we're going to be the majority soon furious moslim parent taunts

First topic message reminder :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3246453/We-going-majority-soon-Furious-Muslim-parents-taunt-New-Jersey-school-board-religious-holiday-closure.html


'We're going to be the majority soon!' Furious Muslim parents taunt New Jersey school board over religious holiday closure
Muslim families wanted Jersey City schools to close down September 24 in observance of Eid al-Adha holiday
After initially approving closure, school board ultimately voted to keep schools open so as not to disrupt lives of non-Muslim families
Students who choose to stay home Thursday to celebrate the holiday will not be penalized


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3246453/We-going-majority-soon-Furious-Muslim-parents-taunt-New-Jersey-school-board-religious-holiday-closure.html#ixzz3maVptow7
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

For all those weeks in the summer? Wow!

This is why I said "in term time".

By the way, "spaz" is considered to be unPC - Didge will threaten to break your neck if he sees that post.

I'll call him racist it's Australian  

Ever think we made the terms when they are to fit the Christian holidays

Well they do fit in rather nicely. If Easter had been in February, I doubt that would have happened. Where does the long summer holiday fit into your argument?

that is just play time it is the opposite time of the year here December /January (like summer is)

Actually is from the time when people worked the land and need their kids labor

veya_victaous wrote:

Shady wrote:

Veya you don't half lie a lot.What you've said about Eddie is a lie.

Why do you lie so much? Is it because you don't know much & are generally thick?

Just wondering.

it is obviously true she gets upset when whites are said to less than perfect but accepts all but the most extreme comments about other races and religions
No need to lie, it is plain as day.

Why do you persecute refugees so much? Did a refugee steal your girlfriend?

Steal my girlfriend? Well there were no refugees when I got home.And I've helped out more refugees in last three months than you have.

Raggamuffin wrote:Suddenly Quill is in favour of religious holidays. Strange that.

What do Indians have to do with religion?

The point of the article was actually politics...or did you not think it through? The majority prevails on political questions in America, whether in a local school board session or nationally, in a presidential election.

Caucasians are being confronted all over America with the fact that they will soon not be the majority. They will be outvoted, like the indians.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Suddenly Quill is in favour of religious holidays. Strange that.

What do Indians have to do with religion?

The point of the article was actually politics...or did you not think it through?  The majority prevails on political questions in America, whether in a local school board session or nationally, in a presidential election.  

Caucasians are being confronted all over America with the fact that they will soon not be the majority.  They will be outvoted, like the indians.

So you approve of a majority prevailing if they are white then?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Suddenly Quill is in favour of religious holidays. Strange that.

What do Indians have to do with religion?

The point of the article was actually politics...or did you not think it through?  The majority prevails on political questions in America, whether in a local school board session or nationally, in a presidential election.  

Caucasians are being confronted all over America with the fact that they will soon not be the majority.  They will be outvoted, like the indians.

And what difference will that make...!?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What do Indians have to do with religion?

The point of the article was actually politics...or did you not think it through?  The majority prevails on political questions in America, whether in a local school board session or nationally, in a presidential election.  

Caucasians are being confronted all over America with the fact that they will soon not be the majority.  They will be outvoted, like the indians.

So you approve of a majority prevailing if they are white then?

Well, don't you? It's been that way for centuries, and I don't see anything better.

Whites--particularly the party of Republicans--have done well enough, up to about 1965. It's a fairly recent party, started in Wisconsin in 1854. They had guys like T. Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower, who were fair-to-middlin' caretakers of the nation. But they began to get squirrelly with Nixon, and now it's a full blown circus.

What has defeated white America is racism. The white majority are so preoccupied with their social status vis-a-vis the black man, that it has sent a warp wave through their whole ideology.

Imagine, then, how apoplectic they went when an actual black man was elected to be president...not just once, but to two terms. They can't stomach it. He's got to be a Muslim. He was born in Kenya. He's selling the country to Islam. They've gone through all manner of back-flips in order to find a reason that he doesn't belong. The inside view is fascinating; but stand back and view it from a distance...it's a phenomenal melt-down. It has literally destroyed the Republican Party. I mean...who would ever run on the ticket that once fielded Donald Trump?

Today, sadly, America is a one-Party system. Political theorists out there ought to try to figure out the implications of that. It's a new world.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What do Indians have to do with religion?

The point of the article was actually politics...or did you not think it through?  The majority prevails on political questions in America, whether in a local school board session or nationally, in a presidential election.  

Caucasians are being confronted all over America with the fact that they will soon not be the majority.  They will be outvoted, like the indians.

And what difference will that make...!?

Well...?


Care to explain?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


And what difference will that make...!?

Well...?


Care to explain?

It means there will be a civil war Tommy.Europe is in the throe's of one now & the mood worldwide is ripe for large scale civil unrest.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


And what difference will that make...!?

Well...?


Care to explain?

I can tell you, nothing. As whites will still be the majority group of the minorities, They are ony a minoritiy when the other minority groups are addded together.

Shady wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Well...?


Care to explain?

It means there will be a civil war Tommy.Europe is in the throe's of one now & the mood worldwide is ripe for large scale civil unrest.

This civil war you prey to your blood deity for?
What you need to ask is why has it not happened today, or yesterday, 10 years back, 20 years back, or even 30 when things were really bad? If it has not kicked off when things were far worse, what hope have you it will happen now?

You want this war, where the strong rule, in your eyes,
You are going to have a very long wait, sorry to burst your bubble.

Who cares who's a majority or minority in the world?
It's not about whose "group" is bigger.

What isn't right is going about bragging about it, threatening and demanding and doing your best to try to be the largest and the biggest.
It's called bullying.

eddie wrote:Who cares who's a majority or minority in the world?
It's not about whose "group"  is bigger.

What isn't right is going about bragging about it, threatening and demanding and doing your best to try to be the largest and the biggest.
It's called bullying.

Sadly people end up caring when they were a minority, its about having to experince it.
That is why South Africa will take decades to move properly forward. The rensentment and hate was ingrained from a young age and then throughout life. Its hard to change that, where that resentment can only change though their children.
A woman bragging about Islam becoming the dominant force is no different from any religious literal believer wanting their faith to dominate. It is all what they sadly want, that all people believe as they do.
That is the danger of religion, it offers false hope, one that does not allow a person to truly accept who they are.
Human. When they recoginize that, the fear goes away. The need for something after. Sadly religion allows people to believe they can and should dominate others, because religion has an elite system. Ones who are privilidged and are saved, and those discrminated against and condemned.

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:Who cares who's a majority or minority in the world?
It's not about whose "group"  is bigger.

What isn't right is going about bragging about it, threatening and demanding and doing your best to try to be the largest and the biggest.
It's called bullying.

Sadly people end up caring when they were a minority, its about having to experince it.
That is why South Africa will take decades to move properly forward. The rensentment and hate was ingrained from a young age and then throughout life. Its hard to change that, where that resentment can only change though their children.
A woman bragging about Islam becoming the dominant force is no different from any religious literal believer wanting their faith to dominate. It is all what they sadly want, that all people believe as they do.
That is the danger of religion, it offers false hope, one that does not allow a person to truly accept who they are.
Human. When they recoginize that, the fear goes away. The need for something after. Sadly religion allows people to believe they can and should dominate others, because religion has an elite system. Ones who are privilidged and are saved, and those discrminated against and condemned.

Whites are the minority in south Africa and always have been you twat!!!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_South_African

Tommy Monk wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Sadly people end up caring when they were a minority, its about having to experince it.
That is why South Africa will take decades to move properly forward. The rensentment and hate was ingrained from a young age and then throughout life. Its hard to change that, where that resentment can only change though their children.
A woman bragging about Islam becoming the dominant force is no different from any religious literal believer wanting their faith to dominate. It is all what they sadly want, that all people believe as they do.
That is the danger of religion, it offers false hope, one that does not allow a person to truly accept who they are.
Human. When they recoginize that, the fear goes away. The need for something after. Sadly religion allows people to believe they can and should dominate others, because religion has an elite system. Ones who are privilidged and are saved, and those discrminated against and condemned.

Whites are the minority in south Africa and always have been you twat!!!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_South_African

Oh I see Twatty failed to understand the point, thatt people oppressed harbour ill feeling towards their oppressors. I seemed to have confused that pea brain of yours, where I never meant to claim they were a minoirity. Pointing out SA is a typical example where a group were treated worse than a minority.
I see Twatty i back to being an imbicille and hence why is now mostly ignored by most posters lol.
It is why generally the far ight as seen are quite thick and have an e=inflated ego claiming they have a high IQ yet when as seen are as thick as shit ha ha ha

eddie wrote:Who cares who's a majority or minority in the world?
It's not about whose "group"  is bigger.

What isn't right is going about bragging about it, threatening and demanding and doing your best to try to be the largest and the biggest.
It's called bullying.

No, it's called insecurity, eds.  America through its history has always had an insecurity, up until WWII.  Alexis de Toqueville wrote about it in 1834, in Democracy in America.  In WWII we essentially saved Europe--the son saved the father and mother, think of the biblical implications--and we became aware that we were the one big dog.  With the defeat of the USSR, the cycle was complete.  Why do you think GWB and Cheney were so confident starting a war anywhere, anytime, anyone?

The other great insecurity that the white American has had is with the psycho-sexual self-perception vis-a-vis the black man.  This insecurity was kept in check as long as old, white men ruled.  Sure blacks were coming up in the legal world, or the medical and business world, but the myth the white Americans told themselves was...'Ummm, it's affirmative action...the universities are giving out scholarships...the white man will out and show himself to be superior'.

But all hell broke loose when power--the actual, ultimate power--was given to a black man.  That brought out this racist mean streak that you call 'bullying', but is really insecurity.  I don't want to probe the debts of the psychology of it, but it's something to do with psychological inadequacy feelings, and sexual inadequacy feelings ("They're raping our women," yelled Dylan Roof, as he gunned down the black churchgoes in South Carolina).

America would be a perfect nation were it not for racism.

Contrary to what you think Quill, I know all of this and I know that black people can be, and are still (in certain parts of US) oppressed.
I don't agree or like that

Contrary to what you think, I have no problem with different races and creeds and am possibly one of the very few on here, that don't even ridicule people for their religious beliefs.

I have no problem with giving schoolchildren holidays for their religion, I have no problem with the burka (one of the very very few on here who don't) I have no problem with immigrants and no problem helping refugees.

My only problem is when any one of those groups, including whites, are favoured over any other.

That's what you have never understood about my posts and my position.

Equality for ALL, should mean equality for ALL.

You have called me racist for having that opinion, which is cool, you're entitled to your opinion.
Thankfully those I love, know this to be total crap.

Cuchulain wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:





Whites are the minority in south Africa and always have been you twat!!!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_South_African

Oh I see Twatty failed to understand the point, thatt people oppressed harbour ill feeling towards their oppressors. I seemed to have confused that pea brain of yours, where I never meant to claim they were a minoirity. Pointing out SA is a typical example where a group were treated worse than a minority.
I see Twatty i back to being an imbicille and hence why is now mostly ignored by most posters lol.
It is why generally the far ight as seen are quite thick and have an e=inflated ego claiming they have a high IQ yet when as seen are as thick as shit ha ha ha

Maybe you should try reading the link...


Apartheid was not about oppressiog the blacks or punishing them... it was about protecting the whites FROM the blacks!!!


Blacks had plenty of opportunities And benefited greatly from the white south Africans and The infrastructures they built... even mandela had university education!!!

I see Tommy is inventing history again and is an apologist of Apartheid. Says it all really.

What bit of my post is not true...!?

So you are saying racial segregation was a necessity, based on protecting whites with having a better education, jobs etc?
Please do enlighten the forum as to your reasons.

Was mandela's education sub standard?

The patronage of the paramount chief resulted in Mandela joining the chief’s son, Justice, when they were sent to the only university for Blacks (African, Coloured and Indian) at Fort Hare near Alice in the Eastern Cape. At Fort Hare, Mandela studied English, Anthropology,

Also what year did Mandela go to University Tommy?

He joined an all black college, Fort
Hare, where he was expelled for joining a student boycott.  He later
obtained an arts degree in Johannesburg and studied law at the University
of Witwatersrand.

Tommy Monk wrote:He joined an all black college, Fort
Hare, where he was expelled for joining a student boycott.  He later
obtained an arts degree in Johannesburg and studied law at the University
of Witwatersrand.

What year did Mandela go to University Tommy?

During apartheid... so downtrodden and oppressed that he was free to study at universities and get degrees!!!


As others were able to do also!!!



Was mandela's education sub standard?

Tommy Monk wrote:During apartheid... so downtrodden and oppressed that he was free to study at universities and get degrees!!!


As others were able to do also!!!



Was mandela's education sub standard?

Well it would help if you answered the question.

So I will now further make you look a simpleton

What year did Mandela go to University Tommy and study law?

1943

What year did Apartheid become law in South Africa?

1948

DOH

Oh poor Tommy gets himself in a right muddle, as Mandela was educated before Aparteid was made offical law. Even before Aparteid was made law, there was still segregation, white only votes, discrmination etc.


For education under Apartheid please read:


http://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-5/apartheid-education

Now I am not going to waste my time further with such a simpleton as you Tommy.

eddie wrote:Contrary to what you think Quill, I know all of this and I know that black people can be, and are still (in certain parts of US) oppressed.
I don't agree or like that

Contrary to what you think, I have no problem with different races and creeds and am possibly one of the very few on here, that don't even ridicule people for their religious beliefs.

I have no problem with giving schoolchildren holidays for their religion, I have no problem with the burka (one of the very very few on here who don't) I have no problem with immigrants and no problem helping refugees.

My only problem is when any one of those groups, including whites, are favoured over any other.

That's what you have never understood about my posts and my position.

Equality for ALL, should mean equality for ALL.

You have called me racist for having that opinion, which is cool, you're entitled to your opinion.
Thankfully those I love, know this to be total crap.

We are closer to agreement than you realize. I do not say that whites cannot be discriminated against; it's theoretically, entirely possible. I just said it hasn't happened as between whites and blacks in America. Whites have always been in the position of privilege, just as in So. Africa they have always been in the minority. I mention So. Africa to point up that a minority can still be privileged...two different concepts.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Contrary to what you think Quill, I know all of this and I know that black people can be, and are still (in certain parts of US) oppressed.
I don't agree or like that

Contrary to what you think, I have no problem with different races and creeds and am possibly one of the very few on here, that don't even ridicule people for their religious beliefs.

I have no problem with giving schoolchildren holidays for their religion, I have no problem with the burka (one of the very very few on here who don't) I have no problem with immigrants and no problem helping refugees.

My only problem is when any one of those groups, including whites, are favoured over any other.

That's what you have never understood about my posts and my position.

Equality for ALL, should mean equality for ALL.

You have called me racist for having that opinion, which is cool, you're entitled to your opinion.
Thankfully those I love, know this to be total crap.

We are closer to agreement than you realize.  I do not say that whites cannot be discriminated against; it's theoretically, entirely possible.  I just said it hasn't happened as between whites and blacks in America.  Whites have always been in the position of privilege, just as in So. Africa they have always been in the minority.  I mention So. Africa to point up that a minority can still be privileged...two different concepts.

HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

Talk about back pedaling.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

We are closer to agreement than you realize.  I do not say that whites cannot be discriminated against; it's theoretically, entirely possible.  I just said it hasn't happened as between whites and blacks in America.  Whites have always been in the position of privilege, just as in So. Africa they have always been in the minority.  I mention So. Africa to point up that a minority can still be privileged...two different concepts.

HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

Talk about back pedaling.

 I thot you never read long posts.  You could have a stroke with a 5-liner.

Be careful pussy-lips.

Original Quill wrote:

Shady wrote:


HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

Talk about back pedaling.

 I thot you never read long posts.  You could have a stroke with a 5-liner.

Be careful pussy-lips.  

I tend not to talk to racists like you.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

 I thot you never read long posts.  You could have a stroke with a 5-liner.

Be careful pussy-lips.  

I tend not to talk to racists like you.

Yet here you are.

Cuchulain wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:During apartheid... so downtrodden and oppressed that he was free to study at universities and get degrees!!!


As others were able to do also!!!



Was mandela's education sub standard?

Well it would help if you answered the question.

So I will now further make you look a simpleton

What year did Mandela go to University Tommy and study law?

1943

What year did Apartheid become law in South Africa?

1948

DOH

Oh poor Tommy gets himself in a right muddle, as Mandela was educated before Aparteid was made offical law. Even before Aparteid was made law, there was still segregation, white only votes, discrmination etc.


For education under Apartheid please read:


http://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter-5/apartheid-education

Now I am not going to waste my time further with such a simpleton as you Tommy.

Firstly... do you really think everything changed all at once in 1948...!?

The segregation was going on much before that...



The Franchise and Ballot Act of 1892 instituted limits based on financial means and education to the black franchise,[14] and the Natal Legislative Assembly Bill of 1894 deprived Indians of the right to vote.[15] The Glen Grey Act of 1894, instigated by the government of Prime Minister Cecil John Rhodes limited the amount of land Africans could hold. In 1905 the General Pass Regulations Act denied blacks the vote, limited them to fixed areas and inaugurated the infamous Pass System.[16] The Asiatic Registration Act (1906) required all Indians to register and carry passes.[17] In 1910 the Union of South Africa was created as a self-governing dominion, which continued the legislative programme: the South Africa Act (1910) enfranchised whites, giving them complete political control over all other racial groups while removing the right of blacks to sit in parliament,[18] the Native Land Act (1913) prevented blacks, except those in the Cape, from buying land outside "reserves",[18] the Natives in Urban Areas Bill (1918) was designed to force blacks into "locations",[19] the Urban Areas Act (1923) introduced residential segregation and provided cheap labour for industry led by white people, the Colour Bar Act (1926) prevented black mine workers from practising skilled trades, the Native Administration Act (1927) made the British Crown, rather than paramount chiefs, the supreme head over all African affairs,[20][better source needed] the Native Land and Trust Act (1936) complemented the 1913 Native Land Act and, in the same year, the Representation of Natives Act removed previous black voters from the Cape voters' roll and allowed them to elect three whites to Parliament.



Although blacks were most able to study at universities and work in their chosen professions.



Secondly... are you saying that this was not an option for any of them after 1948...!?







And let's not forget that you started off telling us that whites in south Africa were a majority!!!

Original Quill wrote:

Shady wrote:

I tend not to talk to racists like you.

Yet here you are.  

Not me sexy boy.You're the one with the problem against whites.I have no problem with people because of the colour of their skin.

You clearly do.Quill you need to stick to theorizing about things like dark matter,evolution & tadpoles.I'm sure you coud teach us a lot about those subjects.

Stay away from the controversial stuff where you get all mixed up.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yet here you are.  

Not me sexy boy.  I have no problem with people because of the colour of their skin.

Except when it comes to stealing their toys. Shame, shame, cowboy.

I like being with different cultures.
What isn't right, is when governments and powers that be, bend over backward to accomodate someone becaeue of their colour.
It's patronising in the extreme.

Sometimes I think interviews should be held over a long period online - chatting and reading what that person says. Then colour or creed, wouldn't ever come into it.

eddie wrote:I like being with different cultures.
What isn't right, is when governments and powers that be, bend over backward to accomodate someone becaeue of their colour.
It's patronising in the extreme.

Sometimes I think interviews should be held over a long period online - chatting and reading what that person says. Then colour or creed,  wouldn't ever come into it.

The problem is though it is whites in society that are being accomadated and advantaged through white privildge. So yes how patronising is it that people who come or even born here through not fault of their own, of where they never choose to be who they were born as or the colour of their skin. Face a disadvantage from the start where a system advantages one group above the rest..

I'm not sure that's entirely true didge?! That's what equal opportunity is for within the workplace.

I've said this before, but Nigerians and alot of EE countries' children fare better at school nowadays.
That's because of the extra help they get at home; the parents put in the work.
They'll be the ones that will get the jobs.

eddie wrote:I'm not sure that's entirely true didge?! That's what equal opportunity is for within the workplace.

I've said this before, but Nigerians and alot of EE countries' children fare better at school nowadays.
That's because of the extra help they get at home; the parents put in the work.
They'll be the ones that will get the jobs.

But equality does not happen in practice Eddie, which is the whole point. We are advantaged in many ways, of which many we never even recognise. I am all for equality, but we are yet to obtain that goal and again I do not think anyone coming here should be advantaged in anyway either, but the deck is still balanced in favour of whites in society. Education is one of the biggest keys to bring about balance and equality, but its not quite there yet. We have religious schools ones which are able to pick the best students. That is not equality, it is a discriminating policy which needs to be addressed. As i say have only secular schools to ensure equality.
Do not get me wrong its much better than the US is but the problem still exists.

Anyway have a good evening