Bkk Brian

Oh look. Another attempt at cancelling out opposing opinions. How sad

How? Perhaps check IHL and the killing of civilians before making inflammatory claims

That's according to the Houthis which also happen to be a Foreign Terrorist Organization. It was their terminal blown up which is a huge blow to them. There may have been some civilian casualties but unknown how many. How is it a war crime?

Who told you? Women teaching men There is no legal objection to men teaching women or vice-versa. Muslims have always maintained that the mere presence of women in the same place as men is not prohibited in itself. https://www.dar-alifta.org/en/fatwa/details/4871/women-teaching-men "Islamic scholars generally agree that women can teach men, and there are no specific verses in the Quran or Sunnah that forbid it."

Try a little harder............what's the matter, cant believe the Hill would publish this? "Trump’s not hurting democracy. He’s blowing up their oligarchy, which is why they’re so mad"

I don't know as you have no idea also. But there are plenty of other names and top boys name for babies in the UK for the last 6 years running in not exactly misleading, its as plane as day. Pew Research estimated that by 2050, 17% of the population will be Muslim. In some constituencies such as Birmingham, Hodge Hill 62.4% of constituents identify as Muslim, with 58.7% identifying as Muslim in Bradford West, and 55.9% in Birmingham, Hall Green.

I think you are not right, been that way for years, see link below from 2016 Muslims in UK top 3 million for first time... with over 50% born outside Britain: Number in country doubles in a decade as immigration and birth rates soar https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3424584/Muslims-UK-3-million-time-50-born-outside-Britain-Number-country-doubles-decade-immigration-birth-rates-soar.html

Its all inevitable now. Did you know? "The name Muhammad, when allowing for spelling variants, has been the top boys name for babies in Britain for six years running." https://christianconcern.com/resource/the-challenge-of-islam-in-the-uk/#:~:text=The fastest growing religion in,six years running.[11] "After the recent debates on Gaza in the House of Commons, a journalist said that an MP told him: “he had weighed up his own physical safety when deciding how to vote.”.[6] How many other MPs did this? Islam is now influencing our democracy, but not with benign intentions or means."

I don't think anyone would disagree with the digitally altered image that Trump posted with text stamps to highlight the meaning of the symbols. Are all the other images that Trump did not post also altered?

Yea all just coincidence, got it.

What facts, you gave opinions.

lol yea whatever

They have everything to do with MS-13, what hole and who's digging? Marijuana leaf = M Smiley face = S Cross coverup = 1 Skull coverup = 3

Its a huge issue in the UK. The equal act polices have to be changed in all places of work, hospitals, the whole of the NHS, schools and as the example above. The police.

Are these fake too? https://nypost.com/2025/04/18/us-news/social-media-flooded-with-theories-about-kilmar-abrego-garcias-ms-13-tattoos/

This Has been discussed already when it was first announced. The many responses remain the same.

It's certainly a "legal due process" I know it is. Goodnight

How is it bizarre? The point is certainly worth arguing Then go ahead and argue whether its a legal due process with someone else. I don't waste time on such nonsense

I don't recall anyone arguing that the government was the source. That wouldn't make sense on a lot of levels.

Yes the legal system because that is what it is. To try and argue that point is just bizarre

No not at all. New facts are always welcome unlike those who attempt to lie and deny what the judges said. The Evidence the judges had was from a confidential source, no mention of the government being that source on BBC verify.

Al Jazeera? I much prefer BBC Verify and stick with the facts: "Nevertheless, the judge presiding over Abrego Garcia’s 2019 case found enough evidence—based on the confidential source—to conclude that he was affiliated with the gang, a finding later upheld by another judge. This resulted in his being denied bail. During this time, he filed for asylum to avoid deportation to El Salvador, claiming his family had been targeted by Barrio-18, a rival gang."

Yes I know you prefer not to believe the legal system by way of judges decisions. You further EDIT once I had replied is more evidence of your dishonesty

You can stop telling me what point I'm ignoring too. I called you out for your false claims he was not a member of a gang and provided proof via way of two separate judges and the evidence they replied on to refuse his bail.

How do you know it was weak evidence. It was two judges anyway. In separate hearings. More deflection. I am not nor have I ever claimed it was correct to deport him. In fact a judge ruled he shouldn't. I respect that decision to. Unlike you I am not cherry picking which judges to believe.