Muslim Plot Thickens

First topic message reminder :

14th April 2014

Twenty-five schools are being investigated in connection with an alleged plot by conservative Muslims to force out headteachers and governors.

A new chief advisor is now being appointed by Birmingham City Council to handle the at least 200 complaints received in relation to Operation Trojan Horse after an unsigned, undated document was sent to the council and teaching unions last year.

It apparently set out a blueprint for seizing control of the governing bodies of schools, and forcing out those who do not agree. It claimed to have forced a change of leadership at four schools.

Whistleblowers - including former staff - have made a number of allegations against schools in Birmingham since the accusations came to light, including one claim the teachings of an al-Qaeda-linked preacher were praised in front of pupils.

Other complaints include the alleged segregation of boys and girls in lessons and assemblies, a ban on sex education and bullying of non-Muslim staff.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said he was "very, very concerned about allegations that taxpayer-funded schools have become vehicles of particular ideologies".

"I have always supported faith schools but the best faith schools use their religious identity as engines of integration rather than silos of segregation," he added.

The council's investigation, running alongside a separate inquiry by the Department for Education (DfE), is due to initially report back in May.

At a briefing, councillors said the 25 schools being investigated in Birmingham included primaries, secondaries, community schools and academies. Fifteen of the schools have so far been inspected by Ofsted.

Birmingham City Council also confirmed that it was in contact with authorities in Bradford and Manchester who had been experiencing "similar" issues.

http://news.sky.com/story/1242295/Muslim-plot-to-take-over-schools-investigated

Tesstacious wrote:

eddie wrote:

Haven't you done that with the missing plane?
Don't we do that with every single story on here? Including your Christians kill a lot of people in Africa one??

Works both ways and there's no answer to that one sass. Some of you have blinkers when it comes to some things. Sorry!!

Spot on.  What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect.  By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.  Ask a Muslim - ask Sexy Mama - she's condemned things that need condemning.  You wouldn't protect all murderers and rapists because they happened to be English; it's the same principle.

Spot on yourself.   

eddie wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:

Spot on.  What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect.  By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.  Ask a Muslim - ask Sexy Mama - she's condemned things that need condemning.  You wouldn't protect all murderers and rapists because they happened to be English; it's the same principle.

Spot on yourself.   

Hardly Eddie, as nobody is defending anyone save the countless many Muslims clubbed together with Salfists and people have condemned those that are doing this, what is being done though and seen here again is to promote a view this is what all Muslims are like, and that is poor, and part of an agenda to demonize Muslims not only in this country but elsewhere.
So if true which I have no doubt some Salafists have been trying to undermine the school system, many have already condemned, I fail to see where any have not or said they would not, but you like Tess go off the back of the media.


Maybe you can show me where any would not or have not condemned those involved?

You see that is a copout claus to try and hide the real motive yet again to club together all Muslims as bad, the same lame usage of claiming people do not condemn when they do

eddie wrote:

Tesstacious wrote:

Spot on.  What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect.  By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.  Ask a Muslim - ask Sexy Mama - she's condemned things that need condemning.  You wouldn't protect all murderers and rapists because they happened to be English; it's the same principle.

Spot on yourself.   

Without the wish to spread spots incase they are infectious, Chicken pox, Measles, and the non nice ones......

Spot on threesome............. calamine to the ready.

Well said. Bravo.

so Now 3/4 people agree on some non-existent claim to people not condemning?

  

Very odd

Didge wrote:so Now 3/4 people agree on some non-existent claim to people not condemning?

  

Very odd

Are you the quarter, or the fourth ?

gerber wrote:

Didge wrote:so Now 3/4 people agree on some non-existent claim to people not condemning?

  

Very odd

Are you the quarter, or the fourth ?

Hi Gerber

Ha Ha nope, was unsure if Vod had also agreed, hence 3 to 4


Again am still waiting with anticipation showing where anyone has not condemned an actual crime where they have posted on a thread?

Didge wrote:

gerber wrote:

Are you the quarter, or the fourth ?

Hi Gerber

Ha Ha nope, was unsure if Vod had also agreed, hence 3 to 4


Again am still waiting with anticipation showing where anyone has not condemned an actual crime where they have posted on a thread?

Ok.............

Mr Nels clever bugger confusing advocate...

Cannot get the link, the thread, the thought. Looked through whole post. No idea of where you are coming from....

gerber wrote:

Didge wrote:


Hi Gerber

Ha Ha nope, was unsure if Vod had also agreed, hence 3 to 4


Again am still waiting with anticipation showing where anyone has not condemned an actual crime where they have posted on a thread?

Ok.............

Mr Nels clever bugger confusing advocate...

Cannot get the link, the thread, the thought.  Looked through whole post.  No idea of where you are coming from....

You and Eddie agreed with this:


What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect. By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.


Where has anyone not condemned any guilt people found to be doing anything Gerber?


Nobody has excused anything, so tell me what is the indefensible here?

Didge wrote:

gerber wrote:

Ok.............

Mr Nels clever bugger confusing advocate...

Cannot get the link, the thread, the thought.  Looked through whole post.  No idea of where you are coming from....

You and Eddie agreed with this:


What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect.  By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.


Where has anyone not condemned any guilt people found to be doing anything Gerber?


Nobody has excused anything, so tell me what is the indefensible here?

Mr Nels,

Why are the Birmingham Police, Councillors, education officers et al so against the appointment of Peter Clarke to review the findings of the smoking gun the non Trojan Horse......

maybe some radicalism will be unearthed, maybe his nose will smell an agent provocateur, who knows.............. but people are unhappy..... And so be it.

And the Community will win out on this and someone without nonse and more fluffy slippers will be adjudicator........ sad day for the England.

gerber wrote:

Didge wrote:


You and Eddie agreed with this:


What people who are so bent on defending the indefensible don't realize is that they're causing more damage to the group they want to protect.  By excusing any behaviour no matter how appalling just because the perpetrator is a Muslim results in people hating Muslims per se.


Where has anyone not condemned any guilt people found to be doing anything Gerber?


Nobody has excused anything, so tell me what is the indefensible here?

Mr Nels,

Why are the Birmingham Police, Councillors, education officers et al so against the appointment of Peter Clarke to review the findings of the smoking gun the non Trojan Horse......

maybe some radicalism will be unearthed, maybe his nose will smell an agent provocateur, who knows..............  but people are unhappy.....  And so be it.

And the Community will win out on this and someone without nonse and more fluffy slippers will be adjudicator........  sad day for the England.

So you could find no poster then Gerber?


I have made my views clear as to what and who I think is behind this, that was though not what I asked, as 3 of you agreed that posters were defending the indefensible, of which I have seen none of, of which I am yet to be told who the indefensible are, is it Muslims, or the people, no doubt Salafists behind such an attempt if found true on schools?

If it is the Salafists, I already condemn them before any of this as I against their hard line Ultra conservative views and would condemn any if found to be involved in any plot


So again, I ask, please can either, Eddie, Tess or yourself point out who is the indefensible here and who found guilty has not been condemned?

Um, there is nothing here to be defended or abhorred, so far it's just allegations and people too ready to believe the worst about others without evidence.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Um, there is nothing here to be defended or abhorred, so far it's just allegations and people too ready to believe the worst about others without evidence.

Agreed, I am though still interested to know who the indefensible are?

Didge it sometimes feels as though no one is allowed to criticise a Muslim in case we all get jumped on.
Now you already know my stance on Muslims, from times past and from here.

But I do see, as with some of Andy's threads, that he'll post up a news story and it's blatantly obvious that the person in question is vile or nuts or whatever, but Andy gets attacked because the story is about a Muslim or immigrant.
He gets jumped all over for posting the story and the criminal or whatever is completely ignored and almost seems to be excused, because it's Andy's thread and "Andy hates Muslims and immigrants so here we go!"

That's my point of view.
Now I'm not up for going round in circles with this didge, as it's what I sometimes see (not always) and that's that.
No doubt you'll disagree but that's your view and this is mine x

Really Eds? You don't see what he's up to, when he posts threads like 'are all crimes in the UK committed by immigrants'?

Sassy wrote:Really Eds?   You don't see what he's up to, when he posts threads like 'are all crimes in the UK committed by immigrants'?

Don't take any notice of those ones sass. Of course not all crimes are committed by immigrants.   

Didge AKA Mr nels

I have already given my reasons and are not answerable to you.

To remind you....

25 schools average number of pupils lets be minimalist..... 800.............. 25 x 800 = 20,000. Alot of Muslim children. Number irrelevant if radicalization was not taking place. It is.............

The percentage is growing year by year. Do not wish my family, my friends, my neighbours nor anyone else to be caught in an act of terrorism,........... an act btw in my mind against the state. We live in a state and the radical musmims need to be stopped. They are willing to kill their own religion.............. and why, ' cause most of their religion are normal easy going residents of the UK.

I

eddie wrote:Didge it sometimes feels as though no one is allowed to criticise a Muslim in case we all get jumped on.
Now you already know my stance on Muslims, from times past and from here.

But I do see, as with some of Andy's threads, that he'll post up a news story and it's blatantly obvious that the person in question is vile or nuts or whatever, but Andy gets attacked because the story is about a Muslim or immigrant.
He gets jumped all over for posting the story and the criminal or whatever is completely ignored and almost seems to be excused, because it's Andy's thread and "Andy hates Muslims and immigrants so here we go!"

That's my point of view.
Now I'm not up for going round  in circles with this didge, as it's what I sometimes see (not always) and that's that.
No doubt you'll disagree but that's your view and this is mine x

I know your stance Eddie, of which I do not have issue with but again you agreed that people were defending the indefensible, of which I have not seen one post where anyone has defended anyone here. I have seen people say not to cast all Muslims in the same pot, is that defending the indefensible? That means people are admitting some Muslims do wrong, they are not defending the ones that do wrong, so by the term indefensible, who is this?

You can be critical of anyone who commits a crime, I will be happy to agree with you, but again my view is not on also allowing people to take the view that if we see some Muslims in a bad light this is then used to castigate all with this view of which this view is actually growing off such poor arguments used with guilt by association. Andy does this time and again and gets castigated for stupid arguments like posting up a murder, under the heading foreign murders and the person does not have an English sounding name, sorry but that deserves the full amount of mockery for such stupidity, meaning you miss this whole point. If he posted an article stating a crime and what people though and why that is different, but to claim, when he does not know it is a foreigner, is stupid within itself, hence the mockery. Sorry Eddie if you do not see past that, I am shocked actually and some try to portray a view of Muslims off the back of how some act, that again is an agenda to stoke up fear against all, bringing me back to the view today we see the same views expressed about Muslims as were once done to Jews. I know my History very well Eddie and am thus not fooled by such threads when they do have agenda.


Tonight we have a story about some Pakistani's being cannibals, no doubt also Muslims, but was either their ethnicity or religion brought into it? No, thus showing people can be easily critical of a crime, as it is a horrific crime, even worse how there is no law there, but here no agenda was played out with a subtle title or question about their ethnicity or faith. So I am sorry Eddie there is your difference and people will happily debate that, compared to where Andy has a view to promote fear of different ethnicity and religions being as he is xenophobic.


So again a Tess's point which you and Gerber agreed on stated quite clearly that people were defending the indefensible, of which again I see neither of you can explain as to who this is, of which again I have seen no post on this thread stating any such thing.


So I ask all 3 of you again, who is this indefensible you talk of that people are always defending?


xx

gerber wrote:Didge  AKA Mr nels

I have already given my reasons and are not answerable to you.

To remind you....

25 schools average number of pupils lets be minimalist.....  800..............  25 x 800 = 20,000.  Alot of Muslim children.  Number irrelevant if radicalization was not taking place.  It is.............

The percentage is growing year by year. Do not wish my family, my friends, my neighbours nor anyone else to be caught in an act of terrorism,...........  an act btw in my mind against the state.  We live in a state and the radical musmims need to be stopped.  They are willing to kill their own religion..............  and why, ' cause most of their religion are normal easy going residents of the UK.  

I

Great and I agree on stopping radicals, if it is found that this many schools have been infiltrated by Salafists, am right behind you on that cause also Gerber, even more so when you read my earlier views, but and it is a big but who is the indefensible you claim others on here have defended?

Didge wrote:

gerber wrote:Didge  AKA Mr nels

I have already given my reasons and are not answerable to you.

To remind you....

25 schools average number of pupils lets be minimalist.....  800..............  25 x 800 = 20,000.  Alot of Muslim children.  Number irrelevant if radicalization was not taking place.  It is.............

The percentage is growing year by year. Do not wish my family, my friends, my neighbours nor anyone else to be caught in an act of terrorism,...........  an act btw in my mind against the state.  We live in a state and the radical musmims need to be stopped.  They are willing to kill their own religion..............  and why, ' cause most of their religion are normal easy going residents of the UK.  

I

Great and I agree on stopping radicals, if it is found that this many schools have been infiltrated by Salafists, am right behind you on that cause also Gerber, even more so when you read my earlier views, but and it is a big but who is the indefensible you claim others on here have defended?

Mr Nels

Too late too many crushed grapes

xx

gerber wrote:

Didge wrote:


Great and I agree on stopping radicals, if it is found that this many schools have been infiltrated by Salafists, am right behind you on that cause also Gerber, even more so when you read my earlier views, but and it is a big but who is the indefensible you claim others on here have defended?

Mr Nels

Too late too many crushed grapes

xx

lol still do not get the Mr Nels part, you have me at a loss but have a good evening and sleep well Gerber


xx