Jump to content

UK General Election Dec 2019


woolley

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

The Miriam-Webster Dictionary definition;

Islamophobia:  Irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam;

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Islamophobia 

The Cambridge Dictionary;

Islamophobia:  unreasonable dislike or dear of, and prejudice against, Muslims or Islam;

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/islamophobia

Collins Disctionary;

hatred or fear of Muslims or their politics or culture

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/islamophobia 

 

so a made up word that no one knows the meaning of.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, quilp said:

No seriously, it's the irrational fear aspect. 

 

1 hour ago, quilp said:

The fear, not the anti bit. 

It's a wholly disingenuous use of the suffix "-phobe", which means fear or dislike of something. Its meaning has been augmented subtly over recent decades, encouraged by the West European liberal media and establishment with their instinctive faux superiority. It morphed to embrace far more than its narrow definition should permit, and in so doing it acquired a pejorative connotation. The result was potent. Now, anyone who has an issue with the face of a country or a continent being transformed by the injection, over a short period of time, of millions of aliens with difficult to assimilate cultures and traditions is condemned as a "-phobe". Be very clear that nowadays you do not actually have to hate or fear anyone or any group to be classed as a "-phobe" in liberal circles.

Whether through accusations of Islamophobia or xenophobia, etc, it is routinely made out that anyone who gently suggests that such influx might not be a very good idea for future societal cohesion is somehow "afraid" of difference, or harbours "hatred" towards others. This is the way that sensible debate about immigration and demographics was stifled for decades. It was so successful in shutting the subject down that anyone wanting to make a comment on it felt the need to prefix it with "I'm not racist but..........." which was then also jumped upon as by definition racist and also roundly condemned. So continued the build up in the pressure cooker. In recent years, at long last, there has been a somewhat more open attitude to discussion of the subject, and that had to come, much to the chagrin of the liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, woolley said:

It's a wholly disingenuous use of the suffix "-phobe", which means fear or dislike of something. Its meaning has been augmented subtly over recent decades, encouraged by the West European liberal media and establishment with their instinctive faux superiority. It morphed to embrace far more than its narrow definition should permit, and in so doing it acquired a pejorative connotation. The result was potent. Now, anyone who has an issue with the face of a country or a continent being transformed by the injection, over a short period of time, of millions of aliens with difficult to assimilate cultures and traditions is condemned as a "-phobe". Be very clear that nowadays you do not actually have to hate or fear anyone or any group to be classed as a "-phobe" in liberal circles.

Whether through accusations of Islamophobia or xenophobia, etc, it is routinely made out that anyone who gently suggests that such influx might not be a very good idea for future societal cohesion is somehow "afraid" of difference, or harbours "hatred" towards others. This is the way that sensible debate about immigration and demographics was stifled for decades. It was so successful in shutting the subject down that anyone wanting to make a comment on it felt the need to prefix it with "I'm not racist but..........." which was then also jumped upon as by definition racist and also roundly condemned. So continued the build up in the pressure cooker. In recent years, at long last, there has been a somewhat more open attitude to discussion of the subject, and that had to come, much to the chagrin of the liberals.

Liberals are, of course, responsible for world hunger as well.... :)

You're starting to sound obsessed. Unhealthily so I would say...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woolley said:

 

It's a wholly disingenuous use of the suffix "-phobe", which means fear or dislike of something. Its meaning has been augmented subtly over recent decades, encouraged by the West European liberal media and establishment with their instinctive faux superiority. It morphed to embrace far more than its narrow definition should permit, and in so doing it acquired a pejorative connotation. The result was potent. Now, anyone who has an issue with the face of a country or a continent being transformed by the injection, over a short period of time, of millions of aliens with difficult to assimilate cultures and traditions is condemned as a "-phobe". Be very clear that nowadays you do not actually have to hate or fear anyone or any group to be classed as a "-phobe" in liberal circles.

Whether through accusations of Islamophobia or xenophobia, etc, it is routinely made out that anyone who gently suggests that such influx might not be a very good idea for future societal cohesion is somehow "afraid" of difference, or harbours "hatred" towards others. This is the way that sensible debate about immigration and demographics was stifled for decades. It was so successful in shutting the subject down that anyone wanting to make a comment on it felt the need to prefix it with "I'm not racist but..........." which was then also jumped upon as by definition racist and also roundly condemned. So continued the build up in the pressure cooker. In recent years, at long last, there has been a somewhat more open attitude to discussion of the subject, and that had to come, much to the chagrin of the liberals.

The U.K. not only chose to form a free movement trading block including the majority of the world’s Muslim population, it recruited those Muslim populations for its armies during countless colonial wars and two world wars. I suppose you think Muslims are incapable of fitting in with British traditions like regular  bathing, shampoo, pyjamas, cricket, tea, curry, kebabs and hashish? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cabinet Office blocks publication of OBR economic forecast

Treasury forecaster’s report was expected to show decline in UK public finances

The government’s top civil servant has blocked publication of a report by the Treasury’s economic forecaster that was expected to show the UK’s public finances have deteriorated over the last eight months.

Mark Sedwill, the head of the Cabinet Office, pulled the plug only an hour before the Office for Budget Responsibility was due to send out documents that were also expected to chart how Brexit uncertainty has worsened the outlook for public finances.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/07/cabinet-office-blocks-publication-of-obr-economic-forecast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...