Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

41 to 60 of 70rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by bazwillrun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Naomi....When Khan starts getting to grips with the housing crisis in London, gets the Tube sorted out, moves the debate along a bit over the new Heathrow runway, and loads of other things, I can't see what he does on a Friday is of any concern to anybody else.

Does Dave go to church every Sunday ? That is a rhetorical question, as its entirely irrelevant if he does or not.

Let us judge Khan for what he does in the next 4-8 years.....handsome is as handsome does as far as I am concerned !
Mikey, fingers in ears, hands over eyes. Thassa boy!
Can I broaden my earlier question which was to the OP to anyone interested in answering. I'm seeing lots of comments on the net from people unhappy at SK's election and citing it as symptomatic of a UK decline, but I'm genuinely interested in hearing why people think this is. Anyone? Thanks.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character"

You keep on harping on about race, Mikey. This is not about race but religion. Many Muslims are white Europeans, born and bred (Cherie Blair's sister, singer Cat Stevens, for example). They are white Muslims and I view them in the same way as I view Asian Muslims - followers of what I consider to be a pernicious, inflexible, intolerant and invasive faith.

I forgot to add in my earlier post that the election of Mr Khan is not a driver of the potential decline of the UK it is a symptom. There is already talk of a Muslim PM. This will happen because the number of Muslims in the UK is set to rise at a far faster rate than the number of non-Muslims. There is no doubt in my mind that Mr Khan was chosen by many Londoners because he is a Muslim. Not because he is a Labour member or because he is a jolly good egg. There are huge numbers of Muslims in London and their propensity to choose a Muslim regardless of any other consideration undoubtedly swung the vote. If you think this is not a phenomenon to be considered take a look at the judgement of the election court which investigated the malpractices of Lutfur Rahman, the former Mayor of Tower Hamlets. Mr Rahman was thrown out and barred from office for a series of offences in the run up to the 2014 Mayoral election in that wretched borough. There is a link to the full judgement a short way into this BBC article:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32428648

It’s a long but very eye-opening read. I’m not for one moment suggesting there was any malpractice in the London Mayoral election, but it will give you an insight into the psyche of Muslims when “one of their own” is available for election.
"I'm seeing lots of comments on the net from people unhappy at SK's election and citing it as symptomatic of a UK decline, but I'm genuinely interested in hearing why people think this is. Anyone? Thanks. "

I think I've done that but to make it clear, I see MR Khan's election as a symptom of the increasing influence Muslims are having in the UK. I see this influence will increase to a point where Muslims will determine the direction the UK takes. And for those in any doubt about whether that will be benficial for the UK or not, take a look at any Muslim state.
Backdrifter, I think New Judge's post above answers your question.
Backdrifter....I have been asking the same question all day, but all I can see is a lot of bad grace, because the Tories were thrashed, by Labour !
Mikey, you've been getting answers all day. Read them.
Perhaps then we should stay in Europe, the better to resist the tide of islamification?
Safety in numbers and all that.
Don't be silly, Mikey. They weren't 'thrashed', they were defeated. London is natural Labour/ethnic minority territory. No surprise there.
NJ...the majority of Londoners able to vote are not Muslim, and yet a Labour candidate won, who also happens to be a Muslim.

I have been saying this all day.....if it was so horrific to have a Muslim Mayor, then all those millions of adults could have voted for Goldsmith, but they didn't.

The people have spoken.
Jack...if London is natural Labour territory, why did Boris win twice in a row ?
...if London could twice elect a sleazeball like Livingstone as mayor, we should not really be surprised at this result.
Ever heard of personality?
Jack...you didn't answer my question !
"Does Dave go to church every Sunday ? That is a rhetorical question, as its entirely irrelevant if he does or not. "

You're making the mistake of comparing Islam with other religions, Mikey. A non-starter I'm afraid for the reasons I've already cited.

Furthermore I doubt anybody voted for Mr Cameron for his religious persuasions (if anybody knows whatthey are). There is no doubt whatsoever that a sizeable number of people voted for Mt Khan because he is a Muslim.
If that is true Jack, than it must be that Khan has a better personality than Goldsmith .....you can't have it both ways !
But NJ....I repeat....why didn't more people vote for Goldsmith ?
You are probably correct. Boris is larger than life and attracts support from those who ordinarily would be his opponents.
Jack...actually, I quite like Boris, and I am on record for saying that many times here on AB. We shall miss him.

Of course, he will soon be in Number Ten, so I guess he won't be out of the news for very long.

41 to 60 of 70rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

How This Country Is Slowly But Surely Being Destroyed

Answer Question >>