Imploding Turtle wrote:IT's funny how you and I share the same opinion about her yet we are both reacted to entirely differently.

Have you never considered or explored the possibility you could express the same opinion differently despite sharing the same opinion.

Jakubclaret wrote:Have you never considered or explored the possibility you could express the same opinion differently despite sharing the same opinion.

Yes. But I don't like accommodating other people's stupidity. I'm well aware that some people are going to take what I say and run a bunch of assumptions with it. That's their fault and they should learn to stop doing it.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Yes. But I don't like accommodating other people's stupidity.

We know. You already have your hands full.

thatdberight wrote:We know. You already have your hands full.

Quality.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/shamima-begum ... 31649.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I think keeping such an evil little bitch away from our shores is the correct decision .
I wonder if Corbyn would still want her back ? Probably yes as she would certainly be anti Semitic.

Quick bring her home....said the idiots.

bfcjg wrote:https://uk.news.yahoo.com/shamima-begum ... 31649.html
I think keeping such an evil little bitch away from our shores is the correct decision .
I wonder if Corbyn would still want her back ? Probably yes as she would certainly be anti Semitic.

No different to Saudi Arabia then. A country that Britain is happy to sell arms to.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Quick bring her home....said the idiots.

No one said that.

Imploding Turtle wrote:No one said that.

That was a quick search of the entire internet, or were you concerned I meant you?

Enough people wanted her back without considering what she may have done over there that I consider them to be pretty stupid or naive, whichever cap fits.

You just whinged about the legality of not letting her home, but you've stopped whinging now so clearly it didn't bother you that much.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:That was a quick search of the entire internet, or were you concerned I meant you?

Enough people wanted her back without considering what she may have done over there that I consider them to be pretty stupid or naive, whichever cap fits.

You just whinged about the legality of not letting her home, but you've stopped whinging now so clearly it didn't bother you that much.

Are you sure people wanted her back? I’ve not read a single comment from someone who wanted her back. Some people rightly questioned whether morally and indeed legally it was our responsibility to take her back.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:That was a quick search of the entire internet, or were you concerned I meant you?

Enough people wanted her back without considering what she may have done over there that I consider them to be pretty stupid or naive, whichever cap fits.

You just whinged about the legality of not letting her home, but you've stopped whinging now so clearly it didn't bother you that much.

I searched as much of the internet as you did.

And yes, we all know who you meant. You were trying to smear those of us who made the rights-based argument (that we lost some, including fools like you) as if we were really on the side of Begum. It's what you people constantly do when faced with opposing arguments from those of us who argue in favour of defending our rights. You constantly try to tell everyone we're on the side of terrorists. And that's exactly what you were continuing to do here.

And yes, it does bother me that my country can now simply accuse me of something and i no longer have the right to defend myself against it's accusations.

When you think about how many far-right extremists are gaining power around the world, and you see how quickly people are willing to give away their rights it is a serious worry for anyone with half a brain what a far-right extremist government would do if they were to gain power after we've signed away our rights to things such as the right to a fair trial.

It'll be like Brexit, we'd be absolutely ****** but at least i'd get to enjoy being right.

Imploding Turtle wrote:I searched as much of the internet as you did.

And yes, we all know who you meant. You were trying to smear those of us who made the rights-based argument (that we lost some, including fools like you) as if we were really on the side of Begum. It's what you people constantly do when faced with opposing arguments from those of us who argue in favour of defending our rights. You constantly try to tell everyone we're on the side of terrorists. And that's exactly what you were continuing to do here.

And yes, it does bother me that my country can now simply accuse me of something and i no longer have the right to defend myself against it's accusations.

Cool story.

Imploding Turtle wrote:When you think about how many far-right extremists are gaining power around the world, and you see how quickly people are willing to give away their rights it is a serious worry for anyone with half a brain what a far-right extremist government would do if they were to gain power after we've signed away our rights to things such as the right to a fair trial.

It'll be like Brexit, we'd be absolutely ****** but at least i'd get to enjoy being right.

There are no facts whatsoever to suggest brexit will or won't succeed only time will tell so how can you be right??

If the world carries on like it is then we will be ruled by Muslims before long which is as extreme as they come an you'll end up with the exact same treatment your talking about.

bumba wrote:There are no facts whatsoever to suggest brexit will or won't succeed only time will tell so how can you be right??

If the world carries on like it is then we will be ruled by Muslims before long which is as extreme as they come an you'll end up with the exact same treatment your talking about.

And this kind of Great Replacement nazi bullshit is what will bring the far-right into power.

At least it won't be serious fear mongering, like, you know, an emergency budget.

I see that Jacob Rees Mogg was on the radio today saying that she shouldn't have been stripped of her citizenship and it is correct that she should get legal aid

I have been very concerned about the removal of her citizenship. I think she is a British responsibility. And I believe that she is correctly given legal aid, that we have a principle of innocence until proved guilty in this country and I think that taking away a passport by purely administrative act, with no judicial oversight, is not just.
...
I believe that a British citizenship ought to be protected, and that means that you have the full protection of the law. And if you have committed an offence, you can be charged. But you are our responsibility, not Bangladesh’s responsibility.

aggi wrote:I see that Jacob Rees Mogg was on the radio today saying that she shouldn't have been stripped of her citizenship and it is correct that she should get legal aid

I have been very concerned about the removal of her citizenship. I think she is a British responsibility. And I believe that she is correctly given legal aid, that we have a principle of innocence until proved guilty in this country and I think that taking away a passport by purely administrative act, with no judicial oversight, is not just.
...
I believe that a British citizenship ought to be protected, and that means that you have the full protection of the law. And if you have committed an offence, you can be charged. But you are our responsibility, not Bangladesh’s responsibility.

Bloody sandal wearing communist libtard

aggi wrote:I see that Jacob Rees Mogg was on the radio today saying that she shouldn't have been stripped of her citizenship and it is correct that she should get legal aid

I have been very concerned about the removal of her citizenship. I think she is a British responsibility. And I believe that she is correctly given legal aid, that we have a principle of innocence until proved guilty in this country and I think that taking away a passport by purely administrative act, with no judicial oversight, is not just.
...
I believe that a British citizenship ought to be protected, and that means that you have the full protection of the law. And if you have committed an offence, you can be charged. But you are our responsibility, not Bangladesh’s responsibility.

Funnily enough James O'Brien didn't do his 5 minutes of hate towards Mogg today, i wonder why ?

aggi wrote:I see that Jacob Rees Mogg was on the radio today saying that she shouldn't have been stripped of her citizenship and it is correct that she should get legal aid

I have been very concerned about the removal of her citizenship. I think she is a British responsibility. And I believe that she is correctly given legal aid, that we have a principle of innocence until proved guilty in this country and I think that taking away a passport by purely administrative act, with no judicial oversight, is not just.
...
I believe that a British citizenship ought to be protected, and that means that you have the full protection of the law. And if you have committed an offence, you can be charged. But you are our responsibility, not Bangladesh’s responsibility.

Wow. What a traitor.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Wow. What a traitor.

So you agree with him ?

Funnily enough James O'Brien didn't do his 5 minutes of hate towards Mogg today, i wonder why ?

Yeah he did, but just on twitter.

Good for him I reckon, Mogg needs calling out for what he is.

AndyClaret wrote:So you agree with him ?

Of course. JRM has many faults that make him a ****, but he at least seems to believe in democracy the right to a fair trial.

It's amusing to me though, because a lot of people who I imagine quite like him called me all kinds of vile things for expressing the same opinion. I wonder if they'll be equally outraged.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Of course. JRM has many faults that make him a ****, but he at least seems to believe in democracy the right to a fair trial.

It's amusing to me though, because a lot of people who I imagine quite like him called me all kinds of vile things for expressing the same opinion. I wonder if they'll be equally outraged.

They are.

JRM is losing popularity by the week.

ClaretMoffitt wrote:They are.

JRM is losing popularity by the week.

Well, he believe in stuff like fair trials for brown people.

I mean, that can't be allowed to happen.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Well, he believe in stuff like fair trials for brown people.

I mean, that can't be allowed to happen.

damn straight, now you're talking LC

ClaretMoffitt wrote:damn straight, now you're talking LC

Being serious for a sec CM, you know very well that is exactly the reason.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Yeah he did, but just on twitter.

Good for him I reckon, Mogg needs calling out for what he is.

He hides in the broom cupboard when the J dogg's in the house.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Being serious for a sec CM, you know very well that is exactly the reason.

"Pretend to joke about it until the punchline /really/ lands"

bumba wrote:There are no facts whatsoever to suggest brexit will or won't succeed only time will tell so how can you be right??

If the world carries on like it is then we will be ruled by Muslims before long which is as extreme as they come an you'll end up with the exact same treatment your talking about.

"We will be ruled by Muslims..." - I really hate this lazy, inaccurate, and frankly stupid argument. How many Muslims live in Britain? How many of them hold positions of power; in the government, army, judiciary, police, civil service, industry, finance, or any sector of our economy that is important? They are under-represented, so not going to take over this way.

So let's look at demographics: Muslims make up less than ten percent of our population. That should end this part of the debate, but instead I'll write more. A few years ago a friend of mine from Canada came to stay. He's a right-wing guy with similar views to you about Muslims "taking over". I live in a very mixed area of London, that is predominantly Muslim; and he conceded that it wasn't a "no go" area whatsoever. We sat down over beers one night and he talked instead about the rest of Europe - Germany and France - being over-run by Muslims. Together we looked up the figures and discovered it wasn't as he'd said. We looked at Bulgaria with a twenty-five percent Muslim population, and both laughed at that being the best the Muslim Turks could do in five hundred years of ruling it.

Of all the religions in the world, Christianity has been the best shot at making itself the world-wide religion. By 1922 Christian countries controlled most of the world, and despite the best efforts of Christian preachers, the world isn't a Christian place.

So how do you reckon Muslims will take over?

AndrewJB wrote:"We will be ruled by Muslims..." - I really hate this lazy, inaccurate, and frankly stupid argument. How many Muslims live in Britain? How many of them hold positions of power; in the government, army, judiciary, police, civil service, industry, finance, or any sector of our economy that is important? They are under-represented, so not going to take over this way.

So let's look at demographics: Muslims make up less than ten percent of our population. That should end this part of the debate, but instead I'll write more. A few years ago a friend of mine from Canada came to stay. He's a right-wing guy with similar views to you about Muslims "taking over". I live in a very mixed area of London, that is predominantly Muslim; and he conceded that it wasn't a "no go" area whatsoever. We sat down over beers one night and he talked instead about the rest of Europe - Germany and France - being over-run by Muslims. Together we looked up the figures and discovered it wasn't as he'd said. We looked at Bulgaria with a twenty-five percent Muslim population, and both laughed at that being the best the Muslim Turks could do in five hundred years of ruling it.

Of all the religions in the world, Christianity has been the best shot at making itself the world-wide religion. By 1922 Christian countries controlled most of the world, and despite the best efforts of Christian preachers, the world isn't a Christian place.

So how do you reckon Muslims will take over?

It's a Nazi-eqsue conspiracy theory called the Great Replacement. It's also a central theme in the manifesto of the Christchurch shooter. It's not just Muslims that frighten them, it's white people over-all that they worry about becoming a minority (almost as if minorities are treated badly, or something)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbxVfSqtt8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AndrewJB wrote:"We will be ruled by Muslims..." - I really hate this lazy, inaccurate, and frankly stupid argument. How many Muslims live in Britain? How many of them hold positions of power; in the government, army, judiciary, police, civil service, industry, finance, or any sector of our economy that is important? They are under-represented, so not going to take over this way.

So let's look at demographics: Muslims make up less than ten percent of our population. That should end this part of the debate, but instead I'll write more. A few years ago a friend of mine from Canada came to stay. He's a right-wing guy with similar views to you about Muslims "taking over". I live in a very mixed area of London, that is predominantly Muslim; and he conceded that it wasn't a "no go" area whatsoever. We sat down over beers one night and he talked instead about the rest of Europe - Germany and France - being over-run by Muslims. Together we looked up the figures and discovered it wasn't as he'd said. We looked at Bulgaria with a twenty-five percent Muslim population, and both laughed at that being the best the Muslim Turks could do in five hundred years of ruling it.

Of all the religions in the world, Christianity has been the best shot at making itself the world-wide religion. By 1922 Christian countries controlled most of the world, and despite the best efforts of Christian preachers, the world isn't a Christian place.

So how do you reckon Muslims will take over?

Numbers in Britain ? The Pew Research Cente ‘ The Muslim population of Britain is set to triple in 30 years’ using Median migration levels this will be 4.1 million in 2016 and grow to 30 million in 2050. So nearly half the UK population as we know it now will be Muslim by 2050.

Positions of power(Govt): The Home Secretary is one if the highest political positions you can hold and thus is currently a Muslim by origin.

Positions of power(Police): assistant Met Police Comissioner 1974 to 2007 Tarique Ghaffur Born I n Uganda and Muslim.

Positions of power (local govt ): I invite you to look at the list of Pendle Councillors.

Blackrod wrote:Numbers in Britain ? The Pew Research Cente ‘ The Muslim population of Britain is set to triple in 30 years’ using Median migration levels this will be 4.1 million in 2016 and grow to 30 million in 2050. So nearly half the UK population as we know it now will be Muslim by 2050.

Positions of power(Govt): The Home Secretary is one if the highest political positions you can hold and thus is currently a Muslim by origin.

Positions of power(Police): assistant Met Police Comissioner 1974 to 2007 Tarique Ghaffur Born I n Uganda and Muslim.

Positions of power (local govt ): I invite you to look at the list of Pendle Councillors.

I've checked and 4 x 3 = 12

But I do know they have special Muslamic death ray numbers, so it might be 30.

Blackrod wrote:Numbers in Britain ? The Pew Research Cente ‘ The Muslim population of Britain is set to triple in 30 years’ using Median migration levels this will be 4.1 million in 2016 and grow to 30 million in 2050. So nearly half the UK population as we know it now will be Muslim by 2050.

Positions of power(Govt): The Home Secretary is one if the highest political positions you can hold and thus is currently a Muslim by origin.

Positions of power(Police): assistant Met Police Comissioner 1974 to 2007 Tarique Ghaffur Born I n Uganda and Muslim.

Positions of power (local govt ): I invite you to look at the list of Pendle Councillors.

Number aren't really your thing, are they? Scaremongering about Muslims though, that's right up your alley.

thatdberight wrote:I've checked and 4 x 3 = 12

But I do know they have special Muslamic death ray numbers, so it might be 30.

Muslims invented numbers so maybe Blackrod just thinks they're biased.

Blackrod wrote:Positions of power(Govt): The Home Secretary is one if the highest political positions you can hold and thus is currently a Muslim by origin.

So? What's wrong with that?

Blackrod wrote:Positions of power(Police): assistant Met Police Comissioner 1974 to 2007 Tarique Ghaffur Born I n Uganda and Muslim.

So? What was wrong with that?

Blackrod wrote:Positions of power (local govt ): I invite you to look at the list of Pendle Councillors.

So? What's wrong with that?

Are you saying that Muslim people should be barred from holding certain positions in public life because of their religion?

There may not be that many of them, according to the statistics mentioned above, but the world is running scared and is constantly on high alert because of them.

Just take a look at the changes to the relatively simple act of taking a flight and the hoops we now have to jump through. They've got the rest world running scared I'm afraid and I can't see it changing any time soon.

JohnMcGreal wrote:Are you saying that Muslim people should be barred from holding certain positions in public life because of their religion?

He was responding to an assertion that Muslims didn't hold those types of positions.

Funkydrummer wrote:There may not be that many of them, according to the statistics mentioned above, but the world is running scared and is constantly on high alert because of them.

Just take a look at the changes to the relatively simple act of taking a flight and the hoops we now have to jump through. They've got the rest world running scared I'm afraid and I can't see it changing any time soon.

So we take off, and nuke the whole site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure?

Or we could realise that its perhaps not as bad as the nationalists and the dipshit racists would have you believe maybe?

Funkydrummer wrote:There may not be that many of them, according to the statistics mentioned above, but the world is running scared and is constantly on high alert because of them.

Just take a look at the changes to the relatively simple act of taking a flight and the hoops we now have to jump through. They've got the rest world running scared I'm afraid and I can't see it changing any time soon.

That's because of terrorists, not because of Muslims.

Blackrod wrote:Numbers in Britain ? The Pew Research Cente ‘ The Muslim population of Britain is set to triple in 30 years’ using Median migration levels this will be 4.1 million in 2016 and grow to 30 million in 2050. So nearly half the UK population as we know it now will be Muslim by 2050.

Positions of power(Govt): The Home Secretary is one if the highest political positions you can hold and thus is currently a Muslim by origin.

Positions of power(Police): assistant Met Police Comissioner 1974 to 2007 Tarique Ghaffur Born I n Uganda and Muslim.

Positions of power (local govt ): I invite you to look at the list of Pendle Councillors.

I accepted your invitation:

Which ones are the ones we should be frightened of?







https://www.pendle.gov.uk/councillors/name" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tall Paul wrote:That's because of terrorists, not because of Muslims.

Come on TP, I know what you're inviting with that comment, but you and I are
not that naive.

4.1 million Muslims to 30 million in 34 years is the most hilarious thing I've ever read.

Funkydrummer wrote:Come on TP, I know what you're inviting with that comment, but you and I are
not that naive.

He inviting you to clarify that you understand that it is because of terrorists, not because of the religion of the terrorists. We'd have had to jump through hoops no matter what religion the terrorists were. If Christian terrorists had flown planes into the twin towers nothing would have been different when it comes to airport security and what not. (except that the "random" passenger checks would be a bit more random)

ClaretAndJew wrote:4.1 million Muslims to 30 million in 34 years is the most hilarious thing I've ever read.

Sales of lube are going to go through the roof to even get that close.

Imploding Turtle wrote:He inviting you to clarify that you understand that it is because of terrorists, not because of the religion of the terrorists. We'd have had to jump through hoops no matter what religion the terrorists were. If Christian terrorists had flown planes into the twin towers nothing would have been different when it comes to airport security and what not. (except that the "random" passenger checks would be a bit more random)

You're not that naive either.

thatdberight wrote:He was responding to an assertion that Muslims didn't hold those types of positions.

To be clear, I didn't assert Muslims don't hold those positions of power (my own mayor is Muslim), but that they're under-represented as a proportion of the population.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Muslims invented numbers so maybe Blackrod just thinks they're biased.

I think you'll find numbers were invented long before Mohammed was born.

dsr wrote: I think you'll find numbers were invented long before Mohammed was born.

I wanted to keep the joke simple and chose "numbers" instead of "Arabic numerals", but thanks for your input.

Imploding Turtle wrote:I wanted to keep the joke simple and chose "numbers" instead of "Arabic numerals", but thanks for your input.

Your jokes really need a smiley to identify them.

dsr wrote:Your jokes really need a smiley to identify them.

I'd have thought the idea that someone would see numbers as biased would be enough to identify something as less than serious.