The Student Room Group

Muslim migrants are forcing Christians to take part in Islamic prayers at refugee cam

Scroll to see replies

Original post by hazzer1998
They still follow the religion .. saying Islam has nothing to do with terrorism and intolerance is like saying guns have nothing to do with shooting people


I never said Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, dont put words in my mouth. For a 'political ambassador' your debating skills are laughable.
Original post by george_c00per
So maybe it's doing the rounds in the European versions of the Daily Mail?

A biased newspaper doesn't usually print out lies, it picks out what it wants to tell to the people who buy it, therefore giving the readers a one-sided view of the issue. It may be true that some Muslims have been forcing Christians to pray to Islam, however you never seem to hear about the positive things that happen in the camps at Calais, such as how the majority of refugees there work together, help each other out and accept others, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or skin colour. It's constantly "Muslims gang up on other minorities", "Muslims sneak into the Channel Tunnel", or "Muslims argue with Christians".

How come we aren't focusing on the fact that these people have been displaced by wars which are ruining their home countries, and how staying there is a huge risk for their lives, families, and future?


Because if that were the case we would have one state newspaper which was only allowed to print balanced publications which highlighted all of the things you are saying. Just because the Mail (like the Guardian) prints one side of the story does not mean that it is not printing fact. I trust that a lot of people are sensible enough to read multiple publications to get the real picture of what is going on (in the round).
Original post by Grand High Witch
Because if that were the case we would have one state newspaper which was only allowed to print balanced publications which highlighted all of the things you are saying. Just because the Mail (like the Guardian) prints one side of the story does not mean that it is not printing fact. I trust that a lot of people are sensible enough to read multiple publications to get the real picture of what is going on (in the round).


Unfortunately though, many people really aren't sensible enough to read other sources for a balanced view. :frown:

I completely agree that many newspapers are very bias towards left-wing agendas, however the way in which the media as a whole presents this refugee crisis does so in a way to create division and separation between religions and societies.


Huffington post alert, crazy leftist SJW detected.
Original post by The_Opinion
Huffington post alert, crazy leftist SJW detected.


As i said, simple minded.

You want me to call you a fascist for thinking the DM is a legitimate source?

'crazy' 'leftist' 'SJW' All petty insults used by a bigoted idiot.

Sidenote: You still havent sufficiently responded to my first post. I take it that you have accepted you are wrong.
(edited 7 years ago)
I am a Muslim. Does that mean that I am evil? Don't generalise 1.6 billion people based on the actions of some bad muslims. There is good and bad in EVERY community.
Feel free to call me a "leftist" "apologist" "terrorist sympathizer" that sounds a lot like the EDL
Original post by lolatmaths
As i said, simple minded.

You want me to call you a fascist for thinking the DM is a legitimate source?

'crazy' 'leftist' 'SJW' All petty insults used by a bigoted idiot.

Sidenote: You still havent sufficiently responded to my first post. I take it that you have accepted you are wrong.


Read the link that you sent to me, the top rated comment summarise the article, the author and people like you.

"So I guess we are being asked to have infinite tolerance for those who have certain "cultural practices" that mutilate women, oppress gays and minorities, kill and imprison those who disagree with them, etc. because they say they have the correct version of their religion, and others don't. Otherwise we are properly called "racists" and intolerant and deserve the violence we get. Is that the jist of it?"

One day you shall realise how naïve you are.
Original post by The_Opinion
Read the link that you sent to me, the top rated comment summarise the article, the author and people like you.

"So I guess we are being asked to have infinite tolerance for those who have certain "cultural practices" that mutilate women, oppress gays and minorities, kill and imprison those who disagree with them, etc. because they say they have the correct version of their religion, and others don't. Otherwise we are properly called "racists" and intolerant and deserve the violence we get. Is that the jist of it?"

One day you shall realise how naïve you are.


As i said, you havent sufficiently replied to my original comment, just drifting off on a tangent. No, im not going to sit here and defend Islam, its very much a backward ideology but people like you cant fathom a bit of tolerance because idiots like you often take it too far, to the point where it is counter productive.

Im naive? You havent even replied to the original comment i made, you sit here and ignore it. Keep doing this and ill just blank you.
Original post by george_c00per
When it's a source which is known for being outstandingly biased towards many issues, it's not really a "source you don't like".


Yes, it is, because biased does not mean lying.
Original post by The_Opinion
Read the link that you sent to me, the top rated comment summarise the article, the author and people like you.

"So I guess we are being asked to have infinite tolerance for those who have certain "cultural practices" that mutilate women, oppress gays and minorities, kill and imprison those who disagree with them, etc. because they say they have the correct version of their religion, and others don't. Otherwise we are properly called "racists" and intolerant and deserve the violence we get. Is that the jist of it?"

One day you shall realise how naïve you are.


no, that's not what the article said. the point was that just because muslims are not a single race doesn't mean that you aren't racist by bashing them. bashing muslims just because of their religion is called bigotry.
Original post by lolatmaths
As i said, you havent sufficiently replied to my original comment, just drifting off on a tangent. No, im not going to sit here and defend Islam, its very much a backward ideology but people like you cant fathom a bit of tolerance because idiots like you often take it too far, to the point where it is counter productive.

Im naive? You havent even replied to the original comment i made, you sit here and ignore it. Keep doing this and ill just blank you.

I bet he is quaking in his boots and the prospect of losing your witty, incitement and polite commentary/discourse.
Original post by HanSoloLuck
I bet he is quaking in his boots and the prospect of losing your witty, incitement and polite commentary/discourse.


Are you a member of the EDL/Britain First/National Front?
Original post by HanSoloLuck
I bet he is quaking in his boots and the prospect of losing your witty, incitement and polite commentary/discourse.


Read all my posts and have another go at trying to patronise me.
I wont waste anymore time explaining bigots why painting EVERY SINGLE MUSLIM with the same brush is counterproductive and does not solve anything. Muslims aren't homogeneous. I agree that Islamism is an issue and that Islamic terror groups need to be taken care of. However, hating every Muslim for it won't bring world peace.
Original post by Taimur.Maqbool
no, that's not what the article said. the point was that just because muslims are not a single race doesn't mean that you aren't racist by bashing them. bashing muslims just because of their religion is called bigotry.


Therefore it is not racist is it.

Words have meanings.

Also, perhaps if you had learnt to read properly, you would have noticed that most of my post was quoting the most liked comment from the website.

Quick Reply

Latest