(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Seeing as there's a thread for the US Democrat & Republican parties... I thought it would be a good idea to make a politics related thread for here in the UK. I thought having 1 thread would increase the debates and discussion.

So yeah, talk about it here.

If you don't know much about UK politics, we currently have a coalition government between the Tories & the Lib Dems (Tories didn't get the majority of votes). The four main parties are:

Conservatives - British Conservatism, British Unionism, Eurosceptism -You must login or register to view this content.

Labour - Democratic Socialism, Support the working class -You must login or register to view this content.

Liberal Democrat - Social & Green Liberalism, Internationalism, Social Democracy, Left Libertarianism -You must login or register to view this content.

UKIP - Eurosceptism, Libertarianism, Traditional Conservatism - You must login or register to view this content.

There's also parties such as BNP who are right wing, BNP in particular are very anti-immigration, SNP & Plaid Cymru who focus on independence for their constituent countries, as well as other parties such as the Green party who support British Republicanism

Ok then I'll give you some citations. The sharia courts may be held under British law but it would take a fool to think they are operating in a legal manner under the British law. They are a threat to our judicial system. This just goes to show what really happens: You must login or register to view this content.




I don't need to propose to remove passages from other religions because they aren't the ones reigning terror in our streets in the name of their religion.




No I don't and never have proposed to kick people out who believe in something and/or hold dissenting views, you're putting words in my mouth. Those who hold religious views that incite & cause violence in the name of said religion, that discriminate against those who don't believe in their views; hate preaching clerics who encourage forms of religious extremism should all be held accountable under the law and if the law doesn't accommodate to these then in my opinion they should be changed. It goes for all religions but I would refer to the religion of Islam directly because they are the ones who are threatening our way of life.




It might hold that influence because in some cases it holds the truth, it's freedom of speech is it not? There shouldn't be censorship where journalism is concerned, It's upto the responsibility of the individual where they take that information and how they express it but I've never encountered in my life someone who has committed an atrocity in the name of what they have read on the dailymail and if they have it's because they held that view beforehand.




Supposedly? Well I think you'll find Abu Qatada and Anjem Choudary are very good examples of these "supposed" hate clerics.

"you don't have an entire nationality agreeing with you". Of course I don't, who does? But when you have Protest movements by the likes of the EDL who have a great number of divisions then that would certainly express that there is a concern amongst our nation about the threat of Islam. The BNP wouldn't be heard of or an electable party is there wasn't at least some concern about Islamic extremism which has been nurtured and and produced by our own tolerance. The very fact we are discussing this would also suggest that people do and will share views on this specific religion and it's profound effect on societies.

People only now are willing to express their viewpoint because they are sick of being bound by PC and ridicule from the left who have stifled debate for far too long.

Not so long ago it was reported on Sky news and other media outlets a video of a group of muslims taking patrol in the street saying "this is a muslim only zone"; "you must not be carrying alcohol" and things of that nature.

This is just one instance and yes it's on the dailymail but you cannot deny video evidence. You must login or register to view this content.



You said it yourself "at one point". But this wasn't part of the current times therefore we cannot be held accountable for the threat it served however Islam and muslims can because they are the ones holding this threat.

I wonder what would happen if an equal number of Christians proposed British Law in their countries, we wouldn't even get a chance to speak before they butchered me. Now why would I get the impression they would "butcher" me? Because that's often the view associated with Islam with very good reason.




Other religions like I've said before aren't imposing their own laws and views from their homelands that directly contradict our way of life. When our way of life is threatened people will oppose and quash that threat no matter who it is but as it stands, Islam is the one doing the inciting. I've seen the videos and events that would suggest Islam is directly opposing my way of life therefore it will be an enemy to me until these extremist views are upheld and stopped.

If they want Sharia law, they can hop onto the next flight to the middle east and I do understand not all muslims hold this view but they should have and should do more to extinguish this extreme element. As far as I know they have only ever really came out and opposed the death of Lee Rigby out of fear of retaliation. How do I know they are secretly sympathetic of extreme forms of Islam.



Once again putting words in my mouth, I never said the majority. But if you watch the news you'd notice the demographics of these grooming/rape gangs that commit these are certainly of ****stani muslim descent. Are you really going to sit here and deny this very solid fact which you can find anywhere, by saying otherwise you are betraying hundreds of vulnerable young girls.

Same goes for catholic priests but these grooming gangs are emerging weekly and must be opposed. Is this what immigration was meant for? to harbour young criminals from third world countries? I was told it was for multiculturalism and cultural enrichment!



But that's my point why is P A K I defined as an insult? Goes to show the government is more concerned about offending the minorities because they're a minority rather than white Britons because frankly who cares if someone directs something racist at me?




What would you like me to say instead?




Well if males as you say have an advantage how would that suggest my privilege is being taken away? Next thing you'll be accusing me of being a misogynist. But (sorry for lack of a better term in your eyes) the left like to throw accusations of certain keywords around, it's nothing knew and often shows the lack of ability to debate at the same time reducing the power of these keywords to nothing more than everyday terms.

I'm complaining about our government's inability to quash a rising threat to my way of life (and alot of other things) just because they fear being labelled as a racist, fascist, xenophobe, NAZI and all the rest of it.




You're holding contempt for those who have an increasing concern and a right to freedom of speech and protest. Why exactly should Muslims get the right to build mosques wherever they like? Where is the process of debate and ultimately democracy in that? I know in my area they want to turn the setting of Byker Grove school into a mosque, what gives them that right especially when the majority oppose it. It seems the minorities have the perks for the simple fact they are the minority and take offence very easily, the government would be accused of this and that if the plans didn't go ahead.




Ok that's fine for you to hold that viewpoint but I would disagree entirely. The actions of the UAF are the ones who behave like ignorant children as they are generally the ones who don't allow the EDL's right to peacefully protest and are the ones who generally cause the violence. What was it, 58 arrests just yesterday?




There is nothing under UKIP policy which would suggest they are far-right in anyway infact they are more libertarian than most in some of their policies, labelling them as far-right is absurd. By labelling them as such you are alienating those with genuine concern and therefore they will be more inclined to vote for them assuming they weren't so sure at first. I look to them because I support their leader and policy not because they are right/left/centre ground etc.



Didn't you say earlier that citations were needed to prove the left were responsible for some of the difficult situations facing this country based on what I said? You've basically just admitted it yourself. You are right, he is an incredibly dishonest politician and to be fair he has no face value. The fact he's able to get his say out in the media after his actions goes to show the level we have stooped too. I would agree with him here though even though he is partly responsible for a number of atrocities based of what he preaches against.




Of course it's not official because the public wouldn't allow it but that's not to say muslims aren't taking it into their own hands because I've seen videos and I've showed you a video which would suggest that they are.


TLR Islam is a threat and has never been wanted by a resounding majority, it was imposed upon us. Multiculturalism was just a guise for "we want your votes in future" because quite frankly it has been proven to not work.

I bet you'd have something to say if I imposed my rule over yours.

Way to twist and warp what I was saying. How about you read carefully next time or gain a better understanding before sharing a quite frankly, dire response. I think in future I shall restrain myself from commenting on a forum full of bigoted teens.

Next time you're out find a police officer and an Asian in near proximity and call them a P a k i, see where it gets you.

I also never suggested that the government was/wasn't racist and all the rest of it. I was merely expressing that they don't want to be perceived in that way because that wouldn't be a very appealing concept for their party.

Did you have anything you wanted to share on the current topic of Islam or are you just looking to impress your friends over here? Maybe you don't like me and want to argue? Either way I won't be losing any sleep and your points would make way for comedy reading.

I actually saw that episode of Panorama and it's exactly as I described. They verbally suggest stuff but they never actually force anyone to do anything. Therefore, legal.



Example (one of many): In 2011 Anders Breivik slaughtered dozens of teenagers in Norway in the name of Christianity. Funnily enough if you read his point of view You must login or register to view this content. it's identical to your own and that of the EDL.

Point being, people "reign down terror" in the streets of nations all over the world for more religions than just Islam. So, I'll ask again, why are you singling out Islam?



...



Christianity then.



Christianity again. Gay marriage is a recent example of this.



Christian ministers do this sort of stuff. In America there was one who ended up on CNN because he thought that we should round up all the homosexuals and put them in a pen somewhere a la Auschwitz.



You either have freedom of speech or you don't. The problem I have with censoring this sort of speech is that at the end of the day some most likely untrustworthy politicians are going to be the ones to decide what qualifies as hate speech and that quickly results in censorship. We all have different opinions on what qualifies so it's infinitely easier to just say "screw it, say whatever you want". Nobody can be forced to be violent through some cleric spewing religious crap. If somebody is violent following that, it's the legal fault of the one carrying out the act of violence.



Bahahahahahahahahaha. Literally the funniest, most out of whack opinion I've read in here for months. Bahahaha. Sorry, but I feel the need to show how comical I find this to be. The Daily Mail is an insidious, manipulative, demonstrably lying tabloid that only seeks to serve its own political agenda. It cares not for truth.



So the big tabloids that could easily be in cahoots with the government get freedom of speech but we the citizens don't? WHY?



Hurrah, we're getting somewhere. This is exactly what I'm saying regarding those clerics you mentioned.



A few acts of 'terror' versus influencing millions of voters on significantly more important matters... hmm. Honestly I think the Daily Mail are worse.



Or alternatively the extreme views are the ones that gain airtime, just as with the 'extreme' sect of Islam. Most Muslims don't incite violence and most Brits don't want the eradication of Islam.



You should note that even I, someone very irreligious and antitheistic, am willing to defend Islam here. That should mean something.



Fixed: Ignorant people only now have the opportunity to spout their nonsense in their masses without fear of retribution.

Again, please provide an example of "the left" stifling debate here. I suspect the words you're looking for are "disagreeing with", though.



And what would they do to those who disobey? Hint: Nothing, because they're not willing to break the law. They're only a little more pushy than those preachers that come knocking at my door every other week.



You know I don't trust the Daily Mail and I've explained why. They're an incredibly biased and hypocritical source. They're essentially our equivalent of Fox News. Find any other source and I'll take the time to read it.



No, most Muslims are not the ones holding this threat, a minority are. You keep forgetting that.



Here is a prime example to prove that we're at a further societal stage than those countries. Instead of throwing them out along with the millions of peaceful Muslims, we should just ignore them. Literally, that's it. This fuss is over ever so little and yet it will inevitable affect so many, and all because you're letting a minority of violent Muslims speak for the majority. As I said, the extreme views are always the ones to get the airtime.



Define "my way of life". Assuming way of life merely means political views, I'd argue that Christianity and the monarchy are currently threatening what I deem to be my way of life. And yet incredibly I'm not demanding that they all leave the country and their beliefs be perished.



That last sentence reeks of Islamophobia. They are people just like you and me. They are not inherently any more or less trustworthy just because of their religious beliefs. I don't distrust all Christians because of a few 'extremists' - you need to show Muslims the same courtesy.



I'll deny it until you find a source with verifiable numbers. Honestly I feel that certain sources (see: Daily Mail) are skewing your world view... but I'm happy to be corrected, just find me a proper source.



Source...



It's an insult because people, such as those in the EDL, use it as an insult. They believe it is negative to be a P*kistani and thus use it as an insult. The same goes for homosexuality and the constant slurring with the words "gay" and "faggot". Us white, straight guys don't have the same perils to contend with.




Be specific. If for example the BBC says something you disagree with, quote it and source it. Don't use a blanket term like "the left". That tells me nothing.



We're in a gradual process of that privilege being taken away right now. Fortunately.



Misogynist means something. "The left" does not.

As it happens I disagree massively with what the current feminist movement has become so it's unlikely that you'll see me throwing that particular word around.



You distrust all Muslims because of the actions of a few. You're only willing to work with your current "way of life", whatever that is. You are a good few of those words above.

By the way, I'm getting sick of seeing socially 'behind' people using the term "political correctness" as an opportunity to play the victim card. You are not a victim. Neither am I. You are however making millions of Muslims the victims and so needlessly.



They're using their own freedom of speech to try and remove someone else's freedom of speech. Oh the irony. Yes I will scorn them for that.



Lots of people near me don't want some place turned into a new block of flats over at Cat Hill. There's been a big campaign about it and hundreds of people have voiced opposition, and yet it's going ahead anyway. That happens. The mosque thing isn't because of "political correctness", it's most likely just down to money and/or demand.



Heh, I wasn't aware of that until now. Sure, as much as I agree with the UAF's point of view*, they shouldn't have done that. A similar thing happened between the police and some pro-republicanism protesters at the jubilee. Shouldn't be allowed.

* Assuming UAF = Unite Against Fascism which I found courtesy of Google.



I see the resemblance to libertarianism I guess. Socially their views are very much far right though.



He's responsible, not every liberal politician or supporter.



Ignoring his political angling I agree. But certain news outlets love controversy and that's what this gives them.



Putting up a poster. A Daily Mail article. Yes, how convincing.



Multiculturalism... hmm. Maybe it's just not imposing artificial barriers between different people?



Most definitely, but even the extreme Muslims aren't doing that. We both know they've no political chance of that.

I think that any terrorist who acts in the name of religion is a poor representation of their belief, just like how I think any UKIP member who makes a racist comment is a poor representation of the party. Basically all I have to say on this whole Islam promotes terrorism argument.

I can't even be bothered to reply much because we aren't going to agree, so let's agree to disagree. Just a few notes I'd pick up on though when I said "reign down terror" "in our streets", why would I need to care about other nations streets if I'm not living there? I'm only fixated on what's happening on the streets of my country because it effects me.

I also distrust Muslims because they have given me a reason too. You can blather on about Christianity being this and that but we're a christian nation and the laws of Christianity have never been forced upon me unlike what Muslims are trying to do, minority or not. You also twisted the view from Anders Breivik, he done it because he didn't support or want the Islamic cultural Marxist ideology being forced upon him by the left as such we are seeing from this country& the rest of Europe. He didn't do it because the bible told him to do it so really you cannot compare the situation. Christianity was never a motive, Islamaphobia was.

People have a reason to be afraid of this rising threat and you can kick it into the long grass all you want but terrorist attacks in the name of Islam are always and more likely to happen than any other religion. I mean people really fear those Buddhists, the worst thing they could possibly do is set themselves on fire.

If you consider posters that incite death or violence; burning of poppies; terrorists attacks; Muslims verbally abusing soldiers families as freedom of speech then you must be living in a very one-sided view of the world.

Quite honestly you make it sound as if Islam is this so-called religion of "peace" and that's where the right-wing are becoming more and more vocal because we're not blind to what happens around the world and especially at home. Also "a few attacks", what world are you living on? I could find an attack every few days which was motivated by Islam on the Internet. If you honestly believe the the killing of Lee Rigby was all it took for people to take to the streets then you are seriously deluded.

It's abit like those Turkish riots where some people think they're happening solely because the government wanted to demolish a natural preserve yet in reality it's been a pressure cooker over the last decade where he is increasingly becoming authoritarian and edging closer to Islamic law; banning alcohol etc. No wonder the Turks are rioting because they know they'd be plunged back into the 10th Century under his governance. Not too far off in this country either with the increasing amount of Muslim immigrants.

The politically incorrect truth about Islam, you lot don't like to hear it. All religion is messed up but this is in a class of its' own.

Something interesting I picked up on. Terrorist attacks since 9/11 from Islamic extemists. Over 21,000 deadly attacks and counting You must login or register to view this content.

No
He used Christianity as a motive it was also mixed with Islamaphobia dishonest to state otherwise. Analogous same goals as al-Qaida any attacks carried out by Anders Breivik. You also need to learn history Christianity was forced on this nation minority or not but it was done.
You appear to me to have a case of Islamophobia.
Forget the facts and rewrite the rules in order to get your point across.

We can agree on one thing cake is a lie.

Assumingly it was Liam

:p wanted to check if people read my posts.
Also rewriting the rules.

He's Christian but there was nothing written in the bible that influenced him to commit those atrocities. He wanted to preserve European culture which in itself is linked to Christianity so it does have that aspect.

I don't need to learn about Christianity being forced on this nation because we would be going back a more or less a millenia and in no way effects me directly. So because Christianity was forced on us by a minority that makes the actions of Muslims who are forcing their religious beliefs upon me somehow acceptable? The only thing that has been done without my consent regarding the Christian religion was a baptism but that's because parents just see it as something that should be done with little connection to religion itself.

Really, me islamophobic? I thought that was patently obvious throughout my many replies. You say that as if it makes me a worse person for it, myself and many others have a number of reasons to be islamophobic. It's not as if I just woke up one day and thought I'm going to start hating this religion and supporters of it, it was a gradual process. Any religion that regards me as an infideland ultimately an enemy automatically shows the bigotry and extremism from within.

Forget the facts? I could get a number of facts related the negative aspects of Islam and trust me there are many, infact I'd just have to show you the videos. I really cannot remember any "honour killings" in the name of Christianity probably because there are near enough none. The fact they want to overturn British law and replace it with Shari'a just shows that they have absolutely no regard for others especially when in a number of cases they weren't even born here.

"The Qu'ran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers. Some are quite graphic. Qur'an 2:191-193 and Qur'an 3:151 are some of many.

Qur'an 5:51 : Muslims are not to take Jews and the Christians for friends, the allah god describes them as 'unjust people'. Concerning violence Qur'an 8:12 says "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

I cannot believe you actually think you have an argument other than the fact that it's a minority. As I've said before if moderate muslims are 100% opposed to the extreme element and the call for Sharia then they should have and should continue to do more to rally up against it. They are the ones that are going to suffer as a result because people are feeling threatened and have been threatened in their own streets. As it stands it's going to get worse before it gets better because the government seems to oblivious and devoid of facts regarding Islam, Nick Clegg is so deluded he thinks it's a very peaceful religion.

As long as they intend to cause terror and keep pushing their wishes for Sharia with absolutely no regard for the population then I will always be an Islamophobe. The fact Shari'a law is still applicable in the modern age is beyond me yet they continue to press for it.

And where equality is concerned how come Muslim women are still allowed to wear the Burkha where I myself get wrong in certain areas for wearing a hood. It's an old argument but it's still applicable.

You seem to be avoiding some of the content I'm linking regarding Muslims such as those who declared the street as a Muslim only area but you're good at avoiding those things. Care to state what rules I'm rewriting?


Cake isn't a lie, religion is.