Major Incident In London

[Eddie]

Surely the situation is that if the Palestinians gave up bombing the Israeli's violent actions would cease whereas if the Israeli's gave up violence first the Palestinians would continue.

332945[/snapback]

Disagree with that. Israeli policy has shown that it is simply interested in claiming more and more land, which means until there is no more Palestinian state their actions will not cease, regardless of any suicide bombings or other violent acts, that simply provides them with an excuse. They are intent on claiming back land that they feel is rightfully theirs based on religious regions, no opposition or lack of opposition will change this.

[joey_big_nose]

Disagree with that. Israeli policy has shown that it is simply interested in claiming more and more land, which means until there is no more Palestinian state their actions will not cease, regardless of any suicide bombings or other violent acts, that simply provides them with an excuse. They are intent on claiming back land that they feel is rightfully theirs based on religious regions, no opposition or lack of opposition will change this.

332950[/snapback]

I wouldnt say that. I think if the Israli's would accept a situation where there was a peaceful Palestinian state existing alongside their own. Indeed, I would say the majority of Israelis would just like to live peacefully and get on with their lives. The same goes for the Palestinians, it is just a militant minority who are slowly destroying everything.

[Eddie]

I would agree that the majority of Israeli's do wish to live peacefully and would accept a seperate state, however I don't believe their government and the powers at be are looking for this sort of settlement.

[thenodrog]

They are intent on claiming back land that they feel is rightfully theirs based on religious regions,

332950[/snapback]

I'm not too well versed with middle eastern politics but isn't that basically the Palestinians motivation too?

Edited July 17, 2005 by thenodrog

[Eddie]

Yes, essentially that has been the motivation for all three of the semitic religions at one point or another. However, in modern times Israel seems the only one willing to basically eradicate all opposition in order to achieve this. While you cannot justify the suicide bombers you have to understand that desperate times call for desperate measures. While you cannot condone what they do and they certainly deserve a much worse fate than even they recieve, with their nation on the brink of eradication and their people suffering it is not hard to understand why people with little weapons or training fighting against one of the best armed and trained armies in the world would turn to this sort of thing.

[American]

I wouldnt say that. I think if the Israli's would accept a situation where there was a peaceful Palestinian state existing alongside their own. Indeed, I would say the majority of Israelis would just like to live peacefully and get on with their lives. The same goes for the Palestinians, it is just a militant minority who are slowly destroying everything.

332975[/snapback]

Um, actually, the Israelis have had plenty of chances to do that. Remember, the land was taken from the Palestinians. How would you feel if someone came into Blackburn and said the land belonged to Burnley and increased that town.

But one point that goes back on subject is the majority of Muslims also want to live peacefully and get on with their lives. It's the militant minority who, rightfully or not, give Phil and Gord (and others) the views that they have.

[Paul]

I hadn't planned to contribute to this thread - other than maoning about the personal abuse - but I heard part of a radio interview on Five Live which gave me a new perspective on the issue last night. Now I was driving with the kids so I may have got some of this wrong but these are views I have not heard so well explained before. The interviewee was not, IMV, radical but most certainly committed. The young man was what we might refer to as a "British Muslim"

Apparently, to some (maybe all, I don't know) a muslim is muslim first and a "national" second. In fact the nationality is seen to be largely irrelevant. Muslims are seen as a part of an expanding world-wide movement. There is a muslim word to describe this but I have forgotten it.

The young man interviewed stated all mulims have a duty to protect, aid, defend one and other regardless of where they live. He did not believe in the concept of British muslims - one is either British or a muslim, not both. He believed "British" muslims, to be subjugated, down-trodden, persecuted and was not able to condemn those who sort to defend other muslims.

He wanted to leave the UK to raise his family in Syria, believing the Arabic world to be more "blessed" as this is the seat of muslim and there must have been a reason why the movement started in the Arab world. He also wished to move his children from what he sees as the corrupting influence of western society.

Couple of questions please:

1. Has anyone got a link to this in the Five Live archive. I can't find one. It was at 7.00pm last night

2. I'd like to know more on this subject. Has anyone got something factual I can look at. A link or something, without starting another flame war please.

cheers

[Flopsy]

It was the five live report - I was too busy shouting abuse at the radio -to find out when it will be on MP3 but it will probably be on now. (Listen Again Feature)

Also it is my view that if that was the gentlemans view - Muslim first - British a distant second, well theres the airport - sod off.

Most British Muslims are exactly that, british nationality, Muslim faith

same way as according to the census Im a British Jedi - Obi Wan Flopsy

[Paul]

Thanks Flopsy. I'll try that later.

BTW I'm not expressing a view, simply interested to hear the interview in full as it was new for me.

[pg]

Paul - such views are also very common for very religious (i.e. Orthodox) Jews.

[thenodrog]

I'm sure that I can hear some pennies dropping on this board?

Trouble with link so ........

Britain's Role in Iraq Helps Terrorism - Report

Prime Minister Tony Blair has come under fresh attack with the release of a report saying British involvement in the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan could have fuelled the London terror bombings.

Terrorism and security experts said there was "no doubt'' that the Iraq war imposed "particular difficulties for the UK'' and that the conflicts had boosted al Qaida "propaganda, recruitment and fund raising''.

The report contradicted Mr Blair's insistence that it was wrong to link the London attack to military operations in the Islamic world.

It said Mr Blair's close alliance with President George Bush had made Britain more of a terror target.

As America's closest ally, Britain was at particular risk, experts at the influential Chatham House think-tank said.

UK troop deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq had increased the chances of an attack, they conclude in a joint report with the Economic and Social Research Council.

The UK is stuck as a "pillion passenger" to the United States' war on terror, a "high-risk policy" that had left the "ally in the driving seat" to do the steering.

Islamic terrorists were only given the appropriate priority in the late 1990s, the experts said.

Report authors Frank Gregory, of the University of Southampton, and Professor Paul Wilkinson, of the University of St Andrews, said: "There is no doubt that the situation over Iraq has imposed particular difficulties for the UK, and for the wider coalition against terrorism.''

They added: "The UK is at particular risk because it is the closest ally of the United States.''

I wonder what the boffins (oops I nearly said bright bgugars) in the govts think tank at Chatham House have been doing all these years before they found this thread?

Silly sods though aren't they? Talk about stating the obvious! Only people who have had their heads up their ar5es for years could think that that is news.

Supreme timing but maybe Heath should have paid a bit more attention to old 'knocky' and the British public eh?

Edited July 18, 2005 by thenodrog

[Flopsy]

What reliving Live 8? Why I didnt watch it the first time?

[Biddy]

So it's not just me getting the AOL home page with that link.

[SouthAussieRover]

The penny has indeed dropped.

I can finally watch Live8

Also doing a search myself it's interesting how the CIA and Bin Laden worked closely together http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

Edited July 18, 2005 by SouthAussieRover

[thenodrog]

Yes, essentially that has been the motivation for all three of the semitic religions at one point or another. However, in modern times Israel seems the only one willing to basically eradicate all opposition in order to achieve this. While you cannot justify the suicide bombers you have to understand that desperate times call for desperate measures. While you cannot condone what they do and they certainly deserve a much worse fate than even they recieve, with their nation on the brink of eradication and their people suffering it is not hard to understand why people with little weapons or training fighting against one of the best armed and trained armies in the world would turn to this sort of thing.

332994[/snapback]

Kinell! Now is this board topical or what? On Breakfast News this morning it is revealed that the Met are studying (and implementing in the square mile) Israeli security tactics for dealing with terror threats and recognising and preventing suicide bombers.

Whether commentators in positions of assumed total safety think they are over the top or not, it appears that the Israeli methods are being viewed differently now by our own security forces.

[thenodrog]

Also doing a search myself it's interesting how the CIA and Bin Laden worked closely together http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

333042[/snapback]

As did Neville Chamberlain and Adolph Hitler SAR!

[Eddie]

Kinell!  Now is this board topical or what?  On Breakfast News this morning it is revealed that the Met are studying  (and implementing in the square mile) Israeli security tactics for dealing with terror threats and recognising and preventing suicide bombers.

Whether commentators in positions of assumed total safety think they are over the top or not, it appears that the Israeli methods are being viewed differently now by our own security forces.

333044[/snapback]

I'm sure as they have had to deal with it for a relatively long time that they have some very good methods, however, I don't think we'll be seeing tanks rolling down the streets of Muslim areas and missiles blowing up buildings...could be wrong though.

Edited July 18, 2005 by Eddie

[Rovermatt]

Terrorism and security experts said there was "no doubt'' that the Iraq war imposed "particular difficulties for the UK'' and that the conflicts had boosted al Qaida "propaganda, recruitment and fund raising''.

333038[/snapback]

No sh*t.

Edited July 18, 2005 by Rovermatt

[Gareth]

I'm sure that I can hear some pennies dropping on this board?

Trouble with link so ........

Britain's Role in Iraq Helps Terrorism - Report

Prime Minister Tony Blair has come under fresh attack with the release of a report saying British involvement in the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan could have fuelled the London terror bombings.

Terrorism and security experts said there was "no doubt'' that the Iraq war imposed "particular difficulties for the UK'' and that the conflicts had boosted al Qaida "propaganda, recruitment and fund raising''.

333038[/snapback]

Well Bliar was warned by the security services in the run-up to the war that it would lead to a higher risk of being attacked by terrorist...

[blue phil]

Apparently, to some (maybe all, I don't know) a muslim is muslim first and a "national" second. In fact the nationality is seen to be largely irrelevant. Muslims are seen as a part of an expanding world-wide movement. There is a muslim word to describe this but I have forgotten it.

The young man interviewed stated all mulims have a duty to protect, aid, defend one and other regardless of where they live. He did not believe in the concept of British muslims - one is either British or a muslim, not both. He believed "British" muslims, to be subjugated, down-trodden, persecuted and was not able to condemn those who sort to defend other muslims.

He wanted to leave the UK to raise his family in Syria, believing the Arabic world to be more "blessed" as this is the seat of muslim and there must have been a reason why the movement started in the Arab world. He also wished to move his children from what he sees as the corrupting influence of western society.

333012[/snapback]

Mmm . Sounds like this young man has been expressing some views that could surely be regarded as racist had they been uttered by Theno , AESF or myself . This particular Muslim , however , must be congratulated on bringing to the attention of us all of the fundamental conflict between being British and being Muslim .

In other faiths there are those who would also chose their religion over their country when it comes to the question of "allegiance". Where Islam differs is that they harbour extremists who are willing to cross the line from quiet faith to violence against the culture and religions which they feel is against them and the book which dominates every aspect of their lives from birth til death. Not only that but many of their elders and leaders within their communities foster such hatred at worst and ignore it at best . Even those "leaders" who condemn it are unwilling to confront the root of the problem and make absolute and unequivical their opposition to the literal interpretation of the Koran .

Words are meaningless until the basic principles of the enlightenment - which Christianity and Judaism have accepted (reluctantly at times) - displaces this literalism interpration of their dogmatic religion . Islam will always be at war with democracy until they accept that their religion MUST take second place to the principles of democracy , universal suffrage and true equality between the sexes.

The war in Iraq has added fuel to the fire of this world conflict but be under no illusions , the conflict is all about two incompatible belief systems , democracy and Islam , and it will continue for a long time yet .

That word you were looking for , Paul , that describes this expanding world wide movement ....it's "fascism" and appeasement of fascism invariably leads to disaster .

[MCMC1875]

Can anyone

Edited July 19, 2005 by MCMC1875

[colin]

In other faiths there are those who would also chose their religion over their country when it comes to the question of "allegiance".  Where Islam differs is that they harbour extremists who are willing to cross the line from quiet faith to violence against the culture and religions which they feel is against them and the book which dominates every aspect of their lives from birth til death. Not only that but many of their elders and leaders within their communities foster such hatred at worst and ignore it at best . Even those "leaders" who condemn it are unwilling to confront the root of the problem and make absolute and unequivical their opposition to the literal interpretation of the Koran .

I think the key word in that is "extremists." You've let it slip there.

Your obvious obsession with hating Islam may well be blinding you to the fact that since humans evolved from eating bananas with their feet, they have been knocking seven bells out of each other because "they" are "different." Jericho was first destroyed in 7,300BC, presumably by some people who didn't like them.

In 2005 some dangerous maniacs may be killing people in the name of Islam, but that no more reflects an Islamic view than (say) American "Christians" who murder people who carry out abortions represent the Archbishop of Cantebury.

No doubt you can think of scores of other example, from the Spanish invasion of South America to the European destruction of Tasmanian Aboriginies, to dear Old Adolph, to Rwanda, to Omagh, to the Highland Clearances, to The Crusades, to some"good old boys" stringing up some "uppity nigger."

Islamic extremists are nothing new.

Edited July 18, 2005 by colin

[thenodrog]

No doubt you can think of scores of other example, from the Spanish invasion of South America to the European destruction of Tasmanian Aboriginies, to dear Old Adolph, to Rwanda, to Omagh, to the Highland Clearances, to The Crusades, to some"good old boys" stringing up some "uppity nigger."

Islamic extremists are nothing new.

333227[/snapback]

Never thought of it that way Colin. But now you put it like that I suppose it makes it quite alright for deranged and deluded people to carry out indiscriminate mass murder in the name of some long dead geezer to continue indefinitely.

[colin]

Never thought of it that way Colin.  But now you put it like that I suppose it makes it quite alright for deranged and deluded people to carry out indiscriminate mass murder in the name of some long dead geezer to continue indefinitely.      

333253[/snapback]

Did I say "it makes it it quite alright?" Go and have another look at my post. Go and have a good hard look. Give yourself five minutes to read it, then come back here and finish off reading this post.

Did I say "it makes it it quite alright?"

No, I didn't, so your post is fairly pointless isn't it?

For heaven's sake: read the bloody posts before you reply to them.

Edited July 18, 2005 by colin

[Dan Furness]

Seen few pictures not published yet from the bus. not nice at all..