their interpretation.

 

If our government had a similar interpretation of the Bible that destroyed all our human rights I would be saying the same thing about that religion. Just as I would be saying it if Christians were flying Jumbo Jets into buildings and commiting mass murder in the name of Jesus.

[Junction 9]

I was on holiday and missed the programme but I understand it turned into a bit of a farce.

If true it's a shame that a decent opportunity to ask Griffin some important political questions was lost. There aren't many programmes with the format of QT around, the BBC should have handled this episode differently if you ask me.

[RonManager]

I was on holiday and missed the programme but I understand it turned into a bit of a farce.

If true it's a shame that a decent opportunity to ask Griffin some important political questions was lost. There aren't many programmes with the format of QT around, the BBC should have handled this episode differently if you ask me.

 

It's on BBC iPlayer if your interested.

[Verbal]

I can't agree with that, whilst Christianity and Islam might have similarities to say they are more or less the same is rubbish.

 

The Taliban are strictly religious, while you say they go against the rule of Islam they will say they are following it to the letter. Whilst religious extremists of any type are bad some very religious Islamic countries are completely screwed up, the more religious they are the more screwed up they are IMO.

 

Islam is openly sexist and homophobic, and just because the church is too doesn't make it any more acceptable.

 

To ay the actions of despicable governments like Saudi Arabia are not linked to Islam is nieve in the extreme.

 

One of the problems with any discussion about Islam is our profound ignorance of it. This is not a dig at you by any means - it's a widespread phenomenon that actually reinforces the problem itself.

 

Islam's foundation dates back to the late sixth century, when it started as a social reform movement intended to bring monotheism to the polytheistic Arab peninsula.

 

The brand of Islam you mean, when you talk about Saudi Arabia, dates back only to the 18th century - and to a psychopathic preacher called Abd al-Wahhab. After a motiveless attack on a woman, whom he stoned to death, he was evicted from the settlement he'd been staying in for some years, and wound up at an oasis village led by a nobody called Saud. Long story short, they entered into a pact which resulted in Wahhab gaining control of Mecca and Medina and Saud gaining political power.

 

Ever since - and especially after the discovery of oil - the Saudis have exported this brand of Islam (known as 'Wahhabism') for all their worth. And that's a LOT.

 

Consequently, the dominant liberal traditions in Islam, like sufism, have been shattered, and their adherents murdered and threatened. Believe it or not, Afghanistan was until relatively recently a country dominated by Sufi traditions of Islam. The shrines they once worshipped in are now mostly destroyed.

 

How closely is Wahhabism related to Islam? Well of course, if you ask them, they ARE Islam. And unfortunately, you are one of many who simply perpetuate the myth.

 

But ask yourself another question: how closely are the Wahhabis related to Mohammad and the original founders of the religion? A fairly graphic answer lies in the actions of Wahhabis in 1802, who, in a fit of collective rage, destroyed the graves of Muhammad's wives and daughters, and desecrated the places where he had grown up.

 

By the way, 'Sharia' simply did not exist in Muhammad's time. The first mosque he built in Medina did not separate men from women, and women - especially his wife - had a profound influence on his most critical decisions and actions.

 

Oh, and the Taliban are mostly ethnic Pashtuns, whose warrior-like ethos ("Pashtunwali') actually predates Islam by centuries - and goes back to the time of Alexander the Great.

Edited 30 October, 2009 by Verbal

[Thedelldays]

I have been to the gulf states and the level of "islam" witnessed differs so much everywhere...

 

saddam hussain was very moderate....yet a nutter..lol

[aintforever]

One of the problems with any discussion about Islam is our profound ignorance of it. This is not a dig at you by any means - it's a widespread phenomenon that actually reinforces the problem itself.

 

Islam's foundation dates back to the late sixth century, when it started as a social reform movement intended to bring monotheism to the polytheistic Arab peninsula.

 

The brand of Islam you mean, when you talk about Saudi Arabia, dates back only to the 18th century - and to a psychopathic preacher called Abd al-Wahhab. After a motiveless attack on a woman, whom he stoned to death, he was evicted from the settlement he'd been staying in for some years, and wound up at an oasis village led by a nobody called Saud. Long story short, they entered into a pact which resulted in Wahhab gaining control of Mecca and Medina and Saud gaining political power.

 

Ever since - and especially after the discovery of oil - the Saudis have exported this brand of Islam (known as 'Wahhabism') for all their worth. And that's a LOT.

 

Consequently, the dominant liberal traditions in Islam, like sufism, have been shattered, and their adherents murdered and threatened. Believe it or not, Afghanistan was until relatively recently a country dominated by Sufi traditions of Islam. The shrines they once worshipped in are now mostly destroyed.

 

How closely is Wahhabism related to Islam? Well of course, if you ask them, they ARE Islam. And unfortunately, you are one of many who simply perpetuate the myth.

 

But ask yourself another question: how closely are the Wahhabis related to Mohammad and the original founders of the religion? A fairly graphic answer lies in the actions of Wahhabis in 1802, who, in a fit of collective rage, destroyed the graves of Muhammad's wives and daughters, and desecrated the places where he had grown up.

 

By the way, 'Sharia' simply did not exist in Muhammad's time. The first mosque he built in Medina did not separate men from women, and women - especially his wife - had a profound influence on his most critical decisions and actions.

 

Oh, and the Taliban are mostly ethnic Pashtuns, whose warrior-like ethos ("Pashtunwali') actually predates Islam by centuries - and goes back to the time of Alexander the Great.

 

All very interesting, except you contradict yourself by saying Wahhabism is a brand of Islam then say it is not Islam.

 

Anyway, the name, brand or whatever is not important. Wether it's called Islam, Wahhabism, or Pashtunwali there are elements that are backward and contribute to abuses of human rights in some countries.

 

it's obviously a complex issue and I don't agree with the BNP's policies but I am glad they raise the issue because the other parties seem to tread on egg shells around the whole thing. It's not right that people should suffer because of any religion, and it's certainly not right that we should turn a blind eye or ignore what is obviously wrong.

[Rattlehead]

Religion is for losers.

[Sheaf Saint]

Anyway, the name, brand or whatever is not important. Wether it's called Islam, Wahhabism, or Pashtunwali there are elements that are backward and contribute to abuses of human rights in some countries.

 

There are certain cultures whose interpretation of Islam leads to those human rights abuses, certainly, but the same can be said of any religion the world over. You only need to look at the situation in (christian) Nigeria where the government turn a blind eye to religious ministers branding children as witches and forcing their parents to give them money to have them 'exorcised'.

 

You cannot single out Islam as the only oppressive religion in the world.

[rpb]

Religion is for losers.

 

Was Mother Teresa a loser?

[Joensuu]

Was Mother Teresa a loser?

 

Nobody's perfect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aplank/Criticisms_of_Mother_Teresa

[Verbal]

All very interesting, except you contradict yourself by saying Wahhabism is a brand of Islam then say it is not Islam.

 

Anyway, the name, brand or whatever is not important. Wether it's called Islam, Wahhabism, or Pashtunwali there are elements that are backward and contribute to abuses of human rights in some countries.

 

it's obviously a complex issue and I don't agree with the BNP's policies but I am glad they raise the issue because the other parties seem to tread on egg shells around the whole thing. It's not right that people should suffer because of any religion, and it's certainly not right that we should turn a blind eye or ignore what is obviously wrong.

 

I didn't say Wahhabism is or isn't 'Islam'. To say either is clearly idiotic. Islam as a religion has many strands, just as Christianity does. The tragedy is that Wahhabis, sponsored by the Saudis, have exported their violent ideology across the Islamic world, with devastating results.

 

The BNP are screaming about Muslims for their own sleazy reasons. What exactly is real the 'issue' with Islam? It is, surely the violence perpetrated by the Wahhabis and their Jihadist followers.. Feeble d*ckheads like the BNP, by casting all Muslims in the same light, actually help to make the problem worse.

 

No one looking at this sensibly is turning a blind eye. On the contrary, the BNP and their fellow travellers are the ones turning a blind eye, or two, to the real causes of - and solutions to - jihadist extremism.

[Barney Trubble]

An interesting view and an informative website in general.

 

http://www.name-n-shame.co.uk/muslims.htm

[miserableoldgit]

An interesting view and an informative website in general.

 

http://www.name-n-shame.co.uk/muslims.htm

I do hope that you have a tin hat ready for the incoming, you racist, Daily Mail reading Nazi bastard!

[Barney Trubble]

I do hope that you have a tin hat ready for the incoming, you racist, Daily Mail reading Nazi bastard!

 

Oh sorry, didn't mean to offend. I was looking at the site for dodgy council practices(s), when I came across that section. In don't necessarily agree with the comments but I think that it raises some valid points, especially under the 'people' header, especially like the Freemasons section:D

[miserableoldgit]

Oh sorry, didn't mean to offend. I was looking at the site for dodgy council practices(s), when I came across that section. In don't necessarily agree with the comments but I think that it raises some valid points, especially under the 'people' header, especially like the Freemasons section:D

It always seems strange to me that the "PC" brigade always preach "tolerance" but are never tolerant of any views opposed to theirs!

[.comsaint]

An interesting view and an informative website in general.

 

http://www.name-n-shame.co.uk/muslims.htm

 

Indeed. And a view the vast majority of us share.

[bridge too far]

Indeed. And a view the vast majority of us share.

 

Doubt it TBH. Apart from the bit about the Freemasons.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I've actually finally just got round to watching all of it via SkyPlus+...why are we worried about this clown and his party?

[greg_hill]

Sitting next to Nick Griffin on the show was Jack Straw. That would be Jack Straw from Labour, the party which actively pursued, created faked documents for, told lies in support of and signed off billions of pounds for a war in Iraq. A war that killed thousand of innocents including women and children, created misery nd pain, racial hatred, opportunities for western countries to commit economic rape, and destroyed liberty for thousands of Muslims. When one good man tried to tell the truth about it, they pressured him so much it drove him to suicide.

 

Yet here we are demonising the bloke sat next to him.

 

I have an Asian wife and mixed race kids, I don't support the BNP and I am well aware of the truths and lies about them, but I find it sad that we get things out of proportion simply by using tags such as 'racist' and 'fascist' (the latter is a term rarely understood or studied by those who use it) to demonise people. The show itself was a farce. The BBC obviously felt intimidated by the pressure groups who take it upon themselves to decide what the rest of us are allowed to see (all in the name of 'anti'-fascism, of course) but could not lose face by dropping Griffin altogether. So, they allowed the show to become a circus. At one point they asked Griffin three questions in a row then when he tried to answer one, Dimbley spoke over him and asked for the next question! What kind of 'Question Time' is that?!

 

 

Now onto Islam. Someone on here has written a piece basically equating Wahbisim with the 'down' side of Islam nd implying the rest is better. Well I've actually taken the time to read The Koran (so many apologists have not, they prefer to take a moral high ground rather than do the actual hard work) and I can't agree.

 

To be sure, most Muslims are good people. I work with Muslims and have Muslims friends. However, the religion per se is not good. Sharia Law is not good. The Koran has a whole lot of verses that should be massive cause for concern. These include anti-semitism, violence against those who leave Islam ,strong chavanisma nd numerous violent verses. Apologists will often point out that The Bible has similar problems. The reply is twofold: first, The Bible has a lot less, second, we live in a relatively secular west. We may derive our laws from Christianity but we have adapted and progressed them. Islamic societies treat the Koran as their constitution, it is, literally, the word of law. We should engage in a very careful discussion with Islamic groups in the west to ensure that Sharia Law is rejected and nobody seeks to impose out in the west. The Koran does tell its followers to spread Sharia Law.

[saint boggy]

i didn't watch Question Time the other week, so i cannot comment on anything relating to it....what i DO want to say however is aimed at the chavvy little scrotes who were drinking outside the pub (i forget it's name now) in Bethnal Green today......(i am posting this on here as i didn't want to poison the feel-good factor of the Orient post-match thread.

 

i politely request that you f*ck right off away from decent Saints fans if you want to chant at the tops of your voices "B.N.P. , B.N.P".!!

WTF has THAT got to do with supporting OUR football team??

i don't want to hear that sh1t being bellowed out, like some kind of war-cry, so that passers-by then associate MY football team with being a racist bunch of seeyounexttuesdays!!........you just make yourselves look complete c8cks and embarrass the rest of us who actually HAVE more than 2 brain cells to rub together!....

if you think it's THAT clever and that you have every right to do it then stand up for your beliefs and all 15 of ya go and walk through the streets of Brixton and do it, rather than staying in the relative safety of fellow fans and numerous police officers......

Edited 1 November, 2009 by saint boggy

[Rattlehead]

We have some proper goons as fans saint boggy, for sure.

[rallyboy]

I'm with Boggy on this one and we need to make a stand.

If the inbred Southampton children who behaved like that in Bethnal Green want to show themselves to be ignorant and easily led by 'bigger boys' who supported the Germans in WWII, that's their choice - but don't bring shame on our club by displaying your stupidity in public.

The team don't want you, the huge support at Orient doesn't want you, and now that half term is over just go back to your sad little lonely world of truancy and failure.

[Verbal]

Now onto Islam. Someone on here has written a piece basically equating Wahbisim with the 'down' side of Islam nd implying the rest is better. Well I've actually taken the time to read The Koran (so many apologists have not, they prefer to take a moral high ground rather than do the actual hard work) and I can't agree.

 

To be sure, most Muslims are good people. I work with Muslims and have Muslims friends. However, the religion per se is not good. Sharia Law is not good. The Koran has a whole lot of verses that should be massive cause for concern. These include anti-semitism, violence against those who leave Islam ,strong chavanisma nd numerous violent verses. Apologists will often point out that The Bible has similar problems. The reply is twofold: first, The Bible has a lot less, second, we live in a relatively secular west. We may derive our laws from Christianity but we have adapted and progressed them. Islamic societies treat the Koran as their constitution, it is, literally, the word of law. We should engage in a very careful discussion with Islamic groups in the west to ensure that Sharia Law is rejected and nobody seeks to impose out in the west. The Koran does tell its followers to spread Sharia Law.

 

That ‘someone’ was me. I do find it depressing that you understood so little of what I wrote.

 

I have no particular opinions about what’s good or bad about the religion itself, other than those based upon what I’ve seen. My point in talking about Sufism in particular is that it explicitly rejects Shariah. As someone who’s spent time studying what happens at one of the world’s most sacred Sufi shrine, at Sehwan Sharif, I can only tell you that what happens there is about as far removed from your clichéd view of the religion as it is possible to imagine. Sufis aren’t some small, insignificant part of the religion; in the Indian sub-continent, and in the largest population centres of Pakistan in particular, they are the dominant form of religious practice.

 

So it is no surprise that the Wahhabis have taken especial care to wipe out all traces of Sufi beliefs and customs. Not that we in the West care, but Sufis once also dominated in Afghanistan. But there shrines have been burned down, and the adherents terrorized and murdered.

 

Why does this matter? Because what’s really going on is a battle for the soul of the religion. Al Qaeda’s basic end-game is to assume control of Mecca and Medina – to ‘liberate’ it from the House of Saud, whom Osama bin Laden regards as too soft and thoroughly corrupt. If you think shariah is bad now, wait until OSM and his wild bunch gets his hands on the real levers of power.

 

Now we fancifully believe that we are engaged in a ‘clash of civilizations’ – a war on terror where one way of life will triumph over another.

 

For OSM, however, the attacks in the West are nothing more than ‘spectaculars’ (his word), whose intention is to act as a recruitment drive for more maniacs and to raise enough money to take them that little step further towards Mecca. The West, in other words, is a sideshow. We are not important – just cannon fodder. Our deaths and maimings simply mean more cash and carriers in another, unrelated cause.

 

As part of this general strategy, OSM and his lieutenants explicitly want to drive as many Muslims into a corner as possible – wherever they are. Only then will they ‘see the light’ and come over and support him.

 

The great paradox of the BNP’s behaviour regarding Muslims is that they are, quite directly, acting as recruiting sergeants for al Qaeda. Every Muslim beaten up by BNP thugs is another potential recruit. Revenge is a dish best served with a plateful of dynamite.

 

Moderate Muslims are under assault, on the one hand, by al Qaeda evangelists, and on the other, by thuggish dimwits in ‘white-rights’ organizations like the BNP. It’s no wonder many feel under siege.

 

This is why we should support traditions of Islam like Sufism.

 

By the way, I’m sorry, but I always treat with the utmost scepticism claims that start with: ‘I have read the Koran and…’ Unless you’re an actual, devoted Muslim, the book is interminably, unreadably boring and unintelligible. As evidence that you haven’t read it, your claim that ‘The Koran does tell its followers to spread Sharia Law’ is untrue – for the pretty good reason that the Koran predates the formulation of Shariah by three hundred years or more.

 

Also, your claim that all ‘Islamic societies treat the Koran as their constitution’ is patent rubbish. The largest Muslim country in the world, by far, Indonesia, has a constitution that explicitly incorporates five religions. If you look at the Pakistani flag, the large band of white represents Christianity, etc, etc. It’s only in places like Saudi Arabia and the places where Wahhabism has spread like a disease that the Koran could be said to be a constitution.

 

The enemy isn’t all Muslims. If you don’t understand that, and bang on as if they were, you are not part of the solution regarding the extremists – you’re part of the problem. You are a cog in the engine that churns them out.

[AndyNorthernSaints]

i didn't watch Question Time the other week, so i cannot comment on anything relating to it....what i DO want to say however is aimed at the chavvy little scrotes who were drinking outside the pub (i forget it's name now) in Bethnal Green today......(i am posting this on here as i didn't want to poison the feel-good factor of the Orient post-match thread.

 

i politely request that you f*ck right off away from decent Saints fans if you want to chant at the tops of your voices "B.N.P. , B.N.P".!!

WTF has THAT got to do with supporting OUR football team??

i don't want to hear that sh1t being bellowed out, like some kind of war-cry, so that passers-by then associate MY football team with being a racist bunch of seeyounexttuesdays!!........you just make yourselves look complete c8cks and embarrass the rest of us who actually HAVE more than 2 brain cells to rub together!....

if you think it's THAT clever and that you have every right to do it then stand up for your beliefs and all 15 of ya go and walk through the streets of Brixton and do it, rather than staying in the relative safety of fellow fans and numerous police officers......

 

Always happens at London games for some reason. One of the reasons i avoid London games these days is to avoid the inbred thick ****wits.

[saint boggy]

Always happens at London games for some reason. One of the reasons i avoid London games these days is to avoid the inbred thick ****wits.

i honestly think that it is because there is such a diverse cross-section of ethnicities in London that the 'poor little white boys' get scared and so attempt to stamp their 'white supremacy' by chanting their pseudo-support of the BNP.....i wonder how many of them have any idea of what the BNP'S policies on,say, health and the welfare state are.....i bet if anyone was to ask them, their eyes would glaze over and a look of fear and embarassment would spread across their spotty little faces....

 

:smt071

Edited 1 November, 2009 by saint boggy

[Thedelldays]

i honestly think that it is because there is such a diverse cross-section of ethnicities in London that the 'poor little white boys' get scared and so attempt to stamp their 'white supremacy' by chanting their pseudo-support of the BNP.....i wonder how many of them have any idea of what the BNP'S policies on,say, health and the welfare state are.....i bet if anyone was to ask them, their eyes would glaze over and a look of fear and embarassment would spread across their spotty little faces....

 

:smt071

 

 

what are BNPs policies on health and the welfare state..?

[EastleighSoulBoy]

what are BNPs policies on health and the welfare state..?

 

To name a few.

 

Claw back all ex council housing which is being let privately.*

 

* I'm not too sure that people who have 'bought to let' will be happy with this. Presumably a BNP Government would buy these properties back at full market value and recompense any expense laid out by current owners in mortgage interest, repairs and agency fees?

 

Give benefits only to British Citizens in a 'Workfare' scheme.**

 

** I think that's a fair aspiration?

 

Bring Hospital cleaning back in house from contractors because they often employ illegal immigrants.***

 

*** Not sure how this happens because people employed at Hospitals (contract or direct) go through a CRB check. From what the BNP are implying it would seem that these 'illegal immigrants' only have their Criminal Record Checked? Yet agencies now openly require proof that you are entitled to work in the UK.

 

One can only presume that the the term 'Illegal immigrant' being used is the current UK legal definition and not the BNP take on it?

[saint boggy]

what are BNPs policies on health and the welfare state..?

i don't have a clue, which is understandable since i have no interest whatsoever in politics. The point i was making (as you well know) was that these idiots are chanting the name of a political party which they, no doubt, have NO CLUE whatsoever of what policies they would emply once in power .(not that THAT would ever happen,of course)

I would not stand in the middle of the street chanting "new,new,new Labour!!!" because very few people feel THAT strongly about politics, these guys were just being obnoxious little pr1cks SOLELY for the racist and inflammatory conotations (sp), nothing more, nothing less.

[Rattlehead]

You seem to be a very angry old woman saint_doggy.

[saint boggy]

You seem to be a very angry old woman saint_doggy.

ere!, not so much of the 'old' ,young man!!! LOL

i'm not an angry woman, trust me, i'm normally very placid, but seeing this and having people associate MY beloved football club with small-minded, racist little dipsh1ts really does get my back up.

[Thedelldays]

ere!, not so much of the 'old' ,young man!!! LOL

i'm not an angry woman, trust me, i'm normally very placid, but seeing this and having people associate MY beloved football club with small-minded, racist little dipsh1ts really does get my back up.

 

 

what are your thoughts on labour voting saints supporters..?

[AndyNorthernSaints]

what are your thoughts on labour voting saints supporters..?

 

Most decent human beings and people with more than half a brain cell would not be embarrassed by fellow Saints fans being Labour, Lib Dem etc voters. Now stop being a troll.

[Thedelldays]

Most decent human beings and people with more than half a brain cell would not be embarrassed by fellow Saints fans being Labour, Lib Dem etc voters. Now stop being a troll.

 

Sitting next to Nick Griffin on the show was Jack Straw. That would be Jack Straw from Labour, the party which actively pursued, created faked documents for, told lies in support of and signed off billions of pounds for a war in Iraq. A war that killed thousand of innocents including women and children, created misery nd pain, racial hatred, opportunities for western countries to commit economic rape, and destroyed liberty for thousands of Muslims. When one good man tried to tell the truth about it, they pressured him so much it drove him to suicide.

 

.

 

 

hmmmm

[AndyNorthernSaints]

hmmmm

I forgot you don't have a brain cell.

[Thedelldays]

I forgot you don't have a brain cell.

why is that..because I agree with you..?

 

very SWF'esque

[AndyNorthernSaints]

why is that..because I agree with you..?

 

very SWF'esque

 

SWF?

[Thedelldays]

SWF?

you are the one with the brain cells...work it out

[Thedelldays]

nope

[Kadeem Hardison]

What lives in the sea and is really stupid?

[Wilko]

What lives in the sea and is really stupid?

 

Navy boys?

[miserableoldgit]

What lives in the sea and is really stupid?

A skate??

[Verbal]

SWF?

 

Socialist Workers' Front. Delldays is a Trotskyist. Surprised?

[benjii]

Sitting next to Nick Griffin on the show was Jack Straw. That would be Jack Straw from Labour, the party which actively pursued, created faked documents for, told lies in support of and signed off billions of pounds for a war in Iraq. A war that killed thousand of innocents including women and children, created misery nd pain, racial hatred, opportunities for western countries to commit economic rape, and destroyed liberty for thousands of Muslims. When one good man tried to tell the truth about it, they pressured him so much it drove him to suicide.

 

Yet here we are demonising the bloke sat next to him.

 

I have an Asian wife and mixed race kids, I don't support the BNP and I am well aware of the truths and lies about them, but I find it sad that we get things out of proportion simply by using tags such as 'racist' and 'fascist' (the latter is a term rarely understood or studied by those who use it) to demonise people. The show itself was a farce. The BBC obviously felt intimidated by the pressure groups who take it upon themselves to decide what the rest of us are allowed to see (all in the name of 'anti'-fascism, of course) but could not lose face by dropping Griffin altogether. So, they allowed the show to become a circus. At one point they asked Griffin three questions in a row then when he tried to answer one, Dimbley spoke over him and asked for the next question! What kind of 'Question Time' is that?!

 

 

Now onto Islam. Someone on here has written a piece basically equating Wahbisim with the 'down' side of Islam nd implying the rest is better. Well I've actually taken the time to read The Koran (so many apologists have not, they prefer to take a moral high ground rather than do the actual hard work) and I can't agree.

 

To be sure, most Muslims are good people. I work with Muslims and have Muslims friends. However, the religion per se is not good. Sharia Law is not good. The Koran has a whole lot of verses that should be massive cause for concern. These include anti-semitism, violence against those who leave Islam ,strong chavanisma nd numerous violent verses. Apologists will often point out that The Bible has similar problems. The reply is twofold: first, The Bible has a lot less, second, we live in a relatively secular west. We may derive our laws from Christianity but we have adapted and progressed them. Islamic societies treat the Koran as their constitution, it is, literally, the word of law. We should engage in a very careful discussion with Islamic groups in the west to ensure that Sharia Law is rejected and nobody seeks to impose out in the west. The Koran does tell its followers to spread Sharia Law.

 

Great post.

[bridge too far]

Great post.

 

But not as good as Verbal's.

[benjii]

I'm not sure if I've read Verbal's.

 

Am going out in a minute so probably won't now.

 

Anyway, the only people who came out of this badly were the Beeb IMO (and the idiot anti-fascist idiots outside).

[View From The Top]

But not as good as Verbal's.

 

The one where Verbal dimisses his views as he doesn't believe he's read the Koran?

 

Verbal's views on the BNP/EDL are as balanced as the neo-fascists he obviously, rightly, hates and he carries that attitude into everything he writes.

 

A pity as he obviously a clever bloke with an interesting insight but is so blinkered it makes him as bad as SRS.

Edited 1 November, 2009 by View From The Top