Mr Bigstuff

The silly cow copies stories off the BNP website and posts them here. She’s turned this forum into a conduit for neo-nazi propaganda. Sadly, some people actually agree with her idiotic and bigoted comments.

What a load of bullsh1t, especially from Geoff who decided to quote from my post without bothering to read it. First of all, wearing a veil is usually the woman’s own choice, they wear it because they want to wear it. Why should it be viewed as isolationist? Just because some people feel threatened by people who dress differently to them and…[Read more]

White people come here who don’t speak English well either. I remember when I was in school there were a few Iberian kids who barely spoke any English. It wasn’t a problem for us though because it was a Christian school and it didn’t suffer from the sort of ignorant prejudices that exist among adults in our society.

Drivel doesn’t realize that it…[Read more]

Some muslim women see it as obligatory to wear a veil just like some Christians see it as obligatory to fast during Lent (my point being that not all people do it). So the wearing of a full veil (niqab I think it’s called) is seen by some muslim women as something that has to done. It’s futile to try to examine the Koran for teaching about wearing…[Read more]

@BOB2GO wrote:

Emmalush, I look at all the new topics and see they are nearly all started by you and they are nearly all complete garbage. Your domination of these message boards is embarrassing. Nobody ever agrees with you but you don’t shut up. You are a fuc/king moron.

AMEN!!!!!

It’s true that muslim women don’t have to wear veils in the presence of young children. So there was no sense in her refusing to remove it.

The caveat that I would add is that the Standard belongs to the same group of papers as the Daily Mail. I don’t think they’ve given us the whole story and apparently the school is yet to investigate what exactly happened:

“The school is now investigating exactly what happened before deciding what action – if any – to take against…[Read more]

@emmalush wrote:

The military aint safe

and the Pope is Catholic

Korea might be capable of hitting the west coast of the USA. There are also US bases in the south that would be vulnerable to an attack from the north. Obviously North Korea is capable of hitting Japan and South Korea too. On top of that they have a 1 million man army. So the only real option is diplomacy (or assassination but that’s frowned upon…[Read more]

I thought that act related to criminal cases and not civil cases. I don’t think it says anything about defamation. Well, it’s your neck on the line not mine. If you’re happy with the risk then so be it.

OMG! Emma really is mad! To PB, you do realize this place could be up the creek if anyone actually took Emma’s advice and contacted Diane Abbott. Emma’s comments are libellous there’s not even a hint of a doubt about it and you’ve published them. I’m not a lawyer so I really don’t know if saying that the views are not your own will suffice. I…[Read more]

Believing in a higher power isn’t as nonsensical as you portray it. Even if you disregard religious dogma, eminent scientists still debate over the existence of a creator. Is the universe the product of a long sequence of flukes, or is it the product of some supreme entity?

I believe that there must be a God out there. Not some old man with a…[Read more]

I don’t really know about credit unions but I know that if someone has a bad credit rating then it’s probably not wise to lend them money. Even with credit unions, they probably have to assess each person’s circumstances before granting them a loan. It’s not just about where you live, how long you’ve lived there and how much you earn. They also…[Read more]

You can’t defame a prominent public figure especially not an MP (well you could but you better have a pretty big bank balance). You really could end up in deep sh1t Emma but you’re far too stupid to realize. You ought to withdraw everything you’ve said about her. All it would take would be for 1 person who came across this board to email Diane…[Read more]

It’s up to the bus companies to make it a condition of travel that people have to lift their veils or whatever when asked to by the driver. Otherwise there is a grey area. As I keep saying, if there’s nothing in the terms and conditions that say that a person has to take something off when asked and a person is refused travel, then the passenger…[Read more]

Nick Griffin’s a loud-mouthed idiot and he would make himself look like a fool if he went on Question Time. I doubt he has the ability to debate with veteran politicians in front of a studio audience. They’d get under his collar and trick him into making foolish comments and no doubt he’d be hit with a barrage of boos.

Anyway, the BBC don’t just…[Read more]

Surely freedom of speech means freedom to protest too. Personally, I think a person’s freedom of speech should have self-imposed limits for the greater good of the society as a whole.

That’s total nonsense. You have the reasoning ability of a bowl of porridge. To incite racial hatred you have to incite hatred towards a race. She clearly didn’t do that. To accuse Peter Hitchens of having a low opinion of black people is not racism nor is it inciting racial hatred. So you’ve libelled her.

Also, inciting racial hatred isn’t a…[Read more]

@sweetasbaileez wrote:

@Mr Bigstuff wrote:

Unless it expressly says in the terms and conditions of the travelcard that a person has to remove a hat or sunglasses or any other item that might obscure a face, then the woman is entirely within her rights to refuse to remove her veil. If her photo is in the photocard and her ticket is valid then she is…

[Read more]

Unless it expressly says in the terms and conditions of the travelcard that a person has to remove a hat or sunglasses or any other item that might obscure a face, then the woman is entirely within her rights to refuse to remove her veil. If her photo is in the photocard and her ticket is valid then she is travelling legally and complying by the…[Read more]