Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
28 Nov 19
14:02
Joined:
Date Joined:
07 Sep 15
Lately this term has been used fairly frequently in the media. Is it a myth? Is it overblown? Is it attention seeking? Is it an excuse? Is it narcissism?
Show More
Would Stephen Fry be arrested now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfLfc04QTH0
It's cult not a race, and the above was fine even with the BBC till liberal snowflakes trashed everything including tv and film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfLfc04QTH0
It's cult not a race, and the above was fine even with the BBC till liberal snowflakes trashed everything including tv and film.
A word that signifies all ability to think has been lost.
Total nonsense word.
Total nonsense word.
It's a cringeworthy and totally contrived term, invented to try and give one sector of the community something to complain about.
A phobia is, after all, an irrational fear. I'd say that fear of the Religion of Peace is a perfectly rational thing. For example, if you are the parents of children who went to an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, but never got home because of a Peace-Loving Suicide Bomber. (There are of course many other examples, and can be found on an almost global scale).
A phobia is, after all, an irrational fear. I'd say that fear of the Religion of Peace is a perfectly rational thing. For example, if you are the parents of children who went to an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, but never got home because of a Peace-Loving Suicide Bomber. (There are of course many other examples, and can be found on an almost global scale).
(There are of course many other examples, and can be found on an almost global scale).
They can be hard to Find these days .... Wonder why ?
They can be hard to Find these days .... Wonder why ?
It's a sh!t word. Means nothing. Like h0mophobia is a pretendy description of nothing at all.
What's brought about Islamophobia? Why no Christianityphobia, Judaismphobia, Buddhismphobia, Taoismphobia or Mormonismphobia? Is it merely an irrational behaviour induced by irrational beliefs towards Islam and Muslims? If so, why?
Is it UK specific? I've not heard it being used in any other country outside The UK, and I'd like to think I'm fairly well-read and informed esp on the horses!
Is it UK specific? I've not heard it being used in any other country outside The UK, and I'd like to think I'm fairly well-read and informed esp on the horses!
If i get on a tube and there are muslims on there with backpacks on, i get off, does that mean i suffer from Islamaphobia, if thats the case, so do thousands of others,
Could i be arrested for being islamaphobic, in other words, can i get arrested for being scared ?
Could i be arrested for being islamaphobic, in other words, can i get arrested for being scared ?
As all contributors have said, it's a contrivance designed to push an already-prefered group still further up the victim hierarchy, protecting them from amy meaningful discussion or scrutiny. Chritopher Hitchens summed it up as “a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.”
Factually the first part of the quote is totally correct. The term was conjured up and pumped into the international debate around politics and religion decades ago by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Factually the first part of the quote is totally correct. The term was conjured up and pumped into the international debate around politics and religion decades ago by the Muslim Brotherhood.
I think the term was first coined by Tevor Philips and he has since disowned it citing it has been used to stifle debate about certain actions and attitudes by hardliners.
Phobia means fear but this term is now applied to any rightful criticism of the actions of some muslims
Phobia means fear but this term is now applied to any rightful criticism of the actions of some muslims
'dambuster', I'd probably do the same if a seat is available in the next carriage or further down - I've always been told beware of one's presence in public places.
If I remember correctly in the past eg during the height of the IRA activities one could not enter an institution eg a bank, museum or a public place wearing a helmet. Now does the same apply to any person wearing a burqa? If not, why not? One's safety and well-being in public places are more important than all known prejudices combined; self-preservation is paramount, is it not?
If I remember correctly in the past eg during the height of the IRA activities one could not enter an institution eg a bank, museum or a public place wearing a helmet. Now does the same apply to any person wearing a burqa? If not, why not? One's safety and well-being in public places are more important than all known prejudices combined; self-preservation is paramount, is it not?
Is the religion at fault or merely its teachings miss-practised to suit? I find it extremely difficult to believe or accept any religion has no place in a modern society. However, I can fully accept if the teachings of a religion have been manipulated and twisted by unscrupulous "practitioners" to suit their agenda.
I do agree totally a "word" can be created by a self-interest group, used by the self-interested cowards to manipulate/twist the minds of morons to achieve an agenda.
I do agree totally a "word" can be created by a self-interest group, used by the self-interested cowards to manipulate/twist the minds of morons to achieve an agenda.
utterly meaningless, deliberately made up nonsense word that George Orwell would be proud of
makes as much sense as murderphobia or rapephobia
makes as much sense as murderphobia or rapephobia
LOB Platini......it is a word that has evolved due to the immigration policy of this country, followed by the genuine concerns of the original residents, as a result of what they see/experience, around them every day....but politicians for some strange reason don't give a f...k......or most of them, it seems... and meanwhile the public are expected to acquiesce and keep their mouths shut:(
Is it threats or backhanders, that makes them(the politicians) complicit in the constant invasion?
Is it threats or backhanders, that makes them(the politicians) complicit in the constant invasion?
I have a genuine and rational fear of Islam and its effects on my country.
Gaddafi had and although deceased, has the solution. It takes time.
Nov 28, 2019 -- 4:32PM, impossible123 wrote:
Is the religion at fault or merely its teachings miss-practised to suit? I find it extremely difficult to believe or accept any religion has no place in a modern society. However, I can fully accept if the teachings of a religion have been manipulated and twisted by unscrupulous "practitioners" to suit their agenda.I do agree totally a "word" can be created by a self-interest group, used by the self-interested cowards to manipulate/twist the minds of morons to achieve an agenda.
The cult is at fault. According to the cult it's God's FINAL word and a TOTAL (totalitarian) solution
No criticism is allowed of the Koran or the goat shagging pedo Mo'
Death is the punishment for any breach of the above
One of the strangest concepts is liberal women defending Islamic immigration to the west! 
Think i'm right in mentioning the Chinese have built concentration camps in which theyre educate their Muslims.....now there's a thought
Think i'm right in mentioning the Chinese have built concentration camps in which they're re educating their Muslims.....now there's a thought
He's been named - he name is Khan, and has form; just released from HMP just recently.
Is Islamophobia justified given the repeated terrorist incidents in London by the "cowards"? I think if my adrenaline overcomes me I'd possibly react in the same manner as the courageous and selfless passersby yesterday because the perpetrators have been nothing but exhibiting the behaviour of a coward. And, it saves lives despite two innocent Londoners were killed by the coward.
Is Islamophobia justified given the repeated terrorist incidents in London by the "cowards"? I think if my adrenaline overcomes me I'd possibly react in the same manner as the courageous and selfless passersby yesterday because the perpetrators have been nothing but exhibiting the behaviour of a coward. And, it saves lives despite two innocent Londoners were killed by the coward.
The Chinese clearly do not intend to let Islam ruin their own country. Good on them, they have seen Europe decay so quickly.
Open Letter: APPG Islamophobia Definition Threatens Civil Liberties
Addressed to the Home Secretary Sajid Javid
The APPG on British Muslims' definition of Islamophobia has now been adopted by the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats Federal board, Plaid Cymru and the Mayor of London, as well as several local councils. All of this is occurring before the Home Affairs Select Committee has been able to assess the evidence for and against the adoption of the definition nationally.
Meanwhile the Conservatives are having their own debate about rooting out Islamophobia from the party.
According to the APPG definition, "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness".
With this definition in hand, it is perhaps no surprise that following the horrific attack on a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, some place responsibility for the atrocity on the pens of journalists and academics who have criticised Islamic beliefs and practices, commented on or investigated Islamist extremism.
The undersigned unequivocally, unreservedly and emphatically condemn acts of violence against Muslims, and recognise the urgent need to deal with anti-Muslim hatred. However, we are extremely concerned about the uncritical and hasty adoption of the APPG's definition of Islamophobia.
This vague and expansive definition is being taken on without an adequate scrutiny or proper consideration of its negative consequences for freedom of expression, and academic and journalistic freedom. The definition will also undermine social cohesion – fuelling the very bigotry against Muslims which it is designed to prevent.
We are concerned that allegations of Islamophobia will be, indeed already are being, used to effectively shield Islamic beliefs and even extremists from criticism, and that formalising this definition will result in it being employed effectively as something of a backdoor blasphemy law.
The accusation of Islamophobia has already been used against those opposing religious and gender segregation in education, the hijab, halal slaughter on the grounds of animal welfare, LGBT rights campaigners opposing Muslim views on homosexuality, ex-Muslims and feminists opposing Islamic views and practices relating to women, as well as those concerned about the issue of grooming gangs. It has been used against journalists who investigate Islamism, Muslims working in counter-extremism, schools and Ofsted for resisting conservative religious pressure and enforcing gender equality.
Evidently abuse, harmful practices, or the activities of groups and individuals which promote ideas contrary to British values are far more likely to go unreported as a result of fear of being called Islamophobic. This will only increase if the APPG definition is formally adopted in law.
We are concerned that the definition will be used to shut down legitimate criticism and investigation. While the APPG authors have assured that it does not wish to infringe free speech, the entire content of the report, the definition itself, and early signs of how it would be used, suggest that it certainly would. Civil liberties should not be treated as an afterthought in the effort to tackle anti-Muslim prejudice.
The conflation of race and religion employed under the confused concept of 'cultural racism' expands the definition beyond anti-Muslim hatred to include 'illegitimate' criticism of the Islamic religion. The concept of Muslimness can effectively be transferred to Muslim practices and beliefs, allowing the report to claim that criticism of Islam is instrumentalised to hurt Muslims.
No religion should be given special protection against criticism. Like anti-Sikh, anti-Christian, or anti-Hindu hatred, we believe the term anti-Muslim hatred is more appropriate and less likely to infringe on free speech. A proliferation of 'phobias' is not desirable, as already stated by Sikh and Christian organisations who recognise the importance of free discussion about their beliefs.
Current legislative provisions are sufficient, as the law already protects individuals against attacks and unlawful discrimination on the basis of their religion. Rather than helping, this definition is likely to create a climate of self-censorship whereby people are fearful of criticising Islam and Islamic beliefs. It will therefore effectively shut down open discussions about matters of public interest. It will only aggravate community tensions further and is therefore no long term solution.
If this definition is adopted the government will likely turn to self-appointed 'representatives of the community' to define 'Muslimness'. This is clearly open to abuse. The APPG already entirely overlooked Muslims who are often considered to be "insufficiently Muslim" by other Muslims, moderates, liberals, reformers and the Ahmadiyyah, who often suffer persecution and violence at the hands of other Muslims.
For all these reasons, the APPG definition of Islamophobia is deeply problematic and unfit for purpose. Acceptance of this definition will only serve to aggravate community tensions and to inhibit free speech about matters of fundamental importance. We urge the government, political parties, local councils and other organisations to reject this flawed proposed definition.
Emma Webb, Civitas
Hardeep Singh, Network of Sikh Organisations (NSOUK)
Lord Singh of Wimbledon
Tim Dieppe, Christian Concern
Stephen Evans, National Secular Society (NSS)
Sadia Hameed, Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain (CEMB)
Prof. Paul Cliteur, candidate for the Dutch Senate, Professor of Law, University of Leiden
Brendan O'Neill, Editor of Spiked
Maajid Nawaz, Founder, Quilliam International
Rt. Rev'd Dr Gavin Ashenden
Pragna Patel, director of Southall Black Sisters
Professor Richard Dawkins
Rahila Gupta, author and Journalist
Peter Whittle, founder and director of New Culture Forum
Trupti Patel, President of Hindu Forum of Britain
Dr Lakshmi Vyas, President Hindu Forum of Europe
Harsha Shukla MBE, President Hindu Council of North UK
Tarang Shelat, President Hindu Council of Birmingham
Ashvin Patel, Chairman, Hindu Forum (Walsall)
Ana Gonzalez, partner at Wilson Solicitors LLP
Baron Desai of Clement Danes
Baroness Cox of Queensbury
Lord Alton of Liverpool
Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali
Ade Omooba MBE, Co-Chair National Church Leaders Forum (NCLF)
Wilson Chowdhry, British Pakistani Christian Association
Ashish Joshi, Sikh Media Monitoring Group
Satish K Sharma, National Council of Hindu Temples
Rumy Hasan, Academic and author
Amina Lone, Co-Director, Social Action and Research Foundation
Peter Tatchell, Peter Tatchell Foundation
Seyran Ates, Imam
Gina Khan, One Law for All
Mohammed Amin MBE
Baroness D'Souza
Michael Mosbacher, Acting Editor, Standpoint Magazine
Lisa-Marie Taylor, CEO FiLiA
Julie Bindel, journalist and feminist campaigner
Dr Adrian Hilton, academic
Neil Anderson, academic
Tom Holland, historian
Toby Keynes
Prof. Dr. Bassam Tibi, Professor Emeritus for International Relations, University of Goettingen
Dr Stephen Law, philosopher and author
Addressed to the Home Secretary Sajid Javid
The APPG on British Muslims' definition of Islamophobia has now been adopted by the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats Federal board, Plaid Cymru and the Mayor of London, as well as several local councils. All of this is occurring before the Home Affairs Select Committee has been able to assess the evidence for and against the adoption of the definition nationally.
Meanwhile the Conservatives are having their own debate about rooting out Islamophobia from the party.
According to the APPG definition, "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness".
With this definition in hand, it is perhaps no surprise that following the horrific attack on a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, some place responsibility for the atrocity on the pens of journalists and academics who have criticised Islamic beliefs and practices, commented on or investigated Islamist extremism.
The undersigned unequivocally, unreservedly and emphatically condemn acts of violence against Muslims, and recognise the urgent need to deal with anti-Muslim hatred. However, we are extremely concerned about the uncritical and hasty adoption of the APPG's definition of Islamophobia.
This vague and expansive definition is being taken on without an adequate scrutiny or proper consideration of its negative consequences for freedom of expression, and academic and journalistic freedom. The definition will also undermine social cohesion – fuelling the very bigotry against Muslims which it is designed to prevent.
We are concerned that allegations of Islamophobia will be, indeed already are being, used to effectively shield Islamic beliefs and even extremists from criticism, and that formalising this definition will result in it being employed effectively as something of a backdoor blasphemy law.
The accusation of Islamophobia has already been used against those opposing religious and gender segregation in education, the hijab, halal slaughter on the grounds of animal welfare, LGBT rights campaigners opposing Muslim views on homosexuality, ex-Muslims and feminists opposing Islamic views and practices relating to women, as well as those concerned about the issue of grooming gangs. It has been used against journalists who investigate Islamism, Muslims working in counter-extremism, schools and Ofsted for resisting conservative religious pressure and enforcing gender equality.
Evidently abuse, harmful practices, or the activities of groups and individuals which promote ideas contrary to British values are far more likely to go unreported as a result of fear of being called Islamophobic. This will only increase if the APPG definition is formally adopted in law.
We are concerned that the definition will be used to shut down legitimate criticism and investigation. While the APPG authors have assured that it does not wish to infringe free speech, the entire content of the report, the definition itself, and early signs of how it would be used, suggest that it certainly would. Civil liberties should not be treated as an afterthought in the effort to tackle anti-Muslim prejudice.
The conflation of race and religion employed under the confused concept of 'cultural racism' expands the definition beyond anti-Muslim hatred to include 'illegitimate' criticism of the Islamic religion. The concept of Muslimness can effectively be transferred to Muslim practices and beliefs, allowing the report to claim that criticism of Islam is instrumentalised to hurt Muslims.
No religion should be given special protection against criticism. Like anti-Sikh, anti-Christian, or anti-Hindu hatred, we believe the term anti-Muslim hatred is more appropriate and less likely to infringe on free speech. A proliferation of 'phobias' is not desirable, as already stated by Sikh and Christian organisations who recognise the importance of free discussion about their beliefs.
Current legislative provisions are sufficient, as the law already protects individuals against attacks and unlawful discrimination on the basis of their religion. Rather than helping, this definition is likely to create a climate of self-censorship whereby people are fearful of criticising Islam and Islamic beliefs. It will therefore effectively shut down open discussions about matters of public interest. It will only aggravate community tensions further and is therefore no long term solution.
If this definition is adopted the government will likely turn to self-appointed 'representatives of the community' to define 'Muslimness'. This is clearly open to abuse. The APPG already entirely overlooked Muslims who are often considered to be "insufficiently Muslim" by other Muslims, moderates, liberals, reformers and the Ahmadiyyah, who often suffer persecution and violence at the hands of other Muslims.
For all these reasons, the APPG definition of Islamophobia is deeply problematic and unfit for purpose. Acceptance of this definition will only serve to aggravate community tensions and to inhibit free speech about matters of fundamental importance. We urge the government, political parties, local councils and other organisations to reject this flawed proposed definition.
Emma Webb, Civitas
Hardeep Singh, Network of Sikh Organisations (NSOUK)
Lord Singh of Wimbledon
Tim Dieppe, Christian Concern
Stephen Evans, National Secular Society (NSS)
Sadia Hameed, Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain (CEMB)
Prof. Paul Cliteur, candidate for the Dutch Senate, Professor of Law, University of Leiden
Brendan O'Neill, Editor of Spiked
Maajid Nawaz, Founder, Quilliam International
Rt. Rev'd Dr Gavin Ashenden
Pragna Patel, director of Southall Black Sisters
Professor Richard Dawkins
Rahila Gupta, author and Journalist
Peter Whittle, founder and director of New Culture Forum
Trupti Patel, President of Hindu Forum of Britain
Dr Lakshmi Vyas, President Hindu Forum of Europe
Harsha Shukla MBE, President Hindu Council of North UK
Tarang Shelat, President Hindu Council of Birmingham
Ashvin Patel, Chairman, Hindu Forum (Walsall)
Ana Gonzalez, partner at Wilson Solicitors LLP
Baron Desai of Clement Danes
Baroness Cox of Queensbury
Lord Alton of Liverpool
Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali
Ade Omooba MBE, Co-Chair National Church Leaders Forum (NCLF)
Wilson Chowdhry, British Pakistani Christian Association
Ashish Joshi, Sikh Media Monitoring Group
Satish K Sharma, National Council of Hindu Temples
Rumy Hasan, Academic and author
Amina Lone, Co-Director, Social Action and Research Foundation
Peter Tatchell, Peter Tatchell Foundation
Seyran Ates, Imam
Gina Khan, One Law for All
Mohammed Amin MBE
Baroness D'Souza
Michael Mosbacher, Acting Editor, Standpoint Magazine
Lisa-Marie Taylor, CEO FiLiA
Julie Bindel, journalist and feminist campaigner
Dr Adrian Hilton, academic
Neil Anderson, academic
Tom Holland, historian
Toby Keynes
Prof. Dr. Bassam Tibi, Professor Emeritus for International Relations, University of Goettingen
Dr Stephen Law, philosopher and author
as the growth continues there will be more and more pressure to give in to them and new laws will be created until they eventually achieve hegemony - the demographic shift will secure this
open borders > free movement > extended family immigration > state subsidised population growth > ascending into top tiers of education system, academia and the media, electing more local councillors > more MPs > government positions > cabinet >white papers >introduction of blasphemy laws > Sharia Law
tick tock
tick tock
Angoose may come along and actually give his opinion on these matters. Or he might continue to merely comment on the thoughts of others.
they are part of the victim ideology and have to protect them otherwise you can't belong
so that's you banned from their club ho ho
I am still a card carrying member - do you think they might take it away.
so that's you banned from their club ho ho
I am still a card carrying member - do you think they might take it away.
Platini's nailed it.
A concise, damning and brilliant post.
A concise, damning and brilliant post.
might as well continue the theme ...internment of whitey Brits
might as well continue the theme ...internment of whitey Brits
ne of the strangest concepts is liberal women defending Islamic immigration to the west!
If they dont favour the Flange , they Favour the Grant c0ck, the More the Merrier ..........
If they dont favour the Flange , they Favour the Grant c0ck, the More the Merrier ..........
They just pretend there is no conflict. One of my closest friends is a rabid feminist Calais loving Guardianista labour supporter. She is quite well off and lives in a county with one the lowest number of ethnics in the land. She often expresses loathing for North Yorkshire people, and lives in York.
you mean the she-hadists ?
Its not that strange, they're the useful idiots for the death cult to hide behind.
Its not that strange, they're the useful idiots for the death cult to hide behind.
Take away her politics and she's lovely. I have resisted going on free holidays to their place in Palma for years. They refuse to take money from anyone for using the place, but suggest a donation to Medicine Sans Frontier for those who want to. I am no freeloader and I will not donate to the Calais mob, so I've never been.
Feminism was hijacked a long time ago, infiltrated by the marxists who have sold them their victimhood ideology, and most of them have lapped it up.
They're not real feminists (real feminists wouldn't sacrifice women's rights in favour of a minority group that seemingly trumps theirs), they're a new breed of radical feminists.
Radical feminists don't hate men you see, they only hate white men. That untenable position, right there, betrays their radicalisation.
They're not real feminists (real feminists wouldn't sacrifice women's rights in favour of a minority group that seemingly trumps theirs), they're a new breed of radical feminists.
Radical feminists don't hate men you see, they only hate white men. That untenable position, right there, betrays their radicalisation.
Real feminsts would appreciate the word 'feminine'. Instead they hate it. Good grief, don't EVEN dare to mention 'graceful' or 'elegant'...
They despise stay at home Mums but prefer aggressive, butch types with sharp elbows.
It's Operation Redefinition:
Gender 'flexible'
Sexuality 'anything'
Women 'become men'
UK - 'abandon all you once knew'
Ground zero. Demolish it all (especially the white working class who will make a stand...) Rebuild with Sharia.
They despise stay at home Mums but prefer aggressive, butch types with sharp elbows.
It's Operation Redefinition:
Gender 'flexible'
Sexuality 'anything'
Women 'become men'
UK - 'abandon all you once knew'
Ground zero. Demolish it all (especially the white working class who will make a stand...) Rebuild with Sharia.
The non-Islam Muslims eg Christians, etc, do not even like the Islam-Muslims, and visits to one another's households is not encouraged - I've been told by my non-Islam Muslim friends from Turkey; some non-Islam Muslims will eat pork, but that is seen as unclean as the said animal is deemed dirty and polygamous - yes that's what I've been told by an Islam-Muslim (a he) from Afghanistan - and is the accepted and universal logic of the Islam-Muslims, why?
Islam-Muslims can have up to 4 wives at the same time. Yet, he accused the pig of being unclean (who is responsible for the cleanliness of the pig), and polygamous - a double standard of the highest degree.
I do not blame the religion, but the practitioners who are much of a muchness and mostly not learned but individuals living, working and mixing within their own community. I've utmost concerns for the future of The UK and detest their non-integration into the British Society; their dominant presence in any single town; ever quick bleating about discrimination by others; irritating arrogance on matters not their forte; a lack of respect for our laws and traditions; communicating in their own language outside their home and some workplaces in public; etc.
Most of all I detest their increasing political prominence in British Politics not conducive to the locals - to achieve hegemony in a town thro' population and not integration is sufficiently abhorrent, but in British Politics and possibly deciding the future of The UK
could be concerning, reprehensible and problematic for the locals.
Islam-Muslims can have up to 4 wives at the same time. Yet, he accused the pig of being unclean (who is responsible for the cleanliness of the pig), and polygamous - a double standard of the highest degree.
I do not blame the religion, but the practitioners who are much of a muchness and mostly not learned but individuals living, working and mixing within their own community. I've utmost concerns for the future of The UK and detest their non-integration into the British Society; their dominant presence in any single town; ever quick bleating about discrimination by others; irritating arrogance on matters not their forte; a lack of respect for our laws and traditions; communicating in their own language outside their home and some workplaces in public; etc.
Most of all I detest their increasing political prominence in British Politics not conducive to the locals - to achieve hegemony in a town thro' population and not integration is sufficiently abhorrent, but in British Politics and possibly deciding the future of The UK
could be concerning, reprehensible and problematic for the locals.
no one absolutely no one is likely to be interested in debating this - particularly in mainstream politics where they already have a small but very important position Imagine if say - jess phillips pointed this out - not that she would - she would be told to resign
YOU CANNOT QUESTION the inevitable
YOU CANNOT QUESTION the inevitable
In every country the Asians have been guests but dominant in economy and wealth they had been kicked-out (eventually) - that says a lot about their mentality. Even inter-marriages with locals are frowned upon and dissuaded as it's deemed non-pure next generation.
Nov 30, 2019 -- 2:09PM, Platini wrote:
open borders > free movement > extended family immigration > state subsidised population growth > ascending into top tiers of education system, academia and the media, electing more local councillors > more MPs > government positions > cabinet >white papers >introduction of blasphemy laws > Sharia Law tick tock
Spot on Plat. Belongs in the top ten posts of the year, imo.
We've a few of our own up here to be keeping an eye on - some more dodgy than others
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Scottish_people_of_Pakistani_descent
She-hadists Quality!
The lefties are playing with fire.
They're sleepwalking into letting them take over their party without putting any thought into the long term.
The anti=Semitic concession is simply the thin end of the wedge.
The Labour party is there for the taking.
They're sleepwalking into letting them take over their party without putting any thought into the long term.
The anti=Semitic concession is simply the thin end of the wedge.
The Labour party is there for the taking.
This could be interesting after the ten o'clock news on Radio 4 (1015 - 11pm)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000bncc
Sima Kotecha chairs a special debate in Coventry exploring the values of diverse groups of young people, living, working and studying in the city. Can the participants come to a consensus about what it means to live a good life? At the end of the programme they are invited to come up with nine ‘truths’ – moral maxims to live by.
#NineTruths
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000bncc
Sima Kotecha chairs a special debate in Coventry exploring the values of diverse groups of young people, living, working and studying in the city. Can the participants come to a consensus about what it means to live a good life? At the end of the programme they are invited to come up with nine ‘truths’ – moral maxims to live by.
#NineTruths
nine ‘truths’ – moral maxims to live by.
Always play the race card to get your own way should be No 1 amongst ethnics.
And never even go there should be No 1 amongst non-ethnics.
Always play the race card to get your own way should be No 1 amongst ethnics.
And never even go there should be No 1 amongst non-ethnics.
I started to listen to the programme however it was childish and fell asleep half way through.
more about how we successfully gain hegemony without too much opposition
This community is arrogant, full-of-themselves and more demanding and ambitious than any other in The UK; they'd readily cry wolf to gain an advantage over others, if necessary. However, would plead ignorance or beg for forgiveness to escape a penalty if caught committing a misdemeanour.
I think if Islamophobia is over-used and regularly it could soon be ignored (and rightly so) by other minority groups and locals given their prominence in presence in some cities and towns, and politics.
Remember those who cried wolf....
I think if Islamophobia is over-used and regularly it could soon be ignored (and rightly so) by other minority groups and locals given their prominence in presence in some cities and towns, and politics.
Remember those who cried wolf....
new laws are waiting in the wings and you simply will no longer be able to say that
But it's true. Other minority groups will not stand aside and allow them hegemony in some towns and political arenas when terrorist activities are repeated in our cities.
I really don't see many attacks happening to achieve hegemony. I think it will be done with the demographic shift.
Hegemony is gradual but surely, and as you rightly said through demographic shift; terrorist attacks could only instil hatred and further distrust of the community.
I hate to see the day when The UK is divided (not just North and South) but is coming like some troubled areas eg Iraq, Syria, Kurdistan and Afghanistan where different faiths take over and rule.
I hate to see the day when The UK is divided (not just North and South) but is coming like some troubled areas eg Iraq, Syria, Kurdistan and Afghanistan where different faiths take over and rule.
General Election and another attack-erm seems like the two go hand in hand these days
Aye, I wonder how much they paid them graduates to get butchered.
They knew the guy was a huge risk,the judge who sentence him said he would be a risk for many years,and then they let him out early-im not going to argue with anyone but what kind of f uckary is that?
Them graduates were rather irresponsible inviting such people to the centre of London,what about security for themselves,other participants or the general public they may have met on their way ? Difficult questions to ask but when will their own behaviour be challenged ?
One convicted offender helped to disarm the coward, but I think there will be no more of this "event" ever taking place anywhere unless in a secured place away from the public with armed police present. This innocent "killings" could have been avoided if the relevant authorities and political parties have assumed more responsibility for the safety of the British public and not naive and vote-buying.
I'd like to see a shoot-to-kill policy implemented similar to the days of the atrocities by The IRA in the early 70/80's. If I remember correctly we were told to be vigilant about packages and individuals with strong Irish accent in public places acting suspiciously. It was not anti-Irish then was it? What's the difference then and now? They were/are terrorist attacks on the public.
I'd like to see a shoot-to-kill policy implemented similar to the days of the atrocities by The IRA in the early 70/80's. If I remember correctly we were told to be vigilant about packages and individuals with strong Irish accent in public places acting suspiciously. It was not anti-Irish then was it? What's the difference then and now? They were/are terrorist attacks on the public.
Has any politician and/or media commentator stepped forward yet to dare to suggest that Friday's terrorism might have had "something to do with Islam" ?
Do we know whether the Muslim Council of Britain are more concerned about (non-existent) "Islamophobia", or the London murders on Friday carried by by an Islamist Terrorist ?
Do we know whether the Muslim Council of Britain are more concerned about (non-existent) "Islamophobia", or the London murders on Friday carried by by an Islamist Terrorist ?
Of course it has something to do with Islam
We invaded the Middle East and killed a lot of Islamic Arabs...to protect Israel in my opinion
Now we let or invite them in our country...some of these people are looking for revenge
Not hard to work that out
We invaded the Middle East and killed a lot of Islamic Arabs...to protect Israel in my opinion
Now we let or invite them in our country...some of these people are looking for revenge
Not hard to work that out
We expert our Government to protect us not to let this madman who hates us out early to start killing innocent people.Might as well let the Yorkshire Ripper out.
He probably is but they haven't told us yet until he commits another murder.
Has the Corbra meeting that inevitably follow these Islamic terrorist attacks to protect us from the "right-wing backlash" been held yet?
I'm so looking forward to pictures of our great and good, celebrities, Royalties, journalists, pop idols and sage looking clerics standing shoulder to shoulder with Muslim leaders, some women of them even donning head scarfs, in support of our beleaguered community.
At times like these we as a nation should stand together against the bigots who throw ham sandwiches at mosques or the racist Islamophobes who call to shut down madrassas.
What we clearly need now is an education program for the wider public on the peaceful message of all faiths. Let us forgive and send the few who have totally misunderstood this peaceful message and have somehow mistook the word peace for kill on an evening course, once a week.
Please do not worry. Our politicians, media, academia, security agencies, celebrities etc have got it covered. They're doing everything they can to protect us from the right-wing Islamophobe bigots.
I'm so looking forward to pictures of our great and good, celebrities, Royalties, journalists, pop idols and sage looking clerics standing shoulder to shoulder with Muslim leaders, some women of them even donning head scarfs, in support of our beleaguered community.
At times like these we as a nation should stand together against the bigots who throw ham sandwiches at mosques or the racist Islamophobes who call to shut down madrassas.
What we clearly need now is an education program for the wider public on the peaceful message of all faiths. Let us forgive and send the few who have totally misunderstood this peaceful message and have somehow mistook the word peace for kill on an evening course, once a week.
Please do not worry. Our politicians, media, academia, security agencies, celebrities etc have got it covered. They're doing everything they can to protect us from the right-wing Islamophobe bigots.
I'd like to see the clerics and imams condemning the action of the Islamic terrorist who killed two innocent helpful individuals on London Bridge. Where are they? Huddling in a corner in some religious building? Why no street protest from the community renouncing his cowardice action?
I think Londoners and non-followers of the Islam faith are owed that, at least.
I think Londoners and non-followers of the Islam faith are owed that, at least.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539