Tommy Robinson attacked at McDonald’s
Discussion
Alpinestars said:
Racism - our laws would disagree with you. You still didn’t quite get past the are 
s a race? Do you respect our laws and can you answer whether Pakistanis are a race? Or are you going to keep avoiding that question? To remind you, you though a white person calling a brown Asian a , is racist. What race are Pakistanis vis a vis the white European?
Could a white person be convicted of racism against a white muslim?s a race? Do you respect our laws and can you answer whether Pakistanis are a race? Or are you going to keep avoiding that question? To remind you, you though a white person calling a brown Asian a , is racist. What race are Pakistanis vis a vis the white European? e30m3Mark said:
The TR fan club do appear to believe they represent a large proportion of the British public though,
Of course they believe that - they believe everything their fake news sources tell them.Like that rally they held for him in, err, Cairo
del mar said:
As a vegetarian......
I wonder what UKIP define as extreme / radical Islam.
Are they talking about chapters 2, 4 and 6 or is this something else ?
You’re the expert. Enlighten us. And point to the people that follow the Quran in its entirety. Because that would be a proper Muslim right? I wonder what UKIP define as extreme / radical Islam.
Are they talking about chapters 2, 4 and 6 or is this something else ?
colin_p said:
The answer, it isn't, it is a theocratic socio-political belief system that transcends all races.
It is perfectly acceptable to dislike it,
Is it OK to 'dislike' all its adherents by extension? It is perfectly acceptable to dislike it,
colin_p said:
Saying that, it is unfair to compare other religions to islam as other religions do not govern every single other aspect of a persons life like islam does, right down to how to wipe (or not) ones arse.
You're right in that it is more fundamentally embedded in the day to day, but there are different forms of it, different interpretations and different levels of adherence - in public and private. Algeria, a secular but predominantly Muslim country has fought a 15 year war with extremist Islamic terror groups as a case in point. They seem to be able to separate out 'normal Muslim' and 'Djihadist fundamentalist' easily enough; why can't we? Do we see all Irish or all Catholics as being a threat to society after the prolonged campaign of terror by the IRA?
Edited by andy_s on Saturday 22 September 15:27
Noodle1982 said:
Alpinestars said:
Noodle1982 said:
Could a white person be convicted of racism against a white muslim?
Same questions to you. Do you respect our laws? And what race are Pakistanis cf white Europeans. Countdown said:
Noodle1982 said:
Could a white person be convicted of racism against a white muslim?
https://newmatilda.com/2017/11/07/but-islams-not-a-race-michael-brull-destroys-the-islamophobes-fave-comeback/Alpinestars said:
Noodle1982 said:
Could a white person be convicted of racism against a white muslim?
Do you respect our laws? andy_s said:
Is it OK to 'dislike' all its adherents by extension?
No, that would be stupid. andy_s said:
You're right in that it is more fundamentally embedded in the day to day, but there are different forms of it, different interpretations and different levels of adherence - in public and private. Algeria, a secular but predominantly Muslim country has fought a 15 year war with extremist Islamic terror groups as a case in point. They seem to be able to separate out 'normal Muslim' and 'Djihadist fundamentalist' easily enough; why can't we?
You are not alone in making the mistake of saying that those of us who question the prescence of islam in the West somehow extend that questioning to conflate that all muslims are bad. We don't. Perhaps it is you who has trouble separating them?There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
colin_p said:
You are not alone in making the mistake of saying that those of us who question the prescence of islam in the West somehow extend that questioning to conflate that all muslims are bad. We don't. Perhaps it is you who has trouble separating them?
There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
You’ve still not answered the question about Pakistanis. Struggling again. There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
colin_p said:
You are not alone in making the mistake of saying that those of us who question the prescence of islam in the West somehow extend that questioning to conflate that all muslims are bad. We don't. Perhaps it is you who has trouble separating them?
There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
No I don't have too much trouble with separating it out, nor was that the point of my question - a genuine one that has given you the opportunity to clarify your position.There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
You could replace 'islam' with 'christianity', 'extreme left-wing', 'extreme right-wing' or even 'oil' and you'd be just as right - people are easily manipulated, n'est pas?.
Alpinestars said:
colin_p said:
You are not alone in making the mistake of saying that those of us who question the prescence of islam in the West somehow extend that questioning to conflate that all muslims are bad. We don't. Perhaps it is you who has trouble separating them?
There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
You’ve still not answered the question about Pakistanis. Struggling again. There is also an interesting example in your second para in that wherever islam manifests on this planet there is the same kind of trouble regardless.
Kccv23highliftcam said:
References.
the law said:
Section 31 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 creates three racially or religiously aggravated public order offences.
31(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he commits -
(a) an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986 (fear or provocation of violence);
(b) an offence under section 4A of that Act (intentional harassment, alarm or distress); or
(c) an offence under section 5 of that Act (harassment, alarm or distress),
which is racially or religiously aggravated for the purposes of this section.
They're effectively the same offence whether racially or religiously aggravated.31(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he commits -
(a) an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986 (fear or provocation of violence);
(b) an offence under section 4A of that Act (intentional harassment, alarm or distress); or
(c) an offence under section 5 of that Act (harassment, alarm or distress),
which is racially or religiously aggravated for the purposes of this section.
Noodle1982 said:
Alpinestars said:
The Courts consider being anti Muslim racism. Now do you respect the laws of my land?
No they don't. We've been over this in this thread previously. Religious Hatred and racial are two different things.
Do you respect our laws?
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/v...
http://eastlondonnews.co.uk/shabby-racist-sent-to-...
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/great...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff