Unlike taby, I find Hodgman quite reasonable, except that he is misguided. So I'll reply.

Quote:

Original post by Hodgman Secondly, criticising a religion is free speech, but encouraging violence against one is hate speech. One of those is a prized value of our society, one is an intolerable crime.

First, I do not regard anything I have said as qualifying as hate speech. Second, in the US, according to wiki, "Even in cases where speech encourages illegal violence, instances of incitement qualify as criminal only if the threat of violence is imminent." In Canada, cases that actually reach courts as opposed to just federal or provincial human rights tribunals are similarly limited as in the US.

Quote:

Talking about nuclear pre-emptive strikes against a race, religion, etc, makes you look like part of a hateful, confused lynch mob (that deserves to be in jail), not a level-headed critic simply exercising their rights.

It is a logical conclusion of applying a utilitarian approach--small tactical nuclear devices would limit casulaties while severely sapping, through image destruction, the power of a religion that causes and will cause untold suffering and has the potential of eventually overrunning Western society, Western values, and Western culture. By the news article I posted about those NATO officials, I am not alone in this line of thinking.

Quote:

You can't blame political correctness or mis-use of human rights for this. This isn't some "soft jihad". This is plain and simple xenophobia.

The soft jihad is very real and now well documented.

Quote:

You're a racist - defend that.

Doubt it--I've dated girls from most races (not to mention that the majority of Islamists are Caucasian--the same race I happen to belong to).

Quote:

Also, going back to your conspiracy theory...

I have no conspiracy theory. Islam is not a conspiracy. It is a cancerous meme, much like other religions, but one carrying a much deadlier payload.

Quote:

Some religious extremists from a fractured terrorist network kill a few thousand, and now we know their entire religion is planning world domination.

We know Islam is intent on world domination because it's in its teachings to subjugate the infidels, kill the apostates, and put the world under the umbrella of sharia law.

Quote:

...but when the government of a superpower kills millions, that's not worthy of a world domination conspiracy?

Next you'll be telling me that 9/11 was an inside job...

Look, I'm sorry to be presenting an inconvenient truth, but don't shoot the messenger for goodness' sake

I think it's cute that people actually still read Prune's post, even though it's obvious that he's completely insane.

Quote:

Original post by Prune ...

No Prune, everyone who is a racist pig is a fuckface. So far that's only you.

The sarcas/satire that you mention implies some kind of context. Well, here you are still ranting and raving about Islamic people without so much as providing a URL as evidence. The context is perfectly clear: you're a racist pig.

You're backpeddling on this, just like you're backpeddling in our other argument about the technological singularity.

You know what you can do with your fake sarcasm tag.

Yet more baseless accusations. I'm neither racist, nor liar, and most of all, I am not backpedaling on anything. All you've been doing in your posts is name-calling and childish insults--it is their sole content. You should stay within your area of expertise, where you do well; outside it, your insight is so lacking that you cannot even see your limitation.

Quote:

Original post by Prune No, that's the good thing. Islam is not a religion; it's a way of life and jihad is at the core. Islam seeks nothing short of the overthrow of anything non-Islam, and a take over of the world. And violent jihad is just one aspect; the soft jihad waged through the courts and human rights organizations of the Western world is another (and here in Canada at least, freedom advocates like Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn are putting the much-needed spotlight on these tactics, and of course in the UK and US there's the inimitable Christopher Hitchens). People would argue that Christianity also used to be vicious and militant, what with the crusades and inquisition and such. But Christianity has been neutered by history and is now a tamed religion, and so, despite being an atheist, I have some respect for a religion that is foundational in the origin of the value systems and culture of Western civilizations. Islam has nothing in it to ameliorate the oppression, inhumanity, and frankly, evil that are inherent in this most destructive and dangerous ways of life. It is the single biggest threat facing humanity--more than nuclear war, more than peak oil, and more than economic collapse. It is a politically correct cop out to argue that most Muslims do not support radical Islam. You can bet your ass they cheer its every advance towards world domination.

I've been rated down 1000 points for a lot less than that.

Honestly, after having read the (actual) history of how the Islam was founded and what kind of person Muhammad and his soldiers were, I fail to see how someone could think Prune's reasoning is out of the line. I'm reading the thread backwards and I yet have to find where exactly Prune used name calling (yeah, the fuckface thingy everyone is using on him).

He is entitled to have a mind of his own on the subject, and smart people should be proving him wrong with documentations and facts but above anything understanding that he might be wrong and that it's worth educating him (in the case someone thinks he needs it).

Everyone here failed at that. Noone, and I mean *NOONE* achieved to made an argument as concise as his personal oppinion and base it upon facts.

I believe the fact that I'm posting this should mean the death of this thread and my suspension for speaking my mind over forbidden stuff.

Fuck it.

Quote:

Original post by owl ...

You're forgetting about the evidence, owl. He has none.

Don't forget that when we talk on gamedev.net, we usually provide reference material to each other. That's what civilized discussion is... the sharing of information.

Quote:

Original post by Prune small tactical nuclear devices would limit casulaties while severely sapping, through image destruction, the power of a religion that causes...

Destroying the WTC was supposed to show that western capitalism isn't invulnerable -- look at the response that generated (over a hundred thousand dead).
You really think that killing millions more innocents is going to defuse the situation, and not create more rabid radical hatred?

Quote:

a religion that .... has the potential of eventually overrunning Western society, Western values, and Western culture.

I'm sorry, but this just isn't happening. It's especially not happening in the islamophobic countries!
If it does happen, it will because of majority will, thus democratically right.

Quote:

The soft jihad is very real and now well documented.

If by 'soft jihad' you mean people using the legal system to harrass/attempt to silence their critics... Then yes, muslims, cristians, and (famously) scientologists all do this. Individuals and corporations also do this regularly. Singling out islamic instances and branding them as a form of holy war is an unfair symptom of your paranoid delusions.

Quote:

I have no conspiracy theory.

You accuse all muslims of being secretly radical and supporting violent jihad.
That is a crackpot conspiracy theory.

Quote:

We know Islam is intent on world domination because it's in its teachings to subjugate the infidels, kill the apostates, and put the world under the umbrella of sharia law.

The Bhagavad gita (Hindu holy book) can be summed up like this:
"Soldier: God, I'm leading this army, but I don't want to kill people.
God: That may be your uncle over there, but cut his fucking head off already!"
This story was used by Ghandi to justify his ideas of non-violence (he turns the violence into a methophorical struggle). It has also been used throughout history to support genocide -- as has the christian bible!

In the same way, islamic teachings can be interpreted violentely, but they don't have to be. Again, your conspiracy theorises that all muslims interpret it in the worst possible way, while assuming that other religions interpret their teachings in non-violent ways.
You're beliving this based on faith in your own phobia -- you've even recognised the "normal" muslims, but stated that they're secretly "radical" ones!

Quote:

Quote: ...but when the government of a superpower kills millions, that's not worthy of a world domination conspiracy? Next you'll be telling me that 9/11 was an inside job...

You're saying the US isn't a dangerous government that's killed millions?
Off the top of my head, some big ones are:
Nuclear bombing of Japan - 1/4 million dead + 1/4 million suffering survivors.
Vietnam - 1 million killed during the war + 1 million killed by US-supported dictator afterwards.
1st gulf war - 100,000 dead.
Iraq containment post gulf war - 1 million starved.
2nd gulf war - 100,000 dead.

That's not bad for half a century of imperialistic world domination...

Quote:

Original post by Prune ...

OK. Where's your evidence?

Are you familiar with David Ahenakew? He was tried for saying less vile things than you. He got off, but only because the law is compassionate -- he was old and full of cancer. You're not.

Quote:

Original post by owl Quote: Original post by Prune No, that's the good thing. Islam is not a religion; it's a way of life and jihad is at the core. Islam seeks nothing short of the overthrow of anything non-Islam, and a take over of the world. And violent jihad is just one aspect; the soft jihad waged through the courts and human rights organizations of the Western world is another (and here in Canada at least, freedom advocates like Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn are putting the much-needed spotlight on these tactics, and of course in the UK and US there's the inimitable Christopher Hitchens). People would argue that Christianity also used to be vicious and militant, what with the crusades and inquisition and such. But Christianity has been neutered by history and is now a tamed religion, and so, despite being an atheist, I have some respect for a religion that is foundational in the origin of the value systems and culture of Western civilizations. Islam has nothing in it to ameliorate the oppression, inhumanity, and frankly, evil that are inherent in this most destructive and dangerous ways of life. It is the single biggest threat facing humanity--more than nuclear war, more than peak oil, and more than economic collapse. It is a politically correct cop out to argue that most Muslims do not support radical Islam. You can bet your ass they cheer its every advance towards world domination. I've been rated down 1000 points for a lot less than that. Honestly, after having read the (actual) history of how the Islam was founded and what kind of person Muhammad and his soldiers were, I fail to see how someone could think Prune's reasoning is out of the line. I'm reading the thread backwards and I yet have to find where exactly Prune used name calling (yeah, the fuckface thingy everyone is using on him). He is entitled to have a mind of his own on the subject, and smart people should be proving him wrong with documentations and facts but above anything understanding that he might be wrong and that it's worth educating him (in the case someone thinks he needs it). Everyone here failed at that. Noone, and I mean *NOONE* achieved to made an argument as concise as his personal oppinion and base it upon facts. I believe the fact that I'm posting this should mean the death of this thread and my suspension for speaking my mind over forbidden stuff. Fuck it.

__owl__, your post means a lot to me. But I feel like I'm trying to help blind people see. At least Hodgman and some others can have a proper discussion, even if I don't appreciate the name-calling. But taby has been an enormous disappointment, especially in light of some of his other posts in different sections of the forum which have been interesting.

taby, the evidence against Islam is overwhelming, and __owl__ is telling you the same thing. Maybe you need to let your preconceptions go and start digging into the wealth of information. I have presented a good start with a few links that will lead to more.

I used to be on the left, a definite socialist, and bleeding-heart at that. But I have always kept an open mind and tried to refine my belief system towards what I refer to as PAC, or probably approximately correct (to steal the term from the stochastic search and machine learning literature). But I have seen and read and heard enough and I have the cojones to take a stand in the face of evil.

Quote:

Original post by Prune But I feel like I'm trying to help blind people see. At least Hodgman and some others can have a proper discussion, even if I don't appreciate the name-calling.

You're accusing one in five people (selected via cultural/religious criteria) of being violently insane. That falls under several common definitions of racism (cultural discrimination).
You've presented no evidence that these billions of people think in the way that you're accusing them of, so your accusations are simply unfounded racism.

Calling you a racist isn't name calling. It's the ugly truth.

Quote:

the evidence against Islam is overwhelming

Ok...

Quote:

I've been rated down 1000 points for a lot less than that.

I've been offensive to Prune in this post - telling him to shut the fuck up, etc.

It's interesting to see my rating drop 5 points while his drops 100... Apparently I'm not the only one abhored by the racism in this thread.