User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 115

  1. #31
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Terrorism has always had highly negative effects beyond the immediate deaths it engenders-do you really think black Americans were foolish to fear the Klan more than riding a horse or automobile? Did FARC pose only a minor danger to the Colombian state a few years ago, because the deaths that it dealt were so much smaller than the number of automobile deaths? You're comparing apples to oranges.
    Well, it was an aside, LR. But, if you want I can respond.

    Recently in Colombia there were over 35,000 deaths per year attributable to FARC. The period following 1948 - “La Violencia” - saw at least 200,000 civilian deaths.

    Whereas, if 60 people die over 10 years in London at the hands of "Jihadis" (4 losers) I don't think I have to be that scared at all, in fact. I have no plans to abandon using the London Underground in the foreseeable future. Do I have to spell out what "risk" means?

    Even at the height of the PIRA UK bombing campaign, most people went about their business as normal, although the frequency of PIRA bombings was much greater.

    Other than asserting control by fear, the KKK has little similarity to the FARC. But it's interesting you should bunch the KKK with the narco-terrorism of the FARC.

    Far from being classic "terrorists" the KKK comprised of "upstanding" members of society, with influence ingrained in civil society and the judiciary. But for the record, "nearly 5,000 African Americans were lynched in the United States between 1860 and 1890" (lazily taken from Wiki). The problem wasn't that the KKK were bomb-vested loonies. The problem was that they were ordinary, God-fearin' white folks. Don't bother trying to re-write the bits of your history that you don't like, mate. That's a real no-no - and it shows that it's you that doesn't know his apples from his oranges.

    But you might like to mention the Provisional IRA in your little pool of terrorists. They managed to kill, injure, burn and torture over 30,000 people in under 30 years. And their main sponsor - freedom-lovin' white Americans - through their benevolent donations to NORAID. Have a look at the death and injury figures: CAIN: Northern Ireland Society - Security and Defence. All carried out with zeal, by white Europeans - with a little help from our American friends.

    But then I only put that last bit in to wind you up, so don’t take it too seriously.

    But, hey, seriously, Lowtech. All this chatter doesn't mean we go soft on the fellas that want to blow us up. Hell, no. We have a very effective security apparatus (that cost a fortune) to catch these guys. And when we do catch 'em, we pop 'em in Belmarsh for 40 years.

    You do understand I'm getting at the depiction of the problem creating bigger problems. I'm not trying to deny that there's a problem. And Ms Hirsi is part of the problem - or is that too confusing?

    All the best.

  2. #32
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    It's interesting that, in an academic sense, you'll let her off the hook because she's a woman.

    This is called discrimination and it has no place in the world of literary criticism.

    But then again you're confusing her rights as a writer (she has none) to her rights as a woman.

    This is a thread in the "Politics, History, and Current Events" forum. It has nothing to do with literary criticism to anyone other than your good self.
    I'm really not very interested in the woman, on or off the hook, as I think I've made perfectly clear. People who lie for the purposes of gaining political asylum should be deported, as far as I'm concerned. But you are derailing with irrelevant details just because you like to be disputatious.

    Hirsi may have been the inspiration for the thread but she shouldn't be its focus. The OP's question is
    Is Islam a dangerous, totalitarian ideology masquerading as a religion, and is the Enlightenment the answer?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  3. #33
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post

    This is a thread in the "Politics, History, and Current Events" forum. It has nothing to do with literary criticism to anyone other than your good self.
    I'm really not very interested in the woman, on or off the hook, as I think I've made perfectly clear. People who lie for the purposes of gaining political asylum should be deported, as far as I'm concerned. But you are derailing with irrelevant details just because you like to be disputatious.
    You could try taking your whinings to the mods. If they'll listen to you, that is. But as you are one of the forum's biggest interlopers of irrelevant nonsense, I wouldn't build my hopes up.

    Hirsi may have been the inspiration for the thread but she shouldn't be its focus. The OP's question is...
    The OP used Hirsi as "inspiration" alright. So it's okay for me to deconstruct that inspiration to get nearer both the OP's motives and the subject at hand.

    If the OP uses a drama queen like Hirsi to inspire himself, then maybe I enjoy shattering the misplaced faith he has in her. Why do I enjoy that, Blue? Does the irony escape you. Or do I have to spell it out?

    But since I'm a sport, we'll stay "on track". Just for you.

    Would you say that in the UK and France, for example, the treatment of religion within the state is markedly similar - similar enough to come from the same Enlightenmment - or different enough that they must have emerged from differing strands - Locke and Voltaire had distinct ideas on the subject, for example.

    So when the OP says "Enlightenment" and does not qualify what he means he is either trying to hoodwink us into believing something that may not be correct, or he is simply ignorant of the subject matter at hand.

    Capice?

    As always, impressed by your savoir faire,

    banana

  4. #34
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    You do understand I'm getting at the depiction of the problem creating bigger problems. I'm not trying to deny that there's a problem. And Ms Hirsi is part of the problem - or is that too confusing?
    Deaths for the sake of terrorism through organized and deliberate human agency impact the lives of everyone, while accidental deaths typically do not. An individual might be in more danger from death by accident than from death through terrorism, but their lives and aspirations are affected more by a relatively small number of terrorist actions than a larger number of accidental deaths.

    And, of course, Islamism and the jihad doctrine within Muslim populations are much greater problems than Islamic terrorism (which is merely a sub-set of those problems), just as culturally entrenched beliefs concerning white supremacy and segregation were the real problem in the American South, not the KKK.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    And, of course, Islamism and the jihad doctrine within Muslim populations are much greater problems than Islamic terrorism (which is merely a sub-set of those problems), just as culturally entrenched beliefs concerning white supremacy and segregation were the real problem in the American South, not the KKK.
    Can you explain the "jihad doctrine"?

    Secondly, how tied do you think "Islamism" is to Islamic terrorism?

  6. #36
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    An individual might be in more danger from death by accident than from death through terrorism, but their lives and aspirations are affected more by a relatively small number of terrorist actions than a larger number of accidental deaths.
    You're wrong. Your life will be more affected by actually dying in a car crash than potentially being blown up in an aircraft. The former being much more likely.

    If you take every newspaper headline at face value, you'll live your life in fear - and a car crash might be the more preferable of the two. /joke

    Then again you could chose to be more critical and ask whether your fear is grounded in reason or caused by a bogeyman.

    And, of course, Islamism and the jihad doctrine within Muslim populations are much greater problems than Islamic terrorism (which is merely a sub-set of those problems), just as culturally entrenched beliefs concerning white supremacy and segregation were the real problem in the American South, not the KKK.
    Totally agree with you there, buddy. The US is much better at integrating incomers. I imagine you take it for granted. It makes forming an accomodation with Islam easier, if Muslims engage in the process. Dealing with the problem as well as the symptoms.

    We don't do that well at all in Europe and could learn a few things from the US on that score.

  7. #37
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Can you explain the "jihad doctrine"?

    Secondly, how tied do you think "Islamism" is to Islamic terrorism?
    We've had this debate before, as I recall...

    The "jihad doctrine" refers to religiously mandated or encouraged warfare to advance Shariah law, the precise details of which are heavily disputed among Muslims. Islamic terrorist are basically Islamists with a more expansive interpretation of the jihad doctrine. Islamists, in turn, are basically orthodox Muslims in terms of core beliefs, though more radicalized and adaptive to modern global political currents.

    The relationship between Islamists and Islamic terrorism essentially parallels that of segregationist beliefs in the Old South and groups like the KKK; Islamists provide a de-facto support network, ideological incubator, and recruitment pool for Islamic terrorist groups.

  8. #38
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    You could try taking your whinings to the mods. If they'll listen to you, that is. But as you are one of the forum's biggest interlopers of irrelevant nonsense, I wouldn't build my hopes up.

    The OP used Hirsi as "inspiration" alright. So it's okay for me to deconstruct that inspiration to get nearer both the OP's motives and the subject at hand.

    If the OP uses a drama queen like Hirsi to inspire himself, then maybe I enjoy shattering the misplaced faith he has in her. Why do I enjoy that, Blue? Does the irony escape you. Or do I have to spell it out?

    But since I'm a sport, we'll stay "on track". Just for you.

    Would you say that in the UK and France, for example, the treatment of religion within the state is markedly similar - similar enough to come from the same Enlightenmment - or different enough that they must have emerged from differing strands - Locke and Voltaire had distinct ideas on the subject, for example.

    So when the OP says "Enlightenment" and does not qualify what he means he is either trying to hoodwink us into believing something that may not be correct, or he is simply ignorant of the subject matter at hand.

    Capice?
    So why not Enlighten us, instead of getting your panties in a bunch about hidden motives?

    I think the statement was provocative and patronizing, if not incendiary.
    I thought you were a fan of those?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #39
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    So why not Enlighten us, instead of getting your panties in a bunch about hidden motives?

    I think the statement was provocative and patronizing, if not incendiary.
    I thought you were a fan of those?
    I do it for the lulz, Blue. Or hadn't you noticed that?

    Edit: I thought I did. I asked - which Enlightenment? Capice?

  10. #40
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    We've had this debate before, as I recall...


    The "jihad doctrine" refers to religiously mandated or encouraged warfare to advance Shariah law, the precise details of which are heavily disputed among Muslims.
    Bolded, yes, and an important thing to note.

    Islamic terrorist are basically Islamists with a more expansive interpretation of the jihad doctrine. Islamists, in turn, are basically orthodox Muslims in terms of core beliefs, though more radicalized and adaptive to modern global political currents.

    The relationship between Islamists and Islamic terrorism essentially parallels that of segregationist beliefs in the Old South and groups like the KKK; Islamists provide a de-facto support network, ideological incubator, and recruitment pool for Islamic terrorist groups.
    So, it's all about the (current) interpretations of Islam by certain factions of the adherents of Islam.

    May I ask then, given this, how you would respond to the OP's question:
    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    So is Islam a dangerous, totalitarian ideology masquerading as a religion, and is the Enlightenment the answer?
    **
    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Islamists, in turn, are basically orthodox Muslims in terms of core beliefs, though more radicalized and adaptive to modern global political currents.
    Personally, I would have chosen the word "reactive" rather than "adaptive".

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. My blog and the ideological course of culture... to be elaborated on in the new year
    By Zangetshumody in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2017, 08:41 AM
  3. MBTI and the Anti-Enlightenment
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-25-2012, 04:31 AM
  4. [Te] The Message and the Messenger
    By proteanmix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 09:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO