Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by Dogsauce, Jun 19, 2017 at 1:23 AM.
'rothschild khazars' - want to explain what you mean by this? Actually don't. Never mind.
Would someone like to post with an actual point? Yes that's directed at you B&P and JC whatever.
Finsbury Park mosque has been associated with radical terrorist sympathising preecher in the past. Serving a large community of Muslim people, Who have no truck with such radical Islamic violent rhetoric. It has changed, pressure from with in and without the community it seems to me. Some murderous cunt has not A care for that and has chosen that as the target of his alleged murderous activity. Because it was iconic.
In the past this particular location had been the subject of media speculation and commentary - and with the involvement of the Metropolitan Police Service those associated with a particular narrative were removed and replaced by a new structure / individuals considered to be more 'mainstream'. Not that it is the business of the state to determine the parameters of religious expression - or what is considered normative or premissable. Setting this aside, the allegedly iconic site appears to have been within the purview of an alleged terrorist attack, allegedly involving a white male from Cardiff (in Wales). Not that Cardiff doesn't have sites of importance in regard to the study /exploration / expression(s) of Islam. After all, why go local when you can travel to a site in London - some distance away.
This whole narrative stinks.
Actually, I find stuff like that Telegraph piece far more substantial than my late night anecdotal musings.
The hate-preachers may have deserted Finsbury Park, I don't doubt they are still dotted around, often funded by our Saudi buddies. This government remains truly soft on hate and terror - aided and abetted the Manchester Bombers group FFS.
But whatever the "islamic" hate preachers may be up to, we know that the racist billionaire press is preaching hate from 10,000s of news-stands every day.
If you read the 'Telegraph' what else would you expect? Douglas Murray with the solution to your problems? Maajid Nawaz? Sara Khan?
What stinks about it?
The rest of your post, I am leaving aside for now. But I want to know what do you see about this terrorist attack, what do you make of it?
It is surely a terrorist attack, or do you disagree?
More importantly, why the fuck do you insist on using words that it's very clear to absolutely everyone else that you don't quite understand the meaning of? It makes you look a right tit.
I read articles from all over ta. The fact that such evidence is presented in a publication hardly known as a haven of acceptance says a great deal. In common with a lot of people here, I don't really know what you are getting at and suspect your anti-telegraph sneering could be a dissembling ruse.
Martin Rowson on the Finsbury Park attack – cartoon
You use narrative a lot but don't know what it means. You're clearly even a bit confused about what allegedly means. And the sentence 'what is considered normative' makes no sense.
I'm sure you think you're impressing people with what you clearly believe to be your impressive vocabulary but in truth you're just making a right twat of yourself.
Use words you actually understand. Go on, give it a go
Being as you now agree with the point that I made on the first page of this thread I do wonder why you felt it necessary to act the clueless wanker last night, bnp
Good posting, but imho, you could have elaborated a bit more in the first sentence, as thus;
Finsbury Park Mosque has been associated with puritanical salafi/wahabi sect preachers, whom were indoctrinating Muslims with their ideaolgy.
The Hebrews israealites joined the al-Quds on sunday, so who were the people purporting to represent jew's that were trying to stop it?
The ones that I spoke to had never been to Israel let alone the ME. They couldn't converse in basic Palestinian phrases.
You do this. You act the dick on the Holocaust thread, and although it was explained to you several times you pretend not to understand. Then you "hide" things like this in posts that you think could be taken as ironic or not, which you don't explain. You think you're being clever, but you're not. Your card's marked.
People like you are bringing BDS and Palestinian justice movements into disrepute.
Why have you quoted me, that's what xenon said.
A stinking Finsbury Park narrative, pictured yesterday according to our sources.
Wtf is this?
No idea but why are this clown and the other one spouting quasi- academic gobbledygook still allowed on this thread? :/
Just ban the prick.
Another example is 'purview'. I don't think you really know what it means. And the typos like 'verancular' and 'premissable' are just funny in the context of so much prolixity/verbiage/long-windedness (see, I can do it, only better) and bogus erudition.
The trouble is you're addressing either people who do know what these words mean, so the whole thing reeks of bullshit because nothing rings completely true,or people who don't know what the fuck you're on about.
I think if you translate this into English it says something like: I don't believe that this happened as reported, I suspect some sort of false flag, cos if it really was a white male from Cardiff he'd have just mown down some Muslim people closer to home.
Yeah. I can only think of a couple of reasons for chucking phrases like "Rothschild Khazar" into conversation - either you're some variety of far-right/racist or you're pressing those buttons for the lulz.
Neither should be acceptable round here imho.
an anti semite
It's either ern trying to cause a stink for the lolz or a far-right scumbucket, imo.
I don't think its right to say 'far right' when you just mean Jew-hater, tbh.
What do you mean?
Separate names with a comma.