Not a bad try there Perilous....

I do see your reasoning..but I dispute your chronology.

Here is my take.

"If people come into the streets of London with signs saying "Annihiliate those who slander Islam"
and/or
"Europe you will pay, the Mujahideen are on their way"
and/or
"Bomb Denmark, we will invade you, and take your wives as war booty"

If vociforous Muslims abuse publically the Home Secretary of England..

Or run a hostile demonstration and abuse Britain and Christians outside Westminster Cathedral

well...

I suggest that THAT.. will indeed bring about a reaction.. part of which is my on going theme and may I say the growing world wide anger and readiness to stand up against it.(Which I am seeing more of each day)

I don't recall ever even thinking about organizing a rally and signs saying "Annihilate those who insult Christ"
"Kill those who take the Lords name in vain"

So.. in reality, you've got the order of action/reaction quite wrong.

Though I have to commend your grasp of Latin (or your cut/paste abilities :)

Honestly... don't you see this ?

Let me run it by you again.

1/ people call for annihilation of non Muslims simply because the 'take the name in vain'
2/ Those to whom they speak.. are rather upset.

Do you follow now ?

I think we may be getting somewhere at last, Boaz.

>>I do see your reasoning..but I dispute your chronology.<<

So your final defence for your rabble-rousing would appear to be that famous childhood receptus ignavorum, "but mum, he started it".

("Coward's retreat", by the way - yes, the Latin is genuine. So, of course, are my cut 'n' paste skills. I didn't feel like typing it)

Surely you cannot believe that a grown man can get away with such a puerile (puerilis, -e adj. childish) excuse, especially one who presumes to come from a relatively civilized society?

The analogy is real. When your mum told you off for fighting, and you gave her that line, what did she say?

"Boaz, I don't care who started it, you should be old enough to stop it."

Let's try again.

>>I suggest that THAT.. will indeed bring about a reaction.. part of which is my on going theme and may I say the growing world wide anger and readiness to stand up against it.(Which I am seeing more of each day)<<

And I suggest that exactly as you do with children, you ignore their petty squabbling and posturing, only coming down hard on them when they break the law. It happens to be legal to stage demonstrations in England, thank goodness, and most people treat them with the contempt or respect that they deserve.

You must have been asleep in the sixties, when there were violent demonstrations against the Vietnam war, with placards equally inflammatory and insulting, around the world.

By acting as you do, you provide enormous opportunities for agents provocateurs (French. Sorry) to set you up to do their dirty work for them.

All they have to do is put a video up on YouTube, it would seem.

Constructive perspective Pericles....

Ok.. lets look at your scenario just a tad closer.

"But Mum... HEEEee started it..."

Sure.. as children this is indeed a refuge for our wounded pride.. but often we are speaking the truth.

Your offering suggests that 'justice and fairness' have no part in childrens squabbles.

Each case of 'he started it' must be dealt with on its merits.

If..for example.. each time you walked home.. the idiot in question fired a ball bearing at you from a sling shot.. EVERY time you came home..and you had asked him..his mother, his father to stop it.. and ur own parents.. and still he aims at you.. well.. blow me down if I don't think giving him a decent blood nose isn't the way to fix it. (at that age)

I 'fixed' a number of such things as a youth.. never had any more trouble after a decent whack in the mouth I assure you. In one case I did so with blood from mouth to navel from a king hit, So..I did learn 'violence' can solve problems :) the alternative would be to increasingly cringe, avoid, repress, etc all that ur feeling, and later on it comes out in behavior to some poor sap in the wrong place.

These days, I prefer to replace 'violence' with agitating for political change. Safer all round and more satisfying to the adult frame of mind.

What I believe you are missing..is that there is a line which, once crossed, will have dire results.

-One man calling for invasion of Demnark so he can take their wives as ware booty...... now that's his mindset in the UK....
-Others hearkening back to battles fought centuries ago.....
-Calling for 'extermination'... now Pericles..even you would realize this is beyond the pale.. have a look at what extermination means.

MY CALL... is for laws preventing people saying such things. That's a core issue with me. That...is true hate speech and must be stopped, legally. Don't you agree ? so..how does one get 'migrant vote dependant' politicians to actually change the law ? seriously..how?

FrankGol dismisses Boazy's carp and trout analogy.

So why do pro-multiculturalists themselves use a biodiversity analogy to assert the "benefits of diversity"?

In ecosystems, diversity is good.

The "benefits of diversity" don't however apply to *introduced* species or analogously, "introduced" cultural elements.

Introduce an exotic species (like cane toads) and all hell breaks loose.

Likewise with cultures.
They have internal diversity, but the diversity is organically related.

Cultures can assimilate elements of exotic cultures, but only to the extent that they're compatible with the existing system.

Diversity is essential to ecosystems and cultures.
But not without compatibility or relatedness.

And I can't believe you guys are bagging Boazy for tenaciously holding on to "outdated" beliefs, while applauding or excusing Muslims for doing the same thing!

(Yes, Boazy, I am a reactionary.
Radicals and their revolutions have caused death and destruction for hundreds of years.
And every revolution ends up becoming just another Orthodoxy.
It's only a matter of time before the green-left "revolution" turns into a mean, sour killfest.
It's no wonder the watermelons love Muslims so much, they share the same mentality: Obey or Be Punished!)

Pericles, "I'd rather die behind the chemical sheds" is a quote from the film "V For Vendetta".
When you see the film (and any self-respecting liberal should), you'll understand what I mean.

And yes, the film lumps Muslims in with Homosexuals and other "oppressed" groups.
Another of my favorite films, "Escape From L.A" makes the same "mistake".

I think the makers of both films are suffering the same delusion as many OLOers: That Muslims, despite provoking their "victimisation", and despite being one of the most *oppressive* groups in history, should be sympathised with, because treating them differently would be "the same" as treating other groups like Blacks, Gays and Jews differently.

The difference is the latter groups have done nothing to deserve their "oppression".
Muslims have brought it upon themselves.

Sometimes you may need to be a bit of a tyrant, to prevent an *even worse* tyrant getting their way.

And I don't own a trumpet.
Percussion instruments are my speciality.