Trusting others


by Rumbold
31st July, 2009 at 9:28 pm    

A woman in a cinema asked a group of youths to be quiet. After the film,

“Two of the group followed the family into a nearby restaurant and threw bleach over the woman’s head and back, leaving her needing hospital treatment for burns to her skin and possible permanent damage to her eyes.”

I believe that most people are good people (and that some others who do bad things are not always bad people), and that if you trust them they will repay it. It is what makes me a libertarian. Sometimes it is difficult to stick to that belief.

Yet I feel I must do. To be inherently mistrustful of the majority of people is to open oneself up to a life of misery. Imagine how the average BNP voter feels, constantly in fear of ‘the other’, a fear which turns into hate; or the terrorist willing to kill themselves in order to murder others. Our common reaction is to mock and despise them. But we mustn’t forget the importance of pity. Pity not for their views, but because they can hold such views.

Governments and many different political ideologies too warn us to be mistrustful of people, from social conservatism to socialism. It is why they want the state to have more of a say in our lives: we cannot be trusted if left to our own devices, because we are painted as inherently bad (along with other deficiencies).

We do need some system of law and order. There are bad people in the world (like the gang above), and there needs to be a way to stop them. But there also needs to be a reassessment of the way too many people view the majority of others. Not every youth on a street corner is a potential mugger. Not every Muslim is a potential terrorist. Most people will surprise you if you give them a chance.

Such a piece is no doubt of little comfort to the women scarred by bleach. But I don’t see any other way to act.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs






84 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. Henry North London — on 31st July, 2009 at 9:31 pm  

    Yes but the people who did this should be given forty lashes They would think twice before doing it again.

    And 10 years in prison

  2. Chris Baldwin — on 31st July, 2009 at 9:52 pm  

    Some people are just evil, most people aren’t. In political terms it means little.

  3. Chris Baldwin — on 31st July, 2009 at 9:54 pm  

    “Governments and many different political ideologies too warn us to be mistrustful of people, from social conservatism to socialism. It is why they want the state to have more of a say in our lives: we cannot be trusted if left to our own devices, because we are painted as inherently bad (along with other deficiencies).”

    This has nothing to do with socialism. Socialism is libertarianism.

  4. David O'Keefe — on 31st July, 2009 at 10:03 pm  

    “Governments and many different political ideologies too warn us to be mistrustful of people, from social conservatism to socialism.”

    Rummy as a leftie, this is bollocks of the highest order, socialism engenders solidarity, trade unionism and social convervatism(pre -Thatcher tory party)always looked to promote social harmony between rich and poor.

    For the record your a member of a party whose policies would definitely increase mistrust.

  5. douglas clark — on 31st July, 2009 at 10:04 pm  

    Rumbold,

    It is too late, my friend. The damage has already been done. And the only part of my sympathies is towards the woman.

    I’d like every Muslim who posts here to say @this is not acceptable’.

    anobody, are you willing to start?

  6. Adnan — on 31st July, 2009 at 10:11 pm  

    “I’d like every Muslim who posts here to say @this is not acceptable’.”

    Am I reading this correctly Douglas ? WTF is this to do with muslims ?

  7. Adnan — on 31st July, 2009 at 10:34 pm  

    Rumbold, who would you identify with politically – the Tories or UK Libertarian party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_Kingdom))?

  8. Adnan — on 31st July, 2009 at 11:04 pm  

    This seems really out of character for Douglas. I think somebody may be trolling under his name.

  9. anobody — on 31st July, 2009 at 11:35 pm  

    douglas clarke,

    Rumbold,

    It is too late, my friend. The damage has already been done. And the only part of my sympathies is towards the woman.

    I’d like every Muslim who posts here to say @this is not acceptable’.

    anobody, are you willing to start?

    I know it’s Friday night, and you may have gone out on the lash, but you need to really lay off of that wife beating juice.

  10. Leon — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:52 am  

    It’s Douglas, at least going by his email address.

    Doug, you’re going to have to explain yourself and well.

  11. douglas clark — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:17 am  

    Leon,

    Police said one of the attackers was described as a light-skinned, mixed-race man, about 19 years old, 6ft tall and of an athletic build. He had short, dark-brown hair and was wearing a black, short-sleeved t-shirt and black bottoms.

    The second attacker was described as Asian, aged around 14, about 5ft 4ins tall and fat. He was wearing black clothing.

    The driver of the car, which was possibly a five-door vehicle with tinted rear windows, was described as white, aged 17 to 18, of a wiry build with light-coloured, crew-cut hair.

    Another member of the group was a black girl, aged around 14, about 5ft 2ins tall, thin and with her hair tied back in a braid.

    Thugs, the lot of them….

    If this wasn’t a race crime, given the evidence Rumbold provided, then I don’t know squat.

    I’d have liked the opportunity to review this before I posted it. Where the heck has that facility gone?

  12. douglas clark — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:22 am  

    Leon,

    Perhaps this is daft, but Afghan women, kids really, are subject to this sort of attack. I’d like every Muslim on here to say that that is wrong, and I certainly don’t want it extended to women in a Leeds cinema.

  13. Edna Welthorpe — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:35 am  

    Events of this sort seem to bring out the slumbering Littlejohn within the breast if even the mosy goodthinkful we-must-try-to-understand person.

    Will we hear the rest of the story? Wait and see.

  14. Leon — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:40 am  

    Doug point is why should they? They aint responsible for this shit. It’s exactly that type of ‘thinking’ PP is against.

  15. douglas clark — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:53 am  

    anobody,

    who I seemed to have reasonably friendly relations with on other threads, seems incapable of answering the straightforward question:

    I’d like every Muslim who posts here to say this is not acceptable’.

    C’mon, anobody, it ain’t difficult, it doesn’t even apply to you.

    Just reject this sort of activity, out loud, and clearly.

    And Leon, get the fuck off my case. You know exactly who I am. You and I have read each others’ comments on here since year dot. I have no notion whether you agree with me or not, but I haven’t changed much. You, on the other hand, seem to think knowing my e-mail address gives you power.

    I write stuff here under my given name, mainly because it keeps me real.

    Can’t really say the same for you…

  16. douglas clark — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:05 am  

    Leon,

    Doug point is why should they? They aint responsible for this shit. It’s exactly that type of ‘thinking’ PP is against.

    Fucks sake Leon, it is as obvious as the nose on my face that anobody and others aren’t responsible for any of this shit. But, it is done in their name.

    And that is why I’d like them to reject it.

    It is for that religous community to say ‘this is wrong’ and really mean it.

    I’d await anobodys views, except I’d probably agree with them.

  17. douglas clark — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:37 am  

    Edna Welthorpe @ 13,

    Events of this sort seem to bring out the slumbering Littlejohn within the breast if even the mosy goodthinkful we-must-try-to-understand person.

    Will we hear the rest of the story? Wait and see.

    I might have differences with Leon Green. I do, in fact. And I have enormous tolerance for what he says, and usually, I’d think it is mutual.

    But, there you go, he and me have a history that goes way back.

    So, shut the fuck up.

  18. Golam Murtaza — on 1st August, 2009 at 8:03 am  

    Jesus…what kind of people walk around with BLEACH just in case they might encounter a situation where they might have to throw it over someone?!

    Or at least, if they don’t walk around with the stuff, what kind of people make sure they know where they can get rapid access to bleach if they ‘need’ it?

    What makes me particularly angry is that I know the sentence will be inadequate if these guys are caught. And I also know, with a gloomy sense of inevitability, that none of them will feel any sincere remorse.

  19. Arif — on 1st August, 2009 at 8:43 am  

    Douglas, if it turns out that the perpetrators were doing this out of a sense of religious duty as Muslims, I’d say that then it would be the time for Muslim people to clearly reject it.

    As it is now, I think earning your respect by saying what you want me to say, when you want me to say it, in a public forum, to prove I am not some terrible bogeyman, comes at the cost of self-respect.

    I’d be happy to reassure you in a 1 to 1 discussion, as then it would be a question of helping you deal with your personal fears of me. But in public discourse, I don’t want to be pulled into discussions framed by others so I have to prove my trustworthiness. If you feel Muslims cannot be trusted unless they pass a public test you set, that’s your political framework, not mine. I don’t want to legitimise that framework, so I am not going to conform to it (if I can avoid it).

    On a more pragmatic note, however, the mistrust goes in many directions. If there were some eccentric Muslim sect that believed it a duty to throw bleach over anyone who asked you to be quiet in a cinema, how would other Muslims be able to gain legitimacy with the eccentrics enough to lead them to a different understanding of religious duties? One thing would be that the mainstream Muslims make it clear their concern is based on moral reasoning, not desire to appease non-Muslims. They cannot do that if they had already rushed out statements of condemnation in response to demands by others.

    So there are several pragmatic routes, for example:

    1. Think about who is most threatening to you, most likely to end up lynching you, and then rush out public statements to placate their fears.
    2. Think about who you want to influence and make your statements in a way which is most likely to win their trust and moral leadership over them.
    3. Try to avoid making any public statements motivated by desire to please others, and stick to your own moral framework(s).

    Sometimes we do have to compromise our self-respect by taking route 1. But if it becomes a habit, then you make yourself open to a lot of manipulation.

  20. Sunny — on 1st August, 2009 at 9:15 am  

    Yes but the people who did this should be given forty lashes They would think twice before doing it again.

    And 10 years in prison

    That assumes that high penalties works as a deterrence.

  21. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 9:15 am  

    douglas clarke,

    I really hoped it wasn’t you who posted at 5.

    How am I responsible for what goes on in Afghanistan? Why should I apologise?

    Are you going to start by apologising for Baby P? Or any of this lot?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8178295.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8177083.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/8178406.stm

    Infact everytime there’s a murder, a killing, a rape in these shores I think you should stand up and say, “NOT IN MY NAME”. Sound silly? Well that’s exactly how you are coming across.

    You’re a silly paranoid man to really think I should apologise. Very strange.

  22. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 9:20 am  

    Actually, you shouldn’t apologise for the crimes reported in the last link. It was a Christian guy, maybe you can demand one of our resident Christian posters to apologise?

  23. Rumbold — on 1st August, 2009 at 10:16 am  

    Douglas:

    I think that you have misread the article. There is no mention of Muslims. All we have is a report that suggested a gang with different skin tones.

    David O’Keefe:

    There are some nice socialists out there, on a personal level. But socialism as a philosophy is about control. And people only want to control others if they do not trust them and/or don’t regard them as intelligent enough (“people cannot be relied on to make the right choices”, etc.).

    Adnan:

    Well, I am a member of the Libertarian Party. I don’t agree with a number of its policies, but I agree with the general thrust towards returning power to the people.

  24. Rajesh — on 1st August, 2009 at 10:20 am  

    Sunny,whilst I do believe that there is a deterrent effect in the criminal justice system the punishment aspect is in my opinion more important.
    This is an abhorent crime with no justification and therefore the punishment should be high.

  25. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 12:48 pm  

    David O’Keefe

    “this is bollocks of the highest order, socialism engenders solidarity”

    LOL. Oh the irony…

    Where has socialism, ever, actually engendered solidarity?

    In socialist deities such as Venezuela and Cuba they regularly shut down free debate. How is that “engendering solidarity”? It’s more like dictatorship. Solidarity through suppression of opposing view points, perhaps.

    You can’t get much more sectarian than socialists. And fantasist. :P

  26. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 12:50 pm  

    “Socialism is libertarianism.”

    Another corker! Another socialist with a rather creative mind :) Socialism necessarily dictates how businesses and the economy is run. How, sweet jesus, is that libertarianism!!!

  27. Kulvinder — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:12 pm  

    Its a tangential point but its pretty hilarious that on the one hand most politicians and policy makers seems on a race to out do each other in advocating ‘stranger danger’ and the ‘paedophile meanace’ whilst on the other raging against the ‘disrespectful and violent youth’.

    Personally im curious how else they expect children, raised in a hysterical culture, to behave. If i were told every person of a particular ethnicity, or age group was very likely a rapist i doubt id be treating them with any respect either.

    Obviously i wish the woman who was attacked well, and hope whoever did this is brought to justice.

  28. Shamit — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:16 pm  

    What do people suggest? give them a slap on the wrist.

    These fuckers need to pay – and if I was the prosecutor they should be charged with attempted murder. I could give two shits about the perpetrators. What did the lady do wrong?

    There is this problem in london and other cities where people are scared to say anything when a group of teenagers run riot on buses, other public transport and sometimes even on the road. In a specific part of SW London – where supposedly its posh — people around and in some council estates were feeling threatened by these sorts of behaviour. And the police finally had to create a massive police presence to deter these assholes.

    Why should law abiding citizens be afraid to come out of their houses? I am all for ensuring everyone in our society gets opportunities but I am also for everyone taking their share of responsibilities of controlling their kids etc. If they can’t the state must deal with them to protect those who are law abiding citizens.

    And if it were up to me, and the perpetrators were not natural born British citizens then they should serve their terms and be kicked out of the country.

    But if you do not agree please tell me what we should do. Be scared — and this sort of threatening behaviour is also leading many middle class parents to move their children to private schools.

    I am not saying anyone here has sympathies for these assholes but this is increasingly becoming a problem — people feeling threatened on buses, on the roads, in the movie theatres – well something needs to be done.

    And please don’t tell me oh they are not given opportunities and they may be underprivileged– everyone has an opportunity to go to school and not get caught up in this shit and its a parental responsibility.

    Douglas — this sort of behaviour has got nothing to do with religion, creed or colour – and No muslim or brown person or black person should have to apologise for this kind of behaviour mate – I am sure you agree. Assholes and criminals are exactly that and not representative of any community they might represent

  29. Kulvinder — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:21 pm  

    Socialism necessarily dictates how businesses and the economy is run. How, sweet jesus, is that libertarianism!!!

    You’re arguing different things, left leaning socialism or anarchism is pretty widely acknowledged as a philosophy.

    The issue is how people who don’t wish to live in that way are dealt with. Its a matter of dichotomy, not principle.

  30. limpia — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:29 pm  

    your country is sort of resembling that i saw in ‘clockwork orange;. No matter who actually did this particular crime, you and your neighbors germany and france need to grasp that u have a right to control immigration, which has led to higher crime rate.

  31. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:33 pm  

    What is it with throwing corrosive chemicals over people, especially women?

    It does seem a form of violence peculiar of Muslim societies, going from anecdotal evidence of attacks on women in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq etc. I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark, and in the press only the other day where a man had acid poured down his throat and the woman was in fear of her life.

    I don’t see why all Muslims should actively condemn it but certainly sometimes the silence from Islamic religious quarters is deafening regarding such violence where the perpetrator is a Muslim (and victim Muslim or not).

    Contrast and compare the reaction in these Islamic religious quarters when a non-muslim attacks a Muslim such as the one in Germany. Universal outrage in these quarters whilst conveniently ignoring the constant world-wide violence by their brothers in god.

    Imagine in that previous story, if a non-Muslim had poured acid down a Muslims throat and threatened to kill the wife for ‘honour’? The violent facts would remain unchanged, but the furore would be massive. Both by the media (think numerous opinion pieces in the Guardian) and Islamic corners. But one form of hate ideology – violent misogyny – is virtually brushed under the carpets in Muslim communities (of course also in other south-Asian communities too).

    I haven’t, however been able to find any supporting evidence that the attacker in this case was a Muslim, but we are only told that one of the lads was an Asian from Leeds.

    Having said all of that, these attacks are no more or less as terrible, and in that sense the culture, religion or ideology of the attacker is irrelevant.

    Which is why it gets my goat when people assign their level of outraged based upon the race or religion of the victim or perpetrator. We could from here move on to the I/P conflict but won’t, suffice to say I support a two state solution… Jeez, where’s summer gone? It’s grey and miserable outside.

  32. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:38 pm  

    Despite my comment, I hope it’s not misinterpreted, I agree very much with Shamit

    “Assholes and criminals are exactly that and not representative of any community they might represent”

    I don’t see why members of the community should apologise for criminal acts by pathetic and dangerous individuals.

    Great comment in general Shamit. We should absolutely come down on these fuckers like a ton of bricks.

  33. Shamit — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:42 pm  

    Marvin

    Criminals are criminals and I don’t know why you are reiterating the Muslim angle.

    Most Muslims in Britain are law abiding and they loathe the practices of honour killings and other violent behaviour as much as you do if not more. So I agree we need to deal with them as fucking criminals and assholes who deserve the worst possible sentences the State could throw at them.

    Also, those who argue for the government to be more representative of the views of the people — especially the pseudo intellectual left are the ones who do it most — folks, most people by significant majority believe we should bring back the death penalty.

    If Government was representative as you want it then we should put it in the statute books today — but we don’t.

    So, if the idiotic left and idiotic right shut up for a moment and think about the country first may be we could resolve most of these problems through consensus. But neither the left nor the right want this — that is why we get vitriol poured on centrist leaders aka Blair and Cameron and guess what they have been both very popular. May be the ideologues should take time out and reflect why our country is essentially centrist. But playing class war games I guess is more fun.

  34. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:43 pm  

    And Sunny, there is an argument that harsh penal consequences may not act as a deterrent in some cases, but two points 1. If they are in prison they can’t be harming innocent members of the public 2. A sense of justice for everybody which is actually vital for health society. “You do evil and you will caught and you will be incarcerated for a long time” should be the message.

  35. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:49 pm  

    Oh I vey much agree Shamit, my point was perhaps more tangential, the specfic act of chucking or pouring corrosive chemicals over people. Take it as a side note. Like the way London gangstas may have a peculier trait for slashing arse cheeks (you wont get done for attempted murder).

    “Most Muslims in Britain are law abiding and they loathe the practices of honour killings” I absolutely agree. I think ‘more should be done’ by prominent Muslims intent on having their morals for society known such as Imams and various leaders. But that’s a different matter really.

    The crux is the violent act itself and our correct response as a democratic society to such acts.

  36. Shatterface — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:57 pm  

    your country is sort of resembling that i saw in ‘clockwork orange;. No matter who actually did this particular crime, you and your neighbors germany and france need to grasp that u have a right to control immigration, which has led to higher crime rate.’

    Alex and his droogs were English (though ‘nadsat’ borrows from Eastern European languages as well as Cockney rhyming slang). ‘A Clockwork Orange’ has nothing to say about immigration. In fact it is anti-coersion, whether that coersion is by negative condition or by responding to violent behaviour by employing equally thuggish police.

  37. Shatterface — on 1st August, 2009 at 1:59 pm  

    ‘..conditioning’, obviously.

  38. Shamit — on 1st August, 2009 at 2:13 pm  

    Anobdy -

    you said yesterday, I should feel pleased for the women and children who get their faces deformed with acid bulbs or get lynched for apparently breaking the Shariah law — because in the eyes of Allah they would be martyrs.

    however, even on that thread you fail to mention that right to forgive and punish lies in the hands of Allah and not some punks in Taliban. And while not condoning the Taliban’s behaviour you do not condemn that behaviour – look at the thread on immigration/race thing.

    While I don’t agree with Douglas’ asking for Muslims to apologise for this particular incident — I think what you said yesterday here:

    “As a person who has grown up with two polarised ideologies[secularism and Muslim], which are both a part of me, I think I am more better placed to see which one I prefer. You may disagree, but that’s your prerogative.”

    “I cannot judge on the flogging of any woman or man, but what I can say is my secular upbringing tells me it is wrong, but my religion teaches me if she has died a Muslim, and Allah judges her death premature, she is guaranteed salvation.”

    Not a word about that what Taliban is doing wrong by bmbing schools and burning children with acid because they want to study.

    So don’t you dare try to take the moral high ground with Douglas mate. Sorry

  39. David O'Keefe — on 1st August, 2009 at 2:23 pm  

    Any more cheap digs Marvin? You bring up Venezuela and Cuba, forgive me for bringing this up but isn’t HUgo Chavez democratically elected? Why not bring up Scandinavia? plenty of socialism in that part of the world.

    Rumbold: Capitalism and Freedom are not synomynous; take a look at China.

    It is strange that you are using a criminal incident to promote anarcho-capitalism, but then considering that the state has had to rescue capital, I too would start clutching at straws.

    Changing the subject..

    Lets all wish Dougie a swift recovery from this bought of temporary insanity.

  40. MaidMarian — on 1st August, 2009 at 2:52 pm  

    The latent hostility and aggression on talkboards is not exactly a good advert for ‘love thy neighbour.’

    We, as a society, have become ever more self-indulgent and narky. Dressing this up as some off-shoot of political ideology is to dismiss our individuality. There are some nasty pieces of work out there – simple as that.

  41. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 3:38 pm  

    marvin,

    It does seem a form of violence peculiar of Muslim societies, going from anecdotal evidence of attacks on women in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq etc. I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark, and in the press only the other day where a man had acid poured down his throat and the woman was in fear of her life.

    That’s ridiculous. It’s like saying using rohypnol to rape, or using taxis to pick up rape victims, is a trademark peculiarity of the secular white western man, when he feels like a bit of rape after a hard days graft at the office. Or child pornography, is the trademark peculiarity of the white western man. After all it is always the caucasian secular man who is caught in molestation of babies, or setting up infant pornography websites/rings.

    Sound absurd? Well, that is how you sound.

    I don’t see why all Muslims should actively condemn it but certainly sometimes the silence from Islamic religious quarters is deafening regarding such violence where the perpetrator is a Muslim (and victim Muslim or not).

    Almost as deafening as the silence from the leaders of the free world when the child porn rings are bust, or the rohypnol using friday night clubber/rapist is caught. I can’t remember the last time the PM had a press conference condemning rape using rohypnol. Do you?

    Contrast and compare the reaction in these Islamic religious quarters when a non-muslim attacks a Muslim such as the one in Germany. Universal outrage in these quarters whilst conveniently ignoring the constant world-wide violence by their brothers in god.

    Maybe because she was attacked on the grounds of being a Muslim – the killer spouting disgusting bigotry while killing her – and no other reason. If she attacked and killed for other reasons, then I doubt you would have heard about it here.

    I haven’t, however been able to find any supporting evidence that the attacker in this case was a Muslim, but we are only told that one of the lads was an Asian from Leeds.

    Showing that you actually went looking, says something about your own preconceptions of Muslims.

    Also there was a mix raced boy, a white driver, and a black girl all involved in this judging by the report.

    Even if he were to be a Muslim, does not mean it was an attack in the name of Islam, which is really the point I am trying to make. If that Asian boy was reciting passages from the Quran, whilst dousing her with acid, then you’d get the reaction that you want marvin – if you really wanted to hear it. Similarly, if the attackers of those women in Afghanistan and Iraq, were carrying out their attacks in the name of religion, then again you’d get your reaction – if it’s reported here, or if you genuinely wanted to hear condemnation.

    I would imagine people universally – regardless of colour, creed, age, sex – would abhor the attack on this woman, as it is senseless and based on nothing. If we were to live by your coming-out-and-condemning-it mentality, why are you not calling for all mixed race, Asian, braided haired, northern, white people to do so? Perhaps because it’s silly?

    Having said all of that, these attacks are no more or less as terrible, and in that sense the culture, religion or ideology of the attacker is irrelevant.

    Exactly. This is where you should have started and stopped.

  42. ali — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:05 pm  

    marvin

    It does seem a form of violence peculiar of Muslim societies, going from anecdotal evidence of attacks on women in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq etc.

    You clearly are ignorant of the thosands of dowry deaths committed by Hindus in India

    http://www.articlesbase.com/national,-state,-local-articles/dowry-death-538040.html

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/3071963.stm

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jul2001/ind-j04.shtml

    I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark,

    This is a disgraceful comment. Imagine if someone said financial fraud was a “virtual trademark” of Jewish people

    Contrast and compare the reaction in these Islamic religious quarters when a non-muslim attacks a Muslim such as the one in Germany. Universal outrage in these quarters whilst conveniently ignoring the constant world-wide violence by their brothers in god.

    You mean like outrage in Jewish quarters when there is an anti-semitic attack compared with support for/ignoring Israel slaughtering thousands and starving hunderds of thousands of Palestinians?

    Since it only feeds Muslim-haters like you , no Muslim should ever “apologise” for what other Muslims do.

  43. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:05 pm  

    Shamit,

    If you’re going to quote me paraphrase me or whatever else me, please can you at least link and blockquote my own words. A humble request. As I think you’ve taken out some of the things, which I have said.

    I’ve seen what goes on in this place, where words are twisted, meanings are augmented and people are being pungently accused of all sorts. I don’t want to be next. [NB: I am not pointing an accusatory finger here]

    Also, I’m not taking the moral high ground. I’m trying to help douglas clarke understand. As you and others have pointed out, it’s ridiculous to take the Muslim angle on the this terrible acid attack [look, me a Muslim is condemning - someone get the Kodak out] and then to make some out of the blue request for apologies.

  44. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:29 pm  

    That’s ridiculous. It’s like saying using rohypnol to rape, or using taxis to pick up rape victims, is a trademark peculiarity of the secular white western man, when he feels like a bit of rape after a hard days graft at the office. Or child pornography, is the trademark peculiarity of the white western man. After all it is always the caucasian secular man who is caught in molestation of babies, or setting up infant pornography websites/rings.

    Actually it doesn’t sound absurd. If there’s a child pornography ring then chances are it’s bunch of white middle aged men. I’m not offended by such assumptions. Because statistics speak for themselves. I don’t know why people get so offended when similiar profiles, based on statistical probabililty, is applied with regards to race or religion. How on earth do you address a problem if you refuse to look at the facts?

    It’s the same problem when it emerged that police are deliberately doing stop and search under the terrorism act on people who are very unlikely to be admirers of that dirty wizard Bin Laden – in the name of political correctness. How bizarre. And a potentially fatal policy.

    Almost as deafening as the silence from the leaders of the free world when the child porn rings are bust, or the rohypnol using friday night clubber/rapist is caught. I can’t remember the last time the PM had a press conference condemning rape using rohypnol. Do you?

    If this was anywhere near as preventable as honour killings and violent misogyny displayed in Muslim communities in the UK (and yes other south-asian communities) then I would expect leaders to have press conferences condemning it. The example you give is an extremely rare occurrence so hardly analogous.

    If there’s a wave of criminal violence virtually synonymous with a racial or religious grouping than it would be negligence to not profile and peruse on this basis. If white pensioners started violently ramming custard pies in peoples faces, would take offence if there was a news report about violent custard pie throwing, and I assumed it was a white pensioner? If you were being consistent, then yes you would take offence by that.

    Do you find Operation Trident offensive?

    Do you find the notion that proportionally more Muslims are stopped and searched under terrorism act than other groups like Hare Krishnas?

    Do you find that idea that more black youths are stopped and searched for guns and knives than Swedish students?

    You would if you were being consistent.

  45. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:30 pm  

    “Since it only feeds Muslim-haters like you”

    Don’t be a cunt. Everybody here knows i am not a Muslim hater.

  46. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:35 pm  

    “I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark” by young angry Muslim men who think like the Taliban not by all Muslims.

    You have deliberately misconstrued me and you know it,

    Are you munir?

  47. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:39 pm  

    I am aware of the dowry deaths munir.

    You have deliberately chosen to take offence. I admit I could have worded it differently but painting me as a simple bigot will not work. I am not.

    I have already agreed that the vast majority of Muslims are decent law abiding folk. How can I then be a ‘muslim hater’?

  48. ali — on 1st August, 2009 at 4:59 pm  

    marvin

    I am aware of the dowry deaths

    Then why did you say

    “I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark”

    You have deliberately chosen to take offence. I admit I could have worded it differently but painting me as a simple bigot will not work. I am not.

    Im sure if someone said “financial fraud is a virtual trademark of the Jews” you would deliberately choose to take offence

    Do you find Operation Trident offensive?

    Do you find the notion that proportionally more Muslims are stopped and searched under terrorism act than other groups like Hare Krishnas?

    Do you find that idea that more black youths are stopped and searched for guns and knives than Swedish students?

    You would if you were being consistent.

    Since you support this one takes it you wouldnt object to Jewish workers in Finance being checked more than others for potential financial fraud

  49. Rumbold — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:35 pm  

    Marvin:

    Ali is not Munir.

    David:

    I didn’t say that capitalism equals freedom. For me a free state features the rule of law and a general lack of interference in people’s lives, providing that they do not harm one another. if you take that to mean anarcho-capitalism then fair enough.

  50. Edna Welthorpe — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:40 pm  

    Re. ANOBODY’S
    first link on #21:

    GIVE ME LIBRIUM OR GIVE ME METH !

  51. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:43 pm  

    If there were hundreds of cases of Jewish people defrauding people in the UK I think it would become a point of discussion. People would be asking why this is happening. And why Jews is particular? Is it cultural? Religious? Fashionable in judaic circles? Tribal tradition? But only a racist like you would imply it’s a ‘trait of the Jews’.

    But it’s not the case. It’s an antisemitic conspiracy theory. One of many that seems central to your worldview munir. I would say that probably whites are more likely than Jews to commit fraud. I don’t know, and frankly don’t care. And besides, commiting fraud is not the same as pouring acid on women’s faces because you don’t like their boyfriends.

    It is not however an islamphobic conspiracy theory that MI5 are tracking around 2,000 Muslims suspected to be involved in terrorist activities. There have been numerous attempts to massacre people; one was successful on 7th July 2005 killing 52 people. It’s not a made up lie based on some islamophobic bigotry. It’s true. It’s also true that violent misogyny is prevelaent in Muslim communities, partly because of culture, and in some cases explicitly for religious reasons. It’s also a problem in Hindu and Sikh communities too. Hell it was popular past time in this country for a bit of wife beating until relatively recently.

    Far too many Islamic scholars say you should beat your wife if she is disobedient. This is not an islamophobic conspiracy. It’s known as “the truth”, something I don’t think you’ll ever understand.

  52. marvin — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:46 pm  

    Are you sure Rumbold? He hasn’t denied it. It’s a pretty uncanny impression if not….He could be at somebody else’s house/using a proxy etc.

  53. Rumbold — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:50 pm  

    Marvin:

    As far as we can tell it’s not Munir. And there is no need to swear.

  54. Edna Welthorpe — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:51 pm  

    ETHNICITY AND CRIME IN AUSTRALIA:

    The AMERICAN RENAISSANCE site led me here [of course] so here’s the original:

    http://www.theherald.com.au/blogs/jeff-corbett/unconditional-welcome/1580461.aspx

    Some sharp surprises. Those jolly and happy-go-lucky Pacific Islanders have the sly Italians beaten by a mile!

    On ethnicity and REAL crime, it can be said that the swaggering young xxxxxxx on the unlit street only want your wallet but the xxxx running an investment scam want your life savings!

    Discuss

  55. Rumbold — on 1st August, 2009 at 6:55 pm  

    Edna Welthrope:

    Why do you have to use capital letters so much? Why?

  56. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:07 pm  

    marvin,

    You should be a politician

    Actually it doesn’t sound absurd. If there’s a child pornography ring then chances are it’s bunch of white middle aged men. I’m not offended by such assumptions. Because statistics speak for themselves. I don’t know why people get so offended when similiar profiles, based on statistical probabililty, is applied with regards to race or religion. How on earth do you address a problem if you refuse to look at the facts?

    With all due respect, that’s not what i said though is it?

    It sounds absurd [i]if[/i] it was constantly reported along the lines of “WHITE WESTERN SECULAR MAN OF THE FREE WORLD arrested for child pornography”, playing on the emphasis that it was because of his white secular free upbringing. This followed by countless days of expert analysis, on how to deal with radical secularism.

    Is it because of this man’s secular values/upbrining that led to him vewing child porn? Is it by virtue of this man being secular he committed this crime? Do you think there should be a round table discussion on changing liberties and freedom; or on how we get rid of the scurge of his kind of people taking the secularist notion of freedom of action literally which leads to him jacking off to minors on the internet?

    No, because the crime was not done in the name of being a white person, or because of secular values, or his secular upbringing but because he’s just a very disturbing person.

    Likewise, everytime some man decides to douse some woman in acid, in a far away land, we shouldn’t say it was because of his Muslim upbringing or because of his Islamic values, or have a round table discussion on changing Islam, or changing the Quran – which is what happens.

    I don’t see why all Muslims should actively condemn it but certainly sometimes the silence from Islamic religious quarters is deafening regarding such violence where the perpetrator is a Muslim (and victim Muslim or not).

    Nor should we expect the Islamic religious quarters to come out and make a big hoo haa, if it wasn’t done in the name of Islam.

    Likewise we shouldn’t expect PM Brown to come out and denounce the distributors of child pornography, who happen to live in a liberal progressive society under the premiership of PM Brown – by saying “This is not the work of the freeworld, or liberal democracy, or our labour policy manifesto in action”. This is what you expect from Islamic leaders, because Muslims, are happening to be doing a crime.

    As for a single Muslim leader – that’s a laugh. Find me one.

    I don’t know what Operation Trident is and your subsequent questions are redundant, because you’ve taken what I’ve said, and gone off the radar with it.

    Anyway douglas clarke?

  57. Adnan — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:12 pm  

    So Rumbold, how much freedom from state interference is required ? The wikipedia page on the UK Libertarian party seems to say that their model of a state does not extend much beyond a police force, courts, and armed forces. I doubt the others in the party have the attitude that we should trust people to do good, it’ll probably be a case of “I’m alright Jack”.

    Regarding the bleach attack – this is more along the lines of a bunch of opportunistic shitheads than religiously motivated. There have been plenty of similar cases e.g. the young father whose family was was harassed for months, culiminating in his death due to stabbing or a beating.

    As a separate note, munir did seem to appear to post last night under the alias Anwar and he’s got zapped.

  58. Soso — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:14 pm  

    This whole unfortunate incident plays into the hands of the Far Right not just in England, but Europe as well.

  59. anobody — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:18 pm  

    ^There was a white get away driver.

    Far Right, would be silly to play with this story.

    I suppose, they’ll say it was the non whites who forced the white dude to drive them away. Or, it was the non-white side of the mixed race gang member, that committed the crime.

  60. Adnan — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:27 pm  

    “I can see why Douglas has thought this was an attack by a Muslim as this is virtually trademark,”

    Hardly applying Occam’s razor. That’s why I was so surprised at the originator, but not so at the person finding a reason for it.

  61. Leon — on 1st August, 2009 at 7:51 pm  

    Fucks sake Leon, it is as obvious as the nose on my face that anobody and others aren’t responsible for any of this shit. But, it is done in their name.

    That’s fucking horseshit. If Richard Dawkins tortured a bunch of religious people I’ll be damned if I’ll be held accountable for his actions.

    You’re talking out of your arse mate, and I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt on account of the booze but I’m not so sure now. You have this seething streak of bigotry going on in you it seems.

  62. Edna Welthorpe — on 1st August, 2009 at 8:05 pm  

    What deters crime is not so much the prospect of draconian punishmenents, even when inflicted publicly, as the near-certainty of detection and conviction.

    One country, detested by so many that it need not be named here, offers and pays cash rewards to those who nark on, turn in, denounce, peach on [etc.,] those who commit crimes, ESPECIALLY those very nasty crimes which catch the public imagination, such as that being discussed here.

    A good idea?

    Well, I certainly think so!

    Any comment?

    POSTSCRIPT:
    Remember when a young American was caned for vandalism in Singapore?
    [He was NOT whipped or even caned in public, as some may mis-remember]

    Subsequent to the sentence and the caning, the Singaporean government was inundated with letters and faxes from Americans congratulating Singapore on having REAL laws and for being willing to inflict worthwhile punishments.

  63. Leon — on 1st August, 2009 at 8:57 pm  

    Maybe I missed something but where in the judicial system is there such a thing as a ‘Muslim crime’?

  64. Rumbold — on 1st August, 2009 at 9:32 pm  

    Adnan:

    I see the need for a national education and health system. I just don’t see the need for so much unecessary government. Why, for example, does the state consider it its business to monitor and try and control what people eat? Yes, obesity costs the NHS money, but that’s why we have taxes on food, and obese people are also likely to die earlier. Or run a media network (the BBC)? Or countless other examples.

    Then there is the monetary aspect. The state, even in a good year, costs us over half a trillion punds. And it cannot even provide rape crisis centres. Want I want to see is a slimmed down state providing only what the market really can’t supply. So, for example, you could never have a commercially-viable rape crisis centre, which is why the taxpayer should fund them. There is a need. Funding art and entertainment, on the other hand, isn’t a need, it is a whim. Would art disappear if not government-funded? No.

    People shouldn’t be forced to hand over money to pay for whims.

  65. another — on 1st August, 2009 at 9:36 pm  

    no, but if the person is not an idiot he can easily guess the chances of one and the same crime to be made by muslim and non-muslim

  66. Adnan — on 1st August, 2009 at 10:14 pm  

    Rumbold,

    so what does LPUK provide what the Tories don’t ? I’m sure Osborne will take the opportunity to slash a lot more than is required. Maybe they won’t go far enough for the LPUK membership.

    The LPUK site has a test of how liberal one is – I’m apparently 70% ;) liberal.

  67. Rumbold — on 2nd August, 2009 at 10:02 am  

    Adnan:

    Well, for a long time the Tories were committed to keeping the sme levels of public spending as Labour. And their controlling nature was highlighted by pronouncements on where WH Smiths should put chocolate oranges.

    I just took the quiz, and like most quizzes, it is pretty simplistic (they have to be if you have only a yes or no answer). I disagree with LPUK on guns, while there is nothing wrong with a progressive tax system, providing that the taxes are not so high as to discourage investment in this country, and discourage people from workers (as is the case at the moment). The foreign intervention question was also weak.

  68. Halima — on 2nd August, 2009 at 1:41 pm  

    “Maybe I missed something but where in the judicial system is there such a thing as a ‘Muslim crime’?”

    Good point, Leon.

    It seems there is a healthy contingent who would like it to be – far sooner than pushing for better protection against religious hate crimes…

  69. Katy Newton — on 2nd August, 2009 at 10:01 pm  

    Dousing people with bleach is not a “trademark” of the Muslim community, is it? I’ve never heard of this before. This just sounds like a gang of nasty violent people to me.

  70. marvin — on 2nd August, 2009 at 11:13 pm  

    Christ on a bike. It’s “trademark” for the a very tiny minute minority of Muslim males who attack women with acid. Largely in Pakistan it seems.

    But the correlation is there. There’s a correlation between a very tiny minuscule number of hindus in India and burning the wife on the funeral pyres too isn’t there? Or perhaps I’m being a bigot and we should say that all cultures and races equally have exactly the same minority of males who chuck acid in the faces of women or who burn wives on funeral pyres.

    And only a days ago a man had acid poured down his throat and the woman is living in fear IN LONDON.

    Look what I have found

    http://www.acidsurvivorspakistan.org/

    Acid Survivors Foundation (ASF) is a registered charitable organization, providing comprehensive services to meet the medical, surgical, psychological, legal, and rehabilitation needs of the acid attacked people in all regions of Pakistan.

    Acid attack on Afghan schoolgirls

    Attackers in Afghanistan have sprayed acid in the faces of at least 15 girls near a school in Kandahar, police say.

    http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1908/

    Acid-attack victims and their families are seeking justice in Pakistan courts and speaking out against a form of violence that disfigures hundreds of women every year

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/02/19/acid.attack.victim/

    TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) — Ameneh Bahrami is certain that one day she’ll meet someone, fall in love and get married. But when her wedding day comes, her husband won’t see her eyes, and she won’t see her husband. Bahrami is blind, the victim of an acid attack by a spurned suitor.

    And this bit of googling took minutes. I was hardly looking for dregs.

  71. Shamit — on 2nd August, 2009 at 11:49 pm  

    Violence against women sadly is far too common in way too many cultures – and acid has often been a weapon of choice of weak men trying to control the behaviour of women.

    And while Marvin may find a series of attacks which were perpetrated by assholes calling themselves Muslims — there have been a series of incidents in India where idiots claiming to be Hindus have done exactly the same.

    And sadly many of those are not even reported — is it a Muslim problem? NO. Is it a South Asian problem? Yes.

    However, it has no place in Britain – and these attacks should be treated as attempted premeditated homicide.

    Can we stop getting caught up into this completely ineffective conversation where we try to attribute crimes to a particular religion or culture – because if the crime was committed by someone not belonging to this particular group it would still be a horrific crime.

    And like every heinous crime it challenges the basic societal norms and the victims don’t feel any less or more pain and their lives get equally ruined irrespective of the culture, creed or religion of the perpetrator of the crime.

    I want these assholes punished and I want the punishment to reflect the vicious and premeditated nature of the crime.

  72. Halima — on 3rd August, 2009 at 2:01 am  

    “It’s “trademark” for the a very tiny minute minority of Muslim males who attack women with acid. Largely in Pakistan it seems. ”

    It’s also used in Jamaica for petty rivalries between women. Rejection by women is another motivation in South Asia. In Bangladesh it is one of common explanations for acid abuse in Bangladesh where girls refuse marriage propositions (of coarse they would coming from a bloke harrassing you on the street…). There’s a great organisation in Dhaka working with women who have suffered from disfigurement resulting from such violence called the Acid Survivers Foundation.

    The girl is such situations is always pretty, never ugly.

    It’s cheap and available, that’s the problem.

    It has no place in any society, not just in Britain.

  73. Gorgeous — on 3rd August, 2009 at 6:35 am  

    Vitriol-throwing had a cameo role in a Sherlock Holmes story and was a regular in a number of Victorian penny-dreadfuls.

  74. anobody — on 3rd August, 2009 at 8:36 am  

    Shamit,

    I want these assholes punished and I want the punishment to reflect the vicious and premeditated nature of the crime.

    Capital punishment?

  75. Rumbold — on 3rd August, 2009 at 9:03 am  

    I really don’t know how we got onto Muslims. Can anyone point me to the bit in the original report that talked about Muslims?

  76. cjcjc — on 3rd August, 2009 at 9:35 am  

    @74 – 11 months = like out in under 6.

    Wow – what a deterrent our justice system has become.

  77. cjcjc — on 3rd August, 2009 at 9:37 am  

    Most people will surprise you if you give them a chance.

    So do you ask people to keep the noise down in cinemas, or when playing loud music on public transport?

    How far does your trust go?!

    (Serious question.)

  78. Rumbold — on 3rd August, 2009 at 10:01 am  

    Cjcjc:

    I find that most people respond well if you ask them something. Often they don’t realise that they are being disruptive (the classic example being the person who puts something on the train seat beside them without realising). If it was late at night and there was a large group of them I might not, because people are often drunk at that time and so not in control.

  79. Ravi Naik — on 3rd August, 2009 at 10:31 am  

    Which is why it gets my goat when people assign their level of outraged based upon the race or religion of the victim or perpetrator.

    I think you are grossly mistaken – I think most people in this country are horrified that these attacks happen regardless of the race or religion of the victim or perpetrator.

    here’s a correlation between a very tiny minuscule number of hindus in India and burning the wife on the funeral pyres too isn’t there?

    Since 1987, in a country of a billion people, there have been very few cases (5 or 6), most of which were probably suicides. When you have that many people, you you can find a correlation for anything.

    Actually it doesn’t sound absurd. If there’s a child pornography ring then chances are it’s bunch of white middle aged men. I’m not offended by such assumptions.

    How about using your words… “Child abuse is a trademark attack by whites”, does that offend you? It offends me, because it is a vile racist statement.

    Marvin, I still do not know whether you write in good faith but are rather reckless in the terms you use, or you know exactly what you are doing. I really hope it is the former.

  80. Ala — on 3rd August, 2009 at 12:05 pm  

    Rumbold, don’t you think something should be done to address the problem that caused these young people to be so violent? Sure, people will always be pricks, but what caused a group of young people who have their whole lives ahead of them to be so hateful of people and so hopeless about life? (People who commit such gratuitous crimes can’t have much hope in their lives).

    You can’t prevent people from becoming potential Bernard Madoffs- that definitely is an inherent flaw in human nature. But imagine these kids were doing their A’levels and hoping to get into Oxbridge, that their parents were lawyers, doctors or teachers, and they were planning their gap year to Peru to volunteer for Save the Children. It would be very strange indeed if they then went and threw acid on a woman for telling them to shut up at the cinema.

    It’s all well and good to blame the parents, and then hopefully get them banged up too, but the parents are just passing on to their children the kind of upbringing they had, and there’s only so much room in our prisons for every member of the criminal underclass.

    The question is, how do you prevent a criminal underclass from existing in the first place? There’s no doubt only some form of state intervention, but what? More prisons, forced sterilisation, or social welfare and good free education?

    This is not a crime of passion, or the crime of a lone deranged sociopath, this was a social, gang crime and not something that’s inevitable.

  81. Rumbold — on 3rd August, 2009 at 12:08 pm  

    Ala:

    I agree that we should try and do something to stop these people acting the way they did. I don’t think most people are born that way, so we have to try and find and crush the factors that made them this way, whether it is broken homes, lack of education, etc.

    I don’t that there is a simple solution, but if we make people’s lives better, we make them less angry.

  82. marvin — on 3rd August, 2009 at 12:31 pm  

    “Child abuse is a trademark attack by whites”

    FFS Ravi I couldnt give a shit. It isn’t a trademark of whites though is it, in the slightest?

    I could link to 20 cases of acid in the face attacks at random. They would all be Muslim women most probably. What the hell is the problem with this statement??!?!

    But lets pretend eh, that its just as common in elderly innuit communities!

  83. Ravi Naik — on 3rd August, 2009 at 1:23 pm  

    FFS Ravi I couldnt give a shit. It isn’t a trademark of whites though is it, in the slightest?

    According to your standards, it is. You said that if there is a paedophile ring then chances are it is a bunch of white men. So, according to you, it is a “trademark attack” by whites.

    Perhaps you can explain how an ethnic community earns a “trademark attack”.

  84. marvin — on 3rd August, 2009 at 3:15 pm  

    Ah yes if you’re talking about paedo rings then yes we’re talking white middle aged with facial hair. Standard. Probably a Belgium :)

    I am sorry about the previous much misaligned comment. I definitely did not mean a trademark of the Muslim race!

    I like to offend everyone equally. Some of the worst people in the planet are white aged around 30 years old and live in London. Doh. That’s me.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.