Islamic Fundamentalists, Outraged Protesters, Members Of The Tehreek-E-Labaik (Tlp) Party Or Most Followers Of The Islamic Faith?

[anotheoldgit]

Could we see the same thing happen on the streets of Britain?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6341091/Huge-crowds-Islamists-protest-second-day-Pakistan-Christian.html

[naomi24]

What a strange question, Khandro.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Is Cathy Newman a "proper" journalist? Has she been formally trained?

[naomi24]

Watching that video again (it has been posted before) and the ranting of the mob, how ironic that the ECHR has recently ruled that insulting religion (even when speaking the truth) is a criminal offence. Crazy world!

[sanmac]

Khandro, I was being slightly sarcastic when I mentioned "formal training" since one frequent poster is adamant that to be classed as a journalist you have to have formal training. Yet he himself claims to be a type of journalist even though he admitted on one thread that he has no formal training whatsoever.

[naomi24]

Prime Minister, Imran Khan, has warned demonstrators not to "force the government to have to take action". I wonder what action the government would consider taking? This report seems to indicate that Islamabad is in turmoil.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/11/pakistan-thousands-protest-blasphemy-acquittal-ignore-pm-call-181101140852399.html

[Zacs-Master]

Naomi, the ECHR have ruled that insulting religion IN A COUNTRY WHERE THERE IS A LAW AGAINST IT is illegal. Stop trying to make out that the ECHR have suddenly taken it upon itself to do that. They haven’t.

[naomi24]

I know what they've done. They've set a dangerous precedent.

[Zacs-Master]

No. A dangerous precedent would be the ECHR upholding an individual breaking the law. Now THAT’S a slippery slope.
As I’ve said before, you may not agree with that law but you (and the ECHR) can’t simply over-rule them. That’s anarchy.

[douglas9401]

"That’s anarchy."

Islam too, apparently.

[Zacs-Master]

You trying to make a point dooooogie? Cos it ain’t at all clear.

[douglas9401]

"you may not agree with that law but you..... can’t simply over-rule them. That’s anarchy."

The loons ignore the ruling of their own court in favour of their fairy story of choice.

But you knew that, you just wanted to punch that 'o' button a few times.

[naomi24]

zacs, if you want to discuss the ECHR’s ruling, revisit the other thread where you’ll find that, contrary to your continuing inaccurate claim, it can over-rule individual laws and has done on several occasions. In this instance that body has, at the request of the Austrian government, overridden the very clear human rights of the individual in order to avoid upsetting one section of society, thereby compromising its integrity – and in doing so has, by the very nature of its remit, set a precedent.

[Khandro]

n. Stubborn and ardent clinging to an opinion is the best proof of stupidity, better move on perhaps. :0)

[anotheoldgit]

sanmac

//// You mean Tommy Robinson the noted journalist (with no formal training, of course). ///

His training as been from what he has witnessed is happening to our country, not from what he has read in any text book.

[anotheoldgit]

/// a large number of AB'ers accept that terrorism by Islamists is simply a natural by-product of worshiping as a Muslim. ///

I wonder if andy-hughes who wrote this in another thread, is still in the same frame of mind, after seeing what is happening on the streets of Pakistan?

[Peter Pedant]

// They really haven't advanced themselves since the stoneage.
No I don't think so in my lifetime.//

I think we have gone backward

compare St Trump election opinion that it was OK to shoot the other side ( 2 amendment - he didnt know)
(OK not the 2nd amendment - whichever one it was then that allows you to go blamma blamma blamma on your opponents or those that disagree with you)

[Peter Pedant]

// you’ll find that, contrary to your continuing inaccurate claim, it can over-rule individual laws and has done on several occasions//

erm no baaarp! specifically english law doesnt NOT allow nullification. Parliament has to do so

dificult to argue these points as no one on AB knows diddly squat about islamic law, austrian law, the role of the ECtHR and so on

[sanmac]

Aog, I explained my answer at 1741 yesterday.

[naomi24]

Peter Pedant, we know that the ECHR’s role isn’t to uphold laws that are detrimental to the human rights of the individual which on this occasion they have done, but this thread is being unnecessarily sidetracked so enough of that. I believe v_e has a question for you on the subject on other thread.

[Togo]

It would appear that the majority muslim group in Pakistan regard the 1.6% Christian group a threat and an aberration not to be tolerated. Even to the extent of sanctioning execution, or mob rule, if that is denied them. But..... very but, here in the UK when concern about the 75% rise in the last 10 years alone,regarding the muslim communities to a fast approaching 5%, ( more than 35% in parts of London and other large urban areas) the official line is that this is to be applauded and further encouraged, and woe betide any who have the temerity to question the folly. I would warrant that they who sanction the Pakistani viewpoint are all in favour of the islamification of large swathes of the UK.