Arab Woman gives Muslims a Thrashing
- Thread starter Gmart
- Start date
maomao said:
I know how to check links and trace their IP's, but I can't spend time on that just to watch endless videos and/or reading endless articles, to check if the issue would be of my interest.
If the poster does not give a summary of what it is about, I think he has no clue himself or is too lazy to get one
salaam.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Im not gonna watch the video but I'd be interested to hear peoples opinions about MEMRI.
im not sure what i think of them tbh. Are they a source thats worth trusting? Sometimes there is stuff on there that seems quite believable, and other times it just seems to be loads of islamophobic propaganda.
im not sure what i think of them tbh. Are they a source thats worth trusting? Sometimes there is stuff on there that seems quite believable, and other times it just seems to be loads of islamophobic propaganda.
Gmarthews said:I agree with her wholeheartedly, she puts it way better than i could.
It could be a start of a thread to summarize what she said and to add the reason why that was better expressed than you could say "it".
As long as "it" remains blank... every option is open for me to fill it in. So what would you like me to fill in? (I have a vivid fantasy.)
salaam.
frogwoman said:
Just like every well-thought propaganda tool they actually have sometimes reliable tranlsations and some articles that seem to be balanced at first sight.
As long as you don't forget you are looking at the wolf in disguise it is more informative to read MEMRI than FOX News or CNN
salaam.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Aldebaran said:
Seeing the video is the only obvious substitute for 'it'.
It's like Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd, (or performance arts even), there is no possible substitute to the experience.
Bearing in mind the media outlet itself is esp important. I would be favour of having a label on all people on U75 to state whether they are religious or not, OK with evolution or not. These are key issues, and discriminating against people who have these views is only natural.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Gmarthews said:Seeing the video is the only obvious substitute for 'it'.
It's like Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd, (or performance arts even), there is no possible substitute to the experience.
Now it all makes sense. Horrible horrible sense. Oh mathew!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Gmarthews said:
You do a suitable yellow star and i'm there.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Gmarthews said:
how about we go one step further and create badges for each religion in real life so they can be easily identified on the street, so for instance a jew would have to wear a yellow star and a christian would have to wear a cross at all times and if they believed in creationism they'd have to wear a necklace round their neck saying "I AM A DANGER TO SCIENCE". after all we dont want these people working with us do we, or talking to our children - OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Then once we all knew who they were we could begin the task of rounding them all up
maomao
普費斯
frogwoman said:how about we go one step further and create badges for each religion in real life so they can be easily identified on the street, so for instance a jew would have to wear a yellow star and a christian would have to wear a cross at all times and if they believed in creationism they'd have to wear a necklace round their neck saying "I AM A DANGER TO SCIENCE". after all we dont want these people working with us do we, or talking to our children - OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Then once we all knew who they were we could begin the task of rounding them all up
Sounds good to me. I don't see the point in distinguishing between different religions though.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
butchersapron said:
You mean you claim not to dismiss people's words based on your knowledge of them??
Come now, I beg to differ!!
People pigeonhole others, simplifying them in the process. I would say that the majority of people (at least here) do this to some degree or another!
Mandatory labels, mmm the way forward. For everyone of course, no exceptions!!
Murdoch papers could be labelled as such! Or maybe it should only be individuals?
Religious, atheist and agnostics. That'll do.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Do you like george Bernard Shaw matthews?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Gmarthews said:Religious, atheist and agnostics. That'll do.
How about Randists and non-randist?
Why are you unable to distinguish peoples beliefs on the basis of that they say and do anyway? It's not that hard. Maybe you could get a grant for a home help or something?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Gmarthews said:
Sorry, a complex idea like hanging a sign around their necks is infinitely more sophisticated.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Gmarthews said:You mean you claim not to dismiss people's words based on your knowledge of them??
Come now, I beg to differ!!
People pigeonhole others, simplifying them in the process. I would say that the majority of people (at least here) do this to some degree or another!
Mandatory labels, mmm the way forward. For everyone of course, no exceptions!!
Murdoch papers could be labelled as such! Or maybe it should only be individuals?
Religious, atheist and agnostics. That'll do.
Fuck me, a real life fascist.
