NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › Simultaneous terrorist attacks around Paris...Vol. Here we go again.Update 07/14/16 p42: Nice terror attacks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Simultaneous terrorist attacks around Paris...Vol. Here we go again.Update 07/14/16 p42: Nice terror attacks - Page 20

post #571 of 1414
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
post #572 of 1414
Thread Starter 

Ben Shapiro from Breitbart? That's as unbiased as they come :lol>D

post #573 of 1414
Ben Shaprio sick.gifmean.gif

You can't be serious

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

-As for the content fs the video, he is misusing the data to just inflate his "radical number" to prop us his BS position.

They favor Sharia Law.............radical

If I tried to make those kinda of leaps in logic when I'm presenting my reports in front of other the economist in my department, I would get slapped outta the room.

Such a garbage analysis
Edited by RustyShackleford - 11/14/15 at 11:59am
post #574 of 1414
Thread Starter 

Don't know if anyone else heard it but apparently the suicide bombers at the stadium had tickets and were planning to detonate inside the stadium during the match. Thankfully there was a hero security guard that didn't let one of them in when he noticed the explosive belt. Could you imagine if they had gotten inside that packed stadium and blew up? The panic and hysteria afterwards would've surely been the cause of many more deaths. Somehow,this thing could've been even worse :x:{ 

post #575 of 1414
Yea the pres was at the game so the security was heightened
"There isn't much that I feel I need..... a solid soul, and the blood i bleed."
Reply
"There isn't much that I feel I need..... a solid soul, and the blood i bleed."
Reply
post #576 of 1414
Thread Starter 

One of the cooler tributes I've seen

 

They carried out the French flag along with the American one before the Army football game today

 

post #577 of 1414
I see a lot of rationalization and blame shifting across the board
...
Reply
...
Reply
post #578 of 1414
Shapiro cited the work of the Pew Research Center, a very reputable source.

You can skim through some of the information for yourself.

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
post #579 of 1414
For those numbers to be accurate they would have needed to poll every single Muslim in all of those countries
...
Reply
...
Reply
post #580 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPEG View Post

Shapiro cited the work of the Pew Research Center, a very reputable source.

You can skim through some of the information for yourself.

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

It is not the numbers he sites that are the problem, it is his interruption of those numbers that is the problem.

If someone says the believe in Sharia Law, he immediately labels them a "radical". In the same boat as terrorist

There are tons of Christians in this country that think the Bible should be the supreme law of the land. We don't label them radicals, now do we?

He is doing the classic trick of labeling all fundamentalist as radicals, when they are different.

Believing in Sharia Law in Muslim Countries =/= Believing Terrorism is right

From that Pew Report btw:
Quote:
Extremism Widely Rejected
Muslims around the world strongly reject violence in the name of Islam. Asked specifically about suicide bombing, clear majorities in most countries say such acts are rarely or never justified as a means of defending Islam from its enemies.In most countries where the question was asked, roughly three-quarters or more.

Muslims reject suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilians. And inmost countries, the prevailing view is that such acts are never justified as a means of defending Islam from its enemies. Yet there are some countries in which substantial minorities think violence against civilians is at least sometimes justified. This view is particularly widespread among Muslims in the Palestinian territories (40%), Afghanistan (39%), Egypt (29%) and Bangladesh (26%).

The survey finds little evidence that attitudes toward violence in the name of Islam are linked to factors such as age, gender or education. Similarly, the survey finds no consistent link between support for enshrining sharia as official law and attitudes toward religiously motivated violence. In only three of the 15 countries with sufficient samples sizes for analysis – Egypt, Kosovo and Tunisia – are sharia supporters significantly more likely to say suicide bombing and other forms of violence are at least sometimes justified. In Bangladesh, sharia supporters are significantly less likely to hold this view.

This is the exact thing Shapiro is say is the case. Dude is using numbers from a survey to argue a point, when that survey itself explicitly contradicts him.
Edited by RustyShackleford - 11/14/15 at 12:29pm
post #581 of 1414
The irony is laughable
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolaholic View Post

One of the cooler tributes I've seen

They carried out the French flag along with the American one before the Army football game today


post #582 of 1414
Shapiro is a Portuguese jewish surname

Pretty ironic considering how the jews were expelled from portugal

Just another Jew promoting an agenda. Can't fool me
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPEG View Post

post #583 of 1414
Thread Starter 

Where's the irony in that particular tribute? The fact that it's the army? The French did the same after 9/11 so it's reasonable for them to reciprocate 

post #584 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth-Serum View Post

Shapiro is a jewish surname

Just another Jew promoting an agenda. Can't fool me

calling the generalization of an entire religion "an agenda" while generalizing an entire religion in the same post :lol

pimp.gifTEAM MBENGApimp.gif

 

Thank you for calling NT tech support, can i take your order please? 

 

nerd.gifAbout Menerd.gif 

Reply

pimp.gifTEAM MBENGApimp.gif

 

Thank you for calling NT tech support, can i take your order please? 

 

nerd.gifAbout Menerd.gif 

Reply
post #585 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccastro02 View Post

When things like this happen, it always puts me a bit on edge. Especially because I take the LIRR to commute to work and i'm at Penn Station everyday. Thank god for the military personnel and the police officers who are stationed at penn station keeping all of us commuters safe.

 

Same. It's scary. Every time I'm in the movie theater I'm even on edge, especially if I see a young dude walk in and sit down alone. Happened to me the other night. Young dude walks in alone WITH A BACKPACK. Couldn't relax the whole time.

 
Reply
 
Reply
post #586 of 1414
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
Reps on site: OGbobbyjohnson773, lobotomybeats.
Reply
post #587 of 1414
We got dudes in here that call themselves progressive being apologists for Sharia Law laugh.gif

Anyone in the States suggesting the Bible be the law of the law is 100% radical...hello Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee.
post #588 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopper View Post

We got dudes in here that call themselves progressive being apologists for Sharia Law laugh.gif

Anyone in the States suggesting the Bible be the law of the law is 100% radical...hello Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee.

Bill Maher Jr., Where are people defending Sharia Law?
post #589 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by sea manup View Post

calling the generalization of an entire religion "an agenda" while generalizing an entire religion in the same post laugh.gif

One way or another, these situations always manage to push the bigots out into the light
...
Reply
...
Reply
post #590 of 1414
Thread Starter 

Sharia law apologists in this thread? The heck are you talking about? 

 

I do see a lot of blanket statements though

post #591 of 1414
Sharia law isn't radical?
post #592 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopper View Post

Sharia law isn't radical?

Does supporting Sharia Law mean supporting terrorism?
post #593 of 1414
No.
post #594 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopper View Post

No.

Then you answer your own damb question.

You can't label terrorist, and Sharia Law supporting fundamentalist both radicals

STOP GROUPING THEM TOGETHER

I'm in no way a supporter of Sharia law, nothing I have said even hints at that.

The problem you have, just your homeboy Billy is that you'll can't talk about one group without bringing up the other

No better than conservatives that feel the need to mention black on black crime or Chicago when talking about a crime involing black folk
post #595 of 1414
How do I add a France backdrop to my social media profile images? I'm feeling very compassionate about this particular atrocity.
post #596 of 1414
Some of you ever heard of blind tolerance? If you believe in sharia law then you're already radicalized
post #597 of 1414
Umm... I never grouped them. I don't think radical = terrorist. I think terrorists can certainly be radical, but you can have radical views/beliefs and not support terrorism.
post #598 of 1414


God Bless America Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/03/us-led-air-strikes-on-isis-targets-killed-more-than-450-civilians-report
Hundreds of civilians killed in US-led air strikes on Isis targets – report
Airwars project details ‘credible reports’ of at least 459 non-combatant deaths, including 100 children, in 52 air strikes

A US-led air strike in October in Kobani, Syria, during fighting between Syrian Kurds and Islamic State. Chris Woods, of Airwars, said: ‘You can’t have an air war of this intensity without civilians getting killed or injured.’ Photograph: Gokhan Sahin/Getty Images
Alice Ross
Monday 3 August 2015 07.03 EDT Last modified on Monday 3 August 2015 19.00 EDT
Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Shares
25k
Comments
1,274
Save for later
The air campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has killed more than 450 civilians, according to a new report, even though the US-led coalition has so far acknowledged just two non-combatant deaths.

More than 5,700 air strikes have been launched in the campaign, which nears its first anniversary this Saturday, with its impact on civilians largely unknown.

Now Airwars, a project by a team of independent journalists, is publishing details of 52 strikes with what it believes are credible reports of at least 459 non-combatant deaths, including those of more than 100 children.

It says there is a “worrying gulf between public and coalition positions” on the campaign’s toll on civilians.


To date the US Central Command (Centcom), the lead force in the campaign, has published one official investigation – a report in May that found two children were killed in a November 2014 strike in Syria.

US 'reasonably certain' it has killed 'Jihadi John' – as it happened
Follow the latest updates after the US carried out a drone strike in Syria targeting Mohammed Emwazi, the British Isis terrorist referred to as ‘Jihadi John’
Read more
The coalition’s lead commander, Lt Gen John Hesterman, has called the campaign “the most precise and disciplined in the history of aerial warfare”.

But Airwars project leader Chris Woods told the Guardian: “The emphasis on precision in our view hasn’t been borne out by facts on the ground.”

Since May, Centcom has conducted investigations into three further strikes, which found claims of civilian deaths were “unfounded”.

One of the attacks investigated was on Fadhiliya, Iraq, on 4 April. When the Guardian investigated this strike in May, witnesses and local politicians said a family of five had died, including a pregnant woman and an eight-year-old girl.

Centcom told Airwars it would only publish investigations with a “preponderance of evidence” of civilian deaths. It is understood to be examining six further incidents.

Sahr Muhamadally, from the Center for Civilians in Conflict, said: “All allegations of civilian harm, including from open sources, should be investigated by the coalition and processes should be in place to acknowledge and assist those harmed.”

International NGOs point out that coalition air strikes are significantly safer for civilians than those carried out by either the Assad regime or the Iraqi military.

However, over six months, Airwars examined 118 air strikes and identified 52 that Woods said “warrant urgent investigation”. Airwars believes there are strong indications of civilian deaths, according to multiple, reliable sources, from these attacks.

Airwars used international and local news reports in Arabic and English, social media postings including photos and videos, and the findings of monitoring groups on the ground. They cross-referenced these with coalition military reports.


US-led coalition warplanes drop new leaflets over Isis stronghold in Syria
Read more
The ongoing violence means that on-the-ground verification is all but impossible. But the conflict does not take place in an information vacuum: local people are often quick to post videos and photos on Twitter and YouTube, and to create martyrdom pages on Facebook.

In Syria, the long civil war has seen groups spring up to record atrocities of all kinds, who often funnel news to colleagues outside the country.

Making things more complicated, emotive footage or reports of civilian deaths are used for propaganda by all sides of the chaotic war. In three cases, Airwars found evidence that it believes disproves claims of civilian deaths, for example by unearthing online videos that show that supposed non-combatants were active Isis members.

Advertisement

But in many cases civilian deaths are well-documented. In some attacks, multiple sources suggest that scores of civilians may have been killed.

The bloodiest was a 3 June air strike on a suspected IED [improvised explosive device] factory and storage facility in Hawija, Iraq. Videos and photos posted online after the bombing show a landscape of destroyed buildings and mangled metal. Local people told al-Jazeera and Reuters that over 70 civilians were killed.

In a press briefing shortly after the strike, Hesterman said the coalition used a “fairly small weapon on a known IED building in an industrial area”, but that this had hit a “massive amount of Daesh [Isis] high explosives”.

He added: “If there are unintended injuries, that responsibility rests squarely on Daesh.”

Centcom has since announced a formal investigation after receiving “credible” evidence of civilian deaths.

In Syria, the worst incidents include a 28 December air strike on an Isis facility in Al Bab that was being used as a temporary prison. Reports gathered by Airwars found that at least 58 prisoners – many of whom were being held for petty infractions of Isis’ rules, such as buying cigarettes – were killed. Local activists claimed that the use of the building as a prison was well known.

The coalition did not acknowledge the attack for nearly two weeks, after which it conceded, following repeated questions by news agency McClatchy, that it had conducted the strike.


Centcom spokesman Lt Co Kyle Raines said the coalition takes great care to avoid civilian deaths. “We take all allegations of civilian casualties seriously, and we apply very rigorous standards in our targeting process to avoid or to minimise civilian casualties in the first place,” he said.

Advertisement

The UK is the second-most active participant in the coalition, having launched almost 250 strikes in Iraq.

As Britain’s MPs prepare to vote this autumn on expanding UK air strikes from Iraq to Syria, Labour MP Tom Watson called for thorough official investigations into claims of civilian deaths to allow an “informed debate” about the campaign. He added: “The UK should be leading in the tracking, reporting of and response to allegations of civilian casualties.”

Former international development secretary Andrew Mitchell told the Guardian he was in favour of expanding British strikes into Syria. “But if it’s our common objective to win hearts and minds and split off the terrorist thugs from the related population, then we have to acknowledge that killing innocent civilians acts as a significant recruiting sergeant for the terrorists,” he said.

A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said that the UK takes “every possible measure” to avoid civilian casualties. “We are not aware of any incidents of civilian casualties as a result of UK strike activity over Iraq,” she added.

Woods, from Airwars, said the US-led campaign’s focus on urban areas made civilian deaths unavoidable, despite “significant efforts” to avoid them. “What we are seeing in Iraq and Syria is the coalition is bombing where Isis is, and that’s in the cities … Unsurprisingly, that’s where we are tracking the highest number of civilian casualties.” The Isis stronghold of Mosul, Iraq, alone accounts for 40% of all civilian casualty reports in Airwars’ data.


Yazidis yearn for their Sinjar home one year after Isis forced them to flee
Read more
The sheer pace of the strikes adds to the risk to civilians. Raines said that pre-planned missions made up approximately 10% of strikes.

The vast majority are on “emerging targets”. In these strikes the targeting process takes “anywhere from minutes to hours depending on collateral damage concerns, while maintaining careful consideration for each target to ensure we do our best to minimise civilian casualties and collateral damage,” Raines said.

Even the highest estimates of civilian deaths in international air strikes are dwarfed by numbers believed killed by Syrian regime barrel bombings and Iraqi government air strikes, and by armed groups including Isis and al Nusra Front.

But Woods said Airwars’ findings suggest that the coalition’s narrative of virtually no civilian casualties may not be true. “You can’t have an air war of this intensity without civilians getting killed or injured, but they need to be more transparent,” he said.


This **** continues as long as the public let's it continue, believe it or not.
DRINK MORE WATER.
seek more truth
Reply
DRINK MORE WATER.
seek more truth
Reply
post #599 of 1414

These terrorists have a one way ticket to hell. They will be cast into the everlasting fire for all eternity.

post #600 of 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chopper View Post

Umm... I never grouped them. I don't think radical = terrorist. I think terrorists can certainly be radical, but you can have radical views/beliefs and not support terrorism.

You spew Bill Maher talking points, cosign everything he has to say on Muslims

But when I pin you down, you want to bob and weave with this "I never said that..."

You're in no position to talk, with "i never grouped". You came into this thread just now accusing folk of defending Sharia Law, when no one was doing that.

So pot, meet kettle
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General
NikeTalk › NikeTalk Forums › The Lounge › General › Simultaneous terrorist attacks around Paris...Vol. Here we go again.Update 07/14/16 p42: Nice terror attacks