Free Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon | Page 19 | Vital Football

Free Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Detritus said:
For the benefit of those like me who have no knowledge of Islam's teachings could you please detail what these are. Preferably with references and notations so I can study them more (actual references to genuine teachings rather than any anti-Islamic interpretations). Then I can make an informed decision too. Thank you kindly.
Click to expand...

I would suggest reading 'Mohammeds Koran ' by Tommy Robinson. There you will find chapter and verse

https://books.google.es/books/about...EACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y
 
ThreeSixes said:
What is the question? Ask me again and I will answer it.

You didn't answer my question from earlier (you never do). Is it only lack of opportunity that stops you abusing underage girls?
Click to expand...
This was my question:
Why do you pick solely on muslims other than for racism and hatred? Why don't you condemn all types of abuse and grooming. Why don't you condemn those who groom online - white men predominately?
 
That actually made me laugh schoolboy. Well done.

What do you think of that source Detritus? Objective by any chance?
 
Did you not read my request VG? I would prefer it if you could detail the teachings and show me where they’re stated. I’d like to read for myself the actual words of these teachings that you have clearly read and are basing your arguments on. The actual words, not those that are edited or twisted for some attention seekers own goals (I’m referring to the author (sic) of the book you linked, not you).
 
I
Detritus said:
Did you not read my request VG? I would prefer it if you could detail the teachings and show me where they’re stated. I’d like to read for myself the actual words of these teachings that you have clearly read and are basing your arguments on. The actual words, not those that are edited or twisted for some attention seekers own goals (I’m referring to the author (sic) of the book you linked, not you).
Click to expand...

I'm not qualified to teach you Detrius , hence why I suggested you read up on it.
I don't pretend to know everything , unlike Wayne for example
Europeans are seeing for themselves what migration is bringing to their countries.
If you think that the world is rosy , and that there aren't problems with Islam , good luck to you!
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
This was my question:
Why do you pick solely on muslims other than for racism and hatred? Why don't you condemn all types of abuse and grooming. Why don't you condemn those who groom online - white men predominately?
Click to expand...

But I answered that (post 333) and you responded to my reply (334). It was only yesterday, so that's a bit of a worry.
 
ThreeSixes said:
First paragraph - You would expect the majority of abusers to be white, in a country that is 87% white. I don't know how long that statement will be true though, based on current growth rates.

Second paragraph, I don't think it makes much difference to the abused whether their abusers are doing it because they are Muslim or because they are Pakistani? I disagree though, it wasn't Pakistanis abusing women on new year's eve in Germany.

Third paragraph, yes I'm sure you're right. Teachers, aid workers, social workers, vicars, football coaches etc have all taken advantage of "opportunities". What is different in the grooming cases are that they are groups of 20+ men in their 30s and 40s, passing around young girls over a sustained period. This seems to be a new phenomenon, and just isn't something I can imagine white taxi drivers doing.
Click to expand...

Your first paragraph betrays that you have, intentionally or otherwise, completely misunderstood my point. I was not comparing white men to other groups in some league table of paedophile shame. I was making what I thought was an uncontoversial point about labelling and false logic. White men are overwhelmingly the largest group of child abusers but all white men are not predisposed to child abuse.

Imagine that I did have an irrational and prejudiced view that a particular ethnic, religous, or political group were intrinsically paedophile. I might chirp up on a football website every time I found a case that fitted the profile. It would be very tiresome. Imagine if I came on here every single time I found such a story with catholic involvement. If I caste the net wider and included all christianity then I woul;d become a titanic bore and I wouldn't add a jot to general wisdom and intelligence.

What pray does the behaviour at new year celebrations of european men in europe have to do with organised grooming of children in England. I could just as easily chuck in a bit of gratuitous and irrational irrlevance by pointing out how your populist right wingery went from the words to violence and murder in Greece. That would be idiotic, unfair and untrue.
 
ThreeSixes said:
But I answered that (post 333) and you responded to my reply (334). It was only yesterday, so that's a bit of a worry.
Click to expand...
Your 333 was hardly an answer because you do not condemn all groomers and abusers but simply find ways to single out those of Pakistani heritage to the exclusion of all others even those you vilify are in a very small minority.
 
valenciagill said:
Europeans are seeing for themselves what migration is bringing to their countries.
If you think that the world is rosy , and that there aren't problems with Islam , good luck to you!
Click to expand...

Agreed - no one is going to change their opinion, that's patently clear
 
What is clear is that some fail to stand their arguments up when challenged.

Still waiting to hear about the alleged muslim company by the way. I'd get sacked if I did was a poor argument and too far too long to surface. If we were given chapter and verse and think of any logical way that the company would get away with victimisation, illegal working practises and racism.

The two detrminedly illogical and irrational groups, who defy all scholarship and knowledge are the islamist extremists and their right wing opponents.
 
jogills said:
Your first paragraph betrays that you have, intentionally or otherwise, completely misunderstood my point. I was not comparing white men to other groups in some league table of paedophile shame. I was making what I thought was an uncontoversial point about labelling and false logic. White men are overwhelmingly the largest group of child abusers but all white men are not predisposed to child abuse.

Imagine that I did have an irrational and prejudiced view that a particular ethnic, religous, or political group were intrinsically paedophile. I might chirp up on a football website every time I found a case that fitted the profile. It would be very tiresome. Imagine if I came on here every single time I found such a story with catholic involvement. If I caste the net wider and included all christianity then I woul;d become a titanic bore and I wouldn't add a jot to general wisdom and intelligence.

What pray does the behaviour at new year celebrations of european men in europe have to do with organised grooming of children in England. I could just as easily chuck in a bit of gratuitous and irrational irrlevance by pointing out how your populist right wingery went from the words to violence and murder in Greece. That would be idiotic, unfair and untrue.
Click to expand...

It's not uncontroversial to say that white men are overwhelmingly the largest group of child abusers. Children have it much better in Europe than they do in Africa and Asia. It is just that some of the things that are considered child abuse in the uk (eg FGM, forced marriage, subjugation of girls) are not in other cultures.

Re Germany new year's eve, that's a fair point, but others were bringing Catholics in the US into the argument.

And re me being a right winger, that's not true. I have said numerous times I'm anti racism, anti sexism and anti homophobia. If the taxi drivers in Rochdale, Rotherham, Huddersfield etc, etc, etc were white, I'm sure we would both be arguing on the same side
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
Your 333 was hardly an answer because you do not condemn all groomers and abusers but simply find ways to single out those of Pakistani heritage to the exclusion of all others even those you vilify are in a very small minority.
Click to expand...
Post 264, and also 312 and 317.

You realise that YOU have never once actually condemned abusers and groomers, you just deflect the argument and abuse people.

You don't need to answer my earlier question, both answers would condemn you so probably better that you take the fifth
 
ThreeSixes said:
Post 264, and also 312 and 317.

You realise that YOU have never once actually condemned abusers and groomers, you just deflect the argument and abuse people.

You don't need to answer my earlier question, both answers would condemn you so probably better that you take the fifth
Click to expand...
I have frequently condemned such vile practices and condemned the agencies that failed to listen to the women and girls, who could possibly been rescued from the clutches of pimps, drug dealers and those who helped facilitate the crimes as well as the actual perpetrators but then you're selective in what you read and always choose to justify your own position ahead of any others' views or opinions.
 
ThreeSixes said:
It's not uncontroversial to say that white men are overwhelmingly the largest group of child abusers. Children have it much better in Europe than they do in Africa and Asia. It is just that some of the things that are considered child abuse in the uk (eg FGM, forced marriage, subjugation of girls) are not in other cultures.

Re Germany new year's eve, that's a fair point, but others were bringing Catholics in the US into the argument.

And re me being a right winger, that's not true. I have said numerous times I'm anti racism, anti sexism and anti homophobia. If the taxi drivers in Rochdale, Rotherham, Huddersfield etc, etc, etc were white, I'm sure we would both be arguing on the same side
Click to expand...

I don't believe that all right wingers are racist, homophobic and sexist. I don't believe all left wingers are free of those prejudices either. That is the general point I am trying to make. Similarly all muslims are not paedophiles. Paedophile crimes are universal. Incidentally if I believed you to be racist, homophobic and sexist I would say so.

If the taxi drivers you refer to were all white then jokerman's rule comes into play. I would be more on the condemnatory charge and you more on the defensive charge. Taxi driving is an occupation that provides more than usual opportunities for exploitation of several kinds. That doesn't mean all taxi drivers are worse people than the general population. It does mean we need to licence and regulate them carefully.
 
jogills said:
I don't believe that all right wingers are racist, homophobic and sexist. I don't believe all left wingers are free of those prejudices either. That is the general point I am trying to make. Similarly all muslims are not paedophiles. Paedophile crimes are universal. Incidentally if I believed you to be racist, homophobic and sexist I would say so.
Click to expand...

Maybe we're closer in thinking than I thought then, I agree with all of that. I don't agree that the grooming gangs do it because they are taxi drivers though. Just on a statistical, non - emotive basis, if that was the case you would see a majority of white "taxi driver" grooming gangs, and that isn't the case. 84% of those convictions are Muslim Asians, that's only what the facts say
 
valenciagill said:
I

I'm not qualified to teach you Detrius , hence why I suggested you read up on it.
I don't pretend to know everything , unlike Wayne for example
Europeans are seeing for themselves what migration is bringing to their countries.
If you think that the world is rosy , and that there aren't problems with Islam , good luck to you!
Click to expand...
I’m not asking you to teach me, what I’m asking you for is the proof of these teachings that you have read which back up your beliefs. So that I can read up on it in the same way that you have. Not, as I have stated before, the illiterate ramblings of an attention seeking bigot, but the actual script of the Islamic teachings that state what you are claiming they state. I’m sure you have based your beliefs and views after reading the actual texts so please point me in the direction of the documents you read and clarify how they back up your interpretation of their meaning. Then, maybe, I can understand your concerns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.