Click here for Arsenal FC news and reports

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42

Thread: Violent crime soaring. Still, at least the police have their priorities right and are

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    How do we propose policing woman-only carriages? And what of the transgenders? Would possession of a functioning ***** and testicles preclude you from taking your place on a woman-only carriage?

    It's a minefield, p.
    Not our problem is it. Happy for all sorts of benders and weirdos to join the women. Make it their problem.

    I would go further though and give them the entire train. I'll get the next one with a bunch of geezers who just pile on, shut the **** up and then get off.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter View Post
    The two examples given were manspreading (sounded pretty bloody innocent to me) and rubbing up against the woman while standing in a packed tube. Again, the woman herself couldn't work out whether it was accidental or not. The persistent movement, not always in time with the movement of the train, convinced her.

    No word on whether they were muslims but then you cant say that these days, can you.

    The Police are obviously taking the whole thing extremely seriously whilst accepting they cant really do anything.

    So, female only carriages is the only way forward. I'm in favour. Women get on my ****ing nerves and I would love to not have to deal with them.
    Hang on, I was totally joking when I mentioned manspreading. Are you serious?

    I doubt very much the fella rubbing himself off on the woman was Muslim. Muslims tend to be far more brazen when it comes to sexual assault and are more likely to opt for the "find a working class white girl and use them as your sex slave" approach.

    Of course, any Muslim who does such a thing is adopting an utterly warped interpretation of the religion of peace, which as we know says absolutely nothing to endorse taking women as sex slaves.


    Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" This is one of several personal-sounding verses "from Allah" narrated by Muhammad - in this case allowing a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Other Muslims are restricted to four wives, but they may also have sex with any number of slaves, following the example of their prophet.
    Quran (23:5-6) - "..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. See also Quran (70:29-30). The Quran is a small book, so if Allah used valuable space to repeat the same point four times, sex slavery must be very important to him. He was relatively reticent on matters of human compassion and love.

    Quran (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.

    Quran (8:69) - "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."

    Quran (24:32) - "And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..." Breeding slaves based on fitness.

    Quran (2:178) - "O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans are not created equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman's worth is also distinguished from that of a man).

    Quran (16:75) - "Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means praise be to Allah.' Yet another confirmation that the slave is is not equal to the master. In this case, it is plain that the slave owes his status to Allah's will. (According to 16:71, the owner should be careful about insulting Allah by bestowing Allah's gifts on slaves - those whom the god of Islam has not favored).

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post
    Hang on, I was totally joking when I mentioned manspreading. Are you serious?

    I doubt very much the fella rubbing himself off on the woman was Muslim. Muslims tend to be far more brazen when it comes to sexual assault and are more likely to opt for the "find a working class white girl and use them as your sex slave" approach.

    Of course, any Muslim who does such a thing is adopting an utterly warped interpretation of the religion of peace, which as we know says absolutely nothing to endorse taking women as sex slaves.


    Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" This is one of several personal-sounding verses "from Allah" narrated by Muhammad - in this case allowing a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Other Muslims are restricted to four wives, but they may also have sex with any number of slaves, following the example of their prophet.
    Quran (23:5-6) - "..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. See also Quran (70:29-30). The Quran is a small book, so if Allah used valuable space to repeat the same point four times, sex slavery must be very important to him. He was relatively reticent on matters of human compassion and love.

    Quran (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.

    Quran (8:69) - "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."

    Quran (24:32) - "And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..." Breeding slaves based on fitness.

    Quran (2:178) - "O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans are not created equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman's worth is also distinguished from that of a man).

    Quran (16:75) - "Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means praise be to Allah.' Yet another confirmation that the slave is is not equal to the master. In this case, it is plain that the slave owes his status to Allah's will. (According to 16:71, the owner should be careful about insulting Allah by bestowing Allah's gifts on slaves - those whom the god of Islam has not favored).
    She said that the man sat next to her and his legs were touching hers. She moved her legs and he spread his legs further so they were still touching. She made eye contact with the man sat across from her but he did nothing. At no point did she suggest that the guy did anything other than rest his legs against hers.

    Sounds like he was being a bit selfish with the space but...sexual assault? I'm thinking not guilty.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter View Post
    She said that the man sat next to her and his legs were touching hers. She moved her legs and he spread his legs further so they were still touching. She made eye contact with the man sat across from her but he did nothing. At no point did she suggest that the guy did anything other than rest his legs against hers.

    Sounds like he was being a bit selfish with the space but...sexual assault? I'm thinking not guilty.
    Yup. Unless he whipped it out at the same time, it's a no from me.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter View Post
    Sounds like he was being a bit selfish with the space but...sexual assault? I'm thinking not guilty.
    Manspreading is a pesky nuisance though. The bloke who sits next to me at the ground does it. I have to keep gently bashing his knee with mine to get him to retreat back into his own territory. I can see how a woman might interpret it in a certain way.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    Manspreading is a pesky nuisance though. The bloke who sits next to me at the ground does it. I have to keep gently bashing his knee with mine to get him to retreat back into his own territory. I can see how a woman might interpret it in a certain way.
    There is a fair old gap between nuisance and sexual assault.

    I have a similar challenge on long haul flights. If I am sat next to a geezer of reasonable height then you just have to accept that your legs are going to touch every now and then and be ok with it.

    Most often I am sat next to a Muslim woman whose husband takes a look at me and briefly wonders whether he would rather let his wife sit next to a western infidel or move there himself, thus surrendering his aisle seat. I have never yet seen a husband move

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter View Post
    There is a fair old gap between nuisance and sexual assault.

    I have a similar challenge on long haul flights. If I am sat next to a geezer of reasonable height then you just have to accept that your legs are going to touch every now and then and be ok with it.

    Most often I am sat next to a Muslim woman whose husband takes a look at me and briefly wonders whether he would rather let his wife sit next to a western infidel or move there himself, thus surrendering his aisle seat. I have never yet seen a husband move
    bag13n-1-web.jpg

    Religion

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Ash View Post
    Manspreading is a pesky nuisance though. The bloke who sits next to me at the ground does it. I have to keep gently bashing his knee with mine to get him to retreat back into his own territory. I can see how a woman might interpret it in a certain way.
    Oh, I'm expert at dealing with this on aeroplanes. If a chap's trying to spread out, you make sure you put your limbs where they are actually touching his (ideally skin-on-skin). If you're determined enough, he will usually back down first because he's uncomfortable touching another man for that long.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Monty92 View Post


    what if the bloke next to it needs a piss? You cant have a bag of recycling shuffling round the plane

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    Oh, I'm expert at dealing with this on aeroplanes. If a chap's trying to spread out, you make sure you put your limbs where they are actually touching his (ideally skin-on-skin). If you're determined enough, he will usually back down first because he's uncomfortable touching another man for that long.
    What about the **** in front who stretches his arms over his headrest, obscuring your TV?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •