How Liberals Argue

[M.Dancer]

the other link may not be an 'authority' but it, along with many others from Europe tells about the no go areas etc. N.A. doesn't have the same demographics or problems as Europe.

Given that the riots were sparked by two youths killed by police in one of the so called no go zones, the claim that police don't go there is suspect....further claims that in these areas sharia etc etc...is practiced goes against the hard line stance that France takes against islam.

[Michael Hardner]

...but then, pretty well most topics on here end up going way off on tangents.

Speaking of tangents, would you care to admit that the accusation of 'no go' zones espoused by your robot friend is a myth ?

Or do you not want to discuss it ?

[Jack Weber]

How Shady argues:

Duh, Liberals are dumb, duh! Here's a Youtube video and some out-of-context quotes to show you. Duh...

Plus...You forgot being completely out of his depth during a historical discussion,and after he's proven to be historically clueless,claim it does'nt have anything to do with modern times,and then,using the fallback position of calling the person nailing him on his historical cluelessness as "crazy"...

I have dealt with Professor Kitzel like this on a few occasions...

[scribblet]

Speaking of tangents, would you care to admit that the accusation of 'no go' zones espoused by your robot friend is a myth ?

Or do you not want to discuss it ?

No go zones are not a myth, just google it... you'll have to start another thread

[Michael Hardner]

No go zones are not a myth, just google it... you'll have to start another thread

That's proof that it's real ? Google it. Come on, just give it up.

[Moonlight Graham]

lol, that was funny. Very stereotypical, and didn't watch it all, but very funny.

Is there one like this with conservatives too?

Edited October 28, 2010 by Moonlight Graham

[BubberMiley]

No go zones are not a myth, just google it... you'll have to start another thread

I googled it. The results are all conservative blogs with an anti-islam focus like stopsharianow.org and jihadwatch.org. None of them provide any evidence there are really areas in Europe that the police will not enter.

I think there are some in Winnipeg though, but the population there just worships at the altar of the neighbourhood crackhouse.

Edited October 28, 2010 by BubberMiley

[Shady]

I googled it. The results are all conservative blogs

Actually they're not. I posted a link to several different references. I even found no go zone talk on trip advisor. I guess they're a conservative blog too huh?

[BubberMiley]

You posted a link to a right-wing blog with an anti-muslim focus that provided a few anecdotes of bad behaviour.

[Shady]

You posted a link to a right-wing blog with an anti-muslim focus that provided a few anecdotes of bad behaviour.

I had no idea The New York Times is a right-wing blog with an anti-muslim focus.

Clichy-sous-Bois has a substantial immigrant population, a large share of public housing and a history of social problems.

Sarkozy promised stepped-up security in restive neighborhoods with riot police to ensure order and intelligence agents to search for troublemakers.

Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life.

Since the start of the year, 9,000 police cars have been stoned and, each night, 20 to 40 cars are torched, Sarkozy said in an interview last week with the newspaper Le Monde.

NYT

This is what is meant by a no-go zone/area. Sarkozy refers to them as restive neighborhoods.

[Michael Hardner]

This is what is meant by a no-go zone/area. Sarkozy refers to them as restive neighborhoods.

So you're correcting the statements in the OP ? If so, then thank you - finally...

[dre]

I had no idea The New York Times is a right-wing blog with an anti-muslim focus.

This is what is meant by a no-go zone/area. Sarkozy refers to them as restive neighborhoods.

Gotcha... so 9000 police cars got torched in places police dont go?

[BubberMiley]

I think he doesn't know what a "no-go zone" means. He's just repeating the talking points he's been fed again.

[Michael Hardner]

""in many European cities, there are now no-go zones where non-Muslims and police cannot enter""

That's the actual quote from boy robot....

I actually think this should be titled this is how Liberals and Conservatives argue...

lies... hysteria... The facts are subordinate to the natural dislike between the parties anyway.

[scribblet]

Speaking about the original post, Glenn Murray Lib. MP is a poster boy for the argument in the original OP as he has made unsubstantiated allegations of bigotry and possible libelous statements.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/28/national-post-editorial-board-whos-the-real-bigot/

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JB12Aa02.html

Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the bishop of Rochester, warned on January 7 of the spread of "no-go" zones in England that non-Muslims dare not enter. As a result, Nazir-Ali has received death threats against himself and his family and requires protection.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/nyregion/10gellerb.html?pagewanted=3

You cannot ignore the fact that there are no-go zones, where the police cannot go in France, cannot go in England, the fire department cannot go.

There are hundreds of references to no go zones in Europe but don't forget that a big issue is that the media usually doesn't like to report on these things and often white wash such issues. They can't all be making it up

http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2010/09/swedens_general_election

http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=13161

Interview with firefighters in Sweden’s ‘no go zones

Edited October 28, 2010 by scribblet

[Michael Hardner]

They can't all be making it up

Why not ? We can see on this very thread that the mythology started to spread pretty easily.

It went from an initial misstatement about areas where police can't go, with the implication being that the government is tacitly dividing up their territory into religious reserves. That idea is all incorporated into a new term - "no go zone".

So we have a new term, that seems to be used to describe something new - as in "there are now no-go zones where the police can't go". When we look into it, they're just saying "there are slums".

But they didn't say that - they used the term "no go zone". What does it mean ? Not what the OP robot said. So it's deceptive.

You could call dangerous neighbourhoods in the US no-go zones if you're using the criteria of high-crime enclaves but it wouldn't be perceived as the same thing at all.

This thread is the first time I've heard of no-go zones. Let's see how often they get picked up and used by people who are arguing against immigration. This myth has legs.

[Shady]

So you're correcting the statements in the OP ? If so, then thank you - finally...

Yes, clearifying it. However, like I've already stated. The video is satire. How many times do I have to say that before you start to understand?

[Shady]

This thread is the first time I've heard of no-go zones. Let's see how often they get picked up and used by people who are arguing against immigration. This myth has legs.

Well, clearly if you've never heard of them before, than they obviously dont' exist.

It's a fact that in Britain for example, military personnel are forbidden from going to certain areas while wearing their uniforms because of "cultural sensitivity." Of course, it's only one group that they really have to worry about. I'm sure you can guess which one.

[scribblet]

I had heard of no go zones many times, if you read more about European issues you'll see more of it.

The original video might be satire but it does speak to a real issue which is embodied in the unsubstantiated allegations and smears made by Glenn Murray Lib. MP.

[Michael Hardner]

Fine, it's satire. As such, the thread title is wrong.

[DogOnPorch]

Clichy-sous-Bois is what would be inaccurately termed a 'no go zone'. I'm sure police can venture in but are certainly not welcome.

[Shady]

Fine, it's satire. As such, the thread title is wrong.

Nope. The thread title is completely appropriate regardless.

[Michael Hardner]

Nope. The thread title is completely appropriate regardless.

How about "How Liberals argue with decepticons ?"

[Shady]

How about "How Liberals argue with decepticons ?"

Now you're just quibbling over semantics. However, how would you have Jonathan Swift re-title his 'A Modest Proposal?' Since is obviously not modest at all, and as such needs a more accurate title description.

[Michael Hardner]

Now you're just quibbling over semantics. However, how would you have Jonathan Swift re-title his 'A Modest Proposal?' Since is obviously not modest at all, and as such needs a more accurate title description.

The whole point of the thread is that Liberals are idiots. But the robot is a lying robot. Sorry to argue.

I could start a thread on Rob Ford's weight and call it Rob Ford is skinny, I suppose.