Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Britain First - Paul Golding
455 Answers
Appears at court today but what of the charges he faces? The 'uniform' charge is bizarre to say the least. Short video in the link where Golding outlines the situation.
https:/
https:/
Answers
mikey, the mosque is being built on a car park adjacent to the station, which is a key commuting point for workers in London. as well as the loss of that facility, the local council has arranged a deal with the train company for the mosque to block-buy nearly 80 spaces in their own car park. thus aside from the disruption of the building work itself, the resultant...
10:57 Sun 09th Nov 2014
ChillDoubt - "Erm........if they're 'being seen' to be plotting or preparing acts of terror, that's fairly criminal behaviour from where I'm standing."
It is not possible to have degrees of criminal behaviour - either it is criminal behaviour, or it's not.
If they are 'being seen' by the authorities, then appropriate action will be taken, if they are being seen by members of the public, they should report their suspicions to the police for action.
The notion of going around harrassing innocent people, or inciting others to do so, does not have any place in that system of behaviour, and thank heavens for that.
Again andy, you need to remove those pinky-lensed spectacles and take a look around at what's happening in the real world from time to time, you spend too much time around 'rock stars'.
It is not possible to have degrees of criminal behaviour - either it is criminal behaviour, or it's not.
If they are 'being seen' by the authorities, then appropriate action will be taken, if they are being seen by members of the public, they should report their suspicions to the police for action.
The notion of going around harrassing innocent people, or inciting others to do so, does not have any place in that system of behaviour, and thank heavens for that.
Again andy, you need to remove those pinky-lensed spectacles and take a look around at what's happening in the real world from time to time, you spend too much time around 'rock stars'.
Ag, I have been following this thread with interest. You seem to be being a little cryptic so to avoid us all falling into some imaginary trap which you may be setting, could you clarify:
a) whether you support BF
b) whether you support their actions in this instance
c) whether you think their existence is justified by such 'outings'.
Ta.
a) whether you support BF
b) whether you support their actions in this instance
c) whether you think their existence is justified by such 'outings'.
Ta.
"what is the opposition by BF to the Mosque all about then? I say its just naked racism...what do you think the cause is ?"
I don't know what BF's aims are, but I can guess: I imagine they think Islam (which is a religion, not a race, by the way) is a threat to British society, and want to stop it spreading. Now it is obviously true that many traditional Muslim attitudes (maybe "cultural" as much as religious) are incompatible with the norms of western society. I mean by "norms" such values and standards as freedom of speech, tolerance of religious and sexual diversity, the equality of the sexes, opposition to anti-Semitism (meaning anti-Jewish). It is equally incontestable that in those Muslim countries where these traditional attitudes are dominant "rights " predicated on western values (and taken for granted by us) are denied. So it follows (does it not?) that IF there are sufficiently large numbers of Muslims in the UK who follow traditional forms of Islam (maybe by recent immigration from , say, the Horn of Africa), then there will be at least a tension between the two incompatible cultures. IF, secondly, these traditional Muslims are unwilling to accommodate to western values (and you can understand very well why they might not), but expect accommodation to theirs, then friction will result. Now, both these propositions of mine may be false (or, maybe they are true now, but the traditional attitudes I describe will change fast). However, if both are true (and remain so) then BF (irrespective of its true character and any methods it may choose to promote its policies) is absolutely right in perceiving a threat, and wrong only in ascribing to a whole religion a threat posed by only a backward school of it.
I don't know what BF's aims are, but I can guess: I imagine they think Islam (which is a religion, not a race, by the way) is a threat to British society, and want to stop it spreading. Now it is obviously true that many traditional Muslim attitudes (maybe "cultural" as much as religious) are incompatible with the norms of western society. I mean by "norms" such values and standards as freedom of speech, tolerance of religious and sexual diversity, the equality of the sexes, opposition to anti-Semitism (meaning anti-Jewish). It is equally incontestable that in those Muslim countries where these traditional attitudes are dominant "rights " predicated on western values (and taken for granted by us) are denied. So it follows (does it not?) that IF there are sufficiently large numbers of Muslims in the UK who follow traditional forms of Islam (maybe by recent immigration from , say, the Horn of Africa), then there will be at least a tension between the two incompatible cultures. IF, secondly, these traditional Muslims are unwilling to accommodate to western values (and you can understand very well why they might not), but expect accommodation to theirs, then friction will result. Now, both these propositions of mine may be false (or, maybe they are true now, but the traditional attitudes I describe will change fast). However, if both are true (and remain so) then BF (irrespective of its true character and any methods it may choose to promote its policies) is absolutely right in perceiving a threat, and wrong only in ascribing to a whole religion a threat posed by only a backward school of it.
"absolutely right in perceiving a threat, and wrong only in ascribing to a whole religion a threat posed by only a backward school of it. "
That is quite a serious "wrong only" :-)
With huge implications. Except that I would guess that many of the comments and much of the support on their Facebook page comes from people whose main commitment to political action amounts to clicking "like" in Facebook :-)
That is quite a serious "wrong only" :-)
With huge implications. Except that I would guess that many of the comments and much of the support on their Facebook page comes from people whose main commitment to political action amounts to clicking "like" in Facebook :-)
