Arthur.beaker wrote: » Sounds like this could be another 'gas leak'. We really need to take better care when dealing with gas.
tonycascarino wrote: » What a surprise. Yet another Syrian ''refugee'' ...Merkel is one massive dope...Hopefully they catch the 'refugee' before anything major happens
Grayson wrote: » What exactly is the point in that post. You're bitching about how one incident was misreported initially as a gas leak. You use that one example, which was corrected as soon as the facts were known, to try and say there's some liberal conspiracy to hide facts from you. This isn't a conspiracy. You're the paranoid one. The simple fact that this story is being reported as a potential terrorist attack actually disproves your stupid theory. look at this, the "liberal media" is reporting this as a terrorist threat. Look at all those people trying to hide the truth from you.
ChikiChiki wrote: » When she flung open the doors to uncontrolled immigration anyone with half a brain cell realised the threat that her policy would cause. It was glaringly obvious. Those fears have been vindicated. She's an absolute fool.
Arthur.beaker wrote: » Wake up, Sheeple.
Grayson wrote: » Thank you for winning my argument for me
Arthur.beaker wrote: » All it takes is 100 or fewer of the 1 million to be bad eggs.
Grayson wrote: » I kind of agree with you. However the numbers are just so incredibly small. Think of it this way, each year since 2001 on average more people are killed by toddlers with guns in the US than by islamic terrorists. Now for some reason people are terrified of islamic terrorists but not of toddlers. The human brain is strange in the way it quantifies risk. Toddlers are familiar so they're not feared. Refugees and even islam isn't familiar so it's feared. It's like the way people are scared of bird flu. People get the flu every year. We're used to it. It also kills loads every year. Bird flu however has killed far smaller amounts. But because bird flu gets headlines and because it's unknown it's feared more than regular flu. Now that's not to say that toddlers with guns, bird flu or refugees should be given a free pass. Obviously we should do whatever we can to decrease the risk of harm from any of them. We should study the flu, make vaccines and kill off birds that are infected. With refugees we should screen them, we should try to make sure they don't feel isolated. We should make sure our anti terrorist police are given the resources they need. but if we take the figure of 100 in a million (I'm not holding you to that, I know it was just a figure thrown out to make a point) is it worth treating all 999,900 other refugees as potential suspects? We don't do it with toddlers.
b_mac2 wrote: » Deflect Deflect Deflect. Ye will do absolutely anything, but, deal with the actual issue here, it's pathetic. Why don't you start going in to statistics from Islam controlled areas? How many people in Europe died from terrorist attacks in the last year? Do you think it's an acceptable loss for helping all these "refugees"? Of course you won't give a straight answer to that question though, will you.
Grayson wrote: » I'm not deflecting. I'm talking about the maths involved. Listen, you hate muslims, I get that. I doubt you know many or have ever had a negative interaction with one but for some reason you hate them. I didn't say that people didn't die from terrorist attacks. I'm saying that the number of muslims committing these crimes is so small that it's irrational to hold the entire population responsible for them. During the 80's it would have been considered crazy to hold every Irish catholic responsible for the actions of a few. The UK was being attacked by them but no-one said that the problem was with Irish Catholicism. And his was at a point where contraception without prescription was illegal, marital rape was allowed, women needed a man to open a bank account, laundries still operated, divorce was illegal and homosexuality was a criminal offence. Yet Irish people as a whole, even those living in the UK, were not held collectively responsible for the actions of a few. And we look back at the discrimination that they faced in the 60's and see it as a horrible time. Why is it different now? A muslim does something bad so muslims are all bad. I'm not saying that every muslim is a lovely person. I'm certainly not saying that there aren't a few that don't want to commit horrible crimes but I'm not going to hold every muslim responsible for those few. Just like I don't think every Irish Catholic is a terrorist or that every toddler is a potential shooter.
b_mac2 wrote: » Yeah, i didn't think you would answer that question.
Hande hoche! wrote: » The CDU will get a thumping next year, at this rate.
My name is URL wrote: » Merkel has an approval rating of 54% right now, in spite of all that's happening. That's a higher approval rating than any Irish political leader has. Kenny is currently at around 30% approval. Do people think FG are about to implode because of that?
Arthur.beaker wrote: » Has her party not lost significant share of the vote in 2 recent regional elections?
gitzy16v wrote: » The sooner we stop making excuses and start questioning we might just get a grip on reality
