Kilroy is off the air

[Aladdin]

Robert Kilroy-Silk's BBC1 daily talk show has been taken off the air by the Corporation after the TV host penned an "anti-Arab rant" in a national newspaper column.

Writing in the Sunday Express at the weekend, the ex-Labour MP described Arabs as "suicide bombers, limb amputators and women repressors".

Under the headline, We Owe Arabs Nothing, he continued: "Apart from oil - which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the West - what do they contribute?

"Can you think of anything? Anything really useful?... No, nor can I..."

Story in full (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1118606,00.html)

Well, that's one less * our television then.

His programme was appalling beyond description anyway. I doubt many will miss him.

Still, I'm sure Richard Littlejohn will be happy to welcome him aboard his Sky News programme... :rolleyes:

[Blagsta]

He's a *

[*DEVIL*]

Originally posted by Blagsta
He's a *

I used to think he was a nice chap.

But then can we believe everything that apears in the Sunday Express? :p

A spokesman for the Sunday Express defended the column: "The article was not a racist article and it was a rewrite of a previous article that appeared in April without complaint.

"The Sunday Express rewrote it during the Christmas period, but there was not one complaint before."

[Blagsta]

he's always been a *

[Major Tom]

i dont agree with kilroy's comments, but if he is to be silenced, why is nothing done about abu hamza, a *, why, he's even worse than solo ha ha ha

[Aladdin]

He doesn't work for the BBC.

[Char_Baby]

he has a point, arabs do commit suicide bombs and repress women, the whole religion of islam is (in my opinion) to repress women and 'keep them in there place' he cant be blamed for having an opinion, i dont like his show, but how can the BBC defend themselves, a while ago britain was bombing thousands of arabs

and i dont clas shim as a 'racist lowlife' just because he has an opinion, racists generally have no idea, they hate people because there different, if i dont like a group of people i have a good reason for it

[Aladdin]

Oh dear dear dear...

Where to start on this?!

Here we fucking go again...

So do you think the actions of a couple of hundred people justify branding an entire race as murderers then?

Do you think the Arabs have contributed nothing to the world then (the 'what did the Romans ever do for us' scene in Life of Brian comes to mind :rolleyes: )?

Can I safely label all Christians a bunch of bombing, murderous, child killing bastards because of the actions of the IRA and the loyalist terrorists?

Do you want to compare the limbs amputated by the Taleban with those amputated by British and American bombs? Aren't we also brutal limb amputators ourselves?

Jesus fucking christ!

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
he has a point, arabs do commit suicide bombs and repress women,

What, all of them?

Originally posted by Char_Baby
the whole religion of islam is (in my opinion) to repress women and 'keep them in there place'

Goes to show that you know fuck all about Islam then.

Originally posted by Char_Baby
he cant be blamed for having an opinion, i dont like his show, but how can the BBC defend themselves, a while ago britain was bombing thousands of arabs

This makes no sense. :confused:

Originally posted by Char_Baby
and i dont clas shim as a 'racist lowlife' just because he has an opinion, racists generally have no idea, they hate people because there different, if i dont like a group of people i have a good reason for it

He's a *

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
he has a point, arabs do commit suicide bombs and repress women, the whole religion of islam is (in my opinion) to repress women and 'keep them in there place' he cant be blamed for having an opinion, i dont like his show, but how can the BBC defend themselves, a while ago britain was bombing thousands of arabs

and i dont clas shim as a 'racist lowlife' just because he has an opinion, racists generally have no idea, they hate people because there different, if i dont like a group of people i have a good reason for it

The point in Islam is not to repress women and keep them in their place. While it happens frequently in muslim countries, I think it's more down to culture. Plus, things like wearing a scarf can for many muslim women seem like an honor. Same goes for many other things. Need to stand a bit on the side, instead of assuming that everyone's head works as yours.

Britain was not bombing thousands of arabs. Britain was bombing aims which led to death of arabs. They were not the target, and there's a difference in that.

Either way, before spiting off in all possible forums that the regular posters here are a "bunch of snobs", you'd rather check what you state before posting. Might give you a better response...

[Moraji]

Originally posted by Char_Baby

and i dont clas shim as a 'racist lowlife' just because he has an opinion, racists generally have no idea, they hate people because there different, if i dont like a group of people i have a good reason for it

But does he have a good reason for it? His article seemed to be based on stereotyping and sweeping generalisations, suggesting he doesn't have much of an idea, ergo he's a racist lowlife, surely?

What I can't understand is how he could be so unbelievably stupid, not only writing a racist rant like that in the 21st century, but also when the BBC is actively trying to stop its employees writing anything vaguely controversial as columnists. My theory is that he wanted to retire and thought this would be a good way to go out, for whatever reason.

[Aladdin]

Not the smartest way to leave a job, unless he had some sort of fat cancellation fee on his contract.

Not the nicest thing to have on your CV either- unless that is you are thinking of applying for a job at the S*n, Daily Sexpress or the Daily HateMail, in which case it'd be the best credentials you can show.

Either way good riddance.

[BlackArab]

One of the outcomes already in place since the Hutton enquiry is that BBC employees who freelance are not allowed to bring the BBc into disrepute.

Char Baby let me put into simple terms Islam doesn't repress women, men do. Do you know what one of the biggest killers of women is in British society?

[Yerascrote]

i certainly disagree with his stereotyping and his sweeping generalisations of the islamic people, however he did make one good point, other than oil, what have arabs really truly given us as a development for our race, i can't think of nothin major, only trivial things, i.e architecture etc

[Char_Baby]

Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper

Either way, before spiting off in all possible forums that the regular posters here are a "bunch of snobs", you'd rather check what you state before posting. Might give you a better response...

well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid

Actually the ones claiming to be involved in politics are the ones criticised the most (with good reason as well).
I don't get what your problem is. I've been posting here since I signed up, that being the age of 15,. If you want to say something, you'll find a way to make yourself heard.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by turlough
however he did make one good point, other than oil, what have arabs really truly given us as a development for our race, i can't think of nothin major, only trivial things, i.e architecture etc science medicine and maths ...
writing ...the first written words come from iraq 4,000yrs ago. the first written laws come from iraq 4.000yrs ago.
arab empires stretched from europe to india.
huge breakthroughs in maths and astronomy around the 12th century.
a medicine book written by an arab in the 11th century remained a standard textbook into the 20th century.
the arab world was the cradle of modern civilisation.

[hybrid]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
science medicine and maths ...

:yes: the ones today maybe be not everyone's favourite ethnic group but they contributed greatly over time to the development of the world today

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid char stick with it ...there are some people in here who do have a very deep interest in politics and therefore have more insight into certain things. there are also very inteligent but stupid people in here. there are stubborn bastards as well with far too much pride to ever back down/admit that the other guys point of view may well be correct.
thats the nature of the place ...you can learn a lot about political viewpoints in here and ...even more about the people who inhabit it.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid

Hey if you cant beat em, join em.
Show these lot what your made off, show them that you dont need degrees to have a point of view. We need more people in this forum to sort the 'old mob' out :D

Really when I came here they all used to shout at me, still do to be honest but its water off a ducks bath now, I give them as much as they give me :lol:

One thing I will say I have noticed is that some members now try not to use big words when they reply to me because they know I aint got a clue what they are talking about, so im finding now that I can make sense of some of the posts.
Once upon a time id see all these big words and think 'what the fuck are they talking about ' :lol: :lol:

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Hey if you cant beat em, join em.
Show these lot what your made off, show them that you dont need degrees to have a point of view. We need more people in this forum to sort the 'old mob' out :D

Really when I came here they all used to shout at me, still do to be honest but its water off a ducks bath now, I give them as much as they give me :lol:

One thing I will say I have noticed is that some members now try not to use big words when they reply to me because they know I aint got a clue what they are talking about, so im finding now that I can make sense of some of the posts.
Once upon a time id see all these big words and think 'what the fuck are they talking about ' :lol: :lol: the nutty nun has spoken.

[hybrid]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
science medicine and maths ...
writing ...the first written words come from iraq 4,000yrs ago. the first written laws come from iraq 4.000yrs ago.
arab empires stretched from europe to india.
huge breakthroughs in maths and astronomy around the 12th century.
a medicine book written by an arab in the 11th century remained a standard textbook into the 20th century.
the arab world was the cradle of modern civilisation.

Did you steal that out of the Daily Express? :p I could have sworn I read the same stuff in there!

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by hybrid
Did you steal that out of the Daily Express? :p I could have sworn I read the same stuff in there! no!
















































the daily mirror ...

[hybrid]

I knew it!

:p

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid

My degree's in graphic design and multimedia, dunno 'bout anyone elses.

[Aladdin]

Originally posted by turlough
i certainly disagree with his stereotyping and his sweeping generalisations of the islamic people, however he did make one good point, other than oil, what have arabs really truly given us as a development for our race, i can't think of nothin major, only trivial things, i.e architecture etc

What did the Arabs ever do for us? Eh? Eh?

Other than:

- algebra
- backgammon
- ethanol alcohol
- sulfuric acid
- ammonia
- camphor
- pomades
- syrups
- cough medicine
- Dante
- fine horses
- the pendulum
- advanced astronomy
- space observatories
- guitars
- internal medicine
- ophthalmology
- orthopedics
- pharmacology
- kebabs
- coffee
- hydraulic presses
- water clocks
- optics
- roses
- religious tolerance
- racial equality
- universities
- Venetian glass
- artichokes
- rice
- cotton
- asparagus
- oranges
- lemons
- limes
- figs
- dates
- spinach
- eggplants
- watermelons
- the number zero

I mean, other than these and a few more things I have left out, WHAT HAVE THE ARABS EVER DONE FOR US???

Souce (http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2002/01/08/alphabet/index.html)

[Russ T Bitz]

Stepping away from the whole "He's a racist" mullarky - who was more at fault, Kilroy-Silk for professing a view (which I believe is shared by a significantly large *silent* section of society) or the newspaper editor who allowed such comments to be published?

[Aladdin]

Kilroy is mainly at fault, but the editor of the Sunday Express is also to blame for allowing such defamatory, untrue racist bullshit to be published. The scumbags are not exactly repentant either. Whether he means it or not at least Kilroy has apologized- more than can be said for that worthless rag and its editor.

I don't believe however Kilroy’s views are shared by anyone but a small racist minority and a few confused people who should know better. Does a majority of people in this country believe ALL Arabs (or even a majority :rolleyes: ) are actually terrorists? Is that what several hundred million people do for a living in the Middle East then? I can't believe for a millisecond that any significant number of people in this country would believe such bollocks. If they did, then this country would officially have an IQ of -17.

[Renzo]

It is sick :|

Would readers of the Express agree with it though? Its a right of centre 'newspaper' in the loosest term of the word right?

[Russ T Bitz]

Originally posted by Aladdin
I don't believe however Kilroy’s views are shared by anyone but a small racist minority and a few confused people who should know better. Does a majority of people in this country believe ALL Arabs (or even a majority :rolleyes: ) are actually terrorists? Is that what several hundred million people do for a living in the Middle East then? I can't believe for a millisecond that any significant number of people in this country would believe such bollocks. If they did, then this country would officially have an IQ of -17.

We just don't know and neither will we ever know for sure as these people won't speak up out of fear of recriminations, but listen to pub-speak and 'canteen-culture' - it's all around us.

My own view is that people are free to like or dislike whoever they want, as long as they don't act on their views then fine.

[Uncle Joe]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
and i dont clas shim as a 'racist lowlife' just because he has an opinion, racists generally have no idea, they hate people because there different, if i dont like a group of people i have a good reason for it It's true that many racists have no idea, although what proportion depends on how you define 'racist'. The dangerous racists, and people who are just exploiting racism for their own purposes, very much have a clue; people such as Nicholas Griffin, or Robert Mugabe, or Ariel Sharon/Yasser Arafat.* 'Arabs' is too large a group of people to make such specific charges as Silk did, even leaving aside the fact that the Iranians aren't Arabs.




*Take your pick.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Char_Baby
well all of you prove me right, if anyone who posts in here dosent have a fucking degree in politics they get flamed and made to feel stupid

Oh grow up. You come in and make a fatuous statement without any back-up for it and you dont expect to be corrected? Ignoring Blagsta, who has problems with anyone who doesnt say that his viewpoint is perfect in every way, where exactly were you made to feel stupid? If you say something stupid it will be pointed out, but thats not the same thing.

[Kermit]

What Kilroy said was wrong in just about every way, it grossly over-exaggerated and it made sweeping judgements about a whole race of people because of the actions of a few.

But that isnt the issue. The issue, yet again, is freedom of speech. And how in the name of political correctness so many opinions have not only become socially unacceptable, they have become ILLEGAL, or at the very least they have caused people to lose their jobs.

Kilroy-Silk has not attacked one individual. Kilroy-Silk has not attacked a small class of people. Kilroy-Silk has attacked an entire race of people, so who exactly is he harming? Anyone who is "personally offended" by his remarks needs to grow up, because his remarks are too vague to be offensive to anybody- or at least they shouldnt be. All that will happen is, yet again, the CRE will set back race relations in this country by years because people will not tolerate being told what to say and what not to say.

If I want to express racist opinions I should be freely allowed to, and that is the crux of the matter. Once you start deciding what opinions are not allowed because they are not "socially acceptable" then it is a very slippery slope- what idea will next be "socially unacceptable".

Unless you attack an individual or small body of people, then you should be allowed to say what you want and when you want. Racism is abhorrent but all that the CRE do is make matters worse- if push comes to shove, I will back Kilroy-Silk, because freedom of speech is too important not to. And all that happens then is that the BNP et al can claim a moral victory.

[Blagsta]

The point is that RKS is not just an ordinary bod on the street, he is a public figure with a high media profile.
Who do his views harm? Everyone. They add to the general feelings of mistrust and hatred towards arabs and muslims that seems to be the agenda of a certain section of the tabloid media.

[Russ T Bitz]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Who do his views harm? Everyone.

He hasn't harmed me :confused:

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
The point is that RKS is not just an ordinary bod on the street, he is a public figure with a high media profile.
Who do his views harm? Everyone. They add to the general feelings of mistrust and hatred towards arabs and muslims that seems to be the agenda of a certain section of the tabloid media.

They havent harmed me :confused:

The point you seem unable to grasp, Blagsta, is that people who read this filth and think it to be accurate ALREADY BELIEVE WHAT IS BEING SAID. It doesnt add to any mistrust, reading RKS isnt going to make a rational liberal suddenly start wanting to kill Arabs.

His media profile is irrelevant, Blagsta, as well you know. Just because he has a job on the telly doesnt mean he should toe the current political orthodoxy- yes, his views are bollocks, but thats not the point. RKS has expressed an opinion, and just because hes on the telly it doesnt mean hes not entitled to express it, or that his views have more credence, for that matter. He hasnt harmed anyone by expressing the opinion that Arabs are women-repressors.

Perhaps the CRE and the Muslim bodies should be spending more time clamping down on those who still feel that female circumcision is perfectly acceptable, and that "honour killings" are honourable, than taking pot-shots at a wanker on the TV. But then they dont get their faces on the news, so of course they wont.

[BeckyBoo]

Why would it have been allowed to be printed ? surely Kilroy must have professionals who read over his work to make sure it is not liable etc.
For the record i watch Kilroy reguarly and i actually like the guy and Ive never seen him come across as racial on there.

[Aladdin]

I think he means everyone of the same race; in this case the Arab race.

And I completely disagree with Kermit on this. He seems to be implying that people should be allowed to say pretty much anything they want: such as "all blacks are ******* and ******* who live in ***** and eat *******." So would it be okay to say that because such comments wouldn't be directed to one individual but to a whole race?

I'm sorry Kermit, utter bollocks. There ARE limits to freedom of expression.

Suppose this scenario: a bloke comes to you and says "your mother is a real ******* **** and a ***** who likes to **** **** like the ***** **** she is. And I'm going to create a website announcing this, and I will also write the same thing in the column I write for the local newspaper".

Would you be defending this bloke's right to write such article about your mother and publishing in a local newspaper? No, of course you wouldn't. Freedom of expression doesn't cover such offensive shit. Well, the very same principle applies to racist comments, whether they are directed at one individual or to a whole race.

Like it or not racist abuse is an offence in this country. I don't think freedom of expression is affected in anyway, not any more than the right of someone to say and print offensive and defamatory shit about you or your family. Like I said there is no difference between individuals and whole group of people. Why the hell should it be???

[Kermit]

Becky, its not libellous because its not against one person or definable organisation. Its merely offensive.

Aladdin, I see what youre saying but I dont think it particularly holds water. If hed said that Arab X was a wife-beater and a suicide bomber, then that would be libellous or slanderous, and illegal. If hed said that "all Arabs deserve to die because theyre scum" then that would be inciting racial hatred.

Over-exaggerating facts about some parts of a race to make that entire race look bad is deeply racist and deeply wrong, but I dont think its enough to warrant someone losing their job. Racism is not illegal, Aladdin, discrimination is illegal and inciting hatred is illegal. RKS' article, which I read, does neither, therefore it is not illegal but merely distasteful.

Racism shouldnt be tolerated, but I believe that offending the sensibilities of a few in order to protect free speech is a price that is worth paying, though it is unfortunate that it has to be paid.

Ive said elsewhere that, unfortunately, a people are judged by their respective governments, at the end of the day. And, like it or not, many Arabian and Islamic governments DO chop limbs off for stealing, they DO sentence women to death for having a child out of wedlock, they DO flog women who dont wear a burkha in public. Some Islamic communities, even in Britain, DO circumcise women, they DO kill women for not marrying the family's choice of man. These are far bigger problems that RKS over-egging a pudding about these facts, yet these are problems that the Islamic community, and the CRE, are strangely silent on.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kermit
Becky, its not libellous because its not against one person or definable organisation. Its merely offensive.


Sorry I used the wrong word. What I mean is when he writes material surely a man of his status would have his work read over by one of his professionals and basically tell him that his post is unethical or whatever ?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
His media profile is irrelevant, Blagsta, as well you know.

No, his media profile is entirely the point.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
Aladdin, discrimination is illegal and inciting hatred is illegal. RKS' article, which I read, does neither, therefore it is not illegal but merely distasteful.

But it does incite hatred. It implies that all Arabs are suicide bombers intent on destroying Western society, it implies that all Arabs support brutal dictatorships. And this paragraph

"Moreover, the people who claim we are loathsome are currently threatening our civilian populations with chemical and biological weapons. They are promising to let suicide bombers loose in Western and American cities. They are trying to terrorise us, disrupt our lives.
And then they expect us to be careful of their sensibilities? We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security."

links suicide bombers and asylum seekers and plays on the current media bullshit about asylum seekers sponging off the state. Its nasty racist hateful bollocks and just feeds into the current anti-Islamic and anti-asylum seeker nonsense.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Sorry I used the wrong word. What I mean is when he writes material surely a man of his status would have his work read over by one of his professionals and basically tell him that his post is unethical or whatever ?

Nah, hes making money out of being contrary. Its in his interests to be as offensive as possible, especially in the Sexpress.

Though what no-one has commented on yet is that RKS has been rpinting the same three articles for 18 months. Thats why I think it smacks of political expediency not any desire to prevent racism.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Its nasty racist hateful bollocks and just feeds into the current anti-Islamic and anti-asylum seeker nonsense.

That was never in doubt, RKS is wrong to say that. Very wrong.

But my point is that holding a wrong opinion, however insulting, is not an offence that should lead to being sacked. I dont agree with one word of the article, but I do agree with the right to say it.

Freedom of speech is important, very important, and besides which, sacking RKS for his article is counter-productive. Rather than educating those with racist opinions, like the CRE should be doing, its actions are merely playing into the hands of the racists- all the CRE have done is made RKS a martyr for the racists.

[Blagsta]

No, the point is *I belive* that he is a high profile media figure inciting racial hatred.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
No, the point is that he is a high profile media figure inciting racial hatred.

...which implies that if he was Joe Nobody it wouldnt matter.

So what about his media profile, just because he has a profile does NOT mean that he is not allowed to say what he wants just in cse he might insult someone, somewhere.

The simple fact is that Arab countries ARE what RKS says they are, that is not the same thing as saying Arabs are, which is where RKS slipped up. Inciting racial hatred means that you clamour for people to attack that race, such as with Hamza, it does not stretch to saying that Arabs repress women.

And just as I think RKS should be allowed to say what he wants, providing it neither attacks an individual nor threatens an individual of a greater class, I think the Islamic racists, of which there are many, should be allowed to say what they want.

[Blagsta]

No, it means that if he was Joe Nobody then his views would only be heard by his mates down the pub.

[Balddog]

Originally posted by turlough
i certainly disagree with his stereotyping and his sweeping generalisations of the islamic people, however he did make one good point, other than oil, what have arabs really truly given us as a development for our race, i can't think of nothin major, only trivial things, i.e architecture etc

Might I ask what the Irish have done for the world?

Since when did the contributions of a group equal their worth?

Perhaps if successive european and pseudo european nations hadnt fucked over the arab world for 600 odd years, they would be contributing more to the world today...At the moment, i think staying alive is of more importance than inventing stuff.

[Balddog]

I dont see this as a freedom of speech issue...Kilroy has not had his right to speech taken away, he can write another article tommorrow if he wants.

The BBC is a company and as such they have the right to dismiss anyone who brings them into disrepute. They have no obligation to employ someone who loses them business/viewers. He was well aware what would happen when he wrote that article..

Nobody has stopped him saying anything, the BBC has merely disassociated itself from a *

[Renzo]

Obviously people do listen too him a person i know on msn just said:


hahaha kilroy is the man

the great thing is tho hes funny, and hes true, coz arabs r renowned for beating women, and they do blow things up


:mad: What a twat

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Balddog
I dont see this as a freedom of speech issue...Kilroy has not had his right to speech taken away, he can write another article tommorrow if he wants.



He has had his speech taken away, his show has been axed. So if thats not taking his speech away what is ?

[Paul_2]

I’ve read the Article and agree with everything he has written. Please point out the bits you disagree with. He is only saying what the majority of the UK population think. We as a nation don’t like Arabs or Islam, get used to it.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Balddog
Nobody has stopped him saying anything, the BBC has merely disassociated itself from a bigoted moron.

I think thats fair enough, but what I find really distasteful is the way the CRE has been clamouring for this "bigoted moron" to be prosecuted for his actions- that is wrong.

[Balddog]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He has had his speech taken away, his show has been axed. So if thats not taking his speech away what is ?

He didnt use his show to air his views on arabs...He used the newspaper..

Nothing has changed as to him expressing his views on arabs. He wasnt allowed to express such views on his show anyway so nothing has been taken away.

His job has gone because hes an embarrasment to the BBC and is damaging to their image.

Kermit, i agree totally...He shouldnt be prosecuted, thats just insane. But then, the CRE needs to keep the race relations industry in turmoil.

[Paul_2]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
science medicine and maths ...
writing ...the first written words come from iraq 4,000yrs ago. the first written laws come from iraq 4.000yrs ago.
arab empires stretched from europe to india.
huge breakthroughs in maths and astronomy around the 12th century.
a medicine book written by an arab in the 11th century remained a standard textbook into the 20th century.
the arab world was the cradle of modern civilisation.

Then it adopted Islam, and its been a slow death ever since.

[piccolo]

Originally posted by Aladdin
Do you think the Arabs have contributed nothing to the world then (the 'what did the Romans ever do for us' scene in Life of Brian comes to mind :rolleyes: )? Every culture contriubutes to the life of the others. Some of the most influential historical / religious / cultural figures came from the Arab states, to give but the obvious examples of Jesus and Mohammed...

Who has the right to say one nation is more valid than another, anyway?! Britain has done no more for the Arab nations (and, in fact, has probably done less) than they have for us.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Balddog
He didnt use his show to air his views on arabs...He used the newspaper..



Yes thats right however, we seem to forget the thousands of people who he has helped on his show. What about anyone else who wants or needs his help ?
Dont tell me someone will replace him because thats not the same, without Kilroy that show is nothing.

[Paul_2]

Originally posted by Aladdin
What did the Arabs ever do for us? Eh? Eh?

O
- the number zero

I mean, other than these and a few more things I have left out, WHAT HAVE THE ARABS EVER DONE FOR US???

Souce (http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2002/01/08/alphabet/index.html)

The number zero came from India, so thats one wrong on that list. My guess would be many of the others are as well.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by piccolo
Every culture contriubutes to the life of the others. Some of the most influential historical / religious / cultural figures came from the Arab states, to give but the obvious examples of Jesus and Mohammed...

oh dear ...jesus was a jew! how can you possibly think jesus was a fucking arab!
you could get stoned for that ...personaly i find other reasons to but there you go.

[Aladdin]

Originally posted by paul_2
He is only saying what the majority of the UK population think. We as a nation don’t like Arabs or Islam, get used to it. YOU don't like Arabs or Islam. Don't try to drag the population of Great Britain into it. Luckily this is not a bigoted racist country, despite the best actions of a minority.

The number zero came from India, so thats one wrong on that list. My guess would be many of the others are as well. My guess would be that you are deeply wrong.

We owe an awful lot to Islam. They were the pinnacle of civilasation while we were still acting like intolerant, bigoted barbarians and hadn't a clue about pretty much anything. Oh, and they taught us a thing or two about religious, racial and sexual tolerance and respect.

Deal with it.

Then it adopted Islam, and its been a slow death ever since. Your ignorance of Islam is rather worrying.

[Russ T Bitz]

Originally posted by Aladdin
We owe an awful lot to Islam. They were the pinnacle of civilasation while we were still acting like intolerant, bigoted barbarians and hadn't a clue about pretty much anything. Oh, and they taught us a thing or two about religious, racial and sexual tolerance and respect.


Much the same could be said about true Christians :)

Live and let live, peeps :)

[DG]

Does anyone have a link to the original article printed in April - I'd like to read it for myself before passing judgement.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Paul_2
I’ve read the Article and agree with everything he has written. Please point out the bits you disagree with. He is only saying what the majority of the UK population think. We as a nation don’t like Arabs or Islam, get used to it.

But you're well known for being a racist so of course you agree with him.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Yes thats right however, we seem to forget the thousands of people who he has helped on his show. What about anyone else who wants or needs his help ?
Dont tell me someone will replace him because thats not the same, without Kilroy that show is nothing.

His show was rubbish. A couple of mates of mine have been on it and its totally rigged to only show one point of view. Apparently RKS is a rude arrogant slimeball and won't let people speak on his programme who don't actually agree with his point of view.
I'm glad he's lost his job.

[Kermit]

To move away from RKS' obnoxiousness, heres an idea for you:

If RKS had said that "Catholics are boy-rapers and home-breakers" should he still be facing the sack?

And if not, why not?

[Blagsta]

He'd still get the sack for that.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
He'd still get the sack for that.

I would hope so, but I chose that example for a reason. In particular the bile that comes up about Catolicism every time theres a scandal, of which nothing is ever done about.

Its just interesting how its ok to slag off one group of people but not another.

[Blagsta]

Theres a difference though. First of all, when people slag off Catholicism, they don't generally slag off Catholics.
Also, Islam is a lot more tied up with issues of race than Catholicism.

(Although I know I am discounting racism against the Irish, the behaviour of the British in Ireland etc).

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Theres a difference though. First of all, when people slag off Catholicism, they don't generally slag off Catholics.
Also, Islam is a lot more tied up with issues of race than Catholicism.

Oh, they do. "Catholics do this, Catholics do that"- critcising the Church and criticising the congregation is almost the same thing anyway, and very often the lines are blurred.

The next statement is fatuous- of course Catholicism is tied up with race. Not just the Irish situation, but in other parts of the world the Catholics are singled oput for racial violence- if you dont believe me, look at the hassle Catholics in India and Pakistan receive, including schools being bombed. What you mean to say is that Islam is tied up with race in this country, because Islam is not a traditional religion of thsi country- its the religion of immigrants.

But even that is a non-statement, because it excuses religious bigotry against one group because they happen to have been here longer.

[Blagsta]

^
Hmmmm...of course its only my feeling/opinion, but I think you're wrong. Islam is much more tied up with race and anti-Islamic feeling is (in this country and in fact in most of the Western world) tied up with racism.
Muslims tend to be black or asian (although I do know some white British Muslims and Eastern Europe has quite an Islamic population) while Catholics are white, black, asian etc.

Thats why its different IMO.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Thats why its different IMO.

Its not different, Catholicism is STILL seen as predominantly Irish and Slavic- Im called a feenian by bigots for a reason.

And you have fallen into the typical PC trap of thinking all white people are the same- round here, at least, theyre not- weve got a lot of Irish and a lot of Slavs, and only an idiot would see them as the same.

Though I notice you make no comment about the reverse situation in the Indian sub-continent.

[Blagsta]

Sorry? Where have I said that white people are all the same? :confused: :confused: :confused:

But you have missed my point...in this country at least, Islam is tied up with race and colour. Catholicism is not.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Sorry? Where have I said that white people are all the same? :confused:

Erp, my bad. Slightly misread something you said:)

But you have missed my point...in this country at least, Islam is tied up with race and colour. Catholicism is not.

I understand that point perfectly well, I just dont see how it makes a difference. Leaving aside the fact that this time RKS said "Arab", quite often he and Littlejohn talk about "Muslims" being women-oppressors and such like. That isnt any different from people like Littlejohn, again, banging on about "Catholics" being child molestors, which is an opinion that has been expressed on here before by supposedly tolerant people.

My point is not that Littlejohn is a *, but that he is only ever pulled up on the bigotry against "Muslims" and not any other religious denomination. And as I said before, Catholicism IS tied up with race, especially Slavism and Irishness- the term feenian, widely used by many Protestants, especially in Northern Ireland and in Scotland, is derogatory against Catholics, the assumption being all Catholics are Irish. The only difference is that Irish is now fashionable, and the Irish are accepted into the UK.

But that doesnt excuse racist abuse. And it doesnt mean its less serious- racism is racism, regardless of who it is against. YOu onyl seem to feel that its racist iof its against a minority.

[Blagsta]

Being half Irish myself, I do know a little about the Irish situation.

My point is however, that Catholicism is not as tied up with race as Islam is, no matter what you think. A lot of asians get abuse from racists who assume that they're Muslim based on their colour, regardless of the fact that they might be Sikh, Hindu, atheist, C of E, Buddhist or even Catholic. See?

And please find where I have stated this point of view "YOu onyl seem to feel that its racist iof its against a minority".

Misreading again I think. :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
His show was rubbish.

Thats your opinion, in my opinion he does a good show. He tries to sort peoples problems out, he has in the past said he would not allow racism on his show because ive heard him say that.

and in your opinion the thousands of people he has helped he has not let them speak ? Ive seen many of his shows and he has always come across as fair and wanting everyone to be able to speak. I appreciate parts of the show are cut however i still think he is very good at debating, he does let you know when he agrees with something and he also lets you know when he does not agree with.
It seems to me as though you think he aint allowed an opinion now ?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Theres a difference though. First of all, when people slag off Catholicism, they don't generally slag off Catholics.


Of course they do, if you are a practising Catholic then you are getting slagged off.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Thats your opinion,

Of course it is, what else could it be?

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
in my opinion he does a good show. He tries to sort peoples problems out, he has in the past said he would not allow racism on his show because ive heard him say that.

and in your opinion the thousands of people he has helped he has not let them speak ? Ive seen many of his shows and he has always come across as fair and wanting everyone to be able to speak. I appreciate parts of the show are cut however i still think he is very good at debating, he does let you know when he agrees with something and he also lets you know when he does not agree with.
It seems to me as though you think he aint allowed an opinion now ?

Personally I think he's a *

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Of course they do, if you are a practising Catholic then you are getting slagged off.

You misunderstand me. People tend to slag off Catholicism, not Catholics in general. They tend to slag the Pope or the fact that the church protects paedophile priests etc. They don't tend to slag off an entire community of people.

[Uncle Joe]

Originally posted by Kermit
Oh, they do. "Catholics do this, Catholics do that"- critcising the Church and criticising the congregation is almost the same thing anyway, and very often the lines are blurred. You'd have to provide an example of what 'they' say. Arguably the most prevalent accusation laid against the Catholic Church involves child abuse. I Googled for 'catholic child abuse' and all but one (a 'catholicandprolife' site which didn't point the finger in any particular direction), of the first ten hits involved priests. Catholic parishioners don't share the opprobrium.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta


Personally I think he's a *.

Again your entitled to your opinion, for what its worth I dont agree with it..............one day we might agree on something eh.

[Major Tom]

this country is supposed to be a democracy with freedom of speech, kilroy was merely exercising this right. whether you agree with his views or not, he is allowed to voice an opinion. abu hamza enjoys the same right, except his right is protected by the police ( and funded by the taxpayer). it sounds like some people would rather censor kilroy and the ''daily hatemail'' because they don't like the views expressed. that is fascism pure and simple.

[Blagsta]

^
Yes people have freedom of speech (but this has limits - shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre anyone?), but the point is (as has been made on this thread a few times) that RKS has a high media profile and as such should not be inciting racial hatred.

And hasn't abu hamza been stripped of his citizenship and threatened with deportation?

Fascism? Hardly. :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Blagsta have you ever seen him show racial discrimination in any of his shows ?
I watch him very reguarly and I cant think of any time where he has shown any disregard whatsoever to ethnic minorities/blacks etc etc.
Surely if he was racist then it would come over in his show, even with the editting of shows you would see him favour white people. He always allows people to speak, sometimes he has to be cocky and say "hey you have spoken enough" because if he didnt a guest could take all that valuable talking time.

[Major Tom]

kilroy never encouraged anyone to attack arabs ( or anyone else for that matter). that is the difference between him and abu hamza, who is *. all kilroy has done is criticise arabs. right or wrong, he is allowed an opinion.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Blagsta have you ever seen him show racial discrimination in any of his shows ?
I watch him very reguarly and I cant think of any time where he has shown any disregard whatsoever to ethnic minorities/blacks etc etc.
Surely if he was racist then it would come over in his show, even with the editting of shows you would see him favour white people. He always allows people to speak, sometimes he has to be cocky and say "hey you have spoken enough" because if he didnt a guest could take all that valuable talking time.

I haven't watched his show in a while.
But that article he wrote is nastily racist. I think thats enough.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
kilroy never encouraged anyone to attack arabs ( or anyone else for that matter). that is the difference between him and abu hamza, who is a racist. all kilroy has done is criticise arabs. right or wrong, he is allowed an opinion.

No, his article is inciting racial hatred.
Abu Hamza does not have a TV show or a column in a national newspaper. See the difference?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I haven't watched his show in a while.
But that article he wrote is nastily racist. I think thats enough.

and you have made our mind up already without even trying to see where he's coming from.

Sounds about right to me.

[Blagsta]

Errrrr...what do I need to know? His article is racist bollocks. Thats enough for me.

[morrocan roll]

at the end of the day we can't have celebrity figures spouting this kind of stuff without them being reprimanded in some way. it would become the norm for all kinds of weirdos. that is not the kind of place i wanna live!

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by morrocan roll at the end of the day we can't have celebrity figures spouting this kind of stuff without them being reprimanded in some way. it would become the norm for all kinds of weirdos.

At the end of the day just because he is famous should not mean he aint entitled to an opinion. As I said I have watched many of his shows and he has never come across as racial to me.

So his show gets axed and as I said previously what about the thousands of people he has helped ? what about the thousands of people he could help if his show hadnt been axed ?

Also did he need to be axed from the show, could he not have received a warning and made to put a statement in the paper ?

I just feel that people are not looking to the good stuff he does, I dont know much about the guy only what Ive seen on his show. So he has made a mistake, how many other people have made mistakes and got a second chance ? Nah he wont because he is a well known figure and now people have got their claws into him they aint gonna let go.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
At the end of the day just because he is famous should not mean he aint entitled to an opinion. i agree with that bit but ...voicing those opinions down the pub with his mates is one thing ...splashing them across national newspapers is another. lets have some paki bashing and gay bashing. let all the hatred in peoples hearts be published and what kind of democracy do you think we would end up living in? freedom of speech is one thing ...but with freedom comes responsibility.
we would end up with newspapers that realy were called the daily hate mail. just think of the tv programmes we could air ...your nightly quizz show ...ten good reasons to kill a black man.
urging people to look down on others, backing people who look down on others and stirring bigotry and hatred against different sections of the comminity can't in any way be desirable.
would you realy like to live in a country that encouraged such stuff?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
What good stuff? *.

Fuck 'im.

and thats your attitude just say 'fuck im' .

Even if I told you what good things I have seen on that show your response would still be 'fuck im', you only see the bad in people, you never see any good. your like these people who I said about earlier, once the claws are in theres no letting go.

So instead of saying 'fuck im' dont you think it would be better for you to sit there and say why it shouldn't be said so then people who may be on these boards who feel the same maybe be swayyed to change their views ? just by saying 'fuck im' is not helping the matter you need to go deeper and try to find out why people feel like they do.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
urging people to look down on others, backing people who look down on others and stirring bigotry and hatred against different sections of the comminity can't in any way be desirable.
would you realy like to live in a country that encouraged such stuff?

Im not saying I agree with what he said, im saying he should be able to have a view just like anyone else.

Instead of axing the show they maybe should have done another show and allowed him to speak in person and say exactly what he does feel. Let someone question him and try to talk to him and let him see that his words could influence people and let him see that his view on this is wrong.
Dont just say "your wrong and we are right" because lets face it when someone says to me "your wrong" they get no response, when they try to talk to me and tell me where they are coming from i will listen then think 'well yeah, maybe they are right'. I dont think im alone on this neither.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
im saying he should be able to have a view just like anyone else.

and i've agreed with you on that bit. come on becks ...this man is an ex politician a newspaper columnist a tv presenter ...surely he knows whats what!

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
and i've agreed with you on that bit. come on becks ...this man is an ex politician a newspaper columnist a tv presenter ...surely he knows whats what!

He's on Trevor McDonald Tonight's show this evening 8pm, I think I will watch that and pass judgment after watching it.

Just to add I have just found this Here (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30500-12971367,00.html)

[Aladdin]

Right, two points previously mentioned by several people that are still not sinking in with others:

- No one has suppressed Kuntroy's freedom of speech. He's still free to say what he wants.

- As an employer the BBC has the right to determine whether an employee is bringing the corporation into disrepute or breaking company rules in any way. And if it concludes he is, then it has the right to act accordingly and bring disciplinary action.

Regardless of whether you agree with Kuntroy or not, I think no one can deny he has brought the BBC into disrepute hasn't he? The BBC is perfectly within its right to dismiss him- especially so since it is a public corporation the BBC must be impartial, fair and not offensive to anyone.

It’s that simple really.

Those who might miss the * need no worry. His Express column is not going to be axed, and I would imagine a less scrupulous TV channel would not mind employing him. At the end of the day, if Richard Littlec*nt is allowed on the air, why not Kuntroy? :rolleyes:

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
and thats your attitude just say 'fuck im' .

Even if I told you what good things I have seen on that show your response would still be 'fuck im', you only see the bad in people, you never see any good. your like these people who I said about earlier, once the claws are in theres no letting go.

So instead of saying 'fuck im' dont you think it would be better for you to sit there and say why it shouldn't be said so then people who may be on these boards who feel the same maybe be swayyed to change their views ? just by saying 'fuck im' is not helping the matter you need to go deeper and try to find out why people feel like they do.

I've seen the show. I don't think he does any good for anyone. I've talked to people who've been on his show.

He's *


Oh and if you read my posts a bit more, you would see that I do write reasons why racist opinions are shit. :rolleyes:

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He's on Trevor McDonald Tonight's show this evening 8pm, I think I will watch that and pass judgment after watching it.

Just to add I have just found this Here (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30500-12971367,00.html)

He's trying to wriggle out of it and save his skin.

Don't believe the hype.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I've seen the show.

Oh please make your mind up darling :rolleyes:

I haven't watched his show in a while

So if you have not seen his show for a while how do you know wether he does any good for anyone ? Only the other week i saw him reuinte arguing family members, got them to talk after years of not talking. They were actually quite civil and with the help of him tried to bury the hatchet.

But thats not helping is it.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Oh please make your mind up darling :rolleyes:



So if you have not seen his show for a while how do you know wether he does any good for anyone ? Only the other week i saw him reuinte arguing family members, got them to talk after years of not talking. They were actually quite civil and with the help of him tried to bury the hatchet.

But thats not helping is it.

Where did I say I've never seen his show. I said I haven't seen it in a while. A few months or so.

Don't believe everything you see on telly either, its very manipulated.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta


Don't believe everything you see on telly either, its very manipulated.

So now your telling me that these people were forced to talk, forced to give each other a hug. Sure the show will have been cut in certain parts and im sure they did have heated exchanges which I didnt see, but thats normal when you have a feuding family. The end result was that with him playing mediator he got theses people talking and you cant take that away from him.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Where did I say I've never seen his show. I said I haven't seen it in a while. A few months or so.


and your telling me he has done no good on any of the shows you watched ?
If so all I can say is you aint been watching the Kilroy that I have.

[Blagsta]

As I said before, from talking to a couple of people I know who've been on his show, he only ever lets one side of the argument be presented. He called my mate "a right bastard" as well.

Couple that with his article inciting racial hatred and he can fuck right off as far as I'm concerned.

[morrocan roll]

so the argument now is wether or not his telly shows are good or bad!

[Blagsta]

I think its irrelevant - Becky doesn't.

Go figure.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I think its irrelevant - Becky doesn't.

Go figure.

YOU go figure because you are always right arent you.

It is relevant in the way of you dont hear him spout racism at every chance. I am stating he DOES do some good, I have NEVER seen him act racial in any form on is show and again I will say if he was that racist it would show through any editing of his show.

and now I will say no more on the matter till I watch The Tonight show and I can see what he has to say regarding his actions, if thats ok with you like.

[Blagsta]

So what was that article about then? :rolleyes:

[Namaste]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
i agree with that bit but ...voicing those opinions down the pub with his mates is one thing ...splashing them across national newspapers is another. lets have some paki bashing and gay bashing. let all the hatred in peoples hearts be published and what kind of democracy do you think we would end up living in? freedom of speech is one thing ...but with freedom comes responsibility.
we would end up with newspapers that realy were called the daily hate mail. just think of the tv programmes we could air ...your nightly quizz show ...ten good reasons to kill a black man.
urging people to look down on others, backing people who look down on others and stirring bigotry and hatred against different sections of the comminity can't in any way be desirable.
would you realy like to live in a country that encouraged such stuff?

Mr Roll, as usual you speak perfect sense. Also, how did Kilroy back up what he said? An opinion is one thing but you got to have concrete evidence and a decent backup before you voice it.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by MoonRat
An opinion is one thing but you got to have concrete evidence and a decent backup before you voice it.

I think the human rights records in Libya, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia is enough to back any argument about "limb-amputating" Arabs. Theyre Arabs, they amputate limbs, duh-duh.

But thats just me being a pedant.

Ive read the article, and I think Kilroy has a point when he says two things: 1) why werent the CRE complaining way back in April, when the article was published originally, and 2) instead of leading a witch-hunt against him for expressing an opinion, why arent the CRE doing something about, lets say, female circumcision?

This is the trouble with political correctness in this country- too much is simply dismissed as "racist" and tidily swept under the carpet. Again to change the focus, look at the way Ann Cryer, left-wing MP for Keighley, was vilified for saying that, in many Moslem areas, poverty is imported because theyre next-of-kin are allowed into the UK regardless of the ability to speak English. This was at the time that the chairman of the CRE was abusing a police officer with racist terms, of course.

He called my mate a right bastard.

And now we see why you hate him so much :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Having seen the interview I firmly beleive that he did not mean 'Arabs' but the regime in some countries. To me he made it clear that he did not mean to offend arabs and he did apologise to the people who were offended.

I dont think Trevor McDonald was very fair in this interview as he kept interupting Kilroy and would not let the man defend himself.

I think he should be reinstated.

[BlackArab]

You have to wonder why he feels the need to speak out on Arab womens rights when there are approximately 500,000 incidents of domestic violence a year in this country and two women are murdered every week.

Its always so much easier to criticise foreigners than worry about our own shameful record.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by BlackArab
You have to wonder why he feels the need to speak out on Arab womens rights when there are approximately 500,000 incidents of domestic violence a year in this country and two women are murdered every week.


He does talk about domestic violence on his shows, he talks about many subjects. I cant comment on his stories in the paper though as I dont read that paper.
Just out of curiosity what topics does he usually write about in the newspaper and has he ever written stuff which could be classed as racist ?

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Just out of curiosity what topics does he usually write about in the newspaper and has he ever written stuff which could be classed as racist ?

He has been critical of the Middle East in terms of terrorism and human rights, and wonders what the Arabs have against a country that is democratic.

But hes also been critical of domestic violence, Tony Blair, student tuition fees, rapists and paedophiles, the CRE for not doing their job properly (that was about 9 months ago), illegal immigration, police racism, and benefit cheats.

He writes a lot of things, its amazingly easy to take one thing out of context. And as for his show, of course its edited- anyone who thinks it isnt is a moron. But, in my viewing experience, he always allows both viewpoints to be heard, and heard well.

[Major Tom]

thank you kermit, some sense at last. the following is an extract from a letter in today's daily telegraph, written by a mr. randhir singh bains;

'' ...in the book of hadis ( sayings of mohammed)- widely available in britain- non-muslims are described as unclean and uncivilised, and muslims are encouraged to civilise them by converting them to islam. since no eyebrow was raised over the runnymede trust report or the book of hadis, one cannot help concluding that britain's race relations and human rights industries perceive a book or an article as racist only when it is written by a white author and denigrates the non-whites, not the other way round.''
this backs up what i have been saying all along; the unelected taxpayer-funded race relations industry obviously believes only white people are capable of racism. utter crap.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BlackArab
You have to wonder why he feels the need to speak out on Arab womens rights when there are approximately 500,000 incidents of domestic violence a year in this country and two women are murdered every week.

I can see you dont read his article then.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kermit
But hes also been critical of domestic violence, Tony Blair, student tuition fees, rapists and paedophiles, the CRE for not doing their job properly (that was about 9 months ago), illegal immigration, police racism, and benefit cheats.



So when he writes he criticises anyone and everyone, which I think fair play to him. He does not agree with it so he speaks up, only this time he is basically on trial for it.

[Luce]

I agree with Major Tom and Kermit. Kilroy's freedom of speech has been suppressed, because although he was allowed to voice his opinion by having it printed in a newspaper column, he then lost his job as a consequence.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
So when he writes he criticises anyone and everyone, which I think fair play to him. He does not agree with it so he speaks up, only this time he is basically on trial for it.

Exactly, he slags off most things, usually to start a debate I think. But this time hes crossed the taboo, you simply CANNOT criticise ethnic minorities because it is racist.

[morrocan roll]

watched it while boiling a chicken carcass ...he is a decent inteligent man who made a mistake in the way he critised arabs.
instead of critisising the regiems. the regiems are fucking evil by our standards. if you think they are fine and dandy then go live there or campaign for the same political religous order here.
as for calling him a moron and a c unt etc and slagging his shows ...which millions love ...i hope none of you never make a mistake in the way you you present your case ...oops ...too fucking late for that innit!

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kermit
you simply CANNOT criticise ethnic minorities because it is racist.

I beleive him when he said he was not slating Arabs but the regime.
What more can he do, he has publically apologised for what he said, he has stood in front of thousands of people and basically held his hands up and said 'sorry', what more do they want ?

If he was that arrogant and racist like has been stated then would he have even did the interview ?

[Kermit]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
.i hope none of you never make a mistake in the way you you present your case

Thats exactly it Rolly.

The thing is a people are judged by their Government, rightly or wrongly. And Arabian governments DO oppress women, they DO chop off limbs, and you dont see many suicide bombers from Wigan.

Because the US Government is neo-fascist many people believe that most Americans are gun-toting, God-fearin rednecks. And theyre not, but their government acts like that so the whole country is tarnished with the same brush. Its the same with seeing the French as obnoxious and stubborn, or the Germans as gluttonous, or the Italians and Russians as corrupt.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
I beleive him when he said he was not slating Arabs but the regime.

I read his apology in the Express this weekend, and I agreed with his reasons. He expressed them badly, because he said "Arabs" not "Arabian governments", but the essence is still true.

The trouble is that a lot of people dont like their weaknesses being pointed out, and now the CRE allows the ethnic minorities to hide their weaknesses behind the banner of racism.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
IAnd now we see why you hate him so much :rolleyes:

Don't be any more foolish than you are already are.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Having seen the interview I firmly beleive that he did not mean 'Arabs' but the regime in some countries. To me he made it clear that he did not mean to offend arabs and he did apologise to the people who were offended.

I dont think Trevor McDonald was very fair in this interview as he kept interupting Kilroy and would not let the man defend himself.

I think he should be reinstated.

Having read the article, I think he knew full well what he was writing and he's just trying to backtrack and wheedle his way out of it.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Don't be any more foolish than you are already are.

I think its perfectly relevant- your personal experience of his racism is thorugh a person who was insulted by him, its not exactly impartial is it?

If it was irrelevant you wouldnt have brought it up, after all.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
thank you kermit, some sense at last. the following is an extract from a letter in today's daily telegraph, written by a mr. randhir singh bains;

'' ...in the book of hadis ( sayings of mohammed)- widely available in britain- non-muslims are described as unclean and uncivilised, and muslims are encouraged to civilise them by converting them to islam. since no eyebrow was raised over the runnymede trust report or the book of hadis, one cannot help concluding that britain's race relations and human rights industries perceive a book or an article as racist only when it is written by a white author and denigrates the non-whites, not the other way round.''

No, I think the difference is in how the opinions are disseminated and how high the exposure is.

Originally posted by Major Tom
this backs up what i have been saying all along; the unelected taxpayer-funded race relations industry obviously believes only white people are capable of racism. utter crap.

Usual bullshit opinion from racism apologists. The CRE will pursue any claim of racism from anyone. :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Having read the article, I think he knew full well what he was writing and he's just trying to backtrack and wheedle his way out of it.

Forget about the article did you see the interview ?

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Having read the article, I think he knew full well what he was writing and he's just trying to backtrack and wheedle his way out of it.

Then thats your opinion. But one persons opinion shouldnt be enough to see someone fired.

If you take his article in context with the rest of them I believe he was criticising bigoted, oppressive and violent regimes, not saying that an entire people act like that. Because, lets face it, not even Richard Littledick would be that moronic.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
I think its perfectly relevant- your personal experience of his racism is thorugh a person who was insulted by him, its not exactly impartial is it?

If it was irrelevant you wouldnt have brought it up, after all.

Its got nothing to do with his racism and everything to do with his arrogance and the way he treats people who he disagrees with. I brought it up as an example of how RKS is not impartial. It has little to do with my personal feelings which are more based on how I perceive RKS's personality.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
The CRE will pursue any claim of racism from anyone. :rolleyes:

Including the policeman who was racially abused by the ex-Chairman of the CRE (who was obviously allowed to resign and keep his pension and bonuses), I assume?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
Then thats your opinion. But one persons opinion shouldnt be enough to see someone fired.

For about the 5th time - it is the fact of his position in the media that means he should be fired for having obnoxious opnions.

Originally posted by Kermit
If you take his article in context with the rest of them I believe he was criticising bigoted, oppressive and violent regimes, not saying that an entire people act like that. Because, lets face it, not even Richard Littledick would be that moronic.

Have you read his article?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
Including the policeman who was racially abused by the ex-Chairman of the CRE (who was obviously allowed to resign and keep his pension and bonuses), I assume?

I have no idea. Why don't you email them? :rolleyes: x 1000000

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I brought it up as an example of how RKS is not impartial.

Of course he isnt, hes not paid to be.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I have no idea. Why don't you email them? :rolleyes: x 1000000

What is the point in trying to debate with you when all you can do is be sarcastic and use the :rolleyes:

[Uncle Joe]

Originally posted by Kermit

Ive read the article, and I think Kilroy has a point when he says two things: 1) why werent the CRE complaining way back in April, when the article was published originally, and 2) instead of leading a witch-hunt against him for expressing an opinion, why arent the CRE doing something about, lets say, female circumcision? AS I understand it, while the article published a week ago was printed as Kilroy wrote it, the previous was edited by the Express. so they sensibly changed 'Arabs' to 'Arab states', which probably allowed it to go under the wire. Lots of Arabs/Muslims have little time for the governments of Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. Lots of British people have little time for Blair's government, be they socialists or conservatives.

And if the CRE don't have a policy on female circumcision in the UK, I'll be very surprised.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
you simply CANNOT criticise ethnic minorities because it is racist.

Oh sweet Jesus. :rolleyes:

This is the usual line taken by the hard of thinking or apologists for racism.

Can you not see the difference between criticsing individual people or governments for their actions and generalsing and stereotyping to an entire group of people? One is acceptable and the other isn't. Geddit? Its not that hard to work out.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
For about the 5th time - it is the fact of his position in the media that means he should be fired for having obnoxious opnions.

But its only YOUR OPINION that theyre obnoxious- Im sure I could find 1000 neo-nazis who think racial tolerance is obnoxious, it doesnt mean that theyre right.

How many complaints did the BBC receive- it was comfortably under 100, I do believe. And it was a big fat 0 when the article was first published.

Have you read his article?

Yes, Ive read most of them. Hes wrong on a lot of things, but it is an undeniable fact that Arabian governments are brutal, dictatorial and oppressive. This time he argeud badly and generalised too much, but the essence of the article is still valid IMHO.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Major Tom
thank you kermit, some sense at last. the following is an extract from a letter in today's daily telegraph, written by a mr. randhir singh bains;

'' ...in the book of hadis ( sayings of mohammed)- widely available in britain- non-muslims are described as unclean and uncivilised, and muslims are encouraged to civilise them by converting them to islam. since no eyebrow was raised over the runnymede trust report or the book of hadis, one cannot help concluding that britain's race relations and human rights industries perceive a book or an article as racist only when it is written by a white author and denigrates the non-whites, not the other way round.''
this backs up what i have been saying all along; the unelected taxpayer-funded race relations industry obviously believes only white people are capable of racism. utter crap.

What rubbish, the Bible says similair things and Mein Kampf is legally available. Also you state the book as making statements against non-Muslims not whites, if you really have a problem with it why don't you report it to the police? :rolleyes:

[Uncle Joe]

Originally posted by Kermit
Including the policeman who was racially abused by the ex-Chairman of the CRE (who was obviously allowed to resign and keep his pension and bonuses), I assume? Damn straight, they should have made him stay...

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Kermit
I can see you dont read his article then.

No but I fail to see the need to denigrate a whole body of people for the things individuals do either.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
I beleive him when he said he was not slating Arabs but the regime.

Oh come on! Have you read the article?

This paragraph

Moreover, the people who claim we are loathsome are currently threatening our civilian populations with chemical and biological weapons. They are promising to let suicide bombers loose in Western and American cities. They are trying to terrorise us, disrupt our lives.
And then they expect us to be careful of their sensibilities? We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security.

is blatantly racist. If he meant to just criticise Arab regimes (which would be a fair point) then why mouth off about how all Arabs are trying to kill us and then linking this with the asylum issue? Its racist nonsense, plain and simple.

Article bottom of this page btw
http://www.mcb.org.uk/letter60.html

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
What more can he do, he has publically apologised for what he said, he has stood in front of thousands of people and basically held his hands up and said 'sorry', what more do they want ?

If he was that arrogant and racist like has been stated then would he have even did the interview ?

Trying to save his career.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Can you not see the difference between criticsing individual people or governments for their actions and generalsing and stereotyping to an entire group of people? One is acceptable and the other isn't. Geddit? Its not that hard to work out.

I do believe that my eyesight is fully functioning thanks very much.

But I dont think that the addition of the word "states" changes the point of the article, and suddenly makes it any more valid. reading the article in context its easy to see that hes criticising the Arabian governments, and the brutal culture they instil on those who dont have a choice in the matter, not saying that every Arab will have your sodding hand off if you turn your back.

Read his articles in April, youll see what I mean.

[morrocan roll]

the man is a respected guy. his shows may be crap to some but obviously not to many others. they have ran for how long? he stirs debate and controversy ...thats how he makes his dosh.

before some of you hang draw and quarter him ...let me ask of you angry ones ...have any of you ever started a thread in this place about that big fat mullah who lives in birmingham ...where the council have kindly knocked a couple of houses into one for him and his wives and children ...where WE pay the rent for him ...and every other convenience in his life ...a thread about why should we do this when he openly preaches the downfall of western society. the society he so fucking hates but is happy to bleed? well. i know who's company i'd prefer. i' know who's views i'd sooner warm to down the pub.
some of you are that far up your own comfortable fucking arses that you no longer have any balance.
the guy made a mistake in his presentation ...maybe he does feel well pissed off about hate filled mullahs living off us while preaching our destruction. i'm sure the guy is perfectly capable of socialising with arabs and being treated and or fed by arabs.
i know who i'd prefer to share my evenings with.
trevor mcdonald was hard ...good on him. he would have been slagged as a white patsy had he been otherwise.
some of you need to get a sense of proportion. i stand by my earlier posts about public figures not behaving the way kilroy has.
i pray none of you ...ever make a mistake.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
But its only YOUR OPINION that theyre obnoxious- Im sure I could find 1000 neo-nazis who think racial tolerance is obnoxious, it doesnt mean that theyre right.

This doesn't even deserve and answer.

Originally posted by Kermit
How many complaints did the BBC receive- it was comfortably under 100, I do believe. And it was a big fat 0 when the article was first published.

I have no idea. You got a source for those figures?

Originally posted by Kermit
Yes, Ive read most of them. Hes wrong on a lot of things, but it is an undeniable fact that Arabian governments are brutal, dictatorial and oppressive. This time he argeud badly and generalised too much, but the essence of the article is still valid IMHO.

No, read his article. Surely he's intelligent enough to write an article that criticises Arab regimes in a valid and constructive way and not be stereotyped racist nonsense.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kermit .

reading the article in context its easy to see that hes criticising the Arabian governments, and the brutal culture they instil on those who dont have a choice in the matter, not saying that every Arab will have your sodding hand off if you turn your back.

Read his articles in April, youll see what I mean.

Blagsta in reply to your question listen to Kermit, he is making more sense than me.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BlackArab
No but I fail to see the need to denigrate a whole body of people for the things individuals do either.

No, of course not. But a government is more than an individual, look at the Taliban in Afghanistan- you did as they did, or you were killed.

Oh, and Blagsta, I dont think the immigration issue is as irrelevant as you seem to think. Remind me, werent all those involved in the 11/9 attacks legally allowed to stay in the United States?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
Of course he isnt, hes not paid to be.

And I brought it up because Becky claimed he was.

Try and keep up. :p

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
I do believe that my eyesight is fully functioning thanks very much.

But I dont think that the addition of the word "states" changes the point of the article, and suddenly makes it any more valid. reading the article in context its easy to see that hes criticising the Arabian governments, and the brutal culture they instil on those who dont have a choice in the matter, not saying that every Arab will have your sodding hand off if you turn your back.

Read his articles in April, youll see what I mean.

I have read the article.

Please justify this paragraph

Moreover, the people who claim we are loathsome are currently threatening our civilian populations with chemical and biological weapons. They are promising to let suicide bombers loose in Western and American cities. They are trying to terrorise us, disrupt our lives.
And then they expect us to be careful of their sensibilities? We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security.

[Uncle Joe]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Blagsta in reply to your question listen to Kermit, he is making more sense than me. Sure, but that's just your opinion.

And he seems to be completely blanking me, which shows a severe lack of good judgement ;)

[BlackArab]

So Kilroy was aiming at states then tell me which states was he referring to in the paragraph posted above.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
Oh, and Blagsta, I dont think the immigration issue is as irrelevant as you seem to think. Remind me, werent all those involved in the 11/9 attacks legally allowed to stay in the United States?

:confused: :confused: :confused:

How is this relevant to the situation in the UK? How does it justify RKS drawing a comparison between terrorists and asylum seekers? How does it justify him stating "We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security."? Can you not see what this paragraph does? It draws a link in the minds of readers between all Arabs, terrorism, asylum and fears over benefit payments.
Its nasty racist bullshit.
Please try and justify it.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Please justify this paragraph:

I dont think its particularly unfair, given the circumstances- as I said, werent the 11/9 bombers legally granted leave to remain the US. Werent the WTC bombers in 1995 (or whenever) legally allowed to be in the US? You have to remember this was written in the context of war, with hundreds of young Islamic youths going off to fight AGAINST the British forces, this was written in the context of the supporters of Hamza being allowed to stay here living on OUR money whilst preaching death to us all.

Unfortunately its impossible to make the point that its wrong for us to be paying for those who preach against us without bringing in the issue of illegal immigration- the point is not that ALL illegal immigrants will blow us up, but that SOME MAY. Especially given the current climate, and how popular Hamza is in some sections of the Islamic communities.

Personally I disagree with his views on illegal immigration, but I am sensible enough to appreciate that its a serious problem, and that those with genuine cause to stay are getting tarnished because of those who are nothing more than economic migrants.

[Blagsta]

I repeat

Originally posted by Blagsta
:confused: :confused: :confused:

How is this relevant to the situation in the UK? How does it justify RKS drawing a comparison between terrorists and asylum seekers? How does it justify him stating "We have thousands of asylum seekers from Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries living happily in this country on social security."? Can you not see what this paragraph does? It draws a link in the minds of readers between all Arabs, terrorism, asylum and fears over benefit payments.
Its nasty racist bullshit.
Please try and justify it.

[BlackArab]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kermit
[B]No, of course not. But a government is more than an individual, look at the Taliban in Afghanistan- you did as they did, or you were killed.

And if an Afghan was forced to do something under the threat of death who are we to condemn him. The Taliban is another matter.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Sure, but that's just your opinion.



He was saying what I thought and put it so much better, also was a brilliant way for me to sit on the side for a while ;)

[Major Tom]

aha! so it's ok to criticise arab states provided it's done in a sensitive, non stereotyping manner. just like the islamic fundamentalists preach about western society. according to the itv lunchtime news today, kilroy '' has received two hate letters, and nearly a hundred letters of support.'' just face it, kilroy has exercised his democratic right to say what he thinks, whether you like it or not. i think a lot of people are sick and tired of being silenced because their views do not conform to political correctness. it's funny how blagsta claims white people can express their views, sorry, kilroy's case has disproved that.

[Major Tom]

Originally posted by Blagsta




Usual bullshit opinion from racism apologists. The CRE will pursue any claim of racism from anyone. :rolleyes:

really? how many non whites have been prosecuted under the race relations act then? by the way my opinion is not bullshit, neither is yours, its just an opinion, thats all.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
aha! so it's ok to criticise arab states provided it's done in a sensitive, non stereotyping manner. just like the islamic fundamentalists preach about western society. according to the itv lunchtime news today, kilroy '' has received two hate letters, and nearly a hundred letters of support.'' just face it, kilroy has exercised his democratic right to say what he thinks, whether you like it or not. i think a lot of people are sick and tired of being silenced because their views do not conform to political correctness. it's funny how blagsta claims white people can express their views, sorry, kilroy's case has disproved that.

Sorry, I can't make head nor tail of that. :confused: :confused:

So Islamic fundamentalists say hateful things about Western society. How does this justify RKS being racist? Never heard the saying "two wrongs don't make a right"?
And Islamic fundamentalists are not all Arabs, as RKS implies in his article.

This especially
"it's funny how blagsta claims white people can express their views, sorry, kilroy's case has disproved that"
makes no sense. :confused:
I have no problem with the fact that RKS expressed his view. But he should have been intelligent enough to understand the consequences of this, given his high media profile.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
really? how many non whites have been prosecuted under the race relations act then? by the way my opinion is not bullshit, neither is yours, its just an opinion, thats all.

I don't know, why don't you email them and find out?

My opinion is that your opinion is bullshit.

[Major Tom]

i dont know why you can't understand my post, the grammar, punctuation, and syntax seem fairly correct. not bad for a bnp troll. and yes, i'll take you're next paycheque, since you did call me that.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He was saying what I thought and put it so much better, also was a brilliant way for me to sit on the side for a while ;)

Thats not very fair, I had to go and stack the dishwasher and get another glass of wine:p

[Major Tom]

oh grow up! you dont seem to have an opinion on the issue we are supposed to be debating, all you are doing is calling people names because you dont like what they have to say. i disagree with you but i respect your opinion and your right to express it.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta


My opinion is that your opinion is bullshit.

Really was there any need for that ?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Major Tom
all you are doing is calling people names because you dont like what they have to say.

Major Tom let me introduce you to Blagsta, king of name calling :D

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
oh grow up! you dont seem to have an opinion on the issue we are supposed to be debating, all you are doing is calling people names because you dont like what they have to say. i disagree with you but i respect your opinion and your right to express it.

It was a tongue in cheek comment on your statement about opinions. Maybe I should have put a :p in.
Of course they're only opinions, but I'm allowed to have an opinion that your opinion is bullshit.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Really was there any need for that ?

See above.

I think my sense of humour is a bit too warped for some of you.

[morrocan roll]

you know ...so many of you just refuse to be open to argument and agreement. kermit , who i often dissagree with or plain don't understand ...at least tries to be balanced.
some of you realy are entrenched in your own slime.
debate is about give and take but thats way over your big headed but tiny little fucking minds.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Major Tom
i dont know why you can't understand my post, the grammar, punctuation, and syntax seem fairly correct. not bad for a bnp troll. and yes, i'll take you're next paycheque, since you did call me that.

Because it makes no logical sense. Please reply to my points critiqueing it.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
you know ...so many of you just refuse to be open to argument and agreement. kermit , who i often dissagree with or plain don't understand ...at least tries to be balanced.
some of you realy are entrenched in your own slime.
debate is about give and take but thats way over your big headed but tiny little fucking minds.

I take it this is a dig at me.

I'm aware that I get a bit heated at times, but its all part of being passionate about politics and justice IMO. I do try and take part in debate as well.

Oh and Kermit strikes me as being quite bloody minded actually, not that balanced at all.

BeckyBoo strikes me as more balanced, if a little naive (no offence meant Becky).

[Kermit]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
kermit , who i often dissagree with or plain don't understand

:lol: I try my best:D

...at least tries to be balanced.

Thank you:)

I dont agree with much RKS says, and I dont agree with racism, but I dont think that sacking people who arent sugary about others is exactly a proportionate step.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
but I dont think that sacking people who arent sugary about others is exactly a proportionate step.

But thats not why he was sacked is it?

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Major Tom
aha! so it's ok to criticise arab states provided it's done in a sensitive, non stereotyping manner. just like the islamic fundamentalists preach about western society. according to the itv lunchtime news today, kilroy '' has received two hate letters, and nearly a hundred letters of support.'' just face it, kilroy has exercised his democratic right to say what he thinks, whether you like it or not. i think a lot of people are sick and tired of being silenced because their views do not conform to political correctness. it's funny how blagsta claims white people can express their views, sorry, kilroy's case has disproved that.


If you think the islamic fundamentalists are wrong then you'll understand why people are against anybody coming out with crap like that. You don't condemn someones behaviour then adopt it.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Oh and Kermit strikes me as being quite bloody minded actually, not that balanced at all.

Im not particularly, the fact that RKS was too generalistic isnt really in protest. Not with me anyway.

I guess I just dont like being told what to think, and how to think it. Which is what the CRE in particular does, in my opinion.

Im against what appear to be nothing less than quotas, and Im against "positive" discrimination. I defend someone elses right to utter a constant stream of bollocks because, I guess, I think people are bright enough to not believe everything they read in the papers.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kermit
I guess I just dont like being told what to think, and how to think it. Which is what the CRE in particular does, in my opinion..

How so? How has the CRE told you what to think?

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I take it this is a dig at me.

no mate the fucking lot of ya!
i think me and becky are possibly on the same level education wise ...i hope you don't take offence at that becky but passion for a belief seems all to often to cloud sensable judgement for many people. take a look around the world you live in. take a look at our history. so much could have been achieved ...so much could have been avoided if that passion had given way to humility.
do you know what humility actualy means?
it means that you have the ability to to learn.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Blagsta
BeckyBoo strikes me as more balanced, if a little naive (no offence meant Becky).

If only you will listen to me when I say you are coming across exactly how I used to.
I knew everything, I was always right I used to always use the :rolleyes: smiley and make it quite clear to people I had not intention of listening to them. I had my mind made up and that was it.
I realise after reading my posts what an arrogant cow I was actually coming across as and I think my attitude has changed a lot since I came to the boards. I am able to listen to other people and realise that they also have an opinion even if I dont agree with it.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Paul_2
I’ve read the Article and agree with everything he has written. Please point out the bits you disagree with. He is only saying what the majority of the UK population think. We as a nation don’t like Arabs or Islam, get used to it.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
no mate the fucking lot of ya!
i think me and becky are possibly on the same level education wise ...i hope you don't take offence at that becky but passion for a belief seems all to often to cloud sensable judgement for many people. take a look around the world you live in. take a look at our history. so much could have been achieved ...so much could have been avoided if that passion had given way to humility.
do you know what humility actualy means?
it means that you have the ability to to learn.


We are stating an opinion and getting condemned for it, don't you think thats a bit ironic?

[Aladdin]

Right here are my two pennies worth again (this thread does move fast!):

With regard to the 'misunderstanding', it stinks. I'm sorry, Kilroy is not some 14 year-old foreign student who can barely speak English. Kilroy is an educated (from the grammatical point of view at least) English speaker and his claims that he didn't mean all Arabs but just their governments is fucking risible. Of course he meant all Arabs. It's crystal clear in the article, and his claims now that what he meant to say some Arab states or governments and not the Arabs as a people is a pathetic attempt to s