Measuring and dealing with hate
- Thread starter WATU2
- Start date
Let me get this straight. You are saying that when Islamic Terrorists kill people hatred of Muslims goes up? So when police kill members of a minority, does not hatred for police go up in that minority? Especially if they were innocent or if people feel force was excessive. Isn't that what Baltimore was all about? Was there not more hatred of Japanese after Pearl Harbor than before? I'm not surprised that such things bring out hate, nor do I hate all Muslims. But the little thingy in Brussels should not be expected, nor was it even intended, to win friends among the Belgies. You don't need word searches. Suppose I search "how often do Islamic terrorists kill Muslims?" I just searched using the phrase "kill Muslims."
We need a combined meter to measure happiness and hatred of Muslims electronically. You might find out that some people are happy hating Muslims or some groups are happy killing Westerners. I know some people who have an irrational fear and hatred of Clowns. Yet they have never killed a Clown. I'll bet a study would find that some countries are happier than us and hate some group or other more than we do. You love to point out that more people are killed by guns, or cars, or CO2 than by terrorists. But how many Muslims are killed by people who Google the phrase "kill Muslims."
We need a combined meter to measure happiness and hatred of Muslims electronically. You might find out that some people are happy hating Muslims or some groups are happy killing Westerners. I know some people who have an irrational fear and hatred of Clowns. Yet they have never killed a Clown. I'll bet a study would find that some countries are happier than us and hate some group or other more than we do. You love to point out that more people are killed by guns, or cars, or CO2 than by terrorists. But how many Muslims are killed by people who Google the phrase "kill Muslims."
Last edited:
Easy now. I'm not :"saying anything". Just posting an interesting article. Google searches have been increasingly used to track and predict behavior in the US such as the progress of diseases. This struck me as an interesting one in a sensitive area.
So as Muslim terrorism increases the negative attitudes towards Muslims increases as well? I would have been shocked if this wasn't the case. Do we have a problem with Muslims being murdered because of their religious faith in the U.S.?
Assault occurred this past September by some idiot teenager? While things like that should never occur I don't see how it shows we have a systemic problem with Muslims being murdered due to their faith. Ironically, a Christian man was beaten to death in Maine by three Somalian Muslim immigrants about the same time as this assault occurred. Do we have a problem with Christians being murdered in this country due to their religion?
Suppose I need more evidence than one assault seven months ago to admit we have a problem with Muslims being murdered here do to their religious faith.
Suppose I need more evidence than one assault seven months ago to admit we have a problem with Muslims being murdered here do to their religious faith.
Discussion is one thing. Trying to make everything into an argument is not something I'm interested in.
Attacks on Sikhs are terrible and you are correct reflect ignorance. For that matter attacks on innocent Muslims are also terrible, as are attacks on Westerners by Muslims.
In case you haven't noticed, there have been a number of attacks by Islamic Terrorists on non Muslims. That number is much larger than the reverse. Google search is a stupid way to measure hate. If I were to read an article about the Manhattan Project, it might cause me to look up several things concerning the details of making a nuclear weapon. I have no intention of making such a thing.
In fact, by reading the article you posted and by my comments I have used the phrase "Kill Muslims" a number of times. Oops, I just did it again. Google scans are so easy and you let the computer do all your thinking.
Oh, so you quote an article, defend it awhile then say it was only posted because it was interesting.
I'm all for discussion. I simply don't see how one assault back in September furthers the premise that murders against Muslims are increasing due to the rise in Islamic terrorism here and abroad. I do readily admit that negative opinions toward Muslims are likely to increase as innocents are continued to be murdered in the name of Islam. I don't think many would debate that retaliatory killings of Muslims for the acts of others is wrong and should be condemned.
Is wanting to observe the immigration laws, hate?
Is wanting to ensure "refugees" are not Trojan horses, hate?
Is wanting people to pay their own way, hate?
Is requiring people to Earn their pay, hate?
. . .
Is wanting to ensure "refugees" are not Trojan horses, hate?
Is wanting people to pay their own way, hate?
Is requiring people to Earn their pay, hate?
. . .
Thought this story fit well within the "hate" discussion. Most of us can't comprehend the pure hate hundreds of thousands have toward Christians and the West in the middle east. This story is a sobering reminder of the mindset among the masses:
As pictures emerged of the sea of humanity that coalesced around the white ambulance strewn with red rose petals that carried Mr. Qadri’s body, a few thoughts occurred to me: Was this the first funeral on this scale ever given to a convicted murderer? Did the men who took to the street in such great numbers come out of their hatred of my father or their love of his killer? They hardly knew Mr. Qadri. The only thing he had done in all his life, as far as they knew, was kill my father. Before that he was anonymous; after that he was in jail. Was this the first time that mourners had assembled on this scale not out of love but out of hate?
And finally, I wondered, what happens when an ideology of hate is no longer just coming from the mouths of Saudi-funded clerics but has infected the body of the people? What do you do when the madness is not confined to radical mosques and madrasas, but is abroad among a population of nearly 200 million?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/o...K&kwp_0=127960&kwp_4=583610&kwp_1=305277&_r=1
As pictures emerged of the sea of humanity that coalesced around the white ambulance strewn with red rose petals that carried Mr. Qadri’s body, a few thoughts occurred to me: Was this the first funeral on this scale ever given to a convicted murderer? Did the men who took to the street in such great numbers come out of their hatred of my father or their love of his killer? They hardly knew Mr. Qadri. The only thing he had done in all his life, as far as they knew, was kill my father. Before that he was anonymous; after that he was in jail. Was this the first time that mourners had assembled on this scale not out of love but out of hate?
And finally, I wondered, what happens when an ideology of hate is no longer just coming from the mouths of Saudi-funded clerics but has infected the body of the people? What do you do when the madness is not confined to radical mosques and madrasas, but is abroad among a population of nearly 200 million?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/o...K&kwp_0=127960&kwp_4=583610&kwp_1=305277&_r=1
Maybe if we stopped bombing their countries they'd stop hating us.
We had troops stationed in Saudi since George the first's original Gulf War. They didn't appreciate that. I'm not arguing that any of the motives Osama or the Saudi's had to attack the US were legitimate. I'm just saying that those were the motivations that were listed after the attacks.
Maybe leaving the Middle East alone might be the best strategy right now. They don't want us there and we don't really want to be there.
We had a minimal number of troops in Saudi at the time and they were there in part to train Saudi troops to operate the military hardware they were purchasing from us. You're damn straight they wanted us and our "toys" there. If they had a beef then it should have been with the Saudi royal family.
We leave the Middle East and it's likely extreme radicals like ISIS control the area imo. Giving ISIS or their equivalent control of all that oil as well as nuclear weapons would be a disaster. I don't like being over there but the alternative is worse imo.
We leave the Middle East and it's likely extreme radicals like ISIS control the area imo. Giving ISIS or their equivalent control of all that oil as well as nuclear weapons would be a disaster. I don't like being over there but the alternative is worse imo.
This is slightly off topic Lawpoke, but related to the article you posted. It took some time to really jog my memory on what the culture is like over there, but I've slowly come around to your point of view on the refugees. Not because of the terrorist threat, but because the things that the vast majority of them believe are ok would shock most people. I think we should find a way to set up safe areas for them in the middle east somehow, but I'm not in favor of a mass importation of the views and customs of their cultures. The results in europe are not good.
They very well appreciated it. After Saddam had invaded Kuwait, we put 10,000 troops of the 82nd Airborne into Saudi Arabia. Just across the water were 400,000 Iraqi troops. The 82nd Airborne can get places fast. But to do so they travel light.
If the Iraqi's had continued their advance into Saudi Arabia, the Americans would not have been able to stop them. I'll bet Bush 41 lost some sleep that night. Our soldiers were a trip wire. Even Saddam wasn't stupid enough to kill or capture 10,000 American troops. If you will remember, all of the Arab countries backed our action and contributed to it. Don't confuse Gulf War I with the next one.
Now, American troops in the home of Islam did anger Bin Laden. George H.W. Bush had much more support from the Arab world than Bush 43. We could have gone on but Bush had promised that we were there only to free Kuwait and he kept his word.
Yes....they were there at the request of Saudi to protect the Kingdom. Again...any anger should have been directed at the House of Saud.
Culturally they simply aren't a good fit with the western culture and system. Generally, they haven't integrated well into Europe. America would be even a more difficult transition. I've always argued that we should do what we can to set them up in the Middle East. Close to their home, similar culture and language. Surely with what the U.S. and Europe are currently spending in this matter we could partner with other Arab nations and find a more local home.
I didn't mean the Saudi royal family, I meant Osama. If you look up his listed motives he presented for 9/11 and the Fatwa's put out by the radical islamic leaders prior to 9/11 it's all about having infidels stationed on the Arabian Peninsula where two of Islam's holiest sites exist. Then of course there's our support for Jerusalem... but there's nothing we can really do about that.
Not sure what 'legitimate' means. But it struck a chord with the masses in the middle east, legitimate or illegitimate. Isn't Trump doing the same thing? Appealing to people's dissatisfactions regardless of whether his solutions made sense.
