Well, the problem is I have never said all Muslims are terrorists or radicals.konfusion wrote:
I agree with all but the last point.Stingray24 wrote:
Lowing has a valid points here gentlemen:
1. An unstable person shooting innocent people does not warrant the extreme step of taking away all means of defense from law abiding citizens.
2. Thinking that the government is eavesdropping on your conversation with your grandma in Idaho because of the Patriot Act requires a tinfoil hat.
3. Islam governed by Sharia law does not blend with a free society in any way, shape, or form. They are polar opposites.
4. He has never condemned all Muslims as radical.
I know that if people are calling you paranoid, I deserve to be called the same - I am scared of the Patriot Act. Heck, I moved out of the dorm at my school because they introduced cameras in the hallways (that they are only allowed to look at in case of a theft).
So sure, call me paranoid. However, that doesn't make what you do any better. I have to say you have some fair points, but I disagree that all Muslims are terrorists. They're just not. The same way satanists aren't what they're described as in many movies (whence I initially got my "infos").
You have the freedom to live without satanists: it's called looking around the neighborhood and finding a house surrounded by people you're likely to get along with. However, your freedom ends where the freedom of speech and religion begins.
-konfusion
k, you are paranoid about muslims. and yes, "liberals" are paranoid about gun control. but the concentration of wealth and political power in our country coupled with our diminishing rights is a factual and easily verifiable process and i dont see how you are comparing it to the relatively miniscule number of terrorist attacks or crazy shootings in the US. just because you dont see the government spying on people doesnt mean it doesnt happen when they explicitly state in the form of legislation that they do.lowing wrote:
As you all know I have been hit especially hard over threads and comments I have made regarding Islam. More commonly I have told I am paranoid.
This leads me to a question
WHy do all think I am paranoid about the obvious intent of Islamic radicalism and their "peaceful and tolerant religion" and you think you are not paranoid about shootings in the US or the Patriot Act?
Whenever multiple people get shot in the US there is the inevitable outcry for taking ALL of our law abiding citizens guns away from us. As if this would solve the problem. There is also the perception that we can't walk down our streets because we are allowed to own guns. How do you feel you are not a bit paranoid and over reacting to this issue?
You all think the Patriot Act is George Bush listening in on your phone calls as if this administration has nothing better to do than listen to you tell your friends how the new girl you are dating won't fuck you yet. It is a tool to make it easier to build evidence to capture bad guys. Nothing more. Yet, you all insist we are headed to an "Orwellian" state and this is the beginning of the end for the US and freedom all together. Kinda paranoid if you ask me.
Now back to my posts about Islam and its radical elements:
I say, radical members of Islam want to destroy the west. I think Islam itself is a major tool used by its members to try and accomplish this. I say Islam is a one fucked up backasswards religion that has no place in western society, and I say that continued immigration of these Muslims into the west will cause problems because of the ease the radical elements can blend in. I have never said radical Islam will succeed in their quest for the destruction of western society. There is nothing paranoid about these comments, they are all fact, or opinion based on what I read.
All of this bullshit about how I endorse genocide, rounding up the Muslims and putting them in concentration camps, and countless other accusations was never said by me. This crap comes from all of you. I have pretty much maintained a level head and calm composer even through all of the bombardment of comments about how I am a Nazi, racist, bigot, asshole, stupid, my lost credibility, and all the rest.
So the question is..................who is paranoid again??
Lowing, this is probably your best thread. You make a lot of good points with this.lowing wrote:
As you all know I have been hit especially hard over threads and comments I have made regarding Islam. More commonly I have told I am paranoid.
This leads me to a question
WHy do all think I am paranoid about the obvious intent of Islamic radicalism and their "peaceful and tolerant religion" and you think you are not paranoid about shootings in the US or the Patriot Act?
Whenever multiple people get shot in the US there is the inevitable outcry for taking ALL of our law abiding citizens guns away from us. As if this would solve the problem. There is also the perception that we can't walk down our streets because we are allowed to own guns. How do you feel you are not a bit paranoid and over reacting to this issue?
You all think the Patriot Act is George Bush listening in on your phone calls as if this administration has nothing better to do than listen to you tell your friends how the new girl you are dating won't fuck you yet. It is a tool to make it easier to build evidence to capture bad guys. Nothing more. Yet, you all insist we are headed to an "Orwellian" state and this is the beginning of the end for the US and freedom all together. Kinda paranoid if you ask me.
Now back to my posts about Islam and its radical elements:
I say, radical members of Islam want to destroy the west. I think Islam itself is a major tool used by its members to try and accomplish this. I say Islam is a one fucked up backasswards religion that has no place in western society, and I say that continued immigration of these Muslims into the west will cause problems because of the ease the radical elements can blend in. I have never said radical Islam will succeed in their quest for the destruction of western society. There is nothing paranoid about these comments, they are all fact, or opinion based on what I read.
All of this bullshit about how I endorse genocide, rounding up the Muslims and putting them in concentration camps, and countless other accusations was never said by me. This crap comes from all of you. I have pretty much maintained a level head and calm composer even through all of the bombardment of comments about how I am a Nazi, racist, bigot, asshole, stupid, my lost credibility, and all the rest.
So the question is..................who is paranoid again??
Personally, I would agree with you on the guns thing. The people that yell for more gun control are idiots because they don't realize that it's not a matter of disarming people -- it's about making it easier for people to defend themselves.
The reason why I'm more paranoid about the Patriot Act than I am about terrorism is because terrorism has a much lower prevalence in our society than the government does.
If we had daily carbombings in America like we do in Iraq, then I'd definitely side with you on the Islamic extremism thing because it would imply that a huge amount of terrorists were living here. Because that isn't happening, I can only assume that a small amount of extremists are here -- a much smaller amount than who live in Iraq.
On the other hand, the Patriot Act is a direct extension of the government's power over our lives. It doesn't matter if the stated intention of the act is to apprehend terrorists -- the Patriot Act gives sweeping powers to the government that can easily be abused.
If there's anything we can agree on, I'm sure we can agree that, if the power is there, it will be abused. You're generally a conservative guy, so I figure you can sympathize with me on my distrust of big government, right?
Well I'm wondering how, after one or two attacks on the US carried out by members of an extremist group whose members are also moslems, you determine that islam is the greatest threat to America? Don't you think that could be paranoid?I did not say gun control advocates are paranoid. I said I am wondering how, after a shooting, you can get on here and spout off about disarming ALL of our law abiding citizens as the solution to making us safe. I am wondering why you think that we are not safe in America because there was a shooting.... This is paranoid.
I am wondering why you think big brother is watching all the time and there is a microphone in your tube of toothpaste, because the Patriot Act makes it easier to track and keep tabs on the enemies of the state. This is paranoid.
The Japanese attacked the US, maybe Shinto is the root of all the evil in the world?
The ME is in the grip of radical islam, which is becoming more radical and firming its grip in large part due to the actions and responses of the paranoid US - your statements being one example.
The US is in the grip of extremist christians, the US President gets his instructions directly from 'god' apparently.
Maybe the christians should be herded together and nuked, I don't know.
IMO All religions are crap, divisive and used by:
- Thickos to give some meaning to their pointless lives
- Malign individuals to dominate and manipulate the above thickos to do their evil work
Fuck Israel
For the most part, yes...Dilbert_X wrote:
IMO All religions are crap, divisive and used by:
- Thickos to give some meaning to their pointless lives
- Malign individuals to dominate and manipulate the above thickos to do their evil work
On the other hand, China has shown that you can even turn a government into a religion and have the same effects on the populace.
The sad truth would seem to be that people are easily manipulated one way or another. All that matters is that the people doing the manipulating are generally levelheaded about it. Currently, the West seems the best about this, but we still have quite a bit of improvement to do.
America is probably more influenced by paranoia by itself than Christianity though. We are a religious nation, but not nearly as religious as the Middle East is.
Hard not to think so when you say that Western civilization is going to be destroyed by radicalismlowing wrote:
As you all know I have been hit especially hard over threads and comments I have made regarding Islam. More commonly I have told I am paranoid.
What about the Patriot Act?This leads me to a question
WHy do all think I am paranoid about the obvious intent of Islamic radicalism and their "peaceful and tolerant religion" and you think you are not paranoid about shootings in the US or the Patriot Act?
Speaking personally, you have your laws, we have ours. Keep it that way.Whenever multiple people get shot in the US there is the inevitable outcry for taking ALL of our law abiding citizens guns away from us. As if this would solve the problem. There is also the perception that we can't walk down our streets because we are allowed to own guns. How do you feel you are not a bit paranoid and over reacting to this issue?
Well, that is kinda paranoid. When was the last time someone talked about this though? Civil rights and the balance between that and the ability to gather information is a extremely serious topic, and people tend to fall to one side.You all think the Patriot Act is George Bush listening in on your phone calls as if this administration has nothing better to do than listen to you tell your friends how the new girl you are dating won't fuck you yet. It is a tool to make it easier to build evidence to capture bad guys. Nothing more. Yet, you all insist we are headed to an "Orwellian" state and this is the beginning of the end for the US and freedom all together. Kinda paranoid if you ask me.
First part is kinda obvious, I don't think anyone will bother debating that. As for the second and third points: You can do that, but you are treading a thin line. Without trying you could easily slip into religious discrimination, where people of Islamic origin/background are suspect and reviled simply because of their religion.Now back to my posts about Islam and its radical elements:
I say, radical members of Islam want to destroy the west. I think Islam itself is a major tool used by its members to try and accomplish this. I say Islam is a one fucked up backasswards religion that has no place in western society, and I say that continued immigration of these Muslims into the west will cause problems because of the ease the radical elements can blend in.
A point: I thought one of the central tenets of Western society was that ALL religions can have their place?
That's not what you've been hinting about these posts.I have never said radical Islam will succeed in their quest for the destruction of western society. There is nothing paranoid about these comments, they are all fact, or opinion based on what I read.
Not you, but I have seen at least one person advocate genocide. And another advocates putting all free thinkers in jail.All of this bullshit about how I endorse genocide, rounding up the Muslims and putting them in concentration camps, and countless other accusations was never said by me. This crap comes from all of you.
K.I have pretty much maintained a level head and calm composer even through all of the bombardment of comments about how I am a Nazi, racist, bigot, asshole, stupid, my lost credibility, and all the rest.
Good points though.
On a global level, yes. But on a grassroots level religion can be a wonderful thing. Our ethnic community is held together as strongly by religion as by ethnicity. Everyone there is a devout believer, but they are certainly not thick and they are completely normal.Dilbert_X wrote:
IMO All religions are crap, divisive and used by:
- Thickos to give some meaning to their pointless lives
- Malign individuals to dominate and manipulate the above thickos to do their evil work
Last edited by Spark (2008-02-16 18:05:52)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
here you go Lowing the, ravings of a kindred spirit for you..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/fe … ands.islamA TV addict with bleached hair who adores Maggie Thatcher and prefers kebabs to hamburgers, Geert Wilders has got nothing against Muslims. He just hates Islam. Or so he says. 'Islam is not a religion, it's an ideology,' says Wilders, a lanky Roman Catholic right-winger, 'the ideology of a retarded culture.'
The Dutch politician, who sees himself as heir to a recent string of assassinated or hounded mavericks who have turned Holland upside down, has been doing a crash course in Koranic study. Likening the Islamic sacred text to Hitler's Mein Kampf, he wants the 'fascist Koran' outlawed in Holland, the constitution rewritten to make that possible, all immigration from Muslim countries halted, Muslim immigrants paid to leave and all Muslim 'criminals' stripped of Dutch citizenship and deported 'back where they came from'. But he has nothing against Muslims. 'I have a problem with Islamic tradition, culture, ideology. Not with Muslim people.'
Wilders has been immersing himself in the suras and verse of seventh-century Arabia. The outcome of his scholarship, a short film, has Holland in a panic. He is just putting the finishing touches to the 10-minute film, he says, and talking to four TV channels about screening it.
'It's like a walk through the Koran,' he explains in a sterile conference room in the Dutch parliament in The Hague, security chaps hovering outside. 'My intention is to show the real face of Islam. I see it as a threat. I'm trying to use images to show that what's written in the Koran is giving incentives to people all over the world. On a daily basis Moroccan youths are beating up homosexuals on the streets of Amsterdam.'
Wilders is lucid and shrewd and the provactive soundbites trip easily off his tongue. He was recently voted Holland's most effective politician. If 18 months ago he sat alone in the second chamber or lower house in The Hague, his People's Party now has nine of 150 seats and is running at about 15 per cent in the polls. His Islam-bashing seems to be paying off. And not only in Holland. All across Europe, the new breed of right-wing populists are trying to revive their political fortunes by appealing to anti-Muslim prejudice.
A few months ago the Swiss People's Party of the pugnacious billionaire Christoph Blocher won a general election while simultaneously running a campaign to change the Swiss constitution to ban the building of minarets on mosques. Last month in Antwerp, far-right leaders from 15 European cities and from political parties in Belgium, Germany and Austria got together to launch a charter 'against the Islamisation of western European cities', reiterating the call for a mosque-building moratorium.
'We already have more than 6,000 mosques in Europe, which are not only a place to worship but also a symbol of radicalisation, some financed by extreme groups in Saudi Arabia or Iran,' argued Filip Dewinter, leader of Belgium's Flemish separatist party, the Vlaams Belang, who organised the Antwerp get-together. 'Its minarets are six floors high, higher than the floodlights of the Feyenoord soccer stadium,' he said of a new mosque being built in Rotterdam. 'These kinds of symbols have to stop.'
Where a few years ago the far right in Europe concentrated its fire on immigration, these days Islam is fast becoming the most popular target. It is a campaign that is having mixed results. In Switzerland, the Blocher party has been highly successful. In Holland, Wilders is thriving by constantly poking sticks in the eyes of the politically correct Dutch establishment. But when Susanne Winter ran for a seat on the local council in the Austrian city of Graz last month by branding the Prophet Muhammad a child molester, she lost her far-right Freedom Party votes.
For the mainstream centre-right in Europe, foreigner-bashing is also backfiring. Roland Koch, the German Christian Democrat once tipped as a future Chancellor, wrecked his chances a fortnight ago by forfeiting a 12-point lead in a state election after a campaign that denounced Muslim ritual slaughter practices and called for the deportation of young immigrant criminals.
Wilders echoes some of the arguments against multiculturalism that have convulsed Germany in recent years. Like many on the traditional German right, he wants the European Judaeo-Christian tradition to be formally recognised as the dominating culture, or Leitkultur. 'There is no equality between our culture and the retarded Islamic culture. Look at their views on homosexuality or women,' he says.
But if Wilders shares positions and aims with others on the far right in Europe, he is also a very specific Dutch phenomenon, viewing himself as a libertarian provocateur like the late Pim Fortuyn or Theo van Gogh, railing against 'Islamisation' as a threat to what used to be the easy-going Dutch model of tolerance.
'My allies are not Le Pen or Haider,' he emphasises. 'We'll never join up with the fascists and Mussolinis of Italy. I'm very afraid of being linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups.' Dutch iconoclasm, Scandinavian insistence on free expression, the right to provoke are what drive him, he says.
He shrugs off anxieties that his film will trigger a fresh bout of violence of the kind that left Van Gogh stabbed to death on an Amsterdam street and his estranged colleague Ayaan Hirsi Ali in hiding, or the murderous furore over the Danish cartoons in 2005.
The Dutch government is planning emergency evacuation of its nationals and diplomats from the Middle East should the Wilders film be shown. It is alarmed about the impact on Dutch business. 'Our Prime Minister is a big coward. The government is weak,' says Wilders. 'They hate my guts and I don't like them either.'
And if people are murdered as a result of his film? 'They say that if there's bloodshed it would be the responsibility of this strange politician. It's almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're creating an atmosphere. I'm not responsible for using democratic means and acting within the law. I don't want Dutch people or Dutch interests to be hurt.'
But he does want to create a stir. 'Islam is something we can't afford any more in the Netherlands. I want the fascist Koran banned. We need to stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.'
Free speech or hate speech? 'I don't create hate. I want to be honest. I don't hate people. I don't hate Muslims. I hate their book and their ideology.'
For more than three years, Wilders has been paying for his 'honesty' by living under permanent police guard as the internet bristles with threats on his life. He has lived in army barracks, in prisons, under guard at home. 'There's no freedom, no privacy. If I said I was not afraid, I would be lying.'
There is little doubt that if Wilders's film exists - and it's shrouded in secrecy - and is broadcast, it will be construed as blasphemy in large parts of the world and may spark a new bloody crisis in relations between the West and the Muslim world.
He does not seem to care. 'People ask why don't you moderate your voice and not make this movie. If I do that and not say what I think, then the extremists who threaten me would win.'
Ok well a coupla thingsIG-Calibre wrote:
here you go Lowing the, ravings of a kindred spirit for you..http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/fe … ands.islamA TV addict with bleached hair who adores Maggie Thatcher and prefers kebabs to hamburgers, Geert Wilders has got nothing against Muslims. He just hates Islam. Or so he says. 'Islam is not a religion, it's an ideology,' says Wilders, a lanky Roman Catholic right-winger, 'the ideology of a retarded culture.'
The Dutch politician, who sees himself as heir to a recent string of assassinated or hounded mavericks who have turned Holland upside down, has been doing a crash course in Koranic study. Likening the Islamic sacred text to Hitler's Mein Kampf, he wants the 'fascist Koran' outlawed in Holland, the constitution rewritten to make that possible, all immigration from Muslim countries halted, Muslim immigrants paid to leave and all Muslim 'criminals' stripped of Dutch citizenship and deported 'back where they came from'. But he has nothing against Muslims. 'I have a problem with Islamic tradition, culture, ideology. Not with Muslim people.'
Wilders has been immersing himself in the suras and verse of seventh-century Arabia. The outcome of his scholarship, a short film, has Holland in a panic. He is just putting the finishing touches to the 10-minute film, he says, and talking to four TV channels about screening it.
'It's like a walk through the Koran,' he explains in a sterile conference room in the Dutch parliament in The Hague, security chaps hovering outside. 'My intention is to show the real face of Islam. I see it as a threat. I'm trying to use images to show that what's written in the Koran is giving incentives to people all over the world. On a daily basis Moroccan youths are beating up homosexuals on the streets of Amsterdam.'
Wilders is lucid and shrewd and the provactive soundbites trip easily off his tongue. He was recently voted Holland's most effective politician. If 18 months ago he sat alone in the second chamber or lower house in The Hague, his People's Party now has nine of 150 seats and is running at about 15 per cent in the polls. His Islam-bashing seems to be paying off. And not only in Holland. All across Europe, the new breed of right-wing populists are trying to revive their political fortunes by appealing to anti-Muslim prejudice.
A few months ago the Swiss People's Party of the pugnacious billionaire Christoph Blocher won a general election while simultaneously running a campaign to change the Swiss constitution to ban the building of minarets on mosques. Last month in Antwerp, far-right leaders from 15 European cities and from political parties in Belgium, Germany and Austria got together to launch a charter 'against the Islamisation of western European cities', reiterating the call for a mosque-building moratorium.
'We already have more than 6,000 mosques in Europe, which are not only a place to worship but also a symbol of radicalisation, some financed by extreme groups in Saudi Arabia or Iran,' argued Filip Dewinter, leader of Belgium's Flemish separatist party, the Vlaams Belang, who organised the Antwerp get-together. 'Its minarets are six floors high, higher than the floodlights of the Feyenoord soccer stadium,' he said of a new mosque being built in Rotterdam. 'These kinds of symbols have to stop.'
Where a few years ago the far right in Europe concentrated its fire on immigration, these days Islam is fast becoming the most popular target. It is a campaign that is having mixed results. In Switzerland, the Blocher party has been highly successful. In Holland, Wilders is thriving by constantly poking sticks in the eyes of the politically correct Dutch establishment. But when Susanne Winter ran for a seat on the local council in the Austrian city of Graz last month by branding the Prophet Muhammad a child molester, she lost her far-right Freedom Party votes.
For the mainstream centre-right in Europe, foreigner-bashing is also backfiring. Roland Koch, the German Christian Democrat once tipped as a future Chancellor, wrecked his chances a fortnight ago by forfeiting a 12-point lead in a state election after a campaign that denounced Muslim ritual slaughter practices and called for the deportation of young immigrant criminals.
Wilders echoes some of the arguments against multiculturalism that have convulsed Germany in recent years. Like many on the traditional German right, he wants the European Judaeo-Christian tradition to be formally recognised as the dominating culture, or Leitkultur. 'There is no equality between our culture and the retarded Islamic culture. Look at their views on homosexuality or women,' he says.
But if Wilders shares positions and aims with others on the far right in Europe, he is also a very specific Dutch phenomenon, viewing himself as a libertarian provocateur like the late Pim Fortuyn or Theo van Gogh, railing against 'Islamisation' as a threat to what used to be the easy-going Dutch model of tolerance.
'My allies are not Le Pen or Haider,' he emphasises. 'We'll never join up with the fascists and Mussolinis of Italy. I'm very afraid of being linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups.' Dutch iconoclasm, Scandinavian insistence on free expression, the right to provoke are what drive him, he says.
He shrugs off anxieties that his film will trigger a fresh bout of violence of the kind that left Van Gogh stabbed to death on an Amsterdam street and his estranged colleague Ayaan Hirsi Ali in hiding, or the murderous furore over the Danish cartoons in 2005.
The Dutch government is planning emergency evacuation of its nationals and diplomats from the Middle East should the Wilders film be shown. It is alarmed about the impact on Dutch business. 'Our Prime Minister is a big coward. The government is weak,' says Wilders. 'They hate my guts and I don't like them either.'
And if people are murdered as a result of his film? 'They say that if there's bloodshed it would be the responsibility of this strange politician. It's almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're creating an atmosphere. I'm not responsible for using democratic means and acting within the law. I don't want Dutch people or Dutch interests to be hurt.'
But he does want to create a stir. 'Islam is something we can't afford any more in the Netherlands. I want the fascist Koran banned. We need to stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.'
Free speech or hate speech? 'I don't create hate. I want to be honest. I don't hate people. I don't hate Muslims. I hate their book and their ideology.'
For more than three years, Wilders has been paying for his 'honesty' by living under permanent police guard as the internet bristles with threats on his life. He has lived in army barracks, in prisons, under guard at home. 'There's no freedom, no privacy. If I said I was not afraid, I would be lying.'
There is little doubt that if Wilders's film exists - and it's shrouded in secrecy - and is broadcast, it will be construed as blasphemy in large parts of the world and may spark a new bloody crisis in relations between the West and the Muslim world.
He does not seem to care. 'People ask why don't you moderate your voice and not make this movie. If I do that and not say what I think, then the extremists who threaten me would win.'
1. If Islam is not a problem why should he fear for his life for his free speech? I bet some Islamic groups are planning his assassination right now for saying Islam is violent and barbaric
2. I am not running for public office, my opinions are, well...........mine. If I were running for office, like all politicians, I would tell you all exactly what I thought you wanted to hear.