Terrorist attack on Canadian Mosque

[dieter 3,325]

7 minutes ago, Biffen said:

All self -hating Germans should flagellate themselves over a war that ended 60 years ago.

Sounds like fun to me.

[Binmans PA 26,123]

19 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I haven't advocated a ban on anything.

DO you think "you obviously like paedophiles" is an acceptable way to argue a point.?

If you're not "[advocating] a ban on anything", what the heck have you been crapping on about for the past 10 pages?

Do you think calling all Muslims "barbaric and spiteful, disgusting, repressive and vindictive" is an acceptable way to argue a point?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

22 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I haven't advocated a ban on anything.

DO you think "you obviously like paedophiles" is an acceptable way to argue a point.?

Huh?

I never said anything like "you obviously like paedophiles". AF said that.

[Biffen 12,330]

7 minutes ago, A F said:

If you're not "[advocating] a ban on anything", what the heck have you been crapping on about for the past 10 pages?

Do you think calling all Muslims "barbaric and spiteful, disgusting, repressive and vindictive" is an acceptable way to argue a point?

Bans don't work.

I'm not the type to advocate them ,even against you, for your gutter comment above which you still haven't apologised for.

[Biffen 12,330]

2 minutes ago, Choke said:

Huh?

I never said anything like "you obviously like paedophiles". AF said that.

yes I know that-do you think it's an acceptable way to discuss something?

[daisycutter 28,562]

8 minutes ago, A F said:

If you're not "[advocating] a ban on anything", what the heck have you been crapping on about for the past 10 pages?

Do you think calling all Muslims "barbaric and spiteful, disgusting, repressive and vindictive" is an acceptable way to argue a point?

stop flogging your illogical dead horse, adam. it was a vile, wrong and dumb, personal comment.

and while you're contemplating your navel, google bacha bazi

[Binmans PA 26,123]

It was sarcasm, but unacceptable. I apologise for hurting your feelings, Biffen.

I don't expect an apology for all the name calling in this thread though. Nor do I expect you to see that what you said was unacceptable either.

[Biffen 12,330]

3 hours ago, hardtack said:

Harking back to this post, it was interesting to see that probably the biggest so called mass sexual assault in Europe has been declared fake...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/newspaper-report-of-mass-sexual-assault-by-refugees-in-frankfurt-was-baseless-police-say-20170215-gudybw.html

i saw that today .

It mentions some reports were exaggerated.

There is clearly an information war going on in the world.

 

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

7 minutes ago, Biffen said:

yes I know that-do you think it's an acceptable way to discuss something?

That particular comment, no.

But the parallel he drew that exposes a flaw in your argument is valid.

If one wants to ban all Muslim migration because of a small number of jihadists, why is there no call for a similar ban on Catholics because of their exposed record of institutionalised child abuse?

 

 

Also, yes you have indeed advocated for a ban on Muslim migration:

On 01/02/2017 at 3:00 PM, Biffen said:

 

I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely.I would like overseas marriage visas cancelled for those who identify as Muslim and family re-unification visas scrapped as well.

 

8 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Bans don't work.

I'm not the type to advocate them ,even against you, for your gutter comment above which you still haven't apologised for.

 

 

 

WTF man. Advocate for a ban and then claim bans don't work???

[Biffen 12,330]

2 minutes ago, A F said:

It was sarcasm, but unacceptable. I apologise for hurting your feelings, Biffen.

I don't expect an apology for all the name calling in this thread though. Nor do I expect you to see that what you said was unacceptable either.

Not so much my feelings AF.

It was just a touch dumb.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

38 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I haven't advocated a ban on anything.

 

 

See post above.

 

[Binmans PA 26,123]

3 hours ago, hardtack said:

Harking back to this post, it was interesting to see that probably the biggest so called mass sexual assault in Europe has been declared fake...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/newspaper-report-of-mass-sexual-assault-by-refugees-in-frankfurt-was-baseless-police-say-20170215-gudybw.html

Very important article. This situation has been used in Europe and the Americas to justify a ban on refugees and undermine Merkel's immigration policies. Unfortunately, the people that need to see this article won't.

[Biffen 12,330]

2 minutes ago, Choke said:

That particular comment, no.

But the parallel he drew that exposes a flaw in your argument is valid.

If one wants to ban all Muslim migration because of a small number of jihadists, why is there no call for a similar ban on Catholics because of their exposed record of institutionalised child abuse?

 

 

Also, yes you have indeed advocated for a ban on Muslim migration:

 

 

 

 

WTF man. Advocate for a ban and then claim bans don't work???

That's not advocating a ban.

2.2% will grow into a larger figure in a short time span  as a % of population so I think they should marry within Australia and not import teenage brides.

I'm not about defending Paedophiles,or increasing Christian numbers either.

[hardtack 10,127]

10 minutes ago, Biffen said:

i saw that today .

It mentions some reports were exaggerated.

There is clearly an information war going on in the world.

 

Let's not bring anything that even remotely resembles Alex Jones into this please.

I have read through it a couple of times however, and the word "exagerated" is not used at all... in fact, the newspaper responsible for the original report is apologising: "In a humiliating backdown, the German newspaper Bild, which originally reported the claims, has apologised for what it said was a "false report", which was based on the now disputed claims of a pub owner and some of their staff."

And "the police said they had interrogated staff and patrons at the pub and their statements "created considerable doubt about the portrayal of events" and that the story was "baseless" or "without foundation". One person who had claimed to have witnessed the attacks was not even in Frankfurt on New Year's Eve.

Prosecutors are now investigating two of the people who allegedly fabricated the claims."

It goes on to say that: "Germany has had to deal with a rash of hoax stories targeting refugees and immigrants, with the rise of anti-immigration political party AfD and tensions following 2015's extraordinary migration of almost one million refugees into the country."

A little more than mere "exageration" methinks.

Edited February 16, 2017 by hardtack

[Biffen 12,330]

3 minutes ago, Choke said:

 

See post above.

 

No use of the word Ban.

I saws it ,I wrote it,I stick by it.

[Binmans PA 26,123]

10 minutes ago, Choke said:

That particular comment, no.

But the parallel he drew that exposes a flaw in your argument is valid.

If one wants to ban all Muslim migration because of a small number of jihadists, why is there no call for a similar ban on Catholics because of their exposed record of institutionalised child abuse?

 

 

Also, yes you have indeed advocated for a ban on Muslim migration:

 

 

 

 

WTF man. Advocate for a ban and then claim bans don't work???

Game, set, match.

[Biffen 12,330]

Just now, hardtack said:

Let's not bring anything that even remotely resembles Alex Jones into this please.

He is terrible.

I'll concede that.

[Binmans PA 26,123]

6 minutes ago, Biffen said:

No use of the word Ban.

I saws it ,I wrote it,I stick by it.

"I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely". Haha, what would you like here, Biffen? A definition of the word 'ban'?

[Biffen 12,330]

1 minute ago, A F said:

Game, set, match.

Child,

go get the balls.

[Biffen 12,330]

1 minute ago, A F said:

"I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely". Haha, what would you like here, Biffen? A definition of the word 'ban'?

Are you discussing a travel ban or permanent migration?

Not that you ever make any sense.

[Binmans PA 26,123]

5 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Are you discussing a travel ban or permanent migration?

Not that you ever make any sense.

You said and I quote: "I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely". That is a ban. Why do I have to explain this to you? Don't let me go and get the dictionary again, Biffen.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

14 minutes ago, Biffen said:

No use of the word Ban.

I saws it ,I wrote it,I stick by it.

 

 

11 minutes ago, A F said:

"I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely". Haha, what would you like here, Biffen? A definition of the word 'ban'?

 

[Biffen 12,330]

1 minute ago, A F said:

You said and I quote: "I would like Muslim immigration halted entirely". That is a ban. Why do I have to explain this to you? Don't let me go and get the dictionary again, Biffen.

I'm not opposed to Muslims travelling here.

I'm opposed to increasing their numbers here with permanent migration.

Subtlety isn't your strong point.

Did you look up Bacha Bazi?

You will find child sexual abuse abounds in Pakistan,Afghanistan and Iran.

Fairly difficult for people to complain about it to the Imams when they can advocate capital or corporal punishment to the families concerned.

I'm sure it's in every religion.

Another reason to have a good secular state where religion is kept in check.

[Biffen 12,330]

Just now, Choke said:

 

 

 

Travel ban/Immigration policy.

Will repeat for the slow.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

1 hour ago, dieter said:

Wrecker, what did you say? All religions have 'traditional geographic locations'? What does that mean? That all christians and jews and muslims ought to go back to the middle east? 

I was quoting something to highlight how ridiculous it was.