I see that, as ever, my words have been quoted out of context, twisted to mean something else or simply ignored.

The usual tactic by those who have no answer to what I have actually said.

What the result of walking around anywhere with a picture of Mohammed claiming he is a myth would be is irrelevant to the issue of freedom of speech.

If I were prevented from so doing, whether by violence or not, that would be a violation of my right to freedom of speech; and wrong.

Of course, like Anjem Choudray and others, I may also be arrested for inciting racial or religious hatred; but unless at the same time I also spouted the views of many here; I doubt it.

As for my home town; every weekend there are a bunch of Christians in the town centre preaching their faith; whilst around the corner are a bunch of Muslims doing the same. No problems between them at all; ever.

I believe the right to freedom of speech should apply to all; even those with whom I disagree or even strongly oppose.

Unlike many here, who from their posts believe that right should only extend to those with whom they agree.

BTW; Mohammed is a real, historical person. Whether you believe he is also the final prophet of God depends on your religion; not being a Muslim, I don't.

As usual you claim that your words are either, taken out of context, twisted or ignored.

Pot and kettle applies.

But lets dissect the above.

1. What the result of walking around anywhere with a picture of Mohammed claiming he is a myth would be is irrelevant to the issue of freedom of speech.

It is not irrelevant to the issue of free speech, it is the essence of free speech.

2. If I were prevented from so doing, whether by violence or not, that would be a violation of my right to freedom of speech; and wrong.

If you were prevented from doing so, that would be a violation, no doubt about it. But it is guaranteed that if you done so in a number of areas, you would be assaulted if not killed.

3. I believe the right to freedom of speech should apply to all; even those with whom I disagree or even strongly oppose.

See above. Try what was suggested and see what others think of your right to free speech.

4. Unlike many here, who from their posts believe that right should only extend to those with whom they agree.

I do not think that statement applies to anyone on here. But some on here will also agree that people who want to live in the UK but as a separate entity, have no right to be in the UK. Personally, I see nothing wrong with this. The UK has rules and laws, and if you do not want to abide by them, follow other laws and rules, go elsewhere where those laws and rules are the norm.

5. BTW; Mohammed is a real, historical person. Whether you believe he is also the final prophet of God depends on your religion; not being a Muslim, I don't.

As for Mohammed being a real, historical person, did you meet him ? So how do you know ? I am sure that there was 100's if not 1000's of Mohammed's around at that time. I am also positive that it was as popular then as it is in the UK today.

.

Our culture is being eroded on a daily basis and the term no go embraces a lot of rights and freedoms being removed.

The England I grew up in is fast disappearing.

Take this story from a Yorkshire newspaper.

BOSSES at Yorkshire Coast College have removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar so as not to cause offence to ethnic minorities or religious groups.

The Evening News was tipped off about the move by an outraged member of staff who described the college as "a joke" and Scarborough MP Robert Goodwill has slammed the initiative as "political correctness gone mad".

A college spokesman said the decision had been made in accordance with Ofsted guidelines and was aimed at increasing inclusion and diversity.

She said: "Every school and college, wherever located, is responsible for educating its learners who will live and work in a country which is diverse in terms of cultures, religions or beliefs, ethnicities and social backgrounds.

"All employees at Yorkshire Coast College are encouraged to closely follow guidelines set out by Ofsted for the promotion of equality and diversity.

http://www.thescarboroughnews.co.uk/news/local/college-in-scarborough-axes-christmas-comment-on-this-story-1-1430762

Then of course we have the rewriting or avoiding of history as demonstrated by this government document.

The National Curriculum for History and GCSE and AS/A2 specifications often touch on social, cultural, religious and ethnic fault lines within and beyond Britain.

Many teachers often avoided controversy in the classroom when focused on history. At the same time, there is widespread recognition that the way many past events are perceived and understood can stir emotions and controversy within and across communities.

This publication examines the various ways teachers can approach these controversial topics and offers effective practice for teaching them.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/RW100

Even mans best friend is not safe from the thought police.

A POLICE force has apologised over concerns that an advertisement featuring a German shepherd pup could be offensive to the Islamic community.

As part of a campaign to publicise its new non-emergency telephone number, Tayside Police used a picture of a black puppy, Rebel, on postcards to be distributed throughout the east coast region.

However, following the intervention of Mohammed Asif, a Dundee councillor who warned police the image would "not be welcomed" by some communities, the force described the publicity drive as an "oversight".

Mr Asif, a member of the Tayside Joint Police Board, raised the matter on Monday after claiming the potentially offensive nature of the postcards had been brought to his attention by members of the city's 3,000-strong Muslim community.

Traditionally, dogs have been seen as impure, and the Islamic legal tradition has developed several injunctions that warn Muslims against most contact with them.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/apology-on-the-cards-as-police-pup-picture-sparks-warning-over-offence-to-muslims-1-1078393

I see that, as ever, my words have been quoted out of context, twisted to mean something else or simply ignored.

The usual tactic by those who have no answer to what I have actually said.

What the result of walking around anywhere with a picture of Mohammed claiming he is a myth would be is irrelevant to the issue of freedom of speech.

If I were prevented from so doing, whether by violence or not, that would be a violation of my right to freedom of speech; and wrong.

Of course, like Anjem Choudray and others, I may also be arrested for inciting racial or religious hatred; but unless at the same time I also spouted the views of many here; I doubt it.

As for my home town; every weekend there are a bunch of Christians in the town centre preaching their faith; whilst around the corner are a bunch of Muslims doing the same. No problems between them at all; ever.

I believe the right to freedom of speech should apply to all; even those with whom I disagree or even strongly oppose.

Unlike many here, who from their posts believe that right should only extend to those with whom they agree.

BTW; Mohammed is a real, historical person. Whether you believe he is also the final prophet of God depends on your religion; not being a Muslim, I don't.

As usual you claim that your words are either, taken out of context, twisted or ignored.

Pot and kettle applies.

But lets dissect the above.

1. What the result of walking around anywhere with a picture of Mohammed claiming he is a myth would be is irrelevant to the issue of freedom of speech.

It is not irrelevant to the issue of free speech, it is the essence of free speech.

2. If I were prevented from so doing, whether by violence or not, that would be a violation of my right to freedom of speech; and wrong.

If you were prevented from doing so, that would be a violation, no doubt about it. But it is guaranteed that if you done so in a number of areas, you would be assaulted if not killed.

3. I believe the right to freedom of speech should apply to all; even those with whom I disagree or even strongly oppose.

See above. Try what was suggested and see what others think of your right to free speech.

4. Unlike many here, who from their posts believe that right should only extend to those with whom they agree.

I do not think that statement applies to anyone on here. But some on here will also agree that people who want to live in the UK but as a separate entity, have no right to be in the UK. Personally, I see nothing wrong with this. The UK has rules and laws, and if you do not want to abide by them, follow other laws and rules, go elsewhere where those laws and rules are the norm.

5. BTW; Mohammed is a real, historical person. Whether you believe he is also the final prophet of God depends on your religion; not being a Muslim, I don't.

As for Mohammed being a real, historical person, did you meet him ? So how do you know ? I am sure that there was 100's if not 1000's of Mohammed's around at that time. I am also positive that it was as popular then as it is in the UK today.

.

Channel 4 produced a documentary concerning the origins of Islam. At one point it covered the complete absence of Mohammad's name on any coinage contemporary to his life and for sixty years after. The implication being that the life of Mohammad may have been written post-hoc to serve the political ends of various warlords.

This is my sole post on this issue here, suffice to say the program was never shown on British television due to fears of violence from the usual suspects. We have no go Zones when it comes to freedom of speech too, sadly.

Channel 4 produced a documentary concerning the origins of Islam. At one point it covered the complete absence of Mohammad's name on any coinage contemporary to his life and for sixty years after. The implication being that the life of Mohammad may have been written post-hoc to serve the political ends of various warlords.

This is my sole post on this issue here, suffice to say the program was never shown on British television due to fears of violence from the usual suspects. We have no go Zones when it comes to freedom of speech too, sadly.

Except, of course, it WAS shown on British TV in August 2012!

Here's a review of it from the Telegraph.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

Channel 4 produced a documentary concerning the origins of Islam. At one point it covered the complete absence of Mohammad's name on any coinage contemporary to his life and for sixty years after. The implication being that the life of Mohammad may have been written post-hoc to serve the political ends of various warlords.

This is my sole post on this issue here, suffice to say the program was never shown on British television due to fears of violence from the usual suspects. We have no go Zones when it comes to freedom of speech too, sadly.

Except, of course, it WAS shown on British TV in August 2012!

Here's a review of it from the Telegraph.

My bad, it was the public screening at channel 4 headquarters which was cancelled after they received about 1200 complaints. We all know what happens to blasphemers who gather in one location, ask Charlie Hebdo.

A reply to a removed post has been removed.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

The link just goes back to page 1 of the thread.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

The link just goes back to page 1 of the thread.

That's odd.

Shows YouTube as the link, but you're right it takes you back to page 1.

Anyway, just look on Youtube for Paul Weston. He does make valid points.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

That link also takes me to the first page of this thread. Let's try it again, MJP.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

That link also takes me to the first page of this thread. Let's try it again, MJP.

Yup, that's the one.

Strong words there in his description of muhammad.

He got arrested by police last year for quoting Winston Churchill in public.

So much for free speech in the UK!

This from the BBC.

A candidate in the South East European elections has been arrested after making a speech quoting from a book by Winston Churchill about Islam.

Paul Weston, chairman of Liberty GB, was making the speech on the steps of Winchester Guildhall in Hampshire on Saturday after a passer-by complained.

He was detained after failing to comply with a request by police to move on under the powers of a dispersal order.

He was further arrested on suspicion of religious or racial harassment.

Mr Weston, 50, from Dorset, had been reading from Churchill's book The River War, written in 1899 while Churchill was a British army officer in Sudan.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-27186573

This from the BBC also . . .

Prince Charles says radicalisation of young people 'alarming'

The Prince of Wales has described the extent to which young people are becoming radicalised as "alarming" and one of the "greatest worries".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31199692

The Heir to the Throne must be arrested now!

Mr Weston, 50, from Dorset, had been reading from Churchill's book The River War, written in 1899 while Churchill was a British army officer in Sudan.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-27186573

"The River War is a history of the British imperial involvement in the Sudan, and the Mahdi War between the British forces, led by Lord Kitchener, and the Dervish forces, led by Khalifa Abdallahi ibn Muhammad, “The Mahdi”, heir to the self-proclaimed Mahdi Muhammad Ahmad who had embarked on a campaign to conquer Egypt, to drive out the non-Muslim infidels." LINK

But that's not possible in the late 1800's. These actions against "infidels" didn't start until Israel the West the USA created these bastards.

And a guy should be arrested for quoting Winston Churchill's book. After all, Churchill was an infidel.

Paul Weston is quite correct. Western politicians spouting this "religion of peace" nonsense will be the end of us . . .

www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1EV-oIPgoc

That link also takes me to the first page of this thread. Let's try it again, MJP.

Yup, that's the one.

Spot on with every point, UK needs more politicians speaking out like this, appeasement has not worked. I expect the apologists will call him a racist, bigoted Islamophobe who quotes the 'Holy' koran out of context and who ignores the millions of 'peaceful' Muslims who always come out in their millions against atrocities carried out in the name of the prophet

The UK needs to revert to a. secularism b. V-neck cardigans and Volvo's outside a CofE church on a Sunday, jam making and roof fixing.

The appeasement from Western leaders continues because it panders to the delusions of narcissists. Appeasement only encourages fascists, the cowards and traitors need shooting for their criminal betrayal of their Countries.

http://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2015/02/04/appeasement-as-narcissism-n1952849/page/full

Mr Weston was not arrested for reading from Churchill's book.

From the Hampshire and Isle of Wight police and crime commissioner: Response to the arrest of Paul Weston

It has been wrongly suggested that Mr Weston was arrested for reciting passages written by Winston Churchill. I understand he was not welcome outside the Winchester Guildhall, the Police were called and he was asked to move on. I also understand that he was not prepared to move on and was arrested for this reason.

Another example of people ignoring the facts and preferring the myth.

Were it not so dangerous, it would be amusing that his party is called 'Liberty UK' yet it's declared aim is to restrict the freedoms of those with whom they disagree!

The appeasement from Western leaders continues because it panders to the delusions of narcissists. Appeasement only encourages fascists, the cowards and traitors need shooting for their criminal betrayal of their Countries.

http://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2015/02/04/appeasement-as-narcissism-n1952849/page/full

The ramblings of an ultra conservative website in an attack on a Democrat president are hardly proof of anything except that websites politics.

Though I suspect that their hatred of Obama has more to do with his colour than his politics!

Though I suspect that their hatred of Obama has more to do with his colour than his politics!

That old canard. Obama is hated for his failed ideology and stupid policies, but the far left can't admit that.

Rubbish. His international policies, corporatism and warmongering are hardly different than the right wing facsists that he followed. A man who drops fire on brown children in Asia, but is villified as a socialist and a crypto-muslim marxist. What are we left with? Bigotry.

What are we left with? Bigotry.

That is what YOU are left with. I'm left with blatant lies to get Obamcare passed. Blocking the Keystone Pipeline, even though most American want it. Obama calling Bush “unpatriotic” for adding so much to the debt and promising to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Yet, the national debt is UP almost 8 trillion dollars since Obama became President. The IRS targeted Obama’s political enemies and soon he is going to allow Iran to enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons.... need I go on?

Mr Weston was not arrested for reading from Churchill's book.

From the Hampshire and Isle of Wight police and crime commissioner: Response to the arrest of Paul Weston

It has been wrongly suggested that Mr Weston was arrested for reciting passages written by Winston Churchill. I understand he was not welcome outside the Winchester Guildhall, the Police were called and he was asked to move on. I also understand that he was not prepared to move on and was arrested for this reason.Another example of people ignoring the facts and preferring the myth.

Were it not so dangerous, it would be amusing that his party is called 'Liberty UK' yet it's declared aim is to restrict the freedoms of those with whom they disagree!

Here you go again glossing over facts. Paul Weston was originally arrested based on the premise mentioned in your link, however at the Police station he was re-arrested under a racially aggravated offense of the public order act section 4, a much more serious charge. The whole sequence of events leading up to the arrest was filmed and he did not make any other remarks about Muslims except for quoting Churchill, hence it is difficult to conclude other than it being the Churchill quote which was deemed offensive. I note the police statement does not mention the rearrest. How convenient.

Tellingly, MEP Daniel Hannan who stood against Paul Weston was absolutely scathing about the political nature of Weston's arrest. Any objective observer would conclude the same except for those prepared to go that extra mile defending attempts to interfere with our democratic system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Weston_%28politician%29

He was making a speech on private land without the landowners permission.

If he had moved on when requested to do so, he would not have been arrested at all!

According to this Telegraph report, the police attempted to calmly move him on for 40 minutes before arresting him.

His motivation is obvious; get arrested and get his name in the papers.

Churchill said many things in his youth he may have regretted later; such as calling Gandhi a 'half naked fakir.'

Of course the police were on the spot to arrest him quickly while elsewhere in the UK Pakistani gang members who serial raped girls were still walking the streets.

He was in a public place! No doubt if there were 20 travellers caravans plod etc would be nowhere to be seen.

The police are quick to find some charges to stop someone quoting Churchill ignoring the basic right of free speech.

They ignored hook handed radical Muslim preacher Abu Hamza for years and in the end it took the USA to lock the evil man away for life.

Of course the police were on the spot to arrest him quickly while elsewhere in the UK Pakistani gang members who serial raped girls were still walking the streets.

He was in a public place! No doubt if there were 20 travellers caravans plod etc would be nowhere to be seen.

The police are quick to find some charges to stop someone quoting Churchill ignoring the basic right of free speech.

They ignored hook handed radical Muslim preacher Abu Hamza for years and in the end it took the USA to lock the evil man away for life.

How long have we had to put up with Anjem Choudary threatening to cut our heads off?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-hate-preacher-anjem-choudary-hopes-quit-britain-freedom-islamic-state-1473696

May his wish be granted.

I have taken the liberty of quoting from the above link.....

Britain's least popular Muslim Anjem Choudary has revealed he hopes to leave the country for good to live in the so-called 'Islamic State' of Isis.

Radical preacher Choudary who has hailed the killers of soldier Lee Rigby and Brit hostage Alan Henning is keen to renounce his UK citizenship and live in territory carved out by the rampaging terror group in Iraq and Syria.

But the 47-year-old trained lawyer has a problem: he is stuck in Britain because the Home Office confiscated his passport and now will not hand it back.

Can some one please explain why my taxes support this waste of space and allow him his liberty instead of locking him up?

Plod down in Winchester must be able to find something?

Maybe treason?

This from the BBC website

UK jihadists who travel to Iraq or Syria to fight could be tried for treason, Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond has said.

He added that such people had "sworn personal allegiance" to Islamic State (IS) and therefore could potentially have committed the offence.

The last UK prosecution for treason was in 1946, when William Joyce was hanged for Nazi propaganda broadcasts.

Committing the offence involves being disloyal to the Crown.

Mr Hammond revealed that UK jihadists could be tried for treason when he was asked a question in the House of Commons by Conservative backbencher Philip Hollobone.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29655099

Of course the police were on the spot to arrest him quickly while elsewhere in the UK Pakistani gang members who serial raped girls were still walking the streets.

He was in a public place! No doubt if there were 20 travellers caravans plod etc would be nowhere to be seen.

The police are quick to find some charges to stop someone quoting Churchill ignoring the basic right of free speech.

They ignored hook handed radical Muslim preacher Abu Hamza for years and in the end it took the USA to lock the evil man away for life.

How long have we had to put up with Anjem Choudary threatening to cut our heads off?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-hate-preacher-anjem-choudary-hopes-quit-britain-freedom-islamic-state-1473696

May his wish be granted.

Don't forget to take the family when you go Andy.

He was making a speech on private land without the landowners permission.

If he had moved on when requested to do so, he would not have been arrested at all!

According to this Telegraph report, the police attempted to calmly move him on for 40 minutes before arresting him.

His motivation is obvious; get arrested and get his name in the papers.

Churchill said many things in his youth he may have regretted later; such as calling Gandhi a 'half naked fakir.'

His motivation was no doubt to demonstrate the dual policing policy applied to Muslims and the rest. He succeeded. Charges were dropped, because to prosecute someone for quoting Churchill, which is what he was re-arrested for, would have been too much for even supine and cowed Britannia to stomach.

As I have said before the term no go embraces many different parts of UK life now.

When I go in to a supermarket in Norfolk and buy some chicken there is no way I tell if it is halal or not.

The reason being that most chicken in the UK is now halal for the benefit of the minority who eat it.

This from the Spectator.

The Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday have revealed that were all eating halal meat all the time, wherever we go as a consequence of big business making pragmatic decisions and not bothering to tell us about them. Chicken and lamb bought from your local

supermarket will most probably be halal-slaughtered but this is also true of the meals you order from those untermensch staples such as Dominos Pizza, Pizza Hut, Nandos and Subway. Not to mention Wembley Stadium. And the less obviously untermensch venues of Ascot, Goodwood and Epsom. It wouldnt surprise me if next week they discovered that the food at Buck

House and Glyndebourne was halal. In other words, whether we like it or not, we are conforming to Islamic strictures in the food we eat; we are subsuming ourselves to the wishes of a tiny minority of our population.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/6319003/i-refuse-to-buy-meat-from-supermarkets-until-they-ban-halal-slaughter/

On 5 March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales.

That allows me to say what I like about god or religion in public,without fear of prosecution.

I could drive a truck hoarding around Luton plastered with a cartoon showing Jesus on the cross with some witty remark underneath and no one would bat an eyelid.

Try that with a cartoon of Mohamed welcoming IS terrorists as they chop some more heads off for him and plod will have me inside in seconds if they can battle through the riots.

There we have it. No go Britain 2015