Bias against Trump

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Bias against Trump

Page 29 of 344 < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 >

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 3.32pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays They are criticising Trump because they are progressive and they look for any chance to criticise him. The BBC website takes numerous opportunities to push a progressive agenda...on general taxpayer money. Calling these videos 'unverified' is amusing. It's just another apologist 'get out of jail' card. I've watched plenty of videos like those. It's not until you hear the sound of a homosexual or opponent hitting the pavement from a roof that words like 'unverified' become amusing....yeah mate, give you name and address when you post that stuff...thanks. No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.27pm) Is it wise for the 'leader of the free world ' to retweet stuff from Britain First?

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 3.32pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

They are criticising Trump because they are progressive and they look for any chance to criticise him. The BBC website takes numerous opportunities to push a progressive agenda...on general taxpayer money.

Calling these videos 'unverified' is amusing. It's just another apologist 'get out of jail' card. I've watched plenty of videos like those. It's not until you hear the sound of a homosexual or opponent hitting the pavement from a roof that words like 'unverified' become amusing....yeah mate, give you name and address when you post that stuff...thanks.

No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.27pm)

Is it wise for the 'leader of the free world ' to retweet stuff from Britain First?

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 29 Nov 17 3.41pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays They are criticising Trump because they are progressive and they look for any chance to criticise him. The BBC website takes numerous opportunities to push a progressive agenda...on general taxpayer money. Calling these videos 'unverified' is amusing. It's just another apologist 'get out of jail' card. I've watched plenty of videos like those. It's not until you hear the sound of a homosexual or opponent hitting the pavement from a roof that words like 'unverified' become amusing....yeah mate, give you name and address when you post that stuff...thanks. No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.27pm) Again, I do agree that people will jump on any reason to criticise Trump, but in this case, I don't think there's a defence to be made - as I said, consider your reaction if this was Corbyn. It's moronic behaviour by someone in such a position. I don't think it's amusing to call them unverified; I'd say it's correct - you can't even tell if the people in these videos are Muslim - they are just an assortment of random violent encounters which have been assigned a caption to support an agenda - for someone who sites evidence and sources quite meticulously on here to suggest that these videos are indicative of anything is quite surprising. I think you're overarching points are correct in the 'over-criticism' of Trump, and the 'over-protection' of Islam, but I don't think either are particularly relevant here.

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 29 Nov 17 3.41pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.27pm)

Again, I do agree that people will jump on any reason to criticise Trump, but in this case, I don't think there's a defence to be made - as I said, consider your reaction if this was Corbyn. It's moronic behaviour by someone in such a position.

I don't think it's amusing to call them unverified; I'd say it's correct - you can't even tell if the people in these videos are Muslim - they are just an assortment of random violent encounters which have been assigned a caption to support an agenda - for someone who sites evidence and sources quite meticulously on here to suggest that these videos are indicative of anything is quite surprising.

I think you're overarching points are correct in the 'over-criticism' of Trump, and the 'over-protection' of Islam, but I don't think either are particularly relevant here.

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 3.55pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow Again, I do agree that people will jump on any reason to criticise Trump, but in this case, I don't think there's a defence to be made - as I said, consider your reaction if this was Corbyn. It's moronic behaviour by someone in such a position. I don't think it's amusing to call them unverified; I'd say it's correct - you can't even tell if the people in these videos are Muslim - they are just an assortment of random violent encounters which have been assigned a caption to support an agenda - for someone who sites evidence and sources quite meticulously on here to suggest that these videos are indicative of anything is quite surprising. I think you're overarching points are correct in the 'over-criticism' of Trump, and the 'over-protection' of Islam, but I don't think either are particularly relevant here. Well, obviously we don't agree I regard points in your last paragraph as being evidenced and seen in this piece. As for sources....well, there is a point if we had to regard Twitter as a court of law but that's not how I see Twitter nor Trump. Trump is Trump, he isn't required to fit anyone's conceptions of how a president should act. He gets elected or he doesn't. Tell me, do you regard the unverified videos of the last Syrian chemical attacks as having no worth? As something that should be kept from the public? Are those videos of IS throwing supposed homosexuals off of roofs as having no worth because they are unverified.....should they be kept from the public? Surely you understand that the nature of many of these videos means they are unverified. You either believe them or don't.....usually using context and number of them.....but certainty is for the deluded. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 4.03pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 3.55pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

I think you're overarching points are correct in the 'over-criticism' of Trump, and the 'over-protection' of Islam, but I don't think either are particularly relevant here.

Well, obviously we don't agree I regard points in your last paragraph as being evidenced and seen in this piece.

As for sources....well, there is a point if we had to regard Twitter as a court of law but that's not how I see Twitter nor Trump.

Trump is Trump, he isn't required to fit anyone's conceptions of how a president should act. He gets elected or he doesn't.

Tell me, do you regard the unverified videos of the last Syrian chemical attacks as having no worth? As something that should be kept from the public?

Are those videos of IS throwing supposed homosexuals off of roofs as having no worth because they are unverified.....should they be kept from the public?

Surely you understand that the nature of many of these videos means they are unverified. You either believe them or don't.....usually using context and number of them.....but certainty is for the deluded.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 4.03pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 4.00pm
Originally posted by nickgusset Is it wise for the 'leader of the free world ' to retweet stuff from Britain First? Fine by me, there's nothing in those videos that Islamic radicals aren't doing regularly.....or wouldn't want to do if they had the chance. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 4.00pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

Is it wise for the 'leader of the free world ' to retweet stuff from Britain First?

Fine by me, there's nothing in those videos that Islamic radicals aren't doing regularly.....or wouldn't want to do if they had the chance.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 29 Nov 17 4.16pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Well, obviously we don't agree I regard points in your last paragraph as being evidenced and seen in this piece. As for sources....well, there is a point if we had to regard Twitter as a court of law but that's not how I see Twitter nor Trump. Trump is Trump, he isn't required to fit anyone's conceptions of how a president should act. He gets elected or he doesn't. Tell me, do you regard the unverified videos of the last Syrian chemical attacks as having no worth? As something that should be kept from the public? Are those videos of IS throwing supposed homosexuals off of roofs as no worth because they are unverified.....should they be kept from the public? Surely you understand that the nature of many of these videos means they are unverified. You either believe them or don't.....usually using context and number of them.....but certainty is for the deluded. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.58pm) I'd start off by saying that by no means am I arguing that these videos should be 'kept from the public' - just because something isn't being retweed by the POTUS, it doesn't mean it's being hidden from the public; there is a bit of a range between those two extremes. The video of the Syrian attacks is an interesting comparison and one I had not considered - having said that, I think the key difference is you know exactly what you are looking at and where/when it took place (context) - as I said above, random videos of violence where one of those involved happens to have brown skin are not really showing anything as you have no idea if religion is even involved in the incident. Sure, there are some where it's very obvious (like the ISIS on the roof one you mention), but there are many on that particular Twitter page which are not at all, and many where the caption Britain First have attached to it has been proven to be entirely incorrect. Of course the nature of these videos is unverified, but then my gripe is not at all with the existence (or indeed circulation) of the videos themselves. My gripe is with someone in Donald's Trump's position of influence tweeting inflammatory content with no relevant information or research shared, and without any sort of verification - it's astonishingly naive. He's a President who's spent large parts of his term ousting 'fake news', and yet here he is broadcasting information which fits that description perfectly - that deserves criticism.

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 29 Nov 17 4.16pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well, obviously we don't agree I regard points in your last paragraph as being evidenced and seen in this piece.

As for sources....well, there is a point if we had to regard Twitter as a court of law but that's not how I see Twitter nor Trump.

Trump is Trump, he isn't required to fit anyone's conceptions of how a president should act. He gets elected or he doesn't.

Tell me, do you regard the unverified videos of the last Syrian chemical attacks as having no worth? As something that should be kept from the public?

Are those videos of IS throwing supposed homosexuals off of roofs as no worth because they are unverified.....should they be kept from the public?

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 3.58pm)

I'd start off by saying that by no means am I arguing that these videos should be 'kept from the public' - just because something isn't being retweed by the POTUS, it doesn't mean it's being hidden from the public; there is a bit of a range between those two extremes.

The video of the Syrian attacks is an interesting comparison and one I had not considered - having said that, I think the key difference is you know exactly what you are looking at and where/when it took place (context) - as I said above, random videos of violence where one of those involved happens to have brown skin are not really showing anything as you have no idea if religion is even involved in the incident. Sure, there are some where it's very obvious (like the ISIS on the roof one you mention), but there are many on that particular Twitter page which are not at all, and many where the caption Britain First have attached to it has been proven to be entirely incorrect.

Of course the nature of these videos is unverified, but then my gripe is not at all with the existence (or indeed circulation) of the videos themselves. My gripe is with someone in Donald's Trump's position of influence tweeting inflammatory content with no relevant information or research shared, and without any sort of verification - it's astonishingly naive.

He's a President who's spent large parts of his term ousting 'fake news', and yet here he is broadcasting information which fits that description perfectly - that deserves criticism.

DanH SW2 29 Nov 17 4.22pm
It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A f*cking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion.

DanH

SW2 29 Nov 17 4.22pm

It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A f*cking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion.

croydon proud Any european country i fancy! 29 Nov 17 4.26pm
Originally posted by DanH It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A f*cking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion. Hear hear ! or as donald would say,,,,Hear hear , hear hear!

croydon proud

Any european country i fancy! 29 Nov 17 4.26pm

Originally posted by DanH

It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A f*cking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion.

Hear hear ! or as donald would say,,,,Hear hear , hear hear!

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 4.31pm
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow I'd start off by saying that by no means am I arguing that these videos should be 'kept from the public' - just because something isn't being retweed by the POTUS, it doesn't mean it's being hidden from the public; there is a bit of a range between those two extremes. The video of the Syrian attacks is an interesting comparison and one I had not considered - having said that, I think the key difference is you know exactly what you are looking at and where/when it took place (context) - as I said above, random videos of violence where one of those involved happens to have brown skin are not really showing anything as you have no idea if religion is even involved in the incident. Sure, there are some where it's very obvious (like the ISIS on the roof one you mention), but there are many on that particular Twitter page which are not at all, and many where the caption Britain First have attached to it has been proven to be entirely incorrect. Of course the nature of these videos is unverified, but then my gripe is not at all with the existence (or indeed circulation) of the videos themselves. My gripe is with someone in Donald's Trump's position of influence tweeting inflammatory content with no relevant information or research shared, and without any sort of verification - it's astonishingly naive. He's a President who's spent large parts of his term ousting 'fake news', and yet here he is broadcasting information which fits that description perfectly - that deserves criticism. It's a totally valid criticism to point out that Trump is a hypocrite......he lies every day. He's also lied about every day but nevertheless...nothing worse than he would do. America choose between him and Clinton and it was basically tied....he gets in on the states' votes system they have. Should he retweet this stuff.....well, I'm fine with it but I recognise your point about the POTUS position.....am I wrong to find the reactions against him a bit amusing...what can I say...guilty as charged. Still, one of the few areas I agree with him is in recognising the threat from radical Islam and being willing to keep it relevant and find ways to improve immigration. You say we know about the Syrian chemical attacks and roof murders are probably true.....well....yeah we do..It's hard to fake that stuff..and that's how I view these videos because nothing in them hasn't been seen before. Could they be faked....yeah.....probably not though....but perhaps that will come out. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 4.33pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 4.31pm

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

He's a President who's spent large parts of his term ousting 'fake news', and yet here he is broadcasting information which fits that description perfectly - that deserves criticism.

It's a totally valid criticism to point out that Trump is a hypocrite......he lies every day. He's also lied about every day but nevertheless...nothing worse than he would do.

America choose between him and Clinton and it was basically tied....he gets in on the states' votes system they have.

Should he retweet this stuff.....well, I'm fine with it but I recognise your point about the POTUS position.....am I wrong to find the reactions against him a bit amusing...what can I say...guilty as charged.

Still, one of the few areas I agree with him is in recognising the threat from radical Islam and being willing to keep it relevant and find ways to improve immigration.

You say we know about the Syrian chemical attacks and roof murders are probably true.....well....yeah we do..It's hard to fake that stuff..and that's how I view these videos because nothing in them hasn't been seen before.

Could they be faked....yeah.....probably not though....but perhaps that will come out.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 4.33pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 7.41pm
I still can't get my head around that the leader of the free world retweeted a convicted fascists video of unverified Islamic attacks , thus helping promote an islamaphobic group, Britain First to his 4 million followers. If he ever comes here, he should be nicked for inciting racial hatred.

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 7.41pm

I still can't get my head around that the leader of the free world retweeted a convicted fascists video of unverified Islamic attacks , thus helping promote an islamaphobic group, Britain First to his 4 million followers.

If he ever comes here, he should be nicked for inciting racial hatred.

tome Inner Tantalus Time. 29 Nov 17 8.06pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I agree. The BBC is no longer representative of the majority. ITV and Channel 4 are even worse. I'm genuinely struggling with both your views on this. The BBC is one of the greatest institutions in the world, let alone this country. It's not perfect, but what is your alternative? A one and a two...

tome

Inner Tantalus Time. 29 Nov 17 8.06pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I agree. The BBC is no longer representative of the majority. ITV and Channel 4 are even worse.

I'm genuinely struggling with both your views on this. The BBC is one of the greatest institutions in the world, let alone this country. It's not perfect, but what is your alternative?

A one and a two...

Ray in Houston Houston 29 Nov 17 8.21pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays They are criticising Trump because they are progressive and they look for any chance to criticise him. The BBC website takes numerous opportunities to push a progressive agenda...on general taxpayer money. Calling these videos 'unverified' is amusing. It's just another apologist 'get out of jail' card. I've watched plenty of videos like those. It's not until you hear the sound of a homosexual or opponent hitting the pavement from a roof that words like 'unverified' become amusing....yeah mate, give you name and address when you post that stuff...thanks. No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public. Let's hope he doesn't retweet a vine of someone in a red and blue scarf setting off a firework at a football match... We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Ray in Houston

Houston 29 Nov 17 8.21pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

No one is saying these videos are from Britain, but I find it hard to justify censoring the truth about the excesses of religion from the general public.

Let's hope he doesn't retweet a vine of someone in a red and blue scarf setting off a firework at a football match...

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Ray in Houston Houston 29 Nov 17 8.25pm
Originally posted by DanH It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A fcking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion. John Oliver's team produced a tweet by just accepting whatever predicted word came up next on their iPhone. It made far more sense than many of Trump's statements. At least the iPhone knows "covfefe" isn't a word. [Link] We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa*ing with a football.

Ray in Houston

Houston 29 Nov 17 8.25pm

Originally posted by DanH

It doesn't need biased or unbiased press reporting to realise the bloke is a Grade A f*cking moron. Just listening to him speak is enough for any rational person to come to that conclusion.

John Oliver's team produced a tweet by just accepting whatever predicted word came up next on their iPhone. It made far more sense than many of Trump's statements. At least the iPhone knows "covfefe" isn't a word. [Link]

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 8.37pm
Originally posted by nickgusset I still can't get my head around that the leader of the free world retweeted a convicted fascists video of unverified Islamic attacks , thus helping promote an islamaphobic group, Britain First to his 4 million followers. If he ever comes here, he should be nicked for inciting racial hatred. I'd say you inspire quite a lot of racial hatred yourself. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 8.37pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

If he ever comes here, he should be nicked for inciting racial hatred.

I'd say you inspire quite a lot of racial hatred yourself.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.40pm
Husband of Jo Cox, whose killer shouted 'Britain First' whilst murdering her... [Tweet Link]

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.40pm

Husband of Jo Cox, whose killer shouted 'Britain First' whilst murdering her...

[Tweet Link]

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 8.41pm
Originally posted by tome I'm genuinely struggling with both your views on this. The BBC is one of the greatest institutions in the world, let alone this country. It's not perfect, but what is your alternative? How about a non lefty news broadcaster on free to air. None exists. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 8.41pm

Originally posted by tome

I'm genuinely struggling with both your views on this. The BBC is one of the greatest institutions in the world, let alone this country. It's not perfect, but what is your alternative?

How about a non lefty news broadcaster on free to air.

None exists.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.44pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays How about a non lefty news broadcaster on free to air. None exists. LBC has Farage on it, and your mate Shawaz

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.44pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

How about a non lefty news broadcaster on free to air.

None exists.

LBC has Farage on it, and your mate Shawaz

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 8.46pm
Originally posted by nickgusset Husband of Jo Cox, whose killer shouted 'Britain First' whilst murdering her... [Tweet Link] I say 'Britain first' as well.....haven't murdered anyone though. But hey....'Britain First'....must be evil......look...a mad man said it before murdering an MP. How about all the Islamic radicals who shout 'Allah Akbar'.....that means, 'god is great' and comes from the Islamic religion. Funny....you never make that connection do you. Perhaps it's because not everyone who says that is a religious nutter looking to murder others. It's said all the time in the religion. No one in Britain first has killed anyone as far as I know.....no more than in any other political party anyway. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 8.46pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

Husband of Jo Cox, whose killer shouted 'Britain First' whilst murdering her...

[Tweet Link]

I say 'Britain first' as well.....haven't murdered anyone though.

But hey....'Britain First'....must be evil......look...a mad man said it before murdering an MP.

How about all the Islamic radicals who shout 'Allah Akbar'.....that means, 'god is great' and comes from the Islamic religion.

Funny....you never make that connection do you.

Perhaps it's because not everyone who says that is a religious nutter looking to murder others. It's said all the time in the religion.

No one in Britain first has killed anyone as far as I know.....no more than in any other political party anyway.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays 29 Nov 17 8.49pm
Originally posted by nickgusset LBC has Farage on it, and your mate Shawaz Yeah, I'm referring to the goggle box mate....far far more people watch that than listen to radio. Lefty liberal shut out. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 8.49pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays

29 Nov 17 8.49pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

LBC has Farage on it, and your mate Shawaz

Yeah, I'm referring to the goggle box mate....far far more people watch that than listen to radio.

Lefty liberal shut out.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 8.49pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.52pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Yeah, I'm referring to the goggle box mate....far far more people watch that than listen to radio. Lefty liberal shut out. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 8.49pm) It was the word broadcasting that muddied the waters. Dave is very right wing because Jeremy Clarkson seems to be on the screen every time I turn over to it.

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 29 Nov 17 8.52pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Yeah, I'm referring to the goggle box mate....far far more people watch that than listen to radio.

Lefty liberal shut out.

Edited by Stirlingsays (29 Nov 2017 8.49pm)

It was the word broadcasting that muddied the waters.

Dave is very right wing because Jeremy Clarkson seems to be on the screen every time I turn over to it.

Hrolf The Ganger 29 Nov 17 8.53pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays I say 'Britain first' as well.....haven't murdered anyone though. But hey....'Britain First'....must be evil......look...a mad man said it before murdering an MP. How about all the Islamic radicals who shout 'Allah Akbar'.....that means, 'god is great' and comes from the Islamic religion. Funny....you never make that connection do you. Perhaps it's because not everyone who says that is a religious nutter looking to murder others. It's said all the time in the religion. No one in Britain first has killed anyone as far as I know.....no more than in any other political party anyway. Labour MP's seem to have had a high mortality in the last few weeks. No one is talking about that.

Hrolf The Ganger

29 Nov 17 8.53pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I say 'Britain first' as well.....haven't murdered anyone though.

But hey....'Britain First'....must be evil......look...a mad man said it before murdering an MP.

How about all the Islamic radicals who shout 'Allah Akbar'.....that means, 'god is great' and comes from the Islamic religion.

Funny....you never make that connection do you.

Perhaps it's because not everyone who says that is a religious nutter looking to murder others. It's said all the time in the religion.

No one in Britain first has killed anyone as far as I know.....no more than in any other political party anyway.

Labour MP's seem to have had a high mortality in the last few weeks. No one is talking about that.

Page 29 of 344 < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Bias against Trump

Site Map