Bigotry garbage

[kiaer.ts]

[NOTE FROM MSK: This crap was removed from another thread. See Post No. 4 below for link to the original thread.]

The only bigot posting here now is that apologist for terrorism, Adonis Vlahos. His presence is a blight on this forum, if not a crime. His attacks on Ayaan Hirsi Ali are shameful. His statement of his

'fear" for her - when it is worshippers of the madman from medina and his blood-soaked desert demon who cut of her clitoris, stabbed her coworker in the street, hounded her out of two homelands, and continue to call for her murder today - amounts to a terroristic threat. It is a violation of the posting guidleines for this forum - and activity worth a letter to Ali's lawyers and the Department of Homeland Security.

There are plenty of websites for madmen like him to spread their lies. Why on an Objectivist website, with the blind support of its owner?

Religion is a voluntary matter. You cannot call criticism of a murderous faith bigotry and pretend to be an Objectivist or understand Objectivism.

No one is calling on you to denounce non-violent relatives and acquaintances of yours who do not advocate the cult of a madman. But Vlahos is a willing agent of this murderous agenda. What is next, threads in support of pederasts and white supremecists, in the name of tolerance?

If you want to continue to make an issue of this, it behooves those of us who consider ourselves opposed to mutilation and murder in the name of an insane religion to call you out on it, if not to bring attention to veiled threats to the attention of the appropriate authorities.

[Brant Gaede]

However you may characterize Adonis his presence is very valuable for what he says reveals things we might not otherwise know. He is intelligent and knowledgeable--and extremely slick.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ted,

Adonis is not a bigot in my view, although I believe he has crudely mistaken views on Hamas and Israel. I believe when he sees some things with his own eyes, he will come to different conclusions than the ones he espouses when people like you taunt him. I have seen enough of his posts to know he backs up and goes for the party line when taunted, but is far more intellectual when the ideas flow. I attribute some of this to him standing up to bullying.

You are a bigot in my view. You have a history of taunting bigoted posts against Islam as a whole and continue to refer to Mohammad as a pedophile, etc.

You can call yourself an Objectivist and pretend you are a cop for the purity of Objectivism or whatever the hell you want to call yourself. I am not like you and I call you a bigot. I avoid people like you.

Look at you. You claim to be "opposed to mutilation and murder in the name of an insane religion" and insinuate that I am not. Well I am opposed to it. Just as I am opposed to your brand of bigotry. All bigotry in fact, but your kind is particularly odious.

You want to call out things? How's that for calling bullshit what it is--bullshit?

Now Ted, if you want to preach your spiteful bigotry, go ahead and preach it.

But not here.

If you don't like this, move on.

And please, do contact the authorities. I would be delighted for them to read your posts.

EDIT - I am not going to debate this, either. Be advised that if you keep up this bullshit, I will start deleting your posts.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I peeled this off from this thread, with apology to Brant. His post did not make sense if left dangling on that thread.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Maybe the Garbage Pile should be renamed "Bullshit!"--with apologies to P & T.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

Here is Adonis's post about Ayaan Hirsi when specifically asked:

Because there are extremists out there that would kill Ayaan Hirsi for what she says, just as they've done with any of their opposition whether those opposition hate Islam, or are Muslims who simply hate the cancerous ideals of Wahhabism. They do need to be stopped.

Despite the lies that Hirsi has told and the misguided hate she incites towards Islam, rather than the practices of culturalism and tribalism that she has seen, I don't believe that killing anyone is going to benefit..

In fact, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him was insulted and lied about more during his own life than he has been in the past 10 years and he didn't react like that.. So why should we?

In other words, to paraphrase Adonis on the danger Hirsi faces, despite being offended by her views on Islam:

1. He does not condone the idea of killing her, and

2. He thinks that the people who want to kill her need to be stopped.

Do you read him saying anything different?

I have no rational way to reconcile this with what has been said about him and call it valid.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ted posted more spiteful BS, and I deleted it, as I said I was going to do.

Michael

[Philip Coates]

Michael,

I don't think Ted is a "bigot".

That's -way- overstated language. Anyone else have a view on that allegation?

Neither the claim that Islam is a dangerous religion nor the claim that Mohammed was a pedophile is bigotry.

Each is open to factual discussion. 1) -Most- religions are dangerous. 2) Mohammed did a lot of evil things. Have you read up enough on him to know if that was one of them?

What I object to is saying -all- muslims do x. That would be stupid. Or just sloppy posting and failing to qualify one's remarks. It's sort of like saying Catholic priests are dangerous; look at the abuse of children in the news. It's *overgeneralized*.

But bigotry requires a lot more than that. It's a much more serious charge and requires -many- examples. Not just a few occasional 'rant' type statements.

Ted is one of the few really intelligent, well-read, highly knowledgeable posters we have here.

Don't drive him off like you did Bidinotto or get into flame wars with him and apparently temporarily? drive people into less posting like you have done in the past with Bidinotto, Ellen S, Roger Bissell, Jim Heaps-Nelson.

,,,,,

PS, I wish you wouldn't always be getting into fights with thoughtful posters who have lots of contributions to make. But I'm not your mother.

...You want to obsess about Perigo though, no problemo...

Edited August 15, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Philip Coates]

> apologist for terrorism, Adonis Vlahos

Ted, I have read a dozen or so of his posts and I don't recall seeing him defend terrorism.

If someone gives reasons why a terrorist would act in a certain way, that does not mean he defends that reason of considers it moral.

Do you have an exact quote and post number?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Phil,

I have been following his posts for years. He likes to bait Muslims with really nasty bigoted comments, albeit no Muslims have been around him (in the stuff I have read) until Adonis. So the bait has been to any Muslims in the general public who read the forum threads.

Now that there is a flesh and blood Muslim nearby whose thinking is based in another culture, just look at the outpouring of bile and hatred.

I can dig up a mountain of of the "baiting" posts, but I don't have the time to babysit this issue.

That's my evaluation.

Like I said, I am not going to debate this crap, anyway.

As usual, you are free to disagree and even research it if you like.

As to the pedophile thing, here is a page from WikiAnswers, which is pretty non-biased in looking at the different facets: Was Muhammad a pedophile?

Answer

The simple answer is no. However the answer is more complex than it might look on the surface.

One of Muhammad's wives was Ayesha or Aisha. Depending on what sources are used her age at marriage is sometimes put at 6 and consummation at 9. However there are a number of facts which need to be factored in.

1: Not all sources agree with Bukhari about Ayesha's age, Bukhari's Hadith were not collated until 300-odd years after Muhammad's death. Other sources give Ayesha's age as being 16 at marriage and 19 at consummation.

2: Even if her age were 6 / 9, the custom of taking child brides was a part of Middle-Eastern culture. The Jews practised it as well as many of the other nations in the Middle-East and remember too that Mary of Nazareth's age was probably around the 12-14 mark.

3: Pedophilia is both a sexual dysfunction and a legal one. Muhammad's others wives were adult women with who he apparently had very good realtions. This would not normally be the case for a pedophile.

4: Customs and Traditions as well as laws were very different then from now. What is considered unacceptable now was not considered anything to comment about then.

Note: There are comments associated with this question. See the discussion page to add to the conversation.

. . .

This answer is closed to changes. This is done in rare cases when questions are being vandalized or answers have become debates. E-mail Reopen @ WikiAnswers.com (no spaces) if you would like it to be reopened.

Michael