Luton "Anti war demo"

[Fop 1]

There's the irony, both 'sides' driven by the same type of hatred, and both oblivious to it.

Exactly, and of course that one side is policed in a completely different (and institutionally racist/discriminatory) way to the other.

 

But where was the condemnation (or the media coverage) of these marches in the videos? There was plenty on the actual peaceful "peace" marches and there would have been plenty on any BNP/football/pro or anti-hunt/anti-globalisation/green violence.

 

In fact probably the reason the Luton example made it into the media so strongly is probably because of the conflict angle between the Islamofacist demonstrators and the people that took exception to them and it became too big to ignore.

[LeazesMag 0]

Depends what they did tbf.

 

Irrespective of what they did, I would also expect the "demonstrators", given the inflamatory nature of their protest, to be charged with something like "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace" or some such. But it'll never happen.

 

Quite a few in the London demo that proclaimed 'Death to those who insult Islam' and such bollocks were ultimately arrested were they not? For me this one is much more borderline and highlights the need to balance the right to free speech with the potential to incite public disorder. I'm not sure what the correct repsonse should have been tbh.

 

I hear a lot about muslims being allowed to do X, Y, and Z whereas white people would get arrested for it, but I've not seen many clear cut examples cited. Just like the supposed banning of the St George cross but not other national flags etc. It all sounds a bit Daily Mail without any proof to me.

 

 

I expect the Guardian doesn't print the type of articles you are looking for. Still, what the hell eh, that means its never happened.

 

 

Wow. All these posts and mine are the ones you feel forced to respond to. Do you have any proof that the St George Cross has been specifically banned then? Or is it more likely it's an urban myth like Rob says? I must have told you at least a hundred time now btw that I don't read the Observer or Guardian.

 

Fop, I don't relly see the point in posting a video I can't even see. Surely you must have some better 'evidence' to back your views.

 

I suppose this will be totally ignored yet it gives the proof you are asking for, sorry if it pisses on your chips, just like the last time when you asked me to find where I said you had advocated "planning", and I went and linked to a post you made and you pathetically tried to wriggle out of your own comments.

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1389502/posts

 

http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblo...tly-ben-sm.html

 

Thats twice I've supplied "evidence"

 

Still. What the hell eh. I'm quite amazed a smart lad like you can't see how this particular problem is growing all the time, due to tosspots trying to tell the majority of normal minded people what they can and can't say in our own country.

 

Not particularly good evidence, also nice to get an insight into your web-surfing habits Leazes. The first link just seems to be from a weird neocon blog whose veracity can certainly be questioned. The second is from an extreme anti-islamic site and could easily have been made up. But even if it wasn't, so what? All it shows is an isolated case where some over zealous policeman has seemingly taken offence to the author of the piece for some reason. Hardly evidence of some systematic campaign to ban the St George cross, is it? However there is good evidence that no such campaign exists and it occurs every two years or so.

 

I honestly think its a bit sad you are clearly growing to hate our country on the back of non-stories from hate-sites such as these. Your loss really though I suppose.

 

Basically Renton, its nothing to do with sites I "surf", its just an entry put into google. Kids know how to do this, you should try it sometime.

 

Canny to see you are still excusing such atrocious behaviour and continue a total lack of perception as to what is happening to the country. You're not a muslim are you ?

 

If they're the best sources of information your googling could come up with then that kind of proves my point I would have thought. I would have thought it was also fairly obvious I'm neither a muslim or a christian. Was it Stevie who also thought Parky was a muslim?

 

The second last line is typical of your misrepresenting me though. I'm not condoning their behaviour at all, I think they are odious, cretinous, scumbags (I bet you continue to ignore this). But that's not the debate, the debate is about the right of freedom of speech, which I think should be universal, within limits (the limits are another debate really). For instance I recognise the right for Stevie to come out with what reads to me as a genocidal racist tirade (I highlighted the bits in bold that I'm referring to). I also respect your right to think this is a 'good post'. Somehow I doubt this is what our forefathers fought for against the nazis though. That's what makes this country great tbh, and why I am, unlike you, generally happy with the status quo.

 

not the best sources, just the first half decent ones I spotted. Making you out to be the nob you are isnt' worth too much effort, I don't spend too much time "surfing the web".

 

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time when people like you sit back and make excuses for it.

 

If you dont' think our forefathers fought to save this country from odious bastards and defend our rights and traditions what do you think they did fight for ? They would be turning in their grave. A quite unbelievable comment, what do they teach you smart lads these days

Edited March 17, 2009 by LeazesMag

[Renton 18038]

There's the irony, both 'sides' driven by the same type of hatred, and both oblivious to it.

Exactly, and of course that one side is policed in a completely different (and institutionally racist/discriminatory) way to the other.

 

But where was the condemnation (or the media coverage) of these marches in the videos? There was plenty on the actual peaceful "peace" marches and there would have been plenty on any BNP/football/pro or anti-hunt/anti-globalisation/green violence.

 

In fact probably the reason the Luton example made it into the media so strongly is probably because of the conflict angle between the Islamofacist demonstrators and the people that took exception to them and it became too big to ignore.

 

Glad we agree on one thing even if we failt to agree on the other. I can think of several islamic 'protests' that were reported and (rightly) widely condemned. Then what about islamic 'scholars' such as Abu Hamza? His continuing preaching of hatred was widely condemned in the media, and he has (again rightly imo) been bought to task for it. But you don't hear too much about that from the media. Basically, imo, we have a system, and it works, given time. It's not perfect but then what is.

 

Going off on a bit of a tangent, I see the only solution to the present problems as lying with secularisation. Ban all faith schools. Ban the burkah etc. Enshrine a secular constitution. Personal worship should be allowed but that is as far as it should go. This isn't going to happen overnight like.

[Renton 18038]

Depends what they did tbf.

 

Irrespective of what they did, I would also expect the "demonstrators", given the inflamatory nature of their protest, to be charged with something like "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace" or some such. But it'll never happen.

 

Quite a few in the London demo that proclaimed 'Death to those who insult Islam' and such bollocks were ultimately arrested were they not? For me this one is much more borderline and highlights the need to balance the right to free speech with the potential to incite public disorder. I'm not sure what the correct repsonse should have been tbh.

 

I hear a lot about muslims being allowed to do X, Y, and Z whereas white people would get arrested for it, but I've not seen many clear cut examples cited. Just like the supposed banning of the St George cross but not other national flags etc. It all sounds a bit Daily Mail without any proof to me.

 

 

I expect the Guardian doesn't print the type of articles you are looking for. Still, what the hell eh, that means its never happened.

 

 

Wow. All these posts and mine are the ones you feel forced to respond to. Do you have any proof that the St George Cross has been specifically banned then? Or is it more likely it's an urban myth like Rob says? I must have told you at least a hundred time now btw that I don't read the Observer or Guardian.

 

Fop, I don't relly see the point in posting a video I can't even see. Surely you must have some better 'evidence' to back your views.

 

I suppose this will be totally ignored yet it gives the proof you are asking for, sorry if it pisses on your chips, just like the last time when you asked me to find where I said you had advocated "planning", and I went and linked to a post you made and you pathetically tried to wriggle out of your own comments.

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1389502/posts

 

http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblo...tly-ben-sm.html

 

Thats twice I've supplied "evidence"

 

Still. What the hell eh. I'm quite amazed a smart lad like you can't see how this particular problem is growing all the time, due to tosspots trying to tell the majority of normal minded people what they can and can't say in our own country.

 

Not particularly good evidence, also nice to get an insight into your web-surfing habits Leazes. The first link just seems to be from a weird neocon blog whose veracity can certainly be questioned. The second is from an extreme anti-islamic site and could easily have been made up. But even if it wasn't, so what? All it shows is an isolated case where some over zealous policeman has seemingly taken offence to the author of the piece for some reason. Hardly evidence of some systematic campaign to ban the St George cross, is it? However there is good evidence that no such campaign exists and it occurs every two years or so.

 

I honestly think its a bit sad you are clearly growing to hate our country on the back of non-stories from hate-sites such as these. Your loss really though I suppose.

 

Basically Renton, its nothing to do with sites I "surf", its just an entry put into google. Kids know how to do this, you should try it sometime.

 

Canny to see you are still excusing such atrocious behaviour and continue a total lack of perception as to what is happening to the country. You're not a muslim are you ?

 

If they're the best sources of information your googling could come up with then that kind of proves my point I would have thought. I would have thought it was also fairly obvious I'm neither a muslim or a christian. Was it Stevie who also thought Parky was a muslim?

 

The second last line is typical of your misrepresenting me though. I'm not condoning their behaviour at all, I think they are odious, cretinous, scumbags (I bet you continue to ignore this). But that's not the debate, the debate is about the right of freedom of speech, which I think should be universal, within limits (the limits are another debate really). For instance I recognise the right for Stevie to come out with what reads to me as a genocidal racist tirade (I highlighted the bits in bold that I'm referring to). I also respect your right to think this is a 'good post'. Somehow I doubt this is what our forefathers fought for against the nazis though. That's what makes this country great tbh, and why I am, unlike you, generally happy with the status quo.

 

not the best sources, just the first half decent ones I spotted. Making you out to be the nob you are isnt' worth too much effort, I don't spend too much time "surfing the web".

 

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time when people like you sit back and make excuses for it.

 

If you dont' think our forefathers fought to save this country from odious bastards and defend our rights and traditions what do you think they did fight for ? They would be turning in their grave. A quite unbelievable comment, what do they teach you smart lads these days

 

I'm fairly sure freedom of speech was quite high on their agenda Leazes. It's a tradition and right I strongly associate with this country, don't you? I'm fairly sure quite a few would turn in their graves at some of the stuff that has been said in this thread too, especially considering the regime they were fighting. Surprised you can't see this. Well, actually, I'm not.

[Fop 1]

Glad we agree on one thing even if we failt to agree on the other. I can think of several islamic 'protests' that were reported and (rightly) widely condemned. Then what about islamic 'scholars' such as Abu Hamza? His continuing preaching of hatred was widely condemned in the media, and he has (again rightly imo) been bought to task for it. But you don't hear too much about that from the media. Basically, imo, we have a system, and it works, given time. It's not perfect but then what is.

The main issue I have with that is how long it was allowed to go under the radar, it was well known, but never mentioned in the mainstream media, frankly if 9/11 had never happened it (he and others) might still be sitting there, quietly and studiously ignored, now.

 

Going off on a bit of a tangent, I see the only solution to the present problems as lying with secularisation. Ban all faith schools. Ban the burkah etc. Enshrine a secular constitution. Personal worship should be allowed but that is as far as it should go. This isn't going to happen overnight like.

Aye, unfortunately we're going in the opposite direction for some inexplicable reason. It's also a big issue in other parts of the word, Turkey for example is currently having this fight.

 

The annoying this is the UK was basically like that (in practice if not in law), but it is becoming more and more dissevered with more and more lines drawn not less (yes maybe the "headline" issues are better now, but a society isn't better if everyone is quietly and without name calling sitting in their own little cliques utterly hating each other. It's just more sweeping things under the rug. ).

[Douggy B 0]

I'm fairly sure freedom of speech was quite high on their agenda Leazes. It's a tradition and right I strongly associate with this country, don't you? I'm fairly sure quite a few would turn in their graves at some of the stuff that has been said in this thread too, especially considering the regime they were fighting. Surprised you can't see this. Well, actually, I'm not.

 

Freedom of speach as long as it is legal Renton, that is what you appear to be glossing over.

 

What they are doing is illegal, if I racially abused them I would be locked up, they are inciting hatred and should be punished.

 

Its not hard.

[tooner 243]

not sure what the video was "supposed" to be showing, looked like the 5-0 was scared shitless and outnumbered. If there had been more police with riot gear you can be assured there would have been more conflict.

Pro-hunt protesters out numbered them in Parliament square, that still didn't stop the police beating innocent people to a bloody pulp for a crowd surge behind them (not hitting police with sticks or throwing fencing or anything like that, not even for just swearing at them).

 

I can't remember them telling the miners to "calm down, please calm down" either, just beatings and horse charges.

 

As for all the "send em back" sentiment, have a word with yourselves ffs. Fact is we live in a time of global cultural experience that stands for all countries. Canada has a very open immigration policy and it makes Canada a better place for it. This idea that only those that were born in a country that has the freedom of expression are protected by that freedom is frankly appalling, more appalling than anything I saw on the video.

That's the whole point, they aren't.... only in completely the OPPOSITE direction to the one you are implying in this case (which is utter hypocrisy on your part, I'm afraid - you can't claim you are against such things, then turn a blind eye when something then doesn't fit your beliefs).

 

so because you can provide two examples of the police treating white people different during protests i'm a hypocrite?

how does this not fit my beliefs? FFS give your head a shake, the stanza you quoted me on was commenting on the implication by other posters that what was being said was illegal which it is not. Throwing fences and pylons at police IS illegal and I can't fathom why the police would not enforce based on those things, however this was a discussion about the "abuse" of the freedom of "speech"......refer to my other posts in this thread if you need clarification of my beliefs.

[Renton 18038]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

[Renton 18038]

I'm fairly sure freedom of speech was quite high on their agenda Leazes. It's a tradition and right I strongly associate with this country, don't you? I'm fairly sure quite a few would turn in their graves at some of the stuff that has been said in this thread too, especially considering the regime they were fighting. Surprised you can't see this. Well, actually, I'm not.

 

Freedom of speach as long as it is legal Renton, that is what you appear to be glossing over.

 

What they are doing is illegal, if I racially abused them I would be locked up, they are inciting hatred and should be punished.

 

Its not hard.

 

I don't disagree. If they are judged to be inciting violence, I'd have them arrested and tried. I'm not even sure if I disagree with you or Fop tbh, I genuinely don't have sound here so can't interpret the video.

[tooner 243]

I'm fairly sure freedom of speech was quite high on their agenda Leazes. It's a tradition and right I strongly associate with this country, don't you? I'm fairly sure quite a few would turn in their graves at some of the stuff that has been said in this thread too, especially considering the regime they were fighting. Surprised you can't see this. Well, actually, I'm not.

 

Freedom of speach as long as it is legal Renton, that is what you appear to be glossing over.

 

What they are doing is illegal, if I racially abused them I would be locked up, they are inciting hatred and should be punished.

 

Its not hard.

 

could you make out something other than "free palestine" and "allah akbar" in the video?

 

from Wiki, but also found in the act itself(section 29J)

 

"The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 amended the Public Order Act 1986 by adding Part 3A. That Part says, "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred." The Part protects freedom of expression by stating in Section 29J:

 

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system."

Edited March 17, 2009 by tooner

[Park Life 71]

I'm fairly sure freedom of speech was quite high on their agenda Leazes. It's a tradition and right I strongly associate with this country, don't you? I'm fairly sure quite a few would turn in their graves at some of the stuff that has been said in this thread too, especially considering the regime they were fighting. Surprised you can't see this. Well, actually, I'm not.

 

Freedom of speach as long as it is legal Renton, that is what you appear to be glossing over.

 

What they are doing is illegal, if I racially abused them I would be locked up, they are inciting hatred and should be punished.

 

Its not hard.

 

could you make out something other than "free palestine" and "allah akbar" in the video?

 

from Wiki, but also found in the act itself(section 29J)

 

"The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 amended the Public Order Act 1986 by adding Part 3A. That Part says, "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred." The Part protects freedom of expression by stating in Section 29J:

 

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system."

 

ha ha nice find.

[Renton 18038]

Well if you live a free country you've got to accept you're going to have listen to stuff that you find offensive or objectional.

 

Otherwise go live in Saudi.

[Park Life 71]

Well if you live a free country you've got to accept you're going to have listen to stuff that you find offensive or objectional.

 

Otherwise go live in Saudi.

 

Quite.

[LeazesMag 0]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

 

I don't have easy solutions either, now. Its a long way down the line. Turning a blind eye and accepting it isn't going to make it go away though.

 

What cost would you put on the social services, the NHS, the cost to the education system, the cost in jobs and the psychological result of people who have spent their life in the UK and lived within the laws and traditions of the country, being thrown on the scrapheap. How more overpopulated is this country going to become before we simply run out of resources and the means to look after, care for and feed the population ?

[Fop 1]

so because you can provide two examples of the police treating white people different during protests i'm a hypocrite?

No, not accepting it's every bit as bad as any other example of institutional racism does (and that it had nothing to do with numbers as the other examples show).

 

how does this not fit my beliefs? FFS give your head a shake, the stanza you quoted me on was commenting on the implication by other posters that what was being said was illegal which it is not. Throwing fences and pylons at police IS illegal and I can't fathom why the police would not enforce based on those things, however this was a discussion about the "abuse" of the freedom of "speech"......refer to my other posts in this thread if you need clarification of my beliefs.

And yes I believe hitting a police officer with a stick or a traffic cone or a bit of metal fencing (or any of the other incidents shown is illegal), and usually warrants a little more than a "calm down, just calm down".

 

In fact being pushed seemingly allows some one to be beaten into bloody unconsciousness by the police in other circumstances.

 

 

Freedom of Speech is a vitally important thing, but then so is the freedom to be policed equally (irrespective of race, creed or time of the month).

[Fop 1]

could you make out something other than "free palestine" and "allah akbar" in the video?

 

from Wiki, but also found in the act itself(section 29J)

 

"The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 amended the Public Order Act 1986 by adding Part 3A. That Part says, "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred." The Part protects freedom of expression by stating in Section 29J:

 

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system."

 

Interestingly they've banned or moved BNP protests for less (the safety and incitement issue would have been enough to move it away in most any other circumstances - if you're talking about the Luton demo) and the BNP and Islamofascists like those are two sides of the same coin.

 

So there's a massive hypocrisy there.

 

 

 

 

If you're talking about the videos I posted, then threatening behaviour and shouting insults at the police is more than enough to get you arrested in most circumstances (again try the experiment yourself and see), never mind actualy hitting them with sticks, traffic cones and metal fencing.

[Park Life 71]

so because you can provide two examples of the police treating white people different during protests i'm a hypocrite?

No, not accepting it's every bit as bad as any other example of institutional racism does (and that it had nothing to do with numbers as the other examples show).

 

how does this not fit my beliefs? FFS give your head a shake, the stanza you quoted me on was commenting on the implication by other posters that what was being said was illegal which it is not. Throwing fences and pylons at police IS illegal and I can't fathom why the police would not enforce based on those things, however this was a discussion about the "abuse" of the freedom of "speech"......refer to my other posts in this thread if you need clarification of my beliefs.

And yes I believe hitting a police officer with a stick or a traffic cone or a bit of metal fencing (or any of the other incidents shown is illegal), and usually warrants a little more than a "calm down, just calm down".

 

In fact being pushed seemingly allows some one to be beaten into bloody unconsciousness by the police in other circumstances.

 

 

Freedom of Speech is a vitally important thing, but then so is the freedom to be policed equally (irrespective of race, creed or time of the month).

 

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

[Fop 1]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

[Renton 18038]

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

[Renton 18038]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

 

I don't have easy solutions either, now. Its a long way down the line. Turning a blind eye and accepting it isn't going to make it go away though.

 

What cost would you put on the social services, the NHS, the cost to the education system, the cost in jobs and the psychological result of people who have spent their life in the UK and lived within the laws and traditions of the country, being thrown on the scrapheap. How more overpopulated is this country going to become before we simply run out of resources and the means to look after, care for and feed the population ?

 

Then we can agree we both have concerns (you admittedly more than me) and neither of us has solutions. I can live with that.

[Park Life 71]

Is this the equality you're talking about Foppy?

 

 

 

Metropolitan police pays Muslim man damages over assaults

 

Babar Ahmad was subjected to prolonged, repeated and gratuitous assaults and religious insults during his arrest, court hears

Rachel Williams and agencies

guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 March 2009 13.09 GMT

Article history

 

 

The Metropolitan police today agreed to pay £60,000 damages to a British Muslim man accused of raising funds for terrorism after admitting in the high court that arresting officers subjected him to a prolonged series of violent assaults and religious abuse.

 

One of the unnamed officers allegedly involved in what happened to Babar Ahmad is to face criminal proceedings, Mr Justice Holroyde heard.

 

Ahmad, a 34-year-old IT support analyst, was in court to hear lawyers for the Met commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, concede that Ahmad had been the victim of gratuitous violence by specialist officers during a dawn arrest at his home in Tooting, south-west London, in December 2003.

 

The court had been told Ahmad was punched, kicked and strangled during his arrest.

 

Ahmad was dragged from his bed and rammed against a window before being repeatedly beaten by officers dressed in riot gear, the court heard.

 

During what his counsel, Phillippa Kaufmann, described as a "prolonged and violent series of gratuitous assaults", Ahmad claims officers forced him into the Muslim prayer position before shouting "Where is your God now? … Pray to him."

[LeazesMag 0]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

 

I don't have easy solutions either, now. Its a long way down the line. Turning a blind eye and accepting it isn't going to make it go away though.

 

What cost would you put on the social services, the NHS, the cost to the education system, the cost in jobs and the psychological result of people who have spent their life in the UK and lived within the laws and traditions of the country, being thrown on the scrapheap. How more overpopulated is this country going to become before we simply run out of resources and the means to look after, care for and feed the population ?

 

Then we can agree we both have concerns (you admittedly more than me) and neither of us has solutions. I can live with that.

 

I said I don't have an easy solution. You however, don't appear to be interested in finding one.

[Renton 18038]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

 

I don't have easy solutions either, now. Its a long way down the line. Turning a blind eye and accepting it isn't going to make it go away though.

 

What cost would you put on the social services, the NHS, the cost to the education system, the cost in jobs and the psychological result of people who have spent their life in the UK and lived within the laws and traditions of the country, being thrown on the scrapheap. How more overpopulated is this country going to become before we simply run out of resources and the means to look after, care for and feed the population ?

 

Then we can agree we both have concerns (you admittedly more than me) and neither of us has solutions. I can live with that.

 

I said I don't have an easy solution. You however, don't appear to be interested in finding one.

 

I gave one earlier, not a complete solution maybe, but a start. Secularisation of all public places.

 

Spill the beans on your 'hard' solution then.

[LeazesMag 0]

At least you realise they are scumbags, so why are you happy to put up with their behaviour ? Do you accept this problem we have with these racist shitbags is massively worse than it was 20 years ago, do you realise why it is worse, and do you envisage a similar worsening in 20 years time......

 

OK, Leazes, say I agree with you to an extent here, which I probably do. I'm the first to admit I don't have the answers but really what are your honest solutions? By this I mean real-life policies which could actually work, not 'ship them all out' which is just never going to happen in the real world, not even with the tories. I'm all ears (less name calling would be canny too).

 

I don't have easy solutions either, now. Its a long way down the line. Turning a blind eye and accepting it isn't going to make it go away though.

 

What cost would you put on the social services, the NHS, the cost to the education system, the cost in jobs and the psychological result of people who have spent their life in the UK and lived within the laws and traditions of the country, being thrown on the scrapheap. How more overpopulated is this country going to become before we simply run out of resources and the means to look after, care for and feed the population ?

 

Then we can agree we both have concerns (you admittedly more than me) and neither of us has solutions. I can live with that.

 

I said I don't have an easy solution. You however, don't appear to be interested in finding one.

 

I gave one earlier, not a complete solution maybe, but a start. Secularisation of all public places.

 

Spill the beans on your 'hard' solution then.

 

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

[Renton 18038]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.