BruceVC

Article uses assumption that this attackers are European born and grown. Which means that nobody allowed them in Europe in first place. "European" as second or third generation North Africans and Middle Easterners. The result of an ongoing policy since the end of WWII. You can't come to Europe because your children or your children's children may grow to become terrorists because of things that have happened yet. Sounds reasonable policy, too bad that our politicians didn't understood need for such caution decades ago. Elerond what do you expect your politicians to do? I am interested

I assume there is proof of this claim? Don't leave us hanging. What color is it? There is ALWAYS proof.....but surly you dont need it to believe someone a forum?

Nice, I didnt think you Swedes used cars? I always assumed reindeer pulling a sleigh was how you got around

Yes I know you made a general comment not directed to me, I was just explaining how my experiences may tie in to your view. Come on...it must have felt great when the hottie realized you aren't some indigent , uneducated hillbilly Its not like you need acceptance from anyone but its still fun smashing stereotypes

True, but I'm of the opinion that crappy behavior works both ways. BVC is of the opinion that whoever he feels is oppressed is free to do the same things to others and its totally cool. I think you're being a little harsh on him. Its more I'm being misunderstood, my objectives to achieve social equality are not based on believing minority groups need to oppress groups that use to oppress them I dont believe in the Animal Farm outcome and never have Not quite the same. The animals on Animal Farm didn't oppress the humans. The oppressed the other animals to the point they became just like the humans. Which is pretty inevitable when one group obtains power over another history tells us. Personally on the topic you guys were discussing if reading the words of someone you don't really know or give a f--k about makes someone "feel bad" I'd suggest they drink a shot of whiskey and man the f--k up. Words don't cause injury.* *(Except in cases of libel or slander. just don't tell lies ok?) ' " GD you know how many times I get "insulted " on these forums ? People say I'm ignorant, a troll and other things...imagine if every single time someone said something " nasty " about me I got offended...I would quite possibly be offended every day But I only care what people who I respect say about me so sometimes I may something possibly rude to someone and I dont mean to come across a certain way. That bothers me because obviously you dont want to offend people you like. Like where I wasn't sure if I had annoyed you with the whole " redneck " comment

In my opinion, it's less about "payback", and more about "this is a thing that happens to women more often than it does to men, hence even if the number of women who do it doubles, things still won't be equal". The logic behind getting interrupted = shaming I do not understand, but I'm willing to entertain the possibility of it making sense in context of the actual lecture (lord knows I've seen accomplished scientists in respected fields write presentation headers and text that made absolutely no goddamn sense when read). I was hoping you would get my point, you have a good view of these matters I can explain the point to you in more detail if you interested?

Some people in SA complained that this series was mocking Christianity so the cable channel had to move the show later

I'm dont understand your point,sorry Zora ? Maybe someone can explain what you mean because it sounds interesting ...I'm missing the reason you compare them to Star Wars?

Well its more a suggested official new word in the English dictionary, see below http://www.collinsdictionary.com/submission/16561/manterrupting Well its not acceptable now for men to be interrupted, no one is suggesting that Its just a symbolic word that represents a culture of behavior that some men still practice, I wish I could explain it properly because I'm failing

There's still and appeal to challenge the verdict and even if they lose that, IIRC, Gawker can file for remittitur (?) asking for relief against an excessive verdict. Good points and I'm sure they will appeal....whats your view on the severity of this fine Amentep, I know we discussed this in the past and I ended up accepting that its fine for Gawker to be sued. You made a good argument back then but now that the court hearing is real do you still think its fair?

Okay I'll keep it simple but please understand I'm not saying "no " ...I am just saying there is context The whole concept of a man interrupting a women is historical and represents an aspect of women that have been marginalized for centuries. Its ties into the whole era where women weren't allowed or expected to have an opinion. So its an injustice around gender equality and this term " "manterrupting" for me just symbolizes this metaphorically But men haven't typically ever been in social environments where they weren't allowed to speak as there gender made them perceived to be inferior So yes if you ignore the historical context then being interrupted by a women would or could be seen as shaming but typically because this is not common for men its not considered something shameful ?

True, but I'm of the opinion that crappy behavior works both ways. BVC is of the opinion that whoever he feels is oppressed is free to do the same things to others and its totally cool. I think you're being a little harsh on him. Its more I'm being misunderstood, my objectives to achieve social equality are not based on believing minority groups need to oppress groups that use to oppress them I dont believe in the Animal Farm outcome and never have

But thats not what I believe but I dont have time to explain now, maybe later?

It appears ISIS has now accepted responsibility for the attacks in Brussels

Well I appreciate the honesty because I would rather not make a long post if someone doesn't want me to

C'mon BVC. If "manterrupting" is "shaming" a female, is it the same when a woman interrupts a man? I know you think I'm using double standards but there is a difference, I can explain it if you are interested but it will be a few paragraphs? If you want me to explain please give me 2-3 hours as I have my complex Trustee meeting now and I need to prepare some notes

YOU TAKE THAT BACK! Every one of my posts is a precious pearl of wisdom that can only improve the lives of those that read them. Also definitely some of my posts must be considered very insightful and erudite ?

I couldnt find that word in any dictionary yet I know at times I get interrupted by my lady friends..and I talk a lot so it takes a lot to interrupt me But do we need that word in a dictionary? I dont feel shame getting interrupted by my lady friends?

No its not because the word is used in the struggle to achieve gender equality. So the word would be used by women and men who believe in gender equality and the word represents one of those societal problems that does exist in some places. Its symbolic and has relevance http://www.collinsdictionary.com/submission/16561/manterrupting

Those 7 points seem reasonable to me, which ones dont you think is shaming ? Mods how have you not banned this guy? I mean....it's getting pretty blatant. What because I don't agree with you....all those points are still examples of shaming. You are over-analyzing things

Those 7 points seem reasonable to me, which ones dont you think is shaming ?

It may appear like that but this is a very complicated situation and we need to consider the views of countries directly impacted by the arrival of thousands of refugees the thing is though that, like in the Paris attacks, the perpetrators may prove to be locals and not jihadists that came in among the refugees. Oh dont misunderstand me, you are correct that in some EU countries you already have established Islamic Extremism ....and that will have to be dealt with. But that is a separate issue to sending the refugees back to Turkey. Also I have asked this numerous times...why cant the Sunni countries in the ME like Saudi Arabia, Qatar or UAE take in fellow Muslims? But the expectation is that Western, primarily Christian countries with completely different values and cultural norms will be able to absorb millions ?

The fact that Gawker has been held liable for damages that may or may not run them out of business and consequently indirectly punish their employees (both those guilty and not guilty of the wrongdoing that's causing Gawker to be held for damages) is, by my own estimation, primarily Gawker's (and their guilty employees') fault, not anybody else's. I feel bad for those who haven't done anything who may lose their jobs as a result, but I blame solely Gawker and their fellow employees who did wrong for it. If Gawker doesn't have the money to get away with doing illegal stuff...then maybe they shouldn't have done that illegal stuff. You won't see me saying, "But I don't have the means to withstand the results of a murder trial!" after I decide to murder somebody and get caught for it. ...P.S. I prefer just being openly aggressive rather than passive-aggressive, personally...but that's just me. Barti I would say you equally aggressive and passive-aggressive ?

Yes this is my point, its not fair to punish all Gawker staff

It may appear like that but this is a very complicated situation and we need to consider the views of countries directly impacted by the arrival of thousands of refugees