Politics & Stuff

[Peppen 934]

I don't really know, are there so many criminals now ?

Many years ago I walked from Muswell Hill in London to Hammersmith on feet in the middle of the night. For some reason I had no money at all - I forgot to take from the bank and there were no ATM's those days. I did not meet anybody in the streets. Not a soul. When I passed through Fleet street a copper approached me and took my transistor radio out of my pocket, to check if indeed it was a transistor radio !

I don't do that nowadays, but there are stories. A man wanted to take his wife to maternity hospital in the centre of Athens, walked downstairs to ready the car and two Afghanis slaughtered him - the victim's family were pro-immigrant left wingers as well, as was publicised later. There have also been revenge killings by right wingers against innocent Pakistani street vendors.

On the whole some of those stories must be true but I suspect a big part of it is propaganda from monopoly companies / other protected professions who want to keep prices up in the face of competition.

80 % of home robberies are immigrants (in DK). The Peoples Party (nationalist) is predicted to be the biggest party after the next election, surpassing the Social Democrats and Liberal Party. Immigrants are generating a huge deficit when looking at the tax revenue generated by immigrants and subtracting the amount of money the state pays the unemployed and those unable to work. They are overrepresented in criminal statistics, and I could go on...

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I dont doubt he would turn on his own people, and the Turkish role in Syria is not endearing themselves to their wish to join the EU. On Syria there are more and more people here wanting to go off and fight. The lads wanting to go fall basically into 3 categories. Wannabe heroes, who as soon as they get there have their pics on facebook, complete with kaleshnikov, jihadists, and people who genuinely want to help on humanitarian grounds.

The uk govt has appealed to muslim mothers here to take away their sons passports !

Yeah, the biggest number of foreigners fighting in Syria from a western country is by far from the UK, followed by Germany and the US. It's not about who they are going to kill and blow up in Syria, it's about the fact that every single one of those Muslim extremists is a walking suicide bomber when he returns to his country. And the ones that stay in those armed groups in the middle east are just as dangerous. They've gained something very powerful and invaluable in war and that cannot be imitated: fighting experience.

But the solution cannot be taking their passports away. This is the price the UK is paying for endorsing and funding the sheikhs who preach for Jihad and extremism and giving them British citizenships back in the 80s. That is the route of all the Muslim extremism in the world right now, a few hundred sheikhs in some of the poorest areas in the world, paid to preach their version of "Jihad" against whatever bugs their funders.

[cosmicway 1,323]

80 % of home robberies are immigrants (in DK). The Peoples Party (nationalist) is predicted to be the biggest party after the next election, surpassing the Social Democrats and Liberal Party. Immigrants are generating a huge deficit when looking at the tax revenue generated by immigrants and subtracting the amount of money the state pays the unemployed and those unable to work. They are overrepresented in criminal statistics, and I could go on...

Then you are decided, not undecided.

It's the same story always.

My grand dad who was a construction worker fought for the American army in WWI and my grandma -long gone now- related to us how the American press vilified the immigrants (some of whom are rotten apples - no doubt).

[Peppen 934]

Then you are decided, not undecided.

It's the same story always.

My grand dad who was a construction worker fought for the American army in WWI and my grandma -long gone now- related to us how the American press vilified the immigrants (some of whom are rotten apples - no doubt).

Mate, I am a leftist, but I am merely stating what most Danes think of the current immigration situation, which I am, partly, inclined to agree with. The press is no doubt vilifying immigrants, that is a fact, but they do so because of those rotten apples that make it so tough for everyone else. Radicalized Islam is not making the whole mess any less complicated.

[cosmicway 1,323]

Mate, I am a leftist, but I am merely stating what most Danes think of the current immigration situation, which I am, partly, inclined to agree with. The press is no doubt vilifying immigrants, that is a fact, but they do so because of those rotten apples that make it so tough for everyone else. Radicalized Islam is not making the whole mess any less complicated.

Two Romanians robbed my house one day, twelve years ago. I was asleep and I did n't wake up - family was in England. There was also construction job next door so in my sleep I heard noises that I though were coming from the construction workers. Then I found everything was broken and all the gold jewels gone. Months later I liste on tv "gang of jewel thieves caught". I go to the police and say to them "listen there are many resemblences check if it was those those who did ours too". The cops said we will notify central HQ and indeed it was so. Then the cops told me you are lucky to be alive, they were carrying crowbars while doing those jobs and if you had woken up during the robbery they were going to kill you. But the Romanian thief who was the leader was not really sentenced. Some 2-3 years I think and after a couple of months they expelled him to Romania.

But I put all that aside. Romania is a historic nation and a long time ally of Greece. I cannot bring myself to hate the people of Romania.

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

quote name="CHOULO19" post="891097" timestamp="1398364491"]
Yeah, the biggest number of foreigners fighting in Syria from a western country is by far from the UK, followed by Germany and the US. It's not about who they are going to kill and blow up in Syria, it's about the fact that every single one of those Muslim extremists is a walking suicide bomber when he returns to his country. And the ones that stay in those armed groups in the middle east are just as dangerous. They've gained something very powerful and invaluable in war and that cannot be imitated: fighting experience.

But the solution cannot be taking their passports away. This is the price the UK is paying for endorsing and funding the sheikhs who preach for Jihad and extremism and giving them British citizenships back in the 80s. That is the route of all the Muslim extremism in the world right now, a few hundred sheikhs in some of the poorest areas in the world, paid to preach their version of "Jihad" against whatever bugs their funders.


The question of motibation of jihadists on the UK and indeed more widely is a complex issue. Yes there are sheiks, orators and websites preaching war and attrition against the 'west', but it hasnt always been so. There was a watershed moment I can remember when George Bush snr decided to attack Iraq for the first gulf war in1991. Since then there has been kashmir, kosovo, iraq (again), afghanistan..and there is not one muslim that is not fucked off about the plight of the palestinians at the hands of israel and the support it gets from the US.

This book is an excellent read on the radicalisation, and why

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/03/muslims-are-coming-islamophobia-extremism-domestic-war-on-terror-review

[CHOULO19 24,332]

The question of motibation of jihadists on the UK and indeed more widely is a complex issue. Yes there are sheiks, orators and websites preaching war and attrition against the 'west', but it hasnt always been so. There was a watershed moment I can remember when George Bush snr decided to attack Iraq for the first gulf war in1991. Since then there has been kashmir, kosovo, iraq (again), afghanistan..and there is not one muslim that is not fucked off about the plight of the palestinians at the hands of israel and the support it gets from the US.

This book is an excellent read on the radicalisation, and why

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/03/muslims-are-coming-islamophobia-extremism-domestic-war-on-terror-review

But those aren't just about Muslims unless you want to look at it that way. I can tell you of 1.5m Christians in Lebanon, about 3m in Syria (prewar, now probably less than 1m remain) and about 8m in Egypt are just as fucked off about the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Tens of thousands of Christians were thrown out of their houses in 1948 and thousands of Christians are persecuted in Palestine today.

In Lebanon, for example, the resistance against Israel was initially made up from the secular left parties, mostly the Lebanese communist party. It was only till the late 80s that it became the "Islamic resistance". Even till this day, many of its military leaders are those that were the leaders of the secular resistance (like Moughniyye who was assassinated by the mosad in 2008 and Ayyach who they are trying to frame with the assassination of Al Hariri in 2005). Same in Palestine with secular Fateh, but now it's sectarian Hamas.

Those issues that you mentioned make the jobs for those Sheikhs easier because there already is a great hostility and hatred towards the west in the middle east, but they are not the origin of Muslim extremism. The origin was Afghanistan and Chechnya in the late 70s and early 80s when the UK and the US thought it would be a good idea to use something in Islam called Jihad to turn the Muslim inhabitants against the Soviet union.

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

But those aren't just about Muslims unless you want to look at it that way. I can tell you of 1.5m Christians in Lebanon, about 3m in Syria (prewar, now probably less than 1m remain) and about 8m in Egypt are just as fucked off about the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Tens of thousands of Christians were thrown out of their houses in 1948 and thousands of Christians are persecuted in Palestine today.

In Lebanon, for example, the resistance against Israel was initially made up from the secular left parties, mostly the Lebanese communist party. It was only till the late 80s that it became the "Islamic resistance". Even till this day, many of its military leaders are those that were the leaders of the secular resistance (like Moughniyye who was assassinated by the mosad in 2008 and Ayyach who they are trying to frame with the assassination of Al Hariri in 2005). Same in Palestine with secular Fateh, but now it's sectarian Hamas.

Those issues that you mentioned make the jobs for those Sheikhs easier because there already is a great hostility and hatred towards the west in the middle east, but they are not the origin of Muslim extremism. The origin was Afghanistan and Chechnya in the late 70s and early 80s when the UK and the US thought it would be a good idea to use something in Islam called Jihad to turn the Muslim inhabitants against the Soviet union.

Yes I know all about the Mujahadeen in the 80s fighting in Afghanistan fighting the USSR. Proper fighters, went on to turn against the West when they were disowned.

Didnt know about the christians thrown out by israel, all I know is the muslims I work with know their Islamic history, eg they may not know whats going on in South America or Japan, but they sure as hell know about Shatilla 82 or Kashmir.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Yes I know all about the Mujahadeen in the 80s fighting in Afghanistan fighting the USSR. Proper fighters, went on to turn against the West when they were disowned.

Didnt know about the christians thrown out by israel, all I know is the muslims I work with know their Islamic history, eg they may not know whats going on in South America or Japan, but they sure as hell know about Shatilla 82 or Kashmir.

There are thousands of Christian Palestinians in Lebanon still living in refugee camps just like the Muslim ones. There was never any differentiation between Muslim and Christian Palestinians. Funny thing about Shatila, the leader of the group that executed the massacre (yes, it was planned by Israel but it was executed by a Lebanese Christian extremist militia, the Israeli soldiers just stood at the entrance of the camp and lit it with flares), Samir Gaegae, is currently running for presidency in Lebanon and in the first vote got more than two times more votes from Muslim parliament members than Christian ones. Religious extremism is surprisingly flexible!

Yes, the Muslims around the world have had to look up their "Muslim history" because they have the entire western media propaganda vilifying them. They have to prove, to themselves probably before others, that the religion and values that their parents raised them with is not as is being portrayed by the media. Same with black people in the middle of the last century in the USA who all learned their black history. Same with the Armenians I know here in Lebanon, to go back to the original point that started this conversation. They all know their Armenian history because they still feel like they are living in an unjust situation.

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

And now we have the truce between hamas and and fatah. I cant help thinking israels stance on this at first glance appears very childish if it actually sincerely wants peace. Its like a spoiled kid in the playground that doesnt want two kids it knows to be friends. The reality, divide and rule is what they seem to want, and lets face it netanyahu is not the right person to represent israel if they really want peace. The first rule of solving conflict is dialogue so what does he do ? Stop negotiating.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

And now we have the truce between hamas and and fatah. I cant help thinking israels stance on this at first glance appears very childish if it actually sincerely wants peace. Its like a spoiled kid in the playground that doesnt want two kids it knows to be friends. The reality, divide and rule is what they seem to want, and lets face it netanyahu is not the right person to represent israel if they really want peace. The first rule of solving conflict is dialogue so what does he do ? Stop negotiating.

Ha! The peace talks are the biggest joke since the UN sent the UNIFIL to "keep peace". It's just PR for Israel to create an image that they want peace and against violence, something to erase the images of the countless massacres from the memory of the average western citizen. The moment that they think it might actually lead to something, the back right out.

It's not a matter of agreeing with the Palestinians. They can get the Palestinian "leaders" to agree to selling their own children, let alone land, for a night with Livni. They have always been corrupt and stupid. On any account, the Palestinian cause is no longer in the hands of the Palestinians themselves. The spearheads today are Iran and Hezboullah.

There can be no agreements while neither can lose. No one ever agrees to peace willingly. Someone has to lose because peace must take the terms of the winner. You can't have fair and balanced peace!

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

Is this the middle ages or something ?

528 people to be hanged in Egypt. 528 pre meditatively murdered.

Never mind that the "trials" were riven with irregularities. It doesnt matter what persuasion they were, the human race should have risen above this. Do the authorities think in their warped minds it will act as some deterrent to their precious order of things ?? Quite the opposite. History has shown when there are state political murders the victims become beacons, martyrs for others.

Interesting how the cheif capitalist state, the US, is more concerned about property (land in Ukraine) than state sponsored murder. Then again they are quite happy to have people on death row for 30 years then kill them.

The human race should be above all this shit.

I hope know you get what I mean when I explained how the Judiciary system works. So what What the media reported as 528 getting the death penalty turned out to be just bad press handling of how the system works. Final verdict is 38 getting the death sentence. Again what the media failed to report is that out of the 38 only 7 or 8 are in prison. Meaning that the other 30/31 who got that sentence will be automatically re trialed. Not to mention that the 7/8 will appeal this sentence and have a chance to escape the death penalty.

I though the western media, will atleast learn from that first case. Instead, they just did the same all over with the 683. Everyone gets hyped and start talking about mass murdering and in the end that is not true. I find that way of reporting news quiet disturbing. Especially when ordinary people, who live in countries that doesn't have the death penalty and do not know how the Judiciary system works in Egypt, read about it. I don't blame them for getting irritated or angry, but I blame the media for not reporting things accurately and educating people. If I am to report something about another country, I have to make sure that the people would know how that country operates by stating facts, not blurry subjective opinions.

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

I hope know you get what I mean when I explained how the Judiciary system works. So what What the media reported as 528 getting the death penalty turned out to be just bad press handling of how the system works. Final verdict is 38 getting the death sentence. Again what the media failed to report is that out of the 38 only 7 or 8 are in prison. Meaning that the other 30/31 who got that sentence will be automatically re trialed. Not to mention that the 7/8 will appeal this sentence and have a chance to escape the death penalty.

I though the western media, will atleast learn from that first case. Instead, they just did the same all over with the 683. Everyone gets hyped and start talking about mass murdering and in the end that is not true. I find that way of reporting news quiet disturbing. Especially when ordinary people, who live in countries that doesn't have the death penalty and do not know how the Judiciary system works in Egypt, read about it. I don't blame them for getting irritated or angry, but I blame the media for not reporting things accurately and educating people. If I am to report something about another country, I have to make sure that the people would know how that country operates by stating facts, not blurry subjective opinions.

Yes, though thinking back to people like Chomsky, corporate media is a lot more than blurry, subjective opinions. Corporate media is a very important arm of the state- in manufacturing consent.

Ownership of the media is becoming more concentrated, and the views of those owners and managers reflect the same views as their capitalist cohorts. I made a mistake in not questioning the Egyptian story, it should always be the default position - question everything, and more importantly qui bono ? Who benefits ??

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

Yes, though thinking back to people like Chomsky, corporate media is a lot more than blurry, subjective opinions. Corporate media is a very important arm of the state- in manufacturing consent.

Ownership of the media is becoming more concentrated, and the views of those owners and managers reflect the same views as their capitalist cohorts. I made a mistake in not questioning the Egyptian story, it should always be the default position - question everything, and more importantly qui bono ? Who benefits ??

The worst thing about it is, that it creates hostility between nations among the ordinary people. When you check the posts of westerns on the topic and how much hatred there is, you would be shocked. At the same time, the Egyptians see that the west just hates Egypt and this allows them to sink deeper into their conspiracy theories. The scary thing is that this makes the most fertile environment for extremism. As far as who benefits, I think I do know

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

The worst thing about it is, that it creates hostility between nations among the ordinary people. When you check the posts of westerns on the topic and how much hatred there is, you would be shocked. At the same time, the Egyptians see that the west just hates Egypt and this allows them to sink deeper into their conspiracy theories. The scary thing is that this makes the most fertile environment for extremism. As far as who benefits, I think I do know

On a macro scale as to who benefits, I could go on about the number of nation states and the fact that they have doubled in number since WW2. This for instance benefits the US and Russia. The most common tactic for leaders and the super wealthy to survive and keep power is Divide and Rule. So globally you have a proliferation of nation states, nationally almost every country has a corporate media playing on peoples differences and fostering hate. They do this because they are scared. Scared of how many we are, scared of our unrealised potential power.

The media for example in the uk is an expert at dividing people over race, football team, the deserving and "undeserving poor", fear of foreigners, paedophiles, health worries, consumer choice etc etc. This is genius at isolating and dividing people which means the people with relatively nothing, pose no threat to the rich and their media friends.

Take the arab/israeli conflict. The average israeli and arab probably have more in common with each other than they realise, yet their leaders have a vested interest in keeping the acrimony and hatred constantly fuelled. The leaders greed and shortcomings are overlooked if they can point over the border, and say "look your problems stem from those people over the border". The media plays a vital role in this, and if you can mix religion in with it as well, theyre on a surefire winner. Divide and Rule, the oldest trick in the book, yet people fall for it every time.

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

On a macro scale as to who benefits, I could go on about the number of nation states and the fact that they have doubled in number since WW2. This for instance benefits the US and Russia. The most common tactic for leaders and the super wealthy to survive and keep power is Divide and Rule. So globally you have a proliferation of nation states, nationally almost every country has a corporate media playing on peoples differences and fostering hate. They do this because they are scared. Scared of how many we are, scared of our unrealised potential power.

The media for example in the uk is an expert at dividing people over race, football team, the deserving and "undeserving poor", fear of foreigners, paedophiles, health worries, consumer choice etc etc. This is genius at isolating and dividing people which means the people with relatively nothing, pose no threat to the rich and their media friends.

Take the arab/israeli conflict. The average israeli and arab probably have more in common with each other than they realise, yet their leaders have a vested interest in keeping the acrimony and hatred constantly fuelled. The leaders greed and shortcomings are overlooked if they can point over the border, and say "look your problems stem from those people over the border". The media plays a vital role in this, and if you can mix religion in with it as well, theyre on a surefire winner. Divide and Rule, the oldest trick in the book, yet people fall for it every time.

"Divide and Rule", a phrase a lot of people are familiar with. A question though, especially to the English. Since that we have a history, and a very long one if I may say. How come, people don't understand or reject the media behavior? I know politicians are backing up the media, or actually the media are backing up the politicians. It is so easy for the media to ask their embassies if they really wanted to know what is going on. The people are my concern. I always have blamed poverty and lack of education in countries like Egypt. Apparently I am wrong. There are other factors. I don't know them, but I know they are there when I look at how people from first world countries act.

A week or so, Ayman Al Zawahri, leader of Alqaeda, said that he backed up the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, along with other non sense against the U.S and other nations. I was like " Yes, atleast now people would know what is going on in Egypt and that it is not political like they think. It is all based on criminal and terrorist acts". I was naive at that moment . I checked out how people reacted on "CNN" and "BBC", and people were condemning Muslims for being quiet and not making statements or taking actions against such terrorist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. I REALLY LAUGHED OUT LOUD. A few days later the sentencing of the outlaws is presented (20% of which are MB) and we are still condemned. I understand the media aspect. But please explain to me why the people fail to understand, think, and evaluate before following the media blindly? They have access to good education and resources. They majority of people are not suffering from a crushing poverty. Why the ignorance and trivial judgements? I mean no offense ofcourse and I am not stereotyping. But I am referring to the public opinion that backs up certain foreign policies. I would really like to know.

[Fulham Broadway 16,831]

"Divide and Rule", a phrase a lot of people are familiar with. A question though, especially to the English. Since that we have a history, and a very long one if I may say. How come, people don't understand or reject the media behavior? I know politicians are backing up the media, or actually the media are backing up the politicians. It is so easy for the media to ask their embassies if they really wanted to know what is going on. The people are my concern. I always have blamed poverty and lack of education in countries like Egypt. Apparently I am wrong. There are other factors. I don't know them, but I know they are there when I look at how people from first world countries act.

A week or so, Ayman Al Zawahri, leader of Alqaeda, said that he backed up the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, along with other non sense against the U.S and other nations. I was like " Yes, atleast now people would know what is going on in Egypt and that it is not political like they think. It is all based on criminal and terrorist acts". I was naive at that moment . I checked out how people reacted on "CNN" and "BBC", and people were condemning Muslims for being quiet and not making statements or taking actions against such terrorist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. I REALLY LAUGHED OUT LOUD. A few days later the sentencing of the outlaws is presented (20% of which are MB) and we are still condemned. I understand the media aspect. But please explain to me why the people fail to understand, think, and evaluate before following the media blindly? They have access to good education and resources. They majority of people are not suffering from a crushing poverty. Why the ignorance and trivial judgements? I mean no offense ofcourse and I am not stereotyping. But I am referring to the public opinion that backs up certain foreign policies. I would really like to know.

I dont think theres a quick answer to that. For most people coroprate media is their main source of information. We agree that this is disseminated with an 'agenda'.

Chomsky put it succinctly “If the media were honest, they would say, Look, here are the interests we represent and this is the framework within which we look at things. This is our set of beliefs and commitments. That’s what they would say, very much as their critics say. Their mask of balance and objectivity is a crucial part of the propaganda function. In fact, they actually go beyond that. They try to present themselves as adversarial to power, as subversive, digging away at powerful institutions and undermining them. The academic profession plays along with this game.”

The first modern propaganda agency was the British Ministry of Information a century ago, which secretly defined its task as “to direct the thought of most of the world” — primarily progressive American intellectuals, who had to be mobilized to come to the aid of Britain during World War I." This included propaganda crudities such as Belgian nuns raped by the Hun -totally fabricated.

On the positive, more and more people as seen in Egyptian revolution/Arab spring are using social media to gather information, rather than propaganda belched out by the state.

[Mohammed Seif 1,451]

I dont think theres a quick answer to that. For most people coroprate media is their main source of information. We agree that this is disseminated with an 'agenda'.

Chomsky put it succinctly “If the media were honest, they would say, Look, here are the interests we represent and this is the framework within which we look at things. This is our set of beliefs and commitments. That’s what they would say, very much as their critics say. Their mask of balance and objectivity is a crucial part of the propaganda function. In fact, they actually go beyond that. They try to present themselves as adversarial to power, as subversive, digging away at powerful institutions and undermining them. The academic profession plays along with this game.”

The first modern propaganda agency was the British Ministry of Information a century ago, which secretly defined its task as “to direct the thought of most of the world” — primarily progressive American intellectuals, who had to be mobilized to come to the aid of Britain during World War I." This included propaganda crudities such as Belgian nuns raped by the Hun -totally fabricated.

On the positive, more and more people as seen in Egyptian revolution/Arab spring are using social media to gather information, rather than propaganda belched out by the state.

Reminds me of the book "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion".