Good point, FD. How can G believe something he read on the internet when you’re here on the internet telling him something else entirely?

But I must confess to being curious. What exactly is the truth here? You’re not saying.

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2015 at 10:19pm:


Every "lie" you came up with is deemed to be a lie for no other reason that you reject the reported version of events with absolutely no facts to back you up. The claims still stand up - by simple virtue of the fact that there is absolutely no logical or rational reason to reject them on the little information we are given - let alone declare it as emblematic of a sinister ruse to conceal the true threat of Islam. I dealt with this in post 225.

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2015 at 10:19pm:


You mean the one that shows one muslim in traditional dress and the rest in normal western clothing? The photo proves you can't identify a muslim in a crowd simply by how they look. And keeping in mind this is the sole basis on which you deem the hundreds of muslims claim as a clear lie.

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2015 at 10:19pm:


No, and neither are you. Thats why its idiotic to claim with no shred of evidence that the claim is definitely a lie. And when you revealed last post your conviction is based on nothing else but you seeing a photo - it just makes you look even more foolish. Quite simply there no reason to disbelieve the claim. No reason whatsoever. But watch while FD hits back with "besides all the other incriminating lies" - like quibbling over what is and isn't a line 

freediver wrote on Apr 4^th, 2015 at 10:19pm:


FD reviews it for himself - and comes to the emphatic conclusion that there are definitely not hundreds of muslims because he can't see hundreds of stereotypical visual markers. And he will maintain that any questioning of this impeccable logic is nothing short of a most sinister lie. FD will likely be marking this down at some point as "deferring to common sense" and "being able to think for oneself".

freediver wrote on Apr 5^th, 2015 at 7:32am:


Sinister no?

Do you ever get tired of just pulling stuff out of your arse FD? The first photo I posted was in post #119 - do you see any men there that might be muslim? In fact is there *ANY* photo I posted in this thread that shows only muslim women and no men? (hint: no there isn't).

Can you at least take some time to reflect on all the crap you spew - before you launch into these tired hysterics about all the terrible non-lies muslim make?

freediver wrote on Apr 5^th, 2015 at 7:32am:


I know you are being deliberately stupid, but its clear we need to break this down into kindergarten level.

Do you understand that not all muslims have an outwardly "islamic" appearance - in terms of their physical appearance?

Do you agree that there are likely many muslims in that crowd that look indistinguishable from native Norwegian non-muslims?

If you agree with the above, you must therefore agree that it is not possible to cite a mere photograph of a crowd as proof that there are not hundreds of muslims present.

Once we're clear on that we can then move on to the absurdity of accusing people who dare subscribe to the above logic as sinister liars bent on concealing the true threat of Islam.

Quote:


I am. The photos contradict it Gandalf. There was no seond line. You can put on a white shirt, but you can't put on a white skin. Perhaps they are all Michael Jackson fans? Is that what progressive Muslims do? Become white?

Quote:


Yes I notice you always fall back on this Gandalf. Not very convincing is it? Do you have any reason to disbelieve contradictory assertions that there were far fewer Muslims?

Quote:


The photos contradict it Gandalf. You have posted plenty of photos of people who appear to be Muslim when it suits you - Arab appearance, Muslim dress, Islamic grooming etc. This makes sense, given the demographics of Oslo's Muslim population. What does not make sense is after all this, you turn around and post a photo of a crowd of white people with a few token Muslims and are suddenly incapable of calling a spade a spade.

freediver wrote on Apr 5^th, 2015 at 8:57am:


Ah I get it now - muslims can't have white skin - even when the largest muslim demographic in Norway is from countries that are amongst the lightest skinned in the muslim world - Pakistan, Turkey and Bosnia. And its especially obvious who is and isn't muslim in a night-time photo where almost all people are largely concealed in warm clothing.

I think I'll just let FD's "I know for a fact how many muslims there aren't because I can tell by the photo" idiocy speak for itself.

Lets just take FD's reasoning to its logical conclusion and agree that there was no event involving anyone showing solidarity with jews at the jewish synagogue in Oslo. In fact there probably is no jewish synagogue in Oslo. We can certainly dismiss FD's original criticism of the event - that muslims were chanting "no to islamophobia" - since it was from a report that was "based on lies" and "went beyond regular journalistic incompetence".