London Jihad Demo Leader Is Nhs Doctor

[naomi24]

//The firebrand leader of an extremist Islamic group that called for 'jihad' at an anti-Israel protest works as an NHS GP under a different name....As head of Hizb ut-Tahrir in the UK, Abdul Wahid celebrated the barbaric Hamas terror attacks that slaughtered 1,400 Jewish men, women and children earlier this month as a 'very welcome punch on the nose' to Israel....The Government has faced repeated calls to ban HT, which wants the whole Islamic world to unite under one leader, and for Britain to fall under the rule of that 'caliph'.//

 

//Wahid told the baying crowd: 'Victory is coming and everyone has to choose a side. Whose side are you going to be on?'//

 

Sadly I think he's right about that.  He hasn't been arrested.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12683925/London-jihad-demo-leader-NHS-doctor-Islamic-extremists-double-life-suburban-GP-exposed.html

[royfromaus]

I could double the thread posts by  putting up the vidoes of lazy imam preachers who have been inciting violence up and down the country since their beloved Hamas attacked innocent Jews.

 

 

[naomi24]

SP, any idea what the missing 27% were classified as?

[Peter Pedant]

DeeDee dont dazzle us with facts: it doesnt work on AB

Islam has been trying to overrun Europe for centuries they, (the Ottomans) got as far as the gates of Vienna in 1683 and were fought back - a very close thing.

channel 91 PBS interesting prog going the rounds - two parter on modern Turkey - as a construct of the 19th century

DOES do 1683 - along with the mines and renches to undermine the Walls of Vienny - now only visible at the Melksturm by Beethoven's House

and makes the point that the high point was probably 1529 - Last campaign of Soleyman the Magnificent. - he dies  on campaign and they go back home

[Peter Pedant]

I could double the thread posts ....

a mod cd halve the posts on this thread by randoom deleting 50% - someone is having a good go anyway !

[ladybirder]

Khandro's BA post is bang on.

[Countrylover]

/Lottie, you seem to find everything objectionable /

Yep mainly on this subject and directed to those who have been so convinced they are right and been extremely rude to those who disagree with them,including myself, and accusing us being supporters of Hammas, anti semitic, jew haters and of approving of  beheading babies.

I am not accusing you of doing this, but I do think such nastiness should be removed and because you, as a mod as well as a user  and were visibly there on those threads, I assumed you found them acceptable.  

I actually had young very fiery  friend, who a good few years ago  was studying Judaism for her Masters degree and spent some time living In a Kibbutz.  She came back with very little support for Israel because of the way Palestinians were being treated.  In fact she was glad to get away.  She was very angry.  I can understand why.  

You said on another thread that you stuck to the views you have had for years, or words to that effect.  I stick to my long term views about what I think of the Israel/Palestinian situation.

I've done an Andy thread,  but it's something I feel very strongly about! ;0)

No more of me on these threads.  That's now a promise!

 

 

[Redhelen72]

I worked for Orthodox Jews in the 90's and was told countless times that they wished for the final solution to be carried out on the Palestinians.

[youngmafbog]

Yes of course they did.

[royfromaus]

I worked as a minor in the 90's and the British government expressed their will to impose a final solution on us.

[Countrylover]

But you were only a minor, under 18 then!  A bit unfair to get rid of kids.  I don't remember that!  

[royfromaus]

lol

this switching from comp to phone is doing me in.

Predtext...Miner. 

[ToraToraTora]

redhelen: "I worked for Orthodox Jews in the 90's and was told countless times that they wished for the final solution to be carried out on the Palestinians." - Well that is the openly stated position on the rest of us from Islam. That also includes those that are useful idiots to them.

[Redhelen72]

1525 is that in response to my post?

[Countrylover]

I hate predictive text Roy.  I guessed it was that  ;0)

[Khandro]

So now we know what a ‘globalised intifada’ might look like. That’s what people chanted for on the streets of London on Saturday. ‘From London to Gaza, we’ll have an intifada’, they yelled. Useful fools all, & there's some on AB too,  would you believe ?

[Peter Pedant]

as a minor in the 90's

my god how old are you now ?  ( and so wise !)

[New Judge]

Someone only has to perceive it & voila! it's a crime.

And that, my friends, is a direct result of the preposterous recommendation (No. 12 of 70) which came from the MacPherson report into the death of Stephen Lawrence:

"A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person".

The police do NOT simply take a victim's word for it and it becomes a hate crime. That's balls.

The police do not take the victim’s word for it to become a crime. But once they decide a crime has been committed,  they do take the victim’s word (or that of “any other person”) for it when making their decision to categorise as a “hate” crime. The CPS guidance which you kindly provided makes this quite clear:

 The police and the CPS have agreed the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes:

"Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person's disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity."

So, no evidence required, just a "perception". This is a disgusting travesty. There are considerably enhanced penalties for crimes which are sentenced as “hate” crimes. The police and CPS should investigate and gather evidence for all elements of a crime and not simply take the perception of somebody, who may not even have been present, that it is a “hate” crime. You would not expect the police and CPS to accept that an assault was committed with a baseball bat rather than bare hands based on anybody’s “perception” of the incident. So why should they accept the considerably aggravating feature of “hate” based solely on such a perception?

 "Yes you can report it but the rozzers wont do anything."
Evidence please.

Not everybody seems to agree with you that offences against white people are treated with equal diligence:

https://iea.org.uk/media/hate-speech-laws-threaten-free-speech-say-new-iea-paper/

The paper says that hate speech laws are enforced in a politically partial and inconsistent manner, with police refusing to seek prosecutions for analogous cases when they are directed against white people. Police, for example, refused to pursue a case against Bahar Mustafa, the welfare and diversity officer of Goldsmiths University’s Students’ Union, who posted the phrase ‘KillAllWhiteMen’.

This censorious phenomenon is driven by the view that speech must be controlled to prevent alleged “harm” against certain marginalised groups." 

[Peter Pedant]

Police, ... refused to pursue a case against Bahar Mustafa, .... who posted the phrase ‘KillAllWhiteMen’.

But HAD in the good old  days, pursued a case against a greaser who wore a leather - ACAB - but that was around 1960. 

rozzers dont do annyfing - Home invasion, neighbour,  where he knocked out the assailant. No video no crime we were astounded to be told

tempora mutantur  = times are changed

[douglas9401]

First, do no harm has been replaced with first, that's haram.