TOPIC: Paris Shooting/Explosion

All this shite is going to end it all.

Can it not go back to us all smirking at at each other at our differing beliefs?

Killing innocent folk ffs.

The main ones are:

1) In certain schools the daily Lords Prayer has been stopped and replaced by Muslim Prayers.
2) In some workplaces the wearing of religious symbols has been banned (the cross) for fear of upsetting the Muslims
3) We are all (at some point) eating Halal slaughtered meat as the main chains adopt this policy of killing animals.
4) In certain City communities UK law is totally ignored and Sharia law is used.

thesilentone wrote:
Spot the Daily Mail / Express reader!

DeckchairBlue wrote:
My post was in answer to your questions, could I suggest you ignore the post by MerseysideBlue and do you own research from here.

Fairly frightening stuff over the weekend, not just the killings in Paris, but some of the reactions to it all on social media. The lack of any understanding shown is a worry, and I'm sure the media is partly to blame, they've managed to whip up a frenzy about Paris that all the right wing elements will get right behind (EDL, Britain First etc). I have no idea what the answer is to all of this, because it is almost impossible to work out what the question is. That may be because the general public, certainly in this country, does not get any proper reporting on the problem. Certainly though, as alluded to earlier, or "friends" in Saudi Arabia have a fair bit to answer for, but as have we all for blurring the lines in the entire region for decades.

How many people, for instance, know that a "Caliphate" was declared well over a year ago? How many people know what a "Caliphate" actually is (a state governed by Islamic (sharia) law and run by God's deputy on earth)? Why is al Baghdadi not reported on more? After all he's the bloke who is God's deputy (Caliph).

IS have demanded allegiance from all Muslims around the world, but they are a mainly Sunni faction, so there will be millions of followers of the Islamic faith (Shia) who can not, in all conscience, have anything to do with them. That makes those people just as much a target as anybody in Paris. You just have to look at what they are doing in Iraq since they captured Mosul to see that they aren't actually to do with Islam in reality. They are murdering Muslims in far greater numbers than any other religion, in most cases because they won't accept the warped version of "Islamic" law they are imposing. Just outside Tikrit they killed nearly 2,000 Shia Muslims in one go, did anybody hear the reports about that? Or see the support for those people in the press and on facebook? Further proof, if needed, that this is not an Islamic group - but just a load of disgusting lunatics - comes with what they did in the Kurdish regions where they killed thousands of Muslim men and boys and enslaved and raped the women.

What they are up to needs to be fully reported, and yes the Muslim community needs to start taking a lead, the Sunni Muslim religion is the largest religion in the world (bigger than Catholicism) and makes up the vast majority of the Muslim religion in the world, but a very tiny minority of them are fanatical at all, certainly not to the extent that IS are, they are doing it in the name of Sunni Islam and the real Sunnis need to start to stand up and be counted.

The (main) difference between Sunni and Shia Islam, by the way, is who was the first Caliph (after the death of their prophet). Sunnis say it is Abu Bakr, Shia say Ali (who the Sunnis see as the fourth Caliph - therefore the Shias are effectively rejecting the first 3 Sunni Caliphs). They've been arguing about it ever since, they're an argumentative set of religions really, very similar to Christianity in many ways. Bear in mind there was a Caliphate, of sorts, on the Iberian Peninsula for over 750 years the Moors originally invaded in the early 8th century and stayed (even despite El Cid - great film) until America was discovered.

That's all well and good moorlad, but have you changed your Facebook photo to that of the French flag yet or not?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As a matter of fact, no. Nor do I have any intention of doing so.

My facebook photo is me celebrating a Danny Graham goal, scored from a cross by Cleveland Taylor.

@SkyNews: Belgian media reports police have arrested suspect #SalahAbdelsalam over alleged involvement in the #ParisAttacks t.co/GDFcmlyvAZ

Hope the [censored] gets water boarded daily for the rest of his days...

Moorlad wrote: Good chance there's some red, white and blue on it then. Unless you've gone for a moody black and white photo!?

The stuff implicating Belgium in this lot is interesting to me. I have just been reading some stuff on the internet about Belgium, and it seems to have higher levels of radicalisation, among it's Muslim population than any other western country. More Belgian Muslims, per head of population, are fighting in Syria than any other western country for example. I wonder if it is to do with the fact that Belgium itself is a fairly divided country (Dutch, French speaking areas), or if they've failed even worse than we have to integrate immigrants with the existing society.

Certainly this Jihadism and radicalism in Belgium must make it very easy for those concerned to launch attacks in Paris, it's only about 200 miles from Brussels to Paris, and of course there are no internal border controls in Europe.

What about the civilians killed when the US illegally bombed power plants in Syria last month. Nobody seems to be bothered about those innocent fellas.

A European/US life seem to be worth a lot more than that of any other.

I haven't been radicalised I'm just saying like!

Looks like Putin sending 150,000 soldiers to Syria. 3rd world war anyone?

It seems to be just a matter of what they can make the most sensational news coverage from. Even the BBC has fallen for this, and their reporting of the whole situation is a disgrace. Coverage seems to be massively taken up by this story, compare it to the Russian aircraft the other week (more died) where the coverage wasn't anywhere near as big, or the suicide bombings in Beirut last Thursday which killed dozens and hardly merits a single mention, or Boko Haram over the past month in Chad and Nigeria, or the bombings in Turkey last month (Ankarra?) where 100 people died. You're right Nobby.

From looking on latest news streams it appears the French have arrested 23 people and placed over 100 more under house arrest, they've recovered weapons including rocket launchers as well. Does the swiftness of these arrests mean they perhaps knew who these people were? If that is the case should they not have been arrested before? Are there such people in the UK who the authorities know are terrorists, but haven't yet arrested?

Moorlad wrote: Didn't see any threads on here about those things. Don't think the BBC edit this site either.

See quite a bit of "why aren't you talking about x?" these days on social media etc. Suppose the easy response is, "wasn't aware of it, why aren't you talking about it, as you clearly were?

Suppose the media just give us what (they think) we want.

thesilentone wrote:
1) Would that be Islamic faith schools by any chance? Personally I don't see why prayers should be said in schools other than faith ones.
2) You'll probably find that in those workplaces all religious symbols will be banned, not only christian ones. Much like in France where the crucifix and the Burka are banned in public.
3) Halal meat is always labelled as such, so if you don't want to eat it, don't, simple as that.
4) Bollocks

Yeah Cheadle, do they do it to give us what they think we want, or do they do it because it is what they want, and they have their own agenda? Was it the media outcry that caused the social media stuff about France, or did the media follow the social media stuff?

That's just it isn't it, if it isn't widely reported fewer people know about it, and it isn't likely to get mentioned on here, if it is the only item on the national news for 2 full days, then it is bound to get a mention.

DeckchairBlue wrote:
Yep in fact it is all bollocks. There is absolutely no way that any UK school has had the Lord's prayer replaced by Islamic prayers. The religious symbolism nutters (about 4 years ago) were trying to make out their workplaces were discriminating against them for being Christian, I think it even went to the European court (might have been British Airways, can't remember).

This is scare mongering stuff which has been picked up from the Daily Mail or Britain First, sadly though there are large amounts of people who believe it (Christmas and Easter being banned etc).

I'm sure if BBC news was covering a range of news from around the world and attracting viewers from ITV or Sky (who were only covering a few) they would all start showing more different stories.

Depends on your outlook I guess, I'd probably call a lot of people paranoid over media hidden agenda but then those people would probably call me naive.

Moorlad wrote: I wish they'd succeeded in getting Peppa Pig banned, [censored] shit that it is!

I find the reactions to these things often reflect the way I respond to them.

Was I more shocked and appalled at what happened in Paris on Friday than I was to the Russian plane going down, or the bombings in Beirut? Absolutely, so I'd expect to see more coverage on them and will also seek more coverage out.

Do I think that one is worse than another? No, but an attack on Paris is always going to feel like it's a lot closer to home - especially when it's attacking people who are out for food/drinks/sport/music, everyday things that we all enjoy. A lot of us have also either been to Paris a number of times or have friends/family that might have been there when the attacks happened, so it's natural to have more interest.

It may not be just to give one of these attacks more coverage than the others, but I don't need the media to tell me I care more about the Paris attack than I do the others, because I know that myself.

There should be no such things as faith schools great start to life isn't it filling kids heads full of brainwashed bullshit...
You don't have to believe in some God or whatever to be a pleasant hard working tolerant human being

What faith has to do with education is beyond me shouldn't be in schools

DeckchairBlue wrote:
So your saying if I'm in for instance the Bradford area and decide to get a nice special kebab the kebab shop owner will have to clearly Mark if any of his products are halal?

Halal and Kosher meat should be clearly marked as to whether it was pre stunned or not imo...

people can then make informed decisions

Dancingbear wrote: I'm not certain on this, but think it would/should state it somewhere on the menu and or in the shop. So yes.

thesilentone wrote:
1) That's only in muslim schools,
2) Thats not true it was just a bullshit article
3) That's definitely not true i know that that for a fact
4) PLEASE stop reading the daily mail its just 60 pages of bullshit

As for the doubters, please read and make up your own mind...........

---

fullfact.org/law/uk_sharia_courts-39429

fullfact.org/factcheck/law/80_sharia_courts_britain-38319

Halal

Despite recent reports to the contrary, many fast-food and restaurant chains in Britain have been using halal – in Arabic "permissible" or "lawful" – meat for years. Nearly 100 KFC outlets around the country serve halal-approved chicken, as do around 75 – a fifth – of Nando's. The sandwiches served in selected Subway stores have contained halal meat since 2007, while all Pizza Express chicken is halal. Even McDonald's trialled a halal offering, before deciding the changes required to its kitchen procedures would be too great.

Sainsbury's, Tesco and Morrisons, which sell halal ranges at selected stores, and Boots, which sells halal baby food, serve halal meat firstly because people want it: Britain's Muslim population is growing – 3% of the population in the 2001 census, 5% in 2011, and an estimated 8.2%, or around 5.6 million people, by 2030. As KFC puts it: "Feedback from consumers has indicated that there is significant demand for halal food … We've chosen [to serve it] in stores in areas where we expect demand for halal restaurants."

For Pizza Express, as for the major food service companies that supply schools, hospitals and airlines, serving halal chicken across the board simplifies the supply chain and minimises the risk of complaints from customers who may unknowingly eat non-halal meat.

There remains, of course, the risk of complaints from customers who unknowingly eat halal meat – which is why restaurants should make clear, as most do in their windows and on their menus and website, what they are serving. (KFC and Nando's both also say they ensure, when opening a new halal restaurant, that there is a non-halal one nearby.)

There is considerable confusion, however, about exactly what halal meat is. Islamic rules require the animal to be slaughtered while alive and healthy, that the appropriate Islamic blessing be recited, and, crucially, that it be killed by a single, quick cut to the throat and its blood allowed to drain out fully.

That sounds bad. But banner headlines about "ritually slaughtered meat" conceal the fact that, according to a 2012 Food Standards Agency report cited by the RSPCA, 97% of cattle, 96% of poultry and 90% of sheep slaughtered using the halal method in UK abattoirs are stunned before being killed – a procedure that makes them insensible to pain and distress.

That, of course, means that up to 10% of British halal meat may come from animals that have not been slaughtered in a way animal welfare experts consider humane: some stricter Muslims insist stunning is not halal, and some halal authentication bodies – of which there are five in the UK alone – deem it an offence against Qur'anic law and tradition. But the halal meat served by KFC, Nando's, Pizza Express and Subway is certified by bodies that do permit pre-stunning. These chains stress that their suppliers are "contractually obliged" to provide only pre-stunned meat, that all EU and UK legislation has been met, and, in the words of KFC, that "none of our welfare standards have been compromised".

People should, of course, know exactly what they are eating. But they should also know that, in terms of animal welfare, the RSPCA makes no distinction between pre-stunned halal meat and conventionally slaughtered meat. It argues only that consumers should have "the right to choose whether or not they wish to buy meat from animals slaughtered without pre-stunning". The headlines do not always make that clear.

---

Religious Symbols in the Workplace


www.economist.com/news/business/21600694...king-care-expressing

You said "In certain City communities UK law is totally ignored", that is quite clearly completely wrong. There is nowhere at all in the United Kingdom where we have Sharia police. These so called "Sharia courts" can never place themselves above the English courts, and any rulings they make (mainly religious) must comply with English law.

As for Halal, what you've posted makes it fairly clear that most reputable places are making clear how their meat is slaughtered. Personally I don't care, it really isn't that long since we were all eating meat killed in that way anyhow. I've seen sheep slaughtered that way less than 45 years ago, in this country. Admittedly no Islamic prayers were being said over it. So I've never really seen what the big deal is.

thesilentone wrote: "Are there ‘Sharia courts’ in Britain?

While there are undoubtedly lots of different councils and tribunals dealing with Sharia principles, they aren’t courts of law.

Most are Sharia ‘councils’ set up to make decisions on purely religious matters, although there are some bodies that mix Sharia principles with legally binding arbitration. But none can overrule the regular courts."

That is taken from the 1st article you posted. So like I said, bollocks.

Your essay about Halal meat just says that the places that sell it already make it clear that they sell it, so people can make a choice over whether they want to eat it. And if you think that the way they kill Halal meat is any worse than normal, you need to visit an abbatoir.

I'm confused as to what point your trying to make with those articles because they all go against your original gripes.

Like I said, make up your own minds..................


www.islamic-sharia.org/

"Welcome to the Islamic Sharia Council. The Islamic Shari'a Council was formed to solve the matrimonial problems of Muslims living in the United Kingdom in the light of Islamic family law. The council is made up of members from all of the major schools of Islamic legal thought (mad'hab) and is widely accepted as an authoritative body with regards to Islamic law. "

Yes, but English law takes precedence, so for you to say UK law is totally ignored is quite clearly wrong.

It is just your sort of Xenophobic, bigoted nonsense that the people who perpetrated the massacre in Paris want to see. They want to set the rest of us against Muslims, because that is the route to radicalising more youngsters. They'd love to see Muslims being persecuted in western countries because there'd be no better recruiting sergeant for them.

This is from that website you've linked (95% of their cases are to do with marital disputes).

"A divorce decision issued by the Council dissolves an Islamic marriage to which it applies only and has no bearing on the staus of any coexistent civil contract (one which is recognised as legally binding under UK Law); for a civil divorce, applicants are advised to refer to the UK legal system for assistance in this area."

Looks like they're completely ignoring UK law there doesn't it?

Don't animals slaughtered for KFC and that not live a horrible existence anyway? Why are people suddenly bothered about the way they're slaughtered?

To be fair to the silentone (which is a shame because the guy is a [censored] bigot), there was a bit of a storm about Halal (and Kosher come to that) not being labelled (unless your trying to tell me that "Any Questions" is in the same league as the Daily Mail). The actual storm was about their being no differentiation between pre-stunned or not Halal/Kosher food.

It's understandable from an industry point of view as it simplifies the supply chain. Not so good for the animals or those who have objections to the animals suffering.

I had a bit of a google and found this:

www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct;=j&q;=&esrc;=...467506,d.bGQ&cad;=rja

Kind of backs up the fact that there's no legal requirement to label Halal/Kosher food.

I'm sure you're probably right to be honest spaffhead, I can't imagine they'd be too keen to pay extra (and therefore make consumers pay extra) to get top quality, free range chickens. They're most likely shed bred, and alive for only a few weeks, but their suppliers will all meet EU regulations (just, I suspect). Doesn't stop too many people, me included, from eating them from time to time.

Oh aye I'll still go for a KFC, especially if I'm hungover. Ex-girlfriend "rescued" some chickens from a chicken farm and the state of them was unbelievable.

Armo wrote:
Granted Armo, no doubt you're right. Also no doubt thesilentone is right too with his claim that there is halal/kosher meat in the system. My view is: does anybody actually really care, apart from a (very) few animal rights campaigners and militant vegans? The rest of it is just frenzied bias against something because it is Muslim (or labelled as such).

Personally, I'm of the opinion that I don't give much of a shit as long as it tastes nice.

Moorlad wrote:

Oh, no doubt. Of course thesilentone is using it as Islam bashing but, at least on this one point, he's right.

Well the backlash is starting tribune.com.pk/story/991322/man-pushes-m...und-train-in-london/

Happyblue wrote:
That was on 10th November, 3 days before Paris

Moorlad wrote:

---

There is a creeping plague going on all around us, hopefully there are people who do care....................

What creeping plague? Are you really saying Islam is a creeping plague?

Armo wrote:

Your bit about crosses being banned to appease Muslims was a lie, and an example of pure religious bigotry. I'm certain armo will find many more.

Or how about your claims that the lords prayer has been replaced by muslim prayers and proved to be utter horseshit as another?

I could go on.

Silent one,
Isn't there another train strike that you could drone on about again.
Stop digging yourself a hole with your uninformed views.

For the Bigots.........


bigot
ˈbɪɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city"
synonyms: dogmatist, partisan, sectarian, prejudiced person; More

Mind the Sharia law part of that post might have been your biggest lie, and the most bigoted statement you've made on this thread.

Then again, your creeping plague comes close. If you don't realise you're doing it, I feel sorry for you.

Useless wrote:
As long as the uniform isn't that of a member of the RMT

Not a bigoted view, I just think the leaders of the RMT are a bunch of Fat, Lazy, Republicans who exploit Unionism and what it stands for...........