Pouring Gasoline on the Muslim Fire

[Deleted]

Excellent bills... K when I'm home.

Growing up in America, many people are unable to conceive of the lack of tool available, even to adults, in some places...

Decent, as we can see in this thread, is a very subjective term... And people can easily be manipulated thru fear, desperation, ignorance, ... to do things that others would not consider decent.

[billisonboard]

Sept 23, 2012 9:55:41 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Sept 23, 2012 9:53:49 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

"...Too true, unfortunately. Also unfortunate is the fact these folks aren't going to change any time soon."

Carrying an entire toolbox rather than just a hammer makes perfect sense, so long as you're capable of recognizing which tool is required for the job, and so long as you're willing to use and capable of using the hammer when the job calls for it... ;D

The challenge is that determination of when the job calls for it.

[Deleted]

I see lots of adults here calling for the hammer...

[TonyTiger]

Oh, and, Ms. M., I agree that the image in #47, yesterday, was ugly... I was not keen on seeing a street-gang of angry Muslims mock-killing an effigy of President Obama, either, but it seemed an appropriate opposite-camp reinforcement of the idea that there is a lot more hatred coming from the Muslim side of the fence - directed against entire races and nations of people - never mind 'groups' - than may be seen on the Western side of the fence. This is the mindless hatred that those street-corner mullahs capitalize upon at each and every chance, to our own great detriment and disadvantage, and the timing simply seemed right - to illustrate that the 'group' against whom those deleted comments had been made, was up to far, far worse mischief than a misplaced comment or two - putting things into a bit more well-rounded perspective, in the context of the deletions. I agree that it was ugly. Truth is oftentimes ugly.

[mmhmm]

TonyTiger: ... to the blah

I agree, tony. People should be able to voice their opinions and, for the most part, they are and do. When those opinions cross the line into an area that breaks ToS/CoC, the posts will be removed. That's been said. It's nothing new, just as the purpose of this forum is nothing new to those who have been posting here since its inception.

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 9:59:54 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

"...The challenge is that determination of when the job calls for it."

Bingo - and that, of course, is the source of much contention... ;D

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2012 10:01:44 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Oh, and, Ms. M., I agree that the image in #47, yesterday, was ugly... I was not keen on seeing a street-gang of angry Muslims mock-killing an effigy of President Obama, either, but it seemed an appropriate opposite-camp reinforcement of the idea that there is a lot more hatred coming from the Muslim side of the fence - directed against entire races and nations of people - never mind 'groups' - than may be seen on the Western side of the fence. This is the mindless hatred that those street-corner mullahs capitalize upon at each and every chance, to our own great detriment and disadvantage, and the timing simply seemed right - to illustrate that the 'group' against whom those deleted comments had been made, was up to far, far worse mischief than a misplaced comment or two - putting things into a bit more well-rounded perspective, in the context of the deletions. I agree that it was ugly. Truth is oftentimes ugly.

In other (and fewer) words, your posting of said picture had a purpose, too: To arouse anger and dislike here for those pictured. The purpose on both sides was the same, as I see it. It's a shame it works on some.

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 10:09:00 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Sept 23, 2012 10:01:44 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Oh, and, Ms. M., I agree that the image in #47, yesterday, was ugly... I was not keen on seeing a street-gang of angry Muslims mock-killing an effigy of President Obama, either, but it seemed an appropriate opposite-camp reinforcement of the idea that there is a lot more hatred coming from the Muslim side of the fence - directed against entire races and nations of people - never mind 'groups' - than may be seen on the Western side of the fence. This is the mindless hatred that those street-corner mullahs capitalize upon at each and every chance, to our own great detriment and disadvantage, and the timing simply seemed right - to illustrate that the 'group' against whom those deleted comments had been made, was up to far, far worse mischief than a misplaced comment or two - putting things into a bit more well-rounded perspective, in the context of the deletions. I agree that it was ugly. Truth is oftentimes ugly.

In other (and fewer) words, your posting of said picture had a purpose, too: To arouse anger and dislike here for those pictured. The purpose on both sides was the same, as I see it. It's a shame it works on some.

I have already stated my purpose (immediately above).

You read something else into it and seem reluctant to accept my explanation.

I cannot do anything about that, nor do I wish to.

I will say that the inflamatory, deleted posts occured BEFORE the posting of that counterpointing picture, so, I don't feel particularly obliged to accept any responsibility for that, nor will I submit to any accusation (explicit or implied) of inflamatory intent to egg-on further postings in such a vein.

You are trying to read intent into the posting of that picture over-and-above my own already-proferred explanation.

As you have so often admonished ME in the past - you do NOT know anything to the contrary...

Neither as a matter of fact nor as a matter of likely and reasonable inference...

My motivation in posting an image of Muslims beating on an effigy of President Obama was exactly what I described here...

It would be nice if you believed my explanation but it is not necessary....

I know the truth of it, and that's all that need concern me...

[TonyTiger]

Well, one-sided discussion DOES make for a more peaceful chat-room - leaving more time for cute kitten pictures and the like... ;D

[mmhmm]

I stated my opinion, tony. It's been agreed people can do that as long as the CoC and ToS are upheld.

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 10:24:12 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I stated my opinion, tony. It's been agreed people can do that as long as the CoC and ToS are upheld.

Remember that, the next time you put on your Pompous Hat, and try to pull the same krap on me again...

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 10:31:23 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

"...Good luck with that happening"

I harbor no illusions on the subject...

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2012 10:26:23 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Sept 23, 2012 10:24:12 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I stated my opinion, tony. It's been agreed people can do that as long as the CoC and ToS are upheld.

Remember that, the next time you put on your Pompous Hat, and try to pull the same krap on me again...

I know it quite well, tony. I also recognize Pompous Hats pretty quickly. The one you wear is quite ... colorful. You're not the least bit intimidating, however, so your efforts at warning are falling on deaf ears, I fear.

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2012 10:21:00 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

It is not a very fair discussion if the people who like Muslims get to categorize the religion as peaceful, but the people who don't think Islam is peaceful can't categorize Muslims as dangerous.

There have been any number of opinions put forth on both sides of this issue, cretinous. The vast majority from both sides still stand. If it breaks ToS, or CoC, however, it will be removed. Whether you think that's fair, or not, is not at issue. ProBoards makes that decision when it comes to ToS. This board's ownership makes the decision when it comes to CoC.

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 10:37:02 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Sept 23, 2012 10:26:23 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Remember that, the next time you put on your Pompous Hat, and try to pull the same krap on me again...

I know it quite well, tony. I also recognize Pompous Hats pretty quickly. The one you wear is quite ... colorful. You're not the least bit intimidating, however, so your efforts at warning are falling on deaf ears, I fear.

Throws automatic gainsay switch to 'off' position...

Walks away from the exchange...

[deziloooooo]

Message deleted by deziloooooo.Duplicate

[deziloooooo]

Sept 23, 2012 9:49:39 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Sept 23, 2012 8:40:18 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

"..."

The truth is oftentimes an ugly thing.

This is a forum for the discussing of Politics - both domestic and international - and the related news which drives our decisions.

Making decisions on foreign policy and our intereactions with the rest of the world - and supporting or opposing those decisions - requires open, honest, frank and objective discussion, so that readers are free to interact with their colleagues, and so that they feel free to reach their own common-sense conclusions without fear of censure by a group of their peers who already lean strongly in one direction or the other - hawk or dove or anything in-between.

Personally, I am unashamedly and boldy anti-Muslim.

I have given my reasons in these threads time and again; citing, as I do, the nature of the so-called Divine Message, the bloodstained hands of its Founder, its text-embedded permissions and encouragements to war and violence upon one's fellow Man in their name of their vision of God under various circumstances, the ease by which any street-corner mullah may incite his flock to commit violence, its systemic repression of women, gays, and non-believers and apostates, its savage punishments, its intolerance for both criticism and competition, and on and on and on.

But my own brand of disgust and distaste resonates more to a hard and unyielding stance such as we see in that of the British comedian and commentor in the video on Page 1 of this thread, rather than undertaking a modern-day Crusade or series of nuke-sorties, as we've seen referenced in this very thread over the past day or two that it's been on its feet.

Whenever one advocates a firm resistance to foreign attempts to censor our press and our freedoms, one is almost certain to draw a variety of reactions...

1. agreement, on the part of a sizable percentage of readers; although there will be wide disagreement over how to achieve that firm resistance.

2. passivity, on the part of naive, head-in-the-sand types

3. hawkishness, on the part of the more direct, brunt types

All three types of reaction have their place in a public forum and all three types should be free to express themselves without fear of ridicule or censure to the point of silencing their voices.

Responses along the lines of (2) and (3) can be dead-serious and entirely valid and rationally articulated and supported, or they can be mini-sound-bytes that border on jingoism, or they can be comic (intentionally or otherwise), or they can get downright vicious, or even contemptible - as folks use the medium to vent their feelings and frustrations and even - sometimes - go too far and begin to border on the contemptible rather than the rational.

Apparently, there's been a bit of that here (delete-able posts of the [3] [hawkish] type) in the past day or so, but that's understandable as well, given that some of our colleagues feel very strongly about a very large group of people whose attitudes and hair-trigger susceptibility to hatred and violence seem to threaten our very way of life, when viewed as a long-term (even multi-generational) ebb and flow of confrontation interspersed with periods of rest and recuperation and retooling and re-strengthening.

Those harsher expressions do not in most instances reflect Bad People; rather, they oftentimes reflect such factors as youth, inexperience, not yet having thought a problem through in search of additional solution-options, a bad case of follow-the-leader syndrome, or impatience and anger as a reaction to the perceived threat, or certainty that fanatics linked to a violence-prone belief system cannot be dealt with in any manner other than by overwhelming and decisive violence in return.

Any thinking person knows that when the blood begins to boil, hatred is just over the next metaphorical hilltop, and it's a very difficult task, to keep genuine hatred at bay, when taking that third approach - the more aggressive one. I'm not all that surprised that we get a number of "hits" like that which require deletion, because they violate the provider's ToS or our own CoC.

That's why we have you here, to clean that sort of thing up, when things DO get out of hand.

It may be a pain in the ass from time to time, but it beats a near-dead chat room that deals exclusively in coupon-clipping and cute kitten threads.

In my opinion...

In my opinion...much to long and rambling a post to bother going through it all..as usual by the way.

though did see this one at the beginning'.."Personally, I am unashamedly and boldy anti-Muslim."

so silly and wrong in its reasoning ..but enough time wasted here...time to scroll.

[deziloooooo]

Sept 23, 2012 10:26:23 GMT -5 TonyTiger said:

Sept 23, 2012 10:24:12 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I stated my opinion, tony. It's been agreed people can do that as long as the CoC and ToS are upheld.

Remember that, the next time you put on your Pompous Hat, and try to pull the same krap on me again...

lordy , lordy..still has to get the last word in....and in and in and in and....

[mmhmm]

And that's exactly what's happening, Cretinous.

[TonyTiger]

Sept 23, 2012 10:37:02 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

"...You're not the least bit intimidating..."

Nor have I tried to be... why... did you see some attempt at intimidation in my own collection of postings? I have not sensed that myself, but, then again, I probably would not see such a thing, would I? If you have some post or theme in mind, with respect to intimidation, please feel free to put it on the table...

"...however, so your efforts at warning are falling on deaf ears, I fear."

Oh, I dunno.

So long as there is a two-sided dialogue on the subject of the threat posed by Islam at-large, and so long as both sides get a chance to have their say and can do so openly and bravely, without fear of being browbeaten or intimidated into silence, I'm content to contribute my own little pittance in the blogosphere.

And this is every bit as good a place to do it as any other... ;D

[djAdvocate]

Sept 23, 2012 8:17:11 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Sept 22, 2012 20:39:54 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

mmhmm- could you purge this fucking thread? it is so full of vileness and hatred it is really not useful for anything other than perpetuating violence.

tyia,

djpolldancer

While I certainly understand what you're saying, dj, I think the thread does give us a bird's eye view into the way some people think. From that standpoint, it's a good sorting mechanism for our posters. So far, the ToS/CoC hasn't been broken (by any posts still here) but there's a clear light shining on a few elements that may not have made themselves clear prior to this time.

I've removed some posts that actually promoted violence against a group of people who don't meet the expectations of one of our posters, and I'll remove such posts from any poster who posts such garbage. We're all here and we all share our views to the degree allowed by the CoC and ToS. If a poster's views are such that others must die for not sharing them, that's that posters cross to bear. That sort doesn't shock me, and they don't impress me. That sort disgusts me, just as they disgust many other sentient beings. Let 'em rant and credit them, and them alone, with their own sentiments. Treat them, here on these boards, as you feel they deserve.

mmhmm, Administrator

i don't mind disgusting views. in fact, i think they are the perfect test of my commitment to the 1st Amendment. however, when a debate degenerates to the point that it consists of basically saying that we should light another human being or group of humans on fire, it kinda crosses the line for me between grotesque humor and incitement.

i guess part of it is that i have HAD IT with this view of Muslims. i know quite a few of them, and i feel about the same about them as i do Christians. they go to work. they have kids. they are mortal. i don't see them as much different than me. to basically say they are the enemy of good thinking people in any way OTHER than radicals of all sects are is both ludicrous and dangerous.

i am not sure what purpose giving such wretchedness air to breathe serves, but i am not going to debate it any more, either. you made your decision, and i will simply have to live with it.

[djAdvocate]

after further introspection, i have decided that i have more tolerance for the disgusting views of my enemy than for the disgusting views of my allies. i can see how someone might hold that against me, but it is a fact of my nature. of course, i have a rational explanation for WHY this is true for me, but i doubt anyone who likes to bag on Muslims would want to hear it.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 23, 2012 8:57:16 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I agree, billis. However, I take it a step further. If a person is "on the fence" with regard to such things, they're going to fall on the side they choose. They'll do that in spite of what they might read here. The fact that anyone could find themselves "on the fence" in such a case speaks reams, IMO.

and, to further the point, a fence straddler might be conceivably convinced to rethink their hatred if enough light is thrown on it. i can see that.

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2012 11:37:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 23, 2012 8:57:16 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I agree, billis. However, I take it a step further. If a person is "on the fence" with regard to such things, they're going to fall on the side they choose. They'll do that in spite of what they might read here. The fact that anyone could find themselves "on the fence" in such a case speaks reams, IMO.

and, to further the point, a fence straddler might be conceivably convinced to rethink their hatred if enough light is thrown on it. i can see that.

That's kinda my point, dj. I have a lot of friends of the Islamic faith, both here in the US and abroad. I know who they are and how they feel about all this. Trying to convince me all Muslims are to be hated and killed is an exercise in futility and I know I'm not alone. Most thinking people have the good sense to put down the broad brush before painting the woodwork.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 23, 2012 11:45:56 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

Sept 23, 2012 11:33:06 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i don't mind disgusting views. in fact, i think they are the perfect test of my commitment to the 1st Amendment. however, when a debate degenerates to the point that it consists of basically saying that we should light another human being or group of humans on fire, it kinda crosses the line for me between grotesque humor and incitement

i guess part of it is that i have HAD IT with this view of Muslims. i know quite a few of them, and i feel about the same about them as i do Christians. they go to work. they have kids. they are mortal. i don't see them as much different than me. to basically say they are the enemy of good thinking people in any way OTHER than radicals of all sects are is both ludicrous and dangerous.

i am not sure what purpose giving such wretchedness air to breathe serves, but i am not going to debate it any more, either. you made your decision, and i will simply
have to live with it.

You get upset if people bad talk the catholic church as it existed during the time it was torturing people it didn't like? I sure there were some good Catholics then, but to what good? The people doing the suicide bombings are taking orders from religious leaders and comfort from their religion.

i will ignore the fact that this is not how suicide terrorism generally works for a moment. continue....

Does it make more sense to equate Muslims with these people I read about everyday or some people you know? Maybe if the good Muslims had better press.

the problem is that they don't. and because of that, i think that thinking people like you need to speak up for them.

I don't want to repress anyone's religious faith. Even more so I don't want to think someones religious faith is noble when events point out all the evil it causes.

i am not into suppressing speech either, but i draw the line at incitement.

[billisonboard]

Sept 23, 2012 11:50:47 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

...

Who here has said all Muslims should be killed? ...

Sept 22, 2012 20:19:24 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Frankly, those women, who are treated worse than dogs, would be better off dead than living in a country that think so poorly of them. Plus, I'm sorry, but they are raising future killers. I have no issue with cutting off the system that keeps having future killers. You hurt one of our people, boom, a city is gone, just like that, in smoke and ashes. Do it again, same thing but to another city. You don't have to nuke them, just bomb them into another level of thinking. They may grumble but they will stop killing or be dead and then the killing stops anyway.

[mmhmm]

Also, Cretinous, a couple of posts were deleted, if you've read the whole thread. There was a reason for those deletions.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 23, 2012 11:50:47 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

Sept 23, 2012 11:46:48 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

That's kinda my point, dj. I have a lot of friends of the Islamic faith, both here in the US and abroad. I know who they are and how they feel about all this. Trying to convince me all Muslims are to be hated and killed is an exercise in futility and I know I'm not alone. Most thinking people have the good sense to put down the broad brush before painting the woodwork.

Who here has said all Muslims should be killed? Who here said all Muslims should be
hated? I think english probably is not your first language and you get confused on some words. Do you know what "all" means?

mmhmm didn't say "all". neither did i. it is enough that people think that RANDOM violence against Muslims, which will, needless to say, result in the senseless killing of innocents, is somehow justifiable. it really isn't. it is completely devoid of moral conscience and legality.

i found the following comment outrageous:

Send a dart to that dartboard and go for itGeneva convention is just for wimpy countries, like us. The only thing a rabid animal understands is brute force. .

anyone who condones random violence has earned said violence, imo. this is as bluntly as you will ever find me putting it.

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2012 11:50:47 GMT -5 @bloomscuzzer said:

Sept 23, 2012 11:46:48 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

That's kinda my point, dj. I have a lot of friends of the Islamic faith, both here in the US and abroad. I know who they are and how they feel about all this. Trying to convince me all Muslims are to be hated and killed is an exercise in futility and I know I'm not alone. Most thinking people have the good sense to put down the broad brush before painting the woodwork.

Who here has said all Muslims should be killed? Who here said all Muslims should be
hated? I think english probably is not your first language and you get confused on some words. Do you know what "all" means?

Both those things have been said here, Cretinous. Before you go pointing out the purported weakness of another, perhaps you might want to take a good, long gander at your own understanding of English.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 23, 2012 12:00:24 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Also, Cretinous, a couple of posts were deleted, if you've read the whole thread. There was a reason for those deletions.

indeed there were, and i appreciate it. they were well beyond merely vulgar and offensive. as i said, i can deal with that.

i think the clearest way i can put the principle is this, which was espoused by Franklin: it is better to let 100 guilty go free than to wrongly punish one innocent man. THIS is the kind of principle worth dying for. and it is the opposite of the offensive and immoral counterargument voiced by Romney (see 1% doctrine): that it is better to torture 100 innocent men than to let one guilty one go free. have we become so depraved, so helpless, and so fearful that we can't even stand up for our own principles?

i hope not.