Comments by "S Andersson" (@sandersson2813) on "“We Are Saying A Pretty Racist Thing About The Mayor Of London” | Sunak Falls In Islamophobic Row" video.

 @danielthomas4082 Khan has frequently met with members of banned terrorist groups.
7
Fairy tale beliefs and imaginary friends are not "race" issues.
4
@seanjones180 Why is it religious hatred? You probably haven't seen the whole interview, but Anderson (albeit clumsily and probably falsely) accuses Kahn, London AND Starmer as being in thrall of ISLAMISTS, I'm presuming you don't consider islamists to be genuine Muslims? Why is it "Islamophobic" if you refer to Khan, but not if you refer to London or Starmer?
2
@seanjones180 I'm anti islam, I'm anti all religions. Why wouldn't you be?
2
@seanjones180 You have ignored that Anderson said Khan. AND London and Starmer were under the control of Islamism. Why is it only Islamophobic in relation to Khan? (I'm not saying Anderson's claims are correct by the way) Khan, London and Starmer have CERTAINLY been blind and ignored Islamism.
2
@danielthomas4082 Why should immoral beliefs be exempt from criticism?
2
@seanjones180 Religious hatred is perfectly legitimate. Religion is absolutely disgusting and immoral. What is there to respect about religion? You claimed it was racism, but religions are not dependent on race. You can be any race and be any religion.
1
@seanjones180 You might want to take a look at the interview in full. Anderson said that not just the repellent little runt Khan was under the control of Islamists, but that London and ALSO Starmer were, so why is it not "Islamophobic" to say London and Starmer, but only if you talk about Khan? Surely you also would claim that Islamists are not "genuine Muslims"? So what is wrong about having a go at militant islamists? What about all the blatantly racist things that have come out of Khan's office? "Too many white people in London" , "a white family is not representative of London"
1
@seanjones180 I didn't say it wasn't, but I'm not under any requirement to respect religion or give it special treatment. Religion commands ridicule and should be criticised for how ridiculous it is. The OP was in relation to "which race" and tjen you start talking about religion, as of its connected to race. Religion is absolutely disgusting and immoral and we shouldn't tolerate it as anything other than a private, fairy tale book club.
1
@seanjones180 You didn't answer the question, why did left wing media cut off the part of the interview saying that London AND Starmer were under the control of ISLAMISM? I already said it was most likely an unfounded claim, but why is it only "Islamophobic" when Khan is mentioned? Again, you've refused to mention whether you think Islamic Fundamentalists, which is what Islamism refers to is part of a genuine, legitimate Muslim movement. I wonder why that is? It may be true that Khan, London and Starmer are not under "control" of Islamism, but they've categorically been blind to it, and refuse to react to what it is doing.
1
@mrman8388 He said anyone who was against ULEZ was in league with the far right, his office said there are too many white people in London and that a white family in an advert on a London bus doesn't represent London.
1
@LampostG What would you think if Tory's met with banned far right terrorist groups? You'd be all over it wouldn't you, but it's fine for Khan?
1
@danielthomas4082 Religious beliefs are unjustified, indefensible, immoral and laughable. No credibility or special treatment should be given to any religion. They are fairy tales, but it is FINE to hate these religions because even if you don't believe in them, and you shouldn't they affect everyone who doesn't believe such preposterous beliefs as they are intent on getting involved in education, politics, law making all whilst paying zero tax. Tax religions.
1
@danielthomas4082 Religion is disgusting. It's perfectly fine to hate anyone who pushes their religion.
1