Another beheading in France
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:43 am
A place where escape goats go to play
https://www.notplanetrugby.com/
FFS do you always have to ask the same bloody question after every terrorist attack?DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
So is Christianity if you only measure it by the actions of those on the fringes.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
Look, Sam, it's not my fault if you don't have the bravery or balls to answer it.
At the risk of indulging you, yes. Also no.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
Western Civilisation was built on the back of Christian values.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:27 amSo is Christianity if you only measure it by the actions of those on the fringes.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
Ban all imaginary sky fairies is the way to go; or at the very least tax them into oblivion.
And slavesDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amWestern Civilisation was built on the back of Christian values.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:27 amSo is Christianity if you only measure it by the actions of those on the fringes.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
Ban all imaginary sky fairies is the way to go; or at the very least tax them into oblivion.
Name one civilisation that wasn't?Sandstorm wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:33 amAnd slavesDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amWestern Civilisation was built on the back of Christian values.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:27 am
So is Christianity if you only measure it by the actions of those on the fringes.
Ban all imaginary sky fairies is the way to go; or at the very least tax them into oblivion.
The Mole People
That's a lovely, but naive opinion. Given the atrocities committed against tens of thousands of young vunerable children and young women in this country that could not and would not have happened without the implicit enabling of most of the culprits communities. It's unescapable logic.sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amAt the risk of indulging you, yes. Also no.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
It's obviously not all Muslims or we'd be in outright warfare, but that statement feels an awful lot like 'not all men' when certain women's issues are discussed. No, not all, but enough. Then around that there will be those who actively support and legitimise, but do not themselves commit the atrocities. Then there are those who offer more tacit support, those who feign or claim indifference (which is tantamount to tacit support), others who are too cowed to speak up when they encounter an extremist view or support for extremists (again, functionally tacit support). It is an Islam problem and as someone with strong French heritage and still has family over there l I'm getting particularly sick and fucking tired of all the excuses that get made for the one faith group that keeps providing individuals willing to execute our citizens and an environment that nurtures them.
However, with that, there are Muslims perfectly happy to adhere to the norms and laws of the Western European societies they live in. Many have started to liberalise massively. They are absolutely compatible.
How we ditch the former, keep the latter and quash Islamist terror I simply do not know.
and the raping of childrenDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amWestern Civilisation was built on the back of Christian values.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:27 amSo is Christianity if you only measure it by the actions of those on the fringes.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
Ban all imaginary sky fairies is the way to go; or at the very least tax them into oblivion.
raping of children = Christian valuesDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:56 pm If I read that correctly, Western Civilisation was built on the back of raping children?
That's a new height in apologism. Congratulations, that's really set the bar quite high.
Normal Person: 3 people were murdered today, at least two of them were almost beheaded.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:59 pmraping of children = Christian valuesDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:56 pm If I read that correctly, Western Civilisation was built on the back of raping children?
That's a new height in apologism. Congratulations, that's really set the bar quite high.
No apologism, that's in your head. I treat all religions with same degree of contempt.
Normal Person: 3 people were murdered todayDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:07 pmNormal Person: 3 people were murdered today, at least two of them were almost beheaded.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:59 pmraping of children = Christian valuesDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:56 pm If I read that correctly, Western Civilisation was built on the back of raping children?
That's a new height in apologism. Congratulations, that's really set the bar quite high.
No apologism, that's in your head. I treat all religions with same degree of contempt.
Insane Homer: Western Civilisation was built on the back of raping children.
You're incredible.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:12 pmNormal Person: 3 people were murdered todayDAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:07 pmNormal Person: 3 people were murdered today, at least two of them were almost beheaded.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:59 pm
raping of children = Christian values
No apologism, that's in your head. I treat all religions with same degree of contempt.
Insane Homer: Western Civilisation was built on the back of raping children.
DAC: All Muslims are bad because we should judge them based on the actions of a few, but not Christianity, institutionalised child raping is just the price we have to pay for our western civilisation.
You're transparent, one eyed, with an agenda that's almost as selectively, and intentionally, myopic as Tommy Robinsons.
He's just here to protect the vulnerable women and children in our nations.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:38 pmYou're transparent, one eyed, with an agenda that's almost as selectively, and intentionally, myopic as Tommy Robinsons.
Tommy? He'd do better to look a bit closer to home if it's really about saving the childrenSandstorm wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:41 pmHe's just here to protect the vulnerable women and children in our nations.Insane_Homer wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:38 pmYou're transparent, one eyed, with an agenda that's almost as selectively, and intentionally, myopic as Tommy Robinsons.
Good Post.sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amAt the risk of indulging you, yes. Also no.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
It's obviously not all Muslims or we'd be in outright warfare, but that statement feels an awful lot like 'not all men' when certain women's issues are discussed. No, not all, but enough. Then around that there will be those who actively support and legitimise, but do not themselves commit the atrocities. Then there are those who offer more tacit support, those who feign or claim indifference (which is tantamount to tacit support), others who are too cowed to speak up when they encounter an extremist view or support for extremists (again, functionally tacit support). It is an Islam problem and as someone with strong French heritage and still has family over there l I'm getting particularly sick and fucking tired of all the excuses that get made for the one faith group that keeps providing individuals willing to execute our citizens and an environment that nurtures them.
However, with that, there are Muslims perfectly happy to adhere to the norms and laws of the Western European societies they live in. Many have started to liberalise massively. They are absolutely compatible.
How we ditch the former, keep the latter and quash Islamist terror I simply do not know.
I don't know either - but certainly I can't see any downside to labelling the latter as terrorists, "randomly" selecting them for stop and search and basically telling them they are incompatible with "our" society!sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:31 amAt the risk of indulging you, yes. Also no.DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:11 am Doesn't that prove that it's incompatible with Western Civilisation?
It's obviously not all Muslims or we'd be in outright warfare, but that statement feels an awful lot like 'not all men' when certain women's issues are discussed. No, not all, but enough. Then around that there will be those who actively support and legitimise, but do not themselves commit the atrocities. Then there are those who offer more tacit support, those who feign or claim indifference (which is tantamount to tacit support), others who are too cowed to speak up when they encounter an extremist view or support for extremists (again, functionally tacit support). It is an Islam problem and as someone with strong French heritage and still has family over there l I'm getting particularly sick and fucking tired of all the excuses that get made for the one faith group that keeps providing individuals willing to execute our citizens and an environment that nurtures them.
However, with that, there are Muslims perfectly happy to adhere to the norms and laws of the Western European societies they live in. Many have started to liberalise massively. They are absolutely compatible.
How we ditch the former, keep the latter and quash Islamist terror I simply do not know.
Is this your "rivers of blood" speech?DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:30 pm The Left scream "far right" at anything that isn't slightly left of Pol Pot. They are going to be in for a very big surprise when the real "far right" emerge due to the inaction by politicans of all colours and the media. Don't say you weren't warned.
Rivers of blood? Ask the people in Nice, 86 killed not so long ago, people beheaded today...actual rivers of blood.ASMO wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:32 pmIs this your "rivers of blood" speech?DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:30 pm The Left scream "far right" at anything that isn't slightly left of Pol Pot. They are going to be in for a very big surprise when the real "far right" emerge due to the inaction by politicans of all colours and the media. Don't say you weren't warned.
Don't you have any new material?DAC wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:30 pm The Left scream "far right" at anything that isn't slightly left of Pol Pot. They are going to be in for a very big surprise when the real "far right" emerge due to the inaction by politicans of all colours and the media. Don't say you weren't warned.
The measures Macron is talking about implementing are a step in the right direction.sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:33 am Did anyone catch last week those two towns projecting the Mo cartoons against municipal buildings? Sparked some heated debate in various corners of the internet, unsurprisingly.
On the one hand, yes, it is provocative and would stir up further hostility from the Muslim community liek this horrendous incident. On the other, if you don't do it or something else to reinforce that anyone has the right to depict the prophet, whether it's in an educational context as with the teacher or straight up wanting to be offensive for the sake of it, then the extremists win. Yet if you take the course to assert the rights and secularism of France it gets construed as attacking Islam and helps the extremist recruiters. Every action that is perceived to encroach upon Islam fuels actions that will encourage greater state intervention and resentment of the French public towards their Islamic citizens (regardless of whether they're Islamists or not), yet the state cannot simply turn the other cheek. To do so would be a dereliction of duty to the populous.
It's a vicious Catch 22 to which I see no solution.