Women's safety in Europe after Cologne

[DavidTCDaviesMP]

I have been invited onto Mumsnet to discuss the situation for women in Europe following the attacks in Cologne, and the challenge we face in Europe in trying to help millions of mainly young men, who are arriving in Europe from cultures which treat women very differently. I believe this is an issue which needs open discussion by political leaders yet is swept under the carpet. David Davies MP

emma thompson's comment, if not misquoted, is so arrogant and ignorant. Who cares what she thinks? She's an actress and probably has not studied politics, international relations etc. therefore she has no expert knowledge on the topic it;s just an opinion, her personal feelings, which are not relevant or interesting to most British people as we are not as privileged as she is. she can afford private health care, drivers, exclusive members clubs etc.

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Champagne+Socialist

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Dictionary

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Dictionary

www.urbandictionary.com/
you can type in the space the words regressive left and read what you get…

Mari,

I hadn't realised until today, when I started looking for what Thompson actually said, that she has just starred in a film about Nazi Germany based on the lives of Otto and Elise Hampel. Her remarks were made in Berlin, in the context of the film, and it looks as though they have been taken slightly out of context:

Thompson also talked about how what she described as “England’s fascistic side” affected the UK’s view of Germany and the second world war. “If you consider I was born in 1959, it’s only 14 years after the war ended. All the films I saw while growing up about Germans were about the war and us being marvellous and beating the Nazis. I was completely brainwashed, I realise.” Citing Sebastian Haffner’s Defying Hitler, she said: “It wasn’t until I started reading about it, and reading about that many Germans felt they had been invaded by the Nazis as much as anyone else. That was for me was key.”

Tbh that seems fair enough, though I wouldn't use the term "England's fascistic side" to describe the anti-German sentiment of the 1960s. I grew up in Britain at the same period, and I'm half-German: so I definitely remember the feeling that everything children of my generation knew about Germany was negative. She said that she was brainwashed, not that the British as a whole were. She also said that "many Germans" felt they had been invaded, not that all Germans did.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3045303/We-luvvie-rude-Tories-Richard-Wilson-Martin-Freeman-Champagne-Socialists-support-Labour.html
Paragraph 3!

Would make for a funny Venn diagram.

As far as Ms Thompson goes, I thought it was incredibly brave/folly of her to adopt the former child soldier "fresh from duty" as it were. Of course as alluded to by PP, she had the financial means to provide round-the-clock nanny care/help and a small army of psychologists. Yet there is an underlying suggestion from this "group" that the rest of us should also welcome such damaged children/people into our hearts and homes. I think she was very lucky that her social experiment did not backfire on her own children - one only needs to scratch the surface of stories coming from foster homes in Kent to discover how badly fucking wrong it can go.

It also brings us back to resources, the warriors will cry we need an army of psychologists to help these children - but where do these resources come from and/or funded? At which point do the GP become irked when "little John Smith from Bracknell" cannot be assessed for e.g., ASD when all resources are being spent on others.

There is no clear answer - and certainly not one which people wish to really consider and draw their own personal line in the sand.

LongWayRound, it's based on the Hans Fallada book 'Alone in Berlin' which draws on their lives (which is an amazing book which I highly recommend btw). But having read the book, it does make very clear that people who opposed the Nazis were a minority and very isolated.

I think Emma Thompson's comments are indicative of a wider left wing movement to strip any British pride in WWII away. From highlighting 'atrocities' (Dresden, atomic bombs) and insisting that we bear guilt for the holocaust (hint: we didn't do it) whilst at the same time recasting the general German populace as victims, rather than the enthusiastic supporters of Nazism they mostly were.

More 'anecdotes' from Britt I see, suggesting Islam is incompatible with the Western way of life and an oddly revisionist take on terrorism which sporting responds to as 'true. ¨Blimey,the level of credulity on this thread is staggering.

Britt's latest anecdote seems to have spurred on more fears about what 'they' are going to do, but yet again, no rigorous analysis of who exactly "they" are. Don't Muslims make 1.6 billion people? I am sure there are many shades of opinion in that figure.

'Except, Deo the worst I have heard a Christian fundamentalist doing is shooting abortion doctors. And being harassed, sporting by the Born Agains hardly equates to the terrorist outrages, or the Mumbai killings in 2008, etc'.

In Europe in 2011, Anders Breivik slaughtered 77 people in Norway to further his anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, and pro-“Christian Europe” agenda as he stated in his manifesto.

In the Central African Republic, a group purporting to be based on Christian principles, has slaughtered thousands of men, women and children, raped women, and forced people into being sex slaves over a 25-year period starting in 1986.

Britt, you say 'the worst' you have heard is the shottings at abortion clinics. Are they not bad enough? Since 1977 there have been “eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 181 arsons, and thousands of incidences of other criminal activities” targeting reproductive health care facilities in the USA. With few exceptions, there were perpetrated by 'Christians' who opposed abortion for religious reasons.

Eric Rudolph, tied to the white supremacist “Christian Identity” movement, had bombed abortion clinics, a gay nightclub and the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, which killed two people and wounded 110. Rudolph’s stated motivation was to stop abortion, claiming our government had “legalized, sanctioned and legitimized” abortion, and thus, “they forfeited their legitimacy and moral authority to govern.”

There was also the 2009 execution of Dr. George Tiller, who became nationally known for performing late-term abortions. His killer, Scott Roeder, was a born-again Christian who claimed that he the killing “was justified to save the lives of unborn children.

Also, didn't the IRA identify as Catholic Christians?

It seems clear to me all terrorists seek to further a political agenda rather than follow religious principles.

I've attached a graph of terrorism stats in the US.

'I hesitate to post the following on here...' Really?

Britt, you say he had converted to Islam but seem to cite this as the reason for his horrible misogynistic remark. Perhaps he had always been a misogynistic assole?

How cruel to call what Emma T did a 'social experiment.' It was a wonderful thing to do, regardless of how much money she has.

See ^^ absolute denial. Apparently all Muslims are lovely fluffy feminists and new men. The fact that the societies they live in almost universally have pretty horrific attitudes towards women and minorities comes from, I dunno, rocks? Evil ice cream cones taking over the world with their oppressive ideas. Nothing to do with the fact that a hell of a lot of people within those societies support and perpetuate those views.

Incidentally the IRA quite openly identified themselves with Marxism, and were terrorists who happened to be Catholics, not Catholic terrorist. They did not commit terrorist acts in the name of promoting Catholicism, or because it was what Catholicism told them what to do. In fact, the Pope excommunicated them and ordered them to stop. Bearing in mind the pope is supposed to be infallible and the ultimate authority for Catholics, that shows you exactly how Catholic they were - they ignored him.

Fatalities from terrorism are at a record high now with just two groups, Boko Haram and Islamic State responsible for half of them, a new report showed. The Nigerian militants kill more people than their Iraqi-Syrian allies.
From here

The breakdown, for 2014 alone, shows that Islamist groups are the three biggest killers:
Boko Haram: 6,600
ISIS: 6,000
Taliban: 3,500
So far as I can tell from the article, that doesn't include battlefield kills: it's civilians only.

Let's not forget that virtually all of their victims are other Muslims, though there is a virtual genocide being conducted against Christians by ISIS.

The Lord's Resistance Army (I had to resort to Wiki here) appears to have killed less than a dozen civilians in 2014, though I have no idea how complete those figures are.

As for the US, virtually all Americans who have been killed in terror attacks since the turn of the century have been killed by Islamist militants.
This fact sheet tells us that 3,000 Americans have died in terror attacks since then, 2,900 of them on 9/11.

That chart emily. The Puerto Rican terrorist attacks consisted of vandalisation, letter writing and a failed armed robbery. 0 casualties.

Eco terrorists mainly use vandalism. There was a campaign of letter bombs, but the only caused injuries: 0 casualties.

Animal rights: vandalism, failed fire bombing: 0 casualties.

TBC

I'm sorry but I'm howling at the thought of "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" being considered an act of terrorism and it brings to mind that episode of Red Dwarf where Rimmer suggests they "hit 'em hard with a leaflet campaign".

No Bill, denial is stating that people identifying as Muslims commit more atrocities when it is blatantly untrue. Denial is stating most terrorism comes from Muslims when it doesn't, as most of the terrorist activity in the U.S. in recent years has come not from Muslims, but from radical Christianists, white supremacists and far-right militia groups.

Many men are not 'fluffy feminists or new men', regardless of religion. My own Dad was a misogynist and he was an atheist.

'The fact that the societies they live in almost universally have pretty horrific attitudes towards women and minorities comes from, I dunno, rocks?'

1.6 billion Bill. If you want to say 'almost universally', I suggest you state where and how.

Holy crap, this is the THIRD time I have posted this link to the Pew survey of attitudes in Muslim countries
Attitudes towards women.
Attitudes towards gays.
Attitudes towards inheritance.
It's all there.

shouldn't think it does, Britt: 'facing' just means the direction the grave is dug

But Lumela the Council extract I included states that: The Muslim sections are laid out with the graves orientated towards Mecca – a necessary religious requirement.

Whatever 'facing' means in this context, the direction is acknowledged (to be East) by both parties.

What I meant, Britt, was that graves can be dug facing any orientation, to I doubt that east-facing graves are being used by or dominated by only one group. So probably the Christian sections face east too. That's all.

I am much more worried abotu sexism and homophobia and silly clothing rules affecting hard work women's rights in the UK than a few teenager Muslim nutters blowing us up. Without doubt many of the new groups who have come from abroad have worse attitudes than most of us here to those issues so we need to be vigilant and ensure we will not tolerate any reduction in practice or law in women's rights and the freedoms of gay men and women even in Muslim areas of the UK practising their sexuality.

That is one research group Lumela, but you seem to think it contains firmly established 'truths.'

Does anyone have a comprehensive list of countries where Islam is the dominant religion - where women, children & gays have the same rights as men? I've misplaced mine.

Cuban exiles: 0 deaths
Jewish terrorism: 2 deaths
Armenian groups: 1 death
Communist: 0 deaths
Venezuelan: 0 deaths
Islamic terrorism: 3032 deaths
White supremacy: 190 deaths

Your little chart deliberately leaves information out. It tries to fool by pretending that vandalising offices is on the same level as setting out to kill as many people as violently as possible. One thing you overlook, is that your little chart also claims that the least significant threat in the U.S. is white supremacist terrorism, which you later go on to tell us is the most dangerous.

So what is it emily, you like those figures when you claim they back you up, but when they undermine you they're wrong?' Bit selective there aren't we emily. The fact is, if someone has been murdered by a terrorist in the U.S., they are overwhelmingly likely to have been killed by a Muslim. Conflating a few cases of vandalism or sit ins in Oregon doesn't change that.

Only in emilyland would a survey of 35,000 people be dismissed as 'That is just one research group'.

It's a survey that demonstrates dazzlingly that not all Muslims are alike, that even in countries with Sharia law some Muslims disagree with it, and so on.

Really, it's less painful to go and hit your head against the nearest wall.