dfOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 meh. I think I can disagree with it because I have an open mind to the posibilities of the human race. The fact that one has a religion, culture or pigmentation which is not the same as the one I have does not diminish the value that person has within society. These people have acted in a way which you find offensive and I have no objection to you feeling offended. However for their race to be a guiding factor within that offense is short sighted and rather pathetic really. where have I intimated that these peoples race is a "guiding factor" towards my offence??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 It's the implications of "England(istan)" that grate. And I don't agree that it would only be allowed to happen in England. That's a typical nonsensical response if ever there was one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Dog Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 You think "Only in England(istan)" is a valid point? There's plenty of reasons to get upset with this demonstration but I'm not sure spouting racist bollox is the way to vent that frustration Maybe my comment ''Only in England(istan)'' was not very PC. If it has caused offence then I apoligise - it was not meant to. That said, I believe my comment was a valid one....I personally believe that only in this country do we allow ourselves to be intimidated by the Islamic fundamentalists to such an extent that it seems their rights take precedence over the rights of the majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 And I don't agree that it would only be allowed to happen in England. That's a typical nonsensical response if ever there was one. so where else would/has similar been allowed to happen??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 (edited) It's what is implied by the use of England(istan) which makes any point the poster was trying to make suspect. EDIT: Balls I think it's time for me to get some kip I'm slowing down a bit!! Edited March 10, 2009 by mikebOAFC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 his point was that this would only be allowed to happen in England or "England(istan)" as he called it. if you know otherwise feel free to educate us....................... In the US right wing (white) Christians protest at the landing of Air Force planes which are carrying the dead bodies of American Soldiers killed in Iraq and Afganistan... I think on the scale of offense this is a bit further along from a piss poor placard with hell written on it. where have I intimated that these peoples race is a "guiding factor" towards my offence??? I apologise if that read as directed at you specifically. It was aimed at the two quotes I referenced earlier and which you have defended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Maybe my comment ''Only in England(istan)'' was not very PC. If it has caused offence then I apoligise - it was not meant to. That said, I believe my comment was a valid one....I personally believe that only in this country do we allow ourselves to be intimidated by the Islamic fundamentalists to such an extent that it seems their rights take precedence over the rights of the majority. I'll answer this before I disappear. Firstly no offence taken on my part mate, although I don't think it's "un-PC" it simply comes across as having racist undertones. As for your second point..I have absolutely no problem with you or anyone else holding that point of view. I don't agree with it in the slightest but if everyone agreed with me the country would be a dull one (plus it sounds much more reasonable when put as eloquently as in the quote above, as opposed to the questionable way it was phrased in your original post) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Maybe my comment ''Only in England(istan)'' was not very PC. If it has caused offence then I apoligise - it was not meant to. That said, I believe my comment was a valid one....I personally believe that only in this country do we allow ourselves to be intimidated by the Islamic fundamentalists to such an extent that it seems their rights take precedence over the rights of the majority. Fair enough. Although I don't believe we do allow ourselves to be intimidated. Yes there's a difficult line to tread in terms of how the rights of different cultures in the UK should be handled ... and people frequently get it wrong. However, if you want to talk about intimidation, how about the intimidation that ordinary law abiding Muslims feel in the UK as a direct result of this so called "war on terror" - and often as a direct result of heavy handed and inappropriate implementation of anti-terror legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 we're lucky enough to live in the most successful multicultural society in the Western world. White, Blacks, Indians, Chinese, Eastern Europeans, Southern Europeans, Irish, hindu's, buddhists, hare krishna's, catholics, protestants live side by side in (mainly) perfect harmony yet one religious (not racial) group continuously spoils it for the rest. despite this certain people somehow feel a constant need to excuse, ignore or defend the inexcusable actions of the most bigoted group of people blighting British society today. if it wasn't so dangerous it would be laughable. shame on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfOAFC Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Fair enough. Although I don't believe we do allow ourselves to be intimidated. Yes there's a difficult line to tread in terms of how the rights of different cultures in the UK should be handled ... and people frequently get it wrong. However, if you want to talk about intimidation, how about the intimidation that ordinary law abiding Muslims feel in the UK as a direct result of this so called "war on terror" - and often as a direct result of heavy handed and inappropriate implementation of anti-terror legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yard Dog Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Fair enough. Although I don't believe we do allow ourselves to be intimidated. Yes there's a difficult line to tread in terms of how the rights of different cultures in the UK should be handled ... and people frequently get it wrong. However, if you want to talk about intimidation, how about the intimidation that ordinary law abiding Muslims feel in the UK as a direct result of this so called "war on terror" - and often as a direct result of heavy handed and inappropriate implementation of anti-terror legislation. We could go on for hours on this subject, especially as I have read up a lot on this country's ' War on Terror'. It is my view that this country, rather than intimidate ordinary law-abiding Muslims, has actually been far too soft in their policy on anti-terror for fear of upsetting law-abiding Muslims...far far too soft. An interesting book to read is, erm, 'Londonistan'...seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 We could go on for hours on this subject, especially as I have read up a lot on this country's ' War on Terror'. It is my view that this country, rather than intimidate ordinary law-abiding Muslims, has actually been far too soft in their policy on anti-terror for fear of upsetting law-abiding Muslims...far far too soft. An interesting book to read is, erm, 'Londonistan'...seriously. Unfortunate title in the circumstances! Hours? Days and weeks probably. It's a very complex subject that digs very deep into the fabric of Britain and our history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
help_shiny Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 Shame on me for being disgusted by these people - if I strongly disagree with the actions and/or belief systems of a group of people that automatically makes me racist? You might find the tone of my post offensive but believe you me I find being lazily labelled a racist offensive. I'm sure many of us on here were strongly against the war against Iraq, that doesnt make going out waving baby killer placards at British soldiers in any way acceptable. The group of people doing that in Luton yesterday have very little in common with you - they want the end of democracy in this country, they want the end to everything that you hold dear, they dislike everything this country stands for. If you want to get upset that people are having a go at people who happen not to be white and happen not to identify with our country then that's your own issue not ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Shame on me for being disgusted by these people - if I strongly disagree with the actions and/or belief systems of a group of people that automatically makes me racist? You might find the tone of my post offensive but believe you me I find being lazily labelled a racist offensive. I'm sure many of us on here were strongly against the war against Iraq, that doesnt make going out waving baby killer placards at British soldiers in any way acceptable. The group of people doing that in Luton yesterday have very little in common with you - they want the end of democracy in this country, they want the end to everything that you hold dear, they dislike everything this country stands for. If you want to get upset that people are having a go at people who happen not to be white and happen not to identify with our country then that's your own issue not ours. See. I read your post and as I go along I'm thinking perhaps the terminology you used was out of step with your actual thinking... you make excellent (if unsubstantiated) points about the protesters being against 'everything this country stands for' (freedom of speech, democratic process and so forth) but then instead of ending it with "having a go at people..." you again bring race into it. Their race is insignificant. People opposing democracy in a violent manner need to be considered dangerous, but their colour or race should not be the significant characteristic you reference. :censored:! In Ireland over the last week extremists have killed several innocents. They're not described as white, they're not referenced by people as Christians... this despite the thing being about the variation within a SINGLE religious race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7935679.stm Good old Britain, come here, abuse us, get saved by our presumably evil police and then sent on your merry way after ruining a lot of people's day. I wish we'd stop bending over and take a leaf from some of our continental chums - I cant imagine Le Flic's letting that one pass. Hell in a handcart! Firstly, I don’t think this is exactly newsworthy. There doesn’t seem to be many protesters and in fact I’ve had to put up with more anti Israel-protesters in my own workplace (Uni of Manchester) recently and nothing about that has been reported. I’m not sure about the war but I support the armed forces and what they do. However, I’m sure that they can deal with a few protesters and name calling after fighting in armed conflict. I’m 100% for peaceful protest. Yes the slogans used are not nice but in war people die which tends to be worse. If those protesting can do so without resorting to violence then I will say fair enough. I’d much rather see that than see Soldiers murdered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky_Latic Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ee5_1236718042 Here's the video you wont see on the news. The backlash from the locals standing up for the soldiers. Dont view if your easily offended. The language is a bit colourful at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) Whilst I am against the extreme message and the way in which it was put across, I do not agree that all the responsibility for the war, and hence all protest, should be directed at Downing Street. Yes, they take most of the blame. But those who are coming back from Iraq have signed up knowing where they are going and what they'd be doing...they are signing up to go to fight and kill in an illegal war. These guys haven't been drafted, they've made the conscious decision to go out there. They can't be absolved of all responsibility. Again though, the message and the manner in which it was conveyed was completely over-the-top and unnecessary. Edited March 11, 2009 by jsslatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickshire latics Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7935679.stm Good old Britain, come here, abuse us, get saved by our presumably evil police and then sent on your merry way after ruining a lot of people's day. I wish we'd stop bending over and take a leaf from some of our continental chums - I cant imagine Le Flic's letting that one pass. Hell in a handcart! Spot on there mate !!!!! Love to see them in a forward combat position dodging an RPG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Whilst I am against the extreme message and the way in which it was put across, I do not agree that all the responsibility for the war, and hence all protest, should be directed at Downing Street. Yes, they take most of the blame. But those who are coming back from Iraq have signed up knowing where they are going and what they'd be doing...they are signing up to go to fight and kill in an illegal war. These guys haven't been drafted, they've made the conscious decision to go out there. They can't be absolved of all responsibility. Again though, the message and the manner in which it was conveyed was completely over-the-top and unnecessary. Sorry, but completely wide of the mark. You sign up to serve your country and do as ordered. If it is as you say, then our forces are merely merceneries. If this was the case there are other places to go to earn better money. Not one signs up thinking 'yeah, I'll do this so I can go kill a few Muslims'. There's a lot of pride within our regiments, take the Paras for example, the lads join to be a Para nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Sorry, but completely wide of the mark. You sign up to serve your country and do as ordered. If it is as you say, then our forces are merely merceneries. If this was the case there are other places to go to earn better money. Not one signs up thinking 'yeah, I'll do this so I can go kill a few Muslims'. There's a lot of pride within our regiments, take the Paras for example, the lads join to be a Para nothing else. I think there are some who are mercenaries. I'm sure not everyone who signs up does so in order to serve their country - there's a wage involved, and an opportunity to do new things, and if you believe the ads, it opens a number of doors for people's futures. Some, I'm sure, do so because they want to serve the country (though how far they are doing so in fighting in an army which has followed another country's into an illegal war is serving the country is an issue for another day). But everyone who signs up knows what they're letting themselves in for and what they're going to be asked to do. They should make their own judgement as to whether or not the benefits of joining the army outweigh whatever ethical considerations exist. The long and short of it is that the war couldn't continue without people signing up to fight. Those that do therefore should, in my opinion, still shoulder some of the responsibility. That said, again, I don't support the actions of the protesters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I think we should agree to disagree and leave it there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Sorry, but completely wide of the mark. You sign up to serve your country and do as ordered. I think the point jss makes is that you choose to sign up, knowing that you will then have committed to doing as ordered, even if you believe (or know, whatever) that is the case - so in a way you have handed your moral choices away in advance by signing up. I guess it's a fact of modern warfare that no one soldier or airman knows what the effects of his actions will be most of the time so it could be an argument to air on the side of caution in the first place. Anyway, back to the protestors - I might surprise a few and agree that the law IS weighted in favour of Muislim radicals in this country. It's a true fact that if you were to shout back at them with anything like the robustness of what they were doing you would most likely be arrested. I don't think the answer is to lock them up though, I think it's to stop harrassing the free speech of their opponents. It's not the only area where the law is uneven - the anti-terror laws have mainly been used against tree-huggers and anti arms trade protestors, who should also be allowed their right to be wrong over important matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) The minute we didn't have an army, there'd be some squealing going on. Serious squealing. I wonder what forms these "British" lads sign when they go over to Iraq to fight the British forces? Edited March 11, 2009 by RoytonBlueLad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I think the point jss makes is that you choose to sign up, knowing that you will then have committed to doing as ordered, even if you believe (or know, whatever) that is the case - so in a way you have handed your moral choices away in advance by signing up. I guess it's a fact of modern warfare that no one soldier or airman knows what the effects of his actions will be most of the time so it could be an argument to air on the side of caution in the first place. Anyway, back to the protestors - I might surprise a few and agree that the law IS weighted in favour of Muislim radicals in this country. It's a true fact that if you were to shout back at them with anything like the robustness of what they were doing you would most likely be arrested. I don't think the answer is to lock them up though, I think it's to stop harrassing the free speech of their opponents. It's not the only area where the law is uneven - the anti-terror laws have mainly been used against tree-huggers and anti arms trade protestors, who should also be allowed their right to be wrong over important matters. So does every Army world wide Andy, with exception to conscripts. The point is similar to suggesting that somebody takes up a position as a manager in full knowledge they will have to sack somebody one day. I don't suppose for one second this is the driving force behind their decision which is what was being suggested. :censored: it, let's do a poll for the forces and see how many say they joined up to fight a war they shouldn't be involved in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 If you sign up you need to be willing to take orders. If you're ever likely to be a conscientious objector, don't sign up. The blame for us being involved in an illegal and immoral war lies squarely with the politicians. The soldiers just do what they're told and will always have my support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.