Radical backlash means they are going to bomb the crap out of British civilians, buses... and are giving the Lib media a heads up for the excuse to make for them.
"...banning radical Islamic groups could fuel a radical sub-culture..."
Ok. That statement is just plain stupid.
Way too late for that, islamic values are being seen as "demonic" because they ARE demonic.
So get your community to clean up it's own cesspits then there won't be a problem..
Moderate Muslims = Fairy + Tale
Um, this has already happened, hasn't it?
Well we won't allow you to bomb the crap out of us.
Threats, whines, welfare abuse, mass murder...the Muslims are such a pleasant people and wonderful addition to the British Heritage.
I guess I would say damned if you do and damned if you don't ..........so you might as well do. Appeasement only delays the war, it does not prevent it.
It's not a warning it's a threat and it should be responded to appropriately.
Name a legitimate Islamic value. Then tell me what makes it legitimate. Is it legitimate because it upholds the dignity of the human person as a creation of God? Or is it legitimate because "it's in the Koran"?
The Islamic mind is the most circular in its thinking (if you can call it thinking) of any I have ever seen. They are essentially saying, "if you threaten to deport any of us or close down any mosques for fomenting terrorism, we will foment terrorism."
The radical sub-culture already exists. The measures simply address that pre-exisitng culture. This statement is like a threat and call to appeasement.
"We fear that recent events..."
Yes, dear, fear is what terrorism is all about...consider it the "boomerang effect"....or "instant karma".
"They wouldn't have done such horrible Muslim things if we hadn't been mean to them" is just another way of allowing then to blame their pig fat crimes on their victims.
"On issuing today's statement, Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said: "The British Muslim community has always been a law-abiding community and all its endeavours to create a just society have been entirely peaceful."
It's "endeavors to create a just society" is what caused this problem in the first place, genius.
""Criminalising the mere possession of certain opinions is the hallmark of dictatorships, not democracies.""
This is actually a good point, but avoids the fact that islam today is using attitudes which christianity hasn't seen in any widespread fashion at this level of intensity since the 16th and 17th centuries, specifically the conflicts between the catholic and various protestant governments/populaces.
Having let a population with such primitive elements in the immigration door, the governments now find themself essentially legislating speech to a greater degree than ever. While it certainly is a step in the right direction with islam, it is important to note, particularly in the UK but also anywhere else these sorts of tactics are used, that IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME UNTIL THE LAWS PUT ON THE BOOKS NOW ARE USED AGAINST CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL FOR STUFF NEVER SOLD TO THE PUBLIC AS A CONSEQUENCE OF PASSAGE OF SAID LAWS.
That's reason enough right there to deport all the Muslims.
Is it me, or do all these warnings always seem like threats?