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, naÔve European girls (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=334924)

dann 25th February 2019 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12613680)
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?


There is more than indication that the editors of Jyllands-Posten are (were) still on ISIS's list of targets: ON THE ISLAMIC STATE TO-DO-LIST: MURDER MORE 'BLASPHEMERS (2015). And immediately after the first publication of the Muhammed cartoons any Danish corporation (and in some cases ordinary Danes as well) were considered to be likely targets.

Quote:

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.

I guess we'll have to wait to hear what the murderers and their accomplices have to say in court, but even if they mention the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, it could still just be a way of justifying the killings even though they might have considered any Western tourists potential targets.

dann 25th February 2019 01:03 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.


Yes, that is how the hyperbole of white supremacists goes ...

baron 25th February 2019 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle (Post 12613780)
Where did I do any of that?

Stay on subject.

I wasn't accusing you specifically, I was making that point that the people who get their underwear in a knot at the slightest hint Muslims are being demonised because of the actions of a minority have no such qualms about identifying the majority voter-based on the United States as white supremacists and Nazis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613828)
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!

And yet everybody can see I gave your four sources, not one, and if you bothered to read my posts I'd give you four more but what's the point? You realised you'd screwed up and tried to backpeddle, now you're digging a big hole instead of keeping quiet, which would be the wisest course of action given your posting history in this thread.

Here, go do your homework and check out a few of the 400,000+ articles and news items regarding the claim that terrorism "has nothing to do with Islam".

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613828)
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 ...

Utter nuttjobbery. You asked,

"Did Obama claim that ISIS weren't Muslims?"

And when I show that he did, twice, you say Oh, I guess Obama is everybody! Ner! How infantile.

Whilst you might not think Obama is anybody special you might be surprised to learn he was in fact President of the United States. I didn't realise you were holding out for me to quote a better known or more influential person, you should have said.

Information Analyst 25th February 2019 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12613829)
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.

Nah, it's not blasphemy, it's just bollocks. Chinese tourists are more at risk in tourist areas that the ones this crock warns them against.

Baylor 25th February 2019 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613335)
The young woman was one of the Norwegian anti-racists who weren't killed by Anders Behring Breivik, and in spite of being aware of the danger of white supremacists, she was brave enough to confront them.
The only thing that consoles me a little in this tragedy is that the millions of Moroccan Muslims got to know the story of the brave woman killed by the extremists, which probably contributed to their consternation.

tsk tsk. you got caught.

For those not following along, in his religious hysteria, dann said how wonderful it is dead girls aren't racist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613257)
You're right. Jyllands-Posten tried to put the girls through a brainwashing campaign, but fortunately it didn't seem to stick - with the two girls or with the majority of Danes.


Yes, you are reading that correctly: it's better for young women to die a horrific and painful death than it is to be racist.

Reminds me of Sadiq Conman, "look at the different colors of those dead girls's body parts! Isn't that wonderful."

Unbelievable

carlitos 25th February 2019 01:15 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."

I too have visited the sharia liquor stores and strip clubs in and around Dearborn. Ignorant people who share stores like the one above might be unaware of the Chaldean Christian community.

dann 25th February 2019 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613862)
And yet everybody can see I gave your four sources, not one, and if you bothered to read my posts I'd give you four more but what's the point? You realised you'd screwed up and tried to backpeddle, now you're digging a big hole instead of keeping quiet, which would be the wisest course of action given your posting history in this thread.

Here, go do your homework and check out a few of the 400,000+ articles and news items regarding the claim that terrorism "has nothing to do with Islam".


Utterly pathetic! You claimed that "everybody" says that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam. And you came up with two quotations that said nothing of the sort.


Quote:

Utter nuttjobbery. You asked,

"Did Obama claim that ISIS weren't Muslims?"

And when I show that he did, twice, you say Oh, I guess Obama is everybody! Ner! How infantile.

You didn't show anything. I was the one who came up with the Obama quotation in the same post! That you were able to repeat my work does really give you any points!
You haven't proved that everybody says that ISIS isn't Muslim. That ISIS doesn't represent Muslims is an entirely different claim - and one that you don't particularly like, of course.

Quote:

Whilst you might not think Obama is anybody special you might be surprised to learn he was in fact President of the United States. I didn't realise you were holding out for me to quote a better known or more influential person, you should have said.

Oh man, and now you want to teach me about Obama, the guy whose quotation I gave you, and you pretend that I claimed that he wasn't "special"!!! Yes, he used to be the POTUS, but your claim was that presidents (!) and the mainstream media said that ISIS wasn't Muslim, and - as I showed you - the mainstream media, i.e. CNN, disagreed.

Baylor 25th February 2019 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Information Analyst (Post 12613874)
Nah, it's not blasphemy, it's just bollocks. Chinese tourists are more at risk in tourist areas that the ones this crock warns them against.

Acid attack suspects by race

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

dudalb 25th February 2019 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlitos (Post 12611700)
Since Baylor is an expert, perhaps they could enlighten us about the racial differences between Danes and Moroccans. Berbers often have light eyes, but the skin is more cafe latte I know. Is there a color guide we can consult or do we need to measure their noses and stuff?

Danes are played by Richard Widmark, Moors by Sidney Potier...:D

dudalb 25th February 2019 01:32 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."

So now The First Amendment clause about Freedom of Religion is a Western Indulgence?

Archie Gemmill Goal 25th February 2019 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12613883)
Acid attack suspects by race

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

By 'race'?????

Dark European is a race?
Oriental???
Asian???

Information Analyst 25th February 2019 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12613883)
Acid attack suspects by race

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

So you're indulging in your usual ******* of posting some random graphic without linking to the source, because you somehow think it backs up your racism by some sort of bigoted osmosis. Even then, it shows only 2% of victims as "Oriental," which is roughly the same percentage as in London's population, so they are neither under- nor over-represented. Basically you have disproved your own "evidence."

dudalb 25th February 2019 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlennB (Post 12613760)
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.

I guess Camden town has changed in the Ten Years since I visited London. Back then it has the reputation of being London's "Little Mexico' with a lot of Mexican immigrants there (probably because Mexico had it's embassy there).
Several guidebooks recommended Camden as being great for getting good Mexican food, (back then good Mexican food was not easy to find in London).Guess things have changed, or somebody got their stereotypes wrong, or just could not tell people with Brown Skins apart.
For the record,quite a few Mexican dishes are pork based....

baron 25th February 2019 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613882)
Utterly pathetic! You claimed that "everybody" says that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam. And you came up with two quotations that said nothing of the sort.

Oh I see, you're just doubling down on your infantile behaviour. I said 'everybody' so unless I provide seven billion cites my claim is void. Bravo! Your incisive argument really put me in my place!

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613882)
You didn't show anything. I was the one who came up with the Obama quotation in the same post! That you were able to repeat my work does really give you any points!

You said Obama's quote is irrelevant yet now you're boasting about having cited it in the first place! You really are confused.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613882)
You haven't proved that everybody says that ISIS isn't Muslim. That ISIS doesn't represent Muslims is an entirely different claim - and one that you don't particularly like, of course.

And saying 'not Muslims' as opposed to 'not representative of Islam' is different how? Which other Muslims are not representative of Islam? More childish games because you've failed to make your point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dann (Post 12613882)
Oh man, and now you want to teach me about Obama, the guy whose quotation I gave you, and you pretend that I claimed that he wasn't "special"!!! Yes, he used to be the POTUS, but your claim was that presidents (!) and the mainstream media said that ISIS wasn't Muslim, and - as I showed you - the mainstream media, i.e. CNN, disagreed.

And yet CNN say no such thing.

Quote:

The trouble comes from the fact that organizations such as ISIS and Boko Haram cherry pick tribal customs and then apply an Islamic veneer to rationalize them.
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/01/o...age/index.html

Maybe you think that applies to all Muslims but I suggest it does not. And whilst I'm at it, let me anticipate your next move...

"Oh but you haven't shown that every single person who works for CNN believes this!"

Yawn...

Thermal 25th February 2019 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Information Analyst (Post 12613915)
So you're indulging in your usual ******* of posting some random graphic without linking to the source, because you somehow think backs up your racism by some sort of bigoted osmosis.

Just noticed those classings: dark European and oriental? Have a feeling I know what type of publisher this came from

Delphic Oracle 25th February 2019 02:36 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."

Insert self-awareness here...

carlitos 25th February 2019 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thermal (Post 12613921)
Just noticed those classings: dark European and oriental? Have a feeling I know what type of publisher this came from

There is a gray square that says "BBC Three," so it must be legit. Google Image Search was unhelpful.


ETA - regular old google was more helpful - Everything you know about acid attacks is wrong - BBC Three


Quote:

  • The suspect was male 74% of the time and victim was male 67% of the time
  • Just 6% of suspects were Asian
  • Only one so-called ‘honour’ attack was recorded in 15 years
  • Four out of five violent offences never reached trial



baron 25th February 2019 02:41 PM

Three seconds

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/artic...9-f9eae0d52f91

Archie Gemmill Goal 25th February 2019 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlitos (Post 12614029)
There is a gray square that says "BBC Three," so it must be legit. Google Image Search was unhelpful.


ETA - regular old google was more helpful - Everything you know about acid attacks is wrong - BBC Three

This one was just a weird non sequitur from a weird source rather than a deliberate piece of racist nonsense then?

Minoosh 25th February 2019 03:24 PM

Don't know why the thread is titled "Girls" :confused: They were women, 24 and 28. They apparently decided to go off backpacking through remote terrain, so maybe they were too trusting of men. That may be painting men with too broad a brush, but while most men are not murderers, 96 percent of murderers are men.

I'm female and felt safer Tehran than I did in my home city (except when I tried to cross the street). I was sexually harassed in Yazd and my complaint was taken very seriously.

I'd like to believe I would be safe backpacking through the U.S. alone or with another woman, but I have to be realistic. There are a lot of predators out there, almost all of them men.

Baylor 25th February 2019 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Information Analyst (Post 12613915)
So you're indulging in your usual ******* of posting some random graphic without linking to the source, because you somehow think it backs up your racism by some sort of bigoted osmosis. Even then, it shows only 2% of victims as "Oriental," which is roughly the same percentage as in London's population, so they are neither under- nor over-represented. Basically you have disproved your own "evidence."

And that brings me back to my original point. Thanks for making this derail on topic!
it shows only 2% of victims as "Oriental," which is roughly the same percentage as in London's population, so they are neither under- nor over-represented.
Exactly! Because China has the good sense to warn its citizens of the dangers when traveling abroad. There are no religious hang ups from people like dann.

Baylor 25th February 2019 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoosh (Post 12614077)
Don't know why the thread is titled "Girls" :confused: They were women, 24 and 28.

Europeans are infantalized beyond belief. Have children?!?! I'm 46! Can I just enjoy my life first!?!?!

Archie Gemmill Goal 25th February 2019 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12614080)
And that brings me back to my original point. Thanks for making this derail on topic!
it shows only 2% of victims as "Oriental," which is roughly the same percentage as in London's population, so they are neither under- nor over-represented.
Exactly! Because China has the good sense to warn its citizens of the dangers when traveling abroad. There are no religious hang ups from people like dann.

Given that the article you quoted your non sequitur from was explaining that acid attacks are a gang phenomenon and chinese tourists are woefully underrepresented in gangs i think this may explain it better than a random leaflet

dudalb 25th February 2019 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12614091)
Europeans are infantalized beyond belief. Have children?!?! I'm 46! Can I just enjoy my life first!?!?!

Just keeps digging himself in deeper.....

Doubt 25th February 2019 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12614091)
Europeans are infantalized beyond belief. Have children?!?! I'm 46! Can I just enjoy my life first!?!?!

So in addition to knowing nothing about Islam and Europe you appear to have no actual knowledge of women. Educated woman have fewer children.

carlitos 25th February 2019 04:23 PM

If all I knew about Europe was what I had gathered from Mark Steyn books and Pamela Gellar, this would all make sense.

Information Analyst 25th February 2019 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12614080)
And that brings me back to my original point. Thanks for making this derail on topic!
it shows only 2% of victims as "Oriental," which is roughly the same percentage as in London's population, so they are neither under- nor over-represented.
Exactly! Because China has the good sense to warn its citizens of the dangers when traveling abroad. There are no religious hang ups from people like dann.

So now it's your usual goalpost-shifting trick? You post some load of racist guff put out by the Chinese government, then try to bolster it with a completely irrelevant graphic about "acid" attacks in London, which in fact shows that there was no unusually high risk to "Oriental" people, anyway. The 2% identified as such in the graphic equates to less than 45 people across the 15 year period it relates to, so around three per year out of a Chinese population in the capital of around 125,000, not to mention a large chunk of the 260,000 visitors from China to the UK every year.

varwoche 25th February 2019 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12613793)
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.

That doesn't capture the role of the Danish publication.

dudalb 25th February 2019 04:57 PM

It also seems to pass Baylor by that most of the victims of Muslim Extermists are other Muslims. Religious fanatics usually reserve their worst hate for Heretics rather then Infidels.

Minoosh 25th February 2019 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12614091)
Europeans are infantalized beyond belief. Have children?!?! I'm 46! Can I just enjoy my life first!?!?!

What is your evidence? And what does not having kids have to do with it?

rdwight 25th February 2019 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by varwoche (Post 12614157)
That doesn't capture the role of the Danish publication.

As of yet there is no evidence it played any role in this situation. If it plays any role in increasing the likelihood of violence for the average Danish traveler in Muslim countries, I would need some specific evidence in regards to an uptick in attacks directed at them after the publication, and at what level it remains today. There was clearly an increase in the immediate aftermath of publication. Are those affects still felt today? If not, why bother insinuating it as a cause.

Same as I would need to see some evidence vacationing in Muslim majority countries for westerners is more dangerous than visiting comparable non-Muslim countries. In the case of Morocco I am not seeing it, but I could be persuaded either way with some evidence.

dann 25th February 2019 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baron (Post 12613920)
Oh I see, you're just doubling down on your infantile behaviour. I said 'everybody' so unless I provide seven billion cites my claim is void. Bravo! Your incisive argument really put me in my place!


Your claim is void because you haven't come up with anything. You claim that

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.


And you come up with absolutely nothing! You provide two links that show the exact opposite, one from an archbishop making the same claim you do and the other one from a mainstream media representative, who also says that one shouldn't claim that ISIS have nothing to do with Islam.


Quote:

You said Obama's quote is irrelevant yet now you're boasting about having cited it in the first place! You really are confused.

You are the only one who's confused about this! Go back to my post! I cited Obama. That you cite him again and do so after I cited him may seem to you like a big win, but it still doesn't prove that "this garbage is foisted upon us by everybody from mainstream media to presidents."
You have cited one president - the same one I did - and nobody else. So your whole argument rests upon Obama making this mistake once, but in the world of white supremacy this becomes "everybody from mainstream media to presidents" - even when the mainstream media (BBC3) do the opposite of what you claim.

Quote:

And saying 'not Muslims' as opposed to 'not representative of Islam' is different how?

It's different in the fact that they are Muslims but not representative of Islam! It's like when I say that you're white but not representative of white people. Anders Behring Breivik is also white but not representative of white people. However, his thinking is representative of white supremacists, and only white supremacists find it difficult to distinguish between the two things: white people and white supremacists, much the same way that they can't distinguish between Muslim extremists and ordinary Muslims.

Quote:

Which other Muslims are not representative of Islam? More childish games because you've failed to make your point.

You really don't get it, do you?!
The majority of them aren't representative of Islam. They are ordinary Muslims, but they aren't representative of Muslims. Having to look it up in the dictionary for you is embarrassing. (And I'm reminded of Baylor's taunts about non-native speakers of English.):

Quote:

REPRESENTATIVE
If you're representative of some group, you're typical, youíre a lot like most of the others. You might also be a representative for your group; you were elected to act on behalf of those you represent.
REPRESENTATIVE (vocabulary.com)

Look it up in other dictionaries, too. Read it several times until you get the idea! They all say approximately the same thing. It's possible that white supremacists have their own particular version of a dictionary, I don't know, but this is what the ones I've found say: You can either be a representative for instance of an organization, like the Catholic pope, for instance, but the Islamic extremists weren't elected to act on behalf of ordinary Muslims. They may have been elected to act on behalf of ISIS, I don't know.
When millions of Moroccan Muslims condemn these extremists, it also becomes apparent that they aren't typical Muslims. They may be typical representatives of ISIS, but they aren't typical representatives of Muslims or even typical of Moroccan Muslims!
Do you get it now? Do you understand what the dictionary tells you? You are as wrong as you can possibly be about this, and the thing that makes you wrong yet again is your biassed racist view of the world.

Quote:

And yet CNN say no such thing.
Quote:

The trouble comes from the fact that organizations such as ISIS and Boko Haram cherry pick tribal customs and then apply an Islamic veneer to rationalize them.
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/01/o...age/index.html

Yes, that is exactly what CNN says! If it's because you don't understand the words used by CNN, veneer, for instance, you'll have to look them up in the dictionary yourself.
CNN says that Islamic extremists abuse their religion when dressing up tribal customs to rationalize them. CNN doesn't say that they aren't Muslims.
So even though you may imagine that you have come up with at least one example of "everybody from mainstream media" saying what you claim they're saying, you are absolutely wrong again: CNN doesn't say that ISIS aren't Muslim!


Quote:

Maybe you think that applies to all Muslims but I suggest it does not. And whilst I'm at it, let me anticipate your next move...

"Oh but you haven't shown that every single person who works for CNN believes this!"

Yawn...

Let me anticipate your nexts moves: You'll go on pretending that you've shown that [i]"when ISIS are mentioned there is a big rush to declare that these types are not Muslims and furthermore, [hilite]have nothing to do with Islam[/HILTE]. This garbage is foisted upon us by everybody from mainstream media to presidents." You just happen to be unable to come up with any examples of the "big rush".
After all, it is the baron way. It's what we've come to expect of you! Hyperbole, misunderstandings and outright lies.

dudalb 25th February 2019 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12614202)
As of yet there is no evidence it played any role in this situation. If it plays any role in increasing the likelihood of violence for the average Danish traveler in Muslim countries, I would need some specific evidence in regards to an uptick in attacks directed at them after the publication, and at what level it remains today. There was clearly an increase in the immediate aftermath of publication. Are those affects still felt today? If not, why bother insinuating it as a cause.

Same as I would need to see some evidence vacationing in Muslim majority countries for westerners is more dangerous than visiting comparable non-Muslim countries. In the case of Morocco I am not seeing it, but I could be persuaded either way with some evidence.


I hope you are not giving me this freaking "because a publicatation offended their religions, we have to understand what drove them to these actions" bullcrap. We saw enough of it with the Charlie Hebdo incident in Paris.
Let's just say no freaking way do I want a bunch of religious wackjobs dictating what I can or cannot read;and I don't care if it's a bunch of Fendy Evagelicals in Alabama or bunch of Islamic wackjobs in Morroco.

dann 25th February 2019 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12614202)
As of yet there is no evidence it played any role in this situation. If it plays any role in increasing the likelihood of violence for the average Danish traveler in Muslim countries, I would need some specific evidence in regards to an uptick in attacks directed at them after the publication, and at what level it remains today. There was clearly an increase in the immediate aftermath of publication. Are those affects still felt today? If not, why bother insinuating it as a cause.

Same as I would need to see some evidence vacationing in Muslim majority countries for westerners is more dangerous than visiting comparable non-Muslim countries. In the case of Morocco I am not seeing it, but I could be persuaded either way with some evidence.


What I have already shown you is that ISIS still remembers and refers to Jyllands-Posten's Muhammed cartoons. However, nowadays the role that they played in 2006 may have been eclipsed by Denmark's participation in wars in Islamic countries, which is what warnings from the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Politiken) usually refer to.

Vixen 26th February 2019 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12613919)
I guess Camden town has changed in the Ten Years since I visited London. Back then it has the reputation of being London's "Little Mexico' with a lot of Mexican immigrants there (probably because Mexico had it's embassy there).
Several guidebooks recommended Camden as being great for getting good Mexican food, (back then good Mexican food was not easy to find in London).Guess things have changed, or somebody got their stereotypes wrong, or just could not tell people with Brown Skins apart.
For the record,quite a few Mexican dishes are pork based....

There is a sizeable Irish and Cypriot community. Much of the crime in the area is related to the Camden Market tourist attraction. Drugs and night club brawls. Postcode gangs.

Baylor has a weird idea London is a no go area with people living in fear.

Muslims lying in wait.

Vixen 26th February 2019 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thermal (Post 12613921)
Just noticed those classings: dark European and oriental? Have a feeling I know what type of publisher this came from

Perhaps they're from the other side of the Caucassians.

' She lived on the morning side of the mountain
He was from the evening side of the hill'.

Vixen 26th February 2019 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoosh (Post 12614077)
Don't know why the thread is titled "Girls" :confused: They were women, 24 and 28. They apparently decided to go off backpacking through remote terrain, so maybe they were too trusting of men. That may be painting men with too broad a brush, but while most men are not murderers, 96 percent of murderers are men.

I'm female and felt safer Tehran than I did in my home city (except when I tried to cross the street). I was sexually harassed in Yazd and my complaint was taken very seriously.

I'd like to believe I would be safe backpacking through the U.S. alone or with another woman, but I have to be realistic. There are a lot of predators out there, almost all of them men.

I knew someone who went off to India camping in her little tent for three months quite alone.

Skeptic Ginger 26th February 2019 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baylor (Post 12613883)
Acid attack suspects by race

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

WTF is this crap with no link? :rolleyes:

You think we're stupid?

Skeptic Ginger 26th February 2019 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minoosh (Post 12614077)
Don't know why the thread is titled "Girls" :confused: They were women, 24 and 28. They apparently decided to go off backpacking through remote terrain, so maybe they were too trusting of men. That may be painting men with too broad a brush, but while most men are not murderers, 96 percent of murderers are men.

I'm female and felt safer Tehran than I did in my home city (except when I tried to cross the street). I was sexually harassed in Yazd and my complaint was taken very seriously.

I'd like to believe I would be safe backpacking through the U.S. alone or with another woman, but I have to be realistic. There are a lot of predators out there, almost all of them men.

I've hiked alone a few times in the US wilderness areas and I've always felt uncomfortable doing it.

I'm not sure if I would have camped like these women did. I think not because the men in Muslim countries always give me the impression they can't control their dicks given the circumstances they've grown up under. Too many of them are warped.

However, I actually wandered around Morocco sort of alone. The guy (friend) I was with was walking quite a distance behind me.

I've been all over the world often traveling alone. Only in a few places have I been that I was concerned for my safety and some of those were Western countries, some weren't. Most of the time my fears before I got there didn't turn out to be real risks when I got there.

For the record, I would not have gone where these women went, but that is in hindsight.

Skeptic Ginger 26th February 2019 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 12614417)
I knew someone who went off to India camping in her little tent for three months quite alone.

Yeah India has a mix of areas, not homogenous.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:26 PM.

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