Notices
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 169 of 169
Like Tree52Likes

Thread: as/re anti islam movie?

  1. #101  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Blasphemy laws usually protect one religion.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #102  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    Zwirko. We are dealing with unemployable dissinchanted male ego looking for a justifiable reason for their existance. We have given them, by occupying their Countries, a stone to sharpen their axes on. Terrorists. In the name of protecting Islam. What heros they think themselves to be now. The worst that they fear is that if all the Westwern Nations pack up and go home. Their reason for Existance has now been denied them.

    Will They then sing and dance and play their flutes?? And settle down and grow radishes??? Like hell they will. westwind.
    sculptor likes this.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #103  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I was once thrown out of an army chappel by a red faced red neck southern baptist chaplin, who, with spittle flying out of his mouth screamed
    "OUT OF MY CHURCH YOU SACRILIGIOUS SON OF A BITCH"

    Poor guy had been going on about his view of GOD, and he kept using the word "he"
    so
    I said, "you seem to think of god as a male"
    to which he agreed
    I then asked , " and he is eternal?
    to which he agreed
    I then asked , "and he only had the one child?"
    to which he agreed
    I then asked, " Well what the hell did he do the rest of the time? Beat off?"

    intolerance is a sign of insecurity
    Lynx_Fox likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #104  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by westwind View Post
    Zwirko. We are dealing with unemployable dissinchanted male ego looking for a justifiable reason for their existance. We have given them, by occupying their Countries, a stone to sharpen their axes on. Terrorists. In the name of protecting Islam. What heros they think themselves to be now. The worst that they fear is that if all the Westwern Nations pack up and go home. Their reason for Existance has now been denied them.

    Will They then sing and dance and play their flutes?? And settle down and grow radishes??? Like hell they will. westwind.
    This is the core of the issue, I think.

    However, it's very naive to think they could ever, no matter what happens, ever fail to find a reason to be at war with us. If we packed everything up and went home tomorrow they'd fight to avenge the past. Or stop us from printing pornography. Or get rid of the nation of Israel. That's why we have nothing to gain by being peaceful. In theory it's a good idea, but in practice it won't work.

    So the question is: how else can we deprive them of their mission?

    Another good question is: who are they trying to justify their existence to? Themselves? Us? I think they're trying to justify their existence to their families and communities and wives. They don't have paying jobs, but they eat the community's food. So how do they convince the community that it's worth it to keep feeding them?

    We're trying to use a non-economic solution to solve a fully economic problem. If those unemployed young men come out to fight us, and we kill them so they don't make it home - we're actually helping more than we know. The community no longer has to feed an unemployed loser. The unemployed loser no longer burdens the community. Maybe that's what everyone was hoping for? The young man is dead, but he'll be remembered as a martyr instead of a deadbeat loser. They can all hate the USA for depriving him of the "promising" life he supposedly had in front of him, right?

    In the alternative, if that same young man comes out to fight us and we kill him so he doesn't make it home, and then we go to his village and kill 5 cows. Now the community didn't get what it wanted. How many times will they repeat the experiment before they give up?
    Dave Wilson and westwind like this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #105  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Clearly the goal of extremism is to solve unemployment. There are a few ways to do it.

    1) - Increase the number of available livelihoods.

    2) - Decrease the number of people who need a livelihood.

    3) - Redistribute the livelihoods of some people who already have one.

    #3 - is what forming a terrorist militia does. The militia will expect the community (or some benefactor) to provide it with meals while they're out fighting in the hills (and not producing any food on their own.)

    #2 - is what sending that militia to fight American soldiers accomplishes.

    #1 - is unfortunately quite impossible in most of the Muslim world.

    It's hard for us as Americans to understand that we're dealing with a culture that will send its son into the field to look for landmines rather than send the family cow out there, because they can spare a son, but they can't spare the cow. It's just hard for us to understand what real poverty is like.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #106  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Clearly the goal of extremism is to solve unemployment. There are a few ways to do it.

    1) - Increase the number of available livelihoods.

    #1 - is unfortunately quite impossible in most of the Muslim world.

    It's hard for us as Americans to understand that we're dealing with a culture that will send its son into the field to look for landmines rather than send the family cow out there, because they can spare a son, but they can't spare the cow. It's just hard for us to understand what real poverty is like.
    Why are there not more Professions in the Muslum World? Say in a daily newspaper in Iraq or Afganistan would there be lots of Jobs advertised under "" Situations Vacant? whats lacking here? Intelligence? Organisational Skills? Structure of the type of Community They live in? The level of ""Quality of Life "" they are prepared tp put up with?:

    Or don't the ordinary Mums and Dads have a say in how to structure their Society?

    Western Men and Women seek work because there is a tradition of this behavior. Also they are aware that only through paid labour can they obtain Substance and Shelter for themselves and their Families.

    Muslims are of a different mindset? Waiting for handouts from oil cheques?? Happy with that? Like living on the Dole?

    What would happen if Oil Revenue was stopped?

    Is the land under exploitation fertile enough to grow sufficient food for their needs?

    If they had to trade for food or other essentials how would they pay for this?

    Lots of Questions I know, but what concerns me is the real mindset of the Muslim People living in Iraq and Afganistan. I want to know what their visions are for the Future? westwind.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #107  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    I guess the main #1 crime Western Europeans have committed against the third world is that we brought them modern medicine, which decreased their infant mortality rate. Dirty bastards that we are, we put them in a position where their populations would be increasing exponentially, but their means to sustain a larger population would not be increasing nearly so fast (because it can never hope to increase that fast.)

    If we dare suggest that they use the other medical technology which we have invented to help solve that problem (that being contraception), and/or offer it to them, they get all offended, like how dare we suggest that their babies are not worthy of being born?! (ours aren't either, mind you.)

    So either we must offend their pride, or subject them to the worst economic conditions humanly imaginable. That's the corner we've painted ourselves into. And nobody with any sense of cultural sensitivity would suggest that we offend their pride.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #108  
    Forum Professor Zwirko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    55° N, 3° W
    Posts
    1,082
    Quote Originally Posted by westwind View Post
    Zwirko. We are dealing with unemployable dissinchanted male ego looking for a justifiable reason for their existance. We have given them, by occupying their Countries, a stone to sharpen their axes on. Terrorists. In the name of protecting Islam. What heros they think themselves to be now. The worst that they fear is that if all the Westwern Nations pack up and go home. Their reason for Existance has now been denied them.

    Will They then sing and dance and play their flutes?? And settle down and grow radishes??? Like hell they will. westwind.

    Quite so. If all the Western nations packed up and left, and we all cowered in fear of someone in our midst accidentally saying something they shouldn't have, then I don't think Islamic terror is going to be idly rubbing its hands thinking "what do we do now?". The list of grievances is long and easily manipulated by shady political forces operating behind the scenes.

    The only option I see is ridicule and disrespect. If extremist views can be highlighted, called out, made socially unacceptable, then maybe progress can be made. Enablers and apologists need to get busy either educating or shunning the morons within their communities. When moms from suburban Sydney see nothing wrong in waving "Behead the infidel" posters then clearly there is a lot of work to be done.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #109  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    It's hard for us as Americans to understand that we're dealing with a culture that will send its son into the field to look for landmines rather than send the family cow out there, because they can spare a son, but they can't spare the cow. It's just hard for us to understand what real poverty is like.
    Don't you think that's a bit prejudiced? Considering most Muslims don't live where there's landmines, don't you think it's just maybe not reflexive of how most Muslims think? As if defending your culture, and ability to feed your family is any less noble than the US idea of sending others sons to their deaths so filling SUVs doesn't cost so much.
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; September 24th, 2012 at 12:35 PM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #110  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    It's hard for us as Americans to understand that we're dealing with a culture that will send its son into the field to look for landmines rather than send the family cow out there, because they can spare a son, but they can't spare the cow. It's just hard for us to understand what real poverty is like.
    Don't you think that's a bit prejudiced? Considering most Muslims don't live where there's landmines
    Afghan Muslims do, at least in a lot of areas.

    During the Iran vs. Iraq war, Iran certainly showed that it holds to the ideal I just described.

    Matthias Küntzel: Ahmadinejad's Demons

    I'm just thinking "wow. what a convenient way to get rid of all those teenagers who won't be able to find jobs in a few years." Tell them they'll have all the riches anyone could want by dying today. Viola! Economic problem solved. ..... at least for now.

    Of course, with the same combination of a low infant mortality rate, and high reproduction rate, the time will soon come again when there simply aren't enough fields for those poor kids to plow. And I well imagine their leaders will find them another war for them to go die in. Then their moms can be proud because they raised a martyr (instead of ashamed to have brought such misery with their large families - as any rational human being would be.)



    , don't you think it's just maybe not reflexive of how most Muslims think? As if defending your culture, and ability to feed your family is any less noble than the US idea of sending others sons to their deaths so filling SUVs doesn't cost so much.
    You see the same attitude in Thailand. People who find themselves in any place that is economically desperate enough will do desperate things. It's noble for a young boy to die so that his family doesn't starve to death. I don't even disagree with their actions.

    I'm trying to describe how poverty in general works, not just how Muslim poverty works.

    Islam is not unique in its unfortunate failure to grasp the notion of "overpopulation", and then blame the West when they overpopulate and their economies start to falter. Sure, our companies end up being the ones to exploit them, but they were guaranteed to be exploited the moment they overpopulated. By each other, or the USA, or another Western power or their neighbors. There's no way around it happening. Exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #111  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity.
    And you say you can trace your ancestry directly back to Jonathon Swift rather than the Reverend Malthus. I am surprised.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #112  
    Forum Ph.D. Dave Wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cumbria UK
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post

    Wouldn't we be better to start the debate from a postion of understanding?

    .
    Yes, global Islamification is our adversary.
    Islam isn't the issue some people would just find something else to be offended by, what is the issue is showing we are tollerant to their veiws and willing to show respect and by doing this just maybe we might get some back. How can they respect us if we don't respect them or their veiws?

    Just for example imagine if they went rioting because someone critisised their style of architecture, that wouldn't have anything to do with islam but would still come down to respect, if they feel we are being distrespectful then we are faced with a choice do we want to try and force them into submission or do we want to find a way in which they believe that we are respectful of their sensabilities whatever they maybe. The choice is ours to make, we are the ones in the position of power it's more really about us and the type of people we wish to be.

    Do we use force or
    Do we use diplomacy?

    This is the choice we must make.
    I am certain, that you will remember the British school teacher, who was teaching at a school in Sudan. The teacher, Miss Gibbons, allowed her pupils, to call a teddy bear Mohammed, she was jailed for fifteen days. Okay, she was in a foreign land, as in Rome do as the Romans do. I do find it very difficult, to get my head around the crime, that the unfortunate Miss Gibbons committed, but with more understanding I may just get there. Even if you do not read the link, just have a look at the photographs of the idiots demonstrating to have Miss Gibbons executed, but with more understanding .........................

    Thousands of Islamic fanatics wielding knives demand jailed teddy bear teacher is executed | Mail Online
    Latinos are Republican. They just don't know it yet.
    Ronald Reagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #113  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post

    I am certain, that you will remember the British school teacher, who was teaching at a school in Sudan. The teacher, Miss Gibbons, allowed her pupils, to call a teddy bear Mohammed, she was jailed for fifteen days. Okay, she was in a foreign land, as in Rome do as the Romans do. I do find it very difficult, to get my head around the crime, that the unfortunate Miss Gibbons committed, but with more understanding I may just get there. Even if you do not read the link, just have a look at the photographs of the idiots demonstrating to have Miss Gibbons executed, but with more understanding .........................

    Thousands of Islamic fanatics wielding knives demand jailed teddy bear teacher is executed | Mail Online
    Hi Dave, I do remember the story from the news about it, personally I find the idea she was sent to prison very disturbing, thank god it wouldn't have happened here. That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation. I guess they have different laws and ways of seeing things.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #114  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation.
    I can help you there. Fly to the US. By a ticket to a football game (American version). Remain seated during the national anthem.

    You will get a reasonable sense of what went on in Sudan, and if you stand up at least part of the time you'll probably escape actual injury.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #115  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post

    I am certain, that you will remember the British school teacher, who was teaching at a school in Sudan. The teacher, Miss Gibbons, allowed her pupils, to call a teddy bear Mohammed, she was jailed for fifteen days. Okay, she was in a foreign land, as in Rome do as the Romans do. I do find it very difficult, to get my head around the crime, that the unfortunate Miss Gibbons committed, but with more understanding I may just get there. Even if you do not read the link, just have a look at the photographs of the idiots demonstrating to have Miss Gibbons executed, but with more understanding .........................

    Thousands of Islamic fanatics wielding knives demand jailed teddy bear teacher is executed | Mail Online
    Hi Dave, I do remember the story from the news about it, personally I find the idea she was sent to prison very disturbing, thank god it wouldn't have happened here. That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation. I guess they have different laws and ways of seeing things.
    It's easy to understand, Chris. They are taught from an early age to be extremely intolerant of any other religion, or of any criticism of their own religion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #116  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation.
    I can help you there. Fly to the US. By a ticket to a football game (American version). Remain seated during the national anthem.

    You will get a reasonable sense of what went on in Sudan, and if you stand up at least part of the time you'll probably escape actual injury.
    This is one of the more bizarre things you have posted. When was the last time somebody was beheaded for not standing for the national anthem?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #117  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    John
    sometime while i was wearing the uniform, I decided to quit swearing allegience to the (damned) flag
    (swear allegience to your family and friends and the guy standing next to you, and the deed cannot be misused by double tounged politicians)
    for years after, I never stood nor mouthed the words
    and
    No-one seemed to care

    sitting in the bleachers where everyone there are fans of one team, and cheering for the other teem, however did seem to elicit hostility
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #118  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    So maybe violence is their way of showing devotion to Allah because they can't afford any of the other ways? It makes sense. Violence is cheap. Well.... it's cheap if you don't use expensive toys to wage it.

    It's better than cheap if you die and no longer need any wealth.


    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity.
    And you say you can trace your ancestry directly back to Jonathon Swift rather than the Reverend Malthus. I am surprised.
    I have no idea who either of those people are. I should clarify, that I think exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity - when no deliberate effort is made to apply another method.

    And of course population control is an issue hardly anyone wants to touch with a ten foot pole, so clearly that condition persists. Nobody is willing to make a serious effort to apply any other method.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #119  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    There's very little relationship between population density, poverty or extremism. Look elsewhere.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #120  
    1 Ugly MoFo warthog213's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    147
    ss-120921-muslim-protest-02-jsw-tease_photoblog600.jpg
    If you can only imagine getting this upset over something so damn minor or as stupid as that video was.
    I'd more call it putting on a show for the camera. Luckily most Muslims aren't like this guy and most are
    taking a more peaceful approach to the video. And i'm sorry but no religion will ever cause me to raise arms
    against my fellow man/woman. Only men could do that.......
    (warthog) an ugly little animal in Africa that is hunted, killed and eaten by lions.

    Sorry i'm no scientist so don't expect me to use those terms which scientist use
    to explain things.... I am only an observer of things....

    Every dream i've dreamed isn't the life I live in....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #121  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    There's very little relationship between population density, poverty or extremism. Look elsewhere.

    You don't think it's about poverty? Then what do you think causes it? The examples I've seen you cite are examples of poverty, supposedly the result of Western exploitation. We do all the same things in South America and Africa. They have every bit as much reason to be angry, but for some reason Islam is unique in having demonstrated a willingness and ability to coordinate successful attacks against the USA.

    If it's religion then...... that says something about Islam.

    And when I refer to population density, I don't mean density measured against land. I mean measured against resources. Lebanon, for example has a huge population per square mile, but it also has the most arable land per square mile of any country in the middle East. I don't think physical proximity makes people angry. I think starvation makes them angry. I think lack of the opportunity to raise and provide for a family makes people angry.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon#Primary
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #122  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,631
    Also lack of education, or the education by a muslim radical, who would gladly educate for free. Obviously... I have no problem with muslim being educated by other muslim, as long as they are not the radical anti-everything-that-is-not-exactly-like-them kind of muslim.
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #123  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation.
    I can help you there. Fly to the US. By a ticket to a football game (American version). Remain seated during the national anthem.

    You will get a reasonable sense of what went on in Sudan, and if you stand up at least part of the time you'll probably escape actual injury.
    This is one of the more bizarre things you have posted. When was the last time somebody was beheaded for not standing for the national anthem?
    Harold the hostility that is expressed in my proposed scenario is tangible and is identical in origin, character and intent to the behaviour of the Sudanese in the teddy bear case. Different cultural controls inhibit, or reduce the extent to which the hostility is expressed, but the hostility is still very real.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #124  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity.
    And you say you can trace your ancestry directly back to Jonathon Swift rather than the Reverend Malthus. I am surprised.
    I have no idea who either of those people are. I should clarify, that I think exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity - when no deliberate effort is made to apply another method.

    And of course population control is an issue hardly anyone wants to touch with a ten foot pole, so clearly that condition persists. Nobody is willing to make a serious effort to apply any other method.
    Your quoted post and earlier ones gave the impression that you were not wholly opposed to such exploitation. I may have misread your intent, but I posted on that basis.

    Jonathon Swift, the author of Gulliver's Travels, wrote a satirical piece in which he proposed as a solution to the Irish famine, the Irish should eat their own children. He was actually arguing for government intervention to prevent widespread death.

    Thomas Malthus wrote a piece in the late 18th century that provided Darwin with the insight to arrive at his theory of evolution. Malthus had noted that populations grew exponetially and food supplies linearly, so that eventually people must die. Malthus seemed to accept that this was an OK way of dealing with things - a bit naughty for a Reverend.

    So, I was saying to you, your comments here are not, I think, ironic likes Swift's, but you believe this exploitation is OK, just like Malthus.

    My apologies for being obscure, but what use is an education if you can't flaunt it?
    Ascended likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #125  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    That said I don't really find it that easy from my Western perspective to even understand how they viewed the situation.
    I can help you there. Fly to the US. By a ticket to a football game (American version). Remain seated during the national anthem.

    You will get a reasonable sense of what went on in Sudan, and if you stand up at least part of the time you'll probably escape actual injury.
    This is one of the more bizarre things you have posted. When was the last time somebody was beheaded for not standing for the national anthem?
    Harold the hostility that is expressed in my proposed scenario is tangible and is identical in origin, character and intent to the behaviour of the Sudanese in the teddy bear case. Different cultural controls inhibit, or reduce the extent to which the hostility is expressed, but the hostility is still very real.
    I guess you could say that, but it is a bit like saying that putting your elbows up on the table is a cultural faux pas just like grand larceny is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #126  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity.
    And you say you can trace your ancestry directly back to Jonathon Swift rather than the Reverend Malthus. I am surprised.
    I have no idea who either of those people are. I should clarify, that I think exploitation is the means by which the economy adjusts to excess humanity - when no deliberate effort is made to apply another method.

    And of course population control is an issue hardly anyone wants to touch with a ten foot pole, so clearly that condition persists. Nobody is willing to make a serious effort to apply any other method.
    Your quoted post and earlier ones gave the impression that you were not wholly opposed to such exploitation. I may have misread your intent, but I posted on that basis.

    Jonathon Swift, the author of Gulliver's Travels, wrote a satirical piece in which he proposed as a solution to the Irish famine, the Irish should eat their own children. He was actually arguing for government intervention to prevent widespread death.

    Thomas Malthus wrote a piece in the late 18th century that provided Darwin with the insight to arrive at his theory of evolution. Malthus had noted that populations grew exponetially and food supplies linearly, so that eventually people must die. Malthus seemed to accept that this was an OK way of dealing with things - a bit naughty for a Reverend.

    So, I was saying to you, your comments here are not, I think, ironic likes Swift's, but you believe this exploitation is OK, just like Malthus.

    My apologies for being obscure, but what use is an education if you can't flaunt it?

    I approve of people accepting it as truth. I suppose some people see that as a jaded and cynical form of giving up. But I look at it the other way. How does an alcoholic give up alcohol? Step 1 is admitting they have a problem.

    Why don't we admit that exploitation is totally unavoidable absent population control and then proceed to seek a solution? Why put all of our effort into trying to break Malthus's rule? Why not just accept it's real and then solve it in a way we can be sure will work, instead of rolling the dice again and again that we might be able to expand our economy to fit all those poor children, and falling flat on our face again and again?


    Living in denial is not generous or kind when somebody else is going to have to experience the reality you're living in denial about.
    westwind likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #127  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Wilson View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post

    Wouldn't we be better to start the debate from a postion of understanding?

    .
    Yes, global Islamification is our adversary.
    Islam isn't the issue some people would just find something else to be offended by, what is the issue is showing we are tollerant to their veiws and willing to show respect and by doing this just maybe we might get some back. How can they respect us if we don't respect them or their veiws?

    Just for example imagine if they went rioting because someone critisised their style of architecture, that wouldn't have anything to do with islam but would still come down to respect, if they feel we are being distrespectful then we are faced with a choice do we want to try and force them into submission or do we want to find a way in which they believe that we are respectful of their sensabilities whatever they maybe. The choice is ours to make, we are the ones in the position of power it's more really about us and the type of people we wish to be.

    Do we use force or
    Do we use diplomacy?

    This is the choice we must make.
    I am certain, that you will remember the British school teacher, who was teaching at a school in Sudan. The teacher, Miss Gibbons, allowed her pupils, to call a teddy bear Mohammed, she was jailed for fifteen days. Okay, she was in a foreign land, as in Rome do as the Romans do. I do find it very difficult, to get my head around the crime, that the unfortunate Miss Gibbons committed, but with more understanding I may just get there. Even if you do not read the link, just have a look at the photographs of the idiots demonstrating to have Miss Gibbons executed, but with more understanding .........................

    Thousands of Islamic fanatics wielding knives demand jailed teddy bear teacher is executed | Mail Online
    How do we convince ourselves that these same people aren't cheering on the terrorists? Because their governments apologize? Their non-popular (for the most part) governments?

    This stuff is why I see nothing wrong with waging war on the civilian population. We shouldn't murder them, but we should give them a good reason to think about whether they really want to be at war with us or not. I just find it to be utter bullocks when people keep trying to say the terrorists are acting alone. Clearly they are not. Clearly they have popular support, support the populace has no right to be giving, and should be shown consequences for having given.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #128  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    we should give them a good reason to think about whether they really want to be at war with us or not.
    I find your logic to be flawed. The extremists are not a group which can be beaten into submission. Like the mythical hydra, when you chop off one head, another takes its place. These people are ready and willing to die for their cause. They have shown us that. How do you fight someone who has no fear of death?

    Personally, I think our only hope is to convince the rational and reasonable people in the middle east that these radical extremists are twisting the will of God, manipulating his words, in order to have an army to carry out their own murderous plans. If the people in that area do not come to understand that their view of Americans is as ignorant as our view of them so often is, we have no real way to quell the monster.

    We cannot bomb these people into submission. In fact, I think trying to humiliate them or depress their standard of living to unbearable levels will only fuel their cause.
    westwind and sculptor like this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #129  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    we should give them a good reason to think about whether they really want to be at war with us or not.
    I find your logic to be flawed. The extremists are not a group which can be beaten into submission. Like the mythical hydra, when you chop off one head, another takes its place. These people are ready and willing to die for their cause. They have shown us that. How do you fight someone who has no fear of death?
    That's why you don't go after the head. You go after the feet.

    Cut off their support and those terrorists become pretty un-dangerous, like some crazy homeless person on the street ranting to himself about wanting to kill the president.

    If they can't feed an insurgent army, then they can't field one. If they don't expect to be remembered as heroes in their home community, then 90% of their incentive go out and fight is gone. (As well 90% of their faith that they'll get 70 virgins or whatever disappears also when their home community stops considering their actions to be a service to Allah.)




    Personally, I think our only hope is to convince the rational and reasonable people in the middle east that these radical extremists are twisting the will of God, manipulating his words, in order to have an army to carry out their own murderous plans. If the people in that area do not come to understand that their view of Americans is as ignorant as our view of them so often is, we have no real way to quell the monster.
    Have you ever been part of a religion? Do you think Muslims are going to listen to a non-Muslim tell them what their religion believes?


    We cannot bomb these people into submission. In fact, I think trying to humiliate them or depress their standard of living to unbearable levels will only fuel their cause.

    I guess my reading of history is different from yours. I see people's wills getting broken all the time throughout history. Strong proud people, once deprived of their means of nourishment, quickly become weak willed mice. They're willing to suffer themselves, but then they see their kids starving, and suddenly they're not so brave. The American natives were ultimately broken by economics, not death count. The living became to be more of a burden than the dead. I think their fear ultimately became that we wouldn't wipe them out, just leave them on the under-funded reservations and stop giving them what little food we were giving them.

    Bad enough economic conditions force people to become divided. That's when the culture knows real fear, because once they're killing one another over a loaf of bread, they've got little or nothing left of their relationship with one another. And then they've lost their very identity. And.... that's exactly what I want them to lose. Then maybe they'll go out and find a better identity. Destruction is necessary for creation and progress.
    westwind likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #130  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    kojax... you cannot bring economic means and apply them in totallity to the Islam Peoples. Over 200,000,000 indonesians are muslim. Shall we starve them? Or muslims in The UK? In Africa? My fundermental question is, do Muslims require Islam ( the Koran ) to exist as a People? Is this what defines Them? History shows that it is very difficult indeed to separate a People from their chosen Faith. ( the lions in the Colisseum, licking their chops over Christians ) Is it necessary to separate a People from their Faith to bring about change in attitude? It is the abuse of this Faith and its Tenets that gives rise to Fanatics, both internally and externally. Is it then an unstable Faith? Wanting in new direction?

    Isolation, indifference? Will this help the problem go away? Completely ignor the stew-pot and let it boil over? Have we arrived at a time in History where the Islamic Faith as a Movement, held up by Muslims, has reached saturation point.? ie; No more Followers to recruit? No more Countries or Peoples to convert? If so, what do you believe the next move will be by Islamic Peoples? Now that the Oil is as good as gone? westwind.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #131  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    "If so, what do you believe the next move will be by Islamic Peoples? Now that the Oil is as good as gone?" westwind.

    It's already nearly run out in several states which are doing quite well. Dubai, perhaps the best example, have become huge traders and foreign investors. Kuwait, even during its occupation was making huge money from real estate overseas and continues to invest heavily off its shore as well as building it's own tourism. All nations are capable of investing in their own people's education, the best resource of all--Iranians, for example, are better educated than most nations (including probably the US) and considered the shining cultural center for most nations in the region - mineral resources are helpful but don't make a nation.

    I think we worry too much.
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; September 28th, 2012 at 05:46 PM.
    sculptor likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #132  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by westwind View Post
    kojax... you cannot bring economic means and apply them in totallity to the Islam Peoples. Over 200,000,000 indonesians are muslim. Shall we starve them? Or muslims in The UK? In Africa? My fundermental question is, do Muslims require Islam ( the Koran ) to exist as a People? Is this what defines Them? History shows that it is very difficult indeed to separate a People from their chosen Faith. ( the lions in the Colisseum, licking their chops over Christians ) Is it necessary to separate a People from their Faith to bring about change in attitude? It is the abuse of this Faith and its Tenets that gives rise to Fanatics, both internally and externally. Is it then an unstable Faith? Wanting in new direction?

    Good point. The guys who crashed into the WTC on 911 were for the most part, affluent themselves. The affluent Muslims will fight for the poor Muslims kind of like how some eco-terrorists fight against deforestation.

    The key is to quit focusing on the terrorists themselves, and go after their motivation. What is their motivation? Apparently it is the suffering of oppressed Muslims all over the world. So, now we have three options:

    1) - Give them what they want

    2) - Don't give them what they want.

    3) - Find what little they already have of what they're trying to get from us, and take that away from them.

    I like 3 because it's pro-active and I have found such tactics to be effective in my own life.

    If what they want is for us to treat the poor oppressed Muslims of the world better, then I think we should treat them worse. Just simply say we refuse to be the least bit kind until they use pacifism to advocate their needs.

    Kind of like making a little kid say "please" instead of acting out when they want a desert.


    Isolation, indifference? Will this help the problem go away? Completely ignor the stew-pot and let it boil over? Have we arrived at a time in History where the Islamic Faith as a Movement, held up by Muslims, has reached saturation point.? ie; No more Followers to recruit? No more Countries or Peoples to convert? If so, what do you believe the next move will be by Islamic Peoples? Now that the Oil is as good as gone? westwind.
    They'll never run out of babies to indoctrinate. They can produce them in their own villages with the help of their wives.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #133  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Have you ever been part of a religion? Do you think Muslims are going to listen to a non-Muslim tell them what their religion believes?
    I'm not trying to ignore the rest of your post, but this is the key from my perspective.

    We're trying to convince people in the middle east that we are not their enemy. They have no reason to listen to us. There is a huge divide between us, both cultural and religious.

    What we need to do is convince the non-extremist Muslims in the middle east that we can be friends. That we don't have to have a huge divide between us. If we can narrow that gap by working with them on a closer level, developing more than just oil deals with them, maybe THEY can stand up to these radical groups. They're the ones who are going to have to help convince their own people that Americans are not the bad guys and that the radicals are the aberration.

    I don't think we will ever get the every-man and -woman middle easterners on our side by bombing their cities and running troops through their streets and telling them how to govern their countries.

    I just don't think this conflict can be solved with bombs. It has to be solved by shifting the ideology away from this radicalism we've been seeing.

    I put myself in their shoes. I'm more likely to be swayed to someone's cause by a voice of reason in my own nation than a threat halfway across the world.
    westwind likes this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #134  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I had posted this in the antifertilizer thread, but, perhaps, it is more appropriate here?:

    a quote from AuH2O
    I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!
    If we constantly threaten other's freedoms (perceived and real)with our military might.
    Do we not invite extremism?
    If their armies were here, would some of us not strike them in their homes and workplaces?
    ............................
    on another note
    the tv said that the FBI in Libya, suspected that the attack was a planned terrorist attack and they were investigating an Al queda connection
    ...
    kinda reminds me of a phrase from an old movie
    "round up the usual suspects"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #135  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    If we constantly threaten other's freedoms (perceived and real)with our military might.
    Do we not invite extremism?
    I would suggest that we should expect the same fervent extremism to be presented by those in the middle east in defense of their way of life that we would exhibit in defense of ours. The more force we apply to them, the more they will apply back at us. Do we push each other harder until one of us crumbles to dust, or do we back off and find another way?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #136  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    This all sounds quite reminiscent of that nut that wanted to burn a copy of the koran, and the Government were going nuts trying to persuade him not to. He got plenty of publicity out of it though. Just seems though this the Government were to late getting to the film makers to persuade them not to, it's not stopped them from extracting some retribution though as at least one man linked to the film is now being held without bail, whether you think this is right or not it still seems to be the way governments handle it.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #137  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    This all sounds quite reminiscent of that nut that wanted to burn a copy of the koran, and the Government were going nuts trying to persuade him not to. He got plenty of publicity out of it though. Just seems though this the Government were to late getting to the film makers to persuade them not to, it's not stopped them from extracting some retribution though as at least one man linked to the film is now being held without bail, whether you think this is right or not it still seems to be the way governments handle it.
    He's being held for breaking parole from other crimes (he was a sham artist).
    Anti-Islam filmmaker held at Los Angeles federal jail | Reuters
    Flick Montana likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #138  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Yeah, some freedom-of-speech constitution-thumpers are up in arms about his arrest. They are falsely attributing it to the movie. The fact is, the guy was a scum bag in more ways than one and check fraud got him locked up.

    I believe the pastor who burned the Koran was one of the people who screened his movie at their church, but don't hold me to that.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #139  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    He's being held for breaking parole from other crimes (he was a sham artist).
    a sham artist
    and
    a scam artist
    Lynx_Fox likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #140  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    It does kind of take the mickey though all this over a film, nearly the same over a book, when you think of what's going on in Syria, you kind of think they should to be busy trying to stop what's happening there, I mean come on learn to prioritise at least.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #141  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post

    What we need to do is convince the non-extremist Muslims in the middle east that we can be friends. That we don't have to have a huge divide between us. If we can narrow that gap by working with them on a closer level, developing more than just oil deals with them, maybe THEY can stand up to these radical groups. They're the ones who are going to have to help convince their own people that Americans are not the bad guys and that the radicals are the aberration.

    I don't think we will ever get the every-man and -woman middle easterners on our side by bombing their cities and running troops through their streets and telling them how to govern their countries.

    I just don't think this conflict can be solved with bombs. It has to be solved by shifting the ideology away from this radicalism we've been seeing.

    I put myself in their shoes. I'm more likely to be swayed to someone's cause by a voice of reason in my own nation than a threat halfway across the world.
    If we want to be friends, we have to start listening to them. But we've got to do like I was saying with the little kid who throws a tantrum. Only listen to them when they voice their wishes through a pacifist medium. (Or only listen to the child when they say "please".) Malcolm X didn't get white Americans to listen to the needs and wishes of black people. Martin Luther King did. I'm sure Malcolm X served a purpose in the struggle, but talking with him wouldn't have facilitated any real or useful communication.

    The trouble right now is that Islam doesn't have a Martin Luther King figure. They've got lots and lots of Malcolm X figures, and that's about it. How do we get all the Malcolm X's to shut up, so a Martin Luther King can get a few words in edgewise?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    If we constantly threaten other's freedoms (perceived and real)with our military might.
    Do we not invite extremism?
    I would suggest that we should expect the same fervent extremism to be presented by those in the middle east in defense of their way of life that we would exhibit in defense of ours. The more force we apply to them, the more they will apply back at us. Do we push each other harder until one of us crumbles to dust, or do we back off and find another way?
    I guess you already know my answer. Except I think we should push them until it's clear they will crumble to dust, and then extend them mercy at the last minute.

    The way they will know we are not, and never were, truly their enemy is when they've exposed their jugular and we don't bite it. When it's clear we could if we wanted to, and we don't. Otherwise they'll always think the only reason we don't is because we can't, and they'll continue to mobilize their forces to make sure that we continue to not be able.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #142  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    If we want to be friends, we have to start listening to them. But we've got to do like I was saying with the little kid who throws a tantrum. Only listen to them when they voice their wishes through a pacifist medium. (Or only listen to the child when they say "please".) Malcolm X didn't get white Americans to listen to the needs and wishes of black people. Martin Luther King did. I'm sure Malcolm X served a purpose in the struggle, but talking with him wouldn't have facilitated any real or useful communication.

    The trouble right now is that Islam doesn't have a Martin Luther King figure. They've got lots and lots of Malcolm X figures, and that's about it. How do we get all the Malcolm X's to shut up, so a Martin Luther King can get a few words in edgewise?

    I guess you already know my answer. Except I think we should push them until it's clear they will crumble to dust, and then extend them mercy at the last minute.

    The way they will know we are not, and never were, truly their enemy is when they've exposed their jugular and we don't bite it. When it's clear we could if we wanted to, and we don't. Otherwise they'll always think the only reason we don't is because we can't, and they'll continue to mobilize their forces to make sure that we continue to not be able.
    The reasonable and rational voice is the voice of the people. Look at the uprising in Egypt. There are people who want their freedoms, who want a change in their government, and many of these people are young. They are reachable as well through modern social internet venues. These people do not want to see their country at war anymore. If the US reaches out to these citizens instead of to their corrupt leadership, we can help them change their country from within. The problem the US has is that we have to then accept that leadership as the choice of their people. We cannot deny them simply because we do not agree with them.

    I also find the idea of taking on the merciful God character reprehensible. That is not the business of the US, nor is it the persona we should be putting out there to the rest of the world. We need to stop pretending we are the dominant world power and that babysitting the rest of the world is our prerogative. I'm not isolationist, but the meddling of the United States is going to keep us in hot water with other nations around the globe. We can be a presence without being a force.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #143  
    Forum Ph.D. Dave Wilson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cumbria UK
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    If we want to be friends, we have to start listening to them. But we've got to do like I was saying with the little kid who throws a tantrum. Only listen to them when they voice their wishes through a pacifist medium. (Or only listen to the child when they say "please".) Malcolm X didn't get white Americans to listen to the needs and wishes of black people. Martin Luther King did. I'm sure Malcolm X served a purpose in the struggle, but talking with him wouldn't have facilitated any real or useful communication.

    The trouble right now is that Islam doesn't have a Martin Luther King figure. They've got lots and lots of Malcolm X figures, and that's about it. How do we get all the Malcolm X's to shut up, so a Martin Luther King can get a few words in edgewise?

    I guess you already know my answer. Except I think we should push them until it's clear they will crumble to dust, and then extend them mercy at the last minute.

    The way they will know we are not, and never were, truly their enemy is when they've exposed their jugular and we don't bite it. When it's clear we could if we wanted to, and we don't. Otherwise they'll always think the only reason we don't is because we can't, and they'll continue to mobilize their forces to make sure that we continue to not be able.
    The reasonable and rational voice is the voice of the people. Look at the uprising in Egypt. There are people who want their freedoms, who want a change in their government, and many of these people are young. They are reachable as well through modern social internet venues. These people do not want to see their country at war anymore. If the US reaches out to these citizens instead of to their corrupt leadership, we can help them change their country from within. The problem the US has is that we have to then accept that leadership as the choice of their people. We cannot deny them simply because we do not agree with them.

    I also find the idea of taking on the merciful God character reprehensible. That is not the business of the US, nor is it the persona we should be putting out there to the rest of the world. We need to stop pretending we are the dominant world power and that babysitting the rest of the world is our prerogative. I'm not isolationist, but the meddling of the United States is going to keep us in hot water with other nations around the globe. We can be a presence without being a force.
    Flick, you mentioned modern social internet venues. Here is a fine example of Muslims going off on one in Bangladesh. They accused a Buddhist of posting a photograph on Facebook that insulted Islam. The ensuing Muslim shit storm created mayhem, but thank Allah, as we do have moderate Muslims too.
    Muslims set fire to temples and homes in Bangladesh in protest at Buddhist man insulting their religion | Mail Online
    Latinos are Republican. They just don't know it yet.
    Ronald Reagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #144  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    It's the rational and moderate ones that are the key. Rather than punishing everyone in the middle east, we need to put more effort into encouraging the Muslims who don't want their entire lives to be war.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #145  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I hope that the arsonists are caught and made to pay for the rebuilding,
    personal liability is the key to controlling mob rampages-------------and the dummies are probably bragging about their destruction on-line----catch one---catch all

    if you were a muslim, and knew that your neighbor was one of the rioters, would you turn him in?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #146  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    The reasonable and rational voice is the voice of the people. Look at the uprising in Egypt. There are people who want their freedoms, who want a change in their government, and many of these people are young. They are reachable as well through modern social internet venues. These people do not want to see their country at war anymore. If the US reaches out to these citizens instead of to their corrupt leadership, we can help them change their country from within. The problem the US has is that we have to then accept that leadership as the choice of their people. We cannot deny them simply because we do not agree with them.
    That's the picture you see?

    The picture I see is a bunch of adolescent males who know they'll never hold a good job, but who want to distinguish themselves any way they can. Those boys want a war. They want it desperately. It's their only hope of living a life that won't be forgotten.

    As for the women, they well know that if those boys don't make war on us, they're going to turn inward on each other. And they'd rather raise their children in an environment where the wars are being fought far away from home. If the boys don't find an external war to fight, the women and children will find themselves living in a wasteland of gang violence.



    I also find the idea of taking on the merciful God character reprehensible. That is not the business of the US, nor is it the persona we should be putting out there to the rest of the world. We need to stop pretending we are the dominant world power and that babysitting the rest of the world is our prerogative. I'm not isolationist, but the meddling of the United States is going to keep us in hot water with other nations around the globe. We can be a presence without being a force.
    Our problem isn't that we're world police, it's that we can't decide which one we want to be. It really is an "either" "or". Either we have to stay out of everyone else's business entirely, or take fully on the role of leadership, pin a badge on our chest and declare ourselves to be the town sheriff.

    If we stay in between, then the role effectively taking on (de - facto) is that of the vigilante, sewing chaos left and right by dishing out our own brand of street justice, and then leaving everyone else to clean up the mess.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #147  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    I've said all I basically have to say. It sounds like you already know what these people are thinking and how they are going to behave, so in the face of such blinding insight I cannot offer any more suggestions.

    For what it's worth, I sincerely hope that your aggressive and, at least to me, violent mindset is not shared by the majority.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #148  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Why don't you try putting yourself in their shoes? Then maybe that insight wouldn't seem so "blind" to you. People are constantly trying to predict what impoverished populations are going to do based on the assumptions they work from as wealthy westerners. By "wealthy" I don't mean just having a nice house ... etc now. It's having the prospect of it.

    Most of the third world utterly lacks the upward mobility we enjoy in the West. It's not just about being poor now. It's about having a very nearly absolute 0% hope of ever, in your wildest dreams, hoping to have any more (or for your kids to.)

    If violence is the only path to upward mobility, then how plausible is it to assume people wouldn't want it? We in the West don't want it, because we've got a lot of other options. Just imagine if you didn't. Or at least try to imagine it. Imagine choosing between the prospect of dying a violent death, and the prospect of living a long life in a state of constant desperation with no light at the end of the tunnel.

    Tell me if you're able to arrive at a different conclusion than I am, and please tell me whatever you can about how you managed to do it. I don't see any way to do so. It appears to me to be an utterly inevitable conclusion.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #149  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Why don't you try putting yourself in their shoes?
    That would not afford me an accumulated lifetime of experience in a war-torn part of the world. I would just be a middle-class white American in raggedy shoes.

    You, however, seem completely capable of putting yourself right there in their mindset. In fact, you already seem to have all the answers so I'm sure nothing I can contribute will have any effect on your opinion. I was mostly stating my case for the benefit of people who are analyzing all the input from members, not someone who refuses to accept another opinion as valid under any circumstance.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #150  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Why don't you try putting yourself in their shoes? Then maybe that insight wouldn't seem so "blind" to you. People are constantly trying to predict what impoverished populations are going to do based on the assumptions they work from as wealthy westerners. By "wealthy" I don't mean just having a nice house ... etc now. It's having the prospect of it.

    Most of the third world utterly lacks the upward mobility we enjoy in the West. It's not just about being poor now. It's about having a very nearly absolute 0% hope of ever, in your wildest dreams, hoping to have any more (or for your kids to.)

    If violence is the only path to upward mobility, then how plausible is it to assume people wouldn't want it? We in the West don't want it, because we've got a lot of other options. Just imagine if you didn't. Or at least try to imagine it. Imagine choosing between the prospect of dying a violent death, and the prospect of living a long life in a state of constant desperation with no light at the end of the tunnel.

    Tell me if you're able to arrive at a different conclusion than I am, and please tell me whatever you can about how you managed to do it. I don't see any way to do so. It appears to me to be an utterly inevitable conclusion.
    I agree with much of this post. Poverty and limited opportunities are more than anything else, including religion, are at the root cause of violence. One part is disagree with it here "Most of the third world utterly lacks the upward mobility we enjoy in the West." Actually most of the developing world has more social mobility than the Western nations (think China, the Arab coastal nations, India)--particularly in the US (which has the worst upward mobility among industrialized nations)--and as we've shown a couple times now violence is lower in many of those places (regardless of their religion). But we could use the US subcultures as a model--to a large degree deeply impoverished minority groups account for the disproportional amount of the violence in the US--why? Because we have a system which denies them opportunities--harassing them for minding their own business (icetea and scittles) often busting them as young adult even for for victimless crimes--giving them a label as felons for life which means they'll never have a good job and can't vote--so they do violence.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #151  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Why don't you try putting yourself in their shoes? Then maybe that insight wouldn't seem so "blind" to you. People are constantly trying to predict what impoverished populations are going to do based on the assumptions they work from as wealthy westerners. By "wealthy" I don't mean just having a nice house ... etc now. It's having the prospect of it.

    Most of the third world utterly lacks the upward mobility we enjoy in the West. It's not just about being poor now. It's about having a very nearly absolute 0% hope of ever, in your wildest dreams, hoping to have any more (or for your kids to.)

    If violence is the only path to upward mobility, then how plausible is it to assume people wouldn't want it? We in the West don't want it, because we've got a lot of other options. Just imagine if you didn't. Or at least try to imagine it. Imagine choosing between the prospect of dying a violent death, and the prospect of living a long life in a state of constant desperation with no light at the end of the tunnel.

    Tell me if you're able to arrive at a different conclusion than I am, and please tell me whatever you can about how you managed to do it. I don't see any way to do so. It appears to me to be an utterly inevitable conclusion.
    I agree with much of this post. Poverty and limited opportunities are more than anything else, including religion, are at the root cause of violence. One part is disagree with it here "Most of the third world utterly lacks the upward mobility we enjoy in the West." Actually most of the developing world has more social mobility than the Western nations (think China, the Arab coastal nations, India)--particularly in the US (which has the worst upward mobility among industrialized nations)--
    I don't know. I had an econ professor from India go into great length once in class about how much he hadn't observed that to be true.

    I'm sure if you know the right people you can go anywhere in nearly any country. If you're born into the right family that has the right connections, or you're just very good at manipulating the corruption around you to help the right people make a lot of money.

    Of course, you're also right in stating that a lot of the USA's upward mobility in terms of finance is just a fable we tell ourselves. We're just too dumb to realize we're desperate.

    and as we've shown a couple times now violence is lower in many of those places (regardless of their religion). But we could use the US subcultures as a model--to a large degree deeply impoverished minority groups account for the disproportional amount of the violence in the US--why? Because we have a system which denies them opportunities--harassing them for minding their own business (icetea and scittles) often busting them as young adult even for for victimless crimes--giving them a label as felons for life which means they'll never have a good job and can't vote--so they do violence.
    I used to think drugs were a victimless racket, until it occurred to me one day: what if a person sees a drug deal go down and doesn't feel like keeping quiet about it? Will the drug dealer just shrug and say, "ok, you got me" to the police, or will they silence the witness?

    Now if drugs weren't illegal, selling them also wouldn't be a very profitable racket. So probably that same person would go find something else that still is illegal and profitable. It will always be something. And they'll always have to be willing to kill in order to do it, whatever it is. In the 40's maybe it was running alcohol.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #152  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    And they'll always have to be willing to kill
    maybe, maybe not

    One way to find out
    decriminalize all drugs, and bring our military home,(we just keep poking the tiger, and act surprised when it reacts)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #153  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    the US (which has the worst upward mobility among industrialized nations)--and as we've shown a couple times now violence is lower in many of those places (regardless of their religion). But we could use the US subcultures as a model--to a large degree deeply impoverished minority groups account for the disproportional amount of the violence in the US--why? Because we have a system which denies them opportunities--harassing them for minding their own business (icetea and scittles) often busting them as young adult even for for victimless crimes--giving them a label as felons for life which means they'll never have a good job and can't vote--so they do violence.
    Where do you get your statistic that the US has the worst upward mobility? There are plenty of people who have worked their way up starting with nothing. Are you seriously saying that some neigborhood watch person keeping an eye on a suspicious looking character in his neighborhood is keeping minorities impoverished? Ridiculous.

    Nobody is forcing anyone to become a drug dealer. As a matter of fact, Muslim nations have much stricter drug laws than the US, so by your theory, they should have prisons full of non-upwardly mobile citizens.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #154  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Where do you get your statistic that the US has the worst upward mobility? There are plenty of people who have worked their way up starting with nothing.
    There's been quite a few studies about it:
    https://www.russellsage.org/publications/parents-to-children]Pew Center on the States
    [/URL]
    Which is the larger summary of 16 related studies that all conclude nearly the same thing--mobility is among the worse in the US compared to other industrialized nations.
    https://www.russellsage.org/publications/parents-to-children

    This one explores the high correlation between society inequality and lack of social mobility...the US level of economic inequality is approaching developing nations, a concern both form the mobility point of view address in the study, as for political stability because inequal societies tend to revolt more often.
    An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
    Here's another that finds that same things, though it's focus is on developing a predictive model.
    An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie


    Here's another from the Brookings institute which is neat because it shows the perceptions compared to the realities of economic mobility: The US scores high for perceptions of mobility among its citizens, but in actually has relative low mobility compared to many others.
    http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2008/2/economic mobility sawhill/02_economic_mobility_sawhill_ch3.PDF

    We could get into the numerous reasons and what not here--but from the studies (and personal experience) much has to do with a combination of cultural factors (many of my friends from the poor fishing town never wanted better than to struggle in fishing like their family had been doing for generations), education (my town got 1/3 the money per kid as a school in Portland ME--in some states it used to be 7:1 difference depending on what side of the tracks you were born on--the huge problem with local school funding), and opportunity (most of my town couldn't hope to go to college--only 2 of about 80 in my class eventually made it to college--me because of a near death fishing trip and brains enough to get me a free ride after a couple years).

    Are you seriously saying that some neighborhood watch person keeping an eye on a suspicious looking character in his neighborhood is keeping minorities impoverished? Ridiculous.
    If it stopped with just eyeing them i guess not--but of course the reason they are "suspicious" is because of their skin color, which is wrong on every level. But of course it doesn't stop there. Following them, reporting them for doing nothing wrong etc. it is a pattern of harassment of minorities that pervades some parts of the US, reduced their self esteem, interfering with their daily lives, and contributing to their disfranchisement from society including doing the very things that would improve their condition like going to college--after being oppressed all your life the last thing you want to do it join their prejudices society. I saw it in Maine, Southeast Texas, Eastern Virginia, Kentucky and while living in Colorado--things like blacks and Hispanics pulled over for minor reasons and having everything in the car dragged out into the rain in what were probably unconstitutional searches, white judges reflexively issuing warrants to turn a minority's houses upside down on the flimsiest evidence such as a phone call from a prejudiced neighbor--this stuff happens all the time.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #155  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    It is a garbage statistic which doesn't tell much if anything about opportunity. In a country where everybody is equally miserable, the stat would show wonderful "upward mobility" just because of the lack of income disparity. Of course, there are lots of people who are happy enough to be miserable, as long as their neighbors are equally miserable.

    The "upward mobility" could be accomplished by confiscating wealth from those who work hard and earn, to those who are slackers. This to me is the opposite of opportunity.

    There is no evidence that George Zimmerman was motivated by race. None whatsoever.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #156  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    It is a garbage statistic which doesn't tell much if anything about opportunity. In a country where everybody is equally miserable, the stat would show wonderful "upward mobility" just because of the lack of income disparity. Of course, there are lots of people who are happy enough to be miserable, as long as their neighbors are equally miserable.
    People in Canada, Denmark and Sweden are equally miserable? The data is clear, from multiple studies that people born rich in the US tend to stay rich through their lives, while those born in poverty strongly tend to remain that way--and those tendencies are stronger, for whatever reasons than in many other nations--some rich some poor. I was personally disappointing by the studies--not such by the evidence itself, which I'm not surprised by because I've seen it myself as I've traveled the world--but because so many American's can't come to accept that despite our many strengths, American still has a lot of problems--including this big one. And lets not forget the linkage between this low mobility, particularly among the most impoverished in America, and what makes the US also one of the more violent--as Kojak correctly identified, it's one of the main reasons.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #157  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Are you seriously saying that some neighborhood watch person keeping an eye on a suspicious looking character in his neighborhood is keeping minorities impoverished? Ridiculous.
    If it stopped with just eyeing them i guess not--but of course the reason they are "suspicious" is because of their skin color, which is wrong on every level. But of course it doesn't stop there. Following them, reporting them for doing nothing wrong etc. it is a pattern of harassment of minorities that pervades some parts of the US, reduced their self esteem, interfering with their daily lives, and contributing to their disfranchisement from society including doing the very things that would improve their condition like going to college--after being oppressed all your life the last thing you want to do it join their prejudices society. I saw it in Maine, Southeast Texas, Eastern Virginia, Kentucky and while living in Colorado--things like blacks and Hispanics pulled over for minor reasons and having everything in the car dragged out into the rain in what were probably unconstitutional searches, white judges reflexively issuing warrants to turn a minority's houses upside down on the flimsiest evidence such as a phone call from a prejudiced neighbor--this stuff happens all the time.

    The flip side is that, also we've got racially self identifying gangs turning around and using that excuse and public sympathy to hide drugs in the more polarized communities, because they know the police are not able to operate freely in those neighborhoods. The difficulty of finding cooperation may cause those police to feel like the whole community is united against them, either passive aggressively, or outright.

    .....and I'm not sure they're wrong. Not every single last white person is racist against minorities, either, but we talk about racism as a problem in our country. And similarly not ever single member of such a community is resentful and deliberately unhelpful to the police. But insofar as we can make a broadly sweeping statement like "white society is racist", it's got to be equally fair game to say that many minority subgroups are "anti-cop".

    Maybe the police are simply responding to hostility with hostility.

    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    And they'll always have to be willing to kill
    maybe, maybe not

    One way to find out
    decriminalize all drugs, and bring our military home,(we just keep poking the tiger, and act surprised when it reacts)

    Basing off perhaps a friend of a friend who was a drug dealer.... Drug dealing isn't like selling newspapers. The gangs are very territorial. That is to say that if you try and sell on their turf, they're not going submit a letter of complaint to the local chamber of commerce.

    On the flip side, their customers are well.... drug addicts. What do you do when an addict runs out of money and starts threatening to narc you out?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #158  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    So to recap, there was no protest, mob or even a small group of people upset about this film in Libya, this is just what Obama and his administration claimed, right? In fact, there was no one outside this building and Al Qaeda attacked, blew through the doors and started killing people, correct?

    These Americans, before this full blown attack on the US was carried out by al qaeda, asked/begged Obama and his administration to give them proper security and Obama's team told them "no, shut up, stop asking, we are not going to do anything for you." 9/11 2012 goes down, al qaeda is highly successful in attacking america again, Obama and his team tell the world and every american that this was not al qaeda but a small protesting mob who was upset about a youtube video, he and his team then go about condemning the video and campaigning, even skipping multiple meeting and briefs with the intel community..... I think Obama, immediately after the 9/11 2012 attack on America went to Vegas for fun, fundraising and shoulder rubbing, huh? He even talked in front of the UN about how the video is horrid and muslims and islam is great and he still did not tell the american people that al qaeda attacked america again.. He even attacked Romney for telling him to shut up and stop talking about a video... Am I missing anything?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #159  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzales56 View Post
    So to recap, there was no protest, mob or even a small group of people upset about this film in Libya, this is just what Obama and his administration claimed, right? In fact, there was no one outside this building and Al Qaeda attacked, blew through the doors and started killing people, correct?

    These Americans, before this full blown attack on the US was carried out by al qaeda, asked/begged Obama and his administration to give them proper security and Obama's team told them "no, shut up, stop asking, we are not going to do anything for you." 9/11 2012 goes down, al qaeda is highly successful in attacking america again, Obama and his team tell the world and every american that this was not al qaeda but a small protesting mob who was upset about a youtube video, he and his team then go about condemning the video and campaigning, even skipping multiple meeting and briefs with the intel community..... I think Obama, immediately after the 9/11 2012 attack on America went to Vegas for fun, fundraising and shoulder rubbing, huh? He even talked in front of the UN about how the video is horrid and muslims and islam is great and he still did not tell the american people that al qaeda attacked america again.. He even attacked Romney for telling him to shut up and stop talking about a video... Am I missing anything?
    Right, and the sad thing is, most people probably still think it was a mob protesting the film. The retraction was in the news for about a day, in most of the Obama-compliant news media except Fox, whereas they went on and on for over a week with the false story about the video.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #160  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    To be fair the administration never ruled out terrorism, in fact it was brought up as a possibility by the president the very next day in the Rose garden. Talking about the vid to the UN really has no baring, obviously there were and still are protect (some violent) to the vid going on.

    Also there's Congress cutting the state department security budget by 330 million dollars, far deeper than the administration recommended. And the deliberate confusion by some between consulate, which are placed for convenience, not security, and almost never get military detachments, and embassies which are usually well fortified.

    I do hope they get the ones responsible--though there's an excellent chance they won't like thousands of similar sized attacks on our troops in Iraq and Afghan (or American inner city gang fights for that matter) that never get resolved even in the country we occupy.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #161  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Susan Rice out and out lied about it and made up a whole elaborate story based on no evidence at all, and contradicting the Libyan govermnent.
    Ambassador Susan Rice: Libya Attack Not Premeditated - ABC News
    U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi last week was not premeditated, directly contradicting top Libyan officials who say the attack was planned in advance.
    “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo,” Rice told me this morning on “This Week.”
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #162  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Susan Rice out and out lied

    Really. Is there really any evidence that at the point (four days after) that she'd seen vids of the attack that showed there was no protest going on at the same time? The new government didn't have a clue either and his statements sounded like an excuse to blame outsiders. I doubt it--she wasn't' in charge,or even connected to the investigation. She even admits her comments are preliminary pending the investigation, which is pretty much the same position that the president had at that time.



    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #163  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Don't make excuses for these idiots. If you don't have any facts, you just say so. You don't fabricate some elaborate scenario and pretend like you have some evidence to show that actually happened. That is dishonest.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #164  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Don't make excuses for these idiots. If you don't have any facts, you just say so. You don't fabricate some elaborate scenario and pretend like you have some evidence to show that actually happened. That is dishonest.
    Not too elaborate assuming the same thing was happening as was happening all over over the Middle East and this one got carried away--I dare say that most people watching the events unfold in the region about the vid protest assumed the same thing.

    I agree she was premature in her conclusion and the caveat about the investigation not strong enough. She would have been better to simply shut about about it, or as the president did numerous times, allow the possibility of a terror attack and center her remarks on the investigation's results as they came in. But what she said is very different from knowing what actually happened and saying something different.

    Lied is simply too strong a word for her statement.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #165  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Their story is not even credible. Here is Obama on Letterman, a week after the attack, blaming it on a "shadowy character" who made the film. Do you seriously think the CIA did not know they were hit by al Quaeda for a whole week? Is the CIA in the habit of operating on assumptions, suppositions and guesses? Bullshit.
    Obama: Anti-Islam filmmaker a 'shadowy character' - seattlepi.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #166  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Their story is not even credible. Here is Obama on Letterman, a week after the attack, blaming it on a "shadowy character" who made the film. Do you seriously think the CIA did not know they were hit by al Quaeda for a whole week? Is the CIA in the habit of operating on assumptions, suppositions and guesses? Bullshit.
    Obama: Anti-Islam filmmaker a 'shadowy character' - seattlepi.com
    Just how did you get that from the story?

    One paragraph is talking about the vid---which in fact, as we know now, was made by a shadowy figure who's not been arrested for breaking his parole. Anti-Islam Filmmaker Nakoula Basseley Nakoula Arrested on Probation Violation - ABC News

    The next paragraph ends only partially attributes the attack with the vid and says "The White House says the matter still is under investigation and that assessment could change."

    "Is the CIA in the habit of operating on assumptions, suppositions and guesses?" We should all hope they aren't--but given the number of friends I've known and tens of thousands of crippled young Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraq citizens killed based on so called CIA intelligence, how things should be, and how things really are, aren't the same thing. Obviously the CIA completely missed this attack from what we know--not really a surprise given the continuing chaos in the country, the CIAs low presence and the small number of people involved in the attack.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #167  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Watch the video. On September 18 Letterman asks him about the attack in Benghazi, and he immediately starts talking about the shadowy figure with the video. Obama: Consulate attack not an act of war - CBS News Video

    Now compare to this article on September 12, the day after the attack, which indicates they already knew what it was.
    Libya Attack May Have Been Planned, U.S. Officials Say

    Now tell me Obama isn't blatantly lying.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #168  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Watch the video. On September 18 Letterman asks him about the attack in Benghazi, and he immediately starts talking about the shadowy figure with the video. Obama: Consulate attack not an act of war - CBS News Video

    Now compare to this article on September 12, the day after the attack, which indicates they already knew what it was.
    Libya Attack May Have Been Planned, U.S. Officials Say

    Now tell me Obama isn't blatantly lying.
    The president admits openly it is a terror attack and thinks that the terrorist used the vidio as an excuse to attack the consulate. Now how is that not a reasonable conclusion--? How is that lying?
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #169  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Watch the video. On September 18 Letterman asks him about the attack in Benghazi, and he immediately starts talking about the shadowy figure with the video. Obama: Consulate attack not an act of war - CBS News Video

    Now compare to this article on September 12, the day after the attack, which indicates they already knew what it was.
    Libya Attack May Have Been Planned, U.S. Officials Say

    Now tell me Obama isn't blatantly lying.
    The president admits openly it is a terror attack and thinks that the terrorist used the vidio as an excuse to attack the consulate. Now how is that not a reasonable conclusion--? How is that lying?i
    Bull.. Obama and his team flat out said that it was a protest gone wrong,when in fact there was absolutely no protest at all. This was a full blown attack by al qaeda. Very few people know that to this day because the president flat out misled the america people and told them that this was a protest of angry people due to some video. All lies... This info spread by Obama is false.. It is untrue, it is a lie, and to suggest that the president of the united states was clueless, had no idea, was as dumb and ignorant as they come, is also a lie.

    To this day most americans and the rest of the western world do not know there was no protest and al qaeda flat out attacked america, and Obama wanted it that way and flat out spun it that way to help himself politically. It is an abuse of power, anti american and shameful. It is sick that a president would lie and spin in this manner.. He has lied and gone out of his way to shelter/deflect from/protect al qaeda while attacking and blaming free speech and american values concerning free speech.

    I hope Romney cleans his lying clock for this and exposes him in the next debate.

    Protection for our men and women in peaceful places should be cut but, extra should be given to our people in libya etc.. No need to arm our Canadian ambassador to the teeth,, Cut their security some but for goodness sake, protect americans when you send them to work around al qaeda cells. This garbage about cuts being the reason why Obama sent them to their deaths, like the rest of Obamas lies and spin, will not work. I am tired of this guy hating on american rights and american people while loving on islam extremist and lying to americans when they attack Us.
    Last edited by gonzales56; October 13th, 2012 at 02:51 AM.
    Dave Wilson likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Anti-Einstein = Anti-Semitic?
    By GiantEvil in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2010, 11:37 PM
  2. Viral anti virus (VAV) the theory of true anti virus
    By hazem_boss in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 11th, 2010, 08:43 AM
  3. Anti movie piracy
    By Aiplex in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2009, 11:58 PM
  4. ISLAM
    By sherif003 in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: October 6th, 2007, 09:25 PM
  5. ISLAM FAILS SCIENCE, +50 SCIENTIFIC ERRORS IN ISLAM
    By FEARDEATH in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2007, 01:13 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •