Meat egypt's newest president

[Hamata]

This guy (cant remember his name) is Egypt's first democarticly elected president

people from egypt say this is a victory for the revoultion and have high hopes for this guy hopefully this will be good for the future of the egyptian people

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/incoming/article462085.ece/ALTERNATES/g4l/146303654.jpg

[Fragony]

Got bad news for you, he is not

[Lemur]

Ruh-roh (http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_13/74584752/): " 'The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,' Morsi said in his election speech before Cairo University students on Saturday night. [...] 'Today we can establish Sharia law because our nation will acquire well-being only with Islam and Sharia. The Muslim Brothers and the Freedom and Justice Party will be the conductors of these goals,' he said."

Dang it all to heck, why can't Egypt go straight from military oppression to Jeffersonian democracy?

[CBR]

Dang it all to heck, why can't Egypt go straight from military oppression to Jeffersonian democracy?
They don't have slavery, and women can vote, so at least they are on the right track.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ruh-roh (http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_13/74584752/): " 'The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,' Morsi said in his election speech before Cairo University students on Saturday night. [...] 'Today we can establish Sharia law because our nation will acquire well-being only with Islam and Sharia. The Muslim Brothers and the Freedom and Justice Party will be the conductors of these goals,' he said."

Dang it all to heck, why can't Egypt go straight from military oppression to Jeffersonian democracy?

OTOH, his actual speech (a translation) from Sunday: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/25/president-egyptians-mohamed-morsi

I reserve judgement.

As you read - consider the number of bland references American and European politicians make.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Considering the military disbanded parliament and this guy's a not-even-poorly-disguised fundamentalist whacko... I'd say Egypt is doing the whole 'take one step forward, take ten steps backwards' thing.

Hey, at least people were punished for all those Secret Prison/Torturing Innocent People thing right? Right!? Oh, of course not. The papers and files probably won't even be released.

Really, I'm not even making it up. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12674714

He may be a fundamentalist, but that doesn't mean he's a whacko.

Rhy is a fundamentalist, but he's not going to ban abortion, stone scarlet women, kick all the Muslims and force all Scottish children to learn Hebrew - unless perchance he was elected on that platform.

This guy was elected on a socially conservative democratising program which emphasised plurality.

He might turn out to be no worse than pre-breakdown George W Bush.

[Greyblades]

Heh, meat.

Er, ahem.

Ruh-roh: " 'The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,' Morsi said in his election speech before Cairo University students on Saturday night. [...] 'Today we can establish Sharia law because our nation will acquire well-being only with Islam and Sharia. The Muslim Brothers and the Freedom and Justice Party will be the conductors of these goals,' he said."

Huh, I would say something about "I cant believe something this inflamitory and stupid gets someone elected" until I realized we hear the same sort of stupidity from successful politicians here, just replace sharia law with "lessen benefits for all unemployed council house yobs" and "the poor have only themselves to blame for being poor"

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Heh, meat.

Er, ahem.


Huh, I would say something about "I cant believe something this inflamitory and stupid gets someone elected" until I realized we hear the same sort of stupidity from successful politicians here, just replace sharia law with "lessen benefits for all unemployed council house yobs" and "the poor have only themselves to blame for being poor"

I dunno - as a 25 year old who went home instead of trying to get housing benefit, I don't think the two are comparable.

More likely, US media is obfusticating via translation.

[Tuuvi]

Call me naive but I'm just glad Egypt got to elect it's own president. If the Egyptians want an islamist president then let them have one, it is their first election after all I think we should cut them some slack. What we should be worrying about is the armed forces, it's obvious they were trying to grab power from the get go and now that they have it they're very reluctant to let it go. I think the Egyptian revolution has a ways to go yet, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[HopAlongBunny]

First democratically elected president of Egypt; very much like the people of Egypt not everyone is going to like the choice-that's democracy.

The reaction of the military will make or break the story as a "win" for US policy; most ppl will assume that whatever the military does, they do at the behest of their paymasters (whether that is true or not). I just hope US intelligence on Egypt is a bit more sophisticated than their intelligence on Iraq was...

[Greyblades]

I dunno - as a 25 year old who went home instead of trying to get housing benefit, I don't think the two are comparable.

How so?

[HoreTore]

I suppose that term does get thrown around loosely. Violent Fundamentalist, then.

The brotherhood is without a doubt totalitarian. But communism is totalitarian too, yet we have seen plenty of communist parties gain power without implementing a terror regime. So, what Mursi will actually do is wide-open in my mind.

It must also be said that he has far from complete power. The old regime(the military) and the liberals are still considerable powers, and will continue to influence Egypt.

[Fragony]

Call me naive but I'm just glad Egypt got to elect it's own president. If the Egyptians want an islamist president then let them have one, it is their first election after all I think we should cut them some slack.

That's fair, this is mostly about the economy, not religion. But the muslim brotherhood is bad news, they are no longer violent themselves but still the hand under it's skirt

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I suppose that term does get thrown around loosely. Violent Fundamentalist, then.

So like Nelson Mandela then?

Or Gerry Adams?

The fact is - nobody actually knows what the Brotherhood is going to be like. What we know about this guy is that he is a US educated engineer, but then Bin Laden was a doctor...

[rory_20_uk]

President Assad Was an Opthalmologist at St Mary's Paddington.

The West is happier with those who are understandable and can be bribed - sorry, aid sent - with understandable results. Those who believe things might not be as easy to control - sorry, lead down the path of Western Utopia.

~:smoking:

[Fragony]

So like Nelson Mandela then?

For their sake I hope not

[Major Robert Dump]

I just noticed the word Meat in the thread title. No thanks, he's not my type

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

For their sake I hope not

That depends on how you view the situation in SA now viz Mandela and those who came after him. The (boer) family I have out there think he was a better thing than Aparteid, but they're not keen on the current lot.

[Fragony]

That depends on how you view the situation in SA now viz Mandela and those who came after him. The (boer) family I have out there think he was a better thing than Aparteid, but they're not keen on the current lot.

Mandela is a piece of scum with a lot of blood on his hands. The Boers should just accept their new situation and just return to the Netherlands where they belong. Africa is for Africans and it ought to be like that. No country for white men.

[Strike For The South]

Mandela is a piece of scum with a lot of blood on his hands. The Boers should just accept their new situation and just return to the Netherlands where they belong. Africa is for Africans and it ought to be like that. No country for white men.

It's not the 300 years of terror and disenfranchisement. It is the simple fact the peoples do not mix

Sometimes I want to hug you until you stop breathing

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Mandela is a piece of scum with a lot of blood on his hands. The Boers should just accept their new situation and just return to the Netherlands where they belong. Africa is for Africans and it ought to be like that. No country for white men.

Basing this on what exactly?

It's not like the Boers would be well treated in the Netherlands, they don't belong there any more than you belong in SA. You're forgetting the basic rule of blood soaked ground, generations of Boers died for the right to live there.

[Fragony]

Basing this on what exactly?

It's not like the Boers would be well treated in the Netherlands, they don't belong there any more than you belong in SA. You're forgetting the basic rule of blood soaked ground, generations of Boers died for the right to live there.

Against the brittish yes, not very nice of you. But that is nothing compared to what they are facing now. They will be fine here. In ANC South Africa, whites have no acces to healthcare and no acces to wealthfare, tens of thousands have been killed already and hundreds of thousands are starving because they get no aid at all.

[Strike For The South]

Against the brittish yes, not very nice of you. But that is nothing compared to what they are facing now. They will be fine here. In ANC South Africa, whites have no acces to healthcare and no acces to wealthfare, tens of thousands have been killed already and hundreds of thousands are starving because they get no aid at all.

Lies, lies, lies.

You are conflating having no access with having all the access. People point to the surge in white poverty as some sort of marker of discrimination when in reality it is just the aparthied rug being pulled out from under the Afrikaners.

I certainly do not agree with the polices of the ANC, people like Mbeki have sent millions to their graves for various power plaus. However, I also do not shed many tears for people who ruled in tyrrany

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Against the brittish yes, not very nice of you. But that is nothing compared to what they are facing now. They will be fine here. In ANC South Africa, whites have no acces to healthcare and no acces to wealthfare, tens of thousands have been killed already and hundreds of thousands are starving because they get no aid at all.

I take it you have close family out there, who are well connected and know what's going on?

I do.

Whites do fine in general, yes there is discrimination, but it is not the legal discrimination of the sort that denies basic services.

There have been some killings, but not "tens of thousands". I seem to recall you were one of the ones pouring scorn on such claims made for Libya - yet you are credulous when it comes to SA?

If things were as bad as you say my Uncle and his family would be in Britain.


Lies, lies, lies.

You are conflating having no access with having all the access. People point to the surge in white poverty as some sort of marker of discrimination when in reality it is just the aparthied rug being pulled out from under the Afrikaners.

I certainly do not agree with the polices of the ANC, people like Mbeki have sent millions to their graves for various power plaus. However, I also do not shed many tears for people who ruled in tyrrany

Not quite, there are serious problems with the ways whites are treated, especially in municipalities where they make up the poor rather than the wealthy. The biggest problem, admitted by President Zuma, is that the government doesn't really concieve of the idea of "poor whites", it just doesn't factor into the thinking generally. The reason a white underclass has developed is because of the fall in prosperity of whites generally, so the waelthy can no longer afford as many servants.

[Strike For The South]

The fact Zuma is president speaks to the real problem of SA politics.

How that man is not in some hospital, convulsing as AIDS sucks the last moments out of his pitiful life, is proof that there is no God.

[HoreTore]

Mandela is a piece of scum with a lot of blood on his hands.

This has got to be some of the worst I've heard from you so far, frags. This is rivalling the treatment Martin Luther King gets from "not-racists" in the US.

What nonsense. And here I was, thinking you only hate muslims. Good to see you're doing your best to prove that you're a full-blown racist.

You really should stop reading racist blogs. You're parroting all of their racist views, one after another.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The fact Zuma is president speaks to the real problem of SA politics.

How that man is not in some hospital, convulsing as AIDS sucks the last moments out of his pitiful life, is proof that there is no God.

Yeah... taking a shower and having a good scrub down there will actually reduce the likely hood of infection for men, and the varients of HIV down there are no where near as infectious as the Asian varients (which are hardier and therefore easier to transmit).

He's about the calibre of your average shop-forman Socialist. SA's problem is that after Aparteid all White, and by extrnsion most educated Black and Coloured, politcians are tarred with the Aparteid brush.

As a result, the ANC rarely faces serious opposition and this means there's little impetus for them to govern well, as they keep getting elected for being static. Eventually the ANC will fracture (it's already had bits splinter off) and things will improve. SA has Zimbabwe as the object lesson over the border, they won't go the same way.

Overall the picture may be bleak, but SA still has some very good universities and schools that produce educated people, they just need opertunities to enter politics.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This has got to be some of the worst I've heard from you so far, frags. This is rivalling the treatment Martin Luther King gets from "not-racists" in the US.

What nonsense. And here I was, thinking you only hate muslims. Good to see you're doing your best to prove that you're a full-blown racist.

You really should stop reading racist blogs. You're parroting all of their racist views, one after another.

To be fair, MLK was a pacifist, Mandela was a terrorist.

The appropriate comparison is with the Irish Republicans McGuiness and Adams, not MLK.

[HoreTore]

To be fair, MLK was a pacifist, Mandela was a terrorist.

The appropriate comparison is with the Irish Republicans McGuiness and Adams, not MLK.

I have no idea what smear campaigns McGuiness or Adams have recieved(heck, I don't even know who they are, nobody cares about brits), so I can't compare Mandela with them.

Martin Luther King, on the other hand, has had a significant smear campaign, one which has gone on since he entered the public stage, hence the comparison(to the smear, not the person per se).

[Strike For The South]

I have no idea what smear campaigns McGuiness or Adams have recieved(heck, I don't even know who they are, nobody cares about brits), so I can't compare Mandela with them.

Martin Luther King, on the other hand, has had a significant smear campaign, one which has gone on since he entered the public stage, hence the comparison(to the smear, not the person per se).

Is it a smear campaign when you are what they say you are?

[HoreTore]

Is it a smear campaign when you are what they say you are?

This (http://www.stormfront.org/forum/f81/) is an example of smear.

[Strike For The South]

This (http://www.stormfront.org/forum/f81/) is an example of smear.

Since do we count marginlized groups of racists on the internet?

Mandela was a terrorist, MLK was an adulterer. That is not smear.


Mandelas terrorism was understandable

I could care less who King slept with

[HoreTore]

Since do we count marginlized groups of racists on the internet?

Mandela was a terrorist, MLK was an adulterer. That is not smear.


Mandelas terrorism was understandable

I could care less who King slept with

The usual term for Mandela is "saboteur", but whatever. Marginalized groups count when someone parrots views coming from other marginalized groups(the "counterjihad movement"). If frags had held the simple opinion that Mandela engaged in armed resistance, there is no way he would've written what he did about him. No, dear frags has adopted the counter-jihad view of Mandela, and that is a smear.

[Strike For The South]

The usual term for Mandela is "saboteur", but whatever. Marginalized groups count when someone parrots views coming from other marginalized groups(the "counterjihad movement"). If frags had held the simple opinion that Mandela engaged in armed resistance, there is no way he would've written what he did about him. No, dear frags has adopted the counter-jihad view of Mandela, and that is a smear.

The usual term for white liberals who have a disingenous view on history becuase the black Afircan can never be wrong. Mandela was a terrorist, this may not go over well in whatever communist circle jerk you hang out in but it is the truth. Mandela was just as much a terrorist as Breivik is.

Frags is Frags

[Greyblades]

The usual term for Mandela is "saboteur",but whatever.
And in Pakistan the usual term for bin laden is "freedomfighter", but whatever.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I have no idea what smear campaigns McGuiness or Adams have recieved(heck, I don't even know who they are, nobody cares about brits), so I can't compare Mandela with them.

Martin Luther King, on the other hand, has had a significant smear campaign, one which has gone on since he entered the public stage, hence the comparison(to the smear, not the person per se).

They were IRA terrorists - they were also instumental in the Good Friday agreement.

Mandela was a terrorist, he may not have actually gone out and killed people personally but his (ghost written) autobiography makes it clear that from the beginnin "direct action" was concieved of as going up to and including attacks on the security services - Mandela was part of formulating that policy.

He used terror to achieve his political aims - he was a terrorist. You might try to justify that, I suspect Mandela himself would have the decency not to bother.

[HoreTore]

The usual term for white liberals who have a disingenous view on history becuase the black Afircan can never be wrong. Mandela was a terrorist, this may not go over well in whatever communist circle jerk you hang out in but it is the truth. Mandela was just as much a terrorist as Breivik is.

Frags is Frags

You know I love you, SFTS.

Now, as for sabouteur/resistance fighter/terrorist:

I call the Norwegian resistance movement(both sides) sabouteurs or resistance fighters. Even though they carried out assassinations. Even though they blew stuff up to terrorize and frighten. Even though they have hundreds of civillian lives on their hands. Even though there are strong indications of murders in a power struggle towards the end of the war. Etc, etc.

So, mostly the same stuff Mandela has done. Hence I give them both the same name.


And for the record, I don't call ABB a terrorist.

[Strike For The South]

You know I love you, SFTS.

Now, as for sabouteur/resistance fighter/terrorist:

I call the Norwegian resistance movement(both sides) sabouteurs or resistance fighters. Even though they carried out assassinations. Even though they blew stuff up to terrorize and frighten. Even though they have hundreds of civillian lives on their hands. Even though there are strong indications of murders in a power struggle towards the end of the war. Etc, etc.

So, mostly the same stuff Mandela has done. Hence I give them both the same name.


So basically the word saboteur is en vogue for you while terrorism is not?

You use them interchangeably, while being obstinate about others using one or the other.

How wonderfully pedantic.

[Lemur]

So basically the word saboteur is en vogue for you while terrorism is not?
With apologies to John Harrington: "Treason Terrorism doth never prosper: what’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason terrorism."

One man's freedom fighter is another man's evil rebel scum. I will concede, however, that honest-to-goodness terrorists such as OBL and Tim McVeigh are a slightly different creature, attempting to use mass casualties and fear to change the world. (Note that the changes they instigate are never what they intended.)

[Beskar]

I think this is when we start calling everyone a terrorist, lets throw George Washington and Ghandi into the mix as well.

[Strike For The South]

With apologies to John Harrington: "Treason Terrorism doth never prosper: what’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason terrorism."

One man's freedom fighter is another man's evil rebel scum. I will concede, however, that honest-to-goodness terrorists such as OBL and Tim McVeigh are a slightly different creature, attempting to use mass casualties and fear to change the world. (Note that the changes they instigate are never what they intended.)

Of course. Terrorism is defined thusly


the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims:

Washington, Mendela, Bin Laden, McVeigh are all terrorists. Some of their aims are more noble and more justified than others but they still all square the definition



I think this is when we start calling everyone a terrorist, lets throw George Washington and Ghandi into the mix as well.



I am unaware that Ghandi fits the description

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think this is when we start calling everyone a terrorist, lets throw George Washington and Ghandi into the mix as well.

Ghandi was non-violent, and advocated non-violent methods.

The Norwegians Resistence were fighting an outside power that had invaded, hence resistence.

The South Africans attacked their own state, albeit an unjust one, the key difference being that it would be impossible to demonstrate the amount of "friendly fire" in an SA bombing because you couldn't know who was on which side. In Norway you just count up the Norwegians who you know aren't collaberators.

The key point remains, however, that the Norwegians were fighting an external aggressor while the ANC basically ramped civil disobedience up to low-level Civil War.

Compare the suicide bomber in Syria to the gunman shotting Americans in Afganistan.

[Beskar]

Though I think the biggest distinction between Freedom Fighter and Terrorist is that Terrorists want to spread terror through the attack on civilian populations to intimidate and scare whilst freedom fighters typically attack government targets (such as an army base) in order to weaker their influence of control and typically backed by popular support.

Obviously there is a grey area in between this, but this typically separates people like George Washington and Mandela from the likes of Osama Bin Laden and Brevik. This is also why typically when George Washington and Mandela pop up, not everyone simply shoots down the name in disgust and they end up as idols and icons recognised in other countries, whilst Osama Bin Laden and Brevik are vilified.

[HoreTore]

Resistance towards an external enemy fits the french resistance, we however had Quisling.

Anyway, Lemur's response basically means a reply from me is redundant, as it sums up most of my opinion.

Anyway, the "point" was indeed pedantic and linguistic, SFTS. If that's your definition of terrorism, then yes, Mandela is a terrorist to you, along with the others mentioned. I define it differently, so to me Mandela is not a terrorist, but rather a former armed revolutionary who changed into something radically different.

I rarely use the word terrorist though, as it has been given so many different definitions that it has become very imprecise. And do remember that you're debating someone who has a positive view of Bakunin, SFTS ~;)

[Lemur]

I don't see how anyone could classify Mandela as a terrorist; he won. Let me see if I can do a reduction sauce here ...

Terrorist = rebel who does not have the strength/inclination to fight the military, hence targets civilians
Rebel = treacherous scum fighting the rightful ruler of their land
Freedom fighter = rebel who won
Founding father = freedom fighter who managed to leave something stable behind

[Fragony]

This has got to be some of the worst I've heard from you so far, frags. This is rivalling the treatment Martin Luther King gets from "not-racists" in the US.

What nonsense. And here I was, thinking you only hate muslims. Good to see you're doing your best to prove that you're a full-blown racist.

You really should stop reading racist blogs. You're parroting all of their racist views, one after another.

What makes you think I hate muslims, I despise islam there's a difference. Mouz and Lennie know I don't hate them, why can't you. I do not like to be called a racist as I am simply not one, black ladies will never cease to seriously confuse me and my friends would never call me one they know better than that, they know I am no racist. Thank you very much Horetore I am actually offended if you call me one. You don't know what is happening in SA because you read quality media.

[a completely inoffensive name]

From what I can tell the Muslim Brotherhood was the strongest, more organized opposition to Mubarak 2.0 and the good ole' boys club of Egypt. I have a feeling that the public quickly understood the spoiler effect and rallied behind the MB simply because they knew it was their best chance at shaking off the old guard. The new guard may not be the best, but in terms of keeping the new democracy going, you have an unknown factor vs. someone who you know is going to try and undermine the thing at the very start in order to keep Mubarak's system in place.

Once you get more parties that are organized and present strong platforms, we might see Egypt start to meet the expectations of Westerners.

[Kralizec]

From what I can tell the Muslim Brotherhood was the strongest, more organized opposition to Mubarak 2.0 and the good ole' boys club of Egypt. I have a feeling that the public quickly understood the spoiler effect and rallied behind the MB simply because they knew it was their best chance at shaking off the old guard. The new guard may not be the best, but in terms of keeping the new democracy going, you have an unknown factor vs. someone who you know is going to try and undermine the thing at the very start in order to keep Mubarak's system in place.

Once you get more parties that are organized and present strong platforms, we might see Egypt start to meet the expectations of Westerners.

This. If Shafiq had just been a boring technocrat under Mubarak things might have been different, but he's former military brass. The menu card was in this case rather underwhelming.

That said, Italy's current president is a communist but that hasn't prevented him from doing well enough so far. We'll just have to wait and see how Morsi does; even though I'm not optimistic I'll reserve judgement at first.

[HoreTore]

What makes you think I hate muslims, I despise islam there's a difference. Mouz and Lennie know I don't hate them, why can't you. I do not like to be called a racist as I am simply not one, black ladies will never cease to seriously confuse me and my friends would never call me one they know better than that, they know I am no racist. Thank you very much Horetore I am actually offended if you call me one. You don't know what is happening in SA because you read quality media.

I appreciate hissy fits from people who have no problem with calling others "multicultis", stalinists, insane and other nonsense at the first sign of disagreement. :smash:

Should I be more politically correct when I write, Frags? Should I use words that will not offend anyone? Should I censor myself rather than upset others? Should I avoid talking about sensitive subjects?

And I read the same blogs you do, Frags, that's why I know where your stance on Mandela and South Africa comes from; I've heard the lies and nonsense a million times already. The difference between the two of us is that in addition to the rubbish, I also read the quality media. ~;)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Though I think the biggest distinction between Freedom Fighter and Terrorist is that Terrorists want to spread terror through the attack on civilian populations to intimidate and scare whilst freedom fighters typically attack government targets (such as an army base) in order to weaker their influence of control and typically backed by popular support.

Obviously there is a grey area in between this, but this typically separates people like George Washington and Mandela from the likes of Osama Bin Laden and Brevik. This is also why typically when George Washington and Mandela pop up, not everyone simply shoots down the name in disgust and they end up as idols and icons recognised in other countries, whilst Osama Bin Laden and Brevik are vilified.

A better distinction would be between he who spreads terror without compunction and he who feels bad about what he does.

Both can be terrorists, but the latter may at some point put down his bombs and make a fist of trying to rejoin society.

[HoreTore]

This. If Shafiq had just been a boring technocrat under Mubarak things might have been different, but he's former military brass. The menu card was in this case rather underwhelming.

That said, Italy's current president is a communist but that hasn't prevented him from doing well enough so far. We'll just have to wait and see how Morsi does; even though I'm not optimistic I'll reserve judgement at first.

Italy's state leadership seems to have a much smaller effect than in other countries. Berlusconi's reign was actually a very stable one by italian standards... However, the country is stable, due to very strong local administrations. Probably due to Italy's history of very independent city-states...

[Fragony]

I appreciate hissy fits from people who have no problem with calling others "multicultis", stalinists and other nonsense at the first sign of disagreement. :smash:

Should I be more politically correct when I write, Frags? Should I use words that will not offend anyone? Should I censor myself rather than upset others? Should I avoid talking about sensitive subjects?

And I read the same blogs you do, Frags, that's why I know where your stance on Mandela and South Africa comes from; I've heard the lies and nonsense a million times already. The difference between the two of us is that in addition to the rubbish, I also read the quality media. ~;)

You ARE a multiculti. But I am no racist. So I can call you a multiculti but you can't call me a racist

[Lemur]

I can call you a multiculti but you can't call me a racist
I am anxiously awaiting someone to use a metaphor involving rubber and glue, the relative adhesive and tensile qualities of these two substances, and the likelihood of adhesion.

[Fragony]

I am anxiously awaiting someone to use a metaphor involving rubber and glue, the relative adhesive and tensile qualities of these two substances, and the likelihood of adhesion.

But if I had any racism in mind I would have racist ideas, isn't that a bit required

[Kralizec]

Which one of Berlusconi's reigns do you mean? There have been four. It's very rare in Italy for any coalition to get reelected - I vagely recall that this has never actually happened post-war, though I could be wrong.

Berlusconi's last government was in many ways ineffective because Lega Nord was hard to appease while their support was crucial. Of course the same happens in left wing coalitions as well to a certain degree, but since I don't follow their politics that well I can't compare the two.

The president's job is actually not all that an influential one normally. Napolitano did pressure Berlusconi into resigning though because his government was unable to tackle the country's financial troubles. And even before that he was largely appreciated as a head of state with dignity, as opposed to their prime minister. Which is why I'm saying he's done a well enough job.

[HoreTore]

You ARE a multiculti. But I am no racist. So I can call you a multiculti but you can't call me a racist

My definition of racist fits your statements perfectly, hence my use. Your definition of multiculti may fit my statements, so feel free to call me that.

But puh-lease, save the drama and hissy fits.

Also, I'll throw in a metaphor(or analogy or whatever), free of charge:

I take a walk, and run into a friend. I accuse him of having peed in his pants. He laughs it off. Later, I run into another friend. I accuse him of having peed his pants too. He gets angry and throws a fit.

Now, which one had actually peed his pants? Obviously the second guy. The first guy didn't do it, so he had no reason to get upset. The other guy, however, tried to conceal it, and reacted angrily and embarrassed when confronted with a fact he tried to keep for himself.

I feel comfortably applying the same logic on how people react to being called racists.

[Papewaio]

Of course. Terrorism is defined thusly


the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims:

Washington, Mendela, Bin Laden, McVeigh are all terrorists. Some of their aims are more noble and more justified than others but they still all square the definition


I would drop the unauthorized part and add in that the primary targets are civilians not military targets.

As such the Syrian government would be acting as a terrorist organization by terrorizing by massacring it's own civilians.

As for Gandhi, note that a slightly broader view would add in that:
a). India and most commonwealth countries are expensive as members of an empire.
b) Britain could either lose India peacefully or go up against Indian WW II army vets including a very militant Sikh minority.

=][=
As for the topic
Look how having Hamas elected in Palestine has severely dropped their popularity from robin hood folk hero to boring politician status.

Nothing like leadership expectations as a reality check on idealists, and as a great curb to popularity. So the new leaders need to improve the economy much like any other politicians or face the wraith of the populace.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I would drop the unauthorized part and add in that the primary targets are civilians not military targets.

As such the Syrian government would be acting as a terrorist organization by terrorizing by massacring it's own civilians.

As for Gandhi, note that a slightly broader view would add in that:
a). India and most commonwealth countries are expensive as members of an empire.
b) Britain could either lose India peacefully or go up against Indian WW II army vets including a very militant Sikh minority.

=][=
As for the topic
Look how having Hamas elected in Palestine has severely dropped their popularity from robin hood folk hero to boring politician status.

Nothing like leadership expectations as a reality check on idealists, and as a great curb to popularity. So the new leaders need to improve the economy much like any other politicians or face the wraith of the populace.

I believe Strike is quoting the internationally recognised definition.

Note that neither French nor Norwegian resistence fighters apply because tge governments they fought against are not recognised to have been legitimate.

[Kralizec]

I believe Strike is quoting the internationally recognised definition.

Note that neither French nor Norwegian resistence fighters apply because tge governments they fought against are not recognised to have been legitimate.

Strike's definition is of course correct. So there is bad terrorism and good more understandable terrorism.

A seemingly pedantic, but crucial point: you said "The South Africans attacked their own state". Black africans weren't second class citizens in SA, they weren't citizens at all. They were denied citizenship (whereas they had it before in many cases, in which case it was revoked) and basic political rights under the bogus reasoning that they had their own political institutions under the apartheid umbrella. Which of course didn't stop the white South Africans from exploiting them as an integral part of their economy while maintaining that they were merely "guest workers".

[HoreTore]

Strike's definition is of course correct. So there is bad terrorism and good more understandable terrorism.

The definition of terrorism changes from scientist to scientist, just like most political terms(fascism, socialism, conservatism, etc). Not just scientists though - as a political term, it is also given meaning by politicians and other powers.

I have quite a few doubts that the CIA and the Chinese intelligence agency have the same definition, for example.

Edit: and to make matters even more complicated, it also changes with time, of course.

[Major Robert Dump]

It should only be a few months now before the Egyptian tourist machine is up and running again, and attractive blonde female journalists will flood the streets of Egypt once again.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The definition of terrorism changes from scientist to scientist, just like most political terms(fascism, socialism, conservatism, etc). Not just scientists though - as a political term, it is also given meaning by politicians and other powers.

I have quite a few doubts that the CIA and the Chinese intelligence agency have the same definition, for example.

Edit: and to make matters even more complicated, it also changes with time, of course.

Um, no.

This is rather like your understanding of the military - there is a generally accepted definition, it is the one confirmed the UN uses -

"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable (https://forums.totalwar.org/wiki/Theory_of_justification), whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"

That is not, however, a definition under International Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

[HoreTore]

Um, no.

This is rather like your understanding of the military - there is a generally accepted definition, it is the one confirmed the UN uses -

"Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable (https://forums.totalwar.org/wiki/Theory_of_justification), whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them"

That is not, however, a definition under International Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Wow.


There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term "terrorism".[1][2] Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of "terrorism". Moreover, the international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed upon, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[3]

You managed to counter your entire post and support my post in just one link - good job!

Also, might I point out that the definition you just gave is different to the definition given earlier in this thread?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Try reading a little more comprehensively, maybe?

Lack of a precise international LEGAL or ACADEMIC definition does not contradict my point - that terrorism is generally understood.

[HoreTore]

Try reading a little more comprehensively, maybe?

Lack of a precise international LEGAL or ACADEMIC definition does not contradict my point - that terrorism is generally understood.

Oh dear........

Nah, it's late, I don't bother.

[Fragony]

My definition of racist fits your statements perfectly, hence my use. Your definition of multiculti may fit my statements, so feel free to call me that.

But puh-lease, save the drama and hissy fits.

Also, I'll throw in a metaphor(or analogy or whatever), free of charge:

I take a walk, and run into a friend. I accuse him of having peed in his pants. He laughs it off. Later, I run into another friend. I accuse him of having peed his pants too. He gets angry and throws a fit.

Now, which one had actually peed his pants? Obviously the second guy. The first guy didn't do it, so he had no reason to get upset. The other guy, however, tried to conceal it, and reacted angrily and embarrassed when confronted with a fact he tried to keep for himself.

I feel comfortably applying the same logic on how people react to being called racists.

But I didn't do anything, didn't say anything, most of all not pissing my pants that's all in the eye of the beholder. In your eyes anyone who doesn't absolutely adore multiculture without question is racist, if you pour water on my pants it's wet, but I didn't wet it

[Hamata]

Corrected spelling on threads title from now on :D

[a completely inoffensive name]

Egypt's new president to pick woman,Christian VPs


http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/26/world/meast/egypt-politics/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/26/world/meast/egypt-politics/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)

[Fragony]

Taqiyya

[HoreTore]

Taqiyya

Classic Islamophobia. Or racism, if you like.

[HoreTore]

But I didn't do anything, didn't say anything, most of all not pissing my pants that's all in the eye of the beholder. In your eyes anyone who doesn't absolutely adore multiculture without question is racist, if you pour water on my pants it's wet, but I didn't wet it

Nonsense.

[Fragony]

Classic Islamophobia. Or racism, if you like.

Yes please, 2 sugar no milk

You are probably too leftist to be able to read this, this what he says when you aren't wiping a tear and biting your lip

'The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,' Morsi said in his election speech before Cairo University students on Saturday night. [...] 'Today we can establish Sharia law because our nation will acquire well-being only with Islam and Sharia. The Muslim Brothers and the Freedom and Justice Party will be the conductors of these goals,'

[HoreTore]

Yes please, 2 sugar no milk

Taqiyya has no basis in reality whatsoever, and those who spread it has an understanding of muslim that is quite racist. Taqiyya represent the classsic racism, the one we also saw in antisemitism. Mattias Gardell calls it a "text-based understanding" of the muslim, ie that a muslims action can be explained by what's written in the Quran. Just like the actions of jews have been explained by what's written in the Torah. The jews were of course also given a god-given right to lie to good christians, just like the counterjihad racists have given muslims the god-given right to lie.

Delusional racism, nothing else.

[Fragony]

Nonsense.

You are too leftist to notice it about yourself, people who do, well do.

Classic case

[Fragony]

Taqiyya has no basis in reality whatsoever, and those who spread it has an understanding of muslim that is quite racist. Taqiyya represent the classsic racism, the one we also saw in antisemitism. Mattias Gardell calls it a "text-based understanding" of the muslim, ie that a muslims action can be explained by what's written in the Quran. Just like the actions of jews have been explained by what's written in the Torah. The jews were of course also given a god-given right to lie to good christians, just like the counterjihad racists have given muslims the god-given right to lie.

Delusional racism, nothing else.

Sure Horetore. The muslim brotherhood are a bunch of peaches. Because they are muslims after all

[HoreTore]

Sure Horetore. The muslim brotherhood are a bunch of peaches. Because they are muslims after all

No. If you bothered to read, you would know that I have already ststed that their ideology is totalitarian.

They do not, however, hold beliefs like Taqiyya, since it simply does not exist in the way counterjihad describes. It's a made up doctrine, taken from thin air, like the doctrine which allowed jews to lie to non-jews was made up.

When someone makes up stuff like that, I call it racism.

[Fragony]

I call it racism.

I know you do that. It is normal leftist people call you a racist if you say something that doesn't comfirm their worldview. It's absolute. Without doubt.

[HoreTore]

I know you do that. It is normal leftist people call you a racist if you say something that doesn't comfirm their worldview. It's absolute. Without doubt.

Did you know the Freemasons kidnapped blonde girls, killed them, salted them in a barrel and sold them to the turks?

[Fragony]

Did you know the Freemasons kidnapped blonde girls, killed them, salted them in a barrel and sold them to the turks?

Those were herrings, smell is confusing

[HoreTore]

By the way Frags, your old buddy Fjordman has come out of the closet as a full-blown racist (http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.no/2012/06/is-there-genetic-component-to-culture.html). Nobody is surprised....

[Fragony]

By the way Frags, your old buddy Fjordman has come out of the closet as a full-blown racist (http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.no/2012/06/is-there-genetic-component-to-culture.html). Nobody is surprised....

It's no secret that people from muslim cultures have a lower IQ, is that racist, yes because you attribute distinct qualities to a race. It's also simply true, westerners are around 100, arabs around 85.

Fact. It's also a fact that in the muslim world inbreeding is excessive, leading to all sorts of mental and physical problems.

I don't even read Fjordman by the way, I know of his blog and read a few of his articles but that's it. I already have an opinion on the islam I don't need his

[HoreTore]

It's no secret that people from muslim cultures have a lower IQ, is that racist, yes because you attribute distinct qualities to a race. It's also simply true, westerners are around 100, arabs around 85.

Fact. It's also a fact that in the muslim world inbreeding is excessive, leading to all sorts of mental and physical problems.

I don't even read Fjordman by the way, I know of his blog and read a few of his articles but that's it. I already have an opinion on the islam I don't need his

I lol'ed.

I always love it when random numbers are thrown around. And you've previously stated that you've read "most of what fjordman has written", I see you now suffer from denial...

[Fragony]

I lol'ed.

I always love it when random numbers are thrown around. And you've previously stated that you've read "most of what fjordman has written", I see you now suffer from denial...

He is sometimes linked from another site I read. Read more about him than from him. What does it matter anyway. No shame here. And just google 'IQ world map'. There are also numerous studies about the effects of inbreeding. They are very easy to find.

[HoreTore]

He is sometimes linked from another site I read. Read more about him than from him. What does it matter anyway. No shame here. And just google 'IQ world map'. There are also numerous studies about the effects of inbreeding. They are very easy to find.

There is very, very little research done on IQ, certainly miles away from having a basis to draw conclusions on. The few studies there are all point in different directions. This is probably due to the post-nazi stigma on racial studies.

That, of course, does not stop racists from drawing conclusions and saying that its "based on science".

[Fragony]

There is very, very little research done on IQ, certainly miles away from having a basis to draw conclusions on. The few studies there are all point in different directions. This is probably due to the post-nazi stigma on racial studies.

That, of course, does not stop racists from drawing conclusions and saying that its "based on science".

Well it is based on IQ tests. See that's what I mean, if something doesn't comfirm your worldview you cast 'racism', a completely normal leftist reaction I might add. It has been carefully cultivated. But it doesn't hurt all that badly because it's so very very normal.

[HoreTore]

Well it is based on IQ tests. See that's what I mean, if something doesn't comfirm your worldview you cast 'racism', a completely normal leftist reaction I might add. It has been carefully cultivated. But it doesn't hurt all that badly because it's so very very normal.

It's really just "unscientific", but the superiority complex makes "racist" a fitting word.

Speaking of IQ tests... All Norwegian conscripts, meaning all Norwegian males and some females, take an IQ test befor serving. This started in the 50's or so. Since then, our average IQ has risen quite significantly. Did Norway change its race? Or are we simply not quite sure about what intelligence is yet?

[Fragony]

It's really just "unscientific", but the superiority complex makes "racist" a fitting word.

Speaking of IQ tests... All Norwegian conscripts, meaning all Norwegian males and some females, take an IQ test befor serving. This started in the 50's or so. Since then, our average IQ has risen quite significantly. Did Norway change its race? Or are we simply not quite sure about what intelligence is yet?

Whatever the hell it is, they are less good at it. They aren't exactly our best and brightest here either, most are on the 'vmbo' which is the lowest we offer besides special schools for the mentally challenged. Most Asians go to the 'VWO' or 'Gymnasium' which is the highest.

[HoreTore]

Whatever the hell it is, they are less good at it. They aren't exactly our best and brightest here either, most are on the 'vmbo' which is the lowest we offer besides special schools for the mentally challenged. Most Asians go to the 'VWO' or 'Gymnasium' which is the highest.

Minority school scores mostly follow the same pattern, regardless of which country or which minority griup we're talking about. The average score will be a little under the national average, while they will have a higher representation in both the griup with the lowest score AND the group with the highest score. So, to put it bluntly, they will have more geniuses and idiots and fewer mediocrities, than the nation as a whole. So, in western europe, the medical and law schools are dominated by immigrants, but so is the statistics for those dropping out of school.

This is also remarkably similar to how boys do in school compared to girls, by the way(with boys being the minority and girls the majority).

The only conclusion one can draw here, is that there is no real conclusion to draw. A conclusion based on racial abilities is, to but it mildly, very unsupported.

[HoreTore]

And to complicate things even further, we know that a lot of those with very high IQ's do very poorly in school...

[Fragony]

And to complicate things even further, we know that a lot of those with very high IQ's do very poorly in school...

And most with high IQ's do well, it's an avarage. I do not know of any studies here mind you but om general it reflects the IQ worldmap. Asians outperform everyone, and blacks and arabs are doing relatively bad. I think it's pretty save to assume that Asians are smarter then us, and that whites are smarter than blacks and arabs.

And of course that's racist, but as long as aren't doing anything with it so what really

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Oh dear........

Nah, it's late, I don't bother.

Could you at least try to think critically?

There is a difference between there not being a precise definition, and there being no definition. Certain points, the deliberate incitement of terror, the illegality of the act, are common to all.

[HoreTore]

And most with high IQ's do well, it's an avarage. I do not know of any studies here mind you but om general it reflects the IQ worldmap. Asians outperform everyone, and blacks and arabs are doing relatively bad. I think it's pretty save to assume that Asians are smarter then us, and that whites are smarter than blacks and arabs.

And of course that's racist, but as long as aren't doing anything with it so what really

So, you believe it's genetic. Thus, you believe that Norwegians have changed their genetics/race over the last 50 years? I don't belong to the same race as my grandfather?

And for the record, the stats for asians is the same as for any other minority group. White, european Balkans as well. The key here seems to be the minority status, not the different ethnicities. The minority status gives an increase in both peaks and bottoms, whule giving a slightly lower average. Pointing to race to explain that sounds horribly naive, simplified and unfounded. The picture is more complex than that.

And then you have a fountain of other problems with IQ: that the test was originally implemented to exclude non-whites from voting, cultural bias, that it still doesn't give an answer to whether it's based on genetics or education, etc.

In short; a field where any conclusion drawn is unfounded.

[Major Robert Dump]

Race and ethnicity have nothing to do with intelligence and potential. Penis size, on the other hand.....

[HoreTore]

Race and ethnicity have nothing to do with intelligence and potential. Penis size, on the other hand.....

MRD brings the debate over to what really matters in the world. :smash:

Boob size too, btw.

[Fragony]

So, you believe it's genetic. Thus, you believe that Norwegians have changed their genetics/race over the last 50 years? I don't belong to the same race as my grandfather?

And for the record, the stats for asians is the same as for any other minority group. White, european Balkans as well. The key here seems to be the minority status, not the different ethnicities. The minority status gives an increase in both peaks and bottoms, whule giving a slightly lower average. Pointing to race to explain that sounds horribly naive, simplified and unfounded. The picture is more complex than that.

And then you have a fountain of other problems with IQ: that the test was originally implemented to exclude non-whites from voting, cultural bias, that it still doesn't give an answer to whether it's based on genetics or education, etc.

In short; a field where any conclusion drawn is unfounded.

I believe Norwegians are more intelligent yes, Norwegians are in the top-tier of civil societies. IQ isn't definite but it's a proper indication. I don't use terms like superior or inferior I'll leave that to those with a bad agenda I would never want to be part of. You ought to see me as an ally really I hate them just as much as you do.

[HoreTore]

I believe Norwegians are more intelligent yes, Norwegians are in the top-tier of civil societies.

The question wasn't Norwegian vs anyone else, the question was Norwegians of 2012 vs Norwegians of 1950.

Are we the same race today as we were in 1950?

[Sp4]

Could be... hmm what happened since then/shorty before then that could change something =p

[Fragony]

The question wasn't Norwegian vs anyone else, the question was Norwegians of 2012 vs Norwegians of 1950.

Are we the same race today as we were in 1950?

Yes, this will inevitabilly result in a nature vs nurture debate but why not look at right now, that's always where you are

[HoreTore]

Yes, this will inevitabilly result in a nature vs nurture debate but why not look at right now, that's always where you are

Because we can't do anything about the presentm we can only change the future. If we are to restrict immigration or offer different treatment for immigrants based on a supposed lower IQ, then we would need to ensure that IQ is genetic(racial).

And if IQ is genetic/racial, then I am not of the same race as my grandfather. If I am of the same race as my grandfather, then IQ is not based on genetics.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Because we can't do anything about the presentm we can only change the future. If we are to restrict immigration or offer different treatment for immigrants based on a supposed lower IQ, then we would need to ensure that IQ is genetic(racial).

And if IQ is genetic/racial, then I am not of the same race as my grandfather. If I am of the same race as my grandfather, then IQ is not based on genetics.

There's a fairly fundamental problem with your argument - you could just make everybody coming in take an IQ test. There is a strong likelyhood that those from Africa (and especially Blacks) will score lower than Europeans, or Anglo-phones from former Asian Colonies.

The reason being, IQ doesn't measure Intelligence per se, it measures aptitude for working in a Western-style economy.

[HoreTore]

There's a fairly fundamental problem with your argument - you could just make everybody coming in take an IQ test. There is a strong likelyhood that those from Africa (and especially Blacks) will score lower than Europeans, or Anglo-phones from former Asian Colonies.

The reason being, IQ doesn't measure Intelligence per se, it measures aptitude for working in a Western-style economy.

Are you seriously suggesting implementation of fascist rule of the strong?

Anyway, IQ is such a poorly understood phenomenon, that at present it cannot and should not be used for anything at all.

[Fragony]

Because we can't do anything about the presentm we can only change the future. If we are to restrict immigration or offer different treatment for immigrants based on a supposed lower IQ, then we would need to ensure that IQ is genetic(racial).

And if IQ is genetic/racial, then I am not of the same race as my grandfather. If I am of the same race as my grandfather, then IQ is not based on genetics.

I have absolutely no intention to do such a thing, I want no immigration from muslim countries because of the islam. I despise islam you know I do, there will be no apoligy. And yes that involves discrimination of muslims, and I do not care a bit about that. I'll leave defending a religion to progressive people.

[Lemur]

I despise islam you know I do, there will be no apoligy.
And somehow Islam crops up in nearly every thread, every topic, every argument. And if it ain't Islam, it's the wicked gutmensch who are responsible for all bad things everywhere. A few quotes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanaticism)come to mind:

George Santayana: "Fanaticism consists of redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim."

Winston Churchill: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Neil Postman: "the key to all fanatical beliefs is that they are self-confirming....(some beliefs are) fanatical not because they are 'false', but because they are expressed in such a way that they can never be shown to be false."

Robertson Davies: "Fanaticism is overcompensation for doubt."

Arthur Miller: "The closer a man approaches tragedy the more intense is his concentration of emotion upon the fixed point of his commitment, which is to say the closer he approaches what in life we call fanaticism."

[Fragony]

And somehow Islam crops up in nearly every thread, every topic, every argument. And if it ain't Islam, it's the wicked gutmensch who are responsible for all bad things everywhere. A few quotes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanaticism)come to mind:

George Santayana: "Fanaticism consists of redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim."

Winston Churchill: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Neil Postman: "the key to all fanatical beliefs is that they are self-confirming....(some beliefs are) fanatical not because they are 'false', but because they are expressed in such a way that they can never be shown to be false."

Robertson Davies: "Fanaticism is overcompensation for doubt."

Arthur Miller: "The closer a man approaches tragedy the more intense is his concentration of emotion upon the fixed point of his commitment, which is to say the closer he approaches what in life we call fanaticism."

Can't just decide it does, I would have to do it first. Progressive people hate all critisism of a religion, I treat it all the same.

[Strike For The South]

Anyway, the "point" was indeed pedantic and linguistic, SFTS. If that's your definition of terrorism, then yes, Mandela is a terrorist to you, along with the others mentioned. I define it differently, so to me Mandela is not a terrorist, but rather a former armed revolutionary who changed into something radically different.

I rarely use the word terrorist though, as it has been given so many different definitions that it has become very imprecise. And do remember that you're debating someone who has a positive view of Bakunin, SFTS ~;)

It is not my definition. It is THE definition. Just becuase you wish to change the meaning of word becuase you can't bring yourself to put your heros and villians under any of the same umbrellas is not my problem. It has become impercise to you becuase terrorism=bad in your opinion. One could write a book on the differences between OBL and Washington but they does not mean they are mutually exclusive

Anarchists are children and shouldn't be taken seriously.


I would drop the unauthorized part and add in that the primary targets are civilians not military targets.

As such the Syrian government would be acting as a terrorist organization by terrorizing by massacring it's own civilians.

As for Gandhi, note that a slightly broader view would add in that:
a). India and most commonwealth countries are expensive as members of an empire.
b) Britain could either lose India peacefully or go up against Indian WW II army vets including a very militant Sikh minority.

=][=
As for the topic
Look how having Hamas elected in Palestine has severely dropped their popularity from robin hood folk hero to boring politician status.

Nothing like leadership expectations as a reality check on idealists, and as a great curb to popularity. So the new leaders need to improve the economy much like any other politicians or face the wraith of the populace.

You can wrtie the fine people at Oxford to request the definition change

[ajaxfetish]

It is not my definition. It is THE definition.
...
You can wrtie the fine people at Oxford to request the definition change

You're right that it's not your definition; however, I'd be a little hesitant to call it THE definition, considering it's only one of three definitions given in the OED entry it's taken from.

Ajax

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Are you seriously suggesting implementation of fascist rule of the strong?

Anyway, IQ is such a poorly understood phenomenon, that at present it cannot and should not be used for anything at all.

No - I'm saying that testing people who are coming to your country to work, be it IQ or another test, is not automatically barbaric.

As I said - IQ essentially tests how good you are at thinking like a Westerner and not, for example, an African Tribesman. That the Western way of thinking, our cognitive processes, are not normative accross the world is well documented - from people being un able to understand Western Colour schemes to people being unable to understand Western drawings or Western "logical" arguments.

You can see a similar process at work when the Classically thinking and the contemporary or Post-modern thinking on this board have any argument about philosophy, religion or ethics - there is a cognative gap that people struggle to bridge.

If we have that within Western culture then to suggest it does not exist outside Western culture is Churlish in the extreme.

[Fragony]

Ya. Churchill was no fan of islam by the way Lemur, do you want more quotes, I will look like a saint

Edit, needs a bit more. Because I actually know muslims I know what they are affraid of, guess what it is. And with good reason I might add.

[Strike For The South]

Please stop refering to "The Muslims" as a singularity.

How would you like it if someone lumped you in with the Germans?


You can see a similar process at work when the Classically thinking and the contemporary or Post-modern thinking on this board have any argument about philosophy, religion or ethics - there is a cognative gap that people struggle to bridge.



You have us all pegged? What am I?

[Fragony]

Please stop refering to "The Muslims" as a singularity.

How would you like it if someone lumped you in with the Germans?



You have us all pegged? What am I?

You are right of course but it's easier this way to 'devide' things into the west and the arab world. It's good enough imho

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You have us all pegged? What am I?

You're suffering from cognative dissonance resulting from your loss of Faith and a complete collapse of belief in a Divinely Ordered Universe vs your essentially Christian moral outlook which is predicated on the rejected normative assumptions.

You are less dissonant that you were a year ago though - which indicates either a weakening of your recieved Christian moral outlook, or the gestation of some form of Deistic worldview to buttress the essentials of said outlook.

At least that's the way you look from my reading of your post content, it's not a medical diagnosis.

[Tellos Athenaios]

You're suffering from cognative dissonance resulting from your loss of Faith and a complete collapse of belief in a Divinely Ordered Universe vs your essentially Christian moral outlook which is predicated on the rejected normative assumptions.

You are less dissonant that you were a year ago though - which indicates either a weakening of your recieved Christian moral outlook, or the gestation of some form of Deistic worldview to buttress the essentials of sain outlook.


You know what? From the style and tone of that post, I think you should write a Backroom horoscope.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You know what? From the style and tone of that post, I think you should write a Backroom horoscope.

All this Liberal Education has to be good for something, and no I can't do you - you never get angry and you don't post in the abortion/gay marriage/Bible is trash/we should all hate Islam threads enough.

[Major Robert Dump]

Me next Me next!!1

[Major Robert Dump]

I think he is working with The Man

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Apparently PVC's coming up with psych evaluations on all of us. :inquisitive: Who are you working for?

Keep asking and you might find out.

:stare:

[PanzerJaeger]

The only good thing that has come out of this thread is the acknowledgement than Nelson Mandela is terrorist scum.

[Strike For The South]

You're suffering from cognative dissonance resulting from your loss of Faith and a complete collapse of belief in a Divinely Ordered Universe vs your essentially Christian moral outlook which is predicated on the rejected normative assumptions.

You are less dissonant that you were a year ago though - which indicates either a weakening of your recieved Christian moral outlook, or the gestation of some form of Deistic worldview to buttress the essentials of said outlook.

At least that's the way you look from my reading of your post content, it's not a medical diagnosis.


Unnerving. This leads me to believe you read what other people post. I should try that.



The only good thing that has come out of this thread is the acknowledgement than Nelson Mandela is terrorist scum.


Just like the government which oppersed him. See kids? Tyrrany devalues everything.

[PanzerJaeger]

Just like the government which oppersed him. See kids? Tyrrany devalues everything.

The former, of course, has not been sanctified. Mandela should still be in prison, not an international hero.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Unnerving. This leads me to believe you read what other people post. I should try that.

I'd love to be able to tell you it's a learned skill - it isn't. I can't read your feelings (or I couldn't, even if I could see you) so I have to understand your beliefs in order to appreciate how you feel about things.

I mean, sure, if you screamed at me and beat me over the head I would probably get that you wer upset, but I'm extra-extra-manly when it comes to being able to read people.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Me next Me next!!1

I really shouldn't but I find myself unable to resist.

The core of your personality seems to be:

Army

The username, the humour, the anecdotes, the preffered method of travel along America's highways being a chopper (the two wheeled kind).

MRD is above all a pragmatic man - he has principles but he's not going to hold on to them just to prove a point if it involves somebody dieing - a mix of the well considered position and the instinctive gut reaction.

Rather tellingly, I don't think I know much or anything about your Civilian life, but I could probably give a fair summation of your service history from your own reports.

More interested on whether a man can get the tracks back on a tank or fix the AirCon for the mess than whose shirt he's lifting or what God he prays to.

How'm I doing?

[Greyblades]

Me next, please.

[Kralizec]

The former, of course, has not been sanctified. Mandela should still be in prison, not an international hero.

Why? Mandela was in prison for almost 30 years. You make the point that none of the white guys responsible for apartheid are receiving praise, but in the interest of reconcilliation, none of them actually served any jail time for what they did.

The ANC's violent actions were perfectly understandable. Wether it can ever be justified is a purely academic question. If you treat people like garbage they will resort to whatever means are at their disposal to rectify things. That a bunch of Europeans and Americans (who, in this case, weren't born or at least not old enough to follow any of this business) will question their actions from an ethical perspective several decades later probably didn't enter their mind.

[PanzerJaeger]

Why? Mandela was in prison for almost 30 years. You make the point that none of the white guys responsible for apartheid are receiving praise, but in the interest of reconcilliation, none of them actually served any jail time for what they did.

The ANC's violent actions were perfectly understandable. Wether it can ever be justified is a purely academic question. If you treat people like garbage they will resort to whatever means are at their disposal to rectify things. That a bunch of Europeans and Americans (who, in this case, weren't born or at least not old enough to follow any of this business) will question their actions from an ethical perspective several decades later probably didn't enter their mind.

They were neither understandable nor justifiable. Violence was not the only path, and surely prolonged the conflict. Gandhi did not bomb innocent civilians. As much of a scumbag as MLK was, he did not have blood on his hands. 'Oppression' never justifies the killing of innocents. Mandela is a vicious killer, and the the ANC's corruption and mediocrity in governing are exactly what the black majority deserves for embracing that violence.

[Fragony]

They were neither understandable nor justifiable. Violence was not the only path, and surely prolonged the conflict. Gandhi did not bomb innocent civilians. As much of a scumbag as MLK was, he did not have blood on his hands. 'Oppression' never justifies the killing of innocents. Mandela is a vicious killer, and the the ANC's corruption and mediocrity in governing are exactly what the black majority deserves for embracing that violence.

It's a bit odd, he has a bit of the status of a saint here, little is done to inform people of what a piece of scum he really is/was. There is also absolute silence about the situation in South-africa, things do not look good for the whites there. White South Africans should come back to the Netherlands I think..

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

They were neither understandable nor justifiable. Violence was not the only path, and surely prolonged the conflict. Gandhi did not bomb innocent civilians. As much of a scumbag as MLK was, he did not have blood on his hands. 'Oppression' never justifies the killing of innocents. Mandela is a vicious killer, and the the ANC's corruption and mediocrity in governing are exactly what the black majority deserves for embracing that violence.

No, they were understandable - just as WWII resistence movements in Freance, Poland, Germany etc. were understandable. That doe not make them right but even so you are equating the character of a man to his actions.

Yes, Mandela formulated a policy of terrorist attacks in SA - but he also fostered a two-way program of peace and reconcilation and he negotiated in good faith with de Klerk. That the ANC does not have any other suitable statesmen is partly to do with it having spent so long as a banned party and partly to do with the post-independence policy of "dumbing down" the black population, mandela being of the last generation to be educated under British rule.

As for the politics of the ANC, in the absence of Western support for an end to Aparteid it is unsurprising that the reformers turned to the Communist Bloc.

[Fragony]

Ya sure https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ya sure https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Yuh - cultural ignorance is awsome for maintaining your prejudices Frags.

Maybe you nned to look up the difference between Boers and Whites from the ANC's perspective?

Also, maybe listen to the guy who has family out there?

[Fragony]

Yuh - cultural ignorance is awsome for maintaining your prejudices Frags.

Maybe you nned to look up the difference between Boers and Whites from the ANC's perspective?

Also, maybe listen to the guy who has family out there?

Got family there, it's a mess. Ask your family about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks

This is just scratching the surface by the way

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Got family there, it's a mess. Ask your family about this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks

This is just scratching the surface by the way

Then you no doubt know that the attacks are carried out my poor blacks on rich whites, not on poor whites by rich blacks.

http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html
(http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html)
Genocide watch does believe things have got better and not worse - which is significant given that they are quite alarmist.

[Fragony]

Then you no doubt know that the attacks are carried out my poor blacks on rich whites, not on poor whites by rich blacks.

http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html
(http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html)
Genocide watch does believe things have got better and not worse - which is significant given that they are quite alarmist.

Ha, no way. Living in a gated community doesn't make you rich, just somewhat safer.

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=d&authuser=0&biw=1024&bih=644&site=imghp&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=starving+whites+south+africa&oq=starving+whites+south+africa&gs_l=img.3...18097.37976.0.38867.51.27.0.18.3.10.191.3235.0j23.24.0...0.0.0Jtp8esCb-U#biv=i|0;d|oD3zWToqiL3g8M: what is really going on. The ANC is starving white Africans they have no acces to the aid funds. They have absolutely no hope of getting anything from NGO's, so they shold just call it a quit. Nice try, come back.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Ha, no way. Living in a gated community doesn't make you rich, just somewhat safer.

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&tbo=d&authuser=0&biw=1024&bih=644&site=imghp&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=starving+whites+south+africa&oq=starving+whites+south+africa&gs_l=img.3...18097.37976.0.38867.51.27.0.18.3.10.191.3235.0j23.24.0...0.0.0Jtp8esCb-U#biv=i|0;d|oD3zWToqiL3g8M: what is really going on. The ANC is starving white Africans they have no acces to the aid funds. They have absolutely no hope of getting anything from NGO's, so they shold just call it a quit. Nice try, come back.

Sorry, how many blacks are starving right now?

This is not a white problem.

Oh - and living in a gated community in SA - yeah you're a lot richer than the average.

[Fragony]

Sorry, how many blacks are starving right now?

This is not a white problem.

Oh - and living in a gated community in SA - yeah you're a lot richer than the average.

You have no idea, whites are deniec acces from all sorts of food programs because of the ANC, they are litteraly starved to death. Deathtoll is around 40.000 right now Afrikaners should just come home, especially Candice Swanenpoel. They have had heir fun against the Brittish but they will die if they stay, enough allready

[Strike For The South]

You have no idea, whites are deniec acces from all sorts of food programs because of the ANC, they are litteraly starved to death. Deathtoll is around 40.000 right now Afrikaners should just come home, especially Candice Swanenpoel. They have had heir fun against the Brittish but they will die if they stay, enough allready

Africa is their home

[Major Robert Dump]

I really shouldn't but I find myself unable to resist.

The core of your personality seems to be:

Army

The username, the humour, the anecdotes, the preffered method of travel along America's highways being a chopper (the two wheeled kind).

MRD is above all a pragmatic man - he has principles but he's not going to hold on to them just to prove a point if it involves somebody dieing - a mix of the well considered position and the instinctive gut reaction.

Rather tellingly, I don't think I know much or anything about your Civilian life, but I could probably give a fair summation of your service history from your own reports.

More interested on whether a man can get the tracks back on a tank or fix the AirCon for the mess than whose shirt he's lifting or what God he prays to.

How'm I doing?

Pretty good, but I am not exactly some military4life type of guy, and find the garrison life quite annoying. I am a lone gumshoe as a civilian. I also like puppies, baby ducks and children. Sig worthy, thanks!!

[Major Robert Dump]

Don't you dare walk around with that cigarette... :stare:

And stay off the grass

[Kralizec]

They were neither understandable nor justifiable. Violence was not the only path, and surely prolonged the conflict. Gandhi did not bomb innocent civilians. As much of a scumbag as MLK was, he did not have blood on his hands. 'Oppression' never justifies the killing of innocents. Mandela is a vicious killer, and the the ANC's corruption and mediocrity in governing are exactly what the black majority deserves for embracing that violence.

Non-violent protests didn't stop apartheid laws from being enacted in the post-WW2 years. Maybe if the ANC stuck with non-violent tactics it would have ended in 2 or 3 decades rather than 4, but we don't know, and neither did they- I can't blame them for being impatient. As far as I know the ANC did not embrace killing civilians as a strategy in itself. Civilians did die; but the general idea was to disrupt the government and the economy, not to create casualties for its own sake. In that regard the ANC was different from Hamas, for example.

Mandela's recognition doesn't stem from his activities in his youth but the fact that in his later years he wasn't vindicative against his former enemies and pursued reconcilliation instead. Of course, the ANC leadership after him was largely crap, no argument there.

Ghandi didn't use violence but he's usually regarded as an examplary standard. The situations that these two people faced were quite dissimilar, and while I'd accept that public perception of Mandela is incomplete, calling him scum is going too far.

[Strike For The South]

I thanked you becuase 4 others did

[a completely inoffensive name]

I thanked him because we all need a dose of consequentialism in here from time to time.

[Fragony]

Non-violent protests didn't stop apartheid laws from being enacted in the post-WW2 years. Maybe if the ANC stuck with non-violent tactics it would have ended in 2 or 3 decades rather than 4, but we don't know, and neither did they- I can't blame them for being impatient. As far as I know the ANC did not embrace killing civilians as a strategy in itself. Civilians did die; but the general idea was to disrupt the government and the economy, not to create casualties for its own sake. In that regard the ANC was different from Hamas, for example.

Mandela's recognition doesn't stem from his activities in his youth but the fact that in his later years he wasn't vindicative against his former enemies and pursued reconcilliation instead. Of course, the ANC leadership after him was largely crap, no argument there.

Ghandi didn't use violence but he's usually regarded as an examplary standard. The situations that these two people faced were quite dissimilar, and while I'd accept that public perception of Mandela is incomplete, calling him scum is going too far.

This is of course completely fair

[PanzerJaeger]

Non-violent protests didn't stop apartheid laws from being enacted in the post-WW2 years. Maybe if the ANC stuck with non-violent tactics it would have ended in 2 or 3 decades rather than 4, but we don't know, and neither did they- I can't blame them for being impatient. As far as I know the ANC did not embrace killing civilians as a strategy in itself. Civilians did die; but the general idea was to disrupt the government and the economy, not to create casualties for its own sake. In that regard the ANC was different from Hamas, for example.

Mandela's recognition doesn't stem from his activities in his youth but the fact that in his later years he wasn't vindicative against his former enemies and pursued reconcilliation instead. Of course, the ANC leadership after him was largely crap, no argument there.

Ghandi didn't use violence but he's usually regarded as an examplary standard. The situations that these two people faced were quite dissimilar, and while I'd accept that public perception of Mandela is incomplete, calling him scum is going too far.

Just to be clear, are you suggesting that Mandela's ANC did not know civilians would be killed in their operations or that a utilitarian view on terrorist attacks killing civilians is appropriate if you deem the cause justifiable?

[Beskar]

Just to be clear, are you suggesting that Mandela's ANC did not know civilians would be killed in their operations or that a utilitarian view on the killing of civilians is appropriate if you deem the cause justifiable?

There is an alternative of "Hey, there is a bunch of people in a hotel, lets blow them up for a statement and kill as many as possible" to "Let's disrupt that army communications tower" and finding out a soldier near by had it fall on top of their head. There is purposefully targeting people to kill for scare tactics/make a statement (Bin Laden/Hamas/etc), the other is disrupting infrastructure with unfortunate causalities.

Your statements miss out "intent" behind the cause of action.

[HoreTore]

There is an alternative of "Hey, there is a bunch of people in a hotel, lets blow them up for a statement and kill as many as possible" to "Let's disrupt that army communications tower" and finding out a soldier near by had it fall on top of their head. There is purposefully targeting people to kill for scare tactics/make a statement (Bin Laden/Hamas/etc), the other is disrupting infrastructure with unfortunate causalities.

Your statements miss out "intent" behind the cause of action.

Apartheid was a horrible regime.

Any action against them is a good action in my book. The regime was illegitimate, which makes all their supporters legitimate targets. Screw 'em.

The reason Mandela is up there with Havel and Gandhi, however, is of course not what he did before he got arrested, but what he did afterwards.

The few people who have managed to dismantle a dictatorship without blood in the streets should be celebrated.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Just to be clear, are you suggesting that Mandela's ANC did not know civilians would be killed in their operations or that a utilitarian view on terrorist attacks killing civilians is appropriate if you deem the cause justifiable?

According to Mandela they had a sort of "sliding scale" that moved from sabatarge up to direct attacks on the military and then other state organs. The judgement was that if they'd moved up the direct attacks (which they did) then that was because the situation was so dire they were justified accepting some collateral damage.

It's important to understand that the ANC was treated as a terrorist organisation even when it wasn't one. People started being beaten and imprisoned without serious charges from the beginning, and then it got worse.

[gaelic cowboy]

mandela is bad mmkay

nah ah he is right on

Oh no he isnt

Oh no you didnt go there



Ah the joys of having your revolution before mass market tabloids, tv, facebook, twitter and partisan blogs.

[Fragony]

According to Mandela they had a sort of "sliding scale" that moved from sabatarge up to direct attacks on the military and then other state organs. The judgement was that if they'd moved up the direct attacks (which they did) then that was because the situation was so dire they were justified accepting some collateral damage.

It's important to understand that the ANC was treated as a terrorist organisation even when it wasn't one. People started being beaten and imprisoned without serious charges from the beginning, and then it got worse.

Sure, they are so cute

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Things are kinda complicated, but you are not properly informed about it

[Fragony]

You can't just be against all violent revolutions. The fine line between freedom fighter and terrorist does exist.

There is also a difference between being a freedom fighter and an absolute saint

[Fragony]

Well, yeah. He's not a Saint. But he was fighting in a situation where any of us (I should hope) would also have been fighting. On top of that, after sitting in jail for longer than I've been alive, he turned around and was magnanimous in victory where most of us (I should expect) would have been much less civilized about it, given the circumstances.

He's not a saint, but he's hardly a monster. At the very least, he's a role model for oppressed people all over the globe.

He is a rolemodel for bored white rich kids from %100 white neighbourhoods, maybe Bono can sing a song about it

[Fragony]

Why do you let what bored white rich kids think bother you?

Well they are bored, have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, and they will scream at me. I don't like it when people scream at me, especially when they have no idea what they are talking about. They are just a dumb lot for making a out of saint of him.

[Fragony]

:thinking2:

Everybody hates yuppie hipsters, but its important to remember that just because they like something (Nelson Mandela) doesn't mean that it must be bad.

It's not yuppie hipsteresm, it's the oh so creepy leftist hand under the skirt, indoctrination and cultivation, the false friendly smile of an evil stepmom

[HoreTore]

Well, yeah. He's not a Saint. But he was fighting in a situation where any of us (I should hope) would also have been fighting. On top of that, after sitting in jail for longer than I've been alive, he turned around and was magnanimous in victory where most of us (I should expect) would have been much less civilized about it, given the circumstances.

He's not a saint, but he's hardly a monster. At the very least, he's a role model for oppressed people all over the globe.

His early actions made him a standard freedom fighter.

His later actions made him a saint. What he is now, is a man completely devoted to peace, democracy and freedom for everyone.

But I suppose a black man will always face villification from racists.

[Strike For The South]

His early actions made him a standard freedom fighter.

His later actions made him a saint. What he is now, is a man completely devoted to peace, democracy and freedom for everyone.

But I suppose a black man will always face villification from racists.

Do you enjoy twisting facts?

Off topic. Whens the last time the sun set?

[HoreTore]

Do you enjoy twisting facts?

Off topic. Whens the last time the sun set?

Right, I forgot that The Elders was a group dedicated to establishing a tyrannical New World Order through bloodshed and terror.

Never mind then.

[Fragony]

:book2: Well then, there you go. I'll file this one under 'Insane Babble and/or Wierd European Problems.

That's ok with me but you keep in mind that leftist people are really really intrusive, they don't see anything wrong with being intrusive, they will sheepingly gaze at you because you disagree first, after that the machine will maul you. Leftism Is fascism with a friendly smile be wary of it.

[Kralizec]

He is a rolemodel for bored white rich kids from %100 white neighbourhoods, maybe Bono can sing a song about it

Amazing. Mandela fought an armed struggle for a worthy goal. You stabbed someone with a knife for a petty reason when you were a kid, and now that you're older, you're a beacon of wisdom and virtue who gets to call Mandela a scumbag and lambast the people who admire him.

I remember a nearly 100% white neighbourhood I lived in when I was a kid. The people there weren't rich, though. I also remember several kids from my age who, when they were in puberty, got arrested for petty thefts, vandalism and whatnot. I didn't keep touch but I imagine that they all vote PVV now. I wonder how their IQ compares with that of Arab countries?

:coffeenews:

[Fragony]

Amazing. Mandela fought an armed struggle for a worthy goal. You stabbed someone with a knife for a petty reason when you were a kid, and now that you're older, you're a beacon of wisdom and virtue who gets to call Mandela a scumbag and lambast the people who admire him.

I remember a nearly 100% white neighbourhood I lived in when I was a kid. The people there weren't rich, though. I also remember several kids from my age who, when they were in puberty, got arrested for petty thefts, vandalism and whatnot. I didn't keep touch but I imagine that they all vote PVV now. I wonder how their IQ compares with that of Arab countries?

:coffeenews:

Remember this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Of course not, your teacher nearly slipped in delight of her chair, and it's also the first time you have ever seen it isn't it, so you don't remember this.

[HoreTore]

Remember this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcOXqFQw2hc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Of course not, your teacher nearly slipped in delight of her chair, and it's also the first time you have ever seen it isn't it, so you don't remember this.

And of course, Frags didn't notice the white guy next to Mandela.

Anyhoo, if Mandela wanted to "kill all the white people", then he had plenty of opportunity when he was president. Instead of doing that though, he chose to pardon the crimes of the previous regime. Thus, sainthood.

[Fragony]

And of course, Frags didn't notice the white guy next to Mandela.

Anyhoo, if Mandela wanted to "kill all the white people", then he had plenty of opportunity when he was president. Instead of doing that though, he chose to pardon the crimes of the previous regime. Thus, sainthood.

Hahaha Horetore I love you but do you really think I am surprised of white people attending. That's leftist confusion in it's purest form

[Kralizec]

That's the third time you've posted that in this thread, so it's not the first time I've seen it. You've got to wonder how accurate the translation is, because there's a white guy standing next to Mandela and they're supposedly singing "kill the whites".

The text in the video says that the guy is not actually white, and that his name is Ronnie Kasrils. He looks white enough to me, so I looked at his wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Kasrils

Kasrils' grandparents were Jewish immigrants from Latvia and Lithuania who fled from Czarist pogroms at the end of the 19th century

Right...

[HoreTore]

Hahaha Horetore I love you but do you really think I am surprised of white people attending. That's leftist confusion in it'ts purest form

Sometimes I wish I believed in whacko conspiracies, life looks so much more fun for a believer.

Well, at least easier, as it doesn't require much thinking...

[HoreTore]

That's the third time you've posted that in this thread, so it's not the first time I've seen it. You've got to wonder how accurate the translation is, because there's a white guy standing next to Mandela and they're supposedly singing "kill the whites".

The text in the video says that the guy is not actually white, and that his name is Ronnie Kasrils. He looks white enough to me, so I looked at his wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Kasrils


Right...

Want to know why they say he's not white?

Because he's a jew, and the neo-nazi sites who made and spread this video don't count jews as white people.

[Fragony]

Sometimes I wish I believed in whacko conspiracies, life looks so much more fun for a believer.

Well, at least easier, as it doesn't require much thinking...

It's no conspiracy it's multiculturalism, some would always support it because they feed on their sellfrightiouness, do you have any idea of what is happening there

[HoreTore]

It's no conspiracy it's multiculturalism, some would always support it because they feed on their oen selfrightiouness, do you have any idea of what is happening there

Yes, I do know what is happening in South Africa. I also know what nonsense the racist blogs you read say about South Africa, as I read them too.

[Fragony]

Yes, I do know what is happening in South Africa. I also know what nonsense the racist blogs you read say about South Africa, as I read them too.

Oh do you, calling you a bluff here, tell me

[HoreTore]

Oh do you, calling you a bluff here, tell me

Regular(daily/semi-daily) reads are gates of vienna, brussels journal, vlad tepez and jihad watch, but I of course read a lot of others from time to time. But let's get real, all the blogs say the exact same thing. If something "good" appears on one blog, it's reposted on all the others within a week.

I do wonder when they're going to cut their lame justificiations for so much focus on South Africa and just come clean with a "WE HATE ALL BLACK PEOPLE" narrative. I'd respect them for their honesty if they did.

Edit: that's the english-speaking ones, of course, I also have a norwegian favourite, Norge IDag. But if you have some other goodies Frags, I'd be sure to bookmark them. I promise I'll read them. Sometimes the other sites are kinda slow and doesn't give me the early morning laughs I need, so I'm always on the lookout for more loonies...

[Kralizec]

Now that I think about it, I do remember Zuma getting criticized several years ago for singing another "revolutionary song". It was about killing Boers (specifically) with machine guns. It was widely reported in quality media.

I suppose it's at least plausible that the lyrics in that video are accurate. But even then, that doesn't mean much in itself- it's a traditional song of the ANC from the old days. The national anthem we had until the 30-ies had a line in it about us "being free of foreign stains". The British had one with "many rebellious scots to crush". I guess Fragony is angry at them for not being PC enough.

EDIT: article (http://af.reuters.com/article/southAfricaNews/idAFLDE62T13W20100330?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0)

[HoreTore]

Now that I think about it, I do remember Zuma getting criticized several years ago for singing another "revolutionary song". It was about killing Boers (specifically) with machine guns. It was widely reported in quality media.

I suppose it's at least plausible that the lyrics in that video are accurate. But even then, that doesn't mean much in itself- it's a traditional song of the ANC from the old days. The national anthem we had until the 30-ies had a line in it about us "being free of foreign stains". The British had one with "many rebellious scots to crush". I guess Fragony is angry at them for not being PC enough.

Indeed. Ever heard this jolly tune?

"To arms citizens
Form your battalions
March, march
Let impure blood
Water our furrows"

Must be the song of some horrible terrorist group, right?

[Fragony]

Regular(daily/semi-daily) reads are gates of vienna, brussels journal, vlad tepez and jihad watch, but I of course read a lot of others from time to time. But let's get real, all the blogs say the exact same thing. If something "good" appears on one blog, it's reposted on all the others within a week.

I do wonder when they're going to cut their lame justificiations for so much focus on South Africa and just come clean with a "WE HATE ALL BLACK PEOPLE" narrative. I'd respect them for their honesty if they did.

Edit: that's the english-speaking ones, of course, I also have a norwegian favourite, Norge IDag. But if you have some other goodies Frags, I'd be sure to bookmark them. I promise I'll read them. Sometimes the other sites are kinda slow and doesn't give me the early morning laughs I need, so I'm always on the lookout for more loonies...

None of these write about South Africa

Why don't you look for genocide watch level 6 for South Africa, Krazilec can't know that because he reads quality media.

[HoreTore]

None of these write about South Africa

Why don't you look for genocide watch level 6 for South Africa, Krazilec can't know that because he reads quality media.

Gates of Vienna and vlad tepez writes nonsense about south africa all the time.

[Fragony]

Gates of Vienna and vlad tepez writes nonsense about south africa all the time.

Maybe you are right I hardly read these, I am not really interested it's always the same stuff.

It's not nonsense by the Human Rights Watch has given South Africa the rating of six on the genocide scale, that is what Rwanda had before the killings. It doesn't look very good. Although I have to say they brought it back to five recently.

Edit, checked it, you are correct

[HoreTore]

Maybe you are right I hardly read these, I am not really interested it's always the same stuff.

It's not nonsense by the Human Rights Watch has given South Africa the rating of six on the genocide scale, that is what Rwanda had before the killings. It doesn't look very good. Although I have to say they brought it back to five recently.

Edit, checked it, you are correct

No, this (http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/01/20/universal-periodic-review-south-africa) is what the human rights watch says about South Africa. Most of the concerns are about the rights of labourers, particularly migrant workers, as well as some freedom of speech and lbgt and womens rights issues.


Whilst these are some examples of legitimate concerns about the protection of human rights in South Africa, South Africa’s human rights institutions, such as the Human Rights Commission have the potential to positively advance human rights protection.

This is how the human rights watch sums it up. Quite a far cray from "minutes away from Rwanda".

And of course, the human rights watch doesn't operate a "genocide scale".

[HoreTore]

And just for the heck of it, here's Amnesty's report (http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/south-africa/report-2012).

Same thing there. Concerns about refugees, lbgt and HIV. They also note excessive use of force against demonstrators though.

Black demonstrators.

[Fragony]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks do note that this isn't without controversy, the ethnic part is indeed controversial

[HoreTore]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_farm_attacks do note that this isn't without controversy.

Screw Amnesty amd HRW, someones got a wiki article!!

Come on, you can do better than that.

When it comes to human rights, I trust Amnesty and HRW above all others. If anything, they are more critical than they should be, not less. The thought of them underreporting an issue is absurd in the extreme.

[Fragony]

Screw Amnesty amd HRW, someones got a wiki article!!

Come on, you can do better than that.

When it comes to human rights, I trust Amnesty and HRW above all others. If anything, they are more critical than they should be, not less. The thought of them underreporting an issue is absurd in the extreme.

Isn't it

[Hax]

Meanwhile, in Egypt.. (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/08/201281215511142445.html)


Egypt's president asserts authority over army
Defence Minister Tantawi and army Chief of Staff Anan replaced and military-issued constitutional amendments cancelled.


The Egyptian president has ordered the powerful head of the army and defence minister, Field Marshal Hussein Mohamed Tantawi, into retirement and cancelled constitutional amendments issued by the military restricting presidential powers.


Mohamed Morsi announced through a spokesman on Sunday the dismissal of Tantawi and his appointment as a presidential adviser.
According to state television, Abdul-Fatah al-Sessi would replace Tantawi as defence minister and the general commander of the army.


Morsi also sent into retirement the chief of army staff, General Sami Anan, and appointed him as a presidential adviser.
Lieutenant-General Sidki Sayed Ahmed was named as Anan's replacement.

Morsi further appointed a senior judge, Mahmoud Mekki, as vice-president. All decisions are effective immediately.
Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh, reporting from Cairo, said that would be no exaggeration to say that no one saw this one coming.


"After the June 5 attack on a border patrol left 16 soldiers dead, the country’s leadership - both civilian and in uniform - was peculiarly quiet," she said.
"Late and terse statements did not quench the public’s thirst for answers.


"But no one thought the price would extend to the head of the military and his deputy.
"After all, both Tantawi and Enan, the two most powerful members of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), long appeared invincible - both during the period SCAF took control over the country and even after President Morsi’s election in June."
The latest moves are seen as escalating the power struggle between Morsi, who took office on June 30, and the military.


In an address to the nation on Sunday evening, Mohammed Morsi said that the decision was not directed at individuals.


"The decisions I took today were not meant ever to target certain persons, nor did I intend to embarrass institutions, nor was my aim to narrow freedoms," Morsi said.


So in one way, I'd say this is good. I don't trust Tantawi and his lackeys for one bit, so any movement aiming to decrease their powers is definitely good, in my opinion. On the other hand, if the balance tips too far in the favour of the Freedom and Justice party, who knows what will happen.

To be fair, I think Morsi is a pretty relaxed guy; I don't see him banning alcohol or closing churches tomorrow. Still, there are some crazy people around. Oh well, let's see what'll happen.

[rvg]

To be fair, I think Morsi is a pretty relaxed guy; I don't see him banning alcohol or closing churches tomorrow.

No, not tomorrow.

[Hax]

But you do know who was appointed as vice-president, right?

[rvg]

But you do know who was appointed as vice-president, right?

Yeah, what of it?

[Hax]

Stuff like that just make me reconsider the possibilities. For example, I don't really see Egypt turning into a sharia state overnight.

[rvg]

Stuff like that just make me reconsider the possibilities. For example, I don't really see Egypt turning into a sharia state overnight. I certainly hope that Egypt becomes a secular republic. Everyone wins in that scenario. Except for the salafists.

[rvg]

And so it begins... (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19249152)

[Fragony]

amazing who expects that

Only people who read quality media furiously scream it's an arab spring. People who are informed know better than that.

[HoreTore]

A new democracy-in-the-makings attempt to disrupt the propaganda machine of the previous dictator?

This has never happened before.

[Fragony]

Sure, but there were less cheerleaders slipping of their chairs with delight. Most of the time they knew there will be blood.

[HoreTore]

Sure, but there were less cheerleaders slipping of their chairs with delight. Most of the time they knew there will be blood.

Most of theworld were rather happy with the fall of the communiet bloc, apartheid, the latin dictators, etc... While I would love to see every revolutionary leader behave like a Mandela or a Havel, we all know that's a utopia. Still,the only way to turn from dictatorship to democracy is through a revolution, like the one in egypt. If it turns into a new dictatorship, a new revolution will be needed. It ain't harder.

What made people so excited by the arab spring, fragony, is that is was a massive, widespread popular uprising against the dictatorships of the arab nationalist wave. It's scale and timing makes it as important as the french revolution; after 1789, all european kings knew that the public could cut their heads off. After 2011, all arab leaders know that their population can do the same. That is the importance of both the french revolution and the arab spring.

France turned to The Terror, but that does not diminish the importance of 1789 in any way.

[rvg]

France turned to The Terror, but that does not diminish the importance of 1789 in any way.

True, but there's no reason to step on the same rake as France did back then.

[Fragony]

What made people so excited by the arab spring, fragony, is that is was a massive, widespread popular uprising against the dictatorships of the arab nationalist wave.

It's about jobs you silly, the so-called Arabian spring is a quality-media invention that is as close to reality as me having Charice Theron in my bed right know

[Xiahou]

To be fair, I think Morsi is a pretty relaxed guy; I don't see him banning alcohol or closing churches tomorrow. And no one saw him dismissing Tantawi before Sunday... funny that.


A new democracy-in-the-makings attempt to disrupt the propaganda machine of the previous dictator?

This has never happened before. Hey, that's some pretty nice spinning there. You should see if they need a spokesperson. ~;)


"Some commentators in Egypt say that Mr Mursi and the Brotherhood are now resorting to tactics employed to great effect by Mubarak and his party to gain influence over media policy, the BBC's Muhammad Sukri says."


Sounds great, right? Move along, nothing to see here.

[HoreTore]

It's about jobs you silly, the so-called Arabian spring is a quality-media invention that is as close to reality as me having Charice Theron in my bed right know

Name one revolution not rooted in economic dissatisfaction. I challenge thee!

People generally do not revolt because they're being abused, people seem to adopt to almost any living situation and manage. When faced with a sharp decline in living standards, however, people get pissed. When people get pissed, they seem to remember all the abuse they've taken from their dictators, and the end result is a revolution. Of course, it can happen the other way too, like with Germany after the crisis in 1929...

As they say, "it's about the economy, stupid!"

[Fragony]

Name one revolution not rooted in economic dissatisfaction. I challenge thee!


Well that is of course going to be incredibly hard. Point is is that the cheerleaders are wrong as usual, they like to have to have their point proven despite reality pointing the other way. I don't think the people cheering this on give a crap about their fellow humans as they would be a little bit more sceptical about this 'arab spring' nonsense if they did, they feed on the world to satisfy their worldview because it makes them feel good about themself. Call me cynical I don't mind

[HoreTore]

Well that is of course going to be incredibly hard. Point is is that the cheerleaders are wrong as usual, they like to have to have their point proven despite reality pointing the other way. I don't think the people cheering this on give a crap about their fellow humans as they would be a little bit more sceptical about this 'arab spring' nonsense if they did, they feed on the world to satisfy their worldview because it makes them feel good about themself. Call me cynical I don't mind

Could you by any chance show me one of these "cheerleaders"? I'll be very interested in seeing an academic who is not aware that a revolution can produce ugly results.

It seems more likely that you're wearing your ideological glasses again, frags, and seeing only what you want to see.

[rvg]

Could you by any chance show me one of these "cheerleaders"? I'll be very interested in seeing an academic who is not aware that a revolution can produce ugly results.
I think Frags' point is that the Arab Spring is already producing ugly results and people still refuse to see them.


It seems more likely that you're wearing your ideological glasses again, frags, and seeing only what you want to see.
Doesn't look that way at all.


Islamists clearly have no sense of humor... (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/world/middleeast/egyptian-actor-guilty-of-insulting-islam-in-films.html)

[Hax]

People who are informed know better than that.

I doubt anyone would call you informed, Frags, on this subject. It's good to see that you're trying to look at other sources for your news, it's just that they're all wrong.


I think Frags' point is that the Arab Spring is already producing ugly results and people still refuse to see them.

I try to avoid using the term "Arab Spring". I don't think it fully covers the different uprisings all over the Arab world and severely understates the impact and goals of these revolutions.

Additionally, I'd like to say that no revolution goes without bloodshed and periods of anarchy. It's important to remember that the Islamist movements were able to gain such massive victories because of their political experience and social work they've been doing for over fifty years. In that respect, whereas the position of the opposition was easy to maintain, because every time the government failed, they could pin it on them not being Islamic enough, be it from a lack of creating jobs, the political situation with Israel or widespread corruption within the government itself.

I think that in a few years, most people will have realised (including Islamists themselves) that you can't slap Islam on everything to make it better. As a matter of fact, we've already seen some severe internal divisions (http://www.policymic.com/articles/972/muslim-brotherhood-s-youth-wing-faces-internal-divisions) over the last couple of months since the ousting of Mubarak.

Finally, I googled some of the news surrounding the court case against Adel Imam. Apparently, an appeals court upheld the original sentence, but the charges were dropped by another three days later (http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/egypt/120427/adel-imam-egyptian-actor-and-comic-given-contrarian-c). I've not really been able to find anything else, but I might try the Arabic written press sometime later. The thing with current news from the Middle-East, be it about talks about necrophilia in the Egyptian parliament (http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/middle-east/egypt/120427/adel-imam-egyptian-actor-and-comic-given-contrarian-c), al-Qaeda threating women with acid in Kashmir (http://kashmirwatch.com/news.php/2012/08/13/alqaeda-threat-resolved-in-kashmir-school-boys-arrested.html) or Quwaiti shaykhs supposedly calling for the desctruction of pyramids (http://rt.com/art-and-culture/news/lost-pyramids-google-giza-622/comments). I'd say that just about any news coming from the Middle-East right now should be treated with utmost care and double-checked.

[Fragony]

'I doubt anyone would call you informed, Frags, on this subject. It's good to see that you're trying to look at other sources for your news, it's just that they're all wrong.'

It is normal that people know, for a fact, that I am wrong. A shame for them I am proven right ohhh so many times regardless. Can't you just buy yourself a teddybear in case you absolutely have the need to hug something it happens to us all.

[rvg]

[/COLOR]I doubt anyone would call you informed, Frags, on this subject. It's good to see that you're trying to look at other sources for your news, it's just that they're all wrong.
Can you be more specific?


I think that in a few years, most people will have realised (including Islamists themselves) that you can't slap Islam on everything to make it better. As a matter of fact, we've already seen some severe internal divisions (http://www.policymic.com/articles/972/muslim-brotherhood-s-youth-wing-faces-internal-divisions) over the last couple of months since the ousting of Mubarak.
In a few years it might be too late though, as the Emir Mursi will be firmly entrenched on his throne. Besides, what are the Copts supposed to do in the meantime?

[Fragony]

Oh don't mention it, people who read quality media don't know about the church-burnings, they know, for a fact, that it's all good tidings

[Hax]

It is normal that people know, for a fact, that I am wrong. A shame for them I am proven right ohhh so many times regardless. Can't you just buy yourself a teddybear in case you absolutely have the need to hug something it happens to us all.

There's nothing bad about being wrong, you know. It's just that in that case, people should be more careful in throwing their opinions around, especially in these cases. Also a cute attempt at, what was that, something of an insult? I don't know.


Can you be more specific?

There are quite some links in the bottom part of my posts that deals exactly with the kind of misinformation that appears to have increased in numbers after the Arab revolutions.


In a few years it might be too late though, as the Emir Mursi will be firmly entrenched on his throne. Besides, what are the Copts supposed to do in the meantime?

Cute Jihad-watchy kinda gimmick, flinging Arabic terms like "emir" or "ayatollah" around, but they serve little purpose apart from leading people to think that there's actually an important difference between the two. Quoting Hans Wehr, Dictionary of Modern Standard Arabic, Third Edition:


امير pl. امراء commander; prince, emir; title of princes of a ruling house; tribal chief

Which would hardly befit a true Islamic ruler. How about amir al-muminîn or khalîfä?

In any case, to get back on the subject; I think the idea that the Mubarak-era regime was more friendly towards the Coptic minority is actually quite disingenous. When you Google "Mubarak and the Copts", hits usually turn out results such as: Copts fear future without Mubarak (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703439504576116222399438428.html), Mubarak blames foreign hands for Coptic Church blast (http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/mubarak-blames-foreign-hands-for-coptic-church-blast) and Coptic Christians fear life without Mubarak (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/03/world/la-fg-egypt-coptics-20110204), which give the idea that Mubarak's regime was the only thing standing in the way between the Coptic community and a crazed horde of Islamists eager to attack Christians.

However, when looking into the matter somewhat more in-depth, things such as this Ahram article (http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContentP/4/12831/Opinion/Dangerous-hands-sow-Egypts-sectarian-seeds.aspx) (a paper closely linked to the state, I might add) which says: "The crime in Imbaba where two churches were burnt is a natural outcome of the bitter crop harvested since the seeds of sectarianism were planted in Egyptian soil by the Sadat regime in 1970. The Mubarak regime, in its dying days, on purpose let criminals escape to prepare for their next crime. Under that regime, a structured plan was in place to ensure that perpetrators of sectarian crimes were not penalised."

And then continues from there on out.

Furthermore, Guardian writer Amira Nowaira notes in her May 2011 article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/08/copts-post-mubarak-egypt) that "[...]the Coptic population were led to believe that without the protection of the regime they were at the mercy of a predatory population bent on destroying them".

Finally, al-Sharq al-Awsat (meaning, "The Middle East" in Arabic) noted in an interview (http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=3&id=25305) with protestant intellectual Rafik Habib that he thinks that "the relationship between the church and the state has embarrassed the church and harmed the Copts.I think that the relationship between the church and the state has embarrassed the church and harmed the Copts".

In the light of these articles, it's extraordinarily hard to keep up the idea that the Mubarak and Sadat regimes were somehow more friendly towards, or protected the Coptic community.

As a final sidenote, I would like to say that it pretty much depends on the route Morsi is going to take. When you take a look at Islamic modernist movements nowadays, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood, you'll find that many concepts that we accept as being legitimately "western" are being explained in Islamic terms within these movements. I really wonder if that's something bad, per se. It might not be such a bad place to start.

[rvg]

There are quite some links in the bottom part of my posts that deals exactly with the kind of misinformation that appears to have increased in numbers after the Arab revolutions.
Can you provide a link that Fragony referred to along with a credible refutation of that link? So far you've shown no evidence of him being wrong. None at all.




Cute Jihad-watchy kinda gimmick, flinging Arabic terms like "emir" or "ayatollah" around, but they serve little purpose apart from leading people to think that there's actually an important difference between the two. Quoting Hans Wehr, Dictionary of Modern Standard Arabic, Third Edition:
Which would hardly befit a true Islamic ruler. How about amir al-muminîn or khalîfä?
What is your point exactly?


In the light of these articles, it's extraordinarily hard to keep up the idea that the Mubarak and Sadat regimes were somehow more friendly towards, or protected the Coptic community.

No, they were merely the lesser evil. Don't need to look far for an example of how islamists treat Christians. Just take a peek at Gaza.


As a final sidenote, I would like to say that it pretty much depends on the route Morsi is going to take. When you take a look at Islamic modernist movements nowadays, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood, you'll find that many concepts that we accept as being legitimately "western" are being explained in Islamic terms within these movements. I really wonder if that's something bad, per se. It might not be such a bad place to start.
I don't really care how they explain concepts. All I really want to see is tolerance in action. Like maybe, not persecuting Christians, not burning churches. That would be really nice. What they interpret and how, is their business.

[HoreTore]

I think Frags' point is that the Arab Spring is already producing ugly results and people still refuse to see them.

No, sorry, that doesn't cut it. Who refuses to see the uglier side of revolution? Names and proofs are needed. I have yet to see a single name, nor have I seen any such person myself, and so I have to conclude that the two of you are inventing an imaginary foe.

As for attacks on Copts... The muslim brotherhood allied with the copts back in the mubarak days, after the latter started attacking the copts. The muslim brotherhood actually has quite a few coptic christians in their organization, and not just foot soldiers. The ones who are attacking the copts are the salafist party supporters(whose name escapes me atm) and quite possibly mubarak supporters. Yeah, that's right - there are different kinds of islamist movements, and egypt has at least two groups who fit the label.

[rvg]

No, sorry, that doesn't cut it. Who refuses to see the uglier side of revolution? Names and proofs are needed. I have yet to see a single name, nor have I seen any such person myself, and so I have to conclude that the two of you are inventing an imaginary foe.

Look in the mirror. That's one guy right there.

[HoreTore]

Look in the mirror. That's one guy right there.

Thank you for making it clear to me that I can disregard your opinions from now on.

[Kralizec]

I don't really care how they explain concepts. All I really want to see is tolerance in action. Like maybe, not persecuting Christians, not burning churches. That would be really nice. What they interpret and how, is their business.

I likewise don't care how they explain concepts.

The persecution of christians is unacceptable. That said; you've got to wonder how much of it is done by mobs and individuals as opposed the muslim brotherhood as an organisation.

I dislike sectarian parties in general. We've got a christian-democratic party in the Neth's that I'm no fan of, but even so I've got to admit they do deserve credit for some things they did. The muslim brotherhood is "islamist" in that they want, to some degree at least, implement islamic values in politics. There's a difference however between using democracy in a respectful way to implement your policies on one hand and trying to mold the state institutions to suit your purposes on the other hand. Turkey is still a secular republic despite being ruled by an islamic party for a decade now (it goes without saying though that I don't approve of everything the AKP has done).

I thinkt there's a reasonable chance that the muslim brotherhood will evolve into what we could call an islamic-democratic party. I'd still not vote for such a party under any circumstances, but that's hardly the point. Incidents like church burning are regrettable but frankly to be expected in the short term. I think we'll just have to wait and see.

[HoreTore]

Considering how the nuslim brotherhood has changed from the days of Qutb, I'd say the change you're looking for is already well underway, Krazilec.

Also, while the muslim brotherhood = islamist, islamist =/= muslim brotherhood. Considering how the brotherhood has treated copts in the past, I'd say it's unlikely that they are the group responsible for church burnings, even though it's definitely done by islamists(perhaps a minority done by mubarak supporters). There are groups who treat other faiths as blasphemy which should be eradicated, but the brotherhood ain't one of them.

But then again, the brotherhood is a vast organization. It represented the sole opposition for deades, and so became an oranization which many different people joined. While it isn't brotherhood doctrine to attack copts, it cannot be ruled out completely that persons affiliated with them are doing it.

[Fragony]

They are no longer violent that's all, they have learned that the useful idiot is mightier then the sword

[HoreTore]

There are certainly parts of the brotherhood with a potential for violence, but for the organization as a whole I'd agree that the potential is generally low.

[rvg]

Mmmm, Arab spring is blossoming (http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/11/world/meast/egpyt-us-embassy-protests/index.html?hpt=hp_t1) in Egypt...

It sounds almost like we've seen something similar happen before...

[Fisherking]

What the!?

They don’t even know what film upset them.

[Fragony]

lol didn't hear of that one, the people who were furiously hissing it isan arab spring instead of an islamist takeover are kinda united in silence and lost all interest.

[Vladimir]

a black standard with Islamic emblems

Idiots.

Edit: Sorry, just a poorly written article.

Edit 2:
It is not clear which film upset the protesters in Cairo.

Back to my original statement. Idiots.

[rvg]

What the!?

They don’t even know what film upset them.

According to Al-Jazeera it's an amateur flick being made in the US by an ex-pat Copt. Obviously, this is a perfectly good reason to attack a US embassy on 9/11.

[Fisherking]

So, just tell me again, why the world should continue to tolerate the intolerant?

[rvg]

So, just tell me again, why the world should continue to tolerate the intolerant?

Good question. Why should it?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Good question. Why should it?

Because having to deal with dicks shouldn't make you a dick.

[rvg]

Because having to deal with dicks shouldn't make you a dick.

Just a word of warning. Once you're done turning the other cheek, they might ask you to bend over.

[Vuk]

This is the most epic thread title ever...

[Beskar]

Being against bigotry does not make you intolerate
(or as PVC put it, Having to deal with :daisy: shouldn't make you a :daisy:)

TED Convo (http://www.ted.com/conversations/5212/are_you_a_bigot_if_you_are_bia.html):

"bigot" who causes the most trouble, exhibiting obstinate and often blind devotion to his or her beliefs and opinions. In contrast to fanatic and zealot, the term bigot implies intolerance and contempt for those who do not agree (a bigot who could not accept his daughter's decision to marry outside her religion)

So, I guess if you are biased against bigots, you are not really a bigot, unless you are intolerant and contemptuous of those who are not also biased against bigots.

So in short, you can only be a bigot against bigotry if you view those who do not share your viewpoint as contemptuous. Otherwise you are just biased against bigotry.

[rvg]

Freedom Rings Loud and Strong in Libya. With casualties (http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/11/world/africa/libya-american-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t1).

[Major Robert Dump]

Idiots.

It's a film. They are all idiots, they do not understand freedom of expression, they do not understand governing through reason and not fiery emotion, and we coddle them by releasing official statements that skirt the issue. We liberate these people while their Arabic Allies twiddle their thumbs, but oh heavens a film has offended them so lets all throw a hissy.

[rvg]

Idiots.

It's a film. They are all idiots, they do not understand freedom of expression, they do not understand governing through reason and not fiery emotion, and we coddle them by releasing official statements that skirt the issue. We liberate these people while their Arabic Allies twiddle their thumbs, but oh heavens a film has offended them so lets all throw a hissy.

Lesson learned: Bashar stays.

[Populus Romanus]

Iran '79.

[Major Robert Dump]

For the past 2 years, I have been working on something of a book, a satire, which I would rather be a screenplay for a mockumentary, about religion. Mohammed plays a very big part in this. These people have not been offended. These people know not the defintion of offense. I'm going to blow the roof off the house, and it's going to be funny. And I don't just mean the work will be funny, it will be funny watching all the little savages jump up and down and stomp their feet because someone hurt their feelings. And the left will probably call me a racist, even though islam is not a race, and I will be accused of a hate crime because the left, who is normally somewhat anti-religion, has some raging hard on for Islam that I do not understand.

[rvg]

For the past 2 years, I have been working on something of a book, a satire, which I would rather be a screenplay for a mockumentary, about religion. Mohammed plays a very big part in this. These people have not been offended. These people know not the defintion of offense. I'm going to blow the roof off the house, and it's going to be funny. And I don't just mean the work will be funny, it will be funny watching all the little savages jump up and down and stomp their feet because someone hurt their feelings. And the left will probably call me a racist, even though islam is not a race, and I will be accused of a hate crime because the left, who is normally somewhat anti-religion, has some raging hard on for Islam that I do not understand.

Make it easy for them: name it "An Offensive Documentary about Islam."

[Major Robert Dump]

It's not about Islam, thats just a part of it. It's a work of fiction. It's Art. But I bet the chrisitans and buddhists and hindus won't be rioting and trying to kill me.

[rvg]

It's not about Islam, thats just a part of it. It's a work of fiction. It's Art. But I bet the chrisitans and buddhists and hindus won't be rioting and trying to kill me.

Bill Maher nailed it back in the day when he said: "I always say that Islam is a religion of peace. Otherwise they'll kill me."

[Xiahou]

And we have the US Embassy's official statement (http://egypt.usembassy.gov/pr091112.html):
September 11, 2012

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others
So, a bunch of over-sensitive nutjobs raid the US embassy.... on 9/11... and the embassy's response is to apologize? :dizzy2:

[Major Robert Dump]

Our nation is not based on respect for religious beliefs. It is based on not favoring one religion over another, and the freedom to commentate without being murdered or jailed for hurting someones feelings. Funny how we dont talk respect in regards to catholics, jehovahs, judiasm, etc

[Fragony]

For the past 2 years, I have been working on something of a book, a satire, which I would rather be a screenplay for a mockumentary, about religion. Mohammed plays a very big part in this. These people have not been offended. These people know not the defintion of offense. I'm going to blow the roof off the house, and it's going to be funny. And I don't just mean the work will be funny, it will be funny watching all the little savages jump up and down and stomp their feet because someone hurt their feelings. And the left will probably call me a racist, even though islam is not a race, and I will be accused of a hate crime because the left, who is normally somewhat anti-religion, has some raging hard on for Islam that I do not understand.

You just don't understand leftist logic, neither do I. You found yourself a customer for that book, you are good at writing

edit: I demand a signed copy

[Fragony]

lol same thing in Libya, American consulate attacked by people with culture. Leftist people know, for a fact, that we need more islam here

[Fisherking]

A spoiled child will through tantrums to get their way. Those who give in get more tantrums. Taking the enlightened approach and explain that tantrums don’t get you your way get a blank stare.

So, what is the quickest method which gets children from throwing tantrums?

What happens when people never learn to stop throwing tantrums?

[Sir Moody]

not to rain on your parade but how is this related to the Arab spring?

Neither of these events were supported by the local Governments (in fact in Libya there were Riot police trying to stop them)

What you have here is your average religious nut cases doing what religious nut cases do

The religious extremists while more numerous in the middle east are not unique to it - don't make me break out the long list of Christian nut cases in the US who have pulled just as stupid acts (protesting funerals etc etc)

As to "the left" being apologetic over Islam - can I have what you are smoking?

The "Left" is generally united in its criticism of extremist Islam - the "Left" is against people blaming the ENTIRE of Islam for acts of a minority - funnily enough this is exactly what you are doing

[Fisherking]

not to rain on your parade but how is this related to the Arab spring?

Neither of these events were supported by the local Governments (in fact in Libya there were Riot police trying to stop them)

What you have here is your average religious nut cases doing what religious nut cases do

The religious extremists while more numerous in the middle east are not unique to it - don't make me break out the long list of Christian nut cases in the US who have pulled just as stupid acts (protesting funerals etc etc)

As to "the left" being apologetic over Islam - can I have what you are smoking?

The "Left" is generally united in its criticism of extremist Islam - the "Left" is against people blaming the ENTIRE of Islam for acts of a minority - funnily enough this is exactly what you are doing

So if we just ignore it for a few hundred years then everything will be just fine?

[Fragony]

not to rain on your parade but how is this related to the Arab spring?

Neither of these events were supported by the local Governments (in fact in Libya there were Riot police trying to stop them)

What you have here is your average religious nut cases doing what religious nut cases do

The religious extremists while more numerous in the middle east are not unique to it - don't make me break out the long list of Christian nut cases in the US who have pulled just as stupid acts (protesting funerals etc etc)

As to "the left" being apologetic over Islam - can I have what you are smoking?

The "Left" is generally united in its criticism of extremist Islam - the "Left" is against people blaming the ENTIRE of Islam for acts of a minority - funnily enough this is exactly what you are doing

I wouldn't really call the left apologetic as there can't be any problem whatsoever by leftist logic, I would rather call it totalislamphilae of people who are furiously hissing if you don't absolutely adore anything islam whatever it is

'So if we just ignore it for a few hundred years then everything will be just fine?'

Had we supported the Iranian green wave we would have won a thousand, now we are stuck with islamists taking over north-africa.

[Hax]

So if we just ignore it for a few hundred years then everything will be just fine

Nobody is telling you to ignore anything. We still have to discriminate between the people who did this and the local governments as a whole.

[Greyblades]

It is based on not favoring one religion over another, and the freedom to commentate without being murdered or jailed for hurting someones feelings.

Back in the 1800's maybe, then it went fiercely pro christianity in the 50's and hasn't looked back.

[Fragony]

Hi America, if you just lost an ambassador, he went in that direction http://www.skylines.io/pictures/zaidbenjamin-a-picture-believed-to-be-for-the-u-s-ambassador-in-libya-after-he-was-killed-last-night-in-benghazi-3e65f869-ff99-4b7c-a122-070a0110cdd6

People who have culture are apparently angry about this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC6yGzpSvjU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Video of the embassy getting attaked by people who have culture http://www.elsevier.nl/web/Nieuws/Buitenland/349187/Ambassadeur-Amerika-in-Libie-gedood-bij-raketaanval.htm

[Fisherking]

Nobody is telling you to ignore anything. We still have to discriminate between the people who did this and the local governments as a whole.

If I have the story correctly, then because an Egyptian living in the US is allowed to produce his own film which they find insulting and most people never knew about, it gives people the right to riot, attack US facilities, shoot and kill, burn and loot in the name of their religion.

I find it hard to get my head around the idea that all Americans are at fault because they have the freedoms and liberties to do things like making films that other people might disagree with.

I blame extremists for their actions. Government responses were, at the least, totally inadequate. When governments hold a lot of the same views as the attackers it gets harder to swallow. When it happens to coincide with another tragedy it tends to inflame the populous of the nation attacked.

International politics are conducted on a very childish level. If you kick out one of my people because you say he is a spy I am going to reduce your embassy staff by one or tow or 15 or maybe make you close it. Look at how WWI started.

Religious extremists color the whole religion just like political extremists can color a whole nation.

Someone needs to get a handle on it before it escalates out of control. Before nations start seeing Islam as a security threat and other extremists are calling for its extermination.

Mob mentality just leads to more mob mentality. If Islam can not produce something to counter the extremists then I fear what will develop.

[Fragony]

Oh lollipop, Dutch Egyptian ambassie is also besieged by people with culture, people with culture think it was a Dutch production apparantly. There is your Arab spring lefties

[Sir Moody]

If I have the story correctly, then because an Egyptian living in the US is allowed to produce his own film which they find insulting and most people never knew about, it gives people the right to riot, attack US facilities, shoot and kill, burn and loot in the name of their religion.

no - no they have a right to protest but not riot or attack US facilities and certainly not kill - don't mistake us criticising you guys for painting Islam with too wide a brush with us supporting the rioters - they are scum


I find it hard to get my head around the idea that all Americans are at fault because they have the freedoms and liberties to do things like making films that other people might disagree with.

that's because it isn't the fault of America - the problem is entirely with the Extremists


I blame extremists for their actions. Government responses were, at the least, totally inadequate. When governments hold a lot of the same views as the attackers it gets harder to swallow. When it happens to coincide with another tragedy it tends to inflame the populous of the nation attacked.

The Government response was to send riot police in - I think that's a justified response

They also don't share the "views" - if they did it would have been soldiers storming the embassy not rioters


International politics are conducted on a very childish level. If you kick out one of my people because you say he is a spy I am going to reduce your embassy staff by one or tow or 15 or maybe make you close it. Look at how WWI started.

Religious extremists color the whole religion just like political extremists can color a whole nation.

Someone needs to get a handle on it before it escalates out of control. Before nations start seeing Islam as a security threat and other extremists are calling for its extermination.

Mob mentality just leads to more mob mentality. If Islam can not produce something to counter the extremists then I fear what will develop.

The next few days are going to be a key to understanding how the new Libya will develop - if the Government doesn't crack down on this now, and HARD, then Frag will probably end up being right - the new Libya will slide into just another Extremist nation

If however they do crack down then it signals the opposite - its a pretty major turning point for the Libyan Government and I hope they make the right choice...

[Kralizec]

The film producer is an Israeli-American, apparently, and not a Copt.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444017504577645681057498266.html?mod=WSJUK_hpp_MIDDLETopNews

What can I say? The producer might be a dick who's aim is to badmouth Islam rather than present objective facts, but he's free to do so, and it's not Clinton's or anyone elses place to condemn him for it.

I'm starting to think that we need more films such as these, but not because I agree with their content or the motivation behind them. If we release 4-5 of them each year these people will hopefully get tired of rioting and do the right thing: ignoring those films, or if they feel the need to protest about it at least practice some restraint and basic civility.

There's the possibility of course that in some of those countries they'll persist foaming at the mouth and that they'll get their governments to break down diplomatic relations with us and restrict trade and whatnot. I can live with that - western countries need to draw a line in the sand about freedom of expression, and muslims who riot over this sort of things need to learn that relations between countries are not going to be ruled exclusively on their terms.

[Fragony]

Libyan government doesn't have a choice Sir Moody, there are more guns than people over there right now. I am only surprised it took so long, and I'm buying Panzerjaeger a beer because he agreed with me from the start. Wrong as usual

[Fisherking]

Apparently the Libyan authorities are afraid if the Salafis, in part because they are better armed.

I take it that you may have heard what Reuters is reporting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9537683/US-ambassador-to-Libya-killed-in-attack-on-Benghazi-consulate.html


The death of the US ambassador, Christopher Stevens, was reported by Reuters, who had spoken to a Libyan official. It had not been confirmed.
It was not clear if the ambassador was in his car or the Libyan consulate when the attack occurred.
"The Libyan ambassador and three staff members were killed when gunmen fired rockets at them," the official in Benghazi told Reuters.

[Sir Moody]

that I can believe - Libya is awash with weapons left over from the rebellion - most are not in Government hands...

[Fragony]

Apparently the Libyan authorities are afraid if the Salafis, in part because they are better armed.

Oh really

[Fisherking]

To make matters worse, there is an election campaign going in the US and Oboma can’t be seen as soft on the issue. Otherwise his oppositions will have a field day.

If the US Ambassador and several aids are dead there will be a response.

[Fragony]

To make matters worse, there is an election campaign going in the US and Oboma can’t be seen as soft on the issue. Otherwise his oppositions will have a field day.

If the US Ambassador and several aids are dead there will be a response.

There already was, Hilary Clinton insisted it was because of inflamatory content on the internet. Of course not because a bunch of cavemen with a desert-ideoligy who have zero sense of humour unless being spread out over 5 meters is hilarious

[Fisherking]

There already was, Hilary Clinton insisted it was because of inflamatory content on the internet. Of course not because a bunch of cavemen with a desert-ideoligy who have zero sense of humour unless being spread out over 5 meters is hilarious

No Frags, I don’t think that is the end of it.

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/US-ambassador-killed-in-consulate-attack-in-Libya-3856652.php

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidblair/100180582/murder-at-the-us-embassy-barack-obama-cannot-attack-libya-so-what-does-he-do/

What ever Obama does it may be seen as too little.

This could also turn into something akin to Austria’s demands on Serbia. What ever happens I don’t
Think it is going to be very pretty.

[Beskar]

I wouldn't really call the left apologetic as there can't be any problem whatsoever by leftist logic, I would rather call it totalislamphilae of people who are furiously hissing if you don't absolutely adore anything islam whatever it is

So Lefties love Muslims because they keep telling Islamophobes to stop hating on innocent Muslims, that majority who just do their daily shopping, work and abide the laws and cause zero issues or trouble like a upstanding citizen should do?

[Fisherking]

The main problem is the silence of the innocent. Otherwise the perception becomes that all are radicalized.

If there is no significant and continued outcry from others in Islam they allow themselves to be painted with the broad brush.

If no one speaks against it, isn’t it possible they may agree? That is what most people will think, true or not.

[Fragony]

So Lefties love Muslims because they keep telling Islamophobes to stop hating on innocent Muslims, that majority who just do their daily shopping, work and abide the laws and cause zero issues or trouble like a upstanding citizen should do?

Why would we have a problem with these?