jakee

Because I wanted you do do what you did, I didn't have time. Thanks. So what you're saying is, you've been talking bollocks for the last two pages because you were too lazy to read your own link, and you aren't even gracious enough to apologise for being wrong and obnoxious? What exactly is it then, that you think you bring to the discussion? I graciously gave you the opportunity to learn. Learn that you were wrong, lazy and rude? Shit, I knew that already. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Because I wanted you do do what you did, I didn't have time. Thanks. So what you're saying is, you've been talking bollocks for the last two pages because you were too lazy to read your own link, and you aren't even gracious enough to apologise for being wrong and obnoxious? What exactly is it then, that you think you bring to the discussion? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

What do arabs have to do with afghans? So... lie to them? Not really. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Until they committed a crime? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I followed your link to an article, which said 1 in 4 women in the whole of Sweden will be raped. I followed the link to its source (an article by an anti-islamic correspondant in another right wing site) whose headline was 1 IN 4 SWEDISH WOMEN WILL BE RAPED. I followed their link to a wordpress blog called "TheMuslimIssue" whose headline was Shocking Predictive (Muslim) Rape Numbers: Over One in Four Swedes will be raped in their life. What did your lazy ass do? So please, tell me again how you weren't talking about the whole of Sweden and explain why you posted an article you so strongly disagree with? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

A) Yes. B) Then why are you using it to support a claim that 1 in 4 women in the whole country are raped? I'm not, I was quoting the site. It is from a certain area. Yeah, the area of Sweden. Which, last time I checked, is a whole country. Go back and read. You mean, go back and read the first sentence of the first paragraph of the body of the article you linked to from that ridiculously racist, xenophobic, anti-Islamic website? OK, it says this: "The risk of being raped in Sweden during one’s lifetime is one out of four..." So... your turn. Go back and read (I wonder why you linked to that article in the first place when you so strongly believe its claims are not true?) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

A) Yes. B) Then why are you using it to support a claim that 1 in 4 women in the whole country are raped? I'm not, I was quoting the site. It is from a certain area. Yeah, the area of Sweden. Which, last time I checked, is a whole country. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

More problems than Saudi Arabia? Jeez, and you accuse other people of bashing America... Do you want to have an ideagasm?

A) Yes. B) Then why are you using it to support a claim that 1 in 4 women in the whole country are raped? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

"Has" stats of 1 in 4? I think you need to delve a little deeper into your article, my friend. Who would have thought that the click bait headline was a gross manipulation of fact? Frankly, I'm just as shocked as you are Translated from Swedish Statistics "Bra" (can't make the "a" with the "o" on top) In 2013, 17,400 sexual offenses were reported, of which 5,900 was categorized as rape. The number of reported rapes is down 5 percent from last year. Seen over a ten-year period, the number of reported rapes has increased sharply due to several reasons….Sexual offenses are one of the types of crime that is least likely to be reported to the police — only 23 percent of sexual offenses are reported. And in which part of that did you read that 1 in 4 women in sweden are raped? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And how many times has a slight, imaginary racial overtone followed by media sensationalism ended a cop's career? Like, what sort of percentage of "could" are we talking about here? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

"Has" stats of 1 in 4? I think you need to delve a little deeper into your article, my friend. Who would have thought that the click bait headline was a gross manipulation of fact? Frankly, I'm just as shocked as you are Do you want to have an ideagasm?

If you're going to go back to the Nazis and Stalin you may as well go back to Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears. You guys were so effective you just ran out of people to exterminate. Americans had work ethics back in the days. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

If you're going to go back to the Nazis and Stalin you may as well go back to Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears. You guys were so effective you just ran out of people to exterminate. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Ok, so which bit of it directly addressed the differences in the offences which are included under the 'violent crime' umbrella between the UK, the USA and SA? Because I've got to be honest, I didn't notice that bit at all. Please, do feel free to point it out to me and prove that I'm just being obtuse The only possible answer here is LOL. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And how does any of that relate to your previous source being complete bollocks? Yet again, your ability to skip from argument to argument while ignoring anything you've previously said that was shown to be nonsense is very impressive. And you took the easy one, deflection. Big surprise. Like the way you took the easy out of quoting my post yet ignoring it completely and starting a brand new topic? How is that not deflection? Why do you expect me to directly answer every aspect of your posts when your replies to mine aren't even on the same topic? In fact, I don't even know how you expected me to reply to your post at all. Since it was entirely composed of a non-sequitur cut and paste with none of your own words for context I honestly have no idea what your point even was. What part of that post, which relates to our ongoing discussion, did you want me to reply to anyway? BTW, I thought you said you were going to shut up for a whie and go and learn stats. What happened with that? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Terrorism, Justin Bieber, or right wingers furiously masturbating over photos of a dead Bin Laden? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And how does any of that relate to your previous source being complete bollocks? Yet again, your ability to skip from argument to argument while ignoring anything you've previously said that was shown to be nonsense is very impressive. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Like the right and the threat of Islamic terrorism? It's practically a non-issue yet raging against it makes them wetter than a teenage girl at a Justin Bieber concert. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Well, no. No-one makes a spectacle over one life being taken by an armed murderer, unless there is something else to make it more interesting, topical or unique. Case in point, your own examples - in some of them one or more people were murdered (aside from the gunmen) and you still didn't hear about it. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

How many people died at Columbine? How many people died in all of your examples put together? That's the difference between what's newsworthy and what isn't. Face it bro, in the US of A 1 or 2 people being shot is only going to make the news if there are other much more interesting factors involved. The context being that there are normal people being murdered with firearms all the time that you never hear about? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Don't feel bad, I can't recall much that was in the media 18 years ago either. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Like right-wing anti-terrorists? (And what is it that they're ignoring?) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Patriot act, anyone? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Yeah, the problem is that's bollocks, and it always was. it comes down to classification of a 'violent' offence. In the UK that covers an enormous range of incredibly petty situations that the US and SA (and many others) do not classify in the same way. Do you want to have an ideagasm?