EDL In Birmingham Shown Where To Go By Mosque And Residents

by Guest Sun Apr 09, 2017 6:47 am

First topic message reminder :

The English Defence League (EDL) held a march in Birmingham on Saturday and if one photo has to sum the day up it is definitely this one.

EDL In Birmingham Shown Where To Go By Mosque And Residents - Page 3 C86ZpbDXUAEdypF

EDL In Birmingham Shown Where To Go By Mosque And Residents - Page 3 C86ZpbDXUAEdypF

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/edl-in-birmingham_uk_58e93ffee4b05413bfe36c87?90c&utm_hp_ref=uk

by Tommy Monk Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:39 pm

Thorin wrote:
Vicar of Dibley (vod) wrote:

She said the edl members were pointing at her because she was a mulsem so how could they have known ? Think she might telling fibs .

Well you might want to listen to the recording of the event.

I posted the video

The EDL clearly stereotyped her being Muslim, based on her part Asian ethnicity

I think you are posting up a hell of a lot of excuses for the EDL here.

So whether she was a Muslim or not, this is how generally the EDL views Asians in Britain. As if their all Muslims. Then when they shout to the other Muslim woman involved at the protest and accuse her of not British. (as to many in the EDL only white people can be English or British) When she is if born here. Thus showing how racially motivated and racist some of the EDL minds are.

I mean why else would the EDL members shout at a British Muslim female, (attempting to deny them their birth right to being British) claiming they are not British?

English is an ethnicity of its own Didge...

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:01 am

https://youtu.be/QN5TgItGWlk

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:07 am

Thorin wrote:

The whole bullshit propaganda story is based on 2 bullshit fake photoshop 'pictures'...!

by Guest Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:10 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Well you might want to listen to the recording of the event.

I posted the video

The EDL clearly stereotyped her being Muslim, based on her part Asian ethnicity

I think you are posting up a hell of a lot of excuses for the EDL here.

So whether she was a Muslim or not, this is how generally the EDL views Asians in Britain. As if their all Muslims. Then when they shout to the other Muslim woman involved at the protest and accuse her of not British. (as to many in the EDL only white people can be English or British) When she is if born here. Thus showing how racially motivated and racist some of the EDL minds are.

I mean why else would the EDL members shout at a British Muslim female, (attempting to deny them their birth right to being British) claiming they are not British?

English is an ethnicity of its own Didge...

All ethnic groups are.

Does that mean people born here cannot be British or English if born to this land. Have grown up speaking the English language?

You do realise to be English is just a concept, just as every other ethnicity is a concept. Based around a common national identity or cultural tradition.

Which means racists have no right to deny people their British and English nationality identities. As its not an exclusive "whites only" club.

by eddie Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:14 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

On this thread so far, we have seen both VoD and Tommy running mad with their usual scumbag racist, intolerant and bigotted vitriol, apologising for their extremist chums in the EDL while freely slandering strangers, purely on the basis of innocent photo's and videos, and unsubstantiated EDL propaganda...

And not a single whimper from either of the two England-based moderators on here against VoD's or Tommy's regular hatemongering garbage across several threads over recent days -- despite those mod's being all to ready to criticise me, or Andy, or any other random "lefties" simply for 'calling a spade a spade' !

Have any non-English mods said anything then?
Didn't think so. When you make a point try and be able to back it up.

by Guest Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:16 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

The whole bullshit propaganda story is based on 2 bullshit fake photoshop 'pictures'...!

Jackanory

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:25 am

Thorin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

English is an ethnicity of its own Didge...

All ethnic groups are.

Does that mean people born here cannot be British or English if born to this land. Have grown up speaking the English language?

You do realise to be English is just a concept, just as every other ethnicity is a concept. Based around a common national identity or cultural tradition.

Which means racists have no right to deny people their British and English nationality identities. As its not an exclusive "whites only" club.

English is an ethnicity of its own!!!

by Guest Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:28 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Thorin wrote:

All ethnic groups are.

Does that mean people born here cannot be British or English if born to this land. Have grown up speaking the English language?

You do realise to be English is just a concept, just as every other ethnicity is a concept. Based around a common national identity or cultural tradition.

Which means racists have no right to deny people their British and English nationality identities. As its not an exclusive "whites only" club.

English is an ethnicity of its own!!!

All ethnic groups are.

Does that mean people born here cannot be British or English if born to this land. Have grown up speaking the English language?

You do realise to be English is just a concept, just as every other ethnicity is a concept. Based around a common national identity or cultural tradition.

Which means racists have no right to deny people their British and English nationality identities. As its not an exclusive "whites only" club.

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:38 am

Sounds like it is you who wants to deny people their ethnic identity Didge...

by Guest Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:43 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Sounds like it is you who wants to deny people their ethnic identity Didge...

Really??

Or is it, that you need to go to specsavers?

All ethnic groups are.

Does that mean people born here cannot be British or English if born to this land. Have grown up speaking the English language?

You do realise to be English is just a concept, just as every other ethnicity is a concept. Based around a common national identity or cultural tradition.

Which means racists have no right to deny people their British and English nationality identities. As its not an exclusive "whites only" club.

by veya_victaous Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:47 am

English is not an ethic group
'Anglo' is
You know the people that most white English descend from that Invaded 1700 odd years ago.

by veya_victaous Sun Apr 16, 2017 5:49 am

eddie wrote:
WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

On this thread so far, we have seen both VoD and Tommy running mad with their usual scumbag racist, intolerant and bigotted vitriol, apologising for their extremist chums in the EDL while freely slandering strangers, purely on the basis of innocent photo's and videos, and unsubstantiated EDL propaganda...

And not a single whimper from either of the two England-based moderators on here against VoD's or Tommy's regular hatemongering garbage across several threads over recent days -- despite those mod's being all to ready to criticise me, or Andy, or any other random "lefties" simply for 'calling a spade a spade' !

Have any non-English mods said anything then?
Didn't think so. When you make a point try and be able to back it up.

YES i have
Tommy has used homophobic abuse as a 'joke'
and is being plain racist as per usual Rolling Eyes

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 16, 2017 11:12 am

English is an ethnic identity all of its own...

And I have not used homophobic abuse as a joke... and there is nothing wrong with declaring your ethnic identity...

by Original Quill Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:29 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:English is an ethnic identity all of its own...

And I have not used homophobic abuse as a joke... and there is nothing wrong with declaring your ethnic identity...

The ethnic identity of the people who inhabit the eastern British Isles is Anglo Saxon, people who emanated from the land between the Elbe and Weser Rivers.

by 'Wolfie Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:00 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:English is an ethnic identity all of its own...

And I have not used homophobic abuse as a joke... and there is nothing wrong with declaring your ethnic identity...

The ethnic identity of the people who inhabit the eastern British Isles is Anglo Saxon, people who emanated from the land between the Elbe and Weser Rivers.

Once again, Tommy's self-declared genius-osity has let him down...

Is there a more clueless dumbfuck in the whole NewsFix universe, than poor little clueless Tommykins ?

Let's just consider some of those big words, terms and concepts that are so far beyond his pathetically limited comprehension :

Ethnicity vs. Nationality vs. Tribalism
Genetics/nature vs. Upbringing/nurture
Bigotry -- Racism -- Discrimination
Equality, Fairness, Justice
Climate vs. Weather vs. Global warming/cooling
Scientific method, Empirical reasoning & Statistical analysis
Science == Factual == Truth
History vs. Wishful thinking...

People who are as ignorant as Tommy -- who can't even grasp basic definittions and concepts at the core of so many ideas and debates -- shouldn't even be allowed to take part in intelligent discussions. Especially when proven incapable of even accepting their own ignorance..

by Tommy Monk Mon Apr 17, 2017 1:45 pm

Yawn...

Troll on...

by nicko Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:45 pm

I think Wolf's got it in for Tommy, pathetic really.

by Original Quill Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:19 pm

Actually, Wolf's post is quite informative. He identifies a list of eight themes that appear as errors quite frequently on this site.

We should all take the opportunity to jot the list down, and when the blunders appear again, we might recall it and compare. Some members could learn from the exercise.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:23 pm

Original Quill wrote:Actually, Wolf's post is quite informative. He identifies a list of eight themes that appear as errors quite frequently on this site.

We should all take the opportunity to jot the list down, and when the blunders appear again, we might recall it and compare. Some members could learn from the exercise.

You could maybe learn something from Wolfman if you feel inclined, but the only thing he has to teach anyone is how not to behave. Cool

by Original Quill Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:29 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Actually, Wolf's post is quite informative. He identifies a list of eight themes that appear as errors quite frequently on this site.

We should all take the opportunity to jot the list down, and when the blunders appear again, we might recall it and compare. Some members could learn from the exercise.

You could maybe learn something from Wolfman if you feel inclined, but the only thing he has to teach anyone is how not to behave.

All of you conservatives gang up on Wolf because he's willing to names names. It invites a visceral reaction that often gets in the way of his message. For that reason I only do it if I'm having a direct conversation with someone.

But if you bother to listen to what he says, it's pretty insightful. He's a learned man, and not just a little bit of a conservative himself in his personal ways and views.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:37 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

You could maybe learn something from Wolfman if you feel inclined, but the only thing he has to teach anyone is how not to behave.

All of you conservatives gang up on Wolf because he's willing to names names. It invites a visceral reaction that often gets in the way of his message. For that reason I only do it if I'm having a direct conversation with someone.

But if you bother to listen to what he says, it's pretty insightful. He's a learned man, and not just a little bit of a conservative himself in his personal ways and views.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have a go back if he has a go at me, which he generally does even if I've not posted in a thread. You're blinkered, and you have form for not reading posts properly and for "missing" his abusive posts.

by Original Quill Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:46 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

All of you conservatives gang up on Wolf because he's willing to names names. It invites a visceral reaction that often gets in the way of his message. For that reason I only do it if I'm having a direct conversation with someone.

But if you bother to listen to what he says, it's pretty insightful. He's a learned man, and not just a little bit of a conservative himself in his personal ways and views.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have a go back if he has a go at me, which he generally does even if I've not posted in a thread. You're blinkered, and you have form for not reading posts properly and for "missing" his abusive posts.

I'm well aware of his posts. I often say to myself, damn, it's a good point if he didn't start out with the personal condemnations.

But water off a duck's back...if you move past it, he's saying some important things. The thing is, all of you conservatives have conditioned yourselves not to read past the first incendiary line or two.

Anyway, I don't want to turn this or any other thread into a personal opinion dialogue about someone.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:50 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have a go back if he has a go at me, which he generally does even if I've not posted in a thread. You're blinkered, and you have form for not reading posts properly and for "missing" his abusive posts.

I'm well aware of his posts. I often say to myself, damn, it's a good point if he didn't start out with the personal condemnations.

But water off a duck's back...if you move past it, he's saying some important things. The thing is, all of you conservatives have conditioned yourselves not to read past the first incendiary line or two.

Anyway, I don't want to turn this or any other thread into a personal opinion dialogue about someone.

The onus is not on me to move past the abuse, the onus is on him to stop the abuse.

by Fuzzy Zack Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:50 am

It's all fake and photoshopped!

She interrupted a minutes silence!

Dum dum dum!

by eddie Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:00 am

I cannot stand the EDL. I am an advocate of free speech and so wouldn't deny them their right to it, but they just look like a bunch of yobs.
Make me feel embarrassed to be English to be honest.

by Tommy Monk Wed Apr 26, 2017 11:44 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:It's all fake and photoshopped!

She interrupted a minutes silence!

Dum dum dum!

So where in that film footage does it show the woman and man that close together as 'shown' in picture...!?

by Fuzzy Zack Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:18 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:It's all fake and photoshopped!

She interrupted a minutes silence!

Dum dum dum!

So where in that film footage does it show the woman and man that close together as 'shown' in picture...!?

Lol!

1:28 onwards.

But the point is there was no minutes silence before just this incident. These yobbish chavs couldn't keep silent because they were piss drunk and probably high on coke.

by nicko Fri Apr 28, 2017 5:42 am

Does "Pepsi" have the same effect?

by Original Quill Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:02 pm

nicko wrote:Does "Pepsi" have the same effect?

Nah, Pepsi was a knock-off. Coca-cola was originally made with cocaine, as was Lidocaine, so popular with the Victorian crowd. When cocaine became a controlled substance, Coke switched its base to caffeine...but it never changed the name.

Then, when powered cocaine became so popular in the 1970's and 80's, the users went back to the original lingo whence Coca-cola got it's name. "Coke" became a homonym...but with a common derivation.

by Tommy Monk Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:22 am

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

So where in that film footage does it show the woman and man that close together as 'shown' in picture...!?

Lol!

1:28 onwards.

But the point is there was no minutes silence before just this incident. These yobbish chavs couldn't keep silent because they were piss drunk and probably high on coke.

No... the point is that there is nowhere in the video clip you posted, that proves the authenticity of the 'photograph' that we are discussing...

In fact... if anything... it proves that the pic was faked, as it shows that the edl man and the leftie protester woman were never as close as the 'picture' portrays...!

So... just more leftie lies and spin...!

by Guest Sun Apr 30, 2017 1:12 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Lol!

1:28 onwards.

But the point is there was no minutes silence before just this incident. These yobbish chavs couldn't keep silent because they were piss drunk and probably high on coke.

No... the point is that there is nowhere in the video clip you posted, that proves the authenticity of the 'photograph' that we are discussing...

In fact... if anything... it proves that the pic was faked, as it shows that the edl man and the leftie protester woman were never as close as the 'picture' portrays...!

So... just more leftie lies and spin...!

Or more to the point you clearly need to go to specsavers

PMSL

by Tommy Monk Mon May 01, 2017 2:21 pm

Ok... at what point in the video were they in the positions shown in the picture...!?

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 3:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Ok... at what point in the video were they in the positions shown in the picture...!?

The video didn't show them together, but at least 2 photographs did.
Not everything was videotaped. The girl was led away by two police officers ...that was on video, but the run up to why she was escorted away was not taped.
She says it was to protect her and get her away from the mob of angry EDL supporters and I believe that's what happened, but there is no video evidence to prove that.

by Original Quill Mon May 01, 2017 3:53 pm

Syl wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Ok... at what point in the video were they in the positions shown in the picture...!?

The video didn't show them together, but at least 2 photographs did.
Not everything was videotaped. The girl was led away by two police officers ...that was on video, but the run up to why she was escorted away was not taped.
She says it was to protect her and get her away from the mob of angry EDL supporters and I believe that's what happened, but there is no video evidence to prove that.

Tommy knows that. He is just playing a Breitbart hand.

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 4:25 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:

The video didn't show them together, but at least 2 photographs did.
Not everything was videotaped. The girl was led away by two police officers ...that was on video, but the run up to why she was escorted away was not taped.
She says it was to protect her and get her away from the mob of angry EDL supporters and I believe that's what happened, but there is no video evidence to prove that.

Tommy knows that. He is just playing a Breitbart hand.

I had to google that. Smile

Tommy seems to be playing the opposite of a Breitbart hand if I understand the term correctly.
He is saying the papers took the pic out of context by splicing two unconnected photos together and making it look like a face off... and there is no proof (on video) to prove that they didn't.

I think the majority of people though, who have seen various videos of both the girl and Crossland in the same vicinity at the same time, believe the photo to be true.

by Andy Mon May 01, 2017 4:33 pm

Tommy is making a futile and vain attempt to find the girl guilty of disruption , for 2 sole reasons, she is Muslim and she is coloured. Those 2 reasons alone are sufficient in Tommy's warped little mind to suspect her of being a suicide bomber.

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 4:49 pm

Angry Andy wrote:Tommy is making a futile and vain attempt to find the girl guilty of disruption , for 2 sole reasons, she is Muslim and she is coloured. Those 2 reasons alone are sufficient in Tommy's warped little mind to suspect her of being a suicide bomber.

I think the correct terminology today ( though it could all change tomorrow) is black. Smile

by Original Quill Mon May 01, 2017 4:58 pm

Syl wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Tommy knows that. He is just playing a Breitbart hand.

I had to google that.
Tommy seems to be playing the opposite of a Breitbart hand if I understand the term correctly.
He is saying the papers took the pic out on context by splicing two unconnected photos together and making it look like a face off... and there is no proof (on video) to prove that they didn't.

I think the majority of people though, who have seen various videos of both the girl and Crossland in the same vicinity at the same time, believe the photo to be true.

Breitbart is known for taking false or half-facts, leaving out substantiation, and turning them into the story. Tommy is doing that right here.

Tommy is saying that because no one has produced a video that shows the two principals together, ergo, they were never together. This, despite the fact that the still photo clearly shows the two together. In other words, he is saying that only the video is valid. To do this he has to allege the still photo is altered...but he offers no proof of alteration, nor even a plausible explanation of why. This is typical Breitbart.

Tommy is selectively acknowledging only half the evidence, and thereby fabricating his story. I call this, playing a Breitbart hand.

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 5:09 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Syl wrote:

I had to google that.
Tommy seems to be playing the opposite of a Breitbart hand if I understand the term correctly.
He is saying the papers took the pic out on context by splicing two unconnected photos together and making it look like a face off... and there is no proof (on video) to prove that they didn't.

I think the majority of people though, who have seen various videos of both the girl and Crossland in the same vicinity at the same time, believe the photo to be true.

Breitbart is known for taking false or half-facts, leaving out substantiation, and turning them into the story. Tommy is doing that right here.

Tommy is saying that because no one has produced a video that shows the two principals together, ergo, they were never together. This, despite the fact that the still photo clearly shows the two together. In other words, he is saying that only the video is valid. To do this he has to allege the still photo is altered...but he offers no proof of alteration, nor even a plausible explanation of why. This is typical Breitbart.

Tommy is selectively acknowledging only half the evidence, and thereby fabricating his story. I call this, playing a Breitbart hand.

OK.
I took it more to mean that Tommy is accusing the press of playing a Breitbart hand by falsifying the photo, which he obviously believes they have done.

by Andy Mon May 01, 2017 5:23 pm

Syl wrote:
Angry Andy wrote:Tommy is making a futile and vain attempt to find the girl guilty of disruption , for 2 sole reasons, she is Muslim and she is coloured. Those 2 reasons alone are sufficient in Tommy's warped little mind to suspect her of being a suicide bomber.

I think the correct terminology today ( though it could all change tomorrow) is black.

Which is , of course ridiculous as she is of brown skin. Indeed, few humans are genuinely of black skin, some tribes in Africa and the Amazon, but most pigments are shades of brown.
[size=35]I am sure she would be happier to be called bown skinned or of colour rather than black.[/size]
[size=35]I suspect the term 'black' for everyone not caucasian derives from racist origins. White = good. Black = bad. Or so they think.
[/size]

by nicko Mon May 01, 2017 5:27 pm

Ever noticed in old Westerns, the "Baddies" wore black hats and the "goodies" wore white ones?

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 5:27 pm

Angry Andy wrote:
Syl wrote:

I think the correct terminology today ( though it could all change tomorrow) is black.
Which is , of course ridiculous as she is of brown skin. Indeed, few humans are genuinely of black skin, some tribes in Africa and the Amazon, but most pigments are shades of brown.
[size=35]I am sure she would be happier to be called bown skinned or of colour rather than black.[/size]
[size=35]I suspect the term 'black' for everyone not caucasian derives from racist origins. White = good. Black = bad. Or so they think.
[/size]

Mixed race would probably best describe her....coloured people now prefer the term black, as the use of the word coloured was used when segregation was allowed.

Its all confusing to me tbh, I do still forget and use the term coloured instead of black or mixed race....old habits died hard.
Language does evolve though and I think we should all try to move along with it...if we didn't we would still be saying negro and nig ger.

by nicko Mon May 01, 2017 5:30 pm

Why can't we print the word n---er? My daughters partner is black, and him and his mates often use the word?

by JulesV Mon May 01, 2017 5:40 pm

Lol Tommy you keep bumping up this thread to say that the pic was photoshopped. lol!

It wasn't.

In Fuzzy's vid there were two nasty assaults clearly seen in the immediate foreground of the film and the famous confrontation took place between these two assaults, or it could have been just after. (At ~ 1:31 is my best bet.)

The girl said the police officer had to stop the guy waving his finger in her face, so at one stage they were certainly close together and this was already shown during first vid. The photo is not a fake, that's the bottom line.

by JulesV Mon May 01, 2017 5:47 pm

Oddly enough, the fakest photoshop vid I've ever seen on here was shown by YOU, Tommy. An embarrassingly amateur hatchet job showing Hillary "twitching and having epileptic seizures." Funny how you were so willing to lower your notoriously strict standards, in order to discredit poor Hillary. Laughing

by Andy Mon May 01, 2017 5:49 pm

nicko wrote:Ever noticed in old Westerns, the "Baddies" wore black hats and the "goodies" wore white ones?

Happens in all areas. Ever watched American or even British wrestling just as an example The bad guys, or heels always wear black, the goodies wear white or patriotic colours like red white and blue.
It is a visual preconception thing.

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 6:28 pm

Hmmm...my favourite colour is black, I wear it all the time, wonder what that says about me. Razz

by Syl Mon May 01, 2017 6:31 pm

nicko wrote:Why can't we print the word n---er? My daughters partner is black, and him and his mates often use the word?

Black music is filled with the word, I was walking round some shop not long ago...that word, plus mother f***** was blasting out from somewhere.
Its double standards obviously, but my opinion is if something upsets someone try not to do it.

by Ben Reilly Mon May 01, 2017 8:55 pm

Syl wrote:
nicko wrote:Why can't we print the word n---er? My daughters partner is black, and him and his mates often use the word?
Black music is filled with the word, I was walking round some shop not long ago...that word, plus mother f***** was blasting out from somewhere.
Its double standards obviously, but my opinion is if something upsets someone try not to do it.

I don't understand why people have such a hard time with a word being okay for a certain group to use among themselves, but not okay for other groups to use.

by eddie Mon May 01, 2017 9:50 pm

Words are used in cliques of people and become like their own language.
My three close friends and I call eachother "bitch fam" - it's an expression I'd only use with people who spoke my language and whom I considered close.
I wouldn't dream of saying it a complete stranger.

The word n---er is really a friendly, "family" word that black people will use with people they consider one of their "people". If a white person is called "my nigga" by a black person, that's pretty high praise.
However. It's also used as a term of abuse and some blacks use it as a slur. It's up to all within the group to know how it's to be taken and that, of course, is the secret of knowing if you are indeed, "their people".

Hope that made sense. Took me ages to type it.

by Sponsored content