It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If you cannot win an argument, use the race card!
Instead, people seem to not want a discussion, but to attack others for their opinions and insert words in my mouth that I never said.
I can't even express the frustration that all you xenophobes are causing me
This coming from the man who starts a thread "What does this racist iranian poster mean?"
Originally posted by Jamuhn
And to 27jd, I agree with your observation that we should not accept the extremist elements of their religion. There is a fine line between displaying one's identity and taking away the rights of another, and any custom, activity, or law should end when it starts alienating the rights of another.
You don't live in the US, do you?
Oh, I see you claim to live in Manhattan.
You don't get out of the condo much do you?
Maybe racist was a bad choice of words. Perhaps anti-semetic or insane would have been a better choice.
The problem though, is that quite a large portion of them are fairly extreme. In Pakistan, a father is pretty much able to slaughter his wife or children if he even thinks they may dishonor him in the future, and his punishment is financial restitution to the family. Only recently did that law change to where the father may face some jail time if the maximum punishment is ordered for his crimes. Many countries in that region have governments that base their authority on archaic, brutal religious fundamentalism.
It's easy to find the root of the problem, children see murder, brutality, etc. from birth, and are indoctrinated from the start.
They are ruled by fear, and those who live their lives in fear amidst violence either become passive and withdrawn (the reason you don't see alot of muslims speaking out against violence in those countries), or they become violent and respect only those who also dish out violence. It's human nature. Look at children who come from extremely abusive homes, either they are quiet and terrified their whole lives, or they only respect the abusive parent and grow up just like them. In both cases the child will have extreme trouble adapting to a normal, healthy relationship.
Originally posted by Dronetek
I found this poster today and I just wondered what the Iranian apologists have to say about it.
To me, it looks like take down American first, than Israel will follow. Note this was the poster from their holocaust denial conference.
Imagine the uproar is Bush gave a speech with the same poster, but replacing the us and Isreali balls in to Africa and a cresent moon.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
For those in denial of the poster, and for those apparently incapable of comprehending basic symbolic meaning, let me help you out.
The poster is trying to tell us that the US and Israel have to be destroyed so the world can be rid of them.
Originally posted by Luxifero
A large portion of Iranians are fairly extreme? Exactly how will you be substantianing this baseless remark?
This is laughable, as laughable as you someone carry upon this culture, that of Pakistans as if it's remotely similiar, or somehow, based upon the simple principle. Nay have you realized that both cultures and regions of the world have attempted to free themselves from burdens of two seperate entities, and each society normality is relative therein.
As for other countries in that region -which would obviously included India and Saudi Arabia-- which are exclusive of American support, and which are inclusive, and of those, which are also brutual monarchies or dictatorships; and which are democracies?
Your view of extremisim stems from your ignorance of societal norms in Pakistan which does not construe the morality of honour killings, but at the same time, dictate that you find this to be an accepted normality in Pakistan and surrounding cultures, something which it is not.
"The right to life of women in Pakistan is conditional on their obeying social norms and traditions."
Hina Jilani, lawyer and human rights activist
Women in Pakistan live in fear. They face death by shooting, burning or killing with axes if they are deemed to have brought shame on the family. They are killed for supposed 'illicit' relationships, for marrying men of their choice, for divorcing abusive husbands. They are even murdered by their kin if they are raped as they are thereby deemed to have brought shame on their family. The truth of the suspicion does not matter -- merely the allegation is enough to bring dishonour on the family and therefore justifies the slaying.
I was never aware that children are indoctrinated from murders, brutality, and other such variables you propose. In actuality, one cannot be indoctrinated, as this term constitutes a level of education to be habituated into the acceptence of murder and brutality as a normality, and if this is so, then you're statement that they are human is not correct, as you clearly junction between the western world and that of thiers; you've stated, blatantly, that the choices these persons make are due to their violent nature and enviroment, which states that the more phenomenal violent nature that takes place in the United States of American must occur on conclusions of another, human, reason which is exclusive of America's brutal and violent history. You're starting to sound a bit confusing with your sociology of these people.
No, it's due to the fact that many of those Muslims are disconnected that the west impies as a normality in those countries, not becuase they are conceptualy habituated or indoctrinated into the acceptence of such violence.
Your entire argument is non sequitur. Those raised under violent premises and conditions are not wholly accountable to your assessment. Your administration of postulate nature about these people is unjustified in analysis. As for your statement that they become either violent -deliquent- in nature, or passive, does not include the numerous examples of those who have chosen the side of diplomacy, or even rational choices made my persons; rational choice theorists propose that delinquents/diplomacy are meditated between possible outcomes of an act of delinquency/diplomacy in consequentiality; if I were to engage in ‘x’ activity with ‘y’ outcome, what are the odds that ‘x’ activity will subsequently lead to ‘y’ outcome; and of this ‘y’ outcome, what are the chances of greatest risk and rewards of ‘x’ activity. This is exclusive of this so-called indoctrination which you tout as axiomological. If anything, it just sounds bigoted upon your part. As Americans would pity upon Africans centuries back as savages with no soul nor sense of ethics and morality.
And to think, i'm just starting to discourse here...
Hmm, dont think I totally agree with you there, it says, "A world without Zionisim" and my guess on the symbolisim would be "is a world without USA and Israel". Its a common expression, " A world without blah blah is a world without blah blahs."
Originally posted by ArchAngel
Not all Israelies, and certainly not all Americans are Zionists.
While Israel, and America are the biggest Zionist nations it is the foriegn policies at issue.
Zionism is an ism like terrorism.
Zionism is Anti-Arab.
You do not have to wipe out all the people to get rid of the extremism.
They would love to see America end its Zionism and end the extremism.
Zionism is Anti-Arab.
Zionism is a political movement and an ideology that supports a Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel, where the Jewish nation is believed to have originated and where Jewish kingdoms and self-governing states existed at various times in history. While Zionism is based heavily upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, the modern movement was originally secular, beginning largely as a response to rampant antisemitism in late 19th century Europe.