Muslim Terrorists Jailed

[billvon 3,087]

>1. I don't think you qualify to speak on behalf of everyone here.

Perhaps not, but you even less so, since the mantra of "the democrats/liberals/civil rights activists/anti war crowd hate the US and want the terrorists to win" has been abandoned by all but the most frothing-at-the-mouth conservatives. It's a lie that just plain didn't work out. Three flats, my analogy-using friend.

>3. I'm not necessarily conservative.

Either you are conservative or the vast majority of posts misrepresent your position. So which is it? Either way, that last tire is flat. But hey, you can drive for quite a while on your rims I hear.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

> I don't think you qualify to speak on behalf of everyone here.

Perhaps not, but you even less so, since the mantra of "the democrats/liberals/civil rights activists/anti war crowd hate the US and want the terrorists to win" has been abandoned by all but the most frothing-at-the-mouth conservatives. It's a lie that just plain didn't work out.

You're putting words in my mouth again, which I did not speak, in order to try and win your strawman argument. You've started doing this a lot lately, and it does not serve you well.

What I said was;

"Some people hate America and England so much that they cheer for the terrorists to win. They would like to see guys like you and me killed."

First, please note that I didn't single out specifically anyone like democrats, liberals etc. That's your own invention, not mine.

Second, it's an absolute demonstrated fact that there are people out there like this in the world. You don't have to be a "frothing-at-the- mouth conservative" to understand that, from the events of 9/11/01 and many others.

Quote

> I'm not necessarily conservative.

Either you are conservative or the vast majority of posts misrepresent your position. So which is it?

Which is it? Neither. The answer to your confusion is that you just haven't been paying enough attention.

For example, I'm pro-choice on abortion, up to a point. Now tell me, how does that make me a conservative?

My positions on various political topics vary widely, and do not fall in line uniformly with only one party.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Non-Muslim terrorist organizations:
FARC (Colombia)
ELN (Colombia)
etc...

How many of those non-muslim terrorist organizations are pledged to destroy America, and have actually carried out terrorist attacks against American interests?

[Weezil 0]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Slander the whole publication and hope that everyone buys it? blah blah blah...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'm still waiting for you to provide an example from that particular story that shows a bias as you claim, or any incorrect facts.

Speak in generalities all you want, but you've yet to show that there was anything wrong with the story which started this thread.

The tits on page 3 have no bearing upon the accuracy of the story of jailed muslim terrorists on page 1.

Quote

Well, I don't think that is a very polite reponse to my crash course in journalism. Your quoting of me ("blah blah blah") was clearly inspired by your favorite newspaper
But if you hark back to my original post, i was merely questioning your choice of references. I did state twice in fact that the subject was valid of wider debate (if for the crappy selection of choices).

I spoke in generalities as you invited me to question the integrity of the sun, and as you can probably gather from the extensive references (which you asked for) I did. They came somewhere after the blah blah blahs....

Quote

I'm still waiting for you to provide an example from that particular story that shows a bias as you claim, or any incorrect facts.

So you want me to show there is a bias in this story?
Well it is right there in the title.
THe correct terminology would be "Dirty bomb plotters jailed" or "Dirty bomb plotters incarcerated." The use of the term "Dirty bomb plotters caged" demonstrates a bias. towards classifying them as animals or subhuman. Something I am inclined to agree with, but nevertheless biased.

So.......

I am still waiting for a response to my orginal posts (drumming of fingers....)

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

....

Some people hate America and England so much that they cheer for the terrorists to win. They would like to see guys like you and me killed.

Holy Christ, what kind of written sh*t is THAT???

Why don't you just return to your usual playground such as guns and weapons and shotguns and CCW and NRA and cartridges and calibres and and and ... THAT sounds much more like you, JohnRich

Your poll just is insulting peoples' intelligence, at least mine.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

How many of those non-muslim terrorist organizations are pledged to destroy America, and have actually carried out terrorist attacks against American interests?

McVeigh and co.
The Davidians, if you believe the ATF, intended to
The anthrax scares
The Earth First types, again if you believe the ATF

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

So you want me to show there is a bias in this story?
Well it is right there in the title. THe correct terminology would be "Dirty bomb plotters jailed" or "Dirty bomb plotters incarcerated." The use of the term "Dirty bomb plotters caged" demonstrates a bias towards classifying them as animals or subhuman.

That's the best example of bias that you can come up with - using the word "caged" instead of "jailed"?

Okay, I think I'll let you have that as the last word, and rest my case.

I contend you have NOT proven any bias or inaccuracy in that news story.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

How many of those non-muslim terrorist organizations are pledged to destroy America, and have actually carried out terrorist attacks against American interests?

McVeigh and co.
The Davidians, if you believe the ATF, intended to
The anthrax scares
The Earth First types, again if you believe the ATF

Sorry, none of those were on crotalus01's list.

One attack by McVeigh doesn't come close to the repeated number committed by muslims. If a Christian religious sect was going around blowing up U.S. Embassies, maybe you'd have something - but they're not.

The Davidians weren't attacking anyone - they were minding their own business on their own property. The ATF attacked them.

I don't recall any organized group ever being caught and convicted for the anthrax scares.

The radical environmentalists aren't attacking America per se, but rather certain policies of America, or companies within America. They don't target innocent citizens at random - they go after those whose policies they disagree with. They're not out to destroy America as a nation.

Your examples fail.

[livendive 8]

Quote

That's the best example of bias that you can come up with - using the word "caged" instead of "jailed"?

Okay, I think I'll let you have that as the last word, and rest my case.

I contend you have NOT proven any bias or inaccuracy in that news story.

I don't really care who wins this argument, but a brief skim of the article showed, "The seventh man, Qaisir Shaffi denied the charges, but the jury saw through his lies." If going for an unbiased, non-sensationalized reporting of new, perhaps something along the lines of "The seventh man, Qaisir Shaffi denied the charges, but the jury concluded he was guilty of them" would have worked. The reporter doesn't know the man was lying, he only knows that the jury found him guilty.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kallend 2,114]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

> Where do you suppose this is all going to end ?

It won't.

There was a time that christians burned witches and killed Muslims by the millions because they were Muslims.

Millions? How many millions? And when was that time? Or is this just another exagerated, well outside the bell curve comparison?

Please enlighten me. I just want to learn.

Maybe it was exaggeration for rhetorical purposes. Happens a lot, I'm surprised you haven't noticed.

You mean like naming a thread "Pelosi - I want my jet!"?

Well, that was an outright falsehood, not an exaggeration.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,114]

Quote

Quote

Slander the whole publication and hope that everyone buys it? blah blah blah...

I'm still waiting for you to provide an example from that particular story that shows a bias as you claim, or any incorrect facts.

Speak in generalities all you want, but you've yet to show that there was anything wrong with the story which started this thread.

The tits on page 3 have no bearing upon the accuracy of the story of jailed muslim terrorists on page 1.

The trouble with that argument is that the SUN has been proven in court to be an unreliable source, and as all can see, it panders to the public's desire for titillation.

So who knows if this story is true or not? I don't think it's our job to prove that it's false.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Your examples fail.

Sure, if you dismiss them all out of hand. Nice dodge on anthrax. And of the hundreds killed at Oklahoma city. Prior to 9/11, it was the most successful attack.

[Richards 0]

Quote

Easy - just have to turn the page from Page Three, the only reason anyone actually opens The Sun

And Marmaduke

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[RBM 1]

Quote

They will turn again. Perhaps the Tamil Tigers will grow to be the next big threat, or Confucianism will ally with communism and start yet another religious war.

Or better, Heavens Gate members who went and got on the spaceship will come back and wipe out all humanity so they can set their new colony on this planet.

[wmw999 2,558]

Ignoring connotation is either stupid or dishonest. The John I know is neither in person. It's a cheap trick in debate.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[mnealtx 0]

Serious question:

I don't recall of a single instance where someone affiliated with AQ has not been a self-professed Muslim... does anyone recall differently?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Weezil 0]

Quote

Post:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


So you want me to show there is a bias in this story?
Well it is right there in the title. THe correct terminology would be "Dirty bomb plotters jailed" or "Dirty bomb plotters incarcerated." The use of the term "Dirty bomb plotters caged" demonstrates a bias towards classifying them as animals or subhuman.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That's the best example of bias that you can come up with - using the word "caged" instead of "jailed"?

Quote

Well the bias may be too subtle for you, but I and others have shown it's right there, as you requested. The nature of bias, particularly with sun readers, is that it is often overlooked but inevitiably becomes imprinted on their opinion.

Okay, I think I'll let you have that as the last word.....

Quote

It is not up to you to give me the last word. I made a valid criticism of your ill-conceived poll and your side-stepping one-liners. I am still waiting for some sort of response to the other points I made.

.....and rest my case.

Quote

YOu may well rest your case, but by my last count in this poll, there are 6 terrosrist sympathisers/horny mad mullahs looking in on this very thread

I contend you have NOT proven any bias or inaccuracy in that news story.

Quote

Is that an echo?.
Well I guess I won't have the last word

I and others have gone to some effort to demonstrate the clear bias that exists in this report. You, on the other hand, have made no such effort. In this instance, your opinion alone is not sufficent and your contention is irrelevant.
If this was a court of law, you would be reaching for your cheque book this very minute.

Please check out the links I gave (particularly the definition of 'bias'), read the other posters remarks, and explain why you think this report is not biased.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Serious question:

I don't recall of a single instance where someone affiliated with AQ has not been a self-professed Muslim... does anyone recall differently?

That data was probably gathered, then scrapped over concerns of profiling...

Honestly I don't know, I would guess that you are correct, but maybe there are a few non-Muslims who support "the base".

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Maybe it was exaggeration for rhetorical purposes. Happens a lot, I'm surprised you haven't noticed.

You mean like naming a thread "Pelosi - I want my jet!"?

Well, that was an outright falsehood, not an exaggeration.

It seems that the people who don't get the joke, find it the least funny. Bummer for them, eh? On several levels.

Then there are those who tell "outright falsehoods" a.k.a. LIES,... and they're completely serious.

[kallend 2,114]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Maybe it was exaggeration for rhetorical purposes. Happens a lot, I'm surprised you haven't noticed.

You mean like naming a thread "Pelosi - I want my jet!"?

Well, that was an outright falsehood, not an exaggeration.

It seems that the people who don't get the joke, find it the least funny. Bummer for them, eh? On several levels.

Then there are those who tell "outright falsehoods" a.k.a. LIES,... and they're completely serious.

Then there are those tossing pebbles from glass houses who think the world can't see in.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Maybe it was exaggeration for rhetorical purposes. Happens a lot, I'm surprised you haven't noticed.

You mean like naming a thread "Pelosi - I want my jet!"?

Well, that was an outright falsehood, not an exaggeration.

It seems that the people who don't get the joke, find it the least funny. Bummer for them, eh? On several levels.

Then there are those who tell "outright falsehoods" a.k.a. LIES,... and they're completely serious.

Then there are those tossing pebbles from glass houses who think the world can't see in.

Then there are those who seem unwilling to admit wrongdoing when their "outright falsehoods" are exposed.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

The tits on page 3 have no bearing upon the accuracy of the story of jailed muslim terrorists on page 1.

The trouble with that argument is that the SUN has been proven in court to be an unreliable source, and as all can see, it panders to the public's desire for titillation.

So who knows if this story is true or not? I don't think it's our job to prove that it's false.

Neither is it my job to prove that it's true. You can take it or leave it - it doesn't matter to me. But the veracity of the story from The Sun can be proven through numerous other news sources, and I provided a link to some of those other stories for those who wished to check.

It's interesting that rather than discuss the terrorists and their plots against the U.S. and U.K., all some people want to do is bash The Sun. I guess that's more important.

Page 3 Boobies!

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Your examples fail.

Sure, if you dismiss them all out of hand. Nice dodge on anthrax. And of the hundreds killed at Oklahoma city.

I didn't "dismiss them out of hand", I explained why they failed.

As for the anthrax scares, no one has ever been caught for that. So that's not a "dodge", it's an unknown. You can't blame someone, if you don't know who did it.

Oklahoma City was a one-of-a-kind event, so far. One event does not make a trend. On the other hand, Muslim attacks against Americans are quite numerous, and on-going.

Your examples fail.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Oklahoma City was a one-of-a-kind event, so far. One event does not make a trend. On the other hand, Muslim attacks against Americans are quite numerous, and on-going.

How many Muslim attacks on American soil besides 9/11? Oh right, none. It was one of a kind too.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Oklahoma City was a one-of-a-kind event, so far. One event does not make a trend. On the other hand, Muslim attacks against Americans are quite numerous, and on-going.

How many Muslim attacks on American soil besides 9/11? Oh right, none. It was one of a kind too.

None successful, no... I'm sure I don't need to remind you of the attempted attacks on Ft. Dix or JFK, just to name a few recent attempts.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706