Opinion of Khan based on region of UK one lives in?

[Money_May]

lol exactly - the Hindus and Sikhs are, for the most part, very nice people. It is important to note than many Hindus and Sikhs HATE ******s. Still, ignorant posters point out violent white thugs such as some of those at EDL protests and condemn white people for being racist. There must be some reason why many Hindus and Sikhs dislike ******s too.

Yeah because of war between pakistan india thats the one and only reason

[Taaj Manzoor]

Covering your face isn't sharia law hence a minority of women in the UK actually do! Yes I know uk is becoming less religious, 40% of UK is athiest. But tolerance is becoming less and less everyday due to the pollution of hatred in the media these days. By the way nobody welcomes the idea of EDL or BNP either in the UK.

Covering their face is still their choice (maybe); but if they want to be more accepted into a different culture, then doing so is only counter productive.

[Big Vern]

I couldn't bring myself to read more than 5 pages over this overwhelmingly ****** thread, but those of you who genuinely believe the North is 'more racist' than the South are unbelievably daft. I mean, you'll come in this thread and you'll take the moral high-ground by condemning those who generalise ******s due to their religion, yet you're going to say the North, as a whole, is more racist? Nice logic, bros, just go ahead and do what you're claiming is so ludicrous. Everywhere you go you have racists, that's just the way it is. I've traveled all over the UK - as well other countries - for work, and everywhere's the same; you have your people that are racist and your people that aren't.

Some people are so ignorant, and the fact they don't even realise it is truly mind-boggling.

[Froghead99]

We are involved in different arguments my friend. Not once did I make an argument involving the US since I don't know anything about it. I was arguing because you seem to believe in the fallacy that Britain is full of racist skinheads. Spare me the BS. The UK is overly tolerant of ethnic ********** at times and this is undeniable.

No, from the very beginning we've been arguing basically two things, first and foremost it was that the US is a far better place for **********. And then you decided to wrongly argue that minorites in the Uk have the same opportunities as white people. Which is insane. I then proceeded to post you articles by the BBC, the Guardian, and The Independant to prove that, that is INSANELY WRONG. Even in the US minorites are at a disadvantage, just not as much as in Europe.

Then, you retaliated with an BS story from the ***ing Daily Telegraph. Really the Daily Telegraph? The whole crux of your argument was this,

***ellery in general should be forbidden, although there are "exceptional circumstances" where schools need to be sensitive towards those from other faiths, according to draft guidance sent out by one local education authority.

Are you ***ing kidding? Thats your argument, some hysterical nonsense from the Daily Telegraph? Its all based on one DRAFT by ONE authority. In reality, crosses were not banned. Jesus christ, at least read the article you post.

The UK overly tolerant to **********. Okay, my fellow racist, whatever you say.

[stefl14]

Did you even read the article? Nothing happened, crosses were not banned in favor for Islamic garb. All it says is ***elry is meant to be banned except for religous type. This is the daily telegraph just sensationalizing nothing. This is your proof? Thats pathetic dude.




So they have already banned ****** girls from wearing veils.


And all of this is based on a draft guidance. "***ellery in general should be forbidden, although there are "exceptional circumstances" where schools need to be sensitive towards those from other faiths, according to draft guidance sent out by one local education authority." Nothing even happened. THis is a non story.

You obviously didn't read the article.

Yes I did, the article points out clear double standards. Schools have been told that they should ban crosses and crucifixes, but allow ****** children to wear symbols, even though they are not compulsory. Why? So we should be sensitive to ********** but not Christians...

If you lived in the UK you would know that this is actually quite normal and goes on in schools. And as for the veils, most schools allow it.

[Froghead99]

Yes I did, the article points out clear double standards. Schools have been told that they should ban crosses and crucifixes, but allow ****** children to wear symbols, even though they are not compulsory. Why? So we should be sensitive to ********** but not Christians...

If you lived in the UK you would know that this is actually quite normal and goes on in schools. And as for the veils, most schools allow it.

First of all this is irrelevant.

Secondly, NO THEY DIDN'T. Read the ***ing article in full. Schools were not told to ban crosses and crucifixes. One Draft, from One authority didn't mention crosses and crucifixes, THAT IS ALL. Theres not a single school in the UK that has banned crosses and crucifixes yet allowed Islamic bands. But seriously, this is such a non story, its not even funny.

Schools NEVER EVER banned crosses and crucifixes. Your whole argument is down to a draft of a document that was changed. Come on dude, at least READ THE ARTICLE.

How is one draft from one authority, that barely even says what you claim, somehow representative of the WHOLE COUNTRY. It's not.

[stefl14]

No, from the very beginning we've been arguing basically two things, first and foremost it was that the US is a far better place for **********. And then you decided to wrongly argue that minorites in the Uk have the same opportunities as white people. Which is insane. I then proceeded to post you articles by the BBC, the Guardian, and The Independant to prove that, that is INSANELY WRONG. Even in the US minorites are at a disadvantage, just not as much as in Europe.

Then, you retaliated with an BS story from the ***ing Daily Telegraph. Really the Daily Telegraph? The whole crux of your argument was this,

Are you ***ing kidding? Thats your argument, some hysterical nonsense from the Daily Telegraph? Its all based on one DOCUMENT sent out by ONE authority. In reality, crosses were not banned. Jesus christ, at least read the article you post.

The UK overly tolerant to **********. Okay, my fellow racist, whatever you say.

I was in this thread before you were I believe, I think I know what I am arguing about. And as for the bolded, that is just below the belt. I am not racist at all, I just pisses me off how white people are demonised and labelled as racists when those belonging to ethnic ********** don't want to integrate whatsoever. I live in a place with over 50% brown people (Hindus, Sikhs, ******s) and have friends from ethnic **********. I find that Hindus and Sikhs are usually very polite and ******s are too, but in general you get more extreme ******s than you do hindus and sikhs. These extreme ******s are often rude and don't want to associate with anyone but those belonging to their faith. I speak from experience. You don't know **** about the UK.

[stefl14]

First of all this is irrelevant.

Secondly, NO THEY DIDN'T. Read the ***ing article in full. Schools were not told to ban crosses and crucifixes. One Draft, from One authority didn't mention crosses and crucifixes, THAT IS ALL.

Schools NEVER EVER banned crosses and crucifixes. Your whole argument is down to a draft of a document that was changed. Come on dude, at least READ THE ARTICLE.

How is one draft from one authority, that barely even says what you claim, somehow representative of the WHOLE COUNTRY. It's not.

When I used to go to high school about 4 years ago, asians were allowed to wear religous items and Christians were not allowed to wear crosses. Don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about. It may not be widespread but it occurs in towns with many people from ethnic **********.

[talz]

I was in this thread before you were I believe, I think I know what I am arguing about. And as for the bolded, that is just below the belt. I am not racist at all, I just pisses me off how white people are demonised and labelled as racists when those belonging to ethnic ********** don't want to integrate whatsoever. I live in a place with over 50% brown people (Hindus, Sikhs, ******s) and have friends from ethnic **********. I find that Hindus and Sikhs are usually very polite and ******s are too, but in general you get more extreme ******s than you do hindus and sikhs. These extreme ******s are often rude and don't want to associate with anyone but those belonging to their faith. I speak from experience. You don't know **** about the UK.

Listen mate I live in the UK and its only a minority of ******s who incite hatred. Now lets end this bollox. Just because you know a tiny amount of hindus and sikhs who are friends to you doesn't mean every hindu and sikh in UK is friendly. Actually one of the main speakers of EDL is actually sikh, WHAT A SUPRISE !!!

[stefl14]

Oh, and I would like to point out just how racist I am. My top 4 favourite fighters goes like this: Pacquiao, Hopkins, Froch, Khan... really racist. And I've got Ali in my avatar lol.