Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread

No there are not. You have provided no evidence for this. No we do not. Funny jihad they have there, attacking cars. How does the church commit violence with no individuals involved?So you are ok with Oriental Orthodox (Armenian Orthodox and Syriac Orthodox), Eastern Orthodox (such as Greeks or Russians), Roman Catholics, various Eastern Catholic Churches that are under the authority of the Pope, all coming in as refugees?

I noticed there was no mention of Moslems in news reports about the Oklahoma City bombing and no mention of them on any abortion clinic violence stories. How very PC. Since nothing was mentioned, the MSM is being very PC by not mentioning them.IT BURNS.

My theory is that this is made up. This theory explains perfectly why you have no evidence for it.

Now come on, we KNOW it was leftist Marxist PC Jihadi arsonists. Most of them, are also Roman Catholic Atheist Evolutionists who are also Geologists. They probably use illegal bait too!It's the PC Jihadis burning cars without a doubt and our Right-wing PCist KNOWS it. According to the radio, Toyota pickups are never torched. ISIS drives Toyota pickups. Coincidence? I think not.

Wonderful. I don't understand the mentality but it's certainly predictable by now. You just don't want it to be Muslims, therefore it isn't Muslims, despite those saying it is Muslims and despite the fact that Political Correctness demands that it not be Muslims which ought to be a red flag but for some reason isn't. The desire to be deluded is hard to fathom. Also the desire for the destruction of the west which is certainly happeinhg. Strange sort of suicidal mentality.

Show us evidence of Muslims burning hundreds of cars. It is truly that simple. You provide the evidence we will make our own ideas on the quality of the evidence and let you know. As of right now there is no evidence.

I trust people who report such things and there are a lot of them, especially Christians. I don't need more evidence than that, and your insistent demand for evidence is just the usual determination to believe what you want to believe. I think you deserve what you're going to get.

OK, here's a very believable article on your side of this question, by a guy who writes for Reuters, this time about people insisting they are covering up Muslim crimes by using general terms like "youths" to describe the car burnings:http://blogs.reuters.com/...s-torching-cars-on-new-years-eveUnless those who are brought into custody are identified there wouldn't be any way to know who is doing it. Nevertheless other sources say they are "predominantly" Muslim, and Al Qaeda even got into the act:Sucuri WebSite Firewall - Access DeniedSee links.It's frustrating to find reports of people taken into custody, which say nothing about their ethnicity.This blogger mentions a reason why that might be: GalliaWatch: Crimes, car burnings, accidents this New Year's Eve

quote:

---

Wonderful. I don't understand the mentality but it's certainly predictable by now. You just don't want it to be Muslims, therefore it isn't Muslims, despite those saying it is Muslims and despite the fact that Political Correctness demands that it not be Muslims which ought to be a red flag but for some reason isn't.

---

I don't understand the mentality but it is certainly predictable by now. When the evidence turns out to go against your claims you start lying about everyone who dares to disagree with you.The fact is that we have evidence that on average a total of 80 cars a day are torched in France. Simply on the evidence the claim that Muslims are torching nearly one hundred - the original claim - is almost certainly false. We can say that it is likely that some of the perpetrators are Muslims, but nearly ALL of them ? That is unlikely, even without the much higher UK figures (which might be out of date, but are certainly good enough for a comparison)Wielding the cudgel of "political correctness" as an excuse for prejudice and hate - for a guilty until proven innocent mentality is hardly any better. If any accusation against Muslims is to be held to be true in the absence of evidence - or even, as in this case, the presence of contrary evidence - because it is "politically correct" to hold that Muslims are innocent then you are rejecting justice in favour of prejudice.

As far as I can see there is no clear evidence that it's not mostly Muslims as you all insist. I'll admit that once again I trusted my sources too readily, but nevertheless I still believe that the truth is on their side because I've read up on Islam myself and know that they will rise up against the west in any way possible whenever possible because taking the world for Allah is their objective, even if it takes a long time, and destructive behavior fits right in to that agenda.Political Correctness IS the correct explanation for all the gyrations that go into covering up any crime or fault of Muslims or any outgroup, and France does seem to have that attitude built into its treatment of crimes, that's why it's so hard to find out anything about the perpetrators for sure. The idea that we're all exactly the same and that different cultures don't have different agendas is what PC is all about, and it's a recipe for cultural suicide because Islam in particular follows a world domination agenda that apparently you'd all rather pretend doesn't exist. I quoted a Frenchman complaining that you can't talk about these things without being called a racist or an Islamophobe or a bigot or whatnot, and that's the amazingly effective intimidating main tactic of political correctness that shuts up all sane voices, and it certainly reigns at EvC even if not everyone indulges in it vocally. What did I get back but Dr. A's confirmation that it depends on what you say about those groups. Of course it does. You can't say they are behind crimes, you can't say immigration should be restricted, you can't say that perpetrators of crimes should be deported etc etc etc. That's what would be politically incorrect. Of course the people saying this aren't at the moment their victims. Not sure even that would cure this attitude anyway though.abe: "The cudgel of political correctness as an excuse for prejudice and hate." Thanks PaulK, you are right on cue and right in the center of the PC zone. "Prejudice and hate." That really describes Islam, and it unfortunately also describes those who refuse to listen to the ones warning about Islam, who AREN'T motivated by prejudice and hate at all. /abeI've been looking for a book I've had since before 9/11, Philistine by Ramon Bennett, that spells out Islam's agenda, which includes emigration to all nonMuslim nations to build up their population to the point that they can take that nation for Allah and treat all nonMuslims as the kind of trash they are free to rape or spit on. One thing Islam is NOT is tolerant of other beliefs, but it's amazing how those who try to warn about Islam are the ones subjected to that label instead. "Intolerant," yes, one of the terms in the PC arsenal.I can't find the book, but in looking for it I happened to run across a stash of books about Islam hidden behind a stack of pamphlets. Got my work cut out for me. I hope the information I want is somewhere in this stash. The book I have in mind has plenty of quotations by Muslim leaders and Arab political leaders about the Islamic agenda, which ought to be evidence enough even for Theodoric, but I won't hold my breath. It may not matter to those under the spell of PC who have decided that it's just hunky-dory to give Europe and America to Allah, of course.To tie this back to the election, I don't think Trump knows the worst about Islam, but at least he cares about dangers to the nation through its clear proclivities to inspire violent extremists. Since radicalization is something that happens to individuals, though the doctrines are always right there in the texts for anyone to follow, the Muslims who are innocent of this level of Islam should be given refuge and as I suggested, it would help if Christians helped them out in great numbers, so among other things they can see that Christianity is not violent like the jihadists.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What is the evidence that the burning of cars in France is related to a "Muslim jihad against the West?"

LOL! C'mon, Faith... Surely even you had to have hesitated on posting such an absurdly dubious "source."

Well, Hyro, I've heard it for months now from a lot of different sources, I figure that must carry some weight, or should, but as usuall apparently not at EvC. Because of what I know about Islam, see post above, I am probably too ready to accept a blanket statement along these lines, but I have no doubt that the main thrust of the reports is the truth. If anyone can find out the ethnic status of the people taken into custody for the car burnings, we'd know more.I don't consider the organizations I hear on Christian radio to be a "dubious" source. They generally have a good track record for knowing what they are talking about and they are very cautious in how they present their information. And again, I have heard this for months now anyway/Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

What you continue to misunderstand is that not all Muslims operate in some kind of homogenous union. Shi'a and Sunni agree on almost nothing, and even amongst their sects there is discord. This kind of fearmongering is no different than Nazi ideology in how it manipulates shreds of facts to create some insidious beast that, in actuality, exists in the minds of the paranoid and is massively overstated so that it distorts reality. This is Groupthink and Mean-World Syndrome that you're falling victim to. While I agree that some countries have a tendency to whitewash or downplay the actions of Jihadis, France is not one of them. They are aware that very radicalized Islamic cells are in their country. But they aren't going to lay at the feet of all Muslims the burning of cars if there is no evidence to support that it is nothing beyond vandalism. Mein Kampf provided the evidence that the Jews were also bent on world domination.See how easy it is to get carried away?

quote:

---

As far as I can see there is no clear evidence that it's not mostly Muslims as you all insist.

---

For you to be correct it has to be pretty much all Muslims. If three quarters of them were Muslims you would have only 60 a day, which is hardly pushing 100. And I don't see any reason to believe that it's that high - surely criminals covering up evidence and non-Muslim vandals account for a significant proportion. I'm sure that some of the people burning cars happen to be Muslims, but that is as far as the evidence will take us.

quote:

---

Political Correctness IS the correct explanation for all the gyrations that go into covering up any crime or fault of Muslims or any outgroup,

---

What is the correct term for questioning unevidenced and likely false accusations against an outgroup - which is what is actually going on in this discussion ?