You are actually too generous. It was I that jumped off the deep end, not you. I have already withdrawn my daft comment, and I apologise for it.

I think we do see eye to eye on this. The issue is probably more about youthful territoriality than anything else.

Usually, the mean streets of Pollokshields are not that mean, they are less than five minutes away from where I live and I have never felt alarmed walking through the area. But, as you say, I am not the target audience. Which was the point I was not getting.

Thanks.

The very term ‘no go areas’ does, as Douglas suggests, seem obfuscatory, as well as being uncomfortably ambiguous.

Tom – yes! my sentiments exactly. This really does annoy me, a lot.

anyway, I think we’re basically in agreement so there you go.

Thanks for the clarification. I withdraw my comment.

dsquared’s point, to me, reads more like ‘we’re all the same’, which includes an often overlooked aspect of anti-racism, that if you accept that all people share a common humanity that includes the vices as well as the virtues.

It occurs to me that if you went out there and got beaten up by a white gang, the Melanite response would be ‘this is symptomatic of the decadence and decay at the heart of a once proud Judao-Christian nation and that will lead to dhimmification’ while if you got beaten up by an Asian gang it would be because Asians were taking over the streets and making them no-go areas prior to enslaving us all. In other words, whatever you do there’s a ready-made incoherent right-wing argument waiting at the end.

There must be a better way of tackling this, probably satire. There’s no adequate satire of Mel’n'co at present, because the so-called liberal media are too scared of them. It’s political correctness gone mad, I tell you, and will lead to idiotification.

douglas – I think you’re misreading dsquared’s post. He’s not far from where you are.

anticant:
It’s the totalitarian mindset of their barmy religion. Your oh-so-”liberal” tolerance to this makes me curious as to what your attitude would have been towards Nazism in the 1930s?

Why am I surprised you’ve raised the nazis again. Look, you can think what you want about Islam the religion. Frankly I couldn’t care a rats arse. But I do have a problem with someone making the statement that all Muslims are potential trouble makers or terrorists or whatever just because they happen to be Muslim.

and I think Islam, whether extremist or moderate, is one – are incompatible with an open democratic society. Either this is a real problem which has to be faced up to or else I am utterly mistaken, in which case you are welcome to convince me of my error.

I think you’re past convincing, so frankly its a waste of time. You see all Muslims as a problem – that’s your prerogative. I think you’re being a bigot frankly. I’ve got close Muslims mates who drink and close Muslim mates who are more bloody pacifist than I am.

It doesn’t matter if you’re a quarter Arab. The fact is, you clearly don’t know many Muslims if thats all you can say. And trying to bring up nazis, stalin really is wasting everyone’s intelligence. It doesn’t bother me if you want to join the Melanie Phillips camp. But please don’t pretend your views are anything but irrational xenophobia, stoked by stupid media narratives.

As for streets you wouldn’t be wise to walk down, I’m don’t soubt there are plenty in most British cities and towns, depending on the area and time of day. I know for sure there are plenty of streets here in London I wouldn’t care to walk down at any time of day – and not just because of Muslims. Kids [race unspecified] carrying knives, for one thing.

And I am not arguing that anyone should give up their beliefs – just that some beliefs – and I think Islam, whether extremist or moderate, is one – are incompatible with an open democratic society. Either this is a real problem which has to be faced up to or else I am utterly mistaken, in which case you are welcome to convince me of my error.

Can you name a street I can’t walk down? Quite frankly, I want to walk that street and then tell you how I experienced it. I think I’d be OK. But there you go, I might be wrong.

So, name that street, mate. That is what this thread is about, not hah hah liberalism. I am not willing to compromise on my lack of religion. Yet, you’d be hard pushed to hear me argue that you should give up your beliefs. So, lets hear it. Where are those streets?

So, the lines in the sand have to be drawn, but either you think there are no, no go areas, or you think there aren’t.

what the hell does that mean? I haven’t a clue.

Or. altenatively, “So the lines in the sand are drawn but either you think there are no go areas, or you don’t.”

Oh, fuck it.. The guy is just talking pish….that’s what being a long time admirer of someone – dsquared in this case – does to you….all heros have the potential to be dust….

Shit.

If you ever discover a street that someone says we can’t walk down, please let me and john b know. I think there is a telly programme in this….

What was that ridiculous Johhny Cash number:

“I’ll walk the line”.

I’d think that a direct challenge to this ridiculous notion might kill it dead. I, and you and john b should put our money where our mouths are, and walk that line. Assuming that dsquared and his colleagues can come up with a line for us to walk. Which they can’t.

Urban myth, dsquared. Name that street.

dsquared, apart from this complete nonense, which brings you back to a human scale, I think you talk a lot of sense. However, this has not been your finest hour, Name that street. Pay my railfare, and I’ll be there. And if anyone makes a bean out of the media it ought to be Sunny Hundal, john b and me.

There you go. Someone that plays with hydrogen peroxide can’t be scared of a challenge like this?

john b and Sunny Hundal, if you don’t wan’t to participate, and , I’;d understand if you didn’t. The potential for fucking it up is enormoius, although I would absolve dsquared from that, for he is an honest man.

So, the lines in the sand have to be drawn, but either you think there are no, no go areas, or you think there aren’t. I know where I stand.

If you sell this to the telly, I want half!

Nope, you are not going to get let off on this. Either there are streets you and I can walk down, or there aren’t. I’d doubt there would be a problem. You are, frankly buying into the myth without evidence. So, a challenge.

You should accept it.

As I doubt you are young enough to be just macho , and hopefully you’d not be daft enough to wear a T-Shirt saying something offensive, let’s see if you and I can walk down a street without being attacked. Name the street, pay my rail fare and lets see whether it is true or not.

I accept the gang ownership arguement. But that has always been the case and is seperate from race, religion or politics. It is about territory. Yet, I think you and I could walk down any street in the UK without anything adverse happening to us.

What I am saying to you is that this is an Urban Myth, and one that deserves to be kicked into touch.

Let’s have lots of streets named here. Lets have lots of train tickets bought. I’ll walk down those streets with or without dsquared.

Mmm… ok I’ll concede that point.

anticant: Maybe if you have a real big yawn, your rose-coloured spectacles will drop off.

I’m not sure what I have rose-tinted spectacles about. More than most bloggers I’ve taken to task Muslim orgs over their stance on extremism etc. Just have a look at my articles on CIF. I know the differences between them and their stances better than 99% of bloggers.

What I don’t stand for is thinly veiled racist and bigotry in the name of “we just want to protect ourselves from Muslims and their attempts to take over our country“. Especially when the evidence on that is so flimsy as to be laughable.

Jennie: Well, I for one, tend to tar ALL religious folk with the same brush.

I think this is also quite dangerous, and I don’t. There are plenty of compassionate, leftwing, humanistic people who believe in God and their faith. I have no problems with them at all. After all, I don’t describe myself as an atheist.

My problem is only with fundamentalists of all stripes. Nadine Dorries for example cannot be compared to Simon Barrow for example, also of this parish.

Well, I for one, tend to tar ALL religious folk with the same brush. And then get called on it by my pagan/tolerant christian/tolerant muslim/jewish friends. But yes, lots of people these days are using “Muslims” in the way they used to use “Pakis”. It’s fun, therefore, to bring other religions into the equation. When they start going on about muslim intolerance, say “I know, but bloody Christians are as bad! And as for atheists, don’t get me started on that Dawkins chap…”

Not that I like to sow mischief, or anything…

well really, there was no need to gob at them

I would qualify this. I would guess that in a number of places, particularly in some of the Lancashire ex-mill towns, there are majority-Muslim parts of town where young white men would be well-advised not to go in small numbers after dark. This is because, just as there are bits of Glasgow that are “no go” if you’re wearing a Rangers shirt, towns do have gangs and territories, and in towns with a big Asian population, some of those gang territories are going to split up on racial lines which are also religious lines. If you were looking for a kernel of truth in this patent bollocks, that would probably be it.

I have clear memories of a time when most people in this country didn’t feel nearly so bothered about or threatened by religious bigots as they do today

yes, during the Brixton riots one hardly gave the matter a thought. Can we call a stainless steel digging implement a bloody entrenching tool here; this “Muslims” thing is simply racist code-talk and people ought to be called on it a hell of a lot more than they actually are.

I don’t know how long you’ve been around, but I have clear memories of a time when most people in this country didn’t feel nearly so bothered about or threatened by religious bigots as they do today.

Maybe if you have a real big yawn, your rose-coloured spectacles will drop off.

I disagree – I think Hazel Blears was very much buying into the narrative and the ‘skirting’ was around saying anything explicit that could come back to her later. E.g. on your ‘inflation’ charge: the quotes I copied from the Daily Mail are used in the exact same way (exact same order and exact same quotes) by the Fabian Society itself, on its own website, to introduce her speech, which she delivered at its event, entitled ‘No more urban exclusion zones’ (http://fabians.org.uk/general-news/general-news/blears-newtowns).

‘No more urban exclusion zones’ sounds a lot like ‘no-go urban areas’ to me, just in New Labour speak.

It’s not, when you look at who exactly is caught up in the legislation over 90% of the time.

Zohra, I think in that case the Daily Mail inflated what the minister said… I wouldn’t exactly say she’s buying into the same narrative. She’s trying to skirt around it.

Her actual speech, which you can see on the Fabian website somewhere, was a lot more measured.

Incidental to the story, but a police officer or a PCSO telling a member of the public that something that is not a crime is a crime really should be quite a serious disciplinary matter.

Yes, but it hardly constitutes the end of British society as we know it.