Jump to content
IGNORED

Edl Causing Trouble In Bristol...


Cider army1981

Recommended Posts

If the EDL were really a "non-racist organisation" as they say, they would forcibly exclude the vocally racist, provocative behaviour and Nazi following. But they do not. Watch this from the Newcastle demo on the 25th May:

If you still have any sympathy for them, I think we can draw our own conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Russia today, Tommy Robinson of the EDL gives a great argument against Edward Mortimer from Exeter (Edward Mortimer is some type of Cultural Marxist unelected EU Strasburg Euro Toff)............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoMIeTAAswk

Edward Mortimore is not anything to do with the EU. He is senior programme advisor at the Salzburg Seminar (a non-profit making organisation which encourages international dialogue on a wide range of topics). Previously, he was a journalist at the Financial Times and wrote the book "Faith and Power: the rise of Islam"

Did you really think that Tommy Robinson made a good argument? I thought that Edward Mortimore pointed out that Robinson made broad generalisations, and quite reasonably suggested that Robinson might not have understood Sharia.

And I thought that Robinson was suggesting the Mortimore was out of touch because he came from the South West...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edward Mortimore is not anything to do with the EU. He is senior programme advisor at the Salzburg Seminar (a non-profit making organisation which encourages international dialogue on a wide range of topics). Previously, he was a journalist at the Financial Times and wrote the book "Faith and Power: the rise of Islam"

Did you really think that Tommy Robinson made a good argument? I thought that Edward Mortimore pointed out that Robinson made broad generalisations, and quite reasonably suggested that Robinson might not have understood Sharia.

And I thought that Robinson was suggesting the Mortimore was out of touch because he came from the South West...

Edward Mortimer came across to me as a smarmy elitist. Even with the benefit of an expensive Oxbridge education, Edward Mortimer was shown to inhabit an 'ivory tower and general fantasy land' when it came to understanding the problems created by the islamification of England as described by Tommy Robinson. Tommy Robinson is from Luton and he's far more eloquent and knowledgeable on the problems creatred by islamists especially with regard to Muslim paedo gangs grooming, drugging then raping very vulnerable and young white English school girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edward Mortimer came across to me as a smarmy elitist. Even with the benefit of an expensive Oxbridge education, Edward Mortimer was shown to inhabit an 'ivory tower and general fantasy land' when it came to understanding the problems created by the islamification of England as described by Tommy Robinson. Tommy Robinson is from Luton and he's far more eloquent and knowledgeable on the problems creatred by islamists especially with regard to Muslim paedo gangs grooming, drugging then raping very vulnerable and young white English school girls.

Well, Tommy Robinson is very knowledgeable and eloquent with regards 'Muslim Paedo Gangs' from the point of view of people who've only looked as far into the problem of 'Muslim Paedo Gangs' as reading a newspaper. To my knowledge, in the last 4-5 years there have been three such gangs uncovered (Rochdale, Derby & Oxford) and the things I've read about it have generally inferred it to be something culturally linked to people who's roots are in certain regions of Pakistan, rather than a problem (if incidents involving approximately 50 people over a few years can be described a problem) that persists through all of British Islamic culture. Several internet child porn rings have been uncovered in recent months and years, run mainly by White men and women. Does that mean that every Christian wants to abuse your baby? I would argue that in recent history your children have been at greater risk from the catholic church than a Pakistani kebab shop owner

Tommy Robinson is clearly quite an intelligent man on some levels, especially as he appears to learn from criticism and argue the same point from different angles, unlike say Nick Griffin who given enough rope will always hang himself. There is a grain of truth (the size of that grain is the crux of the debate) in much of what he says. However, I still get the impression that most of his information comes from things he reads in the press or on selected websites and the press have a vested interest in keeping us all afraid and buying their product for forewarning of the next thing that's going to threaten our very existence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Tommy Robinson is very knowledgeable and eloquent with regards 'Muslim Paedo Gangs' from the point of view of people who've only looked as far into the problem of 'Muslim Paedo Gangs' as reading a newspaper. To my knowledge, in the last 4-5 years there have been three such gangs uncovered (Rochdale, Derby & Oxford) and the things I've read about it have generally inferred it to be something culturally linked to people who's roots are in certain regions of Pakistan, rather than a problem (if incidents involving approximately 50 people over a few years can be described a problem) that persists through all of British Islamic culture. Several internet child porn rings have been uncovered in recent months and years, run mainly by White men and women. Does that mean that every Christian wants to abuse your baby? I would argue that in recent history your children have been at greater risk from the catholic church than a Pakistani kebab shop owner

Tommy Robinson is clearly quite an intelligent man on some levels, especially as he appears to learn from criticism and argue the same point from different angles, unlike say Nick Griffin who given enough rope will always hang himself. There is a grain of truth (the size of that grain is the crux of the debate) in much of what he says. However, I still get the impression that most of his information comes from things he reads in the press or on selected websites and the press have a vested interest in keeping us all afraid and buying their product for forewarning of the next thing that's going to threaten our very existence

From what I know of Tommy Robinson and the EDL, they've got their information first hand from the young school girls that have been the victims of the Muslim paedophile rape gangs. Nick Griffin and the BNP have also vigourously campaigned against these Muslim grooming and rape gangs. This problem was hushed up by the Labour Party and only when we got the Con-Dem government of 2010 did we get to hear about the problem in the mass media. However, I agree that children have - historically - probably been at greater risk of sexual assault on BBC premises - from BBC 'stars' such as Jimmy Saville and Catholic Church priests than Pakistani kebab shop owners and Muslim taxi drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I know of Tommy Robinson and the EDL, they've got their information first hand from the young school girls that have been the victims of the Muslim paedophile rape gangs. Nick Griffin and the BNP have also vigourously campaigned against these Muslim grooming and rape gangs. This problem was hushed up by the Labour Party and only when we got the Con-Dem government of 2010 did we get to hear about the problem in the mass media. However, I agree that children have - historically - probably been at greater risk of sexual assault on BBC premises - from BBC 'stars' such as Jimmy Saville and Catholic Church priests than Pakistani kebab shop owners and Muslim taxi drivers.

The problem is good old Tommy is a football hooligan and a man with a long history of violence and that is exactly what most right thinking people will ever see, he will always lack credibility and why he only ever appeals to a certain section of society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean that every Christian wants to abuse your baby? I would argue that in recent history your children have been at greater risk from the catholic church than a Pakistani kebab shop owner

I just did a quick trawl of the Internet for Anglican paedos - yes, I'm Church of England :fear: - and I found this example of a C of E paedo.......

"A retired Church of England priest was jailed for 10 years Monday after a jury found him guilty of 36 separate sex offenses against children in the 1960s and 1970s.

Prosecutors said Gordon Rideout, 74, abused his position of trust and assaulted children he met over the years. A jury found him guilty of 34 counts of indecent assault and two counts of attempted rape on 16 boys and girls in the southeastern English counties of Hampshire and Sussex between 1962 and 1973.

Most of the 36 offenses related to his work as an assistant curate at St. Mary's Church in Crawley, 28 miles (45 kms) south of London, when he would visit a children's home nearby. The home has since closed."

Source: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/retired-anglican-priest-convicted-sex-abuse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't doubt the power of Jesus, brother.

He was no paedophile (unlike Mohammed with his 9 year old wife).

Simply for comparison purposes, I'd like to list the ages of some queens of England when they were married.

Charles I, aged 25, married Henrietta Marie of France when she was 13.

Richard II, aged 29, married Isabella of Valois when she was 6.

Empress Mathilda was aged 12 when she married Henry V, the Holy Roman Emperor

John, aged 34 married Isabella of Angouleme when she was 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply for comparison purposes, I'd like to list the ages of some queens of England when they were married.

Charles I, aged 25, married Henrietta Marie of France when she was 13.

Richard II, aged 29, married Isabella of Valois when she was 6.

Empress Mathilda was aged 12 when she married Henry V, the Holy Roman Emperor

John, aged 34 married Isabella of Angouleme when she was 12.

.......I still rate King Richard I 'Cœur de Lion' (The Lionheart) as England's greatest King as he was more interested in fighting than shagging underage girls. The Cœur de Lion led from the front, a fine figure of a man and of truely noble Norman-French stock :shifty: .........

crusades2.jpg

King Richard I seen here wearing the Holy tabbard of the Knights Hospitaller military order (Knights of St John).........

Richard_coeur_de_lion.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.......I still rate King Richard I 'Cœur de Lion' (The Lionheart) as England's greatest King as he was more interested in fighting than shagging underage girls. The Cœur de Lion led from the front, a fine figure of a man and of truely noble Norman-French stock :shifty: .........

Richard hated England, refused to learn the language or to integrate in any way, and used the state to finance his lifestyle. Sounds familiar...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply for comparison purposes, I'd like to list the ages of some queens of England when they were married.

Charles I, aged 25, married Henrietta Marie of France when she was 13.

Richard II, aged 29, married Isabella of Valois when she was 6.

Empress Mathilda was aged 12 when she married Henry V, the Holy Roman Emperor

John, aged 34 married Isabella of Angouleme when she was 12.

British royalty do not compare to Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard hated England, refused to learn the language or to integrate in any way, and used the state to finance his lifestyle. Sounds familiar...

.......bullshit. The main spoken language of England was French for about 300 years after the Norman conquest of England in 1066. Latin was the language of state and English spoken by the subjugated English (mainly Anglo-Saxons) of that period. England and most of France were but one country for most of this period. As far as I'm aware, England has not been defeated by the Islamists even though many of our traitor politicians - especially the Cultural Marxist Labour Party - love giving Islamists more state aid and legal rights than the indigenous Christian English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.......bullshit. The main spoken language of England was French for about 300 years after the Norman conquest of England in 1066. Latin was the language of state and English spoken by the subjugated English (mainly Anglo-Saxons) of that period. England and most of France were but one country for most of this period. As far as I'm aware, England has not been defeated by the Islamists even though many of our traitor politicians - especially the Cultural Marxist Labour Party - love giving Islamists more state aid and legal rights than the indigenous Christian English.

So we agree that Richard may not have learned English. He is reported to have disliked England, preferring to focus his attention on his French possessions. Furthermore, he spent the "Saladin Tithe" and raised further taxes in England to finance the Third Crusade, leaving the country nearly bankrupt. Some writers have criticised Richard for spending only six months of his reign in England and siphoning the kingdom's resources to support his crusade. According to William Stubbs:

He was a bad king: his great exploits, his military skill, his splendour and extravagance, his poetical tastes, his adventurous spirit, do not serve to cloak his entire want of sympathy, or even consideration, for his people. He was no Englishman, but it does not follow that he gave to Normandy, Anjou, or Aquitaine the love or care that he denied to his kingdom. His ambition was that of a mere warrior: he would fight for anything whatever, but he would sell everything that was worth fighting for. The glory that he sought was that of victory rather than conquest.

Actually, I was mostly just making a tiny joke. It seems to have missed the mark somewhat. But I'm glad that you agree with me completely :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm really confused is Tommy Robinson being favourably compared to English kings?

Not by me, I was comparing English kings to Mohammed.

Now that I type it out like that, it does seem the tiniest bit inflammatory...sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we agree that Richard may not have learned English. He is reported to have disliked England, preferring to focus his attention on his French possessions. Furthermore, he spent the "Saladin Tithe" and raised further taxes in England to finance the Third Crusade, leaving the country nearly bankrupt. Some writers have criticised Richard for spending only six months of his reign in England and siphoning the kingdom's resources to support his crusade. According to William Stubbs:

He was a bad king: his great exploits, his military skill, his splendour and extravagance, his poetical tastes, his adventurous spirit, do not serve to cloak his entire want of sympathy, or even consideration, for his people. He was no Englishman, but it does not follow that he gave to Normandy, Anjou, or Aquitaine the love or care that he denied to his kingdom. His ambition was that of a mere warrior: he would fight for anything whatever, but he would sell everything that was worth fighting for. The glory that he sought was that of victory rather than conquest.

Actually, I was mostly just making a tiny joke. It seems to have missed the mark somewhat. But I'm glad that you agree with me completely :)

Indeed, the glory that he sought was that of victory rather than conquest - rather like a modern footballer or football supporter or even a classical warrior King or hero of ancient Greece? Whatever, King Richard 'Cœur de Lion' is loved by England to this day with the national English football team even bearing his very own 3 lions emblem. He can even be seen outside Parliament........

450px-Richard_I_statue_outside_Parliamen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we agree that Richard may not have learned English. He is reported to have disliked England, preferring to focus his attention on his French possessions. Furthermore, he spent the "Saladin Tithe" and raised further taxes in England to finance the Third Crusade, leaving the country nearly bankrupt. Some writers have criticised Richard for spending only six months of his reign in England and siphoning the kingdom's resources to support his crusade. According to William Stubbs:

He was a bad king: his great exploits, his military skill, his splendour and extravagance, his poetical tastes, his adventurous spirit, do not serve to cloak his entire want of sympathy, or even consideration, for his people. He was no Englishman, but it does not follow that he gave to Normandy, Anjou, or Aquitaine the love or care that he denied to his kingdom. His ambition was that of a mere warrior: he would fight for anything whatever, but he would sell everything that was worth fighting for. The glory that he sought was that of victory rather than conquest.

Actually, I was mostly just making a tiny joke. It seems to have missed the mark somewhat. But I'm glad that you agree with me completely :)

Even in English Rugby Union the memory and exploits of King Richard I and the crusades lives on with one of the top Rugby clubs being known as 'Saracens' - the ancient name for Muslims. England rugby supporters.......

eng-m_1526321a.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There you go then RG, you get off on football hooligans with a long history of violence, who may or may not be racist, but I think we know his true colours really and probably yours.

Tommy Robinson is a Luton Town supporter - so his colours are orange? From what I've gleaned from your posts you're Tory blue. Perhaps you do or don't get off on the exploits of the Eton/ Oxbridge Bullingdon Club Tory Toffs. They can never be accused of 'hooliganism' as their exploits are merely 'high jinx' :D ........Osborne, Johnson and Camoron - the Bullingdon Club boys....

8742033106_a2b50e5748_z.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replying to 'EDL Causing Trouble In Bristol'..........logic says if there was no threat from the Fundamentalist Islamic Sharia nutters then there would be no such thing as the EDL.

First law of causal occurrence: "for every action, there is a reaction".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy Robinson is a Luton Town supporter - so his colours are orange? From what I've gleaned from your posts you're Tory blue. Perhaps you do or don't get off on the exploits of the Eton/ Oxbridge Bullingdon Club Tory Toffs. They can never be accused of 'hooliganism' as their exploits are merely 'high jinx' :D ........Osborne, Johnson and Camoron - the Bullingdon Club boys....

8742033106_a2b50e5748_z.jpg

You really do have memory problems, I have told you more than once your assumptions could not be further from the truth, I would not stand a snowballs chance in hell of getting into the tory party on many many grounds, so please stop making up stories and lies to add to your strange fantasy nether world and go on worshipping at the altar of good old Tommy the football hooligan and the saviour of humanity and perhaps have tests done on your lack of memory, you just might thank me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...