Paris attacks
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2015, 02:12 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 01:54 PM)Anjele Wrote:  The Omni Hotel - Dallas skyline last night.

[img][Image: Omni-Dallas-111315_zpsc9i2yt6r.jpg][/img]

I had no idea Dallas was so beautiful! What's it like as a holiday destination?

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:20 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 02:12 PM)SunnyD1 Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 01:54 PM)Anjele Wrote:  The Omni Hotel - Dallas skyline last night.

[img][Image: Omni-Dallas-111315_zpsc9i2yt6r.jpg][/img]

I had no idea Dallas was so beautiful! What's it like as a holiday destination?

Dallas does have a pretty skyline for a city that isn't near mountains or water.

As for holiday destination, I don't know...moved to a suburb of Dallas in 2006. I don't get out much so I am a poor tourist guide. Undecided

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat

Are my Chakras on straight?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:23 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 01:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 01:50 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Let's try something, like a thought experiment, see how it fits...


Consider

Cute.

I was on board until you implied that Merkel endorsed sex crimes. Apparently you didn't quite understand what I was saying.
(either that or you're... deliberately playing dumb? although I can't imagine what that's supposed to accomplish)

No, seriously. I'm sitting here and completely failing to see what even you think you're trying to say.

As I understood it your "history lesson" was to show that once a radical idea (i.e. being against child labor) brought on by disaffected and marginalized group can in time become a mainstream idea and accepted standard?

Is that not what you were saying ?

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:32 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 11:44 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 11:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  Of course you don't. Others might.

You knew your intent, others may not.

If neither the original post in its context nor this whole follow-up conversation made things clear to these hypothetical "others", they can say so themselves.

I'll change it, but I really hope a mod deletes the intervening derailing posts quibbling about it, because it'll be even dumber when it's referring to something that's not there.

That's an excellent idea.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:42 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 01:50 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Let's try something, like a thought experiment, see how it fits...

(14-11-2015 12:26 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Are any of you familiar with the social history of the late 19th century? The disaffected and marginalised turn to radical ideologies if they feel like nothing else will change anything - that's a constant, but how it manifested then is what might concern us. At the turn of 20th century the prototypical terrorist was a murderous, bomb-throwing, radical anarchist* - the "propaganda of the deed", as it was known. The perpetrators were, of course, the radical fringe at the far end of a spectrum. Consider that in the 1890s it was considered radical to argue against child labour; when Roosevelt said that every reform movement had a lunatic fringe he was being deadly serious in a way that's easy to miss at such a remove.




anonymous Wrote:Are any of you familiar with the social history of the early 21th century? The disaffected and marginalised turn to radical ideologies if they feel like nothing else will change anything - that's a constant, but how it manifested then is what might concern us. At the beginning of 21th century the prototypical terrorist was a murderous, bomb-throwing, radical Islamist - the "Jihad", as it was known. The perpetrators were, of course, the radical fringe at the far end of a spectrum. Consider that in the 2000s it was considered radical to argue for marrying prepubescent girls ; when Merkel said that every reform movement had a lunatic fringe she was being deadly serious in a way that's easy to miss at such a remove.
Consider

You can make your point without actually attributing words that the poster did not say. Facepalm

I urge you to edit that quote attribution. It could be misunderstood.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:46 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 02:42 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 01:50 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  Let's try something, like a thought experiment, see how it fits...





Consider

You can make your point without actually attributing words that the poster did not say. Facepalm

I urge you to edit that quote attribution. It could be misunderstood.

cjlr invented the game, I'm just playing along.

But I'll edit it to make sure that it is clear that those are not his words.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 02:56 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 02:23 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 01:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Cute.

I was on board until you implied that Merkel endorsed sex crimes. Apparently you didn't quite understand what I was saying.
(either that or you're... deliberately playing dumb? although I can't imagine what that's supposed to accomplish)

No, seriously. I'm sitting here and completely failing to see what even you think you're trying to say.

As I understood it your "history lesson" was to show that once a radical idea (i.e. being against child labor) brought on by disaffected and marginalized group can in time become a mainstream idea and accepted standard?

Is that not what you were saying ?

There is no possible way you genuinely think that. You're not that stupid. I'd like to think you're not that dishonest, either, but you don't leave me much choice.

But no; I'm an indulgent man, on occasion. So:
There are always some members in any society who are disaffected and angry. It is human nature to look for reasons for that - external reasons. Totalitarian ideology makes the world so very, enticingly simple. Once upon a time that was anarchism. Later it was fascism and communism, then pro/anti-colonialism. Often, today, it's religious fundamentalism - as indeed it has been at many times throughout history. Much of the initial growth of Protestantism correlated with the emerging social classes unaccounted for in medieval tradition - and indeed, Islam in maritime southeast Asia fulfilled a similar contemporaneous role.

Czolgosz did not kill McKinley because of labour laws. He killed him because he believed in violent radicalism, and he believed in violent radicalism because it described a world in which he could explain his outsider status as a Polish immigrant who hadn't worked since the 1893 market crash, could explain class inequality and political repression; in which there was something he, as an individual, could do about it.

The way to deal with radicalism is to identify and address the factors leading to radicalism. People don't wake up one day touched by the Terrorism Fairy. Differing factors overlap and influence each other, without entailing the ludicrous conflation you impute to me.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
14-11-2015, 02:57 PM (This post was last modified: 14-11-2015 03:02 PM by cjlr.)
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 02:46 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  cjlr invented the game, I'm just playing along.

EDIT:
No, that was rude. But I still don't think either misunderstanding or mischaracterising counts as "playing along".

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2015, 04:59 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 09:40 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 09:31 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Because you're loose ones are really working out for you huh?
You really think you have a leg to stand on with that argument here?

Not to mention that these terror attacks are different from mentally ill people shooting up a school.

The terrorists got guns despite the strict laws.

Civilians didn't have guns to deal with the terrorists because of the strict laws.

You missed my point.

Allow me to explain. There is a point between terrorists, funded, getting guns and having connections and know-how, and some 15 year old kid having easy access to his dads m4.

(14-11-2015 10:47 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 08:45 AM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  Muslims are a plague and Islam is a disease!!! The muslim is the nazi brownshirt of the 21st century! The muslim is a stinking cancerous tumor on the civilised societies of the world! The muslim must be removed from civilisation and returned to his disgusting homeland of savagry if civilisation is to survive!

I dunno, man. That sounds kinda familiar.

Quote:Jews are a plague and Judaism is a disease!!! The jew is the mongol of the 20th century! The jew is a stinking cancerous tumor on the civilised societies of the world! The jew must be removed from civilisation and returned to his disgusting homeland of savagry if civilisation is to survive!

Yep. Thought so.

I agree with you his comments were a little unwarranted because not all Muslims are like these extremists. HOWEVER, Jews didn't go on kill sprees (as far as I'm aware).
There is a difference between hating people because they do bad things like kill innocent people and hating people because you're just 'cause.

Extremist Muslims bring it upon themselves. Jews did nothing but be jews.

Quote:Dumb question from me...

But could it be that Isil just doesn't want other countries to take in refugees?

I know this is a complex issue with many branches...

When I heard that France closed their borders, I heard someone else (I was out at the time), say it was about time and that no one should be taking them in blah blah blah.

France is one of the biggest contributors towards airstrikes on ISIS targets.
ISIS have been threatening and targeting France for a while now. The good thing about France compared to the US is France is a lot easier to get to. France also stands for a lot of things, free speech, liberty etc... all that shit. So it's more symbolic to hit them compared to somewhere like Germany.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
14-11-2015, 05:03 PM
RE: Paris attacks
(14-11-2015 02:56 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 02:23 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  As I understood it your "history lesson" was to show that once a radical idea (i.e. being against child labor) brought on by disaffected and marginalized group can in time become a mainstream idea and accepted standard?

Is that not what you were saying ?

There is no possible way you genuinely think that. You're not that stupid. I'd like to think you're not that dishonest, either, but you don't leave me much choice.
Oh, save it, not everyone appreciates your quasi intellectualism , your moot points are intentionally buried under a pile of bullshit, vague references , metaphors and parallels so you can dodge when called out on them by telling people that they are stupid and that they misunderstood you.

The rest of your post is a showcase for that, you made your (moot again ) point in the last 3 sentences and the rest of it is just you piling up bullshit in order to look intellectual.

Quote:But no; I'm an indulgent man, on occasion. So:
There are always some members in any society who are disaffected and angry. It is human nature to look for reasons for that - external reasons. Totalitarian ideology makes the world so very, enticingly simple. Once upon a time that was anarchism. Later it was fascism and communism, then pro/anti-colonialism. Often, today, it's religious fundamentalism - as indeed it has been at many times throughout history. Much of the initial growth of Protestantism correlated with the emerging social classes unaccounted for in medieval tradition - and indeed, Islam in maritime southeast Asia fulfilled a similar contemporaneous role.

Czolgosz did not kill McKinley because of labour laws. He killed him because he believed in violent radicalism, and he believed in violent radicalism because it described a world in which he could explain his outsider status as a Polish immigrant who hadn't worked since the 1893 market crash, could explain class inequality and political repression; in which there was something he, as an individual, could do about it.

The way to deal with radicalism is to identify and address the factors leading to radicalism. People don't wake up one day touched by the Terrorism Fairy. Differing factors overlap and influence each other, without entailing the ludicrous conflation you impute to me.
But as I am also an indulgent man, on occasion, I will address your moot point...

First and foremost you need to address the imminent threat that radicalism presents and then you can identify and address the factors leading to it.
But, if you find out that factors leading to radicalism are integral if not essential part of the ideology you are dealing with, then what ?


(14-11-2015 02:57 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2015 02:46 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  cjlr invented the game, I'm just playing along.

EDIT:
No, that was rude. But I still don't think either misunderstanding or mischaracterising counts as "playing along".
Yeah, I read the original post "Ok, child...."

Let me get this right...you were the one who edited GaC's post in the way that seemed that he is anti semitic ( he is anti islamic, islamophob or whatever, but that is beside the point ) effectively mischaracterizing him personally.

Then I edited your post in the same manner but not in the effort to mischaracterize you ( I think that is obvious because you didn't express your personal opinion in that post ) but to put it in the perspective. Not in any way attacking you personally.

Then you immediately pull the discussion to the personal level with insults and in the same time YOU are the one complaining about mischaracterization and dishonesty ????

You are a fakn piece of work.

Tell you what....how about you consider me stupid or dishonest or both, I'll leave that up to you, and I will consider you a quasi intellectual dishonest asshole and we can ignore each other from now on.

Would that work for you?

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: