Mavis
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2015
- Messages
- 115
- Reaction score
- 41
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Well don't forget to wipe and pull the flush handle.
Well don't forget to wipe and pull the flush handle.I posted it by accident in the wrong place, it is in its proper place now.
The irony of argumentum ad hominem offered as argumentum ad nauseam can't be any better defined, or ironically lost on you pbrauer. :shrug:Since they are your quotes, that's an excellent idea to flush them. Thanks.
I like you too bubba, so I am giving you this:Here Pete. I give you this because I like you.
Jindal fights back on No-Go-Zones, trying to set record straight
Deny all this and you're left with denying all the sources (some are from CNN ... uh oh) and all the quotes therein.
I like you too bubba, so I am giving you this:
Bobby Jindal Defends "No-Go Zones" Myth: Fox's John Bolton Said It Was True | Blog | Media Matters for America
The Associated Press noted that "Like many other countries, Britain and France have crime-plagued neighborhoods where outsiders risk muggings and violence. In Europe,some of the highest-profile propagators of the idea have repudiated it."
insome of these areas are predominantly Muslim,
large part because they were settled by poor families from former colonies with Muslim majorities.
While drug gangs and radical imams sometimes vie for influence in these zones,
none is subject to the rule of Sharia."
Nope ... you really need to read the link I gave you.
As for this from the MM piece ...
Jindal has not been apologetic. His office recently released a document titled, "Setting the record straight: Reports of 'no-go zones' in Europe." The document leads with: "Ambassador John Bolton's Gatestone Institute Chronicled Dozens Of Reports Of 'No-Go' Zones In Europe." The document predominantly relied on Gatestone but also cited Daily Mail, CNN, The Washington Times, and The Daily Caller.
The Republican appeared on the January 21 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto. Cavuto said the term "no-go zones was wrong. I mean we reported the same, and we were wrong, we botched it, we apologized for it, you are not, I take it." Jindal said he wasn't apologizing, claiming "there are neighborhoods in the U.K. and in France that have been documented, very well documented, by Ambassador Bolton and others."
Jindal also said what I told you days ago. That FOX essentially apologized for letting the point go that Birmingham, UK was a no-go zone. Not that there aren't any de facto no-go zones around Europe.
I'm betting you're old enough to recognize when people are playing word games with you.
The way this was weasel worded should have been a red flag ...
The Atlantic's David A. Graham explored the no-go zones myth and wrote that "Jindal is plainly wrong" and "there's no evidence for no-go zones and
The Associated Press noted that "Like many other countries, Britain and France have crime-plagued neighborhoods where outsiders risk muggings and violence. In Europe,in
It's a way of calling no-go zones by other words and the link I gave you explains that there are absolutely movements to have those areas subject to Sharia Law.
I'd wager if pressed they'd say, weeeeeelll if it's not a Government endorsed no-go zone then it can't be called a no-go zone.
I'm telling you Pete, you're on the wrong pony with this one.
Sorry, but you must learn to post better. Its very difficult to figure out what you are writing and what you are quoting. Also much of the stuff you copied and pasted contains imbedded links and you made no attempt to carry them forward.Nope ... you really need to read the link I gave you.
As for this from the MM piece ...
Jindal has not been apologetic. His office recently released a document titled, "Setting the record straight: Reports of 'no-go zones' in Europe." The document leads with: "Ambassador John Bolton's Gatestone Institute Chronicled Dozens Of Reports Of 'No-Go' Zones In Europe." The document predominantly relied on Gatestone but also cited Daily Mail, CNN, The Washington Times, and The Daily Caller.
The Republican appeared on the January 21 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto. Cavuto said the term "no-go zones was wrong. I mean we reported the same, and we were wrong, we botched it, we apologized for it, you are not, I take it." Jindal said he wasn't apologizing, claiming "there are neighborhoods in the U.K. and in France that have been documented, very well documented, by Ambassador Bolton and others."
Jindal also said what I told you days ago. That FOX essentially apologized for letting the point go that Birmingham, UK was a no-go zone. Not that there aren't any de facto no-go zones around Europe.
I'm betting you're old enough to recognize when people are playing word games with you.
The way this was weasel worded should have been a red flag ...
The Atlantic's David A. Graham explored the no-go zones myth and wrote that "Jindal is plainly wrong" and "there's no evidence for no-go zones and
The Associated Press noted that "Like many other countries, Britain and France have crime-plagued neighborhoods where outsiders risk muggings and violence. In Europe,in
It's a way of calling no-go zones by other words and the link I gave you explains that there are absolutely movements to have those areas subject to Sharia Law.
I'd wager if pressed they'd say, weeeeeelll if it's not a Government endorsed no-go zone then it can't be called a no-go zone.
I'm telling you Pete, you're on the wrong pony with this one.
Sorry, but you must learn to post better. Its very difficult to figure out what you are writing and what you are quoting. Also much of the stuff you copied and pasted contains imbedded links and you made no attempt to carry them forward.
*Imitates Hermione Granger*Here is the Media Matters article:again.
To me there are 2 very tightly related reasons she would deny the truth about Islamists ...Greetings, bubba. :2wave:
When the mayors of various cities in Europe state that there indeed "no-go" zones in their cities, I've got to believe them! They live there! And Bolton would also know the truth, IMO. Okay, so the entire city of Birmingham is not a no-go zone, and Fox has apologized for wording it incorrectly.Is it fear for some reason that prompts this ridiculous threat of a lawsuit?Why would the Paris mayor threaten anyone who tells the truth about French no-go zones?.
So that's your story and you're sticking to it until Barack says different.Sorry, but you must learn to post better. Its very difficult to figure out what you are writing and what you are quoting. Also much of the stuff you copied and pasted contains imbedded links and you made no attempt to carry them forward.
Believe me I am old enough, to give you an idea how old, I was drafted in to the US Army November 1963.
Those no-go zones are nothing other than poor high crime areas.
!Don't mess with Paris.
Fox News is learning the hard way that insults to the City of Light will not go unchallenged.
The network has already been threatened with a lawsuit over allegedly "prejudiced" coverage of the city. And now, it's facing something that might be even worse: French taunting.
"Le Petit Journal," which is something like "The Daily Show," sent two comics into the streets of Paris dressed up as Fox News reporters. As "John and Mike," the two freaked out in English at all the supposed Islamic threats they encountered.
With Fox News-style graphics flying across the screen -- including a "MASSIVE ALERT" -- the two totally lost it over a bearded taxi driver and a "terrorist restaurant" (which was just a typical Turkish take-out place).
"Oh my God, a couscous!" one of them cried with a graphic reading "COUSCOUS ATTACK IN PARIS."
"Paris is the most dangerous city in the universe," declared "John."
Check out the clip above. It starts out in French, but the Fox News "reporters" speak English throughout the segment... "
'Le Petit Journal,' French TV Show, Totally Trolls Fox News
Maybe your confusion is that you didn't realize the italics were the extracts from your MM link.Sorry, but you must learn to post better. Its very difficult to figure out what you are writing and what you are quoting. Also much of the stuff you copied and pasted contains imbedded links and you made no attempt to carry them forward.
Believe me I am old enough, to give you an idea how old, I was drafted in to the US Army November 1963.
Those no-go zones are nothing other than poor high crime areas.
Well if you get your head out of a Harry Potter book... :lamo*Imitates Hermione Granger*
Argumentum ad hominem plus argumentum ad nauseam aequus reductio ad absurdum. :screwy
So that's your story and you're sticking to it until Barack says different.
Maybe your confusion is that you didn't realize the italics were the extracts from your MM link.
Too subtle?
Let me summarize this whole thread theme ... some of us present to some of you some facts about actual no-go zones, whether state designated or de facto, and you respond with fact-no-go denial zones that rely on word games.
Obama taught you well.
To me there are 2 very tightly related reasons she would deny the truth about Islamists ...
1) For some reason it's what Socialists are wont to do regarding their assessment of Islamists (e.g. Obama won't even say the word)
2) the Mayor of Paris is a Socialist too.
Assuming that sometime in the future, Islamic radials are victorious in their quest for control of parts of Europe, either by complacency on the part of the citizenry or a bloodless takeover or something else - which is unlikely but possible, I guess - do the socialists believe they will be exempt from strictures decreed by the radicals?and with war being declared on all Western cultures by the radicals, isn't that a little bit like protecting a deadly snake in your midst?With all the sleeper cells that have been identified so far throughout Europe,
My grandfather left me his entire collection of Reader's Digests from the 30s and 40s, and events recorded as they were happening is sure interesting to read, including the fact that half of France suddenly no longer belonged to the French, and it remained that way for years. Whatever....
I don't know how to break this to ya Pete, but your link contains nothing persuasive that de facto no-go zones don't exist.I don't depend upon politicians to get the facts, your references to President Obama are BS, I thought you were better than that. Your sources are either anti Muslim or ignorant or both.
How Did The Muslim 'No-Go Zones' Myth Get Started Anyway?
I don't know how to break this to ya Pete, but your link contains nothing persuasive that de facto no-go zones don't exist.
Granted, the lady does her damndest to word-dance around it but uh-uh.
She fails too.
So let me ask you this ... the piece at your link includes a reference to something by Dan Pipes.
After you read it, had your curiosity piqued, and, subsequently searched for pieces actually written by Dan Pipes on the subject what did you discover?
You starting to get the idea you are dealing with a brick wall yet bubbagone? Looks a lot like it, good luck with that.I don't know how to break this to ya Pete, but your link contains nothing persuasive that de facto no-go zones don't exist.
Granted, the lady does her damndest to word-dance around it but uh-uh.
She fails too.
So let me ask you this ... the piece at your link includes a reference to something by Dan Pipes.
After you read it, had your curiosity piqued, and, subsequently searched for pieces actually written by Dan Pipes on the subject what did you discover?
...This:
Jan. 14, 2015 update: Jack Sommers, a UK-based reporter for Huffington Post, posed this series of questions to me about the ZUS and their equivalents elsewhere in Europe:
Could you describe the places you visited in more detail? What were your impressions of these places before you visited them? Did you feel personally safe visiting them? Do you think there is any truth to the claims being made that police and non-Muslims fear to visit them?My reply:
I have visited predominantly immigrant (and largely Muslim) areas of Brussels, Copenhagen, Malmö, Stockholm, Berlin, Paris, and Athens. In the case of Paris, I spent time both in Belleville and in such suburbs as Sarcelles, Val d'Oise, and Seine Saint Denis.
Before my travels, I expected these areas to be similar to the worst areas of the United States, such as the Bronx or Detroit, where buildings are decrepit, streets menacing, and outsiders feel distinctly unwelcome.
My experiences starting in 2007 belied this expectation. All the immigrant areas turned out to be well maintained, with safe streets, and no sense of intimidation. I walked around, usually with camera in hand, and felt at ease. I encountered no difficulties at all.
That said, there is a reason why the French government calls these regions sensibles(sensitive, delicate). They contain many social pathologies (unemployment, drugs, political extremism), they seethe with antagonism toward the majority society, and are prone to outbreaks of violence.
So, from an American point of view, these areas are a bit confusing: potentially dangerous, yes, but in normal times very ordinary looking and with no sense of foreboding. Thus, the term no-go zone does not accurately reflect the situation.
The 751 No-Go Zones of France :: Daniel Pipes
Of course, but ideology is usually tough material to pierce.You starting to get the idea you are dealing with a brick wall yet bubbagone? Looks a lot like it, good luck with that.
What do you call black neighborhoods that have poverty and high crime? Is it because they're black or something else? If those areas that fit the description are only Muslim I would be shocked. The people who are pushing this meme hate Muslims, I hope you are not one of them....
"What does one call Rotherham and Birmingham? They are not no-go zones, neither in terms of geography or sovereignty. This is where we – Emerson, others (such as Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal), and I stumbled. The English language lacks a readily-available term for this. And for good reason: I know of no historical parallel, in which a majority population accepts the customs and even the criminality of a poorer and weaker immigrant community. The world has never seen anything comparable to the contemporary West's blend of achievement, timidity, and guilt, of hugely superior power matched by a deep reluctance to use it.
Instead of no-go zones, I propose semi-autonomous sectors, a term that emphasizes their indistinct and non-geographic nature – thus permitting a more accurate discussion of what is, arguably, West Europe's most acute problem."
Does Europe Have No-go Zones? :: Daniel Pipes
Like I've been saying, Pete ... word games ... reading comprehension is key.
Pipes, and others here, are calling attention to the differences between government designated no-go zones, traditional no-go zones, and what's happening around Europe and popping up here.
Pipes said they are "Europe's most acute problem"(!) but let's call them something else because they may not currently fit the traditional definition.
Now if you still want to go on thinking Muslims have nothing to do with that acute problem despite what we've shown you, it's clear you're not going to budge.
What do you call black neighborhoods that have poverty and high crime? Is it because they're black or something else? If those areas that fit the description are only Muslim I would be shocked. The people who are pushing this meme hate Muslims, I hope you are not one of them.
I know of no historical parallel, in which a majority population accepts the customs and even the criminality of a poorer and weaker immigrant community.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?