Another monstrous beheading by ISIS

Cliff

MPs don't always tow the Party line. In this case there was a vote. She, as a labour MP need not have voted against her conscience - she should have just voted no.   

The message she sends to 'some people' - Am I one of those? - is not important.
The real damage is the message of solidarity she has sent out to all her Muslim constituents.

As a matter of interest did she have an alternative plan for reigning in ISIS? Or would she be happy for them to take over Iraq and possibly Syria and threaten other Middle east countries?

hdsport

...but as I explained there is a difference when you are a backbencher to when you are in the cabinent/shadow cabinent.  You can't just vote against the party line.  It's same the reason Ian McKenzie (another Labour MP) was sacked as a parliamentary aide to Shadow Defence Secretary Vernon Coaker for voting against military action.

RAF Jets Poised To Strike Jihadists In Iraq

Cabinet collective responsibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Only if you think her Muslim constiuents are one amorphous blob who all think the same are influenced by what their MP does.  What message do the non-Muslim MPs send out?  Are the SNP MPs telling their constituents to rise up ISIS style against their English oppressors!?
I have no idea what her plan is or whether she has one.   However if I was an MP and the government had a plan to nuke the entire Middle East and intern everyone with dark skin on the Isle of Wight I don't think it would invalidate my vote if I voted against it without proposing an alternative.  Nor would it imply that by voting against it I was pro-ISIS.

Stuey1

I'm not a Muslim but generally agree with her message...

The only thing I can see us helping by doing this is the recruitment of fighters for IS

This is just the west looking after their own interests, the UK government and other western governments aren't interested in freeing Iraq or Syria they just feel threatened by IS and are using defending Iraq as an excuse to make the attacks legal

It's being reported that Saudi and other Middle Eastern countries are 'Helping' which is better than last time but at the very least they should be leading the way rather than the US.

Cliff

In the Spectator.
We should be honest about why we're bombing Isis
Isis is a danger to Britain for one reason only, a reason that is blindingly obvious yet is never made on radio or television, or as far as I know in the comment pages of any newspaper. Britain now has a large Islamic population..
...estimates of public opinion in the past have put sympathy for al-Qa’eda-like groups at between 6 and 13 per cent of the British Muslim population.

This is why we have we have to be careful about our decisions and this is why the labour MP resigned.

Multiculturalism makes Isis a threat to Britain » Spectator Blogs

krish

Bill Maher on ISIS, on his HBO show last night ...

pragmatic

Good video, perspective is definitely needed.

In the UK the messenger is attacked if he is seen as being racist, but often non white people have a cloak of invisibility where they can not only be racist, but sexist, be authoritarian over the lives of their women, force their daughters to be mutilated and forced to marry or face punishment, men equally are coerced into marrying within the community but face an unequal punishment for doing so.

The most abhorrent things are happening in the UK, but the real issue seems to be a couple who support UKIP wanting to adopt a child, as we should definitely not dwell on that on another street in the same town ran by the exact same child services there is mass grooming abuse, sexual exploitation and violence against children and young women, all because of the colour of the skin, religion held and socioeconomic standing of those involved make it a no go area.

The guy in the video is correct in saying these so called liberals.  The people who we've allowed to take up the matra for a liberal, fair, equal and just society have perverted it in a religious like believe with a sadomasochistic framed guilt complex.  The indigenous population must be reeducated to understand our failings, racism, sexism and homophobia are the most despicable crimes and if these can be made thought crimes the problem goes away, all will be good in the world.

I have to agree that without these Britain will be a better place, and to some degree it works, but only when it is fair, equal and just.  Homosexuals don't want special treatment they just want to do as anyone else can without being abused for it, women don't want special treatment but simply not to be seen as something that a man owns or is a man play thing.

Racism though covers everything from skin colour, to religion, to country of origin and culture.  Technically there are only 4/5 genetically distinct races but the term has been widened out to mean foreigner, not traditionally naively from these lands.

I believe this latter distinction is what is wrong with the whole way multiculturalism has been assumed and implemented.  Multiculturalism reeducation as been based on the pushing of the pluralism of cultures over any native culture, the need to adopt and adapt to whatever comes out way but not enforce our own standards on new comers.

This is of course insulting as it suggests that people from other cultures need to be mollycoddled as they don't have the wherewithal or intelligence to live by western rules, tradition or culture.  We have to accept some strange reverse colonisation (maybe in some payment for Empire) except to extrapolate this to some potential future that we're going to face a battle of cultures for Britain, especially England, where the native population are told to stand aside and accept the culture of whoever declare themselves winner.

pragmatic

A little anecdote, I was at a wedding the other week and at the table I was speaking to a teacher about trojan horse and she told me a while ago (maybe 6 months or a year) she worked in a Bradford school where the governors where pushing for the children to be taught Pakistani history, apparently because that is their culture, the school also had a half day on Friday so the kids could go to mosque for Friday prayers and schooling, those where the highlights but there were others too.
She said many of the teachers didn't object as they got half day on Friday and that suited them, but there was certainly a real attempt to turn the school into a Pakistani Muslim educational center and not a secular school, the head was pushed out for example.

Ironically (or not, struggle for the correct words), but this was changing as there were an influx of Roma children into the school which meant Roma parents weren't happy with goings on.  Eventually the head of and some other governors where sacked (may have veen some ofsted involvement), she said she'd not learned of anything that had happened after she left the school, but was just happy to be out of there.

This has made me reassess my belief in free schools, in that the parents would know what is best for their children's education, we need state control so that we're not creating schools where when people leave they may as well have lived their entire lives in another country all funded through our taxes.

Multicultralism, social cohesion, your having a laugh, its a fight for supremacy.
Just as Liberal left != fair, equal and just, this has been misappropriated and needs to be owned by people who are truly blind to race, gender, sexuality, religion and culture.

The rule of law has primacy over everything, and anyone who feels that's unfair, that they should be treated differently, should be made most unwelcome (I include white Christians bigots in this too if it wasn't obvious).

Cliff

It is a problem that needs to be faced. We in Britain and some other European countries have got used to a way of life that is fair, has freedoms and people act responsibly. We are used to democracy, where we can vote on which party we feel is best for the country and ourselves. If our party loses, then we wait for the next election.
We are very naive about how the 3rd world works. We think they will play by the rules engrained in our culture. Why should they? They will vote en bloc based on their country of heritage, their tribe, their religion etc.
We and other countries are waking up to this and the laissez-faire approach to Free schools and many other institutions cannot continue.
We are a multi-cultural country. There is no turning back. This means we will have to change the laws and our outlook to cope with new ways. We must also be very firm on officials looking the other way because of 'cultural sensitivities'. We must be very strict of the Islamic groups that teach/ and brain wash people to join groups such as ISIS. We need new definitions of tolerance and new boundaries.

If we don't change our ways, the country that so many immigrants come to and can thrive in today, will a place of conflict tomorrow.

tapzilla2k

She's in Galloway's old seat.

As far as defeating ISIS goes military wise ? It's going to take boots on the ground to destroy ISIS. Hearts and Minds wise ? Same old problems we've faced since before 9/11.

Cliff

Agreed.
As usual I don't think an end game has been thought out.
Now that we are doing air strikes they should be at specific economic targets so that the group is not funded by oil. And perhaps some of their hide outs in Iraq that target minorities.

Although I am very critical of Rushanara Ali, I do not think this action will achieve much either. On balance they will make things worse in Iraq and Syria and worse in the UK given the feelings of Muslims like her.

It has been mooted that one of the reasons we are joining the US is because we need their support in Ukraine and in Europe generally?