Terrorist attack on Canadian Mosque

[daisycutter 28,487]

35 minutes ago, hardtack said:

"Holding stereotypes or negative feelings about Muslims in general is technically religious bigotry, not racism.  However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races."

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-hating-on-Muslims-is-racist

quoting quora, hardtack? i'm sure you could come up with something better yourself 

[hardtack 10,126]

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

quoting quora, hardtack? i'm sure you could come up with something better yourself 

It didn't really matter who I was quoting as it is the broad definition of why anti-muslim sentiments can be considered racist. Any google search will bring up a very long list of sites that will essentially provide a very similar answer... I was lazy and that just happened to be one of the first in the list

[Biffen 12,323]

42 minutes ago, hardtack said:

It didn't really matter who I was quoting as it is the broad definition of why anti-muslim sentiments can be considered racist. Any google search will bring up a very long list of sites that will essentially provide a very similar answer... I was lazy and that just happened to be one of the first in the list

Yes you were.

[hardtack 10,126]

3 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Yes you were.

Just as you were obviously too lazy to attempt comprehension of the two preceding sentences :-)

[Biffen 12,323]

1 minute ago, hardtack said:

Just as you were obviously too lazy to attempt comprehension of the two preceding sentences :-)

No ,no -you were proved wrong again.

 

 

 

 

[hardtack 10,126]

9 minutes ago, Biffen said:

No ,no -you were proved wrong again.

 

Proven wrong?  How so...you want screen grabs of the google search? And "again"? What was the previous instance?

[Biffen 12,323]

8 hours ago, hardtack said:

Proven wrong?  How so...you want screen grabs of the google search? And "again"? What was the previous instance?

A better question might be when "have I ever been right ?".

 

[hardtack 10,126]

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

A better question might be when "have I ever been right ?".

 

Ok, so nothing to substantiate the claim...no problem (but you should never be ashamed to admit it Biff).

[Biffen 12,323]

8 minutes ago, hardtack said:

Ok, so nothing to substantiate the claim...no problem (but you should never be ashamed to admit it Biff).

I admit you were wrong again.

[hardtack 10,126]

Just now, Biffen said:

I admit you were wrong again.

You remind me of my 14 year old son... the old "I know you are but what am I" approach to discussion. But in his case it's immaturity as opposed to fear of failure.

[Biffen 12,323]

Just now, hardtack said:

You remind me of my 14 year old son... the old "I know you are but what am I" approach to discussion. But in his case it's immaturity as opposed to fear of failure.

If your son was of colour I would accuse you of spouting racism.

thats how logical you are these days.

[hardtack 10,126]

5 minutes ago, Biffen said:

If your son was of colour I would accuse you of spouting racism.

thats how logical you are these days.

At a stretch, that might make sense if I had pointed the finger and categorically accused anyone of being a racist. Or is it the fact that I pointed to an explanation relating islamophobia to racism in response to a question YOU asked?

[Biffen 12,323]

1 minute ago, hardtack said:

At a stretch, that might make sense if I had pointed the finger and categorically accused anyone of being a racist. Or is it the fact that I pointed to an explanation relating islamophobia to racism in response to a question YOU asked?

Ok .So the definition you provided clearly says the two key words "not racism".

It gets frustrating arguing the same point continuously.

I will take it you have not used the r word in reference to me.

Thanks.

I am clearly against Islam -not in fear of it.

I would prefer the rule of law in my own country.

It's still my right to express these views.

As I hope it always will be.

[dieter 3,325]

7 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Ok .So the definition you provided clearly says the two key words "not racism".

It gets frustrating arguing the same point continuously.

I will take it you have not used the r word in reference to me.

Thanks.

I am clearly against Islam -not in fear of it.

I would prefer the rule of law in my own country.

It's still my right to express these views.

As I hope it always will be.

Ah, Twitter, after Howard, Abbottoir and Turnbulldust give me Jacqui's notion of Sharia law any day, baby.

[hardtack 10,126]

2 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Ok .So the definition you provided clearly says the two key words "not racism".

It gets frustrating arguing the same point continuously.

I will take it you have not used the r word in reference to me.

Thanks.

I am clearly against Islam -not in fear of it.

I would prefer the rule of law in my own country.

It's still my right to express these views.

As I hope it always will be.

I did ask you once if it was a race thing, but made no accusations. The definition I provided does not dismiss it as a non race thing entirely as it states: "However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races". 

On the Indonesians, you say they don't belong in Bali, but as it stands, Bali is an Indonesian island, albeit mostly Hindu (I believe), and so whether we like it or not, people of Islamic faith have as much right to be there as anyone else. A very good friend of mine Louiza Zervos died in the bombing but it was down to a handful of extremists in what is the largest Islamic population on the planet...a population that you yourself said were a much more placid lot in response to my asking whether you object to their presence here. That was why I asked in that other post whether it was a race thing, and that relates directly to the quote above.

[Biffen 12,323]

31 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I did ask you once if it was a race thing, but made no accusations. The definition I provided does not dismiss it as a non race thing entirely as it states: "However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races". 

On the Indonesians, you say they don't belong in Bali, but as it stands, Bali is an Indonesian island, albeit mostly Hindu (I believe), and so whether we like it or not, people of Islamic faith have as much right to be there as anyone else. A very good friend of mine Louiza Zervos died in the bombing but it was down to a handful of extremists in what is the largest Islamic population on the planet...a population that you yourself said were a much more placid lot in response to my asking whether you object to their presence here. That was why I asked in that other post whether it was a race thing, and that relates directly to the quote above.

Ok .

It's not a race I object to but a barbaric and spiteful, disgusting,repressive,vindictive ideology written in the 7th century and unchanged up until today.

I don't want it in my country.

Thank you for the clarification .

It's not a race thing.

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by Biffen

[Binmans PA 26,019]

55 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Ok .

It's not a race I object to but a barbaric and spiteful, disgusting,repressive,vindictive ideology written in the 7th century and unchanged up until today.

I don't want it in my country.

Thank you for the clarification .

It's not a race thing.

 

But you're okay with Christianity? You obviously like pedophiles. Are all Christians child molesters? Or is it just that all Muslims are barbaric, spiteful, disgusting, repressive and  vindictive?

[Biffen 12,323]

2 minutes ago, A F said:

But you're okay with Christianity? You obviously like pedophiles. Are all Christians child molesters? Or is it just that all Muslims are barbaric, spiteful, disgusting, repressive and  vindictive?

Take a look at that sentence in bold.

It shows your intellect.

No,I don't care much for Christianity either as I've stated.

You've gone from pathetic to useless.

[hardtack 10,126]

On 10/02/2017 at 5:48 PM, Biffen said:

No mate.

These aren't isolated incidents, there is a wave of it across Europe.

Alcohol has nothing to do with it.

Pack animals do .

Or maybe European women and men who've been raped asked for it.

Harking back to this post, it was interesting to see that probably the biggest so called mass sexual assault in Europe has been declared fake...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/newspaper-report-of-mass-sexual-assault-by-refugees-in-frankfurt-was-baseless-police-say-20170215-gudybw.html

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

9 hours ago, Biffen said:

Take a look at that sentence in bold.

It shows your intellect.

No,I don't care much for Christianity either as I've stated.

You've gone from pathetic to useless.

AF drew a valid parallel.

Not all Christians are child molesters, just as not all Muslims are jihadists.

You only advocate for a ban on one of these.

At the end of the day, a ban stands no chance of being implemented here anyway. The ban in the US has been stayed by the courts, and Trump doesn't look like challenging the decision again (wow he sure is bringing his 'winning' business acumen to the White House eh?).

He might construct a new EO, but that too will be challenged and likely overturned. I doubt he wants to look like a perennial loser.

[Wrecker45 3,378]

On 15/02/2017 at 10:53 AM, hardtack said:

"Holding stereotypes or negative feelings about Muslims in general is technically religious bigotry, not racism.  However, the traditional geographic associations of Islam mean that it's an easy cultural shorthand for a particular race or a broadly defined group of races."

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-hating-on-Muslims-is-racist

Well if that's the case any negative feelings about any religion are racist. All religions have traditional geographic locations.

I'm going to start calling the George Pell hunters racist.

[Biffen 12,323]

30 minutes ago, Choke said:

AF drew a valid parallel.

Not all Christians are child molesters, just as not all Muslims are jihadists.

You only advocate for a ban on one of these.

At the end of the day, a ban stands no chance of being implemented here anyway. The ban in the US has been stayed by the courts, and Trump doesn't look like challenging the decision again (wow he sure is bringing his 'winning' business acumen to the White House eh?).

He might construct a new EO, but that too will be challenged and likely overturned. I doubt he wants to look like a perennial loser.

I haven't advocated a ban on anything.

DO you think "you obviously like paedophiles" is an acceptable way to argue a point.?

Edited February 16, 2017 by Biffen

[nutbean 8,837]

31 minutes ago, Choke said:

At the end of the day, a ban stands no chance of being implemented here anyway.

Forget implemented. It stands no chance of meeting its goals even if implemented. To ban entry of people from countries to stop the terrorists from entering is nonsensical. Most of the organised terror plots have terrorists using fake passports and visas or moving to countries where there is some ease in obtaining passport/visas. If terrorists are not home grown they will just obtain a passport from a country where there is no ban.

This is the biggest fraud since "we need to stop the boats as we there may be terrorists". Terrorists are not trained and  construct sophisticated plans and then  get on a rickety boat with some chance of surviving the high seas.

This is not an argument on whether or not Governments want individuals from certain coming to their countries. This is just highlighting that the "terrorist" reason given is bogus.  

  

Edited February 16, 2017 by nutbean

[dieter 3,325]

3 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

Well if that's the case any negative feelings about any religion are racist. All religions have traditional geographic locations.

 

Wrecker, what did you say? All religions have 'traditional geographic locations'? What does that mean? That all christians and jews and muslims ought to go back to the middle east? 

[Biffen 12,323]

1 minute ago, dieter said:

Wrecker, what did you say? All religions have 'traditional geographic locations'? What does that mean? That all christians and jews and muslims ought to go back to the middle east? 

All self -hating Germans should flagellate themselves over a war that ended 60 years ago.