Suspects Shot Dead At $10K Muhammad Cartoon Contest

[Bonam]

No, I went to one of those weird schools which often had bullies who simply liked to pound on smaller kids. I guess by your measure and that of your socialist teacher the kid being picked on needed to be punished just as much as the one picking on him, huh?

Actually that is fairly typically the attitude of teachers. They do not distinguish between "who started it" or "who was the bully". They just punish everyone involved equally. And yes, that means the smaller kids get in just as much trouble as the bully. Been there, done that. Learned there and then that the system exists to maintain the status quo, not to address injustice.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Bonam

[Je suis Omar]

Apparently you either didnt read, or failed to understand what the link says. The US constitution applies to you if you are in the US.

In theory. The reality about the USA is always vastly different.

At other times, however, the U.S. position garners absolutely no legal supportand deserves none. On multiple occasions, the United States has joined a valid treaty, helped bring it into legal force, accepted the obliga- tions and the benefits that come with it, and then unarguably and ostenta- tiously violated the treaty. As detailed in the three cases below, the United States has a history of flatly breaching commitments and, when challenged, having nothing to assert in its defense.

http://www.fletcherforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Koplow_37-1.pdf

[On Guard for Thee]

In theory. The reality about the USA is always vastly different.

Well the glaring example of course is Gitmo. My point was to clarify what the law actually says, not fluctuations in its application.

Edited May 12, 2015 by On Guard for Thee

[Je suis Omar]

It's funny, you were spot on about the golf...

I was, wasn't I?

Care to address the other issue?

[Je suis Omar]

Well the glaring example of course is Gitmo.

Certainly important. It's 22 pages but it provides more proof of the oft denied reality that the USA is and has been the most vicious, violent, larcenous rogue nation on the planet.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Je suis Omar]

My point was to clarify what the law actually says, not fluctuations in its application.

Noted. I am aware of that.

I'm still very interested in hearing Shady's explanation.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[On Guard for Thee]

Noted. I am aware of that.

I'm still very interested in hearing Shady's explanation.

Obama, Im guessing.

[Guest]

I was, wasn't I?

Care to address the other issue?

"Islam is inherently more violent than other religions. This is the Supreme Islamophobic Myth."

That's up there with your 9/11 views.

[eyeball]

Actually that is fairly typically the attitude of teachers. They do not distinguish between "who started it" or "who was the bully". They just punish everyone involved equally. And yes, that means the smaller kids get in just as much trouble as the bully. Been there, done that. Learned there and then that the system exists to maintain the status quo, not to address injustice.

Hmm I must have lucked out. I had a teacher who taught us to speak up if we saw just that very thing happening He was Krishna biker sort of dude at the Rochdale Free School.

[Je suis Omar]

"Islam is inherently more violent than other religions. This is the Supreme Islamophobic Myth."

You missed the part that described the USA, a Christian nation, being at war for the vast majority of its existence. And 'war' is really a highly deceptive euphemism. They weren't wars, they were the equivalent of a band of the most vicious of pirates, who, had real pirates paid attention to USA predation, they may well have learned the true meaning of "rape and pillage".

That's up there with your 9/11 views.

Ouch!!

Not my views; you've forgotten to mention that those are the views of 2000 plus architects, engineers and scientists who have simply done what scientists do, follow the science.

[Je suis Omar]

"Islam is inherently more violent than other religions. This is the Supreme Islamophobic Myth."

You missed the part that described the USA, a Christian nation, being at war for the vast majority of its existence. And 'war' is really a highly deceptive euphemism. They weren't wars, they were the equivalent of a band of the most vicious of pirates, who, had real pirates paid attention to USA predation, they may well have learned the true meaning of "rape and pillage".

That's up there with your 9/11 views.

Ouch!!

Not my views; you've forgotten to mention that those are the views of 2000 plus architects, engineers and scientists who have simply done what scientists do, follow the science.

Sir Isaac Newton, do you remember him? set down some laws regarding physics that haven't been repealed yet. People believe the official story only because they don't know the official story.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Guest]

A double quote. I'm honourerd!

[sharkman]

I'm not defending anything. That's your problem. You can't seem to understand what it is people are arguing here. I'm providing an explanation as to why people might get violent. When you crap all over something people find sacred, they get incensed. I would give you an example, but you're not even willing to meet me halfway and be reasonable about this discussion. If you refuse to see how doing one of the most extremely offensive things to a person and crapping all over their culture and religion might incite them to violence, then I don't know what else to say to you. You just plainly refuse to understand it.

Okay. People get violent, and there must be an explanation, right? What you don't seem to be able to accept is that wanting to kill someone because they drew a picture of your holy man is not rational, regardless of what their religious laws say. For some reason you are unwilling to judge what it is they are getting murderous over. Of course there is an explanation as to why the muslim kook wants to kill you. But it's the mindset of a nutbar. So it doesn't matter what he's thinking. It's insanity. He wants to take a life because of a drawn picture. Surely you can see this. This same extremist wants to beat up your wife for wearing shorts in public. Why? Because she's a slut, of course. Are you able to process this? He wants to round up all gays and kill them too. Are you getting this?

If a religious kook shoots an abortion doctor, I suspect you'd have no qualms in judging the act as being wrong. But if a religious kook shoots a cartoon artist, suddenly you start comparing what the kook holds sacred and find it equivalent to you holding something sacred.

[Je suis Omar]

A double quote. I'm honourerd!

Nice Look a squirrel!!, BCS.

[cybercoma]

I think there are parallel arguments here. Of course everything you say is true. It's just that there is no comparison between the act and the response. One is an insult, the other is a murder. (Or it would have been, in this case.) It really doesn't matter how egregious the insult.

Nor does the intent matter. The Texicans might have been intentionally provacative. So what? The response was still insanely wrong. Salman Rushdie wasn't being intentionally provocative. Same insane response. Theo Gogh wasn't either. Same insane response.

The culture and religion is the problem here. Not the insult.

Of course the response is wrong. I don't think anyone on this forum condones murder. The issue here is that a bunch of people act completely surprised when people react violently to the things they hold sacred being constantly attacked.

[cybercoma]

If a religious kook shoots an abortion doctor, I suspect you'd have no qualms in judging the act as being wrong. But if a religious kook shoots a cartoon artist, suddenly you start comparing what the kook holds sacred and find it equivalent to you holding something sacred.

If a religious kook shoots an abortion doctor, I understand why they're shooting that abortion doctor and that it's against the tenets of their religion and that they're a kook who does not represent all of Christianity. Your ilk defines Islam by the kooks on the fringes who murder people for doing things against their religion, such as drawing pictures of The Prophet. That's the difference between you and me.

[Je suis Omar]

What you don't seem to be able to accept is that wanting to kill someone because they drew a picture of your holy man is not rational, regardless of what their religious laws say. For some reason you are unwilling to judge what it is they are getting murderous over. .. It's insanity.

Isn't it also "not rational" to kill millions because they disagree with you pillaging their lands and killing their children.

Still this oh so insignificant event captures your attention.

[sharkman]

If a religious kook shoots an abortion doctor, I understand why they're shooting that abortion doctor and that it's against the tenets of their religion and that they're a kook who does not represent all of Christianity. Your ilk defines Islam by the kooks on the fringes who murder people for doing things against their religion, such as drawing pictures of The Prophet. That's the difference between you and me.

You don't actually know how I define Islam. The difference between you and me is you want to observe the wishes of the kook who says if you draw a picture of Muhammad, I will kill you. I'm not sure why you don't observe the wishes they have regarding women, it's the same thing, you are picking and choosing which of their laws you respect which is hypocritical. I will not observe the wishes of a kook.

[Guest]

Nice Look a squirrel!!, BCS.

It's an eagle, for Pete's sake.

It's just politeness on my part.

[Guest]

Of course the response is wrong. I don't think anyone on this forum condones murder. The issue here is that a bunch of people act completely surprised when people react violently to the things they hold sacred being constantly attacked.

I don't think completely surprised is the right description. I wasn't surprised. It's a shocking event, but not an entirely unexpected one.

[Guest]

If a religious kook shoots an abortion doctor, I understand why they're shooting that abortion doctor and that it's against the tenets of their religion and that they're a kook who does not represent all of Christianity. Your ilk defines Islam by the kooks on the fringes who murder people for doing things against their religion, such as drawing pictures of The Prophet. That's the difference between you and me.

No, that's exactly what his ilk doesn't do. His ilk, and I include myself in that group, take enormous pains to show that we are talking only about those Muslims who deserve to be described as insane nutcases, and most absolutely not all Muslims. The group is large, because to my mind it includes those Muslims who support punishment for adultery, blasphemy and apostasy as well as those who would actually go so far as to kill someone themselves. It includes those who support FGM and the subjugation of women by denying them education and choice over how to dress and who to marry. (it recognises that religious and cultural practices sometimes coincide)

It includes the people who did this, and those who think it was okay to do it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32701001

Your "ilk" like to say that the minority of Muslims who belong to the group I have described above is so small as to render their description using their religion somehow incorrect, and driven by something other than disgust at their actions and beliefs. I suppose you do this because you don't want to admit disgust at their actions and beliefs yourselves. I don't know.

[Je suis Omar]

It's an eagle, for Pete's sake.

It's just politeness on my part.

Another squirrel. Carry on.

[Guest]

Another squirrel. Carry on.

It's not a squirrel, it's politeness. I don't want to outright call you a kook, but you do insist. You have outrageous views regarding Islam (Supreme Islamaphobic myth FFS!) and completely nonsensical views regarding 9/11. I really don't care what you think of Isaac Newton. Duh!

It's been done, so please don't ask me to watch another video.

As for the US, I like them. A lot!

Edited May 13, 2015 by bcsapper

[poochy]

You hear of a massive genocide where, with the able assistance of US/UK death lists, half a million plus people were slaughtered, untold numbers were imprisoned and for you it's not worthy of a mention.

You'd rather dither back and forth with other like minded compassionate folk on something you seem to know precious little about.

except there is no actual evidence to support anywhere near that number.

[Je suis Omar]

It's not a squirrel, it's politeness. I don't want to outright call you a kook, but you do insist. You have outrageous views regarding Islam (Supreme Islamaphobic myth FFS!) and completely nonsensical views regarding 9/11. I really don't care what you think of Isaac Newton. Duh!

It's been done, so please don't ask me to watch another video.

As for the US, I like them. A lot!

You really don't know or understand my views because you aren't brave enough to find them out. I'm sure you're a bright individual but you're obviously too invested emotionally to be willing to look at things objectively.

Your sources also are rather lame. But that's only because they are nonexistent.

That also applies to 9/11. Why does the truth frighten you so? Notice how you jump right back to ignoring the 2000 plus scientists and focus on me. That is patently dishonest.

I like many Americans myself. But we're not talking about individual Americans. You can like Americans, just as you could have liked many Germans. But a decent human being shouldn't let that cloud their vision to avoid the massive war crimes and the unrelenting terrorism that has marked the USA since before it formed.