School district bans drawings of religious leaders after Acton students draw Muhammad (http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20151104/school-district-bans-drawings-of-religious-leaders-after-acton-students-draw-muhammad)
QuoteAn Acton school district superintendent said Wednesday he has banned depicting religious leaders after middle school students drew images on a history worksheet of Muhammad, which is forbidden in Islam.
Following a parent’s complaint and media inquiries, Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District Superintendent Brent Woodard told a reporter Tuesday he would consult with an expert on Islam to determine whether a vocabulary handout given to a 7th-grade history class at High Desert School in Acton was offensive. The worksheet, Vocabulary Pictures: The Rise of Islam, listed words such as Quran, Mecca, Bedouins and Muhammad with spaces for students to draw pictures or images related to those words.
“I have directed all staff to permanently suspend the practice of drawing or depiction of any religious leader,†Woodard said Wednesday afternoon in a text message. “I am certain this teacher did not intend to offend anyone and in fact was simply teaching respect and tolerance for all cultures.â€
Good call. Imagine the shitstorm if it got out that they are drawing Muhammad!
Whew! That was close.
*religious leaders (plural). No, just one in particular. We all know which one, don't we?
We have learned the lesson.
They shouldn't be studying any religion in any public school at all. I agree with French laicity ... in the public domain.
Quote from: Baruch on November 07, 2015, 12:25:57 AM
They shouldn't be studying any religion in any public school at all. I agree with French laicity ... in the public domain.
There is an exemption for Islam. Have a word with ACLU. See what they think.
NOTICE: THIS SEEMS TO BE THE ONLY SITE REPORTING THIS AS HAPPENING, JUST LIKE THE BOOK BURNINGS IN GERMANY THAT NO ACTUAL NEWS ORGANIZATION OR LOCAL REPORT SAID EXISTED. TAKE THE ARTICLE ABOVE WITH A GRAIN O SALT. --------------------------------
Now, assuming it is true...
Quote...which is forbidden in Islam.
Again, assuming Islam is a monolithic entity.
No it isn't. A Qu'ran scholar like yourself should know that. It is prohibited in mainstream Sunni Islam, but amongst Shia Muslims it is common and has been in Persian art for hundreds of years. But it is only in hadiths, which as you should know are what keep Islam from being a monolithic entity and instead many different interpretations, where it is justified as something to be banned.
I am torn on how I feel about this; if it was Christians complaining about the portrayal of Jesus (as some Puritans, Calvanists and others would do if they existed in any sizable sense nowadays) , what would we do? Most likely we would pull the assignment and say it was a bad idea as well.
Shiranu wrote:QuoteI am torn on how I feel about this; if it was Christians complaining about the portrayal of Jesus (as some Puritans, Calvanists and others would do if they existed in any sizable sense nowadays) , what would we do? Most likely we would pull the assignment and say it was a bad idea as well.
I'll make it easy for you.
Which group is more likely to go ape and threaten you with violence? And even carry it out?
Muslims or Christians?
Isn't it a pity there are no larger fonts available? Mind you, there are still color options.
Or a stupid gif that you are so fond of.
Grow up.
Sheesh.
BTW, I googled the title: About 6,340 results (0.71 seconds)
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 01:27:35 AM
Shiranu wrote:I'll make it easy for you.
Which group is more likely to go ape and threaten you with violence? And even carry it out?
Muslims or Christians?
Isn't it a pity there are no larger fonts available? Mind you, there are still color options.
Or a stupid gif that you are so fond of.
Grow up.
Sheesh.
BTW, I googled the title: About 6,340 results (0.71 seconds)
Maybe. But that isnt the point. The point is if there are any independent reports of this. (Which wouldn use the same headline)
QuoteBut that isnt the point.
The point is, that the content is against your preconceptions, therefore it is deemed invalid.
Thanks for playing.
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 01:27:35 AM
Shiranu wrote:I'll make it easy for you.
Which group is more likely to go ape and threaten you with violence? And even carry it out?
Muslims or Christians?
Isn't it a pity there are no larger fonts available? Mind you, there are still color options.
Or a stupid gif that you are so fond of.
Grow up.
Sheesh.
BTW, I googled the title: About 6,340 results (0.71 seconds)
Don't fret, there are larger fonts yet to come! As for my gifs, I am heart broken you do not appreciate them... truly.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bOvo0hIXQUw/UO9VX8nbkMI/AAAAAAAAAuw/UkzJKHcn6YE/s1600/crying.gif)
On googling;
I got 62,000(ish) results when I copy-pasted the title. Lets take a look at the 2 first pages and see which one's are actual news organizations, shale we?
1. Dailycaller... no.
2. Dailynews... no.
3. Eagnews... no.
4. Truthrevolt...no.
five (my # won't show up): libertynews...no.
6. reddit... no.
7. fcmat.com...no.
8. vladtepesblog...no.
You get the point; you don't miss anything from 9-18... only Breibart, patriotnow and liberals101 stand out.
I can site you 100,000 pages proving evolution is a myth, but without a SINGLE valid source that would prove nothing. And when the search box is dominated by only right wing/anti-Islam agenda websites like Breibart, patriotnow and truthrevolt, you have to excuse me if the fact that 62,000 pages of bullshit coming up doesn't sway me too much.
The other fact that people actually defend and buy your boogieman bullshit is even more pathetic. But while we laugh and point, then foam at the mouth and scream at creationists who post their bullshit here, when it's someone on our side we just nod our head and say, "Yup, yup, preach it brother!" and start declaring that anyone who disagrees is just some dirty liberal (and that is all the justification they need to close their ears)... from a strictly anthropological/sociological standpoint, it is a quite interesting phenomenon to watch.
If being a grown up like yourself means buying every bullshit article I see as the absolute truth, and lying to people's faces as you have done time and time again... or that to be a grown up means I have to agree with my group and how dare anyone ever oppose us!... then I am not interested, thanks.
So Brenda Gazzar (http://Brenda.Gazzar@dailynews.com) has made it up.
Well, her email address is in this post. Perhaps you could call her out on it. Ask her why.
Brenda Gazzar (http://www.dailynews.com/staff/64)
Whilst you are at it, contact these too:
http://libertynews.com/2015/11/history-teacher-asks-students-to-draw-muhammad-school-district-responds-by-banning-drawings-of-religious-leaders/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/953/yes-left-supports-government-established-ben-shapiro
http://www.newsshine.com/us-local-news/california/education/199261-school-district-bans-drawings-of-religious-leaders-after-acton-students-draw-muhammad.html
Edit: fair enough, daily is legitimate and presents it with some actual journalistic integrity. However that still doesn't change the point that the only people who apparently making this a deal are hard-right blog "news sites".
Nor does it change the fact that we would do the same thing for Christians...
...or for that matter, someone who is lactose-intolerant or gluten-free. I guess those gluten-free people are some dangerous terrorists to evoke that type of fear...
Shiranu wrote:QuoteEdit to your edit: So you want me to start contacting blogs about why they aren't legitimate news sites. Sorry, I have better things to do with my life, thank you though.
Apparently you feel strongly enough about it that you argue the toss just for the hell of it.
Over sized fonts. Gifs. Long paragraphs.
Ignoring it is not an option.
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 03:37:02 AM
Shiranu wrote:
Apparently you feel strongly enough about it that you argue the toss just for the hell of it.
Ignoring it is not an option.
Uh, yes... people can visit those sites all they want. It's when they start being presented as truth in a site that claims to care about the truth that it becomes an issue. Especially that German one though... that was downright disgraceful on your part and pathetic on the people who ate it up. It's one thing to wrap yourself up in your world of delusion, it's another to try to ensnare others in it. I don't have a hope in hell you are going to change, or even the people who buy your fear mongering... but I would feel like an asshole to just ignore the preacher on the side of the street yelling, "The end is near, fear your neighbour for he will destroy your culture, rape your women and bring upon the Armageddon!". To ignore such rhetoric has been historically disastrous.
If someone came in here and started posting article after article about how atheists are evil and want to kill us because some hard right blog "newsites" said so... do you think the reaction would be "just ignore it"? Really nao?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Gv7i18CFKK1xK/giphy.gif)
OK. You have better things to do with your life, but...
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 03:42:30 AM
OK. You have better things to do with your life, but...
But it's 2:44 and I am playing CIV, and it doesn't take much effort to type while the next turn is loading.
Oh, FFS.
Carry on. Whatever floats your boat.
Edit: What the hell is CIV?
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 03:46:24 AM
Oh, FFS.
Carry on. Whatever floats your boat.
What can I say, having fun is important to me... more so than sitting under my bed cowering that the Mooslims will invade any day and destroy Western civilization...
Nice one. Good jab. Keep 'em coming.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 07, 2015, 03:51:57 AM
What can I say, having fun is important to me... more so than sitting under my bed cowering that the Mooslims will invade any day and destroy Western civilization...
But the Evil Moose Lambs
are invading and destroying Western civilization. I did it in Crusader Kings 2, and that game is a
historical simulator, so it must be true!
(http://i.imgur.com/LCm3x.jpg)
:lol:
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 12:19:36 AM
School district bans drawings of religious leaders after Acton students draw Muhammad (http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20151104/school-district-bans-drawings-of-religious-leaders-after-acton-students-draw-muhammad)Good call. Imagine the shitstorm if it got out that they are drawing Muhammad!
Whew! That was close.
*religious leaders (plural). No, just one in particular. We all know which one, don't we?
We have learned the lesson.
With what happened over the Danish cartoon controversy and what happened at Charlie Hebdo, I believe that what the school did was prudent. You don't want to risk the lives of young people when there are so many crazies out there.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on November 07, 2015, 08:58:34 AM
With what happened over the Danish cartoon controversy and what happened at Charlie Hebdo, I believe that what the school did was prudent. You don't want to risk the lives of young people when there are so many crazies out there.
I would certainly ban school assignments on Moses or Jesus as well. If you want to know about Moses, it is best to ask a rabbi.
So Pr126 ... I am being even handed. Do you object? And Breitbart ... really ... a den of impotent neo-Nazis ;-( I believe every word of the Lyndon Larouche web site myself ;-)
So when middle school kids ask why they can't draw a picture of a religious leader what do you tell them? Do you lie, or do you tell them that certain people from a particular religion might harm or even kill them for drawing a picture? Even if the school sugar coats it, a lot of parents won't. You have to wonder how that affects their perception of a whole slew of issues like freedom of speech, bullying, multiculturalism, Islam, muslims, terrorism, etc.
Jack89 wrote:QuoteYou have to wonder how that affects their perception of a whole slew of issues like freedom of speech, bullying, multiculturalism, Islam, muslims, terrorism, etc.
Don't forget idolatry!
Muhammad and the Quran are the two most important Idols in Islam.
So we had a history sheet given out by a teacher that required the drawing of moohamodd (faeces be upon him) by the pupils.
Do we believe in religious freedom?
I will stand for my right to criticize in anyway I wish a religion. However I have no right to direct a religious person to do an act against their faith.
This history paper is doing exactly that, directing an islamic child to make an image contrary to their faith, and as such it should be removed.
PR do you understand about British culture and religious freedom? If you say you understand those concepts why did you post this shit?
I have been putting down your variance from British culture that you were a refugee that we British people were nice enough to let in, I am now seriously wondering if you have any contact with Britain at all.
Quote from: Jack89 on November 07, 2015, 09:32:38 AM
So when middle school kids ask why they can't draw a picture of a religious leader what do you tell them? Do you lie, or do you tell them that certain people from a particular religion might harm or even kill them for drawing a picture? Even if the school sugar coats it, a lot of parents won't. You have to wonder how that affects their perception of a whole slew of issues like freedom of speech, bullying, multiculturalism, Islam, muslims, terrorism, etc.
I believe that can be handled by stressing that such drawings are offensive to certain people of a certain faith. It's a great opportunity to teach comparative religions, and demonstrate what each religion teaches, what is their credo and their practices. Knowledge is better than ignorance.
I suppose that the teacher was totally ignorant of Islam, Muslims and if (s)he knew about it this would not have happened.
That is the biggest problem we have, that people who should know better are ignorant (mostly willfully) about the subject they supposed to teach.
Also being totally unaware of the Danish cartoon riots, or Charli Hebdo is puzzling.
Perhaps the teacher is a visitor from another planet?
Quote from: jonb on November 07, 2015, 09:45:05 AM
So we had a history sheet given out by a teacher that required the drawing of moohamodd (faeces be upon him) by the pupils.
Do we believe in religious freedom?
I will stand for my right to criticize in anyway I wish a religion. However I have no right to direct a religious person to do an act against their faith.
This history paper is doing exactly that, directing an islamic child to make an image contrary to their faith, and as such it should be removed.
PR do you understand about British culture and religious freedom? If you say you understand those concepts why did you post this shit?
I have been putting down your variance from British culture that you were a refugee that we British people were nice enough to let in, I am now seriously wondering if you have any contact with Britain at all.
One can't often expect acculturation of immigrants ... unless they are pre-schoolers. If one is an adult immigrant, I expect a different result.
Schools are for state indoctrination ... not for free speech. Ask any student who asks to or forces themselves to the front of the class, to take over from the teacher ;-) Free speech is only for those who can afford it. I can post here, because of my economic status in the US ... I am not an enslaved cocao picker in the Cote d'ivoire.
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 09:55:17 AM
I suppose that the teacher was totally ignorant of Islam, Muslims and if (s)he knew about it this would not have happened.
That is the biggest problem we have, that people who should know better are ignorant (mostly willfully) about the subject they supposed to teach.
Also being totally unaware of the Danish cartoon riots, or Charli Hebdo is puzzling.
Perhaps the teacher is a visitor from another planet?
If you knew the hours a primary school teacher worked, you might understand why they might not be aware of what has happened in the news. My wife's working day runs from seven thirty in the morning to six and then from seven in the evening to midnight or one in the morning and a further 14 to 20 hours at weekends.
If you read what you posted it was not a religious paper, but one on history, the teacher late at night working through a lesson plan did not even think about religious considerations.
The boogieman under pr's bed at night is now an oppressed minority and the moozlims have taken over.
Quote from: jonb on November 07, 2015, 09:45:05 AM
So we had a history sheet given out by a teacher that required the drawing of moohamodd (faeces be upon him) by the pupils.
Do we believe in religious freedom?
I will stand for my right to criticize in anyway I wish a religion. However I have no right to direct a religious person to do an act against their faith.
This history paper is doing exactly that, directing an islamic child to make an image contrary to their faith, and as such it should be removed.
No, the kid should have the option of not doing the assignment. Just like you don't remove hot dogs and Jello from the cafeteria because there are Jewish and Muslim kids in school. It's necessary that people understand and tolerate each other's beliefs and taboos, but that doesn't mean we should structure education around them, especially in a melting pot like California.
There is also the question of teaching religious subjects in school, even from a secular point of view. Some would argue that there is no place for it, but I find it hard to avoid when when religion is at the core of so many current events. These issues pop up in classrooms where inquiry and discussion are valued, especially when you get into middle and high school.
Quote from: Baruch on November 07, 2015, 12:25:57 AM
They shouldn't be studying any religion in any public school at all. I agree with French laicity ... in the public domain.
Disagree. Religious education and religious practice are not the same thing. Education is rarely a bad thing. I am grateful for my own religious education.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on November 07, 2015, 10:28:17 AM
The boogieman under pr's bed at night is now an oppressed minority and the moozlims have taken over.
:shut_up:
Quote from: pr126 on November 07, 2015, 10:39:53 AM
:shut_up:
Wow..snappy comeback no doubt inspired by the oppressed boogieman.
Teaching religion is like listening to second hand car salesmen, trying to sell an invisible used car.
The books shown are history books covering the growth of Islamic empires.
A history lesson.
If in teaching about Italy the pope was mentioned and the papal states would that make it religious education?
Is there any evidence shown religion was being taught?
Drawing Mohammed is such a hot topic because radical Muslims kill people for it, not because it's supposedly disrespectful to do so. The reason it is forbidden by Muslims is to prevent idol worship, as alluded to by pr. Mohammed is considered a man and drawing his image may lead to worshiping him rather than Allah. Makes sense if you're Muslim, but is ridiculous of you're not.
I see this as similar to some Jews spelling God as G-d. To them it's disrespectful to erase the name of God so you avoid writing it. Again, that's great for those who believe such a thing, but ridiculous for those who don't. The difference is that we don't have radical Jews going around killing people for writing the word "God". Would it be appropriate to forbid kids from spelling the word God in school, or avoid assignments where it would occur?
Or could it be that with a 1.4% Asian presence even in a little place like Acton California there could be islamic children in the class?
To not expect them to do the work would be problematic for an all inclusive policy, so it might be better to get children to draw something else next time which would not effect anybodies education in the least.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on November 07, 2015, 10:28:17 AM
The boogieman under pr's bed at night is now an oppressed minority and the moozlims have taken over.
I'll be honest, when I see new topics started by pr, all I can think is "What have the Muslims done now?"
Quote from: jonb on November 07, 2015, 11:33:41 AM
Or could it be that with a 1.4% Asian presence even in a little place like Acton California there could be islamic children in the class?
To not expect them to do the work would be problematic for an all inclusive policy, so it might be better to get children to draw something else next time which would not effect anybodies education in the least.
Should we avoid teaching evolution in schools to comply with an all inclusive policy? It obviously offends a lot of Christians and isn't necessary for most professions. Of course not.
It seems like such a little thing to avoid the subject, but we need to recognize it for what it is. It's falling prey to coercion. We're afraid for our children so we comply with terrorist demands. It's perfectly understandable.
Sorry I forgot how fucked up you country is, if getting ten year olds to draw pictures of semi mythical beings in history lessons is the only way that you can then be allowed to teach biology then you have to make those choices.
I feel so lucky to be on this side of the pond.
Quote from: Mermaid on November 07, 2015, 10:39:41 AM
Disagree. Religious education and religious practice are not the same thing. Education is rarely a bad thing. I am grateful for my own religious education.
I got my religious education outside of school. For example when Catholicism was mentioned in public school, it was part of history, not as a religion. I knew Cortez was a Spanish Catholic ... but I didn't need to know much about Catholicism for that. So yes, as long as religious figures are treated as historical figures ... no problem. Except of course that Jesus is not a historical figure, nor was Moses. Muhammad was.
Quote from: Jack89 on November 07, 2015, 11:17:29 AM
Drawing Mohammed is such a hot topic because radical Muslims kill people for it, not because it's supposedly disrespectful to do so. The reason it is forbidden by Muslims is to prevent idol worship, as alluded to by pr. Mohammed is considered a man and drawing his image may lead to worshiping him rather than Allah. Makes sense if you're Muslim, but is ridiculous of you're not.
I see this as similar to some Jews spelling God as G-d. To them it's disrespectful to erase the name of God so you avoid writing it. Again, that's great for those who believe such a thing, but ridiculous for those who don't. The difference is that we don't have radical Jews going around killing people for writing the word "God". Would it be appropriate to forbid kids from spelling the word God in school, or avoid assignments where it would occur?
Only ultra-orthodox Jews would get after someone for using god or God ... and only when done by Jews. We don't try to enforce our standards outside our group ... for obvious reasons. In a public school situation, I would encourage "god" or "gods" as standard, treating all the same way most of us treat Greek mythology.
Quote from: jonb on November 07, 2015, 02:21:08 PM
Sorry I forgot how fucked up you country is, if getting ten year olds to draw pictures of semi mythical beings in history lessons is the only way that you can then be allowed to teach biology then you have to make those choices.
I feel so lucky to be on this side of the pond.
You sent all your crazies over here ... what did you expect ;-)
It always goes down to pr calling shir the equivalently of a Muslim apologist/west hater and shir calling pr an alarmist racist type deal.
I miss the randomness of these threads ;3;
Quote from: GrinningYMIR on November 07, 2015, 08:32:32 PM
It always goes down to pr calling shir the equivalently of a Muslim apologist/west hater and shir calling pr an alarmist racist type deal.
I miss the randomness of these threads ;3;
I get the Muslim apologist, but I never understood the, "I hate the west!" angle. Ah well...
Quote from: Baruch on November 07, 2015, 08:18:18 PM
Only ultra-orthodox Jews would get after someone for using god or God ... and only when done by Jews. We don't try to enforce our standards outside our group ... for obvious reasons. In a public school situation, I would encourage "god" or "gods" as standard, treating all the same way most of us treat Greek mythology.
As it should be. Thanks for the clarification.
Quote from: Baruch on November 07, 2015, 08:19:49 PM
You sent all your crazies over here ... what did you expect ;-)
Not all though sadly, and we are still busy creating new ones to replace those we have lost.
PS
And I think you might also realise that many English people think of me as one of the crazies they would love to export.
When a public school makes it policy to ban what is banned by a religion, and only because it is banned by a religion, then how is this not a 1st Amendment violation? Fuck that noise, students have every right to express their religious ideas! It's the teachers and school administrators who need to keep their hands off it, and this is precisely what they are not doing.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 07, 2015, 09:01:18 PM
I get the Muslim apologist, but I never understood the, "I hate the west!" angle. Ah well...
Part of the "if you are not for us, you are against us" logic. If you don't believe in genocidal Western imperialism, then you are an enemy of the State. Pr126 is not genocidal ... and I don't think he approves of Western imperialism ... just to be clear. What he wants is for Muslims to stay home, and those who have come, to go back home. Strictly an anti-immigration angle. Some of his sources however, cross over into the "barbarous" side. Pr126 also doesn't believe that Muslim immigrants want to or even can (given history) go back home or stay home ... they are army ants to him.
I have no idea how history will go ... but I suspect that however many genuine refugees come to W Europe ... they will stay. It is possible that economic emigres will be sent home eventually, and this is bad for the Turks, who have been used as guest workers in Germany for decades ... the refugees might be used to replace them.
Baruch wrote:Quoteand I don't think he approves of Western imperialism ...
There is no such thing as western imperialism any more.
For example Great Britain is not great any more, not for a long time. Not since WWI.
The USA with its 19 trillion debt is circling the drain.
Obama said that he will fundamentally change America. He did. Not for the better either.
No more American Exceptionalism. No more superpower.
I would be happy for China and Russia to stomp all over the Old World and S America for the next 50 years. Then those folks will have something to complain about. Russia is Western and China nearly so. Just keep your grubby hands off of N America. The problem is petroleum ... for industry (even off shored to China) and for war. And that impacts the all important Petro-dollar.
Yes, Obama takes the cake ... but then Bush/Cheney and Clinton/Lewinsky took the US down notches too. American power is impressive, only when not used, just threatened. I would not have stopped Saddam in 1991 ... I would have told him that we support him in taking out all of the resources of the Arabian Gulf ... to keep if from being the Persian Gulf. Blame Thatcher for persuading Bush Sr. There would have been no 9/11 if Saudi Arabia had been taken out.
Quote...and I don't think he approves of Western imperialism ...
QuoteFor example Great Britain is not great any more, not for a long time. Not since WWI.
Obama said that he will fundamentally change America. He did. Not for the better either.
No more American Exceptionalism. No more superpower.
I think both of yall might have been mistaken then :P. American Exceptionalism was built on turning America into a nation with it's hands pulling the rest of the world's strings; an empire. Same for his lamentations on the death of "Great" Britain... as an immigrant from a country not part of the Commonwealth, I can see how he could have romanticized it. As a descendant of immigrants from two (three I guess if you count American, but my ancestors got here long after the British were overthrown) countries that were under British rule... I think that romanticization is extremely misguided and "offensive", for lack of a better word.
Quote from: pr126 on November 08, 2015, 09:20:44 AM
Baruch wrote:There is no such thing as western imperialism any more.
For example Great Britain is not great any more, not for a long time. Not since WWI.
The USA with its 19 trillion debt is circling the drain.
Obama said that he will fundamentally change America. He did. Not for the better either.
No more American Exceptionalism. No more superpower.
Since WW2, the US has taken on the role of patrolling the sea routes unchallenged, and by de facto, became the policeman of the world. However, this is presently challenged by China, Russia, and even Iran on the perception that Obama is a weak leader. All bets are off though with the next president. There is a very strong mood in the Pentagon that the US must make greater stride to strengthen its position as the only superpower.
josephpalazzo wrote:QuoteThere is a very strong mood in the Pentagon that the US must make greater stride to strengthen its position as the only superpower.
I hope so.
But voters will vote for the POTUS the media tells them to vote for.
That is how you got a double helping of Obama.
Quote from: Baruch on November 08, 2015, 09:41:13 AM
I would be happy for China and Russia to stomp all over the Old World and S America for the next 50 years. Then those folks will have something to complain about. Russia is Western and China nearly so. Just keep your grubby hands off of N America. The problem is petroleum ... for industry (even off shored to China) and for war. And that impacts the all important Petro-dollar.
Yes, Obama takes the cake ... but then Bush/Cheney and Clinton/Lewinsky took the US down notches too. American power is impressive, only when not used, just threatened. I would not have stopped Saddam in 1991 ... I would have told him that we support him in taking out all of the resources of the Arabian Gulf ... to keep if from being the Persian Gulf. Blame Thatcher for persuading Bush Sr. There would have been no 9/11 if Saudi Arabia had been taken out.
That makes you no better than anyone who has ever practiced imperialism, regardless of their nationality.
America did not invent imperialism, nor did the British, the Russians, the Ottomans, Genghis Khan, the Huns, the Byzantines, the Romans, the Greeks, the Jews, the Babylonians, nor the Egyptians - it's simply the way of any powerful, hierarchical society supported by agriculture or industrial labor. Say thanks to science and technological development for the death of that practice.
QuoteSay thanks to science and technological development for the death of that practice.
What?
If you think American (or more accurately, Western and a few Eastern) imperialism is dead... then what is our use of 3rd world countries as factories for cheap goods and food? Sure, we don't officially rule them like the "good ol' days" of Great Britain, the American Empire, the Ottomans, the Romans, etc. etc. , but we still make sure they provide us with cheap goods as basically satellite states.
I would say imperialism is alive and well, we just learned to not leave a flag for the whole world to see who is in charge and to share the benefits with our neighbours.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 08, 2015, 05:19:40 PM
What?
If you think American (or more accurately, Western and a few Eastern) imperialism is dead... then what is our use of 3rd world countries as factories for cheap goods and food? Sure, we don't officially rule them like the "good ol' days" of Great Britain, the American Empire, the Ottomans, the Romans, etc. etc. , but we still make sure they provide us with cheap goods as basically satellite states.
I would say imperialism is alive and well, we just learned to not leave a flag for the whole world to see who is in charge and to share the benefits with our neighbours.
You're right, I should have said "decline", not "death". There has been much decline of imperialism worldwide, no exceptions with the US. Recriminations on the past are pointless at this point, as this generation is only responsible for what it does going forward. On account of increased global exchange of ideas and education, and no more new colonies to imperialize, it looks to me like imperialsm will continue to decline in the for awhile, although this could reverse if extreme climatic disasters foment extreme politics in Europe, Russia, and China (maybe the US too).
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 08, 2015, 07:12:53 PM
You're right, I should have said "decline", not "death". There has been much decline of imperialism worldwide, no exceptions with the US. Recriminations on the past are pointless at this point, as this generation is only responsible for what it does going forward. On account of increased global exchange of ideas and education, and no more new colonies to imperialize, it looks to me like imperialsm will continue to decline in the for awhile, although this could reverse if extreme climatic disasters foment extreme politics in Europe, Russia, and China (maybe the US too).
Alright, that makes sense.
I will say that I think national empires are on the borderline of death, I think an almost imperial system of more regional communities and corporations as the two main players are rising.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 08, 2015, 07:26:57 PM
I will say that I think national empires are on the borderline of death, I think an almost imperial system of more regional communities and corporations as the two main players are rising.
while I think I understand your position I am not sure that suggesting A is better that B when both are realistically the same thing is any a better spot to sit and piss on the rest.
We have several people in the world who have the wealth to buy entire countries….many countries! I am now to the point where any idea of politics has already been stolen by these few. I almost wish for a more diversified power system in this world today but I fear there is a hidden hand behind every thing today and it is driven by the same greed. The new revolution is coming, but there are few face bookers, tweeters, pinteresters, instagramers or other social media zombies that will dare to challenge the power. Eating a carrot may not be as good as eating a steak, but they may believe it is better than eating grass, and there are many who will lay down and be happy for the carrot.
Quote from: aitm on November 08, 2015, 07:59:43 PM
while I think I understand your position I am not sure that suggesting A is better that B when both are realistically the same thing is any a better spot to sit and piss on the rest.
We have several people in the world who have the wealth to buy entire countries….many countries! I am now to the point where any idea of politics has already been stolen by these few. I almost wish for a more diversified power system in this world today but I fear there is a hidden hand behind every thing today and it is driven by the same greed. The new revolution is coming, but there are few face bookers, tweeters, pinteresters, instagramers or other social media zombies that will dare to challenge the power. Eating a carrot may not be as good as eating a steak, but they may believe it is better than eating grass, and there are many who will lay down and be happy for the carrot.
You're right - bring on that Zero Day, watch everything collapse, and rejoice as you literally fight to stay alive with thugs ruling the streets. At least you'll know they can't control everything everywhere, and the few fuckers who set it all up to happen probably came to a bad end.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 08, 2015, 08:43:57 PM
the few fuckers who set it all up to happen probably came to a bad end.
It will be your fight if you wish to engage, I will be long dead by then .
I must have worded it wrong, it's my opinion that they are in practical terms the same thing.
Quote from: aitm on November 08, 2015, 08:58:30 PM
It will be your fight if you wish to engage, I will be long dead by then .
Zero Day could happen tomorrow, which may lead to a lot of us being dead sooner than we had planned.
Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 08, 2015, 09:07:29 PM
Zero Day could happen tomorrow, which may lead to a lot of us being dead sooner than we had planned.
The vast majority of humanity dies sooner than they plan. In the grand scheme, they don't give a fuck about the grand scheme. They want to live as long as they can with the ones they love as long as they can, its a pretty simple plan. Humanity, interestingly enough, probably owes its existence to humans that really don't give a shit about personal longevity……thats what religion does
Zero day your debt will no longer exist. Money will no longer be sucked up into the hands of a few overly rich families. I wonder in who's interests might it be to tell stories of frightful Armageddon?
When the western Roman Empire failed. over the next fifty years the average hight increased probably meaning the average person was more healthy. Without the burden of a vast centralised control system things started to be built again in western Europe. And although there were petty war lords their armies were so small they had to arrange where to meet for a fight otherwise with so few men in arms they just did not have ability to find each other.
Zero day, you know you might just like it.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 08, 2015, 07:26:57 PM
Alright, that makes sense.
I will say that I think national empires are on the borderline of death, I think an almost imperial system of more regional communities and corporations as the two main players are rising.
Rollerball. But really, having bankers rule is as old as the Medici of Florence.
Jonb ... "Zero day, you know you might just like it." ... I have already seen the future, in those old Capital One credit card adverts featuring barbarians ;-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkkeaYwg53A
... credit ... it's uncivilized!
Fortunately there will still be Mini Coopers ;-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLpoLE_M9wU
I can remember before credit cards when we had crossed cheques that could only be used once, and you were not reliant on the receiver to be honest, Unlike now where the usual scam is to record the transaction and then change the amount and make repeat withdrawals from an account without the owner knowing until it is too late.
Vikings in horned helmets, German Volkswagens with British names, no those to are images of now, I am looking at a different beach.
(https://steepstairs.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/grafitti1.jpg)
https://youtu.be/2SvdWk8zRrI
(http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxg7yykEvE1qzz5ieo1_1280.png)
"All the girls in France wear tissue-paper pants"? No wonder the Vikings did their R&R there, again and again ...
Quote from: Baruch on November 07, 2015, 12:25:57 AM
They shouldn't be studying any religion in any public school at all. I agree with French laicity ... in the public domain.
In French Republic or
"République Française" in French. Religions are studied in Collège during history courses
(Junior High School).
Of course it is taught as belief in the way of laïcité or laicity in English even if many facts are ignored.
It is possible to speak about Christian violence
(In theses courses conflict between Catholics and Protestants are described like religious conflict even if there were also politic. The political and social context are ignored). Islamic Violence during Mohammedan time is described as self-defense
(Because in these courses about Islam we learn a bit of mainstream Islamic point of view and not historical fact).
Oui. Très bonne. Le résultat de la révolution étudiant de 1968? La désinformation politique.
Quote from: Baruch on November 13, 2015, 07:20:21 AM
Oui. Très bonne. Le résultat de la révolution étudiant de 1968? La désinformation politique.
何？ã,ã‹ã,Šã¾ã›ã,"...
æ¯ä¸ªäººéƒ½çŸ¥é"法国