Clonskeagh Mosque - Homeless

ohnonotgmail · 28-11-2017 5:16pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

I don't see why all websites have to be impartial..it's time the truth was told.

You can sign us for whatever newsletter you like..it's the nature of democracy..in a theocracy however you'd have to be careful with your opinions.

Any more questions?

If the site is not impartial then it is just spreading propaganda. I wonder which far-right group runs it.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:16pm

Odhinn wrote: »

What deflection? It's a hate site. Do you want to ignore it?

Surely it's at pains to point out where the true hate is originating and it's able to back it up with facts and figures.

Any more qustions?

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:17pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

I don't see why all websites have to be impartial..it's time the truth was told.

You can sign us for whatever newsletter you like..it's the nature of democracy..in a theocracy however you'd have to be careful with your opinions.

Any more questions?

Ja, ja, ja.

It's a hatesite, foaming at the mouth islamophobia, and is of no use to any real discussion.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:18pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If the site is not impartial then it is just spreading propaganda. I wonder which far-right group runs it.

Ah yes..the far-left support islam don't they...the way the Nazis did in WW2.

ohnonotgmail · 28-11-2017 5:20pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Ah yes..the far-left support islam don't they...the way the Nazis did in WW2.

careful now. you are starting to foam at the mouth.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:24pm

Odhinn wrote: »

Ja, ja, ja.

It's a hatesite, foaming at the mouth islamophobia, and is of no use to any real discussion.

No such word.

It was invented by Iranian Fundamentalists to justify muslim expansion by first denying it.

At the end of the 1970s, Iranian fundamentalists invented the term "Islamophobia" formed in analogy to "xenophobia". The aim of this word was to declare Islam inviolate. Whoever crosses this border is deemed a racist. This term, which is worthy of totalitarian propaganda, is deliberately unspecific about whether it refers to a religion, a belief system or its faithful adherents around the world.

The term "Islamophobia" serves a number of functions: it denies the reality of an Islamic offensive in Europe all the better to justify it; it attacks secularism by equating it with fundamentalism. Above all, however, it wants to silence all those Muslims who question the Koran, who demand equality of the sexes, who claim the right to renounce religion, and who want to practice their faith freely and without submitting to the dictates of the bearded and doctrinaire. It follows that young girls are stigmatised for not wearing the veil, as are French, German or English citizens of Maghribi, Turkish, African or Algerian origin who demand the right to religious indifference, the right not to believe in God, the right not to fast during Ramadan. Fingers are pointed at these renegades, they are delivered up to the wrath of their religions communities in order to quash all hope of change among the followers of the Prophet.

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:25pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Surely it's at pains to point out where the true hate is originating and it's able to back it up with facts and figures.

Apparently not.

"Bare Naked Islam is a news and opinion website with an extreme right wing bias. This source promotes extreme Islamophobia and is classified as an Anti-Islam hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Further, this source has a poor record with fact checking. This is a very unreliable hate group. (10/29/2016) Updated (6/19/2017)"
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bare-naked-islam/

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:26pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

No such word.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,.

You can't say "no such word" and then link to some claim about who invented it. Try to think logically.

It's real origins are listed here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:30pm

Odhinn wrote: »

Apparently not.

"Bare Naked Islam is a news and opinion website with an extreme right wing bias. This source promotes extreme Islamophobia and is classified as an Anti-Islam hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Further, this source has a poor record with fact checking. This is a very unreliable hate group. (10/29/2016) Updated (6/19/2017)"
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bare-naked-islam/

Ah the Southern Poverty Law Centre...a collection of far-left hacks,anti-law enforcement agitators and communist terrorists.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) recently classified the organization White Lives Matter as a hate group, but refused to apply the same classification to Black Lives Matter.
Based on The Washington Post's report, the White Lives Matter group appears to be filled with white supremacists and people who have ties to neo-Nazi groups, so the hate group label could very well be a perfect fit. But what about Black Lives Matter, whose members have explicitly called for dead cops, the lynching of white people, and endorse racial segregation? For some reason, the SPLC's president, Richard Cohen, does not believe the label equally applies to the Leftist group.
"There’s no doubt that some protesters who claim the mantle of Black Lives Matter have said offensive things, like the chant 'pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon' that was heard at one rally," Cohen wrote in a blog post. "But before we condemn the entire movement for the words of a few, we should ask ourselves whether we would also condemn the entire Republican Party for the racist words of its presumptive nominee — or for the racist rhetoric of many other politicians in the party over the course of years."
The reality is that the SPLC is a leftist hack advocacy group which picks and chooses what standards to apply to its labels, consistently turning a blind eye to leftist and pro-Democrat groups and individuals while targeting, often unfairly, their enemies on the right. Here are seven things you need to know about the SPLC.
1. The SPLC was founded by a leftist who sought out leftist donors to enrich himself. As Rosslyn Smith at the American Thinker explained in 2012, the SPLC was founded by Morris Dees, a lawyer who donated money to Jimmy Carter and unsuccessfully lobbied for the attorney general position in Carter's administration. Dees courted northern leftists who donated to George McGovern's failed presidential campaign because he thought they "would get a vicarious thrill from sending a check to the Alabama-based SPLC to fight the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists."
As Smith explains, the SPLC peddles leftist donors under the false guise that the organization is short on cash and demonizes certain organizations – such as anti-amnesty groups – now that the KKK has faded into irrelevancy in an appeal to white guilt:

In his 2000 article, [Ken] Silverstein noted that during its then-29 years of existence, the SPLC had carefully adjusted its operations to fit the needs and self-image of its largely urban, white, and often Jewish donor base. Causes that garnered favorable early media attention but which also risked upsetting some donors, such as filing suits protesting the death penalty, were dropped, even if that meant the mass resignation of staff attorneys. Images of angry blacks and other minorities never appear in solicitations. Nor do concrete issues related to race and poverty get much attention in these appeals. Donors aren't called on to actually fight to improve housing, improve inner-city schools, or end violence at the borders. Everything is geared to the equal-opportunity and secular sin of being intolerant of those who are different. According to Silverstein, the payoff is also always the same -- the SPLC is all about making guilty white donors feel good about themselves for being understanding by writing a check to the wealthy and largely white SPLC. Actual attempts to help the oppressed and downtrodden aren't just optional. They are almost superfluous.

The fear-mongering worked, as the SPLC raked in over $54 million in total revenue 2014.
2. The SPLC vastly overstates the number of hate groups in the country. One of the reasons for this is that the SPLC has a bad habit of labeling groups with conservative positions as hate groups. As Human Events wrote back in 2011:

For example, based on the report, if you state that kids do best when raised by a mom and dad (as opposed to two moms or two dads), you are propagating a known falsehood. Or if you agree with the many therapists and psychologists who argue that a child’s upbringing and early-life experiences (including being sexually abused) play a major role in the development of his or her sexual orientation, you are propagating a known falsehood. The same is true if you claim that hate crime laws could lead to the arresting of pastors who criticize homosexuality (this has already happened in Sweden, England and Canada), or if you argue that it would be detrimental to the military to have gays serving openly. Yes, according to the SPLC, disseminating such views officially constitutes “hate.”

The SPLC has also labeled Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum, the John Birch Society, and LewRockwell.com as hate groups in 2015 even though they are "nonviolent" organizations, according to Reason.com's Jesse Walker.
"Nonviolent groups can be a stepping-stone to violence, but they can also pull people away from violence; in several cases, nonviolent activists have even turned would-be terrorists in," writes Walker. "[SPLC's Mark] Potok never tries to account for those dynamics."
Walker also points out that the SPLC also has a bad habit of duplicating certain organizations in their overall count of hate groups. For instance, the SPLC claimed that there was a rise in KKK organizations, but Potok admitted that this was based on the fact two large KKK groups splintered off into several smaller groups.
National Review's Patrick Brennan observed a similar phenomenon in 2013:

Only on the site where you find the raw data, and in none of their media releases, do they make it clear that the “1,007 hate groups” number counts individual chapters of national or regional groups. For instance, “the American Nazi Party is listed six times, and the Council of Conservative Citizens is listed 37 times. There are many more. When you filter the list for organizations with identical names, the list of 1,007 becomes a list of 358.” Or look at “‘Georgia Militia,’ which is listed 14 times. One listing has a county as its location, another says ’statewide,’ and the remaining 12 list no location and contain no links to additional information.”

Additionally, the SPLC overstated the number of lone wolf terror attacks in 2015, as they used a metric that included "gang slayings, domestic violence, and other apolitical or ambiguous assaults in which the killer also happens to subscribe to an 'extremist' worldview," according to Walker.
3. The SPLC is not interested in classifying a leftist organization as a hate group. In 2011, National Review's Charles Cooke pressed the SPLC as to why they weren't tracking the Occupy Wall Street movement after a group affiliated with the movement plotted to blow up a bridge in Cleveland, Ohio. After a back-and-forth with a male representative from the SPLC, Cooke got the representative to admit: "We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left."
The representative even tried to argue that Occupy Wall Street wasn't a political movement and answered "Yes I suppose so" when Cooke asked him if "the SPLC covers a group if there is even a minute 'right-wing' component."
Cooke felt that "there was a little bit of a syllogism going on" in the SPLC, as he felt that in their mind "'Left' equals 'good,' and 'Right' equals 'bad,' and therefore anything 'Left' couldn’t be 'bad' unless it were infiltrated by the 'Right.'

"In my time covering Occupy Wall Street I have seen anti-Semitism, black nationalism, class hatred, and threats of violence; there have been rapes, a few murders, and now some domestic terrorism," wrote Cooke. "One would have thought that these things would be sufficient warrant for a group like the Southern Poverty Law Center to stand up and take serious note, but, as I learned yesterday, there’s one problem: They’re just 'not set up to cover the extreme Left.'"
4. A shooting occurred at the Family Research Council (FRC) in 2012 after the organization was labeled a hate group by the SPLC. The shooter, Floyd Lee Corkins, admitted that he wanted to "kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-Fil-A sandwiches in victims’ faces, and kill the guard" after he saw the FRC listed on the SPLC's website as a "hate group."
"Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups," Corkins said in an FBI video. "I found them online, did a little research, went to the website, stuff like that."
Leo Johnson, a security guard at the FRC, was shot by Corkins and survived. Corkins was sentenced to 25 years in prison.
The SPLC defended its designation of the FRC as a hate group even after the shooting.
5. In 2014, the SPLC actually listed Dr. Ben Carson under their "Extremist Files" list. Via The Christian Science Monitor:

In February 2015, after criticism of his inclusion, the group apologized to the candidate. The SPLC said that while some might consider Dr. Carson’s statements, including several that referenced Adolf Hitler, and comments on gay marriage, to be extreme, he should not have been branded an extremist.

The Hitler comments are a reference to when Carson said, "The likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed." This is hardly an extreme comment, in fact it's accurate. Carson's opposition to gay marriage is also not a viewpoint worthy of being put on an extremist list.
After being publicly shamed, the SPLC reluctantly removed Carson from the list.
6. The FBI removed the SPLC as a "resource" in 2014 for their "hate crime Web page." The FBI refused to comment on it, but according to The Blaze, the move came "after 15 conservative groups lobbied Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director James Comey to end the endorsement."
7. The actual hate group is the SPLC. As Human Events concluded in 2011:

All of which begs the question: Is the SPLC, by its own criteria, the real hate group? It still carries weight in plenty of circles here in America, and so when it categorizes an organization as a hate group, many people of good conscience are influenced by that designation, one which is quite stigmatizing and destructive, as evidenced by the recent events involving FOTF and AFA mentioned above. Yet it is the leaders of the SPLC who are either irresponsibly attacking other fine organizations, or worse still, knowingly defaming them.
Who then deserves the title of “hate group,” Focus on the Family or the Southern Poverty Law Center? Who has been guilty of demonizing others and spreading hurtful, inaccurate information? Whose actions and words have been hateful? The record speaks for itself.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:31pm

Odhinn wrote: »

You can't say "no such word" and then link to some claim about who invented it. Try to think logically.

It's real origins are listed here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

That's not the real origin..that's the only one you could find that suits your pro-islamic agenda.

Tell me..do you think Ibrahim Halawa was "just on holiday" in Egypt when he was arrested?

end of the road · 28-11-2017 5:35pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Surely it's at pains to point out where the true hate is originating and it's able to back it up with facts and figures.

Any more qustions?

it pointed out makey uppy nonsense backed up by makey uppy facts and makey uppy figures. it's an islamophobic hate site which is as dubious as it gets.

MysticMonk wrote: »

No such word.

It was invented by Iranian Fundamentalists to justify muslim expansion by first denying it.

so there is no such word yet it was invented by the iranians? okay!!!!

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:36pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Ah the Southern Poverty Law Centre...a collection of far-left hacks,anti-law enforcement agitators and communist terrorists.

You really are spending too much time on far right american sites. Why didn't you link back to "The Daily Wire"?

Southern Poverty law centre....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:38pm

<shouty text>

Examples of points 7 and 10 are all over this thread.

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:39pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

That's not the real origin..

Sorry, but that is.

origin in 1920's
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/islamophobia

First known use 1923
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Islamophobia

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:40pm

Odhinn wrote: »

You really are spending too much time on far right american sites. Why didn't you link back to "The Daily Wire"?

Southern Poverty law centre....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center

Anti-establishment and anti-whie terrorist organisation.

Just like Antifa and Black Lives Matter..no better than communist terrorists.

end of the road · 28-11-2017 5:43pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Ah the Southern Poverty Law Centre...a collection of far-left hacks,anti-law enforcement agitators and communist terrorists.

yeah, sure. bare naked islam is an islamophobic hate site which is of dubious merrit. calling other groups who point out what is clear to all but those who have an "agenda" communist terrorists, dispite the fact they aren't, doesn't change that reality.

MysticMonk wrote: »

That's not the real origin..that's the only one you could find that suits your pro-islamic agenda.

those are the origines. you claimed the word doesn't exist yet said the iranians invented it. so how can a word not exist if someone invented it?

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:43pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Anti-establishment and anti-whie terrorist organisation.

Just like Antifa and Black Lives Matter..no better than communist terrorists.

That's nice. Have you anymore groundless stuff to share with us?

Care to explain the oxford and merriam webster dating of the word "islamophobia"?

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:44pm

end of the road wrote: »

it pointed out makey uppy nonsense backed up by makey uppy facts and makey uppy figures. it's an islamophobic hate site which is as dubious as it gets.

So you say..there's plenty of people who arent blinded by bullshiite and accusations of "isms" and "phobias".

You people must be fondly pining for the days when you could shut down a discussion,ANY discussion by simply throwing around the word Racist.

Times have changed and the the far left are losing the battle one stupid comment at a time

seachto7 · 28-11-2017 5:45pm

Odhinn wrote: »

You really are spending too much time on far right american sites. Why didn't you link back to "The Daily Wire"?

Southern Poverty law centre....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center

I don't agree with MysticMonk, but the SPLC referred to Majid Nawaz as an extremist lately if I'm not mistaken. I think he took them to court. I haven't followed it in a while, but if they're against him, then they're up to no good in my eyes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/maajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:45pm

Odhinn wrote: »

That's nice. Have you anymore groundless stuff to share with us?

Who is us? Are you attempting to hide in the crowd like all lefty agitators?

Mr. CooL ICE · 28-11-2017 5:45pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

<shouty text>

Examples of points 7 and 10 are all over this thread.

Mod: I have no idea where you got this, but at the very least, link your source please. Copying and pasting text from another site without referencing said site is bordering on plagiarism

end of the road · 28-11-2017 5:46pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

<shouty text>

Examples of points 7 and 10 are all over this thread.

this is more ranting.

MysticMonk wrote: »

Anti-establishment and anti-whie terrorist organisation.

Just like Antifa and Black Lives Matter..no better than communist terrorists.

nope. none of those are on the banned organisations list to my knowledge. so they are not terrorist organisations at all.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:49pm

Odhinn wrote: »

That's nice. Have you anymore groundless stuff to share with us?

Yes.

I'll share this with you before i go home:

Note the percentages for various countries and the expontial level of unrest as the population increases.
[FONT=times new roman,times]Forget the [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Five Pillars[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] of Islam. It is the Five Stages of Islam that threaten the fundamental freedoms of Western Democracy. Freedoms which include freedom of thought, expression, and association and the crucial derived right of freedom of the press. We should never forget that "Islam" means submission -- the opposite of self-determination and Enlightenment values.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Six years ago Dr. Peter Hammond [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]published[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] a remarkable book which included a statistical study of the correlation between Muslim to non-Muslim population ratios and the transition from conciliatory Islam to fascist Islam. The stages are the same in 2011 but the demographics have changed to show an alarming progression. Many European nations and the U.S. are on the cusp of moving to a higher bracket. The demographics change but the story is the same. First comes the taqiyya [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]and[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] the kitman; then comes the Sword of Islam. [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Imam[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] Rauf, the Ground Zero Mosque promoter, is the current master of taqiyya. He has gulled everyone from [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Bloomberg[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] to Maureen [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Dowd[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] of the NYT -- who fanaticizes over male Muslims. Expect doppelgangers of Khomeini for stage 5 and Islamic PEACE at last.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Stage 1. Establish a Beachhead[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Population density à 2% (US, Australia, Canada).[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Muslims are conciliatory, deferential but request harmless special treatment (foot bath facilities, removal/elimination of that which is offensive to delicate Muslim sensibilities - like walking dogs near Mosques).[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Stage 2. Establish Outposts[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Population density 2% - 5% (UK, Germany, Denmark). [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. A recent [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]example[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] is that of Sheikh Abdullah el-Faisal who is back in Jamaica after being kicked out of the UK. Sound harmless? Read on:[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]The dispatch, dated February 2010, warns that that Jamaica could be fertile ground for jihadists because of its underground drug economy, marginalized youth, insufficient security and gang networks in U.S. and British prisons.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Stage 3. Establish Sectional Control of Major Cities.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Population density 5% - 10% (France, Sweden, Netherlands).[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]First comes the demand for halal food in supermarkets, and the blocking of streets for prayers; then comes the demand for self rule (within their ghettos) under Sharia. When Muslims approach 10% of the population the demands turn to lawlessness. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any criticism of Islam results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam. In France which may be over the 10% range, the minority Muslim populations live in [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]ghettos[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times], within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrassas. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Stage 4. Establish Regional Control.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Population density 20% - 50% (Europe 2020?).[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Stage 5. Total Control, Brutal Suppression, and Dhimmitude.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Population density > 50%.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and jizya, the tax placed on infidels. As Muslim population levels increase and all infidels cower in submission there will peace at last. Dar al-Islam is achieved and everyone lives under Sharia and the Koran is the only word.[/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Our current Western world leaders are suckered by taqiyya and kitman and steering us into stage 3. [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Allen West[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] seems to get it but I can't see that any of the crop of current GOP contenders really get it. Fear of bigotry at stage 2 is the Islamists' greatest weapon. Crucified on the cross of bigotry -- is that the future of the Western democracies? Bigotry is only bigotry if it is out of touch with reality and it is the suckers who believe the stage 1-2 peace pitch of Islam who are the ones who are out of touch with reality -- not to mention our mesmerized President. The first GOP candidate who announces to Imam Rauf and his supporters, "Fine. A Mosque at ground zero. But how about a cathedral in Mecca first? It is part of our Christian outreach program of bridge building." will be the first to get it and a big boost in the polls.[/FONT]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/the_five_stages_of_islam.html#ixzz4zkIuj8k1
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:50pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

So you say..(...............) one stupid comment at a time

Are you going to explain why the oxford and merriam webster dictionaries give roughly the same time period of origin? Or do we have to just trust some far right american on the subject?

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:52pm

end of the road wrote: »

this is more ranting.

nope. none of those are on the banned organisations list to my knowledge. so they are not terrorist organisations at all.

But they advocate the murder of white people and law enforcement..do you not *think* they should be on the "banned organisations list" (whatever that is).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WzzUVBi1_Q

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:54pm

Odhinn wrote: »

Are you going to explain why the oxford and merriam webster dictionaries give roughly the same time period of origin? Or do we have to just trust some far right american on the subject?

Less of the questions and more of the facts to refute what i (and the pages i linked) are saying.

If you can't refute trying to deflect is only showing you up for what you are...a one-trick pony trying to deflect from facts because of some vague white guilt that you feel.

end of the road · 28-11-2017 5:55pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

So you say..there's plenty of people who arent blinded by bullshiite and accusations of "isms" and "phobias".

You people must be fondly pining for the days when you could shut down a discussion,ANY discussion by simply throwing around the word Racist.

Times have changed and the the far left are losing the battle one stupid comment at a time

i'm not interested in shutting down any discussion. however blatent hate filled nonsense from hate filled websites must be counteracted and debunked.
the far left aren't losing the battle as there was no battle for them to lose, given that the vast majority of people don't subscribe to either extremes.

Odhinn · 28-11-2017 5:55pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Yes.

I'll share this with you before i go home:

..............

Why bother? It's just some far right lunatic who rants about muslims. The only difference between him and some guy spitting at passing cars is a typewriter and maybe three more braincells.

MysticMonk · 28-11-2017 5:56pm

end of the road wrote: »

nope. none of those are on the banned organisations list to my knowledge. so they are not terrorist organisations at all.

Great..well i'm sure they'd welcome you with open arms if you want to go and join them.

end of the road · 28-11-2017 6:00pm

MysticMonk wrote: »

Less of the questions and more of the facts to refute what i (and the pages i linked) are saying.

that was already done, and very easily as well. you claimed the word islamophobia doesn't exist, yet then stated it was invented by the iranians. so how can a word that doesn't exist be invented?

MysticMonk wrote: »

If you can't refute trying to deflect is only showing you up for what you are...a one-trick pony trying to deflect from facts because of some vague white guilt that you feel.

you have provided no facts, just a bunch of nonsense from hate filled websites. pointing out that nonsense is exactly that, nonsense, isn't "white guilt" or whatever other far right buzz term people throw around.

Clonskeagh Mosque - Homeless

Comments