More French riots

[Orwell]

No.

Checking a thesaurus I see that synonyms for "trivial" are atomic, commonplace, diminutive, evanescent, everyday, flimsy, frivolous, immaterial, inappreciable, incidental, inconsequential, inconsiderable, insignificant, irrelevant, little, meager, mean, meaningless, microscopic, minor, minute, momentary, negligible, nonessential, nugatory, paltry, petty, piddling*, puny, rinky-dink, scanty, skin-deep*, slight, small, small-town, superficial, trifling, trite, two-bit, unimportant, valueless, vanishing, wee, and worthless.

Synonyms for "obvious" are accessible, barefaced, bright, clear, conclusive, conspicuous, discernible, distinct, distinguishable, evident, explicit, exposed, glaring, in evidence, indisputable, lucid, manifest, noticeable, observable, open, outstanding, overt, palpable, patent, perceivable, perceptible, plain, precise, prominent, pronounced, public, recognizable, self-evident, self-explanatory, straightforward, transparent, unconcealed, undeniable, understandable, undisguised, unmistakable, unsubtle, and visible.

Trivial

Adjective

S: (adj) fiddling, footling, lilliputian, little, niggling, piddling, piffling, petty, picayune, trivial ((informal) small and of little importance) "a fiddling sum of money"; "a footling gesture"; "our worries are lilliputian compared with those of countries that are at war"; "a little (or small) matter"; "a dispute over niggling details"; "limited to petty enterprises"; "piffling efforts"; "giving a police officer a free meal may be against the law, but it seems to be a picayune infraction"
S: (adj) trivial (obvious and dull) "trivial conversation"; "commonplace prose"
S: (adj) superficial, trivial (of little substance or significance) "a few superficial editorial changes"; "only trivial objections"
S: (adj) trivial (concerned with trivialities) "a trivial young woman"; "a trivial mind"
S: (adj) insignificant, trivial (not large enough to consider or notice)

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=trivial

Get a life, Thycrotch... A sense of humour would probably help too.

 

[Belz...]

On doit éviter les choses écrites par les sympathisants du Front National parce ce sont des racistes. Et, en ce qui me concerne, les gens qui des idées racistes n'ont pas de crédibilité: ils ont tendance à croire n'importe quoi, tant que ça renforce leurs préjugés.

C'est malheureusement vrai de bien des gens qui ont des opinions.

 

[Belz...]

Aucun il n'est pas clair. Cela ressemble à de la propagande.

Was that google-translated ?

 

[Belz...]

It isn't? Are you claiming the rioters aren't overwhelmingly Muslim?

It would bear pointing out, however, using a hyperbole, that the fact that they are also all mammals doesn't seem relevant, so one would need to know if the FACT that they are muslims has anything to do with their motivations.

Not saying I agree or disagree, I'm just pointing out this fact.

 

[Orwell]

C'est malheureusement vrai de bien des gens qui ont des opinions.

Bien vrai. Mais cela n'est pas évident la plupart du temps, pas trop clair, car les opinions ne sont pas extrêmes. Les racistes nous rendent la vie plus facile: leur racisme indique très clairement leur manque d'objectivité.

 

[Mycroft]

Trivial

Adjective
<snip>

Questionable, but not worth pursuing any further.

Declaring something "obvious" is not the same as offering evidence. It does not make for a strong argument.

Get a life, Thycrotch... A sense of humour would probably help too.

Name-calling also does not make your argument stronger. You have been reported, again.

 

[Orwell]

Questionable, but not worth pursuing any further.

Tell that to Princeton U.

Declaring something "obvious" is not the same as offering evidence. It does not make for a strong argument.

I was not presenting evidence. I was telling you why I think that Reuters didn't bother with using "muslims" to describe the rioters because it is a well known fact that religion is not directly involved. The main riots took place several months ago, and they have been amply discussed and analysed in the French media. Some of these things ahve been translated. Go see for yourself: you have a computer, there's google, do the research.

But if you're feeling lazy, here's the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Paris_suburb_riots

The head of the French intelligence agency (Renseignements généraux - RG) denied any Islamic factor in the riots, while the New York Times reported on November 5, 2005 that "while a majority of the youths committing the acts are Muslim, and of African or North African origin" local residents say that "second-generation Portuguese immigrants and even some children of native French have taken part." [25]

the neutrality of the article is disputed, though.

Name-calling also does not make your argument stronger. You have been reported, again.

Really, Mycroft: get a life, would ya?

 

[Huntster]

....BTW, they are also overwhelmingly wearing clothes inspired from LA "gangsta culture" and listening to French rap music, which can be verified by watching the news on French TV. Curiously, no press agency seems to stress the possible correlation with these facts and violence

Ahhhh, the L.A. riot culture.

Is it just car burning, or are Muslim owned businesses being burned and looted, as well?

I hope the French government doesn't have to rebuild the Muslim neighborhoods repeatedly, because of the guilt of what it has done to those poor souls..........

 

[Huntster]

Was that google-translated ?

Nope.

 

[Orwell]

Nope.

Je ne vous crois pas.

 

[Huntster]

You don't know much about French politics, do you?...

No, I don't.

However, I'm very familiar with the Culture Wars of the West, and I'll take the conservative side each and every time.

I would hope that the Front National is not anti-semetic, but I'm very familiar with how Pat Buchanan was painted with that brush, and I have a whole lot of experience with leftist propaganda, so I'll just let the French people get sick and tired of leftist failures (like the Canadians are doing), and hope that as the pendulum swings back to the right it doesn't go too far.

 

[Orwell]

No, I don't.

However, I'm very familiar with the Culture Wars of the West, and I'll take the conservative side each and every time.

I would hope that the Front National is not anti-semetic, but I'm very familiar with how Pat Buchanan was painted with that brush, and I have a whole lot of experience with leftist propaganda, so I'll just let the French people get sick and tired of leftist failures (like the Canadians are doing), and hope that as the pendulum swings back to the right it doesn't go too far.

Pat Buchanan In His Own Words

On Jews

Buchanan referred to Capitol Hill as "Israeli-occupied territory." (St. Louis Post Dispatch, 10/20/90)

During the Gulf crisis: "There are only two groups that are beating the drums for war in the Middle East -- the Israeli defense ministry and its 'amen corner' in the United States." ("McLaughlin Group," 8/26/90)

In a 1977 column, Buchanan said that despite Hitler's anti-Semitic and genocidal tendencies, he was "an individual of great courage...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path." (The Guardian, 1/14/92)

Writing of "group fantasies of martyrdom," Buchanan challenged the historical record that thousands of Jews were gassed to death by diesel exhaust at Treblinka: "Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody." (New Republic, 10/22/90) Buchanan's columns have run in the Liberty Lobby's Spotlight, the German-American National PAC newsletter and other publications that claim Nazi death camps are a Zionist concoction.

Buchanan called for closing the U.S. Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations, which prosecuted Nazi war criminals, because it was "running down 70-year-old camp guards." (New York Times, 4/21/87)

Buchanan was vehement in pushing President Reagan -- despite protests -- to visit Germany's Bitburg cemetery, where Nazi SS troops were buried. At a White House meeting, Buchanan reportedly reminded Jewish leaders that they were "Americans first" -- and repeatedly scrawled the phrase "Succumbing to the pressure of the Jews" in his notebook. Buchanan was credited with crafting Ronald Reagan's line that the SS troops buried at Bitburg were "victims just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps." (New York Times, 5/16/85; New Republic, 1/22/96)

After Cardinal O'Connor criticized anti-Semitism during the controversy over construction of a convent near Auschwitz, Buchanan wrote: "If U.S. Jewry takes the clucking appeasement of the Catholic cardinalate as indicative of our submission, it is mistaken. When Cardinal O'Connor of New York seeks to soothe the always irate Elie Wiesel by reassuring him 'there are many Catholics who are anti-Semitic'...he speaks for himself. Be not afraid, Your Eminence; just step aside, there are bishops and priests ready to assume the role of defender of the faith." (New Republic, 10/22/90)

The Buchanan '96 campaign's World Wide Web site included an article blaming the death of White House aide Vincent Foster on the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad -- and alleging that Foster and Hillary Clinton were Mossad spies. (The campaign removed the article after its existence was reported by a Jewish on-line news service; Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 2/21/96.)

In his September 1993 speech to the Christian Coalition, Buchanan declared: "Our culture is superior. Our culture is superior because our religion is Christianity and that is the truth that makes men free." (ADL Report, 1994)

 

[BPSCG]

I was not presenting evidence. I was telling you why I think that Reuters didn't bother with using "muslims" to describe the rioters because it is a well known fact that religion is not directly involved.

Excellent. It's a "well known fact that religion is not directly involved," but your reply to any demand for evidence of this claim is, "I was not presenting evidence."

[sidetrack, not a derail]
Okay, class, now what do we call a claim that is not backed up by any evidence? Yes, Jimmy?

"A hypothesis, Mr. BPSCG."

"Excellent, Jimmy, you've been paying attention. And what do we need to turn a hypothesis into a fact? Susie?"

"Lots of strong evidence, Mr. BPSCG."

"Very good, Susie. Now, how do we know whether the evidence is strong? Orwell, you had your hand up."

"Because I said so, you stupid dootyhead. And Jimbo agrees with me."

"I'm sorry, Orwell, but we discussed last semester why that doesn't work..."
[/sidetrack, not a derail]

I've asked you several times to provide evidence of your claim, but you have not done so.

Is it perhaps because it is, in fact, an untestable claim? Or what we call here an unfalsifiable claim?

Come on, Orwell, put up or shut up. Prove your unfalsifiable claim that, "it is a well known fact that religion is not directly involved" in the current riots.

And try to do it without ad homs, appeals to authority, appeals to the crowd, ipse dixit ("because I said so"), poisoning the well, or any of the other obvious fallacies of argument you are so fond of and have put on display for us here.

 

[daredelvis]

Excellent. It's a "well known fact that religion is not directly involved," but your reply to any demand for evidence of this claim is, "I was not presenting evidence."

[sidetrack, not a derail]
<snip> Strawman <snip>
[/sidetrack, not a derail]

Come on, Orwell, put up or shut up. Prove your unfalsifiable claim that, "it is a well known fact that religion is not directly involved" in the current riots.

And try to do it without ad homs, appeals to authority, appeals to the crowd, ipse dixit ("because I said so"), poisoning the well, or any of the other obvious fallacies of argument you are so fond of and have put on display for us here.

Please provide evidence that “religion was directly involved” in motivating the rioters.

Daredelvis

 

[Mycroft]

Please provide evidence that “religion was directly involved” in motivating the rioters.

Daredelvis

One piece of evidence would be that the rioters are overwhelmingly Muslim.

 

[BPSCG]

Please provide evidence that “religion was directly involved” in motivating the rioters.

I never made that claim, so I will not attempt to back it up. I simply observed that Reuters, in reporting the story, attributed the riots predominantly to African and Arab immigrants, when it could have more economically attributed them primarily to Muslims. I said nothing about their motivations and in at least one post, confessed ignorance regarding them.

Orwell, OTOH, says the riots have nothing to do with religion, "the common thread connecting these rioters isn't religion," "the religion angle is not relevant," "there doesn't seem to be a religious component to these riots" and so forth. Having made those claims, it is his responsibility to prove them.

 

[Orwell]

I find it funny that, in that little jokey "mise-en-scène" posted by BP, he takes the place of the teacher, since in this case the students obviously know more than he does: how's your French, BP?

Anyway, since you seem to be so interested in knowing if religion was part of it or not, why don't you look for yourself? It's not my job to alleviate your ignorance...

 

[BPSCG]

I find it funny that, in that little jokey "mise-en-scène" posted by BP, he takes the place of the teacher, since in this case the students obviously know more than he does: how's your French, BP?

Good enough to have read through your posts earlier today without having to resort to a French-English dictionary. Though Ed only knows why I bothered.

Anyway, since you seem to be so interested in knowing if religion was part of it or not, why don't you look for yourself? It's not my job to alleviate your ignorance...

But it is very much your job to back up your own claims. Or is that how you're getting through your university classes - by getting others to do your research for you?

 

[Orwell]

Good enough to have read through your posts earlier today without having to resort to a French-English dictionary. Though Ed only knows why I bothered.

Could you translate it for us then?

But it is very much your job to back up your own claims. Or is that how you're getting through your university classes - by getting others to do your research for you?

See posts 73, 84, 109.

It's annoying having to prove the bleeding obvious, or what any joker with a fast connection and google can verify.

 

[Mycroft]

See posts 73, 84, 109.

Posts 73 and 84 are more of just you stating your opinion. The only evidence you provide is in post 109 where you link to a wikipedia article where the neutrality is disputed.