The EU debate - Part III

Way to avoid the salient point he was making like......

"Can't wait to negotiate with @BorisJohnson, so that I can read him Article 3 of the Treaty of Rome."

 

He is the man that the three stooges will have to negotiate with. He also suggested that the biggest ever waste of money by the EU was paying Farage's salary and expenses for 17 years. He seems to be the ideal man for the job.

 

He'd need there to still be an EU, viable or as is, and for him to be part of it for it to even to begin to matter.

 

But you've gone on to echo my views in your replies, much as you have on other issues.

Much as it pains you to admit it, we probably agree on more than you try to disagree with me on.

 

Unless you think that the EU will disappear before we begin to negotiate, he will definitely matter.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rugby-tackled-ground-murdering-Labour-MP.html

What religion is that terrorist, then?

 

http://theantimedia.org/propaganda-and-islam-what-youre-not-being-told/

 

'Alleged' terrorist. He's an innocent man isn't he?

As an aside, I was surprised to see he's pleading not guilty.

I feel a bit grubby making comments about an incident that resulted in the tragic waste of what seems to have been a valuable woman.

 

Except people are specifically not making the allegations it's reputing. It's others repeatedly saying that they are

It seems they don't think for themselves and swallow the alternative media guff.

 

I'd ordinarily agree about the alleged bit, but the evidence seems rather overwhelming in this case, doesn't it?
It'll be interesting to see how he defends himself in court, if he actually tries to do it.
I suspect that he'll just protest that he doesn't recognise the court's authority or some ****, though.
He seems the type to go in for that sovereign citizen nonsense.

 

Erm...

 

Media rules through inference.
If a paper reported every time a child was hit by a car then logical and sensible people would start to infer that this has become a serious problem that must be addressed. Their perception would be altered to beleive the chances of a child being run over is much higher than it really is.

By the mail/express repeatedly focusing on a religion they are deliberately altering the publics perception. Effectively encouraging hate towards a section of society.

 

There's still 27 members after we leave like, so I reckon he's not ****ting himself as it stands.

 

Yes, I appears we do agree on some points.

In this case, I was merely replying to a poor attempt at sarcasm...

 

In a similar way though, people on here often label others as 'racist' 'xenophobic' etc, and associate them with other groups. They can't substantiate those claims and despite it being pointed out, the claims continue. Is the onus on someone else to realise the claims are bollocks, or for those accused to challenge the false narrative and show the accusers up for what they are?

I would argue that the decent muslims have a responsibility to themselves and each other to show unity with the west against the terrorists and make it clear that they're pushing a false version of their faith.

It doesn't mean they have to condone the wests actions, in fact they'd find they get a lot of support all round for pointing out where representatives of the west are without a doubt a big part of the problem. and I believe that would help make the world a better place.

 

Every time any terrorist attacks are performed by Muslim, there are a ton of other Muslims disavowing them.
It's never publicised by the media. You'll read a small paragraph here and there and that's it.

People on here are being accused of racism and xenophobia either because they clearly, demonstrably are or they're siding with those that are.
It's funny that you don't apply the same standard to these people as you do to Muslims.

 

I haven't had time to look through the evidence to know whether claims are justified. For some I beleive it probably is.

Moderate muslims struggle to get a fair hearing and are drowned out. There have been press releases by Muslim leaders against terrorist activities and events that have received little mainstream attention so to blame the religion that is the target of most negative press is a bit rich.

 

I agree that the media have an aversion to giving the moderates a voice. That is shameful.

For me, it means the moderates need to push harder. They don't seem to struggle to roll out a "community leader" for other events. I know some will argue they shouldn't need to, but if they don't, they have less of an argument for being lumped with the extremists.

 

Your last paragraph is just bollocks. I've repeatedly challenged it when it's aimed at me and they've failed, but still tediously continue.

The first paragraph confirms what I said. It's shameful, but I'd say they need to work harder.

 

You don't think that anyone on here has posted anything racist or bigoted or linked to stuff from those that are?

Google any Islamic terrorist atrocity or organisation and add the words Muslims condemn.
You'll see that loads of people do it every time, including prominent members of that community and various clerics.
It doesn't gain any traction. What are they supposed to do?