david_carnell

Just so you don't have room for manouevre Tony - my mobile device makes providing a link to the stats difficult. However, the wikipedia page listing WW2 casualties lists them all by nation. A casual glance allows for a quick rebuttal of your "guesstimate".

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your reply above seems perfectly reasonable in > their case. > > As you know millions died in the last 2 World Wars > fighting for Freedom for Britain and the British > people. > > 99% of them were White/British, which was > representative of British Society then. > > How do you think THEY would feel if by, a time > machine they returned to Britain now and observed > that their Culture and fellow White/Brits ,that > they fought and died for, have become almost > extinct and fast diminishing in many areas ? > > How do you, honestly, think thatTHEY would feel > about that? Well firstly your stats are incorrect. Your 99% White/British codswallop does a massive disservice to the 2.5million Indians who served, fought and died in war that didn't affect them, and for an empire that had yet to free them. And then there were the 250000 Africans who fought too. I wonder how THEY feel that their contribution is overlooked and ignored in order to justify some spurious race-relation nonsense about the decline of pie and mash shops?

Shut up Sean. The beer and unaccustomed bout of physical activity can do funny things to a mans sense of bravado.

The race will be underway in 10 mins. All spectators to the Clockhouse. On your marks...

The hungry caterpillar?

Would you kill 1000001 people if it saved 1000000 people? Torture is NEVER acceptable. Ever. Without room for negotiation.

True, the Daily Mail might be interested. Doesn't *Bob* work for them? He'll set you straight.

Oh well done Ted. We forgot that last year and the chaos caused by a dozen joggers on the pavement to the traffic of SE London was negligible. But better safe than sorry. Unless you're an injury lawyer like me in which case sorry doesn't cut it and we'll give you 100% of your compensation.

Marjorie - relax. As an injury-lawyer I have already taken the precaution of phoning the police, council, and the Health & Safety Executive to get clearance for the event. My colleagues were threatening to hand out business cards to anyone who fell over otherwise. If you would like to PM me I can give you reference numbers and officials to talk to if you need reassurance. Now... do all competitors have their mandatory safety equipment (hard hat, elbow & knee pads, bucket for vomitus) and please bring your insurance waivers with you, countersigned by your mothers on the day. Good luck all.

Leonard Shelby it is Ted. You're up.

Correctamundo. Over to you HAL....

I am a Cuban ?migr? under the guise of a political refugee. Despite a close call with a lumberjack my pursuit of wealth and power goes well until I had incestuous thoughts about my sister, killed my best friend, said hello to a diminutive pal and then died in amongst some South American exports I had been handling.

Luke Skywalker?

Could have been dead baby mice in a bottle of wine: http://cdn-i.dmdentertainment.com/cracked/wong/micewine2.jpg

Good. In the meantime I'm off to hug a mugger and knit my own yoghurt.

Anecdotally (I buy the Guardian, my parents buy the Daily Mail) I would say that the left wing broadsheets tend to publish less sensationalised stories about the moral decline of Britain and scaremongering articles on crime. I doubt it would be possible to verify this theory though. Of course there are some serious problems that still afflict our nation today, but I don't believe things are as bad as is often made out. PS: Truce over?? You mean my enemy's enemy isn't my friend?! ;-)

I can't imagine many people would want to sit around and listen to us windbags argue back and forth. Mind you, I love the sound of my own voice so am happy to shoot the breeze in real life with you, MamoraMan. Name your time and place. I nominate the Dulwich Constitutional Club for the first bout with a rematch at the Peckham Working Man's Club.

Atila Reincarnate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm sure many of you on EDF have read/heard about > the tragic case of a 14 year old lad you was > knifed and killed in a random gang attack in East > London. The lad himslef had no association with a > gang. AS he was being punched and kicked to the > ground he screamed in pain and called out for his > mum. The alleged assailant was heard by witnesses > to have said that the victime would "feel my > shank". > > I'm guessing that ther are those of you on this > Forum would say that the knifeman should be told > in no uncertain terms that he is a very naughty > boy and mustn't do such horrid things ever again. > He should then be given some form of counselling > so that he can, at some point in his life, be > valuable to society by offering the benefit of his > considerable social skills and life experience. > After all the poor mite has obviously suffered > some kind of trauma to act in such a nasty way. > And if none of this works we let him back into > society and no doubt some other inocent bystander > will "feel my shank". Oh well never mind, these > things are sent to try us eh? > > I hope this is a reasonable, articulate and non > spittle flecked and meets with the approval of d > carnell, Mr MaGabhann and Bob. I trust you are all > enjoying your day. Epic fail.

I know. Apologies, but I only saw that after I'd published.

Sherwick - it's phrases like "our values" that worry me if I'm honest. Whose values? Yours? Mine? Tony's? Gordon Brown's? Nick Griffin's? Take something like equality for women and homosexuals. Whilst you might struggle to find someone on this site who disagrees with those sentiments, there are undoubtedly people out there that do. The Christian Right for example. Now those people are as British as you or I yet have very different "values". How can you then reconcile somehow forcing (and I'm not sure how you'd achieve or measure this anyway) immigrants to sign up to some abstract set of values? In fact I'd challenge people to come up with a list of irrefutable values that are the basic tenets of "British-ness". 1) Rule of law 2) Democratic government 3) ???? Almost everything else I've thought of can be challenged and argued over.

Sherwick - I think the difficulty is in defining what these shared values and "indigenous culture" are. Culture is not static. Values spring from the dialectical clash of cultures. The conflicts between working-class culture and bourgeois culture in industrial society is what gave us freedoms of speech, assembly and press, adult franchise, trade union rights, free education and the welfare state. The welfare state itself could not have taken off without the contribution of immigrant workers from the Commonwealth. And the clash of cultures between West Indian and Asian workers on the one hand and white workers, on the other, is what freed the trade unions of their racism and threw up common values of racial justice. Nor is culture homogeneous. A homogeneous culture, as advocated by Christian, Muslim and Hindu fundamentalists is a dead culture. Culture progresses through bastardisation. And besides you can't have had an empire (like Britain) and be homogeneous at the same time. In Britain we should be in search of the integration that Roy Jenkins envisaged. "Not as a flattening process of assimilation but as equal opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance". Albeit with some of the provisos I outlined in my previous post. There does need to be a framework established where certain values or rights are non-negotiable (acknowledging the rule of law for eg). Edit - have just read you last post - yes, certain values are sacrosanct and those that settle in this country should be encouraged to sign up to them. The equality of women, rule of law, democracy etc would, imo, be among these.

This is a bitter pill to swallow, but I think I know, partially, what Tony is getting at and to some extent I have sympathy with his position or the position of those he refers to. Let me explain. There is, I believe, very large segments of people within our society who sense that they are threatened by massive immigration and by the growing minorities within their borders that hail from different cultures, follow different practices, and have separate institutions and loyalties. But street violence, verbal outbursts of hate, and growing support for various extremist parties are unwholesome reactions. People feel threatened that their sense of identity, self-determination, and culture, which come on top of concerns evoked by globalization, new communications technologies, and a gradual loss of national sovereignty are being eroded. To throw the feelings of many millions of people in their faces, calling them ?discriminatory,? ?exclusionary,? ?hypocritical,? and worse, is an easy politics, but is not truly committed to resolving the problem. People?s anxieties and concerns should not be dismissed out of hand, nor can they be effectively treated by labelling them racist or xenophobic. Furthermore, telling people that they ?need? immigrants because of economic reasons or demographic shortfalls makes a valid and useful argument, but does not address their profoundest misgivings. The challenge is to find ways to constructively address these concerns. At the same time, we should ensure that these sentiments do not find antisocial, hateful, let alone violent expressions. Two approaches are to be avoided: promoting assimilation and unbounded multiculturalism. Assimilation ? which entails requiring minorities to abandon all of their distinct institutions, cultures, values, habits, and connections to other societies in order to fully mesh into the prevailing culture (see France to an extent) ? is sociologically difficult to achieve. It is morally unjustified because of our respect for some normative differences, such as to which gods we pray. Unbounded multiculturalism ? which entails giving up the concept of shared values, loyalties, and identity in order to privilege ethnic and religious differences, presuming that nations can be replaced by a large number of diverse minorities ? is also unwelcome. It is likely to evoke undemocratic backlashes, ranging from support for extremist, rightwing parties and populist leaders (see the furore surrounding the BNP) to anti-minority policies. It is unjustified because it fails to recognize the values and institutions held dear by the society at large, such as those that protect women?s and gay rights. The basic approach I favour is Diversity Within Unity (from which I have plagiarised this post). It presumes that all members of a given society will fully respect and adhere to those basic values and institutions that are considered part of the basic shared framework of the society. At the same time, every group in society is free to maintain its distinct subculture ? those policies, habits, and institutions that do not conflict with the shared core ? and a strong measure of loyalty to its country of origin, as long as this does not trump loyalty to the society in which it lives if these loyalties come into conflict. Respect for the whole and respect for all is at the essence of the position. The problem comes in trying to define what those shared values and frameworks are.....

Ted Max Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it student union debating to think that the > constant wail of Broken Britain from the Telegraph > and the Mail (the two worst, but not only, > culprits) has had a part to play in this > coarsening of mood. Or am I blaming the > messengers? Not at all Ted. I think that is definitely part of the problem. In innumerable ways the country is as good as it has ever been, yet from reading and watching various media outlets anyone would think that society is on the brink of collapse due to any of the following: drugs, crime, sex, alcohol, abortion, gays, young people, ethnic minorities, political correctness etc. But good news doesn't sell newspapers. Just ask the owners of the Guardian and Independent.

SteveT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > d-c wrote:- This could be a short and pyrrhic > victory for the BNP. > > > pyrrhic definition, Metrical foot. > > Pyrrhic with capital P is a war dance of the > ancient Greeks. > > > Nothing like sticking to the point a david-c. Nothing like pointless pedantry eh Steve. A Pyrrhic victory is one that comes at great cost to the victor. I think it's pretty obvious what I meant in relation to my point about EU employment law being used to prosecute the BNP. I mean, really?!

We haven't had hyper inflation with ten million unemployed. We haven't just lost a major European war suffering hundreds of thousands of casualties. The BNP do not have an armed wing carrying out attacks on rival political parties. This current govt, whilst inept at times, is hardly the Weimar Republic. We haven't been paying punitive restoration payments to our European neighbours not have we been banned from having an armed forces.