Censorship and Social Media

[Spindle]

I don’t know the details either but the Jewish scheme is primarily funded and run by the Jewish community, so presumably the grant is just a top up to help with the increased threat.

I don’t defend those who use violence against people they don’t share values with, whatever the reason or whoever they are. Such attitudes need to be eradicated. It’s how we do that where differences occur.

Got any suggestions as to how we eradicate this Islamic violence?

I have.

 

[Spindle]

My comment about integration was far from foolish.

Do you seriously think that if an immigrant to this country marries a local and they have a child together that they haven’t integrated? I know someone extremely well who has done precisely that, has become a British citizen, has many British friends and has lived here for many years. They aren’t Pakistani!

So when I told you I had never said the things you claimed I said about Pakistani’s marrying their cousins etc, you using the example you did as justification wasn’t just completely wrong. It was ridiculously wrong.

You now owe me yet another apology.

None of which has the remotest of remote connections to the plight of those working for governments here and the EU and helping to prepare the social media legislation. They are being revenge targeted by the Trump administration. Nothing to do with integration at all. In fact one of them has integrated, thus heightening the unfairness, but the attack on him was not because of integration.

It seems to me you are unable to accept when you have been caught out and can only respond with crude insults. Just man up and apologise.

Good god you are as smart as Forrest Gump. I just laid it out for you with screenshots and you are too dense to understand what you wrote. Do you even know what logic is? Or hypocrisy? Or what an analogy is?

A Pakistani with a British passport IS a Brit, and if they get their cousin over from Pakistan to marry, who IS Pakistani, then in your view is that immigrant integrated? That's your logic from what you said before and again now.

What a weapon.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Good god you are as smart as Forrest Gump. I just laid it out for you with screenshots and you are too dense to understand what you wrote. Do you even know what logic is? Or hypocrisy? Or what an analogy is?

A Pakistani with a British passport IS a Brit, and if they get their cousin over from Pakistan to marry, who IS Pakistani, then in your view is that immigrant integrated? That's your logic from what you said before and again now.

What a weapon.

You wrote:-

“According to you marriages of Bradford Pakistanis to their first cousin in Pakistan, who comes over here then has 5 kids, all of whom support Pakistan in the cricket and go to a Muslim school, live in a 90% Muslim area, are integrated.”

I have never suggested that, and don’t believe it. You implying that something I said about an unrelated set of circumstances also means I think that, is just evidence of an extremely warped mind. It’s both incorrect and insulting. There’s no logic of yours involved. You don’t speak for me. I do. If I thought your example was true I would say so. I don’t. Nor does it have the slightest relevance to the behaviour of the US authorities towards government officials of the UK and EU involved in the preparation of social media legislation.

You are stacking up the number of times you need to apologise and digging your hole so deep your feet must be getting hot.

I await your apologies.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Got any suggestions as to how we eradicate this Islamic violence?

I have.

I have and have offered them here several times. You can find them if you are really interested so I won’t repeat them here, in this thread.

 

[Spindle]

You wrote:-

“According to you marriages of Bradford Pakistanis to their first cousin in Pakistan, who comes over here then has 5 kids, all of whom support Pakistan in the cricket and go to a Muslim school, live in a 90% Muslim area, are integrated.”

I have never suggested that, and don’t believe it. You implying that something I said about an unrelated set of circumstances also means I think that, is just evidence of an extremely warped mind. It’s both incorrect and insulting. There’s no logic of yours involved. You don’t speak for me. I do. If I thought your example was true I would say so. I don’t. Nor does it have the slightest relevance to the behaviour of the US authorities towards government officials of the UK and EU involved in the preparation of social media legislation.

You are stacking up the number of times you need to apologise and digging your hole so deep your feet must be getting hot.

I await your apologies.

You claimed that the US government was wrong citing that the accused had married a US citizen and had kids therefore was integrated, using it as a weapon to beat Trump with. I pointed out with an example that it doesn't mean he's integrated, and now you are denying it happened at all

Such a short time in life you have left and you're demanding unwarranted apologies online. Typical loony lefty with the faux offense and attempts at cancellation. Get stuffed.

 

[Spindle]

I have and have offered them here several times. You can find them if you are really interested so I won’t repeat them here, in this thread.

Oh yes, more of the same weakness that they exploit.

Useless.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

You seem to be seperating Islam and Muslim. By its very nature a follower of Islam is a Muslim. A Muslim is not necessarily a terrorist but - from what is reported - most terrorists are followers of Islam/in the name of Islam. The problem exists within the Muslim community and my conclusion is that if we are going to provide money to that community it should be to extract the terrorist element. That way the ‘stigma’ of being a Muslim is lessened or removed and we can all get on with our lives.
It still doesn’t explain why more government money is provided for the protection of the community that doesn’t appear to be under attack , whilst the community that is under attack receives half as much.

There seems to be a glimmer of agreement poking through here in the acceptance that not all Muslims are terrorists and that we need to extract the terrorist element.

The question then is how. My view being that we show the decent people that we care and that we want them on our side. So we will protect them. Showing them love and understanding ought, in time, begin to crack open the dividing lines and isolate the terrorist elements. The longer people are exposed to British culture the more they start to accept and value it.

How and why government money is being spent to achieve this is well beyond any area of my competence. I assume that there are expert bodies consulting on this which will include representatives of all the major religious groups. Such groups often having very good and close relationships at senior levels.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

You claimed that the US government was wrong citing that the accused had married a US citizen and had kids therefore was integrated, using it as a weapon to beat Trump with. I pointed out with an example that it doesn't mean he's integrated, and now you are denying it happened at all

Such a short time in life you have left and you're demanding unwarranted apologies online. Typical loony lefty with the faux offense and attempts at cancellation. Get stuffed.

Completely wrong. The fact that a particular individual happens to be married to a US citizen, and is settled in the USA, is a side issue to the behaviour of the US administration towards these people. It’s not the reason why it’s so wrong. It just adds another layer of cruelty and has nothing whatsoever to do with integration.

Ignoring requests for apologies when you have been shown to be repeatedly posting untrue claims is not something I would be proud of.

Other sites ban people for less. Perhaps that’s why you are here?

 

[ASCPFC]

Completely wrong. The fact that a particular individual happens to be married to a US citizen, and is settled in the USA, is a side issue to the behaviour of the US administration towards these people. It’s not the reason why it’s so wrong. It just adds another layer of cruelty and has nothing whatsoever to do with integration.

Ignoring requests for apologies when you have been shown to be repeatedly posting untrue claims is not something I would be proud of.

Other sites ban people for less. Perhaps that’s why you are here?

This site doesn't enjoy people calling for sanctions.
On immigration it's become needs must. I guarantee most people can see that. Tides have to go out sometimes. Not just keep coming in and in.

 

[eaglesdare]

It won't be long now untill we have to upload our IDs to any social media sites.

Simon Harris says Ireland to lead EU drive for ID-verified social media

In an interview with Extra.ie, Tánaiste Simon Harris said that the Government will lead calls for the introduction of ID-verified social media accounts.

extra.ie