Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Spindrift]

Jay, I couldn't agree with you more.

Adam, swear off TV and news for 3 months. Buy a book or a Kindle and read...spend time with your family, walk your dogs, play your instrument. Record.

I look back on what I've accomplished since I swore off TV and I'm actually a little proud.

A good book to start with is Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves To Death". It is a fantastic read on the degradation of the national dialogue to a bunch of mindless chatter via TV and even the news.  He argues that the-shit-hit-the-fan with the invention of the telegraph. All of a sudden, you could now know things about people very far away in which you had no connection to, really didn't care about, and could do absolutely nothing about.  A fascinating read.

Also, Terry's suggestions of DeTocqueville and the Federalist/Anti-Federalist papers are excellent reads.

[MagnetoSound]

Spindrift wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 20:13

He argues that the-shit-hit-the-fan with the invention of the telegraph. All of a sudden, you could now know things about people very far away in which you had no connection to, really didn't care about, and could do absolutely nothing about.

Rather like the internet.

[Spindrift]

Exactly. It was written in 1985 but is now more relevant than ever!

[Samc]

what are you doing posting here then, aren't you afraid of being corrupted?  

Somebody wrote a book blaming all our problems on technology and it's now gospel.  The problem is that too many of us need someone to tell us things, to figure out and decipher the world for us, sticking our heads in the sand is not the answer, learning how to think for ourselves might be a better solution.

[Samc]

Bill_Urick wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 12:11

I interpreted this as an allusion to the clothing, headware and beards that are typically worn and stand in contrast to most western "fashion".

Duh, come on Bill, isn't this 'look' a particularity of people from the middle east?  He's talking about their clothes but not them!!!

[Spindrift]

Samc wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 14:04

what are you doing posting here then, aren't you afraid of being corrupted?   Somebody wrote a book blaming all our problems on technology and it's now gospel.  The problem is that too many of us need someone to tell us things, to figure out and decipher the world for us, sticking our heads in the sand is not the answer, learning how to think for ourselves might be a better solution.

Afraid of being corrupted?  Way too late for that  This forum is a way to interact and discuss and connect with others and LEARN something and sometimes TEACH something.  

And how do you propose learning to think for one's self?  Sitting in front of the tele or reading/discussing books and interpreting and evaluating the points the author proposes?  Reading a book is having someone tell me what to think?  

I don't know about you but that's not how I approach books and my own personal educational pursuits.

[Wireline]

Ya know what....?


Whether we like it or not, Adam (and every one else) is absolutely entitled to dislike anyone they choose, regardless of reason.  We don't have to like it, agree with it, or even be able to stomach it.

Pretty dadgum pretentious of anyone to judge him for it, though.  Chastising him, calling him names,  or preaching to him about his evil ways is almost a harassing tactic...what next - send the PC police after him?

Jes saying.

I don't like people that wear cargo shorts and flip flops to church, but I don't call them out on it....

[Jon Hodgson]

Wireline wrote on Thu, 21 October 2010 00:44

Ya know what....? Whether we like it or not, Adam (and every one else) is absolutely entitled to dislike anyone they choose, regardless of reason.  We don't have to like it, agree with it, or even be able to stomach it. Pretty dadgum pretentious of anyone to judge him for it, though.  Chastising him, calling him names,  or preaching to him about his evil ways is almost a harassing tactic...what next - send the PC police after him? Jes saying. I don't like people that wear cargo shorts and flip flops to church, but I don't call them out on it....

So you judge people as pretentious and chastise them for judging someone and chastising them?

Ah, the irony.

[Samc]

Wireline wrote on Thu, 21 October 2010 00:44

Ya know what....? Whether we like it or not, Adam (and every one else) is absolutely entitled to dislike anyone they choose, regardless of reason.  We don't have to like it, agree with it, or even be able to stomach it. Pretty dadgum pretentious of anyone to judge him for it, though.  Chastising him, calling him names,  or preaching to him about his evil ways is almost a harassing tactic...what next - send the PC police after him? Jes saying. I don't like people that wear cargo shorts and flip flops to church, but I don't call them out on it....

I couldn't care less who or what he likes or doesn't like, but he posted about it on a public forum, and the same right you have to come here and call me names, chastise and preach to me.....I'm sure I don't have to spell it out for you.  

Like Jon wrote above, "Ah, the irony."

Feel free to continue harassing me all you want by the way, and hey, I like the analogy, you not liking flip flops in church and him not liking muslims...

[Edvaard]

Jon Hodgson wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 21:16

Wireline wrote on Thu, 21 October 2010 00:44 Pretty dadgum pretentious of anyone to judge him for it, though. So you judge people as pretentious and chastise them for judging someone and chastising them?

It wasn't a judgment, just a preliminary hearing.


Personally, I think it's OK to chastise someone for thinking it's OK to have a certain opinion, though I might chastise someone for thinking it's OK to chastise.

[Wireline]

just pointing it out people...y'all have been treating Adam like he's just eaten an AID's infected Ebola sandwich....

Now jumping on me for pointing it out.  Guess we are all guilty of being humans, should be immediately be terminated, and let God sort it all out.

[Samc]

Wireline wrote on Thu, 21 October 2010 03:49

just pointing it out people...y'all have been treating Adam like he's just eaten an AID's infected Ebola sandwich....

Not everybody Ken, most people here have been very supportive and have offered words of encouragement to him, I and a few others have reacted to his prejudicial discourse against muslims.

Just wondering though what the climate would be here now had these vile, and very prejudicial remarks been made against Americans and christianity?

[Bill_Urick]

Samc wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 17:29

Bill_Urick wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 12:11 I interpreted this as an allusion to the clothing, headware and beards that are typically worn and stand in contrast to most western "fashion".   Duh, come on Bill, isn't this 'look' a particularity of people from the middle east?  He's talking about their clothes but not them!!!

You say it is. Jon says it isn't.
Not trying to link the two arguments, but what is true?

I'm not speaking for or defending Adam.
I'm not "bashing a religion".

I'm saying that invoking a racial argument is invalid and lame.

Let's say someone, (Juan Williams, for example?) expresses some misgivings regarding Muslims.

Quote:

"You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Notice Juan specifically mentioned "garb".

I'm sure what Juan really meant was that he doesn't like Muslims because they're "brown people".

Which is really what you guys are saying.

Concerned about Militant-Islamic threats to national security?

You're a racist.

Don't like the healthcare bill?

You're a racist.

Think the federal government should enforce existing immigration law?

You're a racist.


This shit just makes me tired.


From:

http://www.everydaychristian.com/blogs/post/8729/

Quote:

Fact or Opinion? We face a vague landscape in the world of journalism. The lines between the opinion column and the news article are permanently blurred. Purely objective news reporting was never a reality, but it is more obvious now than ever before with our culture of political correctness and challenges to free speech. The way we see the world impacts everything we do, from how we relate to people in the grocery store to how we respond to the daily news. In reporting the most basic news, every choice of word is a decision regarding the communication of a particular message, even if this occurs at the subconscious level. Take for example, NPR President Vivian Schiller’s comments about the firing of Juan Williams. On the one hand, Schiller defended the decision, saying that Williams had violated NPR's guidelines barring its analysts from taking “personal public positions on controversial issues.” This communicates her belief that Williams took a position rather than simply stating a reality. Furthermore, she claimed she was not there to judge Williams feelings, but said his feelings were "between him and his psychiatrist or his publicist." What message does that communicate? Whether she intended to or not, Schiller communicated that she believes Williams has mental issues. If NPR wants its analysts to stick to the facts and avoid personal positions, offenses and controversy, its leadership should mind its own policy. But the truth is: Sticking to the facts apart from any personal influence is all but impossible to do. The real reason? Williams’ firing comes after the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) relayed this message: “NPR should address the fact that one of its news analysts seems to believe that all airline passengers who are perceived to be Muslim can legitimately be viewed as security threats,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. “Such irresponsible and inflammatory comments would not be tolerated if they targeted any other racial, ethnic or religious minority, and they should not pass without action by NPR.” Were Williams comments really irresponsible and inflammatory? How does one measure that? Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe Williams’ comments as valid and thought-provoking. If so, then Williams did his job. He’s a news analyst. He just didn't analyze the news the way NPR or CAIR would have liked, as proven by Schiller’s written response. “In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.” "Unfortunately, Juan’s comments on Fox violated our standards as well as our values and offended many in doing so.” The evidence suggests this reality: NPR values political correctness over transparent analysis of the news. Williams values the opposite. Williams offended Muslims just as O’Reilly did, but CAIR knew full well Fox News would not make “an example” out of O’Reilly, but trusted that NPR would make an example out of Williams.

[Jon Hodgson]

Bill_Urick wrote on Fri, 22 October 2010 11:43

Samc wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 17:29 Bill_Urick wrote on Wed, 20 October 2010 12:11 I interpreted this as an allusion to the clothing, headware and beards that are typically worn and stand in contrast to most western "fashion".   Duh, come on Bill, isn't this 'look' a particularity of people from the middle east?  He's talking about their clothes but not them!!! You say it is. Jon says it isn't. Not trying to link the two arguments, but what is true?

Sorry, but I don't see the contradiction. In fact I think I made it fairly clear that this "look" that many people assume means "muslim" is actually really a regional look, not a religious one. It's not only Christians who make the mistake, muslims do it too, notably young western raised ones who become more militant (and also those of western backgrounds who convert), they want to advertise that they are muslims and proud of it, and how do they do it? By wearing clothes which happen to be the traditional fashion in countries which these days are primarily muslim.

The reality is that there are over a billion muslims in the world and most of them dress the same as their non muslim neighbours, there is no "typical" look.

There are certain looks where you can make a pretty good bet that the wearer is a muslim, that's true, but that's not the same as having a muslim "look".

As for invoking the racial argument, I'm not. I don't know how Adam thinks he can identify muslims by their look, or even in  fact if he thinks he can. "They look the same" doesn't mean "they look the same as each other but different to non christians", which people are assuming he meant, nor have I any reason from your post to think that you have any aversion to muslims due to their skin colour (or indeed any aversion at all), I was merely correcting your apparant belief in a typical muslim look.

[Adam The Truck Driver]

I don't hate any one person, nor any group of people with one, make that two exceptions: 1-people  who are extremist Muslim terrorist. Sorry. Don't like them at all. 2-people who tolerate extremist Muslim terrorists. However terrorist in general are bad, right, but seems a particular group with particular beliefs are always the ones fucking shit up all around the world. I have zero respect for those people. I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire. I can't figure out why it isn't obvious to everyone as to why I would hate those people, with all the horrific killing they do for publicity, and their twisted extremist beliefs. Example would be, member of the world's press taken prisoner, then videoed, having his head cut off while he was alive, posted on the internet. I saw that clip while in training to go overseas. Perhaps I too should sympathize with those terrorists as it seems others do? Then that would put me in the second group and I'd have to hate myself. It isn't skin color or religion I have a problem with. It's the acts of terrorism by a group who all happen to look the same, talk the same, & have the same religion, and have heritage from mostly the middle east I have a problem with. I'm not being racists. If they were, say, Scottish I'd feel the same way, if they committed the same acts of terrorism.