Sounds a bit grim, 11 killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30853305

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30848689

 

Exercising their rights to complain about it elsewhere.

May have missed the demos against the killings in these places.

 

I have a certain understanding of the calls not to offend and the fact free speech comes with a certain responsibility, however, it comes a distant second to the right to stay alive after drawing a cartoon.

We've got our own legal system and no other should be entertained

The Arbitration Act IS our legal system. It's not that hard to get your head around.

No it doesn't. They don't have any jurisdiction in criminal law. They can help settle petty disputes, but believe it or not, we could have a Wanderersways court if we wanted to.

 

Sharia hearings are recognised under the Arbitration Act (1996) which 'allows almost any body to act as a dispute resolution service if both parties agreed to be bound by its decision.'

 

So it's absolutely not 2 tier. You crack on though!

Do you seriously believe that these Sharia courts just deal with petty disputes? They are a way of keeping entire communities within the confines of a 'law' that is incompatible with the the legal law everyone else abides by.

The Arbitration Act IS our legal system. It's not that hard to get your head around.

It's a fucking sop introduced in 1996, a wrong minded piece of legislation to accommodate foreigners, get a grip

 

It's hardly the centel tenet of uk law, honed over centuries

 

You're just arguing for the sake of it

Ok then here's another thousands of Jews throughout Europe are relocating back to Israel...some that have never known anything different than the European countries they were born in...

 

Their parents and grand parents have integrated and not imposed their beliefs on anyone....living and working within all other communities...

 

And now muslims are treating them as the nazis did ....

 

And you just stand by and defend the culture that is doing it

 

You should be ashamed

Edited January 16, 201511 yr by Bobcat

Mormons.

 

They've never chopped anyone up in the name of some mythical creature.

 

Hindu's, Sikhs, Chinese and Leprechauns...nobody seems to have issues with their behaviour either.

This thread is like watching Fox News.

 

 

admit it, you've never liked coloured people - except your jamaican friend - and you love every chance to stick the knife in

 

What a fucking stupid statement that is. Thankfully, there is at least one poster on here who can disprove that pathetic jibe (other than me). Sadly, you and the other appeasers on here always try to simplify things by taking it down to the lowest common denominator. Nothing could be further from the truth but carry on if it's the only way you can find succour. 

You've got your parallels all to shit.

 

The parallel you're looking for is far right parties using fear and loathing to gain political capital.

 

 

Really? So the overrunning of land which is not yours and annihilating the local populace like the einsatzgrueppen did doesn't make you think that way about IS? (cue the Palestine bandwagon jumpers). They and the other prong of the islamic extremist fork are just as bad as the Nazi's.

 

As usual, easier to demonise the far right than the true demons eh? Especially in your situation.

Sort of. But it's different in the respect that Islamic Jihadists are fringe lunatics and haven't just been voted into the Reichstag/Houses of Parliament.

 

I can however, definitely draw a parallel between the demonisation of Muslims in modern Britain with the dehumanisation of the Jews in 1930's Germany. The constant drip feed of progaganda/negative stories making folk hyper vigilant to the point of believing every Muslim/Jew is part of a conspiracy to destroy the country from the inside. Ramped up to the point where seemingly reasonable people start calling for war.

 

 

Thank you for at least acknowledging the first point which others seem incapable of.

 

The only other comment relates to your last three words. "Calling for war" and highlighting the possibility are two distinctly different things.

This thread is like watching Fox News.

Shit?

On Choudray and his ilk.

 

Let's close down the mosque and stick him and his followers in prison. OR the security services are happy that as he is so public he is easier to keep tabs on and potentially infiltrate.

 

Yes a couple of the people involved in incidents can be traced back to him, but it is the groups that we do not know about that are in the background that perpetrate the attacks.

 

There seem to be two sides to the arguement, the right wing, which is all about confronting and taking the fight to the enemy. The issue I have with that is identifying the real enemy and then doing it in a way that does not increase support for the enemy. No point if everytime you shoot an extremist it turns two more people over to the dark side. People being converted to extremeism as they think it is the only to fight perceived injustice against their religion. Increase the perceived injustice you increase the converts. That seems logical so before or alongside the fight there has to be something to reduce the rate of conversion.

 

On the left wing the arguement is that we need to engage with the communities and tackle the perceived injustice and this will in turn reduce radicalisation. The problem here is that some of perceived Injustice is actually not injustice it is rules that 'they' do not like, so taking the piss out of the prophet is not illegal so people can do it. It might offend your morals but it ain't illegal so it ain't injustice. However what the vast majority of us do not get is that the taking the piss is deeply offensive to them, not a nuisance, deeply offensive. The only example I can think of is people singing a song about Lofthouse dying would offend me more than I thought songs about Munich would offend United fans (daft example but saying that 'we' do not mind jokes about Jesus does not mean that Muslims should also not mind jokes about their prophet)

 

So now throw in the internet stories true,invented, exaggerated whatever will continue to appear about Muslim oppression whatever we do and as long as their is oil in countries with large Muslim populations the West will continue to interfere in their affairs. So just fucking them off is not a realistic option.

 

The Irish comparisons, the solution there resulted in people who everyone knows have murdered English sliders sitting in parliament making laws in this country so how palatable is that as an outcome ? This is also a worldwide threat so local solutions and secret negotiations are not an option because there is not one group to talk to. I mean where the fuck did ISIS come from ?

 

The only solution can come from a process that involves a public facing campaign to tackle the causes of extremeism and that will need to include flexibility in the law to reflect the different structure of society and the fact the citizens of the country are different than they used to be. Alongside this a secret and forceful campaign to identify and attack not only the leaders of the most extreme factions but also to undermine their support and funding. And finally a tolerance across all communities and respect for the differences.

 

The Uk is IMO the greatest country in the world with a society built on free speech and tolerance. Lots of talk about how liberal we are and we should be proud of that and defend it. Not go down the path of throwing away all those principles because of the evil and hateful actions for a minority (even a growing and extremely hateful minority)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-30853305

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30848689

 

Exercising their rights to complain about it elsewhere.

May have missed the demos against the killings in these places.

 

I have a certain understanding of the calls not to offend and the fact free speech comes with a certain responsibility, however, it comes a distant second to the right to stay alive after drawing a cartoon.

 

Some of the protesters were armed with bows and arrows as well as clubs

 

Primitive fuckers, as least use a Gun FFS

Shit?

 

Aye, effluence more than influence.

The Arbitration Act IS our legal system. It's not that hard to get your head around.

Hypothetical situation (in this country): Person is accused of theft and 'agrees' to the 'case' being dealt with under 'sharia', both parties must agree to the case being heard by 'arbitration' under the arbitration act. The ruling of the sharia 'court' is amputation of a hand.

 

Do you consider this a legal outcome? The decision having been arrived at complying with uk statute.

 

Or is it a case of another poorly drafted piece of legislation being hijacked for something other than it's original intention?

No because like I've already pointed out - it doesn't allow them to arbitrate on criminal cases. They might be able to settle a dispute between two Muslims about where a garden fence might get places though.

At least they can't pull the old "we've lived here for 2000 years" argument.

Ah, so would they be able to 'arbitrate' on apostasy? Which as far as I am aware is not a criminal offence in the uk.

Ah, so would they be able to 'arbitrate' on apostasy? Which as far as I am aware is not a criminal offence in the uk.

I'm pretty sure the 'apostate' wouldn't agree to be arbitrated by a sharia committee on account that they're a fucking apostate!

I'm pretty sure the 'apostate' wouldn't agree to be arbitrated by a sharia committee on account that they're a fucking apostate!

But you agree, under uk statute that could be the case?

Kent, you really do surprise me here, I thought you were all for equal rights. Under Sharia Law, women do not have such a luxury. Whether it be seen with any legal standing or not, the Women in Muslim communities & countries do not have the same standing as men.

But you agree, under uk statute that could be the case?

I don't know - but I very much doubt it would be sanctioned. It's a legal technicality and I'm not a solicitor.

 

I also don't understand why somebody who had rejected Islam would agree to be arbitrated under Islamic law.

 

Why do you ask out of interest? Has this eventuality ever come about because I've never heard of it?

But you agree, under uk statute that could be the case?

By the way - you might also want to get similarly outraged by 'Judge Rinder' on ITV which also operates under the same piece of legislation and is a regular feature on daytime TV.

Kent, you really do surprise me here, I thought you were all for equal rights. Under Sharia Law, women do not have such a luxury. Whether it be seen with any legal standing or not, the Women in Muslim communities & countries do not have the same standing as men.

We could repeal it tomorrow as far as I'm concerned and I wouldn't be losing any sleep. I just pisses me off when folk focus on one tiny aspect and ignore everything else.

 

Come the atheist revolution this will all be but a happy memory! :-)

Just been out with the dog, no sign of all this extra security considering we live in one of the largest Jewish community outside London.