Farage tastes some sweet irony

[Tarne]

And Ohio kind of makes our point today...

[rmanx]

Thomas Mair acted alone and without the encouragement of a expanded network of thugs and supremacists. It could not've been predicted.

 

His heinous crime does not reflect the aims of the ("cancer of society" [dear oh dear!]) right-wing in Britain.

 

Nooooo...at no point has he been encouraged (quote "hang and execute all traitors")...he in no way was connected to Britain First (with its originals in Irish terrorism and organised crime).

 

 

 

It could not've been predicted.

 

Oh sweet baby Jesus, you genuinely believe that don't you?

 

 

 

His heinous crime does not reflect the aims of the ("cancer of society" [dear oh dear!]) right-wing in Britain.

 

Of course it does. It perfectly suits the aims of far right groups. Now politicians will think again about trying to stop them for fear of ending up like Mrs Cox (almost as if their aim has spread terror to further their political/religious goals....otherwise known as terrorism if you are dark of skin).

[rmanx]

And Ohio kind of makes our point today...

 

Your confirmation bias is painfully obvious...

 

http://www.juancole.com/2016/10/terrorists-radicalized-trumpism.html

 

For every story you can find, I can find just as many. Again and again you ignore the facts. "Muslim" terrorism receives far more media attention than any other type of terrorism, despite not being the main cause (for want of a better word).

[woolley]

 

And Ohio kind of makes our point today...

 

Your confirmation bias is painfully obvious...

 

http://www.juancole.com/2016/10/terrorists-radicalized-trumpism.html

 

For every story you can find, I can find just as many. Again and again you ignore the facts. "Muslim" terrorism receives far more media attention than any other type of terrorism, despite not being the main cause (for want of a better word).

 

Reporting on lower level examples of the breakdown in "community cohesion" is routinely supressed by the mainstream media, particularly with regard to violent attacks by one ethnic minority on another.

 

A close relative of mine was in a shopping centre in a northern English town when a gang of about 50 Asian youths rampaged through it and smashed multiple windows and assaulted terrified shoppers. We expected to see it covered at least on the North West news thinking the even the BBC could not ignore such an event. Not a word.

[rmanx]

 

 

And Ohio kind of makes our point today...

 

Your confirmation bias is painfully obvious...

 

http://www.juancole.com/2016/10/terrorists-radicalized-trumpism.html

 

For every story you can find, I can find just as many. Again and again you ignore the facts. "Muslim" terrorism receives far more media attention than any other type of terrorism, despite not being the main cause (for want of a better word).

 

Reporting on lower level examples of the breakdown in "community cohesion" is routinely supressed by the mainstream media, particularly with regard to violent attacks by one ethnic minority on another.

 

A close relative of mine was in a shopping centre in a northern English town when a gang of about 50 Asian youths rampaged through it and smashed multiple windows and assaulted terrified shoppers. We expected to see it covered at least on the North West news thinking the even the BBC could not ignore such an event. Not a word.

 

 

What was the important part of your story...that there were 50 youths or 50 Asian youths?

 

And do you have any evidence to back up your story?

[woolley]

50 Asian youths. Your question is nonsense, but typical of the apologists for the side effects of the multicultural experiment.

 

I believe what my family tells me since they have no reason to lie. She wasn't alone at the time and she and her friend were in fear for their lives. As for evidence, I can't point to the BBC report, that's for sure!! But you have the same view as they do. If we put our fingers in our ears and ignore it, it didn't happen.

 

I don't give a toss what you think sitting in comfort as you do in your fool's paradise on an island totally unaffected by these problems and yet casting judgement on those facing them regularly.

[rmanx]

50 Asian youths. Your question is nonsense, but typical of the apologists for the side effects of the multicultural experiment.

 

I believe what my family tells me since they have no reason to lie. She wasn't alone at the time and she and her friend were in fear for their lives. As for evidence, I can't point to the BBC report, that's for sure!! But you have the same view as they do. If we put our fingers in our ears and ignore it, it didn't happen.

 

I don't give a toss what you think sitting in comfort as you do in your fool's paradise on an island totally unaffected by these problems and yet casting judgement on those facing them regularly.

 

My question isn't nonsense, it just doesn't fit your narrative.

 

By Asian, do you mean Indian, Pakistani, Syrian, etc? Or is it just a case of brown kids are the only bad youths?

 

I mean there is the video of 30 odd kids kicking the crap out of those two police officers the other day...plenty of white faces in there.

 

My question tries to get to the root of the problem, was it a racial problem or a youth problem.

 

I'm not calling your family liars (although this is the internet and they could be completely made up for all we know), but for something that large someone somewhere would have had to report on it.

[pongo]

50 Asian youths ... she and her friend were in fear for their lives.

Do you imagine that non white people would have been any less concerned about 50 youths rioting? Irrespective of what colour the youths were. It's the fact that they were rioting which is significant - not what colour they are.

 

Here is a report on the BBC about 1000 'youths' rioting in 1964. Holidaymakers and the elderly were apparently terrified. That was in 1964.

[woolley]

 

I'm not calling your family liars (although this is the internet and they could be completely made up for all we know), but for something that large someone somewhere would have had to report on it.

 

You really would think so wouldn't you? But no. I am not saying that this is happening every day of course, but nor is it particularly exceptional.

 

And no. "Brown" kids are not the only "bad" kids. There are plenty of white cretins as well. This is the crucial point; the potential for conflict.

[quilp]

The Council of Europe recently recommended that the British media NOT report when criminals and terror-suspects are Muslim. The ECRI's recommendation's called for:-

 

*The establishment of an "independent press regulator.

*Rigorous training for journalists to, "ensure better compliance (uh-oh) with ethical standards."

*Review the provisions on "incitement to hatred with a view to making them more effective and usable."

*Establish a, "real dialogue with Muslims in order to combat 'Islamophobia'. They should be consult them (muslims) on all policies which could affect Muslims."

*Amending the 'Editors code of practice' to, "ensure that members of groups can submit complaints as victims against biased or prejudicial reporting concerning their community."

 

By following these recommendations, the British government would place Muslim organisations in a kind of monopoly position: they would become the only source of information about themselves. It is the perfect totalitarian information order. If a breach of that kind would open in the future, no doubt all the lobbies would rush into the breach: political parties, Protestants, Catholics, Jews, even the multinationals. In other words, everyone!

 

The British government did not fall into this carefully worded trap, and firmly rebuffed the ECRI's demands. It told the European Council's body:-

 

"The government is committed to a free and open press and does not interfere with what the press does and does not publish as long as the press abides by the law." Hm-mm...

 

Anyway, in Great Britain, and in all countries of European Union, anti-hate laws already exist, in virtual abundance. Created to guard against the kind of xenophobic and anti-Semitic propaganda that gave rise to the Holocaust, national hate-speech laws have increasingly been invoked to criminalise speech that is merely deemed insulting to one's race, ethnicity, religion or nationality. The current case brought against Dutch politician Geert Wilders' in The Netherlands is an example of these laws.

 

These laws have also been invoked often by Islamists to sue against anti-islamist speech (cartoons of Muhammad, blasphemy against Islam, etc.) as manifestations of "racism" -- fortunately, in the UK at least, with little success. Most court cases that Islamic have initiated have failed because Islam is not a race.

 

Agnes Callamard, expert on human rights, in reference to the United Nations Charter:

 

"ARTICLE 19 recognises that reasonable restrictions on freedom of expression may be necessary or legitimate to prevent advocacy of hatred based on nationality, race, religion that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. The organisation does not extend such legitimate restrictions to offensive and blasphemous expressions.

 

It is disturbing to wonder how long the Council of Europe will strongly engage its experts and influence to cut through existing legal obstacles, in a quest to suppress any type of criticism of Islam, and to submit to the values of Jihad.

 

This is the moment where hate-speech laws become a greater threat to democracy and freedom of speech than hate-speech itself. Prohibiting journo's from naming "Islamic terrorism," and encouraging them to hide the association of Muslims with terrorism, is an attempt to misrepresent the truth in the same way the former Soviet Union censored the truth.

 

For the ECRI, the biggest problem seems to be:

 

"... where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators' motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations." I see a problem with this. The report does not explain what thes "alternative explanations are. But we can find some examples in the French press: when a Muslim attacks a soldier and tries to take his gun, he is not an islamist terrorist, but a lunatic. Such attacks by these, "lunatics" are now increasingly common in France. The French press wilfully downplays attacks by deciding not to name Muslim perpetrators: incriminating a "Muhammad" or an "Abdul" could, in the minds of French journalists, incite retaliation against Muslims. In another example, Muslim gangs cannot be connected to any form of violence, so they have become "youths". It seems in France, Muslim terrorists are never Muslim terrorist, but "lunatics", "maniacs" and, in turn, "youths."

 

The duplicity and ambiguity has to stop.

[woolley]

 

50 Asian youths ... she and her friend were in fear for their lives.

Do you imagine that non white people would have been any less concerned about 50 youths rioting? Irrespective of what colour the youths were. It's the fact that they were rioting which is significant - not what colour they are.

 

Here is a report on the BBC about 1000 'youths' rioting in 1964. Holidaymakers and the elderly were apparently terrified. That was in 1964.

 

Indeed. Terrifying. Particularly in days when it was indeed rare and genuinely shocking. Two differences though. It was very widely reported at the time, and the perpetrators subjected to the opprobrium of the masses as opposed to being brushed under the carpet for reasons of political correctness. The racial dimension is an undeniably aggravating factor in an attack by one group on a facility largely frequented by another. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

[pongo]

It was very widely reported at the time, and the perpetrators subjected to the opprobrium of the masses as opposed to being brushed under the carpet for reasons of political correctness. The racial dimension is an undeniably aggravating factor in an attack by one group on a facility largely frequented by another. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

What was the date and location of the incident?

[quilp]

Before I'm labelled as being one 'phobe of various expression let me state that I am motivated by my fundamental Atheism and desire to expose all forms of religious extremism and its followers be that whatever creed, colour, denomination or ideology.

 

It just so happens that the horror the world is heir to at this present time is ideologically (religiously) motivated. It is not difficult to identify where those responsible for most of the carnage originate from.

 

Without freedom of speech and expression the world sleep-walks into lawlessness and submission.

[woolley]

 

It was very widely reported at the time, and the perpetrators subjected to the opprobrium of the masses as opposed to being brushed under the carpet for reasons of political correctness. The racial dimension is an undeniably aggravating factor in an attack by one group on a facility largely frequented by another. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

What was the date and location of the incident?

 

Oldham. I would say around 2006. Certainly after the wider spread riots in the town.

[rmanx]

It just so happens that the horror the world is heir to at this present time is ideologically (religiously) motivated. It is not difficult to identify where those responsible for most of the carnage originate from.

 

 

Yeap those bloody white Christians....