| Yes | 28% | 28% - 41 | ||||
| No | 37% | 37% - 53 | ||||
| Go fuck yourself | 34% | 34% - 49 | ||||
| Total: 143 | ||||||
A) If he had said that women must remove the veil to talk to him, then that would be wrong. We don't refuse to talk to women if they don't get their tits out, and in fact a public figure even asking would actually cause a major stir (no pun intended). It's just different standards of decency.aardfrith wrote:
Yes.
We pander to the islamists too much these days. Take for example Jack Straw's (leader of the House of Commons) comments yesterday on wanting face to face meetings with his constituents - we communicate with more than just words and it's not easy to have face to face meetings when the person on the other side is wearing a veil. The media is up in arms saying this is a slur on the muslim faith and he should never have said that. All he's doing is voicing an opinion. Another example of where the veil is inappropriate is banks - motorcyclists have to remove their full-face helmets so their faces are captured on security videos, muslim women do not.
Slowly but surely, our civil rights (e.g. free speech) and way of life are being eroded because the islamic faith is unbending. It's their way or they have protest marches calling for people's heads. I've had enough. Send them back where they belong. There's enough muslim countries to take them all.
What would be the result if we closed our countries to Muslims? Some restaurants, takeaways, corner shops and taxi firms would close. The number of asylum seekers would drop massively.
Why can't we do it? Okay, the cost would be astronomical. It would be a contravention of the right to choose a religion without facing persecution? How about the right to draw a picture without persecution? Not if it's Mohammed, you can't. How about the right to write a book without persecution? As far as I know, Salman Rushdie still lives in hiding because a fatwa was issued against him in 1988. How about the right to go to work without fear of being blown up? Tell the people of New York, Madrid and London about that.
And are you planning on sending back the Irish too?ELITE-UK wrote:
i think they should, they have lost their right to live in the western world after repeated bomb attacks on our cities!
What a great idea, lets set up some concentration camps for muslims. That'll show 'em.ELITE-UK wrote:
i think they should, they have lost their right to live in the western world after repeated bomb attacks on our cities!
I voted yes, and heres why, If they are radical Muslims, and dare protest carrying the flag of there country, then we should honor there sense of pride and send them home and let them join in the America hateing with there fellow countrymen. I also say yes to Any Muslim Who If asked to, wont protest against Terrorist attacks, or bombings of inocent people by radical muslim groups either here or abroad. Until they REALLY start acting like they want to be part of the american society, and Stand by us hand in hand and wave the same damn flag we wave, then im sad to say I had to vote yes.CameronPoe wrote:
So, here's an open question for everyone -
Should all muslims based here in western nations be repatriated back to the countries from which they themselves or their fathers and forefathers come from?
After making your choice please expound on the merits of and reasoning behind said choice, it's feasibility, etc. I feel a lot of people on this forum would genuinely like to see fellow countrymen and women, who happen to be muslim, expelled from their country. This is their platform to tell me why.
Yes i did, But did so to suit my own opinion. So Unless they are with us, then Yes ALL.Spark wrote:
You re-interpreted the question, note the word 'ALL'.
A) He never said that they must remove the veils, only said that he prefer to actually see the person he's talking to. The point he was making had little to do with the veils as such; more the integration of Muslims and other racial groups into our society.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
A) If he had said that women must remove the veil to talk to him, then that would be wrong. We don't refuse to talk to women if they don't get their tits out, and in fact a public figure even asking would actually cause a major stir (no pun intended). It's just different standards of decency.
B) They only have to remove helmits because of repeated bank robberies by people wearing motorcycle helmets. When we have a spate of robberies by Muslim women wearing veils, I'll agree it causes problems. And I'm sure they would need to show their face for any transaction which required photo id verification.
...
F) I've lived with terrorism my whole life, security alerts, bomb threats, cancelled trains, and more. And the bulk of it was done by Christians, not Muslims. And I know that fear is letting the those who seek political change through such means win. Living in a major city, the risk of getting struck by lightning is probably lower, due to conductor density, than in the countryside, so it might help you to look on terrorism as an equally unlikely urban substitute. If you can't deal with the heat, then get fuck out of the kitchen. And if you don't understand why people born in London feel that way, it's probably because Yorkshire is even in the same house as the kitchen.
actually only the born again variety of Christians are going to Heaven - soon. Everyone else will have to go to the other place. John 3:3 - 8. Then read Revelations.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
how about all religious people goto heaven RIGHT NOW and let the rest of us human beings sort out the mess.
F) So what if you were born in London? I was born in Kent and travelled through London quite a lot, as a teenager. I was evacuated from Paddington Station when there was a bomb threat. Similarly from a shopping centre in Essex. I now live in Leeds but during the 1997 general electrion run up, I commuted by train. And Leeds train station was hit by the IRA, followed by security alerts around the city. Manchester had a shopping centre blown up. In Warrington, a shopping street was targeted. Remember the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings? My brother lived in Belfast and worked in Stormont, when the IRA were active. Heck, even the building where I work has had an anthrax scare.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
F) I've lived with terrorism my whole life, security alerts, bomb threats, cancelled trains, and more. And the bulk of it was done by Christians, not Muslims. And I know that fear is letting the those who seek political change through such means win. Living in a major city, the risk of getting struck by lightning is probably lower, due to conductor density, than in the countryside, so it might help you to look on terrorism as an equally unlikely urban substitute. If you can't deal with the heat, then get fuck out of the kitchen. And if you don't understand why people born in London feel that way, it's probably because Yorkshire is even in the same house as the kitchen.
A) I happen to agree with Jack Straw on this one, at least to some extent. There is a significant portion of the muslim population of the UK who make very little effort to integrate in British society and culture. They should be making more of an effort to integrate themselves, if they aren't happy to do that they really shouldn't have come here in the first place. There is a minority of muslims in the UK who believe Britain should follow Sharia law, which they need to accept will never happen, trying to make it happen is tantamount to treason and they should be prosecuted accordingly. Muslims in the UK are a minority and need to accept and at least partially conform to majority rule, which I believe most do, quite a lot don't though.Jainus wrote:
A) He never said that they must remove the veils, only said that he prefer to actually see the person he's talking to. The point he was making had little to do with the veils as such; more the integration of Muslims and other racial groups into our society.UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
A) If he had said that women must remove the veil to talk to him, then that would be wrong. We don't refuse to talk to women if they don't get their tits out, and in fact a public figure even asking would actually cause a major stir (no pun intended). It's just different standards of decency.
B) They only have to remove helmits because of repeated bank robberies by people wearing motorcycle helmets. When we have a spate of robberies by Muslim women wearing veils, I'll agree it causes problems. And I'm sure they would need to show their face for any transaction which required photo id verification.
...
F) I've lived with terrorism my whole life, security alerts, bomb threats, cancelled trains, and more. And the bulk of it was done by Christians, not Muslims. And I know that fear is letting the those who seek political change through such means win. Living in a major city, the risk of getting struck by lightning is probably lower, due to conductor density, than in the countryside, so it might help you to look on terrorism as an equally unlikely urban substitute. If you can't deal with the heat, then get fuck out of the kitchen. And if you don't understand why people born in London feel that way, it's probably because Yorkshire is even in the same house as the kitchen.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5411954.stm
B) Whether there have been a string of veil robberies or not, its the principle that stands. If your going to ask motorcyclists to remove their helmets, people to put down their hoods or whatever all under the reason of security and photo i.d., then why should it not apply equally across all people in the society?
Either you have one rule for everyone or you don't. If you want multiple standards for people depending on their creed, race, age, transport of choice then fine; put your ideas forward. I happen to fundamentally disagree as i believe that all people should be treated the same, no exceptions and no favourites.
F) Lastly, this has nothing to do with Muslims btw, why is it that Londoners think that they are the only people under threat? You do realise that there are other cities in the UK don't you? Like York, Leeds and Sheffield for example in say Yorkshire.
I'm the son of an ex-military guy. Whilst the IRA was bombing (and targeting mostly military targets) our family lived in an area that was fair game; in Germany on the military base itself. None of the bases were particularly close to a large city or to London (being as they were in Germany. You know where Germany is?) but don't be so fucking stupid as to tell me that there was no danger because i didn't live in London. You owe Aardfrith an apology for trivialising his fears and you owe an apology to every other member of the UK who doesn't live in London. Get your head out of your arse.
Are you joking? London is the centre of England and indeed the UK, not geographically certainly, but in every other way. London has a population of almost 10 million of the UK's 60 million inhabitants. London is by far the largest city in the country and is amongst the largest in the world (609 sq miles). London is the economic and political centre of the country, subsiding the rest of the country by £100s of millions every year.aardfrith wrote:
London is not the centre of England, let alone the UK. Terrorism is not restricted to London. Now that the IRA have renounced violence, I have no wish for a return to the days when terrorism and the fear of it was part of daily life.
Most of the people I know seem determined not to let fear change their lives. Seems to me like if they did, the IRA might still be using violence.aardfrith wrote:
London is not the centre of England, let alone the UK. Terrorism is not restricted to London. Now that the IRA have renounced violence, I have no wish for a return to the days when terrorism and the fear of it was part of daily life.
DesertFox423 wrote:
As long as they're legal immigrants into these countries, I have no problem with them.
this and so long as they don't practice acts of sedition and such as in republica del norteKmarion wrote:
DesertFox423 wrote:
As long as they're legal immigrants into these countries, I have no problem with them.
kr@cker wrote:
this and so long as they don't practice acts of sedition and such as in republica del norteKmarion wrote:
DesertFox423 wrote:
As long as they're legal immigrants into these countries, I have no problem with them.
The you would have to deal with us and we will fuck you up. So whats worse? LMAO.fkin_ wrote:
what if all christians and jews and europeans were expelled from the usa. given back to the native indians............. hell yeh
send em back to where they came from the invading bitches.
are the shark's genitals and brains are made of high explosives that they can detonate to attract mates?doneyone wrote:
U must send them back in a leaking boat full of sharks (yes a boat full of sharks)
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-10-06 08:11:21)