These responses help mock bigots. It fixes a critical problem of bigots posting without enough shame. It is entirely embarrassing to just start riffing mindlessly about random perceived problems with Muslims in response to a terrorist attack perpetrated by Muslims. It speaks clearly to the mental state of bigots who, when terrorist attacks happen, just start incoherently jabbering about whatever random slights of Muslim culture they can think of as some kind of 'helpful response'. In any case I'm not sure what "problem" you think needs fixing but I suspect we do not agree on what exactly is a problem and that you assume your own conclusions.

What do you think would be the response if a nuke was dropped onto Isis?

After 15 years only 34% have a full time job with no need for income related welfare. 26% have some amount of work hours, but are still welfare dependant. 40% have no income outside of welfare.

Hahahahaha. You don't have to "accept" anything under your proposal. You are wanting to to impose the entire security burden on other people in exchange for weaker security. That is the opposite of making tough decisions. And it would be entirely on you, not terrorists, for imposing exploitable and prejudiced security.

Besides a ****load of innocent people dying?

What does that have to do with terrorist attacks in Belgium?

Btw. Latest numbers are as followed.
At least 34 dead and 230 wounded.

Right wingers are always so concerned about Muslim treatment of gays. Funny how they give no ****s about gay rights at home.

And even more strangely, only when Muslims are blowing stuff up, like, somewhere else in the world. Incredible timing to develop deep sympathies with the LGBT movement at that precise moment, every time.

You don't play much poker I see.

Lack of them in the US? San Bernardino and Boston more recently, not to mention that whole 9/11 thing that kickstarted the cycle of violence resulting in an explosion of terrorism around the world since the early 2000s.

See here's how it works, if you want to keep bigots out of the country you are a bigot yourself.

So adios, MrTrampoline, to be clear then:

On occasion of like some Muslims dudes blowing up the airport and train stations in Brussels, we are prohibiting Muslim immigration entirely to like, what, all Western countries due to the treatment of gays in Saudi Arabia, because bigotry?

Did I capture that?

Don't just take my word for it: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archiv...ouble_wit.html

what you said is exactly what I meant. I didn't have time to phrase things carefully. I agree that the answer to domer's question is Muslim but the point is that the question is useless as phrased. Because the question we want to answer is whether we're justified pre-emptively targeting Muslims who haven't yet done anything, not whether we can make a reasonable post-hoc assessment.

Actually that's wrong. The conclusion is not that they are entirely unrelated, but that targeting all Muslims with invasive policies is not a rational way to fight terrorism. I said this explicitly in my point (1).

Misrepresentation. We're not looking at the world population, just the population of Muslims. This is relevant given that the context of my argument is about why it's a bad idea to form anti-terrorism policies that treat all Muslims identically.

I assume you mean worldwide. If so, I would point out that something like 40 people every day are murdered just in the U.S. And yet no one would argue that we should pass sweeping policies targeting billion-member subsets of humanity in order to address that problem.

This is essentially a bayesian stats problem. It's correct that acts of terrorism are more likely to be committed by Muslims than members of other religious groups and yet, because people who commit terrorist acts are such an infinitesimal percentage of Muslims, it's nonetheless extremely prejudicial to legally treat every Muslim as a probable terrorist. That's the entire argument. It's an argument against statements like Cruz's about policing Muslim neighborhoods.

The argument does not mean, as I stated explicitly, that it is invalid to make any criticism of Islam or even to construct some anti-terrorism policy that might take into account the Islamic ideology of the people in question in some way. It just needs to be far more targeted to not be pure xenophobia.

Yeah definitely no problem here. March 22, 34 people murdered. Nothing to see here. A few months ago, 130 people blasted in Paris. Is there or is there NOT a problem with Islamism? Yes or no question, its that simple.

Let's also not forget which cartoonists you shamed for drawing Muhammad cartoonists, calling them bigots. Great work back then.

I was just in the Dr's office and FNC was on of course. Bill O'Reilley says Obama doesn't have the resolve to stand up to ISIS. Yes that's it Bill. There are so many good solutions that don't involve 10-year nation building. And just pretend like we aren't already bombing the hell out of ISIS. Gahhh I know this **** is routine now but it still gets to me.

Every time I ask a conservative how they would deal with ISIS differently than Obama, it's either a real life black stare or the forum equivalent of one. Then when the solutions do trickle out they are either 1) bomb more (ok where?), 2) nuke everything, 3) boots on the ground, kill them all then leave. Sigh.

this seems bizarre. are they working steady part time jobs? are normal low wage jobs subsidised and excluded? or is it some kind of public work scheme?

i think the real employment rate in denmark is a little less than 50% for refugees (20-6x) after 10 years in the country.

Damn these attacks always bring the bigots scurrying about the forum thicker than Mexicans in BruceZ's neighborhood.

Same goes for people who offer no solutions other than they want to point out how much Islam sucks. Ok that's helpful.

Other than the 100s of 1000s of dead civilians? Or is this fantasy land where we evacuate all of them and tell ISIS to stay put?

So there are tonnes of hypocritical right-wingers out there.

Like I can literally set my watch to how these threads play out, everytime.

1. Muslims do bad stuff
2. Mad lib, by the number criticisms of Muslims
3. Ban all of them from migration and/or UNLEASH LAW ENFORCEMENT SURVEILLANCE AND PROFILING SCHEMES

The most incredible thing is the seemingly genuine incredulousness of the advocates of this **** have any opponents, like OF COURSE we just do some drastic thing to all Muslims due to the actions of like 5 of them, HAVEN'T YOU HEARD THEY TREAT GAYS BAD IN SAUDI ARABIA?

Like what in the actual **** are these people even talking about? For the sake of all of our brain cells, can't we just do it honestly? Just be like "MUSLIMS BAD, DON'T WANT EM." But like why even wait for a terrorist attack? What do the terrorist attacks have to do with anything? It's plainly completely irrelevant to the point that like the conduct of the Saudi government vis a vis gays and/or QUARAN SWORD VERSES is prima facie evidence they aren't fit for migration to civilized nations or something. Like every ****ing time, it's like OK, you can get these clowns to admit, if you insist, some preposterously small number of Muslims do terrorism, but can we talk about how women are treated in Qatar?!

At some point you are forced to conclude various clowns are literally trolls waiting under the bridge, seeing terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims and the hope that in the fog of fear and anxiety mixed together with their various canned Muslim plent-t-plain spiel you'll sign up for their BAN MUSLIMS change.org petition. I have no other explanation for what is otherwise completely nonsensical behavior.

Obama's done a pretty good job. What's funny is that the tactics he's using (Drones, targeted killings, special operations, and widespread surveillance that is monitored appropriately) are all pretty much anathema to the extreme liberal wing of his party.

I mean if on the occasion of like a black guy shooting a cop or something, someone was like WELP rap music, midnight basketball and Al Sharpton have done it again, better dust off the old Jim Crow laws, I think we'd all be like "woah what in the actual ****, we got a real genuine racist asshat here!" but substitute Muslim stuff and alot of you guys want to be like nah it's OK, this is solid here, time to grow up liberals, we have a problem on our hands.

GTFO of here.