Quote:
Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J
Hell yes I would say he was terrorist.
I agree with Mani if he was muslim he would have been preverbially hung drawn and quarted by the press and Media.
|
If he is convicted of these crimes, then yes I too would call him a terrorist.
However, I totally disagree that if he had been a Muslim he would have been treated any differently. There is admittedly anti-Islamic bias, both in the press, and in the public arena. But there is also the case were Muslim crimes are handled with kid gloves, so as not to offend, and appease the politically correct loby, which is present both in society in general, and the law of the land.
A good example of this would be the recent trial of the BNP's leader Nick Griffin on race hate crime charges, following undercover filming by the BBC. The charges came to light, and the Crown Prosecution Service took the case to trial. Griffin was found not guilty.
On the other hand we have the very similar story were Channel 4's Dispatches programme secretly filmed Muslim leaders, in British mosques, spouting similar hate filled rhetoric as Griffin did. No charges are to be brought against the people who were filmed coming out with racist, and homophobic garbage. The law of the land should be applicable to everyone, regardless of creed, or colour.
This man from Lancashire sounds like a total headcase, and he may or may not be found guilty of these crimes, but do not try to turn this into a case about racism, and how Muslims are a persecuted minority.
In my opinion there would be much less unrest in the country, if leaders of the Muslim faith condemed the extremists who are preaching hate and separatism in the name of Islam, from the comfort of a democratic country, Britain, and are being allowed to get away with it law.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/leg...icle342857.ece
http://www.judeoscope.ca/breve.php3?id_breve=3074