Why the demand that Muslims 'must condemn ISIS' is racist

But even asking for condemnations is ridiculous. Muslims globally are no more responsible for the actions of ISIS than British Jews are for Israeli war-crimes. During the Gaza offensive no one asked British Jews to apologise for the Israeli bombs that killed hundreds of children. This is despite the fact that British Jews do go and fight in the IDF.

Demanding that Muslims condemn ISIS is xenophobic because it implies that they are sympathetic to the terrorist group unless they state otherwise. It implies all Muslims are responsible for the actions of terrorists. And there’s a double-standard because other minorities aren’t held to the same standard.

Yes, I’m aware that British Muslims have gone to fight with ISIS. But we live in a free country and British Mosques can’t stop people from travelling to Syria any more than the police can stop crimes before they happen.

From:


http://liberalconspiracy.org/2014/08/21/the-demand-that-more-Muslims-must-condemn-isis-is-racist-and-rubbish/

No comparison with Israel.

It is exactly the same. It is also the same as condemning all Christians for things like murdering abortion doctors and the Pope's attacks on using condoms- you can't blame all people of one faith for the actions of a few.

Attacks on abortion clinics have been so rare and isolated incidents that irrelevant to debate.

They may be isolated but the principal is the same. For every million Muslims how many are violent extremists? Not many. Yet you expect every Muslim to go to extra lengths to condemn ISIS as if they are somehow responsible.

They aren't.

We see mass outrage by Muslims all over the world about a silly cartoon etc, but otherwise strangely quiet.


We also have the 'Muslim council of Britain' and other spokes people popping up and talking about 'we Muslims...' as A collective etc.



Any decent person would be condemning this so why are some Muslims so reluctant to do so....???

Tommy has a point

let some one "insult" their "prophet" or deity and all hell breaks loose on an international scale, riots, flag burnings etc..

so they CAN condemn something that "interests" or concerns them..

yet as tommy says  strangely quiet on Isis (and all the other outrages...where was the mass riots, flag burnings etc for Lee Rigby?)

so Fuzzy...what are we to make of that.

there can ONLY be two sensible alternatives....either they dont care

OR they at best Passively agree with these monstrosities?

In other words their behaviour over the "terrorists" so called jihad is totally contradictory to their behaviour over something the percieve as the least slight to their belief.

The point I was making the other day, any minor perceived slight on the religion of peace creates protests and threats of violence in response.


A silly cartoon, a teacher calling a cuddly toy Mohammed at request of her child students, a pregnant woman imprisoned, sentenced to death and forced to give birth in squalid prison cell chained up for daring not to be a Muslim although she had always been a Christian and never been a Muslim....



Lynchings by large gangs because of a rumour about defacing a Koran in Pakistan....




But a group of barbaric terrorists beheading,murdering men women and children, raping and robbing their way round all in The name of Islam and disrespecting the religion completely and bringing it into total disrepute.......... hardly a peep out of them!!!



Why is that...!?

Actually its daft to think others should apologise when this is never replicated elsewhere or asked for, where for example was the mass apology or the call for it for the Holocaust from Christians world wide?
You can only blame a people if they are culpable in electing a group, say for example Hamas, or Labour with Tony Blair with Iraq, but people from faiths in nations that have nothing to do with any such crime have no need or reason to say sorry for anything, because they have no culpability.

Also what is missed each time protests over the Quran is burnt say, is that the hundreds of millions of Muslims that do not protests, we see a few thousand Muslims protest and again people stupidly cast all Muslims, ignoring the fact hundreds of millions of Muslims never protested at all, showing that again is an absurd association

The cartoon protests themselves were only carried out or participated in by a small minority of people in each country. Among the protesters, only a small minority of them committed violent acts.

It's totally unfair to ask every member of a group to answer for, or condemn, the actions of any other member of that group. If each of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims was personally dedicated to carrying out violence against Westerners and Israelis, we'd be in a world war right now.

There were massive worldwide angry and violent protests about the printing of cartoons in Denmark.




Look it up....




But murdering and beheading civilians and children, raping, robbing etc in The name of Islam and relative silence......

Tommy Monk wrote:There were massive worldwide angry and violent protests about the printing of cartoons in Denmark.




Look it up....




But murdering and beheading civilians and children, raping, robbing etc in The name of Islam and relative silence......

I did look it up, it's not like every single Muslim, or every other Muslim, or one quarter of all Muslims, or one tenth, or one in a hundred or in a thousand showed up to even protest -- and like I said before, most of those protesters didn't get violent.

While we're talking about looking things up, have you done this search? http://bit.ly/1vjFLi2

And just to have something here so you don't even have to click my link:

Why don’t we hear Muslims condemning the barbarian ISIS terrorists?

Turns out they are loudly condemning ISIS … but our press isn’t covering it.

Father Elias Mallon of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association explains:

“Why aren’t Muslims speaking out against these atrocities?” The answer is: Muslims have been speaking out in the strongest terms, condemning the crimes against humanity committed by ISIS (or, as it is increasingly called, IS) and others in the name of Islam.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/Muslim-leaders-worldwide-condemn-isis/5397364

Yeah and the same ones are denying it is anything to do with Islam and how nothing in their guide book tells them to do any of it....



Like fighting infidels and non believers, forcing conversion to Islam or pay jizya or face death, or striking at the necks etc.... even if they were "people of The book"..... and Mohammed never did any of that either....... no murdering, war, rape, kidnap robbing, death and destruction......




Oh..... hold on a minute..... that IS all in The Koran....!!!!

victorisnotamused wrote:Tommy has a point

let some one "insult" their "prophet" or deity and all hell breaks loose on an international scale, riots, flag burnings etc..

so they CAN condemn something that "interests" or concerns them..

yet as tommy says  strangely quiet on Isis (and all the other outrages...where was the mass riots, flag burnings etc for Lee Rigby?)

so Fuzzy...what are we to make of that.

there can ONLY be two sensible alternatives....either they dont care

OR they at best Passively agree with these monstrosities?

In other words their behaviour over the "terrorists" so called jihad is totally contradictory to their behaviour over something the percieve as the least slight to their belief.

Sorry but I find your opinion quite simple.

The fact is that the kind of Muslim (the few of them that they were) who protested against the cartoons (where they held placards saying behead the infidel), are the same kind of Muslim who has gone to fight with ISIS.

Those passive Muslims (as you put it) didn't protest against the cartoons either.

That's why your post above is illogical.

And of course Muslims don't lie do they.....?
Oh, hold on, that's in there too!!!
Taqiyya.....

And kitman is in there too.....


Kitman (Arabic kitmān كتمان "secrecy, concealment") is the act of paying lip
service to authority while holding personal opposition.

Didge wrote:Actually its daft to think others should apologise when this is never replicated elsewhere or asked for, where for example was the mass apology or the call for it for the Holocaust from Christians world wide?
You can only blame a people if they are culpable in electing a group, say for example Hamas, or Labour with Tony Blair with Iraq, but people from faiths in nations that have nothing to do with any such crime have no need or reason to say sorry for anything, because they have no culpability.

Also what is missed each time protests over the Quran is burnt say, is that the hundreds of millions of Muslims that do not protests, we see a few thousand Muslims protest and again people stupidly cast all Muslims, ignoring the fact hundreds of millions of Muslims never protested at all, showing that again is an absurd association

I disagree with you about blaming the electorate for either Tony Blair or Hamas.

Apart from the fact that Israeli's use that as an excuse to blockade and bomb Gaza, the 7/7 bombers used that as 'the' excuse to justify what they did.

But the truth is the electorate empower these people in good faith. Nobody voted for Hamas or Blair to start or continue a war. Once they are in power, democracy stops. They do what they want by manufacturing consent in parliament or public. So it's not really a democracy.

The 7/7 bombers did blame the electorate for voting blair back in 2005 (or around then), after the Iraq war. But people are manipulated during an election to think about issues that matter to them. Namely, the economy (jobs, standard of living, etc).

Ben_Reilly wrote:The cartoon protests themselves were only carried out or participated in by a small minority of people in each country. Among the protesters, only a small minority of them committed violent acts.

It's totally unfair to ask every member of a group to answer for, or condemn, the actions of any other member of that group. If each of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims was personally dedicated to carrying out violence against Westerners and Israelis, we'd be in a world war right now.

Exactly what I said.

Tommy Monk wrote:And of course Muslims don't lie do they.....?
Oh, hold on, that's in there too!!!
Taqiyya.....

Lol! Just when I was missing Smelly Bandit and Mentor.

Taqiyah says Muslims are allowed to lie if their life is in danger.

You know Tommy, like if someone was forcing you to convert at the point of a gun.

That is what the Shia are using when the iS are forcing them to convert. And it's saving their lives.

Tommy Monk wrote:


And kitman is in there too.....


Kitman (Arabic kitmān كتمان "secrecy, concealment") is the act of paying lip
service to authority while holding personal opposition.

In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad allowed for three (and only three) exceptions to the rule of truth-telling:

Lying is not permitted except in three cases: (1) a man’s speaking to his wife to make her happy; (2) lying at times of war; (3) and lying in order to reconcile between people.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/08/silencing-spencer-taqiyya-and-kitman-are-part-of-judeo-christian-belief/

Muslims forced to conver to Islam.....
I think you'll find it is the Christians who are being forced to convert to Islam...... nothing to do with Islam though and although it is instructed in The Koran it is nothing to do with that either......

It seems to me that the appologists and appeasers are turning the blatant truth on its head and saying because some Muslims are peaceful ALL Muslims are peaceful, therefore we can all safely bury our heads in the sand....
and they will still be bleating this pathetic and terrible philosophy when the bombs begin ripping the heart out of our cities........becasue one thing is quite clear , with this issue, as with all issues they get their grubby hands on, because they cannot consolidate any solutions, are scared of taking any necessary steps for fear of "upsetting" another, and are generally weak and clueless they firstly deny there IS a problem, then when the problem smacks em in the face run round like headless chicken because they have NO idea what to do.

I have seen this with all issues the lefties get involved with, from the banal to the deadly serious...

all "ideas" and no actual solutions.... their constant mantra...i dont want this....but I have no idea what to do about the problem...never mind something will come along......

for a banal example take the fox hunting row...they dont want fox hunting....but they have NO idea what to do about the (large) cost of the damage foxes do to farming...not one iota of an idea....

Tommy Monk wrote:Yeah and the same ones are denying it is anything to do with Islam and how nothing in their guide book tells them to do any of it....



Like fighting infidels and non believers, forcing conversion to Islam or pay jizya or face death, or striking at the necks etc.... even if they were "people of The book"..... and Mohammed never did any of that either....... no murdering, war, rape, kidnap robbing, death and destruction......




Oh..... hold on a minute..... that IS all in The Koran....!!!!

Really -- chapters and verses, please.

victorisnotamused wrote:It seems to me that the appologists and appeasers are turning the blatant truth on its head and saying because some Muslims are peaceful ALL Muslims are peaceful, therefore we can all safely bury our heads in the sand....
and they will still be bleating this pathetic and terrible philosophy when the bombs begin ripping the heart out of our cities........becasue one thing is quite clear , with this issue, as with all issues they get their grubby hands on, because they cannot consolidate any solutions, are scared of taking any necessary steps for fear of "upsetting" another, and are generally weak and clueless they firstly deny there IS a problem, then when the problem smacks em in the face run round like headless chicken because they have NO idea what to do.

I have seen this with all issues the lefties get involved with, from the banal to the deadly serious...

all "ideas" and no actual solutions.... their constant mantra...i dont want this....but I have no idea what to do about the problem...never mind something will come along......

for a banal example take the fox hunting row...they dont want fox hunting....but they have NO idea what to do about the (large) cost of the damage foxes do to farming...not one iota of an idea....

I don't think anybody's saying all Muslims are peaceful anymore than they'd say all Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus or atheists are peaceful, vic.

and the rest of the post i made?

Tommy Monk wrote:Muslims forced to conver to Islam.....
I think you'll find it is the Christians who are being forced to convert to Islam...... nothing to do with Islam though and although it is instructed in The Koran it is nothing to do with that either......

So are the Shia. D'UH!

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:Actually its daft to think others should apologise when this is never replicated elsewhere or asked for, where for example was the mass apology or the call for it for the Holocaust from Christians world wide?
You can only blame a people if they are culpable in electing a group, say for example Hamas, or Labour with Tony Blair with Iraq, but people from faiths in nations that have nothing to do with any such crime have no need or reason to say sorry for anything, because they have no culpability.

Also what is missed each time protests over the Quran is burnt say, is that the hundreds of millions of Muslims that do not protests, we see a few thousand Muslims protest and again people stupidly cast all Muslims, ignoring the fact hundreds of millions of Muslims never protested at all, showing that again is an absurd association

I disagree with you about blaming the electorate for either Tony Blair or Hamas.

Apart from the fact that Israeli's use that as an excuse to blockade and bomb Gaza, the 7/7 bombers used that as 'the' excuse to justify what they did.

But the truth is the electorate empower these people in good faith. Nobody voted for Hamas or Blair to start or continue a war. Once they are in power, democracy stops. They do what they want by manufacturing consent in parliament or public. So it's not really a democracy.

The 7/7 bombers did blame the electorate for voting blair back in 2005 (or around then), after the Iraq war. But people are manipulated during an election to think about issues that matter to them. Namely, the economy (jobs, standard of living, etc).

Sorry disagree, we have had groups voted in, the biggest example being the Nazi's and thus people are thus culpable for their actions for doing so, where if others are and have been unhappy with a regime even if a dictatorship they have risen up against them or passive deviance, thus they do take responsibility for who they have voted into power. You cannot allow people through their mistakes to then say they are not responsible because of where this mistake has led to

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:Actually its daft to think others should apologise when this is never replicated elsewhere or asked for, where for example was the mass apology or the call for it for the Holocaust from Christians world wide?
You can only blame a people if they are culpable in electing a group, say for example Hamas, or Labour with Tony Blair with Iraq, but people from faiths in nations that have nothing to do with any such crime have no need or reason to say sorry for anything, because they have no culpability.

Also what is missed each time protests over the Quran is burnt say, is that the hundreds of millions of Muslims that do not protests, we see a few thousand Muslims protest and again people stupidly cast all Muslims, ignoring the fact hundreds of millions of Muslims never protested at all, showing that again is an absurd association

I disagree with you about blaming the electorate for either Tony Blair or Hamas.

Apart from the fact that Israeli's use that as an excuse to blockade and bomb Gaza, the 7/7 bombers used that as 'the' excuse to justify what they did.

But the truth is the electorate empower these people in good faith. Nobody voted for Hamas or Blair to start or continue a war. Once they are in power, democracy stops. They do what they want by manufacturing consent in parliament or public. So it's not really a democracy.

The 7/7 bombers did blame the electorate for voting blair back in 2005 (or around then), after the Iraq war. But people are manipulated during an election to think about issues that matter to them. Namely, the economy (jobs, standard of living, etc).

Sorry disagree, we have had groups voted in, the biggest example being the Nazi's and thus people are thus culpable for their actions for doing so, where if others are and have been unhappy with a regime even if a dictatorship they have risen up against them or passive deviance, thus they do take responsibility for who they have voted into power. You cannot allow people through their mistakes to then say they are not responsible because of where this mistake has led to

But the Nazi never got over 50% of the popular vote.. So therefore over half of Germans even at the time were blame less.
It also assumes Democracy Actually 'works as stated' and isn't just a system to that heavily weighted in the interest of the powerful but give the perception to the common man that his voice is being heard.....like it has been in EVERY iteration of is since Athens.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Sorry disagree, we have had groups voted in, the biggest example being the Nazi's and thus people are thus culpable for their actions for doing so, where if others are and have been unhappy with a regime even if a dictatorship they have risen up against them or passive deviance, thus they do take responsibility for who they have voted into power. You cannot allow people through their mistakes to then say they are not responsible because of where this mistake has led to

But the Nazi never got over 50% of the popular vote.. So therefore over half of Germans even at the time were blame less.
It also assumes Democracy Actually 'works as stated' and isn't just a system to that heavily weighted in the interest of the powerful but give the perception to the common man that his voice is being heard.....like it has been in EVERY iteration of is since Athens.

They got 44% and again the majority of the nation was very active in its support after they gained power to the point of culpability, where many had foreign slave labour, many knew of the concentration camps and many allowed crimes to happen and were complicit in them, so to claim half were blameless is short sighted and incorrect, as only a few resisted the Nazis.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Muslims forced to conver to Islam.....
I think you'll find it is the Christians who are being forced to convert to Islam...... nothing to do with Islam though and although it is instructed in The Koran it is nothing to do with that either......

So are the Shia. D'UH!

LOL
as if TM understands that there is more than one type of Muslim.... he is struggling with the concept that MOST Muslims are Not Arabs
he cant seem to remember than every single one of the points he has raised has been categorically disproved already (in some case multiple times)

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Sorry disagree, we have had groups voted in, the biggest example being the Nazi's and thus people are thus culpable for their actions for doing so, where if others are and have been unhappy with a regime even if a dictatorship they have risen up against them or passive deviance, thus they do take responsibility for who they have voted into power. You cannot allow people through their mistakes to then say they are not responsible because of where this mistake has led to

But the Nazi never got over 50% of the popular vote.. So therefore over half of Germans even at the time were blame less.
It also assumes Democracy Actually 'works as stated' and isn't just a system to that heavily weighted in the interest of the powerful but give the perception to the common man that his voice is being heard.....like it has been in EVERY iteration of is since Athens.

They got 44% and again the majority of the nation was very active in its support after they gained power to the point of culpability, where many had foreign slave labour, many knew of the concentration camps and many allowed crimes to happen and were complicit in them, so to claim half were blameless is short sighted and incorrect, as only a few resisted the Nazis.

IF crazy people with guns are throwing people in concentration camps are you going to stand up and say something???... because pretty sure you just got your self a place in the concentration camp.
few people would resist openly through desire for self preservation. this in not exclusive to the Nazis look at Cambodia, Afghanistan and heaps other nations just in the last century. Most people are not Brave.

you can't fairly blame them any more than you can fairly blame the average Israeli for war crime committed by IDF. Ultimately we elect representatives for a very limited pool of candidates, and all of those candidates still have 'interests' that they will put over interests of the regular citizen.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:



They got 44% and again the majority of the nation was very active in its support after they gained power to the point of culpability, where many had foreign slave labour, many knew of the concentration camps and many allowed crimes to happen and were complicit in them, so to claim half were blameless is short sighted and incorrect, as only a few resisted the Nazis.

IF crazy people with guns are throwing people in concentration camps are you going to stand up and say something???...  because pretty sure you just got your self a place in the concentration camp.
few people would resist openly through desire for self preservation.  this in not exclusive to the Nazis look at Cambodia, Afghanistan and heaps other nations just in the last century. Most people are not Brave.

you can't fairly blame them any more than you can fairly blame the average Israeli for war crime committed by IDF.  Ultimately we elect representatives for a very limited pool of candidates, and all of those candidates still have 'interests' that they will put over interests of the regular citizen.

Gobbledygook, you again failed to understand the vast majority of the nation was complicit, where again with the likes and use of slave labour on farms, and people did resist the Nazis, so to claim they would not is also incorrect, the reality is the vast majority of the population was complicit and even the attempt on Hitlers life created outrage from the German population, not the actions of a people against him, even when it was clear Germany would lose the war. So yes I can blame them very much so, as where you look at other areas of dictatorships people fought back, like for example Russia and Spain, where there was two civil wars. To the point of Tony Blair, people still voted him for a third term. People have to be and people were accountable in Germany for their mistakes.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:



They got 44% and again the majority of the nation was very active in its support after they gained power to the point of culpability, where many had foreign slave labour, many knew of the concentration camps and many allowed crimes to happen and were complicit in them, so to claim half were blameless is short sighted and incorrect, as only a few resisted the Nazis.

IF crazy people with guns are throwing people in concentration camps are you going to stand up and say something???...  because pretty sure you just got your self a place in the concentration camp.
few people would resist openly through desire for self preservation.  this in not exclusive to the Nazis look at Cambodia, Afghanistan and heaps other nations just in the last century. Most people are not Brave.

you can't fairly blame them any more than you can fairly blame the average Israeli for war crime committed by IDF.  Ultimately we elect representatives for a very limited pool of candidates, and all of those candidates still have 'interests' that they will put over interests of the regular citizen.

Agree with Veya, Didge.

People can and are conditioned to act on self interest and life preservation.

Same thing is happening in the iS territory, where many Sunni are defending IS out of fear.

fear is the greatest motivator and used all the time, including in peaceful, Western democracies.

Even people in Germany (while I'm sure many supported the Nazi's on many levels), were conditioned.

We are conditioned in the UK also.

Just found this and found it funny

http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/455810/The-INCREDIBLE-picture-that-proves-Adolf-Hitler-lived-to-95-with-his-Brazilian-lover

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

IF crazy people with guns are throwing people in concentration camps are you going to stand up and say something???...  because pretty sure you just got your self a place in the concentration camp.
few people would resist openly through desire for self preservation.  this in not exclusive to the Nazis look at Cambodia, Afghanistan and heaps other nations just in the last century. Most people are not Brave.

you can't fairly blame them any more than you can fairly blame the average Israeli for war crime committed by IDF.  Ultimately we elect representatives for a very limited pool of candidates, and all of those candidates still have 'interests' that they will put over interests of the regular citizen.

Agree with Veya, Didge.

People can and are conditioned to act on self interest and life preservation.

Same thing is happening in the iS territory, where many Sunni are defending IS out of fear.

fear is the greatest motivator and used all the time, including in peaceful, Western democracies.

Even people in Germany (while I'm sure many supported the Nazi's on many levels), were conditioned.

We are conditioned in the UK also.

IS is different, people are fighting and resisting them and in Iraq it is corrupt where people have been voted into power, so it is not about taking a view of something singular, but looking at the whole picture Zack and again people were complicit in Iraq for discrimination against Sunnis. That does not justify any genocide against them Shias or other minority groups, but they are responsible for the reason Sunnis have been attracted to join IS, even where their views differ from IS. People ere conditioned, through centuries of hatred of Jews, based upon Lutheranism  and racial views that stemmed way back to the Pan Germanic League, but this does excuse a nation for its crime, it does not mean they should have the same replicated onto them, but it does mean they are responsible for their complicity.

This is what I mean:

5 Opponents
The Nazi's used 'fear and horror' against anyone who disapproved of their regime:
Hitler banned all Trade Unions on 2 May 1933. Their offices were closed, their money confiscated, and their leaders put in prison.
Communists were put into concentration camps or killed.
Many Protestant pastors such as Dietrich Bonhoffer were persecuted and executed.
Each block of flats had a 'staircase ruler' who reported grumblers to the police - they were arrested and either murdered, or sent to concentration camps.
Children were encouraged to report their parents to the Gestapo if they criticized Hitler or the Nazi party.

But remember that:
Many Germans welcomed this because it brought political stability after the Weimar years.

http://www.johndclare.net/Nazi_Germany3.htm

The proverbial carrot and stick approach.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:This is what I mean:

5    Opponents
The Nazi's used 'fear and horror' against anyone who disapproved of their regime:
Hitler banned all Trade Unions on 2 May 1933.   Their offices were closed, their money confiscated, and their leaders put in prison.
Communists were put into concentration camps or killed.
Many Protestant pastors such as Dietrich Bonhoffer were persecuted and executed.
Each block of flats had a 'staircase ruler' who reported grumblers to the police - they were arrested and either murdered, or sent to concentration camps.
Children were encouraged to report their parents to the Gestapo if they criticized Hitler or the Nazi party.
 
But remember that:
Many Germans welcomed this because it brought political stability after the Weimar years.

http://www.johndclare.net/Nazi_Germany3.htm

The proverbial carrot and stick approach.

This was only a small minority, many believed in Hitlers views and came to be very complicit, as I stated even in 1944 many were very outraged at the attempt on his life, in fact it did not even spark a mass rebellion, where his policies in the 1930's were hailed by the German people, so again they were very much complicit and many agreed with his views.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Agree with Veya, Didge.

People can and are conditioned to act on self interest and life preservation.

Same thing is happening in the iS territory, where many Sunni are defending IS out of fear.

fear is the greatest motivator and used all the time, including in peaceful, Western democracies.

Even people in Germany (while I'm sure many supported the Nazi's on many levels), were conditioned.

We are conditioned in the UK also.

IS is different, people are fighting and resisting them and in Iraq it is corrupt where people have been voted into power, so it is not about taking a view of something singular, but looking at the whole picture Zack and again people were complicit in Iraq for discrimination against Sunnis. That does not justify any genocide against them Shias or other minority groups, but they are responsible for the reason Sunnis have been attracted to join IS, even where their views differ from IS. People ere conditioned, through centuries of hatred of Jews, based upon Lutheranism  and racial views that stemmed way back to the Pan Germanic League, but this does excuse a nation for its crime, it does not mean they should have the same replicated onto them, but it does mean they are responsible for their complicity.

That's my point. It is all a form of conditioning.

Are conditioned people 'responsible'? Or just fooled?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


IS is different, people are fighting and resisting them and in Iraq it is corrupt where people have been voted into power, so it is not about taking a view of something singular, but looking at the whole picture Zack and again people were complicit in Iraq for discrimination against Sunnis. That does not justify any genocide against them Shias or other minority groups, but they are responsible for the reason Sunnis have been attracted to join IS, even where their views differ from IS. People ere conditioned, through centuries of hatred of Jews, based upon Lutheranism  and racial views that stemmed way back to the Pan Germanic League, but this does excuse a nation for its crime, it does not mean they should have the same replicated onto them, but it does mean they are responsible for their complicity.

That's my point. It is all a form of conditioning.

Are conditioned people 'responsible'? Or just fooled?  

I find it kind of a copout to be honest, as we are all responsible for our own actions, to say this, we then excuse people discriminating against anyone and this is exactly what the far right use conditioning of extremist attacks to excuse hatred towards innocent Muslims

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:



They got 44% and again the majority of the nation was very active in its support after they gained power to the point of culpability, where many had foreign slave labour, many knew of the concentration camps and many allowed crimes to happen and were complicit in them, so to claim half were blameless is short sighted and incorrect, as only a few resisted the Nazis.

IF crazy people with guns are throwing people in concentration camps are you going to stand up and say something???...  because pretty sure you just got your self a place in the concentration camp.
few people would resist openly through desire for self preservation.  this in not exclusive to the Nazis look at Cambodia, Afghanistan and heaps other nations just in the last century. Most people are not Brave.

you can't fairly blame them any more than you can fairly blame the average Israeli for war crime committed by IDF.  Ultimately we elect representatives for a very limited pool of candidates, and all of those candidates still have 'interests' that they will put over interests of the regular citizen.

Gobbledygook, you again failed to understand the vast majority of the nation was complicit, where again with the likes and use of slave labour on farms, and people did resist the Nazis, so to claim they would not is also incorrect, the reality is the vast majority of the population was complicit and even the attempt on Hitlers life created outrage from the German population, not the actions of a people against him, even when it was clear Germany would lose the war. So yes I can blame them very much so, as where you look at other areas of dictatorships people fought back, like for example Russia and Spain, where there was two civil wars. To the point of Tony Blair, people still voted him for a third term. People have to be and people were accountable in Germany for their mistakes.

and you seem to fail to understand that a human is biological organism which DESPITE all the pretty words is programmed to survive, which is programmed to say "better him than me" or any other mental trick to justify inaction (or action) that produces benefit or safety for the individual.
We have entire systems developed over centuries for keeping the average man in his place, with out him even knowing about it.

Let me ask you about Churchill? King George?
were they good men?
Because the answer Entirely depends on which nation you're from  

Is North Korea the Strongest nation and Kim the Best golfer?????  why do the North Koreans think so  


Is it a Cope out? yeah it is, but again MOST people are not brave when put in the circumstance.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

That's my point. It is all a form of conditioning.

Are conditioned people 'responsible'? Or just fooled?  

I find it kind of a copout to be honest, as we are all responsible for our own actions, to say this, we then excuse people discriminating against anyone and this is exactly what the far right use conditioning of extremist attacks to excuse hatred towards innocent Muslims

Maybe a copout. I'm not wise or old enough to know the answer.

But I still have a problem with your view: surely you must face a consequence for being responsible? And those people could be in their millions.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:


Gobbledygook, you again failed to understand the vast majority of the nation was complicit, where again with the likes and use of slave labour on farms, and people did resist the Nazis, so to claim they would not is also incorrect, the reality is the vast majority of the population was complicit and even the attempt on Hitlers life created outrage from the German population, not the actions of a people against him, even when it was clear Germany would lose the war. So yes I can blame them very much so, as where you look at other areas of dictatorships people fought back, like for example Russia and Spain, where there was two civil wars. To the point of Tony Blair, people still voted him for a third term. People have to be and people were accountable in Germany for their mistakes.

and you seem to fail to understand that a human is biological organism which DESPITE all the pretty words is programmed to survive, which is programmed to say "better him than me" or any other mental trick to justify inaction (or action) that produces benefit or safety for the individual.
We have entire systems developed over centuries for keeping the average man in his place, with out him even knowing about it.

Let me ask you about Churchill? King George?
were they good men?
Because the answer Entirely depends on which nation you're from  

Is North Korea the Strongest nation and Kim the Best golfer?????  why do the North Koreans think so  


Is it a Cope out? yeah it is, but again MOST people are not brave when put in the circumstance.

So basically you are justify any genocide based on survival, where it had no relevance, where people did actually resist Hitler, being the whole point survival would mean actually resisting Hitler being as he brought about total destruction to Germany
So your logic completely failed.
King George, had no real power and Churchill did have power and made some appalling decisions like the allowing the starvation of Indians, so yes he did wrong which I point out all the time, but he also saved Britain in its darkest hour, so he is responsible for millions of deaths on India, so again your argument has no validity

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


I find it kind of a copout to be honest, as we are all responsible for our own actions, to say this, we then excuse people discriminating against anyone and this is exactly what the far right use conditioning of extremist attacks to excuse hatred towards innocent Muslims

Maybe a copout. I'm not wise or old enough to know the answer.

But I still have a problem with your view: surely you must face a consequence for being responsible? And those people could be in their millions.

The reality is people if they are drawn to propaganda as has happened throughout any recession, then are responsible for believing this are they not Zack?
You cannot provide people with an excuse for their own actions, where again look at today where the far right has grown in support based on the same principles applied with hate against Muslims and other ethnic groups as was once used against the Jews by Nazi Germany. So are we by stating condition, allowing people off the hook for their actions and decisions?

You just have to remember how the public (who were split 50:50, if you recall) were manipulated by the whole establishment.

Even the world wars were started by the so called establishment.

People are just manipulated and used as pawns.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Maybe a copout. I'm not wise or old enough to know the answer.

But I still have a problem with your view: surely you must face a consequence for being responsible? And those people could be in their millions.

The reality is people if they are drawn to propaganda as has happened throughout any recession, then are responsible for believing this are they not Zack?
You cannot provide people with an excuse for their own actions, where again look at today where the far right has grown in support based on the same principles applied with hate against Muslims and other ethnic groups as was once used against the Jews by Nazi Germany. So are we by stating condition, allowing people off the hook for their actions and decisions?

If you're not holding them responsible for their actions, then yes - the alternative is to let them off the hook.

Otherwise, how do you hold them responsible? How would you hold those Germans who supported Hitler (support does not mean war crimes, just by voting and not saying or doing anything)?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:You just have to remember how the public (who were split 50:50, if you recall) were manipulated by the whole establishment.

Even the world wars were started by the so called establishment.

People are just manipulated and used as pawns.

Again you are trying to justify reason for people where they make mistakes, where again the German army used the excuse of following orders when they committed atrocities, it was nothing short of an excuse because the reality is many did view the enemy as subhuman and had no issue shooting them out of hand and this is why such excuses were not bought by the allies. The reality is to excuse people being manipulated the buck still stops with those falling for such propaganda, where they are allowing fear to get the better of their judgement, that still makes them responsible, because if others are not bought, it does not excuse those who are

@didge
He also said Surrender Australia to the Japanese.

And I meant George the 3rd... no worse than any other English king
But in US history he is, THE Evil Tyrant and the good people could no longer stand to exist under his Evil Rule, redcoats literally exactly like Nazis soldiers in US version of history

it is Fully Valid..
People resisted Hitler at the height of his power and were killed for it.... People successful resisted AFTER years on enduring his 'leadership'.


And treating them as sub human and shooting them out of hand is EXACTLY the course of action you propose against ISIS (or worse since you want to throw away the rules of war at all)
Now your telling us that IF enough fools vote for that evil idea we should also be to blame... Even if we use every legal means to protest, we are still to blame Unless we turn to Violent resistance towards the legally ruling political party because a democratic election didn't go the way we want????


you are trying to justify reason for people where they make mistakes,
YES because there are plenty of valid reasons why people make mistakes.... don't want human error .... VOTE 1 SKYNET

veya_victaous wrote:@didge
He also said Surrender Australia to the Japanese.

And I meant George the 3rd...  no worse than any other English king
But in US history he is, THE Evil Tyrant and the good people could no longer stand to exist under his Evil Rule, redcoats literally exactly like Nazis soldiers in US version of history

it is Fully Valid..  
People resisted Hitler at the height of his power and were killed for it.... People successful resisted AFTER years on enduring his 'leadership'.


And treating them as sub human and shooting them out of hand is EXACTLY the course of action you propose against ISIS (or worse since you want to throw away the rules of war at all)
Now your telling us that IF enough fools vote for that evil idea we should also be to blame... Even if we use every legal means to protest, we are still to blame Unless we turn to Violent resistance towards the legally ruling political party because a democratic election didn't go the way we want????


you are trying to justify reason for people where they make mistakes,  
YES because there are plenty of valid reasons why people make mistakes....  don't want human error .... VOTE 1 SKYNET

Wrong again, I never claimed they were subhuman but evil which is exactly what they are and we did the same to the Waffen SS, where your knowledge is poor and even hanged many for their crimes, what I am talking about is what we did in WW2 with assassinations, which is different, so again your argument is moot and falls as flat as a pancake. The Germans viewed all of a people as subhuman, this is not my claim, they killed women and children, none of which I am suggesting, so again your argument is shortsighted  You can go on about views of past English kings where again, it bears no relevance, which is just you point scoring against the English where I make no claim otherwise to past wrongs, and again I never have, so your argument is just mere deflection.
Yes you can blame people for their mistakes, are you now saying there should never be any war crimes and we should just let them live happily every after for their crimes?
That again is utterly absurd and your skynet philosophy is bollocks also
I am also happy tpo live with the fact we execute IS troops and those that fund them, because of the threat they pose to the world,, which any rational person would back and again you have to make tactical hard and tough decisions to defeat your enemy.and I can live with my view because it seeks to protect the world from a very real threat, where sometimes as stated you have to make difficult decisions

I have to go, but most of your points have no relevance and avoid the fact people are culpable for their actions

@victor

As has been said, the minority who partake in violent demonstrations of cartoons and mostly the same radical minority who make up or support extremists groups. The press reports those protests so it looks like a widespread rage from most Muslims, when the truth is most Muslims, even if offended by such cartoons, don't make a fuss...

Likewise now most Muslims may well be disgusted and offended by ISIS. tommy is nutty enough to think they should go and fight ISIS, at least you're not so radical. But you expect most Muslims to what? Take to street in protest? Even though most didn't for the cartoons or anything else. Muslins have condemned ISIS, Zack and Sexy have here, heck even the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia has (for what his words are worth...).

The difference is condemnation from more rational normal people tends to be more 'sane'. The protests by radicalized Muslims over the cartoons was exactly the rageful ridiculousness you'd expect from those with extreme views- you can't expect that kind of behaviour from the moderare majority.