I think it is particularly disturbing that just three people can create so much disruption in a country the size of France...... .....I wonder how many would it take to bring the UK to a standstill, given that the number of our 'security personnel' is significantly less than that of France.
Given that islam represents such a vast, existential threat to the peace and liberty of the world, and given that getting on for a quarter of the world's population are muslims, one of the greatest problems facing the world's statesmen is what to do about them. If only they could be somehow persuaded to kill each other in quantities, in many areas, and for long periods. But wait a minute ...
So what do you mean by "moderate muslims"? There are certainly thousands of ex-muslims who speak of their support for Western values and way of life, and have to show great personal bravery in doing so. But muslim doctrines are totally inimical to liberty and freedom of speech, so the so-called moderate muslims are all speaking out against Western values not for them.
I'm fed up being PC around a religion where the majority seem bent on my destruction. Even statements from groups and individuals around the whole "religion of peace" I don't trust - read this to see why: TheReligionofPeace - Islam: Taqiyya and Lying Our tolerance is our weakness. In a week that saw the 90 year old WW2 veteran who smuggled himself to France last summer die, a man who saw many of his friends die young fighting for our freedoms, I am less inclined to keep up the pretence that islam is fine and I should tolerate it. Alas, there are is always the racist/bigot card played, usually by the muslims themselves if people speak out about their religion. This despite it being a religion lacking any tolerance that I can see. My freedoms allow me to draw a cartoon of their fantasy prophet and I'm less inclined to respect their religious crap when they are shooting at me.
That's OK, you keep the rest of the infidels in order with their spelling, typo's and punctuation and I will look after yours
No easy answer to that. IMHO It's almost impossible to reach a mutual understanding and tolerance in a global society, where everyone else thinks their beliefs garner more credibility than others. All that can be done or that people can strive or hope for, is to protect their right to voice their differences within a framework that is shaped by future design, discussion and measures, which will prevent them from being targeted by others, for freely expressing them and punishes those that seek to take that liberty away from them. Censorship of expression, a denial of someones freedom of speech, is no-ones right to take away. It may not sit well with people who dis-agree with what may be said, but it is their right to express it, however it may be viewed, with the exception of the usual caveats such as verbal abuse, threatening language, slander etc. It's a sad indictment of modern life, that certain misguided fools, who act in the "interest" of their religion, feel that their actions are justified and of benefit. Doubtless to their own cause, it's probably a noble and worthy thing to do, but in the eyes of the many millions within the rest of the world religions, they are reduced to nothing more than neanderthals, in that their views have not evolved with the rest of civilized society, seeking to be more tolerant of each other. For now thankfully, this small extremist section of the population is still hugely outnumbered by those that have actually evolved and who at least possess the ability to look elsewhere for solutions, instead of foolishly believing a firearm is the answer to all your problems. Instead of glorifying themselves they perpetuate indifference, mistrust and division from other sections of society. What's frustrating is that they either don't care or are so blinded by faith as to be oblivious, that this, being one of the may consequences they cause, will bear no fruit in the long run, not even for them.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is so broad and general, and the means of enforcing it so weak and ineffectual, that barbaric tyrannies rarely hesitate to sign up to it. Still, it's a start and an aspiration. The European Convention on Human Rights is more explicit and realistic, and has the European Court of Human Rights to back it up, so is a good deal more effective. Even so, some nations (including shamefully the UK) try to elude its provisions sometimes, and even more disgracefully there are some politicians in the UK who advocate withdrawal from the ECHR. They are not muslims, by the way, although they might just as well be.
David Dimbleby stated on Question Time yesterday that the BBC already had editorial guidelines in place to not use religious images that were likely to cause offence and the "the Prophet Mohammed must not be represented in any way, shape or form" Our newspapers and all news outlets seem to have been cowered into refraining from showing any Hebdo cartoons. I think this is extremely weak, PC liberalism and is ultimately dangerous for us all. Will we soon start to accommodate more and more to appease those who are intolerant. If this intolerance was challenged it would be for the best even if a lot of people were offended. Hopefully this website is at least one outlet. Can someone please explain why this is offensive?
View attachment 41076 Can someone please explain why this is offensive?[/QUOTE] The headscarf is the wrong shade of green. Soooooo 2014 dahling!
You make that many mistakes I put it in the emphasise your shortfalls - sometimes the English Language requires adjustment to highlight certain things - this being one of those times
