7/7 London Islamic Festival

littlegreenfootballs.com...

A festival celebrating Islam is scheduled for London on 7/7.
The Mayor and some 'cultural people' are kicking it off.
Interesting list of speakers as well. Kiddie play areas and rides.
Everything expected of a festival I guess.

Sorry, but I think this timing is in really poor taste.
Have it a week before or a week after. Don't have it on 7/7.

WHY were these dates picked? WHY would the mayor
go along with it for those dates knowing their significance
to radical Islam? Are they trying to 'take back' the date
somehow .. make it not so significant to them? That could
only happen if they were having speakers that would talk
peace and tolerance.

Here's the program -
islamexpo.info...


There is a Islamic Conference scheduled for the same day.
I don't know if it's connected to the 'festival'. But the speakers
that are planning on going are radical fundamentalist Islamics.
They blame the West for all terror attacks ... saying that they
brought it on themselves.

www.asharq-e.com...





[edit on 6/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

[edit on 6/28/2006 by FlyersFan]

I agree its in pretty poor taste to have the festival on that paticular date. It would be like having a big Islamic celebration on 9/11. If they want to have an islamic cultural celebration, fine. Why not choose a date seperate?

I think its pretty insensitive to the victims and families. Im sure they have other things they want to remember on 7/7, and holding an Islamic celebration day is pretty much rubbing stuff in their faces.

Very poor taste and timing.

Unfortunately its only what we can expect from that sniveling little creep Ken Livingstone

RIDCULLY was spot on mate!

Mohammed ken livingston and sidekick the prophet george galloway will try anything to get on the right side of anything islamic.

If too many people oppose this and i doubt this will happen) they will all be labeld rascist!

This is absolutly DISTGUSTING and the people in power should have more backbone than simply bowing down and let this go ahead.


Still can we really expect anything else of LONDONistan

Oh dear,
"Red Ken" is at it again its abit disrepectful and sick to start the event of 7/7. Due to us being glued to the World Cup, this is why Ken has decided to sneek it in. (It hasn't been reported on British news btw)

Seems like that are trying to take back the date, in a sense, yes. Seems risky, rather than remind londoners that muslims are just people like the rest of us, it might provoke an anti-muslim reaction on that date.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
A festival celebrating Islam is scheduled for London on 7/7.

You might have liked to point out it starts on the 6th of July going on through to the 9th of July. It is funny your source claims that it is for:
For the anniversary of the London Islamic terror attacks and then goes on to say:
featuring a cast of radical Islamic superstars .

So:
Tariq Ramadan, Rageh Omaar, etc, those people who work for Universities in the U.S.A. or the United Kingdom or even employed by the BBC are now radical? Why not go tell them that. In fact, I've never heard anything like that coming from his mouth at University of Oxford. In fact, such claims are groundless - granted the U.S. has stopped him from entering the country, however they have never given a reason. They have never claimed he is a "radical muslim" and shown us this or any links to terrorists.

In fact, I find that article more insulting to those who died. Instead of showing why these people are "radical" it just says they are. I say they're not, should I go pay for webspace and thus it becomes true? No, things don't work like that. Just because it is claimed, doesn't make it true and I pity those of you who honestly believe they are - unless the BBC is now supporting Radical Islam?

Source
Tariq Ramadan advocates that Muslims living in the West should not view themselves as foreigners or temporary residents of their countries, but rather as full citizens with full rights and responsibilities. In some respects, he argues for integration and not alienation from the surrounding society. Indeed, the main theme of his book, To Be a European Muslim attempts to bridge the gap between being a Muslim and being European.

He also advocates that immigrant parents not confuse culture with religion. So, Muslims born in Western countries should adopt the tastes and cultural norms of their country, and not those of their parents' homeland.

-snip-

From 2000 to 2002, Tariq Ramadan was frequently lauded in Western media as a Muslim reformer, and even dubbed the Muslim "Martin Luther" by Paul Donnelly of the Washington Post

He sounds so radical, maybe if you support Osama and don't want Muslims to intergrate with us.

Source
On the first anniversary of the 7 July attacks in London, Islamists in Britain will hold a seminar in Birmingham followed by a press conference in the capital on Monday 3 July.

Does anyone read these sources? How can they on the 3rd of July do something, after the conference which is on the 7th? Christ...these Radical Muslims can time travel. In fact, they are being good enough to do it in Birmingham not in London and it's not that radical. Let's be honest, why they are doing it doesn't seem at all radical. Instead we're taking one persons view, without hearing what they have to say? So that's how we should do things? Judge a book by its cover?

So, Muslims were affected by the 7/7 bombings, they have legally arranged something to speak about the event. In fact, to discuss things such as Holy War, the Islamic role in Britain and they have invited people who have been created with writing a positive book. In fact, these books call for Muslim's to accept the norms and values of the British Society, which is to many a good thing. They have a right and instead of being rude about it, why not go there? Why not see if you can take part and be involved? Ask if you can tape it, PODcast it if it is going to be so radical?

In fact, things such as this can help. We need to remember what has happend and why it happend. We have to remember it, but move on and we have to allow ourselves to make sure it can never happen. On a date such as this, a date where it happend it is the best date to teach future generations not to allow it to happen again. It is a day we can use to show what happens when we do not intergrate and when evil people hijack something and are willing to harm others for their own cause.

Instead people have used this thread to insult people, use websites that provide no evidence and to attack individuals. Clear people that have not bothered to read what these people have written and to go as far as to intermix two different events. If I organize something and Nygdan does, it does not make it the same event. Even though we are both members of the same organization - ATS. We do not judge every member on one, so why all Muslims?

Why not go there? Why not buy the books? Why not learn before we judge? Do people not realise, this is why there are so many problems within society. let's go judge everyone on skin colour, accent, how they look, rather than what they say and do.

You might have liked to point out it starts on the
6th of July going on through to the 9th of July

That doesn't matter. The fact is that it was scheduled for
a very sensitive time. I provided links to show dates and
schedule. The schedule is plain for all to see. It was chosen
to coincide with the 7/7 anniversary.

featuring a cast of radical Islamic superstars

.... and their enablers.

such claims are groundless

You are free to disagree. However, the facts and bios are
there. islamexpo.info... YOU may not
consider those doing the speaking to be radical, but others do.

the U.S. has stopped him from entering the country,
however they have never given a reason

the USA doesn't have to personally hand you a reason for placing
someone on a terrorist watch list or for not allowing them to enter
the country. BETTER MINDS then yours (and mine), and those who
we have placed in charge of such matters, have seen the
facts on those people. You don't have access to all the info and
you don't have a 'need to know'.

I find that article more insulting to those who died

I'm sure that those who died are more likely to be insulted that their
city and their mayor are holding and participating in an Islamic
Festival and that another conference is scheduled for that day.

unless the BBC is now supporting Radical Islam?

Perhaps a few of their reporters sympathize with it. As far as
the BBC itself ... dunno.

How can they on the 3rd of July do something,
after the conference which is on the 7th?

Simple typo at the site. Happens all the time ... people make
typos on this site as well. No big deal.

In fact, things such as this can help.

That's why I asked if it was to 'take back the date'.
Guess you failed to see that. Too busy being faux-incensed.

and to go as far as to intermix two different events.

Nope. I said that there was another conference on that date
but that I didn't know if they were in any way connected.
So no - the two were not 'intermixed'.

Why not go there? Why not buy the books?

Simple - because that day isn't for THEM. It's for the families
and for the dead. It's for the victims. It's NOT for learning
about the religion of those who did the mass murdering and
who have promised to continue to mass murder.

FlyersFan, you're so laughable.

Let us take a few prize quotes:

You are free to disagree. However, the facts and bios are there. islamexpo.info... YOU may not consider those doing the speaking to be radical, but others do.

When speaking about buying the books:

Simple - because that day isn't for THEM. It's for the families and for the dead. It's for the victims. It's NOT for learning about the religion of those who did the mass murdering and who have promised to continue to mass murder.

So let us look at radical first. If as you claim or seem to make out, Islam is this Dark Force - one that is set out upon killing innocent not Muslims or converting them. So in that case, let's look at the definition of
radical:

One who advocates fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions.

So from whose view do we call them Radical? People such as Tariq Ramadan, can be classed as radical. This however, is due to their views on the Theroy of the Ethnic Penalty and Islamic Culture in the United Kingdom. This is, no to limit themselves to just Muslims or Muslim communities but to accept British culture and norms. The whole idea these people can be classed as radical, is very distorted. You've yet to evidence anything that shows that as calling for destruction or harm upon Britain.

I'm sure that those who died are more likely to be insulted that their city and their mayor are holding and participating in an Islamic Festival and that another conference is scheduled for that day.

Well, one of them is in Birmingham so it is hard for Ken to really do much about that. So we'll focus on the London issue, where it actually happened. Remembering is an important aspect of this event, however the most important aspect is to make sure no other innocent people die. To make sure the event does not happen again and one way to do that is to increase our understanding and trust between different groups.

One of the largest problems we have in the United Kingdom, is how certain ethnic groups are unable to intermix with out culture. Part of this is down to them, there cultural norms are so different that it does take time for them to intermix and certain groups will force themselves away or even go as far as to create there own subculture. However, as has been shown by Indians and Chinese people, it is fully possible for them to accept our culture and to keep their religion. However, we have to begin to forge links with them it can't all be one sided and while groups such as Muslim Men, Black Men, etc, are treated different on an institutional level this will not help it. It is not nice to stop people constantly because of how they look - it creates a level of resentment for the Government which we are now seeing with Muslim Youth.

An event like this, can be good and the time they are doing it also can be. You are taking something which was done in the name of Islam, their name. They are doing it on a day which can take the most roar emotion, from Muslim's who were also affected by the aftermath or the direct event itself and they are taking people who are tryign to get Muslims to trust the British Society and mix with us. Until you bother to read the words these people have said and their books, you are coming at this blind. You're claiming they're promoting a negative agenda, in fact accusing rather well known reporters as going the same thing without evidencing it. They have books out there, which you can read and find out for yourself or you can go to the event.

In fact, I am struggling to find much of a difference between you and many of these people who hate Western Society so much. You've not experienced or shown to have Islam nor these people. You've not lost someone in London nor have you heard the words these people speak. You're coming from this from a side based on rash emotion and it is very understandible. However, it's nothing bad but could be good. They're not trying to lesson the loss of the people who dies but rather explain to the Youth why they should not distrust the rest of society and not force themselves away from it.

A healthy society changes, grows and we have to learn people mourn, grieve and learn in different ways. It has been normal in many institutions to use events bad around World War Two for the teaching of it and to never allow it to happen again this is just another twist on that but to make sure nothing like what happened in July happens again. Forcing muslims out of our society, won't stop it but rather them being shown our culture isn't "all bad" will help.

First Odium.
you quote of ''flyers fan your so laughable?
you quote of people are using this thread to insult others, well i think you just made a good job of that.

Rageh Omaarfrom The Times re: his book)
And you might have expected much from a Somali-born, Oxford-educated Muslim and leading BBC journalist, especially when his book is the second in a two-book deal for which Penguin paid around £600,000. Unfortunately, Rageh Omaar’s book on growing up a Muslim in Britain, interspersed with asides about his homeland, the Iraq war and the general Wickedness of the West, is a crushing disappointment: bland, platitudinous, muddled, lazy, factually unreliable and morally reprehensible.

There is only a single moment here when the disorienting experience of cultural translocation comes alive: when his family first flew out of Somalia in 1972, stopping over in Rome, and the five-year-old Rageh gazed on the city’s fountains, astonished by both the naked statuary and the prodigious waste of water. Otherwise the biographical material here is thin and puzzling. He tells us that he lived around London’s Edgware Road from “five until I was 25”, and while taking A-levels would pop into the “Husseins’ shop to buy cigarettes”. This is odd because I remember him spending much of his time as a boarder at Cheltenham College, a smiley little chap in the fourth form when I was in the sixth.

One would love to know more about his religious beliefs, too. He affirms that, “The Koran is the immutable word of Allah, and cannot be changed, revised or altered in any way. There are no versions of the Koran as there are of the Bible.” But is he really such a fundamentalist? Western scholars know very well that the Koran is a fascinating muddle, contradicting itself about how long Allah took with the Creation, and about the use of wine, among other things. But even westerners have to be careful what they say, and those within the Muslim world who dare to entertain more sophisticated theories about the Koran’s historical origins can end up like poor Suliman Bashear of the University of Nablus, whose students threw him out of a second-floor window. There is a lacuna, too, in Omaar’s description of his homeland as “99.95% Muslim”: this may be related to the fact that the few Christians left in Somalia are frequently murdered.

Then there are the factual errors, especially about Iraq. He says that the monumental Arch of Ctesiphon outside Baghdad dates from the second century (scholarly consensus dates it to the fourth); and that it “marks the beginning of Islam’s flowering in the Middle East”, which makes no sense whichever date you plump for. He tells us that the commander of the British forces that captured Baghdad in 1917 was “General Angus Maude”. Angus Maude was paymaster-general under Mrs Thatcher, nicknamed “the Mekon” due to his amusingly shaped head. The officer who captured Baghdad was Lt-General Sir Frederick Stanley Maude, who later died of cholera from drinking unboiled milk.

More seriously, there is the slant and bias. He describes a horrible knife attack on his cousin which might have been a racist or anti-Muslim attack, although “at the time of writing there has been no conclusion to the investigation”. Four pages later, his cousin has become one of “hundreds of victims” of “right-wing British groups, novelists, journalists or European MEPs”. This slippery elision is the worst kind of journalism. His attackers might just have been after his wallet for all we, or the police, can determine.

Most shocking of all, though, is a chapter in which Omaar lumps together Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the celebrated Somalian feminist and anti-Muslim polemicist who was until recently a Dutch MP, and Yasin Hassan Omar, one of the failed July 21 suicide bombers. While both are driven by identical “bigotry and hate”, argues Omaar, Ali is protected by something called the “liberal fascism” of the West. To draw moral equivalence between a woman who has only ever used words to attack what she views as a repressive and outmoded ideology, and a man who set out to kill and maim as many innocent people as he could, is frankly a disgrace.

Omaar has now left the BBC and works for the Arab television station, Al-Jazeera, which he feels is free from the bias and “fraud” of western coverage of the war in Iraq.

Tariq Said Ramadanfrom wikipedia)
The MASTER OF DOUBLE TALK..
His books and are widely read by the mainly francophone young Muslims in Europe. His lectures are also distributed widely on cassette tapes.
Many French intellectuals accuse Ramadan of being "The Master of Doubletalk," of saying one thing to the non-Muslim public and the opposite to his Muslim audience. Caroline Fourest analysed Tariq Ramadan's books and recordings

, then the French Minister of the Interior, publicly accused him of this in a televised debate. His beliefs that Muslim youth should remain within their own religious community (especially for personal and marital relations) has been criticized as segregationist, and at odds with the integrationist beliefs he has stated elsewhere, and also to his marriage to a woman who was originally non-Muslim, his refusual
until April 2005, to condemn stoning for sharia crimes was also an issue.

More fundamentally, his attitude toward European legal and democratic institutions is dubious at best because of his insistence that Muslims should literally respect the Qur'an and sharia, and that there would be no incompatibility between those and the secular democratic society
BY the way have you read the Qur'an? or hadith?

Nother qote you made was: We need to remember what has happend and why it happend. We have to remember it, but move on and we have to allow ourselves to make sure it can never happen.
Well why did it happen? what would you say to the families who have been left without loved ones (black or white /mulim or christian) go read a book they didnt mean it???

BBC taken from their own website)
well this i find totaly distgusting
On BBC1 now, a muslim "singer" who has a cd out called Fun-Da-Mental yes he sings about 7/7, bin laden,carrying suicide belts, and he is releasing it on 7/7.
Extracts
I Reject
Reject your thieving foreign policies
Reject your mini skirt liberation
Reject your concept of integration ...
Reject your blood I reject your creed
Reject your queen and her stolen crown

thankyou for allowing me to rant

It's perfectly possible and consistent to reject 'western liberal values', be a republican, reject any particular (or all) religion, be a Muslim and not support or have anything to do with Islamic fundamentalist or any other sort of terrorism - seems like it should be obvious but it seems it needs saying here.

The 7/7 bombers did not represent 'Islam', so claiming an Islamic festival that is happening around that anniversary is somehow "offensive" because of them is totally illogical.
Just like the IRA did not represent the Roman Catholic Church and neither did the UVF represent the Protestant Churches.
(.....and almost every day is an anniversary of something aweful if you look long enough, especially in the UK with the 'troubles' we had here.)

Of course everyone should be entitled to freely (and legally) do what they like on that or any other date because hard as it might seem for some to face 'freedom' is all about everyone being free - even to do those things you might not necessarily approve of.
Because if not then the fascists have won and to hell with that and them - and I couldn't care less whether they be western or religious fundamentalist fascists (of whatever religious 'brand').

So a festival celebrating (Britain's very long ties and links to) the Muslim world is entirely appropriate whatever the date in the UK.
(For instance, the London Mosque was built as a thank you to all Muslims for their contribution and help towards Britain's survival during WW2.)

Hello Sminkeypinkey how have you been..good i hope?
anyway i knew it wouldnt take you long to 'sniff' this one out hehehehe?

Re :the London mosque:
it wasnt paid or given to 'islam 'for their help during the ww2 war, from what i can gather it was Regent’s Park Mosque, or “Islamic Cultural Centre and London Central Mosque”, was built on the site of Hanover Lodge granted by King George VI in exchange for land in Cairo where an Anglican cathedral could be built. Although its official opening was in 1944, which was attended by the King himself, it did not become the current mosque until 1977.

Perhaps you may be refering to one of the many other mosques in London.

I agree with you on one 'very small part' that everyone should have the freedom of expression providing it is legal.

But even you sminkey would understand that this is a very sensitive date for all concerned and to hold a rally/march/festival whatever you want to call it is in-appropriate.

What about Theo Van gough? his freedom of expression and life was taken away from him just because he dared to tell a side of islam that the maniacs dont want the rest of the world to see how the Qu'ran treats women?

What about the Danish newspaper cartoons? Freedom of expression!

What about the De Vinci code..shall we all go and riot?
Shall we march thru London with banners held high saying that we will kill all who say anything bad about Christ or christians.........

Come on Sminkey this Freedom of speech / expression CANNOT all be one sided, lets face the facts, you have seen it all in NI (if i remember right) allthough both sides were right and wrong in what they wanted and how they aimed to achieve this, but at least both sides were heard.!

all the best mate



SAY NO TO THE EURO sorry sminkey had to get that in mate (no offense)

spymaster, your posts make no sense. You need to split it up in a way which shows what you are saying and the parts, which you have just lifted off of other websites by other people.

Try this here. It'll help you understand the tags that this forum uses.

However, I'll lift the bits I can work out are questions and then answer them for you.

you quote of people are using this thread to insult others, well i think you just made a good job of that.

Actually, I stated:

Instead people have used this thread to insult people, use websites that provide no evidence and to attack individuals. Clear people that have not bothered to read what these people have written

If you pay attention, my problem was with people not reading what these people have written. Clearly, I have paid attention to what he has written and I found it laughable. I was expressing this. :-)

Well why did it happen? what would you say to the families who have been left without loved ones (black or white /mulim or christian) go read a book they didnt mean it???

Why did it happen? If you remember, there was a video they found where they said why. you can go watch that if you desire to see why they said they did it.

As for the second point, well I work in the Criminal Justice System. I have spent many years with victims of crime and many times, they do not blame the group the people are from. I've yet to meet a victim, who blames every Black, White, Rich, Poor, Asian, Muslim, Jew, Christian, etc, for the crimes of a few in that group. In fact, most people just want to see justice however in hte case of July the 7th you can't. The people who did it are dead.

However, where did I tell the victims to go read a book? In fact, the ISCB came out and were one of the first groups to condem the attacks on that day. However, I did say for people to judge the words of people, not the group they are labelled to. You yourself, have only bothered to quote other peoples views on people. People who I've seen speak.

BY the way have you read the Qur'an? or hadith?

Yep, I also can speak some Arabic.

However, let us replace some of your quotes on these people and actually put what was said on Wikipedia about Tariq Said Ramadan.

Nicolas Sarkozy, then the French Minister of the Interior, publicly accused him of this in a televised debate. His beliefs that Muslim youth should remain within their own religious community (especially for personal and marital relations) has been criticized as segregationist, and at odds with the integrationist beliefs he has stated elsewhere, and also to his marriage to a woman who was originally non-Muslim[citation needed]. His refusal[citation needed], until April 2005, to condemn stoning for sharia crimes was also an issue.[citation needed]

Other charges levelled against him in the French media are that he is sexist and a reactionary Islamist.[citation needed] More fundamentally, his attitude toward European legal and democratic institutions is dubious[citation needed] at best because of his insistence that Muslims should literally respect the Qur'an and sharia, and that there would be no incompatibility between those and the secular democratic society[citation needed]. This conflict is nevertheless quite explicitly recognised by the European Court of Human Rights, which said that "The Court concurs...that sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy[citation needed]" (13/02/2003).

This was at a time of tension between French secularists and officials and Muslims over the hijab ban issue, and increasing anti-Jewish and anti-Christian activities by Muslim youth[citation needed].

Other French intellectuals and politicians accused Tariq Ramadan of being anti-Semitic[citation needed],

Clearly, you are not the spymaster. You decided not to alert anyone to a very important aspect. All of those criticisms, except ONE has no reference. In fact, anyone could have wrote that and until they find the citation then...well really what point is there in posting it?

You know what, you also make me laugh. Thank you for this, in future when using Wikipedia it might be wise to make sure they have actually got the sources in place. Otherwise it's another Wikilegend. :-)

As for the song, so what? I won't buy it. However I won't say it can't be said. Everyone should be allowed to say what they desire to say, even if we dislike it. Otherwise, we just begin to limit and limit and limit until only one view is heard and I'd rather not live in that world at all.

Originally posted by spymaster
What about Theo Van gough? his freedom of expression and life was taken away from him just because he dared to tell a side of islam that the maniacs dont want the rest of the world to see how the Qu'ran treats women?

How do they treat women?

I'd like direct quotes from the Qu'ran please. :-) Especailly since we all know domestic abuse isn't just limited to Muslims, I'd like to see some sort of link displaying that it is down to the Qu'ran.

Originally posted by spymaster
Hello Sminkeypinkey

how have you been..good i hope?

- Things going pretty good sm thanks, & for yourself too, I hope?

anyway i knew it wouldnt take you long to 'sniff' this one out hehehehe?

- Yeah, a libertarian lefty like myself is practically hard-wired to have a nose for them, huh?

Re :the London mosque

- Yeah, I should have referred to it as 'the London Central Mosque'.

its history began quite differently, as a "gift" wrung out after decades of pressure from Winston Churchill's war cabinet to its Muslim fellow−citizens. Although Muslims represented numerically the largest confessional community in the British Empire, and though Muslim soldiers lost their lives in a correspondingly large number, there was nowhere in London for Muslims to congregate.
In 1944, a Mosque committee formed from diplomats from Islamic countries and Muslim Britons took over the land at the Hanover Gate end of Regent's Park that had been offered to them by the government for the erection of an Islamic centre

www.eurozine.com...

But even you sminkey would understand that this is a very sensitive date for all concerned and to hold a rally/march/festival whatever you want to call it is in-appropriate.

- I can understand that it may look that way on the surface but I still think it comes down to whether or not you believe those people responsible for 7/7 represented Islam.

If you do then I can see why an Islamic festival would offend.

I do not and I can see no reason why Muslims cannot also claim that date to assert 'they' too were attacked then, as I believe 'they' were.

What about Theo Van gough? his freedom of expression and life was taken away from him just because he dared to tell a side of islam that the maniacs dont want the rest of the world to see how the Qu'ran treats women?

- True his freedom was taken, by a psychopathic religious nutter, not by 'Islam' nor anyone actually representing 'Islam'.

Sadly he wasn't the first person murdered by a religious nutter and I'm sorry to say I very much doubt he'll be the last......but that history contains many many thousands murdered by nutters from many religions.
Today it's nutter Muslims, it wasn't always so.

Should we suspect and crack down upon all fundamentalist 'Christians' because a small number of them have attacked - and murdered Dr.s - who have carried out abortions?

What about the Danish newspaper cartoons? Freedom of expression!

- What about them?
They were printed so in that specific case where was the 'freedom' curtailed?

In any event citing a blanket 'freedom of expression' is hardly the entire story, one may say what one likes but that does not mean it is consequence-free and libel lawyers the world over will tell you.

I can recall Mary Whitehouse holding marches and demos opposing the 'blasphemy' she believe she saw in the 1970's (OK, so it was not a violent series of protests but nevertheless a mass-movement - however unrepresentitive and a minority - pressing for the curtailing of other people's freedom of expression).

What about the De Vinci code..shall we all go and riot?

- Where did I ever suggest rioting was ok?

.....and if you did should I then feel free to repress all 'Christians' on the basis that I assume your unlawful behaviour is typical and a common 'value' held by all 'Christians'?

Shall we march thru London with banners held high saying that we will kill all who say anything bad about Christ or christians.........

- Like I said a small but visible gang of fundamentalists calling for the deaths of others is representitive of no-one but themselves.

Come on Sminkey this Freedom of speech / expression CANNOT all be one sided

- But that is exactly the point.
Real and actual 'freedom' is side-less.

It is not about the things we find easy to do or tolerate it is all about those (legal) things we find objectionable and difficult.

lets face the facts, you have seen it all in NI (if i remember right) allthough both sides were right and wrong in what they wanted and how they aimed to achieve this, but at least both sides were heard.!

- Well not quite.
You may recall the counter-productive efforts by Mrs T.'s gov to 'deny republicans the oxygen of publicity' (or some similar phrase).

Curbing freedom can sometimes be considered acceptable (there are numerous examples during WW2) but as a matter of peacetime policy I believe it has to be very seriously considered.

We can choose to turn our country into a paranoid, fearful and repressed country or not.
I prefer not because despite any individual problem cases in principle I believe we all are much better off by not taking that route.

Fundamental to this is the notion that 'all Muslims' are somehow 'suspect' or on the 'wrong side'.
I think 30yrs+ in Northern Ireland's recent history shows exactly how unnecessarily self-harming that kind of attitude can be.

I think NI shows that if you want the general Muslim population to sympathise and/or side with 'the enemy' then treat them like an enemy.
If you do that it won't be long in coming......but IMO that would be an utterly unnecessary, totally avoidable and a hugely dangerous situation 'we' would have then deliberately created.
In short, madness.

all the best mate

- You too.

SAY NO TO THE EURO

sorry sminkey had to get that in mate (no offense)

- None taken sm.
You see, freedom.

Originally posted by Odium
I have paid attention to what he has written and I found it laughable.

How sad for you. Really. Either you only saw what you wanted, or
you actually believe the opinions to be 'wrong'. Either way ... how sad for you.

I stand by my opinion. To have two Islamic conferences; one of which
is FOR SURE radical and the other 'festival' is at least questionable; on the
7/7 date is insulting to the families and the victims. It was poor judgement
on the part of the mayor to agree to be a part of it.

As I said - if this was to 'take back the date' in some way, then it would
be fine. But I don't see any evidence of that. There isn't even a rememberance
for the victims. The MAYOR shouldn't be participating in this. If it were
on other dates - that would be open for debate but NOT with a festival
that is on 7/7.

Originally posted by Odium
If as you claim or seem to make out, Islam is this Dark Force -
one that is set out upon killing innocent not Muslims or converting them.

Hmmmmm .... where exactly did I say that 'Islam is this Dark Force'??
Where did I say that Islam is 'set out upon killing innocent not muslims
or converting them'? *looking over the thread* Nope. Not here. You are
making this up Odium. Not exactly good behavior for an alleged 'councilor'.

On one OTHER thread I said that RADICAL Islam believes in the
'convert or die' philosophy. That absolutely true.

To make sure the event does not happen again and one way
to do that is to increase our understanding and trust between different groups.

There is nothing to 'understand'. RADICAL Islam says convert or die.
NOTE that I didn't say 'Islam' ... I said 'RADICAL Islam'. And Radical
Islam doesn't give a rats back end what non-Islamics think. If people
want to teach about what REAL Islam believes, or people want to learn
what Islam really believes then that's fine. Have them pick a different
day. 7/7 isn't for that.

I am struggling to find much of a difference between you and
many of these people who hate Western Society so much.

Then you are blind. Either that or you are so 'chamberlainesque' that
you refuse to see that someone can simply say that having these
conferences on THAT day is a wrong thing to do. It's just that simple.
It's wrong. Pick another day.

Edited - Spelling error (oops)


[edit on 6/29/2006 by FlyersFan]

RADICAL Islam mantra -

Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them. Seize them,
beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war."
Qur'an, Sura 9:5

What my Muslim neighbors say (yes, I do have them)

The Prophet said, "The Muslim is a person who does no harm
to anyone close to him, either with his hand or with his tongue."





[edit on 6/29/2006 by FlyersFan]

I believe your opinions, FlyersFan, to be groundless. That is, your views on Islam have no basis on which to judge it. You take an alarmist view point and nit pick specific events to create scare tactics and a nation of fear, without any ability to judge their culture.

I stand by my opinion. To have two Islamic conferences; one of which is FOR SURE radical and the other 'festival' is at least questionable; on the
7/7 date is insulting to the families and the victims. It was poor judgement
on the part of the mayor to agree to be a part of it.

Good for you and I don't.

As I said - if this was to 'take back the date' in some way, then it would
be fine. But I don't see any evidence of that. There isn't even a rememberance for the victims. The MAYOR shouldn't be participating in this. If it were
on other dates - that would be open for debate but NOT with a festival that is on 7/7.

Actually, it is starting on the sixth of July. You don't know what the Mayor is saying, so you don't know what his aspect of it will be nor the content of what they are going to say.

You're going at this blind.

Originally posted by Odium
spymaster, your posts make no sense. You need to split it up in a way which shows what you are saying and the parts, which you have just lifted off of other websites by other people.

If you read it properly you will see that i had quoted from your original source of wikipedia (except you left out the bits of information that i included)
and also from the Times i included another article, i never once mentioned that the words were from myself...GOD i am not that inteligent and literate.

However, I'll lift the bits I can work out are questions and then answer them for you.

thankyou very much.

you quote of people are using this thread to insult others, well i think you just made a good job of that.

Actually, I stated:

Instead people have used this thread to insult people, use websites that provide no evidence and to attack individuals. Clear people that have not bothered to read what these people have written

you was clearly trying to be-little flyersfan!

[quote/]I've yet to meet a victim, who blames every Black, White, Rich, Poor, Asian, Muslim, Jew, Christian, etc, for the crimes of a few in that group. In fact, most people just want to see justice however in hte case of July the 7th you can't. The people who did it are dead.[quote/]

Along with 52 innocent people!!
and the injustice still carries on today

However, where did I tell the victims to go read a book?[quote/]

You didnt! but were quiet happy to tell flyersfan to read up, it was me being SARCASTIC

Clearly, you are not the spymaster. You decided not to alert anyone to a very important aspect. All of those criticisms, except ONE has no reference. In fact, anyone could have wrote that and until they find the citation then...well really what point is there in posting it?[quote/]

No i am not the spymaster tut tut dont be silly!!!
You was the person that quoted wikipedia but only felt it right to include the bits you wanted everyone to read.. i just filled in the gaps of the MASTER OF DOUBLETALK

You know what, you also make me laugh.

Thank you for this, in future when using Wikipedia it might be wise to make sure they have actually got the sources in place. Otherwise it's another Wikilegend. :-)[quote/]

Why thankyou im glad i have made your day, coz the words you originally quoted you or a third party actually copied from wikipedia i was just doing the same

As for the song, so what? I won't buy it. However I won't say it can't be said. Everyone should be allowed to say what they desire to say, even if we dislike it. Otherwise, we just begin to limit and limit and limit until only one view is heard and I'd rather not live in that world at all.

[quote/]

Let me get this straight...and you work in the Criminal justice System...hum HUM thats says it all in your answere