Dylan Ratigan: A most excellent rant on 'War with Islam'

[5-0 Kenpo]

No, it just seeems many people want thier cake and to eat it too. They don't want all Christians held to task for things such as the Crusades, the inquisition,

None of those people are alive today, so why should those Christians who are be "held to task".

abortion doctor killings, child abuse, etc.

And for everyone of those events you will see several million Christians say that the person was wrong, what they did was evil, does not represent what they believe.

When I ask for examples of the same from Muslims, I hear... crickets.

At the same time they want to paint 911 as an act supported by an entire religion.

See the differences listed above.

This is sometimes a question of simplicity and ignorance. Not everyone has time to become an expert on the Koran, the Hadith, the hundreds of cultures and their various interpretations of Islam. But perhaps, just maybe, if millions of Muslims would cry out and rage against the terrorism, then maybe it would be believed that this is something other then a religious act.

It really isn't difficult to understand why the hypocritical nature of this is being called out.

Not really hypocritical when the situations are different, and don't relate.

 

[Marginal]

It's funny people here are very quick to decry groups like the tea party as a whole, stating things like The Majority is responsible for the Racists because they do nothing about them at the rallies, or that Christians as a whole are idiots because a specific group of them believe there were no dinosaurs and that the earth is 6000 years old, but have nothing to say about the THOUSANDS of Muslims who stood in the streets celebrating, ululating, and cheering the fall of the towers we were presented images of on TV the day of 9-11.

THAT was clearly ok, for some reason.

Tail wagging the dog.

 

[Cryozombie]

Tail wagging the dog.

So Pithy and informative! Thanks for that stunning and intelligent response, it genuinely addressed the relevant points at hand, like so many of your posts.

I bow to your superiority.

 

[Empty Hands]

And for everyone of those events you will see several million Christians say that the person was wrong, what they did was evil, does not represent what they believe.

When I ask for examples of the same from Muslims, I hear... crickets.

That's a pathetic lie. It's even been exposed as a lie on this very board again and again, yet it continues to be repeated.

These pictures were taken at rallies by Muslims against terrorism in Muslim and mixed Muslim countries. If you haven't heard anything, it's because you are sticking your fingers in your ears.

 

[Big Don]

Three cheers for the subjugation of women! Oh, that wasn't your point? oops

 

[Empty Hands]

Three cheers for the subjugation of women! Oh, that wasn't your point? oops

Even more pathetic.

 

[Big Don]

Even more pathetic.

Yeah, because the women probably don't deserve equal rights anyways...

 

[Empty Hands]

Yeah, because the women probably don't deserve equal rights anyways...

Yep, you nailed it right on the head. And you aren't avoiding the issue even in the slightest! Nor are you desperately attempting to justify your own bigotry by changing the topic!

Well done on not doing all of that.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

That's a pathetic lie. It's even been exposed as a lie on this very board again and again, yet it continues to be repeated.

These pictures were taken at rallies by Muslims against terrorism in Muslim and mixed Muslim countries. If you haven't heard anything, it's because you are sticking your fingers in your ears.

So am I a pathetic liar, or just ignorant. You can't have it both ways.

What's funny, you condescending, arrogant, self-righteous troll, is that I spent an entire thread asking for the type of info you post now, and instead of posting such and more, you sit there and thank the person with whom I was debating, contributing nothing.

No, it's only I phrase a statement a certain way, and until you have the chance at name calling do you speak up. You want to talk about pathetic. Why don't you go sooth your ego somewhere else, and stop doing it at my expense.

 

[Marginal]

So Pithy and informative! Thanks for that stunning and intelligent response, it genuinely addressed the relevant points at hand, like so many of your posts.

I bow to your superiority.

"They get to be pissy. We should get to be pissy too! At least we have valid reasons!" (Mainly their pissiness justifies it all apparently.)

This is a deep argument I'm supposed to treat as a valid point of high minded discussion?

 

[Ramirez]

Dude the Crusades were what 700-800 years ago? People have to stop using that old meme, it has nothing to do with todays situation. My examples were from the 20th-21st century, not from the 13th.

May as well blame the Romans for something while we are at it. My grandparents generation rounded up the Japanese and put them in camps. We have come a long way since then. How much more so since the 1200's??

okay, here is a more recent event committed by Christians....25,000 -30,000 Muslim men and boys massacred.


Srebrenic massacre


So do we lay the blame for this on all Christians?

I guess most of us can see that Christianity had nothing to do with it but ethnicity, politics and historical enmity did, so we can blame Serbs , not all Serbs and certainly not Christians.

 

[Big Don]

okay, here is a more recent event committed by Christians....25,000 -30,000 Muslim men and boys massacred.


Srebrenic massacre


So do we lay the blame for this on all Christians?

I guess most of us can see that Christianity had nothing to do with it but ethnicity, politics and historical enmity did, so we can blame Serbs , not all Serbs and certainly not Christians.

Your comparison is not apt. They didn't claim to be doing God's work.

 

[Ramirez]

Your comparison is not apt. They didn't claim to be doing God's work.

what difference does that make? They killed men and boys because they were Muslim, the religious aspect is just a cover for a deeper historical conflict, the same way Wahabism is a response to historical colonialism in countries where Islam was the dominant religion by countries where Christianity was the dominant religion.

Certainly I have to wonder where the Orthodox Catholic Church had to say while this was happening.

 

[Big Don]

what difference does that make? They killed men and boys because they were Muslim, the religious aspect is just a cover for a deeper historical conflict, the same way Wahabism is a response to historical colonialism in countries where Islam was the dominant religion by countries where Christianity was the dominant religion.

Certainly I have to wonder where the Orthodox Catholic Church had to say while this was happening.

The Whaabis clearly state their hatred for infidels...
You are comparing apples and wheel nuts

 

[Ramirez]

The Whaabis clearly state their hatred for infidels...

What, to murder 25,000-30,000 males, a good percentage of which were boys doesn't involve some hatred of Muslims? I would like to know then what the motivation was.

 

[Empty Hands]

What's funny, you condescending, arrogant, self-righteous troll...

I'm not the one acting the bigot, after my bigoted remarks are disproved again and again and again. If you want the ability to make moral judgments, it helps to act in a moral manner first.

 

[WC_lun]

I truly am in awe of how time and again holes are poked in arguements based upon broad generalizations, stereotypes, and just plain old bigotry, yet the response is that our examples and reasoning aren't as valid as thiers. It boggles the mind.

It also amazes me to see how often conservatives are taking the victim role, then I notice how often they post with attacks on progressives. How many threads have you seen started in the last three months by progrssives attacking the right compared to the other way around? its telling.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I'm not the one acting the bigot, after my bigoted remarks are disproved again and again and again. If you want the ability to make moral judgments, it helps to act in a moral manner first.

You're making the assumption that your "arguments" disprove other positions. Sorry to bruise your ego, but sometimes they don't. That does not give you the right to condescend to people who still disagree with you . Not only that, but when you do posit your argumenjt, you do so in a prissy, holier-then-thou attitude which is completely unnecessary.

BTW, posting pictures and saying where they come from rather then giving the actual source is scant, weak evidence. Those pictures could mean several different things given an open ended context, for which you suggest we all just take your word. I don't think so.

What does this picture mean:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Bellamy_salute_1.jpg

If I were to simply post this pick and say that these kids were being indoctrinated into Nazism, without any context, could you realistically refute me? Or would it help if I also gave you this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute

And, I am not a bigot:

a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
Websters

There are many creeds, beliefs and opinions for which I am tolerant. Quite the contrary, you seem to be the one who is bigoted against opinions which differ from yours, as evidenced by your attitude.

What I also don't understand is how asking questions, and stating the information I have available to me is somehow bigoted.

 

[Empty Hands]

Not only that, but when you do posit your argumenjt, you do so in a prissy, holier-then-thou attitude which is completely unnecessary.

Bigots deserve contempt.

BTW, posting pictures and saying where they come from rather then giving the actual source is scant, weak evidence.

This is part of what makes you a bigot. The very first search I tried in Google, "muslims against terrorism", returned many hits, including those pictures. Yet you decided that the Muslim world was silent in the face of terrorism without even bothering to do a simple search first!

How could I not hold someone in contempt who won't do even the bare minimum of looking before holding 1.3 billion people complicit? How can such a person be anything but willfully ignorant if they won't even bother to confirm their prejudices first?

And, I am not a bigot:

Now you've gone from the realm of bigotry to out and out stupidity. So you must be intolerant of all differing creeds to be a bigot? So if I only hate Catholics, I'm not a bigot? If I only hate Jews, I'm not a bigot? If I only hate blacks, I'm not a bigot?

You honestly think I shouldn't be condescending in the face of such pathetic arguments?

Quite the contrary, you seem to be the one who is bigoted against opinions which differ from yours, as evidenced by your attitude.

Oh, yes, the usual defense. It's not the person judging all Muslims in the world as complicit and silent in the face of terrorism without even bothering to check who is intolerant; it's the person holding them to account who is the real intolerant bigot. What a shameful claim to make. If you actually believed this nonsense, then you would have to claim that those who hold Nazis in contempt are the truly intolerant. That those who hold racists and thugs in contempt are the truly intolerant. Somehow I doubt your attitude extends so far. It's only those who question your actions and motives who are the "real bigots."

What I also don't understand is how asking questions, and stating the information I have available to me is somehow bigoted.

'
Because you have made no effort to find out the real information before making your conclusions that impugn the character of 1.3 billion people. That information is very easy to find, and to boot has been presented in this forum many times. Yet you chose to ignore all that information, not bother to do any checking on your own, and decided that the Muslim world is silent in the face of terror.

When you make negative conclusions about a group of people against all evidence and reason, without even trying to find out if your conclusions are true, that makes you a bigot!