Jump to content

Turkish leader challanges Obama


ScotsAlan
 Share

Recommended Posts

I found this article interesting.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31449973

 

If the religion of the victims and alleged murderer were reversed, would the news coverage be any different?

 

I think it would. If the alleged murderer was a Muslim I reckon his entire internet browsing history would be on every front page, together with anything he has posted on FB etc.

 

Edited by ScotsAlan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You raise a very good point.

 

But there are a number of factors that must be taken into account, not least that Erdogan is intent on making a name for himself as a world leader of a reconstituted Ottoman Empire and returning Turkey from a notionally secular nation to another Islamic pre-medieval hell hole.

 

IMO in the case of Barack Hussein Obama and Recep Tayyip Erdogan one is as bad as the other.

 

And no, the response in the US if the positions had been reversed would probably have been even more muted because of the inexplicable refusal by so many people to recognise what is taking place across the West as Islamification continues unchallenged and unabated.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually Spook, I stand to be corrected over details of his FB page etc being published.

 

"The Young Turks" on youtube have a good opinion piece on this. I can't post a link because I don't have Youtube at the moment.

 

It seems the guy was anti religion overall. But he was a gun advocate.

 

However, I still stand by my original post in that if the victim/alleged killer were reversed, this would have been headline news.

 

And no, I don't agree that Turkey wants to be an Empire again. Turkey has a secular Government. It is a Secular state that just happens to have a majority Muslim population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing crimes committed by Muslims in the name of Allah and Jihad with crimes committed by lone agents with other beliefs is fine so far as we understand that the two are completely different things.

 

If the Chapel Hill murders had anything to do with atheism then it is an isolated incident of a man losing the plot. He had no practical support in the form of weapons, training, and encouragement from a wider network of militant atheists (though such things do exists they are not a serious force). Nor has a group with an atheist or anti-theist ideology at its core sworn a violent terrorist war against the theist world!

 

In order to deal with organised Islamist extremism we must first acknowledge that it exists as a problem and is not somehow the same thing as lone-wolf attacks by people of other faiths like Breivik.

 

I do sympathise to some extent with peaceful Muslims but the reporting of these incidents generally reflects their newsworthyness. Homicides are a dime a dozen as they say over there, but terrorist attacks are a totally different thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the movie "American sniper" was funded by Iran and had been titled "anti American sniper" would it be in the lineup for oscars? I do link the two

 

That's a bit off track isn't it? We go from questioning the reporting on murder to how Hollywood's self-congratulatory award giving favours its own movies.

 

A good example of why fundamentalist Atheists are talking out of their chocolate valentine's day buttholes when they claim religion is the cause of all the violence in the world.

 

Who are these atheist who are claiming that religion is the cause of all violence? I don't think any educated person would say that, but we can say for certain that religion is a crucial ideological crutch in many conflicts. The core texts of the Abrahamic religions in particular are suffused with violence, bigotry, and racism and, being sincerely believed to be the word of god by their followers, are used to justify, inspire, and glorify murder in the name of god.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam has been the instigator of wars for 1300 years.

 

True, and Christianity was the instigator of wars for 1700 years. At this rate, Islam has another 400 years before they can catch up with Christianity. And Christianity is involved in a lot of the tribal wars out in Africa. A lot of the current wars involve Muslims but they didn't instigate those wars. Iraq and Afghanistan didn't declare war on America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christianity was not, people claiming to support Christ's message were, even though what the did ran counter to Christ's message.

 

The irony is that Muslims who do NOT follow the ranting of Mohammad are the people who do avoid causing and engaging in war against we infidels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ScotsAlan - Erdogan is pushing Turkey away from secularism, the latest changes in education where he and his crew have pushed a program that is driving for a 'pious generation'. Check it out along with a raft of other things that have taken place to replace a secular democracy further and further towards a Mohammadan theocracy. It's happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If the movie "American sniper" was funded by Iran and had been titled "anti American sniper" would it be in the lineup for oscars? I do link the two

 

That's a bit off track isn't it? We go from questioning the reporting on murder to how Hollywood's self-congratulatory award giving favours its own movies.

 

A good example of why fundamentalist Atheists are talking out of their chocolate valentine's day buttholes when they claim religion is the cause of all the violence in the world.

 

Who are these atheist who are claiming that religion is the cause of all violence? I don't think any educated person would say that, but we can say for certain that religion is a crucial ideological crutch in many conflicts. The core texts of the Abrahamic religions in particular are suffused with violence, bigotry, and racism and, being sincerely believed to be the word of god by their followers, are used to justify, inspire, and glorify murder in the name of god.

 

 

I agree with what you say Vulgarian. The point I was trying to make (not very well), was that in different circumstances the accused would have had his entire social and personal life being broadcast to the masses.

 

It is off on a tangent I agree, and the connection is very tenious and I openly admit I am totally in the wrong to assume a connection. But i think we will see a rise in hate crimes in the US because of this film. And that's not saying the film is wrong. Of course I am not saying that, freedom of speech etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...