Great news for WW2 FPS fans

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Ever wanted to go back in time and liberate Auschwitz? Well, someone's trying to take Hungary back about 75 years and rebuild Auschwitz, so you may get a chance.

Captcha was "dangerous lunatics" but Firefox crashed, and now it's "baby steps" instead. O.o

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/JD-halperin/hungary-anti-semite-_b_2224817.html

Recently, Márton Gyöngyösi, the foreign policy critic of Hungary's ultra-far-right Jobbik party -- the third most populous party in Hungary -- said publicly what would cause Canadian jaws to drop if said by a Canadian politician here:

"I think such a conflict [the recent Israel and Gaza war] makes it timely to tally up people of Jewish ancestry who live here, especially in the Hungarian parliament and the Hungarian government, who, indeed, pose a national security risk to Hungary."

He wants to catalogue Hungary's Jews in a database simply for being Jewish. Something this deplorable requires no counter argument. Of course, he claims he was misquoted, but his backpedaling cleared up nothing. Really he meant to "call the attention to the threat posed by government members and in parliament by Hungarian-Israeli dual citizens." Not Jews, Israelis.

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/11/28/3113001/hungarian-jewish-body-to-sue-lawmaker-for-nazi-speech

A Hungarian Jewish organization said it will file a complaint against a lawmaker who proposed drawing up a list of "dangerous" Jews in government.

During a Parliament session on Israel's latest clash with Hamas, Gyongyosi said that Jews in the government posed a national risk and should be monitored. He also said a census should be held of all Hungarian Jews.

I can drive, and I'm fairly good with a rifle, but I donated all my old army gear to a theatre company years ago. If you need an extra shooter for the extraction, call me!

Not too different from that Ukrainian party.

Wasn't Auschwitz in Poland?

TheIronRuler:
Not too different from that Ukrainian party.

Wasn't Auschwitz in Poland?

My thoughts exactly.

In saying that ; if he wants to talk like an idiot let them. They have enough problems in Hungary; I'm fairly sure the tiresome act of cataloging the locals Jews will fall by the wayside.

The distinctly worrying Jobbik and their voters aren't even half Hungary's problems. You should see what the governing Fidesz party has been getting up to.

Fraser Greenfield:

TheIronRuler:
Not too different from that Ukrainian party.

Wasn't Auschwitz in Poland?

My thoughts exactly.

In saying that ; if he wants to talk like an idiot let them. They have enough problems in Hungary; I'm fairly sure the tiresome act of cataloging the locals Jews will fall by the wayside.

.
Hating and Blaming the outside is always popular. Hell, Greece has a similar party too (though less antisemitic than my example). I remember its head saying that the Auschwitz gas chambers never existed! When Europe falls into economic despair, they will blame the Jews. They will blame the outsiders. Ukraine will blame the remaining Russian ethnic minority within it, for example.

From what I read online, Jobbik holds 43 (recently down from 44) out of 386 seats in the Hungarian Parliament... Which to me suggests that they probably don't have the votes to do any such thing. It sounds like it initially wasn't much of a story because people are used to Jobbik being a party of racist ass-hats:

...the problem is such a disturbing comment apparently isn't a huge deal because it's commonplace. Paul Steiner, a Jewish opposition MP, claims he "couldn't digest what we'd heard, we're so used to remarks like this from Jobbik." This is a story because it wasn't a story.[1]

Regardless, for a fascist, nationalist, racist party to hold even that much sway in the government seems pretty lame. On top of that, and I guess what's really disappointing, is that Jobbik has been steadily gaining ground since the party was first founded in 2002.

I guess the good news is some of the party's own members quit over this? Meh.

Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

.
Did you just defend antisemitism?

Plus, where are you pulling this 'information' from?

TheIronRuler:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

.
Did you just defend antisemitism?

Plus, where are you pulling this 'information' from?

Are you saying the equivalent towards Muslims is fine then if you're calling that a defense?

Dijkstra:

TheIronRuler:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

.
Did you just defend antisemitism?

Plus, where are you pulling this 'information' from?

Are you saying the equivalent towards Muslims is fine then if you're calling that a defense?

.
No, I am not. Only he claims A without providing proof, while the OP claims B with providing links.

TheIronRuler:

Dijkstra:

TheIronRuler:

.
Did you just defend antisemitism?

Plus, where are you pulling this 'information' from?

Are you saying the equivalent towards Muslims is fine then if you're calling that a defense?

.
No, I am not.

Sure looks like it when you call what he said defending antisemitism

Only he claims A without providing proof, while the OP claims B with providing links.

Doesn't matter when it comes to how ridiculous it seemed for you to ask whether he was defending antisemitism.

Dijkstra:

TheIronRuler:

Dijkstra:

Are you saying the equivalent towards Muslims is fine then if you're calling that a defense?

.
No, I am not.

Sure looks like it when you call what he said defending antisemitism

Only he claims A without providing proof, while the OP claims B with providing links.

Doesn't matter when it comes to how ridiculous it seemed for you to ask whether he was defending antisemitism.

.
What he said earlier seemed to be out of place, and I inquired him about his intentions.

Well, that's pretty insane. Let's hope the consequences of that are harsh for him and his party. Maybe a proper media firestorm will cause enough damage to him to drive away anybody but the most ardent bigots who simply don't care about being called out. People like that need to be marginalized, put on the fringe, the very edge of political discourse where they can't affect anybody or anything. Considering how many seats they currently have, that has clearly not happened yet. They may not be a major party, but they have obviously received numerous votes translating into a sizeable bit of support from either a) people who agree with this shit b) people who don't mind this shit even though they should or c) both. I am really disturbed when people are willing to overlook things that should make politicians outright unelectable because they agree with some other thing they said. As for the people who actually agree, well... that's even worse, of course.

TheIronRuler:
What he said earlier seemed to be out of place, and I inquired him about his intentions.

Nah, you accused him of defending antisemitism. Putting a question mark at the end of a sentence doesn't change that. Fox News doesn't get away with that stuff, either.
Is Obama a freedom-hating Commie-Muslim-Nazi-Kenyan-Atheist? We're just asking questions here.
Over him pointing out other problematic behaviour, I might add.

Skeleon:
Well, that's pretty insane. Let's hope the consequences of that are harsh for him and his party. Maybe a proper media firestorm will cause enough damage to him to drive away anybody but the most ardent bigots who simply don't care about being called out. People like that need to be marginalized, put on the fringe, the very edge of political discourse where they can't affect anybody or anything. Considering how many seats they currently have, that has clearly not happened yet. They may not be a major party, but they have obviously received numerous votes translating into a sizeable bit of support from either a) people who agree with this shit b) people who don't mind this shit even though they should or c) both. I am really disturbed when people are willing to overlook things that should make politicians outright unelectable because they agree with some other thing they said. As for the people who actually agree, well... that's even worse, of course.

TheIronRuler:
What he said earlier seemed to be out of place, and I inquired him about his intentions.

Nah, you accused him of defending antisemitism. Putting a question mark at the end of a sentence doesn't change that. Fox News doesn't get away with that stuff, either.
Is Obama a freedom-hating Commie-Muslim-Nazi-Kenyan-Atheist? We're just asking questions here.
Over him pointing out other problematic behaviour, I might add.

.
Why are you putting words in my mouth? It's not very comfortable. I asked him to clear up his stance, that's all there was to it.

EDIT: I think I know Nik enough to determine he won't do what you think I accused him of, I was curious why he decided to put what he did in this thread and if he was willing to open up a discussion (provide evidence) for what he said.

TheIronRuler:

Skeleon:
Well, that's pretty insane. Let's hope the consequences of that are harsh for him and his party. Maybe a proper media firestorm will cause enough damage to him to drive away anybody but the most ardent bigots who simply don't care about being called out. People like that need to be marginalized, put on the fringe, the very edge of political discourse where they can't affect anybody or anything. Considering how many seats they currently have, that has clearly not happened yet. They may not be a major party, but they have obviously received numerous votes translating into a sizeable bit of support from either a) people who agree with this shit b) people who don't mind this shit even though they should or c) both. I am really disturbed when people are willing to overlook things that should make politicians outright unelectable because they agree with some other thing they said. As for the people who actually agree, well... that's even worse, of course.

TheIronRuler:
What he said earlier seemed to be out of place, and I inquired him about his intentions.

Nah, you accused him of defending antisemitism. Putting a question mark at the end of a sentence doesn't change that. Fox News doesn't get away with that stuff, either.
Is Obama a freedom-hating Commie-Muslim-Nazi-Kenyan-Atheist? We're just asking questions here.
Over him pointing out other problematic behaviour, I might add.

.
Why are you putting words in my mouth? It's not very comfortable. I asked him to clear up his stance, that's all there was to it.

EDIT: I think I know Nik enough to determine he won't do what you think I accused him of, I was curious why he decided to put what he did in this thread and if he was willing to open up a discussion (provide evidence) for what he said.

I suspect his point was to highlight the attitude amongst certain non-Israeli-but-pro-Israel political affiliations, and among some Israelis, which could justifiably be called "rank hypocrisy" and that pops up from time to time when some cretinous shite crawls out of the woodwork spewing anti-Semitic bile. The same people who immediately and vociferously decry any anti-Semitic(justifiably) or anti-Israeli(less so, depending on what is said) remark as monstrous/racist/Jew-hating/Nazism will often overlook and even condone extremely similar language or policy providing the targets are Muslim or Arab. I suspect he raised that point in order to ascertain if you are one of those people.

I could also be completely wrong in my assessment of his intent, of course.

Magichead:

TheIronRuler:

Skeleon:
Well, that's pretty insane. Let's hope the consequences of that are harsh for him and his party. Maybe a proper media firestorm will cause enough damage to him to drive away anybody but the most ardent bigots who simply don't care about being called out. People like that need to be marginalized, put on the fringe, the very edge of political discourse where they can't affect anybody or anything. Considering how many seats they currently have, that has clearly not happened yet. They may not be a major party, but they have obviously received numerous votes translating into a sizeable bit of support from either a) people who agree with this shit b) people who don't mind this shit even though they should or c) both. I am really disturbed when people are willing to overlook things that should make politicians outright unelectable because they agree with some other thing they said. As for the people who actually agree, well... that's even worse, of course.

Nah, you accused him of defending antisemitism. Putting a question mark at the end of a sentence doesn't change that. Fox News doesn't get away with that stuff, either.
Is Obama a freedom-hating Commie-Muslim-Nazi-Kenyan-Atheist? We're just asking questions here.
Over him pointing out other problematic behaviour, I might add.

.
Why are you putting words in my mouth? It's not very comfortable. I asked him to clear up his stance, that's all there was to it.

EDIT: I think I know Nik enough to determine he won't do what you think I accused him of, I was curious why he decided to put what he did in this thread and if he was willing to open up a discussion (provide evidence) for what he said.

I suspect his point was to highlight the attitude amongst certain non-Israeli-but-pro-Israel political affiliations, and among some Israelis, which could justifiably be called "rank hypocrisy" and that pops up from time to time when some cretinous shite crawls out of the woodwork spewing anti-Semitic bile. The same people who immediately and vociferously decry any anti-Semitic(justifiably) or anti-Israeli(less so, depending on what is said) remark as monstrous/racist/Jew-hating/Nazism will often overlook and even condone extremely similar language or policy providing the targets are Muslim or Arab. I suspect he raised that point in order to ascertain if you are one of those people.

I could also be completely wrong in my assessment of his intent, of course.

.
I know about some actions done and comments said against Muslims within the USA by individuals of note and even public officials holding power, but what he said in his post was preposterous. I know that the difference between people crying to kick out the Muslims out of Europe and the ones crying to kick out the Jews out of Europe is very little, but I never support them. I do however support the right of the people that want to prevent certain groups from coming to their country to complain openly about it, but what could that vocal minority do? This is the same reason why I want people who deny the holocaust to speak up so they can be heard - along with their boundless stupidity. This is why whenever such a party like in the OP or the one I mentioned gets some power I flippantly call them populists and don't get mad. Europe's economy is diving into the gutter, I'm not surprised to see this kind of talk in their local politics. This is happening in Spain, Greece, Ukraine, Hungary... There are probably more I'm not aware of.

In other news the banking sector in Hungary collapses.

Also in totally unrelated news; demand for Kosher products in Eastern Austria skyrockets!

OT: This is just anti-semitism. The only news worthy aspect is that it comes from a somewhat modern country.

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Different in the sense that one actually happened and the other is a product of your fevered paranoia, yes yes they are different.

Capatcha, until tonight... that's forboding.

TheIronRuler:

Why are you putting words in my mouth?

TheIronRuler:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

.
Did you just defend antisemitism?

lol.

OT: Blatant anti-semitism. I love how he tried to say he was misquoted though, that's hilarious.

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

Yeah, last I checked Jewish terrorism didn't occur in Hungary in the last twenty years. America can't say the same thing about Muslim terrorism. That said, there are American politicians that oppose the idea that all Muslims are criminals.

Nikolaz72:

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Yet you'll completely skip over the story in the OP and say nothing about a government body that wants to put all Hungarian Jews on a list.

OP:I think its a bit far to say its Auschwitz, but at the same time....what the hell?

the clockmaker:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Different in the sense that one actually happened and the other is a product of your fevered paranoia, yes yes they are different.

It's not paranoia, look at this.

http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/category-muslim-names.html

Seems innocent right? WRONG. It's corruption, corruption of the highest order. I can't tell you what's been corrupted here, all I can tell you is that it's corrupt.

Gold:

the clockmaker:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Different in the sense that one actually happened and the other is a product of your fevered paranoia, yes yes they are different.

It's not paranoia, look at this.

http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/category-muslim-names.html

Seems innocent right? WRONG. It's corruption, corruption of the highest order. I can't tell you what's been corrupted here, all I can tell you is that it's corrupt.

That's it, the super secret government spy nazi racists can keep that list, and when they meet someone, they can look them up to see if they are a muslim.... OH MY GOD, what if someone puts my name on the list, then the government will think I'm a muslim and bug my computer, SAVE ME NIKOLAZ, SAVE ME.....

EVERYTHING IS FINE, HAVE A PATRIOTIC DAY FELLOW CITIZEN.

What's up with fascists and jews? That was Hitler's thing. There are plenty of ethnic or political minorities to scapegoat in any given country.

Glad to see right wing insanity, though prevalent in the U.S., hasn't quite gotten that far... or has it? I'm not exactly up to date on if some nutter representative said we should put gays in concentration camps yet.

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Though I still don't aprove of it, what the FBI actually does is profile using name, ethnicity, immigration status, frequency of trips to the middle east, etc to come up with a list of people who may be worth questioning. Still profiling in the worst manner, but not really the same considering ethnicity was not the sole or really even primary factor.

WouldYouKindly:
What's up with fascists and jews? That was Hitler's thing. There are plenty of ethnic or political minorities to scapegoat in any given country.

Anti-semitism seems to be one of the really popular ones for some reason, yeah.

WouldYouKindly:
Glad to see right wing insanity, though prevalent in the U.S., hasn't quite gotten that far... or has it? I'm not exactly up to date on if some nutter representative said we should put gays in concentration camps yet.

Yeah, that sort of thing has been suggested a lot in the US, normally not by someone in any kind of real power though. You get the odd person calling for people with HIV/AIDS to wear patches on their clothing as well.

As an aside, a lot of gay people liberated from Nazi concentration camps were locked back up in civilian prisons.

Revnak:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Though I still don't aprove of it, what the FBI actually does is profile using name, ethnicity, immigration status, frequency of trips to the middle east, etc to come up with a list of people who may be worth questioning. Still profiling in the worst manner, but not really the same considering ethnicity was not the sole or really even primary factor.

Eh? Profiling works, every investigation uses profiling the question is about racial profiling.
When detectives are investigating a murder they build a profile of the subject, if you match that profile you have a higher chance of being investigated and or questioned. The problem with racial profiling especially in the US is that for a long long time blacks where automatically profiled as potential subject just based on the color of their skin.
My girl friend is Icelandic, when she travels to Israel with ELAL she has gets screened more you know why? because every attempt against EL-AL flights, and most hijackings in the 70's and 80's involved young European women bringing explosives and weapons on board even with out knowing they are doing it.
Considering political beliefs, background, and even religion as a part of a profile is not morally wrong, if some one would light up a cross i doubt most people would think to go question the local rabbi before visiting the local white supremacist congregation.
As an example the xmass bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was a young Muslim male, traveling alone, with no checked in luggage, had a one way plane ticket payed in cash, had a Nigerian passport which was issued in Libya, and was traveling to Detroit in the winter wearing a T-Shirt.
If that profile does not raises some red flags then i don't know what would, and sadly political correctness dictates that it's evil and you should treat all passengers the same regardless of their background. So instead of asking 3-5 personal questions, taking a look at the passenger as a person and not as a property we have to take off shoes and belts at the airport, pretty much molested to make sure we don't have a bomb up our arse and it still wont stop any one from bringing a bomb on board.
On the other hand flying from Israel you don't need to remove any thing, you pass trough security with in about 10 min(even if you are "questioned"), you can bring liquids, pastes, and just about every thing short of a rocket launcher on board the aircraft with no fuss.

Revnak:

Nikolaz72:
Is this different from America putting all the people with muslim-sounding names on a list? Just asking.. No? Yes?

If this is the case I'm gonna be the first to call the FBI nazi's.

Though I still don't aprove of it, what the FBI actually does is profile using name, ethnicity, immigration status, frequency of trips to the middle east, etc to come up with a list of people who may be worth questioning. Still profiling in the worst manner, but not really the same considering ethnicity was not the sole or really even primary factor.

I was taking it to an extreme, I do not agree wtih an extreme-rightwing antisemitist. But I was making a point that racial profiling isnt exclusive to white-supemacists and is infact rather common in a lot of countries. This means that 'if' there is a reason to suspect that people of jewish heritage are more likely to commit violence in Hungary (And he presents evidence for this, plenty of evidence. Which he cannot) Then it would not be any different than what is already going on most everywhere else.

If young Jewish hungarians had a habbit of bombing supermarkets, I see no reason they should be protected from the same treatment other minorities gets when a decent part of the people in affiliation with their religion does stupid shit.

The problem 'with' Racial profiling is that people can abuse it. And have abused it. It has little to do with political correctness, but the extreme right-wing tends to pull a fast one and ignore facts in the favor of appealing to the... well... extreme right-wing demographic.

Politics.

Verbatim:
Eh? Profiling works, every investigation uses profiling the question is about racial profiling.
When detectives are investigating a murder they build a profile of the subject, if you match that profile you have a higher chance of being investigated and or questioned. The problem with racial profiling especially in the US is that for a long long time blacks where automatically profiled as potential subject just based on the color of their skin.
My girl friend is Icelandic, when she travels to Israel with ELAL she has gets screened more you know why? because every attempt against EL-AL flights, and most hijackings in the 70's and 80's involved young European women bringing explosives and weapons on board even with out knowing they are doing it.
Considering political beliefs, background, and even religion as a part of a profile is not morally wrong, if some one would light up a cross i doubt most people would think to go question the local rabbi before visiting the local white supremacist congregation.
As an example the xmass bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was a young Muslim male, traveling alone, with no checked in luggage, had a one way plane ticket payed in cash, had a Nigerian passport which was issued in Libya, and was traveling to Detroit in the winter wearing a T-Shirt.
If that profile does not raises some red flags then i don't know what would, and sadly political correctness dictates that it's evil and you should treat all passengers the same regardless of their background. So instead of asking 3-5 personal questions, taking a look at the passenger as a person and not as a property we have to take off shoes and belts at the airport, pretty much molested to make sure we don't have a bomb up our arse and it still wont stop any one from bringing a bomb on board.
On the other hand flying from Israel you don't need to remove any thing, you pass trough security with in about 10 min(even if you are "questioned"), you can bring liquids, pastes, and just about every thing short of a rocket launcher on board the aircraft with no fuss.

I don't disagree as such, race as part of profiling isn't inherently wrong, and doing away with it makes things harder.

Unfortunately, it's out of favour because of many people abusing it. Now, tightening restrictions on how it is used to come down on that sort of thing would make sense, but in their absence people have decided people need to do away with it, and I'm not sure I disagree.

TheIronRuler:
But wait! It's not antisemitism if you're targeting Israeli Jews!

While I know you didn't mean that the way it sounded (the sarcasm tag was a big clue :-P), it's still an argument I don't like - that somehow criticism of Israel's behaviour is antisemitic by dint of the fact that it's an ostensibly religious country. When other nations criticise England, we can't cry Christian persecution because we have a state religion, yet there are people floating around the net (admittedly, many of them are right-wing Christians with a vested interest in maintaining a Jewish state) who will accuse anyone who speaks negatively about Israel of antisemitism.

OT: Though the guy quoted in the OP is obviously just being a tool, it does sound reminiscent of the way the USA treated the Japanese in the second world war, the idea that it's not racist - or the 'ism/ist' of your choice - if they might be agents of a hostile country. Worrying.

thaluikhain:
Yeah, that sort of thing has been suggested a lot in the US, normally not by someone in any kind of real power though. You get the odd person calling for people with HIV/AIDS to wear patches on their clothing as well.

Unrelated, but still disturbing - there was a recent study that estimated there are around 250,000 people wandering around the UK who are HIV+ but aren't aware of it, and so may still be going around having unprotected sex.

To play devil's advocate for a moment, do you think this would be as big of an issue if there was some way to identify people with HIV/AIDS (like the patches you mentioned) before sleeping with them? You know, other than asking them, which seems a little bit rude :-P

SonicWaffle:

TheIronRuler:
But wait! It's not antisemitism if you're targeting Israeli Jews!

While I know you didn't mean that the way it sounded (the sarcasm tag was a big clue :-P), it's still an argument I don't like - that somehow criticism of Israel's behaviour is antisemitic by dint of the fact that it's an ostensibly religious country. When other nations criticise England, we can't cry Christian persecution because we have a state religion, yet there are people floating around the net (admittedly, many of them are right-wing Christians with a vested interest in maintaining a Jewish state) who will accuse anyone who speaks negatively about Israel of antisemitism.

OT: Though the guy quoted in the OP is obviously just being a tool, it does sound reminiscent of the way the USA treated the Japanese in the second world war, the idea that it's not racist - or the 'ism/ist' of your choice - if they might be agents of a hostile country. Worrying.

.
This is crazier than saying American Catholics are working for the Pope and they're all double agents.
It happened.
I'm serious.

More often than I hope people who criticism Israel don't stop there and continue with the 'Zionist plot'. How can you then continue to call what they do 'criticism' and nothing else? What, the book - 'Elders of Zion' is now a book criticizing Israel because of semantics they have the word 'Zion' in it? Dafuq is that?

TheIronRuler:
This is crazier than saying American Catholics are working for the Pope and they're all double agents.
It happened.
I'm serious.

Speaking as a guy who was raised Catholic, shhhh! Stop telling everyone! Our plan relies on the element of surprise!

Seriously though, this doesn't surprise me at all. There are whole swathes of the American Baptist movement who consider Catholicism to be anything from misguided and heretical to downright Satanic. Check out Jack Chick's wonderful tract on the subject.

TheIronRuler:
More often than I hope people who criticism Israel don't stop there and continue with the 'Zionist plot'. How can you then continue to call what they do 'criticism' and nothing else? What, the book - 'Elders of Zion' is now a book criticizing Israel because of semantics they have the word 'Zion' in it? Dafuq is that?

I wasn't talking about the David Icke-alikes who think Israel is some plot by Jewish space-lizards. Those people are crazy, and it's pretty fair to label them antisemites. My complaint is with those who will attempt to deflect any criticism of Israel by accusing the critic of antisemitism. We should be allowed to say that, for instance, Israeli handling of the West Bank situation is an overly-aggressive clusterfuck without being labelled as bigots.

Obviously not everyone does this, but it's disturbingly common, particularly on the internet.

Nikolaz72:
snip

Again racial profiling is racial profiling only when a single 1 dimensional characteristic which is tied to race, ethnicity, or any other factor is used to justify prosecution.
There is no more reason to question a say dutch Muslim who lived in the country for 20 years traveling home from a vacation in Florida than to question a white dutch woman.
How ever if the same person had multiple visits to say Libya, Pakistan, and Mali which he can't reasonably explain that justifies questioning and investigating him further, he might have been sight seeing, but more likely than not he was there for training and or taking part in the mujahedin "activities" in those parts of the world.
BTW the same would be true if the white "christian" woman had the same background, the amount of "converts" that are actively participating in "freedom fighting activities" is quite staggering these days.
The problem is that people who are against "profiling" are not against racial profiling, they are against all kinds of profiling which is stupid.
To them the fact that you traveled to say Mali 10 times over the pass 3 year a country which is being overrun violently by Muslim extremest to the point where music is now outlawed a punishable by death in almost half of the country.
Is on it's own racial profiling just because you work of the "assumption" that Mali is filled with non-white people, and has allot of Muslims so you must be doing something wrong.
In any case of profiling you have to take into question the entire background of a person, and the more data it has the more accurate your profile is, and good profiles are accurate to a scary point. A good profiler can pretty much tell you you're whole life story, and predict how you will act in most situations based on relatively small amount of information.
It's used every day weather to solve or stop crime, to hire workers, or ever to help people suffering from mental and psychosocial problems.
And the sad part is that no matter how much those groups push to stop it it will continue, just sadly not in an official capacity if you hear about a suicide bombing you assume it was a Muslim, if you hear about some banker you assume it was a Jew, and if you hear about some firebombing an abortion clinic you assume it was a Christian nut job.
Those assumptions are not inherently wrong, they resonate both from personal, and the collective experience of the society you live in.
Ignoring them just makes certain activities much less efficient, and puts a greater strain and discomfort on the wide population.
What's next not allowing blood banks to "profile" donors by blood type?

Verbatim:
Snip

Whatever excuses you have and strawmen you build, this still doesnt justify the possibility of abuse.

Nikolaz72:

Verbatim:
Snip

Whatever excuses you have and strawmen you build, this still doesnt justify the possibility of abuse.

It's not excuses nor strawman, if any thing the fact that you have to molest a 4 yr old girl because you are not allowed to profile people in airports is more of an abuse than having to question some one that fits a profile.
Profiling is used everywhere, your bank and credit card companies do it every time you apply for a loan or a card, your employer/headhunting agency they use to it every time you submit a resume, and your doctor uses it every time they issue you a treatment.
So yeah i don't see any reason why not use the same profiling methods to screen passengers that want to turn the aircraft into a light show.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked