Explosion at Manchester Arena - Fatalities Confirmed

by cofty 342 Replies latest members politics

  • hothabanero
    hothabanero
    Don't play semantic games. It is a sure sign of somebody who can't support the reasonableness of their argument.

    I read this somewhere: If a semantic game is to say things that have no bearing on the discussion in order to score points then what is accusing someone of playing semantic games? lol.

    I will explain my thoughts with an illustration.

    Imagine there is a man (Jones) with a small factory. All Jones ever wish to do is to build small robots that go out and kill people in the neighborhood. He spends every day doing this... he writes about how he is doing it... he explains why it is a good and useful thing to do.

    He is not very good at it. Most of the robots he build just waddle out and do nothing... but once in a while one of them go BOOM in a shopping center, a playground, a concert....

    This go on year after years... everyone know Jones is doing it and are pissed off but they say to each other: My God, another playground was blown up by one of Jones little robots. If only there was something we could do but alas, all Jones does is assemble small robots in his own privacy. Let's remind ourselves that not all his robots work as intended and be happy for that.

    You are smart so you probably understand my point but let me explain.

    There are people who preach death to infidels.. jews... that people should really do this. Most of the people who hear this do not kill other humans but some do. The people are programming other people in a cult-like fashion for murder. They are rarely successful but sometimes they succeed. We all know this. Yet people say: Oh what a tragedy, if only we could do something, but alas he is only talking, having his thoughts, and sometimes sharing them, and we can't arrest him for thought-crimes. Let us remind ourselves he does not always succeed!

    You see my point?

    Thoughts are contagious.. some are very dangerous.

    My answer: Bulldoze Jones bombshop & make sure he never get his hands on another robot again.


  • hothabanero
    hothabanero
    @Cofty:
    I have no hesitation in saying that number one should be shot but according to Hothab all of them should be executed along with their families. Is that really what anybody believes?

    I think your post was directed at Simon so I won't reply but as I wrote, my views are the same as Simons on this topic and I don't believe what you wrote above. I hoped I made that clear.

    Can you please accept my apology for not writing this clearly enough the other day when I was upset bc of the bombing & not strawman me? it is frustrating and you are clever enough to know better.

  • cofty
    cofty
    You see my point? - Hothab

    No not really. I'm not interested in hypothetical robots.

    I posted 5 examples because I am interested in specifically how your rhetoric translates into the real world. It was addressed to you and Simon, LUHE, Hecce, Barry and anybody else who wants to join the conversation.

    Numbers 1 - 5. Who should be executed and if not all five of them what should we do with them?

  • Hecce
    Hecce

    Car bombs kill 23 in central Baghdad, hit Ramadan crowd

    http://news.trust.org/item/20170530071435-c800l

  • hothabanero
    hothabanero

    @Cofty: Just a single question before I answer (later).

    How many of those are "thought-crimes" and do you believe thought-crimes should not be punished?

  • cofty
    cofty

    Those are judgements for you to make. That's the whole point.

    You are the one who called for the execution of anybody who was judged to be "most radical".

    I want to know where you draw the line.

  • hothabanero
    hothabanero

    @Cofty: You have been accusing me of saying people should be executed for thought-crimes. That is why I am asking you: which of those things on your list are thought-crimes according to YOUR definition and should thought-crimes be punishable?

  • cofty
    cofty
    You have been accusing me of saying people should be executed for thought-crimes - Hothab

    Yes. You said there should be a database of all Muslims that includes information on "how Muslim they are" and the "most radical" should be shot. You said that this should also "apply to their family".

    Now you insist you didn't mean what you said. Good.

    I have suggested five specific scenarios to see where we draw the line.

    "Thought-crimes" do not exist in a free society.

  • hothabanero
    hothabanero

    ok I will answer your question

    1: stop at all costs

    2-3: jail

    4-5: questioned, jail depending on outcome

    Family and friends should be looked into in all instances and whatever caused this radicalization should be stopped. Deportations should happen whenever possible. They should also all go into a database with info such as radicalization level. There is already such such a database in the UK btw. with people being monitored.

    So now I ask you: Did I just put an innocent man in jail bc of "thoughtcrimes"? You accused me of wanting to kill people bc of thoughtcrimes so I wonder how they enter into the equation.... or perhaps your example has nothing to do with thoughtcrimes lol!

  • cofty
    cofty

    Thank you for your answers.

    Could you say more about number 5? Let's say he is questioned and no evidence can be found apart from his approval of terrorism against kafir. Do we jail him? For how long?

    Deportations should happen whenever possible

    Not possible. Assume they are all local citizens.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit