John Reid Really Is A Complete Arse

According to the text of Reid's speech on labour.org.uk, the Tories have opposed "Tougher sentences for murder, sexual offences, violent offences, dangerous driving, immigration, asylum"

I don't recall the latter two being specifically made illegal, but now he mentions it, it does seem to fit...

The thought of John Reid for leader is enough to make one yearn for Gordon Brown... Or is that what he is banking on...?

Reidy is starting to make Michael Howard look like a nuanced renaisence liberal.

god/allah/buddah/jehovah/moses help us all.
(or am i inciting religious hatred in the above line?)

WozzA

I agree with your fears and the "stalinist" description. However, do you *really* think he's wrong to say that we need to face down the religious nutters? Would you rather have the religious nutters in charge?

We *have* got the religious nutters in charge, if you accept my definition of religious nutter as an ideologically driven individual who fervently *believes* in something and ignores reality when it doesn't fit. This is the essence of fundamentalism. Many of them are actually religious, particularly Blair and Bush, of course, and a quick scan of the current Cabinet reveals a high number of religious types, but that kind of managerial non-thinking where decisions make things happen and decisions are always right if taken by the right people is prevalent throughout New Labour and the Republican Party.

The other point is that the chances of the religious nutters Reid is talking about taking over is vanishingly remote - there are far more worrying things being done to Britain in the alleged name of democracy by the people in power. The answer to the straw man argument you raise is 'show me a plausible mechanism by which a given set of religious nutters can take over'. There's the example of the US, of course, where they did it by mobilising grass roots, emphasising certain dog whistle issues like abortion over and over again, infiltrating one of the two main political parties to a high level and having vast resources in terms of TV airtime and money. None of that is particularly likely to be available to a chap with a beard and a terraced house in Walthamstow. Compare the amount spent on the 9/11 operation ($500,000 I think) with the amount spent by US conservative Christians over the last 25 years. Who spent the money? Who got the power?

Sound arguments well put, if I may make so bold. But I'm getting increasingly worried by the "my enemy's enemy is my friend" approach to politics, particularly where the religious nuts are concerned.

Well, if by my enemy's enemy you mean the majority of British Muslims who feel threatened and isolated because of the increasingly obvious Islamophobia of John Reid's discourse, plus the Menezes case, plus the many 'plots' that turn out to be vapour or grossly exaggerated, then they bloody well deserve some friendship. The loudmouthed racists who advocate murdering Jews or the Pope should be excoriated in the same way as one excoriates the BNP and other morons, preferably by ignoring them. However, since the tabloid press and Government *require* their presence in order to pretend to the rest of us that Islam is a Threat this also involves attacking the media/Government PR conspiracy.

The tiny but real number of actual terrorists, who are usually quiet, dedicated types working away behind the scenes should be tackled tactically by proper professional policing involving legally authorised surveillance and old-style legwork rather than headline grabbing raids, and strategically by removing the climate in which they can recruit and operate. This can only be done by tackling Blair and Bush's nihilistic and disastrous foreign policy while we stil have a semblance of free speech left.

Have you seen the mobs stirred up by the Imams across the world after Friday prayers?

The Pope of all people has to apologise for speaking his mind or a nun in Somalia gets it.

Where's the free speech you like so much?

Anjem Choudary can walk about threatening to destroy this country in a civil war and he has free speech. If I said the same I would have my collar felt in double quick time. So don't spout about freedom of speech.

Furthermore while I agree that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are nothing more than costly sideshows in a wider war, I fail to see to see how saying sorry is going to save the west from Islamic extremism.

How many times do they have to tell you that they want to run this country before you listen? The police can do all the leg work they like, but while Islamic extremism is on the march across the world all the coppers in the Met will not stop them.

Why do you people insist that Islam is not a threat when it is?

The majority of British Muslims are not a threat, but why can't the MCB denounce the extremists? I mean a flat out denial of jihad against the West without reserve.

You people live in a vacuum.

Why do you people insist that Islam is not a threat when it is?

Because it isn't? Because you're spouting the usual ignorant islamophobic bullshit without putting forward a conceivable mechanism for an Islamic takeover of the UK (even the BNP have one of these, it goes 'they outbreed us, don't they, in 100 years the country will be full of them', which is still bullshit but at least the racist morons try).

It won't happen for the same reason that the US and UK will lose in Iraq - the population is against it. We'll just have to put up with our own brand of unpleasant religious extremists.

Anjem Choudary can walk about threatening to destroy this country in a civil war and he has free speech.

Yes, that's the point of free speech. You too, have free speech. Try calling him a wanker, if you produce unbiased evidence I might even agree with you. One of the tenets of my anti-racist philosophy is that humans are capable of being wankers regardless of gender, religion, sexuality or skin colour. However, since you are sensible enough oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a better use of your time and free speech would be to campaign for a withdrawal of British troops, which would help reduce the risk of creating new extremists more than forcing a hundred denunciations from the MCB, which I doubt the 'extremists' would listen to anyway. Islam is a decentralised religion, which is part of the problem, but you're not going to solve it by forcing them to centralise around an unrepresentative body, or pretending decentralisation doesn't exist.
A good start would be to stop the damaging symbiotic relationship whereby the press use extremists to sell papers and the extremists use the press to try and pretend that they're the only representatives of Islam in the UK.

You people live in a vacuum.

No, I live in a house. I use a vacuum to clean it though. I also prefer getting wound up about real threats rather than imaginary ones.

“Our religion is Islam - obedience to the one true God, Allah, and following the footsteps of the final prophet and messenger Muhammad... This is how our ethical stances are dictated.”

These are the words of Sidique Khan, a man in his thirties who was a teacher before he blew himself up. Note the end of that statement.

“This is how our ethical stances are dictated”.

No notion of free speech there, no notion of free thought. His ethical stance had been dictated in his own words by the Koran.

So you tell me how that man and others like him are going to feel warm and fuzzy about my embracing him?

Strange as you may find it, I’m not a BNP supporter or racist. But it is entirely possible that we are going to end up with Northern Ireland style enclaves in Britain.

So sorry if I don’t agree, but I fail to see why my Son should have to live in a country where the likes of Anjem Choudary encourage the likes of Sidique Khan to spoil my lad’s world.

I owe these dickheads nothing. But they owe a lot for their violence and hatred. Why should I understand them? When the school bully detached my retina, I waited a while and punched him back. I didn’t do it because I was brave, just because I needed to do it.

If you are telling me that I should have understood that bully, then I am telling you to get a life. He didn’t bully me anymore.

The huge majority of Muslims in this country are peaceful. But the bullies are bullying the Muslims too and they should be punched as hard as we can.

Finally, if a Danish cartoonists and the Pope can enflame the Muslim world enough to kill things, including a seventy year old Catholic nun. Then I don’t see how calling Choudary a wanker is going to polarise the Muslim community against us? Surely he is a wanker simply because he has given up is profession as a solicitor to go on the dole and try to subvert Britain.

Does he need to carry a bomb in his coat for you people to realise that he wants you to be Dhimmi in your own land?

Nasty horrible people tend to shout loud and inspire other nasty horrible people to shout loud. Next thing they have formed a group and they shout really loud. Finally they start hurting people who disagree. Welcome to the world of Anjem Choudary and his friends.

And the Left says: Well I’m your friend! Please don’t make me wear different coloured shoes.

If you are telling me that I should have understood that bully,

I haven't told you anything of the sort, nor have I mentioned anything about different coloured shoes or anything about embracing Anjam Choudhary. That's three misattributions in one post, plus no answer to my twice-posed question about how you expect a Muslim takeover of Britain to proceed, plus you're still anonymous. I'm not remotely convinced yet. Put up or shut up, and try arguing on the points I make rather than assumptions about 'the Left', which I'm not on anyway, except insofar as the centre has moved rightwards, which is hardly my fault.

These are the words of Sidique Khan

They're the words of any reasonably devout Muslim, and with a few slight terminological changes (from Allah to God and Muhammad to Jesus, for instance), any reasonably devout Christian. I don't like organised religion at all, but that's about the least offensive thing Sidique Khan did or said in his final days. Human rights and free speech infer freedom of religion and freedom of religious expression, which is just one of those things you've got to put up with if you believe in allowing people to be who they want to be.

It's the first time I've heard someone derided for *not* being a lawyer any more.

But the bullies are bullying the Muslims too and they should be punched as hard as we can.

And the reason for increased Islamophobia is partly the same fear and distrust you appear to suffer from, plus a nasty dose of exacting collective punishment on the Evil Other. That's hardly a solution.

You can leave off the misattribution contempt if you are going reply about Choudary.

“And the reason for increased Islamophobia is partly the same fear and distrust you appear to suffer from, plus a nasty dose of exacting collective punishment on the Evil Other. That's hardly a solution”.

I never said I was Islamophobic. That is your assumption. I have no fear from anybody of any faith who I have met in the last thirty years at least.

If I am prepared to match the likes of Anjem Choudary with a threat of equal violence in response to his proposed domination of the country, then I am somebody who doesn’t suffer fools gladly. But I am not Islamophobic. That is like saying you should forgive the man who hurts you. Christian belief maybe, but it’s not mine.

I said this before, I am not racist. If you keep saying it, it won’t become true.

I just seriously disagree with understanding those who wish to harm you. Invariably they see your passive arguments as weakness and beat you more.

It’s a shitty world.

Way to go with the lazy tarring of over half a million people with your ill-loaded brush. For the record, John Reid was not born in Glasgow, was not schooled in Glasgow, didn't go to university in Glasgow and has never represented a Glasgow constituency.

While there may be Glaswegians who fit your clearly ill-researched characterisation, we're not all like that.

You're good, friend. Try not to spoil it.

"the amount spent on the 9/11 operation ($500,000 I think)"

By whom?
911 Research

Tom

“Our religion is Islam - obedience to the one true God, Allah, and following the footsteps of the final prophet and messenger Muhammad... This is how our ethical stances are dictated.”

How our ethical stances are DICTATED.

I met a group of young Christians outside the market I shop at. They had guitars and a drum and one of them was handing out leaflets. I was passed one of these leaflets and it said that Atheists will live a life in hell. I as an Atheist felt like shoving the leaflet into a guitar and beating the leaflet giver over the head with it. Instead I threw it into the bin.

I found there message offensive but I ignored it. My life goes on regardless of them.

I didn’t burn effigies of young Christians, I didn’t shoot anybody. So why should I feel for people who think that their religion makes them different? They are no better than me or you whether they like it or not.

Muhammed Ali is closer to God than Allah is as far as I am concerned. He was human and so much more, arrogant yes, but he has inspired so many young men to do well. I was inspired by his confidence and I will never be Muslim.

I worked in Germany as a mechanic. I tried my hardest to learn the language, I hate raw meat sandwiches and I took part in a fireworks fight on New Years Eve that would never be allowed in Britain. I stood drinking a beer as rockets bounced off the floor around me. At the end of it all we met at the middle of bridge and rejoiced.

Why on earth should the Muslim community be a special case?