The religion of...wait, no, that's not...nevermind. This has nothing to do with religion.
Full story.
So what do we make of this?
Full story.
So what do we make of this?
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Egyptian Vigilantes Kill Two Suspected Thieves
- Thread starter Balerion
- Start date
I am ok with middle-east Muslims killing other Muslims. They really aren't that valuable to me.
Last edited:
I am ok with middle-east Muslims killing other Muslims. They really aren't that valuable.
That's disgusting.
Hey bigot, remember the case last year in the US?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1335984.htmlGeorge Zimmerman, Neighborhood Watch Captain Who Shot Trayvon Martin, Charged With Violence Before
An attorney for the family of Trayvon Martin, the teenager shot to death last month by a neighborhood watch captain in an Orlando, Fla., suburb, said police withheld the shooter's violent past from the slain youth's family.
Police initially told Martin’s family that George Zimmerman, 28, admitted to shooting Martin, 17, on Feb. 26, after he called 911 and reported a suspicious person, said the attorney, Benjamin Crump. Zimmerman said the shooting was in self-defense, police said.
Zimmerman, who is white, has not been charged in the death of Martin, who was black. Police in Sanford, where the shooting occurred, told Martin’s family that Zimmerman had a “squeaky-clean” record and that’s why they had not arrested him, according to Tracy Martin, the teen’s father.
Crump said public records show that Zimmerman was arrested in Orange County in 2005 on charges of resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer.
“They just lied to the family,” Crump said. “They just couldn’t see why [Zimmerman] would do anything wrong or be violent. But not only do you know the guy killed this kid, because he admitted to it, you knew that he has a propensity for violence because of his past record.”
The Orange County Clerk of Courts website shows a man named George Zimmerman, 28, was charged in July 2005 with resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer. The charges appear to have been dropped.
An email to Sanford Chief Bill Lee was not immediately returned on Friday evening. A phone number for Zimmerman has been disconnected. He could not be reached for comment.
In an interview with HuffPost on Thursday, Tracy Martin said that when he asked police why Zimmerman hadn't been charged, officers told him "they respected [Zimmerman's] background, that he studied criminal justice for four years and that he was squeaky clean." He continued: "My question to them was, did they run my child's background check? They said yes. I asked them what they came up with, and they said nothing. So I asked if Zimmerman had a clean record, did that give him the right to shoot and kill an unarmed kid?"
Crump has asked law enforcement officials to turn over the 911 tapes recorded the night Martin was killed. He has since filed a public records lawsuit to get the recordings.
The teenager was on his way back from a convenience store during halftime of the NBA All-Star game when Zimmerman began following him in his car, police said.
Chief Lee on Thursday said that Zimmerman called 911 and reported a suspicious person. “For some reason he felt that Trayvon, the way that he was walking or appeared, seemed suspicious to him,” Lee told HuffPost. “He called this in and at one part of this initial call [the dispatcher] recommends him not to follow Trayvon. A police officer is on the way at that point.”
Lee said Zimmerman instead followed Martin. A confrontation ensued, and soon after he shot the teen, the chief said.
And here is another
http://uhurunews.com/story?resource_name=make-some-noise-for-jordan-davisAnother white vigilante murders a 17-year-old African in Florida. Make some noise for Jordan Davis!
JACKSONVILLE, FL—Jordan Davis, a 17-year-old unarmed African teenager was shot and killed in Jacksonville, Florida on Friday, November 30, 2012.
Michael David Dunn, a white man, shot Davis after an exchange about loud music at a gas station. Dunn fired over eight shots into the SUV where Davis was in the backseat.
Dunn claims that he thought he saw a shotgun in the car. No shotgun was found and Dunn has been charged with second degree murder.
Jordan’s mother called the death a hate crime, his father called the murder "The Black Friday Massacre," others say it was one of the five other so-called “Stand Your Ground” cases in 2012.
We know very well that there are many other gun enthusiasts that would have done like Dunn—riddle the SUV with bullets and leave the crime scene—only to have the murder dismissed by colonial courts and judges.
Although we will again be watching this one closely, the courts are still subject to pull a fast one on us before our very eyes.
They can do this because the courts are a part of the colonial State apparatus that is used to keep Africans oppressed and exploited.
The masses of our people recognize that Trayvon Martin, murdered in February 2012 by a white nationalist vigilante, and now Jordan Davis, represent a history of violence against our people since we were brought to these shores from Africa to serve the interests of someone other than ourselves.
Then there is the case of Marissa Alexander who did not even shoot anyone, less known kill, but who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a warning shot at her estranged husband whom she had a restraining order against.
Obviously the “Stand Your Ground” law does not apply to African people with guns.
Some might attribute this violence against Africans to the published predictions that the Mayan Calendar says the world is coming to an end. Others might even attribute the rise in vigilante attacks against our community to the election and re-election of Barrack Hussein Obama.
But I would like to believe that we can attribute this violence to economic conditions that the general white population is facing in this country and the fact that there is a history of white vigilante violence against African people, including lynchings and tarring and feathering.
So “Stand Your Ground” is just the new legal excuse in the old, New Jim Crow system.
We are finally capitalizing when they let their cards show.
When they show their true colors, we become literate of our history and present day reality of our position in relation to white power.
We are mobilizing around exposing the corrupt courts, education and legal systems that the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) wants to become privatized.
We are on the street with our video cameras, ID (know our rights) cards that we quote for the police when they want to arrest us.
Through facebook and other social media, we are making people aware.
There were 200 instances since 2005 where the “Stand Your Ground” law was used.
Now, all those cases are accessible online, not like in the 1900’s, when the tormenting frustrations of the black laborers were not as easily recorded.
So the case of Jordan Davis reminds us of slavery days of the past following our so-called emancipation when African workers would be picked up off the streets of Birmingham, Alabama to work in the mills of the U.S. Steel Company for free as convicts.
From this has grown an entire Prison Industrial Complex.
It is the same today where the judges, police and political system are all in cahoots to sell our people to giant prison corporations for profit.
So we in Jacksonville are telling our youth to come together soon to “Turn up your radio, turn up your volume,” literally. We are listening to the silenced voices, recording them on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.
We want them to know “Yeah, you may not have been under Bull Connor's Birmingham, Alabama water hoses and killer dogs, and you may not have gone up against bull-dozers like the youth in Soweto, but you can also make some noise.
When we make some noise and every time we do, let’s turn it up!
We must join organizations that are fighting against these injustices.
That's disgusting.
That's subjective.
IfIonlyhadabrain
Registered Member
That's subjective.
No it really is disgusting.
Hey bigot, remember the case last year in the US?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1335984.html
And here is another
http://uhurunews.com/story?resource_name=make-some-noise-for-jordan-davis
Hey moron, did you happen to see my comments on the Trayvon Martin discussion here? Am I supposed to link to those old threads every time something happens regarding a Muslim?
Do you think this event isn't newsworthy? Or is it something we're not allowed to talk about because the people involved are Muslims? (What their religion has to do with this, I don't know)
Idiot.
That's subjective.
No, it really is gross. I've reported your post, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't post in this thread again.
No it really is disgusting.
Demonstrate that disgusting exists outside the scope of a person's mind and you might have a point.
No, it really is gross. I've reported your post, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't post in this thread again.
Reported for what? Going against your personal sensibilities? If you want to limit who can participate in your threads then you can always make a private group and invite all the like-minded participants that you wish, but until you do that any thread you create is open season for any member.
Reported for what? Going against your personal sensibilities? If you want to limit who can participate in your threads then you can always make a private group and invite all the like-minded participants that you wish, but until you do that any thread you create is open season for any member.
Reported for saying that you don't mind Middle Eastern Muslims killing each other because "they're not valuable." That kind of hate-speech is against the rules.
I asked you nicely to stay out of the thread. If you won't oblige, I'll just hope that the moderation here does its job.
Reported for saying that you don't mind Middle Eastern Muslims killing each other because "they're not valuable." That kind of hate-speech is against the rules.
I asked you nicely to stay out of the thread. If you won't oblige, I'll just hope that the moderation here does its job.
How is that hate speech? Hate speech is vilifying some group or person on the basis of one or more characteristics such as race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, or age. Kind of like what this thread appears to be attempting to do with Egyption Muslims, or perhaps just Muslims in general (which is somewhat of a comical irony). The fact that I don't find middle-eastern Muslims valuable isn't a statement of vilification. It's an opinion. You did after all ask: "So what do we make of this?". Again, if you only want like-minded opinions then make a private group and invite like-minded people.
IfIonlyhadabrain
Registered Member
Demonstrate that disgusting exists outside the scope of a person's mind and you might have a point.
Disgusting is a quality, and can be ascribed to attitudes and expressions. It is the quality that causes the observer of that which is disgusting to feel revolted at the observation. The only part of this that is relative is the perceptive framework present in the mind of the observer which translates the observation into understandable facts.
The portion of the statement you made that is disgusting is the part where you reduce human persons to non-valuable objects. This kind of speech is what spurred events like the slave trade and the holocaust. People are inherently valuable, and speech which reduces people to sub-human, or sub-persons, is disgusting.
A person's perceptual framework may allow them to see this, or not. Much like a colorblind person may not be able to see red, because his brain didn't develop that capability, and red as an attribute still exists in the form of specific-light-wavelength reflection, so too does the disgustingness of your expression exist even though you haven't developed the moral sense to see it.
How is that hate speech? Hate speech is vilifying some group or person on the basis of one or more characteristics such as race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, or age. Kind of like what this thread appears to be attempting to do with Egyption Muslims, or perhaps just Muslims in general (which is somewhat of a comical irony). The fact that I don't find middle-eastern Muslims valuable isn't a statement of vilification. It's an opinion. You did after all ask: "So what do we make of this?". Again, if you only want like-minded opinions then make a private group and invite like-minded people.
Are you serious? You just dehumanized a group of people based on their religion. You said you don't mind them getting killed because "they're not valuable." Your statement portrays Middle Eastern Muslims as intrinsically less valuable than other human beings. That is the definition of hate speech.
My post has nothing to do with their religion. This is a thread about the deterioration of Egypt since the Arab Spring, and about the morality of vigilantism. Has nothing at all to do with religion. But thanks for tanking this thread with your bigotry and ignorance.
wow you hate being called a bigot but you seem hell bent on making sure its immpossible to do otherwise
Hey moron, did you happen to see my comments on the Trayvon Martin discussion here? Am I supposed to link to those old threads every time something happens regarding a Muslim?
Do you think this event isn't newsworthy? Or is it something we're not allowed to talk about because the people involved are Muslims? (What their religion has to do with this, I don't know)
Idiot.
um your the own who brought up the faith not anybody else so quit your bitching. your clearly just trolling for comments on your hatred of islam here.
Disgusting is a quality, and can be ascribed to attitudes and expressions. It is the quality that causes the observer of that which is disgusting to feel revolted at the observation. The only part of this that is relative is the perceptive framework present in the mind of the observer which translates the observation into understandable facts.
The portion of the statement you made that is disgusting is the part where you reduce human persons to non-valuable objects. This kind of speech is what spurred events like the slave trade and the holocaust. People are inherently valuable, and speech which reduces people to sub-human, or sub-persons, is disgusting.
A person's perceptual framework may allow them to see this, or not. Much like a colorblind person may not be able to see red, because his brain didn't develop that capability, and red as an attribute still exists in the form of specific-light-wavelength reflection, so too does the disgustingness of your expression exist even though you haven't developed the moral sense to see it.
You just spent a quite a bit of effort agreeing with me. Yes I realize that "disgusting" is subjective and that was my point. You find it disgusting, but to say "it is disgusting" means that some kind of object or property of an object exists in objective reality that is "disgusting". That would make it fully measurable and exists whether or not a person is around to interpret it. That is of course something you cannot demonstrate because "disgusting" is subjective and not objective. If you can demonstrate otheriwse, you are welcome to. Until that point, all you have is an opinion just like me. Let's however expore the inverse of my opinion because you are so against it. Why should I (or anyone else) find middle-eastern Muslims valuable? Just saying that people are inherently valuable isn't an argument as it is again entirely subjective. Let's go for some real objective reasons and evidence.
Are you serious? You just dehumanized a group of people based on their religion.
That is incorrect. What I did was state that they are not valuable to me based on their geography and religion as combined criteria. It's no different than me stating that U.S. Muslims are valuable to me. Both are true statements of my opinion.
You said you don't mind them getting killed because "they're not valuable.".
That's also incorrect. I said that I don't mind them killing each other.
Your statement portrays Middle Eastern Muslims as intrinsically less valuable than other human beings. That is the definition of hate speech.
My statement means that they are not valuable in my opinion. Also, this is the definition of hate speech for your reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
My post has nothing to do with their religion.
The very first statement you issued (no matter how sarcastically intended) says otherwise: "The religion of...wait, no, that's not...nevermind."
This is a thread about the deterioration of Egypt since the Arab Spring, and about the morality of vigilantism. Has nothing at all to do with religion. But thanks for tanking this thread with your bigotry and ignorance.
Most (if not all) societies deteriorate to various degrees if their government is overthrown / outsted by the local population. A power vaccum then often gets filled by generally not so good things. Vigilantism is likely a symptom of that in Egypt. That's somewhat obvious but I suspect you would not have made this thread if something specific wasn't on your mind, so let me turn the question back to you: what do you think about this?
That is incorrect. What I did was state that they are not valuable to me based on their geography and religion as combined criteria. It's no different than me stating that U.S. Muslims are valuable to me. Both are true statements of my opinion.
Then you should have said so. Instead, you made the statement "They really aren't that valuable." You expect us to extrapolate a crude and callous "they aren't that valuable to me based on their geography" from such a blunt and obviously bigoted statement? We're not mind-readers.
That's also incorrect. I said that I don't mind them killing each other.
You're splitting hairs. What your comment boils down to is that their lives are not of any value. You are now amending this to say, at least from what it seems, that they have no value to you, which is still a gross statement to make, but perhaps not bigoted.
My statement means that they are not valuable in my opinion.
Which is a disgusting statement to make regardless of the rationale, but it certainly appeared to be bigoted in nature.
Also, this is the definition of hate speech for your reference:
I see your wiki and raise you Dictionary.com:
Dictionary.com said:speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.
and the World English Dictionary:
World English Dictionary said:speech disparaging a racial, sexual, or ethnic group or a member of such a group
So yes, your comment certainly falls within those parameters.
The very first statement you issued (no matter how sarcastically intended) says otherwise: "The religion of...wait, no, that's not...nevermind."
I can certainly see how this has been misconstrued. I was attempting to make a joking reference to my previous thread, and the heat that was brought by bleeding-heart morons eager for a cause to champion. If I were to spell it out completely, it would have read: "The religion of...wait, this doesn't have anything to do with religion..." I'll amend it now, for the sake of clarity. I certainly wasn't trying to imply that religion was responsible at all for this event. This clearly is about Egypt's societal deterioration since the Arab Spring.
Most (if not all) societies deteriorate to various degrees if their government is overthrown / outsted by the local population. A power vaccum then often gets filled by generally not so good things. Vigilantism is likely a symptom of that in Egypt. That's somewhat obvious but I suspect you would not have made this thread if something specific wasn't on your mind, so let me turn the question back to you: what do you think about this?
Horrible attempt at a deflection, troll. I'm aware of all that, I just wanted to get everyone else's opinions on it. I like learning things from people who know more than I do about things.
um your the own who brought up the faith not anybody else so quit your bitching. your clearly just trolling for comments on your hatred of islam here.
I was jokingly referring to the previous thread, but I've amended the opening line for clarity.
I also don't deny my distaste for Islam, so I don't know what makes you think I'd be trying to hide it. Islam is an awful philosophy that, since its fall roughly a thousand years ago, has brought little else but bloodshed and unrest to the world. I don't apologize for holding that opinion. However, this thread isn't about Islam, it's about the trouble in Egypt.