The Student Room Group

Innocent Muslim attacked in NYC

Scroll to see replies

Original post by MeMoiLove
You fools are defending him, hypothetically giving the fool cancer and all the rest. The fact is HE BURNT HER. That is a crime. She was wearing a hijab and hadn't provoked him. I'm not surprised your ability to make logical conclusions is suddenly impaired now that the victim is Muslim - which as you pointed out - happens quite regularly.

The bias is quite disgusting. If the attacker was Muslim the papers would emphasise that - So why not when the victim is Muslim?


The political climate in America also plays a role but clearly burying your head is easier that facing up to the truth.


'But for a start we'd at least wait for the facts before rushing to play the victim card'
Original post by QE2
Of course he wasn't justified. But if you read the replies to the OP, they are taking issue with certain assertions and assumptions he makes.
Why do some people find it so difficult to grasp simple concepts.






I love how accurately you've described your own stupidity. So flipping cute! LMAO
Reply 182
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by MeMoiLove
I love how accurately you've described your own stupidity. So flipping cute! LMAO
You still don't understand what the big boys are talking about, do you?
Original post by BaconandSauce
'But for a start we'd at least wait for the facts before rushing to play the victim card'

When a Muslim blows up in the middle of a crowded street screaming allahu akbar we see the non-conclusionists come out of the wood work. If someone sneezes in the general direction of a Muslim then the same people cry 'it must be a hate crime'.
Original post by HanSoloLuck
When a Muslim blows up in the middle of a crowded street screaming allahu akbar we see the non-conclusionists come out of the wood work. If someone sneezes in the general direction of a Muslim then the same people cry 'it must be a hate crime'.


Likewise, any mention of Islam in a news article, we see non-conclusionists go ape on Islam's ills.
Reply 185
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Well, well.
I hate to say "I told you so, but..."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/14/muslim-woman-set-fire-no-bias-other-victims-police
I await the posts of contrition from all the "It is clearly an anti-Muslim hate crime", knee-jerkers.

@alevelstresss @HAnwar @MeMoiLove
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 186
Avatar for h333
h333
16
Original post by HAnwar
Yeah just because you don't see the condemnations, doesn't mean they don't exist.
@h333 and I both expressed our disapproval of the suicide bombing on shias in Saudi a couple of months ago on ISOC.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Exactly but I don't think some people are ready to accept that. They want Muslims to be some kind of super humans to be condeming things all the time on TSR (or they just don't think there is a world outside of TSR :hmmm: ) :rolleyes: but they themselves don't even condemn most or all of the time. Tragic events happen all over the world everyday nearly, I am sure most people know and feel sad about it and condemn it.
I don't remember entirely if I did or not with that event but I am sure you must have.
Reply 187
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by h333
Exactly but I don't think some people are ready to accept that. They want Muslims to be some kind of super humans to be condeming things all the time on TSR (or they just don't think there is a world outside of TSR :hmmm: ) :rolleyes: but they themselves don't even condemn most or all of the time. Tragic events happen all over the world everyday nearly, I am sure most people know and feel sad about it and condemn it.
I don't remember entirely if I did or not with that event but I am sure you must have.
The point was, there are certain posters on ISOC who make almost daily posts about attacks on a specific demographic, but don't mention similar attacks on a different one.

And other posters (like myself) do not need to repeat condemnation because they do not equivocate in their condemnation on certain issues.

All deliberate violent attacks on non-combatants and civilians are always wrong, regardless who the victims or the perpetrators are, without exception.

See. That covers everything from the Paris attacks to barrel bombs in Syria to Sunni IEDs in Iraq to the singed sleeve to drone strikes. The lot, you name it. No need to repeat myself because there is no ambiguity or equivocation. I condemn it all. End of.
Original post by QE2
Well, well.
I hate to say "I told you so, but..."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/14/muslim-woman-set-fire-no-bias-other-victims-police
I await the posts of contrition from all the "It is clearly an anti-Muslim hate crime", knee-jerkers.

@alevelstresss @HAnwar @MeMoiLove

I don't understand why you're tagging me? I never claimed it was an anti Muslim Islamophobic hate crime in the first place.
Not sure if you intentionally missed my second comment on this thread :rolleyes:

Original post by h333
Exactly but I don't think some people are ready to accept that. They want Muslims to be some kind of super humans to be condeming things all the time on TSR (or they just don't think there is a world outside of TSR :hmmm: ) :rolleyes: but they themselves don't even condemn most or all of the time. Tragic events happen all over the world everyday nearly, I am sure most people know and feel sad about it and condemn it.
I don't remember entirely if I did or not with that event but I am sure you must have.


Agreed. PRSOM.

And yeah, I sent the link to QE2 which includes your comment of condemnation. Hate to say I told him so...

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 189
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by HAnwar
I don't understand why you're tagging me? I never claimed it was an anti Muslim Islamophobic hate crime in the first place.
Not sure if you intentionally missed my second comment on this thread :rolleyes:
Very true. But you did think it was though, didn't you? Come on. Even I thought it was likely, it was just that there was no evidence for it.
A perfect example of why we should always wait for more info.

And yeah, I sent the link to QE2 which includes your comment of condemnation. Hate to say I told him so...
And I apologised for my error (or did you intentionally miss that comment :rolleyes:)
Reply 190
Avatar for h333
h333
16
Original post by QE2
The point was, there are certain posters on ISOC who make almost daily posts about attacks on a specific demographic, but don't mention similar attacks on a different one.

And other posters (like myself) do not need to repeat condemnation because they do not equivocate in their condemnation on certain issues.

All deliberate violent attacks on non-combatants and civilians are always wrong, regardless who the victims or the perpetrators are, without exception.

See. That covers everything from the Paris attacks to barrel bombs in Syria to Sunni IEDs in Iraq to the singed sleeve to drone strikes. The lot, you name it. No need to repeat myself because there is no ambiguity or equivocation. I condemn it all. End of.


The same can be said about others just focusing on one part of the world, why is the focus always on ISOC? Therefore, I say let people condemn any tragic act, obvioulsy if it is deliberate to cause terror etc, it is upto them, there should be no problem. What I mean is we should not say "Why are you only condemming this?" If you feel strongly that an act needs to be condemned and for some reason specifically it has to be shown on ISOC then you can post about it yourself and I am sure users will condemn it as long as it is a crime etc. Still it doesn't automatically mean they just care about one part of the world, we have no right to claim that, unless they confess themselves. Even the posters you are talking about, I am sure they have a heart and do care about all innocent lives.

And good for you, same here. A crime is a crime no matter where it happes in the world.
The victim was a muslim. So nobody ontsr cares.
Original post by QE2
Well, well.
I hate to say "I told you so, but..."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/14/muslim-woman-set-fire-no-bias-other-victims-police
I await the posts of contrition from all the "It is clearly an anti-Muslim hate crime", knee-jerkers.

@alevelstresss @HAnwar @MeMoiLove


but it was SO obvious and certain and without doubt and.........
Original post by QE2
Well, well.
I hate to say "I told you so, but..."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/14/muslim-woman-set-fire-no-bias-other-victims-police
I await the posts of contrition from all the "It is clearly an anti-Muslim hate crime", knee-jerkers.

@alevelstresss @HAnwar @MeMoiLove

You spoiled such a great celebration.. :smile:
alevelstresss
Although it almost certainly is.


alevelstresss

The victim was almost certainly a victim of hate crime because she was Muslim



Such certainty:biggrin:

But certainly wrong,
Reply 195
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by BaconandSauce
Such certainty:biggrin:

But certainly wrong,
And now, he's certainly conspicuous by his absence.
Original post by QE2
And now, he's certainly conspicuous by his absence.


also is it just me or have most of his posts from yesterday vanished?
Original post by BaconandSauce
Such certainty:biggrin:

But certainly wrong,


The victim was wearing a hijab. So the chances of it being a targeted hate crime are pretty high.
In the modern world we live in, this is revolting to see that these kind of satanic acts are still carried out in the name of religion. :frown:
Original post by alevelstresss
The victim was wearing a hijab. So the chances of it being a targeted hate crime are pretty high.


as you have been shown numerous times

The assumption that A causes B simply because A correlates with B is often not accepted as a legitimate form of argument.


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

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you