The EU debate - Part II

The quran is claimed to be the word of god as revealed directly to mohamed. It's why they get upset if a book is damaged. The trouble is, he was illiterate, and the book was written after his death, based on written and verbal versions that were gathered up. Some were contradictory, and were edited out, which makes the claim problematic. Given it's the basis for the whole belief system, it begs many questions.

 

In terms of the Middle East I think it's safe to say that various forms of Christianity, Islam and Judaism have at various times been the aggressors and the oppressed in the area.

Just like on a global scale various nations have forged empires, taken slaves and intervened in one way or another where they did things that by today's standards would be seen as wrong.

I think there is an interesting point in regards to social attitudes and morals throughout history at the times of various empires and by what standards they should be judged. I personally don't think it is fair to judge the choices and actions of those that came from different eras based on our own social and cultural level of understanding today, whilst we should still look back and know that done today those same acts would be outrageous.

Though many look back at the days of empires with disgust, it is often forgotten all the positive advances in technologies, globalisation, industrialisation, social learning and cultural sharing and various other positives that came from them. Like most things in life there is good and bad and it's worth remembering both.

 

When the **** did this happen? About the time the aliens were building the pyramids I suppose?

Recorded history essentially starts with written records. Which in Britain was the time of the Roman conquest, yes. The era before this is known as pre-history.

 

There was an interesting documentary some time ago which looked at the dilemmas faced by aid agencies working in war zones.

Very briefly, using medicine sans frontiers as an example, they would treat anyone that came to them needing help, because to do otherwise meant they had taken sides, and lost their impartiality and claims to be a humane organisation.

A consequence was that victims would be recovering next to the people that put them there. The aggressors were repaired and nursed back to fighting strength ready to carry out more atrocities once they were up and about.

 

The Sumerians pre-date that piffle by about 3500 years.

 

Isn't there evidence of traded goods throughout Europe in pre roman times?

 

I think he's trying to claim there was no history before things were "written", which means Stonehenge isn't there.

 

UKIP or EDL then your racist ****

 

Stick the semantics you brainless racist prick

 

Britain you ****ing maggot

Never heard of the Empire?

 

There was no recorded history in Britain before the arrival of the Romans, because writing did not exist. Hence, pre-Roman Britain is referred to as pre-historic Britain, and very little is known about it precisely because there are no written records. What little we know about life in Britain before the Roman conquest, we have learned from the study of archeology and anthropology, not history. Everything we know about Stonehenge and the people who built it is pure conjecture, based solely on archeological evidence..

Obviously in other parts of the world recorded history began earlier, as writing began earlier.

Of course, lack of evidence doesn't stop the ignorant and the imaginative making **** up - in fact it encourages exactly that. But pure invention based on flimsy evidence isn't history. It's fantasy.

Obviously, many people in Hull still believe in Orcs and dragons. Having seen some of the women up there, I can easily understand why.

 

I can't believe you're even humouring this racist prick.

He deserves nothing but disdain, it's ****s like this who are the cause of the right wing divisive bullshit that's encroaching into the mainstream of British politics.

 

I also think a lack of openness, ability to listen and not judge and inability to discuss topics without a political slant by the mainstream parties has contributed to the more extreme left and right wing politics we are starting to see. Too much dismissal and disdain for those who don't fall in line or those who question the status quo and a lack of distinction between politicians has lead to growth at both ends of the political spectrum.

 

I think Zlatan has ****ed off. I was trying to educate the primitive tribesman from the North Sea coast.

 

**** off

This **** is a blatant racist you UKIP bell end

 

Calm down sweetheart

I'm not defending any other persons posts, just chiming in with some reasons I think we are seeing a growth in more left and right leaning politics rather than the centre ground status quo we have seen for a couple of decades at least.

I've explained my reasons for voting UKIP multiple times on these forums and anyone who took the time to listen to me will have understood my reasoning and not used it as a way to berate my future opinions

 

You were defending his stance and his 'right to air his view' by default

I hate the way the right wing xenophobic, racially intolerant, islamophobic, racist tit head view has been given a veneer of acceptability in recent times, within the political spectrum of this country.

The EDL, BNP et al sorts have merged into UKIP ( the party you support)

They spout off like this twat, trying to rationalise their generalists racist bullshit, and it's somehow deemed a 'reasoned debate'. It ****ing isn't, he's a hate peddler making massive generalisations about an entire religion and deserves nothing more than a smack in the mouth

 

Another bell end from Hull? Or a multi of one of the existing bell ends from Hull?

 

I didn't ask how many kitchens this one had.

 

He could have 500, he's still a ****.

I note the posters who were either directly or indirectly defending his viewpoint were all out voters .

Spooky coincidence I'm sure