The war on ISIS.

[BobK]

Have you even been following this thread?

That's hilarious, coming from someone who was unaware he'd been asked a question no less than four times.

I'm well aware you didn't call for the bombing of ISIL during prayer time - someone else did, and that was the comment I originally called racist.

Thereby establishing that you haven't a clue what racism is.

How is it a good thing to presume someone is guilty of something simply because they're not white?

Again with putting words in peoples' mouths. Which you hypocritically complain about when you think someone does the same to you.

Why would I address them, given that I know what his response will be regardless of the case I make?

Because the specific issues he was referring to was the way you were repeatedly putting words in his mouth.

Assuming that a Muslim is plotting a terrorist attack because they're a Muslim rather than because there is evidence is a clear-cut case of racial profiling.

Again, you are totally ignorant of what "racism"means.

actively targeting people by taking advantage of their faith is, in itself racist.

A clue: Being racist involves acting based on -- wait for it -- somebody's race. If you still don't get it, faith is not the same as race.

Among other things,

Faith is a choice, race is not.

Clear yet?

Assuming that a Muslim is plotting a terrorist attack because they're a Muslim rather than because there is evidence is a clear-cut case of racial profiling.

Wrong again.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Again with putting words in peoples' mouths. Which you hypocritically complain about when you think someone does the same to you.

I'm sorry, what?

Racial profiling is a phenomenon whereby law enforcement personnel take somebody's race as probable cause that they have committed or are planning to commit a crime, rather than any actual evidence. It is a phenomenon that is almost exclusive to white communities.

So how is anything that I said wrong?

 

[Furinkazen]

I'm sorry, what?

Racial profiling is a phenomenon whereby law enforcement personnel take somebody's race as probable cause that they have committed or are planning to commit a crime, rather than any actual evidence. It is a phenomenon that is almost exclusive to white communities.

So how is anything that I said wrong?

Because you said someone was being racist by saying they wanted IS to be bombed... despite the fact that is not racist in any shape in form as racism is:

somebody's race as probable cause that they have committed or are planning to commit a crime, rather than any actual evidence.

IS are not a "racial group" as I have pointed out on my previous post. It may be closer to Sectarianism than Racism, and even then that only applies if you talk about a specific sect such as Sunni, Kurdish, Shia, and so on.

And if you want source / linkage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sectarianism#Iraq

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Because you said someone was being racist by saying they wanted IS to be bombed...

No, not that they wanted ISIL to be bombed - that they wanted to bomb ISIL by taking advantage of their religious practice.

 

[Carbonox]

No, not that they wanted ISIL to be bombed - that they wanted to bomb ISIL by taking advantage of their religious practice.

So... religion = race? You learn something new every day.

 

[Furinkazen]

No, not that they wanted ISIL to be bombed - that they wanted to bomb ISIL by taking advantage of their religious practice.

Again, in absolutely no way racist. Race is something pre determined. - you are born caucasian, black, Arab... but if you are Christian, Hindu, Muslim, that is a choice. People been showing up how you've been wrong and explaining this for a good while but for some reason you don't understand it.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

People been showing up how you've been wrong and explaining this for a good while but for some reason you don't understand it.

What I understand is that while in theory this may be true, in practice it's completely impractical. Go ahead - rile up an angry mob by saying something discriminatory, and then try to talk them down by arguing semantics.

 

[Furinkazen]

What I understand is that while in theory this may be true, in practice it's completely impractical. Go ahead - rile up an angry mob by saying something discriminatory, and then try to talk them down by arguing semantics.

It is somewhat ironic... we can argue about if people are "racist" to ISIS - but they wouldn't give a damn. To them it is black and white. If you are not with us, you are against us regardless of ethnicity, sect, faith.

 

[SalmanBH]

I find it quite ironic how the US invaded Iraq, left and now wants to invade again.

Here's why, from the former VP himself.



The 2003 Iraq War, along with the violent Syrian Civil War have caused the formation of a vacuum for extremist terrorist organisations such as the Islamic State. The US saw this coming, and is only making the same mistakes they made before.

It's as if the only tool they had was a hammer, and so every problem they face has to look like a nail.

 

[BobK]

I'm sorry, what?

I have to wonder if you're being deliberately obtuse here. You have repeatedly been misquoting people here, numerous examples have been pointed out just in the last couple pages. Yet you spoke up when you felt someone had misquoted you. Misquoting someone especially to shift emphasis (such as from "vast majority" to "all") is widely seen as putting words in peoples' mouths. You've been doing that a lot. And you still don't see it as an issue?

Racial profiling is a phenomenon whereby law enforcement personnel take somebody's race as probable cause that they have committed or are planning to commit a crime, rather than any actual evidence. It is a phenomenon that is almost exclusive to white communities.

Excellent. You found a definition of "racial profiling". However, although racial profiling is a form of racism,it's racism itself we're discussing. In particular, your not knowing what is and is not racism. The fact you cite a definition for racial profiling lends credence to the idea you do not know what racism is.

In particular, you've said that attacking people while at prayer is racism. Here is the core issue you fail to grasp:

RELIGION IS NOT RACE

Attacking someone while engaged in a religious practice is not racism.
Is that clear enough for you?

So how is anything that I said wrong?

QED.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Attacking someone while engaged in a religious practice is not racism.

It's not me that you have to convince. It's the community. The only way to defeat ISIL is to engage with the community and demonstrate that ISIL fighters are criminals who happen to be Muslims, rather than Muslims who happen to be criminals.

Australia has just been rocked by a series of anti-terror raids that were carried out after an ISIL commander allegedly approved a terrorist operation to go ahead. The alleged plot was pretty disturbing, and while the investigation is ongoing, the police did try to be transparent about it. But there has been a flurry of protests from the Islamic community over the way those raids were carried out. The Muslim community down here is pretty moderate, but many have felt that the Muslim community has been targeted as dozens of properties were raided, but only one arrest was made. And there are still latent tensions that date back to the Cronulla race riots a few years ago, as members of the public have been reportedly abusing Muslims (or in some cases, fair-skinned Indians, who are not Muslim).

And your solution to defusing this situation is to say "well, it's not technically racism, so you have no complaint"? You might technically right, but in all practicality, the only thing you have done is further divide the community.

But hey, at least you get to claim a semantic victory while the whole situation crumbles around you.

 

[BobK]

It's not me that you have to convince. It's the community.

Actually, no; since it's you who doesn't know the difference between religion and race.

The only way to defeat ISIL is to engage with the community and demonstrate that ISIL fighters are criminals who happen to be Muslims, rather than Muslims who happen to be criminals.

True. Which has nothing whatsoever to do with racism.

Australia has just been rocked by a series of anti-terror raids that were carried out after an ISIL commander allegedly approved a terrorist operation to go ahead. The alleged plot was pretty disturbing, and while the investigation is ongoing, the police did try to be transparent about it. But there has been a flurry of protests from the Islamic community over the way those raids were carried out. The Muslim community down here is pretty moderate, but many have felt that the Muslim community has been targeted as dozens of properties were raided, but only one arrest was made. And there are still latent tensions that date back to the Cronulla race riots a few years ago, as members of the public have been reportedly abusing Muslims (or in some cases, fair-skinned Indians, who are not Muslim).

And this is relevant somehow to the way you insist on branding the act of attacking a group of people at prayer as racism?

And your solution to defusing this situation is to say "well, it's not technically racism, so you have no complaint"? You might technically right, but in all practicality, the only thing you have done is further divide the community.

But hey, at least you get to claim a semantic victory while the whole situation crumbles around you.

I never said anything of the sort. Let's see, how did you put this recently? Oh yes -- "I would thank you to stop putting words in my mouth." So why do you persist in putting words in other peoples' mouths?

Yes, clearly there is a problem. but labeling something to deal with the problem no matter how ill-advised it may be as "racism" in no way helps to deal with the actual problem.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I never said anything of the sort.

So you have spent the better part of two days trying to argue a semantic point, then? And for what? To prove that you're right about something on the internet?

 

[BobK]

So you have spent the better part of two days trying to argue a semantic point, then? And for what? To prove that you're right about something on the internet?

Also to address the problem of people putting words in other peoples' mouths. But hey, if you prefer strawmen to real debate, whatever.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

But hey, if you prefer strawmen to real debate, whatever.

Speaking of strawmen, what do you call what you've been doing all this time? For all your insistence on the difference between race and religion, you haven't once addressed the underlying issue - that bombing ISIL during prayer time will only convince the wider Muslim community that they're being targeted.

 

[BobK]

Speaking of strawmen, what do you call what you've been doing all this time?

So we can add "strawman" to the list of words you don't know the meaning of.

 

[Furinkazen]

bombing ISIL during prayer time will only convince the wider Muslim community that they're being targeted.

Considering the wider muslim community and a most Iraqis do not support ISIL as they end getting killed by them - point void.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Considering the wider muslim community and a most Iraqis do not support ISIL as they end getting killed by them - point void.

Then why did the moderate Muslim community down here protest against the police raids on ISIL sympathisers on the grounds that they felt they were being targeted?

 

[Furinkazen]

Then why did the moderate Muslim community down here protest against the police raids on ISIL sympathisers on the grounds that they felt they were being targeted?

Is that relevant to my point about:

Considering the wider muslim community and most Iraqis

Is that relevant when discussing muslims worldwide as well?

 

[Carbonox]

Then why did the moderate Muslim community down here protest against the police raids on ISIL sympathisers on the grounds that they felt they were being targeted?

They don't sound particularly moderate if they feel there's no difference between themselves and ISIL sympathisers.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Is that relevant when discussing muslims worldwide as well?

Yes, considering that a large part of our Muslim community is Iraqi.

They don't sound particularly moderate if they feel there's no difference between themselves and ISIL sympathisers.

Their argument was that a) the police had a standard of evidence that was disproportionately low when considering the allegations, b) over eight hundred officers raided more than a dozen properties, and yet only one person was actually arrested, and c) the dawn raids unnecessarily terrorised innocent people and put them in harm's way.

It's not that they feel there is no difference between themselves and ISIL sympathisers - it's that they feel the police think there is no difference, and by extension of that, the government. If the conservative media think there is a difference, then they don't bother to make it, and all of this shapes public opinion. There have already been threats made against mosques in Western Sydney - not that you'd know it, of course; nobody talks about it - and all of this reinforces the idea that Muslims are being targeted because they're Muslims, and that to be a Muslim and to be an ISIL sympathiser are one and the same. Which only inspires some parts of the Muslim community to become radicalised, and the whole sorry mess feeds back into itself.

 

[SalmanBH]

Yes, considering that a large part of our Muslim community is Iraqi.


Their argument was that a) the police had a standard of evidence that was disproportionately low when considering the allegations, b) over eight hundred officers raided more than a dozen properties, and yet only one person was actually arrested, and c) the dawn raids unnecessarily terrorised innocent people and put them in harm's way.

It's not that they feel there is no difference between themselves and ISIL sympathisers - it's that they feel the police think there is no difference, and by extension of that, the government. If the conservative media think there is a difference, then they don't bother to make it, and all of this shapes public opinion. There have already been threats made against mosques in Western Sydney - not that you'd know it, of course; nobody talks about it - and all of this reinforces the idea that Muslims are being targeted because they're Muslims, and that to be a Muslim and to be an ISIL sympathiser are one and the same. Which only inspires some parts of the Muslim community to become radicalised, and the whole sorry mess feeds back into itself.

The part put in bold, along with the underlined phrase? I completely agree with you, prisonermonkeys.

I see this happen in my own country, with some people even putting up the IS emblem on the back of their cars which then resulted in the government fining anyone seen with those stickers and taking them down immediately.

It's a sad reality, and if the media doesn't change the way it presents news where they all focus on one aspect of an event to over-exaggerate any thing they want to over-exaggerate, then this problem will continue to consume and re-consume this bait.

 

[Carbonox]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...068366594?nk=6ea88f2bf45d15a14db0519db871efbf

In before @prisonermonkeys suggests we combat these monkeys with tolerance and mentions that Australian cops are "racist".

 

[Furinkazen]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...068366594?nk=6ea88f2bf45d15a14db0519db871efbf

In before @prisonermonkeys suggests we combat these monkeys with tolerance and mentions that Australian cops are "racist".

Always one nutter. That is all.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

In before @prisonermonkeys suggests we combat these monkeys with tolerance and mentions that Australian cops are "racist".

I didn't say the police were racist - I said you were. Regardless of his faith or his intentions, you just referred to a man of Middle Eastern appearance as a "monkey", which only proves my point.

Like I said, community attitudes are key to defeating ISIL, and you're just creating more problems than you're solving. Typical Liberal voter attitude - so convinced that you're right that you'll never consider the alternative, if only to embellish your own knowledge.

 

[PeterJB]

I wouldn't exactly call Carbonox liberal...

 

[Furinkazen]

I wouldn't exactly call Carbonox liberal...

Plain misguided is my take.


Problem is, yes we need to convince the wider muslim community to stand more vocally against such people, but for every thing you do against extremists they find it more motivational and reason to fight. If the US bomb the hell out of IS in Iraq now then remaining fighters and other smaller groups will see it more example of western oppression and rise up to take the place. A vicious circle sadly.

 

[Carbonox]

I didn't say the police were racist - I said you were. Regardless of his faith or his intentions, you just referred to a man of Middle Eastern appearance as a "monkey", which only proves my point.

On the contrary, his intentions have quite a lot to do with it. I view him as a monkey because of his complete lack of common sense - what kind of a human stabs two cops?

Like I said, community attitudes are key to defeating ISIL, and you're just creating more problems than you're solving. Typical Liberal voter attitude - so convinced that you're right that you'll never consider the alternative, if only to embellish your own knowledge.

Liberal? Not in my worst nightmares. When I look around, I can see that liberal left-wing politicians are the ones causing this whole massive, nearly uncontrolled influx of immigrants from incompatible cultures. As long as they keep shoving multiculturalism down people's throats, I steer clear of them in the voting booth.

 

[Furinkazen]

On the contrary, his intentions have quite a lot to do with it. I view him as a monkey because of his complete lack of common sense - what kind of a human stabs two cops?


Liberal? Not in my worst nightmares. When I look around, I can see that liberal left-wing politicians are the ones causing this whole massive, nearly uncontrolled influx of immigrants from incompatible cultures. As long as they keep shoving multiculturalism down people's throats, I steer clear of them in the voting booth.

You never once specified that particular person.

 

[Carbonox]

You never once specified that particular person.

His ISIL buddies aren't particularly different.