I think maybe if we combined your IQ and Mental's IQ we might, just might get three digits.
The vast majority of killing of Muslims in the ME is being done by.........(wait for it).........Muslims.
Canadians voice support for Muslims amid ‘hatred’ unleashed at Liberal MP
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
I think maybe if we combined your IQ and Mental's IQ we might, just might get three digits.
The vast majority of killing of Muslims in the ME is being done by.........(wait for it).........Muslims.
That means as much as the vast majority of killing of Americans in the US are done by Americans.
Such an idiot.
219 dead in 15 months and a country with suspended individual rights is not at peace you fool.
Only 516 Canadians died in the three years of the Korean War.
I guess we were at peace then too, huh?
What if muslim countries quit threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the earth?
Who is exploiting the resource of Muslim countries? Last I heard OPEC was setting the price of oil in the muddle east. Seems like all the exploiting is being done by muslim leaders.
the vast majority of white people who are victims of murder are committed by white people in western nations, what's your point? i mean when a demographic of a nation is predominantly a certain "race", crime will likely be perpetrated by that certain "race". this says nothing.
but how many innocent white Americans are at a wedding, or in hospital and have bombs dropped on to them by Muslim imperialists? Zero that's right.
but how many innocent white Americans are at a wedding, or in hospital and have bombs dropped on to them by Muslim imperialists? Zero that's right.
219 is far fewer than the number terrorist attacks from decades past. We've consistently had fewer terrorist attacks since they peaked in the 1970s.
Quite possibly. Wouldn't want democracy to run rampant amonst the stone age dictatorships that surround Israel.
The rates of terrorism in Western Europe, according to the Global Terrorism Database, were much higher from 1972 to 1992 than they were in 2015, and 2015 was a terrible year for terrorism. Not that it was great in the '70s and '80s, because there were high rates of terrorism, but Europe survived and Europe will survive this round of [terror] attacks.
Terrorist movements always fail. They go out of existence. They do not achieve their strategic aims. Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, and Basque Country is still part of Spain, and Israel continues to exist … the list goes on and on.
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/16/12486586/2016-worst-year-ever-violence-trump-terrorism
Terrorist movements always fail. They go out of existence. They do not achieve their strategic aims. Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, and Basque Country is still part of Spain, and Israel continues to exist … the list goes on and on.
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/16/12486586/2016-worst-year-ever-violence-trump-terrorism
What changed? Couldn't be diligence could it?
DEVELOPMENT OF AVIATION SECURITY
Two major events caused the public to exert pressure on the U.S. government to implement security procedures at airports and to mandate security requirements for U.S. air carriers. The first was the increase in the incidence of hijackings during the late 1960s and early 1970s (see figure 1-1), which resulted in the establishment of Anti-Hijacking Program of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The second event was the destruction of Pan American Airlines Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, on December 21, 1988, which resulted in the creation of the President's Commission on Airline Security and Terrorism in 1989 and the enactment of the recommendations of that commission into the Aviation Security Improvement Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-604).
FAA Anti-Hijacking Program
On September 11, 1970, President Richard Nixon announced "a program to deal with airplane hijacking," which ordered air carriers to deploy "surveillance equipment and techniques to all appropriate airports in the United States." The president further instructed the Departments of Defense and Transportation to work with the U.S. air carrier industry to determine if metal detectors and x-ray devices used by the military could assist in preventing hijackings. On February 1, 1972, the FAA issued a rule requiring air carriers to use a screening system, acceptable to the FAA, that would require screening all passengers "by one or more of the following systems: behavioral profile, magnetometer, identification check, physical search." Hijackings continued and on December 5, 1972, the FAA issued emergency rules that required screening all passengers and carry-on baggage on all certified, scheduled passenger aircraft. The anti-hijacking or screening program currently used by U.S. air carriers is almost identical to the program initiated in 1972. This program requires air carriers to implement a security program capable of preventing the introduction of weapons and explosive or incendiary devices aboard an aircraft. Since the issuance of this rule, the screening program has been improved in terms of training procedures, x-ray and metal-detector standards, access control specifications, employment standards, and testing requirements.
As a result of the increased incidence of hijacking and sabotage of U.S. air carriers in the past quarter century, numerous statutes, treaties, and regulations have been promulgated by a variety of entities to establish the current U.S. civil aviation security system (see appendix A). Air carriers, airports, and the FAA each have specific roles to play in ensuring airport security, as outlined in table 1-1
PASSENGER SCREENING
Approximately 1.5 million commercial aviation passengers are screened in the United States each day for weapons and dangerous articles prior to boarding an airplane. Passengers place their carry-on baggage on a conveyor belt for inspection by x-ray equipment, and they walk through a portal that detects the presence of metallic objects. If the metal-detecting portal sounds an alarm, passengers are searched further to determine the cause of the alarm and to ensure that they are not carrying objects that could be a threat to aviation security. These alarm-clearing search procedures employ either a hand-wand metal detector or a physical pat-down search. The technologies for detecting metallic objects are mature, and the manner in which these technologies are implemented to ensure airport and air carrier security is familiar to travelers.
However, these technologies are not capable of detecting nonmetallic weapons, plastic explosives, and other dangerous materials. The FAA is working to make current technologies more effective and to develop new technologies with wider applicability. As these new technologies mature, issues regarding their implementation in airports, including passenger acceptance and air carrier and airport accommodation, will become important factors in determining which technologies will be appropriate for airport use.
The Panel on Passenger Screening investigated a variety of nontechnology issues related to the implementation of new screening technologies to assist the FAA in identifying the most promising technologies. The panel reviewed potential screening devices or methods currently under consideration by the FAA for use in airports. The panel also assessed aspects of each method that could cause public concern over such issues as health risks involved (e.g., exposure to radiation), privacy, and traveler comfort, in light of current and anticipated health regulations, and privacy laws. The panel considered ways in which the methods could be implemented to maintain high levels of effectiveness, while minimizing health risks and increasing public acceptance. The panel also identified key factors that could affect their implementation, considering mitigating strategies and alternate screening methods for those passengers who wish to avoid the automated system. Methods for clearing alarms also were discussed.
Because both current and new technologies require security personnel to supplement the automated system when a passenger sets off the alarm, the panel considered the operator as an integral part of the entire passenger screening system.
Diligence!
So why bother with seat belts and airbags?
Rate of deaths from terrorism worldwide, 1970-2007
No, I need them to help propagate the truth.
No, I need them to help propagate the truth.
Last edited:
@CBCPolitics Drug dealers = irregular pharmacists? Loan sharks = irregular bankers? CBC = irregular journalism?
CBC PoliticsVerified account@CBCPolitics
Two Tory MPs call on Ottawa to stop irregular Canada-U.S. border crossings http://ift.tt/2lb9Lgz #hw #cdnpoli
Two Tory MPs call on Ottawa to stop irregular Canada-U.S. border crossings - Manitoba - CBC News
#progwurdz
CBC PoliticsVerified account@CBCPolitics
Two Tory MPs call on Ottawa to stop irregular Canada-U.S. border crossings http://ift.tt/2lb9Lgz #hw #cdnpoli
Two Tory MPs call on Ottawa to stop irregular Canada-U.S. border crossings - Manitoba - CBC News
#progwurdz
A Conservative Discovers the Racist Right
Throughout American history, there have been periodic opportunities to make real headway against racism if only both parties had provided a united front. But that's never happened. One party or the other has always found the votes of white racists too alluring to ignore.
As the number of white racists declines, it should be easier to reject them, but instead just the opposite has happened. In our 50-50 nation, even a smallish bloc is far too large to actively repudiate. Trump may be the last gasp of white racial anxiety in America, or he might represent the start of a global white nationalist movement. I hope for the former and fear for the latter. Either way, it would be nice if both parties recognized the danger.
A Conservative Discovers the Racist Right | Mother Jones
Throughout American history, there have been periodic opportunities to make real headway against racism if only both parties had provided a united front. But that's never happened. One party or the other has always found the votes of white racists too alluring to ignore.
As the number of white racists declines, it should be easier to reject them, but instead just the opposite has happened. In our 50-50 nation, even a smallish bloc is far too large to actively repudiate. Trump may be the last gasp of white racial anxiety in America, or he might represent the start of a global white nationalist movement. I hope for the former and fear for the latter. Either way, it would be nice if both parties recognized the danger.
A Conservative Discovers the Racist Right | Mother Jones