:clap1::clap1::clap1::clap1::clap1:

This is of course wrong.I haven't seen anyone say that this is right(scuse the pun).
It is however understandable.If the far right are going to gain traction anywhere in the west then mainland Europe is an ideal candidate at the moment.
Masses of illegal immigrants are literally flooding Europe,a section of them are Islamists and a small section of those will and have acted on it.The EU has been absolutely fecking useless at dealing with it.If the whole of Europe had a sensible immigration policy and better border controls then towns like this would be less likely to pop up.This is probably born through fear and it's not an entirely irrational fear when attacks have happened and there is a strong possibility it will happen again.This town is dealing with the problem the wrong way but i can see more stories like this appearing until the inept EU pull their finger out.It is not a mystery as to why the far right are gaining strength in Europe.

It's just bad grammar, or at best a colloquialism.

Got it in one.:wavey::thumbs:

I would have thought the innate population of a country should be entitled to a say/vote on letting immigrants into the country or not.

As it is a contentious subject with the potential of having negative effects on existing citizens and/or future generations they have every right to an opinion and a say. What is wrong with that? Could it be that anyone objecting would do so because they fear the outcome.

Most democratic countries have elections to vote in a government who speak for them and the best interests of the country and its citizens. Immigration en masse has now become a very valid part of 'best interests' for many Western countries.

Muslim exremists and/or those Muslims demonstrating their antiquated and misogynistic views on women on our streets when 'parading' around them in Burkas are the main ones responsible for the increase in antiislamic feeling in the West and the increase in the numbers of people wanting to limit immigration.

If I were a Muslim I would be demonstrating against and doing more to speak up against Muslims refusing to integrate in the country they 'choose' to live.

Thank you very much, Alfie. Still... it gave Kizzy another chance to have a dig so... everyone's a winner.

So from this I have to assume that you currently demonstrate against the sub-communities of somewhat lawless white British people that exist mostly outside of the mainstream community, in every single town in the country?

No? Do you perhaps just get on with your own life? Is that perhaps what the generally well integrated Muslims in the UK want to do? You know... Go to work, spend time with their families, maybe have a hobby? Oh wait no they're duty bound to be political activists because after all, it's "folks like them" causing such trouble.

Comparing terrorists with "sub-communities of somewhat lawless white British people..." is kind of flawed because those sub-communities are not carrying out terrorist atrocities all over the world, particularly on other Muslims.

I think if people are concerned about the effects such behaviours are having on them and their community they should.

From a Muslim perspective I would have thought the current depth of feeling in so many ie Brexit would make me think and maybe want to do something about the 'minority' of Muslims potentially threatening the position of other Muslims.

Many such Muslims are clearly motivated to demonstrate against Brexit and Trump but not so clearly motivated to take action against Muslims that spoil things for them. They makes me wonder about their loyalties and priorities and clearly many others feel the same.

Quebec, Jo Cox, Dylann Roof ring any bells?

Members of these sub-communities are carrying out terrorist attacks across the western world. For some reason when a white supremacist commits an attrocity, the entire white population is not required to answer for their crimes.

Oh I think they are as demonstrated by how such 'comparisons' are used against anyone who dares to express any concerns about mass immigration.

Nothing special about this. White nationialists are welcome in all europen towns and cities.:shrug:

I don't see anyone comparing people concerned about immigration to these people, though. The government of this country is hell bent on ending free movement, for goodness' sake, even of they have to destroy the economy in the process. This whole idea that people who are worried about immigration are somehow labelled, attacked or shouted down and silenced- that they are somehow victims- is preposterous.

You're in the majority!!

As for my post, I was just commenting on the idea that you can't compare certain sub-communities of white people to terrorists is flawed, becaue there are terrorists who belong to those same sub-communities.

That's not the point at all. Merely an illustration that we all know fine well, if we're honest, that we do and should only represent ourselves and we are not responsible for the actions of others just because they fall under the same broad "grouping". Otherwise I, as a white (culturally) Christian man, would never stop apologising to everyone I encounter. But I don't apologise because I don't feel responsible in the slightest for the actions of other white blokes? They aren't me? I can fully understand why a peaceful Muslim individual living a peaceful life doesn't feel inclined to apologise for, and in fact would feel uncomfortable with the notion that they are expected to apologise for, the actions of random other Muslim individuals.

That's the comparison you made. And no, it isn't the point. We agree at last.

It's the comparison I made for a specific and clearly laid out reason, which you chose to ignore in favour of "But terrorists blow people up with bombs so it's not the same".

You're confusing "comparison" with "equation". You do that quite a lot, actually.

Excuse me you had a dig at DR for not understanding you, not everyone is a cockney sparra me ol china.
All I did was explain the semantic expression.

What was Thomas Mair?

A terrorist. And so was the guy that punched Nazi Richard Spencer. And so were the people who attacked innocent people at Berkley last week.

terrorist
ˈtɛrərɪst/
noun
noun: terrorist; plural noun: terrorists
1.
a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
"
1.
unlawfully using violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
"a terrorist organization"

Yes thank you, I was highlighting that sub communities of white British are terrorists too if they commit terrorist acts in their own communities or not.

Don't go putting the notion that only brown people can be called terrorists to bed fgs, back in the day when the IRA were active, every Irish person was considered a terrorist, were we brown no..did people complain about how it was wrong to treat Irish people in this way..no, its not a new thing to tar people with the same brush, but some people think they invented the wheel and that this is all new and of course can only be because everyone is racist

most of the *cough* left leaning members cannot remember the Troubles

:idc:

Its a pity the government stood back and allowed the fundraising for the ira to take place every saturday afternoon on the streets of glasgow....probably to many fingers in to many pies..or eachothers holes or young boys holes at the time for anyone concerned to care..bunch of paedos with to much to hide to just end it all.. bit like now with the fresh batch of child molesting beasts we have running the muslim and government stuff...hang the ****ing lot of them

Racism is the word of the day with some. It can shut down discussion and is constantly used by those trying to do just that.

It is also inflammatory and baiting behaviour and should be recognised as so by those dictating acceptable and non-acceptable behaviour in any such discussions.

If it walks like a duck....