EDL Clashing with the police in London

[Rascal]

I have just watched Tommy Robinson's being interviewed thingy

And decided im a barking raving mad far right loon


Beware you lefties you are gonna get it

Barking? I think you mean Mitcham mate

I knew i should have said Tooting

 

[roaminblue]

I have just watched Tommy Robinson's being interviewed thingy

And decided im a barking raving mad far right loon


Beware you lefties you are gonna get it

Barking? I think you mean Mitcham mate

I knew i should have said Tooting

Yeah tooting is unpleasant. Thankfully, due to my gated estate in Dulwich, I didn't have to cross paths with the nouveau politicised

 

[Rascal]

Barking? I think you mean Mitcham mate

I knew i should have said Tooting

Yeah tooting is unpleasant. Thankfully, due to my gated estate in Dulwich, I didn't have to cross paths with the nouveau politicised

Tooting was a guarded reference to the famous TPF

I forget you young ens never saw Citizen Smith :))

 

[roaminblue]

I knew i should have said Tooting

Yeah tooting is unpleasant. Thankfully, due to my gated estate in Dulwich, I didn't have to cross paths with the nouveau politicised

Tooting was a guarded reference to the famous TPF

I forget you young ens never saw Citizen Smith :))

Ah, I am ashamed. While it was a bit before my time, I've seen a few episodes. Robet Lindsay? Unless I'm thinking of the wrong show?

 

[Dubai Blue]

Makes quite a lot of interesting points, I think the fact hes got Stone Island on and is constantly sniffing doesn't do him any favours. Going back to my original point about hooligans I suppose, if it were a respected politician saying what hes saying then it would get taken more seriously.

The fact that the brain-dead idiot can't even string a coherent sentence together is his biggest downfall.

"That utter disrespect that the government's done nothing to protect."

What does that even mean? It's frightening to think that he's considered to be the brightest of the bunch.

 

[tidyman]

Maybe it was worded a bit too bluntly, JMA was only referring to the terrorist attacks that actually happened as the only bad thing. I was just highlighting another set of incidents, which in my opinion stir just as much emotion.

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

Child rape certainly does stir emotions.

I'm not sure it has any relevance on a debate about the EDL/ Islam though.

Unless you're suggesting that child rape is some how linked to Islam teachings? In which case I'm all ears.

I suspect it's more to do with the fact that a small percentage of sick fucks convicted for child rape happen to have Muslim as their nominal religion.

I highly doubt that anyone who goes around raping children is really a person of faith. Despite it sometimes appearing like its in the job description for some positions in various churches.

Fair point. Listen, I don't have any particular opinion and dont really know anything about the teaching of Islam, to be honest just thought with it being a current topic it would be good to debate with a few people of different attitudes towards it. It is perceived as in issue within the Muslim community though would you agree that much?

It is perceived as an issue with the BNP and probably the EDL, I expect.

I have no idea if Muslims are over represented in the kiddy fiddling, religion, league table.

I've no reason to believe they are but if stats exist for rapists by their religion, I'd have a look at them and come to a more informed opinion that taking Nick Griffin's word for it, that, "they are all raping our children."

 

[argyle]

This guy follows what the EDL has been up to on social media sites, it's actually pretty funny just how many of them have criminal convictions, yet believe they are patriots and knights in shining armour protecting us all.

http://twitpic.com/photos/EDLNewsXtra

 

[bluemoon32]

This guy follows what the EDL has been up to on social media sites, it's actually pretty funny just how many of them have criminal convictions, yet believe they are patriots and knights in shining armour protecting us all.

http://twitpic.com/photos/EDLNewsXtra

EDL typical day....Travel to places, get pissed, have a ruck with the police, get outnumbered by local anti-fash, go home to Mummy with their tails between their legs.
That's the usual MO.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I will use the term 'they are both as bad as each other about Islamic fundamentalist and EDL supporters' and here's why.

You (actually, I don't think you are actually saying this), or others making the point, seem to think that the isolated actions of each of them are the only impact that they have. But if that were the case there wouldn't be terrorism and there would be far right 'hate' groups (not just now, but throughout history).

The real issue is what they stand for, who they influence and the issues they create through their actions.

You are right, there is no real comparison regarding the physical acts that they get up to. One 'side' is murder and 'one' is (mostly) 'just' hate at present.

However, I would imagine that Islamic extremists, given that their atrocities are committed by a handful of people, find genuine support amongst a very small percentage of the population (both the general population and the Islamic population). Their acts are so extreme and vicious that it is obviously to all but the extremely disturbed that they are full of hate, misguided and wrong. Their will also be some sympathisers to such causes and they only have to influence one genuine nutter every five years for such acts to continue but there will be relatively few people who don't see them as complete morons and disgusting.

The EDL on the other hand, whilst not committing such terrible acts, have a far more perverse and sickening impact on the general population. For proof of that, see the amount of people on here who are always desperate to pop their head up and talk of them as 'prepared to stand up' or give out crap like 'I don't support them but..............' (then going on to basically say that they think they will be proven to be correct or that they will become a major power).

The EDL is just as dangerous as Islamic fundamentalism in my view because of the influence that it has on, and this sounds arrogant, the thicker members of society. Before you jump all over the arrogance though, you don't have to go far back in history at all to find dozens of examples where gullible idiots have been agitated by disgraceful regimes to 'rise up' against the 'people who are the cause of all their problems' in their society. It's even easier when that taps in to the casual (and not so casual) racism and prejudice that many people hold anyway.

The idiots and those with long standing prejudices are the easiest to influence. But then such language and beliefs become gradually more mainstream and others pop up reflecting the same thing - either through pure exposure to such influence or because they are more emboldened to express dirty little beliefs they would have kept quiet in a normal society. That's how the spread, in the more extreme cases, of a far right culture works. Until, if they get their way, parts of society never previous having any interaction with that point of view see it as gaining prominence and as a 'norm'.

What is more dangerous? The threat of a horrific terrorist act every five years, slaughtering inrecnocents? Or the growth of a national culture where hate and fear and persecution of a section of society is, if not seen as the norm, certainly not seen as anything to be ashamed of by those involved in such.

In terms of body count (at this stage of the development of a far right political culture, anyway), then - no contest - the terrorism wins hands down (although tell that to people in countries where a similar far right 'scapegoatism' has developed a few years further than the seeds of some nobs on a march). In terms of the threat to the every day fabric and tolerance of society and in terms of influencing a country to become like regimes we fought against not so long ago. It's a much tighter call.

Both are huge dangers to what we hold dear in this country and anyone supporting either - even verbally or, in the EDL's case, by proclaiming them to be some sort of 'natural reaction or 'having a point' on the internet - is a fucking disgrace.

I will avoid the temptation to take issue with your recidivistic habit of categorising those with whom you disagree as "thick" (I strongly suspect, for example, you wouldn't say the same of union members manipulated into striking) as on this occasion you have had the decency to admit that it can appear to be arrogant, but rather your apparent assertion that the influence and reach of Islamic extremism is limited to the acts committed in its name.

Sadly, this is wholly incorrect, because I believe you are looking at it from the wrong angle. It has been used by those that govern us as a vehicle to influence foreign policy, wage illegal wars and erode our civil liberties. We may disagree about a great deal, but I imagine these are matters upon which we concur greatly as to their importance.

I agree with your views on the EDL in the main, they are a deeply unpleasant group of people, but the influence of Islamic fundamentalism upon us as citizens can be seen every day: from opening a bank account, to going through customs; from the willful blindness of torture of British nationals to the extra powers that the state has to monitor its citizens.

You are correct that atrocities in the name of Islam are committed on a relatively infrequent basis. Five people die everyday on the roads and yet any attempt to limit the use of cars as a consequence of that statistic would be rounded on by the right wing press as an assault on our liberty. The infrequency of these "terrorist" events makes their impact on our freedoms all the more insidious. We have allowed these isolated acts to alter the way we live our lives and who knows where it will end. Why should it be that something which impacts statistically on far fewer people that deaths on the road be allowed to impose so readily on the liberties that we have sacrificed so much as a nation, and as people, to acquire and retain?

In that sense Islamic fundamentalism has had a far more pernicious effect on us as a society. Not because of the way it has made us think, but rather because of the criminal way we have allowed it let us to drop our guard against those who seek to govern and rule us. That's far more dangerous because it is something that right thinking people have far less control over than being in thrall of the faintly absurd EDL.

 

[Challenger1978]

I will use the term 'they are both as bad as each other about Islamic fundamentalist and EDL supporters' and here's why.

You (actually, I don't think you are actually saying this), or others making the point, seem to think that the isolated actions of each of them are the only impact that they have. But if that were the case there wouldn't be terrorism and there would be far right 'hate' groups (not just now, but throughout history).

The real issue is what they stand for, who they influence and the issues they create through their actions.

You are right, there is no real comparison regarding the physical acts that they get up to. One 'side' is murder and 'one' is (mostly) 'just' hate at present.

However, I would imagine that Islamic extremists, given that their atrocities are committed by a handful of people, find genuine support amongst a very small percentage of the population (both the general population and the Islamic population). Their acts are so extreme and vicious that it is obviously to all but the extremely disturbed that they are full of hate, misguided and wrong. Their will also be some sympathisers to such causes and they only have to influence one genuine nutter every five years for such acts to continue but there will be relatively few people who don't see them as complete morons and disgusting.

The EDL on the other hand, whilst not committing such terrible acts, have a far more perverse and sickening impact on the general population. For proof of that, see the amount of people on here who are always desperate to pop their head up and talk of them as 'prepared to stand up' or give out crap like 'I don't support them but..............' (then going on to basically say that they think they will be proven to be correct or that they will become a major power).

The EDL is just as dangerous as Islamic fundamentalism in my view because of the influence that it has on, and this sounds arrogant, the thicker members of society. Before you jump all over the arrogance though, you don't have to go far back in history at all to find dozens of examples where gullible idiots have been agitated by disgraceful regimes to 'rise up' against the 'people who are the cause of all their problems' in their society. It's even easier when that taps in to the casual (and not so casual) racism and prejudice that many people hold anyway.

The idiots and those with long standing prejudices are the easiest to influence. But then such language and beliefs become gradually more mainstream and others pop up reflecting the same thing - either through pure exposure to such influence or because they are more emboldened to express dirty little beliefs they would have kept quiet in a normal society. That's how the spread, in the more extreme cases, of a far right culture works. Until, if they get their way, parts of society never previous having any interaction with that point of view see it as gaining prominence and as a 'norm'.

What is more dangerous? The threat of a horrific terrorist act every five years, slaughtering inrecnocents? Or the growth of a national culture where hate and fear and persecution of a section of society is, if not seen as the norm, certainly not seen as anything to be ashamed of by those involved in such.

In terms of body count (at this stage of the development of a far right political culture, anyway), then - no contest - the terrorism wins hands down (although tell that to people in countries where a similar far right 'scapegoatism' has developed a few years further than the seeds of some nobs on a march). In terms of the threat to the every day fabric and tolerance of society and in terms of influencing a country to become like regimes we fought against not so long ago. It's a much tighter call.

Both are huge dangers to what we hold dear in this country and anyone supporting either - even verbally or, in the EDL's case, by proclaiming them to be some sort of 'natural reaction or 'having a point' on the internet - is a fucking disgrace.

I will avoid the temptation to take issue with your recidivistic habit of categorising those with whom you disagree as "thick" (I strongly suspect, for example, you wouldn't say the same of union members manipulated into striking) as on this occasion you have had the decency to admit that it can appear to be arrogant, but rather your apparent assertion that the influence and reach of Islamic extremism is limited to the acts committed in its name.

Sadly, this is wholly incorrect, because I believe you are looking at it from the wrong angle. It has been used by those that govern us as a vehicle to influence foreign policy, wage illegal wars and erode our civil liberties. We may disagree about a great deal, but I imagine these are matters upon which we concur greatly as to their importance.

I agree with your views on the EDL in the main, they are a deeply unpleasant group of people, but the influence of Islamic fundamentalism upon us as citizens can be seen every day: from opening a bank account, to going through customs; from the willful blindness of torture of British nationals to the extra powers that the state has to monitor its citizens.

You are correct that atrocities in the name of Islam are committed on a relatively infrequent basis. Five people die everyday on the roads and yet any attempt to limit the use of cars as a consequence of that statistic would be rounded on by the right wing press as an assault on our liberty. The infrequency of these "terrorist" events makes their impact on our freedoms all the more insidious. We have allowed these isolated acts to alter the way we live our lives and who knows where it will end. Why should it be that something which impacts statistically on far fewer people that deaths on the road be allowed to impose so readily on the liberties that we have sacrificed so much as a nation, and as people, to acquire and retain?

In that sense Islamic fundamentalism has had a far more pernicious effect on us as a society. Not because of the way it has made us think, but rather because of the criminal way we have allowed it let us to drop our guard against those who seek to govern and rule us. That's far more dangerous because it is something that right thinking people have far less control over than being in thrall of the faintly absurd EDL.

That is a very good post, I'd just like to raise one point though. Statistically it might be one person dies every five years from a terrorist attack. The thing is though how many terrorist plots do we hear about all the time that are foiled. How many people could of died in those attacks if those plots had not been stopped. Now i agree with you i really don't like the direction the government is heading with all this. As this constant but slow push towards eventually turning the UK in to totalitarian state is sickening.

Its a very strange situation to be in we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't, surely there has to be some kind of middle ground somewhere ?