boyfriday Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Nobody likes muslims, even muslims don't like muslims. Muslims have more to fear from other muslims than any other people. Oh Mecky, you've been imbibing those substances you create in your basement laboratory again haven't you? Your Dr Jekyll incarnation is so much more socially appealing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 ..as outrageous a claim that would be, would you just shrug it off or would you have something to say about it? In fact I would go further and say we have a social and political responsibility to challenge unfounded nonsense. The internet has helped spread information like no other system in history but it can also be used to spread misinformation, rumour and lies. At the moment, large numbers of EDL members are frothing at the mouth because their leader 'Sir' Tommy Robinson has been convicted by a Muslim judge under Sharia law. I think this may have been started by a troll taking the **** on facebook, but it has now become an accepted truth and anyone suggesting otherwise is being dismissed as a 'stinking muzzy lover'. Someone has also set up a spoof Amnesty International site where Tommy Robinson has been declared a "Prisoner of Conscience" (along with Mr Bean!) as he currently is on 'hunger' strike in Luton jail for breaking his bail conditions on Saturday. Lots of EDLrs are now getting very excited and think that the government will have to release him in the next few hours. No-one has actually bothered to have a look at the real Amnesty website where they will find that their glorious leader is not actually on their list. We have to be so careful these days. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0114owl1867 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 In fact I would go further and say we have a social and political responsibility to challenge unfounded nonsense. The internet has helped spread information like no other system in history but it can also be used to spread misinformation, rumour and lies. At the moment, large numbers of EDL members are frothing at the mouth because their leader 'Sir' Tommy Robinson has been convicted by a Muslim judge under Sharia law. I think this may have been started by a troll taking the **** on facebook, but it has now become an accepted truth and anyone suggesting otherwise is being dismissed as a 'stinking muzzy lover'. Someone has also set up a spoof Amnesty International site where Tommy Robinson has been declared a "Prisoner of Conscience" (along with Mr Bean!) as he currently is on 'hunger' strike in Luton jail for breaking his bail conditions on Saturday. Lots of EDLrs are now getting very excited and think that the government will have to release him in the next few hours. No-one has actually bothered to have a look at the real Amnesty website where they will find that their glorious leader is not actually on their list. We have to be so careful these days. John X Is this a wind up ? how can an Englishman be judged by a 'sharia law' judge? ha thats funny - well yes of course it could be true, Salman Rushdie still has a death warrant on his head from that mad mullah from Tehran in 1989 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Don't know how many kids white folks have on average, though as a trend I heard somewhere that it is declining, I've had two - wish it had been more, dunno why as they skin me to the bone That's an interesting point, you've referred to the white birth rate rather than the white birthrate in the areas I mentioned. I think it's appropriate to say that birthrates are dependent on many factors-cultural influences being one of them, but poverty, age and education being others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0114owl1867 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 That's an interesting point, you've referred to the white birth rate rather than the white birthrate in the areas I mentioned. I think it's appropriate to say that birthrates are dependent on many factors-cultural influences being one of them, but poverty, age and education being others. I dare say some people have more kids just to gain more benefits aswell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Is this a wind up ? how can an Englishman be judged by a 'sharia law' judge? Yes it is a wind-up, presumably started by a troll on an EDL facebook page. However it has now been taken as gospel by a lot of EDL supporters and any voice of reason is dismissed as a 'muzzie lover'. It is an interesting example of what we are discussing here, where somebody's desire to believe that something is true, overides any desire to look at evidence to the contrary and the subsequent ready dismissal of that evidence when presented with it. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 I love it! I take YOUR estimated growth rate for the Muslim community and show that even at that rate with NO growth in any other population, the Islamic community would not even reach 10% in 100 years from now. Your response is firstly to question my estimate of the current Muslim population, then you come up with the crazy claim above about 4 year old Muslims and 70 year old Christians! (was that factor not already included in your original 33% per generation claim and if not, why not?) I'm starting to think now, that you are not interested in reality but your own hysterical prejudiced dislike for a certain section of our community. You're clutching at straws fella! John X I'm not clutching at straws, and I'm certainly not prejudice. I still stand by what I said as the birthrate over the last four years will have undoubtedly increased the likelihood of the twenty yearly increase exceeding one third. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I'm not clutching at straws, and I'm certainly not prejudice. I still stand by what I said as the birthrate over the last four years will have undoubtedly increased the likelihood of the twenty yearly increase exceeding 3%. That doesn't make sense. Have you found a reference to most Christians being over 70 yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 7, 2011 Author Share Posted September 7, 2011 Not every opinion or idea can be supported by hard evidence, Owl, but some are just utterly preposterous. John X does indeed have a point in that the source of a 'fact' needs looking at. Some 'facts' are clearly just made up - like Danot's crazy assertion that most christians are over 70. He just invented it. I don't need to resort to telling lies Halibut. Here, it's written in the SF Bible. Read just above Patron saints http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/relgion_in_the_united_kingdom Sorry, link not working. You can still access it though by selecting- Religions in the united kindon, followed by Did you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The rate of net immigration into the UK has been falling, year on year since as far back as 2004. Have you ever seen that on a Migration Watch website? Of course not because it doesn't fit their picture of immigration spiralling out of control. Oh dear, what a howler You won't find it on Migration Watch because it's not true, it's just something you made up. So, year on year fall in net immigration since 2004, you sure about that? A simple look at net migration charts for the UK shows otherwise. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14668726 It peaked in Jul 2005. As you can see, it declined for a year through to Jul 2006, when it started increasing again to Dec 2007. As you can also see, it increased from Jul 2009 through to Dec 2010. So while as they claim, the total number of immigrants to the UK increases every year, the rate of that increase has been declining for nearly 10 years now and is set to continue to decline. They don't point out the latter because it undermines their whole campaign. I've not seen them making a bland assertion of net immigration increasing year on year, links? Immigration to the UK has been declining for a decade, is that another one of your made up factoids? Please refer again to the above link. Inward migration is less than what it was when it peaked in 2004, but it is higher than it was in 2001, as is net migration. As a source of information for an impartial discussion of immigration, they are a waste of time. I'm sure you'll be pleased to have noted the source of the above link then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.