|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 15:37:58 GMT
We've been through this Flim Flam. A report of hate crime is not actually proof of anything since it doesn't have to be proven or even reported to the police. Or did you think I forgot that? This is a non-sequitur since my reply here was merely about the widely noticed, and generally acknowledged, increase in hate crime or different sorts since Brexit. And, duh, such crime will yes include that which is not reported in official police statistics. Which makes things worse. [Flim Flam] Childish name games are still not an argument, just as they weren't before. After all, I would never dream of calling you ThorHasshole. It is certainly a reasonable assumption it reflects the Islamo- and Xenophobia of some who voted to leave, the success of which has acted to embolden, and make more acceptable unpleasant sentiments. As we have seen on the boards here. But the fact that, for whatever reason, it suits you to play down that which is well documented is certainly an argument for something. I think I know what it is, too. I am sure know your various nationalistic stances by now, but thanks anyway. Whether something actually happened isn't relevant in the World of FLimmy. Just so we all know folks. We saw the same in the US, the Hate Crime Hysteria after Trump. Amazingly most of its turns out to be bullshit. And why you think its obvious that we should use figures of crime not collect by the police as evidence of actual crimes is beyond me. An increase in reporting does not mean an increase in crime does it? At least that what you lot say about rape in Sweden.... But it isn't well documented is it? Essex police denied any link between Breitx and hate crime, they put it down to the fact that they had opened nearly 30 centres accross the county to deal "hate" coupled with increased effort to encourage reporting and the ability to report online. Its legitimately baffling to me that you don't get that I can sit here all day reporting "hate crime" online anonymously. The very fact that this can be included in any kind of statistical analysis is moronic. But lets analyse shall we? In July the police noted about 5800 "Hate Crimes" an increase of 41% Meaning, according to you, an increase of 2400 were due to Brexit.....Assuming they are all from different people this represents 0.013% of people who voted leave. But lets say that only 1% of "Hate Crime" was recorded. That gives you 1.3% of Brexiteers. And that is assuming again that all the hate came from Leavers and nobody reported Remainers. So even if we remove the higher figure from the Brexit vote. We still won. OOh,ooh,ooh, am I a Nazi? Am I a racist? Do what you lot always do when you lose an argument or a vote. Label the other side. ITs working out so well for you..... The simple fact is that your "Hate Crime" argument, even if true, makes no odds to the actual vote. And you know what? In some areas Asians voted in favour of leave....Gonna go call them racists? Thought not.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 15:40:39 GMT
Duh, yoo is tez racistz and jus wantz to call teh brownz namz........... I've explained this to you. I've explained my objections to hate speech laws. I've explained why the government should not be allowed to legislate what I can and cannot say. I've explained why the police should not be taking a feelings over facts approach to the law. I've explained why current legislation allows you to be convicted of a "Homophobic Hate Crime" even if you didn't know the victim was gay, that was confirmed to me by the police. But you know all that don't you? Yes, you have explained a lot and what you think ought to be the case in lieu of the existing laws on hate speech, as it would suit you and others better. And you have made it very clear the minorities which would benefit from your kindly attentions after. Too much so, unfortunately.
If you think objecting to government sanctioned speech is a problem, thats your concern. Don't worry though. There are still some of us fighting for your right to speak your mind without fear of arrest.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 9, 2018 15:47:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 15:52:32 GMT
The economic impact is in dispute. All the negative forecasts come from remainers. The true is we cannot predict how our economy will go. There are advantages to both. Personally I think short term it will hurt us, but long term we will be better off. And its amazing to me that people like you still do not get that calling everyone a racist if they don't agree with you stopped working about five years ago. Brexit and Trump showed us this. Freedom of movement has been around since 1992. Nobody cared, it only became a problem when Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria etc joined, because then we started seeing mass movement of people into Western Europe. Not rich people, but working class men competing for jobs and services. The population of the UK has risen by 7,000,000 in the last 15 years, but remainers cannot see any link between that and the housing crisis and the current strain on the NHS. IF you bothered to actually listen to the main arguments of the Brexiteers, instead of labelling them, the main objection to the EU was lack of Sovereignty of Westminster. www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-06-30/poll-shows-brexit-vote-was-about-british-sovereignty-not-anti-immigrationYou lot had the chance to argue that point, but you didn't. You instead chose to do what you are still doing. Call us all racist. It failed then and it will continue to fail. It's all about sovereignty... because there were so many things that the EU prevented the UK from doing that we'll be free to do once we leave that will revolutionise this country such as... what exactly? What is it that all the "give us back our sovereignty" people want that the EU stopped them doing? Blue Passports? We were actually allowed blue passports under the EU legislation, the government just decided to adopt the EU colours. Bring back the death penalty? Well that's not going to happen anyway. Get better trade deals? That may happen. It may not. Who knows. But it's sure as hell going to take a veeeeeeery long time and cost us Billions and Billions in the interim so they better be f*cking awesome trade deals, the best trade deals the world has ever seen to make up for the money it's cost the country waiting for them. Do away with Fisheries Policies? So we can over-fish now and destroy the fishing industry in 20 years time and everyone then will say "why didn't they do something about 20 years ago?" and if we're out of the EU (who buy most of our fish) - who are we going to sell it to anyway? So what does that leave? For the majority it was about Sovereignty. I'm really sorry this upsets you, but as I said, you had the chance to argue this and you preferred "Project Fear" and calling everyone racist. Don't blame me that your side chose to engage in a campaign people didn't care about. And what can't we do now? You just said it. Trade. We trade more with the rest of the World than we do with the EU, yet we cannot regulate this trade, why? We are subject to the ECJ, why? Did you see the EU attempting sanctions against Poland and Hungary for not accepting EU dictated migrant quotas? Why should the EU have that right? What options do you think we will have when the EU moves towards its goal of a single nation with a single army? Where is our sovereignty then? Now you may very well be in favour of that, which is fine, but make the bloody argument for it instead of talking shit about the working class. Fisheries? You instantly go back to project fear. Obviously us Britons can't be trusted to do anything sensible, like have a sustained fishing policy. No, we need the Germans to tell us what to do. Jesus Christ man...And if we are out of the EU.....we can still trade with them....Know who our biggest trading partner is? The United States, who last time I checked, were not in the EU.....
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 15:53:59 GMT
[Flim Flam] Childish name games are still not an argument, just as they weren't before. After all, I would never dream of calling you ThorHasshole. The thing is: The only poster who I remember calling you Flim Flam on the old IMDb board was the poster formerly known as Ada Lovelace / Helen Black. Coincidence? Maybe... Yes, you got me....I'm Ada. Jesus Christ man....
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 16:01:09 GMT
It's good to see that the board's biggest proponents of Brexit isn't disputing that Brexit will cause severe economic damage to the UK. So if we're not doing it for economic reasons and we're not doing it to appease the inner racists in the Brexiteers, why are we doing it? The principal reasons are: to keep out the swarms of Johnny Foreigner, who take all our jobs apparently (even though employment rates in the UK are at level highs, and haven't dipped much) and soak up health services (even though they pay taxes like everyone else and keep social care and the NHS going through essential staffing); as well as to 'take back control' of our laws and courts (even though it looks like we will, by whatever mechanism, still have to obey EU commercial regulations, and follow some internal social, standards in order to do future trade with them and offer 'regulatory alignment'). However things eventually settle, no matter what trade deals we seek, it is also worth noting that there will inevitably have to be some higher, transnational court to resolve trade disputes and set standards. Why didn't you just say "I don't understand the demand part of supply and demand?" The increase in population due to migration has not been matched by an increase in services. Yes, migrants pay tax, but the government spend per head is about £11,000 per capita. Very, very few people contribute this much in tax, so the chances of the Eastern Europeans making a net contribution are slim to none. This means that real spending on services is declining. And why is it people like you seem to think migration is a binary choice of Open Borders or Zero? Is it possible for us to incentivise the workers we need to come to the UK while having a limit on the overall numbers? Hmm....Its almost like that would be sensible. But maybe companies should adopt this approach, tell Google that if they need a software programmer, they should just hire the first 100 people through the door and hope one of them has the skills they need. Sounds like a plan.
|
|
|
Post by OpiateOfTheMasses on Feb 9, 2018 16:11:33 GMT
It's all about sovereignty... because there were so many things that the EU prevented the UK from doing that we'll be free to do once we leave that will revolutionise this country such as... what exactly? What is it that all the "give us back our sovereignty" people want that the EU stopped them doing? Blue Passports? We were actually allowed blue passports under the EU legislation, the government just decided to adopt the EU colours. Bring back the death penalty? Well that's not going to happen anyway. Get better trade deals? That may happen. It may not. Who knows. But it's sure as hell going to take a veeeeeeery long time and cost us Billions and Billions in the interim so they better be f*cking awesome trade deals, the best trade deals the world has ever seen to make up for the money it's cost the country waiting for them. Do away with Fisheries Policies? So we can over-fish now and destroy the fishing industry in 20 years time and everyone then will say "why didn't they do something about 20 years ago?" and if we're out of the EU (who buy most of our fish) - who are we going to sell it to anyway? So what does that leave? For the majority it was about Sovereignty. I'm really sorry this upsets you, but as I said, you had the chance to argue this and you preferred "Project Fear" and calling everyone racist. Don't blame me that your side chose to engage in a campaign people didn't care about. And what can't we do now? You just said it. Trade. We trade more with the rest of the World than we do with the EU, yet we cannot regulate this trade, why? We are subject to the ECJ, why? Did you see the EU attempting sanctions against Poland and Hungary for not accepting EU dictated migrant quotas? Why should the EU have that right? What options do you think we will have when the EU moves towards its goal of a single nation with a single army? Where is our sovereignty then? Now you may very well be in favour of that, which is fine, but make the bloody argument for it instead of talking shit about the working class. Fisheries? You instantly go back to project fear. Obviously us Britons can't be trusted to do anything sensible, like have a sustained fishing policy. No, we need the Germans to tell us what to do. Jesus Christ man...And if we are out of the EU.....we can still trade with them....Know who our biggest trading partner is? The United States, who last time I checked, were not in the EU..... Where was my project fear? That we might over-fish? Is that it? The fishing industry wanted to do away with the limitations imposed on them by the EU, so what do you think they wanted to replace them with? A British limit that was the same but cos it's got a Union Jack on it, they'd be happy with it? And yes, we trade with lots of countries. We do that as part of the EU and we'll do that outside of the EU. So I'm really not sure what your point is there. What sort of new Trade deal are you hoping for from the US or China that will be better than the current arrangements? Can you give me some details please?
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 17:15:41 GMT
For the majority it was about Sovereignty. I'm really sorry this upsets you, but as I said, you had the chance to argue this and you preferred "Project Fear" and calling everyone racist. Don't blame me that your side chose to engage in a campaign people didn't care about. And what can't we do now? You just said it. Trade. We trade more with the rest of the World than we do with the EU, yet we cannot regulate this trade, why? We are subject to the ECJ, why? Did you see the EU attempting sanctions against Poland and Hungary for not accepting EU dictated migrant quotas? Why should the EU have that right? What options do you think we will have when the EU moves towards its goal of a single nation with a single army? Where is our sovereignty then? Now you may very well be in favour of that, which is fine, but make the bloody argument for it instead of talking shit about the working class. Fisheries? You instantly go back to project fear. Obviously us Britons can't be trusted to do anything sensible, like have a sustained fishing policy. No, we need the Germans to tell us what to do. Jesus Christ man...And if we are out of the EU.....we can still trade with them....Know who our biggest trading partner is? The United States, who last time I checked, were not in the EU..... Where was my project fear? That we might over-fish? Is that it? The fishing industry wanted to do away with the limitations imposed on them by the EU, so what do you think they wanted to replace them with? A British limit that was the same but cos it's got a Union Jack on it, they'd be happy with it? And yes, we trade with lots of countries. We do that as part of the EU and we'll do that outside of the EU. So I'm really not sure what your point is there. What sort of new Trade deal are you hoping for from the US or China that will be better than the current arrangements? Can you give me some details please? You know very well what Project Fear was. And if trade deals are so pointless, why do we need to be in the Single Market? Could it be that removing barriers to trade are beneficial to the economy? If that is the case, why are you in favour of a system that places barriers to the majority of our trade and stops us removing them? And fish? We are allowed 30% 0of the catch from our waters. The rest of the allowable catch in UK waters is for the EU fisherman. I wonder why people in the UK aren't happy with that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2018 17:19:13 GMT
Lol at that. A kind euphemism on your part. Let's put it this way: an honest to goodness war between the combined "might" of the EU and Great Britain would last about as long as your campaign against Argentina lasted. The only difference is that you'd hear a dozen different phrases of surrender instead of one. To be fair the French military is pretty competent. They get a lot of stick, but they are capable and are the only ones besides the UK with any real combat in recent times. The British armed forces are not what they were either. Our army is now less than 90,000 and we struggle with our overseas commitments. Same for thee Royal Navy. By 2020 we will have two carriers that are only lightly armed but not enough surface vessels to protect both and our new frigates not expected till the mid 2020's I hope you take this in good humor, but it's good to see that some things never change and that the British still hold the French in higher regard than the rest of the world. The world wouldn't be right if Brits didn't have a love/hate crush on the French. And don't worry, if the shit ever hit the fan, the U.S. will sell you all the weapons you need, no matter who your enemy is. That crush you have on the French? Yeah, we still kind of have one on you.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 17:32:54 GMT
To be fair the French military is pretty competent. They get a lot of stick, but they are capable and are the only ones besides the UK with any real combat in recent times. The British armed forces are not what they were either. Our army is now less than 90,000 and we struggle with our overseas commitments. Same for thee Royal Navy. By 2020 we will have two carriers that are only lightly armed but not enough surface vessels to protect both and our new frigates not expected till the mid 2020's I hope you take this in good humor, but it's good to see that some things never change and that the British still hold the French in higher regard than the rest of the world. The world wouldn't be right if Brits didn't have a love/hate crush on the French. And don't worry, if the shit ever hit the fan, the U.S. will sell you all the weapons you need, no matter who your enemy is. That crush you have on the French? Yeah, we still kind of have one on you. Lol. Fighting the Germans was a fad, we spent centuries fighting the bloody French. I think we have a longer term perspective on the French military than the rest of the World that just see their abject failure in WWII and even that can be placed at the hands of the leaders, rather than the fighters. And yeah. I'm a huge fan of the US. I love giving Americans shite, but thats just the British way. As much as it isn't trendy to say, the US Military has kept the Western World safe for seven decades. Sure, it isn't entirely altruistic and you guys shafted us at the end of WWII, but Europeans need to recognise their reliance on American soldiers and shut up or step up themselves. I see Trump said recently "There is nothing that could happen to you that we won't be there to fight for you" and "We will come to your defence if anything should happen" Which is why I am pro American rather than Pro EU because I trust the Yanks more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2018 17:42:49 GMT
I hope you take this in good humor, but it's good to see that some things never change and that the British still hold the French in higher regard than the rest of the world. The world wouldn't be right if Brits didn't have a love/hate crush on the French. And don't worry, if the shit ever hit the fan, the U.S. will sell you all the weapons you need, no matter who your enemy is. That crush you have on the French? Yeah, we still kind of have one on you. Lol. Fighting the Germans was a fad, we spent centuries fighting the bloody French. I think we have a longer term perspective on the French military than the rest of the World that just see their abject failure in WWII and even that can be placed at the hands of the leaders, rather than the fighters. And yeah. I'm a huge fan of the US. I love giving Americans shite, but thats just the British way. As much as it isn't trendy to say, the US Military has kept the Western World safe for seven decades. Sure, it isn't entirely altruistic and you guys shafted us at the end of WWII, but Europeans need to recognise their reliance on American soldiers and shut up or step up themselves. I see Trump said recently "There is nothing that could happen to you that we won't be there to fight for you" and "We will come to your defence if anything should happen" Which is why I am pro American rather than Pro EU because I trust the Yanks more. Well, don't forget Vietnam. Which...uhm...isn't to say we didn't have our own problems over there, but the French didn't do so well. To be fair, you can only trust one side of the aisle. That side will come out en masse to support Great Britain, Israel, and, to lesser extents, Australia and Japan. But you can't trust the other side of the aisle. You could have as recently as Bill Clinton's presidency, but not now. The left has lost its mind. They consider you an enemy because you have too many white men in your country and you want to be British rather than European. That's okay, though. We Trumped them in 2016 and we will do so again in 2020 and even if the darkest of dark days shrouds American politics, those of us on the right have all the guns and are the ones willing to use them.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 9, 2018 18:48:21 GMT
Lol. Fighting the Germans was a fad, we spent centuries fighting the bloody French. I think we have a longer term perspective on the French military than the rest of the World that just see their abject failure in WWII and even that can be placed at the hands of the leaders, rather than the fighters. And yeah. I'm a huge fan of the US. I love giving Americans shite, but thats just the British way. As much as it isn't trendy to say, the US Military has kept the Western World safe for seven decades. Sure, it isn't entirely altruistic and you guys shafted us at the end of WWII, but Europeans need to recognise their reliance on American soldiers and shut up or step up themselves. I see Trump said recently "There is nothing that could happen to you that we won't be there to fight for you" and "We will come to your defence if anything should happen" Which is why I am pro American rather than Pro EU because I trust the Yanks more. Well, don't forget Vietnam. Which...uhm...isn't to say we didn't have our own problems over there, but the French didn't do so well. To be fair, you can only trust one side of the aisle. That side will come out en masse to support Great Britain, Israel, and, to lesser extents, Australia and Japan. But you can't trust the other side of the aisle. You could have as recently as Bill Clinton's presidency, but not now. The left has lost its mind. They consider you an enemy because you have too many white men in your country and you want to be British rather than European. That's okay, though. We Trumped them in 2016 and we will do so again in 2020 and even if the darkest of dark days shrouds American politics, those of us on the right have all the guns and are the ones willing to use them. Whats your take on the Memo stuff happening over there? A I see it, it appears to show collusion between the FBI, DNC and foreign actors?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2018 19:05:50 GMT
Well, don't forget Vietnam. Which...uhm...isn't to say we didn't have our own problems over there, but the French didn't do so well. To be fair, you can only trust one side of the aisle. That side will come out en masse to support Great Britain, Israel, and, to lesser extents, Australia and Japan. But you can't trust the other side of the aisle. You could have as recently as Bill Clinton's presidency, but not now. The left has lost its mind. They consider you an enemy because you have too many white men in your country and you want to be British rather than European. That's okay, though. We Trumped them in 2016 and we will do so again in 2020 and even if the darkest of dark days shrouds American politics, those of us on the right have all the guns and are the ones willing to use them. Whats your take on the Memo stuff happening over there? A I see it, it appears to show collusion between the FBI, DNC and foreign actors? One thing you have to understand about American liberals is that they project constantly. Whatever they accuse you of, you can bet they are guilty of it. It's no different with the Russian collusion story or the claims of rigged elections. The more it unravels, the more we find out that it was Democrats who were the ones colluding and it it already an accepted fact that Democrats rigged their own primary and stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders. Libs are in denial, of course, and will laugh at you if you suggest it (just like they laughed when anyone had the guts to predict on tv shows that Trump was going to win the election), but you watch: some of the anti-Trump players are going to jail over this. It's only a matter of time and ensuing documentation release. Obama and Clinton herself will probably get off due to pure clout, but these FBI guys are going to go to prison for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 9, 2018 19:17:17 GMT
LOL, somebody thinks the "right" are the ones with all the guns in the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 13:08:07 GMT
The increase in population due to migration has not been matched by an increase in services. Yes, migrants pay tax, but the government spend per head is about £11,000 per capita. Very, very few people contribute this much in tax, so the chances of the Eastern Europeans making a net contribution are slim to none. This means that real spending on services is declining. This does not change the fact that the vast majority of immigrants pay their taxes. (They also, in most cases as already observed, at the same time fill vacancies for which there is a critical shortage, such as in the health service and social care etc - or for those jobs that the native Brits just don't want to do.) There is no reason to scapegoat minorities because government has favoured austerity over investment ever since the financial crisis, or has failed to raise taxes to fund things properly. No reason of course, unless one has an emotional charge against immigrants in the first place, or is one who might rail against diversity in the workplace, say, or equality, hate crime legislation or the religion of minorities. When I actually say this is what I think, then feel free to ask of me again. Any incentive, until recently, was a successful economy and a welcome, both of which have unfortunately shrunk since Brexit. That is one reason why the latest figure show immigration (from Europe) decreasing. But I am sure you have something pertinent to say about the figures from the rest of the world though. And in different instance, the UK government has been able to restrict immigration for some time - such as that which comes from the commonwealth and rest of world which together make up a good proportion of the total. Maybe the Government could actually amend the present quota system which can prevent qualified and badly needed health professionals from filling places. www.nhsemployers.org/news/2015/09/nhs-employers-raises-concerns-over-immigration-rules workpermit.com/news/tier-2-visa-problems-making-nhs-staffing-crisis-worse-20150917 www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11690480/Nurses-will-be-deported-under-new-visa-rules.html Admittedly, there has been some urgent tweaking of the system since these reports. But there are still cases of much needed upper-level, qualified and ready, health staff being turned away since they have an offer of earnings under a £55K baseline.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 13:16:48 GMT
Yes, you have explained a lot and what you think ought to be the case in lieu of the existing laws on hate speech, as it would suit you and others better. And you have made it very clear the minorities which would benefit from your kindly attentions after. Too much so, unfortunately.
If you think objecting to government sanctioned speech is a problem, thats your concern. Don't worry though. There are still some of us fighting for your right to speak your mind without fear of arrest. Don't forget to bomb the post office.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 13:38:47 GMT
Whether something actually happened isn't relevant in the World of FLimmy. Just so we all know folks. We saw the same in the US, the Hate Crime Hysteria after Trump. Amazingly most of its turns out to be bullshit. Has hate crime really not increased of late? A cynic would think that it would suit your narrative to assert this. Alternatively I can say that, compared to the old board, I have not seen so much splenetic, continued, hated of Islam - at least as I have here from you, Cody, and your ilk.
I am not sure in what connection this comment is made. The figures I normally refer to are the two most widely used in the UK, including the National Crime Survey. A useful site is here:
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/2015-10-15
Since hate crime always exercises you so much, a detailed assessment of 2016-2017 can be found here
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf
Where we read "The increase over the last year is thought to reflect both a genuine rise in hate crime around the time of the EU referendum and also due to ongoing improvements in crime recording by the police. "
Although it is just an opinion, my view is that the terms of the Brexit debate, and the final decision, has given the haters confidence to come out of the woodwork.
I hope that helps.
You will note that the above quote addresses the issue of better reporting strategies, admits, and allows for it. I didn't say, or mean to say, only due to Brexit, Thor. I would be sorry if this is what you understand, or my phrasing was off. But apart from better reporting swelling the figures, what else can you think of which was so profound, and which has happened from and over the same period? Won the referendum - or the hate crime level lol? You seem a bit confused and seem to be answering claims I have not made. All I said - as do many observers and commentators - was that hate crime, xenophobia and Islamophobia have, both anecdotally and statistically, risen noticeably from around the time of Brexit. I think the two events are associated. Now, yes, I know that correlation is not necessarily cause, but the fact is striking and most people accept that the UK is more divided now on nationalistic - or jingoistic - lines than for some years. If you suggest that I am claiming you are a Nazi, or racist because of the referendum result, then you will need to work much harder. It is interesting to see the range of progressive policies and social groupings covered in disputations which have so set you off on these boards of late though lol.. However, through your various comments you do come across as, unfortunately, rather Islamophobic. What have Asian voting patterns to do with views of hate crime of anyone which, (apart of course from those who find the present restrictions on intimidating and hateful speech irksome) is overwhelmingly that of disapproval? The level of non-sequiturs in this reply of yours says much more about you than your arguments. Ah well.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Feb 12, 2018 15:55:38 GMT
You know very well what Project Fear was. Ironic this, given the fear and dread projected in almost every post by Thor here in which Islam features - his aggression towards a perceived threat, especially to the UK, only constrained by (he finds) restrictive hate speech laws.. For some Muslims can be "Worse than Brexit", apparently. Flim Flam? Why do you keep lying about the "Worse than Brexit" thing? I didn't say that. I corrected you in the other thread yet here you are again quoting something I didn't say. One might think your argument is so weak you have to resort to lying.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 16:06:27 GMT
Ironic this, given the fear and dread projected in almost every post by Thor here in which Islam features - his aggression towards a perceived threat, especially to the UK, only constrained by (he finds) restrictive hate speech laws.. For some Muslims can be "Worse than Brexit", apparently. Flim Flam? Why do you keep lying about the "Worse than Brexit" thing? I didn't say that. I corrected you in the other thread yet here you are again quoting something I didn't say. One might think your argument is so weak you have to resort to lying. Oh yes my mistake, an inexact quote, apologies. What you actually said was ""The majority of Muslims in the UK don't come from the EU. They are from Pakistan, Somalia and Bangladesh. Brexit means nothing to this." Which clearly means nothing like 'worse than'. LOL
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 12, 2018 16:11:17 GMT
You know very well what Project Fear was. Ironic this, given the fear and dread projected in almost every post by Thor here in which Islam features - his aggression towards a perceived threat, especially to the UK, only constrained by (he finds) restrictive hate speech laws.. For some Muslims can be "Worse than Brexit", apparently. Also ironic since, as the government's own analysis showed this week, (or a product of a fix-up by corrupt civil service, depending where one's sympathies lie) the more Britain sets out to reclaim sovereignty the more it will dent prosperity - and, apparently hit those areas which voted to leave the most.
|
|