EDL (English Defence League)

[lcfcadam]

It was plastered all over the news.

Also, I've met some of the East Midlands EDL, and they weren't fighting or throwing bottles. They talked to me and made some valid arguments in my opinion. They were nice to my girlfriend as well, who is an Indian.

Btw one of the leaders is a Sikh.

Not saying I support them, just pointing out they are not as bad as everyone is making out.

These kind of gestures and gimmicks are simply their 'sacrifice', an attempt to try and brainwash people into thinking that they're "not as bad as everyone is making out" - obviously it worked on you.

Face facts, a member who genuinely supports the ideals of the group would throw your Indian girlfriend out the country in an instant (probably after getting pissed and being abusive to her first).

There are no "valid arguments" from these people, end of.

[l444ry]

[z-layrex]

Did any of you watch that tv programme about them a few months back? They're horrible people.

[Nick]

!

Violent homosexuals......

[Bilo]

Good blog here.

http://batcountryadventures.blogspot.com/2010/09/your-racist-grandfather-fought-in.html

[accessory]

EDL forum confirms plans for demo on 9 October

Whether plod or the Home Office will allow this remains to be seen..

[C-man]

£300k.

[Fosse Boy]

£300k.

It's a small price to pay so that a legitimate and worthy protest* can take place.

*Well, an all day piss-up and shouting "Allah is a paedo" over and over

[Zingari]

£300k.

quite cheap actually

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310600/Popes-day-visit-Britain-cost-1-5million-police.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Pope's four-day visit to Britain will cost £1.5million to police

[Bilo]

Depressing really.

Though as somebody said on the Mercury comments page,,£300k spent on keeping these evolutionary throwbacks under control is better than allowing them to incite a riot.

I assume the UAF will be doing a counter protest as well which will add to the costs.

[BoneDog]

It's a small price to pay so that a legitimate and worthy protest* can take place.

*Well, an all day piss-up and shouting "Allah is a paedo" over and over

I've heard loads of folk spout this line! I presume they are talking about Muhammad marrying Aisha and the old propaganda line that she was 6-9 years old. Well EDL lads, I don't mean to spoil your fun but I'm afraid she was 19 years old at the time.

If they are really upstanding citizens who care about getting justice for paedo victims then I suggest campaigning at Downing Street to try and stop our system letting perverts out of prison so often instead of chanting false lines against Islam.

[Dr The Singh]

I've heard loads of folk spout this line! I presume they are talking about Muhammad marrying Aisha and the old propaganda line that she was 6-9 years old. Well EDL lads, I don't mean to spoil your fun but I'm afraid she was 19 years old at the time.

If they are really upstanding citizens who care about getting justice for paedo victims then I suggest campaigning at Downing Street to try and stop our system letting perverts out of prison so often instead of chanting false lines against Islam.

The problem is that there's is no evidence to suggest that she was 19, infact noone really knows her age, but most hadiths and even most Islamic scholars agree Aisha was wed to Mohammed before puberty.

From muslim.org

We quote below from two such reports in Bukhari.

"It is reported from Aisha that she said: The Prophet entered into

marriage with me when I was a girl of six

… and at the time [of joining his household] I was a girl of nine years of age."

"Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed [alone] for two years or so. He married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and

he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old."

[3]

CASE CLOSED!!!

[FoxyPV]

Are there any religions that are safe?

[Dr The Singh]

Are there any religions that are safe?

All religions are safe, aslong as you think for yourself!!!!

[FoxyPV]

All religions are safe, aslong as you think for yourself!!!!

I think that's a bit of an oxymoron - organised religion and thinking for yourself the two definitely don't go together

[Dr The Singh]

I think that's a bit of an oxymoron - organised religion and thinking for yourself the two definitely don't go together

Depends on the religion, not all tell you which way to shit, eat and poo! Unfortunately it's more the institutions, rather then the religious doctrine that want to control people!

[ozleicester]

Are there any religions that are safe?

No, It seems to me, that all are in place to control the lives and thoughts of others, as safety is not just physical but also mental this inevitably means they are not safe.

Nevertheless many religious people do wonderful things for society.

[Zingari]

No, It seems to me, that all are in place to control the lives and thoughts of others, as safety is not just physical but also mental this inevitably means they are not safe.

Nevertheless many religious people do wonderful things for society.

do they do good things because they are religious or is just because they are good people

if they do things because of a feeling or fear of divine retribution come judgement day , it's not as meaningful or altruistic as something done out of pure goodness ?

dawkins goes into this argument quite a bit in his books

but i take your point though

[ozleicester]

do they do good things because they are religious or is just because they are good people

if they do things because of a feeling or fear of divine retribution come judgement day , it's not as meaningful or altruistic as something done out of pure goodness ?

dawkins goes into this argument quite a bit in his books

but i take your point though

Ahhh but, is ANYTHING ever completely altruistic?

whether its done for financial gain.. or just for a good feeling... isnt it all about selfishness?

[Zingari]

Ahhh but, is ANYTHING ever completely altruistic?

whether its done for financial gain.. or just for a good feeling... isnt it all about selfishness?

ultimately , yes that does seem to be true

you've just reminded me of some lyall watson books ( dark nature i think ) that i ought to dig out again a re read , thanks

[BoneDog]

The problem is that there's is no evidence to suggest that she was 19, infact noone really knows her age, but most hadiths and even most Islamic scholars agree Aisha was wed to Mohammed before puberty.

From muslim.org

We quote below from two such reports in Bukhari.

"It is reported from Aisha that she said: The Prophet entered into

marriage with me when I was a girl of six

… and at the time [of joining his household] I was a girl of nine years of age."

"Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed [alone] for two years or so. He married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and

he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old."

[3]

CASE CLOSED!!!

it's not case closed just because muslim.org has info on some false hadiths on show! I know Bukhari is supposed to all be authentic, but the fact is that hadiths have been messed around with, changed and added to just as the Bible has been. Many 'scholars' of Islam and websites are just shills and like Paul started off changing Jesus' teachings, Islam was infiltrated very early on too. Only the Quran is authentic in this day and age.

Aisha was definitely between the age of 18 and 20 when she married. It is hard to say exactly how old as no-one really knows the date of the wedding or the date of her birth. What is known is that she had a sister (Asma I think her name was) who was nearly ten years older than Aisha and Asma was 27 at the time of Aishas marriage. I know many people still don't know this (including many Muslims) but that is just unfortunate and gives haters a good chance to try to slander one of the greatest men of the last 2000 years.

On a side note I'm sure that pretty soon that the people who want to start more fighting between different cultures will get their wish as we will soon see another false flag terrorist attack that will be blamed on Muslims yet again. They'll probaly blame it on some Muslims who were angry about the Qurans being burned at ground zero (by some alphabet agency shill) and the other Quran being shitted on.

Are there any religions that are safe?

All religions that I can think of are safe. It's just that some elements (who would be causing trouble even if religion didn't exist) use religion to stir up shit and hatred. The same power hungry trouble makers would find another way to cause wars and other problems with or without religion.

I think that's a bit of an oxymoron - organised religion and thinking for yourself the two definitely don't go together

Oh come on! There are millions of religious people who think for themselves and many that I know think for themselves more than the average Joe on the streets. Many of the atheists I know are the least open-minded people I know and they just regurgitate the same old lines that they are spoon-fed by the government and media that they actually know nothing about.

[BoneDog]

do they do good things because they are religious or is just because they are good people

if they do things because of a feeling or fear of divine retribution come judgement day , it's not as meaningful or altruistic as something done out of pure goodness ?

dawkins goes into this argument quite a bit in his books

but i take your point though

They do things because they are good people. A few might do good things just for show like giving to charity (there are a few 'organisations' that do this) but most people who do good and kindly actions really are good and caring people.

[Zingari]

They do things because they are good people. A few might do good things just for show like giving to charity (there are a few 'organisations' that do this) but most people who do good and kindly actions really are good and caring people.

so you are saying that people do good things irrespective of religious teachings ? , if so , i agree

but i refer you to the quote

by nature , good people will always do good things and bad people will always do bad things

but for good people to bad things , that takes religion !

[Finnegan]

"Definitely between the ages of 18 and 20?"

This is why you consistently come across like a complete muppet, Empty. What on Earth is wrong with accepting some fallibility when you're talking about either theory or ancient dogma?

Nothing's ever completely known in these contexts.

Though it baffles me what exactly would be so unprecedented even if she were to have been married at six. The Medieval West is littered with pre-pubescent marriages. Obviously they're vile by contemporary standards but you can't really judge ancient history by contemporary standards.

most people who do good and kindly actions really are good and caring people

I disagree. Either I'm a borderline sociopath and massively unlike everyone else (unlikely) or I'm just honest enough to admit it, occasionally I do "nice" and "generous" things instinctively but for the most part I do it because it makes me feel good. I enjoy how it feels to me to be caring, good or generous.

The end product might be all the same but whether fully consciously or sub-consciously the motive is entirely selfish.

[Dr The Singh]

it's not case closed just because muslim.org has info on some false hadiths on show! I know Bukhari is supposed to all be authentic, but the fact is that hadiths have been messed around with, changed and added to just as the Bible has been. Many 'scholars' of Islam and websites are just shills and like Paul started off changing Jesus' teachings, Islam was infiltrated very early on too. Only the Quran is authentic in this day and age.

Aisha was definitely between the age of 18 and 20 when she married. It is hard to say exactly how old as no-one really knows the date of the wedding or the date of her birth. What is known is that she had a sister (Asma I think her name was) who was nearly ten years older than Aisha and Asma was 27 at the time of Aishas marriage. I know many people still don't know this (including many Muslims) but that is just unfortunate and gives haters a good chance to try to slander one of the greatest men of the last 2000 years.

On a side note I'm sure that pretty soon that the people who want to start more fighting between different cultures will get their wish as we will soon see another false flag terrorist attack that will be blamed on Muslims yet again. They'll probaly blame it on some Muslims who were angry about the Qurans being burned at ground zero (by some alphabet agency shill) and the other Quran being shitted on.

All religions that I can think of are safe. It's just that some elements (who would be causing trouble even if religion didn't exist) use religion to stir up shit and hatred. The same power hungry trouble makers would find another way to cause wars and other problems with or without religion.

Oh come on! There are millions of religious people who think for themselves and many that I know think for themselves more than the average Joe on the streets. Many of the atheists I know are the least open-minded people I know and they just regurgitate the same old lines that they are spoon-fed by the government and media that they actually know nothing about.

Oh dear o dear Empty, there is no evidence from any scholar or litraly source that has her past puberty. Infact there's tens of hadiths from many sources that say the same thing, have incidences of Aisha playing with dolls and sitting on Mohammed's lap. Agreed maybe one or two hadiths might be debatable but 50 or 60, I dioubt it.

Mohammed the greatest man in the last 2000 years, in your opinion, any man who advocates slavery and as the the Koran states 'what his right hand posses' is never gonna reach the peaks of the 'greatest man' imo!!