Muslim Tolerance - Not Even in Death

Status
Not open for further replies.
your leaps into conjecture are equivalent to:

"Norcon faces having his house demolished"

"Norcon's next-door neighbour has objected to Norcon growing pansies in his window boxes. This may lead to his house being demolished"

Did Norcon say that his house is at risk of being demolished? If he did, is there an atom of truth in the idea?
Does the story contain any evidence to suggest that it is a possibility?
Or is it am imaginative idea thrown in to spice up the story on a dull news day?
You're clearly getting desperate. :rolleyes: Give up, delete the thread and move on :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:
 
Sponsored Links
He asked where it was suggested FFS. Not whether it was true or not. You're wrong get over it.
 
what, you mean in the sense that Norcon might have said "they'll try to get my house demolished?"

Whether the idea is an invention of the reporter or an invention of someone she spoke to, I do not know. Though a reporter would have wanted to print "Norcon told me of his fears that his house would be demolished" so probably the reporter invented it. There is no mention of anybody saying it to her.

Now, please go and read the article to the end. What does the local authority owning the cemetery say?
 
Sponsored Links
what, you mean in the sense that Norcon might have said "they'll try to get my house demolished?"

Whether the idea is an invention of the reporter or an invention of someone she spoke to, I do not know. Though a reporter would have wanted to print "Norcon told me of his fears that his house would be demolished" so probably the reporter invented it. There is no mention of anybody saying it to her.

Now, please go and read the article to the end. What does the local authority owning the cemetery say?
I have read what the reporter decided to quote. It does not mean that other things weren't said to him which he decided not to quote. Why do you insist on jumping to the conclusion that the reporter probably made it up, with no evidence whatsoever to corroborate that accusation?
 
why do you insist on jumping to the conclusion that some eye-catching headline, vague and unsubstantiated, with nothing in the article to support it, is anything other than a journalistic trick?

What does the local authority owning the cemetery say?
 
Does anyone know why the muslim families don't want that old fella buried next to their relatives?
 
why do you insist on jumping to the conclusion that some eye-catching headline, vague and unsubstantiated, with nothing in the article to support it, is anything other than a journalistic trick?

What does the local authority owning the cemetery say?
I'm not jumping to any conclusions since I, like you, weren't there. You however have a magic crystal ball into which you peer and see what you want, regardless of there being no substantiated evidence to support it. You're being very silly. I can see it and so can everyone else. :rolleyes:
 
We know some facts -

1. both old boys are now interred in the ground alongside one another.

2. The muslim family don't want the gypsy man there.

3. the cemetery are taking the muslim families complaint seriously.

I think it's fair to say that both the cemetery and the muslim family would be quite happy for the gypsy corpse to be shifted, only the gypsy family seem to be standing in the way of that for now.

now I don't know if a cemetery has to jump through the same sort of hoops to move a body from one plot to another, as the police would have to exhume proper, and if not then it's a possibility.
 
The only facts you know are 1 & 2

3 is conjecture as is your following statement

You're also assuming that the objection is on the basis of religion.
 
The only facts you know are 1 & 2

3 is conjecture as is your following statement

You're also assuming that the objection is on the basis of religion.

3 is not conjecture, they (the cemetery) have called up a very recently bereaved family and asked them to move plots, and then go on to ask them sell them a plot back so they can install a hedge. It's pretty clear they're taking it seriously.

I'd also say it was pretty understood the objection is on religious reasons. What would your alternative suggestion be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top