An alternate take on the Charlie Hebdo attacks

[cabri]

Massively long ...'s and numerous !'s work against the point you are trying to make.

Why not back up what you have to say with links to legitimate, eyes on the ground, news sources along with thoughtful commentary regarding direct descriptions?

The problem with facts is how they are interpreted and reported.

 

[inachu]

Someone says if you post here again, they'll kill you. If you do and they do, it's your fault.

My point was more to avail ones self to respect.

Lacking respect. Lets take that small child at school who always has a big mouth. Yes sure he has all the rights in the world to shoot off his mouth.

So now that little kid now bumps into the school bully.

Now before the attacks happend then the newspaper was the bully and not the shooter.
So now the bully(newspaper) becomes the victim because they did not respect.

So now freedom lovers want perversion of speech in all its grand various forms be it anything. Living to the standard of "Sticks and stone may break bones but words may never harm me."

Well that false sense of security of spouting off and you think the bully is not around.

You can and do spout out all you want and I support your right to do it but sometimes it takes a moment of conscience thought.... perhaps deep thought. Is poking the lion/poison ivy this much really a good thing?

If you fall in the pig pen and get all dirty then do not complain to me.

 

[inachu]

You must think that someone like Mossad also planned 9/11.

No but they did dance in joy as they fell and they were arrested and they did instantly leave for Israel.

 

[inachu]

This is horrendously incorrect. Ivy has no human agency, no choice about whom it harms: human beings do.

If they don't then the conclusion to be draw is NOT don't touch the ivy, it's destroy all the ivy as it is a blight upon the earth.

GET IT?

Destroy Islam it is the blight of the earth. Hmmm.... Many neocons say that very thing every day.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Destroy Islam it is the blight of the earth. Hmmm.... Many neocons say that very thing every day.

Ever had poison Ivy in your yard? You don't leave it there, you get rid of every last bit of it.

Inachu: it is you who are saying they are an uncontrollable blight on the earth; people who have neither human agency nor a conscience. If that's the case then the conclusion is clear.

On the other hand if they are humans who can make choices then their making the choice to kill someone should never be the expected outcome and individuals who do such things are criminals. Conspiracies to do such things should be thwarted. And the general freedom of individual expression should not be curtailed because of these criminals.

It is your "they are all the same, they can't control themselves" logic that is the basis of neocon policy.

 

[Black Octagon]

DixyCat: explain why 'poison ivy' is an apt metaphor for Islam or start expressing yourself in real English. ANYONE could accept that statement solely by associating poison ivy with the thing they don't like. That doesn't mean that the thing they don't like is truly akin to poison ivy. Flora does not, for instance, constitute human beings, with agency.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

DixyCat: explain why 'poison ivy' is an apt metaphor for Islam or start expressing yourself in real English..

It isn't! inachu came up with that de-humanizing condescending metaphor in order to blame the victims:

If you do not want Poison Ivy then do not touch the poison ivy.

I think the proper way to look at the situation is that the people who did this are are humans who can make choices. Further a person making the choice to kill someone should never be the expected response to something someone said. Therefore the individuals who kill in the name avenging offense against their God should be treated like criminals.

 

[Black Octagon]

It isn't! inachu came up with that de-humanizing condescending metaphor in order to blame the victims:





I think the proper way to look at the situation is that the people who did this are are humans who can make choices. Further a person making the choice to kill someone should never be the expected response to something someone said. Therefore the individuals who kill in the name avenging offense against their God should be treated like criminals.

Thanks. I FULLY agree with you. Holding individuals accountable is far superior to generalizing about an entire religion.