***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 4 *****
==========================================================
I fully accept that a negligible proportion of the people who would describe themselves as Muslims, in developed countries especially, do not identify with ISIL. But it happens in the name of their religion. On the face of it they must be more opposed to ISIL, and fearful of it in fact, than the rest of us. The Syrian refugees are mostly Muslims; there was an interview with one, an oil industry engineer with a wife and family, who said he had been contacted by ISIL and told he had to work for them - so he very sensibly scarpered instead.
But where are the Islamic countries in all this? Why are more refugees not moving to other Arab states or to Turkey, and aligning themselves with decent folk with similar beliefs to their own?
>>not only does every other religion, but most Muslims would actually agree with you
>>that they need dealing with. Most Muslims are just ordinary people wanting to earn
>> a crust, raise their families, and get ahead in life
Indeed. People are people, everywhere. But while you are berating Roger for his description of Islam as proselytising and intolerant, at the centre of the religion is Saudi Arabia; a ready made Sunni Islamic state where every citizen must be Muslim, and is forbidden on pain of death to convert to another religion, and where practising any other faith is illegal (it does go on unofficially among non-citizens, but I suspect they are very circumspect about involving any Saudis).
It's complicated and unfair. People such as your friend are not to blame; and I am sure that the majority of sensible Muslims (I'm not even getting into the Sunni/Shia aspect and further sub-divisions) do not feel that they are any part of the problem - but it would be a stretch to say that it has nothing to do with Islam.
I freely admit that I understand very little about how it all fits together or where to start fixing things; but I'm pretty sure that emptying Syria and north Africa into Europe is not the answer, their sake as well as Europe's.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Sep 15 at 19:26
|
>> But where are the Islamic countries in all this? Why are more refugees not moving
>> to other Arab states or to Turkey, and aligning themselves with decent folk with similar
>> beliefs to their own?
Lebanon (1.14 million), Jordan (608,000) Turkey (815,000) syrian refuges. (those are the numbers for those registered, its believed its double that number in lebanon and Jordan) 500k have even fled to iraq!
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 7 Sep 15 at 18:20
|
>> Lebanon (1.14 million), Jordan (608,000) Turkey (815,000) syrian refuges. (those are the numbers for
>> those registered, its believed its double that number in lebanon and Jordan) 500k have even
>> fled to iraq!
Well when you put it like that...a little more light on the subject.
There's also the question I guess of where people think they can earn a living; probably more to the front of most people's minds than where they can claim benefits. I don't suppose that idea has much appeal for the Mail either unless it is construed as "taking our jobs".
|
> I'm pretty sure that emptying Syria and north Africa into Europe is not the answer, their sake as well as Europe's.
It's not. But neither is barbed wire.
But look, the media has moved in one week from the evil criminals in Calais to the pitiful people need support.
A solution would need careful thought, deliberate action and consistency over time. It would require the will to live with one's choices, for good and for bad.
How is that possible in a country managed by the Daily Mail?
The UK is a country full of gobby NIMBYs. "All poor refugees should be helped". "Its horrible to abandon them". "They should be housed and looked after".
"............but not in my backyard!!!!"
Extremists like Roger who are scared of all things foreigner are not common, nor are the other extremists who want to fling the doors open and welcome everybody blindly.
The trouble is, its those two bunches of idiots making all the noise with the media flip flapping between the two.
The middle of the road needs to speak. There are rational and sensible approaches, just don't expect the mouthy bigots to come up with them, or support them, whichever side of the line they hide.
|
I personally believe that there is a huge number of people who are not extreme nor are they racist and nor are they led by the DM but are at best doubtful about the wisdom of massive immigration, whatever the source and reason. However they do not speak up because when they do, they are accused of being racist, unhumanitarian, extreme or otherwise prejudiced.
I agree with your comment about NIMBYism too, but I suspect that one reason for the Nimbys is the reason above.
|
An explanation for the whole Levant/ISIS thing:
i100.independent.co.uk/article/letter-to-daily-mail-gives-excellent-explanation-of-war-with-isis--lkdXgHvQrg
To be fair the existence of Aubrey Murray and the true authorship are matters of dispute.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 7 Sep 15 at 20:41
|
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11848477/Islamic-State-is-rubbing-its-hands-with-glee-over-the-Syrian-refugee-crisis.html
>>
They don't sound like gleeful people, but ISIL did reportedly (or was that just the DM?) threaten back in Jan/Feb to send half a million asylum seekers to Europe into which it would also insinuate 500 (?) "fighters".
It is fairly assured of hitting the first target. I wonder how it is getting on with the second.
Even if the higher estimate of 200,000 armed oppressors is correct, they are running rings around the governments opposing them.
And the more territory they control, the greater the number of new conscripts.
A compassion contest has broken out amongst the Labour leadership candidates with the oily Burnham claiming he was the first to demand that UK took more Syrians in, not Cooper.
We need some serious thought here, not this knee-jerk, populist posturing whether it is for or against housing refugees. Fat chance.
|
Ultimately ISIS will die when it becomes unfashionable. When its fighters aren't getting global recognition, feted in every village, in the newspapers whenever they want, then they will return tot he infighting and squabbling that they have been doing for millenia.
The leaders will decide they like being reach and can't be bothered with all the hard work, individuals build their little fiefdoms and the infighting starts.
To be fair though, western media, politicians and reactionaries are trying their best to keep it going as long as possible.
Even our local pet racists continue to try to stir up the fear to maintain the momentum.
Fortunately, they too shall pass.
|
>>I personally believe that there is a huge number of people who are not extreme nor are they racist and nor are they led by the DM
You would certainly hope so. But they are a bit invisible and unheard.
>>at best doubtful about the wisdom of massive immigration
I doubt that anybody rational can truly think its a good idea. And I don't mean out of fear and hatred from people such as Roger, but out of genuine and practical concern.
However, it is difficult to know what else you can do in the current situation; Certainly in a sufficiently short timescale. But because of ignorant fanatics at either end of the spectrum, and an appalling media feeding both, then a sensible conversation is all but impossible.
|
|
Were I commanding ISIS I'd be regarding this as a wonderful opportunity to slip as many terrorists as I could in among the refugees.
|
|
I take your point, but I don't think they need to. All the successful terrorist attacks of recent years seem to have involved nationals of the attacked country or those at least well established there.
|
>> I take your point, but I don't think they need to. All the successful terrorist
>> attacks of recent years seem to have involved nationals of the attacked country or those
>> at least well established there.
>>
Nothing like the real thing to do a bit of serious recruiting and provid a direct link to the organisation though.
|
>> Nothing like the real thing to do a bit of serious recruiting and provid a
>> direct link to the organisation though.
Will we get as many back as we sent out there?
|
>>Nothing like the real thing to do a bit of serious recruiting and provid a direct link to the organisation though
I'm sure that's true, but in my limited experience they are not really the major problem.
When I was working in Boston in the 80s, the most fervent supporters of the IRA were the "Irish American" who'd had absolutely nothing to do with Ireland since the 20s, if then, and they only knew about that from grandparents [at least].
I have some very good friends in Birmingham - Pakistani Muslim. They are two different families who are both quite liberal (by their standards) in their views. However, the families around them that are the most strict, the most restrictive and the most traditional are those who left Pakistan in the 50s.
I rather suspect that "new" immigrants are not a fraction of the problem, nor cause a fraction of the difficulty, as those fanatics who think that they are part of something.
Like these kids we read of in the Daily Mail who go off to defend oppressed Muslims by joining ISIS.
They're not recent immigrants, or even immigrants at all. They are descendants of immigrants who for some reason feel the need to associate with some imaginary past.
I've seen/experienced similar all over the world.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 7 Sep 15 at 22:22
|
"Like these kids we read of in the Daily Mail who go off to defend oppressed Muslims by joining ISIS."
How to spot a member of the so-called 'permanently-offended' brigade - they read the DM solely to be offended. They know that it's a load of rubbish, they know that other news outlets are available (all carrying the same story) - yet still they read the DM. Ah, well!
"They are descendants of immigrants who for some reason feel the need to associate with some imaginary past."
This is the worrying bit. Many of the indigenous population question the sense in importing folks who profess a medieval religion into what is evolving into a stable secular society.
|
>>How to spot a member of the so-called 'permanently-offended' brigade
Perhaps you should stick to subjects a little less complex and a little easier to understand. This one appears to be a little beyond you.
|
"Perhaps you should stick to subjects a little less complex"
I didn't realise that choice of newspaper was such a complex affair.
|
>>I didn't realise that choice of newspaper was such a complex affair.
The fact that you think it was about choice of newspaper is what makes it appear a little beyond you.
|
"The fact that you think it was about choice of newspaper is what makes it appear a little beyond you."
Apologies if I have offended you. If you wish to read the DM, that's entirely up to you.
|
|
To be fair, I read the DM online for entertainment pretty regularly, and while there's plenty more about the Kardashians than in (say) the Telegraph, I don't remember stories about kids joining ISIS that weren't all over the media.
|
>> >>How to spot a member of the so-called 'permanently-offended' brigade
>>
>> Perhaps you should stick to subjects a little less complex and a little easier to
>> understand. This one appears to be a little beyond you.
>>
Sometimes you are just too rude and up yourself.
|
|
If it irritates idiots its fine for me.
|
>> This is the worrying bit. Many of the indigenous population question the sense in importing
>> folks who profess a medieval religion into what is evolving into a stable secular society.
Quite right. Lets ban Catholics and Jews from entering the country. Oh and protestants form Northern Ireland.
|
"Quite right. Lets ban Catholics and Jews from entering the country. Oh and protestants form Northern Ireland."
Yes - I did say 'evolving into a stable, secular society' - we aren't there yet. It was reported that anti-semitic attacks have increased recently.
|
This country can not evolve in to a secular society so long as the head of one religion is the automatic, unelected head of state, and clerics of that state religion are granted unelected seats in the legislature.
If, as you say, you desire a secular society, we must first reform the governance of the country to remove the church from the establishment.
I'm glad someone else on here finally agrees with me, Haywain. Republic now, and fully elected legislature.
|
"This country can not evolve in to a secular society........"
Evolution can be a long, slow process.......
|
Yes, and the necessary mutations have to happen for it to happen at all. In this case, the mutations needed for the evolution to begin are the removal of the Monarchy and the unelected second chamber.
Impossible to see it otherwise. We can not, by definition, consider ourselves secular until these tasks are out of the way.
|
Sorry, maybe I am irritable this morning, but do give it a rest Al
Society in this country is secular in any meaningful way you want to measure it.
Religions play no real meaningful part in the governance of this country.
You are mistaking ceremonial traditions with real influence.
People of any religion, gender, sexual preference etc can be prime minister.
We have a monarchy because most of us either like it that way or don't mind because it isn't, in any real way, part of the power structure of this nation.
Rant over
|
None so blind as those who won't see, cd. To imagine that the monarchy and established church have no influence in this country is extremely naive. How you can state that unelected positions in the legislature for clerics is non-influential and just a ceremonial tradition is beyond me.
I'm just stating simple fact that an established church and monarchy preclude the ability to call ourselves a secular society. Faith schools on the rise is another example. Continued divisions along religious lines in major cities and regions. Secular? No way. The fish rots from the head down.
In no way will I give this a rest, however much you want to rant about it.
France is secular. We are not.
|
The monarchy and established church have no power in this country, and have not had for a good many years.
26 bishops in 790 members of the house of Lords is not power,
Faith schools are an option in the world of education to take or leave as parents choose.
We are a society where, for the vast majority, religion is a personal choice and not a source of discrimination. Most of us have friends and colleagues of other faiths or no faith, it does not limit or define how we live,
That is the real measure of a "secular" society
France at times veers towards fundamentalist secular and is not, in that respect, anything desirable.
|
"Yes, and the necessary mutations have to happen for it to happen at all. In this case, the mutations needed for the evolution to begin are the removal of the Monarchy and the unelected second chamber."
Evolution is an elemental process - not everything has to happen at once though of course, various changes can be developing concurrently. Presently, there's a great deal of discontentment with politicians and few folks would argue against a severe pruning of the upper house - particularly the religious component. The monarchy is, however, very popular with the majority of the public - so not a good time to try and remove them; best to wait until they turn bad enough to sway opinion.
Unfortunately, any attempts to rush evolution by revolution usually involve bloodshed, tears and unpleasant consequences.
|
|
Nobody is suggesting revolution. Merely a vote on the matter.
Last edited by: Alanović on Tue 8 Sep 15 at 12:11
|
"Nobody is suggesting revolution. Merely a vote on the matter."
Exactly, but voting on the popularity of the upper house would give a different result to voting on the future of the monarchy. Wait a few years and feelings about the monarchy with religious connections may be different. What would happen if a future monarch decided that, after all, he/she didn't believe in god and, in conscience, wouldn't wish to take the throne?
I wonder if they just go through with the pomp and ceremony like some people go through a church wedding service. We chose to get hitched* in a registry office, but this would not have been considered good form at one time.
* I'm not sure nowadays what the difference is between marriage, civil ceremony etc, so 'hitched' seems to be the most appropriate term.
|
>> Nobody is suggesting revolution. Merely a vote on the matter.
You really don't want one of those. The result would defeat your stance and everyone would abuse you because you are a minion.
sorry, meant minority.
|
I would expect the result to depend entirely upon the question. Then the answer of the people should then be abided by, whether it's the one I want or not. I am not Alex Salmond.
I'd just like us to be asked for starters, I'm not aware we have been. Death of the current Monarch would be a good time, but no real reason to not have it sooner.
|
I don't see the connection between disestablishmentarianism and republicanism.
The church is connected to the state, as represented by the monarch, that's all. You don't have to get rid of the monarchy to disestablish the church.
I am in favour of a secular state. The state has no business with religion other than maintaining freedom of religion.
When the most popular religion in the UK (by number of professed adherents) ceases to be christianity and becomes islam, the idea that a state should have a religion will be untenable and that problem will be solved.
Last edited by: Manatee on Tue 8 Sep 15 at 11:29
|
>> I am in favour of a secular state.
Then how can you be in favour of the head of that state being the head of a religion, unelected and by right? How can you be in favour of unelected clerics sitting in the legislature?
|
|
Do these unelected clerics (or bishops to the rest of us) actually vote on anything?
|
Yes.
Why would we want people in the legislature who don't vote on things anyway, if you're implying that would be OK?
|
|
I think there's quite a few that don't vote but are members. Interesting i don't know that they voted.
|
>> >> I am in favour of a secular state.
>>
>> Then how can you be in favour of the head of that state being the
>> head of a religion, unelected and by right? How can you be in favour of
>> unelected clerics sitting in the legislature?
well I'm not, am I?
If you disestablish the church, then that goes away and the monarchy can remain. The monarch is only head of the church on behalf of the state - it is a state church, not the monarch's church, that is very clear to me. Disestablishment as an idea has been around for hundreds of years and has actually happened in Scotland and Wales.
Just separate (verb) church and state. A state church is an anachronism in that it sets one church, and therefore one religion, above the others when they are all equally fantastic.
|
|
OK, none of which justifies an unelected head of state, nor does it address the matter of clerics in the HoL.
|
>> OK, none of which justifies an unelected head of state, nor does it address the
>> matter of clerics in the HoL.
It's not meant to justify an unelected head of state, that's another question.
And if you disestablish the church then it seems reasonable to remove the automatic right of said clerics to take part in the legislature.
|
>> >. Disestablishment as
>> an idea has been around for hundreds of years and has actually happened in Scotland
>> and Wales.
>>
I don't think the Church of Scotland has been disestablished.
The Queen has some other title, and is not the head as she is of the Church of England.
|
I'm an anti-disestablishmentarianist.
Well I'm not really but that's the only time I've ever got to use what I alwasy understood to be the longest word in the English language.
|
"I'm an anti-disestablishmentarianist.
Well I'm not really but that's the only time I've ever got to use what I alwasy understood to be the longest word in the English language."
Not quite - anti-disestablishmentarianism is a bit longer because a 'm' takes up more room that a 't'.
;-)
|
>> Not quite - anti-disestablishmentarianism is a bit longer because a 'm' takes up more room
>> that a 't'.
Only when a proportional font is used.
|
"Only when a proportional font is used."
Or when I write it out by hand.
'Handwriting ........... anyone remember that? ;-)
|
Remember it but don't miss it.
Never in my life did I manage to write something neatly or presentably.
|
>> Remember it but don't miss it.
>>
>> Never in my life did I manage to write something neatly or presentably.
Was in Chillingham Castle a week or two back (oddest place I've ever been) and in a case was a handwritten letter. Two small boys were trailing around, and one asked his big brother what it was.
"Don't know. I can't read that. Anyway, it's done by hand and nobody except the Queen ever did that."
|
>> Was in Chillingham Castle a week or two back (oddest place I've ever been)
do tell! whats the oddness?
|
Tripadvisor might tell you better than I, but in brief:
You pay your reasonably large entry fee. Whilst you queue you notice everything is a bit grubby. And smelly. And there is a mismatch of objects on the walls. No problem, it will all be explained no doubt.
It's not. There is room after room of dilapidated furniture, broken bits and pieces, junk, strange out of keeping items, none of which have relationship to the castle, or the family, or anything at all. There are things all over the stairs. The Health and Safety boys have clearly been barred entry.
It's like Steptoe's yard, tipped over every surface with no reason. It's very down at heel, very sad, and completely puzzling.
Post trip googling reveals the information that Sir Humphrey apparently goes around the world to random junk shops, buys the lot and literally dumps it all in any corner still left. If that's not true it feels as if it is.
My family all thought it was a complete rip off. I thought it was great.
I put a picture on my Flickr if you want to see it, just as an example...
flic.kr/p/wWU4rp
|
I assume you can stick pins in it? fantastic. I love places like that.
Tho on the other hand, I went to Eltham Palace on Sunday. Utterly fantastic place for anyone who loves 1930s art deco modernism. (I do I admit)
There was a pretend dinner party on, and people who entered were given a pretend identity. I was Rab Butler.
|
>> I put a picture on my Flickr if you want to see it, just as
>> an example...
>>
>> flic.kr/p/wWU4rp
Sounds as if he was inspired by Snowshill Manor, but doesn't quite have the eye.
Worth a visit when you are in the area.
www.nationaltrust.org.uk/snowshill-manor/
|
We've always loved Eltham. Wonderful stuff. And yes, we did compare with Snowshill but there you come out feeling charmed, whereas at Chillingham there's probably a possibility of the same but without the c at the front.
|
>> Sounds as if he was inspired by Snowshill Manor, but doesn't quite have the eye.
>> www.nationaltrust.org.uk/snowshill-manor/
I'll put that one in my todo list. I love upmarket junk shops.
|
>>There is room after room of dilapidated furniture, broken bits and pieces, junk, strange out of keeping items, none of which have relationship to the castle, or the family, or anything at all. There are things all over the stairs. The Health and Safety boys have clearly been barred entry.
>>It's like Steptoe's yard, tipped over every surface with no reason. It's very down at heel, very sad, and completely puzzling.
Not changed in the 9 years since we were there, then.
|
|
I got baptised in a font. I think it was round not proportional
|
Anyone who suggests that the children of immigrants are by necessity less narrow minded forget that the London bombers were second generation immigrants.. as was teh jihadist killed by a drone.
Until the Muslim population in the UK actively stand up and condemn those who preach hatred and try to convert young Muslims, then there will be a problem. (maybe they are, I don't know)
After all, we all heard that Salman Rushdie was given a fatwa - but preachers of hate apparently are immune.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" .Edmund Burke.
|
Until the Muslim population in the UK actively stand up and condemn those who preach
>> hatred and try to convert young Muslims, then there will be a problem. (maybe they are, I don't know)
Not being funny, but if you don't know what they are doing, why state they aren't doing enough ?
|
>> Not being funny, but if you don't know what they are doing, why state they
>> aren't doing enough ?
>>
Because there are Muslims going to train in terrorism abroad and home based ones have bombed and murdered here. They need to sort out their own.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 8 Sep 15 at 12:20
|
Missed the edit.
And not complain when it is done for them, even if it does involve a drone.
|
>> Missed the edit.
>>
>> And not complain when it is done for them, even if it does involve a
>> drone.
Never understood the outrage over remote piloted aircraft. I think alot of it is based on ignorance.
|
>> Never understood the outrage over remote piloted aircraft. I think alot of it is based on ignorance.
Yes. It annoys people to think they may be killed by a robot instead of a human risking his or her life.
It's funny really. Robots make sense to me.
|
>> >> Never understood the outrage over remote piloted aircraft. I think alot of it is
>> based on ignorance.
>>
>> Yes. It annoys people to think they may be killed by a robot
They aren't robots not really.
instead of a human risking his or her life.
Minimal difference in this case.
|
>> They aren't robots not really.
True, sorry, they aren't autonomous but remotely controlled or piloted.
Quite a big difference though. Human protoplasm is judged to be precious (even when it's cheaper financially than drone technology). Machines are disposable.
|
|
There are differences of course non of them matter in this case though.
|
>> Missed the edit.
>>
>> And not complain when it is done for them, even if it does involve a
>> drone.
You got to a place, of your own free will, where you know it is dangerous, you go there to kill and there is a good chance you will get killed.
You get killed.
No one deserves or has a right to an explanation, how or by who or why.
|
>> You got to a place, of your own free will, where you know it is
>> dangerous, you go there to kill and there is a good chance you will get
>> killed.
>>
>> You get killed.
If you get killed by a stray bullet or get captured /tortured by the another side, and Assad's goons ain't nice people, I'd agree.
But being taken out in a targeted assassination by you're own government, without any declaration of war and when operating outside the government's parlaimentary mandate?
Hmmmm
While those questioning this for now might be libertarians of right or left it's only a few steps before public opinion sudenly gives a stuff. Or even if not - who was bothered about WMD until the scandal blew up on TB's watch?
|
>> who was bothered about WMD until the scandal blew up on TB's watch?
>>
The bother with WMD at the time and more so as time went on is/was that they were mythical or so well hidden that nobody has found them, although maybe in 50 years someone will find a train full of them in a mountain.
|
|
They aren't the police are mi5. They can't get perfection.
|
|
Should say or rather than are.
|
>> Because there are Muslims going to train in terrorism abroad and home based ones have
>> bombed and murdered here. They need to sort out their own.
Was the Pope supposed to sort out his own in the IRA?
|
>>
>> >> Because there are Muslims going to train in terrorism abroad and home based ones
>> have
>> >> bombed and murdered here. They need to sort out their own.
>>
>> Was the Pope supposed to sort out his own in the IRA?
>>
I thought the Pope at the time was Polish and not Irish so Ireland was nothing to do with him...
|
|
It might have been a help.
|
>> Was the Pope supposed to sort out his own in the IRA?
There was certainly a view that he should have!
|
Private Eye alerted me to this one.
www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/corrections/article4523201.ece
Do bears sh** in the woods? :-)
|
>>
>> >> Was the Pope supposed to sort out his own in the IRA?
>>
>> There was certainly a view that he should have!
>>
Well as he could not even sort out his own child abusing priests in S Ireland, the idea he could could sort out N Ireland lacks a certain credibility...
|
Interesting item on Radio 4's PM last night. One stream feeding into the migration to Europe is apparently people leaving Jordan and Turkey. The reason is that the the UN funding that was housing and feeding them has petered out.
Left destitute they either risk returning to Syria or take the risky boat trip to Europe.
|
|
I wonder when the link to the ending of op mare nostrum to this increase will be made, none of the press have made the link yet. A good question would be to start looking at the reasons why it ended.
|
Many will have seen the clip of the big crane falling onto the Grand Mosque in Mecca and seen the casualty figures.
There was an item on the box last night about a suicide bomber inside a mosque, not that one but I thought also in Mecca. The camera dwelt on big pools of blood and guts soaked into carpets, and shrapnel damage up to roof level from the ball bearings the bomber is said to have packed round the explosive vest he/she wore.
No mention of anything like that since, or in today's comic. Did it happen, or did I imagine it? Perhaps it was felt we aren't grown-up enough to be shown stuff like that.
|
>> There was an item on the box last night about a suicide bomber inside a
>> mosque, not that one but I thought also in Mecca.
A bit of googling brings up a suicide bombing at a mosque in Saudi during August. Not in Mecca though, somewhere towards Yemen. Thought to be aimed at military and probably part of the proxy war going on in Yemen.
ISIL bombed one in Kuwait earlier in year too.
|
Thanks Bromptonaut. Saudi but not Mecca.
I'm crap at googling.
|
|
Well, according to the effete "Dhimmi" Dave, all Yorkshire folk hate each other anyway, so that won't matter.
|
Come on Dog, the Express effectively say "we've extrapolated these figures" as in "we've made them up for the story".
|
>>Come on Dog, the Express effectively say "we've extrapolated these figures" as in "we've made them up for the story".
Tomorrows loo paper ... available a day early ;)
|
>> Well, according to the effete "Dhimmi" Dave,
I've not heard that before, wiki tells me it means protected person in Arabic.
|
>> >> Well, according to the effete "Dhimmi" Dave,
>>
>> I've not heard that before, wiki tells me it means protected person in Arabic.
>>
"protected person in Arabic!
It's a pejorative term in this instance.
|
>> It's a pejorative term in this instance.
>>
>>
In what sense ?
|
Migrant Crisis - Zero
