These aren't mutually exclusive, Stainesy. The common denominator is the Tory party. Tory Austerity + Tory Brexit = Tory chaos.
The New Zealand Mosque Massacre Blame Game Is Out of Control Radical Islamists and radical leftists have seized on the Christchurch tragedy to push their own hateful agendas. please log in to view this image Maajid Nawaz 03.19.19 4:09 AM ET please log in to view this image opinion Fiona Goodall/Getty LONDON—The anti-Muslim terrorist attack at two mosques in New Zealand marked perhaps the lowest point for Muslim communities in the West since the Bosnia genocide. It has left no doubt that far-right extremism is on the march once more. But the sheer human tragedy of this attack against my Muslim communities has not deterred extremists from those other two ends of our political spectrum, the far left and the theocratic Islamists, from seeking to exploit it for their own nefarious purposes. “Lists are for fascists.” Just as a visibly pregnant Chelsea Clinton was accosted at an NYU vigil and faced unwarranted blame for the attack, others too have found themselves caught in the unforgiving crosshairs of ideologues seeking to settle scores. This was unsurprising. If the daughter of a Democratic president and a Democratic presidential candidate was fair game, what chance would those with lesser liberal bona fides have of being spared? Last month I was racially attacked in the Soho area of London. I was punched in the face as my assailant shouted “f***ing Paki”, and my forehead was punctured with an unknown object. I will probably be scarred for life. So I know how tempting it can be to succumb to the forces of vengeance and division in times like these. In my youth, as an angry 15-year-old Muslim witnessing the Bosnia genocide, I once succumbed to this temptation and promoted extreme Islamism myself for a few years. I know what giving in to hate feels like, and I know the lasting damage it can cause. But that is exactly the reaction that extremists want, and exactly why it must be resisted with all our might. So it is with no surprise that I noticed, a mere day after 50 of my fellow Muslims were so publicly and tragically killed, while the blood was still wet and the bodies remained unburied, that the ideologues had circled like vultures. Opportunistic Islamist and far-left extremists began calling for a purge of people whose politics they disagree with, and started publishing McCarthyite lists of personae non grata to target. Few have come under fiercer assault than my friend and collaborator in dialogue, Sam Harris. The following spectacle has been incredibly unedifying. TERRORISM Time to Attack White Nationalism for the Terror Group It Is Christopher Dickey please log in to view this image After the multiple jihadist terror attacks Western cities have faced to date, it has been these same far-left and Islamist voices resisting the call to name the ideology behind these attacks as “Islamism”, and to distinguish it from the religion of Islam. They have taken the view that talking about the Islamist ideology unfairly stigmatises all Muslims. They have preferred to beseech us all to understand the grievances that fuel the anger of jihadists, and have encouraged instead ‘hug a Muslim’ campaigns. Yet, after New Zealand, these same voices paradoxically insist on directly addressing white nationalist ideology; they hounded a pregnant Chelsea Clinton; they have taken to compiling blacklists of individuals they do not like; and they are calling for the deplatforming of “right-wing” pundits and protests against “right-wing” media. Consistency has been sorely missing. This is dangerous, despicable and disingenuous. Only the extremist seeks to erase all opposition. Already, ISIS spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir has broken six months' silence after the group’s recent humiliating series of defeats in Syria to encourage Muslims to take revenge for New Zealand. But this obviously does not mean that critics of right-wing extremism or the war in Syria are in league with ISIS. So just as it would be wrong to blame critics of western foreign policy generally for jihadist terror in the West, it should be unacceptable to use this latest attack to to blame critics of Islam or immigration, or to seek to silence the political right generally. Shutting down debate in this way will only make matters worse and is precisely what the New Zealand terrorist explicitly told us he wanted, in his diatribe commonly referred to as a manifesto. In fact, there is an entire section in which Brenton Tarrant muses over pitting the American left against the American right in order to sow chaos. Falling for this trap is to allow ourselves to be trolled by a terrorist. DEADLY FRENEMIES The London Mosque Killer Attacked Muslims, but Helped ISIS Maajid Nawaz please log in to view this image Lists are for fascists. And when the far left start seeking division and disagreement before seeking common ground and understanding, then there is little difference remaining between them and the far right. In particular, it is crucial to distinguish between those who peddle anti-Muslim hatred, and those like my friend Sam Harris who simply wish to scrutinise one of the world’s great religions, my religion: Islam. To confuse hating all Muslims with critiquing the doctrines of Islam, is akin to confusing anti-smoking campaigns with hating all smokers. It is to avoid precisely this confusion, and to steer clear of introducing blasphemy laws through the backdoor, that I reject the popular misnomer Islamophobia, for the more accurate phrase Muslimphobia, or anti-Muslim hate. Related in World please log in to view this image How White Supremacists and Jihadists Feed Off Each Other please log in to view this image Mosque Shooting Suspect Flashes White Power Sign in Court please log in to view this image Mosque Attack Video Linked to ‘White Genocide’ Rant Of course, inflammatory anti-Muslim language must be condemned by us all, and many anti-Muslim provocateurs should take a hard look at themselves after New Zealand, just as we must condemn inflammatory Islamist and far-left language. That is different, though, from trying to silence an entire policy concern like Western foreign policy or opposing immigration and critiquing Islam respectively. Only the extremists wish to shut down debate. And so it is crucial that we do not respond to far-right extremism in such a way that we inadvertently empower extremists from other ends of the political spectrum. Terrorists prefer the bullet to the ballot. Let us not become pawns in their game. Let us continue to debate all the hot issues in defiance. But in doing so there is one principle I would ask that we all remember: just as no idea should be above scrutiny, no person should be beneath dignity. If this line between critiquing ideas and seeking to humiliate people is not drawn clearly, any one of us could become the next Chelsea Clinton.
I agree that the Tories are to blame for a lot of it. Austerity has hit both the most needy and the most deserving, while the rich seem to be getting richer. My point mate is that a few on here seem to be getting so excited about a meaningless petition, that will make absolutely no difference whatsoever in government policy or decision making.....while kids are being stabbed to death for being in the wrong ****ing postcode and MH patients are being left on the street to basically die. Maybe I’m too soft and getting too emotional about it.....but it’s something that really does get to me.
To be honest Stainsey, most of the posts on here referencing the petition are now from you. Your points about stabbings and MH are of course right but if the revoke petition is pointless (and I think it is) why should petitions on these make any difference? People are just expressing an opinion about something they care about, partly because it’s a ‘simple’ answer to a bit of collective misery which has gone on too long. Knife crime and MH don’t have such simple answers, most of us are confused and scared by these issues. We can chuck money at MH (and we should, along with all the other things we should chuck money at) and police at knife crime, which party should we be voting for to achieve this? Or do we need to wait for the revolution? I don’t get what you want to happen, beyond people shouting about different things.
Gove is PM material I have to admit but I am a labour supporter (that does not include the Blair years)
It will require a complete change in culture Staines and as I have said before it will only get worse until it’s run it’s course ... lot of responsibilities on our children under 12 now to educate them out of this appalling trend .
Whatever G, I’m done with it now. Good news for me is I’ve just been emailed to say I’ve been accepted for the ‘Knife crime presentation’ volunteer group so I can maybe spread the message to the people that matter and direct my passion to those that need to listen. Might do me the world of good and stop me spouting **** on here
Which party? Would reversing the massive cuts in public services count as 'chucking money' at a situation, or would it be correcting a monstrous injustice? Which party would do this? This is a rhetorical question.
I reckon there is one hell of a lot of stuff that the UK Tory Government should have been doing the last 3 years, that they could have had more resources to tackle and had better financing of, if they hadn't ever started this Brexit mess. It has almost totally preoccupied them. I remember talking about this on here 2 or 3 years ago- it has got even worse since then. However, I would have had no faith in a Tory Government in particular, of finding ways of reducing crime or MH care, Brexit or no Brexit. Too much hate, and too little love and respect for fellow human beings, let alone animals, in too many places in this World today sadly.
Not sure skin colour has anything to do with Brexit London on the whole including all skin colours voted to remain ... different in little London however ( Brighton) mainly whiteys down there
That's not entirely the case though DT. I know quite a few Asians who voted to leave. The problem is that everyone's being out in categories and it's then assumed they voted in a particular way - even down to religion ffs! My mum and dad and most of my aunts and uncles are all in their 70s and most voted to remain. Conversely a few of my mates' kids in their teens or early twenties voted leave. The country genuinely is virtually split down the middle. Sorry - to take your main point I agree that skin colour had nothing to do with it. Well certainly from my group of friends, colleagues and acquaintances anyway!
Trump-Russia inquiry: President 'did not conspire with Russia' Mueller report a "complete exoneration", says US President Trump President Trump's campaign did not conspire with Russia during the 2016 election, according to a summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report submitted to Congress on Sunday. The report summary did not draw a conclusion as to whether Mr Trump illegally obstructed justice - not exonerating the president. The report was summarised for Congress by the attorney general, William Barr. President Trump tweeted in response: "No Collusion, No Obstruction." Follow live reaction to report's conclusions Mueller report: Key lines from Barr summary Read Barr's full summary of the report Mr Trump, who repeatedly described the inquiry as a witch hunt, said on Sunday that "it was a shame that the country had to go through this", describing the inquiry as an "illegal takedown that failed". The report is the culmination of two years of investigation by Mr Mueller which saw some of the president's closest former aides prosecuted and, in some cases, imprisoned. "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him," Mr Mueller wrote in his report. Skip Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump Report End of Twitter post by @realDonaldTrump please log in to view this image What is in the report summary? The summary letter by Mr Barr outlines the inquiry's findings relating to Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election. Mr Barr concluded: "The special counsel did not find that any US person or Trump campaign official conspired or knowingly co-ordinated with Russia." The second part of the letter addresses the issue of obstruction of justice. Mr Barr's summary says the special counsel report "ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment". "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other - as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction," the letter read. Who's who in the drama to end all dramas? The Trump-Russia saga in 350 words Mr Barr says that the evidence was not sufficient "to establish that the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offence". Mr Barr ends his letter to Congress by saying he will release more from the full report, but that some of the material is subject to restrictions. "Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the [grand jury] material that by law cannot be made public," he wrote. "I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all information contained in the report as quickly as possible." How have US politicians reacted? Congressman Jerry Nadler, the Democratic Chair of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, emphasised that the attorney general did not rule out that Mr Trump may have obstructed justice. "Barr says that the president may have acted to obstruct justice, but that for an obstruction conviction, 'the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct'." Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, a member of the Senate's Judiciary Committee, said that while there was a lack of evidence to support "a prosecutable criminal conspiracy", questions remained over whether Mr Trump had been compromised. Skip Twitter post by @SenBlumenthal Report End of Twitter post by @SenBlumenthal please log in to view this image Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said in a joint statement that Mr Barr's letter "raises as many questions as it answers" and called for access to the full report. "For the president to say he is completely exonerated directly contradicts the words of Mr Mueller and is not to be taken with any degree of credibility," the statement said. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders described the findings of the report as "a total and complete exoneration of the president". Mr Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, said the report was "better than I expected". Republican Senator Mitt Romney welcomed the "good news", tweeting that it was now "time for the country to move forward". please log in to view this image A good day for Trump In his four-page letter to Congress, Attorney General William Barr summarises, mostly in his own words, the conclusions of the special counsel's investigation. In one key line, however, he directly quotes the report. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or co-ordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities." There, in Robert Mueller's own words, is the end result of nearly two years of work, 2,800 subpoenas, hundreds of search warrants and countless hours of interviews. There were "multiple offers" of help from "Russian-affiliated individuals" to the Trump campaign, but they never took the bait. There was, as Donald Trump might say, "no collusion". At least, no evidence of it was unearthed. The obstruction of justice component is a murkier matter. The decision of whether to charge Mr Trump with interference with the various investigations wasn't Mr Mueller's. Saying it involved "difficult issues", the former FBI director punted. Instead, Mr Barr - in consultation with Department of Justice staff - decided not to prosecute, in part because there was no apparent underlying crime to obstruct. Make no mistake, today was a very good day for Mr Trump. While a bevy of inquiries into his presidency will grind on, the shadow of Mr Mueller's investigation - hovering over the White House since May 2017 - has been lifted.
Yep actually you are right The divide must include all People’s it’s maths Brighton however is a white city imo Middle class down from London to escape plus add to that it’s the UKs San Francisco it all adds up
