Woman beheaded in London

That's just the thing though, plenty of people are "beheaded" through criminal acts who are in no way related to the Islamic faith.

No. They're not. Beheading are virtually an Islamic exclusive, especially in the West in populations centres with lots of Mohamedans, much like London.

The journalistic use of the word "beheaded" rather than the journalistic standard:decapitated is to play on his religious affiliation or to point to religion as a motive for the act which is likewise what individuals responding to this thread assumed, and yes that's silly.

There exists no such "journalistic standard". What are you gonna do, break out the AP "stylebook" to tell us how to document the truth? The relationship between these events and Islam is obvious. You're clearly trying to run interference for Islam/Mohamedans and it's pathetic. Please stop insulting the intelligence of the rest of us.
 
This is perfectly acceptable to the leftist on this board.

Can you link to even one post where a "leftist" has supported the beheading of women?

Why not speak out against islams treatment of woman????

How about it!

According to the article the individual who was arrested gave no motive for the attack so far.

better yet can you link to one post in which you have dennounced it?

Why would he denounce it? He is busy obfuscating the relationship between such murders and Islam. He has no time to denounce it, lest he be implicitly acknowledging the overlap between Islam and such murders.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.
 
No. They're not. Beheading are virtually an Islamic exclusive, especially in the West in populations centres with lots of Mohamedans, much like London.

That's really not true. We see decapitations and dismemberment in violent crime throughout the world. The degrees to which it is engaged in in islamic areas varies quite a bit across regions, and some of the worst spots for such crimes aren't Islamic at all (like the DR Congo)

There exists no such "journalistic standard". What are you gonna do, break out the AP "stylebook" to tell us how to document the truth?

I was a print journalist on international issues for seven years. As any journalist knows different words convey different imagery and are associated with different things. Take female circumcision for example vs female genital mutilation, or yes, beheading vs decapitation or dismemberment.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not it's in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?
 
Last edited:
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not its in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

No, just dumb.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not its in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

No, just dumb.


Said Einstein :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
That's really not true. We see decapitations and dismemberment in violent crime throughout the world. The degrees to which it is engaged in in islamic areas varies quite a bit across regions, and some of the worst spots for such crimes aren't Islamic at all (like the DR Congo)

We're not talking about drug cartels in Mexico or Moonga Boonga voodoo tribes in the Congo. We're talking about a beheading in London. It's obviously a Mohamedan.

I was a print journalist on international issues for seven years. As any journalist knows different words convey different imagery and are associated with different things. Take female circumcision for example vs female genital mutilation, or yes, beheading vs decapitation or dismemberment.

I don't need you to explain to mean the different emotional reactions we have to different terms. The woman was beheaded, and not decapitated as a result of some accident involving heavy machinery in some factory. What I reject is your attempt to sanitise the language in order to satisfy your political objective of obfuscating the relationship between this murder and Islam/Mohamedans. I'll pass on your Orwellian language games.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not its in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

Are you saying that Americans don't travel around the world?
 
Can you link to even one post where a "leftist" has supported the beheading of women?



According to the article the individual who was arrested gave no motive for the attack so far.

better yet can you link to one post in which you have dennounced it?

Why would he denounce it? He is busy obfuscating the relationship between such murders and Islam. He has no time to denounce it, lest he be implicitly acknowledging the overlap between Islam and such murders.

Actually you almost have it. See, when you get attacked and put on defense for crapola you never espoused in the first place, just for looking at an event objectively, there isn't any time left to denounce the event itself. Because let's face it, y'all don't care about the victim, your priority is scoring message board political "points".

(reading news)

Goofus: "Hey look! Here's a story involving violence and it looks like Muslims!"

Doofus: "Oh yeah? Well you know what this means..."

Both together: "Right! Let's go attack the liberals!!"
 
Last edited:
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not its in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

No, just dumb.


This is coming from the guy who is doing his best to tell us that the murderer of the girl in London is only coincidentally a Mohamedan.
 
Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not its in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

No, just dumb.


This is coming from the guy who is doing his best to tell us that the murderer of the girl in London is only coincidentally a Mohamedan.

No, this coming from a guy who merely pointed out that the article said nothing about his personal motives, nor has he. It's called standards.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Well, whenever I hear of a mass shooting I also immediately hear of its location, so I know whether or not it's in America. If a mass shooting occurs at a school I assume it's a white male, in his teens of twenties, and one who is mentally ill and a Democrat. Does that make me racist?

Nope. It makes you a partisan hack.
 
No, just dumb.


This is coming from the guy who is doing his best to tell us that the murderer of the girl in London is only coincidentally a Mohamedan.

No, this coming from a guy who merely pointed out that the article said nothing about his personal motives, nor has he. It's called standards.

Right, so until the "journalists" tell us what happened (assuming they choose to investigate, which they most likely will not), the truth doesn't exist? If a tree falls in the woods and Osomir doesn't hear it, does it make a sound?
 
We're not talking about drug cartels in Mexico or Moonga Boonga voodoo tribes in the Congo. We're talking about a beheading in London. It's obviously a Mohamedan.

Aww, it's cute how you think you're good at trolling.

I don't need you to explain to mean the different emotional reactions we have to different terms.

Apparently you did.
 
Whenever I read of a mass shooting somewhere in the world I just assume that the perpetrator is American.

Understandable. As noted backthread, the only difference between Achmed cutting his wife's head off and Alfred shooting his wife's head off is the technology employed. At the base of both is the same disease -- gynophobia.
 
This is coming from the guy who is doing his best to tell us that the murderer of the girl in London is only coincidentally a Mohamedan.

No, this coming from a guy who merely pointed out that the article said nothing about his personal motives, nor has he. It's called standards.

Right, so until the "journalists" tell us what happened (assuming they choose to investigate, which they most likely will not), the truth doesn't exist? If a tree falls in the woods and Osomir doesn't hear it, does it make a sound?

Well, when you put it that way, I guess you're right.
Rumour, assumptions, innuendo, stereotyping and racial profiling are the only proper way to fill in the gaps until the real details of a story are reported.
 

Forum List

Back
Top