hardtack

I have no problem with that as long as they don't go to the opposite extreme (if they are true... something that must be thrown into doubt now)... a certain amount of compassion must be shown. I don't want them to go the way of Trump and put a blanket ban on everyone just because they come from a particular country, particularly when he is not banning those from the only countries known to have committed acts of terror on the US mainland (all business related of course).

I have not asked why 3/4 of the Syrian refugees in Germany were young men of fighting age because that figure tells us nothing in regards to the actual figures... how many arrive in Germany to begin with (Greece and Italy take far more refugees)? The figures I have seen indicate 75% are males, but not necessarily all are young males. One reason (and a reasonable one I would have thought) is that because of the treacherous/physically demanding journey they have to make, the fittest make the journey with a view to establishing somewhere for the rest of the family to join them later; obviously the younger men fit that bill. Of course some may be avoiding national service, but who could blame them when you see what is confronting them. It's not hard to understand why these people have fled when you see what the combination of ISIS, Russia, Syrian Govt forces and even the USA have done to their cities. No one is saying that it is Europe's "responsibility", but it certainly could be considered a moral obligation, I would have thought. These people fleeing did not bring these wars upon themselves and to my way of thinking are just as worthy of support as those caught up in natural disasters. You can call me a left wing [censored] if you like, but I'd rather that than not care at all.

You know for a fact that the Cologne assaults are entirely real news Wrecker? Everyone thought the Frankfurt assaults were real until very recently... something that must throw a lot of doubt on all mass assaults attributed to refugees. That's not to say that there weren't sexual assaults, but the figures may well be brought under scrutiny.

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.

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 did ask you once if it was a race thing, but made no accusations. The definition I provided does not dismiss it as a non race thing entirely as it states: "However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races". On the Indonesians, you say they don't belong in Bali, but as it stands, Bali is an Indonesian island, albeit mostly Hindu (I believe), and so whether we like it or not, people of Islamic faith have as much right to be there as anyone else. A very good friend of mine Louiza Zervos died in the bombing but it was down to a handful of extremists in what is the largest Islamic population on the planet...a population that you yourself said were a much more placid lot in response to my asking whether you object to their presence here. That was why I asked in that other post whether it was a race thing, and that relates directly to the quote above.

The little I saw of him when I attended the first couple of training sessions this year, he reminds me physically of Petracca. Can't wait to see what he can do on the field.

At a stretch, that might make sense if I had pointed the finger and categorically accused anyone of being a racist. Or is it the fact that I pointed to an explanation relating islamophobia to racism in response to a question YOU asked?

You remind me of my 14 year old son... the old "I know you are but what am I" approach to discussion. But in his case it's immaturity as opposed to fear of failure.

Ok, so nothing to substantiate the claim...no problem (but you should never be ashamed to admit it Biff).

Proven wrong? How so...you want screen grabs of the google search? And "again"? What was the previous instance?

Just as you were obviously too lazy to attempt comprehension of the two preceding sentences :-)

Blame Trump :-)

It didn't really matter who I was quoting as it is the broad definition of why anti-muslim sentiments can be considered racist. Any google search will bring up a very long list of sites that will essentially provide a very similar answer... I was lazy and that just happened to be one of the first in the list

Well, he had been to see Guns n Roses the previous evening, which (in my opinion only) could be viewed as preparing for Grand Final entertainment of Meatloaf proportions.

"Holding stereotypes or negative feelings about Muslims in general is technically religious bigotry, not racism. However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races." https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-hating-on-Muslims-is-racist

His Muslim ban already, and in the worst possible way, showed that inability. He didn't ban countries that he has business dealings with, despite their involvement in the worst terror attacks on US soil.

Trump totals everything he touches...not just tea.

A couple of things interest me about that article. Firstly, why is it seemingly only Dr Bates who has come out on this issue? Surely once his "revelations" were brought to light, other scientists would be jumping in to support what he is saying...but there is no mention of any others at all (only a possible congressional investigation). The other thing is the last line of the article which seems to be acknowledging that climate change is indeed real...otherwise, why describe getting it right as critical to our future?

In the quotes I supplied above, there was a link to a paper that discusses what you are asking about... this link will take you to a preview of the paper which, if it piques your interest and you want to look at the paper in full, a temporary licence can be purchased ($6 or so for 48hrs from memory): http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1530-0277.2010.01286.x/epdf?r3_referer=wol&tracking_action=preview_click&show_checkout=1&purchase_site_license=LICENSE_DENIED

I had a similar issue with the GWS vs Dees womens' game that is on as a curtain raiser to the GWS v Swans JLT match out in Sydney's wild wild west at Blacktown. I phoned the MFC and was told that I don't need to book, but just show up with my (and my son's) membership cards and we will be scanned in for free. Hopefully being the opening game and not involving two Sydney clubs, crowds won't be an issue... but once scanned in, we have the option of staying for the JLT match as well.

"I'd rather the bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy" (Tom Waits).

"One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking." "But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does tend to increase one's risk of dying, even when you exclude former problem drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers. " http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2017200,00.html

I don't know that we can attribute last week's performance to 'form'... those were pretty extreme weather conditions, so it was always going to be a bit of a lottery as to who would win.

That's a mature comeback Biff. It was relevant in as far as you choose to highlight any incident involving people of middle eastern origins (who may or may not be islamic), so I offer a counterpoint to show the futility of doing that. White anglos are just as capable of threatening or carrying out acts of violence as 'people of middle eastern appearance', which would tend to indicate it is not all necessarily related to religion. In fact the worst acts of violence in this country have all been perpetrated by white anglo christians...Port Arthur, Hoddle Street, King Street, Strathfield, etc etc. I'd actually be interested to know how you feel about Indonesians living in Australia, because they are rarely, if ever, involved in acts of, or threats of violence here, yet they are from the country with the largest islamic population on the planet. Or is it more of a race thing with you?