Originally Posted by claire stone:
Perhaps we should also ask all those poor people who mug, rape , murder and molest children why they do what they do?
That depends. I do not think that the particular crimes you list have a political motive. In general terrorism does have an underlying political agenda (usually along the lines of "stop oppressing me" or "get out of my land". If you understand the political agenda and work towards a peaceful resolution of the conflict, I'm pretty sure that that is the best course of action for all - particularly potential innocent victims of terrorism. The IRA/Sinn Fein springs to mind as an example of this. OK. It might take years, but is it not better to start a peaceful political process than endure a campaign of terrorism?
Of course, not all political demands of terrorists are reasonable, but to not even attempt to understand them in the first place is surely the height of ignorance, even from the simply point of view of getting to 'know thy enemy'.
[Rep]
Originally Posted by alfred the great:
WPCIF,If you read my post ,the sarcastic point i was making was why should police dogs have to wear bootees when they go in to certain peoples houses.
And if you read my post you would have realised that I don't know and don't care. I'm not a spokesman for people who don't want dogs to wear booties in their house. The fact that you think I am demonstrates that you think I'm part of a faceless homogenous mass of Muslims which all think and act the same, when this is not the case.
A quick search of the Internet reveals this:
Originally Posted by :
Ibrahim Mogra, one of Britain’s leading imams, said the measures were unnecessary: “In Islamic law the dog is not regarded as impure, only its saliva is. Most Islamic schools of law agree on that. If security measures require to send a dog into a house, then it has to be done. I think Acpo needs to consult better and more widely.
“I know in the Muslim community there is a hang-up against dogs, but this is cultural. Also, we know the British like dogs; we Muslims should do our bit to change our attitudes.”
Sniffer dogs to wear ‘Muslim’ bootees - Times Online
It seems that Ibrahim Mogra ('one of Britain’s leading imams') and I agree. If you are suspected of a crime and it requires that dogs visit your house, then that is hard lines you have to put up with it. Further to that, it seems that the Association of Chief Police Officers need to "consult better and more widely" when drawing up guidelines for booty wearing dogs.
Secondly, I cannot find any mention that this is a rule that has come into effect, only that it was something being considered.
Originally Posted by alfred the great:
in the same way has people in the workplace who can not eat there food in front of muslems who are fasting
There is nothing stopping anybody eating in front of a fasting Muslim. If Muslims were offended by people eating in front of them whilst they were fasting, I'm pretty sure no Muslim would be able to leave their house during fasting. I would assume, though, that in the workplace people have simple common decency and understanding that perhaps eating in front of anybody who is fasting is tactless. This is the same principle as not offering somebody a fag if they are trying to quit smoking, or offering them chocolate if they have given it up for lent. Simple human understanding and kindness would prohibit you from doing such things, would it not?
Originally Posted by alfred the great:
Also if you are right in saying these people have been born here ok,i digress ,they are then sons and daughters of economic migrants who have come here since the passing of the british nationality act in 1947.Once again there loyalty is only to there own.
If by 'their own' you mean friends and family, I'm sure you are right. If you mean that all the children of all the economic migrants that have come to this country do not value Britain, then I'd say you were wrong.
An ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph, for instance, found that 91% of Muslims felt loyal to Britain, although they had other gripes with "feeling more alienated from mainstream society" I would suggest that might be because some people choose to take as fact that "sniffer dogs must wear booties in Muslim houses" and "you can't eat in front of a fasting Muslim" when that is actually not the case if you try to understand the full story.
[Rep]
Originally Posted by alfred the great:
WPCIF,If you read my post ,the sarcastic point i was making was why should police dogs have to wear bootees when they go in to certain peoples houses.
If a dog can walk into a mosque without wearing booties, then a home should be no exception.
BBC NEWS | England | Leicestershire | Ruling allows guide dog in mosque
Scroll down and you will see that this BBC report has video of the dog walking into the mosque without bootees, and the previously quoted Ibrahim Mogra telling us that he doesn't see why dogs shouldn't be allowed into mosques.
I trust this will put this particular issue to rest now.
[Rep]
Originally Posted by Hartlepool:
I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong wpcif,but they may have been going to do it because they are 2 of your everyday fanatical muslim terrorist types carrying out alahs order to inflict death on all unbelievers.
What do you reckon?
Spot on! Just another pair of Religious nutters who want to kill everybody who isn't stupid enough to follow their faith! I'd like to know, where are the supposed majority of peace loving moderate Muslims? Why aren't they hitting the headlines condemning the violent nutters? I'm sure if there were Christian nutters going around trying to kill non believers, the Archbishop and other Church leaders would be on TV everyday not only condemning the violence, but also condemning the violence that is being used in the name of their faith!
[Rep]
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Digg this Thread!
Add Thread to del.icio.us
Bookmark in Technorati
Furl this Thread!
FuzzFizz It!