|
|
Post by sandypine on May 5, 2023 8:48:53 GMT
But you're not in the right mind. You believe you have a special right to dictate who is and isn't allowed to protest, and you do this with propaganda. I know what the EDL are and I know the history of this Tommy Robinson character. I am under no illusion that he's Mr Innocent, but I know for a fact that the vast majority of violence is instigated by the Left. I've seen it first hand from AntiFA, who you probably adore.
There was nothing racist about the EDL.
The so called "English Defence League" was originally formed from soccer hooligans, skinheads, casuals and mostly young men with racist views. This is the difinitive, factual origins of the EDL. Many EDL demonstrations ended up in violence, usually fueled by over-consumption of alcohol, and often cocaine. Many EDL demonstrations ended up in attacking either Mosques, Asian businesses and sometimes Asian people, these attacks were often indiscriminate, with many Hindus and Sikhs physically attacked, and often verbaly accosted and intimidated with abusive, threataning and insulting language. Sometimes Temples (Hindu) and Gurdwaras (Sikh) were attacked This is what Wikipedia states about the EDL and EDL activity (all from testimony in court cases) >>
"although many attending its rallies stated that they did so because they enjoyed the adrenalin rush brought on by violent confrontation.[249] Some also described violent clashes as the best way to draw media attention to their cause,[250] and presented their violence as being heroic.[251] Meadowcroft and Morrow argued that many football hooligans joined the EDL because of the opportunity that its rallies offered for violence at a time when there were decreasing opportunities to do so at football matches themselves due to greater use of banning orders targeting known hooligans, a more effective police presence, and increasing ticket prices that had becoming prohibitively high for those on low incomes.[51]ANYONE who describes the EDL as "not racist" is basically an Arse Hole So just to be clear again. You find some in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs and in the main I cannot disagree but what you then do is attribute their views and actions onto the whole group of people who associate themselves with them. That is a bit like saying radical Muslims are what Islam is all about and we know how much you despise that viewpoint. What I find fascinating with the left and very very worrying is this ability to preach in moral tones as regards tolerance, understanding and the rights of others and almost in the same breath be viciously intolerant completely misunderstand and be quite prepared to trample all over the rights of others as they see fit. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 9:32:06 GMT
B-4 >> You have no evidence whatsoever that the EDL was racist and your post is just full of your own arrogant and clueless nonsense, which is probably passed down to you by your far-left mates. Football hooligans are not racists. You can describe me as an arsehole all you like. After all, it's only coming from another liar in Labour. -------------------------------------------No evidence ? ... Even a Chimpanzee with half a brain can see the evidence, its everywhere, on-line, in newspaper archives, on film, on YouTube, in pictures, in sources of reference. Far left ? ... Well I realise it would "fit in" with your bigoted, narrow minded stereotyping, but I guess it must be a bit of a disappointment for you to learn that I dont particularly like the "far left". Now in this first video from ITN News, the so called EDL are protesting because Muslims in Dudley wish to build a new Mosque ( a place of worship ), and the EDL show their opposition by marching along a street, with flags, shouting " E...e...edl". ( they look like very inteligent people ) www.youtube.com/watch?v=r93xAqUreY4In the second video by ITV News Central, an EDL march in Walsall results in bottles, stones, bricks a pieces of wood been thrown at police and reporters. www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FZ75Xq4HBU
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 9:43:26 GMT
sandypine ... So just to be clear again. You find some in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs and in the main I cannot disagree but what you then do is attribute their views and actions onto the whole group of people who associate themselves with them. That is a bit like saying radical Muslims are what Islam is all about and we know how much you despise that viewpoint. What I find fascinating with the left and very very worrying is this ability to preach in moral tones as regards tolerance, understanding and the rights of others and almost in the same breath be viciously intolerant completely misunderstand and be quite prepared to trample all over the rights of others as they see fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------
No - I do not find SOME in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs, I find the majority of them unpleasant and thugs
If you associate yourself with the EDL, then you clearly have bigoted views
I can very easily distinguish Islamic extremists and terrorists from mainstream Muslims, I know the difference, and I know how extremely unfair it is to associate murderers, terrorists or extremists with most Muslims - pity that the EDL do not have the same ability to do the same.
My views on the EDL have got absolutely nothing what so ever to do with politics of the Left, and many people from a wide cross section of politics agree with my standpoint, my views have got everything to do with values of democracy, freedom, including the right to Freedom Of Religion, all faiths, and for people to be treated equaly.
The EDL, or whats now left of the shower of shit, were a threat to such basic, decent principles
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 9:50:13 GMT
The so called "English Defence League" was originally formed from soccer hooligans, skinheads, casuals and mostly young men with racist views. This is the difinitive, factual origins of the EDL. Many EDL demonstrations ended up in violence, usually fueled by over-consumption of alcohol, and often cocaine. Many EDL demonstrations ended up in attacking either Mosques, Asian businesses and sometimes Asian people, these attacks were often indiscriminate, with many Hindus and Sikhs physically attacked, and often verbaly accosted and intimidated with abusive, threataning and insulting language. Sometimes Temples (Hindu) and Gurdwaras (Sikh) were attacked This is what Wikipedia states about the EDL and EDL activity (all from testimony in court cases) >>
"although many attending its rallies stated that they did so because they enjoyed the adrenalin rush brought on by violent confrontation.[249] Some also described violent clashes as the best way to draw media attention to their cause,[250] and presented their violence as being heroic.[251] Meadowcroft and Morrow argued that many football hooligans joined the EDL because of the opportunity that its rallies offered for violence at a time when there were decreasing opportunities to do so at football matches themselves due to greater use of banning orders targeting known hooligans, a more effective police presence, and increasing ticket prices that had becoming prohibitively high for those on low incomes.[51]ANYONE who describes the EDL as "not racist" is basically an Arse Hole So just to be clear again. You find some in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs and in the main I cannot disagree but what you then do is attribute their views and actions onto the whole group of people who associate themselves with them. That is a bit like saying radical Muslims are what Islam is all about and we know how much you despise that viewpoint. What I find fascinating with the left and very very worrying is this ability to preach in moral tones as regards tolerance, understanding and the rights of others and almost in the same breath be viciously intolerant completely misunderstand and be quite prepared to trample all over the rights of others as they see fit. It's strange that they're so blinded to their own hypocrisy, bigotry and racism, even if they're driven by their deluded self-righteous and arrogant virtue signalling. After all, this is a guy who believes his opinion should override any other, where those he doesn't like shouldn't be allowed to protest. It's why they formed anti-protest protests and demanded, in true illiberal fashion, for government to ban protests. They have no tolerance for anything that questions or challenges their insanity and shameless double standards.
Even now, after he was screaming racist, he's moved goal posts. He obviously cannot even look into the grey area and just ends up sounding like an extremist.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 5, 2023 14:26:29 GMT
sandypine ... So just to be clear again. You find some in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs and in the main I cannot disagree but what you then do is attribute their views and actions onto the whole group of people who associate themselves with them. That is a bit like saying radical Muslims are what Islam is all about and we know how much you despise that viewpoint. What I find fascinating with the left and very very worrying is this ability to preach in moral tones as regards tolerance, understanding and the rights of others and almost in the same breath be viciously intolerant completely misunderstand and be quite prepared to trample all over the rights of others as they see fit. ----------------------------------------------------------------No - I do not find SOME in the EDL as unpleasant people and thugs, I find the majority of them unpleasant and thugs If you associate yourself with the EDL, then you clearly have bigoted views I can very easily distinguish Islamic extremists and terrorists from mainstream Muslims, I know the difference, and I know how extremely unfair it is to associate murderers, terrorists or extremists with most Muslims - pity that the EDL do not have the same ability to do the same. My views on the EDL have got absolutely nothing what so ever to do with politics of the Left, and many people from a wide cross section of politics agree with my standpoint, my views have got everything to do with values of democracy, freedom, including the right to Freedom Of Religion, all faiths, and for people to be treated equaly. The EDL, or whats now left of the shower of shit, were a threat to such basic, decent principles So I ask again as they are British Citizens, do the EDL have a right to demonstrate and disrupt some of society. Whether they are right or not is not the issue. You say people have a right to demonstrate and disrupt to make a point in a free society. Does that extend to the EDL? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 16:59:06 GMT
sandypine >> So I ask again as they are British Citizens, do the EDL have a right to demonstrate and disrupt some of society. Whether they are right or not is not the issue. You say people have a right to demonstrate and disrupt to make a point in a free society. Does that extend to the EDL?
-----------------------------------------------------------
In principle I agree that the EDL have a right to protest, but the reality is that far too many of their protests ended up in violence and street fighting, vandalism, and fear from both ordinary people and Asians in particular.
My personal view is that the EDL are "borderline" when it comes to whether the organisation ought to be proscribed, or banned from gathering.
My reasons for this are (1) as above, a record of violence, public riot and damage to property, and (2) there is sufficient evidence to prove that the EDL do not exist merely to protest agains extremism or grooming gangs, they are in fact Islamophobic or anti Muslim.
"The Incitement To Racial Hatred" became a criminal offence under "The Public Order Act 1986"
This offence refers to:
deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group
distributing racist material to the public
making inflammatory public speeches
creating racist websites on the Internet
inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group, for the purpose of spreading racial discontent.
Also .... The Racial And Religious Hatred Act 2006
(1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 5, 2023 17:21:37 GMT
sandypine >> So I ask again as they are British Citizens, do the EDL have a right to demonstrate and disrupt some of society. Whether they are right or not is not the issue. You say people have a right to demonstrate and disrupt to make a point in a free society. Does that extend to the EDL? -----------------------------------------------------------In principle I agree that the EDL have a right to protest, but the reality is that far too many of their protests ended up in violence and street fighting, vandalism, and fear from both ordinary people and Asians in particular. My personal view is that the EDL are "borderline" when it comes to whether the organisation ought to be proscribed, or banned from gathering. My reasons for this are (1) as above, a record of violence, public riot and damage to property, and (2) there is sufficient evidence to prove that the EDL do not exist merely to protest agains extremism or grooming gangs, they are in fact Islamophobic or anti Muslim. "The Incitement To Racial Hatred" became a criminal offence under "The Public Order Act 1986" This offence refers to: deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group distributing racist material to the public making inflammatory public speeches creating racist websites on the Internet inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group, for the purpose of spreading racial discontent. Also .... The Racial And Religious Hatred Act 2006 (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred. Then you have to ask why does violence occur so routinely and the answer is easy to see and occasionally reported accurately. Antifa are committed to violent opposition to those they deem fascist, there is no debate as regards who they so label, they are the sole arbiters of who is fascist and who they attack. They are aided by sister groups. I can recall there was a march in Bristol where the EDL were opposed by many groups and violence flared and even the BBC had to admit that a group of Asians had crept around the EDL and attacked them with stones, bottles and dustbins. In other marches, Stoke I believe, Antifa broke through police lines and started throwing bricks at the EDL crowd. As a side word during the BLM statues day there was a white man attacked at Waterloo station by a group of black men who accused him of being EDL. The papers were full of how a black man saved him from the crowd. Not a whisper about the racial attack or that his life was in danger from that attack which made it attempted murder and no charges forthcoming as far as I am aware. Pictures tell stories but actual events are often more informative. If the EDL are in breach of the law it is the police that deal with it and if these sites and actions are in breach of teh law why are so few charges brought despite many people like yourself endlessly complaining. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 20:58:16 GMT
I think it's obvious, he will support violence from the far-left, because it suits Labour to do so, whilst accusing his enemies of violence. He will accuse EVERYONE of racism, without further explanation, even when people are protesting the racial abuse that the Labour government and Labour councils ignored for years. Obviously we have blasphemy laws in this country that are a win-win for Islamism and the far-left, which the police act upon. They call it anti-fascism, but what they really mean is that they will violently attack anyone they disagree with then insist that authority deny those they disagree with the right to protest.
They're as intolerant and illiberal as the Islamists.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 5, 2023 21:16:57 GMT
I think it's obvious, he will support violence from the far-left, because it suits Labour to do so, whilst accusing his enemies of violence. He will accuse EVERYONE of racism, without further explanation, even when people are protesting the racial abuse that the Labour government and Labour councils ignored for years. Obviously we have blasphemy laws in this country that are a win-win for Islamism and the far-left, which the police act upon. They call it anti-fascism, but what they really mean is that they will violently attack anyone they disagree with then insist that authority deny those they disagree with the right to protest.
They're as intolerant and illiberal as the Islamists.
I think the worst of it is that he actually believes that the moral choices are his to make and if he believes a person must be cancelled for what Sid knows that person believes then that is only just and right, Freedom and rights are there to be used to give freedom and rights to the people who deserve those freedoms and rights, others are undeserving. His own words tell the tale and he cannot see it. Voltaire is spinning in his grave. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 21:23:41 GMT
Not before time . Maybe the protesters will now find more legitamate targets of protest than the public who quite frankly have had enough of them. At this rate the Left will have done so much damage that nobody will be able to protest.
They violently attack protests they disagree with.
They demand government ban protests they disagree with.
They intentionally break the law and undermine protest rights. They protest over things that are basically moronic and just to piss off the general public. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 21:33:27 GMT
I think it's obvious, he will support violence from the far-left, because it suits Labour to do so, whilst accusing his enemies of violence. He will accuse EVERYONE of racism, without further explanation, even when people are protesting the racial abuse that the Labour government and Labour councils ignored for years. Obviously we have blasphemy laws in this country that are a win-win for Islamism and the far-left, which the police act upon. They call it anti-fascism, but what they really mean is that they will violently attack anyone they disagree with then insist that authority deny those they disagree with the right to protest.
They're as intolerant and illiberal as the Islamists.
I think the worst of it is that he actually believes that the moral choices are his to make and if he believes a person must be cancelled for what Sid knows that person believes then that is only just and right, Freedom and rights are there to be used to give freedom and rights to the people who deserve those freedoms and rights, others are undeserving. His own words tell the tale and he cannot see it. Voltaire is spinning in his grave. To put it politely, yes, he's totally brainwashed and stuck up his own arsehole. There's no reasoning with these people and they will continue to strip liberties and rights away from people who do not share the same extreme authoritarian bigotry as they do. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 22:19:37 GMT
sandypine >> Then you have to ask why does violence occur so routinely and the answer is easy to see and occasionally reported accurately. Antifa are committed to violent opposition to those they deem fascist, there is no debate as regards who they so label, they are the sole arbiters of who is fascist and who they attack. They are aided by sister groups.
I can recall there was a march in Bristol where the EDL were opposed by many groups and violence flared and even the BBC had to admit that a group of Asians had crept around the EDL and attacked them with stones, bottles and dustbins. In other marches, Stoke I believe, Antifa broke through police lines and started throwing bricks at the EDL crowd. As a side word during the BLM statues day there was a white man attacked at Waterloo station by a group of black men who accused him of being EDL. The papers were full of how a black man saved him from the crowd. Not a whisper about the racial attack or that his life was in danger from that attack which made it attempted murder and no charges forthcoming as far as I am aware. Pictures tell stories but actual events are often more informative.
If the EDL are in breach of the law it is the police that deal with it and if these sites and actions are in breach of teh law why are so few charges brought despite many people like yourself endlessly complaining.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is how the EDL worked - firstly, they chose an area with a high population of Muslims, secondly they bus in hundreds of supporters to a protest or demonstration.
In every instance, the vast majority of people in the places they chose did not want the EDL there, they did not want their marches, their protests or their demonstrations. This was the case in Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley, the West Midlands, Newcastle, London and everywhere else.
If these were LOCAL protests by local people with genuine grievences, then perhaps I could understand - but they never were, the EDL had to bring in protesters from all over the country to their mass brawls, booze-ups and bust-ups.
In many instances there were no counter protests, and in other instances the counter protests were kept well apart by the police.
Chicken or Egg ? - If the EDL had not proposed or organised a demonstration in the first instance, then there would be no counter protest from groups opposing the EDL.
Wherever the EDL went, they caused violence, disruption, vandalism, riots, and in the towns they chose to protest, no one wanted them there.
The only word to describe the EDL is "scum", a bunch of bigoted, racist low lives with low intelligence, who's origins are in soccer hooligans, skinheads and lager louts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2023 22:29:42 GMT
Bristol doesn't have a high population of Muslims, so your first claim has been exposed as a lie. There were always counter-protests, and they would throw glass bottles and rocks at the EDL and the police.
The EDL didn't cause the violence, vandalism or the riots. They were a legitimate protest group which those you do support attacked with violence because you're intolerant of anyone you disagree with having the right to protest, as proven by your very posts.
You are against people you disagree with having rights, whilst insisting that only those you agree with should have rights. It's incredibly moronic of you to insist that those you disagree with should be denied Human Rights whilst accusing them of bigotry.
Still, if calling people names is all you have then I guess you're just very upset because the EDL were successful in disrupting the racist grooming gangs and exposed the media and government silence, which led to some action being taken.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 6, 2023 9:18:59 GMT
sandypine >> Then you have to ask why does violence occur so routinely and the answer is easy to see and occasionally reported accurately. Antifa are committed to violent opposition to those they deem fascist, there is no debate as regards who they so label, they are the sole arbiters of who is fascist and who they attack. They are aided by sister groups.
I can recall there was a march in Bristol where the EDL were opposed by many groups and violence flared and even the BBC had to admit that a group of Asians had crept around the EDL and attacked them with stones, bottles and dustbins. In other marches, Stoke I believe, Antifa broke through police lines and started throwing bricks at the EDL crowd. As a side word during the BLM statues day there was a white man attacked at Waterloo station by a group of black men who accused him of being EDL. The papers were full of how a black man saved him from the crowd. Not a whisper about the racial attack or that his life was in danger from that attack which made it attempted murder and no charges forthcoming as far as I am aware. Pictures tell stories but actual events are often more informative.
If the EDL are in breach of the law it is the police that deal with it and if these sites and actions are in breach of teh law why are so few charges brought despite many people like yourself endlessly complaining. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is how the EDL worked - firstly, they chose an area with a high population of Muslims, secondly they bus in hundreds of supporters to a protest or demonstration. In every instance, the vast majority of people in the places they chose did not want the EDL there, they did not want their marches, their protests or their demonstrations. This was the case in Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley, the West Midlands, Newcastle, London and everywhere else. If these were LOCAL protests by local people with genuine grievences, then perhaps I could understand - but they never were, the EDL had to bring in protesters from all over the country to their mass brawls, booze-ups and bust-ups. In many instances there were no counter protests, and in other instances the counter protests were kept well apart by the police. Chicken or Egg ? - If the EDL had not proposed or organised a demonstration in the first instance, then there would be no counter protest from groups opposing the EDL. Wherever the EDL went, they caused violence, disruption, vandalism, riots, and in the towns they chose to protest, no one wanted them there. The only word to describe the EDL is "scum", a bunch of bigoted, racist low lives with low intelligence, who's origins are in soccer hooligans, skinheads and lager louts. You are arguing against the rights you wish extended to all (except those you disagree with). If one is demonstrating against Muslim rape gangs and Muslim terrorism being promoted in Mosques then it is both idiotic and of no real consequence if you protest in Orbiston Parva instead of areas where Muslims live. They are not protesting against Muslims but against radical Muslims and criminal Muslims that are ineffectively countered within those communities. Just stop oil target motorists using oil, they do not sit down in a farmers field to stop him harvesting potatoes. Most motorists do not want Just stop oil to be in their area but they have no choice but to suffer disruption, somehow this is a right for you but if locals object to EDL then the local wishes should be respected. This is hypocrisy on a grand scale that you are obviously blind to. The M25 sit ins were not LOCAL people with real grievances (again a real grievance is something YOU decide on). Chicken or egg? If the Just stop oil protestors did not sit in the road then there would be no risk of any violence yet you support that right. THis again is hypocrisy on your part when you say JSO have a right to do it but EDL must not do it. When the EDL marched there were always counter protests by Antifa and when Muslim gangs could not get at the EDL they attacked the police instead. In Birmingham the police charged six Asian men who had plotted to attack the EDL march in 2012 and video evidence is clear on many marches from whence the initial violence came. Your last sentence also illustrates well the British value of tolerance as exercised by the left. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on May 7, 2023 12:25:10 GMT
Sid is a lefty, an anarchist. He believes that anyone who waves an English flag is a far right extremist, that anyone who believes in English nationalism is a racist, but he fully supports Welsh or Scottish nationalism. Which kinda suggests he's a bit of a racist, a closet bigot. You know the sort... No he isn’t,I often disagree with him but he’s not an anarchist and supporting labour doesn’t make you so. I used to vote labour and I’ve been called a lefty liberal **** and I’ve also been called a nazi, extremists whether right or left are a pita but Yaxley Lennon is a mammoth ****. As it happens, I used to be a fully paid up card carrying member of the Labour party. OK I'm going back a while, but it goes to show that people can and do see the light.  |
|
