White terrorists don't make news in the UK

[lubna]

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/104841


Police recover largest haul of bomb making chemicals


If this was a muslim man, half of Burnley would have been cordoned off, and it would have been all over our media for days.

But in this case... silence.

This is like the cases in the US of Irv Rubin (who was arrested for plotting to blow up a US Congressman) and Dr. Robert Goldstein (caught with maps to 30 Mosques and enough explosives to destroy most of them), neither of which were ever referred to as "terrorists" in those very few US media stories that even bothered to report the arrests.

[wildlifer]

If it wasn't reported, how did you find out about it?
Not to mention, if you performed a Google search you would know your assertions of Goldstein and Irv Rubin not being called terrorists are false.

[Franky]

If it wasn't reported, how did you find out about it?oh come on wildlifer, you know as well as i do as to what sister lubna meant...... charges of possssing bomb making chemicals by a non muslim are not widespread headline news in the mainstream media. more than likely it was a tiny square column in the middle of a local paper or the like. we all know this would be different had the person been a muslim. why?.... because there is a government/media agenda to demonise muslims at the slightest of opportunities. obviously there is no such agenda relating to white non muslims as they are the same race/culture as the media and government.... no one's going to demonise themselves now are they?

the reasons for this agenda are many. here's a few that immediately spring to mind........ to gain public support for the invasion of muslim lands, to minimise the amount of people that convert to islam, to turn ignorant muslims away from supporting the mujahideen (oh sorry, i mean insurgents). there's many more reasons but i won't bother posting an index list.

regards, franky

[wildlifer]

oh come on wildlifer, you know as well as i do as to what sister lubna meant...... charges of possssing bomb making chemicals by a non muslim are not widespread headline news in the mainstream media. more than likely it was a tiny square column in the middle of a local paper or the like. we all know this would be different had the person been a muslim. why?.... because there is a government/media agenda to demonise muslims at the slightest of opportunities. obviously there is no such agenda relating to white non muslims as they are the same race/culture as the media and government.... no one's going to demonise themselves now are they?

the reasons for this agenda are many. here's a few that immediately spring to mind........ to gain public support for the invasion of muslim lands, to minimise the amount of people that convert to islam, to turn ignorant muslims away from supporting the mujahideen (oh sorry, i mean insurgents). there's many more reasons but i won't bother posting an index list.

regards, franky


Oh yeah, I forgot about the GREAT CONSPIRACY .... nevermind.

[lubna]

to turn ignorant muslims away from supporting the mujahideen

allow me to counter balance it...:)
long live my beloved Mujahidine,
long live my good muslim brothers with BEARD,
long live my good muslim brothers with their trousers above their ANKLES,
long live my muslim sisters with NIQAB,
and long live all the other good muslims with not so obvious marks,
Ameen.


my dear brother franky, what can you expect from the enmey of islam and muslims, they will not be satisfied until they turm muslims back from their religion, but inshaAllah good muslims will only increase in their eemaan.

isnt it that the very magicians that firown relyed upon became muslims themselves! and the crowed that he gathered to see the defeat of musa AS wittnessed the shahadah of the magicians! who can plan better than Allah?this is the nature of the truth who ever gets closer gets struck by it alhumdulillah.

may Allah guide us all to the truth and keep us stead fast under all testing times Ameen.

Ma'assalama

lubna

[Netcurtains3]

First off its clearly not because they are white. The IRA, PLO and ETA have been front page terrorists for decades.

Second it would clearly be concidered a front page news item "IF" their guilt was not concidered borderline. Eg if they own a business that uses the chemicals for a legitimate use then in reality what would be wrong would be the incorrect storage of the chemicals. The law they were charged with might be the police trying to throw the book at them for perhaps a minor-ish (by comparision to real terrorism) offences. For example the police have on occassion stopped white teenage relatives of mine under "prevention of terrorism" charges but in reality they just wanted to search them for drugs (they had none). It is possible it is a media cover up or its not. Either way if you go to NUMEROUS Brit-Asian web sites (eg Pickled Politics used by secular Brit-hindus, secular Brit-muslims etc) it has been widely discussed. Lets wait until more facts emerge before saying the press are covering up (badly) something.

John

[macmuslim]

Oh come on now

Today, we have Jack Straw, a senior politician in the UK in the news for politicising the issue of Niqaab (face veils)
Why? Because JS wants to prove he is a big man who can discuss meaty issues that no-one really thinks or speaks about until it comes up in this way - suddenly other people think "Yeah! You know, we see them fighting us on the telly, and we have some here, it might be Bin Laden under that veil so lets stop them wearing it!"

Meanwhile a sister is stopped from working in a school in Dewsbury for wearing Niqaab (nice timing eh?) and a lady is stopped from wearing a crucifix by British Airways - suddenly Anne Widdicombe, another prominent politician announces a Christian Fightback......

This type of stuff is selling papers and suiting those who allow it to happen as it fits their agenda.

[Netcurtains3]

Hi,
I bought the Sunday Times today (something I don't normally do - I don't like the Murdoch press).

The reason?
You said: "it fits their agenda".....

I wanted to see if I could see the agenda you're on about in this newspaper (a typical UK paper).

First - my bias on the topics you mentioned.

1.The cross.
British Airways sent a FORTUNE a few years ago rebranding themselves from "Fly the FLAG" (eg British and huge cross of Christian origin) to "Worlds favourite airline"... They therefore do not want to see crosses on staff. I Don't blame them. Showing off crosses has nothing to do with Christianity. Anne Widdicombe is clearly wrong on this issue.

2. The veil.
You cannot teach English wearing a veil. She should never have been employed, I can't understand how on earth she got the job. But once there, she has to go. There are thousands of mothers queuing up to be teaching assistants.

Now I challenge you to read todays Sunday Times and see any hint of an anti-muslim bias. I think you're off your trolly (no offence meant).

John

[macmuslim]

Greetings

No offence taken

Personally I perceive you as a deluded, wannabe intellectual who often changes theme or direction, and in the process contradicts yourself or regularly make apparently nonsensical posts, but no offence meant to you either, now that I know we can be adult enough to be upfront and honest.

:D

It is strange coincidence that the paper you refer to historically has had a well established anti Muslim stance. Was that the first paper you reached for? ;)

[Netcurtains3]

Thats why I picked the Sunday Times - it was (apparently) the most anti-muslim. The only story that could be concieved as anti-muslim was the Chelsea V Reading commentory. It made out it was a war and Reading had USA players. You could feel an agenda that somewhere along the line the Sunday Times will want Coppell for England manager.

The paper I normally buy is the Observer. Its main headline today was for new rights for ***s. This, could be seen as anti-muslim but you would have to be blinkered to think that way. Most of the papers this week have been trashing the drinks industry (which is a pro-muslim stance) . The papers abortion stance (eg Daily Mail) is more muslim than athiest.

My gut feeling is you are not academic in that you see islam as clothing and ethnic wars, whereas islam like most religions, is about abortion laws, praying, social responsible drinking, better policing especially around houses owned by the elderly and young families and of course generally being a nice and helpful person. No real muslim can seriously believe (which you appear to) that wearing a veil to teach kids English is a good or sensible idea. Its not islam its malsi (malsi is my new term for nutter fundies).

John