Salon.com WORRIED About Hate Speech....and, oh yeah, the Paris Victims

a reply to: ~Lucidity

OK, I see I am supposed to shy away...

a reply to: madmac5150

We are free... no dominion, no expectations...

a reply to: ErrorErrorError

According to Hollande , Paris will be "ruthless" in their response. I don't know him, but is he a cowboy?

a reply to: MOMof3

May they unfurl the French battle flag...

a reply to: MOMof3

He doesn't have that reputation.

But the French military, particularly the FFL, isn't to be taken lightly. Their SpecOps troops are supposed to be pretty good, as well.

The Intelligence apparatus is on a par with anything the British, Americans, and Russians have. Or so the stories go...

a reply to: FlySolo

Y'know, we have to talk about this eh. Sweeping a serious social problem under the carpet for the sake of political correctness is not going to solve anything.

This thread is political correctness. The growing popularity of eliminationist rhetoric among conservatives is a serious social problem and conservative ideologues will attack en masse anyone who dares call it for what it is.

It's little comments like this I believe causes more damage. Clearly! This particular religion is a pain the ass for everyone and please don't deny that. It really is a royal pain in the ass. And not just a few trouble makers, a lot. Like hundreds of thousands. By not being able to call out the entire ideology on this and deal with it head on, by burying our heads and pretending there's nothing seriously effed up in their culture, it will never get resolved. By stigmatizing the discussion makes it too taboo to even talk about. That's not right. We need to talk about this, openly and transparently.

If it's such a taboo subject, why do so many people feel completely comfortable expressing extremist views about detaining millions of innocent people in interment camps and using nuclear weapons to kill millions more — literally an attempt at radicalizing others into an extremist ideology.

Most people are open to having honest discussions about terrorism, the problem is that ideologues on the Right don't consider any discussion "honest" if it doesn't start with denouncing Islam as intrinsically evil and end with ethnic cleansing.

The Salon people are despicable individuals, too caught up in their dogma to be respected as journalists. They're like the nobs who write the student union paper but refuse to grow up.


As for Hollande s speech...It's about time the French unfurled the Oriflamme. ..With all that it entails.

originally posted by: madmac5150
a reply to: MOMof3

May they unfurl the French battle flag...

The last 2 world wars that has been a white sheet

a reply to: woodwardjnr

WWII, yes.

WWI, not so much.

I suspect that wouldn't happen again.

a reply to: seagullww1 they still relied on the rest of the world to save them.

I suspect it won't happen again too, but tackling Isis is going to need to be a global efferort, where we will need to work alongside Russia and other former enemies like Iran to defeat them. We also need to desperately reassess our relationships with close allies like Saudi Arabia and the UAE who are not helping the situation at all, in fact making things much worse. We can no longer afford these relationships with hardline Muslim nations.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

I agree with all of what you said.

Especially about the reevaluation of our current relations with countries in the region. Most especially the House of Saud.

originally posted by: Stearman65
BS, enact the draft and go fight unlimited warfare in the Middle East and this would be over in no time. We should either wipe them out or stay home. This limited warfare we have been fighting is a big part of the problem. a reply to: madmac5150

Watch out, we got a badass here!

Posts like these always make me giggle. So hardcore, so confident.

So NOT rushing to a recruiting station to sign up.

a reply to: theantediluvian

If it's such a taboo subject, why do so many people feel completely comfortable expressing extremist views about detaining millions of innocent people in interment camps and using nuclear weapons to kill millions more — literally an attempt at radicalizing others into an extremist ideology.

I would point out the irony in your statement. Those that express views to nuke Islam are not "so many people", they are a small group of right wingers, not the whole. It would be wrong to accuse all right wingers as 'extreme' because they don't reflect the opinions of the majority of those who oppose Islam. See where I'm going with this? For example, I voted Liberal this year but my leaning towards the immigration is right. So what group do I belong to? I don't support radical right wing views, but I support open critical dialog on the religion. This part is what is taboo. Any criticism is considered Islamaphobic.

Most people are open to having honest discussions about terrorism, the problem is that ideologues on the Right don't consider any discussion "honest" if it doesn't start with denouncing Islam as intrinsically evil and end with ethnic cleansing.

See? You just did it. You said discussions about terrorism but you completely left out the fact that this type of terrorism stems for the Ideology you don't want to discuss. The elephant in the room. You can't say Muslims. You have to say "terrorists" In EU you can't say "Muslims" You have to say "Asians". In Sweden, you can't even say that or criticize immigration or face a criminal charge. How open is that? There's no "honest" dialog here. let's be real.

a reply to: reldra

I do deny that. It is actually little, brainless, unhappy people that call out entire religions. People like this disappear due to evolution.

With your passive attitude, I'm willing to bet it will be your extinction before mine. To call it "brainless" shows you're not even using yours. It's not wrong to call out religions. Who or what gave "religion" a free pass from criticism? What country are you from? It's not racist. It's not bigotry. So what is it? Atheists criticize religion all the time. Is that a crime now?

Let me use an ATS analogy for you. Would ATS be a better place if no one disagreed with you? What if there was no HOAX bin and everyone could post anything without critical opposition? What about a democracy with no opposition party? How do you think that would work out if all votes in parliamentary were "yeas' ? Look, you need opposition for everything because no one is 100% always right. Opposition is balance and this Muslim ideology has no balance. It goes completely unchecked and anyone who calls it out immediately goes suppressed by people like you. If you could have your way, you would stifle any criticism about Islam while ignoring the social problems it presents. How helpful is that?. Not. In fact, it's this passive dismissive attitude that allows the religion complete unfettered, unimpeded radicalism.

And you say my thinking about this is brainless?

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
a reply to: Christosterone

How does one attempt to reason with the unreasonable? They can only try...

You are grouping together all Muslims for the actions of a few, which is highly illogical. Did all Muslims take part in these terrorist attacks? The answer is no. This "guilt by association" type thinking is the same as somebody blaming all Christians for the actions of a few. How would that sit with you? Would you be fine with people advocating all Christians be deported and killed because one person bombs an abortion clinic?

Remind me again where I "grouped together all Muslims for the actions of a few"...
Let alone conflating anything I said to deporting and killing anyone...

Spoiler alert: I NEVER SAID ANYTHING THE LIKE.....you simply assumed it based on [perhaps] an inability to see through your own prejudice.

-Christosterone

originally posted by: RevolutionAnon
a reply to: Christosterone

It is inconsiderate but as of yet there is no proof to suggest who committed this and pointing to the obvious party may be the logical approach, and the odds are stacked that they will be held accountable, but it is unfair - innocent until proven guilty.

You know what is MORE unfair than an extremely plausible accusation? That 160 people were butchered on Friday Night just trying to live their lives. THAT IS MORE UNFAIR than an accusation that any person who is capable of basic logic would make.

You are completely unbelievable.

Has anyone considered that the attacks by ISIS are designed to start a war against Islam? This would polarize the world and, in ISIS' view, give them legitimacy.
The big problem with Islam is that the 'rules and regulations' are approaching 1500 years of age. The world has changed significantly and that religion has maintained a philosophy that reflects life in the 7th century. The concepts that apostates should be killed, that those who insult the prophet or the religion can be killed, that women are property, and that Sharia law is a good idea, among other things, might need a little update. Most importantly, the Mullahs have to voice these changes and support them.
When Muslims migrate to new countries, they have to adapt. Expecting women to wear veils while getting photo ID's made is unrealistic. The respect demanded for Islam does not seem to be extended by Islam for others. Islam should grow up and learn to accept the modern world or ISIS will get its wish.

a reply to: reldra

Pedophiles regardless of vocation should DIAF.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

According to Hollande , Paris will be "ruthless" in their response. I don't know him, but is he a cowboy?

Hollande?

He's a socialist. The guy he replaced was more of the terrible right-leaning cowboy paradigm. But the thing most people don't understand is that if you scratch a socialist, you will find a nationalist tyrant underneath. It's just a matter of what brings that impulse out.

WWI and WWII in the US? The presidents who got us into those two were both leftists progressives and enacted some of the most draconian domestic war measures the country has ever seen.

a reply to: pteridine

Oh yes, I've considered it. ISIS wants to bring about the Islamic version of the end times.

In order for that to happen, they need a large army of Western forces, preferably American, to materialize in Syria at a certain point where they believe they will defeat them.

Given that Islam is an Abrahamic religion although I have my doubts about which angel revealed revelations to Mohammad, it may well happen too. There are quite a few events in the Islamic version of the end times that dovetail suspiciously well with events in the Christian version of Revelation.