Geert Wilders

johnnie, you been stewing the 'shrooms' 😉

Junkyard, sincere Christians would in no way wish any harm to you or anyone. God's commandment is to love one another.

At least a sensible contribution.
No been up Snowdon it rocked.
Just the ignorant nonesense written about Islam by people on here whose sole knowledge base is the media really get on my t1ts.
I consider many Muslims to be amongst my close friends and the perception that they either want to convert me to Islam or impose Sharia law or blow me up is just ridiculous.
Bunch of ignorant ***** *****

TYGER: What did Jesus say then about the sword did you read the quote ?

Junkyard, could you possibly be saying that both the Koran and the Bible are contradictory, confusing and complex documents, that rely to a great extent on interpretation and translation, and further to this they are frequently misused by people to justify hatred and violence that might not be in accordance with the basic tenets of their respective religions?

surely not?

no Z-11 I am saying you are doing this to serve your agenda … I think your earlier posts amply demonstrate this

I would further say that anyone who preaches hatred and engages in Jihad [ not the real pillar version but the Western version where struggle means war on the Infidel] has failed to be a good Muslim. More to the point so would 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all Muslims.

What did Jesus say then about the sword did you read the quote ?

Sorry, which quote?

No, I just do not recall you ever questioning the right of other minority groups from entering the UK.

Also interesting that, as is your wont, you fail to address the main point of the argument.

I don't know wtf you are talking about Rogerthecat. But if it helps, let me spell out exactly where I stand.

I am totally opposed to all those who incite hatred and violence. It does not make one iota of difference who they are.

I am equally opposed to any foreign Muslim coming to the UK to preach hatred.

I fully support the banning of such people ….as indeed many are.

However this thread is not about the right of a Muslim f**kwit to come here to preach hatred. It is about a Dutch, hate-filled f**kwit.

Furthermore, not only do I fully support the prosecution of any British Muslim who spreads hatred and incites others to commit acts of violence, but I damn well demand it.

And if you think I am only saying these things for the purpose of this thread, then I am more than happy for you to quote any of this post in the future.

**And for your information this is not a 'left-wing issue'. This present government which is somewhere to the right of Margaret Thatcher, wanted Geert Wilders barred from entering the UK because they were fully aware that he wasn't coming here on a sight-seeing tour – he came here to spread hatred. Indeed some on the far left despise Islam (which they see as a "medieval anti-left ideology") so much, that they are happy to see Geert Wilders film receive publicity.

ernie, are you a politician in real life…..
you never actually answer a question straightforwardly…
you do long drawn out roundabout answers to confuse people like me… 😆

you never actually answer a question straightforwardly…

I didn't spell out where I stand, eh ton ?

Actually I rather like giving direct answers to direct questions** …… so no, I'd make a rubbish politician 😐

** excluding the bollox which Ratty comes out with, when he makes puerile attempts to change the subject
….. I almost always ignore them 8)

look, you have done it again………. 🙄 😉

Sorry 😐

excused……. 😆

Well done Ernie – a straight answer, top man and we seem to agree on something.
What I was referring to was your usual politically polarised view, your overpowering self belief that yours is the one true path and the way you often change the axis of a discussion.

Ah, Ernie, I'm touched.

One problem – at what point do you ban someone? when they have committed a criminal offence, or when a politician doesn't like something they say?

The issue with Wilders, is that nothing he has said, either inside or outside the UK, would constitute a criminal offence – he has not called for the murder of anyone, he has not called for violence against any minority groups, as such he has the freedom of speech, and the freedom to come in and out of the country, an independent tribunal has confirmed this!

Now, where was that point mentioned before about the fact that Wilders had not condemned the BNP, or is that one just going to slide by the wayside? or how about the allegation that my mention of the word multiculturalism 'stank of racism'? Dang it, that must be that selective memory kicking in again, or is it just me trying to change the subject back to something you seem to have glossed over?

Junkyard – just re-read your post and quote from the Gospel of Matthew.
From my humble understanding this is just referring to the fact that whenever someone decides to follow Jesus and become a Christian don't assume all will be plain sailing. Being a Christian is not a soft option or a cushy number – indeed many have been thrown out of their families and even faced the threat of death by them (especially if they were Muslim).

…your usual politically polarised view, your overpowering self belief that yours is the one true path and the way you often change the axis of a discussion.

Not following you mate 😕

Of course I'm "politically polarised". What do you expect me to do – change political poles every day ? I'm on the left of British politics – simple as. Which obviously makes me very predictable. You would hardly expect me to left-wing on Monday, Wednesday, Saturday, Sunday, and Tory on the rest of the days. And yes, I believe that my conclusions are right – not much point in believing something which you think is 'wrong' 😕

"you often change the axis of a discussion"

Again, I really don't know what you are referring to – or maybe I just don't understand what you mean. I try to stick to the discussion. Despite the attempts by some on this thread, to talk about "total Iraqi deaths" or other completely irrelevant topics 😕

……….. still, no worries.

1 – IMO you browbeat people with whom you do not share an opinion, it ceases to be a discussion and degenerates into rhetoric. I don't expect you to change your political allegiance, but listening to others may just help you understand that, for whatever reason, people may have an alternative view.
2 – this thread was about the rights of an individual to come into the UK and speak, you then brought the BNP into the discussion to reinforce a point but then seemed to go off on an anti BNP tack rather than return to the subject of Geert Wilders.

As you say, no worries.

Yeah, I know what you mean – now, who first mentioned iraq and afghanistan and millions of deaths, ah, TJ…

Right, back to the subject Ernie – where did we leave the 'Wilders has not condemned the BNP' part of the discussion again? oh, there it is, under the carpet…

Ernie:

Of course he won't denounce the BNP because he doesn't give a toss about gay people being nail-bombed by BNP members. As I said, he is a liar and a hypocrite. The BNP connection proves that.

Telegraph:

"in the European Parliament his four MEPs will not ally with the British National party, he said, claiming he had never met a BNP Member. "I understand they talk a lot about blacks and whites. This is disgusting," he said.

IMO you browbeat people with whom you do not share an opinion

It might well be your opinion, but appears to be completely wrong. I've just done a very quick check on what I posted on this thread, and I can't find any examples of me challenging anyone (tell me if I'm wrong)

However, I can find examples of me being challenged. And yes, I responded to those challenges – was I expected/supposed to ignore them ?

And you might have noticed that for a while now, I've been ignoring Ratty's persistent challenges (which is probably annoying him). Although I'm sure he thinks it is because I can't think of anything to say. Which obviously means that he has won the argument. I am hugely relaxed with letting Ratty think that he's won the argument …….. I frankly can't be bothered.

And btw rogerthecat, as a result of the OP said (go back and check if you wish) I think it is very pertinent to point out that the BNP is by far the most homophobic political in Britain today. So instead of Geert Wilders coming over here to lecture us on the plight of gay men in Islamic countries (which we already know but can't do anything about) I think he should be arguing for more tolerance towards gays in Britain and denouncing the BNP – the British people can do something about the BNP.

Obviously rogerthecat, you don't agree with my opinion. But for reasons best known to you, you have decided to keep challenging me on that, and you clearly don't want to let it go (you brought up again in your last post) Maybe just accept that we have a difference of opinion, no ?

So, in summary

Dutch guy comes to Britain to preach an anti-Islam message, based partly on the perceived homophobia of Islamic states
The BNP jump onto this bandwagon as part of their anti-everyone else policies. Which is interesting as the BNP are pretty homophobic themselves
Naturally, ernie and tj have to jump in with their "anti dutch guy because the BNP like him" rants.
But if the guy is anti Islam because of it's homophobic tendencies, then doesn't that mean they are supporting those homophobic tendencies. Just like the the BNP.

Nice to know where you stand, boys.

Strewth!

crumbs !! and i thought we all came on here to talk about bikes!
not who's the most racist or who's the most ignorant 🙄

Legend76 – that would be the Bike Forum then!

Zulu-Eleven – Member

Ah, Ernie, I'm touched.

One problem – at what point do you ban someone? when they have committed a criminal offence, or when a politician doesn't like something they say?

That is a difficult call for sure and there is a danger of banning people for their thoughts however IMO it would be a lower burdon of proof for allowing someone in – I believe the phrase is about "presence not conducive to the public good"

The issue with Wilders, is that nothing he has said, either inside or outside the UK, would constitute a criminal offence

this is simply wrong ( suprise suprise) – he is being prosecuted for racist offences in the Netherlands and some of his statements would clearly be illegal in the UK. Incitement to racial hatred. conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace and so on.

Clearly racist, being prosecuted for racist offenses, clearly coming here to stir up racial hatred. I bet you he is arrested

TJ, can you actually point me to a statement which would "clearly be illegal in the UK" or constitutes incitement to racial hatred?

note, that he's not yet been convicted of anything! innocent till proven guilty and all that…

Might be worth you reading the CPS charging standards on the issue:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/Publications/prosecution/rrpbcrpol.html#_09

Firstly, I think you're wrong because he has not discussed race, only religion, and as such I don't think that a charge of incitement to racial hatred is likely to stick, and a charge of incitement to religious hatred would not be made out as there is nothing threatening about what he has said.

So, look, an intelligent discussion about the intricacies of the law, remarkable – you've said I was simply wrong, I've demonstrated exactly why I don't think anything he's said would be illegal – unless you can show me a statement that he's actually made that would be illegal, then there is no reason to censor him or refuse him entry to the UK, since the tribunal found in his favour, I'd be willing to bet you're relying on hyperbole and left wing hysteria rather than anything he's said or done.

he has not discussed race, only religion

I think this point often gets confused on this site for some reason

I'd be willing to bet you're relying on hyperbole and left wing hysteria rather than anything he's said or done.

.

What, like your impressive "hyperbole" and "hysteria" here Ratty ?

Zulu-Eleven – Member

Typical labour socialist totalitarian bollocks, close down freedom of speech to protect their failed exercise in social engineering through multiculturalism

Posted 1 day ago

Hysteria and talking bollox, appear to be subjects which you are something of an expert on.

Ah, Ernie, I thought you were ignoring me… frankly, you weren't bothered were you? and just when I was getting annoyed… 😆

So Ernie, maybe you could point me to something he's said that is actually illegal, rather than hyperbole

See Ratty, you can never be sure whether I will ignore you or slag you off. That's because I decide whether I respond to your extreme right-wing bollox, or not ……… not you 8)

…….. bit of a bugger innit ?

chubbybloke in lycra…please try and use logic for what it is meant your conclusion in no way follows from your argument.
tyger …thanks eventually…hope you read the Bible better than my posts 😉 and hope you employ equally less literal/overly rich interpreation of the bits about gays.
Zullu11- we know why you are using him and As I have said he raises some interesting points but are you really suggesting Wilders is some sort of rabid tolerant lefty liberal and that is why he dislikes the oppresive Muslims?

A selection of his policies include
The present Article 1 of the Dutch constitution, guaranteeing equality under law, will be replaced by a clause stating the cultural dominance of the Christian, Jewish and humanist traditions. so he wants his freedoms but to repress others then
A ban of five years on the founding of mosques and Islamic schools; a permanent ban on preaching in any other language but Dutch. Foreign imams will be forbidden to preach. Radical mosques will be closed; radical Muslims will be expelled. so he wants his freedoms but to repress others then

Complete support for Israel and a dislike of all her enemies. "We [in the West] are all Israel”

Wilders

"I don't hate Muslims. I hate their book and their ideology".

Given a Muslim is a[devout ] follower of the book[which is the word of God] he refers to and a follower of the ideology I fail to see what the point of his qualification is.
He is iirc currently awaiting trial in his own country for some of the things he has said.
Racist /religious intolerant you decide either way he is not a nice guy. Does he have the right of freedom of Speech he does and I must defend the freedom of speech of those I oppose

My worry is that he will meet an untimely end due to assassination.

Religion is manifestly ridiculous and should be exposed then subsequently ridiculed at every opportunity.

DrJ – Member

I am sure they have their fair share of "Griffins" as does every country, but after what was done to them by the Nazis under occupation I would think many would be very offended by that remark.

Indeed – they had the highest percentage of Jews deported of all European countries (IIRC). We might wonder why that is.

Meaningless !! Whether people were deported or not is hardly relevant, its their survival one way or another that counts, so for example Poland which had a large number of extermination camps on its soil may well not have had many Jews deported, however they had about 90% of the 3,300,000 jews who lived there pre war exterminated. Hollands 140,000/75% exterminated hardly compares next to that now does it?

FFS are we really meant to discuss at what percentage or number killed genocide has a point now ?
It was meaningless for the Jews to be deported

Shall I come and get the state to forcibly evict you from your home, steal your possesions and dump you somewhere abroad. When you complain can I remind you it is meanginless as you are still alive.

Meaningless !!

Not meaningless. Not an open and shut case, but not meaningless. A more valid comparison might be with another small country with a border with Germany – Denmark.

Stop it! stop it! You all sound like a bunch of thought police. That ernie lynch would fit right in as boss of a totalitarian state. Left right you are all the same, how about discussing and not insulting (pot kettle oops).

Now does Mr Dewhatever have a point, is there a threat from people trying to impose an Islamic state in various European countries or not? Remember it's not a race question.

So come on what was the basis of Dewilders(?) argument and why is it wrong or right.

MT – he has no point whatsoever. No truth in his smears nothing but hatred of others behind his views. A very nasty piece of work.

That is not to defend the fundamental Islamic nutters who are equally abhorant.

mt – so long as it's not a race question then I think that potentially he might have concerning our current values and freedoms. As to the reality, then maybe only time will tell.

MT
I keep making points people keep ignoring them.
Yes Islam is not a race but I am not sure that hating a religion is any better than hating a race – see the quote of his on is views on both Islam and Israel and also his desire to have more rights than them.
He is not interested in their freedoms just his own freedom to do as he please which entails oppressing them. Why I should tolerate someone who is intolerant has not been explained to me yet.
Given this I oppose his views. His interpreation of the Koran is at best misleading and at worst false. See also the quote I gave re Jesus putting us all to the sword ….are we worried Christians may be planning to do this?