It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

White House Warns Against Blaming Religion of Islam After Ohio State Attack

page: 7
30
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If the goal of the criticism is to foster hatred and fear, that's a hate site.




posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I suspect your criticism more than I respect it, but duly noted. I said what I did because Islam is often confused with a race, and criticism of Islam is confused with racism. You calling religionofpeace.com a hate site for example. The neologism "islamophobia" for example.




What can be done to stop acts of terrorism from violent Islamic extremists? (Jihadist, Radical Islamic Terrorist — whatever magical term will pierce this semantical smokescreen)


Criticism is a start.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If the goal of the criticism is to foster hatred and fear, that's a hate site.


If that's the measure we're using, then Islam must be a hate religion.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:04 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

What of the tone was simply to change of the site? What if they mocked Islam with malice and derision? Would it be considered a hate site then?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: loam


Look, it's pretty simple.


Obviously it's not that simple. Your diatribe amounts to preposterous magical thinking. Extremism among Muslim isn't a demon in a possession flick that you can control by uttering its secret name. That's all bulls#. I could use a lot more words if you want to piss on one another's legs or we could just be frank.

The evidence of how wrong you are is all around you in this very thread. Look at LesMis contorting himself to explain why religionofpeace.com is a not a hate site. Look how many stars his post received.

Where did he make a distinction in his post? Where does religionofpeace.com make a distinction? Where is Winstonian making a distinction when he says the below?


Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. It is the religion of peace. Please stop posting racism. This white supremacist hetero patriarchy is completely out of the control in the USA trying to oppress peaceful suicide bombers.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: loam


Look, it's pretty simple.


Obviously it's not that simple. Your diatribe amounts to preposterous magical thinking. Extremism among Muslim isn't a demon in a possession flick that you can control by uttering its secret name. That's all bulls#. I could use a lot more words if you want to piss on one another's legs or we could just be frank.

The evidence of how wrong you are is all around you in this very thread. Look at LesMis contorting himself to explain why religionofpeace.com is a not a hate site. Look how many stars his post received.

Where did he make a distinction in his post? Where does religionofpeace.com make a distinction? Where is Winstonian making a distinction when he says the below?


Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. It is the religion of peace. Please stop posting racism. This white supremacist hetero patriarchy is completely out of the control in the USA trying to oppress peaceful suicide bombers.


Not a single valid argument in your word spaghetti. Let's be frank: tell us more about your feelings.




Where does religionofpeace.com make a distinction?


On their website. But you would know that because you've looked at it and are opposed to magical thinking.
edit on 30-11-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I haven't looked at the website you mention, so I can't comment on that now. But I have no problem assuming for the benefit of discussion that it's a hate site as you describe.

So what?

The fact of the existence of nut-cases on either end of the spectrum is not evidence that the vast majority of people are card carrying members of either extreme. Nor is anything said in this thread evidence of the same.

To me, the magical thinking comes from you, where you converted the entire substance of my argument into a childish assertion that I believe that by merely calling radical Islamists just that, we somehow solve all our problems.

The point you either willfully chose not to address, or simply didn't understand, is that by not naming them you burden all Muslims with a growing and unjustified suspicion.

But rage on. I often sit on the fence trying to decide whether you are an honest broker or not. I don't enjoy exercises in futility, and given your response to me, I doubt we will come to any meaningful understanding between one another on this topic.





edit on 30-11-2016 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I suspect your criticism more than I respect it, but duly noted.


Are you expecting me to start giving a f now all of a sudden?


I said what I did because Islam is often confused with a race, and criticism of Islam is confused with racism. You calling religionofpeace.com a hate site for example. The neologism "islamophobia" for example.


By whom is Islam often confused with a race? Certainly not wingnuts! Ignorant assholes never assault Sikhs, Hindus and other brown-skinned non-Muslims based on their conflation of racial characteristics with religious affiliation. There aren't people like Richard Spencer proclaiming themselves "cultural Christians" because they associate Christianity with the universal culture of "whiteness."

You're entire shtick boils down to semantics. By calling Islamophobia a neologism, you're insinuating that what people use the term for doesn't exist. I disagree and since your comments are more baseless accusation than substantive argument, I don't believe more of a response is required.

If a site whose singular purpose is to foment hatred and fear through its criticism isn't a hate site then there is no such thing as a hate site.

What else ya got in that bag of rhetorical tricks? Maybe a mini-rant about how calling out bigotry against a religious group is the real intolerance and therefore I'm the bigot? I haven't read that one yet in this thread.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: marg6043
The muslim president needs to shut the hell off and move to the middle east with his brothers in arms.

He is nothing but a joke, I can not wait to see him leave once and for all.


"The Muslim President."

You're an idiot.


Everyone except Obama and followers say he is a Muslim. Walks like a Muslim, talks like a Muslim, pays billions of dollars cash to Muslims. IS a Muslim, or might as well be a Muslim. Get it? I didn't think so.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:43 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Crikey mate,

That's a bit over the top. I listen to you but don't start throwing remarks at others.

bally



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:51 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


On their website. But you would know that because you've looked at it and are opposed to magical thinking.


I have read it over on a number of occassions actually. You apparently have not. Color me surprised.

Ten Obvious Reasons Why
Islam is Not a Religion of Peace


Better yet, let's just skip right to the About Page:


TheReligionofPeace.com is a pluralistic, non-partisan site concerned with Islam's true political and religious teachings according to its own texts. The purpose is to underscore the threat that Islam poses to human dignity and freedom, as well as the violence and dysfunction that ensues as a direct consequence of this religion's supremacist teachings.

Islam breeds arrogance and self-absorption, which accounts for the collective petulance and perpetual grievance that characterizes Muslim populations in general - along with the astonishing unwillingness to extend equal moral consideration to those outside the religion.


Dripping with distinctions. Maybe you could point out what you're talking about?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

Not my finest moment. I'm sorry marg, that was uncalled for.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:18 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

If accurate reporting and compiling is tantamount to a hate site that's on the subject rather the audience.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
in America we will never let radicals take over


Unless they are radical "christians" who want to do stupid things like outlaw abortions, those sorts of radicals are fine!



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Riffrafter


It is *way* past time to call a spade a spade. No pun or offense intended.

Show me another "religion" that has fanatical followers who go out of their way to slaughter innocents and those they deem to be infidels on a worldwide scale?

I'll wait...

Can't begin to solve the problem if we're not even willing to admit it *is* a problem.


Who are these people who do not know that the majority of recent acts of terrorism in the West have been perpetrated by Muslims?

Who are they? Is it the CIA? The NSA? The FBI? Other Western intelligence and investigative agencies? The military? The media? People at foreign policy think tanks? The average person on the street?

The average teenager in bumbf# rural nowhere can list the recent terrorist attacks.

This ain't substance abuse or a gambling addiction. This "admitting there is a problem is the first step" crap doesn't relate to the situation no matter how many times it's repeated. Everyone knows that there is a problem.

So what's the solution?


From the way you write, you don't want a solution. You want to call names and criticize people for what they think, but you provide no solution yourself. You sound as if you are all about the chaos and what ensues after.

The solution is simple. You use their own religion against them. If an islamic terrorist is caught alive drown him in pigs blood. If you have to shoot him make sure that pigs blood is on the ammo you use. After a while they will stop trying to die for their religion because they will not make it to heaven after being defiled. How is that for a solution. Is it to sick for your sensibilities? Is it good to do these things? Of course not, but when you see isis burning people alive, and drowning them in cages, my sympathy for their religions well being just don't come to mind.
edit on 30-11-2016 by 3daysgone because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-11-2016 by 3daysgone because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 03:44 AM
link   
Don't blame the religion, blame the attacker. These things happen in the States all the time, usually with guns, and nine times out of ten the attacker isn't a Muslim, it's not about being PC, it's obvious some people on here just need one incident to reinforce their already blinkered world view and prejudice.

The main premise of this sight is to 'Deny ignorance" but so many of you on here, especially recently, have shown a complete lack of objectivity,. ISIS don't represent Islam, they are a bunch of murderers using fear in order to gain power....sound familiar?



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 04:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Sounds fine to me, Mr. Obama.

I'll just refer to the maniac as a Hillary supporter and a democrat.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Your percentage is wrong, just a number you threw out, what a shame.

The Obama admin did not say we shouldn't blame the 1.7 billion, or the entire Muslim population. Only the millions who are actually radical extremists.

It's around 10% of the population view ISIS favorably, that's only 170 million people. Some Islamic countries have over 90% who support sharia law, like public beheading and raping a woman if she isn't covered up.

Either you know this, and are lying, or you don't know this and are being ignorant.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
Please somebody enlighten me as to what the agenda is here because for the life of me, I can't figure out what the hell blaming a religion of 1.7 billion people is supposed to accomplish?

What do you want? What do you hope to achieve?

"We need to have discussion!" is a common nonsensical response I see. We're having plenty of discussions... about how we can't have discussions.

What is it you expect to happen?


You say this yet you try to connect a few dozen neo-nazis to Trump and all of his supporters.



posted on Nov, 30 2016 @ 05:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: eluryh22

It's not simply about the backlash against the 99.99999999% of Muslims in America. The more we other people, the more they are likely to become radicalized. The more that become radicalized, the more acts of terrorism there will be. Then what? More blaming Islam?

Repeat until the animosity reaches the level that people are demanding a holy war?

How far do we take it? When the dead are in the tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Millions? What's the plan?


Yes, when those two Muslims tried to murder people at a draway Mohammed contest, the 99% of peaceful Muslims protested the Muhammad drawing contest, not the attempted murder.

Why don't you ever use the standard that you have for Muslims, with your political opposition in America? These standards that you have created go right out the window when you're talking about them.
edit on 30-11-2016 by TheBulk because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
30
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join