Son of Sam
Banned
So the Muslim leaders who are openly condemning ISIS are secretly backing ISIS, is that what you're implying?
No. In regards to ISIS we have not seen that.
So the Muslim leaders who are openly condemning ISIS are secretly backing ISIS, is that what you're implying?
What. Trust me. They are not integrated into american society the way you think they are.I don't know about China or the other places, but the aborigines in the Americas / Australia were efficiently genocided, so their low population numbers may explain a long period of non-radicalization. When their numbers came back, they were already integrated in the american societies.
What. Trust me. They are not integrated into american society the way you think they are.
Also are you implying that we use genocide on Muslims so they can be better integrated into American society?
Let alone the fact that Europeans came to North America and systematically wiped out almost all Native Americans. Are we implying that the Natives in 1500 were radicals?
So genocide is okay if only you give the original inhabitants shit land, force them to live far away from everybody else, and then force their children to go to residential schools so their future generations forgot their language, culture, and religion.Well yes.
But they are so few and relatively pacified that America was comfortable in giving them their own little states and some sovereignty
So genocide is okay if only you give the original inhabitants shit land, force them to live far away from everybody else, and then force their children to go to residential schools so their future generations forgot their language, culture, and religion.
Effectively nutering a whole fucking group of people.
I feel like every time I hear about Sam Harris it involves someone else trying to explain what he "really meant."
I feel like every time I hear about Sam Harris it involves someone else trying to explain what he "really meant."
Yes because there's people purposely cherry picking his words to make it look a certain way. Complex issues can't be described in one sentence.
Holy...wow....the Irony in this very quote is staggering. Think about it everyone. Go over this very quote and look at the historical perspective of all arguments on this issue by looking at this
Yes, think about it. Harris has always said there needs to be open and honest discussion about the effects of dangerous and dogmatic ideas. This isn't a simple issue, has anyone claimed it to be?
Problem is you can't speak about it in the middle east, you'll die.
You don't get it did you. ok
He understands it. And he understands how doctrines like this can be a problem in the areas where those factors are at play.
It's easier to begin a religion with the weak but it can only grow after it takes over the establishment.
Then please by all means, elaborate.
Why are you defending genocide now?
I really didn't get that impression at all. Quite the opposite, really. He was resistant to the idea at every turn. He went on and on with the "if someone says they're doing it for religious reasons, why don't libs believe them?" angle. It seemed that he felt like political/socio-economical issues were the least of the reasons; the least significant of factors. To me, that's a failure to appreciate the significance of poverty and anger or simple mental derangement of sociopaths. The religion just becomes the outlet to vent anger that otherwise has nowhere to go rather than simply the religion being the essentially the beginning and end of the conversation.
Haha. wow guy, just wow!
I'm not the one who brought in genocide and linked it to integration to western society, Which this thread isn't about.
...says the guy purposely cherry picking Quran verses out of context to make it look a certain way.Yes because there's people purposely cherry picking his words to make it look a certain way. Complex issues can't be described in one sentence.
i didnt knew who Cenk Uygur was before watching this video, but now i know he is an idiot.
what exactly qualifies him to do that tv show?
Reading tripe of his that misrepresents Islamic actors
Yes, we are observing. Beheadings, shooting guards in a peaceful ceremony, running soldiers over, sentencing people to death for insulting the prophet all in the last month.staggering isn't it? the words are out for everyone to see and observe. absolutely ridiculous
Yes, to look a certain way.....You shouldn't have to interpret the word of god. If you have to interpret the divine wishes of your deity then you should probably throw the whole thing out....says the guy purposely cherry picking Quran verses out of context to make it look a certain way.
Not that I'm defending what he's saying, but passages on justifying warfare and killing under defensive circumstances are not what I'd expect from an interventionist, benevolent, omnipotent god whose absolute morality pervades the cosmos, no. It's 100% what I'd expect from a human religious leader in 5th/6th century Arabia, though.
If you're making a comparison to other religions, it's certainly plausible to see pacifism married to self sacrifice. Buddhist theology doesn't give us just war theory, and Jesus was all about martyrdom. Old testament Christianity is iffy as usual, and seems to be a completely unrelated god to the Gospel peacenik god.
I personally think that the Old Testament God, and the version of him in the Qur'an, are more thematically similar than God in the Gospel. It almost seems like Jesus was the one off when it comes to the Abrahamic faiths.
I feel like every time I hear about Sam Harris it involves someone else trying to explain what he "really meant."
Who is he misrepresenting? Are we going to continue to play this ridiculous game that a faith based on an ancient doctrine filled with some pretty poor ideas doesn't hold any accountability in this? Now that's wow.
Yes, we are observing. Beheadings, shooting guards in a peaceful ceremony, running soldiers over, sentencing people to death for insulting the prophet all in the last month.
what else would you like to observe?
Yes, to look a certain way.....You shouldn't have to interpret the word of god. If you have to interpret the divine wishes of your deity then you should probably throw the whole thing out.
"You cannot quote Sam Harris out of context! But I will quote a big book written over 23 years out of context"Yes, to look a certain way.....You shouldn't have to interpret the word of god. If you have to interpret the divine wishes of your deity then you should probably throw the whole thing out.
Harris himself does it all the time as well. Invariably, the follow-ups to articles he writes are filled with caveats, qualifications, and empty rationalizations.
You'd think he'd strive to make himself come off as clear and lucid the first time around, yet this appears to consistently pose great difficulties for him.
Harris himself does it all the time as well. Invariably, the follow-ups to articles he writes are filled with caveats, qualifications, and empty rationalizations.
You'd think he'd strive to make himself come off as clear and lucid the first time around, yet this appears to consistently pose great difficulties for him.
He has quite a big beef brewing with Glenn Greenwald. The way he snipes at Greenwald in his follow up "clarifications" is just juvenile. I think Glenn called him a Neocon at one point.Harris himself does it all the time as well. Invariably, the follow-ups to articles he writes are filled with caveats, qualifications, and empty rationalizations.
You'd think he'd strive to make himself come off as clear and lucid the first time around, yet this appears to consistently pose great difficulties for him.
He has quite a big beef brewing with Glenn Greenwald. The way he snipes at Greenwald in his follow up "clarifications" is just juvenile. I think Glenn called him a Neocon at one point.
My bad. Didn't know you were replying to somebody else.I am answering to the old post of a guy who said why imperialism in america didn't lead to radicalization like it did with islamic nations.
Part of the answer is, because what happened in america was way worse.
You are the one trying to misconstruct that as a defense of genocide. I am sorry the point went over your head.
"You cannot quote Sam Harris out of context! But I will quote a big book written over 23 years out of context"
Hypocrit.
Aparently the nearly billion moderates who believe in the word of Quran as the word of God are fundamentalists as per that view of thinking.
There are 3 flavors of Muslims:
1. Liberal Muslims who are casual muslims who are not serious about their faith (who Sam Harris describes as True Moderates) *Minority
2. Moderate Muslims who are serious about their faith (Who Sam Harris says are hard to find if existing) *Majority
3. Fundamentalist Muslims who follow maudoodism/Wahabbism (modern concepts of conservatism) (Who Sam Harris rails against) *Minority
Maninthemirror, where's the uproar from the Muslim community both here and in the Middle East over what just transpired in Canada? Where is it? Where's the marches on the streets?
How come if majority of Muslims disagree with radicalism are there only burnings of embassies and marches in public with supposed offenses to the faith that involves cartoons or some silly movie. I would think murdering an innocent man at a ceremony would be the most offensive slander to the faith of all.
I'm observing, and I don't see it.
Maninthemirror, where's the uproar from the Muslim community both here and in the Middle East over what just transpired in Canada? Where is it? Where's the marches on the streets?
How come if majority of Muslims disagree with radicalism are there only burnings of embassies and marches in public with supposed offenses to the faith that involves cartoons or some silly movie. I would think murdering an innocent man at a ceremony would be the most offensive slander to the faith of all.
I'm observing, and I don't see it.
Why should the billions of Muslims in the world have to answer for the actions of that crazy in Canada?
Where is the uproar over all the innocent Muslims killed in drone strikes and wars in Asia?
Who is he misrepresenting? Are we going to continue to play this ridiculous game that a faith based on an ancient doctrine filled with some pretty poor ideas doesn't hold any accountability in this? Now that's wow.
.
I can't think of anyone more pedantically enunciate than Harris. Of all people to criticisize for a lack of clarity!Thats my main problem with him. I agree with him in this interview, but in his writing he could learn from that BA in Philosophy he has and learn to be far more clear. In most philosophy it is paramount that you be as clear as possible (almost to the point of boredom). I guess he skipped that part of essay writing in philosophy. Some philosophy is ambiguous, but mostly that comes from the realm of metaphysics which itself is ambiguous.
personal interpretations vs literal interpretations of the Qur'an in this thread...says the guy purposely cherry picking Quran verses out of context to make it look a certain way.
At this point I really want you to cut the bullshit and just give us your thesis statement because reading these posts it's hard not to conclude you have a complete disdain for not only Islam but most of those practicing it.Maninthemirror, where's the uproar from the Muslim community both here and in the Middle East over what just transpired in Canada? Where is it? Where's the marches on the streets?
How come if majority of Muslims disagree with radicalism are there only burnings of embassies and marches in public with supposed offenses to the faith that involves cartoons or some silly movie. I would think murdering an innocent man at a ceremony would be the most offensive slander to the faith of all.
I'm observing, and I don't see it.
39 min and Cenk looks for the worse. Have done so much facepalming here.
Why should the billions of Muslims in the world have to answer for the actions of that crazy in Canada?
At this point I really want you to cut the bullshit and just give us your thesis statement because reading these posts it's hard not to conclude you have a complete disdain for not only Islam but most of those practicing it.
There's roughly 1.5 billion muslims in the world. So, no not billionS. And i never said they should answer for it, i said why isn't there as large of an uproar for that then for someone depicting Muhammed in a cartoon? Muslim organizations in Denmark called for the cartoonist to be fired, to be imprisoned, riots erupted in Muslim countries, the list goes on.
Where is this outrage for what just happened in Canada? I haven't heard of any. If you have please point me to it.
Are you about to call me a bigot?
I find your post far more ironic.I believe the word you are looking for is 'Nuanced' its a favorite word
Holy...wow....the Irony in this very quote is staggering. Think about it everyone. Go over this very quote and look at the historical perspective of all arguments on this issue by looking at this
I really didn't get that impression at all. Quite the opposite, really. He was resistant to the idea at every turn. He went on and on with the "if someone says they're doing it for religious reasons, why don't libs believe them?" angle. It seemed that he felt like clearly underlying political/socio-economical issues were the least of the reasons; the least significant of factors. To me, that's a failure to appreciate the significance of poverty and anger or simple mental derangement of sociopaths. The religion just becomes the outlet to vent anger that otherwise has nowhere to go rather than simply the religion being essentially the beginning and end of the conversation.
No, he was very resistant to that to the degree of chastising people who suggest otherwise. This is not to say religion doesn't play a significant role in this case. It does, as it is the weapon that is being wielded and wildly swung in an effort to make people with no power feel powerful. It is also a fair critique to say that the anger these people have would not take the form of suicide bombings and beheadings and other barbaric shit if not for the texts that can be twisted by naives to make a trap for fools. But to be sure, the source of their anger would have simply manifested itself in a different but still destructive way (though I'd also agree that it would probably have been a less organized and less dangerous way).
Smh... seriously? you are buying into this Fox News level talking point?
I don't even know what the purpose of it is? even if 90% of Muslims supported the action I don't think we are justified in generalizing to the point where we punish the 10% that don't. doing so is the definition of bigotry
You can only see what I said as a solution to the conflict if you think the conflict is primarily about religion, which I don't, and which I don't think the majority of historians who study the issue believe either. And you're seeing the Jews as a solely religious group, and not also as an ethnic group. Again: Zionism, for much of its history, has been primarily a nationalist movement, not a religious one (also, Herzl founded Zionism, not Israel). The prominence of extreme religious elements in Israeli politics recently does not change that it remains a country with a strongly secular streak.
But again, is it because of the religious divide? That's what I'm taking issue with here.