From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Telmo Menezes
Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 6:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Democracy
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:23 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List
<[email protected]> wrote:
_____
From: spudboy100 via Everything List <[email protected]>
Your mistake is comparing hand grenades to nerve gas. The Zetas want money and
power, while Boko Haram wants money, power, the lust to kill, and paradise with
babes forever. You do not see the Zetas or the Mafia wiping out a magazine
headquarters, nor do we see meth heads becoming suicide bombers.
You really don't know much about the Zetas (and other Mexican drug mafias) do
you? Killing journalists, politicians, students, police is something that has
been happening frequently in Mexico. Dude more than 60,000 people have been
killed in Mexico's drug wars; that is a lot of people.
You are performing the narrative of the Bamer administration because my pov
(based on observation) is offensive to your weltanschauung. Its not your fault
that the Islamists behave in such a way, and neither is it mine.
ISIS is Islam, and says so in its rule books.
BS, ISIS is not Islam,
Who has the authority to say if ISIS is Islam or not? What does that even mean?
Isn't this a bit like discussing who would win a fight between Batman and
Superman?
I claim the authority to state that ISIS does not represent Islam!
So does any normally intelligent person, with the ability to understand the
implications of a bell curve distribution graph, and a decent dataset sampling
the range of current interpretations of Islam. Draw the distribution graph and
you will find ISIS is at an extreme edge of that distribution curve. This is a
clear and convincing indication that ISIS does not in fact represent Islam.
If you have a bunch of irrational and self-contradictory set of beliefs (like
Christianity and like many other religions) it is not possible to have a
rational discussion about who adheres correctly to that set of beliefs or not.
>From a very specific perspective I disagree, if one is outside of (the often
>horribly vicious) sectarian arguments that divide most religions; if one
>instead takes the bird’s eye view of the religion, viewing it as a cultural
>phenomenon and studies it from this perspective, it is possible, using
>statistical analysis to say a large number of things about any widespread and
>historically complex phenomenon as a major religion.
In the western world we achieved something fairly close to freedom of speech
through centuries of bloody wars and revolutions. It was not trivial to get
here, and we gained *so so much* from it that I think we should guard it like a
very precious treasure. It is freedom of speech that allowed our science,
technology and art to evolve to what we have now.
I agree, and emphatically so!
I would also add a few other hard won rights: to petition for a writ of habeas
corpus; the related concept of due process and rule of law.
Free speech is a treasure worth defending; however one cannot bomb peoples into
adopting this point of view. It is my conviction that this revolutionary idea
is spreading and taking root all across our planet, by virtue of its virtue!
Freedom of speech is an all-or-nothing proposition. Once you open an exception,
this exception *will* be explored by the usual suspect. Notice how quickly the
Pope jumped at the opportunity to join the "there are limits to free speech"
side of the debate. Just when I had almost forgot that the Pope is, in fact, a
Catholic.
There are and need to be limits to free speech as pointed out by Oliver Wendell
Holmes (a former chief justice of the US Supreme Court)… free speech does not
include the right of “falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater". This is
seems like a sensible (if kept very limited) abridgment of free speech.
But in general I agree and I support the right of free speech, even that which
I find odious. However I also notice that a fair number of folks who speak of
free speech really intend free speech for some groups whilst other groups
speech is criminalized. This kind of perverse view of free speech is something
that is both insidious and mortally dangerous to true free speech.
For example that obnoxious comic in France was arrested for saying he
sympathized with the terrorists. One can find his speech odious, but when it
becomes criminalized then there has been an abdication of the principal of free
speech, which has been replaced by its evil twin; Free “sanctioned” speech.
Free speech is either free (and that also means that it is free for those with
whom we disagree and find odious and objectionable) or it is NOT! There is an
entire class of speech that has been made illegal in most European countries
and in Canada and Australia as well.
If one believes in free speech the principal, then this is something that needs
to be faced.
And now we are going to let some weird tribe deprive us of one of the
fundamental pillars of our civilisation?
Islam is a religion… how did it become weird tribe? There is a fairly wide
spread of actual day to day real world living interpretations of the meaning of
Islam as it has inter-acted with the many cultures, races, and ethnicities of
the peoples who self-identify in this manner.
And it is NOT just Islam that is the only or even the major threat to Free
Speech. A far, far greater threat to free speech is the secret security state
that effectively rules the US/NATO.
ISIS is a side show…. A freak horror show.
Meanwhile the true enemies of free speech are building the Orwellian secret
security state that exists within the state.
If you believe in defending free speech; it is incumbent to know who is really
threatening it!
Fuck that. I have nothing against any ethnicity or against private religion. I
very much have something against those that want us to go back in our
civilisation progress. The very same civilisation process that allows many
different ethnicities and cultures to coexist in mega-cities with surprisingly
little violence of conflict.
Again, let me patiently repeat the obvious, self-evident truth. The enemies of
free speech that should concern you are not the ISIS horror freak show, but the
secret security state that exists within the French state (and the USA state).
If you value free speech, it is incumbent to recognize the actual real
existential threat to free speech, which is the rise of a transnational secret
security state that is increasingly imposing an Orwellian model on its subject
– e.g. YOU & ME!
It's not perfect for sure, but we sure are closer to the Star Trek world than
those hell-holes like Arabia Saudita, run by religious creeps, who just
sentenced a guy to 1000 lashes (50 lashes every week or until he dies from the
brutality) for FUCKING WRITING THINGS IN A BLOG.
Saudi Arabia is to some degree a Wahhabi prison; and it is horrible (but, it
bears mentioning that this medieval minded sentence is also under review in
Saudi Arabia and has not actually been carried out and may turn out to never be
carried out)
We must not make any concessions. We are the adults in this matter. The whole
world will be better with free speech. If we arrived first then we must resist
for the sake of everyone else.
What about all of the people who are arrested in Europe for anti-Semitic
speech? Do you defend their right to free speech? (Even if you find it
repugnant… as I do)
In most of Western Europe, Canada and Australia there are hate speech laws that
seem to be selectively applied and enforced. Isn’t this as much of an insidious
threat to free speech as *some* Muslim’s intolerance of speech that offends
their beliefs?
Many things offend me. I don't see anyone losing their sleep over this. Nor
should they. But we must be careful not to offend the religious? Why? I can
only think of two reasons:
Either speech is free or it is not!
The laws that circumscribe free speech must remain themselves very carefully
circumscribed and contained within specifically defined classes of speech. For
example I don’t believe that most people would say that the right of free
speech includes threatening to kill someone for example. A mobster does not
enjoy the protections of free speech when he threatens a reluctant (to submit…
to pay) shop owner. That is extortion, and not free speech. Similarly falsely
shouting fire in a crowded theater is speech that does not deserve to be
protected.
However this is not the case in our so called free societies. There is some
speech in our countries that has been defined as being illegal.
- I am considered inferior to the religious, they enjoy rights that I don't
enjoy;
- The religious are considered mentally challenged, so they must be patronised.
Can you think of another explanation, or do you agree that "we must be careful
not to offend" must necessarily be because one of the above reasons?
In life we all should be careful not to offend. Being offensive to others
(especially very large groups of others) puts one in the position of becoming a
target of their anger. Sometimes the principal one is defending makes this
worth the price.
I am not making an ethical argument, just pointing out a pretty clear fact of
life.
If some white idiot shouts “nigger” in a crowd of black people, they do enjoy
their right of free speech perhaps, but should society necessarily go out of
its way to protect them? The same for a black man shouting honkeys in some
redneck bar; they are certainly free to do so, but it would probably be
inadvisable. When people engage in speech that enrages – and is designed to
enrage -- a group of people, then often there are consequences for those
persons.
-Chris
Telmo.
and the fact that you keep insisting that it somehow represents Islam exposes
your own prejudicial views.
Think of the comparison of how Christianity behaved say, from 325-1945, with
wars, slaughters, racism, hatred, and all those other fun things.
And yet Doctors are getting murdered in the US by Christian fundamentalists
motivated by their religious hatred. Some Norwegian nut invoked defending the
Christian and ethnic identity of Norway to justify his slaughter of scores of
teenagers at an island summer camp.
This is Islam today and the nice guys are in the minority. ISIS doesn't need to
be the Reich to do heavy damage, because honestly the Germans weren't that
illogical, irrational yes, illogical no. Breivik in Norway was a neonazi that
saw his fellow Norwegians as traitors to the fatherland. Breivik wasn't seeking
paradise, in the same sense that Pol Pot in Cambodia wasn't seeking paradise.
Janah or Paradise, is what literally gets Muslims up in the morning, factually
and allegorically.
You keep repeating this lie. Perhaps you believe that repeating a lie enough
times gives it a patina of truth. What gets Muslims is the same thing that
gets people up in the morning all over the world; people have daily lives and
routines. People get up in the morning, to get on with their lives; you are
expressing a bigots view.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 1:11 pm
Subject: RE: Democracy
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]?> ]
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 8:19 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Democracy
I don't know if I'm a likable fellow, and I'd say probably not, but thanks. The
war and clash of civilizations thing comes up in the absence of some better
alternative. Being overly polite with the Islamists leads to Boko Haram and
Paris, I truly believe, because they view gentleness as weakness.
Who is “they”? Muslim culture in general, or specific criminal gangs of thugs
using Islam as a justification and cover for their crimes?
The killings are worldwide, in places, on a far smaller scale as in Thailand
and the Philippines and India.
Gang killings occur in every country. Organized criminal thugs are operating in
many places around the world, not just in Muslim countries. Why do you
constrain yourself to fight only organized criminal organizations that operate
under cover of Islam, using it as a fig leaf to cover their murderous actions?
Do you think the Zetas and other Mexican drug cartels (or any of the other drug
cartels for that matter are not as murderous? I used to live and drive all over
the region of Mexico and South Texas where the Zetas; that whole region has
been terrified by these murderous criminal thugs who have beheaded people
before ISIS got into that game (ex. 2013 beheaded four woman allegedly tied to
a rival gang). They have done many mass killings; more than 60,000 people have
died in Mexican drug wars.
The reason, in large part, is the Islamists want to achieve immediate entrance
to Janah, or Paradise, where they get endless access to women, and good times
forever, for sacrificing now.
Blablabla… yeah so they tell you. Criminal thugs are not motivated by such
stupid fairy tales, these are hardcore criminal psychopaths who are using Islam
as window dressing.
ISIS is not the Third Reich; to make that comparison is fucking laughable. ISIS
is an organized murderous criminal gang. It should be dealt with in that manner
and portrayed in this light.
ISIS is not Islam, in the same way as that asshole who mass murdered all those
teenagers in a summer youth camp in Norway is not Christian.
-Chris
This is one reason. In a way, this is akin to letting the 3rd Reich or Japanese
imperialists gain power and momentum in a war, which most nations didn't
want-then war becomes the only solution, because things then become
existential. This seems to be happening once more with the Islamists-which
appear to be gaining momentum today.
Points to be remembered on this forum. No I don't have the proper answer, nor
do I have influence to effect events, for good or ill. It's just my attempt at
problem solving, and sometimes being bloody-minded is something that needs to
be thought through, before choosing a better option. That is if we have
options?
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 2:06 am
Subject: RE: Democracy
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]?> ]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Democracy
Brent says true, in that terrorism is a method, not an end in itself. I wonder
if people would agree to the terms, as a war against Islamist extremists, or
radical Jihadis or? I think naming the enemies of freedom and peace in the
middle east in nigeria with boko haram, and today in belgium (Hi Bruno) would
be more acceptable, in that its limited targets, for a limited duration. Also,
the mean of 'war' need not be violent, because you can't beat an idea with war
alone.
You’re a far more likable fellow, when you don’t do the gung ho go to war talk.
P.S. What Boko Harem did in the towns of Baga and Doron Baga – during the same
days as what went on in France FYI – is a first order war crime. They massacred
2,500 people (Muslim African people) and destroyed almost 4,000 buildings,
literally razing those towns to the ground. They surely should be hunted down
and arrested for their horrible war crimes, including the enslavement of all
those school girls, but it should be a police action, not a war, and certainly
not a crusade!
Bastards like that don’t deserve the honor of being treated as enemies, they
are criminal murderous thugs, and in a just world would be brought to face
justice.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: meekerdb <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 1:04 pm
Subject: Re: Democracy
On 1/14/2015 11:52 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
In case no one has noticed, our dear president Obama has changed the rhetoric
used as cover for our Orwellian systems state of permanent war…. The term “War
on Terror” is bad enough, it implies an endless war requiring an Orwellian
intrusive state. But at least it seemed circumscribed to opponents it could
describe as being involved in terror.
Obama is now calling it the “War on extremism”. That term sends Orwellian
shivers down my spine; it is so broad and arbitrary in nature and can be used
to describe any and all opponents.
Sigh, everybody's so paranoid about government. Obama started using
"extremism" because the chattering classes kept pointing out that terrorism is
just a tactic and you can't make war on a tactic.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected].
To post to this group, send email to <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected].
Visit this group at <http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 1:11 pm
Subject: RE: Democracy
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]?> ]
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 8:19 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Democracy
I don't know if I'm a likable fellow, and I'd say probably not, but thanks. The
war and clash of civilizations thing comes up in the absence of some better
alternative. Being overly polite with the Islamists leads to Boko Haram and
Paris, I truly believe, because they view gentleness as weakness.
Who is “they”? Muslim culture in general, or specific criminal gangs of thugs
using Islam as a justification and cover for their crimes?
The killings are worldwide, in places, on a far smaller scale as in Thailand
and the Philippines and India.
Gang killings occur in every country. Organized criminal thugs are operating in
many places around the world, not just in Muslim countries. Why do you
constrain yourself to fight only organized criminal organizations that operate
under cover of Islam, using it as a fig leaf to cover their murderous actions?
Do you think the Zetas and other Mexican drug cartels (or any of the other drug
cartels for that matter are not as murderous? I used to live and drive all over
the region of Mexico and South Texas where the Zetas; that whole region has
been terrified by these murderous criminal thugs who have beheaded people
before ISIS got into that game (ex. 2013 beheaded four woman allegedly tied to
a rival gang). They have done many mass killings; more than 60,000 people have
died in Mexican drug wars.
The reason, in large part, is the Islamists want to achieve immediate entrance
to Janah, or Paradise, where they get endless access to women, and good times
forever, for sacrificing now.
Blablabla… yeah so they tell you. Criminal thugs are not motivated by such
stupid fairy tales, these are hardcore criminal psychopaths who are using Islam
as window dressing.
ISIS is not the Third Reich; to make that comparison is fucking laughable. ISIS
is an organized murderous criminal gang. It should be dealt with in that manner
and portrayed in this light.
ISIS is not Islam, in the same way as that asshole who mass murdered all those
teenagers in a summer youth camp in Norway is not Christian.
-Chris
This is one reason. In a way, this is akin to letting the 3rd Reich or Japanese
imperialists gain power and momentum in a war, which most nations didn't
want-then war becomes the only solution, because things then become
existential. This seems to be happening once more with the Islamists-which
appear to be gaining momentum today.
Points to be remembered on this forum. No I don't have the proper answer, nor
do I have influence to effect events, for good or ill. It's just my attempt at
problem solving, and sometimes being bloody-minded is something that needs to
be thought through, before choosing a better option. That is if we have
options?
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 16, 2015 2:06 am
Subject: RE: Democracy
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]?> ]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Democracy
Brent says true, in that terrorism is a method, not an end in itself. I wonder
if people would agree to the terms, as a war against Islamist extremists, or
radical Jihadis or? I think naming the enemies of freedom and peace in the
middle east in nigeria with boko haram, and today in belgium (Hi Bruno) would
be more acceptable, in that its limited targets, for a limited duration. Also,
the mean of 'war' need not be violent, because you can't beat an idea with war
alone.
You’re a far more likable fellow, when you don’t do the gung ho go to war talk.
P.S. What Boko Harem did in the towns of Baga and Doron Baga – during the same
days as what went on in France FYI – is a first order war crime. They massacred
2,500 people (Muslim African people) and destroyed almost 4,000 buildings,
literally razing those towns to the ground. They surely should be hunted down
and arrested for their horrible war crimes, including the enslavement of all
those school girls, but it should be a police action, not a war, and certainly
not a crusade!
Bastards like that don’t deserve the honor of being treated as enemies, they
are criminal murderous thugs, and in a just world would be brought to face
justice.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: meekerdb <[email protected]>
To: everything-list <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 1:04 pm
Subject: Re: Democracy
On 1/14/2015 11:52 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List wrote:
In case no one has noticed, our dear president Obama has changed the rhetoric
used as cover for our Orwellian systems state of permanent war…. The term “War
on Terror” is bad enough, it implies an endless war requiring an Orwellian
intrusive state. But at least it seemed circumscribed to opponents it could
describe as being involved in terror.
Obama is now calling it the “War on extremism”. That term sends Orwellian
shivers down my spine; it is so broad and arbitrary in nature and can be used
to describe any and all opponents.
Sigh, everybody's so paranoid about government. Obama started using
"extremism" because the chattering classes kept pointing out that terrorism is
just a tactic and you can't make war on a tactic.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
