Keith

[Paul]

Why can't we all just get along?

 

Excellent point.

[theghost]

Excellent point.

 

Agreed

[Strontium]

I always thought being a liberal was to be much more live and let live, but that's just one fellow's opinion.

 

There's definitely something of that to it, and in no way would I dream of stopping Rashid from following his life as he would wish to lead it, however much I may disagree with him. That doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on the way he leads his life though, or that I can't express that opinion, because free thought and free speech is also a fundamental part of liberalism.

[theghost]

There's definitely something of that to it, and in no way would I dream of stopping Rashid from following his life as he would wish to lead it, however much I may disagree with him. That doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on the way he leads his life though, or that I can't express that opinion, because free thought and free speech is also a fundamental part of liberalism.

 

I agree - free speech rules. I just think that continued and unrelenting derision of someone's beliefs is not at all tolerant, which I believe is another pillar of being a liberal. I think that you're fully within your rights to discuss Islam with Rash, but I also feel like the way you go about it is rather rude and not at all conducive to decent conversation.

[Strontium]

I agree - free speech rules. I just think that continued and unrelenting derision of someone's beliefs is not at all tolerant, which I believe is another pillar of being a liberal. I think that you're fully within your rights to discuss Islam with Rash, but I also feel like the way you go about it is rather rude and not at all conducive to decent conversation.

 

That's why I never raise the topic myself any more. But if someone is gonna discuss his beliefs in public, I won't hold back. I give very short shrift to people who worship invisible sky wizards, although I certainly respect their right to do whatever they wish so long as they don't harm me. I don't believe I'm intolerant though; if religious people were only half as tolerant as I am, we wouldn't have people flying planes into skyscrapers, stoning homosexuals to death or forcing women into burkhas.

[Paul]

There's definitely something of that to it, and in no way would I dream of stopping Rashid from following his life as he would wish to lead it, however much I may disagree with him. That doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on the way he leads his life though, or that I can't express that opinion, because free thought and free speech is also a fundamental part of liberalism.

 

What if the manner of expression is itself oppressive? Isn't freedom from oppression a part of Liberalism?

[Strontium]

What if the manner of expression is itself oppressive? Isn't freedom from oppression a part of Liberalism?

 

You think calling Allah an invisible/imaginary sky wizard is oppressive? I think it's pretty darn accurate myself.

[Rashid]

That's why I never raise the topic myself any more. But if someone is gonna discuss his beliefs in public, I won't hold back. I give very short shrift to people who worship invisible sky wizards, although I certainly respect their right to do whatever they wish so long as they don't harm me. I don't believe I'm intolerant though; if religious people were only half as tolerant as I am, we wouldn't have people flying planes into skyscrapers, stoning homosexuals to death or forcing women into burkhas.

 

So it is only Islam that has nutters? You're very selective aren't you?

 

Not so long ago England was being bombed by Catholics, not so long ago the British army was being bombed by Jews, not so long in England women were not allowed to vote.... see a pattern?

 

People are at different levels around the world, and what is crazy for you is normal for others. E.g. many Muslims think shagging a woman, making her pregnant and then leaving her is oppression of that woman and a total lack of respect, in Islam one is told that he should marry her and look after the child.

 

It really depends how you view life SD. Obviously you are intolerent towards Islam, not religions per se but towards Islam. Fair enough, but don't take the piss out of me, don't do it in a vindictive way, joking fine yes, but not the way you're doing it cos I'd freak if you did that to my face. We can talk about free speech afterwards.

[Rashid]

There's definitely something of that to it, and in no way would I dream of stopping Rashid from following his life as he would wish to lead it, however much I may disagree with him. That doesn't mean I can't have an opinion on the way he leads his life though, or that I can't express that opinion, because free thought and free speech is also a fundamental part of liberalism.

 

Free speech is fine if it is an opinion and not done to goad people, peopel who do it vindictively deserve the kicking they would get if they did it like a man in public.

[Strontium]

So it is only Islam that has nutters?

 

I haven't said that, and indeed there are a lot of nutters in other religions too, although Islam probably has more than any other.

 

Not so long ago England was being bombed by Catholics, not so long ago the British army was being bombed by Jews, not so long in England women were not allowed to vote.... see a pattern?

 

Yes I do. The pattern is that Judaism and Christianity has largely secularised, and with that secularisation comes moderation of views and behaviour. For all our sakes, I just hope we have enough tube trains and airplanes while we all sit around waiting for Islamic extremism to downgrade itself from stark-raving mad to slightly bonkers. Unfortunately, with Islamic youth seemingly becoming more radical and not less, I don't envisage that being any time soon.

 

It really depends how you view life SD. Obviously you are intolerent towards Islam, not religions per se but towards Islam.

 

I am not "intolerant" and I don't single out any religion particularly. I think they're all equally nuts, although it's certainly fair to say that the Archbishop of Canterbury isn't telling people to detonate themselves in Safeway.

 

Fair enough, but don't take the piss out of me, don't do it in a vindictive way, joking fine yes, but not the way you're doing it cos I'd freak if you did that to my face. We can talk about free speech afterwards.

 

I don't think I was vindictive, at least I wasn't intending to be. I think you're demanding I respect your religious beliefs more than I would respect, say, someone who told me that he prays to the Easter Bunny or someone who claims that there are Leprechauns at the bottom of his garden. I won't do that; I think your views are ludicrous, although you are perfectly free to hold them.

 

Free speech is fine if it is an opinion and not done to goad people, peopel who do it vindictively deserve the kicking they would get if they did it like a man in public.

 

Telling people that they deserve to get a kicking is not what I would personally call tolerant. I think I can promise that I am always more tolerant than that at least!

[Rashid]

As I said free speech is fine so long as it isn't done with a vindictive intent, like you are doing SD, for that reason you deserve a good kicking.

 

Secondly, since when has the Arch Bishop of Canterbury had 100's of 1000's of Christians die before his eyes. If you think Islamic radicalism is ONLY down to the religion itself and not down to UK/US foreign policy then you are pretty thick.

 

Also, how many "Christian" countries currently sit "occupied" - I'd say only technically Northern Ireland but thats complicated? I am not condoning the killing of innocents and never would but when you have people with a grievance, just like IRA did or the Jews did 50 years ago, or the Muslims now, you are going to get a hard core element that want to fight back.

 

You also can't seem to understand that killing of innocents, be it state sponsored or by lunatics with a gun is more or less the same thing if it is done without the approval of international law.

 

I am digressing, forget the rules, back to my point, you can take the piss as much as you want, but do it in a vindictive way then you should be man enough to do it in public - and I KNOW you aren't SD, you're just a bit of a prick with an agenda.

[theghost]

As I said free speech is fine so long as it isn't done with a vindictive intent, like you are doing SD, for that reason you deserve a good kicking.

 

Secondly, since when has the Arch Bishop of Canterbury had 100's of 1000's of Christians die before his eyes. If you think Islamic radicalism is ONLY down to the religion itself and not down to UK/US foreign policy then you are pretty thick.

 

Also, how many "Christian" countries currently sit "occupied" - I'd say only technically Northern Ireland but thats complicated? I am not condoning the killing of innocents and never would but when you have people with a grievance, just like IRA did or the Jews did 50 years ago, or the Muslims now, you are going to get a hard core element that want to fight back.

 

You also can't seem to understand that killing of innocents, be it state sponsored or by lunatics with a gun is more or less the same thing if it is done without the approval of international law.

 

I am digressing, forget the rules, back to my point, you can take the piss as much as you want, but do it in a vindictive way then you should be man enough to do it in public - and I KNOW you aren't SD, you're just a bit of a prick with an agenda.

 

Will you please stop with the name calling? Honestly, it's not helping you out here at all. Do I agree with how SD is going about this? No, I don't - but by venting your spleen and acting childish, you're not going to make him listen. Try chilling out and scaling back the assault a little and maybe the two of you can have a real conversation, and not a slanging match.

[Red Lead]

Will you please stop with the name calling? Honestly, it's not helping you out here at all. Do I agree with how SD is going about this? No, I don't - but by venting your spleen and acting childish, you're not going to make him listen. Try chilling out and scaling back the assault a little and maybe the two of you can have a real conversation, and not a slanging match.

 

Well said.

[Anny Road]

As I said free speech is fine so long as it isn't done with a vindictive intent, like you are doing SD, for that reason you deserve a good kicking.

 

Secondly, since when has the Arch Bishop of Canterbury had 100's of 1000's of Christians die before his eyes. If you think Islamic radicalism is ONLY down to the religion itself and not down to UK/US foreign policy then you are pretty thick.

 

Also, how many "Christian" countries currently sit "occupied" - I'd say only technically Northern Ireland but thats complicated? I am not condoning the killing of innocents and never would but when you have people with a grievance, just like IRA did or the Jews did 50 years ago, or the Muslims now, you are going to get a hard core element that want to fight back.

 

You also can't seem to understand that killing of innocents, be it state sponsored or by lunatics with a gun is more or less the same thing if it is done without the approval of international law.

 

I am digressing, forget the rules, back to my point, you can take the piss as much as you want, but do it in a vindictive way then you should be man enough to do it in public - and I KNOW you aren't SD, you're just a bit of a prick with an agenda.

 

If I lived in Iraq or Palestine I would kill every western soldier I came across. Same as I would kill ever Arab here if Saudi decided Brown was a cunt and needed shifting because he was not buying oil.

 

I would not however go on the tube with 20 bags of natural blonde and try to blow kids up in the air.

[Karl_b]

If I lived in Iraq or Palestine I would kill every western soldier I came across. Same as I would kill ever Arab here if Saudi decided Brown was a cunt and needed shifting because he was not buying oil.

 

I would not however go on the tube with 20 bags of natural blonde and try to blow kids up in the air.

 

Errm.

[Strontium]

As I said free speech is fine so long as it isn't done with a vindictive intent, like you are doing SD, for that reason you deserve a good kicking.

 

There's nothing vindictive about my words, and the fact that you can criticise me as vindictive when you openly state that I need a good kicking for merely writing something is gobsmacking. I appreciate that violence is a first response to criticism for many Muslims, but I would expect better from you Rashid.

 

Secondly, since when has the Arch Bishop of Canterbury had 100's of 1000's of Christians die before his eyes. If you think Islamic radicalism is ONLY down to the religion itself and not down to UK/US foreign policy then you are pretty thick.

 

Ifitadnerbinfortheamericans? Do you realise how silly that sounds?

 

Let's assume for one crazy moment that American foreign policy is valid justification for a guy from Leeds to blow himself up on a crowded tube train. Why is it only apparent Western oppression of Muslims that causes rage? Why aren't Muslims up in arms about Muslim oppression of Muslims? Why aren't people blowing themselves up in Riyadh or Tehran?

 

Analysis of al Qaeda's argument and a simple understanding of history will show that American and British foreign policy is an excuse for Islamic radicalism, and not a major motivating factor.

 

I'm upset about Muslims being oppressed too; the difference is I don't feel the need to kill even more innocent people because of it. It's this insistence of Muslims to collectivise themselves first and foremost by religion which allows them to justify killing people in London for perceived grievances in Iraq.

 

You also can't seem to understand that killing of innocents, be it state sponsored or by lunatics with a gun is more or less the same thing if it is done without the approval of international law.

 

I don't agree at all. There is no moral equivalence between suicide bombing and removing nasty dictators from power.

 

I am digressing, forget the rules, back to my point, you can take the piss as much as you want, but do it in a vindictive way then you should be man enough to do it in public - and I KNOW you aren't SD, you're just a bit of a prick with an agenda.

 

This is a public forum is it not? My identity is public is it not? If you're saying I should march into a mosque and starting shouting the odds, then there's no way I am going to go that far, and why would I? That's their space where they are free, within the confines of the law, to do what they wish.

[Rashid]

Agree with that 100%. It is also forbidden in Islam.

 

What I am asking is whether it would to the same extent if our soldiers were not raping the middle east?

 

Finally, wasn't it Catholics doing it for near on 40 years not so long ago? Catholic terrorists / freedom fighters have killed more innocents on public transport than Muslims have. Both bad but do you get my point?

 

SD has tunnel vision. Bearded towel heads bad, everyone else good!

[Anny Road]

Errm.

 

Would you not defend your homeland against invasion.

[Karl_b]

Would you not defend your homeland against invasion.

 

By killing every soldier who is there doing their job?

[Anny Road]

Catholic terrorists / freedom fighters have killed more innocents on public transport than Muslims have. Both bad but do you get my point?

 

SD has tunnel vision. Bearded towel heads bad, everyone else good!

 

There is a difference though Rash. You dont get Catholics in Indonesia blowing up bars to protest against the treatment of thier brothers in Ireland.

[Rashid]

SD do you know anything about foreign countries? Muslims are fighting oppressive governments in Saudh, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. Do you not see riots in these countries all the time?

 

Also whats this about evil dictators? Do we not need international clearance to invade? Are you a far right extremist in disguise?

 

When we going to invade Zimbabwe? Do you think we should attack Iran? They even took some of ours hostage! Hmmm thats more than what Saddam ever did to us.

[Anny Road]

By killing every soldier who is there doing their job?

 

If Saudi Arabi or Germany Invaded this country and were subjecting the people to what the Yanks have done in Iraq I would join the resistance in a heartbeat.

 

Are you French?

[Strontium]

SD has tunnel vision. Bearded towel heads bad, everyone else good!

 

What total rot. I don't care who you are, where you come from or what you look like; if you try and justify suicide bombing, oppression of women and homosexuals, or any other similar kind of thing, then you are going to find yourself on the wrong side of me. And I don't care what magic entity you want to submit yourself to, that's your business. It's when those people start harming others using that magic entity as an excuse to do so that I get angry.

[Rashid]

But its ok for catholics in america to financially support the IRA? I actually have sympathy for the Irish issue by the way.

 

Anyway stick to the point YOU made. Why is killing innocents on public transport different when Muslims do it? I think they are all terrorists.

[Karl_b]

If Saudi Arabi or Germany Invaded this country and were subjecting the people to what the Yanks have done in Iraq I would join the resistance in a heartbeat.

 

Are you French?

 

Nope. Know what, I'm not even going to get into this. I stay out of threads like this because I don't enjoy the confrontation (I'm a big girl) that goes on in them. I think you have a simplistic view on things, killing all western soldiers because they were sent to do their job? What about their lives, wives, husbands, parents, children, friends? Or doesn't that matter, you just want to kill them. Unless I've completely misunderstood what you're saying I have no desire to debate this with you, I see exactly where it will go.