Eight injured in "terrorist" stabbing attack Sweden

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Except a poster DID state that in response to my post;

I said
To which the poster directly replied

So was the reply directly made to my post meant to directly contradict my point in that post that people were going about their lives, or was it a total non-sequitur?

If that poster wasn't suggesting that these increased taxes were preventing people in those cities from going about their lives, why address it in reply to my post stating that they were?

I've no idea of the thought processes in third party's heads.
I've no idea what point you're making.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

The poster who directly replied to my comment that people in those cities were going about their lives as normal, stating that this was not the case due to the tax increases.

Again.
No one said this, despite your verbal gymnastics.


This is what they said:
Nothing about not going about their lives.
You've been gas lighting and derailing a few pages now.

Strumms wrote: »

The average person in the cities and country’s you mentioned are paying a higher tax because they are funding more police, more intelligence, more immigration, more housing, more shelter, more health, more benefits, more everything as a result of more people turning up, some legitimately, some legally but some or many not meeting any criteria of entitlement to be there.

The more people coming to live here without means on wish to contribute , the higher the investment in public services, the more burden on taxpayers and the less services available to us taxpayers..

In 20 years the asylum bill to facilitate and accommodate asylum seekers is in the region of 1.5 billion... that’s in just 20 years...

Good luck as an Irish taxpayer getting funding for rehabilitate medical treatment...when I needed it I was told to take a running jump, after my application sitting in some fûcking tossbags inbox in the HSE for 8 months after I left hospital... I’ve paid for my rehab exclusively privately....

But there are billions to be spent on accommodating, feeding, caring for the health, wellbeing and success of people just arriving off a plane, we have no plan or ability to limit cases... literally if a third of the population of the Sudan wanted to rock up here next week, 14 million people because of famine, war or whatever, legally we can’t refuse...... our glorious politicians would probably push through legislation to compulsory purchase homes from Irish people to give to them..

In actual fact, you wanted evidence of paying more tax.
Then you got it. a link and all.
Which you moved the goalposts on, had to be a tax to fund security.

Please stop soap boxing.

Unless you're going to walk me through the thing about the cows, we're done, I don't fancy a thread ban.

Fionn1952

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

I've no idea of the thought processes in third party's heads.
I've no idea what point you're making.




Again.
No one said this, despite your verbal gymnastics.


This is what they said:
Nothing about not going about their lives.
You've been gas lighting and derailing a few pages now.



In actual fact, you wanted evidence of paying more tax.
Then you got it. a link and all.
Which you moved the goalposts on, had to be a tax to fund security.

Please stop soap boxing.

Unless you're going to walk me through the thing about the cows, we're done, I don't fancy a thread ban.

It was a direct response to my statement that most people were going about their normal lives. If you can't read basic context, that's a big old heap of your own problem. To a normally mentally capable person, one would infer that responding to my comment in that manner was a direct response to said comment, and by responding to a comment about people going about their normal lives in that manner, said poster was suggesting with their response that it was an example of something which directly contradicted my own statement. If you have no idea what the poster meant, I'd suggest that you wait for that poster to clarify rather than making and arguing your own inferences.

If you're unable to converse in a manner that wouldn't lead to a thread ban I'd agree with your suggestion that you should stop responding though; it doesn't demonstrate a great degree of self control or rationality. I wish you the best of luck, and hope you never find anything during your routine checks under your bed.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

It was a direct response to my statement that most people were going about their normal lives. If you can't read basic context, that's a big old heap of your own problem. To a normally mentally capable person, one would infer that responding to my comment in that manner was a direct response to said comment, and by responding to a comment about people going about their normal lives in that manner, said poster was suggesting with their response that it was an example of something which directly contradicted my own statement. If you have no idea what the poster meant, I'd suggest that you wait for that poster to clarify rather than making and arguing your own inferences.

If you're unable to converse in a manner that wouldn't lead to a thread ban I'd agree with your suggestion that you should stop responding though; it doesn't demonstrate a great degree of self control or rationality. I wish you the best of luck, and hope you never find anything during your routine checks under your bed.

I'm just disappointed you never walked me through the whole cow thing

Fionn1952

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

I'm just disappointed you never walked me through the whole cow thing

I thought you were off to check under your bed for the night?

You're still more likely to be killed by a cow here in Ireland than an Islamic terrorist, not the most difficult logic to follow for those of a rational mindset. I could get the crayons out if it helps you?

I'll take the fact that you didn't actually address the content of the post you replied to as a difficult yet subtle acknowledgement that you accept my premise and you'd prefer to move on from the topic of my continued correctness.

On that note, I bid you adieu for tonight, and will return when I'm taking a break for a cup of tea during work tomorrow to accept your apology.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I thought you were off to check under your bed for the night?

You're still more likely to be killed by a cow here in Ireland than an Islamic terrorist, not the most difficult logic to follow for those of a rational mindset. I could get the crayons out if it helps you?

I'll take the fact that you didn't actually address the content of the post you replied to as a difficult yet subtle acknowledgement that you accept my premise and you'd prefer to move on from the topic of my continued correctness.

On that note, I bid you adieu for tonight, and will return when I'm taking a break for a cup of tea during work tomorrow to accept your apology.

So thats what the cow thing was...
I have to say, I'm rather disappointed, I was half expecting something more.

So, in a thread about jihadi attacks in Sweden, you're talking about cow attacks in Ireland... We've also very low numbers of shark attacks, or bear attacks, but also very irrelevant to thread.

Berlin and the fags/insurance tax not accepted as it had to be Nice, Paris or Manchester, but you see fit to wither about cows in Ireland.

Fancy doing the cow thing for Western Europe? Seeing you were exerting yourself moving goal posts earlier, trying to account for your failings.(I've no idea of the cow thing, but I'm willing to have a crack at it with you).

Ah lad, thus is gold.
You're all over the place; playing by your own rules, making others play fair.

Fionn1952

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

So thats what the cow thing was...
I have to say, I'm rather disappointed, I was half expecting something more.

So, in a thread about jihadi attacks in Sweden, you're talking about cow attacks in Ireland... We've also very low numbers of shark attacks, or bear attacks, but also very irrelevant to thread.

Berlin and the fags/insurance tax not accepted as it had to be Nice, Paris or Manchester, but you see fit to wither about cows in Ireland.

Fancy doing the cow thing for Western Europe? Seeing you were exerting yourself moving goal posts earlier, trying to account for your failings.(I've no idea of the cow thing, but I'm willing to have a crack at it with you).

Ah lad, thus is gold.
You're all over the place; playing by your own rules, making others play fair.

I'm aware we have very few cow, shark or bear attacks.....the former being much more common and the latter two about as common as jihadi attacks are to have happened to your average Irish person.

A cow attack is much more likely to happen in Western Europe than a jihadi attack, a jihadi attack slightly more likely to be a cause of death if you must know. Now watch as you accuse me of going off topic for answering a question you asked!

The rest of your post increasingly descends into rambling, so I won't address it any further. Perhaps your advice to yourself from earlier was solid.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I'm aware we have very few cow, shark or bear attacks.....the former being much more common and the latter two about as common as jihadi attacks are to have happened to your average Irish person.

A cow attack is much more likely to happen in Western Europe than a jihadi attack, a jihadi attack slightly more likely to be a cause of death if you must know. Now watch as you accuse me of going off topic for answering a question you asked!

The rest of your post increasingly descends into rambling, so I won't address it any further. Perhaps your advice to yourself from earlier was solid.

The best advice is oft ignored

While its a little more relevant, its too little too late, but least you acknowledge a jihadi is probably more likely to kill you than a cow in Western Europe.
Progress.

At this stage, you should really apologise to the members for what you've done to this thread, withdraw for a time, lick your wounds and let time heal them.

Fionn1952

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

The best advice is oft ignored

While its a little more relevant, its too little too late, but least you acknowledge a jihadi is probably more likely to kill you than a cow in Western Europe.
Progress.

At this stage, you should really apologise to the members for what you've done to this thread, withdraw for a time, lick your wounds and let time heal them.

As previously stated, feel free to report my posts and should a moderator see fit, I will of course cease posting upon their instruction. Resorting to outright ad hominems really is the last vestige of someone with absolutely nothing of merit to say.

I will however give your advise all the consideration I would a nutjob rambling on a street corner about the Muslims coming to get us.

enricoh

Fionn1952 wrote: »

As previously stated, feel free to report my posts and should a moderator see fit, I will of course cease posting upon their instruction. Resorting to outright ad hominems really is the last vestige of someone with absolutely nothing of merit to say.

I will however give your advise all the consideration I would a nutjob rambling on a street corner about the Muslims coming to get us.

Only 23000 potential jihadis in the uk according to mi5. They're probably making it up for the bit of overtime , eh fionn?! now they should stop wasting time preventing terror attacks n get the manpower out to the countryside to identify wicked bulls! Mi5 are nutjobs on the street corner folks!

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huge-scale-of-terror-threat-revealed-uk-home-to-23-000-jihadists-3zvn58mhq

Fionn1952

enricoh wrote: »

Only 23000 potential jihadis in the uk according to mi5. They're probably making it up for the bit of overtime , eh fionn?! now they should stop wasting time preventing terror attacks n get the manpower out to the countryside to identify wicked bulls! Mi5 are nutjobs on the street corner folks!

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/huge-scale-of-terror-threat-revealed-uk-home-to-23-000-jihadists-3zvn58mhq

From your own link

About 3,000 people from the total group are judged to pose a threat

That would be out of the UK Muslim population of almost three and a half million.....so yes, I'd say less than a tenth of a percent of Muslims being judged to pose a threat would support my assertion that blanket treatment of Muslims is a pretty inefficient way to target stopping Jihadi terror attacks.....which is probably why MI5 are spending their efforts on identifying actual threats rather than just hassling anyone who looks like they might be a bit too Muslim.

biko

More news

Apparently Tamim Sultani was upset that he wasn't given money to fly home to Afghanistan (unclear if it was for a holiday or what).

https://www.dn.se/sverige/den-misstankte-22-aringens-vanner-han-ville-tillbaka-till-afghanistan/

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

If you can't read basic context, that's a big old heap of your own problem. To a normally mentally capable person..

Fionn1952 wrote: »

The rest of your post increasingly descends into rambling.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

...not the most difficult logic to follow for those of a rational mindset. I could get the crayons out if it helps you?

And then

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Resorting to outright ad hominems really is the last vestige of someone with absolutely nothing of merit to say.

The hypocrisy of the woke.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I will however give your advise all the consideration I would a nutjob rambling on a street corner about the Muslims coming to get us.

Whos talking about Muslims coming to get us? More gas lighting.

You do know Muslims are not a homogeneous group?
We're talking about jihadi attacks (and briefly indulging your cow fetish).

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

From your own link

That would be out of the UK Muslim population of almost three and a half million.....so yes, I'd say less than a tenth of a percent of Muslims being judged to pose a threat would support my assertion that blanket treatment of Muslims is a pretty inefficient way to target stopping Jihadi terror attacks.....which is probably why MI5 are spending their efforts on identifying actual threats rather than just hassling anyone who looks like they might be a bit too Muslim.

Talk about bad faith.

The whole quote reads
Intelligence officers have identified 23,000 jihadist extremists living in Britain as potential terrorist attackers, it emerged yesterday...

About 3,000 people from the total group are judged to pose a threat and are under investigation or active monitoring in 500 operations being run by police and intelligence services. The 20,000 others have featured in previous inquiries and are categorised as posing a “residual risk”.

Have another look at your maths. More muddying.
Who's more likely to commit an attack, a 4yr girl or a 25yr old male?

And where is this blanket maltreatment "hassling"of all Muslims?

Baggly

Mod

Fionn & Mike - quit it now or ill give you a holiday from the thread.

Fionn1952

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

Fionn & Mike - quit it now or ill give you a holiday from the thread.

Reprimand noted. I'll refrain from any further interaction with that poster lest either of us be tempted to fall back to trading barbed comments.

Fionn1952

Fionn1952 wrote: »

Reprimand noted. I'll refrain from any further interaction with that poster lest either of us be tempted to fall back to trading barbed comments.

Agreed.

Hector Savage

Baggly wrote: »

Mod

Fionn & Mike - quit it now or ill give you a holiday from the thread.

Yeah Mike, quit bringing up uncomfortable facts !

Baggly

Hector Savage wrote: »

Yeah Mike, quit bringing up uncomfortable facts !

Mod

Dont post in this thread again.

biko

biko wrote: »

More news

Apparently Tamim Sultani was upset that he wasn't given money to fly home to Afghanistan (unclear if it was for a holiday or what).

https://www.dn.se/sverige/den-misstankte-22-aringens-vanner-han-ville-tillbaka-till-afghanistan/

The Afghan attacker in Vetlanda should never have been in Sweden.
He sought asylum 2015 in Norway and told them he was born 1988 (27 years old). Norway denied the application.
He then processed to apply for asylum in Sweden and now claimed to be born 1999 (11 years younger!). Sweden bought his story and he got a temp leave to reamin.
https://www.dn.se/sverige/misstankte-mannen-i-vetlanda-sokte-asyl-i-norge/
Sweden and Norway are both in the Dublin area so this guy should not have been able to apply in Sweden at all.