Calling Some One a Racist or Bigot

[Guest coot]

Gee, lighten up will you. Don't tell me you have not seen any published books with intriguing titles such as that!

Intriguing? Hardly. No, I didn't rush to read it. I don't bother with anything to do with Islam or global warming on this board. Too many tin-foil hat conspiracy/clash of civilizations nuts on this board.

But I think we must go to very different book stores.

[ScottSA]

Intriguing? Hardly. No, I didn't rush to read it. I don't bother with anything to do with Islam or global warming on this board. Too many tin-foil hat conspiracy/clash of civilizations nuts on this board.

But I think we must go to very different book stores.

For someone who didn't read it, you sure have a lot to say about it.

[Guest coot]

For someone who didn't read it, you sure have a lot to say about it.

I read the thread title, and that's all I commented on. Though I imagine it didn't get much deeper inside the thread, so I can see why you thought I read it.

[betsy]

Intriguing? Hardly. No, I didn't rush to read it. I don't bother with anything to do with Islam or global warming on this board. Too many tin-foil hat conspiracy/clash of civilizations nuts on this board.

But I think we must go to very different book stores.

Well, here are some intriguing book titles. I saw these titles on Wiki. No I haven't read any of these books. I go to mainstream bookstores....I don't know where you go. But really, some books do grab you by their titles. That's what creative writing is all about....especially if you want to sell your books.

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims is a controversial collection of 63 essays, including 17 by Bat Ye'or, edited by writer Robert Spencer, the director of Jihad Watch, and other Middle Eastern scholars and experts on Islam, including Ibn Warraq, Walid Phares, David Littman, Patrick Sookhdeo, and Mark Durie. "

The Calcutta Quran Petition ( कलकत्ता कुरान याचिका ) is a book by Sita Ram Goel and Chandmal Chopra, and published by Goel under his Voice of India imprint. The first edition was published in 1986, the second in 1987 and the third in 1999.

The subject matter of this book is censorship, the banning of books and the Quran. After the publication of this book, some people tried to ban it.

Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations is a 1996 book by author and comedian Al Franken. It is satirically critical of right-wing political figures, such as Bob Dole, Phil Gramm, Newt Gingrich, and particularly radio host Rush Limbaugh.

Michael Moore Is a Big Fat Stupid White Man - rebuts the arguments set forth in Michael Moore's books Michael Moore Is a Big Fat Stupid White Man is a book by David T. Hardy and Jason Clarke about author and filmmaker Michael Moore. It is a book designed to criticize and discredit Moore and his works. The title can be seen as a parody of the titles Stupid White Men by Moore and Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot by Al Franken.

The Holocaust Industry - subtitled Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering

The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering is a book by Norman G. Finkelstein which argues that an "industry" has exploited the memory of the Holocaust to further Jewish and Israeli interests, and has corrupted the Jewish culture and heritage of Judaism as well as the history of the Holocaust.

The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed - supposes Jewish plot to take over the world by subverting countries.

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

So....what's the big deal with "Islam, the sneaky buggers?" What more, we normally use the term "sneaky bugger" - as in "you sneaky bugger - usually on a lighter or teasing note.

Edited October 7, 2007 by betsy

[ScottSA]

Perhaps next time I'll use the title "psychotic genocidal murdercult commits another kneeslapper".

Or maybe we should start two new threads: "Daily murder count by Muslims in the name of Islam" and "Daily murder count by Christians in the name of Jesus." There's a good chance the latter might languish and die from inactivity, but maybe we can turn it into a chess club or something. I hope there's enough bandwidth on the internet for the former.

[ScottSA]

I read the thread title, and that's all I commented on. Though I imagine it didn't get much deeper inside the thread, so I can see why you thought I read it.

Yes, we wouldn't want to sully our "see no evil" mindset with inconvenient facts, would we? I'll condense it for you: A bunch of high profile Islamofascists posing as moderates plotted to install Sharia in the US. Nothing to concern yourself with, of course, although CAIR, the largest "moderate" Muslim organization in the US (and Canada - CAIR-Can), is named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the case...

[Guest American Woman]

I agree that it's strange that something so prominent as a thread title expressing racist ideas would be tolerated, but there would be a problem with calling it racist. Makes you wonder.

I wonder why such a thread title is allowed in the first place while "fat slob" isn't allowed. According to the rules of the board:

Insults levelled at third-parties (companies, political parties, nationalities) are ... forbidden in the forums.

So why is "sneaky buggers" allowed, for example, but "fat slob" is not? Seems to me rules should be uniformly enforced, which is the point I'm making, so I don't understand why one is ok and the other is not. I'd truly like an answer to that, I'd like to know why the rules are only selectively enforced, but I don't see an explanation forthcoming.

[betsy]

I wonder why such a thread title is allowed in the first place while "fat slob" isn't allowed. According to the rules of the board:

Insults levelled at third-parties (companies, political parties, nationalities) are ... forbidden in the forums.

So why is "sneaky buggers" allowed, for example, but "fat slob" is not? Seems to me rules should be uniformly enforced, which is the point I'm making, so I don't understand why one is ok and the other is not. I'd truly like an answer to that, I'd like to know why the rules are only selectively enforced, but I don't see an explanation forthcoming.

Well "Islam, the sneaky buggers" is unlike "Michael Moore is a Fat slob".....

Singling out one individual and calling him a fat slob is a direct and very personal insult. That's along the level of calling a fat woman a cow...or a lard-ass!

ScottSA title is not insulting at all since he plainly explained the reason behind it. They were sneaky indeed .....and actually, imo, ScottSA had shown restraint with his choice of words. In light of what these people are up to, I would be using more colorful words in place of sneaky....and buggers.

[margrace]

There is some discussion on here about the racist preaching of fundamentalists. One only has to read the Oath a person joing the Orange Lodge in Northern Ireland has to make to find out the truth of that one. I cannot find it on here but I will get it if anyone wants to read it, may take some time.

My husband and I watch the reruns of the Lawrence Welk show, and it does concern me a bit that there is a token black person on there. Evidently he played an instrument of some kind but in order to be on the show he had to take up tap dancing. This is a pretty good example of racism I would think. I don't think if that was a new show today that this would have been allowed however maybe in some parts of the country it would.

[Guest American Woman]

My husband and I watch the reruns of the Lawrence Welk show, and it does concern me a bit that there is a token black person on there. Evidently he played an instrument of some kind but in order to be on the show he had to take up tap dancing. This is a pretty good example of racism I would think. I don't think if that was a new show today that this would have been allowed however maybe in some parts of the country it would.

Don't know where you got your information from, but it's incorrect. The black man you are referring to is Arthur Duncan, and he was a well established 'song and dance man' before becoming part of the Lawrence Welk show. He was an amazing tap dancer prior to joining the show in 1964; but yes, there have been some strides made in regards to blacks appearing on television shows since then-- in all parts of the country.

[Guest coot]

Singling out one individual and calling him a fat slob is a direct and very personal insult.

Yes, and generalizing a whole tribe of people and calling them sneaky buggers is racism.

[Drea]

Yes, and generalizing a whole tribe of people and calling them sneaky buggers is racism.

no it's not if it's truuuue

/sarcasm.

Here are some more wonderful generalizations. Any of you fit in these categories?... no?

...but you MUST fit into at least ONE category! Or else all these are false! LOL

All jews are money grubbers.

All blacks are criminals

Blondes are dumb

white women are easy lays

Men can't raise children

Oriental kids are smarter than others

all tall people are good at basketball

Christians are frothing at the mouth for "Ameggedon"

women can't drive very well

oriental women are subservient

my friend in Iran (gasp a muslim!) is not a "sneaky bugger", and Betsy is not frothing over Armageddon... but all tall people ARE good at basketball aren't they??

[Guest American Woman]

Yes, and generalizing a whole tribe of people and calling them sneaky buggers is racism.

Or at the very least, an insult-- which according to the rules isn't allowed.

[ScottSA]

Or at the very least, an insult-- which according to the rules isn't allowed.

Well, are the sneaky buggers not Islamic? The US courts seem to think so in both cases, the perps are on tape admitting it, and even the IBD articles calls it "The Islamist Head Fake."

I simply don't understand the energy expended in mincing about looking for evidence of "racism" and "bigotry" and "insults." That includes the energy expended in this thread protecting me from being called a "bigot." The stupidity and double standard of those who use the phrase is evident without it being banned IMO, and speaks louder than any proscription against it. My only beef is the fact that the same people who yowl "racism" can't take the heat when they are called names in return, and so report it. That, I suspect, is why Greg levelled the playing field a bit, although I could be wrong. Maybe Greg is a "racist" and "bigot" too, and this is part of his master plan to bigotize the world!

[Higgly]

Well, are the sneaky buggers not Islamic? The US courts seem to think so in both cases, the perps are on tape admitting it, and even the IBD articles calls it "The Islamist Head Fake."

I simply don't understand the energy expended in mincing about looking for evidence of "racism" and "bigotry" and "insults." That includes the energy expended in this thread protecting me from being called a "bigot." The stupidity and double standard of those who use the phrase is evident without it being banned IMO, and speaks louder than any proscription against it. My only beef is the fact that the same people who yowl "racism" can't take the heat when they are called names in return, and so report it. That, I suspect, is why Greg levelled the playing field a bit, although I could be wrong. Maybe Greg is a "racist" and "bigot" too, and this is part of his master plan to bigotize the world!

Don't you have your own forum? What exactly is your message to those of us who devote all of our political discussion time to this forum? Can you put it in a post and let us bat it around for awhile?

[ScottSA]

Don't you have your own forum? What exactly is your message to those of us who devote all of our political discussion time to this forum? Can you put it in a post and let us bat it around for awhile?

What exactly is your point?

[Higgly]

My point is that you need to shit or get off the pot. You have your own forum? Good for you. Go to it.

Don't go away mad, ScottSA. Just go away.

Edited October 7, 2007 by Higgly

[jazzer]

1

[Moxie]

My point is that you need to shit or get off the pot. You have your own forum? Good for you. Go to it.

Don't go away mad, ScottSA. Just go away.

/quote]

Speak for yourself Higgly, unless you own this forum Scot has everyright to his opinion. Your side hasn't won the war on gagging those who "YOU" deem Racists or bigots yet. Frankly you and your ilk scare me, your desire to silence anyone who doesn't agree with you smacks of communism/socialism. Spit, one only has to look at Sweden to see the damage your kind cause in silencing a voice that doesn't agree with you. You absolute intolerance of Scots views makes you equally bigoted and racists (Scot could be a black scot's man).

Rock on Scot, I may not agree with all you views but I respect your right to an opinion and your RIGHT of freedom of expression. You are articulate and well educated in your posts, I enjoy your point of view. Weather you have a forum of your own is a not applicable, well it is to Higgly. Me thinks someone is a tad jealous of Scots debating ability.

[jazzer]

Frankly you and your ilk scare me, your desire to silence anyone who doesn't agree with you smacks of communism/socialism.

As one in the "ilk" you described, I'd be happy with a little less insults.

Edited October 7, 2007 by jazzer

[Higgly]

As one in the "ilk" you described, I'd be happy with a little less insults.

We are the ilk. I love it.

[ScottSA]

My point is that you need to shit or get off the pot. You have your own forum? Good for you. Go to it.

Don't go away mad, ScottSA. Just go away.

I see the totalitarian side of the PC movement is in full gear. Who exactly do you think you are demanding that other people leave? Good grief.

[betsy]

Don't you have your own forum? What exactly is your message to those of us who devote all of our political discussion time to this forum? Can you put it in a post and let us bat it around for awhile?

Perhaps you need a break from this forum?

Judging from your various posts that had been directed towards the moderation of this thread, which I think galvanized these other sheep to say baaa-baaa too (or lemmings that are following you off the cliff), they're now also complaining of imagined unfairness (to the point of nit-picking for heaven's sake).... obviously you are not happy here.

Why stick around? There are tons of other forums out there.

Just a suggestion. How can it be fun to be here if it causes you such aggravation?

Edited October 8, 2007 by betsy

[betsy]

Or at the very least, an insult-- which according to the rules isn't allowed.

The way I take that title, Scott was referring to the group of people who were involved with the plan. But that is if you read his opening line. After all, it is sheer stupidity to comment on something one hasn't read, isn't it?

For someone whom I thought is quite smart, I'm sure you know very well that you are deliberately twisting the context of the title.

But perhaps I'm wrong about you....

Edited October 8, 2007 by betsy

[betsy]

Higgly, Coot and American Woman....take a deep breath.

Maybe it's time for you three to have your group hug.