So if you try to kill a cop in the name of Islam....it is not influenced by Islam

[Subyman]

I think the issue is that the media and a lot of people like to use these incidents as fuel for their Islamic outrage engine. Fox News had the image with the man shooting into the car with the words over the image saying, "Man unsuccessfully tried to execute cop" and then under that in HUGE block typeface "IN THE NAME OF ISLAM."

The media knows what they are doing when they create imagery in that way. Fox shows what is more important for them to portray, not that there was attempted murder of a cop in broad day light, but what the assailant's religion was. I wouldn't be surprised to see them change the font to red and make it flash, like a matador's cape. It is sad to see the media almost revel in these stories and try to stitch together a greater narrative by constantly bombarding us with every act and then an "analysis."

There may very well be issues within the Islamic community that can be identified and approached, but stoking a rage furnace only creates anger and colors everything we see. Ever since we killed the last wolf, we've perfected the art of creating our own monsters (this is for both sides.)

 

[nickqt]

Are you truly that stupid?

The guy flat out said after attempting to kill the man:




I mean, seriously? You're that dense?

Step 1: Be a moron.
Step 2: Seek fame.
Step 3: Do stupid stuff.
Step 4: Claim to do something on behalf of something else that is famous.
Step 5: Right-wingers shit the bed just a little bit harder before hiding in their closets because of the Mooselman threat.

 

[realibrad]

Are you seriously saying that the growth of terrorism in Muslim areas has nothing to do with our involvement in those countries? I don't suppose you would call the military destruction of Iraq terrorism, would you, or that the MOAB is anything other than just a kiss on the cheek.

I have yet to attribute cause in this thread, but no, I would not dismiss western actions as part of the things we see.

I would not call the destruction of Iraq during the war terrorism, but that is a much much longer story about the military industrial complex getting its way and making massive amounts of money.

 

[realibrad]

I think the issue is that the media and a lot of people like to use these incidents as fuel for their Islamic outrage engine. Fox News had the image with the man shooting into the car with the words over the image saying, "Man unsuccessfully tried to execute cop" and then under that in HUGE block typeface "IN THE NAME OF ISLAM."

The media knows what they are doing when they create imagery in that way. Fox shows what is more important for them to portray, not that there was attempted murder of a cop in broad day light, but what the assailant's religion was. I wouldn't be surprised to see them change the font to red and make it flash, like a matador's cape. It is sad to see the media almost revel in these stories and try to stitch together a greater narrative by constantly bombarding us with every act and then an "analysis."

There may very well be issues within the Islamic community that can be identified and approached, but stoking a rage furnace only creates anger and colors everything we see. Ever since we killed the last wolf, we've perfected the art of creating our own monsters (this is for both sides.)

First, let me say that I agree that our media is out to get ratings and has little concern for news reporting as we knew it 30+ years ago. The media is now entertainment and they are just giving people what they want though.

Correct me if I am not understanding you, but it seems like you are saying that people cannot handle the truth because they are too stupid and or weak to deal with reality.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Every rape and every shooting, followed by pious lecturing that it "has nothing to do with Islam" is, for better or worse, another slew of votes for Trump.

 

[Subyman]

First, let me say that I agree that our media is out to get ratings and has little concern for news reporting as we knew it 30+ years ago. The media is now entertainment and they are just giving people what they want though.

Correct me if I am not understanding you, but it seems like you are saying that people cannot handle the truth because they are too stupid and or weak to deal with reality.

I think people create external conflicts so they can ignore the self. I'm not saying there isn't a some threat by radical terrorists. There obviously is, but the perceived threat by those needing something to rally against is disproportionate to the actual threat. Some media outlets feed that void.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

I think people create external conflicts so they can ignore the self. I'm not saying there isn't a some threat by radical terrorists. There obviously is, but the perceived threat by those needing something to rally against is disproportionate to the actual threat. Some media outlets feed that void.

What are the internal conflicts they want to ignore?

 

[nickqt]

I think people create external conflicts so they can ignore the self. I'm not saying there isn't a some threat by radical terrorists. There obviously is, but the perceived threat by those needing something to rally against is disproportionate to the actual threat. Some media outlets feed that void.

If conservatives are always afraid of "others" who are going to kill everyone and destroy the country, and the media is always covering the "others" and making the threat of the "others" much more dire than it actually is, then isn't the media conservative?

Just kidding! Massive corporations that own the media and are part and parcel of the military industrial complex and highly invested in empire and foreign infrastructure destruction are clearly liberal biased, because, like, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly shit it into my skull every day on the radio and television.

Nevermind, y'all. Just an irrelevant brainfart!

 

[Subyman]

What are the internal conflicts they want to ignore?

That's the greatest question man faces.

 

[raildogg]

That's the greatest question man faces.

And among the toughest.

 

[Moonbeam]

Yes, things might be worth dying for. What I was getting at was "Who benefits from these attacks?"

The attacks we have seen over the years seem to not really help the cause of these so-called terrorists. However, it always seems to help in one way or another the politicians who exploit them for their gain. Or replace the word politician with corporate interests, media, etc.

You are correct. I am making assumptions based on my opinions and experiences. Every other person will look at it totally differently.

And I did not mean that life is more important than ideas. I was trying to say that when people do stuff, they do it for their own interests first in that moment. The religion might have some relevance but not entirely. This basic selfishness of humans must never be ignored. It comes before anything else.

That is an unsophisticated way to look at selfishness in my opinion. Everything people do can be reduced to the notion they do it for selfish reasons, but that tells us nothing at all about the value of what they believe. A man, say who stops a bullet for his wife or child, does it for selfish reasons because he values their life above his own. It's silly, I think, to refer acts of self sacrifice to selfishness because it just doesn't tell us anything. When you meld selfishness to conscious awareness of what real good is, you get actions that are greater than selfishness can ever explain. You don't know it, but there is the self of the ego and the self that is the image of God and their actions represent two different kinds of selfishness.

 

[Blanky]

So this "not a real muslim" according to the mayor of philly is in fact a "devout muslim", "a pious man who began expressing interest in Islam in his teenage years and devoted his life to religion. He participated in a local Muslim football league"..."Video of the attack shows a man in a long robe similar to the traditional dishdasha, or thobe, often worn by Muslim men in parts of the Middle East"..."She said that while Archer was "exceptionally knowledgeable" about Islam, there may have been an "overload" of information that led him to become radicalized."

Apparently he went full retard after a trip to saudi arabia.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/shooter-p...-described-quiet-devout-muslim-044834349.html

Mayor's statement is downright Orwellian.

 

[Blanky]

Step 1: Be a moron.
Step 2: Seek fame.
Step 3: Do stupid stuff.
Step 4: Claim to do something on behalf of something else that is famous.
Step 5: Right-wingers shit the bed just a little bit harder before hiding in their closets because of the Mooselman threat.

In light of not only obvious reality but the last post I made I'm quoting this one so that your mental retardation can be on display forever.

 

[nickqt]

In light of not only obvious reality but the last post I made I'm quoting this one so that your mental retardation can be on display forever.

Quick, Mosselmans are comin' to get ya.

Shit the bed and go hide in a closet!

 

[Moonbeam]

I have yet to attribute cause in this thread, but no, I would not dismiss western actions as part of the things we see.

I would not call the destruction of Iraq during the war terrorism, but that is a much much longer story about the military industrial complex getting its way and making massive amounts of money.

So you would call it something perhaps even more despicable then terrorism, genocide for profit, maybe. Just imagine a nation of great power destroying smaller countries so as to steal their oil. I wouldn't expect any terrorism form that if it happened to us, just a patriotic armed insurrection.

 

[Blanky]

Quick, Mosselmans are comin' to get ya.

Shit the bed and go hide in a closet!

In other words "You just owned the fuck out of me but I didn't like it, so I'll say something irrelevant instead."

 

[nickqt]

In other words "You just owned the fuck out of me but I didn't like it, so I'll say something irrelevant instead."

Oh, yes, you owned me, clearly, since all you have is being scared, shitless (because you shit the bed like a good conservative) about them Mooselmans a'comin' to getcha!

Run! Hide! Figure out a final solution to the Mooselman question!

Also: Benghazi.

 

[realibrad]

I think people create external conflicts so they can ignore the self. I'm not saying there isn't a some threat by radical terrorists. There obviously is, but the perceived threat by those needing something to rally against is disproportionate to the actual threat. Some media outlets feed that void.

Totally agree with that.

 

[raildogg]

So this "not a real muslim" according to the mayor of philly is in fact a "devout muslim", "a pious man who began expressing interest in Islam in his teenage years and devoted his life to religion. He participated in a local Muslim football league"..."Video of the attack shows a man in a long robe similar to the traditional dishdasha, or thobe, often worn by Muslim men in parts of the Middle East"..."She said that while Archer was "exceptionally knowledgeable" about Islam, there may have been an "overload" of information that led him to become radicalized."

Apparently he went full retard after a trip to saudi arabia.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/shooter-p...-described-quiet-devout-muslim-044834349.html

Mayor's statement is downright Orwellian.

Ok, so a "devout" Muslim does what? Prays a certain number of times? Goes to a Mosque regularly? Dresses a certain way? Goes to Saudi Arabia?

Is this the definition of a so-called "devout" Muslim?

What about checking the man's values ... his heart, his way of conduct, his mental capacity? Aren't these attributes much more valuable to know whether a person is really "devout" or is just devout externally?

Anyone can go to a Mosque and wear a certain dress. I really, really doubt anyone is truly "devout" in the real sense of the word. You can tell about a person by his conduct. What this guy did is anything but religious.

So here we are, calling a man who wears a certain dress a "Devout Muslim." A killer that we choose to call a Muslim. Tell me that doesn't create friction among people. People are already looking for reasons to hate another groups; this just fuels the fire.

But hey, we can throw words around all day.

 

[Vic]

Every rape and every shooting, followed by pious lecturing that it "has nothing to do with Islam" is, for better or worse, another slew of votes for Trump.

Who said it has nothing to do with Islam? What people are saying is that these acts are not representative of the entirety of Islam, anymore so than a similar act by a Christian (of which there are many) is representative of the entirety of Christianity.

As for Trump, I think he's doing some good things for America. For one thing, now that he's encouraged the dark underbelly of fundamentalist Christianity to expose itself on social media, more and more liberals are turning against gun control, and buying guns.

 

[Vic]

I think people create external conflicts so they can ignore the self. I'm not saying there isn't a some threat by radical terrorists. There obviously is, but the perceived threat by those needing something to rally against is disproportionate to the actual threat. Some media outlets feed that void.

This.

Although I believe it applies on a greater level as well. Our country currently faces many internal threats which we are ignoring.

 

[realibrad]

So you would call it something perhaps even more despicable then terrorism, genocide for profit, maybe. Just imagine a nation of great power destroying smaller countries so as to steal their oil. I wouldn't expect any terrorism form that if it happened to us, just a patriotic armed insurrection.

I would not even call it genocide. They are not doing it to rid the world of "those" people. I think they care about money and don't care about how they get it. It's like the saying "don't shit where you eat".

Now, the 2nd part I disagree with. Almost every country has dealt with the powerful forcing their will on the weak. You even see terrorist activities from it. What we are seeing today in the Arab world is very different.

Also, violence in that region is not new. The Mongols ran into issues. Hell, even Hitler thought the Arabs would be his warrior class because of how quick they were to fight.

 

[Vic]

Ok, so a "devout" Muslim does what? Prays a certain number of times? Goes to a Mosque regularly? Dresses a certain way? Goes to Saudi Arabia?

Is this the definition of a so-called "devout" Muslim?

What about checking the man's values ... his heart, his way of conduct, his mental capacity? Aren't these attributes much more valuable to know whether a person is really "devout" or is just devout externally?

Anyone can go to a Mosque and wear a certain dress. I really, really doubt anyone is truly "devout" in the real sense of the word. You can tell about a person by his conduct. What this guy did is anything but religious.

So here we are, calling a man who wears a certain dress a "Devout Muslim." A killer that we choose to call a Muslim. Tell me that doesn't create friction among people. People are already looking for reasons to hate another groups; this just fuels the fire.

But hey, we can throw words around all day.

A devout fundamentalist Christian, who attended his church every Sunday and was active in other ways, shot up a UPS facility in Alabama in September 2014, killing 4 people.
The media barely mentioned his religious affiliation, the RWNJs were not outraged, and no politicians called for draconian measures until we can figure out what's going on.

 

[Subyman]

This.

Although I believe it applies on a greater level as well. Our country currently faces many internal threats which we are ignoring.

That is a great point. Collective consciousness is a very real thing.

 

[BoberFett]

Yeah yeah, we know your rhetoric already. "All Muslims, blacks, gays, liberals, etc are killers," which is why you need to kill them first. It's the dark cabal of the "International Muslim" and Obummer is their leader!

Is there massive brain trauma in your recent past Vic? You clearly aren't well.