• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Behavior of UK Police officers.

Baylor said:
Had you actually looked at the data you'd see …
Click to expand...
That British Muslims tend to vote Labour. Which, considering their economic status is mundane and unsurprising and was not the point you wanted to show, which was that labour is bending over backwards to pander to Islamist immigrants.

But since the graph you provided shows the opposite, you have to move the goalposts to demonstrate that if you just make an entirely different point, your can find a graph that doesn't contradict it. Don't worry. Nobody will notice.
 
Information Analyst said:
The cross is just window dressing for the known racist and Islamophobe carrying it.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_335705bb48ebf78d58.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Your opinions of the woman are irrelevant. Muslims know UK law doesn't apply to them. If the roles were reversed and a Muslim were on the receiving end of a verbal assault the assailant would be arrested and it'd be all over the news. But Muslims are allowed to get away with this because they occupy much of the UK.

fR0toez.jpg
 
You know that poster has nothing whatever to do with Muslims, right? It's about Christians who hate other Christians.
 
Planigale said:
I am not certain what you definition of a home invasion is, but the 'accused' was knocking on the front door. There was a business dispute between the two. The other persons remained outside of the boundary fence. The man who 'fought off' the 'home invader' at his front door came to the door with his adult sons armed (with sticks) and proceeded to make threats telling in no uncertain terms people of a particular colour to go away or they would come to harm (this is actually a crime in England; threatening people). Subsequently he has had to resign as a magistrate. The police decided that knocking at a front door does not constitute a crime.
Click to expand...

Breaking a physical barricade to enter private property. That counts as a home invasion. It's also constitutes a crime, at least in the US. I'm sure it does in the UK, unless the property owner calls you a bad name.

qFl0Grz.png
 
Jack by the hedge said:
You know that poster has nothing whatever to do with Muslims, right? It's about Christians who hate other Christians.
Click to expand...

So you're allowed to use racial and religious epithets at Muslims then? Cool. Maybe the UK isn't entirely lost after all.
 
Baylor said:
Your opinions of the woman are irrelevant.
Click to expand...
The facts about the woman are very much relevant. If a nobody walked through a "Muslim area" (which invariably means large minority, rather than majority) carry a cross and saying nothign about Islam, must locals - non-Muslim and Muslim alike - would just think "nutter" or perhaps someone on their way to take part in a passion play, and just walk on past. When a known racist and Islamophobe turns up carrying a cross (that should by rights cause third-degree burns to her hands), and ranting about Islam, they're going to get push-back from all sides.

Muslims know UK law doesn't apply to them. If the roles were reversed and a Muslim were on the receiving end of a verbal assault the assailant would be arrested and it'd be all over the news.

But Muslims are allowed to get away with this because they occupy much of the UK.

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/fR0toez.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

LOL! Oh my! You really haven't got a clue what you're posting as "evidence," have you? That sign has nothing to do with Muslims.
 
Baylor said:
Breaking a physical barricade to enter private property. That counts as a home invasion.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't.

It's also constitutes a crime, at least in the US. I'm sure it does in the UK, unless the property owner calls you a bad name.

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/qFl0Grz.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...

No, here it's civil trespass, unless there's evidence of criminal damage to the fence.
 
Last edited:
Baylor said:
So you're allowed to use racial and religious epithets at Muslims then? Cool. Maybe the UK isn't entirely lost after all.
Click to expand...

No, you're not allowed to use racial or religious pejoratives that cause fear or alarm toward anyone.

I could walk up to you and call you a ******* *******-thick ****, and you weren't bothered, that would be fine. If I called you an ******* *******-thick American ****, and you were afraid and/or alarmed by it, that would be different.

Of course, you'd actually have to first set foot in the UK for that to happen.
 
Last edited:
Baylor said:
So you're allowed to use racial and religious epithets at Muslims then? Cool. Maybe the UK isn't entirely lost after all.
Click to expand...

So you genuinely had no clue that the poster was about Catholic vs Protestant sectarian hate in the West of Scotland. Did some source you trust tell you it was something to do with Muslims? Maybe we all learned something.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
So you genuinely had no clue that the poster was about Catholic vs Protestant sectarian hate in the West of Scotland. Did some source you trust tell you it was something to do with Muslims? Maybe we all learned something.
Click to expand...

So does the law only apply to Christians, or when the language is directed at Christians?
 
Baylor said:
So does the law only apply to Christians, or when the language is directed at Christians?
Click to expand...

No, but clearly the antipathy between two different types of "Christians" is a big enough problem in the locale in question to address directly and specifically. I'd be fascinated to know where you found the image that made you think it was in any way connected to Muslims.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom