Balanced Question Time panel tonight - of course not!
Discussion
Mark Benson said:
Of course it's part of Islam. An embarrassing part for most Muslims but to say "It 's not Islam" is to deny the roots of ISIL.
Stupid woman.
To say ISIS has nothing to do with Islam is just as silly as saying it has everything to do with Islam. It has now become fashionable to shout "ISIS have nothing to do with Islam". Even politicians like Boris Johnson now speak the same politically correct language. A bit different to what he was saying post London bombings when he was just a low profile MP.Stupid woman.
Boris in 2005 said:
We — non-Muslims — cannot solve the problem; we cannot brainwash them out of their fundamentalist beliefs. The Islamicists last week horribly and irrefutably asserted the supreme importance of that faith, overriding all worldly considerations, and it will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Muslims who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain. That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.
To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?
It is time that we started to insist that the Muslim Council of Great Britain, and all the preachers in all the mosques, extremist or moderate, began to acculturate themselves more closely to what we think of as British values. We can’t force it on them, but we should begin to demand change in a way that is both friendly and outspoken, and by way of a first gesture the entire Muslim clergy might announce, loud and clear, for the benefit of all Bradford-born chipshop boys, that there is no eternal blessedness for the suicide bombers, there are no 72 virgins, and that the whole thing is a con and a fraud upon impressionable minds. That might be a first step towards what could be called the re-Britannification of Britain.
http://new.spectator.co.uk/2005/07/just-dont-call-it-war/To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?
It is time that we started to insist that the Muslim Council of Great Britain, and all the preachers in all the mosques, extremist or moderate, began to acculturate themselves more closely to what we think of as British values. We can’t force it on them, but we should begin to demand change in a way that is both friendly and outspoken, and by way of a first gesture the entire Muslim clergy might announce, loud and clear, for the benefit of all Bradford-born chipshop boys, that there is no eternal blessedness for the suicide bombers, there are no 72 virgins, and that the whole thing is a con and a fraud upon impressionable minds. That might be a first step towards what could be called the re-Britannification of Britain.
The first 100 seconds are the most impressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oONoFFK5H0k
I expect the Police will be investigating Andrew Neil for anti islamist thoughts or somesuch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oONoFFK5H0k
I expect the Police will be investigating Andrew Neil for anti islamist thoughts or somesuch
desolate said:
Halb said:
Gorgeous George speaking sense there.
A breath of fresh air and not what I was expecting at all.Andy Zarse said:
desolate said:
Halb said:
Gorgeous George speaking sense there.
A breath of fresh air and not what I was expecting at all.hidetheelephants said:
Halb said:
Blackpuddin said:
Yevgeny Sunovabich is quite a smooth dude all round.
Is that beard suspiciously uniformly black? He is very coiffured.desolate said:
A breath of fresh air and not what I was expecting at all.
Indeed.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8XwEhlH7Is
shoestring7 said:
It was a terrible panel: no-one could respond in any sensible way to the Paris attacks. The BBC management must realise they've spread the talent too thin- time for the show to go monthly I feel.
SS7
I agree, seeing how ill informed, naive with almost a fantasy land view that Burnham and Soubry hold, I now understand how UK policy is such a utter confused mess. SS7
A quick summary that Burnham and Soubry will understand.
Let's fight / bomb ISIS (they are real baddies, even worse than Al Qaeda, so are proper bad baddies) but also fight Asaad (He is semi bad too, but partially good as he is fighting ISIS), Putin is moderately bad, but he is now looking a little like a goodie, but he has lots of BIG weapons so we cannot bomb him. Iran is also a baddie but are now sort of goodies as they are fighting ISIS, Hezbollah are baddies, but also sort of goodies as they are also fighting ISIS. The Islamist fundamentalist moderates are sort of goodies but no one seems to know who they actually are, and no one knows if they are just ISIS with better PR. Saudi are goodies but actually sneaky baddies and also chop off heads. America is bombing ISIS, so goodies, but supplying weapons to pretty much everyone, so they do not care who wins.
I suspect the above is the level of discussion you can expect from these two intellectual heavyweights. Depressing.
QuantumTokoloshi said:
I agree, seeing how ill informed, naive with almost a fantasy land view that Burnham and Soubry hold, I now understand how UK policy is such a utter confused mess.
A quick summary that Burnham and Soubry will understand.
Let's fight / bomb ISIS (they are real baddies, even worse than Al Qaeda, so are proper bad baddies) but also fight Asaad (He is semi bad too, but partially good as he is fighting ISIS), Putin is moderately bad, but he is now looking a little like a goodie, but he has lots of BIG weapons so we cannot bomb him. Iran is also a baddie but are now sort of goodies as they are fighting ISIS, Hezbollah are baddies, but also sort of goodies as they are also fighting ISIS. The Islamist fundamentalist moderates are sort of goodies but no one seems to know who they actually are, and no one knows if they are just ISIS with better PR. Saudi are goodies but actually sneaky baddies and also chop off heads. America is bombing ISIS, so goodies, but supplying weapons to pretty much everyone, so they do not care who wins.
It plays well to a particular sort of individual. Check out the other threads in this forum, it matches well some of the posts I've read.
Sometimes I just wanna retire from humanity.
I suspect the above is the level of discussion you can expect from these two intellectual heavyweights. Depressing.
A quick summary that Burnham and Soubry will understand.
Let's fight / bomb ISIS (they are real baddies, even worse than Al Qaeda, so are proper bad baddies) but also fight Asaad (He is semi bad too, but partially good as he is fighting ISIS), Putin is moderately bad, but he is now looking a little like a goodie, but he has lots of BIG weapons so we cannot bomb him. Iran is also a baddie but are now sort of goodies as they are fighting ISIS, Hezbollah are baddies, but also sort of goodies as they are also fighting ISIS. The Islamist fundamentalist moderates are sort of goodies but no one seems to know who they actually are, and no one knows if they are just ISIS with better PR. Saudi are goodies but actually sneaky baddies and also chop off heads. America is bombing ISIS, so goodies, but supplying weapons to pretty much everyone, so they do not care who wins.
It plays well to a particular sort of individual. Check out the other threads in this forum, it matches well some of the posts I've read.
Sometimes I just wanna retire from humanity.
I suspect the above is the level of discussion you can expect from these two intellectual heavyweights. Depressing.
Halb said:
George has always had a way with words, but that is probably the best interview on Syria, terrorism etc. I have seen by any UK or US / European politician. Cogent and accurate.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff