User Tag List

First 345

Results 41 to 49 of 49

  1. #41
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default 2014 Commonwealth Games, Dogs, Terrorists, and Islam

    It's extraordinary. Islamic countries have protested at the use of scotty dogs dressed in tartan at the Commonwealth Games in Scotland.

    Using scottish dogs at the Scottish Commonwealth Games in Scotland is a deliberate offence to Islam, Islamic nations are saying loud and clear.

    But these same Islamic nations are remarkably silent about the horrors being perpetrated across the world.

    It would seen Islam hates dogs more than they hate terrorists.

  2. #42
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    I've got nothing but nuance in terms of this particular issue. I've always had a lot of trouble drawing any conclusions at all- it's so complex with so many moving parts. I sympathize with both "sides" and I think both "sides" have committed atrocities. And of course there aren't just two "sides"; the "sides" are made up of disparate groups that don't agree or approve or even understand everything the other groups on their "side" are doing.

    Basically, I'm stumped.

  3. #43
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    It's extraordinary. Islamic countries have protested at the use of scotty dogs dressed in tartan at the Commonwealth Games in Scotland.

    Using scottish dogs at the Scottish Commonwealth Games in Scotland is a deliberate offence to Islam, Islamic nations are saying loud and clear.

    But these same Islamic nations are remarkably silent about the horrors being perpetrated across the world.

    It would seen Islam hates dogs more than they hate terrorists.
    Your Islamophobia is extraordinarily tiring.


    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    I don't see how you can read my posts, including a rebuttal to one of Mal's posts, and conclude that I see the conflict in black and white terms (especially regarding the history of the conflict)......
    My apologies for lumping you in with Barney. You're right, you're not on the same plane as him, with regards to this topic.

    I simply lean more toward one side (especially when the other side is restricted to the Hamas faction, as they are the subject of this thread) than you believe to be warranted, and I'm not willing to automatically discount articles from mainstream Israeli newspapers (that's basically the same as automatically discounting articles from Al-Jazeera or Arab sources).
    Look, I could go on and veer this topic into the manufacturing of consent, and the propaganda model, and why the sources and ownership of the media can be problematic, but that really is not the crux of the discussion. It is peripheral to my point that certain "facts" you (have taken) take for granted must be evaluated before it can be used to make a point, that aims to be impartial.

    Also, if you don't care what Israel is trying to accomplish, I daresay that accusations of willful bias against me ring a little hollow.....both sides (or at least the people both sides fight on behalf for) have legitimate interests in this conflict in general, and during this flare-up in particular.
    I think you are reading my reply as quite one-sided. You're equating my not agreeing with Israel to mean that I must naturally then agree with Hamas, and discount everything that Israel is doing. That is not so. My point was that what Israel is trying to accomplish and what they're presenting to the world, in terms of what they're trying to accomplish, are (1) not transparent and consistent, (2) not altogether kosher, (3) not just about protecting themselves. They have vested interest in this conflict, this war, far beyond simply trying to stay safe. And, yes, so does Hamas, but you and I are both in agreement about this. I don't need to parrot our agreement, which I've already said in my previous response, that Hamas has its own political gains in mind more so than the safety of its citizens.

    What I questioned was your repeated assertion that Israel has no other choice, and that what they're doing currently is the "only way"/is wholly justified, because they are the victim; it is merely self-defense (you didn't say it so blatantly, but that is what I am picking up from your responses). This is why I said that it seems like you're looking at this as quite black/white.

    The fact that Gaza is not a foreign entity (an independent state) from Israel, and now Israel is calling it a "hostile entity", on which it is waging war, but at the same time, because it is not an independent state, Israel still has monopoly, authority and control over Gaza, through trade blockades, its entry and exit points, its airspace, its water supplies, etc., etc., makes Israel's "woe is me" position a little hard to take. And flies directly in the face of international laws. When you hold people that are still technically your own citizens, prisoners of sorts, by quarantining them into a small piece of land, and then the crazies amongst them decide to revolt and attack you back, then sitting back on the excuse that your "clean hands" are getting attacked, so you must attack back to defend yourself, seems hollow.

    How would you suggest that Israel effectively protect itself from Hamas, with less collateral damage? I can think of many ways the Palestinians can pursue independence and freedom of movement in absence of terrorism against civilians or the ideological commitment to Israel's destruction (as contained in the Hamas charter).
    Sure, defend yourself against the attack, but don't twist your involvement in why the attacks escalated to what it did. And, if you continue to minimize, justify, skew your own involvement in this, then, all you will continue to do is defend against hate and attack. Forget peace.

    As for asking me if I know of perfect solutions to this Israel-Gaza conflict, that will minimize the civilian deaths collateral damanges, I'm sorry to disappoint you but I do not have an answer. And if I did, I wouldn't be typing on a TypeC forum about it.

    But, please, if you have the answers, enlighten me on some of the ways that Palestinians can pursue independence and freedom, without completely submitting to Israel's terms? You seem like you have the answers to this conflict. Would love to hear it. Maybe we can submit them to the leaders? Imagine! Gaza-Israel conflict, resolved on TypeC!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    John Kerry agrees with you. He took this viewpoint to the Paris negotiations. Israel was treated as if it were on equal terms with Hamas. Therefore the negotiations failed. If you want to succeed in bringing a temporary peace, then stop equating non-terrorists with terrorists.

    Krauthammer: Kerry 'Undermined' Israel-Hamas Peace Efforts
    'U.S. meddling in Israeli-Hamas negotiations has sewn "wreckage" in attempts to end the murderous conflict, according to Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer, who points the finger of blame directly at Secretary of State John Kerry...Kerry goes over and then he negotiates in Paris with who? Qatar and Turkey, and returns essentially as the lawyer for Hamas and hands Israel a proposition that is so outrageous that the Cabinet votes 19-0 against it.

    "Israeli Cabinets have never voted 19-0 on whether the sun rises in the east. It was unbelievable. It would have given Hamas all of its demands."'

    "A delegation of Palestinian officials, expected to include Hamas members, is to meet with Egyptian leaders in Cairo to discuss reviving a weeks-old ceasefire plan originally rejected by Hamas, news media in the region reported."

    News of the meeting, to be held without American interlocutors, comes as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is under fire for his eroding influence over the Gaza Strip conflict that has killed more than 1,100 Palestinians and 56 Israelis." This eroding influence is directly due to his failure to convince anybody using your non-black-and-white values.

    Open ridicule of secretary of state John Kerry as details emerge of rejected U.S. ceasefire plan | National Post
    'The Israeli media carried similarly mocking depictions in abundance Sunday — all fuelled by senior figures in Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, who professed amazement at the terms of a proposed ceasefire deal which they said were skewed in favour of Hamas, the Islamist militant group.

    Writing in Maariv, Ben Caspit called the U.S. Secretary of State “an ongoing embarrassment, with the characteristics of a snowball. The further he rolls, the greater the embarrassment”.'

    Your views ARE an embarrassment.
    Your usertitle is spot on! If what you gleaned from my response is that I'm taking Hamas' side/favouring them, then I really can't help you understand my meaning with any more clarity.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Your usertitle is spot on! If what you gleaned from my response is that I'm taking Hamas' side/favouring them, then I really can't help you understand my meaning with any more clarity.
    The mistake was not taking Hamas' side, but treating Hamas and Israel as morally equal. This should have been obvious in my links.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #45
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    What I questioned was your repeated assertion that Israel has no other choice, and that what they're doing currently is the "only way"/is wholly justified, because they are the victim; it is merely self-defense (you didn't say it so blatantly, but that is what I am picking up from your responses). This is why I said that it seems like you're looking at this as quite black/white.

    But, please, if you have the answers, enlighten me on some of the ways that Palestinians can pursue independence and freedom, without completely submitting to Israel's terms? You seem like you have the answers to this conflict. Would love to hear it. Maybe we can submit them to the leaders? Imagine! Gaza-Israel conflict, resolved on TypeC!!!
    They are victims in the sense that indiscriminate attacks are coming from Gaza, rather than targeted attacks aimed at specific grievances (for example, military troops manning checkpoints). And while Israel does have a history of using necessary defensive actions as cover for other goals*, most of these do not apply to Gaza; there are no more settlements, no major aquifers, and no point to attaining bargaining power for a permanent agreement with Hamas, who reject the very concept of permanent treaties with Israel. There is simply no other way to deprive Hamas of the military capacity to threaten Israeli civilians than thru targeted embargoes and military actions when necessary (such as to destroy the tunnel system).

    My ideas for alternate Palestinian methods are general rather than specific, as you may have guessed, but still better than terrorism; a combination of non-violent resistance toward Israel along with strategic attacks against actual military targets inside the West Bank and Gaza strip, like the aforementioned troops manning checkpoints or during military incursions (its entirely possible for both sides to have the right to defend themselves against the other at the same time).

    *settlements leading to 'facts on the ground'**, control and disproportionate allocation of water supplies, damage against Palestinian properties for apparently vindictive purposes (such as cutting down entire groves of olive trees rather than just trees alongside dangerous roads), deepening economic dependence for advantage, etc.).

    **some of which are actually understandable in light of the inability for Jews to safely live as minorities in Arab states, including former Jewish communities in the West Bank, in marked contrast to Palestinians living in Israel, but which is also frequently a manifestation of naked greed and opportunism, and sometimes delusional ideological fervor, on the part of Israelis, especially during the late 90's.*** If Jewish settlers could live safely as minorities in the West Bank I would have less of a tolerant attitude towards Israel keeping some of the settlements, but even so until the very last minute before the Oslo Accords broke down Israel was being extremely unreasonable in their demands and expectations. Sorry for the tangent, its easy to get sidetracked by the moral and political complexity on things surrounding this issue.

    ***Sorry for this other tangent, but this is not to say delusional ideological fervor is completely lacking in Israel now, but it mostly seems to have morphed from keeping a substantial portion of the occupied territories into thoughts of a 'population transfer' involving Israeli Arabs among extremist elements within Israel.

  6. #46
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Your Islamophobia is extraordinarily tiring.
    The accusation of Islamophobia is an direct attack on free speech.

    Free speech forms the basis of liberal democracy and human rights.

    And liberal democracy and human rights have been openly and publicly rejected by the 57 Islamic nations of the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation (OIC) in the United Nations in favour of Sharia. And the OIC have passed a resolution in the United Nations to criminalise free speech.

    Fortunately we enjoy free speech on Typology Central and we are not oppressed by Sharia.

  7. #47
    Senior Member Forever_Jung's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    2,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    Your Islamophobia is extraordinarily tiring.
    I dunno, I thought he made a good point. How was it Islamophobic? Shouldn't religious people be more concerned with the core teachings and values of their religion, rather than the petty, minor aspects of dogma and tradition? While I think all religions should learn that lesson, it seems Islam needs it the most (lately).

  8. #48
    Glamour puss with a tan Raffaella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    I dunno, I thought he made a good point. How was it Islamophobic? Shouldn't religious people be more concerned with the core teachings and values of their religion, rather than the petty, minor aspects of dogma and tradition? While I think all religions should learn that lesson, it seems Islam needs it the most (lately).
    tbh, I don't see the purpose of his point. This thread is about unjustified Palestinians deaths not muslim traditions or whatever. It's just deflection to me. Just start another thread 'cause Palestinians aren't just muslims, there are plenty of Christians you don't hear about.

    Edit: 72 hour ceasefire!
    Night is another candle

  9. #49
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    I've got nothing but nuance in terms of this particular issue. I've always had a lot of trouble drawing any conclusions at all- it's so complex with so many moving parts. I sympathize with both "sides" and I think both "sides" have committed atrocities. And of course there aren't just two "sides"; the "sides" are made up of disparate groups that don't agree or approve or even understand everything the other groups on their "side" are doing.

    Basically, I'm stumped.
    Boring. What if I want to feel self-righteous about a complex geopolitical issue? How does your precious "nuance" help with that?

    My analysis of the situation:

    Shit looks real bad over there.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 370
    Last Post: 02-07-2016, 09:54 PM
  2. You're on an island. With a television.
    By disregard in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: 05-02-2012, 01:40 AM
  3. INFJ James Jay Lee Discovery hostage taker with bomb
    By Guava in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-26-2010, 05:07 PM
  4. Buddhist "Mindfulness" -- Compatible with Ti?
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-13-2007, 10:25 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