UK

Rain (AM and PM) 6° London Hi 10°C / Lo 6°C

Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked

Labour peer says criticism of segregation was 'cowardly'

By Michael Savage, Political Correspondent

A Labour peer has demanded an apology from Jim Fitzpatrick, the Farming minister, after Mr Fitzpatrick publicly criticised the segregation of men and women at Muslim weddings.

Lord Patel of Blackburn, a senior figure in Britain's Muslim community, accused Mr Fitzpatrick of launching a "cowardly attack" on Muslims who opted for a segregated wedding, accusing him of pandering to "anti-Muslim sentiment" within his constituency.

Mr Fitzpatrick angered many Muslims in his east London constituency when he walked out of a ceremony at the London Muslim Centre last week in protest at being split up from his wife. He also gave interviews suggesting that the custom showed a "degree of intolerance" towards guests who may be offended.

But in a scathing attack on his party colleague, Lord Patel said that Mr Fitzpatrick's stance was merely an attempt to gain votes.

"I suspect Mr Fitzpatrick has one eye on the general election and has mistakenly used this event for political gain," he said. "He is playing to a section of the voters with whom anti-Muslim sentiment is appealing. This is underhand and dangerous."

He warned that Mr Fitzpatrick risked creating "alienation and distrust" within his own community by implying that all Muslims in the area must assimilate for reasons of social cohesion.

The bridegroom has also asked for an apology from Mr Fitzpatrick for "hijacking" the ceremony for political gain. Bodrul Islam said he had been "amazed and shocked" by Mr Fitzpatrick's protest.

The minister blamed the decision to segregate men and women at the ceremony on the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE), a conservative group with an office at the East London Mosque next door to the wedding venue. However, Mr Islam denied that he or his wife had come under any pressure to separate their guests.

Mr Fitzpatrick yesterday said he had been seeking to highlight the growing influence of the IFE, rather than criticise the wishes of the families involved.

"There was nothing cowardly about the attack on the IFE. It was very direct and very open," he said.

"The IFE are intolerant, not the community. The community is a very generous and open one. My beef is that the IFE is starting to influence the social and political life of the Bangladeshi and Muslim community.

"I have apologised on camera to the families and to the community for any offence that I may have caused. That was not what I was trying to do."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
[info]marlinspike2009 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 12:13 am (UTC)
"He warned that Mr Fitzpatrick risked creating "alienation and distrust" within his own community by implying that all Muslims in the area must assimilate for reasons of social cohesion."

Erm what's the alternative? A ghetto?

No thanks. If assimilation into the UK population is such a bad thing - why come here?
[info]antizion wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:36 pm (UTC)
Resistance is futile - YOU MUST ASSIMILATE !!

You twat they didnt come here they were BORN HERE !!

Why should they be forced to dress the way you do or follow your 'culture' (of binge drinking, pornography, sex & havings kids outside of marriage etc etc)
(no subject) - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:15 pm (UTC) Expand
Really?
[info]ianpurdie wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 12:17 am (UTC)
Can Mr Fitzpatrick claim he was unaware of this "opted for a segregated wedding" well before arriving? If so then he simply should have held his counsel and gone along with his hosts custom.

If he was earlier aware of the proposed arrangements and found them not to his liking then he could have politely decined the invitation.

I was always taught to respect your hosts customs. If not to your liking then don't go.

Pretty simple, pretty basic and don't make a total pratt of yourself by seeking to make cheap political capital.
Re: Really?
[info]mark1928 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:02 am (UTC)
This is the UK, a European country, and we are the hosts. So before our guests the muslims arrived perhaps they should have been aware of our customs. They could then have hosted a non-segregated wedding.

If they don't respect our customs perhaps they should leave the UK?

Pretty simple, pretty basic, no?
Re: Really? - [info]worichards - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:17 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]pozac - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:40 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]jahrigsby - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:26 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]chaps25 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 11:00 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]mark1928 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 11:36 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]ligeia_bm - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:42 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]pozac - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:30 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Really? - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:17 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]thomas_66 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:06 am (UTC) Expand
[info]world_of_water wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 12:18 am (UTC)
Would he have walked out of a segregated wedding of any other faith? The Jewish faith for example? I think not!
I would have done
[info]jonny_socialist wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:58 am (UTC)
We need to stop the intolerance practiced by religious organisations. And quite apart from anything esle segregation is illegal in this country. Its called gender discrimination. Mr Fitzpatrick is right.
Re: I would have done - [info]john_b_ellis - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:44 am (UTC) Expand
Re: I would have done - [info]bowesy - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:58 am (UTC) Expand
Re: I would have done - [info]worichards - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:30 am (UTC) Expand
Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 02:14 am (UTC)
It was coming to him.
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
Re: Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked
[info]pozac wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:44 pm (UTC)
Just remeber YOU said it.
Re: Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked - [info]famulla - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 02:07 am (UTC) Expand
Sexual segregation at Muslim Weddings.
[info]peterhawkins1 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 03:08 am (UTC)
It is quite normal for a Muslim Wedding to be performed in the absence of the Bride, who is represented by a Man for the formal contract. Conscientious Imams presiding at such a ceremony may see the Bride to ascertain her wishes, but there are many occasions when this does not happen. For those of us who follow the Roman system of marriage requiring Publicity, Mutual Consent, Mutual Vows in Public and a life together of one man with one woman, the Muslim system of Marriage seems to be oppressive of the women who must take part in it. To have one's wife segregated without consulation on such an occasion is offensive and disturbing. Having had this done to my wife once, I have always made it clear to future Muslim hosts that I could not accept such segregation in future. It has not happened since, and indeed such segregation is lessening. The Reverend Peter M. Hawkins.
Re: Sexual segregation at Muslim Weddings.
[info]jahrigsby wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:35 am (UTC)
"may see the bride??" what the hell are you talking about? what on earth is so offensive to you about the marriage custom of asking the bride AWAY from her husband to be about HER WISHES, without the prejudicial presence of her in-laws.? The reason the bride is asked seperately whether she wishes to marry her beloved is so she can do so of her own free will, not pressurised by anyone. Good grief, what is wrong with you idiots out there?
Re: Sexual segregation at Muslim Weddings. - [info]peterhawkins1 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 05:12 pm (UTC) Expand
All a bit of posturing
[info]49niner wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 04:45 am (UTC)
The minister leaving the Muslim wedding, if the story has been reported accurately, was insensitive. If you attend an event in a different culture, surely you need to know in advance a bit about the ceremony and how it is conducted, so you don't make an inadvertent faux pas, for instance.

Storming out of the ceremony and making a scene about it was just very bad manners and Mr Fitzpatrick has opened himself to all the criticism that has been thrown in his direction. I feel sorry for the young couple on their big day. Weddings are stressful at the best of times when you are the centre of attention, and this is the last thing they needed.

Muslim weddings and culture are different from our traditions. But if that's how they want to conduct their lives, then who is it hurting? A bit of live and let live, please.
Re: All a bit of posturing
[info]marlinspike2009 wrote:
Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:21 pm (UTC)
Women fought and died for equality in this country. Let's turn back all those years of hardship and effort because 49niner doesn't have the balls to stand up to a few medieval loudmouths.

Pathetic.

Are you a closet misogynist as well, or are you a full on fairy tale believer?
This is Britain
[info]serendipity1066 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 04:53 am (UTC)
If people want to practice misogyny and gender discrimination then they need to leave this country. This is not an Islamic state and whilst we tolerate the Islamic religion we can never accept these backward practices. The political agenda of creeping Islamification and gradual colonisation of our country must be stopped now. Enough is enough we have seen the trouble that 2 million of them create what happens when that rises to a predicted level of 10 or 15 million.
Re: This is Britain
[info]john_b_ellis wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:11 am (UTC)
Come on, serendipity. I actually share the fear expressed in your last sentence, should the population proportion grow in the way that you describe. But there's no Islamification of the UK until you see serious attempts to mould everyone's practices into an Islamic style - such as segregated weddings for all!

Be careful what you argue for - encourage governments to prescribe and proscribe, and you may find them curtailing rights and liberties that are important to you. It might feel different then!
Re: This is Britain - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:25 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: This is Britain - [info]worichards - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:26 am (UTC) Expand
Re: This is Britain - [info]jahrigsby - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:38 am (UTC) Expand
Re: This is Britain - [info]pozac - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:52 pm (UTC) Expand
Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked
[info]daidwl wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:10 am (UTC)
This was a Muslim wedding. At Muslim weddings the sexes are segregated as in other parts of their life.
If this guy has Muslim constituents, shouln't he be sent on a course on a) getting to know other cultures / religions and b) manners.
Re: Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked
[info]mark1928 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:15 am (UTC)
what about sending the muslims on a course to learn about other cultures, i.e. the UK and Europe?

This is an issue across the whole of Western Europe. I was just only holiday in Spain and it was a big conversational topic.

Seriously, you new labour liberals can keep on doing whatever you like not to offend immigrants and their medieval ways, but the populace across the continent are becoming seriously fed up with this.
Re: Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked - [info]ligeia_bm - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:51 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Minister who left Muslim wedding attacked - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:27 pm (UTC) Expand
Who is Lord Patel?
[info]raywoods99 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:14 am (UTC)
This is what happens when you give people a title. Who is Lord Patel and who cares anyway.
The Labour MP concerned is more in tune with the electorate than 'Lord Patel'
This is the most tolerant state in the World and we have had enough of being told what to think and do by those who remain closeted behind a small world in which women are told what to do and what to think by men. Go to any political meeting in a Moslem community and see for yourself.
Re: Who is Lord Patel?
[info]austincambridge wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 12:57 pm (UTC)
I've no idea who Lord Patel is. He sounds like a fictional creation.
Insensitive? Really?
[info]had_it wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:22 am (UTC)
How culturally insensitive of the hosts to violate local customs so blatantly. If you host an event in a different culture, surely you need to know a bit about how to do it without committing social faux pas like segregating males and females.

The hosts have been in Britain long enough to know that the British value gender equality. I was always taught to respect the values of the country I am in. Pretty simple, pretty basic, really.

Unless, of course, the host were deliberately intending to insult the values of the country they live in and of all of the British guests they invited. Or perhaps they were merely trying to get some headlines by inviting an MP to a ceremony that ignored or insulted local values.
Re: Insensitive? Really?
[info]ligeia_bm wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:09 pm (UTC)
Sorry, the wedding was carried out in a PRIVATE place near a Mosque. If an Orthodox Jewish wedding is carried out in a PRIVATE setting according to Jewish orthodox customs, there wouldn't be the same uproar about the host "violating local custom". One does anything one wants in your OWN PRIVATE environment. An environment that belongs to the Muslim community, and where Muslim customs are expected to be followed. As much as anyone is expected to follow or respect Jewish customs (or Buddhists, or whatever) in a PRIVATE place belonging to those communities. I guess that the true nature of intolerant Europe is starting to show again. You have never accepted anything that didn't follow the European style. In the past, pogroms persecuted Jews. There were no mosques or temples belonging to other faiths, and Christians killed each other. Now, faith doesn't play such an important role in European life. But racism does. Anything that doesn't conform to what you believe is European uses and customs has to disappear. So much for tolerance. This has been the rule for centuries. You are again behaving as you always did. My way or the highway. Today are Muslims, next will be someone else who doesn't look European enough. Latin Americans and Africans, and Asians feel it already, though less violently. They'll have their turn soon enough, though.

Anyway, you are reversing the whole episode. Usually, in everyday life, when an spoiled brat goes to a party and throws a tantrum because the host doesn't do what he wants, he doesn't deserve anything but contempt, some laughter and jokes at his expenses in most cases. But as this was a MUSLIM wedding (attended by a majority of Muslims who adhere to the rules and customs practiced in Muslims weddings normally), then the blame is not of the guest, but of the host! UNBELIEVABLE. Bad manners of the guest are rewarded in this case, because of the anti Muslim bias. So, because ONE non Muslim guest wanted that Muslims changed their arrangements to suit him better, we have that the Muslims are in the wrong, not the bad mannered, spoiled brat of this MP? Well, this only proves what I said before. Britons, and Europeans in general are intolerant, racist bigots. It's their way, or their highway. Even in our own countries that are invaded when we don't do as they want... As I said before, Europeans are a plague.
Re: Insensitive? Really? - [info]had_it - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 07:42 am (UTC) Expand
These are the usual beliefs amongst us. No one is dragged to the wedding. In any event, there is a p
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:23 am (UTC)
I did my homework and I am told this. The preparations take a long time and all those to come heartily invited as they are they say, Friends and relatives who are part of the family and that the wedding would be blessed with their presence” These are the usual beliefs amongst us. No one is dragged to the wedding. In any event, there is a politer note at times. RSVP please sent your apologies to mail…. and please do not bring any gifts. We need your blessing by you presence. Now if you forget to bring the gift, go to bless them then remember, “Oops I forgot the gift, the host says, “It is okay. We need your blessing”. You march off and say, “I don’t like your saying I do” no one has asked you what you like. That is my childhood days when I was five when I used to forget the gift, ate plenty, and said, “The cake was not baked”. Bad? Now I am grown I eat and say the beer was flat
Diastrophism USAGE:
"There is even a mosque across the street from the hotel, but most people here believe it was spirits, not volcanic diastrophism, that sent deadly vapors roiling up from Lake Nios, killing the villagers who lived over the hills." Jonathan Broder; Spirits in Lake, Bottle Haunt Cameroon; The Chicago Tribune; Sep 2, 1986.
Re: These are the usual beliefs amongst us. No one is dragged to the wedding. In any event, there is
[info]lexyboy wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:45 am (UTC)
er, what?
it wasnt a public event
[info]cognito_sum wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:38 am (UTC)
This was a private event and was being held as per the customs of the hosts and the vast majority of their guests. I agree with an earlier post on the fact that maybe the MP concerned should have checked his PC handbook before attending instead of making such a big mess of it after the event. Also, what if a Muslim peer or MP had walked out of a church wedding because his wife was made to sit next to an un-related male or because there was alcohol and non-halal food? Mr Fitzpatrick's wife was not taken away by the muslim Mafia to be forecbly converted to Islam - she was asked to go sit with the Ladies section of the congregation which is always the rule in mosques no matter where they are or what is being done and its not reliant on whose offices are next to the mosque! FYI - segregation of the congregation is also perfectly accepted and normal practice in Hindu temples, sikh Gurudwaras and Jewish sinagogues (sp)...thats four out of the five leading faiths in this country.
AND AND AND AND AND AND AND AND Obama welcome all You bad padre??
[info]famulla wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:38 am (UTC)
About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday ? the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.
Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
This warrants closer scrutiny
[info]stewartpa wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 06:49 am (UTC)
Jim Fitzpatrick has been quoted as saying : I have been to many muslim weddings before and on the only other occasion that men and women were separated (at this mosque) we left. Did this make the news at the time? He did not know the couple personally - why was he invited? The mosque has been holding weddings where men and women are separated since 2004 - why the change?
No moral equivalence
[info]thetitssayso wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:09 am (UTC)
This is the kind of trouble that can happen when some individuals and groups believe that backward and primitive norms of behavior have a moral equivalence to the norms and culture of the west, and then take umbrage when someone who stands by what he knows is right and wrong refuses to bend to their rules. Fitzpatrick was correct to refuse to participate in an event with such a retrograde cultural influence as to do so would be seen as lending it moral equivalence to western norms of behavior, which it does not deserve.
Sheer ignorance
[info]allenn007 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:30 am (UTC)
which is not surprising either from a minister of this Government. He should have known about Islamic customs. He should have known that this was likely. But it does seem that Muslims have become the new Jews. He should be made to resign his position for engendering anti-Islamic sentiment and playing up to the BNP.
Re: Sheer ignorance
[info]mark1928 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:04 am (UTC)
yeah weird isn't it. It's not like they've launched terrorist attacks or anything like that is it?
Re: Sheer ignorance - [info]allenn007 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 09:36 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Sheer ignorance - [info]mark1928 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:14 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Sheer ignorance - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:31 pm (UTC) Expand
Alienation and Distrust
[info]tflrichard wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:35 am (UTC)
Does one MP walking out of your wedding really need to provoke such a response from Mr Patel? All this seems to me to be is an example of a prominent Muslim being unable to silently accept criticism of his faith; whether that criticism is cosntructive or justified is immaterial.

I do think it would've been wise for Mr Fitzpatrick to accept the custom and remain at the wedding though, whilst he may not agree with the practices, as others have pointed out on here many religions and cultures have them and it's good manners to accept them. It's not as if he was asked to flog a woman for wearing trousers.

On the wider subject of gender discrimination in Islam I am far from an expert but I believe in equal rights for women and men and feel any faiths, customs or beliefs that advocate otherwise to be morally wrong and their being put into practice should have no place in this country. The right to choose your faith, food and way of life yes but where these clash with moral standards, such as this equality of men and women, then the latter takes precendence. I would be interested to hear how many Muslims agree with this last point?
Re: Alienation and Distrust
[info]jahrigsby wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:47 am (UTC)
the vast majority of muslim weddings are NOT segrgated affairs. it's funny how we muslims are now being told to adjust and respect customs here, but having been 'here' for over 50 years, the hosts know next to nothing about us!
Re: Alienation and Distrust - [info]drahcir38 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 12:17 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Alienation and Distrust - [info]marlinspike2009 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:38 pm (UTC) Expand
[info]botegogae wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 07:55 am (UTC)
Ian Purdie (12:17 am) is right, if Fitzpatrick didn't know beforehand just what happens at a muslim wedding then he is an idiot. If he did know he could have declined the invitation.

Usually it's Jack Straw who does somersaults to impress his muslim constituents in Blackburn. New Labour doesn't seem to know whether it's coming or going.
changing rooms
[info]rexxxxxxxx wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:01 am (UTC)


when I used the womans changing room at our local swimming pool to protest against segregation.I was thrown out by an angry mob before I could even get my pants off.

I think this was a legitimate protest.

they had no right to smash my video camera and should have let me get dressed before chasing me down the street
Re: changing rooms
[info]rexxxxxxxx wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 04:42 pm (UTC)


they never did return my anorak
"cowardly attack"
[info]igor1st wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:20 am (UTC)
Lord Patel needs a Roget's Thesaurus, or better still, a copy of the OED. (House library ?)..to look up "Cowardly"...

On the other hand Farmer Jim needs to get out more among the Asian folks in his community... it could be said he cannot best serve their interests with so little knowledge of their ways.

What fits Patel, Fitzpatrick
[info]lambbalti wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:38 am (UTC)


Marlinspike. You and I assume from the quote, Fitzpatrick, are both confusing integration with assimilation. You can become integrated into the UK population without becoming assimilated.
Re: What fits Patel, Fitzpatrick
[info]marlinspike2009 wrote:
Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:33 pm (UTC)
Indeed: neither has happened. I live in Whitechapel, and there is no integration.

Segregating social events due to gender is backward, medieval, and misogynist and has no place in the United Kingdom.

Next we'll be saying female circumcision is OK as we don't want to offend those who practice it.

It's sick - the suffragettes must be turning in their graves to see the British people laid prostrate before yet another backward, male-dominated fairy story.
Sympathy for Fitzpatrick
[info]unshakenwill wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:51 am (UTC)
The mind boggles. "Lord Patel" - Is it not enough that the latter has been honoured in the British Upper House. Does he have to strut about demanding apologies from us - elected representatives in our country? In this case, it was offensive for the hosts to separate him from his wife in an act which was demeaning to his wife. He should have been, at least, pre-warned. Let us say that this barbarity does not occur at all Moslem weddings so Mr Fitzpatrick might have been forgiven for not having it enter his mind before the event.

I would have been greatly offended if I were invited to a wedding or whatever event and told I would be segregated with my gender group. I recall as long as 25 years ago in England when my husband and I were invited to dinner at the home of an old friend of mine. As soon as dinner was over, the men went off into one room to drink, smoke cigars, fart and tell course jokes while the women were herded into another room where we received a lecture on wrapping Christmas presents. Both my husband and I felt extremely uncomfortable but we were dignified and stayed out the experience for long enough to make it legitimate to wish our hosts Good Bye. We did not stay in touch and I remember feeling quite mortified. Whenever the thought crosses my mind, it makes me shiver.

I believe Lord Patel would do well to stop to reflect that in 2009 - certainly in Britain and in all Western countries, the segregation of men and women, socially, civicly or domestically is quite beyond the pale. Different cultures have different traditions - they are no more than traditions, disputed even among themselves but to impose them on the host nation, in your face, in pretence of religious mores, is quite unacceptable.
To Firoz Ali Mullah
[info]directhex wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:54 am (UTC)
Dear FA. Mullah,

As muslim I find your interventions on this discussion boards embarassing. You maybe be a nice guy, and full off enthusiams but you never stick to the topic and make arguments that are frankly meaningless. If this was Star Wars you'd be Jar Jar Binks.

I'm sorry for whacking you like this but I've been watching for a while. Whenever I see your name I end up cringing. Stop it mate OR practice discursive writing - one of the two, at the moment you make no sense -ever
Re: To Firoz Ali Mullah
[info]ali_bear9 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:21 am (UTC)
You may well be a muslim, but i don't believe 'famulla' is. I too have been observing his bizarre postings and my guess is he's a joker. Weird sense of humour, but a joker nonetheless.
Re: To Firoz Ali Mullah - [info]hitch2 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 10:34 am (UTC) Expand
Re: To Firoz Ali Mullah - [info]famulla - Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 11:35 am (UTC) Expand
Re: To Firoz Ali Mullah - [info]cyberhippy13 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 03:36 am (UTC) Expand
I wouldn't havegone in the first place . . .
[info]olde_janner wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC)
"alienation and distrust" - That has already been accomplished by themselves. They don't need any helping hand from another agenda driven numptie.
[info]goatface69 wrote:
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 at 08:59 am (UTC)
marlinspike2009 - 'If assimilation into the UK population is such a bad thing - why come here?' - so you must mean assimilate like ex-pat brits assimilate into cultures abroad; or rather as THEY DONT and live as they would back home in the UK complete with a copy of the sun, baked beens on toast and a nice rumble down the boozer with some locals...take a look at your own culture before assuming to label others...retard

[info]marlinspike2009 wrote:
Wednesday, 19 August 2009 at 12:36 pm (UTC)
"take a look at your own culture before assuming to label others...retard"

"Ex-pat Brits" are not my own culture. If I were Spanish for example, I would have exactly the same opinions about these Britsh living in Spain who refuse to integrate.

I do not have one rule for British people, and one for another.

However, tabloid newspapers and rumbles in the boozer are also part of Spanish culture, although I will concede that Baked Beans are a peculiarity. It's not like introducing misogyny, female circumcision, forced marriage or burning heathens (although again, historical Spain had as good a record as historical Britain on this front).

Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date