AAAAGH Reform. Are people ignoring the racist?

[Peasnbeans]

And that he's no economist skills yet promising the impossible. And a racist. And mysoginist.

If Mumsnet is full of women, how is no-one talking about Reform and limiting women's rights?
I know I'll get flamed for this, but it is a boiling frog situation! Jump out!
And I didn't choose the AIBU board but I looked down all the Current Threads and this didn't feature.

No idea what point your trying to make here? A shoplifter uses their clothing to conceal their goods. Plenty of people pushing prams/buggies have used them to shoplift should we ban people with prams/buggies? Criminals are criminals and use all sorts of things to conceal their crimes

Keir Starmer is trying to out-Farage Farage. Their main focus is immigration at the moment and the rhetoric coming out of a Labour government is indistinguishable from Conservative and Reform MPs.

The Conservatives were in power for 14 years and completely failed to reduce immigration. There is absolutely no evidence that any Reform councilors, Mayors or MPs would be competent in power, in fact evidence shows that they would not. The calibre of many of their candidates during the General Election was woeful and many of them had been guilty of racism and homophobia in the past.

Reform voters tend to lean right or far right on immigration and other social issues but fairly left wing on economic policies and government spending. Farage will only deliver right wing policies.

Yes the Reform voters around here primarily fit into 2 groups - older people (60+) who have done well for themselves thanks to favourable economic circumstances and now want to pull up the drawbridge behind them, and younger people from poorer backgrounds who are on benefits and often have SEN children etc

For the latter voting Reform makes no sense

We already have Sharia courts

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/society/article/sharia-law-courts-uk-marriages-divorce-zs76vq2c9

Now where are the Christian hardline courts of which you imply?

That's weirdly specific about the two groups and quite inaccurate I think. The categories are much broader than that. And let's be honest, if you've got SEN children then depending on what the SEN is, voting for Labour hasn't made a ton of sense either, is it? At least with Reform you know what you are getting, unlike the duplicious hypocrites that are the current Labour government.

There was no implication of Christian hard-line courts.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2019-0102/CDP-2019-0102.pdf

Sharia councils – also known as Sharia courts – have existed in the UK since
the early 1980s.1 The Islamic Sharia Council (ISC) based in Leyton, East
London, was established in 1982.
Its website states that it was formed to “solve the matrimonial problems of
Muslims living in the United Kingdom in the light of Islamic family law”, for
example marriages, divorce and inheritance issues. The ISC is a Registered
Charity2 and not a formal court of law, and therefore only deals with the
Islamic Nikah marriage ceremony rather than civil marriage contracts.
The ISC lists its broader Objectives as to be of assistance to Muslims in the
UK by:
• fostering and encouraging the practice of the Muslim faith according
to the Quran and the Sunnah;
• providing Advice and assistance in the operation of Muslim family
life;
• establishing a bench of scholars to operate as the Islamic Sharia
Council and to make decisions on matters of Muslim family law
referred to it;
• promoting an enlightened practice of the Islamic faith by Muslims
living in the UK;
• to educate the public generally regarding Islam and to dispel negative
stereotypes.3
Sharia councils have no official legal or constitutional role in the UK. Their
work consists primarily of adjudicating on religious divorces, usually at the
request of women. They may also give verdicts on other aspects of day-to-
day life, for example on Sharia-compliant finance or on halal food.

It is oddly specific. I wonder what information it was based on.

Well….they have not done a thing as yet ….plenty of talk/empty but no action….

The numbers are at a record high over 10,300 already this year it’s terrifying 😟.

So when is it going to stop?

Answers on a post card …Starmer doesn’t have the guts to smash the gangs as he keeps parroting …

That is just another hair brain scheme that will go nowhere it’s a 1 for 1 swap not a curb/cessation of numbers …it’s not what people want at all…the French have already played us and had millions of pounds and done nothing …stood back and allowed they won’t intervene on their side …

His fan base though vehemently defend his position. You've got to hand it to the lefty luvvies, they are like a dog with a bone in defending Labour. It's entertaining watching them squirm though, particularly when the bombshell was dropped at targeting benefits, extending beyond picking on the elderly.

Oh please do come to Lincolnshire and tell us all that on Thursday.

Ridiculous.

No, I was referring to your claim that you have Muslim colleague that didn’t have a problem with you eating in front of them during Ramadan , therefore it has never happened to anyone else. What insular and anti social thinking.

Are you one of the people on this thread that instantly assume any man on a small boat is a desperate person fleeing v for his life from distant war torn lands (as opposed to getting on said small boat in very much non war torn France, having travelled through several very non war torn European countries) that can’t possibly commit violence to any UK resident, speaks perfect English and will be a huge net contributor to society?

But then you accuse me of my colleague of lying. 🙄

Re the meat issue, UK abbatoirs have very strict welfare regulations. I can’t believe you are suggesting that because there are some failures in the otherwise very well intentioned system, that it’s perfectly fine to kill a conscious animal by slitting its throat and watching while it bleeds to death. I take you you are vegan?

Your language is so inflammatory and outraged for something so ordinary and normal.

No, no-one should have their "food intake controlled."

But if a colleague was on a diet and finding it difficult, or had a medical condition where particular food smells made her nauseous, wouldn't you adapt what and where you ate?

It's nothing about "offence".

It's just because it's a perfectly ordinary, polite and decent thing to do.

Why do you think they haven’t?

So you are erasing generations of their Rwandan heritage?

Now THAT’S racist.

It would depend really. If I worked in an office where the only place I could eat was at my desk then no I wouldn't change my eating habits if someone was on a diet, or fasting for a month. That is their choice.

Medical reasons are entirely different.

Would you like to back up the claims with some actual figures? Actual data?

Most immigrants are legal. Illegal immigrants cost less to deal with than would be made if large corporations were forced to pay their tax bills.

We are an island - would you choose to risk your life to get here if you weren’t desperate?

The main reason the cost of living is increasing is because it is a case of profits before people. Nothing to do with immigrants, illegal or otherwise.

“Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things.” ― Terry Pratchett, I Shall Wear Midnight

Because this seems to encapsulate Reforms policies. Treating people as things just because they are a little bit different.

I don’t think it’s erasing someone’s heritage to say that if they’re born in Britain, they’re British.

I am wondering what the criteria of a British name are.

I know it seems so shocking that you are struggling to understand but yes, she was told quite specifically not to eat in the office.

It’s very strange that along with your fellow pro immigration poster - you accept unquestioningly the assumption that every single man on a small boat is literally fleeing for his life (despite travelling through several safe countries with a less generous asylum provision and small boats across the English Channel not being inherently dangerous - 4133 very safe leisure crossings say so) and has absolutely no possibility of being violent towards any UK resident, yet you refuse to believe my report about an actual thing that happened to an actual person here in the UK - even when it is backed by another pp posting policies that reflect that and give an enthusiastically pro Muslim manager scope to order such a thing. Odd.

The accusation was that it was outrageously racist to say that Rudakubana is clearly not a British name.

Are you progressing towards a claim that there is no such thing as a ‘British’ name and as soon as citizenship is achieved, Rudakubana becomes a ‘British’ name by default?

It’s a similar argument deployed by people who want to insert men into women’s spaces “what is a woman anyway?”

That word does not mean what you think it means.