• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The ISIS offensive in Iraq

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
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. 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 I'd agree with you.

You don't honestly believe that Pamela Geller created this contest with the purpose of weeding out violent extremists, do you? So she's not being a divisive bigot for once, and is instead working with the authorities to do God's work?
 
You don't honestly believe that Pamela Geller created this contest with the purpose of weeding out violent extremists, do you?

Neither of us can say for sure exactly what her motives were, but I think a reasonable guess is that she created this contest to provoke a reaction that she believes would demonstrate intolerance for freedom of speech/religion within whatever elements of the Muslim community it exists.

I do not think it is unrelated to what happened at Charlie Hebdo, or really, to the whole line of fascistic behavior from the response to Salman Rushdie right through the present.

So she's not being a divisive bigot for once, and is instead working with the authorities to do God's work?

No. She's not "working with the authorities" and I never stated or implied that she was. And yes, she's being divisive. She's trying to divide those who are intolerant of free speech from the rest of us. She may also be a bigot, which is why I said I supported only this particular action, not whatever else she may have done.

I'm curious -- what did you think of all those newspapers and magazines that reprinted the Charlie Hebdo cartoons after that attack? What were they trying to accomplish, and do you think that was justified?

But could you please expand on something else you said earlier:

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.

What exactly does that mean? Are you saying it makes them less well disposed to the country as a whole, more sympathetic to the radicals or ...what, exactly? Because I don't think that's actually true in any significant sense.

But if it is (again, I don't think so), then the problem is much, much bigger than just those we currently classify as "extremists".
 
You don't honestly believe that Pamela Geller created this contest with the purpose of weeding out violent extremists, do you? So she's not being a divisive bigot for once, and is instead working with the authorities to do God's work?

Don't feed the trolls kosis...
 
I was wondering when captain high horse would come in and start disqualifying people from the discussion.
 
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.



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



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.





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.

What in God's green fuck are you talking about?

You know exactly what I'm saying and you're trying to use me as a punching bag for your anger towards brown people. We both know I wouldn't and didn't justify these idiots trying to kill people, and I'm glad they're dead.

Beyond that...not interested in the standard straw-man vs straw-man bullshit you and gourimoko go through every 48 hours or so on here.

Terrorists are dead. Im glad they're dead. Stop baiting terrorists here in the US. If good people get pissed off when you offend their religion on a deep level, perhaps you (that being everyone) should re-think whether what you're doing or saying is productive. If evil people get offended by what you're doing or saying...it's ok for people like to be to want to avoid instigating those people to attack us here in the United States.

That's as far down the rabbit hole I'll go because you already added about 8 arguments to my initial statement that you know I wouldn't make. That ain't goin anywhere with me.
 
Last edited:
I was wondering when captain high horse would come in and start disqualifying people from the discussion.

A discussion to which you've added nothing?

You can't possibly believe, for one second, that Pamela Geller isn't a bigot, and that this "contest" wasn't solely designed as an exercise in bigotry.

She said herself, on national television, that Muslims are "evil."

So frankly Soda, I doubt you're either up to date on current events, or you yourself are trolling. You want to say this is being on a "high horse," that's fine. Perhaps you're right, as I do look down on people like you who take every and all opportunities to defend racists like Pam Geller.

Kosis' point is entirely correct, and anyone who thinks we should be endorsing Pam Geller is almost assuredly demonstrating prejudice and bias.
 
A discussion to which you've added nothing?

You can't possibly believe, for one second, that Pamela Geller isn't a bigot, and that this "contest" wasn't solely designed as an exercise in bigotry.

She said herself, on national television, that Muslims are "evil."

Clearly, you don't read. If you have me on ignore, that's fine, but don't come in here and say "you've added nothing" just because you didn't see it. I see what you're doing, though. You're insinuating that I somehow support Pamela Geller, which, if you did read, you would see is completely false. Or, it's just a lie.

What did your statement to kosis add? Since we're keeping score of who adds what.
 
Clearly, you don't read. If you have me on ignore, that's fine, but don't come in here and say "you've added nothing" just because you didn't see it.

No Soda, I don't have you on ignore. I don't have anyone on ignore. I read your posts.. I'll say it again, you've added nothing to the discussion regarding the OP or the topic, which is the ISIS offensive in Iraq.

I see what you're doing, though. You're insinuating that I somehow support Pamela Geller, which, if you did read, you would see is completely false. Or, it's just a lie.

I don't read? That's a first.. You're really trying to compare our relative knowledge levels and intellectual strengths Soda? Lol...

Anyway, I'm not insinuating you support Pam Geller, I'm stating openly that your knee-jerk and mistimed personal attack on me ignored the numerous posts by Q-Tip that are supporting Pam Geller.

Rather than rapid-respond to posts that say "gourimoko" simply because you have a problem with me, maybe you should read what I wrote instead. If you disagree, just state your argument, but this pathetic prodding has gone far enough.

The point of my post was that Q-Tip's points are often nonsensical. He's either trolling, or he's genuinely arguing in circles, because no one could rationally believe that Geller's motives are anything but bigoted when she herself has admitted to being a bigot numerous times.

You act like I'm the first person to call him out on this, when there are no less than 5 other posters in this thread alone who have done the same thing.
 
What in God's green fuck are you talking about?

I'm talking about the fact that words matter. People choose the words they use to create a certain impression, and when words are used hyperbolically or inaccurately, even if unintentionally, things go off the rails.

I think there's a pretty big difference between saying that someone was offended, and saying they were attacked. We all need to tolerate being offended. We shouldn't tolerate being attacked. You normally don't use that kind of hyperbole, so that's why I commented on it.

And screw your "brown people" reference, btw. I don't give a crap what color someone is, or what their religion is, as long as they don't believe that gives them the right to control the speech/actions of other people. To the extent that belief exists, I think it should be openly defied, regardless of the color of the people involved.
 
I call bullshit...

No one would support a cartoon drawing contest that drew images of swastikas or rat-like Jewish caricatures..

jew-rat1.png


jew-nazi-whip-rat-animal-beast-tail-ass.jpg




png_plague_rats.png


Who won first prize?
 
I don't read? That's a first.. You're really trying to compare our relative knowledge levels and intellectual strengths Soda? Lol...

Reported. And I'm going to keep reporting bullshit like that. You really don't have a legitimate basis to make the statement from. You've got more degrees than I? Congrats. I actually like when you post about the stuff you're an expert in. I don't enjoy your arrogance elsewhere.

If you're talking about one poster, don't say "trolls". I know that you're aware of exactly what you're saying when you type.

Not everything ties back to the OP. I don't know if you just think it's your rules and/or quality control that guide this site. I responded to the most recent thing posted in here.
 
Reported. And I'm going to keep reporting bullshit like that. You really don't have a legitimate basis to make the statement from. You've got more degrees than I? Congrats. I actually like when you post about the stuff you're an expert in. I don't enjoy your arrogance elsewhere.

....Soda, that's perfect, let's waste the time of the admins and mods who surely have nothing better to do. Hopefully a mod can go back through our posts and see that I haven't quoted you, tagged you, or responded to something you've said in months; wherein the reverse is not true - you continually quote me and respond to my posts with vitriol.

I'm not concerned with you dude.. I've asked you to put me on ignore for months now, I'd rather not waste my time talking to you.

If you're talking about one poster, don't say "trolls". I know that you're aware of exactly what you're saying when you type.

Again.. don't be absurd.

Not everything ties back to the OP. I don't know if you just think it's your rules and/or quality control that guide this site. I responded to the most recent thing posted in here.

I do think it's quality control, yes. Your post to me added nothing. My post to kosis is basically saying that this line of conversation, with a specific poster, is useless and is frankly off-topic.

Read Jigo's last post, "fuck it," is the right attitude towards Q-Tip in this regard and numerous posters would agree. The guy gives no ground and is not open to discussion with regards to his views; and with that, he argues in circles.

My point to you is that your post had no reason to be made. None. You only seem to quote me in discussions that are, again, based on prejudice - which, for whatever reason - seems to be the only time you and I are even in the same thread.

You say you were "waiting" for me to comment, but if you go back, I have more posts than any other poster in this thread. Yet you chime in only when your favorite subject comes up?

I find all of this unnecessary. Again, I ask that you just put me on ignore - I don't want to interact with you or people like you in any respect.
 
Last edited:
Clearly, you don't read. If you have me on ignore, that's fine, but don't come in here and say "you've added nothing" just because you didn't see it. I see what you're doing, though. You're insinuating that I somehow support Pamela Geller, which, if you did read, you would see is completely false. Or, it's just a lie.

I didn't even know who Geller was until this whole incident. Since then, I've read some stuff about ads her group bought to put on busses, and about her opposition to the mosque near Ground Zero. The latter I think was wrong. Don't know enough about the bus thing, which involved an offensive quote
attributed to "Hamas MTV" -- "Killing Jews is worship that draws us close to Allah." If that's something that Hamas actually said, then I suppose I can see value in disseminating that fact. Otherwise, it's ridiculous. Problem is that I can't find any more specific attribution for that quote, so I'd probably be thumbs down on that absent verification.

Anyway, as I said at the outset, I only support this particular action in Texas, not whatever else she may have done because I honestly don't know enough about her.

But the Texas thing I view as akin to all those newspapers and magazines that reprinted the "offensive" Charlie Hebdo cartoon.
 
You only seem to quote me in discussions that are, again, based on prejudice - which, for whatever reason - seems to be the only time you and I are even in the same thread.

Well, I think you're prejudiced. That's why I take exception to your posts. There's a level of arrogance towards anyone who disagrees with you. You also offended me a long time ago with something you said that was unfounded nor supported. Sorry if it seems like I'm holding a grudge. I am.

I don't want to interact with you or people like you in any respect.

And what kind of people would that be?
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top