Paris shooting/explosion

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Luke Scicluna, Nov 13, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    Of course you're confused. Remember this? "Crazy how poor my conception of ISIS was prior to spending a couple hours today reading the collection of articles that had built up in my browser tabs." ;) Not only did you take nothing away from that, but you MOCK me for reading. :noplease: Yes, I'll quote something specific from the Quran when you speculate about "aspects" of it. And I'll reference self-proclaimed "normal" Muslims in their own words when you pretend to know what they think. My points were clear. They're in the 99% of the post you again conveniently left out of your reply. :rolleyes: They're also in constructive exchanges I've had with others.

    Umm, that part of my post wasn't directed towards you--I clearly quoted the person I was responding to--and I was actually agreeing with one of his points and reiterated my own because they're related. Don't complain about something like this...

    [​IMG]

    ...when you come at me with such scornful nonsense.
     
  2. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,797
    Likes Received:
    1,155
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Ugh, I don't mock you for reading. I mock you for listing the things you've read as if stating these things makes your points stronger! It's just a dodge away from stating clearly what your point is and providing support for your argument (for like the 5th time on one page).

    If I cut out all the sex slavery and "this is how much I read" content from your 99% post you only say two things: you agree with how moderate Muslims interpret it and you can also understand how ISIS derive their legitimacy from it. I don't know - kudos? That's not a special power you have because you read the Quran - myself and presumably others in the thread have this position as well. Was that supposed to be your point?
     
  3. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,797
    Likes Received:
    1,155
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    Actually, you know... nevermind. It's just not worth the time to read more of your posts.
     
  4. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    In what alternate universe does reading the Quran, viewing profiles of ISIS recruits in their own words, and listening to moderate Muslims in their own words not inform the discussion or bolster my points about said faith and institution? And you're the guy who ADMITTED to being ignorant and having to backpedal after I and others posted some reading & viewing material. :noplease: Axehappy got it. vilk got it. molsoncanadian got it. FILTHnFEAR got it. You're the only one busting my balls for no apparent reason since...

    ...you're supposedly agreeing with me. :scratch: You're really trolling in an effort to diminish, dilute and obfuscate points I made pages ago. It's childish. I could do the same to you if I wanted. Every time you open your mouth I can go "So uhhh, what's your point? Oh, you think you have special powers cuz you read stuff? What's your point? What's your point? Wanna cookie? What's your point...." :wallbash:
     
  5. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,787
    Likes Received:
    2,406
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    This thread has gotten way too chippy and the next snarky post gets a month off. A few of you have been warned before, so don't test me or i'm bumping it to permanent.
     
  6. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,351
    Likes Received:
    934
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    I think it's relevant to note that at this point, it's established that Robert Dear is a Christian who has been listening to the anti-planned-parenthood rhetoric and calls for violence common on the religious and political right.

    I just thought it would be good to eliminate claims that Dear's religious motivations are unknown.
     
  7. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    My point in mentioning it was simply to point out that no faith is void of violence and violent scripture. The Christian Bible is full of just as much violence as any other holy book and sometimes crazy people act on it. I don't go around accusing my Christian neighbors of being potential terrorists however, like many seem to enjoy doing towards Muslims. Like 1/7 of the world's population is Muslim. This means two things: eliminating the religion is simply not going to happen (it's almost impossible to talk someone out of their faith once they've fully committed to it) and obviously the majority of them are in fact not terrorists (shocking to some, I know). Blaming Islam is akin to solely blaming the gun for a murder. Yes, it is part of the problem and yes removing it would certainly help the situation, but making that happen isn't as simple as declaring that it is the cause either. In both cases it usually just derails the discussion into pointless philosophical notions that will never come to pass.

    No one has to apologize either, or do anything at all for that matter, when someone else commits a crime of some sort. Black people don't have to 'speak up' against gang violence, Muslims don't have to 'speak up' against terrorists, feminists don't have to 'speak up' against radical feminists, and so on. We are not responsible for other peoples behavior. On the flip side, Christians can't say that Christian terrorists/criminals aren't Christian anymore than a Muslim can say that ISIS, ISIL, Taliban, etc. aren't Muslim. It blows my mind sometimes how often people try to pull the 'No True Scotsman' when someone isn't representing their ideas the way they like. Perhaps we should stop labeling people as a group and just say that people are individuals who have a particular faith. That way people feel less of a need to disassociate from others who have done horrible wrongs. After all, it doesn't require faith for someone to be crazy and it certainly doesn't require religion for someone to want to kill someone else. Murders happen everyday over silly things like jealousy, anger, money, etc.
     
  8. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    False analogy. Guns aren't self-proclaimed sacred, unalterable text that instruct people to alienate themselves (which clearly pushes some people to "crazy" like in those NYT profiles of ISIS recruits) or instruct people to commit violence. Moderate Muslims who are sincere in their opposition to fundamentalism are thus hamstrung to an extent, but it's ridiculous to suggest they shouldn't speak out against it or continue to try to reform their religion.

    Plenty religions have come and gone and other religions have steadily reformed and assimilated, thanks to internal & external pressures. No one's suggesting it'll happen overnight, but ZERO progress will be made if we just throw our hands up in the air and pretend there's no problem with religious doctrine and white wash the whole thing with truisms like "people do bad stuff."
     
  9. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Many of them do speak out. That said, the problem is claiming that they must, and if they don't, it's tacit or even explicit support.

    Nobody's suggesting we completely throw our hands up in the air about the entire problem, and then extremist violence is just going to magically sort itself out; we're arguing that religious extremism is a symptom, or a vector, and not the root of the problem itself.
     
  10. will_shred

    will_shred not that good.

    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    340
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Location:
    Rochester NY
    The "jews" have done some pretty egregious things in the name of Isreal, so I still don't see how Islam as a whole is the fundamental promoter of violence. Wahabi Islam, exported by the Saudi's mostly is without a doubt part of the problem. However you seem to be taking Islam out of context of the entire geopolitical history of the region. Like, it seems as though you're trying to frame islam as the #1 root cause of the problems in the middle east, and that is just plain small minded. The world isn't that simple. Just as an example, I know many people who served with the US army, who were Afghani natives, who are Muslim, who fought against the radical jihadists. Another example, Iraq and Iran were once both much more progressive nations, until in 1953 the CIA facilitated an overthrow of the democratically elected prime minister of Iran in order to strengthen the Shah (who would then allow BP to drill and export Iranian oil).The Shah was then overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini who established what we know today as The Islamic Republic of Iran. Again, these are just little anecdotes. My point is that the political situation in the middle east is ridiculously complicated, and there are LOTS of players involved in the background that aren't discussed in the national conversation. Not to mention the US invasion of Iraq, and i'm not even going to get into that, but lets just say that wars aren't great for political stability. They use a lot of resources and kill a lot of people, and leave many more homeless and hungry, with dead loved ones. People who are backed into corners like that are more likely to become violent. Who would'a thought, huh? The Syrian revolution happened during one of the longest droughts in the modern history of Syria which caused a huge spike in food prices, not to mention massive water shortages "As described here, water and climatic conditions have played a direct role in the deterioration of Syria’s economic conditions. There is a long history of conflicts over water in these regions because of the natural water scarcity, the early development of irrigated agriculture, and complex religious and ethnic diversity. In recent years, there has been an increase in incidences of water-related violence around the world at the subnational level attributable to the role that water plays in development disputes and economic activities. Because conflicts are rarely, if ever, attributable to single causes, conflict analysis and concomitant efforts at reducing the risks of conflict must consider a multitude of complex relationships and contributing factors." (source, American Meteorological society, Dr. Peter Gelick). Trying to explain it all away by blaming Islam is stupid. Islam is the second largest religion in the world, and there are over a billion Muslims, trying to paint a billion people with one brush is also kind of, well, stupid. Only %20 of Muslims live in the middle east, and of those people, they are highly varied in their practices and social beliefs. Like any other large group of humans. I mean, what if people imagined that all christian Americans were liked the PP shooter? This is practically a demonstration of the kind of double standard I was just talking about.

    Also



    I don't really know how many more ways I can explain it. My dad's best friend married a Muslim from Morocco, she's a wonderful person who says .... Daesh.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DopY5N3JeYA

     
  11. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    Nowhere did I say they didn't. :scratch:
    I didn't say that either.
    You haven't argued that at all. The statement is meaningless. Symptom of WHAT is the question. And we've been through that already.
    That's a whole lotta words you put in my mouth. :eek: :nono: Nowhere did I absolve Jews of their role in perpetuating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Nowhere did I absolve their scripture either. You in fact quoted me referencing some of its inhumane parts. Nowhere did I say US foreign policy hasn't had disastrous consequences in the mideast. Nowhere did I say all Muslims are the same. Nowhere did I say Muslims are scary and dangerous. :spock: HOWEVER...

    ...this relentless narrative of "people who are backed into corners like that are more likely to become violent" ignores the inconvenient facts that ISIS recruits come from diverse backgrounds and that the one common thread IS Islam. I referenced the NYT article in support of that. You can google plenty others. That's not "explaining it all away by blaming Islam." That's identifying a real problem. Moderates recognize this and are trying to combat it. Again, they're hamstrung to an extent because inherent to the faith is the concept that it's revealed truth and unchangeable, but their efforts are important.
     
  12. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I was making a simile, not an analogy, and it works in both cases anyhow (nothing 'false' about it). They don't have to be one-to-one the same for the idea to be comprehensible.

    I never said that they shouldn't say anything, but that they are under ZERO obligation to do so and the lack of an opinion on the topic has ZERO implications on their affiliation with terrorist groups. It doesn't make you a supporter and it doesn't make you a sympathizer for you to not rally against bad people. That completely aside, many Muslims have publicly denounced these practices and events despite the fact they have ZERO obligation to do so. I don't go around apologizing for white guys who behave like jackasses or men for being pigs just because I'm a white male and I'm under no obligation to (and not so surprisingly no one expects me to like they do for minority groups).

    You've been speaking in far more absolutes than the majority of posters on here yet you claim we are all speaking in 'truisms'. One could argue saying religion is the root and sole cause of it all is a truism as well. It certainly doesn't add anything to the discussion and there isn't anything you as an individual can really do about it either.

    ZERO progress is going to be made by trying to oversimplify complex issues and trying to pin almost all of it on a singular idea that for the most part is immutable to begin with. 'Religion is to blame for it all!!!' So now what do you propose exactly? You've picked the one piece of this puzzle that not only doesn't seem to garner the same interpretation one reader to the next (since the massive majority of Muslims in fact don't commit acts of terror), but is also literally the least likely to change in any meaningful way. Even if it were to change terrorists aren't going to just up and change with them (their motives are not strictly religious). Christianity changed because its support diminished over time and they had to more and more agree to secular logic and laws to fit in with society (something geopolitics has forced to stall and in some cases made worse for Islamic countries). It wasn't because it's demonized as the root of all that is wrong with the world. To this day someone reading the Christian bible could very easily interpret a vast number of chapters as a call to violence and some of them still do to this day, despite all the progress made in making it a more modern religion. How do you exactly propose eliminating Islam from the picture now that you've narrowed it down as the sole and majority cause of the problem?

    We (and by we I mean national leaders since none of us here are actually going to be changing anything in any meaningful way) need to focus on things that they can actually help with. Putting all our focus and energy on religion is just simply not helpful, even if it were true.

    ---

    Ideally I agree with you, as I do think the world would be a better place without any religion whatsoever, but it exists and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon so we need to think about more practical issues. An outsider of Islam certainly isn't going to convince any followers to be more secular or to stop believing all together. Islam is practiced by a gigantic number of people and, like all Abrahamic religions, very much against scrutiny. Telling a religious person their faith is wrong isn't going to just make them up and quit their faith. The only people I've ever seen leave their religion were people who didn't have strong convictions for their beliefs to begin with. People who believe it to their core are lifers.
     
  13. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    You said "Blaming Islam is akin to solely blaming the gun for a murder." That's not simile. That's analogy. Your own copy-pasted definition and examples clearly show the difference, and that difference is not up for debate. The comparison is invalid because a gun doesn't come with self-proclaimed sacred, unalterable war doctrine and alienating social imperatives.

    Whether they're obligated or not is moot, but thanks for clarifying.

    Absolutes and truisms are not at all the same. So your attempt at painting me hypocritical there is bunk even if your accusation had merit. And it doesn't.

    Would you kindly stop putting words in my mouth? LITERALLY? That whole spiel is arguing stuff I never said, never implied, and never advocated.
    Quite a few absolutes in there. ;) Not to mention the usual straw man.
     
  14. will_shred

    will_shred not that good.

    Messages:
    2,824
    Likes Received:
    340
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Location:
    Rochester NY
    I still think that out of all the issues that could be discussed in the war on terror, religion is the lowest hanging fruit, and to me the argument wreaks of xenophobia. Not to mention that religion is probably the least productive issue to choose to debate about, because out of all the numerous causes of the extremely unstable situation, there are probably a few that we could actually work on and make progress on, however religion is not one of them. You're not going to have a secular middle east, that's just not going to happen. People mostly have nothing but their religion to hang onto, it might be easier for people to let go of their orthodoxies if they had some economic and political security. I really don't think that Islam itself would even be a significant contributing factor. People with bad intentions have always, and will always wrap their actions up in some kind of holy text to make it easier for their subordinate to swallow. But don't forget, Christianity has also been used in this way plenty of times. That kind of systemic violence is the result of a lot of different things going wrong for a lot of different reasons.
     
  15. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    Xenophobia!?!? Hold on a sec... Ben Affleck, is that you? :lol: Sorry, but that's your issue, not mine.
    There's really no debate here. You're speculating. I'm presenting fact. ISIS recruits come from diverse backgrounds, including economically. The only common thread is Islam. Say what you will about the relative value of scrutinizing that part of the problem; your idea that comfy, secure lifestyles preempt fundamentalism and Islamic State recruitment is EMPIRICALLY FALSE and thus a nonstarter altogether, no matter how many times you paraphrase it.
    Well that's just false. I doubt you meant what you said there.
    This thread ain't about Christian terrorism. But I'd wager that among all those "different reasons," Christianity would be common to all cases, and thus worthy of scrutiny. ;)
     
  16. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,797
    Likes Received:
    1,155
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    I don't want to take sides regarding the extent to which regional instability (as Will mentions), anti-muslim sentiment (as mentioned earlier, regarding France IIRC), and other social factors influence muslims to sympathize or join ISIS. But, your fact is anything but:

    1.) Will is talking about pressures and unrest closer to the region of ISIS's influence (correct me if I'm wrong). You're citing an article that studies the attitudes of US sympathizers. Clearly the demographics and motivations of Americans will likely differ significantly from those physically close to the turmoil. Do we know anything about the lifestyles of sympathizers in Europe and Asia? No. How many Americans are joining up with ISIS? Almost none.

    2.) Your reference is itself referencing a study of 400 US sympathizers. While it is a large study for a study of its kind, that is a tiny number with respect to the actual number of sympathizers. Between the size of the study and the fact that it deals solely with Americans, you're not in any position to make claims about what is or isn't motivating the people who actually join ISIS (our target of discussion here), or their socioeconomic characteristics. This is even forgoing the fact that there's a huge difference between someone who sympathizes with ISIS on social media, and someone who actually desires to join that community.

    3.) Socioeconomic status, largely the focus of the study, is only one part of a larger number of societal pressures at play, that could be improved through policy or through efforts that are otherwise spent not blaming Islam itself for everything. Simply because someone appears to have a "comfy, secure" lifestyle on their Facebook or their annual census doesn't mean they don't feel ostracized in their school or community for their religious beliefs, or any number of additional factors that push them towards extremism.

    In short, you're "presenting fact"? "EMPIRICALLY FALSE"? First, you're going to need some different articles with different studies that actually support that. Claiming that something is not a significant factor is much harder than the other way around. The burden of proof is on you.

    Second, you're likely going to have to accept that no study in the social sciences, regardless of what direction its conclusions point to, is going to deal a death blow to what other factors could be at play. Nor will you see the studies themselves actually state that, because..well...they're written by actual scientists who, if they're good scientists, know just how definitive their conclusions can be given their methodology. Claiming such absolutes just does not fly in real life.

    So... "US ISIS sympathizers are young and diverse" =/= ~"It's *just* Islam!!"

    In fact, let me close with a quote from the actual study referenced in the article you linked to, which speaks with the cautioned, qualified, and rational tone that all your posts are lacking:

     
  17. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    When you're stating that they have to it actually isn't all that moot. Just because YOU feel like they have to say something because you have an axe to grind with religion (and no I'm not religious at all) doesn't mean they have to. Frankly, with all the morons out their constantly making illogical statements about how an individual who is indirectly associated with any group is somehow responsible for that groups outcomes I'd personally prefer they didn't.

    But you are absolutely behaving like a hypocrite whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. :shrug:

    And? Pretty much every single thing you've said in your posts have either been deflective or condescending and on top of that almost all of your points have been framed as absolutes. It's not a straw man to say that religion runs deep in those who believe in it, but in your case I'm not surprised you took it as such.

    Which is why I'm just no longer going to respond to any of his posts. :wallbash: :lol:
     
  18. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    Didn't say they have to.
    First you confounded simile with analogy. Now it's absolutes vs truisms. smh If you had said "You've been speaking in absolutes yet you claim we are speaking in truisms absolutes" you'd have a point. But you didn't. And you don't. /tangent
    So when you and others deflect, put words in my mouth, attack my character with baseless accusations, and speculate in absolutes, it's fine and dandy. When I condescend, deflect and use absolutes present facts with references, it's a problem.

    Like narad?
    :lol:

    Of course you don't want to take sides on any of those factors. You've done nothing to look into them. And you won't. You even admit that your case should be easier to substantiate but you want me to do your homework for you. :spock:
    If you can't argue without putting words in my mouth, kindly refrain. Thanks in advance.
    And guess what they're all dynamically radicalizing into. ;)
     
  19. narad

    narad SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    4,797
    Likes Received:
    1,155
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    I am done actually arguing about ISIS (and would probably wind up being snooty enough to get banned if I did). But if you're going to claim you're bringing all this evidence to the table and point to this article (and transitively, the study) you can't be surprised if someone actually takes the time to read said article and discovers out how irrelevant it actually is. Very disingenuous to link an article, and instead of discussing what it says, reduce the entire thing to a single line that better supports your claim but doesn't reflect what the article/study show. And this is a big problem right now - not just in this thread, but on social media at large. Misinformation can travel quickly, and lots of people will reference this paper or that paper without verifying that it does support their argument, because they're too eager to make a point.

    There's really no way around it -- If this was homework, you'd get an F, or if you were in a scientific field and tried submitting a paper referencing that article as you did, it'd be rejected. I know you're not the type to ever admit your mistakes, but anyone who wants to take the time to go back and see how well your article lines up with your claims has some nice pointers now. So I hope in the future you will only cite papers and articles from credible sources that truly support the claims you are making, especially if your purpose in doing so is to entirely dismiss the points that others make.

    I like how you started adding smileys though. That's a nice touch :)
     
  20. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    230
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
    That's not the only article I referenced, and even if it were, you've come to the table with 0 articles, 0 facts, 0 homework, 50% speculation, and 50% attacks on my character, even AFTER Randy's warning. And now you try to brush the whole thing off as irrelevant. Sorry, but the study authors found no trend of poverty or mental illness or insecurity or any of the things you and others have been insisting--with zero evidence--are somehow driving people to join the Islamic State. They even say how surprised they were by this finding. Like you, they probably expected to see at least 1 trend among those factors. But that's how science works: the hypothesis is abandoned or at least revised when evidence contradicts it. The only common thread they did uncover among ISIS recruits is Islam. This is fact, not "misinformation." And since you're admittedly unwilling to do any research in support of your thus-far unsubstantiated and/or debunked claims, I dunno what else to tell ya.

    And um, I've been using smileys. lol
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page