Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 8 hours ago, The_Dude said: I love that country. Aside from Roman history, English history is a hobby of mine. Sadly, the country is going to enter a downward spin. Great Britain will be a caliphate by 2050. Good thing they don’t got guns. Churchill would weep if he knew who the mayor of London was. Churchill admired much about Islam (so much so his family was worried he might convert - never seriously on the cards as he was pretty much an atheist by then). He was also very critical of elements of it. His view was nuanced. And he would be fine with the current mayor. Most British Muslims do not want a Caliphate (although there is a loudmouthed minority who do). Chances of this happening is just about nil (ie: about as likely as the US becoming an Islamic Caliphate). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 On 6/1/2018 at 4:03 AM, B-Man said: Tommy Robinson Drew Attention to ‘Grooming Gangs.’ Britain Has Persecuted Him. “RAPE GANGS” IS A MORE ACCURATE TERM: Read the whole thing. The British authorities have behaved contemptibly here. Their behavior is what one might expect from an occupation government under a foreign conqueror. Jeez. There was a whole slew of paedophile activities that have been exposed in the last decade or so. These included awful examples of childcare workers, entertainers, sports coaches, Catholic and Anglican priests, (a very small number of) Members of Parliament, and others in (and out of) the public eye. The grooming gangs of Muslim men are/were just one of these. The term grooming gangs is used not to lessen their awful crimes but to accurately label their methods - different child rapists have different methods of getting victims - most people in the UK are aware of what the grooming gangs are and how they operate (thanks to a series of in depth reporting from various news sources not called Tommy Robinson). Tommy Robinson was not the catalyst for the exposure of these. Various journalists (BBC, The Times and others) exposed different scumbags over the years and also the appalling failures of the authorities to properly investigate and prosecute these scum. What Tommy Robinson has done is target the Muslim grooming gangs specifically for his own agenda. He is well aware people are outraged over the child rape scandals and has used them to gather support. He is not some great journalistic giant pursuing the truth. There is plenty being reported. Interesting that the article you link has the Daily Mail being shown as being unfair to Tommy Robinson. The Daily Mail (like most of the UK's national press) is a right wing newspaper. So right wing that it was pro-fascist and pro-Hitler right up until it became obvious that war was coming in the summer of 39. Overall its views have not changed that much. In the UK the right to a fair trial is considered an important thing, along with the presumption of innocence. In order to achieve this in some ongoing trials there are limits to what the press can report so that a fair trial can be achieved. Once the legal proceedings are over then the press is free to report the trial and its outcome. Tommy Robinson was well aware of the restrictions of this case and ignored them. He knew what he was doing. In due course the trial (like others before) will conclude and those judged guilty will be locked up for a long time. And they and their crimes will be reported in the press. As has happened before. Repeatedly. Essentially the right to a fair trial is considered so fundamental that we have these temporary restrictions to ensure that. The historical failure of the authorities to stamp out the abuse at a far earlier stage is contemptible (and is not unique to Muslim paedophiles or to the UK). Sending Tommy Robinson to gaol for his actions is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 UK has different standards than North America for press coverage. Canada’s most recent hassle, 15 or so years ago, was the accused’s past charges and convictions, of a clearly similar theme, were deemed prejudicial to his current trial, the media was not allowed to publish them until the jury was sequestered. The headlines stating his past conduct led to a lot of tense discussion at the time. I recall having to try to calmly state that he was only on trial for the evidence on the current matter He was duly convicted on that matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Yeah. I imagine the current case is linked to other cases that have previously gone to trial or will do so in the future (the most common cause for the limits to reporting in these types of cases in the UK) - so there is plenty of potential for prejudicial information to be published otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) Just looked it up, kinda wished I didn’t.... Edited June 4, 2018 by row_33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 On 5/29/2018 at 11:18 PM, B-Man said: There are so many things going on over there, they need their own thread....................... Oh, how I wish I was kidding............ London cyclists too white, male and middle class, says capital's cycling chief in vow to tackle diversity 'problem' Will Norman promises action as figures show black, Asian and minority ethnic groups account for just 15 per cent of the city’s cycle trips https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cycling-london-uk-sadiq-khan-bikes-race-class-gender-a8367916.html I guess the authorities have got those acid attacks and immigrant rape gangs all covered, time to move on to the more important things If you take this article in isolation and without any background information it might appear nuts, however... There is a major concern in the UK about people's health. The British are becoming a nation of fatties. Lumps of lard. Bags of ballast. Ad infinitum. We also have an issue with a lot of cars on our overstretched roads. One way to tackle both these issues is to encourage people to cycle more. This will help them stay fit(ish) and healthy(ish). Plus it will reduce pollution and congestion. These are not bad aims. Generally this has been successful. (It has helped that we are producing a lot of top international cyclists at the moment). As the article indicates it has been very successful among white middle class men (who are in danger of the dreaded middle aged spread). This is a good thing. It will be a better thing if more people benefited from other groups. Which is all the article is on about. The idea of this having anything to do with anything else assumes this is a zero sum issue. It is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Thanks Brit, good posts.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 14 minutes ago, row_33 said: Just looked it up: the jury could not hear he was out on parole for rape convictions The local tabloid printed this in huge block letters when they were allowed to, everyone saw it that day. Yeah. Similar to what happens here. Previous convictions have a real difference to the severity of sentence here - not in the trial to decide guilt. It was right not to report. It was right he got convicted (and hopefully sent back to gaol for a very long time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Brit said: Churchill admired much about Islam (so much so his family was worried he might convert - never seriously on the cards as he was pretty much an atheist by then). He was also very critical of elements of it. His view was nuanced. And he would be fine with the current mayor. Most British Muslims do not want a Caliphate (although there is a loudmouthed minority who do). Chances of this happening is just about nil (ie: about as likely as the US becoming an Islamic Caliphate). I am curious why you have suddenly shown up on this message board, and only to post in the political forum. Are you a Bills fan? What brought you to this site specifically? You are welcome to present your views here, but it's kind of odd. Like, I couldn't imagine just popping on to say, a Burnley FC message board, to talk politics. Edited June 4, 2018 by OJABBA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, OJABBA said: I am curious why you have suddenly shown up on this message board, and only to post in the political forum. Are you a Bills fan? What brought you to this site specifically? You are welcome to present your views here, but it's kind of odd. I was around earlier (ie: years ago) with a different poster name and email address. Forgot my login and had to re-register. Lurk a lot on the forums, used to visit the old Bills chatroom on game days (I miss that). Unfortunately there is little I can add to the Bills forums as I do not get to see the Bills very often (although I did go and see the London game, of course. Just another emotional scar added to the many already suffered). About all I could add would be fluff (Go bills! and all that) - hard to be well informed this far away from the action - it is why I come to the site so I can be as well informed as I can be. Of course, I am better informed than pretty much everyone else on the forum about the UK (living here for most my life and everything). So this is somewhere I can add some substance to a discussion (and try to shed light on reality with a wider appreciation of how things are this side of the pond). Edited June 4, 2018 by Brit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Just now, Brit said: I was around earlier (ie: years ago) with a different poster name and email address. Forgot my login and had to re-register. Lurk a lot on the forums, used to visit the old Bills chatroom on game days (I miss that). Unfortunately there is little I can add to the Bills forums as I do not get to see the Bills very often (although I did go and see the London game, of course. Just another emotional scar added to the many already suffered). About all I could add would be fluff (Go bills! and all that) - hard to be well informed this far away from the action - it is why I come to the site so I can be as well informed as I can be. I see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 2 minutes ago, OJABBA said: I see... Ominous use of an ellipsis there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 26 minutes ago, Brit said: Yeah. Similar to what happens here. Previous convictions have a real difference to the severity of sentence here - not in the trial to decide guilt. It was right not to report. It was right he got convicted (and hopefully sent back to gaol for a very long time). He was sentenced to our highest penalty. Our highest penalty is 25 years before parole hearing, with basically zero chance of release for the worst. but having to go through the process and reminder is a burden that should be avoided. Each year brings up another parole hearing for something that is best to not give publicity to..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 3 hours ago, Brit said: Most British Muslims do not want a Caliphate (although there is a loudmouthed minority who do). Neither did most Muslims living in areas controlled by ISIS. But the loudmouth minority as you called them are what took over 1 hour ago, Brit said: Of course, I am better informed than pretty much everyone else on the forum about the UK Aww snap, I think you may have just triggered Tom ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Brit said: Jeez. There was a whole slew of paedophile activities that have been exposed in the last decade or so. These included awful examples of childcare workers, entertainers, sports coaches, Catholic and Anglican priests, (a very small number of) Members of Parliament, and others in (and out of) the public eye. The grooming gangs of Muslim men are/were just one of these. The term grooming gangs is used not to lessen their awful crimes but to accurately label their methods - different child rapists have different methods of getting victims - most people in the UK are aware of what the grooming gangs are and how they operate (thanks to a series of in depth reporting from various news sources not called Tommy Robinson). Tommy Robinson was not the catalyst for the exposure of these. Various journalists (BBC, The Times and others) exposed different scumbags over the years and also the appalling failures of the authorities to properly investigate and prosecute these scum. What Tommy Robinson has done is target the Muslim grooming gangs specifically for his own agenda. He is well aware people are outraged over the child rape scandals and has used them to gather support. He is not some great journalistic giant pursuing the truth. There is plenty being reported. Interesting that the article you link has the Daily Mail being shown as being unfair to Tommy Robinson. The Daily Mail (like most of the UK's national press) is a right wing newspaper. So right wing that it was pro-fascist and pro-Hitler right up until it became obvious that war was coming in the summer of 39. Overall its views have not changed that much. In the UK the right to a fair trial is considered an important thing, along with the presumption of innocence. In order to achieve this in some ongoing trials there are limits to what the press can report so that a fair trial can be achieved. Once the legal proceedings are over then the press is free to report the trial and its outcome. Tommy Robinson was well aware of the restrictions of this case and ignored them. He knew what he was doing. In due course the trial (like others before) will conclude and those judged guilty will be locked up for a long time. And they and their crimes will be reported in the press. As has happened before. Repeatedly. Essentially the right to a fair trial is considered so fundamental that we have these temporary restrictions to ensure that. The historical failure of the authorities to stamp out the abuse at a far earlier stage is contemptible (and is not unique to Muslim paedophiles or to the UK). Sending Tommy Robinson to gaol for his actions is not. Lol at the whole fair trial being important thing. Perhaps for some, but not all. Giant douche or not, an arrest, "trial" and sentencing within hours isn't right. And the ban on reporting about this guy is not the mark of a free society. Care to weigh in on the whole adverse/averse thing? Edited June 4, 2018 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Dude Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 3 hours ago, Brit said: Churchill admired much about Islam (so much so his family was worried he might convert - never seriously on the cards as he was pretty much an atheist by then). He was also very critical of elements of it. His view was nuanced. And he would be fine with the current mayor. Most British Muslims do not want a Caliphate (although there is a loudmouthed minority who do). Chances of this happening is just about nil (ie: about as likely as the US becoming an Islamic Caliphate). Churchill was not in love with Islam — WTF are you talking about. Ive read a lot of Churchill and at no point does he speak fondly of it. However, he always refused to call Constantinople by its Muslim name and tried to retake the city during WWI — it’s a shame they failed. You must forgive me. I’ve read thousands of pages written by Churchill and on Churchill and what your writing is nonsense spurred on by some family letter. Churchill was an atheist who advocated for the Anglican Church and Anglican beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 31 minutes ago, The_Dude said: Churchill was not in love with Islam — WTF are you talking about. Ive read a lot of Churchill and at no point does he speak fondly of it. However, he always refused to call Constantinople by its Muslim name and tried to retake the city during WWI — it’s a shame they failed. You must forgive me. I’ve read thousands of pages written by Churchill and on Churchill and what your writing is nonsense spurred on by some family letter. Churchill was an atheist who advocated for the Anglican Church and Anglican beliefs. Er, no. I said he admired much of Islam and was very critical of aspects of it. Perhaps I should have emphasised the 'very' bit more. Apologies for that. Many aspects of Islam do deserve to be criticised. Nothing in what I said was indicative of a love of Islam. His family was worried he might convert such was his admiration of some parts of it (a conversion which was never on the cards). You would think he may well have said something to his family to cause such concerns - it is unlikely they would have pulled something like that out of the blue or if he had been so totally against Islam at that point. Orientalism was popular in the UK when he was a young man, unsurprising given the state and breadth of the Empire at that point in history. He noted that many, many Muslims were brave and loyal to the British crown. This was during a critique of Islam. Refusing to call Istanbul by its correct name is something you could expect from Churchill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said: Lol at the whole fair trial being important thing. Perhaps for some, but not all. Giant douche or not, an arrest, "trial" and sentencing within hours isn't right. And the ban on reporting about this guy is not the mark of a free society. Care to weigh in on the whole adverse/averse thing? Definitely averse. Also irrelevant since I knew what was being talked about via context, if not the grammar. Robinson was sent to gaol for contempt of court. As in the USA contempt of court is at the prerogative of the court. He was arrested in front of the court committing an act of contempt. He videoed himself committing the act. Nothing gets put into motion as fast as Contempt of Court. If you decide to act in contempt in front of a trial Judge while a trial is ongoing the process can take a lot less than a few hours. (Both here and in the US). Most of the time it is an act of truly reckless stupidity when someone commits contempt. The fact that this was the second time Robinson had done this speaks an awful lot about the man... In Robinson's own case the ban (postponement) on reporting was put in place in case his arrest and imprisonment would prejudice the serious trial he was in contempt of. The last thing anyone involved in the process would want is innocent men being found guilty because of Robinson and his actions, or guilty men having to be freed - there was a possibility Robinson's conviction potentially could have caused this. The court looked at the issue and after deliberation made a decision - the temporary ban was lifted. This was a more nuanced matter than the contempt proceedings - it still took no more than a day / day and a half to resolve. All such bans are merely postponements in reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 2 hours ago, /dev/null said: Neither did most Muslims living in areas controlled by ISIS. But the loudmouth minority as you called them are what took over Aww snap, I think you may have just triggered Tom ? Well, ISIS controlled areas which were almost totally Muslims. And many of those Muslims had been so badly treated by their neighbours (ie the Sunnis were badly treated by the Shias) that they gave support to ISIS as they were (to all appearances) their coreligionists. The fact their judgement in this was badly wrong would be a serious understatement. Muslims in the UK for the most part get on with their non-Muslim neighbours. While there are idiots and scumbags who stir up tensions (on both sides) and there are issues that need to be redressed there is sod all chance of ISIS forming a caliphate here at any point. Come on. I did specifically say I am better informed about the UK. This is not a stretch. I have bugger all knowledge about upstate New York or the use of bicycle paths in Delaware. I would bow to the superior knowledge of those who live there (although I reserve the right to be skeptical about anyone from Delaware complaining about the UFOs from upstate state New York using their cycle paths...). Besides, isn't Tom the font of all knowledge? A modern Thomas Young, perchance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 6 hours ago, Brit said: You are mistaken. Ooooh. Now he's going to call you a Nazi... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts