The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Philosophy, Religion & Society => Topic started by: Rushy on June 04, 2017, 02:12:21 AM
-
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40146916
I guess these people ordered free shipping on their peace delivery. The van brought it straight away at high speeds.
-
:(
God damn psychopaths.
-
Oh and hey, Trump responded.
"We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871143765473406976
"Whatever the United States can do to help out in London and the U. K., we will be there - WE ARE WITH YOU. GOD BLESS!"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871145660036378624
Those two tweets were done in that order.
-
And now he's criticizing the mayor of London, talking about how we're not having a gun debate (how is that relavent?), and how we need to stop political correctness which I'm pretty sure means "Let me ban whoever I want based on religion!".
So political correctness = Freedom.
-
Europe bans ideologies all the time (e.g. Nazism). They're just as hypocritical in their refusal to ban Islam as Trump is in trying to ban a religion despite the first amendment (which only applies to US citizens, anyway).
-
I prefer Islams school bus ventilation services to their delivery service.
-
Time to ban cars and sharp objects.
-
Time to ban cars and sharp objects.
Nah bro, just ban driving.
Like in North Korea.
-
Europe bans ideologies all the time (e.g. Nazism). They're just as hypocritical in their refusal to ban Islam as Trump is in trying to ban a religion despite the first amendment (which only applies to US citizens, anyway).
Bullshit! Apart from Nazism little else is prohibited, the wearing of religious symbols in some workplaces, what else?
And if you ban a religion you target millions of people who have no truck with the kind of thing these morons believe (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-terror-attack-latest-muslims-help-victims-free-rides-food-shelter-borough-market-isis-a7771796.html). Should we have banned Catholicism when the IRA were bombing London, Manchester and other cities and assassinating public figures? Or do you look at the reasons people do this kind of thing, isolate and marginalise.
Knee jerk over reaction, especially the American way (9/11 invasions!), bombing countries
(who had fuck all to do with it) back to the stone age and stealing their oil, if our idiot leaders at the time hadn't followed the “War on terror” we probably wouldn't have this shit going on.
We can't stop all of these people getting through, but hopefully we will respond calmly and with reason and leave the likes of Trump to shout in the wilderness with all the other wankers. Take a look at the “one love Manchester” concert going on at the moment, that is how it should be countered, not with more bloodshed.
edit; The concert line up is pretty shocking actually, Coldplay & Justin bieber for christsake! But the sentiments are good.
-
Europe bans ideologies all the time (e.g. Nazism). They're just as hypocritical in their refusal to ban Islam as Trump is in trying to ban a religion despite the first amendment (which only applies to US citizens, anyway).
Bullshit! Apart from Nazism little else is prohibited, the wearing of religious symbols in some workplaces, what else?
And if you ban a religion you target millions of people who have no truck with the kind of thing these morons believe (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-terror-attack-latest-muslims-help-victims-free-rides-food-shelter-borough-market-isis-a7771796.html). Should we have banned Catholicism when the IRA were bombing London, Manchester and other cities and assassinating public figures? Or do you look at the reasons people do this kind of thing, isolate and marginalise.
Knee jerk over reaction, especially the American way (9/11 invasions!), bombing countries
(who had fuck all to do with it) back to the stone age and stealing their oil, if our idiot leaders at the time hadn't followed the “War on terror” we probably wouldn't have this shit going on.
We can't stop all of these people getting through, but hopefully we will respond calmly and with reason and leave the likes of Trump to shout in the wilderness with all the other wankers. Take a look at the “one love Manchester” concert going on at the moment, that is how it should be countered, not with more bloodshed.
edit; The concert line up is pretty shocking actually, Coldplay & Justin bieber for christsake! But the sentiments are good.
Not all Nazis are violent, yet the ideology and symbols associated with it are banned anyway. But sure, it's totally not the same thing, I mean it isn't like the prophet of Islam was a power hungry warmonger or anything. He also definitely did not write a book that encouraged the rape and pillage of the surrounding area, and that book definitely did not encourage thousands of Arabs to rape and pillage the surrounding area for the next millennia. Haha, totally never happened.
-
Yeah okay Rushy, not all Nazi's are bad and the Koran is the book of rape, you keep it simple.
-
It's also an irrelevant discussion, Naziism isn't illegal in Britain.
-
Yeah okay Rushy, not all Nazi's are bad and the Koran is the book of rape, you keep it simple.
Are you really incapable of seeing the clash in logic? Telling me "we shouldn't ban muslims because not all of them kill people" is no different than saying "we shouldn't ban Nazis because not all of them kill people". If your idea of what makes an ideology bad is whether or not it kills people then I'm not sure how else to explain this.
If the Nazis had claimed Hitler was a prophet, would you agree that they simply must be allowed to follow Hitler's religion?
-
the first amendment (which only applies to US citizens, anyway).
No, the First Amendment applies to everyone.
-
the first amendment (which only applies to US citizens, anyway).
No, the First Amendment applies to everyone.
It applies to anyone on US soil and also citizens regardless of location. It doesn't apply to everyone.
-
Well, there needs to be American jurisdiction, obviously, but my point is that it applies to immigration policies too. There's a reason why Trump's been insisting that his travel ban isn't a Muslim ban.
-
Well, there needs to be American jurisdiction, obviously, but my point is that it applies to immigration policies too. There's a reason why Trump's been insisting that his travel ban isn't a Muslim ban.
It actually doesn't, the president has legal precedence to block any group of people attempting to entering the nation, including those that belong to a single ideology. (Jews learned that the hard way in the early 1900s) People outside of the US are not covered by the first amendment.
It also isn't a Muslim ban, since it doesn't ban all Muslim nations (it doesn't ban Indonesia, for example). The insistence that it's a Muslim ban is a meme, just like "muh Russia conspiracy".
-
It's a de facto ban on Muslims from specific countries but not a blanket ban on all Muslims.
-
It's a de facto ban on Muslims from specific countries but not a blanket ban on all Muslims.
It's almost like some Muslims are a lot worse than others.
-
Yeah okay Rushy, not all Nazi's are bad and the Koran is the book of rape, you keep it simple.
Are you really incapable of seeing the clash in logic? Telling me "we shouldn't ban muslims because not all of them kill people" is no different than saying "we shouldn't ban Nazis because not all of them kill people". If your idea of what makes an ideology bad is whether or not it kills people then I'm not sure how else to explain this.
If the Nazis had claimed Hitler was a prophet, would you agree that they simply must be allowed to follow Hitler's religion?
I’m not seeing any logic.
I’m either seeing someone who is intentionally trying to start an argument by comparing apples and pears (odds on), or someone that mired in prejudice that little in the way of logic will suffice.
I don’t know if you have ever met any Muslims, but living where I do there are lots, and they are much like the rest of humanity, if they called all Christians genocidal, baby killers based on Samuel 15:3 and Psalm 137 I would think that they were doing something like the above.
-
Well, there needs to be American jurisdiction, obviously, but my point is that it applies to immigration policies too. There's a reason why Trump's been insisting that his travel ban isn't a Muslim ban.
It actually doesn't, the president has legal precedence to block any group of people attempting to entering the nation, including those that belong to a single ideology. (Jews learned that the hard way in the early 1900s) People outside of the US are not covered by the first amendment.
It also isn't a Muslim ban, since it doesn't ban all Muslim nations (it doesn't ban Indonesia, for example). The insistence that it's a Muslim ban is a meme, just like "muh Russia conspiracy".
If it was as clear-cut as you're saying, there wouldn't be an ongoing court case about this to begin with. The historical precedents you're referring to are many decades old and have since been replaced by anti-discrimination laws and broader constitutional protections.
-
Not only that but the court is using Trump's own words as evidence for the underlying motive of the travel ban. I mean, when a man says "Ban all Muslims" over and over in the campaign, it's not gonna go unnoticed by the courts when they get a "Ban people from these countries (that are mostly Muslim)".
It's like going on facebook, ranting and raving about how you wanna rob houses for crack money then going to a locksmith and asking to learn the trade.
Or wanting to join the police academy.
-
Yeah okay Rushy, not all Nazi's are bad and the Koran is the book of rape, you keep it simple.
Are you really incapable of seeing the clash in logic? Telling me "we shouldn't ban muslims because not all of them kill people" is no different than saying "we shouldn't ban Nazis because not all of them kill people". If your idea of what makes an ideology bad is whether or not it kills people then I'm not sure how else to explain this.
If the Nazis had claimed Hitler was a prophet, would you agree that they simply must be allowed to follow Hitler's religion?
I’m not seeing any logic.
I’m either seeing someone who is intentionally trying to start an argument by comparing apples and pears (odds on), or someone that mired in prejudice that little in the way of logic will suffice.
I don’t know if you have ever met any Muslims, but living where I do there are lots, and they are much like the rest of humanity, if they called all Christians genocidal, baby killers based on Samuel 15:3 and Psalm 137 I would think that they were doing something like the above.
I know Nazis that are pretty nice too, therefore Nazism is okay, right? None of the Nazis I've spoken to have ever actually killed anyone. I know you're needlessly prejudiced against them, but not all Nazis are "holocaust everyone!". In fact, I'm pretty sure by criticizing Nazism, Europe has simply caused it to become more extreme. If you didn't criticize them so much, maybe they wouldn't be so angry.
If it was as clear-cut as you're saying, there wouldn't be an ongoing court case about this to begin with. The historical precedents you're referring to are many decades old and have since been replaced by anti-discrimination laws and broader constitutional protections.
The court case is nothing more than activist judges trying to hinder the current administration. The travel ban will eventually be held up, it'll just run through dozens of speed bumps because "hurr durr da durnald dumpf can't ban people!"
-
Yeah okay Rushy, not all Nazi's are bad and the Koran is the book of rape, you keep it simple.
Are you really incapable of seeing the clash in logic? Telling me "we shouldn't ban muslims because not all of them kill people" is no different than saying "we shouldn't ban Nazis because not all of them kill people". If your idea of what makes an ideology bad is whether or not it kills people then I'm not sure how else to explain this.
If the Nazis had claimed Hitler was a prophet, would you agree that they simply must be allowed to follow Hitler's religion?
I’m not seeing any logic.
I’m either seeing someone who is intentionally trying to start an argument by comparing apples and pears (odds on), or someone that mired in prejudice that little in the way of logic will suffice.
I don’t know if you have ever met any Muslims, but living where I do there are lots, and they are much like the rest of humanity, if they called all Christians genocidal, baby killers based on Samuel 15:3 and Psalm 137 I would think that they were doing something like the above.
You're right that not all Muslims are baby-killers or somesuch, but you do seem to be ignoring that you can attribute some pretty heinous beliefs to majority of muslims, such as death for apostates or criminalizing homosexuality. This is a problem, that gets glossed over frequently. I don't think a ban on Muslim immigration or banning a belief system is a solution, but the problem still needs to be dealt with.
-
Naziism: Political ideology
Islam: Religion.
This is why one is on to ban and the other isn't. For some reason we hold religion higher than political ideology on the scale of freedom yet they're almost identical in practice.
-
criminalizing homosexuality.
Let's ban all religions that would have homosexuality be a punishable offense. Totally a Muslim thing, lol
-
criminalizing homosexuality.
Let's ban all religions that would have homosexuality be a punishable offense. Totally a Muslim thing, lol
Did I say a religion should be banned? Oh no wait, I said that a ban wasn't a solution. Ok good. I also called out adherrents rather than the source material because only an idiot would say, "Their holy book says it so obvi they believe it." Thanks for playing though Roundy. Leave the trolling to the professionals.
-
Let's ban all religions that would have homosexuality be a punishable offense.
I'm in. State atheism, let's go!
-
Naziism: Political ideology
Islam: Religion.
This is why one is on to ban and the other isn't. For some reason we hold religion higher than political ideology on the scale of freedom yet they're almost identical in practice.
In Islam there is no difference between religion and politics. Your religious affiliation is literally your political ideology. That's why the Quran outlines a very specific kind of government that all Muslims are commanded by God to work towards. The fact that you'd list Islam as something separate from political ideology tells me you know very little about Islam. After the founding of the religion, it immediately began conquering the Middle East and North Africa, very violently, by the way. Gee, that almost kind of sounds like WWII, except Islam won their takeover.
The only difference between Hitler and Mohammad was that Hitler didn't claim he was a prophet of god. A mistake on his part, obviously, as he should of known all the cool warmongers claim that "God wills it".
I also called out adherrents rather than the source material because only an idiot would say, "Their holy book says it so obvi they believe it." Thanks for playing though Roundy. Leave the trolling to the professionals.
If there are parts of a religion's holy book that you have to think "well I certainly hope they don't actually believe this!" then maybe calling their religion into question shouldn't be considered a bad thing.
-
Naziism: Political ideology
Islam: Religion.
This is why one is on to ban and the other isn't. For some reason we hold religion higher than political ideology on the scale of freedom yet they're almost identical in practice.
In Islam there is no difference between religion and politics. Your religious affiliation is literally your political ideology. That's why the Quran outlines a very specific kind of government that all Muslims are commanded by God to work towards. The fact that you'd list Islam as something separate from political ideology tells me you know very little about Islam. After the founding of the religion, it immediately began conquering the Middle East and North Africa, very violently, by the way. Gee, that almost kind of sounds like WWII, except Islam won their takeover.
The only difference between Hitler and Mohammad was that Hitler didn't claim he was a prophet of god. A mistake on his part, obviously, as he should of known all the cool warmongers claim that "God wills it".
Yes, I am aware of Sharia law. However, Islam is still considered a religion first and foremost by the world. Moreover, the Quran is more of a collection of sayings and less laws. Sharia law was developed AFTER Mohammad's death and was collected from his life experiences, his interpretations of God's word, and what he did. So if he liked cats, well... cats would be part of Sharia law. Just like how Jesus's life and actions form the basis of morality in Christianity.
And like Christianity, a ruling body was setup to write the laws and rules. In fact, both do it via proxy. The ruling bodies in Saudi Arabia and Iran are kept in power by the Islamic church but are not, themselves, the heads of the Islamic church.
The difference is not if one group has a political ideology or not (they all do once you get past the faith), it's what the ideology is based on.
If it's faith then Religion.
If it's not then "Political Ideology"
Islam is based off the belief that God backs their political ideology.
Nazisim is based off their belief that they're the best and that belief has no other backing.
Of course, I'm trying to find actual bans on being a nazi.
Several countries have bans on the symbols and salutes (with some exceptions) and the sales of nazi memorabilia is illegal but I can't find any country that outright bans the nazi party or makes it illegal to BE a nazi.
-
Yes, I am aware of Sharia law. However, Islam is still considered a religion first and foremost by the world. Moreover, the Quran is more of a collection of sayings and less laws. Sharia law was developed AFTER Mohammad's death and was collected from his life experiences, his interpretations of God's word, and what he did. So if he liked cats, well... cats would be part of Sharia law. Just like how Jesus's life and actions form the basis of morality in Christianity.
And like Christianity, a ruling body was setup to write the laws and rules. In fact, both do it via proxy. The ruling bodies in Saudi Arabia and Iran are kept in power by the Islamic church but are not, themselves, the heads of the Islamic church.
The difference is not if one group has a political ideology or not (they all do once you get past the faith), it's what the ideology is based on.
If it's faith then Religion.
If it's not then "Political Ideology"
Islam is based off the belief that God backs their political ideology.
Nazisim is based off their belief that they're the best and that belief has no other backing.
Of course, I'm trying to find actual bans on being a nazi.
Several countries have bans on the symbols and salutes (with some exceptions) and the sales of nazi memorabilia is illegal but I can't find any country that outright bans the nazi party or makes it illegal to BE a nazi.
For starter's, it's just "Sharia". Saying "Sharia law" is redundant, in the same way that you shouldn't say "ATM machine". Sharia means "law".
Secondly, Islam is a religion founded by a literal warmonger. Mohammad married a wealthy widow and then later began using his wealth to preach his madness. Then after convincing even crazier wealthy men to follow him, he gathered up an army and began invading cities throughout Arabia. His book is nothing but ramblings that consist of morale enforcers for an army. Kill people who aren't in your army, don't kill people who are in it. That's a good strategy, as shown by the fact that the Muslims conquered vast swathes of land. It also means they're still doing it and once again Europe is slow to react.
Also, no, "being" a Nazi is not illegal because you can't prove thought crimes (yet!). However, any item or communication that is Nazi in origin is considered hate speech in most EU nations and it will get you jail time. I'm not arguing that being a Nazi should be legal, but I am arguing that if you have the balls to ban Nazism then you should have the balls to ban Muslims too. The difference being that Nazis don't run into arenas and blow up on command. The terrorists are winning because the EU is obviously too scared to bother doing anything against the people performing this nonsense.
-
I know Nazis that are pretty nice too, therefore Nazism is okay, right? None of the Nazis I've spoken to have ever actually killed anyone. I know you're needlessly prejudiced against them, but not all Nazis are "holocaust everyone!". In fact, I'm pretty sure by criticizing Nazism, Europe has simply caused it to become more extreme. If you didn't criticize them so much, maybe they wouldn't be so angry.
God you talk some rubbish! There are some bans on Hitler worshipping style Nazi groups in some European countries, usually those that suffered liquidation events (how much more extreme do you want), Nazi memorabilia isn't banned in Britain although it is frowned upon, and you still haven't given any of the other “bans” that Europe is supposedly full of.
And if you believe the bull you wrote above, then by your own admission, banning would make them more extreme.
If there are parts of a religion's holy book that you have to think "well I certainly hope they don't actually believe this!" then maybe calling their religion into question shouldn't be considered a bad thing.
Christianity then!
All religions are retarded, and Islam in its extreme is undoubtedly the worst, but if we insist that those in our country abide by our laws, and realise an us and them mentality is divisive and counterproductive, work with those (the majority in my experience) who want peace, it's far likelier we will reach a peaceful solution than fucking up their countries.
Incidentally, if Trump is so set on getting at Radical Muslims why was he sucking up to the Saudi's, the heart of the Wahhabi movement and the source of most if not all radicalism, a faith that many Islamic scholars (see Al-Azhar university) regularly denounce as a vile sect and a Satanic faith.
And terrorists are winning nothing, and never will. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40164590
-
God you talk some rubbish! There are some bans on Hitler worshipping style Nazi groups in some European countries, usually those that suffered liquidation events (how much more extreme do you want), Nazi memorabilia isn't banned in Britain although it is frowned upon, and you still haven't given any of the other “bans” that Europe is supposedly full of.
And if you believe the bull you wrote above, then by your own admission, banning would make them more extreme.
Alright, I give up, there must be some kind of language barrier going on. I feel like I'm trying to have a discussion with Inti-Lite. There's no way things like "banning would make them more extreme" flew over your head this easily unless there's a language issue.
Christianity then!
All religions are retarded, and Islam in its extreme is undoubtedly the worst, but if we insist that those in our country abide by our laws, and realise an us and them mentality is divisive and counterproductive, work with those (the majority in my experience) who want peace, it's far likelier we will reach a peaceful solution than fucking up their countries.
I'm just pointing out the eventual pointlessness of your governments banning ideologies they don't like. Europe can't decide whether it likes America's free speech anything-goes argument but also thinks banning Islam is "islamaphobic" so they've taken a shitty route that involves banning some people but not others. Have fun when Muslims eventually get into political power and use legal precedence to ban things they don't like (and they aren't afraid to do it!). By choosing to ban ideologies based on feels, you've allowed any future government to do the same, and I have a strong feeling that future governments in the EU are going to feel that Judaism and Christianity are bad.
Incidentally, if Trump is so set on getting at Radical Muslims why was he sucking up to the Saudi's, the heart of the Wahhabi movement and the source of most if not all radicalism, a faith that many Islamic scholars (see Al-Azhar university) regularly denounce as a vile sect and a Satanic faith.
And terrorists are winning nothing, and never will. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40164590
It's because Trump, like most politicians, lied about his supposed position. It's also because Islam is powerful and it grows more powerful every year.
-
any item or communication that is Nazi in origin is considered hate speech in most EU nations and it will get you jail time. I'm not arguing that being a Nazi should be legal, but I am arguing that if you have the balls to ban Nazism then you should have the balls to ban Muslims too.
Again, because I think the point was missed. The UK does not have a ban on Naziism, neither does the EU - individual countries like Germany have.
-
any item or communication that is Nazi in origin is considered hate speech in most EU nations and it will get you jail time. I'm not arguing that being a Nazi should be legal, but I am arguing that if you have the balls to ban Nazism then you should have the balls to ban Muslims too.
Again, because I think the point was missed. The UK does not have a ban on Naziism, neither does the EU - individual countries like Germany have.
So if I displayed Nazi paraphernalia outside my home in London, it would garner absolutely no attention from authorities?
-
You'd probably get attention from authorities no matter where you did that.
-
You'd probably get attention from authorities no matter where you did that.
Did you forget where I live, Saddam? I've seen plenty of confederate flags (the more common) and nazi flags being flown. Albeit I've never seen the nazi ones inside the city limits.
-
So if I displayed Nazi paraphernalia outside my home in London, it would garner absolutely no attention from authorities?
Attention, sure, but not much more than that. Hell, Prince Harry made sure of it (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1481148/Prince-Harry-faces-outcry-at-Nazi-outfit.html)
-
Just clarify your position for me Rushy, as you seem to be for Trumps ban on Islam, whilst praising the right of your redneck buddies to wave swastika flags, but you think that Britain/Europe is soft on Islam (it isn’t) but overly harsh on Nazi’s (we aren’t).
While you are doing that I will attempt to put you right on a few things that Fox has misinformed you on.
Britain has 71 proscribed organisations, 14 are paramilitary organisation from Northern Ireland from the troubles there.
1 is a far-right group called National Action, who promote anti-Semitic, homophobic violence, and race-war and was only put on in 2016 after it praised the shooting and stabbing to death of Labour politician Jo Cox by a supporter, calling her a traitor.
1 , N17 seems to be an anti-Greek junta-American group (?).
The rest as far as I can see (please check, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/612076/20170503_Proscription.pdf) Are Islamist groups, who’d of thought?
In-line with a lot of Americans who rarely question their Hollywood education, you have the idea that Europe is soft, forgetting that some of those films you have seen, were based here, (and unlike the films they weren’t all won by Yanks) you also forget that terrorism isn’t new to us and that it has never prevailed.
-
Just clarify your position for me Rushy, as you seem to be for Trumps ban on Islam, whilst praising the right of your redneck buddies to wave swastika flags, but you think that Britain/Europe is soft on Islam (it isn’t) but overly harsh on Nazi’s (we aren’t).
Let me state this plainly as I can:
You either don't ban ANY hateful ideology.
Or you ban ALL OF THEM.
Many European nations have chosen a "middle ground" where they pick and choose which ones they don't like. That's a very bad long term strategy that's going to result in problems down the road. The American view of freedom of speech is the most logical one. You allow all speech, no matter what it is, because anything else is allowing your government to choose what speech is okay and what speech is not okay, which is absolutely unacceptable.
Additionally, there's no difference between Nazism and Islam in an ideological sense. They are both in-group, out-group ideologies strongly based on racial and tribal senses. Saying "Islam is okay because not all Muslims kill people" is not a defense when Islam establishes an obvious out-group (and encourages discrimination against that out-group). That discrimination doesn't always take the form of blowing people up, and I'm not sure why you think it simply has to do that.
-
Well then we are in accordance, as the Ghostly one has stated we haven't banned Nazi's and we won't ban Islam. The terrorist exclusion list of the US is similar to ours.
Where as your glorious leader is the one who called for “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States”
Who are you arguing with?
-
Well then we are in accordance, as the Ghostly one has stated we haven't banned Nazi's and we won't ban Islam. The terrorist exclusion list of the US is similar to ours.
I think you're misunderstanding what counts as "banned". Again, thought crimes are impossible, I never once stated otherwise, so of course you can't ban someone from thinking they're a nazi. They are, however, banned from demonstrating. That's a big difference.
Where as your glorious leader is the one who called for “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States”
Who are you arguing with?
Keeping a certain class of people from entering the country is not the same as oppressing them inside the country itself.
-
They are, however, banned from demonstrating.
No, they're not.
I live in the centre of a city which has seen several protests, marches, and rallies from a variety of far-right groups, including members who have proudly worn symbols of British fascism, including the white Celtic cross. Hell, the National Front used to have its headquarters around the corner from my parents' old house.
As Jura said, wearing Nazi paraphernalia isn't banned, one of our Princes wore it to a fancy-dress party.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/736874/Bolton-mosque-protest-Neo-Nazi-rabble-un-British-anti-Islam-march
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/neo-nazis-national-front-white-pride-day-alt-right-scotland-edinburgh-unite-a7636611.html
-
Ghostly beat me here but;
Not true, https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=edl+march&hl=en&site=webhp&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigmOuH06vUAhWJYlAKHdbQD8oQ_AUIBygC&biw=1123&bih=793.
Search EDL march UK and click images, then substitute the EDL (stands for English Defence League) for NF, BDP, BNP, combat 18 or the White Wolves (scratch the white wolves, you get pictures of pigmentally challenged canines).
Now you won’t see Nazi flags here as your British racist arsehole is firmly welded to the Union Jack or the good old George Cross, but check out their Tat’s and the meaning of the 18 in Combat 18 and it’s there, the Salute too.
Now I know you want this to be true Rushy, but it just isn’t
-
thought crimes are impossible, I never once stated otherwise, so of course you can't ban someone from thinking they're a nazi.
Think again. Theresa May will get the job done!
-
They are, however, banned from demonstrating.
No, they're not.
I live in the centre of a city which has seen several protests, marches, and rallies from a variety of far-right groups, including members who have proudly worn symbols of British fascism, including the white Celtic cross. Hell, the National Front used to have its headquarters around the corner from my parents' old house.
As Jura said, wearing Nazi paraphernalia isn't banned, one of our Princes wore it to a fancy-dress party.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/736874/Bolton-mosque-protest-Neo-Nazi-rabble-un-British-anti-Islam-march
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/neo-nazis-national-front-white-pride-day-alt-right-scotland-edinburgh-unite-a7636611.html
Hm, I must just be thinking of Germany, then.
thought crimes are impossible, I never once stated otherwise, so of course you can't ban someone from thinking they're a nazi.
Think again. Theresa May will get the job done!
Pornography is a gateway to terrorism.
-
As Jura said, wearing Nazi paraphernalia isn't banned, one of our Princes wore it to a fancy-dress party.
To be honest all you wearers of Hugo Boss are doing pretty much the same.
-
Pornography is a gateway to terrorism.
Actually, this time I was talking about her pledge to change human rights laws in order to better tackle terrorists.
Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn is being criticised for saying it's illegal to arrest people for voicing support for ISIS.
-
Also, Britain is literally shaking
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT1gPfVJnC4
-
Rushy read this, especially the bit about the verse of the sword
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40175088
-
Rushy read this, especially the bit about the verse of the sword
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40175088
Religions can always move forward given enough pressure, the problem being of course that the vast majority of Islam is firmly stuck in the past. In addition, higher education is strongly leaning towards Secularism, so an Imam with a Ph.D. in psychiatry is going to see that killing the infidels isn't exactly a good thing.
Also, he states that the verse only applies if you believe you're at war with someone. Well, a large portion of Muslims in the Muslim world think they're at war with the West (mostly because we've literally been at war with them for well over a decade now). That means his interpretation won't stop ceaseless killings of civilians.
-
Up to a point you are right, but what I am trying to point out is that the message that is peddled in a large part of the American media that Europe is awash with Muslims that are poised to rise up and impose Sharia on the gullible white folk is as wrong as your other assertions.
Most are appalled and worried they will be tarred with the same brush as these fanatics, as you are doing. That they have an Imam with a PhD is indicative of their society here, that no one will bury the fuckers and they turned out to the vigils wasn't fear or cynicism, it was heart felt revulsion of what had been done in the name of their religion.
No doubt there will be more atrocities, as you say there are many angry, traumatised, naive and down right evil Muslims that look at the middle East and blame (not without some justification) the West for the death and destruction there, I think that would be the case if my country had been ravaged and foreign aircraft had bombed my people, the poisonous brand of Islam that has taken root is evil but it isn't the only one.
-
Up to a point you are right, but what I am trying to point out is that the message that is peddled in a large part of the American media that Europe is awash with Muslims that are poised to rise up and impose Sharia on the gullible white folk is as wrong as your other assertions.
Absolutely not. The media constantly paints them as purveyors of peace, tolerance, and women's rights... when the reality is that is absolutely not true in any Muslim Majority nation.
The rejection of Islamic Terror and Sharia is rooted in actual data and analysis. A phobia is an irrational fear. For the general public in your own country, I am willing to bet that this fear is very real and very reasonable fear to have.
-
Not sure what media you subscribe to, but if you read it as well as you obviously did my posts, then you probably got that wrong too.
-
Talking of Nazi memorabilia, there is a signed Mien Kampf up for auction in Lancashire if you want one Rushy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-40276600
-
Talking of Nazi memorabilia, there is a signed Mien Kampf up for auction in Lancashire if you want one Rushy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-40276600
I would no more want a signed Mein Kampf than a signed Quran.
-
Well it's gone now, £17,000 paid in bit-coins apparently.
-
Well it's gone now, £17,000 paid in bit-coins apparently.
what a waste of extremely valuable digital currency. Also it's just one word, bitcoin.
-
Talking of Nazi memorabilia, there is a signed Mien Kampf up for auction in Lancashire if you want one Rushy?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-40276600
I would no more want a signed Mein Kampf than a signed Quran.
Hitler was a sadistic maniac who blamed Jews for all the problems in the World. So I see the similarities between him and Muhammad to be honest.
-
A man has driven a van into Muslims coming out of Finsbury Park Mosque in London.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960
-
A man has driven a van into Muslims coming out of Finsbury Park Mosque in London.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40322960
The BBC needs to get their shit together and start telling us the attackers' race.
Was it a brown man driving a van into brown men? If so, we need to make a strong political statement about dumb sand people killing each other. Also we should close all borders.
Was it a white man driving a van into brown men? Clearly, right-wing nutjobs are at it again and we should open all borders.
-
Well it looks as though he might have been a Welshman, the only sensible thing to do now is to bomb Cardiff & Swansea until they are just rubble and then send some peace keepers in with a tanker of water to try and win hearts & minds.
-
Ooh, Welsh terrorists. Get them into government, pronto!
-
Only if they have an antediluvian world view and can sure up brexitisation.
-
At this rate, they're gonna put concrete dividers along all sidewalks... sheesh...
-
the most important thing we can do now is to figure out why this is someone else's fault. bonus points if we can blame it on a book he read.
-
Well I don't think van hire firms are doing enough to vet their customers. A simple questionnaire, "Do you intend to mow down innocent passers by, due to deeply held, badly thought through prejudices?" would have stopped it all.
-
Well I don't think van hire firms are doing enough to vet their customers. A simple questionnaire, "Do you intend to mow down innocent passers by due to deeply held, badly thought through prejudices?" would have stopped it all.
Required facebook and twitter names.
-
London just needs to post "no van zone" signs on sidewalks and then that will solve the problem.
-
London just needs to post "no van zone" signs on sidewalks and then that will solve the problem.
Or outlaw vans except for police.
But then, only the criminals will have vans. :(
-
London just needs to post "no van zone" signs on sidewalks and then that will solve the problem.
Or outlaw vans except for police.
But then, only the criminals will have vans. :(
We can compromise. Ban high-capacity van space and equipment racks.