Peter Reynolds

The life and times of Peter Reynolds

Brutal Police Thugs Shame Our Nation

with 56 comments

They beat our children.

They brutalise our youth.

They destroy our civilisation.

They are violent, evil monsters, armed to the teeth, using steel shod horses to terrorise and oppress.

They assault, murder and create mayhem with impunity

They are the enemy.

Written by Peter Reynolds

December 10, 2010 at 4:34 pm

56 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. just got this to say!!!


    December 10, 2010 at 4:45 pm

  2. I dunno, seems a fair reaction to dispel the violent lefties of their impertinent ideology that they are entitled to what they want. It was some well needed growing up, weaning from the socialist teet that they had been sucklingt from for the last ten, fifteen years…hurrah!

    Brian Putman

    December 10, 2010 at 4:54 pm

    • No ones asking for a free ride and no one said anything about geting entitlement to what they want when they want. but tripling uni fees in ressestion when we need skilled labor? thats intellegence with a capital RETARD.

      Martin Rumbold

      December 10, 2010 at 7:29 pm

      • What does tripling university fees in a recession have to do with anything, students don’t have to pay until they earn over £21k, if they never do, they never pay and if they are at university, it doesn’t matter that they cannot get a job, they are studying. In the same way your reference to skilled labour demonstrates your intransigence! Oh yeah, and there are three spelling mistakes in your tirade. What was that again? Oh yeah: RETARD(?)

        Brian Putman

        December 10, 2010 at 8:40 pm

  3. we must find a way to reach them soldiers; a way to activate their critical thinking and question their masters’ orders

    daniel carter

    December 10, 2010 at 5:37 pm

    • Ref:

      “we must find a way to reach them soldiers”

      Did you mean “…reach those soldiers”?

      Stoodent are you? Cambridge I expect.


      December 11, 2010 at 1:41 pm

      • Very ironic remarks. And what if the person that made those grammatical mistakes didn’t have enough money to enter university? Didn’t have enough to do A-levels? or he may have Dyslexia, do u know this condition? I assume that u dont know, due to Education cuts at your time when you were 18.

        Sophia Charalabaki, Athens Greece

        December 14, 2010 at 11:21 pm

  4. Ain’t that the truth that they’re ain’t no-one to speak for us, there aint no-one there and there ain’t no-one over there, there or there, to listen to us.

    Waiting here my true wise leader of men sworn to destroy this con-dem party.

    This isn’t what we voted for, for these are traitors to every principle held dear. What we would like to keep and protect the goodly folk, and what we do not want is the greedy ones, the enemies of democracy; they who would stiffle protesters with intollerable violence,deny their right to peaceful protest and when students defend themselves from police mindless violence.


    December 10, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    • @ D –


      There ‘aint’n no way’ that it is worth trying to educate (or protect) imbeciles.

      Double negatives – the whole crowd of today’s so-called stooodents, imho. They knew there’d be trouble, SO they turned up.

      Double negatives they clearly are.

      I suppose recent generations can chalk up one success to their so-called ‘intellect’ – the verbal ignorance (wish I could say it was ‘dexterity’) which produced a previously unknown double positive.

      Yeah. Right?


      December 11, 2010 at 12:07 pm

  5. Peter, in a reciprocal way I have to tell you, my friend, you are an IDIOT if you believe your own post.

    Siding with the violent, anarchic and the ignorant as you are doing, is unworthy of you.

    We are facing Libertarian Anarchy. Many of the ‘student’ fools, such as the Cambridge student who didn’t know he was defacing Churchill’s memorial don’t know history. Nor do these dullards know whose side they are on. It isn’t the side of democracy, that’s for sure.

    He’s probably angry with himself now, cos he upset the nodding dog.


    December 11, 2010 at 2:48 am

    • I think you’ve forgotten your manners ktbfpm. It would be easy to use such language in describing your obsession with ol’ Tone but hardly conducive to mutual understanding.

      Of course there are thugs, morons and troublemakers on the streets who need locking up, preferably with a little roughing up on the way. Some of them need to go to jail for a long time. What concerns me is that far, far too many of them are wearing a police uniform.

      Both my sons are out there on the streets. I don’t agree with their argument but they’re entitled to make it without being charged down by a horse and hit over the head with a baton as my eldest was on Thursday. You get a different perspective on things when your own blood is at stake.

      The Met have been out of control and incompetent for far too long anyway. What do you expect when they’re allowed to get off scot free with assault and murder as at the G20 protests?

      This could get a whole lot worse yet but if the police don’t start behaving themselves they’re going to find me and other parents up against them and if they keep using weapons and horses we’re going to have to have our own too. The government should bring the army in before its too late. They’re professionals and I’d trust their judgement and ability to go in hard where necessary and not indulge in gratuitous bullying. The police are violent, cowardly thugs with no idea what they’re doing. If they murder or brutalise any more of our ctizens then they can expect casualities too.

      What can be more “violent, anarchic and ignorant” than cavalry charging a crowd of young people and CHILDREN with steel shod, blinkered horses each weighing more than ton? If next time there’s someone in the crowd with a submachine gun the thugs will get what they deserve.

      As you’re obviously having great difficulty in opening your eyes and watching the television, let me fill you in with a couple more reality checks:

      Peter Reynolds

      December 11, 2010 at 9:02 am

  6. Somehow our politicians don’t seem worthy of police protection, yet mob rule is no alternative. I don’t approve of the police tactics and share some of Peter’s feelings. Youth has had a harder time than we grant as oldies, much as I hate them.


    December 11, 2010 at 8:14 am

  7. I agree totally i’ve witnessed police brutality at its worst being from Northern Ireland and have a criminal record for riotous behavior it started in Botonic park it was a peaceful weekend summers night alot off students and what you in them days crusty punks which i was 1 to all haven a good drink not a difference between any other night then in comes over 10 landrovers vans they just started beating people indiscriminately i got up to get out off the way a landrover drove toward me while getting away they ran over my foot friends then helped me out of the way got to the front gate then was faced with even more police there was a team me them beating on a fella who i know he was mentally slow but no harm to any1 so in a bid to help the police then attacked me after a good kicking i saw a chance to run then the police set a dog onto me i had to fight the dog off then the police arrested me put me into a landrover i was in it by myself so i jumped over the front seat and out the door.


    December 11, 2010 at 11:14 am

  8. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Peter Reynolds, Peter Reynolds. Peter Reynolds said: Brutal Police Thugs Shame Our Nation: […]

  9. “Bring back hanging!
    Here – what’s that round my neck?
    Not for me, you fool – I meant for OTHER PEOPLE!”

    So went the gist of a political cartoon that I saw some years ago, featuring a bowler-hatted gent who clearly represented ‘the establishment’ or the middle classes.

    We now have a right wing authoritarian government, who have sneaked into power behind the face of an ‘acceptable’ tory party, and on the back of the lying, conniving, self-serving incompetence of Bliar and Brown. You reap what you sow mothers, except that in this case, no-one actually voted for the result that we’ve been landed with.

    I am encouraged to see the students on the streets, venting their frustration – it’s about time that the British public stopped being led by the nose. We have become truly apathetic; as long as we have X-Factor, Strictly come celebrity cooking on ice in the jungle, and MOTD, we don’t give a toss how screwed over we get. I can’t condone wanton vandalism and mob violence, but it’s an unfortunate fact of society that any high-profile demo is going to be hijacked to some degree by both the anarchists for their agenda, and the state for a bit of Daily Mail led condemnation.

    Despite his best efforts, my son never made it to any of the demos. I’d have been proud of him if he had, yet annoyed with him had he been suckered into wanton distruction.

    The police have a duty to work within the law that is far more binding and important than any such obligation on our part. that’s what makes their job so difficult. At the moment, they’re failing miserably – whether that’s by accident or higher level design is another matter.


    December 11, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    • I’m shoulder to shoulder with you against the tyrants Nobbly.

      My eldest was ridden down by a horse and smashed over the head with a baton on Thursday while trying to protect a group of children, some as young as eight (God alone knows why they were there!).

      Peter Reynolds

      December 11, 2010 at 12:57 pm

      • @ Peter,

        A clue in your own comment?

        “… a group of children, some as young as eight (God alone knows why they were there!)”

        They were there, used and abused, as were the 15 and 16 year-olds also there, IN ORDER to ACCUSE the Police of attacking kids.

        It’s ANARCHY. But not as we, sorry, you – know it or wish to recognise it.


        December 11, 2010 at 1:49 pm

      • Mad conspiracy theories now. You’re indentifying too much with you know who!

        Peter Reynolds

        December 11, 2010 at 3:37 pm

      • Keep Blair – to suggest anyone would put a group of children in harms way just to make a point is a bit rash and bordering insulting isn’t it?

        There’s a hundred mundane reasons people get caught up in a melee, hence the literal definition. No one is going to make points in this way.

        Jason (HomeGrown Outlaw)

        December 13, 2010 at 7:53 pm

      • OK, Jason. Perhaps I shouldn’t have suggested that. Actually I was only following through from what Peter had said about these kids.

        On the other hand, since this was the FOURTH student demo, and the other three had turned out violently, why would anyone bring their young kids into the vicinity. If I knew it was happening, and it is possible these families didn’t, I concede, I wouldn’t bring young kids. Would you?


        December 14, 2010 at 2:05 am

    • @ NobblySan –

      “At the moment, they’re failing miserably – whether that’s by accident or higher level design is another matter.”

      Oh it’s BOUND to be by ‘higher level design’ isn’t it? I mean they just WANT to have us all rioting so they can bring in an armed police force? Don’t they?

      Oh, FGS. Gimme strength!


      December 11, 2010 at 1:45 pm

      • Chill, dude….

        Are you honestly convinced that governments are so on the level that they would never manipulate such situations to their advantage?

        How much anti-protest press has been generated by the fact that Chuck Windsor and his missus ended up getting in the way of the mob? Maybe that’s taking the argument to extremes, but it has always suited the state to have a little unrest that can be stamped on with the full approval of the chattering classes. If it takes a little provocation, or manipulation, then so be it.

        Of course, the flip side of my comment is that it really is local thuggery at individual plod level that is at work. In which case, Peter is right, and the coppers advocating violence against the public on IG’s site are typical of the breed.

        I had written more, but just deleted it, as I don’t wish to end up at complete loggerheads with you. You have your view and I have mine. We differ on your undying dedication to Blair, so we will differ on other issues as well.


        December 11, 2010 at 2:19 pm

      • Nobbly,

        Government manipulation?

        Now let me work this out.

        What you are suggesting is that “Chuck” Windsor, (charming lack of simple courtesy – “Prince Charles” would have been sufficient & would have avoided you offering us some more of your political views) – was put IN DANGER on purpose!? Was this the conversation between his security people/Police/Government?

        “Let’s send Prince Charles’ car right into the student melee just so that these creatures can show us what they’re made of. If he gets killed, well, there’s always Wills.”


        Apart from anything else, MUCH if not most of the chattering classes are anti-establishment and anti-royalty. They wouldn’t give a damn what happened to the heir to the throne.

        What you may also be implying is that the Police ENCOURAGED underage children to come on to this demonstration, even though at the Tory HQ demo (where they clearly didn’t have enough ‘co-conspirators’ on patrol) there was outrageous violence including the throwing of fire extinguishers at the Police and the crowd in fact!

        FGS, again!

        The end result is as I have said before to Peter and he has failed to respond – the Police are a RESPONSE force. They do not get out of bed in the morning to attack the public. The public attacked them.

        Or do you and Peter think they were all innocents in London and would never have been in any way violent if the Police hadn’t been there?

        Please get a handle on reality.


        December 11, 2010 at 3:10 pm

      • As I’ve just said on your site:

        Actually, I think you’re very, very naive. You should go and have a look at Inspector Gadget. There are dozens if not hundreds of policemen who do get out of bed in the morning precisely to go and crack heads. They love it! That’s what they joined up for.

        Of course there are brave and honourable policemen but there are far too many like Sgt Delroy Smellie and the murderer PC Simon Harwood.

        Come on ktbfpm, you know the type, he’s a bully and a coward so he gets a job in which he can wear a uniform and legally carry a weapon. There’s loads of them.

        Yes, they’re supposed to be a RESPONSE force but to many of them this is why tehy signed up. Hundreds of policmen and prison officers and soldiers are border line psychopaths just gagging to inflict violence under the protection of the law.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 11, 2010 at 3:30 pm

      • I did take a quick glance at Inspector Gadget. Will read more when I get round to it later.

        But, really, Peter?

        “Hundreds of policmen and prison officers and soldiers are border line psychopaths just gagging to inflict violence under the protection of the law.”

        You have performed an independent anaysis of the psychological make-up of our police then, have you?

        If not, can I suggest that we don’t extrapolate the sins and shortcoming of the few to the many. It’s what the naysayers do about politicians, and it is wrong in their case too.


        December 11, 2010 at 3:42 pm

      • I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I make statements, and you ignore them, choosing to take others and extrapolate them to suit your own point of view.
        Are you sure you’re not a politician after all? Sorry, that could be deemed offensive – I retract that.

        Incidentally, the ‘Chuck Windsor’ bit was what is known round these here parts as ‘humour’, if it offended you or was lost on you then I apologise. I’m not anti-royalist, in fact I think rather highly of them.


        December 11, 2010 at 3:32 pm

      • Go Nobbly! It does old ktbfpm good to get slapped every now and then (in fact I think he enjoys it).

        Got to go Christmas shopping now.


        Peter Reynolds

        December 11, 2010 at 3:38 pm

      • @ Nobbly,

        OK, as soon as I finish knocking Peter of his perch at my site, I’ll see where I missed responding to your statements. Though I thought statements were just that – “statements”. Not necessarily related to facts. Just opinion. When I want a response to a point I tend to ask for one.

        But I will try to look back later when I have time and try to answer your points. The arguments (er statements) here against the Police are just so easy to demolish. How can I resist?

        As for “Chuck” – humour? OK, but not exactly funny. Student-humour, and something adults should have left behind in their student days, imho.

        And guess what? I am not a royalist. I can take them or leave them. Though I think civilised simple respect is lacking today in our country. Respect for all its institutions. Thus the picture I will lead my next post with. (As yet unpublished.)


        December 11, 2010 at 3:53 pm

  10. […] of this feral behaviour, eh, Peter? ( Still determined to side with the ‘stoodent mindless’? (Present family members […]

    • Did you get all your Christmas shopping done, Peter? Did you get mine while you were at it? You early bird, you!


      December 14, 2010 at 1:59 am

  11. But what is wrong with the filth battering criminals?

    Brian Putman

    December 11, 2010 at 3:46 pm

  12. How dare the police use force to stop a rampaging mob!

    They should of course have waggled their fingers, shook their heads, tut-tutted, and otherwise showed their displeasure in a non-violent way.


    December 11, 2010 at 9:50 pm

    • We weren’t a rampaging mob. There were about 150 people who started violence; after about 6pm, the only people left in Parliament Square were innocent peaceful protestors who were then described as hardcore thugs on the news. The real troublemakers had previously broken through the police barriers, and went on to Oxford Street/Charles & Camilla’s car. The rest of us were unjustly kettled — which led to more violence.
      I know for a fact that 98% of us who were trapped on Westminster Bridge were peaceful, and just wanted to go home. I was standing next to a fourteen year old boy whose Dad was waiting for him.
      I don’t think all the police are “brutal”, but they certainly over-reacted, and the massive number of police aggravated things.


      December 12, 2010 at 6:49 pm

      • Thank you Helen

        Peter Reynolds

        December 12, 2010 at 7:10 pm

  13. […] This post is in response to a post from Peter Reynolds and his carefully selected picture – […]

  14. Unfortunately the violent deliberately merge with the non-violent to carry out their attacks on public property. Because it is so hard to pick them out in a crowd the only way to contain them is to kettle the mass of people in which they are operating. The blame for innocent people being caught up in the kettling therefore lies firmly with the rampagers not the police. But for the kettling I’m sure others would have been free to run amok.


    December 13, 2010 at 1:16 pm

  15. Peter

    It’s hardly surprising that neither Stan (who idolises a country where political protest is met by a bullet in the back of the head) nor KTBFPM (who considers the EDL’s thugs to be exemplars of peace-loving democracy) have much time for your criticisms. Personally I think the student violence did get out of hand (though it seems to have been grossly exaggerated), but the police response was – as so often with the Met – completely over the top. Having Charles and Camilla deliberately routed through a crowd of protestors was obviously intended to provoke a response to “justify” a few more head-breakings.

    While I agree that there are plenty of people who join the police in order to commit legelised acts of violence, that does seem to be more prevalent in the Met than in other forces. Or perhaps the other forces hide it better. In any case, let’d remember that for every disgraceful thug there are hundreds of decent coppers (and decent students come to that).

    Oh, and nobody else seems to have asked – s/he is just a student after all – how is your son/daughter recovering? I hope there was no lasting damage.


    December 13, 2010 at 3:03 pm

    • Thanks Rob. I couldn’t agree with you more on all the points you make.

      My son is fine thank you, just enraged! He’s flexing his newly-qualified lawyer’s muscles on how he’s going to indict Sir Paul Stephenson I think!

      Peter Reynolds

      December 13, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    • @ Rob,

      I don’t actually consider EDL people to be exemplars of peace. I DO think they have a right to be heard, especially since we hear so many others who have been permitted into our land and have brought along a fair amount of grief. You know what I’m referring to, Rob. If not I’ll put it in my link. (I’ll do that anyway.) The group who confront the EDL at their legally permitted demos are of course Muslims Against Fascism. Fascism? Well, they, or at least some of their number, should know about that ideology. And they do. And they invariably turn out to confront WITHOUT police permission. Why aren’t they arrested or at least sent packing? You might well ask, except I know, Rob, you won’t.

      Intriguing in the video footage I have seen of these confontations that the ‘Anti fascism’ group are by far the more vitriolic, loud and violent and yet are arrested far less frequently than the EDL members.

      Btw, there were almost 3,000 police officers last Thursday at that student “demo”. THREE THOUSAND. And another “demo” is due on Tuesday, I understand.

      The idea that there are police officers who join the force IN ORDER to commit acts of violence is utterly reprehensible. There may well be, in fact there ARE some who do commit acts of violence, of course. No-one’s denying that. But to suggest that they join IN ORDER to commit acts of violence is mad in the extreme.

      Have to congratulate you though, Rob, on your taste in jazz greats.

      Well, even you have to get something right.


      December 14, 2010 at 1:57 am

      • I really do not belive that you can even pretend to be so naive!

        Of course there are many who join the police, the prison service amd the army precisely so that they can indulge in violence and bullying against their fellow man. Thank God the training in the army is so much better than in the other two freemason dominated, hives of bullies and social inadequates.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 14, 2010 at 10:09 am

      • Rubbish again, Peter. You seem to have a lot of ‘knowledge’ of the world’s oddballs. And your extrapolation skills are second-to-none.

        I happen to know members of all the above, and frankly I think they deserve medals for their forbearance.

        The recrutiment process for the Police is very demanding, and very pc orientated, you may be surprised to know.

        Social inadequates indeed! You have a problem, my friend, with reality.


        December 14, 2010 at 12:19 pm

      • And of course your attitude in your comment on these ‘inadequates’ suggests you DO have little regard for the Police in general. This was my suggestion at my site, which you denied there. Otherwise, why issue such a damning statement as though it refers to all in the Police?


        December 14, 2010 at 12:23 pm

      • You’re an intelligent man with, I think, substantial experience of the world. Surely this not something that has passed you by?

        Uniforms attract many who are socially inadequate and need the support to their fragile personalities that a badge of authority provides. Not everyone in uniform falls into this category but many do.

        Get real ktbfpm. Even ol’ Tone would be surprised at your lack of insight here!

        Peter Reynolds

        December 14, 2010 at 12:44 pm

      • Peter, call me naive if you like, but do you want to know something unfashionable?

        I TRUST the Police.

        You can be happy that you have an ally (apart from Rob). President Amanutjob also thinks the British government has been too harsh on the students!

        He, of course would have strung ’em all up by now, so destroying the evidence.

        So there you go, that makes three of you – Rob, and the leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Peter.

        Meanwhile it seems the Police have been told to ratchet up their defence against rioters. Watch as the House of Lords debates this tonight. I bet the students who gather will be fewer in number and better behaved. I hope so anyway.


        December 14, 2010 at 2:47 pm

      • Well that is naive and not very sensible of you ktbfpm. (notice my careful use of language please).

        I seriously worry for you and your personal security if you take such a trusting attitude towards the police. I pray that you do only ever meet the good ones.

        As for talking about Allahshandjob and me in the same sentence, I will not dignify it with any further comment.

        Peter Reynolds

        December 14, 2010 at 3:24 pm

      • Don’t know if this’ll fall into the right comment slot, Peter. This WordPress thing isn’t always that smart, is it? A bit like the rest of, mayhap.

        I have only ever met good polic officers, true. I prefer not to put myself in a position where any not so trustworthy are after me.

        Of course I don’t see you in Ahmadinejad’s tribe, Peter. But I just thought it was worth mentioning that HE was on YOUR side.

        Well, isn’t it? Worth mentioning?

        Btw, did you notice the Assange lawyer resorting to sports analogies about umpires and hurdles? Untrue and misleading analogies, as it happens. It is DUE PROCESS that Sweden can put in an appeal, NOT opportunistic ignoring of the “umpire”. The message was that his man is doing nothing other than playing the game.

        Some of the time these cross-references tell us something about starting points and mindsets. Like for instance that ALL of those trying to raise the £200,000 are anti-Iraq war pacifist types.

        And THEY say that governments have an agenda!

        That was my point.

        We all have agendas. None of us has a halo of purity above our every thought.


        December 14, 2010 at 10:53 pm

      • Adrian Tudway, the national co-ordinator for domestic extremism, told the Observer: “We look at the extreme right and left, but currently our biggest single area of business are the various groups which call themselves defence leagues. These defence leagues can be found across England.”

        That’s probably why the police arrest more EDL thugs than “anti-fascists”: because unlike you and Tony B, they consider them and not Muslim bogeymen to be the main extremist threat facing British society.

        Muslims know about fascism for the same reason that Jews do: because they are its victims. These days there are far more racially/religiously motivated attacks on British Muslims than on British Jews, and the pattern is being repeated all across Europe thanks to the efforts of your idol Geert Wilders and his fellow Euronazis.

        As for police permission to demonstrate (and in a supposedly free country why should anyone have to ask permission?) both the EDL and MAF obtain clearance sometimes, and sometimes they “…arrive unannounced and neither the police or the scum will know any details’.

        And I’m proud to say that a good many more decent British people than just the members of Muslims Against Fascism oppose the racist thuggery of the EDL and the other “defence leagues”.

        Incidentally I noticed you having a go over at KTBFPM at people wearing masks at demonstrations or elsewhere. You get double points for simultaneously attacking student demonstrators AND Muslim grannies and young mums in their veils, but score own goals regarding the Cross-of-St-George-masked EDL gangs as well as the visors and (often) the gas masks of the police. (And if the SAS should ever called in to deal with real terrorism, well, rather you than me when it comes to ripping off the balaclavas of Hereford’s finest!)


        December 14, 2010 at 2:03 pm

      • As inviarably (you seldom disappoint) you miss and/or twist the point, Rob.

        My point being that we have allowed Muslim extremists to go on attacking verbally and by terror attacks and attempts while we seldom charge them with being violent or violence-inducing. YET – when something called the EDL (and I am not a supporter) chooses to “defend” its own country (whether rightly or wrongly – whichever – they do NOT murder or incite it) THEY somehow are beyond the pale.

        These double-standards should be highlighted.

        They are indicative of crazies.

        And I will continue to highlight those who propagate such double standards.

        As for the masks/hoods – YES! Absolutely. I am against the sort of mask or hood or BURKHA – GOT IT!? – that hides one’s indentity. It is not the British way. Or at least it never was until fundamentalists like yourself wrecked the British way.


        December 14, 2010 at 2:40 pm

      • Now how about actually addressing my points? Muslims Against Fascism do not carry out terror attacks as well you know ( though several EDL members have firebombed mosques and other buildings). So are you saying they should be locked up for “verbal attacks”? Where’s that commitment to free speech you roll put whenever Geert Wilders wants to have a Nazi rally here? And am I to take it that you agree that the police and the EDL thugs should not be allowed to hide their faces? Or do you just want to bully a few Muslim women into conformity with your dress code?

        I didn’t know I was a fundamentalist. You must tell me what kind I am: I’d hate to miss out on the fun. As to wrecking the British way, YOUR “British way” was comprehensively wrecked by that nice Mr Churchill (not just a statue, also a doughty opponent of your kind of political utopia). I think the real British way is perfectly safe in BRITISH hands. Not Dutch, not Israeli, not American, and not Iranian either. Sorry to disappoint you.


        December 14, 2010 at 6:55 pm

      • You ARE a fundamentalist, Rob, though of course you don’t realise it. You fundamentally detest and resent Tony Blair. And you fundamentally support anything Muslim. Both without question.

        I question both my support for one at times, and my suspicion of the other. You never do. You are one of the blessed We All Knowers.

        You fundamentally believe you are ALWAYS right, Even though, as far as I can see, you are invariably wrong.

        We could have some fun here sending each other to watch reports and videos which PROVE our own positions on the Muslims Against Fascism mob and the EDL gang. It’ll prove nothing to either you nor me.

        It’s news to those who voted for Wilders that he is a ‘Nazi’. But he is, of course. Rob said he is, so he must be.

        What I am saying is that while we let the extremely MAD and frankly EVIL yell “Kill the British Invaders”/ “Muslims Will Take over Buckingham Palace”/ “The Islamic Flag Will Fly Over Downing Street” rants go unsanctioned we have no right to stop EDL members saying what they wish to say.


        Too simple for your mixed-up brain to fathom.

        If you can, please explain what Churchill wrecked. Can hardly wait. It’ll all be helpful to let us decipher in which ways you really ARE fundamentalist.

        I suppose it’s a relief to find out that this is something Blair didn’t wreck: Britain. It was already wrecked by Churchill.

        A fundamentalist, Rob, said so. So it must be true.


        Are you smoking what Peter’s smoking?


        December 14, 2010 at 9:43 pm

      • You are well, well over the top now ktbfpm.

        You diminish your own argument.

        In fact, I think you are a little off form at present. In need of the Christmas break perhaps?

        Peter Reynolds

        December 14, 2010 at 10:26 pm

      • Elaborate, please, Peter. In which way am I off-form?

        If you think I am OTT re Rob, you should know we have history. I banned him for some time at my blog for his abusive language. He has now softened the lingo, but he now has some fun stalking my blog and trying to pick holes in my arguments.

        What he may have meant to say was that Churchill was less opinionated on threats from SOME immigrants than am I. He clearly doesn’t know his Churchill. He wrote River Wars in which he stressed the Dangers of Mohammedanism.

        ‘How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its *votaries! – The River War, first edition, Vol. II by Winston Churchill’



        “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
        Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property (either as a child, a wife, or a concubine) must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science (the science against which it had vainly struggled) the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

        Winston Churchill said this 110 years ago. Rob would say that proves he was wrong. Well, maybe. As I said before, I don’t profess to KNOW everything. I leave that to such as Rob.


        December 14, 2010 at 11:08 pm

      • Ah, right. Because I dislike Tony Blair and his destruction of the Labour Party I’m a “fundamentalist”. You Yanks really do have trouble with the language sometimes. I look forward to hearing about how I “support anything Muslim without question”. No, on second thoughts don’t bother: that will be because I didn’t support Blair over Iraq, obviously.

        Those who vote for Wilders and the other Euronazis are perfectly clear on what they are supporting, and so are you. What Churchill wrecked was the threat to British values and lives from European fascism, a threat you choose not simply to ignore but to collaborate with.

        I have no problem with letting the EDL say whatever they want (or indeed Wilders, though I don’t see why we should let him come to Britain to say it, any more than we permit Muslim hate-spouters unrestricted entry). However, unlike your good self they don’t generally restrict themselves to spewing out verbal attacks but resort to violence and intimidation. Not very British but entirely consistent with their Mosleyite forebears.


        December 15, 2010 at 11:27 am

      • P.S. Ktbfpm didn’t ban me from his blog for “abusive language”. He banned me for calling him a liar when he claimed only to be against Muslim extremists and not against all Muslims. As he had just reprinted a post which claimed that all Muslims were cannibals who practiced human sacrifice, I asked him which moderate cannibals and non-extremist sacrificers he supported. Look on his blog, or indeed mine, if you want corroboration. I dare say I also referred to him as a racist on account of his relentless characterization of British Muslims as non-indigenous and “fundamentally” un-British. Churchill didn’t make that mistake.


        December 15, 2010 at 11:39 am

      • Btw, Rob I think the two characters named in the EDL article should be arrested and charged. They probably should have ben locked up years ago, and the key thrown away.

        The reason for this group’s rise is that none of the main parties are dealing with the issues. So others fall into the vacuum.

        I still think that they have right to be heard, though.


        December 14, 2010 at 10:58 pm

  16. A typical Rob comment, abusing his critics while completely ignoring the actual points made.

    Glad we can agree on his final observation though.


    December 13, 2010 at 3:47 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: