German study claims devout Islamic youth more violence-prone

does Islam have a monopoly on this?

 

I nearly spilled my iffing drink :grin:

 

I really don't care if you think I am "a decent enough poster," and I certainly am not "jumping to conclusions" about you. It is perfectly obvious that you are ignorant and a bigot. You've called Jackie a Nazi more than once. Why? Because he happens to be German and he is saying things with which you disagree. Disagree with him all you want, I frequently do, but try to keep the bigotry under control. Thanks in advance.

 

If that's the case, then why do you quote a study that shows the more devout a Muslim is the more prone to violence they are as well? That doesn't sound like someone who has a beef with just a handful, it sounds like you got a beef with the whole chicken enchilada my friend.

Also, you post a lot of new threads that are highly antagonistic towards Muslims. It certainly does appear you got a beef. If you recognize it's just a handful, why are you making these sweeping generalizations?

Oh...and keep trying to get under my skin. You'll have to up your game.

 

To be fair (and I'm not saying it's necessarily the case here), he could disagree with ATW and consider him a Nazi simultaneously. It is not impossible.

For example, if I spoke to Mr Udo Voigt, leader of this political party:

I reserve the right to disagree with him AND call him a Nazi.

So in this case, True Beaner may be exaggerating to make a point more than anything else. Frankly, I can't say the thought hasn't crossed my mind as ATW is constantly verbally attacking Arabs, Turks and any Muslims who do not do something anti-Muslim and seems to overcompensate in his defense of Israeli government actions.

Now, I'm not saying that ATW is a Nazi, but the exaggeration is as valid as him saying I'm an ape.

 

Oh

My


God.


Do you seriously still not get it?

I specifically stated that whenever he was generalizing a specific group of people it would be like me calling him a nazi.

You are not inarticulate, its not that hard to comprehend or realize It was hypothetical and more of making a point.

If you don't get that, I have explained it to you now. I wasn't calling him a nazi. I was making an analogy.

 

And I realize you like playing the ncie guy on this forum, but for you to call me the bigot and be completely impartial on the issue shows how ignorant you are.

I get that jackie and you are bud buds, but read his posts, and decide for yourself what you think ignorant and bigotted is.

 

Being hispanic, I can tell you I can't STAND generalizations of any group of people. I have faced it numerous times, and done it myself on quite a few occasions and learned from it.

I guess its ok for ATW to make the most racist and discriminatory posts in this forum, but when I try to use his logic and prove to him that it would be like calling all Germans Nazis, I'm the bigot here.

Its hilarious.

 

Since I wouldn't belong to a religion that would have me as a member, your...

Oh

My


God.

...is a bit wasted on me. So is your "explanation." You say your original post was (I assume your were "generalizing" here) explained as...

"I specifically stated that whenever he was generalizing a specific group of people it would be like me calling him a nazi."

You are not inarticulate, its not that hard to comprehend or realize It was hypothetical and more of making a point.

If you don't get that, I have explained it to you now. I wasn't calling him a nazi. I was making an analogy.

Here's the post:

I don't like the "analogy." If one's intellect is reduced to using slurs of this nature, the kind of slurs I could easily find to use as "analogies" when having discussions with people of other racial/tribal groups, then perhaps they would have been better left unsaid. We don't need to toss words like that around that are hurtful to entire groups of people, words based upon a history that the current generation had no part in creating.

This is hilarious. So now I "play the nice guy" and have obviously hurt your feelings. It's nearly as funny as you imagining that Jackie and I are "best buds." (I assume that's what you meant. Bud buds might be more useful in a discussion of The Big Lebowski )

 

Hurting my feelings is precisely what you did, and Nazi refers to a political party during 1940s germany that held extremely discriminatory views. I didn't use it as a slang, but in the literal sense trying to contrast his views on here with the generalization that he HAD to be a Nazi to show him how wrong generalizations tend to be.

Thanks in advance.

 

Just remember, America went to Iraq. The Jews wen to Palestine.

They wanted to go to war.

 

Do you think there were no Jews in 'Palestine'?

 

Shocker.

 

What does this have to do with this thread? America invaded Iraq. They are the violent ones who declared war. The jews invaded Palestine and started killing everyone from babies to women to the elderly.

 

Well, because of a few things:

1) Jews didn't invade Palestine. Jews lived there. They didn't come from somewhere until afterwards, and that's not the majority of them. Most of them are from Palestine and the Middle East.

2) Technically, there was no "Palestine" as you're describing it. There was British Mandate Palestine. This mandate didn't belong to Palestinians, it belonged to the British. The British gave the Jews a part of that land upon the expiration of the mandate. Considering both the Palestinians and Jews have inhabited that land forever, it's only fair that it's split between them proportionately.

Now about murders, I take your point, though I don't know enough about it to judge. About how Israel basically owns most of it comfortably I also disagree. But generally speaking, Jews didn't invade Israel. Jews were given part of the land they lived in. If you're going to blame anyone, blame the Brits. If I were a jew, I would be celebrating, and if I was a Palestinian, I would be trying to murder those jews just because I didn't get AAAAAAALL the land.

 

The Brits in Europe did not own Palestine in the Middle East.

I can't argue with you as your history is too false.

 

They had just as much right to create Israel as they did to split it into Palestine and Jordan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine

 

According to what? The Brits own all of the lands?