I guess there's some irony in the argument that a religion that punishes non-conformity of view should be punished for its non-conformity of view. And that the UK culture of openness, tolerance and acceptance is best maintained by no longer being open, tolerant or accepting.
Every Post on this subject eventually gets shut down ....
- Thread starter Dutto
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
I guess there's some irony in the argument that a religion that punishes non-conformity of view should be punished for its non-conformity of view. And that the UK culture of openness, tolerance and acceptance is best maintained by no longer being open, tolerant or accepting.
Bah, I'm up to those levels now, and with waaay more chilli heat than HE could handle! Just because it's 'genuine' Indian doesn't make it the best... that accolade goes to my curries, no contest. Besides, bet he hasn't got a clue how to make a Yorkshire pudding.
Hi!
????? If 20% 0f working age Muslims are employed full time, how can that be 31.7% of those who are of working age?
The report shows 1,810,929 Muslims in the age range 16-74. Of these, 831,296 are economically active (i.e.not unemployed, retired, students etc). Of these, 358,413 are in full-time employment; this represents 43.1% of the economically active (and 19.8% of all Muslims aged 16 to 74).
As far as the rest of the population, 59.96% of the economically active are in full-time employment.
I apologise that my original post was inaccurate; it was due to the error in the BBC article which stated that 20% of Muslims were unemployed, when, in fact, it is roughly 20% of the age range 16 to 74.
Hi!
My final comment in this thread - it's a shame that there are members who I respect enormously as home brewers but wouldn't want to sit down and share a beer with.
My final comment in this thread - it's a shame that there are members who I respect enormously as home brewers but wouldn't want to sit down and share a beer with.
As much as I'm sure we all like to have a mass debate whilst online from time-to-time, I'm really here for the beer. And for that reason, I'm also out.
There's a few folk I like to have a beer with, but they couldn't make the stuff to save their lives. Will my page 4- prediction come to pass? Looking gurd!
Saisonator
Landlord.
Yes I agree with you on that one.
jceg316
Landlord.
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2014
- Messages
- 2,811
- Reaction score
- 1,161
Please cite your sources for these numbers and statistics.
The Frank Zappa album Apostrophe is probably his best IMO, but music is opinion I guess.
Something like the Qoran is open to interpretation and many different groups have their interpretations on what this means. This is very common in a lot of Eastern religions, which is why there are so many different types of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism etc. I'm no expert in the Qoran, but from what I understand of similar religious texts, rarely does "kill this person" or "death to so and so" actually mean what it does. It can refer to spiritual death, ostracisation, but very rarely does it actually refer to a physical death. Similarly the old testament has references to who should be killed and for what reasons, but these aren't carried out or focused on.
I don't deny there are groups like Isis and the Taliban who use the Qoran's face value to wage war, but the reality is they use a book as propaganda and call themselves Muslim. Then for people to think all Muslims, all ~1.8 billion of them, have these violent tendencies. A bit like judging all white people on the actions of KKK.
I'm not saying here that you believe all Muslims are bad, what I'm getting at is it doesn't matter whether you're Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Atheist, All or nothing, people will bad and people will be different. I mean this with all due respect, and I'm not saying this to be insulting, it sounds like you are putting Britain's issues on a minority of people.
Can't beat a good Yorkshire pudding.
Saisonator
Landlord.
My last word.
Although I disagree with you because I believe that the native British are of a distinct type, much like a breed of dog that comprises of various other breeds back in it's ancestry but has evolved for long enough to be of a distinct type.
But to be honest that's not something I am particularly hung up on, as I don't care what ethnicity an individual is, if they want class themselves as British or English then I will support them without question.
I would class myself as a cultural nationalist and not a racial nationalist, but if I believe that an outside influence is detrimental to the greater good then I think I have a obligation to air my opinion.
I actually disagree on this point. We've no basis for assuming that these texts don't mean exactly what they say, and you have to remember they were written in a time when this was considered perfectly acceptable behaviour.
We simply ought to be thankful that most modern people interpret them differently. And this applies to Christianity just as much as other abrahamic religions.
The other side of that coin is that there are many people who interpret them literally. Again, this applies to Christianity just as much as other abrahamic religions. Look up the Lord' Resistance Army, or the Nationalist Liberation Front of Tripura.
The fact is, people's own morality informs their interpretation of their religion, rather than vice versa.
Dutto
Landlord.
That's probably because so many of the Dutch speak English; and they speak it because English is on the teaching agenda for all Dutch schools from the age of ten.
With regard to Northern Belgium, their native language is a form of Dutch but they too speak English for the same reason. In the Waloon area of Belgium they speak a version of French and have yet to introduce English as a compulsory subject.
Als een zaak van belang, hoe veel Nederlands spreek je? Ik vond het een moeilijkste taal om te beheersen, vooral de uitspraak.
Dutto
Landlord.
I too think that this Thread has run its course and the fact that it hasn't been shut down is a great illustration of a real Snug. My God how we used to argue but we very seldom resorted to personal insult or blows!
I'll end my contribution to the Thread with a typical headline from The Sun that is in today's paper. The headline reads:
CORBYN AND THE COMMIE SPY
Jeremy Corbyn met a Communist spy during the Cold War
and ‘briefed’ evil regime of clampdown by British intelligence
If one reads the article with care you will see that all of these "shock/horror" allegations:
The Sun has done us the favour of printing a translation of the report that the Czech Embassy Official submitted after his meeting with Mr. Corbyn. In the report he states that the knowledge he gained “... could not be utilised for the purpose of information as they were limited to general nature.”
At this stage The Sun doesn't have a story so enter "Cold War expert Professor Anthony Glees, of the Oxford Intelligence Group".
This academic gives an in depth analysis of the situation by telling everyone
It reminds me of The Sun's "shock/horror" story published in defence of "The British Banger". To much hullabaloo they explained how Brussels had decided that there had to be major changes made to the "traditional" British Banger; but when you read the story they were partly correct. Those swine over in Brussels wanted us to put MEAT in OUR sausages; instead of the mixture of rusk, offal and fat that we had grown used to!
I'll end my contribution to the Thread with a typical headline from The Sun that is in today's paper. The headline reads:
CORBYN AND THE COMMIE SPY
Jeremy Corbyn met a Communist spy during the Cold War
and ‘briefed’ evil regime of clampdown by British intelligence
If one reads the article with care you will see that all of these "shock/horror" allegations:
- Occurred over 20 years ago when Mr. Corbyn was a young MP.
- Are based on the fact that he met a person working at the Czech Embassy "... at least three times — twice in the Commons,"
The Sun has done us the favour of printing a translation of the report that the Czech Embassy Official submitted after his meeting with Mr. Corbyn. In the report he states that the knowledge he gained “... could not be utilised for the purpose of information as they were limited to general nature.”
At this stage The Sun doesn't have a story so enter "Cold War expert Professor Anthony Glees, of the Oxford Intelligence Group".
This academic gives an in depth analysis of the situation by telling everyone
- “These files show Jeremy Corbyn had been targeted by Czech intelligence services." which was a problem for all MPs at the time, not just Mr. Corbyn's.
- “Mr Corbyn says he didn’t know, but it shows breathtaking naivete from someone who wants to head the British government." I fail to see why. The Czech report made it clear that Mr. Corbyn didn't pass on any information that could be useful to a foreign power so he showed remarkable aplomb not naivety.
- “It is a criminal offence to knowingly engage with a hostile foreign state’s intelligence agency. No doubt he didn’t know." (my highlight) "But even if he thought they were just government embassy staff, this was a repressive communist state — it’s despicable to be meeting with them." The reason the Cold War ended was that the President of the USA met in public with the President of Russia. If you don't meet with people to discuss matters you finish up going to war against them.
- “Jeremy Corbyn should insist any archival material held on him in the East German or Czech archives be made public." I thought that was what The Sun was doing, but just in case they weren't let's make it a universal request and insist that the East German or Czech archives are made public; including all those that name politicians from other parties!
- “He needs to do this so he can be seen as a fit and proper person to be Prime Minister." Professor Anthony Glees is as much an "academic" as my left foot. To be seen as a fit and proper person to be Prime Minister I suggest that proof of not passing on security information to a foreign power was a good start.
It reminds me of The Sun's "shock/horror" story published in defence of "The British Banger". To much hullabaloo they explained how Brussels had decided that there had to be major changes made to the "traditional" British Banger; but when you read the story they were partly correct. Those swine over in Brussels wanted us to put MEAT in OUR sausages; instead of the mixture of rusk, offal and fat that we had grown used to!
That's probably because so many of the Dutch speak English; and they speak it because English is on the teaching agenda for all Dutch schools from the age of ten.
With regard to Northern Belgium, their native language is a form of Dutch but they too speak English for the same reason. In the Waloon area of Belgium they speak a version of French and have yet to introduce English as a compulsory subject.
No, sorry dutto, I like the culture
Als een zaak van belang, hoe veel Nederlands spreek je? Ik vond het een moeilijkste taal om te beheersen, vooral de uitspraak.
only a bit. wilt u alstublieft vat langzamer spreken? gives me the most trouble of all the dutch I can speak.
tot ziens!
And it's fine for you to have that opinion, providing you understand that it has no scientific or academic basis whatsoever and has been roundly debunked time after time.
We can at least agree on this much.
Herein lies the source of our disagreement. I abhorr nationalism of all types.
I would agree that things detrimental to the greater good, whether internal or external, ought to be roundly condemned. I include nationalism within that.
Which leads me back to my broader point: nationalism is an idea. We ought to condemn bad ideas. But I absolutely disagree that you can class entire groups of people (who are in fact quite diverse despite the single unifying feature you happen to be focussing on) as "detrimental".
Saisonator
Landlord.
You are again wrong about the first point, never been debunked.
I really despise Marxism and even more so the modern cultural Marxism that has sprung from it, it should be treated in the same was Nazism due to the millions of deaths, poverty and misery it has caused. In fact in numbers of dead it is even worse.
Many so called socialists are in fact Marxist like John McDonnell.
An odd thing about the modern left is their choice bed mates? A group that include some of the most socially conservative, homophobic and sexist members of our society, who follow what is basically a totalitarian supremacist ideology.
I think the term they are often labelled with is 'useful idiots', due to the fact that many of the people they are supporting have a different agenda and are just using these leftists.
simon12
Landlord.
There are many sides to look at on immigration and heres an important 1. Legal immigrants on average do put more in our economy than they take out but because so many have come so quickly there is no chance the extra they put in can be turned into the number of extra houses, hospital, schools etc. that are needed. Also the extra the amount they put in doesn't take into account if they have deprived a native of a job or driven down wages, so even if they do contribute more than they take it could still be bad for our economy as well as infrastructure. So its has a double negative on the poor as jobs are harder to find, housing/renting prices are driven up (by many other factors as well) and the public services they rely on are pushed even harder.
Yes it has. Sorry, your view doesn't simply become fact because you declare it to be so.
This isn't a new theory. What you're asserting here is essentially Scientific Racism or Racialism, the pseudoscientific belief that humans can be classified into physically discrete racial groups based on their phenotype or genotype. It is unscientific nonsense with no academic basis whatsoever, and has not been accepted by any mainstream scientist since at least the 60s. It has no basis in biological reality.
Again, your pet theory does not become true simply because you say so, especially when anyone with a relevant academic background says otherwise. I invite you to present any serious scientific evidence backing it up.
Dutto
Landlord.
I am an old fashioned Socialist. I am also a Member of the Labour Party and proud of it. If anyone can find anything wrong about the following extract from the current Labour Party Rule Book I would very much like to know what is is.
Clause IV(1) of the Labour Party Rule Book states:
"The Labour Party is a democratic socialist Party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few; where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect."
With regard to the quote above, all I can say is "If I am being used to fulfil the requirements of Clause IV(1) then please use me!"
When I am brewing beer, I am more interested in the end result than the process. At the moment we can see that the end result of our current government; it is increasing homelessness and poverty for the many and increasing wealth and influence for the few!
Things have to change!
