INTERVIEWER Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Cameron the coward makes a big sweeping statement about being tougher on groups promoting 'Islamist' extremism. Yet he fails to mention the name of a single one of these groups - as to do so would be 'controversial'. So much for a tougher stance. Cameron has fallen at the first hurdle. It will be the same for each and every one of his 'improvement' ideas for the UK. This Tory weakling is only mentioning the issue at all because the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has already done so in Germany - when she used much stronger language than Cameron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Would that be in middle England because the description certainly doesnt apply to Darnall,Cheetham Hill,St Pauls etc etc In middle England the differences between communities are based on class rather than the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I know politicians like to kowtow to the tabloids, but Cameron's made a major gaffe with this paranoid nonsense. Have you read the speech ? It was excellent and nothing like you are portraying it. The speech was given at a security conference in Munich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 true. and so we should; fit in, that is. and we can all keep our own separate identities etc, culture and religion included. i think the idea some have of expecting 'integration' to mean everyone has all these friends from all different races, religions etc is expecting too much and would be the exception rather than the rule. as long as we all have some common aims and goals, no matter how arbitrary or ill defined, we should be alright. Sense at last, well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Sorry I don't agree I think he has neutralised extremists on both sides. I hope that turns out to be the case, but if it doesn't he'll be blamed for making a gross error of judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Cameron the coward makes a big sweeping statement about being tougher on groups promoting 'Islamist' extremism. Yet he fails to mention the name of a single one of these groups - as to do so would be 'controversial'. So much for a tougher stance. Cameron has fallen at the first hurdle. It will be the same for each and every one of his 'improvement' ideas for the UK. This Tory weakling is only mentioning the issue at all because the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has already done so in Germany - when she used much stronger language than Cameron. But if Labour had said it you would be applauding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I'm not afraid to go home. The police deny no go areas exist. Residents deny no go areas exist. The statistics demonstrate no go areas don't exist. Conrod's "proof" is a single nutter shouting at a politician. you're right...to a point. police have numbers to look at etc. the thing is people who speak of no go areas are in the minority, but their numbers are growing. there has to be a reason. we need to look into why. no use just saying 'they don't exist'. if you ask people they'll give you examples. i know a lot of people who won't go to some places. for many, it's simply that 'there's too many of them there'. that's their reason. there are many more. they need to be explored. shooting them down just means they go off, join the EDL etc and things worsen. they need to be heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I hope that turns out to be the case, but if it doesn't he'll be blamed for making a gross error of judgement. Or take it a step further if there is trouble it will support him and justify him taking action quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 In middle England the differences between communities are based on class rather than the obvious. Leytonstone is certainly not "middle England"! Politicians say stuff for the press and TV, and the world carries on regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 In middle England the differences between communities are based on class rather than the obvious. true. it's the money talks now. it's the hungry who need someone to blame so look to obvious and unavoidable or changeable differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.