BBC Panorama 22/11/10 - Muslims kids getting hate lessons in UK

[Suffragette1 10]

Yes, you are right.

 

Grahame, this is a first!

[Baz1 29]

Do you really think that the Ulster Unionists would be able to teach that Jews are like pigs and monkeys without any comebacks within its own ranks, Wildcat? I doubt that even the BNP would get away with it from its own members.

 

Problem you have there is that this 'mole' used by Panorama clearly did not translate the arabic as it should have been- the script is visible from the programme and anyone with arabic knowledge can pin point that immediately- this is (as usual) another John Ware Mission to demonise muslims and Islam.

 

The actual translation in that script was reference to the jews who broke the sabbath-this so called 'arab expert' should not be doing translations, especially with an agenda against Islam.

 

The text shown actually says "... and the breakers of the Sabbath were punished by being morphed into monkeys and pigs...".

 

 

And I think its wise to attach below the statement made by IERA which makes a few good points which likes of Panorama don't want to talk about!

 

http://www.iera.org.uk/pdf/PRESS_RELEASE_iERA_Responds_to_the_British_Schools_Islamic_Rules_Panorama_Programme.pdf

 

So come on you lot, have a read- that includes all Islamaphobes...don't plead ignorance all your life.

 

Apart from that, the subject is a dead issue- just sensationalism as usual.

[Grahame 10]

Grahame, this is a first!

 

Lets hope for many more.

[donkey 10]

That was all you!

 

I am determined not to let you get away with manipulating my comments! Clearly I was asking a question because I asked it again later on when you didn't answer.

 

Nothing detracts from the fact that PT and you were dismissing the issue.

 

You keep banging on about me needing the last word but you reply so how are you acting any different.

 

Admittedly you tend to reply with an insult rather than a point...

 

Oh, that's a fact because you say so, even though you have not been able to explain why pointing out that these threads become abusive towards Muslims (which this one did) is the same as dismissing the issue of hate preaching, but here you are now presenting it as an established fact!

 

In much the same way you give a nonsensical explaination as to how you demonstrated you were not insinuating PT was an apologist by the use of a random selection of posts, the crux of your argument being that when you had said something along the lines of "here comes the first one now" in reply to a post of mine where I had highlighted a passage about 'apologists' in the OP, you were not refering to the bit I had highlighted at all, but to another bit much further up the post, which you had failed to specify, and anyway would have made your reply to my post irrelevant and meaningless. Your further proof was that you used the word "dismissed" rather than 'apologist' in a later post.So that prooves it, as far as you are concerned. that too can now be passed off as fact.

 

Furthermore, by pointing out the absurdity of your arguments, I am 'insulting' you. So I insult you all the time, in every post. That's another one of your proven facts. I can't argue with sterling logic like that. You may have the last word, and well done for having an unbroken run of victories, at least in that respect.

Edited November 24, 2010 by donkey

[Grahame 10]

Morphed.

 

Origin:

1525–35; < NL metamorphōsis < Gk metamórphōsis transformation. See meta-, -morph, -osis

 

Not an Arabic word and too late for Mohamed to use.

[llamatron 10]

Oh, that's a fact because you say so, even though you have not been able to explain why pointing out that these threads become abusive towards Muslims (which this one did) is the same as dismissing the issue of hate preaching. And furthermore, somewhwere in between when you first said that, you seem to have forgotten that you have not even tried to demonstrate how that adds up, despite being asked to do so, but here you are now presenting it as an established fact!

 

In much the same way you give a nonsensical explaination as to how you demonstrated you were not insinuating PT was an apologist by the use of a random selection of posts, the crux of your argument being that when you had said something along the lines of "here comes the first one now" in reply to a post of mine where I had highlighted a passage about 'apologists' in the OP, you were not refering to the bit I had highlighted at all, but to another bit much further up the post, which you had failed to specify, and anyway would have made your reply to my post irrelevant and meaningless. Your further proof was that you used the word "dismissed" rather than 'apologist' in a later post.

 

So that prooves it, as far as you are concerned. that too can now be passed off as fact. And by pointing out the absurdity of your arguments, I am 'insulting' you. So I insult you all the time, in every post. That's another one of your proven facts. I can't argue with sterling logic like that. You may have the last word, and well done for having an unbroken run of victories, at least in that respect.

 

And we are back here again you weren't pointing out these threads become abusive to muslims you were agreeing with PT dismissing the issue. You can't say because these threads often become abusive to muslims we should ignore the extremist views.

 

Again I never said PT was apologising I said dismissing over and over again. Just accept that one. You quoted the whole of the OPs comment. I have shown you which part I was referring to as I explained straight away and have quoted for you and given you the numbers of the posts. If you still don't get it, then I don't think anyone will be able to help you with it.

 

You continually call me stupid then get upset when I say you are using insults, you are. Most of your posts call someone a name or infer they are thicker than you because they disagree. Resorting to this demonstrates your arguing capabilities.

 

You must try harder!

[mort 10]

As this is now going in circles... closing.