Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...otes-reactions

    Pretty much spot on
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    whats wrong with thinking it was muslims? statistically they are the most likely to do this
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iamgreatness)
    whats wrong with thinking it was muslims? statistically they are the most likely to do this
    Ah man, where's that video where it dispels this myth.

    It's on youtube. and it's done by a professor who did a ground breaking study.

    Also, there's a difference between saying "it could be Muslims" vs what the majority say with certainty "oh its dem muslims agen hur dur".
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Typical pathetic Guardian waffle.

    Let's compare a double tap tactic used against combatants that can only be engaged in when they are clearly combatants to a bomb designed to take out civilians. Let's compare collateral damage to intentionally targetting civilians. Let's blame the US for everything wrong with Iraq today. And let's do all this explicitly.

    Is the rush to blame Islamic extremists worrying? Yes. Is it understandable? Yes. But some of the implications in this article are absurd. His claim that in the US the term terrorism is only used when it involves Muslims is ridiculous.

    The Guardian is just as bad as the Mail sometimes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Typical pathetic Guardian waffle.

    Let's compare a double tap tactic used against combatants that can only be engaged in when they are clearly combatants to a bomb designed to take out civilians. Let's compare collateral damage to intentionally targetting civilians. Let's blame the US for everything wrong with Iraq today. And let's do all this explicitly.

    Is the rush to blame Islamic extremists worrying? Yes. Is it understandable? Yes. But some of the implications in this article are absurd. His claim that in the US the term terrorism is only used when it involves Muslims is ridiculous.

    The Guardian is just as bad as the Mail sometimes.
    Let's compare state sanctioned terrorism vs nutjobs. Let's compare systematic devastation vs a saddening, but comparatively minor isolated event. Let's blame USA for everything wrong with Iraq today.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have increasingly noticed this PC hysteria around the bombings. They're hijacking this story to try and prove racism against Muslims, or that everybody is blaming Muslims.

    Just because somebody may also believe they were Muslims or A Muslim, doesn't mean they're hating on muslims. Some people susepct North Korea & Far-right groups as well. It's not the first time we've seen fabrications such as this before though. The Western world seems to take every opportunity it can to create this racism narrative. I am sure that if a veiled, Muslim woman was randomly assaulted in an unprovoked attack, People would jump to 'Racism' or 'Islamophobia'... Which has been much more common in our society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Guardian - a rush to exonerate Muslims.

    The Guardian - rushes to blame Israel for everything and anything.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slickrick666999)
    I have increasingly noticed this PC hysteria around the bombings. They're hijacking this story to try and prove racism against Muslims, or that everybody is blaming Muslims.

    Just because somebody may also believe they were Muslims or A Muslim, doesn't mean they're hating on muslims. Some people susepct North Korea & Far-right groups as well. It's not the first time we've seen fabrications such as this before though. The Western world seems to take every opportunity it can to create this racism narrative.
    See earlier post.

    " there's a difference between saying "it could be Muslims" vs what the majority say with certainty "oh its dem muslims agen hur dur"."
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Also, are you really blaming the Guardian for these "pro-Muslim viewpoints"?

    It's "comment is free", it doesn't represent the views of the Editorial.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That article is disgusting! I hate that every time 'terrorism' is used everyone immediately assumes its Muslims. For all we know this could have been done by Christians or Jews! The media just wants us to being that this is the doing of Muslims. We should be ignoring that sh*t


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ahhhh The Guardian. Prime example of doublespeak, ass kissing to anyone non-white, and hatred of British/Western ethos.

    The exploitation of a human tragedy never goes amiss.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thewildwun)
    That article is disgusting! I hate that every time 'terrorism' is used everyone immediately assumes its Muslims. For all we know this could have been done by Christians or Jews! The media just wants us to being that this is the doing of Muslims. We should be ignoring that sh*t


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That means you agree with the article...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehforum)
    See earlier post.

    " there's a difference between saying "it could be Muslims" vs what the majority say with certainty "oh its dem muslims agen hur dur"."
    Is the majority saying that with certainty or do you suspect it? As I said, these issues have been occuring for years. Why is everybody now speaking up when it's on Muslims? :confused:

    The Media ran storys for 4/5 days on the Toulouser shooter being a Far-Right affiliate and Neo-Nazism/Facism on the rise. I read one story online tagged 'Minority communities on stand-by'.

    Yet 4 or 5 days afer looking for this far-right, white frenchman, they actually discovered the shooter was a Muslim. Story seemed to go a bit cold after that....But I do not remember anybody getting particularly angry about non-muslims being blamed. I guess because maybe accusing white people isn't exactly Politically incorrect by definition..
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iamgreatness)
    whats wrong with thinking it was muslims? statistically they are the most likely to do this
    Well if we all started to scapegoat races, religions, or other groups based on little except your own opinions and prejudices then that's how scapegoating and scaremongering starts, which follows by mass witch hunts of people of said group.
    Since we are (supposedly) the smartest species on the planet and (supposedly) a first world nation why don't we try not pointing the finger wildly which only leads to hatred and potentially violence. Think you can manage that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehforum)
    Let's compare state sanctioned terrorism vs nutjobs. Let's compare systematic devastation vs a saddening, but comparatively minor isolated event. Let's blame USA for everything wrong with Iraq today.
    You can't blame Americans for suspecting the most notorious group which has repeatedly demonstrated it is not a religion of peace. Now I'm not saying that a radical Muslim group is responsible as of yet, but you are in no position to blame people for thinking rationally in light of previous terrorist attacks. You can't tar all of Islam under one brush but at the same time you can't expect Americans not to be pissed off. And if it does turn out to be another terrorist attack from a radical muslim group once again then you've basically told everyone not to suspect the culprit.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    Well if we all started to scapegoat races, religions, or other groups based on little except your own opinions and prejudices then that's how scapegoating and scaremongering starts, which follows by mass witch hunts of people of said group.
    Since we are (supposedly) the smartest species on the planet and (supposedly) a first world nation why don't we try not pointing the finger wildly which only leads to hatred and potentially violence. Think you can manage that?
    Didn't you read what i put? statistically. Statistics dont have any prejudice. its based on empirical knowledge. dont bother replying if you're going to chat some left wing ****.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehforum)
    Let's compare state sanctioned terrorism vs nutjobs. Let's compare systematic devastation vs a saddening, but comparatively minor isolated event. Let's blame USA for everything wrong with Iraq today.
    Can you provide an example of this "state sanctioned terrorism"? I fear you're getting the terms confused.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slickrick666999)
    Is the majority saying that with certainty or do you suspect it? As I said, these issues have been occuring for years. Why is everybody now speaking up when it's on Muslims? :confused:

    The Media ran storys for 4/5 days on the Toulouser shooter being a Far-Right affiliate and Neo-Nazism/Facism on the rise. I read one story online tagged 'Minority communities on stand-by'.

    Yet 4 or 5 days afer looking for this far-right, white frenchman, they actually discovered the shooter was a Muslim. Story seemed to go a bit cold after that....But I do not remember anybody getting particularly angry about non-muslims being blamed. I guess because maybe accusing white people isn't exactly Politically incorrect by definition..
    See point 2, paragraph 1 of the article for evidence. Everyone is speaking up when its possibly Muslims because the media is heavily focused on it. What comparative groups were you thinking of?
    (Original post by Kiss)
    You can't blame Americans for suspecting the most notorious group which has repeatedly demonstrated it is not a religion of peace. Now I'm not saying that a radical Muslim group is responsible as of yet, but you are in no position to blame people for thinking rationally in light of previous terrorist attacks. You can't tar all of Islam under one brush but at the same time you can't expect Americans not to be pissed off.
    Yes, I don't expect Americans and the media to acquiesce to these attacks. But as above, see point 2, para 1, their claims are disgusting and completely unprofessional. The media whatever their stance, should remain impartial until the facts are out, until then it's all speculation. Once the facts are out, and maybe the attackers turn out to be Muslim then propound your right wing views to the readership of their respective newspaper.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iamgreatness)
    Didn't you read what i put? statistically. Statistics dont have any prejudice. its based on empirical knowledge. dont bother replying if you're going to chat some left wing ****.
    I did see that part but statistics means little at the moment. Also it rather depends on the source of the stats. You are at best using the stats to mask your beliefs and prejudices to blame one group before any proof or indication has revealed members of that group are to blame so what I said sticks. Tough titties if you don't like it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    Ahhhh The Guardian. Prime example of doublespeak, ass kissing to anyone non-white, and hatred of British/Western ethos.

    The exploitation of a human tragedy never goes amiss.
    I agree. If I could thumbs up I would.

    I wouldn't particularly claim that the Guardian are anti British, but the media has proven itself to be very, very PC and very pro-multiculturalism. They've pretty much reserved the word racist for white people exclusively over the past 30 years. White on minority crimes seem to get a lot more attention, comments only become 'controversial' when they're against minorities, or come out of a white persons mouth.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.