Transgender women stoned in Germany

The_Kew_Tour

Thelomen Toblackai wrote: »

So this is your process is it ? Make a claim, lie about having something to back it up, avoid having to produce said evidence, when pushed give any old shíte, when called out as a liar claim the goalposts have been moved, when that doesn't wash throw out the old "Yeah but you haven't proven anything..".

You didn't answer my other question. Why were you trying to turn the discussion into one about Jews rather than the paper ?

Your process was to change your argument when I posted up what you wanted.

You went from show me this paper slamming their own and Germans, to show me these German attacks that the boy you seem know about.

All seem to post is asking for Apology and calling out Liars which is pot kettle.

StewartGriffin

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

All seem to post is asking for Apology and calling out Liars which is pot kettle.

SeanW

Thelomen Toblackai wrote: »

Moving goalposts ? If asking you to back up your claim is moving the goalposts then we're in trouble...

And why do you keep talking about Jews ?

It was the leftists on here who started about "the Jewish press". Note, not "Israeli", or "Zionist". The Jewish press. Which I found eerily reminiscent of Mein Kampf.

Canadel

Paramite Pie wrote: »

I'm sure there are Right Wingers who are enjoying the fact that some of the victims are LGBT. I've seen such comments on other sites.

Sticks and stones will break transgender bones but names will never hurt them.

The_Kew_Tour

Forget Right Wing or Left Wing stuff.

This about protecting human beings, women, children and men from attacks in the open because people are not willing to accept them for who they are or they can be treated like meat.

MRnotlob606

SeanW wrote: »

It was the leftists on here who started about "the Jewish press". Note, not "Israeli", or "Zionist". The Jewish press. Which I found eerily reminiscent of Mein Kampf.

It was also Leftists that helped created Israel

suicide_circus

Until Islam has a "Vatican II" style reshuffle, its dogma is incompatible with a western lifestyle. The punishment for apostasy is still death ffs.

Now, for the record, Islam =/= Muslim people.

ceadaoin.

mansize wrote: »

I'm in Cologne atm at was at an anti racism anti sexism rally in Cologne yesterday- talked with a few of the Muslims there showing their outrage at the NYE attacks.

It's like blaming all the Irish for the acts of Irish criminals and terrorists

So are you accepting that these attacks on women occurred now? And that they were unprecedented in Europe? On the original thread that got closed you tried your best to minimise by denying that they even happened on such a large scale and then by claiming that it wasnt anything unusual for a normal weekend in any big city. It didn't seem like you cared too much about women's rights then to be honest.

Not many people are blaming all Muslims by the way, it's pretty obvious that isn't the case.

jmayo

StewartGriffin wrote: »

That's what it all boils down to isn't it? Picking sides. Little boys in the playground. Not clever enough to see the spectrum.

Ah yes the old superiority complex. :rolleyes:

And maybe some of us aren't dumb enough to think that people with a totally different mindset can be easily integrated into our open liberal society, espeically seeing that they don't want to integrate in the first place.

Folks we have everything in this thread...much like all the others.

Shoot the messenger be it a Jewish newspaper, a tabloid, etc,
wheel out the locals who harrass/assault/rape,
drag in the catholic church and it's sad disgusting history,
drag in the nazis and ultra far right,
label anyone that disagrees a racist or a bigot.

Do everything possible to negate the facts.
And the simple facts are that these guys, yes guys, have introduced a new level of misogynistic homophobic racist threatening behaviour to the cities and towns in which they now dwell.

The fact that members of the socially liberal left, LGBT community, feminists, etc are remaining silent, even worse proffering excuses if not actually supporting them is akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.

Of course that analogy is wrong, since it is getting to the stage where Christmas will no longer be allowed mentioned lest some of our new arrivals feel discriminated.

kupus

As always in threads like these I see the 4Ds at work

DENY the problem..... It didnt happen its a right wing rag paper.
DISTORT the problem..... right wingers didnt like trans before this, why now
DEFLECT the problem..... but but but
DEFAME the problem raisers.... racist, bigots, rednecks, knuckle dragging apes, sister fcukers, transphobic, homophobic everythingophobic.

it would help if the emotive crap was thrown out and the discussion was about what we see and what we know and NOT how we feels.

BigJackC

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Forget Right Wing or Left Wing stuff.

This about protecting human beings, women, children and men from attacks in the open because people are not willing to accept them for who they are or they can be treated like meat.

Ian O'Doherty summed it up well in his column.

Does anyone - and I mean anyone - not feel outrage that Western women are now expected to conform to the social mores of backward 'cultures' simply for their own safety?

We've seen similar developments in Sweden, Denmark and Finland and now asylum seekers in Sweden are to be given lessons teaching them not to rape.

I really don't care what desert hell hole you've come from, if you need to be educated in the fine art of not raping people, then Europe is better off without you.

Perhaps the laziest cliché is how the 'far right' is stoking racial tensions. Not true - racial tensions are being stoked by mass sexual assaults.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/ian-odoherty/ian-odoherty-the-lessons-europe-is-learning-way-too-late-34365639.html

crybaby

Is it a sign of getting old when I start agreeing with Ian O'Doherty articles?

tommyboy2222

crybaby wrote: »

Is it a sign of getting old when I start agreeing with Ian O'Doherty articles?

No it's a sign of common sense.

kupus

crybaby wrote: »

Is it a sign of getting old when I start agreeing with Ian O'Doherty articles?

No its just a sign that youve copped on a bit.

Ever since I signed onto boards 2010/11 I was always gob smacked by the naivety of a lot of the posters. So much so that I put my location as a tongue in cheek gesture. THe thing is I detest the right just as much, but as least with the far right you know what you are getting.

There are posters here that seem to have their tongues stuck up each others holes, the funny thing is they think themselves worldly and traveled, and blah blah blah. ad in reality they have the life experience of a goldfish in a pet shop.

Now the difference I see.....people are starting to question. And thats what I like to see. Questions thats all. You dont have to agree with me on everything but just ask questions.

And the best question you can ever ask is who benefits? and one other simple bit of advice, follow the money.
Once those are answered its easy to come up with an answer.

Life is very simple if you step away from the keyboard and take a look around every once in a while, also, never surround yourself with people that think the same as you and agree with you on everything..... remember the goldfish analogy.

Nodin

kupus wrote: »

............

There are posters here that seem to have their tongues stuck up each others holes, the funny thing is they think themselves worldly and traveled, and blah blah blah. ad in reality they have the life experience of a goldfish in a pet shop.
.............

So you can judge a persons world and life experience on the strength of whether or not they agree with you. By jaysus, that's deep.

kupus

Nodin wrote: »

So you can judge a persons world and life experience on the strength of whether or not they agree with you. By jaysus, that's deep.

about as deep as a supporter of a baby murdering terrorist group. im sure slab murphy is a grand fella.

I judge people on how they can act outside their comfort zone nad whether they surround themselves with yes men. plain and simple.

Nodin

kupus wrote: »

about as deep as a supporter of a baby murdering terrorist group. im sure slab murphy is a grand fella..

And behold, the dual purposed Ad hominem/Red herring remark.

kupus wrote: »

I judge people on how they can act outside their comfort zone nad whether they surround themselves with yes men. plain and simple.

Again- how would you know? This is a text based message board. Unless you actually know the person in real life, and I mean know them well, not in passing, you've no way of telling. Unless of course you resort to the "they don't agree with me therefore...." method.

kupus

Nodin wrote: »

And behold, the dual purposed Ad hominem/Red herring remark.
Ok Ill take that back and shouldnt have siad it. Sorry.

but coming from you thats a compliment:p shure your the king of deflecting threads.
Ill edit it out if you want.

Ulysses Gaze

suicide_circus wrote: »

Until Islam has a "Vatican II" style reshuffle, its dogma is incompatible with a western lifestyle. The punishment for apostasy is still death ffs.

Now, for the record, Islam =/= Muslim people.

I cannot see that happening in the next 50/70 years.

Azalea

kupus wrote: »

DISTORT the problem..... right wingers didnt like trans before this, why now

I share the concerns people have about the sexual assaults and islamic fundamentalism in general, but just on the above point: if a person who is trans sees people making derogatory comments about trans people/being complacent about the experiences trans people have to put up with in general, and then, not long after, the same people expressing concern for the trans woman this thread is about, it's understandable for a trans person to view this as pretty dishonest and hollow.

Nodin

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I cannot see that happening in the next 50/70 years.

Given that there is no church establishment and thus no "Vatican", its actually a non-starter of a notion.

suicide_circus

Nodin wrote: »

Given that there is no church establishment and thus no "Vatican", its actually a non-starter of a notion.

Absolutely true and as such its dogma will continue to be at odds with western secularism. This issue can only be perpetuated or resolved by its adherents.

Nodin

suicide_circus wrote: »

Absolutely true and as such its dogma will continue to be at odds with western secularism. This issue can only be perpetuated or resolved by its adherents.

...millions live in the west and seem to get on fine.

suicide_circus

Nodin wrote: »

...millions live in the west and seem to get on fine.

And as long as they continue to ignore some of the core tenets of their faith they will continue to do so.

AtomicHorror

suicide_circus wrote: »

And as long as they continue to ignore some of the core tenets of their faith they will continue to do so.

Also true of Christians, to be fair. Islam hardly has the monopoly on crazy.

suicide_circus

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Also true of Christians, to be fair. Islam hardly has the monopoly on crazy.

Oh 100% I agree. However, Christianity does not call for those who leave the religion to be put to death for example.

Whosthis

suicide_circus wrote: »

Oh 100% I agree. However, Christianity does not call for those who leave the religion to be put to death for example.

The catholic church deal with that issue a different way, they just won't let you leave.

suicide_circus

Whosthis wrote: »

The catholic church deal with that issue a different way, they just won't let you leave.

Yep, utterly outrageous but ultimately laughable. A death sentence is quite another matter.

Wibbs

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Also true of Christians, to be fair. Islam hardly has the monopoly on crazy.

Certainly, though even the briefest of study of the basics of theology, philosophy and early history of both faiths shows quite large differences. IMH those that compare the two as if that's an argument have studied neither to any degree.

suicide_circus

As the youngest of the major Abrahamic religions, Islam has more to prove. Let's say that Islam is 500 years younger than Christianity.... What were Christians doing in the 1500s?....yeah, scary stuff. So if we imagine for arguments sake that Islam is at a similar stage of "development" (bear with me) then it would make sense that Islam is at a more committed, passionate and literal time in its life. Hence it stands to reason that it's dogma will be at odds with western secular society which is essentially based on a lapsed and flabby Christianity which has exhausted itself of fire and brimstone.

Whosthis

suicide_circus wrote: »

Yep, utterly outrageous but ultimately laughable. A death sentence is quite another matter.

I think it should be quite obvious that I didn't intend the two to be comparable

suicide_circus

Whosthis wrote: »

I think it should be quite obvious that I didn't intend the two to be comparable

You're right, it should be.

Whosthis

suicide_circus wrote: »

You're right, it should be.

Zzz, predictable post is predictable.

Azalea

In terms of today, comparing catholic fanaticism with islamic fanaticism is not really comparing like with like. Both extremist takes on their respective dogmas but in terms of the acts that are carried out, and the numbers willing to carry these out, they are not comparable.

I'm not a practising catholic, or religious at all, by the way.

Ken.

Mod-This has gone way off topic and is no longer about the opening post.
Locked.