TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 101 to 118 of 118

Thread: Manchester Terrorist Attack

  1. #101
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    There's no point. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

    In any case, if you think religious freedom is a small thing to sacrifice, and that banning nearly 2 billion people is an appropriate reaction to isolated* acts of violence, it speaks for itself. Muslims as a whole are not responsible for radical extremists any more than christians are responsible for Army of God.

    * in the sense of not being related to the vast vast majority of ordinary muslims just trying to live their lives, just in case it wasn't clear
    Last edited by Starker; 26th May 2017 at 17:38.

  2. #102
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Iacon
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    I also challenge you to point out where I've suggested "inhumane" treatment of immigrants. It's much simpler than that: as anyone from the U.K. should remember from dealing with the IRA terrorism is inextricably linked to organized crime. You don't have to actually start exterminating immigrants or any of that shit you think right wingers want to do. All you need to do is start going after the individual mosques, storefronts, etc. that are involved in the money laundering, trafficking, and other crimes that support terrorism. Make things a less fertile ground in the U.K. And they will go elsewhere. Just because the entities involved are Muslim owned doesn't mean they should get a pass.
    I may have gotten you mixed up with Krush who's sat there fantasizing about firing muslims out of the west with a really big catapault.

    But you do seem have taken a stance on his side, and taking swipes at those who would be treat refugees and muslims decently.

  3. #103
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Vertigo, DragonSand, Xeen
    Quote Originally Posted by Queue View Post
    And believe you me, it was a nasty paper-cut.
    So brave...

  4. #104
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2009
    Location: Montreal, Canada
    Is there an objective study of religious violence over say the last 20 years, with statistics and percentages to show which religions are the biggest offenders? Because that would help clear things up

  5. #105
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2008
    Location: in your second eyelids
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    There's no point. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

    In any case, if you think religious freedom is a small thing to sacrifice, and that banning nearly 2 billion people is an appropriate reaction to isolated* acts of violence, it speaks for itself. Muslims as a whole are not responsible for radical extremists any more than christians are responsible for Army of God.

    * in the sense of not being related to the vast vast majority of ordinary muslims just trying to live their lives, just in case it wasn't clear
    Nope, I only think that a religion that is fundamentally opposing to western values has no place in a western society. The fundamental tenants of islam itself justify violence. The peaceful muslims that integrate in our society are the ones that actually betray their original religion. Or we can soften it by saying they "adjust" it. Nobody has a problem with people that integrate in a society, pay their taxes and don't cause trouble. I believe it is probably the majority, but I'm unconvined of the "vastness" of it.

    Only you didn't have enough "self awareness" (to misuse this term in a similar way that you did) to read what I actually said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azaran View Post
    Is there an objective study of religious violence over say the last 20 years, with statistics and percentages to show which religions are the biggest offenders? Because that would help clear things up
    I do doubt it, as that would risk offending people like Starker and his hatred for the culture he inherited.
    Politicians own whatever parts of science they want to own (government funding) to further their political power. Also 2+2=4

  6. #106
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Christians have been "betraying" their religion for a while now, despite what their holy book says.

    Also, you are not the one to talk about western values when you so casually suggest trampling on them.

    Anyway, come back when you have a more nuanced worldview than "western civilisation is being destroyed by libruls who are hating their culture and letting just anyone in" and "why don't we just ban all muslims?".
    Last edited by Starker; 27th May 2017 at 09:27.

  7. #107
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Thor View Post
    a religion that is fundamentally opposing to western values has no place in a western society.
    Most religions are fundamentally opposing western (modern) values. Men are worth more than women, people who do not believe in your god are worth less than believers. Homosexuals should not exist. People should not oppose hierarchy and oppression and injustice, but just suffer through their lives, thinking there is a reward when they die. Etc, etc.

    Christianity has pretty low influence in western Europe these day (UK, Germany, Benelux, Scandinavia, even France I think). But in the US its only gaining influence, it seems.

    If you want to make the world a better place, religion should lose all its power. Not just in the west, but everywhere in the world. Why don't you want Islam in the west, but you don't care about Islam in the Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Turkey, etc ? Do you think it is fun for women, homosexuals, intellectuals, atheists, scientists, etc, to live in those countries ? Do they not deserve a peaceful life, like you and other people in western countries ?
    Last edited by Gryzemuis; 27th May 2017 at 10:23.

  8. #108
    Classical Master 2008
    Registered: Jun 2002
    Location: Civitas Quinque Ecclesiae HU

    the thread

  9. #109
    Taking a break
    Registered: Oct 2013
    Meanwhile, the British Police sent in a Helicopter and what seems to be the equivalent of a SWAT team in to size......a jukebox that played a song making fun of Bin Laden.

    I shit you not: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...party-13097525

    Most religions are fundamentally opposing western (modern) values. Men are worth more than women, people who do not believe in your god are worth less than believers. Homosexuals should not exist. People should not oppose hierarchy and oppression and injustice, but just suffer through their lives, thinking there is a reward when they die. Etc, etc.

    Christianity has pretty low influence in western Europe these day (UK, Germany, Benelux, Scandinavia, even France I think). But in the US its only gaining influence, it seems.
    Incorrect. What has increased is the amount of US media showing Christians as crazy, deranged rednecks. The number of Americans who actually go to church services or describe themselves as believing in Christian theology is at an all time low and continuing to decline.

    That said I don't think you have a clue what the theology of those "religions" actually says. It's only the ones who have a literalist interpretation of Abrahamic texts who believe that kind of thing. Most sects(including Catholics, the world's largest single Christian sect) explicitly disavow the doctrine of a literal interpretation: https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcinter.htm

    I challenge you to find ANY single place that the doctrines you mentioned ("homosexuals should not exist", "Men are worth more than women", or "people who do not believe in your god are worth less than believers") anywhere in the official teachings of the top 3 American churches: Catholic, Baptist, or Methodist.

    Although I should note the inherent moral contradiction of Protestantism: their churches were founded on the believe that there is no objective moral truth (kind of like modern day neoliberals) so only the conscience can guide morality, yet also believe that if you don't practice their exact form of religion then you're going to Hell. I don't see how you reconcile those two ideas.

  10. #110
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Incorrect. What has increased is the amount of US media showing Christians as crazy, deranged rednecks. The number of Americans who actually go to church services or describe themselves as believing in Christian theology is at an all time low and continuing to decline.
    Oh, Jesus Christ. Far Cry 5 shows up on the scene, and now everyone is screaming about how "THE MEDIA" is portraying Christians and conservatives as blah blah blah and so and so.

    I swear, people like you, Tony, are the whiniest, most obnoxious fucks I've ever seen in my entire life. For all the talk of the so-called liberal snowflake, I've never seen anyone so desperately seek out reasons to paint themselves as the prosecuted few as well as you mouthbreathers.

  11. #111
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2003
    Location: Location, Location
    Preach.

  12. #112
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2001
    Location: uk
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Meanwhile, the British Police sent in a Helicopter and what seems to be the equivalent of a SWAT team in to size......a jukebox that played a song making fun of Bin Laden.

    I shit you not: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news...party-13097525
    I realise you're reading that through the eyes of someone living in a part of the world where armed police are the norm but what that says is that they sent one PC to deal with whatever it was that was reported and then *everyone* when instead of being vaguely polite, somewhat reasonable and accepting of the fact that their neighbours might not appreciate their choice of music as much as they did they managed to worry that one PC enough that she called for help.

  13. #113
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2015
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    No. You have absolutely ZERO right to moralize to me on this topic. There are multiple times where I have put my life directly on the line to protect Middle Eastern Muslims, most notably when I led a team out of an IED mined area while wounded...
    Progressive-minded people have to deal with is that they never had left their shielded environment or - simply named - their safe space. Like most people obviously. Trust me, not only the middle east is fucked up, but also refugee centers and even no-go areas in big cities these days. But how could they understand without leaving their safe room? Become a cop or join the army. See some shit and come back after some years and surely your mind would change. But nonono, instead they would rather attend a diploma in social science.

    I really don't want to point with a finger on these guys, I just want to tell theme to life their fucking lifes, but without being arrogant and explaining their moral superiority to others because NO ONE is superior or in right. Immigrants will never intergrate to your weird western "values" because they vast majority just want to life their fucking lives. Accept that. I wouldn't tell others how good and morality superior I am. Because even I only want to life my fucking life. Thanks folks

  14. #114
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Not this guy. I was a co-founder of a Teen Age Republicans club in the late 80s and pretty libertarian when I was younger. After getting out of school and into the world, I turned into more of a pragmatist, still with libertarian leanings. Through my 20s, I could not accept the concept of positive liberty, but after moving around and traveling and meeting different kinds of people and having kids I get it. To be a true libertarian in the good sense of the word, i.e. an advocate for liberty, you have to believe in equality of opportunity and freedom from oppression, persecution, and discrimination. Not just laissez-faire.

    Western liberal values are all about letting people live their lives as much as they see fit as long as their lifestyle doesn't bring them into conflict with others, and giving them the freedom and opportunity to get the most out of life they can given their abilities and motivations. These days, the political Right seems way more interested in cultural isolationism than traditional Western values. And the center-right "establishment" here that's trying to hang onto control of both parties has a pro-global business/GDP over everything mentality that's been effectively been maximizing liberty for the upper classes and denying liberty to the working classes for the last few decades. So in today's political climate, I guess that makes me a progressive.

    I would say that the people who have the worst "us vs. them" mentality are the people who never stepped out of their cultural bubble, and the people who are more worldly in experience are more accepting of other cultures. That's not a left vs. right thing because "us vs. them" thrives in bubbles on both sides.

    As for immigration, I live in a country that was settled and founded by immigrants and was built into a great and powerful country by immigrants, most of whom came here because they "want to life their fucking lives".

  15. #115
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    For me, it took traveling and life experience to see that people elsewhere in the world are just people. This is why I don't fall for conspiracy theories and scaremongering about how brown people and foreigners are the downfall of western civilisation SOON™.

    Also, when people show up with "ha ha, take that liberals" in a thread about a tragic terror attack, when I see people posting misleading bullshit like that migrant crime map earlier in the thread, I have every moral right to call them out for that.
    Last edited by Starker; 1st Jun 2017 at 13:26.

  16. #116
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    I sometimes wonder why we think humans are worth preserving. Manchester One Love concert: 'Thousands make false ticket claims'

    More than 10,000 "unscrupulous" people have falsely claimed they were at the scene of the Manchester attack in order to get free tickets for Sunday's benefit concert, Ticketmaster has said.

    The agency said "opportunists or touts" had tried to take advantage of its offer for those who were at the Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena.

    It has said fans at the original show can get into Sunday's event for free.
    Some 25,000 people applied - but just 14,200 were at the concert on 22 May.
    If it's true, but it would seem par for the course.

  17. #117
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2009
    Location: Montreal, Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by Thor View Post
    Btw, media is a religious force too. The narrative and the "side picked" is already predetermined and everything that follows is only to convince your belief of this side and they're not going to flip their narrative. Not most of the media anyway. It's just a less fairy-tale approach, because that shit simply doesn't fly anymore with the technological revolution.
    It's funny how the media manipulates coverage to fit its desired narrative. I saw this the other day, and it cemented it even more. The most persecuted people in the world, deliberately ignored

    As of May 28th, no media outlets or human rights activist groups outside Bangladesh condemned the hate crime attacks on this ancient Hindu temple during Ramadan. However, our team did a quick analysis and any instance globally where a Christian or Muslim minority had their house of worship attacked during a majority groupís religious holiday, then it was made a national debate of growing intolerance. We ask, why donít Hindu lives matter too? Of the over 180 attacks on Hindu temples in Bangladesh over 12 months, we repeatedly reached out to media houses and journalists at Vice, Toronto Star, NYTimes, Washington Post, CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, NDTV, Guardian, CBC, Fox News and more. However, the result was that only 1 instance of attacks was covered by New York Times, Fox News and Al Jazeera. Media outlets such as Toronto Star, CNN, Vice, CBC, Washington Post have ignored our requests without reply. However, as a test we did once share that a Mosque was attacked and almost all outlets or journalists from the outlet did show response.

    And why? I saw people on Facebook claiming that mainstream media receives plenty of Saudi money to manipulate public opinion. After seeing this, I wouldn't put it past them

  18. #118
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Azaran View Post
    However, as a test we did once share that a Mosque was attacked and almost all outlets or journalists from the outlet did show response.
    Show us. Show us links, show us any proof that the attacks on Mosques in Bangladesh were widely reported.

    I googled: "attack on hindus in bangladesh". -> About 414.000 results
    I googled: "attack on mosque in bangladesh". -> About 474.000 results.

    First article from my google search indicates that it was ISIL that attacked a Shia Mosque.

    Your story is an example how fake news propagates over social media. (I guess forums are also social media. But only for old people). You tell something that is true (there were attacks) and you combine it with a conclusion that someone might have made up.


    I suspect that he real reason that attack on Hindus in Bangladesh are not widely reported is very simple. 9 Out of 10 Americans and Canadians have zero clue where Bangladesh is in the world. They don't know anyone there. They are no Americans fighting there. There are only poor people in Bangladesh. They don't care. And thus media don't report about it. There is no story. Now on the other hand, if ISIL ("we know those, they are bad!") does something in Bangladesh, then at least there is one connection with the Americans and Canadians. So there is a story to report.

    I've spent quite a bit of time in the US in the past. One thing I noticed was how the US news-programs and newspapers report 99.5% only about the US. And absolutely nothing else. Unless there are Americans there killing non-Americans, they report on that too. But any news without Americans ? Not worth talking about. Compare that to European tv-stations or newspapers and it is closer to 50% (very rough guess).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •