BF2S Forums More PC in GB. Did you know Christmas and Easter are now offensive?

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

I guess I wonder why they would bother about worrying about offending anyone...according to the UK people on this forum, the muslim population is so insignificant it shouldn't be mentioned at all.

exactly, yet there seems to be constant efforts to not offend people that do not seem to exist in any significant numbers there. Not sure what is happening.

You guys really have no clue what you're talking about; keep on rimming each other's cornholes because you're both full of misinformation.

Any British citizen that denies the presence of other cultures and religious groups in today's modern Britain is clearly living under a rock. Of course it's not 'significant' in terms of actual statistics- White British denizens are still the great majority, but there are definite and considerable minority groups present (Muslims are an example)- and they have their own culture areas and place in modern British society.

Read a book on the subject, as opposed to the Daily Mail. They don't "sugar coat" articles, they make shit up, or publish rumours on a whim because they know it'll sell to dimwit clueless dipshits like yourselves that lap it up with their latent xenophobism and anti-Islamism.

Bertster7 wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Read a book on the subject, as opposed to the Daily Mail. They don't "sugar coat" articles, they make shit up, or publish rumours on a whim because they know it'll sell to dimwit clueless dipshits like yourselves that lap it up with their latent xenophobism and anti-Islamism.

Yes they do. Just because stuff is in a book doesn't mean it is accurate or unbiased. I can think of numerous pertinent examples to this case - but the best known books of this sort are possibly Michael Moores.

"Read a book" is a figure of speech more than a literal imperative; what, you want me to supply him with a reading list? The figure of speech doesn't imply that books are a pure fountain of knowledge and intellectual clarity, I just meant it in the 'read some real educating news on the topic' sense. Geesh, I can't believe I have to explain this point. Go buy a book of popular idioms.

And whilst we're on the tangent of discussing bias and accurate books, I hope your Michael Moore comment was sarcastic. No one person's bullshit is nicer smelling than another's.

Last edited by Uzique (2008-09-19 11:05:08)

To people like Uzique, and Spark and just about everyone else the only reliable sources of information are those that back up their opinions. I am sure I could, "read a book" all day long about Eurabia or the Islamification of Europe, but of course these would be considered "bullshit". To get truly enlightened I must "read a book" that agrees with them.

Uzique wrote:

What the fuck is with people's lack of reading comprehension nowadays?

I said the Daily Mail is a shitrag of a paper, that makes shit up and panders rumours and sensationalism to an underclass of neanderthals.

The response?

Pug wrote:

Ummm...you trust the media?  The media is biased by nature.

You're right, I totally trust the media. Especially the Daily Mail. And of course all newspapers - tabloids and broadsheets alike - are edited and printed to achieve higher sales. But that doesn't always necessarily equal sensationalism, that's a very broad and obtuse approach. Economist newspapers and business journals don't sell on sensationalism, in fact they sell because they provide the complete opposite to a readerbase.

Lowing wrote:

To people like Uzique, and Spark and just about everyone else the only reliable sources of information are those that back up their opinions. I am sure I could, "read a book" all day long about Eurabia or the Islamification of Europe, but of course these would be considered "bullshit". To get truly enlightened I must "read a book" that agrees with them.

No, no. Just read something that isn't written and published by a collective of morons and no-talent hacks. Then I'll respect your (well-informed) opinion and stance on the issue.

...

Just kidding, how can anyone respect a dumbass that refers to Europe as 'Eurabia', whaha. Why don't they call North America 'Pilgrima', or 'The United States of New Europe'? You have just as much claim to your land there as us Europeans have to total and absolute control of Europe. Most of Eastern Europe and a lot of the Mediterranean areas have always historically had Islamic cultures and minorities. It's like arguing with a child that considers himself a don on the subject because they're read a few 'favourable' gossip articles that compliment their warped and racist sense of reality.

Contrary to popular belief here in the forum, I do not write the articles I post as references, so I did not invent Eurabia, nor did I coin the phrase the "Islamification of Europe". Like it or not, there are plenty of Europeans that seem to feel Islam is a threat to Europes identity. That, or more people read my posts and I am more influential than I thought, but I highly doubt that.

It never fails though, no matter what is posted to the contrary of an argument from the left, it is always dimissed as biased or a rag, etc....These arguments are made as if what is posted by you all is somehow, UN-biased and carries a neutral point of view.

lowing wrote:

Contrary to popular belief here in the forum, I do not write the articles I post as references, so I did not invent Eurabia, nor did I coin the phrase the "Islamification of Europe". Like it or not, there are plenty of Europeans that seem to feel Islam is a threat to Europes identity. That, or more people read my posts and I am more influential than I thought, but I highly doubt that.

It never fails though, no matter what is posted to the contrary of an argument from the left, it is always dimissed as biased or a rag, etc....These arguments are made as if what is posted by you all is somehow, UN-biased and carries a neutral point of view.

But you still peddle this 'Eurabia' shit as if the source you did read it from is Gospel. Have you been to Europe? Do you know the history of Europe from pre-Christian times up to now? Arabs, Moors, Muslims, Eastern-European Islamists, Turks, Persians... Christ, there's an endless number of references to a strong Islamic culture in Europe throughout world history; pick a time-period out of a hat and it will feature this new 21st century "Islamification of Europe". Haha. And I bet throughout history there have always been bigots posting ignorant tripe in their 'news outlets', with more idiots such as yourself eating it up and loving every sensationalist nugget they publish.

Let's not focus on this 'constant dismissal' based on the grounds of the paper being a "rag"; let's focus on your real fundamental argument. You talk about the 'Islamification of Europe' and the adjusting of popular culture to encourage and embrace more cultures as a bad thing. Why? Christianity, Judaism and Islam all stem from the same tree, they all originate in the same area and they all gradually spread through Europe gaining popularity and widespread following around the same time. Why does Europe have to be an implicitly-Christian continent with Christian morality and good little White-Aryan Christian people? Because an imperialistic military Roman regime decided to champion the Christian cause and sow it throughout Europe? Because we were oppressed and ruled through a period of intellectual and cultural retardation by the Catholic Church? I think you should really examine your argument and motives behind the actual basis of your opposition. Islam as a religion and culture isn't confined to the dustbowls and oilfields of the Middle-East, as much as your American mind no doubt likes to segregate and separate, simplistically so.

An argument against political correctness has some credibility, but who are you fooling Lowing? This little morsel of an article clearly compliments your bigger stance on Islam in Europe as a whole- and your posts have done nothing but to amplify that notion. But really the foundation that you stand on in your perspective stems from bigotry and ignorance. Europe is not a white-Christian haven, again I use the example of your own country: if we are experiencing the 'Islamification' of our fair white-owned lands, then the American continent should be viewed as a collection of parasites; the 'Europeanification of Native America'. No one gene-tree or religion has right to a country, your mentality is fixed firmly in the 18th century.

Pug wrote:

Is the Scarborough source listed a sucky one?  (I don't know) Or why is a Tory quoted if its a non-issue?

Tory's are our opposition party, they're not the "UK Government" as you earlier assumed. To have a Tory comment on an article may of course represent the views of many people, but really in the mainstream media it's the same as Fox News inviting on Michael Moore for the novelty factor- and of course from a political perspective they're willing to say anything that exposes a flaw or a disadvantage in Labour policy or stances (e.g. political correctness, multiculturalism). My point is that frequently in the UK media you will see comments and interviews with Tory Party members in order to just provide the predictable anti-Labour perspective; simply to chime in with their own "See, they're fucking it up! Vote Conservative!" stuff.

I do agree that sometimes political correctness can extend to ridiculous lengths. But let's be frank, the last few pages of this discussion have been Lowing's extolment of White-Christian Europe, using the completely arbitrary cause of political correctness in order to launch some seditious anti-Islam call. My only 'contentions' within this topic are that a) The Daily Mail doesn't deserve recognition or consideration and b) the matter of Europe and Islam. Political correctness can eat its' heart out, no one really pays attention to it, and contrary to what you may believe from your undoubtedly infallible 'sources', it's not nearly as bad as you'd think.

Last edited by Uzique (2008-09-19 11:58:22)

Uzique wrote:

lowing wrote:

Contrary to popular belief here in the forum, I do not write the articles I post as references, so I did not invent Eurabia, nor did I coin the phrase the "Islamification of Europe". Like it or not, there are plenty of Europeans that seem to feel Islam is a threat to Europes identity. That, or more people read my posts and I am more influential than I thought, but I highly doubt that.

It never fails though, no matter what is posted to the contrary of an argument from the left, it is always dimissed as biased or a rag, etc....These arguments are made as if what is posted by you all is somehow, UN-biased and carries a neutral point of view.

But you still peddle this 'Eurabia' shit as if the source you did read it from is Gospel. Have you been to Europe? Do you know the history of Europe from pre-Christian times up to now? Arabs, Moors, Muslims, Eastern-European Islamists, Turks, Persians... Christ, there's an endless number of references to a strong Islamic culture in Europe throughout world history; pick a time-period out of a hat and it will feature this new 21st century "Islamification of Europe". Haha. And I bet throughout history there have always been bigots posting ignorant tripe in their 'news outlets', with more idiots such as yourself eating it up and loving every sensationalist nugget they publish.

Let's not focus on this 'constant dismissal' based on the grounds of the paper being a "rag"; let's focus on your real fundamental argument. You talk about the 'Islamification of Europe' and the adjusting of popular culture to encourage and embrace more cultures as a bad thing. Why? Christianity, Judaism and Islam all stem from the same tree, they all originate in the same area and they all gradually spread through Europe gaining popularity and widespread following around the same time. Why does Europe have to be an implicitly-Christian continent with Christian morality and good little White-Aryan Christian people? Because an imperialistic military Roman regime decided to champion the Christian cause and sow it throughout Europe? Because we were oppressed and ruled through a period of intellectual and cultural retardation by the Catholic Church? I think you should really examine your argument and motives behind the actual basis of your opposition. Islam as a religion and culture isn't confined to the dustbowls and oilfields of the Middle-East, as much as your American mind no doubt likes to segregate and separate, simplistically so.

An argument against political correctness has some credibility, but who are you fooling Lowing? This little morsel of an article clearly compliments your bigger stance on Islam in Europe as a whole- and your posts have done nothing but to amplify that notion. But really the foundation that you stand on in your perspective stems from bigotry and ignorance. Europe is not a white-Christian haven, again I use the example of your own country: if we are experiencing the 'Islamification' of our fair white-owned lands, then the American continent should be viewed as a collection of parasites; the 'Europeanification of Native America'. No one gene-tree or religion has right to a country, your mentality is fixed firmly in the 18th century.

Pug wrote:

Is the Scarborough source listed a sucky one?  (I don't know) Or why is a Tory quoted if its a non-issue?

Tory's are our opposition party, they're not the "UK Government" as you earlier assumed. To have a Tory comment on an article may of course represent the views of many people, but really in the mainstream media it's the same as Fox News inviting on Michael Moore for the novelty factor- and of course from a political perspective they're willing to say anything that exposes a flaw or a disadvantage in Labour policy or stances (e.g. political correctness, multiculturalism). My point is that frequently in the UK media you will see comments and interviews with Tory Party members in order to just provide the predictable anti-Labour perspective; simply to chime in with their own "See, they're fucking it up! Vote Conservative!" stuff.

I do agree that sometimes political correctness can extend to ridiculous lengths. But let's be frank, the last few pages of this discussion have been Lowing's extolment of White-Christian Europe, using the completely arbitrary cause of political correctness in order to launch some seditious anti-Islam call. My only 'contentions' within this topic are that a) The Daily Mail doesn't deserve recognition or consideration and b) the matter of Europe and Islam. Political correctness can eat its' heart out, no one really pays attention to it, and contrary to what you may believe from your undoubtedly infallible 'sources', it's not nearly as bad as you'd think.

Only problem with your constant adjusting of society is that Islam does not move a society forward, it detracts from progress fought for. This is my problem with it. Yet you want to embrace Islamic culture and welcome it. Good for you, I however choose not to do so.

"Gutless appeasers"

Do the smart thing and celebrate other cultures holidays.

"Boss, Im not coming to work next week because I will be celebrating Ramadan"
"I didnt know you were muslim"
"Im not, but its still a holiday"

Uzique wrote:

Fuck off Lowing, your debating technique is ridiculous. Because I don't jump on your Hitlerite anti-Islam pro-Whites only bandwagon, I "embrace Islam"? My family come from a very old English tradition and lineage, albeit even more right-wing and steeped in traditional values than your yankee doodle sell-your-soul background (I still find it ironic with every post that you rely on these 'detractive' people for your career, you parasite), so where do you reach the conclusion that I embrace Islam? I just don't agree with your gross misunderstanding of European history and culture; viz. a culture and history very much interlaced with the Islamic faith, as well as other religions such as Christianity and Judaism.

I'm sorry but society does "constantly adjust". It doesn't bring about Armageddon. If society didn't adjust and move forward in religious, moral, ethical and cultural ways- then we'd all still be living in pagan and druidic clans, no? If society was not a dynamic and ever-changing entity, surely that would only result in the narrowminded stifling of human nature? I simply can't reason with you, your reasoning and perspective extends no further than 100 years prior (clearly shown by your grasping of European history), and the future you contemplate is clearly only projected for another five years, at which point Jews/Muslims/Arabs/Chinese/Koreans/Russians/Aliens will provoke a nuclear race/religion war.

War Man wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

        War Man wrote:

        I will take lowing's side on this.

    and that is?

    can u explain his side to me

The side where you say the correct name for the holiday

... You mean Winter Solstice? Another short-sighted American with a ridiculous grasp of world history and culture. Not to daub you all with the same paintbrush but what is with the overbearing levels of Ku Klux Klan representation here? The Christmas and Easter periods are not 'correctly' called so, this is a rebranding that has occured very recently relative to history- get a clue.

Then I guess Christ isn't 'correctly' called so.

Uzique wrote:

Yes Lowing, and your snide remarks, subtle comments and suggestive hinting sentiments are in an entirely different class of decency.

My remarks aren't ironic at all, you debase me, yourself and everyone that is suffered to read it with tosh rebuttals such as "You want to embrace Islam and welcome it"... and I am embracing it how exactly, by giving it the same freedoms, rights and liberties as other faiths within my multicultural continent? Isn't that what your nation was founded on? Crazy logic, I know.

I kindly await your next snooty little comment.

x.

On the actual note-worthy topic of political correctness: at what point do people think the line has been crossed? Personally I am tired of the feminist brigade and the sexist agenda- renaming "manholes" to 'personholes' and whatnot . Of course I exaggerate a little but still I am long bored of the tedious and insipid feminist groups. As for equal opportunity and equality between religions and creeds, I definitely support this so long as I live in a country that declares and brands itself as being 'multicultural'. You quite simply cannot open your floodgates and invite all manner of people into your country and society, only to expect them to subvert to purely Christian practices and customs. The buffoons that buy into tabloids such as The Daily Mail often forget that it was our government and their directives/plans that invited this situation upon us, and not some sinister act of Islamic expansionism. People all through this society direct their anger and hatred at the wrong camp; the fundamentalist Muslims directing campaigns against the common British citizen, whilst the same citizen also spits venom and spite towards the Muslims. It's a sorry circle created by blunderous politicians and perpetuated by simple blind ignorance.

Like I said, you do embrace Islam and invite it into your "multicultural continent" as part of what it means to be "european". I have made no snide or snooty comments about it, nor was I being a smart ass. I meant every word I said. Islam does not add to a western society it detracts from it. It peddles backwards all strides made in tolerence and equality. Now, I know this is the part where you call me a hypocrite for bitching about not accepting Islam all the while preaching tolerence. Well you might be correct. I however view it as simply not tolerating intolerence.

To answer this question
"and I am embracing it how exactly, by giving it the same freedoms, rights and liberties as other faiths within my multicultural continent?"

Yes.

It does not mix with freedom liberties and rights, as it does not recognize them, nor practice them within its own beliefs. So to welcome such a culture into a society that does, is pretty much asking for conflict within that society. You will say that you see no conflict. To that I will answer the conflict has already begun only at a very subtle level. Western society is giving in to PC, all for the sake trying to practice what they preach, freedom, rights and liberties. In my opinion, this giving inch by inch will eventually measure up to a mile. We are practicing PC for a religion and culture that does not practice it in return. All that is recognized is what is "wrong with us" and what we should be doing to fix it to make it right for everyone, except us.

Last edited by lowing (2008-09-19 19:32:19)

Vilham wrote:

wow you guys are still "debating" this? Retarded much?

Its getting personal

Everyone knows you can't go full retard.

lowing wrote:

Mutantsteak wrote:

Vilham wrote:

wow you guys are still "debating" this? Retarded much?

Its getting personal

I find, for whatever reason, when I am involved, it always becomes personal and emotional. I don't see many others getting attacked and insulted quiet the way I do in here.

It's because you're too damned stubborn (I'm not saying that is a bad thing).

It's just, well, why do you even bother debating?

You know, as well as we do, what your views are, and that you will not change them.

But, there are only two reasons to enter a debate - to change someone elses views or to change your own.

People don't like having their views changed, and your not looking to change yours, so the inevitable happens.