Tory leadership frontrunner attacks multiculturalism

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


Or, if your memory stretches back further than five years, you'd realise that by your definitions the most dangerous religion up until that time was Christianity.

5 years??

Hamas began its campaign of terror before the 1992 Oslo accords, and subverted said accords from the beginng.

Radical jihadis murdered civilians in Algeria and Egypt throughout the 90's. Egyptian Islamic Jihad assasinated Anwar Sadat, Nobel Laureate and peacemaker, in 1979.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Yep. But that ain't London.

I never claimed that it was a good measure, you see?

[C0ckney]

thanks lotm, good post

ph and whaleboy (once again), the question asked was which religion is more dangerous, that means now, in the present time, considering what's happend recently, just in case you were confused... talking about things which happened hundreds of years ago is wholly besides the point, but then both of you know that already. :/

ph, it's sad that you hate christians so much

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Is it a religious issue? It strikes me as being far more about politics and social division, personally.

[C0ckney]

and i would agree with you, but i was taking issue with ph's ridiculous statement made earlier in the thread.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Is it a religious issue? It strikes me as being far more about politics and social division, personally.

Politics? There are plenty of people who disagree with their countries foreign policy, as a general rule they dont express this by blowing themselves up, a method that is not likely to be successful in this instance anyway. Social divisions are certainly a real concern, but not simple to tease out - most muslims dont express their problems with discrimination by blowing themselves up, much less other immigrants. And many who do blow themselves up are relatively successful. SOME muslims, in reaction to their personal social experiences, and under the influence of CERTAIN religious leaders, and seeing in political events abroad not so much a realistic political conflict, but a further humiliation of muslims, which the religious leaders make sense of, go bombing.

Of course we should try to achieve just results, fair to ALL parties, in the mideast, Kashmir, etc. But the solutions the jihadis look to are NOT going to be fair to all parties. ANd of course we should integrate different groups, and avoid ghettozation (wasnt that what this was about?) But to ignore the radical preachers, the radical mosques and madrassahs, and the part that CERTAIN STRAINS of Islam play - we do that at our peril.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Among those strains of Islam, I see a distinct lack of our Abrahamic brothers attempting to teach us the way. It's not a religious war- it's politics with an unconvincing veneer of hotly-disputed dogma.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Among those strains of Islam, I see a distinct lack of our Abrahamic brothers attempting to teach us the way. It's not a religious war- it's politics with an unconvincing veneer of hotly-disputed dogma.

I dont understand the first sentence. I didnt say it was a religious war - but religion is an essential part of it.

During the cold war there were socialists, even some Marxists, who were firmly in the Western camp (not to mention some communists who opposed Soviet block expansion) - and there was plenty of cynicism in the Soviet leadership, at least in the Brezhnev years. That DOESNT mean that would could ignore Marxism-Leninism and ideology and understand the cold war. WE are not fighting a religious war = and the motivations of individual recruits may vary on their side - and even of some AQ allies - but AQ's leadership is CERTAINLY fighting a religious war. Its not a war to convert us, necessarily - its a war to establish an Islamic caliphate, impose Sharia in all Muslim lands, and expel the cultural presence of the west from all muslim lands. Once the glorious caliphate is created, conversion is expected to take place more or less spontaneously, IIUC.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by C0ckney
ph, it's sad that you hate christians so much

Hate is a very strong word. There is this massive misunderstanding that I 'hate', that this somehow consumes me, when in fact for me, it plays no part in my existence whatsoever. I just find Christianity, as I do any other religion, to be really, really silly.

[C0ckney]

and i find 28 year old virgins very silly, but there you go.

[Provost Harrison]

Oooh, now getting personal is really not called for. If you can't win the argument with rational debate, then don't take part.

[C0ckney]

don't dish it out if you can't take it

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Biblebashers lecturing me on irrationality

[Provost Harrison]

Valid point - you get presented with the facts and you ignore them only to go with your own little fairytale instead. My sex life, however, is completely irrelevent to this debate. It's just you looking stupid now Cockney...because you want to say something so nasty because I've hit a nerve. Ask yourself, how have I hit a nerve so easily? Is your belief in your faith not rigid enough to stand up to it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

[q=lord of the mark] its a war to establish an Islamic caliphate, impose Sharia in all Muslim lands, and expel the cultural presence of the west from all muslim lands.[/q]

With AQ leadership as the top (as caliphs), which is why Laz was saying it's mostly politics with religious veneer thrown on top. The AQ people want to rule, they have a way in which to do it by inciting the flames of religion. It works because so many are dissastisfied.

When the IRA was bombing Protestants left and right people weren't talk about a fight for the future of Catholicism. They realized it was mostly a political struggle that took on religious clothing.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Valid point - you get presented with the facts and you ignore them only to go with your own little fairytale instead. My sex life, however, is completely irrelevent to this debate. It's just you looking stupid now Cockney...because you want to say something so nasty because I've hit a nerve. Ask yourself, how have I hit a nerve so easily? Is your belief in your faith not rigid enough to stand up to it?

Indeed... Cockney, you just look like a git who couldn't defend yourself in debate now.