The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > SHH Community > Politics

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-19-2012, 01:17 PM   #551
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Overlord View Post
Does all this generosity justify all the times the US supported dictatorships around the world? Where was that generosity when the US supported a military in Chile in 1972 or during the Iran-Contra Affair? What gives the US government the right to support dictatorships, is that not contrary to America's values?

Let's not be naive here, America is not the great Satan that some make it to be, but America is not morally superior to every other country on the planet. Portraying America that way breeds arrogance and complacency, no one is going to see the need for improvement if conservatives insist America is almost perfect in the first place.
I don't think the US was trying to support a dictator in Chile. On the contrary, it seems their fear was that Allende was to friendly with Cuba which we were more contetious with back then and so under JFK and continuing thru Nixon, they took actions to keep Chile from becoming what they thought would be another Cuba.

I guess you have to think if you want Amnerica involved at all in trying to affect what goes on in other parts of the world. If we can pick and choose, there should be some clearly defined parameters for doing so/not doing so. Or make it completely hands off - we don;t mess with anyone else, we make sure no one else messes with us.

You know in the 80s when we helped the Afghan rebels against the Russians (who at the time were our nemesis) who knew we were in effect helping the ones who would become an even greater nemesis? SOmetimes things blow up in your face. No one's perfect. More clearly delineated policies would help with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Overlord
Also do you really think other Western countries don't give a lot of foreign aid to poor countries?
I don't know the stats but I'd say we are always present when aid is being given to a foreign country. I don't know if there is another country you can say that about.

Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-19-2012, 02:54 PM   #552
MessiahDecoy123
Cosmic Spidey
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,788
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
Exactly: it is 'being used' for their purpose. And in the absence of the video, they'd have just found somemother excuse.




Yes, you are correct. It is their right to not show nipples show nipples but refuse to take down the muhammad video. Hey, maybe they just don't like islamic terrorists and don't want to take it down because they view it as an extension of their right to free speech. I'd say your only recourse if you don't like Youtube's policies is to boycott them yourself and encourage others to do the same. That is your right.




Hey, I've asked you some very simple questions and because you can't answer them you want to resort to childish namecalling?

You do not know that removing the video would have done anything to reduce the incidence of the riots. You assume that if we give them what they want (removing the video) they will respond with a concession of their own (stopping/never starting the riots). My view is that the video was never the catalyst in the first place (backed by several sources already shown) and that all removing the video would do would be to show them that they can get what they want by commiting atrocious acts of terror and would only encourage them to commit more to see how far they could push the envelope? I asked you how far do you think they should be allowed to push that envelope and in spite of addressing others' posts, you merely throw out an immature aspersion at me. Whatever. Why don't you go play in the little boys' forum until you grow up a little.
You don't find your own condescending remarks immature or potentially offensive?

Interesting.

All I'm saying is if, from a business standpoint, YouTube can ban sex, violence and trolling when it offends soccer moms why can't they ban something that is helping destroy western progress in the entire Middle East?

Why is money more important than helping stabilize the Middle East?

MessiahDecoy123 is online now  
Old 09-19-2012, 05:04 PM   #553
Marvolo
Side-Kick
 
Marvolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,513
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

One of the actresses that was in the film is now suing the producer and Youtube because she is receiving death threats. Lol yes blame everyone but yourself.

Marvolo is offline  
Old 09-19-2012, 05:07 PM   #554
DaveMoral
Side-Kick
 
DaveMoral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,639
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

The actord were duped as to the subject matter of the film and their lines were dubbed in post. She has a spectacular case for fraud there.

DaveMoral is offline  
Old 09-19-2012, 05:11 PM   #555
Marvolo
Side-Kick
 
Marvolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,513
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveMoral View Post
The actord were duped as to the subject matter of the film and their lines were dubbed in post. She has a spectacular case for fraud there.
With that in mind, i retract my statement. She should go after the producer and director. But im not sure about Youtube being liable. They had no way of knowing this.

__________________
The Most Astounding Fact (Neil deGrasse Tyson, HD):
VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson: A Fascinatingly Disturbing Thought
VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:
Marvolo is offline  
Old 09-19-2012, 05:12 PM   #556
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,056
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

None may be liable....depends on what her contract states.....

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God'… Maya Angelou
Kelly is offline  
Old 09-19-2012, 05:20 PM   #557
Kahran Ramsus
Side-Kick
 
Kahran Ramsus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Sunshine State
Posts: 4,549
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly View Post
None may be liable....depends on what her contract states.....
Youtube definitely isn't though.

Kahran Ramsus is online now  
Old 09-19-2012, 06:20 PM   #558
MessiahDecoy123
Cosmic Spidey
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,788
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Didn't YouTube popularize the video?

How many obscure videos get popularized without YouTube?

MessiahDecoy123 is online now  
Old 09-19-2012, 06:37 PM   #559
Kahran Ramsus
Side-Kick
 
Kahran Ramsus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Sunshine State
Posts: 4,549
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Youtube is merely a site that allows people to upload videos. It has nothing to do with the content of those videos or whether contracts were followed or not for people starring in them. It would be like a writer accusing another author or plagiarism and then suing the library. There is no chance Youtube will be held liable in an American court, unless they ignore a court order to remove it, which hasn't happened.

Kahran Ramsus is online now  
Old 09-19-2012, 11:25 PM   #560
Midnyte_Sun
Medianoche de Sol
 
Midnyte_Sun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 5,175
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
I cant make it any clearer than the source.

http://www.albawaba.com/editorchoice...muslims-442553

"People in Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, Libya and India have lost access to the controversial film “Innocence of Muslims,” following moves by Google and YouTube. Google has begun barring access in Malaysia to the controversial video after the country’s Internet regulator lodged an official complaint."
Are you clarifying or arguing? Not really sure, but again, the states are the ones responsible for the banning of the Youtubez, not Google.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
What ideology do you think could be promoted in a more reasonable way and how would that promotion spread US interest abroad?
I think some opportunities are unique to the countries they are interested in.
But the most important one is education! I love the idea of study abroad programs, workshops to teach men and women vocational skills. I like the idea of collaboration in the arts. In the 60's, Afghanistan had a program with the US in which US students would study there and vice versa, it was very successful up until the Russians invaded. Many countries in the Middle East also took part in these programs. Some of the students went to the west and study and went back to their countries to teach or begin their professional careers. This program is still in effect. Education and employment is what will get people to think critically about issues that arise, instead of blindly joining the mob mentality.

This path is a lot slower and the results won't be on your daily news, but this is the best way.

Cultural sensitivity goes a long way. Collaborate with them in science, mathematics, business, etc. It takes quite a lot of tact when dealing with a culture that is entirely different from your own. When the Russians invaded Afghanistan back in the late 70's, they brought some of their Soviet teachers to preach the merits of communism and atheism to some uneducated villagers. They responded in kind by beheading the teachers in question and burning their books. The Russians claimed they were working for the rebels, but how easy is it to get people angry when you've already invaded their country? When the country is in the middle of war, sensitivity goes way up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
What you either don't understand or won't admit to is that our very existence provokes them.
That's quite a large generalization on Muslims. There are estimates of up to 3 Million Muslims in the United states, and over 60 Million Muslims in Europe. Most Muslims are not even in Europe or the Middle East, but in South East Asia. Are you saying they are all hellbent on burning your house down?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
What Obama doesn't understand is that there is no making friends with them. There is nothing we can do to win there favor but to die. There is nothing less they will settle for than our complete subjugation to the laws of Islam.
Another giant generalization.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
As has been stated repeatedly in this thread, these acts were planned months ago, well before the video was released. Is it your view that if the video was never released that the attacks on our embassies would never have happened?
I'll let the FBI come out with their final assessment on what really happened at the embassy in Libya. From what I've read it seems there were extremist elements ready to attack and there were warnings that were ignored. That doesn't explain though how the videos themselves ignited an outcry from many people around the world. We know from the past that attacking their religion by burning their holy book (in the case of Pastor Terry Jones and the US forces in Afghanistan) led to deaths in Afghanistan.

The people killed, and the people who rioted were non-bearded, non-Taliban, some of them not even the same religious sect as the Taliban. Burning their holy book is universally condemned by every sect and religious school of thought in Islam. There's no question extremist elements will take advantage of these incendiary videos, but the majority of people offended were non-extremists. They're just not going to go out and burn tires on the street.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
You sound intelligent enough not to be that niave. What if they said next that our "American Films and television shows" are an affront to them?
Does every show involve burning their holy books and insulting their identity? The fact of the matter is, the governments of Muslim Republics wouldn't allow such programs to air offensive videos in the first place.

In Afghanistan, clerics had been calling the government to ban Indian soap operas for corrupting the minds of youths and promoting idolatry. The government enacted a ban, but people in the country are still streaming it from their sattelite dishes without any regulations. This just goes to show, the people will watch shows that aren't "halaal entertainment' such as Hollywood, Bollywood, movies, even pornography, as long as they feel the show doesn't specifically target their religion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
That analogy is completely wrong. Lemonade is good, 'the destructive ideology of Islam' which is what Jones said he was 'promoting', is not, ergo not apples to apples. Again how far do you go to aquiesce to these people's demands? When they can continually change what 'provokes' them, from your viewpoint you're pretty much screwed.
You're obviously not getting the point. Terry Jones is a loon who burned Korans because he said Jihadis built a "Victory Mosque" at Ground Zero. He also believes that Obama is a Muslim. When he was questioned about burning the Korans and the implications it had for US security, he said it was exercising his right of freedom of expression. So freedom of expression (Lemonade) is what he wanted to show these so-called freedom hating Muslims.

He believed burning Korans was a great way to show that he isn't 'bowing down' to these Jihadis for building their 'victory mosque.' So in essence, yes, Yosemite Sam Terry Jones wants to show that Lemonade is good and that no Muslim can take that right away from him. But the way he wants to show it is by shooting lemonade in their eyes.


Last edited by Midnyte_Sun; 09-19-2012 at 11:29 PM.
Midnyte_Sun is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 07:16 AM   #561
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
You don't find your own condescending remarks immature or potentially offensive?

Interesting.

All I'm saying is if, from a business standpoint, YouTube can ban sex, violence and trolling when it offends soccer moms why can't they ban something that is helping destroy western progress in the entire Middle East?

Why is money more important than helping stabilize the Middle East?
Yes, from a business standpoint Youtube can ban sex, violence and trolling. They could ban the video. I guess they just choose not to. From a business standpoint, that is their right. Yes, they actually have that right. It seems this hurts your sensibilities but there it is.

And are you serious? How long has it been since the middle east has been stabilized? You trying to say that this video is somehow the magic pill that will solve hundreds if not thousands of years of instability?

There will never be any 'western progress' in the middle east at least not enough to make a difference (unless you call the US giving in to Al Quaeda's every demand until they basically rule us 'progress' - that is the only way they will ever stop). Get real.

And now there is evidence that the attacks were led out by a former Gitmo detainee. Yay hope and change! Now let's just keep moving 'forward'.

Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 08:01 AM   #562
MessiahDecoy123
Cosmic Spidey
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,788
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider - Man View Post
Yes, from a business standpoint Youtube can ban sex, violence and trolling. They could ban the video. I guess they just choose not to. From a business standpoint, that is their right. Yes, they actually have that right. It seems this hurts your sensibilities but there it is.
I know it's their right but

1) Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it.

2) Their stance on freedom of speech is hypocritical BS. They ban things that offend soccer moms hundreds of times a day.

Is it their right to be shamefully hypocritical? Yes.

Should we call them out on it. Of course.

Is the media and public calling them out for hypocrisy? Unfortunately no.

Quote:
And are you serious? How long has it been since the middle east has been stabilized? You trying to say that this video is somehow the magic pill that will solve hundreds if not thousands of years of instability?
Pedophilia has been going on for thousands of years but we don't legalize it and open the floodgates of child abuse. It's about limiting the corrosion of rights and western influence around the world. Not throwing gasoline on it for the sake of a hypocritical censorship stance.

Quote:
There will never be any 'western progress' in the middle east at least not enough to make a difference (unless you call the US giving in to Al Quaeda's every demand until they basically rule us 'progress' - that is the only way they will ever stop). Get real.

And now there is evidence that the attacks were led out by a former Gitmo detainee. Yay hope and change! Now let's just keep moving 'forward'.
So you think we should leave the Middle East? Finally we agree.

However that will never happen because they have the biggest oil reserves on the entire planet. But if we want that oil we have to respect their beliefs and customs to some extent. It's called diplomacy. If a kid wants to play another kids XBOX he's probably not going to call his mother a whore and smear her picture with feces on YouTube then hide behind the freedom of speech. That would be counterproductive and not practical in any way.

There are better ways to teach the Middle East about the value of Free Speech. This is the WORST way to do it. THE WORST.


Last edited by MessiahDecoy123; 09-20-2012 at 08:15 AM.
MessiahDecoy123 is online now  
Old 09-20-2012, 08:34 AM   #563
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun View Post
Are you clarifying or arguing? Not really sure, but again, the states are the ones responsible for the banning of the Youtubez, not Google.
Here are the important parts of what I posted:

lost access to the controversial film “Innocence of Muslims,” following moves by Google and YouTube.

Google has begun barring access

the country’s Internet regulator lodged an official complaint

The country lodged a complaint but it was Google and Youtube who made the moves to bar the access. What is not clear about that?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
I think some opportunities are unique to the countries they are interested in.
But the most important one is education! I love the idea of study abroad programs, workshops to teach men and women vocational skills. I like the idea of collaboration in the arts. In the 60's, Afghanistan had a program with the US in which US students would study there and vice versa, it was very successful up until the Russians invaded. Many countries in the Middle East also took part in these programs. Some of the students went to the west and study and went back to their countries to teach or begin their professional careers. This program is still in effect. Education and employment is what will get people to think critically about issues that arise, instead of blindly joining the mob mentality.

This path is a lot slower and the results won't be on your daily news, but this is the best way.

Cultural sensitivity goes a long way. Collaborate with them in science, mathematics, business, etc. It takes quite a lot of tact when dealing with a culture that is entirely different from your own. When the Russians invaded Afghanistan back in the late 70's, they brought some of their Soviet teachers to preach the merits of communism and atheism to some uneducated villagers. They responded in kind by beheading the teachers in question and burning their books. The Russians claimed they were working for the rebels, but how easy is it to get people angry when you've already invaded their country? When the country is in the middle of war, sensitivity goes way up.
You talk like this is some new idea that no one has ever thought of before. Do you think there have not long been efforts to 'educate' and collaborate over there? It doesn't change anything. And things only get worse over there. I remember in the 70s when Carter held the peace talks with Bagin (sp?) and Sadat and they were all so warm and fuzzy and even called it the 'Jimmy Carter Peace talks'. What good did that do? None. Situation's worse than ever.

And in the 60s we didn't have al quaeda flying planes into our skyscrapers and attacking and killing American citizens in embassies (American soil). Little step backwards there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
That's quite a large generalization on Muslims. There are estimates of up to 3 Million Muslims in the United states, and over 60 Million Muslims in Europe. Most Muslims are not even in Europe or the Middle East, but in South East Asia. Are you saying they are all hellbent on burning your house down?
Well, in case it wasn't clear, I was speaking of militant Muslim extremists, you know the ones everyone is talking about in this thread, the ones who attacked our embassies. I thought I had specified that but if not I at least thought it was clear that's who we were all discussing in this thread. Go back and apply what I said to the population I was actually talking about and f you still don;t agree, then we are just of a different mind as to the kind of people we're dealing with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
Another giant generalization.
Again, muslim extremists, not all muslims. However I would like to take a second to point out a glaring disparity. I find it funny that it seems ok to democrats to paint all conservatives as racist/homophobic/sexist/whatever yet it must be pointed out when talking of muslims that the majority of them are peace-loving. Just seems funny how the left gets to apply these double standards with no one calling them on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
I'll let the FBI come out with their final assessment on what really happened at the embassy in Libya. From what I've read it seems there were extremist elements ready to attack and there were warnings that were ignored. That doesn't explain though how the videos themselves ignited an outcry from many people around the world. We know from the past that attacking their religion by burning their holy book (in the case of Pastor Terry Jones and the US forces in Afghanistan) led to deaths in Afghanistan.
I'll just say this about it since I haven;t actually looked for any evidence, but for myself, the first I heard about the video was from Jay Carney on the national news. How many others do you think first discovered this otherwise obscure video from this white house rep who was trying to say that the riots weren't due to them hating America but over the video? How far did that one message go to promote the existence of this video?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
The people killed, and the people who rioted were non-bearded, non-Taliban, some of them not even the same religious sect as the Taliban.
source?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
Burning their holy book is universally condemned by every sect and religious school of thought in Islam. There's no question extremist elements will take advantage of these incendiary videos, but the majority of people offended were non-extremists. They're just not going to go out and burn tires on the street.
Sounds like you make a pretty good argument for banning any anti-Christian stuff in the media (which would be A LOT OF STUFF!). Since there are no insidence of Christians attacking movie studios, production companies, publishing companies, Youtube, and a host of other outlets which promote Christian bashing/mockery, they seem to fall into the same category as the people whose rights to be offended you seem to be speaking in support of. The anti-muslim media doesn't compare in quantity and scope to that which makes fun of Christianity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
Does every show involve burning their holy books and insulting their identity? The fact of the matter is, the governments of Muslim Republics wouldn't allow such programs to air offensive videos in the first place.

In Afghanistan, clerics had been calling the government to ban Indian soap operas for corrupting the minds of youths and promoting idolatry. The government enacted a ban, but people in the country are still streaming it from their sattelite dishes without any regulations. This just goes to show, the people will watch shows that aren't "halaal entertainment' such as Hollywood, Bollywood, movies, even pornography, as long as they feel the show doesn't specifically target their religion.
You just contradicted yourself. First you say that the government wouldn't allow such offensive videos and then show that the government not allowing them makes no difference anyway. This further sinks your earlier point about the government banning youtube as you clearly point out how government banning media is basically ineffectual.

For my part, I was again talking about the extremist muslims, not the majority of those who will watch whatever as long as it doesn't attack their religion. The muslim extremists are more concerned with how far they can push the envelope to meet their objective: seeing the entire world under muslim rule. My point is that they first use 'offense over attacks against their religion' as an excuse (and thats all it is, an excuse to be violent and barbaric) to get non-muslim countries and governments to give in to their demands. When they are shown that they can do whatever they want and their demands are met (i.e.: the video being taken down, a free-speech issue) they'll say "hey, let's push a little more, ask for something a little less reasonable and threaten more violence if our demands aren't met and see just how much the weak americans will actually give up to avoid any conflict with us! Hey, let's say we're offended by their tv shows and movies because they show women with their heads uncovered and being equal to men (snicker)! And corrupting themselves with alcohol! (heehee!) and eating pork!" Your point was that we shouldn't offned them so what if they next say that is what offends them? How far do we let them go commiting acts of murder against Americans before we realize that the more we give in, the more they will want, only stopping up to and including a world-wide ban on freedom of any religion other than islam.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnyte_Sun
You're obviously not getting the point. Terry Jones is a loon who burned Korans because he said Jihadis built a "Victory Mosque" at Ground Zero. He also believes that Obama is a Muslim. When he was questioned about burning the Korans and the implications it had for US security, he said it was exercising his right of freedom of expression. So freedom of expression (Lemonade) is what he wanted to show these so-called freedom hating Muslims.

He believed burning Korans was a great way to show that he isn't 'bowing down' to these Jihadis for building their 'victory mosque.' So in essence, yes, Yosemite Sam Terry Jones wants to show that Lemonade is good and that no Muslim can take that right away from him. But the way he wants to show it is by shooting lemonade in their eyes.
We will just choose to disagree. I don't think that the main point he wanted to get across was that he had the right to express himself. I don;t think he was saying "see, i have the right, because I live in America, to express myself!" (your lemonade) which is good. The right to freedom of expression is a good thing but not the point he was trying to get across. I think the point he wanted to get across is what he thinks of as the 'destructive ideology of islam (which he considers bad, not good, i.e.: not like lemonade).

http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/201...-and-violence/

Side note: did you not find it strange that certain people wanted to put a mosque that represented the religion that people who commited the most infamous act against America said they were doing in honor of in the location that that very act was commited? Did you not find that a little bit of insult to injury? As someone said once, America won't fall with a bang, but with a shrug of apathy.


Last edited by Spider - Man; 09-20-2012 at 08:41 AM.
Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 08:57 AM   #564
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Edit : Deleted


Last edited by Mandalore464; 10-18-2012 at 03:17 AM.
Mandalore464 is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 09:33 AM   #565
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
I know it's their right but

1) Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it.

2) Their stance on freedom of speech is hypocritical BS. They ban things that offend soccer moms hundreds of times a day.

Is it their right to be shamefully hypocritical? Yes.

Should we call them out on it. Of course.

Is the media and public calling them out for hypocrisy? Unfortunately no.
First, what the hell is your issue with soccer moms? And exactly what is Youtube's stand on free speech? You keep alluding to it but do you actually know what their stance is? I mean do they reference freedom of speech in their mission statement or something? Wthout that, you're arguing against something that doesn't even exist. I never knew they even claimed a specific stance on freedom of speech.

There are rights and then there is what should/should not be done. Rights are pretty concrete. What is for the best/should be done is a matter of opinion. As to rights, we're discussing 2 different ones: the right of freedom of speech of whoever posts on youtube and the right of youtube to allow whatever they want to be shown and ban what they don't. The second supercedes the first in this case since it is their business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123
Pedophilia has been going on for thousands of years but we don't legalize it and open the floodgates of child abuse. It's about limiting the corrosion of rights and western influence around the world. Not throwing gasoline on it for the sake of a hypocritical censorship stance.
I don't know where you're coming from within the context of what this is supposed to be a reply to. What is pedophelia supposed to be an analogy for, instability in the middle east (what we were talking about)? How could we 'legalize' anything to do with that? I don't understand your context. The floodgates are open and have been open for that instability for hundreds and hundreds of years without any help from some video.

Going back, you said you think they should ban this video because it helps destroy western progress in the middle east. That money (what you presume youtube will receive more of for leaving the video up) is more important (supposedly to youtube) than helping stabilize the middle east (what you think will happen if they take it down). My point is that the middle east have been unstable for centuries and nothing you, me, the maker of some video or whether some company allows that video to play are going to make one bit of difference over there.

And 'corrosion of rights'? Isn't that exactly what you're arguing against, Youtube's right to post/remove whatever they choose to? If you want to be a supporter of someone's rights in the middle east, how about voicing your support over women;s rights under sharia law (or lack thereof), how about directibg that vitriol you reserve for youtube at those who completely deny a woman any rights other than to be totally subjugated to their husbands/fathers under islam. Choosing what to allow/not allow is only hypocritical to you because you personally think they should take the video down because it offends a certain group. Again, how about taking down your avatar which is so offensive to a certain cultural group? Don't you think you're being a bit hypocritical yourself?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123
So you think we should leave the Middle East? Finally we agree.

However that will never happen because they have the biggest oil reserves on the entire planet. But if we want that oil we have to respect their beliefs and customs to some extent. It's called diplomacy. If a kid wants to play another kids XBOX he's probably not going to call his mother a whore and smear her picture with feces on YouTube then hide behind the freedom of speech. That would be counterproductive and not practical in any way.

There are better ways to teach the Middle East about the value of Free Speech. This is the WORST way to do it. THE WORST.
They already have free speech in the middle east. They use that right every day when they burn our flag. Moreso, they apparently have the right to kill americans with no recourse. Does anyone think that those behind those murders will ever face justice? Obama vows that Libya killers will be brought to justice. I will follow this 'promise' very closely. I wonder, just as with OJ when he promised he wouldn't stop until he found Nicole's 'real' killer, if he'll mainly be looking for them on the golf course.

I personally think the worst way to teach the middle east about freedoms of any kind is to be willing give up each and every one to avoid conflict.

My idea of diplomacy: This is America where we have the right to say what we like. You exercise your right to burn American flags, which is very offensive to us, without any recourse. We expect that there should be no recourse over some video that you find offensive. If you do retaliate,our view is that you are in the wrong and we will do everything in our power to see that you are punished. Otherwise let's live and let live.

Your idea of diplomacy: Oh, you killed some americans because of a video? Well, certainly we will remove that video at once, punish those who made it as well as those who allowed it to continue playing on their website and might I say please accept our most humble apologies at whatever offense you have suffered over this. Look, we will do whatever you want just as long as we can keep from offending you and progress western ideology in the middle east.

You just seem so much more focused on the killers' rights not to be offended than the victims' right to life which the killers violated.

Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 09:59 AM   #566
MessiahDecoy123
Cosmic Spidey
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,788
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

I'm not saying ban the video for the benefit of those who murdered our people. Do it to show the Muslim world that we care about advancing Western values in their homeland and will do what's necessary to stop their countries to falling into the hands of theocratic madmen.

But something tells me the Pentagon prefer that to happen since the Cold War is long over and Bin Laden is dead. You need to justify that big war machine somehow. What better way than several theocratic states in the Middle East?

MessiahDecoy123 is online now  
Old 09-20-2012, 11:22 AM   #567
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464 View Post
Absolutely not.

See, that's the whole point. Erecting a Mosque there shows them that we KNOW the people who committed those acts are phonies using Islam as an excuse for violence, when it is actually a non-violent religion. It shows that we know Islam is not to blame for 9/11. And it shows that we will not fear that religion and will not fall into the trap of Islamophobia, but that we actually embrace Islam as a religion that's as worthy as any other.

It sends all the right signals.

People who get offended at this idea clearly didn't get it. Muslims did not cause 9/11.
Wow, so much ridiculousness. Let me debunk it.

Your first assertion, Islam is non-violent:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

"
Other than the fact that Muslims haven't killed every non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal persecution with little resistance. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if Muslim demands are not met. Either situation seems to provide a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism.

The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. This is why Muslim apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret the Quran without their "assistance" - even while claiming that it is a perfect book.

Far from being mere history or theological construct, the violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and genocide. This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni's bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam's Genghis Khan) slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from destruction. Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian subcontinent. Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more slowly) in areas conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran.

So ingrained is violence in the religion that Islam has never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.

Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own."

I could provide soooo much more but I think this illustrates the absurdity of your claim...

Next you say that 9/11 was not to blame for 9/11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks

"The money handed down to the plotters originated from Al-Qaeda, the international Islamic jihadi organization."

Pay particular attention to the bolded underlined portion of the sentence above.

To sum up, I do not believe that the majority of the practitioners of islam supported the actions on 9/11 but the ludicrousy of your view which basically negates the right of anyone who lost loved ones on 9/11 to be offended by a muslim mosque at ground zero would allow that black people should not be offended at having a Confederate flag hung with the statue of MLK because it was never meant to be a racist symbol.

As for the signals it sends, the action you condone only sends the message that if they need a place to put up a mosque, all they have to do is fly a plane into a building where they want it to go.


Last edited by Spider - Man; 09-20-2012 at 11:26 AM.
Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 12:50 PM   #568
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Edit : Deleted


Last edited by Mandalore464; 10-18-2012 at 03:17 AM.
Mandalore464 is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 01:32 PM   #569
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464 View Post
Sorry about the first point you tried to make, I stopped reading after seeing the name of the website you tried to get me to read... Did anyone say biased?
How can bias effect what it says in the koran? The very book that muslims base the practice of their religion on advocates violence against infidels (non-muslims). Perhaps it is you who fear being educated. There are many more sites with references to the violence inherent in Islam but they are ultimately unnecessary when the koran itself advocates the violence you seem to think islam doesn't promote. if you are blind to the persecution perpetrated by Muslims against non-muslims in muslim countries then you are just blind period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
Anyway, are you Christian? Do you similarly attack every Christian on this planet for the wars that have been made in the name of Christianity over the last 2012 years of history?
Yes I'm a Christian. No I don't attack Christians for wars made in the name of Christianity because there is no one alive who had anything to do with a war made in the name of Christianity. Again, education. We're talking about the violence commited by Muslims today, not things that were done in generations past.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
I read Islamic Jihadi Organization. Pay particular attention to the bolded ord. They're not Muslims. They're extremists claiming to act in the name of Islam. World of difference.
Jihad (English pronunciation: /ɪˈhɑːd/; Arabic: جهاد‎ ǧihād [dʒiˈhæːd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims.

How do you twist them being a jihadi organization to mean that they aren't muslims?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
That's not even remotely comparable. Mosque = Islam. Ground Zero = Non-islamic attack. That has nothing to do with it. You fail again.
I just showed reference that the attack was islamic based. That you want to remain deliberately obtuse doesn't change the fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
And drop the condescension, it makes you sound like an ass. You already sound really uneducated. No one wants to be an uneducated ass.
So you say I'm condescending to you and I sound really uneducated. What does that say about you? I at least have the presence of mind to back up what I say with references, your fear of learning something by reading them notwithstanding. People like you make people like me be an ass to people like you. At least I'm not a dumbass.

Spider - Man is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 02:02 PM   #570
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Edit : Deleted


Last edited by Mandalore464; 10-18-2012 at 03:17 AM.
Mandalore464 is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 02:57 PM   #571
Pink Ranger
TV Poster, Radio Face
 
Pink Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 21,476
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Remember that not too long ago the United States had a fundamentalist Christian president who started an unnecessary war in Iraq because, by his own admission, God told him to do it.

How many Middle Easterners have been killed in that action? Far more than Americans killed in 9/11, and way, way, way more than the number of Americans killed because of the youtube video.

Furthermore, the war in Iraq and actions similar to that are also ideology-driven: by extreme fundamentalist Christians who believe an apocalyptic war in the Middle East will bring Jesus back. This idealogy shaped the military and foreign relations policy of the largest military power in the world during the Bush era, and still exerts considerable influence now.

So tell me again that Islam is somehow alone in being an extremely dangerous religion and a threat to the rest of the world.

__________________
Notice to all Hype members: Put down your phone and/or game controller right now and pick up a copy of The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon. A must-read for anybody who visits this website.
Pink Ranger is online now  
Old 09-20-2012, 04:48 PM   #572
Kahran Ramsus
Side-Kick
 
Kahran Ramsus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Sunshine State
Posts: 4,549
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

The Iraq War was a (misguided) attempt at bringing democracy to the Middle East as well as settling an old grudge with Saddam Hussein. A pessimist would say it was an attempt to gain resources for Bush's buddies at Haliburton. Either way, it had nothing to do with a Holy War against Muslims. If it was they wouldn't have handed back power in Iraq to Muslims as soon as possible and stayed around as a security force for them.

Also, am I the only one that notices the double standard in claiming that the jihadists are not true Muslims while at the same time saying the fundamentalists are representative of all Christians?

Kahran Ramsus is online now  
Old 09-20-2012, 05:13 PM   #573
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Edit : Deleted


Last edited by Mandalore464; 10-18-2012 at 03:17 AM.
Mandalore464 is offline  
Old 09-20-2012, 05:50 PM   #574
Kahran Ramsus
Side-Kick
 
Kahran Ramsus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Sunshine State
Posts: 4,549
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464 View Post
Except no one said anything of the sort. I said Jihadists were not real Muslims just like Christian fundamentalists were not true Christians. So where's the double standard? I guess you were addressing my post here since I'm the only one who mentioned Jihadists not being true Muslims.

Also, I happen to agree with you about Irak. It was the wrong thing to do but I don't think religious extremism had anything to do with it.
It sounds like I confused what you said with Pink Ranger, so for that I do apologize.


Last edited by Kahran Ramsus; 09-20-2012 at 05:53 PM.
Kahran Ramsus is online now  
Old 09-20-2012, 08:55 PM   #575
Spider - Man
Banned User
 
Spider - Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,472
Default Re: Discussion: North Africa & Southwest Asia Regional Issues II

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464 View Post
Hey, I only got aggressive after you tried to ridicule my post by belittling me. How does that feel?


I didn't think you got aggressive but whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
Have you read the Bible? Should you not go wage war against those who worship idols and other non-Christian Gods then? You have to stop assuming that people are stupid. A Muslim can tell the difference between what's right and wrong, just like you do.
The Bible clearly delineates between the Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament is about when the Israelites lived under the Law. They had to make blood sacrafices to be forgiven their sins. And yes there were certain things expectd under the Law when they went in to a Phillistine or other enemies' city. The New Testament was about the coming of Christ, His death, burial and ressurection so that men would no longer live under the law but under His Grace. The New Testament replaced waging war against those who worship idols other than the true God with 'turn the other cheek' and 'love thy neighbor as thyself'.

Does the Koran make a distinction that there should come a time when the violence against non-muslims should come to an end in favor of peace or does the it read like the violent acts are meant for all ages of man whenever the passages are read? To put it plain, does the koran call for acts of violence against infidels or not? If you say no, there is no further reason for us to discuss this because you are obviously reading a koran from some alternate existence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
Anders Breivik called himself a "modern-day crusader". A Christian one by the way.

See, nutcases will always find excuses in religion to perpetrate their horrors. It doesn't make the real Muslims responsible for them. Just like you're not responsible for making Breivik a modern-day crusader.


Like I said, people can make the difference between what they should or should not follow from religious books. Just like you know better than to kill someone who worships another God than yours. Even though your Holy book certainly advocates it.
Again, context. The Bible does NOT advocate it. Never heard of this Andres guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
You showed no evidence. Show me a link between this obviously extremist organization and Muslims or Islam in general, and you'll have a point.
On what grounds do you feel you can deny that they are in fact muslims? They claim to be muslims. Is there some officiating body that deems every single person who claims to be muslim legit or not? Do you have that right to tell every person who claims to be muslim whether they actually are or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
Sorry if I hurt your feelings.
You never hurt my feelings, just insult my intelligence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
I mastered in Oriental cultures and lived in India for 18 months. There I met on a daily basis dozens of Muslims from India and Pakistan, many of which are still my friends as of today. They are down-to-earth, educated, tolerant people.

I know what I'm talking about. No Muslim, let me stress that: NO MUSLIM ever condoned the actions of Al Qaeda on 9/11. Those who did are not Muslims, but extremists.
Again I don’t know what power you feel you have to say that the ones who commit acts of terror are not muslims. Again on what grounds do you base that statement? And for someone as educated as you claim to be, I wouldn’t think you’d make as foolish and absolute a statement as “no muslim ever condoned 9/11” something you could not possibly know not knowing every one of the millions of muslims in the world.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464
You also seem to forget that Muslims are actually the first targets of extremists. You should be glad you're not a Muslim living in 2001 Afghanistan, who had to fear everytime he was leaving his home in the morning that some Taliban nut would enter his house to rape his wife and stone her to death because she would not wear a burqa.

It pains me to say that you are exactly the type of person who give Americans a bad name abroad. Many people think you're all ignorant and bigoted and think the whole world wants you dead. What does that tell you about generalizations?

Nothing good ever comes out of them.
I'm sure it pains you greatly but I'm equally sure you'll get over it. Muslims were certainly not the first targets of extremists on the morning of 9/11/01. And how do I generalize? I don’t say every muslim is evil or every muslim condoned the actions of 9/11. But I’m also not dense enough to say that the perpetrators were not muslim when they clearly were nor that ‘no muslim condoned the act’ when it is clear that some have.

Bottom line, it’s extremely insensitive of such a peace loving religion to put a mosque where thousands of Americans’ loved ones were murdered in the very name of that religion.

Spider - Man is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:54 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.