Educational

Author Topic: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam  (Read 6549 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #105 on: November 20, 2016, 06:13:04 PM »
You really, really, really need to reread that definition. And then have someone explain it to you.

No, YOU need to do that. Benji is right. The willingness to throw the word bigotry around whenever someone disagrees with you is ..... intellectually dishonest. Discussing what impact radical Islamic extremism has on the World and whether better border protection measures/national security measures (in light of this possible threat) are of any merit, is NOT bigotry.

This throwing around of bigotry (and whatever other forms of bigotry you wish to use) is illiberal and simply shuts down conversation and discussion. It is beyond weak, Odeon.

I will give you another tip. It is not defending anyone it is simply saying "what I say goes and cannot be questioned". Seen a little bit of that from you lately. Its pretty pathetic and demeans you and any moral pulpit you believe you are preaching from. You are no more moral and no more liberal minded, inclusive or accepting. Petty little Tyrant.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Gopher Gary

  • sockpuppet alert!
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *
  • Posts: 12663
  • Karma: 651
  • I'm not wearing pants.
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #106 on: November 20, 2016, 07:06:21 PM »
Look how cleverly he added that into the discussion!

I know, right? My butt's awesome like that.  :zoinks:
:gopher:

Offline Gopher Gary

  • sockpuppet alert!
  • Maniacal Postwhore
  • *
  • Posts: 12663
  • Karma: 651
  • I'm not wearing pants.
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #107 on: November 20, 2016, 07:38:29 PM »
Incidentally, America doesn't  have a good record for tolerating different ideologies, does it? For all that banging on about the "Land of the Free" . i'm not especially inclined to blame the American people for that, 

I blame my intolerance on autocorrect.  :zoinks:
:gopher:

Offline Walkie

  • Wooden sword crusader of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Dedicated Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 3121
  • Karma: 352
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #108 on: November 21, 2016, 04:28:10 AM »
In a bigot's world, it's never about attacking, is it? So yeah, it's obvious that you don't see it.

It could well be being that I am not a bigot and presumably neither are any of the people here talking about radical Muslim extremism or Muslims in general, you have really failed to make a point. Who amoung us have been critical of Islam? Who has said that Muslims are all rasdicalised and dangerous? For God's sake, what position do you think you are actually defending and from whom?

See, this is why I don't respect your opinion. This is why you are a bigot, and you don't even see it.

At least Al is taking on views he disagrees with and will argue till the cows come home with people he disagrees with, that's not bigotry.  Your complete dismissal of views you disagree with makes you a complete bigot in the true sense of the word.
i think you just fingered the real problem there  :LOL: . And Our Glorious Leader will snark til the cows come home.  And we are all idioits and bigots. ofc.  And Even Walkie is tiring of this same old. Can't we talk about Islam, instead , FFS?

I'm happy to talk to you about Islam etc.  I can see that you are mislead though.  You seem like you are getting your information from people like Sam Harris, who just blames everything on Islam.  If there are suicide bombings, it's Islam or religion in general.  I guess he must forget that the Japanese and Vietnamese carried out suicide bombings.  I like to get to the route causes of the problem instead.

I don't regard   Islam , Christianity, Bufddhism etc as significantly different from other ideologies, such as Capitalism, Communism, Rationalism  etc. and further, I do  believe that ideologies can be influential. Maybe you , or somebody , could explain what's wrong with that  POV?

Incidentally, America doesn't  have a good record for tolerating different ideologies, does it? For all that banging on about the "Land of the Free" . i'm not especially inclined to blame the American people for that, I hasten to add, but some of them do become pretty damned  radicalised.

I can probably say the above , about America, wthout provoking a shitstorm...I think (but then again, I'm not in America)   

Well, i've got various responses queing up in my head, but right now I need to do other things, and also give my brain a rest, cos I'm heartily sick of clicking wrong buttons etc.  I hope that won't become an issue in my absence :LOL:. I'm pleased to see that this thread has got to be less about personalities and more about other issues, since I last checked.   I don't wanna ruin all  that  by letting myself get accused of deliberately snubbing  people *wince*

Yeah, people are the problem.  Check out a guy called Chris Hedges.  Have you heard of him?

Americans are mostly brainwashed by the media, on both sides.  It suits the interests of those in power to have 2 different kinds of media, as to divide people. 

Just write responses on wordpad if you mean you keep losing your responses?

You didn't answer my question, but nvm, maybe somebody else will.

I wish you wouldn' use that word "brainwashed" . It's condescending,. My Dad applied that exact same word  that all the time, of people who disagreed with his POV.  Do you think it brought us round to seeing things his way? Nope, It just helped to confirm him, in our view, as an arrogant, inflexible git, who was always bloody well right.  :LOL:  He's my Dad, and i loved him, but heck, that man  really did believe  that the rest of the world was mentally weak, as compared with himself.

Ofc you might say i've acquired a prejudice against people who say "brainwashed" , and I couldn't really deny that. But seriously, i think you'll find that's a very common prejudice, rooted in rather too much  reality.

Of course the media influence people (including my Dad). Of course  media influence is a huge part of the problem (s). It's perfectly possible to discuss that without suggesting that you're some sort of intellectual paragon, immune from the effects of such influence, unlike the rest of us idiots.  .  You might take a tip or two from Chris Hedges, since you mention him


I must thank you very much for the mention of Chris Hedges. I hadn't heard of him. But I looked him up and found the following  article, which is highly relevant to our current discussion, and  so immensely quotable I found myself wanting to quote about 90% of it.  :LOL:

What can I do but just provide the link:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/we_are_all_deplorables_20161120

The situation of the American "deplorables" he describes isn't significantly  different from the situation of the English working class  *sigh*

As for my issues with posting: much more complex than that. I do find my own multipliccity of workarounds (including your suggestion); but when my brain gets seriously overtired, there's bugger all i can do, realistically , but give it a rest. My problem  yesterday was that I didn't give in soon enough, not near soon enough, and it's almost as if I lost about 6 hours towards the end of the day... as well as at the start of the day, come to that. I'm gonna try to be more sensible today. 





« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 04:41:26 AM by Walkie »

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #109 on: November 21, 2016, 09:29:44 AM »
In a bigot's world, it's never about attacking, is it? So yeah, it's obvious that you don't see it.

It could well be being that I am not a bigot and presumably neither are any of the people here talking about radical Muslim extremism or Muslims in general, you have really failed to make a point. Who amoung us have been critical of Islam? Who has said that Muslims are all rasdicalised and dangerous? For God's sake, what position do you think you are actually defending and from whom?

See, this is why I don't respect your opinion. This is why you are a bigot, and you don't even see it.

What was that, rapist?

Being critical of radical Islamic extremists is NOT being bigoted towards Muslims as a whole and only someone who is really stupid or ideologically blinded would fail to see it. Which are you?
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #110 on: November 21, 2016, 09:38:44 AM »
In real life, the truth matters whole lot more than who exactly says it, and the truth has a thousand different facets. So, if Al or anyone responds to a snark on my behalf, i think "Good, that's the really pointless bit out of the way" (if only it were quite that easy). But credit where credit's due , he did it well and scored more points than you, if I'm any judge. If you can't be arsed with reading Al's posts, that's really not my problem.

It can be, if you don't reply to my posts, thinking that Al already did address something or the other. Right now, I respect your opinion and your right to it, and will consider it before answering. Al's I am most likely going to ignore or use as target practice.

You definitely need the practice.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #111 on: November 21, 2016, 11:19:27 AM »
I don't know if direct stats are available on this, but the kind of stats  that would really interst me, are not "terrorism" stats as such but something more along the lines of "Acts of aggression against feedom of speech,  freedom of religion etc"

http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Global-Terrorism-Index-2015.pdf

Some of the things you are looking for are there, but as you point out yourself, most wouldn't be classified as terrorism. Charlie Hebdo, Salman Rushdie and the like are a mere footnote when compared to the systematic repression of free speech in many parts of the world.

The problem in what you are saying (which superficially looks fine btw) is your use of "many parts of the world". In Thailand, try saying anything aloud disrespectful of the King. You will have your right to free speech respected. That is THEIR custom.
So how is that different to Radical Muslim extremists? They also would not respect free speech to criticise Muhammad.
So what will the Thai people (or indeed any subset or groups within the Thai people) do to you in YOUR country if you criticise or parody their King? Now make the same argument for what radicalised Muslim extremists will do for criticising or parodying Muhammed. If you are struggling, start with Charlie Hebdo and go from there.

:facepalm:

Suppression of free speech is far more widespread than that, and it goes far beyond the Charlie Hebdo attackers. A recent example is the spat between Germany and Turkey about what a German comedian can and cannot say. Another, also about Turkey, is the aftermath of the failed coup in July.

The Charlie Hebdo attack was far more visible, though, far more dramatic. It makes for better headlines and it's just so much easier to pimp your Facebook avatar to show your support. It's more tangible and more direct, but I would argue less harmful to free speech.

You're simply trying to score simple, and simplistic, points. No surprises there.

I do not have Facebook and no such pimping ever took place. So I do not see how that applies to me. Perhaps your point is redundant?

If a German comedian is forbidden from saying something in Turkey (Believe me this is the first I have heard of it and it is such a weak example, I am not going to look it up, I will simply concede that it was a terrible thing - just not newsworthy or noteworthy), then okay...and? Does that mean IF he says something in Turkey that goes against the Turkish government, he could get imprisoned? Same as I mentioned in Thailand, if you are in Thailand and you say something horrible about the royal family, you will be jailed.

Will that get you killed in your own country? Is there an actual threat of that? Is there equivalence in your example?

Quote
When Walkie talks about the threat of free speech and you seem to agree in principle and then talk about other places in the world, it waters down entirely what she is talking about and I think you do this deliberately. There is no direct equivalence in threat to free speech from the Thais nor the Russians nor any group within such countries that absolutely have recognisable inhibitions on free speech. Let's stick to where the problems ACTUALLY lay.

Where YOU think they are, right?

Yes. Thais and Russians and Turkish government. All of these places have incursions against free speech in their own country. But these are internal issues. In the Netherlands I could smoke pot in a cafe. In Australia I could get a court appearance and a fine if a carried personal usage amounts on me. In Thailand I would definitely be put in jail and for years. All of these are dependent on customs, laws, rules and regulations of a country. They apply only whilst you are in that country and is part of that country's fabric. What you can or cannot say whilst in that country is also governed by that country's laws and will be specific to that country. THAT is NOT a threat.

However, IF you say 'Our country has X law/custom/practice and it is specific to our country but we like this law so much that we feel we must force it to other places in the world that have not been inclined to introduce it, THAT is a threat.

It is not specific to radicalised Isalmic Extremist beliefs, I think IF America and other nations try forcing their will and ideas about what customs different cultures SHOULD implement and I think that is equally as wrong.

Threat is the moment it crosses borders.

Quote
Quote
Obviously, some Islamist terrorist attacks would equally come under that heading eg the attack on Charlie Hebdo
Blowing up that statue of Buddha  would count
The fatwa against Salman Rushdie would count.
And bviously a lot of of acts by other religious groups  would count too.

IMO, the Islamist terror attacks have been very different from the IRA terror attacks on England. The IRA message was "Withdraw your troops from Northern Ireland". There was actually a lot of sympathy for their cause amongst the English, if not for the methods.   ( I know. I was there. I had Irish Catholic friends with IRA sympathies. A lot of people did. ) . It put  the English on the horns of one hellova   dilemma, but it was (arguably) a reasonable demand

I see where you're coming from but would argue that groups like Al Qaeda have similar messages (i.e. GTFO of the Middle East), and actually, so do ISIS, even though their idea seems to be to expand to a worldwide caliphate. The differences between them and IRA are in how they define and allow the use of political violence.

Indeed there is ABSOLUTELY an element of this and I know people like Benji and myself have absolutely been critical of the West and more specifically the US and its allies in starting wars and conflicts and trying to nation build and interfere with World Policing.

They have made a rod for their own backs.

But it is not hypocrisy nor being disingenuous that I can be critical of the interfering and world policing (and can even see how people from such regions may hate us collectively for said interfering) and yet condemn what they believe is adequate response when it comes to the treatment of radicalised Muslim extremists and their attacks at Westerners.

Huh? You lost yourself there, didn't you? Try again.

Certainly didn't. You simply did not keep up.

If for example Hillary without the support of the UN and whilst Qaddafi is brokering a peace deal, goes in and kills Qaddafi and topples the country, then this is wrong. Libyans can hate US and her allies. (please tell me you are with me so far) If Libyans act on that hatred and started blowing up US kindergartens, that would not be right either. Whilst you can understand why that particular person or group of people may be angry, it does not make such reactions morally defensible.

Did you keep up this time?

Quote
One does not make the other right.

This we agree on.

Even a broken watch is right twice a day.

Quote
ISIS is absolutely about setting up a new caliphate. They Absolutely want to spread Islamic rule. They are absolutely opposed to Western values and Western people. They are absolutely a danger and talk of their justifications or differences in culture or alluding to any efforts to stop them being bigoted as to it possibly impacting on decent Muslims is both stupid and disingenuous.

I agree regarding them being a danger, obviously, but if you fail to understand their reasoning, however wrong you think it is, you will fail to take appropriate action, not only against ISIS but when (or, in your case, IF) you attempt to help the millions of people who are running for their lives. You will fail to help and only replace the present disaster with something else.

But ISIS is infiltrated within those communities. It is not a maybe or up for discussion. If they weren't, it would be so simple wouldn't it. If these groups of fleeing refugees were guaranteed to be free of radicalised Islamic extremists OR if they were easily recognisable OR even if the refugee groups could separate themselves

So the reality of the situation is that there are streams of people pouring in from Africa and the Middle East as a result of conflicts that probably ought never have been started. These hordes of people are often unable to be vetted or identified and we know are infiltrated by people from some horrible groups that are a National security risk to the citizens of any country that may take the refugees on.

Only a moron would turn their eyes from the unidentified, unmeasurable risk and unquestioningly take on all the refugees knowing the danger in lurking within or call bigotry if this "all in" position was questioned. (which kind of brings us to you, I guess?)

Quote
Quote
It;s that demand  makes the attacks so deeply threatening , not the number of people killed.  We've been reminded ad nauseam that our chance of being killed in a terror attack is minute, compared to our chances of being killed crossing the road. and I alway think, so what?   The cars and trucks are not threatening my freedom .

And neither are the Muslims, even though that is the message brought to you by the populist politicians and media.

Not that any of us ARE talking about Muslims and you are not too stupid to not compute this right.

You obviously have reading comprehension issues, but don't insult the others by using the collective "we" when you are the dimwit.

No, I have decent reading comprehension but you don't/ When Walkie says

Quote
The cars and trucks are not threatening my freedom .

Everyone knows she is saying that Radical Islamic extremists ARE threatening her freedoms. Fact. They are. Not up for discussion. Muslims aren't. Certainly not as a whole nor collectively. Radical Muslim extremists (Like ISIS) are.

So you say in reply

Quote
And neither are the Muslims, even though that is the message brought to you by the populist politicians and media.


Quote
"Our" gripe is ONLY (read that) for the radicalised Muslim extremists. So its cute and all that you steer away from these groups to constantly talk about Muslims as a whole and pretend that is what you were responding to. But you are not fooling us and you are not apply that point to what was saying specifically. (I'd give it up were I you because I am not even sure you believe it).

Bloody hell, are you really this stupid?

I do not think you are in a place to judge.

Quote
Quote
That's why so many people all over the world stood up and declared "I am Charlie" . We were all saying : we will not be intimidated into giving up any of our freedoms. And the freedom to mock a religion is every bit as important as the freedom to practice that  religion.

And I fully agree. But where is their support when less visible but far more serious threats against these freedoms pop up in places like Poland, Hungary, France or (obviously) Russia?

In all fairness, when Trump was elected, protests erupted because enough people see through him. In all fairness, it's why some Jews now say they will register as Muslims if Trump goes ahead with the Muslim database.

More serious threats? Fail.

When Trump was elected, people had been whipped up into a frenzy that they believed that he was a threat and so when they had the double whammy of Hillary not winning like they were promised and him being a leader like they had all been taught to fear through the fearmongering media, they protested in fear.

It was NOT that they were basing this on anything more than zealous ideology. "He is Literally Hitler. He is going to go from home to home with immigration deportations squads and set up deportation detention centres and even send Black Africans "back" to Africa." Yes this is not hyperbole. People ACTUALLY believe that and not from what Trump said, but what they were told by the Press, the DNC tasking heads, community leaders and Academic institutions.

Let's have a look at what he actually said:

Latinos:

Quote
Thank you. It's true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

And

Quote
It's coming from more than Mexico. It's coming from all over South and Latin America, and it's coming probably -- probably -- from the Middle East.

The ban on *all* Muslims entering the US (the first 20 seconds will do):

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/dec/08/donald-trump-calls-for-complete-ban-on-muslims-entering-the-us-video

The list goes on. Do a Google search on "what did Trump actually say on ..." and see for yourself. Then try to explain it away. This is not Hillary making up anything, this is Trump stating his opinions. I don't blame people for being scared of what this lunatic will do.

Quote
Pretending that:
Quote
protests erupted because enough people see through him
is just disingenuous, and believing it is idiotic.

As for registers...and? Some Jews believe what exactly about registers or databases recording Muslims from these areas? Do you know why it is that Muslims coming from Iraq are NOW able to be vetted but Muslims from Libya or Syria aren't? What is the one reason? Intel. What kind of intel? Registers of all the Iraqi based Muslims are now thorough enough to account for enough of the threats as to be marginal.

See that is the problem. People see the word "register and suddenly let their imaginations run in conspiratorial directions because they feel a negative undercurrent which makes them fearful that the person using said register will do so to do harm.

The negative undercurrent being that some citizens would have to register while others wouldn't. I'm pretty sure that wasn't what the founding fathers had in mind, but I'm not an American, so...

Quote
What if said register is simply not a sword but a shield. It is just recording who is who so that the nastier elements are able to be identified and contained? what if identifying the bad elements means that the decent Muslims who are NOT radical extremists are NOT restricted from access to America and not otherwise inhibited? Wouldn't that be swell?

Ah. The "if you have nothing to hide..." defence. This is the kind of argument brought forward by DDR officials, actually, and I have to say, you'd make a fine STASI officer. A shame it's too late for that particular career option.

Great ad hom, Odeon. By great I mean stupid.

I am not saying anything about nothing to hide. I am saying that the reason for him wanting to make a register is because there are no databases because there is no infrastructure.

I am really struggling on how I can break this down for you.

Lots of people wanting to come to a country. Refugees. Some people in that group very bad. Cannot identify who any of those people are.

Solution A: Walk them all in without finding out who they are even though some are bad and will seek to do the country they move to, harm.

Solution B: List them all. Build your own database and find out who they are before letting them in, so none of them do your country harm.

That is your solutions. I say Solution B sounds a little more reasoned.

I have explained his poor speech about Mexicans a number of times but what the heck:

Quote
Thank you. It's true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

Who are "they"? How can them not being their best and yet being good people?

It was simply a word salad.

Who were the they? The Cartels. The Cartels operate just south of the border in the no man's land of the non-walled off border running drugs and warring on each others (graves and dismemberment of rival gangs is commonplace. As are rapes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/central-america-migrants-rape_n_5806972

Rape trees festoon the landscapes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_tree

So what he said was accurate but clumsy. What he was pointing to was a really bad problem. No not all illegal immigrants are bad and he did not say that which is why he said and some are good people. Sure, the prey are probably all decent people but those preying on them sure as Hell aren't.

There is nothing wrong with any of that. It was not PC, it was clumsy but so what?

So while everyone is being so offended he did not disclaim x or clarify Y or dot what i, the sum opf what he said was unquestionably true and a real problem. Rapists are raping at the border in horrific numbers because the borders are open. Terrible cartel members kill wantonly and cross on whim. Drugs are trafficked and murders commonplace. Yet you and everyone is offended how he said it?

Get real.

I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline benjimanbreeg

  • Elder
  • Dedicated Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 4573
  • Karma: 76
  • Gender: Male
  • I do not have the right not to do so
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #112 on: November 21, 2016, 12:15:15 PM »
Walkie-

They can be influential, but just blaming everything on a religion and ignoring the war against Islam, is just ridiculous.  The kind of people that use religion to do evil things are the kind of people that would do them anyway.  Also, if a group of people have become so desperate and are fighting a war machine with sticks and stones, they almost need that belief that God is behind them, like an equalizer.  Or when they commit sickening acts they need to believe that God is telling them to do it, which makes it OK.
I think it's the appropriate word to use though.  Not everyone I debate with is like you, a lot of people I argue with are the condescending ones.  From studying WWII, I can see how the German people and soldiers were brainwashed, and what I see in the world today isn't much different.  Everyone putting a French flag behind their profile pictures on facebook.  Even girls with bikini shots, I just find that disrespectful. 

I know what I go through to question everything, so seeing masses of people just swallowing lies and propaganda is hard to take.  Yes, I'm learning not to be such a bitch, but I guess this site brings the worst out in people. 

No worries.  I don't subscribe to terms like "Islamophobia" and "hate crimes". 



Yes, I understand that completely.  I have been relentless for months with political issues.  I need a break.
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"

"When men lead by words that are false as they preach
Fatality waits in the wings
Surrounded by fools behind walls that are breached
Beware of the jester that sings"


Leeeeeaaaave Benji alooooooone!  :bigcry:

Offline Walkie

  • Wooden sword crusader of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Dedicated Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 3121
  • Karma: 352
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #113 on: November 21, 2016, 12:27:37 PM »

Suppression of free speech is far more widespread than that, and it goes far beyond the Charlie Hebdo attackers. A recent example is the spat between Germany and Turkey about what a German comedian can and cannot say. Another, also about Turkey, is the aftermath of the failed coup in July.

The Charlie Hebdo attack was far more visible, though, far more dramatic. It makes for better headlines and it's just so much easier to pimp your Facebook avatar to show your support. It's more tangible and more direct, but I would argue less harmful to free speech.

excuse me for taking the quote out-of-context, but the entire context would cover my screen 10 tinmes over, and easily found if anyone wants it, I must agree that suppression of free speexch is more widespread, but am intrigued  by the examples you chose,  Odeon, in that both involved the Muslim president (Erdogan) of a Muslim country (Turkey) ,
Ifyou intended to say "It's not just Muslims supressing free speech " , I'm sure you could have found better examples than that .

 I might try to guess what you really getting at, but then  again, given that you were addressing Al at the time , can't help wondering if it was just an impish exercise in spot-the-deliberate-mistake?

In any case, I personally have no problem at all with the public response to Charle Hebdo . In some peoples minds, at least (i think most, actually, but I'm no mindreader)  that was a symbolic response to all assults against freedom of speech, besides standing as a public rejection of violence. And it was  heartwarming  to see quite a lot Muslims joining in. It's hard to come up with anything more positive than that display of solidarity..   It shouldn't displace our awareness of  other acts of aggression against freedom  speech,  but stand as a monument to them all




Offline odeon

  • Witchlet of the Aspie Elite
  • Webmaster
  • Postwhore Beyond Repair
  • *****
  • Posts: 108879
  • Karma: 4482
  • Gender: Male
  • Replacement Despot
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #114 on: November 21, 2016, 03:26:30 PM »
You really, really, really need to reread that definition. And then have someone explain it to you.

No, YOU need to do that. Benji is right. The willingness to throw the word bigotry around whenever someone disagrees with you is ..... intellectually dishonest. Discussing what impact radical Islamic extremism has on the World and whether better border protection measures/national security measures (in light of this possible threat) are of any merit, is NOT bigotry.

This throwing around of bigotry (and whatever other forms of bigotry you wish to use) is illiberal and simply shuts down conversation and discussion. It is beyond weak, Odeon.

I will give you another tip. It is not defending anyone it is simply saying "what I say goes and cannot be questioned". Seen a little bit of that from you lately. Its pretty pathetic and demeans you and any moral pulpit you believe you are preaching from. You are no more moral and no more liberal minded, inclusive or accepting. Petty little Tyrant.

You're so predictable it hurts. As usual you got it all wrong but I'm done educating you. Dimwit.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

- Albert Einstein

Offline odeon

  • Witchlet of the Aspie Elite
  • Webmaster
  • Postwhore Beyond Repair
  • *****
  • Posts: 108879
  • Karma: 4482
  • Gender: Male
  • Replacement Despot
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #115 on: November 21, 2016, 03:28:53 PM »
In a bigot's world, it's never about attacking, is it? So yeah, it's obvious that you don't see it.

It could well be being that I am not a bigot and presumably neither are any of the people here talking about radical Muslim extremism or Muslims in general, you have really failed to make a point. Who amoung us have been critical of Islam? Who has said that Muslims are all rasdicalised and dangerous? For God's sake, what position do you think you are actually defending and from whom?

See, this is why I don't respect your opinion. This is why you are a bigot, and you don't even see it.

What was that, rapist?

Being critical of radical Islamic extremists is NOT being bigoted towards Muslims as a whole and only someone who is really stupid or ideologically blinded would fail to see it. Which are you?

You also have reading comprehension problems. Poor dimwit bigot.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

- Albert Einstein

Offline odeon

  • Witchlet of the Aspie Elite
  • Webmaster
  • Postwhore Beyond Repair
  • *****
  • Posts: 108879
  • Karma: 4482
  • Gender: Male
  • Replacement Despot
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #116 on: November 21, 2016, 03:56:35 PM »

Suppression of free speech is far more widespread than that, and it goes far beyond the Charlie Hebdo attackers. A recent example is the spat between Germany and Turkey about what a German comedian can and cannot say. Another, also about Turkey, is the aftermath of the failed coup in July.

The Charlie Hebdo attack was far more visible, though, far more dramatic. It makes for better headlines and it's just so much easier to pimp your Facebook avatar to show your support. It's more tangible and more direct, but I would argue less harmful to free speech.

excuse me for taking the quote out-of-context, but the entire context would cover my screen 10 tinmes over, and easily found if anyone wants it, I must agree that suppression of free speexch is more widespread, but am intrigued  by the examples you chose,  Odeon, in that both involved the Muslim president (Erdogan) of a Muslim country (Turkey) ,
Ifyou intended to say "It's not just Muslims supressing free speech " , I'm sure you could have found better examples than that .

 I might try to guess what you really getting at, but then  again, given that you were addressing Al at the time , can't help wondering if it was just an impish exercise in spot-the-deliberate-mistake?

In any case, I personally have no problem at all with the public response to Charle Hebdo . In some peoples minds, at least (i think most, actually, but I'm no mindreader)  that was a symbolic response to all assults against freedom of speech, besides standing as a public rejection of violence. And it was  heartwarming  to see quite a lot Muslims joining in. It's hard to come up with anything more positive than that display of solidarity..   It shouldn't displace our awareness of  other acts of aggression against freedom  speech,  but stand as a monument to them all

Actually Turkey is an excellent example because while a Muslim, Erdogan's activities have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.  If you do want to equal it as a good example of Islam as a threat against free speech, then we should probably stop this discussion right now because the difference should be painfully obvious. Not everything in a Muslim country is about Islam, just as little as not everything in a Christian country is about Christianity.

I'm not sure I agree with you re the public response to the Charlie Hebdo attack--I'm sure many people meant is as such but unfortunately it became very much a response against radical Islam rather than a response to any attack on free speech. At least that is my perception--the many violations against free speech elsewhere were never addressed using Charlie Hebdo as a symbol. Actually, most were never addressed at all.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

- Albert Einstein

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #117 on: November 21, 2016, 04:28:41 PM »
You really, really, really need to reread that definition. And then have someone explain it to you.

No, YOU need to do that. Benji is right. The willingness to throw the word bigotry around whenever someone disagrees with you is ..... intellectually dishonest. Discussing what impact radical Islamic extremism has on the World and whether better border protection measures/national security measures (in light of this possible threat) are of any merit, is NOT bigotry.

This throwing around of bigotry (and whatever other forms of bigotry you wish to use) is illiberal and simply shuts down conversation and discussion. It is beyond weak, Odeon.

I will give you another tip. It is not defending anyone it is simply saying "what I say goes and cannot be questioned". Seen a little bit of that from you lately. Its pretty pathetic and demeans you and any moral pulpit you believe you are preaching from. You are no more moral and no more liberal minded, inclusive or accepting. Petty little Tyrant.

You're so predictable it hurts. As usual you got it all wrong but I'm done educating you. Dimwit.

You do not have the equipment to be able to educate me, you moron. You cannot think beyond your own little self-exiled cognitive bubble.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #118 on: November 21, 2016, 04:31:22 PM »
In a bigot's world, it's never about attacking, is it? So yeah, it's obvious that you don't see it.

It could well be being that I am not a bigot and presumably neither are any of the people here talking about radical Muslim extremism or Muslims in general, you have really failed to make a point. Who amoung us have been critical of Islam? Who has said that Muslims are all rasdicalised and dangerous? For God's sake, what position do you think you are actually defending and from whom?

See, this is why I don't respect your opinion. This is why you are a bigot, and you don't even see it.

What was that, rapist?

Being critical of radical Islamic extremists is NOT being bigoted towards Muslims as a whole and only someone who is really stupid or ideologically blinded would fail to see it. Which are you?

You also have reading comprehension problems. Poor dimwit bigot.

Swedish rapist strikes again. You do not have so much a reading comprehension problem, specifically, as you have more of a general problem with the ability to critically think
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap

Offline Al Swearegen

  • Pussycat of the Aspie Elite
  • Elder
  • Almighty Postwhore
  • *****
  • Posts: 18721
  • Karma: 2240
  • Always front on and in your face
Re: Let's Have Another Argument about Islam
« Reply #119 on: November 21, 2016, 05:00:26 PM »

Suppression of free speech is far more widespread than that, and it goes far beyond the Charlie Hebdo attackers. A recent example is the spat between Germany and Turkey about what a German comedian can and cannot say. Another, also about Turkey, is the aftermath of the failed coup in July.

The Charlie Hebdo attack was far more visible, though, far more dramatic. It makes for better headlines and it's just so much easier to pimp your Facebook avatar to show your support. It's more tangible and more direct, but I would argue less harmful to free speech.

excuse me for taking the quote out-of-context, but the entire context would cover my screen 10 tinmes over, and easily found if anyone wants it, I must agree that suppression of free speexch is more widespread, but am intrigued  by the examples you chose,  Odeon, in that both involved the Muslim president (Erdogan) of a Muslim country (Turkey) ,
Ifyou intended to say "It's not just Muslims supressing free speech " , I'm sure you could have found better examples than that .

 I might try to guess what you really getting at, but then  again, given that you were addressing Al at the time , can't help wondering if it was just an impish exercise in spot-the-deliberate-mistake?

In any case, I personally have no problem at all with the public response to Charle Hebdo . In some peoples minds, at least (i think most, actually, but I'm no mindreader)  that was a symbolic response to all assults against freedom of speech, besides standing as a public rejection of violence. And it was  heartwarming  to see quite a lot Muslims joining in. It's hard to come up with anything more positive than that display of solidarity..   It shouldn't displace our awareness of  other acts of aggression against freedom  speech,  but stand as a monument to them all

Actually Turkey is an excellent example because while a Muslim, Erdogan's activities have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.  If you do want to equal it as a good example of Islam as a threat against free speech, then we should probably stop this discussion right now because the difference should be painfully obvious. Not everything in a Muslim country is about Islam, just as little as not everything in a Christian country is about Christianity.

I'm not sure I agree with you re the public response to the Charlie Hebdo attack--I'm sure many people meant is as such but unfortunately it became very much a response against radical Islam rather than a response to any attack on free speech. At least that is my perception--the many violations against free speech elsewhere were never addressed using Charlie Hebdo as a symbol. Actually, most were never addressed at all.

No shit, not everything in Islamic countries is about Islam. Whoever said it was? Oh yeah, just you. Why? Because you are trying to insert a suggestion that it was questioned to pad out a very weak position. Makes it look disingenuous when you are caught doing it and the person catching you exposes it, huh?

I DON'T (now let's pay attention here Odeon) equate Islam with attacks on free speech. At all. Never have. So where does that leave you? If you don't believe so, you can look through anything I said.
I DO believe that the radical Islamic Extremists DO, amoung other things, attack free speech abroad. There is a slight difference, see if you can pick it.
What Turkey or Thailand or Russia or Sweden or Australia, do in their own countries is up to them and the will of the people collectively. How they govern at home is their business. I do not give a damn if radical Muslim extremists want to preach whatever radicalised ideology or enforce it amoung their chosen or even if it is adopted whole cloth by a country as a state religion. None of that bothers me......until it becomes a threat to people not within that country or region or religion or sect.
I would also by the same token say, as a tourist, I would be very careful to observe the laws and accept what was in that country was going to be different to mine in terms of customs, laws and sensibilities.
But I will expect in MY country citizens and non-citizens will equally respect our differences.
I2 today is not i2 of yesteryear. It is a knitting circle. Those that participate be they nice or asshats know their place and the price to be there. Odeon is the overlord

.Benevolent if you toe the line.

Think it is I2 of old? Even Odeon is not so delusional as to think otherwise. He may on occasionally pretend otherwise but his base is that knitting circle.

Censoring/banning/restricting/moderating myself, Calanadale & Scrapheap were all not his finest moments.

How to apologise to Scrap