Australian Politics Forum - Hundreds of muslims show solidarity with Oslo Jews

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95886
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #135 - Mar 10^th, 2015 at 10:50pm

Soren wrote on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 6:05pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 2:49pm:

Soren firstly claimed there were exactly zero muslims besides those that formed the symbolic line. After quietly abandoning this,

You must have that quote handy somewhere, Gandy.

Actually, here it is. Nobody says 'there were zero muslims besides those that formed a symbolic line' symbolising a ring formed by 1300 Mulsims.

The organiser said there were 'hundreds of Muslims'. Why they didn't join in to form a symbolic line, ring, whatever, is not revealed. It's not like there was no room in that line. The Muslim organiser makes random, totally spurious claims about 'hundreds', knowing that there is no way of verifying his claim.

But if you judge people by the ACTIONS, then there were only 20 Muslims there who were prepared to personally participate in a symbolic act of protecting Jews. That IS a fact, verifiable, undisputed. 20 or so Muslims.

And so it is true that there were far, far more Muslims, several hundred, at the Danish Muslim shooters funeral who were prepared to make a symbolic gesture to farewell a Jew-killer than there were Muslims who were prepared to personally make a symbolic gesture of protecting Jews.

According to the Islamic Society, twice as many people gathered in and around the mosque for the shooter's funeral than is usual for regular Friday prayers.

Versus 20, mostly school girls holding hands and denouncing Islamophobia a propos the Muslim guy killing a Jew.

Old boy, you really must put a health warning on your excretia.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #136 - Mar 11^th, 2015 at 11:08am

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 6:53pm:

Is the extent of the errors in the article typical of journalistic incompetence? Is that the same thing as a conspiracy?

You tell me FD - are you persisting with your conspiracy previous claim that the inventions go beyond mere journalistic incompetence? And that you connect these inventions with covering up for what happened in Copenhagen? I guess this is FD's Clayton's conspiracy - the conspiracy you have when you're not having a conspiracy.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 6:53pm:

They may employ Muslims. It is a pretty big leap to go from finding a lie in an AFP/AP publication to concluding that a Muslim could not possibly be the source of it Gandalf.

seriously sometimes I think you're deliberately taking the piss. Here we have journalistic mistakes pertaining to a story about muslims which you assume with absolutely no basis is because of sinister muslims.... and you have the hide to lecture me about a "pretty big leap". Unbelievable.

Can you at least answer the question you ignored before - are all journalistic mistakes related to undue favourable reporting of muslims by default the fault of muslims - unless proven otherwise? I think its a reasonable question given your extraordinary stance on this.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2015 at 6:53pm:

Now that you have realised what you, Soren and I have been discussing, I will give you the opportunity to change your mind about how many Muslims formed the symbolic line symbolising the symbolic ring.

Reading comprehension PLEASE.

the word was *WILLING* to form the line. Soren made the baseless claim that 20 formed the line and the rest "declined" to join. The BS narrative he is trying to spin was that there was an extraordinary small number of muslims willing to "stick their neck out" and make this gesture. The TOI article clearly explains what happened, and why Soren's narrative is BS - a decision was made to form a small symbolic line of about 20 people for the cameras. Behind that, behind the police barricade was a *SECOND* line of hundreds of muslims and also some non-muslims. The decision to make the two lines was for logistical and security concerns - *NOT* because only 20 were willing to form a ring. Clearly hundreds of muslims turned up wanting to make a ring. But of course you would know all this if you bothered to read the TOI article I keep referencing.

So don't strawman me and say that I claimed there were more than 20 people in that first line.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49071
At my desk.

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #137 - Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm

Quote:

You tell me FD - are you persisting with your conspiracy previous claim that the inventions go beyond mere journalistic incompetence?

OK, let's start at the beginning again. I (still) think it goes beyond regular journalistic incompetence, just like I said the first time. Do you agree? Is that the same as a conspiracy?

Quote:

And that you connect these inventions with covering up

Your words Gandalf, not mine.

Quote:

seriously sometimes I think you're deliberately taking the piss. Here we have journalistic mistakes pertaining to a story about muslims which you assume with absolutely no basis is because of sinister muslims....

You are the one claiming to know where they come from, not me. You made a specific claim about the Muslims at the protest which you have no evidence at all for.

Quote:

the word was *WILLING* to form the line. Soren made the baseless claim that 20 formed the line and the rest "declined" to join.

Right. Your version is that "it was decided". What is the distinction you are trying to make Gandalf?

Quote:

The BS narrative he is trying to spin was that there was an extraordinary small number of muslims willing to "stick their neck out" and make this gesture.

Compared to the numbers who turned up to the funeral of the terrorist, it is extraordinary. Even when they try to turn it into a protest against Islamophobia they can't get the numbers.

Quote:

The TOI article clearly explains what happened, and why Soren's narrative is BS - a decision was made to form a small symbolic line of about 20 people for the cameras.

Oh, that explains everything. "A decision was made".

Quote:

Behind that, behind the police barricade was a *SECOND* line of hundreds of muslims and also some non-muslims.

A second symbolic line symbolising a symbolic ring? Two lines and a barricade? Have you considered working for AP?

Quote:

The decision to make the two lines was for logistical and security concerns

What security concerns? What happens when Muslims surround a synagog?

Quote:

Clearly hundreds of muslims turned up

When you say clearly, you mean a Muslim said so, and after an endless stream of lies, you "see no reason" to disbelieve him.

Quote:

But of course you would know all this if you bothered to read the TOI article I keep referencing.

Can you quote the relevant bit? I keep telling you I must have missed it.

Quote:

So don't strawman me and say that I claimed there were more than 20 people in that first line.

Of course. You have now invented a second symbolic line, hundreds strong, symbolising a symbolic ring. Except that this one was not and actual symbolic line symbolising a symbolic ring, was it? It was more a bunch of random people in a symbolic group symbolising a symbolic line symbolising a symbolic ring, protesting the Islamophobic response to Muslims openly slaughtering Jews and turning out en masse at the terrorist's funeral.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #138 - Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:33pm

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

OK, let's start at the beginning again. I (still) think it goes beyond regular journalistic incompetence, just like I said the first time. Do you agree? Is that the same as a conspiracy?

You tell me - exactly what *DO* you mean by "goes beyond regular journalistic incompetence". You can even do it without using the word 'conspiracy' if you really want. In your last post you seemed to be going to great pains to suggest the inventions came from muslims in order to mask the threat of islam. Again, feel free to explain, in your own words, what such an apparent collusion between western journalists and sinister muslims actually means - and of course don't feel pressured to use the word 'conspiracy'.

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

Quote:
And that you connect these inventions with covering up

Your words Gandalf, not mine.

No, your words:

Quote:

It was deliberately blown out of proportion to find a counterweight to the large number of Muslims that turned up to mourn the dead terrorist. It is an attempt to mislead people about the threat posed by Islam and Muslims.

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

You are the one claiming to know where they come from, not me

You're right - I do claim to know where the reuters claim of 1000 muslims came from - reuters. Very presumptuous of me, I know. And as you say, its a "pretty big leap of logic" for me to assume that the fault of the incorrect report by reuters lies at the feet of the journalist (and editors) who provided reuters the report. And furthermore, its definitely *NOT* a "pretty big leap of logic" to assume that the source of the incorrect fact came from sinister muslims.

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

Right. Your version is that "it was decided". What is the distinction you are trying to make Gandalf?

The organisers in consultation with the police "decided" not to form one big ring with everyone in it. Now tell me again you are having difficulty distinguishing between this and 99% of muslims present not wanting to participate.

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

A second symbolic line symbolising a symbolic ring? Two lines and a barricade? Have you considered working for AP?

Simply being there with the jews demonstrates solidarity - would you agree? I think its fairly safe to say you would be slamming the muslims as sinister opportunists if they actually did all form one giant ring around the mosque. Masking the threat of islam remember?

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

What security concerns? What happens when Muslims surround a synagog?

Heaven forbid there might be people who might want to harm such people. I mean its not like Norway has never had a guy going on a shooting rampage over his obsession with islam in Europe have they?

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

When you say clearly, you mean a Muslim said so, and after an endless stream of lies, you "see no reason" to disbelieve him.

Except not one of the "endless stream of lies" about this came from any muslim. But of course we must do that thing thats definitely not a "big leap of logic" and assume the "lies" that were published by western news wires really came from muslims - right?

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:35pm:

Of course. You have now invented a second symbolic line,

Not my invention, its mentioned in the TOI article which you will never read (why would you - you wouldn't be able to continually question what is in it).

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

\|dev\|null Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4434 Gender:	Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons Reply #139 - Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:52pm I wonder how many Muslims can dance on the head of a pin?
Back to top	"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013. "we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions." Freediver, 2007. IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49071
At my desk.

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #140 - Mar 11^th, 2015 at 9:25pm

Quote:

You tell me - exactly what *DO* you mean by "goes beyond regular journalistic incompetence".

I mean exactly what I said. Let's make this a bit simpler. Forget about what you think I meant. Do you agree with what I said?

Quote:

You can even do it without using the word 'conspiracy' if you really want.

I am doing fine without blurting out conspiracy every single post. How about you? Can you manage?

Quote:

In your last post you seemed to be going to great pains to suggest

Is this your way of acknowledging that I did not actually say what you keep accusing me of saying?

Quote:

the inventions came from muslims in order to mask the threat of islam

You are the only one who has made a specific claim about this - completely without basis, of course.

Quote:

No, your words:

Yes Gandalf they are my words. Now, if you read them, you will note they are significantly different from the version you made up.

Quote:

You're right - I do claim to know where the reuters claim of 1000 muslims came from - reuters. Very presumptuous of me, I know.

This is what you claimed:

Quote:

None of the muslims there made any of the "inventions" you refer to

Just to clarify, you do not actually know this, nor do you have any idea who made it up, do you? You really want to believe that reuters made the whole thing up, but that's about it.

Quote:

The organisers in consultation with the police "decided" not to form one big ring with everyone in it.

Yes Gandalf. We have established that "it was decided". After all, they aren't zombies, merely Muslims.

Quote:

Now tell me again you are having difficulty distinguishing between this and 99% of muslims present not wanting to participate.

99%? I think this crowd just ballooned again. What is the difference between not wanting to participate and deciding not to participate?

Quote:

Heaven forbid there might be people who might want to harm such people. I mean its not like Norway has never had a guy going on a shooting rampage over his obsession with islam in Europe have they?

And this is likely to happen as a result of Muslims forming a symbolic ring? No wonder they tried to turn it into a protest against Islamophobia. They must huddle together in groups so the police can protect them with a barricade. At what point do you realise how ludicrous this sounds?

Quote:

Except not one of the "endless stream of lies" about this came from any muslim.

So you keep saying. Other than finding the lies in a newspaper, which you seem to think is all the evidence you need for where it came from, is there anything else that makes you think that not one of them came from a Muslim? Is this another case of you "having no reason to" assume all the Muslims involved are completely honest?

Quote:

But of course we must do that thing thats definitely not a "big leap of logic" and assume the "lies" that were published by western news wires really came from muslims - right?

You are assuming the opposite Gandalf, without evidence. Instead of seeing this for what it is, you keep pretending I am making the same mistake you are. You are the only one making this error.

Quote:

Not my invention, its mentioned in the TOI article which you will never read (why would you - you wouldn't be able to continually question what is in it).

So the first symbolic line symbolising a symbolic ring was a bit of a failure at only 20 people, but there was a second line consisting of hundreds of people? And even though you have already looked silly by regurgitating the first newspaper article in the face of all the evidence that it was wrong, you now insist this second line was real because you read it in another article, which for some reason you refuse to quote or link to again?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #141 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 9:04am

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 9:25pm:

Just to clarify, you do not actually know this, nor do you have any idea who made it up, do you? You really want to believe that reuters made the whole thing up, but that's about it.

FD, it really defies belief that you can't understand where I'm coming from with this.

The false reports came from the western news wires - agreed? No one has produced any evidence that these false reports were sourced from muslims. Now see if you can explain for once, without the huffing and puffing, why you would reject the imminently common sense conclusion that we shouldn't assume the inventions came from sinister muslims.

And try and answer my question that I have asked three times now and you continue to avoid - are all false reports in the media that give undue praise to muslims by default the fault of muslims - unless proven otherwise?

I figure if I ignore all your other BS you'll have a better chance on focusing on this important point and actually addressing it for once.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49071
At my desk.

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #142 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:04pm

Gandalf's story:

Hundreds of Muslims turn up to a Synagog to show solidarity by forming a symbolic protective ring and turning it into a protest against Islamophobia, because the best way to show people that their fear of Islam is irrational is to make a giant symbol of the protection that Jews need from Muslim terrorists. Their hopes are dashed when hardly any turn up, and they realise the police do not have enough barricade to form an actual protective ring to protect the symbolic protective ring. The few Muslims present are forced to huddle at the entrance, lest they get picked off one by one by the wandering bands of Islamophobes patrolling the streets. The Jews involved may have also objected to the thought of Muslims surrounding their synagog to protest their irrationality. Police form a barricade, otherwise known as a temporary fence, out the front. Bravely, about 20 Muslims cross to the other side of the barrier to protest Islamophobia and take on the dangerous throng of journalists, who outnumber them significantly. These Muslims form a symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring to protect the barrier, which is protecting the much larger line of Muslims forming a second symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring behind the barrier. The purpose of this barrier sandwich must be to protect Muslims from journalists. It works, as they only manage to photograph about 3 Muslims forming a line.

All the lies and transparent spin doctoring have nothing at all to do with the bad publicity arising from several European Muslim terrorists attacking cartoonists, free speech advocates and Jews, and the massive turnout at the funeral of one of the Muslims who killed Jews.

Gandalf initially presents and defends an article claiming that that over a thousand Muslims formed an actual symbolic protective ring, then tries to detract from this this mistake by constantly accusing Soren of lying. His current version of events is based on an article in the Israeli Times, who obviously have a secret headquarters in an Oslo synagog from where they got their first hand account. Gandalf avoids linking or quoting the article, but "has no reason to disbelieve" it. He "knows" that none of the Muslims involved were responsible for the steady stream of lies, and anyone who questions how he knows this is falsely claiming, without evidence, that they know those Muslims are responsible, and it is therefor up to them to provide the evidence.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #143 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:09pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 9:04am:

freediver wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 9:25pm:

Just to clarify, you do not actually know this, nor do you have any idea who made it up, do you? You really want to believe that reuters made the whole thing up, but that's about it.

FD, it really defies belief that you can't understand where I'm coming from with this.

The false reports came from the western news wires - agreed? No one has produced any evidence that these false reports were sourced from muslims. Now see if you can explain for once, without the huffing and puffing, why you would reject the imminently common sense conclusion that we shouldn't assume the inventions came from sinister muslims.

And try and answer my question that I have asked three times now and you continue to avoid - are all false reports in the media that give undue praise to muslims by default the fault of muslims - unless proven otherwise?

I figure if I ignore all your other BS you'll have a better chance on focusing on this important point and actually addressing it for once.

It's the same kind of solicitude towards Muslims if not outroght prostration before Islam as, say, praising Dr Rifi for not being a nutter like the rest of the spokesthingies.

There is a large and readily recognisable non-Muslim element in the media and in the institutions that instinctively talks up Muslim achievement and minimises or trivialises Muslim atrocity. They have their Muslim networks and go-to contacts whop will eagerly support this "You've got to accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative' approach.

Talking up 20 girls in front of a Synagogues forming a shortish line as '1300 Muslims' forming a protective ring, or as you do in the title, "Hundreds of Muslims show solidarity with Jews' is the same kind of boosterism in the face of the relentless bad news about Muslims behaving badly. The central point is that they are not true but the wish that they were is so strong that the news is distorted to serve that wish.

It's a miracle of Muslim mathematics that somehow 20 suicide bombers are representing the views of the 'tiny minority of Muslims' whereas 20 Muslim girls are touted as if they were the symbols of the will of the vast majority of Muslims.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sprintcyclist

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 40755
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #144 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:18pm

freediver wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:04pm:

Gandalf's story:

Hundreds of Muslims turn up to a Synagog to show solidarity by forming a symbolic protective ring and turning it into a protest against Islamophobia, because the best way to show people that their fear of Islam is irrational is to make a giant symbol of the protection that Jews need from Muslim terrorists. Their hopes are dashed when hardly any turn up, and they realise the police do not have enough barricade to form an actual protective ring to protect the symbolic protective ring. The few Muslims present are forced to huddle at the entrance, lest they get picked off one by one by the wandering bands of Islamophobes patrolling the streets. The Jews involved may have also objected to the thought of Muslims surrounding their synagog to protest their irrationality. Police form a barricade, otherwise known as a temporary fence, out the front. Bravely, about 20 Muslims cross to the other side of the barrier to protest Islamophobia and take on the dangerous throng of journalists, who outnumber them significantly. These Muslims form a symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring to protect the barrier, which is protecting the much larger line of Muslims forming a second symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring behind the barrier. The purpose of this barrier sandwich must be to protect Muslims from journalists. It works, as they only manage to photograph about 3 Muslims forming a line.

All the lies and transparent spin doctoring have nothing at all to do with the bad publicity arising from several European Muslim terrorists attacking cartoonists, free speech advocates and Jews, and the massive turnout at the funeral of one of the Muslims who killed Jews.

Gandalf initially presents and defends an article claiming that that over a thousand Muslims formed an actual symbolic protective ring, then tries to detract from this this mistake by constantly accusing Soren of lying. His current version of events is based on an article in the Israeli Times, who obviously have a secret headquarters in an Oslo synagog from where they got their first hand account. Gandalf avoids linking or quoting the article, but "has no reason to disbelieve" it. He "knows" that none of the Muslims involved were responsible for the steady stream of lies, and anyone who questions how he knows this is falsely claiming, without evidence, that they know those Muslims are responsible, and it is therefor up to them to provide the evidence.

factual account of the events

Back to top

Modern Classic Right Wing

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #145 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 3:22pm

freediver wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:04pm:

Gandalf's story:

FD's story: I'm going to keep raving and deflecting from the most relevant question because I'm on a roll making sh*t up and jumping to the most ridiculous of conclusions.

4th time FD - so you can deflect it again:

are all false reports in the media that give undue praise to muslims by default the fault of muslims - unless proven otherwise?

An even simpler question - can you trace a single one of the inventions you've been raving about to any muslim? Or did all of them come from western news wires?

Please explain to me this phenomenon (thats definitely not a conspiracy) where the misreporting by western news wires is definitely about muslims trying to cover up the threat of islam - when there is not a shed of evidence it came from any muslim, and was in fact directly contradicted by the only muslim involved in the event who spoke about it.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95886 Gender:	Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons Reply #146 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 5:43pm Now now, FD doesn’t answer questions, G. He’s the new Abu.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49071
At my desk.

Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons
Reply #147 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 7:17pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 3:22pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:04pm:

Gandalf's story:

FD's story: I'm going to keep raving and deflecting from the most relevant question because I'm on a roll making sh*t up and jumping to the most ridiculous of conclusions.

4th time FD - so you can deflect it again:

are all false reports in the media that give undue praise to muslims by default the fault of muslims - unless proven otherwise?

An even simpler question - can you trace a single one of the inventions you've been raving about to any muslim? Or did all of them come from western news wires?

Please explain to me this phenomenon (thats definitely not a conspiracy) where the misreporting by western news wires is definitely about muslims trying to cover up the threat of islam - when there is not a shed of evidence it came from any muslim, and was in fact directly contradicted by the only muslim involved in the event who spoke about it.

Do you disagree with anything in "Gandalf's story"?

Perhaps you would like me to explain something I actually said, rather than expecting me to explain away your inexplicably misleading version of it. I have quoted you plenty of times making specific statements that you cannot back up, and your response to this is to demand I provide evidence for something I did not actually say.

Gandalf's story:

Hundreds of Muslims turn up to a Synagog to show solidarity by forming a symbolic protective ring and turning it into a protest against Islamophobia, because the best way to show people that their fear of Islam is irrational is to make a giant symbol of the protection that Jews need from Muslim terrorists. Their hopes are dashed when hardly any turn up, and they realise the police do not have enough barricade to form an actual protective ring to protect the symbolic protective ring. The few Muslims present are forced to huddle at the entrance, lest they get picked off one by one by the wandering bands of Islamophobes patrolling the streets. The Jews involved may have also objected to the thought of Muslims surrounding their synagog to protest their irrationality. Police form a barricade, otherwise known as a temporary fence, out the front. Bravely, about 20 Muslims cross to the other side of the barrier to protest Islamophobia and take on the dangerous throng of journalists, who outnumber them significantly. These Muslims form a symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring to protect the barrier, which is protecting the much larger line of Muslims forming a second symbolic line symbolising a symbolic protective ring behind the barrier. The purpose of this barrier sandwich must be to protect Muslims from journalists. It works, as they only manage to photograph about 3 Muslims forming a line.

All the lies and transparent spin doctoring have nothing at all to do with the bad publicity arising from several European Muslim terrorists attacking cartoonists, free speech advocates and Jews, and the massive turnout at the funeral of one of the Muslims who killed Jews.

Gandalf initially presents and defends an article claiming that that over a thousand Muslims formed an actual symbolic protective ring, then tries to detract from this mistake by constantly accusing Soren of lying. His current version of events is based on an article in the Israeli Times, who obviously have a secret headquarters in an Oslo synagog from where they got their first hand account. Gandalf avoids linking or quoting the article, but "has no reason to disbelieve" it. He "knows" that none of the Muslims involved were responsible for the steady stream of lies, and anyone who questions how he knows this is falsely claiming, without evidence, that they know those Muslims are responsible, and it is therefor up to them to provide the evidence.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95886 Gender:	Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons Reply #148 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 10:34pm Told you. Best to let FD ask the questions, G. Do you disagree with anything in your story? Answer the question, Moslem.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: British muslims protest Charlie Hebdo cartoons Reply #149 - Mar 13^th, 2015 at 10:13am Masterful deflection FD. Try a fifth time....
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged