International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   Visiting Morocco while being daft, naïve European girls (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334924)

applecorped 25th February 2019 04:16 AM

Can we all agree if they were wearing Maga hats this would have been totally justified?

Vixen 25th February 2019 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613341)
I think that Baylor's point is that if she'd been a racist, she would never have left Scandinavia to go anywhere in the rest of the world. She could then have stayed biassed and ignorant, and white supremacists wouldn't have tried to kill her.

It goes to show how out of touch with reality Baylor is. Truth is, nordics love their holidays in sunnier climes. The key motivation being sun.

dann 25th February 2019 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 12613342)
I passed the psychology exam. I can quote the names behind the theory.


Congratulations. But I am very well-read in this field as well. Being fully aware of the dangers of smoking and deciding to continue to smoke without being in denial about the facts is not cognitive (!) dissonance. It's not very clever, but it's not cognitive dissonance.

dann 25th February 2019 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 12613345)
It goes to show how out of touch with reality Baylor is. Truth is, nordics love their holidays in sunnier climes. The key motivation being sun.


I need to go to the Canaries and/or Cuba at least for times a year. I can live with the cold, but I just can't stand the darkness of November, December, January and February.
And I tend to have a bit of cognitive dissonance about jet fuel, CO2 and global warming! :)

Vixen 25th February 2019 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613347)
Congratulations. But I am very well-read in this field as well. Being fully aware of the dangers of smoking and deciding to continue to smoke without being in denial about the facts is not cognitive (!) dissonance. It's not very clever, but it's not cognitive dissonance.

Ah, but I didn't say that. I alluded to the level of psychological discomfort felt. Denial or justification are just a couple of the several ways people deal with cognitive dissonance. For example, not all smokers deny it causes cancer.

baron 25th February 2019 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613347)
Congratulations. But I am very well-read in this field as well. Being fully aware of the dangers of smoking and deciding to continue to smoke without being in denial about the facts is not cognitive (!) dissonance. It's not very clever, but it's not cognitive dissonance.

Actually, it is. It's a common example in the field.

Quote:

Let’s say a woman smokes cigarettes despite knowing it can lead to lung cancer. She continues to do it because she tells herself she needs the cigarettes to help her deal with anxiety. Or maybe she’ll say she doesn’t smoke nearly enough cigarettes for them to cause serious harm. In this example, she’s reducing the dissonance by convincing herself the behavior is okay in her mind.

dann 25th February 2019 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613352)
Actually, it is. It's a common example in the field.

Quote:

Let’s say a woman smokes cigarettes despite knowing it can lead to lung cancer. She continues to do it because she tells herself she needs the cigarettes to help her deal with anxiety. Or maybe she’ll say she doesn’t smoke nearly enough cigarettes for them to cause serious harm. In this example, she’s reducing the dissonance by convincing herself the behavior is okay in her mind.


Thank you for proving my point.

Thermal 25th February 2019 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613352)
Actually, it is. It's a common example in the field.

I thought the rationalizing was the coping mechanism for resolving the dissonance, rather than the dissonance itself?

Gilbert Syndrome 25th February 2019 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12610493)
I put less stock in that horrendous video. Even the "not racist" Danish person hasn't tried to defend whatever the hell that thing was. I'm still trying to make sense out of it. It's wonderful when a white man commits a drug crime because everyone expected a Muslim to get busted. What? That seems offensive to both Muslims and white people. The American equivalent would be a commercial where a white man gets busted for robbing a liquor store and it's wonderful that a woman watched it because she thought only black people rob liquor stores. Jaws would be on the floor if a commercial like that aired in America. My only explanation is this is the new religious craze in Scandinavia. If you want to make sense out of that train wreck, I'm all ears.

I'm the last person to jump aboard the PC Bandwagon and start yammering on about how we should love and accept radical Islamist hermits out in the mountains and apologize for even remotely upsetting them or their God, but my point is, basing anything on what people are saying in the comments section of news articles or Youtube videos is just pretty redundant, as they're mostly all illiterate, slightly retarded weirdos with nothing better to do. These are the same comment sections that bring us the flat-earthers, David Icke fans and all-round weirdly religious nutjobs of every faith imaginable.

All of this being said, I can't honestly blame an entire religion or its followers for the actions of a "few." Do I think Islam is a mess? Yep. Do I care what it's followers think? Nope. But then again, I also don't care what mental, Trump-loving, gun-toting Christians think, either.

Of course you're going to find some mental hermits willing to murder two white European girls up in the Moroccan mountains like some degenerate Hills Have Eyes savages, that shouldn't be surprising, much as it's not surprising if you get mugged walking through an inner-city park at night.

None of this proves or means anything unless you already have a narrative that you're supporting.

These two girls, unfortunately, were way too naive, and that's what it comes down to here for me. If you think it means see, I told ya all Muslims are killers, well that's no less naive than thinking you can go wandering about in the mountains of a foreign country and not come to harm. Over the last several years, there's been a few reports of backpackers being killed in many countries, and there were no religious fanatics in sight, just nutjobs. The world is full of nutjobs, and it certainly ain't limited to the Muslim community.

From what I can gather, you seem surprised that the world contains idiots, white idiots, black idiots, brown idiots, Christian idiots, Muslim idiots, Jewish idiots, etc, etc. I don't know what to tell you other than wake up and smell the human excrement.

baron 25th February 2019 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome (Post 12613385)
These two girls, unfortunately, were way too naive, and that's what it comes down to here for me.

Which returns us to my original point. The media obsession with convincing people that Islam is 'the religion of peace' is partly to blame for this naivety. In the same way as well-meaning liberal girls believe all immigrants are gentle, grateful refugees on the back of media campaigns, then are surprised when they're attacked and raped, it's not surprising that a gullible person who is constantly told that the most peaceful people on earth are Muslims, when broadly speaking the opposite is true, is taken off guard when a bunch of them chop off her head.

Gilbert Syndrome 25th February 2019 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613392)
Which returns us to my original point. The media obsession with convincing people that Islam is 'the religion of peace' is partly to blame for this naivety. In the same way as well-meaning liberal girls believe all immigrants are gentle, grateful refugees on the back of media campaigns, then are surprised when they're attacked and raped, it's not surprising that a gullible person who is constantly told that the most peaceful people on earth are Muslims, when broadly speaking the opposite is true, is taken off guard when a bunch of them chop off her head.

I tend not to listen to what they media has to say, and would gladly invite others to join me, but people will be people.

I think it can go both ways, some news outlets would have us believe that ISIS are planning to tunnel beneath our homes and behead our garden gnomes, while other outlets would have us believe that we're the problem, and we're responsible for the actions of radical Islamist extremists, and I'd say both sides are full of crap.

Tolls 25th February 2019 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613392)
Which returns us to my original point. The media obsession with convincing people that Islam is 'the religion of peace' is partly to blame for this naivety. In the same way as well-meaning liberal girls believe all immigrants are gentle, grateful refugees on the back of media campaigns, then are surprised when they're attacked and raped, it's not surprising that a gullible person who is constantly told that the most peaceful people on earth are Muslims, when broadly speaking the opposite is true, is taken off guard when a bunch of them chop off her head.

Are you watching some completely different media to the rest of us?

I'm not sure that squares with reporting around ISIS, for example.

As GS has said, people get attacked backpacking all the time...all over the place. I really don't see this as a media thing.

dann 25th February 2019 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thermal (Post 12613384)
I thought the rationalizing was the coping mechanism for resolving the dissonance, rather than the dissonance itself?


It is the dissonance itself. There are several ways of solving the dissonance - I mentioned two in the case of smokers - or of finding ways to live with it. In an interview, James Randi mentioned a (well-known) skeptic friend of his who was also a Christian. According to Randi, he chose to believe because it made him feel good and he needed no other justification for the apparent contradiction. And Randi, the atheist, accepted his choice. Agreeing to disagree ...

ETA: I can recommend Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me) (Wikipedia). And Baylor will be pleased to hear that, in spite of the title, it's not about Trump! :) (It's from 2007)

dann 25th February 2019 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tolls (Post 12613431)
Are you watching some completely different media to the rest of us?

I'm not sure that squares with reporting around ISIS, for example.

As GS has said, people get attacked backpacking all the time...all over the place. I really don't see this as a media thing.


The problem is that you don't see that they all happened to be daft, naïve girls who would be alive today if they hadn't been anti-racists! :)

varwoche 25th February 2019 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome (Post 12613385)
... All of this being said, I can't honestly blame an entire religion or its followers for the actions of a "few." Do I think Islam is a mess? Yep. Do I care what it's followers think? Nope. But then again, I also don't care what mental, Trump-loving, gun-toting Christians think, either.

Textbook willful ignorance.

I may have a low opinion about what certain people think. But that's a far cry from not caring. Know thy enemy, etc.

varwoche 25th February 2019 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12610284)
No, she didn't, and no, she wouldn't. However, they might still have been alive if Jyllands-Posten hadn't posted its stupid Muhammad drawing, which made Danes a target for Muslim extremists.

This post prompted a lot of responses, most of which impress me as vacuous posturing based on binary thinking.

Responsibility lies with the killers of course. But that doesn't negate cause and effect. An imperfect example: If an attractive, 16 year old girl wearing skimpy clothing says she's going to a party at R Kelly's house (or Jeffrey Epstein's if you prefer) I have no problem telling her that's an idiotic, high-risk decision and she's asking for trouble. But if that trouble occurs, of course the ultimate blame lies with the perp.

It's entirely possible that the Danish publication stupidly and provocatively placed a target on the backs of traveling Danes, while at the same time the ultimate blame lies with the perps. These concepts aren't contradictory.

baron 25th February 2019 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tolls (Post 12613431)
Are you watching some completely different media to the rest of us?

I'm not sure that squares with reporting around ISIS, for example.

Haven't I just explained this? :confused:

I said the narrative is that Islam Is The Religion Of Peace.

When ISIS are mentioned there is a big rush to declare that these types are not Muslims and furthermore, have nothing to do with Islam. This garbage is foisted upon us by everybody from mainstream media to presidents.

So other than the absolute insane extremes such as ISIS, we are told all of Islam is not just simply conforming to the mean of human behaviour but actually exceeds it, so much so it is worthy of a special title all of its own - The Religion Of Peace. Ironic, when you think that Islam incorporates by far the most violent and intolerant ideologies in the world today.

sadhatter 25th February 2019 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12611654)
My victim blaming?!!! Did you notice the title of this thread?!
It's the absolute truth that the two Scandinavian girls might still have been alive if Jyllands-Posten hadn't started the stupid campaign against the peaceful Muslim minority in Denmark. Most of the world wouldn't have heard about Denmark otherwise, but after that, Danes became a target - even two girls who were brave enough to stand up against the homicidal terror of white supremacists in Scandinavia. (By the way, I'm happy that the Moroccans get to hear that part of the story. It will serve to make them despise the terrorist murderers so much more!)

The one who has been blaming the victims from the very beginning, the title of the OP, is Baylor, who seems to agree with Breivik in his criticism of Scandinavian anti-racists.
And the repulsive worldview is yours!




Thank you! That's what I've been saying was your focus the whole time: Not crimes committed by Muslim extremists, but crimes committed by Muslims - in spite of the fact that the millions of Moroccan Muslims despise and condemn these terrorists the same way that the girls and I have condemned white supremacist terrorists.




When terrorists murdering two innocent Scandinavian girls is treated as a (pseudo-)argument, it's not whataboutism to point out that blaming the alleged naïvety of girls for having turned them into murder victims (Yes! You guys are the actual victim blamers!) is absurd in the light of the teenagers massacred by Christian white supremacist Anders Behring Breivik!
And once again you don't deliver any proof that it is so, but you accuse me of finding "it acceptable to apologise for Islamic murderers."
With your grotesque lies, you still wonder why I'm reminded of Trump?!




You and Baylor appear to be the victim-blaiming cheerleaders for terrorism in this thread!





And where exactly do I revile free speech - and in particular, of course, "for non-Muslims", now? And where do I "support Islamic atrocities"? (As if you were ever going to back up your accusations with proof.)
Aren't you guys the ones who claimed that the "daft, naïve European girls" brought it upon themselves?!
Oh, the glee that you felt when writing and reading that title!

Both of you

" I mean white extremists *mentions token extremists ***** on whites* "

" I mean muslim extremists *mentions token extremists ***** on muslims*"

Behold the horror of centrist thinking.

All cultures inspire extremists, it is how those cultures tolerate and react to those extremists that is important. But please continue to try and convince someone on the internet their entire worldview is wrong with one verbal haymaker instead of analysing these trends.

dann 25th February 2019 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613497)
When ISIS are mentioned there is a big rush to declare that these types are not Muslims and furthermore, have nothing to do with Islam. This garbage is foisted upon us by everybody from mainstream media to presidents.


OK, Baron. It's time again for me to ask for evidence:
Who declares that ISIS aren't Muslims? You claim that there's not only a big rush to declare that they aren't, but it's actually "foisted upon us by everybody," so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to present us with an awful lot of examples: Everybody claims that ISIS aren't Muslims! I can imagine that you can find Muslims who will claim that ISIS aren't good Muslims or real Muslims, much the same way that most Christians will distance themselves from the Christianity of Anders Behring Breivik, but apart from that who else does? Did Obama claim that ISIS weren't Muslims? Does Trump?

Quote:

So other than the absolute insane extremes such as ISIS, we are told all of Islam is not just simply conforming to the mean of human behaviour but actually exceeds it, so much so it is worthy of a special title all of its own - The Religion Of Peace. Ironic, when you think that Islam incorporates by far the most violent and intolerant ideologies in the world today.

I can think of a lot of other "violent and intolerant ideologies in the world today," white supremacism, for example, which has proven to be far more violent in my part of the world, i.e. Scandinavia, than Muslim extremism, which Scandinavians, for the same reason, tend to fear more than Muslim extremists. The Scandinavians who fear ordinary Muslims are fortunately a minority.


ETA: I can see that Obama at one point made the claim: Strong reaction to Obama statement: 'ISIL is not Islamic' (CNN, Sep. 11, 2014), but the mainstream media, i.e. in this case the CNN, immediately pointed out that they may have sympathized with his intentions, i.e. to distinguish between Muslims and Islamic extremists, but they didn't think that his statement was correct.

carlitos 25th February 2019 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by varwoche (Post 12613490)
This post prompted a lot of responses, most of which impress me as vacuous posturing based on binary thinking.

Responsibility lies with the killers of course. But that doesn't negate cause and effect. An imperfect example: If an attractive, 16 year old girl wearing skimpy clothing says she's going to a party at R Kelly's house (or Jeffrey Epstein's if you prefer) I have no problem telling her that's an idiotic, high-risk decision and she's asking for trouble. But if that trouble occurs, of course the ultimate blame lies with the perp.

It's entirely possible that the Danish publication stupidly and provocatively placed a target on the backs of traveling Danes, while at the same time the ultimate blame lies with the perps. These concepts aren't contradictory.

The above is quite sensible. :thumbsup:

dann 25th February 2019 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thermal (Post 12613384)
I thought the rationalizing was the coping mechanism for resolving the dissonance, rather than the dissonance itself?


I found the interview with James Randi that I was talking about in post 253. It's called Still 'Amazing': A Conversation with James Randi (CSICOP's Skeptical Inquirer, March/April 2017), and he was talking about Martin Gardner. It's at the beginning of the interview.

dann 25th February 2019 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlitos (Post 12613619)
The above is quite sensible. :thumbsup:


I agree.

Archie Gemmill Goal 25th February 2019 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome (Post 12613394)
I tend not to listen to what they media has to say, and would gladly invite others to join me, but people will be people.

I think it can go both ways, some news outlets would have us believe that ISIS are planning to tunnel beneath our homes and behead our garden gnomes, while other outlets would have us believe that we're the problem, and we're responsible for the actions of radical Islamist extremists, and I'd say both sides are full of crap.

The media has done very little except propagate Islamophobia for years in the UK. Of course the resident racists don't think they go far enough bit then they wouldn't would they?

The same people get their news from Tommy Robinson's twitter feed and UKIP leaflets

Archie Gemmill Goal 25th February 2019 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
OK, Baron. It's time again for me to ask for evidence:
Who declares that ISIS aren't Muslims? You claim that there's not only a big rush to declare that they aren't, but it's actually "foisted upon us by everybody," so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to present us with an awful lot of examples: Everybody claims that ISIS aren't Muslims!




I can think of a lot of other "violent and intolerant ideologies in the world today," white supremacism, for example, which has proven to be far more violent in my part of the world, i.e. Scandinavia, than Muslim extremism, which Scandinavians, for the same reason, tend to fear more than Muslim extremists. The Scandinavians who fear ordinary Muslims are fortunately a minority.

no no.... white people don't have violent ideologies. They just have lone wolves, mentally ill people and assorted crazies. Its only THEM that have ideologies.

Doubt 25th February 2019 10:02 AM

Cities I have spent more than 24 hours in Europe:

Copenhagen
Stockholm
Berlin
Bamberg
Garmich
Frankfurt
Sulmona
Rome
Swiebodzin
Yaroslavl
Tolyatti
London
Amsterdam

Actual time various from 24 hours to almost 2 years in the case of Bamberg. I did not include places where I spent less than a day or rural areas such as military training areas. Years involved are from the mid 80's to 2017. Number of places where they seemed to have some wide eyed innocence about the potential for Islamic terrorism is none of them. The one country were they might just be overdoing it was Russia.

The idea that any guy on the internet spouting ideas about Scandinavian countries he has probably only seen on a computer screen in his mother's basement is laughably stupid.

The only dumber idea is when my fellow Americans try to tell me about how Dearborn Michigan is now run under Sharia law. I used to work there and it is pretty easy to find strip joints and liquor stores on google maps let alone what you can see on street view.

dann 25th February 2019 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doubt (Post 12613652)
The only dumber idea is when my fellow Americans try to tell me about how Dearborn Michigan is now run under Sharia law. I used to work there and it is pretty easy to find strip joints and liquor stores on google maps let alone what you can see on street view.


Yes, but they are Halal strip joints selling Halal liquor! :)

rdwight 25th February 2019 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613253)
No, no way at all:

It almost goes without saying that the he coward who published the Muhammed drawings still pretends to be a freedom fighter even though he would never do anything to upset the (cultural) Christian minority in Denmark and went after the Muslims merely because he expected it to serve his own interests at at the time. This was the actual 'freedom fighter' part of the story:

And some of the cartoonist knew about this and knew about the real purpose of Jyllands-Posten's stunt, of course. I've already told you about this, but here you'll find more details:

These are some of the things that racists abroad don't know and that racists in Denmark don't want to know. (Of course, racists abroad also don't want to know them.)

You are not addressing my point. Is there any indication their nationality played a roll in this? Any mention of said drawings being a cause? Anything at all to bring this up as if it pertains to this case?

I see no statistical evidence to back baylor's position, just like I see no evidence at all to go down the rabbit hole with your view. There is nothing there to suggest they would have been safer or treated differently had those images never been published.

Doubt 25th February 2019 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613675)
Yes, but they are Halal strip joints selling Halal liquor! :)

The G-Burqas are hot!

rdwight 25th February 2019 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by varwoche (Post 12613490)
This post prompted a lot of responses, most of which impress me as vacuous posturing based on binary thinking.

Responsibility lies with the killers of course. But that doesn't negate cause and effect. An imperfect example: If an attractive, 16 year old girl wearing skimpy clothing says she's going to a party at R Kelly's house (or Jeffrey Epstein's if you prefer) I have no problem telling her that's an idiotic, high-risk decision and she's asking for trouble. But if that trouble occurs, of course the ultimate blame lies with the perp.

It's entirely possible that the Danish publication stupidly and provocatively placed a target on the backs of traveling Danes, while at the same time the ultimate blame lies with the perps. These concepts aren't contradictory.

Do you think your examples match the situation? Backpacking in the mountains anywhere comes with a certain amount of risk. I really haven't seen anyone point to specifics of how these women increased their risk. I also think calling them naive is a stretch. I assume they recognized there are risks, but like most people were optimistic it wouldn't happen to them. If we are going to call that naive, then every tourist that gets killed was naive because they put themselves in a place where the crime happened.

As for the publication placing a target on their backs, I haven't seen anything at all pointing to that yet. I guess everyone will speculate with their favorite position, dann's being the newspaper, others being safety around muslims in foreign countries. I just can't see getting much out of this besides they were unlucky and bad things happened.

baron 25th February 2019 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
OK, Baron. It's time again for me to ask for evidence:
Who declares that ISIS aren't Muslims?

Well, the former president of the United States for one

Quote:

No religion is responsible for terrorism
Quote:

ISIL's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith...
https://www.vox.com/2015/2/19/8065143/obama-isis-islam

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov...-rahman-kassig

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
You claim that there's not only a big rush to declare that they aren't, but it's actually "foisted upon us by everybody," so it shouldn't be too difficult for you to present us with an awful lot of examples

I'm not wasting my time presenting you with a lot of anything, do your own homework, but it became so prevalent that the likes of the BBC's Head of Religion and the Archbishop of Canterbury actually spoke out against its widespread use and absurdity.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7060871.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-a7427096.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
Did Obama claim that ISIS weren't Muslims?

Yes, as I just demonstrated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
I can think of a lot of other "violent and intolerant ideologies in the world today," white supremacism, for example, which has proven to be far more violent in my part of the world, i.e. Scandinavia, than Muslim extremism, which Scandinavians, for the same reason, tend to fear more than Muslim extremists. The Scandinavians who fear ordinary Muslims are fortunately a minority.

Yeah, well you'll learn the same as everybody else, and then you'd wish you'd listened.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613615)
ETA: I can see that Obama at one point made the claim: Strong reaction to Obama statement: 'ISIL is not Islamic' (CNN, Sep. 11, 2014), but the mainstream media, i.e. in this case the CNN, immediately pointed out that they may have sympathized with his intentions, i.e. to distinguish between Muslims and Islamic extremists, but they didn't think that his statement was correct.

There you go. You answered your own question. Good job I didn't waste too much time on it.

Information Analyst 25th February 2019 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12610227)
Considering just about every person commenting on the topic thinks the same thing I do about the ignorance of Western women, yes. Nearly every comment on the YouTube video and article have stated that these girls were brainwashed by Western propaganda. You haven't even put forth an argument stating otherwise.

That'll be because the comments of racist cockwombles are proof of nothing but their own cockwomblery.

GlennB 25th February 2019 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doubt (Post 12613652)
The idea that any guy on the internet spouting ideas about Scandinavian countries he has probably only seen on a computer screen in his mother's basement is laughably stupid.

The only dumber idea is when my fellow Americans try to tell me about how Dearborn Michigan is now run under Sharia law. I used to work there and it is pretty easy to find strip joints and liquor stores on google maps let alone what you can see on street view.

I think it was Baylor who tried to tell us that certain areas of London were Muslim "no-go areas", and mentioned Camden Town, among others. That area is thick with pubs and places that sell pork-based food. Hijabs strictly optional.

varwoche 25th February 2019 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12613693)
Do you think your examples match the situation? Backpacking in the mountains anywhere comes with a certain amount of risk. I really haven't seen anyone point to specifics of how these women increased their risk. I also think calling them naive is a stretch.

No the example doesn't match -- it involves three parties. Close enough to make the point though.

Quote:

I assume they recognized there are risks, but like most people were optimistic it wouldn't happen to them. If we are going to call that naive, then every tourist that gets killed was naive because they put themselves in a place where the crime happened.
I'm not calling them naive -- I don't know enough to form an opinion.

Delphic Oracle 25th February 2019 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613326)
Yep, you wouldn't want to tar a huge group of people with the same brush. Just imagine if you did that with, say, Trump voters. Imagine the bigotry, violence and terrorism that you would cause.

Where did I do any of that?

Stay on subject.

rdwight 25th February 2019 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by varwoche (Post 12613773)
No the example doesn't match -- it involves three parties. Close enough to make the point though.

I'm not calling them naive -- I don't know enough to form an opinion.

I understand your point but I don't feel it's a good representation. Maybe something like sky diving would be a better example. Known risks, but nothing done on a persons part to add to the danger beforehand, just bad luck on something bad happening.

dann 25th February 2019 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613695)
Well, the former president of the United States for one

https://www.vox.com/2015/2/19/8065143/obama-isis-islam

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov...-rahman-kassig

I'm not wasting my time presenting you with a lot of anything, do your own homework, but it became so prevalent that the likes of the BBC's Head of Religion and the Archbishop of Canterbury actually spoke out against its widespread use and absurdity.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7060871.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...-a7427096.html

Yes, as I just demonstrated.

Yeah, well you'll learn the same as everybody else, and then you'd wish you'd listened.

There you go. You answered your own question. Good job I didn't waste too much time on it.


That is so pathetic, Baron. "There you go."
You probably didn't "waste" much time on it because you soon realized that you couldn't come up with anything other than what I'd posted myself: The one sentence from Obama! Your claim was "everybody", and in particular the media. You haven't come up with one single thing, and your two quotations don't say that ISIS aren't Muslim. They only say that ISIS doesn't represent Muslims, i.e. Islam. You are embarrassing your own claims with these quotes!

"I'm not wasting my time presenting you with a lot of anything, do your own homework, but it became so prevalent that the likes of the BBC's Head of Religion and the Archbishop of Canterbury actually spoke out against its widespread use and absurdity."

Indeed, you aren't 'wasting your time' trying to prove the point because you can't. Your claim has been utterly humiliated and you weren't able to find a single thing - other than the one Obama quotation that I found for you, but I guess that to you Obama is everybody ...

Baylor 25th February 2019 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal (Post 12613650)
no no.... white people don't have violent ideologies. They just have lone wolves, mentally ill people and assorted crazies. Its only THEM that have ideologies.

We have grown men on this board who say this as if this is some great retort. "There are evil people in all parts of the world," is something you hear in a 5th grade social studies class.

What some people, like these two girls, are too naive to understand is that different rules apply in different parts of the world. And you need to be cognizant of these rules. I don't understand why this is controversial or hard to grasp.

Here's a warning Chinese gives its citizens when visiting London. This is blasphemous, according to the religious creed of people like dann.

https://i.imgur.com/jc1ovSB.png

I must admit, it must be weird being a non-Westerner and seeing white people get worked up over stupid stuff like this.

Baylor 25th February 2019 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doubt (Post 12613652)
The only dumber idea is when my fellow Americans try to tell me about how Dearborn Michigan is now run under Sharia law. I used to work there and it is pretty easy to find strip joints and liquor stores on google maps let alone what you can see on street view.

Hyperbole. When an American says "Dearborn is under sharia law," she means, Dearborn is populated by Muslims. No one is surprised Muslims enjoy Western indulgences. But they don't welcome people who are not like them into their communities -- what you would call "racist."

Baylor 25th February 2019 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome (Post 12613385)
These two girls, unfortunately, were way too naive, and that's what it comes down to here for me. If you think it means see, I told ya all Muslims are killers, well that's no less naive than thinking you can go wandering about in the mountains of a foreign country and not come to harm. Over the last several years, there's been a few reports of backpackers being killed in many countries, and there were no religious fanatics in sight, just nutjobs. The world is full of nutjobs, and it certainly ain't limited to the Muslim community.

From what I can gather, you seem surprised that the world contains idiots, white idiots, black idiots, brown idiots, Christian idiots, Muslim idiots, Jewish idiots, etc, etc. I don't know what to tell you other than wake up and smell the human excrement.

See my previous post regarding this. To sum up: Different rules apply in different parts of the world. To teach young people otherwise is a betrayal of trust.

American women are less susceptible (but still susceptible) as most were given a front row seat at the multicultural **** show. By everything I've seen, people from the whitest parts of the world are most likely to be taken in by "humanity is one giant rainbow" propaganda.

Doubt 25th February 2019 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12613836)
Hyperbole. When an American says "Dearborn is under sharia law," she means, Dearborn is populated by Muslims. No one is surprised Muslims enjoy Western indulgences. But they don't welcome people who are not like them into their communities -- what you would call "racist."

No, they actually want believe that and produce videos selectively edited to make people believe it.

Dearborn is about 45% Arab but only about 29% Muslims. And few if any are interested in Sharia. Now before we go any further, do you mean by "their community" Does that include Dearborn?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.