gmc;1491613 wrote: The thing to remember the actions taken by tony blair and GWB were also taken with the fukll consent of the political establishment. In the UK parliament is sovereign not the prime minister. In the US how being attacked by saudi arabia results in an invasion of iraq is like the plot out of a very bad conspiracy movie.
Parliament was LIED TO by Blair; remember the WMD ( weapons of mass destruction) allegedly possessed by Saddam and deployable within 45 mins against the UK? Parliament is like a computer (albeit a particularly crap one); rubbish in=rubbish out.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491616 wrote: Parliament was LIED TO by Blair; remember the WMD ( weapons of mass destruction) allegedly possessed by Saddam and deployable within 45 mins against the UK? Parliament is like a computer (albeit a particularly crap one); rubbish in=rubbish out.
Parliament is not like a computer, it is composed of six hundred plus thinking human beings. If over a million British people could see the lie (not difficult, the claims were blatantly impossible) and take to the streets in protest then why could the MPs not see it.
If the answer to that is embedded within the institution of parliament then that institution is not fit for purpose and should be changed.
Parliament is not like a computer, it is composed of six hundred plus thinking human beings. If over a million British people could see the lie (not difficult, the claims were blatantly impossible) and take to the streets in protest then why could the MPs not see it.
If the answer to that is embedded within the institution of parliament then that institution is not fit for purpose and should be changed.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491614 wrote: Given the highlighted quote do you not feel that it is incumbent upon us to do more to clean up the mess than just deploy more armed forces to batter them into submission?
It's all very well daemonising Muslims and treating them all as if they're fundamentalist terrorists (which is demonstrably what both our government and our media are doing) but at some time we're going to have to talk to the moderate majority and resolve the problems we've caused.
We are indeed going to have to talk to the Muslim majority, but we must also be seen to have learned by our previous error(s), insomuch as we stop interfering with religions and cultures we don't understand (and invariably making things worse hereby) and are not a threat to us.
These cultures don't need our 'help', merely our non-interference.
I would also agree that more military deployment at this stage will probably do more harm than good, but unfortunately the corrupt intellectual pygmies that
form the UK, and indeed the US governments don't see it this way, and are busily 'painting themselves (and everybody else) into a corner'. How foolish of the U.K. government to invite virtually unlimited amounts of Muslim immigrants into Britain, then offend them all by slaughtering their brethren in various quarters of the world on the pretext of improving their lives with 'regime change'!
Unfortunately, the politicians in the UK, and indeed the US are amongst the most corrupt in the world and are unlikely to be capable of 'joined up thinking', and thus a solution, in this area.
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line....What a gross betrayal our governments have perpetrated against the people they are supposed to represent. Democracy, ethics and the humanities have been well and truly hijacked by these maggots for their own ends (power, priviledge, money) and it's the 'ordinary Joe' that'll end up 'paying the piper'!
It's all very well daemonising Muslims and treating them all as if they're fundamentalist terrorists (which is demonstrably what both our government and our media are doing) but at some time we're going to have to talk to the moderate majority and resolve the problems we've caused.
We are indeed going to have to talk to the Muslim majority, but we must also be seen to have learned by our previous error(s), insomuch as we stop interfering with religions and cultures we don't understand (and invariably making things worse hereby) and are not a threat to us.
These cultures don't need our 'help', merely our non-interference.
I would also agree that more military deployment at this stage will probably do more harm than good, but unfortunately the corrupt intellectual pygmies that
form the UK, and indeed the US governments don't see it this way, and are busily 'painting themselves (and everybody else) into a corner'. How foolish of the U.K. government to invite virtually unlimited amounts of Muslim immigrants into Britain, then offend them all by slaughtering their brethren in various quarters of the world on the pretext of improving their lives with 'regime change'!
Unfortunately, the politicians in the UK, and indeed the US are amongst the most corrupt in the world and are unlikely to be capable of 'joined up thinking', and thus a solution, in this area.
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line....What a gross betrayal our governments have perpetrated against the people they are supposed to represent. Democracy, ethics and the humanities have been well and truly hijacked by these maggots for their own ends (power, priviledge, money) and it's the 'ordinary Joe' that'll end up 'paying the piper'!
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491618 wrote: We are indeed going to have to talk to the Muslim majority, but we must also be seen to have learned by our previous error(s), insomuch as we stop interfering with religions and cultures we don't understand (and invariably making things worse hereby) and are not a threat to us.
These cultures don't need our 'help', merely our non-interference.
I would also agree that more military deployment at this stage will probably do more harm than good, but unfortunately the corrupt intellectual pygmies that
form the UK, and indeed the US governments don't see it this way, and are busily 'painting themselves (and everybody else) into a corner'. How foolish of the U.K. government to invite virtually unlimited amounts of Muslim immigrants into Britain, then offend them all by slaughtering their brethren in various quarters of the world on the pretext of improving their lives with 'regime change'!
Unfortunately, the politicians in the UK, and indeed the US are amongst the most corrupt in the world and are unlikely to be capable of 'joined up thinking', and thus a solution, in this area.
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line....What a gross betrayal our governments have perpetrated against the people they are supposed to represent. Democracy, ethics and the humanities have been well and truly hijacked by these maggots for their own ends (power, priviledge, money) and it's the 'ordinary Joe' that'll end up 'paying the piper'!
Are you seriously suggesting that there is a possibility of a military takeover of the UK by our current Muslim population?
Who's feeding you scare stories?
These cultures don't need our 'help', merely our non-interference.
I would also agree that more military deployment at this stage will probably do more harm than good, but unfortunately the corrupt intellectual pygmies that
form the UK, and indeed the US governments don't see it this way, and are busily 'painting themselves (and everybody else) into a corner'. How foolish of the U.K. government to invite virtually unlimited amounts of Muslim immigrants into Britain, then offend them all by slaughtering their brethren in various quarters of the world on the pretext of improving their lives with 'regime change'!
Unfortunately, the politicians in the UK, and indeed the US are amongst the most corrupt in the world and are unlikely to be capable of 'joined up thinking', and thus a solution, in this area.
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line....What a gross betrayal our governments have perpetrated against the people they are supposed to represent. Democracy, ethics and the humanities have been well and truly hijacked by these maggots for their own ends (power, priviledge, money) and it's the 'ordinary Joe' that'll end up 'paying the piper'!
Are you seriously suggesting that there is a possibility of a military takeover of the UK by our current Muslim population?
Who's feeding you scare stories?
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491617 wrote: Parliament is not like a computer, it is composed of six hundred plus thinking human beings. If over a million British people could see the lie (not difficult, the claims were blatantly impossible) and take to the streets in protest then why could the MPs not see it.
If the answer to that is embedded within the institution of parliament then that institution is not fit for purpose and should be changed.
I disagree with your first point, and agree with your second, Bryn Mawr. There are party whips that dictate how MP's will vote on certain issues. As you are aware, the whips are defy-able, but at what cost to your political career? Many of these 'political animals' are intent on 'riding the gravy train' and thus end up being suborned by their political superiors; self-interest rules here ( mainly). As I said, somewhat like a malfunctioning/crappy computer. WMD was false (rubbish in) and the response to this was terminally flawed
( rubbish out). Rather like a maladroitly programmed computer, I would opine....
As to your second point, I agree entirely. Parliament is NOT fit for purpose when it can inflict so much harm and betray so many without anyone(in Parliament) being held to account! It's in urgent need of MAJOR reform(P.R. elections would be a start), and far greater input from public opinion on matters that affect us all. This would be relatively easy to achieve if the voting public were able to vote (possibly by swipe-card in public buildings/libraries/compatible home computers) on a range of issues decidable by the individual ( crucial/ mainstream/all, for instance), and this public vote being LEGALLY BINDING to all parties in Parliament. Parliament, if it should disagree with the vote, would be able to 'send it back' to the public for another vote (and state their reasons for this), but after the result of the SECOND vote (if required), this result/decision/law enactment now becomes final.
But you can be sure the 'elite' won't want their precious, intoxicating power and priviledge taken off them in this manner....
If the answer to that is embedded within the institution of parliament then that institution is not fit for purpose and should be changed.
I disagree with your first point, and agree with your second, Bryn Mawr. There are party whips that dictate how MP's will vote on certain issues. As you are aware, the whips are defy-able, but at what cost to your political career? Many of these 'political animals' are intent on 'riding the gravy train' and thus end up being suborned by their political superiors; self-interest rules here ( mainly). As I said, somewhat like a malfunctioning/crappy computer. WMD was false (rubbish in) and the response to this was terminally flawed
( rubbish out). Rather like a maladroitly programmed computer, I would opine....
As to your second point, I agree entirely. Parliament is NOT fit for purpose when it can inflict so much harm and betray so many without anyone(in Parliament) being held to account! It's in urgent need of MAJOR reform(P.R. elections would be a start), and far greater input from public opinion on matters that affect us all. This would be relatively easy to achieve if the voting public were able to vote (possibly by swipe-card in public buildings/libraries/compatible home computers) on a range of issues decidable by the individual ( crucial/ mainstream/all, for instance), and this public vote being LEGALLY BINDING to all parties in Parliament. Parliament, if it should disagree with the vote, would be able to 'send it back' to the public for another vote (and state their reasons for this), but after the result of the SECOND vote (if required), this result/decision/law enactment now becomes final.
But you can be sure the 'elite' won't want their precious, intoxicating power and priviledge taken off them in this manner....
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491619 wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that there is a possibility of a military takeover of the UK by our current Muslim population?
Who's feeding you scare stories?
The symptoms are here already.
A Muslim-led ( though not necessarily exclusively Muslim rebels; just think of all the long-term unemployed, the homeless and those in low paid jobs slaving away doing long hours just to put food on the table and keep a roof over the family's head, all generally ignored by government as unimportant; that's an awful lot of downtrodden, disenfranchised people I would say, when taken as a whole) large scale civil insurrection is actually quite logical if you read the previous post and think about the effect our misguided policies are having in relation to growing acts of terrorism globally, coupled with a large pool of Muslims here in the Uk who could end up radicalized if we continue to oppress and kill their brethren in other parts of the world. There are Sharia patrols on the streets in certain areas of London (and other cities) right now; who appointed them to dictate what we can and can't do in our own land? Symptoms.
As stated earlier, if we don't find a solution to this problem (and quickly) it may very well become UNSOLVABLE. Do you trust Parliament (as it currently stands) to find a fair, ethical and humane way of solving this rapidly growing problem? If you do, you're either optimistic or naive in the extreme, IMO.
Who's feeding you scare stories?
The symptoms are here already.
A Muslim-led ( though not necessarily exclusively Muslim rebels; just think of all the long-term unemployed, the homeless and those in low paid jobs slaving away doing long hours just to put food on the table and keep a roof over the family's head, all generally ignored by government as unimportant; that's an awful lot of downtrodden, disenfranchised people I would say, when taken as a whole) large scale civil insurrection is actually quite logical if you read the previous post and think about the effect our misguided policies are having in relation to growing acts of terrorism globally, coupled with a large pool of Muslims here in the Uk who could end up radicalized if we continue to oppress and kill their brethren in other parts of the world. There are Sharia patrols on the streets in certain areas of London (and other cities) right now; who appointed them to dictate what we can and can't do in our own land? Symptoms.
As stated earlier, if we don't find a solution to this problem (and quickly) it may very well become UNSOLVABLE. Do you trust Parliament (as it currently stands) to find a fair, ethical and humane way of solving this rapidly growing problem? If you do, you're either optimistic or naive in the extreme, IMO.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491591 wrote: You *cannot* understand the present or focus on the future without knowing the past and what has led to the problem.
Take a look at the two highlighted statements and you'll see the impossibility.
Islam of the past is not the intolerant Islam of today.
We can point that out to them but at present, they do not care.
MEMRI: Tunisian Professor Amel Grami: Homosexuality Emerged from Our Heritage
You go ahead and study history that does not apply to today. I will focus on today.
Regards
DL
Take a look at the two highlighted statements and you'll see the impossibility.
Islam of the past is not the intolerant Islam of today.
We can point that out to them but at present, they do not care.
MEMRI: Tunisian Professor Amel Grami: Homosexuality Emerged from Our Heritage
You go ahead and study history that does not apply to today. I will focus on today.
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
gmc;1491613 wrote: The thing to remember the actions taken by tony blair and GWB were also taken with the fukll consent of the political establishment. In the UK parliament is sovereign not the prime minister. In the US how being attacked by saudi arabia results in an invasion of iraq is like the plot out of a very bad conspiracy movie.
Whilst that may be so in theory, in practice when there is a majority Government, and MPs fearful of their leader, then everyone toes the line, and what the PM says gos. With a majority Government anything is possible, and the only real protection we have is the House of Lords. Why else do you think Cameron is now trying to restrict the power of the Lords after they overturned his Tax Credit bill? This is the way of all Dictators - gradually dispose of all obstacles in the way of achieving outright power - including restricting who is eligible to vote (ie making potential Labour voters ineligible).
Whilst that may be so in theory, in practice when there is a majority Government, and MPs fearful of their leader, then everyone toes the line, and what the PM says gos. With a majority Government anything is possible, and the only real protection we have is the House of Lords. Why else do you think Cameron is now trying to restrict the power of the Lords after they overturned his Tax Credit bill? This is the way of all Dictators - gradually dispose of all obstacles in the way of achieving outright power - including restricting who is eligible to vote (ie making potential Labour voters ineligible).
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491600 wrote: Look at Iran. The British and the west virtually stole their oil and left many in poverty for years. Multiply this with more countries and they have a point. I don't agree with their tactics but it is their way of looking at the issue. Lets judge on the basis of Justice. an equitable sharing of the earths resources. And if the shoe had been on the other foot??
Ya ya.
Lets be real friendly with those who imprison their own wives and daughters.
Oh wait. We are.
We would all like to use love to conquer the evils of Islam but they are not allowing us that political correct reaction.
They will not tolerate us and are forcing us to be quite intolerant of them.
Do you think we should tolerate a regime that will not even shake the hand of the U.S. president's wife because of lack of respect?
Regards
DL
Ya ya.
Lets be real friendly with those who imprison their own wives and daughters.
Oh wait. We are.
We would all like to use love to conquer the evils of Islam but they are not allowing us that political correct reaction.
They will not tolerate us and are forcing us to be quite intolerant of them.
Do you think we should tolerate a regime that will not even shake the hand of the U.S. president's wife because of lack of respect?
Regards
DL
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
tude dog;1491601 wrote: Thank you GC.
I just don't like such sweeping comments.
And Trump does not like having even more militant Muslims in the U.S.
Hitler was not protecting Germans by his antics. That is Trump's intention and it was clearly stated.
The time for political correctness is past.
Regards
DL
I just don't like such sweeping comments.
And Trump does not like having even more militant Muslims in the U.S.
Hitler was not protecting Germans by his antics. That is Trump's intention and it was clearly stated.
The time for political correctness is past.
Regards
DL
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
tude dog;1491602 wrote: Payback is childish.
Going to get those responsible is justifiable and reason enough for satisfaction.
I fail to see the satisfaction murdering 3000+ innocent people one 9/11.
Most cannot see the use of any false flag ops.
I do not either yet governments use them quite often.
Regards
DL
Going to get those responsible is justifiable and reason enough for satisfaction.
I fail to see the satisfaction murdering 3000+ innocent people one 9/11.
Most cannot see the use of any false flag ops.
I do not either yet governments use them quite often.
Regards
DL
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
tude dog;1491603 wrote: This Trumb guy, he's killing me.
Donald Trump misquotes scripture, appeals to religious Christian voters during speech at Liberty University
Daily News
That is a real Bible guy, Trumb is.
Nit picking and one-upmanship impresses you does it?
Regards
DL
Donald Trump misquotes scripture, appeals to religious Christian voters during speech at Liberty University
Daily News
That is a real Bible guy, Trumb is.
Nit picking and one-upmanship impresses you does it?
Regards
DL
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491614 wrote: but at some time we're going to have to talk to the moderate majority and resolve the problems we've caused.
What moderate minority?
Regards
DL
What moderate minority?
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
FourPart;1491627 wrote: Whilst that may be so in theory, in practice when there is a majority Government, and MPs fearful of their leader, then everyone toes the line, and what the PM says gos. With a majority Government anything is possible, and the only real protection we have is the House of Lords. Why else do you think Cameron is now trying to restrict the power of the Lords after they overturned his Tax Credit bill? This is the way of all Dictators - gradually dispose of all obstacles in the way of achieving outright power - including restricting who is eligible to vote (ie making potential Labour voters ineligible).
Yep, it's gradually moving that way FourPart. Take a gold star, buddy!
Yep, it's gradually moving that way FourPart. Take a gold star, buddy!
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491620 wrote: I disagree with your first point, and agree with your second, Bryn Mawr. There are party whips that dictate how MP's will vote on certain issues. As you are aware, the whips are defy-able, but at what cost to your political career? Many of these 'political animals' are intent on 'riding the gravy train' and thus end up being suborned by their political superiors; self-interest rules here ( mainly). As I said, somewhat like a malfunctioning/crappy computer. WMD was false (rubbish in) and the response to this was terminally flawed
( rubbish out). Rather like a maladroitly programmed computer, I would opine....
As to your second point, I agree entirely. Parliament is NOT fit for purpose when it can inflict so much harm and betray so many without anyone(in Parliament) being held to account! It's in urgent need of MAJOR reform(P.R. elections would be a start), and far greater input from public opinion on matters that affect us all. This would be relatively easy to achieve if the voting public were able to vote (possibly by swipe-card in public buildings/libraries/compatible home computers) on a range of issues decidable by the individual ( crucial/ mainstream/all, for instance), and this public vote being LEGALLY BINDING to all parties in Parliament. Parliament, if it should disagree with the vote, would be able to 'send it back' to the public for another vote (and state their reasons for this), but after the result of the SECOND vote (if required), this result/decision/law enactment now becomes final.
But you can be sure the 'elite' won't want their precious, intoxicating power and priviledge taken off them in this manner....
To the best of my recall the Iraq vote was left open so that MPs could follow their conscience but in any case, one hundred and thirty nine MPs found it within themselves to vote against and many resigned rather than have war declared in their name.
( rubbish out). Rather like a maladroitly programmed computer, I would opine....
As to your second point, I agree entirely. Parliament is NOT fit for purpose when it can inflict so much harm and betray so many without anyone(in Parliament) being held to account! It's in urgent need of MAJOR reform(P.R. elections would be a start), and far greater input from public opinion on matters that affect us all. This would be relatively easy to achieve if the voting public were able to vote (possibly by swipe-card in public buildings/libraries/compatible home computers) on a range of issues decidable by the individual ( crucial/ mainstream/all, for instance), and this public vote being LEGALLY BINDING to all parties in Parliament. Parliament, if it should disagree with the vote, would be able to 'send it back' to the public for another vote (and state their reasons for this), but after the result of the SECOND vote (if required), this result/decision/law enactment now becomes final.
But you can be sure the 'elite' won't want their precious, intoxicating power and priviledge taken off them in this manner....
To the best of my recall the Iraq vote was left open so that MPs could follow their conscience but in any case, one hundred and thirty nine MPs found it within themselves to vote against and many resigned rather than have war declared in their name.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491621 wrote: The symptoms are here already.
A Muslim-led ( though not necessarily exclusively Muslim rebels; just think of all the long-term unemployed, the homeless and those in low paid jobs slaving away doing long hours just to put food on the table and keep a roof over the family's head, all generally ignored by government as unimportant; that's an awful lot of downtrodden, disenfranchised people I would say, when taken as a whole) large scale civil insurrection is actually quite logical if you read the previous post and think about the effect our misguided policies are having in relation to growing acts of terrorism globally, coupled with a large pool of Muslims here in the Uk who could end up radicalized if we continue to oppress and kill their brethren in other parts of the world. There are Sharia patrols on the streets in certain areas of London (and other cities) right now; who appointed them to dictate what we can and can't do in our own land? Symptoms.
As stated earlier, if we don't find a solution to this problem (and quickly) it may very well become UNSOLVABLE. Do you trust Parliament (as it currently stands) to find a fair, ethical and humane way of solving this rapidly growing problem? If you do, you're either optimistic or naive in the extreme, IMO.
Fantasy!
A Muslim-led ( though not necessarily exclusively Muslim rebels; just think of all the long-term unemployed, the homeless and those in low paid jobs slaving away doing long hours just to put food on the table and keep a roof over the family's head, all generally ignored by government as unimportant; that's an awful lot of downtrodden, disenfranchised people I would say, when taken as a whole) large scale civil insurrection is actually quite logical if you read the previous post and think about the effect our misguided policies are having in relation to growing acts of terrorism globally, coupled with a large pool of Muslims here in the Uk who could end up radicalized if we continue to oppress and kill their brethren in other parts of the world. There are Sharia patrols on the streets in certain areas of London (and other cities) right now; who appointed them to dictate what we can and can't do in our own land? Symptoms.
As stated earlier, if we don't find a solution to this problem (and quickly) it may very well become UNSOLVABLE. Do you trust Parliament (as it currently stands) to find a fair, ethical and humane way of solving this rapidly growing problem? If you do, you're either optimistic or naive in the extreme, IMO.
Fantasy!
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491648 wrote: Fantasy!
Fantasy?
You've already stated that " If the answer to that is embedded in the institution, then Parliament is unfit for purpose and should be changed"
Corruption and self interest are indeed deeply buried within this institution, and it does need change! I've even suggested HOW it should change, and HOW the change would improve matters greatly.
If that's the best you've got after the careful explanations and reasoning of my posts, then all I can say is "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr"!
Or is it a case of "If I can't see the elephant in the room, then it can't see me?"
I'm afraid the fantasists are those that say there's no danger of us losing all that we've laboured so hard to gain over the centuries. Betrayal by complacency...
" All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" is a fair example of this complacency.
Fantasy?
You've already stated that " If the answer to that is embedded in the institution, then Parliament is unfit for purpose and should be changed"
Corruption and self interest are indeed deeply buried within this institution, and it does need change! I've even suggested HOW it should change, and HOW the change would improve matters greatly.
If that's the best you've got after the careful explanations and reasoning of my posts, then all I can say is "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr"!
Or is it a case of "If I can't see the elephant in the room, then it can't see me?"
I'm afraid the fantasists are those that say there's no danger of us losing all that we've laboured so hard to gain over the centuries. Betrayal by complacency...
" All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" is a fair example of this complacency.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491646 wrote: To the best of my recall the Iraq vote was left open so that MPs could follow their conscience but in any case, one hundred and thirty nine MPs found it within themselves to vote against and many resigned rather than have war declared in their name.
What about the rest of those 'duffers' who swallowed the lies (or followed the 'behind closed doors' instructions)? Those that resigned or voted against were the ethical/moral ones, and they were vastly outnumbered, weren't they?
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
How much more evidence is required to convince some people that we're in trouble here in the UK, and that it's seriously 'time past' for MAJOR POLITICAL REFORM? One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection! When the people in power stop listening, FORCE is the only recourse left, is it not?
All so needless. Reform is the answer, or we'll just be getting more of the same.
What about the rest of those 'duffers' who swallowed the lies (or followed the 'behind closed doors' instructions)? Those that resigned or voted against were the ethical/moral ones, and they were vastly outnumbered, weren't they?
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
How much more evidence is required to convince some people that we're in trouble here in the UK, and that it's seriously 'time past' for MAJOR POLITICAL REFORM? One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection! When the people in power stop listening, FORCE is the only recourse left, is it not?
All so needless. Reform is the answer, or we'll just be getting more of the same.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491656 wrote: What about the rest of those 'duffers' who swallowed the lies (or followed the 'behind closed doors' instructions)? Those that resigned or voted against were the ethical/moral ones, and they were vastly outnumbered, weren't they?
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
Just for your files to show how we are screwed by the political status quo.
20 years of data reveals that Congress doesn't care what you think.
The oligarchs get what they want 100% of the time.
That is why this type of link can be found.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/r ... -1.2500284
We have and want a hierarchical socio economic demographic pyramid, but not the immoral one we suffer today.
Regards
DL
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
Just for your files to show how we are screwed by the political status quo.
20 years of data reveals that Congress doesn't care what you think.
The oligarchs get what they want 100% of the time.
That is why this type of link can be found.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/r ... -1.2500284
We have and want a hierarchical socio economic demographic pyramid, but not the immoral one we suffer today.
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491653 wrote: Fantasy?
You've already stated that " If the answer to that is embedded in the institution, then Parliament is unfit for purpose and should be changed"
Corruption and self interest are indeed deeply buried within this institution, and it does need change! I've even suggested HOW it should change, and HOW the change would improve matters greatly.
If that's the best you've got after the careful explanations and reasoning of my posts, then all I can say is "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr"!
Or is it a case of "If I can't see the elephant in the room, then it can't see me?"
I'm afraid the fantasists are those that say there's no danger of us losing all that we've laboured so hard to gain over the centuries. Betrayal by complacency...
" All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" is a fair example of this complacency.
To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
You've already stated that " If the answer to that is embedded in the institution, then Parliament is unfit for purpose and should be changed"
Corruption and self interest are indeed deeply buried within this institution, and it does need change! I've even suggested HOW it should change, and HOW the change would improve matters greatly.
If that's the best you've got after the careful explanations and reasoning of my posts, then all I can say is "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr"!
Or is it a case of "If I can't see the elephant in the room, then it can't see me?"
I'm afraid the fantasists are those that say there's no danger of us losing all that we've laboured so hard to gain over the centuries. Betrayal by complacency...
" All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" is a fair example of this complacency.
To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491656 wrote: What about the rest of those 'duffers' who swallowed the lies (or followed the 'behind closed doors' instructions)? Those that resigned or voted against were the ethical/moral ones, and they were vastly outnumbered, weren't they?
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
How much more evidence is required to convince some people that we're in trouble here in the UK, and that it's seriously 'time past' for MAJOR POLITICAL REFORM? One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection! When the people in power stop listening, FORCE is the only recourse left, is it not?
All so needless. Reform is the answer, or we'll just be getting more of the same.
Your argument was that MPs could be controlled by the oligarchs as if parliament was a computer to be programmed but that the common people could not, I'm just demonstrating that MPs are not fully under the whip's control but that too many of the common people can be controlled by the media.
I totally agree that we need reform but going to the vox populi is not the answer.
What about the MILLIONS of people who came out in protest marches all over the country with "Not in my name" banners and placards? I was one of those and we were all ignored by Blair's corrupt cohorts! These people almost NEVER do anything to represent us, only themselves and their Oligarch paymasters!
How much more evidence is required to convince some people that we're in trouble here in the UK, and that it's seriously 'time past' for MAJOR POLITICAL REFORM? One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection! When the people in power stop listening, FORCE is the only recourse left, is it not?
All so needless. Reform is the answer, or we'll just be getting more of the same.
Your argument was that MPs could be controlled by the oligarchs as if parliament was a computer to be programmed but that the common people could not, I'm just demonstrating that MPs are not fully under the whip's control but that too many of the common people can be controlled by the media.
I totally agree that we need reform but going to the vox populi is not the answer.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491662 wrote: To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
Revolution/insurrecton is nothing new, you know, and it could happen here. All the ingredients to fuel it are starting to appear; corruption and intolerance in 'the halls of power', coupled with disdain for the common man's viewpoint, mass immigration of Muslims to these shores coupled with our warmongering policies against said Muslims in foreign lands, thus causing an enhanced risk of radicalization to those Muslims in Britain, and elsewhere ; downtrodden, poorly paid people working long hours just to make ends meet on national minimum wage (exorbitant rents charged by landlords, difficulty 'keeping food on the table') massive competition for most jobs, unemployment on the rise, despite government bull stating otherwise, DWP looking to apply sanctions on payments wherever and whenever it can. And that's just for starters!
And you still tell me there's no risk?
Incredible. As I said in my last post "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr!"
For the record, what I actually said was; "One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection!"
The operative word here being may.
Revolution/insurrecton is nothing new, you know, and it could happen here. All the ingredients to fuel it are starting to appear; corruption and intolerance in 'the halls of power', coupled with disdain for the common man's viewpoint, mass immigration of Muslims to these shores coupled with our warmongering policies against said Muslims in foreign lands, thus causing an enhanced risk of radicalization to those Muslims in Britain, and elsewhere ; downtrodden, poorly paid people working long hours just to make ends meet on national minimum wage (exorbitant rents charged by landlords, difficulty 'keeping food on the table') massive competition for most jobs, unemployment on the rise, despite government bull stating otherwise, DWP looking to apply sanctions on payments wherever and whenever it can. And that's just for starters!
And you still tell me there's no risk?
Incredible. As I said in my last post "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr!"
For the record, what I actually said was; "One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection!"
The operative word here being may.
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491666 wrote: Revolution/insurrecton is nothing new, you know, and it could happen here. All the ingredients to fuel it are starting to appear; corruption and intolerance in 'the halls of power', coupled with disdain for the common man's viewpoint, mass immigration of Muslims to these shores coupled with our warmongering policies against said Muslims in foreign lands, thus causing an enhanced risk of radicalization to those Muslims in Britain, and elsewhere ; downtrodden, poorly paid people working long hours just to make ends meet on national minimum wage (exorbitant rents charged by landlords, difficulty 'keeping food on the table') massive competition for most jobs, unemployment on the rise, despite government bull stating otherwise, DWP looking to apply sanctions on payments wherever and whenever it can. And that's just for starters!
And you still tell me there's no risk?
Incredible. As I said in my last post "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr!"
For the record, what I actually said was; "One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection!"
The operative word here being may.
Then we must agree to disagree, as I said in my previous post, "fantasy".
And you still tell me there's no risk?
Incredible. As I said in my last post "Back to your Ivory Tower, Bryn Mawr!"
For the record, what I actually said was; "One day, folk may well decide that enough's enough, but by then it may well be too late to avoid the bloodshed and slaughter entailed with a civil insurrection!"
The operative word here being may.
Then we must agree to disagree, as I said in my previous post, "fantasy".
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491673 wrote: Then we must agree to disagree, as I said in my previous post, "fantasy".
Indeed we must, as you continually answer with the cheapest shot in the book. "Fantasy". Anyone can say that without a moments thought going into it! Why bother with reasoned debate when you can cry "Fantasy?"
Indeed we must, as you continually answer with the cheapest shot in the book. "Fantasy". Anyone can say that without a moments thought going into it! Why bother with reasoned debate when you can cry "Fantasy?"
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Look at history. The Jewish revolt CE 70, the Russian revolution, the American revolution, the French revolution, Marcos in the Philippines. Many of these happened because the people said enough is enough. Can't happen again???
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491680 wrote: Look at history. The Jewish revolt CE 70, the Russian revolution, the American revolution, the French revolution, Marcos in the Philippines. Many of these happened because the people said enough is enough. Can't happen again???
Quite right Ted. There are many examples throughout history. We've been lucky here so far, and we're used to stability (UK) in this regard. However, just because it hasn't happened recently, there is a tendency to assume it will always be like this, and that's just sheer complacency, IMO. I have found that some of the most persistent principles on Earth are accident, error, tyranny, hope, despair, coincidence and compassion, in no particular order, as opposed to stability. Nature tends to fluctuate between stable periods and instability quite regularly, as do we ourselves....
Quite right Ted. There are many examples throughout history. We've been lucky here so far, and we're used to stability (UK) in this regard. However, just because it hasn't happened recently, there is a tendency to assume it will always be like this, and that's just sheer complacency, IMO. I have found that some of the most persistent principles on Earth are accident, error, tyranny, hope, despair, coincidence and compassion, in no particular order, as opposed to stability. Nature tends to fluctuate between stable periods and instability quite regularly, as do we ourselves....
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491678 wrote: Indeed we must, as you continually answer with the cheapest shot in the book. "Fantasy". Anyone can say that without a moments thought going into it! Why bother with reasoned debate when you can cry "Fantasy?"
To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491680 wrote: Look at history. The Jewish revolt CE 70, the Russian revolution, the American revolution, the French revolution, Marcos in the Philippines. Many of these happened because the people said enough is enough. Can't happen again???
It can - but not in this country for the reason given. To suggest that the Muslim population could go from their current passive state to overrunning the army without passing through a sufficient number of intermediate states to provoke a backlash amongst the rest of the population is a nonsense.
It can - but not in this country for the reason given. To suggest that the Muslim population could go from their current passive state to overrunning the army without passing through a sufficient number of intermediate states to provoke a backlash amongst the rest of the population is a nonsense.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491692 wrote: To jump from "parliament should be changed" to "there will be armed insurrection on the streets" more than stretches credulity, it breaks it asunder. Where there is such a break in logic it is not careful explanation and reasoning it is fantasy.
This post is a duplicate of post#120 Bryn Mawr. (This has happened to me from time to time) The question is, why do past posts do this seemingly of their own volition? ( Scratches head in perplexity)
This post is a duplicate of post#120 Bryn Mawr. (This has happened to me from time to time) The question is, why do past posts do this seemingly of their own volition? ( Scratches head in perplexity)
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491694 wrote: This post is a duplicate of post#120 Bryn Mawr. (This has happened to me from time to time) The question is, why do past posts do this seemingly of their own volition? ( Scratches head in perplexity)
See post #124
See post #124
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491693 wrote: It can - but not in this country for the reason given. To suggest that the Muslim population could go from their current passive state to overrunning the army without passing through a sufficient number of intermediate states to provoke a backlash amongst the rest of the population is a nonsense.
The way we behave militarily and politically may cause more and more of these (thus far) moderate Muslims to radicalize, provoking an undesirable, though understandable, backlash against them. Sure, the majority are passive at present, but that minority of violent fundamentalists is growing all the time. If this number were to reach, say, 1 million or so, who's to say what the upshot will be, especially as we only have about 70k troops. And if these fundamentalists have been acquiring guns and making secret caches here and there (similar to the IRA)....All the recipe needed for an armed insurrection (especially with our crummy border controls). Small vessels can dock in a great many secluded locations around the UK, so this is not an impossibility! That would indeed be a shock to a great many people.
The other potential danger is if enough of the downtrodden, abused and ignored people of this sad island decide that any enemy of the political elite that is abusing them is by default an ally, then full-blown insurrection is a real possibility. The main trouble with insurrections is what comes after to fill the political void?....
You say fantasy, I say insurrection somewhere down the line's a real possibility. Agree to disagree we must!
The way we behave militarily and politically may cause more and more of these (thus far) moderate Muslims to radicalize, provoking an undesirable, though understandable, backlash against them. Sure, the majority are passive at present, but that minority of violent fundamentalists is growing all the time. If this number were to reach, say, 1 million or so, who's to say what the upshot will be, especially as we only have about 70k troops. And if these fundamentalists have been acquiring guns and making secret caches here and there (similar to the IRA)....All the recipe needed for an armed insurrection (especially with our crummy border controls). Small vessels can dock in a great many secluded locations around the UK, so this is not an impossibility! That would indeed be a shock to a great many people.
The other potential danger is if enough of the downtrodden, abused and ignored people of this sad island decide that any enemy of the political elite that is abusing them is by default an ally, then full-blown insurrection is a real possibility. The main trouble with insurrections is what comes after to fill the political void?....
You say fantasy, I say insurrection somewhere down the line's a real possibility. Agree to disagree we must!
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491680 wrote: Look at history. The Jewish revolt CE 70, the Russian revolution, the American revolution, the French revolution, Marcos in the Philippines. Many of these happened because the people said enough is enough. Can't happen again???
Sure it can but it becomes harder over time I think.
Trump is basically rebelling against what Islam is doing and look at how the so called progressive left are being quite regressive and siding with those who promote child brides and the stoning of rape victims.
I don't know if it is due to fear of offending murderous Muslims or just political correctness gone stupid.
Regards
DL
Sure it can but it becomes harder over time I think.
Trump is basically rebelling against what Islam is doing and look at how the so called progressive left are being quite regressive and siding with those who promote child brides and the stoning of rape victims.
I don't know if it is due to fear of offending murderous Muslims or just political correctness gone stupid.
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Trump is making on huge mistake. He is taring every body with same brush. Talks about the Bible but he apparently doesn't really know what it says.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491705 wrote: The way we behave militarily and politically may cause more and more of these (thus far) moderate Muslims to radicalize, provoking an undesirable, though understandable, backlash against them. Sure, the majority are passive at present, but that minority of violent fundamentalists is growing all the time. If this number were to reach, say, 1 million or so, who's to say what the upshot will be, especially as we only have about 70k troops. And if these fundamentalists have been acquiring guns and making secret caches here and there (similar to the IRA)....All the recipe needed for an armed insurrection (especially with our crummy border controls). Small vessels can dock in a great many secluded locations around the UK, so this is not an impossibility! That would indeed be a shock to a great many people.
The other potential danger is if enough of the downtrodden, abused and ignored people of this sad island decide that any enemy of the political elite that is abusing them is by default an ally, then full-blown insurrection is a real possibility. The main trouble with insurrections is what comes after to fill the political void?....
You say fantasy, I say insurrection somewhere down the line's a real possibility. Agree to disagree we must!
Before the numbers could escalate to anything like a million (moving from 0.001% of the target population to 33.3% of the target population) there would be several changes of state within the society. At each of these changes of state there would be a backlash from the rest of the society and there would be a ramping up of the security service state of readiness to counter the threat.
You cannot move from the current situation to the situation you envisage without adaptation - your scenario cannot happen.
The other potential danger is if enough of the downtrodden, abused and ignored people of this sad island decide that any enemy of the political elite that is abusing them is by default an ally, then full-blown insurrection is a real possibility. The main trouble with insurrections is what comes after to fill the political void?....
You say fantasy, I say insurrection somewhere down the line's a real possibility. Agree to disagree we must!
Before the numbers could escalate to anything like a million (moving from 0.001% of the target population to 33.3% of the target population) there would be several changes of state within the society. At each of these changes of state there would be a backlash from the rest of the society and there would be a ramping up of the security service state of readiness to counter the threat.
You cannot move from the current situation to the situation you envisage without adaptation - your scenario cannot happen.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491717 wrote: Trump is making on huge mistake. He is taring every body with same brush. Talks about the Bible but he apparently doesn't really know what it says.
How do you differentiate one of the (good) Muslims from one of the (bad) Muslims?
And knowing that the stats seem to indicate that 70 odd % are (bad) Muslims, why should Trump not want to keep all of them out till, as he said, things can be sorted out?
Why not ere, if it is an error, on the side of protecting the existing Americans?
Why risk American lives to appease or tolerate those who do not want to tolerate the West?
Regards
DL
How do you differentiate one of the (good) Muslims from one of the (bad) Muslims?
And knowing that the stats seem to indicate that 70 odd % are (bad) Muslims, why should Trump not want to keep all of them out till, as he said, things can be sorted out?
Why not ere, if it is an error, on the side of protecting the existing Americans?
Why risk American lives to appease or tolerate those who do not want to tolerate the West?
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491646 wrote: To the best of my recall the Iraq vote was left open so that MPs could follow their conscience but in any case, one hundred and thirty nine MPs found it within themselves to vote against and many resigned rather than have war declared in their name.
As you say, it was an open vote, so no party has the right to blame the "Previous Government" (as is usually the way). However, regardless of who voted for or against, the vote would have been based on the evidence available. With hindsight we know that the evidence was false, but I still don't know for certain whether or not Blair deliberately misled the public, or whether it was because he was too much up Bush's backside & was being fed all that info, also believing it to be true. Don't get me wrong - I'm not disputing that there clearly was deception - it's just a question of who really did the deceiving.
As you say, it was an open vote, so no party has the right to blame the "Previous Government" (as is usually the way). However, regardless of who voted for or against, the vote would have been based on the evidence available. With hindsight we know that the evidence was false, but I still don't know for certain whether or not Blair deliberately misled the public, or whether it was because he was too much up Bush's backside & was being fed all that info, also believing it to be true. Don't get me wrong - I'm not disputing that there clearly was deception - it's just a question of who really did the deceiving.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
FourPart;1491736 wrote: As you say, it was an open vote, so no party has the right to blame the "Previous Government" (as is usually the way). However, regardless of who voted for or against, the vote would have been based on the evidence available. With hindsight we know that the evidence was false, but I still don't know for certain whether or not Blair deliberately misled the public, or whether it was because he was too much up Bush's backside & was being fed all that info, also believing it to be true. Don't get me wrong - I'm not disputing that there clearly was deception - it's just a question of who really did the deceiving.
With foresight we knew that the evidence was false and we said so by the hundreds of thousands. The evidence available (as opposed to the evidence being touted by Tony Blair) was that Iraq was highly unlikely to have WMD and even if they did were totally incapable of using them to attack the UK, never mind at forty five minuted notice.
There is evidence that TB put pressure on the information services to produce the document he wanted - it is up to the courts to decide whether he was culpable.
With foresight we knew that the evidence was false and we said so by the hundreds of thousands. The evidence available (as opposed to the evidence being touted by Tony Blair) was that Iraq was highly unlikely to have WMD and even if they did were totally incapable of using them to attack the UK, never mind at forty five minuted notice.
There is evidence that TB put pressure on the information services to produce the document he wanted - it is up to the courts to decide whether he was culpable.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
FourPart;1491736 wrote: As you say, it was an open vote, so no party has the right to blame the "Previous Government" (as is usually the way). However, regardless of who voted for or against, the vote would have been based on the evidence available. With hindsight we know that the evidence was false, but I still don't know for certain whether or not Blair deliberately misled the public, or whether it was because he was too much up Bush's backside & was being fed all that info, also believing it to be true. Don't get me wrong - I'm not disputing that there clearly was deception - it's just a question of who really did the deceiving.
I wonder if Bush used the same line to convince the British politicians to go into Iraq.
Regards
DL
I wonder if Bush used the same line to convince the British politicians to go into Iraq.
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
FourPart;1491736 wrote: As you say, it was an open vote, so no party has the right to blame the "Previous Government" (as is usually the way). However, regardless of who voted for or against, the vote would have been based on the evidence available. With hindsight we know that the evidence was false, but I still don't know for certain whether or not Blair deliberately misled the public, or whether it was because he was too much up Bush's backside & was being fed all that info, also believing it to be true. Don't get me wrong - I'm not disputing that there clearly was deception - it's just a question of who really did the deceiving.
We know who did the deceiving, sadly the BBC backed down instead of backing their own reporters and they have been failing badly to ne objective ever sonce terrified of being accused of bias by a political system hostile to the notion of the bbc reporting both sides.
remember this?
Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.
Threat questioned
Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralised and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days.
We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.
Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term - namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target.
It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories.
Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?
Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?
Saudi arabians attack the US and they invade Afghanistan and Iraq. You couldn't make it up
We know who did the deceiving, sadly the BBC backed down instead of backing their own reporters and they have been failing badly to ne objective ever sonce terrified of being accused of bias by a political system hostile to the notion of the bbc reporting both sides.
remember this?
Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.
Threat questioned
Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralised and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days.
We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.
Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term - namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target.
It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories.
Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?
Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?
Saudi arabians attack the US and they invade Afghanistan and Iraq. You couldn't make it up
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491723 wrote: Before the numbers could escalate to anything like a million (moving from 0.001% of the target population to 33.3% of the target population) there would be several changes of state within the society. At each of these changes of state there would be a backlash from the rest of the society and there would be a ramping up of the security service state of readiness to counter the threat.
You cannot move from the current situation to the situation you envisage without adaptation - your scenario cannot happen.
Did you see the news? The BBC and various papers reported on a small gang of extremists planning to shoot police, army, or even members of the public (in London, I believe), using weapons that had been cached in secret. My questions are; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here?
I'll bet military intelligence can't answer ANY of those question accurately, so I don't see anyone else being able to; certainly no-one on FG!
With this in mind, one can be sure of nothing!
You cannot move from the current situation to the situation you envisage without adaptation - your scenario cannot happen.
Did you see the news? The BBC and various papers reported on a small gang of extremists planning to shoot police, army, or even members of the public (in London, I believe), using weapons that had been cached in secret. My questions are; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here?
I'll bet military intelligence can't answer ANY of those question accurately, so I don't see anyone else being able to; certainly no-one on FG!
With this in mind, one can be sure of nothing!
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491769 wrote: Did you see the news? The BBC and various papers reported on a small gang of extremists planning to shoot police, army, or even members of the public (in London, I believe), using weapons that had been cached in secret. My questions are; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here?
I'll bet military intelligence can't answer ANY of those question accurately, so I don't see anyone else being able too; certainly no-one on FG!
With this in mind, you can be sure of nothing!
But that's not what you're talking about is it. Your scenario was not a few terrorists on the streets it's :-
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line...
Firstly, your figure of approx seventy thousand is way out - the current figure is about two hundred and thirty thousand :-
United Kingdom Military Strength
Secondly :-
How do you get two to three million peaceful and law abiding citizens radicalised, trained, equipped and mobilised without raising every alarm under the sun within the security services?
Are you suggesting that it's already happened and they are about to strike? That's scare stories for children and the gullible.
If you take a realistic timescale for such a thing to happen then the whole situation in this country would have changed radially as the process unfolds - it would *not* be transparent to the security forces, changes on that scale could never be achieved in secret.
As the number of radicalised Muslims increased there would be a corresponding radicalisation within the rest of the population to oppose it - that is already happening even at the very low levels we see today.
Before the number of radicalised Muslims reached a point where they were capable of taking on the armed forces those forces would be mobilised and active in suppressing the sedition - in effect we'd have The Troubles but on the British mainland.
As the numbers increased the UK Armed Services would be bolstered to combat the threat - they would not be facing two hundred and thirty thousand but many more.
If any sustained level of terrorist activity took place you would see the rise of paramilitary organisations - the likes of the BNP and EDL would immitate the UDF etc
So, how do you see ten percent of the population rising in armed insurrection and over-running our armed forces and the other ninety percent of the population - apart from anything else your famous oligarch paymasters would never allow it, it's bad for business.
I'll bet military intelligence can't answer ANY of those question accurately, so I don't see anyone else being able too; certainly no-one on FG!
With this in mind, you can be sure of nothing!
But that's not what you're talking about is it. Your scenario was not a few terrorists on the streets it's :-
Couple that with a 2-3 million population of Muslims in the UK, and an army of 70,000 (approx) soldiers to defend us, and it becomes evident that with sufficient radicalization, WE could be inflicted with 'regime change' somewhere down the line...
Firstly, your figure of approx seventy thousand is way out - the current figure is about two hundred and thirty thousand :-
United Kingdom Military Strength
Secondly :-
How do you get two to three million peaceful and law abiding citizens radicalised, trained, equipped and mobilised without raising every alarm under the sun within the security services?
Are you suggesting that it's already happened and they are about to strike? That's scare stories for children and the gullible.
If you take a realistic timescale for such a thing to happen then the whole situation in this country would have changed radially as the process unfolds - it would *not* be transparent to the security forces, changes on that scale could never be achieved in secret.
As the number of radicalised Muslims increased there would be a corresponding radicalisation within the rest of the population to oppose it - that is already happening even at the very low levels we see today.
Before the number of radicalised Muslims reached a point where they were capable of taking on the armed forces those forces would be mobilised and active in suppressing the sedition - in effect we'd have The Troubles but on the British mainland.
As the numbers increased the UK Armed Services would be bolstered to combat the threat - they would not be facing two hundred and thirty thousand but many more.
If any sustained level of terrorist activity took place you would see the rise of paramilitary organisations - the likes of the BNP and EDL would immitate the UDF etc
So, how do you see ten percent of the population rising in armed insurrection and over-running our armed forces and the other ninety percent of the population - apart from anything else your famous oligarch paymasters would never allow it, it's bad for business.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
How do we differentiate between bad and good: Christians, Hindus , Muslims, Buddhists, and whatever other faiths have?
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491781 wrote: How do we differentiate between bad and good: Christians, Hindus , Muslims, Buddhists, and whatever other faiths have?
If you believe the media it's easy - Muslim = evil, Christian = good, others = neutral
In real life you can only tell by their words and actions.
If you believe the media it's easy - Muslim = evil, Christian = good, others = neutral
In real life you can only tell by their words and actions.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Bryn Mawr;1491779 wrote: But that's not what you're talking about is it. Your scenario was not a few terrorists on the streets it's :-
Firstly, your figure of approx seventy thousand is way out - the current figure is about two hundred and thirty thousand :-
United Kingdom Military Strength
Secondly :-
How do you get two to three million peaceful and law abiding citizens radicalised, trained, equipped and mobilised without raising every alarm under the sun within the security services?
Are you suggesting that it's already happened and they are about to strike? That's scare stories for children and the gullible.
If you take a realistic timescale for such a thing to happen then the whole situation in this country would have changed radially as the process unfolds - it would *not* be transparent to the security forces, changes on that scale could never be achieved in secret.
As the number of radicalised Muslims increased there would be a corresponding radicalisation within the rest of the population to oppose it - that is already happening even at the very low levels we see today.
Before the number of radicalised Muslims reached a point where they were capable of taking on the armed forces those forces would be mobilised and active in suppressing the sedition - in effect we'd have The Troubles but on the British mainland.
As the numbers increased the UK Armed Services would be bolstered to combat the threat - they would not be facing two hundred and thirty thousand but many more.
If any sustained level of terrorist activity took place you would see the rise of paramilitary organisations - the likes of the BNP and EDL would immitate the UDF etc
So, how do you see ten percent of the population rising in armed insurrection and over-running our armed forces and the other ninety percent of the population - apart from anything else your famous oligarch paymasters would never allow it, it's bad for business.
A few terrorists on the streets is just the beginning. 5 years before the Nazis came to power, there were only a few of them on the streets too....
The figure that's been touted as our 'front line' army size (BBC News) is 70k. Not sure how may reserves we have, but it can't be more than about 70k. So maybe 140k troops maximum potential.
Set against that here are 3 million Muslims resident here at present. At least 50% of them are male. How many of these have been radicalized? How many more will be radicalized in future?
Harping back to the terror gang arrested in London for plotting acts of terror/atrocities; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here? As I stated in a previous post, I doubt that government or military intelligence could answer ANY of these questions!
There are also many other disenfranchised, unhappy people living in this country, some of whom may be happy to 'throw in their lot' with insurrectionists, having lost most of what they hold dear; people in 'cardboard city', victims of injustice/wrongful imprisonment, people struggling on minimum wage who are just 1 paycheck from eviction, 'refugees' coming from Africa and Syria,as well as thugs and violent criminals who don't care who's in charge as long as they get a nice chunk!
I'm not for one moment suggesting that all these people are going to engage in an insurrection, but if only 25% of them do, that will still be one hell of a lot of insurrectionists! Then we have all the ILLEGAL immigrants arriving undetected on these shores....(The government admitted it has no idea how many illegals are currently here without permission, but accepts it could be well over a million. This was on a BBC news article about a year ago)
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
No, I'm not saying this has happened (sufficient insurrectionists trained, equipped, mobilised) and a 'strike' is imminent. What I AM saying is that what we are seeing is 'the thin end of the wedge'. We have all the ingredients starting to accumulate slowly. Who knows what the 'picture' will look like in a decade.
Even if the security forces were aware of a growing threat, WE wouldn't be told. Government wouldn't want to spread alarm amongst the population (similar to if a meteor was about to wipe us all out).
Yes, there would indeed be a backlash as counter-radicalization set in amongst certain elements of the population; we are seeing this at lowish (though increasing) levels today (BNP,EDL,Britain First, to name a few of the more prolific).Not a good sign.
As for mobilising these large defence forces; where would the money come from to do this? We are in an era of sweeping cuts that go beyond the bone, with no end in sight yet. Our national debt is bigger than ever now, despite the cuts, and our credit rating is reduced, so borrowing costs more now.
I wonder how many army/airforce units would 'defect' in the event of an insurrection, rather than fire on their own countrymen, especially the way some of these servicemen have been treated by government? There are always defectors....
If 10% of the current population went into full-blown revolt, that would be 6 million people. Even if it was only 5% that's still 3 million; way too many to contain!As for the other 90% of the population, most would probably be keeping their heads down! Wars and insurrections usually involve quite small chunks of the population (relatively speaking).
As for the Oligarchs, I expect they'll do what they always do when faced with a setback; turn disaster into opportunity....Imagine the guns, clothes, medicines and vehicles they could sell (to both sides)....
I checked out GFP (global firepower) and they admit that some figures are estimates. These figures obviously don't take into account how many vehicles are currently unuseable (the MOD admitted as much as 50% of it's helicopters are incapable of flight, though this was about 2 years back. I would imagine similar would apply to land vehicles).
As a footnote, ISIL have stated that an invasion of the UK is on the agenda. Maybe they mean infiltration? Very dangerous, as these fundamentalists/extremists are not afraid to die for their cause, will radicalize many 'moderates' and unlike conventional forces, they don't wear a uniform....
And because we belong to the EU (at present), we don't have control of our borders....
Firstly, your figure of approx seventy thousand is way out - the current figure is about two hundred and thirty thousand :-
United Kingdom Military Strength
Secondly :-
How do you get two to three million peaceful and law abiding citizens radicalised, trained, equipped and mobilised without raising every alarm under the sun within the security services?
Are you suggesting that it's already happened and they are about to strike? That's scare stories for children and the gullible.
If you take a realistic timescale for such a thing to happen then the whole situation in this country would have changed radially as the process unfolds - it would *not* be transparent to the security forces, changes on that scale could never be achieved in secret.
As the number of radicalised Muslims increased there would be a corresponding radicalisation within the rest of the population to oppose it - that is already happening even at the very low levels we see today.
Before the number of radicalised Muslims reached a point where they were capable of taking on the armed forces those forces would be mobilised and active in suppressing the sedition - in effect we'd have The Troubles but on the British mainland.
As the numbers increased the UK Armed Services would be bolstered to combat the threat - they would not be facing two hundred and thirty thousand but many more.
If any sustained level of terrorist activity took place you would see the rise of paramilitary organisations - the likes of the BNP and EDL would immitate the UDF etc
So, how do you see ten percent of the population rising in armed insurrection and over-running our armed forces and the other ninety percent of the population - apart from anything else your famous oligarch paymasters would never allow it, it's bad for business.
A few terrorists on the streets is just the beginning. 5 years before the Nazis came to power, there were only a few of them on the streets too....
The figure that's been touted as our 'front line' army size (BBC News) is 70k. Not sure how may reserves we have, but it can't be more than about 70k. So maybe 140k troops maximum potential.
Set against that here are 3 million Muslims resident here at present. At least 50% of them are male. How many of these have been radicalized? How many more will be radicalized in future?
Harping back to the terror gang arrested in London for plotting acts of terror/atrocities; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here? As I stated in a previous post, I doubt that government or military intelligence could answer ANY of these questions!
There are also many other disenfranchised, unhappy people living in this country, some of whom may be happy to 'throw in their lot' with insurrectionists, having lost most of what they hold dear; people in 'cardboard city', victims of injustice/wrongful imprisonment, people struggling on minimum wage who are just 1 paycheck from eviction, 'refugees' coming from Africa and Syria,as well as thugs and violent criminals who don't care who's in charge as long as they get a nice chunk!
I'm not for one moment suggesting that all these people are going to engage in an insurrection, but if only 25% of them do, that will still be one hell of a lot of insurrectionists! Then we have all the ILLEGAL immigrants arriving undetected on these shores....(The government admitted it has no idea how many illegals are currently here without permission, but accepts it could be well over a million. This was on a BBC news article about a year ago)
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
No, I'm not saying this has happened (sufficient insurrectionists trained, equipped, mobilised) and a 'strike' is imminent. What I AM saying is that what we are seeing is 'the thin end of the wedge'. We have all the ingredients starting to accumulate slowly. Who knows what the 'picture' will look like in a decade.
Even if the security forces were aware of a growing threat, WE wouldn't be told. Government wouldn't want to spread alarm amongst the population (similar to if a meteor was about to wipe us all out).
Yes, there would indeed be a backlash as counter-radicalization set in amongst certain elements of the population; we are seeing this at lowish (though increasing) levels today (BNP,EDL,Britain First, to name a few of the more prolific).Not a good sign.
As for mobilising these large defence forces; where would the money come from to do this? We are in an era of sweeping cuts that go beyond the bone, with no end in sight yet. Our national debt is bigger than ever now, despite the cuts, and our credit rating is reduced, so borrowing costs more now.
I wonder how many army/airforce units would 'defect' in the event of an insurrection, rather than fire on their own countrymen, especially the way some of these servicemen have been treated by government? There are always defectors....
If 10% of the current population went into full-blown revolt, that would be 6 million people. Even if it was only 5% that's still 3 million; way too many to contain!As for the other 90% of the population, most would probably be keeping their heads down! Wars and insurrections usually involve quite small chunks of the population (relatively speaking).
As for the Oligarchs, I expect they'll do what they always do when faced with a setback; turn disaster into opportunity....Imagine the guns, clothes, medicines and vehicles they could sell (to both sides)....
I checked out GFP (global firepower) and they admit that some figures are estimates. These figures obviously don't take into account how many vehicles are currently unuseable (the MOD admitted as much as 50% of it's helicopters are incapable of flight, though this was about 2 years back. I would imagine similar would apply to land vehicles).
As a footnote, ISIL have stated that an invasion of the UK is on the agenda. Maybe they mean infiltration? Very dangerous, as these fundamentalists/extremists are not afraid to die for their cause, will radicalize many 'moderates' and unlike conventional forces, they don't wear a uniform....
And because we belong to the EU (at present), we don't have control of our borders....
" To finish first, first you have to finish!" Rick Mears. 4x Winner Indy 500. 3x Indycar National Champion.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
A few terrorists on the streets is just the beginning. 5 years before the Nazis came to power, there were only a few of them on the streets too....
Are you kiddiing do you really think the nazis sprung up out of nowhere?
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
Many people in this country were more terrified of a communist revolution than they were of a nazi one. Churchill was the one who ordered troops with machine guns and tanks on to the streets of glasgow in 1919 to take on an unarmed populace. In germany right wing militias were brought in (the friekorps and were to become the nucleus of the nazi stormtroopers ) and there was wholesale massacre of socialists and communists in the armed uprisings in 1919. In 1923 the first labour government was formed, you can argue that was because the british government for all it's fauts did not go in for using armed thugs to take out political opponents (don't mention ireland or maybe they had learned the lessons of 1916 not to make martyrs of people). For myself I like to think it was because they were terrified of angering the people and doing something that would cause a general uprising. There was the general strike in 1926 the royal navy mutinied in 1932 do you really think people were complacent and not aware of what was going on? It's like today, the arseholes in power are not necessarily aware of what is going on around them. Lord beaverbrooke supported appeasement right up until the war started where did you get the idea he was somehow prescient and saw it coming - the daily mail quite openly supported hitler and the nazis much as they do the modern day equivalents although cameron is no hitler.
Marx was jewish as were many of the intellectual leaders of the socialst and communist movement in germany that's one of the main reasons hitler got the support of the catholic church that ansd because theyt bekloeved in the eperation of church and state and why they supported fascism in spain and italy. Anti-semitism was not a peculiarly german phenomenon
You need to read a bit more widely if all you read is the ramblings of conspiracy theorists you end up with a very strange world view things are never simpli this or that, black or white. With an independent scotland and jeremy corbyn in number 10 things might not turn out the way you imagine.
Are you kiddiing do you really think the nazis sprung up out of nowhere?
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
Many people in this country were more terrified of a communist revolution than they were of a nazi one. Churchill was the one who ordered troops with machine guns and tanks on to the streets of glasgow in 1919 to take on an unarmed populace. In germany right wing militias were brought in (the friekorps and were to become the nucleus of the nazi stormtroopers ) and there was wholesale massacre of socialists and communists in the armed uprisings in 1919. In 1923 the first labour government was formed, you can argue that was because the british government for all it's fauts did not go in for using armed thugs to take out political opponents (don't mention ireland or maybe they had learned the lessons of 1916 not to make martyrs of people). For myself I like to think it was because they were terrified of angering the people and doing something that would cause a general uprising. There was the general strike in 1926 the royal navy mutinied in 1932 do you really think people were complacent and not aware of what was going on? It's like today, the arseholes in power are not necessarily aware of what is going on around them. Lord beaverbrooke supported appeasement right up until the war started where did you get the idea he was somehow prescient and saw it coming - the daily mail quite openly supported hitler and the nazis much as they do the modern day equivalents although cameron is no hitler.
Marx was jewish as were many of the intellectual leaders of the socialst and communist movement in germany that's one of the main reasons hitler got the support of the catholic church that ansd because theyt bekloeved in the eperation of church and state and why they supported fascism in spain and italy. Anti-semitism was not a peculiarly german phenomenon
You need to read a bit more widely if all you read is the ramblings of conspiracy theorists you end up with a very strange world view things are never simpli this or that, black or white. With an independent scotland and jeremy corbyn in number 10 things might not turn out the way you imagine.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Smaug;1491790 wrote: A few terrorists on the streets is just the beginning. 5 years before the Nazis came to power, there were only a few of them on the streets too....
The figure that's been touted as our 'front line' army size (BBC News) is 70k. Not sure how may reserves we have, but it can't be more than about 70k. So maybe 140k troops maximum potential.
Set against that here are 3 million Muslims resident here at present. At least 50% of them are male. How many of these have been radicalized? How many more will be radicalized in future?
So, as soon as it's challenged your number doubles - then add in the likes of the Marines (Navy rather than Army so not included in your figure) and who knows how high it will go. The figure I gave was (indirectly) from the CIA Factbook so I'll take that over your estimate.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: Harping back to the terror gang arrested in London for plotting acts of terror/atrocities; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here? As I stated in a previous post, I doubt that government or military intelligence could answer ANY of these questions!
Answer them to what degree of precision? I doubt that anyone could give you a dot and comma figure but they can certainly give you a range of 95% probability - whether it's 0.01% or 0.001% of the Muslim population it is certainly well away from the 100% that you were postulating.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: There are also many other disenfranchised, unhappy people living in this country, some of whom may be happy to 'throw in their lot' with insurrectionists, having lost most of what they hold dear; people in 'cardboard city', victims of injustice/wrongful imprisonment, people struggling on minimum wage who are just 1 paycheck from eviction, 'refugees' coming from Africa and Syria,as well as thugs and violent criminals who don't care who's in charge as long as they get a nice chunk!
OK, if the original claim doesn't stack up let's expand the remit?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I'm not for one moment suggesting that all these people are going to engage in an insurrection, but if only 25% of them do, that will still be one hell of a lot of insurrectionists! Then we have all the ILLEGAL immigrants arriving undetected on these shores....(The government admitted it has no idea how many illegals are currently here without permission, but accepts it could be well over a million. This was on a BBC news article about a year ago)
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
So from an internal revolt we're not talking of an invasion by foreign powers?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: No, I'm not saying this has happened (sufficient insurrectionists trained, equipped, mobilised) and a 'strike' is imminent. What I AM saying is that what we are seeing is 'the thin end of the wedge'. We have all the ingredients starting to accumulate slowly. Who knows what the 'picture' will look like in a decade.
Even if the security forces were aware of a growing threat, WE wouldn't be told. Government wouldn't want to spread alarm amongst the population (similar to if a meteor was about to wipe us all out).
Yes, there would indeed be a backlash as counter-radicalization set in amongst certain elements of the population; we are seeing this at lowish (though increasing) levels today (BNP,EDL,Britain First, to name a few of the more prolific).Not a good sign.
The point being that the situation at any point where they is the possibility of an internal insurgency by the Muslim population of the sort that you were describing the situation would be so significantly different to that of today that your totally misrepresenting it.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As for mobilising these large defence forces; where would the money come from to do this? We are in an era of sweeping cuts that go beyond the bone, with no end in sight yet. Our national debt is bigger than ever now, despite the cuts, and our credit rating is reduced, so borrowing costs more now.
Where did the money come from for Afghanistan and Iraq? Come to that, where did the money come from for WWII? In a war situation the money is *always* found and the payback is sorted out afterwards.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I wonder how many army/airforce units would 'defect' in the event of an insurrection, rather than fire on their own countrymen, especially the way some of these servicemen have been treated by government? There are always defectors....
At the Unit level? Given that you're talking of an insurrection by a tenth of the population and that would be represented within the unit structure the likely answer is none.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: If 10% of the current population went into full-blown revolt, that would be 6 million people. Even if it was only 5% that's still 3 million; way too many to contain!As for the other 90% of the population, most would probably be keeping their heads down! Wars and insurrections usually involve quite small chunks of the population (relatively speaking).
So now you're including women, children and the geriatric in your counts? I don't see much danger from the pre-toddlers so can we at least exclude them?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As for the Oligarchs, I expect they'll do what they always do when faced with a setback; turn disaster into opportunity....Imagine the guns, clothes, medicines and vehicles they could sell (to both sides)....
This is a joke surely?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I checked out GFP (global firepower) and they admit that some figures are estimates. These figures obviously don't take into account how many vehicles are currently unuseable (the MOD admitted as much as 50% of it's helicopters are incapable of flight, though this was about 2 years back. I would imagine similar would apply to land vehicles).
As I said at the start of this reply, the figure I quoted was taken directly from the CIA factbook - it does not involve the number of armaments the MoD hold which were estimated, it is a straight count of our fighting force.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As a footnote, ISIL have stated that an invasion of the UK is on the agenda. Maybe they mean infiltration? Very dangerous, as these fundamentalists/extremists are not afraid to die for their cause, will radicalize many 'moderates' and unlike conventional forces, they don't wear a uniform....
And maybe they mean to panic the more gullible parts of our population into putting pressure on the government to pull out of the Middle East? Shall we deal in reality rather than supposition?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: And because we belong to the EU (at present), we don't have control of our borders....
And because we belong to the EU (and Nato etc.) we have other resources to call on in the event of the type of insurgency you're imagining.
The figure that's been touted as our 'front line' army size (BBC News) is 70k. Not sure how may reserves we have, but it can't be more than about 70k. So maybe 140k troops maximum potential.
Set against that here are 3 million Muslims resident here at present. At least 50% of them are male. How many of these have been radicalized? How many more will be radicalized in future?
So, as soon as it's challenged your number doubles - then add in the likes of the Marines (Navy rather than Army so not included in your figure) and who knows how high it will go. The figure I gave was (indirectly) from the CIA Factbook so I'll take that over your estimate.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: Harping back to the terror gang arrested in London for plotting acts of terror/atrocities; 1.Where did they obtain the firearms? 2.How many firearms caches are there hidden away throughout this country? 3.How many fundamentalists are planning to enter the UK? 4.How many fundamentalists currently reside in the UK? 5.Given our past record/current military activities involving Islamic nations, how many more fundamentalist groups will be resident in the UK 5 years on from here? As I stated in a previous post, I doubt that government or military intelligence could answer ANY of these questions!
Answer them to what degree of precision? I doubt that anyone could give you a dot and comma figure but they can certainly give you a range of 95% probability - whether it's 0.01% or 0.001% of the Muslim population it is certainly well away from the 100% that you were postulating.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: There are also many other disenfranchised, unhappy people living in this country, some of whom may be happy to 'throw in their lot' with insurrectionists, having lost most of what they hold dear; people in 'cardboard city', victims of injustice/wrongful imprisonment, people struggling on minimum wage who are just 1 paycheck from eviction, 'refugees' coming from Africa and Syria,as well as thugs and violent criminals who don't care who's in charge as long as they get a nice chunk!
OK, if the original claim doesn't stack up let's expand the remit?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I'm not for one moment suggesting that all these people are going to engage in an insurrection, but if only 25% of them do, that will still be one hell of a lot of insurrectionists! Then we have all the ILLEGAL immigrants arriving undetected on these shores....(The government admitted it has no idea how many illegals are currently here without permission, but accepts it could be well over a million. This was on a BBC news article about a year ago)
Just before WW2 erupted, MANY people in this country thought "It can't/won't happen again". That was complacency, and it was pervasive throughout most of the government (and the general population) at that time. If it had not been for the likes of Churchill and Lord Beaverbrooke we'd have been knocked flat by a resurgent Germany. I see a similar complacency again now in government, also in much of the general population.
So from an internal revolt we're not talking of an invasion by foreign powers?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: No, I'm not saying this has happened (sufficient insurrectionists trained, equipped, mobilised) and a 'strike' is imminent. What I AM saying is that what we are seeing is 'the thin end of the wedge'. We have all the ingredients starting to accumulate slowly. Who knows what the 'picture' will look like in a decade.
Even if the security forces were aware of a growing threat, WE wouldn't be told. Government wouldn't want to spread alarm amongst the population (similar to if a meteor was about to wipe us all out).
Yes, there would indeed be a backlash as counter-radicalization set in amongst certain elements of the population; we are seeing this at lowish (though increasing) levels today (BNP,EDL,Britain First, to name a few of the more prolific).Not a good sign.
The point being that the situation at any point where they is the possibility of an internal insurgency by the Muslim population of the sort that you were describing the situation would be so significantly different to that of today that your totally misrepresenting it.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As for mobilising these large defence forces; where would the money come from to do this? We are in an era of sweeping cuts that go beyond the bone, with no end in sight yet. Our national debt is bigger than ever now, despite the cuts, and our credit rating is reduced, so borrowing costs more now.
Where did the money come from for Afghanistan and Iraq? Come to that, where did the money come from for WWII? In a war situation the money is *always* found and the payback is sorted out afterwards.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I wonder how many army/airforce units would 'defect' in the event of an insurrection, rather than fire on their own countrymen, especially the way some of these servicemen have been treated by government? There are always defectors....
At the Unit level? Given that you're talking of an insurrection by a tenth of the population and that would be represented within the unit structure the likely answer is none.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: If 10% of the current population went into full-blown revolt, that would be 6 million people. Even if it was only 5% that's still 3 million; way too many to contain!As for the other 90% of the population, most would probably be keeping their heads down! Wars and insurrections usually involve quite small chunks of the population (relatively speaking).
So now you're including women, children and the geriatric in your counts? I don't see much danger from the pre-toddlers so can we at least exclude them?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As for the Oligarchs, I expect they'll do what they always do when faced with a setback; turn disaster into opportunity....Imagine the guns, clothes, medicines and vehicles they could sell (to both sides)....
This is a joke surely?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: I checked out GFP (global firepower) and they admit that some figures are estimates. These figures obviously don't take into account how many vehicles are currently unuseable (the MOD admitted as much as 50% of it's helicopters are incapable of flight, though this was about 2 years back. I would imagine similar would apply to land vehicles).
As I said at the start of this reply, the figure I quoted was taken directly from the CIA factbook - it does not involve the number of armaments the MoD hold which were estimated, it is a straight count of our fighting force.
Smaug;1491790 wrote: As a footnote, ISIL have stated that an invasion of the UK is on the agenda. Maybe they mean infiltration? Very dangerous, as these fundamentalists/extremists are not afraid to die for their cause, will radicalize many 'moderates' and unlike conventional forces, they don't wear a uniform....
And maybe they mean to panic the more gullible parts of our population into putting pressure on the government to pull out of the Middle East? Shall we deal in reality rather than supposition?
Smaug;1491790 wrote: And because we belong to the EU (at present), we don't have control of our borders....
And because we belong to the EU (and Nato etc.) we have other resources to call on in the event of the type of insurgency you're imagining.
-
Gnostic Christian Bishop
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:25 pm
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Ted;1491781 wrote: How do we differentiate between bad and good: Christians, Hindus , Muslims, Buddhists, and whatever other faiths have?
I will be putting this in the political area. No comment is required unless you see errors.
Should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Why do we squander so many lives and so much wealth for speculative religious nonsense while never fighting the religious side and kill the imaginary Allah and his sidekick Yahweh?
A huge part of our national wealth has gone to and continues to go to religions that have imaginary Gods. The tribalism that is religion was more necessary in the past than it is in our modern times. Public religious displays are outdated and maintaining them seems insane. It is dumb to maintain and pay for antiquated systems.
I have no problem with the religious. I am in that camp. But I see idol worshiping religions having huge public gathering, --- that in tribal terms are done to intimidate, --- as having out-lived their usefulness to man.
That belief in imaginary Gods is costing us a lot of lives as well as wealth.
Jesus preached to pray and display religiosity in private. He was wise in this because public displays are creating a lot of strife and intolerance.
I suggest that Islam and Christianity be reminded of this as they waste wealth on their lavish cathedrals, mosques and churches to display what Jesus preached against. That is hardly what Jesus would call private.
Peace takes forgiving but our love of war prevents us from doing so. We must all recognize that we must all forgive each other’s past infractions if world peace is to become a reality. If we collectively forgave, we would have world peace and a lot more wealth at hand. Love of war prevents us.
Love war. But let us change the rules by taking imaginary supernatural entities out of our belief systems. They are not worth dying for.
Recognize that government support is all that keeps us squandering lives and wealth on figments of human religious imagination, should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Regards
DL
I will be putting this in the political area. No comment is required unless you see errors.
Should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Why do we squander so many lives and so much wealth for speculative religious nonsense while never fighting the religious side and kill the imaginary Allah and his sidekick Yahweh?
A huge part of our national wealth has gone to and continues to go to religions that have imaginary Gods. The tribalism that is religion was more necessary in the past than it is in our modern times. Public religious displays are outdated and maintaining them seems insane. It is dumb to maintain and pay for antiquated systems.
I have no problem with the religious. I am in that camp. But I see idol worshiping religions having huge public gathering, --- that in tribal terms are done to intimidate, --- as having out-lived their usefulness to man.
That belief in imaginary Gods is costing us a lot of lives as well as wealth.
Jesus preached to pray and display religiosity in private. He was wise in this because public displays are creating a lot of strife and intolerance.
I suggest that Islam and Christianity be reminded of this as they waste wealth on their lavish cathedrals, mosques and churches to display what Jesus preached against. That is hardly what Jesus would call private.
Peace takes forgiving but our love of war prevents us from doing so. We must all recognize that we must all forgive each other’s past infractions if world peace is to become a reality. If we collectively forgave, we would have world peace and a lot more wealth at hand. Love of war prevents us.
Love war. But let us change the rules by taking imaginary supernatural entities out of our belief systems. They are not worth dying for.
Recognize that government support is all that keeps us squandering lives and wealth on figments of human religious imagination, should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Regards
DL
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
Gnostic Christian Bishop;1491865 wrote:
Should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Who are we?
Why do we squander so many lives and so much wealth for speculative religious nonsense while never fighting the religious side and kill the imaginary Allah and his sidekick Yahweh?
That is quite a leap.
Should we urge governments to stop squandering lives and wealth for imaginary religious constructs like Gods?
Who are we?
Why do we squander so many lives and so much wealth for speculative religious nonsense while never fighting the religious side and kill the imaginary Allah and his sidekick Yahweh?
That is quite a leap.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
The problem here seems to be that we cannot get out of the mindset of invasion being of one country against another, or one race against another. The current situation is not about race or nation, it is about Religion. Religion can be internal and / or external. It is not just one country or another. It is Global. Who can we make war on. The 'invasion' is already on our home soil. The invading 'armies' are our own nationals.
Religion has always been about the manipulation of power. That is why it is more representative of Politics than superstition, and it must be recognised as such. We currently have a Right Wing Government. Discontent with this regime is bringing about the rise of the Left Wing. It is the same with Islam.
Religion has always been about the manipulation of power. That is why it is more representative of Politics than superstition, and it must be recognised as such. We currently have a Right Wing Government. Discontent with this regime is bringing about the rise of the Left Wing. It is the same with Islam.
Trump is right. Islam and Sharia do not belong is the U.S.A..
I don't believe that many love war. I would suggest that the love of war belongs to a minority. In any conflict if both sides decide to end it they can but when only one side wants peace and the other does not there can be none. The conflict then is one of self preservation. It takes two to tango. Many years ago in ancient times there was no division between politics and religion. B. Ehrman, Diana Butler bass and a host of others. Religion has caused some problems in the past, maybe much however the statistics clearly show that the non religious have caused far more than religion ever will. Yes religion is used by many but as an excuse for war when the real issue is power and money. I see some here who constantly blame religion for every thing and continue to preach what is many churches today is simply not the way it is in many. A little research might help. If anyone needs titles and authors I can help you. It is truly amazing to me how much the church is changing in this day and age.