Jindal: Muslims form 'no-go zones' outside civic control

To "Liberal In Zion" you used a lot of words and said nothing to address the question.

"I listed a French Government web site that listed the sensitive urban areas, or no-go zones, and you say that I am wrong?! That makes sense".

@Red Shirts...Agree I did use a lot of words which apparently you are unable to grasp. Apparently I should attempt another form of communication without using "words"? The website you mentioned IS NOT a government website. Also I'm quite certain you are already aware of this fact the areas mentioned ARE NOT "no go zones" rather information regarding higher crime areas which surround the larger cities of France. If you are familiar with the area which is quite apparent you are not you would understand this key fact. In closing. One notices you are a user of "a lot of words". Possibly the next time you will choose to use these "words" more carefully and most important use factually. Apparently you have no desire or possess the proper information to site sources. You would much prefer to post another non factual rant.

@RedShirtMIT --

"you make me laugh."

I'm happy to bring sunshine into your day. :-)

"Your inability to admit that you agree with me..."

Red -- your claims about your specific interpretations of no-go zones are completely irrelevant to this discussion, because your odd redefinitions are entirely different than what either Jindal or FOX were claiming before FOX admitted to their multiple falsehoods.

"Read "Muslims segregated from French society in growing Islamist mini-states" in the Washington Times."

Hellloooo? As one historian has noted, the Washington Times is "published strictly for the (conservative) movement's benefit, a propaganda sheet whose distortions are so obvious and so alien that it puts one in mind of those official party organs one encounters when traveling in authoritarian countries." Until very recently, that paper was owned by **the Moonies**.

You're not helping your credibility any, Red.

Muslims are no more "colonizing" France and Europe than the Chinese in New York are "colonizing" the US. It's a ludicrous misuse of the word.

FOX made multiple false claims -- and admitted to having made them.

Get over it.

To "Contrariusesters" you make me laugh. Your inability to admit that you agree with me that there are no-go zones all around the world, and that in France and Europe those no go zones are filled with Muslims is laughable.

You also ignore the French government and actual events that are going on there. Read "Muslims segregated from French society in growing Islamist mini-states" in the Washington Times. They report that Muslims in France OPENLY declare that they want a Muslim takeover of France, among other disturbing things. To show that this isn't just a recent thing or anything like that, read "Islam in France: The French Way of Life Is in Danger" from the Middle East Forum. See also "French City with 40% Muslim Population is the Most Dangerous City in Europe" in Front Page Magazine

Experts for 18 years now have noticed that the Muslims want to take over France and possibly Europe. Just because that is politically incorrect to say now, does not change the findings of the experts. The experts will be ignored, and the danger posed by the Muslims in the no-go zones will increase.

Red --

"Why do you keep fighting against the fact that YOU AGREE with me, and would not go into the no-go zones?"

I agree with the FOX News statement, which admitted that they had previously made many false claims about these supposed Muslim no-go zones. Why do you keep disagreeing with FOX?

There is no "colonizing" of countries that are already settled and established, unless their governments are FIRST overthrown.

Muslims are no more "colonizing" France and Europe than the Chinese in New York are "colonizing" the US. It's a ludicrous misuse of the word.

Jindal said Muslim immigrants are seeking "to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that."

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

These supposed "no-go" zones have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Liberal In Zion" you used a lot of words and said nothing to address the question.

I listed a French Government web site that listed the sensitive urban areas, or no-go zones, and you say that I am wrong?! That makes no sense. It is like going outside in the middle of the day and saying it is dark.

To "Coontrariusester" you realize that in the definition of "New Territory" that does not mean that they are going someplace that has never been populated. It means that they go from their original territory to a different, or NEW territory.

Nice try, but epic fail on your part.

FYI, I have not been disputing the statistics that Fox used, I have maintained that there are places that you would not go, and you have agreed with me. Why do you keep fighting against the fact that YOU AGREE with me, and would not go into the no-go zones?

Red --

In case you haven't noticed, neither France nor England are "new territories". They already have established populations and governments, believe it or not. There is no "colonizing" of countries that are already settled and established, unless their governments are FIRST overthrown. Have you seen the French or English governments being thrown out of power lately? No, I didn't think so.

Muslims are no more "colonizing" France and Europe than the Chinese in New York are "colonizing" the US. It's a ludicrous misuse of the word.

Jindal said Muslim immigrants are seeking "to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that."

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

And various Fox commentators promulgated other related and similar lies.

These supposed "no-go" zones have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

@Red Shirts..."Are you calling the French Government lairs. Do you know something that they do not"?

Would enjoy the equal opportunity and ability to retort @Red Shirts however, my comments are now continually placed into a "hold" status or "denied" outright. Apparently this is customary in American newspapers. Unfortunately sources which have actually resided in the specific areas being discussed (France) are ignorantly discredited and or ignored. Like most American Tea Party members your belief is that you are an expert regarding every topic at hand. Apparently this topic being the latest. Even questioning those that have lived in the area being discussed (France) for nearly 20 years! Believe your American "news" source apologized several times for the obsurd comments and "story". Have you asked yourself why? In closing, to answer your question no I do not believe that I know more than the French Government. However, confidently I do believe that I know much more about a country in which I lived then an ultra conservative poster which believes their grossly inaccurate comments are in fact reality. How about question in regards to your "sources". Any from French newspapers or French television?

To "Contrariusest" so, lets clarify the argument about no-go zones and if they exist or not.

You, along with me, and Fox News all say that there are areas in France, Europe, and the US where if you are not part of a specific ethnic/racial group you should not enter without risking your life. That is a no-go zone, barrio, ghetto, or whatever you want to it.

However, you have failed to understand the definition of Colony and are now twisting it so that you can continue to argue.

Tell us what is wrong about calling out the no-go zones that are controlled by Muslims. It doesn't matter if it is a part of a city or an entire city, shouldn't you be concerned that there are areas housing thousands of people that support terrorists in and around major cities throughout Europe?

@Red --

"The definition of a colony is "a body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state". Therefore, per the dictionary the Muslims that are in Europe are a colony. Or do you know more than the dictionary?"

Red -- in case you haven't noticed, neither France nor England are "new territories". They already have established populations and governments, believe it or not.

;-D

Jindal said Muslim immigrants are seeking "to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that."

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

These supposed "no-go" zones have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Contrariusest" you are the one who apparently can't get over it.

You make me laugh because even when you agree with me, you can't admit it. You have to fight against it.

The definition of a colony is "a body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state". Therefore, per the dictionary the Muslims that are in Europe are a colony. Or do you know more than the dictionary?

Just say it. Yes, there are no-go zones that are Muslim Colonies.

@Red --

"Would you go into the "slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them" areas if you were not part of that racial/ethnic group?"

I wouldn't even go into slums containing white-Anglo-Protestant populations if I could help it -- and that's my OWN racial/ethnic group.

Avoidance of slums has nothing to do with particular racial/ethnic groups -- it has to do with poverty and **crime rates**. And the existence of slums has nothing to do with supposed insidious plots of certain religions to gain power.

Jindal said Muslim immigrants are seeking "to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that."

This is a lie. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is a lie. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

These supposed "no-go" zones have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Contrariusest" you are still avoiding the question.

Would you go into the "slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them" areas if you were not part of that racial/ethnic group?

The answer that we all know is that you would not go into those zones. In France those zones are filled with Muslims who have entered the country and seek out other Muslims or Muslim neighborhoods.

I am sorry that you can't see it, but the fact is that there are places you would not go that are overrun by Muslims. How they came to be or why they exist is not the point. The point is that there are places that you and people like you would not go. Hence the term no-go zones.

Keep running away from the issue, but we all can see clearly that you don't want to admit that there are places that you would not go because of racial or ethnic groups that have taken over.

@Red --

Bobby Jindal accused Muslims in France of attempting to infiltrate and colonize France. "Jindal said some immigrants are seeking 'to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that.'"

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator on Fox claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

And various Fox commentators promulgated other related and similar falsehoods.

These supposed "no-go" zones are nothing more than the economically and socially disadvantaged areas that we see in any developed country -- slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them. They have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Contrarius" the fact remains that there are places that you would not go unless you belonged to or could blend in with the ethnic/racial group in an area. If there are places like that throughout Europe and the US, you have no-go zones. That is the issue at hand. You cannot admit that you agree that there are places you would not go, and it is because of the ethnic/racial group that has colonized those areas.

@RedShirtUofU --

Bobby Jindal accused Muslims in France of attempting to infiltrate and colonize France. "Jindal said some immigrants are seeking 'to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that.'"

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator on Fox claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

And various Fox commentators promulgated other related and similar falsehoods.

These supposed "no-go" zones are nothing more than the economically and socially disadvantaged areas that we see in any developed country -- slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them. They have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Contrariuserer" so you are saying that there are areas within France, the US, and throughout Europe where you don't go, unless you are part of the cultural/ethnic group that inhabits that area or the police. So, you agree that those zones or areas are no-go zones.

You can deny it all you want, but we all know that there are places in France (not just Paris) or England where you would be very concerned for your safety that are filled with Muslims. The French Government knows this, and that is why they have produced maps showing those areas where you should be concerned.

You can admit it, that there are places within the US and Europe that you would be frightened to enter and would avoid going. It is ok to agree with a conservative, you will not die.

@RedShirtUofU --

"you are saying that as a white person you would not enter into a ghetto that is overrun with black gang members. I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like a no-go zone."

Red --

Bobby Jindal accused Muslims in France of attempting to infiltrate and colonize France. "Jindal said some immigrants are seeking 'to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that.'"

This is not true. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator on Fox claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is not true. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

And various Fox commentators promulgated other related and similar falsehoods.

These supposed "no-go" zones are nothing more than the economically and socially disadvantaged areas that we see in any developed country -- slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them. They have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

@RedShirtUofU --

"you are saying that as a white person you would not enter into a ghetto that is overrun with black gang members. I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like a no-go zone."

Red --

Bobby Jindal accused Muslims in France of attempting to infiltrate and colonize France. "Jindal said some immigrants are seeking 'to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that.'"

This is a lie. The Muslims neither "set up their own enclaves" nor "demanded recognition of a no-go zone".

A conservative commentator on Fox claimed that the entire city of Birmingham was a Muslim no-go zone. This is a lie. 80% of the population of Birmingham isn't even Muslim.

And various Fox commentators promulgated other related and similar lies.

These supposed "no-go" zones are nothing more than the economically and socially disadvantaged areas that we see in any developed country -- slums, barrios, ghettos, whatever you want to call them. They have nothing whatsoever to do with supposed Muslim infiltration or colonization.

Get over it.

To "Contrariuserer" so you are saying that as a white person you would not enter into a ghetto that is overrun with black gang members. I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like a no-go zone.

How about the Hispanic ghettos that resemble Mexico more than they do the US and are also overrun with Mexican gangs and drug dealers? We already know that you wouldn't step foot in those areas. Isn't that essentially a colony of Hispanics in the US?

Try as you might, you wouldn't go into the no-go zones without protection or doing something to hide who you really area.

@RedShirtUofU --

"so you are saying that a white person should have no reason to fear going into a ghetto that is full of black gang members?"

You know perfectly well that I never said any such things.

On the other hand, I would also not accuse the black gang members of trying to infiltrate and colonize America, as Bobby Jindal did with the Muslims in France.

To "Contrariuserer" so you are saying that a white person should have no reason to fear going into a ghetto that is full of black gang members? Would you go into an one of the sensitive urban zones, slums, or whatever you want to call them without some sort of protection or changing your appearance in some way to blend in?

@RedShirtUofU --

"Are you calling the government of France a liar? They have a map of "Sensitive Urban Zones", which are the no-go zones being discussed. Do you know something that the Government of France does not?"

Give it up, Red. These "sensitive urban zones" are merely the same sorts of economically disadvantaged zones that any modern countries have -- barrios, ghettos, slums, whatever you want to label them. They are NOT the evidence of imaginary insidious plots for Muslim infiltration that FOX and some conservative schemers like to pretend they are.

I'm still laughing about Birmingham supposedly being a Muslim no-go zone when 80% of its residents aren't even Muslim. ;-D

To "Lib living on Planet Utah " Are you calling the government of France a liar? They have a map of "Sensitive Urban Zones", which are the no-go zones being discussed. Do you know something that the Government of France does not?

@What in Tucket? --

"The head of the British Independence Party said France had over 700 no go zones. There seem to plenty in England. They should not be allowed."

As even Red has admitted, these supposed "no-go" zones are just the equivalents of our slums and barrios and ghettos. Do you seriously think it would be possible to outlaw such things??

The head of the British Independence Party said France had over 700 no go zones. There seem to plenty in England. They should not be allowed.

@RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT
To "Contrariuser" yes, the no-go zones in Europe are JUST LIKE the no-go zones in the US. There are areas in L.A., Chicago, New York, and other major cities where the gangs and other criminal organizations run them, not the City Government.
How is it a lie, when the French Government has created maps of the areas it is losing control of and where Muslims have taken over and enforce Sharia laws or will physically attack anybody that is not Muslim (including police and firefighters)?

*****Please take notice regarding my post to "@Lost". Absolutely 100% lies! Have you lived in Paris? We both know you have not because if so you would realize how blatantly false your posts are regarding this topic. Simply repeating eroneous information and attempting to pass it along as factual does not make it so. Care to share your specific sources from French newspapers?

@lost in DC
West Jordan, UT
HVH
lies - yeah, like the early morning radar 12/7/41 that showed a large flight of inbound aircraft coming to Honolulu. We know what happens when clear warning signs are ignored.

Mark B
repeating lies fifty times - you are describing the main liberal tactic.

There have have been previous news reports in mainstream newspapers describing such areas in Parisian suburbs, but liberals have a such a hatred of the GOP they will find any way possible to bash a potential GOP presidential candidate - so what if it damages the country in the long run, as long as they are able to cause political damage?

Lived and worked throughout France for nearly 20 years, mostly in Paris. You apparently have not based upon another outlandish comment. There is absolutely no such thing as "no zones"! This has all been made up by your fantical Tea Party and the American Network which caters to these extreme views. If you are going to offer criticism at least have it be somewhat factual. In closing. Care to site sources regarding your claim? Seems to me you are living proof that repeating blatant lies is the American conservative playbook.

@RedShirt --

"where is the lie?"

Red, don't be obtuse.

Fox's whole point was that Islam is somehow consciously taking over -- or as this article put it, "Jindal said some immigrants are seeking 'to colonize Western countries, because setting up your own enclave and demanding recognition of a no-go zone are exactly that.'"

This is pure balderdash. Fox, France, England, the US all know it. Stop pretending that you don't know it.

To "Contrarius" where is the lie? You have yet to show that there was a lie about the no-go zones. Yes they got the demographics wrong, but they are right about the no go zones.

The question you need to ask yourself is this: Would you want a no-go zone in your city that was filled with people who religiously believe that they should bomb you and your families unless you convert to their religion? Would you want a no-go zone that is not just terrorist friendly, but financially supports terrorists?

Your complaint about Fox is changing every time you are proven wrong. Please tell us what part of the Fox statements you didn't like. They apologized for the no-go zone comment, not the demographics. So, you have moved on to something else. Thanks for helping to prove that Fox gave into to political correctness in their apology.

@RedShirt --

"yes, the no-go zones in Europe are JUST LIKE the no-go zones in the US."

Dingdingdingding! Good answer.

And since these areas of France are just like areas in the US, these areas **have nothing to do with particular religions.**

They are created through poverty and the natural social and economic isolation of immigrants and minority groups -- pressures that disadvantaged groups in EVERY country face, regardless of the particular religion or ethnicity of the group in that area.

Islam has nothing in particular to do with it.

Taa daa.

Again: even Fox News has admitted they were lying. That's all the discussion that's really needed. Do you seriously believe they would have caved if they had even a shred of evidence to back up their lies? Ha. Heck, their most impressive claim -- the one about all of Birmingham (UK) being one of these supposed Sharia zones -- was so stupid that someone simply pointed out to them that in reality Birmingham only has a 20% Muslim population. Fox conveniently forgot about that other 80%. LOL.

To "Contrariuser" yes, the no-go zones in Europe are JUST LIKE the no-go zones in the US. There are areas in L.A., Chicago, New York, and other major cities where the gangs and other criminal organizations run them, not the City Government.

How is it a lie, when the French Government has created maps of the areas it is losing control of and where Muslims have taken over and enforce Sharia laws or will physically attack anybody that is not Muslim (including police and firefighters)? You have not explained that. Just because somebody cowers to Political Correctness, doesn't change the fact that there are areas in France you don't go unless you are a Muslim.

What would you call an area in a city you don't go or you fear to go unless you are part of the religious or ethnic group?

@RedShirt --

"1. The governments of France and other nations in Europe have officially recognized that there are areas within their countries where you don't go unless you belong to that specific ethnic group. They recognize that they have less control in those areas than they do elsewhere."

And how is this any different than barrios or other slums and ghettos in the US or other countries?

"2. Fox News Executives are cowards, and have as much backbone as a Democrat during election season."

LOL.

"Which do you want to discuss?"

Red, when even Fox News admits that they were spreading lies, there isn't much left to discuss.

To "Contrariuser" you are now talking 2 separate issues.

1. The governments of France and other nations in Europe have officially recognized that there are areas within their countries where you don't go unless you belong to that specific ethnic group. They recognize that they have less control in those areas than they do elsewhere.

2. Fox News Executives are cowards, and have as much backbone as a Democrat during election season.

Which do you want to discuss?

@RedShirt --

"...at the Gatestone Institute."

LOL.

From the wikipedia listing on Gatestone:

-----
The Institute for Policy Studies has noted that "[t]he institute was founded in 2011 by Nina Rosenwald,... who has been a key philanthropic backer of anti-Muslim groups and individuals in the United States".
-----

Yes, Red, France has a lot of poor areas with increased crime rates into which police are cautious about going. Yes, these poor areas are often heavily populated by minorities. Kind of like... oh, say, slums and ghettos all over the US.

Even Fox News has been forced to publicly apologize -- multiple times! -- for spreading these "no-go" lies, Red.

As they specifically admitted:

--

"...there is no formal designation of these zones in either country and no credible information to support the assertion there are specific areas in these countries that exclude individuals based solely on their religion. There are certainly areas of high crime in Europe as there are in the United States and other countries — where police and visitors enter with caution. We deeply regret the errors and apologize to any and all who may have taken offense, including the people of France and England."

--

To "Iron Rod" read up on the over 700 Sensitive Urban Areas that are all over France and Europe. Read "France Seeks to Reclaim 'No-Go' Zones" at the Gatestone Institute. You can also go to the French Government Website "Atlas des Zones urbaines sensibles (Zus)" and see all of the areas that the French Government recognizes that Muslims and other minorities have significant control and are not welcoming of outsiders.

You can either believe the facts, or believe the myth that there are no areas that you should be afraid to enter.

@ Iron Rod: The story that Redshirt is talking about pertains to the British Law Society (equivalent to the American Bar Association) issuing guidelines for lawyers on writing and interpreting Muslim wills based on religious (Sharia) dictates. Apparently, there are those who feel religious freedom should not extend to Muslims - although I have a hard time imagining those same people would be supportive of restrictions on how Christians write their wills.

Many of these people also object to Muslims settling family disputes with their religious leaders but would again object to being told they cannot seek counseling from their own religious leaders.

The nerve of England allowing religious practices some people find objectionable!

RE RedShirtCalTech
Pasedena, CA

Just took a look at the article in "The Daily Mail."

I would like to see some of his sources such as "areas where police refuse to go in."

If he gets his news from FOX I wonder if he did not here them apologize and repudiate that same story a couple of days ago?

Could you be a little more specific about "England allowing Muslims to incorporate Sharia law into English laws.?

Thanks

Paris has urban zones where police officers are more cautious and where tourists (and Parisians who don't live there) don't go. Not because they are not allowed, but because they're higher crime zones - like many of the inner city areas in major cities here in the US. And yes, some of the areas are predominantly Muslim, but most of them are not. (@ Redshirt and Lost: Do a little more research on those news articles you reference, and you will find this is the case. One of the reporters of one of the stories referenced by Redshirt went into one of the zones, and came to the conclusion that the Bronx is worse.)

There are areas in California and Florida that are under the control of Mexican street gangs. You do not go in these areas unless you are affiliated with the controlling gang. Police officers are super cautious when going into these areas, if they go in at all. Many members of Mexican street gangs are Catholic. Does that make these areas Catholic "no-go" zones? Should we worry Catholic immigrants have ulterior motives of forcing Catholic laws on all of us?

Wait - isn't Jindal Catholic?

To "Happy Valley Heretic" and the other liberals here. See "Native French under Attack in Muslim Areas" on CBN. See also "Yes, there are 'no go' zones in France - sort of" in the American Thinker (This one explains that the No Go zones are not official, but understood by the people where they are welcome and where they are in danger).

See also "Lee Rigby identified as British soldier viciously killed on London street; 2 more suspects busted" in the NY Daily. Their last paragraph states "In recent years, London has also seen a rise of so-called Muslim Patrols, which are Islamic vigilantes who have been accused of hassling women who don’t dress modestly and beating up gays who wander into "Muslim Areas.'"

If you look all the way back to 2014 you can see videos and news articles about areas of major European cities that are controlled by Muslims. You can even see where England is allowing Muslims to incorporate Sharia Law into English laws.

No, Rebecca Chalif, the embarrassment all belongs to Obama. Embarrassment over Benghazi, IRS, weapons, Paris (stayed home), bowing to foreign kings, overuse of secret service for his family's vacation whims, AND so MUCH MORE. The list is EXTENSIVE AND FACTUAL.

The warning signs ARE all around us but the Dems refuse to see. Obama can't even say the politically-correct words that link the horrific radical people to terrorism. It's like the three monkeys, hear, see and speak no evil.

HVH
lies - yeah, like the early morning radar 12/7/41 that showed a large flight of inbound aircraft coming to Honolulu. We know what happens when clear warning signs are ignored.

Mark B
repeating lies fifty times - you are describing the main liberal tactic.

There have have been previous news reports in mainstream newspapers describing such areas in Parisian suburbs, but liberals have a such a hatred of the GOP they will find any way possible to bash a potential GOP presidential candidate - so what if it damages the country in the long run, as long as they are able to cause political damage?

America and the world need to be very cautious about leaders like Jindahl and the rhetoric they spew. While they are free to tell lies, we need to be vocal and defiant in confronting them. Fear and hatred can be very dangerous if not confronted.

You repeat the lie about fifty times, then announce ONCE that it wasn't true. Then proceed to let others repeat the lie as if it had never been withdrawn at all. It's like asking Cheney if he had ever predicted that US troops would be "welcomed as heroes" in Iraq. Nope - must have been someone else who looked like him.

So Jindal repeats lies he heard on Fox news, (no surprise there) by Steven Emerson.

And Prime Minister David Cameron responded by calling Emerson a "complete idiot."
Emerson later apologized and said his comments "were totally in error."

However, not to be deterred by the truth, when asked if he regretted talking about "no-go zones," Jindal replied: "Not at all."

So even when presented with the truth he continues to rant about a lie, how does one do that?