Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Shoes off!
Now this is probably just media propaganda but do you think thast it is acceptable that house raids on suspected terror houses that our armed response service have to remove their shoes before entering a muslim house to make arrests? I just find the image of several pairs of Doc Martins or whatever on the doorstep quite amuing, as to avoid being disrespectful to the house occupants. This was reported in the express yesterday I think!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ICEMANSAV. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Health and Safety shoud prohibit this, I think you will find that this is too great an occupational hazard considering the state of some houses. What about ambulance workers, help my husbands having a heart attack but take your shoes off first!!! Sounds more like the Daily Mail to me...possibly the Sport?
How is the Express any better than the Mail!?
You lot really scare me - seriously. To think that we're living in a country with a principle of "innocent until proven guilty". But so many member of the public (you lot) have edited it to read:
"innocent until proven guilty unless you're Muslim then we can trash your house and damage sacred items in your home because we're all scared of Muslims now because less than 10 Muslims, out of the 1 and a half million plus Muslims in this country bombed, or tried to bomb our capital."
Read between the lines acw how often do armed police make swoops on houses? They must have some idea of activity inside. You are taking about equal rights so why would police have to take off their shoes before entering a muslim house to avoid offence yet similar offence to a non muslim would be ignored. I agree with somebodies post that regular police should have to show respect and removal of shoes is all well and good but armed police in socks is not that effective now is it? People like you scare me acw , the PC genes that run through you are the sort that are making this country a joke.
ICEMANSAV - Don't bring my family into this - HOW DARE YOU?!?
And don't start blaming me for the state of this country!!!! I don't see that respect and tolerance are ruining this country. You wouldn't know - having none of either.
If you don't like it, why don't you and all the other racist xenophobes go elsehwere and start your own little "whites only" colony and see how well THAT turns out.
The story was a bl00dy wind up anyway - probably written to give you BNP lot another chance to dig at the people in this country like me who think it's a good thing that Hitler was defeated in WWII and that fascism is NOT a good idea.
Again acw you have mis-read, you have jumped on your moral high ground and decided that because I don't agree with the soft toch approach to sucide bombers and the suspects that I am now comparable to hitler!? I assume from your other posts that you are studying law of some sort or even gained your law degree, this i think you feel you have to use to argue constantly, in one post you expressed your dismay at the fact that no one was allowed to express their opinion, yet now you are guilty of that very crime re was no reference for your family intended and if you took it that way then I apologise. You began the tone with your post " you lot really scare me....." so don't be so outraged when someone challenges you about your generalisations. I am not racist, far from it, however I think the issue of fanatics needs a more heavy hand if we are to deal correctly with the situation.
Lots of balance now. There is absolutely nowhere near even a vague hint of faint similarity between UK 2005 and Nazi Germany. This thread may have been a wind-up, but if so it took a while to spot, and if it isn't is frighteningly credible isn't it ?
I think to brand any poster here as BNP is indicative of panic and is hitting below the belt a bit (insert smiley here). If we lot are frightening, may our god protect us from the state we'd have if 'they' succeed.
I think the point people are so amazed about is this...
"we can search your house make a complete mess of it and destroy your sacred artifacts unless of course your a Muslim and it doesn't apply"
It should read
"Were going to do it to everyone regardless"
or
"Were going to do it to nobody"
I think this kind of reverse majority discrimination is just as bad as minority discrimination. How would you feel if a collegue got preferential treatment because they had bigger ears...its a bit unfair, unless your job involves listening to music....or perhaps recieving satalite images.
How was mentioning my genes NOT a reference to my family?
You lot do scare me - because you're not prepared to accept that you don't understand everything re this issue. We CAN'T understand it all - yet you feel it's ok to make these judgements - especially based on an article that was probably no longer than 300 words in the tabloid press.
Don't you lot realise that this is just fear of the unknown? None of us understand what is going on at the moment so we get scared. We are just reacting in different ways.
I personally feel that whilst some reaction is necessary, we shouldn't change the core values of this country in a fit of panic. If you disagree with me that is entirely your perogative.
I have an LLB and am currently finishing my LLM. That is not what makes me enjoy a good debate. Perhaps you are confusing the system of teaching law here with that shown in the movies set in the USA.
I like a good debate because like you, I deem myself to be reasonably intelligent, reasonably knowledgable and definitely interested in current affairs.
Again - if you have a problem with that then fine.
mfewell - After someone starts sl*gging off my family, I do tend to get angry. I don't think I'm unique in that. I also didn't really think that icemansav would be offended by being associated with the BNP.
Well said Iceman.
Basically what we have here is a clash between religion and state. The state is employing the police to fulfil a specific function, and the fashion in which they do so is determined by reason. They drive fast cars cos they may have to chase someone. They carry handcuffs cos they may have to arrest someone. They arrest people if there is a strong suspicion of them having done something bad. They don't go into Muslim houses with their shoes on because....because...Well, there's no reason. No one says it, but deep down most believe it: why should I shape my life round the total bo**ox that someone else has been forced to shape their life around? If they want to practice their silliness, be it Islam, Judaism, Xianity, WugaWuga, fine, let them. But when they try to get me to adjust my perfectly normal and justifiable lifestyle (such as wearing cowbits on my size 11s cos it keeps them warm and protected) I will politely but firmly tell them the basis on which they do so: a pile of bo**ox.
Discussions about race or political correctness will always have someone bring up the 'oh the nazis, remember them' point, because its the only way to force some points through...god, we don't want that guy. It tends to obliterate the totally reasonable counterargument to the PC rant.
I crossed posts with reportmonkey there.
I think perhaps I need to clarify. I don't for one second think that the police should be making a special deal for Muslims. I think they should be equally respectful of everyone. It's just that that means different things in different households. For things that are generally know-able in advance, such as 'it is disrespectful to walk on a prayer mat', then it seems only fair that the police try to respect this.
After all, the newspaper article wasn't suggesting that police were only going to show respect to Mulsims. Whether a hoax or not, it was merely recognising that that has particular implications in Muslim households. It's not like the police are going to deliberately trash Christian households and then pop up the street and be the perfect guests in a Muslim home.
Showing respect to Muslims doesn't PREVENT one from showing respect to others.
Or do you lot disagree with me? I presume you will.
acw, love, the 'genes' bit was referring to the PCness that pervades many of your posts.
I have been at close quarters with law and lawyers all my life, in no way does it qualify one for any kind of broad superiority when it comes to matters of social philosophy, no matter how much those in the profession like to think they are. Maybe even the opposite.
Nope absolutely agree, but the Koran should be in the highest place in the house anyway and not on the floor.
However if your going to get offended at something so trivial as a persons shoes then your going to be shocked at most things.
Seems like a story designed to angry up the blood I notice a distinctive lack of responisible journalism these days...its a constant stream of demoralising bad news and scaremongoring. I have not heard one of those nice news stories about a puppy getting stuck down a drain for ages...and I don't get home in time for newsround (I meant that its nice if the puppy gets out alive, not that the puppy getting stuck in the first place was nice story).
Marge, love, you are confusing the hell out of me today! :-p
Genes refers to genetics, ergo it was a dig at my family. Surely?
Otherwise he'd have said "posts" not"genes".
Why do people seem to type 'PCness' with a certain sneer in their words? I don't think that trying not to be racist makes one PC obsessive. I for one think that many attempts at being PC are utterly ridiculous. But that doesn't mean that respect has to go out of the window.
Also MargeB - I've never once tried to suggest that my academic background gives me some sort of superiority over the rest of you. I'm so sorry if you have thought that - it really does reflect very poorly on me that that's your conclusion. I only mentioned my degree subject because ICEMANSAV decided this was the reason why I liked to argue. I really do think that we're all entitled to our opinions and that in many cases we'll have to agree to disagree. I just don't think people need to start laying into other people's families to get a point across.
Oh - and of course the Hitler comments were just designed to provoke a reaction. But then when people decide you're just a PC do-gooder and that therefore everything you say is utter fluff, sometimes it's necessary to yell to get them to evern bother to read what you're writing before dismissing it out of hand.
Totally agree that people shouldn't leave things where they will get trodden on (unless they're carpets, rugs or doormats).
acw , I do find the link to BNP offensive and obviously you know this point. As a reference to your genes, i should have been more specific, it was an incorrect use of the phrase, again I wish to apologise for any offence you suffered. I don't care if you are the best solicitor in the U.K everyone else has an opinion and it should be respected regardless, and not dismissed under your cloak of letters! How could I " slag " off your family when I do not know them or indeed you, lets get something straight I have nothing against muslims, its terrorists that we are talking about and it shouldn't matter if a suspected terrorist is white, asian or an alien, the treatment should be the same, ( I think you attempted to portray this viewpoint also ).
You are very overly defensive which is a trait of character and spoils your very good points that you make.
I too like a debate and sure that we will disagree again on threads in the future:-) but comparing me to a BNP member or even Hitler is a bit extreme!
P.S With the amount of time you spend on here, if I had t work then I would most certainly have opted to be a solicitor ;-) j/k
acw- could you please clarify: who exactly is 'you lot'? You're saying it a lot and it's starting to wind me up a bit. I think sometimes you argue for argument's sake.
I think that even if this story was a fake, it has raised an interesting debate. I believe that the police should NOT have to remove their shoes before entering the house of a practising Muslim if they are raiding it. They are not going to trash the place, merely find who they�re looking for and leave. If, however, they are just making enquiries, then it would only be polite to remove their shoes.
How this has all degenerated into a big argument about xenophobes (although none of us have made any racist comments and �you lot� (which you haven�t explained), I don�t know. It makes for quite interesting reading though!
acw, isn't it possible that people go on a bit about PC because one heck of a lot of people are worried about it. Only in this country could it be suggested that the bombings be blamed on someone else (breakaway Salvation Army?) lest we upset muslims.
We all get agitated by opposing opinions, but it is healthy to debate, and good that we have the freedom in this country to do so. Many of the comments made on AB would have you in chokey pdq in Xistan. In Nazi Germany you would have disappeared into the Night and Fog.
How much law you gittin' done today...? (smiley)
If this is an actual policy, then it's completely ridiculous! Surely armed police are only deployed when there is an immediate threat? If that's the case, they haven't got time to pussyfoot around!
I agree that under normal circumstances they should show respect for people's property and beliefs (and I suspect that most of them do without needing official dictats), but if an armed squad is needed then the circumstances are somewhat different.
Just to point out (before the bleeding heart brigade accuse me of racism) I'd also think it was ridiculous if armed police had to remove the buttons from their uniforms if raiding an Amish house!
Right - it seems I have to defend myself to several people at once here.
I'll try to address it all in turn before you swing round for the next attack.
ICEMANSAV - I will explain again - I am NOT a solicitor. I have a law degree and am working for a masters. So do thousands of other people in this country. I just went to great pains to explain that I really don't think that this makes me superior and I accept it as a slur on my character that people think this of me. I am ashamed of myself if I have come across this way - but it is you, icemansav, you brought up my academic background in this thread, not me.
Again - as I am not employed as a solicitor, but a student (yes, I'm a student, wow, more weapons for your armoury there). I've been on here all morning as I like to know when I'm being sl*gged off so I can keep an eye on it all. Also I study at home and .. hang on, I'm not defending my use of this site to anyone!!
Finally, sorry if I caused offence with the BNP comment. All the anti-PC stuff sounded fairly right of centre to me. I concede that I was wrong about that and I'm sorry.
ctd...
