The Left must just hate that woman.
You are a fucking idiot.
These truths may apply to the majority of Arabs… but not Muslims.
Ever been to Morocco? Mostly Muslims there, but unlike the Arabs, they’re not that whacked out in the head.
[quote]unbending wrote:
You are a fucking idiot.
These truths may apply to the majority of Arabs… but not Muslims.
Ever been to Morocco? Mostly Muslims there, but unlike the Arabs, they’re not that whacked out in the head.[/quote]
Um, I don’t remember ever going to Morroco. I did watch Morocco Mole on tv when I was a kid though.
First, I didn’t say anything about Muslims in general. The woman in the video did.
Second, don’t start your reply with “You are a fucking idiot.” It kinda backfires on you.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
The Left must just hate that woman.[/quote]
Then I don’t know where I stand on the spectrum, 'cause I think she rocks. We need to clone about 30 million copies of her and flood Saudi Arabia.
Brave woman. I am sure the fatwas have been issue though, and no doubt, she has a price on her head.
Though the videos of it are few and far between, when you see a strong minded middle eastern woman debating a man and speaking her mind, it’s amazing to watch the guy sit back dumbfounded that she’d have the nerve to do that.
I love when he resorts to calling her a heretic.
Pay Per View Stuff.
[quote]derek wrote:
unbending wrote:
You are a fucking idiot.
These truths may apply to the majority of Arabs… but not Muslims.
Ever been to Morocco? Mostly Muslims there, but unlike the Arabs, they’re not that whacked out in the head.
Um, I don’t remember ever going to Morroco. I did watch Morocco Mole on tv when I was a kid though.
First, I didn’t say anything about Muslims in general. The woman in the video did.
Second, don’t start your reply with “You are a fucking idiot.” It kinda backfires on you.[/quote]
Careful with that Morocco Mole image. You want a repeat of the Danish cartoons of the prophet rage to ignite?
[quote]pookie wrote:
Then I don’t know where I stand on the spectrum, 'cause I think she rocks. We need to clone about 30 million copies of her and flood Saudi Arabia.
[/quote]
I, too, like her. Presumably, a “secular humanist” like her would be a champion of the Left.
But she has broken the Sacred Covenant - putting the blame for the problem of Muslim culture on the culture itself, instead of adhering to the Commandment that “No matter what the Islamic world does to itself or others, it isn’t their fault - it is the Israel’s and the complicit West”.
She is a heretic at the church of the Left.
In Christianity, to murder is a mortal sin. Your soul is toast.
In Islam, murder is sometimes acceptable, as in murdering an apostate.
That lady laid the smack down on Islam. She is a veritable tigress! Wow!
Of course, I think she’s right. SO right that it’s like a lightbulb turning on that clears up an entire issue and places blame where it belongs and removes it from where it should never have been.
I really enjoyed the major point about the two vastly opposed sides. It remeinds me of the time before slavery was abolished. There were (white) Americans that supported slavery and those that were (A)bolishionists. They could not be lumped together as far as thought process is concerned. Yes, they looked the same, they lived amongst each other but were of opposing viewpoints and philosophies.
She cleared up what many still believe. That is that all Muslims are of a like mind. Far from it.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
The Left must just hate that woman.[/quote]
Well, I am on the Left and I basically agree with her. Only I would specify that it is broader than Islam. It applies to a certain section of people,a minority, in most of the world’s major religions (maybe not Buddhists).
In no way do I consider left-wing ideals coincide with the reactionary ones of so-called radical Islam. The first wants women’s liberation, the latter wants women’s repression. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.
In stating that the “Left must hate this woman” you are making a generalization. There may be some on the Left who erroneously see radical Islam as somehow anti-imperialist. It may be COINCIDENTALLY anti-imperialist or anti-zionist, but what it offers is not liberation but a return to medieval
repression. Those who follow it would only be trading one evil for another.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
In stating that the “Left must hate this woman” you are making a generalization. [/quote]
As generalized as saying that someone who likes federalism is a racist and supports slavery?
I would say more than some. But I am certain it isn’t unanimous.
However, it is enough when more people of the Left won’t recognize radical Islam as a greater threat to all they hold dear - liberalism - than, say, a term-limited President from Texas.
I have seen this before, but it’s definitely worth watching again. I am sure a fatwa has been issued for her death. Anyone know for sure?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
…
However, it is enough when more people of the Left won’t recognize radical Islam as a greater threat to all they hold dear - liberalism - than, say, a term-limited President from Texas.[/quote]
This is the whole problem in a nutshell.
Political maneuvering has trumped the struggle against the dangers of radical Islam.
Do I think that Islamic culture and society is fundamentally backwards? In some respects, undoubtedly so. One can’t avoid the obvious conclusion: That if the Muslim world today represented the peak of civilization, then THEY would be leading the world, not the West. That’s how civilizations work. The most advanced civilizations dominate the others, keeping them “behind the times”, so to speak.
As usual, liberals have polluted a legitimate academic field with deranged notions of “equality” where none has ever existed and never will. There are no “equal, co-existing civilizations” on earth and there never will be. That’s simply not the way things work in the reality zone.
I’ve seen the video before as it’s a famous neocon prop. The question that deserves to be analyzed is this:
How best to “bring up” the Muslim world to 21st century standards?
The neocon philosophy answers that question point blanc by suggesting that it can be accomplished through “benevolent world hegemony” and a policy of regime change.
Libertarians and traditional conservatives think otherwise. They abhor the neocon doctrine of “democracy imposed at gunpoint” and believe that the best way to “bring up” a single nation or an entire civilization is through the natural processes of free market trade and capitalism. That is why the libertarian solution to terrorism is “complete troop withdrawl and fully unregulated trade”.
History has shown that the libertarian approach is the only one that works. Nations and individuals cannot be intimidated into improving themselves (as per the neocon strategy) nor bribed into doing so (as per the wims of bleeding heart liberals).
This is a very rich topic for discussion. Something that goes much deeper than the usual partisan BS.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
As usual, liberals have polluted a legitimate academic field with deranged notions of “equality” where none has ever existed and never will. There are no “equal, co-existing civilizations” on earth and there never will be. That’s simply not the way things work in the reality zone.
[/quote]
I keep seeing you write this but I cannot for one second understand what “notion” you think liberals have of equality–that ain’t it. The fact that all humans should have equal access to rights afforded to everyone else is not untrue. We may not be the same physically or spiritually but everyone ever born should always be considered equals in regard to their rights.
You say you are a student of power but you have much to learn, grasshopper. Power is not real, it is an abstract concept because it is derived from energy which is also abstract. Power is the ability to do work in a given amount of time–it is a relative value and like any other macroscopic observable is dependent on ones frame of reference.
Maybe you mean power in the Nietzschean sense of “will to power”?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
In Christianity, to murder is a mortal sin. Your soul is toast.
In Islam, murder is sometimes acceptable, as in murdering an apostate.
[/quote]
pure word games
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
As usual, liberals have polluted a legitimate academic field with deranged notions of “equality” where none has ever existed and never will. There are no “equal, co-existing civilizations” on earth and there never will be. That’s simply not the way things work in the reality zone.
I keep seeing you write this but I cannot for one second understand what “notion” you think liberals have of equality–that ain’t it. The fact that all humans should have equal access to rights afforded to everyone else is not untrue. We may not be the same physically or spiritually but everyone ever born should always be considered equals in regard to their rights.
You say you are a student of power but you have much to learn, grasshopper. Power is not real, it is an abstract concept because it is derived from energy which is also abstract. Power is the ability to do work in a given amount of time–it is a relative value and like any other macroscopic observable is dependent on ones frame of reference.
Maybe you mean power in the Nietzschean sense of “will to power”?[/quote]
In general, we understand by ?power? the chance of a man or of a number of men to realize their own will in a communal action even against the resistance of others who are participating in the same action.
Max Weber ,1946
[quote]orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
In Christianity, to murder is a mortal sin. Your soul is toast.
In Islam, murder is sometimes acceptable, as in murdering an apostate.
pure word games
[/quote]
How so? Isn’t it true?