From day one all of the media here in Scandinavia and most people I have spoken with have been calling him a terrorist...
But he is of course a giant nutcase as well (and worse things that I wont type here.....)
Is More To Come?
From day one all of the media here in Scandinavia and most people I have spoken with have been calling him a terrorist...
But he is of course a giant nutcase as well (and worse things that I wont type here.....)
You and I are in complete agreement on this, even though you speak as one half whinging pom yourself; the other half I recognise as half whinging kiwi - but I like you lol. I believe most Brits agree with your take.
Our government fails to protect us from the like of this:-
"I have felt bone-chilling fear twice in my life. The first occasion was while filming a television report about little British-born girls from London’s Somali community being sent abroad to have their genitals mutilated.
They call it female circumcision – an inadequate description of the radical and primitive surgery they’re forced to undergo.
Teachers in their schools had wept as they described bright young pupils of five or six coming back at the end of the holidays in agony and in deep shock, no longer able to manage the lavatory without crying out.
The local Imam, when I challenged him about such a barbaric practice, which he justified as a religious and cultural necessity to ensure their purity at marriage, had steely eyes which bored through me.
‘In the not too distant future,’ he intoned, ‘all British girls will be circumcised when Islam rules this country.’
That kind of thinking has not gone away. Last week we saw posters declaring that areas of East London are now subject to Sharia Law – a clearly unacceptable concept in a society with its own, highly developed legal system."
Jenni Murray . MoS.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
But this is our failure, we continually elect governments that choose politically correct over the laws of the nation.
Western nations have built their success and freedom on the premise of being secular nations therefore the law of the land over rides religious law, doctrine or any other dogma that comes with religion, the problem is that for some reason we seem unable to find politicians that are prepared to enforce the rules we already have.
However here are a couple of editorials that have appeared in the NZHerald recently...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10741961
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10741926
Western nations have built their success and freedom on the premise of being secular nations therefore the law of the land over rides religious law, doctrine or any other dogma that comes with religion, the problem is that for some reason we seem unable to find politicians that are prepared to enforce the rules we already have.
However here are a couple of editorials that have appeared in the NZHerald recently...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10741961
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10741926
Ironically for people like Monty B, it wont be the Left, or the Greens, or Labour Party, or atheist secularists that will sound the alarm or engage in the struggle to stop the Imans in the Murray account quoted by Del Boy above, but Christians and the Church. The Left has all but put out a red carpet and said come on in and enjoy our Western standard of living and the muslims have accepted the invitation but many have then envisioned a take-over, eventually, and I think it will be too late. The violent scenes we see on TV from Lebanon and elsewhere - Christian vs Muslim - will one day, (by the early 22nd Century, if not before, I predict), be seen in Britain, Australia and NZ. I think France and a few European countries already see the writing on the wall, hence the ban on the burqua.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
I think you have missed the point completely, I cant afford to go out and fight the Imams because the second I turn my back the Christians, Catholics, Mormons and Jehovah's Witness will be attempting to do exactly the same as the Imams want to do.
Do not assume that I do not regard Islam as a threat to my way of life but do understand that I do not think that "Christianity" and all its half baked offshoots are any less of a threat to that way of life or to be direct I don't want any religion imposing its views on the populace.
Last edited:
There in the States Libs seem to be way more concerned about what Christians will "do" to them than what others, like Muslims would, plus the agenda seems to be to oppose what is typically "America". Traditionaly America is White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, with God Guns & guts + the "American Melting Pot" as fundamentals. We see the Constitutional ban on Official Religions being overshadowed by a mere comment in a personal letter by Jefferson about seperation of Church & State to be construed as basis for religious cleansing of all religious refrences in Public places. At the same time we saw "Johnny Taliban" created by imersion study of Islam in California schools, where it wasn't Christian that was cool thing to do. The Melting Pot is targeted for breakage with such policies as were your from, heritage, being more important that where you are, why bother learning English? For a while the US was spending $ creating written forms of foriegn languages instead of teaching them English. List seems to go on emphasizing things nontraditional.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
One of the things I have never understood is the American desire or perhaps the "conservative" desire to cling to tradition, I believe that if the way forward means consigning a tradition to the history books then so be it.
As for religion I do not have a place for it and I don't care what brand or denomination it is, I personally believe religion little more than a parasite that prays on peoples fears to control them but I also accept that my opinions are just my opinions and yours will differ so the individual must be free to believe what they want.
Now the problem is that should any religion gain the upper hand again I am damned certain that my desire to believe what I want will go out the window faster than S**t through a goose.
As far as learning about religions in schools I am all for it as long as it is taught in an unbiased manner and not preached.
Traditions give national identity, in a broad sence, or @ least the way I'm talking about here. Lib thought on this can be summed up by....America is the greatest nation & I want to change it-B. Obama. Yeah there's control freaks everywhere & some of them causes concern.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
But your problem is that I think New Zealand is the greatest nation, I bet Senojekips believes Australia is the greatest nation and I have little doubt that Delboy believes England is the greatest nation, none of us follow the same political or religious views but I bet all 3 of us can see things about our nations we would change.
Change is not an evil it is a fact of life.
Traditions do not give national identity a tradition is simply something that is handed down and there are or were thousands of actions that could be considered traditional that have simply been abandoned as pointless or unsuitable for modern society.
Now you are being silly my boy. Everybody knows that England is the greatest nation the world has seen, and that any imposed changes to the culture we have sieved and nurtured for hundreds of years so carefully, through severe trial and tribulation, must indeed be evil.
Regarding Padre's point - those fearless atheists and agnostics should certainly fear the imposition of the Imams and their sharia law, because the tide is rolling in. Ask not for whom the bell tolls - it tolls for thee.
senojekips
Active member
I dunno that I'd say we were the "greatest" nation, but, I do think we should be justifiably proud of the greatest part of our heritage.
Other than that. Yes,... The absolute first thing that I'd like to see, is the total removal of that stupid and totally irrelevant piece of drivel "Waltzing Matilda" from any links with the Australian people. It makes me want to vomit every time I hear it.
roamsk
Active member
I think this is a very interesting thread, because it has made me think, ask myself some questions, and even do a bit of Google & wikipedia research !
Just what I've found so far, just in case other people may be just reading this and may not dare to step it with questions or opinions because the adult level of the conversation in here may seem intimidating !
1. re. religion vs. religiosity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology (please take the time to read all, including controversy and scholarly links before actually formulating a conclusion; it is still a work in progress in the domain of accumulated human knowledge up to this date).(BTW, did you know that the Kingdom of Norway's govt. Department of Education is called the "Dept. of Knowledge" ?)
2. @lvcabbie, re. why did the media and many people call that mass-murderer of Norway a terrorist right from the beginning: at first, even before that person was apprehended, the M.O., possibly hinting also at motivation, was indeed terrorist in nature; then, he was apprehended relatively quickly and was talking to Police from minute 1, and Police was also talking regularly to the media, (I again applaud the professionalism of the Norwegian Police because of their ongoing communication to the public & media, thus allaying many fears, dismissing rumors, etc.), so it became very quickly apparent that he was to be charged under Norwegian law which does contain that charge of terrorist attack. If you look under the definition of the word "terrorism" in the Norwegian language from wikipedia, it is MUCH shorter and also quite clearer than the page in the English language, and also much more focused on the legal type of definition of the term, (in contrast with the the French language page which jumps into politics right from the beginning, but also tries to classify it according to various M.O.'s, and the English language page, which seems to be written by a Journalism student who is still trying to find out more about it before writing down something conclusive, plus it says so directly that the word is "emotionally charged"). (I am sorry I do not know German or Russian, but I assume one could google-translate those pages as well, and see what is their opinion on it. And I apologize to the Italian & Spanish language speaking populations, because I could have made an effort to click on those pages too, but I was too lazy to do it !)
Just what I've found so far, just in case other people may be just reading this and may not dare to step it with questions or opinions because the adult level of the conversation in here may seem intimidating !
1. re. religion vs. religiosity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology (please take the time to read all, including controversy and scholarly links before actually formulating a conclusion; it is still a work in progress in the domain of accumulated human knowledge up to this date).(BTW, did you know that the Kingdom of Norway's govt. Department of Education is called the "Dept. of Knowledge" ?)
2. @lvcabbie, re. why did the media and many people call that mass-murderer of Norway a terrorist right from the beginning: at first, even before that person was apprehended, the M.O., possibly hinting also at motivation, was indeed terrorist in nature; then, he was apprehended relatively quickly and was talking to Police from minute 1, and Police was also talking regularly to the media, (I again applaud the professionalism of the Norwegian Police because of their ongoing communication to the public & media, thus allaying many fears, dismissing rumors, etc.), so it became very quickly apparent that he was to be charged under Norwegian law which does contain that charge of terrorist attack. If you look under the definition of the word "terrorism" in the Norwegian language from wikipedia, it is MUCH shorter and also quite clearer than the page in the English language, and also much more focused on the legal type of definition of the term, (in contrast with the the French language page which jumps into politics right from the beginning, but also tries to classify it according to various M.O.'s, and the English language page, which seems to be written by a Journalism student who is still trying to find out more about it before writing down something conclusive, plus it says so directly that the word is "emotionally charged"). (I am sorry I do not know German or Russian, but I assume one could google-translate those pages as well, and see what is their opinion on it. And I apologize to the Italian & Spanish language speaking populations, because I could have made an effort to click on those pages too, but I was too lazy to do it !)
Last edited:
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Much in the same way you dislike Nietzsche I dislike Aldous Huxley as in everything I have read of his it became apparent that he did not understand cause and effect he seemed to believe that all things happened independently of other things around it which I think is very much along the lines of what Pehr Granqvist pointed out in his criticism of the original work and best summed up with... "Granqvist et al. failed to replicate Persinger's experiments double-blinded, and concluded that the presence or absence of the magnetic field had no relationship with any religious or spiritual experience reported by the participants, but was predicted entirely by their suggestibility and personality traits."
roamsk
Active member
@MontyB: the way I explained it, my initial gut-feeling of Nietzsche dislike was way more primitive than yours, because it had occurred even before I read anything written by him or even before reading on wikipedia about him...all I knew was that I thought he had written that thing "God is dead", which seemed to me more sensationalistic in style rather than scholarly, plus I knew, by having read before about Hannah Arendt's unfortunate encounter with real Nazi party member Martin Heidegger, that this Heidegger had publicly said he admired Nietzsche...so you can see why I reacted just like when faced with some high-school class group misbehavior or perceived injustice...at the level of a rumor based "guilty by association" verdict.
I will furthermore admit I have never actually read ANY philosophy book written by a professional philosopher...I never even managed to get very far with Jostein Gaarder 's "Sophie's World", (which is, IMHO, having read about 1/3 of it, a high-school level somewhat romanticized history of philosophy), even though it was recommended to me by a person whose critical judgment I trust very much and who knows me very well.
It was only when a Norwegian reputable professional writer and translator who had actually read Nietzsche, and who is most certainly NOT some form of nihilist or "anarchist", said to me that I didn't know what I was talking about, that, thus shamed, I started reading about Nietzsche on wikipedia, and then I found out about his mental illness, then I found out about OTHERS who seemed to be quite spread out on the political spectrum said they liked what he wrote, or at least gave him some time and serious consideration...including, as I said, some French left style political philosophers, Gen. de Gaulle, who certainly was not left, or Mr. President Teddy Roosevelt, who may have been a liberal, but he was an American Progressive Era liberal), Mr. President Richard Nixon, who was an American Old Cold War Era conservative...so, then I truly had to ethically take that into consideration myself...
...although, quite candidly, after having expended so much effort on only ONE philosopher, (and there are SO MANY !), I still most certainly wish that most, if not all, philosophy books come with a little cautionary warning, (like the pillow tags !), saying something along the lines of:
1. this is the abstract opinion of one philosopher, and must not be considered as generally explanatory for the real world around us;
2. it is better before reading the book to read both the Preface of this book, plus another independent source about the life and history of that particular philosopher who wrote it, in order to understand the exact historical, political, social, and geographic context it was written in;
3. it is highly advisable NOT to use illegal drugs while reading or thinking about philosophy;
4. if anyone, while reading this book starts feeling very depressed or starts to think about harming themselves or anyone else, please immediately call this 800-"Hotline" type number, or the Emergency 911 (in the USA + Canada)/112 (in Europe, up to the old USSR borders) number for immediate assistance.
I will furthermore admit I have never actually read ANY philosophy book written by a professional philosopher...I never even managed to get very far with Jostein Gaarder 's "Sophie's World", (which is, IMHO, having read about 1/3 of it, a high-school level somewhat romanticized history of philosophy), even though it was recommended to me by a person whose critical judgment I trust very much and who knows me very well.
It was only when a Norwegian reputable professional writer and translator who had actually read Nietzsche, and who is most certainly NOT some form of nihilist or "anarchist", said to me that I didn't know what I was talking about, that, thus shamed, I started reading about Nietzsche on wikipedia, and then I found out about his mental illness, then I found out about OTHERS who seemed to be quite spread out on the political spectrum said they liked what he wrote, or at least gave him some time and serious consideration...including, as I said, some French left style political philosophers, Gen. de Gaulle, who certainly was not left, or Mr. President Teddy Roosevelt, who may have been a liberal, but he was an American Progressive Era liberal), Mr. President Richard Nixon, who was an American Old Cold War Era conservative...so, then I truly had to ethically take that into consideration myself...
...although, quite candidly, after having expended so much effort on only ONE philosopher, (and there are SO MANY !), I still most certainly wish that most, if not all, philosophy books come with a little cautionary warning, (like the pillow tags !), saying something along the lines of:
1. this is the abstract opinion of one philosopher, and must not be considered as generally explanatory for the real world around us;
2. it is better before reading the book to read both the Preface of this book, plus another independent source about the life and history of that particular philosopher who wrote it, in order to understand the exact historical, political, social, and geographic context it was written in;
3. it is highly advisable NOT to use illegal drugs while reading or thinking about philosophy;
4. if anyone, while reading this book starts feeling very depressed or starts to think about harming themselves or anyone else, please immediately call this 800-"Hotline" type number, or the Emergency 911 (in the USA + Canada)/112 (in Europe, up to the old USSR borders) number for immediate assistance.
Last edited:
bulldogg
Milforum's Bouncer
Not taking away from the tragedy but I see racism in how it is being reported and other tragedies are being undereported because the victims are asian or african. In China alone in the last year more children under the age of 10 have been killed near or in their schools by nutjobs... perhaps its just been spread out too far to be of interest. Guess PolPot got it right when it comes to how to kill scores without the world giving a damn. Bosnia/Yugo et al gets NATO but Rwanda, nothing. Which conflict had more dead... Rwanda. I'm a little tired of how western peoples marginalise the suffering of others that is far greater but their skin pigment is simply not as pale as their own.
KJ
Active member
FU Bulldog, I call bollocks.
You know who I am and what I have done for people who´s skin pigments are quite alot darker then mine so don´t give me that racist crap.
As for the reporting, I doubt it has as much to do with skinpigment as geographical proximity.
This type of deal WILL feel closer to you when the crime is being committed 50 miles from your doorstep then when it is committed in the centre of the African continent.
Is it right? Hell no.
Is it a fact of human behaviour, Hell yeah. And you know it.
As for Rwanda not getting their fair shake..Had alot to do with noone being willing to take point.
The area was of no strategic use.
Not a safety concern.
And that´s all she ****ing wrote.
Wanna talk being stupid?
How about sending a EUFOR to Tchad to prevent the Sudaneese unrest spilling over the border.. Why not handle the Sudan straight up?
Worked in Bunia.
JEM rebels? Are you ****ing kidding me?
And lastly.
I dare you to mention ONE true report in the papers regarding something of importance, something else then ****ing Britney Spears latest hair due that looks lika a bird took a dump on her head.
When you find a reporter even attempting to press on reporting FACTS over selling issues you give me a call and I´ll call him/her and sing their praises.
Untill then, sure people die in the world and it sucks but before it gets personal noone will do **** about it.
FACT.
KJ sends..
bulldogg
Milforum's Bouncer
KJ, I said with how it was being 'reported'. Nothing to do with anyone here, save any reporters who might be lurking.
Never called you or anyone else racist other than the journo's. Even the news outlets in asia carry more stories about Europe and N.A. so it doesn't look like geographical location unless you take into account where the multinational corporations are that own the new outlets worldwide.
Never called you or anyone else racist other than the journo's. Even the news outlets in asia carry more stories about Europe and N.A. so it doesn't look like geographical location unless you take into account where the multinational corporations are that own the new outlets worldwide.
Last edited:
KJ
Active member
I find it quite alarming how the media holds different people to different standards..
I ain´t seeing alot of journos trying to "explain Abdullah fighter in JEM,s political motivation" as they are doing with one lone nutter in Norway right now..
Nor do I see the outrage of the press of the senceless killings done once a week by Abdullah and his JEM friends.
But once a year they hold a benefitgala with "celebrities" making guest appearances during Awareness of Sudan week.
It really is enough to make you sick.
KJ sends
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Man... not even going to go anywhere near this one.
bulldogg
Milforum's Bouncer
You might... :rambo: