Favorite Scene

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Treale

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: Treale

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

I don't know, maybe because General forums were created to encourage discourse.

Why does every divergent thought and the discourse that folows it find itself being attacked by someone descrying the "highjacking" of the original thought?

Assuming, of course, that the "people you are talking(?) about" are indeed actually bad and the "bad" isn't just a figment of your imagination.

Oh, and btw, aren't you guilty of being "bad" by your own professed standard by even replying at all to state that you won't reply? [8|]

For me to argue the point with you would take this subject even farther off topic. Then I would be just as bad as the people that I was talking about !!!

[Doggie]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything [&:]?

Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism. You don't see people in Ethiopia murdering peace Corps workers and hijacking foreign aid shipments.

Or did you watch Saving Private Ryan thinking "man, look at all those Christians getting killed..."?

Nah, I watched it with a lump in my throat, thinking what a shame it is that so many Europeans don't appreciate what those Christians in Normandy sacrificed for them.

Was the conflict in Somalia "religious" conflict? I don't think so. Sure, somalis were muslim, but were they fighting the UN and Americans because they were muslims?

When was the UN fighting anyone in Somalia? The UN just stood by and watched as Muslim fanatics butchered everyone, like they always do.

They would have fought them had UN and US only sent muslim forces of their own in to Somalia. Hell, they fought the Pakistanis as well, and they were muslim as well

They did not "fight" the Pakistanis; they murdered them. It takes two to make a "fight". The Pakistanis were butchered for delivering U.S. supplied food to starving Somalies without paying off the Imams and their drones.

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

Beats me. My original comment was a bit of sarcasm. "Poor innocent Muslims" trying to murder the people who are trying to feed them. Nemesis tried to inject a "Islam is a religion of peace" take into things, as if the religion of the criminals who steal relief supplies from their own people has nothing to do with the situation.

[String]

ORIGINAL: Doggie

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything [&:]?

Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism. You don't see people in Ethiopia murdering peace Corps workers and hijacking foreign aid shipments.

I can name atleast one other religion that has actively encouraged killing its opponents throughout the ages [:'(]

[JMHawkins]

Oh, there are so many.

Tuco: "When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

[ilovestrategy]

ORIGINAL: JMHawkins

Oh, there are so many.

Tuco: "When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

I laughed so hard at this scene! [:D]

[Nemesis]

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism.

Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

Nah, I watched it with a lump in my throat, thinking what a shame it is that so many Europeans don't appreciate what those Christians in Normandy sacrificed for them.

Sure we appreciate it. But that does not mean that we should be _eternally_ grateful for it, nor does it mean that we should do whatever US asks us to do. Are you still grateful for the help French gave to USA during your fight for independence? If you are, how do you show it?

When was the UN fighting anyone in Somalia? The UN just stood by and watched as Muslim fanatics butchered everyone, like they always do.

By the Somali-standpoint, UN was interfering in their business. And why do I get the feeling that if UN became more proactive and "aggressive" in dealing with violence all over the world, you would start whining how UN is creating a military of their own, and how we are sliding towards NWO?

They did not "fight" the Pakistanis; they murdered them.

But the point stands: they were not killed (or murdered, take your pick) because of their religion. The fact that you are now arguing that were the Pakistanis "killed" or "murdered" is just pointless hair-splitting that does not change the point I was making in one way or the other.

Beats me. My original comment was a bit of sarcasm. "Poor innocent Muslims" trying to murder the people who are trying to feed them. Nemesis tried to inject a "Islam is a religion of peace" take into things

No I did not. Learn to read and more importantly: learn to understand what you read. What I was _trying_ to say was that the religion of the somali-fighters was completely off-topic. Specially mentioning that they were muslim is like going out of your way to make the point that "you do realize that most of the people in Omaha Beach were Christians?". Um, so? What does the religious beliefs of the participant of the US force have to do with anything that happened in Normandy? It doesn't.

as if the religion of the criminals who steal relief supplies from their own people has nothing to do with the situation.

Well, does it? If people who steal those supplies are Muslim, does that mean that Islam is to blame? By that exact same logic: The snipers who shot civilians in Sarajevo were Christians. The Serbs who killed thousands of Muslims in Srebrenica were Christians. The IRA was Christian. Therefore, by Doggie-logic, those facts indisputably proove that Christianity is evil. Yet, for some reason, we never talk about "genocide of Muslims in Srebrenica my Christians", we always talk about "genocide of Bosnians in Srebrenica by Serbs". Why is that? Surely you agree that we should be talking about religious beliefs of the participants, instead of their nationality?

Could you please explain this double-standard to me? Why is it OK to drag religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators happen to be muslim, yet we do not drag the religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators are Christian?

[JudgeDredd]

[Nemesis]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Yeah, I must admit that there is a risk that this might turn "ugly". But it does not have to.

I for one have zero desire to fight with someone on a web-forum. But I still feel that my question was valid. I just hope that Doggie will keep the discussion civil, as opposed to making claims that are 100% false (like saying that I made claims about Islam being "religion of peace", when in reality I said nothing of the sort).

But it must be said that the fact that Doggie went out of his way to specificly mention that the Somalis happened to be muslim, betrays his bias and prejudice on this matter. Hell, it would be similar if I said something like "Look at those nice Christians who killed all those people in My Lai" or ""look at all those Christians killing Tutsis in Rwanda".

Yes, there are loads of Muslims who are running around and trying their best to ruin this planet for everyone. But that still does not mean that we should drag religion in to things that have very little to do with religion. We don't go out of our way to mention that Americans in Vietnam were mostly Christians. We don't go out of our way to specificly mention that Finns in WW2 were mostly Christians. We don't go out of our way to mention that Japanese in WW2 were Shinto. But if there's a conflict where one (or both) participants happen to be muslims, then we SHOULD specificly underline that fact, and the draw somekind of conclusions from it?

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

You're the one that needs to read it and don't stop at the Old Testament. Christianity springs from the New Testament. Also note that just because something is chronicled in the OT, that doesn't mean Christians actively encourage the activity today.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

I for one have zero desire to fight with someone on a web-forum.

Then don't spout ignorant BS.

[Nemesis]

ORIGINAL: mjk428

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

You're the one that needs to read it and don't stop at the Old Testament. Christianity springs from the New Testament. Also note that just because something is chronicled in the OT, that doesn't mean Christians actively encourage the activity today.

Um, last time I checked, the Christian holy book is called "The Bible". That book consists of two parts: Old Testament and New Testament. You can't go around and tell people that "Go read The Bible, but ignore the first half of it". Why should we do that? Because it's teachings are a bit too "inconvenient"?

Like it or not, the Old Testament is part of the Christian holy scripture. If you insist that people should ignore it, then you are not teaching Christianity.

And even if we just stuck to NT, we would still have passages that (among other things) support slavery. Should we ignore those as well? Hell, why not re-write the entire Bible while we are at it? Drop out all the "inconvenient" parts out, so it will sound a bit nicer?

Then don't spout ignorant BS.

It's not "ignorant". It's just inconvenient for you. Christianity is knee-deep in blood.

[morvwilson]

Nemesis,
I am not sure what you are refering to by christianity is knee-deep in blood.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but could you be referring to maybe the 30 year war? or maybe the witch burnings that were popular in europe at one time? or maybe the crusades?
If it was one of the above things then I think you may have missed some context. In the above situations real estate was the issue. Religion was used as a motivator by those in power. Also it should be noted that these events are at a minimum 400+ years old. Can you imagine the Pope, for instance, giving a speach in which he calls for the death of non believers? Don't think that is likely to happen today.
On the islamic side, those type of speaches are happening. Religion (islam) is being used as a motivator to gain control of real estate. Something we in the west gave up over 400 years ago.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

Um, last time I checked, the Christian holy book is called "The Bible". That book consists of two parts: Old Testament and New Testament. You can't go around and tell people that "Go read The Bible, but ignore the first half of it". Why should we do that? Because it's teachings are a bit too "inconvenient"?

Like it or not, the Old Testament is part of the Christian holy scripture. If you insist that people should ignore it, then you are not teaching Christianity.

And even if we just stuck to NT, we would still have passages that (among other things) support slavery. Should we ignore those as well? Hell, why not re-write the entire Bible while we are at it? Drop out all the "inconvenient" parts out, so it will sound a bit nicer?

I didn't say ignore it, I said don't stop there. Christians are followers of Christ's teachings. Christ's teachings are found in the New Testament. EVERYTHING in the OT is trumped by the NT. It's not a matter of convenience, it's a matter of understanding Christianity. Something you clearly do not.

It's not "ignorant". It's just inconvenient for you. Christianity is knee-deep in blood.

If Christianity is such a bloodthirsty religion, and Christians no different than modern Islamists, where are the videos of Christians hacking off heads to the shouts of "Praise Jesus"?

[Doggie]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis



I for one have zero desire to fight with someone on a web-forum. But I still feel that my question was valid. I just hope that Doggie will keep the discussion civil, as opposed to making claims that are 100% false ....

, betrays his bias and prejudice on this matter. Hell, it would be similar if I said something like "Look at those nice Christians who killed all those people in My Lai" or ""look at all those Christians killing Tutsis in Rwanda".....

We don't go out of our way to mention that Americans in Vietnam were mostly Christians.

How "civil" of you. It's always a pleasure to spar with a guy that always takes the high road, and never would never infer that I'm a liar, a racist, or a citizen of a country full of murdering christian bigots who slaughter poor third world citizens all the time just because we're evil.

I assure you I shall do my best to adhere to the high moral standards you have set.

[Doggie]

ORIGINAL: Nemesis



Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

I didn't notice anything in the Ten Commandments about how rape, amputations, stonings, mass murders, and genocide are ordained by God and the right of every true Christian. I would suggest you go read the Koran and listen to modern day Islamic clerics.

Sure we appreciate it. But that does not mean that we should be _eternally_ grateful for it, nor does it mean that we should do whatever US asks us to do. Are you still grateful for the help French gave to USA during your fight for independence? If you are, how do you show it?

In exchange for one French Marquis and a green statue, we gave back one slightly scorched French nation, rescued twice from foreign invaders and completely rebuilt at the cost of a couple hundred thousand American lives and billions of American dollars. I'd say the French got the better part of the bargain. And perhaps you could list the demands Americans have made on europe since? Perhaps some massive foreign aid program or some sort of servitude the rest of us are unaware of? Just exactly what have the evil Imperists asked of you?

By the Somali-standpoint, UN was interfering in their business.

And their "business" was stealing UN food supplies intended to feed their own people, along with murdering humanitarian aid workers.

And why do I get the feeling that if UN became more proactive and "aggressive" in dealing with violence all over the world, you would start whining how UN is creating a military of their own, and how we are sliding towards NWO?

Actually, we would welcome some "proactiveness" on the part of the UN. Since it's inception, the United States and Great Britain have dealt with most of the violence all over the world while sniveling UN diplomats take credit for it. The latest example was in Indonesia, when "UN helicopters" from the United States Navy conducted relief operations after that region was devsasted by a Tsunami.

But the point stands: they were not killed (or murdered, take your pick) because of their religion.

Yes, the point does stand. Only in places like Somalia, the Sudan, and "Palestine" are humanitarian aid workers routinely kidnapped and murdered by the very people they are trying to help.

What I was _trying_ to say was that the religion of the somali-fighters was completely off-topic.

No, your objection to the mention of the fact that the somali fighters who murder people who are trying to feed them are Muslim was completely off topic.

What does the religious beliefs of the participant of the US force have to do with anything that happened in Normandy? It doesn't.

Neither side at Normandy believed it was their God given right to murder people who were trying to save them from starving to death.

Could you please explain this double-standard to me? Why is it OK to drag religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators happen to be muslim, yet we do not drag the religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators are Christian?

So why are you trying to drag religion into this? There is no double standard, except on your part. You are trying, and failing, to compare Islamic jihadists to modern day Christians. The Catholic church does not exort it's members to go forth and slaughter un believers. There has not been a single fatwah issued by any Christian church commanding the faithfull to behead those who have insulted the Madonna. In fact, you can insult Christain all you want and not worry about somebody blowing you to pieces or sawing your head off. The same cannot be said of Dutch film makers, Danish cartoonists, or English elementary school teachers armed with teddy bears of blasphemy.

Um, last time I checked, the Christian holy book is called "The Bible". That book consists of two parts: Old Testament and New Testament. You can't go around and tell people that "Go read The Bible, but ignore the first half of it". Why should we do that? Because it's teachings are a bit too "inconvenient"?

The Bible, specifically the Old Testament, is a compilation of history. It does not 'teach" followers to kill the first born of Egypt, part the Red Sea, or build an ark. It simply puts ancient history into verses. You can believe or not; it's your choice. To deny the Koran is not a choice. Offending Islam is punishable by death.

What the Bible teaches are things like Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal and thou shat not covet thy neighbors wife.

The Koran teaches that it perfectly acceptable to kill and steal in the name of Islam, and the wives and children of the people you murder become your property to do with as you wish. That is why the religion of the people of Somalia is relevent. No other religion teaches their followers that murder, theft, and rape are acceptable practices.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Doggie

The Bible, specifically the Old Testament, is a compilation of history. It does not 'teach" followers to kill the first born of Egypt, part the Red Sea, or build an ark.

Bill Cosby

God: (standing on a chair behind Noah, he rings a bell once) NOAH.
Noah: (Looks up) Is someone calling me? (Shrugs and goes back to his work)
God: (Ding) NOAH!!
Noah: Who is that?
God: It's the Lord, Noah.
Noah: Right ... Where are ya? What do ya want? I've been good.
God: I want you to build an ark.
Noah: Right ... What's an ark?
God: Get some wood and build it 300 cubits by 80 cubits by 40 cubits.
Noah: Right ... What's a cubit?
God: Well never mind. Don't worry about that right now. After you build the
ark, I want you to go out into the world and collect all the animals of the
world, two by two, male and female, and put them into the ark.
Noah: Right ... Who is this really? What's going on? How come you want me to
do all these weird things?
God: I'm going to destroy the world.
Noah: Right ... Am I on Candid Camera? How are you gonna do it?
God: I'm going to make it rain for a thousand days and drown them right out.
Noah: Right ... Listen, do this and you'll save water. Let it rain for forty
days and forty nights and wait for the sewers to back up.
God: Right...

http://www.skatedc.org/pipermail/skated ... 05683.html



(back on topic)

[ilovestrategy]

I had a fun thread about favorite movie scenes and a couple of people hijacked it and ruined it for all the others. Good going guys [:(]

[JudgeDredd]

I'm afraid therein lies the dangers of the general discussion forum.

[ezzler]

Come on .. lets go the stoning

[fvianello]

It's already in the thread, but it deserves an extra vote: Dr. Strangelove final speech in the war room.

I've seen the movie at least 20 times, but still I can't stop laughing when it comes to "MEIN FUEHER! I can walk!"