Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
How the BBC reported the throwing of a petrol bomb at a muslim dairy in windsor
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/berkshire/5408254.stm
Now the truth:
“The recent disturbances in Windsor sounded an urgent alarm. The Muslim owner of a dairy in the town applied for planning permission to turn it into a mosque and Islamic centre.
Although the council turned down the application, locals say the owner ignored this and extremist worshippers regularly turned up in the dairy to pray.
Trouble flared when a 15-year-old non-Muslim boy was attacked outside the “mosque”. When the boy’s mother and 18-year-old sister arrived to remonstrate, they were apparently set upon by people, allegedly from within the building, wielding iron bars and pitchforks.
This set in train four nights of disturbances when, according to the police, both white racists and Muslim extremists muscled in and the dairy was firebombed.
In a further unrelated but disturbing development in the town, four British soldiers returning from Afghanistan were forced to abandon a house they were planning to rent after threats and intimidation by Muslims. And all this in the heart of the Home Counties.”
Courtesy of Melanie Phillips and the Daily Mail.
As I said in an earlier thread, when it comes to the truth I’ll take the Daily Mail over the BBC any day.
Peter Fisk may be disliked by some Israelis and some americans, but received the British Press Awards’ International Journalist of the Year seven times, and twice won its Reporter of the Year award.
Anon | 16.10.06 – 12:40 pm
Who is “Peter Fisk”?
Steve Bell won an award for his cartoon showing a hook-nosed Ariel Sharon eating babies.
Yasser Arafat received the Nobel Peace prize.
What exactly is your point?
Oh, you mean this Fisk, ‘”Journalist” of the Year’:
http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/fisk_karshed/
It is difficult to turn a page of The Great War for Civilisation without encountering some basic error. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not, as Fisk has it, in Jerusalem. The Caliph Ali, the Prophet Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, was murdered in the year 661, not in the 8th century. Emir Abdallah became king of Transjordan in 1946, not 1921, and both he and his younger brother, King Faisal I of Iraq, hailed not from a “Gulf tribe” but rather from the Hashemites on the other side of the Arabian peninsula. The Iraqi monarchy was overthrown in 1958, not 1962; Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, was appointed by the British authorities, not elected; Ayatollah Khomeini transferred his exile from Turkey to the holy Shiite city of Najaf not during Saddam Hussein’s rule but fourteen years before Saddam seized power. Security Council resolution 242 was passed in November 1967, not 1968; Anwar Sadat of Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, not 1977, and was assassinated in October 1981, not 1979. Yitzhak Rabin was minister of defense, not prime minister, during the first Palestinian intifada, and al Qaeda was established not in 1998 but a decade earlier. And so on and so forth.
Anon
The great values of liberty and freedom that make our civilisation what it is are those of the Enlightment, not christianity. We don’t have the church to thank for free speech quite frankly.
And I suppose that the Enlightenment happened in the Judeo Christian world by luck? Chance? It simply happened out of the blue? You misunderstnad me though. The moral certainties of our civilisation have sustained our liberties and freedoms. It boils down to the belief that good is good and that evil must be overcome and defeated. When the Wehrmacht were 22 miles away on the other side of the English Channel, we fought on against all odds. We don’t have that certitude in our spine now. It wouldn’t happen now. It wouldn’t happen because of the pernicious effect of spineless, cowardly, left wing, peacenik, communistic, hippie trash. The reason why Europe will be under the boot of Sharia Law in some of our lifetimes is because of the loss of our own will to defend our own civilisation. It has nothing to do with the Enlightenment, it has everything to do with the very foundations of our civilisation being undermined.
Pete_London
The reason why Europe will be under the boot of Sharia Law in some of our lifetimes is because of the loss of our own will to defend our own civilisation.
Pete – I hope you’re wrong. I have hope/faith that, should things get worse (implementation of sharia law, victimisation of non-muslims, terrorism etc), most Brits will find their spine again, stand up to be counted and, well, fight.
I wasn’t around about the time of WW2 but just as much as Chamberlain had his supporters, when Britain was faced with the stark choice of fighting the nazis or surrendering to them, we stood up and fought.
I hope/pray the same will happen in future if it needs to.
BiodegradableSorry – Robert Fisk. My point was that he is still a decorated journalist and thus the BBC can call him “distinguished” without fear of contradiction, because he is whether you agree with the awards or not.
Pete Every now and then you seem sensible and then you go and say that some country in Europe will be under sharia law in our lifetimes. This is simply nonsense. Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ?
“And I suppose that the Enlightenment happened in the Judeo Christian world by luck? Chance? It simply happened out of the blue?”
So what are you saying, that because Adam Smith and David Hume lived in the “judeo/christian world” (not sure how many jews there were in Edinburgh in the 1700’s, This would be the same chrtistian dominated Europe where anti-semtism was rife.) we have those religions to thank for them ? Neither were religious, and infact Hume fought a long battle with the church who wanted to try him as a heretic. At least he had the courage to speak out against the church, and it still takes courage thanks to those with yours and melanie phillips views, if Hume were around today you’d have him down as spineless, morally berefit and a man without “values”. A man who like other “liberals” will lay down at the feet of the barbarian hordes.
Sharia law will not be in effect anywhere in Europe during my life time, I’d bet everything I had on that. Infact the opposite will slowly happen just as religious dogma relaxed it’s grip on Europe (some of the more devoutly reigious of course fleeing to the fledgling colonies in north america because of the moral corruptness of the ideas coming of the time). There’s already a backlash against muslims in Europe, mostly because of Islams apparantley contrary teachings concerning the values of the European enlightment. Tolerance helps to breed respect, confrontation will only lead to more hatred. There’s more chance of young muslims being inspired by the liberal ideals of Europe & the US when we don’t have our boot on the throat of their countries, propping up unpopular regiemes and dismissing their cultural heritage as barbarism when in reality it is no more barbaric than much of our own history.
Also, why has no one attacked the BBC for not calling the Tamil Tigers terrorists ? Is it because that wouldn’t fit with the real agenda ?
Anon “Sharia law will not be in effect anywhere in Europe during my life time, I’d bet everything I had on that. Infact the opposite will slowly happen”
Well the evidence of my own eyes disputes your belief.
10 years ago in my northern town it would have been rare to see a young Muslim woman with her hair covered, v.rare to see baggy clothing, niqabs were not seen at all. Similarly men dressed in Western clothing, not knee length baggy shirts over cotton trousers. Few had beards. Not now!
I had never heard of Sharia law, now polls & TV talking heads show a significant number wanting its introduction.
Muslims are more estranged from the white mainstream than they have ever been. And never have they made so much effort to display their seperate identity.
“And never have they made so much effort to display their seperate identity.”
That may be true, but they are and will always be in the minortiy and thus they have no means by which to inflict such a law on the general population. Sharia law is so utterly incompatible that it would never be countenaced unless a muslim army invaded and conquered the UK. That simply aint going to happen, I don’t care what anyone says.
Anon: Every now and then you seem sensible and then you go and say that some country in Europe will be under sharia law in our lifetimes. This is simply nonsense. Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ?
Didn’t we deal with that last week? Which country topped the list?
“Well the evidence of my own eyes disputes your belief.”
Care to to explain how a part, not even all or most, of an ethnic group comprising about 2% of the country will rise up to take over the judiciary and political infrastructure within your lifetime?
The more estranged [extremist] muslims become from the mainstream, precisely the less likelihood they have of affecting any meaningful change – hence the appeal, one presumes, of dramatic gestures/acts, firebrand rhetoric and overt displays of religious identity.
Anon
Tolerance helps to breed respect …
Who do you think you’re debating with here, a bunch of five year olds? We’ve had 50 years of enforced tolerance and it brought us mass murder in London at the hands of home bred islamic terrorists.
Tolerance breeds contempt, it breeds disdain, it breeds the view that the west no longer has the stomach to fight in defence of itself. And you know what? Muslims are right.
After even the mass slaughter of London and Madrid, that you can sit there and type, in all seriousness ‘Tolerance helps to breed respect’ shows how low, how decadent and how delusional how culture has become.
Liberal so-called multiculturalism (another way of saying ‘we hate the West’) reached it’s zenith on 7/7. You people have nothing left to say. You have no credibility in such matters. Your enforced tolerance aided and abedded mass slaughter and it’s time you lot shut up.
You have the utter cheek to call upon the Enlightenment, free speech, liberal values and freedom, David Hume Adam Smith, and in the same breath tell me to be tolerant of the intolerant. You know what you can do with your tolerance. And what’s this?:
There’s already a backlash against muslims in Europe, mostly because of Islams apparantley contrary teachings concerning the values of the European enlightment.
You know nothing of islam. It has nothing to say about the damned Enlightenment! Mohammed taught his followers to spread islam by the sword. Mullahs do not stand in their mosques an a Friday teaching muslims about modern European history. There are the rumblings of a backlash against muslims because people are becoming increasingly fed up your tolerance of a foreign, alian culture and they’re sick to the back teeth of the liberal world created by you and yours. Now give everyone a rest and shut up about it for bloody long time.
The 2% have already taken up about 50% of airtime on our media. You can almost guarantee that around 15 minutes of every 30 minute news bulletin will revolve around the Muslim population. For an answer on how that will happen in our lifetimes (I don’t think it will in Britain, or in France for that matter, but smaller countries like Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden and Norway are far more at risk – I would bet on one of them being the first) read any number of essays and articles by Mark Steyn (www.steynonline.com).
The point is not what the overall population is, it is what proportion of people under the ages of 30, 20 and 10 are Muslim, and the figures here are much higher. While the indigenous populations of modern Europe – France, Germany, Italy, Spain – reproduce at around 1.1 child per family, which is not enough to sustain the countries, the Muslim population is reproducing at a far more rapid rate – in excess of 3 per family. It doesn’t matter what the indigenous populations are if they’re all over 50 years old. As Steyn would say, “It’s the Demography, stupid”. Already we are seeing figures of Muslim populations for some European cities as around 40% – Malmo and Rotterdam are two examples, it doesn’t take a genius to work out which way things are headed at the moment.
In addition to this, we are seeing legal concessions to the Muslim population that only serve to accelerate this process. If someone had told you 5 years ago that there would be talk of arranged marriages and Sharia Law being introduced in parts of Britain, you would have thought them mad. This is now happening for real.
Your attitude is prevalent among the liberal classes today – you are very blase about it; of course it’ll never happen. Unless we start standing up for our own identity and our own values rather than kowtowing to those who shout loudest and threaten us, there may be a rather nasty shock coming our way, especially if we happen to be female, gay or Christian.
pete
“You know nothing of islam. It has nothing to say about the damned Enlightenment!”
Take a pill you idiot, note that’s why i said it was “contrary” to it. Even a 5 year old would know what “contraryr” means. Christ on a bike..
“Tolerance breeds contempt, it breeds disdain
Only to far right lunatics like you it does. Get a grip. I’m not saying we should tolerate terrorism or extremism, but we should “tolerate” the vast majority of law abiding muslims who live in the UK. And if you disagree with that then it only goes to show what an extremist you are.
Reciprocated indifference creates respect.
There is ZERO reciprocation from the islamic colonists in the UK.
But which ones are the “colonists” ? All of them ? Some of them have been here for nearly 50 years, thank goodness that our generation can wake up and realise they’re colonists and kick ’em out eh !
Anon-
There’s already a backlash against muslims in Europe, mostly because of Islams apparantley contrary teachings concerning the values of the European enlightment.
Learn to wield the English language properly.
I’m not saying we should tolerate terrorism or extremism, but we should “tolerate” the vast majority of law abiding muslims who live in the UK.
So you’re happy to tolerate the status of women as the chattels of men in GB? You’re happy to tolerate the gift of women to men in arranged marriages? You’re happy that men may compel their chattels to shroud themselves, to deny their sexuality, their individuality and even their humanity in order to becoma a black cloud in GB?
This is how twisted you lefties have become. Wimmin’s rights drove you lot on for 30 years, until islamic conquest looked a better bet for bringing our civilisation down and you jumped straight onto that horse. When you defend islam and the freedom of its followers to follow it, you are defending a set of idea little different from the totalitarianism of nazism and communism.
This is how sick you lot are. I can sit here comfortably and damn islam for stamping down on women and for wishing to do so to 5 billion others in the world. I can do that because that’s entirely consistent with my individualistic philosophy. That you see the need to defend such an evil, dysfunctional creed shows what you are. And some people belief I’m harsh on lefties!
Just admit what you are, Anon. Come out with it. Expand on what you really mean in this comment:
….. propping up unpopular regiemes and dismissing their cultural heritage as barbarism when in reality it is no more barbaric than much of our own history.
You sound like just another deluded, dreary George Galloway groupie.
Annon:
“Sharia law will not be in effect anywhere in Europe during my life time, I’d bet everything I had on that. Infact the opposite will slowly happen”
When it becomes too much trouble to actively police certain Muslim areas, and the state starts to loosen its grip over such areas, then you will see Sharia law start to appear. It will all be easier for the authorities to just turn a blind eye then risk another set of riots.
I believe we are reaching just such a point in parts of some France cities.
And people like you will change in a heartbeat from denying it will ever happen to trying to convince the rest of us to accept it in the name of “tolerance”.
“What Melanie Phillips is saying is that in losing our strong moral and cultural Judeo Christian reference points our society is at the mercy of these other silly and dangerous beliefs. She’s bang on.Pete_London | ”
dont know about that mate. its as if Mel has completely forgotten about the Age of Enlightenment , or even the Renaissance – both were born out of struggles for freedom from oppressive religion. but i take your general point though about “reference points” – indeed that is true.
bit of an argument going on above – quality posts though.
“Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ? ”
Sweden (Malmo), Holland (Rotterdam) or Belgium (Antwerp)…
i’d say Belgium will be the first.
“Every now and then you seem sensible and then you go and say that some country in Europe will be under sharia law in our lifetimes. This is simply nonsense. Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ?”
France.
1.) They have the most muslims
2.) They like to surrender.
3.) Socialists will try to integrate the muslim vote
4.) Jews are leaving in droves. roughly 3% of the population is leaving each year.
“This is how twisted you lefties have become. Wimmin’s rights drove you lot on for 30 years, until islamic conquest looked a better bet for bringing our civilisation down and you jumped straight onto that horse. When you defend islam and the freedom of its followers to follow it, you are defending a set of idea little different from the totalitarianism of nazism and communism.”
Huzzah!! Huzzah!! Huzzah!!
archduke:
“Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ? ”
Sweden (Malmo), Holland (Rotterdam)
Yep, looks like they’re pretty busy in Holland…..
Dutch terror suspects go on trial
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6054324.stm
“Six suspects have gone on trial in the Netherlands under tough new anti-terror laws, accused of links to an Islamist terrorist group.”
Here’s something new. The reporter refers to an Islamist terrorist group. Without doubt or scare quotes.
How refreshing (watch out for a stealth edit).
Pete_london
Regarding your distaste for my ability to “wield” the english language, given that I said “teachings concerning the values of the European enlightment.” there is nothing semantically wrong with my sentance. It doesn’t imply that Islam teaches specificially relative to the texts of the enlightment, rather the values those texts espouse, which it does. Stop trying to excuse going off on one and attempting to pigeon hole everyone with your stupid far right mentality wherein everyone falls into neatly definable categories.
As usual, your premise for hatred of islam is cockeyed. I would support the right of any woman who wanted to break away from the islamic faith, just I would support anyone who wanted to break free from any religious faith but felt it hard to do so because of cultural pressures. The UK, because it is such a great country, probably has womans groups who will help women in this situation. They would also have the full force of the law firmly on their side. I don’t see or hear too many muslim women complaining about the intolerable oprresion they are all suffering according to you.
“Wimmin’s rights drove you lot on for 30 years,”
There are many muslim “wimmin” who consider themselves feminists and feel they should have the right to wear whatever they want even if that offends you. I agree with them. If you find this spineless and “sick” then it’s because you are a tool. And when you say that the women who say these things are part of “an evil, dysfunctional creed” you must include my neighbours who have been excellent neighbours to me, a perfectly lovely family with well mannered and poilte children who hold the stair door open for me and always smile and say hello. A lot more friendly than most other people in the stair. Ocassionally I see the little girls in their veil, but not often and I certainly don’t consider myself “sick” for not wanting to ban their religion and presumably boot them out the country.
How do you propose that we deal with this “intolerable creed” pete – let’s have your answers since tolerating them living next to me is clearly an option only a spineless sicko would choose. So what’s your solution ?
p.s. George Galloway is as they say up here – a fanny.
I wonder why a collection of Anons regularly diverts threads on this blog away from matters directly relating to the BBC.
Why respond to Anons who can’t be arsed to provide a name, any name? Typing in anon, other anon, etc is just seeking to aggravate.
It’s just short for A nonce!
OT – Indy columnist Matthew Norman lays into BBC DG
Mark ‘wallowing in a jacuzzi of cash’ Thompson
Matthew Norman’s Media Diary
Cheshire is waiting for you, Mark
http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article1874661.ece
“The behaviour of the BBC director general, Mark Thompson, is most bamboozling. Thommo, best known to the public for biting a colleague, last week bared his top plate at the Government, insisting that, if the licence fee rise is not to his taste, he will cancel the relocation of large chunks of the corporation to Manchester in 2010.
“From the start the BBC’s governors have made it abundantly clear that they would only approve the case for Salford if it could demonstrate robust value for money,” said Mr Thompson last week. “I am sure that the Trust [the new nonentity-packed overseeing body replacing the governors] is likely to take the same view.” This is highly confusing. After all, the move was announced in 2004, by Thommo and chairman Michael Grade, as part of their Better Public Value campaign. If it represented a way to cut long-term expenditure two years ago – and Manchester, although bursting with energy, is far cheaper than London – how has that changed since? In fact, by increasing the pressure to economise, a disappointing settlement would surely make the move a more urgent priority than ever.”
Dilema posed for the BBC?
Baroness Tonge found favour with the BBC for her understanding of anti-Israeli suicide bombers – they dispatched her to the West Bank with a BBC crew.
But now her remarks about the VZC have upset Sir Ming
Menzies Campbell “I have acted with the maximum powers at my disposal at this time. I have written to Baroness Tonge dissociating myself and the party from her deeply offensive remarks and what I believe to be their clear anti-Semitic connotations. I have asked for a review of the disciplinary powers available to the Liberal Democrat leaders in both the House of Lords and Commons.”
Ming/Jenny, Jenny/Ming, can both continue as heroes of the “Today” programme?
via
Time’s Up for Jenny Tonge
http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/
Conor Dignam, editor of ‘Broadcast’ magazine
has a go (at the BBC) too.
The BBC can afford the move to Salford if it really wants it http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article1874665.ece
“Hand over the cash or the puppy gets it” was pretty much the threat BBC director general Mark Thompson made in a speech last week.
The cash of course is the 1.8 per cent above-inflation licence fee settlement that the BBC is demanding from government for the next seven years.
And the poor puppy with the gun barrel being held to its head is the BBC’s plans to move 1,500 staff up north to a new media centre in Salford from 2010.”
……..
.
(Brussels Journal)
“Why Muslim Immigration is a Threat to Western Democracy”
“Muslims can thus undermine Western democracy in two ways:
By massive immigration and infiltration of established, especially Socialist, parties until they can be turned to serve the Islamic agenda, or by simply creating a climate of fear and distrust that gradually makes the democratic system unworkable.
In Western Europe right now, they are making significant headway on both accounts”..
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1571
.
The BBC and the stupidest headline of the day;
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7079/bbcnn9.jpg
Control order suspect ‘is on run’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6056168.stm
This is just pathetic.
OT
Chemical campaigns ‘misleading’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6040146.stm
“Leading toxicologists have warned green groups are “misleading” the public with chemical contamination campaigns.
They said they are deliberately and unfairly scaring the public.
In particular, they criticised a WWF campaign that has highlighted the presence of chemicals in blood, food and in babies’ umbilical cords.”
Lefty eco-warriors misleading the public? Never!
What next? Global warming is a bunch of croc pushed by enviro-nuts?…..
there is nothing semantically wrong with my sentance.
Except it’s called a sentence.
There are many muslim “wimmin” who consider themselves feminists…
Haahahahahaha! 😆
“While the indigenous populations of modern Europe – France, Germany, Italy, Spain – reproduce at around 1.1 child per family”
You may want to check your figures, there. Germany has a population problem, but France, Italy and Spain most certainly do not average 1.1 children per family.
This rhetoric about an Islamic takeover has more than a whiff of Germany circa 1936 and the Brussels Journal is a good example. Lo and behold we learn that immigrants are going to subvert democracy, by voting, apparently, for those cursed leftists no less. Or else they are going to create a climate of fear, presumably by targeting messages at the kind of people that buy into “Londonistan” hook, line and sinker.
Anon
Please, you’re all over the place. Give us tougher targets. In discussing infidel/islamic relations you stated:
Tolerance helps to breed respect …
Then in discussing the place of women in islam, you state:
I would support the right of any woman who wanted to break away from the islamic faith …
Now I expect you’ll be aware that the penalty for apostacy in islam is death. No exceptions, no quibbling about it. The penalty is death. This is one of those inconvenient things for which I have no tolerance (and yes, would ban in GB) but for which you exhort I and others to have ‘tolerance’. But you then say you support the right of islamic women to leave islam. You cannot be tolerant of a penalty of death for apostacy and yet ‘support’ a woman’s right to apostacy. This is clearly contradictory. So which is it? Apostacy or death, Anon?
Now you clearly don’t think things through, like most lefties. You urge we nasty types to be nice, be tolerant, be good, to care. But the world isn’t like that. If you hold principle then you cannot pick and choose when to apply them. Well, you can, but that’s what marks you out as a leftist. It’s very easy to duck the difficult questions when you don’t apply principles universally. So which is it to be, ‘tolerance’ for islam, or the right of apostacy for islamic women?
This rhetoric about an Islamic takeover has more than a whiff of Germany circa 1936
Oh dear, more “Muslims are the new Jews” malarkey – as if we are 4 year olds and can’t see the difference.
Well, I must have missed the bit about Jews planting bombs on Berlin trams in 1936. Or Jews proclaiming the desire to see Germany become a Jewish state. Or Jews rioting, beating up and assaulting non-Jews in Munich, Hamburg, Leipzig etc..
With Synagogues and graveyards vandalised, Jews attacked in the streets, I would have though the behaviour of many muslims in Europe 2006 had more than a whiff of Germany circa 1936.
As an Arcehrs Anarchist – we KNOW it’s a documentary – I shal not rise to the baiting. But the BBC is HIDEOUSLY pro-metric. I have yet to figure out why news rep0orts fromAmerica, which does not use metric distances, to the UK, which does not use metric distances, they should convert all the distances into kilometers. The even did it for the wind speeds in the no hurricane – i do not believe all those southern US residents were telling them it blew their homes 300 meters down the road or that it was a 200Kph wind.
Nor were there circa 1 billion Jews in the Middle East financing jewish terrorism in Germany.
Whiff of Germany in 1936?
[deleted]
Edited By Siteowner
I commented here yesterday about the “snowmail” message from that creep Alex Thomson looking to close down discussion about niqabed Muslim women.
Gavin Essler previewing tonight’s “Newsnight” is on the same theme
I have seen more veiled British Muslim women on television news in the
past two weeks than I have seen in real life in this country in the past
20 years.
Well he must spend all his time watching TV!
Many non-Muslims also wonder why so much news is devoted to a tiny part of a minority religion
“Non-muslims” – does he mean everyday British folk, or just himself & his BBC cronies?
will | 16.10.06 – 8:20 pm
Many non-Muslims also wonder why so much news is devoted to a tiny part of a minority religion
essler is part of the left-wing set that decides what is shown on the news and in current affairs.
If he can’t tell us why there are so many muslim-oriented features who can?
“Non-muslims” – does he mean everyday British folk, or just himself & his BBC cronies?
will | 16.10.06 – 8:20 pm
I’d much rather they stopped beating about the bush and called the rest of us Kafirs.
It’s good to know it isn’t just *American* local government who’s gone loco:
From London’s Daily Telegraph:
It has taken more than 12 months and cost about £10,000 but a council is finally on the verge of discovering the identity of a man who kept saying “baa” during a planning meeting.
After a wide-ranging investigation, Havering council, based in Romford, Essex, has prepared a 300-page report, according to the Romford Recorder newspaper.
Unfortunately, the downside is that the prime suspect is no longer a councillor and is, therefore, beyond the scope of any punishment that it might want to mete out.
The incident has it roots in a planning meeting in September last year when an application was being heard to put a mobile home on a farm housing rare breeds of horses and sheep.
The solemnity of the debate was, apparently, interrupted by a male councillor making unhelpful “baa-ing” noises.
(courtesy of the Wall Street Journal)
BBC bias?
Here is how today the BBC reported on the racist murder of a 15 white child a few years back;
“Imran Shahid, 29, his brother Zeeshan Shahid, 29, and Mohammed Faisal Mushtaq, 27, are accused of abducting Kriss Donald, repeatedly slashing him with knives or similar instruments, then setting him on fire after a terror drive to Dundee and back. “
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6048974.stm
and here is how they reported it at the time;
“A teenager may have been held down over a log while he was knifed 13 times before being doused in petrol and set on fire, a court has heard.
A forensic pathologist said that Kriss Donald suffered seven stab wounds on his front, five on his back and one on his left arm during the attack.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4003223.stm
I’d really like to know why the BBC replaced stabbed with slashed and also why they omitted the fact that poor child also received a beating from hell.
The BBC biased? nah not them they stand out for impartial reporting and the truth.
“Every now and then you seem sensible and then you go and say that some country in Europe will be under sharia law in our lifetimes. This is simply nonsense. Care to predict which country will be the first to fall ?”
Native Europeans are not breeding as fast as immigrant muslim population. The difference between birth rates is so staggering that the change will only take a couple of generations.
In the early 70’s there were about 15 000 muslims living in the Netherlands. Today there are roughly a million.
The most common response I have received to this scenario is that the muslims will eventually find Western culture more attractive to their own traditional lifestyle. Can you see any evidence of that happening in the UK?
There is already an example of how some European countries might look like in a couple of decades. Lebanon used to be a Christian majority country but the muslim population eventually outgrew the Christian one. When this uneasy balance was tipped to the muslim favour by adding the Palestinians to the equation, a civil war broke out. Today the communities live in an uneasy peace with one another and the largest group are the Shiites represented by Hezbollah.
If you want to know which countries in Europe are most likely to face the fate of Lebanon just look at the share of Muslim population.
France, the Netherlands and Belgium are the most likely candidates to fall. However, I would bet on Belgium, since it is the most artificial construct of these three.
pete_london
So your answer is to ban Islam in the UK ? That in itself goes against the universal declaration of human rights. There are estimated to be around 200,000 apostates in the UK, and the law in this country clearly makes it illegal to kill someone for being an apostate. This, presumably, is why we haven’t seen 200,000 murders.
You cannot be a law abiding citizen of the UK as well as busy murdering apostates. And yet there are people living in this country, who call themselves muslims, who don’t go murdering apostates. How can this be ? Is that an “easy” enough questions for you to explain ?
Hence as I stated ages ago, “law abiding muslims”. This is not diffcult to follow, nor is it all “over the place” When you say you would ban it – which would you ban Islam or punishement by death of apostasy(sic) because as you well know the latter is already banned in this country, so you will also need to explain why it is a reason to ban the entire religion.
“You cannot be tolerant of a penalty of death for apostacy”
I’m not.
“‘support’ a woman’s right to apostacy.
I do.
“This is clearly contradictory.”
Punishment by death for apostasy(sic) is illegal in this country. Therefore,someone leaving any religous faith has the full power of the law on their side.
If we follow your logic, all muslims would murder an apostate, but this, once again, appears to be incorrect. Don’t bother replying with links about what happens in other countries, because we are talking about the UK here.
Is the best you can come up with for banning a religion ?
And pete – you never explained how I should begin acting towards my neighbours. If I don’t want to give them the impression that I’m spineless and tolerant of them so long as they don’t bother me, what should I do ? Spit at them ?
Bombing underground trains is also illegal, innit? As is flying planes into buildings…
Apostates usually have to cut all family ties, change their identities and go into hiding. If they all kept living their lives after “leaving islam” I’d bet the murder rate would be a lot higher. Not that it would be called “murder” though.
Alan Mann
You don’t say what the solution is to avoid this ? Deportation, extermination or banning of islam ?
“The most common response I have received to this scenario is that the muslims will eventually find Western culture more attractive to their own traditional lifestyle. Can you see any evidence of that happening in the UK?”
There are an estimated 200,000 apostates in the UK, and personally see plenty evidence of muslims who live in the community without conflict. In Edinburgh most of the new immigrants are from eastern europe.
The idea the Belgium, with the centre of govt. for the EU will shortly come under Sharia law is laughable. It’s out the box all right I’ll grant you that.
The BBC and how it lies to our children;
Remember the story of that poor little Girl who was suspended for wearing her veil at school;
Here is how the BBC reported the story when it broke;
” School suspends woman over veil
A Muslim woman has been suspended by a school in West Yorkshire after she insisted on wearing a veil in lessons. Bilingual support worker Aishah Azmi, 24, was asked to remove the veil after pupils found it hard to understand her during English language lessons. Headfield Church of England Junior School, in Dewsbury, said she could wear the veil outside the classroom.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6046992.stm
and here is how the story has been written for CBBC:
“Ms Azmi, who works at a junior school in Dewsbury, said that the pupils never complained about it. She is happy to take the veil off in front of children, ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6050000/newsid_6054100/6054132.stm
Happy? If she was happy this story wouldn’t have taken up the vast majority of the BBCs airtime this past weekend. It is a Blatant lie, she wasn’t happy to take off that veil in front of anybody never mind the children. That is the reason she was sent home. Saying she is more than happy to take off her veil is an outright lie. Promoting that lie as fact to impressionable children promotes the message that only Muslims can be victims and that the school is out of order.
Why am I not surprised