CHAPEL END CHARLIE

I too thought the game was rather strange experience with almost everyone in the stadium - both players and fans alike - knowing what the result would be after 3 minutes - if not long before a ball had been kicked in reality. But both teams went through the motions as you would expect well paid professionals to do. We played some nice stuff at times without ever getting into top gear while their defence did its now familiar 'Keystone Cops' impression. ' Easily the best moment of the match however was Townsend's wonder goal - which seemed to stun both groups of fans so incongruous it was in a game of this nature. Hard to pick out one player out as my MOTM, but everyone must have noticed that Fonte could have played this match in his slippers on so commanding did he look most of the time. Good to see Jrod back of course - that lad has had a rotten time of late and he must know is future career is in the balance. I took my Newcastle supporting mate with me and nipper as I do for this fixture every season. To compensate for the near certainy of defeat he had put a bet on that we would win 4-0 - but some sloppy finishing on our part denied him even that minor compensation. Never mind, relegation is not the end of the world.

Nonsense. Rape (and many other forms of sexual abuse) are predominently crimes motivated by either unrestrained sexual desire on the part of the offender or perhaps an expression of some deepseated psychological need to exercise power and control over another individual. Sexual abuse is I think seldom a matter that can be so glibly associated with some old religious text - that would be a absurd oversimplification of the matter. I am alas no great religious scholar, and yes I am aware that certain islamaphobes often do cite carefully selected passages from the Qur'an and interpret them to mean that this religious text allows believers to "rape" female captives. For that matter as recently as this week I witnessed on TV a Christian 'bible basher' in the United States employ the book of Liviticus to argue that God instructs the faithful to slay all homosexuals! So the truth is you can if you want read almost anything into the great works of religious literature depending on the agenda you are seeking to promote. However, it seems to me that the central teaching of the Bible (or the New Testiment anyway) is surely not one of hatred towards anyone but rather one of Christ's message of compasson and forgiveness for all. My understanding is that the Qur'an is also quite explicit is instructing the faithful that Allah requires CHASTITY be maintained outside of marriage.

If modern America interests you even slightly then surely you cannot afford to miss the documentory series "Inside Obama's Whitehouse" shown on BBC2. The US President is often depicted as the most powerfull man on earth, but as we see here in reality all too often executive power is severely constrained if the President does not enjoy the support of Congress. Nevertheless, Obama will go down in history I think as a inspirational and much better than average President who could perhaps have been a truely great one were it not for the dysfunctional nature of US politics that makes it almost (but not quite) impossible to get anything important done. The adsurd reaction from Obama's many right wing opponents to his attempts to introduce healthcare and gun-control reform illustrating just how difficult the job of President is now in the land of the free - and the redneck. However, looking at some of the candidates being lined up to replace him methinks this administration may be as near as we come to seeing a real life "West Wing" in the foreseeable future. Highly recommended. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/group/b074g0gt

On Tuesday the PM stated that he had no money invested in off-shore funds. This statement would appear to be both factually correct and misleading at the same time because he now admits that he had cashed-in a (modest) fund before he became Prime Minister. This is obviously highly embarrassing for him but I don't think this is serious enough to be a resigning matter as there is afterall - as yet - no suggestion of any illegality here. Lose the coming EU referendum on the other hand and his position will surely become untenable I would have thought.

I understand that official statistics show that the UK British-Muslim population is both younger and poorer (on average of course) than other groups in modern British society. Experts in the field of criminology the world over have long identifield that a relationship exists everywhere between youth, poverty and rates of criminal offending. So it would seem then that socio-economic factors would either explain, or at least partially explain, this issue. The other side of the coin here is that Crime Survey data shows that Muslims, Sikhs, and Jews are more likley to become the VICTIMS of crime in our society.

But this is not of question of one person being unfairly branded as a racist as he continues to display racist attitudes on a daily basis and can be said to have "outed" himself in that regard. Although he will no doubt continue to deny this these repeated denials are incompatible with his stated opinions and therefore meaningless. The record also shows that, when cornered, he will revert to outright lies, or even feign some form of amnesia that seems highly selective in its effect. I (and others) find this type of behaviour to be utterly contemptible. I have explained the concept of "culteral racism" at some length now. If you either don't understand, or perhaps don't agree with, the concept then that is a matter for you. However, the idea itself cannot be glibly dismissed as "ridiculous" or for that matter as being something of my invention. Attempts to avoid the charge of racism mearly by stating that Muslims are not a "race" so therefore his dislike of the Asians he has to live ammong is not racism represent a obvious attempt at avoidance or even sophistry. As for the concept of "race" itself being a debatable intellectual construct, I can only repeat that this conclusion is indeed the prevailing scientific consenus on the issue. All individuals (identical twins excepted of course) exhibit their own unique DNA sequences, but when examined on a larger scale the differences between regional populations are superficial from a scientific perspective - i.e. there is only one Human Race and we are ALL Homo Sapiens .

Type away if you like, but the general advice is that when in a hole it's best to stop digging.

You are exposed as both a racist and a liar. Therefore any further posts from you are of no real significance as you retain ZERO credibilty on this forum. So in a sense "my work here is done" - but being the stubbon type I'll happily bait you for a while yet if you insist.

So there we have it. The forum will see that Sour is now on the record for everyone to see claiming that he never said that Muslims make no worthwhile contribution to our society - this despite the fact that numerous people can recall him stating (or at the very least implying) exactly that. In all my years on here I can recall no more disgraceful lie being posted on here. I for one hold the person in question in utter contempt and fully expect that reacton to be a commonplace one from all on here who retain any respect for the truth.

The only person on here avoiding questions would be you. So again, did you or did you not claim, or at least imply, that Muslims make no positive contribution to British Society? If you do finaly conceed this point - and surely you must becaue it is true - then how on Earth would such a opinion differ from racism?

An elderly goldfish suffering from Alzheimer's then.

One of the problems of conversing with you is that you appear to have the memory capacity of a elderly goldfish. Please try to remember that I have alreadty told you that I believe there is only one race.

The great Paul Simon once wrote the lyric "don't deny the obvious child" - advice you might heed. But I am taking your lack of any denial as to the existance of the racist post in question as a form of grudging admission - so we are at least making some limited progress then. As for me supposidly being reluctant to debate any subject you like, I can only assure you that I stand ready to continue this conversation far into the 'wee small hours' if you like - it turns out that even insomnia has its advantages. Your habit of claiming that your little questions are never answered - when they are- is now beyond parady by the way.

Why on Earth would I need to labouriously traw my way back through a thread of this length looking for post numbers when you, me and every tom d1ck and harrot on here well know that you surely did clearly imply that Muslims make no worthwhile contribution to our society? Or are you attempting to deny that too?

Oh yeah? Methinks you suddenly know the term "cultral racism" only because you have just Googled it in the last few minutes and discovered that it has its own Wikipedia page! It's no good issuing a series of blatantly racist posts on here and then imagining that you can somehow get away with this behaviour as all you need to do is just deny everything and people will just accept that. Denials need to be remotely plausible and connected to reality in order to be taken seriously. Imagine if you will that Jeremy Clarkson came on TV tonight and claimed that he really didn't like fast cars at all. He could say that from now to eternity but no one would believe him because that is clearly not true. It would be going too far to claim that I could respect you if you just admitted your racism openly. But at least that would be a honest statement and that is surely better than just more tedious lies. A racist AND a liar is really not a very pretty picture of you is it?

You are seriously attempting to claim that I invented the term "culteral racist" on here today?

Are you suffering from a short term memory retention problem? You told me that that you were not a racist because Muslims were not a race. So if Muslims are not a race then this begs the obvious question which group do you think is? In reality you are obviously a cultural racist - I intend to abbreviate that term to just "racist" in order to save time.

There is only one race you loon - the Human Race. As far back as 1950 UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) issued a statement asserting that all humans belong to the same species and that 'race' is not a biological reality but rather a myth. It makes no more sense to define someone on their skin colour or facial features that it does to claim that people with brown or blone hair belong to different 'races'. This is the conclusion of an international panel of leading anthropologists, geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists. If the idea of race is not really valid then does that also mean that there is no such thing as racism then? Not really, racism is alive and well alas - as this very thread shows - but what we really mean by the term today is that people like you (for example) hold views that are 'culturally racist' in nature. We could I suppose have a long and fruitless debate about the difference between culture and ethnicity, but this type of semantically tedious stuff is of little appeal and let's face it you are not really up to it are you? So methinks I know a racist when I see one - and I see at least one on here.

You were asked to provide examples of a racial group as you define the term.

Okay then, define the term 'race' and provide examples.

Is that the best you can come up with? I don't suppose that members of what is now known as the 'traveler community' are a race strictly speaking, but that will not save Joe Marler. The point is YOU are treating Muslims as if they were a race therefore you are a racist.

But you don't debate you rant and then resort to what is now a tiresome "not me guv" defence whenever challenged. As for your mighty debating skills, methinks a moderately bright ten year old could out argue you seven times a week and twice on Sundays.

No, in your case the term 'racist' is a matter-of-fact descripton of you based on your contributions to this thread. racist: noun The belief that members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to another race or races: So when you choose to characterise British Muslims as being a group that does not contribute positivity to our society - in your opinion - then that would be a textbook example of racist behaviour - i.e. according to you Muslims as a group act in a specific manner that you clearly regard as inferior to other groups in society. QED. Others might wonder why those in authority on here have tolerated your overt racism for so long when such behaviour is specifically prohibited in this forum's published 'terms & conditions' ....

Again you are invited to proffer an opinion as to what kind of counter-reaction against terrorism you would find acceptable. Until you specify what you are seeking then it is rather hard to know what I'm supposed to be looking for!

Oh really? This post leaves me wondering what DOES actualy qualify as a sufficient backlash against terrorism. If words are not enough for some on here then perhaps bands of moderate muslims roaming the streets every night on the constant look out for extremists would convince?