I noticed you dodged my question regarding the 66% Muslim's whom would not report one of their peers for planning or committing an act of terror. Do you not find this troubling?
Ok I read the article, no indication of who conducted the poll or what the questions were etc. On the surface the results sound troubling but more detail is needed IMO.
Also I found the Richard Clarke interview I mentioned earlier.
quote
COOPER: With threat levels and security being tightened in Great Britain and here at home in the wake of Manchester bombing, we want to take a deeper look in what the men and women in charge of keeping us all safe have on their plates right now and the steps they're taking.
Joining us now is someone who once had that responsibility, Richard Clarke, who is the former National Coordinator for Security and Counter-terrorism who famously warned the Bush administration by an Al-Qaeda attack before 9/11. He's the author of a number of incredible books, including, " Warnings: Finding Cassandras to Stop Catastrophes." Thanks very much for being with us.
RICHARD CLARKE, FORMER NATIONAL COORDINATOR FOR SECURITY AND COUNTER- TERRORISM: Great to be here.
COOPER: When you see this attack, I mean, there was security at this arena. They couldn't get a device in. And yet, as we were discussing before we went on air, outside of any secure environment there's people waiting, cueing to get in or grouping as they come out.
CLARKE: No matter what you do at a big venue where there's going to be a crowd, no matter how secure the access is, there's going to be a crowd outside waiting to get in. That's true at airports where people line up at the counters before they go through TSA, into the secure zone. It's true at sporting events. You can do some things in that perimeter area, but you can never make it as secure as inside a hard target. In short, you can't make security perfect.
COOPER: When you hear -- you know, as the details emerge about who this person was who carries this device to that location, you know, born and bred in a second generation. You know, his parents, I guess came from Libya. He traveled there. We don't know. Did he have contact there? But, I just feel like we hear this time and time again of people, you know, who were born in England, born in Belgium, born in Paris and yet --
CLARKE: That's the pattern. These are -- the people who become terrorists in Europe are not refugees. They're not people who have been born in the Middle East and come here. They are people who are disaffected citizens of their own country, the country of their birth.
In Europe they live in Islamic ghettoes. It's not a homogeneous society and they are discriminated against and they just made excuse what they did. So we have to think about, what are the root causes? What causes a kid to move from being sort of radicalized to being willing to give up his life and kill children? What motivates him? Part of it is this crazy ideology. But part of it is a sense of victimization, too.
You know, the president the other day said we have to drive terrorist out, drive them out, he said three times. Well, you know, it's not that easy. If it were that easy, we would have done it. We have to deal not just with police tactics and intelligence tactics, but we have to get at the root causes.
[21:20:08] COOPER: It does seem like a lot of -- you know, the president referred to this person as a loser earlier today. And often when you look at the pattern of their life, they are petty there. There are criminals who haven't done anything. They dabble in drugs. They, you know --
CLARKE: And were not particularly religious until --
COOPER: Well, of course, right.
CLARKE: -- until just before they do the attack.
COOPER: Yes.
CLARKE: They have this conversion to being highly religious or what they think is religious, and then they'll do the attack.
COOPER: It seems like it almost gives their meaningless life some sort of -- they're no longer just some petty criminal, they're a terrorist. They're, you know -- CLARKE: Well, they're a martyr.
COOPER: A martyr, yes.
CLARKE: Yeah. That's exactly what's going on. And so if societies can offer people an alternative pathway, employment perhaps, meaningful life, education, a chance to move up, you're not going to see as much of this. And that's the problem in Germany. It's the problem in France. It's the problem in the United Kingdom. Thankfully, it's not the problem here.
COOPER: The -- as ISIS loses on the battlefield and obviously they still have strongholds in Syria and Raqqa. But is there -- it seems like they are encouraging people not to come anymore, but to stay where they are and do what they can. Grab a car. Grab a knife, do what you can.
CLARKE: For the last two years, that's been their message. Stay at home. It's too dangerous to probably come here. If you're not already here, don't come, but you can get a truck and you can drive into a crowd.
And so you see in the United States, for example, I was at the Boston marathon this year checking at security. All along the route, big, big trucks blocking all the side streets, out of fear that someone would just go and get a truck and drive it into the marathon.
COOPER: Can you compare Al-Qaeda to ISIS?
CLARKE: ISIS is much more effective.
COOPER: ISIS is more effective?
CLARKE: Much more.
COOPER: More effective in getting people and reaching out to people?
CLARKE: First of all, in recruitment. Many, many thousands more people have been in ISIS than ever were in Al-Qaeda. Now, many of them have been killed. A very large number of them have been killed in Iraq and Syria. But they recruited a very large army. They occupied cities in Libya, in Iraq, and in Syria. Al-Qaeda never occupied a city. This is -- if you think of ISIS or Daesh as the others (ph) called them, it's kind of Al-Qaeda 2.0.
COOPER: And their ability to connect with individuals in the United States --
CLARKE: Far more advanced.
COOPER: Far more -- it is far more advanced.
CLARKE: Far more advanced use of the internet to micro target individuals, coach them, bring them along, and then activate them.
COOPER: Richard Clarke, I appreciate it very much. Thank you so much.
CLARKE: Thank you.
COOPER: It is heartbreaking to think about the families tonight whose kids never came home from that concert. More on those who lost their lives ahead.
If only more "normals" would get angry. It is the first step to fighting back.
The West must stop accepting radical Islam.
Those terrorists are our enemy and there is only one appropriate reaction to the kind of people who strap on bomb vests packed with nails and blow up a bunch of kids. Retribution upon the Islamic state.
Of course, that's not going to happen. The enemy doesn’t fear us. They laugh at us and they should, because we are ridiculous.
We are fools who think that with just a little more submission they will accept us as friends.
We are fools whose response to spilled blood is flowers, cards, Facebook posts and tweets.
We are fools for not having a fraction of the faith in ourselves that the terrorists have in themselves. They blow themselves to smithereens for their cause while we shop at Walmart and fret about Katy Perry's latest love interest.
We are fools for inviting them into our countries, sacrificing our own values so they can remain what they always have been, 7th century savages and we do it on our dime.
You know, we elected a president who wants to slow down the refugee surge so we have a chance to figure out who the hell they are and the Liberal elite went to court and used sanctimonious legal reasoning to ensure that our people are kept defenseless.
Why did the Libs do this?
So they can feel good about themselves. Which means that "Normals" are dying due to narcissism.
The answer to this madness is not fake solidarity, social media memes and sacrificing a few little girls here and there. The answer is to destroy the enemy, to take up arms and crush them and scare the survivors so that their descendants talk in awe about the vengeance of Western Civilization for ten generations.
Or not.....oh look, it's the hockey playoffs.
I know it's hard to actually look at facts and easy to place blame but.....Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, the west have been helping destroy the Islamic State since it's inception, the fact that people go on about their daily lives while remaining vigilant is exactly why terrorists don't succeed. And yes you elected which many claim have their ideals at heart, in fact he said he knew how to solve and destroy ISIS because he knew better than the generals and that they would be gone within a 100 days. How's that working out??? Oh yeah he won't even say Radical Islamic Terrorists anymore, and apparently recently got his nose whacked by a rolled up newspaper about his tweeting, info leaking, and saying Islamic instead of Islamist.
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-25-2017).]
I know it's hard to actually look at facts and easy to place blame but.....Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, the west have been helping destroy the Islamic State since it's inception, the fact that people go on about their daily lives while remaining vigilant is exactly why terrorists don't succeed. And yes you elected which many claim have their ideals at heart, in fact he said he knew how to solve and destroy ISIS because he knew better than the generals and that they would be gone within a 100 days. How's that working out??? Oh yeah he won't even say Radical Islamic Terrorists anymore, and apparently recently got his nose whacked by a rolled up newspaper about his tweeting, info leaking, and saying Islamic instead of Islamist.
Ya know, there isn't a damn thing I or we can do about past issues. Won't argue about who did what.
But, generally the human species responds to both positive and negative influences. It's pretty apparent that positive actions aren't accomplishing squat. Again, I ask for your ideas on how to solve this quandary.
Very few of these terrorists are not members of some network, people know of these networks and who is involved. Take them all out. Those who know but don't speak up are not your or my friends. You should recognize that.
Edited: OK, I've procrastinated long enough, time to get on the road. I've got places to go, people to meet and vehicles to transport. Be safe out there. It's a proven fact there are people out there who do not wish you well. ------------------ Ron
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun.... Open your frigg'n minds, think about all the other tools that can be made into WMDs.
I sincerely hope that life is never discovered on another planet because, sure as hell Progressives and Socialists will want to send them money.
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-25-2017).]
I know it's hard to actually look at facts and easy to place blame but.....Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, the west have been helping destroy the Islamic State since it's inception, the fact that people go on about their daily lives while remaining vigilant is exactly why terrorists don't succeed. And yes you elected which many claim have their ideals at heart, in fact he said he knew how to solve and destroy ISIS because he knew better than the generals and that they would be gone within a 100 days. How's that working out??? Oh yeah he won't even say Radical Islamic Terrorists anymore, and apparently recently got his nose whacked by a rolled up newspaper about his tweeting, info leaking, and saying Islamic instead of Islamist.
What the heck are you talking about? Are you paying ANY attention?
The West isn't helping to destroy the Islamic state. If we wanted to ACTUALLY destroy these 7th century savages they'd be destroyed. Instead we nibble about the edges and "contain" them.
As for home grown terrorists that is just more Liberal BS. Included in this particular stinking pile are the terms "lone wolf", "home grown" and "self radicalized".
"Lone wolf” suggest that terrorists are unconnected individuals hatching similar plans simply by happenstance. In actuality every jihadist is part of a network strung together by the web of hate and lunacy that is Islamism.
"Home-grown” is a description designed to disguise the connection between ALL jihadists and the Middle Eastern countries that spawn them. A terrorist born and raised in the country he attacks did not absorb motivations from the culture of his European or American roots. It all traces back to Mideast Islamism. It's also pretty darn stupid to allow MORE of them into our country to keep fanning the flames.
“Self-radicalized,” is a false depiction of terrorists as spontaneously combusting with visions of innocent victims to kill, requiring no external inspiration. This is a fraudulent attempt to conceal where radicalization comes from: Islamism.
And lastly, as for Mr. Trump not getting everything done in the first 100 days, it's pretty funny that the left criticizes him for not accomplishing all his promises while shouting "Resist" from the roof tops.
As usual, you want your cake and eat it too. Uh, actually, you want MY cake and eat it too.
Originally posted by RayOtton:As usual, you want your cake and eat it too. Uh, actually, you want MY cake and eat it too.
Whoa.................... You've got cake?
------------------ Ron
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun.... Open your frigg'n minds, think about all the other tools that can be made into WMDs.
I sincerely hope that life is never discovered on another planet because, sure as hell Progressives and Socialists will want to send them money.
I know it's hard to actually look at facts and easy to place blame but.....Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, the west have been helping destroy the Islamic State since it's inception, the fact that people go on about their daily lives while remaining vigilant is exactly why terrorists don't succeed. And yes you elected which many claim have their ideals at heart, in fact he said he knew how to solve and destroy ISIS because he knew better than the generals and that they would be gone within a 100 days. How's that working out??? Oh yeah he won't even say Radical Islamic Terrorists anymore, and apparently recently got his nose whacked by a rolled up newspaper about his tweeting, info leaking, and saying Islamic instead of Islamist.
oh boy, and how did they get to the terrorist islam mode.. hint, from other muslums that have come to these countries.. Why is it that they didn't try to kill until after they change to islam..
If only more "normals" would get angry. It is the first step to fighting back.
...
Of course, that's not going to happen. The enemy doesn’t fear us. They laugh at us and they should, because we are ridiculous.
...
Or not.....oh look, it's the hockey playoffs.
I have told of this since forever. I know, hate speech and all, but I have sat at tables with "peaceful muslims". So many of you have only viewed what you thought may have been muslims or perhaps worked with a muslim once. Yeah, your inexperience does not matter.
Back to that table... Business owning muslims. The kind that those around envy. Not the movie kind, but real life gangsters. The movers and shakers of Dearborn. Basically, the mother ****ers that are running the operations. So many of you cannot say this. So many of you have no real understanding of the mind of a cave dwelling being. Yes, times have changed, but they have not.
Originally posted by newf: Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, ...
All of the latest terrorists, are immigrants from other countries, either first or second generation. Lack of self assimilation or invasion ?
quote
Originally posted by newf: ... the west have been helping destroy the Islamic State since it's inception, ...
History much ? It doesn't look like it. Did you ever hear about the Crusades ? That was what ? ... 300 years ago ?
Stupid much ? Which 'Good Book' preaches destroying infidels, even if they are Muslim ?
The Crusades were about Christians finally being intolerant of being slaughtered, and being subjected to a faith that they have no faith in.
Co-ink-e dinky, It happened in Europe.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
quote
Originally posted by newf: ... the fact that people go on about their daily lives while remaining vigilant is exactly why terrorists don't succeed.
Blame the victim. The ones who do not remain vigilant. I am glad I don't have to lock my doors. I am going to say that again !
I am glad I don't have to lock my doors. Many times the keys to my vehicles are, in the ignition. Sheds open, maybe dummy locked. I think about self vigilance.
Tell me "Mr. NEWF" ? How would you suggest those targeted young girls could have been more vigilant ?
Elections have been postponed.
Parents are worrying about their kids going anywhere.
Think newf, think. Are the terrorists winning ? When will you crusade ?
Admit it. You were drunk when you posted.
quote
Originally posted by newf: And yes you elected which many claim have their ideals at heart, in fact he said he knew how to solve and destroy ISIS because he knew better than the generals and that they would be gone within a 100 days. How's that working out???
Ye' of faint heart, it is working out well. How many days has it been ? What has Drumph done ?
I am glad you asked !
He was Royally received by the King of Sadia Arabia. An honor Nobama never received.
Drumph was the keynote speaker at a hosted venue of 50+ Muslim leaders. Who are worried about muslim Iran. More too the point, Iran being the Muslim left. Domination.
Do you ever pay attention newf ? Can you google newf ?
quote
Originally posted by newf: Oh yeah he won't even say Radical Islamic Terrorists anymore, and apparently recently got his nose whacked by a rolled up newspaper about his tweeting, info leaking, and saying Islamic instead of Islamist.
baa haa hah. Go cry in your own pudding.
[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 05-25-2017).]
When one is so dislocated from reality, both mentally and physically, a Newf is born.
One, you are not exactly fluent in muslim. Actually, I wonder if you have any muslims where you live? I just cannot imagine a large muslim populace there, but I may be wrong.
Two, your knowledge of islam is through either reading, or viewing only. I cannot believe otherwise.
Sorry, but it is not productive to learn from you. You are not a teacher. You are still a student, and you know this.
Originally posted by newf: I know it's hard to actually look at facts and easy to place blame but.....Many of the latest terrorist have been born in the country they have attacked, ...
Many is debatable. Actually suspect.
First, dig deep, I don't want no zhit. Why did they attack their own country ?
Dig deep. Why did they attack a country they wanted to go to ? Why do they insist on bringing with them the same values they fled, ?
Ok I read the article, no indication of who conducted the poll or what the questions were etc. On the surface the results sound troubling but more detail is needed IMO.
Thank you for posting the Richard Clarke interview. Will read through on my lunch break. The poll was conducted by ICM research for Channel 4 News. A full list of the questions can be found here:
"ICM Unlimited interviewed a random sample of 1,081 adults aged 18+ who self-identified themselves as belonging to the Muslim faith. Interviews were carried out face-to-face, in-home, in geographical areas in which minimum Muslims incidence was confirmed by Census to be a minimum of 20%. Interviews took place between 25th April and 31st May 2015 and the data has been weighted to representative of all Muslims by age, gender, work status and region.
A nationally representative control sample of 1,008 adults aged 18+ was also conducted, by telephone, between 5th-7th June 2015. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
If, you knew that a terrorist was from your home town and the price for his terrorism was the destruction of the town unannounced, there might just be more folks reporting terrorist suspects. I'll admit, I'm still looking for a better way but, the fact stands that it is impossible to stop a dedicated person from killing/dying for his/her beliefs. So, is it worth it to take all your family and friends with you? Only the terrorist can make that decision.
Almost agree, but i believe we should warn the town in advance. Drop flyers like we did with hiroshima and nagasaki.
WW2 was a "regular" war with regular armies. What we are fighting now is a guerilla war where the enemy is hiding in plain sight amongst the population.
Dropping leaflets would only make them evavuate at the same time the populace did and we end up bombing empty real estate getting no closer to beating them.
Screw the colatoral damage, in fact inflict enough of it and they might smarten up on their own. (Yeh, not likely but there IS a slim chance)
I still think wiping Mecca off the planet would have the effect of demoralizing and splintering them to the point they just disintergrate on their own.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 05-25-2017).]
WW2 was a "regular" war with regular armies. What we are fighting now is a guerilla war where the enemy is hiding in plain sight amongst the population.
Dropping leaflets would only make them evavuate at the same time the populace did and we end up bombing empty real estate getting no closer to beating them.
Screw the colatoral damage, in fact inflict enough of it and they might smarten up on their own. (Yeh, not likely but there IS a slim chance)
I still think wiping Mecca off the planet would have the effect of demoralizing and splintering them to the point they just disintergrate on their own.
I understand they would be vacant, but sooner or later the countries would glow in the dark.
Dropping leaflets have proven that those that can get out do. Those without the means to get out do not. Those that do not know of the leaflets also do not get out.
We are a First World Nation. Our access to information and ability to travel is nothing like many of the countries housing terrorists. You cannot think like us, and fight them.
When was the last time islam sent out a pre bomb warning?
Thank you for posting the Richard Clarke interview. Will read through on my lunch break. The poll was conducted by ICM research for Channel 4 News. A full list of the questions can be found here:
"ICM Unlimited interviewed a random sample of 1,081 adults aged 18+ who self-identified themselves as belonging to the Muslim faith. Interviews were carried out face-to-face, in-home, in geographical areas in which minimum Muslims incidence was confirmed by Census to be a minimum of 20%. Interviews took place between 25th April and 31st May 2015 and the data has been weighted to representative of all Muslims by age, gender, work status and region.
A nationally representative control sample of 1,008 adults aged 18+ was also conducted, by telephone, between 5th-7th June 2015. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
Ye' of faint heart, it is working out well. How many days has it been ? What has Drumph done ?
I am glad you asked !
He was Royally received by the King of Sadia Arabia. An honor Nobama never received.
Drumph was the keynote speaker at a hosted venue of 50+ Muslim leaders. Who are worried about muslim Iran. More too the point, Iran being the Muslim left. Domination.
Do you ever pay attention newf ? Can you google newf ?
Ok this is rich.
So the Saudi's are the "good" Muslims are they, The Wahhabists? And you ask me if I pay attention or Google.
I've rarely seen people contradict themselves more than I have on here lately. You must have yourself twisted in knots, seriously man how far is your head up your own ass?
As for Crusading, no thanks that's you and your fellow haters agenda....Kill them all etc etc. if you believe it so much get off your asses and do something instead of sitting behind a keyboard whining and bitching about it all the time. Do you guys at least talk your hate when it the company of Muslims or other minorities??
If, you knew that a terrorist was from your home town and the price for his terrorism was the destruction of the town unannounced, there might just be more folks reporting terrorist suspects. I'll admit, I'm still looking for a better way but, the fact stands that it is impossible to stop a dedicated person from killing/dying for his/her beliefs. So, is it worth it to take all your family and friends with you? Only the terrorist can make that decision.
History has shown, that no matter what the affiliation or 'cause' is, (political, religious or otherwise) there is little evidence to support your hypothesis. London 1940-41, during the Blitz never considered surrender. Even after the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped, the Japanese people were still determined to continue on, even if it mean the complete destruction of their homeland and all their cities. It was only when Emperor Hirohito was consulted that a decision to surrender was accepted by the people of Japan, and even then, begrudgingly. There was mass and open mourning by the people of Japan that the surrender terms had been accepted. They had already accepted the eventuality of destruction and we fine with that eventuality as long as they had the opportunity to die for their cause (and Emperor.)
Germany was a defeated nation long before the Russian and other allied tanks rolled into Berlin. People may have been tired of war, but even after the realization they would most likely die and lose, they were still going to fight on to the end and did.
The carrot instead of the whip, known as Pacification/winning "Hearts and minds" strategy adopted in Vietnam in the very late 60s-early 70s was a debacle of a failure. Even if it meant the destruction of their homes and becoming dead or refugees, few people outed the NVA, and thousands of civilians in S. Vietnam knew of enemy movements and troop strength.
The IDF's retaliatory strikes against Gaza and West bank rocketeers, 10-100 fold over what they may have received is well known. Still, very little advance warning or outing of neighbors takes place. The populace will watch their entire towns of homes bulldozed before they say a word.
In war, there is a certain finality that sets in. 'We may lose, we and our families killed, our country in ruins, but the greater goal will transcend that'. And of course, even with death and destruction all around, there is always the "well, maybe 'MY' family won't be casualties--maybe the bomb won't hit "OUR" house" syndrome.
America may be different, but I don't think so. By far, the greatest majority of us will choose to see our cities and families perish before we allow the nation and it's ideology is destroyed. I never really met a single person in the 50s or 60s that believed in the "Better red than dead" ideology.
A town or large city may be reduced to ashes, but there's always another population center down the road with just as much resolve, no matter what the esoteric ideology or religious belief, or political goal is. People will fight to the very end, regardless of the personal sacrifices they may endure, even for a cause already lost. It's simply human nature.
I do not know what the answer is, but trying to bomb anyone into submission has not had a very good history of success, especially if it involves collateral damage..
...Do you guys at least talk your hate when it the company of Muslims or other minorities??
Oh, rich indeed...
Do you think that I have not while growing up several blocks east of Dearborn, MI? I mean, can you even ask that question to me with a straight face? Again, you really have no clue? None at all how it really works. I will continue this for several more rounds, but at some point you may become an untrainable dog.
And, for what it is worth, I will most defiantly speak up against criminals of any race color or creed. Where is your valor? I have never read of an accolade of yours Newf? Only your dislike for all things republican. I have asked for even one thread of joy from you, and like dobey, we only get flack. Misfired, misdirectional, and misquoted flack?
Republicans are repairable.
Democrats are pool noodles only to be discarded after the smell.
Do you think that I have not while growing up several blocks east of Dearborn, MI? I mean, can you even ask that question to me with a straight face? Again, you really have no clue? None at all how it really works. I will continue this for several more rounds, but at some point you may become an untrainable dog.
And, for what it is worth, I will most defiantly speak up against criminals of any race color or creed. Where is your valor? I have never read of an accolade of yours Newf? Only your dislike for all things republican. I have asked for even one thread of joy from you, and like dobey, we only get flack. Misfired, misdirectional, and misquoted flack?
Republicans are repairable.
Democrats are pool noodles only to be discarded after the smell.
Yeah I don't feel the need to tout accolades or accomplishments on the internet, I'll let others regale us, to each their own. Nor do I feel a need to post a thread of joy (whatever that entails), I'm in a good place, in fact I'm often amazed by the bitching, whining, blaming and hating that other people do. I suspect that when some people are unhappy with certain aspects of their own life due to controllable or uncontrollable events they often like to fill themselves with hatred and fear of other things and that keeps them from looking at where the real issues in their lives reside. I also find that when surrounded by negative people that it's easy to get caught up in complaining, disliking and getting easily annoyed at things. That's why I take this place with a grain of salt, and take breaks from it, the internet is full of whiney bitches and unhappy people who for some reason like to drag people down with them. Misery loves company I suppose.
AS for me disliking Republicans, nope. A persons politics is secondary to my liking or disliking someone.
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-25-2017).]
You do not get to demand anything from any other members, little tonya. You want a thread of joy? Then start one. The onus is on you, not us. You are the one starting the threads of hate. You are the one spreading the hate. Unfortunately, you seem to only take joy in the suffering of others, so I'm sure any thread you start will be based on that base instinct.
Take up your own initiative you cowardly little criminal loving hatemonger. Quick to convict the brown skinned man, who has merely been accused, but when one of your fellow whitey righty troupe is accused of something, you're quick to defend and claim it as only lies and allegations, with no conviction. And you are consistently unable to take the personal responsibility you so claim to be a fan of, for your own actions and words. Your joyous response supporting a violent reaction to a reporter asking questions is indeed your supporting violence against those you would disagree with. Your threat of punching someone in the nose for stating you are a racist, is yet more proof of your support for unprovoked violence.
You do not get to demand anything from any other members, little tonya. You want a thread of joy? Then start one. The onus is on you, not us. You are the one starting the threads of hate. You are the one spreading the hate. Unfortunately, you seem to only take joy in the suffering of others, so I'm sure any thread you start will be based on that base instinct.
Take up your own initiative you cowardly little criminal loving hatemonger. Quick to convict the brown skinned man, who has merely been accused, but when one of your fellow whitey righty troupe is accused of something, you're quick to defend and claim it as only lies and allegations, with no conviction. And you are consistently unable to take the personal responsibility you so claim to be a fan of, for your own actions and words. Your joyous response supporting a violent reaction to a reporter asking questions is indeed your supporting violence against those you would disagree with. Your threat of punching someone in the nose for stating you are a racist, is yet more proof of your support for unprovoked violence.
I have to chuckle at this repose Rodney. Really nothing more to hit upon.
This is how islam greeted the citizens of Manchester and the World this morning...
The Burka of Love...
Thanks for sharing that clip of British Muslims supporting the city of Manchester and grieving the loss of the recent victims of hate.
Did you bother to listen to what they said or did you just misinterpret the meaning of that one ladies shirt and post it thinking you made some kind of point against Muslims?
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 05-25-2017).]
Thanks for sharing that clip of British Muslims supporting the city of Manchester and grieving the loss of the recent victims of hate.
Did you bother to listen to what they said or did you just misinterpret the meaning of that one ladies shirt and post it thinking you made some kind of point against MusArabic
I watched the clip in it's entirety. How much Arabic can you speak Newf?
Thank you for posting the Richard Clarke interview. Will read through on my lunch break. The poll was conducted by ICM research for Channel 4 News. A full list of the questions can be found here:
"ICM Unlimited interviewed a random sample of 1,081 adults aged 18+ who self-identified themselves as belonging to the Muslim faith. Interviews were carried out face-to-face, in-home, in geographical areas in which minimum Muslims incidence was confirmed by Census to be a minimum of 20%. Interviews took place between 25th April and 31st May 2015 and the data has been weighted to representative of all Muslims by age, gender, work status and region.
A nationally representative control sample of 1,008 adults aged 18+ was also conducted, by telephone, between 5th-7th June 2015. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
OK so it seems you may have misrepresented the poll.
This is what you said the question was.
quote
So Newf says we shouldn't hold the average Muslim responsible for the actions of the "radicals", yet 66% of British Muslims say that they would not give the police any terror related tip offs. With the British Muslim population at 2,900,000, this means that 1,914,000 Muslims would have protected the coward responsible for yesterdays attack. This is beyond defensible, and shows the peaceful majority garbage spouted by the left to be utter garbage.
Here's what the actual question was.
quote
Q: If you thought that someone who is close to you was getting involved with people who support terrorism in Syria, would you report it to the police?
34% would inform the police if they thought somebody they knew was getting involved with people who support terrorism in Syria.
Now what did they mean by getting involved with people who support terrorism in Syria, did they mean support ISIS? Did they mean support whomever was fighting against Bashar Al-Assad?
Also when asked the questions like:
quote
Q: Please tell me tell me whether you sympathise or condemn people who take part in suicide bombing to fight injustice?
Q: To what extent do you sympathise or condemn with people who commit terrorist acts as a form of political protest?
How many sympathized with these? I notice you didn't include those numbers!
So the Saudi's are the "good" Muslims are they, The Wahhabists? And you ask me if I pay attention or Google. ... seriously man how far is your head up your own ass?
My head is not as far up my ass as it used to be. I believe it is less up my ass than yours is up yours. I say that in jest.
Let me ask you a question. Who are the good Muslims ?
quote
Originally posted by newf: Do you guys at least talk your hate when it the company of Muslims or other minorities??
Do you drink beer ? C'mon down. I will take you to my friends homes, Mexican or Black, your choice. You can then judge their own 'hate' against "their own kind". I hang out with the 'good' Blacks and the 'good' Mexicans.
A whole 34% would inform the Police or authorities? Ok, that leaves 56% that don't give a **** about your life.
Britain ~ 2.71million muslims @ 34% = 921,400 friendly muslims that would call authorities and leave 1,788,600 unfriendly muslims.
Have you ever played poker? You throw that hand away every time. *That is an analogy.
There's so much wrong with this I'm not even sure where to start, looks like you have your spellcheck on at least.
Read through the thread it's already been covered, with the correct math. Duhhh
And yeah that m&m's analogy...
quote
Why is the poisonous M&Ms analogy flawed?
There are many reasons why the poisonous M&Ms analogy does not work. Here is a short survey of some of the more egregious flaws:
Little to no specificity: because the argument has essentially no specificity, we can revert the argument back to the group making it. If white supremacists use it to support their indefensible stereotype of African-Americans as criminals, we can apply it back to white supremacists. If conservatives make the argument against liberals, the argument can be sent back with the corresponding stereotype of conservatives. Here is how it would look when it is reverted back against white supremacists: “You say that I am overgeneralizing about white supremacists being criminals? Imagine a bowl of M&Ms. 10% of them are poisoned. Go ahead, eat a handful of them. After all, they are not all poisonous!” No white supremacist would accept that argument as reasonable, which means they cannot reasonably deploy it against ethnic minorities either.
Base rate neglect: a rational risk analysis must take base rates into account, not just the consequences. Even if the consequences of an event is large and negative, the probability of the event might be low. The “poisonous M&Ms analogy” does state a non-empirical base rate (10%), but it never figures in the risk evaluation because of the way the analogy is constructed. It tries to make the case that you should not eat M&Ms even if the base rate of getting a poisonous one is small. In fact, the analogy does not just neglect base rates, it ignores its relevance completely.
Assumes that “risk-free” is possible: the analogy also tries to exploit the human tendency to think that it is possible for an event to be risk-free. After all, the moral of the analogy is that even if there is a small risk of getting poisoned, it is reasonable to not take one. You only want to eat M&Ms if there is virtually no risk of getting poisoned, right? Most people would probably not eat one of the M&Ms even if there was a 1% or a 0.1% chance of being poisoned. In reality, any event such as walking across the street, traveling in a car or drinking a glass of water is not risk-free. However, proponents of this analogy would never argue that you should not drink water because of a small risk of choking.
Not poisonous to you: even if you happen to come across an individual from group X that fits with the stereotype does not mean that you are in danger. For instance, most crimes are committed by a small number of criminals and so most criminals commit very few crimes. Thus, even if the person of group X you come across happens to be a criminal, it does not automatically mean that you are in any particular danger. However, in the analogy, the poisonous M&Ms are obviously poisonous to humans in general.
Not a random sample: base rates apply to a random sample. Your friends, colleagues, dates or people you walk past in the night do not constitute a random sample from the underlying population. So even if we accept a given base rate (such as 10% in the analogy) does not mean that a given person of group X has a 10% probability of being a criminal. However, the analogy want us to believe that a given M&M has a 10% risk of being poisonous. In reality, a bowl of M&Ms usually come from the same bag or batch, so even that does not qualify as a random sample. So the argument essentially tries to compare two non-random samples and say the two situations are analogous.
Predictors exists: it is commonly believed that you cannot tell criminals apart from non-criminals. However, this is not true as there exists several predictors of criminal behavior: childhood maltreatment, failing school, poor moral reasoning and empathy, excessive alcohol and drug use, certain personality traits such as impulsivity and insensitivity as well as hanging out with criminals and extreme commitment to traditional masculinity (Bernard, Snipes and Gerould, 2010, p. 353). However, the analogy assumes that all M&Ms look the same whether or not they are poisonous or not. If there was a way to distinguish the two, it would not matter that a certain proportion are toxic as you could just not pick them.
Conclusions
The Poisonous M&Ms analogy is an irrational monstrosity as it can be deployed in an effort to dismiss any criticisms of flawed stereotypes. However, it has numerous flaws: it can be used against any group without specificity, it ignores base rates, it assumes that risk-free existence is possible, it fails to grasp the important of a random sample and promotes several false claims about criminology. In the end, the poisonous M&Ms analogy is just a dishonest tactic to whitewashing bigotry.
There's so much wrong with this I'm not even sure where to start, looks like you have your spellcheck on at least.
Read through the thread it's already been covered, with the correct math. Duhhh
And yeah that m&m's analogy...
So, you talk shat, I send you a PM, you puss out, continue to talk shat, and expect a different return on your investment?
This. Let us begin with this...
"There's so much wrong with this I'm not even sure where to start, look like you have spellcheck on at least."
Grammar? Punctuation? Like a child I ask, do you see anything wrong with the sentence that you wrote? Think before answering.
Or, how about you answer YOUR OWN STATEMENT. "Where to start?" I would start with YOUR critique of my writings. But, you go off in a tangent not even defending your very own statement? Liberal pussy.
[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 05-26-2017).]
?
None at all how it really works. I will continue this for several more rounds, but at some point you may become an untrainable dog. 
Really nothing more to hit upon. 
Ok, that leaves 56% that don't give a **** about your life. 
