Defenceless Muslim women are the prime target of Britain's cowardly racists

First topic message reminder :

Muslim women in Milton Keynes are living in fear every time they step out of their homes following a nauseating racially aggravated assault in which a pregnant woman was kicked in the stomach and lost her unborn baby.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/defenceless-Muslim-women-are-prime-target-britains-cowardly-racists-1581508

Was this the defenceless female that was attacked from behind?

Wow!   So you are prepared to overlook it.   Because there are no lies, he admitted to knowing about an attack on a Muslim woman that was not in the press, in fact he's just clarified it was with a brick.   So the only way he could have known about was from the people who did it.   But that ok, it was only a Muslim.

HT, that was not the one in the OP:


Muslim women in Milton Keynes are living in fear every time they step out of their homes following a nauseating racially aggravated assault in which a pregnant woman was kicked in the stomach and lost her unborn baby.
Thames Valley Police have arrested a 37-year-old man in connection with the incident in which the 34-year-old woman endured the horrific ordeal in the car park of the Co-op supermarket on the evening of 6 August, resulting in her falling to the ground and losing her baby.

While the ethnicity of the woman has not been disclosed by police, she is believed to be a Somalian Muslim. Speaking after a prayer ceremony at the Hazrath Shahjalal Jamie Masjid mosque, located a stone's throw away from where the attack took place, several members of the local Muslim community have said they believed the pregnant woman was set upon solely because she had been wearing a hijab.
Rofiql Islam, 40, said many Muslims in the area now experience "odd people saying something on the street". He thinks it is the women in the area who suffer the most abuse because they are easier to identify.
He and fellow mosque attendee Shah Rahman, 50, were able to give two separate recent examples where women in the local area have had men approach them on the street, subjected them to racist abuse or even attempted to forcibly remove their hijabs.]A visibly Muslim woman becomes an easier target for a perpetrator because her Muslim identity is more pronounced

Lord Foul wrote:

scrat wrote:
When are you going to start addressing the fact that this forum is being subjected to a far right extremist propaganda attack, orchestrated and organised off site?

when are you going to get treatment for your psychosis?

I telling you now scrat...i will remove to the hidden thread section EVERY post of yours that continues to contain your lies, that are intended to do nothing but disrupt, and those that are designed by you to act as a platform to attack posters you dont like...

moreover if you dont desist in the above activites I WILL  ban you.......again and again and again, if necessary...........

if you dont like that then piss off somewhere else...perhaps where YOU are organising your rubbish with the rest of your clique....

More threats, obviously we're no longer allowed to confront the onsite racist criminals who've implicated this forum in a violent premeditated crime against a defenceless Muslim female.

Are you suggesting that violent crimes against Muslims should be encouraged, especially female Muslims because that is what it sounds like, is the owner of this forum aware of this?

Ps only you consider the truth to be lies, so please continue with your stalking, continue your attack, continue with your threats, in the meantime please post these lies you're continually referring too.

Do fuck off scat, you have used all these arguments before on Flap,

and at the finish you got so hysterical you got banned.

Fuck off yourself Nicko, we have an extremist on here boasting about attacks on defenceless woman and getting away with it.

sassy wrote:Wow!   So you are prepared to overlook it.   Because there are no lies, he admitted to knowing about an attack on a Muslim woman that was not in the press, in fact he's just clarified it was with a brick.   So the only way he could have known about was from the people who did it.   But that ok, it was only a Muslim.

You are the one (and a couple of your cohorts) who keep on insisting he KNOWS about an attack,

" I heard today from oop north that a person dressed in the customary black cloak and mask had half ender hit her in the back.

Anyone know about it or have a link?"



That.../\ is actually what he said, he HEARD about an attack and was asking if anyone else had.

The same as when he said all nonces should be strung up....his words were twisted, just as mine are if I ever agree with anything he says, just as everyones are if they DARE to not hate him with the same intensity that seems to be blocking your own vision every time he posts.

Don't dare imply I care less about Muslims than I do about anyone else....hatred seems to be distorting your views lately Sassy....not mine.

sassy wrote:Wow!   So you are prepared to overlook it.   Because there are no lies, he admitted to knowing about an attack on a Muslim woman that was not in the press, in fact he's just clarified it was with a brick.   So the only way he could have known about was from the people who did it.   But that ok, it was only a Muslim.

He didn't say he knew about anything, he said he'd heard about it. If it wasn't in the press it obviously wasn't that serious, or it didn't happen.

Raggamuffin wrote:

sassy wrote:Wow!   So you are prepared to overlook it.   Because there are no lies, he admitted to knowing about an attack on a Muslim woman that was not in the press, in fact he's just clarified it was with a brick.   So the only way he could have known about was from the people who did it.   But that ok, it was only a Muslim.

He didn't say he knew about anything, he said he'd heard about it. If it wasn't in the press it obviously wasn't that serious, or it didn't happen.

He is a "Britain first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

scrat wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

He didn't say he knew about anything, he said he'd heard about it. If it wasn't in the press it obviously wasn't that serious, or it didn't happen.

He is a "Britain first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

I'm not sure how long your lies are going to be tolerated on this forum.
You don't twist things...you blatantly lie, repeat the lies, get your friends to join in....then your lies become gospel to you and your ilk.

You are a forum joke, but you are getting to be a very sour one now.

scrat wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

sassy wrote:Wow!   So you are prepared to overlook it.   Because there are no lies, he admitted to knowing about an attack on a Muslim woman that was not in the press, in fact he's just clarified it was with a brick.   So the only way he could have known about was from the people who did it.   But that ok, it was only a Muslim.

He didn't say he knew about anything, he said he'd heard about it. If it wasn't in the press it obviously wasn't that serious, or it didn't happen.

He is a "Britain first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

where ...exactly....does he "allege" he was a witness to it???

scrat wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

He didn't say he knew about anything, he said he'd heard about it. If it wasn't in the press it obviously wasn't that serious, or it didn't happen.

He is a "Britain first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

No he hasn't. You're making things up again.

nicko wrote:
Do fuck off scat,   you have used all these arguments before on Flap,

and at the  finish you got so hysterical you got banned.

WHY do you keep attacking scrat and Andy so fiercely, while totally ignoring Pte. Stotmee's much worse neo-nazi propaganda and shit-stirring on Newsfix, nicko  ???

You know that Stormee, Tommy, or Raggs right here, are regularly in the wrong many times..
Simply backing Raggs shaky premises, ignoring Stormee's odious and vulgar claims, and supporting Tommy's non-news fables and exaggerated claims, can easily be seen as tacit support for their positions..

That kind of support can often appear to be only a couple of steps removed from the outright backing that Pte. Pain gets from his loopy majorettes --  Ragg's, HT, syl, Nems, magica --  and nobody in their right mind would honestly want to be alligned with that cretinous mob of nasties.

It's a strange thing, but I always know what Wolfman is going to say before he says it.

Lord Foul wrote:

scrat wrote:
He is a "Britains first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

where ...exactly....does he "allege" he was a witness to it???

When he asks if there were "any links" to it.

Raggamuffin wrote:It's a strange thing, but I always know what Wolfman is going to say before he says it.

That's odd....so do I.

"Cretinous mob of nasties" of course wolf you never insult anyone do you?

Wolfman says pretty much the same thing on most thread - ranting on and on about mobs and gangs, and naming the same posters even when they've said nothing. He mocks people with mental disabilities, and he's a homophobe who thinks that women who complain about inappropriate behaviour from men must be "mad militant lesbians".

nicko wrote: "Cretinous mob of nasties"  of course wolf you never insult anyone do you?

He thinks it's fine to say that. He flies under the radar most of the time on here, probably because not many people read his nasty rants.

Syl wrote:

scrat wrote:
He is a "Britain first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

I'm not sure how long your lies are going to be tolerated on this forum.
You don't twist things...you blatantly lie, repeat the lies, get your friends to join in....then your lies become gospel to you and your ilk.

You are a forum joke, but you are getting to be a very sour one now.

I'm being attacked by far right filth and I have been attacked by far right filth for all my forum existence.

Exposing far right extremists like yourself doesn't come without its whining multitude of malcontents, fret not,,,I'm used to it!

Raggamuffin wrote:

scrat wrote:
So why did you mention up north?

To let you know Milton Keynes isn't up north.

As someone with an MK postcode I can categorically confirm that Milton Keynes is up north of Watford but down south of Northampton.

As someone who is Barnsley born and bred I can equally categorically confirm that it ain't the real "oop north"...you have to have the High Peak behind you and God's own county in front of you to qualify for that.

Raggamuffin wrote:Wolfman says pretty much the same thing on most thread - ranting on and on about mobs and gangs, and naming the same posters even when they've said nothing. He mocks people with mental disabilities, and he's a homophobe who thinks that women who complain about inappropriate behaviour from men must be "mad militant lesbians".

Sounds like a typical Nazi.

The only ones attacking anyone on this thread are raging lefties attacking normal people. The normal people are merely using logic and defending themselves.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

To let you know Milton Keynes isn't up north.

As someone with an MK postcode I can categorically confirm that Milton Keynes up north of Watford but down south of Northampton.

As someone who is Barnsley born and bred I can equally categorically confirm that it ain't the real "oop north"...you have to have the High Peak behind you and God's own county in front of you to qualify for that.

Thank you for that Fred. It does of course depend on where one lives as to what constitutes "up north". I usually go by the local accents.

Syl wrote:

sassy wrote:

Are you completely nuts?  You are THANKING him for telling you the attack, WHICH WASN'T IN THE PAPERS, WHICH HE HAD INSIDER KNOWLEDGE OF, was of a brick hitting her rather than a car?  Just how far will some of you go to defend his extremism?  I'm utterly disgusted.

I am thanking him for explaining what he meant Sassy.....I am not well up on Cockney rhyming slang.

I am not joining in with all the RW, LW hysteria that's taken over this forum lately, ....  

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:

I am thanking him for explaining what he meant Sassy.....I am not well up on Cockney rhyming slang.

I am not joining in with all the RW, LW hysteria that's taken over this forum lately, ....  

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

Whats your point?....apart from trying to shoehorn your way into words between 2 posters that has nothing to do with you...as per.

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:

I am thanking him for explaining what he meant Sassy.....I am not well up on Cockney rhyming slang.

I am not joining in with all the RW, LW hysteria that's taken over this forum lately, ....  

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you, so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

scrat wrote:

Syl wrote:

I'm not sure how long your lies are going to be tolerated on this forum.
You don't twist things...you blatantly lie, repeat the lies, get your friends to join in....then your lies become gospel to you and your ilk.

You are a forum joke, but you are getting to be a very sour one now.

I'm being attacked by far right filth and I have been attacked by far right filth for all my forum existence.

Exposing far right extremists like yourself doesn't come without its whining multitude of malcontents, fret not,,,I'm used to it!

Your modus operandi is, and always been, to twist, misrepresent, misquote and even edit and re-post messages posted by anyone having the temerity to oppose your childish ranting and tub-thumping in order to fit your own warped agenda.

You have also been exposed time and time again making up outrageous lies about others and then repeating them like the nasty Goebbels-like character that you really are in the hope that you might actually be believed.

It came as no surprise to note that you lost no time in starting to spread your vile poison here.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you, so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

Thanks Rags, for knowing exactly what I was meaning when I answered Sassy .
I use 'lately' in the correct sense....I have been here just over a year, but it's only in the last few months that I have noticed this huge divide in what some people see as extreme R or L wing posters...it's like two camps...unfortunately for them some people are not playing this game of extremism.

Syl wrote:

Jules wrote:

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

Whats your point?....apart from trying to shoehorn your way into words between 2 posters that has nothing to do with you...as per.

You don't need me to remind you that any member can comment on any post. But hey, feel free to make a brand new rule saying that posters can only comment on posts which have something to do with them.

My post was perfectly clear and needs no clarification whatsoever.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you, so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

This forum is under attack by far right extremists, nothing else is being discussed and it's become nauseating to witness thread after thread about Muslims and immigrants, this is the propaganda from far right extremist sites like monkey boys, like "Britain first" BNP/EDL and more recently stormfront, obviously certain posters have their agenda, an agenda that is orchestrated and organised off site.

Either we reach a seminal moment and confront it, as normal people do in real life, or we encourage each other to attack Muslims, homosexuals and immigrants.

or...and I know this is novel to you scrat....we can deconstruct their arguments without resorting to NKDV style tactics and personal abuse....

scrat wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you, so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

This forum is under attack by far right extremists, nothing else is being discussed  and it's become nauseating to witness thread after thread about Muslims and immigrants, this is the propaganda from far right extremist sites like monkey boys, like "Britain first" BNP/EDL and more recently stormfront, obviously certain posters have their agenda, an agenda that is orchestrated and organised off site.

Either we reach a seminal moment and confront it, as normal people do in real life, or we encourage each other to attack Muslims, homosexuals and immigrants.

Perhaps if you discussed something other than other posters, you might enjoy it more. There are indeed a lot of threads about Muslims - a large number of them are posted by you and Sassy.

You were the one who linked to Stormfront - nobody else took anything from there.

scrat wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

scrat wrote:
He is a "Britains first" racist who has bragged about a crime against a defenceless female Muslim from behind he alleges he was witness too.

Let's be clear about this.

where ...exactly....does he "allege" he was a witness to it???

When he asks if there were "any links" to it.

how does that allege he was witness to it??

Jules wrote:

Syl wrote:


Whats your point?....apart from trying to shoehorn your way into words between 2 posters that has nothing to do with you...as per.

You don't need me to remind you that any member can comment on any post. But hey, feel free to make a brand new rule saying that posters can only comment on posts which have something to do with them.

My post was perfectly clear and needs no clarification whatsoever.

Neither does this....piss off, you are boring me.

Very mature lol.

Well I laughed.

Lord Foul wrote:

scrat wrote:
When he asks if there were "any links" to it.

how does that allege he was witness to it??

Are you really that stupid, I'll give you another hour to think about it, Christ on a bike, and you're licensed? Ffs!

he claimed he'd "heard about it" and asked if there were any links???

that does NOT mean he was witness to it, unless you have coroborating evidence...

it could just as easily be the question of someone whishing to know if what he heard was true as it could be (which I presume is your interpretation) the act of someone involved wanting to know if it had "got out yet"

you are in fact making baseless assumptions...

Lord Foul wrote:he claimed he'd "heard about it" and asked if there were any links???

that does NOT mean he was witness to it, unless you have coroborating evidence...

it could just as easily be the question of someone whishing to know if what he heard was true as it could be (which I presume is your interpretation) the act of someone involved wanting to know if it had "got out yet"

you are in fact making baseless assumptions...

If these are baseless assumptions why did you ban him for 6 weeks?

Why would he post " he heard about it" and request links? he was witness to this crime, possibly directly connected.

Anyway, why I am having to justify the condemnation of this crime to you, and why are you defending a racist bragging about a violent attack on a defenceless female Muslim, shouldn't you be assisting me in trying to get to the bottom of this alleged event.

Raggamuffin wrote:It's a strange thing, but I always know what Wolfman is going to say before he says it.

He doesn't.

scrat wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:he claimed he'd "heard about it" and asked if there were any links???

that does NOT mean he was witness to it, unless you have coroborating evidence...

it could just as easily be the question of someone whishing to know if what he heard was true as it could be (which I presume is your interpretation) the act of someone involved wanting to know if it had "got out yet"

you are in fact making baseless assumptions...

If these are baseless assumptions why did you ban him for 6 weeks?

not for any post in THAT thread and a seperate issue altogether

Why would he post " he heard about it" and request links? he was witness to this crime, possibly directly connected.

If you heard about something and couldnt find any reference to it...would you ask if anyone else had heard about it?

Anyway, why I am having to justify the condemnation of this crime to you, and why are you defending a racist bragging about a violent attack on a defenceless female Muslim, shouldn't you be assisting me in trying to get to the bottom of this alleged event.

the only way to "get to the bottom of it" is to find some sort of official story line" like for instance a police report....or a report in the press...I'm sure such an incident would be reported somewhere...wouldnt it?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

When you keep saying ''lately'' you do realise that people like sassy, scrat, wolfie, were all members here before you?? I also saw you telling people who were doing nothing wrong ''to crawl back where you came from'', even tho joined this forum before you. Perhaps you should look at joining dates before you attack people.

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you,

so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

Well actually I have made no comments about ''trends'' and it's not me who brought up the subject either.

But for the record I'm certain that the reason for the sudden sharp divide between RW and LW on forums is simply due to BREXIT and TRUMP elections happening in close succession. The fallout after two extremely polarising events.

So it's not rocket science, it's dead obvious. And all forums are affected. As is social media.

Some of us are not extremists either way.

Oh and of course the murder of poor Jo Cox is another factor. It led to a thousand, thousand arguments between RW and LW camps, on every forum. The issue went nuclear!!!

I don't join in political discussions much, I hardly comment. But like I said, I will always try and do my bit to speak out against racism, bigotry and intolerance.

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

They never used to be so histrionic about it though. Syl is entitled to comment as she's constantly being attacked by Wolfman and Scrat. Also, Scrat didn't post here for a long time.

I've been here a lot longer than you,

so you have no idea what the new "trends" are here.

Well actually I have made no comments about ''trends'' and it's not me who brought up the subject either.

But for the record I'm certain that the reason for the sudden sharp divide between RW and LW on forums is simply due to BREXIT and TRUMP elections happening in close succession. The fallout after two extremely polarising events.

So it's not rocket science, it's dead obvious. And all forums are affected. As is social media.

You chose to interfere when Syl was not talking to you. There is a new "trend" for some posters to accuse others constantly of being "right wing" - more than used to be the case. It's not relevant how long those posters have been here.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Jules wrote:

Well actually I have made no comments about ''trends'' and it's not me who brought up the subject either.

But for the record I'm certain that the reason for the sudden sharp divide between RW and LW on forums is simply due to BREXIT and TRUMP elections happening in close succession. The fallout after two extremely polarising events.

So it's not rocket science, it's dead obvious. And all forums are affected. As is social media.

You chose to interfere when Syl was not talking to you. There is a new "trend" for some posters to accuse others constantly of being "right wing" - more than used to be the case. It's not relevant how long those posters have been here.

Well I could say the exact same thing about you. You call it interference, but all I was doing was pointing out something I had observed. Which is something is you do nonstop on here, yourself.

Going by your logic, you get the diamond-encrusted gold medal, for ''interference.''

Jules wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You chose to interfere when Syl was not talking to you. There is a new "trend" for some posters to accuse others constantly of being "right wing" - more than used to be the case. It's not relevant how long those posters have been here.

Well I could say the exact same thing about you. You call it interference, but all I was doing was pointing out something I had observed. Which is something is you do nonstop on here, yourself.

Going by your logic, you get the diamond-encrusted gold medal, for ''interference.''

You always claim you don't interfere though, and then jump in to interfere, only to then claim that you don't interfere again.

I'm also pointing out what I've observed, and my observation agrees with Syl's. Your post was completely unnecessary.

Oh you've brought that old chestnut up yet again. Good. Gives me a chance to straighten the record once and for all.


Listen up. There are only two things on forums I don't intrefere in.

One is mods' decisions to ban.
The second is commenting on the business of complete strangers, who I don't personally know. NEVER ever in a billion years do I interfere or get involved, if I don't know the person.

Jules wrote:Oh you've brought that old chestnut up yet again. Good. Gives me a chance to straighten the record once and for all.


Listen up. There are only two things on forums I don't intrefere in.

One is mods' decisions to ban.
The second is commenting on the business of complete strangers, who I don't personally know. NEVER ever in a billion years do I interfere or get involved,  if I don't know the person.

You like to post to say that you don't interfere in bannings though, don't you? I mean, you just have to post in a thread about a banning to say that you're not going to interfere. Why not just keep your mouth shut?

I freely comment on everything else, as is my right as a member. I would not be on forums if I did not have an opinion on anything, or if I wasn't willing to give opinions on anything.