EU membership referendum debate thread

Post by **clv101** » 18 Jun 2016, 10:35

Yet again, a white shooter is a "deranged and mentally ill individual". OED might as well redefine the word 'terrorist'. If Thomas Mair were Muslim, this would be a "terrorist incident". As he's white it's somehow murder, he's mentally ill and needs psychiatrist.

The divergence between polls and bookies is getting wider. Paddy Power are still offering just 0.5 returns on 'Remain' and 1.625 on 'Leave', William Hill are 0.44 and 1.75!

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 11:13

clv101 wrote:Yet again, a white shooter is a "deranged and mentally ill individual". OED might as well redefine the word 'terrorist'.

The divergence between polls and bookies is getting wider. Paddy Power are still offering just 0.5 returns on 'Remain' and 1.625 on 'Leave', William Hill are 0.44 and 1.75!

In a world without dogmatic ideology, most notable of which is religion, the worst offenders of which are the monotheist religions and the absolute epitome of which is Radical Islam, good (or, if you prefer, mentally well) men do good things and bad (or, if you prefer, mentally unwell) men do bad things. However, it takes dogmatic ideology to make good men do bad things. There is little to no evidence this man held or publicly discussed any strong religious or political views. There is, however, evidence he was mentally ill.

You are erecting a false dichotomy. However, you are not stupid. So, that means you are attempting to deceive either yourself or others.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 11:15

Why are David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn both prejudicing the upcoming trial of this man?

http://heatst.com/uk/justice-first-jo-c ... arliament/

Post by **clv101** » 18 Jun 2016, 11:26

Little John wrote:There is little to no evidence this man held or publicly discussed any strong religious or political views.

Really? In court today he gave his name as "Death to traitors, freedom for Britain". I'm pretty happy with the idea he holds strong political views.

What I'm disappointed by is how this isn't described as terrorism, as I'm sure it would be had he been muslim. The deputy Chief Magistrate actually said today "he ought to be seen by a psychiatrist". That would never have happen had he been muslim.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 11:42

This is still no indication that the primary cause is not mental illness due to the lack of previous behaviour that matches his words in court. However, if we take your argument to it logical, but absurd conclusion, then we must accept that a very significant minority of Muslim men are suffering from a similar mental illness.

In other words, you don't get it both ways. Either all such behaviour is explainable in mental illness terms, in which case, you are writing off a significant portion of a particular cultural group (Muslims) as mentally ill. Or, it is all explainable in terms of ideology, in which case, how many white working class men hold the same views as this man, if only in terms of sympathising with them? Arguably, that number would be a tiny minority.

On the other hand, the proportion of Muslims who hold at least sympathies with extreme radical Islamic acts, if not themselves directly motivated to act in that way, is arguably far from tiny.

Post by **clv101** » 18 Jun 2016, 11:53

Indeed, that's my point. I don't want it 'both ways'. What I'm disappointed with is how this event seem to being reported differently. Too often it seems atrocities committed by muslims are described as terrorism but that term is far less often attributed to similar atrocities by non-muslims. That's why I mentioned OED should revisit their definition.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 18 Jun 2016, 13:21

People can have a political motivation and also be mentally ill in some way.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 18 Jun 2016, 18:29

clv101 wrote:Indeed, that's my point. I don't want it 'both ways'. What I'm disappointed with is how this event seem to being reported differently. Too often it seems atrocities committed by muslims are described as terrorism but that term is far less often attributed to similar atrocities by non-muslims. That's why I mentioned OED should revisit their definition.

"Terrorism" is one of the most abused words in the English language.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 20:20

In terms of what this man's actions inform us vis a vis the EU referendum, the answer is precisely nothing, despite the utterly detestable attempt by the Remain camp to link this man's actions to voting for Leave. That is to say, by insinuating that anyone who votes Leave is somehow allying themselves with far right extremism. That tactic, in itself, is utterly disgusting

There is no significant indication that the primary cause of this man's actions is not mental illness due to a lack of significant previous violent behaviour that matches his actions against Jo Cox or his words in court. However, even if we take the Remain argument that his behaviour is due entirely to a far right ideology, I ask the following question; How many white working class men hold the same views as this man, if only in terms of sympathising with them? Arguably, that number would be a tiny minority. On the other hand, the proportion of Muslim men (Northern African, third world, young, single Muslim men being the bulk of the illegal migrants into Europe) who hold at least sympathies with extreme radical Islamic acts, if not themselves directly motivated to act in that way, is arguably far from tiny (or, if they do not hold violent Islamic ideological views, nevertheless hold mediaeval views to woman and a host of other cultural issues). Why aren't the dangers of the extremism of those men being discussed so vigorously by the Remain camp vis a vis the migrant crisis?

In short, either this man's actions are based largely on mental illness, which is terribly sad, but informs us of nothing in terms of the EU debate. Or, this man's actions are based on a far right ideology, in which case this also informs informs us of nothing in terms of the EU debate.

The only way that this man's actions, if based largely on a far right ideology, COULD be argued to inform the EU debate would be if one were seeking to use this awful event to demonise and stigmatise vast portions of the working class of this country by insinuating anyone on the LEAVE side of this referendum is allied to far right extremism.

In other words, how is it that people on the Remain side of this debate are oh-so-willing to use the actions of one man acting in an incredibly rare event, a man who it is known suffers from mental illness, as being indicative of a more general cultural mentality common to those who would vote LEAVE, but are remarkably reluctant to apply the same generalisations to relatively common acts of Islamic inspired violence as being indicative of a more general mentality common to those who belong to the Islamic faith? They don't get to have it both ways.

Post by **clv101** » 18 Jun 2016, 20:45

UndercoverElephant wrote:"Terrorism" is one of the most abused words in the English language.

Indeed. Greenwald has a good piece on this:
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/17/why ... terrorist/
"In the West, functionally speaking, it’s now a propaganda term with little meaning other than “a Muslim who engages in violence against Westerners or their allies.” It’s even used for Muslims who attack soldiers of an army occupying their country.
...
Does anyone have any doubt at all that if Cox’s suspected killer had been Muslim, yelling “Allah Akbar” instead of “Britain First,” then every media outlet on the planet would be describing him forever as a “terrorist”? The fact that they are not doing so here sheds great light into what this word really is."

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 18 Jun 2016, 20:50

Little John wrote:In terms of what this man's actions inform us vis a vis the EU referendum, the answer is precisely nothing

I agree with you about that.

Little John wrote:, despite the utterly detestable attempt by the Remain camp to link this man's actions to voting for Leave. That is to say, by insinuating that anyone who votes Leave is somehow allying themselves with far right extremism. That tactic, in itself, is utterly disgusting.

Please give a link to where this is.

Post by **clv101** » 18 Jun 2016, 21:00

johnhemming2 wrote:
Little John wrote:In terms of what this man's actions inform us vis a vis the EU referendum, the answer is precisely nothing
I agree with you about that.

Little John wrote:, despite the utterly detestable attempt by the Remain camp to link this man's actions to voting for Leave. That is to say, by insinuating that anyone who votes Leave is somehow allying themselves with far right extremism. That tactic, in itself, is utterly disgusting.
Please give a link to where this is.

Agreeed, I think this all goes without saying really!

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 21:41

You are joking..right? The implication is being made across the entire BBC coverage not to mention the usual suspects on social media. In other words, a large portion of the MSM, the mouthpiece of the remain camp, is doing their dirty work for them.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 18 Jun 2016, 21:45

clv101 wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:"Terrorism" is one of the most abused words in the English language.
Indeed. Greenwald has a good piece on this:
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/17/why ... terrorist/
"In the West, functionally speaking, it’s now a propaganda term with little meaning other than “a Muslim who engages in violence against Westerners or their allies.” It’s even used for Muslims who attack soldiers of an army occupying their country.
...
Does anyone have any doubt at all that if Cox’s suspected killer had been Muslim, yelling “Allah Akbar” instead of “Britain First,” then every media outlet on the planet would be describing him forever as a “terrorist”? The fact that they are not doing so here sheds great light into what this word really is."

You are doing it again. So I will put it to you again:

Either this man's actions are based largely on mental illness, which is terribly sad, but informs us of nothing in terms of the EU debate. Or, this man's actions are based on a far right ideology, in which case this also informs informs us of nothing in terms of the EU debate.

The only way that this man's actions, if based largely on a far right ideology, could be used by those in the remain camp in the context of the EU debate would be if one were seeking to use this awful event to demonise and stigmatise vast portions of the working class of this country by insinuating anyone on the LEAVE side of this referendum is allied to far right extremism. Are you doing that? If you are not, then what are you doing?

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 18 Jun 2016, 22:28

Little John wrote:You are joking..right? The implication is being made across the entire BBC coverage not to mention the usual suspects on social media. In other words, a large portion of the MSM, the mouthpiece of the remain camp, is doing their dirty work for them.

Try to find a link to someone who is part of the remain campaign.