If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Germany, a country with stricter anti-hate speech laws than America, has its embassy stormed in Khartoum over American-produced video perceived to be hate speech. Protesters, you're doing it wrong   (reuters.com) divider line 278
    More: Fail, Khartoum, hate speech, Boko Haram, u.s. consulate, religious values, Islamic flags, German Chancellor, Basra  
•       •       •

4671 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Sep 2012 at 12:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



278 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-14 02:35:11 PM
Seriously...where does all this shiat end. My Facebook page is blowing up with everyone yelling war. War? With who? The protesters in these dozen countries or so? The government of these countries? Islam as a whole?

Let's just assume we identify a target and we do go to war. We send our planes over. Our men (and women) over. We blow some shiat up. We shoot some people dead. We capture some people and put them on trial and execute them. We install a democratic government. Then what? We go home and these countries are in the same farked up American hating state there were just before we arrived.

I'm not try to be a tree hugging hippy here because this dumb ass shiat pisses me off as much as anyone else. I'm just saying unless our goals are to: a.) blow the entire place up for good. or b.) install some concentration camps over there and brainwash every muslim into loving America then we're not going to accomplish shiat but going to war in a traditional sense.
 
2012-09-14 02:35:16 PM

WillyChase: rebelpride644: WillyChase: rebelpride644: BMulligan: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can't bomb these goat farkers fast enough.

The world will be a better place on the day that you leave it.

So it's ok for you to wish death on someone??

Uh, he didn't wish death on anyone. If you can't tell the difference between those two statements you quoted then maybe you should just sit your bad self down before you make yourself look stupid again.

Unless he is leaving this world in a farking spaceship they are both advocating another's death.

If I say "The world will be a better place when Fred Phelps leaves it" it doesn't mean I wish for Fred Phelps to die, just that when he's gone the world will be a better place.

If I say "Can't bomb these westborough farkers fast enough" it means I wish for them to be killed by a bomb.

See the difference Rebel Pride?


I understand the difference...my point was that the underlying goal of both statements is the same.

Also, thanks for bringing up my Login as if that invalidates my argument.
 
2012-09-14 02:35:48 PM

BMulligan: HotIgneous Intruder: These folks would murder me and my children without so much as a second thought.

You believe that everyone in the countries where these protests are occurring would murder you and your children without so much as a second thought? Because that's what you would have to believe to justify a full-scale military response, which is how I interpret exhortations to begin bombing.


It's pretty sad when we have to look to W as a good example of a neocon who didn't support the wholesale slaughter of Muslims.
 
2012-09-14 02:37:52 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Ow! That was my feelings!: HotIgneous Intruder: Ow! That was my feelings!: Dear Subby,

America has no anti-hate speech laws, not "less strict".

signed,
Duh

But we have "hate crime" laws. That's why the Justice Dept. is investigating our buddy Sambecile.
His speech may be protected, but he is not.
Hard life.

I understand they are looking into the guy, but "hate crime" is a sentence "enhancer", not an actual crime. He will not face charges because his speech is protected by the first amendment. There is no initial crime for the hate crime enhancer to be used.

United States Federal law addresses hate crimes and provides penalties:
18 USC § 249 - Hate crime acts
As I keep saying, his speech is protected, but he is not.


I guess I'm dense today, but I'm not getting your "he is not" protected comment. The code you linked too clearly states "willfully causes bodily injury" or attempts to do so. I haven't seen the trailer, but from what I've read there is no direct threats made and obviously no direct violence. So, his speech and his freedom to be a dick are protected by the first.
 
2012-09-14 02:38:47 PM

12349876: An obsure, barely seen Youtube video gets shown on Egyptian TV by a radical Islamist talk show host and that's why it's an "outrage" and other videos still in intertube obscurity are not.


These protests just make me want to seek out and watch said movie. Haven't they heard of the Streisand effect? This isn't Arab Spring - it's just more Eternal September.
 
2012-09-14 02:38:59 PM
If your neighbors were rioting, murdering foreign diplomats in your town, would you take any action, directly, or politically? I would, most of us would I am sure. We don't like murder and terrorism here.

Why don't all these other countries do the same? Because they don't really mind it. That is the difference between us and them. We are moral people as a whole, they are not.
 
2012-09-14 02:40:07 PM

BMulligan: alexanderplatz: Whether Iran was actually involved in instigating protests and attacks or not, the whole situation does benefit them. A few days ago Iran was more isolated from its neighbors with respect to nuclear weapons and a possible war with Israel. Now the Muslim populations of many nations are practically unified in fury against the West. They're not unified specifically in support of Iran, but if Israel attacked Iran right now, it seems clear to me that the hordes or rioters would go even more ape-shiat in their anti-West and anti-Israel fury.

I don't think for a moment that Iran is behind this because I don't think they have the capability to pull it off. You're right, though - it definitely works to their advantage.

In an odd way, it probably works to everyone's advantage (except for the dead people of course). An Israeli strike on Iran would be an international disaster of unthinkable proportion, and the current situation makes that virtually impossible for the reasons you've cited. It sucks to watch this sort of senseless violence breaking out in so much of the world, and the deaths of those who were killed in the consulate attack are terrible and tragic, but in the long run it may turn out that this was paradoxically a good thing.


I'm wondering how hard you think it is to get a group of people who already hate everyone that isn't like them to protest in the streets?

I can get 100 people to do the hokey pokey at the mall in about 2hours.
 
2012-09-14 02:40:20 PM

smitty04: [img.photobucket.com image 456x386]


Moderate Muslims, demonstrating for peace:

i.dailymail.co.uk
cdn.ph.upi.com
s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-09-14 02:40:42 PM

Ow! That was my feelings!: I guess I'm dense today, but I'm not getting your "he is not" protected comment. The code you linked too clearly states "willfully causes bodily injury" or attempts to do so. I haven't seen the trailer, but from what I've read there is no direct threats made and obviously no direct violence. So, his speech and his freedom to be a dick are protected by the first.


I get your point. I'm also saying that the guy is a convicted criminal on probation and if he violated his probation he's going to have a fun time back in the slammer with the sweet, polite sons of the Nation of Islam, Allah's own representatives of the religion of peace.
His speech is protected, but he is not.
 
2012-09-14 02:41:30 PM

The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can't bomb these goat farkers fast enough.


Wouldn't say that in public in Germany if I were you.
 
2012-09-14 02:43:21 PM

Thunderpipes: If your neighbors were rioting, murdering foreign diplomats in your town, would you take any action, directly, or politically? I would, most of us would I am sure. We don't like murder and terrorism here.

Why don't all these other countries do the same? Because they don't really mind it. That is the difference between us and them. We are moral people as a whole, they are not.


Because they are weak leaders with already tenuous grasps on leadership without needing to stir up a hornet's nest in their country? You really think the government of Uganda or the DRC is in a position to criticize a bunch of bored jobless Islamists? They are more concerned with increasing the life expectancy from 35 to 40. We're not talking about Australia here.
 
2012-09-14 02:43:44 PM
My right to free speech is protected, but if I got to a drug corner in Baltimore and start preaching master race nonsense to the corner boys, my highbrow rights don't really apply after a point.
My speech is protected, but my ass is not.
 
2012-09-14 02:44:04 PM

dehehn: smitty04: [img.photobucket.com image 456x386]

Moderate Muslims, demonstrating for peace:

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x538]
[cdn.ph.upi.com image 531x354]
[s3.amazonaws.com image 550x355]


And every one of them probably knows evil people, and just don't want to take action. It will take major political and spiritual change among those people. Chances of that happening are zero.

And it happens here too, look at the LA riots, and the riots that will happen when Zimmerman is cleared. Some people just won't change and have violence in them.
 
2012-09-14 02:44:55 PM

druiid: Get everyone working and happy and they won't have time or care to protest. You could hear this kind of attitude from the working classes in Egypt the United States during the uprising the OWS protests, basically everyone whom already had a job going 'I just want to get back to work'.


Maybe someone should tell american corporations and wall street suits the same thing... before it's, you know, too late...
 
2012-09-14 02:45:09 PM

TrixieDelite:

P.S. And don't any of you have JOBS? Sheeesh.


Actually they don't, and it's a big big problem. Youth unemployment in the middle east is like 50% or some shiat. That's a lot of young men with nothing to do but sweat in the heat and get angry. They can't even have a beer and go to a titty bar to blow off steam. And most of them still live at home with their mothers.

It's a riot waiting to happen all the damn time.
 
2012-09-14 02:46:32 PM

Goodfella: The Dog Ate The Constitution: Can't bomb these goat farkers fast enough.



Yes, lets start a war with every one of these countries that is protesting our embassies:

[xtupload.com image 850x317]

You must be a quantum physicist and Yale graduate of the highest order.


While i don't advocate turning any country and it's population into a smoking crater WWII style, you would only have to do it to one country to get the others to calm their shiat down.
 
2012-09-14 02:49:27 PM
If ridiculous, stupid, trolltastic crap that offends a person's most cherished beliefs sends the muslim world into this much of a frenzy what is going to happen when the arab translation of Fark's politics tab get out?
 
2012-09-14 02:50:42 PM

Lunchlady: Thunderpipes: If your neighbors were rioting, murdering foreign diplomats in your town, would you take any action, directly, or politically? I would, most of us would I am sure. We don't like murder and terrorism here.

Why don't all these other countries do the same? Because they don't really mind it. That is the difference between us and them. We are moral people as a whole, they are not.

Because they are weak leaders with already tenuous grasps on leadership without needing to stir up a hornet's nest in their country? You really think the government of Uganda or the DRC is in a position to criticize a bunch of bored jobless Islamists? They are more concerned with increasing the life expectancy from 35 to 40. We're not talking about Australia here.


most of the year it's too cold to protest there.
 
2012-09-14 02:52:18 PM

jaybeezey: While i don't advocate turning any country and it's population into a smoking crater WWII style, you would only have to do it to one country to get the others to calm their shiat down.


Wait - do you honestly believe that if the United States engaged in strategic bombing of any predominantly Muslim country over this incident, that the remaining 1.5 billion or so Muslims worldwide would "calm their shiat down?" Really?
 
2012-09-14 02:54:02 PM

Bonzo_1116: Actually they don't, and it's a big big problem. Youth unemployment in the middle east is like 50% or some shiat. That's a lot of young men with nothing to do but sweat in the heat and get angry. They can't even have a beer and go to a titty bar to blow off steam. And most of them still live at home with their mothers.


I feel like a lot of the hard-line governments and fundies that curtail entertainment activities do it with the cynical aim of maintaining a perennial crop of always-frustrated young stooges.
 
2012-09-14 02:54:05 PM

BMulligan: jaybeezey: While i don't advocate turning any country and it's population into a smoking crater WWII style, you would only have to do it to one country to get the others to calm their shiat down.

Wait - do you honestly believe that if the United States engaged in strategic bombing of any predominantly Muslim country over this incident, that the remaining 1.5 billion or so Muslims worldwide would "calm their shiat down?" Really?


A strategic strike would be glassifying Mecca, yes. The Saudis are our allies. They would understand.
 
2012-09-14 02:56:22 PM

rwfan: If ridiculous, stupid, trolltastic crap that offends a person's most cherished beliefs sends the muslim world into this much of a frenzy what is going to happen when the arab translation of Fark's politics tab get out?


It's protected free speech. No worries.
 
2012-09-14 02:59:55 PM
CNN is showing the dead American killed by protected speech coming home to Andrews AFB right now.
 
2012-09-14 03:00:32 PM
Again, when I see muslims attacking stuff because of a cartoon or a movie, I can't help but think of a troop of monkeys at the zoo losing their shiat over a Coke can somebody dropped into the enclosure.
 
2012-09-14 03:01:50 PM

DECMATH: 12349876: An obsure, barely seen Youtube video gets shown on Egyptian TV by a radical Islamist talk show host and that's why it's an "outrage" and other videos still in intertube obscurity are not.

These protests just make me want to seek out and watch said movie. Haven't they heard of the Streisand effect? This isn't Arab Spring - it's just more Eternal September.


The trailer is laughably bad. I feel bad for the "actors" in it. Terrible greenscreen effects, stick-on beards...but at least the donkey was real and brayed on cue.
 
2012-09-14 03:16:01 PM

Thunderpipes: dehehn: smitty04: [img.photobucket.com image 456x386]

Moderate Muslims, demonstrating for peace:

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x538]
[cdn.ph.upi.com image 531x354]
[s3.amazonaws.com image 550x355]

And every one of them probably knows evil people, and just don't want to take action. It will take major political and spiritual change among those people. Chances of that happening are zero.

And it happens here too, look at the LA riots, and the riots that will happen when Zimmerman is cleared. Some people just won't change and have violence in them.


Listen here, Thunderlips, "spiritual change" is what causes clusterfarks like this in the first place. Maybe what the need is less religion, not just a different brand.
 
2012-09-14 03:18:56 PM

halfof33: PsiChick: If anyone's surprised, I'd like to remind you that America has spent the past fifty years propping up a country with the manners of Hulk on steroid smoothies and spent the past twenty years in two wars that caused thousands of civilian casualties, major human rights violations, stomped all over the idea of the Arab League's rights to deal with the ME their own way, left two countries in shambles, and opened up the idea that America can attack anyone, anywhere, without any consequences.

Yeah. I am Jack's complete and utter lack of shock right about now.

Wow, a libtard making about justifications and excuses for violance against America.

Yeah. I am Jack's complete and utter lack of shock right about now.

Hey, you missed the fact that America was wearing a really tight skirt, and was just BEGGING for it.


The phrase 'strawman argument' is a name for a debating technique, when you claim that the other person said something that they did not, in fact, say. Now, you've used a brilliant example. Your argument here is that I am making justifications and excuses for the embassy attacks.

On its face, that argument is just stupid. I was talking about being unsurprised about the attacks, not about the morality of the attacks. But there's certainly a way for your argument to make complete sense, halfof33--if we assume, as so many people do, that when you say 'that serial killer has schizophrenia', it's another way of saying 'that serial killer should be let off all charges'.

This is another common debating technique that relies on complete and utter idiocy, although I don't know if it has a formal name. If I understand that X + 3 =23, therefore X = 20, does that mean I think X is a ridiculous number for cupcakes served to one child? Of course not. I may believe both separately, but knowing that X = 20 doesn't have a damn thing to do with cupcakes. In more accurate terms, knowledge itself does not require specific action.

In simple English, when you understand that X = 20, you are not required to do a damn thing with knowing that. And that means that, when someone says 'well, I'm not surprised this and that happened', you honestly do not know what sort of judgement they're making on the actual event. You can't. You don't have enough information.

Now, as it so happens, I wholeheartedly condemn the attacks and would like to see the attackers in jail and awaiting trial. But that's not something you could reasonably assume to know or not know based on what I said. Therefore, you have what is known as a strawman argument.

And the saddest part of all of this is that you could know everything I've said here by taking a high school debate class.
 
2012-09-14 03:27:15 PM

Walker: American mentality: free speech

Middle East mentality: say something I disagree with and I will kill anyone from your country or even allies of your country and then burn down my own city. That will learn you.

Close our embassies and don't give one more penny to these countries that hate us and want to kill us. We gave billions to Pakistan while they hid Bin laden for a decade. And if you think Pakistan didn't know he was there I have a bridge to sell you.


here's your 'freedom'

Freedom of press?

elections arn't bought?

committing worldwide felonies?

what does that get ya?

Accounting fraud?

Think you can't be spied on

imageshack.us



imageshack.us

 

imageshack.us 

remember citizen

Truth comes from authority

Intelligence is the ability to repeat and remember

accurate memory and repetition are rewarded

non-compliance is punished

conform:socially and intellectually

do not resist
 

BUT DON'T YOU DARE VIEW CRAPPY MOVIES ONLINE. DO YOU HEAR MEEEE!?!?!?!? why no, lobbying and subsidies arn't bribery and tax evasion, why do you ask?
 
2012-09-14 03:28:15 PM

Thunderpipes: We don't like murder and terrorism here.


Then why is the murder rate so high? And why do the police terrorize minorities?
 
2012-09-14 03:29:30 PM
and don't forget

www.yesnet.yk.ca
 
2012-09-14 03:29:38 PM

PsiChick: . I was talking about being unsurprised about the attacks, not about the morality of the attacks. .


Wow! That is A LOT of words, good for you, sugar.

here is a few more words that, curiously, did not make it into your little rant:

"If anyone's surprised, I'd like to remind you that America has spent the past fifty years propping up a country with the manners of Hulk on steroid smoothies and spent the past twenty years in two wars that caused thousands of civilian casualties, major human rights violations, stomped all over the idea of the Arab League's rights to deal with the ME their own way, left two countries in shambles, and opened up the idea that America can attack anyone, anywhere, without any consequences."

The funny thing is you wrote those words. My mistake was reading them, huh, champ?

"if anyone's surprised..." Face palm.

Great post, and borderline incomprehensible follow up. Thanks for posting.
 
2012-09-14 03:31:16 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa. There is unrest in the Middle East? Surely you jest!
 
2012-09-14 03:36:37 PM
Make fun of a Christian and they say they'll pray for your soul in hell.

Make fun of a Muslim, well, let's just say you better have a bomb-sniffing dog around at all times.
 
2012-09-14 03:38:05 PM

halfof33: PsiChick: . I was talking about being unsurprised about the attacks, not about the morality of the attacks. .

Wow! That is A LOT of words, good for you, sugar.

here is a few more words that, curiously, did not make it into your little rant:

"If anyone's surprised, I'd like to remind you that America has spent the past fifty years propping up a country with the manners of Hulk on steroid smoothies and spent the past twenty years in two wars that caused thousands of civilian casualties, major human rights violations, stomped all over the idea of the Arab League's rights to deal with the ME their own way, left two countries in shambles, and opened up the idea that America can attack anyone, anywhere, without any consequences."

The funny thing is you wrote those words. My mistake was reading them, huh, champ?

"if anyone's surprised..." Face palm.

Great post, and borderline incomprehensible follow up. Thanks for posting.


Fine, then, I'll use small words for you.

I condemn the attacks. I am not surprised they happened.

I also didn't think I needed to spell the first one out or be accused of supporting farking murderers. My bad. Apparently we live in a society where people are too stupid to differentiate.
 
2012-09-14 03:39:19 PM

halfof33: PsiChick: . I was talking about being unsurprised about the attacks, not about the morality of the attacks. .

Wow! That is A LOT of words, good for you, sugar.

here is a few more words that, curiously, did not make it into your little rant:

"If anyone's surprised, I'd like to remind you that America has spent the past fifty years propping up a country with the manners of Hulk on steroid smoothies and spent the past twenty years in two wars that caused thousands of civilian casualties, major human rights violations, stomped all over the idea of the Arab League's rights to deal with the ME their own way, left two countries in shambles, and opened up the idea that America can attack anyone, anywhere, without any consequences."

The funny thing is you wrote those words. My mistake was reading them, huh, champ?

"if anyone's surprised..." Face palm.

Great post, and borderline incomprehensible follow up. Thanks for posting.


Listen here, cupcake, understanding the justification behind these horrendous attacks is not the same as supporting them.

Cupcake.
 
2012-09-14 03:44:14 PM

Tat'dGreaser: You gotta give it to Al Qaeda, they've been looking for a way to hit us hard and then this video came along. They popped smoke, hit us hard and got an Ambassador and then got us to get pissed at all Muslims. Brilliant.


Absolutely - and we're buying it like rubes at a county fair.
 
2012-09-14 03:46:53 PM

Blue_Blazer: Listen here, cupcake, understanding the justification behind these horrendous attacks is not the same as supporting them.


Say, pork chop, the "justification" for those attacks is a stupid web video insulting the "Prophet."

Y'all want to lkeep up with the farking news?

In fact, even characterizing them as "justifications" is ludicrous.

Am I going to fast for the liberal farking guilt mob here?
 
2012-09-14 03:53:58 PM

PsiChick: halfof33: PsiChick: . I was talking about being unsurprised about the attacks, not about the morality of the attacks. .

Wow! That is A LOT of words, good for you, sugar.

here is a few more words that, curiously, did not make it into your little rant:

"If anyone's surprised, I'd like to remind you that America has spent the past fifty years propping up a country with the manners of Hulk on steroid smoothies and spent the past twenty years in two wars that caused thousands of civilian casualties, major human rights violations, stomped all over the idea of the Arab League's rights to deal with the ME their own way, left two countries in shambles, and opened up the idea that America can attack anyone, anywhere, without any consequences."

The funny thing is you wrote those words. My mistake was reading them, huh, champ?

"if anyone's surprised..." Face palm.

Great post, and borderline incomprehensible follow up. Thanks for posting.

Fine, then, I'll use small words for you.

I condemn the attacks. I am not surprised they happened.

I also didn't think I needed to spell the first one out or be accused of supporting farking murderers. My bad. Apparently we live in a society where people are too stupid to differentiate.


You are engaged in the equivalent of trying to teach a dog calculus.
 
2012-09-14 03:58:54 PM

halfof33: Blue_Blazer: Listen here, cupcake, understanding the justification behind these horrendous attacks is not the same as supporting them.

Say, pork chop, the "justification" for those attacks is a stupid web video insulting the "Prophet."

Y'all want to lkeep up with the farking news?

In fact, even characterizing them as "justifications" is ludicrous.

Am I going to fast for the liberal farking guilt mob here?


No, I'm fairly sure that the justifications are exactly as Psichick described. You are quite obtuse if you truly believe that this film is the SOLE AND PRIMARY justification.

/damn it now I want porkchops and cupcakes
 
2012-09-14 04:06:08 PM
So why is this not being covered more in America? Does the media/government not want us outraged?


media.washtimes.com
 
2012-09-14 04:10:03 PM

Blue_Blazer: No, I'm fairly sure that the justifications are exactly as Psichick described.


No I'm pretty sure they are not, because those "justifications" (and they are not justifications, they are perjorative conclusions) would treat the Muslim world as a single amorphous mass, which is idiotic.

But I'm going to do you a favor. I am going to explain this as one would to a child:

This;

"I condemn her rape."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn her rape, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed."

Just like this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed America has acted for the last 50 years."

Thus endeth the lesson, go and sin no more.

Class Dismissed.
 
2012-09-14 04:13:34 PM

Mr. Cat Poop: I really don't want Germany on our side in WWIII. They lost the first 2 already. Can we pick Russia again?


What's the old saying? Third one is the charme?
 
2012-09-14 04:14:52 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: CNN is showing the dead American killed by protected speech coming home to Andrews AFB right now.


No, CNN showed the dead Americans killed by medieval thugs that can't gain power as long as there's protected speech. Protected speech doesn't kill people. Thugs enabled by cowards who'd trade away the rights that others fought for kill people.
 
2012-09-14 04:14:57 PM

jso2897: PsiChick: halfof33: PsiChick:

You are engaged in the equivalent of trying to teach a dog calculus.


I used to be roughly where that guy is--I knew you were supposed to say X, Y, and Z, but couldn't figure out why, so sometimes I'd think X was Z. I learned and got better. Maybe he can too.

/Although I'm not really being incredibly patient today...I need more coffee.
 
2012-09-14 04:24:05 PM

halfof33: Blue_Blazer: No, I'm fairly sure that the justifications are exactly as Psichick described.

No I'm pretty sure they are not, because those "justifications" (and they are not justifications, they are perjorative conclusions) would treat the Muslim world as a single amorphous mass, which is idiotic.

But I'm going to do you a favor. I am going to explain this as one would to a child:

This;

"I condemn her rape."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn her rape, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed."

Just like this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed America has acted for the last 50 years."

Thus endeth the lesson, go and sin no more.

Class Dismissed.


I can't believe I'm saying this, but you're right: they aren't the same.
The statements with the "but" clause signify that the speaker is able to understand causality. The other, simpler statements seem to have no such understanding.
I am not going to debate hypotheticals involving rape.
Seriously why do all the cons always want to talk about abortion and rape?
 
2012-09-14 04:31:22 PM

Blue_Blazer: The statements with the "but" clause signify that the speaker is able to understand causality.


FACE PALM. Understand casuality? Are you serious? The second examples falsely and fallaciously ascribe causes that blame the victim.

Unbelievable.

/the rape hypotheical is the classic example of the fallacious arguments you people are making.
 
2012-09-14 04:36:17 PM

halfof33: Blue_Blazer: No, I'm fairly sure that the justifications are exactly as Psichick described.

No I'm pretty sure they are not, because those "justifications" (and they are not justifications, they are perjorative conclusions) would treat the Muslim world as a single amorphous mass, which is idiotic.

But I'm going to do you a favor. I am going to explain this as one would to a child:

This;

"I condemn her rape."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn her rape, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed."

Just like this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy."

is not the same as this:

"I condemn the violence at the Embassy, but I am not surprised by it because of the way she dressed America has acted for the last 50 years."

Thus endeth the lesson, go and sin no more.

Class Dismissed.



PS, in case you missed my post above, it sadly looks like you can cross out everything you typed because there is an ACTUAL rape victim. So... yeah. Sickening and outrageous. Oh and Blue_Blazer you suck at logic. Thanks...
 
2012-09-14 04:37:59 PM

imasig: Seriously...where does all this shiat end. My Facebook page is blowing up with everyone yelling war. War? With who? The protesters in these dozen countries or so? The government of these countries? Islam as a whole?

Let's just assume we identify a target and we do go to war. We send our planes over. Our men (and women) over. We blow some shiat up. We shoot some people dead. We capture some people and put them on trial and execute them. We install a democratic government. Then what? We go home and these countries are in the same farked up American hating state there were just before we arrived.

I'm not try to be a tree hugging hippy here because this dumb ass shiat pisses me off as much as anyone else. I'm just saying unless our goals are to: a.) blow the entire place up for good. or b.) install some concentration camps over there and brainwash every muslim into loving America then we're not going to accomplish shiat but going to war in a traditional sense.


WOLVERINES!!!!!
 
2012-09-14 04:43:16 PM
Once again, you can argue rape hypotheticals all you want. You seem to not understand the, admittedly nuanced, difference between "blaming the victim" and understanding justifications, whether or not those justifications are valid.
For example, let's suppose that some white knight defender of yours decides to come kill me because. I called you cupcake.
Here are two possible sentences you might say:
White Knight killed Blue_Blazer
White Knight killed Blue_Blazer because he called me cupcake.
You can say the second sentence without providing a moral judgment on whether he SHOULD have killed me. You would be providing the killer's justification, but you would NOT be tacitly agreeing with it. In fact, whether you agree or not is a completely separate matter.
 
2012-09-14 04:48:01 PM

halfof33: Blue_Blazer: The statements with the "but" clause signify that the speaker is able to understand causality.

FACE PALM. Understand casuality? Are you serious? The second examples falsely and fallaciously ascribe causes that blame the victim.

Unbelievable.

/the rape hypotheical is the classic example of the fallacious arguments you people are making.


It's pretty silly to suggest the history of US involvement in the middle east is akin to wearing a skirt and too much makeup.
 
Displayed 50 of 278 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report