Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the statistics-or-lies? dept.

Scott Alexander gives a great breakdown of Trump and how the portrayal of him as being "openly white supremacist" is probably (likely) wrong.

I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he's "the candidate of the KKK" and "the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement" is made up. It's a catastrophic distraction from the dozens of other undeniable problems with Trump that could have convinced voters to abandon him. That it came to dominate the election cycle should be considered a horrifying indictment of our political discourse, in the same way that it would be a horrifying indictment of our political discourse if the entire Republican campaign had been based around the theory that Hillary Clinton was a secret Satanist. Yes, calling Romney a racist was crying wolf. But you are still crying wolf.

I avoided pushing this point any more since last October because I didn't want to look like I was supporting Trump, or accidentally convince anyone else to support Trump. But since we're past the point where that matters any more, I want to present my case.

He further states: "I realize that all of this is going to make me sound like a crazy person and put me completely at odds with every respectable thinker in the media, but luckily, being a crazy person at odds with every respectable thinker in the media has been a pretty good ticket to predictive accuracy lately, so whatever."

So do his claims hold up under scrutiny, is he manipulating the figures, or is he just a 'crazy person' ?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:29PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:29PM (#429439)

    There is too much in that blogger's post to completely address. So for the sake of being concise I will limit it two of his points, one narrow and one broad.

    (13) Lots of people (and not just whites!) are hasty to generalize from “ISIS is scary” to “I am scared of all Muslims”.

    No. There is no generalization going on here. Trump literally said "Islam hates us." And in case that was just an inartful phrasing, the interviewer prompted him to say that he was not talking about normal muslims. Trump would not do it, instead he said "its very hard to define because you don't know who is who." That is the religious equivalent of "they all look alike to me." See it in this 50 second clip of his interview on CNN. [youtube.com]

    Furthermore, his pick for national security advisor has a history of holding all muslims responsible for the worst actions of the few [politico.com] in ways that would leave no question of bigotry if he were to say the same thing about jews or christians. For example he promoted a video literally named "Fear of Jews is RATIONAL" on twitter. So not only is Trump saying it, he's hiring someone who says the same thing for a position where that opinion will directly influence policy decisions.

    (17) Isn’t this a lot of special pleading? Like, sure, you can make up various non-racist explanations for every single racist-sounding thing Trump says, and say a lot of it is just coincidence or Trump being inexplicably weird, but eventually the coincidences start adding up. You have to look at this kind of thing in context.
    ...
    This is the natural pattern you get when challenging a false theory. The theory was built out of random noise and ad hoc misinterpretations, so the refutation will have to be “every one of your multiple superficially plausible points is random noise, or else it’s a misinterpretation for a different reason”.

    The blogger compares Trump's words to a random collection of unrelated, cherry-picked facts that have been back-fitted into a bogus theory about Atlantis, but Trump is not a random collection of cherry-picked facts. Trump is a single, cohesive person who chooses what he says . Even when prompted to lay out a non-bigoted explanation for his words, he won't do it. That's literally the opposite of back-fitting.

    To argue that Trump is not explicitly and deliberately racist unlike any recent president is to deny not just Trump's own words, but Trump's responsibility for his own words.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Insightful=1, Informative=4, Total=5
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:45PM

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:45PM (#429451) Homepage Journal

    Islam is not a race. It is an ideology. Those are fair game to discriminate against if you find valid reason.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:55PM (#429456)

      > Islam is not a race. It is an ideology. Those are fair game to discriminate against if you find valid reason.

      Is hispanic a race?

      Is white a race?

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:58PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @04:58PM (#429458) Homepage Journal

        Me: Mustangs are not Chevrolets
        You: Are Camaros? Are Corvettes?

        Your argument confuses me.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:02PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:02PM (#429462)

          Answer the questions. Yes or no. You are the one so concerned with precision, so I asked you questions that could not be more conscise or direct.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:05PM

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:05PM (#429466) Homepage Journal

            Your questions are a non-sequitur. You might as well have asked if I like puppies.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:13PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:13PM (#429471)

              If islam isn't a race. then white and hispanic are not races either. If you disagree explain why that's wrong.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:24PM

                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:24PM (#429477) Homepage Journal

                If Mustangs are not Chevrolets then Corvettes and Camaros are not Chevrolets either. Do please listen to what you are saying. We're done here unless you have a point to make.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 4, Informative) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:31PM

                by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:31PM (#429480) Journal
                Islam is not a race, it's a religion. You join it by accepting the creed. You can later repudiate it and leave by rejecting that, even if you were born Muslim. None of that is true of a race, you cannot convert to or from a race, not in any possible reality, period.

                Hispanic is not a race either. Hispanic is a (US) ethnic designation. You are Hispanic (in the US sense) if you speak Spanish at home, grew up speaking Spanish at home, or at least one of your known ancestors did so, and you feel like calling yourself that. You could be of any race, and any religion as well, even though most Hispanics are Catholic.

                "White" is the only one of the three words you gave that can be argued to be a race. It's a classification that traditionally is seen as quite explicitly racial, although if you read some of the modern works you'll actually find people more and more using it as an ethnic designation instead, leading to even more confusion when two parties to the conversation are using it in two entirely different senses.

                --
                If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:53PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:53PM (#429493)

                  > you cannot convert to or from a race, not in any possible reality, period

                  Really? On what basis do you make that claim?

                  • (Score: 5, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:04PM

                    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:04PM (#429498) Homepage Journal

                    I assume he bases it on the definition of the word "race".

                    Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics.

                    I suppose you'll be redefining it to suit your argument though. That's been very much in vogue lately.

                    --
                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:05PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:05PM (#429499)

                      So, is it also your contention that is impossible to change race?

                      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:21PM

                        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:21PM (#429511) Homepage Journal

                        Currently, yes. In the future there may come a day when a retrovirus can alter the DNA of each of your cells enough to change your race but that day is not today.

                        --
                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:31PM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:31PM (#429522)

                          Well, there are literally millions of examples of people changing their race.
                          For example, Carol Channing. [biography.com]

                          Its pretty funny you cited a dictionary definition of race without linking to that definition and then accused me making up a definition of race.
                          Where did you get that definition from?

                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:18PM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:18PM (#429595)

                            http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/05/millions-of-americans-changed-their-racial-or-ethnic-identity-from-one-census-to-the-next/ [pewresearch.org]

                            The researchers, who included university and government population scientists, analyzed census forms for 168 million Americans, and found that more than 10 million of them checked different race or Hispanic-origin boxes in the 2010 census than they had in the 2000 count. Smaller-scale studies have shown that people sometimes change the way they describe their race or Hispanic identity, but the new research is the first to use data from the census of all Americans to look at how these selections may vary on a wide scale.

                            “Do Americans change their race? Yes, millions do,” said study co-author Carolyn A. Liebler, a University of Minnesota sociologist who worked with Census Bureau researchers.

                            But clearly buzzard knows better than all of those people and the scientists who study them.

                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:43AM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:43AM (#429764)

                              Man, you're a fucking Genius with a capital G!

                              What I need now is an official form with check boxes for the length of my penis, how many minutes I can last with 10 cheerleaders, and my yearly income. Three check boxes away from being able to change reality!

                              "I have seen the top of the mountain ....... and it is good"

                              - Butthead

                            • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:15AM

                              by Gaaark (41) on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:15AM (#429774) Journal

                              Okay, so my car is a Corvette, but I sometimes call it a Yugo and sometimes a Ducati motorcycle.

                              It's still a Corvette, though.

                              --
                              --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:40AM

                                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:40AM (#429781)

                                Since we aren't actually talking about cars, you fail.

                                In kindergarten you learned one simplified age-appropriate definition of race and despite growing up, your understanding never matured.

                                You know that definition that buzzard cut-n-pasted?
                                Do you know why he didn't include the URL?
                                Because the rest of the definition totally contradicts him.

                                Go ahead, google that definition. The link will take you right to the whole thing. He cited 1.1, take a look at 1.2.

                                Or don't. You seem more interested in rationalizing remaining ignorant of what all of science settled decades ago.

                                BTW, do you know what a definition of bigot is?
                                a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices

                                Being obstinately devoted to a child's definition of a word pretty much qualifies.
                                I'm guessing its not the only opinion of yours that would qualify. Seems to go hand-in-hand with a lot of other ones.

                          • (Score: 1) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:24PM

                            by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:24PM (#429598) Journal
                            She didn't change her race, she was born human and the best I know she still is.

                            Just because racists are wrong about multiple races existing, though, doesn't mean that race is not a word that conceives of, that necessarily implies a biological division, indeed that is precisely their error - they reify social divisions and conceive of them as racial rather than social.

                            If there were such a division, you certainly couldn't cross it without changing your DNA, and whatever race you attribute to Channing, it clearly never changed, at most it could be said to have been misidentified either in the first case or the second. Those are different things.

                            --
                            If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:32PM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:32PM (#429604)

                              > She didn't change her race, she was born human and the best I know she still is.

                              Why should anyone take you seriously after that?

                              You simply do not understand race. [nap.edu] You, like buzzard, think genetics determine race when in fact genes are only a small, superficial component of race and determinate of nothing in particular. Anyone who has actually studied race knows that to be true because racial distinctions are so arbitrary [vox.com] that they change on the timescale of decades.

                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:35AM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:35AM (#429763)

                            Wow. You do realize how full of shit you are right? You did not demonstrate a change of race:

                            In her memoir Just Lucky I Guess (2002), Channing revealed that in 1937, when she was a 16-year-old about to head off to Bennington College, her mother told her that her father's birth certificate had marked him as "colored," as his mother had been black. It was an unexpected revelation for Channing, and she didn't make the information public for decades (a decision that allowed her to avoid the discriminatory treatment African Americans faced at the time).

                            However, Channing didn't completely forget about her heritage, which she credits with giving her the impressive vocal range and agility that helped her succeed as a performer. In a 2002 interview with Larry King, she declared, "I got the greatest genes in show business."

                            A clerical error and misinformation is very distinct from an actual state change. Five minutes before she knew, she still had her father's genes in her, and five minutes later she continued to do so. All that changed was her ignorance of it.

                            You literally argued that ignorance once removed constitutes a physical state change. This is the one and the same principle that allows little children to fly in Neverland. You should've sprinkled your post with Pixie Dust.

                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:44AM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:44AM (#429784)

                              > Wow. You do realize how full of shit you are right? You did not demonstrate a change of race:

                              Hey genius. Genes are not race. They are genes.

                              Race is something that society both imposes on you and you express to society.

                              Everybody thought carol channing was white. She never had to experience being treated as black. For everything that matters, she was white.

                    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:28PM

                      by hemocyanin (186) on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:28PM (#429519) Journal

                      Forget him. He's obviously trolling. And not very well.

                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:33PM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:33PM (#429524)

                        Not trolling. Trying to get lazy minds to make concrete statements of their beliefs so that those beliefs can be debated.
                        Buzzard knows he's on really thin ice, that's why he's always trying to squirm out from making specific, falsifiable statements.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:22PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:22PM (#429512)

                    What are you smoking and where can I get some?

                • (Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:23PM

                  by q.kontinuum (532) on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:23PM (#429515) Journal

                  While I agree with the distinction between genetic differences and religion, it is not possible for every Muslim to renounce his/her beleives. Apostasy [wikipedia.org] is punished in some countries by death or long prioson terms, in others by "only" losing custodial rights over the own children, inheritance etc. In other countries it might be completely legal and without sanction, but you can't generalize it.

                  --
                  Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
                  • (Score: 3, Informative) by hemocyanin on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:30PM

                    by hemocyanin (186) on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:30PM (#429521) Journal

                    Difficulty, even a death penalty, is not "impossible". If it was impossible to abandon Islam, there'd be no death penalty for doing it because it would be ... impossible.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:52PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:52PM (#429573)

                      If you are that categorial things get a bit difficult, because with extensive plastic surgery, skin transplants, makeup, I am not sure it's impossible to change race.
                      At the least Asian to Caucasian seems very plausible.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:45PM

      by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:45PM (#429488) Journal
      It's not a race, you're right.

      It's a religion. Free exercise of religion, and freedom of conscience, are fundamental core American values. Saying "it's fair game to discriminate" against a religion is dangerous. Perhaps you parse it very narrowly and in a way that can be harmonized, but even if you do, your reader cannot be expected to understand that from what you wrote.

      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 3, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:00PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:00PM (#429495) Homepage Journal

        True, the problem is if you are remotely good at being Islamic, you are a horrible person by western values and values can and absolutely should be discriminated against because they are a large part of what decide our actions. By "western values" in this case I mean egalitarianism, tolerance, and peacefulness. None of which are found within the religion of Islam as it is largely practiced in the world.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:41PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:41PM (#429533) Homepage Journal

          Objectively true and stated in a civil manner but gets modded Flamebait? Please don't make me link to the "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH" clip.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:23PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:23PM (#429557)

            Your surprise is a big part of the problem. You have beliefs that are extreme, one might call you an extremist! But hey, lots of old people also have "a good friend who is black" so you'll probably have company if you go work for a retirement home.

            Every time I've been modded flamebait I'm forced to think about and I've always said "yup, deserved". Try imagining you can be wrong?

            • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:28PM

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:28PM (#429560) Homepage Journal

              Not surprise. Annoyance that people still downmod things they simply disagree with. If I am attempting to be civil and have a civil discussion, my posts are not within the definition of Flamebait. Neither Troll. It is simply a bad moderation.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 5, Interesting) by linkdude64 on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:52PM

              by linkdude64 (5482) on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:52PM (#429575)

              " You have beliefs that are extreme, one might call you an extremist! "

              This is problem with liberals. You think that people on the political right are extremists. You literally think that having an opinion - even an outright racist one - is extremism.

              No.

              If you would like, I will link you a video demonstrating extremism. The heads of dozens of kneeling people with black bags over their heads getting sawn off - right in front of your eyes, in HD quality, because they are not the "right kind of Muslim."

              THAT is extremism, and YOU ARE CRYING WOLF just like the article states. If you would like to see the meaning of your words, I will show it to you.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:14AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:14AM (#429772)

                I'm sure that is what a lot of people said before the Nazis carted them off. "Don't worry, they just don't want us here. They'll take us somewhere till they have somewhere to send us!"

                Taking this stuff lightly is not an option for me, and it is sad that you consider it a viable path. You even offer to behead me, that right there shows your mental state. I may be crying wolf, but that's just cause the wolf is hiding in his granny costume pretending to care about all the tasty people.

                Or was I supposed to know that was just "guy talk"?

                • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:43PM

                  by linkdude64 (5482) on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:43PM (#429921)

                  "You even offer to behead me, that right there shows your mental state."

                  NEVER would I do that to somebody. I would rather shoot myself or cut my own throat than saw the head off of a disarmed person. The true extremists would not - and I can show you a VIDEO of that as empirical evidence - I never once meant to threaten you. Only to educate you as to what extremism actually is.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @06:29PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @06:29PM (#429990)

                    Well in case you haven't been paying attention, there are extremists on both sides. Maybe not up to beheading people on camera, but violence has been done to liberals and conservatives. Many people have advocated violence this election cycle, and while much of it is hot air (such as you) it is impossible to tell when someone will snap and make good on their threats.

                    My original extremist comment was a bit tongue in cheek to point how the irony how most that dislike Muslims are themselves on the path to prejudice and extremism.

                  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday November 20 2016, @07:19PM

                    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Sunday November 20 2016, @07:19PM (#430016) Homepage
                    Have you ever had a seemingly moderate and seemingly reasonable muslim threaten to kill you if you finish the sentence where you explain why you became an atheist?

                    I have.

                    "If you finish that sentence I will have to kill you" were his exact words. In disbelief I let one more word out, and he immediately repeated his threat. I stopped cold. I could see he actually meant it. Would you call that extremist behaviour?

                    You see, even the seemingly moderate and seemingly reasonable muslims have a dangerous psychopathy and sociopathy, because their religion obliges them.
                    --
                    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
                    • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday November 20 2016, @08:09PM

                      by linkdude64 (5482) on Sunday November 20 2016, @08:09PM (#430043)

                      "Have you ever had a seemingly moderate and seemingly reasonable muslim threaten to kill you if you finish the sentence where you explain why you became an atheist?"

                      No, but estimates of muslim extremists worldwide are held at an estimated 15%-25%. With a worldwide muslim population of almost 2 billion, that is a huge number. Even if you are lying, there is statistical certainty that hundreds of millions of people around the world have had that exact same experience.

                      Fools think that violent minorities are not enough to cause problems - that focus must be kept on how peaceful the majority are.

                      Tell that to the majority of peaceful Germans in Nazi Germany. Or to the majority of peaceful Russians during their revolutions which killed tens of millions. Or to the peaceful Japanese majority as the minority butchered their way across southeast Asia.

                      Radical Islamic Terrorism is a global threat, because Radical Islamic Terrorists are seeding themselves all around the world and gathering resources - especially in the European countries that are essentially committing suicide.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @09:16AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @09:16AM (#430409)

                    I never once meant to threaten you. Only to educate you as to what extremism actually is.

                    Oh, great, now I am really, really scared. That is what the extremists always say, just before they cut off your head.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:03AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:03AM (#429803)

                " You have beliefs that are extreme, one might call you an extremist! "

                This is problem with liberals. You think that people on the political right are extremists. You literally think that having an opinion - even an outright racist one - is extremism.

                Sorry to burst your bubble, but in my opinion if you are still harbouring racist views in the 21st century then you are an extremist. And I'm not a liberal. Now, according to the First Amendment, you are allowed to have those views and gather together with like-minded individuals who share your views. But that in no way protects you from the neighbours calling you and your racist friends out as extremist assholes. That's not how the First Amendment works.

                • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:45PM

                  by linkdude64 (5482) on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:45PM (#429923)

                  You misunderstand - you have every right to call me an extremist, but we would then only be extremists relative to Western civilization. That is a relative scale.

                  On an absolute scale, we would be extremely moderate, because of the "real" extremists for whom genocide of those who you disagree with - within your own religion - is acceptable.

                  Even the KKK doesn't kill people anymore. That alone should say something about them compared to ISIS.

        • (Score: 4, Informative) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:53PM

          by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:53PM (#429540) Journal
          "None of which are found within the religion of Islam as it is largely practiced in the world."

          The only thing that saves that statement from being a bald-faced lie, of course, is the caveat at the end.

          But even if what you are saying isn't completely and utterly incorrect, what you are doing is picking up, endorsing, amplifying the claims of the very people I am sure you think you are against. Islam encompasses many schools, many traditions. Most of them very different from the picture you paint of them. One group, a group that was small, despised, without power or influence a century ago, matches your picture. The UK foolishly gave them control of the Muslim holy sites and the Arabian oil fields (and the US confirmed and extended the policy to this very day,) and they've been using those gifts to promote their own view worldwide since, and they've grown powerful and influential enough to be a serious problem, most seriously for other muslims of course.

          They are the enemy here - not Islam in general, just this one strain of it. They hope to polarize, to create a world where the west as a whole makes exactly the mistake you make here - giving their claims credence, endorsing them as 'real Islam' is absolutely playing into their hands. They want all the other Muslims to feel so hated, so downtrodden, so trapped, that they have no other choice but to join the jihadis, and the narrative you are pushing is exactly the one they want us to accept for that reason.

          --
          If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:06PM

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:06PM (#429548) Homepage Journal

            The only thing that saves that statement from being a bald-faced lie, of course, is the caveat at the end.

            And yet the end of it does make it objectively and provably true. Which is why I typed it.

            just this one strain of it

            No, there are several different yet similarly violent strains of it currently dominating the Middle East and other areas where Islam is the majority religion. But that's me being a bit pedantic. It is not simply those in power who are pushing for Islamic domination through violence. It is quite popularly supported among the people on the street of Islamic nations as well, last I checked.

            Were they convinced of this by those in power or would they have been of the same opinion left to their own devices? It doesn't matter. Their current views are what is relevant. Passive support of the destruction of all that is not Islam is not as dangerous as outright jihadism but it still should not be allowed within our borders willingly.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:15PM

              by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:15PM (#429553) Journal
              "Were they convinced of this by those in power or would they have been of the same opinion left to their own devices? It doesn't matter."

              It doesn't matter, really?

              :?

              <sarc>No, no, of course not, understanding why something is happening has nothing to do with formulating effective plans to stop it. What was I thinking? </sarc>
              --
              If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
              • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:25PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:25PM (#429559)

                Welcome to conversing with a true believer.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:31PM

                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:31PM (#429561) Homepage Journal

                It doesn't matter, really?

                For the purposes of deciding to allow or disallow immigration, no, it does not. Much like the reason behind a bus is speeding towards you is irrelevant until you are out of its path. What would be relevant is that a bus is speeding towards you.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:53PM

                  by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:53PM (#429576) Journal
                  So your logic is that some Muslims are terrorists, therefore no Muslims should be allowed to immigrate? And to hell with the US Constitution! - really?

                  I'll go you one better. Some people are terrorists, therefore no people should be allowed to immigrate again. My plan doesn't make any more sense than yours does in terms of solving terrorism, but at least it's not so directly inconsistent with the Constitution.

                  Seems you're smart enough to realize there's a problem but still don't understand the importance of diagnosing a problem correctly before you prescribe a solution. 'Just do something' is a foolish motto. All too often, those who are the quickest to 'do something' do the wrong damn thing and make it worse. Sometimes, quite often actually, an attack is not really about the damage it does. It's about provoking a specific reaction. Giving them the reaction they seek is not such a great strategy.

                  --
                  If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:25PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:25PM (#429599)

            Caveat? Actions is what is real.

        • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @12:24AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @12:24AM (#429719)

          > the problem is if you are remotely good at being Islamic, you are a horrible person by western values

          Oh shut the fuck up already. You dumbass okie who has never met a muslim in your entire life.
          I grew up in Dewey, but then I got the fuck out of dumbassistan and actually met real people who were from other places.
          And you know what? They are all the same. Most all of them are decent. They just want to live their lives like anyone else.

          The idea that you can't be a good muslim unless you are like ISIS is total fuckwadery
          That's what ISIS says. Nobody fucking likes ISIS least of all other muslims.
          That's like saying you can't be a christian unless you live like the Lord Resistances Army.
          Being muslim isn't defined by what the worst muslim thinks their religion is.
          So stop collaborating with the enemy.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by bradley13 on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:12PM

        by bradley13 (3053) on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:12PM (#429551) Homepage Journal

        Free exercise of religion, and freedom of conscience, are fundamental core American values

        Well, no. Just as an example: if your religion requires you to practice cannibalism, you will find your freedom rather severely restricted.

        The problem with Islam, or at least the branches of it that concern us, is this: They believe that theirs is the only valid religion, and that they are commanded to convert or slay everyone else (do note: this includes other muslims). Islam (by which I mean this fundamentalist branch of the muslim faith), is incompatible with Western values. Simple self-preservation requires that we ban this barbaric ideology. Adherents are welcome to live out their lives in their own countries, but they have no place in ours.

        --
        Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:18PM

          by Arik (4543) on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:18PM (#429555) Journal
          "Islam (by which I mean this fundamentalist branch of the muslim faith)"

          People (by which I mean this one really rude guy at work)...

          The mind boggles. If you don't mean Islam then quit saying Islam.

          The word you are looking for is Wahhabism.
          --
          If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
          • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @10:15PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @10:15PM (#429647)

            ...and it's worth mentioning that the chief purveyor of that radical brand of Islam is valued USA.gov "ally"[1] Saudi Arabia (think: religious police).

            [1] This "ally" also finances IS/ISIL/ISIS/Daesch.

            -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:36PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:36PM (#429563)

        Free exercise of religion, and freedom of conscience, are fundamental core American values. Saying "it's fair game to discriminate" against a religion is dangerous.

        Glad you feel that way. People are such a bigots hating on us peaceful Khornites for wanting to chop off their heads upon the field of battle as a ritual of worshiping our lord and savior [wikia.com].

        Chaos Undivided is the religion of peace, especially Khorne, the god of war and violence.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:31PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:31PM (#429601)

          qualifies as a cult, like Scientology :)

          Games Workshop certainly acts like Scientology's leadership.

      • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:45AM

        by Reziac (2489) on Sunday November 20 2016, @03:45AM (#429785) Homepage

        TMB is right. Islam is mostly an ideology and political system, with a small dab of religion stuck on sideways. For enlightenment, check out Bill Warner's videos (Political Islam on Youtube).

        And it's entirely fair and reasonable to discriminate against an ideology, especially one that flat out states its goal is to destroy everything that doesn't submit to it.

        --
        And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:49PM (#429490)

      > Islam is not a race. It is an ideology. Those are fair game to discriminate against if you find valid reason.

      Islam is not an ideology, it is a culture. Or rather it is a broad group of cultures.
      Being muslim means a million different things to a million different people.

      Literally all it takes to be a muslim is to follow the five pillars - prayer, charity, fasting, pilgrimage and belief in god.

      Everything beyond that is subject to interpretation and for plenty of people who consider themselves muslim you don't even have to do all five - tons of muslims will never take a pilgrimage. Tons do not pray on a daily basis, some are too stingy or to poor to afford charity. Plenty of muslims don't even consider other muslims to be muslim. Just ask any saudi salafist, they'll tell you the mullahs in iran are not muslim.

      Kind of like how millions of evangelicals deny that catholics are christian. [born-again-christian.info]

      So, if even muslims can't agree on who is really a muslim, its ignorant to say that islam is an ideology.

      Furthermore, race is not genetic. Race is culture. That's why guys like Ben Franklin did not consider Italians, Germans or even Irish to be white. [gutenberg.org]

      the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny; Asia chiefly tawny; America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians, and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who, with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth.

      So your reductive complaint that "islam is not a race" is at best meaningless pedantry, but really a confession that you think race is merely biology when the actual definition [oxforddictionaries.com] is far more broad than that.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:09PM (#429501)

        Nope, we are just at the point where people are trying very hard to keep their prejudice palatable. Fear and prejudice is sneaky and such people aren't evil, just misguided. They feel like their reasoning is justified and don't consider that they are generalizing unfairly. I don't think TMB sees how close he is to it...

        I've got a friend who went on and on about how Muslims are inherently violent etc, until I pointed out how Christians have bombed clinics and such. He had to think a bit on that one and pulled back a bit on his judgments. I doubt TMB is willing to adjust, he is too smart for his own good.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:28PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:28PM (#429520) Homepage Journal

          Christianity, as practiced overall in the modern world, does not preach or even condone violence. Islam does. That is your difference. I am not afraid of Islam or those who follow it any more than I am afraid of lightning strikes. I simply recognize that there is no way to mesh mainstream Islam as it is practiced overall today with western values. Individual cases may vary but the generalization holds. Any attempt at integrating the two will lead to violence as is being witnessed all throughout Europe as we speak.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:51PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:51PM (#429538)

            It is already being done. You're so full of baseless presumptions.

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:19PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:19PM (#429509) Homepage Journal

        Fair argument. Incorrect but at least well thought out.

        The only possible entry in your link to support your position is 1.2 and it is not in current, popular usage. Certainly not widely enough to be the root meaning of the extremely widely used "racism". Definition 1.1 is clearly the only definition of "race" as involved with the word "racism" [oxforddictionaries.com], unless you are looking to redefine that word.

        So, if even muslims can't agree on who is really a muslim, its ignorant to say that islam is an ideology.

        No, it is simply a simplification of convenience. If you were to take every last interpretation of Islam, give it a name, and replace "Islam" with that name in my statement, it would still be correct. Religions and ideologies are not races as required for the term "racism".

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:11PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:11PM (#429550)

          > The only possible entry in your link to support your position is 1.2 and it is not in current, popular usage.

          I see you do not understand how dictionaries work. The definitions are ordered by the frequency of current usage. That's why the last definition in the list is the one labeled archaic. Thus the second on the list is the second most common usage.

          Race as a synonym for culture is used all the time. For example, black music. [nmaam.org] Music isn't genetic. Maybe you'd like to argue that black is not a race?

          And similarly islamic architecture [britannica.com]. Architecture can't have an ideology, but it is definitely cultural.
           
          > Certainly not widely enough to be the root meaning of the extremely widely used "racism".

          Now that we've established that culture is a commonly used meaning of race. Lets apply that to the definition of racism as you linked and see how well it fits:

          Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own culture is superior

          Well, surprise. That's exactly how Trump sees islam.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:40PM

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:40PM (#429567) Homepage Journal

            I disagree but for argument's sake, let's go ahead with your definition and conclusion.

            Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own culture is superior

            Well, surprise. That's exactly how Trump sees islam.

            And in that he would be absolutely correct. By any objective standard you care to think up, western culture will come out superior to Islamic culture.

            Or would you rather throw homosexuals to their deaths from rooftops, restrict women from going to school, driving, walking unescorted, or showing so much as an ankle in public, allow the raping of your wife, punish the women when they are raped, and call for the deaths of anyone not subscribing to western culture? Because that is precisely what Islamic culture would bring you.

            It's a valid question. You need to answer it, to yourself at least, before you go promoting cultural equality.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:00PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:00PM (#429580)

              > I disagree but for argument's sake, let's go ahead with your definition and conclusion.

              No lets not.

              Switching to an argument about whether your racism is justified is just a capitulation because you can no longer defend your original statement.
              That's all I cared about.

            • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Whoever on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:13PM

              by Whoever (4524) on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:13PM (#429591) Journal

              Or would you rather throw homosexuals to their deaths from rooftops,

              Did you fail to notice who Trump appointed to lead the Justice department? Someone who argued in favor of locking up homosexuals.

              Your point about people claiming to support Trump does not mean that Trump agrees with those people. However, that point becomes irrelevant when Trump appoints those same people to his cabinet. You can't say that the KKK supporting Trump is irrelevant when Trump appoints a white supremacist as his chief strategist.

            • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:32AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:32AM (#429810)

              And in that he would be absolutely correct. By any objective standard you care to think up, western culture will come out superior to Islamic culture.

              Look, I don't give a damn about your vaunted notions of culture! What I care about is individual people. By all means, hold individual persons accountable for their actions; you get no argument from me on that point. And I have little patience for someone who wants to be excused for their actions because "it's just a part of my culture". But to hold an individual accountable for the culture they were born into, as if they have complete control over everyone of their neighbours, is just plain stupid. I notice that this is not the first time you have been called out for being rather uncharitable (some might even say mean-spirited) in your views. The fact that you don't seem to learn from your past mistakes does not speak well of you. Frankly, I would expect better from the people who post comments here on SN. If you like, you may consider this my way of trying to positively influence those within my cultural sphere.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:00PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:00PM (#429581)

        Islam is not an ideology, it is a culture. Or rather it is a broad group of cultures.

        Literally all it takes to be a muslim is to follow the five pillars - prayer, charity, fasting, pilgrimage and belief in god.

        So Islam is not an idology but it entails following a set of doctrines and beliefs... You keep using that word, but I don't think it means what you think it means.

        Being muslim means a million different things to a million different people.

        Yes and they all agree they should follow the Quran. Which describes a set of practices that all good Muslims should follow.

        So, if even muslims can't agree on who is really a muslim, its ignorant to say that islam is an ideology.

        And all Nazis can't agree on who is really a Nazi, therefore it's ignorant to say Nazism is an ideology.

        Everything beyond that is subject to interpretation and for plenty of people who consider themselves muslim you don't even have to do all five

        Any doctrine with more than 10 followers has practitioners who half-ass it. That doesn't mean they stop being ideologies, it just means there are people who are bad at them.

        Kind of like how millions of evangelicals deny that catholics are christian.

        That would be a No True Scotsman which is a well-established logical error.

        Furthermore, race is not genetic. Race is culture.

        Right. Okay, who let the post-modernist loon in here?

        That's why guys like Ben Franklin did not consider Italians, Germans or even Irish to be white.

        Ben Franklin is not an anthropologist. His opinion on what consists of race is about as relevant as Ted Stevens's opinion on the nature of the Internet.

        So your reductive complaint that "islam is not a race" is at best meaningless pedantry, but really a confession that you think race is merely biology when the actual definition is far more broad than that.

        Ah, I see what the problem is. The actual definition depends on what all speakers of a given word agree upon. Most English speakers use only one definition for the word, which is the classification of people based on external traits as it defined in the old anthropological models of classifying humans. Furthermore, since people like you are trying to redefine race as cultural in order to abuse the power of branding people of racist, this creates the logical error where the vilification of racism is justified because people are unable to control their heritable genetic traits, but this would not apply to race(culture) since you can choose not to follow tenets of your own culture. Nice sophism through, I rate it 19/84.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:43AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:43AM (#429817)

          Most English speakers use only one definition for the word, which is the classification of people based on external traits as it defined in the old anthropological models of classifying humans.

          That's some fancy ad populum fallacy. And your evidence for what "most english speakers" mean is what exactly?

          Because essentially all geneticists say there is no biological basis for race. [scientificamerican.com]
          For example, Craig Venter of the Human Genome Project: [nytimes.com] ''Race is a social concept, not a scientific one,''

          Perhaps what you really mean is that most in the group of bigoted english speakers like yourself.
          Do you really want to argue with the previously cited oxford english dictionary? [oxforddictionaries.com] Are you so confident that you think you know better than them what is common usage?
          I guess there is no telling a bigot anything he doesn't want to hear.

          Why not just own that r-word? Get it off your chest, out in the open.
          You will feel so much freer to indulge your true self without the internal restraint of trying to conform to social norms.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @07:47AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @07:47AM (#429843)

            That's some fancy ad populum fallacy.

            No, this is literally how language is formed. It's not faulty logic because this is the actual mechanism of action of word formation. That would be like saying it's an ad populum to say that the person who got most votes won the election.

            Incidentally, citing the dictionary is actually an argument from authority, because dictionaries are descriptive rather than prescriptive. A dictionary does not tell you how you should use words, it tells you how words are being used by people. Furthermore, ignoring the fact that the very same page also lists the definition of race you argue against is cherrypicking.

            And your evidence for what "most english speakers" mean is what exactly?

            None, this is just my opinion. If you really have to be a contrarian about it, we can agree to disagree.

            Because essentially all geneticists say there is no biological basis for race.

            I didn't say it is. It's not that unusual for people to use vague and inaccurate definitions, that doesn't mean the definition is wrong. A logically unsound concept can be accurately defined.

            Perhaps what you really mean is that most in the group of bigoted english speakers like yourself.

            No.

            Do you really want to argue with the previously cited oxford english dictionary?

            I'm not even sure how exactly one is supposed to argue with a definition. Suppose that OED defined "rock" as a "large blue mouse". How exactly would you argue against it?

            Are you so confident that you think you know better than them what is common usage?

            Being in the dictionary does not imply it's commonly used. Many words have rare, outdated or domain-specific interpretations. Take hacker for example, some tech nerds use a fairly benign meaning for it, but to most people outside the hacker subculture, it just means someone who illegally breaks into computer systems.

            I guess there is no telling a bigot anything he doesn't want to hear.

            That's a bit extreme to say about someone based on linguistic disagreements.

            Why not just own that r-word? Get it off your chest, out in the open.
            You will feel so much freer to indulge your true self without the internal restraint of trying to conform to social norms.

            Raspberry!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:05PM (#429547)

      Christianity therefore is not a religion either, by that agument, and thus not protected by 1st Amendment etc either.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:13PM (#429472)

    If a religions belief (Islam, Muslim, or whatever) is that all other religions (Non Islam, Muslim, or whatever) are "Infidels and should be killed", I think that violates the first amendment right there. If you want to argue that statement then why not open the border and invite ISIS to freely invade the USA and do what they've been doing? Freedom of religion right?

  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:21PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:21PM (#429474)

    Trump literally said "Islam hates us." And in case that was just an inartful phrasing, the interviewer prompted him to say that he was not talking about normal muslims. Trump would not do it, instead he said "its very hard to define because you don't know who is who." That is the religious equivalent of "they all look alike to me."

    Seems quite reasonable to me, all considered...

    Muslim:C20B1N4597 The Prophet said at the conquest of Mecca: There is no migration now, but only Jihad, fighting for the Cause of Islam.

    Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

    Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

    Sahih Bukhari (52:177) "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @05:53PM (#429492)

      You dumbfucks are tiresome. You really want to get into a "pick your favorite line" game? I'm up for it as long as I can use that Old Testament with all it's hateful, incestual passages.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:16PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:16PM (#429506)

        You dumbfucks are tiresome. You really want to get into a "pick your favorite line" game? I'm up for it as long as I can use that Old Testament with all it's hateful, incestual passages.

        Sure, also tally it with the amount of people that have been murdered due to writings in the Old Testament vis-a-vis the Quran in recent history. Tiresome indeed...

        Sahih Bukhari (11:626) - "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."

        Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us"

        Sahih Bukhari (8:387) - "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:26PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:26PM (#429518)

          Sure, also tally it with the amount of people that have been murdered due to writings in the Old Testament vis-a-vis the Quran in recent history.

          Christians killed about 100,000 muslims [combatgenocide.org] in the former yugoslavia during the early 1990s.
          So, if bodycount is what matters, christianity is looking pretty horrible.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:47PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @06:47PM (#429537)

            Christians killed about 100,000 muslims in the former yugoslavia during the early 1990s. So, if bodycount is what matters, christianity is looking pretty horrible.

            Where did the New Testament instruct Christians to do that? Were these actions not roundly condemned by (almost) every Western country?

            We're getting towards 50,000 human beings murdered by Islamic terrorists in the last 2 years alone. [thereligionofpeace.com] Many of these victims are muslim, as is the case of the (est.) ~275,000,000 people slaughtered in the name of Islam over the last 1400 years.

            What you should know is that I am an atheist and opposed to every single one of these murders. Stalin was wrong, loss of human life is not a statistic.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:47PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @07:47PM (#429570)

              > Where did the New Testament instruct Christians to do that?

              Are you really going to try to retcon the old testament out of modern christianity?
              Most christians, especially the orthodox christians who murdered those muslims believe that old testament is official christian canon.
              But don't take my word for, here's what Jesus said:

              'The Scripture cannot be broken’ (John 10:35)
              ‘the commandment of God’ (Matthew 15:3)
              ‘Word of God’ (Mark 7:13)

              And the big one:
              I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God's law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.
              (Matthew 5:18)
               

              > Were these actions not roundly condemned by (almost) every Western country?

              And ISIS has been widely condemned by muslims [google.com] too.
               

              > We're getting towards 50,000 human beings murdered by Islamic terrorists in the last 2 years alone. Many of these victims are muslim

              If everyone who is killed by muslims is killed because of religion including other muslims then the rwandan genocide puts the christian bodycount up another 800,000 and that's ignoring a couple of little wars you might have heard of - WWI and WII.

              And this is going to be my last response to you because anyone citing an islamofoe webnsite like that is not someone looking for truth, they are someone looking to rationalize bigotry. There is no honor or humanity in debating with someone doing that because there is no possibility to change minds.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:36PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:36PM (#429606)

                Orthodox christians say Old Testament does not matter now.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @09:03PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @09:03PM (#429617)

                Are you really going to try to retcon the old testament out of modern christianity? Most christians, especially the orthodox christians who murdered those muslims believe that old testament is official christian canon.

                The Ottomans didn't conquer these lands until the 15th Century and following the breakup of Yugoslavia, the Bosnian situation escalated because an independence referendum was voted on in the absence of the Serbs (together with Croats, they made up around 60% of the population). It was Pakistan that violated the UN embargo on the supply of arms and turned the situation to complete shit. The KLA didn't start shooting Serbian police until the late '90s. I suggest that the the usual list of suspects get the blame. [counterpunch.org] You cannot seriously be suggesting that orthodox Christians woke up one morning and decided to start massacring muslims apropos of nothing but religious compulsion?

                the rwandan genocide puts the christian bodycount up another 800,000

                This was a post-colonial tribal war, the Tutsi comprised both Christians and Muslims. The original point of contention was not religion.

                ignoring a couple of little wars you might have heard of - WWI and WII.

                Err, no! These wars were simply not fought over religion.

          • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday November 20 2016, @04:04AM

            by Reziac (2489) on Sunday November 20 2016, @04:04AM (#429790) Homepage

            Compared to what? By some estimates, Islamic jihad has killed around 270 MILLION people across 1400 years. A fairly comprehensive overview, well worth an hour of your time:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y [youtube.com]

            --
            And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:20AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:20AM (#429805)

              > By some estimates,

              Grow up. No one neutral has made such estimates, only outright bigots.
              If you insist on citing outright bigots, that makes you an outright bigot too.

  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:06PM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:06PM (#429584) Journal

    I didn't see the video and have no intention of seeing it, but the fear of both the Israeli and the Palestinians is rational. If you look back through just a few decades of history you can easily see that they both have extremely rational reasons for fear. Currently the Israelis have more power, and they are using it abusively, but this doesn't mean that their fears are irrational. If you just go back a few decades (years?) every single country neighboring to Israel was endeavoring to destroy the country. Frequently with explicitly anti-jewish slogans. In the case of the Palestinians you only need to go back a week or so. (I don't follow the news carefully, it could have been yesterday.)

    The problem is there's a quite small parcel of land and two quite immiscible groups are both trying to live there. They both have valid reasons to distrust the other. And given the history of the reason I'm tempted to say there are no good guys there, though when talking of individuals rather than governments and quasi-governmental groups I know this is false.

    Now it's clearly wrong to judge a video by it's title, but your post was essentially asking me to do just that, so this is my response.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:22AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @05:22AM (#429806)

      > didn't see the video and have no intention of seeing it, but the fear of both the Israeli and the Palestinians is rational.

      Since when did muslim mean palestinian and when did jew mean israeli?

      You sound even worse than Flynn.