The ISIS offensive in Iraq

[The Human Q-Tip]

I don't like some other stuff Geller has done, but I support being purposefully inflammatory in this instance. The beliefs offended by this event deserved to be challenged openly.

 

[kosis]

It's so much fun to be openly hateful and offend people's beliefs on purpose these days. So brave and inspiring.

 

[Soda]

People shouldn't be shooting people for drawing a cartoon. I don't care what your belief is.

 

[kosis]

People shouldn't be shooting people for drawing a cartoon. I don't care what your belief is.

Has anyone on this board at ANY point disagreed with that statement?

 

[The Oi]

Why people insist on stepping on these fire ant hills boggles my mind.

 

[Soda]

Has anyone on this board at ANY point disagreed with that statement?

Probably the same as the amount of folks around here who've been openly hateful and bigoted towards others' beliefs.

I don't think it's right to be that way, but I don't think it's necessarily wrong to challenge a belief. It irks me that it was seen as adequate punishment to shoot-up a place for drawing the cartoon. At the same time, it does irk me that this lady used her position to intentionally be inflammatory. Even if it is, in my opinion, something that should be tolerable.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Why people insist on stepping on these fire ant hills boggles my mind.

Because the goal of this particular fire ant hill is to intimidate the rest of the population into complying with their religious beliefs, or be killed. Open defiance of that -- coupled with some good shooting Texans -- combats that intimidation.

More broadly, these kind of provocations don't create those murderous jihadi assholes. The murderous jihadi assholes already exist, and (as demonstrated here) are simply waiting for a convenient opportunity to kill those who defy them. I personally think the world is a better place when such people are smoked out and killed.

 

[The Oi]

Because the goal of this particular fire ant hill is to intimidate the rest of the population into complying with their religious beliefs, or be killed. Open defiance of that -- coupled with some good shooting Texans -- combats that intimidation.

More broadly, these kind of provocations don't create those murderous jihadi assholes. The murderous jihadi assholes already exist, and (as demonstrated here) are simply waiting for a convenient opportunity to kill those who defy them. I personally think the world is a better place when such people are smoked out and killed.

I get that.

I just don't understand the need to aggressively and intentionally attack an entire group of people who don't feel that way in order to piss off those who do.

Let's be real. This isn't South Park. The intention isn't to mock everyone equally. It's to initiate this kind of stupid shit on our own soil, which means building up even more ill will with these assholes and increasing the likelihood of more attacks like these.

It helps nobody.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

It's so much fun to be openly hateful and offend people's beliefs on purpose these days. So brave and inspiring.

Actually, it is brave when you know there are lunatics out there who will try to murder you if you offend them. That's kind of the whole point. If there weren't murderous a-holes out there, then the only thing you'd be accomplishing is deliberately offending nonviolent people, which is the kind of juvenile logic behind the burning of the American flag here in the States, or "Piss Christ".

But when you have a significant movement advocating murder if their religious beliefs are offended, that's something that deserves offense.

And, I see nothing wrong with being hateful towards those who believe that murdering those who offend them is justified. The day such attacks and widespread calls for killing stop is the day I'll join you in condemning deliberate offense of those religious beliefs. If we do it loudly and often enough, maybe it'll finally sink in that it's something they'll have to learn to live with.

Until then, f*ck 'em.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I get that.

I just don't understand the need to aggressively and intentionally attack an entire group of people who don't feel that way in order to piss off those who do.

Oh, so these two guys were attacked. I wasn't aware of that. Well then, I suppose we can't blame them for trying to kill people because it was only self-defense after they were attacked.

GMAFB. Who was "aggressively and intentionally attacked? That's the kind of over the top, misleading rhetoric I'd expect from...well, some others. Not you. It's the kind of bogus description that almost justifies violence because they're just defending themselves after being "attacked". They were offended, not attacked.

Nobody was attacked except the people at that rally, and the only ones doing the attacking were the two losers who -- happily -- were killed before they managed to kill some innocents there or elsewhere.

Let's be real. This isn't South Park. The intention isn't to mock everyone equally.

Of course not. The point is to offend and provoke those who hold a twisted moral view that justifies murder. Expose them. Defy them.

It's to initiate this kind of stupid shit on our own soil, which means building up even more ill will with these assholes and increasing the likelihood of more attacks like these.

We're not the ones initiating anything here. The ones who initiated these actions in this country are the 9/11 terrorists, the Fort Hood jackhole, the Tsarnaev brothers, etc. etc. etc.

It helps nobody.

Sure it does. For starters, it helps the next comedian, commentator, or average citizen who dares to say something that offends those kind of goons, because these particular guys are no longer around to try to commit murder. It is an open challenge to the twisted morality that one religion can impose, through the threat of violence, its religious restrictions upon others.

 

[kosis]

Probably the same as the amount of folks around here who've been openly hateful and bigoted towards others' beliefs.

I'd disagree with that.

I don't think it's right to be that way, but I don't think it's necessarily wrong to challenge a belief. It irks me that it was seen as adequate punishment to shoot-up a place for drawing the cartoon. At the same time, it does irk me that this lady used her position to intentionally be inflammatory. Even if it is, in my opinion, something that should be tolerable.

I don't see how this is "challenging" a belief. I'll caveat again by saying no one should be hurt over cartoons -just in case- but you are intentionally prodding at a large population's beliefs for no other reason than to disrespect them. Shootings or not, that's an extremely lousy strategy that you learn way back on the playground. I for one can tell you for a fact that these types of things are alienating the Muslim community where there was no such divide before. When hatemongers start hosting contests about who can offend Muslims more, what you're essentially creating is hostility among friends. This is true even with no violence.

This is not an attempt at blocking Sharia or whatever hot take opinion people have today. Blocking nudity, banning pork... stuff like that would be in step with that line of thinking. This is clear provocation towards a community hoping for backlash, and sadly those cretins gave it to her.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I think it should be remembered that these weren't two otherwise peaceful guys just sitting around playing xbox, read about this contest, and then all of a sudden became committed to violent jihadism just because of this contest.

They were committed to violent jihadism before this, and were just looking for the best opportunity to vent their violent intolerance. They weren't created by this incident --they were exposed.

 

[kosis]

Actually, it is brave when you know there are lunatics out there who will try to murder you if you offend them. That's kind of the whole point. If there weren't murderous a-holes out there, then the only thing you'd be accomplishing is deliberately offending nonviolent people, which is the kind of juvenile logic behind the burning of the American flag here in the States, or "Piss Christ".

But when you have a significant movement advocating murder if their religious beliefs are offended, that's something that deserves offense.

And, I see nothing wrong with being hateful towards those who believe that murdering those who offend them is justified. The day such attacks and widespread calls for killing stop is the day I'll join you in condemning deliberate offense of those religious beliefs. If we do it loudly and often enough, maybe it'll finally sink in that it's something they'll have to learn to live with.

Until then, f*ck 'em.

What you don't seem to understand is that this contest isn't meant to offend extremists. It was meant to offend all Muslims, just as all of Geller's work is. And I'm not saying no one is ever allowed to offend Muslims. I'm saying intentionally trying to offend all Muslims is not valiant work. It's cheap.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I'd disagree with that.



I don't see how this is "challenging" a belief. I'll caveat again by saying no one should be hurt over cartoons -just in case- but you are intentionally prodding at a large population's beliefs for no other reason than to disrespect them.

No, that is not the reason. Those beliefs are being prodded to expose the degree of violent intolerance that exists within a dangerous segment of that community. There wouldn't even be any point to it at all if the only response you got was the shrugging of shoulders or a few complaints. Again, if there wasn't a history of violent attacks and very credible threats of violence, then you'd be right about the only goal being sheer offense and disrespect, and then I'd agree with you.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

What you don't seem to understand is that this contest isn't meant to offend extremists.

I disagree completely.

It was meant to offend all Muslims, just as all of Geller's work is.

But all Muslims includes extremists. There is no way to offend one without offending the other. I think there is value in openly defying those who seek to violently intimidate the rest of society.

And I'm not saying no one is ever allowed to offend Muslims. I'm saying intentionally trying to offend all Muslims is not valiant work. It's cheap.

You're ignoring the inarguable reality that they did offend extremists, that offended extremists attempted to kill them, and that such a reaction is hardly unheard of. They went to the expense of hiring a security guard, so it's not like they thought there were no risks involved. Shit, I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up getting killed at some point, so yes, I do think it is brave, even if you think it is misguided.