Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah.
Or the real reason having to do with Islamic iconoclasm.
Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah.
Or the real reason having to do with Islamic iconoclasm.
What... you mean like the "no graven images" bit from the good ol' 10 Rules of Thumb?
Now, us Jews? We'll lie about anything. Hell, ask any one of us to see our horns and we'll act like we don't have any! We're such bastards. But how could they not trust the word of 1939-1945 Germans? I mean, really.
Disclaimer: the following links are extremely nsfw.
According to the him, these children were just willing participants in this great scientist's research.
I realize that he may not construe it this way and instead disregard it as conspiracy, but if you're blind to this, you're blind.
Now, us Jews? We'll lie about anything. Hell, ask any one of us to see our horns and we'll act like we don't have any! We're such bastards. But how could they not trust the word of 1939-1945 Germans? I mean, really.
Disclaimer: the following links are extremely nsfw.
According to the him, these children were just willing participants in this great scientist's research.
I realize that he may not construe it this way and instead disregard it as conspiracy, but if you're blind to this, you're blind.
Now, us Jews? We'll lie about anything. Hell, ask any one of us to see our horns and we'll act like we don't have any! We're such bastards. But how could they not trust the word of 1939-1945 Germans? I mean, really.
Disclaimer: the following links are extremely nsfw.
According to the him, these children were just willing participants in this great scientist's research.
I realize that he may not construe it this way and instead disregard it as conspiracy, but if you're blind to this, you're blind.
Color blind, maybe?
I hope you're not projecting on me.
It's tragic that what we most strongly object to, we're not willing to do anything about. Stated preferences != actual preferences.
Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah.
Or the real reason having to do with Islamic iconoclasm.
What... you mean like the "no graven images" bit from the good ol' 10 Rules of Thumb?
Like the no idolatry bit which has been variously interpreted to mean don't draw Mohammed, or his face, or any drawing at all or no statues.
Christianity is pretty morbid when you think about it. People go to sit in ranks in a big building, practice ritualistic cannibalism and stare at a carving of a guy nailed to a hunk of wood.
Yeah, I didn't have enough room to write "FACT: Muhammad flew up into the sky on the back of a flying donkey horse creature with the head of a beautiful woman."
Apparently the buraq (his magic steed) is related to the Babylonian lamassu and the sphinx.
And I like how Islamic art skirts the "you can't draw Muhammad!" rule by portraying his head as a giant fireball.
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah.
Or the real reason having to do with Islamic iconoclasm.
What... you mean like the "no graven images" bit from the good ol' 10 Rules of Thumb?
Like the no idolatry bit which has been variously interpreted to mean don't draw Mohammed, or his face, or any drawing at all or no statues.
Unless they're abstract representations through geometric forms. Which is likely why Persia kicked Rome's ass in long division.
Yeah I guess that's true, although the other named Armenian, Ukranian, and Black (Maafa) Holocausts did occur before the Jewish one.
Would the Crusades be counted as a Holocaust aswell?
I don't think it quite matches the usual definition of genocide, but of course there's a tremendous gray area in between obviously asymmetrical warfare against a defenseless group of people versus viciously bloody all-out war.
I actually think we should leave "Holocaust" to the Jewish event and refer to others as genocides, but that's just me.
The suffering of the 6 million Jews is referred to as the Shoah. The 5 million others who went into the ovens just tend to get ignored. So, I say we should give them the Holocaust and let everything else be genocide ___. Spread the word around.
What do you mean, "interpreted . . . right . . . "? It's been interpreted different ways at different times by different groups of Muslims.
Just like how the Bible has been reinterpreted by everyone and their dog?
More or less, except by powerful rulers who killed people for defying them. Same thing in principle though. I still don't think I understand what you are getting at.
That was a fun speech, made it a fucking bitch to get to school though.
The best moment was when he was asked about the execution of homosexuals in Iran and, after evading the question once, he answered:
"We do not have the phenomenon of homosexuals in Iran that the Western countries have"
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
Perhaps if Columbia were in Berlin and not New York, but why let things like the constitution and judicial precedent get in the way of a good America bashing.
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
Perhaps if Columbia were in Berlin and not New York, but why let things like the constitution and judicial precedent get in the way of a good America bashing.
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
I agree. Christopher Hitchens had a really elegant line on the subject, but I'm too lazy to find it.
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
I agree. Christopher Hitchens had a really elegant line on the subject, but I'm too lazy to find it.
It just seems odd that this chunk of history is off-limits to debate.
I think it is odd that one cannot question the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad's point that we seemingly are allowed to question history, but not this part of history, is a good point to raise.
Perhaps if Columbia were in Berlin and not New York, but why let things like the constitution and judicial precedent get in the way of a good America bashing.
I don't understand.
You're allowed to question the Holocaust in America. Germany not so much, but he wasn't in Germany and has as much legal protection to deny the Holocaust here as he does to deny his citizens' freedom of speech back home. More, actually.
moniker on
0
Options
Muse Among MenSuburban Bunny Princess?Its time for a new shtick Registered Userregular
edited September 2007
I feel dumb for asking, but does anyone know a site where I could watch that whole brouhaha?
Well, it is probably the best documented historical event ever.
Of course. Denying its existence is about as nonsensical as denying the existence of evolution. But deniers have managed to get (if I recall my Michael Shermer reading correctly) the people who study the holocaust to get the figures quoted to be less on the side of hyperbole and more on the side of accuracy.
There's a justified stigmatization towards people who would willfully misinterpret reality, but I don't think any subjects should ever be considered too sacred for debate and examination.
Well, it is probably the best documented historical event ever.
Of course. Denying its existence is about as nonsensical as denying the existence of evolution. But deniers have managed to get (if I recall my Michael Shermer reading correctly) the people who study the holocaust to get the figures quoted to be less on the side of hyperbole and more on the side of accuracy.
There's a justified stigmatization towards people who would willfully misinterpret reality, but I don't think any subjects should ever be considered too sacred for debate and examination.
Questioning proof is what leads to more significant forms of proof. I think fabricating false evidence is problematic. But saying "Prove it." isn't ever problematic.
To which someone replies "prove it" and we all have a lawl.
Yeah I guess that's true, although the other named Armenian, Ukranian, and Black (Maafa) Holocausts did occur before the Jewish one.
Would the Crusades be counted as a Holocaust aswell?
I don't think it quite matches the usual definition of genocide, but of course there's a tremendous gray area in between obviously asymmetrical warfare against a defenseless group of people versus viciously bloody all-out war.
I actually think we should leave "Holocaust" to the Jewish event and refer to others as genocides, but that's just me.
The suffering of the 6 million Jews is referred to as the Shoah. The 5 million others who went into the ovens just tend to get ignored. So, I say we should give them the Holocaust and let everything else be genocide ___. Spread the word around.
I've always found that odd. You go to any high school in America and ask the students how many people died in the Holocaust in Nazi concentration camps. They will either not know or say six million. The estimate is ten million people were killed in total, though, including gypsies, pacifists, captured French resistance, and homosexuals.
You really think that was the most problematic aspect of the guy's speech?
If I had to choose I'd say "there are no homosexuals in Iran" (anymore?) ... though I liked how everyone laughed when he said that.
Yeah see, the laughter means he's probably going to go home and have a good ol' pogrom. You don't see how raiding a lot of houses and hanging unsuspecting men is worse than saber-rattling?
What?
Its pretty simple, dude. Iran has a history of executing gays. Being laughed at for denying the existence of homosexuality in his country is highly likely to trigger a 'do they know something i don't?' reaction, especially given that the illicit web in iran is a haven for alt-lifestylers and freethinkers and that these people have closer ties to the west through those communication channels. I can easily see him going back home and, you know, 'making sure' that there's no homosexuals around as a result of all this.
Well, it is probably the best documented historical event ever.
Don't forget who pulled the "proof" out of the burnt ruins of the extermination camps.
I'm pretty sure the Russians were VERY interested in manipulating those.
Ferrus on
I would like to pause for a moment, to talk about my penis.
My penis is like a toddler. A toddler—who is a perfectly normal size for his age—on a long road trip to what he thinks is Disney World. My penis is excited because he hasn’t been to Disney World in a long, long time, but remembers a time when he used to go every day. So now the penis toddler is constantly fidgeting, whining “Are we there yet? Are we there yet? How about now? Now? How about... now?”
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
0
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
edited September 2007
This whole Ahmedinejad thing is making me very angry at my father. He and his brothers went to watch his speech in New York on Sunday and my mom tried to play off his Colombia speech as a debilitating attack from Lee Bollinger which caused him to eloquently defend his position. I was all, are you fucking around with me. I guess it's just nationalistic pride and some residue of the ol' American-hating from Iran, but when I just blew up at my father and asked how he could even think this guy was a good leader he's like "Well what about Bush?" Like Bush's transgressions, though numerous, are comparable to this shit. And, like our illustrious but diminutive President Ahmagh-inejad*, my dad managed to avoid talking about the real problems with Iran and instead listed all the bad shit America's done. I can see a serious falling out between us soon.
*I went to a recent wedding where people called him this; "Ahmagh" means retard/idiot person in Farsi.
As for the homosexual comment, he's obviously using it, like so many right-wing evangelists, as a measure of immorality run rampant; He's all "Look, my country is more ethical than yours because we don't have as many tinkerbells running around." Ignoring of course the utter stupidity of equating the population of homosexuality with the number of Satan points accrued for a nation, this sort of rhetoric is disturbingly familiar, what with several Christian leaders spouting off how 9/11 and Katrina were results of all our damn homosexicals.
Though in my own personal experience, I'd prefer gay Iranian guys. The straight ones have their heads so far up their asses it's crazy.
Has anyone got a link to Ahmadinejad actually denying the Holocaust(TM)?
I hear plenty of people accusing him but the only remarks I've heard him make about the holocaust have been to do with the way it's used by Zionism as a justification for the existence of Israel. I also remember seeing Hasidic jews attending the so called "Holocaust Denial" conference.
As for "wiping Israel off the map", that's largely an accident of translation. He talks about the regime being wiped out it in the same way the Soviet Union and the Shah in Iran no longer exist - not a threat to nuke Israel.
He may well be a crazy fuck in general, but I think it's best to mock him for shit that' he's actually done.
Well, it is probably the best documented historical event ever.
Of course. Denying its existence is about as nonsensical as denying the existence of evolution. But deniers have managed to get (if I recall my Michael Shermer reading correctly) the people who study the holocaust to get the figures quoted to be less on the side of hyperbole and more on the side of accuracy.
There's a justified stigmatization towards people who would willfully misinterpret reality, but I don't think any subjects should ever be considered too sacred for debate and examination.
Questioning proof is what leads to more significant forms of proof. I think fabricating false evidence is problematic. But saying "Prove it." isn't ever problematic.
To which someone replies "prove it" and we all have a lawl.
but it's already been proven.
it's like he may as well be saying 'how do we know WWII ever happened?'
Was the eyeroll for Andrew Sullivan or against him? The Columbia Queer Alliance has a good point, even if that wasn't the time or place for that point to be made.
Posts
If you can't see his face, he could look like anybody.
As for the fireball, there's no difference between that and portraying Jesus with a Halo.
Yeah.
Or the real reason having to do with Islamic iconoclasm.
What... you mean like the "no graven images" bit from the good ol' 10 Rules of Thumb?
Disclaimer: the following links are extremely nsfw.
I realize that he may not construe it this way and instead disregard it as conspiracy, but if you're blind to this, you're blind.
Color blind, maybe?
It's tragic that what we most strongly object to, we're not willing to do anything about.
Like the no idolatry bit which has been variously interpreted to mean don't draw Mohammed, or his face, or any drawing at all or no statues.
Ever think maybe it's not a bad thing?
Christianity is pretty morbid when you think about it. People go to sit in ranks in a big building, practice ritualistic cannibalism and stare at a carving of a guy nailed to a hunk of wood.
I don't think anything about it. I'm neither Muslim nor Christian.
Unless they're abstract representations through geometric forms. Which is likely why Persia kicked Rome's ass in long division.
The suffering of the 6 million Jews is referred to as the Shoah. The 5 million others who went into the ovens just tend to get ignored. So, I say we should give them the Holocaust and let everything else be genocide ___. Spread the word around.
Just like how the Bible has been reinterpreted by everyone and their dog?
More or less, except by powerful rulers who killed people for defying them. Same thing in principle though. I still don't think I understand what you are getting at.
The best moment was when he was asked about the execution of homosexuals in Iran and, after evading the question once, he answered:
"We do not have the phenomenon of homosexuals in Iran that the Western countries have"
The crowd was in stitches.
He is obviously just gone Super Saiyan.
Perhaps if Columbia were in Berlin and not New York, but why let things like the constitution and judicial precedent get in the way of a good America bashing.
I don't understand.
I agree. Christopher Hitchens had a really elegant line on the subject, but I'm too lazy to find it.
It just seems odd that this chunk of history is off-limits to debate.
You're allowed to question the Holocaust in America. Germany not so much, but he wasn't in Germany and has as much legal protection to deny the Holocaust here as he does to deny his citizens' freedom of speech back home. More, actually.
Youtube?!
Of course. Denying its existence is about as nonsensical as denying the existence of evolution. But deniers have managed to get (if I recall my Michael Shermer reading correctly) the people who study the holocaust to get the figures quoted to be less on the side of hyperbole and more on the side of accuracy.
There's a justified stigmatization towards people who would willfully misinterpret reality, but I don't think any subjects should ever be considered too sacred for debate and examination.
Questioning proof is what leads to more significant forms of proof. I think fabricating false evidence is problematic. But saying "Prove it." isn't ever problematic.
To which someone replies "prove it" and we all have a lawl.
I've always found that odd. You go to any high school in America and ask the students how many people died in the Holocaust in Nazi concentration camps. They will either not know or say six million. The estimate is ten million people were killed in total, though, including gypsies, pacifists, captured French resistance, and homosexuals.
Don't forget the retards. Nazis killed retards.
Its pretty simple, dude. Iran has a history of executing gays. Being laughed at for denying the existence of homosexuality in his country is highly likely to trigger a 'do they know something i don't?' reaction, especially given that the illicit web in iran is a haven for alt-lifestylers and freethinkers and that these people have closer ties to the west through those communication channels. I can easily see him going back home and, you know, 'making sure' that there's no homosexuals around as a result of all this.
Don't forget who pulled the "proof" out of the burnt ruins of the extermination camps.
I'm pretty sure the Russians were VERY interested in manipulating those.
And Disney World is nowhere in sight.
*I went to a recent wedding where people called him this; "Ahmagh" means retard/idiot person in Farsi.
As for the homosexual comment, he's obviously using it, like so many right-wing evangelists, as a measure of immorality run rampant; He's all "Look, my country is more ethical than yours because we don't have as many tinkerbells running around." Ignoring of course the utter stupidity of equating the population of homosexuality with the number of Satan points accrued for a nation, this sort of rhetoric is disturbingly familiar, what with several Christian leaders spouting off how 9/11 and Katrina were results of all our damn homosexicals.
Though in my own personal experience, I'd prefer gay Iranian guys. The straight ones have their heads so far up their asses it's crazy.
NNID: Hakkekage
:roll:
Must....resist....terrible....joke....
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
I hear plenty of people accusing him but the only remarks I've heard him make about the holocaust have been to do with the way it's used by Zionism as a justification for the existence of Israel. I also remember seeing Hasidic jews attending the so called "Holocaust Denial" conference.
As for "wiping Israel off the map", that's largely an accident of translation. He talks about the regime being wiped out it in the same way the Soviet Union and the Shah in Iran no longer exist - not a threat to nuke Israel.
He may well be a crazy fuck in general, but I think it's best to mock him for shit that' he's actually done.
but it's already been proven.
it's like he may as well be saying 'how do we know WWII ever happened?'
Was the eyeroll for Andrew Sullivan or against him? The Columbia Queer Alliance has a good point, even if that wasn't the time or place for that point to be made.