Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 Next »
From	Message
zorroloco 27-May-17, 21:46	Terrorists! White Terrorists Killed More Americans This Week Than Refugees Have in 40 Years Posted By: Tom CahillMay 27, 2017 President Trump is quick to condemn Muslim terrorist attacks, but he has been largely silent about hate crimes carried out by white terrorists. After the latest hate crime in Portland, Oregon — in which white supremacist Jeremy Christian killed Ricky Best and Taliesin Namkai-Meche on a train after they attempted to stop him from berating two Muslim women — three people have been killed by white terrorists in the last week. The other hate crime-related murder happened at the University of Maryland, when 23-year-old Richard Collins III was stabbed to death by Sean Urbanski. Collins was just commissioned as a lieutenant in the United States Army. Conversely, no refugees hailing from any of the countries included in Trump’s Muslim ban have ever killed any Americans. The last time any refugees killed any Americans was more than 40 years ago, when three Cuban refugees killed three Americans (Cuba is not included in the travel ban). Ever since the Refugee Act of 1980, no refugees who have fled war-torn areas to seek asylum in the U.S. have ever killed any Americans. The Atlantic examined crime statistics and found that refugees constitute far less of a risk to Americans than fellow U.S. citizens: Over the last four decades, 20 out of 3.25 million refugees welcomed to the United States have been convicted of attempting or committing terrorism on U.S. soil, and only three Americans have been killed in attacks committed by refugees—all by Cuban refugees in the 1970s. Zero Americans have been killed by Syrian refugees in a terrorist attack in the United States. This includes refugees from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, which are the countries Trump has singled out for his Muslim travel ban. Politifact gave a “mostly true” score to a claim made by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-California), in which he said the chances of being killed by a refugee were 1 in 3.6 billion. The chances of winning the Powerball lottery’s grand prize are 1 in 292.2 million, meaning you would win the Powerball an average of 12 times before being killed by a refugee. In building up his case for the Muslim ban, then-Senator Jeff Sessions published a list of 580 terror-related convictions in the U.S. since 9/11, with 380 offenders coming from other countries. However, even the conservative Cato Institute cast doubt on Sessions’ study, pointing out that “terror-related” convictions don’t actually involve acts of terrorism, but are rather the product of other convictions handed down as the result of an investigation for a terror-related crime that never came to fruition: [O]nly 40 of the 580 convictions (6.9 percent) were for foreigners planning a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Seeking to join a foreign terrorist group overseas, material support for a foreign terrorist, and seeking to commit an act of terror on foreign soil account for 180 of the 580 convictions (31 percent). Terrorism on foreign soil is a crime, should be a crime, and those convicted of these offenses should be punished severely but the government cannot claim that these convictions made America safe again because these folks were not targeting U.S. soil. While the numbers back up the claim that the real terror threat is not from refugees, the Trump administration has been eerily silent about the growing trend of hate crimes in the United States committed by white people against people of color, particularly in the name of Trump. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reported that of the 1,000+ acts of hate reported in the wake of the November 8, 2016 election, 37 percent of those incidents“directly referenced either President-elect Donald Trump, his campaign slogans, or his infamous remarks about sexual assault.”
zorroloco 28-May-17, 12:38	Actually I'm not convinced that refugees have killed only theee in 40 years. But that's kind of irrelevant .... the argument still holds up.
zorroloco 29-May-17, 09:13	Native Americans have controversially called for a complete ban on Christians of any denomination entering the US until representatives can ‘figure out what the hell is going on.’ “Seriously, you guys have screwed this place up,” said Chief Simon with Williams “Two world wars, I don’t know how many ‘minor conflicts,’ mass-shootings, Adam Sandler, toy dogs, the Star Wars prequels. Ryan Adams covering Taylor Swift, MacDonalds; I mean, all this is bad enough but now you unleash Donald Trump on us?” “I’m sorry, it’s extreme but we have to say enough is enough.” The call for a ban has been seen as highly provocative to an already incredibly violent religious group whose more extreme wings are responsible for some of the worst mass-killings in US history. “Hey, some of my best friends are Christians,” said the Chief. “And they are good people, seriously. But until we figure out a way to tell the nice ones from the hate-filled, bigoted, war-mongering mass-killers then we’ve got to look after ourselves.” If the ban was put in place, it would affect such world figures such as the Pope, Bono, and Bill Turnbill, and open up the US to accusations of being profoundly silly. The chief was conciliatory, “True words, I don’t want the US looking silly. Okay, if we can’t ban all Christians, then let’s just ban Donald Trump?”
ace-of-aces 02-Jun-17, 11:12	Migrants are not terrorists but youtu.be when they act like that in France who would like to accept them ? Population wise, I believe France have more Muslim migrants than US. At least we have to suspect that Trump may be right. If there are more Muslims, we will have chaos like in France. It is worse in Islamic nations like Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. More Muslims are killed by Muslims. Recent bombing in Afghanistan killed 80 people and injured hundreds. Look at how much police put restraints on anger in the youtube video. Thy don't shoot back, although they can be killed by rioters.
ace-of-aces 03-Jun-17, 21:28	London Terror attack. 3 radical Islamic terrorists drove a truck and ploughed into pedestrians on London bridge. They left the car and attacked the crowd by stabbing. 3 attackers were shot dead. 6 people died and several are still in the hospital and doctors are struggling to save their lives. History is repeating itself and people in this GK may not be interested anymore since nobody except me would like to post this message for discussion. Correct me if I am wrong. One reason people are not interested for discussion is that we are helpless there is no peaceful solution for that and become routine news. London was on high alert and yet this kind of attack could happen. If you are just unlucky and are in the wrong place and the wrong time it can happen to anyone. So far dump Trump appears to find a solution that his " Muslim ban " will work and he takes this opportunity by tweeting on internet. Local judge cancelled his Muslim ban. He is fighting to reinstate his Muslim ban. Have not British learned Trump's lesson? This happened 2 weeks after Manchester suicide attack. Even if the British people believe it or not on Trump's sound advice, like a Pink Panther, Islamic terrorists will strike again. Almost all of them believe that this is not the last one. Prepare and brace for their deep hatred attack against us.
stalhandske 03-Jun-17, 22:23	I think it is incorrect to discuss this terrible attack in London on the same page as President Trump's "Muslim ban".
softaire 03-Jun-17, 22:29	Ace I think nobody here wants to discuss another terror attack in London is because most have said that Muslims in London are peaceful and that type of thing does not happen there. There is no problem. So, just move along... nothing to see here.
ace-of-aces 03-Jun-17, 22:51	Why it is incorrect or inappropriate to discuss Trump's " Muslim ban"? I think it is very relevant to discuss this topic. This is 1A club and everything can be discussed in a peaceful and civilized manner. I don't mind even if stal will say negative things about Trump and I don't think zorro will censor and ban this topic.
stalhandske 03-Jun-17, 23:02	<Why it is incorrect or inappropriate to discuss Trump's " Muslim ban"?> It is not. I was unclear. I meant that it has hardly any relevance with respect to the London attack.
dmaestro 03-Jun-17, 23:35	Stahl is correct. Trump's Muslim ban has noting to do with terrorism in England. Trump is just cynically exploiting the violence since a high percentage of his supporters are bigots. Softaire believes and has posted his share of Islamophobic nonsense here and we can expect it to continue. But it's not relevant.
dmaestro 03-Jun-17, 23:42	www.google.com Trump has no decency. People died and Trump cynically exploits their deaths to push an irrelevant Muslim ban.
mo-oneandmore 04-Jun-17, 04:59	London = Muslim ban???? Stalh is entirely correct!
ace-of-aces 05-Jun-17, 15:41	No reason to be alarmed. How do you interpret this message ? London mayor said it after London attack. The mayor is of Pakistani origin and a Muslim. Police identified the attackers as radical Islamic terrorists. Trump tweeted " Pathetic". You can interpret both the message in different ways. In my opinion the mayor would like to say. 1. No reason to be alarmed because our law enforcement is in total control now. 2. The attack is just like a pin prick compared to 911 attack. It is just like some other minor violent attack that occurs quite often. 3. He wants to downplay the situation so that angry Islamophobes may attack other innocent Muslims. 4. Is he just trying to cover up the serious nature of the incident because he is a Muslim terrorist sympathizer. Trump's twitter message can be interpreted in different ways. 1. To fit his Islamophobic agenda that if you don't listen to my Muslim travel ban it can happen like that. 2. A Muslim terrorist sympathizer will do like that. 3. Mayor's action is inadequate and does not understand the serious nature of the attack. I know much better than him to tackle or prevention of this kind of attack. 4.Trump's tweet appear to be sarcastic and a revenge to British legislators who would like to ban him from visiting Britain because of his anti Islamic ideation. I like to hear how will you interpret the two messages.
ace-of-aces 05-Jun-17, 15:55	Who will be welcomed to UK between the two ? 1. A Syrian Muslim refugee. 2. Trump who owns a golf club in UK and gives jobs to some UK citizens. The correct answer is # 1. Bristish legislators would like to ban Trump from landing on UK because of his anti Muslim remarks. Believe it or not. Is that sound weird ? Haven't they learn their lesson from radical Islam attacks 3 times within 3 months. I believe Trump would like to say that way.
lord_shiva 05-Jun-17, 16:49	Banning Groper is an excellent idea. Comrade Groper is the greatest recruitment tool ISIL has, now that Dick Cheney is no longer torturing Muslims.
softaire 05-Jun-17, 17:34	Sure... Muslims pose no danger to the English or anyone else over there. No worries mate. English Common Law and Sharia can coexist quite well together... if you don't mind Honor Killings.
lord_shiva 05-Jun-17, 17:38	Vapid Nonsense My mistake. I though Muslims were required to obey the law--I was not aware they were exempt. Where do you get such balderdash, Softaire?
softaire 05-Jun-17, 17:42	ls Just what is it about my post that you consider balderdash?
lord_shiva 05-Jun-17, 17:43	Malarky The very claim Muslims are slaughtering innocent people is twaddle and poppycock, contradicted by Imams across the globe. This bosh is promoted by zealots, xenophobes, bigots, and of course propaganda outlets posing as legitimate news organizations.
lord_shiva 05-Jun-17, 17:47	Balderdash Your nasty insinuation people of the Muslim faith naturally represent "a danger" to the English or others. That honor killings are not prosecuted as crimes--if such even occur. JihadiWatch claims they DO occur, though cannot provide names or details of any cases.
zorroloco 05-Jun-17, 17:58	Softy It's all wrong!
dmaestro 05-Jun-17, 21:38	You can't really discuss much with someone who posts such bigoted nonsense and really believes it. It's all wrong of course. Ridiculous in fact. Take a break from hate sites, try talking with ordinary Muslim Americans and go visit a mosque first huh? If you'd drop the ignorant bigotry you would find this relevant: m.huffpost.com
softaire 05-Jun-17, 22:02	So, what I see LS saying is that no Muslims slaughtered innocent people in England recently and that to say such is twaddle and poppycock, or bosh. He also seems to doubt that honor killings occur. OK... whatever you say. My personal opinion is that this kind of disconnect with reality is how you (the Democrats) have come to lose so many elections since about 2010.
stalhandske 05-Jun-17, 22:24	Softaire, I am beginning to think that you don't really see the hole in your logic. And that you really mean what you posted. I don't think anyone disagrees with the fact that many of the recent awful terror deeds were done in the name of Islam. It is also true that so-called honour killings have happened, and that they are carried out by people of the Muslim faith. My point is that we are talking about an extremely small percentage of people of the Muslim faith, who carry out this terror. Moreover, they do it falsely in the name of Allah - at least based on what influential Muslim imams have declared. With this background (I don't know if you agree with it), it is irresponsible to write: <Sure... Muslims pose no danger to the English or anyone else over there. No worries mate. English Common Law and Sharia can coexist quite well together... if you don't mind Honor Killings.> Is your next question "why"? The answer is that you are integrating the atrocities done by an extremely small fraction of Muslims to the whole Muslim community.
stalhandske 05-Jun-17, 22:37	softaire In some sense your logic is like throwing out the baby with the bath water. Now, if you were to recognise this - at least to a tiny degree - it may be possible to have a reasonable discussion.
lord_shiva 05-Jun-17, 23:05	Groper's Muslim Ban Groper has taken to calling his Muslim ban a travel ban. Why they needed to ban Muslims for ninety days to beef up extreme vetting way more than 90 days ago, and STILL need to ban nasty Muslims undermines their own blind idiocy. Not even Nixon undermined his own authority as much as Groper has harmed himself. This incompetent buffoon must be neutralized before he causes our nation and our world even greater harm. Time for Groper to go.
stalhandske 05-Jun-17, 23:36	softaire as usual, we cannot expect any reasonable discussion from you
softaire 06-Jun-17, 12:41	stalh You can't expect a reasonable discussion from me... why? Is it because I failed to answer you in your allotted time frame? You're a little PUSHY aren't you. It doesn't matter that the percentage of idiot, terrorist Muslims is small in relation to the entire group of Muslims around the world. One percent of a few billion is a LARGE number. Roughly 30% of Muslims in France & England think Honor killings can be justified. When they are trying to kill you it makes no sense to invite them into the country without extreme vetting. It also makes no sense to know who they are, and where they have been recently (like the British knew about these guys) and then do nothing about it. It makes NO sense to continue saying that "but most of them are good people" while allowing the few bad percentages to kill and maim your people making them afraid to go anywhere or do anything. As usual, we cannot expect any reasonable, common sense discussion from you.
lord_shiva 06-Jun-17, 14:17	Views of Muslims Regarding ISIL Close to 100% of Muslims in Lebanon oppose ISIL. 97% in Israel, with 2% undecided. 94% in Jordan, with 4% undecided. 84% in the Palestinian territories, 10% undecided. 80% in Indonesia oppose ISIL, 18% undecided. When we look at Comrade Groper's support among evangelical Xtians regarding his statements on torturing Muslim infidels and torturing their children before them, we find much higher levels of support. Lots of evangelical Xtians salivate at the prospect of torturing Muslims. The Muslims view these westerners as greed, immoral, selfish, violent, arrogant, and to a lesser extent fanatical. This view is exacerbated by idiot pastors burning Korans in church parking lots, and of course by the inflammatory rhetoric of Groper himself. www.pewresearch.org The claim 30% of UK Muslims favor honor killings is propaganda put forward by religious hate groups, and was part of the reason behind the success of Brexit.
lord_shiva 06-Jun-17, 14:24	Hmpf A BBC poll (the most recent I could find) showed one in ten UK Asians (not one in three) supported honor killings. Granted, far too high. There are three completely unacceptable practices in the Arab world, this, FGM, and execution (or even imprisonment) for blasphemy. There are plenty of other things that ought to be changed as well, but I've never seen it my place to force others to adopt my own preferences. That is a conservative political ideology.
Pages:  1 2 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, Internet chess league, chess teams, monthly chess tournaments, chess clubs, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.