Let's wind Bert up, shall we ?

Gregg Carter · 11-20-2007, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheCranker:
tbf I think Amis has a point and his point was that there are valid criticisms to be made of Islam but they aren't made because people are afraid of being labelled as racist. What he's neglecting to mention though is that the people who are genuine racists make it equally difficult for people who want to have a logical debate about the issue.

Problem is you always have to take sides and it's the extremists on both sides that create this situation.

Oh i agree that Amis has a point, the problem is, that it's quite clear that he himself is a racist and so rather than making the point eloquently it does come across in an incredibly negative fashion.

Abe as for your comment:

Quote:

Why is it so difficult for you to comprehend that not everybody has problems with letting the good apples suffer under the bad apples?

I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I would concur wholeheartedly that there must be a compromise for the greater good, however, the question is, how far does that go? You cannot remove the civil liberties of every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistani. When it comes to questioning how far you go, that is too far.

Razor Eddie · 11-20-2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
Eddie, that poem's apalling.

Who said any different ? :p

Sir Bert Preast · 11-21-2007, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gregg Carter:

Oh i agree that Amis has a point, the problem is, that it's quite clear that he himself is a racist and so rather than making the point eloquently it does come across in an incredibly negative fashion.

What makes you so sure?

Abe Lenstra · 11-21-2007, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gregg Carter:
Oh i agree that Amis has a point, the problem is, that it's quite clear that he himself is a racist and so rather than making the point eloquently it does come across in an incredibly negative fashion.

But could it be that he is 'coming across in an incredibly negative fashion' because the ideology that you and people like you follow does not allow these kind of observations?

So, despite that 'he has a point' the fact that he goes against what your ideology dictates in terms of what people are allowed to say is of much greater impact??

Quote:

Originally posted by Gregg Carter:
Abe as for your comment:

<BLOCKQUOTE>
Why is it so difficult for you to comprehend that not everybody has problems with letting the good apples suffer under the bad apples?

I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I would concur wholeheartedly that there must be a compromise for the greater good, however, the question is, how far does that go? You cannot remove the civil liberties of every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistani. When it comes to questioning how far you go, that is too far. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, as i see it, regardless of what you think is right and wrong, it's all about setting priorities.

It's comendable (sp?) that you show your concern for the wellbeing, civil rights and what-have-you of 'every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistani' but society is paying a huge price for it on so many fronts and more and more people are simply not willing to pay that price anymore.

I don't think that your 'You cannot remove the civil liberties of every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistani'- will be the certainty that you make it out to be in the future.

TheCranker · 11-21-2007, 01:16 PM

So Abe, would you condone the following actions against every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistan?

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>Not let them travel.
<LI>Deportation - further down the road.
<LI>Curtailing of freedoms.
<LI>Strip-searching people who look like they're from the Middle East or from Pakistan.
</UL>

Abe Lenstra · 11-21-2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheCranker:
So Abe, would you condone the following actions against every single person who looks vaguely Middle Eastern or Pakistan?

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>Not let them travel.
<LI>Deportation - further down the road.
<LI>Curtailing of freedoms.
<LI>Strip-searching people who look like they're from the Middle East or from Pakistan.
</UL>

Yeah, apart from not letting them travel. I don't see the point in that. I think this will cause more harm to society then it would do good (in fact, see my first remark: what's the point??) and besides, there's no way you could effectively enforce it.

Obviously, as far as the third point goes: Bit vague. You need to specify that before i could agree or disagree.

TheCranker · 11-21-2007, 01:31 PM

One of Amis' main points is that the community or the family should suffer for the crimes of those amongst them or their children. Would you be happy for families to be deported if their children are criminals or even unrelated sections of the community?

Abe Lenstra · 11-21-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheCranker:
One of Amis' main points is that the community or the family should suffer for the crimes of those amongst them or their children. Would you be happy for families to be deported if their children are criminals or even unrelated sections of the community?

Not unrelated sections off course.

And again: Yes. If your kid is a minor then the parents are responsible, aren't they?