4 ms·

> And never mind that Israel still has a fundamentalist, authoritarian government All true, very true. Of course the other bunch will slaughter you for drawing

by ta20240528 2y ago

> And never mind that Israel still has a fundamentalist, authoritarian government All true, very true. Of course the other bunch will slaughter you for drawing a cartoon. I submit that you have a responsibility to be comprehensive when posting.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
spacephysics 2y ago
I submit no such responsibility is required, thats one reason comment threads exist. So others can add to the discussion…
piltdownman 2y ago
In the interests of comprehensiveness, the 'other bunch' have AIPAC, the Shomrim, and will get legislation passed enshrining Orwellian Newspeak. Anti-Zionism is now categorised as Anti-Semitism in American discourse. Insanity. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/894 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolutio...
hmcq6 2y ago
> All true, very true. Of course the other bunch will slaughter you for drawing a cartoon. You're confusing Al-Qaeda with Muslims.
- kgwgk 2y ago
  > Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% [of British Muslims] agreed that such violence was never justifiable. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196 You’re confusing Al-Qaeda with one third of Muslims living in a Western country.
  - hmcq6 2y ago
    > Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable. > But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied "don't know" or refused to answer. > Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws. 24%. 24% = 1/3. You seem like the kind of person who caused the McDonalds 1/3 pounder flop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWdD206eSv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWdD206eSv0 But the better argument is that 24% of people saying "it could be justified" is that it actually could be justified. Should I punch everyone who includes Nazi symbology in their art? No. Should I punch a Nazi who repeatedly promotes his ideology through his art? Yes.
    - kgwgk 2y ago
      I missed that figure, I stand corrected. So it’s “only” one fourth that told that it may be justified - the rest up to one third didn’t confirm nor deny that it may be justified. It’s also very reassuring that maybe they don’t find that violence is justified when you publish only one image of muhammad. Maybe you’re right and it’s repeated publication of muhammad images that deserves violence. Here is a long-time offender: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/feb/17/wikipedia.islam https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/feb/17/wikipedia... Or maybe you meant that violence against anyone who does anything may be justified (?) because of some other thing that they may be doing.
      - hmcq6 2y ago
        > Is violence an appropriate response to hate speech? The Cato 2017 Free Speech and Tolernace Survey finds most Americans say no. More than two-thirds (68%) of Americans say it is not morally acceptable to punch a Nazi in the face. About a third (32%), however, say it is morally acceptable. https://www.cato.org/blog/51-strong-liberals-say-its-morally-acceptable-punch-nazis https://www.cato.org/blog/51-strong-liberals-say-its-morally... Your implication that Muslims are more accepting of political violence doesn't seem to bear out in the facts. > Maybe you’re right and it’s repeated publication of muhammad images that deserves violence. Thats not what I said. > Or maybe you meant that violence against anyone who does anything may be justified (?) because of some other thing that they may be doing. This is clearly the least charitable take one could take in response to my comment. "It's ok to punch Nazis" is not a take that usually gets this much pushback. Edit: Actually, technically, I guess it does usually get this much push back (68%) but still the slippery slope argument is trash
- dralley 2y ago
  The aperture is wider than just those who are already members of some terrorist organization or other. e.g. the killing of Samuel Paty
- apetrov 2y ago
  well, the list a little bit longer https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/ https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

spacephysics 2y ago

I submit no such responsibility is required, thats one reason comment threads exist. So others can add to the discussion…

piltdownman 2y ago

In the interests of comprehensiveness, the 'other bunch' have AIPAC, the Shomrim, and will get legislation passed enshrining Orwellian Newspeak. Anti-Zionism is now categorised as Anti-Semitism in American discourse. Insanity. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/894 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolutio...

hmcq6 2y ago

> All true, very true. Of course the other bunch will slaughter you for drawing a cartoon. You're confusing Al-Qaeda with Muslims.

kgwgk 2y ago
> Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% [of British Muslims] agreed that such violence was never justifiable. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196 You’re confusing Al-Qaeda with one third of Muslims living in a Western country.
- hmcq6 2y ago
  > Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable. > But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied "don't know" or refused to answer. > Of those polled, 95% felt a loyalty to Britain, while 93% believed that Muslims in Britain should always obey British laws. 24%. 24% = 1/3. You seem like the kind of person who caused the McDonalds 1/3 pounder flop. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWdD206eSv0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWdD206eSv0 But the better argument is that 24% of people saying "it could be justified" is that it actually could be justified. Should I punch everyone who includes Nazi symbology in their art? No. Should I punch a Nazi who repeatedly promotes his ideology through his art? Yes.
  - kgwgk 2y ago
    I missed that figure, I stand corrected. So it’s “only” one fourth that told that it may be justified - the rest up to one third didn’t confirm nor deny that it may be justified. It’s also very reassuring that maybe they don’t find that violence is justified when you publish only one image of muhammad. Maybe you’re right and it’s repeated publication of muhammad images that deserves violence. Here is a long-time offender: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/feb/17/wikipedia.islam https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/feb/17/wikipedia... Or maybe you meant that violence against anyone who does anything may be justified (?) because of some other thing that they may be doing.
    - hmcq6 2y ago
      > Is violence an appropriate response to hate speech? The Cato 2017 Free Speech and Tolernace Survey finds most Americans say no. More than two-thirds (68%) of Americans say it is not morally acceptable to punch a Nazi in the face. About a third (32%), however, say it is morally acceptable. https://www.cato.org/blog/51-strong-liberals-say-its-morally-acceptable-punch-nazis https://www.cato.org/blog/51-strong-liberals-say-its-morally... Your implication that Muslims are more accepting of political violence doesn't seem to bear out in the facts. > Maybe you’re right and it’s repeated publication of muhammad images that deserves violence. Thats not what I said. > Or maybe you meant that violence against anyone who does anything may be justified (?) because of some other thing that they may be doing. This is clearly the least charitable take one could take in response to my comment. "It's ok to punch Nazis" is not a take that usually gets this much pushback. Edit: Actually, technically, I guess it does usually get this much push back (68%) but still the slippery slope argument is trash
dralley 2y ago
The aperture is wider than just those who are already members of some terrorist organization or other. e.g. the killing of Samuel Paty
apetrov 2y ago
well, the list a little bit longer https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/ https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/