Crosswords5 mins ago
Is Britain A Fair And Equal Society?
A few facts on here may make you wonder;
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. 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.
Corby; I'm not making an issue of it, as Naomi says, they are bad enough in your own accepted numbers. But there are plenty of other indisputable facts in the video, for example how easy it is for a Muslim to get fired because the work is contrary to his/her religion and go straight onto benefits.
What do you say about that?
What do you say about that?
It says there's a link to the guidance but I can't view the link but I know it's the Decision Maker's Guide. The guidance refers to claimants who have religious objections,not to Muslims.
He quotes four examples of religious or conscientious objections but fails to mention it goes on to say,
"Note 1: This is not an exhaustive list or specific criteria that mean a claimant would
have automatic good reason but examples of some of the more commonly raised
religious or cultural beliefs. The DM should consider any issue raised by the claimant
in consideration of good reason however the DM would have to be satisfied that all
the criteria at DMG 34321 are met for it to be good reason due to a sincere religious
or conscientious objection." It is not AUTOMATIC GOOD REASON. (A DM is the Decision Maker by the way)
He quotes four examples of religious or conscientious objections but fails to mention it goes on to say,
"Note 1: This is not an exhaustive list or specific criteria that mean a claimant would
have automatic good reason but examples of some of the more commonly raised
religious or cultural beliefs. The DM should consider any issue raised by the claimant
in consideration of good reason however the DM would have to be satisfied that all
the criteria at DMG 34321 are met for it to be good reason due to a sincere religious
or conscientious objection." It is not AUTOMATIC GOOD REASON. (A DM is the Decision Maker by the way)
There are so many cases such as;
https:/
and airline stewards refusing to serve alcohol on flights one reads about.
//The guidance refers to claimants who have religious objections,not to Muslims.//
Who else demand 5 prayer times off work throughout their working day and refuse to handle wine pork or tobacco? Which religion do you have in mind?
Are you now or have you ever been employed, if so, how do you think your employer would have responded if you had said you belonged to an obscure religious sect which didn't allow these things, or that you should not work with members of the opposite sex?
https:/
and airline stewards refusing to serve alcohol on flights one reads about.
//The guidance refers to claimants who have religious objections,not to Muslims.//
Who else demand 5 prayer times off work throughout their working day and refuse to handle wine pork or tobacco? Which religion do you have in mind?
Are you now or have you ever been employed, if so, how do you think your employer would have responded if you had said you belonged to an obscure religious sect which didn't allow these things, or that you should not work with members of the opposite sex?
Khandro, this is who you area associating with:
"Mark Adrian Collett (born 3 October 1980) is a British political activist and neo-Nazi. He is a former chairman of the Young BNP, the youth division of the British National Party (BNP), and was director of publicity for the party before being suspended from the party in early April 2010."
Are you happy siding with a literal neo-nazi?
"Mark Adrian Collett (born 3 October 1980) is a British political activist and neo-Nazi. He is a former chairman of the Young BNP, the youth division of the British National Party (BNP), and was director of publicity for the party before being suspended from the party in early April 2010."
Are you happy siding with a literal neo-nazi?
Khandro, are you serious?
There's no place for it in modern british life, nor on this site. As you know.
I have been concerned about your decent into the gross, misinformed, hateful side of the internet for some time and this seems to be further proof that you've really taken leave of your critical faculties.
There's no place for it in modern british life, nor on this site. As you know.
I have been concerned about your decent into the gross, misinformed, hateful side of the internet for some time and this seems to be further proof that you've really taken leave of your critical faculties.
AB editor; Yes I am serious, what do you mean by "neo-Nazi"?
I have family members who have had plenty of first-hand experience of National Socialism and we see nothing around which resembles it.
It seems a cheap and easy way to dismiss a point of view which one find opposes one's own, by instead of countering it with rational argument, use such terms as neo-Nazi, fascist, racist or bigot.
I have family members who have had plenty of first-hand experience of National Socialism and we see nothing around which resembles it.
It seems a cheap and easy way to dismiss a point of view which one find opposes one's own, by instead of countering it with rational argument, use such terms as neo-Nazi, fascist, racist or bigot.
//...youth division of the British National Party (BNP)...Are you happy siding with a literal neo-nazi?//
I am concerned about Ab Editor's logic here: is he losing his critical faculties, I wonder?
Can you clarify, please, ED?
Do you mean: Whatever a neo-Nazi says must be a lie?
Or: Agreeing with a neo-Nazi on anything he says is equivalent to support for neo-Nazism?
Same question to you, SP.
I am concerned about Ab Editor's logic here: is he losing his critical faculties, I wonder?
Can you clarify, please, ED?
Do you mean: Whatever a neo-Nazi says must be a lie?
Or: Agreeing with a neo-Nazi on anything he says is equivalent to support for neo-Nazism?
Same question to you, SP.
Re the question in my 15:30 post, no need to answer, anyone. I've got it - it's option 2: agreement = support.
Got an example of EDthink from thirteen years ago:
On 28 May 2004, Lester Holloway wrote this at the website of Black Information Link:
"Last week Channel 4 axed their documentary 'Edge of the City' after a howl of protests from Muslim and Black community leaders, and the intervention of a top cop. West Yorkshire chief constable Colin Cramphorn warned C4's chief executive Mark Thompson that the screening could provoke 'a risk to community safety'...
The portrayal of Muslim Asian men as child abusers and paedophiles outraged community leaders, some who feared it would become a 'recruiting sergeant' for the BNP. After C4 axed the screening... Griffin attempted to hijack the documentary's content for his election campaign.
Unite Against Fascism are organising protests outside the BBC's West London Television Centre, and BBC offices in Cardiff and Manchester in protest at the Beeb's decision to show the BNP's propaganda. Weyman Bennett, joint secretary for Unite, said:
'The BNP are not a legitimate party, they are a Fascist party who stir up racial hatred...."
Note the phrase "BNP's propaganda.". So any truth (now rebranded as propaganda) spoken by a neo-Nazi must be rejected for fear of nourishing the beast.
The application of EDthink in this case led to some evil consequences. Not too strong a statement, is it?
Got an example of EDthink from thirteen years ago:
On 28 May 2004, Lester Holloway wrote this at the website of Black Information Link:
"Last week Channel 4 axed their documentary 'Edge of the City' after a howl of protests from Muslim and Black community leaders, and the intervention of a top cop. West Yorkshire chief constable Colin Cramphorn warned C4's chief executive Mark Thompson that the screening could provoke 'a risk to community safety'...
The portrayal of Muslim Asian men as child abusers and paedophiles outraged community leaders, some who feared it would become a 'recruiting sergeant' for the BNP. After C4 axed the screening... Griffin attempted to hijack the documentary's content for his election campaign.
Unite Against Fascism are organising protests outside the BBC's West London Television Centre, and BBC offices in Cardiff and Manchester in protest at the Beeb's decision to show the BNP's propaganda. Weyman Bennett, joint secretary for Unite, said:
'The BNP are not a legitimate party, they are a Fascist party who stir up racial hatred...."
Note the phrase "BNP's propaganda.". So any truth (now rebranded as propaganda) spoken by a neo-Nazi must be rejected for fear of nourishing the beast.
The application of EDthink in this case led to some evil consequences. Not too strong a statement, is it?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.