More protests getting out of hand in Berkeley

[Orignal Earl]

Liberals seem to think that any concern about Islam is demonization. Any desire to impose limits is bigotry. They seem completely incapable of cultural analysis of the Islamic world, and only view it through rose-colored glasses, seeing only the nice things that they want to see.

My uncle just got back from Iraq a couple weeks ago
His view of the Islamic world is different from you and Max's

 

[shortylickens]

Liberals seem to think that any concern about Islam is demonization. Any desire to impose limits is bigotry. They seem completely incapable of cultural analysis of the Islamic world, and only view it through rose-colored glasses, seeing only the nice things that they want to see.

Could you please show me where they think that?
Any evidence would be nice, really.

 

[Commodus]

That is their center. Black suffering. They extrapolate black suffering to every group under the sun, from LGBT to Muslims. What did you expect?

You misunderstand. He does have a point: we have a tremendous hypocrisy when we deem someone else's entire religion to be evil because of the actions of its extremists, but willingly turn a blind eye to terrorism committed in the name of our 'native' religion. If you're going to label that broadly (which you shouldn't), be consistent.

The issue is that he's going for shock value. We all know lynchings are horrible; you don't need to show real examples to remind people of that.

 

[Jhhnn]

Not to mention corporate taxes are less than half of those in the USA. Having said that, the claim that blue 'wouldn't make it' in the US is absurd. The pay is higher in Canadia, buy so is the cost of living. The 'make-it-ability' of a person is completely dependent on the person, not the place, when speaking of Canukistan vs USSA.

That bit about Canadian corporate taxes is highly inaccurate. It's only the efforts of the previous Conservative govt that made them as low as they are-

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/corporate-tax-rate

 

[Commodus]

Liberals seem to think that any concern about Islam is demonization. Any desire to impose limits is bigotry. They seem completely incapable of cultural analysis of the Islamic world, and only view it through rose-colored glasses, seeing only the nice things that they want to see.

But that's not true. Many of us ultimately want Muslims to have social freedoms, and know that there are practices that don't have a place in our society (such as genital mutilation or arranged marriages). However, the issue is when people decide that "limits" effectively involve banning the religion itself, whether it's basic practices or immigrating from a predominantly Muslim country. Do make sure that women who want to remove the hijab feel comfortable doing so; don't force them to take it off. Do make sure that a Syrian refugee isn't harboring extreme ideologies; don't ban all Muslim refugees, or demand that Muslim people turn over their social network passwords just because they've entered the country.

If you believe that someone deserves less freedom of expression, less freedom of movement and less privacy simply because of their religion, you're betraying everything the US stands for.

 

[desura]

But that's not true. Many of us ultimately want Muslims to have social freedoms, and know that there are practices that don't have a place in our society (such as genital mutilation or arranged marriages). However, the issue is when people decide that "limits" effectively involve banning the religion itself, whether it's basic practices or immigrating from a predominantly Muslim country. Do make sure that women who want to remove the hijab feel comfortable doing so; don't force them to take it off. Do make sure that a Syrian refugee isn't harboring extreme ideologies; don't ban all Muslim refugees, or demand that Muslim people turn over their social network passwords just because they've entered the country.

If you believe that someone deserves less freedom of expression, less freedom of movement and less privacy simply because of their religion, you're betraying everything the US stands for.

There is only so far that you can peer into someone's soul and so far you can get. There has in fact been a demonstrated history of Muslim individuals acting organically against this country and its people. Beyond that, this country is intractable intertwined with Israel, and for the foreseeable future it will not be having a more normal relationship. Which means that you have to pick a side, and cannot have it both ways. The side has been picked, since 1948.

France is an extreme case which no one should want. You throw up numerous straw men, as if anyone has ever proposed a hijab law in the USA. You also demonstrate that you are not willing to do any thorough vetting with this social media remark. Choices like this show an unseriousness about vetting, and lean on traditional American cultural fears.

I'm sure there are good Muslim candidates for emigration to the USA. But, frankly, Syed Farook's family should never have been allowed to set foot in the United States. They brought no special skills, and only brought horrible destruction to the lives of 14 people in San Bernardino.

 

[Commodus]

There is only so far that you can peer into someone's soul and so far you can get. There has in fact been a demonstrated history of Muslim individuals acting organically against this country and its people. Beyond that, this country is intractable intertwined with Israel, and for the foreseeable future it will not be having a more normal relationship. Which means that you have to pick a side, and cannot have it both ways. The side has been picked, since 1948.

France is an extreme case which no one should want. You throw up numerous straw men, as if anyone has ever proposed a hijab law in the USA. You also demonstrate that you are not willing to do any thorough vetting with this social media remark. Choices like this show an unseriousness about vetting, and lean on traditional American cultural fears.

I'm sure there are good Muslim candidates for emigration to the USA. But, frankly, Syed Farook's family should never have been allowed to set foot in the United States. They brought no special skills, and only brought horrible destruction to the lives of 14 people in San Bernardino.

No, I don't have to pick a side. Cowards reduce things to an us-versus-them mentality; brave people acknowledge the complex nature of the world and that there are no easy answers.

And hey, hello, it's not a straw man when the Trump administration has tried to implement an unconstitutional anti-Muslim ban twice, and encourages security officials to invade the privacy of travellers simply due to their names and skin colors. This is a man who said he would strip the civil rights of people caught burning the flag if he could. Sure, Trump isn't banning hijabs or Qu'rans, but is that because he doesn't want to, or because even he knows that these bans would be shot down in court?

Also, it's entirely possible to be serious about vetting without insisting that people expose their entire digital lives simply because of their religion. Focus on people who are high-risk. Try to find evidence from public sources first before resorting to demanding logins. And it's definitely not vetting when you order someone to hand over their Facebook password simply because they're brown and have a foreign-sounding name. That's by far my biggest issue with the Trump administration and those who support its anti-Islam policies -- their mindset is that merely being Muslim means you "deserve" reduced freedoms.

 

[Jhhnn]

There is only so far that you can peer into someone's soul and so far you can get. There has in fact been a demonstrated history of Muslim individuals acting organically against this country and its people. Beyond that, this country is intractable intertwined with Israel, and for the foreseeable future it will not be having a more normal relationship. Which means that you have to pick a side, and cannot have it both ways. The side has been picked, since 1948.

France is an extreme case which no one should want. You throw up numerous straw men, as if anyone has ever proposed a hijab law in the USA. You also demonstrate that you are not willing to do any thorough vetting with this social media remark. Choices like this show an unseriousness about vetting, and lean on traditional American cultural fears.

I'm sure there are good Muslim candidates for emigration to the USA. But, frankly, Syed Farook's family should never have been allowed to set foot in the United States. They brought no special skills, and only brought horrible destruction to the lives of 14 people in San Bernardino.

Heh. Fayood's Wiki page mentions this-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Ysidro_McDonald's_massacre

Had he not lost it completely he'd probably have been in Berkeley...

 

[desura]

No, I don't have to pick a side. Cowards reduce things to an us-versus-them mentality; brave people acknowledge the complex nature of the world and that there are no easy answers.

And hey, hello, it's not a straw man when the Trump administration has tried to implement an unconstitutional anti-Muslim ban twice, and encourages security officials to invade the privacy of travellers simply due to their names and skin colors. This is a man who said he would strip the civil rights of people caught burning the flag if he could. Sure, Trump isn't banning hijabs or Qu'rans, but is that because he doesn't want to, or because even he knows that these bans would be shot down in court?

Also, it's entirely possible to be serious about vetting without insisting that people expose their entire digital lives simply because of their religion. Focus on people who are high-risk. Try to find evidence from public sources first before resorting to demanding logins. And it's definitely not vetting when you order someone to hand over their Facebook password simply because they're brown and have a foreign-sounding name. That's by far my biggest issue with the Trump administration and those who support its anti-Islam policies -- their mindset is that merely being Muslim means you "deserve" reduced freedoms.

Trump doesn't want to. He has proven himself very clumsy in handling the courts already so he is no master here. It is pointless to do these straw men, but statistics do show that the Muslim population is more of a risk than say the Hindu population.

yeah, Muslims are automatically suspect. If you actually look at the profile, the Muslims doing these terrorist attacks do so for ideological reasons tied in with their Muslim identity. They aren't doing so because poverty results in a breakdown of mental capacity which is the convenient fiction liberals so desperately want to believe. Many are capable and successful professionals who have prosperous careers and years of generous education. Especially in the case of Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, I believe they were gradually radicalized while in the USA and did not come in intending to do harm. But gradually, their Muslim identity took precedence.

There is a danger of retaliatory measures taken by other countries, which is the best argument against this social media measure,

And fools act like we can have it all and don't have to make tradeoffs or ignore the real anger that exists within the Muslim world against us. That is voodoo thinking.

If you ask the simple question of why isn't there Mexican terrorism against the USA, or Vietnamese terrorism, you come to realize that all of the excuses of dictatorships (as the neocons believed), or poverty as liberals believe, don't stack up. It goes deeper.

 

[stormkroe]

That bit about Canadian corporate taxes is highly inaccurate. It's only the efforts of the previous Conservative govt that made them as low as they are-

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/corporate-tax-rate

26.5% vs 38.9% and less than 30 for the last 7 years, per your own link, I currently pay 25% for my Alberta company (when I said half, I was only thinking about federal, which is 15%).
http://www.albertacanada.com/business/overview/competitive-corporate-taxes.aspx

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

Can someone else on the left please explain to me why you do not see Islam as an existential threat? It's everything that's wrong with Christianity except it hasn't had a 300+-year running beatdown via Enlightenment thought to make it behave. One reason I have trouble identifying as a leftist is this bizarre infatuation with Islam.

Islam is the precise opposite of what any liberal should stand for. All the Abrahamic religions are, really, but Jews are a tiny minority and Christians are tolerable if properly defanged.

Anyone?

 

[Jhhnn]

26.5% vs 38.9% and less than 30 for the last 7 years, per your own link, I currently pay 25% for my Alberta company (when I said half, I was only thinking about federal, which is 15%).
http://www.albertacanada.com/business/overview/competitive-corporate-taxes.aspx

The max rate is really immaterial in the US. What matters is the bottom line, what they actually pay after the lawyers & accounts get done with the numbers. In that, American Corporations aren't taxed nearly as much as right wing crocodile tears would suggest-

https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-corporate-tax-rates/

 

[Jhhnn]

Can someone else on the left please explain to me why you do not see Islam as an existential threat? It's everything that's wrong with Christianity except it hasn't had a 300+-year running beatdown via Enlightenment thought to make it behave. One reason I have trouble identifying as a leftist is this bizarre infatuation with Islam.

Islam is the precise opposite of what any liberal should stand for. All the Abrahamic religions are, really, but Jews are a tiny minority and Christians are tolerable if properly defanged.

Anyone?

Define exactly how Islam is an existential threat to the US. What could Muslims possibly do to topple our govt?

 

[desura]

Define exactly how Islam is an existential threat to the US. What could Muslims possibly do to topple our govt?

Fly airplanes into the Capitol building, the financial centers, and the military command centers.

Detonate an EMP device in the atmosphere, destroying electrical infrastructure

 

[Orignal Earl]

Define exactly how Islam is an existential threat to the US. What could Muslims possibly do to topple our govt?

They could get a hold of the pee pee videos and release them

 

[Jhhnn]

Fly airplanes into the Capitol building, the financial centers, and the military command centers.

Detonate an EMP device in the atmosphere, destroying electrical infrastructure

That's not an existential threat or a very real one, either. Explain how a religion can have nuclear weapons while you're at it.

 

[Blue_Max]

Define exactly how Islam is an existential threat to the US. What could Muslims possibly do to topple our govt?

Ask Germany, Sweden, maybe France and England too. They might have a few ideas about that...

 

[HamburgerBoy]

How sad. You know a man has lost all morality and humanity when they defend violent white supremacist pro-fascists and try to demonize those who stand against them.

And yes, the logical end to racism and fascism is violence. Both racism and fascism require the violent removal of human rights for individuals to come to fruition.

The only excuse is that they themselves are racist and fascist. There is no other explanation. And thus, they have no right or moral leg to stand on when people act violently against them, for their very ideology threatens whole peoples, races, religions and cultures with violence.

What ideologies don't have a logical end in violence? Not all take things to a logical end, sometimes a logical middle is good enough. See Japan and South Korea: racist societies, but they don't go around lynching minorities anymore, nor do they really show any indication that they soon will.

 

[mikeymikec]

Can someone else on the left please explain to me why you do not see Islam as an existential threat? It's everything that's wrong with Christianity except it hasn't had a 300+-year running beatdown via Enlightenment thought to make it behave. One reason I have trouble identifying as a leftist is this bizarre infatuation with Islam.

Islam is the precise opposite of what any liberal should stand for. All the Abrahamic religions are, really, but Jews are a tiny minority and Christians are tolerable if properly defanged.

Anyone?

Logically, if one sees a whole group of people as a threat based on the actions of less than 1% of them, then pretty much any sufficiently large group of people in humanity are a threat.

 

[trenchfoot]

So we go traipsing into the Middle East creating havoc, despair, agony, countless deaths, upheaval and all sorts of other mayhem and then condemn their religion for being the cause of a terrorist threat that we in large part helped create?

Time for some self-reflection as to why our nation have a need to exert control over those nations in that area and how their religion is being exploited by all interested parties.

 

[ch33zw1z]

We've been fucking their shit up since the crusades. It's a real wonder why were hated.

 

[Grooveriding]

Can someone else on the left please explain to me why you do not see Islam as an existential threat? It's everything that's wrong with Christianity except it hasn't had a 300+-year running beatdown via Enlightenment thought to make it behave. One reason I have trouble identifying as a leftist is this bizarre infatuation with Islam.

Islam is the precise opposite of what any liberal should stand for. All the Abrahamic religions are, really, but Jews are a tiny minority and Christians are tolerable if properly defanged.

Anyone?

It's common sense based on observable realities. There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world - about 1 in 5 people on the face of the Earth. If it were anywhere near the threat the propagandized hiding under their beds alt-right believes it is, there would be a constant barrage of terrorism and attacks. They've been bombarded by propaganda and had their minds compromised for the past 15 years to be terrified of them. I went to school with Muslims, work with some, some of my neighbours are Muslim. Muslims immigrate into my country regularly. There are no notable issues due to any of them being there.

It's a propaganda talking point that the 'left' adores Islam, assuredly there are some overtly fanatical people who lean left that do think that way. The right and left certainly have their fanatics, but if you're discussing the right of America or alt-right trash, they are overwhelmingly more fanatical in their beliefs than the left of their nation. The irony is they have more in common with Islamic fanatics than anywhere else in the world, consider the fanatics of Islam are far right, just as the fanatics of Christianity who want to strip people of their rights due to their religious beliefs.

The reality is that there are profoundly irrational people in this world, susceptible to being converted and turned into dangerous lunatics. This is separate from religion or political ideology and a fundamental weakness of these people. Their religion is an avenue into their already fractured minds to turn them crazy and drive them to destructive behaviour. Religion is inherently irrational and the three current day religious myths are all based on the mythologies of Middle Eastern goat herders who lived anywhere from about 1500 (Islam) to 2000 (Christianity) to 2500 (Jewish) years ago. I think there should also be some simple exercises in empathy that are performed to try and understand why there is hatred from regions like Iraq towards the West. About 400,000 were murdered in the last Iraq war from the bombs being dropped and related carnage of that invasion. Imagine you are sitting in your home and suddenly a bomb rips through the roof and incinerates your spouse, or this happens to someone else close to you. How are you going to feel about the entity that dropped that bomb ? It's high time the aggressive arrogant foreign policy decisions to meddle in that part of the world are giving some considerations. It's not reasonable to expect to slaughter large numbers of people in a region and act surprised when they resent those doing the slaughter. It created a breeding ground for people that fanatics could recruit and use for terror. It's not an apology for those who choose to become violent and attack others in retribution. They are making that choice and it is their responsibility. But those acts of aggression are giving fanatics a basis of hate on which to indoctrinate and recruit with.

So when far right propaganda victims start in on their rants that the left loves Islam I just laugh it off. I abhor all religion. It is a cancer on society and the current day Abrahamic myths should have been relegated to the dustbin of historical myths like the Greek mythological religions and Pagan myths that came before them. What I don't have time for is ostracizing or demonizing people because of their susceptibility to fairy tales about being able to escape death or that they are the chosen of some invisible deity that is spying on their every daily action and thought. They have the right to believe what they want, regardless of how foolish. You can look at some of the posts in this thread and see the fearful propagandized bed wetters that advocate taking away basic human rights from Muslims and treating them as subhuman. That is where I have my issue. Christianity is not under an attack of human rights in the West, whereas Islam is. So I have no issue speaking out against these fearful assholes, even if I deplore the dogma of Islam as much as I do the other two major religion's dogma. It's a common trait among the religious to think they are better than the other faiths, just due to the difference of faith and believing their myth is better than the other's.

I agree that Islam has not been moderated like Christianity has. I believe this is because there are still nation based theocracies with governing laws based on the faith. But the evidence does not support the claim that 1 in 5 people on this Earth are fundamentally a danger because of some silly fairy tale they prescribe to. The actual violent acts and number of people involved is so minuscule compared to that 1.5 billion number that the argument holds no weight. Everything used to prop up that bullshit is innuendo and fear-mongering. The hard numbers are the proof that it's bullshit.

1 in 3 American Christians believe the bible is the literal truth. Even knowing that, when I'm in America I'm not afraid of my wife being raped or seeing babies slaughtered in their cribs as is advocated in the old testament, because it takes a leap beyond the religious dogma, requiring someone in a very small minority whose mind is broken to actually act on the bullshit found in the religious books of fables.

 

[desura]

We've been fucking their shit up since the crusades. It's a real wonder why were hated.

Pretty good reason to keep them out then. Sure, their anger is justified. They still mean harm, regardless.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Ask Germany, Sweden, maybe France and England too. They might have a few ideas about that...

How about Canada and Norway?
Should we start iceberging the alt right terrorists yet?

 

[Blue_Max]

We've been fucking their shit up since the crusades. It's a real wonder why were hated.

...of course, they did plenty before and after... compare the size and scale here: (Skip to 1:15 if you wanna' get right to the action.)

Sorry... the theory that it's OUR fault for "triggering" a response is false.