Muslims to march in London

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

"send em all back" I would agree with someone if they said send all the protesters back, if you read the protesters billboards they were not simply saying ban the cartoons they were promoting murders terrorism and putting down our way of life. So I say if they dont like it they free to go back to the middle east.

People posting here seem to have overlooked a fundamental element of the equation.

In all probability many of the protesters seen in London last week are as British as Yorkshire pudding - born and reared in Britain. As far as I know, and I'm not condoning it (before anyone gets their Oswald Mosley / Enoch Powell hats on), up until last week waving a placard promoting or glorifying terrorism wasn't a criminal offence under British law.

Can someone explain to me how you tell someone born in Britain to go back to somewhere they may never have been? Is it as simple as determining by the colour of their skin, or the religion that they practice that they don't quite fit in to "our way of life"? Is it as simple as asserting, simply because they elect to advocate and practice a freedom of speech which espouses something contrary to our collective moral beliefs, that they should be "sent home"?

Comments such as "Send em all back" and "if they dont like it they are free to go back to the middle east" are as racist, shameful and bigotted as the "No blacks, no dogs, no Irish" signs which adorned the windows of many thousands of B&B's throughout Britain in the 70's - 80's and anyone who would suggest otherwise is deluding themselves.

The bottom line, as far as the protesters are concerned, is you either respect their right to freedom of speech or you don't. You either respect them as individuals or you consider them all to be terrorists and you either acknowledge their right to be British or you deny it. A denial of their legitimate right to freedom of speech or their British nationality (where applicable) and the fundamental human right to the freedom of religious expression and practice - irresepective of their place of birth, colour of skin or religious denomination - is a racist action.

You are perfectly entitled to disagree with / dispute their point of view. Their nationality, however, is not up for debate. It is defined by their passport / place of birth and an elected desire on their part to be declared a citizen of whatever country they wish - with the provision that they meet the qualifying criteria and are deemed to have done so by the appropriate legislative authority.

If you're a racist come out and say it. If you're a xenophobe don't be afraid to say it but, for goodness sake, don't try to hide behind some sort of moral / sociopolitical children's playground argument that deludes you into thinking that you've adopted a moral high ground that puts you beyond others seeing you for what you actually are.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

up until last week waving a placard promoting or glorifying terrorism wasn't a criminal offence under British law.

Not true... It comes under the banner of incitement to [religious] hatred/violence, which is why people wree complaning that cops had the tools but didn't use them. Nick Griffin had already been caught under it in the late 90s. It was the reason that drug dealer who dressed up as a suicide bomber was arrested.

What the MPs were arguing about was to make the order from a Public Order offence (relatively mild) to an offence under the Terrorism Act (which is serious and gives the government/police much more power to process, than a PO offence).

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by punky

What the MPs were arguing about was to make the order from a Public Order offence (relatively mild) to an offence under the Terrorism Act (which is serious and gives the government/police much more power to process, than a PO offence).

I'm sorry, but it is true and is exactly what I said "...up until last week waving a placard promoting or glorifying terrorism wasn't a criminal offence under British law".

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

People posting here seem to have overlooked a fundamental element of the equation.

In all probability many of the protesters seen in London last week are as British as Yorkshire pudding - born and reared in Britain. As far as I know, and I'm not condoning it (before anyone gets their Oswald Mosley / Enoch Powell hats on), up until last week waving a placard promoting or glorifying terrorism wasn't a criminal offence under British law.

Can someone explain to me how you tell someone born in Britain to go back to somewhere they may never have been? Is it as simple as determining by the colour of their skin, or the religion that they practice that they don't quite fit in to "our way of life"? Is it as simple as asserting, simply because they elect to advocate and practice a freedom of speech which espouses something contrary to our collective moral beliefs, that they should be "sent home"?

Comments such as "Send em all back" and "if they dont like it they are free to go back to the middle east" are as racist, shameful and bigotted as the "No blacks, no dogs, no Irish" signs which adorned the windows of many thousands of B&B's throughout Britain in the 70's - 80's and anyone who would suggest otherwise is deluding themselves.

The bottom line, as far as the protesters are concerned, is you either respect their right to freedom of speech or you don't. You either respect them as individuals or you consider them all to be terrorists and you either acknowledge their right to be British or you deny it. A denial of their legitimate right to freedom of speech or their British nationality (where applicable) and the fundamental human right to the freedom of religious expression and practice - irresepective of their place of birth, colour of skin or religious denomination - is a racist action.

You are perfectly entitled to disagree with / dispute their point of view. Their nationality, however, is not up for debate. It is defined by their passport / place of birth and an elected desire on their part to be declared a citizen of whatever country they wish - with the provision that they meet the qualifying criteria and are deemed to have done so by the appropriate legislative authority.

If you're a racist come out and say it. If you're a xenophobe don't be afraid to say it but, for goodness sake, don't try to hide behind some sort of moral / sociopolitical children's playground argument that deludes you into thinking that you've adopted a moral high ground that puts you beyond others seeing you for what you actually are.

Now that's one of the best posts Ive seen on this thread. I couldnt have said it better myself.

---------- Post added at 09:33 ---------- Previous post was at 09:23 ----------

Just looking back at some posts previously about how this country is being changed to accomadate muslims (there was a mention of sharia compliant mortgages/halal food shops/ halal food in schools etc etc). I'd just like to say that where you get a large population of any particular religion, businesses will do their best to cater for them because it makes them money.

For example as well as the independant muslim run halaal butchers you get in Streatham, the Safeways/Morrisons now isnt it, here also sells halaal meat. This wasnt down to a muslim orhganised petition but more to do so with the fact that the business is making the most of a situation for their own good.

Also HSBC for example are delivering shariah compliant mortgages (which involves them being free from interest/but yuou still pay in another manner) because it sees a way of making money from the thousands of muslims in the UK applying for a mortgage.

We have to remember that a lot of this is not provided free to muslims, or done so because muslims have gone on the march expecting it. It is done by non - muslim organisations looking to make money from muslims. Nothing wrong in that, but lets paint a balanced picture over some things huh.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

People posting here seem to have overlooked a fundamental element of the equation.

In all probability many of the protesters seen in London last week are as British as Yorkshire pudding - born and reared in Britain.......
Can someone explain to me how you tell someone born in Britain to go back to somewhere they may never have been? Is it as simple as determining by the colour of their skin, or the religion that they practice that they don't quite fit in to "our way of life"? Is it as simple as asserting, simply because they elect to advocate and practice a freedom of speech which espouses something contrary to our collective moral beliefs, that they should be "sent home"?

Comments such as "Send em all back" and "if they dont like it they are free to go back to the middle east" are as racist, shameful and bigotted as the "No blacks, no dogs, no Irish" signs which adorned the windows of many thousands of B&B's throughout Britain in the 70's - 80's and anyone who would suggest otherwise is deluding themselves.

The bottom line, as far as the protesters are concerned, is you either respect their right to freedom of speech or you don't. You either respect them as individuals or you consider them all to be terrorists and you either acknowledge their right to be British or you deny it.

You are perfectly entitled to disagree with / dispute their point of view. Their nationality, however, is not up for debate. It is defined by their passport / place of birth and an elected desire on their part to be declared a citizen of whatever country they wish - with the provision that they meet the qualifying criteria and are deemed to have done so by the appropriate legislative authority.

*sigh* Here I go again. I was born here, but I don't feel British. imo, the same can be said for many of the protestors. They are British in passport alone. Their true home is wherever they want to make Britain into a copy of. It is where their hearts are.......
This country has given them a home and they should stop trying to change it to suite them better.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK

imo, the UK is sleepwalking into disaster....

What I want to know is why? What is so wonderful about sharia law that makes it so attractive?

Or is it simply that it is a symbol of Islamic domination?

I notice that Sacranie doesn't criticise this failure to integrate at all, only going so far as to point out how it reflects Muslim's opposition to the war on terror. How?

Half of the 500 people surveyed said relations between white Britons and Muslims were getting worse.

And that's all the fault of 'white Britons', is it?

The results of the poll, conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, came as thousands of Muslims staged a fresh protest in London yesterday against the publication of cartoons of Mohammed.

Can someone tell me what that was in aid of? How much longer is this going to go on? Are we to have protest marches every Sunday for the next 10 years over this?

Elsewhere in that article it states:

And in Pakistan, a cleric was reported to have put a $1 million (£575,0 00) bounty on the head of the Danish cartoonist who drew the original pictures.

Which one? Or is that the bounty on each of the 12 (?) cartoonists involved? Or for all of them?

Does this mean that this 'cleric' believe it is all the work of one person? If that is the case, then he's very ignorant. Mind you - publicly inciting to murder is a pretty ignorant act.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

Can someone tell me what that was in aid of? How much longer is this going to go on? Are we to have protest marches every Sunday for the next 10 years over this?

On that subject what are they marching about? Have the cartoon been published in the UK?

And why the burning of American flags in some of the demonstrations abroad? As far as I'm aware they haven't been published in any US newpapers or magazines either.

Have I missed something or is it just a convenient excuse to complain about the UK and US?

Originally Posted by dezzo

Have I missed something or is it just a convenient excuse to complain about the UK and US?

That seems to be the way - any excuse to complain about every aspect of UK/US policy or their societies.

For example. this from the BBC:

Religious activists in India and Pakistan have begun separate protests against Valentine's Day celebrations, saying they are an insult to Hinduism and Islam.

Note, they've managed to get the Hindus into protest mode as well.

For f*** sake - is there anything we do that isn't an insult?

While the 'West' is accused of having an anit-Muslim agenda (note, they rarely offer any hard evidence of it) it is quite plain and visible that Muslims have an anti-West agenda.

---------- Post added at 10:11 ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 ----------

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

What I want to know is why? What is so wonderful about sharia law that makes it so attractive?

Example:

A man has been sentenced to death for blasphemy, Pakistani police say.

But read on...

Human rights groups say Pakistan's blasphemy laws are routinely abused to settle land disputes and village or tribal vendettas.

Ah - so that's why sharia law is so attractive.

It's like The Crucible... (Which was all about: http://www.salemweb.com/memorial/ )

[punky]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

The bottom line, as far as the protesters are concerned, is you either respect their right to freedom of speech or you don't.

Works both ways. People are allowed to criticise Islam too.

It is done by non - muslim organisations looking to make money from muslims. Nothing wrong in that, but lets paint a balanced picture over some things huh.

True, but without excusing it, it can be understood. Change scares people. It doesn't matter what's changing, people like consistency, routine. Some of the older generations saw the colour of Britain change bit by bit. Now they are starting to accept that we have the issue of Sharia law coming in. It doesn't matter how or why its coming in, but people hear the word Sharia and all they can think about is:

1. Women being stoned for adultery.
2. Burqas.
3. All the hallmarks of the Taliban like music and sport being banned.
4. The right to beat women.
5. Apostasy, heresy & critism or Islam being capital offences.

No wonder people are nervous. They see today Sharia law is being practised (in whatever form or reason). They hear the (sometimes violent) support for Sharia law, and no wonder they are scared s***less.

Its up to moderate, decent Muslims to counter the more vocal, extremist voice, which is currently fuelling public perception and opinion. Its not right, but at the end of the day, we all have to live together in peace.

[Stuart]

I am not xenophobic (far from it, I have friends from many cultures, including muslims), but I would like to know why the muslims are protesting in countries that have not published the cartoons. Regarding the countries that have published the cartoons, well, as I have stated, I think the Muslims have shot themselves in the foot. Had they just had a little protest (or even ignored the cartoons) in Denmark, the cartoons would have been forgotton, probably within a few hours.

Regarding the conduct of some of the people on the protests. In general, it seemed peaceful, so I have no real problem with them. What I do have a problem with is those who hold the "Death to Infidels" banners, and that tw*t who dressed up as a suicide bomber. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that one of my friends was in the building next door to the bus that exploded in Tavistock Sq, (she spent her day helping the wounded where possible, giving them cups of tea, allowing them to use her phone and email to contact relatives etc), and as a result is scared of buses.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by punky

Its up to moderate, decent Muslims to counter the more vocal, extremist voice, which is currently fuelling public perception and opinion. Its not right, but at the end of the day, we all have to live together in peace.

Quite right! Now tell that to the ones waving the posters......

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Can someone explain to me how you tell someone born in Britain to go back to somewhere they may never have been? Is it as simple as determining by the colour of their skin, or the religion that they practice that they don't quite fit in to "our way of life"? Is it as simple as asserting, simply because they elect to advocate and practice a freedom of speech which espouses something contrary to our collective moral beliefs, that they should be "sent home"?

Strip them of their citizenship, for a set period of time, which would deny them access to public funds.
Hundreds of thousands of people in the UK are in that situation already.
Many of the "extremist" groups deliberately avoid paying tax as a way of attacking Britain, and live off as many benifits as they can.
Without those benifits, they would have to work for a living and pay tax.
A rather tasty irony too.

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Comments such as "Send em all back" and "if they dont like it they are free to go back to the middle east" are as racist, shameful and bigotted as the "No blacks, no dogs, no Irish" signs which adorned the windows of many thousands of B&B's throughout Britain in the 70's - 80's and anyone who would suggest otherwise is deluding themselves.

I dissagree.
I grew up in a country with sharia law.
I knew one man with only one hand, and saw a few others around the city.
I knew that for any christians, the only place to find a chruch was in one of the embassies, as the building of churches is prohibited.
There were areas I could not go to because I am not muslim.
I was in a foreign nation, and therefore abided by their rules.
For someone to be able to come over here, be given asylum and then call for our goverment not to be voted out, but beheadded is not acceptable.
Just as if on a stormy night you let me into your home, and I started calling for you to be killed because of the way you ran your home, is unacceptable.
If I came in and did that, kicked over your coffee table, spilt red wine on your sofa and carpet, would you throw me out, or hand me a bag of dog poo to wipe on your walls?

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

The bottom line, as far as the protesters are concerned, is you either respect their right to freedom of speech or you don't. You either respect them as individuals or you consider them all to be terrorists and you either acknowledge their right to be British or you deny it. A denial of their legitimate right to freedom of speech or their British nationality (where applicable) and the fundamental human right to the freedom of religious expression and practice - irresepective of their place of birth, colour of skin or religious denomination - is a racist action.

It most certainly is not, unless you're saying that to be a muslim you must wave plackards around, insulting the country you live in, calling for it's goverment to be murdered, avoid work as not to pay taxes and live on benifits in an attempt to drag the country down?

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Hundreds of thousands of people in the UK are in that situation already.
Many of the "extremist" groups deliberately avoid paying tax as a way of attacking Britain, and live off as many benifits as they can.
Without those benifits, they would have to work for a living and pay tax.
A rather tasty irony too.

#

So whats the excuse for non muslim benefit cheats doing the same? Are they not attacking Britain too, maybe we should group them into the same people as above.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

#

So whats the excuse for non muslim benefit cheats doing the same? Are they not attacking Britain too, maybe we should group them into the same people as above.

They shouldn't be cheating the system either......
Now, what about the rest of xaccers post--any comments?

---------- Post added at 11:38 ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 ----------

Originally Posted by Xaccers

I knew that for any christians, the only place to find a chruch was in one of the embassies, as the building of churches is prohibited.
There were areas I could not go to because I am not muslim.

Hmm......thats called racism over here isn't it? But anyway, how they run their country is up to them, when in Rome and all that.....

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

#

So whats the excuse for non muslim benefit cheats doing the same? Are they not attacking Britain too, maybe we should group them into the same people as above.

Bone idleness?

If someone attacks this nation then should they go unpunished?
What does Sharia law say about treason?
How about financial theft?

Removing someone's access to public funds when they've been deliberately avoiding work and paying taxes (such as refusing to buy car insurance because of the tax on it) is quite fitting.