Britain criticizes Trump retweeting anti-Muslim videos from far-right party

[simple1]

2 hours ago, johna said:

So you cant name any Christian terrorist groups murdering muslims???

Did a search on the web and came across the response below and examples of self professed Christians' terror activities. IMO the response cuts to the chase of Trump's and others efforts regards vilification of Muslims in general.

 

Rashid knows that, while the people and groups he listed may have identified as Christian, they do not reflect their entire religion — just as Muslim terrorists do not represent all Muslims or all of Islam. And that really should be a lesson for everyone about projecting the actions of an individual onto an entire group. Whether it's profiling on the basis of race, gender, religion, or anything else, it's not only wrong, it makes us less safe.

So next time you hear someone say, "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim," there's a perfect response waiting right here.

 

http://www.upworthy.com/a-troll-demanded-a-muslim-man-show-examples-of-christian-terrorists-he-delivered

[thaihome]

3 hours ago, johna said:

So you cant name any Christian terrorist groups murdering muslims???

https://www.salon.com/2015/04/07/6_modern_day_christian_terrorist_groups_our_media_conveniently_ignores_partner/

 

http://religionnews.com/2017/05/14/christian-militias-kill-up-to-30-muslim-civilians-in-central-african-republican/

[johna]

3 hours ago, thaihome said:

https://www.salon.com/2015/04/07/6_modern_day_christian_terrorist_groups_our_media_conveniently_ignores_partner/

 

http://religionnews.com/2017/05/14/christian-militias-kill-up-to-30-muslim-civilians-in-central-african-republican/

come off it, they can hardly hold a candle to IS or Al Queda, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find these.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, johna said:

come off it, they can hardly hold a candle to IS or Al Queda, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find these.

Off topic - Not the point of the OP which, to repeat, is about the President of the USA encouraging a hate group in contradiction to HMG policy. Why don't you and others in your clique, rather than supporting far right ideology understand the extreme right has clearly been identified in a number of Western countries as a threat to national security and a major distraction for intelligence  and police resources in the fight against against Islamist extremism.

Edited December 4, 2017 by simple1

[stevenl]

11 hours ago, yogi100 said:

 

What will reading up on polling and validity tell us about making any such claims. Surely you don't expect readers to trawl the internet in search of some article that we know nothing about in order to make your point for you. Copy and paste it yourself if it exists.

 

However there is nothing on the internet under the heading 'polling and validity' that could give one reason to doubt the accuracy of this poll nor any others regardless of the issue they may be connected to.

Reading up would have explained to you that such poll by a radio station, is not representative at all, therefore your claim has no validity.

[stephen tracy]

8 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Quite amusing considering some of your heated, if inaccurate posts.

which were inaccurate? Provide details. Not from Wiki if you can

[stephen tracy]

8 hours ago, Morch said:

 

That would move the "argument" into what constitutes "widely deemed". And considering the partisan views, I would guess that would go nowhere. I'm guessing that the above would be applied in some cases, whereas in others the official "certification" or lack of it would be touted, as needed.

The planned/organized murder of unarmed civilians for a political and/religious cause, or at least under the guise of one. Quite simple. 

[stephen tracy]

18 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

Lebanon

Dear confused Morch, have you not heard of Sabra and Chatilla? 

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

which were inaccurate? Provide details. Not from Wiki if you can

 

[Morch]

Just now, stephen tracy said:

Dear confused Morch, have you not heard of Sabra and Chatilla? 

 

Have you heard about deflections? Citing examples without context? Cherry picking. Yep, seems you did.

 

[stephen tracy]

Cherry picking what? I responded to people asking whether Christians had been guilty of "terrorism" and responded with two clear examples (there are more obviously). Just because you you're not familiar with them doesn't mean they're not relevant to that line of discussion. 

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

The planned/organized murder of unarmed civilians for a political and/religious cause, or at least under the guise of one. Quite simple. 

 

Knowing most participating posters positions, doubt the application wouldn't be partisan, regardless. Would any instance of modern warfare carried out in civilian populated areas be "widely deemed" as a terrorist act, then?

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

Cherry picking what? I responded to people asking whether Christians had been guilty of "terrorism" and responded with two clear examples (there are more obviously). Just because you you're not familiar with them doesn't mean they're not relevant to that line of discussion. 

 

You are grasping at straws.

[stephen tracy]

10 hours ago, johna said:

So you cant name any Christian terrorist groups murdering muslims???

Off the top of my head: The Phalange. Serbian forces in Omarska. CAR Christian militias. 

[stephen tracy]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

You are grasping at straws.

Nope, I'm just talking about something you know zero about. 

[Morch]

Just now, stephen tracy said:

Nope, I'm just talking about something you know zero about. 

 

You are funny, I'll give you that.

 

 

 

[stephen tracy]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Knowing most participating posters positions, doubt the application wouldn't be partisan, regardless. Would any instance of modern warfare carried out in civilian populated areas be "widely deemed" as a terrorist act, then?

No, terrorism can be defined in that it deliberately targets civilians, rather than causes civilian casualties due to so-called collateral damage, which likely fall into the category of war crime. 

[stephen tracy]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

You are funny, I'll give you that.

 

 

 

Good, now go on your way. 

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

No, terrorism can be defined in that it deliberately targets civilians, rather than causes civilian casualties due to so-called collateral damage, which likely fall into the category of war crime. 

 

Other than "so-called" and "likely" being wrong, that's not a bad reply. May want to revisit relevant topics and see how it gets applied according to partisan lines, though. But hey, guess that the last bit sort of does that anyway.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

Good, now go on your way. 

 

Umm...pffft?

[Scott]

Next nonsensical, troll, bickering post will earn a suspension.

 

The topic is not Islam vs. Christianity.  

[stephen tracy]

OK, we've been warned about going off topic. Can't say I blame the admin. Apologies. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. These are the kind of people Trump was endorsing by retweeting that stuff: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/04/britain-first-supporter-drove-van-harrow-curry-house-owner-court-hears

[7by7]

21 hours ago, yogi100 said:

<snip>

And LBC is a London based radio talk show. Most of its presenters are liberals. The only one who definitely was not was Katie Hopkins and she got sacked earlier this year after comments she made related to the Manchester Arena atrocity.

Her 'comment' being a tweet calling for 'the final solution' to the Muslim problem!

 

Maybe that's a sentiment you share?

[7by7]

18 hours ago, johna said:

Spin it any way you want, but the Crusaders were fighting to regain the Holy Land from muslim invaders, and  free Europe from this evil religion of hate. 

A sad indictment of whoever taught you both history and English at school!

 

Please explain how you can regain something you've never owned!

[7by7]

18 hours ago, johna said:

Could you please name the Christian terrorist groups that are murdering muslims, any Christian versions of IS, Al Qaeda etc  Labelling the Crusaders as terrorists is absolutely ridiculous. 

 The third time I've been asked this question, so I'm simply going to refer you to my previous two answers.

 

BTW, I didn't label the Crusaders as terrorists; even though they did rape and slaughter their fellow Christians in Constantinople in 1208!

 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2017 by 7by7
Correct typo

[7by7]

17 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

I can't believe that people can be so dim as to not realise the purpose of these videos.

Trump has aligned himself with the suckers of the world.

The logic being a massive false syllogism: the perpetrators in the videos claim to be Muslims therefore all Muslims do this.

How stupid can you get

 Agree completely; except when you say "the perpetrators in the videos claim to be Muslims."

 

It is Britain First's Jayda Fransen who claimed the perpetrators in the videos are all Muslims; a claim which is false.

 

Not for the first time, Trump leapt upon this false claim without first checking the facts.

[7by7]

10 hours ago, johna said:

come off it, they can hardly hold a candle to IS or Al Queda, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find these.

The Serbian war crimes trials have just finished; 

Quote

The events in Srebrenica in 1995 included the killing of more than 8,000 Bosniak ("Bosnian Muslim") men and boys, as well as the mass expulsion of another 25,000–30,000 Bosniak civilians, in and around the town of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina, committed by units of the Army of the Republika Srpska (VRS) under the command of General Ratko Mladić.^[ 

(Source)

8,000 murdered; not worth counting in your view!

 

All the victims of terrorism were individuals worth counting; whatever their religion.

 

All the murderers are scum; whatever their religion.

 

You and those like you who try to paint one type of terrorist as more evil than another, who try to paint the victims of one type of terrorist as less important than the victims of another make me sick.

 

You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself. If you ever have children, I sincerely hope they never read what you have written here and so learn the truth about you.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2017 by 7by7
Link added

[7by7]

Fury at Nigel Farage defence of Donald Trump's Britain First tweets

Quote

But Mr Farage insisted Mr Trump "wouldn't have an earthly clue who Britain First were"

 

Of course he doesn't [know what he's retweeting] of course he doesn't research everything," he told the BBC's Andrew Marr show.

What! 

 

Trump is the most powerful person  in the world.

 

He damn well should know who he is quoting when he retweets!

 

He damn well should know what he's retweeting!

 

He damn well should research, or rather have his advisors research, everything he comments publicly on before he makes that public comment!

 

[Airbagwill]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 Agree completely; except when you say "the perpetrators in the videos claim to be Muslims."

 

It is Britain First's Jayda Fransen who claimed the perpetrators in the videos are all Muslims; a claim which is false.

 

Not for the first time, Trump leapt upon this false claim without first checking the facts.

OK.      -   "are claimed  to be Muslims"

[FreddieRoyle]

6 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

OK, we've been warned about going off topic. Can't say I blame the admin. Apologies. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. These are the kind of people Trump was endorsing by retweeting that stuff: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/04/britain-first-supporter-drove-van-harrow-curry-house-owner-court-hears

Shame on you for trying to smear all white people due to the drunken actions of one thug. The vast majority of BF supporters are peaceful patriots.  Drunk drivers are not good, nor do the BF members and fans support drunk drivers. 

 

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Agree completely; except when you say "the perpetrators in the videos claim to be Muslims."

 

It is Britain First's Jayda Fransen who claimed the perpetrators in the videos are all Muslims; a claim which is false.

 

Not for the first time, Trump leapt upon this false claim without first checking the facts.

The important thing in these videos is the support offered by all bystanders. In the one where the young lad is thrown from the roof and beaten to death, there are no bystanders shouting "wait, should we not allow this gentleman a fair trial?" or "come lads, let us not brutalize this young boy" No. Bystanders are laughing, encouraging, having a whale of a time. This say volumes about the attitude of these people, and was absolutely worth pointing out to the western world. Thank You Trump, good move. I know you ruffled some feathers but hopefully they will learn in time.  I suspect a real expert in this ideology like Lara Logan could have offered some thoughts on the behavior of these ideological crowds, but she has been very quiet.