observer Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 The Arch Bishop of Canterbury compared the antics of the Summer rioters with those of the City speculators - is this a valid comparison? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 A rubbish argument, with only a grain of truth in it. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 The arch bishop is a prat. He is religious and as such has absolutely nothing to do or say that will influence anyone in the 21st century. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 Ouch... you will be comparing the poor old bloke to politicians next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 Well come on... we are close to them identifying the "god" particle and yet these religious nut cases will still have us believe that some big bloke in the sky created everything in 7 days and that we should live by some pre-primeval laws which were made up by some bloke who had had a bad day! Look what is going on around the world in the name of religion..... the religious folks say that they are all peaceful types and yet there are equally religious folks strapping bombs to their arses and blowing up kids in market places.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted December 28, 2011 Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 All very true Baz, but if it wasn't religion it would be something else. The nature of man. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2011 So greed is a natural phenomenon; be it for a TV looted from a shop or a £million bonus for betting on the stock exchange? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 A perfectly fair comparison. They are all thieving bas***ds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 Look what is going on around the world in the name of religion..... the religious folks say that they are all peaceful types and yet there are equally religious folks strapping bombs to their arses and blowing up kids in market places.... But they would argue that it is not what you do in this life but in the next that counts. Many a religious zealot will gladly take your life if they believed it would save your immortal soul in the next life. You may note though that it is never the bloke advocating this sort of action that actually takes part in it. As for the archbishop what he said and what he meant are probably quite different. Rather than antics he should probably have said motives which would have made more sense. The antics used by each were different but the motives were more than likely the same GREED. (by the way I must say that I do not condone violence used for any purpose except in defence of ones own life) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 [quote name='Evil Sid' (by the way I must say that I do not condone violence used for any purpose except in defence of ones own life) And that is what is said in the Qu'ran. Do not take life, which Allah has made sacred, except through justice and the law. He orders this so that you may acquire wisdom" (6:151) and, "Do not take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for a just cause. If anyone is killed unjustly, We allow his heir (to seek justice) but do not allow him to exceed bounds when it comes to taking life, for he is helped (by the law)" (17:33). According to the Qu'ran, killing a person unjustly is the same as killing all of humanity, and saving a person is the same as saving all humanity. (5:32.) Allah permits the killing of somebody to save your own life if you are in imminent danger of being killed by that person but if that person turns away from killing you, you must leave him go in peace and not kill him. Regarding suicide bombers and the like. They may at one time have been good muslims from good muslim families but...... People are like sheep and will follow any leader, their minds, generally, are mallable and they will believe anything they are told by anyone if they are easy to relinquish their own common sense and beliefs. Bin Laden had a grudge against America and wanted to destroy America and her peoples but he couldn't do it himself because he knew if he attempted to do so he would soon be caught and destroyed himself. So what he did was to recruit other people to his cause. He played around with their minds, brainwashed them into believing that they must destroy, kill, americans and anyone else non-muslim, enemies of Allah and Islam, otherwise they (the enemy) would destroy them. Allah forbids the killing of any children and innocent people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 Allah forbids the killing of any children and innocent people. but what is a good muslim? In your eyes Cleo, it is one who follows the words and teachings of Allah... in the eyes of the "radical" muslims they are doing what Allah wants and killing anyone that stands in their way and you are the one who is wrong..... Christians are the same.... in fact all religions are; one lot of followers interprets the words one way, the next lot the other way.... that is why people of the same religion turn against each other.... and if two people following the same religion can't agree, what bloody hope is there?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 but what is a good muslim? In your eyes Cleo, it is one who follows the words and teachings of Allah... in the eyes of the "radical" muslims they are doing what Allah wants and killing anyone that stands in their way and you are the one who is wrong..... And I have already illustrated why that is so. No point in adding to my previous post except to say that all good muslims condemn the actions of the brainwashed radicals who are just a tiny fraction of the muslim movement. So all muslims should not be tarred with the same brush. One thing is for certain - come the final day all people of all religions and even non-believers will unite in calling upon Allah/God to have mercy upon them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 Well, looking around the world; it would seem that religious zealots are the main cause of all the friction; from the US bible belt, to Ulster sectarians, to Jewish zealots, to Sunnis V Shias, Hindus V Muslims; all in the name of their Gods and mystical beliefs. One doesn't need religion to have a moral compass, just a rational mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 One wouldn't disagree with you. But it's not so much the fault of the differing religions but that of the extremists. They do not have differing Gods, just differing names for the same God. All believe in one God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 (by the way I must say that I do not condone violence used for any purpose except in defence of ones own life) You can't beat a good punch-up on a Friday night though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 You can't beat a good punch-up on a Friday night though. Outside the Irish Club in Orford lane was the best fracas in town. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted December 29, 2011 Report Share Posted December 29, 2011 Algy, Forgive me. With due respect, the barneys when the Irish Club was at Bank street/ Buttermarket street were more spectacular. Fair fights though, with no hard feelings. (the Orford Lane Irish club is up-market by comparison. They were the old Irish labourers of no fixed abode and often spent the night in shop doorways. I don't drink but think they are lager fights these days rather than the old fashioned stuff. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted December 30, 2011 Report Share Posted December 30, 2011 Algy, Forgive me. With due respect, the barneys when the Irish Club was at Bank street/ Buttermarket street were more spectacular. Fair fights though, with no hard feelings. (the Orford Lane Irish club is up-market by comparison. They were the old Irish labourers of no fixed abode and often spent the night in shop doorways. I don't drink but think they are lager fights these days rather than the old fashioned stuff. Happy days Harry I would think that you had good reason to remember the scraps and probably broke a good few up, is the old rumour true that the bobby would stand back until they had sorted themselves out then 'pick up the bits' at the end of the fracas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 30, 2011 Report Share Posted December 30, 2011 is the old rumour true that the bobby would stand back until they had sorted themselves out then 'pick up the bits' at the end of the fracas. maybe then, now they prefer the "call about 60 of their biggest mates as backup" and wade in and kick some heads.... and then charge the injured with assaulting a police officer!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2011 In the old days they were big enough to do it, without "calling their mates"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted December 30, 2011 Report Share Posted December 30, 2011 Absolutely. 1955. The pillar at Market Gate flashed and told us there was a big fight at Davies's cafe, nr Central station. I was being shown round by a senior bobby. I was "on my way" when his large arm struck across my chest. He said, more or less just what you said Obs. When we made our steady way down it was easy peasy to sort the miscreants out. My grand-mother could have done it. As a general rule, if just two men are fighting and you get there too early they will both turn on you, so discretion is-------------- I may have mentioned this before, but in pre radio days you had to think on your feet cos almost certainly no help would be forthcoming. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.