Dodgy Bad Taste Warrior Queen Lyrics

[crackerjack]

Mate, will please stop putting words in my mouth. This is ridiculous and has nothing at all to do with what I have said.

If you have a point of view or something to say then say it, stop inventing stuff that you'd like to think I've written. It is very rude.

Wise words. Weird how they come from the same source as this:

Of course, killing is only bad when Muslims do it. Fair enough.

 

[noel emits]

That's way out of context and you know it.

I was inquiring into the wording of that phrase and it's emphasis and I suggested for the sake of argument that 'you can't go killing' would be sufficient, to which you replied 'That would make her a pacifist. Maybe that's a position she doesn't hold.', which was sort of funny and I took it to be a bit of a flip and sarky response so I gave one back and I thought that was perfectly clear. It's quite different to consistently misrepresenting someone's viewpoint over a number of posts.

Anyway you did imply that the song was only condemning killing in the name of Islam and that under other circumstances it might be considered OK.

 

[crackerjack]

Haha. That's way out of context and you know it.

I was inquiring into the wording of that phrase and it's emphasis and I suggested for the sake of argument that 'you can't go killing' would be sufficient, to which you replied 'That would make her a pacifist. Maybe that's a position she doesn't hold.', which was sort of funny and I took it to be a bit of a flip and sarky response so I gave one back and I thought that was perfectly clear. It's quite different to consistently misrepresenting someone's viewpoint over a number of posts.

Anyway you did imply that the song was only condemning killing in the name of Islam and that under other circumstances it might be OK.

It is: killing in (to choose the obvious one) the name of defeating Hitler is absolutely fine by me. WQ's line was a specific response to specific actions - ie mass murder in the name of Islam. She shouldn't be forced to strip it of its meaning by universalising it just to avoid giving offence.

Seemed you were accusing me of a double standard which was pretty far below the belt.

 

[UFO over easy]

and why is that. all the people who commited these crimes said they did it in the name of islam, should i question them?

yes you should, most definitely

if I killed my family on behalf of all white 22 year-olds everywhere, would you blame all white 22 year-olds everywhere? or to use a more relevant example, if I, as an evangelical christian, suicide bombed an abortion clinic on behalf of all christians across the globe, would you BLAME CHRISTIANITY (your caps, not mine ) for that too? would you swallow my nonsense just as unquestioningly?

I don't say all muslims act like this

yet you

...do BLAME ISLAM for that.

blaming an entire community for the actions and opinions of a what you acknowledge to be the minority just because they claim in error to be acting on behalf of the entire community is just ridiculous. this is basic stuff - you're not under obligation to believe every word you read or hear, no matter how strong the conviction of those who make those claims.

 

[noel emits]

All of these ancient social control structures and belief systems are dubious and potentially dangerous, especially when taken literally and out of their original contexts, which of course do not exist anymore.

You could argue, for instance, that the practice of ancient forms of Buddhism by westerners could potentially lead to violence because as a system it doesn't take into account the realities of the world we live in now and leads to dangerous psychological repressions.

 

[crackerjack]

of course he means it sarcastically! that whole song 'illegal business' is about corrupt governments (and how MPs can condemn illegal drug trade but benefit from it on the side)!

That's pretty much my favourite BDP song evah, but it never occurred to me he was being sarcastic. Americans in general (sorry Gav ) strike me as a very patriotic nation and I don't see why a song about hypocritical drug laws and police corruption should entail damning the whole country. KRS was never a NOI/Last Poets type - I think he meant it (and you've gotta love something about a country that can hold a mirror like The Wire up to itself).

 

[bassnation]

Yeah, I think it's ridiculous how people on the left or right "pick a team" like it's a football match. Maybe, just maybe America's aggressive foreign policy and Islamic fundamentalism both stem from equally fucked up attitudes and provide each other with fuel for recrimination?

right on. hate the lot of them, whether its the neo-cons or al qaida - murdering bastards. its a pity that people are caught up in their violence. thats what warrior queen was saying in my view. why should an artist have to reflect every possible counterargument, background and prissy little disclaimers when commenting on something that affected londoners deeply. surely she has the right to pick any angle she wishes. commenting on violence here does not somehow endorse violence elsewhere - and it totally pisses me off every time someone mentions the bombing theres always this mealy mouthed invalidation of it, like we can't talk about it, like we deserved it. what a load of utter bollocks. i lose respect for people who can see the bigger picture but bizarrely not the smaller one, the trauma and the loss of life. its ignorance of this that enables people to commit these crimes in the first place.

 

[Mr. Tea]

this kind of goes without saying though dunnit?

so following on from this, you could interpret warrior queens line in a couple of different ways -

you can't go around killing people in the name of islam - as in, don't go around doing that, it sucks

you can't go around killing people in the name of islam - as in, it's actually impossible to do so, not only because they're not speaking for all followers of the religion but also because these terrorist acts are examples of unmuslim behaviour (can you say that in the same way you can say unchristian?)

I like the second one better, but it's probably less likely

Hmm, good point - although I agree with your self-assessment.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Two consecutive museum directors refrain from showing photographs in their musea, after they wanted to show them at first. Reason: the photos show the prophet mohammed, the directors received threats.

Que? Maybe there's some translation problem here, but I was unaware photography existed in the 6th century AD... :slanted:

 

[noel emits]

it totally pisses me off every time someone mentions the bombing theres always this mealy mouthed invalidation of it, like we can't talk about it, like we deserved it. what a load of utter bollocks.

Really, who does this? Is this in the papers or something?

i lose respect for people who can see the bigger picture but bizarrely not the smaller one, the trauma and the loss of life. its ignorance of this that enables people to commit these crimes in the first place.

Is this directed at things that have been said in this thread?

 

[Mr. Tea]

Really, who does this? Is this in the papers or something?

Oh come on - this is Chairman Zhao's modus operandi all over, isn't it?

 

[crackerjack]

right on. hate the lot of them, whether its the neo-cons or al qaida - murdering bastards. its a pity that people are caught up in their violence. thats what warrior queen was saying in my view. why should an artist have to reflect every possible counterargument, background and prissy little disclaimers when commenting on something that affected londoners deeply. surely she has the right to pick any angle she wishes. commenting on violence here does not somehow endorse violence elsewhere - and it totally pisses me off every time someone mentions the bombing theres always this mealy mouthed invalidation of it, like we can't talk about it, like we deserved it. what a load of utter bollocks. i lose respect for people who can see the bigger picture but bizarrely not the smaller one, the trauma and the loss of life. its ignorance of this that enables people to commit these crimes in the first place.

OTM that.

 

[straight]

thats the thing, noodle armed liberals have a history of loving a bit of the old armed struggle from the vietcong, nicaragua, cuba and the fun and games perpetuated by my fellow northern irishmen over the last 40 odd years, they make ever such good t-shirts. Most of these folk would have a slightly different slant on things if they had to move out of their homes for a fortnight every year as the country turned on itself or been in constant fear of being burned out of their homes because of their heritage as i did growing up. i see no difference between that and these islamic retards.

 

[droid]

Muppet.

Since youre arguing via t-shirt slogans now, I wouldve thought this would be more your style:

 

[petergunn]

this thread=dissensus

 

[droid]

what is with all this calling people who criticize islam islamophobes, where the subtext is that you are a hateful racist, and as such an reprehensible individual?

i never heard anyone who criticized the pope for outlawing condoms being called a christianity-ophobe.

Not everyone - just those who repeatedly condemn Islam as 'the most hateful and violent' religion, and are happy to extend that condemnation to all who practice that religion.

As far as I'm aware, you're not a Quranic, Biblical or Talmudic scholar. You havent done a comparative analysis of the various scriptures and cultures. You're not a theologist. You haven't demonstrated any kind of historical knowledge about Islam to back up your points that couldn't be gleaned from the pages of LGF. You don't take into account the massive variance in interpretations by different peoples of every religious text... in short, your assertions about Islam are irrational, and based on ignorance and bigotry.

Thats why I think you're an Islamophobe.

maybe this is needed:
i think everybody should be able to believe what they want to believe.
i think all people are equal, whatever color of skin, gender, sexual preference or creed.
i vehemently reject violence, and think it should only be used do defend yourself when all other possible solutions are exhausted.
i loathe people who say their use of violence against others is justified by their belief or their ideology, be it christianity, islam, communism, neo-conservatism or whatever

Uh-huh.

 

[droid]

this thread=dissensus

Unfortunately OTM.

 

[swears]

I <3 Dissensus.

 

[straight]

okay, maybe you could agree on it being the religion with most openly hateful devotees preaching openly? the question is not whether there are shady hateful elements within the structure and belief systems of ancient religions because as with any multinational conglomerate there are dodgy dealings and unpleasnt individuals somewhere, its just that with islam these individuals tend to make themselves known by screaming violent hatred in public. Fucking hell. 14 pages of bollocks just because zhao cant speak patty.

 

[droid]

name a religion in which name more atrocities are committed nowadays and i will say your right

Thats an illogical position. I have a rock here that scares away tigers. See any tigers around here? must be because of my rock.

Lets just say you re right - that more atrocities are committed in the name of Islam - that does not mean Islamic teachings are more violent. If this was the case then Muslims would historically be more violent than those who practice other religions - which is not the case.

time and again i have said im attacking the teachings of islam, not muslims. You choose to ignore this, because it is easier to call me a racist, that way you dont have to enter a real discussion.

I didn't call you racist. I called you an Islamophobe.

indeed, you are not aware, you dont know what i studied, read and was interested in all my life. you dont know whether ive done a comparative analysis, that is not the same as you knowing i didnt.

You haven't demonstrated any evidence of this 'study', and your arguments, assertions and attitude would suggest otherwise. Are you sure you're suitably qualified to pass judgment? Have you made an in depth study of the scriptures of all major religions firsthand? Can you even read Arabic or Hebrew? What about Hindi?

I think its safe to say the answer is no. If the answer was yes you'd be in a University Library somewhere studying frantically - not arguing on a messageboard.

and thats why i think you're somebody who thinks he's morally superior, for which reason alone he doesn't have to enter in discussions with people with other views, as they are wrong by defintion (you knowing the truth)

Nonsense. Your statements on many of the threads on this board betray an irrational and illogical position on this issue, thats why I have no interest in entering into a 'real' discussion with you. Not because you're 'morally inferior', but because you're assertions are specious and ill-thought out and you're unresponsive to logical arguments.

yeah, dismiss your opponent, paint him black, slate him as much as you can, as long as you don't have to use real arguments,.

Thats your policy towards Islam summed up nicely. Thank you.