Europe submits voluntarily

[angelo]

The problem here is that not all vehicles are the same and not all miles are the same.

Does that car go 5,000 mi/yr (easily possible for someone who doesn't use it for work) or 50,000 (for someone who spends much of their working time going from point A to point B)? Deaths per passenger-mile are a far better yardstick than deaths per vehicle.

I'm not using deaths per vehicle, I'm using deaths per vehicle kilometer. For all practical purposes, I thus am using your yardstick.

Talking about the difference between city driving and freeway driving, the Netherlands - easily the most densely populated major Western country and thus almost certain to have a higher proportion of city driving - has a death rate per vehicle kilometre of 4.5, almost 37% lower than the US' rate.

Your objections are void.

Loren thinks that anyone even remotely Muslim or Arab is a terrorist.

I
The word " remotely " in this case is not applicable! Sure perhaps 70-80% of the Muslims invaders of Europe are not not hell bent on becoming terrorists. That leaves 20-30% who are. In England alone there are over 30.000 would be terrorists who are kept under surveillance.
The threat is ever present. Many terrorist plots are uncovered before these savages could unleash their terror on innocent people.

 

[Jokodo]

Loren thinks that anyone even remotely Muslim or Arab is a terrorist.

I
The word " remotely " in this case is not applicable! Sure perhaps 70-80% of the Muslims invaders of Europe are not not hell bent on becoming terrorists. That leaves 20-30% who are. In England alone there are over 30.000 would be terrorists who are kept under surveillance.

You wouldn't happen to have a source for either the "20-30%" or the "30.000"?

And you wouldn't happen to have a basic understanding of division? Because that would tell you that 30.000 is actually close to 1% of England's Muslims (around 1.1% if "England" is what you actually meant, almost exactly 1% if you mean to say the UK), and very far from 20-30%. So either one of these figures has to be wrong.

The threat is ever present. Many terrorist plots are uncovered before these savages could unleash their terror on innocent people.

Any numbers on that too?

 

[angelo]

You obviously live in a cocoon, or only notice what you think is happening in your imagination. I suggest you remove your rose coloured glasses and look at the real world!

 

[Jokodo]

You obviously live in a cocoon, or only notice what you think is happening in your imagination. I suggest you remove your rose coloured glasses and look at the real world!

In the real world, there are rules to basic arithmetics, and 30,000 (if true) of British Muslims is nowhere near "20-30%".

 

[angelo]

You obviously live in a cocoon, or only notice what you think is happening in your imagination. I suggest you remove your rose coloured glasses and look at the real world!

In the real world, there are rules to basic arithmetics, and 30,000 (if true) of British Muslims is nowhere near "20-30%".

Why not Google Pew research did on muzzies living in Western Europe. 20-30% is a very conservative figure of Muzzies who put islam first and above their host country. Also extremely conservative figure on those who don't condemn jihadist.

 

[Jokodo]

You obviously live in a cocoon, or only notice what you think is happening in your imagination. I suggest you remove your rose coloured glasses and look at the real world!

In the real world, there are rules to basic arithmetics, and 30,000 (if true) of British Muslims is nowhere near "20-30%".

Why not Google Pew research did on muzzies living in Western Europe. 20-30% is a very conservative figure of Muzzies who put islam first and above their host country. Also extremely conservative figure on those who don't condemn jihadist.

I think I know which one you mean. It doesn't say what you think it says. You'd know this if you'd ever googled it and read the actual thing yourself instead of parroting what you read on some blog/forum.

Your posts show that you haven't done any research - they're full of blatantly false claims. The a priori chance that any any of your claims whose veracity is not immediately apparent is true is thus negligible, and any work devoted to checking them more likely than not wasted. If you have a link to an actual source, bring it up!

Today's post, however, show more than that: They show that you don't even subdue your pseudo-facts to the most basic sanity check. Only thus can it be explained that you confidently express two mutually exclusive factual claims in one and the same post.

 

[Jokodo]

Incidentally, polls also find that nearly 20% of Americans (and 28% of the republican-leaning population) think interracial marriages are morally wrong.

What you're doing is the equivalent of drawing from that poll the conclusion that 20% of Americans are would-be rightwing terrorists. Having some views that you and I find hard to comprehend or even despicable is not the same as being "hell bent on becoming terrorists".

 

[angelo]

You may not find the figures shown in this survey alarming, but many people do!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_toward_terrorism

 

[Jokodo]

You may not find the figures shown in this survey alarming, but many people do!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_toward_terrorism

In what frigging survey? Do you even know what you're linking to? This is not a survey, this is a Wikipedia summary page!

 

[angelo]

A farken summary of what if not a survey? ???

 

[Jokodo]

A farken summary of what if not a survey? ???

Way to show you didn't even look at your own link! It discusses a multitude of different surveys and other sources of information. Among them a survey that found that "Muslim Americans were less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than other Americans" and another one that found that "residents of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states were [on average] less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than residents of non-OIC states [whether by the military or by individuals a. k. a. terrorists - Jokodo]".

Are those the figures I'm supposed to be alarmed about?

 

[Derec]

Zahl der Salafisten in Deutschland hat sich verdoppelt
The number of salafists (a type of Islamist extremist) in Germany has doubled since 2013.

Danke Merkel!

 

[barbos]

A farken summary of what if not a survey? ???

Way to show you didn't even look at your own link! It discusses a multitude of different surveys and other sources of information. Among them a survey that found that "Muslim Americans were less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than other Americans" and another one that found that "residents of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states were [on average] less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than residents of non-OIC states [whether by the military or by individuals a. k. a. terrorists - Jokodo]".

Are those the figures I'm supposed to be alarmed about?

These surveys are bullshit anyway. First, people lie on them and second even if they don't lie they treat/understand questions differently depending on religion and cultural background. Also, American muslims are the most moderate and often are merely culturally muslims and as such they tend to "overcompensate" on these surveys
So comparing them to the rest of the americans is disingenuous. You need to take into account muslims in other countries.
Islam is fundamentaly an ideology which is incompatible with modern society. I know, same can be said about other religions, but let be honest, christianity has been morphed and tamed for centuries, whereas islam has been moving in opposite direction last hundred of years.

 

[angelo]

A farken summary of what if not a survey? ???

Way to show you didn't even look at your own link! It discusses a multitude of different surveys and other sources of information. Among them a survey that found that "Muslim Americans were less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than other Americans" and another one that found that "residents of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states were [on average] less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than residents of non-OIC states [whether by the military or by individuals a. k. a. terrorists - Jokodo]".

Are those the figures I'm supposed to be alarmed about?

In France alone according to some reports, there's approximately 78.000 known rag heads threats. Not Hindus, Buddhists, Xtians, or any other religion/ideology that poses such a threat.
https://gellerreport.com/2018/04/terror-france.html/

 

[Jokodo]

A farken summary of what if not a survey? ???

Way to show you didn't even look at your own link! It discusses a multitude of different surveys and other sources of information. Among them a survey that found that "Muslim Americans were less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than other Americans" and another one that found that "residents of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member states were [on average] less likely to justify the targeting and killing of civilians than residents of non-OIC states [whether by the military or by individuals a. k. a. terrorists - Jokodo]".

Are those the figures I'm supposed to be alarmed about?

In France alone according to some reports, there's approximately 78.000 known rag heads threats. Not Hindus, Buddhists, Xtians, or any other religion/ideology that poses such a threat.
https://gellerreport.com/2018/04/terror-france.html/

78.0 is less than a hundred.

Make up your mind please...

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In France alone according to some reports, there's approximately 78.000 known rag heads threats. Not Hindus, Buddhists, Xtians, or any other religion/ideology that poses such a threat.
https://gellerreport.com/2018/04/terror-france.html/

78.0 is less than a hundred.

Make up your mind please...

Language problem. 78.000 in this context is a writing system that uses a period where we use a comma. It should be translated as 78,000.

 

[repoman]

 

[Jokodo]

In France alone according to some reports, there's approximately 78.000 known rag heads threats. Not Hindus, Buddhists, Xtians, or any other religion/ideology that poses such a threat.
https://gellerreport.com/2018/04/terror-france.html/

78.0 is less than a hundred.

Make up your mind please...

Language problem. 78.000 in this context is a writing system that uses a period where we use a comma. It should be translated as 78,000.

I'm aware of that. It's still the most appropriate reaction when he was asked to provide sources and come up with gellerreport...

 

[Jokodo]

View attachment 15274

Well this is just silly in how counterfactual it is.

Unlike, for example, the United States and a small handful of other countries, every single European country has paid maternity leave, as is mandated by the Union(1).

Unlike the United States, every or pretty much every country has subsidised childcare options, and increasing the rate of 3-year-olds in childcare and parents' access to it is an explicit policy goal of the EU (2). In some countries, including Germany, parents can sue the town council for neglecting its duty to provide adequate options if they don't get a slot(3).

In fact, every measure to increase female labour participation and decrease the penalty of motherhood in the labour market -- two more explicit policy goals of the EU -- can be construed as a measure to increase fertility. It's not a coincidence that high female labour participation and relatively high birth rates are correlated across developed countries. When women can go back to work more easily after having a child, more will decide to become mothers and more will be working (all else equal) (4).

Short summary: It's not "the EU", and least of all leftist policies, that makes European have few children. If anything, conservative, implicit or explicit "women back to the kitchen sink" ideologies stop them from having more.

--

(1) See for example here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2016/593543/EPRS_ATA(2016)593543_EN.pdf

(2) In many countries in Western Europe, the rate is at 90%+ already for 3-year-olds. A country-by-country breakdown of the actual participation rates in pre-primary education of 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds can be found on page 64/66 of this document: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/key_data_series/166EN.pdf
Here's a comparison of the EU's gross rate with that of the US: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.PRE.ENRR?locations=US-EU&view=chart

(3) Source in German: http://www.deutscher-familienverban...184-rechtsanspruch-kitaplatz-fragen-antworten

(4) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/614646/EPRS_IDA(2017)614646_EN.pdf - a quote from page 14:
"Fertility rates are falling worldwide and are associated with growing economic
and social development. However, research suggests that once a certain level of
development is achieved, fertility rates may stabilise or recover to some extent. The
interactions between policies to support families and diverging fertility rates do not
suggest clear solutions, although a common characteristic among countries with stable
or even increasing birth rates is a high degree of female labour force participation."

 

[angelo]

Language problem. 78.000 in this context is a writing system that uses a period where we use a comma. It should be translated as 78,000.

I'm aware of that. It's still the most appropriate reaction when he was asked to provide sources and come up with gellerreport...

You can prove Gellar or other critics of the" religion of peace "are lying?