I've yet to see evidence that the average S*n reader can actually i. read ii. vote I do know that they breathe both through the mouth and through their skin, which is why drowning the MFers is so difficult.
Oh come on Loz, if it turns out that it is made up it who cares, it is the kind of thing he could say, and that is what matters.
TV satirist John Oliver responds to Paris attacks with 'a moment of premium cable profanity' | Television & radio | The Guardian
Here's the UK Government's latest 'weapon' in the fight against the current threats.......apparently.
Being radical is the opposite of being reactionary. Radicals are people who favour changing society and politics in the direction of equality, fairness, justice, freedom, and democracy; this is the liberal agenda. Groups which have suffered discrimination and unfairness may well be radicalised, as they struggle for equality in law and in practice. The jihadi islamists are the opposite of this. They are arch reactionaries. Their agenda is to fight against equality, against fairness, against justice, against freedom, and against democracy; their agenda is totally illiberal. Their aim is to drag the world backwards into medieval barbarity. The last thing they should be called is radicals.
At risk of falling foul of Godwin's Law, I wish to mention what was done about the Nazis after 1945. It was not feasible for them all to be killed, nor to deport them somewhere, nor could they be allowed to go on being Nazis. The only realistic solution was for them to become ex-Nazis. They needed to be converted into useful, peaceful productive citizens. The vile propaganda which their heads had been filled with needed to be counteracted. This is what was done. It was pretty successful. In my opinion (feel free to disagree), this is the solution to islamism. Talk of killing them all etc is nonsense; it is not going to happen. There are already quite a few ex-jihadis and ex-muslims. The focus of Western governments should be on expanding their numbers more and more until the islamists wither away to irrelevance. This would be feasible, and a realistic goal, if the political will was there. Which it isn't.
The problem is not insoluble. The solutions exist and if they were put into effect, in Britain and worldwide, in a few years the problem would be much reduced. This gives grounds for optimism. Unfortunately leaders from Cameron and Obama downwards have set their faces against doing anything useful. They are all in denial. They have not even made a start at a solution. This causes me to feel pessimistic.
Care to detail your mandate for standing as a leader in say, the UK? If, as you state, you feel there is a solution available to be started by a leader.
I don't think anyone seriously believes killing them all is a desirable or feasible option. But justifiably angry people say understandably angry things. Turning a Muslim into an ex-Muslim is a very different proposition to converting a Nazi. However mad it was, Nazi-ism was a secular, quasi-political movement based around the fascist cult of leadership. Perhaps that's a poor description. I don't know. It doesn't matter. The point is, Nazi-ism was susceptible to the application of reason and rationale - and human conscience. It wasn't a religion. Abandoning religious belief might seem to an atheist who has never had faith purely an exercise in logic and therefore readily transferable to the political sphere, but to someone who has never been without faith, it cannot be so easily undone. Turning Muslims into ex-Muslims in any great numbers realistically means converting them to some other more benign and less bigoted faith. Persuading someone who profoundly and devoutly believes in the existence of a deity that they have chosen the wrong path to that deity is one thing; persuading them to stop being silly, give the whole thing up and come and be an atheist is quite another. As all religious scripture is written by human beings not Gods and has always been re-written by human beings (many times in the case of Islam), the realistic hope is that the rules of that religion will be changed from within by enlightened individuals. It is not realistic to expect politicians to drive that process and to attempt to do so might be counter-productive and further entrench religious fanaticism.
Turning Muslims into ex-Muslims is probably not going to happen, however preventing Muslims from becoming extremists / Islamists is a realistic objective. I think we have to clearly state what is, and is not, acceptable in this country, we also have to be quite clear about what will happen if our laws are broken. Combating the radicalisation of youth through Islamist schools along with the preaching of hate is a good place to start. We also need to make it quite clear that if anyone is not part of the solution then they are part of the problem. This is should be the price of continuing tolerance of Islam.
If we can persuade our politicians to do (really do, and mean it) just that we shall be getting somewhere. Unfortunately they are so easily distracted..
I have already listed both short term practical measures and long term goals, as I see them. But I am not a politician and I am not running for office. What more do you want?
The religious fanatics we are discussing are already mass murdering, shooting, bombing, drowning, burning alive ... just how much further could their fanaticism possibly be entrenched?
Even Anonymous are going after them: ISIS Supporters and Militants, We Are Anonymous, We Do Not Forgive, We Do Not Forget, Expect us! We are the collective today we bring you a mass amount of isis twitter accounts for your enjoyment, namaste. By posting thousands of Daesh social network addresses they have left the world's hackers to go for them. Probably do a better job of it than the official efforts to take their sites down.
But we're not talking about them are we? We're talking about those who live among us and who have yet to sink to those extremes but who already value their religion more highly than they value the rights of their fellow citizens. They can potentially become far more entrenched. Politicians should stick to forming and enforcing the law, without let or favour. If by doing so they make being a Muslim incompatible with being a British citizen then so be it. If that was what you meant by politicians doing more to turn Muslims into ex-Muslims then fair enough. It was the thought of some more overt role for politicians in any conversion process that rang alarm bells.
Someone mentioned Godwin's Law...........maybe it was Pete, or maybe someone criticised Pete for mentioning it....... ...Whatever............. ...but I reckon what will eventually happen in the UK and other states, because reactive methods won't be any use; that proactive methods will produce results....... ...be prepared to shave your beards off.........that goes for you too Jen, Ducbird and Char.....(I'll help)
