Jump to content

mikem8634

Members
  • Content Count

    2,622
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mikem8634

  • Rank
    Registered User
  1. It is not deemed unfair by me, it is deemed unfair, like any criticism or allegation, by the lack of evidence that it is true. Nope, sorry, whataboutism is introducing an unrelated issue. You specifically asked about other religions. Yes, you are right, they can be equivalent. I was just showing that you were, once again, imprecise. That is exactly what Christian doctrine states. Many Muslims, in exactly the same way as many Christians, moderate the extremes of their religions with their own secular morality. All religion is man-made fiction and I would prefer a world without it. My issue with your posts is their inconsistency, special pleading fallacies and bias. There is simply no way to legitimately blame people for actions they have not committed. "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent." There you go, now you have no excuse for doing it again. That is an excellent point well made. If you could just be more accurate and disciplined in what you say and also stop blaming people for actions they have not committed then you will actually be doing something admirable. The group you belong to is the right wing. No Zamo, it doesn't. Read it again. I specifically stated that you are not responsible for extremism in the right-wing despite being part of the right-wing. That's the whole point. So the rest of that quote isn't worth addressing as it flows from a mistake. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I note that, once again, despite being specifically asked once again, you have provided no evidence whatsoever for any of your claims. People can judge that as they see fit, but I'll leave you with what Christopher Hitchens had to say on the subject "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." You may benefit from reading some Hitchens, you would probably find a fair bit of common ground when it comes to Islam, and you would certainly gain some insight into how to make a credible argument. I am bowing out at this point as I'm spending too much time on here. Good luck, I hope you get the peace you want, in a way that is peaceful for all concerned.
  2. Not a single one of you engaging with the subject matter. Pretty telling. Perhaps you could watch the footage of Richard Spencer. Full version - Excerpts - ---------- Post added 05-12-2016 at 14:11 ---------- I think this might be something that Margarita was suggesting earlier. This would appear to be a good example of how the shifting of the Overton Window can lead to the Normalisation of Deviance. I haven't gone through the data with a fine tooth comb so (mainly because I keep being told off for spending too much time on here so I'm winding it down:)), so I will change my mind if some massive flaws are exposed in it. However, as it currently stands it serves as a good example of the process in practice. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/uncomfortable-truths-casey-review-immigration-integration-britain_uk_584550c1e4b00b318b106c85?utm_hp_ref=uk I hope it also stands as an example of consistent thinking as opposed to slavish adherence to polarised ideology. ---------- Post added 05-12-2016 at 15:18 ---------- Ok, then. Firstly, I do not have a perception of a huge rise in hate crime post-Brexit. I have a perception of things beginning to change and some very ugly things gaining a prominence that had previously been denied them. I don't only selectively believe the facts and stories I agree with. I have, however, decided that a few sources (some right, some left) are simply too unreliable to treat seriously. The Mail is one of them. That is not to say that it cannot be factual, it can, and I think I will demonstrate that in a moment if you stick with me. In attempting to fact check the article I pretty quickly came across this, which, I think, presents a much more balanced appraisal and represents, broadly speaking, where I think we are. If you read that first, you may be more willing to hear what I have to say about the Mail. http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/hatecrimethefactsbehindtheheadlines.pdf The problem with the Mail article is not necessarily what it says, but how it says it. I am not at all interested in the rhetoric, it undermines objectivity and comes across as childish, lazy and entirely too partisan. Phrases like gravy train, and the constant suggestions that the taxpayer is being ripped-off is where news crosses the line into ideology, where the Mail stops reporting and starts drawing battle lines. That, I believe to be irresponsible and ill-conceived, whether The Mail does it or The Guardian does it, because the truth is, at this stage, we just don't know the full picture. Having some precautionary strategies in place could prove a good idea but the Mail wants everyone to think it is a done deal, end of discussion, just a load of dishonest nonsense. I am highly suspicious of that and have encountered it far too much in the Mail for me to allow it credibility any more. There is an overwhelming variety of sources for information and I don't really see the need to bother with one that has consistently demonstrated that it sold its soul a long time ago. So, yes there are several accurate and correct things in that Mail article, I would just never choose to get them from the Mail. ---------- Post added 05-12-2016 at 15:32 ---------- Margarita, it is really difficult to go through your points due to the format of your post, but I'll have a go nonetheless. The Normalisation of Deviance is not the same as normalising deviation. I think our fundamental misunderstanding can be traced to the following - The difference between deviance and deviation is that deviance is (sociology) actions or behaviours that violate formal and informal cultural norms such as law and the discouragement from public nose-picking while deviation is the act of deviating; a wandering from the way; variation from the common way, from an established rule, etc; departure, as from the right course or the path of duty. http://the-difference-between.com/deviation/deviance I feel you are being exceedingly charitable to the Mail regarding the placement of Edward Mair's conviction. That, of course, is your perogative, but do consider why so many other front pages on that day chose differently. To suggest that a meaning is currently fixed by it's dictionary definition does not preclude future change. Your entire point regarding meanings and definitions relies on the premise that all the dictionaries are wrong. I cannot accept that. I think it is obvious to all concerned that gay does not have to be capitalised in order to mean homosexual, despite your attempt to suggest it does, and that, therefore, the meaning of gay has evolved. I can understand why you are continuing to resist that, as it fatally undermines your position, but it is an inescapable fact. I am happy to provide evidence for anything I claim, no double standards here. So, here you go - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0 http://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/#americas-layered-defenses http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/24/domestic-terrorism-charleston_n_7654720.html http://www.mintpressnews.com/white-americans-are-the-biggest-terror-threat-in-the-united-states/211608/ http://europe.newsweek.com/right-wing-extremists-militants-bigger-threat-america-isis-jihadists-422743?rm=eu https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-terrorist-threat-confronting-the-united-states Of course I accept the evidence of ISIS atrocities. All you need to do is ask Michael_W the exact same question, just replace ISIS with racism, to see the painfully obvious point I was making. ---------- Post added 05-12-2016 at 15:38 ---------- I apologise for that being ridiculously long but there were a good few loose ends to tie up.
  3. Can't believe it took me this long to get that. Over 13 hrs! The penny has literally just dropped. Made me laugh out loud and go AAAHHHHHH!!!! What an eejit!
  4. Has anybody said that unfair criticism is the only thing that contributes to radicalisation? No, they haven't. So we can let your little invention of an argument rest there. I don't know why you keep trying these ploys when they are so transparent and so easily called out. It does you no credit. If you don't think that Christianity has an extremism problem then you are really not paying attention. My guess is you will attempt dismiss that by saying that Islamic extremism is more prevalent and worse, which I will not let you get away with. For the simple reason that, as I am sure you know, one thing being bigger than another does not stop the smaller thing from existing. So let's head that one off at the pass. You don't just get to assert things and for them to become automatically true. I noticed you cited a Muslim burning a national flag vs. a non-Muslim burning the Quran - false equivalence. Where is your evidence that literally every single place where there are Muslims a Non-Muslim would be attacked and possibly killed for burning a Quran? Where is your evidence that the 'moderate' position is already extreme? Especially considering that the phrase itself is utter illogical nonsense as, by definition something moderate cannot be extreme. Have a look at the logical absolutes to avoid making that basic error again. This is just another way of saying that all Muslims are extremists, which is simply factually incorrect and there is no way around that for you. Are you seriously suggesting there is no chance that a Muslim burning the stars and stripes or the Bible (to correct your false equivalence) in the US would be attacked or killed? Are you that entrenched in your rhetoric that you cannot accept that as a possibility. Have you seen a Trump rally? Or maybe The National Policy Institute? Do you think they would just ignore the Bible-burning Muslim and just go on with their Hitler salutes peacefully? How do you think Britain First or the EDL would respond.? How would it go down in one of National Action's White Zones in Newbury or Glasgow? You carry exactly the same amount of guilt as the Muslims who do not launch attacks when their religious symbols are burnt ie. precisely none. So when are you going to sort out Islamic extremism. It is as much your responsibility as it is theirs because neither of you act in the way that you are suggesting needs sorting out. And when you've finished sorting out the issues with Islam that you are not responsible for, I look forward to your detailed action plan for sorting out the problem of extremism in the right-wing, a group to which you belong and, you guessed it, for which you are, of course, not at all responsible. If you are going to impose burdens on innocent people who do not warrant them then pick up your own.
  5. I've laid it out before you and it couldn't be more obvious. Trying to avoid and deflect by attempting to belittle (weird/embarrassing) and feigning indifference is utterly transparent. It is a tactic people resort to when their argument has run out. Critical thinking and some understanding of logic make my evaluations more valid. I have said nothing about seeing or reading being believing. Nor have I said anything about what constitutes hype. Here it is again. By your own admission - you are not willing to believe racist events occur unless you see them with your own eyes. In the case of racism the media is not to be trusted and you consider the evidence to be hype. you are willing to believe ISIS atrocities occur despite having never seen one with your own eyes. In the case of ISIS the media is to be trusted and you consider the evidence to be accurate. I didn't say it, you did. It shows your reasoning is flawed and your conclusions are unsound. It's beyond time to face up to it.
  6. Here you go, this link contains a few of the tweets. I've not read the article though. http://www.caughtoffside.com/2016/11/28/eric-bristow-tweets-about-sexual-abuse-in-football/ ---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 19:07 ---------- Fair point mel. Agreed, both of you.
  7. Don't forget the church too. I remember some years back, I was pressed to make some kind of estimate on the numbers of sexual abusers and the numbers of abused children. My work at the time meant I was in the middle of investigation after investigation and constantly trying to manage the damage left behind so I was probably too close to think entirely objectively. My estimates were one in ten and one in four. That could be wildly out but that was how it seemed twenty years ago.
  8. Yes it is quiet. I've been carefully watching all of the developments but I didn't bother adding them as it just would have made my last post longer and not bumped the thread. I can't believe nobody has had a word to say about Eric Bristow either, unless I've missed it.
  9. If there is work to be done it should be paid at the national living wage level at least.
  10. That's a shame you couldn't face up to what was laid out before you. As I said, it is more important to you to keep your world view safe, intact and unchanged than it is to believe things that are true. And now you retreat, as so many do when the fallacies in their flawed logic become too uncomfortable to accept. The really strange thing is, when somebody does for me, what I have just done for you, I'm grateful.
  11. Stop avoiding the question. Do you admit your double standards and bias? We can discuss your accusations against me in a sec. I'll happily have that chat. I'm not afraid of my bias. I'll even let you off the hook a little if we ever get to that conversation, because everybody has biases. It's impossible not to. ---------- Post added 01-12-2016 at 15:57 ---------- It's really not looking very good for you is it Michael? Are you just going to avoid and deflect or are you going to answer the question?
  12. Do you admit your bias and double standards? It is futile to deny it.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.