200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
What would an appropriate page and view count be?
200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
So I should be allowed, in public, to say that you deserve to be hanged because you may have offended me?
That's not free speech, that's inciting violence.
Are you like actually retarded?A well placed JDAM would sort that shit out in short order.
A well placed JDAM would sort that shit out in short order.
I didn't wanna quote you (just reading the thread) but this is such a nasty post smh.A well placed JDAM would sort that shit out in short order.
News media focuses on crazies more than normals. There are millions of good looking smartly dressed Western-looking civilised Pakistanis who aren't going to get screen time and exposure on Western news media, but the cavemen will and lead people towards pidgeonholing and shoe-horning a country of 220 million people, loads of sects, loads of ethnicities int one image of scruffy brown skinned men that look like hobos to a Western eye.It's a country that gives the death penalty for people that do the very thing they claim to be protesting about. Are you suggesting they aren't representative?
Guys, you don't get it, these pakistanis aren't real muslims.
Islam is the religion of peace.
Bill Maher was right.
The saddest part is those guys holding the sign are most likely doctors and lawyers. The one guy is wearing a fucking Burberry scarf. For those of you that don't know, Burberry scarfs start at $400...
Why was he right. Have we seen every single human that is a Muslim represented through this news article? Is there some fourth dimensional method to consume this article that I'm unaware of that helps you gauge the opinion of every single Muslim in the world? Every Turk, every Albanian Muslim, every Bosniak, every Arab, every Berber, every Nigerian Muslim, every Ivorian Muslim, every Somalian, every Pakistani, Indian Muslim, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan Muslim, Afghanistani, Persian/Tajik, Central Asian Turkic people, Russian citizen Muslims, Western born Muslims, Western converts, South-East Asian Muslims, Hui Chinese Muslims and any that I've forgot.
Oh no. It's just about Pakistan, a highly populous and diverse country and it's a subset of that highly populous and diverse country.
I'm not saying whether hundreds of millions of Muslims agree with the killings or not, I'm just saying that throwing something like that out there without solidified proof (and sorry but these PEW results and related stuff are too small sample sizes to work properly) is ignorant. It's the Western equivalent of the blind hate that many Muslims have towards America and Israel, it's gross.
I suspect people like Maher and Sam Harris are still letting their ethnicity cloud their view despite their atheism and removal from religious zealotry.
IIRC he said hundreds of millions or something along those lines, but my point about "have we seen every single Muslim's opinion" was regarding a hypothetical poll, which would be the way to prove or disprove Maher's statement.I don't think Maher ever said that all Muslims think like that. He said a large/significant portion of them do. Which this article neither proves or refutes, but if anything it adds more evidence towards it being true.
If god is almighty then who do these people think they are defending it, avenging it or doing other things in its name ?
If god is almighty why would it need anyone's help for anything ?
I don't get it
IIRC he said hundreds of millions or something along those lines.
With the PEW results and what not? Absolutely, but I still personal find their sample sizes too small and without a good enough spread across demographics and geographies of the countries they polled.Which I'd suspect isn't absurd by any means, if you do the math/statistics.
With the PEW results and what not? Absolutely, but I still personal find their sample sizes too small and without a good enough spread across demographics and geographies of the countries they polled.
200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
I'm not saying whether hundreds of millions of Muslims agree with the killings or not, I'm just saying that throwing something like that out there without solidified proof (and sorry but these PEW results and related stuff are too small sample sizes to work properly)
I don't know what results you're talking about, haven't seen them. I'm projecting from my own reality (being from a Muslim family myself and living in the Middle East), and what I know about the world. Not claiming that my experience, knowledge and intuition are enough to make an accurate judgement, but they're additional points on the growing and not-so-pretty data pool.
What about the countries that would execute the french satirists on their soil? (which cover half a billion Muslims). Is that not proof for this opinion being widespread?
Are only the extremists in power in those countries and the majority of the people is not for implementation of the Sharia laws? I find that hard to believe, especially as they receive the same indoctrination from birth on.
(btw I don't know care about this Mayer guy)
Turkish background myself, thought not living there. We're probably both skewing the way we see things towards what we see among our people. There certainly are many Turks who didn't mind the killings, but I've seen enough opinions from the civilised side as well, which makes it difficult for me to say whether the country as a whole is one way or the other on the issue.
Perhaps in your case there is no grey area and it's definitely the majority of people that are ok with it?
200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
If god is almighty then who do these people think they are defending it, avenging it or doing other things in its name ?
If god is almighty why would it need anyone's help for anything ?
I don't get it
Of course the whole country isn't one way or another! Almost nothing in the world ever is. Nobody ever said or suggested that an entire country, region, or all Muslims believe one thing or another. Yet you keep bringing it up as if someone is saying that.
I don't know whether the majority of my country (which is like ~95% Muslim) condone the killings or not. I know for certain it's not 100% or perhaps even 50%, but from what I've seen and heard from my own family and my Facebook network, I can tell you there is enough to make it truly disturbing.
You are in complete denial if you think this viewpoint is limited to 200 people.
The polling, protests in other places, killing in other places, etc. Wake up and smell the Jihad.
It is certainly a minority view among most Muslims. But it is a VERY LARGE minority.
Saudi Arabia has a blogger imprisoned for 10 years and who just got his first 50 lashes out of the 1000 lashes assigned to him as punishment for creating a blog that criticized some conservative clerics.
200 people protest and it gets a 10 page thread with 36,000 views on neogaf. smh
I think I can see what you're saying. In the West racism for example is taboo or people saying "glass them" whenever a story about Islamist terrorism or fundamentalism comes up is taboo in general society, but in the East the kind of opinions that we're seeing about the cartoons are much more readily acceptable.
I added an Edit to my previous post to clarify a bit. Hope you read it.
Just read it. Yes that is exactly the kind of attitude I've seen a few Turkish comments express, except they were bringing up the Uyghur Turkic minority in China. I can KIND OF see where they're coming from, but they're saying it all wrong and blindly committing that logical fallacy...false equivalency I think it is?
What the hell does this even mean?
I absolutely love it when people with no freaking clue start talking about stuff like they're experts.Religion is often about turning off rational thinking and just believing.
The word 'Islam' is derived from the Arabic root "Salema" meaning submission and obedience.
I absolutely love it when people with no freaking clue start talking about stuff like they're experts.
What he just said is correct with regards to the etymology of Islam.
I absolutely love it when people with no freaking clue start talking about stuff like they're experts.
I love it when people don't even attempt to dispute an argument and go straight to ad hominem
It's correct meaning is peace in submission to God. I don't even know what 'salema' is.What he just said is correct with regards to the etymology of Islam.
Wait, you were arguing?I love it when people don't even attempt to dispute an argument and go straight to ad hominem
You weren't arguing a point you presented incorrect information.I love it when people don't even attempt to dispute an argument and go straight to ad hominem
I think the protesters who are asking for hangings are out of line and disgusting. If they do not agree with the makers of that cartoon they should display that in a more civil manner. I do not mind the protests themselves at all as long as they do them peacefully.
I personally think the attacks in France are vile and inhumane. I also don't support the cartoons published. I'm not a Muslim either. While I value freedom of speech I also think a certain degree of respect towards other religions would go a long way in making this world a better place. I find it extremely disappointing the way some posters in this thread have been posting. Some posts reeks of racism and generalizations based on ignorance. I genuinely feel bad for fellow gaffers who are Muslims or from Pakistan that had nothing to do with these out of line handful of protesters. This can't be pleasant for them.
I love how people ask Charlie Hebdo to use free speech in a responsible manner while they officially brand themselves 'Irresponsible newspaper' - It's written right under the title!
One of the founding members of Charlie Hebdo has accused its slain editor, Stéphane Charbonnier, or Charb, of dragging the team to their deaths by releasing increasingly provocative cartoons, as five million copies of the survivors edition went on sale.
Henri Roussel, 80, who contributed to the first issue of the satirical weekly in 1970, wrote to the murdered editor, saying: I really hold it against you.
In this weeks Left-leaning magazine Nouvel Obs, Mr Roussel, who publishes under the pen name Delfeil de Ton, wrote: I know its not done, but proceeds to criticise the former boss of the magazine.
Calling Charb an amazing lad, he said he was also a stubborn block head.
What made him feel the need to drag the team into overdoing it, he said, referring to Charbs decision to post a Mohammed character on the magazines front page in 2011. Soon afterwards, the magazines offices were burned down by unknown arsonists.
Delfeil adds: He shouldnt have done it, but Charb did it again a year later, in September 2012.
The accusation sparked a furious reaction from Richard Malka, Charlie Hebdos lawyer for the past 22 years, who sent an angry message to Mathieu Pigasse, one of the owners of Nouvel Obs and Le Monde.
Charb has not yet even been buried and Obs finds nothing better to do that to publish a polemical and venomous piece on him.
The other day, the editor of Nouvel Obs, Matthieu Croissandeau, couldnt shed enough tears to say he would continue the fight. I didnt know he meant it this way. I refuse to allow myself to be invaded by bad thoughts, but my disappointment is immense.
Matthieu Croissandeau, Nouvel Obs editor, said: "We received this text and after a debate I decided to publish it in an edition on freedom of expression, it would have seemed to me worrisome to have censored his voice, even if it is discordant. Particularly as this is the voice of one of the pioneers of the gang."
This is not the first time Delfeil has disagreed with the modern Charlie, accusing Charbs predecessor of turning it into a Zionist and Islamophobic organ.
That was after Philippe Val, the previous editor, fired one of its historic figures, Maurice Sine, for publishing a cartoon on the marriage of Nicolas Sarkozys son, Jean, to a Jewish retailing heiress, which he considered anti-Semitic.
Delfeil said he would not say anymore on recent events. I have refused to speak to the TV and radio, to everyone. I kept my message for Obs, and I am not prepared to open this subject again, he said.
lol.
Never heard of a mirror eh?
Wait, you were arguing?
You weren't arguing a point you presented incorrect information.
Religion is often about turning off rational thinking and just believing.
The word 'Islam' is derived from the Arabic root "Salema" meaning submission and obedience.
What do you make of Charlie Hebdo's founder saying the slain editor (Charb) dragged the team members to their deaths?
Charlie Hebdo founder: Slain editor 'dragged' team to their deaths
In the modern world, religion requires you to believe in a lot of things for which there is no evidence for. A omnipotent god, flying horses, people surviving crucifixion, witches, Djinn, etc. That you take these things on faith.
To do this, you have to let go of rational thinking . . . let go of requiring evidence . . . let go of requiring logic . . . just submit yourself to the narrative and believe. Become obedient and follow what your priest, holy book, imam, Rabbi, etc. says.
Man was created from a clot of blood. You have to believe that because it comes from the messenger as the perfect word of god. Clot of blood? What? What about evolution? OK, forget evolution. Where did the clot of blood come from? Another god? Did animals evolve, create blood, and then god took that blood and create man?
STOP ASKING THESE QUESTIONS! JUST SHUT UP AND SUBMIT TO PERFECT WORD OF GOD. Don't question god! Don't mock god! Don't mock the prophet! BE OBEDIENT! Don't draw cartoons of the prophet! Boko Haram!
It has less to do with religion and more to do with Imperialism. If people would actually look at the wider context of issues surrounding attacks and the general ill feeling these people have then maybe they'd have a better understanding of the situation instead of blaming it solely on religion.
Well here was my post.
In the modern world, religion requires you to believe in a lot of things for which there is no evidence for. A omnipotent god, flying horses, people surviving crucifixion, witches, Djinn, etc. That you take these things on faith.
To do this, you have to let go of rational thinking . . . let go of requiring evidence . . . let go of requiring logic . . . just submit yourself to the narrative and believe. Become obedient and follow what your priest, holy book, imam, Rabbi, etc. says.
I personally think it's fine to believe in something that has no scientific proof to back it
STOP ASKING THESE QUESTIONS!
I... Oh dear, I'll never understand religion.