This is what I posted at Harry's Place at
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/06/17/al-muhajiroun-extremists-and-thugs/#comment-355918
I wonder who the extremists really are.
I was there and would have preferred the debate to have gone ahead
rather than having it stopped on the spurious grounds of infringing the rule of non-segregation.
If only someone had the presence of mind to ask those who were against and for segregation to raise their hands as well as those who didn’t care, and resolved the matter by a democratic vote, even if it meant that the segregationists would have had the day, since they were in the majority.
Not being an extremist trying to make a point, I was actually happy
where I was.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jun/18/islamist-al-muhajiroun-meeting-chaos
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/islamist-group-has-to-abandon-relaunch-debate-1707890.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23709001-details/Clashes+as+Muslim+extremists+attempt+to+segregate+women/article.do
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1193869/Muslim-clashes-segregation-men-women-forces-cancellation-meeting.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jun/18/al-muhajiroun-islamist-relaunch?showallcomments=true
Having been myself accused of all sorts by subsequent commentators, I posted another comment:
It was a trumped-up reason to stop the meeting, and an opportunity was missed to have these Muslims explain to us how and why their version of Sharia is so perfect and beautiful, and for Douglas Murray and anyone else to challenge this.
If they were hiring and paying for the hall, it behoves those
who wished to attend what was after all a free meeting to abide by their rules.To do otherwise would have been an abuse of hospitality.
If invited to someone’s house and asked to remove my shoes before crossing the threshold, I would do so without hesitation and with good grace, even if it were my custom to sleep in my boots in my own home.
It is after all only good manners.
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=135
Vote: Should the Sharia for UK debate have been stopped?
2 comments:
Are you very dim? Al-M did not own the hall. They were the ones with the bad manners by not asking permission of the hall owners before deciding to impose segregation or warning visitors that men and women would not be allowed to sit together. They are clearly mentalists. Would you be so tolerant of racial segregation?
It is for you to decide whether I am very dim.
It seems that all those who were glad the meeting was stopped were all very rude and self-righteous people.
I am sure the segregation would have been fine if no one had objected to it.
It therefore depends on what your priorities are:
If it was your desire to stop the meeting all along, then you would object to segregation.
If it was your desire to hear the debate, then you would have put up with being deprived of the company of opposite sex for the duration of the debate, as I was quite prepared to.
As it was, neither cause was advanced, because of the silly rude people who decided to make a mountain out of a molehill, and the debate did not take place.
Al-M now claims Douglas Murray was rude and frightened of a debate. A spectacular own-goal by the Islamophobes, I'm afraid.
I would have had the debate and then attacked their reasons and arguments later. Indeed, I was looking forward to asking them a few awkward questions, but this was prevented by the Rude and Silly Anti-Segregationist Fanatics.
As for your question about whether I would attend a racially segregated debate in order to hear or report on it, then yes, I would put up with the segregation in order that I may collect ammunition against them from the arguments they put forward, and attack them later.
I won't ask you if you are very dim, even if I rather suspect it, because I would not like to come across as being rude and dim.
Post a Comment