BCWFC Chairman Resigns in 'Ban the Burka' row

No, that's definitely not what I'm saying . If you are only referring to SOME Muslims who break the law and need to be sent elsewhere then this needs to be clear as opposed to lumping them all in the same bracket. If you dont, you'll come across as a bigot, even if not intended. For example:

1)Muslims are terrorists
2) SOME Muslims engage in terrorism.

Just that one word not prevalent in the article makes the world of difference. One is a perfectly reasonable comment to make, the other one isn't.

 

The over reaction reminds of the incident a few weeks ago with George Galloway. He congratulated Liverpool on the Champions league win whilst using the opportunity to have a dig at Tottenham and the sight of various Israel flags on the terraces. Whilst i thought it had little relevance in the grand scheme of things i respected his right to challenge something what he thought was wrong. Talk Radio thought otherwise and sacked him from employment with them. Sacked for having an opinion, thats the start of a police state.

 

Sorry, but I think I am reading the wrong article as in the one I am reading there are no references to muslims being terrorists. The one I've read just talks about burkhas and if people don't want to follow our laws to go to a different country. Sounds fair enough to me.

I have a place in Spain and if I don't want to follow their laws then maybe I should look at France or Italy instead. Simple.

Maybe you think it is best to stay silent about things, like all those dogooders who told Ann Cryer to keep her big fat mouth shut for fear of offending "the community'. Her silencing only ruined the lives of a few thousand children. Personally, I think one child's innocence was too high a price to pay.

I'm just an old fashioned Yorkshireman who prefers to say it as it is and if people don't like it well they know what they can do ;-)

 

Completley misses the point yet again.

This is the last time ill be repeating it. You've already talked about 'good' Muslims. The posts Mark Hird was sharing, on the face of it, didn't aknowledge this and instead the controversy lies in the fact that he lumped all Muslims together in assosiation with crime, if what is said in the article is true. This sweeping generalisation is evident in the language that is used, and iv'e tried to show you the significence of it in the two statements provided. The topic is completley irrelvant, the difference one word has to the entire meaning and connotations of each statement isn't.

Your argument is that he's only reffering to the bad ones, but theres literally zero evidence for this. The word Muslim is applicable to every Muslim out there whether they are law abiding or not and if he really meant the opposite he needs to stop sharing posts that don't accurately represent his views, or make his views clearer to avoid confusion.

Contary to your above post, I dont think that people should be silent on these issues. You want to discuss the issues of drug dealing and grooming gangs prevalent amongst SOME British muslims then do it, but that was never my point was it?

 

I disagree with you.

"Muslims should 'adhere to our laws' and leave if they don't like it."

How are any good Muslims supposed to know if they are excluded from the above?

Anyone who has Muslim beliefs, law abiding or not, is still a Muslim and technically fit under any comments reffering to one unless stated otherwise.

 

What if they want to wear it?

 

Have you read the article?

 

Who told Ann Cryer to keep her mouth shut?

 

Agree with this completely.

I do think there is a pressure to being a Muslim in Britain. Sadly, the actions of terrorists in the name of a religion has resulted in the need, or a feeling of needing to be seen, as a 'good' Muslim.

I was working in a school with a majority Muslim intake at the time of the Manchester bombing. The grief and horror felt by both the parents and children at the time was significant. Partly that their religion was being used as an excuse for such barbarity, partly because of the horror for those that lost their lives and partly because it was an act that would cause further division in our society.

Whenever I see anti-Muslim statements, which fail to provide any level of qualification, as @Tolly856 challenges, I just see prejudice. Prejudice against all the fantastic Muslim children, colleagues and parents I have encountered whilst working in education. I feel very sad about what they have to experience on a daily basis.

This doesn't exclude the right for reasoned debate about things and to challenge. That is vital in our society. However, I don't see posting statements that explicitly target a section of society, without nuance, as freedom of speech - it is freedom to express prejudice. If you can say anything you want in society, without repercussions, then the free society fails. This paradox lies at the heart of this debate.

The man has the right to an opinion, however if that opinion expresses prejudice against a section of society then he is not fit for this particular role.

 

Theres a difference between want and forced by rhetoric.

 

There is. Have you asked anyone wearing one if it is their choice? What would happen to their freedoms if it was banned?

 

The entire establishment.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/30/rotherham-girls-could-have-been-spared-ann-cryer

So sad. So many young lives ruined and the same is happening with drugs, but you can't say anything for fear of offending the good Muslims.

 

It is very similar to what happened with paedophile priests in the 70/80

 

See Naz Shah has got her teeth into this already, I absolutely despise that women with a passion. She is complete poison and terrible news for Bradford.

 

A well reasoned response to a subject that is often a taboo subject in todays world. Irrespective of the words spoken by the person who this debate revolves around, there has been and still is a real fear of being able to question 'idealogies' as we are finding out right now in the house of commons. Buzzwords like ant semitism and islamaphobia are too often thrown out when wanting to stifle good debate about problems that stem from exactly this sort of scenario. To allow these ideaologies to go unchallenged for fear of retribution has gone on for centuries in all religions, and for people like me who do not need or practice religion it is grossly unfair.

 

No mate. I don't miss the point. You are the type of person who wanted to spend all their time arguing over words for two decades whilst young girls were getting raped. Now you want to pick at words whilst thousands more are damaged by the drugs trade.

Yes. There are some lovely Muslims. I get it. Everyone knows that. Doesn't alter the fact that we currently have some serious muslim-related problems on our doorstep and people like you want to put a gagging order on everyone and make people frightened to say anything.

No need to reply as we will never agree and you will never persuade me into thinking that the lives of thousands of young girls and thousands of drug addicts was worth you political correctness.

 

No, as a tolerant and law abiding person i allow people to do as they wish within the laws set. However, i have the right to the opinion not to agree with a practice that should be confined to the dark ages where it truly belongs.

 

Says who?

Innocent Muslims who despise rapists as much as you do should not be tarred with the same brush as sex offenders who groom innocent young girls, and as long as you make that distinction clear then theres no issue.

 

Regarding that issue, RT ............

FORGIVE me if I'm wrong - BUT ......
I believe it's not legal to fly the UnionJack (British Union flag) outside your home, without the 'permission' of the local Authority ? The biggest objection being - It may be offensive to other Races, cultures and creeds ?

IF that IS the case, then surely Galloway had EVERY right to voice his objections ?

 

Probably on a much more industrial scale and to a far more horrific level, but otherwise very similar indeed as people didn't speak out over that either and as a result more and more lives were damaged.