"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
So it’s just the BBC webpage but nothing about Timothy. Suggests it’s a rather trivial thing.
I have no issue with people having faith. I personally am an atheist. I do find aspects of the link in Islam to identity and mysogeny to be chaallenging in a western liberal context. A strongly patriarchal society does not sit easily in the world of eqquaal rights, equality and diversity etc. There is also no doubt that some Muslims do wish to see Islam take over the world. And at the moment a terrorist a attack is most likely to be inspired by a perverted creed of Islam, so people are naturally afraid.
You are more likely to get killed in the accidental spillover from a gang war than by a terrorist attack. You are much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver.
There have been 7 deaths in Great Britain from terrorist attacks since 1 Jan 2020, so about 1 a year. About 4-5 people are killed by cows each year. Don’t be afraid of terrorists, of any sort. Be afraid of cows.
There were about 20 in the Manchester Arena bomb alone.
nice in American English (naɪs) adjective Word forms: nicer, nicest Origin: ME, strange, lazy, foolish < OFr nice, nisce, stupid, foolish < L nescius, ignorant, not knowing < nescire, to be ignorant < ne-, not (see no1) + scire, to know: see science 1. obsolete (I don't care, it's still there) a. ignorant; foolish
So it’s just the BBC webpage but nothing about Timothy. Suggests it’s a rather trivial thing.
I have no issue with people having faith. I personally am an atheist. I do find aspects of the link in Islam to identity and mysogeny to be chaallenging in a western liberal context. A strongly patriarchal society does not sit easily in the world of eqquaal rights, equality and diversity etc. There is also no doubt that some Muslims do wish to see Islam take over the world. And at the moment a terrorist a attack is most likely to be inspired by a perverted creed of Islam, so people are naturally afraid.
You are more likely to get killed in the accidental spillover from a gang war than by a terrorist attack. You are much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver.
There have been 7 deaths in Great Britain from terrorist attacks since 1 Jan 2020, so about 1 a year. About 4-5 people are killed by cows each year. Don’t be afraid of terrorists, of any sort. Be afraid of cows.
There were about 20 in the Manchester Arena bomb alone.
Yep. This is what the future looks like if Farage gets in.
Some of us care about this country's liberal traditions. If you don't then you may well get what you deserve.
I care about this country’s liberal traditions. Which is why I don’t want bigots in charge.
And many people see parts of Islam as bigoted, such as the treatment of women.
Some expressions of Islam, as some expressions of Judaism and Christianity, are sexist and misogynistic. Liberals have spent centuries countering religious oppression and clericalism (usually Christian) to get us where we are today in the UK. We have also worked hard to instil the principle that we don’t judge a category of people by the actions of some in that group. To do that is bigotry.
So it’s just the BBC webpage but nothing about Timothy. Suggests it’s a rather trivial thing.
I have no issue with people having faith. I personally am an atheist. I do find aspects of the link in Islam to identity and mysogeny to be chaallenging in a western liberal context. A strongly patriarchal society does not sit easily in the world of eqquaal rights, equality and diversity etc. There is also no doubt that some Muslims do wish to see Islam take over the world. And at the moment a terrorist a attack is most likely to be inspired by a perverted creed of Islam, so people are naturally afraid.
You are more likely to get killed in the accidental spillover from a gang war than by a terrorist attack. You are much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver.
There have been 7 deaths in Great Britain from terrorist attacks since 1 Jan 2020, so about 1 a year. About 4-5 people are killed by cows each year. Don’t be afraid of terrorists, of any sort. Be afraid of cows.
There were about 20 in the Manchester Arena bomb alone.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
It depends how you define bigotry.
I am quite fine with disliking fascists because of the actions of fascists down the years.
Religion is a philosophy, no better or worse than any other by mere virtue or vice of being a religion.
Yep. This is what the future looks like if Farage gets in.
Some of us care about this country's liberal traditions. If you don't then you may well get what you deserve.
I care about this country’s liberal traditions. Which is why I don’t want bigots in charge.
And many people see parts of Islam as bigoted, such as the treatment of women.
Disliking the demonisation of a quarter of the world's population doesn't equal support for the reactionary beliefs or practices that some of them have.
Yep. This is what the future looks like if Farage gets in.
Some of us care about this country's liberal traditions. If you don't then you may well get what you deserve.
I care about this country’s liberal traditions. Which is why I don’t want bigots in charge.
If you won't confront the Islamic issue, that's what you'll probably get. Don't complain that you weren't warned.
The mayor of the capital for the last 10 years is a practicing muslim, I haven't noticed any attempts to introduce sharia law or restrict people's activities in line with the teaching of the Quran, unless it has something to say on diesels and SUVs. He's also notably less bigoted than either of the two previous mayors.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
One bit of the immigration debate is that nearly everyone has a group* they don't want.
Some years ago, I pranked a bunch of students with a tale of USA'ian rednecks coming to Cornwall to re-open the tin mines. By the time I'd finished with the usual anti-immigrant tales, they were all for throwing them into the sea, in the very spirit of that sea captain in the time of Edward I
Some of this parish got very upset by the idea of Zimbabwean farmers coming here.
Probably, being anti-immigrant is one of those irregular verbs.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
By Israel attacking South Pars (Iran's gas refinery port) Iran has retaliated by attack Ras Laffan in Qatar. This is the worlds largest gas producing complex.
Direct hits reported on Shell's Pearl GTL (Gas to Liquids) plant and Qatar Energy's Laffan refinery (condensate refinery) - both full of very flammable msterial.
Pearl in particular seems to be badly hit. This is a huge and unneccesary escalation. It is almost as if Israel is trying to drag more countries into the conflict.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
You what? The Shah was gouging oil prices. How it finished was most likely an accident, but Zack and Corbyn had nothing to do with the Islamic Revolution.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
You what? The Shah was gouging oil prices. How it finished was most likely an accident, but Zack and Corbyn had nothing to do with the Islamic Revolution.
The left, in Iran and in the West, enthusiastically embraced the revolution in Iran. To the point of trying to prevent the Shah, who was dying and seeking cancer treatment, asylum in just about any country.
I guess he was the Wrong Kind of Immigrant.
Meanwhile, in Iran, the religious comedians turned against their left wing chums, in the usual fashion of escalating revolutions. Quite bloodily.
As often happens, My Enemy's Enemy turned out to be Just Another Enemy.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
Criticism of the religion, the book, or the prophet is worthy of a death sentence, according to the book
Is any of that criticism not Islamophobic?
Try reading the Bible, particularly the Old Testament.
In the case of the Bible, you need to read both Testaments. Because Christianity is supposed to be Judaism 2.0 - a lot of revisions and deprecated code.
Essentially, God had a midlife crisis, an affair with a married woman, the child.... stuff went sideways. The usual story. Anyway, God mellowed a lot after that - probably spent some time surfing and smoking blunts.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
One particular agent provocateur kicks this one off and before you know it one or two others have been triggered. It happens every time. Sometimes I wonder whether the agent provocateur even believes what he says, I suspect he just lights the touch paper and watches the inferno.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
The good news is I haven't.
Oh what a riposte! it’s a triumph dahling!
You're sounding a bit jumpy. Hope all is well.
Spare me the fake concern, it just makes you look even more pompous
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
You what? The Shah was gouging oil prices. How it finished was most likely an accident, but Zack and Corbyn had nothing to do with the Islamic Revolution.
The left, in Iran and in the West, enthusiastically embraced the revolution in Iran. To the point of trying to prevent the Shah, who was dying and seeking cancer treatment, asylum in just about any country.
I guess he was the Wrong Kind of Immigrant.
Meanwhile, in Iran, the religious comedians turned against their left wing chums, in the usual fashion of escalating revolutions. Quite bloodily.
As often happens, My Enemy's Enemy turned out to be Just Another Enemy.
That is a potted history of the fall of the Shah with the accuracy of a Caroline Leavitt press conference.
The Shah was a ruthless US backed Dictator who creamed off oil revenues for himself. He was dying of cancer and he left for treatment in if I remember correctly North Africa.
The Shah was a bad man, only not as bad as Khomeini turned out to be.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
One particular agent provocateur kicks this one off and before you know it one or two others have been triggered. It happens every time. Sometimes I wonder whether the agent provocateur even believes what he says, I suspect he just lights the touch paper and watches the inferno.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
One particular agent provocateur kicks this one off and before you know it one or two others have been triggered. It happens every time. Sometimes I wonder whether the agent provocateur even believes what he says, I suspect he just lights the touch paper and watches the inferno.
SCOOP!!! Trump administration considering deploying thousands of additional troops to the Middle East as the military prepares options for the possible next phase of the Iran war. One option for securing the Strait of Hormuz includes deploying troops to Iranian shores. w/ @idreesali114
SCOOP!!! Trump administration considering deploying thousands of additional troops to the Middle East as the military prepares options for the possible next phase of the Iran war. One option for securing the Strait of Hormuz includes deploying troops to Iranian shores. w/ @idreesali114
'kin hell. I hope you haven't got a bridge to sell me.
SCOOP!!! Trump administration considering deploying thousands of additional troops to the Middle East as the military prepares options for the possible next phase of the Iran war. One option for securing the Strait of Hormuz includes deploying troops to Iranian shores. w/ @idreesali114
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
The important bit is not disliking *groups*.
There are arseholes in all groups.
Yep. Like I know approx one third of Reform voters are racist. But if I meet one, a Reform voter, I'm not going to just assume they are that way inclined. I'll wait until they've said something dodgy before I make that call. And I won't just drop the hammer I'll give them a chance to explain first. Because I might have misconstrued them. It could be me at fault.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You know that thing whereby closet antisemites religiously stick to slagging off "Israel" when inside their own head they mean Jews?
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
The fun bit is when people don't realise what is going on inside their own heads. The number of people who quite genuinely believe that "because a mate at work is X, I can't be anti-X".
A minefield topic too. As we see tonight. The biggest tell for me of somebody fallen down the prejudice hole on muslims is 'they shouldn't be here fouling up the place and taking over' type sentiments.
The important bit is not disliking *groups*.
There are arseholes in all groups.
Yep. Like I know approx one third of Reform voters are racist. But if I meet one, a Reform voter, I'm not going to just assume they are that way inclined. I'll wait until they've said something dodgy before I make that call. And I won't just drop the hammer I'll give them a chance to explain first. Because I might have misconstrued them. It could be me at fault.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Our special treatment of anti-semitism stems from the holocaust. Labour's proposed special treatment of islamaphobia stems from what? We got too grumpy and over-reacted when they blew up our tube trains?
I kinda think it shouldn’t take a genocide for us to stop being bigoted against a group.
Why might we need the government to take some sort of action around Islamophobia? Well, look at this thread and the half a dozen people being very bigoted against Muslims, making up nonsense about Muslims, declaring Islam a unique threat. Two of the commonest bigotries in our country today are anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. (Ziganophobia is up there too.)
Some British muslims blow stuff up. Some gypies living in Britain steal. What bad thing do you think some British Jews do? Do enlighten us.
What’s that got to do with the price of fish? Bigotry is not justified by the actions of a few individuals. Do you really think it’s fine for people to be bigoted against a group because a few individuals in that group have behaved poorly?
A lot of people have come to the conclusion that the downsides of Islamic immigration outweigh the good. It’s not bigoted to think that, it’s a reasonable opinion, backed by some high profile incidents. We are westerners, they are not, and the hassle of trying and failing to integrate them is not worth it.
It's quite rare for somebody to accept they're being bigoted. They'll tend to genuinely believe their opinion is reasonable and evidence based.
If you’ve decided everyone you disagree with is just nasty that must be a comforting line.
The good news is I haven't.
Oh what a riposte! it’s a triumph dahling!
You're sounding a bit jumpy. Hope all is well.
Spare me the fake concern, it just makes you look even more pompous
No, seriously. That was an odd tone of comment. Like you were upset about something. But this one is fine. More than fine.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
The impression I get is that the Shah's regime was pretty bad but not quite as bad as the current one.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
Would it have happened without the non-Islamist leftists working with the Islamists?
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
The impression I get is that the Shah's regime was pretty bad but not quite as bad as the current one.
As far as wicked Dictatorships go the Shah was probably rated a 5 or 6/10. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ratcheted theirs to 11.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
Would it have happened without the non-Islamist leftists working with the Islamists?
I think Robert has clearly stated it wasn't a binary left or right issue. Jimmy Carter, who in the current left-right narrative in American political discourse would according to the Trump regime be far left, would have been content to prop up the Shah.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
Would it have happened without the non-Islamist leftists working with the Islamists?
I think Robert has clearly stated it wasn't a binary left or right issue. Jimmy Carter, who in the current left-right narrative in American political discourse would according to the Trump regime be far left, would have been content to prop up the Shah.
The US left was to the right of the Iranian centre?! Never..
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Criticism of the religion, the book, or the prophet is worthy of a death sentence, according to the book
Is any of that criticism not Islamophobic?
Try reading the Bible, particularly the Old Testament.
That imo was one of Dawkins' problems. He spent his time quote-mining the Old Testament and going "QED !!!" like a finger-jabbing teenager in a school debating society. But he did also do some more interesting thinking.
But he was more a controversialist imo, than any type of thinker.
Criticism of the religion, the book, or the prophet is worthy of a death sentence, according to the book
Is any of that criticism not Islamophobic?
I think that's a problem when the attempt is to pick and choose. There are a number of Islamic countries, for example, which have abolished the death penalty or determined not to use it. That latter was the position here in the UK until final abolition of the death penalty in 1998 as a sentence for iirc Theft from the Royal Dock Yards and perhaps Treason, plus military crimes.
That imo was one of Dawkin's problems. He spent his time quote-mining the Old Testament and going "QED !!!" like a finger-jabbing teenager in a school debating society. But he did also do some more interesting thinking.
For "more liberal", consider the Ahmadiyya Muslims, who are headquartered in the UK having been expelled from Pakistan by Zia ul-Haq when he had a fit of Islamism. Traditionally they and Sufi would be "more liberal", or South East Asian compared to the Arab Muslims who tend to get all the attention. Ahmadis (for short) would be non-orthodox to Sunni and Shia (but Shia are to Sunni to an extent), as say Salvation Army, Seventh Day Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses would be to Christians.
(Of those three, the first 2 would be regarded as orthodox with an unusual practice eg Salvation Army do not take communion, whilst JWs would be regarded as heterodox for having rewritten the Bible to match their own dogmas.)
But really you will only get to grips with this one by getting to know some Muslims, and they are just the same as everyone else in variety, with some differences. Go and knock on the door of your local Mosque and find out.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
Would it have happened without the non-Islamist leftists working with the Islamists?
I'd be interested in hearing more about the leftists working with the Islamists - I'm surmising we are talking look at secular movements in Arab Nationalism, but also the Soviet Union working through proxies.
I think a good deal of the cause is down to imperial interference over nearly 2 centuries by the UK and perhaps since WW2 also by the USA, which is why both of us should stay well out for another century. I also recall that Ayatollah Khomeini (a lot of the USA commentators seem to get Khamenei muddled up with him) was sheltered in Paris in the 1970s.
Much of this is in living memory, so of course they remember and is a part of their national and oral history - just as the Opium Wars are in China.
But some of our politicians want to behave as if nothing ever happened, and we are as pure as the driven snow.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
You need to speak to some Sikhs, plenty of them fear Hindus.
'When a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it does shake a little.'
Should the Sikhs’ Hinduphobia be banned?
Religionphobia should be legal. A religion is a philosophy, being islamophobic is no different to being conservativephobic.
Do we think most of the people banging on about Muslims polluting western society are just intellectually, morally and philosophically offended by the tenets of Islam and the Koran?
By the same token do those who criticise Israel, come what may, do so because they don’t like Jews ?
If it's 'come what may', yes that's a red flag. Their recent and current actions, sadly, give cause for anybody other than pro-Israel zealots to criticise and this, also sadly, gives cover for antisemites (of left and right) to 'express themselves'.
I am morally and philosophically offended by the tenets of Islam. Submit or have your throat struck is a touch OTT for me
Have you read the Koran? I read it in the 1980s and I didn't interpret what I read in the same way Ayatollah Khomeini did.
The Bible which I read in RS says we should stone a woman to death for adultery.
Slavery is fine and dandy in the New Testament too.
Christianity had, and continues to have, reformations
Only the medieval Quran is accepted
That’s just plain ignorant nonsense. Islam is very diverse, like all religions. Sufis have had all sorts of new interpretations of the Quran, for example.
Yes and Sufis are apostates and are regularly killed in pogroms and have had to find sanctuary in India which protects them from other Muslims.
Ah, yes, India. Where no Muslims have ever been killed in pogroms.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
Would it have happened without the non-Islamist leftists working with the Islamists?
Would it have happened if the US hadn't decided that a power change in Iran would weaken OPEC?
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Good morning, everyone.
I recently heard (in a Hellenistic Age podcast) about a minority Buddhist view that there's no permanent soul and each individual is just a combination of one-of factors that have come together, temporarily, to form that unique person. Bit of a tangent, but it seemed pretty interesting to me, and is unlike other types of Buddhism or different religions.
The Seleukid/Hellenistic influence on the monotheistic religions (Genesis and getting kicked out of Eden is just a poor retelling of Prometheus and Epimetheus/Pandora) is often overlooked.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
It is entirely possible that it's a Republican v Republican runoff.
And a pretty ghastly pair as well. A former member of the Oath Keepers who wants ICE to shoot every immigrant, and a pseudo-intellectual supporter of Trump's mad election claims.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
No need for WW3, regime change in Iran should suffice.
The World Wars happened in part as both sides kept dragging in their allies.
Iran has done its best Millwall, we hate everyone and need no mates, impression.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
Yes. It is not looking great for this intervention.
I don't see what can now be achieved for it, other than an embarassing cessation of hostilities. Which is very sad for Iran's people.
What you really want is for the army to go over to the Shah, turn on the IRGC, and then it's game over for the regime. But I feel the attacks have united the two.
Do you know how many lumens you need. Or whether you need any other colour apart from white light? Also how far does the beam* need to project?
I use a See Sense Beam+. You could also try Streamlight which are the go to brand for a lot of the US military / police. You see them in all the cop shows.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
No need for WW3, regime change in Iran should suffice.
The World Wars happened in part as both sides kept dragging in their allies.
Iran has done its best Millwall, we hate everyone and need no mates, impression.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
Yes. It is not looking great for this intervention.
I don't see what can now be achieved for it, other than an embarassing cessation of hostilities. Which is very sad for Iran's people.
What you really want is for the army to go over to the Shah, turn on the IRGC, and then it's game over for the regime. But I feel the attacks have united the two.
A more thoughtful US might have considered all the historical precedents there are for people rallying to their governments, even unpleasant or evil ones, once under attack from an enemy, and the lack of examples of where dropping bombs on people has led to fruitful political change.
The only, tiny, silver lining is that the political and economic fallout from operation Epic Fiasco will surely sink Trump, and with any luck discredit the whole ignorant MAGA movement. And maybe also sink the prospects of their various mini-mes in Europe.
Beautiful morning here today and a world away from the horrors of the middle east and Ukraine
I woke with this 'just make it stop' and despair that it is not going to
Madmen, and they are all men, Trump, Netanyahu, Irans regime, Hamas, Hizbollah, Putin are all malign dangerous fanatics and it is the innocents who pay the price
War is pencilled in until elections in Israel in October.
Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Gilad Erdan said Wednesday that he doesn’t believe the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran will last six more months.
“From our point of view, removing a threat to global security, and definitely to Israel, because for Israel, Iran poses an existential threat, it’s worth even another six months. I don’t know,” Erdan told NewsNation’s Blake Burman on “The Hill.”
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Yes, to a degree that is true, but to do so is to lose out on the philosophical understanding of much or most world cultures, their art, their literature, and current affairs.
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
Yes. It is not looking great for this intervention.
I don't see what can now be achieved for it, other than an embarassing cessation of hostilities. Which is very sad for Iran's people.
What you really want is for the army to go over to the Shah, turn on the IRGC, and then it's game over for the regime. But I feel the attacks have united the two.
A point of agreement for us.
Trump has been in lockstep with Netanyahu fur so long, it must have been something of a surprise when he got bounced into the war - and more so when Israel pursued its own independent war aims,
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Yes, to a degree that is true, but to do so is to lose out on the philosophical understanding of much or most world cultures, their art, their literature, and current affairs.
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
Mildly amused at the 'even atheists' line, given very few monotheists recognise their origin story (literally, in Genesis) is a less reasonable retelling of Zeus bollocking Prometheus for being too helpful to mankind.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Another day
Another unilateral attack from Netanyahu
Another example of who is THE ISSUE here!
Not Iran Not Trump Netanyahu
Take him out!
As we see in Iran 'taking out' the head just strengthens the resolve of the regime and does not result in the end of the conflict, indeed could prolong it
Nobody knows how this ends and all sides in this conflict have questions to answer
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Good morning, everyone.
I recently heard (in a Hellenistic Age podcast) about a minority Buddhist view that there's no permanent soul and each individual is just a combination of one-of factors that have come together, temporarily, to form that unique person. Bit of a tangent, but it seemed pretty interesting to me, and is unlike other types of Buddhism or different religions.
The Seleukid/Hellenistic influence on the monotheistic religions (Genesis and getting kicked out of Eden is just a poor retelling of Prometheus and Epimetheus/Pandora) is often overlooked.
I am not that well read in Bhuddist theology (maybe @dixiedean can help) but my understanding of how reincarnation is conceived is that it is not reincarnation of an individual soul but rather more like the water cycle. The river flows into the sea, slowly evaporates, drops as rain, and forms part of the river. So an eternal cycle of rebirth and regeneration.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
He's paranoid of not even that. Hence the over-reaction to those reminding troops they mustn't obey illegal orders.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Yes, to a degree that is true, but to do so is to lose out on the philosophical understanding of much or most world cultures, their art, their literature, and current affairs.
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
I don't think Ian is arguing against such knowledge, so much as irrational faith ?
But I agree with you; I now value my Christian education, and even the tedious hours spent in Scripture lessons, though I didn't much at the time. Without it, you'd miss a lot of the jokes in Wodehouse.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
He's paranoid of not even that. Hence the over-reaction to those reminding troops they mustn't obey illegal orders.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Good morning, everyone.
I recently heard (in a Hellenistic Age podcast) about a minority Buddhist view that there's no permanent soul and each individual is just a combination of one-of factors that have come together, temporarily, to form that unique person. Bit of a tangent, but it seemed pretty interesting to me, and is unlike other types of Buddhism or different religions.
The Seleukid/Hellenistic influence on the monotheistic religions (Genesis and getting kicked out of Eden is just a poor retelling of Prometheus and Epimetheus/Pandora) is often overlooked.
I am not that well read in Bhuddist theology (maybe @dixiedean can help) but my understanding of how reincarnation is conceived is that it is not reincarnation of an individual soul but rather more like the water cycle. The river flows into the sea, slowly evaporates, drops as rain, and forms part of the river. So an eternal cycle of rebirth and regeneration.
Yeah, I know sod all about it but the very basic outline of the idea did seem pretty interesting to me.
It was in reference to the Indo-Greeks where there was quite a bit of cultural fusion, and probably a greater shift away from Hellenism than in Greco-Bactria.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Another day
Another unilateral attack from Netanyahu
Another example of who is THE ISSUE here!
Not Iran Not Trump Netanyahu
Take him out!
As we see in Iran 'taking out' the head just strengthens the resolve of the regime and does not result in the end of the conflict, indeed could prolong it
Nobody knows how this ends and all sides in this conflict have questions to answer
It's probably true of most attempts to "take out the head"; it's easy to destroy an individual if you are ruthless enough, it's much much harder to destroy an idea.
She has a valid point in terms of that traditional British value of "keeping our word". Migrants came here on the basis of being able to build a new life and get permanant residance after 5 years.
Boo hoo sob, the reason the country is in such a state is bleeding heart liberals happy to give anybody but their own people oodles of largesse. Charity should start at home.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Yes, to a degree that is true, but to do so is to lose out on the philosophical understanding of much or most world cultures, their art, their literature, and current affairs.
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
I don't think Ian is arguing against such knowledge, so much as irrational faith ?
But I agree with you; I now value my Christian education, and even the tedious hours spent in Scripture lessons, though I didn't much at the time. Without it, you'd miss a lot of the jokes in Wodehouse.
Similarly my appreciation of roots reggae was enhanced by knowledge of the KJV. Without that background it is hard to know what Bunny Wailer is on about.
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
He's paranoid of not even that. Hence the over-reaction to those reminding troops they mustn't obey illegal orders.
Trump has been mugged off by the Israeli regime.
He’s probably just realising it.
Hook Line Sinker
Bibi has played him for a complete fool.
Regime change in Israel is the quickest way for peace in the region.
Iran is how it is because the leftists helped the Islamists to power
Ascribing single causes to an event like the Iranian revolution is, at the very least, extremely lazy.
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
What are your Iranian friends’ opinions of the son of the Shah? From a distance he seems excessively dim to carry all the expectations of many of those who want regime change. Not the least part of his dimness is thinking Trump is going to give any real help to his cause.
"When a Jewish News journalist pointed out that similarly large single sex prayer events are also held by Orthodox Jews in London, Badenoch’s representative replied that the Iftar event was “different”, without explaining how."
Well that's ok then!
Timothy must go?
If she fails to answer the question fully if put to her, she should consider her position too?
Kudos to the Jewish News journalist who skewers the hypocrisy in Nick Timothy's bleatings.
There's a notion out there Muslims are somehow given "special treatment" and other religions are ignored or disadvantaged. Certainly, in my part of the world, Hindu, Sikh, Orthodox and Christian religious events are observed,
Diwali and especially Onam (Keralan) are observed in East Ham as is the birthday of Guru Nanak when there is a Sikh parade down the High Street.
Why does nobody need to be ordered not to fear Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Christians?
My Dad moved to the US. He worked on abortion policy. His friends, who actually did abortions, had been shot at by Christians.
A member of our local congregation survived the 1982 Hyde Park bombing by the IRA, part of a sectarian conflict between two groups of Christians.
That doesn't explain why we need to be obligated to not fear Islam
That’s just you getting hung up on etymology. “Islamophobia” has the root -phobia in it, but like homophobia, it’s not a real phobia. It’s about bigotry towards a group. Against Jews, we call it anti-Semitism; against Muslims, we call it Islamophobia.
Phobia has a clinical definition
Homophobia often conceals homosexuality
It’s an irrational fear, like the clinical definition of phobia
Xenophobia, fear literally of barbarians, but fear of foreigners, is largely irrational, but can be otherwise in some circumstances
Fear of submission is entirely irrational and should be illegal
Phobia has a clinical definition, but neither homophobia or Islamophobia are clinical diagnoses. They ain’t in the DSM.
We’ve ended up with words of a confusing etymology to mean bigotry against particular groups. Trying to interpret these words based on their etymology is about as stupid as the people who say that Palestinians can’t be anti-Semitic because they’re Semites too.
Are you successfully arguing that fear of Islam isn’t Islamophobia?
Islamophobia is not a phobia. The Government is not intending to ban people from being afraid of Muslims. “Islamophobia” is the word (with a somewhat confusing etymology) that refers to bigotry towards Muslims. What part of this do you not understand?
In case you missed the distinction; I said fear of Islam, you said fear of Muslims
Not the same thing
You appear to still be stuck reading “Islamophobia” based on its etymology, rather than on how the word is actually used. I don’t know how to help you get past this misunderstanding.
How many of the Islamists on the Islamophobia committee believe that fearing Islam and criticising the Quran is A OK?
There are no Islamists on the committee.
The committee has said, as I quoted earlier: “We are absolutely committed to defending freedom of speech, and any proposed definition must be compatible with the right to freedom of speech and expression.”
Fine words butter no parsnips, as we know reality is far from their fine word salad
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Trump still believes he's in control of events. When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
Yes. It is not looking great for this intervention.
I don't see what can now be achieved for it, other than an embarassing cessation of hostilities. Which is very sad for Iran's people.
What you really want is for the army to go over to the Shah, turn on the IRGC, and then it's game over for the regime. But I feel the attacks have united the two.
A more thoughtful US might have considered all the historical precedents there are for people rallying to their governments, even unpleasant or evil ones, once under attack from an enemy, and the lack of examples of where dropping bombs on people has led to fruitful political change.
There have certainly been big pro-regime protests, but I'm not sure they're indicative of a rally - I would imagine the attendees already had a firm view.
However, the regime remains very intact, and very in control of the streets.
To negotiate from a strong position, Trump must stop the flow of Iranian oil and gas to Iran-sympathetic powers, and re-start the flow of Gulf oil to the West.
I think I would probably just non-violently comandeer the tankers currently being sent to China, pay off the crews, and either keep them anchored somewhere or re-route them West. That way Iran is getting no oil out, and China won't pay for oil and gas it's not getting.
Ismaili Muslims interpret much of the Koran allegorically rather than literally, much as Christians do with the Bible.
People spend lifetimes trying to jump through all these intellectual hoops to reconcile these old texts with the world as it is now, when recognising that all of them were simply made up in their time and are effectively nonsense in terms of any contemporary relevance is so much easier.
Yes, to a degree that is true, but to do so is to lose out on the philosophical understanding of much or most world cultures, their art, their literature, and current affairs.
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
Mildly amused at the 'even atheists' line, given very few monotheists recognise their origin story (literally, in Genesis) is a less reasonable retelling of Zeus bollocking Prometheus for being too helpful to mankind.
More to do with the even older Mesoptamian creation myths that are the common origin of both stories, I think.
But these myths are important to the understanding of Culture and history in the ancient world. They are our heritage and we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
So it’s just the BBC webpage but nothing about Timothy. Suggests it’s a rather trivial thing.
I have no issue with people having faith. I personally am an atheist. I do find aspects of the link in Islam to identity and mysogeny to be chaallenging in a western liberal context. A strongly patriarchal society does not sit easily in the world of eqquaal rights, equality and diversity etc. There is also no doubt that some Muslims do wish to see Islam take over the world. And at the moment a terrorist a attack is most likely to be inspired by a perverted creed of Islam, so people are naturally afraid.
You are more likely to get killed in the accidental spillover from a gang war than by a terrorist attack. You are much more likely to be killed by a drunk driver.
There have been 7 deaths in Great Britain from terrorist attacks since 1 Jan 2020, so about 1 a year. About 4-5 people are killed by cows each year. Don’t be afraid of terrorists, of any sort. Be afraid of cows.
There were about 20 in the Manchester Arena bomb alone.
That was in 2017 ( believe it or not).
It’s almost like he very carefully selected a data set that supported his argument
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
Israel knows what it is doing - by attacking South Pars it guranteed a response against Ras Laffan - dragging a neutrally inclined Qatar into the war - and piling the pressure on reluctant Europeans to get involved.
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Another day
Another unilateral attack from Netanyahu
Another example of who is THE ISSUE here!
Not Iran Not Trump Netanyahu
Take him out!
As we see in Iran 'taking out' the head just strengthens the resolve of the regime and does not result in the end of the conflict, indeed could prolong it
Nobody knows how this ends and all sides in this conflict have questions to answer
There is a massive difference between the evil regime in Iran and a few dozen rabid zealots who back Bibi and hold the Knesset to ransom.
Israel at its best is very democratic
From the minute Netanyahu deliberately ignored multiple warnings of a Hamas attack to now, he has pulled the strings and the wool over the eyes of his own people.
He needs ear, the minute there is no war he is on jail for mass corruption.
Comments
in American English
(naɪs)
adjective
Word forms: nicer, nicest
Origin: ME, strange, lazy, foolish < OFr nice, nisce, stupid, foolish < L nescius, ignorant, not knowing < nescire, to be ignorant < ne-, not (see no1) + scire, to know: see science
1. obsolete (I don't care, it's still there)
a. ignorant; foolish
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/nice
I am quite fine with disliking fascists because of the actions of fascists down the years.
Religion is a philosophy, no better or worse than any other by mere virtue or vice of being a religion.
Pick your poison, eh?
Some years ago, I pranked a bunch of students with a tale of USA'ian rednecks coming to Cornwall to re-open the tin mines. By the time I'd finished with the usual anti-immigrant tales, they were all for throwing them into the sea, in the very spirit of that sea captain in the time of Edward I
Some of this parish got very upset by the idea of Zimbabwean farmers coming here.
Probably, being anti-immigrant is one of those irregular verbs.
*A group. Think about that for a minute.
It's possible to pull off that exact same trick with "Muslims" and "Islam". And people do.
By Israel attacking South Pars (Iran's gas refinery port) Iran has retaliated by attack Ras Laffan in Qatar. This is the worlds largest gas producing complex.
Direct hits reported on Shell's Pearl GTL (Gas to Liquids) plant and Qatar Energy's Laffan refinery (condensate refinery) - both full of very flammable msterial.
Pearl in particular seems to be badly hit. This is a huge and unneccesary escalation. It is almost as if Israel is trying to drag more countries into the conflict.
https://www.npr.org/2008/10/18/95867912/report-u-s-missteps-led-to-shahs-overthrow
I guess he was the Wrong Kind of Immigrant.
Meanwhile, in Iran, the religious comedians turned against their left wing chums, in the usual fashion of escalating revolutions. Quite bloodily.
As often happens, My Enemy's Enemy turned out to be Just Another Enemy.
Essentially, God had a midlife crisis, an affair with a married woman, the child.... stuff went sideways. The usual story. Anyway, God mellowed a lot after that - probably spent some time surfing and smoking blunts.
There are arseholes in all groups.
The Shah was a ruthless US backed Dictator who creamed off oil revenues for himself. He was dying of cancer and he left for treatment in if I remember correctly North Africa.
The Shah was a bad man, only not as bad as Khomeini turned out to be.
https://x.com/phildstewart/status/2034416323808399440
SCOOP!!! Trump administration considering deploying thousands of additional troops to the Middle East as the military prepares options for the possible next phase of the Iran war. One option for securing the Strait of Hormuz includes deploying troops to Iranian shores. w/
@idreesali114
I have plenty of Persian friends here in LA: mostly Jewish, but a fair number of Muslims too. A lot of them fled because their families were too close to the Shah.
Very few of them are particularly kind about him. They think that his brutal repression via SAVAK was entirely counter-productive, as was his insane celebration as the King of Kings at a time when large parts of the country were starving helped turn people against him.
They hate what Persia has become, and they hate the Mullahs, but if you ask them if they blame the Shah more or leftists from the around the world, they would look at you like you were completely bonkers.
It is also worth noting that the Shah was one of the leading proponents of OPEC's price assertiveness, which -of course- was triggered by the West's support of Israel. (And which, in turn, meant the Shah didn't have as many friends in the West -on either side of the political aisle- when the revolution came.)
New - California governor primary
🔴 Hilton 17%
🔴 Bianco 16%
🔵 Swalwell 13%
🔵 Porter 13%
🔵 Steyer 10%
🔵 Becerra 5%
🔴 Top 2 go for a runoff
Barkley #B - RV - 3/14
Contrary to reports from Axios, U.S. President Donald J. Trump states that the United States “knew nothing” about Wednesday’s attack by Israel against Iran’s South Pars Gas Field, adding that “Qatar was in no way, shape, or form, involved with it, nor did it have any idea that it was going to happen. Unfortunately, Iran did not know this, or any of the pertinent facts pertaining to the South Pars attack, and unjustifiably and unfairly attacked a portion of Qatar's LNG Gas facility.”
President Trump states following today’s attack by Israel and retaliatory strikes by Iran, “NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field unless Iran unwisely decides to attack a very innocent, in this case, Qatar - In which instance the United States of America, with or without the help or consent of Israel, will massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field at an amount of strength and power that Iran has never seen or witnessed before.”
But he was more a controversialist imo, than any type of thinker.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/19/uk-steel-tariffs-competition-peter-kyle-tata-steel-port-talbot
That imo was one of Dawkin's problems. He spent his time quote-mining the Old Testament and going "QED !!!" like a finger-jabbing teenager in a school debating society. But he did also do some more interesting thinking.
For "more liberal", consider the Ahmadiyya Muslims, who are headquartered in the UK having been expelled from Pakistan by Zia ul-Haq when he had a fit of Islamism. Traditionally they and Sufi would be "more liberal", or South East Asian compared to the Arab Muslims who tend to get all the attention. Ahmadis (for short) would be non-orthodox to Sunni and Shia (but Shia are to Sunni to an extent), as say Salvation Army, Seventh Day Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses would be to Christians.
(Of those three, the first 2 would be regarded as orthodox with an unusual practice eg Salvation Army do not take communion, whilst JWs would be regarded as heterodox for having rewritten the Bible to match their own dogmas.)
But really you will only get to grips with this one by getting to know some Muslims, and they are just the same as everyone else in variety, with some differences. Go and knock on the door of your local Mosque and find out.
I think a good deal of the cause is down to imperial interference over nearly 2 centuries by the UK and perhaps since WW2 also by the USA, which is why both of us should stay well out for another century. I also recall that Ayatollah Khomeini (a lot of the USA commentators seem to get Khamenei muddled up with him) was sheltered in Paris in the 1970s.
Much of this is in living memory, so of course they remember and is a part of their national and oral history - just as the Opium Wars are in China.
But some of our politicians want to behave as if nothing ever happened, and we are as pure as the driven snow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52fx21FsSRE
And Trump (or at least his advisors) are fully aware of this. The bastards are desparate to achieve WW3.
Head torches.
I'm piping down before I do any even better typos.
There are two Perth's in Australia I believe.
Another unilateral attack from Netanyahu
Another example of who is THE ISSUE here!
Not Iran
Not Trump
Netanyahu
Take him out!
I recently heard (in a Hellenistic Age podcast) about a minority Buddhist view that there's no permanent soul and each individual is just a combination of one-of factors that have come together, temporarily, to form that unique person. Bit of a tangent, but it seemed pretty interesting to me, and is unlike other types of Buddhism or different religions.
The Seleukid/Hellenistic influence on the monotheistic religions (Genesis and getting kicked out of Eden is just a poor retelling of Prometheus and Epimetheus/Pandora) is often overlooked.
Good morning all. Most sites frown when you discuss politics, religion and football. PB is definitely unique.
When you go to war you're in control only of your own forces.
The World Wars happened in part as both sides kept dragging in their allies.
Iran has done its best Millwall, we hate everyone and need no mates, impression.
For that matter too, so has Trump.
I don't see what can now be achieved for it, other than an embarassing cessation of hostilities. Which is very sad for Iran's people.
What you really want is for the army to go over to the Shah, turn on the IRGC, and then it's game over for the regime. But I feel the attacks have united the two.
I use a See Sense Beam+. You could also try Streamlight which are the go to brand for a lot of the US military / police. You see them in all the cop shows.
https://www.streamlight.com/products/explore-products/headlamps
The only, tiny, silver lining is that the political and economic fallout from operation Epic Fiasco will surely sink Trump, and with any luck discredit the whole ignorant MAGA movement. And maybe also sink the prospects of their various mini-mes in Europe.
Beautiful morning here today and a world away from the horrors of the middle east and Ukraine
I woke with this 'just make it stop' and despair that it is not going to
Madmen, and they are all men, Trump, Netanyahu, Irans regime, Hamas, Hizbollah, Putin are all malign dangerous fanatics and it is the innocents who pay the price
“From our point of view, removing a threat to global security, and definitely to Israel, because for Israel, Iran poses an existential threat, it’s worth even another six months. I don’t know,” Erdan told NewsNation’s Blake Burman on “The Hill.”
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5790950-erdan-iran-threat-assessment/
Have you all booked your holidays yet. Best go now.
Pity it clashes with the mid-terms but they may get 'postponed'
Even athiests should be familiar with the foundations of our world. Like is so much poorer without.
Trump has been in lockstep with Netanyahu fur so long, it must have been something of a surprise when he got bounced into the war - and more so when Israel pursued its own independent war aims,
A downside of being surrounded by sycophants.
Nobody knows how this ends and all sides in this conflict have questions to answer
But I agree with you; I now value my Christian education, and even the tedious hours spent in Scripture lessons, though I didn't much at the time.
Without it, you'd miss a lot of the jokes in Wodehouse.
He’s probably just realising it.
It was in reference to the Indo-Greeks where there was quite a bit of cultural fusion, and probably a greater shift away from Hellenism than in Greco-Bactria.
Line
Sinker
Bibi has played him for a complete fool.
Regime change in Israel is the quickest way for peace in the region.
(Except that it was after the event, not before.)
However, the regime remains very intact, and very in control of the streets.
To negotiate from a strong position, Trump must stop the flow of Iranian oil and gas to Iran-sympathetic powers, and re-start the flow of Gulf oil to the West.
I think I would probably just non-violently comandeer the tankers currently being sent to China, pay off the crews, and either keep them anchored somewhere or re-route them West. That way Iran is getting no oil out, and China won't pay for oil and gas it's not getting.
But these myths are important to the understanding of Culture and history in the ancient world. They are our heritage and we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Israel at its best is very democratic
From the minute Netanyahu deliberately ignored multiple warnings of a Hamas attack to now, he has pulled the strings and the wool over the eyes of his own people.
He needs ear, the minute there is no war he is on jail for mass corruption.