General / Off-Topic Third incident in two weeks in Germany

[Minonian]

Nope I am serious.
You must be Donald Trump.
I dont think in light of your recent posts anyone could deny that

And i did not think you can use such low bow.

Edit;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

In this case? To trumph, with the help of a little baiting... If there is no monster, paint to him a pair of horn, and stick in his back a pair of leather wing.

Edit2;

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

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

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

And all the time you boys attempted to use straw man reasoning to twist my words meaning into something to your liking. your mistake was i beaten back all of the attempt.

Forgot something? Yeah Sicilian defense. taking my worlds my style and try to use against me. It's the sign lack of ideas. Not this is the first time you attempted this.
I think you consider this tactics as a sort of super move, finishing blow but i seen you using in others and also this is your second attempt against me. And this is a move, you perfected for a while, but you know nothing else. Its not a supermove, but final attempt.
Desperate measure.

Edit# too many. The appeal of our good heart because of the poor desperate migrants also a fallacy of reason, in this time associated with a false dilemma. We either let them in or leave them in their fate and let them die. It's based on the appeal of guilt or pity. Sorry mate! But its useless.

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

 

[Sunleader]

And i did not think you can use such low bow.

Edit;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

In this case? To trumph, with the help of a little baiting... If there is no monster, paint to him a pair of horn, and stick in his back a pair of leather wing.

Edit2;

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

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

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

And all the time you boys attempted to use straw man reasoning to twist my words meaning into something to your liking. your mistake was i beaten back all of the attempt.

Forgot something? Yeah Sicilian defense. taking my worlds my style and try to use against me. It's the sign lack of ideas. Not this is the first time you attempted this.
I think you consider this tactics as a sort of super move, finishing blow but i seen you using in others and also this is your second attempt against me. And this is a move, you perfected for a while, but you know nothing else. Its not a supermove, but final attempt.
Desperate measure.

Edit# too many. The appeal of our good heart because of the poor desperate migrants also a fallacy of reason, in this time associated with a false dilemma. We either let them in or leave them in their fate and let them die. It's based on the appeal of guilt or pity. Sorry mate! But its useless.

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

I am not using strawman reasoning mate.
I am making an perfectly valid argument here. You just dont understand it because your in denial.

But you will realize when your Hair Grows Blonde.

 

[Minonian]

Yes you do, and yes you just trying to paint me as a dumb half racist, idiot. Sorry man but the fact you see me in this way does not means i really are a dumb half racist butt hole.

And between the two of us, you are at denial, in the matter of fact the reason of denial also a mirror defense move from your part. -A little bit childish, - you are bad no! you are baaad! Laughable.
Besides? One of the most stupid reasoning ever to simply say the other is in denial when he just don't agree with you. Do you ever had the idea the other is not in denial, but you are wrong? In this case not even "karma" can help on you... Especially a faked one.

Getting back to more serious matter, than your empty childish yapping about my racism and Trumph like dumbness?

Both the choices we either let the expelled refugees there or send them back to their death, and we either let in the immigrants, or let them die, are false choices, There are other opinions too you know?

At first, if we can't send back the expelled migrants we can still place them in a closed camp, what's rightful in case they are did something wrong to deserve casting them out, and thus proven we can't let them to run freely amongst us.

At second? We can still send the migrants rescued in the sea to somewhere else like a refugee camp outside of EU territories. Or just home. So that's also not true we must left them into their fate if we don't rescue them.
How we do it? Like, i don't know? By changing or trickily applying the seafaring laws, making new international treaty?
Finally? You can call me a heartless monster if you want to, and i'm not going to care. because? See my previous comment.

Edit; this was your second attempt to accuse me something like this. because fair is fair, i tell you you have one last attempt. After that? Ignore list.
Made myself clear?

 

[Sunleader]

Ok.i guess i.ll explain it as you dont seem to get it.


For those who aint Realizing it.
I am doing a copy of Minorians behavior.

Meaning i am doing a ridiculous claim based on repeating a number of incidents and then interpreting them to my liking to support my claim.



Simply put i am switching out the claim of Refugees being Terrorists send by ISIS and destroying Europe if we dont close borders for the claim that he is Donald Trump.
And i am switching out the incidents he keeps citing as evidence for that despite them not really meaning what he claims they do... for his posts which i then claim to mean hes Donald Trump.

While the rest is basicly a copy of his statements.




I am doing this to show just how ridiculous the reasoning is he tries to use there.

Or to put it more simple.

If he claims that Europe will be destroyed by terrorists (which dont even manage to kill more people each year than die from being crushed by their own furnitur) if we dont keep refugees out.
Than i claim that he will turn into Donald Trump (and grow Blond Hair) if he doesnt stop posting right wing propaganda statements like Donald Trump.



Greetz Sun

 

[Minonian]

You have one more attempt.

 

[Sunleader]

Yes you do, and yes you just trying to paint me as a dumb half racist, idiot. Sorry man but the fact you see me in this way does not means i really are a dumb half racist butt hole.

And between the two of us, you are at denial, in the matter of fact the reason of denial also a mirror defense move from your part. -A little bit childish, - you are bad no! you are baaad! Laughable.
Besides? One of the most stupid reasoning ever to simply say the other is in denial when he just don't agree with you. Do you ever had the idea the other is not in denial, but you are wrong? In this case not even "karma" can help on you... Especially a faked one.

Getting back to more serious matter, than your empty childish yapping about my racism and Trumph like dumbness?

Both the choices we either let the expelled refugees there or send them back to their death, and we either let in the immigrants, or let them die, are false choices, There are other opinions too you know?

At first, if we can't send back the expelled migrants we can still place them in a closed camp, what's rightful in case they are did something wrong to deserve casting them out, and thus proven we can't let them to run freely amongst us.

At second? We can still send the migrants rescued in the sea to somewhere else like a refugee camp outside of EU territories. Or just home. So that's also not true we must left them into their fate if we don't rescue them.
How we do it? Like, i don't know? By changing or trickily applying the seafaring laws, making new international treaty?
Finally? You can call me a heartless monster if you want to, and i'm not going to care. because? See my previous comment.

TLDR

You want to Imprison any Refugees by default and that preferably in a Country not in the EU.
Given you failed to notice. Thats exactly the Deal we got with Turkey.

Unfortunately as you might have noticed.
Not only do Refugees which are Imprisoned in a closed Camp tend to radicalize themselves because of unfair treatment and then run amok or riot. Which makes such Camps perfect recruiting grounds for ISIS.
But also other countries which are ready to do this are rare and demand alot of money for it as compensation.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

You have one more attempt.

You have none left tough.
You wasted all of em by making ridiculous claims which were outside any logic.

 

[Sunleader]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/25/tokyo-knife-attack-stabbing-sagamihara

They must have allowed too many Islamist Terrorist Refugees in.
They just went ahead and topped the Number of all 4 Attacks in Germany in a Single Attack......

 

[DragoonKnight]

Its sad that some people are still blind to all the harm that refugees from Islamic countries are causing. Part of the problem with allowing refugees is that along with the people fleeing the violence, it is also very easy for terrorists to cross the border this way.

Terrorists / ISIS are treating this as a war, but we are not taking this seriously. Each attack is just a police action to us. They kill dozens and all we do is foolishly talk about banning guns or some other thing that would not have stopped them to begin with.
"I'll tell you what war is about, you've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough they stop fighting." - General Curtis LeMay

 

[FuzzySpider]

You are right. But it is not me who insult the others

Really?

This is a serious charge. You should measure your words. Apparently, the terrorists are not alone in having psychiatric problems

Both accusing others of having psychiatric problems, and using psychiatric problems as a pejorative, aren't insults to you? I think the latter is particularly offensive.

And well go to tell these beautiful words to 130 deaths of Paris and to 84 deaths of Nice. And their hundreds persons wounded very seriously. Not to mention Charlie Hebdo, Mohamed Mehra, Kaled Kelkal (1995, the bombs in metro in Paris), Amedy Coulibaly and all the others. Go tell all the victims that it is a real minimal impact. You are unconscious

An appeal to emotion. That doesn't change the facts of this;

1. The actual risk of terrorism is pretty minimal.

2. The psychological effects of terror on a population are amplified, not diminished, by people acting fearfully too it.

3. Holding an entire culture responsible for it both creates more terror and is bigoted and ignorant on the part of those pointing the finger.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Do you say the same to the victims of Breivik and other right wing nutters who think they are waging a culture war against Islam and that's why their actions are justified? You are spreading the message that has lead to mass shootings, arson attacks, stabbings and so forth. How is your message of fear and hate any better? If Islam is responsible for the "islamic terrorists" the the "anti immigration" islamophobic rabble rousers and those repeating their message are responsible for Breivik and his kind.

But obviously that I have not more consideration for the murderers as Breivik and other fanatics who lead a war against the Islam. But this is not the subject here. We speak here of the Islamists in this thread. Messages of hatred and fear? You fantasize. You believe that the inhabitants of Nice (for example) need to hear messages to have afraid or to have the hatred of the Islamists ? They have not need for that. They saw. It is sufficient. It is not your European fellow countrymen who spread the messages of fear and hatred, but the islamists, that you defend constantly, by diverting systematically the conversation towards the other categories of criminals, and other stupid statistics like the road accidents, the diseases, etc .... Come spend your holiday on the French Riviera to understand that people have not need to hear fear and hate messages to be afraid and precisely have the hatred

 

[EdzUp]

Agreed. So here is my pennies worth....

I live in the UK. There are many muslims living here and have done so peacefully for a very long time. These, I would call moderates and most where born here and have grown
up in a modern western society because the UK is a modern western society.

However, refugees who have come to the UK recently from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan etc... have had the biggest culture shock of their lives. They have no idea how to conduct themselves
because they are used to being ruled by brutal dictators who's laws come from the teachings of Islam. And that is where the problem lies. They come from a land where other religions are outlawed. To them, Islam is the only religion and anyone who tries to attack it is considered an infidel and is condemned to death. Their version of Islam is completely incompatible with modern day western society. And I am not just talking about the terrorists. Remember the recent boat crossings where half of one boat contained Muslims and the other half Christians? Well, if you recall, the Muslims threw all of the Christians overboard who then drowned. The culprits were not terrorists, these were just homeless Muslim refugees. It just shows you how these Muslim refugees have no empathy towards other people of other faiths.

Its easy to condemn these people for what they did but there should have been a transition period for all these refugees so that they could educated about western society and to learn to live by its rules.

If you think about it, the problem is not Muslims. The problem is Islam and the sooner it is erased from our society the better.

As an outsider to religion I see the problem for what it is. In my opinion religion is like football your all segregated into groups who then over centuries grow to hate each other.

It's not Humanity that needs to be got rid of its religion ALL religions, this way we can all move forwards as Humanity which we are all born into FIRST.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Really ?

Yes, I answered your insult simply

 

[verminstar]

@Patrick...he's a troll and ye really would be best off just muting the guy or stop interacting with him...seriously.

 

[FuzzySpider]

As an outsider to religion I see the problem for what it is. In my opinion religion is like football your all segregated into groups who then over centuries grow to hate each other.

Not necessarily true. Religion in general doesn't require you to hate other religions, contrary to popular belief.

It's not Humanity that needs to be got rid of its religion ALL religions, this way we can all move forwards as Humanity which we are all born into FIRST.

Humans are "hard wired" to be religious. Even people who are hard-line atheists show religious thinking in how they behave (deference to concepts of morality, altruism, etc). Not that one needs to believe in any form of god at all to be "good", but one must have a belief in "good", which itself is an act of faith.

This is the problem. When the right wing brain is scared statiatics are meaningless. The anecdote and feeling rules. Ot doesn't matter that Islamic terror is a minor factor, what matters is that Islamic terror exists at all and it's terrifying.

You are referring to the UCL study which showed that people with conservative leanings had larger amygdalas? There is another study conducted at Ontario that shows something similar.

I don't know if you read this article that I linked in another thread, but it's well worth reading. It applies to the new global politics that is emerging. The schism that used to exist in politics, typically between rich and poor with the "squeezed middle" courted for votes, is being replaced by an altogether new form of politics. It is between liberal and conservative, educated and uneducated, progressive and regressive.

Look at what happened in the recent referendum - the wealthiest citizens and businessmen generally voted to remain, and found themselves in political agreement with most urban-dwelling middle class and lower class people. The more rural and isolated conservatives, lords, gentry, and upper crust found themselves in alliance with the "hardhat" working class who all voted to leave.

Look at what is going on in the USA right now. Trump supporters aren't just traditional Republicans. There are people who were supporting Sanders who have now stated their intention is to vote Trump because Clinton is running instead. The poorest citizens (typically white or non-ethnic groups) are coming out en masse to support Trump.

I'm not quite sure what the answer is to all this beyond maybe basic intelligence tests for our politicians to ensure they are capable of objective decision making. But that might well create civil unrest.

Humanity might face a difficult future.

 

[Minonian]

You wasted all of em by making ridiculous claims which were outside any logic.

What logic? I don't see any in you, and honestly fed up your .

 

[Necronaught]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/25/tokyo-knife-attack-stabbing-sagamihara

They must have allowed too many Islamist Terrorist Refugees in.
They just went ahead and topped the Number of all 4 Attacks in Germany in a Single Attack......

Yes it has been all over the news that Japan hasn't let many Muslims in and that their terrorist attack rate was low. Then what a coincidence this happens right on cue to fit your narrative.

The world is full of crazies (Manchurian candidates) isn't it?

 

[Minonian]

Yes, I answered your insult simply

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36892785

We are not going to let in Hungary this mob. Muslims are free to practice their religion, within our borders. But we don't need this madness and smart enough to see what it means and learn from it without experiencing it.

I suggest to france to remove the worst or keep them in closed camps until they can go home.
They are going to be radicalised inside the camps? Lol WUT??? They are expelled, or branded as criminals because they are already the worst.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Two Islamists killed a priest (cut the throat), and injured three Christian faithful (one seriously) in the little church of Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray in France

 

[Adept]

Humans are "hard wired" to be religious. Even people who are hard-line atheists show religious thinking in how they behave (deference to concepts of morality, altruism, etc). Not that one needs to believe in any form of god at all to be "good", but one must have a belief in "good", which itself is an act of faith.

This is not true. Religious thinkers love to claim that moral behaviour and ethics come from religious teachings and that atheists are dangerous and amoral. You are falling to this trap even though you change the wording a little.

Humans are hard wired* to be altruistic, and ethics is a branch of philosophy rather than theology. Cooperative, even altruistic behaviour is rational rather than religious and irrational.

*experiments conducted with small toddlers and strangers for instance, as well as studies with monkeys and apes to determine their approach to fairness and cooperation.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

You are referring to the UCL study which showed that people with conservative leanings had larger amygdalas? There is another study conducted at Ontario that shows something similar.

Yeah, this stuff: http://www.salon.com/2014/07/29/sec..._conservatives_see_a_different_hostile_world/

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Yes it has been all over the news that Japan hasn't let many Muslims in and that their terrorist attack rate was low. Then what a coincidence this happens right on cue to fit your narrative.

The world is full of crazies (Manchurian candidates) isn't it?

The above sounded like classic paranoid schizophrenic reasoning. If you think the person went on a stabbing spree to "fit the narrative in the West" you are living in a rather strange world.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36892785

We are not going to let in Hungary this mob. Muslims are free to practice their religion, within our borders. But we don't need this madness and smart enough to see what it means and learn from it without experiencing it.

I suggest to france to remove the worst or keep them in closed camps until they can go home.
They are going to be radicalised inside the camps? Lol WUT??? They are expelled, or branded as criminals because they are already the worst.

*sigh* I know I'm wasting my time, but how do you suggest France separates "the worst" to put in those camps? I assume by "the worst" you mean putting all refugees in camps so you can feel safe. You've suggested as much before. What is this "the worst" angle about then? Trying to make the internment sound more reasonable?

 

[FuzzySpider]

This is not true. Religious thinkers love to claim that moral behaviour and ethics come from religious teachings and that atheists are dangerous and amoral. You are falling to this trap even though you change the wording a little.

Humans are hard wired* to be altruistic, and ethics is a branch of philosophy rather than theology. Cooperative, even altruistic behaviour is rational rather than religious and irrational.

*experiments conducted with small toddlers and strangers for instance, as well as studies with monkeys and apes to determine their approach to fairness and cooperation.

It isn't altruism when it is the function of evolutionary survival. People perform extraordinary acts of selfless behaviour at times, which if looked at in terms of human psychology, are as aberrant as going into a church and shooting a bunch of people because you hate the colour of their skin. In fact it's worse - at least the xenophobe is attempting to protect and enhance those who are more likely to share a genetic past with him. But when people perform real altrusitic acts, they are revered as heroes.

It defies logic.

As I said, belief in god or religious observance isn't necessary for "good" behaviour. However, being able to make the jump from fact to value, for is to ought, is absolutely necessary. Indeed the very concepts of good and evil are values and unquantifiable in a rational sense. Such irrationality is from the same sort of thinking that gives us both culture and religion, which is why religion, culture, and morality are all so tightly wound up together.

I favour secularism, which is nothing close "getting rid of religions". Trying to remove religion because "it is wrong" would be simply trying to supplant one belief with another. Whilst attempts to get rid of religion on the grounds of lack of consistency and logic in religion would lead to the same arguments being applied to culture and morality.

[video=youtube;amY6wjfU48k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amY6wjfU48k[/video]