so anything between 60 to 80 % according to which source you useNo list in the link and no breakdown of the ethnicity or religious affiliation of the forces involved. It's hard to trust your number crunching on this one. 80% sounds like a number you used because it's used a lot.
Fucking hell, didn't think I could make it much clearer.again I’ll remind you
if you seen a video of group of white people outside a hotel shouting get the motherfuckers. you would be fine with that and say they are entitled to their opinion?
takes all of 5 mins to work out how many of those countries have a vast majority of Muslim population
Does it? Looking up close to 100 countries mentioned in there and checking their religlious make up via a reputable source might take Johnny Five that long but I doubt you did that. You want it to be 80%, you want it to 'the Muslims', and you shared a link you found thinking 'slam dunk'. We get it.
Fuck me do you not get bored of posting Gif’s, embarrassing really
look above you lemon. it’s there in black and white unless sources are not good enough for you and if your maths isn’t great 22 out of 28 is 80%
You managed to get an AI generated search result summary to give you the answer you wanted. You might be right, you might be twisting the word 'involve' to suit your point. I'm not fussed.
You've done a good job of proving that you want to talk about the Manchester incident because it's a chance to rant about Muslims. Just start an 'Islam is bad' thread and get on with it. Keep it simple.
god help you in the real world
The AI results are often wrong.lol I don’t put the data in
AI is there to gather the info
you really hate facts being presented to you. god help you in the real world
must be strange living in your fantasy world or more likely living under a carpet where you hate being proved wrong
The AI results are often wrong.
No, they are actually often wrong.they’re wrong when it doesn’t fit your narrative
if they backed it up you would be all over them and that’s a fact
No, they are actually often wrong.
lol I don’t put the data in
AI is there to gather the info
you really hate facts being presented to you. god help you in the real world
must be strange living in your fantasy world or more likely living under a carpet where you hate being proved wrong
You absolutely do put the data in, by prompting AI you are specifying what answer you want. No idea if that’s the case here but don’t just blindly trust whatever a chatbot spits out.
It’s got nothing to do about a narrative. They’re often wrong and it’s been widely highlighted.I’ve showed numerous links and then asked Google for info
what makes me laugh when you present the info all of sudden it’s wrong because it doesn’t suit the narrative
people can see it in black and white and to claim it’s wrong makes their argument look even weaker.
I got asked to prove it, I did in numerous ways and still get shot down. it’s amazing how people can’t take the truth
Hahaha fair enough if you believe they can actually do that.and? Probably got more brain cells than you going by that
I do love how people make themselves look silly when they can’t back counteract a discussion
not one person has countered my claims because they can’t
I
It’s got nothing to do about a narrative. They’re often wrong and it’s been widely highlighted.
No, they are actually often wrong.
Paul Simon's song wouldn't have had the same ring to it.Just a word of caution to those using Google and 'sources' to prove facts. Always check the dates on those sources that AI provide
not one person has countered my claims...
go on. enlighten me? Scotland Yard is HQ not a holding place with cells
Too woke then!🫣No, it's only the HQ of the Metropolitan police, home of the real authority within the Met. Not Reg Hollis down at Sun Hill or wherever.
Would you care to include the actual question you asked google to get that answer, as you seem to have quite handily cut it from the screenshot.so anything between 60 to 80 % according to which source you use
so please stop making a fool of yourself
View attachment 44274
"Please show me a list of examples of all wars where around 80% of them were caused by Muslims"Would you care to include the actual question you asked google to get that answer, as you seem to have quite handily cut it from the screenshot.
How can I put this politely. You are buying into the narrative of a racist idiot, so yes, it matters.
Of course it matters where you get the content from - do you believe everything you read? You should be concerned about who you're using to give you your world view, and what that says about you.
I'm going to say this again, because depressingly, it never seems to stick.
If you think all Muslims are the same (and let's not pretend you're thinking of them being all the same in a positive way) you are a racist.
So, what is your issue with Muslims, mate? What "wrongdoing" is it that you and Tommy think that they are all guilty of, that the rest of us are ignoring?
Yes and it's being investigated.
I'm not sure, but how can you safely shoot someone when they're grappling with police officers (or anyone)?
And anyway, police just can't shoot an unarmed man. I can't believe this is even a question tbh.
Police clearly can shoot an unarmed man. That’s been now established.
As for not being sure there was no violence before I’m astonished you haven’t read about court proceedings.
*they can't shoot an unarmed man except in the most exceptional circumstances.
Fucking hell.
I'm amazed there aren't literally hundreds of people being gunned down by the police every day given how lax the rules apparently are.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?