The Mail & Muslims

Gourami · **Joined:** Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:51 pm **Posts:** 2005

Agreed. Unfortunately, we've got lots of extreme right nutters (NF/Combat 18/EDL) intent on stirring the pot and lots of religious fanatics who shout insults at people leaving the off-licence. It couldn't be less integrated if you tried.

Tubby Isaacs · **Posted:** Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:25 pm

Things here (Tower Hamlets) are generally OK. Spoken English seems to be getting a lot better, and school results improving fast (without any academies). It'll be interesting to see if this continues when the vocational GCSEs are stripped out. On the ebacc front, I think they'll be reasonably OK, because they can count Bengali as a language.

It's pretty segregated- some schools have literally one or two white English pupils. But they're within the mainstream system, so I'm OK with that.

Until someone takes up Gove's offer of multiculturalism on the state, that is.

Malcolm Armsteen · **Posted:** Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:31 pm

I wonder if we'll see this statement from the Muslim Council of Britain reproduced in the Mail?

Quote:

Muslim Council Responds To Jailing of Derby Men For Giving out Gay Death Call Leaflets
Monday 13 February 2012

Three men have been jailed for distributing leaflets in the Derby area, calling for gay people to be killed.

The trio are the first people to be convicted of inciting hatred on the grounds of sexuality since new legislation came into force in 2010.

In response, Farooq Murad, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said: 'It is completely unacceptable that in a diverse and vibrant society such as ours any minority group should fear for their own safety. Unfortunately the leaflets these young men were handing out promoted such fear and division. In Islam there is no allowance for inciting hatred and violence against any people, even if any of their practices are religiously disapproved. While vigorous dialogue and debate around issues of controversy is certainly constructive, this must always take place in the context of mutual respect and tolerance. We must all of us act within the rule of law and never promote active hatred of any minority.'

tonysk14 · **Joined:** Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:44 pm **Posts:** 232

Malcolm Armsteen wrote:

I wonder if we'll see this statement from the Muslim Council of Britain reproduced in the Mail?

Quote:

Muslim Council Responds To Jailing of Derby Men For Giving out Gay Death Call Leaflets
Monday 13 February 2012

Three men have been jailed for distributing leaflets in the Derby area, calling for gay people to be killed.

The trio are the first people to be convicted of inciting hatred on the grounds of sexuality since new legislation came into force in 2010.

In response, Farooq Murad, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said: 'It is completely unacceptable that in a diverse and vibrant society such as ours any minority group should fear for their own safety. Unfortunately the leaflets these young men were handing out promoted such fear and division. In Islam there is no allowance for inciting hatred and violence against any people, even if any of their practices are religiously disapproved. While vigorous dialogue and debate around issues of controversy is certainly constructive, this must always take place in the context of mutual respect and tolerance. We must all of us act within the rule of law and never promote active hatred of any minority.'

I wonder how long we will have to wait until a Christian group says someting similar about the nutty vicar shouting abuse at a gay couple (who of course was given a slap on the wrist and not sent to prison for 2 years). Oh I have just looked out of my window and there are a herd of pink elephants escorted by a flock of flying pigs marching up the hill.

eddyk · **Joined:** Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:19 am **Posts:** 422

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... urity.html

I know the story is a 2 days old now, but I keep hearing people mention it.

What happened was they were going through the scanners, and David Jones mentioned a woman up front had not taken her veil off. However she did not have to remove her veil, as scanners are to see if you have any weapons etc. on you. So she had no reason to remove her veil.

A staff member took offense to his comments and asked for him to apologise. He refused and got irate.

The article makes you think that the police were brought in to arrest him for being racist... when it was David Jones himself who demanded the police be called.

Comments on the article are as terrible as ever.

MacGuffin · **Joined:** Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:07 pm **Posts:** 427

eddyk wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106631/Fireman-Sam-creator-Dave-Jones-detained-branded-racist-burqa-joke-airport-security.html

I know the story is a 2 days old now, but I keep hearing people mention it.

What happened was they were going through the scanners, and David Jones mentioned a woman up front had not taken her veil off. However she did not have to remove her veil, as scanners are to see if you have any weapons etc. on you. So she had no reason to remove her veil.

A staff member took offense to his comments and asked for him to apologise. He refused and got irate.

The article makes you think that the police were brought in to arrest him for being racist... when it was David Jones himself who demanded the police be called.

Comments on the article are as terrible as ever.

Totally one-sided article (not a surprise). But odd that it says this:

Quote:

Muslim passenger ahead of him – who had her face almost completely covered by a hijab

The hijab does not 'almost completely' cover the face.

storygirl · **Posted:** Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:12 pm

MacGuffin wrote:

eddyk wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106631/Fireman-Sam-creator-Dave-Jones-detained-branded-racist-burqa-joke-airport-security.html

I know the story is a 2 days old now, but I keep hearing people mention it.

What happened was they were going through the scanners, and David Jones mentioned a woman up front had not taken her veil off. However she did not have to remove her veil, as scanners are to see if you have any weapons etc. on you. So she had no reason to remove her veil.

A staff member took offense to his comments and asked for him to apologise. He refused and got irate.

The article makes you think that the police were brought in to arrest him for being racist... when it was David Jones himself who demanded the police be called.

Comments on the article are as terrible as ever.

Totally one-sided article (not a surprise). But odd that it says this:

Quote:

Muslim passenger ahead of him – who had her face almost completely covered by a hijab

The hijab does not 'almost completely' cover the face.

I have noticed the misuse of hijab in the tabloids generally and wonder if it is because it is no much more foreign sounding than headscarf and veil?

Andy McDandy · **Posted:** Sat Mar 03, 2012 4:37 pm

I think that it's a bit like the hatred of halal food (even if, as previously said, it was processed using rainbows and pixie dust). Niqab, Hijab, Burkha - they all sound foreign and alien. Headscarves and veils are used by grannies, nuns and brides. So if the article said that a woman was wearing a headscarf, the response from the core readership might well be "So what? So does auntie Flo".

storygirl · **Posted:** Sat Mar 03, 2012 9:52 pm

Andy McDandy wrote:

I think that it's a bit like the hatred of halal food (even if, as previously said, it was processed using rainbows and pixie dust). Niqab, Hijab, Burkha - they all sound foreign and alien. Headscarves and veils are used by grannies, nuns and brides. So if the article said that a woman was wearing a headscarf, the response from the core readership might well be "So what? So does auntie Flo".

Exactly what I was thinking

davidjay · **Joined:** Tue Feb 17, 2009 8:24 pm **Posts:** 3824

Andy McDandy wrote:

I think that it's a bit like the hatred of halal food (even if, as previously said, it was processed using rainbows and pixie dust). Niqab, Hijab, Burkha - they all sound foreign and alien. Headscarves and veils are used by grannies, nuns and brides. So if the article said that a woman was wearing a headscarf, the response from the core readership might well be "So what? So does auntie Flo".

They wouldn't even think that. They'd still be against it because one of Them was doing it.

Big Rob · **Posted:** Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:49 pm

I love how the term 'diverse and vibrant society' trumps religious dogma.

Even though I am unaware of any anti-gay dogma in the muslim 'sacred texts'.

Fflaps · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:43 pm

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... b-bag.html

Why exactly is it so representative of Britain in 2012? A bomb threat can happen anywhere.

oboogie · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:15 pm

Odd that this is happening in Saltburn which, for those who don't know it, is a small seaside town and very mono-cultural. I can't see it being a hotbed of radical Islamic activity somehow. Just watched the local ITN news and there's no mention of it.

Edit: It has made the BBC local news however.

Can anyone tell me why the police appear to be pointing their guns at the bag not the suspect?

Carlos The Badger · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:37 pm

oboogie wrote:

Can anyone tell me why the police appear to be pointing their guns at the bag not the suspect?

I'll tell you if you can tell me what this comment means.

Quote:

and why is this so called local doing this???
- Victoria, Devon, UK, 13/3/2012 18:12

oboogie · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:05 pm

Carlos The Badger wrote:

oboogie wrote:

Can anyone tell me why the police appear to be pointing their guns at the bag not the suspect?

I'll tell you if you can tell me what this comment means.

Quote:

and why is this so called local doing this???
- Victoria, Devon, UK, 13/3/2012 18:12

Carlos, Carlos, you insult me with such easy questions - the answer is obvious, Victoria is a racist cunt.

The Mail & Muslims

Who is online