Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Forumsdwarf]

I have, repeatedly, but apparently racist trolling isn't a bannable offense.

Maybe if you sexed it up with something really sensational like pedophilia ... I did mention Michael Jackson in another thread.  You could totally use that!

[Muz]

Not racist:
"Christians shouldn't bomb abortion clinics."

Racist:
"Muslims shouldn't murder authors and artists."

I think it's just because Muslims are the minority. If you say something like "White Americans are greedy", it's not racist. If you say "Black Americans are greedy", it's completely racist.

When you do it with a majority, everyone knows that not every Christian bombs abortion clinics. But all of a sudden, with Muslims, people actually believe that they're murdering all authors and artists.

I dunno.. I'm starting to believe that people need something to hate. Back in the old days, someone would claim that just because someone is black/irish/ginger/dutch/jewish/etc, when one of them does an evil, everyone of the same ethnicity is evil. If say, a black man kills a white man for insulting another black man, you can assume that all these black people are psychopathic murderers. These days, that's a very racist thing to say. If you decided to extend from there and say that we have to get rid of all people of a certain ethnicity, then you have an evil of Holocaust proportions.

But today, it's perfectly fine to accuse an entire religion of thinking in one way. Religious hatred is even safer than doing it say, 20 years ago. Christianity encourages pedophilia and abortion clinic bombing. Islam prevents freedom and encourages murder. Jews are homicidal baby eaters who practice ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Atheists don't believe in morality and will steal your watch and seduce your wife when you're not looking.

You have people who seriously believe that the Middle East should be nuked, ignoring the fact that there are plenty of Christians, Jews, and Atheists in there too. For some reason, it makes sense to them. What is it that does this? Do people judge an entire society completely from rumors?

[Siquo]

If you say something like "White Americans are greedy", it's not racist.

However true, of course that is racist. If you want equality for all, that also means that the majority also gets to play the "racist" card.

Singling out muslims as a group isn't racist, though, as there is no "muslim race". Well, except maybe for things like this. It's just equally stupid as singling out all christians, all jews, all hindus, all sikhs, et cetera, regardless of religion or lack thereof. Therefore, if you say "all muslims hate all non-muslims", you're ironically making the same generalisation the other way around, making you no better than any muslim who actually believes that (and their numbers are slim, compared to the total).

If you fear an armed uprising check your neighbor first.

He's a muslim  Now what?

[Phmcw]

The difference between forumdwarf and me is that I mention "hardcore conservative Christian".
I don't try to make it look as if all Christian are violent, or supporting violence.

Quote from: Phmcw on June 19, 2010, 08:09:35 pm

    Islamophobia is growing in Europe, because apparently poeple are incapable to distinguish a misbehaved youth from a dangerous terrorist.

Of which kind was the one who murdered Theo van Gogh, and how would one tell the difference before the knife goes in?

No, there isn't a lot of Islam induced murder in Europe. Not more that other murder for phylosophical reason.
If I remember well Pim Fortuyn wasn't killed by a Muslim. Nor has the two poeple killed by the white supremacist in Antwerpen.
A few young Jew have killed a Muslim in France and it was pretty clearly a racist crime.

I could go on. There is actually few philosophical murder in Europe and few of them have been committed by Muslim.
Usually, it's common murder they commit, and that's just because a lot of Muslim are poor.

That's for the frequency.

Of which kind was the one who murdered Theo van Gogh, and how would one tell the difference before the knife goes in?

If you suspect any young Muslim to want to stab you, you may want to see a doctor, because you may have a severe case of paranoia.

[Forumsdwarf]

The difference between forumdwarf and me is that I mention "hardcore conservative Christian".
I don't try to make it look as if all Christian are violent, or supporting violence.

I believe my criticism of "mainstream" Muslims wasn't that they were violent but that instead of showing sympathy and respect for the dead they portray themselves as the "real victims".
I'll go ahead and add that in many cases I've seen in the media and even here on this forum the religious violence is rationalized and justified by arguments about American imperialism.  I have a few questions:

How does America going to war after 9/11 retroactively justify 9/11?
Salman Rushdie is British, born in India.  So his murder would be justified because of the British Empire?  Or maybe the Indo-Pakistani conflict?
How about Theo van Gogh?  What terrible historic crimes of imperialism did the Netherlands commit to justify open season on its citizens?
Ayaan Hirsi-Ali?  Somalia?  Are you kidding me?
Even if one accepts the absurd argument that American foreign policy justifies Islamic terror how does that justify all the non-American authors, artists, dissidents, and apostates murdered or marked for death?

Maybe Muslims are getting a bad rep because of the "Sharpton Effect", a lazy news media going for the most sensational quotes, but then right here on this forum there are justifications for the violence and killing which I've already demonstrated are ridiculous.  Theo van Gogh didn't die because of American foreign policy.  He died for advocating women's rights.

Of which kind was the one who murdered Theo van Gogh, and how would one tell the difference before the knife goes in?

If you suspect any young Muslim to want to stab you, you may want to see a doctor, because you may have a severe case of paranoia.

Unless you're Theo van Gogh.  Or Salman Rushdie.  Or Ayaan Hirsi-Ali.  Or you drew a cartoon of Muhammad.

Kurt Westergaard was "paranoid" enough to build a reinforced bunker inside his home after certain cartoons of a certain prophet gained a certain amount of notoriety.  Of course not every Muslim who comes after you with an axe is out to get you -- that's just the paranoia talking.

[ChairmanPoo]

Unless you're Theo van Gogh.  Or Salman Rushdie.  Or Ayaan Hirsi-Ali.  Or you drew a cartoon of Muhammad.

Yep. Too bad you are none of those.

Heck, for that matter I doubt very much that any of those assume that every single muslim youth is after them. But go ahead, dont let me distract you from your xenophobic rants.

[Phmcw]

Your point doesn't hold. Those poeple took courageous stance (exept for the first drawing of Muhammad which were quite bigot, portraying him as a terrorist.) and attracted hatred from religious crazies . You can do such things with Christian and Jews too. Izaak Rabin has been killed by a fanatic Jew for his stance on peace, I forgot the name of the doctor that have been killed by a fundamentalist for providing abortion, and I dare you to go in front on a conservative church in Texas holding a panel spelling "god doesn't exist" and giving pamphlet.

[Siquo]

I'm just going to keep responding to you because I just realised you're actually really funny in a pathetic, sad, no-hope-for-humanity way.

How about Theo van Gogh?  What terrible historic crimes of imperialism did the Netherlands commit to justify open season on its citizens?

Really? LOL 

Mass-murders, genocide, slavery, the invention of Apartheid, rape, pillaging, theft, destruction of entire empires, be it economically or by force, some more slavery, weapon trade (we still do. A lot. With parties that really shouldn't have weapons...), and all of these on every single continent of the world. Except maybe Antarctica. Maybe. Oh and that's without counting our efficient help to the Third Reich. That's millions upon millions of lives. Versus one example of yours.

[Forumsdwarf]

This and other posts of you have put you on my ignore list. Bye.

Sorry, I can't help myself ...

I'm just going to keep responding to you because I just realised you're actually really funny in a pathetic, sad, no-hope-for-humanity way.

Grow up.

How about Theo van Gogh?  What terrible historic crimes of imperialism did the Netherlands commit to justify open season on its citizens?

Really? LOL 
[Long list of ancient crimes committed by the Netherlands snipped]

Thank you, that's the point I'm trying to make: grievances real and perceived from centuries ago don't justify murder or terrorism.  The fact that you would justify Theo van Gogh's murder by claiming the Netherlands were Nazis and slavers is both absurd and morally repugnant.

Let's start with the Nazi smear.  The government was driven out and replaced by Nazi administrators from Austria and Germany.  How dare you blame the Netherlands for Nazi atrocities.

Now to slavery: by your own twisted moral standards it is as morally justifiable to commit terrorist acts against Muslims as for they to commit terrorism against Theo van Gogh and the rest of the Dutch.  Almost everyone lives in a nation or belongs to a culture connected to the slave trade, and both Muslims and Arabs made huge fortunes out of human misery.

The excuses for violence, intolerance, and terrorism need to stop.  Whatever ancient crimes your country may have committed it does not excuse murder in the here-and-now.  That you believe it does, at least in the specific case of Theo van Gogh, leads to some seriously frightening implications.

Fortunately you're wrong: ancient crimes do not justify terrorism.  If they did the War on Terror would necessarily be World War III, as virtually every nation, culture, and religion on Earth has some blood on its hands from somewhere and would be fighting terrorists obsessed with medieval justice.

Nothing any nation or religion did centuries ago justifies the murder of authors and artists in the present.  The belief that it does when applied to Islamic terror bears out the need for reform.  Geert Wilders, for all his faults, sees that in a way you and your contemporaries do not.

[Footkerchief]

Y'all, I have one thing to say.  I want to chloroform that clown, drag him into an unmarked van, shave off that fucking platinum pompadour, and laser his scalp until he can never again unleash such horror upon the world.

[Siquo]

Here Comes the Fun

Thank you, that's the point I'm trying to make: grievances real and perceived from centuries ago don't justify murder or terrorism.  The fact that you would justify Theo van Gogh's murder by claiming the Netherlands were Nazis and slavers is both absurd and morally repugnant.

Let's start with the Nazi smear.  The government was driven out and replaced by Nazi administrators from Austria and Germany.  How dare you blame the Netherlands for Nazi atrocities.

How I dare? Very simple: a fair number of us (not all, mind you) helped the Nazis (for instance the political party called the NSB), and a large number just ignored the problem. Our efficient bureaucracy, infrastructure and adequate population records significantly helped the Germans in deporting large numbers of jews and other "unwanteds". As things go with history, the few acts of resistance were blown out of proportion, and these facts are downplayed. Ask now, and everyone's father was in the resistance. In reality, they mostly kept their heads down.

Fun fact: The methods of the "heroic" resistance itself were terrorist acts, though Blowing stuff up, assassinations, and secretly helping the "enemy" (the allied forces).

Now to slavery: by your own twisted moral standards it is as morally justifiable to commit terrorist acts against Muslims as for they to commit terrorism against Theo van Gogh and the rest of the Dutch.  Almost everyone lives in a nation or belongs to a culture connected to the slave trade, and both Muslims and Arabs made huge fortunes out of human misery.

Indeed. You just asked for terrible things the dutch had done to the world: There they are.

The excuses for violence, intolerance, and terrorism need to stop.

Agreed. And as Wilders preaches intolerance, he needs to stop as well. I'm glad you agree.

Nothing any nation or religion did centuries ago justifies the murder of authors and artists in the present.  The belief that it does when applied to Islamic terror bears out the need for reform.  Geert Wilders, for all his faults, sees that in a way you and your contemporaries do not.

Nowhere in the world (except Israel who uses 5000 year old promises in books)(Oh, and maybe the greeks and turks who are still mad about Helena) are countries at war because of centuries-old crimes.
What brings some muslims to commit terrorist acts are current and recent affairs, and that is the source of the problem, but as there are over 1.5 BILLION muslims in the world who are NOT terrorists, I hardly think the Islam itself is to blame.

[Forumsdwarf]

... that's the point I'm trying to make: grievances real and perceived from centuries ago don't justify murder or terrorism ... you blame the Netherlands for Nazi atrocities.

Our efficient bureaucracy, infrastructure and adequate population records significantly helped the Germans ...

You were conquered by Nazis.  Were they just going to ignore all your infrastructure?
The Russians practiced a "scorched Earth" policy, yes, but they had time to burn and destroy everything in the path of the advancing Germans because of the terrain.
The idea that the Dutch were willing Nazi collaborators is malicious propaganda on par with Stephen Fry blaming the Poles for Auschwitz.
Every conquered people will have collaborators forced at gunpoint to collaborate under the guise of a "legitimate government".  Vichy France wasn't France; neither was the "government" of the Netherlands representative of anything but Nazi conquest.
Using it as a justification for Islamic terrorism is even more blind to history because most Muslims who fought in World War II took the side of the Nazis.  Why would Islamic terrorism be visited upon the Dutch for the crime of being on the same side?

You just asked for terrible things the dutch had done to the world: There they are.

Wrong.  I asked for which crimes justified the murder of Theo van Gogh.  You genuinely surprised me by giving an answer filled with reasons for why poor Theo should die.
Perhaps you misunderstood the question, so I'll ask it again more plainly:
What terrible past crimes did the Netherlands commit which justify the murder of Theo van Gogh?

The excuses for violence, intolerance, and terrorism need to stop.

Agreed. And as Wilders preaches intolerance, he needs to stop as well. I'm glad you agree.

Almost.  It's a question of the lesser of evils.  I'm sure not long after Wilders is elected and completes some painful but much-needed reforms he will become the greater evil and need to go.

What brings some muslims to commit terrorist acts are current and recent affairs ...

Terrorist attacks have been ongoing for decades -- 9/11 just raised awareness.
If what you say is true, that current and recent affairs motivate terrorism, then there must also be another motivation, because without a time machine current and recent affairs cannot have motivated all those attacks in the past.
To take the War on Terror as just one example, our response to 9/11 cannot have been the provocation for 9/11.  If the War on Terror is motivating terrorism there is no reason to think that without the war the motives that caused 9/11 wouldn't have gone right on motivating terrorism anyway.

... as there are over 1.5 BILLION muslims in the world who are NOT terrorists, I hardly think the Islam itself is to blame.

Offering excuses to terrorists gives them moral cover for their attacks.  When mainstream Muslims take such actions as rioting in the streets demanding the death of editorial cartoonists or insist they are the real victims of terrorist attacks because the non-Muslim world is always against them they are abetting terrorism by making it socially acceptable.

Y'all, I have one thing to say.  I want to chloroform that clown, drag him into an unmarked van, shave off that fucking platinum pompadour, and laser his scalp until he can never again unleash such horror upon the world.

Good grief yes!  He looks like a cross between a televangelist and Slobodan Milosevic.

[Siquo]

The idea that the Dutch were willing Nazi collaborators is malicious propaganda on par with Stephen Fry blaming the Poles for Auschwitz.

Recent studies by historians (as in: last year), unbiased by post-war Allied propaganda/collective shame, tells us otherwise.

What terrible past crimes did the Netherlands commit which justify the murder of Theo van Gogh?

Define justify. The killer felt justified, so he must have had a reason. That we find that reason invalid/wrong/stupid didn't stop him from doing what he did. Personally I like the fact that he wanted to die a martyrs death but was captured alive instead

Almost.  It's a question of the lesser of evils.  I'm sure not long after Wilders is elected and completes some painful but much-needed reforms he will become the greater evil and need to go.

Lesser evils are still evils. If the end justifies the means you're no better than them (the terrorists). Keep in mind the terrorists end is noble in and of itself: protection of their home country, their people, their families, their beliefs. Their means are... less than honourable. Wilders doesn't even adress those means. What he opposes is not terrorists, he opposes an entire religion of mostly peaceful people.

Terrorist attacks have been ongoing for decades -- 9/11 just raised awareness.

"Recent" as in "not more than a century". American politics in the middle east have costed the lives of many people. Saddam gassed and the Kurds and Iranians with American poison gas and weapons, given to him by the US, to be used against Iran. The Saudi royalty is kept forcefully in place by the Americans (a lot of the 9/11 terrorists are Saudis). If I was ruled by a dictator, and he was kept in place by another country, I'd resent that country as well. I'm not saying I condone their actions, but I understand their motivations.

Offering excuses to terrorists gives them moral cover for their attacks.  When mainstream Muslims take such actions as rioting in the streets demanding the death of editorial cartoonists or insist they are the real victims of terrorist attacks because the non-Muslim world is always against them they are abetting terrorism by making it socially acceptable.

You know those were staged by only a small number of people, right? Right? And that those were not "mainstream" muslims? No, you probably don't. Know it now. I haven't seen one muslim protesting back then, and I lived in a street where every shop in the entire street was run by a muslim. The only time I noticed something was when the Turkish football team was doing really well in the championships, and everyone drove circles through town honking their horns and waving turkish flags. It was fun

[Grimlocke]

Its... interesting how Geert Wilders and his ardent supporters are fervously trying to make a martyr out of Theo van Gogh, all the while calling artists the 'freeloaders of society', and suggesting pretty much all subsidization for atrists to be cut off.

Just one of the many, many blattant inconsistencies Wilder's propaganda.

To me him and his followers (of which we seem to have one in this very topic) reek of extremism. Their entire campain seems to be founded on the principal of riling up hatret and intolerance by saying the same one-liners over and over again, all in wording as simple as possible. His statements are all chosen for their popular value, he spents the vast majourity of debates rediculing other parties statements without even trying to be constructive.

No im not kidding. The man has made of point of trying to TAX Islamic headscarfs, which he graciously called 'headrags'. And theres more of those.

Now, dont credit this man for having a new and clever way to make propaganda. This is all copied from the American right wing extremists, who just happen to be the ones funding Wilder's party. And they have to, because this 'party' of Wilders is just a pack of a few dozen 'loyal followers' who are not allowed to undermine Wilder's decissions in any way. Their sole task is to look imporatant and say lots of one-liners.

If this guy makes it into coalition, which is still not that unlikely, then there will be a single man whos statements have often been borderline Nazist, representing one of three ruling parties.

This I find worrysome, a lot more than the tiny minority of misguided criminals with crooked extremist Muslim ideals.

[Nonsapient]

You know those were staged by only a small number of people, right? Right? And that those were not "mainstream" muslims? No, you probably don't. Know it now. I haven't seen one muslim protesting back then, and I lived in a street where every shop in the entire street was run by a muslim. The only time I noticed something was when the Turkish football team was doing really well in the championships, and everyone drove circles through town honking their horns and waving turkish flags. It was fun

Just a note, since I've stepped out of this conversation:  don't ever use prisonplanet as a source.  it makes you lose a lot of credibility.  Alex Jones believes there is a great conspiracy to destroy the majority of the population of the USA by the Jews (and Illuminati, and any other fictional group).  The dude is a retard.

If you take him seriously though,  I think the argument has ended anyway.