Secularism, Muhammed Cartoons and The Sikh Temple Shooting

baalthor

robindch wrote: »

Let me say it again. Breivik is a christian. He said it himself. He is not a "Zionist" as you constantly appear to claim.

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=230762

Christ the Redeemer

There's more Christian Zionists in the world than Jewish. A lot of them are apocalypse wanting nut jobs, but more and more you have the **** the bed types that just decided Israel is awesome after 9/11 and their general racist views of Muslims. They are by far the most annoying strain.

Bloodwing

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

Neilos wrote: »

What does that make you then? What about all the christians you have offended by coming in here and identifying yourself as christ the redeemer? I suppose it's not really that offensive though seen as it's just a user name, much like how pictures of muhammad are just pictures.

That's my real name.

I'm sure it is. Is it your first name or your last name? Is it the name your parents gave you or did you change it?

Brown Bomber

robindch wrote: »

The five men who are "primarily responsible for the dissemination of false facts" constitute an "industry"? Seriously? An "industry"?

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/08/26/new-report-details-funding-sources-behind-anti-muslim-fearmongers/

Yes an industry.

Definition of INDUSTRY

1
: diligence in an employment or pursuit; especially : steady or habitual effort

2
a : systematic labor especially for some useful purpose or the creation of something of value b : a department or branch of a craft, art, business, or manufacture; especially : one that employs a large personnel and capital especially in manufacturing c : a distinct group of productive or profit-making enterprises <the banking industry> d : manufacturing activity as a whole <the nation's industry>

And please, do yourself a favour and read the actual report before making knee-jerk proclamations.

robindch wrote: »

Let me say it again. Breivik is a christian. He said it himself.

Although I've already explained the context to you let's say he is a Christian, what has that got to do with him being a Zionist?

robindch wrote: »

He is not a "Zionist" as you constantly appear to claim.

You evidently don't have the first clue what you are talking about, which is ironic given your needlessly patronising tone.

Anyway, I consider the future consolidation of the cultural conservative forces on all seven fronts as the most important in Norway and in all Western European countries. It is essential that we work to ensure that all these 7 fronts using the Vienna school of thought, or at least parts of the grunlag for 20-70 year-struggle that lies in front of us.


The book is called, by the way 2083 and is in English, 1100 pages).


To sums up the Vienna school of thought:
- Cultural Conservatism (anti-multiculturalism)
- Against Islamization
- Anti-racist
- Anti-authoritarian (resistance to all authoritarian ideologies of hate)
- Pro-Israel/forsvarer of non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries
- Defender of the cultural aspects of Christianity
- To reveal the Eurabia project and the Frankfurt School (ny-marxisme/kulturmarxisme/multikulturalisme)
- Is not an economic policy and can collect everything from socialists to capitalists

robindch wrote: »

Although, frankly, it's pretty hard to extract any specific meaning from the greater part of your confused, wandering prose. And in the few places where your prose admits a single interpretation, the claims are generally trivially false -- your patently silly belief that you're not "defending islam" (while fighting off what you claim are a series of "attacks"). Or that drawing a picture of an unenlightened seventh-century warlord constitutes "an attack" upon a billion or so people. Or that five men are "an industry". And so on.

It appears you are the one who is confused. I never claimed that that five men are "an industry".

I shall now try to avoid any "confused, wandering prose". What is your opinion on the evidence showing that the reinforcement of negative Muslim stereotypes leads to hate crimes?

Brown Bomber

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

I **** you not, I was a called an antisemite for posting this on another forum!

Nahhh, nobody could be that stupid :pac:

Christ the Redeemer

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Nahhh, nobody could be that stupid :pac:

It's a fine tactic, especially on an American forum, most Americans are trained like pavlovs dog to run away scared at the mere mention of anti semitism.

Brown Bomber

joseph brand wrote: »

Relevant.

What needs to be understood is that "Americans" have been dehumanising their enemies since the began massacring Ameri-Indians. The dehumanisation of Muslims as they are being massacred tortured, raped, murdered, their assets pillaged and their property destroyed. This is just the latest in a long line, it is nothing new. What is new is that they have a legion of eager "freedom" advocates (in association with the entire right-wing to do their dirty work for them now.)

King Mob

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

It's a fine tactic, especially on an American forum, most Americans are trained like pavlovs dog to run away scared at the mere mention of anti semitism.

So again, criticising people for supposedly making negative stereotypes by making negative stereotypes.

No wonder you guys like each other's posts.

Brown Bomber

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

It's a fine tactic, especially on an American forum, most Americans are trained like pavlovs dog to run away scared at the mere mention of anti semitism.

In one sense I'm glad they do. Repeated false-charges from Abe Foxman-alikes of anti-semitism have diluted the charge to being essentially meaningless. On the other hand real anti-semitism and anti-semites do exist and they can hide in the fog created by the fools shrieking anti-semitisim at the drop of a hat.

Much like latent Islamophobes and Laissez-Faire racists can disguise themselves amongst ultimately well meaning folk with DMD.

MagicMarker

Nodin wrote: »

So you are saying that the Koran is to blame for terrorist attacks? Do you regret defending it and Islam in previous posts?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Like I've said I don't consider myself as having defended the Koran nor Islam.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Nodin, I am genuinely not trying to be awkward. I don't consider myself to have defended Islam therefore I can't answer your question as it's based on a false premise.

Interesting...

I'll just leave this here....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67244880&postcount=4

Brown Bomber Quote

Are you for real????

That whole post was in defence of Islam!!!

So BB, do you have an answer for Nodin's question?

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Penn, I'll try to explain by way of example:
Had I said "Men are overrepresented in Dublin's Taxi driver industry"" it would be factually correct and quite rightly wouldn't offend anyone. It's not a slight on all men. However, if I said what you advise the sentence wouldn't make any sense. Becoming: "Some men are overrepresented in Dublin's Taxi Driver industry".

It's different when bringing a religion into the equation, because it seems like their religion is a factor on the statement being made.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

We'll try to work this out with examples again in situations where we have interacted and you tell me if you think I am defending Islam or the truth/justice.

EXAMPLE 1: dlofnep posted an ten-year-old BBC article about a fire in Saudi Girls School that left 15 dead and added the mis/disinformation caveat that the girls died because of Islamic police's interventon. Your response was "I ****ing hate religion". My response, which was the rational response was "hang on!... The article doesn't actually say that!"

To me, that is clearly defending the truth.

EXAMPLE 2: On another occasion you posted a Daily Mail article detailing how a Muslim "beauty queen" was stoned to death in the Caucuses in a horrific example of Sharia punishhment. Here crime - entering a beauty contest.

I looked into the story, reviewing official and local sources and it turns out that the girl, wasn't Muslim and she was killed by a classmate who had learning difficulties and the act had absolutely nothing to do with Islam at all.

To me that is clearly defending the truth.

If I am walking down the street and there are two men ahead of me - one in suit, and the other a homeless man - and I witness the man in the suit break a shopfront window when suddenly the police arrive and apprehend the homeless man as the suited man walks away. If I then inform the policeman that the homeless man is innocent am I then defending the homeless or defending the truth/justice? If this incidence occurs 10, 1000 or 1000000 times how does it change anything?

I take no enjoyment from correcting mistruths, but I feel everyone has an obligation to do so. Why you will see me more in threads about Islam is that nobody else seems capable or interested to defend Islam from mis/disinformation.

But again, the trouble is that you ONLY seem to do this with Islam. Even if someone made the statement "What religion does Brown Bomber correct the most mistruths about?", the answer would be Islam, and it's why most people think you're Muslim. You don't correct mistruths about other religions nearly to the same extent as you do for Islam. If that's not your intention and you don't want to cause such confusion, you should adjust your posting habits and either correct mistruths about all religions, or none. Otherwise, people will continue to mistake you for a Muslim, or constantly defending Islam.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1. Draw cartoon of Muhammad with bomb
2. Reinforce negative stereotypes associating Muslims with terrorism.
3. This has been documented as increasing the likelyhood of anti-Muslim crimes.
4. Hate crime

But it's not the stereotypes which associate Muslims with terrorism, it's the extremist Muslims who use Islam as justification for terrorism. Again, this wasn't plucked out of thin air to make fun of Muslims, there is a basis in truth. It's those people willing to commit hate crimes in the first place (and if someone is willing to do that, they need little justification) who cannot differentiate between normal Muslims and extremists.

Hateful people do hateful things. People who are willing to commit a hate crime would do so with little provocation, as they clearly already have underlying issues and motivations. Do you think anything drawn on DMD would be the only factor to push the average Joe Soap to commit a hate crime?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

That's not true. The Tamil Tigers, a secularist outfit, introduced the world to the suicide bombing.

Introduced, but not most commonly known for these days. Again, the whole basis of drawing Muhammad with a bomb is due to extremist Muslim groups twisting the religion to justify such attacks, and the belief that they will be rewarded in paradise with virgins etc.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No, but it certainly doesn't help anything when there is already a climate of Islamophobia to reinforce these same stereotypes when it has been shown that these same stereotypes lead to hate crimes.

And again, if someone is willing to commit a hate crime based on a cartoon drawing some John Doe from Bumble**** Utah drew, there are clearly other factors. Any of these drawings would not be enough by itself to make someone commit a hate crime. Besides which, how far do we take it? Do we never draw Muhammad petting a dog in a meadow in case someone flips out? Do we never make movies like The Matrix in case someone kills their parents over it? Do we never make video games in case someone plays it for 50 hours straight and dies? You can't control the world. Crazy people do crazy things, hateful people do hateful things, killers kill, rapists rape etc etc. They don't need excuses, they just look for them to justify their actions to themselves and others.

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Here is a gem of a quote:
...
(Robert Spencer is part of the anti-Islamic propoganda network and is a large recipient of funding that drives it. This is from his profile at the SPLC where he is considered a part of the "Anti-Muslim Inner Circle")

Pathetic.

This started when you called my site a neo-Nazi site. One would expect this to be followed by some neo-Nazi quotes from my site. But of course you can't find any. So you've got to try some other smear.

So you discover I link to Robert Spencer. So maybe he's a neo-Nazi! One would expect you now to produce neo-Nazi quotes from Spencer. But of course you can't find any of those either.

So you link to the radical left SPLC, who classify anyone whose politics they disagree with as "hate groups". Well maybe they will quote Spencer? No they don't. Instead their smear is all about who once shook hands with who, who once hyperlinked to someone who linked to someone, and so on. No quotes from Spencer at all!

http://markhumphrys.com/lgf.html#quote.spencer

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Your views on Islam are indistinguisable from a cross-section of Neo-Nazi skinheads as far as I can see.
Feel free to correct me and point out where I am wrong.

Put up or shut up.

Quote my so-called neo-Nazi views, or stop your disgusting, sleazy smears.

You're afraid to, because you know you can't.

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'm flattered to be the subject of one of your anti-Islamic conspiracy theories. However, you are claiming that I think like a Muslim. Do you really not realise how bigoted that is?

Not convinced. You write like a right-wing reactionary Muslim conservative who is offended by blasphemy.

What are you, if that is not you?

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If your site is not intending to demonise Muslims then will you update your site as appropriate with information that presents Muslims in a less negative light - providing I provide well documented information?

I quote many liberal Muslim, ex-Muslim, and Arab writers I agree with.

I have sections on Muslims who support Israel:

http://markhumphrys.com/ips.html#pro.israel

and Muslims who have sensible opinions about the Middle East:

http://markhumphrys.com/michael.jansen.html#pro.israel

But somehow I suspect you hate those type of Muslims.

humphrys

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Have you read the reports that demonstrate that anti-Muslim propoganda of the kind your familiar with leads to anti_Muslim hate crimes up to and including death.

How does that make you feel?

You are blaming peaceful democratic critics of jihad and sharia for violence they never called for, and do not support.

How does that make me feel? It makes me feel angry with you and your dishonest attempts to shut down criticism of jihad and sharia.

robindch

Brown Bomber wrote: »

let's say he is a Christian, what has that got to do with him being a Zionist?

Breivik has some violent views which coincide with some violent Zionist views, but the Jerusalem Port article mentioned above makes it quite clear that he does not consider himself a Zionist. So it is quite false to claim that he is.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

robindch wrote: »

The five men who are "primarily responsible for the dissemination of false facts" constitute an "industry"? Seriously? An "industry"?

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/08/26/new-report-details-funding-sources-behind-anti-muslim-fearmongers/

Yes an industry.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I never claimed that that five men are "an industry".

Self-contradicted in one post -- a new forum record!

speaking

two questions

1. Has Jim Corr become a Muslim?

2. Why is everyone arguing with Jim Corr?


(Jim I am Joking okay)

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

It's different when bringing a religion into the equation, because it seems like their religion is a factor on the statement being made.

Only if you apply an emotional, irrational response. It is no different. Facts are facts.

Penn wrote: »

But again, the trouble is that you ONLY seem to do this with Islam. Even if someone made the statement "What religion does Brown Bomber correct the most mistruths about?", the answer would be Islam, and it's why most people think you're Muslim.

People thinking I am Muslim only highlights their own prejudices in that I am acting like a Muslim so I must be Muslim. Muslims are just regular people like you and me.

Penn wrote: »

You don't correct mistruths about other religions nearly to the same extent as you do for Islam. If that's not your intention and you don't want to cause such confusion, you should adjust your posting habits and either correct mistruths about all religions, or none. Otherwise, people will continue to mistake you for a Muslim, or constantly defending Islam.

I don't care if people mistake me for a Muslim, that is their own xenophobia they need to work to correct.

Penn wrote: »

But it's not the stereotypes which associate Muslims with terrorism, it's the extremist Muslims who use Islam as justification for terrorism. Again, this wasn't plucked out of thin air to make fun of Muslims, there is a basis in truth. It's those people willing to commit hate crimes in the first place (and if someone is willing to do that, they need little justification) who cannot differentiate between normal Muslims and extremists.

You are making little sense. Nobody, is born racist. Nobody is born an extremist. Nobody is by default willing to commit hate crimes. They are influenced. Stereotyping of racial/religious groups (such as DMD encourages) exacerbates this. It reinforces the negative stereotype already present in our society of the Muslim as an oppressor, terrorist, filthy, prederatory etc.

Penn wrote: »

Hateful people do hateful things. People who are willing to commit a hate crime would do so with little provocation, as they clearly already have underlying issues and motivations. Do you think anything drawn on DMD would be the only factor to push the average Joe Soap to commit a hate crime?

No. Certainly not. However, it reinforces and in some ways legitimises the right-wing extremist conspiracy theories intentionally or otherwise.

Penn wrote: »

Introduced, but not most commonly known for these days. Again, the whole basis of drawing Muhammad with a bomb is due to extremist Muslim groups twisting the religion to justify such attacks, and the belief that they will be rewarded in paradise with virgins etc.

--- Great, then draw Osama Bin Laden with a bomb in his turban then - not associate a symbol of all of Islam with terrorism and reinforce stereotypes..

Penn

I'll probably address the rest later or after the weekend, just wanted to pick up on one point:

Brown Bomber wrote:

People thinking I am Muslim only highlights their own prejudices in that I am acting like a Muslim so I must be Muslim. Muslims are just regular people like you and me.

Strawman. Nobody is claiming Muslims aren't regular people like you and me, nor are they claiming you're acting like a Muslim (whatever that may mean). It's the fact you only seem to appear in threads about Islam and "defending the truth" about Islam which makes people think you are Muslim.

Brown Bomber

humphrys wrote: »

Pathetic.

This started when you called my site a neo-Nazi site. One would expect this to be followed by some neo-Nazi quotes from my site. But of course you can't find any. So you've got to try some other smear.

Mark -don't lie. I never said your site was a neo-Nazi site. I know you are not a racist or racialist. What I said was that your opinions on Muslims are indistinguisable from a cross-section of Neo-Nazi group, The Hammerskins, of which Wade Page, the Sikh killer was a member.

I've asked you to point out where you disagree with that group of Nazis regarding Islam. Apparently you are incapable of doing so.

humphrys wrote: »

So you discover I link to Robert Spencer. So maybe he's a neo-Nazi! One would expect you now to produce neo-Nazi quotes from Spencer. But of course you can't find any of those either.

Mark, I quoted your hilarious claim that pseudo-intellectual and anti-Muslim professional hatemonger Robert Spencer was the most informed man in the world on matters relating to Islam.. That had nothing to do with neo-Nazis.

humphrys wrote: »

So you link to the radical left SPLC, who classify anyone whose politics they disagree with as "hate groups". Well maybe they will quote Spencer? No they don't. Instead their smear is all about who once shook hands with who, who once hyperlinked to someone who linked to someone, and so on. No quotes from Spencer at all!

http://markhumphrys.com/lgf.html#quote.spencer

Mark, you are confused. They do quote Spencer in the link I provided. I suggest you view the sub-heading "IN HIS OWN WORDS".

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

I'll probably address the rest later or after the weekend, just wanted to pick up on one point:



Strawman. Nobody is claiming Muslims aren't regular people like you and me, nor are they claiming you're acting like a Muslim (whatever that may mean). It's the fact you only seem to appear in threads about Islam and "defending the truth" about Islam which makes people think you are Muslim.

Yes. They are, for example:

You write like a right-wing reactionary Muslim conservative who is offended by blasphemy.

Penn

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Penn wrote: »

I'll probably address the rest later or after the weekend, just wanted to pick up on one point:



Strawman. Nobody is claiming Muslims aren't regular people like you and me, nor are they claiming you're acting like a Muslim (whatever that may mean). It's the fact you only seem to appear in threads about Islam and "defending the truth" about Islam which makes people think you are Muslim.

Yes. They are, for example:

You write like a right-wing reactionary Muslim conservative who is offended by blasphemy.

I've highlighted the key words which differentiate what you were called and a typical average Muslim.

Brown Bomber

Penn wrote: »

I've highlighted the key words which differentiate what you were called and a typical average Muslim.

... and failed to highlight the most important one, Muslim.

The Mad Hatter

Brown Bomber wrote: »

... and failed to highlight the most important one, Muslim.

You think being Muslim would separate a person from being a typical Muslim?

Brown Bomber

humphrys wrote: »

I quote many liberal Muslim, ex-Muslim, and Arab writers I agree with.

I have sections on Muslims who support Israel:

http://markhumphrys.com/ips.html#pro.israel

and Muslims who have sensible opinions about the Middle East:

http://markhumphrys.com/michael.jansen.html#pro.israel

But somehow I suspect you hate those type of Muslims.

Only because they a frauds.

Case in point fake ex-terrorist Walid Shoebat who exchanged the Prophet for profits and who is on the Islamophobia gravy train.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSwr8eGTyiM

Sarky

I regret Draw Muhammed Day if only because Brown Bomber won't shut up about it.

Brown Bomber

robindch wrote: »

Breivik has some violent views which coincide with some violent Zionist views, but the Jerusalem Port article mentioned above makes it quite clear that he does not consider himself a Zionist. So it is quite false to claim that he is

WTF???

From your link:

Breivik lays out his worldview, which includes an extreme, bizarre and rambling screed of Islamophobia, far-right Zionism and venomous attacks on Marxism and multi-culturalism.

robindch wrote: »

Self-contradicted in one post -- a new forum record!

I misspoke. Evidently you have no interest in reading the report that establishes the existence of the Islamophobia network. Perhaps you may watch a short video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04fBZmjNQBY

Brown Bomber

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

You think being Muslim would separate a person from being a typical Muslim?

here are more examples

Your Religion states you cannot draw Muhammed. We are not Muslim. Therefore we don't need to follow your rules while we don't live in a Muslim society.

I'm just going to go ahead and blame you for 9/11. You are Muslim after all.

As a Muslim I presume you believe that Islamic theology is defensible, yes.

I believe many people here do/did believe you were Muslim. I only think this because all of your posts are in relation and defense of Islam, and your near frequent attacks on Judaism, Atheism and often Christianity.

MagicMarker

Brown Bomber wrote: »

here are more examples

Not to mention your user name.

Too much of a coincidence imo....

:pac:

Brown Bomber

MagicMarker wrote: »

Not to mention your user name.

Too much of a coincidence imo....

:pac:

Two anti-Muslim stereoptypes in one post. Brilliant.