[Blaster]

Quote:

The problem I am having with Excelsior's method of debate is that he is personally attacking people's character in order to present his perspective.

Not going to go back and re-read the whole thread but my recollection was that accusations were directed at him first and he was responding in kind (more or less). I believe it was comments calling him a progressive or SJW or something like that. Muslim maybe, also.

[ziggystardust]

(06-14-2017 03:05 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(06-12-2017 06:56 AM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

I wouldn't hate black people if so many of them weren't part of the political eb of 'what ever screws whitey' is best. There are so many blacks in the UK that think that allying themselves, which means making apologetics, with Islam will somehow improve their lives. People like EX don't understand that the current trent of animosity amongst people is, undeservedly, towards whites. This is particularly true in America where they're being attacked from all sides for existing. Heartiste is right on this point.

3 years ago, some zero-rep member showing up and openly proclaiming their hatred for any particular race of people would have been banned pretty rapidly. Today, they are not only able to continue here, but are welcome and handed rep points for their points of view.

That's the change.

I point that out and claim I have a problem with it? I must be another SJW with a victim complex, angry that the "gravy train" (whatever that is supposed to imply) has stopped running. Bitter, delusional, mentally ill - anything but sense.

Once upon a time, all men were welcome here to discuss topics important to men.

Now, only some men are. That's unfortunate for me, but I'm sure you don't mind. You belong in this new place.

Well, I'm sorry this is no longer the safe space you wearily pine for. As a lurker, I've noticed the changes too, but in this case the ends justify the means. These terror attacks have been happening month after month, and after every act of enrichment we have the usual suspects performing 101 mental backflips to defend islam at all costs, mostly for fashion. But now blacks have come out the woodwork too, believing that criticism of islam and it's practitioners are veiled attacks on 'people like them'. Which creates a vicious cycle.

- Live in Britain

- Watch Mussies kill innocents in the name of islam

- Normies question what Islam preaches

- Normies learn the death of innocents is part of Islamic doctrine

- Higher educated blacks defend it's practitioners, claiming white extremism and 'hatred' to be the real problem, even on Rooshvforum

- Lower educated blacks gobble this shit up while still blaming whitey for all their problems.

- Both groups vote for parties that vi for new waves of Mussie immigrants coming to enrich western culture some more

Do you see what's happening here? I'm not actively trying to put black people in the same ideological boat as muslims, but instead, their own thoughts in wake of these attacks have forced me to. At this point, I really have no choice not to hate black people for biting the hand that feeds them and shacking up with the Muhammad's of this world. Not realising that a nation of arabs and pakis will make for a far more hostile country to the average black.

[thedarkknight]

I'm a black and I agree with your position. We do exist!

(06-14-2017 03:06 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 03:05 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(06-12-2017 06:56 AM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

I wouldn't hate black people if so many of them weren't part of the political eb of 'what ever screws whitey' is best. There are so many blacks in the UK that think that allying themselves, which means making apologetics, with Islam will somehow improve their lives. People like EX don't understand that the current trent of animosity amongst people is, undeservedly, towards whites. This is particularly true in America where they're being attacked from all sides for existing. Heartiste is right on this point.

3 years ago, some zero-rep member showing up and openly proclaiming their hatred for any particular race of people would have been banned pretty rapidly. Today, they are not only able to continue here, but are welcome and handed rep points for their points of view.

That's the change.

I point that out and claim I have a problem with it? I must be another SJW with a victim complex, angry that the "gravy train" (whatever that is supposed to imply) has stopped running. Bitter, delusional, mentally ill - anything but sense.

Once upon a time, all men were welcome here to discuss topics important to men.

Now, only some men are. That's unfortunate for me, but I'm sure you don't mind. You belong in this new place.

Well, I'm sorry this is no longer the safe space you wearily pine for. As a lurker, I've noticed the changes too, but in this case the ends justify the means. These terror attacks have been happening month after month, and after every act of enrichment we have the usual suspects performing 101 mental backflips to defend islam at all costs, mostly for fashion. But now blacks have come out the woodwork too, believing that criticism of islam and it's practitioners are veiled attacks on 'people like them'. Which creates a vicious cycle.

- Live in Britain

- Watch Mussies kill innocents in the name of islam

- Normies question what Islam preaches

- Normies learn the death of innocents is part of Islamic doctrine

- Higher educated blacks defend it's practitioners, claiming white extremism and 'hatred' to be the real problem, even on Rooshvforum

- Lower educated blacks gobble this shit up while still blaming whitey for all their problems.

- Both groups vote for parties that vi for new waves of Mussie immigrants coming to enrich western culture some more

Do you see what's happening here? I'm not actively trying to put black people in the same ideological boat as muslims, but instead, their own thoughts in wake of these attacks have forced me to. At this point, I really have no choice not to hate black people for biting the hand that feeds them and shacking up with the Muhammad's of this world. Not realising that a nation of arabs and pakis will make for a far more hostile country to the average black.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

< I wish we would go beyond that. A lot of is just arguing about semantics:

"You said this!"
"But I meant this with this!"
"No - I am sure you meant this and you are that!"
"No - you are that!"

---------

Actual meeting in real life would go like this:

Look into each other eyes, recognize a fellow shitlord, smile, sit down, drink, ogle girls, approach girls, have fun - occasionally disagree on some topics, but brush over it since you like the guy.

Ideological and political discussions are all fine and well, but we will almost never agree on everything. Even guys who have the same racial, religious and social background have different opinions. So of course are we going to differ on a few things - but those matters are seldom eaten as hot as they are cooked.

[kavi]

Ziggystardust you are in UK.

You.got a problem with Pakis too, in addition to blacks?

Just wanna know if your a straight up racist or a closet one?

[ziggystardust]

Nah. If a red pill guy, black or white, starting employing the same mental gymnastics SJW's use to suck the cock of islam in front of me, he'd be getting a heated mouthful.

[Blaster]

(06-14-2017 03:06 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

Well, I'm sorry this is no longer the safe space you wearily pine for.

This is blatantly rude and misrepresents his point. This forum maintained a level of exclusivity to ensure high-quality discussion. It was not a "safe space" from ideas. To quote the rules:

3. No race or political baiting. It's okay to talk about race if that's the topic, but no geo-political discussions on why one race is superior or inferior to another or why an upcoming race war in X country will be bad. Newbies under 50 posts are not allowed to participate in race or political discussions.

It's clear that rule is aimed at preventing flaming and hostility between members, not to suppress unwanted ideas. Note that you're violating that rule explicitly, since you have less than 50 posts.

Quote:

As a lurker, I've noticed the changes too, but in this case the ends justify the means.

What ends? What means? I've been posting here for 5 years and don't consider myself remotely entitled to decide what ends should justify means beyond honest discussion of issues that matter to men.

Quote:

But now blacks have come out the woodwork too, believing that criticism of islam and it's practitioners are veiled attacks on 'people like them'.

This is an unnecessarily insulting way to phrase this, which goes for pretty much the rest of your entire post. 'Mussies'? 'Blaming whitey'? I submit that you have not earned right to use this kind of language among senior, repped members of the forum. Sorry to be condescending but I'm just saying I've seen people banned for less.

[debeguiled]

Not sure you ever have to right to use that kind of language.

Also, I had a feeling we would get around to disrespecting woodwork.

Don't.

[Matsufubu]

Yeah, using 'paki' is akin to using 'nigger', whatever your point might be. It focusses attention on your insult, not your point, and reinforces siege mentality among the non-white members.

[ziggystardust]

I disagree. 'Paki' is literally used here as an abbreviation for pakistani. If couldn't care less if Paki's find it offensive or want to compare it with the historical connotations of the 'N-bomb', which is something I'd refrain from using in public or a forum.

[ziggystardust]

(06-14-2017 03:44 PM)kavi Wrote:  

Ziggystardust you are in UK.

You.got a problem with Pakis too, in addition to blacks?

Just wanna know if your a straight up racist or a closet one?

....

The answer is rather obvious here. I don't like muslims in general, so yeah I got a problem with them.

I live in a very diverse town of 90,000 people. Census tells me that around 6000 of those are British Pakistaini's. Other, than propping up shitty corner shops and being cab drivers, they haven't done anything much to enrich our culture, and they also have the highest rates of crime 'per capita' within my town. From an anecdotal perspective, the majority of paki's i've met are abject scum when you really get to know them. The men of course. The women are too busy having to stay in doors and raise 4-5 children to be scum.

Edit : Notice that I, or many others don't have a problem with British Indians, who make up 3000 of the gen-pop in my town. Their native religion being hinduism of course. Most of them have assimilated very well actually, bringing the best parts of their culture to England. The same people who complain about Muslims, rarely complain about Hindu indians. So I'm thinking racism isn't the problem here.

[Matsufubu]

Oh, come on. Google 'paki' and see what the first page shows up. Nothing but website after website about how it's an offensive slur.

I'm not questioning your points, only that the language you use detracts from them. There's no need for it. I'm whiter than white and even I don't want to see it, because I'm aware that it is a racial slur, regardless of whether you could care less.

[kavi]

I got no problems with critizing Islam and I do it myself but people like Ziggy just remind of this guy.

[WalterBlack]

(06-14-2017 04:23 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

I disagree. 'Paki' is literally used here as an abbreviation for pakistani. If couldn't care less if Paki's find it offensive or want to compare it with the historical connotations of the 'N-bomb', which is something I'd refrain from using in public or a forum.

So you're OK with using racist language?

(06-14-2017 04:32 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 03:44 PM)kavi Wrote:  

Ziggystardust you are in UK.

You.got a problem with Pakis too, in addition to blacks?

Just wanna know if your a straight up racist or a closet one?

....

The answer is rather obvious here. I don't like muslims in general, so yeah I got a problem with them.

I live in a very diverse town of 90,000 people. Census tells me that around 6000 of those are British Pakistaini's. Other, than propping up shitty corner shops and being cab drivers, they haven't done anything much to enrich our culture, and they also have the highest rates of crime 'per capita' within my town. From an anecdotal perspective, the majority of paki's i've met are abject scum when you really get to know them. The men of course. The women are too busy having to stay in doors and raise 4-5 children to be scum.

Edit : Notice that I, or many others don't have a problem with British Indians, who make up 3000 of the gen-pop in my town. Their native religion being hinduism of course. Most of them have assimilated very well actually, bringing the best parts of their culture to England. The same people who complain about Muslims, rarely complain about Hindu indians. So I'm thinking racism isn't the problem here.

I'm a British Indian and the last guy who said "Paki" to my face got a left hook from me. It's a racist term to South Asians.

I get that some non-British people might say it as an abbreviation, but to me it's unacceptable for a non-South Asian British person to use it. Even George Bush said Paki once

I remember talking to a Pakistani guy on a train in London, and he's used the word "Paki" as an abbreviation - half the train (mostly white) turned around to see who said the word.

[Thomas Jackson]

Its just a word grow up.

(06-14-2017 05:51 PM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 04:23 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

I disagree. 'Paki' is literally used here as an abbreviation for pakistani. If couldn't care less if Paki's find it offensive or want to compare it with the historical connotations of the 'N-bomb', which is something I'd refrain from using in public or a forum.

So you're OK with using racist language?

(06-14-2017 04:32 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

(06-14-2017 03:44 PM)kavi Wrote:  

Ziggystardust you are in UK.

You.got a problem with Pakis too, in addition to blacks?

Just wanna know if your a straight up racist or a closet one?

....

The answer is rather obvious here. I don't like muslims in general, so yeah I got a problem with them.

I live in a very diverse town of 90,000 people. Census tells me that around 6000 of those are British Pakistaini's. Other, than propping up shitty corner shops and being cab drivers, they haven't done anything much to enrich our culture, and they also have the highest rates of crime 'per capita' within my town. From an anecdotal perspective, the majority of paki's i've met are abject scum when you really get to know them. The men of course. The women are too busy having to stay in doors and raise 4-5 children to be scum.

Edit : Notice that I, or many others don't have a problem with British Indians, who make up 3000 of the gen-pop in my town. Their native religion being hinduism of course. Most of them have assimilated very well actually, bringing the best parts of their culture to England. The same people who complain about Muslims, rarely complain about Hindu indians. So I'm thinking racism isn't the problem here.

I'm a British Indian and the last guy who said "Paki" to my face got a left hook from me. It's a racist term to South Asians.

I get that some non-British people might say it as an abbreviation, but to me it's unacceptable for a non-South Asian British person to use it. Even George Bush said Paki once

I remember talking to a Pakistani guy on a train in London, and he's used the word "Paki" as an abbreviation - half the train (mostly white) turned around to see who said the word.

[LeeEnfield303]

Good to see that many fruitful discussions are constantly derailed by teh emotional butthurt. Christ, this world is hopelessly pozzed.

[Leonard D Neubache]

For reference, this shit blew up around late page 15 early, page 16.

Basic timeline:

Pg15: Ex posts twitter log that explains how British media are warping public opinion to make it seem like extremist muslims are more mainstream than is really the case. At that point I actually agreed with him since I think more focus has to be put on the snakes in the media. Zel says 'okay, but islam is still islam and it's shit and it's still going to produce terrorism whether Choudry is on the television or not'. Ex begins to push hard on the "vast majority of muslims are peaceful" bit.

Pg16: Given that this was a thread about a terrorist attack some people were a bit dark on ol' Ex pushing the narrative that this had nothing to do with islam and everything to do with media conspiracies since in this particular instance the terrorists were Choudry fans. Ex doubles down with something to the effect of "peaceful muslims are the ones paying the price" and Zel gets angry, replying that maybe the dozens of little girls killed with nailbombs are the ones technically "paying the price." Tigermandingo tells us we're all obsessed with nonsense. The rest of the page is mostly evidence that islamic aggression is not "nonsense".

Pg17: This is where Ex gets his panties in a twist and starts refuting people sentence by sentence. I tell him that Nazis have more in common with western society than muslims (as a means of putting the vast gulf in values into perspective. He says, "That's an indictment on western civilization, not an endorsement." It's at this point I suspect the he gets triggered into the stratosphere and never quite manages to come down. He posts a bunch of statistics about how only a few muslims want an islamic caliphate (a mere one in five it turns out) not realising the can of worms he's opened up. At this point Zel is getting riled up but most people are trying to talk Ex off of the ledge. I ask him a rather simple and direct question.

Quote:

@Excel: What is an acceptable percentage of a demographic that either commits violence in the name of their beliefs or supports the commiting of violence in the name of their beliefs before that demographic must be dealt with as a whole.

Pg18. This is where his shitfit hits second gear. He refuses to engage with that simple question honestly and it's in that moment that I personally thought "here we go..." We start getting more of the sentence-by-sentence quotes about how the west created terrorism and muslims are peaceful people who should not be mis-characterised as a group. Samseau notes the trade of slaves by muslims including black slaves and at this point we have reached critical mass. I hash out his own listed percentages of muslims wanting an islamic supremacy in terms of numbers of people and suggest that if they were white supremacists then there would be no talk of "the peaceful majority". At this point we find out that the west apparently really is riddled, utterly soaked, with white supremacists so there is no moral high ground to be had against islamic supremacists. It's asked if "western fuckery in the middle east" might extend to protecting Israel's right to survive. Tigermandingo tells us that the world would be better off without Israel. This sparks some heat between me and Mandingo.

Pg19: Mandingo catches flack for his contradictory positions and calls for a ceasefire. We almost get to the end of the page before we find out from Excelsior that:

Quote:

I am black and I live in a nation where millions of people openly support not only the marginalization and disenfranchisement of people like myself (who they relentless dog as low iq genetic inferiors lacking in history/civilization, and unfit for western society), but also support white supremacy and policies designed to further it (up to and including neo-Nazism). I live in a nation where I would not even be a citizen if tens of millions of folks had their way, and quite a few more would prefer I not even be in the country.

You might note that millions of Americans are demonstrably not having conversations about IQ/race/history/civilisation so at this point we can see that Ex has turned this issue into a society-wide surrogate for his lamentations of the shift in the forums' political direction. Other members call him out on this nonsense and by page 20 we're firmly in the territory of "you guys only hate muslims because you're a bunch of closet-white-supremacists".

From there the shit-show truly begins in earnest, spilling over into at least one other thread since Excelsior is now doggedly determined to prove to all and sundry that the race-blind utopia of the RVF has been infiltrated by white-supremacist Nazi shitlords who want to genocide him or at least get him deported.

An offshoot of Trump Derangement Syndrome, perhaps. Oh well, shit changes, including internet forums, and some people can't adapt or simply no longer care to. Ex was obviously unhappy but bit his tongue for quite some time. I suppose there were a lot more liberals on the forum once upon a time, but when you have a Trump thread with 2000+ pages it's somewhat inevitable that the heat gets a bit much for some. A few adapt. A few slink away. Others like Ex choose a thread to blow up in and crucify themselves. It's certainly nothing that conservatives haven't become quite used to suffering for, oh... let's say the last five decades or so.

[The Beast1]

(06-14-2017 08:12 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

I suppose there were a lot more liberals on the forum once upon a time, but when you have a Trump thread with 2000+ pages it's somewhat inevitable that the heat gets a bit much for some. A few adapt. A few slink away. Others like Ex choose a thread to blow up in and crucify themselves. It's certainly nothing that conservatives haven't become quite used to suffering for, oh... let's say the last five decades or so.

This is showing itself to be a much larger issue as of late.

Just as of today, we had a berner go out and shoot a bunch of GOP representatives at a softball game!

I fear what what might be coming the more these folks get unhinged.

[kamoz]

(06-14-2017 04:23 PM)ziggystardust Wrote:  

I disagree. 'Paki' is literally used here as an abbreviation for pakistani. If couldn't care less if Paki's find it offensive or want to compare it with the historical connotations of the 'N-bomb', which is something I'd refrain from using in public or a forum.

(06-14-2017 04:35 PM)Matsufubu Wrote:  

Oh, come on. Google 'paki' and see what the first page shows up. Nothing but website after website about how it's an offensive slur.

I'm not questioning your points, only that the language you use detracts from them. There's no need for it. I'm whiter than white and even I don't want to see it, because I'm aware that it is a racial slur, regardless of whether you could care less.

Chill guys as a Pollack I don't care if you call me a Pollack and neither do other Pollacks. Oh I guess it's because we're white

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(06-14-2017 05:51 PM)WalterBlack Wrote:  

I remember talking to a Pakistani guy on a train in London, and he's used the word "Paki" as an abbreviation - half the train (mostly white) turned around to see who said the word.

If you don't want to use Paki, then simply say the new PC word - Rotherham Groomer. Thriving Rotherham Grooming community.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

And this is why they are winning:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...rning.html

Quote:

Two arrested over Facebook and YouTube video of Koran burning amid spate of race attacks in wake of London and Manchester terror attacks
Video shows a tattooed man complaining about being unable to start a fire
He says he has been trying to start fire wondering what 'I can get it going with'
Holding a copy of the Koran up to the camera, he adds: 'And then I found this'
Second video shows him standing outside tearing pages from the holy book

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z4k3L1HTUH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

When will the UK execute the first blasphemers?

Hanging an ISIS flag outside is not problematic.
Going to Syria to join ISIS and coming back is not problematic.
Burning the shitty Quran that is truly not good enough to be used as toilet paper - that is problematic.

[Diogenes]

(06-14-2017 08:33 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

Quote:

Wisdom is personified in the first eight chapters of the Book of Proverbs and is not only the source of virtue but is depicted as the first and best creation of God (Proverbs 8:12-31). Wisdom is also celebrated in the Book of Wisdom.[10]

Wisdom and intelligence aren't the same thing. Intelligence is a necessary but not sufficient condition for wisdom. I think a lot of today's problems are caused by people with high intelligence but no wisdom. Someone with high intelligence might follow a long chain of logical deductions to reach a conclusion whereas someone with wisdom would realise that one or more of the premises used were false. Someone with high intelligence might figure out, "If I do X and Y then Z will happen." Someone with wisdom would realise Z is a bad thing and so not do X or Y, whereas the person with only intelligence would pat himself on the back for being so clever while the world burns around him.

Nil sapientiae odiosius acumine nimio.

[Teedub]

"Paki" is an offensive term in the UK, comparable to (but not quite as bad as) "nigger" in the States. Loads of decent people like Naseem Hamed (not even from Pakistan), Maajid Nawaz etc grew up being shouted at by genuinely nasty people using that word. I dislike political Islam as much as anyone on this forum, as evidenced by my unabashed celebration of Tommy Robinson for starters—but people jumping in and saying "oh it's just a word", "who cares" etc are proving Excelsior's point that the dynamics of the forum have changed dramatically. And to that Ziggy poster who's been here about two minutes dissing black Brits, stop trying to racialise the relationship between blacks and whites in Britain. There's absolutely no racial tension between blacks and whites in the uk these days, and it will be blacks/mixed people like this dude who will be the first to fight back against Islamism when shit hits the fan.

[LEMONed IScream]

It's a clusterfuck! There are racial divides and ideological divides and we have both sides of the far of the spectrutm trying to use it as a battering ram within western countries.

The left puts all the blacks and other minorities in the same basket and tells them not to steer from the political plantation, and the far right presents all blacks as evil because a good chunk of them are criminals, not just blacks obviously, anyone that is brown sometimes also get lumped into the equation. So the question arises, how can we move the debate to IDEOLOGY instead of colour and race.

Of course I think 99% of the people here would side with the above conservative black guy than with that white fat pig that is a traitor to her own country. The issue is, we have to MOVE the debate towards that. At the moment it is so polarized that it is very hard to do so. And we here should not be infighting in this regard as well. But we have to draw the lines of what is acceptable and what is not.

Obviously, if you go around calling people white supremacists just because you get butthurt over something that won't work. We have to accept that yes there are differences but try to move beyond that where we can.

[iop890]

(06-15-2017 02:16 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

When will the UK execute the first blasphemers?

Already being done indirectly.

Throw a bacon sandwich at a mosque and you'll get two years in prison, then they'll accidentally put you in the 100% muslim cell block where you get boiling water poured on you and are beaten to death.

Why do they need to directly execute you when they can give you a year in a majority muslim cell block for blasphemy?