England headed for A Caliphate

The AntiChris said:

TV and credit cards said:

My point is you chose a questionable reference...

Click to expand...

Questionable? That's putting it mildly. It's highly partisan right wing propaganda masquerading as an independent investigation.

Click to expand...

Do you guys have any objection to the reference that isn't an ad hominem? Can you point out any claim in it you have reason to believe is false?

Has it occurred to you guys that Labour, the Conservatives, and the Lib-Dems were all in government during the period this crime wave was blowing up right under their noses and getting ignored and pooh-poohed by the system they were in charge of? They *all* have asses to cover! So who the heck do you think has an incentive to blow the lid off and not minimize it, besides the right wing? The Greens?

Bomb#20 said:

Do you guys have any objection to the reference that isn't an ad hominem?

Click to expand...

My objection is not an ad hom. I'm simply pointing out that your refererence is unlikely to be reliable - I'm not saying that your reference is totally untruthful. Expecting Rupert Lowe to provide reliable data about pakistani rape gangs is about as sensible as asking Pete Hegseth for a reliable update on the state of the US/Iran conflict.

Bomb#20 said:

Sure as heck looks like commonality of sin.

Click to expand...

I did not say there is no commonality of sin. The fact that it exists does not mean that pointing out its existence is always about making excuses. But contending that making excuses is it’s only raison d’etre, is itself making excuse. Or so it appears in this case.

Bomb#20 said:

Do you guys have any objection to the reference that isn't an ad hominem? Can you point out any claim in it you have reason to believe is false?

Has it occurred to you guys that Labour, the Conservatives, and the Lib-Dems were all in government during the period this crime wave was blowing up right under their noses and getting ignored and pooh-poohed by the system they were in charge of? They *all* have asses to cover! So who the heck do you think has an incentive to blow the lid off and not minimize it, besides the right wing? The Greens?

Click to expand...

The Greens will attempt to keep it hidden.
After all they were only young white trash girls who falsey accused virtuous foreigners of inexcusable crimes.

No cared enough to listen to the girls despite the mantra "believe all women/girls" being constantly invoked in other circumstances.

Islam and western liberal democracy are like oil and water. The Quran is a basis for a theocracy. We have separation of church and state.

I looked at constitutions of Mulish sates. Typically there is a general statement of rights like freedom of speech and religion, followed by a caveat it cannot conflict with the Quran.

Basic norms in the west are freedom of speech and expression. The freedom to impugn, criticize, and mock.

On January 7, 2015, two extremist French-Algerian Muslim brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, attacked the Paris offices of the French satirical weekly magazine Charlie Hebdo. Shouting Islamic slogans, they killed 12 people—including cartoonists, editorial staff, and police officers—claiming they were avenging the Prophet Muhammad due to the magazine's publication of controversial caricatures.

Click to expand...

The Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy (or Muhammad cartoons crisis, Danish: Muhammed-krisen)[1] began after the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve editorial cartoons on 30 September 2005 depicting Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, in what it said was a response to the debate over criticism of Islam and self-censorship. Muslim groups in Denmark complained, sparking protests around the world, including violence and riots in some Muslim countries.[2]

Islam has a strong tradition of aniconism, and it is considered blasphemous by the majority of Muslims to visually depict Muhammad. This, compounded with a sense that the cartoons insulted Muhammad and Islam, offended many Muslims. Danish Muslim organisations petitioned the embassies of countries and the Danish government to take action and filed a judicial complaint against the newspaper, which was dismissed in January 2006. After the Danish government refused to meet with diplomatic representatives of the Muslim countries and—per legal principle and in accordance with the Danish legal system—would not intervene in the case, a number of Danish imams headed by Ahmed Akkari met in late 2005 to submit the Akkari-Laban dossier. The dossier presented the twelve Jyllands-Posten cartoons and other depictions of Muhammad, some real and some fake, including one where they claimed he was portrayed as a pig, seen as forbidden and unclean in Islam. This last image was proven to be an Associated Press photograph of a contestant in a pig-squealing contest. Akkari later acknowledged the goal of the delegation had been to stir up controversy.[3][4][5]: 80–4 

Click to expand...

I can’t remember the name. An immigrant Muslim woman in political office who was a women’s rights activist went into hiding due to Muslim threats.

Targeted Authors and Writers
Salman Rushdie: The British-Indian novelist faced a 1989 fatwa and a multi-year underground hiding period ordered by Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini because his novel The Satanic Verses was perceived as blasphemous. He was seriously injured in a 2022 physical attack in the United States.Ayaan Hirsi Ali: A Somali-born Dutch-American activist

Click to expand...

People come to the west to escapee bad conditions, often conflict based in religion. And they bring their own bias and prejudice. creating conflict.

Same to Muslims as I say to Christians. You have a right to faith, not no right to inflict your norms on others. No right to expect others to conform to your religious principles.


You will not hear it publicly, I expect European leaders would like to see Islam to disappear.

The AntiChris said:

My objection is not an ad hom. I'm simply pointing out that your refererence is unlikely to be reliable - I'm not saying that your reference is totally untruthful.

Click to expand...

Well golly, that's very generous of you. Which bit wasn't a lie, the claim "I urge all Britons to read this report in full.", perhaps?[/s]

You're insinuating that some of it is lies. Can you point out any claim in the report you think is a lie, and what evidence you have?

Expecting Rupert Lowe to provide reliable data about pakistani rape gangs is about as sensible as asking Pete Hegseth for a reliable update on the state of the US/Iran conflict.

Click to expand...

"Reliable data"? Nobody is asking you to rely on Rupert Lowe for numerical data. The report says where the numbers I quoted came from. That 87% of people convicted for group-based child sexual exploitation had Muslim names came from a researcher named Peter McLoughlin who went through court records about ten years ago and counted them. The 250,000 figure was clearly stated to be an extrapolation, from the government's own figures for three districts they studied in depth after the scandal became widely publicized, to all the districts where grooming gang activity was reported. So if for some reason you're confident that the raping in Rotherham was much more extensive per capita than in most districts where gangs operated, feel free to scale the number downward; conversely, if you're confident that rape is an underreported crime, feel free to scale the number upward.

Bomb#20 said:

You're insinuating that some of it is lies.

Click to expand...

No I'm not. I'm suggesting that anyone who believes that a privately sponsored report, initiated by a known ultra right wing nutjob, might not be biased and might not make exaggerated claims is, in my view, more than a little gullible.

TV and credit cards said:

The British government's independent inquiry will be chaired by Baroness Anne Longfield.

Click to expand...

The government calling the inquiry "independent" doesn't make it so. I'm assured that critiquing the person responsible for an inquiry instead of its contents is not an ad hominem, so this seems like the place to point out that Ms. Longfield is not a real baroness. Time was when "baroness" meant you'd inherited a barony or married someone who had. Now it means the PM wanted you to have a vote in the unelected house of Parliament. Not saying Longfield was going to reliably do what was in the best interests of Labour; just saying Keir Starmer apparently thought she would when he chose her to be a "baroness".

Britain used to choose its unelected parliament members by accident of birth. That's archaic and classist and stupid, so they abolished that system; but it at least had the merit that it introduced a randomized factor that provided some genuine separation of powers, much like drawing a jury by lot. They could have replaced it with an actual lottery, or with elected Senators, or followed Gilbert & Sullivan's proposal of selection by competitive examination. All those possibilities would have kept the House of Lords independent. Instead Tony Blair decided to use appointment by the sitting PM. "And I can't think why."

So it would come down to reviewing this report and looking for conflicts with Rupert Lowe's. And with the power to compel witnesses and documents, you say they will in all likelihood "water down and whitewash" it.

Click to expand...

Don't know if they will or not; just pointing out they'll have an incentive to.

By what means? Not pursuing avenues of investigation? Ignoring evidence? This should become evident.

Click to expand...

It already has.


"This week*, four women resigned from the inquiry's panel in protest at how the government had handled the process so far.
The women all wrote open letters raising similar concerns about suggestions the inquiry could be widened beyond grooming gangs, tight controls on what they could say and who they could speak to.
...
In her resignation letter, one of the women, Ellie Reynolds, said she felt the inquiry had become "less about the truth and more about a cover-up"."

(* Article is from Oct. 2025)

My point is you chose a questionable reference that supports your belief rather than challenging your belief and seeking the truth. To what end?

Click to expand...

And you're challenging your belief and seeking the truth, are you? At least I produced some evidence, uncertain though it may be. ZH asserted that the government didn't condone the rape gangs, offered no reference at all for his claim, and neither you nor any of the other people jumping down my throat asked him for evidence.

Sure, we all eventually push the I believe button. Let's just wait for the report with evidence to back it up. I trust the press will hold it up to the light.

Click to expand...

You just casually equivocated from "power to compel witnesses and documents" to "evidence". Lowe's report is jam-packed with evidence. Funny how that works. Turns out witnesses will testify voluntarily, even when you don't subpoena them, when they know you'll listen to them and in their experience the government won't.

steve_bank said:

Islam and western liberal democracy are like oil and water. The Quran is a basis for a theocracy. We have separation of church and state.

I looked at constitutions of Mulish sates. Typically there is a general statement of rights like freedom of speech and religion, followed by a caveat it cannot conflict with the Quran.

Basic norms in the west are freedom of speech and expression. The freedom to impugn, criticize, and mock.

Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I can’t remember the name. An immigrant Muslim woman in political office who was a women’s rights activist went into hiding due to Muslim threats.



People come to the west to escapee bad conditions, often conflict based in religion. And they bring their own bias and prejudice. creating conflict.

Same to Muslims as I say to Christians. You have a right to faith, not no right to inflict your norms on others. No right to expect others to conform to your religious principles.


You will not hear it publicly, I expect European leaders would like to see Islam to disappear.

Click to expand...

Separation or church and state? Project 2025 and Doug Wilson as the War Dept. Chapman? Okay. I don’t think the Muslims that left Pakistan et al. to live in secular democracies are the problem. They might act like Baptists if they get the numbers but right now that isn’t the case.

But really that guy in Michigan is both a liberal commie dem and an islamofascist. They all are, obviously. I need to have my brother in law and all his siblings deported before they turn on me. They are lying Trojan horses when they pretend to be allies against musk, Thiel, GOP, heritage.org.

steve_bank said:

Christian right and western liberal democracy are like oil and water. The Bible is a basis for a theocracy. We have separation of church and state.

Click to expand...

Hey! It works this way too.

The invasion of the UK continues.

Middle class areas will need to take more asylum seekers, Andy Burnham said today – as more than 3,000 small boat migrants reached Britain during his first 22 days. Official Home Office figures confirmed 230 people were aboard the record 'mega-dinghy' on Monday, bringing the total number to have arrived under the new PM to a staggering 3,003. The latest data also pushed the total since Labour came to power – beginning with the day after the General Election in July 2024 – past the 80,000 mark. It now stands at 80,186 arrivals under Labour. When pressed on where asylum seekers would be housed, the Prime Minister said wealthier parts of the UK would need to 'play their part'. Official figures show that 15,472 small-boat migrants have arrived this year.

Click to expand...

Daily Mail

The "middle classes" were the champions of the "refugees welcome" mantra. I suspect that there will be a change to this attitude as their neighborhoods become overrun with young muslim men. It was perfectly acceptable to the middle classes to dump these "migrants" into the poorer white neighborhoods where the "gammon" live.

TSwizzle said:

I suspect that there will be a change to this attitude as their neighborhoods become overrun with young muslim men.

Click to expand...

I think those young Muslim men should be required to each bring their own 50 virgins.

Elixir said:

I think those young Muslim men should be required to each bring their own 50 virgins.

Click to expand...

Ha cha cha!

TSwizzle said:

The invasion of the UK continues.

Click to expand...

It is crazy how this mass migration is just accepted by the powers that be. These illegal migrants need to be quickly deported. This will discourage further arrivals. But as long as Europe is taking them all in and giving them benefits, that will just encourage more people to come. Abdul sees how well Ahmed has it in UK or Germoney etc. and they want to come too.

No wonder right wing parties like Reform and AfD get more popular (despite their glaring flaws) when the mainstream parties are so useless.

Some stats about from Germoney about these crimefugees.

Migrants Overrepresented in German Violent Crime Data

European Conservative said:

The imbalance is especially visible at regional level. In several federal states, including Bavaria, Berlin, and Baden-Württemberg, roughly half of all suspects in violent crimes are non-German nationals, highlighting a widening gap between population share and crime involvement.

The disparity sharpens further when broken down by nationality. In Bavaria, data cited by the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) shows Syrians with a crime rate approximately 16 times higher than that of German citizens, with Afghan nationals at around 14 times higher. Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann attributed the trend directly to “high levels of immigration in recent years,” particularly among asylum seekers and individuals without legal residency status.

Click to expand...

Danke Merkel!

Denmark tracked 300 "Palestinian refugees" that were granted asylum in 1992. 64% of them had at least one conviction, most of them and their kids are dependent on state welfare.



Europe is cooked.

Elixir said:

Bomb#20 said:

bilby said:

"Catholics" are a sect of Christianity. "Islamicists" are not a sect of Islam.

Click to expand...

Are you sure of that?

Click to expand...

Aren't you? Which part are you not sure of?

If you're referring to the widespread contention among fundamentalist Protestants that Catholics aren't really Christian, I put as much weight on that as on their contention that the world is 6000 years old.

Click to expand...

Is that the sole criterion for what constitutes a sect? I didn’t even know that Catholics aren’t Christian according to some non-Catholic avowed Christians.
Afaics it’s all of a piece. Lots of ritual throughout, lots of dubious interpretations of dubious versions of “scripture”, lots of exclusionary stuff around all of the sects/cults.
In any event, the amount of “weight” you assign to beliefs of the Christian-ness of various sects claiming to be Christians, is probably not one of the factors often considered by avowed Christians while deciding who is or is not a member of the club to which they belong.

Or … is it? I’m here to learn.
I kinda dumped the whole institutional god thing at an early age, and maybe that led to the ignorance for which I am paying today.

Click to expand...

Dude, you really need to work on that whole reading comprehension thing. There was not even the ghost of a suggestion in my post that Christians, or for that matter anyone but bilby, would or should care about my opinion of who is or isn't Christian. And the only reason I supposed bilby might care is because he asked. And the whole shebang was contained in the "If you're referring" hypothetical case that bilby wasn't sure Catholics are a sect of Christianity -- a point he has subsequently clarified. And my sole comment on the criterion for what constitutes a sect of Christianity was that satisfying the requirements of lunatic fringe Protestants was not necessary in order for Catholics to qualify. I said what the criterion isn't, not what the criterion is.