Replies

"I see no-one jumping to conclusions.

Then you've not been reading this thread.

MizSterious posted "Whine alert, poor mistreated 'students.'"

Since these people are living in OU housing, they are either students or visiting instructors. OU doesn't allow people who no longer attend to live in their housing. (one possible exception, they may also be guests of the above)

indcons posted "we have a bunch of Islamic terrorists/terrorist enablers here and they expect to be treated with kid gloves? Well, the fact that these jihadis haven't been expelled is kid glove treatment enough." among other things.

While some of them MAY be jihadis, that is far from proven, and the roommate has been interrogated under a lie detector, and been released, as noted in the article. There are darned few facts available, and any "determination" of the truth without those facts IS jumping to conclusions.

If someone wanted to express a theory, they would generally say something like "I think..." or "I believe..." but when it is expressed as if it is a fact? Without the facts being known? Sure sounds like jumping to conclusions to me.

Lie detectors (so-called) are not admissable in a court of law, and there might be a good reason for that. What can it be? Oh, yeah, now I remember.

THEY'RE NOT RELIABLE.

For instance, someone whose religion teaches them that it's not only ok, but is admirable to LIE to non-Muslims, could lie without leaving so much as a blip on the graph. Sociopaths are notorious for passing "lie" detector tests.

Believe what you want. I suspect that your main complaint about "jumping to conclusions" is that some of us have "jumped" (after looking at the evidence available) to different conclusions than you did.