First Bowling Green - Now a phantom massacre in Sweden?

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

dk if these have already been posted since I didn't go through the thread.

"Actual video of Friday's terrorist attack in Sweden. This is terrifying."

Source

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1435781209848262

Source

 

[expos4ever]

Assaults committed by Muslim immigrants.

Citation, please.

 

[Kalevalatar]

Assaults committed by Muslim immigrants.

Which assault was that again?

Let's see: Traffic accident, theft, traffic accident, traffic accident, drugs, fire, traffic accident, property damage: broken window, traffic accident, burglary, DUI, traffic accident, fire, theft, traffic accident... Oh, here's a promising one: Assault, Åre: a man assaulted a woman. Åre is a ski resort, though. But maybe them scary Muslim immigrants like skiing, you think? One can always hope, right?

 

[dgiharris]

This thread is proof that a meeting of the minds in anything resembling honest discourse between Trumpers and everyone else will be impossible.

The way language works is we all agree that certain words mean certain things.

The way an argument works is we are trying to communicate a complex series of thoughts to convey what we perceive to be the reality of a particular situation or an idea or a concept...

In order to argue we need:
#1) A common language. A "precise" way to communicate thought
#2) Agreement on the facts and data. If I say 2+2 = 4 you likewise agree 2 + 2 = 4
#3) Shared Reality. When I say the US dropped an atomic bomb on Japan in 1945 you agree and acknowledge that event happened

This thread should have ended by page 2 and should have consisted of:

Anti-Trump: "What the bleep did he say now, another inaccuracy"
Trumper: "Look, he gets excitable and miss-spoke but his sentiment is that things in Europe are bad"
Anti-Trump: "If he can't get his basic facts right for simple stuff why should we trust him with more complex stuff?"
Trumper: "Look, Trump isn't a politician and he was just talking more or less "in general" with the way things are. I agree with his sentiment. Yeah, he was wrong and just shooting from the hip, but I agree with his sentiment."
Anti-Trump: "Again, if he can't get the basic stuff right how can I trust him with the bigger stuff"
Trumper: "Don't bother me with this penny ante crap, Trump is a big picture guy. Like he isn't the only politician to ever make a trivial mistake when speaking. He isn't polished and that is why I like him. You go ahead and lose sleep over these trivial little slip ups, whatever. I have faith he will Make America Great again."

But no, that isn't what happened. What happened is Trumpers are actually trying to defend the indefensible instead of acknowledging that Trump made an elementary mistake.

 

[expos4ever]

This thread is proof that a meeting of the minds in anything resembling honest discourse between Trumpers and everyone else will be impossible.

I agree. I can only wonder at the incredible rationalizations that go on in the mind of the Christians here who repeatedly engage in what cannot be construed as anything other than outright bearing of false witness in their defence of Mr. Trump.

All to avoid having to admit they were duped by the consummate con-man. It's no crime to admit you have been hoodwinked by a real pro.

 

[Albion]

But no, that isn't what happened. What happened is Trumpers are actually trying to defend the indefensible instead of acknowledging that Trump made an elementary mistake.

I don't buy any of that rationalization, but I do think it's clear (if it wouldn't hurt your feelings too much to admit it) that you're sticking like glue to two ideas:

1. The media and the Democrats can be even less accurate or precise than the president when they create these alleged outrages over something the President may--or may not--have said. This doesn't bother you although this what's being poured onto the American people as "news."

and

2. None of this was said of the speeches, etc. given by Obama who, if the same standard had been used, misspoke all the time.

This fact doesn't say much for the objectivity or honesty that the media want us to think is their only concern.

 

[expos4ever]

I don't buy any of that rationalization, but I do think it's clear (if it wouldn't hurt your feelings too much to admit it) that you're sticking like glue to two ideas:......

You claimed:

Assaults committed by Muslim immigrants

Are you going to substantiate this or not?

 

[Albion]

You claimed:


Are you going to substantiate this or not?

Do you seriously mean to say that you are unaware of Sweden's experience with easy immigration?? Here's a story that might help, although it's not specifically part of anything the President said on the occasion in question.

Sweden: Looting, Cars Torched, Police Attacked as Riots Break out in Migrant Suburb

Read it and get back to me.

 

[LinguaIgnota]

Do you seriously mean to say that you are unaware of Sweden's experience with easy immigration?? Here's a story that might help, although it's not specifically part of anything the President said on the occasion in question.

Sweden: Looting, Cars Torched, Police Attacked as Riots Break out in Migrant Suburb

Read it and get back to me.

Why this preoccupation with Sweden when their crime rate is way, way, way lower than that of the US?

 

[Albion]

Why this preoccupation with Sweden when their crime rate is way, way, way lower than that of the US?

Don't you know? The media saw an opportunity and used it. If there were an opening to charge Trump with lying as a result of something said about his golf score, then THAT would have become the outrage du jour instead.

 

[LinguaIgnota]

Don't you know? The media saw an opportunity and used it. If there were an opening to charge Trump with lying as a result of something said about his golf score, then THAT would have become the outrage du jour instead.

That didn't really answer my question. Your orange howler monkey of a president referred to what happened in Sweden "last night" when he actually meant that he had watched an inaccurate (as later demonstrated) programme on Fox News. Since we know for certain that Swedish crime rates - which, by the way, has been dropping over the last couple of years - aren't anywhere near American crime rates, why are they suddenly such a big issue?

 

[Albion]

That didn't really answer my question. Your orange howler monkey of a president

OK. I took your question to be a serious inquiry, but if it's not, I'll move on.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I agree. I can only wonder at the incredible rationalizations that go on in the mind of the Christians here who repeatedly engage in what cannot be construed as anything other than outright bearing of false witness in their defence of Mr. Trump.

All to avoid having to admit they were duped by the consummate con-man. It's no crime to admit you have been hoodwinked by a real pro.

The discomfort some Trump supporters feel when confronted with facts (the non-alternate kind) that show their man in an unfavorable light is palpable given their responses. They'll use any psychological trick (deflection, projection, obfuscation) in an attempt to avoid having to question their beliefs.

Almost sounds like they religiously hold those beliefs...

 

[expos4ever]

Do you seriously mean to say that you are unaware of Sweden's experience with easy immigration?? Here's a story that might help, although it's not specifically part of anything the President said on the occasion in question.

Sweden: Looting, Cars Torched, Police Attacked as Riots Break out in Migrant Suburb

Read it and get back to me.

Breitbart? Come on, how about a reputable source?

I can anticipate your response. You will claim that I asked for evidence and when you provide some, I dismiss the source. Well, I am going to go out on a limb and say that I am extremely confident that a little investigation on my part will provide all the evidence a reasonable person needs to dismiss Breitbart as a reputable source.

We will see - I will look into this.

 

[expos4ever]

Boy, that only took 20 seconds. From wikipedia:

Breitbart News promoted the falsehood that President Obama was a Kenyan-born Muslim.[13]

In June 2016, Breitbart News falsely claimed President Obama supported terrorists.

 

[Albion]

Breitbart? Come on, how about a reputable source?

Yeh, I figured you might say that, but you can find the same news on a number of other sites quite easily. Do that if you want to pursue this.

 

[expos4ever]

Almost sounds like they religiously hold those beliefs...

I agree with your implied point - there are many, many reasons to question the soundness of a "religious" mindset. I happen to be in the rather odd situation where, on the one hand, I affirm Christian faith while, on the other, I agree that a "religious" mindset is profoundly damaging to self and society.

 

[expos4ever]

Yeh, I figured you might say that, but you can find the same news on a number of other sites quite easily. Do that if you want to pursue this.

Enough! Stop asking me to do your homework for you! You made a claim and, when pressed, provided exceedingly dubious support for your claim. If you can, please provide information from a credible news source to support your claim.

It's your claim - you have the responsibility to substantiate it.

 

[Albion]

Enough! Stop asking me to do your homework for you! You made a claim and, when pressed, provided exceedingly dubious support for your claim. If you can, please provide information from a credible news source to support your claim.

It's your claim - you have the responsibility to substantiate it.

Baloney. The Associated Press reported the same news. You asked for substantiation, and I gave it. But you didn't actually want corroboration as much as some way to justify saying there isn't any. So here starts the game of denying the corroboration and sending the other party on a series of expeditions for no good reason.

 

[expos4ever]

Baloney. The Associated Press reported the same news. You asked for substantiation, and I gave it. But you didn't actually want corroboration as much as some way to justify saying there isn't any. So here starts the game of denying the corroboration and sending the other party on a series of expeditions for no good reason.

No! Not good enough and surely you have to realize this. If the AP reported the same news, then you should be able to prove this!

If proper rules of serious discussion were implemented - and I realize this is wildly impractical so this is not a criticism of the moderator - people would simply not be allowed to get away with what you are doing, namely not substantiating your claim.