It’s kind of impressive that on the same page of the same thread I can be accused by Starving Artist of making a strawman argument in one direction because “no one has argued that […] Islam throughout history has been worse then everybody else”, and then accused by Shot From Guns of making a strawman argument in the other direction because “nobody here […] is advocating tolerance of these shitheads”. I think after 20+ pages, folks may be feeling a little bit tired.
To clarify, I’m not accusing anybody here (not counting the recently banned, natch) either of trying to make excuses for radical Islamists or trying to condemn Islam as a whole for the sins of the radical Islamists.
However, I don’t see anything wrong with explicitly making the point that both of those are bad things.
Damuri Ajashi: Making stuff up is old hat for ol’ magellan. This post of mine sums up his modus operandi succinctly, IMHO. And, surprise, surprise! He trotted out the same tired bigotry in another thread where he blamed all Muslims for the actions of a few and, of course, ignored the bad actions of a few Christians.
Man, you’re dumb. Oh, and nice Dio move there with “my post is my cite”. :rolleyes: You’re such an asshole I can only imagine that you stick your head in the toilet bowl to sneeze.
[QUOTE=Monty;13475315[This post of mine]
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12634222&postcount=165) sums up his modus operandi succinctly, IMHO.
[/QUOTE]
Monty, I am not sure why you are giving magellan01 grief about his comment, there.
After all, he is pretty much stating, openly, that when we look at people on the Right of American politics, until we “have a fool-proof way cull the evil-trying-to-kill-us ones from the peaceful ones” “to be wary of the whole lot.”
Such a modest proposal.
And, magellan, that’s not a “my post is my cite” citation. I’m merely stating that I’ve summed up your shenanigans before on the topic of Muslims and provided proof that I have summed it up before.
I think its deeper than simple bigotry. Simple bigotry can be overcome by a conscious effort.
When that bigotry is married with fear, reason simply cannot prevail as long as you can make ANY argument to sustain the bigotry..
For example, one woman in my neighborhood was on the 395 when the plane flew into the pentagon. She was always a mild bigot and somewhat uncomfortable around poor minorities. Then she felt like that these muslims might fly a plane into her house or set off a bomb at her kid’s soccer practice and suddenly she had opinions that she didn’t want her kids to hear.
Magellan, if you have kids, how comfortable would you feel sharing these feelings with them?
Are you kidding. I make them repeat what I say 100 times. And if they make even one little mistake, they get the ruler on the back of their little hands. Two mistakes, they get the ruler and no dinner.
What you seem to not comprehend is that there really are people who want to kill us. Really. They killed some of us already and others have tried and failed. Still others have sworn to do more damage to us than 9/11 did. So, some fear is both justified and healthy. And these people share one thing—they’re radical Islamists. We certainly can quibble as to exactly how much of a threat there is (which the government is constantly trying to assess), and based on that how much fear is healthy. Healthy because it will cause vigilance.
But you’ll have none of that. In your child mind you see me as leaping from: threat > identify threat > radical Islam, and jump to an accusation of racist or bigot.
Let me guess: They accuse them of hating Islam and wanting the crusaders to win, right?
Just once I’d like to see a debate between a Republican and an actual jihadist. Instead it’s always the moderates on either side who get caught in the crossfire.
Thanks for the clarification, I do know that Salafi and Wahhabi as currently used generally refer to the same radical-Islamist ideological movement, and I should have expressed that more clearly in my post.
What you seem to not comprehend is that there really are people who just so happen to be Christians who really want to kill others, yet you’re not calling for being suspicious of all Christians. It’s beyond obvious that you’re prejudiced against the religion and are immune to facts.
Islam is not the problem. Killers are the problem. Well, there’s the whole problem with bigots going on vigilante sprees, too, but I include them in with the killer problem (sorry about the pun).
English. English is the true source of that dreadful degraded witticism, the pun. Ninety-nine point four percent of the really bad puns excreted on the Boards are in English. Hence, it follows that English is a depraved and barbaric language, prone to savage assaults, both physical and aesthetic. The historical record clearly reflects the bloodthirsty ambition of people who insist on following the English language, or even come into contact with it unwillingly. The fundamental drive of English towards world domination can hardly be doubted.
We should therefore refuse to post any longer in English, and confine our arguments strictly to expression in mime.
This is from where our disagreement stems. I agree that Islam—by itself—is not the problem. Got that? I AGREE. But there are groups of radical Islamists who do want to kill us. These people have a view of Islam that compels them to do us damage. To not use the information that radial Islam is a common denominator is the height of foolishness. To ignore that piece of information and view the group as “killers” that might include Charles Manson types, or gang members, or skinheads, or the unstable is amazingly unhelpful. It is what the radical Islamist want us to do. If they could argue in this thread that is precisely what they would argue. They don’t want you to focus on them, they’d prefer that we spread our attention over a broader group.
You are focusing too much on the fact that a defining characteristic of the group wanting to kill us happens to be a strain of a religion. You kneejerk in not wanting to have that matter. But it does. That’s who they are. If they were a biker gang, that would matter, if they were skinheads, that would matter, the fact that they are radical Islamists matters. So it is unhelpful in the extreme to try to define the problem as “killers”. It’s debilitating. You can’t act on it. Even if you start there, the logical thing to do is ask, “what else do we know about these killers?”. And then, unless you allow yourself to be hobbled by the PC notion that you can point to religion, you wind up right where I am: the biggest threat out there trying to kill us is radical Islam.
The evidence here is that you do not agree that Islam is not the problem.
And that is not the majority of Muslims. How you can pretend that you are basing your stance on this is truly amazing.
And that is not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying is that your solution is to treat all Muslims as though they are part of the killer minority. That is what marks you a bigot.
What marks you as a liar is the pathetic falsehoods you’re posting here.
Gee, you must be psychic! Here’s what the UK-based radical Islamic Standard had to say last summer about the conflict between governmental/international troops and Islamist insurgents:
I especially like how even having Christian Africans in the coalition forces isn’t as bad as having “grave worshipping extreme Sufis”!! :eek:
I know that many Somalis have plenty of legitimate grievances against their government, such as it is, and have little incentive to oppose the insurgents. But I don’t see how that justifies Salafi bigots in the UK spewing their hate-filled invective about “apostates” and “secularists” and “grave worshippers” and so on.
When they can spare time from their important cultural missions such as condemning Valentine’s Day, that is:
Move over `Umar al-Khayyam, it’s the renaissance of Islamic love poetry. :rolleyes:
Never mind. You really are too stupid to have a discussion with. You accuse me of lying :rolleyes:. You tell me that what I take the time to write are not things I believe. :rolleyes: You insist on attributing thoughts to me that I’ve expressly and repeatedly said are things I don’t believe.:rolleyes: You are unable to digest either the words on the page nor the argument they present. You’re a small little knee-jerking man.