'A generation of Muslims not able to go to university?' blog discussion

Errata

thebull wrote: »

‘We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us

A clever bit of copy and paste. Do you have any original thoughts in your head to add to the discussion?

dktreesea

olly300 wrote: »

Until last year many of my friends' and family members with Asian backgrounds ( and I'm talking Chinese, Japanese etc as well as India and Pakistan) and my older black friends' and family members felt threatened by Union flags. Those who had married them or are blooded related to them felt the same way. Why?

In childhood they had threatened and called names by people wearing or in one case tattooed with that flag on the street. As teenagers and young adults they had been threatened with being beaten up and knifed on the street, and been told to get out of pubs flying the union flag. Some of the people threatened are short women who were on their own who were threatened by much larger men in pairs and threes.

Thanks to the Jubilee and the Olympics where normal people and loads of businesses where flying the union flag, it helped stopped them associating the flag with just being threatened, beaten up and injured by racists.

The English flag needs to be reclaimed in the same mass way but you flying it on your own at the moment signifies to me you are possibly a racist.

The Scottish and Welsh flags don't give this signal even though I know plenty of people of all backgrounds who have been abused by Scottish thugs.

The reason you are told my councils etc not to fly the flag is simply to stop upsetting loads of people. Plus it stops you being accused of things you haven't done.

Oh when student loans first came in and had to be claimed there were issues with Muslim students then. Lots took out the loans and didn't tell their parents now the specific culture will determine whether they will take the loans out. My Muslim family members will be then again they are related to Christians, Hindus and Jews so have odd ideas on things due to having large family celebrations with them.

I'm sorry for people who have bad experiences. Sh*t happens. And while being so critical of native white actions towards non native people how about taking a look at the other side of the coin, like the child sex rings broken in in Rochdale and Oxford recently? Immigrants can be just as racist as whites, even if they are both born somewhere in Brtiain.

I wouldn't care whether English people thought me racist for flying my flag if I chose to live in England. I wouldn't care. But the councils telling people to take them down if they see them at windows, in gardens etc. that's a different thing entirely. I think that is disgusting.

dktreesea

thebull wrote: »

‘This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great British freedom, ‘THE RIGHT TO LEAVE’.’
‘If you aren’t happy here then LEAVE. We didn’t force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.’
Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truth

You can't ask people who are born here in England to leave. They are as English as the rest. I just don't see why their views - the views of the minority, who happen to be vocal enough to ensure even the various councils support, - should prevail when it comes to things as traditional as celebrating the flag.

Gloomendoom

dktreesea wrote: »

If you are in England, :mad:. It's England. A separate country. One that should be sovereign, in it's own right. There is no such country as The U.K. or Great Britain. Why should the English have to prefer the Union flag to their own flag, just because someone might not feel comfortable seeing the St George's Cross? It was good enough for knights, so why not now.

Sometimes I feel, being English, that I have to apologise for even daring to hold the notion that England deserves to be a separate, sovereign country.

I'd rather it wasn't... and I don't feel the need to apologise.

dktreesea

Gloomendoom wrote: »

I'd rather it wasn't... and I don't feel the need to apologise.

There are people who don't live in England who feel the union is more like the occupation.

Maybe it would be better for England to stop having so many satellite states that it has to support and see instead to governing on behalf of the English. Let's see.....spending taxes raised in England on England for starters.

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

I'm sorry for people who have bad experiences. Sh*t happens. And while being so critical of native white actions towards non native people how about taking a look at the other side of the coin, like the child sex rings broken in in Rochdale and Oxford recently? Immigrants can be just as racist as whites, even if they are both born somewhere in Brtiain.

I'd still like to know what the word 'natives' is supposed to means in this context. And how can we have immigrants that were born in Britain??

Olly300 pointed out that a key symbol, the flag, had negative associations for his multi-racial friends, not that they are suggesting an entire community or ethnic group (in this case caucasian Brits) is racist! The criminal activity you refer to us about as un-Islamic as it's possible to be, just as it's wholly un-Christian for priests to fiddle with the choirboys. Strawman.

dktreesea

Fire_Fox wrote: »

I'd still like to know what the word 'natives' is supposed to means in this context. And how can we have immigrants that were born in Britain??

Olly300 pointed out that a key symbol, the flag, had negative associations for his multi-racial friends, not that they are suggesting an entire community or ethnic group (in this case caucasian Brits) is racist! The criminal activity you refer to us about as un-Islamic as it's possible to be, just as it's wholly un-Christian for priests to fiddle with the choirboys. Strawman.

Anglo Saxons and Celts in Britain are to Britain what the Native Americans are to America - native to the land.

The flag may well have negative connotations to any number of people, including those whose connections to the land don't stretch back centuries. Why are any of us pandering to these views? The St George's Cross is the English flag. It should be respected as such by everyone, including councils. How dare a public institution direct any one of us to take down our flag!

What I meant about the situations that arose in Rochdale and Oxford is that just because someone is of a particular race or creed doesn't make them more pure than the rest of us. Everyone may not have the same inclination towards criminal behavoiur but they certainly have the same potential. But to associate someone's love for their country - and their flag - with racism is, imho, insulting, and doesn't do the one pointing the finger any credit.

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

Anglo Saxons and Celts in Britain are to Britain what the Native Americans are to America - native to the land.

Your dates seem a tad arbitrary! How are you distinguishing your "native white people" from us pasty immigrants who rocked up a couple of hundred years later?

"The Anglo-Saxons were the population in Britain partly descended from the Germanic tribes who migrated from continental Europe and settled the south and east of the island beginning in the early 5th century. The Anglo-Saxon period denotes the period of English history after their initial settlement through their creation of the English nation, up to the Norman conquest; that is, between about 550 and 1066.[1][2] ...

The Benedictine monk Bede, writing in the early 8th century, identified the English as the descendants of three Germanic tribes:[4]
the Angles, who probably came from Angeln (in modern Germany): Bede wrote that their whole nation came to Britain,[5] leaving their former land empty. The name England (Old English: Engla land or Ængla land) originates from this tribe;[6]
the Saxons, from Lower Saxony (in modern Germany; German: Niedersachsen) and the Low Countries;
the Jutes, possibly from the Jutland peninsula (in modern Denmark; Danish: Jylland) ...

The migration of Germanic peoples to Britain from what is now northern Germany, the northern part of the Netherlands and southern Scandinavia is attested from the 5th century (e.g. Undley bracteate). Based on Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, the intruding population is traditionally divided into Angles, Saxons and Jutes, but their composition was likely less clear-cut and may also have included peoples such as the Frisii and the Franks. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle may contain the first recorded indications of the movement of these Germanic tribes to Britain."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxons


"They suggest that the majority of the ancestors of British peoples were the original palaeolithic settlers of Great Britain, and that the differences that exist between the east and west coasts of Great Britain though not large, are deep in prehistory, mostly originating in the upper palaeolithic and Mesolithic (15,000–7,000 years ago). Furthermore, Oppenheimer stated that genetic testing has proven that "75% of British and Irish ancestors arrive[d] between 15,000 and 7,500 years ago" (that is, long before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons, and even before that of the Celts).[34] There is support to say that these ancestors came from the Iberian peninsula and southwestern France, but not from Central Europe, where the Proto-Celts once lived ....

'Once you have an established population, it is quite difficult to change it very radically,'' said Daniel G. Bradley, a geneticist at Trinity College, Dublin. But he said he was ''quite agnostic'' as to whether the original population became established in Britain and Ireland immediately after the glaciers retreated 16,000 years ago, as Dr. Oppenheimer argues, or more recently, in the Neolithic Age, which began 10,000 years ago.

Bryan Sykes, another Oxford geneticist, said he agreed with Dr. Oppenheimer that the ancestors of ''by far the majority of people'' were present in the British Isles before the Roman conquest of A.D. 43. ''The Saxons, Vikings and Normans had a minor effect, and much less than some of the medieval historical texts would indicate,'' he said.

A different view of the Anglo-Saxon invasions has been developed by Mark Thomas of University College, London. Dr. Thomas and colleagues say the invaders wiped out substantial numbers of the indigenous population, replacing 50 percent to 100 percent of those in central England. Their argument is that the Y chromosomes of English men seem identical to those of people in Norway and the Friesland area of the Netherlands, two regions from which the invaders may have originated.

Dr. Oppenheimer disputes this, saying the similarity between the English and northern European Y chromosomes arises because both regions were repopulated by people from the Iberian refuges after the glaciers retreated.''

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E00EED91431F935A35750C0A9619C8B63

dktreesea wrote: »

The flag may well have negative connotations to any number of people, including those whose connections to the land don't stretch back centuries. Why are any of us pandering to these views? The St George's Cross is the English flag. It should be respected as such by everyone, including councils. How dare a public institution direct any one of us to take down our flag!

They dare because they are elected and appointed to make such decisions in the interests of peace and harmony. You want the Oldham riots or Bradford riots again? BNP, EDL and thus both the union flag and St George's Cross were heavily involved in stoking that up, and have been playing on the more recent London riots. Your native Brits/ English allowed the flags to be hijacked, don't whinge at the politicians and peacekeepers get mad at those who corrupted its meaning.

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I did not speak out;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

seven-day-weekend

Fire_Fox wrote: »

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I did not speak out;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Quite true.

There is no-one left who speaks for me because they are all so busy speaking for the others. I have been sidelined because I am English and Christian.

(I support various charities that DO speak for others.)

mumps

What about a four leaf shamrock on St Patrick's Day. I have never seen a four leaf shamrock, I suppose they do exist like a four leaf clover but the whole point of it on St Patrick's Day is the explanation of the Blessed Trinity (I know this isn't historical fact) so if we are worrying about St George and his flag can we also spare a thought for St Patirck.

On behalf of my Ulster relatives can I also mention the use of the Irish flag, is this not excluding all Ulstermen from the St Patrick's Day celebration.

MSE you have insulted us and all by trying to add a bit of Oirishness, yes I call the hat that ML is wearing Oirish as it surely isn't Irish.