halupridol
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 6,153
- Reaction score
- -32
- Country
- Location
yup,straight to heavenBen will get a front row ticket in heaven.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yup,straight to heavenBen will get a front row ticket in heaven.
You brought up the Jewishness in Maher's criticism.
I think Stormfront will be a better forum for you.
Maher supports Israel's right to exist but not to occupy. If you had read any of his books, or watched his documentary or his TV show, you should know.
He criticized Jews in his movie. He is making a religious movie and not a political one.
You didn't know the difference between liberal and libertarian.
Maher claims to be a Liberal and not a Liberatarian.
Rand Paul carries the Liberatarian banner and thats why I mentioned Rand Paul and not Ron Paul.
I had my fun
Can you show me serious criticism of Jews and Judaism by a non-Jewish person in the mainstream media?
As for your other point, I have no problem with legitimate criticism of Muslims. Homophobia, mistreatment of minorities, etc. are legitimate criticisms. However, to say, as Sam Harris implied, that a significant (or most) Muslims are closet jihadis who support a global takeover by Islam is blatant hate mongering.
We need to separate legitimate criticisms from agenda-driven falsehoods.
We also need to challenge the claims that certain conduct is mandated by Islam. There are many interpretations of Islam and, just because one group claims something, does not mean that their interpretation is "mandated" by Islam.
Your comical "discussion" with Don Quixote about Jewishness is hilarious. Like him, you remain perennially clueless about the difference between ethnicity and religion. Two ignorant fools who know zilch about Jewish customs are debating the topic. Quite the spectacle.
The only one living in a delusional bubble is YOU.
Show me where I said that "All Jews are Zionists who want to kill Palestinians".
Until you can show me that statement, you will join the ranks of intellectually dishonest fools who can't argue with facts and make things up out of thin air.
FACT: Bill Maher is NOT, repeat NOT, equally critical of all religions and extremists.
FACT: Bill Maher is a hardcore Zionist and is mostly forgiving of religious fanaticism by Zionists.
FACT: If anyone else showed this bias, we would examine the reasons.
We can conclude the short lesson here is that: If a Muslim want you to be a Jew, he will find some ways to make you a Jew.
Just look at the intense criticism heaped on the Jewish state during the recent hostilities with Hamas as an example. The media does cover events quite fairly, overall, although a tilt one way or another is a matter of perception mainly on part of the audience. If both sides to an issue feel that coverage was biased, then the coverage was probably correct.
you should watch other youtube videos of sam harris arguing against christian clergymen and jewish rabbi.
what do you think about punishment for apostasy under islamic law.
nice ignornace ...Sorry I dont speak that lingo!
Since when was Jewish customs the topic of this thread?
A real intellectual rebuttal would have gone like this:
It's no question that Mr. Maher is bias, does that mean you don't listen to him?
So being Zionist means you don't debate his thesis?
Are Zionists second-class people who don't deserve intellectual debate?
Just look at the intense criticism heaped on the Jewish state during the recent hostilities with Hamas as an example. The media does cover events quite fairly, overall, although a tilt one way or another is a matter of perception mainly on part of the audience. If both sides to an issue feel that coverage was biased, then the coverage was probably correct.
As far a global takeover is concerned, one has to admit that a significant proportion of Muslims would indeed like to see it as the dominant international force, if one is indeed being honest, but that is probably true of almost all major religions, not just Islam.
You are correct in saying that challenging erroneous claims about Islam is important. That is why I always say it is important for all of us to participate in the media game, not just sit outside the ring and berate its unfairness.
Lastly, Islam is what its followers do, not what they claim. We all must realize that.
Answer this simple question: if a group of Muslim fanatics moved to a country and declared that all non-Muslims should be thrown out to create an 'Islamic State", how would they be perceived? Is there any conceivable way in which they would be perceived as victims deserving of sympathy? Yet, the Jewish racial supremacists who colonized Palestine continue to be perceived as victims. That is the triumph of Israeli propaganda.
Any group -- whether it's Muslims, Christians, Hindus, atheists, gays, blacks, short-people -- would wants to be in a position where they aren't exploited, marginalized and discriminated against because of their characteristic. That does not mean that most Muslims want to convert the rest of the world (violently or otherwise) to Islam, as was claimed in the video.
Certainly, the Western media domination is the ongoing after-effect of colonialism, combined with hard word and shrewd management by the Anglophone countries. No one is debating its fairness (there is no such thing in international relations), but merely pointing its existence.
If we were discussing behavior, then one would point out that behavior is a function of interpretation, and Islam has variosu interpretations.
What Maher and Harris are saying is that the version represented by violent jihadists is the one and only true interpreetation of Islam.
Israel was formed by an administrative act of partition by the British Empire in its dying days, just as they partitioned India to create Pakistan. The only difference is that the Muslims accepted the plan, despite it being unfair is many ways. The Palestinians rejected the plan at the behest of their Arab backers and then proceeded to lose the war. That is the basis of their predicament today, any colonization.
And none of that is propaganda, but simple, legal facts.
Having said that, Israels use of overwhelming force was condemned quite soundly by the international media in the recent hostilities, and this was a distinctly widespread phenomenon.
But it is quite clear that most of the exploitation, marginalization and discrimination against Muslims is being carried out by other Muslims, not Western nations. And it is quite hard to deny the fact that many Muslims openly want to impose Sharia in Western countries too.
Again, I would say that Islam is what its followers actually do, not what they claim. The narrative of the violent jihadists is dominating the discourse, not because the Western media are highlighting it unfairly, but because a lack of a more moderate validation of Islam because the majority of moderate Muslims are quiet, many by intimidation and many by a quiet acquiescence to the violence being perpetrated in the name of their religion.
No one is denying that Israel's existence is cemented by legal documents. The point is that those legal documents are imposed by force of (colonialist) firepower.
Israel is a construct of colonial Britain upon the residents of Palestine without their consent. It is as if colonial Britain had imported millions of Eskimos to India and allowed them to call Bengal as an Eskimo State, expelling all non-Eskimos.
If, tomorrow, Arabs gained overwhelming military power, they could erase Israel off the map, populte it with Palestinians, disband the UN (as the League of Nations was disbanded), and form a new international body to rubber stamp their wishes.
Whether this scenario is realistic or not is not the point; the point is that any law on Earth, from parking zones to international boundaries, is only as good as the guns behind it. The colonial, pro-Israel, camp was dominant and they legitimzed their colonial outpost called Israel.
Those are meaningless footnotes, bypassing the core question of Israel as a colonial outpost based on a doctrine of racial superiority.
This is also a well-known tactic of domination: divide and rule.
The naive man fights his enemies, but the smart man empowers rival factions amongst his enemies, so they can kill each other.
This does not diminish the culpability of the Muslim thugs, but the fact remains that external opportunists will be there to subvert and thwart any attempts at reconciliation and compromise within the Muslim world. It does not mean the Muslim world shouldn't attempt self-correction and self-healing, but being aware of the wider scenario is also necessary.
We're going in circles. It all comes back to media presence.
Moderate, mainstream Muslim personalities condemn the extremists all day long, but such condemnation is only as good as the media coverage afforded them. However, giving air time to these moderate groups does not fit with the Western media's pro-Israeli agenda to demonize all Muslims as evil.