there are three incidents being responded to currently in London. One involving a van and a crowd of people.
London under attack
- Thread starter herdfan429
- Start date
190 Americans killed this week by drunk drivers. Next week will be the same, and the next, and the next....
Yeah and it is illegal. We enforce it. You suggest the same thing for muslims?
Europe needs to let more Muslims into its countries. Seems to be working out well.
Murder is illegal. That being said we dealing with an immigration issue and the mass movement and influx of a people and a religion that has a measurable sect that condones violence that effects not only domestic laws but international trade and humanity.
I not suggesting anything. I'm telling you flat out you scaredy cats gag on gnats and swallow camels.
I bet your colostomy bag would overflow if one of those stinky bastards came charging at you with a blade the size of John Holmes' crank.
Anyone that does not recognize the problems Europe has because of an influx of Muslim immigrants is foolish and that includes experts from Wayne County WV.
Back on topic of that actual attacks. The 3rd incident in vauxall was not connected to the terrorist attacks. Current reports list 7 dead and 48 injured
The state you live in has about 300 people killed each year from drunk driving. How many die from terrorist attacks in your state?
I know you think you're real clever with this drunk driving fatality litmus test. But it's not, it's just a ridiculous juxtaposition.
It's not just about absolute numbers of lives lost. We care a lot about things that have less fatalities than drunk driving. Plane crashes are rare, but we spend millions of dollars and man hours insuring it doesn't happen often...but since it is so rare should we not care until it becomes a problem?
This is about radical Islamic terrorism and how by definition the impact of terrorism has on culture, daily lives, and political/economic impact (does the TSA exist in it's current form without radical Islamic terrorism? )...and about how an influx of people of a particular religion may have on your own native culture. America isn't impacted as much, but France and England are staring right at it (the most common name for a baby boy born in London last year was Mohammed).
Is it just me, or does Greed seem to becoming even more stupid with each post. what an idiot.
...and just another reason why this is so different from just fatalities from drunk driving...
Now we have implications about regulating the internet. More surveillance is what we need, right?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ebook-whatsapp-borough-security-a7771896.html
Now we have implications about regulating the internet. More surveillance is what we need, right?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ebook-whatsapp-borough-security-a7771896.html
Help me understand your point better. ET is arguing that something far more deadly - drunk driving - is widely ignored on here while so much attention is given to Islamic terrorism.
Is your argument that Islamic terrorism is given far more attention on here, even though it is far less deadly, because it has the potential to supposedly alter our life much more than drunk driving?
We must check out these muslims who come and go in and out of america. Solution,,send back each musim with a liberal under each arm
I'm saying it's ok to care about both. It's obviously a hotly debated topic because wildly differing opinions about how, why, and what to do about radical Islamic terror exist. Maybe I'm perceiving 'Greens stance incorrectly, but it seems he tries to shut down discussion on it because it doesn't cause as much death as DUIs.
To be clear, I have no belief that Islamic terror will ever come anywhere close to matching fatalities from DUIs. But as mentioned (especially for Londoners), death statistics aren't only at stake, it seems like things like Internet regulation, surveillance, and culture are being affected by a larger influx of Muslims.
Also, drunk driving deaths aren't increasing significantly. Can we say the same about Islamic terror on the West?
http://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/history.html
I get what Green is saying. We pick and choose what battles we take on. I just think the DUI juxtaposition is just so odd in a number of ways.
http://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/history.html
I get what Green is saying. We pick and choose what battles we take on. I just think the DUI juxtaposition is just so odd in a number of ways.
Also - has it not already altered your life more than DUIs? I might be wrong, since maybe a friend or family has been a victim of a DUI, so my assumption may be wrong.
You travel a ton and go to sporting/concert events. Again, I may be wrong but it's not unreasonable to think the way you travel and your day to day has been more impacted from 9/11 and Richard Reid than any DUI related impact, no?
I don't understand how my stance can be misunderstood. It is that we have a bunch of scaredy cats constantly worried about something (terrorism, islamic terrorism to be precise) that does less harm than drunk driving, not only regarding traffic fatalities but also marriages, children's lives, probably the economy, etc. And by unduly emphasizing terrorism, we play right into what terrorism hopes to accomplish.....influence by fear. It is foolish to ignore terrorism, but no more foolish than ignoring traffic fatatities from drunk driving.
Fair enough. I see your point. I just don't agree that wanting to change strategy/stance (i.e. If you live in London not wanting more Muslims) is scaredy cat or being unduly worried - I think concerns are real and not unfounded...even if the impact may be less than a DUI.
From the MADD link above though it appears we are trending in the right direction on DUI. I don't think the same is true of terror in Western Europe.
I'm a "victim" too of seeing the terror more in my face with all the TV/Internet buzz. Right or wrong it riles me up more than DUI stuff so I'll talk about it more on here.
Again, I think it's fair to be concerned about both and labeling as "scaredy cat" is minimizing unfairly.
Last edited:
I was roped into an extra rabbit hole.
I kind of see what he's saying, but it's all one weird comparison to me and I'm not even sure I should have responded.
The kids are napping and I'm procrastinating yard work though and I watched a YouTube video of a pub in London and here we are. What a time to be alive.
If you disagree with "scaredy cat" when I'm talking about the unwarranted amount of fear due to islamic terrorism, then imagine the rhetoric on this board if 10,000 people were killed by islamic planted IED's in the U S annually. With that being said. I'll rest my case.
The libs just want them here to shit on an America where they're jealous of people who were able to get what they wanted.
Want to ruin it with towelheads, Mexicans, fruitcakes, freaks. They've given up. It's time to shit on this place. That's their thinking. They can shit all they want. It'll all be swept into Section 8 hell hole war zones anyway.
Meanwhile, the coal and oil burners will keep on truckin'.
Want to ruin it with towelheads, Mexicans, fruitcakes, freaks. They've given up. It's time to shit on this place. That's their thinking. They can shit all they want. It'll all be swept into Section 8 hell hole war zones anyway.
Meanwhile, the coal and oil burners will keep on truckin'.
The liberals think evil white racists are more of a threat than muslim terrorists. Atleast we arent the ones who want to give them a nice haircut (euphemism for beheading) lol. Whites created the freedom that the feminists, gays and liberals can enjoy today. Now liberals think if they replace us that somehow it wont have any implications. Women will be back into oppression, gays will be hanged, and liberals will be imprisoned or killed out right. Muslims dont care about you.
