Election

[The Rookie Detective]

Religions don't have sex with young girls, explode bombs or terrorise people. Individuals do, and some use religion as an excuse, while others do not. They are all evil.

I think that's something everyone can agree on - unless they are the ones doing these things, or would like the chance.

I fear evil in all its forms, but that's not a phobia. It's called being normal.

The best post on this thread by far.


RD

[caz]

Wrong thread? - that is a Christeresque cop out. So since you can't answer what the differences are in those examples I'll take that I've been wrongly accused of racism etc. The fact of the matter is making observations (akin to the ones I did) are not racist, xenophobic or Islamophobic. The fact is Tab threw out the insults wrongly. If I'd made another observation that did not include 'brown skin' 'white skin' if would have gone unnoticed. Just because someone mentions 'brown skin' does not make the comment racist and to think so it bloody ignorant.

Just for the record I've just seem an African man walk down the street, he was wearing a cream suit and a very shiny pair of shoes. <--- racist or not?

I have not accused you of racism, Geddy. Get over it, or redirect your 'victim card' observations accordingly.

Thank you.

[caz]

You just confirmed my point.
Unless you have forgotten, the Cons. lost power due to their left-leaning values. Britain had two leftist parties, the populous are giving the other left party a chance this time.

The BBC gets into bed with any govt. - they need your license fees, but a left or left-leaning govt. is preferable - Lab. or Cons.

You've lost me now. The voters abandoned the Tories because of their left-leaning values [??????] and plumped instead for a party with more left-leaning values?

Okay, Jon. You may need to give your head a little wobble at this point. And poor Jacob Rees-Mogg will need a little lie-down with a cold flannel when he reads about his left-leaning values. It seems that the memo got lost in transit to Canada.

[Tab]

I don't know whom this was in reply to, but I see my name mentioned there ...

This was Herlocks reply to my post. There was actually more which wasn't posted in this snippet. Here are some parts I'd like to reply to.

How many things can you turn a blind eye to? Many apparently. You have absolutely no conscience about acts of murder but you are up in arms about a perceived slur.

In reply to me asking if Herlocks belief that Islam is the greatest threat since WW2 was born out of fear, he replied:

Grow up. Perhaps you'd like a list of atrocities.

And then proceeded to list the the absolutely horrific list of atrocities and murders in the wake of a Danish newspaper posting a cartoon depiction of Muhammad.

He then said:

I bet you shed no tears for the above.

He then finished the direct reply section with

You need to nothing. Just go and talk to someone else. Perhaps you have a support group where you can sit around wearing beads and holding crystals whilst chanting about how sorry you are for living is this country? Joss sticks, tofu sarnies, portrait of Greta Thunberg on the wall, whale song in the background.

I genuinely don't understand what I have said to garner this perception from Herlock? That I am a terrorist sympathiser. That I don't care about murder and hate my country. It appears to be an hysterical overreaction, and one that is as far from the truth as could possibly be. If I can do my best Iconoclast impression and address my dear readers directly, you are more than welcome to scroll back and look at everything I and everyone else has posted. Being called a monster for simply correcting misinformation and pointing out lies and made up stories (with a little snark and sarcasm thrown in occasionally, I'm only human) is ridiculous.

All the best,
Tab

[Geddy2112]

I have not accused you of racism, Geddy. Get over it, or redirect your 'victim card' observations accordingly.

Thank you.

I take it you read this bit on the post you quoted? 'The fact is Tab threw out the insults wrongly'

[caz]

I think you misread it Caz, would you care to take a second look?

"Overall views are divided in Britain. In April 2023, 52% thought that immigration numbers should be reduced."

"In April 2023, 32% thought immigration was a very bad or a bad thing, while 52% thought their numbers should be reduced (a little or a lot) (Figure 1)."

Figure 1 reads:
37% - Reduced a lot.
15% - Reduced a little.

37+15 = 52%

Have a good day.

You wrote 52% of the UK, Jon.

They can't give an accurate, representative percentage when they can only ask a tiny fraction of the UK population to give their views. They have to estimate what that percentage would look like if they got the views of us all.

Do you honestly think they got the views of 52% of the UK population?

[caz]

I don't think they'll be around in 50 years - they'll be under water - Climate Change.

San Marino?

Don't think so.

[caz]

This was Herlocks reply to my post. There was actually more which wasn't posted in this snippet. Here are some parts I'd like to reply to.



In reply to me asking if Herlocks belief that Islam is the greatest threat since WW2 was born out of fear, he replied:


And then proceeded to list the the absolutely horrific list of atrocities and murders in the wake of a Danish newspaper posting a cartoon depiction of Muhammad.

He then said:



He then finished the direct reply section with



I genuinely don't understand what I have said to garner this perception from Herlock? That I am a terrorist sympathiser. That I don't care about murder and hate my country. It appears to be an hysterical overreaction, and one that is as far from the truth as could possibly be. If I can do my best Iconoclast impression and address my dear readers directly, you are more than welcome to scroll back and look at everything I and everyone else has posted. Being called a monster for simply correcting misinformation and pointing out lies and made up stories (with a little snark and sarcasm thrown in occasionally, I'm only human) is ridiculous.

All the best,
Tab

I do think Herlock needs to lie down with a cold flannel. I'm actually worried about him now.

[caz]

I take it you read this bit on the post you quoted? 'The fact is Tab threw out the insults wrongly'

I did. That is why I suggested you redirect your complaint accordingly, because it was wrongly addressed to me.

[The Rookie Detective]

Can I just add at this juncture I think you are a very learned well rounded person. I enjoy your posts and they always make me go and 'look stuff' up which means I want to be educated more from your initial points. Thank you.
(No I'm not being sarcastic as it's sometimes hard to tell with the 'typed' word, I'm being genuine. Thanks.)

Thank you for your very kind words.

RD

[Tab]

And you need to learn to read. I have not condemned 25% of the world’s population…ever; a fact which should be clear to all. What I have done is to point out a problem that exists within that 25% (which I can’t put a figure on) That it exists is too obvious to require explanation so either you are massively misunderstanding the obvious or you are doing the usual thing - you are deliberately turning a blind eye.

Yes, a problem exists with radical fundamentalist Muslims. No-one is disagreeing with this, not a single person. For the avoidance of doubt, I agree with this. Muslim extremism is a problem. To be honest, this should be obvious and not require pointing out.

Many intellectuals and theologians spend much time on this, but the point is that most don’t (or at least a sizeable percentage don’t) And so, when these people are faced with statements/pronouncements from more senior men (I can’t recall seeing any women being consulted btw but maybe that’s my poor memory or perhaps it’s something hidden by the right-wing press [but clearly sexism is perfectly ok within a religion but not outside]) how can they reject a call to violence? Or even a call to mistreat someone or some group? How can your average Muslim man reject something that a more senior person within the religion has told him?

Why are you couching these statements you clearly believe as facts, as questions? I know you believe they are facts because you have asked these "questions" several times before, and actually received answers of "Yes, of course they can reject these things, for the plethora of reasons already explained." Yet you are still asking these "questions". Just bite the bullet, be brave, remove the question marks from the end.

...

So it would be good if the self-righteous might take a little more care in reading and be a little less quick to think that they ‘know’ what someone actually means. I know exactly what I mean and nothing, absolutely nothing that I have said should be treated with the hysterics that we’ve seen here. It seems that when we discuss a certain religion some things certainly are ‘sacred.’

I would suggest that the only hysterics in this thread have been coming from you, in these long, ranty, look how persecuted I am for my views... posts.

Anything that I’ve said or thought has been stated by others far more eloquently than I have. Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Douglas Murray to name but three.

Christopher Hitchens was towering intellect that I truly wish was still with us. However, he and Sam Harris absolutely do not believe that all Muslims are fundamentalists as you seem to. They are well known for their nuanced views. Hitchens clearly made distinctions between faith, and the fundamentalist elements within those faiths. As does Harris. They do not lump Muslims in with each other as a whole. As for Douglas Murray... let's not.

All the best,
Tab

[Wickerman]

In that case, which lavatory does the law require a predatory lesbian to use? Or a predatory gay man?

The same they would have been expected to use 50 or more years ago - nothing has changed.

[Wickerman]

Religions don't have sex with young girls, explode bombs or terrorise people. Individuals do, and some use religion as an excuse, while others do not. They are all evil.

I think that's something everyone can agree on - unless they are the ones doing these things, or would like the chance.

I fear evil in all its forms, but that's not a phobia. It's called being normal.

Stating the obvious is easy, it's deciding what to do about it that seems to be devisive.

When sex, drug, & theft crimes suddenly increase in all European countries following a large and sudden unflux of foreigners, lets not try to deflect from the obvious conclusion.

It's that denial by Lotus Eaters that leads to the perception of a weak authority, which in turn leads to the type of riots breaking out in Leeds & Whitechapel, last evening.

Is there anyone in the UK with a spine these days?

[Wickerman]

You've lost me now. The voters abandoned the Tories because of their left-leaning values [??????] and plumped instead for a party with more left-leaning values?

That's exactly what the main complaint was - the Conservative party have lost it's identity as a strong authority for law & order in all its facets.

Okay, Jon. You may need to give your head a little wobble at this point. And poor Jacob Rees-Mogg will need a little lie-down with a cold flannel when he reads about his left-leaning values. It seems that the memo got lost in transit to Canada.

On the contrary, Rees-Mogg has spoken openly about his disappointment with the performance of his party which led to him also losing his seat.

[Wickerman]

You wrote 52% of the UK, Jon.

They can't give an accurate, representative percentage when they can only ask a tiny fraction of the UK population to give their views. They have to estimate what that percentage would look like if they got the views of us all.

Do you honestly think they got the views of 52% of the UK population?

Caz, I lifted the quote from the site.

We all know how poles work Caz.
The alternate view is to think one member on here decides the percentage is lower, when the evidence suggests the opposite.
But then, that is how "denial" works, isn't it.