Europe Tells Britain: Don't Say 'Muslims'

Well I made a reasoned post and a 12 year old chose to reply.
I thought that by replying to him in an adult way it would go over his head so replied to him in a way he would understand

Originally posted by loam

Based on the comments made in this thread, it's no wonder we are in the mess we are in.

America is such a great place. Only here can a person who is a friend of Israel , a supporter of the Iraqi war, actually thumb their nose down at a common suicide bomber merely because his explosives come wrapped in a shiny metal casing and can go over a mile away, kill 20 or so civilians, destroy an entire building , the target and still consider it and themselves a highly moral person and way to fight only because he's wearing a yarmulke or wears a cross around his neck instead of a hijab, a burka or a skullcap. He can merely chalk it up to human error, malfunctioning equipment or use the always useful "hiding behind civilian dresses" excuse and come up smelling like roses instead of the feces it really is.

They consider people sitting on fences as being dangerous to themselves and "their" country but no consideration is taken in that their friends are whats helping these things to occur because its inconvenient or their beliefs prevent this from happening.

I'd like to ask those friends of Israel what is the difference between a suicide bomber killing innocent civilians with a bomb belt and a "friend" of yours that drops cluster bombs of which thousands of them go unexploded and are left out in the open for children to find and get killed by, as well as land mines buried all over the place? Lets not forget that requests for maps of land mine positions being refused as well as co-ordinates for drop zones being refused as well. Not to mention the bombs were purchased under specific agreements made to AMERICA and AMERICANS that paid for these weapons, that they NOT be used as an offensive weapon. What makes YOU and YOUR friends better then a terrorist and what gives you the right to stay in this country and shouldn't we be hunting people like you and your friends in the Churches and synagogues too? You are after all placing the rest of us at risk who dont want to have anything to do with all this and just want to live our lives peacefully.Reigning in the terrorists is fine, but you can't do half the job and leave the other half out there just because they are your friends. Otherwise you are just as bad as the moderate muslim sitting on a fence saying nothing about his bretheren blowing up innocent civilians with a bomb-belt.

So I guess now everyone who doesn't agree with you is a twelve year old? Yeah the my-country-is-better-than-yours stuff is crap, but I sense that there's more to this than that

By the way:

Different Mind Set

Yes I see logical side of not offending your Muslim friends. Not wanting them to attack you and change there mind set to a more friendly one. But you can not change ones perspective or heart felt and soul. By the government telling the populace what it can not say and what it can, is a dumbing down of that culture so that everyone in that culture can be at the same level. Like here in America, dumbing down the school systems to keep everyone happy and using drugs to calm down the aggressive. Culture is different. Souls are not. What you feel deep down inside of you, can be distructive if not given a chance to let it out. If by chance, you take one side against another and let a weeker thought rule , then you have yourself to blame. Just say it as it is. This is true thought. Do not, give into your aggressor. I say this as a person looking from the outside of your new great system of laws. Protect your right to speak openly. Protect the liberty to choose what you can say. But, I can see what the system wants you to think. This is a defeatest attitude that should not be allowed to seperate your own culture for sake of theirs.


[edit on 7/13/2007 by zman]

Once again PieMan, you put it so correctly and succinctly.

However going back to the original point of this post.
Europe can tell us to do whatever they want, that doesnt mean we have to or will, do it.
I will call a Muslim a Muslim when and where I want in the UK and the EU cannot stop me. Using that name is neither detrimental or racist.

They finally gave up trying to force us to stop using Pounds and Ounces.
I suspect their next trick will be to try and get all our road signs to be in KMH rather than MPH.

As a classic car owner I am appalled at how the EU has managed to close down over 80% of our car scrapyards and how because of EU reulations it is almost impossible now to buy cheap patterned parts for a car, having to pay a highly inflated OEM price. Though there are still a few places where pattern parts can be sourced.

Originally posted by Chorlton
However going back to the original point of this post.
Europe can tell us to do whatever they want, that doesnt mean we have to or will, do it.
I will call a Muslim a Muslim when and where I want in the UK and the EU cannot stop me. Using that name is neither detrimental or racist.

Hi Chorlton
I really do not think they intended it to be used in the way you are innocently using it. I think maybe the author of the article has put their own little spin on things and the laws intention is to keep it from being used in a racist way. There are ways to say the word jew innocently and there are ways to use the word jew anti-semetically. You can use the word jew innocently but to use it in a different manner is improper. I think this is the effect the EU is shooting for. I would bet the UK's BNP party will not be to appreciative of this suggestion.



[edit on 13-7-2007 by ThePieMaN]

I'm sorry, but I fail to see why some are converting this into a free speech issue.

This is merely a government policy directed at government officials to encourage avoidance of the pitfalls I mentioned.

I can hardly criticize a policy that attempts to minimize needless government-based prejudicial rhetoric.

Originally posted by loam
I'm sorry, but I fail to see why some are converting this into a free speech issue.

This is merely a government policy directed at government officials to encourage avoidance of the pitfalls I mentioned.

I can hardly criticize a policy that attempts to minimize needless government-based prejudicial rhetoric.

But it isnt *my* governments policy. Its the EU policy.
The point being that the EU cant tell our Government how or what to say.

Originally posted by Chorlton
But it isnt *my* governments policy. Its the EU policy.
The point being that the EU cant tell our Government how or what to say.

It sounds like you're fighting a different fight...

I certainly hope you don't have the attitude that any idea expressed by the EU should be opposed, merely because it comes from that political structure.

I object to anything imposed upon me by an unelected, unresponsible cabal of ministers = The EU

I have my own democratically elected government.

I have been involved with a private war against France and their Vehicle laws for the past 4 years. The French government totally ignore all relevant laws about vehicle homologation and continue on their bumbling way despite the superb EU politicians saying they mustnt do it, and the French still bluntly refuse to register my car in France. All the EU does is shrug its shoulders.

I have no doubt there is no shortage of justifiable criticism that can be leveled against the EU...but this thread isn't really about the EU, is it?

It about the unnecessary problem of indicting an entire population of people for the criminal actions of their extremists.