Sex Attacks in Cologne and other European Cities Part VIII

[Cologne2016Petition]

THE PETITION _ Please sign and share
Petition

Thread links
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
Thread 4
Thread 5
Thread 6
Thread 7

Let the debate continue.....

I don’t know about you chaps, but I for one miss Christopher Hitchens dreadfully. Did not agree with everything he said, but he is one of the few who gets to the kernel of any situation and tells it like it is.

Here is a classic example of how a white liberal masochist, who cannot see the wood for the trees, rubs Hitchens the wrong way.

On that dreadful Sunday morning programme where Nicky Campbell repeatedly fails to control discussion so it, inevitably, sinks to people talking over each other there was a black woman on a while ago who argued that racism is a product of power and privilege which non-white communities do not have so, in the UK, white people can be guilty of racism but other races cannot. This seemed to be agreed with by a lot of people but leads to the nonsensical situation that in an insult-hurling situation between two racially intolerant extremists of different races one is committing a hate crime and the other is not.

I'm getting to the point that left-wing concepts are making my head hurt as they seem to be as intolerant as those we used to criticise in my youth which makes me very sad

It all boils down to the pot and the kettle in the end. Neither side has the 'right'. We should actually stop looking at ourselves as separate groups and say, does that individual have the right to do that or say that to another individual taking all external charateristics out of the equation. If you didn't know these and were asked the question the answer would probably be 'No'.

Therefore once you are adding in the external characteristics why is it changing the answer to 'But it's part of X's culture' and not a straight no based on the moral core of the question.

Therefore the left is not dealing with the straight moral questions but giving one grouping an edge over another. This applies to giving precedence of one non white group over another non white group too and other vulnerable and minority communities such as trans people etc. So should we be deciding that one is more 'important' than another?

No one has the 'right' to be intolerant or practice things which go against law and moral really. So it ends as the law being truly secular and not taking any external characteristics into consideration eg. Did this particular individual have the right to sexually assualt that one?

Exactly CalmYoBadSelf. But the thing is, the white people who think that are normally the ones who do have power and privilege (and money) and don't seem to be able to understand that this is not something which comes automatically to all white people just because they have it. This is why you get far more University students subscribing to this view than you do builders or care assistants.

It also ignores the fact that power and privilege are not exclusively white domains anymore.

For example, going back to the current Rotherham case, who had more power? The white families living on sink estates with their children at sink schools who had personal connections to nobody more powerful than school dinner ladies or a site foreman or someone who managed a line in a factory?

Or the (alleged) abusers who had relatives sitting on the council and on the licensing boards, access to the local MP including her attending their families weddings, invitations to campaigning events, bent coppers in their pockets, and of course, exemption from various laws on the basis that their race meant it was not politic for them to be prosecuted.

The 'white privilege' argument is out of date and belongs back in the 1960s. It ignores the fact that it is not universal to white people and has a lot more to do with money and connections than it does race.

Fourmummy I know how you feel.

My understanding is gaining however when you look at the ideas batted round by the elite like the bilderberg group.

I know I keep repeating this but no one else seemed to notice this from the press conference immediately after Paris, I don't need to spell out what a horrific attack it was, you would have thought the immediate thoughts would be to contain France, stop men fleeing using open borders to escape ( which is exactly what did happen and one is still on the run....) But the EU tops mans FIRST THOUGHTS WERE OPEN BORDERS.

I mean - I was horrified at the time, horrified!!

It tells me all I need to know about him and the EU, dirty bombs, terrorists, who gives a crap as long as those borders remain open.

When I say remain open I mean, as in weak and porus with no checks. I believe genuine refugees and assluym seekers should be able to reach Europe but with proper processing etc.

I too saw The Big Questions on BBC1 yesterday, topic was British Islam. The usual talking heads were there, but two women (Yasmin Rehman and a younger woman) who sat on the lefthand side of the TV screen talked sense. They were interrupted all the time by the contingent on the righthand side – imam and the big bloke (rent-a-gob). The very first question was Should Apostates be Killed? Imam eventually worked his way around to saying that personally he would not kill, but cleverly avoided answering why Islam supports it and why.

The shrill woman with face fully covered (apparently a geneticist) did a very good job of wasting time and diluting. If she is a geneticist, does she work in her niqab? If she does lab work, that would not be deemed hygienic. And if she meets with patients, then imparting important news about genetics to parents in full veil is inappropriate, because there should be no barriers to effective communication between staff and patients.

Nicky Campbell did not moderate well, and he seemed easily knocked off the trajectory of his own questions. Maybe it's BBC policy not to pursue for an answer.

Many threads ago someone posted an extract from the Gatestone Institute. I thought it a very good publication and subscribed to it. Here is a recent piece.

The mayor of Molenbeek, Belgium ignored a list she received, one month prior to the Paris attacks, with the names and addresses of more than 80 people suspected as Islamic militants living in her area. This moron did not know what to do with the list! : "What was I supposed to do about them? It is not my job to track possible terrorists,"

www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7309/europe-security-warnings

BrittEkland Mon 01-Feb-16 08:19:04

My Dad is a Liverpool generations deep Labour Voter, he would be horrified to realize the true aims of Corybyn et al.

He is - My dear old Dad, highly educated, intellegent man but there is an element in him of the tribal, never vote tory - liberal thing there. I have seen at first hand how this sort of strange allegiance has blinded him to other things about labour. I imagine lots are the same. Ie they would never vote for anyone else anyway so....and my dad is really excited by Corbyn and John Mcdonell.

I too saw The Big Questions on BBC1 yesterday, topic was British Islam

I was looking forward to a good balanced debate on the subject as the whole show was devoted to the topic, should we have a british islam.

I was sat with jaw to the floor, I was horrified at the shouting down, by the end of it, some speakers on the left couldn't even get their words out for stuttering! I was horrified bullying, shouting down, and yes the lady in the veil, what a horror, disgraceful Nicky Cambell kept going back to her!!

Why >>> because she shouted the loudest. Awful.

Imam eventually worked his way around to saying that personally he would not kill, but cleverly avoided answering why Islam supports it and why.

He may have avoided the questions but to a nationwide audience he did himself no favours, they came across as slippery shifty bullies.

Or the (alleged) abusers who had relatives sitting on the council and on the licensing boards, access to the local MP including her attending their families weddings, invitations to campaigning events, bent coppers in their pockets, and of course, exemption from various laws on the basis that their race meant it was not politic for them to be prosecuted

Within the muslim community there is a large and powerful network, with the lending money aspect etc etc...regular visits to the mosque and so on.

Although “chai boys” are commonplace in some of the societies from which these migrants/refugees are arriving from, being gay is contraindicated in Islam; a person known to be gay would not be allowed to enter a mosque, for example. I wondered what Stonewall has advised gay men and women in light of the Cologne taharrush-style attacks. I have just spoken to Stonewall and have to say that their heads are completely in the sand! The woman there said she felt that the police would respond promptly, whether I had any evidence of xxxxx “of course the Cologne attacks were very serious, but …..” On the other hand, gay men have more strength and speed than women, so perhaps they will not be targeted afterall.

Within our area there is also an element who border on criminal, you don't mess with them.

There was also a case of a girl being groomed and passed around the take aways here with a friend. I knew the girl, she lived across the street. She went from a happy, sunny primary school child to an extremely troubled teenager. Yes there were problems at home too but I don't think they were helped by this. It does still go on and no it doesn't get spoken about because you risk all if you do.

Yep. The Biraderi and clan system. Allowed Galloway to take Bradford. Even Shahid Malik has spoken out on their influence on left wing politics.

www.psa.ac.uk/insight-plus/blog/de-mystifying-biraderi-politics-bradford

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3181851.stm

See also Luftur Rahman and the infiltration of Unite.

eprints.lse.ac.uk/63209/1/democraticaudit.com-Political%20parties%20need%20to%20take%20greater%20responsibility%20for%20Pakistani%20and%20Bangladeshi%20clan%20politicking%20.pdf

I'm also watching Nicky Campbell. The lady in the purple top who works with Muslim women had a lot of interesting stuff to say and the woman in the veil just kept shouting her down. And the guy from Qillam, he is interesting too. I agree with him that the biggest driver of Islamaphobia is denial that there is a problem.

Haha looking forward to a balanced view on the bbc . Watch question time if your blood pressure can stand it.

AMouseLive ..... I was sat with jaw to the floor, I was horrified at the shouting down, by the end of it, some speakers on the left couldn't even get their words out

I watch The Big Questions nearly every Sunday. It is a well-known tactic of course to talk over someone, but that contingent have it down to a fine art. Unfortunately, the man from Quilliam, for example, should have just pressed ahead by talking louder and not stopping & starting to accommodate the rabble. The more equable a speaker the more he/she will always be abused.

We missed the big questions yesterday but usually watch it. I will have a look on iplayer later.

Interesting about the political influence, I imagine that it goes on around here as the same labour candidate has been in for pretty much as long as I've lived here (council not national).

I don't normally watch the big question because it's so badly managed. Nothing changed this Sunday. What fantastic work there is being done out there despite the very strong opposition.

AMouseLive .... Within the muslim community there is a large and powerful network, with the lending money aspect etc etc...regular visits to the mosque and so on.

I think so too. In fact, all Asian sectors. Many know each other through Temple and associated social engagements. I believe that's the main reason why Highway Enforcement in my area will not fine those residents who drive for several houses along the pavement - because they know each other, at least by sight, from Temple and it would be embarrassing to issue a PCN to them.

I was sat with jaw to the floor, I was horrified at the shouting down, by the end of it, some speakers on the left couldn't even get their words out

These people are trained bullies. Intelligent, well-mannered people, Muslims and non-Muslims or ex-Muslims alike will not be able to challenge them. Which is why B1st is pulling stunts like in Luton and Neo-Nazi thugs in Stockholm talk with their fists. It is astounding that conservatives do not take a clearer stance. But then, someone mentioned that many British businesses are owned by rich and powerful Muslims, maybe it has to do with this? How much ££££ do we owe the Saudis?

maybe time to emigrate to Russia.

I just keep thinking of more things ...
My mum knew someone who after being a parish councillor for years went on to being on the town council. He was a good decent bloke - only concerned in the best interests of the community he served etc.
He questioned some decisions the council (Labour run) were making with regards to council housing. He pointed out that what they were doing was unfair as it was increasing the council housing available for larger - so most likely Muslim families - whilst reducing the overall number available. He got called a racist and got in lots of bother - he found it so disheartening that he didn't stand for re-election. I just thought it was sad for him - I knew his heart was in the right place and I didn't know exactly what he said but maybe what he did was worded badly...
But now I've just realised what it was actually about was getting rid of a voice of reason/sense ...
And it is common knowledge that postal votes are widely used in that Muslim community - especially for women - they don't get to vote in secret. And that makes me uncomfortable...

www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7342/germany-migrant-deportation

"Tens of thousands of migrants destroyed their passports and other identity documents before arriving in Germany. It may take years for German authorities to determine the true identities of these people and their countries of origin.

"German authorities are downplaying migrant lawlessness, apparently to avoid fueling anti-immigration sentiment."

Why would you destroy your passport if it could confirm your country of origin was a war zone? Unless of course ......

unlucky, could there have been bribing involved?

The 'white privilege' argument is out of date and belongs back in the 1960s. It ignores the fact that it is not universal to white people and has a lot more to do with money and connections than it does race

I think you're right, Bill - though I imagine your cards will have been well and truly marked for saying so