if we stop responding to this sock puppet cunt, it might just get bored and go awayl

I've said that before, but for some reason, people here just keep feeding the troll.

Stop feeding the troll, people!

I dunno. There are channels that feed out this kind of content, that then get disseminated via social media or bigger mainstream sites. The concern is that this kind of thing gets normalized. Im sure stormfront and their ilk have both a financial means and political impetus to pay people to research and organize talking points, regular folks can't be bothered. But here, there is little chance for this kind of thing to be thought of as normal. Its neutered, like looking at castrated smallpox under a slide. Under these conditions, for me its interesting to see how it plays out. Because im certain im going to walk into someone who will regurgitate something similar, the difference is that they heard it in an uncritical echo chamber, and i did not.

there's zero value in this shit pile spreading memetic disease bombs

Well id be worried about the kind of cookies that the websites #'s uses for sources leave behind in my computer. I read the article though. Now I know if someone tries to make the case that all positive actions done by muslims is spearheaded by a small persecuted minority I won't be caught flatfooted. That's the value I can derive from all this.

"I can drink poison because I'm healthy and eat good food"

thats what I hear you saying...

You can't be certain you're eating good food unless you know what bad food is.

ok you got me there #yaysatanism

I do adore sichuan food. Best mapo doufu i ever had was in a dingy Chinatown basement restaurant with a crumbling drop ceiling. The sauce was the color of the devils blood, and after two spoonfulls you felt like fenrir swallowing the moon. You felt like the vessel for Ragnarok. In a tasty way.

These posts are not like that. They don't really challenge in a substantial way, but i do think its important to maintain other voices even if they are disagreeable. That being said i don't upvote because i don't really know if #'s has reached the point of just being noise since i log in sporadically. You folks got that covered though it seems.

'The difference is that they heard it in an uncritical echo chamber, and i did not."

No echo chamber here?

Are you fucking kidding, kidding, kidding,kidding,kidding,kidding,kidding,kidding...

Oh but its critical though, you can go deaf from everyone calling you a bigoted dick, dick, dick, dick, dick, dick.......

Published in a rag that publishes anthropogenic climate change denying nonsense.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/The_Spectator

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/dec/02/spectator-sea-level-claims

I think you mean anthropogenic. For a second there, I was very intrigued.

Haha thanks, fixed.

Don't worry about the hot flashes. Gaia is just going through The Change.

Way to dismiss a nice gesture.

I honestly don’t think Murray is trying to "dismiss a nice gesture".

These individuals were obviously genuine and well meaning. They understand the gravity of what is occurring in their midst. I believe that Murray’s point it that these people are not exactly representative of the people news outlets like Al Jazeera et al. pretend they are:

To wit:

"The BBC story found no time to mention Ahmadiyya Muslims in this beautiful lead story. Not their own persecuted status. Not their own minority status. And not the fact that wonderful as their message is, they are about as representative of their faith as the deeply non-wonderful Neturei Karta are of Jews."

Well, what he's saying is that these people aren't real Muslims, and so their gesture means nothing to the greater debate about religion and terrorism. The implication being that the Muslim majority that didn't go out of its way to make similar gestures is therefore suspect. (If a small minority of good people is not representative of a larger group, then the larger group must be bad).

Granted it's the sort of argument I often make so perhaps I'm being to harsh. But the constant insistence that Muslims keep making gestures to prove their good will is about as fair as asking why white people aren't constantly denouncing the KKK. It's nice to make a gesture, but failure to do so is not an indictment.

"But the constant insistence that Muslims keep making gestures to prove their good will is about as fair as asking why white people aren't constantly denouncing the KKK. It's nice to make a gesture, but failure to do so is not an indictment."

Reasonable people can disagree regarding whatever obligations non-violent Muslims might have regarding the ongoing bloodbath that is Islam globally. That isn't the question here.

The question is whether or not Muslims in any real sense did make a conciliatory gesture in France after a priest was butchered at the altar. The Al Jazeera article implied they did - Murray suggests, convincingly in my opinion, that these events, lionized on sites like this, are not the representative events they purport to be. That changes their import significantly - and you can tell how important that change of perspective is by the reaction it engenders here. Everybody throws their toys out of the pram when an Al Jazeera article is revealed to be pro-Muslim propaganda - like that should surprise anyone.

BTW - the KKK analogy doesn't hold up to the most basic scrutiny - Islam is an ideology, not a race - It's astonishing how often this obvious point has to be made.

The KKK is an ideology too. I can choose another metaphor if you prefer. Westboro Baptist Church and christians for example. Or the Hell's Angels and motorcycle riders.

I'm not sure why you think that the actions of these people don't count as a conciliatory gesture for Muslims. They certainly call themselves Muslims, and they are at least as representative of the faith as the extremists whose actions they oppose.

[Edit]I just did some research, and I'd say this sect is significantly more representative. Even absurdly inflated figures put extemist Muslims at less than .01% of Muslims globally. So I'm not sure it's really fair to call global Islam an "ongoing bloodbath".

"Is about as fair as asking why white people aren't constantly denouncing the KKK."

Let’s try this again:

The KKK is an ideology.
White people are not an ideology.
Can you see why your analogy falls down?

In other words – properly constructed your argument goes, “Asking Muslims to account for the acts of other Muslims, is like asking the KKK to account for the acts of other KKK members.”

Nobody is asking for non-Muslims to account for the behavior of Muslims, as your “white people” analogy erroneously implies.

Once again, this confusion with race (something one has no control over) and ideology (something that is chosen) invariably encroaches on any sensible discussion of Islam. You do it in your post. The barely literate SJW’s here hiss RACIST at me at every opportunity.

Everybody now…

ISLAM IS NOT A RACE

Lastly, I never said that this doesn’t count as a “conciliatory gesture for Muslims” – of course it does.

However as I argue elsewhere:

“When the majority of the Muslims showing up to protest Muslim violence come from a tiny denomination, representing one percent of the religion, themselves persecuted by Muslims, that changes the whole “French Muslims show solidarity and sorrow” narrative in a very big way.”

The Al Jazeera piece was a “feel good” story that intentionally elided information that would have made the story feel considerably “less good”. The Douglas Murray’s piece is a necessary corrective to understand exactly how small and unrepresentative is the Muslim community that actually “shows solidarity and sorrow” with an old man butchered while saying his prayers.

Nice straw man you've built over the race issue. But we're getting sidetracked, so I'll make this simple.

I will concede that the actions of the Ahmadiyya Muslims are not representative of Muslims in general. In return, I expect you will concede that the actions of terrorist extremist Muslims are not representative of Muslims in general.

If you would care to read the thread, it was you, not I, who brought race into the discussion. Blaming me for that is a little bit rich.

As for whether "terrorist extremist Muslims are representative of Muslims in general" - by definition they are not, otherwise you couldn't frame the question.

The issue here, clearly, is how representative were the Muslims expressing "sorrow and solidarity" over the execution of a Catholic priest in the name of their religion. It would appear that we agree that it was not very representative - so we are on the same page, along with Douglas Murray.

What religion do you follow numbers?

Answer or fuck the hell off already.

Curious folk on this site.

A couple of days ago someone posted an article about French Muslims expressing “solidarity and sorrow” after Muslim men slaughtered an old man at the altar while he said mass. This “good news” post got great peer reviews, leading me to believe that the event it described was of interest to the people on this site.

Knowing how much critical and independent thought is valued hereabouts, I was reasonably certain that if it turned out the reporting of that event were deeply flawed, those very people who had expressed such keen interest in the story would be grateful to be apprised of the report’s numerous shortcomings.

Apparently I was in error. Remarkably, it would seem that the “happy” narrative provide by Al Jazeera (natch), is thin on fact, eliding any reference to Ahmadiyya Muslims, yet remains the story people here want desperately to believe: Even when juxtaposed by a much more thoughtful and complete description of the events by a vastly more credible journal.

It’s also interesting to note that there is no rebuttal of Douglas Murray’s thorough, erudite and illuminating insights into the true facts about this fluff propaganda piece – Not a single reasoned argument in evidence countering it. Just the senseless lashing out of a hive mind disturbed by facts that make it uncomfortable.

Curious.

You're pretty fail for a troll.

Not to mention ignorant.

Flawed? You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that any of us give a shit about internal muslim divisions. As reported, the facts are still true. Muslims did show up to express solidarity with catholics in the wake of terrorism.

Are you hold that we should only count specific sorts of Muslims as Muslims? Do you have some sort of credentials or expert knowledge that indicates I should give a shit about your opinion on the divisions of the Islamic faith?

Here are some other divisions that might interest you. When speaking about Islam as a force of slavery, the Ibadi branch of the faith is by far the most historically significant. They are Omani, and you may not know this, but there was a open air slave market in Oman into the 1960s. And yet, you will never see me claiming that Ibadi Muslims are not Muslims as some means to deflect criticism that Islam promotes slavery.

When the majority of the Muslims showing up to protest Muslim violence come from a tiny denomination, representing one percent of the religion, themselves persecuted, that changes the whole “French Muslims show solidarity and sorrow” narrative in a very big way.

If you can’t grasp something so obvious, I can’t help you.

No, no... I get it. What I am saying is: you understand you are not exactly making any sort of point.. right?

Did any article indicate that these Muslims representing anything but these Muslims? Because if so, I will totally change position.

But for example, when Louis Farrakhan drags out hasidic jews that agree with him, it is not inncorrect to say that there are jews which agree with the stupidity of the Nation of Islam.

Here, let me try this another way... when WBC shows up to protest a funeral, it is not incorrect to say that Christians are protesting a funeral.

If you ask where the Muslims are that are speaking out against terrorism, you don't then get to brush off those that do because of religious differences you don't rightly understand. Can't have your cake and eat it too, numbers.

Your examples are spot on.

“When Louis Farrakhan drags out hasidic jews that agree with him, it is not inncorrect to say that there are jews which agree with the stupidity of the Nation of Islam. When WBC shows up to protest a funeral, it is not incorrect to say that Christians are protesting a funeral.”

Correct and correct. Just like the situation in France. All three are technically correct, and meaningless.

Christians don’t support WBC protesting funerals.
Jews don’t support the Nation of Islam.
And Muslims don’t give a shit about dead Catholic priests.

We are in complete agreement

.

Christians absolutely support WBC protesting funerals, just not all of them.

Jews absolutely support the Nation of Islam, just not all of them.

Muslims absolutely give a shit, just not all of them.

Welcome to logical fallacy 101, numbers.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman

There is no need to argue, and no need shooting Scotsman.

Your post was dead on.

Christian support for protesting soldier's funerals, and Jewish support for Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, is directly analogous to Muslim concern over the ritual slaughter of a Catholic priest by Muslims praying to Allah.

I.

Agree.


(And so does Douglas Murray - he uses the same analogy.)

We're done.

We are almost done.

I just want to point out to everyone that the reason you changed your tune on this is that you realized that logically speaking, if you did not you would undermine your own arguments about Islam and terrorism.

Take note SE.

We took notes awhile ago broseph.

Numbers is a weak strawman troll.

Hence why i refuse to debate him intellectually and now just harrass him.

This just in, Ahmadiyya Muslims somehow not Muslim. News at 11.

https://onsizzle.com/i/hey-im-the-facts-did-you-want-me-racts-we-1737753