1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Dear God... [London terrorist attack]

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by Pyrion, Jul 7, 2005.

  1. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    You trivialized my experiences for the sake of some silly debate, you judged (see your quotes on the bottom). I took it personally. Simple.

    Don't matter if we were. You came on the with the post as if you knew what I've been through, that Muslims today have it much tougher than I did -- forget about knowing what I went through but you made the comparison based on your friends' experience in 1980 - 1988 (1984 and on it was different anyway, ask Ed Koch).

    Here's your quote: <i>You're forgetting I was a New Yorker before you, and I know the score, if anyone paid attention to you at all, it was sympathetic attention, friendly attention, welcoming you to America.</i>

    Just because you were here before me means didly squat, the mere fact of how you evaluated my experience, hence trivialized it by minimizing it, nay, that it was cheery and rosy is another affront.

    Here's more sanctimonious statements:

    <i>What you suffered, you suffered in the Soviet Union. Or did you encounter the same kind of prejudice here, that Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Jamaican or Pakistani immigrants have endured and continue to endure, no matter how much they try to blend? <b>If so, then please enlighten me.</b></i>

    Sarcasm bolded above for you to see once again why this was a bit personal. As if you know what I went through, again, based on your friends' experience.

    It was not italicizing per se, it was your emphasis. Of course, you knew that.

    BTW, I was calm when I wrote that. I never want anyone here or in real life trivialize what I have been through. Just because I never speak of it doesn't mean it was peaches and cream. Perhaps it was for you as an Israeli Jew coming to the city of Jews, it was not so for a Soviet Jew... Somehow someone somewhere forgot the Jew part and left me as a Soviet.

    But I don't cry about it. I scratch it off as ignorance in America and I moved on. I love this country and would die for it. When the majority of Muslims in US feel the same way, then we can talk. IF they feel the same way, I'd like them to be more vocal about it. Not for my sake but for theirs. I've spent many years picking apart the Soviet ideology, even made some friends because of it.
  2. ditch

    ditch Downunder Member

    "They".......Muslims anywhere and everywhere who haven't disowned the terrorists claiming to act in the name of Islam as a religion. Not specifically those running the ads. This is also how I understood Copz to be speaking when replying to my post.....

    There's nothing standing in "their" way to disown the terrorists. Why not respond in every way possible if the Islamofascists are not representative of the majority? After so much criticism of "their" inaction, why not silence the critics?
  3. Kluge

    Kluge Observing your world for over 50 years

    I think it's part of the problem that the economic, political, and/or religious element that supports the terrorism is being described in terms that appear to include the entire population that supports a particular religion. The parallels I can think of are Northern Ireland, where the IRA is or was described as a catholic organization, and incidents in South or Central America where religious leaders were assasinated in connection with other warlike activities.
    Some hawkish forum members here need to take a walk through their national cemetary and see how many vets have the moon and star on their grave. It bothers me (pardon the Rummy phrase) that people who think a die-in staged by college students is harmful to the soldier's psyche but somehow banning someone's immigration because they practice a religion that the soldier practices
    has no significant effect on morale (or behavior).
    2 people like this.
  4. ravital

    ravital Banned

    Ethics, for your benefit, for everyone else's, now and for all times in the future, when I say "please enlighten me" it means please enlighten me. It means please provide information you feel I may lack. It's asking a question, nothing more. If you want to read sarcasm into that, that will be your invention, and your problem.

    There you go again. No, of course I DID NOT know that. When I emphasize, it's to draw your attention to something, to convey to you what if we were talking face to face I would emphasize exactly what I am putting in italics or boldface. That's what emphsizing is for, that's how I use it. Again, if you want to read sarcasm or sanctimony into that, your invention, your problem.

    Oh, you were calm when you were threatening me with physical violence? Thanks good to know. I'm keeping screenshots of this thread, just in case they might come in handy in court someday.
  5. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    Thank you for pointing out something I hadn't even thought of. I'm wondering...what do you think the solution is? Is there even a solution? It seems to me that keeping a lid on inciting violence will help, the Muslim community standing up to their own would help. Don't you think that at some point if those two things are not done that not allowing immigration from certain countries would help too?
  6. joseftu

    joseftu ORIGINAL Pomp-Dumpster

    Wouldn't have helped in London, unless we started two or three generations ago!

    And we would have kept out literally millions of productive, useful, loyal, citizens. Including doctors, paramedics, veterinarians, members of Parliament, soldiers (many of whom, as James Eagan points out, are serving in Iraq right now), etc., etc.

    Banning immigration from certain countries will do more harm than good, guaranteed.
  7. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    Yes, you and I disagree on the that point. (a moratorium on immigration)

    I wasn't just speaking about London, I was speaking about the future. And if the time to have started was generations ago and we missed it.... it's better late than never. Don't you think it would help for the future if Muslims were to stand up to their own, mock those that are spouting garbage, LAUGHING at them and the rest of us joining in to keep a lid on the inciting of violence? Or what do you think should or could be done?
  8. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    While I agree that imposing a ban on immigrants of a certain religion can have bad effects the worst effect is telling the world we are not the country of freedom that includes freedom of religion.

    That said I must admit I am leaning in the direction of a temporary ban on this immigration letting the Islamists of the world know they have the opportunity to choose whether the ban is extended or not. They have the opportunity to distance themselves and help in the fight against terrorism by their religious brothers.

    People of the world who would be free to practice beliefs must band together against anybody wishing to impose any belief on others. At the moment the belief trying to impose their will by violence and murder is Islam.
  9. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    That's a big step for you, isn't it Shiny? I never thought I would hear you say that.
  10. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    Four years since 9/11 and they have not taken the step as countries or as a group. They have not given total support. Their choice.
  11. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    Because it should be enough for a person to simply say I don't approve of terrorism and they shouldn't have to take out TV ads and newspaper ads to prove it to a bunch of people they will never meet.
  12. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    No, what would be enough is to say they don't support it, then back it up with actions - such as reporting information they are privvy to. And they're not. The difference between saying and doing, between planning and implementation. All else is useless lipservice, and is not only neutral, but enabling for the terrorists, as they have an indifferent society to hide in.
  13. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    Yes, because every muslim against terror is privvy to information about terrorism...:rolleyes:
  14. ditch

    ditch Downunder Member

    No. Every Muslim terrorist is claiming to act on behalf of their religion. In the name of Allah. Every Muslim who is against terrorist should disown and condemn those killing in the name of their religion. Wouldn't you condemn a killer claiming to be a member an organisation of which you were a member, falsley acting on behalf of that organisation? Or would you let you rest of the world believe the killers' claims, and let you and your organisation suffer any implications arising from your lack of condemnation?
  15. jfcjrus

    jfcjrus Veteran Member

    There you go again, Cyd, asking pertinent, and direct, questions!
    You're becoming quite the spoilsport! ;)

    I, for one, don't believe that what we're currently doing (regarding terrorists) is the BEST avenue we should be on.
    But, I don't hear any VIABLE alternatives from the hundreds of folks we've elected to represent us in DC (and the citizens that support them).
    All I hear is "I don't agree with our current path." (or some similiar viewpoint)
    But then, what's lacking is any mention of the viable different path that they think we SHOULD be on.

    It's EASY to bitch about something.
    It's quite another thing to LEAD and actually get something done.

    So, until the detractors of President Bush's plan (sometimes inclucing me!) come up with a viable alternative, I don't know what we can do but stay the course he's set, and just hope our warriors can kill them before they kill us.

    I believe in an individual's freedom to live his life as he wishes, AS LONG AS HE DOESN'T DENY ME THE SAME.
    Trying to kill me, for ANY reason, voids that pact.
    Expect me to strike back.
    And that's what I think we're doing.
    I don't know how these terrorists might have thought it'd be any different.

    We have the resources to hunt them down and kill them, one at a time, forever.
    All we need is the will.

    Or, what's an alternative plan that will allow us to live in peace?

  16. Steve

    Steve Is that it, then?

    It seems very simple to me.

    While there is no equivalent to the Pope in Islam, various and sundry mullahs and imams wield large degrees of power and authority over their followers.

    It would seem to me that simply declaring terrorists apostate would do the trick. It'd be sort of like the Pope not only excommunicating but also damning the terrorists to Hell at the same time (if they were Catholic, of course), if enough of the imams and mullahs did it.

    But they haven't.....and they won't.
  17. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    I can condemn it by saying I do, but I do not need to, as a simple member of any organization, hold a press conference and go on a terrorist which hunt in order to satisfy people because they are paranoid. In America I am innocent until proven guilty and if the rest of the world didn't think it was good enough that I said I was against it, they could :kissmy:.
  18. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    Yes, I suppose I am. No sarcasm, no personal attacks, no rolling of the eyes. What in heavens name could I possibly be thinking?! :rofl:
  19. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    Techie, you aren't Muslim, are you? I really don't understand why you think the idea of the general Muslim population, especially in Mosques, shouldn't be holding those spreading hate accountable or why you insist that anyone is saying they should be putting ads in newspapers and hunting people down. Perhaps I missed that being stated somewhere in the thread.
    But what ever.
    It's a witch hunt. :)
  20. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    Technically, I am Catholic although I don't really practice. It has been stated multiple times that condemning the terrorism isn't enough.
    I believe that those who encounter terrorists or terrorism have a duty to do what they can to fight it, but at the same time I am not naive enough to believe every Muslim is going to know a terrorists nor hate spreading nutball, and I believe in a silly old idea called "innocent before proven guilty" whereby we do not indict people because of their religion or associations but rather we indict them because of their actions, not their inactions or failure to conform to some silly doctrine that they are unable to conform to beacuse they don't actually know terrorists so since they can't hand them in they can't prove their innocence. This entire idea of not letting muslims immigrate to America is not just a moral flaw, it is a strategic flaw, a common sense flaw, and in the end it would only serve as a measure to make the paranoid "feel-good" because it really isn't overly difficult to convert to some other religion then convert back after you arrive in America.

Share This Page