6
   

Immigration and Racism in Britain and USA

 
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 06:15 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well. Nimh, are you also one of the posters who is so frightened of my posts that you make personal attacks. I am surprised at you--A PROFESSOR who wishes to silence dissent. You really shouldn't imitate the Quislings of the middle of the last century.

Why don't you just use your massive intellect to totally destroy my arguements one by one? Do you also fear my ideas? If you do, you are no professor but a charlatan.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 06:16 pm
Wait, actually ... I have a minute ...

Italgato

Italgato wrote:
The most eniment and erudite explicator of the legal system in the United States has told us that John Rawls is simplistic. Rawls, according to Judge Richard A. Posner, believes that the most abstract version of liberalism should command the assent of every reasonable person in our society.


Italgato wrote:
Perhaps Frank Apisa is right. I don' t think so.

There are others who don't think so.

Judge Richard A, Posner doesn't think so.

Judge Posner wrote( in his book "An Affair of State"
P. 266

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the presidential mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought of rights to have paid with his job."

Not all will agree, of course, but I think Posner's comment is true and beautiful.


chiczaira

chiczaira wrote:
I am informed by the erudite Joe from Chicago that Richard Posner is NOT the chief judge US court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, I must abjectly beg the erudite Joe From Chicago's pardon. [..]

But I hope that Joe From Chicago does not feel that this lessens, in any way, Judge Posner's legal brilliance and expertise in the finer points of the law.


chiczaira wrote:
Keltic Wizard either does not read or does not care to read.

He apparently skipped the entry about Clinton from the book by the great jurist, Judge Richard A. Posner in which Posner wrote:

"For those who think that auhority depends on mystery, the shattering of the Presidential Mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought of rights to have paid for with his job"


mporter

mporter wrote:
McTag. I am very much afraid that you do not know the meaning of the term- Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
If you need refreshment on the need for conclusive evidence, you are invited to view the excellent book entitled "An Affair of State" in which the preemient jurist, Richard Posner, reveals exactly why the perjurer, Bill Clinton, was not indicted for "perjury"


mporter wrote:
Yes, foxfyre, and you are not alone in that assessment. One of the country's leading jurists, Judge Richard Posner, wrote a book called "An Affair of State" in which he stated:
P. 266

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the Presidential Mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought to of rights have paid with his job"


septembri

septembri wrote:
The name of Ronald Dworkin has been invoked as an "Authority".

It may be that some feel that his arguments and reasoning are persuasive. Not everyone agrees.

I must quote the eminent jurist, Richard A. Posner, who in his highly praised and excellent study, "Overcoming Law" makes this observation about Dworkin: [..]


BernardR

BernardR wrote:
One of the most brilliant Jurists of our day( no, not Debra L A W, although she is very very erudite), Richard A. Posner, has written, in his masterwork--"Overcoming Law" points out-- [..]


BernardR wrote:
The "left wing" has the incredible "Chutzpah" to refer to "Decency" after its leader violated all standards of decency in the Oval Office of the President of the United States.

As Richard A. Posner commented in his book, an Affair of State--

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the presidential mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought to have paid with his job"


-------------------------------------------

That was fun... Razz Laughing
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 06:27 pm
Nailed! LOL
0 Replies
 
Anonymouse
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 07:06 pm
What I have noticed is that the left, egalitarians, liberals and all those who are the vanguards of tolerance and justice seem to display the least of it. Those who seem to speak the most about the need for tolerance, are often the most intolerant of those that disagree. Tolerance, justice and many other words and ideals have always been adopted by every group at some point or another to claim some sort of noble and sublime cause that supposedly separates their cause from the cause of those that they see as ignoble. In reality, humanity only knows a one way street, for morals and dogma are often nothing more than interwined and different sides of the same hand.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 07:18 pm
Anonymouse wrote:
What I have noticed is that the left, egalitarians, liberals and all those who are the vanguards of tolerance and justice seem to display the least of it.

Thats an awfully broad brush you're handling there...
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 08:00 pm
Liberals suck. Just ask Monica.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 08:06 pm
Hmm.. wouldnt that then be, liberals are sucked?
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 09:29 pm
I have a theory (yet to be crushed) that says that we are each tolerant of the ideas of others only to the extent that they conform to our ideas.
0 Replies
 
Anonymouse
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 10:42 pm
nimh wrote:
Anonymouse wrote:
What I have noticed is that the left, egalitarians, liberals and all those who are the vanguards of tolerance and justice seem to display the least of it.

Thats an awfully broad brush you're handling there...


What can I say I am a painter. Is it not a fair characterization? It is already accepted that the conservatives and the right are intolerant. Liberals like to believe they aren't. If you don't believe me, take a look at many of the threads. The only difference between the left and the right is how conscious they are of their intolerance.
0 Replies
 
Anonymouse
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jul, 2006 10:43 pm
Eorl wrote:
I have a theory (yet to be crushed) that says that we are each tolerant of the ideas of others only to the extent that they conform to our ideas.


Actually, that's been the case with humanity since the dawn of consciousness. It's just now people like to believe they are holier-than-thou.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 04:22 am
BernardR wrote:
OCCOM BILL WROTE:

Thanks for the correction Joe!

BernardR, I am less impressed with your knowledge of the USA than Nimh's (increase by a factor of 100 for a mannerism comparison. )


You may think so, but it you are at all objective, stay tuned when Nimm posts anything about the USA. He thinks he knows about the USA but all he really knows is what he reads in the Socialist publications in the thrid world countries of the Netherlands and Hungary.
You are proving your own ignorance to liberals and conservatives alike with each idiotic post suggesting Nimh is as ignorant about the U.S. as you OBVIOUSLY are about him...

Oh, wait, dude's finally decided to spank you for himself...

nimh wrote:
Wait, actually ... I have a minute ...

Italgato

Italgato wrote:
The most eniment and erudite explicator of the legal system in the United States has told us that John Rawls is simplistic. Rawls, according to Judge Richard A. Posner, believes that the most abstract version of liberalism should command the assent of every reasonable person in our society.


Italgato wrote:
Perhaps Frank Apisa is right. I don' t think so.

There are others who don't think so.

Judge Richard A, Posner doesn't think so.

Judge Posner wrote( in his book "An Affair of State"
P. 266

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the presidential mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought of rights to have paid with his job."

Not all will agree, of course, but I think Posner's comment is true and beautiful.


chiczaira

chiczaira wrote:
I am informed by the erudite Joe from Chicago that Richard Posner is NOT the chief judge US court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, I must abjectly beg the erudite Joe From Chicago's pardon. [..]

But I hope that Joe From Chicago does not feel that this lessens, in any way, Judge Posner's legal brilliance and expertise in the finer points of the law.


chiczaira wrote:
Keltic Wizard either does not read or does not care to read.

He apparently skipped the entry about Clinton from the book by the great jurist, Judge Richard A. Posner in which Posner wrote:

"For those who think that auhority depends on mystery, the shattering of the Presidential Mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought of rights to have paid for with his job"


mporter

mporter wrote:
McTag. I am very much afraid that you do not know the meaning of the term- Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
If you need refreshment on the need for conclusive evidence, you are invited to view the excellent book entitled "An Affair of State" in which the preemient jurist, Richard Posner, reveals exactly why the perjurer, Bill Clinton, was not indicted for "perjury"


mporter wrote:
Yes, foxfyre, and you are not alone in that assessment. One of the country's leading jurists, Judge Richard Posner, wrote a book called "An Affair of State" in which he stated:
P. 266

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the Presidential Mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought to of rights have paid with his job"


septembri

septembri wrote:
The name of Ronald Dworkin has been invoked as an "Authority".

It may be that some feel that his arguments and reasoning are persuasive. Not everyone agrees.

I must quote the eminent jurist, Richard A. Posner, who in his highly praised and excellent study, "Overcoming Law" makes this observation about Dworkin: [..]


BernardR

BernardR wrote:
One of the most brilliant Jurists of our day( no, not Debra L A W, although she is very very erudite), Richard A. Posner, has written, in his masterwork--"Overcoming Law" points out-- [..]


BernardR wrote:
The "left wing" has the incredible "Chutzpah" to refer to "Decency" after its leader violated all standards of decency in the Oval Office of the President of the United States.

As Richard A. Posner commented in his book, an Affair of State--

"For those who think that authority depends on mystery, the shattering of the presidential mystique has been a disaster for which Clinton ought to have paid with his job"


-------------------------------------------

That was fun... Razz Laughing
Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Fun to read too. I was growing very tired of your turning the other cheek to this fool. Well done.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 06:07 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
nimh wrote:
That was fun... Razz Laughing

Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Fun to read too. I was growing very tired of your turning the other cheek to this fool. Well done.

It was even better than I'd thought.

I knew I would find a post about Posner from each of Bernard's previous incarnations, and that each of them would be recognizable from his inimitable writing style. I suspected there would be keywords ("eminent", "erudite") that would pop up again and again in the same ways.

But I had no idea that I would actually find the exact same Posner quote about Clinton used by four of Bernard's personas. That was way more than I'd even hoped to find, it was like stumbling across some running gag ;-)
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 06:15 am
Laughing Again, well done!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 06:44 am
You're right about the key words, Habibi--when Bernard was to sneer at me, he makes sarcastic remarks about "the erudite Mr. Setanta" . . . that by itself would have been a dead give-away if nothing else had been.

As for Anonymouse, his sneering is hilarious. I get along well here with a number of "conservatives" with whom i disagree. I don't get along well with flannel-mouthed haters, and that goes for left or right. Anyone who doubts that i will go after a member on the left who is posting drivel should talk to Detano Inipo, Blueflame or Freedom4Free. I ordinarily do not mention the names of members who don't appear in a thread, but i do so here just to be illustrative.

My personal experience is that the young are far more intolerant than any other demographic. I have found that few people hold their beliefs more fervently and with more violence if challenged, than the young.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 07:04 am
Setanta wrote:
Anyone who doubts that i will go after a member on the left who is posting drivel...
Understatement, Set. I haven't forgotten the spanking you gave HobbitBob on my behalf (when I was a newbie), despite agreeing with most of what he said, just because he was being unnecessarily nasty.

Also true what you said about the young. For a month and a half now I've been babysitting a bar and 90% of the people I have to boot are youngsters (though that could be an alcohol/inexperience thing).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 07:11 am
We're dealing in anecdotal evidence here, O'Bill--but yes, having been a bar tender, and having spent more time in bars than was good for me in the bad old days, it was my experience that young guys were the ones most likely to make trouble.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 07:53 am
It is probably sexual energy that can't find an outlet to the sea.

It's the same in my pub.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 08:07 am
BernardR wrote:
Yes. Mr. Attorney from Chicago. And I will state EVEN BEFORE I FIND EVIDENCE THAT THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION BETWEEN SOCIETIES THAT HAVE A HOMOGENOUS POPULATION AND ALSO HAVE LOW CRIME RATES.

Well, let's see. Albania, for instance, has a relatively homogeneous population (according to the CIA World Factbook, Albania's population is 95% Albanian, which is comparable to Japan's ethnic composition of 99% Japanese). Yet it is unlikely that anyone would call Albania's crime rate "low." Indeed, according to the US State Department:
    [b]Albania has a high crime rate[/b], with instances of armed robberies and assaults. Caution should be exercised in bars in Tirana - where violent incidents, some involving the use of firearms, do sometimes occur, particularly in the early morning hours. Carjacking still occurs but with less frequency than in the past. Anyone who is carjacked should surrender the vehicle without resistance. Armed crime is common in Shkoder and frequent in other towns in northern and northwestern Albania. Throughout the country, street crime is fairly common, and occurs particularly at night. Criminals do not deliberately target U.S. citizens or other foreigners, but criminals seek targets of opportunity and select those who appear to have anything of value. Pick pocketing is widespread; U.S. citizens have reported the theft of their passports by pickpockets.

Now, anyone positing that homogeneous populations cause low crime rates must explain why Albania, with its homogeneous population, has a high crime rate.

BernardR wrote:
Now, there is no way to PROVE that the Homogenous Populations caused the low crime rates just as there is no way to PROVE that people with normal blood pressure do not have as many heart attacks as people with high blood pressure BUT THE CORRELATION IS SIGNIFICANT.

On the contrary, the correlation is rather insignificant if we compare all of the countries that have homogeneous populations.

BernardR wrote:
You did not go Harvard? I thought you did. Your arguments on the law in other posts sounded as if you were speaking from on high.

Thanks, I can't tell you how much it means to me to receive a compliment from someone like you.

BernardR wrote:
Did you go to John Marshall? You need not be ashamed. It is a good law school.There are more John Marshall shysters in the halls at 26th and California taking speeding ticket cases than any other group!

John Marshall is indeed a good law school, and I know several graduates of that institution. But I didn't graduate from there either.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 01:32 pm
Hey - we're on page 100, exactly.

Good time to post one of those overarching overview articles about the state of Muslims in the UK. This one appeared in The Independent few days ago, in the aftermath of the 7/7 commemoration.

Although this article is, as social sketches of a community's or country's "mood" tend to be, much focused on the anecdotal and impressionistic, it is a fair enough look at the question, who are Muslims in the UK today?

Want to highlight two paragraphs in it first, though. First, because they're topical to current news (Tony Blair's adminishments the other day). Second, because the question has so often been asked here: why are the moderate Muslims not speaking up? Where are they?

Quote:
But many of the dignitaries gathered for the official opening were still smarting from the words of Tony Blair, who had attacked "the moderate majority" among Muslims earlier in the week. They were not doing enough to combat extremism, he said. They had to reject "the completely false sense of grievance against the West".

Why then, they wondered, was he ignoring them? The Prime Minister had gathered 100 prominent Muslims together after the bombings and asked them to think of ways to beat the extremists. They called for a public inquiry and made 63 other recommendations. But only three of the recommendations have been taken up so far. "They keep saying they want to hear from the Muslim community," said one prominent businessman at Islam Expo, who did not want to be named. "We spoke loud and clear. They have totally ignored us."


OK, now to the overall picture:

Quote:
Islam UK: Made in Britain

The bombers. The victim. The soldier who died in action. They were all Muslims. And they were all British

By Cole Moreton
The Independent
Published: 09 July 2006


On the day the soldier died, the big news was about England playing football and Muslims taking over Alton Towers. The Sun said there would be thousands of them going to the biggest theme park in the country. The booze and gambling outlets would be closed, the music silenced. And a 19-year-old non-believer was outraged after being refused tickets. "What," he fumed, "is the world coming to?"

Imtiaz Hashmi may already have known about the Islamic Fun Day. Coaches will leave from her home city of Birmingham when it happens. But she could not have known that on the day of the report her son Jabron - the good boy who was saving his wages to pay for her trip to Mecca - was in so much trouble, thousands of miles away.

Taliban fighters were firing rocket-propelled grenades at his camp. The 24-year-old was close to his birthplace in Pakistan, but he was wearing a British uniform. He was defending a British base. His unit was in Afghanistan under orders from the British government. L/Cpl Hashmi was British. Eight days ago, while the tabloids were spluttering at the notion of his fellow believers having fun on the rollercoasters, he became the first British Muslim to die on active service since the beginning of the conflict politicians call the war on terror.

"Jabron was a committed soldier and a committed Muslim," said his brother Zeeshan, who has also served. "He was fiercely proud of his Islamic background, and equally proud of being British."

Islamic extremists based here posted on their website a photograph of Jabron surrounded by flames. They called him a "home-grown terrorist". Their "vile views" were disowned by the Muslim Council of Britain, whose spokesman said: "If they don't like living in this country one wonders why they don't seek to emigrate elsewhere."

So when outsiders ask what British Muslims are like, what is the answer? The soldier who dies for his adopted country? The terrorists who celebrate the death of a fellow believer? Or the politician who tries so hard to distance himself from extremism that he ends up sounding like Alf Garnett? None of them, of course, and any of them.

The men who blew themselves up on trains and a bus a year ago last Friday were British Muslims. So were some of their victims, like Shahara Akther Islam, a 20-year-old bank cashier from Plaistow in east London, who died on the No 30 bus on 7 July 2005. A devout follower of Islam and a modern Briton, she sometimes wore a shalwar kameez, but also carried a Burberry handbag. Shahara was still missing that evening, her body unidentified, when her father went to the mosque in the Whitechapel Road to ask if anybody had seen her. Fellow Londoners were at prayer, asking for the help and comfort of Allah the Merciful, the Compassionate. "These people are not human beings," he said of the bombers. "They are not doing anything for Islam."

Yusuf Islam is another kind of British Muslim. He used to be a pop star called Cat Stevens until he converted to the faith and felt led to smash up his instruments. Now the climate has changed and he is preparing a return to commercial music after nearly 30 years. And last Thursday he and the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, opened a festival designed to present the best of Muslim culture in this country. The Islam Expo at the Alexandra Palace in north London featured paintings by modern artists, calligraphy, dance workshops and a comedy team called Allah Made Me Funny. "We need to let the world see the whole picture of Islam," said Yusuf Islam, "and there are many beautiful faces to that picture."

But many of the dignitaries gathered for the official opening were still smarting from the words of Tony Blair, who had attacked "the moderate majority" among Muslims earlier in the week. They were not doing enough to combat extremism, he said. They had to reject "the completely false sense of grievance against the West".

Why then, they wondered, was he ignoring them? The Prime Minister had gathered 100 prominent Muslims together after the bombings and asked them to think of ways to beat the extremists. They called for a public inquiry and made 63 other recommendations. But only three of the recommendations have been taken up so far. "They keep saying they want to hear from the Muslim community," said one prominent businessman at Islam Expo, who did not want to be named. "We spoke loud and clear. They have totally ignored us."

The trouble with that statement is that while everyone talks about the Muslim community, nobody really believes it exists. Not as a coherent whole with a single voice, anyway. The range of opinion and belief is far too wide and the arguments too fierce for that. The Muslim Council of Great Britain represents 400 groups, but would not claim it spoke for everybody.

The first permanent Muslim communities in this country were founded by Yemeni sailors in Cardiff and Liverpool in the 19th century. After the Second World War, when Britain called for help in rebuilding itself, men and women began arriving in larger numbers from India, Pakistan and the eastern part of that country which in 1971 became Bangladesh. Some of them have great-grandchildren now. There are a million people in the UK from the countries of south Asia.

In recent years economic migrants have been joined by refugees from troubled places such as Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkan states. Muslims here speak more than 50 languages. They have their own ethnic and religious prejudices against each other. The faith itself is hardly monolithic: nobody really knows how many are Sunni and how many Shia for example, not to mention other sects. There are 1,600 mosques, some led by liberals in tune with Western thinking and some by men who may be well-versed in theology but cannot speak English and have no pastoral training. One thing the Government did do in response to the task force, was to set up a board to advise on the recruitment of imams.

The first Muslim MPs were elected in 1997, but it was the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that politicised many others. They became a driving force behind the new political party Respect (some were bewildered or enraged when its first MP, the maverick George Galloway, acted like it was his party then went on Big Brother to mew like a cat). They were also active in the Make Poverty History campaign, and gave millions to relief efforts after the tsunami and Kashmiri earthquakes last year.

Muslim Britain is young: 800,000 people are aged under 25, the vast majority straddling two cultures. "Art, music, film and other forms of culture are as much part of the daily lives of Muslims as are politics, religion and science," says Ehsan Masood, author of a British Council guide to Islam in the UK published last month. "The majority won't think twice before downloading music to an iPod or queueing up at the cinema when Daniel Craig makes his first outing as James Bond."

Abdullah Mussa would be described as moderate and modern. The 22-year-old, whose parents are Egyptian, helped set up the first Muslim scout troop in Birmingham, helping young boys and girls meet people outside their community. But he understands why they prefer not to do so a lot of the time. "At school we could not go drinking in pubs or to nightclubs with our non-Muslim friends. We played pool instead or just relaxed in coffee shops instead of bars. It was unspoken, but the two groups grew apart. That is natural."

MI5 has publicly estimated that al-Qa'ida has 8,000 sympathisers in this country, but Abdullah insists that while some young people will flirt with extremism - "just as I have heard young non-Muslims get a thrill out of saying Hitler had a couple of good ideas" - he believes very few will act on it.

Since 9/11 people sometimes ask if he is British or Muslim. "It just does not make sense to me as a question." No other religion is discussed as if it were a different race, he says. And it is true that those who spit or shout or punch often get confused: their victim might just look vaguely Arabic. South Americans get stopped and searched by the police. A Brazilian was shot dead.

Perhaps the attackers should meet Batool Al-Tooma, as some police do. A white Irish woman, she was a devout Catholic before converting to Islam and now works for the Islamic Foundation in Leicestershire helping some of the 14,200 other British converts. Batool also advises the police, lawyers and others on Islamic ways. "They discover that we are normal families like themselves, doing our best to bring up our children to be honourable, respectable members of this society."

At Islam Expo a small child came toddling past with a black balloon bearing the name of the charity Muslim Aid. His mother's face was veiled. Behind her was a teenager in a short skirt and a boy wearing a hoodie with the name of Muhammad Ali on the front. Batool Al-Tooma smiled and said: "Having lived through the days of the IRA and the witch-hunt against the Irish I learned that we must not play the victim card." Muslims should be a visible part of British society, she said - alongside others, not locking themselves away inside theme parks. On 17 September, Alton Towers will be closed to everyone but those who have bought tickets through a company called Islamic Leisure. "That is a total, abject, in-your-face failure to integrate."

Muslims do face hostility, suspicion and violence every day, she said, but there is also "warmth, understanding and support" available from many other British people. "What does not kill you makes you stronger. It is sad that it has taken a situation like the London bombs to open up the community, bring it out of physical and psychological ghettoes, but that is happening. We are becoming stronger, more unified and more open than before."
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Jul, 2006 01:41 pm
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/09/2025 at 12:01:44