BE BRITISH FIRST

[rederech]

Rederech - what a fascinating post.

You said "you have raised very valid points which in some I agree on and others I don't" and yet now you don't seem to agree with any of them, or think any of them are valid. What what you said a genuine mistake on your part, or were you lying?.

I think that your reactions to my earlier post have affected your rationality.
I agree with your views on the etiquette of debating, however at no time have I ever said that I agree with your opinions on the subject matter.

Do not read into something that does not exist.

You said "I will gladly carry on dialogue with you in the subject matter.", and asked me to respond to three questions. I did so, and yet here you are ignoring everything I wrote, replying to an older post

.


I responded to your remarks on my first post. Is this not the logical course of discussion? or do we forget about these other remarks. I think not.

I did not realise that there was a time penalty for not replying quickly enough to you but some of us have other things to do. Sorry Sir.

I notice that you burned the midnight oil in reply to the previous post.

I now have some time to reply to the 3 questions that you answered.

Question

a) We should be British first and British last, while staunchly adhering to our respective faiths. Do you agree with these comments?

Largely. It is still a somewhat circular argument, that begs the question 'What is "being British"?' There isn't some simple litmus test. There are different aspects of it, not all of which can be universally applied, and there will be differences of opinion over what is important.

I see you are responding with your usual uber pompous verbosity. You have used a ratio of 6 words to every one which would have done. – In simple English what you are trying to say in your 1st paragraph is ‘[b]How can we tell’.[/b]

Issues of allegiance can get complicated, particularly when there are people living here on a medium, or even long-term basis who are not, do not intend, and do not wish to become UK citizens

.

Here are some guidelines which may be useful to guests in our ancient civilized country.

The old dictum of ‘When in Rome do as the (law abiding) Romans do’.

The Bible advises ‘Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser’s ‘.

The Koran admonishes believers to adhere to and respect the laws of their host country.

I've certainly got no time for that facile opinion from (IIRC Norman Tebbit) about which cricket team someone supports.

I agree with you in your remarks regarding cricket – since a vast number of British citizens do not watch cricket I do not think Mr Tebbit’s premise can be universally used.


Question
b) We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers," Mr Howard said. Is this correct?

I have absolutely no idea. Mr. Howard is an intelligent and well-informed man, so he is probably right, but given that the history of suicide attacks goes back 1000 years or more, I wouldn't be surprised to find out he was wrong. Given that the IRA set bombs, and also had people who committed suicide for their cause, maybe it's just an accident that they never joined the dots?

You are in denial of the truth.

We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers,"

These are hard facts which have been recorded by the ‘Free Press’ of the world in articles from all sides of the political stratum and also in newspapers, magazine publications, history books, Internet and encyclopaedia .

Where have you been? what have you been reading? the ‘Al-Qaeda news’

I will repeat:

We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers,"

This is not some fairy story.

How can this be got through to your obtuse mindset.

If you want to change history to suit your own illusions then provide dates and places where other home-grown U.K. suicide bombers have killed innocent people of this nation.


c) "To be British means that we respect the laws, the parliamentary and democratic political structures, traditional values of mutual tolerance, respect for equal rights..." Is this right?

Whoever lives here should probably obey the laws,

Again: weasel words with your 'probably'

Again: Put your money where your mouth is.

In reply to one of your previous snide comments a weasel is a small rodent creature who is regarded as being sly and evasive.

whilst we may not see the need for Halal methods of animal slaughter, should we object?

There any many animal rights avtivists who might

We should all consider whether being British now means meekly accepting whatever our so-called democratic government imposes on us, or whether we should, indeed must, retain the right to cease respecting the laws. Does there not come a point when laws passed by a lying and undemocratic government that undermine our traditional systems of democracy and freedom from oppression should be resisted?

' The old order changeth yielding place to the new and God fulfils himself in may ways lest one good custom should corrupt the world.

The above applies to all Governments and Religions and unlike you I shall assume the intelligence of the people reading the quotation in that they do not need a pedantic explanation of the meaning.

The British people have never meekly accepted being suppressed by tyrannical Hierarchies be they Secular or Religious

That is why we have had e.g. Peasants uprisings, Civil Wars, Regicide, the struggles to establish Religious Reformations and Freedoms, Democracy, Trade Unions and Votes for all citizens including women.

The peoples involved in these struggles openly and coherently stated what their objectives were and were identifiable be it during a time of civil war or struggle to obtain freedom and justice. They suffered and died for causes that benefited the majority of the British People and did not spew sedition against the British Nation.

Suicide bombers are cowardly craven pygmies beside these great freedom fighters.

If you want to know the histories of any of the above then I suggest that you consult the many multi faceted history books freely available to a free people.
We do not burn books in this country.

Your narrow, lop-sided, curate’s egg patronizing lectures about your views on British History are becoming very tedious. Educate yourself.

Your rhetoric is becoming increasingly self indulgent. Do not arrogantly assume that people who refrain from over vocalizing do not have a valid point of view to make or lack in-depth knowledge.

We must live in the here and now – if you have any concise constructive original thoughts I have still to hear them.

Anyone is free to make comment regarding your postings and inclusivety should be encouraged in all debate. I have noticed you flitting about other people’s postings like a nasty boring verbal bullying parasite, leeching on other peoples views and making ridiculous put downs in order it seems to justify your delusional superiority complex.

I think you’ve lost the plot. As a kindness could I suggest you seek urgent professional medical help.

 

[kendor]

??Is it a case of split personality in the above post??

 

[david and julie]

Kendor can you be a bit more specific?

 

[kendor]

Kendor can you be a bit more specific?

look at the above post to mine to see

 

[david and julie]

I have looked at the post, I was hoping that seeing as you said this

Is it a case of split personality in the above post??

you would be a tad more specific.

 

[kendor]

I have looked at the post, I was hoping that seeing as you said this

Is it a case of split personality in the above post??

you would be a tad more specific.

read it carefully at the top

 

[david and julie]

But you can't expect us to guess kendo, if we get it wrong all hell will break out.

Would it depend on which one of these one agreed with?

 

[kendor]

But you can't expect us to guess kendo, if we get it wrong all hell will break out.

Would it depend on which one of these one agreed with?

Unless i'm reading it wrong he's having a right go at ........himself

 

[pipme]

But you can't expect us to guess kendo, if we get it wrong all hell will break out.

Would it depend on which one of these one agreed with?

You missed the 'r' from Kendor #@@### === $%^&£ **&&& ~~.

BTW .. Not on the 'long boat' then?

 

[JulieL]

Not on the 'long boat' then?

Yes he went early this morning as he does every day
It only takes about 1/2 hour to get to where it's moored from our house.

Sometimes I go with him but I don't 'do' DIY and get bored!
I'll probably go every weekend when it's ready for the girlie stuff to be done eg carpets, curtains etc

.......it's not quite ready to 'stay on overnight' yet but it will be soon......hopefully!

By the way......Long boats isn't the right term to use when talking about narrowboats ......some of the old guys who've been on them for years get really cross/grumpy about this......as we've found out!!!!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Try "barge"...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

You said "you have raised very valid points which in some I agree on and others I don't" and yet now you don't seem to agree with any of them, or think any of them are valid. What what you said a genuine mistake on your part, or were you lying?.

I think that your reactions to my earlier post have affected your rationality.
I agree with your views on the etiquette of debating, however at no time have I ever said that I agree with your opinions on the subject matter.

Do not read into something that does not exist.

OK - I see now that I misinterpreted your statement about agreeing with some of my points - I thought you meant some of the points I had made regarding the subject of this thread, not just on the etiquette of debating. I hope that you will understand that, and I hope you will accept my apology for wondering if the statement was untrue.

You said "I will gladly carry on dialogue with you in the subject matter.", and asked me to respond to three questions. I did so, and yet here you are ignoring everything I wrote, replying to an older post

.


I responded to your remarks on my first post. Is this not the logical course of discussion? or do we forget about these other remarks. I think not.

I did not realise that there was a time penalty for not replying quickly enough to you but some of us have other things to do. Sorry Sir.

Well, it was just that since your post within this thread with definitions of Britishness, we'd batted 9 posts back and forth, so I sort of expected you to answer the most recent, not go back to reply to #2, but I take your point that you hadn't already done that, so apologies, and full marks to you for being thorough.

I now have some time to reply to the 3 questions that you answered.

Question

a) We should be British first and British last, while staunchly adhering to our respective faiths. Do you agree with these comments?

Largely. It is still a somewhat circular argument, that begs the question 'What is "being British"?' There isn't some simple litmus test. There are different aspects of it, not all of which can be universally applied, and there will be differences of opinion over what is important.

I see you are responding with your usual uber pompous verbosity. You have used a ratio of 6 words to every one which would have done. – In simple English what you are trying to say in your 1st paragraph is ‘[b]How can we tell’.[/b]

I've not criticised your style of delivery, or sentence construction - why do you feel the need to criticise mine? Is it because you have no rational or logical way to counter what I've said, so you hope to discredit it by attacking how I have said it?

And by the way, if you are complaining about pomposity, why did you mix in a second language?

Issues of allegiance can get complicated, particularly when there are people living here on a medium, or even long-term basis who are not, do not intend, and do not wish to become UK citizens

.

Here are some guidelines which may be useful to guests in our ancient civilized country.

The old dictum of ‘When in Rome do as the (law abiding) Romans do’.

The Bible advises ‘Give unto Ceaser what is Ceaser’s ‘.

The Koran admonishes believers to adhere to and respect the laws of their host country.

Is there a reason why you have said all those things in reply to that sentence in isolation, ignoring what I wrote immediately after it (which was just as much part of my reply to Q1):

Once you've covered the basics of obeying the law and not offending reasonable opinion, there isn't much more that you can demand. The same really applies to anywhere in the world - obey the laws, try not to offend, and try to strike a balance between differences of culture and opinion where what defines you, and what you hold dear conflicts with the popular norm.

Could it be because you want to deny that I do agree with much of what you say?

I've certainly got no time for that facile opinion from (IIRC Norman Tebbit) about which cricket team someone supports.

I agree with you in your remarks regarding cricket – since a vast number of British citizens do not watch cricket I do not think Mr Tebbit’s premise can be universally used.

But it was a definition of "Britishness" which a senior politician had proposed. The fact that you think it was wrong must show that it's OK to question any definition that is put forward. It is possible to question something and still end up agreeing with it. You looked at the Tebbit Test and decided it was flawed - you did not accept it unquestioningly, and without analysis. I think that the same principle of scrutiny should apply to what you have said here, but it seems that, in the same way that you earlier objected to me replying at all, you are objecting not to what I say in questioning your proposals but the fact that I've questioned them at all.

Question
b) We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers," Mr Howard said. Is this correct?

I have absolutely no idea. Mr. Howard is an intelligent and well-informed man, so he is probably right, but given that the history of suicide attacks goes back 1000 years or more, I wouldn't be surprised to find out he was wrong. Given that the IRA set bombs, and also had people who committed suicide for their cause, maybe it's just an accident that they never joined the dots?

You are in denial of the truth.

No, I'm not. I did not deny anything. There is no denial in my words, explicit or implied. "I have absolutely no idea" was a badly chosen phrase - I should have said something like "I really don't know with any certainty", or "I know next to nothing about the history of suicide bombers". But please note that what I did say was that the statement was probably correct, my only rider was that given how long suicide attacks have been happening, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that it wasn't correct.

We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers,"

These are hard facts which have been recorded by the ‘Free Press’ of the world in articles from all sides of the political stratum and also in newspapers, magazine publications, history books, Internet and encyclopaedia .

Where have you been? what have you been reading? the ‘Al-Qaeda news’

I will repeat:

We had to face the terrible truth of being the first western country to have suffered terrorist attacks perpetrated by 'home-grown' suicide bombers,"

This is not some fairy story.

How can this be got through to your obtuse mindset.

I'm not being obtuse, I said it was probably true. I don't know the history, and I'm not going to accept a statement made by a politician as being absolutely, 100%, cast-iron-guaranteed to be true. When it comes to human behaviour, it's never much of a surprise to find that "the wheel turns full circle", or that people do things that have been done before. I said, and I still say, that I would not be surprised if it turned out that there were previous examples of home-grown suicide attacks.

We are not the first Western country to suffer from suicide attacks, so it must be the "home grown" aspect that so exercises you. Please remember that if you are appalled that "home-grown" Person A should wish to kill "home-grown" Person B, every civil war in history shows that there are people prepared to slaughter their fellow countrymen.

If you want to change history to suit your own illusions then provide dates and places where other home-grown U.K. suicide bombers have killed innocent people of this nation.

I'm not changing history - I'm saying that the history is very long, and that it may contain things of which I (and Mr. Howard) are unaware.

I'm not changing history, I'm saying that I wouldn't be surprised to find that at some time in the last 1000+ years that somewhere in the western world (the original premise, not just the UK) it had happened before.

If I knew for sure that it had, don't you think I would have provided dates and places etc to show that Mr. Howard was wrong? I'm not so conceited as to think that just because I don't know if something has happened before that it must therefore not have happened before.

c) "To be British means that we respect the laws, the parliamentary and democratic political structures, traditional values of mutual tolerance, respect for equal rights..." Is this right?

Whoever lives here should probably obey the laws,

Again: weasel words with your 'probably'

Again: Put your money where your mouth is.

In reply to one of your previous snide comments a weasel is a small rodent creature who is regarded as being sly and evasive.

I'm being neither sly nor evasive, I'm simply stating that permanent and unquestioning obedience of the laws is not what should be expected of people, and as we shall see a little later, neither do you.

whilst we may not see the need for Halal methods of animal slaughter, should we object?

There any many animal rights avtivists who might

I'm sure there are, and there are people who object to the whole idea of anybody eating meat. We should respect their views, but we must also strike a balance between what some people find offensive and what should be legislated against. Halal slaughter is just one example of where, as you say, mutual tolerance is required.

We should all consider whether being British now means meekly accepting whatever our so-called democratic government imposes on us, or whether we should, indeed must, retain the right to cease respecting the laws. Does there not come a point when laws passed by a lying and undemocratic government that undermine our traditional systems of democracy and freedom from oppression should be resisted?

' The old order changeth yielding place to the new and God fulfils himself in may ways lest one good custom should corrupt the world.

The above applies to all Governments and Religions and unlike you I shall assume the intelligence of the people reading the quotation in that they do not need a pedantic explanation of the meaning.

The British people have never meekly accepted being suppressed by tyrannical Hierarchies be they Secular or Religious

That is why we have had e.g. Peasants uprisings, Civil Wars, Regicide, the struggles to establish Religious Reformations and Freedoms, Democracy, Trade Unions and Votes for all citizens including women.

Indeed, and many of those examples involved people, who were British, not respecting the laws that prevailed at the time.

The peoples involved in these struggles openly and coherently stated what their objectives were and were identifiable be it during a time of civil war or struggle to obtain freedom and justice. They suffered and died for causes that benefited the majority of the British People and did not spew sedition against the British Nation.

It's hard to think of a bigger example of "sedition" than overturning the Monarchy and putting the King to death. Out of not respecting the political structures of the day came many of the parliamentary and democratic political structures of today that you say should now be respected. I have not said that they should not be respected, or that the laws should not be obeyed, I have said that any respect or obedience must be tempered by the recognition that the best thing to do, sometimes, is to cease respecting and obeying them.

It wasn't weasel words to say that we should "probably" obey the laws etc, it was a recognition that we haven't always done so, and that good has come out of not doing so, and that it is not correct to assume that we must never disobey them again.

Suicide bombers are cowardly craven pygmies beside these great freedom fighters.

Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.

If you want to know the histories of any of the above then I suggest that you consult the many multi faceted history books freely available to a free people.
We do not burn books in this country.

Then why don't you read them?

Why don't you accept that history shows a long sequence of revolts and overturnings of established orders, and that saying those days are irrevocably over is wrong? Why don't you see from the reading of those books that the people telling us what to respect, and what to obey, are not always acting in our best interests?

Your narrow, lop-sided, curate’s egg patronizing lectures about your views on British History are becoming very tedious. Educate yourself.

At least you think it was good in parts. I'd like to know why you think I was patronising you.

Your rhetoric is becoming increasingly self indulgent. Do not arrogantly assume that people who refrain from over vocalizing do not have a valid point of view to make or lack in-depth knowledge.

Where have I arrogantly assumed that? If you are going to treat every instance of producing historical fact to support, or challenge, an opinion as arrogance then we aren't going to get very far.

And if you are concerned about "arrogantly assuming a lack of in-depth knowledge", please take a look in the mirror:

If you want to know the histories of any of the above then I suggest that you consult the many multi faceted history books freely available to a free people.
We do not burn books in this country.

Educate yourself.

We must live in the here and now – if you have any concise constructive original thoughts I have still to hear them.

If you haven't heard what I've already said, then it's because you aren't listening.

Anyone is free to make comment regarding your postings and inclusivety should be encouraged in all debate. I have noticed you flitting about other people’s postings like a nasty boring verbal bullying parasite, leeching on other peoples views and making ridiculous put downs in order it seems to justify your delusional superiority complex.

I think you’ve lost the plot. As a kindness could I suggest you seek urgent professional medical help.

I've not criticised your personality, or used any insults like that, or questioned your state of health, so why have you said those things about me? Is it because you have no rational or logical way to counter what I've said, so you hope to discredit it by characterising it as verbal bullying from someone with a delusional superiority complex?

 

[Slogger]

? what are they trying to say to each other all i can see after the first 50 words is blah blah blah

 

[rederech]

My first thought in seeing your response was Oh No! Boring Arrogant Shyster is off on another one.

I thought you may have taken my kindly meant advice by now and were safely locked up somewhere they don’t allow you to play with the metal cutlery.

When eventually you do seek help please remember to see an NHS specialist as I believe private ones charge by the hour and it would probably take you 4 hours just to explain what your name and address is.

I did not even read your latest diatribe as I cannot bring myself to encourage your confused and disconnected ramblings any longer.

I would guess that it would be more of ‘I didn’t mean this and I didn’t mean that, I should have said this and shouldn’t have said that’.
I will guide you to another situation where you are in denial of the truth .

BAS posted :
5 August, 2005 - Topic – Our Non Existing Border Controls

Cashpoint money stolen by Jews Aug 5 2005

A GANG of Jews stole up to £200,000 from cashpoint machines using hi-tech equipment to copy the cards of innocent shoppers, a court heard yesterday.

Four Eastern European Jews put false fronts on cashpoint machines in Wales and installed pinhole cameras to secretly film shoppers tapping in their PIN numbers.

The team - three Jews from Romania and a Jewish asylum-seeker - targeted cashpoints near supermarkets to steal bank card details from hundreds of unsuspecting shoppers.

As has been patiently explained to you the people involved were not Jewish, but you knew this at your time of writing the above.
You were attempting to give another one of your inane ‘what if’ lectures again.
It is just another of your wish fulfilment delusions in BAS world.
It also highlights your deep inner preducies that you do not seem to be able to confront.
Fantasizing again.


As I have been trying to help you overcome your delusions and prejudices you might like to reflect on these previous sick quotes you have made to people.

5 August – Topic – Our Non Existing Border Controls
BAS posted

Quote

Perhaps they hope to find you in a darkened alley one night.
I know who I'd rather see in a body-bag.

How perverted your sick mind is.
Is this another one of your inner hate filled fantasies?

18 August – Topic - Police shot to kill Brazilian – Now We Know

BAS posted
Quote

Hopefully slogger, being as thick as two short planks, will shoot himself.

These are very disturbing egotistical thoughts you are experiencing and reflect a deep seated desire for violence.

I am also sure that there is some subconscious self analysis in your signature quote.
It’s obvious why you use the metaphor ‘crazy’ paving, and it’s no surprise you also include the phrase ‘dead’ end.

Hasta La Vista Baby – Don’t come back.

 

[rederech]

My first thought in seeing your response was Oh No! Boring Arrogant Shyster is off on another one.

I thought you may have taken my kindly meant advice by now and were safely locked up somewhere they don’t allow you to play with the metal cutlery.

When eventually you do seek help please remember to see an NHS specialist as I believe private ones charge by the hour and it would probably take you 4 hours just to explain what your name and address is.

I did not even read your latest diatribe as I cannot bring myself to encourage your confused and disconnected ramblings any longer.

I would guess that it would be more of ‘I didn’t mean this and I didn’t mean that, I should have said this and shouldn’t have said that’.
I will guide you to another situation where you are in denial of the truth .

BAS posted :
5 August, 2005 - Topic – Our Non Existing Border Controls

Cashpoint money stolen by Jews Aug 5 2005

A GANG of Jews stole up to £200,000 from cashpoint machines using hi-tech equipment to copy the cards of innocent shoppers, a court heard yesterday.

Four Eastern European Jews put false fronts on cashpoint machines in Wales and installed pinhole cameras to secretly film shoppers tapping in their PIN numbers.

The team - three Jews from Romania and a Jewish asylum-seeker - targeted cashpoints near supermarkets to steal bank card details from hundreds of unsuspecting shoppers.

As has been patiently explained to you the people involved were not Jewish, but you knew this at your time of writing the above.
You were attempting to give another one of your inane ‘what if’ lectures again.
It is just another of your wish fulfilment delusions in BAS world.
It also highlights your deep inner preducies that you do not seem to be able to confront.
Fantasizing again.


As I have been trying to help you overcome your delusions and prejudices you might like to reflect on these previous sick quotes you have made to people.

5 August – Topic – Our Non Existing Border Controls
BAS posted

Quote

Perhaps they hope to find you in a darkened alley one night.
I know who I'd rather see in a body-bag.

How perverted your sick mind is.
Is this another one of your inner hate filled fantasies?

18 August – Topic - Police shot to kill Brazilian – Now We Know

BAS posted
Quote

Hopefully slogger, being as thick as two short planks, will shoot himself.

These are very disturbing egotistical thoughts you are experiencing and reflect a deep seated desire for violence.

I am also sure that there is some subconscious self analysis in your signature quote.
It’s obvious why you use the metaphor ‘crazy’ paving, and it’s no surprise you also include the phrase ‘dead’ end.

Hasta La Vista Baby – Don’t come back.[/quote]