Spugsy

I don't care if people don't like him, I like Brooker a lot.

littlejimmy

Completely with you. Newswipe is one of the best programmes on TV on TV.

WakeUp

Don't play dumb Norm it doesn't suit you. This thread isn't about my opinions on George Bush and his cronies.

All I will say is that a "War on terror" suggests that those taking up the war will not commit terrorist acts themselves, and will target all terrorist groups in the world, not just the one that suits them, the leader of that targetted group was initially trained and funded by the Americans.

UKCityGent

Norm,

Why do you have to twist almost every topic to regilion and especially your (ignorant and biased) take on Islam ?

Im wondering are you like this in real life - or just an armchair racist ?

Perhaps www.democracyforum.co.uk/bnp this would be a forum for you to reside and meet people of the same ilk.

Norm_uk

Not liking a religion/culture/ideology or aspects of it is not racism or even close to racism. You're simply unhappy that I won't buy into the Party line Narrative and believe in the 'all religions are equal and peaceful', especially the monotheistic faiths. You're so unhappy I see them this way you're willing to accuse me of being a BNP supporter, a racist and a bigot it would seem.

Ironically I would be the last person the BNP would want in their ranks as a Libertarian, British Neo-Con. However, like political parties I am sure there are points we all agree on. I have even been known to agree with Labour on occassion...doesn't mean I'd join them or vote for them

Islam, like any other religion or doctrine or ideology is open to criticism. And since Muslims come in all colours under the sun please do explain how it's racist to comment on it's negative aspects as a system or it's place as a source of inspiration for Jihadist movements looking to bring in a global caliphate? We can also talk about it's positive aspects for many people to but that's another topic don't you think?

Feel free to do this in a separate thread or by PM, but please refrain from accusations of racism. You don't know me at all.

N.

norsk

Let me start by pointing out that I don't agree with Norm on most of the things he posts, but he is usually well informed and his arguments are normally logical and based on facts. There should be a lot of kudos given to him for defending his opinion in the way that he does without going off the hinge and moving into personal attack territory (like some people on the bored have done in the past).

However, as pointed out it can get a bit much sometimes and I'm sure even Norm knows that. In his defence he has stopped (or at least restrained himself) from turning every thread on the bored into a discussion about religion.

Personally I think all religions have both good and bad aspects, and due to their different ages they are not all on the same stages of their natural evolution (which matters if we believe that they mellow and become more tolerant with age). Religions don't evolve you say? I am not even going to attempt to justify. If you don't already know then you need to do some more research.

Also what is the deal with calling people discussing the bad aspects of a religion racists? Last time I checked racism is related to race not religion!

Sorry. Rant over.

typical

I do wish for a few fewer propaganda-style statements that bear little scrutiny ("most terrorist attacks in the world are committed by Muslims", "Jihadist movements looking to bring in a global caliphate"), because I find them really distracting and inevitably end up picking up on them rather than the substance which is inevitably well argured and thoughtful

shiva

( I was going to put a post in here but have decided you must be on crack so won't bother)

Norm_uk

Almighty google tells me there have been around 17,500 attacks worldwide by Islamic Extremists in the last decade or so, with almost a thousand dead in June this year alone. There are sites tracking this, but you'd probably find of them too intolerant or the like.

Western governments do not generally engage in acts of deliberate civillian killings. You're trying to say open, declared conflict is the same as blowing up civillians to make a point. It's not - but that's not to say it's less tragic or more justified of course.

The entire body count of the Arab-Israel conflict since 1947 is around 100,000. That includes military and civillian deaths from openly declared war, terrorists acts, targeting killings etc. To put that into perspective Turkey killed 1,200,000 Armenians (1915) + 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks (1916-22) + 500,000 Assyrians (1915-20). In any case, I know that by accusing Israel of terrorism and you extra long comment on it that you're probably in the same camp as the blindly pro-Arab, blindly anti-Israel people and any other view won't sit with you at all. If I'm wrong though I'll eat my words.

That aside you've mentioned some nasty people like Mugabe, drug cartels etc but not really any specific groups who use terrorism as their standard or only modus operandi.

I'd respond to that flawed statement but someone else (whom you will call right wing but is a self-described socialist) has already pointed out that many of these groups go far beyond Western foreign policy as a justification for their actions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axHR8AOxxkc I'm sure you'll shoot the messenger, perhaps on his other views if not this after viewing that though as it would require a shift in your thinking.

Also, your way of thinking means you must then agree that native Europeans and those who have fully adopted their culture have a valid point in questioning immigration policy that doesn't demand full integration and respect of their values...because anything else could be mucking around in their country and threatening their culture and values, right?

N.

sherri

I think you should have, the only fair way to decide who is on crack!

Norm_uk

Good post - and accurate too. I struggle not to turn everything into religion

N.

Norm_uk

You're telling the wrong person, I don't support the War on Terror. It's a farce based mostly of fueling the industrial military complex of the USA rather than bringing the light to Iraq etc. I hate how Western leaders are too scared to promote our culture as better, link up with Islamic reformists and secularists in the Muslim world who also admit there are some rotten things that can no longer be taken seriously in the texts and stop pandering to OPEC while they're at it to.

Whilst going after Saddam wasn't a bad thing, the reasons were. Still what's done is done. Afganistan is a similar beast done for half and half reasons. I am old fashioned and believe if you are going to invade a country do it properly, dominate them and stamp your culture on them...or don't bother, it's not a pleasant business.

N.

Millhouse

I'd pay more attention to Norm's posts if they were shorter. Just as, I'm sure, he would pay more attention to mine if they were actually researched and not just based on dogma.

Norm_uk

I thought the only reason we all post on this website is we can't find any crack over here

N.

sherri

My mistake, I should have been a wee bit more specific in response to your question: So which group commits more acts of terrorism than Muslims? Suicide bombings are not the only way to commit terrorism.

ter•ror•ism/ˈterəˌrizəm/
Definition: The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of social and political aims

*Western governments/Coalition forces – Political and Social (violence and intimidation) examples: Iraq – oil, Afghanistan – in response to Spy plan incident in China and subsequent Chinese humiliation of US government. Link?? US wanted a base in the region to intimidate Chinese.

*African dictators – Social and Political (violence and intimidation)

*Serbs – Social and Political (violence and intimidation)

*Israel - Social and Political (violence and intimidation)

*Robert Mugabe's regime - Social and Political (violence and intimidation)

*Nutters on the road - Social (intimidation)

*Drug cartels – social and political (violence and intimidation)

*Bankers – social and political (intimidation)

*Media - right-wing extremists etc... social and political (intimidation)

Hope this time it makes sense, before you open your history books or someone call me a crack addict

As for Israel, I am not in the same camp as the blindly pro-Arab – anti-Israel lobby. I believe that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself but I don’t agree with their tactics and heinous crimes against humanity/innocent people. Also, I agree with your facts about the Turks but don't forget the world wars....

My statement about "mucking around" is not flawed, that's my opinion but I know no one is open to that as it would be against their social and political aims.

Yes, I agree that native Europeans and those who have fully adopted their culture have a valid point in questioning immigration policy that doesn't demand full integration and respect of their values. Unfortunately, you live in a more global world now and if you want to turn the clock backwards then you would have to a) convenience fellow natives who agree with you and happy to live in isolation on a continent and b) select an appropriate government that would fulfil your demands.