No need for me to say much only that i mostly agree with him.

C

ChrisLeak

New member
Very well. Wasn't sure about the credibility of what you were saying since it went from one thing to another. Would have changed what I said.

I believe that right now the most violent religious people (as in majority and acting upon their beliefs) are muslim. Therefore I do not see it as such a horrible thing to use that in profiling potential threats, enacting policies, or raising awareness levels. You can't just remove part of somebody's core beliefs because its part of their culture and you have to respect that and assume you can sepperate their actions from it. That's ridiculous. But you also can't abuse the association and tack it on to other people who are peaceful.

As far as ignoring the horrible things done in other religions in the name of their God . . . . that's in the past. If it were now I would be saying the same thing if it were any other religion. I'm not justifying them because it's in the past, but it isn't a current event at the moment so we can't really deal with it can we?
 
E

emilylikesveges

New member
Funny how once upon a time, people were actually fighting against racism and discrimination, and making a stand for fairness, equity and human rights.

But now, more and more, I just see over-sensitive idiots on their moral high horse fighting for nothing but their own paranoia, and being completely counter-productive to the original cause.

Are we seriously living in an age where we can't even refer to someone by their ethnicity or religion, etc., without someone jumping up and accusing you of defying some sort of human rights. One simple statement, "the Muslims...", and the moral police are on the chase. Well, truth is...the people we're talking about ARE Muslims. What else are we expected to call them??
 
B

Bobsy

Member
The link doesn't work for me so I have no idea what it says. I also have no association whatsoever with that link. How are you saying I'm using it for my argument?

And whiney, yes. You give me the impression that you're a person who likes to beat their chest about equal rights and peace to the world with a complete ignorance of what's actually out there, what's happening, and what people are trying to do about it. That is a huge assumption on my part and an unjust one at that but feel free to set me straight with your own experiences and knowledge. I will gladly admit I am wrong and an idiot if presented with legit reasoning and experience rather then a quick, unimformative and dismissive comment.

I have no idea what you mean by health and safety?
 
Q

queenofsiberia

New member
it works so long as you can take it back. Aussies haven't got much to worry about since there's not much negative stuff to say (apart from the ants. You'll have ants that build boats and are letting them live. What's up with that?) but if for instance I used the cases of prisoner abuse in Abu Graihb or something and then made a statement about how american soliders are disgusting, inhuman bastards then I'd expect the americans who use "the muslims" to talk about extremists to take it in their stride.

Also you really can't use that newspaper story thing as a decent basis for a point. Its one incident that's made it to the news because they know people will look at it to enjoy their ten minute rant about PC over their morning OJ.
 
S

sensational_soph

Member
Since I recognised you're not British

There was a time when health and safety laws were making the rounds for sensationalist headlines "The EU says our bananas are too curvy! Back off Brussels!" type stuff. Like journalists would find really stupid one off laws, or in a few cases just straight make stuff up, then act like it was beuracracy gone mad and Britain was going to the dogs before we were going to be swallowed up by some EU superpower and lose our national identitfy. You know, normal mass media stuff.
 
U

UntamedRose

Member
I've never met a single non-peaceful Muslim, fortunately.



I actually wasn't referring just to past fundies. America is plum full of 'em in many non-Muslim varieties. Turn on FOX News, the most popular televised "news" source in America to see this.
 
D

DaniellaM

Member
Umm, the problem is that I have not at all said islam is a threat to our way of life. I have said those that are currently a threat (to what the world wants to see a far as human rights), tend to associate themselves with islam. There is a big difference there. The problem is your apparent inability to differentiate between the two. I also recognize they aren't the only ones, but it is the topic of this particular thread.
 
Z

ZeroGravity

New member
The problem with 'profiling' in this way is that it is far too crude to be of any use whatsoever.

If you are talking about profiling as a counter-terrorism tool then it is no substitute for proper intelligence (in the information sense of the word.) For example, you stop and search the guy with the long beard and the 'ethnic' clothes because he conforms to your idea of what an Islamist terrorist probably looks like, and really he's just a peaceful devout bloke - but the real terrorists in jeans and parkas just sauntered by unchecked because your profile was wrong.

Then you've got 'profiling' in the wider sense, where people repeatedly claim that because there is a dangerous minority of fanatical Islamist terrorists, it is therefore perfectly valid to label Muslims in general and Islam as a religion as being inherently more violent and dangerous than any other religious group. (Not saying that you have done this, necessarily, but we've seen it so many times here on MAP that it got old a LONG time ago.) The illogic of this should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. But try to point this out and you get labelled 'politically correct', which simply shows that the people using the term very rarely understand what it actually means.

There have been awful things done by followers of every religion, but to claim that the adherant of one religion are inherently worse than others seems highly suspect to me. I know that Islamist terrorists have no real equivalent in other religions at the moment, but what has that got to do with the ordinary Muslim in the street?

I think that a big part of the problem is that too many people lap up propaganda about stuff that they have no experience of. If they never meet any Muslims then its easier for them to accept daft generalisations as being some kind of fact. If asked to picture a Muslim they probably just imagine a bloke with a beard and an AK47 burning a US flag. If I was asked the same question I'd picture my neighbours, or my customers, because those are the Muslims I see every day.
 
E

emm

Member
I absolutely refuse to get my information from anything that comes on the television. I don't even watch tv often, and if there wasn't one around I wouldn't feel like I'm missing out on anything. I hate Bill O'reilly by the way, and the only reason I know about him is from youtube, when he decided to try to overpower the President in an interview.
 
J

jojosmommy

New member
More whining? It isn't even true in any case. Take this person:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum
Clearly a threat to western liberal democratic values, and just as clearly not a muslim.
 
M

mystere:ethanita~

New member
Yes you are. You can't see it because you're the one actually doing it, but it's obvious to everybody else- by citing the naughty 'over the top political correctness nazis', you are giving yourself room to be slightly more racist than you would otherwise be.
 
E

Ebbad

New member
Profiling is a very useful tool. Have you ever been taught a class in it? "Does this guy look like he's from the middle east" isn't exactly the main subject of those types of classes. A person who has been taught properly would pay a little more attention to those who looked middle eastern, but would pay more attention to the person's actions, if they look anxious or nervous, if there clothing is capable of conceaing things (man dress vs. jeans, can't hide a whole lot under jeans can you?), if they appear to be intoxicated with any sort of substance, etc.. I believe there is a major failure in the application of proper profiling and teaching those in authoritative positions in how to properly do it than profiling just being a crude and ineffective tool.

As far as one religion being worse then another. My personal view is religion is an enabler for all sorts of messed up stuff. Currently, we are at war with people who associate themselves with islam, have terrorists who associate themselves with islam, and some of the biggest stresses in the world today are coming from people who associate themselves with islam. That's why it applies to the muslim on the street. It just does and it often comes with many injustices. It is wrong and shouldn't go unchecked but it also can't just be ignored to appease people.

The people who you're referring to who make daft generalizations I like to call "consumers" in America. They're good for nothing and don't really care about anything but themselves and their fellow consumer buddies. I don't think they should be allowed to vote due to the disgusting ammount of ignorance and willingness to be blindly led. Much less to I think they have the right to make any sort of generalization at all when they haven't truly been exposed to anything. If I had the choice of shooting a terrorist of any religion or belief, or a consumer, I would ask the person giving me the opportunity to not have any bullets in the gun so I could beat the consumer to death with it.
 
S

sierenthead

Member
Really? Here you are again making me out to say all muslims are evil when I clearly am not, and then trying to justify your accusations with something entirely irrelevant to the conversation. Nobody is saying that there aren't OTHER people who associate themselves with different things that are a threat to where we are trying to get as a human race. But that is not the topic of this thread. You're tying to bring this into areas this conversation isn't trying to go, and off of a belief of things happening that aren't happening. And then you're just being dismissive with your comments. You're not contributing anything.
 
A

aalkouri

Member
For someone who claims to have an all pervading love for his fellow man you do embrace some rather strange ideology.

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/fid_91-96/921_frankfurt.html

Political correctness was designed a gag freedom of speech and its done a brilliant job in the UK.It does what it says on the tin but that is hardly surprising as it was designed for one of the most brutal dictators in history.

While you are at it try checking out Common Purpose,a so-called charity that turns out brainwashed clones by the lorry load.These robots have infested almost every part of British life,including the police,education,local authorities,and certain areas of business.These people are the root cause of a lot of problems.If its announced that Christmas is going to be called something else its usually these people who have instigated the change rather than Muslims.I have yet to meet a Muslim who is offended by Christmas.The people who really hate Christmas are the political correct zombies who have been brainwashed into having a deep seated hatred of Christianity and want to eradicate it.Its these people who need to get over themselves and stop interfering in the lives of normal people who haven't got a racist bone in their body.
 
B

Byakuya

Member
Yeah, I'm not actually convinced that the 'renaming christmas' crap isn't totally made up in the first place.
Plus, I don't have an 'all pervading love for my fellow man'. I hate 50% of you and the other half annoy me.
 
Top