Woman beheaded in London

[krych3k]

My contention is that I only know for a fact that he's a Muslim when the facts are reported...you may be right in your assumption, but you don't know for a fact that he's Muslim, or a plumber.

Right, so if a tree falls in the woods and you don't hear it, it doesn't make a sound in the forest you live in with Osomir. The point is that he is a Muslim whether or not you know it, or choose to believe it. Naivety masquerading as caution before "knowing all the facts" isn't an endearing trait, despite you thinking that it is. It makes you look like a babe in the woods, which is sad assuming you're an adult. Even a leftist like Osomir (although he deludes himself into thinking he's a centrist) can admit that the murderer is "probably" a Muslim.

I wonder, when gangs shoot up neighbourhoods in Chicago, do you not assume that the murderers are young black males?

Whatever I 'assume' doesn't make it a fact.
Saying that the guy was "probably a Muslim" doesn't call it a fact.
You're accusing others of having no understanding of nuance when all you can do is spell the word.

He is a Muslim whether or not anybody, including myself, know it or admit it. His religious identity isn't contingent on the posts, opinions, or beliefs of anyone in this thread. What happens in this thread Your resistance to what should be the obvious truth is quite sad. Whether or not he is a Muslim is also irrelevant to the "chances" of him not being a Muslim.

As far as Osomir goes, he has now diverted to the typical deflection: even if he is a Muslim (which he's conceded he "probably" is, which is about as close to any honesty we'll get from him), the murder may not have anything to do him being a Muslim or with Islam more generally. It never ends with these leftists. They think that these truths aren't truths because they can't somehow be diluted to some mathematical formula (leftists think they're scientific, when they're anything but).

 

[Osomir]

He is a Muslim whether or not anybody, including myself, know it

"He's a Muslim even if I don't know it!" <--- lol

This entire thread is about methodological standards. The fact that you can't see that even after it has been explained to you multiple times is starting to become a little sad. The fact that you want to defend assumptions as absolute fact is even more sad.

You are essentially wiping your ass with our entire legal system.

 

[krych3k]

He is a Muslim whether or not anybody, including myself, know it

"He's a Muslim even if I don't know it!" <--- lol

This entire thread is about methodological standards. The fact that you can't see that even after it has been explained to you multiple times is starting to become a little sad. The fact that you want to defend assumptions as absolute fact is even more sad.

You are essentially wiping your ass with our entire legal system.

This isn't a court of law, this is an internet forum. Don't be so pretentious as to assume that we're operating on that calibre. More importantly, even the legal system doesn't require the jury to know to an absolute certainty what happened in order to convict the accused, the standard is reasonable doubt. Lastly, the man isn't on trial in this thread. What we are doing is examining the absurd positions of leftists like yourself who refuse to acknowledge the truth in order to commit to a false self-perception of demanding "evidence" before knowing anything. In other words, Osomir can't know anything until the NYT tells him he's allowed to know. That's a pretty sad way to operate, that you can't apply anything you know about the world until an "expert" connects the dots for you. God gave (most) of us the ability to obtain knowledge and apply wisdom. Not you, apparently.

 

[idb]

He is a Muslim whether or not anybody, including myself, know it

"He's a Muslim even if I don't know it!" <--- lol

This entire thread is about methodological standards. The fact that you can't see that even after it has been explained to you multiple times is starting to become a little sad. The fact that you want to defend assumptions as absolute fact is even more sad.

You are essentially wiping your ass with our entire legal system.

This isn't a court of law, this is an internet forum. Don't be so pretentious as to assume that we're operating on that calibre. More importantly, even the legal system doesn't require the jury to know to an absolute certainty what happened in order to convict the accused, the standard is reasonable doubt. Lastly, the man isn't on trial in this thread. What we are doing is examining the absurd positions of leftists like yourself who refuse to acknowledge the truth in order to commit to a false self-perception of demanding "evidence" before knowing anything. In other words, Osomir can't know anything until the NYT tells him he's allowed to know. That's a pretty sad way to operate, that you can't apply anything you know about the world until an "expert" connects the dots for you. God gave (most) of us the ability to obtain knowledge and apply wisdom. Not you, apparently.

Are you talking about leftists that don't acknowledge the truth that assumption = wisdom?

 

[Gracie]

Beheadings, middle eastern perp=usually Muslim. That's just the way it is. Fair or unfair train of thought.

Just like ..............

Single woman walking down street at night. Group of black guys hanging out on a stoop chatting. Woman crosses street. Why? Cuz they are black, in a group, it is night.

Is that racist? Or conditioning due to media?

 

[Dragonlady]

No idiot, it makes people less likely to be victims as opposed to places where you have zero chance not to be a victim.

You mean like the people in the movie theatre in Colorado, or the children in Newtown, or the Boston bombings. Are you saying that if people were allowed to carry weapons in these areas, all those people wouldn't have died?

 

[idb]

No idiot, it makes people less likely to be victims as opposed to places where you have zero chance not to be a victim.

You mean like the people in the movie theatre in Colorado, or the children in Newtown, or the Boston bombings. Are you saying that if people were allowed to carry weapons in these areas, all those people wouldn't have died?

I think that's what he's saying alright.

 

[JoeBlam]

No idiot, it makes people less likely to be victims as opposed to places where you have zero chance not to be a victim.

You have statistical studies to support such a claim I'm sure?

Please tell me you don't need statistics to tell you that if you are being attacked by a knife wielding criminal who intends to behead you that you wouldn't be safer if you had a gun to defend yourself with...my Gawwwd... You can't possibly be that stupid.

Don't bother with this clown....he'll hen-peck everything you say, hijack the thread, and make you wish you'd never answered his first, seemingly innocent, question. I got him on iggy...waste of bandwidth.

 

[JoeBlam]

Beheadings, middle eastern perp=usually Muslim. That's just the way it is. Fair or unfair train of thought.

Just like ..............

Single woman walking down street at night. Group of black guys hanging out on a stoop chatting. Woman crosses street. Why? Cuz they are black, in a group, it is night.

Is that racist? Or conditioning due to media?

Common sense.....Jesse Jackson said he'll cross a street rather than encounter certain groups of young blacks.

 

[Katzndogz]

So if the media stopped reporting attacks by groups of black guys, they wouldn't happen?

 

[Katzndogz]

The muslims intend to and are practicing ethnic cleansing in London.

British National Party Television » Blog Archive » Shocking: Ethnic Cleansing in Rotherham

Gates of Vienna: Ethnically Cleansing the English

British National Party

 

[krych3k]

So if the media stopped reporting attacks by groups of black guys, they wouldn't happen?

Exactly. In their world, nothing exists until the BBC says so.