JimCM

I agree there is no defence and suspect that's why @Evil Penevil, a prolific Israel supporter doesn't comment.

Well it's still happening. Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza continues unabated despite ceasefire https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/11/israels-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza-continues-unabated-despite-ceasefire/

The word God has become empty of meaning through thousands of years of misuse... By misuse, I mean that people who have never glimpsed the realm of the sacred, the infinite vastness behind that word, use it with great conviction, as if they knew what they are talking about. Or they argue against it, as if they knew what it is they are denying. This misuse gives rise to absurd beliefs, assertions, and egoic delusions, such as "My or our God is the only true God, and your God is false," or Nietzsche's famous statmeent "God is dead.

Somewhere between Mahayana Buddhism and Judaism. https://www.godisobvious.org/quiz?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22013519502&gbraid=0AAAAADjrwVU7wgHPohSK62oQztwsUWltX&gclid=Cj0KCQiAo4TKBhDRARIsAGW29bdO1bSbdop-s2dCdMjj-r3hF3zCJ-BYhMLCuShykevDJJgTknZ4G4IaAlbtEALw_wcB

Calvin Klein, eternity

Why would Muslims want revenge?

He says the same about Israel.

The tunnels were built as there is a bloody large wall built by the Israelis, locking them all in and not giving them access to enough food, water etc.

What are you on about?

The ultranationalist TV channel fast becoming Israel’s most-watched news source https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/03/ultranationalist-tv-channel-14-most-watched-news-source-israel

Hmm I'll ask AI Is saying this racist- As for me, I wouldn't want to live within 10km of a Muslim You said: Is saying this racist- As for me, I wouldn't want to live within 10km of a Muslim ChatGPT said: Short answer: it’s not racist in the strict, technical sense, but it is discriminatory and widely understood as Islamophobic. Here’s the breakdown: Race vs religion Islam is a religion, not a race, so the statement isn’t technically racist. Why it’s still a problem Saying you wouldn’t want to live within 10km of any Muslim: treats a very large, diverse group of people as a single negative category expresses exclusion based solely on religious identity, not behaviour or individual actions would commonly be described as religious discrimination or Islamophobia How it’s likely to be received Most people would hear this as: hostile prejudicial dehumanising or fear-based Even if no violence is implied, it promotes social exclusion. Legal / platform context Depending on the country or platform, statements like this can fall under hate speech policies, even if they aren’t legally “racist”.

A broadcast on Israel’s right-wing Channel 14 openly celebrated a severe winter storm that’s hitting Gaza, with participants expressing hope that flooding would ‘drown’ the territory and even voicing indifference to whether ‘any people’ survive. https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2025/12/11/israeli-right-wing-tv-show-mocks-gaza-drowning-in-winter-storm

Are you talking about the Muslim community in Thailand that made you escape to Laos? I'm intrigued about your experience. If someone said they wouldn't want to live within 10 km of a Jew, would you think was ignorant?

Totally false, there is no religious discrimination in Japan immigration policy.

This is a really sad, racist thing to say.

You were talking about the two Muslim attackers, the Muslim hero and implying it would be unwise to have any more Muslims. You have no moral integrity and are a bigot.

He is a war criminal, wanted by the International Court. His goals are clear, as are his extremist cabinet.

Unbelievable the Muslim hate on this thread. Of course it's a religion of peace. How many wars has Iran started in the last 200 years? How about Israel or the USA/UK?

Get Farage in, he should deport every single one of them.

More vile islamophobic posts. Firearms licences are issued to individuals, not religions. Saying “Why are Muslims allowed to own firearms?” is no different from asking why Christians, Jews, or white men are allowed to own them. It assumes guilt based solely on identity. Millions of Muslims live peacefully under the law. Treating them as a collective security threat because of one person’s crime is prejudice, not public safety. If a licensed gun owner commits violence, the issue is the person or the licensing process, not their faith. Comparing Muslims to “a fox in the henhouse” is dehumanising and exactly the kind of thinking that fuels hate rather than preventing violence. Judge actions. Not religion.

Oh, of course - let’s ignore 20 years of foreign invasions, the destruction of Iraq under blatantly false pretences, and the resulting refugee crisis. Clearly, millions of people fleeing war and instability in the Middle East has nothing to do with Western governments dropping bombs and destabilising the region. It must all be… their religion. Thanks for the history lesson, Captain Obvious.

What hierarchy? OMG, it's a beautiful day and I'm taking the bait from a guy under a bridge.

This is a new low for you. Comparing Muslims lo Pitbulls. You and your lefty nonsense. I vote Reform and use to vote Conservative. I would have voted for Trump. I'm against as ll illegal immigration and think they should turn all boats away, so enough of your polarised nonsense

Your fear of Muslims in the UK spreads to any topic if by there is a Muslim involved. The man who saved dozens of lives is a Muslim. Scroll through certain corners of the internet and you’ll find no shortage of self-styled “defenders of Britain” sounding the alarm about Muslim immigrants. The tone is familiar: the country is under threat, its identity is being erased, and only the loudest voices on social media are brave enough to tell the truth. But if this sounds new, it shouldn’t. Britain has lived through this kind of moral panic before. Four hundred years ago, the supposed threat came from Catholics. In the aftermath of the Reformation, English Protestants convinced themselves that Catholics were a shadowy internal enemy—agents of foreign powers, plotting to overturn the nation from within. Political tensions and a handful of real conspiracies gave fuel to a fear far larger than the facts, and pamphlets of the time dripped with righteous certainty that the country was on the brink. Today, the pamphlets have been replaced by memes, but the pattern is strikingly similar. Islamophobic corners of social media frame Muslim immigrants not as ordinary people building lives here, but as part of a coordinated “invasion”. The claims are just as dramatic, and just as thinly supported. The focus is not on lived reality but on the thrill of outrage, amplified by algorithms and tribalism. What both eras show is that Britain’s greatest religious panics have rarely been about theology. They have been about social change, uncertainty, and the fear of losing control. When people feel destabilised—by war, economic hardship, or simply rapid change—they look for someone to blame. In the 17th century, it was Catholics. Today, it is often Muslims. The target shifts; the anxiety remains. And yet history also shows something else: these panics pass. Over time, British Catholics became part of the fabric of national life. The same, quietly and steadily, is happening with Britain’s Muslim communities. People work together, live alongside one another, raise families, and share neighbourhoods. The everyday reality of coexistence always outlives the noise of those who insist that the sky is falling. Panic has a short lifespan. Society does not. And each time Britain survives a wave of fear, it learns again what should be obvious: that ordinary people, whatever their faith, are rarely the threat they are made out to be.

Excuse him he knoweth not what he says. It's persecution complex.