Tip of The Iceberg - The Beginning Of The End For Britain ?
Discussion
Tartan Pixie said:
Would be interested in Carmonk's answer too as it's a good question.
The problem is that we are not told what these values are that he believes should be forced upon all Britons and how that will be done. And nor are we told how he will eradicate Islam from the minds of its followers.
It is at this point you begin to realise that you may well be corresponding with the other side of the same coin.
Especially once the excuses and vitriol start to appear in the defense and evasion of explaining how this new British order is to be implemented. Defenses such us ' I asked a question first, you must answer that' and 'asking for contrary evidence and then ignoring it'.
Someone who believes their path so devoutly that they wish to eradicate the thoughts and beliefs of one group is not going to stop there. If their ultimate cause is to install their belief system on all then their actions have to be all encompassing.
You can't ultimately rationalise with an unhealthy mind.
I am however intrigued to know more of the mystical belief system and whether it has been made up by one troubled mind or part of a group and whether this group is recruiting 'jihadis' to its cause and preying on the weak, angry and displaced for its foot soldiers.
Wars and major conflicts throughout history are simple land arguments. The rise since the 80's of Islamic based conflict was due to the arming of Mujahadeen to fight the Russian land grab in Afghanistan, before that the conflict with Israel provided much of the momentum around islamic jihad, a simple land battle. Osama Bin Laden's major beef was about the use by the US Airforce of land in Saudi, the fella in norway has a (dillusional) belief that someone is trying to take his countries land.
The 100's of years Europe was at war, ending in 1945, were essentially about land and control of territory by monarchs and ruling elites, although often mistakenly characterised as religious conflict.
Wars are never fought on theological ideals, at least I can't think of one.
The 100's of years Europe was at war, ending in 1945, were essentially about land and control of territory by monarchs and ruling elites, although often mistakenly characterised as religious conflict.
Wars are never fought on theological ideals, at least I can't think of one.
mattnunn said:
Wars and major conflicts throughout history are simple land arguments. The rise since the 80's of Islamic based conflict was due to the arming of Mujahadeen to fight the Russian land grab in Afghanistan, before that the conflict with Israel provided much of the momentum around islamic jihad, a simple land battle. Osama Bin Laden's major beef was about the use by the US Airforce of land in Saudi, the fella in norway has a (dillusional) belief that someone is trying to take his countries land.
The 100's of years Europe was at war, ending in 1945, were essentially about land and control of territory by monarchs and ruling elites, although often mistakenly characterised as religious conflict.
Wars are never fought on theological ideals, at least I can't think of one.
It's a mechanism to bond a society on an area of land. It does so by retaining core tribal beliefs (such as women as cattle, nailing children etc) while at the same time implanting and enforcing a replacement belief system. The 100's of years Europe was at war, ending in 1945, were essentially about land and control of territory by monarchs and ruling elites, although often mistakenly characterised as religious conflict.
Wars are never fought on theological ideals, at least I can't think of one.
Once achieved you have a tool of control that if maintained is better than money. You can defend and expand your borders through reference to this belief mechanism.
But its power ultimately lies in keeping your population uneducated and at the same time removing free thinkers.
No historical attempts to 'eradicate' a religion have ever succeeded without having another 'religion' to enforce on top and replace with.
And where a 'religion' loses its power over a population due to eduction etc the authorities will seek replacement mechanisms to retain the controlling factor of fear in its population but at the same instance the society becomes susceptible to other religions that instigators would see take control of us and yield control.
A society of humans will always be bonded by a belief system, this is irrefutable. What we have to be wary of is the agenda of those who wish to transplant the indigenous mechanism with their own.
And within those groups you will have the militant radicals. Some will be voiceless foot soldiers brainwashed to carry out the work of the system and others will be intelligent and sent to spread the word.
Both are dangerous and a society has to face up to how to deal with these people and that in its own will be a test of the residual system that the society is operating under.
Tartan Pixie said:
DonkeyApple said:
thinfourth2 said:
How on earth do you intend to do this?
how can you kill an idea?
Its a great idea but its basically impossible
Tax it? It works for CO2.how can you kill an idea?
Its a great idea but its basically impossible
Would be interested in Carmonk's answer too as it's a good question.
The reason I don't respond to TF2 is that he's a troll and not interested in discussion. You can see this by reading the thread where he himself admitted he didn't know or care about the subject and wasn't taking it seriously. I don't respond to DA because he's hysterical and racist. He slipped up and like others before him, revealed his true colours. Hypocritical of course that he accuses me of fascism but I'm happy that nobody who's actually read the thread would give his hysteria any credence.
This topic was bound to be controversial from the off. The debate has been epic to follow, and certainly opened my eyes on a number of occasions. It was also an information overload and has taken quite a lot of time to dissect and understand.
If we are getting to the point where there's nothing left to debate without winding each other up, then let's leave it here. After all, 38 pages is an excellent result without a padlock anywhere in sight.
If anyone has anything more to add to the debate, then by all means feel to continue; I just don't want to see this much effort disappear into a typical PH slagging match which would result in a thread closure.
As you were
If we are getting to the point where there's nothing left to debate without winding each other up, then let's leave it here. After all, 38 pages is an excellent result without a padlock anywhere in sight.
If anyone has anything more to add to the debate, then by all means feel to continue; I just don't want to see this much effort disappear into a typical PH slagging match which would result in a thread closure.
As you were
carmonk said:
Tartan Pixie said:
DonkeyApple said:
thinfourth2 said:
How on earth do you intend to do this?
how can you kill an idea?
Its a great idea but its basically impossible
Tax it? It works for CO2.how can you kill an idea?
Its a great idea but its basically impossible
Would be interested in Carmonk's answer too as it's a good question.
The reason I don't respond to TF2 is that he's a troll and not interested in discussion. You can see this by reading the thread where he himself admitted he didn't know or care about the subject and wasn't taking it seriously. I don't respond to DA because he's hysterical and racist. He slipped up and like others before him, revealed his true colours. Hypocritical of course that he accuses me of fascism but I'm happy that nobody who's actually read the thread would give his hysteria any credence.
Why don't you stop with the accusations and name calling and actually answer the questions:
How do you plan to eradicate Islam and what are the values that you wish to enforce on British society.
And why don't you stop with the name calling, stop telling people that you have already answered these questions when you haven't and stop back tracking.
Or, just go away and pitch your agenda somewhere else.
we could start our own project Orion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nucl...
... and launch from bradford
1000 nukes may deal a small ammount of damage lol
... and launch from bradford
1000 nukes may deal a small ammount of damage lol
LordFlathead said:
If we are getting to the point where there's nothing left to debate without winding each other up, then let's leave it here. After all, 38 pages is an excellent result without a padlock anywhere in sight.
I think we're actually just getting to the core of the problem. The video in the OP is distasteful by almost any standard, not just because of the chants calling for people to be killed but because the UK has its own brand of hatred in the form of fascism and the two feed in to each other.These are the extremes however they are extreme versions of ideas adhered to by far more moderate people. Carmonk has already identified that a number of 'moderate' muslims support terror against the UK, however ask yourself how many indigenous white people in the UK would agree with the following statement:
Inflammatory statement not to be taken out of context said:
All UK muslims should be deported to the middle east regardless of the brutality that would be involved in such an operation.
I'd guess quite a few, certainly more than would admit to it in a public arena. The problem is that these views are difficult to air in public so people who hold them become disenfranchised, leading ultimately to violence.Even in this civilized corner of the internet known as PH it has descended in to people calling each other fascists/trolls which does nothing but hamper debate. If people as articulate as thinfourth2, DonkeyApple and Carmonk can not find the language to communicate effectively then what hope is there for your average reader of the sun newspaper?
Yet this communication is exactly what's required and fortunately people are stepping up to the plate. Someone posted a stat about how many muslims are proud of Britain and I would argue that these people are some of the best ambassadors you will ever find regarding the values enshrined in UK common law. Nothing preaches like the newly converted.
Similarly people like Carmonk or Pat Condell are giving a voice to (and thus enfranchising) a large part of the UK population who would otherwise have no voice and be forced to turn to extremists like the BNP.
In this age of migration where all cultures are trying to come to terms with foreign influence I'll leave you with this little thought - The most dangerous words in any language are 'I am' because you will never find anyone more adherent to your own values than yourself.
Tartan Pixie said:
[snip]
Even in this civilized corner of the internet known as PH it has descended in to people calling each other fascists/trolls which does nothing but hamper debate........................
[snip]
It's called Godwin's LawEven in this civilized corner of the internet known as PH it has descended in to people calling each other fascists/trolls which does nothing but hamper debate........................
[snip]
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff