Get better AC, I’m battling a head cold right now that my nephew gave me. His redeeming value was that he waddled his chunky ass up to the barbell in the garage and tried to grab it like a deadlift. Thus he is forgiven for getting everyone sick.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Mr. Obama just referred to this as workplace violence.
I will bet a great swath in Paris support this. Paris has turned into a multiculturalism shithole.
Australia, Canda, France… “Muslims Acting Badly”, coming to a theater near you. [/quote]
Well, Europeans are racist as hell. So, I expect the citizens to act out and burn down a few mosques over this. [/quote]
Good. Give them a taste of their own medicine. The “moderate” muslims are just as guilty as the crazy ones. They KNOW who the crazy ones are. But they turn a blind eye to the craziness. Next thing you know, people are getting killed.
We need to have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy towards radical RELIGION (christians blowing up abortion clinics are JUST as fucked up as muslims blowing shit up).
RELIGION is not a reason to KILL people. We need to move towards a more secular society and place significant restrictions on religion. [/quote]
There’s lots of things people get pissed off about that get people killed. None of it is ok. Let’s not get into the body count of ideologies, because noone is immune. Atheism has a pretty high body count associated with it’s own ideological predicates.
All of that is off topic.
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.
Until we get real honest about the problem, we won’t even begin to solve it. They won’t solve it themselves and if they kept to themselves that wouldn’t be a problem, but they don’t they take it out on everybody else.
As long as we keep pussyfooting around trying to separate ‘radicals’ from the rest we’re not dealing with the problem.
The problem is to wide spread to be a ‘fringe’ movement. It’s at the point where if they aren’t willing to stand up and clean their own house, then we will do it for them and they won’t like the way we do it. Unless we get honest about it, we’re going to keep stacking up our own bodies.
It’s not our job to educate and understand their culture and religion, it’s their job to peacefully co-exist with the rest of the world. If they are unwilling to do that, then fuck’em. We shall do what we must. But until we wake the fuck up and be honest about what’s going on, we will continue to deceive our politically correct selves at our own peril.
I am not waiting on Islam to clean up their own mess, I am waiting on the world to wake the fuck up to the reality of the people who hold that ideology.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
If you order more than 200 dollars worth of Brain Candy you get 15% off! Hint hint[/quote]
Someone doesn’t hold the same opinion or world view as you, they must not be very intelligent, right?
[/quote]
People get touchy when you insult their religion.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I don’t feel like arguing today - I’ve got the fucking flu. My point is that RELIGION when combined with an IGNORANT population and a MALICIOUS leadership produces the same result regardless of the religion: people killing in the name of god.[/quote]
Would you prefer if people chose to not use religion as the stand-in and just spoke the truth instead? The truth being that they’re killing for nationalism, power, and money?[/quote]
They killed because they got mad at a drawing on a satirical - and funny - newspaper that was never intended to be sold to religious people.
They killed because a piece of art was not conform to their beliefs. They killed because they are bullies who wanted to pressure artists.
And they kill because they think it will please their god or whatever islamic authority figure.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
islam is a religion of HATE, not peace.
Let’s define what “hate” is:
-Drawing a distinction between one’s own tribe and those outside of it
-Drawing moral conclusions based on this distinction
-Placing one’s own tribe as “above” or “superior” to other tribes
-Advocating a different standard of treatment based on tribe membership
-Advocating violence against those of other tribes
The koran qualifies as “hate speech” on each count!
Apologists are correct in that the koran teaches “love and kindness”. They just fail to mention that it applies only to those WITHIN the muslim community.[/quote]
And yet during the middle ages they were more lenient to “infidels” than Christians were to “heretics”.[/quote]
I’m no “fan” of christianity either - but besides the occasional abortion clinic, christians aren’t blowing people up. If you want to prosecute christians for hate speech while we’re at it, I have no problem with that. Religion just needs to go the fuck away. Killing in the name of “god” just isn’t cool anymore.[/quote]
So you have no problem with the government disarming its citizens “for the greater good” as well? OR Doing away with those pesky search warrants and giving the state free run on any citizens private property because it makes us all safer? I mean come one man. Might want to rethink the “lets do away with the first amendment” position.[/quote]
It gets SO FUCKING TIRING arguing against straw men. FUCKING SERIOUSLY!!! Mr.86, did I WRITE that I’m all for the government disarming citizens? Why, no, I DID NOT!!! So why are putting words in my fucking mouth? Did I WRITE that I think search warrants should be done away with? How about you have a nice warm cup of SHUT THE FUCK UP, and argue about the things I ACTUALLY WRITE? [/quote]
I know you are not so dense as to understand the point I was making by using the example of those that would trample on the 2nd and 4th amendment rights for the same reasons you are advocating tearing apart the 1st. It was not a strawman as it was merely using examples to illustrate what the point you are arguing would mean. By making the point you did it shows that you have no regard for the 1st amendment and consider it to dangerous to continue to exist in its current form.
The fact that you replied the way you did to what I said actually shows me that you understand exactly what I meant by it and realize what you are advocating would mean. It seems as though you cant get your hatred for religion and want to take away freedom of religious rights to coincide with your other feelings regarding our other rights.
Who do you start to sound like when you start arguing that some freedoms are more important while others are dispensable, “for the greater good”?
I will wait for you to admit that your previous ideas regarding religious freedom are in fact ignorant or that you continue to hold your previously stated opinion and hold no regard for the bill of rights because there is not middle ground on that issue. Which is it?
EDIT: And by the way, what you are advocating has already been attempted in Houston. City Of Houston Demands Pastors Turn Over Their Sermons - Opposing Views Not the best source but I am to lazy to keep looking and it is pretty general.
[quote]Biskui wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I don’t feel like arguing today - I’ve got the fucking flu. My point is that RELIGION when combined with an IGNORANT population and a MALICIOUS leadership produces the same result regardless of the religion: people killing in the name of god.[/quote]
Would you prefer if people chose to not use religion as the stand-in and just spoke the truth instead? The truth being that they’re killing for nationalism, power, and money?[/quote]
They killed because they got mad at a drawing on a satirical - and funny - newspaper that was never intended to be sold to religious people.
They killed because a piece of art was not conform to their beliefs. They killed because they are bullies who wanted to pressure artists.
And they kill because they think it will please their god or whatever islamic authority figure.[/quote]
You’re sort of romantically painting this.
While the particular individuals that pulled the trigger may have been this idealistic in their evil actions, the people befitting from this (terror networks, Islamic governments that are basically crime syndicates trying to be legitimate, etc) are reaping the power Magic was speaking of.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Biskui wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I don’t feel like arguing today - I’ve got the fucking flu. My point is that RELIGION when combined with an IGNORANT population and a MALICIOUS leadership produces the same result regardless of the religion: people killing in the name of god.[/quote]
Would you prefer if people chose to not use religion as the stand-in and just spoke the truth instead? The truth being that they’re killing for nationalism, power, and money?[/quote]
They killed because they got mad at a drawing on a satirical - and funny - newspaper that was never intended to be sold to religious people.
They killed because a piece of art was not conform to their beliefs. They killed because they are bullies who wanted to pressure artists.
And they kill because they think it will please their god or whatever islamic authority figure.[/quote]
You’re sort of romantically painting this.
While the particular individuals that pulled the trigger may have been this idealistic in their evil actions, the people befitting from this (terror networks, Islamic governments that are basically crime syndicates trying to be legitimate, etc) are reaping the power Magic was speaking of. [/quote]
Sure.
But hard to find an answer to that… Western helped recently to destitute dictators leaving the power to islamists in lots of countries.
I mean, in 2hours flight from Paris, people are killed everyday in Libya…
[quote]Biskui wrote:
I mean, in 2hours flight from Paris, people are killed everyday in Libya…
[/quote]
I mean, in a 30 minute drive from my house, people are killed everyday in Baltimore City…
[quote]Biskui wrote:
But hard to find an answer to that… Western helped recently to destitute dictators leaving the power to islamists in lots of countries.
I mean, in 2hours flight from Paris, people are killed everyday in Libya…
[/quote]
Human’s Will to Power has been a topic for ages now… We’ve long known our major flaws as a species…
[quote]magick wrote:
I have no idea what they printed at the time, but if it comes anything close to what Smh_23 wrote regarding Jesus, then I would think that’s pretty darned offensive.[/quote]
If I recall correctly, the 2012 cartoon was called “a star is born” (Google images should bring you to it),and it was ridiculously ballsy and, yes, “deeply offensive” to Muslims – or, as deeply offensive as the same kind of image would be to Christians, were it Jesus in that position.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Biskui wrote:
I mean, in 2hours flight from Paris, people are killed everyday in Libya…
[/quote]
I mean, in a 30 minute drive from my house, people are killed everyday in Baltimore City…[/quote]
Have you seen recent Libya footage ? This is fucking middle age there.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Mr. Obama just referred to this as workplace violence.
I will bet a great swath in Paris support this. Paris has turned into a multiculturalism shithole.
Australia, Canda, France… “Muslims Acting Badly”, coming to a theater near you. [/quote]
Well, Europeans are racist as hell. So, I expect the citizens to act out and burn down a few mosques over this. [/quote]
Good. Give them a taste of their own medicine. The “moderate” muslims are just as guilty as the crazy ones. They KNOW who the crazy ones are. But they turn a blind eye to the craziness. Next thing you know, people are getting killed.
We need to have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy towards radical RELIGION (christians blowing up abortion clinics are JUST as fucked up as muslims blowing shit up).
RELIGION is not a reason to KILL people. We need to move towards a more secular society and place significant restrictions on religion. [/quote]
There’s lots of things people get pissed off about that get people killed. None of it is ok. Let’s not get into the body count of ideologies, because noone is immune. Atheism has a pretty high body count associated with it’s own ideological predicates.
All of that is off topic.
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.
Until we get real honest about the problem, we won’t even begin to solve it. They won’t solve it themselves and if they kept to themselves that wouldn’t be a problem, but they don’t they take it out on everybody else.
As long as we keep pussyfooting around trying to separate ‘radicals’ from the rest we’re not dealing with the problem.
The problem is to wide spread to be a ‘fringe’ movement. It’s at the point where if they aren’t willing to stand up and clean their own house, then we will do it for them and they won’t like the way we do it. Unless we get honest about it, we’re going to keep stacking up our own bodies.
It’s not our job to educate and understand their culture and religion, it’s their job to peacefully co-exist with the rest of the world. If they are unwilling to do that, then fuck’em. We shall do what we must. But until we wake the fuck up and be honest about what’s going on, we will continue to deceive our politically correct selves at our own peril.
I am not waiting on Islam to clean up their own mess, I am waiting on the world to wake the fuck up to the reality of the people who hold that ideology.[/quote]
What does Christianity teach about situations such as this?
[quote]Biskui wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Biskui wrote:
I mean, in 2hours flight from Paris, people are killed everyday in Libya…
[/quote]
I mean, in a 30 minute drive from my house, people are killed everyday in Baltimore City…[/quote]
Have you seen recent Libya footage ? This is fucking middle age there.
[/quote]
Have you ever seen The Wire?
[quote]Biskui wrote:
The question is how to deal with that in a modern democratic country ? How do you answer to that kind of attack ? [/quote]
Tougher screening for immigrants at their own expense.
Canada, iirc, has recently changed from a “wait in line” or “wait until your application is processed” to what or who is applying. I heard it referred to as the bootstrap immigration policy.
[quote]pat wrote:
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.[/quote]
The same was true for Christianity back in the Middle Ages. Muslims allowed Christians and Jews to live in their land so long as they paid a special non-Muslim tax. Christians just murdered every Jews and Muslims that lived in their land.
The point is- They did so because Islam was the religion of the dominant power of that particular era. Muslims felt confident and secure in their power and so allowed free-thought and inventiveness free reign. Christians, on the other hand, felt besieged and that they were perpetually in danger. So they became insular with their culture and became radical in defending it.
Now the position is reversed. That’s really all there is to it.
Radical conservatism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel weak and in danger. Radical liberalism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel stronger and not in danger.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.[/quote]
The same was true for Christianity back in the Middle Ages. Muslims allowed Christians and Jews to live in their land so long as they paid a special non-Muslim tax. Christians just murdered every Jews and Muslims that lived in their land.
The point is- They did so because Islam was religion of the dominant power of that particular era. Muslims felt confident and secure in their power and so allowed free-thought and inventiveness free reign. Christians, on the other hand, felt besieged and that they were perpetually in danger. So they became insular with their culture and became radical in defending it.
Now the position is reversed. That’s really all there is to it.
Radical conservatism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel weak and in danger. Radical liberalism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel stronger and not in danger.[/quote]
that was a long time ago so it doesn’t count
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
If I recall correctly, the 2012 cartoon was called “a star is born” (Google images should bring you to it),and it was ridiculously ballsy and, yes, “deeply offensive” to Muslims – or, as deeply offensive as the same kind of image would be to Christians, were it Jesus in that position.[/quote]
Ok. If I showed a Jesus-version of that to my Christian friends, they’d be pretty fucking upset.
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.[/quote]
The same was true for Christianity back in the Middle Ages. Muslims allowed Christians and Jews to live in their land so long as they paid a special non-Muslim tax. Christians just murdered every Jews and Muslims that lived in their land.
The point is- They did so because Islam was religion of the dominant power of that particular era. Muslims felt confident and secure in their power and so allowed free-thought and inventiveness free reign. Christians, on the other hand, felt besieged and that they were perpetually in danger. So they became insular with their culture and became radical in defending it.
Now the position is reversed. That’s really all there is to it.
Radical conservatism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel weak and in danger. Radical liberalism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel stronger and not in danger.[/quote]
that was a long time ago so it doesn’t count
[/quote]
Jesus Fucking Christ… Sitting here saying “but da jesus folks did some bad shit a couple hundred years ago” certainly goes a long fucking way to not only explain current radicle elements of Islam, but also does a bang up job of solving the fucking issue.
I swear to god some of you are so hung up on shitting on Judeo-Christian religions you can’t see your ass from your elbow.
[quote]Brett620 wrote:
I think it’s fair to say that the President’s risk-adverse posture prohibts him from calling evil by it’s true name: Radical Islam. It may go deeper than that also. He’s very thin-skinned and hates confrontation. He prefers to fight from afar (think drones). He’s not the roll-up-your-sleeves type. That is why he despises our shirtless Russian friend. Further, the President firmly believes the U.S. and many of the West are the problem, that they oppose and inflame these poor dissidents who inturn are forced to acts of rebellion. We should share the blame.
How do you see Mr. Obama’s worldview Bismark? [/quote]
I believe that President Obama’s Weltanschauung is that of a hopeful realist. If the idealism expressed in the 2008 Democratic primary and presidential campaign was sincere, it has been tempered by the realities of his office. Given the political climate at the time, it may have been exaggerated. I would say that his view of the world is most closely aligned with that of the English school of international relations, which represents a middle ground between realism and liberalism. Simply put, he would prefer to exert American influence through diplomacy and international political or economic regimes, but has no qualms with the use of force if those tools of foreign policy are exhausted or would be impractical. I believe the open source record affirms this position. I will now address your post.
I don’t believe that he is “risk-adverse” as much as he is a practitioner of cost-benefit analysis. If the potential costs of an action exceed or are not equal to the potential benefits, it would be irrational to take that course of action. What benefits would be gained by calling yesterday’s barbaric attack “Radical Islam”? Remember, the POTUS is his country’s chief diplomat. Public speech acts constitute public diplomacy.
“He prefers to fight from afar (think drones).”
I disagree. While is true that the use of drone strikes increased seven fold under President Obama, conventional and special operations also increased dramatically. The 2009 surge introduced over 30,000 additional troops into the Afghan theater. When Obama assumed office, the Pentagon increased the use of special operations raids (i.e., kill/capture missions) from 675 in 2009 to roughly 2,200 in 2011.
The raid in Abbottabad is about as “roll-up-your-sleeves” as military operations get. It was far from certain the UBL was the resident of the targeted compound. Despite what officials described as an extraordinarily concentrated collection effort leading up to the operation, no U.S. spy agency was ever able to capture a photograph of bin Laden at the compound before the raid or a recording of the voice of the mysterious male figure whose family occupied the structure’s top two floors. President Obama could have ordered a drone strike, sent fixed wing aircraft to bomb the facility, or refrained from acting at all. Instead, he sent a special operations force to conduct a clandestine kill/capture mission a mere 61 miles from the capital of a sovereign state, and authorized them to fight their way out if engaged by Pakistani forces. To that end, close air support and a quick reaction force were authorized to support the assault element. Robert Gates, reflecting on the raid in a 60 minutes interview, stated that “I’ve worked for a lot of these guys and this is one of the most courageous calls - decisions - that I think I’ve ever seen a president make.”
“. . . he despises our shirtless Russian friend.”
What evidence is there that Obama despises Putin?
“Further, the President firmly believes the U.S. and many of the West are the problem, that they oppose and inflame these poor dissidents who inturn are forced to acts of rebellion. We should share the blame.”
What evidence is there that Obama subscribes to such a world view? If he does, it certainly hasn’t affected his authorization of numerous kill/capture missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. The scope of John Brennan’s disposition matrix may very well be revealed to be larger than the aforementioned states in the future.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The problem, right now, is not religion. It’s Islam. There’s far to many crazies in it for it to be a fringe movement with in the religion. Far to much murder over pettiness and far to much support for that murder for it to be considered a ‘fringe’.[/quote]
The same was true for Christianity back in the Middle Ages. Muslims allowed Christians and Jews to live in their land so long as they paid a special non-Muslim tax. Christians just murdered every Jews and Muslims that lived in their land.
The point is- They did so because Islam was religion of the dominant power of that particular era. Muslims felt confident and secure in their power and so allowed free-thought and inventiveness free reign. Christians, on the other hand, felt besieged and that they were perpetually in danger. So they became insular with their culture and became radical in defending it.
Now the position is reversed. That’s really all there is to it.
Radical conservatism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel weak and in danger. Radical liberalism becomes more prevalent when the common people feel stronger and not in danger.[/quote]
that was a long time ago so it doesn’t count
[/quote]
Jesus Fucking Christ… Sitting here saying “but da jesus folks did some bad shit a couple hundred years ago” certainly goes a long fucking way to not only explain current radicle elements of Islam, but also does a bang up job of solving the fucking issue.
I swear to god some of you are so hung up on shitting on Judeo-Christian religions you can’t see your ass from your elbow. [/quote]
Because they are hypocrites. as stated in the post by magick if the current situation was that Muslims were the majority and had dominance Christians would be fighting the same way. it is the Christians that turn this into a religious issue. it’s a human issue not a religious one. These peaceful Christians follow a book filled with murder. It’s just that in today’s day and age they are dominant and have eased up on their killing because they have already gained their dominance.