Originally Posted by Master
 |
|
|
|
Thanks: 2
Likes: 19
Dislikes: 1
Cunt of a Mod. Fact.
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.
Flat Calm and Peace Lovin
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
Fenster you can see this is a non sequitur yes? It does not follow that these scum bags are paedos and rapists because they are Muslim. Or you would have to say that Catholic priests who are paedos are because they are Catholic. Because they are celibate priests? that is another argument /excuse entirely. The other glaringly obvious fallacy with this video and the case that it discusses, is that it is built on a myth that it demolishes itself by discussing it. So the press the radio, the television, yes even this interview talks about how people cannot discuss British Muslim nonce rapists, whilst discussing a headline story about them in Britain's leading tabloid newspaper.
So the problem arises also when people insist on both these criminals being called British Muslims whilst insisting these are not British Muslims if they behave like this . They are just Muslim scum. But what about all the other vast majority of Muslims who are appalled by this? are they Muslim, British Muslim, or is it just easier to call them Muslim Scum?
The fundamental problem though is the insistence that those calling people black scum, Muslim Scum etc are not racist or Islamaphobic because they have GOOD black and/or Muslim friends, but that anyone pointing out that this should not define a whole ethnic or religious group must be by definition and necessity, both apologists and naive ostriches burying their head in the sand.
Why?
Because that is the only way to lend credence to a non argument and create a weak, phony opponent. When have I or Master ever denied that there was a problem with some sectors of the British Muslim population? Ever? Once? and think about what a Sikh or a Jew might have to gain by insisting on something like that. It only makes sense if you are creating another stereotype and reducing people to a cardboard cut-out in order to discredit them. Admittedly i am not above this myself in the way I may talk to Lyle recently and others who insist on creating this false narrative. It is a device though that become second nature when the dominant and majority narrative here is so weighed in favour of anti immigration which inevitably leaks into anti-minority. So first it's anti-muslim, then the Jews are fair game, then Pikeys and gypos are always just asking for it, then people with green hair, then people who play loud music, then people who vote for the left etc. etc. etc
Just a dude in blue.
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
So, drivers been released from custody no charges? No horrific pedophilia or rape gang associations? No plots plans or murderous intentions stemmed in racial stereotypes or twisted religious ideology? Just a real shitty driver? Place is stuck on race, even a rbr thread gets sucked into it ffs.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
https://youtu.be/7iHXt6DzC9g
Yup bunch of Nazis always talking race
Banned
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
Straight up
Cunt of a Mod. Fact.
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
I've crossed out the part that doesn't really apply to me.Fenster you can see this is a non sequitur yes? It does not follow that these scum bags are paedos and rapists because they are Muslim. Or you would have to say that Catholic priests who are paedos are because they are Catholic. Because they are celibate priests? that is another argument /excuse entirely. The other glaringly obvious fallacy with this video and the case that it discusses, is that it is built on a myth that it demolishes itself by discussing it. So the press the radio, the television, yes even this interview talks about how people cannot discuss British Muslim nonce rapists, whilst discussing a headline story about them in Britain's leading tabloid newspaper.
So the problem arises also when people insist on both these criminals being called British Muslims whilst insisting these are not British Muslims if they behave like this . They are just Muslim scum. But what about all the other vast majority of Muslims who are appalled by this? are they Muslim, British Muslim, or is it just easier to call them Muslim Scum?
The fundamental problem though is the insistence that those calling people black scum, Muslim Scum etc are not racist or Islamaphobic because they have GOOD black and/or Muslim friends, but that anyone pointing out that this should not define a whole ethnic or religious group must be by definition and necessity, both apologists and naive ostriches burying their head in the sand.
Why?
Because that is the only way to lend credence to a non argument and create a weak, phony opponent. When have I or Master ever denied that there was a problem with some sectors of the British Muslim population? Ever? Once? and think about what a Sikh or a Jew might have to gain by insisting on something like that. It only makes sense if you are creating another stereotype and reducing people to a cardboard cut-out in order to discredit them. Admittedly i am not above this myself in the way I may talk to Lyle recently and others who insist on creating this false narrative. It is a device though that become second nature when the dominant and majority narrative here is so weighed in favour of anti immigration which inevitably leaks into anti-minority. So first it's anti-muslim, then the Jews are fair game, then Pikeys and gypos are always just asking for it, then people with green hair, then people who play loud music, then people who vote for the left etc. etc. etc
The MP had to resign which would suggest "discussing" the problem is problematic. Maajid is a muslim therefore has no fear of being labled a knuckle dragging racist for stating facts.
The key word is - disproportionate
Only 3% of the United Kingdom's population is British Pakistani Muslim. Roughly 4% is Muslim. 28% of rape gang cases involve South Asian Muslims.
"Ostriches burying their head in the sand?" - Yes it does seem that way when people claim it's a mere coincidence these rapists share a religion/culture and purposely target white children.
3-Time SADDO PREDICTION COMP CHAMPION.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
Wow that's the real statistic didn't know
It was like that
OLD GUARD 2.0
Array
Re: driver deliberately mows down pedestrians outside national history museum
i've crossed out the part that doesn't really apply to me.fenster you can see this is a non sequitur yes? It does not follow that these scum bags are paedos and rapists because they are muslim. Or you would have to say that catholic priests who are paedos are because they are catholic. Because they are celibate priests? That is another argument /excuse entirely. The other glaringly obvious fallacy with this video and the case that it discusses, is that it is built on a myth that it demolishes itself by discussing it. So the press the radio, the television, yes even this interview talks about how people cannot discuss british muslim nonce rapists, whilst discussing a headline story about them in britain's leading tabloid newspaper.
so the problem arises also when people insist on both these criminals being called british muslims whilst insisting these are not british muslims if they behave like this . They are just muslim scum. But what about all the other vast majority of muslims who are appalled by this? Are they muslim, british muslim, or is it just easier to call them muslim scum?
The fundamental problem though is the insistence that those calling people black scum, muslim scum etc are not racist or islamaphobic because they have good black and/or muslim friends, but that anyone pointing out that this should not define a whole ethnic or religious group must be by definition and necessity, both apologists and naive ostriches burying their head in the sand.
Why?
Because that is the only way to lend credence to a non argument and create a weak, phony opponent. When have i or master ever denied that there was a problem with some sectors of the british muslim population? Ever? Once? And think about what a sikh or a jew might have to gain by insisting on something like that. It only makes sense if you are creating another stereotype and reducing people to a cardboard cut-out in order to discredit them. Admittedly i am not above this myself in the way i may talk to lyle recently and others who insist on creating this false narrative. It is a device though that become second nature when the dominant and majority narrative here is so weighed in favour of anti immigration which inevitably leaks into anti-minority. So first it's anti-muslim, then the jews are fair game, then pikeys and gypos are always just asking for it, then people with green hair, then people who play loud music, then people who vote for the left etc. Etc. Etc
The mp had to resign which would suggest "discussing" the problem is problematic. Maajid is a muslim therefore has no fear of being labled a knuckle dragging racist for stating facts.
The key word is - disproportionate
only 3% of the united kingdom's population is british pakistani muslim. Roughly 4% is muslim. 28% of rape gang cases involve south asian muslims.
"ostriches burying their head in the sand?" - yes it does seem that way when people claim it's a mere coincidence these rapists share a religion/culture and purposely target white children.
fact.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks