|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 28, 2022 8:05:35 GMT
Any muslim constitutes an elevated security compared with non-muslims - we have about 40,000 on MI5 files and they're just the ones that they know about. And Islam isn't - or at least shouldn't be - a UK problem. We should have been restricting immigration from countries that spnsor terrorism for decades. The idea that we should even be considering allowing a muslim who has been part of Islamic State (and almost certainly still is) back into the country is completely insane. And the fact that we're giving this piece of trash legal aid is beyond insane. As Enoch Powell once said "We must be mad, literally mad"... " It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre". OK then Steppenwolf when you say 'Any muslim constitutes an elevated security compared with non-muslims' in direct response to a point about whether a particular muslim should be jailed or excluded, what did you mean we should do about each and every muslim? I assume you're not going to argue that the muslims DO constitute an elevated security risk compared with non-muslims. That would be futile in view of the facts. As to what I would do about it, I've said many times before how I'd try to mitigate the danger they pose. I'd limit immigration from countries that sponsor terrorism - like Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. And I'd stop bending over backwards to make life easy for muslims who live in the UK. They would have to abide by British laws (just as we have to abide by their laws when we live in a muslim country) - so no more inhumane slaughter of animals and no more import of Halal meat. That should slow down their immigration. |
|
|
|
Post by totheleft3 on Nov 28, 2022 8:56:19 GMT
I dont know where you live lone wolf or how old you are but if you stop Hala meat .they would just kill the likes of hens on there own when like they did when they first started to immigrate to this country
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 28, 2022 11:52:33 GMT
OK then Steppenwolf when you say 'Any muslim constitutes an elevated security compared with non-muslims' in direct response to a point about whether a particular muslim should be jailed or excluded, what did you mean we should do about each and every muslim? I assume you're not going to argue that the muslims DO constitute an elevated security risk compared with non-muslims. That would be futile in view of the facts. As to what I would do about it, I've said many times before how I'd try to mitigate the danger they pose. I'd limit immigration from countries that sponsor terrorism - like Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. And I'd stop bending over backwards to make life easy for muslims who live in the UK. They would have to abide by British laws (just as we have to abide by their laws when we live in a muslim country) - so no more inhumane slaughter of animals and no more import of Halal meat. That should slow down their immigration. I will very much argue that (a) with your 'Any muslim' means you are saying each every muslim is a security risk and (b) you are trying to broad brush malign people based on religion which is rightly illegal and shit behaviour. It's also highly dumb, talk to any real anti terrorism expert and they''ll tell you you don't combat terrorism by driving the masses of good people into the hold of the evil element by broad brush hating them all, you have to separate the evil element out. So if it disappoints you to have your dumb bigotry exposed then tough shit. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 28, 2022 16:01:03 GMT
Nope. I think your habit of telling others what they posted should be pointed out occasionally. As for stalking .that’s just you being a drama Queen . Where's the problem in reminding others what they posted? Just curious. So you are eager to know other peoples business, are you ? Is that because you want to interfere ? Or are you admitting to be strange and unusual? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 28, 2022 16:36:25 GMT
I assume you're not going to argue that the muslims DO constitute an elevated security risk compared with non-muslims. That would be futile in view of the facts. As to what I would do about it, I've said many times before how I'd try to mitigate the danger they pose. I'd limit immigration from countries that sponsor terrorism - like Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. And I'd stop bending over backwards to make life easy for muslims who live in the UK. They would have to abide by British laws (just as we have to abide by their laws when we live in a muslim country) - so no more inhumane slaughter of animals and no more import of Halal meat. That should slow down their immigration. I will very much argue that (a) with your 'Any muslim' means you are saying each every muslim is a security risk and (b) you are trying to broad brush malign people based on religion which is rightly illegal and shit behaviour. It's also highly dumb, talk to any real anti terrorism expert and they''ll tell you you don't combat terrorism by driving the masses of good people into the hold of the evil element by broad brush hating them all, you have to separate the evil element out. So if it disappoints you to have your dumb bigotry exposed then tough shit. To be fair he said any Muslim is an elevated security risk which is not maligning anyone just observing that being a Muslim is a risk factor in terms of terrorism just as being Asian is a risk factor for Type 2 diabetes. Just to be clear if you were betting where the next terror attack within the UK came from I am sure the bookies would place Muslim as a factor in how they calculated the odds. That is just reality, it may not be fair but then reality seldom is. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 28, 2022 18:10:27 GMT
Isn’t that from the “every man is a potential rapist” school. Strictly speaking accurate but in substance grossly misleading?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 28, 2022 18:40:35 GMT
Isn’t that from the “every man is a potential rapist” school. Strictly speaking accurate but in substance grossly misleading? Well it kind of underpins the objection to allowing access to women’s private spaces. It also applies to the perceived threat of strange men that women experience when out on their own. We can’t model society on the that fact but we can’t ignore it either . The same applies to Muslims. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 28, 2022 19:00:39 GMT
Well no. It all depends on frequency and probability. Sadly sexual assault is not particularly uncommon and hence it makes sense for all of us and particularly women to be vigilant. It doesn’t make sense for all men to say be banned from town centres after 10pm.
Terrorism is much much rarer - in fact can’t remember whether there have been any this year (unless you count the Dover incident). So to hold any individual on suspicion solely because of his race or religion would be pretty perverse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 28, 2022 19:05:01 GMT
Well no. It all depends on frequency and probability. Sadly sexual assault is not particularly uncommon and hence it makes sense for all of us and particularly women to be vigilant. It doesn’t make sense for all men to say be banned from town centres after 10pm. Terrorism is much much rarer - in fact can’t remember whether there have been any this year (unless you count the Dover incident). So to hold any individual on suspicion solely because of his race or religion would be pretty perverse. Of course men shouldn’t be banned but if a rape occurs it will be men that be under suspicion. Dont forget that very few men are rapists just as very few Muslims are terrorists. That doesn’t affect the probability of each individual being higher because of the few. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 28, 2022 19:08:28 GMT
Well no. It all depends on frequency and probability. Sadly sexual assault is not particularly uncommon and hence it makes sense for all of us and particularly women to be vigilant. It doesn’t make sense for all men to say be banned from town centres after 10pm. Terrorism is much much rarer - in fact can’t remember whether there have been any this year (unless you count the Dover incident). So to hold any individual on suspicion solely because of his race or religion would be pretty perverse. This is the point as far as I can see is that all that was said was a Muslims bring a higher risk with them by the mere fact they are Muslim and if you were placing odds as a bookmaker you would reflect that fact in your book. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 28, 2022 20:09:37 GMT
But the probability is so minuscule that any differential is tiny. Just as the probability of a man being a sex offender is tiny but higher than a woman.
So factually right (probably although Islamic terrorism seems to be waning) but the implication many would see in the post that Muslim men are dangerous and should all be regarded with suspicion is silly. Maybe the poster didn’t mean that implication but honestly I think we all know he probably did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Nov 28, 2022 20:17:56 GMT
Getting back to Begum, the journalist Andrew Dury has interviewed Begum at great length on numerous occasions in the camp, not once did she claim that she was trafficked for sex, having read what her Barrister told the Court claiming that she was trafficked for sex and she should be allowed to return to the UK, Dury now considers that she is an accomplished liar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 28, 2022 20:22:55 GMT
But the probability is so minuscule that any differential is tiny. Just as the probability of a man being a sex offender is tiny but higher than a woman. So factually right (probably although Islamic terrorism seems to be waning) but the implication many would see in the post that Muslim men are dangerous and should all be regarded with suspicion is silly. Maybe the poster didn’t mean that implication but honestly I think we all know he probably did. I’m not sure whether that’s true. It depends on your definition of sex offender and sex offence . However that’s not really the point . Trying to refute a point in the grounds if what the implications are if it is correct is a fallacy and the claim is pointed at Muslims , not just Muslim men . Begum isn’t a choir girl from the local church . She is a fully paid up member of a toxic brand of Islamic fundamentalism . |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Nov 28, 2022 20:32:53 GMT
Yes 100% if ISIS had not been defeated in Syria, she would still be there with her AK47 part of the Morality Police and helping to sow suicide vests
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Nov 28, 2022 20:45:52 GMT
Where's the problem in reminding others what they posted? Just curious. So you are eager to know other peoples business, are you ? Is that because you want to interfere ? Or are you admitting to be strange and unusual? Was the question too difficult for you? Someone needs to get you to understand that this is an open forum. |
|
