Islamic Rape Gangs and Islamic Terrorism

Liberta Per Gli Ultra

Liberta Per Gli Ultra wrote: »

You pretend to care about the victims while salivating over the opportunity to spread your hatred of Muslims rapists and pedophiles, disgusting.

Fixed.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fixed.

He’s confusing hatred of rapists and pedophiles with hatred of Muslims.

Literally the most incoherent argument you’ll see on boards this year.

His only rebuttal is *reported*

Hunky Monster

Hunky Monster wrote: »

He’s confusing hatred of rapists and pedophiles with hatred of Muslims.

Literally the most incoherent argument you’ll see on boards this year.

His only rebuttal is *reported*

Interestingly, that poster has not once condemned the rape and sexual destruction of children -- but rather has spent their time spreading ire against those who wish to talk about it.

That demonstrates where priorities really do lie.

Lefty Bicek

Boggles wrote: »

What is an Islamic rape gang?

The Swedish Foreign Ministry may know something you don't.

Sexual and gender-based violence is used as a tactic of terrorism by a range of today’s violent extremist groups. This makes it essential to address violence against women and girls as an integrated part in countering and preventing violent extremism.

This is not a reference to the invasion of Malmo by unreconstructed Christian Brothers, is my guess.

Furthermore...

Sweden also supports the International Criminal Court, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and partner countries in their efforts to counter impunity against terror-related sexual and gender-based violence and to promote the integration of a gender perspective at all stages in the work against radicalisation and violent extremism.

http://www.swemfa.se/2017/11/30/sexual-and-gender-based-violence-is-used-as-a-tactic-of-terrorism/

'To counter impunity'.

Read the Rotherham Report if you want to know how 'impunity' works out.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

The Swedish Foreign Ministry may know something you don't.



This is not a reference to the invasion of Malmo by unreconstructed Christian Brothers, is my guess.

Furthermore...



http://www.swemfa.se/2017/11/30/sexual-and-gender-based-violence-is-used-as-a-tactic-of-terrorism/

'To counter impunity'.

Read the Rotherham Report if you want to know how 'impunity' works out.

The last guy who reported on Rotherham ended up in jail.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fixed.

Can you link me to your thread on the EDL paedophiles?

Timberrrrrrrr

Hunky Monster wrote: »

The last guy who reported on Rotherham ended up in jail.

The paedophile apologist?

4068ac1elhodqr

Yet another grooming gang (Telford this time) due up for sentancing tommorow (OP link was to Halifax gang)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7806117/Four-men-guilty-sexually-abusing-rape-victim-12.html

Yet again a Pakistani link, and the standard fast-food delivery lads, preying on young white girls once the sun goes down.
One strange thing is they used to favour churchyards for their acts.

alastair

Gynoid wrote: »

Witness the lovely young women of Iran condemned to life sentences in torturous circumstances now for not wearing scarves. I will not respond further to idiotic cultural equivalence or relativism.

The maximum sentence in Iran for not wearing a hijab is 10 years. And served sentences are typically half the time. So no, nobody is getting a life sentence for it. Despicable oppression, but not what you’re claiming.

alastair

Eric Cartman wrote: »

convictions for violent or sexual crimes (non drug or theft related, not mugging) so basically crimes for the sake of crime, not out of a need in poverty and not public order incidents either

white people (81%) 2018 : 30277
should equate to 373 convictions per percent, meaning that the conviction rate for 'asians' (6.2%) should be 2317 convictions

but its........ 3784, 60% higher than it should be.... for crimes that are not related to poverty or self preservation..

Well, you’d also need to take into account the demographics of those groups as well. Muslims in the UK aren’t anywhere near the same age group as, ehh, White people. Very few U.K. Muslims are over 65 - 4% in fact, compared to the general population where the figure stands at 18%. So a younger demographic is going to register higher on crime and incarceration, regardless of their ethnicity or religion. So you’re not really comparing like with like.

alastair

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

The Swedish Foreign Ministry may know something you don't.



This is not a reference to the invasion of Malmo by unreconstructed Christian Brothers, is my guess.

Furthermore...



http://www.swemfa.se/2017/11/30/sexual-and-gender-based-violence-is-used-as-a-tactic-of-terrorism/

'To counter impunity'.

Read the Rotherham Report if you want to know how 'impunity' works out.

It’s not about the invasion of Malmo by anyone you div, it’s not about anything in Sweden. It’s about the activities by ISIS etc in Syria. The clue is in ‘Foreign’ Affairs.

Lefty Bicek

alastair wrote: »

It’s not about the invasion of Malmo by anyone you div, it’s not about anything in Sweden. It’s about the activities by ISIS etc in Syria. The clue is in ‘Foreign’ Affairs.

Yeah, that's what I said.

This is not a reference to the invasion of Malmo

The link refers explicitly to 'the global anti-terrorism debate'. It makes no discrete case for Syria.

Similarly...

Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy is both impactful and needed, and will continue to contribute to sustainable development, gender equality and the full enjoyment of human rights by all women and girls.

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/?p=33906


No matter, I suppose you also know better than Rotherham survivors...

Like terrorists they [groomers] firmly believe that the crimes they carry out are justified by their religious beliefs. If anything, rising anti-Muslim hate will probably make groomers stronger in their convictions, and drive ordinary young Muslim men towards fundamentalism, grooming gangs and terrorism.

What a neat trio.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rotherham-grooming-gang-sexual-abuse-muslim-islamist-racism-white-girls-religious-extremism-a8261831.html


.

Seathrun66

Boggles wrote: »

What is an Islamic rape gang?

The BBC are keeping this quiet too.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-50838823

As are the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/18/police-officer-among-16-men-charged-with-child-sexual-abuse-in-halifax

A conspiracy of silence as per the OP's point.

AllForIt

15:23 OP

15:28 Matt_Barrett
15:32 Boggles
15:35 alastair

God you guys are on the ball. I mean really on the ball. Like literally stuck to it.

Do you guys share a room by any chance? Honestly don't know where you find the time between the antifa thread, the immigration thread, the free speech thread etc. Anyone would thing expressing your views here was your full time job haha.

How do you do this by the way? Do you setup a keyword search alert or something like that?

Gynoid

alastair wrote: »

The maximum sentence in Iran for not wearing a hijab is 10 years. And served sentences are typically half the time. So no, nobody is getting a life sentence for it. Despicable oppression, but not what you’re claiming.

Completely wrong. There have been a spate of 25 year sentences on young girls and older women to make example of them. Yasaman Aryani, Monireh Arabshahi, Mojgan Keshavarz, Nasrin Sotoudeh, for example. And for you to even partially defend such by shrugging at half of 10 year sentences for not wearing a scarf is what is despicable. But at least it reveals the cut of your jib.

Graces7

Gynoid wrote: »

Completely wrong. There have been a spate of 25 year sentences on young girls and older women to make example of them. Yasaman Aryani, Monireh Arabshahi, Mojgan Keshavarz, Nasrin Sotoudeh, for example. And for you to even partially defend such by shrugging at half of 10 year sentences for not wearing a scarf is what is despicable. But at least it reveals the cut of your jib.

A hijab is not a "scarf".

Graces7

Gynoid wrote: »

Completely wrong. There have been a spate of 25 year sentences on young girls and older women to make example of them. Yasaman Aryani, Monireh Arabshahi, Mojgan Keshavarz, Nasrin Sotoudeh, for example. And for you to even partially defend such by shrugging at half of 10 year sentences for not wearing a scarf is what is despicable. But at least it reveals the cut of your jib.

Proof and exact figures please. Thank you. And some appreciation of the real issues here as opposed to "not wearing a scarf"!

Gynoid

Graces7 wrote: »

Proof and exact figures please. Thank you. And some appreciation of the real issues here as opposed to "not wearing a scarf"!

Look up White Wednesdays Grace. Do your own research.

Gynoid

Graces7 wrote: »

Proof and exact figures please. Thank you. And some appreciation of the real issues here as opposed to "not wearing a scarf"!

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058015167/1/#post111250881

Heres something to help...

zerosugarbuzz

Graces7 wrote: »

A hijab is not a "scarf".

What is it then?

TwoMonthsOff

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

What is it then?

Its most definitely a scarf.

Boggles

AllForIt wrote: »

Anyone would thing expressing your views here was your full time job haha.

I engage with the fringe pro bono.

Sterling contribution as usual though.

Do you know why Christy was left out of the list?

Beechwoodspark

AllForIt wrote: »

15:23 OP

15:28 Matt_Barrett
15:32 Boggles
15:35 alastair

God you guys are on the ball. I mean really on the ball. Like literally stuck to it.

Do you guys share a room by any chance? Honestly don't know where you find the time between the antifa thread, the immigration thread, the free speech thread etc. Anyone would thing expressing your views here was your full time job haha.

How do you do this by the way? Do you setup a keyword search alert or something like that?

I’d be very interested to hear a response to this also. Boggles ? Alastair? Matt Barrett?

Boggles

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I’d be very interested to hear a response to this also. Boggles ? Alastair? Matt Barrett?

Beechwoodspark

I presume it’s an alert when certain words appear on boards ie and then you rush to the keyboard to respond.

So Is this, like, your main employment?

I’m intrigued as tubridy says !

alastair

Gynoid wrote: »

Completely wrong. There have been a spate of 25 year sentences on young girls and older women to make example of them. Yasaman Aryani, Monireh Arabshahi, Mojgan Keshavarz, Nasrin Sotoudeh, for example. And for you to even partially defend such by shrugging at half of 10 year sentences for not wearing a scarf is what is despicable. But at least it reveals the cut of your jib.

Nope - not wrong at all. Any of those women serving life sentences? Any of those women sentenced to more than ten years for not wearing a hijab? No. I’m ‘defending’ nothing but honesty in posts. Making up **** doesn’t serve anyone well.

alastair

Gynoid wrote: »

Look up White Wednesdays Grace. Do your own research.

Suggest you take your own advice.

Ballso

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I’d be very interested to hear a response to this also. Boggles ? Alastair? Matt Barrett?

You are just as bad?

The same few gob****es spend all day every day on boards.ie arguing in these threads. It's bizarre.

Gynoid

alastair wrote: »

Nope - not wrong at all. Any of those women serving life sentences? Any of those women sentenced to more than ten years for not wearing a hijab? No. I’m ‘defending’ nothing but honesty in posts. Making up **** doesn’t serve anyone well.

Yikes. You are impenetrable. You are also wrong. Doubled down on being wrong. Which is just silly. Oh well.

alastair

Gynoid wrote: »

Yikes. You are impenetrable. You are also wrong. Doubled down on being wrong. Which is just silly. Oh well.

I’m 100% right. Prove me wrong.