“Gang of men” violently attack lesbian couple on bus – IOTW Report

“Gang of men” violently attack lesbian couple on bus

Friday, 7 June 2019, 14:51 BFH Uncategorized 36

Take your bets on who the gang of men were.

London isn’t saying.

The couple, oddly, did not give a description of the assailants. That’s happening a lot in the last couple of decades.

Weird, huh?

ht/ dee

36 Comments on “Gang of men” violently attack lesbian couple on bus

  6. They didn’t deserve that. Even if they were flaunting their lifestyle, that barbaric attack pisses me off especially if it was some primitive scum from the usual pedigree.

    19

  7. Who might they likely be, lets see, do they have dark oily skin and hair, smell like camel dung, dress in long flowing nightshirts and have noses like a scarlet Macaw?

    17

  13. I am sure this was a bunch of Methodist likely white supremacist as well.

    Why is every one so afraid of the idiot Muslims?

    I got into it with the TSA a few weeks ago. Called over for a second check the guy ask how is my day. I could not help but tell him it was going fine until I encountered him. He puffed up and really went on about how important they were. Asked what my idea would be for security and I said none. He called me delusional and really started up. I held back as my wife was looking at me like I was going to get it. But the guy had no idea as to the number of Muslims on the plane and is hassling a guy who is 70 in bad health and he expects me to think he is securing the flight.

    20

  14. Why did they wait a week to report this, and why is there apparently no police record of the event occurring or being reported?
    Got a lot more “why”s”, but those two work for now.

    11

  15. What pisses me off is that by not describing their attackers more specifically, they are laying the blame at the feet of all men–chauvinistic, misogynistic, homophobic men. I really don’t think the majority of Western male Londoners care about what these two women do, so don’t blame them–blame the ones who attacked you.

    17

  18. Racer X: Exactly right. For fear of being accused of being islamaphobic for describing their attackers, instead they are OK with painting all of society as homophobic.

    13

  19. Did they assume those peoples gender? And if the attackers were men, why weren’t these two strong, equal women able to defend themselves more adequately. Women are the stronger, superior gender, aren’t they?

    13

  20. It’s the same pattern when hood rats attack. The press will report the assault but they’ll never report the color of the perps. Usually it’s not difficult to divine the origins when the names are posted.

    7

  21. We’re well down the path for excusing such behavior as “cultural”.

    Well then, guess I need to start whipping the uppity darkies, puttin’ my fist in the face of mouthy women, and lying about drunk at midday. After all, that is the culture most yankees say I belong to as a native of the South.

    Or is my “culture” somehow inferior to that of people who would behave as these men did? Who makes that call? What standards are applied when placing context onto ‘cultural’ acts?

    I think the sheep are far nearer the shearing shed than they imagine. And I have no sympathy.

    8

  25. @gin blossom June 7, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    > They didn’t deserve that. Even if they were flaunting their lifestyle, that barbaric attack pisses me off

    Cucks gonna cuck.
    (I know: You do it for love.)

    1

  26. “I think the sheep are far nearer the shearing shed than they imagine. And I have no sympathy.” -Lowell

    But it would be nice if the attackers were IN the shearing shed. You know, getting their heads shaved clean off.

    3

  27. I wonder if they’d agree with John Cleese that London is no longer an English city. Probably not. In fact, they’ll probably go biking through Pakistan next month, just to own the islamophobes.

    5

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.