Muslim Leaders 'Expose ISIS' Lies’ In Digital Magazine

[josephpalazzo]

Yes, life is just grand, if you have nubile nude females dropping grapes into your waiting mouth.  Are you a follower of Ayn Rand?  I followed her in my youth, but not much since. 

Which part of "He's a little trick for your little brains to ax: To anyone who's on the Left, like you for instance, I will be on the Right. To those on the Right, I will be on the Left" don't you understand?

My POV is that some people are assholes, or maybe all of us are.  I don't care what accomplishments the monkeys think they have done.

You're the one who brought the idea of focusing on the little people. Are you backing away from that?

[Baruch]

Which part of "He's a little trick for your little brains to ax: To anyone who's on the Left, like you for instance, I will be on the Right. To those on the Right, I will be on the Left" don't you understand?

You're the one who brought the idea of focusing on the little people. Are you backing away from that?

But ... but ... we are mirrors of each other ... I am doing the same to you ... but you never voice a Left opinion, just the Right ones (occasionally Center).  We are like dancers together both of whom have two Left feet, or is that two Right feet? ;-)

You consistently hero worship, but I feel the same temptation as you.  Though we might differ on individual candidates for Madame Toussauds' cabinet of wax people.  And sometimes you don't respond to specific questions, but that is OK.

[josephpalazzo]

But ... but ... we are mirrors of each other ... I am doing the same to you ... but you never voice a Left opinion, just the Right ones (occasionally Center).  We are like dancers together both of whom have two Left feet, or is that two Right feet? ;-)

You consistently hero worship, but I feel the same temptation as you.  Though we might differ on individual candidates for Madame Toussauds' cabinet of wax people.  And sometimes you don't respond to specific questions, but that is OK.

No, we are not mirror of each other. Only in your dreams. I've been on this forum for nine years. If you had followed my consistent opposition to the Republican party you would be thinking I'm a Lefty. Your perception of people is warped by your left-wing worldviews. So of course to you, I am on the Right.  In another post, I wrote: " But it's my economics knowledge that has led me to see the fallacies of the Left and the Right. They are both horribly terrible in regard to what is considered as sound economic principles. " I guess that went over your head.

[SilentFutility]

What relevance is intent? If I hurt you because I don't like you, or if I hurt you to further my agenda and you got in the way... tell me how much it will matter to the person who was hurt.

I am not interested in intent because it is irrelevant, not because I want people to agree with me. If I wanted people to constantly agree with me, I sure as fuck wouldn't spend my time here.

Uh, no, you are playing stupid and moronic because you are asking for citation that the major nations economies and militaries are the most powerful in the world. There is no way to not say that in an "insulting" manner, because by it's very nature one should be insulted if called on that. The truth is under no obligation to be non-insulting, nice as that would be.

Not what I said. You do not hold people you agree with to the same standards of citations on articles that are very, very questionable at best as you do "the other side". You do not hold people remotely to the same level of, "I remember when this forum was more than ad homs". You are a hypocrite in your social circles, not in your argument.

And if I am being hypocritical about something, by all means call me on it. That's not an insult, that's a statement of "get your shit together". I have not found any of the insults thrown at me by you or several others insulting, but from you I do find them disappointing.

Several ways to address this...

1. That number is closer to 50%, since the Bible and Qu'ran both statistically are comparable in terms of violence per percentage... the Bible at nearly 3% of it is violent verses, the Qu'ran at 5%.

If we are going to hold the two as "violent" books because of 2.7% and 5% percentage has violent verses, then are we going to ignore the verses that promote peace and "right" living? Since we love to only quote the bad, let's get some of the good in here for once... lest we be cherry pickers ourselves.

Truly, a book of true, unadulterated, unfathomable and unopposed evil.


Argument 2. - Take a look at where your shirt is made. Take a look at where the parts on your computer were made. Take a look where nearly every single product you own, every piece of food you eat, was made or grown. Now think about the living standards of the people who made it. We employee millions upon millions of slaves in everything but name in Latin America, Africa, Asia (and for food, at least here in the States, Hispanic slave labour in the fields). Does Islam hold a candle to how many people are suffering not for anything like a religion, but rather just plain, basic greed and indifference of the post-colonial West?

China and India are the two largest countries and growing fast... think about the standards of living in those countries. 36% of the world's population lives in those two countries alone, and the living standards for many, especially in India, are comparable to anywhere in the Middle East.  These countries also wield geo-political power far beyond anyone in the Middle East does, the closest likely being Saudi Arabia and Iran who, while players, are not super powers like these two.

You first claim I am not interested in debating, then claim I am only interested in discrediting... what point is there debating if you do not intend to try and prove the other belief wrong. If I had no intention of trying to discredit, my only option would be to say, "You are 100% right" and then there would be no debate.

Again, your opinion has fuck all to do with why you are disappointing. It is your behaviour that is a let down, but then again I should have expected as much given the turn several posters have taken in the last year or so.

Edit: Sorry, missed a part...

1. It's not the disagreement.

2. Would you say sharing the ideas about creationism is still just, "sharing ideas"? So why is factually bunk articles posted about Islam with a strong xenophobic ideological motivation considered "sharing ideas" instead of posting bullshit.

3. I'll give you the standoffish, though it has gotten worse thanks to a slew of ad homs. and deeply personal attacks by several posters that went unremarked upon by anyone. Still giving you that one though.

We're discussing who the biggest threat to world peace is. I don't need citations for who has the most powerful military, you said that they're the biggest threats to world peace without any evidence to back it up. My assertion is that just because a group or nation is the most powerful, does not mean that it is the largest threat to world peace.

I'm not sure what behaviour I've displayed that could disappoint you beyond disagreeing with you something, perhaps debating it in a manner you also happen to dislike as well. I thought debating things etc. was the point of being here.

By discredit I meant calling me deluded etc. to discredit me rather than arguing against my points specifically. Apologies if this was unclear.

As for your arguments 1 & 2:

1:
I imagine that the majority of violent parts of the bible are in the superceded old testament as already covered. Also, while I have no statistics, the proportion of people who take a literalist interpretation of islam is much higher. There are mainstream, literalist schools of islamic thought that do this that are in a majority in several countries eg. Saudi Arabia. How many literalist christian groups are out there severing heads and hands, killing and torturing etc? Very few, as this isn't the middle ages anymore.

2:
I don't disagree that western foreign policy and ways of life cause huge amounts of suffering world wide.
Perhaps by world peace I'm being unclear: I think that tensions between the islamic world and the west is one of the most major threats to world peace in terms of it is one of the most likely things that could spark off a large-scale war or conflict on a semi-global scale.

[Baruch]

The Muslim vs Other conflict should cause war ... because the Other is doing their best to destroy the Muslims, short of just nuking them out of existence.  The Muslims and the Other are both predatory.  The largest military or largest country ... is a great threat to peace too ... we are the ones who are trying to destroy the Muslims (see PNAC).  It was planned long before 9/11.  The problem for the Muslims is that they are dis-united and lacking in military resources ... necessary to destroy the West ... as per justice, it should be destroyed ... since we initiated the violence ala Axis.  Now we are the Germans!

If one is unaware of one's nations culpability, or one is a jingo who supports whatever stupidity one's nation is doing ... then this nuance won't bother one.  Just support the home team, even if the grandstands are burnt down.  If I were an average Muslim, then just like an average Christian etc ... I would want to kill the West (not seeing that this is maybe a bad idea ... but then my Fuhrer is better than your Fuhrer).