Freedom of Speech - An excuse to be Openly an Anti-Muslim

reply to post by BenReclused


Listen , imagine you see two men in a field and one of them has a rake and some potatoes.

The other has an M16 and a barbed wire fence.

Who do you think owns the field?

If it's operated by a country, it might as well be owned by that country. Control of day to day operations is just that, control.

~Tenth

i'll use my freedom of speech to hate on anyone i want and you ought not try to stop me. Not that i'm much of a hater. Suffering is self created. You're never upset for the reason you think you are. i say something hurtful, it itself does not hurt you. You have to give my words the ability to shake you. So let me say hateful things and you be joyful, why should that be conditional of what anyone says

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I get some of your threads, but not this one.
I have never really seen anyone use freedom of speech to excuse racism against Muslims.
Well not Muslims in particular. I have seen freedom of speech used to excuse all types of racism equally. That other thread was likely just a troll thread anyway, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I love Jewish people (well Jewish women, because I dated one that was suppper fine), but I am not a fan of their government. Zionism is a real thing, so anyone that says it is just a word racists use to excuse anti-semitism is just ignorant on the subject.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by BenReclused

 

Listen , imagine you see two men in a field and one of them has a rake and some potatoes.

The other has an M16 and a barbed wire fence.

Who do you think owns the field?

If it's operated by a country, it might as well be owned by that country. Control of day to day operations is just that, control.

~Tenth

The man with the rake and potatoes owns the land. Just because he had to call on the man with the M-16 to keep his neighbors, who were armed with AK-47s, from stealing his crops, doesn't mean he also relinquished control of his property. After all, isn't he the one still growing, and possessing, his own potatoes?

Just because I might rent, occupy, and "control" an apartment, do you really believe I control the whole apartment complex? If I fail to pay the rent, and get evicted, wouldn't that indicate that I never really had control of the apartment to begin with?

Until the early 60's, we had numerous bases located in France. If you feel it was "occupied" territory, and controlled by the United States, why did we leave when Prime Minister de Gualle asked us to? That was right after the United States forgave France's debt from World War II. Yeah, we are a really, really, nasty country to deal with, aren't we?

We have many bases located in the United States too. Let's use Charleston AFB as an example. Who controls the goings on in Charleston, South Carolina? Is it he base commander, or is it the mayor?

Using your argument, the base commander would be in charge of South Carolina. Do you really believe he is?

Hell, we don't have control of a freaking thing in the Middle East. Do you honestly feel we do?

See ya,
Milt

I got a badge of honor tonight, thanks to this thread. I will wear this with pride! I knew it would happen, and I take NOTHING back from what I said. Period. Thank you, Alien.

A member of the forum staff, alien, has sent you a warning regarding your activity on the thread titled,
Freedom of Speech - An excuse to be Openly an Anti-Muslim. Your have been warned 1 times.
Warnings are recorded, and each individual warning expires in three days (72 hours) from the time it was applied.
If forum staff continue to warn you and you gain 5 or more warnings, a temporary posting ban will be enforced automatically.

Individual warnings carry a points penalty of 500 points which have been deducted from your ats board total.
Do not reply to this U2U.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
This thread is a response to:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

When you criticise a black person it is racism
When you criticise a jew you it is anti-semitism
When you criticise a gay you are a bigot homophobic or intolerance
When you criticise a woman it is sexism or anti-feminism
When you criticize a country,they call it Treason
When you criticize a religious sect, they call it Hate
When you criticise a muslim you are exercising freedom of speech?

It seems that there is an open season on Muslims and anti-Muslim propaganda and acceptance of Muslim bashing in the USA, UK, Israel. This is exactly how hitler operated, he scapegoated a group of people which led to the holocaust which is EXACTLY what is happening right now.

Go to any of the major news websites and look at their comments (eg CNN, MSNBC, daily mail, telegraph.co, fox news), calling people ragheads or towel heads is a form of freedom of speech yet you do anything else listed you are quickly labeled.

Do you think there would be a lot more outrage if there was any other ethnicity on this effigy in NYC?:

A mannequin symbolizing a Muslim in a keffiyeh, strapped to a "Made in the USA" bomb display at a protest of Park51 in New York City.
en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 112929p://2America/ChicagoSat, 18 Feb 2012 11:19:47 -0600 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

I don't know about everyone else here but I didn't see a Muslim strapped to that bomb I seen a terrorist....

-Alien

reply to post by Alien Abduct



I concur!

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


Yeah, I know what you mean. I've had a number posts removed from this thread too. It seems quite fitting to be censored on a topic about "Freedom of Speech", doesn't it?

Anyway... Cheers... and wear your badge with pride. I do!

See ya buddy,
Milt

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


You know "Professional" I read over your OP three times and I just can't seem to find those sources you posted to back your claim???

You claim people are using their freedom of speech to be racist toward Muslims? Do you have any quotes to site? Any links? I thought that was one of the things this site tries to maintain.

I guess people will S&F even half posts now days. I'm truly surprised there are so many people actually chewing on the BS you are feeding them. I mean can't they taste that poop flavor?

-Alien

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

WE were attacked on 9.11.

Because of our war in iraq in 1991 and our support for dictators in the middle east and our killing in the middle east and our occupation of muslim lands.

Which of the 911 hijackers were Iraqi?

Precisely WHAT "killing in the middle east"? It would of necessity predate the current round of wars, if it is to be considered the cause, and is redundant to the first listed cause if you are referring to Gulf War I.

Precisely WHAT "occupation of muslim lands"? Again, this would of necessity pre-date the attacks in order to be considered a cause of them.

edit on 2012/2/19 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)

Here is a better question: Which of the 9-11 hijackers were Muslim? Hmmm????

Perhaps you misapprehend my lie of reasoning. The OP claimed that 9/11 was justified because of the first Gulf War, which was against Iraq. If that is a proper justification, then surely at least one of the hijackers would need to have been an Iraqi... but none were, so that rationale is a fail, nothing more than a poor excuse for an unprovoked attack.

reply to post by Thetawave

Facebook page with over 26,000 muslims calling for the death of Hamza Kasgari.

It is BS like this that is certainly sufficient as an excuse to be openly anti-muslim. I sure as hell am not going to tip-toe around the crazy cult just because being PC is "in" in modern age.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I never said I hate freedom of speech, I said that people are using it as an excuse to be openly anti-muslim, quite a difference there.

Really,isnt this thread your way of attacking those who support America/West/Israel,Using your freedom of speech ? Sugarcoat it anyway you want,with innuendo,cause that's what it is.

Something to ponder......
Before the US was even established as a country,didn't Muslims fight amongst themselves?

Are Some Muslims not warmongers themselves?

Did hatred between Muslims not exist ?

I am highly critical of your threads,because you NEVER give both sides of the coin.Only the side you want those to see.

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by Thetawave

 

Watch this you may learn something. Say no to Islamic Fascism

Say no to fundamentalism. Say no to facism

Say yes to free speech and no to hate speech

say yes to freedom - for everyone - and no to persecution of anyone

I don't want to, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you here. Curtailing "hate speech" is still curtailing speech - it's in opposition to the principles of free speech.

You or I may not like it, we may find it distasteful or even reprehensible, we may not want to hear it, and we may refuse to listen, but the fact remains that they have every right to say it.

If I were to fight to support free speech that would include speech that I dislike. Perhaps ESPECIALLY speech that I dislike. If everyone likes it, it doesn't need to be protected, as no one will challenge it.

Originally posted by ollncasino
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

 

Historians estimate that about 270 million people have been killed by Jihad since Islam came onto this earth.

• 120 million Africans
• 60 million Christians
• 80 million Hindus
• 10 million Buddhists

www.politicalislam.com...

Those numbers are total BS, taken out from thin air.

120 milion Africans

Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

Even assuming the number of 25 million slaves to be correct, and assuming that “Islam” was responsible for them, one cannot simply multpily the number by a single dodgy statistical point to get some sort of a total number of “dead”.

Notice that the whole transatlantic slave trade is attributed to Islam! Apparently, Christians had nothing to do with it. This way we will soon hear that Confederacy was an Islamic separatist state.

However, when we assume the scope of the Arab slave trade (which existed before Islam) to be between 10-18 million people, to claim that Islam as such is responsible for the associated victims is the same as claiming that Christianity is to blame for the victims of slavery and racism perpetrated by Christians.

60 million Christians

The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad.

But where is the 50 million figure from? The source is given as “History of Asia Minor” by Raphael Moore. Quick Google search brings up this source, which is an article by Raphael Moore entitled “In Memory Of The 50 Million Victims Of The Orthodox Christian Holocaust”. Its first sub-section is called “History Of Asia Minor: 1894-1923”, which is apparently at the root of confusion for Geller’s source: the name of the sub-section was confused with the name of the complete work. Such brilliant scholarship.
The number “50 million” does appear in the article, but only as a total number of Christians martyred in XXth century!
Between the tolls exacted from prisons, concentration camps, forced marches and exiles, warfare, famine, and brutal military occupation, it is reasonable to conclude that up to 50 million Orthodox Christians have perished in the first eight decades of the twentieth century.
Geller’s source simply took this number and ascribed it to “Jihad”.

Originally posted by ollncasino
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

 

Historians estimate that about 270 million people have been killed by Jihad since Islam came onto this earth.

• 120 million Africans
• 60 million Christians
• 80 million Hindus
• 10 million Buddhists

www.politicalislam.com...

80 million Hindus

Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

Hindus. It is claimed that the number is estimated by Elst (who is known for right-wing anti-Muslim bias). However, when we take a look at his book we see this:

As a contribution to research on the quantity of the Islamic crimes against humanity, we may mention Prof. K.S.Lal’s estimates about the population figures in medieval India (Growth of Muslim Population in India). According to his calculations, the Indian (subcontinent) population decreased by 80 million between 1000 (conquest of Afghanistan) and 1525 (end of Delhi Sultanate). As a contribution to research on the quantity of the Islamic crimes against humanity, we may mention Prof. K.S.Lal’s estimates about the population figures in medieval India (Growth of Muslim Population in India). According to his calculations, the Indian (subcontinent) population decreased by 80 million between 1000 (conquest of Afghanistan) and 1525 (end of Delhi Sultanate). More research is needed before we can settle for a quantitatively accurate evaluation of Muslim rule in India, but at least we know for sure that the term crime against humanity is not exaggerated.

It is not an estimate of 80 million murders. It’s an estimate of a population decrease in five centuries, the causes of which may be many, including natural population decrease, conversions, etc. So the figure of “80,000,000” Hindus murdered by Muslims is based on nothing but weak speculations.

10 million Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]

Buddhists. The only source given for the alleged Buddhist victims of Muslims is the same book with Christian statistics, not any scholarly historical source about, you know, Buddhists. But when we look at the table 4-1, we only see the number of 10,000,000 Buddhists cited (without sources, I might add; and it contains 80,000,000 alleged Muslim martyrs as well, 10 million more than alleged Christian martyrs, estimated to be 70 million!). There is no indication in the table that these Buddhists were slaughtered by Muslims.

Originally posted by ollncasino
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

 

Historians estimate that about 270 million people have been killed by Jihad since Islam came onto this earth.

• 120 million Africans
• 60 million Christians
• 80 million Hindus
• 10 million Buddhists

www.politicalislam.com...

I agree that Islam is responsible for many deaths trough the history, just like Christianity, but dont throw around with random numbers that come from biased sources. jihadwatch and politicalislam are just biased websites that promote hate, just like jewwatchnews etc.

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by dadgad

 

Free speech as someone above pointed out is only restricted to expressing anything that is withing the perimeters of the accepted norm.

Nope! Not at all! That is "political correctness"! "Political correctness" is the OPPOSITE of "free speech".

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to point that out.

See ya,
Milt

Of course. You misread me.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by Thetawave

 

Watch this you may learn something. Say no to Islamic Fascism

Say no to fundamentalism. Say no to facism

Say yes to free speech and no to hate speech

say yes to freedom - for everyone - and no to persecution of anyone

I don't want to, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you here. Curtailing "hate speech" is still curtailing speech - it's in opposition to the principles of free speech.

You or I may not like it, we may find it distasteful or even reprehensible, we may not want to hear it, and we may refuse to listen, but the fact remains that they have every right to say it.

If I were to fight to support free speech that would include speech that I dislike. Perhaps ESPECIALLY speech that I dislike. If everyone likes it, it doesn't need to be protected, as no one will challenge it.

I can't argue with you nenothtu - at all. not even if I really wanted to

it's an interesting situation - isn't it? :-)

it's a kind of cultural perpetual motion machine - we can't restrict speech - but we monitor it, we meet it head on - using our own right to free speech every chance we get

it requires a certain amount of personal responsibility and a sense of obligation - to each other

yes - it's complicated

they can shout all they want to - but we work to prevent them from crossing the moat and storming the castle :-)

'us' and 'them' depending entirely on who we are and where we're standing - of course

so, civilization remains a mostly upright ship - not leaning too much one way - or the other - it just keeps moving forward

reply to post by Alien Abduct


Just go to this link for an example and take a look at the comments:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Any questions young grasshopper?

reply to post by nenothtu


also - and just for grins...

hate speech should be outlawed

see?

:-)

what a messy universe