or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread - Page 20

post #286 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Where do we want to make the begin date on this bit of data twisting? The Shah just posted a link saying it was from 1980-2005 but it's really 2002-2005. Is this just for the US, the world, or other countries that will demonstrate whatever will provide the most convenient data? confused.gif

Also, as that little hate mongering clergy from CA was just brought up, it makes me ask this question: has any Muslim congregation held a gay wedding yet? Serious question as that would be an interesting tidbit.

There are gay imams you can email them to find out

if you scroll down to the portion that reads, "Chronological Summary of Terrorist Incidents in the United States 1980-2005," you'll find that it does in fact start from 1980. There is even information going back to 1970. The point Isn't to engage in one of your equivalency fetishes, though, so do with it what you will.
post #287 of 1309
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the shah View Post

There are gay imams you can email them to find out

if you scroll down to the portion that reads, "Chronological Summary of Terrorist Incidents in the United States 1980-2005," you'll find that it does in fact start from 1980. There is even information going back to 1970. The point Isn't to engage in one of your equivalency fetishes, though, so do with it what you will.

What is the point then? I assumed it was an attempt to disprove what someone above said, i.e. majority of terrorist attacks being Muslim involved. I'm simply asking for parameters. I could pick my own, something that would seem reasonable, like say in the US since 1990, but those cut points might not yield the desired result (as I assume most folks in this conversation has a desired result.)
post #288 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Where do we want to make the begin date on this bit of data twisting? The Shah just posted a link saying it was from 1980-2005 but it's really 2002-2005. Is this just for the US, the world, or other countries that will demonstrate whatever will provide the most convenient data? confused.gif

Also, as that little hate mongering clergy from CA was just brought up, it makes me ask this question: has any Muslim congregation held a gay wedding yet? Serious question as that would be an interesting tidbit.

I read of a lesbian wedding, yeah. I'd assume this happened multiple times as Islam is even more open to fractious interpretation than Catholicism as it tends slightly more toward Praxis than Dogma when compared to the later.
post #289 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

I certainly haven't broadened the "scope" you were discussing (West vs Islam in a clash of civilization) as what I discuss is certainly not based on that. Maybe I shouldn't even have used ISIS as an example and concentrated on other groups to get the point across. Capitalism is a universalist philosophy (well it came from European culture and its universalist tradition) and has in its scope the unlimited, this explains both why (social) conservatives are not as adapted to its mindset as Silicon valley "progressives" (no roots, change instead of social reproduction, global mindset, going toward the inclusion of all races, creeds and sexual orientations etc.) and thus "on the wrong side of history" (they're shooting themselves in the foot) and why it must necessarily create these epidermic reactions in specific certain areas and cultures (i.e. ISIS) when the supposedly aseptic and axiologically neutral global is displacing the traditional local. Demographic data show us there is a convergence of civilizations as far as important indicators are concerned (literacy rates for women, number of children etc.). If I get a rash I don't say there is a clash between myself and the rash.

One big wrinkle in this, though: since Christianity successfully tag-teamed up with Rome, Jewishness has been the exemplary form of stubborn particularity that not only resists universalism but also reveals universalism as arising out of a particularity that it wants to deny. Not sure if the dogmatic insistence that America (as proponent of global-capitalism-as-democracy) defends Israel in particular (an insistence on that particularity being affixed to its historical-geographical roots) can be reduced to the views of social conservatives. I mean, maybe some Silicon Valley types might say so and think so; maybe others disagree. But there's probably a deeper internal crossover that keeps propping up this link between the global/universal sweep of capitalism and a secularized version of holy particularity. (This crossover inverts but maybe completes the previous anti-Semitic view that Jews are internal to capitalism and are both too good at it and ruin it.) In any case, all of this might make the West-Israel-Muslim world clash more than a skin rash.
post #290 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

What is the point then? I assumed it was an attempt to disprove what someone above said, i.e. majority of terrorist attacks being Muslim involved. I'm simply asking for parameters. I could pick my own, something that would seem reasonable, like say in the US since 1990, but those cut points might not yield the desired result (as I assume most folks in this conversation has a desired result.)

Why don't you ask the guy who made a blanket pronouncement to qualify what he means? We're just trying to throw piss some facts into the stiff breeze of assholery.
post #291 of 1309
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

Why don't you ask the guy who made a blanket pronouncement to qualify what he means? We're just trying to throw piss some facts into the stiff breeze of assholery.

I was obviously open to answers from everyone.

Also, never piss into a stiff breeze. True story.
post #292 of 1309
With respect to the terrorism data-- arguing on whether 5% of the population commits 51% or 40% of the mass-killings does not seem like a persuasive debate frame for Islamic immigration backers.
post #293 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

One big wrinkle in this, though: since Christianity successfully tag-teamed up with Rome, Jewishness has been the exemplary form of stubborn particularity that not only resists universalism but also reveals universalism as arising out of a particularity that it wants to deny. Not sure if the dogmatic insistence that America (as proponent of global-capitalism-as-democracy) defends Israel in particular (an insistence on that particularity being affixed to its historical-geographical roots) can be reduced to the views of social conservatives. I mean, maybe some Silicon Valley types might say so and think so; maybe others disagree. But there's probably a deeper internal crossover that keeps propping up this link between the global/universal sweep of capitalism and a secularized version of holy particularity. (This crossover inverts but maybe completes the previous anti-Semitic view that Jews are internal to capitalism and are both too good at it and ruin it.) In any case, all of this might make the West-Israel-Muslim world clash more than a skin rash.
One reason that would a silly claim to make is that the US has not always been a consistent ally, let a lone a strong ally of Israel. The current close relationship began in the 70s (after the Yom Kippur war in 1973). previously, the US's approach to Israel ranged from mildly hostile to mildly friendly. It is very easy to mistake the present for the always. Unless you want to try to map US support for Israel onto some sort of grid that measures just how capitalist is the US and is Israel at any point in time. That would be especially dumb, but would probably be publishable.
post #294 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

two abrahamic religions have certain branches that not only denounce homosexuals but also call for their killing. to be fair, i didn't insist they were exact equivalents--i asked if there was a meaningful difference since, in this recent christian case, the pastor asked for the state to carry out executions. but you're so smug you didn't even answer my question seriously.

as an ex-devout catholic I'm perfectly aware christians would mostly like to pray away the gay and many christians treat being gay as some sort of sickness. But you need to realize that Leviticus laws that call for killing of gays do not apply to Christians in view of Catholics and every other major sect. Since like you probably are aware christians believe in so called New Convenant established by Jesus Christ, it helps them to disregard nasty stuff from old testament and convinently wear clothes from two types of yarns or not stone people to death for working on sabbath. There are sects that do follow old testament laws, but the belief homosexuals should be put to death is not mainstream in any western christian country, or it's not even accepted to say.

Muslim world in general is less welcoming to gays; as we can see from this graph that represents overall legal situation of gays in various part of the world. 10 countries were you can get death sentence for being gay are all muslim majority. For what exact reason? Idk maybe, it's because we can ignore the old testament and focus on jesus stuff and they can't? This is speculation on my part though, fact remains attitudes in christian western world and muslim world differ a lot.

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here-are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/

when you look at public attitudes you see similar trends;

http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/

so yes there is a meaningful difference, one idiot pastor doesnt change that I guess we can argee what he said was disgusting, but in for example it would be even news lol.
Edited by wojt - 6/15/16 at 1:01pm
post #295 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

One big wrinkle in this, though: since Christianity successfully tag-teamed up with Rome, Jewishness has been the exemplary form of stubborn particularity that not only resists universalism but also reveals universalism as arising out of a particularity that it wants to deny. Not sure if the dogmatic insistence that America (as proponent of global-capitalism-as-democracy) defends Israel in particular (an insistence on that particularity being affixed to its historical-geographical roots) can be reduced to the views of social conservatives. I mean, maybe some Silicon Valley types might say so and think so; maybe others disagree. But there's probably a deeper internal crossover that keeps propping up this link between the global/universal sweep of capitalism and a secularized version of holy particularity. (This crossover inverts but maybe completes the previous anti-Semitic view that Jews are internal to capitalism and are both too good at it and ruin it.) In any case, all of this might make the West-Israel-Muslim world clash more than a skin rash.

I entirely agree with the drive toward illimitation AND the universal going through the Rome/Christianity axis (inherited from our symbolic fathers, the Greeks) being revealed by Jews to be the deconstruction-ready figure of our affirmation hiding the possibility of a negation of this drive, embodying the universal and illimited as an excess of the particular. On the other hand I wouldn't see the supposed "West-Muslim" and "Israel-Muslim" clash as being part of a tripartite arrangement, more like a sound and its later reverberation. I'd also question our globalized capitalism as being currently "western" or attached to "democracy" (Chinese model and all or recent surveys like United Nations' MY World survey of people’s priorities for the future where good governance is judged more important than democracy). I think capitalist globalization has been successful in the sense that it originates with us but is no longer ours or linked to humanism or democracy. I realize I haven't entirely answered your comment, I almost never think of the Israel-USA relation in more, let's say, elevated terms but you are completely right that it cannot be just some prosaic geopolitical situation.
post #296 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by the shah View Post

false. but we don't let facts stand in the way of opinions here so carry on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the shah View Post

1980-2005 list compiled by FBI
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005

But this doesn't jive with the narrative so why bother ?

Does the scope of the attack matter to either of you? 3,000 people were killed on 9/11. How does that one incident stack up against attacks committed by other non-Islamic groups in the U.S. over the last couple decades?

Are you aware of any abortion bombers that are part of a global network of suicide attackers who ultimately want to detonate a warhead in a major city? It's obvious we aren't going to agree on immigration, but when it comes to deciding who is the biggest threat, can we not pretend to live in two different realities?
post #297 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

One reason that would a silly claim to make is that the US has not always been a consistent ally, let a lone a strong ally of Israel. The current close relationship began in the 70s (after the Yom Kippur war in 1973). previously, the US's approach to Israel ranged from mildly hostile to mildly friendly. It is very easy to mistake the present for the always.[/quote

Fair point & reminder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey 
Unless you want to try to map US support for Israel onto some sort of grid that measures just how capitalist is the US and is Israel at any point in time. That would be especially dumb, but would probably be publishable.

Sounds like something a social scientist might publish. Beneath me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

as an ex-devout catholic I'm perfectly aware christians would mostly like to pray away the gay and many christians treat being gay as some sort of sickness. But you need to realize that Leviticus laws that call for killing of gays do not apply to Christians in view of Catholics and every other major sect.

I posted about a Protestant / evangelical pastor openly advocating for the state to execute gay people. You come back with your own personal experiences of Catholicism--and Christians who want to "pray the gay away." And you're going to complain about false equivalences?

P.S. - You apparently didn't learn very much about the nuances and complications of Christian typology (the conceptual mechanism whereby the New Testament fulfills / negates / aufhebungs the Hebrew Bible). That movement is not as clean and simple as you make it out to be and never has been (see: the Incident at Antioch). If you think I'm wrong about everything else in the world, trust me on this--it's kind of my wheelhouse.
post #298 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post


Does the scope of the attack matter to either of you? 3,000 people were killed on 9/11. How does that one incident stack up against attacks committed by other non-Islamic groups in the U.S. over the last couple decades?

Are you aware of any abortion bombers that are part of a global network of suicide attackers who ultimately want to detonate a warhead in a major city? It's obvious we aren't going to agree on immigration, but when it comes to deciding who is the biggest threat, can we not pretend to live in two different realities?


shift shift shift shift goalpost goalpost goalpost goalpost

BTW IIRC, the people who carried out the 9/11 attacks were Saudis and had visas. Should we stop giving out visas to people from Saudi Arabia? Also, some of the attackers met and coordinated in Malaysia (majority Muslim country). Should we stop giving out visas to Malaysians? Should we stop Malaysian immigration?

The biggest threat to American lives is McDonald's and Coca Cola. You should probably stop letting your feelings about furrners make you hysterical.
post #299 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

shift shift shift shift goalpost goalpost goalpost goalpost

BTW IIRC, the people who carried out the 9/11 attacks were Saudis and had visas. Should we stop giving out visas to people from Saudi Arabia? Also, some of the attackers met and coordinated in Malaysia (majority Muslim country). Should we stop giving out visas to Malaysians? Should we stop Malaysian immigration?

Absolutely not, we should spend trillions and kill 100,000 people in foreign wars to bring democracy to the middle east. We should also unleash an extra-judicial surveillance apparatus that would make Orwell proud. And also ruin air travel forever.

(This is less a dig at you, whose position is at least internally consistent, than the rotten GOP establishment.)
post #300 of 1309
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post


The biggest threat to American lives is McDonald's and Coca Cola.


That's a bit of a stretch, but after we solve that problem, maybe we can move on to doctors, who are the number 3 cause of death in the US.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/05/03/476636183/death-certificates-undercount-toll-of-medical-errors

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread