Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
Online
170 guest(s) and 0 member(s)
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
VideoGamesSuck.com :: View topic - belgian burka ban
its only when people like you get personally affected by it takes them to wake up from their fake ideologies. in the us we where fine untill 9/11, that whole incident was needed to give a swift boot to the asses of politicians to wake up.
In Europe we had had decades of experience with terrorism prior to 9/11, much more so than in the US, so I am glad you woke up too. You are just overreacting greatly and blaming the crimes of a few individuals on large groups who did not commit any crimes.
It is clear you do not mind giving up someone else's freedoms and human rights (this shows how much these matter to you) and you have complete trust in your government (otherwise you would have to object to granting far reaching discretionary powers to them), I for sure don't.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:34 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
You are, yet again, confused as to what I mean by anecdotal. We covered this here. I really don't know where you're going with this whole stories-anecdotal-bbc thing. So the BBC link stands as proof that it's a story, therefore, you are anecdotal?
i know what anecdotal means. That link is not a story, it is a fact. you calling it a story amounts to anecdote, which is in fact BS, because it is a fact.
puk wrote:
I never made that "only one idiot" claim, Berzerker did. And I never said the burka posing a security threat is anecdotal.
yes you did, you say all my facts are anecdotal. take a good look around, all the islamic activities links are bbc links. which would mean by your definition they are anecdotal too.
puk wrote:
And the BBC link doesn't invalidate my comment. Far from it; what I said is that the BBC link being used to prove that burkas in general pose a security threat is anecdotal evidence.
okay now you are going back and forth mud slinging. its common sense that that incident reported is not going to be only incident ever to occur or ever to have occurred. So it is given for a fact that it is implicitly logical to assume that the burka will/has been used to as simple solution to pass thru. It is highly unrealistic to conclude no such incident have ever occurred or will ever occur where the impersonator will use the burka to camouflage hi/her. So it is ridiculous and plain stupidity or lack of logical judgment on your part to say it is anecdotal. i refuse to believe you don't have the basic intelligence to infer that such incidents have/will occur, which rules in flavor of your purposeful mud slinging tactics. OR i could be wrong and your simply plain fucking stupid.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:55 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
berzerker wrote:
In Europe we had had decades of experience with terrorism prior to 9/11, much more so than in the US, so I am glad you woke up too.
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
berzerker wrote:
You are just overreacting greatly and blaming the crimes of a few individuals on large groups who did not commit any crimes.
these few individuals come from training camps that are given a free hand to run by the govt and the people of that country. it takes a lot of funds from different sources to train these individuals and motivate them to do what they do and send them overseas from those poor countries. this is not something that is achieved in isolation by a rag-tag group, but mass participation. the conditions in Islamic nations are perfect for such mental training because of their hate philosophy which they so dearly cling on to.
berzerker wrote:
It is clear you do not mind giving up someone else's freedoms and human rights (this shows how much these matter to you) and you have complete trust in your government (otherwise you would have to object to granting far reaching discretionary powers to them), I for sure don't.
when you goto an islamic country you donot enjoy these freedoms. so why should we provide such freedoms to Islamic nations who are basically against the western idea of individual freedoms? sounds ridiculous.
take the case of faizal who conspired to blow up the NY times square. this asshole was given a green card, ie status as an American citizen. i am told green cards are hard to get. Compare that to the freedom you get in a country like Pakistan. Not to sound arrogant but it is safe to assume that being a citizen of us has more advantages than a citizen of a collapsing state like pakistan. Still he didnt value that, the freedoms he could have enjoyed. He made the choice to go against the very country that allowed him to enter as a student, to work and to finally be a citizen of US away from the chaos in Pakistan, a medieval Islamic state. He has taken full advantage of the generosity of America and has repaid back by a failed bombing attempt. These type of individuals should not be tolerated and a befitting message should be sent to such a nation/nations who try to take advance of our freedoms in order to spread their message of hate to innocent people.
You know its surprising, in Europe even with decades of experience with terrorism you fail to realize that those whome you give citizenship/work/education are the ones to bomb your cities.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:29 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
I know what anecdotal means. That link is not a story, it is a fact. you calling it a story amounts to anecdote, which is in fact BS, because it is a fact.
I never called it a story. That's why I gave you the link. There we established that I was using the second definition of anecdotal evidence, namely taking a single outcome and applying it to all possible outcomes.
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
...And I never said the burka posing a security threat is anecdotal.
yes you did, you say all my facts are anecdotal. take a good look around, all the islamic activities links are bbc links. which would mean by your definition they are anecdotal too.
Your powers of interpretation leave much to be desired. I never said "the burka posing a security threat" is anecdotal. Only that you claiming "all burkas pose a security threat because one burka posed a security threat" is anecdotal
_Master_ wrote:
It's common sense that that incident reported is not going to be only incident ever to occur or ever to have occurred. So it is given for a fact that it is implicitly logical to assume that the burka will/has been used to as simple solution to pass thru. It is highly unrealistic to conclude no such incident have ever occurred or will ever occur where the impersonator will use the burka to camouflage hi/her. So it is ridiculous and plain stupidity or lack of logical judgment on your part to say it is anecdotal. i refuse to believe you don't have the basic intelligence to infer that such incidents have/will occur, which rules in flavor of your purposeful mud slinging tactics. OR i could be wrong and your simply plain fucking stupid.
Sure it might be repeated once or twice. It's statistically plausible. But you can't form a theory based on that. Lets take the grandfather story. Assume my grandfather smoked every day and lived until the age of 90. Is it logical to assume there are more like him out there? Sure. Is it "given for a fact that it is implicitly logical to assume that" all smokers will live to be 90? No. Because application of that would be anecdotal.
I don't expect you to agree with any of this, instead you will string long sentences together, and claim that I am the one being anecdotal, while never actually providing a reason as to why I am anecdotal. In fact, I still don't think you understand what I mean when I say 'anecdotal'.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:34 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
bahahahaha I burst out laughing when I read that. The Captn can never be wrong. He'll tilt the world on its axis before being proven wrong.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:38 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
bahahahaha I burst out laughing when I read that.
do you laugh the same way when Dr Shrunks pokes his cock in your bum or simply RollOverFL?
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:56 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
bahahahaha I burst out laughing when I read that.
do you laugh the same way when Dr Shrunks pokes his cock in your bum or simply RollOverFL?
No I pretty much laugh the same way every time you make an ass out of yourself.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:59 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
I never called it a story. That's why I gave you the link.
----------- a little refresher ------------------
puk wrote:
That link has a story about one person wearing a burka
puk wrote:
You taking one story about one case and applying it to every case is anecdotal.
----------------------------------------------
right so you never called it a story
puk wrote:
There we established that I was using the second definition of anecdotal evidence, namely taking a single outcome and applying it to all possible outcomes.
to which i said use your common sense which you seem lacking
puk wrote:
I never said "the burka posing a security threat" is anecdotal. Only that you claiming "all burkas pose a security threat because one burka posed a security threat" is anecdotal
nice very nice, but can you provide me the link where i said "all burkas pose a security threat" ? i am patiently waiting for your link.
puk wrote:
Sure it might be repeated once or twice. It's statistically plausible. But you can't form a theory based on that.
i am not trying to formulate a theory. i am simply exposing an obvious security loophole. and it takes only one individual to blow up and cause mass damage. so your anecdotal anecdotes are simply ridiculous in that context.
puk wrote:
Lets take the grandfather story.
this is not a relevant story. let take the 10's multiplication properties. every multiple of 10 will always have '0' at the end. So you donot need to divide the whole number by 10, instead you can see if it ends in a '0' it will be divisible by 10. It does not make it anecdotal, its simple fucking logic. Likewise burkas pose a serious security threat is also a valid logical conclusion.
puk wrote:
I don't expect you to agree with any of this, instead you will string long sentences together, and claim that I am the one being anecdotal, while never actually providing a reason as to why I am anecdotal.
my sentences are short and to the point. but there is only so much you can do to teach a mule to do.
puk wrote:
In fact, I still don't think you understand what I mean when I say 'anecdotal'.
anecdotal statement
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:02 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
bahahahaha I burst out laughing when I read that.
do you laugh the same way when Dr Shrunks pokes his cock in your bum or simply RollOverFL?
No I pretty much laugh the same way every time you make an ass out of yourself.
so i made an ass of myself when i said this comment
Quote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
??? i am sorry i simply dont understand your ass-logic.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:33 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
well well looks like europe is finally waking up to their prev years of experience
"We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity," Mr Sarkozy told a special session of parliament in Versailles.
"The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic," the French president said.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:49 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
In fact, I still don't think you understand what I mean when I say 'anecdotal'.
anecdotal statement
That's not anecdotal you fucking retard. It's impossible your this dumb.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:58 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
I never called it a story. That's why I gave you the link.
----------- a little refresher ------------------
puk wrote:
That link has a story about one person wearing a burka
puk wrote:
You taking one story about one case and applying it to every case is anecdotal.
----------------------------------------------
right so you never called it a story
Do you read at all or do you just bang your head against the keyboard? If you had read it, you would have clicked on the link, and eventually made your way to the wikipedia page. There are 2 definitions of anecdotal evidence. They are, roughly, applying one case to many/all cases, or taking an anecdote (story) as fact. I used the version of applying one case to all cases. I had stated this before, and I stated it again here. I kept stressing how I wasn't using the 'story' version of anecdotal evidence. I am getting tired of repeating the same thing over and over because you are too dim witted grasp simple concepts:
You taking one story/article/event/aspect/occurrence/what-the-fuck-ever about one case and applying it to every case is anecdotal.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:59 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
so i made an ass of myself when i said this comment
Quote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
??? i am sorry i simply dont understand your ass-logic.
In the words of Berzerker, I didn't expect you to understand.
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:04 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
In fact, I still don't think you understand what I mean when I say 'anecdotal'.
anecdotal statement
That's not anecdotal you fucking retard. It's impossible your this dumb.
by definition
The expression anecdotal evidence has two distinct meanings.
(1) Evidence in the form of an anecdote or hearsay is called anecdotal if there is doubt about its veracity; the evidence itself is considered untrustworthy.
(2) Evidence, which may itself be true and verifiable, used to deduce a conclusion which does not follow from it, usually by generalizing from an insufficient amount of evidence
by using (1) your stmt is anecdotal and i dont see why you would need to keep draging this on. i hope your not planning to do any jihad are you?
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:10 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
puk wrote:
I never called it a story. That's why I gave you the link.
----------- a little refresher ------------------
puk wrote:
That link has a story about one person wearing a burka
puk wrote:
You taking one story about one case and applying it to every case is anecdotal.
----------------------------------------------
right so you never called it a story
Do you read at all or do you just bang your head against the keyboard?
if you had read it with your limited islamic brain you would have realized that you didnt have to write that trash again. you said you never called it a story, i replied in a gentlemanly fashion and exposed that you infact did pukely-mukley. looks like your forehead is a little red from some keyboard banging, i hope it was a meaningful musical experience.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:12 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
so i made an ass of myself when i said this comment
Quote:
can we focus on the current and not pre-history?
??? i am sorry i simply dont understand your ass-logic.
In the words of Berzerker, I didn't expect you to understand.
what happened to your words, a phenomenal cock stuffed in your mouth? anyways in the words of some fag, sorry i dont understand.
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:27 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
_Master_ wrote:
if you had read it with your limited islamic brain you would have realized that you didnt have to write that trash again.
But I do have to write it again. and again. and again for you to understand. I stated several times that I was not criticizing the BBC 'story', furthermore, that I was referring to your use of anecdotal evidence (1).
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:29 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
You taking one story/article/event/aspect/occurrence/what-the-fuck-ever about one case and applying it to every case is anecdotal.
if that is the case then what you are implying is one should have to divide every number by 10 to find out if it is a multiple of 10, which is dumb but not surprising coming from you. i am gonna do the smart thing, look at the last digit and see if it is a zero and call out my verdict.
Getting back
-> Are burkas a security problem?
=> hail yeah!
-> Is that an anecdotal conclusion ?
=> not from a security viewpoint because it takes only one to do damage
->so what should we do?
=> instant ban/imprisonment/exorbitant fines
->but we like to express burka, how can we express that?
=> by promoting anal burka and burka blowjobs one can spread this glorious cultural expression
_________________ follow me or get out of the way
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:29 pm
puk
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
Posts: 2140
Location: Southampton, UK
What's with the cock references? Were you raped as a child? By an Islamic extremist?
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:31 pm
_Master_
A Winner is me!
Joined: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 1711
puk wrote:
_Master_ wrote:
if you had read it with your limited islamic brain you would have realized that you didnt have to write that trash again.
But I do have to write it again. and again. and again for you to understand. I stated several times that I was not criticizing the BBC 'story', furthermore, that I was referring to your use of anecdotal evidence (1).
this is where you need to understand that you should have been more explicit and specified (1) or (2) which you didn't each time. and most of all your understanding is crap.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 3 of 7Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Next
