Ex-soldier told to repaint his St George's

[ciriuslea]

Wait a second, surely he should have the Union Jack? Since all armed forces fly the Union Jack? Not the St.George's flag?

very true I think the ex soldier label was used to give the issue more impact. as if you need to give the issue any more when its basically telling Englishmen to stop flying the English flag in England, because its offensive to some people.

[itsnotoutthere]

Is this one fake too ?

[ciriuslea]

also he looks like a thug or hooligan

His appearance shouldn't be an issue,

[Clarakore]

Have you guys missed my post? Those 4 are real; the one on page 1 is fake.

Prove it, show us the actual news organization that published those.

[itsnotoutthere]

Those are fakes, if one cannot provide the exact publication they are from, they are fake. No reputable news source carried those photos.

The question remains now is if some are gullible enough to believe them because of their sentiment toward Islam or if some are actually passing on photoshops deliberately because of their sentiment toward Islam.

The bottom line is in both is some simply are going to be negative no matter what, all the more reason we can't have them flying symbols of intolerance.

It is in post #48.

The question asked was already answered before it was asked.

No response then.

[itsnotoutthere]

Another 'fake' for you.

[FLOMBIE]

Prove it, show us the actual news organization that published those.

They were not published by news organizations. That does not mean they are fake. Snopes is indeed a reliable source.

Prove they are fake? You should be able to find the originals.

I do not have anything against Muslims, but these pictures are real.

[itsnotoutthere]

http://www.citizenwa...ate-speech.html Edited May 21, 2013 by itsnotoutthere

[TSS]

I haven't got time to go through them all, as i'm supposed to be working..but here's a couple to start..

The guardian printed the words but not the images:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/feb/06/raceandreligion.muhammadcartoons

Daily telegraph printed one from the protest:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080601230655/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1509636/Demonstrators-burn-flags-on-the-streets-of-London.html

[itsnotoutthere]

H E L L O O O O .........

[FLOMBIE]

H E L L O O O O .........

Not the first time.

[Clarakore]

I haven't got time to go through them all, as i'm supposed to be working..but here's a couple to start..

The guardian printed the words but not the images:

http://www.guardian....uhammadcartoons

Daily telegraph printed one from the protest:

http://web.archive.o...-of-London.html

We can discuss this.

Note, this does not pertain to the post above, but anything not sourced from an unbiased and reputable news agency will be dismissed, for the obvious reason. Those who wish to be intolerant can use whatever sources they wish to continue their efforts, others will demand excellent proof!

Keep in mind, those presenting fakes mixed in with real ones aim, deliberately or unknowingly, aim for obfuscation. Including fakes will illicit incredibility toward their whole argument.

===============================================================================

Actual proof finally provided on this thread and intended to foster a dislike for Muslims

Thank you sky scanner for the single post quoted above with acceptable sources than can be analyzed.

The links and the content within them, one single picture, which is all that has been mustered on this thread with the veneer of validity, is all that can be verified for now.

It should further be noted that the one single picture and accompanying text in the second link are from the Telegraph, a known Conservative-biased paper, but it will be accepted with that in mind.

The picture has the words, "Kill Those Who Insult Islam," with the focus being, "Those Who Insult Islam," so it is not calling for killing all people, all Westerners, or anything of that sort to die, it is anger aimed at the initial intolerance. [link]

Then we have the following: "Behead the one who insults the prophet" and "Free speech go to hell". [link]

Again we can see outrage at those who insult Islam or their holy symbols such as the prophet. Do any in the UK insult other religious groups? Do any in Europe show intolerance towards Muslims? If so these intolerant people, the main targets of the protest, have little room to speak up over the 500 or so (out of billions of Muslims) who themselves are showing intolerance. Both groups of intolerant people are backward!

Now we have "Free speech go to hell" [link]. The counter to this is the intolerant Westerners who state "Political correctness aka pluralism go to hell" or something similar. But on this score those detesting pluralism have more power, are from the host country, (keep in mind we are discussing Europe and not the whole world, Muslims and Westerners in Europe, Westerners have more power to hurt the minority than the minority has power to hurt free speech in the West. If we want to discuss the whole world then we know no Middle Eastern country can militarily invade Europe) and it is the intolerant Westerners who can deny the rights to minorities easier and plausibly.

The next item is: "The demonstrators, who also passed the French and German embassies, burned flags and threatened fresh terrorist attacks in revenge for the cartoons." [link]

The conservative Telegraph was not being very specific but clearly paining a poor picture of a small group of minorities who were displaying extremist sentiments.

Are some truly afraid a Middle East country will nuke Europe?

Then we have this: "Nuke Denmark" [link] which is clear bluster since no Middle Eastern immigrant has the ability to use nuclear weapons.

The Telegraph finally offers this portrait of the Regent's Park Mosque protest in 2006: "Protesters nevertheless shouted inflammatory slogans as they marched from the Regent's Park mosque after Friday prayers towards the Danish embassy." [link]

What more mainstream Muslims feel about the extremists

There is also balance, the view of these extremists minorities is not the mainstream view among moderate minorities, this is their view according to the Telegraph:

Muslim leaders, while condemning the cartoons as insulting, called for their communities to exercise restraint and warned that extremists may seek to hijack the controversy.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the general secretary of the Muslim Council, said: "There may be elements that would want to exploit the genuine sense of anguish and hurt among British Muslims about the manner in which the Prophet has been vilified.

*snip*

Other demonstrators complained that the extremist slogans did not represent mainstream Muslims.

[link]

How mainstream British and Jewish leaders feel about Muslims in general

The Telegraph also has British and Jewish leaders condemning the original cartoons, in effect they are protesting the same things Muslims are, they are not, like others (intolerant Westerners) trying to be hostile toward Islam but on their side here. Notice their views on "free speech" while not exactly saying to go to hell it closer parallels that than those saying they can insult whoever they want, however they want.

Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, earlier criticized the European newspapers that had reproduced them, saying freedom of speech carried no "obligation to insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory".

Mr Straw said the reproduction of the cartoons had been "insulting, insensitive, disrespectful and wrong". Papers in Spain, France, Germany and Italy have reprinted the offending drawings in full. British broadcasters, including the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, have shown at least brief glimpses during news reports.

British newspapers have been reluctant to follow their European counterparts and the BBC defended its use of the images, saying it had been "responsible".

The Bishop of Oxford, the Rt Rev Richard Harries, said freedom of speech was fundamental to society but it needed to be exercised "with a sensitivity to cultural differences".

The Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, said: "The only way to have both freedom of speech and freedom from religious hatred is to exercise restraint. Without that, we can have one freedom or the other but not both."

[link]

==============================

The Guardian article should be analyzed for what is in their article alone

The Guardian article has no pictures. They have one paragraph devoted to slogans. Therefore we cannot tie these words to any of the other unverified, some photoshopped pics on this thread, if the following words were meant to do that: "The guardian printed the words but not the images"

Snopes only has pictures from "some e-mail off the internet", not from a reputable media outlet

We can only discuss what was reported in the report in that strict context. Attempting to tie those words to unverified photos does not count, I mean it can for other, but it won't count for those who want definitive proof, not a batch of photos where some are clearly faked, or just on snopes claiming they are from an e-mail. An "e-mail" online is proof it was from an e-mail but not from a reputable media outlet.

The Guardian article's one paragraph covering the horrible Muslims extremists who are very much like Western extremists aka Islamophobes

Here is the singular paragraph of intolerance from the minority of Muslims in Europe:

Most of the placards appeared on Friday, running through permutations on several themes. They read: "Butcher those who mock Islam", "Slay those who insult Islam", "Behead those who insult Islam", and "Kill those who insult Islam". Some evoked previous al-Qaida suicide bombings: "Europe you will pay, your 9/11 is on the way", or "7/7 is on its way", "Europe you will pay, fantastic 4 are on their way", and "Europe you will pay, Bin Laden is on his way". As well as the rhyming "Europe you'll come crawling, when the Mujahideen come roaring", there were splenetic varieties: "Freedom go to hell", "Liberalism go to hell", and "Freedom of expression go to hell".

[link]

We have already discussed the "mock and insult Islam variety". As well as those of the "free speech, freedom, and liberalism, go to hell" types. Many intolerant Westerners also want liberalism to go away.

Good thing if Scotland Yard is investigating these horrible Muslims extremists who do not represent all of Islam just as Western extremists do not represent all of the West

The ones calling for terrorism and craving for war are disgusting and it is good and well if Scotland Yard investigated those. There is no need for such intolerance which mirrors the ugly intolerant Westerners who are Islamophobes. Both type of extremists do not represent the majority of Muslims or Westerners. Both type of haters are losers imo. They feed into each other, but don't drag the rest of Western civilization in your hate or fear.

It should be noted only two people were arrested in this protest, two intolerant Westerners who held up the inflammatory cartoons. No Muslims were arrested.

The European police called the Muslim protesters "well natured"

The police called the Muslims protesters "well natured" [link] which means even if they had ugly signs they did not brawl or throw stones and followed Western protocols of protest. The ugly signs are similar and as much a joke as those intolerant Westboro-style protests, whom they also follow rules and stay within accepted Western protocols for protesting.

Muslim leaders call the extremists protestors a joke

Muslim leaders in Europe called these extremists protesters jokes and clearly stated that does not represent Islam as they see it.

Anjem Choudary, spokesman for al-Ghuraba, the group which helped organise Friday's protests, told the Guardian: "There were a mixture of different people at the demonstration. They were expressing their freedom. The police had the opportunity to say the placards were offensive. I spoke to the ... control operation. I said, if there's any concerns, you can contact me at any time. They saw them at the begining of the demonstration.

You can't take [the placards] literally. It's ridiculous to say we are intending to bomb [Denmark]." Mr Choudary said

he did not know who wrote the placards.

Most Muslim organisations condemned the placard slogans as the work of unrepresentative, extremist factions.

The general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, Sir Iqbal Sacranie, blamed "agents provocateurs".

Hizb ut-Tahrir, which organised Saturday's protest, agreed. Its spokesman, Taji Mustafa, said yesterday:

"We condemn those [placards], those are not acceptable. Many Muslim groups have condemned the Friday protests and the images that were used then

... we must not at this time stoop to the level of those who want to resort to insulting the prophet of Islam as a terrorist."

[link]

Mainstream individuals and intolerant individuals will both have different criteria for proof and thus form differing conclusions

Now while it is understandable those who dislike all of Islam, who dislike Muslims in general, the Western intolerant that they are, will continue to spread hate and fear, most other Westerners can read the words above, understand the nuance, and not come to the conclusion that Islam is a threat. Instead extremists in both Islam and the West are a joke. These haters are on the losing end, pluralism will prevail.

This is also enough time and effort devoted to this thread by myself, with that, pointing out nuance, and fake and/or unsourced photos, except one, it is time for me to dismiss myself. Anyone wishing to discuss me, not the topic, by calling me names will not prove your point to others who think different than you.

This is just one view and does not make anybody else's view wrong or right. This is just a different view

Those who wish to be intolerant, continue being so, an ounce of truth is enough to convince more rational minds on these matters. Screaming hate, posting more fake photos, will not make the intolerance any more true. Have a great morning!

Edited May 21, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[ciriuslea]

We ban and prohibit groups for preaching hate

Al Muhajiroun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Muhajiroun

Islam 4UK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam4UK

and its actually a criminal offence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_the_United_Kingdom

so I think the fact that they can't ban the EDL or the BNP and all they can do is remove any symbolism associated with them is hilarious, if the law can't label them hate groups then we shouldn't either

[Arbenol]

Britney, I know you're probably ignoring me. But just in case you're not. Why have you turned this thread into a discussion about Islamic extremism? We've done that one countless times and no doubt will do so again.

This thread is about what the English flag represents. An expression of patriotism or oppression. Why focus on Muslims?

You've complained about the quality of discussion. Diverting it is rather hypocritical.

[TSS]

We can discuss this.

Note, this does not pertain to the post above, but anything not sourced from an unbiased and reputable news agency will be dismissed, for the obvious reason. Those who wish to be intolerant can use whatever sources they wish to continue their efforts, others will demand excellent proof!

Keep in mind, those presenting fakes mixed in with real ones aim, deliberately or unknowingly, aim for obfuscation. Including fakes will illicit incredibility toward their whole argument.

===============================================================================

Actual proof finally provided on this thread and intended to foster a dislike for Muslims

Thank you sky scanner for the single post quoted above with acceptable sources than can be analyzed.

The links and the content within them, one single picture, which is all that has been mustered on this thread with the veneer of validity, is all that can be verified for now.

It should further be noted that the one single picture and accompanying text in the second link are from the Telegraph, a known Conservative-biased paper, but it will be accepted with that in mind.

The picture has the words, "Kill Those Who Insult Islam," with the focus being, "Those Who Insult Islam," so it is not calling for killing all people, all Westerners, or anything of that sort to die, it is anger aimed at the initial intolerance. [link]

Then we have the following: "Behead the one who insults the prophet" and "Free speech go to hell". [link]

Again we can see outrage at those who insult Islam or their holy symbols such as the prophet. Do any in the UK insult other religious groups? Do any in Europe show intolerance towards Muslims? If so these intolerant people, the main targets of the protest, have little room to speak up over the 500 or so (out of billions of Muslims) who themselves are showing intolerance. Both groups of intolerant people are backward!

Now we have "Free speech go to hell" [link]. The counter to this is the intolerant Westerners who state "Political correctness aka pluralism go to hell" or something similar. But on this score those detesting pluralism have more power, are from the host country, (keep in mind we are discussing Europe and not the whole world, Muslims and Westerners in Europe, Westerners have more power to hurt the minority than the minority has power to hurt free speech in the West. If we want to discuss the whole world then we know no Middle Eastern country can militarily invade Europe) and it is the intolerant Westerners who can deny the rights to minorities easier and plausibly.

The next item is: "The demonstrators, who also passed the French and German embassies, burned flags and threatened fresh terrorist attacks in revenge for the cartoons." [link]

The conservative Telegraph was not being very specific but clearly paining a poor picture of a small group of minorities who were displaying extremist sentiments.

Are some truly afraid a Middle East country will nuke Europe?

Then we have this: "Nuke Denmark" [link] which is clear bluster since no Middle Eastern immigrant has the ability to use nuclear weapons.

The Telegraph finally offers this portrait of the Regent's Park Mosque protest in 2006: "Protesters nevertheless shouted inflammatory slogans as they marched from the Regent's Park mosque after Friday prayers towards the Danish embassy." [link]

What more mainstream Muslims feel about the extremists

There is also balance, the view of these extremists minorities is not the mainstream view among moderate minorities, this is their view according to the Telegraph:

[link]

How mainstream British and Jewish leaders feel about Muslims in general

The Telegraph also has British and Jewish leaders condemning the original cartoons, in effect they are protesting the same things Muslims are, they are not, like others (intolerant Westerners) trying to be hostile toward Islam but on their side here. Notice their views on "free speech" while not exactly saying to go to hell it closer parallels that than those saying they can insult whoever they want, however they want.

[link]

==============================

The Guardian article should be analyzed for what is in their article alone

The Guardian article has no pictures. They have one paragraph devoted to slogans. Therefore we cannot tie these words to any of the other unverified, some photoshopped pics on this thread, if the following words were meant to do that: "The guardian printed the words but not the images"

Snopes only has pictures from "some e-mail off the internet", not from a reputable media outlet

We can only discuss what was reported in the report in that strict context. Attempting to tie those words to unverified photos does not count, I mean it can for other, but it won't count for those who want definitive proof, not a batch of photos where some are clearly faked, or just on snopes claiming they are from an e-mail. An "e-mail" online is proof it was from an e-mail but not from a reputable media outlet.

The Guardian article's one paragraph covering the horrible Muslims extremists who are very much like Western extremists aka Islamophobes

Here is the singular paragraph of intolerance from the minority of Muslims in Europe:

[link]

We have already discussed the "mock and insult Islam variety". As well as those of the "free speech, freedom, and liberalism, go to hell" types. Many intolerant Westerners also want liberalism to go away.

Good thing if Scotland Yard is investigating these horrible Muslims extremists who do not represent all of Islam just as Western extremists do not represent all of the West

The ones calling for terrorism and craving for war are disgusting and it is good and well if Scotland Yard investigated those. There is no need for such intolerance which mirrors the ugly intolerant Westerners who are Islamophobes. Both type of extremists do not represent the majority of Muslims or Westerners. Both type of haters are losers imo. They feed into each other, but don't drag the rest of Western civilization in your hate or fear.

It should be noted only two people were arrested in this protest, two intolerant Westerners who held up the inflammatory cartoons. No Muslims were arrested.

The European police called the Muslim protesters "well natured"

The police called the Muslims protesters "well natured" [link] which means even if they had ugly signs they did not brawl or throw stones and followed Western protocols of protest. The ugly signs are similar and as much a joke as those intolerant Westboro-style protests, whom they also follow rules and stay within accepted Western protocols for protesting.

Muslim leaders call the extremists protestors a joke

Muslim leaders in Europe called these extremists protesters jokes and clearly stated that does not represent Islam as they see it.

[link]

Mainstream individuals and intolerant individuals will both have different criteria for proof and thus form differing conclusions

Now while it is understandable those who dislike all of Islam, who dislike Muslims in general, the Western intolerant that they are, will continue to spread hate and fear, most other Westerners can read the words above, understand the nuance, and not come to the conclusion that Islam is a threat. Instead extremists in both Islam and the West are a joke. These haters are on the losing end, pluralism will prevail.

This is also enough time and effort devoted to this thread by myself, with that, pointing out nuance, and fake and/or unsourced photos, except one, it is time for me to dismiss myself. Anyone wishing to discuss me, not the topic, by calling me names will not prove your point to others who think different than you.

This is just one view and does not make anybody else's view wrong or right. This is just a different view

Those who wish to be intolerant, continue being so, an ounce of truth is enough to convince more rational minds on these matters. Screaming hate, posting more fake photos, will not make the intolerance any more true. Have a great morning!

I can't quite decide yet if you are deliberately missing the point and have some kind of agenda here, or if you genuinely can not see how that what you post fits into any group that does not represent the majority as a whole.

You can not have a two-tier system of tolerance, one whereby you say a small minority does not represent the whole of Islam, yet claim the St George's flag is a symbol of hate based on a small minority group that hardly anyone in England pays any attention too.

Also:

Actual proof finally provided on this thread and intended to foster a dislike for Muslims

You asked for sources to the photo, I provided one, you then say I provided it to foster dislike for muslims. Don't ever pull a stunt like that on here again - it's flamebaiting.

For the record, I didn't post those links to support any side, I have no issues or interest in any religion, and I certainly don't care much for flags either (waste of a good pole if you ask me), what I do dislike though is an uneven playing field when it comes to how people can display those symbols or beliefs that they take pride in - and a nations flag should never be considered a hate symbol based on a few fringe elements within a country.

Lastly, you need to stop with the "we can discuss this, or that" element of your posts, you do not decide what is discussed in these topics. If you wish to ignore points you can not answer, or are not comfortable answering then just quote the ones you are going to answer and ignore the rest. You don't need to keep grandstanding about which aspects you find acceptable for discussion.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Sky Scanner

[Glenville86]

I want the last ten minutes of my life back.

Original topic - Landlord can make him remove it even if it is not bothering anyone. If he owed the property (in my country), he could display the flag.

I am American. Have lived around the world including 2-years in the Middle East. I wish to offer an apology to those who may come away with a negative view of us from the postings of some.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Glenville86

[Space Commander Travis]

So this has, as i expected, turned from talking about the Union Flag and whether or not it is a Symbol of Oppression to the Evils of islam yet again. I'm sure there must be some version of Godwin's Law that says that this will always happen.

[Arbenol]

Look at these nasty, vicious racists.

Hang on. How do I know it's not been photoshopped?

[dekker87]

Look at these nasty, vicious racists.

Hang on. How do I know it's not been photoshopped?

look at this racist filth wrapping himself up in the flag:

members of the 'hate group' the EDL with a st georges cross in the background:

[Arbenol]

That last photo has definitely been altered.

No way is that beard real!

[Lilly]

When Sky Scanner said: "a nations flag should never be considered a hate symbol based on a few fringe elements within a country" it's all that needs to be said. No links/proof/notes from one's Mom are needed to support this very simple concept.

Now, if one chooses to immigrate to a foreign country and they 'don't like' for some reason there's always the option to return home. Basically, a person can't move to another country and expect everyone there to change to accomodate them. Were I to move to another country I'm pretty sure I'd be seeing that nation's flag all over the place...if it offended me I'd either have to leave or get over it.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Lilly
left out a word

[TSS]

I know it is difficult to stay strictly on topic with this, because the subject matter itself brings in a whole raft of other issues....but the topic itself is basically about an individuals right to display their own countries flag on their front door. Lets try and not turn this into an EDL v's Islam thread please.

[dekker87]

I know it is difficult to stay strictly on topic with this, because the subject matter itself brings in a whole raft of other issues....but the topic itself is basically about an individuals right to display their own countries flag on their front door. Lets try and not turn this into an EDL v's Islam thread please.

indeed but one line of argument was that the flag had been appropriated by a hate group - the EDL...as the poster in question was american and relying on the bs from mainstream biased news services such as the BBC it was worthwhile showing that the EDL is not, as an organisation, a 'hate' group....tho i do accept is attracts some real morons to their rallies...even then tho some of those have proven to be plants by extremist elements such as Unite Against Fascism.....

[itsnotoutthere]

indeed but one line of argument was that the flag had been appropriated by a hate group - the EDL...as the poster in question was american and relying on the bs from mainstream biased news services such as the BBC it was worthwhile showing that the EDL is not, as an organisation, a 'hate' group....tho i do accept is attracts some real morons to their rallies...even then tho some of those have proven to be plants by extremist elements such as Unite Against Fascism.....

Couldn't have put it better myself.

[shrooma]

there's a world of difference between nationalism and fascism. being proud of your country isn't a crime.

patriotism isn't a sin.

how on earth can it be deemed offensive to fly your country's flag IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY??

how can ANY foreign national be upset at seeing the flag of the nation that opened their door to them and provided them with a home?

can you imagine what would happen if we went to poland and told them to remove their flags because they 'offended' us??

the area I live in has the 2nd highest rate of asian people (per head of population) in the country, only slightly behind bradford, and the place is literally festooned with flags! no-one bats an eyelid.

the george cross is flown from churches & town halls all over england, and they're hardly bastions of racial hatred are they?

I notice the 'person' making the complaint was english, not asian, and obviously doesn't understand the concept of reverse-racism.

time she started thinking about a career change methinks.....

Edited May 22, 2013 by shrooma