0114owl1867 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Given that most of what he writes is factually wrong or just made up do you not think it reasonable that he's pulled up on it? It's very chivalrous of you I'm sure, but I daresay if Danot feels victimised he can stand up for himself. Or you could complain to the moderating team on his behalf if you think the delicate flower can't take it, couldn't you? On the contrary HB I think he's handled himself admirably in the face of almost non stop provocation, given 'some' and I mean 'some' of the links he has provided I can't see how anyone could contradict him, for example John x quoted something like 'you can't use UKIP or migration watch figures as they are 'biased' towards the right' well just because he said that does not mean that it is true or couldn't John x provide a link to back up his argument ? get me ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The Muslim population is like any other. Over generations they develop. I believe the Muslim population will fall because of a drop in birthrate. Younger Muslims are already, on a whole, more like their western counterparts, with the same aspirations. Lots of kids, unfortunately, means a long financial struggle. Muslim women will also enjoy long careers, and having lots of kids will hinder this. A refreshingly realistic point of view - and unencumbered by paranoia and fear of 'Muslimification'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 You know as well as I do that a large percentage of young British born muslim women are prevented from ever experiencing the same sense of freedom has their none muslim girls friends that dress how they choose and date who they choose. Again you're talking about the 'here and now' and casting that view into the future. As restricted as those girls lives may be, I bet they have more freedom than their grandmothers did..so do you think British, teenage, Muslim females will have children and grandchildren who will choose to live how they have done? It's highly unlikely isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 On the contrary HB I think he's handled himself admirably in the face of almost non stop provocation, given 'some' and I mean 'some' of the links he has provided I can't see how anyone could contradict him, for example John x quoted something like 'you can't use UKIP or migration watch figures as they are 'biased' towards the right' well just because he said that does not mean that it is true or couldn't John x provide a link to back up his argument ? get me ? Not every opinion or idea can be supported by hard evidence, Owl, but some are just utterly preposterous. John X does indeed have a point in that the source of a 'fact' needs looking at. Some 'facts' are clearly just made up - like Danot's crazy assertion that most christians are over 70. He just invented it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0114owl1867 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Are we talking about danot? With all due respect he's being 'ganged up on' because he isn't providing any proof of his claims, merely supposition, lies and innuendo, ironically he's the one denouncing or ignoring the facts/evidence being presented to him. I suspect he's laughing his socks behind his computer screen and is well aware of the fun he's having 'raising the rabble', but his claims should nonetheless be challenged because some people will take them as read. To put it into perspective for you, imagine if someone posted here and said through their 'observations' they believed Wednesdayites were paedophiles..as outrageous a claim that would be, would you just shrug it off or would you have something to say about it? He's handled himself well BF posted links to kinda back up his claims aswell - his replies have been scant one way ravings, I'm not saying everything he's said is true and don't believe his 'predictions' but there is an element of truth to some of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 On the contrary HB I think he's handled himself admirably in the face of almost non stop provocation, given 'some' and I mean 'some' of the links he has provided I can't see how anyone could contradict him, for example John x quoted something like 'you can't use UKIP or migration watch figures as they are 'biased' towards the right' well just because he said that does not mean that it is true or couldn't John x provide a link to back up his argument ? get me ? He's also claimed polygamy, men marrying their cousins, 15 year olds and bringing women over from abroad to marry will increase the birthrate..without providing any evidence to support it whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Correct organisations like Migration Watch do campaign against unbalanced immigration, and they use statistics to back up their arguments. How dare they use statistics in such an appropriate way! We all know that statistics can be used selectively to 'prove a point'. The rate of net immigration into the UK has been falling, year on year since as far back as 2004. Have you ever seen that on a Migration Watch website? Of course not because it doesn't fit their picture of immigration spiralling out of control. So while as they claim, the total number of immigrants to the UK increases every year, the rate of that increase has been declining for nearly 10 years now and is set to continue to decline. They don't point out the latter because it undermines their whole campaign. So as an anti-immigration campaign, they are using statistics in an appropriate way. As a source of information for an impartial discussion of immigration, they are a waste of time. John x PS What is a 'correct' organisation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0114owl1867 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Not every opinion or idea can be supported by hard evidence, Owl, but some are just utterly preposterous. John X does indeed have a point in that the source of a 'fact' needs looking at. Some 'facts' are clearly just made up - like Danot's crazy assertion that most christians are over 70. He just invented it. most Christians are not over 70 - that is stupid to say that, it was invented Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Again you're talking about the 'here and now' and casting that view into the future. As restricted as those girls lives may be, I bet they have more freedom than their grandmothers did..so do you think British, teenage, Muslim females will have children and grandchildren who will choose to live how they have done? It's highly unlikely isn't it? I think it is indeed highly unlikely. The young Muslim teens and kids that I know are obsessed with pretty much the same things that their non-Muslim counterparts are - trashy TV, American culture, rap and fast food (many turn up their noses at traditional foods their mums make and lust after KFC and pizza like any other teen.) It's inevitable that they become more like us (non Muslims) rather than vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 most Christians are not over 70 - that is stupid to say that, it was invented Yes - and therefore it's quite right and proper that such nonsenses are shown up for what they are. You can't have a sensible discussion without challenging the nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.