Discussion and Debate Community Thread

[Prodromos]

Speaking of crimes against humanity, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE are helping China commit genocide against the Uyghurs:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/08/middl...ntl/index.html

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Amannisa Abdullah and her husband, Ahmad Talip, were on their way to shop for baby clothes in Dubai, when the message that changed both their lives came through. Ahmad read it and announced an abrupt change of plan: He had to report to a police station immediately.

Ahmad dropped Amannisa off at a friend's house that day in February 2018, promising to pick her up later. He never came back.

In their Dubai apartment, a sleepless Amannisa prayed and cried through the night, watching the hours pass as her repeated calls to Ahmad went unanswered.

The next morning, the heavily pregnant 29-year-old shuffled out of the door, hugging her 5-year-old son close. They hailed a taxi to the police station where she tried to explain her predicament to a police officer.

As she spoke, her little boy tugged at her hand. Quietly, he pointed towards a jail cell where Ahmad was sitting.

For 13 days, Amannisa shuttled back and forth between her home and the jail, pleading with law enforcement officials to release Ahmad.

With each visit, her husband looked more dejected. He told her he was convinced that the long reach of China had reached his Uyghur family in the United Arab Emirates.

"It's not safe here. You must take our boy and [go] to Turkey," he told Amannisa in their last conversation. "If our new baby is a girl, please name her Amina. If he's a boy, name him Abdullah."

A week later, Ahmad was sent to the UAE capital, Abu Dhabi. Five days later, Amannisa said, Abu Dhabi authorities told her that he had been extradited to China.

Their daughter, Amina, was born a month later in Turkey. She has never met her father.

China vehemently denies allegations of human rights abuses, insisting that the Xinjiang camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," designed to stamp out religious extremism and terrorism.

But testimonies collected by CNN from former detainees describe incidents of forced labor, torture, sexual abuse and even the deaths of fellow detainees.

The US State Department has accused Beijing of "genocide" against the Uyghurs.

In addition to cultural assimilation, human rights groups and overseas Uyghur activists have also alleged that the Chinese government coerced Uyghurs to submit to birth control and enforced sterilization.

In a 2019 open letter, more than a dozen Muslim-majority countries — including the UAE, Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia — publicly endorsed China's policies in Xinjiang. They were among 37 signatories responding to Western criticism of China at the UN Human Rights Council.

Following a visit to Xinjiang in 2020, the UAE's ambassador to Beijing publicly praised China's policies in the province. In a sit-down interview with Chinese state media this February, Ali al-Dhaheri said what "impressed" him the most during the visit was "the positive plan and vision for Xinjiang -- China wants the region to play an active part in the Chinese economy, provide stability, raise living standards and improve the lives of the region's people."

[Vanoi]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ex-mossad...161420930.html

Looks like the former director of Mossad who stepped down days ago did not share the same concerns the US had about China. Will this mean the new Israeli government will also want to keep friendly relations with China? I don't see the Israelis suddenly becoming hard on China or unfriendly with them.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Well if you paint the evil yellow red boogey man on the wall, you can justify increasing defence etat funding and rally the nation behind you. Internal societal problems will then be solved on the Saint Will-Never-Happen day...

[Sir Adrian]

Found an interesting map that shows the reality on the ground that some governments/people do not want you to know about. Purple = greeks, red = armenians.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Islamophobic hate speech kills

Four members of a Muslim family were killed in a "premeditated" vehicle attack on Sunday, Canadian police say.




The attack took place in the city of London, Ontario province. A boy aged nine, the family's only survivor, is in hospital with serious injuries.


A 20-year-old Canadian man has been charged with four counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.


The attack was the worst against Canadian Muslims since six people were killed in a Quebec City mosque in 2017.


"It is believed that these victims were targeted because they were Muslim," Det Supt Paul Waight told a news conference on Monday.


Police are weighing possible terrorism charges, he said, adding that it is believed to be a hate crime.




https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57390398

[Abdülmecid I]

An interesting idea about fixing global warming, made by a Texan congressman.

[Cope]

In one breath, a state perpetrating a genocide against Muslims is dismissed as a "boogey man"; in another, "Islamophobic hate speech kills".

Well if you paint the evil yellow red boogey man on the wall, you can justify increasing defence etat funding and rally the nation behind you. Internal societal problems will then be solved on the Saint Will-Never-Happen day...

Islamophobic hate speech kills

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

@Cope: I don't care what a person is saying, which has quote my posts in the past at one occasion with nothing else than posting Wehrmacht songs like "Wacht am Rhein".

[Axalon]

Islamophobic hate speech kills ...

The same can certainly be said about Islam
Where were your (or the usual) PC-/leftist-/pro-Islam-outrage then, I wonder?

- A

[Abdülmecid I]

Whataboutism aside, Ramadan Bombathon and ReligionofPeace.com do not inspire much confidence to me about the source's impartiality. Their methodology seems a bit shaky, as well:

Two civilians are blown to bits by Sunni shrapnel.

I had met some quite radical Shiite debris a few years ago and they were saying some pretty nasty and sexist stuff about Aisha. I sympathise with the vitriol for for Caliph Yazid, but Aisha as well? We need to draw the line somewhere.

[Axalon]

Ok, so you don’t like “TheReligionofPeace.com”… I get it. Now, what will be you complaining about Wikipedia's global terrorist attacks for 2020, I wonder? At least 30 of the 42 attacks listed there, are clearly linked to Islam somehow - unless my math is failing me…

The bottom line is that it clearly illustrates that Islam repeatedly kills and injures – year after year - and that on a magnitude/scale that ridiculously dwarfs any supposed/proclaimed “hate-speech-islamophobia”-levels anywhere. Is the supposed outrage - expressed here (or in general) – proportionate to the global context of Islam-related attacks, I wonder? So, far I can only (in my assessment) come up with a “no”. If you can magically conjure up a credible “yes” – then by all means, let’s see it.

- A

[Abdülmecid I]

Besides the fact that abstract concepts don't kill, I'm not sure how valid these comparisons are. Most of these attacks are part of active insurgencies or civil wars. Would it be valid to say that Kurdish nationalism is more bloodthirsty than Stalinism, because an Apoist faction happens to be currently active in Syria? In Europe, on the other hand, according to the incomplete list of Wikipedia, the most lethal attack was committed by a far-right extremist.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Happy Birthday to the US Army! The world would be a worse place to live in without you.

[Sir Adrian]

Besides the fact that abstract concepts don't kill, I'm not sure how valid these comparisons are.

They do. They've killed quite a lot of people in the last century alone, in fact. Not to mention all the people who died in the name of honor. Your argument is based on a faulty premise and cherry-picking examples.

[Axalon]

Besides the fact that abstract concepts don't kill, I'm not sure how valid these comparisons are. Most of these attacks are part of active insurgencies or civil wars.

Wishful thinking... The fact is that ideas and abstract concepts do kill because they inspire people to kill… Entire world wars have been fought because of ideas and abstract concepts - other events that suggest the very same are for instance: the Holocaust, the Cultural Revolution, the Stalinist Purges or the Inquisition... Even that Canadian example is ultimately a matter of ideas and abstract concepts btw. In short, that dog won’t fly…

Furthermore, ALL terrorist attacks are deliberate acts of war (one way or another). As all such attacks are the results of individuals and/or organisations who ultimately consider themselves to be in a state of war against their perceived enemy – whatever/whoever that might be. In short, whether such attacks are staged in insurgencies, civil wars or otherwise are utterly irrelevant. It is a non-factor. It makes no difference. And, insurgencies and civil wars are no excuse what-so-ever for resorting to terrorist tactics and/or methods anyways. A terrorist attack is a terrorist attack utterly regardless of where it is staged. Period.

Would it be valid to say that Kurdish nationalism is more bloodthirsty than Stalinism, because an Apoist faction happens to be currently active in Syria?

Suffice to say that this mentioned Apoist faction is clearly the result of Kurdish nationalism in the first place. Furthermore, it is obviously bloodthirsty enough, to willingly take up arms and deliberately kill people (who are perceived as their/its enemies) because of its convictions due to - or in the name of - that Kurdish nationalism.

How Stalinism comes into play in such a context is unclear to me – it strikes me as irrelevant altogether, to be frank. I see no clear or credible connection there, as far as I can tell. Stalinism eventually managed to kill/waste some 20-40 million people - I seriously doubt that this Apoist faction you speak of is anywhere near such figures. So far, at least…

In Europe, on the other hand, according to the incomplete list of Wikipedia, the most lethal attack was committed by a far-right extremist.

I think this statement is overly selective and misleading - to a fault - despite it is technically true within the limited and abnormal perspective that spawned it. I will now contextualize this statement as to show why. I’ll start with…

In Africa, on the other hand, according to the same incomplete list of Wikipedia, the most lethal terrorist attack on the planet 2020 was committed by boko-haram jihadists. In this particular instance - 110 farmers were beheaded for not being Muslims (or sufficiently Muslim) in the first place, with an additional 6 injured survivors. That is 11 times more people killed then that anti-Islamic extremist attack in Europe (Germany) that the above statement curiously or conveniently confines itself too.

In Asia 2020 - according to the same incomplete list of Wikipedia, the most lethal attack was in Afghanistan committed by some other full-throttle jihadists. 34 people died in that specific instance, and add to that some 82 injured too. That’s 3 times the people killed by that right-wing extremist attack staged in Europe (Germany) that seems to be so special - that the above statement simply ignores these outlined details.

In Europe 2020, according to the same incomplete list of Wikipedia, the most deadly terrorist attack that year was indeed that anti-islamic attack in Germany. However, once we also bother to examine all this in a wider (and more natural) historical context – say, since 2000 – we find out that apparently the only year that any anti-Islamic terrorist attacks actually managed to stage/execute a deadlier attack then any pro-Islamic jihadist counterparts in Europe is - 2020... The infamous Breivik-attack of 2011 does not qualify, as that was hardly an anti-islamic terrorist attack - by any rational standards. In order for an anti-Islamic terrorist attack to be – credibly – categorized as anti-Islamic it has too actually target (primarily) Muslims (of sorts) in the first place. Breivik clearly did not do that - hence his attack evidently fails to qualify into that sort of category. To still pretend that the Breivik-attack is an anti-Islamic terrorist attack anyways – in order to sustain some desired leftist/PC-narrative – is ridiculous, irrational and dishonest. This despite what Breivik may have claimed back and forth in his enormous manifesto - if we are supposed to be honest here, that is.

Anyways, let’s see what Wikipedia actually do list as the deadliest terrorist attacks in Europe since 2000, and all that in relation to Islam – either way. Now, keep in mind that to qualify into that list each such terrorist-attack must have killed at least 10+ people. A quick look there and we can easily establish that the frequency of pro-Islam jihadist terrorist attacks as compared to any anti-Islamic extremist terrorist attacks stands at a drastic 10 to 1 ratio in favor of the former. As in 10 such pro-Islamic terrorist attacks and 1 anti-Islamic terrorist attack listed there. Furthermore, the actual kill-ratios of all such relevant attacks will also further illustrate striking differences. The listed 10 pro-Islam attacks have in total killed some 599 people, since the year 2000. And the very same attacks also injured some 4549 people, on top (if my math holds up). Now, if we look at the other side - the only listed anti-Islamic attack killed 10 people (+1 if we count the killed terrorist too) and injured another 6. Thus we have – on that list, the deadliest terrorist attacks in Europe – a 60:1 kill ratio for the pro-Islam terrorists in sheer terms of generated kills. This over the last 20 years…

In other words - on that list alone - we have the circumstance of 600 people dead because they were not Muslims (or not Muslim enough) compared to the 10 people killed because they were Muslims (or was perceived as such). Again, the frequency of these (deadliest) attacks has been 10:1 - thus far - in favor of the pro-Islam jihadist terrorists. This is the reality and proportions we are dealing with here - and it will obviously be factor in all this - whether we like or not. As I said, all these things outlined here was evidently excluded in that (above) statement, as it curiously/conveniently fails to mention/recognize all such relevant and significant details and contexts in which it certainly should be understood and presented with in the first place...


- A
-------------------
As for the “incomplete lists”-card in general… If you do know of any better, more complete or more reliable
or relevant lists on such matters - by all means produce them. If not, further undefined complaints about
the ones we actually do have - will only go so far…

[Vanoi]

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columni...s-jacob-sullum

Great article discussing the legality of anti-BDS laws in the United States and a recent court case involving an anti-BDS law that was struck down.

There's around 6 other on-going court cases regarding anti-BDS laws. None of them have made it to the Supreme Court though in each case the judge has ruled against the anti-BDS laws.

Politically motivated boycotts are protected speech so it would seem like these anti-BDS laws were likely to be struck down.

[Prodromos]

If anti-BDS laws are unconstitutional then the same must be true of all other anti-discrimination laws. After all, prejudice toward Jews and Israelis is no more constitutionally protected than prejudice toward blacks or Australians.

[Vanoi]

If anti-BDS laws are unconstitutional then the same must be true of all other anti-discrimination laws. After all, prejudice toward Jews and Israelis is no more constitutionally protected than prejudice toward blacks or Australians.

You can have prejudice towards blacks or Australians. Just not regarding employment, housing, disability, or things like service. Anti-discrimination laws are not universally applied to every aspect of life.

There's also another aspect to this case.

Another problem with these anti-BDS is that they require government contractors to promise not to boycott Israel or they mandate public investment funds avoid entities that are boycotting Israel. That's not legal.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws

Critics also cite USAID v. Alliance for Open Society (2013) where the Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot require organizations to profess to a specific viewpoint as a condition for government funding. But anti-BDS laws coerces contractors bidding to profess to a specific viewpoint, namely of not boycotting Israel, which would be an unlawful "constitutional condition."[37]

[Exarch]

Chinese space station is being assembled; China is humanity's last and best hope for becoming an interstellar species.

[sumskilz]

All parties in Germany's grand coalition government have agreed to ban the Hamas flag after several antisemitic incidents. For those that don't know, the Hamas flag is green, reportedly Muhamad's favorite color according to tradition. On it, written in Arabic is the Shahada, Islam's essential profession of faith: "There is no god but Allah. Muhammed is the messenger of Allah".

This is not the first time Germany has taken decisive against such a hate symbol, Hezbollah's flag has also been banned. So, no more bad flags, problem solved.