Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I'm sick of the car color metaphor, but here's an article that is very disturbing and shows some pretty crazy behavior when it comes to what some* Muslims--at least in Afghanistan--think is okay to do in the name of their religion.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/21...?_r=2&referrer

TM

*I hesitate to say, "many," but the fact that the Minister of Religion said it would have been a justified street killing had the destroyed pages been from the Koran, speaks volumes.

The death of Farkhunda is definitely a "Ferguson" moment in Afghanistan, a moment capable of igniting change because of the strong reaction of so many, but also one where there are some pretty significant forces aligned against that change. I was up last night in the middle of the night, and my twitter feed was full of articles on Farkhunda, like this one: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...081503908.html or this one: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32009004, and particularly full of images from her funeral.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The death of Farkhunda is definitely a "Ferguson" moment in Afghanistan, a moment capable of igniting change because of the strong reaction of so many, but also one where there are some pretty significant forces aligned against that change. I was up last night in the middle of the night, and my twitter feed was full of articles on Farkhunda, like this one: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...081503908.html or this one: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32009004, and particularly full of images from her funeral.

A couple of things:

1. I brought it up because, weeks ago, we were discussing whether or not the propensity to commit serious violence in the name of Islam was accepted by a large number of Muslims such that there was a lack of outspoken resistance by Muslims to violent acts committed in the name of Islam (or worse outright support of such violent acts). This would seem to demonstrate that both of our points in that the such violence is viewed as acceptable by many and, that there are those who are speaking out against such violence.*

2. It is not at all clear to me that the strong reaction is due to the public, violent mob-killing of a person or whether is was due to the public, violent killing of a person who was innocent of burning the pages of the Koran. It would seem to me that if it was the latter, and that is a strong possibility given the coverage I've seen and read, then what kind of change has been ignited? A move towards only instantly killing those who actually blaspheme?

TM

*And yes, I do recall being encouraged by the many examples we went over here of Muslims speaking out against religious violence.

[Replaced_Texan]

http://www.tedcruz.com/

*snerk*

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

A couple of things:

1. I brought it up because, weeks ago, we were discussing whether or not the propensity to commit serious violence in the name of Islam was accepted by a large number of Muslims such that there was a lack of outspoken resistance by Muslims to violent acts committed in the name of Islam (or worse outright support of such violent acts). This would seem to demonstrate that both of our points in that the such violence is viewed as acceptable by many and, that there are those who are speaking out against such violence.*

2. It is not at all clear to me that the strong reaction is due to the public, violent mob-killing of a person or whether is was due to the public, violent killing of a person who was innocent of burning the pages of the Koran. It would seem to me that if it was the latter, and that is a strong possibility given the coverage I've seen and read, then what kind of change has been ignited? A move towards only instantly killing those who actually blaspheme?

TM

*And yes, I do recall being encouraged by the many examples we went over here of Muslims speaking out against religious violence.

I tried to answer in the context of some of that discussion.

Would it help you to know that now, a few days after this event, they have identified and arrested 18 people in that mob and that they have suspended 30 police officers and are holding 17 of those police officers for questioning? I would have liked to have seen Holder do that here. That's a lot of outspoken resistance. Likewise, Farkhunda's funeral was a lot of outspoken resistance. This in a country where there are armed religious fundamentalists a couple hours drive away or closer ready to punish such resistance with violence in the dead of night.

A lot of the facts in the times article may not be accurate. A lot of other press has indicated that initial reports that she was mentally troubled are not accurate, for example. What precisely is the movement for change and how might it be coopted? I think that's a hard question to answer contemporaneously from a half world away relying only on reporting in English. But it is clearly a BFD in Afghanistan right now. Probably a Bigger More Fucking Deal than Ferguson ever was here.

If you want to look at propensity to commit violence across large groups of people, I would warn you that most statistical surveys will show the US is the one of the most violent countries in the world outside of active war zones. Our murder rate last year was higher than Afghanistan's. If you look at deaths in custody, we're competing with some of the most repressive dictatorships in the world. If you look at death sentences by courts, we're once again in the company of notorious police states. We should be careful about throwing stones.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

http://www.tedcruz.com/

*snerk*

www.tedcruzforamerica.com

*serky snerk*

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I tried to answer in the context of some of that discussion.

Would it help you to know that now, a few days after this event, they have identified and arrested 18 people in that mob and that they have suspended 30 police officers and are holding 17 of those police officers for questioning? I would have liked to have seen Holder do that here. That's a lot of outspoken resistance. Likewise, Farkhunda's funeral was a lot of outspoken resistance. This in a country where there are armed religious fundamentalists a couple hours drive away or closer ready to punish such resistance with violence in the dead of night.

A lot of the facts in the times article may not be accurate. A lot of other press has indicated that initial reports that she was mentally troubled are not accurate, for example. What precisely is the movement for change and how might it be coopted? I think that's a hard question to answer contemporaneously from a half world away relying only on reporting in English. But it is clearly a BFD in Afghanistan right now. Probably a Bigger More Fucking Deal than Ferguson ever was here.

If you want to look at propensity to commit violence across large groups of people, I would warn you that most statistical surveys will show the US is the one of the most violent countries in the world outside of active war zones. Our murder rate last year was higher than Afghanistan's. If you look at deaths in custody, we're competing with some of the most repressive dictatorships in the world. If you look at death sentences by courts, we're once again in the company of notorious police states. We should be careful about throwing stones.

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about something very specific--violence committed in the name of religion (or maybe tolerance levels for such violence).

And yeah, it helps that they've made arrests and are holding police for questioning. But the question remains, had she actually burned the Koran, would there be all this action? Isn't that the crux of the conversation we were having?

And I don't really understand why you think bombarding me with analogies is helping. I don't agree that this was like Ferguson and I wish you'd stop comparing the two.

But even if that analogy did fit, so what? Saying we're super violent and mentioning instances where we do stupid violent shit doesn't render Muslims killing blasphemers non-existent or correct. Can I not hold two similar opinions about how awful violence is and how insane the causes are? Does it make it less awful that (i) a mob will stone someone to death in the street because it's acceptable to do in the name of Islam if one defaces the Koran if (ii) cops in the US shoot unarmed black people?

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about something very specific--violence committed in the name of religion (or maybe tolerance levels for such violence).

And yeah, it helps that they've made arrests and are holding police for questioning. But the question remains, had she actually burned the Koran, would there be all this action? Isn't that the crux of the conversation we were having?

And I don't really understand why you think bombarding me with analogies is helping. I don't agree that this was like Ferguson and I wish you'd stop comparing the two.

But even if that analogy did fit, so what? Saying we're super violent and mentioning instances where we do stupid violent shit doesn't render Muslims killing blasphemers non-existent or correct. Can I not hold two similar opinions about how awful violence is and how insane the causes are? Does it make it less awful that (i) a mob will stone someone to death in the street because it's acceptable to do in the name of Islam if one defaces the Koran if (ii) cops in the US shoot unarmed black people?

TM

First of all, as you know from these boards, limiting conversation to your chosen topic is impossible. I have no interest in being deposed.

I may find the mob violence interesting for different reasons than you. I find it interesting because it is a galvanizing moment there from what I can see. The reaction to it appears pretty overwhelming. And very rapid. As opposed to, say, Saudi Arabia, where I have trouble seeing such a reaction, or India, where there has been some horrific violence against women but where the reaction is more muted and limited. That reaction in Afghanistan is really interesting. Well, at least to me. It is the possibility and direction of change that interests me. Sorry if that's not what you want to talk about.

I don't just suspect but am pretty damn certain both of us, and just about everyone on this board, thinks both the mob violence here and the police violence in Ferguson are very bad things. Did you really pose that as a question someone (that is, me) might argue with you about?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

http://www.tedcruz.com/

*snerk*

Hehehe.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

First of all, as you know from these boards, limiting conversation to your chosen topic is impossible. I have no interest in being deposed.

Very interesting since we spent a ton of time talking about the exact issue I was bringing back up again. Seems to me you are incapable of admitting that Muslims (at least in the Middle East) are open to violence if their religion is insulted. But whatever. If you want to shift to talking about the violence we commit, okay. I agree. It's all bad.

If you want to talk about the seeming changing attitudes towards the type of violence in the article, great! But part of that conversation should include the fact that tolerance for religious-based violence is prevalent, even if it's changing.

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I may find the mob violence interesting for different reasons than you. I find it interesting because it is a galvanizing moment there from what I can see. The reaction to it appears pretty overwhelming. And very rapid. As opposed to, say, Saudi Arabia, where I have trouble seeing such a reaction, or India, where there has been some horrific violence against women but where the reaction is more muted and limited. That reaction in Afghanistan is really interesting. Well, at least to me. It is the possibility and direction of change that interests me. Sorry if that's not what you want to talk about.

Yes. I agree with everything you said. But you win. I have neither the energy or interest in trying to continue the conversation we were having. Congratulations.

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I don't just suspect but am pretty damn certain both of us, and just about everyone on this board, thinks both the mob violence here and the police violence in Ferguson are very bad things. Did you really pose that as a question someone (that is, me) might argue with you about?

No, jackass. The point that you are intentionally ignoring is that your analogies are misplaced in this conversation. Like I already said, "all this violence is bad." Why we're talking about Ferguson or other violence committed in the US or by the US, as it relates to a stoning in Afghanistan is beyond me. If I think one is terrible, why you have to bring up another as a way to show that we do bad shit too is highly irrelevant.

Maybe if you brought up the times that lunatics tried to kill people in Mosques or temples here, it would make more sense. Then we could discuss the difference between those types of attacks (hate-centered) and the one in the article (instant mob punishing a blasphemer) and the official reaction of the Minister of Religion.

If not, I don't really care.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Very interesting since we spent a ton of time talking about the exact issue I was bringing back up again. Seems to me you are incapable of admitting that Muslims (at least in the Middle East) are open to violence if their religion is insulted. But whatever. If you want to shift to talking about the violence we commit, okay. I agree. It's all bad.

If you want to talk about the seeming changing attitudes towards the type of violence in the article, great! But part of that conversation should include the fact that tolerance for religious-based violence is prevalent, even if it's changing.

Yes. I agree with everything you said. But you win. I have neither the energy or interest in trying to continue the conversation we were having. Congratulations.

No, jackass. The point that you are intentionally ignoring is that your analogies are misplaced in this conversation. Like I already said, "all this violence is bad." Why we're talking about Ferguson or other violence committed in the US or by the US, as it relates to a stoning in Afghanistan is beyond me. If I think one is terrible, why you have to bring up another as a way to show that we do bad shit too is highly irrelevant.

Maybe if you brought up the times that lunatics tried to kill people in Mosques or temples here, it would make more sense. Then we could discuss the difference between those types of attacks (hate-centered) and the one in the article (instant mob punishing a blasphemer) and the official reaction of the Minister of Religion.

If not, I don't really care.

TM

Some Muslims are open to violence if their religion is insulted.

So what? That's all you got?

So are some Buddhists.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Some Muslims are open to violence if their religion is insulted.

So what? That's all you got?

So are some Buddhists.

Oh, for fuck's sake. Are you afraid that someone is going to peel the "COEXIST" bumper sticker off of your Volvo?

In other news, I am in the deposition that will not end. And I think my corporate representative just admitted to some sort of felony offense of a work safety rule dealing with maintaining the guards on deli slicers.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Oh, for fuck's sake. Are you afraid that someone is going to peel the "COEXIST" bumper sticker off of your Volvo?

In other news, I am in the deposition that will not end. And I think my corporate representative just admitted to some sort of felony offense of a work safety rule dealing with maintaining the guards on deli slicers.

I don't drive foreign cars.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Some Muslims are open to violence if their religion is insulted.

So what? That's all you got?

So are some Buddhists.

Right. Listen, if you don't want to have a discussion, just say so.

My initial argument was that the attitude amongst Muslims that violence visited upon those who insult Mohammed or desecrate a Koran or blaspheme in some other way is justified seems to create an atmosphere that breeds Muslims who engage in such violence. You and Ty argued that is was more about being poor and disaffected (simplified version of your arguments, for sure). I don't entirely disagree. I thought both of your arguments were very convincing. However, in places where people can spontaneously join in and crush a woman with rocks and their feet because someone loosely accused her of burning the Koran and the Minister of Religion said such a killing would have been justified only if she actually burned the Koran, it leads me to believe that, although surely the issues you mention are important contributing factors, there is more to it than poverty and feeling like an outsider.

And I agree that there may be a change brewing based on the reaction you mentioned (although, it is very hard to tell if the swift reaction to the mob killing is based on the fact that the woman was "innocent" of the "crime" she was killed for or if murder by mob generally is the issue). I surely don't disagree that any such change should be welcomed.

But it seems to me that there is something different about how many* Muslims think about their religion and what an appropriate punishment should be for those who insult it, or worse, who don't believe, that contributes to an atmosphere in which people (young, poor, whatever) think it's okay to turn to violence in the name of Islam.

TM

*Not all or most.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Oh, for fuck's sake. Are you afraid that someone is going to peel the "COEXIST" bumper sticker off of your Volvo?

In other news, I am in the deposition that will not end. And I think my corporate representative just admitted to some sort of felony offense of a work safety rule dealing with maintaining the guards on deli slicers.

Quote from my Austrian exchange student:

Every Austrian family has a meat slicer, and every Austrian family has an "i almost cut off my finger with my meat slicer" story.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Oh, for fuck's sake. Are you afraid that someone is going to peel the "COEXIST" bumper sticker off of your Volvo?

To me the interesting, and unknowable, question is why the fact that she likely didn't burn the Koran is so prominent. Because it sort of parallels the fuck nuts that feel it was okay to shoot the kid in Ferguson because he stole a pack of cigarettes. Both "crimes" shouldn't be a death sentence with no need of a trial.

And why it is different that no one (other than people with clearly unacceptable racist feelings) is saying "let's take a step back and think of whether it's okay that racially biased cops shoot kids where they shouldn't," whereas there seems to be a portion of muslims that think, "well if she had burned the holy book....." GGG you know more than us about the Middle East, would the protests be lesser if she had?

EDIT(I had not read T's last post before writing this- he is the Fugee to my TMdiva)