"England's Green and Prejudiced Land" - S. Times Mag, p16
Discussion
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain? I can't recall ever seeing images of Islamic military aeroplanes flying over Britain, or Islamic warships off the coast of Britain at any time in our history.
So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
All my life i've been told that islam represents a threat to us, but so far it has only seemed to amount to a few bombs on buses - it hardly amounts to B52s pounding the s
t out of us, does it?
We don't like the use of the word jihadi and i think most western people liken the use of the word to a threat. I'm sure people from eastern lands liken the word 'crusade' in a similar light. Indeed they use the word 'crusaders' against us to this day.
I just think it might help the situation if we respect each others sensitivities. It might also help if one day we stop gallivanting in foreign lands under one pretext or another.
You might as well ask how close did the USSR or Nazi Germany, or the Kaiser, or Napoleon come to conquering Britain?So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
All my life i've been told that islam represents a threat to us, but so far it has only seemed to amount to a few bombs on buses - it hardly amounts to B52s pounding the s
t out of us, does it?We don't like the use of the word jihadi and i think most western people liken the use of the word to a threat. I'm sure people from eastern lands liken the word 'crusade' in a similar light. Indeed they use the word 'crusaders' against us to this day.
I just think it might help the situation if we respect each others sensitivities. It might also help if one day we stop gallivanting in foreign lands under one pretext or another.
In these differing times there was different levels of threat, we could pretend that Spain lost her fight for independence from the Caliphate, perhaps the Armada would have sailed under a different flag, and maybe it would not have met bad weather?
Alternative history aside, a nations security and interests - especially our own which relies heavily on international trade, both in the past and today, we have interests beyond our borders.
In modern times post the blood bath of WW1 there were many who argued for an isolationist policy - take the American situation, Japan believed America had no appetite for war.
911 happened because Clinton didn't tackle Osama in the Sudan when he had the opportunity, the islamo-fascist gamble was America ( like Spain after Madrid train bombing ) would pull back.
in short geographically we maybe an Island, but economically we are not, to think our interests end at the white cliffs of dover is blinkered and ignores our long long history of international trading.
If you want to see what the Chinese sponsored islamic governance looks like, just consider the Sudan.
rudecherub said:
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain? I can't recall ever seeing images of Islamic military aeroplanes flying over Britain, or Islamic warships off the coast of Britain at any time in our history.
So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
All my life i've been told that islam represents a threat to us, but so far it has only seemed to amount to a few bombs on buses - it hardly amounts to B52s pounding the st out of us, does it?
We don't like the use of the word jihadi and i think most western people liken the use of the word to a threat. I'm sure people from eastern lands liken the word 'crusade' in a similar light. Indeed they use the word 'crusaders' against us to this day.
I just think it might help the situation if we respect each others sensitivities. It might also help if one day we stop gallivanting in foreign lands under one pretext or another.
You might as well ask how close did the USSR or Nazi Germany, or the Kaiser, or Napoleon come to conquering Britain?So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
All my life i've been told that islam represents a threat to us, but so far it has only seemed to amount to a few bombs on buses - it hardly amounts to B52s pounding the s
t out of us, does it?We don't like the use of the word jihadi and i think most western people liken the use of the word to a threat. I'm sure people from eastern lands liken the word 'crusade' in a similar light. Indeed they use the word 'crusaders' against us to this day.
I just think it might help the situation if we respect each others sensitivities. It might also help if one day we stop gallivanting in foreign lands under one pretext or another.
In these differing times there was different levels of threat, we could pretend that Spain lost her fight for independence from the Caliphate, perhaps the Armada would have sailed under a different flag, and maybe it would not have met bad weather?
Alternative history aside, a nations security and interests - especially our own which relies heavily on international trade, both in the past and today, we have interests beyond our borders.
In modern times post the blood bath of WW1 there were many who argued for an isolationist policy - take the American situation, Japan believed America had no appetite for war.
911 happened because Clinton didn't tackle Osama in the Sudan when he had the opportunity, the islamo-fascist gamble was America ( like Spain after Madrid train bombing ) would pull back.
in short geographically we maybe an Island, but economically we are not, to think our interests end at the white cliffs of dover is blinkered and ignores our long long history of international trading.
If you want to see what the Chinese sponsored islamic governance looks like, just consider the Sudan.
So were all crusades a force for good against evil? My understanding of the catholic church is not a positive one - i don't see the catholic church as a representation of 'good' in any way.
I can't remember the dates now and i can't be bothered to look, but at one point in the middle ages one of the popes attempted to instigate a crusade against Britain, which garnered little support. Had it happened though, would that crusade have been a righteous one as well, or would that particular individual crusade have been wrong?
rudecherub said:
The word crusade has been used in many contexts over the years, crusade against drink driving, or crusade for women's rights, to stop using this term, because a group of people wish to rewrite history to portray themselves as the historical victim rather than the aggressor is to pander to the worst of human nature.
Agreed, it's abhorrent.The article has really irritated me. I am mixed race and my family came to live in England 20 years ago. We were in a town which was predominantly 'white', my mum (being the foreign one) has been treated differently and has been subjected to what I like to think of as curiosity.
Over the years more people from different races have moved there and it is a much more multi-racial town. She has had difficulty making friends with parents at school but that was not because of the colour of her skin but for their varying interests. It has taken her a while to be accepted in the community but now is a very much loved and appreciated member. But I suppose all of the negative experiences she has had she could attribute to racism!
Oddly enough the only place she has ever received racist attacks have been in central London!
People are wary and curious of the unfamiliar, that does not make them racist.
Over the years more people from different races have moved there and it is a much more multi-racial town. She has had difficulty making friends with parents at school but that was not because of the colour of her skin but for their varying interests. It has taken her a while to be accepted in the community but now is a very much loved and appreciated member. But I suppose all of the negative experiences she has had she could attribute to racism!
Oddly enough the only place she has ever received racist attacks have been in central London!
People are wary and curious of the unfamiliar, that does not make them racist.
Perhaps 'Crusade' justifies (for the aggressor) an attack on another party through the misguided view of fear and the resultant requirement of self preservation - let us remove religion from the description.
If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
Asterix said:
Perhaps 'Crusade' justifies (for the aggressor) an attack on another party through the misguided view of fear and the resultant requirement of self preservation - let us remove religion from the description.
If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
Why not be a racial jihadist then?If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
I've no doubt one of the many intentions of the crusades was indeed to preserve racial purity.
heebeegeetee said:
Asterix said:
Perhaps 'Crusade' justifies (for the aggressor) an attack on another party through the misguided view of fear and the resultant requirement of self preservation - let us remove religion from the description.
If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
Why not be a racial jihadist then?If that is the case, then my use of it in describing the article writer as a 'racial crusader' becomes more apt.
I've no doubt one of the many intentions of the crusades was indeed to preserve racial purity.
Ok - so lets find a word for someone, or a group, that gets on their high horse for little or no reason and creates animosity because it suits their political or social agenda.
Jasandjules said:
Willie Dee said:
I too think that because something as abhorrent as racism happens else where, people should not bring it up in this country.
I won't disagree with that. But it is already rather frequently brought up in this country as it stands, is it not? heebeegeetee said:
That's all well and good but moves us a long way away from the tpoic - the use of the word crusade.
So were all crusades a force for good against evil? My understanding of the catholic church is not a positive one - i don't see the catholic church as a representation of 'good' in any way.
I can't remember the dates now and i can't be bothered to look, but at one point in the middle ages one of the popes attempted to instigate a crusade against Britain, which garnered little support. Had it happened though, would that crusade have been a righteous one as well, or would that particular individual crusade have been wrong?
The Catholic Church is a trans national organisation with considerable political strength and economic might, you could compare it to a major international company - or a nation state, with good and bad examples of persons and policy, your mileage may vary.So were all crusades a force for good against evil? My understanding of the catholic church is not a positive one - i don't see the catholic church as a representation of 'good' in any way.
I can't remember the dates now and i can't be bothered to look, but at one point in the middle ages one of the popes attempted to instigate a crusade against Britain, which garnered little support. Had it happened though, would that crusade have been a righteous one as well, or would that particular individual crusade have been wrong?
But to dismiss the whole as bad, is IMO over simplistic, that said I'm not a fan, I'm in the loosest sense an 'old school Protestant', ie I believe that I should be able to read stuff myself and make my own mind up about it.
Why are you trying to make crusade out to be good or bad, it's just what it is a word used to describe a campaign of action in general, and in particular to describe the historic actions of Medieval Europe.
A Crusade can be bad, a Crusade can be good, depending on your attitude, if you're opposed to female emancipation then the suffragettes crusade for the vote would have been bad in your eyes...
I'm not making a sweeping moral assumptions ie all things labeled crusade are good, however unlike Jihad, crusade has taken on a wider meaning, so that for example you can crusade against injustice without religion, just as you can wear the emblem of the red cross without believing that God was hung on one.
Perhaps in time Jihad will be used in a similar way, I don't mind, I don't have a problem with someone saying I'm waging a jihad on injustice for example.
It just boils down to it being a word in general parlance, which unlike other offensive insults is not directed at anyone in particular.
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain? I can't recall ever seeing images of Islamic military aeroplanes flying over Britain, or Islamic warships off the coast of Britain at any time in our history.
So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
Very large numbers of English and European people where taken as slaves to the east between the 14th and 19th centuries. It was one of the factors that prompted the expansion of the royal navy as towns and ships were ransacked and their people enslaved.So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
They moved next door to an "arch-racist" (who never caused them any trouble but, uh, would have been really racist if he had...)
He was "devasted" when his son's mate mentioned his son had big nostrils, clearly believing that his kid should be exempt from normal schoolboy banter on account of not being white. Rather racist of him, believing his son is somehow superior, but that's to be expected from his type.
He found it racist that a mother should confront her son as she believed he'd hurt her own kid. Using his unassailable erudition in these matters, he is immediately "clear" it was because his son is mixed race and the woman is ignorant and vindictive and racist, despite no evidence whatsoever to suggest this. We don't understand this because we are ignorant too. And racist.
When someone tries to welcome his family to the town by saying there was no racism, that's just being ignorant, not simply being pleasant and welcoming.
He criticises the town he's moved to then desperately searches the forums to see if he's provoked any racist comment. He can't find anything so he cites someone telling him to fk off back to London as somehow being racist, when anyone of a right mind would tell him the same thing, racist or not.
He had a complaint against the teacher and he automatically assumed that the teacher would not have treated a white kid the same way. Again, his own lentil-fuelled paranoia.
A teacher mentions that his daughter's hair is "frizzy" and this joker says "that teacher's comment was racist". Of course, it couldn't have been that the teacher thought his daughter's hair was frizzy
One kid calls another "chocolate brown" and apparently that's racist too, and not a kid describing her colour (before being infected by this PC insanity that means you can't make a simple inoffensive comment without being typecast as ignorant, biggoted or racist)
When someone mentions the word "coloured" (no doubt confused, like any normal person, by the constantly changing idea of how to describe a, er, non-white person without being "racist") that's "terrible".
He ends up by talking about when a class is told to draw a portrait and write
a poem about "a black icon", citing this as a great step forwards. Ironically this is the only even vaguely racist incident in the article - unless of course there was a task to draw a "white icon" at some point... Yeah, thought not.
He was "devasted" when his son's mate mentioned his son had big nostrils, clearly believing that his kid should be exempt from normal schoolboy banter on account of not being white. Rather racist of him, believing his son is somehow superior, but that's to be expected from his type.
He found it racist that a mother should confront her son as she believed he'd hurt her own kid. Using his unassailable erudition in these matters, he is immediately "clear" it was because his son is mixed race and the woman is ignorant and vindictive and racist, despite no evidence whatsoever to suggest this. We don't understand this because we are ignorant too. And racist.
When someone tries to welcome his family to the town by saying there was no racism, that's just being ignorant, not simply being pleasant and welcoming.
He criticises the town he's moved to then desperately searches the forums to see if he's provoked any racist comment. He can't find anything so he cites someone telling him to f
k off back to London as somehow being racist, when anyone of a right mind would tell him the same thing, racist or not.He had a complaint against the teacher and he automatically assumed that the teacher would not have treated a white kid the same way. Again, his own lentil-fuelled paranoia.
A teacher mentions that his daughter's hair is "frizzy" and this joker says "that teacher's comment was racist". Of course, it couldn't have been that the teacher thought his daughter's hair was frizzy
One kid calls another "chocolate brown" and apparently that's racist too, and not a kid describing her colour (before being infected by this PC insanity that means you can't make a simple inoffensive comment without being typecast as ignorant, biggoted or racist)
When someone mentions the word "coloured" (no doubt confused, like any normal person, by the constantly changing idea of how to describe a, er, non-white person without being "racist") that's "terrible".
He ends up by talking about when a class is told to draw a portrait and write
a poem about "a black icon", citing this as a great step forwards. Ironically this is the only even vaguely racist incident in the article - unless of course there was a task to draw a "white icon" at some point... Yeah, thought not.
spikeyhead said:
However, having been out in Leighton Buzzard a few times, it's not unheard of to be given a kicking just for coming from the next village.
Well, if you will go there with your horseless cart, talking into a small box with flashing lights and your lardy-da ways what do you expect? 
Just take plenty of coloured beads and hand mirrors to buy them off next time
Racism is genetically engineered into all of us so as we are wary of strangers. It is a basic survival instinct.
The point is that we are sufficiently evolved and educated to be able to mentally and conciously over-ride this effect. Sadly, not all people are.
It is just fear born from ignorance and weakness in modern society.
Colin 1985 said:
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain? I can't recall ever seeing images of Islamic military aeroplanes flying over Britain, or Islamic warships off the coast of Britain at any time in our history.
So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
Very large numbers of English and European people where taken as slaves to the east between the 14th and 19th centuries. It was one of the factors that prompted the expansion of the royal navy as towns and ships were ransacked and their people enslaved.So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
After reading the article it would appear this guy has a seriously large chip on his shoulder. It's as though he is actively looking for ways to be and wants to be offended.
Also he lost me at "We decided to move here because multiracial London had not been the perfect place to bring up our family either". Also, describing November 5th celebrations as "anti-Catholic bigotry". Sorry but the guy is a complete prick.
Also he lost me at "We decided to move here because multiracial London had not been the perfect place to bring up our family either". Also, describing November 5th celebrations as "anti-Catholic bigotry". Sorry but the guy is a complete prick.
Edited by CaptainSlow on Monday 9th August 14:49
rudecherub said:
Why are you trying to make crusade out to be good or bad, it's just what it is a word used to describe a campaign of action in general, and in particular to describe the historic actions of Medieval Europe.
A Crusade can be bad, a Crusade can be good, depending on your attitude, if you're opposed to female emancipation then the suffragettes crusade for the vote would have been bad in your eyes...
I absolutely agree, but that doesn't mean the word isn't a sensitive issue in many parts of the world, and that the word isn't used thoughtlessly. I'm sure most people use the word without a thought, but for a great many people in the world it possibly has an equivalence to 'holocaust' or 'clearances'.A Crusade can be bad, a Crusade can be good, depending on your attitude, if you're opposed to female emancipation then the suffragettes crusade for the vote would have been bad in your eyes...
In short, the English language is a wonderful one and i'm sure we can come up with a better word. I just think it would help if we as Englishmen or Britains had more thought for our past, and that other people might not agree with our version of events.
stitched said:
JagLover said:
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain?
The Arabs/moors reached central france in 732 and the Turks reached Vienna in 1529. Shame on you.
ThePainter said:
Colin 1985 said:
heebeegeetee said:
So how close did Islam come to conquering Britain? I can't recall ever seeing images of Islamic military aeroplanes flying over Britain, or Islamic warships off the coast of Britain at any time in our history.
So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
Very large numbers of English and European people where taken as slaves to the east between the 14th and 19th centuries. It was one of the factors that prompted the expansion of the royal navy as towns and ships were ransacked and their people enslaved.So how big was the threat to us, or indeed western Europe?
Wiki gives some quick sources
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade and;
perhaps 1.5 million Europeans and Americans were enslaved in Islamic North Africa between 1530 and 1780?,
And here ;
BBC ;
there are plenty more on google.
heebeegeetee said:
rudecherub said:
Why are you trying to make crusade out to be good or bad, it's just what it is a word used to describe a campaign of action in general, and in particular to describe the historic actions of Medieval Europe.
A Crusade can be bad, a Crusade can be good, depending on your attitude, if you're opposed to female emancipation then the suffragettes crusade for the vote would have been bad in your eyes...
I absolutely agree, but that doesn't mean the word isn't a sensitive issue in many parts of the world, and that the word isn't used thoughtlessly.A Crusade can be bad, a Crusade can be good, depending on your attitude, if you're opposed to female emancipation then the suffragettes crusade for the vote would have been bad in your eyes...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff