Woman beheaded in London

[krych3k]

One needs some sort of formal expertise to connect the dots between a misogynistic beheading murder in London and Islam/Muslims?

Generally speaking yes that helps.

What kind of formal expertise would that be? Using the AP's style guide or Wikipedia editing guidelines in order to create a facade of non-existent objectivity?

 

[Osomir]

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?

I'm saying that given both my journalistic and policy creation experience I have learned that it is generally a horrible idea to simply jump to whatever conclusions you feel might be right, especially if, as it seems is the case with you, one knows little about the surrounding topics.

There will be a trial for this case and motive will probably be discussed in it. If these things are so common and so easy to trace to the theological concepts of Islam then you shouldn't need it to prove whatever point you are trying to make.

It's ironic how many posters here simply rely on "just open your eyes LOL" as the sole basis of so many of their own personal opinions.

 

[Osomir]

One needs some sort of formal expertise to connect the dots between a misogynistic beheading murder in London and Islam/Muslims?

Generally speaking yes that helps.

What kind of formal expertise would that be? Using the AP's style guide or Wikipedia editing guidelines in order to create a facade of non-existent objectivity?

Having some sort of actual knowledge outside of "i just look at the world around me" of the subjects that you are trying to discuss would generally be useful.

 

[krych3k]

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.

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

 

[Pogo]

Wow.

Moonga Boonga voodoo tribes in the Congo. We're talking about a beheading in London. It's obviously a Mohamedan.

"Moonga Boonga"? Really?

"Voodoo" .... in the Congo?

"Mohamedan"?? what are you, 128 years old?

Your credibility, if you had any, just plummeted off the scale.

 

[krych3k]

Generally speaking yes that helps.

What kind of formal expertise would that be? Using the AP's style guide or Wikipedia editing guidelines in order to create a facade of non-existent objectivity?

Having some sort of actual knowledge outside of "i just look at the world around me" of the subjects that you are trying to discuss would generally be useful.

How else do we gain knowledge other than examining the world around us? Perhaps you have identified some new magical method for the accrual of knowledge outside of what's been employed by humanity since time immemorial?

 

[Osomir]

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.

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

lol godwin jumping into this thread I see.

 

[krych3k]

Wow.

Moonga Boonga voodoo tribes in the Congo. We're talking about a beheading in London. It's obviously a Mohamedan.

"Moonga Boonga"? Really?

"Voodoo" .... in the Congo?

"Mohamedan"?? what are you, 128 years old?

Your credibility, if you had any, just plummeted off the scale.

Yeah. What a bigot I must be. Tell me more about how Mohamedans composed a "significant" portion of France's population pre-1950s, and how they all now have some sort of unofficial "right" to invade the country because their states of origin were former French colonies.

 

[Osomir]

What kind of formal expertise would that be? Using the AP's style guide or Wikipedia editing guidelines in order to create a facade of non-existent objectivity?

Having some sort of actual knowledge outside of "i just look at the world around me" of the subjects that you are trying to discuss would generally be useful.

How else do we gain knowledge other than examining the world around us? Perhaps you have identified some new magical method for the accrual of knowledge outside of what's been employed by humanity since time immemorial?

Either formal educations mixed with area specific work experience, intensive subject specific study (generally best with some sort of guideline from experts) or significant level of work experience pertaining to the issues generally helps.

 

[krych3k]

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.

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

lol godwin jumping into this thread I see.

How impressive. Invoking an "internet law". What are you, eighteen years old? The example was used because it's one that even a "journalist" would be somewhat familiar with through the osmosis of superficial knowledge via Hollywood alone. I invoked it because I understand the calibre of people I'm dealing with in this thread.

 

[idb]

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.

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

Didn't you read my post?
I'm agreeing wholeheartedly with you!
Your personal assumptions and prejudices are much better informed than any reporting or any so-called "facts".

 

[krych3k]

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.

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

Didn't you read my post?
I'm agreeing wholeheartedly with you!
Your personal assumptions and prejudices are much better informed than any reporting or any so-called "facts".

Sure looks like those "assumptions and prejudices" were accurate when it came to knowing that this murderer was a Muslim based on the circumstances and location.

 

[Osomir]

Wow.

Moonga Boonga voodoo tribes in the Congo. We're talking about a beheading in London. It's obviously a Mohamedan.

"Moonga Boonga"? Really?

"Voodoo" .... in the Congo?

"Mohamedan"?? what are you, 128 years old?

Your credibility, if you had any, just plummeted off the scale.

Yeah. What a bigot I must be. Tell me more about how Mohamedans composed a "significant" portion of France's population pre-1950s, and how they all now have some sort of unofficial "right" to invade the country because their states of origin were former French colonies.

many Muslims in France were originally from places like Algeria. and Algeria under French rule was not just a colony. France considered it part of France proper. It had a much different relationship with France than say, England had with Ghana. To France and the French government Algeria was every bit as much a part of France as Paris.

Let's annex Islamic lands and then complain about the existence of Islamic populations :\

 

[krych3k]

Having some sort of actual knowledge outside of "i just look at the world around me" of the subjects that you are trying to discuss would generally be useful.

How else do we gain knowledge other than examining the world around us? Perhaps you have identified some new magical method for the accrual of knowledge outside of what's been employed by humanity since time immemorial?

Either formal educations mixed with area specific work experience, intensive subject specific study (generally best with some sort of guideline from experts) or significant level of work experience pertaining to the issues generally helps.

So one needs such expertise in order to logically assume that the murderer was a Muslim given the fact that the victim was a woman, in London, and that the method was a beheading? Such an assumption requires a Ph.D. in "Islamic studies", in your view? Like I said, do you call the Best Buy Geek Squad "experts" before plugging in your laptop?

 

[Osomir]

Your ideological ancestors were cautioning us not to jump to conclusions when the Nazi Luftwaffe bombed London. There was simply no way of knowing what had happened until the BBC got their "facts" in order. Same thing here. The "facts" don't exist until a "journalist" reports them.

lol godwin jumping into this thread I see.

How impressive. Invoking an "internet law". What are you, eighteen years old? The example was used because it's one that even a "journalist" would be somewhat familiar with through the osmosis of superficial knowledge via Hollywood alone. I invoked it because I understand the calibre of people I'm dealing with in this thread.

I don't base my understanding of WWII on Hollywood. Once again. I have standards.

 

[krych3k]

lol godwin jumping into this thread I see.

How impressive. Invoking an "internet law". What are you, eighteen years old? The example was used because it's one that even a "journalist" would be somewhat familiar with through the osmosis of superficial knowledge via Hollywood alone. I invoked it because I understand the calibre of people I'm dealing with in this thread.

I don't base my understanding of WWII on Hollywood. Once again. I have standards.

I had to go with lowest common denominator stuff considering the nonsense you're coming at me with, conflating stupidity with objectivity.

 

[Osomir]

Like I said, do you call the Best Buy Geek Squad "experts" before plugging in your laptop?

I did two years of technical IT training and work so that I could be more competent with general office hardware yes, but really, we have work experience with computers, and generally those of us who use computers more and gain more experience with them know how to use them better and take care of them better. So: work experience.

How often have you delved into the depths of Islamic theological constructs and jurisprudential codes again?

 

[krych3k]

I'll leave this moronic exchange with one point. Knowledge is one thing, wisdom is something else. Being able to apply knowledge is something you're unwilling to do. You seem to desire to read material that reads like an almanac, where the author(s) have an unwillingness (or inability, in your case) to apply knowledge and render judgments. This is why talking to twenty-something leftists who revel in their own illusions of objectivity is so tiresome.

 

[dilloduck]

How else do we gain knowledge other than examining the world around us? Perhaps you have identified some new magical method for the accrual of knowledge outside of what's been employed by humanity since time immemorial?

Either formal educations mixed with area specific work experience, intensive subject specific study (generally best with some sort of guideline from experts) or significant level of work experience pertaining to the issues generally helps.

So one needs such expertise in order to logically assume that the murderer was a Muslim given the fact that the victim was a woman, in London, and that the method was a beheading? Such an assumption requires a Ph.D. in "Islamic studies", in your view? Like I said, do you call the Best Buy Geek Squad "experts" before plugging in your laptop?

One could logically assume it was someone trying to make Muslims look bad also. Like the ploy Irgun terrorists used to blow up the King David.

 

[krych3k]

How often have you delved into the depths of Islamic theological constructs and jurisprudential codes again?

No need to be an Islamic scholar to make a reasonable assumption about the religious/ethnic identity of the murderer in this case given some of the basic facts. You seem unable to come to grips with the relationship between such events (and contemporary terrorism) with Islam and Mohamedans. Perhaps you are a Muslim. I'm tired of this obfuscation. Good day.