British MPs debate Trump ban, label him 'crazy,' a 'buffoon,' a 'wazzock'

[MrTee]

Hours later English police confirmed that he was right, that many areas are off limits even for police(unless they have prior permission from muslim elders in the community). The whole situation is outrageous.

There are no areas that are off limits for police, nor do they need anyone's permission.

It's unattributed nonsense from the usual right wing storytellers. Usually: "A policeman said"; ""Rob", who works for the Met Police", etc.

A Lancashire Police officer, who wished to remain anonymous, told MailOnline: 'There are Muslim areas of Preston that, if we wish to patrol, we have to contact local Muslim community leaders to get their permission'.

Lancashire Constabulary have subsequently stated that such a claim is without foundation.

Make a mental note:

When you see "Daily Express", "Daily Mail", "The Sun", etc., you can take it all with a very healthy pinch of salt.

A core part of the UK opposition to Trump comes from the supporters of the clown leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn, their newspaper of choice limp rag The Guardian.

Clearly out of touch with the modern world.

The Grauniad is more Lib Dem than Lefty Labour. none of their journalists support Corbyn..

Read Hansard's transcript of the debate and you'll see that all sides attacked the wazzock.

So much fail in one sentence.

Also, an anonymous policeman told the MailOnline.. yeah right of course its true!

[ResandePohm]

I must confess the the term "wazzock" is new to me ...

Nor me,it's probably Cambridge,Oxford or Eton Gibberish from the Tories, or sounds like the sort of word that Pillock Boris Johnson would use !

wazzock

Noun. An idiot, imbecile. Also 'wassock'.

And can be used as an adjective to describe most TVF posters

wazzocked Adj. Totally intoxicated by alcohol or drugs.

[MAJIC]

I must confess the the term "wazzock" is new to me ...

Nor me,it's probably Cambridge,Oxford or Eton Gibberish from the Tories, or sounds like the sort of word that Pillock Boris Johnson would use !

wazzock

Noun. An idiot, imbecile. Also 'wassock'.

And can be used as an adjective to describe most TVF posters

wazzocked Adj. Totally intoxicated by alcohol or drugs.

Yes I looked it up too,not a commonly used word though !

[SheungWan]

A core part of the UK opposition to Trump comes from the supporters of the clown leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn, their newspaper of choice limp rag The Guardian.

Clearly out of touch with the modern world.

The Grauniad is more Lib Dem than Lefty Labour. none of their journalists support Corbyn..

Read Hansard's transcript of the debate and you'll see that all sides attacked the wazzock.

So much fail in one sentence.

Also, an anonymous policeman told the MailOnline.. yeah right of course its true!

Talking of 'fail' it pays to read accurately what is said before throwing bricks. What I said was that the Guardian newspaper was the newspaper of choice of left-wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. And that stands. Oh, and just for people's information, the Guardian recommended in the 2015 UK General Election for readers to vote Labour with a caveat to vote Lib Dem only where the Lib Dems were the main opposition to the Conservative Party.

[MrTee]

A core part of the UK opposition to Trump comes from the supporters of the clown leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn, their newspaper of choice limp rag The Guardian.

Clearly out of touch with the modern world.

The Grauniad is more Lib Dem than Lefty Labour. none of their journalists support Corbyn..

Read Hansard's transcript of the debate and you'll see that all sides attacked the wazzock.

So much fail in one sentence.

Also, an anonymous policeman told the MailOnline.. yeah right of course its true!

Talking of 'fail' it pays to read accurately what is said before throwing bricks. What I said was that the Guardian newspaper was the newspaper of choice of left-wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. And that stands. Oh, and just for people's information, the Guardian recommended in the 2015 UK General Election for readers to vote Labour with a caveat to vote Lib Dem only where the Lib Dems were the main opposition to the Conservative Party.

You are still wrong Sunshine..

The Grauniad is seen as deeply entrenched in New Labour\Progress amongst Corbyn followers.. you know Tory-lite, the Bitterites.

I'm think you'll find that the majority of Corbyn supporters use social media for their new sources. As said : out of touch with the modern world.

Newspapers are so last century.

Read too much Torygraph old boy?

[arjunadawn]

This is another indication of canaries dying in coal mines. This is another indication, not unlike Sweden, of the burgeoning muslim populations, allied with islamophile dhimmis, steering politics already. It is not necessary to wait for the 'tipping point' demographers point to as the PNR (Point of No Return) for European cultures, much of the early warning signs are already on display. Crap like this feeds into the Organization of Islamic Conference efforts to internationalize a law banning islamic criticism. If this is what united the mythical moderate muslim majority, case closed! Its a fiction.

[MrTee]

Are you suggesting we all rally behind Trump to save the world from Muslims?

Do you understand the Petition to ban Trump was started before he made his ban all Muslims from entering the US?

It's not all about Muslims. I know that feed nicely into your agenda, but its not..

I think folk were against his misogynistic, disabled mocking, and racist rhetoric long before he made his ban all Muslims speech..

Wind it in.. yawnn

[lostboy]

This is another indication of canaries dying in coal mines. This is another indication, not unlike Sweden, of the burgeoning muslim populations, allied with islamophile dhimmis, steering politics already. It is not necessary to wait for the 'tipping point' demographers point to as the PNR (Point of No Return) for European cultures, much of the early warning signs are already on display. Crap like this feeds into the Organization of Islamic Conference efforts to internationalize a law banning islamic criticism. If this is what united the mythical moderate muslim majority, case closed! Its a fiction.

Your post sounds very scientific and statistically valid. A demographer analyses population variation and trends. They work in government agencies, social service providers, health care providers, educational institutions and non profit organisations. They are skilled in advanced statistical analysis. So these scientifically objective, data driven tabulators are telling you that there is a PNR. That really sounds impressive, a PNR and all. So who are these demographers. Your trust in their statistical calculations must be based on data and evidence but you forgot to provide links to credible, objective and comprehensive sources. Why is that? Perhaps because this entire post is a fantasy based on ideologically driven motivations, specifically related to the anti-muslim hysteria. Are your sources those disgustingly bigoted websites, you know the Geller one, the Gates of Vienna and similar that provide data on the islamification of nations. I have seen these posted on other threads. Demographers identifying a PNR for European culture. A pseudo-scientific assertion with no real basis in reality.

What an extraordinary leap from a debate that is legally required under UK laws in response to a thresh-hold being reached in signatures on a petition to the Death of Europe. From a petition started by a lady in Scotland who was sick of Trump's BS. Trump and his corporate cronies have committed environmental carnage in Scotland with their commercial activities, suborning individuals and institutions with money, power and influence to push his lifestyle 'brand'. This lady and nearly three quarters of a million Brits sticking up their middle finger to Trump. And you see the Death of Europe.

I also looked at the Conventions and Charter of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/page/?p_id=53&p_ref=27&lan=en Apparently you are somewhat behind the times as it is no longer called the Organisation of Islamic Conference. This organisation that has existed since 1969 does not mention anywhere in its framework documents the desire to promote a law banning the criticism of Islam. It is essentially focussed on trade and development issues like the EEC, APEC, TPP, ASEAN etc.

European culture as manifested by reactionary, old, white men is an artifice of the Right. It is old men reminiscing about the 'good old days' and imagining Rockwellian fantasy scenarios. A nations culture is a construct of both its history and the expression of its citizens. A culture that does not respect the values of all its citizens is not worthy of retention.

[simple1]

@lostboy: I appreciate your contributions to TV, but you should know OIC has previously unsuccessfully lobbied to legislate blasphemy laws though organisations such as the UN. On the other side on the coin OIC does condemn Islamic extremism and other activities on the international stage in an endeavour to reduce conflict.

Edited January 21, 2016 by simple1

[lostboy]

@lostboy: I appreciate your contributions to TV, but you should know OIC has previously unsuccessfully lobbied to legislate blasphemy laws though organisations such as the UN. On the other side on the coin OIC does condemn Islamic extremism and other activities on the international stage in an endeavour to reduce conflict.

Thank you for the information simple1. I did not know that. I am not very familiar with OIC which I why I read their framework documents. If they have lobbied for such blasphemy laws, then I do of course withdraw my comment against arjunadawn. I think the concept of blasphemy, punishments for apostasy and other repressive and punitive actions are inhuman and inhumane. I am not a supporter of religiosity but it would be foolish to ignore that many people are and the same freedoms of expression and critical assessment must apply in their context.

[arjunadawn]

This is another indication of canaries dying in coal mines. This is another indication, not unlike Sweden, of the burgeoning muslim populations, allied with islamophile dhimmis, steering politics already. It is not necessary to wait for the 'tipping point' demographers point to as the PNR (Point of No Return) for European cultures, much of the early warning signs are already on display. Crap like this feeds into the Organization of Islamic Conference efforts to internationalize a law banning islamic criticism. If this is what united the mythical moderate muslim majority, case closed! Its a fiction.

Your post sounds very scientific and statistically valid. A demographer analyses population variation and trends. They work in government agencies, social service providers, health care providers, educational institutions and non profit organisations. They are skilled in advanced statistical analysis. So these scientifically objective, data driven tabulators are telling you that there is a PNR. That really sounds impressive, a PNR and all. So who are these demographers. Your trust in their statistical calculations must be based on data and evidence but you forgot to provide links to credible, objective and comprehensive sources. Why is that? Perhaps because this entire post is a fantasy based on ideologically driven motivations, specifically related to the anti-muslim hysteria. Are your sources those disgustingly bigoted websites, you know the Geller one, the Gates of Vienna and similar that provide data on the islamification of nations. I have seen these posted on other threads. Demographers identifying a PNR for European culture. A pseudo-scientific assertion with no real basis in reality.

What an extraordinary leap from a debate that is legally required under UK laws in response to a thresh-hold being reached in signatures on a petition to the Death of Europe. From a petition started by a lady in Scotland who was sick of Trump's BS. Trump and his corporate cronies have committed environmental carnage in Scotland with their commercial activities, suborning individuals and institutions with money, power and influence to push his lifestyle 'brand'. This lady and nearly three quarters of a million Brits sticking up their middle finger to Trump. And you see the Death of Europe.

I also looked at the Conventions and Charter of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/page/?p_id=53&p_ref=27&lan=en Apparently you are somewhat behind the times as it is no longer called the Organisation of Islamic Conference. This organisation that has existed since 1969 does not mention anywhere in its framework documents the desire to promote a law banning the criticism of Islam. It is essentially focussed on trade and development issues like the EEC, APEC, TPP, ASEAN etc.

European culture as manifested by reactionary, old, white men is an artifice of the Right. It is old men reminiscing about the 'good old days' and imagining Rockwellian fantasy scenarios. A nations culture is a construct of both its history and the expression of its citizens. A culture that does not respect the values of all its citizens is not worthy of retention.

If my post "sounds" scientific to anyone they clearly need to go back to school. No hard facts, no measurements, no studies in my post, just a common sense observation that massive insurgent populations of any source will inexorably change the nature of the culture that hosts them. If the absence of any numbers, data, polls, or trials suggests to any my post "sounds" "statistically valid" they should recuse themselves from further commentary.

No science here, just rational faculty of observation; cause and effect (and the patently obvious fact that great numbers of this said population have views antithetical to the host nation). Yet the studies supporting my post are present everywhere now. Overwhelmingly polls now suggest the majority of muslims in London (if not UK) support sharia law. This is why the outrage at Trump is so telling- because of it contrasting the silence regarding so much other islamic mayhem in the world. Had the MPs been so outraged at the constant push for islamic anti blasphemy laws then this Trump absurdity would not have such contrast.

One could have argued against my post without concluding with an indictment/pejorative/ridicule of "European culture;" but doing so proves a point I often make; there is an insurgent culture with enough numbers to now manipulate European politics/perceptions, aided and abetted by Leftist/Progressive self loathing. It is not necessary to impugn "European culture" to argue against my point above but as usual with leftists the mouth (fingers) betray their mercenary motives every time. "...reactionary, old, white men... artifice of the right..." ad naseum. Its hardly a wonder the Left and Islamic Jihad are mutually sympathetic; both thrive on hatred and exclusion.

The above post is also incorrect. Anti blasphemy laws are not this OP and I will be glad to update elsewhere. But the fact is in 2011 OIC withdrew their resolution pushing it, because they would then be defeated. It was re pushed the following year, and variously since. In fact, OIC is the greatest sponsor of this bill to silence critique of islamic jihad. This fact serves again to contrast the OP Trump point- muslims and others rallied immediately and overwhelmingly to condemn Trump but remain silent with regard to opposing anti blasphemy laws -Read Free Speech. UK MPs are already effectively enabling views that are anathema to a free people.

(I wish all the posts that attacked me were as deficient).

http://www.citizentimes.eu/2013/06/13/if-you-criticize-islam-you-will-suffer-consequences/

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/06/human-rights-group-warns-against-global-blasphemy-law

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/09/19/comment-calls-for-international-blasphemy-law-must-be-r

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea

http://www.rferl.org/content/un-hears-calls-for-blasphemy-ban/24721995.html

[simple1]

This is another indication of canaries dying in coal mines. This is another indication, not unlike Sweden, of the burgeoning muslim populations, allied with islamophile dhimmis, steering politics already. It is not necessary to wait for the 'tipping point' demographers point to as the PNR (Point of No Return) for European cultures, much of the early warning signs are already on display. Crap like this feeds into the Organization of Islamic Conference efforts to internationalize a law banning islamic criticism. If this is what united the mythical moderate muslim majority, case closed! Its a fiction.

Your post sounds very scientific and statistically valid. A demographer analyses population variation and trends. They work in government agencies, social service providers, health care providers, educational institutions and non profit organisations. They are skilled in advanced statistical analysis. So these scientifically objective, data driven tabulators are telling you that there is a PNR. That really sounds impressive, a PNR and all. So who are these demographers. Your trust in their statistical calculations must be based on data and evidence but you forgot to provide links to credible, objective and comprehensive sources. Why is that? Perhaps because this entire post is a fantasy based on ideologically driven motivations, specifically related to the anti-muslim hysteria. Are your sources those disgustingly bigoted websites, you know the Geller one, the Gates of Vienna and similar that provide data on the islamification of nations. I have seen these posted on other threads. Demographers identifying a PNR for European culture. A pseudo-scientific assertion with no real basis in reality.

What an extraordinary leap from a debate that is legally required under UK laws in response to a thresh-hold being reached in signatures on a petition to the Death of Europe. From a petition started by a lady in Scotland who was sick of Trump's BS. Trump and his corporate cronies have committed environmental carnage in Scotland with their commercial activities, suborning individuals and institutions with money, power and influence to push his lifestyle 'brand'. This lady and nearly three quarters of a million Brits sticking up their middle finger to Trump. And you see the Death of Europe.

I also looked at the Conventions and Charter of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/page/?p_id=53&p_ref=27&lan=en Apparently you are somewhat behind the times as it is no longer called the Organisation of Islamic Conference. This organisation that has existed since 1969 does not mention anywhere in its framework documents the desire to promote a law banning the criticism of Islam. It is essentially focussed on trade and development issues like the EEC, APEC, TPP, ASEAN etc.

European culture as manifested by reactionary, old, white men is an artifice of the Right. It is old men reminiscing about the 'good old days' and imagining Rockwellian fantasy scenarios. A nations culture is a construct of both its history and the expression of its citizens. A culture that does not respect the values of all its citizens is not worthy of retention.

If my post "sounds" scientific to anyone they clearly need to go back to school. No hard facts, no measurements, no studies in my post, just a common sense observation that massive insurgent populations of any source will inexorably change the nature of the culture that hosts them. If the absence of any numbers, data, polls, or trials suggests to any my post "sounds" "statistically valid" they should recuse themselves from further commentary.

No science here, just rational faculty of observation; cause and effect (and the patently obvious fact that great numbers of this said population have views antithetical to the host nation). Yet the studies supporting my post are present everywhere now. Overwhelmingly polls now suggest the majority of muslims in London (if not UK) support sharia law. This is why the outrage at Trump is so telling- because of it contrasting the silence regarding so much other islamic mayhem in the world. Had the MPs been so outraged at the constant push for islamic anti blasphemy laws then this Trump absurdity would not have such contrast.

One could have argued against my post without concluding with an indictment/pejorative/ridicule of "European culture;" but doing so proves a point I often make; there is an insurgent culture with enough numbers to now manipulate European politics/perceptions, aided and abetted by Leftist/Progressive self loathing. It is not necessary to impugn "European culture" to argue against my point above but as usual with leftists the mouth (fingers) betray their mercenary motives every time. "...reactionary, old, white men... artifice of the right..." ad naseum. Its hardly a wonder the Left and Islamic Jihad are mutually sympathetic; both thrive on hatred and exclusion.

The above post is also incorrect. Anti blasphemy laws are not this OP and I will be glad to update elsewhere. But the fact is in 2011 OIC withdrew their resolution pushing it, because they would then be defeated. It was re pushed the following year, and variously since. In fact, OIC is the greatest sponsor of this bill to silence critique of islamic jihad. This fact serves again to contrast the OP Trump point- muslims and others rallied immediately and overwhelmingly to condemn Trump but remain silent with regard to opposing anti blasphemy laws -Read Free Speech. UK MPs are already effectively enabling views that are anathema to a free people.

(I wish all the posts that attacked me were as deficient).

http://www.citizentimes.eu/2013/06/13/if-you-criticize-islam-you-will-suffer-consequences/

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/06/human-rights-group-warns-against-global-blasphemy-law

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/09/19/comment-calls-for-international-blasphemy-law-must-be-r

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea

http://www.rferl.org/content/un-hears-calls-for-blasphemy-ban/24721995.html

Well good to see you're providing some links to 'left' organisations (you usually call them out as Dhimmi) condemning OIC's activities on blasphemy laws. OIC has led attempts to counter anti-Islam sentiments which they view as contributing to Islamophobia, as do some Western governments. From a Western government POV one can spin this activity as 'Dhimmi' or a pragmatic response to reduce tensions within society.

UK government legislation does permit Freedom of Expression / Speech, but not activity which "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred."

As you temporarily live in the UK you may wish to get across the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 which gives lots of latitude…

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult (‘insult’ was later removed due to lobbying by Church representatives) or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.

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

"

[arjunadawn]

If my post "sounds" scientific to anyone they clearly need to go back to school. No hard facts, no measurements, no studies in my post, just a common sense observation that massive insurgent populations of any source will inexorably change the nature of the culture that hosts them. If the absence of any numbers, data, polls, or trials suggests to any my post "sounds" "statistically valid" they should recuse themselves from further commentary.

No science here, just rational faculty of observation; cause and effect (and the patently obvious fact that great numbers of this said population have views antithetical to the host nation). Yet the studies supporting my post are present everywhere now. Overwhelmingly polls now suggest the majority of muslims in London (if not UK) support sharia law. This is why the outrage at Trump is so telling- because of it contrasting the silence regarding so much other islamic mayhem in the world. Had the MPs been so outraged at the constant push for islamic anti blasphemy laws then this Trump absurdity would not have such contrast.

One could have argued against my post without concluding with an indictment/pejorative/ridicule of "European culture;" but doing so proves a point I often make; there is an insurgent culture with enough numbers to now manipulate European politics/perceptions, aided and abetted by Leftist/Progressive self loathing. It is not necessary to impugn "European culture" to argue against my point above but as usual with leftists the mouth (fingers) betray their mercenary motives every time. "...reactionary, old, white men... artifice of the right..." ad naseum. Its hardly a wonder the Left and Islamic Jihad are mutually sympathetic; both thrive on hatred and exclusion.

The above post is also incorrect. Anti blasphemy laws are not this OP and I will be glad to update elsewhere. But the fact is in 2011 OIC withdrew their resolution pushing it, because they would then be defeated. It was re pushed the following year, and variously since. In fact, OIC is the greatest sponsor of this bill to silence critique of islamic jihad. This fact serves again to contrast the OP Trump point- muslims and others rallied immediately and overwhelmingly to condemn Trump but remain silent with regard to opposing anti blasphemy laws -Read Free Speech. UK MPs are already effectively enabling views that are anathema to a free people.

(I wish all the posts that attacked me were as deficient).

http://www.citizentimes.eu/2013/06/13/if-you-criticize-islam-you-will-suffer-consequences/

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/06/human-rights-group-warns-against-global-blasphemy-law

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/09/19/comment-calls-for-international-blasphemy-law-must-be-r

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea

http://www.rferl.org/content/un-hears-calls-for-blasphemy-ban/24721995.html

Well good to see you're providing some links to 'left' organisations (you usually call them out as Dhimmi) condemning OIC's activities on blasphemy laws. OIC has led attempts to counter anti-Islam sentiments which they view as contributing to Islamophobia, as do some Western governments. From a Western government POV one can spin this activity as 'Dhimmi' or a pragmatic response to reduce tensions within society.

UK government legislation does permit Freedom of Expression / Speech, but not activity which "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred."

As you temporarily live in the UK you may wish to get across the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 which gives lots of latitude…

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult (‘insult’ was later removed due to lobbying by Church representatives) or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.

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

(Not all dhimmis are leftist; not all leftists are dhimmis; not all MPs are leftists, not all MPs are dhimmis- but many are). You cite a law that is really meaningless as it does not pertain in substantial manner to a vast segment of the population. Any prohibition on hate speech that does not include the single greatest source of hate speech on earth is not a just law, it becomes mechanism to silence critique when not equally applied to all- it is not. There is only one single source of hate speech that daily inculcates derision and disdain for others in the minds and voices of millions. UK MPs continue to cower to this growing constituency.

MPs would ban Trump but turn a blind eye for years to radical threats in British soil? Please... There are now unlimited... unlimited examples of the UK having real and present dangers directly targeting its own citizens and way of life. This rubbish is distraction.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

[Publicus]

Trump is everything the British Parliament has described him as. America is fully deserving of him as their new president.

140,000,000 million will vote in the general election in November.

Tens of millions will vote during the primary/caucus processes in most of the states during the next five months.

No one has cast a vote yet however.

[SheungWan]

A core part of the UK opposition to Trump comes from the supporters of the clown leader of the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn, their newspaper of choice limp rag The Guardian.

Clearly out of touch with the modern world.

The Grauniad is more Lib Dem than Lefty Labour. none of their journalists support Corbyn..

Read Hansard's transcript of the debate and you'll see that all sides attacked the wazzock.

So much fail in one sentence.

Also, an anonymous policeman told the MailOnline.. yeah right of course its true!

Talking of 'fail' it pays to read accurately what is said before throwing bricks. What I said was that the Guardian newspaper was the newspaper of choice of left-wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. And that stands. Oh, and just for people's information, the Guardian recommended in the 2015 UK General Election for readers to vote Labour with a caveat to vote Lib Dem only where the Lib Dems were the main opposition to the Conservative Party.

You are still wrong Sunshine..

The Grauniad is seen as deeply entrenched in New Labour\Progress amongst Corbyn followers.. you know Tory-lite, the Bitterites.

I'm think you'll find that the majority of Corbyn supporters use social media for their new sources. As said : out of touch with the modern world.

Newspapers are so last century.

Read too much Torygraph old boy?

As a former trade union member I know what the guys read. You can speculate what you will. BTW, The Guardian is also popular due to its open free digital access. Not for nothing is The Guardian known as the house journal of the public sector unions. Even the Marxist organisation members (SWP etc...) read the paper as their daily of choice. From this crew one can find the cheerleaders for the Corbynistas leading the charge against Trump (and anybody they can label Tory...). Probably the only bunch on the left too illiterate to read the Guardian but nevertheless would like to have a go at US politicians would be the Class War group whose main claim to fame was physically attacking the Hackney cafe which was selling expensive cereals. Whatever the Guardian's equivocating editorial position it is still the 'left' paper notwithstanding the Independent's efforts. In past decades both the Morning Star (Communist Party) and the Workers Press (WRP) have made efforts to replace the Guardian as the daily paper of choice for the radical left but lamentably failed. The Corbynistas are resolutely old fashioned. Even dear old Jeremy hails from an Orthodox Trotskyist position (no, don't ask...) About as old school as you can get. All reading the Guardian every day. And all out of touch with the modern world. Not to mention getting all excited about banning Donald Trump.

[simple1]

If my post "sounds" scientific to anyone they clearly need to go back to school. No hard facts, no measurements, no studies in my post, just a common sense observation that massive insurgent populations of any source will inexorably change the nature of the culture that hosts them. If the absence of any numbers, data, polls, or trials suggests to any my post "sounds" "statistically valid" they should recuse themselves from further commentary.

No science here, just rational faculty of observation; cause and effect (and the patently obvious fact that great numbers of this said population have views antithetical to the host nation). Yet the studies supporting my post are present everywhere now. Overwhelmingly polls now suggest the majority of muslims in London (if not UK) support sharia law. This is why the outrage at Trump is so telling- because of it contrasting the silence regarding so much other islamic mayhem in the world. Had the MPs been so outraged at the constant push for islamic anti blasphemy laws then this Trump absurdity would not have such contrast.

One could have argued against my post without concluding with an indictment/pejorative/ridicule of "European culture;" but doing so proves a point I often make; there is an insurgent culture with enough numbers to now manipulate European politics/perceptions, aided and abetted by Leftist/Progressive self loathing. It is not necessary to impugn "European culture" to argue against my point above but as usual with leftists the mouth (fingers) betray their mercenary motives every time. "...reactionary, old, white men... artifice of the right..." ad naseum. Its hardly a wonder the Left and Islamic Jihad are mutually sympathetic; both thrive on hatred and exclusion.

The above post is also incorrect. Anti blasphemy laws are not this OP and I will be glad to update elsewhere. But the fact is in 2011 OIC withdrew their resolution pushing it, because they would then be defeated. It was re pushed the following year, and variously since. In fact, OIC is the greatest sponsor of this bill to silence critique of islamic jihad. This fact serves again to contrast the OP Trump point- muslims and others rallied immediately and overwhelmingly to condemn Trump but remain silent with regard to opposing anti blasphemy laws -Read Free Speech. UK MPs are already effectively enabling views that are anathema to a free people.

(I wish all the posts that attacked me were as deficient).

http://www.citizentimes.eu/2013/06/13/if-you-criticize-islam-you-will-suffer-consequences/

http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2015/06/human-rights-group-warns-against-global-blasphemy-law

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/09/19/comment-calls-for-international-blasphemy-law-must-be-r

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea

http://www.rferl.org/content/un-hears-calls-for-blasphemy-ban/24721995.html

Well good to see you're providing some links to 'left' organisations (you usually call them out as Dhimmi) condemning OIC's activities on blasphemy laws. OIC has led attempts to counter anti-Islam sentiments which they view as contributing to Islamophobia, as do some Western governments. From a Western government POV one can spin this activity as 'Dhimmi' or a pragmatic response to reduce tensions within society.

UK government legislation does permit Freedom of Expression / Speech, but not activity which "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred."

As you temporarily live in the UK you may wish to get across the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 which gives lots of latitude…

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult (‘insult’ was later removed due to lobbying by Church representatives) or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.

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

(Not all dhimmis are leftist; not all leftists are dhimmis; not all MPs are leftists, not all MPs are dhimmis- but many are). You cite a law that is really meaningless as it does not pertain in substantial manner to a vast segment of the population. Any prohibition on hate speech that does not include the single greatest source of hate speech on earth is not a just law, it becomes mechanism to silence critique when not equally applied to all- it is not. There is only one single source of hate speech that daily inculcates derision and disdain for others in the minds and voices of millions. UK MPs continue to cower to this growing constituency.

MPs would ban Trump but turn a blind eye for years to radical threats in British soil? Please... There are now unlimited... unlimited examples of the UK having real and present dangers directly targeting its own citizens and way of life. This rubbish is distraction.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/606092/Islamist-Extremist-Islamic-State-ISIS-MI5-Britain-Andrew-Parker-Security-David-Cameron

The petition to ban Trump had to be debated as legislated by HMG, in reality a non sequitur from the beginning.

So far as security threats being taken seriously, MPs cowering etc etc you really should educate yourself on the relevant Acts of Parliament & proposed further tightening of legislation to enable security agencies.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[MrTee]

Clearly out of touch with the modern world.

The Grauniad is more Lib Dem than Lefty Labour. none of their journalists support Corbyn..

Read Hansard's transcript of the debate and you'll see that all sides attacked the wazzock.

So much fail in one sentence.

Also, an anonymous policeman told the MailOnline.. yeah right of course its true!

Talking of 'fail' it pays to read accurately what is said before throwing bricks. What I said was that the Guardian newspaper was the newspaper of choice of left-wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. And that stands. Oh, and just for people's information, the Guardian recommended in the 2015 UK General Election for readers to vote Labour with a caveat to vote Lib Dem only where the Lib Dems were the main opposition to the Conservative Party.

You are still wrong Sunshine..

The Grauniad is seen as deeply entrenched in New Labour\Progress amongst Corbyn followers.. you know Tory-lite, the Bitterites.

I'm think you'll find that the majority of Corbyn supporters use social media for their new sources. As said : out of touch with the modern world.

Newspapers are so last century.

Read too much Torygraph old boy?

As a former trade union member I know what the guys read. You can speculate what you will. BTW, The Guardian is also popular due to its open free digital access. Not for nothing is The Guardian known as the house journal of the public sector unions. Even the Marxist organisation members (SWP etc...) read the paper as their daily of choice. From this crew one can find the cheerleaders for the Corbynistas leading the charge against Trump (and anybody they can label Tory...). Probably the only bunch on the left too illiterate to read the Guardian but nevertheless would like to have a go at US politicians would be the Class War group whose main claim to fame was physically attacking the Hackney cafe which was selling expensive cereals. Whatever the Guardian's equivocating editorial position it is still the 'left' paper notwithstanding the Independent's efforts. In past decades both the Morning Star (Communist Party) and the Workers Press (WRP) have made efforts to replace the Guardian as the daily paper of choice for the radical left but lamentably failed. The Corbynistas are resolutely old fashioned. Even dear old Jeremy hails from an Orthodox Trotskyist position (no, don't ask...) About as old school as you can get. All reading the Guardian every day. And all out of touch with the modern world. Not to mention getting all excited about banning Donald Trump.

As I said you appear way out of touch. Unions, SWP, Trots yadda yadda have f***all to do with British MPs debating banning Trump . The Petition to ban Trump is nothing to do with Corbyn or his supporters.

Far from speculating I was simply stating that the majority of Corbyn supporters do not buy newspapers, and are more inclined to get their news from Social Media and other modern media.

My assertion is supported by empirical evidence and my own experience.

Your bloviation appears to be pushing an agenda that has Jackshit to do with this topic..

I wish you well all the same.

Edited January 23, 2016 by MrTee