Geert Wilders not guilty

[xkatz]

Reading up post upon post of yours, since you seem never to get tired of hateful bigotry against the muslims, why don't you open a hate anti-muslim forum of your own and bang your loose fists over there? 'cause the way you say you hold yourself back from actually exposing muslims, makes it look like as if you're going to have a heart attack or would just plain pass out, if the moderators didn't let you release your hate towards them.

I find it disturbing you equate criticism of religion (in this case Islam), with bigotry and/or racism. In doing so, you are only proving the hypocrisy many religious people employ against people whom are critical or skeptical towards a religion.

 

[YmirGF]

And yeah sure, the way these discussions morph into, here in these forums these days makes it look like that if you and the likes of yours did not have the opportunity to slander islam and bicker about muslims every other day, you'd really have no other valuable purpose to serve in your lives. Some of the christians do it, All athiests do it, all panentheists do it, Polytheists & Pagans do it, UUs do it, Agnostics do it, some Jews do it , wiccans do it, etc and etc do it, name me one belief out of all these here, or more who do not seem to have a holier purpose other than to try to malign and try smear the image of muslims as if enough hasn't already been done.

The sad reality is, Starsoul, that with comments like this, I don't have to say much to besmirch the pristine vaunted image of Islam. You do it yourself, so very well. Nice work.

 

[sandandfoam]

I'd say it's the opposite of paranoia to foster open expression of unpopular thoughts.


You can keep your meddling nanny states over there then.
Freedom of speech can be messy & offensive, but for us it beats having some government prosecutor trolling the airwaves for prey.

I don't see the sense in your argument.
Let's take it down to real life.
Roma and Travellers are real people.
I don't know any Roma but I do know plenty of Travellers. There are quite a lot of Travellers living in and around where I live. Their kids go to the same school as mine and I cross paths with Travellers regularly.
Are you telling me that these people have to accept being slandered as horrid people who raise their children to be criminals because Kathryn is entitled to say whatever she wants?
What about their entitlement to dignity? What about their entitlement to respect for their culture and ethnicity?
What about their childrens right to respect their parents and their heritage?
Are you really telling me that a wealthy educated Texans woman's right to slander them is more important?

 

[Revoltingest]

There are quite a lot of Travellers living in and around where I live. Their kids go to the same school as mine and I cross paths with Travellers regularly.
Are you telling me that these people have to accept being slandered as horrid people who raise their children to be criminals because Kathryn is entitled to say whatever she wants?

No. But your question is worded in a loaded fashion.

What about their entitlement to dignity? What about their entitlement to respect for their culture and ethnicity?

I don't see those as rights for which the state must restrict the speech of others.
We have some history of making disrespect illegal....
The Alien and Sedition Acts
Even recently, we've had trouble. I recall a gal being jailed for telling Prez Clinton that he sucked.
And so we're uncomfortable with a state wielding such power.

What about their childrens right to respect their parents and their heritage?
Are you really telling me that a wealthy educated Texans woman's right to slander them is more important?

She isn't slandering them.....or more correctly, she isn't libeling (printed words) them.
What has wealth, gender, education or Texicanification have to do with it? (She's wealthy? I'm gonna hit her up for a loan.)

 

[sandandfoam]

No. But your question is worded in a loaded fashion.

The only thing it's loaded with is real people

And so we're uncomfortable with a state wielding such power.

I don't accept this. As a nation yours is comfortable with a state wielding the ultimate power i.e. life and death.

She isn't slandering them.....or more correctly, she isn't libeling (printed words) them.

Oh yes she is. To slander is to make a false or damaging statement. To say that is all that she is doing is putting it very mildly

What has wealth, gender, education or Texicanification have to do with it? (She's wealthy? I'm gonna hit her up for a loan.)

THe description is of someone in a position of relative comfort, freedom and power. The relevance is that from this position of comfort, freedom and power she is spreading words of a most unkind nature (to put it very mildly) against 2 ethnic groups.
It is a case of a 'have' heaping unkindness on a huge group of 'have nots'. It is unpleasant, unchristian, unkind and intolerable.
And saying it's about free speech is nonsense.

 

[Revoltingest]

The only thing it's loaded with is real people

Glib! I call you on glibness!

I don't accept this. As a nation yours is comfortable with a state wielding the ultimate power i.e. life and death.

Think how much more dangerous that power would be were it combined with suppression of speech.
I ain't say'n it's right, but I prefer it to your agenda.

Oh yes she is. To slander is to make a false or damaging statement. To say that is all that she is doing is putting it very mildly

Well, she was mild (if a tad broad) in her criticism.

THe description is of someone in a position of relative comfort, freedom and power. The relevance is that from this position of comfort, freedom and power she is spreading words of a most unkind nature (to put it very mildly) against 2 ethnic groups.

It's the internet....we're all on equal footing for our wealth, gender, etc.
For all I know, you could be a middle class Chippewa teenage girl from New Jersey,
instead of a drunken biker Irishman....which is a good thing, btw.

It is a case of a 'have' heaping unkindness on a huge group of 'have nots'. It is unpleasant, unchristian, unkind and intolerable. And saying it's about free speech is nonsense.

Nonsense to you perhaps, but a very significant right to me.

 

[sandandfoam]

instead of a drunken biker Irishman....which is a good thing, btw.

see..talk long enough and we're bound to agree

 

[Starsoul]

I find it disturbing you equate criticism of religion (in this case Islam), with bigotry and/or racism. In doing so, you are only proving the hypocrisy many religious people employ against people whom are critical or skeptical towards a religion.

With respect xkatz, you cant call ignorance about religion criticism, it is only a vain effort to malign its image with a stuck record playing over and over, simple as that. None of the posts of that poster contained one thing that would point out to the fact that he's even ever studied one chapter of the Holy book in detail, I'm sorry but you can't read trashy blogs and articles about Islam and copy paste their opinions, because your lack of first hand contact with the real stuff is too obvious to ignore.(not you, anyone who does that)

You cant criticize what you don't know, or you look like, you know what. If anyone wants to criticize , sure go ahead, but atleast one should have the decency to go through it in detail if you wish to be respected for your criticism or those who know better will intercept you.

I would let you say that if only the threads that contain a strong debate about judaism would manage to last longer than a dozen of comments and it would not get quickly locked on request (maybe rightfully so), because it offends jews greatly when their faith is being wrongly projected or criticized in a demeaning way which serves nothing but to create misunderstandings/vain arguments about faiths, if this forum wants to loose its sensible discussion streak, fine with me,(its already lost btw) But those who spread mis-information need to know where they stand in other's eyes and need to change their ways.

Peace.

 

[YmirGF]

With respect xkatz, you cant call ignorance about religion criticism, it is only a vain effort to malign its image with a stuck record playing over and over, simple as that. None of the posts of that poster contained one thing that would point out to the fact that he's even ever studied one chapter of the Holy book in detail, I'm sorry but you can't read trashy blogs and articles about Islam and copy paste their opinions, because your lack of first hand contact with the real stuff is too obvious to ignore.(not you, anyone who does that)

Whew. You had me worried. It's a good thing that I do not do that. Oddly though, I have frubal comments, on Islamic topics from your Muslim brethren that say, "Brilliant". I guess they know nothing too. Go figure.

 

[Father Heathen]

Roma and Travellers are ethnic groups.

Yeah, and? Judging someone's culture (a society's collective attitudes and behavior) is NOT the same as judging their genetics. Stop embarrassing yourself with knee-jerk reactions and start investing a little more thought into the subject.

 

[Father Heathen]

Nothing personal taken
But to your point - I believe that there is something paranoid in American culture about having the freedom to express any view no matter how vile.
I imagine/am pretty certain, it would be illegal to broadcast the type of views expressed by Kathryn in this thread in mine and most European countries. I think we're the better for it.

Compulsory ignorance and dishonesty? THAT is disgusting rubbish. It's deeply disappointing that Europeans would **** away their rights and freedoms out of cowardice and insecurity. If you think a statement is false, then you simply refute it because surely logic and evidence would be on your side. Grow a spine, show some integrity and stand up to it, not silence it. And you should be ashamed about the way you deliberately and dishonestly misconstrue Kathryn's statements.

 

[sandandfoam]

Yeah, and? Judging someone's culture (a society's collective attitudes and behavior) is NOT the same as judging their genetics. Stop embarrassing yourself with knee-jerk reactions and start investing a little more thought into the subject.

Let's try it your way so.
What's the difference?
1. Travellers are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals. Statement made on the basis of culture
2. Travellers are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals. Stament made on the basis of genetics

 

[sandandfoam]

And you should be ashamed about the way you deliberately and dishonestly misconstrue Kathryn's statements.

I quoted her directly. Where is the misconstrual?
If you think I should be ashamed to call bigotry and slander against 2 communities I disagree strongly. Comments such as those made regarding Roma and Travellers in this thread (i.e. they are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals)are disgusting and I stand over my opposition to them.

 

[sandandfoam]

FAther Heathen,
Given this history

In June 1936, a Central Office to "Combat the Gypsy Nuisance" opened in Munich. This office became the headquarters of a national data bank on Gypsies. Also in June, part of the Ministry of Interior directives for "Combating the Gypsy Nuisance" authorized the Berlin police to conduct raids against Gypsies so that they would not mar the image of the city, host of the summer Olympic games

from SINTI AND ROMA ("GYPSIES"):VICTIMS OF THE NAZI ERA

explain to me please how the statement below is acceptable

So when you're suddenly surrounded by a crowd of small, dark haired and dark eyed clamoring children in a crowded market place in Europe, you don't generalize that they're probably Roma children trying to pick your pocket?

 

[Kathryn]

I imagine/am pretty certain, it would be illegal to broadcast the type of views expressed by Kathryn in this thread in mine and most European countries. I think we're the better for it.

Yet another reason why I thank God every day that I live in the United States.

And we can also play Dire Strait's "Money For Nothin'" - unedited - which is always a good thing...



So when you're suddenly surrounded by a crowd of small, dark haired and dark eyed clamoring children in a crowded market place in Europe, you don't generalize that they're probably Roma children trying to pick your pocket?

Yes, that's the statement I made and I'm sticking to it. If you find yourself in that situation, I have a suggestion - hold tight to your purse and your wallet - because the odds are very high that you've been targeted by a group of children trained by Romani adults to pick your pocket or steal your purse.

Sad but true. I don't blame the kids - I blame their sorry *** parents and the culture they are raised in.

 

[Father Heathen]

Let's try it your way so.
What's the difference?
1. Travellers are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals. Statement made on the basis of culture
2. Travellers are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals. Stament made on the basis of genetics

...lolwow...

Because 1. is based on the actions they choose to take, obviously. People should be held responsible for their deeds, regardless of their skin color. I honestly don't understand what it is that you're struggling with.
You yourself obviously have a problem with American culture, and it's not considered bigoted or racist to criticize American culture, so perhaps you can tell me what the difference is?

 

[Father Heathen]

I quoted her directly. Where is the misconstrual?
If you think I should be ashamed to call bigotry and slander against 2 communities I disagree strongly. Comments such as those made regarding Roma and Travellers in this thread (i.e. they are horrid people and raise their kids to be criminals)are disgusting and I stand over my opposition to them.

So we should pretend systematic child abuse doesn't happen for the sake of a pretentious and shallow display of tolerance?

 

[sandandfoam]

...lolwow...

You yourself obviously have a problem with American culture, and it's not considered bigoted or racist to criticize American culture, so perhaps you can tell me what the difference is?

I don't think this is true. I admire much of American culture. I see what I perceive to be flaws but I do not believe I have a problem with Americans. I've posted on this forum before that when I meet an American I expect to like them.
The difference is that I do not say that all Americans are awful people who abuse their children.
Another important difference is that as a group Americans are powerful, wealthy, healthy and educated.
Travellers and Roma are persecuted, oppressed, disadvantaged and maligned.

 

[sandandfoam]

So we should pretend systematic child abuse doesn't happen for the sake of a pretentious and shallow display of tolerance?

I've asked a couple of times for an explanation of how the bigoted views against Roma expressed here are different from the Nazi nonsense I've posted. Might you tackle that?

 

[Kathryn]

Stephen, that assertion has already been addressed, but I'll repeat myself and expand on it.

Differences between my statements and beliefs about the Romani people and Travelers vs Hitler's statements and beliefs about Jews, Gypsies, etc:

1. Hitler based his beliefs on the theory of RACIAL superiority - in other words, genetic differences between races which he believed to mean that some races were inferior to others. I believe that there is simply no superior race - that the issues within the Romani and Traveler subcultures are due to the CULTURE in which children are raised in those groups - for whatever reasons. It has little or nothing to do with genetics or race.

2. Hitler believed that "inferior" races should be mistreated, rounded up, shipped off to camps or sequestered in ghettos, and systematically murdered. I believe that the Romani and Traveler cultures often abuse children within these cultures, and also perpetrate crimes on the societies in which they live, and that we should do all that we can to HELP the victims of these cultures - whether they live within or outside these subgroups.

3. Hitler believed in separating these groups from other societies, and enforcing segregation to the point of death. He wanted absolutely no integration or interaction between the "host" society and these groups or individuals. I much prefer that these groups interact in wholesome ways, and be integrated fully into the societies in which they live, rather than keeping themselves separate and contributing to their own disenfranchisement.

4. Hitler would be horrified at the idea of a German (or a family member) marrying into a Romani family, and would consider the offspring of that union to be genetically flawed. I would welcome a Romani into my family with open arms, and would dearly love any children who came from that union.

Hope that clarifies some things for you.