Hello Epsilon
I don't see any racism and substituting black in doesn't make my statement racist.
Do you not remember the "Radical black splinter groups?
They were most active in the 1960's and the 1970's and were a violent minority that wanted and did use terror techniques to try and achieve more freedom.
They differed from the peaceful demonstrations and methods favored by most blacks in fighting for more of there freedom?
Unlike Martin Luther King Jr. and the methods he supported these radical groups advocated and used the same violence the Radical christian group calling itself kkk used.
They were a smaller minority than the Radical christian group called the kkk, but both used terror techniques and both associated themselves with larger groups that didn't agree with their methods or actions.
Leaving out the fact they were black in the description of the group doing the violence is silly. As silly as leaving out the fact that the kkk is known for burning crosses in black people yards and white peoples yards that are to sympathetic to the blacks.
It's important to describe such groups by their association with larger groups because it helps to understand them and describes them better.
It also gives a possible key into thier recruitment methods and main sources of members.
I've heard rabid kkk radio preachers trying to use the bible to prove that it was "killer" cain and his descendants who were "turned black" as the mark spoke of in the Bible.
It was probably my laughter and the joking way I poked holes in the reasoning a few days later at my high school by making the statment "That Cain could have just as easily been turned white" that got me the kkk notes in my locker and high school books.
I live less than 100 miles from Memphis and at the time I was foolish enough to think that such racism was nearly dead.
If I simply call them kkk you have no understanding or knowledge of thier methods of twisting and distorting mainstream christian values to justify thier hate and acts of terror. Calling them Radical Christians in two words gives you a inkling and start at understanding them far more than kkk ever would.
The same goes for the Radical muslim groups that have formed, you cannot begin to understand them until you realize they are groups twisting the muslim religion and using it to justify their hate and acts of terror.
I don't think for a second that the majority of muslims advocate attacking women or building rocket bases under schools or that it is allah's will that children be used to clear land mines.
The large minority that do support these actions have twisted their religion and the beliefs of the majority in much the same way the kkk have twisted the beliefs of the majority of christians.
You can't accurately describe these terror groups by simply calling them Hezzbola, Al Keada or any of the dozens of names they use.
Being politically correct and keeping the key muslim aspect out of the headlines and descriptions denies reality, ignores part of thier view and hobbles your understanding.
How many people are aware of the kkk's common practice of twisting the bible to support thier hatrid?
Any use of the words black or muslim in a negative context has become an automatic assumption of racism, when in reality it is simply politically incorrect to do so.
It is not racism and assuming it is hobbles any chance of full understanding of what we are facing.
I've seen studies of the kkk's and neo-nazi's methods of recruitment and many of thier methods are carefully taylored and geared to select for mentally unstable people and then enhance those instabilities through the use of arguments based onfoundation religous beliefs.
In other words many of the videos and tapes the groups like the kkk and other white supremist produce are carefully geared to attract people with mental instabilities.
I suspect the radical muslim groups like the Hezzbolla and others might be using the same type of methods to recruit certain groups of people?
Thanks to the automatic knee jerk politically correct responce of hiding the muslim connection you can't tell if the radicals are using the techniques or not.
Epsilon would you have considered my statement racist had I left out the muslims?
Like it or not the muslim religion is a key part of the Hezzbola, Al Keada and countless other terror groups in the middiles east. They are all radical elements of the muslim religion and make heavy use of that religion twisting it to justify their actions.
Like it or not the christian religion is a key part of the kkk and many other white supremist groups in the United States. They are often radical elements of the christian religion and make heavy use of that religion twisting it to justify their actions.
Neither statement is racist and gives a far better understanding of what the groups stand for and their methods and recruiting targets than the politically correct meaningless statements ever could.
Can my simple statements be taken in the wrong fashion yes, but at least they don't bend over backwards and hide a key aspect of the topic.
I have no doubt the kkk would easily use them as an excuse to advocate killing muslim american's, but stripping away the fact that the majority of attacks on jews are often inspired by radical muslims or radical muslim propaganda and ideas just because they can used by twisted by racist is just as bad.
It is not racism to use the muslim word to describe a group that has ties to the muslim religion and use that religion to spread their beliefs and create yet more of thier terror and violence.
By being politically correct you ignore and hide something that is being used as a key aspect of the problem.
Had the man's pyscologist and the police not been blinded by the fear of being racist about the muslim religion they might have notice the warning signs that he had taken a unhealthy interest in the more radical, violent and twisted version of the muslim religion. These twisted version are spread extensively by the terror groups and yet the police can take no notice for fear of being labeled racist.
howard melton
I don't see any racism and substituting black in doesn't make my statement racist.
Do you not remember the "Radical black splinter groups?
They were most active in the 1960's and the 1970's and were a violent minority that wanted and did use terror techniques to try and achieve more freedom.
They differed from the peaceful demonstrations and methods favored by most blacks in fighting for more of there freedom?
Unlike Martin Luther King Jr. and the methods he supported these radical groups advocated and used the same violence the Radical christian group calling itself kkk used.
They were a smaller minority than the Radical christian group called the kkk, but both used terror techniques and both associated themselves with larger groups that didn't agree with their methods or actions.
Leaving out the fact they were black in the description of the group doing the violence is silly. As silly as leaving out the fact that the kkk is known for burning crosses in black people yards and white peoples yards that are to sympathetic to the blacks.
It's important to describe such groups by their association with larger groups because it helps to understand them and describes them better.
It also gives a possible key into thier recruitment methods and main sources of members.
I've heard rabid kkk radio preachers trying to use the bible to prove that it was "killer" cain and his descendants who were "turned black" as the mark spoke of in the Bible.
It was probably my laughter and the joking way I poked holes in the reasoning a few days later at my high school by making the statment "That Cain could have just as easily been turned white" that got me the kkk notes in my locker and high school books.
I live less than 100 miles from Memphis and at the time I was foolish enough to think that such racism was nearly dead.
If I simply call them kkk you have no understanding or knowledge of thier methods of twisting and distorting mainstream christian values to justify thier hate and acts of terror. Calling them Radical Christians in two words gives you a inkling and start at understanding them far more than kkk ever would.
The same goes for the Radical muslim groups that have formed, you cannot begin to understand them until you realize they are groups twisting the muslim religion and using it to justify their hate and acts of terror.
I don't think for a second that the majority of muslims advocate attacking women or building rocket bases under schools or that it is allah's will that children be used to clear land mines.
The large minority that do support these actions have twisted their religion and the beliefs of the majority in much the same way the kkk have twisted the beliefs of the majority of christians.
You can't accurately describe these terror groups by simply calling them Hezzbola, Al Keada or any of the dozens of names they use.
Being politically correct and keeping the key muslim aspect out of the headlines and descriptions denies reality, ignores part of thier view and hobbles your understanding.
How many people are aware of the kkk's common practice of twisting the bible to support thier hatrid?
Any use of the words black or muslim in a negative context has become an automatic assumption of racism, when in reality it is simply politically incorrect to do so.
It is not racism and assuming it is hobbles any chance of full understanding of what we are facing.
I've seen studies of the kkk's and neo-nazi's methods of recruitment and many of thier methods are carefully taylored and geared to select for mentally unstable people and then enhance those instabilities through the use of arguments based onfoundation religous beliefs.
In other words many of the videos and tapes the groups like the kkk and other white supremist produce are carefully geared to attract people with mental instabilities.
I suspect the radical muslim groups like the Hezzbolla and others might be using the same type of methods to recruit certain groups of people?
Thanks to the automatic knee jerk politically correct responce of hiding the muslim connection you can't tell if the radicals are using the techniques or not.
Epsilon would you have considered my statement racist had I left out the muslims?
Like it or not the muslim religion is a key part of the Hezzbola, Al Keada and countless other terror groups in the middiles east. They are all radical elements of the muslim religion and make heavy use of that religion twisting it to justify their actions.
Like it or not the christian religion is a key part of the kkk and many other white supremist groups in the United States. They are often radical elements of the christian religion and make heavy use of that religion twisting it to justify their actions.
Neither statement is racist and gives a far better understanding of what the groups stand for and their methods and recruiting targets than the politically correct meaningless statements ever could.
Can my simple statements be taken in the wrong fashion yes, but at least they don't bend over backwards and hide a key aspect of the topic.
I have no doubt the kkk would easily use them as an excuse to advocate killing muslim american's, but stripping away the fact that the majority of attacks on jews are often inspired by radical muslims or radical muslim propaganda and ideas just because they can used by twisted by racist is just as bad.
It is not racism to use the muslim word to describe a group that has ties to the muslim religion and use that religion to spread their beliefs and create yet more of thier terror and violence.
By being politically correct you ignore and hide something that is being used as a key aspect of the problem.
Had the man's pyscologist and the police not been blinded by the fear of being racist about the muslim religion they might have notice the warning signs that he had taken a unhealthy interest in the more radical, violent and twisted version of the muslim religion. These twisted version are spread extensively by the terror groups and yet the police can take no notice for fear of being labeled racist.
howard melton