Wednesday, 10 August 2005 - 11:52 PM BST

Face facts. You live in Londonistan.

What are YOU going to do about that?

What can ANYONE do about that?

Is it a lost cause?

Instead of talking about yesterday's events, today's angst, why not discuss the future and how it can be changed for everyone's benefit.

Both sides of the divide, be they conservatives like us or socialists/liberals, have drawn a line in the sand. We are right in our minds and they are right in their minds. So raking over the old coals in every posting is a waste of time. It just reinforces what we know and angers the knee jerking socialists/liberals once again.

What is the future going to be like?

And it isn't just about the Islamic branch of the Sealed Knot. It is about oil but not as the socialists/liberals believe. It's about there not being any and the leveling of the playing field between the rich and the poor nations of the world.

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 4:15 AM BST

"Face facts. You live in Londonistan. What are YOU going to do about that?"

Well for a start we should scrap any idea of expanding the role of 'faith schools'. Our society is too fragmented as it is. I'm sure that much of the hatred in Northern Ireland would be gone in a generation if you didn't have Catholic and Protestant schools.

DY

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 8:49 AM BST

David

There are no such things as "protestant schools", merely "all faith schools" (obviously excluding the private sector faith school).

In Northern Ireland, as well as the rest of the UK, we have segregated Catholic schools, paid for out of our tax pounds, separating children from the age of 5.

Obviously not a healthy situation so i agree with your overriding argument. However, the slant that their are rafts of Protestant schools is entirely wrong and, i would suggest, a material consideration when one thinks of a certain faith receiving subsidised schooling.

Anyway, i am sure that you would agree with me that the sooner we become entirely secular, in our publicly funded education system, the better it will be.

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 10:42 AM BST

I would argue (being on this side of the water) that Catholic schools in the 6 counties are more Bunscol (Irish language schools) than any attempt at self segregation. The use of Irish in the 6 counties was all but illegal until recently and legislation to protect its survival and teaching is very recent. When you English talk of Catholics and Protestants you are actually talking about indigenous Irish and people from Scotland/England brought over during the plantation of Ulster (feel free to learn how to use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page).

This is another liberal/socialist weakness that I despise. The fact that people will attack Christianity, which is a part of European heritage but won't hear a word against Islam. Being ashamed of your own heritage is a self-destructive attitude.

What is wrong with faith DY? It is better to believe in something than nothing at all. As a scientist myself I know that can I only go so far and then my knowledge of life and the universe comes to an abrupt end. I have no problem with my faith in intelligent creation.

Jesus and a God may be too archaic for my scientific mind but created I was. It gives me a sense of belonging and the faith to make something of my life because I have worth. By denying yourself so much and living a hand to mouth, leech like existence I feel you are missing out on so much.

Secularism/materialism/urbanism is nothing to be proud of. Secularisim is just another name for multi-culturalism (which is really mono-culturalism, a part of globalism). Materialism is pleasing oneself with goods and services that do not enrich one's life. Urbanism is a fallacy. During the industrial revolution people flocked to the new cities for one reason, poverty.

It is no different today. With the UN announcing that the majority of the world's population now lives in cities (urban areas) it says one thing about our society. Poverty. Poor spiritually and financially. As we come to the end of the Industrial Age (a brief blip in human history created by oil) we had better rediscover the old ways. Mega cities will fail without oil and you might just have to find another way of feeding, sheltering and heating yourself as there won't be much spare cash floating around for people to gamble with.

It is, in fact, poverty and globalism that is the root cause of Islamism. You and other conservatives with their heads in the sand would be wise to look at the bigger picture. Socialists/liberals must also stop trying to destroy Europe with their shamefull attacks on the greatest of civilisations, Judaism being a part of it. Fifty years from now Europe will be very different. Responsible conservatives need to defeat the socialists/liberals before there is no Europe left to save.

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 11:55 AM BST

"This is another liberal/socialist weakness that I despise. The fact that people will attack Christianity, which is a part of European heritage but won't hear a word against Islam."

Wrong. I despise all forms of fundamentalism. If you lifted your head out of The Telegraph once in a while you'd realise that most liberal types deplore the illiberal nature of Islam.

"Socialists/liberals must also stop trying to destroy Europe with their shamefull attacks on the greatest of civilisations, Judaism being a part of it."

Ooh look. It's our fault again. All very melodramatic, but unless you could be more specific about the nature of these 'shameful' attacks, it's difficult to respond.

"Responsible conservatives need to defeat the socialists/liberals before there is no Europe left to save."

It's quite amusing that you distinguish between 'head in the sand' conservatives and 'responsible' conservatives, but dismiss all socialists/liberals as a some kind of homogenous group. Are you really unaware of the schism created on the left over the last few years?

I'll give you an example. The decision by in France to ban muslim schoolchildren from wearing the burkha was contested by many liberals. Personally, I was all in favour of it.

I'm actually quite protective of the liberal Europe you wish to preserve. You never know, like in the 30's when the fascists marched on Jewish east London, perhaps it will be those on the left who save the day in the end.

p.s. DY, in answer to your original question. The evidence comes from the bombers themselves - or at least the one who was captured in Roma. Iraq is a factor apparently. It also comes from polls of young British muslims who cite Iraq as the principal motivation for their radicalisation.

Let's be honest here - both of us. I'm willing to concede that there are fundamentalist nutters who despise our way of life and are prepared to blow us up. Are you not prepared to concede that Iraq may have pushed some of these people toward that awful cul-de-sac?

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 12:03 PM BST

Once again you just latch on to a few things that I wrote about.

Always on message.

You have no answer to ANY of today's ills.

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 12:49 PM BST

“Once again you just latch on to a few things that I wrote about.”

No, I just responded to the claims that socialists and liberals were responsible for the present situation.

I’ve actually got some sympathy with your other points so felt no need to respond.

Thursday, 11 August 2005 - 6:22 PM BST

Jamie is right that it's not just about left and right. In general the right has been more 'pro-war' than the left, but there are pro-war left-wingers and anti-war right wingers. I sometimes call myself a neo-con. In doing so, I intentionally set myself apart from the paleo-cons, whose attitude I despise. I find them parochial and utterly selfish. Pat Buchanan for instance makes me sick.

As for Jamie's last point, I can concede that Iraq could have pushed some people over the edge, but as Allan Engel points out, the correct response is 'so what?'. A policy is either morally right or morally wrong. The fact that a hot-head with something to prove reacts to it by killing innocent people doesn't make it wrong. Otherwise by the same logic it would be correct to stop immigration in response to any violence initiated by the BNP or the National Front.

I thought I had made my point about the bombers not being Iraqi fairly clear. They may have been inspired by the Iraq war but their behaviour was in such stark contrast to that of the Iraqi exiles that one wonders if they really have the best wishes of the Iraqi people at heart. If Iraqi-Britons don't blow themselves up over Iraq, why should Pakistani-Britons? Are the latter claiming to know more about the war than the former?

Surveys consistently show that the proportion of British muslims who want a withdrawal of British forces from Iraq is higher than the proportion of Iraqis who want this. The fact is that many British muslims are totally out of touch with Iraqis. In fact so too are many Arabs from outside Iraq.

Friday, 12 August 2005 - 1:02 AM BST

Come friendly air liners, fall on us now.

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/12/nribb12.xml

What the imbeciles don't remember is that they are the same design and colour as Sinn Fein saoirse (freedom) ribbons.

We welcome Her Majesty's police to the Fenian cause.

Friday, 12 August 2005 - 11:15 AM BST

"As for Jamie's last point, I can concede that Iraq could have pushed some people over the edge, but as Allan Engel points out, the correct response is 'so what?'. A policy is either morally right or morally wrong."

I agree. Few people would deny that removing Saddam was morally justified, but - and here's where we disagree - at any cost? To the Iraqis? To us? What's the point in doing the right thing if your actions make the situation worse?

Saturday, 13 August 2005 - 8:55 AM BST

With Cherie in charge, the Scottish labour party make up etc etc the fenians have been in charge for a long time.... one has to only look at the current Defence Secretary..... when Minister for NI he correctly, and somewhat candidly, introduced himself to assorted unionists as "just a wee taog from Scotland"....

however, the pro-republican, boys of the old brigade singing politico now lords it over British troops really does say it all

Saturday, 13 August 2005 - 10:51 AM BST

We are called Taidhgs. Accuracy in spelling please. Or Tims, if you can't handle the Gaeilge.

Funny how Britons (Anglo-Saxons really, Britons are fellow Celts in Cornwall and Wales) are more affraid of Catholics than they are of Muslims.

I wonder if that will change when you are dragged out of bed 5 times a day to pray, at gun point, in a future Islamic Britain.

I always thought a Protestant was an atheist who was too ashamed to admit it.

Monday, 15 August 2005 - 7:46 AM BST

Hi Jhaybhee

interesting that you seem to focus on Catholics when i was talking about fenians.....

is that not the gerry adams school of disinformation?

I think you'll find celts in Scotland too.

and talking of being dragged out of bed at gunpoint sort of takes us back to fenianism again... nice closure of the circle really.

Tuesday, 16 August 2005 - 1:41 PM BST

Lots of Celts in Scotland. That's how Scotland gets its name. Land of the Scotti, who are Irish. All of them.