Uh what, well no quite the contrary, you sure you saw that in me?Quote:
Originally Posted by English assassin
Printable View
Uh what, well no quite the contrary, you sure you saw that in me?Quote:
Originally Posted by English assassin
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Yeah its just the charachter that springs to mind whenever someone mentions grammar school , not of course suggesting furunculus that you would write a rubber cheque like Crawfords character
quite, and thank you. :beam:
My Primary school (Which is Public) made me say a prayer every week. That is far worse than this situation where the children did not have to pray.
My state school made me pray when i was under 11 (until secondary school)
By Muhammed's goat-reeking beard, you've got a cute ass.:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
Thanks, but my six is covered already and my twelve is loaded. In other words, forget it sweetheart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Well they did have to pray. But maybe this is indeed not so terrible after all, but with all that multi-pushy you get worked up over little things because it are so many little things. I attended a christian school by the way, never had to pray, never noticed it was a christian school in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
Okay, the details of the article are pretty sketchy, so there's really not enough to form on opinion on the actions of the teacher. Let me say: if their version of events is true and the little darlings were truly punished because they respectfully and non-disruptively declined to kneel and pray to Allah (praised be his name), then I agree with all of the outrage coming from the .org's usual suspects.
However, let me just throw this out there for you. Since we don't have the teacher's version of events yet, might I submit that there is a distinct possibility that her story might go something like this: "I gave the little buggers detention not because they refused to take part in the demonstration prayer, but because they were being loud, disruptive, and making funny accents and fart noises in the back of the classroom while the rest of the class was trying to learn."
And is it then possible that when the little darlings were being taken to task by their parents for getting in trouble at school, the kids sold it to their doting parents as a religious freedom issue, rather than simply one of being an idiot in the classroom?
I'm just throwing that out there, from personal experience. When I was twelve, that was just the kind of behaviour I was capable of and quite often carried out.
And is it then possible that when the little darlings were being taken to task by their parents for getting in trouble at school, the kids sold it to their doting parents as a religious freedom issue, rather than simply one of being an idiot in the classroom?
The first rule of breaking the news your in trouble to your parents is lie and blame someone else.... worked like a charm!
I stopped lying to my parents when I was able to beat them in a fight. Last year as it happens.
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: :inhale: :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I quit lying to Bob, the step-dad, a couple years back, but only 'cause I could finally out-run him, he in a wheel-chair and all.
I needed a good laugh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Where are the days that telling your parents that you got some sort of punishment at school gained you an additional punishment that was more severe than the one you got at school? And the question whether the punishment you got at school was just or not was completely irrelevant.
Now they write articles in newspapers about something as ordinary as two students getting detention in secondary school :wall:
Society where not being a spoiled brat will be considered abnormal, here we come...
Try having funQuote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish
psssssst EA, was referring to this earlier; http://www.mcb.org.uk/media/presstext.php?ann_id=298
The Muslim Council of Britain warmly welcomes the Lord Chief Justice's valuable contribution to the discussion on the role of Islam and Muslims in Britain's legal traditions. In a scholarly speech outlining the development of the equality laws in the English legal system Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers spoke of the "widespread misunderstanding" of the nature of Sharia law.
"There is no reason why Sharia principles, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution [with the understanding] that any sanctions for a failure to comply with the agreed terms of mediation would be drawn from the Laws of England and Wales."
Dogs with pads, not liking curry is racism england is nuts. Sweden will have to work hard for that dhimmi-award.
Alas, having friends and family who are teachers, I am assured that all too often the parents' attitude is "how dare your school punish my little darlings" rather than "how dare you get yourself in trouble".Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
Yep. My mother in law, who is a teacher, sometimes complains about parents contacting a lawyer because the precious child got a (usually well-deserved) punishment/did not pass his exam(s).Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Bloody Infantry
Sad really :no:
There should be a law against stupidity.
I stopped lying to my parents after they beat the crap out of me. Too long ago to remember.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
So the Muslim Council of Britain is now running Sweden?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Pancy's with gaping rectums craving for a salafist are running Sweden, Sweden and the UK are dhimmi-society's, homo-servus they deserve nothing but mockery, giving hatebeards what they want even beofre they realise that they demand it theirselves, disgusting.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish
Right, you ever been to Sweden?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Yep, sure have.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwedishFish
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian II
I still lie to my parents... but only to make them happy :laugh4:
Yes and ?Quote:
psssssst EA, was referring to this earlier
OMG its shocking , where there is this law that two parties can agree to go to arbitration to settle their dispute there is no reason why they cannot agree to choose sharia as the basis for the settlement .
Bloody hell call out the thought police this idea must be stopped at once .:dizzy2:
So then Frag what you want is that two people can choose absolutely anything as they basis they want to sette their dispute in accordance with the laws of the country so long as it is something that doesn't relate to islam .
Or is it perhaps that you don't like the whole law idea and want Britain to abolish its ancient codes and traditions ?:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
not liking curry is racism england is nuts
What planet are you on ?
Please do tell Frag , what is widely accepted as Britains most popular national dish in Britain .
Is it perhaps a chicken thingy with a masala , its tikka so its pukka mate:inquisitive:
Well bugger me sideways Britains national dish is a curry and every beer fuelled yob that doesn't end the friday night with a curry must now be called a racist :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Come down to planet earth sometime Frag , there is this little thing called gravity here that might keep you on the ground instead of floating around on your flights of fantasy all the time .
.....and here I was thinking that the conservatives were running Sweden atm...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
So why does he feel the need to speak up on the subject as a Lord Chief Justice. Now I know that if you want to make it into the higher echelons brittish society believing isn't enough, you have to know that there is only one culture and it's multi but geez stick to the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Bah, only idiots care about culture anyway.
The less we have of it, the better.
You haven't seen the article yet, have you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...ay-report.html
Ah earth, hi. I couldn't make this up tribes you give me way too much credit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Sounds familiar. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
You haven't seen the article yet, have you?
Have you read the publication this article is supposed to be about?
So don't be silly Mars until you do the obvious thing like looking at the report the newspaper says it is writing about .
You wouldn't want to go getting your panties all twisted over nothing like Frag now would ya:idea2:
I love how you question the source when it's something you don't like, even if it's true. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
I love how you question the source when it's something you don't like, even if it's true.
I question all sources no matter what the story , and no matter if I like the story or not I nearly always find that what is being told in the paper is not what the actual story is at the source they claim to be using .
Try it sometime , It may save you getting all het up over a complete non-event .:yes:
So maybe that's why you never post sources. :idea2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
If you want to read the 366 page report and prove the article wrong, go ahead. But until then, the article stands.Quote:
and no matter if I like the story or not I nearly always find that what is being told in the paper is not what the actual story is at the source they claim to be using .
Actually, you are. If I was cashing in on a word per trolling effort you would be the biggest bubba I ever reeled in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Have you had a look down the back of the sofa ? your brain appears to be missing , perhaps it slipped down there .Quote:
If you want to read the 366 page report and prove the article wrong, go ahead. But until then, the article stands.
Lets see , you thought I hadn't read the article . You were wrong
You say the article is consistant with the report and I must be wrong to say it isn't
Yet you havn't even read the bloody thing .:dizzy2:
Sorry Mars but honestly how obviously wrong do you think you can be with such little effort ?
The funny thing is by your own writing you have shown that you havn't got the fainest idea what the article is on about and have the front to say that other people only question things when they want to :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Its like a repeat of the war crimes topic where you insist people are wrong without any idea at all of what it is you are talking about , you really should have learnt by now .:thumbsdown:
Dear Lord, Tribsey, lay off the alcohol. It's for your own good. I'm not presuming you haven't read the article, but you haven't read the report, and frankly, I don't have the time to go through every single three hundred and sixty-six page report I see. The newspapers aren't always unreliable, you know. You haven't read the report either, so who are you to say the article is unreliable?
Oh, and the war crimes topic where the source you brought up proved that it was, in fact, a war crime? Anyhow...
We aren't angry Tribeman just a little dissapointed. From now on, even is wiskey uneven is beer, think you can make it to the end of the month?
while you are looking for your brain have a good rummage there Mars , as you might find your memory has slipped under the cushion too .:yes:
You struck unlucky on this one big time , perhaps yoyu should have commented on the subject before yesterday:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Eh what are the chances of that , chance circumstances come together just in time for this crap:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Well at a certain moment there was this sperm an egg and ultimatily you excuse me for apreciating such coincidence while being you. No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
edit:sup page 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Yes, my bad, the LCJ did join in after Archbishop Beard. Apologies. I stand corrected
I do not stand corrected that there is nothing whatsoever wrong, alarming, or new in the bit I have emboldened. If two parties by agreement want to have their dispute mediated in accordance with Sharia I am at a loss as to why the law should stop them.
It's a question of freedom of choice.
This was a rather interesting programme last night: http://www.channel4.com/news/article...muslim/2314592 Amongst the points was a quick survey of Muslim scare stories in the British media, including the Sun's front page splash "Muslim hate mob attacks home for Our Brave Boys" (not according to the local police it didn't, they said they had no idea who did it) and "Thousands of patients at risk from Muslim doctors" (Muslim women doctors apparently refuse to wash their arms up to the elbows as it is immodest, except that the hospitals in question said that this had never happened.)
Then in one rather telling bit they showed punters headlines like "Doctors say they fear blacks" or "Jews demand special treatment" and everyone said it was outrageous, except that, you guessed it, they weren't real headlines, they had taken real headlines and replaced the word Muslim with other minority groups.
In short: the media lies about muslims.