Chomper Higgot

^ Once again we see there is not bottom to the pit that is MAGA, there is only how low MAGA is today. When the need arises they simply go lower without so much as a blush. In this case almost a thousand years of juries deciding guilt or innocence is attacked as ‘banana republic. Court system’ and why is that necessary? Because novacova will not accept Convicted Felon Trump is, just like the rest of us, subject to the law and beneath the law. Utterly ‘deplorable’.

It’s not what your ‘legal experts’ have to say on the matter. It’s what 12 good citizens decided.

I ❤️ NY

Not having a good day?

Oh and we know Convicted Felons can appeal. Just getting that in before the people who told us Trump would not be indicted, would not be prosecuted and would not be convicted switch to the next line in their never ending ‘Trump can not be held accountable to the law’ HS.

‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ doesn’t exist. Perhaps you were confused on hearing ‘Trump Arraignment’.

No, it’s about me responding to this post, which my own experience of having lived and worked in a number of ‘Muslim countries’ runs contrary to the ridiculous claim Dobson made.

In fairness to Convict Trump, he seems to be struggling a bit of late. I would definitely support the Convict being given a full psychological and cognitive assessment before sentencing.

A brief note to my die hard Trump supporters on this forum. This is me keeping my promise to accept the Jury’s Verdict without reservation. Now. Lock Him Up!

They certainly would have been at higher risk had Trump not been under a partial gag order preventing him attacking the jurors.

Why are you ignoring what the quote I posted from your link says?

From your first link: ”The pattern that emerges from the survey is familar from other surveys of Muslim opinion in the last year or so. There is no universal, monilithic Muslim opinion - there is as much variety as among non-Muslims. While a small minority of Muslims sympathise with extremism and Islamist terror, the vast majority do not.”

This is how it works. You make a statement, you back it up. And here’s what you’ve done: you’ve made a statement to the effect ‘I asked why Muslim councillors and politicians don't campaign on ridding towns and cities of radical Islam,’ I have absolutely no idea that they don’t. But here’s a thing. Neither do you.

It’s you asserting they don’t. Why is it for me to prove otherwise? I’ve provided links to leaders in the Muslim community actively working to combat Islamist extremism. You making assertions without evidence is exactly that. Assertions without evidence.

Most people?

The efforts by leaders within the UK Muslim community to combat Islamist extremism go a lot further than ‘Expressing condolences after terrorist stacks’ The indications are you are unaware of this, perhaps deliberately so.

That’s a rather categorical claim. I’m sure you can back it up?

Well it clearly doesn’t reach you.

A libelous flaming slur.

I don’t know anyone that disagrees with that.

Another slur.

Moving the golf post Brian. I repeat. You have not discussed anything the article says. I’ve underlined that a number times with the intent you don’t miss the point.

There’s a whole article full, you are not short of choices.

The whole article supports my claim Why don’t you try and refute the statements it makes?

I suggest you read through a few more of the links the article references. And did you miss this: Although large news networks seldom carry these Muslim voices of peace, a simple search will turn up all manner of condemnations of those whose actions tarnish the image and teachings of Islam.