EU official's daughter raped and murdered by "refugee"

[paulpablo]

I was disagreeing with the statement that it's only an assumption that the suspect is Muslim.
Based on what I'd heard about the suspect and his background I'd say it's more than an assumption.

I was also pointing out that I don't know where you heard that he isn't Tunisian.
Every news source I've seen says he's Tunisian.

At the time that post was made, it was only an assumption. Do you need everything explained to you?

You're going to cause a smug epidemic in the forum soon.  Thick bellowing clouds of smug.

Yes high and mighty one, you need to explain your perspective to me and I need to explain my perspective to you if we have a disagreement.
I can't read your mind.

Now what I'm going to explain to you is that in my first post where I declared this person to be a Tunisian Muslim I followed it up with telling you that I've already seen several sources going into detail about the connections he has to Islamic terrorists, preachers so and and so forth.
So me saying he's a Muslim isn't without evidence and isn't an assumption.

And this was at the time the post was made, I had already seen in the news this person has links to Islamic Muslim preachers and Islamic Muslim terrorist organisations.

[Thumpalumpacus]

At the time that post was made, it was only an assumption. Do you need everything explained to you?

You're going to cause a smug epidemic in the forum soon.  Thick bellowing clouds of smug.

Yes high and mighty one, you need to explain your perspective to me and I need to explain my perspective to you if we have a disagreement.
I can't read your mind.

Now what I'm going to explain to you is that in my first post where I declared this person to be a Tunisian Muslim I followed it up with telling you that I've already seen several sources going into detail about the connections he has to Islamic terrorists, preachers so and and so forth.
So me saying he's a Muslim isn't without evidence and isn't an assumption.

And this was at the time the post was made, I had already seen in the news this person has links to Islamic Muslim preachers and Islamic Muslim terrorist organisations.

Pity you couldn't take the time to link that news so the readership could assay the source. I'm sure it was reputable, but no doubt others might wish to read for themselves.

Now what I'm going to explain to you is that my point is that your assumptions reveal a lot about yourself, whether or not you realize that. You can cry all you wish about "PC!" but your assumptions mark you.

Your assumption was correct? That still doesn't give it the patina of reason.

Of course, you have to think to understand that much. Good luck on that score, and forgive my pessimism. I simply don't think you're up to it.

[paulpablo]

You're going to cause a smug epidemic in the forum soon.  Thick bellowing clouds of smug.

Yes high and mighty one, you need to explain your perspective to me and I need to explain my perspective to you if we have a disagreement.
I can't read your mind.

Now what I'm going to explain to you is that in my first post where I declared this person to be a Tunisian Muslim I followed it up with telling you that I've already seen several sources going into detail about the connections he has to Islamic terrorists, preachers so and and so forth.
So me saying he's a Muslim isn't without evidence and isn't an assumption.

And this was at the time the post was made, I had already seen in the news this person has links to Islamic Muslim preachers and Islamic Muslim terrorist organisations.

Pity you couldn't take the time to link that news so the readership could assay the source. I'm sure it was reputable, but no doubt others might wish to read for themselves.

Now what I'm going to explain to you is that my point is that your assumptions reveal a lot about yourself, whether or not you realize that. You can cry all you wish about "PC!" but your assumptions mark you.

Your assumption was correct? That still doesn't give it the patina of reason.

Of course, you have to think to understand that much. Good luck on that score, and forgive my pessimism. I simply don't think you're up to it.

haha ok so because I didn't provide links to my evidence the evidence definitely does not exist and therefore I definitely made an assumption.

It's fucking mainstream news.  I still don't know where you found your source about him not being Tunisian.  Every mainstream media source I've viewed says he's a Muslim from Tunisia so since I have proof in the form of media sources such as the BBC, and just about every other news source you can google.

I'm not going to cry PC but I will ask.....

I saw on the television on BBC that this man is a Tunisian Muslim so i think he's a Tunisian Muslim.  What does this say about me?  I'm probably a xenophobic Islamophobic white nationalist I'll bet.

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38392128

Here's the link by the way to the BBC article from one day ago.

I can see how where it says someone in the Tunisian government must have claimed he isn't Tunisian but it also does say that his brother is back there in Tunisia and that his school records and criminal records all indicate him being Tunisian.  Which is why the news sources refar to him as the Tunisian suspect.

[Thumpalumpacus]

haha ok so because I didn't provide links to my evidence the evidence definitely does not exist and therefore I definitely made an assumption.

I'll refer you to my earlier post, and ask you to think. I'm guardedly optimistic about my first request, but distinctly skeptical about the latter.

I'll give you a little time to go find a dictionary to look up those big words that were giving you so much trouble the other day ... I'm a patient guy.

Also, just so I can irritate Private Butthurt a little more, you're building a strawman here.

It's fucking mainstream news.  I still don't know where you found your source about him not being Tunisian.  Every mainstream media source I've viewed says he's a Muslim from Tunisia so since I have proof in the form of media sources such as the BBC, and just about every other news source you can google.

I'm guessing that reading isn't your strong suit. I didn't say he wasn't Tunisian. I said that the Tunisian government denied that he was Tunisian.

If you're not up to this sort of detail, all you have to do is say as much. I will dumb it down for you as much as you need.

I'm not going to cry PC but I will ask.....

I saw on the television on BBC that this man is a Tunisian Muslim so i think he's a Tunisian Muslim.  What does this say about me?  I'm probably a xenophobic Islamophobic white nationalist I'll bet.

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38392128

Here's the link by the way to the BBC article from one day ago.

I can see how where it says someone in the Tunisian government must have claimed he isn't Tunisian but it also does say that his brother is back there in Tunisia and that his school records and criminal records all indicate him being Tunisian.  Which is why the news sources refar to him as the Tunisian suspect.

That's great. How does it advance the conversation about assumptions people make?

Remember, immediately after the OKC bombing, McVeigh was described as a Muslim. And after 9/11, a Sikh was killed (in Arizona, iirc) because he was wearing a turban and the American, out of ignorance, assumed he was Muslim, and out of bigotry decided to kill him.

So when folks come shopping assumptions, I will always question them. It doesn't mean that I'm always right, but it does mean that the folks making the assumptions are being dumbfucks. Because going off half-cocked is not reasonable or rational. Surely even someone as lowbrow as you understands that.

Sorry if that opinion hurts your widdle feelings ... find a safe-zone, there there, you'll be fine, Cupcake.

[Autumnlicious]

Rumor has it that a lot of murderers are men.

Therefore we should do {{something}} (whatever that something is... I don't know, maybe ban them from immigrating?)

Honestly, some people in this thread are practicing abysmally shallow threat assessment. Shame they can vote.

[paulpablo]

haha ok so because I didn't provide links to my evidence the evidence definitely does not exist and therefore I definitely made an assumption.

I'll refer you to my earlier post, and ask you to think. I'm guardedly optimistic about my first request, but distinctly skeptical about the latter.

I'll give you a little time to go find a dictionary to look up those big words that were giving you so much trouble the other day ... I'm a patient guy.

Also, just so I can irritate Private Butthurt a little more, you're building a strawman here.

It's fucking mainstream news.  I still don't know where you found your source about him not being Tunisian.  Every mainstream media source I've viewed says he's a Muslim from Tunisia so since I have proof in the form of media sources such as the BBC, and just about every other news source you can google.

I'm guessing that reading isn't your strong suit. I didn't say he wasn't Tunisian. I said that the Tunisian government denied that he was Tunisian.

If you're not up to this sort of detail, all you have to do is say as much. I will dumb it down for you as much as you need.

I'm not going to cry PC but I will ask.....

I saw on the television on BBC that this man is a Tunisian Muslim so i think he's a Tunisian Muslim.  What does this say about me?  I'm probably a xenophobic Islamophobic white nationalist I'll bet.

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38392128

Here's the link by the way to the BBC article from one day ago.

I can see how where it says someone in the Tunisian government must have claimed he isn't Tunisian but it also does say that his brother is back there in Tunisia and that his school records and criminal records all indicate him being Tunisian.  Which is why the news sources refar to him as the Tunisian suspect.

That's great. How does it advance the conversation about assumptions people make?

Remember, immediately after the OKC bombing, McVeigh was described as a Muslim. And after 9/11, a Sikh was killed (in Arizona, iirc) because he was wearing a turban and the American, out of ignorance, assumed he was Muslim, and out of bigotry decided to kill him.

So when folks come shopping assumptions, I will always question them. It doesn't mean that I'm always right, but it does mean that the folks making the assumptions are being dumbfucks. Because going off half-cocked is not reasonable or rational. Surely even someone as lowbrow as you understands that.

Sorry if that opinion hurts your widdle feelings ... find a safe-zone, there there, you'll be fine, Cupcake.

You don't hurt my feelings I just think you're talking like a pretentious twat.

You're saying I'm making an assumption about him being Muslim when there's as much proof out there as there can possibly be without being able to read his mind.

You've come into the convo without an ounce of doubt that you could possibly be wrong about me making an assumption, you didn't even ask what proof or sources I have before you said I've made an assumption about him being Muslim.

You said sarcastically you'd love to see my source now you see it and your only reply is that these sources can make mistakes.  Look into what the source says and you can clearly see their proof is a little beyond this guy was wearing a turban.

something taken for granted; a supposition: This is the definition of assumption.  I didn't just suppose he was Muslim.  I saw it on the news.  Now the news might be wrong, or even if he says he's a Muslim he might be lying I don't know.  But I didn't just randomly suppose he was a Muslim.

You really really do talk down to people a lot and it doesn't hurt anyone's feelings. Guaranteed the way you talk to people combined with the posing with guitars makes you look pretentious/laughable.

---

Rumor has it that a lot of murderers are men.

Therefore we should do {{something}} (whatever that something is... I don't know, maybe ban them from immigrating?)

Honestly, some people in this thread are practicing abysmally shallow threat assessment. Shame they can vote.

Who?

[Thumpalumpacus]

You don't hurt my feelings I just think you're talking like a pretentious twat.

Yeah, and I think you're being a dumbfuck -- as usual.

You're saying I'm making an assumption about him being Muslim when there's as much proof out there as there can possibly be without being able to read his mind.

No, I'm not, dumbass. I was replying inside the moment and commenting about assumptions twenty hours ago. Do you have enough neurons to keep up?

You've come into the convo without an ounce of doubt that you could possibly be wrong about me making an assumption, you didn't even ask what proof or sources I have before you said I've made an assumption about him being Muslim.

Lol, I wasn't even replying to you in the first place. I was replying to Alpha [sic] Male.

You said sarcastically you'd love to see my source now you see it and your only reply is that these sources can make mistakes.  Look into what the source says and you can clearly see their proof is a little beyond this guy was wearing a turban.

You're still missing my point, unsurprisingly ... you've never shown yourself to be terribly quick, and this is no exception. I will once more reiterate to you that my point was not about the killer, but about the public assumptions. I'd love to trust that you're smart enough to pick up on that, but I'm wise enough to see that you ain't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. So forgive me while I type slow and put it in kindergarten script:

It's about the assumptions, dumbass.

I hope that clears up things.

something taken for granted; a supposition: This is the definition of assumption.  I didn't just suppose he was Muslim.  I saw it on the news.  Now the news might be wrong, or even if he says he's a Muslim he might be lying I don't know.  But I didn't just randomly suppose he was a Muslim.

Oh, really? You didn't just hear this news that a lorry ploughed through a crowd and didn't think, "Goddamn it, it's one of those ragheads again"?

You really expect me to believe that, what with your posting history? I might have fallen off the cabbage truck, kid, but I didn't fall off yesterday.

You really really do talk down to people a lot and it doesn't hurt anyone's feelings.

You deserve it, and it clearly hit a soft spot ... and deservedly so.

Guaranteed the way you talk to people combined with the posing with guitars makes you look pretentious/laughable.

... says the guys who brags online about shagging ugly gals, and then the next week worries his nails for fear of the STD test. Not even smart enough to know how to install a condom, yet bold enough to issue online lectures?

Color me unimpressed. 3/10, you play a little wanky guitar, no feeling, no musicality, and in your posting no brains.



When your opinion is important to me, I'll let you know.

[paulpablo]

Turns out the real suspect is now a Muslim Tunisian asylum seeker not a Muslim Pakistani refugee.

He was refused asylum, yes. Germany tried to send him back, but Tunisia said he wasn't Tunisian.

Given that, I reckon my point stands; he's only a suspect, and the thought that he's Muslim remains an assumption.

Ok, let's rewind back to this.

It looks like you're saying the thought he's a Muslim is an asusmption.

To assume something (to make an assumption) is to take something for granted. To believe something because you feel it is obvious or self-evidently true, rather than because you have evidence.

My argument is that you're wrong because there is evidence this man is a Muslim.  I provided the news source, which there are more of. 

And this news source and others were availaible at the time when I made the statement.

Will the next post be where you claim to be too smart to argue with me and give up?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I would advise you to look into the difference between the present-tense and past-tense verbs, because as I've already made clear, you're harboring butthurt about a comment I made over twenty hours ago about assumptions even as in the interim I've already acknowledged the facts on the ground directly to you.

You're either spoiling for an argument, or woefully dull.

Will the next post be where you claim to be too smart to argue with me and give up?

lol, you should be so lucky!

[paulpablo]

I would advise you to look into the difference between the present-tense and past-tense verbs, because as I've already made clear, you're harboring butthurt about a comment I made over twenty hours ago about assumptions even as in the interim I've already acknowledged the facts on the ground directly to you.

You're either spoiling for an argument, or woefully dull.

Will the next post be where you claim to be too smart to argue with me and give up?

lol, you should be so lucky!

Right so explain what you mean.

I thought that when you said the thought he's a Muslim remains an assumption that you mean't the thought he's a Muslim remains an assumption, I don't know what other way to take it.

And that kind of sounds condecending because I'm basically saying I thought you meant what you said, because it's right there in black and white but I don't know how else to put it across to you.

At the time it wasn't an assumption because at the time I made the comment he's a Muslim there was already evidence pointing to him being a Muslim.

It wasn't an assumption then, not an assumption now, past tense, present tense, future tense, I wouldn't have thought whatever tense was used was of any importance.

If I said he's a baker, and then you say the thought he's a baker is an assumption.  Then I reply with no, my friends have already told me he's a baker.  Then it doesn't really matter what tense is being used in any sentence I would have thought.