Hurrah for Mr Agreeable!

Quite right and well said. Encapsulates my views very well. Obviously being agreeable is much more persuasive than my rather less than subtle “My Arse!” approach, but hey it takes all sorts to spin a wheel.

Yes apparently anyone who expresses any concern about any aspect of Islam is a bigot.

Unfortunately that statement is both very frequently true, and also an often used justification trotted out by racist bigots for their vile filth. (That comment is not aimed at you personally Grumm) Generally its used when folk comment without any knowledge, understanding or acknowledgement of the wider truths, and usually on a VERY narrow spectrum of issues which the vast majority of Muslims find abhorrent, as if they were representative of the whole faith.

You also raise an interesting point in respect of Catholicism. You are right in that respect. But, do you think that might be because bigots don’t see catholicism as some threat to their Aryan maculinity, (given that locally in the UK its largely a white working/middle class religion), rather than that point being some sort of justification for Islamophobia.

Poxy forum!! Double post

What that says Grumm is that the alarmist headlines and so forth are exactly that and not in any way reflective of the Muslim in the street. Much as Northern Ireland was personified in the press as a hot bed of Terrorism for 30 or 40 years, when in fact a few hundred on all sides, perhaps less, had any involvement.

These alarmist articles are propoganda nothing more. They have already succeeded in making the term Sharia Law to be a terrible threat to our Western virginity, all the while overlooking the simple fact that its the oldest legal system in the world, has been around successfully for 1000’s of years, is the basis for much of our own legal system and in the majority of cases the excesses are limited to a few areas where the interpretation is corrupted and taken to extremes.

The argumnents you are putting forward are architypal of those which as I said before start with the phrase “I’m not a racist but….”. (And before the Religion/Racism thing erupts again, could I just ask the simple question Anti-Semitism : Racism or Religious persecution??….. Don’t bother I won’t respond to that point.)

Grumm : This in essence is my whole point of disagreement

but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is automatically wrong in everything he says.

I also have studied at a decent level, and I have to say that I do not agree that a flawed source has value. If anything it is the opposite. As soon as you know its flawed it should at the very least be qualified if used at all.

Regarding the Policy Exchange, its a right wing think tank, favoured by centre to far right. I believe the chinless wonder pays them some credence. Denis MacEoin, is one of their sources. For that reason much of what they have to say on the subject of Islam is quite simply fundamentally flawed.

This sort of Sharia Law thing has been going the rounds in my world for some considerable time. I regularly receive chain emails from people that I would have hoped knew better, but clearly don’t. Dear old Denis is frequently quoted in them, and taken at face value, ” because he’s an academic”. As I said above, there is no need to debate it, a few seconds thought would immediately discredit the notion. For the following reasons. Firstly for Sharia Law to hold any sway in this country it would require not only an act of Parliament, that act would have to go through The House of Lords, that well know bastion of radical religious zeal, but even then it would have to comply with European law too. So what are the chances of that? Well unless we are planning on an overwhelming swing towards Islamic extremisim in Europe some time soon so the political processes are overwhelmed with extreme mullahs etc then its somewhere between slim and none.

A thread like this where intelligent and articulate people sit and discuss the concept just gives the notion credence. That is exactly how the BNP and Denis MacEoin operate. It is a gradual picking away at rational thought, and a subtle placing of suggestions such as this one in peoples psyche.

So what I am doing is pointing out the flaws in the arguments being used not solely by you, but your point on motives has become a focal point. Their motive is to spread disinformation and through that process persuade people that there nasty and deceitful propoganda had some merit.

DrJ – Member
Grumm said: “and their motives for saying things are pretty much universally wrong”

An example: the BNP say (maybe, for the sake of discussion) that blacks make up a disproportionate amount of the prison population. That is accurate, but the motives are wrong.

Yep got it and understood that bit. So please explain to me how that statement is a foundation for stating that

it’s faulty logic to assume that everything they say is therefore incorrect.

All I am saying is that Grumm’s assertion is at the very least misinformed, and at worst insidious. How can you on the one hand acknowledge that what the BNP and for that the Daily Mail is printing is on the one hand universally wrong in its “motivation”, and then on the other state that its logical that some of what they say is correct. Semantics apart obviously.

Grumm and others are then using the Policy Exchange and Denis MacEoin as some sort of academic verification of Islamophobia in respect of Sharia Law, where in fact the man is a self professed supporter of Israel, etc etc etc. Google it and check it out for yourself. I have posted the Wikipedia extract for the sake of brevity, but you don’t have to be an internet genius to independantly verify both his credentials and those of the Policy Exchange on respect of lying and rabble rousing over non issues.

Sharia Law as a serious issue in the UK?? Think about it for about 10 seconds and you will realise immediately thats you are being wound up.

Exert From Wikipedia on Deni MacEoin

He continues to work on Islamic issues, particularly the development of radical Islam. In December 2007 the BBC news program Newsnight produced evidence that suggested some material on which MacEoin’s report on radical Islam in the UK for Policy Exchange, “The Hijacking Of British Islam”, was based had been forged. Gabriele Marranci, an anthropologist at the University of Western Sydney specialising in the study of Muslim communities has made numerous criticisms of the methodology of the report.[2] Accusations of partisanship and bias have also been made against MacEoin. He has stated: “I do not hold a brief for Islam. On the contrary, I have very negative feelings about it, but still try to appreciate those elements that elevate it (such as the finer forms of Sufism, the poetry, the architecture, and the belief in material simplicity over greed)… I am pro-Israeli and involve myself in the defence of Israel

This of itself is not evidence of anything other than the need to be deeply suspicious of anything the bloke writes on the subject.

Best advice I can give, is in the time you’ve got with him be honest and open and try to make sure you’ve said all that you need to. I wasn’t able to and it still upsets me that I couldn’t set the record straight.

Good luck

In what way was I distorting what you said Grumm?

Wrong : Inaccurate ……. Difference ? I would say that is something is wrong it is also by definition inaccurate. Please do enlighten me if I’ve got that “inaccurate”.

Where you are concerned that certainly seems to be the case. Some people are actually trying to have a reasoned debate.

Wheres the reasoning?

PS : Did you note Nick, that I did not put that section as a quotation?? Thats because I got fed up with copying and pasting it, and paraphrased what he had said. I think you’ll find the interpretation was accurate, unless you want to argue that point.

Check out Dennis MacEoin and see what I mean. The guy is fairly widely discredited, and definately could be accused of having an anti Islamic bias. The Policy Exchange is a definitely right wing think tank, and if they are basing their thinking on the writings of Dennis MacEoin have to be questioned.

All this is scaremongering of the worst kind. No more no less, it is the oxygen that the likes of the BNP breath. Just utter the words Sharia Law and immediately the hysterics start. Its that simple

At the risk of sounding childish : Yes he does

grumm – Member

The fact that the BNP and Daily Mail lap it up doesn’t necessarily mean it should be ignored though does it?
Yep pretty much

You see I find that kind of attitude rather silly. Yes the Mail and BNP are nasty bigoted **** and their motives for saying things are pretty much universally wrong. But it’s faulty logic to assume that everything they say is therefore incorrect.

The statistic I posted is from a survey which has nothing to do with the Mail or BNP and if you read the report doesn’t seem to be trying to fan the flames of intolerance. In fact it finds many things which would probably pleasantly surprise Daily Mail readers about British Muslims. That doesn’t however mean that everything is hunky-dory.

Posted 2 hours ago

Whole post copied for info relevant paragraph highlighted.

Incidentally I wholly agree with Mr Agreeable. However, as long as people keep getting sucked into this utter bollocks about Islam in the UK and continuously reinforcing this utter drivel. I will take great delight in pi$$ing them off by pointing out the flaws in the arguments and the inherant racism that is being exhibited, and I make no apology whatsoever for that.

2nd post down on page 3 of this thread

Yet you seem hell bent on making yourself look even more of an idiot with your comments. If i were you I would stop digging.

Oh really?

So please clarify for in what way exactly I am wrong in what I am saying, which is quite simply that the Daily Mail and the BNP are not great sources of unbiased reporting or truth. Therefore it is wise to discount what they say.

<Sits back arms folded waiting with interest for the response.>

committed

There you go I’ve picked out a direct quote too. Does that mean that what they are saying is unimpeachably accurate? Any fool can pick a sentence or a word from anywhere out of context and make it seem acceptable.

If its too much for you to grasp I will spell it out for you.

Grumm : Daily Mail and BNP are almost universally inaccurate
Grumm : But it’s faulty logic to assume that everything they say is therefore incorrect.

Nick, thats exactly what the man said, in the same paragraph so in what way am I twisting it??

I have to say in the simplistic world I live in these two statements would be mutually exclusive. Perhaps they aren’t in yours, but in mine you would have to assume that it is difficult verging on impossible to sort the wheat from the chaff and therefore the only logical thing to do is to discount everything from those sources so as to avoid the bias.

Surfer: I take it your backtracking is in respect of the fact that you have realised that I am merely quoting your own post back at you? If thats childish, then fair play, thats what I am. However, I am not stupid enough to publically pronounce that I am an Islamaphobe.

surfer – Member
G I think your logic is flawed.

If the BNP told me in their literature that 2+2 made 4 should I disbelieve them because the rest of their literature is made up of lies?

Given that you are a self confessed Islamaphobe I would guess that you would believe whatever they said even if it was 4,397 + 9,897,386 = 4!

Nick – Member
In defense of Grumm the motives can be wrong even if the information is correct.

So Nick, how do you tell which is which in an environment where you have already accepted that what they say is almost universally wrong?? Personally I would take myself off somewhere else where the information available was a tad less slanted and that I personally felt was defensible, but then I have a very strong aversion to talking like a complete idiot, especially in a situation where I may well be publically asked to back up what I am saying or detail my sources, like on an internet forum whilst discussing something that is on the borderline of legality for example.

grumm – Member

The fact that the BNP and Daily Mail lap it up doesn’t necessarily mean it should be ignored though does it?
Yep pretty much

You see I find that kind of attitude rather silly.

So sorry, thought you were actually taking things they said as factually accurate and worth basing an opinion on……

……wait a minute apparently you are

But it’s faulty logic to assume that everything they say is therefore incorrect.

So you are in fact saying what I thought you were …… In which case times two with bells on back at you.

**** me!! What sort of half wit posts

Yes the Mail and BNP are nasty bigoted **** and their motives for saying things are pretty much universally wrong.

and then tries to argue that you can in fact trust anything which they say???????

Flipping heck ….. Is it me?? Is it an age thing??? Is it the education system???…

Given the fact that there were two nations on the earth capable of tracking each others space flights, and that they were in competition, nay even conflict with each other, Do you think the other party might have just said something about the fact that it didn’t actually happen?

…..waits for next addition to the conspiracy…..

The fact that the BNP and Daily Mail lap it up doesn’t necessarily mean it should be ignored though does it?

Yep pretty much

Anyone here start conversations with the words “I’m not a racist but…” ?

PS: Tyger, you haven’t by any chance sent money to someone recently who is managing an £8.6 million bequest in your favour ?

<sighs deeply and ignores thread>

Yeah but thats becuase you’re a paddy, thats not proper racism…. 😉

Personally I find all religious groups somewhere between slightly potty, and barking mad. As long as they don’t do anyone any harm then thats fine. If they start overstepping the mark then slap them, thats all of them, including the local god bothers.
Regarding what people wear, frankly thats up to them. If they chose to cover their faces with Burkas, balaclavas or crash helmets thats a free choice, but no petrol and no banking for them. Simple really.

Regarding all the tosh about womens rights and so forth. If anyone on here seriously believes that Muslim men are the only people in this country who “force” their women to do their mans will, I would suggest that you firstly take stock of your racist views, and secondly get a reality check. Personally I’m all for womens rights, and I really don’t like women being oppressed, but FFS lets try to be even handed about it, otherwise you’re just swopping one set of predjudices for another.

Interesting to see how many folk on here are Islamaphobes though.

End

Now you’ve done it ! 😯

Really?

I’ll take that as an admission of spewing out drivel then 😯

Almost hit the nail on the head there Hora. Not quite but almost.

Ewwwwww! Thats sharp Ernie!

But very very fair.

Chewkw : Have you read up on it yet. In fact have you done anything whatsoever apart from spewing out drivel?

a custom that classes women alongside barnyard animals is offensive, at best.

Who told you about that???? I deny it all, anyway that last sheep baa’ed at me in a provocative way and wiggled its bottom, definately a willing partner..

TS: I was coming to that …. 🙄

LOL you are not wrong in that last statement

Certainly, I’m a partner in a small business making and distributing high end bathroom products. We originally started up in the back bedroom of my partners house about 10 years ago, have moved twice in ten years and now in a 10,000sq ft unit with 8 staff.

Just in case this was aimed at me :-

DrJ – Member
Only an idiot thinks that burka (or other similar gear) wearing is anything to do with respect

Could I just point out that I never said it was. Merely that Sarkozies wifes nude modelling exploits are likely to turn his argument on his head for him, and have the pro burka lobby arguing that their culture respects women and thats why they cover up, as opposed to Mr and Mrs Sarkozys attitude to women as a sex object. Not agreeing or disgreeing with either point.

So what about Nuns “habits”… no no the ones they wear??

Incidentally, can I just run my flag up on this one? My view is that religion is a personal issue, and nobodies business but your own.

If you choose to push it in front of other people then you have to accept that there may well be a reaction. I particularly dislike overt expressions of religion such as clothing/hats/hairstyles etc etc etc.

However, having said that its not my business to make these people into martyrs by reacting to it, other than to offer them sympathetic acceptance of their affliction. In respect of Sarkozy, I suspect his own wifes modelling exploits (and very nice they are too! ) may well actually make this all blow up in his rather silly Gaelic face, as being a really good example of why Burka wearing is in fact offering women respect whilst his overt support of the notion of women as sex objects is the precise opposite.

So for me Rasta hair, wooly hats, burkas, skull caps, bishops mitres, dog collars and so on are all a no no IMHO.

Don’t make assumptions. There may very well be good reasons why they are as they are.

My best advice is to do your homework properly, and very thoroughly before you get into it. Asking random questions on an internet forum is not research, as you may get daft responses. Like for example the cost of doing accounts will cost you loads as a limited company, clearly overlooking that the majority of limited compnaies in the UK have no need for audited accounts as their turnover is less than the threshold. The issue about going limited is about reducing your exposure to risk. Sole Trader = Unlimited liability, Limited Company = Liability limited to the shareholders share value and any personal guarantees or indemnities given by the directors.

Try going to the Business Link website, they have a fairly good new business start up check list.

chewkw – Member

I’ll type this slowly for you.

Murder : Crime unsolved. No difference to the crime rate between capital punishment and any other system as you haven’t caught the person.
Murder : Crime solved : The majority of murders are in fact known to the victim and only ever commit that one crime. No difference to the crime rate between capital punishment and any other system, as they had already committed their one offence regardless.
Murder : Serial Killer etc. When these people are caught they are not released generally. No difference between capital punishment and any other system as they don’t get released.

As a deterrent it clearly doesn’t work. Only one example necessary : Jolly Old Uncle Sam, which apparently is also inhabited by half wits like your goodself, and also has one of the highest murder rates in the world.

So at the very least there is NO difference between the two systems. However, more progressive systems recognise some basic truths about criminality and how it comes about. Accordingly pro-active penal methods aimed at nipping criminal behaviour in the bud does and will always reduce the number of serious offenders, who develop from minor crime. Contrariwise, sending young offenders into crime universities almost guarantees that their offending will become more serious.

Go away, read about it check it out for yourself. No need to take my word for it.

Now then about answering the original question posed in my earlier post.
Why is it you want to perpetuate or reintroduce a system which is proven to be unsuccessful. Yet to hear any sort of answer, apart from chest beating and teeth gnashing.

Have a nice day 😉

Hora, so could you elaborate on the reasons why you wish to perpetuate, and in some cases even return to rejected or unsuccessful penal methods?

I’d love to know your rationale beyond the blatantly obvious trolling and your inate red neck tendancies.

Whats really interesting about all of this is that the hang em and flog brigade steadfastly refuse to even acknowledge that ALL of the available evidence indicates that what they are suggesting DOESN’T WORK!! Worse than that the evidence is that what they are proposing is likely to lead to a increase in crime NOT a reduction.

**** unbelievably blinkered and stupid people!!!! Like I said before, insanity : Doing something that doesn’t work and then repeat it endlessly expecting a different outcome.

See what happened when Thatchers lot closed all the loony bins?? 😯

They are all out, (its Ok until they forget to take their meds).

🙄