[Closed] What're the chances of this going ahead (contraversial content)

Theres an old German World War II saying

"When the English fire, we duck"
"When we fire, the English duck"
"When the Americans fire, everyone ducks"

Quack.

Read [url= http://usliberals.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=usliberals&cdn=newsissues&tm=66&f=00&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.brookings.edu/iraqindex ]this[/url] for a start, then make another statement

Jesus, can we just stick to wiki- it helps us form opinions quicker 🙄

[i]Either, you believe that US and British forces have being do nothing for the last 9 years or,
you believe had most US and British soldiers are Muslim............which one is it ? [/i]

I don't believe in either of those statements. So you would appear to be incorrect in your assertion.

I don't believe in either of those statements

O...K ........... so maybe you believe that US and British forces [i]have been[/i] very busy for the last 9 years, but that Al Qadia and the Taliban have being even busier, and have in fact managed to kill more people than the combined US and British forces - is that it ?

BTW, do you also believe that most of the 100,000+ deaths in Iraq were also carried out by Muslims ?
If that's the case, I can't imagine why the US government constantly tries to play down the civilian casualties.

This reminds of those who try to argue that all the atrocities committed by the Nazis during WW2, were if fact committed by the Soviets, the partisan, etc. .....and of course 6 million Jews never died - and those that did, were killed by the advancing Soviet army .... or whatever

Righto.
This reminds me of those who resort to ridiculous hyperbole, so I'll leave you to it.
But before I do I'll leave you the Today programme link [url] http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/default.stm [/url] about 1hr10 minutes in on iplayer for the relevant interview.

Ernie; fact remains, Iraq has never had a democratic government, see my earlier statement about the members of the assembly. What exactly did we carve Iraq out of? Oh yes; the Ottoman empire.Iraq was partitioned on tribal grounds, with a nod to a strategic layout.I would imagine the borders were not properly recognised by anybody in the middle east till the formation of the Jewish state.We were in the country for what, 50 years? Hardly makes it a member of the commonwealth does it? As for backing Saddam,we were not supporting Democracy by doing that.I stand by the suggestion Iraq has no claim on Britain.Oh, and the 1954 election was boycotted by a number of parties over claims of corruption and vote rigging.But I am sure you were aware of this before you used it as an example of a free election.Were women allowed to vote in this democratic election?
Allow me to modify my original statement, Iraq has little or no experience of democracy for one reason or another. (I will give you 30-40 years out of recorded history)Shall we agree to disagree? I fully accept I will never win an arguement with a Marxist (Although I [b]AM[/b] interested in what it is you think we owe these Countries.)

in other related news, the islam 4 uk website is top notch comedy if nothing else! (keeps crashing due to volume of traffic!) I quite liked the buckingham mosque....

.We were in the country for what, 50 years?

Oh right I see how many years do we need to interfere and meddle in the state we created for it to be our responsibility?
Genuine question how many years then?

I AM interested in what it is you think we owe these Countries

Should be on page 5 soon!!!

It's a sad reflection that many of us think that these people who are going to achieve absolutely nothing but to enrage the majority of average Brits (which is exactly what they want) by marching through this small town is acceptable purely due to collateral damage done mainly by Americans.
They are welcome to remember the civilian losses in a place more appropriate than Wooton Basset (Baghdad, Kabul, Bradford?) They may have a legal entitlement to march but it doesn't make it right. strictly speaking, labour acted within the laws in sending the forces to war. Again, doesn't make it right. Nevermind what would happen if you tried this in Saudi or Iran (they're currently killing quite a few of their own people), think what would happen in the US, it would be mayhem.

home secretary just off the phone and said he'd ban a march taking place

strictly speaking, labour acted within the laws in sending the forces to war.

Highly debatable.

duckman - for a teacher your punctuation etc is very poor, as is your grasp of history it seems.

Nevermind what would happen if you tried this in Saudi or Iran

Arghh not again? So you would prefer us to act more like the Saudi or Iranian governments then?

Backhander we are better than Saudi or Iran and allow protest especially for those we oppose as we are a democracy. To prevent them marching is anti-democratic, authoritarian and against free speech...the very reasons we criticise repressive foreign regimes.

Nevermind what would happen if you tried this in Saudi or Iran

Arghh not again? So you would prefer us to act more like the Saudi or Iranian governments then?

I agree it does feel wrong, is provactive and in poor taste but they have the right to do this. It will not help their cause one bit so why worry ...it just makes them look like nutters and allows people to further misunderstand /fear Islam. In fact if you wanted to encourage Islamaphobia this is a very good way of doing it.

And by making people less likely to listen to moderate Muslims they strengthen their own position.It will be banned on grounds of public safety.Maybe the local dss could arrange a claims interview with Mr Chowdrey(?) on the relevant morning.

This reminds me of those who resort to ridiculous hyperbole, so I'll leave you to it.

But there's no "ridiculous hyperbole" here, I'm not exaggerating [i]anything[/i].

In response to glenp's post, you very clearly suggested that the "majority" of the "thousands of innocent civilians" who have died, have been killed by Muslims. So don't leave it at that, either back up your claim, or withdraw it - where's the problem ? 😕

.

the 1954 election was boycotted by a number of parties over claims of corruption and vote rigging.But I am sure you were aware of this before you used it as an example of a free election

I gave it as an example that your claim, that Iraq has, quote : "[i]NEVER had any form of Democracy[/i]" was a false one. And as far as I am aware, the June 1954 were not "boycotted by a number of parties over claims of corruption and vote rigging" (the later ones were) In fact I believe that the opposition parties made significant gains.

Allow me to modify my original statement

Yeah that's fine, I don't have any problem with that at all - we all occasionally, on reflection, like to reconsider what we have said. But presumably you are not modifying your original statement because I was wrong when I suggested that Iraq have had some form of democracy in the past ?

I fully accept I will never win an arguement with a Marxist

I assume the "Marxist" reference was just there to have a little dig at me, on account that you were running of ideas/things to say. How is whether I am a Marxist, Tory, Fascist, Liberal, whatever, relevant to the 'facts' ? But anyway, that's not important - I'm more interested in why do you want to "win" an argument ? I'm not interested in trying to win an argument - an invariably futile excise, when it comes to politics and personal belief systems. We come to our own conclusions, based on our own personal life experiences. Not because we have "lost or won" arguments - specially ones on an internet forum. I'm simply interested in an exchange of ideas - and also seeing how well mine hold up.

It will be banned on grounds of public safety.

I'm sure that's the same reason they give for banning protests in China etc.

Why cant they just fek off home?

because they were born here joe 🙄

And by making people less likely to listen to moderate Muslims they strengthen their own position.

Forgetting the rights and wrongs about the wars etc look at it like this. If we protested in their countries at their "brave" warriors who use bags full of explosives to blow commuters up on trains or fly into buildings etc etc, we would be taken prisoner, taken as a hostage, tied to a chair and blind-folded to have our heads taken off - or we would be killled on the spot and used as propoganda!!!!! And we are supposed to allow these extremists protest in OUR COUNTRY!!!!!!!! Disgrace, an absolute disgrace!

1/ Pull the troops out.
2/ Ban Mosques in the UK
3/ Stop paying benefits to millions who live here.
4/ Use the money saved to find alternatives to oil.
5/ Let the Jews and Arabs have a scrap an almighty scrap.

Thats it, job done the whole things fixed and we can start talking about something more intresting than these beardy tits.

starseven - Member
1/ Pull the troops out.
2/ Ban Mosques in the UK
3/ Stop paying benefits to millions who live here.
4/ Use the money saved to find alternatives to oil.
5/ Let the Jews and Arabs have a scrap an almighty scrap.

Thats it, job done the whole things fixed and we can start talking about something more intresting than these beardy tits.

Oh my..... 😯

LOL

If we protested in their countries

you mean the UK?

Why dont we have a full scale riot Bloody Sunday stylee and spend the next thirty years whining on about it and spend £ 184,9 million of tax payers money over ten years and still not have any report!

Meanwhile we cant even grit the ****ing roads!!

Oh and what about a public inquiry into Warrenpoint? Mountbatten? Enniskillen, Teebane, Corry Square, Omagh? etc?

Now thats sensible!

One thing you can be sure of the terrorists will always be appeased.

In response to glenp's post, you very clearly suggested that the "majority" of the "thousands of innocent civilians" who have died, have been killed by Muslims. So don't leave it at that, either back up your claim, or withdraw it - where's the problem ?

Claims to the effect that the majority of deaths are at the hands of Muslims, not our troops, abound - my point is that we cannot just leave it at that because a large part of our tactic is to co-opt factions within the country to help us.

Ernie; If Democracy is Government for the people by the people, then Iraq has never had this.I modified my statement to allow for the idea that women do not vote in most of the ME, however if 30 years out of 4000 odd makes a democratic nation which was brutally crushed by the empires...err cavalry boot then so be it.Since you seem to be selective about which election in 1954, so shall I.The 1954 election favoured the Communist party in Iraq because they were in many areas the only party left to vote for.The Government which won the second election of 1954 then proceeded to suspend all other political parties,the "association ordinance" did they not? So one election and two months of liberal government a democracy does not make IMO.
That was not meant to be a dig about Marxism.I share a base with two ardent Marxists, who kind of like talking, and will continue to debate subjects such as this, sound familiar?

I'm bored now!

[u]All[/u] religion sucks!

THREAD CLOSED

Spongebob - Member
All religion sucks!

POSTED 15 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

What even the Buddhists??!?!!

Budhism is officially the best religion, as voted by you in 2009.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/onecity/2009/07/freedom-from-religion-buddhism-wins-best-religion-in-the-world-award.html

You are not required to blow people up or touch up small children. I may join, do I get extra time of work?

starseven...

Budhism: [required to blow people]
Maybe I wont try Budhism then!
Just thought I'd throw in a misquote as it seems to be the thing to do?

Nearly on page 6.

e_l -Don't know what you're talking about ....... You very clearly did not read correctly.

Well I guess it's always possible that I did not read something correctly.

Although in this case, I think that's it probably you that misread, ie :

[i]"In [u]response[/u] to glenp's post, you very clearly suggested ....."[/i]

.

That was not meant to be a dig about Marxism.

There's nothing wrong with having 'a dig' at Marxism, and I never accused you of doing so. I accused you of bringing Marx into the discussion for no other reason other than to have a dig at me - presumably because you were struggling to make a relevant point.

.

I'm bored now!

+ 1

is this still rumbling on??

what a load of twollox there will be more reporters than demonstrtaors for sure

the same way 20 guys with a few placards shouting at the soldiers last time was portrayed as some kind of million man march

more fabricated non-news from our fine journalistic institutions

Cheers ernie_lynch!
At last someone quoted me.... page 6, bring it on!

I'm surprised this Choudary fella's got the time to organise this march and do all his radio/TV interviews what with him looking for work and that.

http://order-order.com/2010/01/06/mad-mullah-gets-more-than-frontline-soldier/

<runs away>

This choudary fella is as dispicable as they come a leach and a sponger who through his narrow minded ideals preaches and incites hatred, I hope he watched the programme last night on ITV showing NHS workers going out to work in the front line in Afghanistan that depicted a gorgous 5 year old Afghan girl getting one of her arms blown of by a suicide bomber who killed another child and injured numerous others, what does he say about muslims killing & maming innocent children and adults, non of the coalition forces where injured in that attack. He should be sent out to Afghanistan to see it for himself.