Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Muslim Barbarians Burn Danish Embassy

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >

Sheikh Mahandi Posts: 47 Joined: May 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,08:51    Quote That's the bugger. The man should have been thrown out ages ago. That tosser is not a UK citizen by any stretch of the imagination. I find it incredible he emigrated here, lived off benefits and the whole time preached hatred against the UK and other countries. The information I have uncovered to date suggests that Abu Hamza, lived off benefits only following his injuries received with the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan, until that point he was employed as an engineering contractor and translator. Up until which point no doubt the UK and US governments would have considered him (along with OBL) as "good" jihadis, so castigating him as some form of benefit scrounger in this case is probably counter productive. Criticism of Abu Hamza is probably best to concentrate on his fundamentalism (which estranged a great many moderate muslims who formerly used the Finsbury Park Mosque, including the trustees of the mosque) and then to show the increasing descent into intolerance and hatred beginning with his detestation of corrupt middle eastern regimes and finally flowering into the bigoted, inflammatory hatred of just about everyone and everything. BTW my equating Abu Hamza with Pat Robertson is not entirely tongue in cheek, the differences between them are more of degree than anything else, after all someone who can publicly call for the assassination of a head of state, is not that far removed from the person who would demand the death of anyone opposing (or at least not sharing) their political and religious objectives. -------------- "Love is in the air, everywhere I look around,.....Love is in the air, every sight and every sound,......"

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,09:24    Fair points Sheikh. But it was blatantly obvious for some time that this guy condoned terrorism. IIRC he was not born here and had nothing but contempt for this country. Why was he entitled to our tax money? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3752517.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4643720.stm I agree that Pat Robertson is another dangerous bigotted character.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,09:28    OK, here are a couple of threads that outline my position. Let ignorance be a defense no longer. Arlen wrote: Quote I still find it very troubling that you seem to see no problems with using Jared Taylor's work, and that you actually make excuses for him like that 'nationalist'/'supremacist' distinction. Excuses? "White nationalist" is the more appropriate label so I used it. In practice, there is little to distinguish between the two positions, but the ideas behind them differ so that's what I focused on, especially since a few posters were asking for definitions. And The Color of Crime relies on (repeat after me, students) official government statistics, which allows skeptics to check the author's claims. Please notice that antiracist watchdog groups and professional criminologists have not commented on the study, even though they're aware of its existence and have critiqued similar efforts in the past. All they would have to do is re-examine the Dept. of Justice's figures, show where Jared goofed/lied, and write a rebuttal on the internet. Heck, look at all the math and statistics guys on P.T. Where are their responses? Quote The only people I've seen who find distinctions like that so important are people who are essentially racist in all meaningful senses of the word. And now you've found an exception. Quote Moreover, I find it troubling that in response to allegations of racism, your reflex has always been to attempt to redefine the term, and then, having done so, claim the term now doesn't apply to you. No, the term doesn't apply to me because I don't believe in either racial discrimination or biological differences. So what's your definition of a racist? Quote It's very weaselly, which I suspect you know. And while I'm glad to hear you don't "believe in mental differences among the races", that sounds like another way to dodge answering the question straightforwardly, since I don't consider that to be an essential definition of 'racist'. Which is.....what, exactly? Quote In a case like that we are quite justified in doubting such a person's veracity or objectivity, due to his background. Of course, and that's why I brought up the authors's background from the beginning. You should be suspicious -  I certainly am. But once again, you can cross-check their numbers against the government's. Please keep in mind that any mainstream sociologist who carried out this study and arrived at similar conclusions would shortly be looking for another job, or would have to hire bodyguards to protect him from his own students. Ask John McWhorter about the consequences of challenging racial taboos. Now imagine what would happen to him if he were white. Quote I do not believe that Europe should give an inch on freedom of speech, except that I think that incitements to violence are intolerable. This statement is meaningless, since many Muslims and racial minorities take any criticism as an incitement to violence. Do you defend free speech or don't you? -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

Chris Hyland Posts: 705 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,09:45    Quote But it was blatantly obvious for some time that this guy condoned terrorism. This is a real problem but i don't understand why this is the main thing people have against him when we've known for years: He was the main planner and financier of the 1998 Yemen hostage taking and murder of British citizens. He spent several years attempting to set up a terrorist cell in Oregon and provided fake passports among other things. He has given money to al-qeada. Legally he shouldnt be in the UK in the first place as he married a woman who was still married to her first husband. Incedentally although he claimed he sustained his injuries fighting in Afghanistan they were actually a punishment for stealing when he was living in Saudi Arabia. Regarding the riots: did anybody else find it weird that citizens in middle-eastern countries managed to get their hands on large quantities of Danish flags at extremely short notice.

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,10:18    Quote Arden Chatfield Posts: 92 Joined: Jan. 2006  Posted: Feb. 06 2006,18:33     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Feb. 06 2006,17:36) Quote (tiredofthesos @ Feb. 06 2006,05:25) Hey, GoP!  Been expecting you here, since any bigot is always sure gets their cowardly kicks in, if they have a decent alias to post under. Or police protection and a hood. Oh, and you ARE a bigot, and a racist, no matter how you attempt to squirt out the ink to cover you trail. Please, If you post stuff like this, also post any evidence.   I don't know what tiredofthesos is alluding to, but there are, shall we say, disquieting indications that 'racist' might well be a fair description of GoP. The main occasion I know of where he didn't hide this real well was here: http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/12/saletan_on_id_t.html   (see message 62581, about halfway down)    [/quote] TBH. That post does look pretty damning. But from what I have read of GoP's posts, I think the racist slur is a little pre-emptive. When you read that quote as a response to the posts against him then it doesn't look as bad. I am giving alowance for this being a difficult media to discuss these issues. It is hard to know how a poster truely feels without access to body language and emphasis.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,11:23    Stephen Elliot wrote: Quote TBH. That post does look pretty damning. But from what I have read of GoP's posts, I think the racist slur is a little pre-emptive. When you read that quote as a response to the posts against him then it doesn't look as bad. I am giving alowance for this being a difficult media to discuss these issues. It is hard to know how a poster truely feels without access to body language and emphasis. Keep in mind that there's a history behind my citation of that paper. Cogzoid and I were arguing in another thread about whether or not religion is correlated with crime, and if so, how. I made the point that if you want to tease out the effects of religion, it is wise to make the cross-national samples as homogeneous as possible, thereby avoiding confounding factors. Cogzoid disagreed, and asked for evidence that cultural differences across groups contribute to crime apart from socioeconomic status, discrimination, etc. I responded with The Study That Dare Not Speak Its Name. If you read the original post, you'll see that I clearly expressed skepticism about the study. As time grew and I continued to field objections, I began to realise that the work might have merit. Why people think they've refuted evidence by bitching about its source is beyond me. If anyone can explain this bizarre point of view, I'd like to hear from him/her.... -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,11:38    Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Feb. 07 2006,17:23) Stephen Elliot wrote: Quote TBH. That post does look pretty damning. But from what I have read of GoP's posts, I think the racist slur is a little pre-emptive. When you read that quote as a response to the posts against him then it doesn't look as bad. I am giving alowance for this being a difficult media to discuss these issues. It is hard to know how a poster truely feels without access to body language and emphasis. Keep in mind that there's a history behind my citation of that paper. Cogzoid and I were arguing in another thread about whether or not religion is correlated with crime, and if so, how. I made the point that if you want to tease out the effects of religion, it is wise to make the cross-national samples as homogeneous as possible, thereby avoiding confounding factors. Cogzoid disagreed, and asked for evidence that cultural differences across groups contribute to crime apart from socioeconomic status, discrimination, etc. I responded with The Study That Dare Not Speak Its Name. If you read the original post, you'll see that I clearly expressed skepticism about the study. As time grew and I continued to field objections, I began to realise that the work might have merit. Why people think they've refuted evidence by bitching about its source is beyond me. If anyone can explain this bizarre point of view, I'd like to hear from him/her.... TBH. I read it. I do not think that you are a racist. I might be wrong. Personaly, I think the people who advocate preferencial treatment for racial groups are racists. How else can you interpret that? Whatever hapened to Martin Luther King's dream, of being judged on nothing but your character? That, I do agree with.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,12:38    TBH? "That's Been Handled"? "Thor's been here"? British slang? Don't follow.... -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

C.J.O'Brien Posts: 395 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,12:47    Stephen, reading your last post, I take it you believe MLK, Jr was a racist? He was a strong advocate of Affirmative Action, what I believe you would call Positive Discrimination. My stance on the issue is that it is one on which reasonable people can disagree. (I favor it, but there are good arguments against it.) One of those is not, however, that it is racist. -------------- The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand. --Joe G

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:07    C. J. O'Brien wrote: Quote My stance on [Affirmative Action] is that it is one on which reasonable people can disagree. (I favor it, but there are good arguments against it.) One of those is not, however, that it is racist. Why not? A.A. advocates discrimination against targeted racial groups. That makes it racist by any reasonable definition. A better question would be, "How could it not be racist?" I can see why someone would support it, but let's not kid ourselves.... -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

C.J.O'Brien Posts: 395 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:12    Well met, wisp. Any but the weakest definition of "racism" includes the idea of an asserted superiority. A white racist is a white supremicist. They think black people are inferior. AA, while discriminating on the basis of race, does not assert that any group of people is inferior or superior to any other. If you wish to say discrimination = racism, fine. But then we just need another word for the real thing. -------------- The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand. --Joe G

Chris Hyland Posts: 705 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:25    Quote AA, while discriminating on the basis of race, does not assert that any group of people is inferior or superior to any other. No, but it does assume that a particular group of people are inherently racist(At least thats how it works in Britain). Does that make it racist? I dont know. According to the Oxford English Dictionary Quote Racism: The theory that distinctive human characteristics and abilities are determined by race. Quote Racialism: Belief in the superiority of a particular race leading to prejudice and antagonism towards people of other races, esp. those in close proximity who may be felt as a threat to one's cultural and racial integrity or economic well-being.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:39    Quote AA, while discriminating on the basis of race, does not assert that any group of people is inferior or superior to any other. So you feel that racism has at least two components: 1) Belief in one group's racial superiority 2) Actual discrimination ....or do you think part 1 is sufficient? I think 1 might be enough, except that A.A. posits White moral inferiority, as Mr. Hyland has mentioned. But whether or not it's racist is secondary to the fact that it doesn't accomplish its stated goal - redressing historical discrimination. A.A. simply hands an unfair advantage to middle and upper-class minorities. Funny thing is, the liberals love A.A. in principle, but choose non-A.A. doctors for their kids. Hmmmmmm..... -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

C.J.O'Brien Posts: 395 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:47    There are at least three (not mutually exclusive) rationales for affirmative action: The one that currently flies in the US courts for higher education is that there is an educational benefit to all students in being part of a diverse student body. To redress the crimes of the past. To redress present discrimination. This last must be what you're talking about, C. Hyland. But I don't think it assumes that all members of any group are inherently racist. It just accepts as fact that some (negative) discrimination exists, in hiring, contract awarding, etc. and attempts to "make up" for it. The reasoning being that simply making discrimination illegal doesn't stop it, which is certainly true. -------------- The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand. --Joe G

C.J.O'Brien Posts: 395 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,13:56    Quote A.A. posits White moral inferiority No, I don't think it does. It's well understood that some significant fraction of black people probably don't like white people very much, for no good reason, just as much as vice versa, possibly. But it's much more likely, given socio-economic factors, that a white person will be called upon to hire a black person, than the reverse. -------------- The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand. --Joe G

Chris Hyland Posts: 705 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,14:16    Quote The reasoning being that simply making discrimination illegal doesn't stop it, which is certainly true. I agree this is a big problem, but i know several people whos lives have been adversly affected  because of it. Also in Britain the law is written specifically to refer to minority discrimination, so it is perfectly legal for a minoirty boss to hire according to race. Another problem is that, for example, the metropolitan police decided that they were going to preferentailly hire 'ethnic' officers, but when asked could not give a description of what this was. At first they said, it what they tell us they are, which was replaced by, 'if they look darkish', finally resorting to 'we just go with what the home office tells us'. A friend of mine was rejected from a degree course because they had 'filled up their quota of white British people', but when asked could not give a good definition of what non-white was, or how they would decide before they had seen the people. Ironically my friend is American, so we can only assume they looked at 'ethnicity = caucasian' and the fact the name sounded English.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,14:34    Quote There are at least three (not mutually exclusive) rationales for affirmative action: Each one based on shakier logic than the last.... Quote The one that currently flies in the US courts for higher education is that there is an educational benefit to all students in being part of a diverse student body. So blatantly false that liberals themselves don't buy it. Which is why Chelsea Clinton went to Sidwell Friends School, where Whites are a pretty solid majority, rather than an ultra-diverse public school in the D.C. area. I'm sure Slick Willie would have gone even whiter if people weren't watching. Sure, minorities can contribute as individuals, but there is no evidence that diverse schools outperform nondiverse ones. All students, regardless of color, should be allowed to attend any school they qualify for. The government has no business restricting or creating diversity. Quote To redress the crimes of the past. Which it doesn't, if it ever did. Quote To redress present discrimination. The only evidence for this one being differential results, which would render the N.B.A. a most racist institution. Incidentally, Sowell, McWhorter, and many other blacks don't find institutional racism a huge barrier anymore - who am I, a mere white man, to challenge their perceptions? After all, they're the ones who should know. -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

Dean Morrison Posts: 216 Joined: Dec. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,17:08    Don't be too kind to Gop Steve - We had all this out here: http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....4;t=107 - of course Gop is slippery but I showed his intention to discriminate on the basis of race in his 'modest proposal' qualified him for the OED definition of 'racist'. He's also quite deceitful - he's just repeated here the assertion by the White Nationalists/Supremacists he quoted was such a fine and dandy piece of work no-one had ever even tried to refute it. Well he was presented with evidence to the contrary on that thread by Sheik Mahandi. Since he replied to the comment he can hardly plead ignorance now. He is fond of calling me a liar - but perhaps I'll leave you to be the judge of who's lying here. http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=255 --------------------------------------- Back to the Muslim thing - glad to see both the Mad Sheik, the and the fake Druggie Suicide Bomber being locked up - and action being taken against the buggers with the offensive placards. There has been concerted rabble-rousing going on of course. For decent information on how all this started this Wiki is excellent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....roversy - and to remember the majority of Muslims aren't extermists, and some want to say sorry: http://www.sorrynorwaydenmark.com/ My anger at another load of religious bigots calmed down a little after reading that. PS. - I knew a SA 'immigrant' over here and he was a useless lazy bastard -and met loads in Australia - they made sure they kept hold of or got hold a passport so they didn't count as 'immigrants'. They're not all bad though (don't want to be seen to be making 'racist' statements about anyone- even if in my experience they are the craziest divers in the world:D ). -------------- Don't you have a paper to work on GOP?   This thread was supposed to be about Muslims burning embassies after all? not for essays on 'Affirmative Action' all over again - we've already done that one to death.

Renier Posts: 276 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,20:07    Ah, Affirmative Action (AA) I know all about, in my country anyway. It works this way. Companies are forced to meet a quota. 20% white and 80% black employees, for instance (and it's about right). Due to past discrimination against the blacks by the old apartheid regime, AA was brought in to get black people more jobs, and to get them jobs in higher places and to get them better paying jobs. Now, that's all fine, since there was an inbalance due to past discrimination (that's a fact). Problem is, this AA has been going on for more than 10 years and show no signs of stopping. Children (white males) coming out of school/higher education cannot find jobs, due to the AA law. These kids had NOTHING to do with the old apartheid government, they are innocent, fairly liberal, yet they cannot find jobs. They don't find jobs, not because they are not educated, hard working , willing, eager etc, but because companies cannot by law employ them. We also have a HIGH unemployment rate. Now, imagine yourself a white male with a son that is about to finish school. I just think a person should be employed on merit, and all else is unfair and discrimination. Now, I am an older white male. If I loose my job... I will have to try and make it on my own. On the other hand, it is a STUNNING country! Nothing is perfect, I suppose :-)

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,21:52    Dean, Of course I don't think the majority of Muslims are extremists. But it is obvious that some are. It was also aparent that Muslim extremists have been alowed to voice opinion that would land anyone else in prison. This does nobody (of a reasonable disposition) any favours. What has been encouraging in the last few days, is that reasonable Muslims seem to be getting more assertive in condemning their extremists. I consider treating people differently according to race or religion wrong-headed. It does harm in the long run. Treating people differently according to an individuals character or ability is fine. Quote C.J.O'Brien Posted on Feb. 07 2006,18:47 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen, reading your last post, I take it you believe MLK, Jr was a racist? He was a strong advocate of Affirmative Action, what I believe you would call Positive Discrimination. My stance on the issue is that it is one on which reasonable people can disagree. (I favor it, but there are good arguments against it.) One of those is not, however, that it is racist. This is what I cannot understand. How can discriminating on grounds of a persons race be anything but racist? I can see why someone would think that there is good reason for AA/PD. My belief is that it is wrong though. The long term effects can only be damaging. I have no idea on MLK Jr. being a racist or not (I doubt that he was). But if he was promoting AA then he was promoting a racist policy. I far prefer what MLK Jr. himself said in his "I have a dream" speach, Quote I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, a state sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. now that, I whole-heartedly agree with.

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 07 2006,21:57    Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Feb. 07 2006,18:38) TBH? "That's Been Handled"? "Thor's been here"? British slang? Don't follow.... TBH is net geek speak for To Be Honest. Therefore any post that does not have TBH in, is a lie. jk

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2006,07:44    The Yenta lied: Quote Don't be too kind to Gop Steve - And then the misrepresentations flow like honey. Guys, it's best to treat anything Dean says about me with the strictest of scrutiny. Or you can just follow Fox's advice and ignore his "contentless" (Cogzie's word, not mine) posts. -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

tiredofthesos Posts: 59 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2006,12:03    Get a job, GoP.  Or abandon real labor to write a bible or a UFT.  Keep declaring victory with every defeat.  Promise proofs, though they are always "in the works."  Deny or snap back - with a 13-year-old's idea of snappy comebacks, likely culled from Mad Magazine - when the muck of your prejudices, and fears, is exposed though your own comments.  In cases like yours, I feel your very existence, filled with harmless, smug blatherings and empty self-praise, is punishment enough.

The Ghost of Paley Posts: 1703 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2006,14:31    Quote Keep declaring victory with every defeat.  Promise proofs, though they are always "in the works."  Deny or snap back - with a 13-year-old's idea of snappy comebacks, likely culled from Mad Magazine - when the muck of your prejudices, and fears, is exposed though your own comments. <Yawn>......do you have a real rebuttal, Yenta-with-a-library-computer? Didn't think so. -------------- Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

Dean Morrison Posts: 216 Joined: Dec. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 09 2006,03:29    Don't you have a wobbly Jelly and Sticking plaster 'paper' to Work on Gop? You'd better get on with Googletrawling - those guys on the other thread are starting to get impatient with your stalling.

Pages: (2) < 1 [2] >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard