And I've still never seen one. And I live in Tower Hamlets.

edit. a Sharia controlled zone sticker/poster I mean

this was birmingham-our muslims are harder than yours

lol

nah we saw them all the time-not sharia-just silly 'get outta town' posters

dunno-i cant comment on that-ive no idea why they think like they do

this was birmingham-our muslims are harder than yours

 

lol

nah we saw them all the time-not sharia-just silly 'get outta town' posters

The EDL seem to think they're at their most militant here, they're planning a big fat racist march in Spetember

Originally Posted by pirate1111:

this was birmingham-our muslims are harder than yours

 

lol

nah we saw them all the time-not sharia-just silly 'get outta town' posters

The EDL seem to think they're at their most militant here, they're planning a big fat racist march in Spetember

I think they might be slightly decimated after that maniac in Norway and the supposed closeness to EDL.

Originally Posted by SazBomb:

Originally Posted by pirate1111:

this was birmingham-our muslims are harder than yours

 

lol

nah we saw them all the time-not sharia-just silly 'get outta town' posters

The EDL seem to think they're at their most militant here, they're planning a big fat racist march in Spetember

I think they might be slightly decimated after that maniac in Norway and the supposed closeness to EDL.

its a f*cked up world

im on the red stripe now

j-lo is really good looking for a 42year old-mom of twins

2nd track on dionne bromfields new album is really good

debbie harry is still the goddess of women and

i really want a bacon andwich with brown sauce

and thats sandwich

not andwich

mind you id eat an andwich

with

brown sauce

Hopefully, it was reported in the paper there have been calls for it to be cancelled, but up to now its going ahead... there is a counter rally by UAF, I might go

I don't think those Sharia Law stickers would last 5 minutes where I live. Haven't heard of any comments/complaints about them in London, Saz, so maybe they think it might be a fruitless task? Anyhow, I didn't agree with it when I read the opening post and I still don't agree with it now. Religion is all well and good but don't shove it down other people's throats or make certain territories a 'no go zone' unless you comply. Cheeky bastards.

The fundamental ( no pun intended) problem with all of this and the reporting of it is that very few politicians or public figures are willing to stick their heads above the parapet and institute a serious and fact based discussion on multi culturalism, racism and immigration and what all of it means and how it affects people. And it would be good and sensible if anyone who had something even the slightest bit negative to say about some aspects of these things wasn't automatically labelled as a card carrying send em back BNP racist.

So instead we get the media putting their own spin on these stories for whatever reason - usually to sell crap.

As to the actual story here, I agree with Karma

As for the send them back thing...I couldn't give a stuff who lives where as long as they respect their neighbours/ local community, work (or at least try to work unless feasible circumstances mean they can't) and keep their religion within their own 4 walls or another 4/6/however many walled meeting place where they can practice to their heart's content with like-minded individuals. Religion should be interesting, not a piss take.

May I just say that I'm surprised that the OAP should take an avatar picturing someone for whom I have mucho respect and then quote a load of bolleaux from a crap paper. These sorta faux articles don't do any good whatsoever and IMO are designed to cause trouble.

Well that was kinda my point Joe. The failure of public figures to stick their heads above the parapet because they're afraid in many cases of being labelled either racist or soft on immigration etc etc creates the vacuum in which these sort of stories flourish - whether factual or not.

and again I agree with Karma ( Ello mate!)

Actually, a good few years back in my area there was a terrific hoohaa over an eruv being put up. An eruv is apparently a marked out area for Jewish people to do stuff at Shabbas that they are not allowed to do otherwise ie pushing a pram,

I think the local council marked it out by stretching wires around the top of telegraph poles and lamp posts to mark out the area.

Now I didn't care one way or the other tbh but tensions were really high over it. I could have understood if it involved putting fences or gates around the area but something unobtrusive like they did made no odds to me or anyone else I reckon.

But honestly, while respecting someones elses religion, I did find it totally ridiculous that something banned by the OT for whatever reason could then be allowed by the marking out of an area.

Either follow the rules if you agree with them or don't if you don't is the way I look at it - and that goes for all religions

And may I just say that who and/or what I choose as an avatar is nothing to do with you at all and you would be better advised to show a bit more 'mucho respect' to other posters here whether you agree or disagree with them.

What on earth is the 'mock' French for anyway?

'These sorta faux' articles? What on earth is this phrase supposed to mean? These sort of imitation articles? It isn't an imitation article, it is a quote from a newspaper with a readership of 2 million plus.
'Bolleaux'? What is this supposed to mean? Is it a naughty schoolboy way of saying bollocks and hoping the teacher doesn't tell you off?

'Crap paper'? Tell that to the Daily Mail's lawyers.

OAP? Is that a feeble typo or a sly dig against Old Age Pensioners? I suspect that most OAPs have added a fair deal more to this country than you but feel free to correct me.

IMO this post revealed a fairly sour disposition. It added nothing to the discussion and could easily be seen as another pointless attack on anyone who you perceive as new to this forum, or whose post may not align with the viewpoint you are currently espousing.

I was advised that this forum now seems to have more than its fair share of an inward looking, self-indulgent, and some cases misogynistic coterie, ineffectively moderated. Your feeble attack and the fact it has not been addressed does not dissuade me from accepting that view.

IMO ignoring news stories because they do not fit your 'politically correct' preconceptions is a dangerous position to adopt. Surely the correct response is to inform, investigate, analyze, discuss and reach valid conclusions.

If you have anything to add then add it but don't stoop to these personal attacks, veiled or otherwise.  Perhaps you could provide a thread that contains a list of the Avatars, Post titles, Newspapers, Opinions and Forum members you find personally acceptable to guide my path in future.

I think I just had a light bulb moment

Me too

How did you get it up there?

Oooooooh!   That's you told then, GJ 

Indeed so JMU.  It is not a good time of the month to be crossing me.  

I didn't  But I'm exhausted.

Giz it, mines gone in the living room....

It was an incredibly impressive reply, that's all really. (sorry if I haven't moved the debate forward Geordie Lass).

Agreed....

I am sure you have Suzybean pet

Aww thanks for being kind  I do have a lot to say on this topic, some of it personal and some of it theoretical. I just can't muster the eloquence and articulation that you have displayed tonight. I'll keep looking in and see how this develops (until I collapse in a heap on my sofa).

I have just been reading something awful over on the Beeb - I shall see what other kind souls here think about our judiciary ...............................

The Beeb is more universally accepted 

That was some post there Geordie Lass , as we say up here....Gon yersel hen  
I havent contributed to the debate, but couldnt let that go without saying something  ! x

Wasn't it just. 

I agree........but reacting to the printed press (any) causes me concern....It is easy to pick up a story and run with it to gain readers...........

I don't really want to get into a row here (particularly as I'm going to be scared poopless in a minute by the Ring 2) but Joe is one of the kindest and most respectful fms here.

He has a certain style of writing which I can't remember anyone having a problem with before. And as for the OAP thing, Joe is retired and I think honestly that was a typo, probably caused by predictive texting on his phone as I think he is still posting from Germany at the moment

You're entitled to your views Geordie Lass but I think you've got Joe wrong. And I may be disagreeing with everyone else in this thread but I thought your response to his post was disproportionate.

Just my opinion

Sorry Veggie but I disagree..I can't be the only one to think a minority of FM's seem to look down their noses at other FM's and its not nice..it was'nt just the OAP thing that took me aback but the whole post....

I like Joe too, and I don't think Geordie Lass went over the top in her response (I think it was quite measured), also his tone was a little brusque (especially to those he's not familiar with). I think he can handle himself and have his right of reply without any of us sticking our nebs in 

Just my objective opinion.

I'll ignore your rebuke of Garage Joe but echo the sentiments of Veggieburger.

Is the DM a crap paper?  It's not the Sunday Sport or Daily Star, which are really crap newspapers.  I post a lot of links to the DM, but I don't agree with its politics at all and tend to post from its non-political content.  The DM is certainly not a paper with a reputation for objectivity in its news reporting and all its regular opinion writers are from what I'd say is the hard to centre right of political opinion.

It is a fact that the DM has a well-deserved and accurate reputation for misleading, right wing histrionics and intentionally inflaming the prejudices of its readership.  Many of its staff have admitted to as much over the years. 

It's all very well banging on about political correctness (gone mad), but the issue about such reporting, is not that such things be ignored, but that they should be reported without blowing up the story out of all proportion and trying to induce mass paranoia and the inevitable violence that goes with it.

As I wrote above, I can fully appreciate that such things as proclaiming Sharia Law areas with stickers will be seen as very unsettling and intimidatory by some but then it really falls into the area of anti-social vandalism/graffiti.  Just as an EDL/BNP sticker might be unsettling and intimidatory to some.  The Mail seems to be wrongly insinuating that areas are genuinely under Sharia Law, or that non-compliance with Sharia Law will be met with some form of justice from home-grown wannabe Taliban members. That's just not the case at all.

How do you know that for certain? How do you know that isn't the case? 

Sorry ... quote didn't turn out properly, but hope you can decipher it Carnelian.

Fair enough Suzy, we'll have to agree to disagree.

As for sticking our nebs in, there seem to have no shortage of fms in here praising Geordie Lass for her post.  I was merely putting a different view. No more sticking my neb in to what I believe was an over the top response than people like yourself rating that response as 'impressive'

Different strokes for different folks!

And Carnelian is spot on about the slant that rags such as the DM put on such stories - and the effect that they can have on the population. You don't have to even be a DM reader nowadays to get exposed to this stuff. The internet picks it up and runs with it and soon it's everywhere.

Is the story true? I don't know. Like the other Londoners here I have never seen any of these stickers about although I have heard reports from friends about being hassled when they were going to a party around Whitechapel by young Muslim men because they were wearing skimpy outfits.

For all I know that was an isolated incident with a few wankers. We all know how nobbish groups of young men can be at times. Regardless of religion. If it was some Muslim action to oppress young British women then it is a hate crime in my eyes. But it was probably something less politically sinister like a group of testosterone fuelled lads strutting their stuff.

But if the DM got hold of the story it would no doublt be blown up into some 'terror on the streets' type of story with them inferring it happens every day in every city.

I was commenting on a post not doing the PR on behalf of another FM. Yes GJ is a lovely guy, but we'll have to disagree about his last post in this thread. With my objective hat on I thought that attacking someone via the avatar they chose was kinda lame, that was unimpressive. (I was impressed later on)......but I've said too much already. I'll leave it for Joe if he wants to say anything on that.....

Yeah the Daily Mail is the voice of 'Middle England'...house prices....Conservative/conservative.....cancer causing.....Viscount Rothermere the Nazi.....Paul Dacre the Nazi etc. yada yada yada. But they do have a readership, they do reflect the view of some people in the country who have opinions just as valid and informed as us that get our newsprint news from the Guardian and Independent. The Daily Mail has also been great for some causes that are close to my heart. They have kept the Stephen Lawrence story and miscarriage of justice going for years and have campaigned to have his alleged killers re-tried in a criminal court. 

The Sharia Law story in parts of London is real (to me) and is one worth having a discussion/dialogue on, not dismissed as some flippant exercise in rabble rousing.