The EU debate - Part III

The ones caught committing the extremist actions in Europe have tended to be converts with a criminal background, but the wider atrocities and those doing the radicalising are longer term believers.

 

Define 'racist' and then point to an occasion I've got annoyed by a genuine call being made.

 

Depending on who and where you're talking about, a lot of them also have a rather limited knowledge of the faith.
They're indoctrinated into extremist branches of it and taught a very different version to the mainstream one.
They're also taught not to question it, which creates further issues.

 

You don't know what a racist is? I think you've just admitted to what your problem is.

 

Who are they taught and indoctrinated by?

 

The fact you avoid supporting your claim speaks volumes.

 

Various lunatics. It's a large world.

 

What are the beliefs of these 'lunatics'?

 

No, it doesn't. The fact that you attempt to deflect by getting people to define racism does, though.
Are you really trying to tell us that you don't know what racism is? No? Then what's the purpose of the question?

 

I didn't say I don't know what it means, I'm interested in which version of it you're using and asking you to post examples of them, and with me getting annoyed at them being challenged.

It looks like you can't support your claim by doing either. That really does speak volumes.

 

Which particular lunatics? There are lots.
Most of them don't even have that much in common with each other, let alone the religion that they're supposed to be based upon.

 

Which version of the word racist? There's one.
How many do you think that there are?

 

I doubt even you believe that cobblers.

 

Enlighten me with examples, and include links to me getting annoyed as per your claim.

 

No idea- you're the one promoting Christianity. My point was that just because something influenced society once upon a time it doesn't have to be respected now. The Romans ruled once but that doesn't mean we should kowtow to Rome.

It does define their faith. It just doesn't support your antiquated desire for the UK to be a country to be full of white religious fruitcakes.

 

A big lol from me on this one.

 

Deflect and deflect.
What's wrong with you? Utterly dishonest.

Everyone on here knows what racism is except you, apparently.
You've claimed that there are multiple versions of the word racist.
What are they? It's a simple question.

 

Whooah there trigger. It's no good trying to claim a deflection as a means of deflection.

Just to spin you back upright, this is the claim I'm asking you to back up.


"You just get annoyed when someone says something that's blatantly racist and they're correctly called a racist.
That's why the alt-right came up with different names for their bullshit, like alt-right itself.
It's not pushing an agenda to point out ****ty behaviour, I'm afraid."

No more dodging. Examples with links. Ta.

 

You've done this before where you expect someone to trawl through hundreds of pages of the thread.

How many times do you have to defend the far right (all in the name of debate I'm sure)? If it looks like a pig and sounds like a pig it's probably a pig.

 

If I've done it before, perhaps people shouldn't be so foolish as to make daft claims they can't back up. As you seem to be keeping count, how many times have I criticised it?

How many times when people get nailed down to discussing the issues, have they found we're largely in agreement?