Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

The Church of England, goes more insane.

Discussion in 'The Stump' started by Adrian Wainer, Jan 21, 2009.

Tags:
  1. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Wow, that is a long time ago now, if you are talking about the IRA related incident, I could not give you an opinion on it without reading up on it. But as a general rule, I would say that in the case of members of Sinn Fein PIRA carrying weapons, the British military should have been allowed to open fire on them without challenge. I hope that answers your query but I am not sure what point of argument you are pursuing, so maybe it doesn't, I don't know.

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  2. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Double posting deleted ARW
     
  3. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Well, arresting radical Islamic clerics is relevant to making a defense of Labour as being committed to constitutional politics. But is not actually relevant to arriving at a definition of Fascism. Which, I thought was the point being argued there, so your statement is highly relevant to the general argument, perhaps of crucial importance but tangential to the examination of what is fascism.



    No, he never did.


    Well, those involved with the Channel 4 documentary, Undercover Mosque.


    Well, I have not figures to hand as to the proportion of Muslims who are Arab, but it is irrelevant to my argument, since aside from Iran which is mostly of the Aryan race, Islamofascism is very much an Arab driven project, which has assumptions of the superiority of the Arab race built in to it.

    Well, just seems to me, you are prepared to use the word ignorant, when a person would hold a radically different view to yours, without you substantiating the use of such phraseology.


    Well implicit in that assertion, I presume you would believe you know what Islam is, but if you do not know what is Islam is, your whole proposition falls to pieces. I do not have a problem with Islam, so I do not have a clue what you are talking about. Are you saying for instance, that Sheik Hisham Kabbanni is not a Muslim but Wahhabism is a true and authentic form of Islam? Unless, you are prepared to give some opinion on these matters, your criticism is just so much waffle. No, my position, re the BNP is that, I am even more suspicious of it than Labour, but as it does not have a fraction of the power that Labour has, Labour currently presents a greater threat to democratic governance, than the BNP does.


    I am well aware of the vast difference between parts of Africa and the UK e.g. rural villages in Nigeria and the middle class suburbs of Northern London. That said, people are remarkably similar all over the World and the same societal dynamics are at Work in a Nigerian village with donkeys and bicycles, as in the stockmarket belt areas of the Home Counties with BMWs and speed boats in the driveways of mocktudor houses. Well, I have would no inherent objection to recognizing an Islamic marriage ceremony, as a Church of England ceremony is recognized but the problem is that, Wahhabi Islam does not recognize the legitimacy of the British state and when the British Government insists on defacto recognizing Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism as the representive of all Muslims in the Sunni Ummah in Britain and around the World, I would have a problem with Muslim marriage services being recognized in the manner which you propose.

    Because Labour feel Muslims will block vote in favor of Labour, if Labour pursues Islamofascist friendly policies and that non-Muslims will be too conned about what is going on, to realize what is happening, so Labour will not lose support from non-Muslims.

    http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mf1sCAfNfU

    Oh you are back with the paranoid thing. You have misrepresented my position, Labour is not scheming to turn Britain in to a fascist state, it is merely happy to oblige Islamofascist Muslims in progressing the creation of an Islamofascist State on the territory of the United Kingdom, they are only doing what politicians do i.e. trying to get themselves elected in to power, except Labour appears to be devoid of any moral principles whatsoever.


    I already gave you the wiki, here it is again

    Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    It could not be used to shut down criticism of Islam because the House of Lords, tore a chunk out of it and I thought I made it plain already that the bill passed, was not the bill Labour had originally intended.

    You are perfectly correct in what you say but in fact there is an abundance of such things, so whilst the example is extreme, it is by no means unique or even uncommon.

    The police broke the law, that might have no importance to you but it has some importance to me and not every organization has the financial resources and expertise such as Channel 4 to take on the Police and CPS in the high court and pursue damages, so there still remains a strong intimidatory aspect to what the Police got up to.

    Well, why did you not use the example of Saudi Arabia or did you not know that Shia and Sunni Islam are very much oppositional? No, New Labour is not trying to turn Britain in to an Islamic Sharia state, they are simply trying to facilitate those who have such a goal as a prime objective.

    My view is that, Labour as an organization is entirely disinterested, whether Britain is a fascist or democratic State, all it is interested in, is being elected when there is a national election.

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  4. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,045
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Location:
    Alabama
    It doesn't matter if it constitutes a logical argument or not.

    Did you perchance notice that little "A" after my name? If I don't like the content of a thread or feel that it doesn't "fit" the forum, then I can close it or banish it to the nether regions. As many forums as you are member of, you should know that by now.
     
    von Poop likes this.
  5. Richard

    Richard Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    5,847
    Likes Received:
    333
    How about some rep? :D

    Thanks.
     
  6. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    Stefan,

    Actually, that's just displaying more ignorance of things American. The term, "liberal" here commonly denotes a person who claims to be a progressive, but favors an authoritarian regime which would promote his or her, usually quite emotional and/or illogical agenda to make the world a better place at someone elses expense.

    That may a British definition, but few Americans would agree. Political Correctness means an excessive effort to control behavior, speech, or thought to conform with whatever cause de jure happens to be fashionable among Liberals (see definition above).

    Make up your mind, we can't be entertaining and boring you simultaneously. Or maybe by the British definition we can?

    Another display of ignorance; in the Jolly old Soviet Union people were not only sent to "re-education" camps to practice self-criticism and publicly admit the mistakes they had made in wandering from the Party line. Such self-criticism sessions were quite common among factory workers, neighborhood associations, Party bureaucrats, in fact every level of communist society. These sessions and meetings took place frequently, included people who were otherwise not under a cloud with the Party, and were a major tool used by the Party to keep everybody toeing the Party line. As such, it was quite like the Political Correctness campaigns we see being enforced by petty bureaucrats in today's society.

    So no, it was not a far fetch from not putting up Christmas cards because it might offend muslims, it is very closely related to the same societal dynamic.

    It would. Go ahead and stick with your dictionary definition, see how many people agree with you. And yes, state power is definitly involved in the application of political correctness, although the actual communication process is often delegated to quasi-state media like churches, charities, political advocacy groups, etc. And no, that is not what this thread is about. It is about a Church organization attempting to control the political thought of it's professional members by refusing to allow them to become affiliated with a political party of which you happen to personally disapprove.

    Again, we are either boring you or entertaining you, we can't do both simultaneously. Make up your mind.

    Any political system has an interest in promoting (but not necessarily enforcing) conformity, but capitalism, which I repeat is not a political system but an economic concept, relies on individualism to function. Therefore, capitalism neither enforces, nor requires, conformity to the extent that socialism/communism does.

    Same clothes from the same companies? Well, that ignores the fact that there are possibly a couple of million choices in clothing manufacturers, all of which keep changing styles almost monthly, and offering a bewildering variety of colors, sizes, and fabrics. Maybe if you were speaking exclusively of the people of North Korea, that might be a valid argument, but as an example of enforcing conformity in the Western World, it is an absurd example. In fact, the people in the clothing business absolutely count on styles and individual tastes changing and evolving. Otherwise they wouldn't be able to sll the volume of clothes they do.

    I can only conjecture how it is where you live (North Korea?), but in my part of the world, clothes stores cater to individual tastes and try to keep up with the changes. They certainly don't try to talk people into buying whatever someone else might favor.

    The same goes for cars; there is an immense spectrum of choice in cars. Yes, the government and certain other groups would like us all to buy the smallest, lightest, most fuel efficient cars possible, and in that sense the government attempts to enforce conformity, but the auto manufacturers all attempt to provide a great deal of variety in the hopes of attracting the most customers. Capitalism is all about individualism and appealing to the greatest number of individuals, not dictating what those individuals should buy. success for a capitalist is in predicting what the next trend in consumerism will be, not in directing it.

    Obviously.

    But I majored in Political Science and didn't. One of my professors, Anton Szabo, was formerly a member of the Polish Communist Party before he came to this country. He spent a great deal of class time describing how the Communist Party used "self-criticism", "group criticism", and "re-education" to enforce conformity to the party line. It was an integral part of every communist regime, and I find it described in accounts of every day life in the Soviet Union, China, and even the political meetings that American POW's were forced to attend while in the hands of the North Koreans.

    Well, you already have, but that's too be expected of a person with your attitude. You are making the mistake of thinking that everyone who disagrees with you is simply unsophisticated. That is the same thing as you are accusing me of. You just label whatever you don't like as simplistic and unsophisticated.

    Oh, but it does. Name one country operating under Islamic law which allows true freedom of religion. In many of those countries operating under Islamic law, a person can be put to death for even discussing another religion with a muslim. Islamic law routinely denies human rights to certain classes of people. Women in Islamic countries, for instance, have been stoned to death for the crime of being raped.

    The muslims you are acquainted with don't live in Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or Malaysia. My wife's family has experienced the "tolerance" of an Islamic country. After two decades of living peacefully in British North Borneo, they were violently driven out by muslims when the province became part of Malaysia in the 1950's. Their crime? They were practicing Catholics. So tell me again how uniformly tolerant are the muslims?

    Not only does the Koran justify intolerance, the muslims routinely practice intolerance. Cite the standard Christian religious texts that justify intolerance. Give me a modern day example of Christians driving out whole Islamic communities solely because they practice an alien religion.

    If you can identify Christian extremists who control whole countries and enforce laws which deny human rights on the same scale as Islam does, I sure would be interested in hearing about them. And please, cite current day examples, I'm not interested in what the Christian church did 200 years ago.

    Or the left-wing press, if it happens at all. And since it is an element of the Islamic leadership which is advocating violence and intolerance on the one hand, it would be nice to hear from that alleged faction of the Islamic leadership which is opposed to such violence and intolerance. Where are they?

    Frankly, Stefan, your arguments are pathetically weak. The fact is, Islam has some very shameful current day behavior to answer for, and no one involved in the leadership of Islam appears to even be willing to discuss an answer.
     
  7. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    955
    Nope, cant have them either brother....says I need to share them around others...seems I've been giving you too many...can everyone give Richard 8 rep points on my behalf please...
    Will that do?

    Alternately...say 3 Hail Mary's 2 rosaries and 5 Lords Prayers...And I still dont give you much hope of getting thru the pearly gates....Repent repent repent....
     
  8. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    955
    No just an attempt on my behalf to gauge some moral equivilancy, purely for my own reasoning.
     
  9. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    My response to your very proper remarks, was completely inappropriate as it was based upon the false assumption on my part, it was not a moderator intervention.

    Thank your for patience on this matter.

    Best and Very Warm regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  10. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Well Stefan's definition would have been correct in the 1980s in that is how people would seen political correctness then, but that is about twenty something years ago. People started seeing problems with political correctness, so the phrase gained currency "political correctness gone mad" and then it started to be perceived that political correctness was without any legitimate values and was aggressive social engineering and was precisely not the dictionary interpretation which stefan gave which just fits under the rubric of common decency. I think political correctness reached the absolute nadir when it managed get new Benny Hill episodes scrapped on the grounds it was insulting to Women, whilst cheering on the Taliban stoning Women to death. Political correctness is a laughing stock in Britain and anybody who espoused it in a position of authority, unless they were very clever to camouflage it, under a fancy name would be seen as a "prat".

    n.b. strong langauage appears in the following link
    Urban Dictionary: prat

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  11. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    In fairness there are Muslims who do make a stand, it is reputedly very difficult for them to get airtime on the Media, in that the Saudis have major interests in the US media and practically the only operation that does make an effort to give these people some exposure is Fox, which is one of the few media operations relatively free of Saudi financial interest.

    this is part one of a five part item
    YouTube - FACE to FACE - Shaykh Hisham Kabbani 1/5

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  12. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    In my considered opinion they would, whether they were in a position of authority or not, indeed be a prat. As my wife would say, "Bloody Poms....."
     
  13. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    955
    Whist cheering on the Taliban stoning women to death??? Who did the cheering...do you have the you tube link to hand?

    Very interesting and specific. How specific is that though?
     
  14. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    I am skeptical of the theory that the Saudis control a major segment of the US news media, at least to the extent that they can censor foreign news, as an Islamic leader making such a pronouncement certainly would be. In any case, I watch FOX news on a fairly regular basis and I have yet to see any high level Islamic leader condemning the activities or behavior of militant muslims. Nor have I read in any US newspaper of any Islamic religious leader denouncing extremist Islamic factions.

    I do access a fair cross section of major foreign news and commentary papers and journals. I cannot recall any Islamic leader of any note making any comments of militant muslims unless prompted by an inquisitor, and then the remarks have been heavily qualified and ambivalent in nature.
     
  15. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Well it is not specific it is a generality, off hand this is probably the neatest thing I know of on the Youtube.

    YouTube - George Galloway Meets Saddam

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  16. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    Well when you are talking about an "Islamic leader" I really am not sure what you are talking about, the leader of a Muslim country is not going to stir up a hornet's nest for himself/herself by making some criticism of Islamic fanaticism. Well in fairness, Benazir Bhutto did that to a certain extent and look what happened to her. The sort of people I am talking about are Islamic religious figures and most certainly it is possible for Western media organizations to censor such people, if they have a mind to do so, for the reason that most people in the West would have never heard of such people.

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  17. Adrian Wainer

    Adrian Wainer Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    7
    I think the exact terminology would be "whinging poms" either way not anything like, a true digger hero like Captain Leo Wanker.

    YouTube - Paul Hogan Show - S.W.A.T.T.

    http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqkdcT25ss

    Best and Warm Regards
    Adrian Wainer
     
  18. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    When I say "Islamic leader", I am speaking of any personage who wields significant influence in the Islamic world. That could be an Islamic religious leader, an Islamic political leader (I know they are often one and the same), or even some sort of well known Islamic "celebrity" (for lack of a better word).

    And your point that Islamic leaders aren't going to stir up trouble for themselves illustrates my original premise exactly. Thank you.

    So you believe that Western media organizations are "censoring" the anti-militancy messages of Islamic leaders? To what purpose?
     
  19. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,045
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Location:
    Alabama
  20. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    It's a little tough to keep track of the number of posts in officially approved threads as opposed to the number of posts in threads that are frowned upon.

    Is there somewhere on the board where we can check some sort of score card to see if the ratio is favorable or unfavorable before we post to something that the powers that be deems to be bad?
     

Share This Page