Tommy Robinson attacked at McDonald’s

[Alpinestars]

The Dangerous Elk said:

Alpinestars said:

You’d need to define radical first. And in the context of TR, that seems to be someone who wants to blow us all up and members of rape gangs for starters. So in that context it’s, someone who doesn’t want to blow us all up and isn’t a member of a rape gang - even though the latter has noting to do with Islam.

Ok, I "must", why ? twas you who used a term that was designed to let you direct the conversation toward your "normal" subjects.

What is Moderate ?

Before you have another almighty blow out, Boyd used the term. I responded. And I’ve given you some factors (which are relevant to this conversation) as to what moderate means. Context is everything. The conversation started with TR, and how he conflates his dislike or radical Islam, with Muslims at large. The correct terminology to have used for the other Muslims would have been, non radical.

[dai1983]

Boydie88 said:

Christian countries aren't persecuting gays to my knowledge in the modern world.

There’s a fair few places in Africa, the Caribbean and Eastern Europe where you wouldn’t want to be gay

[Alpinestars]

Boydie88 said:

TTwiggy said:

Boydie88 said:

What race? Utter bks IforB.

Are you really going down the 'Islam isn't a race' route?

It isn't. Again, facts don't care about your feelings.

But judges in our courts do right?

[ZedLeg]

Some people did some stty things. That completely negates all the stty things that gamergaters did. How could I have been so blind.

[IforB]

Boydie88 said:

IforB said:

There are lots of reasons for crime, not just immigration. I suspect if you changed the words "immigration" to "Poverty" then the stats would mirror eachother.

Carry on trying to justify your anti-immigration, anti-muslim rhetoric if you wish. It doesn't change the fact that you are seeing 2 + 2 and making 37 out of it as you aren't willing to look into the real causes, but are simply looking for the simple and usually wrong answers to explain what is going on.

It's pretty standard populist nonsense. Look for the easy answers and ignore reality as it doesn't fit with your world view. It's a well worn path that, so hardly surprising stuff.

Ah yes, all coincidence that bringing in huge levels of immigration from a different culture has seen a rise in crime levels.

Facts disagree with you.

You do understand that coincidence is not fact? Of course not, that would mean you had the wit to think beyond the superficial and look at all the causes rather than the ones that fit your twisted and unpleasant beliefs.

[Alpinestars]

Boydie88 said:

The law is twisted by those in the position to abuse it's power.

I'll go by the definition of the word.

Robinson, like millions of others is concerned by the asinine willingness to accept an authoritarian culture by the uncontrolled proverbial bucket load in and naively assume they will assimilate.

Label it as a racist all you wish, it merely dumbs down the word.

You don’t respect our laws?

[Alpinestars]

amusingduck said:

Islam differs from other religions in that the Quran is a perfect text. It is the literal word of God, flawless. The word of God as dictated to the illiterate prophet Mohammed, who was somehow able to write these words down.

You can't reform the literal word of God.

I think you’ll find Hadiths have “reformed” Islam.

[IforB]

TTwiggy said:

Boydie88 said:

Christian countries aren't persecuting gays to my knowledge in the modern world.

Northern Ireland made a pretty good go of it, and they're still doing their best.

Do you think he actually means that about Christianity and it's relationship to homosexuality?

Not even he could actually believe that?!

[Alpinestars]

Boydie88 said:

Source for the first stat?

Stop the what about-ism.

Christian countries aren't persecuting gays to my knowledge in the modern world.

Muslims make up the vast minority of the population, they should be the minority of paedophiles. Why bring this up?

Where am I defending Robinson's actions?

Are you having problems with the language? Muslims don’t make up the vast majority of the population.

Muslims in this country are not persecuting gays.

http://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/terrorism-and-c...

[anonymous-user]

Boydie88 said:

Ah yes, all coincidence that bringing in huge levels of immigration from a different culture has seen a rise in crime levels.

Facts disagree with you.

Which rise?

[e30m3Mark]

IforB said:

TTwiggy said:

Boydie88 said:

Christian countries aren't persecuting gays to my knowledge in the modern world.

Northern Ireland made a pretty good go of it, and they're still doing their best.

Do you think he actually means that about Christianity and it's relationship to homosexuality?

Not even he could actually believe that?!

I thought I’d misread that too!

I’m still keen to know the thoughts on why so many Muslims are victims in the atrocities carried out by extremists if they’re all the same anyway? Why did the Muslims on the beach in Tunisia form a human shield to protect non Muslims? Surely they should have been willing the gunman on?

[gazza285]

This page has potential...

https://facebook.com/littlerommyrobinson/

[The Dangerous Elk]

TTwiggy said:

Northern Ireland made a pretty good go of it, and they're still doing their best.

Allah on a bike !, that is a stretch

[Not-The-Messiah]

IforB said:

Not-The-Messiah said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.

I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.

There's no point, as you are obviously unwilling to accept that it might indeed be positive.

Your blinkered view is exactly what Mr Fandango is talking about. Dangerous because you believe something to be true without being able to present a coherent argument for it.

Why should there be a need to convince you, or do you not have the courage of your convictions to come out and say why you believe what you believe?

Come out from under your rock and let the rest of the world dissect YOUR argument. If you do not believe it to be strong enough to stand up to scrutiny, then most of us will simply ignore you and park you in the "not worth it category."

Prove my assumption of your character wrong. Try it, you never know what might happen...

I'm perfectly happy to except that its might be a positive thing.

The key word is might and on the same track being so logical and rational you must except that the opposite is true, that it might be a bad thing?

If so then it all comes down to this so called logical argument to argue each preposition.

I don't think ultimately it will be a good thing. I base my opinion on a basic (yes I admit a basic) understanding of things like our fundamental social instinctive tribal behaviours. The historical evidence of whenever competing ideologies have come into close proximity competing for influence it inevitably leads to violence and bloodshed and so on.

I do believe it could be a positive thing but in the same way I think I could win the lottery.

The difference is we haven't just bet a few quid on the hope it will all work out. The stakes are far higher and potentially disastrous if the bet doesn't pay off.

The way some seem to have learn from history. Is that in the past we had a room filled will flammable material and a certain someone came along (Mr Adolf)with a match and lit it and we all ended up burnt.
So what we've done in my opinion is build a bigger room with even more flammable material and all we do now is go round shouting at anyone that dears to look at a match.

I don't believe the likes of TR are suggesting let's light this potential powder keg and get this conflagration going. He's asking/suggesting is it a bright idea to import more fuel.

[Alpinestars]

Ok, so who’s going to own up to being these lovely gents?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/free-tommy-robinson-...

[Dindoit]

Alpinestars said:

Ok, so who’s going to own up to being these lovely gents?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/free-tommy-robinson-...

Why the illiterates say “I’m not a fan of Tommy, but...” this is the mouth they’re breathing through.

[IforB]

Not-The-Messiah said:

IforB said:

Not-The-Messiah said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

If Tommy Robinson is a budding British führer it won't be beaten out of him outside Wetherspoons and it won't be prosecuted out of him. It should be discussed calmly and logically and the folly exposed by reason.

I'm still waiting for this though, for someone to come along with this logic to dispute his arguments. To give a logical argument on how mass immigration and the importation of a incompatible ideology on mass is good for this nation.

There's no point, as you are obviously unwilling to accept that it might indeed be positive.

Your blinkered view is exactly what Mr Fandango is talking about. Dangerous because you believe something to be true without being able to present a coherent argument for it.

Why should there be a need to convince you, or do you not have the courage of your convictions to come out and say why you believe what you believe?

Come out from under your rock and let the rest of the world dissect YOUR argument. If you do not believe it to be strong enough to stand up to scrutiny, then most of us will simply ignore you and park you in the "not worth it category."

Prove my assumption of your character wrong. Try it, you never know what might happen...

I'm perfectly happy to except that its might be a positive thing.

The key word is might and on the same track being so logical and rational you must except that the opposite is true, that it might be a bad thing?

If so then it all comes down to this so called logical argument to argue each preposition.

I don't think ultimately it will be a good thing. I base my opinion on a basic (yes I admit a basic) understanding of things like our fundamental social instinctive tribal behaviours. The historical evidence of whenever competing ideologies have come into close proximity competing for influence it inevitably leads to violence and bloodshed and so on.

I do believe it could be a positive thing but in the same way I think I could win the lottery.

The difference is we haven't just bet a few quid on the hope it will all work out. The stakes are far higher and potentially disastrous if the bet doesn't pay off.

The way some seem to have learn from history. Is that in the past we had a room filled will flammable material and a certain someone came along (Mr Adolf)with a match and lit it and we all ended up burnt.
So what we've done in my opinion is build a bigger room with even more flammable material and all we do now is go round shouting at anyone that dears to look at a match.

I don't believe the likes of TR are suggesting let's light this potential powder keg and get this conflagration going. He's asking/suggesting is it a bright idea to import more fuel.

You are completely failing to grasp the concept that immigration is not a new thing. You seem to be trying to determine whether something that has been happening for millennia is good or bad, whereas, it just is and like all things in life, there are positives and negatives.

Since you have brought up Adolf Hitler (an interesting concept for someone who is anti-immigration) then I will ask you to read up on some history and look at the real things that allowed that monster to come to power. We are not living in a "room filled with flammable material" at all. We just have some nasty minded idiots trying to make progress for their vile agenda and people like you are either actively assisting that or are part of it.

Describing immigrants or Muslims as "fuel" is an awful mindset and frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself. The only people trying to burn anything down are the knuckle-draggers who consider that Yaxley-Lennon is anything other than a stain on humanity.

[Countdown]

Not-The-Messiah said:

The way some seem to have learn from history. Is that in the past we had a room filled will flammable material and a certain someone came along (Mr Adolf)with a match and lit it and we all ended up burnt.
So what we've done in my opinion is build a bigger room with even more flammable material and all we do now is go round shouting at anyone that dears to look at a match.

Out of interest, are you suggesting that

(i) WW2 was caused by/a result of jewish migration to Germany and AH used this for his own nefarious purposes; and

(ii) "We" are now encourging similar levels of immigration and criticising anybdoy who tries to exploit it like Hitler did?

[Not-The-Messiah]

IforB said:

You are completely failing to grasp the concept that immigration is not a new thing. You seem to be trying to determine whether something that has been happening for millennia is good or bad, whereas, it just is and like all things in life, there are positives and negatives.

Since you have brought up Adolf Hitler (an interesting concept for someone who is anti-immigration) then I will ask you to read up on some history and look at the real things that allowed that monster to come to power. We are not living in a "room filled with flammable material" at all. We just have some nasty minded idiots trying to make progress for their vile agenda and people like you are either actively assisting that or are part of it.

Describing immigrants or Muslims as "fuel" is an awful mindset and frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself. The only people trying to burn anything down are the knuckle-draggers who consider that Yaxley-Lennon is anything other than a stain on humanity.

You are completely failing to grasp the difference between immigration and mass immigration.

Can you give me a example of where mass immigration and the mass importation of a different conflicting culture was ever a good thing the indigenous population?

Hitler use a specific environment a economic and social situation to his own evil ends. My argument is that let's not create the potential situation that always people like him to use in the first place.

We are or have created a potential perfect environment for someone like him to exist. It's already started and I don't think no amount of going around shouting at people and calling them racist is going stop it. The working classes are already becomeing angry and disenfranchised.

I personally don't know what the solution is but it would be a start to actually listen to them and confront and tackle the issues they have. Not just go around calling them ill educated racists and dismissing their concerns.

Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Tuesday 16th October 13:11

[TTwiggy]

Not-The-Messiah said:

I personally don't know what the solution is but it would be a start to actually listen to them and confront and tackle the issues they have. Not just go around calling them ill educated racists and dismissing their concerns.

Ok, lets run with this. Who's going to speak for these 'working classes'? Who is going to collate the list of their grievances? If one of their demands happens to be 'send the darkies back home', how do we carry that out?