Jump to content

Jailed British anti-Muslim activist Robinson released on bail


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, hyku1147 said:

" In classical logic, hypothetical syllogism is a valid argument form which is a syllogism having a conditional statement for one or both of its premises. An example in English: If I do not wake up, then I cannot go to work. If I cannot go to work, then I will not get paid."

Here is your hypothetical syllogism

" If he was referred to as a "Man who wants to preserve the 2000 year old British Culture" the progressives (LOL) would boycott the newspaper, use bullhorns to carry their message, and advocate violence against those who do not 'believe'."

The above is the hypothetical part. What's below you asserted as a statement of fact. It is not part of the syllogism. So your defense is invalid.

"Their methods share disturbing similarities with those of the early National Socialist German Workers' Party."

Edited by bristolboy
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hyku1147 said:

Citation required

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually intolerant may constantly accuse other people of being intolerant. It incorporates blame shifting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hyku1147 said:

It is a conditional statement. You are free to disprove it.

You don't seem to get it. The conditional statement does not include this:

"Their methods share disturbing similarities with those of the early National Socialist German Workers' Party."

I think you should give give your recent intake of the definition of syllogism some time to to be digested and assimilated so you won't keep repeating the same error.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, markaoffy said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/01/british-court-recognises-sharia-law-landmark-divorce-case/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_iosshare_ArCrpVS2t0HB this is the reality and Tommy and many more will not be silenced

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

The article does not support your argument it actually disproves it. Marriages carried out under Sharia law can now come under British law when there is a divorce. Would that not be a victory for the likes of Tommy?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hyku1147 said:

I disagree.

How would their (hypothetical) actions be dis-similar to those of the early National-Socialist German Workers' Party?

Wow! You still don't get it. You stated as a hypothetical what their methods would be, but you stated as a fact that their methods are similar to German National Socialists.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

The whole world is moving to the right and you complain about the great tide of liberalism.

 

The whole world is moving right precisely because the liberal approaches of the last few decades are not working regarding immigration. (I say this as a liberal.)

 

Islam is the enemy of liberalism. (I say this as someone who has worked in several muslim countries, not as a phobe.)

Edited by My Thai Life
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

 

The whole world is moving right precisely because the liberal approaches of the last few decades are not working regarding immigration. (I say this as a liberal.)

 

Islam is the enemy of liberalism. (I say this as someone who has worked in several muslim countries, not as a phobe.)

Since you clearly are not a ‘Liberal’ we’ll take your word on these matters shall we?

 

Erm.... no.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

The leftists did not take him out. His own disrespect of the law did. This was a contempt of court case. He intentionally interfered with a legal process.

 

The case he  was live broadcasting was subject to blanket reporting restrictions imposed under the Contempt of Court Act. The Section 4 (2) order is regularly applied in cases to ensure that a fair trial is provided. Interference in the proceedings can result in a dismissal of  charges or a mistrial. Mr. Robinson's actions had potential to sabotage three linked trials. I note that he readily admitted to his  contempt of court.

 

He wanted to protest and to name and shame. That is his  right. He did not have the right to interfere in a judicial process and to possibly allow three cases to be lost because of his publicity stunt. This was a long standing law enacted to protect the integrity of the  judicial process. It's all about respect for the rule of law, especially since Yaxley-Lennon  was subject to conditions arising from a previous  Contempt of Court conviction.

Spot on and well said!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, My Thai Life said:

 

The whole world is moving right precisely because the liberal approaches of the last few decades are not working regarding immigration. (I say this as a liberal.)

 

Islam is the enemy of liberalism. (I say this as someone who has worked in several muslim countries, not as a phobe.)

So you say the previous poster was wrong in saying there is a liberal tide.

 

Because yes, I agree, the world is moving right. I don't agree with your reasoning though.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, vogie said:

It totally intrigues me how anyone can defend a religion that can force young girls into forced marriages.

And what about selling your daughters into slavery? Here's what they say about that:

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Because that's a universal feature of Islam? All Muslim women young or old are forced into marriages? And if you mean arranged marriages, are all Muslim women forced into those? In fact, the poorer a region is the more likely it is that forced and arranged marriages will exist regardless of the prevalent religion..

OK, now you have explained it, that makes it correct does it. And I meant forced, you use what word you think fits your argument the best.

  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And what about selling your daughters into slavery? Here's what they say about that:

“When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are."

You are the master of deflection.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...