hammer attack
Winter has come.
Kay Burley en route.
With your arm around Garreth,
You dangled your carrot
But youâll never get me to join NATO
you donât bring a hammer to a gunfight
1 Like
What exactly is this âeverything we stand forâ Khan refers to?
Letâs examine his own record on things he stood for to get himself electable and electedâŚ
In 2003, appeared at a conference with a member of the banned terrrorist group al-Muhajiroun. Used his family contacts with extremists to ingratiate himself in the London Islamist scene.
Was chair of the Muslim Council of Britainâs legal affairs committee that condoned the Ahmedi murder in Glasgow as âAhmedis are not Muslimsâ.
Argued in parliament that the cleric Al Qaradawi âis not the extremist he is painted asâ, even though said cleric has openly supported suicide bombers and is in favor of wife beating and killing gays.
Referred to Muslims who opposed extremism as âuncle Tomsâ
Khanâs conversion from a sectarian Sunni with ties to extremists to a âmoderateâ Muslim is a very recent one, and obviously politically motivated. Trump is absolutely correct, however clumsy his language is, in calling out this fraud. He has as much to do with radicalizing Muslims in London as anyone.
Wherever Trump lays his hat, thatâs your home.
1 Like
The Daily Beast.
Sounds like a very reputable website.
2 Likes
The Daily Beast is a liberal US media outlet.
Hereâs a conservative piece which effectively says the same thing.
2 Likes
Ah come on. I read the Spectator myself, but itâs a Tory rag.
So, only left wing sources have credibility?
The point of both articles is that calling out Khanâs history of association with Muslim extremists and sectarianism is not racist or Islamophobic, in particular as the Daily Beast piece was written by an ex-extremist Muslim. Itâs not that long ago this cunt was associating with and defending the very people who have radicalized young Muslims in London.
Why do people have such trouble seeing the obvious?
Guys, the Twitterati and social media have already decided that Khan is a hero, get with the programme quickly please.
He certainly conducted himself with admirable aplomb at the weekend and sent that trolling orange gimp from the White House back home with his tea in a mug.
5 Likes
I could replace reference to Khan with Adams or McGuinness and Muslim with Provo and Iâd have read the same thing a hundred times in the Indo/Telegraph/Mail in the last couple of years.
1 Like
Trump has spoken. Khan is a Muslim and therefore tied to the attack in Trumpâs eyes. The forum rats run happily to follow the Pied Piperâs tune.
Trump is 100% correct on the travel ban. Even @Sidney agrees that people travelling to war zones and allowed back is a factor in these attacks. If countries like Syria, Iraq, Yemen, etc. have no ability to control who enters or leaves their countries, why does it not make sense for western countries to try and control the flow?
The argument against the travel ban is that it is religious discrimination, which is mindbogglingly stupid. If it were a Muslim ban, why are countries with massive Muslim populations like Indonesia, India and Pakistan not affected?
Known Islamist fighters, who were cultivated and facilitated by the Tories, you dope.
For you to argue that the travel ban isnât religious discrimination because it doesnât ban include all Muslim-majority countries is your most stupid argument yet, and there have been a lot.
It also conveniently forgets that Muslim British citizens who donât have citizenship of any other country have been stopped coming into the US, which quite obviously marks it out as religious discrimination.
Yes, and only morons living in the UK would believe it.
There is no moral equivalence between the NI conflict and current Islamist extremism. The only people who could possibly claim any equivalence are uneducated morons in the UK and sadly loyalist sympathizers in Ireland.