|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 9, 2024 7:00:01 GMT
linkStarmer is providing £30 million to protect the muslim community and their mosques. But it seems that the Jews pay for the protection of their synagogues (from muslims usually) themselves, and the govt don't give money to the Church to protect their churches. (BTW most of the churches in the Middle East have been burnt down - too late to protect them). I don't object to the police protecting a mosque, on an ad hoc basis, if it comes under attack from rioters. But I think that if we're going to be giving money to protect mosques in general (presumably because the Labour govt wants the muslim vote) there should be some quid pro quo. For a start mosques should be open to all (like churches) and we should check them for extremist literature and hate preaching. After the Manchester Arena attack some muslim scholars went to the Didsbury mosque (which the bomber attended) and found extremist literature and an imam calling for "armed jihad in the UK". This was reported to the police but no action was taken despite the fact that it was a clear breach of the laws on incitement. It seems to me that the muslims behave extremely badly in the UK but our police and our govt are so shit scared of them that they spend their time grovelling to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Aug 9, 2024 7:58:43 GMT
linkStarmer is providing £30 million to protect the muslim community and their mosques. But it seems that the Jews pay for the protection of their synagogues (from muslims usually) themselves, and the govt don't give money to the Church to protect their churches. (BTW most of the churches in the Middle East have been burnt down - too late to protect them). I don't object to the police protecting a mosque, on an ad hoc basis, if it comes under attack from rioters. But I think that if we're going to be giving money to protect mosques in general (presumably because the Labour govt wants the muslim vote) there should be some quid pro quo. For a start mosques should be open to all (like churches) and we should check them for extremist literature and hate preaching. After the Manchester Arena attack some muslim scholars went to the Didsbury mosque (which the bomber attended) and found extremist literature and an imam calling for "armed jihad in the UK". This was reported to the police but no action was taken despite the fact that it was a clear breach of the laws on incitement. It seems to me that the muslims behave extremely badly in the UK but our police and our govt are so shit scared of them that they spend their time grovelling to them. There is a more general principle in operation here. You recall the comment of let them eat cake, well in a way the same fuck you attitude is present in the UK. You see the majority of the UK want these bastards deported, but applying the let them eat cake procedure, if the proles complain, the establishment responds with the opposite and gives even more money to their enemy. What this is likely to do is generate more violence. It will create even bigger angry crowds next time there is a killing. Someone might get badly hurt, even end up in hospital with broken bones. This is what happens when you up the ante. It stores up in people as repressed anger which will unleash on them all at once, with or without security. The Berlin Wall was supposedly secure, but the force of the people made the inevitable happen and with all the more vigour. Like the Berlin Wall, these will become symbols of hate. |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Aug 9, 2024 8:59:10 GMT
It is clear Starmer has taken sides, the whole situation is like a pressure cooker with the lid on, and securely fastened.
An explosion is coming, which may be good, that the whole thing will be reset, and with all explosions, its how things come down, where all things land that will determine the future. Starmer has written his political epitaph, this cannot continue, being the enemy of the ordinary englishman.
And expressing it over and over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Aug 9, 2024 9:53:53 GMT
The King must be very proud of what is happening within his kingdom. He's a keen admirer of Salafism/Wahhabism, which is found in hardline Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 9, 2024 12:30:54 GMT
It is interesting how little the King says about what's going on. It's fair enough that he wants to keep out of politics but he seems very happy to make asinine comments about climate change at every opportunity - and he is meant to be "the defender of faiths". So what does he think about the hard-line mosques that are cropping up all over the UK? Nothing apparently.
|
|
|
|
Post by wassock on Aug 9, 2024 14:06:01 GMT
linkStarmer is providing £30 million to protect the muslim community and their mosques. But it seems that the Jews pay for the protection of their synagogues (from muslims usually) themselves, and the govt don't give money to the Church to protect their churches. (BTW most of the churches in the Middle East have been burnt down - too late to protect them). I don't object to the police protecting a mosque, on an ad hoc basis, if it comes under attack from rioters. But I think that if we're going to be giving money to protect mosques in general (presumably because the Labour govt wants the muslim vote) there should be some quid pro quo. For a start mosques should be open to all (like churches) and we should check them for extremist literature and hate preaching. After the Manchester Arena attack some muslim scholars went to the Didsbury mosque (which the bomber attended) and found extremist literature and an imam calling for "armed jihad in the UK". This was reported to the police but no action was taken despite the fact that it was a clear breach of the laws on incitement. It seems to me that the muslims behave extremely badly in the UK but our police and our govt are so shit scared of them that they spend their time grovelling to them. Unless the CofE received £30+ million as well, then no. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 9, 2024 16:31:09 GMT
linkStarmer is providing £30 million to protect the muslim community and their mosques. But it seems that the Jews pay for the protection of their synagogues (from muslims usually) themselves, and the govt don't give money to the Church to protect their churches. (BTW most of the churches in the Middle East have been burnt down - too late to protect them). I don't object to the police protecting a mosque, on an ad hoc basis, if it comes under attack from rioters. But I think that if we're going to be giving money to protect mosques in general (presumably because the Labour govt wants the muslim vote) there should be some quid pro quo. For a start mosques should be open to all (like churches) and we should check them for extremist literature and hate preaching. After the Manchester Arena attack some muslim scholars went to the Didsbury mosque (which the bomber attended) and found extremist literature and an imam calling for "armed jihad in the UK". This was reported to the police but no action was taken despite the fact that it was a clear breach of the laws on incitement. It seems to me that the muslims behave extremely badly in the UK but our police and our govt are so shit scared of them that they spend their time grovelling to them. Unless the CofE received £30+ million as well, then no. The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Ripley on Aug 9, 2024 17:10:09 GMT
Unless the CofE received £30+ million as well, then no. The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best I couldn't agree more. The state needs to stay out of religion and religion needs to stay the hell out of politics. |
|
|
|
Post by wassock on Aug 9, 2024 17:24:32 GMT
Unless the CofE received £30+ million as well, then no. The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best The UK wasn't built on Islam. All the best. |
|
|
|
Post by wassock on Aug 9, 2024 17:27:23 GMT
The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best I couldn't agree more. The state needs to stay out of religion and religion needs to stay the hell out of politics. Of all documented human wars, only 7% were not religious based. Excluding religion from politics hasn't done mankind any favours. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Aug 9, 2024 17:44:55 GMT
UK law enforcement should police and protect everyone — even proscribed organisations should be dealt with lawfully and not by ad hoc vigilante groups.
The UK is supposedly Christian. If it wants to remain impartial in religious arguments, why doesn’t it ditch its state religion and afford equal legal status to all beliefs…?
|
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 9, 2024 17:45:27 GMT
The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best The UK wasn't built on Islam. All the best. Your point? Christianity is as much a foreign religion as Islam, it just happened further back in history. You are aware that the UK is so NOT a Christian country that we had to be "converted" twice. My point stands: Religion is a matter of Personal Choice, not a matter of state funding and subsidies. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 9, 2024 17:47:03 GMT
I couldn't agree more. The state needs to stay out of religion and religion needs to stay the hell out of politics. Excluding religion from politics hasn't done mankind any favours. Does you have any evidence to support that claim? That's just another reason to fully separate Church and State. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Aug 9, 2024 18:47:41 GMT
The UK wasn't built on Islam. All the best. Your point? Christianity is as much a foreign religion as Islam, it just happened further back in history. You are aware that the UK is so NOT a Christian country that we had to be "converted" twice. My point stands: Religion is a matter of Personal Choice, not a matter of state funding and subsidies. All The Best That won’t register any more than that the flag many of our patriots wrap around themselves incorporates the cross of a Greek or perhaps Turkish martyr who’s also venerated in Islam. My response to all is believe what you want, but because I don’t burst out laughing at your tales, don’t expect me not to be amused by some of your more far fetched accusations of others, or your own ideas based mostly on legend and myth… |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 9, 2024 19:14:51 GMT
The CoE has received many hundreds of times that over the centuries. I'd argue that no religious organisation at all should be in receipt of public money. Religion is a Personal Choice not a matter of State; and certainly not a matter that should be fund or subsidised by the general taxpayer. All The Best The UK wasn't built on Islam. All the best. Does that make any difference?🤔 |
|
