France shutters embassies, schools over new Muhammad cartoon!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/19/13958548-france-shutters-embassies-schools-over-new-muhammad-cartoon?lite

By NBC News' Nancy Ing and wire reports
France has temporarily closed its embassies and schools in 20 countries after a satirical magazine in Paris published insulting cartoons of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, a move it fears will add “fuel to the fire” of global tensions over an anti-Islam film.

“We have indeed decided as a precautionary measure to close our premises, embassies, consulates, cultural centers and schools,” a Foreign Ministry spokesman told Reuters. Riot police were also sent to the offices of the weekly magazine, Charlie Hebdo.

The acting head of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood said French courts should deal with the case as firmly as it dealt with a magazine that published topless photographs of the U.K.'s Duchess of Cambridge.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see more and more of this demanding that other nations adhere to their wishes on Islam being untouchable!
They insist on an absolute ban on critcising Islam with zero tolerance.. Look at how they have made France have to react to their threats and demands. When will the rest of the world stop yeilding to these mmffing savages!!????-Tyr

[Little-Acorn]

So the French basically surrendered before anybody attacked them.

Again.

Why is this considered "news"?

[Dilloduck]

They didn't surrender. The cartoons were published. Now they are preparing for the possible consequences. Makes sense to me.

[Nukeman]

Now we will see if the Mulims actually care about such things or if they only direct their ire towards the US....

[aboutime]

Who? In their right mind would allow the posting of such cartoons anywhere?
Knowing what has happened around the world recently. Why intentionally INTIMIDATE, or INSULT the very people you would least like to intimidate, or insult?

Whatever happens in France is of their own doing. If they think the Muslim population will just laugh, and roll over after such a thing. They deserve what happens.

France DOES NOT have a FIRST AMENDMENT like the United States Constitution, and the Muslim people who are taking over in France know it better than anyone else.

That expression "STUPID IS, AS STUPID DOES!" Really does apply here.

[Dilloduck]

America

[aboutime]

America


Thank you mister Obama.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Now we will see if the Mulims actually care about such things or if they only direct their ire towards the US....

I just posted thread on New York subways being forced(by court decision) to allow anti-Jihad ads to be posted there! Looks like your question may get an answer sooooooooooon.-Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Great opportunity for anyone who hates Muslims.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Great opportunity for anyone who hates Muslims.

Why? Are you stating that -ALL- muslims are Jihadists!!????--Tyr

[aboutime]

Great opportunity for anyone who hates Muslims.


Dilloduck. Take notice. YOU are the only member here on DP who has mentioned hating Muslims.

Great way to conceal your own, real hatred of people like me by pretending. Much like our Appeaser...Obama.

[jafar00]

The acting head of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood said French courts should deal with the case as firmly as it dealt with a magazine that published topless photographs of the U.K.'s Duchess of Cambridge.

This is a good point that everyone seems to have missed. They care more about a stupid paparazzi target who got naked in public then cries about the photos than the strongly held beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims.

[avatar4321]

This is a good point that everyone seems to have missed. They care more about a stupid paparazzi target who got naked in public then cries about the photos than the strongly held beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims.

There is no privacy issue with Satire.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

This is a good point that everyone seems to have missed. They care more about a stupid paparazzi target who got naked in public then cries about the photos than the strongly held beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims.
Thats the problem jethro, you think that all muslims should be held as a huge group(1.5 billion) when it comes to demands they make yet when we cite actions to be taken AGAINST ThAT GROUP AS A GROUP, you peole start wanting to say no-no, that was only this smaller sect of muslims or rogues or certain tribes, or certain illiterate muslims, only that certain nation's muslims . You cant have it both ways pedro.. Either you savages are a damn solid group or not. If you are it then must include the radical terrorists that do yout murdeting for you! Stop trying to play we infidels as if we are ignorant people!
In addition , why the hell should we give a damn what another nation's crazy citizens care about our laws and freedoms!!??? Do you savages change your damn laws and regulations over in those hellholes because we disapprove of the barbarity!?? Answer is --Hell no.. So this American says F-you and the camel you rode in on!
I AM NOT FRENCH, I'LL CHANGE WHEN YOU KILL ME UNTIL THEN KISS MY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN ASS.-Tyr

[aboutime]

Thats the problem jethro, you think that all muslims should be held as a huge group(1.5 billion) when it comes to demands they make yet when we cite actions to be taken AGAINST ThAT GROUP AS A GROUP, you peole start wanting to say no-no, that was only this smaller sect of muslims or rogues or certain tribes, or certain illiterate muslims, only that certain nation's muslims . You cant have it both ways pedro.. Either you savages are a damn solid group or not. If you are it then must include the radical terrorists that do yout murdeting for you! Stop trying to play we infidels as if we are ignorant people!
In addition , why the hell should we give a damn what another nation's crazy citizens care about our laws and freedoms!!??? Do you savages change your damn laws and regulations over in those hellholes because we disapprove of the barbarity!?? Answer is --Hell no.. So this American says F-you and the camel you rode in on!
I AM NOT FRENCH, I'LL CHANGE WHEN YOU KILL ME UNTIL THEN KISS MY PATRIOTIC AMERICAN ASS.-Tyr


Just in case jafar didn't understand what you told him Tyr. I will happily agree, and shorten it for him. ​"K.M.A."

[Dilloduck]

Dilloduck. Take notice. YOU are the only member here on DP who has mentioned hating Muslims.

Great way to conceal your own, real hatred of people like me by pretending. Much like our Appeaser...Obama.

Bulllshit-----others here are ready to damn all Muslims to hell.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Bulllshit-----others here are ready to damn all Muslims to hell.

Cite the quotes by those people to prove your accusation. And not just one rare mad rant which proves nothing.
I've seen no true calls for extermination of muslims and only harsh words spoken in mad rant of which I am guilty of myself. Have seen calls for the extermination of fanatical "muslim terrorist murderers" but you didnt name them , you stated ALL muslims didnt you?-Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Cite the quotes by those people to prove your accusation. And not just one rare mad rant which proves nothing.
I've seen no true calls for extermination of muslims and only harsh words spoken in mad rant of which I am guilty of myself. Have seen calls for the extermination of fanatical "muslim terrorist murderers" but you didnt name them , you stated ALL muslims didnt you?-Tyr

Ok---we can just pretend some posts count and others don't.
look--Islam no more kills people than guns kill people. Convict people who commit crimes.

[Drummond]

Ok---we can just pretend some posts count and others don't.
look--Islam no more kills people than guns kill people. Convict people who commit crimes.

To take a political example illustrating how absurd this is .. consider the Nuremberg Trials. Various Nazi figures were put on trial, and, as individuals, they were tried and (for the most part) executed. But nobody would pretend that Nazism, and Hitler's Third Reich .. and for that matter, Hitler's 'Final Solution' ... weren't ALSO on trial, and ALSO held to be responsible for the atrocities being judged !!

Islam is a belief system (which is in part a political force of its own) which is the catalyst of all that's done in its name, by the terrorists who take it upon themselves to bomb, maim and murder. Islam DOES kill, Dilloduck.

How responsible is Islam for the hatred aimed at Jews ?? Islam is what binds every nation, and every terrorist grouping, that's ever attacked Israel.

[Dilloduck]

To take a political example illustrating how absurd this is .. consider the Nuremberg Trials. Various Nazi figures were put on trial, and, as individuals, they were tried and (for the most part) executed. But nobody would pretend that Nazism, and Hitler's Third Reich .. and for that matter, Hitler's 'Final Solution' ... weren't ALSO on trial, and ALSO held to be responsible for the atrocities being judged !!

Islam is a belief system (which is in part a political force of its own) which is the catalyst of all that's done in its name, by the terrorists who take it upon themselves to bomb, maim and murder. Islam DOES kill, Dilloduck.

How responsible is Islam for the hatred aimed at Jews ?? Islam is what binds every nation, and every terrorist grouping, that's ever attacked Israel.

They didn't convict people for being Nazis. There were convicted for WHAT THEY DID. Stop being dumb, Drum.

[jimnyc]

Bulllshit-----others here are ready to damn all Muslims to hell.

I've been MIA a bit, so I hope I'm not TOO out of line. But wanted to say I find it amazing that you want to continually condemn anyone who doesn't care for Islam, or even takes an extra step to provoke them. Does that give Islam the right to kill people?

I'm sure you hold your family dear, Dillo, no? If someone simply made fun of them - would you kill them as your response? Or even worse, would you kill another innocent person that didn't even say a word, just kill them cause they are the same skin color of the person who only offended you?

And you're wrong. People damn the Muslims who indiscriminately kill and abuse people around the world. It's hardly our fault that this amounts to more than any other civilized group of people added together in the world. Islam's answer to everything is violence and retaliation. They call themselves the religion of peace, but as soon as they feel offended, they run around foaming at the mouth finding someone, anyone to kill.

I won't defend those who mock Islam at this time to get their jollies. But no matter how much they do so, NONE OF THAT gives Islam to reply in the manner they have in the past weeks. And it's not limited to any single nation, it's all of them. And even the peaceful Muslims are speaking out supporting those rioting and killing and condemning America for everything. I'm sorry, that's not peace.

They burn US flags in Islamic countries almost daily. I'm offended by that. Would it make sense to you if I went out and searched for a local Muslim to kill to show how angry I am? They think that is appropriate, and even the non-violent are in support of this rising up going on. Islam has serious problems right now. It's like they all need one humongous group anger management counseling on how to handle their lives. It's very sad actually.

[Drummond]

Bulllshit-----others here are ready to damn all Muslims to hell.

Well, I'm not !!!!!

Take Iran as an example. Iran's leaders have publicly, repeatedly, aimed sick and disgusting threats of genocide at Israel. And, as we all know, (because to suppose otherwise is illogical in the extreme) Iran is working flat-out to get itself the means to make good on that threat.

Now if Israel (or maybe a joint Israel-US force) were to bomb the guts out of Iran's infrastructure, making the threat Iran poses one effectively neutralised, I'd say they most certainly had it coming !! HOWEVER .. if Iran, tomorrow, renounced its threat, apologised for it, and did everything possible to verifiably dismantle their nuclear program, then I would no longer agree that they should be attacked.

A reformed Muslim is a Muslim I'd be delighted to see, and acknowledge as such. Once proof was offered, that is ....

Dilloduck, you need to understand the aggressive nature of Islam, and that stances taken against it are reactions to that aggression.

[Dilloduck]

Well, I'm not !!!!!

Take Iran as an example. Iran's leaders have publicly, repeatedly, aimed sick and disgusting threats of genocide at Israel. And, as we all know, (because to suppose otherwise is illogical in the extreme) Iran is working flat-out to get itself the means to make good on that threat.

Now if Israel (or maybe a joint Israel-US force) were to bomb the guts out of Iran's infrastructure, making the threat Iran poses one effectively neutralised, I'd say they most certainly had it coming !! HOWEVER .. if Iran, tomorrow, renounced its threat, apologised for it, and did everything possible to verifiably dismantle their nuclear program, then I would no longer agree that they should be attacked.

A reformed Muslim is a Muslim I'd be delighted to see, and acknowledge as such. Once proof was offered, that is ....

Dilloduck, you need to understand the aggressive nature of Islam, and that stances taken against it are reactions to that aggression.

You need to understand how clueless you are about Islam. How many Muslims are in GB now ? How many of them murder someone? How many Mulim on Christian murders do you have there everday? week? month?.

[Drummond]

They didn't convict people for being Nazis. There were convicted for WHAT THEY DID. Stop being dumb, Drum.

Yes, they did convict them for what they did. But Nazism, and Hitler's regime, and what it represented, was included as context. Far-reaching lessons were considered necessary and appropriate to learn.

Check this out ..

http://www.rt.com/news/nuremberg-trials-nazi-europe

Read what it says .. in particular ...


He understood that the trial was not only about Hitler and Ribbentrop. It was not just a few people who had to be punished, but an entire ideology of mass killing. His speech impressed the judges ....

[Dilloduck]

I've been MIA a bit, so I hope I'm not TOO out of line. But wanted to say I find it amazing that you want to continually condemn anyone who doesn't care for Islam, or even takes an extra step to provoke them. Does that give Islam the right to kill people?

I'm sure you hold your family dear, Dillo, no? If someone simply made fun of them - would you kill them as your response? Or even worse, would you kill another innocent person that didn't even say a word, just kill them cause they are the same skin color of the person who only offended you?

And you're wrong. People damn the Muslims who indiscriminately kill and abuse people around the world. It's hardly our fault that this amounts to more than any other civilized group of people added together in the world. Islam's answer to everything is violence and retaliation. They call themselves the religion of peace, but as soon as they feel offended, they run around foaming at the mouth finding someone, anyone to kill.

I won't defend those who mock Islam at this time to get their jollies. But no matter how much they do so, NONE OF THAT gives Islam to reply in the manner they have in the past weeks. And it's not limited to any single nation, it's all of them. And even the peaceful Muslims are speaking out supporting those rioting and killing and condemning America for everything. I'm sorry, that's not peace.

They burn US flags in Islamic countries almost daily. I'm offended by that. Would it make sense to you if I went out and searched for a local Muslim to kill to show how angry I am? They think that is appropriate, and even the non-violent are in support of this rising up going on. Islam has serious problems right now. It's like they all need one humongous group anger management counseling on how to handle their lives. It's very sad actually.

I've never condemned people for not liking Islam. I have condemned people for judging the entire religion by the acts of extremists. It's bigotry pure and simply.

[jimnyc]

I've never condemned people for not liking Islam. I have condemned people for judging the entire religion by the acts of extremists. It's bigotry pure and simply.

And what do you call it when and entire region/religion/country or whatever you call it condemn all of America over one man? Strawberries and cream? Why aren't you equally condemning death and destruction as you condemn provocation and silliness?

[Kathianne]

And what do you call it when and entire region/religion/country or whatever you call it condemn all of America over one man? Strawberries and cream? Why aren't you equally condemning death and destruction as you condemn provocation and silliness?

and Jews, Catholics...

[Dilloduck]

And what do you call it when and entire region/religion/country or whatever you call it condemn all of America over one man? Strawberries and cream? Why aren't you equally condemning death and destruction as you condemn provocation and silliness?

Because there is a whole board full of people doing that already.

[jimnyc]

Because there is a whole board full of people doing that already.

Oh, so you're hear to defend Islam, and don't feel the need to speak out yourself about your fellow man dying for no reason at all? You only care to condemn silliness, words on the screen, pictures, movies - but feel it's not necessary to speak up about people killing innocents around the world over what one schmuck posted, that no one even ever heard of! And shit, did you read the guys name? He might be here in America, but that name doesn't sound American to me.

Why condemn petty things and ignore the slaughter of innocent people? I can't seem to comprehend that. Sometimes there IS solely right and wrong. And while this guy posted something dumb, and France would like to provoke further, I find it unfathomable that people around the world would literally murder other people because of it. And when YOU see this happen, your first thought is to come here and condemn those who post the video, or those who condemn those doing the murdering? I'm lost, Dillo. While you may have points about people doing too much condemning at times, you also had a sense of right and wrong at one time and KNEW that it was wrong to murder innocent people over petty garbage.

[Drummond]

You need to understand how clueless you are about Islam. How many Muslims are in GB now ? How many of them murder someone? How many Mulim on Christian murders do you have there everday? week? month?.

Well, we did have our '7/7' attack, several years ago .. an attack on the London Underground, and on a London bus. And, just two weeks later, there were a second group of terrorists who tried for a copycat attack (though their bombmaking 'expertise' proved to not be up to the task).

As for afterwards .. well, we had an appeasing Labour Government (Leftie) who bent over backwards to accommodate Muslims. So, WHY would Muslims bomb people, when they were getting their way through political means instead ?

Don't kid yourself. If we could - somehow - pass a series of laws which Muslims saw to be to their disadvantage, the resulting 'outrage' would undoubtedly spark some attacks. Just as certain cartoons can offend Muslims and they go on killing sprees as a reaction, so ANYTHING Muslims are 'grievously offended' by can do the same.

[Dilloduck]

Oh, so you're hear to defend Islam, and don't feel the need to speak out yourself about your fellow man dying for no reason at all? You only care to condemn silliness, words on the screen, pictures, movies - but feel it's not necessary to speak up about people killing innocents around the world over what one schmuck posted, that no one even ever heard of! And shit, did you read the guys name? He might be here in America, but that name doesn't sound American to me.

Why condemn petty things and ignore the slaughter of innocent people? I can't seem to comprehend that. Sometimes there IS solely right and wrong. And while this guy posted something dumb, and France would like to provoke further, I find it unfathomable that people around the world would literally murder other people because of it. And when YOU see this happen, your first thought is to come here and condemn those who post the video, or those who condemn those doing the murdering? I'm lost, Dillo. While you may have points about people doing too much condemning at times, you also had a sense of right and wrong at one time and KNEW that it was wrong to murder innocent people over petty garbage.

No---I'm not here to defend Islam. I'm here to point out the fallacy of blaming one's religion for the crimes they commit. Killing is wrong. Petty killing (if there is such a thing) is even worse yet it happens all the time--in America--by non muslims.
It's not the religion-----we need to be condemning violence and murder NO MATTER WHO DOES IT. Shit, muslims kill each other in sectarian violence more than they kill others.
Blacks are killing the hell out of each other but we don't condemn them for being black. Sorry but this is plain old common sense and responsibility issues. The CRIME is what's bad. Religions are not crimes.

[jimnyc]

No---I'm not here to defend Islam. I'm here to point out the fallacy of blaming one's religion for the crimes they commit. Killing is wrong. Petty killing (if there is such a thing) is even worse yet it happens all the time--in America--by non muslims.
It's not the religion-----we need to be condemning violence and murder NO MATTER WHO DOES IT. Shit, muslims kill each other in sectarian violence more than they kill others.
Blacks are killing the hell out of each other but we don't condemn them for being black. Sorry but this is plain old common sense and responsibility issues. The CRIME is what's bad. Religions are not crimes.

I have to go out for awhile. But please, while I'm gone, can you link me to posts of yours in the past 2 weeks where you condemned killings other than Americans? If your words ring true, I expect to come back and see a laundry list of posts you made equally condemning violence around the world - which would include Islam since it's in the forefront right now. And this is an honest request as I have been MIA for a few weeks. But, and I mean this respectfully, I don't expect to see more than one post perhaps linked to. I think you're having more fun fighting individuals you don't like right here on this board right now and ignoring the REAL problems in the world and the very violence you just posted about. Prove me wrong. Please. And if you do, you will see a grateful and respectful post in reply.

[Dilloduck]

I have to go out for awhile. But please, while I'm gone, can you link me to posts of yours in the past 2 weeks where you condemned killings other than Americans? If your words ring true, I expect to come back and see a laundry list of posts you made equally condemning violence around the world - which would include Islam since it's in the forefront right now. And this is an honest request as I have been MIA for a few weeks. But, and I mean this respectfully, I don't expect to see more than one post perhaps linked to. I think you're having more fun fighting individuals you don't like right here on this board right now and ignoring the REAL problems in the world and the very violence you just posted about. Prove me wrong. Please. And if you do, you will see a grateful and respectful post in reply.

Sorry--I don't have to prove anything to anyone. There are hundreds of things I am for or against but I haven't ever posted about them. That doesn't discount my feelings about them one iota. I think claiming ISLAM to be evil in itself IS a real danger in the world. You know how libs love to trash Christianity ? Well that's exactly what this is sounding like. A bunch of people ganging up on a religion based ONLY the behavior of a few. It's wasted energy. It's group think. It promotes hate.

[jimnyc]

Sorry--I don't have to prove anything to anyone. There are hundreds of things I am for or against but I haven't ever posted about them. That doesn't discount my feelings about them one iota. I think claiming ISLAM to be evil in itself IS a real danger in the world. You know how libs love to trash Christianity ? Well that's exactly what this is sounding like. A bunch of people ganging up on a religion based ONLY the behavior of a few. It's wasted energy. It's group think. It promotes hate.

But you continually question Drummond, Tyr and others who post things about Islam. Then when someone questions you about your thoughts and intentions in return, you don't need to prove anything.

You want to condemn the pettiness while reveling in itself right here on DP. You used to be above that. But you are in fact correct, you need not prove anything to me. But I fear my suspicions are were correct, hence my questions, and hence your refusals.

Have a nice night, Dillo. I'm not Drummond or Tyr, I won't be lead on goose chases by someone who is solely looking to get a rise while refusing to put an effort into research or thought into posts of his own. These guys write novels and I rarely see 1-2 sentence replies from you. Your interests are more in them, and making them mad, than in the lives being lost around the world. The indifference is not my cup of tea.

Have a nice night and don't expect me to entertain the games. I proved my point in just a few short posts, while extremely sick and not in my right mind.

Peace.

[Little-Acorn]

France shutters embassies, schools over new Muhammad cartoon!



So the French basically surrendered before anybody attacked them.

Again.

Why is this considered "news"?

Reminds me of an ad I saw on a firearms board.

-------------------------------

FOR SALE: French battle rifle. Excellent condition. Never been fired. Only dropped once. White cloth (for cleaning) still attached to muzzle. Offers being accepted.

-------------------------------

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well, we did have our '7/7' attack, several years ago .. an attack on the London Underground, and on a London bus. And, just two weeks later, there were a second group of terrorists who tried for a copycat attack (though their bombmaking 'expertise' proved to not be up to the task).

As for afterwards .. well, we had an appeasing Labour Government (Leftie) who bent over backwards to accommodate Muslims. So, WHY would Muslims bomb people, when they were getting their way through political means instead ?

Don't kid yourself. If we could - somehow - pass a series of laws which Muslims saw to be to their disadvantage, the resulting 'outrage' would undoubtedly spark some attacks. Just as certain cartoons can offend Muslims and they go on killing sprees as a reaction, so ANYTHING Muslims are 'grievously offended' by can do the same.

My friend, Dillo is likely beyond any hope of rescue. Presented facts bounce off his brain much like a tennisball does off a brick wall IMHO. He actually defends their murdering reactions to minor slights of Islam. He tries to be clever about it but the defense of Islam is always there. I posted a comment a while back about his duplicity when posting. I am sure that it was dead on accurate.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

But you continually question Drummond, Tyr and others who post things about Islam. Then when someone questions you about your thoughts and intentions in return, you don't need to prove anything.

You want to condemn the pettiness while reveling in itself right here on DP. You used to be above that. But you are in fact correct, you need not prove anything to me. But I fear my suspicions are were correct, hence my questions, and hence your refusals.

Have a nice night, Dillo. I'm not Drummond or Tyr, I won't be lead on goose chases by someone who is solely looking to get a rise while refusing to put an effort into research or thought into posts of his own. These guys write novels and I rarely see 1-2 sentence replies from you. Your interests are more in them, and making them mad, than in the lives being lost around the world. The indifference is not my cup of tea.

Have a nice night and don't expect me to entertain the games. I proved my point in just a few short posts, while extremely sick and not in my right mind.

Peace.

F R E A K I N G B R A V O.. --:beer:

PRECISE, CONCISE and ELEGANT, you post damn good even when sick!--:beer:----:clap::clap::clap:-Tyr

[Dilloduck]

But you continually question Drummond, Tyr and others who post things about Islam. Then when someone questions you about your thoughts and intentions in return, you don't need to prove anything.

You want to condemn the pettiness while reveling in itself right here on DP. You used to be above that. But you are in fact correct, you need not prove anything to me. But I fear my suspicions are were correct, hence my questions, and hence your refusals.

Have a nice night, Dillo. I'm not Drummond or Tyr, I won't be lead on goose chases by someone who is solely looking to get a rise while refusing to put an effort into research or thought into posts of his own. These guys write novels and I rarely see 1-2 sentence replies from you. Your interests are more in them, and making them mad, than in the lives being lost around the world. The indifference is not my cup of tea.

Have a nice night and don't expect me to entertain the games. I proved my point in just a few short posts, while extremely sick and not in my right mind.

Peace.

I do---I'm pretty sure that's the way debates and discussions are supposed to go. Someone asserts something and those that disagree, make a statement refuting what has been said. I haven't picked out anyone to stalk. I've kept my participation to the issue. If long posts float your boat then enjoy them. I don't need that many words to make my points.

[tailfins]

This is a good point that everyone seems to have missed. They care more about a stupid paparazzi target who got naked in public then cries about the photos than the strongly held beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims.

Huge difference: One involves communicating religious beliefs that another religion is wrong. The other involves invasion of privacy, or a voyeur/Peeping Tom as the case may be. The photos were not taken of a public place.

[Drummond]

F R E A K I N G B R A V O.. --:beer:

PRECISE, CONCISE and ELEGANT, you post damn good even when sick!--:beer:----:clap::clap::clap:-Tyr

Tyr's said it all. Ditto from me !! :clap::clap:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well, we did have our '7/7' attack, several years ago .. an attack on the London Underground, and on a London bus. And, just two weeks later, there were a second group of terrorists who tried for a copycat attack (though their bombmaking 'expertise' proved to not be up to the task).

As for afterwards .. well, we had an appeasing Labour Government (Leftie) who bent over backwards to accommodate Muslims. So, WHY would Muslims bomb people, when they were getting their way through political means instead ?

Don't kid yourself. If we could - somehow - pass a series of laws which Muslims saw to be to their disadvantage, the resulting 'outrage' would undoubtedly spark some attacks. Just as certain cartoons can offend Muslims and they go on killing sprees as a reaction, so ANYTHING Muslims are 'grievously offended' by can do the same.

My friend, Britain is indeed in very sad shape now.
Check out this coming event there. Robinson will win the debate but the media there will not declare it so, right?-Tyr

http://thedebateinitiative.com/

Tommy Robinson, head of the English Defence League, will publicly debate Abdullah al Andalusi on Islam and Britain
Posted: August 28, 2012 | Author: Abdullah al Andalusi | Filed under: Debates, English Defence League, Islam, Islamophobia, MDI, MDI Press Release, MDI UK |

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

English Defence League, the EDL sure lok to be Brit patriots to me...-Tyr

Tommy Robinson, an EDL co-founder, has reportedly considered forming a political party.[24] In November 2011, the EDL formed an alliance with an offshoot of the BNP, known as the British Freedom Party, under which EDL members would be invited to join and stand as candidates in elections.[25] Another senior member is Alan Lake, who has been described as the EDL's chief financier, which Lake denies.[26] According to Searchlight, Lake plays an important role[clarification needed] in expanding EDL's international network.[27] Hope not Hate stated that the EDL is the "largest rightwing threat in the UK today", which mobilizes between "100 to 3000" supporters on the streets.[28]

[Drummond]

Tyr, thanks for your posts about the EDL. Most interesting.

I'm sorry to say, though, that none of this has any chance of achieving anything. The EDL is generally regarded here as a fringe grouping, and many if not most people just dismiss them as racists .. true patriots, or not. With our media having worked from the outset to supply the general public with just that viewpoint to believe in, this isn't too surprising.

The BBC, as I'm sure you know, is our State broadcaster .. and I've yet to see them broadcast anything broadly upbeat about the EDL. Not surprising, of course, since the BBC is what you might call a 'soft-Left' institution these days .. on a par with the Guardian newspaper .. but still, the BBC usually sets the pace for other media outlets here (the obvious exceptions being the Daily Mail, Daily Express, and Daily Telegraph newspapers).

Here's the BBC's 'take' on the EDL, from 2009. You'll see from the article as a whole that they're being painted as racist thugs. Partial quote below ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8250017.stm


.. But the emergence of the English Defence League is worrying many people - not least because it's very difficult to work out who they are.

The BBC has learned that four specialist national police units are investigating the EDL, including detectives with a background in watching hooliganism - but also extreme violence and terrorism. Those units are building up a picture of what the organisation is doing with the help of the British Transport Police and constabularies who have policed the demonstrations to date.

This week the BBC secured exclusive interviews with some of the organisation's leaders.

At a building site north of London, we meet "Tommy". He won't give his real name because he says he will be targeted by extremists.

Joining Tommy is an older man called Alan, from London. Later, a young man from Luton turns up with a mixed-race teenager from north London, who Tommy says is the head of the "youth wing".

"There are town centres now that are plagued by Islamic extremists," he says. "There are women who don't want to go shopping because there are 20 men in long Islamic dress shouting anti-British stuff and calling for a jihad and stirring up religious and racial hatred. Those are our town centres, and we want them back.

"We want them back, not from the Muslims, but from the jihadist extremists that are operating in the Muslim communities. And the Muslim communities need to deal with their extremists.

"They need to drive them out - we have had enough of it."

The English Defence League emerged from the angry scenes in Luton last March when a group of Muslims protested as the Royal Anglian Regiment paraded through the town on its return from Afghanistan.

When a counter-demonstration under the name of United People of Luton led to arrests, local football supporters decided something should be done.

They found common cause with other "soccer casuals" and "firms" associated with major clubs. The chatter concluded that this was a national problem and they had to put aside club rivalries.

Things really took off after the same Islamist group "converted" an 11-year-old boy in Birmingham city centre in June. That incident caused a minor tabloid furore - but a greater reaction on the net, particularly on websites and forums associated with football violence and far-right activity.

By the summer there were English Defence League "divisions" run by football supporters in Luton, north London, Bristol, Portsmouth and Southampton, Derby, Cardiff and the West Midlands.

The EDL turned its attention to Birmingham in August with a march, but found itself outmanoeuvred by anti-racist protest groups in ugly scenes that led to 35 arrests. A similar march planned for Luton was banned.

The British National Party has distanced itself from the EDL, but anti-racism campaigners have named party activists they have photographed at demonstrations. They add that some demos have included people with a record of football violence.

Each demonstration has led to confrontations. But leaders like Tommy are appealing for demonstrators to avoid drink because they don't want to be written off as racist thugs.

In Birmingham last week, the BBC filmed black and white men alongside each other on EDL's lines.

So if it's not exclusively white, is it just a cover for a wider Islamophobia?

"People aren't against Islam, they aren't against anything else other than the funders of terrorism, the sworn enemies of Britain," says Tommy.

"For 10-15 years these groups have gone unchallenged in our towns and cities. Those days have gone now. We will challenge them. Wherever there are terrorists, we will be there."

Nick Lowles is the editor of Searchlight, which campaigns against far-right extremists.

He says that the English Defence League should not be written off because it poses two risks.

"What we are seeing is the formation of a street army, people who will travel around the country to fight," he says.

"Into this mix you can get [far-right] organisations winding them up - let's go here or there, here's some money - giving them some organisational support, that kind of thing.

"But the risk is what happens if they go into areas where there are existing tensions. All those places are potential flashpoints. That's the explosive mix that we have got here.

"I'm not saying that every leader of the EDL is a fascist or hardcore racist but as you have seen with the signs, chanting and actions, it's anti-Muslim - and that's incitement."

Muslim groups are increasingly concerned about the EDL - and they say it's blatantly Islamophobic. In Birmingham, young Muslim men vow to "defend" the city if the EDL turns up again.

Do you see, Tyr, how these issues are managed ? Note that last comment I've indicated in red, that says .. 'It's anti-Muslim - and that's incitement'.

'Incitement', Tyr, is actionable in law over here. Successfully tar the EDL with an 'incitement' charge, and trouble with the police can easily follow.

And note also this ...


"People aren't against Islam, they aren't against anything else other than the funders of terrorism, the sworn enemies of Britain," says Tommy.

Now, I don't know if 'Tommy' is the same one as your own link refers to, Tyr. However, note that the EDL, judging from this, does not want to be seen as anti-Islam as such (.. or at least, it didn't back in 2009) .. just against the 'extremists', which it regarded differently. This could either be a genuinely accurate statement - OR - one that had to be made, because an outright statement saying they were anti-Islam was one they couldn't make without bringing down a massive amount of trouble upon themselves.

Perhaps the EDL has refined its position since then. Nonetheless, the laws of the land here are no less pro-Muslim than they were in 2009. The EDL, though I daresay they'll soldier on, have too much ranged against them to hope to achieve anything much. Our media, and for that matter our police, will see to that.

[Drummond]

Tyr, a correction to my last post.

I thought I'd check on exactly what the law of 'incitement' covered, and what it could mean for anyone charged with it. I've just read a piece which says that the 'incitement' law was abolished in 2007.

I have to assume that the person quoted in the BBC report I pasted before didn't know that, either.

Wikipedia tells me that 'incitement' was an 'inchoate' offence .. and I understand from what I've read that even if the specific offence of 'incitement' has gone, other laws go a long way to cover for it.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inchoate_offences_in_English_law


Inchoate offences in English law are offences in England and Wales that cover illegal acts which have yet to be committed, primarily attempts to commit crimes, incitement to commit crimes, and conspiracy to commit crimes. Attempts, governed by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, are defined as situations where an individual who intends to commit an offence does an act which is "more than merely preparatory" in the offence's commission. Traditionally this definition has caused problems, with no firm rule on what constitutes a "more than merely preparatory" act, but broad judicial statements give some guidance. Incitement, on the other hand, is an offence under the common law, and covers situations where an individual encourages another person to engage in activities which will result in a criminal act taking place, and intends for this act to occur. As a criminal activity, incitement had a particularly broad remit, covering "a suggestion, proposal, request, exhortation, gesture, argument, persuasion, inducement, goading or the arousal of cupidity". It was abolished by the Serious Crime Act 2007, but continues in other offences and as the basis of the new offence of "encouraging or assisting" the commission of a crime.

Do you have any equivalent of 'anticipatory' offences in American law, Tyr ? Because I'd guess that our legal system grants much wider powers of arrest than yours does. And, needless to say ... with the right application, this sort of legal coverage can be used to restrain certain types of freedom of speech.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr, a correction to my last post.

I thought I'd check on exactly what the law of 'incitement' covered, and what it could mean for anyone charged with it. I've just read a piece which says that the 'incitement' law was abolished in 2007.

I have to assume that the person quoted in the BBC report I pasted before didn't know that, either.

Wikipedia tells me that 'incitement' was an 'inchoate' offence .. and I understand from what I've read that even if the specific offence of 'incitement' has gone, other laws go a long way to cover for it.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inchoate_offences_in_English_law



Do you have any equivalent of 'anticipatory' offences in American law, Tyr ? Because I'd guess that our legal system grants much wider powers of arrest than yours does. And, needless to say ... with the right application, this sort of legal coverage can be used to restrain certain types of freedom of speech.

Not sure about that in regards to standing laws, but that would be under the heading of our Freedom of Speech which is a Constitutional right. Now I do know that we have leftist/liberal judges that render all kinds of unsavory rulings. Some even reference foreign law believe it some kind of enlightenment to ignore our Constitution in favor of foreign law, all have been liberal judges . I have no doubt that our government is pursuing every avenue available to limit our right to free speech! Obama is about to get the ability to shut down the internet here when he decides it necessary for National Security. This can not be allowed for its a first major step in destroying our Freedom of Speech. Certainly looks like it will be allowed. Apparently he is going to do it as an Executive order or some such crap. Going to have to research it when time allows. I've been very busy as of late. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr, thanks for your posts about the EDL. Most interesting.

I'm sorry to say, though, that none of this has any chance of achieving anything. The EDL is generally regarded here as a fringe grouping, and many if not most people just dismiss them as racists .. true patriots, or not. With our media having worked from the outset to supply the general public with just that viewpoint to believe in, this isn't too surprising.

The BBC, as I'm sure you know, is our State broadcaster .. and I've yet to see them broadcast anything broadly upbeat about the EDL. Not surprising, of course, since the BBC is what you might call a 'soft-Left' institution these days .. on a par with the Guardian newspaper .. but still, the BBC usually sets the pace for other media outlets here (the obvious exceptions being the Daily Mail, Daily Express, and Daily Telegraph newspapers).

Here's the BBC's 'take' on the EDL, from 2009. You'll see from the article as a whole that they're being painted as racist thugs. Partial quote below ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8250017.stm



Do you see, Tyr, how these issues are managed ? Note that last comment I've indicated in red, that says .. 'It's anti-Muslim - and that's incitement'.

'Incitement', Tyr, is actionable in law over here. Successfully tar the EDL with an 'incitement' charge, and trouble with the police can easily follow.

And note also this ...



Now, I don't know if 'Tommy' is the same one as your own link refers to, Tyr. However, note that the EDL, judging from this, does not want to be seen as anti-Islam as such (.. or at least, it didn't back in 2009) .. just against the 'extremists', which it regarded differently. This could either be a genuinely accurate statement - OR - one that had to be made, because an outright statement saying they were anti-Islam was one they couldn't make without bringing down a massive amount of trouble upon themselves.

Perhaps the EDL has refined its position since then. Nonetheless, the laws of the land here are no less pro-Muslim than they were in 2009. The EDL, though I daresay they'll soldier on, have too much ranged against them to hope to achieve anything much. Our media, and for that matter our police, will see to that.

It is a crying shame that the EDL ,that appear to be patriots to me, are rejected out of hand by Brits because the government/media has tagged them as bigots/rascists. Are there no large independent media to put the truth out ?
Is government media that strong/overpowering there!??
Iam interested in Britains plight for a number of reasons top two our its out ally and we need it to remain so and it is an example of the leftist muslim connection?alliance. And how they cooperate to further destroy the current government by infiltration /other means to advance Islam's destructive agenda! For we see that starting here and its moving much faster now.. Presenting a dire threat to our nation!!--Tyr

[Dilloduck]

Tyr, thanks for your posts about the EDL. Most interesting.

I'm sorry to say, though, that none of this has any chance of achieving anything. The EDL is generally regarded here as a fringe grouping, and many if not most people just dismiss them as racists .. true patriots, or not. With our media having worked from the outset to supply the general public with just that viewpoint to believe in, this isn't too surprising.

The BBC, as I'm sure you know, is our State broadcaster .. and I've yet to see them broadcast anything broadly upbeat about the EDL. Not surprising, of course, since the BBC is what you might call a 'soft-Left' institution these days .. on a par with the Guardian newspaper .. but still, the BBC usually sets the pace for other media outlets here (the obvious exceptions being the Daily Mail, Daily Express, and Daily Telegraph newspapers).

Here's the BBC's 'take' on the EDL, from 2009. You'll see from the article as a whole that they're being painted as racist thugs. Partial quote below ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8250017.stm



Do you see, Tyr, how these issues are managed ? Note that last comment I've indicated in red, that says .. 'It's anti-Muslim - and that's incitement'.

'Incitement', Tyr, is actionable in law over here. Successfully tar the EDL with an 'incitement' charge, and trouble with the police can easily follow.

And note also this ...



Now, I don't know if 'Tommy' is the same one as your own link refers to, Tyr. However, note that the EDL, judging from this, does not want to be seen as anti-Islam as such (.. or at least, it didn't back in 2009) .. just against the 'extremists', which it regarded differently. This could either be a genuinely accurate statement - OR - one that had to be made, because an outright statement saying they were anti-Islam was one they couldn't make without bringing down a massive amount of trouble upon themselves.

Perhaps the EDL has refined its position since then. Nonetheless, the laws of the land here are no less pro-Muslim than they were in 2009. The EDL, though I daresay they'll soldier on, have too much ranged against them to hope to achieve anything much. Our media, and for that matter our police, will see to that.


"We want them back, not from the Muslims, but from the jihadist extremists that are operating in the Muslim communities. And the Muslim communities need to deal with their extremists.

"They need to drive them out - we have had enough of it."

There's no chance that this might be exactly what they believe ? No chance at all ?

[Drummond]

It is a crying shame that the EDL ,that appear to be patriots to me, are rejected out of hand by Brits because the government/media has tagged them as bigots/rascists. Are there no large independent media to put the truth out ?
Is government media that strong/overpowering there!??
Iam interested in Britains plight for a number of reasons top two our its out ally and we need it to remain so and it is an example of the leftist muslim connection?alliance. And how they cooperate to further destroy the current government by infiltration /other means to advance Islam's destructive agenda! For we see that starting here and its moving much faster now.. Presenting a dire threat to our nation!!--Tyr

The simple answer to the highlighted point is ... YES. I'm sorry to say, yes it is.

Our principal TV broadcaster is State-run, which is the BBC, and it had a broadcasting monopoly from 1936 to 1955. From 1955 to the mid-1980's, all we had were two Companies, going head-to-head, the BBC and ITV, or Independent Television. Now, ITV was independent, but produced dumbed-down material for the most part (our first commercial broadcaster), and Governments wouldn't allow them more than one TV channel. The BBC, since the mid-60's, had two ... BBC-2 being the more 'serious' outputter of the two.

ITV wasn't devoid of serious material, but it wasn't the main purveyor of it ... that always fell to the BBC. So, the BBC had a near-monopoly on such output right from its creation in 1936 to approx the 1990's. Channel 4 went on air in the 1980's, Channel 5 followed, then satellite TV took off, now we have hundreds of channels, courtesy of Satellite v Freeview v Freesat mediums.

So .. we literally had one generation of British citizens only getting State TV .. the next one getting two channels, one dumbed-down, the other the BBC, which produced most of the in-depth socio-political material available (.. so that's two successive generations experiencing State-dominated output). Under Mrs Thatcher ... that all changed, and a broadcasting revolution took place. Nonetheless .. the BBC has always been the 'benchmark' broadcaster.

In newspapers ... they're either Conservative, soft-Left, harder-Left, and even outright Communist (one paper, the 'Morning Star'). The 'Independent' newspaper started out as truly independent, but in recent years has veered to the Left ... I'd put them slightly to the left of the Guardian these days. This occurred, I think, as a reaction to the UK Government's support of Bush in the Iraq War, which the paper's editorials were highly critical of.

Radio ... a spectrum, but the BBC tends to dominate, between national stations and community broadcasting.

The additional point needs to be made that the BBC leads the field in technological innovation. You want to access pages of news via the TV ... there are only two principal suppliers, and the BBC's version outdoes the competition for sheer ease-of-use and accessibility, so, people tend to rely on it.

So, you see, the BBC is still turned to for news and in-depth issues, even though these days they're not the only source of it (and besides, by law, revenues pass from the Public directly to the BBC courtesy of a taxation system, called the TV Licensing fee. In law, here, if you legally want to watch TV AT ALL, you pay for a TV licence, and the BBC gets a cut of the money paid. So, if you want to watch TV, you pay the BBC for the privilege .. effectively.

Little wonder that we all want our money's worth from them, and so watch their output ....

[.. yes, I know the BBC abroad operates as a commercial venture. BUT IT NEVER HAS DONE WITHIN UK TERRITORY. It's always been guaranteed money from the Government to operate here, and presumably always will be ..]

The EDL, Tyr, are still only a small venture, and have no actual political power. They have no representation at all in Parliament. And, as my link showed, they've even been under close scrutiny by the police, no doubt being influenced into that by Muslim pressure groups. The simple fact of life here is that, if the EDL did gain power or influence, the BBC and others would simply strengthen their propaganda offensive against them.

Talking of 'small ventures' .. the BNP (British National Party), though nearly powerless, have managed to get a couple of MP's elected. Needless to say, they too have been branded racist and are on the fringes of UK politics (and to be fair, they did ban non-whites from their membership, until the law was changed to outlaw such discrimination). Anyone searching the Internet will doubtless find emotive and bombastic articles branding them accordingly.

Oh, and here's one for Dilloduck, and he'll be delighted with this news ... guess who it was who saw to it that personal details of the entire BNP membership became accessible to everyone ? JULIAN ASSANGE, who published complete lists of such information.

I'm sure that his Leftie pals were delighted with him.

So you see, Tyr ... the more the Right gains power (the mainstream Conservative Party notwithstanding), the more they can expect to be demonised, even be subject to a 'dirty tricks' campaign.

That's just the way things are here.

[Drummond]

There's no chance that this might be exactly what they believe ? No chance at all ?

I'm not completely sure of your meaning. But, if you're asking whether the EDL truly believes that there are extremists who are separate from 'mainstream Islam' ... well, judging by the BBC report (and the BBC is a far from unbiased broadcaster !!) you'd have to believe that the EDL does make such distinctions.

BUT, is it quite that simple ?

The BBC's piece is three years old, and a lot has happened since then. Even in recent DAYS, we've seen how widespread Muslim savagery has been (.. so this isn't dismissable as being the product of a 'fringe few', no matter how hard that Lefties would insist it is). So, my guess is that the EDL's membership's views are hardening, HAVE hardened, are becoming less susceptible to any lingering likelihood of compromise that might've existed before.

And there's another dimension you're maybe (??) not getting. The EDL have in common with the BNP a resentment of Muslim incursion in the UK. Tyr's quite right ... there's a core of patriotism at work there. So it's little wonder that the Muslims in particular want them marginalised, seen as 'racists' ...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The simple answer to the highlighted point is ... YES. I'm sorry to say, yes it is.

Our principal TV broadcaster is State-run, which is the BBC, and it had a broadcasting monopoly from 1936 to 1955. From 1955 to the mid-1980's, all we had were two Companies, going head-to-head, the BBC and ITV, or Independent Television. Now, ITV was independent, but produced dumbed-down material for the most part (our first commercial broadcaster), and Governments wouldn't allow them more than one TV channel. The BBC, since the mid-60's, had two ... BBC-2 being the more 'serious' outputter of the two.

ITV wasn't devoid of serious material, but it wasn't the main purveyor of it ... that always fell to the BBC. So, the BBC had a near-monopoly on such output right from its creation in 1936 to approx the 1990's. Channel 4 went on air in the 1980's, Channel 5 followed, then satellite TV took off, now we have hundreds of channels, courtesy of Satellite v Freeview v Freesat mediums.

So .. we literally had one generation of British citizens only getting State TV .. the next one getting two channels, one dumbed-down, the other the BBC, which produced most of the in-depth socio-political material available (.. so that's two successive generations experiencing State-dominated output). Under Mrs Thatcher ... that all changed, and a broadcasting revolution took place. Nonetheless .. the BBC has always been the 'benchmark' broadcaster.

In newspapers ... they're either Conservative, soft-Left, harder-Left, and even outright Communist (one paper, the 'Morning Star'). The 'Independent' newspaper started out as truly independent, but in recent years has veered to the Left ... I'd put them slightly to the left of the Guardian these days. This occurred, I think, as a reaction to the UK Government's support of Bush in the Iraq War, which the paper's editorials were highly critical of.

Radio ... a spectrum, but the BBC tends to dominate, between national stations and community broadcasting.

The additional point needs to be made that the BBC leads the field in technological innovation. You want to access pages of news via the TV ... there are only two principal suppliers, and the BBC's version outdoes the competition for sheer ease-of-use and accessibility, so, people tend to rely on it.

So, you see, the BBC is still turned to for news and in-depth issues, even though these days they're not the only source of it (and besides, by law, revenues pass from the Public directly to the BBC courtesy of a taxation system, called the TV Licensing fee. In law, here, if you legally want to watch TV AT ALL, you pay for a TV licence, and the BBC gets a cut of the money paid. So, if you want to watch TV, you pay the BBC for the privilege .. effectively.

Little wonder that we all want our money's worth from them, and so watch their output ....

[.. yes, I know the BBC abroad operates as a commercial venture. BUT IT NEVER HAS DONE WITHIN UK TERRITORY. It's always been guaranteed money from the Government to operate here, and presumably always will be ..]

The EDL, Tyr, are still only a small venture, and have no actual political power. They have no representation at all in Parliament. And, as my link showed, they've even been under close scrutiny by the police, no doubt being influenced into that by Muslim pressure groups. The simple fact of life here is that, if the EDL did gain power or influence, the BBC and others would simply strengthen their propaganda offensive against them.

Talking of 'small ventures' .. the BNP (British National Party), though nearly powerless, have managed to get a couple of MP's elected. Needless to say, they too have been branded racist and are on the fringes of UK politics (and to be fair, they did ban non-whites from their membership, until the law was changed to outlaw such discrimination). Anyone searching the Internet will doubtless find emotive and bombastic articles branding them accordingly.

Oh, and here's one for Dilloduck, and he'll be delighted with this news ... guess who it was who saw to it that personal details of the entire BNP membership became accessible to everyone ? JULIAN ASSANGE, who published complete lists of such information.

I'm sure that his Leftie pals were delighted with him.

So you see, Tyr ... the more the Right gains power (the mainstream Conservative Party notwithstanding), the more they can expect to be demonised, even be subject to a 'dirty tricks' campaign.

That's just the way things are here.

My friend, sad to say but it surely looks to me like nothing but a full blown revolution can save Britain. And such would be as bloody as any . What then would emerge after that even if successful would be a greatly diminshed nation. Civil war has always been an extremely costly measure to undertake. That will only happen if there are enough patriots remaining which appears to me possibly that there are not! If Islam triumphs there our fight will be at least ten times harder and the odds on our success greatly diminished! Surely looks to me like our coming to Britain's aid is the only chance it has of survival. First we have to truly see our great danger and also realise that Britain's survival is quite likely a key to ours as well IMHO.-Tyr

[Drummond]

My friend, sad to say but it surely looks to me like nothing but a full blown revolution can save Britain. And such would be as bloody as any . What then would emerge after that even if successful would be a greatly diminshed nation. Civil war has always been an extremely costly measure to undertake. That will only happen if there are enough patriots remaining which appears to me possibly that there are not! If Islam triumphs there our fight will be at least ten times harder and the odds on our success greatly diminished! Surely looks to me like our coming to Britain's aid is the only chance it has of survival. First we have to truly see our great danger and also realise that Britain's survival is quite likely a key to ours as well IMHO.-Tyr

That's a good analysis, Tyr, and I agree with it.

Add to that the fact that most UK citizens don't own a gun - largely because of our stringent anti-gun laws (.. so most people aren't used to the idea of it, either ..) and that sense of self-empowerment, which US citizens can take for granted, is pretty much absent here. Where would we get our 'empowerment' from ? From the authorities, who have done their bit to shape the current status quo !!

And as I've discussed before, this is all further complicated by the extent to which we're tied into EU law these days. Even IF we could change laws that put more power into the hands of the British people, the EU might well be able to brand them illegal. Human rights legislators from the EU would have a field day if we ever started backtracking in earnest from all the Muslim-friendly legislation our Lefties spent over a decade forcing through Parliament.

[jimnyc]

There's no chance that this might be exactly what they believe ? No chance at all ?

AWESOME insight and a well said and well thought out post. Your time spent and effort put into your replies to others is an inspiration to all. :rolleyes:

[Dilloduck]

AWESOME insight and a well said and well thought out post. Your time spent and effort put into your replies to others is an inspiration to all. :rolleyes:

Thanks bro. Care to take a couple seconds and answer the question ?

Seriously----I get your opinion about the length of my posts----you think they are too short and therefore not thought out. Can we move passed that?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's a good analysis, Tyr, and I agree with it.

Add to that the fact that most UK citizens don't own a gun - largely because of our stringent anti-gun laws (.. so most people aren't used to the idea of it, either ..) and that sense of self-empowerment, which US citizens can take for granted, is pretty much absent here. Where would we get our 'empowerment' from ? From the authorities, who have done their bit to shape the current status quo !!

And as I've discussed before, this is all further complicated by the extent to which we're tied into EU law these days. Even IF we could change laws that put more power into the hands of the British people, the EU might well be able to brand them illegal. Human rights legislators from the EU would have a field day if we ever started backtracking in earnest from all the Muslim-friendly legislation our Lefties spent over a decade forcing through Parliament.

Yes, I did leave out the EU problem , entanglement that would have to be sorted out. Was a bad move to be involved with the EU from the start. So many negatives involving the EU. The deck is very heavily stacked against Britain on this one my friend. She is going to need a valiant Dunkirk type rescue and damn quick. One that would never ever even be considered with obama still as our "King"! Our fate and possibly even the fate of the world depends on tossing that bastard out! Certainly in my mind Britain's fate could easily be decided by this coming election and whether our current would be tyrant remains, quite likely the welfare and security of ours too IMHO.
By the way , my composition went over like a lead ballon on the Brit forum. I posted it (complete with paragraphs ;)) on two threads there. It was completely ignored on one thread and viciously attacked by lefty muslim appeasor on the other one! One guy did defend it and state America should remain an ally to Britain. He was quickly criticised for even daring to state that! TZ

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Thanks bro. Care to take a couple seconds and answer the question ?

Seriously----I get your opinion about the length of my posts----you think they are too short and therefore not thought out. Can we move passed that?

I believe that I've mentioned that before myself. Even cited six consecutive replies you made to me on a thread , each was a one line question. One reply was four words if memory serves me well . You tossed it off as insane criticism that indicated nothing at all.
You sir , have become a one line reply master! Often not even responding to the OP other than posing a EXTREMELY short question. By doing that you so often ignore that poster's information given , judgements made ,questions asked and counter made to your stand. Drummonds posts longer , better and more detailed posts than I do and you do the same to him! Its simply a lack of respect or arrogance to equate such one line simplistic replies , questions as being brilliant and/or adequate! I have to agree with Jim , it's not brilliance it is just being lazy IMHO. And I believe done so because you can not counter the opposition replies that are so often detailed and informative. AN INTELLIGENT MAN SPEAKS FROM THE HEART AND DOES SO WITHOUT GUILE. I've seen absolutely nothing of this supposed great Rep you had here from before my arriving here myself. The fact that Jim is speaking about it validates much of my suspicion about your duplicity . Trust me, its a thousand times easier to just be truthful, no lies to remember and no lies to have to try to keep straight! Myself, I enjoy having that great advantage, you should give it a try. A friendly suggestion. Just sayin'... -Tyr

[Dilloduck]

I believe that I've mentioned that before myself. Even cited six consecutive replies you made to me on a thread , each was a one line question. One reply was four words if memory serves me well . You tossed it off as insane criticism that indicated nothing at all.
You sir , have become a one line reply master! Often not even responding to the OP other than posing a EXTREMELY short question. By doing that you so often ignore that poster's information given , judgements made ,questions asked and counter made to your stand. I have to agree with Jim , it's not brilliance it is just being lazy IMHO. And I believe done so because you can not counter opposition replies that are so often detailed and informative. AN INTELLIGENT MAN SPEAKS FROM THE HEART AND DOES SO WITHOUT GUILE. I've seen absolutely nothing of this supposed great Rep you had here from before my arriving here myself. The fact that Jim is speaking about it validates much of my suspicion about your duplicity . Trust me, its a thousand times easier to just be truthful, no lies to remember and no lies to have to try to keep straight! Myself, I enjoy having that great advantage, you should give it a try. A friendly suggestion. Just sayin'... -Tyr

WTF are you talking about ? Duplicity in what ? This is just me. Engaged in what I hoped could be a discussion however we get sidetracked by irrelevant issues like length of posts and dragging out rumors from fucking years ago. You got something to say to me say it. You wanna discuss something? bring it on.

[jimnyc]

Thanks bro. Care to take a couple seconds and answer the question ?

Seriously----I get your opinion about the length of my posts----you think they are too short and therefore not thought out. Can we move passed that?

Mr. High and Mighty aka Mr. Self Righteous, I believe that would be "past".

As for your question, when I see your intelligence return once again and you taking the time to actually reply to OTHERS questions, then I'll come back to engaging you in legit discussion again. Until then, I'm done wasting my time with someone solely looking to get a rise out of me.

[Dilloduck]

Mr. High and Mighty aka Mr. Self Righteous, I believe that would be "past".

As for your question, when I see your intelligence return once again and you taking the time to actually reply to OTHERS questions, then I'll come back to engaging you in legit discussion again. Until then, I'm done wasting my time with someone solely looking to get a rise out of me.

Show me a question I haven't repsonded to.

[jimnyc]

Show me a question I haven't repsonded to.

Oh, how soon we forget. I VERY POLITELY a few days ago asked you to please link me to where you were interested in condemning both parties, to link me to where you had condemned the violence and murders going on around the world in Islamic countries. Do you recall your response? Something about not having to prove a damn thing to anyone and not giving me a reply to what I politely requested?

Slow down too, Dillo. I know I'm wiping the floor with you right now, but it's "responded". Take your time, think and it'll all be better when you take a deep breath. :)

[Dilloduck]

Oh, how soon we forget. I VERY POLITELY a few days ago asked you to please link me to where you were interested in condemning both parties, to link me to where you had condemned the violence and murders going on around the world in Islamic countries. Do you recall your response? Something about not having to prove a damn thing to anyone and not giving me a reply to what I politely requested?

Slow down too, Dillo. I know I'm wiping the floor with you right now, but it's "responded". Take your time, think and it'll all be better when you take a deep breath. :)

That wasn't a question. You asked me to go searching for links. I can tell you now and again-----I condemn violence and murder of all kinds. Always have and it shows over and over in my posts.

[jimnyc]

That wasn't a question. You asked me to go searching for links. I can tell you now and again-----I condemn violence and murder of all kinds. Always have and it shows over and over in my posts.

You have my sincerest apologies, Dilloduck.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=37035

[Drummond]

That wasn't a question. You asked me to go searching for links. I can tell you now and again-----I condemn violence and murder of all kinds. Always have and it shows over and over in my posts.

Excellent.

The War on Terror was intended as an antidote to the worst manifestation imaginable (short of nuclear armaggeddon !) of exactly what you're telling us you condemn. I'd like your confirmation, then, that you're 100% in support of it, and all that must be done in the furtherance of it.

[Drummond]

Yes, I did leave out the EU problem , entanglement that would have to be sorted out. Was a bad move to be involved with the EU from the start. So many negatives involving the EU. The deck is very heavily stacked against Britain on this one my friend. She is going to need a valiant Dunkirk type rescue and damn quick. One that would never ever even be considered with obama still as our "King"! Our fate and possibly even the fate of the world depends on tossing that bastard out! Certainly in my mind Britain's fate could easily be decided by this coming election and whether our current would be tyrant remains, quite likely the welfare and security of ours too IMHO.
By the way , my composition went over like a lead ballon on the Brit forum. I posted it (complete with paragraphs ;)) on two threads there. It was completely ignored on one thread and viciously attacked by lefty muslim appeasor on the other one! One guy did defend it and state America should remain an ally to Britain. He was quickly criticised for even daring to state that! TZ

Well, the initial intention was to sign up to a trade agreement. which was what the original 'Common Market' was meant to be. I myself saw no problem with that.

But then, the whole thing mutated out of all proportion. Now, we've got the likes of Barrosso advocating that Member States accept the loss of their sovereignty and become member units of a single power bloc .. he used the crisis the Euro created to claim that nothing less than political unity under one centralised EU Governmental body would suffice for the future of Europe. That, Tyr, doesn't remotely resemble the original idea.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83f2e49c-fcbe-11e1-9dd2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz27K0wEkWY


Europe must evolve to “a federation of nation states”, Europe’s top official has said, as he pleaded for deeper integration among the EU’s 27 members and an overhaul of the bloc’s treaties to end its ongoing economic turbulence.

The fiscal crisis had revealed the need for a leap forward in political integration to complement the closer co-operation member states had already begun to embrace to harmonise their economic and fiscal policies, José Manuel Barroso said in his annual “state of the union” address.

“I call for ... a democratic federation of nation states that can tackle our common problems, through the sharing of sovereignty in a way that each country and each citizen are better equipped to control their own destiny,” the European Commission president said.

Nigel Farage (leader of the UK Independence Party) said, in his reply to Barrosso's speech in the European Parliament, that a call for a Referendum on future EU membership has never been stronger here, and Barrosso's transparent power-grab, intended to reduce Nation State sovereignty to near zero, surely has to add to that. So .. maybe, all is not lost on that front. Time will tell.

I'm sorry to say that I'm not surprised you had a hard time of it on the Brit forum. What you're meeting there is the effect of decades of indoctrination by the Left. As I've said before ... people believe their ideas and attitudes are their own, but the truth is that a dripfed propaganda effect undertaken over decades has grafted Left-wing imperatives upon people without their being aware of the insidious process happening.

This is one reason why kicking Obama out, now, is all-important. Term after term of Left-wing Governments in the US will do to you what has already been done here, and over time, attitudes will change through their own propagandising efforts.

If you haven't already, Tyr (and judging by your post, you HAVE ..) you'll come to see how much of a stranglehold the Left has over attitudes in the UK. The Left is a ruinous and traitorous enemy.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well, the initial intention was to sign up to a trade agreement. which was what the original 'Common Market' was meant to be. I myself saw no problem with that.

But then, the whole thing mutated out of all proportion. Now, we've got the likes of Barrosso advocating that Member States accept the loss of their sovereignty and become member units of a single power bloc .. he used the crisis the Euro created to claim that nothing less than political unity under one centralised EU Governmental body would suffice for the future of Europe. That, Tyr, doesn't remotely resemble the original idea.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83f2e49c-fcbe-11e1-9dd2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz27K0wEkWY



Nigel Farage (leader of the UK Independence Party) said, in his reply to Barrosso's speech in the European Parliament, that a call for a Referendum on future EU membership has never been stronger here, and Barrosso's transparent power-grab, intended to reduce Nation State sovereignty to near zero, surely has to add to that. So .. maybe, all is not lost on that front. Time will tell.

I'm sorry to say that I'm not surprised you had a hard time of it on the Brit forum. What you're meeting there is the effect of decades of indoctrination by the Left. As I've said before ... people believe their ideas and attitudes are their own, but the truth is that a dripfed propaganda effect undertaken over decades has grafted Left-wing imperatives upon people without their being aware of the insidious process happening.

This is one reason why kicking Obama out, now, is all-important. Term after term of Left-wing Governments in the US will do to you what has already been done here, and over time, attitudes will change through their own propagandising efforts.

If you haven't already, Tyr (and judging by your post, you HAVE ..) you'll come to see how much of a stranglehold the Left has over attitudes in the UK. The Left is a ruinous and traitorous enemy.

First , thanks for an informative and fine post......--:beer:
I have come to the conclusion that a stranglehold existed there just from my interaction on the Brit forum and my researching the subject concerning the Islamic scourge there and its disasterious effects upon the nation... However not to the level you just informed me of and trusting your judgement and integrity I have no doubt about its accuracy! I've found that left agrees often with the Islamists in the compounding effect of minor changes accumulated(death by a thousand cuts) in achieving total success eventually! That and a shared enemy brings both into an alliance that benefits both their agendas. Britain being a prime example of this type of cooperation between the two entities and just how successful it can be! America must come to realise this and address it soon or we shall meet a similiar fate as has Britain.

I have with good reason come to the conclusion that without America's drastic intervention to save it Britain will perish and what takes its place shall be an Islamic hellhole direct from the pits of hell. The non-muslims there will suffer unimaginable misery, death and slavery! This is a sad conclusion made by me and one I wish would be destroyed by our intervention! First and foremost the true Brits need to all get behind the EDL! Then by hook or crook get away from the damn EU! Only then do they stand a decent although small chance of survival. Next seek and accept aid from America(when america does offer it ) after obama is booted the hell out! Do you agree that is a good start?-Tyr

[Drummond]

First , thanks for an informative and fine post......--:beer:
I have come to the conclusion that a stranglehold existed there just from my interaction on the Brit forum and my researching the subject concerning the Islamic scourge there and its disasterious effects upon the nation... However not to the level you just informed me of and trusting your judgement and integrity I have no doubt about its accuracy! I've found that left agrees often with the Islamists in the compounding effect of minor changes accumulated(death by a thousand cuts) in achieving total success eventually! That and a shared enemy brings both into an alliance that benefits both their agendas. Britain being a prime example of this type of cooperation between the two entities and just how successful it can be! America must come to realise this and address it soon or we shall meet a similiar fate as has Britain.

I have with good reason come to the conclusion that without America's drastic intervention to save it Britain will perish and what takes its place shall be an Islamic hellhole direct from the pits of hell. The non-muslims there will suffer unimaginable misery, death and slavery! This is a sad conclusion made by me and one I wish would be destroyed by our intervention! First and foremost the true Brits need to all get behind the EDL! Then by hook or crook get away from the damn EU! Only then do they stand a decent although small chance of survival. Next seek and accept aid from America(when america does offer it ) after obama is booted the hell out! Do you agree that is a good start?-Tyr

I agree with your conclusions, Tyr (and the suggestion of an offer of aid from America is a greatly appreciated one !).

I'm not at all sure that the EDL will be anything more than a fringe group in the eyes of the British public, though .. they may gain further support, but I don't doubt that if they do, the media will go into overdrive in branding them as mere racists. And after all, they've already attracted police attention, something everyone has been made aware of.

My belief is that a political Party such as UKIP (UK Independence Party) has a much better chance of making the proper headway, if not on the Islamic issue (though they're not completely silent on that, in terms of immigration), then at least on getting us free of Europe ... which will be a good start. I suggest that you do some research on them, Tyr, and see if you agree. Their main tactic has been to fight the EU from within itself, as well as being a main driving force for calling for a Referendum on our future membership of the EU.

Have you seen any of Nigel Farage's speeches (he's their leader) ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dranqFntNgo

Gordon Brown (Leftie leader) spoke out in favour of UK unity with Europe ... Farage attacked him in response (brilliant speech) ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDwQEEAZhWM&feature=related

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363236/Ukip-leader-Nigel-Farage-plans-use-Barnsley-election-result-springboard-leapfrog-Lib-Dems.html


'The EU is no longer an academic debate because it's affecting people in their everyday lives: it is now discussed by families at their dinner table,' Mr Farage will say.

Pointing out that the Lib Dems had plunged from second to sixth place in Barnsley, he will suggest that their support is waning across the country.

Mr Farage will add: 'The Lib Dems are no longer the voice of opposition in British Politics - we are. Between now and the next general election our aim is to replace them as the third party in British politics.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2035430/UKIP-leader-Nigel-Farage-accuse-David-Cameron-mass-deception-voters-pre-election-promises-Europe.html


In a full-scale attack on Conservative credentials on the EU, Mr Farage will tell the conference that there has been a 'total breakdown in trust' in all the major parties, with Labour voters disillusioned by the financial crisis and Iraq and Lib Dems by the U-turn on tuition fees.

'But those who must be feeling the most let down, the most disappointed, are the millions of Conservative voters who believed the promises of David Cameron,' he will say.

'They have begun to realise that when Mr Cameron makes promises about EU referendums, immigration figures or human rights legislation, that he is doing so simply to get their vote without ever meaning it himself.

'The Tories' election strategy is one of mass deception and if you're a patriotic, anti-EU Tory voter then your party has disappeared.'

It comes a day after it emerged that Tory MPs are plotting to join forces with Labour Eurosceptics to try to force Mr Cameron to take a harder line on the EU.

The Prime Minister – who yesterday held talks in Downing Street with Europe’s self-styled ‘president’ Herman Van Rompuy – dismissed calls for an ‘in-out’ referendum on Britain’s membership.

He told MPs there was ‘no case’ for such a vote and insisted Britain must make Europe ‘work for us’.

Farage on the 'open door' immigration situation, courtesy of the EU ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLuviUaSVnw

... and it's an important point, Tyr. EU border integration has been a part of our problem. Thanks to this, immigrants get help in being able to move over here in near-uncontrolled numbers. The threat of TURKEY being able to join the EU would itself boost the Islamic influx, making our already dire situation far worse ... Farage clearly has his eye on that, and brought up the subject of Turkey, and Cameron's SUPPORT of their EU membership, in his interview.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I agree with your conclusions, Tyr (and the suggestion of an offer of aid from America is a greatly appreciated one !).

I'm not at all sure that the EDL will be anything more than a fringe group in the eyes of the British public, though .. they may gain further support, but I don't doubt that if they do, the media will go into overdrive in branding them as mere racists. And after all, they've already attracted police attention, something everyone has been made aware of.

My belief is that a political Party such as UKIP (UK Independence Party) has a much better chance of making the proper headway, if not on the Islamic issue (though they're not completely silent on that, in terms of immigration), then at least on getting us free of Europe ... which will be a good start. I suggest that you do some research on them, Tyr, and see if you agree. Their main tactic has been to fight the EU from within itself, as well as being a main driving force for calling for a Referendum on our future membership of the EU.

Have you seen any of Nigel Farage's speeches (he's their leader) ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dranqFntNgo

Gordon Brown (Leftie leader) spoke out in favour of UK unity with Europe ... Farage attacked him in response (brilliant speech) ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDwQEEAZhWM&feature=related

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363236/Ukip-leader-Nigel-Farage-plans-use-Barnsley-election-result-springboard-leapfrog-Lib-Dems.html



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2035430/UKIP-leader-Nigel-Farage-accuse-David-Cameron-mass-deception-voters-pre-election-promises-Europe.html



Farage on the 'open door' immigration situation, courtesy of the EU ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLuviUaSVnw

... and it's an important point, Tyr. EU border integration has been a part of our problem. Thanks to this, immigrants get help in being able to move over here in near-uncontrolled numbers. The threat of TURKEY being able to join the EU would itself boost the Islamic influx, making our already dire situation far worse ... Farage clearly has his eye on that, and brought up the subject of Turkey, and Cameron's SUPPORT of their EU membership, in his interview.

Looks like a good start with the UKIP. I have checked out some of the links you provided and found this of which I list numbers here only 3 and 4. -Tyr


http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies/2553-what-we-stand-for
3 Protect Our Borders & Defend Our Country

• The tide of mass EU immigration has pushed down wages and restricted job opportunities. Only by leaving the EU can we regain control of our borders.

• Freeze permanent immigration for 5 years. Immigrants must be fluent in English, have minimum education levels and show they can financially support themselves.

• Bring in a points based visa system and time limited work permits.

• The State must defend its peoples. Keep our nuclear deterrent and make increased defence spending a clear priority, even in these difficult times, to underpin Britain’s global role.

4 Safeguards Against Crime

• No cuts to front line policing

• Make sentences mean what they say – life must mean life.

• Double prison places to enforce zero tolerance on crime.

• Establish locally elected County Police Boards to set policing aims approved by
voters.

• Scrap the European Arrest Warrant.

• Repeal the Human Rights Act to end abuses by convicted criminals and illegal immigrants.

• Free the police force from the straitjacket of political correctness and ‘targets’
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bolded one part of their quoted policy on immigration and also on Britain keeping its nukes. Not sure if the immigration policy includes a specific intent and means to address the muslim problem but will research more on that as time permits. However, the fact that Britain has nukes and that they could come under muslim control when Britain's collapse has been completed is scary as hell . This could be the major reason for all the massive effort put in there by the muslims. I believe it was their primary aim when starting this immigration policy because Islam has leaders that plan far far ahead. And its obvious those leaders encouraged and aided muslims to immigrate to Britain. I believe they did so as part of their usual relocate to spread Islam policy but seeing Britain's open invitation policy they immediately saw the potential to get nukes without firing a shot. By annexing territory by relocating, growing thier population and seizing control later. They have a long history of doing it that way. Their religious leaders scheme and plan without bothering to tell the masses of followers anything about it because they know that the masses are ignorant as hell (in this case they are right). Sound familiar doesnt it?

Britains greatest mistake in its bid for multiculturalism was in not banning the importation of this one religion(Islam) regardless of their nationality! If the UKIP fails to address this issue within its immigration policy then I think it being a Saviour for Britain will ultimately fail. Simply because great as it is getting out of the EU, even greater and of far greater importance(survival) is properly addressing the muslim scourge! What good is saving the body from fire(EU) if a known infection (MUSLIMS) is allowed to eventualy destroy the brain by it being ignored?

Now I understand that the UKIP could be withholding much of the specifics of their plan to restrict Islamists and even deport them until they gain more power in the government. Any chance that could be the case? Any chance that the EDL could merge into the UKIP? That merger looks like a saving and winning action to me. Also it looks to be necessary to get a stronger sense of patriotism into the UKIP.

What Americans need to be made aware of is just how damn serious it is to us what is going on in Britain now! I was 40 YEARS AHEAD OF MY TIME ON CHINA AND ITS FUTURE ROLE OF BECOMING THE NUMBER ONE POWER AND ITS AGGRESSION WHEN IT GOT THAT SPOT WHICH WAS RIDICULED BY EVERYBODY BACK IN 1972 WHEN I DID MY SENIOR TERM PAPER ON THE SUBJECT. Which by the way, my time table given then was 40 to 50 years(I was close). Its been 40 years exactly , what are the chances that China assumes the number one spot within the coming decade?
Opps , sorry got off track.
Britain 's survival is very likely a key to our survival, I believe that and with good reason. History has shown that twice , two world wars, America teamed up with Brirain to achieve succes . Paricularly important was that the alliance and aid given was of supreme importance in defeating both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan! Our alliance saved the entire world, no small feat!! We are a great nation but we need our allies too. America had better wake up to whats happening to our best ally and do so damn quick , before its too late IMHO!! Consider the world if both America and Britain are gone as influences! You'd have Russia, China and Islam as the three top threats to the rest of the world. Of the three, Islam , would be a hundred times more brutal IMHO..TYR

[Drummond]

Looks like a good start with the UKIP. I have checked out some of the links you provided and found this of which I list numbers here only 3 and 4. -Tyr


http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies/2553-what-we-stand-for
3 Protect Our Borders & Defend Our Country

• The tide of mass EU immigration has pushed down wages and restricted job opportunities. Only by leaving the EU can we regain control of our borders.

• Freeze permanent immigration for 5 years. Immigrants must be fluent in English, have minimum education levels and show they can financially support themselves.

• Bring in a points based visa system and time limited work permits.

• The State must defend its peoples. Keep our nuclear deterrent and make increased defence spending a clear priority, even in these difficult times, to underpin Britain’s global role.

4 Safeguards Against Crime

• No cuts to front line policing

• Make sentences mean what they say – life must mean life.

• Double prison places to enforce zero tolerance on crime.

• Establish locally elected County Police Boards to set policing aims approved by
voters.

• Scrap the European Arrest Warrant.

• Repeal the Human Rights Act to end abuses by convicted criminals and illegal immigrants.

• Free the police force from the straitjacket of political correctness and ‘targets’
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I bolded one part of their quoted policy on immigration and also on Britain keeping its nukes. Not sure if the immigration policy includes a specific intent and means to address the muslim problem but will research more on that as time permits. However, the fact that Britain has nukes and that they could come under muslim control when Britain's collapse has been completed is scary as hell . This could be the major reason for all the massive effort put in there by the muslims. I believe it was their primary aim when starting this immigration policy because Islam has leaders that plan far far ahead. And its obvious those leaders encouraged and aided muslims to immigrate to Britain. I believe they did so as part of their usual relocate to spread Islam policy but seeing Britain's open invitation policy they immediately saw the potential to get nukes without firing a shot. By annexing territory by relocating, growing thier population and seizing control later. They have a long history of doing it that way. Their religious leaders scheme and plan without bothering to tell the masses of followers anything about it because they know that the masses are ignorant as hell (in this case they are right). Sound familiar doesnt it?

Britains greatest mistake in its bid for multiculturalism was in not banning the importation of this one religion(Islam) regardless of their nationality! If the UKIP fails to address this issue within its immigration policy then I think it being a Saviour for Britain will ultimately fail. Simply because great as it is getting out of the EU, even greater and of far greater importance(survival) is properly addressing the muslim scourge! What good is saving the body from fire(EU) if a known infection (MUSLIMS) is allowed to eventualy destroy the brain by it being ignored?

Now I understand that the UKIP could be withholding much of the specifics of their plan to restrict Islamists and even deport them until they gain more power in the government. Any chance that could be the case? Any chance that the EDL could merge into the UKIP? That merger looks like a saving and winning action to me. Also it looks to be necessary to get a stronger sense of patriotism into the UKIP.

What Americans need to be made aware of is just how damn serious it is to us what is going on in Britain now! I was 40 YEARS AHEAD OF MY TIME ON CHINA AND ITS FUTURE ROLE OF BECOMING THE NUMBER ONE POWER AND ITS AGGRESSION WHEN IT GOT THAT SPOT WHICH WAS RIDICULED BY EVERYBODY BACK IN 1972 WHEN I DID MY SENIOR TERM PAPER ON THE SUBJECT. Which by the way, my time table given then was 40 to 50 years(I was close). Its been 40 years exactly , what are the chances that China assumes the number one spot within the coming decade?
Opps , sorry got off track.
Britain 's survival is very likely a key to our survival, I believe that and with good reason. History has shown that twice , two world wars, America teamed up with Brirain to achieve succes . Paricularly important was that the alliance and aid given was of supreme importance in defeating both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan! Our alliance saved the entire world, no small feat!! We are a great nation but we need our allies too. America had better wake up to whats happening to our best ally and do so damn quick , before its too late IMHO!! Consider the world if both America and Britain are gone as influences! You'd have Russia, China and Islam as the three top threats to the rest of the world. Of the three, Islam , would be a hundred times more brutal IMHO..TYR

Your point about Muslims getting their hands on our nuclear capability is a very good one. Of course, it isn't just the fact of having nukes themselves, but also the means we'd have to deliver them ... even if cut down in size these days, we still have naval capabilities, an Air Force ditto !

Such is the political climate over here. Tyr, that if UKIP really DID have specific thoughts or policies about the Muslims, they'd dare not voice them publicly .. our media would make mincemeat of them if they did, and no doubt they, too, would then earn the attentions of our police. But even if they don't single them out, at least there's much about UKIP that takes us in the right general direction. And .. my guess is that UKIP actually DO have worries about Islamic incursion itself .. otherwise, why would Farage make a point of singling out Turkey in his interview, criticising Cameron for not mentioning them ??

The Turkey question is an especially alarming one, since if Turkey did manage to join the EU, they too would automatically be a part of the EU-wide 'open border' policy, meaning, that anyone entering the EU via Turkey would have the AUTOMATIC right to live in ANY member State country of choice. Not only the UK, but in any of the other countries as well. We of ourselves, Tyr, did not decide to open our borders ... EU membership mandated it (though Labour weren't exactly against the idea !!).

The EDL and UKIP are very different entities, Tyr, and my belief is that UKIP would never want to ally themselves with the EDL. The EDL has already been tarred with the 'racist' tag, and UKIP can't afford to be tainted by that if they're going to continue to have any success. Better, I think, that UKIP makes its headway, achieves what it sets out to do (chiefly, get us distanced from any political union of any kind with Europe).

This is a beginning that can be built upon. Success in that sphere would fire up the British people to achieve more. Right now we have Cameron manoeuvring to say he'll wrest powers back from Brussels .. but within the context of saying that he CAN, yet also keep us allied to the EU.

Basically, it's a con trick, and UKIP's role right now is to expose that for what it is .. a limited appeasement of anti-EU sentiment, so as to preserve the status quo in the longer term.

Remember, Tyr, that there are two layers to legal straitjacketing over here. One, the laws that exist in the UK already. But two, and critically, the domination EU law has over us to a considerable degree. As member of the EU, the UK cannot either pass laws, nor remove them, if in so doing, we defy EU laws and directorates. No .. our ridding ourselves of EU domination is the key to a lot of whatever future freedoms we earn for ourselves.

What UKIP is striving to achieve is considerably important. They can't have anything weaken their ability to deliver for the British people what they exist to achieve.

[Drummond]

Probably not the right place to post this ... but anyway, here's some excellent news for us all (not sure about Jafar, though ..).

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/abu-hamza-loses-extradition-battle-3


Radical cleric Abu Hamza and four other terror suspects could be put on a plane to the United States within days after Europe's human rights judges rejected their bid for an appeal.

A panel of five judges threw out their request to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, clearing the way for extradition.

Hamza and the others, who have racked up a multi-million pound bill in detention and legal costs, could be handed over to US authorities and put on a plane within days.

But putting in place the practical arrangements for extradition is likely to take up to three weeks, it is understood.

The ruling amounts to the first green light for US top security prisons and the right of European governments to approve US extradition requests for high-risk suspects.

Hamza, who was jailed for seven years for soliciting to murder and inciting racial hatred, has been fighting extradition since 2004.

Computer expert Babar Ahmad, who was also subject to the ruling, has been held in a UK prison without trial for eight years after being accused of raising funds for terrorism.

The Home Office said Hamza and Ahmad, with Seyla Talha Ahsan, Adel Abdul Bary and Khaled Al-Fawwaz, would be "handed over to the US authorities as quickly as possible".

The Strasbourg-based human rights court ruled on April 10 that "detention conditions and length of sentences of five alleged terrorists would not amount to ill-treatment if they were extradited to the USA".

The unanimous ruling from the judges said there would be no violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights - the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment - as a result of detention conditions the five men might face at ADX Florence "supermax" prison in Colorado.

CONGRATULATIONS, AMERICA ! You've been trying to get your hands on Hamza for years. Now, finally, some common sense has won out !!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Your point about Muslims getting their hands on our nuclear capability is a very good one. Of course, it isn't just the fact of having nukes themselves, but also the means we'd have to deliver them ... even if cut down in size these days, we still have naval capabilities, an Air Force ditto !

Such is the political climate over here. Tyr, that if UKIP really DID have specific thoughts or policies about the Muslims, they'd dare not voice them publicly .. our media would make mincemeat of them if they did, and no doubt they, too, would then earn the attentions of our police. But even if they don't single them out, at least there's much about UKIP that takes us in the right general direction. And .. my guess is that UKIP actually DO have worries about Islamic incursion itself .. otherwise, why would Farage make a point of singling out Turkey in his interview, criticising Cameron for not mentioning them ??

The Turkey question is an especially alarming one, since if Turkey did manage to join the EU, they too would automatically be a part of the EU-wide 'open border' policy, meaning, that anyone entering the EU via Turkey would have the AUTOMATIC right to live in ANY member State country of choice. Not only the UK, but in any of the other countries as well. We of ourselves, Tyr, did not decide to open our borders ... EU membership mandated it (though Labour weren't exactly against the idea !!).

The EDL and UKIP are very different entities, Tyr, and my belief is that UKIP would never want to ally themselves with the EDL. The EDL has already been tarred with the 'racist' tag, and UKIP can't afford to be tainted by that if they're going to continue to have any success. Better, I think, that UKIP makes its headway, achieves what it sets out to do (chiefly, get us distanced from any political union of any kind with Europe).

This is a beginning that can be built upon. Success in that sphere would fire up the British people to achieve more. Right now we have Cameron manoeuvring to say he'll wrest powers back from Brussels .. but within the context of saying that he CAN, yet also keep us allied to the EU.

Basically, it's a con trick, and UKIP's role right now is to expose that for what it is .. a limited appeasement of anti-EU sentiment, so as to preserve the status quo in the longer term.

Remember, Tyr, that there are two layers to legal straitjacketing over here. One, the laws that exist in the UK already. But two, and critically, the domination EU law has over us to a considerable degree. As member of the EU, the UK cannot either pass laws, nor remove them, if in so doing, we defy EU laws and directorates. No .. our ridding ourselves of EU domination is the key to a lot of whatever future freedoms we earn for ourselves.

What UKIP is striving to achieve is considerably important. They can't have anything weaken their ability to deliver for the British people what they exist to achieve.

I agree that getting out from under the EU umbrella is an absolute must and a first step. My friend that step must be taken very very soon. Then after getting totally independent from the EU a fast campaign must be started to address the Islamic scourge there. ODDS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF YOU GUYS BECAUSE THIS ALL SHOULD HAVE BEEN STARTED MANY YEARS AGO!

Are you for or against the EDL? DO YOU BELIEVE THAT IT IS JUST A RACIST ORGANIZATION?

From my start at finding out about it I think it is more about patriotism myself but will look much deeper now.-Tyr

[Drummond]

I agree that getting out from under the EU umbrella is an absolute must and a first step. My friend that step must be taken very very soon. Then after getting totally independent from the EU a fast campaign must be started to address the Islamic scourge there. ODDS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF YOU GUYS BECAUSE THIS ALL SHOULD HAVE BEEN STARTED MANY YEARS AGO!

Are you for or against the EDL? DO YOU BELIEVE THAT IT IS JUST A RACIST ORGANIZATION?

From my start at finding out about it I think it is more about patriotism myself but will look much deeper now.-Tyr

I agree - we should've started long ago. Trouble was, we had Lefties in power, so for as long as that was true, no progress at all was possible. And I'm not sure that we're very much better off under Cameron's Coalition. Cameron himself believes a lot of what Labour did, as it's turned out .. he is determined to keep us in the EU.

For or against the EDL: ... broadly, FOR. I accept they have never set out to be racist. That said .. they do attract a racist element. See ..

http://onmymindbyadam.wordpress.com/2012/04/03/47-tommy-robinson-fights-far-left-fascist-bastion-on-the-big-questions-words-from-winston-churchill-and-does-george-galloways-victory-in-bradford-by-election-signal-a-step-towards-a-global/


Tommy Robinson has ejected racist elements that have infiltrated EDL ranks, notably typical bigots and dregs of racist organisations such as Combat 18 that latched onto their rallies.

It's good that Robinson remains active in that regard, though, will he always be successful ?

See also ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defence_League


However, scholarly fieldwork into the group has suggested that racism and Islamophobia "may well be more commonplace among the EDL’s ‘rank and file’ than the group’s leaders would publicly admit," and at least one of their marches was heavily promoted on the fascist and white supremacist website "Stormfront."

So ... you see the problem. Media reports hinting at racism in the EDL are likely to make racists gravitate towards the EDL .. unfortunately.

[Drummond]

... oh, and Tyr, note from my post above the Wikipedia reference to 'Islamophobia'. Typical British media/Internet term, that ... you see, it's a part of accepted reporting to demonise with a label like that. In BritSpeak .. people not tolerant of Islam must be 'Islamophobic'. Just as any Muslims not conforming to the myth of Islam and Islamists being 'peaceful', must therefore be 'extremists'.

Even our most Conservative commentators follow that last imperative, labelling violent Muslims, bomb-wielding Muslims and the like 'extremists'. They HAVE to, to avoid association with a 'hatespeech' charge.

It's that sort of language management that is creating the psychology over here which cannot grasp certain basic truths, or face them. It's partly why, Tyr, when you visit the Brit forum, you get such relatively uniform resistance to what you offer it.

And .. it's why extended doses of Left-wing politicians in charge CANNOT be afforded, neither in your Society, nor mine. Left-wing methodology is - in large part - concerned with conditioning attitudes over time. The greater the conditioning, so the tougher the road to reverse it.

Be in no doubt. George Orwell knew what he was talking about !!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

... oh, and Tyr, note from my post above the Wikipedia reference to 'Islamophobia'. Typical British media/Internet term, that ... you see, it's a part of accepted reporting to demonise with a label like that. In BritSpeak .. people not tolerant of Islam must be 'Islamophobic'. Just as any Muslims not conforming to the myth of Islam and Islamists being 'peaceful', must therefore be 'extremists'.

Even our most Conservative commentators follow that last imperative, labelling violent Muslims, bomb-wielding Muslims and the like 'extremists'. They HAVE to, to avoid association with a 'hatespeech' charge.

It's that sort of language management that is creating the psychology over here which cannot grasp certain basic truths, or face them. It's partly why, Tyr, when you visit the Brit forum, you get such relatively uniform resistance to what you offer it.

And .. it's why extended doses of Left-wing politicians in charge CANNOT be afforded, neither in your Society, nor mine. Left-wing methodology is - in large part - concerned with conditioning attitudes over time. The greater the conditioning, so the tougher the road to reverse it.

Be in no doubt. George Orwell knew what he was talking about !!

That same type of cooperation and alliance has been birthed here my friend, the leftists and muslims are neck deep in working against this culture , this nation! They also have their willing partners in ignorant Americans, cowardly Americans, socalled "enlightened Americans , bought out Americans , the MSM and a great many rotten organizations and crooked politicians(mostly lib/dem). It just started here later than it did in Britain. No matter what anybody says about it, Islam will one day, force violent confrontations all across this great land! I'd bet my life against a damn nickel that they will unless we start right now with absolute defiance and a properly devised program to stop them . It must be VIGILANT AND LATER ,extreme and brutal , because once started they will force that to be the case BECAUSE SACRIFICING LIVES MEANS ZERO TO THEM. ANOTHER REASON THEY ARE FILTHY BARBARIC SAVAGES!-Tyr