England headed for A Caliphate

[TV and credit cards]

Here ya go...

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...781615537601/The+Rape+Gang+Inquiry+Report.pdf

Crowdsource funded, published and chaired by Rupert Lowe, leader of Restore Britain. A report with no legal authority behind it.
Wouldn't be my first choice.

If and when the government report comes out, it will have "the legal power to call witnesses and to require organisations to produce documents and records".
BBC Complaint Inquiry

 

[Bomb#20]

No, B. The nature of a gestalt is, it’s insidious. It permeates, subconsciously. This one affects you, me and everyone else living in western societies.
Of course I don’t THINK of Muslims as sub-human, and I doubt that you do either. But that doesn’t exempt us.

Gotta love those unfalsifiable ad hominems.

Are you replying to another post?
Because what I posted was clearly “de se” as much as “ad hominem”.

Dude, it's called "Commonality of Sin"; it's an ancient and venerable rhetorical strategy. Saint Paul said "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief". The most famous practitioner was Saint Augustine whose main propaganda work was literally named "Confessions". Google AI writes:

Why Speakers Use This Specific Tactic

1. Neutralizing Defensiveness: By saying "we are all guilty," the speaker lowers the target's shields. It is rhetorically difficult to argue "I am innocent" when the person leveling the charge has already readily conceded their own guilt.
2. Establishing Moral Authority: Confessing to the flaw first paradoxically grants the speaker the authority to lecture others about it. It frames the speaker as honest, self-aware, and objective.
3. Coercing Agreement: It forces a logical trap. If you reject the accusation, you are framed as lacking self-awareness; if you accept it, you have validated the speaker's original charge against you.
​

 

[Elixir]

Dude, it's called "Commonality of Sin"; it's an ancient and venerable rhetorical strategy. Saint Paul said "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief". The most famous practitioner was Saint Augustine whose main propaganda work was literally named "Confessions". Google AI writes:

​

Why Speakers Use This Specific Tactic​

​

1. Neutralizing Defensiveness: By saying "we are all guilty," the speaker lowers the target's shields. It is rhetorically difficult to argue "I am innocent" when the person leveling the charge has already readily conceded their own guilt.​

2. Establishing Moral Authority: Confessing to the flaw first paradoxically grants the speaker the authority to lecture others about it. It frames the speaker as honest, self-aware, and objective.​

3. Coercing Agreement: It forces a logical trap. If you reject the accusation, you are framed as lacking self-awareness; if you accept it, you have validated the speaker's original charge against you.​

​

Interesting … and “common sense” correct. But not necessarily applicable.
Typifying my post as invoking commonality of sin ignores that it was in fact “de se”.
What it specifically was not, is:
*neutraluzing defensiveness
*establishing moral authority, or
*coercing agreement (which I think was already there, regarding the de se nature of my description of gestalts.)

 

[scombrid]

Crowdsource funded, published and chaired by Rupert Lowe, leader of Restore Britain. A report with no legal authority behind it.
Wouldn't be my first choice.

If and when the government report comes out, it will have "the legal power to call witnesses and to require organisations to produce documents and records".
BBC Complaint Inquiry

Yeah. Kind of ironic to complain about strawmen when sourcing to cherry picked agenda driven Gish Gallopy propaganda. Wading through that crap would be about as useful as arguing with the latest ufologist or creationist or anti-vax or 911 theory.

 

[ZiprHead]

Yeah. Kind of ironic to complain about strawmen when sourcing to cherry picked agenda driven Gish Gallopy propaganda. Wading through that crap would be about as useful as arguing with the latest ufologist or creationist or anti-vax or 911 theory.

I guess it sounded "troothy".

 

[scombrid]

Can’t expect much from people that select RFK Jr to run HHS.

 

[Bomb#20]

Crowdsource funded, published and chaired by Rupert Lowe, leader of Restore Britain. A report with no legal authority behind it.
Wouldn't be my first choice.

If and when the government report comes out, it will have "the legal power to call witnesses and to require organisations to produce documents and records".
BBC Complaint Inquiry

Well that was predictable.

You know, don't you, that the government that will have the legal power to call witnesses and to require organizations to produce documents and records will also have a massive conflict of interest: an institutional incentive to water down and whitewash its own officials' culpability? If you're approaching this with the viewpoint of some Catholic who wouldn't believe his Church covered up for child molesters until Pope Francis came out and admitted it, you're apt to be waiting a long time. There are a lot more Benedicts than Francises in the halls of government.

 

[Bomb#20]

Typifying my post as invoking commonality of sin ignores that it was in fact “de se”.

Commonality of sin rhetoric is always de se! It's a defining feature!

 

[Bomb#20]

I guess it sounded "troothy".

You really want to take that tack?

Are the rape gangs being condoned and supported by the government? No.

Cite?

 

[Elixir]

Commonality of sin rhetoric is always de se! It's a defining feature!

That doesn’t make every de se comment an exercise in “commonality of sin”.
I thought that was clear when I plainly stated it was NOT
*neutralizing defensiveness
*establishing moral authority, or
*coercing agreement

 

[Bomb#20]

Yeah. Kind of ironic to complain about strawmen when sourcing to cherry picked agenda driven Gish Gallopy propaganda. Wading through that crap would be about as useful as arguing with the latest ufologist or creationist or anti-vax or 911 theory.

I pointed out strawmen in your post. Can you point out any strawman in the Rape Gang Inquiry Report?

 

[Bomb#20]

That doesn’t make every de se comment an exercise in “commonality of sin”.
I thought that was clear when I plainly stated it was NOT
*neutralizing defensiveness
*establishing moral authority, or
*coercing agreement

"It permeates, subconsciously. This one affects you, me and everyone else living in western societies." Sure as heck looks like commonality of sin. Do you have any evidence that it wasn't an attempt at neutralizing defensiveness, establishing moral authority, or coercing agreement?

I should add that commonality of sin rhetoric has a fourth purpose Google didn't mention. When people speak about themselves falsely they usually claim to be better than they are; this common experience gives people a psychological predisposition to believe a self-critical statement is the truth. It's what causes a normally intelligent lady like Judge Judy to say an idiotic thing like "If you didn't do it you wouldn't have pled guilty!". People use commonality of sin statements to leverage this listener bias, in order to make their claim more credible.

 

[Elixir]

People use commonality of sin statements to leverage this listener bias, in order to make their claim more credible.

What claim would that be?
I have a feeling that any generalized characterizing statement would get the same denialist response ftom you.
Just for your edification, such statements are usually, as in this case, mere musings rather than proclamations binding all who behold them to the tenets described.
Feel free to describe the nature of your exemption from the dynamic described. I’m sure you maintain a perfect distance to preserve “objectivity”.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Crowdsource funded, published and chaired by Rupert Lowe, leader of Restore Britain. A report with no legal authority behind it.
Wouldn't be my first choice.

If and when the government report comes out, it will have "the legal power to call witnesses and to require organisations to produce documents and records".
BBC Complaint Inquiry

Well that was predictable.

You know, don't you, that the government that will have the legal power to call witnesses and to require organizations to produce documents and records will also have a massive conflict of interest: an institutional incentive to water down and whitewash its own officials' culpability? If you're approaching this with the viewpoint of some Catholic who wouldn't believe his Church covered up for child molesters until Pope Francis came out and admitted it, you're apt to be waiting a long time. There are a lot more Benedicts than Francises in the halls of government.

The British government's independent inquiry will be chaired by Baroness Anne Longfield. So it would come down to reviewing this report and looking for conflicts with Rupert Lowe's. And with the power to compel witnesses and documents, you say they will in all likelihood "water down and whitewash" it. By what means? Not pursuing avenues of investigation? Ignoring evidence? This should become evident.
My point is you chose a questionable reference that supports your belief rather than challenging your belief and seeking the truth. To what end?
Sure, we all eventually push the I believe button. Let's just wait for the report with evidence to back it up. I trust the press will hold it up to the light.

 

[The AntiChris]

My point is you chose a questionable reference...

Questionable? That's putting it mildly. It's highly partisan right wing propaganda masquerading as an independent investigation.

 

[Bomb#20]

What claim would that be?

"Jews are people and Muslims are sub-human, in the western gestalt", and that's the reason Jews didn't get a "the" in ZH's post.

I have a feeling that any generalized characterizing statement would get the same denialist response ftom you.

Hey man, you want to tell me all people have brain stems or all ethnic Europeans have Neanderthal DNA, you won't get a sniff from me. But I don't believe there is such a thing as "the western gestalt". It looks like psychobabble to me. What there are are memes, infectious self-reproducing thought patterns. Like any other infectious agent they successfully infect some potential hosts and not others. When you say "the western gestalt" you appear to be talking about some meme or set of memes that found fertile soil in some western brains and hostile immune systems in others, and so made hosts of some westerners and not others. Well, that describes every meme under the sun. So if we identify two memes that have each succeeded in making a partial inroad into the set of all western minds, and you want to tell me one is in "the western gestalt" and the other is not, how the bejesus is that assertion falsifiable?

So much for generalities. On the specific implication that the "Muslims are sub-human" meme may have infected ZH's brain and this is what accounts for his word choice, that hypothesis strikes me as wildly implausible.

Just for your edification, such statements are usually, as in this case, mere musings rather than proclamations binding all who behold them to the tenets described.
Feel free to describe the nature of your exemption from the dynamic described. I’m sure you maintain a perfect distance to preserve “objectivity”.

Sarcasm noted. It's lame. People do not need 'a perfect distance to preserve “objectivity”' for their brains to have immune systems rendering them barren soil for some given meme. No doubt there are parasitic mind-viruses that evade my brain's defenses (see, I can play de se too!); but that's hardly an argument that the one you're focusing on has to be one of them.

As far as I can see, "Jews are people and Muslims are sub-human" is a parasite that's confined to a small fraction of the western population. It used to be rare; then it had a surge of popularity in the 40s to the 60s ; it's been in long-term decline ever since. The nature of my exemption is a lifetime of wallowing like a pig in individualistic liberalism that left me with a hypersensitive mental allergic reaction to anything that smacks of collectivism. Treating outgroups as interchangeable parts smacks of collectivism.

In contrast, what I've seen of ZH's posts makes it look to me like what he's been wallowing in is collectivistic PC progressivism; but as he can hardly be unaware that Muslims outrank Jews on the progressive stack, I'd expect his brain's immune system to be just as allergic to the "Jews are people and Muslims are sub-human" meme as mine is, but perhaps for somewhat different reasons.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Here ya go...

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...781615537601/The+Rape+Gang+Inquiry+Report.pdf

That report mentions victims who are "white girls" and points to another report from Christian Concern that mentions victims who were White or Sikh. And then that second report for the Muslim perpetrator claims points to a third report:

Peter McLoughlin has compiled a list of all the grooming gang convictions since 1997. To date 275 of the 317 people convicted have Muslim names. This means 87% of the convicts are of Muslim heritage and most likely self-identify as Muslim. Given that Muslims are only 5% of the population, this would mean that a Muslim man is some 127 times more likely to be convicted as part of a grooming gang than a non-Muslim.

The "compiled a list" link throws warnings on my computer and blocks me from it. Do you have an alternate link so I can see the data and methodology?

Any count of sexual exploitations or assaults is bad, but I am trying to understand and track the reasoning which appears to be extrapolations or hasty generalizations in multiple dimensions. That certainly doesn't mean there is no issue to uncover and nothing to address but it could mean the wrong thing is being addressed or the hypothetical solutions are not quite right.

 

[aupmanyav]

In India, we have 'love-jihad'. Muslims men would change their identity and befriend Hindu (or Christian) girls through social media. The end result may be marriage, blackmail to get other girls in similar mess, being sold in prostitution or murder (It is impossible to find the girl in Muslim ghettos). Hundreds of such Muslim men are in jails and facing prosecution. Muslim clerics are involved in this plan. They are heavily funded by middle-eastern sources.
There are fixed rates for conversion to Islam. Brahmins are again at the top with USD 15-20,000 for the bargain.

Marriage among consenting adults is OK in India. My grand-daughter has married a Roman Catholic from Kerala. Impersonation is a crime.

 

[Elixir]

"Jews are people and Muslims are sub-human" is a parasite that's confined to a small fraction of the western population. It used to be rare; then it had a surge of popularity in the 40s to the 60s ; it's been in long-term decline ever since.

Disagree with the last part. It is massively resurgent under Trumpism. Sadly, calling Trumpsuckers a small fraction of “the western population” doesn’t mitigate the fact that is is sufficiently large in ‘Murka to place a Muzzie-vilifying and Bibi placating moron in charge of the largest “western” country.

 

[scombrid]

If some guys that left IDF are believed then subhuman Muslims is a strong sentiment in that world. Then there is Nancy Mace speaking her truth about them all being out to get us.