John Wilkes Booth

lol, i never said seek revenge in the form of violence. just that we shouldn't self-censor for their sake or else they win. which i'm still saying. i'm not even fighting at this point i feel like i'm restating my point again and again and you keep arguing back against some **** i never said in the first place. i don't know if you agree or disagree, that's up to you but yea basically that's where i stand.

Oriphiel

I can't emphasis this enough...

Your argument (compromise doesn't work in the face of violence):

The part when you gave up on that argument (admitting that compromise does work in the face of violence):

Please stop posting in this thread, You have been debunked on every level.

John Wilkes Booth

maybe you don't understand what i meant by "compromise doesn't work in the face of violence" but i meant to back down and self censor as a result of their violence is giving them what they want.

then you respond with the civil rights movement where the people who ended up backing down were the violent ones. that only proves me right even more lol. i'm saying we should continue to assert our rights. ignore that point all you like, i can't make it any simpler tbh.

Oriphiel

If compromise worked in The Civil Rights Movement, when racists were being violent and ignorant, why wouldn't it work in our situation today, where terrorists are being violent and ignorant? I've already proven that you agree with me on every point, and yet you keep coming back to shout about nothing. Can we please just go get those waffles and bacon now?

John Wilkes Booth

lol i feel like we're having two seperate conversations or something. i've tried to be pretty clear but i am running out of energy tbh. i'll try one more time.

if by compromise you mean continue to say and post whatever we like in our society then i guess we agree, i just don't call that compromise tbh. that sounds to me like doing whatever we want.

if by compromise you mean self-censor then i don't think we should do that. i think in the civil rights analogy that kind of compromise would have been akin to the protesters just giving up and agreeing to drink from different water fountains and **** to appease the racists. that's the kind of compromise that i'm not really in favor of.

other than that i'd really prefer to have some bacon at this point.

Unknown Soldier

Really? You can't tell the difference between a subjugated population rising up against their oppressor to have a say in their own land and a highly mobile terrorist unit that strikes wherever it chooses.?

The video's a load of bollocks, they've confused ethnic zones in principal European cities as quasi mini-muslim states as no go areas, when the reality is that a lot of communities especially Asian and Middle Eastern are known for living in their own communities until they become more integrated into society as a whole (Asians especially in the UK are slower here than other races but they still get there) and finally branch out from the zones that they first lived in.

The so-called no go areas are areas left by the police for two reasons. 1) because the area is a lost cause due to its crime and is usually just a small area anyway or 2) the Police as is the case in Europe, often have a low-level approach to immigrant areas as a whole, for race relations and stuff etc, and in my mind that shows good sense.

Not only did the two in the video lack any real knowledge of what they were talking about but also had a stuttering phase to emphasize it even more.

__________________
Metal Wars

Power Metal

Pounding Decibels- A Hard and Heavy History

Oriphiel

I never said that I supported censorship. In fact, I spent the majority of the thread defending freedom of speech. For example:

My point is that respect and understanding lead to small compromises between enemies over time, and eventually positive change occurs. You've already agreed with me on this, and we both agree that freedom of speech shouldn't ever be given away. So why are we fighting again? I realize that I may have come off as rude at certain times, and I apologize. Friends?

John Wilkes Booth

i didn't say they're the same exact scenario, but the basic dynamic is this: extortioner threatens violence, extortion appeaser complies to avoid violence, freedom-fighter tells extortioner to **** off out of principle.

John Wilkes Booth

yea i agree with you as long as you agree we shouldn't stop insulting their prophet to avoid terrorism or whatever. i'm not even the type to go seeking out this fight like burning the koran and bull**** like that, its just when it does go down i'm always going to side with the people who are being attacked with actual violence. if muslim extremists just responded back with their own hateful cartoons then i might even side with them instead. either way even if you disagree with me here i'm wiling to drop it at this point. and at the friends? thing i'm fine with you, i don't take this sort of thing personally like i said lol. i guess i do have vitriol in my arguments but its for the argument i'm up against not the person presenting them,

Oriphiel

Heh, I couldn't resist. Had a good time debating with you guys! Now i'm off to go hunt down some breakfast...