THE BRITISH THREAD

My Sharona - The knack

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

That is not reason to assume, however, that all British Muslims are nutters.

No its not and I dont say they are. Only a small proportion are religious/political zealots. Unfortunately I keep underestimating what that proportion is.

0 Replies

sorry I posted a song on this thread by mistake...

x

0 Replies

I thought my sharona the knack yes we have no bananas

was one of the more sensible comments on this thread

0 Replies

I listened to the man that barracked on the radio today, he was being interviewed along with a moderate Muslim woman M.P.

It was unbearable...

He refused to acknowledge her as a Muslim, said she was 'half naked and didn't know how to wash properly'

Yet he teaches young children at the Mosque every week!

When you teach religious fundamentalism of any kind, it IS child abuse...

You restrict their opportunities and make their 'world' so narrow and unchanging...

It's teaching obedience, not exploration.

That's my 2 pennyworth anyway.

0 Replies

Hear hear to Smorgs and Steve . . .

0 Replies

Thanks, Setanta. Very Happy

Though spendy will be along any minute to pour scorn on my humble post.

I'm almost nervous... bracing myself...

Be nice now, spendy...

We want to hear what you have to say, just without the snidey asides...

kiss, kiss

And don't go calling me pink-chubby (that's my 'special' name, that you're only allowed to whisper)

x

0 Replies

Shame about Richard Hammond...

Crying or Very sad

0 Replies

George Graham was of the opinion that the nutter who barracked the Home Secretary was well-known to the police, and could only have been let into the meeting as a deliberate police "sting", intended to show how extreme the views and behaviour of the "enemies of the state" are.

Odd, that the film camera position chosen was nearer to the dissenter than to Mr Reid, therby guaranteeing excellent pictures for the evening TV News.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

George Graham was of the opinion that the nutter who barracked the Home Secretary was well-known to the police, and could only have been let into the meeting as a deliberate police "sting", intended to show how extreme the views and behaviour of the "enemies of the state" are.

Odd, that the film camera position chosen was nearer to the dissenter than to Mr Reid, therby guaranteeing excellent pictures for the evening TV News.

Very interesting take, McT . . . all the news that's fit to print . . . or to broadcast . . . or to engineer . . .

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

McTag wrote:
Pretty sneaky the way he used the word "groom" there. Not usually heard in this context.
That's evil, in my view. As if things weren't bad enough, without allusions to paedophilia.
Weaselly words, just what we expect from a politician.

Cant agree with you there Taggers. Grooming is exactly what these nutters do. Not for sex but something worse. Either way its child abuse imo.

Yeah but I think it's unnecessary and sleazy. And certainly deliberate. What's wrong with using the good old standby word "brainwashing"?

0 Replies

smorgs wrote:

Shame about Richard Hammond...

Yes, shame.

On that subject, I am in the camp of all those who hate Jeremy Clarkson and all his works, and all the petrolheads and boy racers who infest his TV programmes, and other programmes like Top Gear and Fifth Gear.

I don't like motor sport (or any sport involving horses either, by the way) and I certainly don't think people should be encouraged to drive fast cars competitively on the Queen's highway.
And don't get me started on off-roaders.

0 Replies

Right Mac. It is a relief to accede to your request.

smorgsy wrote-

Quote:

It's teaching obedience, not exploration.

Isn't it a major problem that exploration gets underway before obedience has been thouroughly conditioned?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote-

Quote:

Very interesting take, McT

What's interesting about something so obvious.

What is interesting is that Setanta didn't find my post telling him it was a stunt interesting despite it being four hours ahead of Mac's.

Not circling the wagons again are we?

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

Steve 41oo wrote:
McTag wrote:
Pretty sneaky the way he used the word "groom" there. Not usually heard in this context.
That's evil, in my view. As if things weren't bad enough, without allusions to paedophilia.
Weaselly words, just what we expect from a politician.

Cant agree with you there Taggers. Grooming is exactly what these nutters do. Not for sex but something worse. Either way its child abuse imo.

Yeah but I think it's unnecessary and sleazy. And certainly deliberate. What's wrong with using the good old standby word "brainwashing"?

Grooming and brainwashing, to me, are two separate things, McT.

Child grooming is befriending a child, often in the negative context of preparing it to accept inappropriate behavior from the other person.

To me, the innapropriate behaviour in this context, is the brainwashing.

The two, in this context, go hand in hand.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Quote:

Isn't it a major problem that exploration gets underway before obedience has been thouroughly conditioned?

It is my opinion that a fundamentalist upbringing/education stifles a child's natural inclination TO explore.

But I'm constantly re-assessing my opinion on things... testing them... trying to absorb the bigger picture.. reading 'around' things, poking my own predjudices.

Years ago, I was rabidly opposed to single sex education (due, in most part to my own narrow experience), but I've done a complete u-turn on this...

I campaigned (sucessfully) to get my daughter into the best school, even though they required religious affiliation and regular attendance at services. It also fed into the best (Catholic) College. Some might see that as a sell out on my part... considering my feelings on religion in education. But I couldn't gamble her education on my emotion-driven beliefs.

I was cheated out of my Grammar School place, simply due to the cost of the uniform, and my Mum was a barmaid. I'd never heard of Shakespeare when I left my Convent - and that's a crime, don't you think?

I'm interested in your views on this...

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Setanta wrote-

Quote:
Very interesting take, McT

What's interesting about something so obvious.

What is interesting is that Setanta didn't find my post telling him it was a stunt interesting despite it being four hours ahead of Mac's.

Not circling the wagons again are we?

Spendi, your paranoia is showing, and you must try harder at not being a prat.

Don't forget, this is the British Thread (cue background music "Land of Hope and Glory") and we must show a good example to these foreign johnnies...

0 Replies

Okay Mac. I wasn't getting at you.

I wouldn't claim any credit for being 4 hours earlier than you. You were probably having a jar somewhere and I don't hold that against anybody. Where I got it from was earlier than me. I'll give credit to the stunt though. It was pretty good.

Why did Setanta not respond to what I said. Maybe he doesn't read properly eh? Maybe he likes you you lucky boy. You're a bit easier for him to manage than I am and by some margin.

He was circling the wagons alright. It's called "comprobatio" or "eulogia".
Get your sympathy and suck you into the anti-ID camp. You know. It's done in pubs by gaspers with no cash.

Before you know it you won't understand what the expression "GI-brides" means when decoded by a scientific mind sans the slightest spark of decency as befits such a mind.

0 Replies

Interesting post smorgsy.

It's Thursday. Bath now on Thursdays.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

Don't forget, this is the British Thread (cue background music "Land of Hope and Glory") and we must show a good example to these foreign johnnies...

I'm finding this thread quite revealing Smile

0 Replies

THE BRITISH THREAD

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know