Shooting in California

conorhal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I seem to remember bombs going off in England..



Yeah the IRA bombing England..

So using your logic, the UK should have barred Irish people..

Or would you like to modify what you said to get around this

You're just wilfully ignoring the point, England was bombed by UK citizens from the UK, or is N. Ireland not part of the UK?
They can't exclude their own citizens and thus suffered incidents of domestic terrorism.

What we shouldn't be doing, and are doing, is allowing immigration from the Middle East which is a hot-bed of Islamic terrorism and thus replicating all the mistakes of the UK and France, which now also have a domestic terrorism problem that is a product of mass immigration. There is no good reason to import a problem so why do so?

asherbassad

c_man wrote: »

Wonder does that include Muslims serving in the military?! It's gone beyond a joke at this stage.

It could be a bit of a meltdown moment. A lot of Trump's supporters (Tea-party nutjobs) think Obama is a Muslim.....so if they petition Trump to kick out Obama, Trump has to tell them that Obama isn't a Muslim ....cue exploding Tea-party heads :pac:

Dohnjoe

conorhal wrote: »

You're just wilfully ignoring the point, England was bombed by UK citizens from the UK, or is N. Ireland not part of the UK?]

Right, so no one from the south.. gotcha..

What we shouldn't be doing, and are doing, is allowing immigration from the Middle East which is a hot-bed of Islamic terrorism and thus replicating all the mistakes of the UK and France, which now also have a domestic terrorism problem that is a product of mass immigration. There is no good reason to import a problem so why do so?

Since the attacks carried out by French nationals are a domestic problem (e.g. the Charlie Hebdo attacks) - as you have strictly pointed out.. they are therefore "ok"..

and those carried out by e.g. Belgian nationals (involved in the recent Paris attack) means that Belgians should be banned from entering France?

Along this same vein of logic does this mean that Middle Eastern countries should be banning Europeans because thousands of Europeans have traveled to the Middle East to join ISIS who are killing countless Middle Eastern civilians?

I'm just trying to get my head around how this would work..

(because it cannot be a ****wittingly stupid as "ban Muslims because terrorism")

Orangebrigade

More publicity for Trump and in truth only preached to the converted, his support base.

RobertKK

conorhal wrote: »

The don't have any Islamic ghettos though, and a tiny number in proportion to their population, france has a 10% Muslim population and no end of trouble that would never be tollerated in Japan.

Most of the Muslim refugees are not Muslim Jihadists. You just need a small handful of Jihadists to cause mayhem, in the case of San Bernardino it was just two.

Nodin

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I don't think that Trump was planted. He's always been a complete egomaniac. The Republicans tend to have these kind of characters.

True, though they tend to be the "no-hopers" who go in the early stages.

Orangebrigade

Trump has no one to answer to and can get away with saying what he wants. He can easily go right over the line if he wants and it probably won't effect his run to be the Republican candidate for President.

conorhal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Right, so no one from the south.. gotcha..



Since the attacks carried out by French nationals are a domestic problem (e.g. the Charlie Hebdo attacks) - as you have strictly pointed out.. they are therefore "ok"..

and those carried out by e.g. Belgian nationals (involved in the recent Paris attack) means that Belgians should be banned from entering France?

Along this same vein of logic does this mean that Middle Eastern countries should be banning Europeans because thousands of Europeans have traveled to the Middle East to join ISIS who are killing countless Middle Eastern civilians?

I'm just trying to get my head around how this would work..

(because it cannot be a ****wittingly stupid as "ban Muslims because terrorism")

You're just intent on putting words in my mouth aren'tcha?

I'll explain how it will 'all work out' Schengen will collapse, that's how it will work out. Preventing that will require an immigration policy that respects national soverignty. Mass immigration has been a boon for nobody but the multinationals.

TeaBagMania

asherbassad wrote: »

A lot of Trump's supporters (Tea-party nutjobs) think Obama is a Muslim

I don't care what anybody says that POS is a muslim and he hates America.

Guess that makes me a nutjob

The Randy Riverbeast

TeaBagMania wrote: »

I don't care what anybody says that POS is a muslim and he hates America.

Guess that makes me a nutjob

You've been waiting for a year for your name to be perfect.

Nodin

TeaBagMania wrote: »

I don't care what anybody says that POS is a muslim and he hates America.

Guess that makes me a nutjob

It might, it might not. Hard to tell.

TeaBagMania

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

You've been waiting for a year for your name to be perfect.

lol, its TeaBag, not TeaParty

Dohnjoe

conorhal wrote: »

You're just intent on putting words in my mouth aren'tcha?

Nope I'm calling out bigoted populism

One rule for us, another rule for "them"

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

Right then. What has them marked out as "Islamists" in that picture?

http://www.enkivillage.com/s/upload/images/2014/12/7cf607a8cf7cc084f20b2a8557786009.jpg

what marks these lads out as Amish, given that they are not on their way to a Halloween party, not is it an etching of 16th century peasants.

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

http://www.enkivillage.com/s/upload/images/2014/12/7cf607a8cf7cc084f20b2a8557786009.jpg

what marks these lads out as Amish, given that they are not on their way to a Halloween party, not is it an etching of 16th century peasants.

The gear.

Now -

"Islamism (Urdu: اسلام پرستی‎; Arabic: إسلاموية‎), also known as Political Islam, utilizes certain Muslim "doctrines, beliefs and values as the foundation of a political structure that supporters of that ideology have called 'the Islamic State'."./COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc]1[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc Islamists can have varying interpretations on various Quranic suras and ayahs. Islamist views emphasize the implementation of Sharia (Islamic law); of pan-Islamic political unity; and of the selective removal of non-Muslim, particularly Western military, economic, political, social, or cultural influences in the Muslim world that they believe to be incompatible with Islam./COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc]2[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

We'll try again. What in your picture marks those two out as "Islamist"?

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

The gear.

Now -

"Islamism (Urdu: اسلام پرستی‎; Arabic: إسلاموية‎), also known as Political Islam, utilizes certain Muslim "doctrines, beliefs and values as the foundation of a political structure that supporters of that ideology have called 'the Islamic State'."./COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc]1[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc Islamists can have varying interpretations on various Quranic suras and ayahs. Islamist views emphasize the implementation of Sharia (Islamic law); of pan-Islamic political unity; and of the selective removal of non-Muslim, particularly Western military, economic, political, social, or cultural influences in the Muslim world that they believe to be incompatible with Islam./COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc]2[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=#0066cc"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

We'll try again. What in your picture marks those two out as "Islamist"?

The same way I can tell an Amish from a regular anglo saxon.....


They fact they live in a civilised first world democracy and dress like 7th century desert peasants would indicate to anyone that they subscribe to Islamism. Ive worked with muslims, they are like you or I, they dont burqa their wives, they dont pray five times a day, they are just normal people. Islamists on the other hand.....You can pick them out, obviously not all Islamists would go for the garb, but its a pretty good sign.

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

The same way I can tell an Amish from a regular anglo saxon.....


They fact they live in a civilised first world democracy and dress like 7th century desert peasants would indicate to anyone that they subscribe to Islamism. Ive worked with muslims, they are like you or I, they dont burqa their wives, they dont pray five times a day, they are just normal people. Islamists on the other hand.....You can pick them out, obviously not all Islamists would go for the garb, but its a pretty good sign.

So you just looked at the gear and stereotyped them as being Islamist. Grand. Don't worry about the number of times those criteria would have you 'pick out' the wrong people.

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

So you just looked at the gear and stereotyped them as being Islamist. Grand. Don't worry about the number of times those criteria would have you 'pick out' the wrong people.

What do you mean wrong people? Everyone in the garb is an regressive islamist, the only debate is whether they will commit violence or not, which obv, only a small percentage of them will. Still doesnt make them any less unwelcome in the first world, we want increased secularism, not importing more religious loons.

BattleCorp

TeaBagMania wrote: »

I don't care what anybody says that POS is a muslim and he hates America.

Guess that makes me a nutjob

Guess who just got themselves on a No Fly list.

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

What do you mean wrong people? Everyone in the garb is an regressive islamist, the only debate is whether they will commit violence or not, which obv, only a small percentage of them will. Still doesnt make them any less unwelcome in the first world, we want increased secularism, not importing more religious loons.

Sectarian nonsense. No, not "everyone in the garb is an regressive islamist". I find it amusing that you previously referred to the seventh century in a disparaging manner, yet here you are promoting the kind of thing that belongs in it.

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

Sectarian nonsense. No, not "everyone in the garb is an regressive islamist". I find it amusing that you previously referred to the seventh century in a disparaging manner, yet here you are promoting the kind of thing that belongs in it.

Yes they are Islamists otherwise they would be indistinguishable from the society they live in. They dress and act according to Islamic Law, therefore they are Islamists, Its not a hard concept to grasp. The same way if you dress and act like an Amish, shock, horror, you are one.

What Im promoting, self preservation, rationality, secularism and enlightenment values are not 7th century ideas...unlike Islam.

Billy86

conorhal wrote: »

The don't have any Islamic ghettos though, and a tiny number in proportion to their population, france has a 10% Muslim population and no end of trouble that would never be tollerated in Japan.

Actually it is 8% and not 10, slightly lower than greater Toronto which mysteriously isn't suffering from the same issues.

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Yes they are Islamists otherwise they would be indistinguishable from the society they live in. They dress and act according to Islamic Law, therefore they are Islamists, Its not a hard concept to grasp. The same way if you dress and act like an Amish, shock, horror, you
are one..

The garb is not nesseciarily indicative of an "Islamist", therefore it's a non sequitur.

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

What Im promoting, self preservation, rationality, secularism and enlightenment values are not 7th century ideas...unlike Islam.

.....by stereotyping based on an irrational unenlightened notion which fails to stand up to any scrutiny.

"Islam" - Weren't you supposed to be worried about "Islamists" and not the whole religion?

Orangebrigade

If someone invented a religion today and its leader and founder went about beheading non believers and destroying monuments and idols of a different belief system and slept with children, you would see uproar about it.

Funny what time can do.

Dohnjoe

Orangebrigade wrote: »

If someone invented a religion today and its leader and founder went about beheading non believers and destroying monuments and idols of a different belief system and slept with children, you would see uproar about it.

Funny what time can do.

There needs to be more uproar about ISIS, like some sort of coalition of countries from the US, to UK, France, Iran, Iraq, Russia.. bombing them?

or should the average Irish Muslim be outside in this weather telling passerby's that ISIS are bad and down with that sort of thing..

How does this work?

Orangebrigade

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There needs to be more uproar about ISIS, like some sort of coalition of countries from the US, to UK, France, Iran, Iraq, Russia.. bombing them?

or should the average Irish Muslim be outside in this weather telling passerby's that ISIS are bad and down with that sort of thing..

How does this work?

Of course you can argue about Islamic terrorists and so on. It's just no one thinks you should discuss the thing that gives them the inspiration to strap a suicide vest to themselves.

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

The garb is not nesseciarily indicative of an "Islamist", therefore it's a non sequitur.


.....by stereotyping based on an irrational unenlightened notion which fails to stand up to any scrutiny.

"Islam" - Weren't you supposed to be worried about "Islamists" and not the whole religion?

In the west it is...
I see a sikh walking down the street I can logically assume he is a Sikh due to his garb, same with an amish, a Hare Krishna etc etc. So when I see a woman wrapped head to toe in bin liner and her skull capped dress wearing bearded husband marching alongside, one can rightly assume said person is an islamist, otherwise they would be dressed like a normal person.

They are dressed that way because they are hardliners, Islamists, and lo and behold they were.

Nodin

Orangebrigade wrote: »

Of course you can argue about Islamic terrorists and so on. It's just no one thinks you should discuss the thing that gives them the inspiration to strap a suicide vest to themselves.

So, following on from that logic, we should blame Protestantism for the UDA, UVF and Ian Paisley etc?

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

In the west it is...
I see a sikh walking down the street I can logically assume he is a Sikh due to his garb, same with an amish, a Hare Krishna etc etc. So when I see a woman wrapped head to toe in bin liner and her skull capped dress wearing bearded husband marching alongside, one can rightly assume said person is an islamist, otherwise they would be dressed like a normal person.

They are dressed that way because they are hardliners, Islamists, and lo and behold they were.

You are conflating muslim garb with Islamism. It - along with your choice of words above - is an horrific example of stereotyping, xenophobia and sectarianism.

JPNelsforearm

Nodin wrote: »

You are conflating muslim garb with Islamism. It - along with your choice of words above - is an horrific example of stereotyping, xenophobia and sectarianism.

They would wear normal clothes if they weren't Islamists, its implicit.
It is recognised as Islamic garb

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_clothing

Dont lump muslims in with these headers.

LOL at "horrific example of stereotyping, xenophobia and sectarianism." Its 2015, the year of our Donald, dont you know PC is kill?

Nodin

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

They would wear normal clothes if they weren't Islamists, its implicit.
It is recognised as Islamic garb

Islamic and Islamist are two separate things. This was pointed out to you earlier.

Orangebrigade

Nodin wrote: »

So, following on from that logic, we should blame Protestantism for the UDA, UVF and Ian Paisley etc?

I can't deny that Protestantism has a fierce element to it which can lead to such groups and inspiration such as For God and Ulster. Let's not ignore it.

Religion is a very powerful tool and very seducing. Ian Paisley got all his inspiration from his Protestant faith.

Nodin

Orangebrigade wrote: »

I can't deny that Protestantism has a fierce element to it which can lead to such groups and inspiration such as For God and Ulster. Let's not ignore it.

Religion is a very powerful tool and very seducing. Ian Paisley got all his inspiration from his Protestant faith.

But do we consider all those who practice Protestantism as Ian Paisley? And, lets face it, when somebody says "Episcopalian" there isn't a rush to find cover and hide the women and children.

Orangebrigade

Nodin wrote: »

But do we consider all those who practice Protestantism as Ian Paisley? And, lets face it, when somebody says "Episcopalian" there isn't a rush to find cover and hide the women and children.

Most Protestants would be Conservative or have Conservative views on social situations in NI.

What Donald Trump said was just for publicity, don't even think he believes what he said. It is just for effect to get himself headlines which has worked. He was in South Carolina, a very proud people who hold deeply held Conservative and religion.

He just wants to win these primaries, he doesn't care how he does it.

Amazingfun

This is pretty good: Molyneux's take on Trump's proposal re: Islamic immigration.

Amazingfun

ooooh:

San Bernardino shooters planned bigger attack, investigators believe

Farook and Malik were in the final planning stages of an assault on a location or building that housed a lot more people than the Inland Regional Center, possibly a nearby school or college, according to federal sources familiar with the widening investigation.

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-sb-shooting-20151211-story.html

Nodin

Amazingfun wrote: »

This is pretty good: Molyneux's take on Trump's proposal re: Islamic immigration.
.............

And whats your take on it?

Amazingfun

Nodin wrote: »

And whats your take on it?

I already said this is good, but I suppose I can say it's excellent really, and I hope everyone, including you, will watch it

Nodin

Amazingfun wrote: »

I already said this is good, but I suppose I can say it's excellent really, and I hope everyone, including you, will watch it

You can't summarise it?

You can't give your own more detailed take on Trumps "immigration policy"?

Amazingfun

Nodin wrote: »

You can't summarise it?

You can't watch it yourself? Yes, I think you have it in you, take it in small chunks maybe....

Nodin

Amazingfun wrote: »

You can't watch it yourself? ....

No, nor should I have to given that it's customary to provide a synopsis when posting a video.

You can't give your own personal more detailed take on Trumps "immigration policy"?

Amazingfun

Ah so you need a synopsis?

Ok: Trump is right, the media truly are 70% lying scum, Israel/Jews treatment of immigrants is very interesting and reveals a very curious double standard when contrasted with the non-stop "outrage" directed at Trump.

Enjoy!

Nodin

Amazingfun wrote: »

Ah so you need a synopsis?

Ok: Trump is right, the media truly are 70% lying scum, Israel/Jews treatment of immigrants is very interesting and reveals a very curious double standard when contrasted with the non-stop "outrage" directed at Trump.

I wouldn't consider Trump a bastion of integrity myself.

Israel and "Jews" are different things, unless you are IS or Stefan Molyneux.

What's your own personal more detailed take on Trumps "immigration policy"?

Wompa1

Amazingfun wrote: »

Ah so you need a synopsis?

Ok: Trump is right, the media truly are 70% lying scum, Israel/Jews treatment of immigrants is very interesting and reveals a very curious double standard when contrasted with the non-stop "outrage" directed at Trump.

Enjoy!

I watched all of his videos about the current candidates. He did such a great job on most of them but then showed his own personal bias on others. Too bad. Watch the Ben Carson episode. He gave him a fair shake but didn't do the same for others...meh!

Amazingfun

Nodin wrote: »

I wouldn't consider Trump a bastion of integrity myself.

Fascinating, and so shocking, lol. Note I never asked for your opinion of Trump's integrity, mostly because it's not a mystery, and you are not someone capable of appreciating Trump's awesomeness anyways

Amazingfun

Wompa1 wrote: »

I watched all of his videos about the current candidates. He did such a great job on most of them but then showed his own personal bias on others. Too bad. Watch the Ben Carson episode. He gave him a fair shake but didn't do the same for others...meh!

In fairness he has been really working overtime to put a LOT of material out lately. I have watched a good few, but not all, will get to the rest this week.

kettlehead

Two 'asylum seekers' in Finland were arrested for executing eleven unarmed Iraqi air cadets. They were caught as ISIS recorded and uploaded the executions. The Finnish Interior Minister has said that 300 'asylum seekers' are affiliated with terrorist groups.

Interior Minister: 300 asylum seekers in Finland have links to terrorism
Interior Minister Petteri Orpo said on Thursday that the arrest of two Iraqis on suspicion of eleven murders in Iraq shows that Finnish law enforcement is up to the task. Orpo added that according to Finnish intelligence, some 300 asylum seekers in Finland have some link to terrorism.

www.yle.fi/uutiset/interior_minister_300_asylum_seekers_in_finland_have_links_to_terrorism/8520152

They would have travelled through numerous countries to get to Finland. If they can get to Finland, they can get into any EU member state. Now, to me, closing the borders or severely curtailing and vetting the influx is a lot more rational and sane than the current situation and a lot of people will lean towards Trumps suggestions.

Christy42

Amazingfun wrote: »

Ah so you need a synopsis?

Ok: Trump is right, the media truly are 70% lying scum, Israel/Jews treatment of immigrants is very interesting and reveals a very curious double standard when contrasted with the non-stop "outrage" directed at Trump.

Enjoy!

A: liberals are more annoyed about gun crime because it kills more people. Like a lot more people every year, especially in the states. Linking the two to say both are trying to prevent deaths is willfully ignoring this rather important fact.

B: Wasn't the reason a lot of people went to the states to get away from religious persecution?

C: Yes Sharia law is ****e, why does that make it right to tell people trying to get away from it

No one is at war with all Muslims. Otherwise we would be in a lot of trouble given the numbers. Hence the banning all Muslims is not like banning Germans in ww2.

E: The man didn't seem like he was getting to a good point anytime soon. If he had any good points please summarise them. I don't have a half hour for everyone with a camera.

Nodin

Amazingfun wrote: »

Fascinating, and so shocking, lol. Note I never asked for your opinion of Trump's integrity, mostly because it's not a mystery, and you are not someone capable of appreciating Trump's awesomeness anyways

Is there some reason you can't give your own personal more detailed take on Trumps "immigration policy"?

kettlehead

I am warming to Trump. The professionally offended Twiterrati will all be on blood pressure pills if he keeps this up. It's like Trump is finding every single possible way to be a complete asshole, and it's only making him rise in the polls. He's retweeting pol memes ffs!