17 minutes ago, Bruntoid said:

Bizarre - the clear implication from the previous racist spouting ‘Muslim stuff’ was they are all, or have terrorise inclinations.

 

So divide total Muslims by total terrorists and you should have your answer about who is likely to be a true Muslim or perhaps more accurately hold true Muslim beliefs, it should also easily dispel the fact all Muslims are terrorists, unless of course you’re a racist. 

 

Even on the most simplest of points you frequently seem to have a problem joining the dots, even when there’s only two of them ! 

Racism? Don't know why you would a call religion a race. Many different races may follow the same religion.

Edited October 3, 20196 yr by nauseus
may follow the same religion.

17.4 billion people voted to LEAVE over 3 years ago - just get BREXIT DONE !

On 9/19/2019 at 7:50 AM, transam said:

No, just want our streets and purse strings back. Our past shows we have the balls to do that, something you would not understand...

Eh ? How does Brexit give you ‘our streets’ back ? 

 

Which streets ? 

5 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

17.4 billion people voted to LEAVE over 3 years ago - just get BREXIT DONE !

Did Diane Abbot do those sums ? 

 

13 hours ago, Bruntoid said:

Bizarre - the clear implication from the previous racist spouting ‘Muslim stuff’ was they are all, or have terrorise inclinations.

 

So divide total Muslims by total terrorists and you should have your answer about who is likely to be a true Muslim or perhaps more accurately hold true Muslim beliefs, it should also easily dispel the fact all Muslims are terrorists, unless of course you’re a racist. 

 

Even on the most simplest of points you frequently seem to have a problem joining the dots, even when there’s only two of them ! 

You are basing that on *majority rule* .

If whoever thge the majority of any Religion, then they are the true people of that Religion and any minorities are not really of that Religious persuasion .

   So, Orthodox Jews are not proper real Jews , Orthodox Jews are not Jews at all, because they are the minority .

   Church of England followers are not real Christians, because they are in the minority of World Christians .

   Majority rule, minorities are not really real .

Going by your theory , Muslims are the minority in the UK, they arent real British ', 

  You theory doesnt hold up to scrutiny 

3 hours ago, Bruntoid said:

Did Diane Abbot do those sums ? 

 

This is Brexit what's a few noughts here or there that will make any difference to the madness of the cults. 

 

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I never said that you did; but I did ask you what you meant by 

in response to my saying

 

 

That was when you started to witter on about Muslims! 

So if you were not saying that you thought I supported Islamic terrorism, what were you saying?

 

What attitude are you accusing me of having?

 

I have said that Islamic terrorists are not true Muslims and do not represent the majority of Muslims; in the same way that Christian terrorists such as the Lord's Resistance Army, are not true Christians and do not represent the majority of Christians. 

 

Yes, I know; I said so

 

 

What do you mean by 'Muslim stuff?'

 

What 'Muslim stuff' have I made excuses for?

You think I am the only one who has read your Muslim protection stuff over the years..????

Every time Islamic terrorist blow folk up, YOU are HERE, defending Muslims, spouting the terrorists are not Muslims...You also have said "My Muslim friends told you so".... ????

7 hours ago, Bruntoid said:

Eh ? How does Brexit give you ‘our streets’ back ? 

 

Which streets ? 

Oh dear, crack on chap....????

Brexit is largely the emotions versus the rational. So good arguements are rare.

For a change as big as Brexit a supermajority is usually required and the last referendum fell way short of that.....any second referendum is likely to do the same regardless of which way it goes. See Farage's comments at the last referendum.

I

Another problem is that of arguments..... They simply aren't arguments...just entrenched gainsaying.

 

For instance, it is well established that industry, agriculture and even fisheries are going to be negatively impacted by any kind of Brexit. This is however not argued with but labelled as "project fear" instead. No reasoned arguments are ever put forward to show how Brexit will benefit these sectors.

 

The result is that any referendum without a supermajority is unlikely to settle the issue and in fact may just execerbate it. Whether UK has technically left or not. 

What is required is a full general election with a full term campaign and then let a parliament....the ultimate soreignty in the UK ....decide.

Any referendum, a very unBritish tool, would need to be several months or over a year down the line with clearly defined legal parameters.

 

 

 

On 10/3/2019 at 11:42 PM, nauseus said:

Racism? Don't know why you would a call religion a race. Many different races may follow the same religion.

It is such a cliché...racists trying to deny racism by saying its not a race it's a religion. How ill informed can you get .... The concept of race is fallacious in the first place and discrimination is just a sickness looking for somewhere to go.

7 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

It is such a cliché...racists trying to deny racism by saying its not a race it's a religion. How ill informed can you get .... The concept of race is fallacious in the first place and discrimination is just a sickness looking for somewhere to go.

Sounds like you've been reading too many social science hypotheses, written by those who are totally confused within themselves, for you to come up with this very accusatory, incorrect and misinformed comment. Must I assume that you are a passenger airbag? 

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Sounds like you've been reading too many social science hypotheses, written by those who are totally confused within themselves, for you to come up with this very accusatory, incorrect and misinformed comment. Must I assume that you are a passenger airbag? 

All that shows is how little you yourself understand. Anyone with the slightest understanding of the issues would never embarrass themselves with a post like the one you've just done.

 

I'd start by finding out what a "science hypothesis" is.

Edited October 6, 20196 yr by Airbagwill

5 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

All that shows is how little you yourself understand. Anyone with the slightest understanding of the issues would never embarrass themselves with a post like the one you've just done

I don't feel at all embarrassed. Anyone with such great understanding of these "issues", such as your own knowledgeable self, should be able to justify what they really mean. References welcome. 

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I don't feel at all embarrassed. Anyone with such great understanding of these "issues", such as your own knowledgeable self, should be able to justify what they really mean. References welcome. 

It's quite obvious you don't feel embarrassed...that's what I said!

 

Furthermore you don't even seem to  recognise the hallmark of someone without an argument - asking for citations in ridiculous circumstances - you're digging a hole here.

Edited October 6, 20196 yr by Airbagwill

2 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

It's quite obvious you don't feel embarrassed...that's what I said!

 

Furthermore you don't even seem to  recognise the hallmark of someone without an argument - asking for citations in ridiculous circumstances - you're digging a hole here.

I asked for justification, which you have not provided. You do not have any argument, only false accusations.

 

Passenger airbag it is then!

Best of 5 it is then

38 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I asked for justification, which you have not provided. You do not have any argument, only false accusations.

 

Passenger airbag it is then!

Yes... OK you win...I can't argue with stupid, they drag me down to their level and they're so much better at it than me.

Edited October 6, 20196 yr by Airbagwill

59 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Sounds like you've been reading too many social science hypotheses, written by those who are totally confused within themselves, for you to come up with this very accusatory, incorrect and misinformed comment. Must I assume that you are a passenger airbag? 

The concept of race is fallacious in the first place 

 

Actually, technically hes right. However in saying Race is not a religion you are also correct.. If I may suggest... discrimination is practised by absolutely everyone globally all the time, so the use of these words are actually meaningless as insults other than the importance the modern world lends them to control a narrative and most often used as a trigger to elicit a reaction. 

 

It especially annoys me when racists are accused of 'discrimination.' The ability to discriminate is a precious facility; by judging all members of one 'race' to be the same, the racist precisely shows himself incapable of discrimination[Christopher Hitchens]

 

 

1 hour ago, englishoak said:

The concept of race is fallacious in the first place 

 

Actually, technically hes right. However in saying Race is not a religion you are also correct.. If I may suggest... discrimination is practised by absolutely everyone globally all the time, so the use of these words are actually meaningless as insults other than the importance the modern world lends them to control a narrative and most often used as a trigger to elicit a reaction. 

 

It especially annoys me when racists are accused of 'discrimination.' The ability to discriminate is a precious facility; by judging all members of one 'race' to be the same, the racist precisely shows himself incapable of discrimination[Christopher Hitchens]

 

 

You're earning your shilling today!

On 10/4/2019 at 1:32 AM, transam said:

 

You think I am the only one who has read your Muslim protection stuff over the years..????

Every time Islamic terrorist blow folk up, YOU are HERE, defending Muslims, spouting the terrorists are not Muslims...You also have said "My Muslim friends told you so".... ????

 

So according to what passes for logic in your mind:-

 

Some terrorists are Muslims therefore all Muslims are terrorists.

 

Because I point out that the overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide condemn the terrorists as unIslamic that means I support the terrorists.

 

Because I have Muslim friends, I must support the terrorists.

 

Sad, you need to get out more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 

So according to what passes for logic in your mind:-

 

Some terrorists are Muslims therefore all Muslims are terrorists.

 

Because I point out that the overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide condemn the terrorists as unIslamic that means I support the terrorists.

 

Because I have Muslim friends, I must support the terrorists.

 

Sad, you need to get out more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Twisting my words again ........Very sad indeed.....But expected...????

 

1 minute ago, transam said:

Twisting my words again ........Very sad indeed.....But expected...????

 

 So what did you mean by "You think I am the only one who has read your Muslim protection stuff over the years..

Every time Islamic terrorist blow folk up, YOU are HERE, defending Muslims, spouting the terrorists are not Muslims...You also have said "My Muslim friends told you so"....?"

2 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Yes... OK you win...I can't argue with stupid, they drag me down to their level and they're so much better at it than me.

Still no argument, just more insults escaping like hot air from a bag.  

3 hours ago, englishoak said:

The concept of race is fallacious in the first place 

 

Actually, technically hes right. However in saying Race is not a religion you are also correct.. If I may suggest... discrimination is practised by absolutely everyone globally all the time, so the use of these words are actually meaningless as insults other than the importance the modern world lends them to control a narrative and most often used as a trigger to elicit a reaction. 

 

It especially annoys me when racists are accused of 'discrimination.' The ability to discriminate is a precious facility; by judging all members of one 'race' to be the same, the racist precisely shows himself incapable of discrimination[Christopher Hitchens]

 

 

Not in British law. If you abuse someone on the grounds that they are a Moslem, you will be charged with "racial abuse" and the offence will be logged as a race hate crime.

9 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Not in British law. If you abuse someone on the grounds that they are a Moslem, you will be charged with "racial abuse" and the offence will be logged as a race hate crime.

Wouldnt they  get charged under the *Religious hate crime act * rather than "Racial hate crime act" if they targeting someone based on their Religion ?

3 hours ago, englishoak said:

The concept of race is fallacious in the first place 

 

Actually, technically hes right. However in saying Race is not a religion you are also correct.. If I may suggest... discrimination is practised by absolutely everyone globally all the time, so the use of these words are actually meaningless as insults other than the importance the modern world lends them to control a narrative and most often used as a trigger to elicit a reaction. 

 

It especially annoys me when racists are accused of 'discrimination.' The ability to discriminate is a precious facility; by judging all members of one 'race' to be the same, the racist precisely shows himself incapable of discrimination[Christopher Hitchens]

 

 

The word fallacious spikes argument as soon as anyone uses it.

13 hours ago, sanemax said:

Wouldnt they  get charged under the *Religious hate crime act * rather than "Racial hate crime act" if they targeting someone based on their Religion ?

No. It's classified as race hate.