Muhammad Rasheed's Blog, page 201

Son of the FRAY: Shedding the Big Two

Deuce Richardson - I just left the "BNM" group. What was once a bastion of free thought and deft use of the English language has turned into a "safe space" for an enemy of the aforementioned. I didn't want to leave, but I have no time to cater to the whinings of someone who wants to dominate the discussion with his off-topic rants.

Muhammad Rasheed - You fail to realize that one of the reasons this group was created was so that the founders could trade with me without getting threads deleted willy-nilly, yes?

lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Hi, Deuce! :D

Muhammad Rasheed - As an aside, I notice you do an awful lot of crying, whining, complaining, and "I'm taking my ball and LEAVING!" outbursts for someone who had the nerve to label ME the victimologist.

Try growing a pair, please. Thanks.

Deuce Richardson - MWM didn't inform me of that, but I'm always ready to engage in a discussion with a near sub-literate who can't distinguish between a quote and a personal opinion. I'll be surprised if your knowledge of the Islamic core texts exceeds mine. If there aren't referees here, bring it. Are you real Islam or Nation of Islam? My "pair" is fine, according to your maternal unit.

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Considering you spun on your heels -- skirts all askew -- to stomp your way out of a group because your weak plan to get me banned failed, it's obvious you AREN'T ready to engage. I fully expect you to cry and leave this one, too, after I bust your ass in front of your friends.

2.) I'm a real Muslim.

3.) Maybe you can order a pair from Amazon since your body hath betrayed you? Look it up. You're welcome.

Deuce Richardson - You give yourself too much credit. Quite honestly, I hadn't even checked out the group for several days. I had other things going on and assumed your importation of off-topic, Muslim bitchiness had been shut down. I came back to find admins leaving and you discovering the "true" meaning of Jack Vance. Mott signed me up for this group. I figured we were here to talk Vance. Looks like you're here, too. I'd rather talk Vance, but if you want a fight, I have no problems with that. You apparently infest all sectors of the Vance-sphere. I didn't try and get you banned in the other group and I'm not trying here.

Muhammad Rasheed - Deuce Richardson wrote: “You give yourself too much credit.”

Are you going to determine how much credit I’m going to have, too??? Does your oppressive, racist evil know no bounds????

Deuce Richardson wrote: “…and assumed your importation of off-topic, Muslim bitchiness had been shut down.”

Addressing Churchill’s offensive vomit was necessary as I subscribe to the doctrine he was insulting. You all could have just left it alone after that since none of you had any skin in the game, so to speak. It was MY sacred belief system the vile beast was slandering. One would think civilized gentlemen would recognize that and allow me to have the one post rant, but no. They decided to gang up on the only Muslim present in support of Churchill’s hateful stance, I defended myself, and now you ALLLLLLLLL are crying, deleting your accounts, whining, bitching, etc., in the aftermath. If I were YOU, I would drop the matter from the embarrassment. As this lot is fond of pointing out: “Everyone is watching.”

Deuce Richardson wrote: “I figured we were here to talk Vance. Looks like you're here, too. I'd rather talk Vance, but if you want a fight, I have no problems with that.”

I would be delighted to talk about Vance’s works. My favorites in order, are: The Dying Earth saga, the Lyonesse trilogy, the Demon Prince saga, Green Magic, and To Live Forever. These all appeal to the superhero genre fan in me. What are your favs?

My part of the fight was purely defensive as a reading through the threads will easily reveal, even the skirmish between us two. The conflict was over, as both me and the Mod pointed out, when you then came in snapping and foaming at the mouth, elbows & knees pumping, winging exclamation marks around like a madman.

Deuce Richardson wrote: “You apparently infest all sectors of the Vance-sphere.”

lol No, just these two.

Deuce Richardson wrote: “I didn't try and get you banned in the other group and I'm not trying here.”

Sure. Tell me: why do you hate the truth so much, Deuce? Hm? Did it kill your parents in front of you as a lad? Is your demonstrated chronic whiny twitchiness the result of PTSD?

Paul Rhoads - My friends, perhaps this interesting rascal Rasheed will eventully calm down. Until then l suggest we treat him as suffering from Terets and use a corosponding indulgence. As for his deeper problem, as WM Mott suggested, he is a living example of a vancian phenomina and should be cherished for that reason.Think: we have our own real-life Lens Larque / Ronald Wilby to study at close quarters! lt's like living in a vance story!!

Note that the name Will-Be was apparantly not chosen at random expressing as it does the essence of the solopsistic project.

Muhammad Rasheed - Alternately, you could simply stop insulting my sacred belief system so I do not feel compelled to live in 'battle mode' all the time; we could talk Vance stuff all day, and forge a lifelong friendship the envy of the world.

I'm good either way.

Paul Rhoads - lt is not an insult to say what one believes is true. Can you live with that or must you go into jehad mode at the sight of any opinion which "insults" your "sacred" attitudes and start squalling "lies!" and so on?

To me Churchill is as sacred as lslam is to you. I say so, quite honestly, and you go banans!

I can live with you thinking what you think about Churchill: can you live with me thinking what l think of Mohammed?

Let me put it another way: are you a man or a crybaby?

Muhammad Rasheed - lol Paul, if you say something crazy I will counter it. That's not crying, that's defense.

"Crying" is all of the complaining and protesting that I AM defending myself. You want me to stop defending myself when you say something that irks me. I do not care for the feeling of being ganged up on, and as you see, both Will and Deuce are actively hostile. If you want me to relax, have THEM relax, and let there be Peace.

Paul Rhoads - Yes: Stop defending yourself! It is a stance of weakness unworthy of a Vance reader!

Stop being determined by the attitudes of others.

You are in fact among friends - even if you are dark gray, and a Fancher! ; -)

Muhammad Rasheed - So to clarify your position, you are demanding to be able to say whatever you want about me and the things/concepts I care most about, you get the unprecedented authority to decide whether I am insulted or not by your uncontrolled statements, and I am not allowed to counter/critique your comments in any way, nor say whatever I want about whatever you believe.

Does this sum up the nature of the engagement that you wish to put in place between us?  I strongly suspect I just dragged the essence of the foul  "White Privilege" out into the light...   O_O



See Also:

THE FRAY: Crossed Blades Underneath a Twinkling Gaean Reach Canopy

WARNING! This Discussion Forum is Guarded by the Thought Police! NO DISCUSSIONS ALLOWED!

The Spirit of Trullion: A Religious Dialogue within the Alastor Cluster

Churchill's Anti-Islam Drivel Revisited

A Tribute to Jack Vance (August 28, 1916 – May 26, 2013)

THE FRAY: Crossed Blades Underneath a Twinkling Gaean Reach Canopy

Paul Rhoads - Hey, Muhammad Rasheed, you rascal, get over here! l've had enough of your "dark gray" cave. If you have a reply to my last comment, say it here. ; -)

Muhammad Rasheed - *BAM!*

John Justin Green - Fantastic. Literally. If anyone thinks they understand all that I, then they are likely alone in a unique personal reality. This is masterbation Muhammad.

Kindly try to develop reliable exchange where we or at least two people brlieve they have the same understanding. What is going on here is far from that.

I would not trust us on anything so developed. Let us see if we can underztand what each other thinks is good and what is evil. Seriously. Dont joke. We need to start somewhere very basic.

I will start. Good is only what God wants. Evil is rebelion from the will of God. You?

Paul Rhoads - hmm.. that's a big start John..

Rasheed, you rascal, how about enligtehing us on what should be excised from western society - besides racism because l have a vauge impression - nothing too clear - that you feel a slight disaproval of it - just my speculation based on a sort of general impression, so no need to get upset if my l'm a bit off in this regard!

So, racism asside: what should go?

John Justin Green - I know but where would you start?

Paul Rhoads - where start? how about some minor points which might allow us to callibrate the discussion into some sort of reasonable mode.... we got to calm this baby down! Get him out of over-reaction insult mode..

John Justin Green - I hope Muhammad Rasheed knows his Bam comes across like a boy crossing the enzone and doing a victory dance for an imaginary game he stars in.

Paul Rhoads - ... l mean lies from the pit of hell ... how do you deal with that?

Paul Rhoads - Oh, let him dance. The world is watching. If his moves are good he'll get applause.

John Justin Green - I thought good evil could help us calibrate. It would take a lot of discussion but I believe that is the efficient path.

Paul Rhoads - start small - to calibrate. Theology later.lf we can't reach friedly conversation mode it's not workable.

John Justin Green - Good and evil is a song we all think we know. If we check that it would be a value even if it is not as meta as you are thinking.

John Justin Green - Where to start then?

John Justin Green - Actually God's will is as meta as we can imagine

William Michael Mott - I think we should discuss the various traits of a Vancian villain: sneaky, manipulative, violent to a precise fault. The kind of guy who has a balance of sociopathic tendenices and egomaniacal ones... and who wants to bend all others to his will. Even little girls whom he finds attractive and wants to take home. He might even start his own religion... didn't Vance write about that a few times? Any real-world megalomaniacal scumbags from our own human history would surely be coincidental.

John Justin Green - Or maybe a fundamental exploration of Theology. The underlying theme of the old law from the Tora. And the underlying principles of Christ and Mohamed.

John Justin Green - Tora is the establishment of property rights and God's desires for respecting individual rights via avoidance of all encroachments by lies or physical invasion.

John Justin Green - Christ's message of forgiveness and individual efforts to forgive and love each other

John Justin Green - And then Mohomed's directive to follow the outlines for life he set and subjugate everyone and free will to those outlines. This is not compatible with the freedoms and respect of individual property and thought which was the basis of the US. Freedom of religion was a concept in the early US that did not realize the existence of such an incompatible theology.

John Justin Green - Muhammad Rasheed might strive to correct me, but I have become aware of duplicity in Islamic scripture. The redacted scripture after Mohamed left Mecca is an issue which I would like to see him deal with to our satisfaction. But he is likely to claim we can not understand why what seems wrong is actually good without an amount of study that would practically make us Muslim. I would like have my expectations exceeded.

Paul Rhoads - Indeed! As William Michael Mott points out: solopsim of such force that it bends reality!

Vancian villans who create religions: Arman (Crusade to Maxus) - all about ending slavery, very aprops.

.... Loomie is not a villan but he creats realities - one of which, as l recall, is identical to a situation set up by Maziran ... in fact out dear Muhammad Rasheed makes me feel like poor Turgen to his mini dragon! ... V. Faluche also created realites... all very appropos... our Rasheed, while denying clairity to all others, proclames a personal reality which he projects and maintains, in the manner we have seen.

Paul Rhoads - @John Justin Green… you think too big! Let's see if we can get our friend to agree that 2+2 is a number between zero ( a great muslim achievment in science!!!!) and 7.

William Michael Mott - @Paul Rhoads… don't forget: Viole Falushe has many personality traits and behaviors which are identical to those ascribed to Mohammed in both the Koran and the hadiths.

Muhammad Rasheed - Paul Rhoads wrote: "I mean lies from the pit of hell ... how do you deal with that?"

Hopefully by dialing WAY back on the lying. That would be the recommended method.

Muhammad Rasheed - Paul Rhoads wrote: "So, racism asside: what should go?"

Sexism/misogyny. Thus and so.

Muhammad Rasheed - John Justin Green wrote: "I know but where would you start?"

At the front of the line! This is found in the beginning, in the time-honored grand tradition!

John Justin Green - We should all practice what we preach. But you do realize the three of us are under the belief that you are delusional and we have it all strait. And you think likewise. Do you have any interest in professing your view on fundamental areas as I mentioned above? If not, then what?

Muhammad Rasheed - John Justin Green wrote: "I will start. Good is only what God wants. Evil is rebelion from the will of God. You?"

I have no problem accepting this definition, especially since it is the absolute truth. Surprising coming from you. I lack hope that lightning will strike twice, of course.

William Michael Mott - Apparently Rasheed doesn't realize that what we now call political correctness was repugnant to Vance, and his writings bear this out. There are more instances of his ridicule and satirizing such things than I have time to list at the moment. Start with Adam Reith's interaction with various human groups on Tschai, and move onward to Cugel, and then the Alastor Cluster. And so many more.

John Justin Green - Is it posible for you to make a post without the reference to your superiority? That would reduce the number of letter you type and get the same message across. The wuality of a man speaks through his work and not so well his mouth.

William Michael Mott - In short: Rigid and unforgiving/unbending religious, social and political systems were the foils of Vance's protagonists. Always. Without exception. This would correlate well with Churchill's factual evaluation.

Muhammad Rasheed - So long as a bare minimum of respect is maintained I will 'realize' your points with sincerity. My line is thus: Please do not get too comfortable and start whipping around traditional racial slurs. It will be impossible for me to stick around at that point. All else is fair game.

William Michael Mott - This is what is revolting: bringing race into a discussion out of the blue, when it was not present previously. The set-up for a weak argument of false indignation.

Muhammad Rasheed - John Justin Green wrote: "Is it posible for you to make a post without the reference to your superiority?"

Certainly! Merely elevate your status from uncouth lout to noble Muslim, and VOILA! Your goal will be achieved!

Muhammad Rasheed - Almost like magic!

John Justin Green - Ok then the next dtep is check what we believe is God's will. Here I expect we differ.

God wants us to respect each other's property and be truthful and show honor to him, love each other and make no claim on each other. What say you?

Muhammad Rasheed - Agreed! I have no issue with this.

John Justin Green - When you are Muslim aee you all on the same level?

William Michael Mott - A noble Muslim? Really? This sounds somewhat sanctimonious and supremacist, doesn't it? But of course it does, it's just par for the course, disguised as a half-jest. Having lived in a Muslim nation as a child, I believe all American Muslims should do the same, along with their families. Then they would have access to data which enables an accurate evaluation.

Muhammad Rasheed - Explain.

William Michael Mott - The statement is self-explanatory.

John Justin Green - You are going to far. We have not even agreed on what it is God wants.

Muhammad Rasheed - Explain what the benefits are as you see them, Will. May I remind you that you yourself pointed out our vast differences in seeing the world. "Self-explanatory" may need a bit of a nudge or two, truly.

John Justin Green - I think Mike is referring to the material travesties that are common to fully Muslim states. But that is for a later discussion. I think we are making progress at the begining of the road.

Muhammad Rasheed - John Justin Green wrote: "When you are Muslim aee you all on the same level?"

By no means! God said He only judges humanity on the levels of righteousness they have achieved. Those who are more righteous are on a higher level than those who flounder.

John Justin Green - Then I can not believe becoming a Muslim will stop your frequent bludgeoning!

Muhammad Rasheed - Try it. You may be surprised.

John Justin Green - If I do and I do not like it, the penalty is death. So I will need to consult my lawyers, prepare methods of escape and generally take extreme care before I do so.

John Justin Green - I mean if I turn back from it to my former Christian state

William Michael Mott - I will posit it to you like this: You see every mention of Islam or Muslims or Mohammed as in need of your personal approval, and permission. This is the attitude of a slave, even if a mental one. Is Allah not tough enough to take up for himself, without outraged, nitpicking revisionists to constantly go on the attack? Pretty pathetic.

A real God would take care of his detractors himself. He would not need constant harping and help, to deal with even imagined slights. It is ironic that you read Vance, Mohammed, as your mind is not really free. You are enslaved by a cruel political system which masquerades as a religion, and you dare not tolerate a stray thought that makes you question your programming.

I have lived in a Muslim society. There were many beautiful things there, and many filthy and merciless ones. Backwards, actually. The kinds of things that had a housekeeper begging my parents to adopt her daughter and bring her back the USA, to escape the culture and religious insanity, but which they were not permitted by law to do. The kind of things that go on throughout the Muslim world today, where black people are still sold and held as slaves, women and girls are brutalized, and boys are raped. American Muslims should move to the Gulf States and experience this cultural enrichment first hand.

John Justin Green - Wow, I had no idea you did that.

William Michael Mott - Yes.

John Justin Green - What does God want Rasheed?

Muhammad Rasheed - [stand by; responses pending]

John Justin Green - No hurry. Paul is away and I need to go to bed. East Coast USA.

William Michael Mott - Oh, and to be clear: Criticism of anything Islamic is not "racist". A belief-system is not a "race". There are Muslims of every conceivable hue and ethnic background, just as there are among Buddhists, Christians, Hindus and so on. To throw the race-card or the oppressed card here is to earn contempt. Do it too often and it is to earn banishment. This is not censorship; rather it is the exclusion of an immature and petulant mentality of a disrupting nature, which wastes time and energy.

Muhammad Rasheed - I was specifically referring to my status as a Black American, in which "race" is quite apt as an appropriate descriptor.

All else is fair game.

John Justin Green - In our mind Mike that is so. But the overlapping identities of race and belief here make for an association which Rasheed believes is also a cause effect relationship. And coincidental. He believes we are white supremacists and that we have issue with Islam from the same source as our racism. It is a self verifying loop which can not be proven wrong any more than you can prove that I do not command invisible undetectable magic dragons which I insist on. AM I right Rasheed?

William Michael Mott - I would hope that we could discuss Vance, without bringing race into any of it. Why do you feel the need to do so? Again, are you attempting to create racial tension where none existed previously? If so, I would submit that the only concerns with race are coming from you, out of the blue and with no basis. In other words, I don't care what color you are. I care only about your character and your mind.

John Justin Green - Un-testable belief should not be pushed at anyone. The whole subeject of race is seriously flawed and irrational. I think I will explain this to Rasheed in a good way tomorrow.

John Justin Green - He thinks we have nothing new to show him but that is not true.

William Michael Mott - I see such self-inflicted victimhood identity as inherently "racist", and the fact that it is even brought up, repugnant. Vance was a Caucasian of Irish descent. So why then would Rasheed read him? After all, he wrote about white imperialism and expansionism into the cosmos. Isn't that anathema to whiny, overly-sensitive self-identified-victim PC types?

John Justin Green - But Mike we may be so culturally biased that we are unaware of said racism. So we must give it a fair hearing. First Rasheed must make crystal clear what he mean by racism.

William Michael Mott - Why even bring it up in this forum? It is designed, again, simply to create a false narrative of victimhood and oppression. No one is being oppressed or racially profiled here--unless it is everyone other than Rasheed, and he is doing it to us. Without basis, grounds or bearing.

John Justin Green - I am bringing it up because I have a point or two to make about it. Tomorrow.
Paul Rhoads - ... l think that our rascally friend in fact really wants to talk about racism : it's the only thing that really interests him - beacuse his version of lslam is just a faccade for a sort of supercharged judaisized Christianity, and his politics are just leftist boilerplate... so l'm going to start another thread.  Bravo John: you have done what l couldn't do: get our friend to partisipate in some positive and vaugely polite exchages! You're a better man than l...

Muhammad Rasheed - Patience! I'm still at work!

Muhammad Rasheed - Some of these questions are too meaty to get into right at this moment. Trust me I'll get to them. Smacking Deuce upside the back of his head was lite work.
Paul Rhoads - You are becomming tiersome, than which no fault is more shameful. We all want to have some fruitful engagements. Stop emulating you warrior prophet name-sake and trying to conquer and destroy all the time! We want to be friends, so we can explore each other's ideas and perhaps learn something.

Hencefourth l will be ignoring anything unfriendly.

Muhammad Rasheed - If I tried that, it would only encourage the behavior that you are pretending not to do. "We aren't insulting you if it's what we really believe about [insert Islam insult]!"

Muhammad Rasheed - You put me in the position of forcing me to defend myself, with sarcastic quips making up the bulk of my arsenal, so if they carry a sting I can only advise you to be more considerate to others who you are quite aware do not share your world view. But because I am outnumbered here, it does not inspire me to be nice if I read something that sounds like either a blatant or underhanded slight at my expense. If I just let it go without countering, it will eventually build up as a resentment in me because of my 'scorpio' tit-for-tat nature (i don't really believe in horoscope sign lore FYI).

William Michael Mott - Rasheed, no one cares. The gist of it is that no one here is going to kow-tow to your PC garbage, including your attempts to paint yourself as some sort of victim. Apparently you are used to playing those cards, ad nauseum, in most of your interactions. Without that act to fall back on, what do you have to offer, intellectually speaking? I would submit "not much".

I would be more interested, for instance, in discussing how Vance's writing influenced your graphic storytelling, character development, and so on. But you are stuck on virtual jihad setting. That would be a meaningful exchange. In the larger picture, you are not going to revise history and fact while I'm around. You're just spinning your wheels if you try to do so.

Muhammad Rasheed - The prophet was not like that. The early Muslim battles during his lifetime were defensive in nature.

Muhammad Rasheed - William Michael Mott wrote: "Rasheed, no one cares."

Oh, you care alright. That's why you invited me.

William Michael Mott - No, they weren't. And his overall lifetime was one of warfare, pillage, rape, slave-taking, and murdering those who opposed him. And no, I didn't invite you. Green did. I'm tolerating you (for now).

Muhammad Rasheed - Ask me any questions you wish about Vance's influence on my process, etc. I will answer.

William Michael Mott - Let's do it in another thread. Or even better, please start another one. That way we can keep the topics separated. I do think it's important to create media with a better use of vocabulary and language. I suspect you've done that.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, they were defensive in nature. Your bias against the religion does not equal truth I'm afraid.

Green did, but why did you say "no one cares?" That would imply more than just you, yes?

Muhammad Rasheed - First, I will address some of these questions you all asked before I left the house earlier. Even though your mind is closed tight as a zygote fist against anything that opposes your dedicated anti-Islam hatred, it will be fun for my records.

Paul Rhoads - "hatred" - how tieresom!

We allow you to have your opinions but you will not allow us to have ours.

I DO NOT APPROVE OF ISLAM.

Can you not live with that? Live with it, because you have no choice.

Muhammad Rasheed - I am allowing you to have your opinions; how am I not? My countering things that come across as insulting to me is just my response. Now if you want me to just not say anything back, then I consider that censorship. Why do you get to be Brave & Free, but not I?

Paul Rhoads - And stop justifying yourself. We don't care. In fact we are like Mr. Rogers: we like you as you are - but you make it boring to interact with you.

We must learn to accept that some people won't regard as sacred what we regard as sacred.

Muhammad Rasheed - That double-standard mindset -- that you can't even see that you are doing -- is a big part of the main conflict!

Paul Rhoads - if l am blind it behooves you to be indulgent.

How can you exspect me to SEE if l am BLIND?

Your attitude is uncharitable! Where is your vaunted muslim charitableness (in fact crypto-christian charitablenesd, but never mind...)

Muhammad Rasheed - Paul, you just admitted to having a idolatry relationship with your image of Churchill. As a Muslim, why would you think that would pull sympathy from me, even if the old windbag WASN'T a racist piece of crap? No offense.

Paul Rhoads - "racist piece of crap" No offence... ? why should l take offence since it becomes more and more difficult to take you seriously.

And what do l care for your excitableness about the word "sacred" by which you are avoiding the friendly point l made?
Muhammad Rasheed - hahahaha But it didn't even make sense! lol What was I supposed to DO with that??? hahaha

William Michael Mott - Again, note that Rasheed says *for his records". This bears out my earlier observations about his character and motivations. He seeks to use this group and his interactions here as some sort of self-vindication for his imagined persecution complex. It would be best just to send him on his way. He really has nothing of substance to offer.

Paul Rhoads - ... l'm beginning to wonder.

Paul Rhoads - ... This really is vance villan behavior: defining reality, seing slights everywhere... not so good.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Paul Rhoads - olo

Muhammad Rasheed - Guys, what we just went through in the other group should reveal the TRUE motivation. I hate thread-deleting, thought police behavior as much as you do. I control the discussions I take part in. Period.

Muhammad Rasheed - I hate others having power over what I say, where I say it, and how when/where it is displayed.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's about FREEDOM, not villainy.

William Michael Mott - You "control the discussions", yet it's "about freedom". Thanks for displaying your totalitarian and even egomaniacal mindset so openly. The amusing thing is that you fail to even see it as you do it.

William Michael Mott - You control nothing, certainly not with your intellect.

Paul Rhoads - You won't respect my freedom to think differently than you.

You assume that opinions you don't like are lies.

You take offence when no offence is meant.

You take a stance of victime and hurl invective wtwithout restraint on this basis.

You refuse the hand of friendship repeatedly offered.

Muhammad Rasheed - Paul, you reflect back to me every single thing you listed, but you consider me unreasonable. lol

I swear I don't understand how you think.

Paul Rhoads - WMM puts his finger defly on the nub .... l suppose Rasheed will cry "lie" instead of learning something.

Muhammad Rasheed - I control whether the discussions I take part in disappear from the face of the earth without my consent, yes. You are free to do whatever you wish with your threads, but I will control my content.

Paul Rhoads - Apparanty you don't. I'm beginning to wonder if you are not feeble minded!

Muhammad Rasheed - What has William offered that was worthy of learning? I have found him the single most hateful person I've encountered in the last week.

Paul Rhoads - Stop controlling!!! Be free!!! Let go!! Explore, learn, share!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - @Paul... was that another example of the offered "hand of friendship?" Because I read it differently.

Paul Rhoads - Anything you dislike is "hateful" ... does this remind you of nothing in Vance??

Muhammad Rasheed - Did you feel free when you were still under the impression that those threads had been lost forever?

William Michael Mott - So I REFUSE to enable your persecution fantasies. You are out of your league here, with your throwing around the w I Rd "freedom" as you seek to undermine the free thinking and speech of others. Islam means "submission" or "surrender"; you have done so, even intellectually. The rest of us refuse to do so and will remain truly free thinkers. Be sure and copy that for your blog, although I'm sure you will omit portions just as you did from the other group. I'm all for booting you, but I'll leave that up to John Justin Green for now.

Muhammad Rasheed - @ Paul... No. The fact that you don't consider his comments to me to be insulting makes me think you have the feeble mind you accused me of having though.

Paul Rhoads - You see everything negatively because you start from the wrong assumption.

i.e. you will not acknoledge my good will ( as l acknoledge yours).

Muhammad Rasheed - @William… tell me specifically what I did to undermine your free thinking and speech, please.

William Michael Mott - Your words and intent, along with your silly ad hominids, speak for themselves.

Muhammad Rasheed - But you've been insulting me continuously since we've met. Are you not accountable for your own behavior?

Paul Rhoads - l've aready told you! You insist on taking as insult what others regard as fact - with out prejudice to you. We can think you are wrong while still being friends.

Muhammad Rasheed - Why are you pretending this is only about me? Because there are two of you? lol

William Michael Mott - Insulting you? No. Observations based on your behavior and motivations are not insults.

Muhammad Rasheed - well, that's fine. I still have the right of Free Speech to respond back to it, don't I? So why do you campaign so hard to get me to relinquish my rights?

Would you be willing to do that if I were equally so insistent?

Muhammad Rasheed - Then why are you acting insulted when i do it back to you, Will?

Paul Rhoads - Two sides: good will on one and paranoia on the other.

Stop the fake laughing, it has a shit-eating quality that l don't like to see in you.

William Michael Mott - What exactly are you even postulation or saying? Nothing, really.

Muhammad Rasheed - You two have a blatant double-standard stance that I hate to see on you. Will you set it aside and become significantly more likeable?

William Michael Mott - Yours is the double-standard, Rasheed. Absurdly so.

Paul Rhoads - ug!!! LET GO MAN!!

Cut it out with the rights and defence and hurt feelings!!

Be free! If you are strong insults mean nothing. If you truly believe you need no approbation or safe-space.

Stand WITH us.

Muhammad Rasheed - Okay, so this part of the discussion is growing boring, because it's exactly like talking to a couple of stone pillars.

I'm going to scroll back up to Paul & John's original posts, and start answering the actual fun questions now to rekindle my interest.

Paul Rhoads - lndeed... what is it really about...? The "freedom / right" to say anything about Churchill without being answered.

Paul Rhoads - ...l'm not going to deal with secondary threads. Post at the bottom, start a new thread, or do without me. :(

Muhammad Rasheed - So you want to indulge in your Freedom of Speech while stifling mine. And you somehow consider that "friendship."

"Standing with you" sounds remarkably like I would be deliberately agreeing to a subordinate slave state. You're actually getting upset with me because nothing at all about what you are proposing is even remotely appealing. I "submit" to the Supreme Creator of the heavens and the earth alone, gentlemen.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'll post my answers at the bottom of the thread still. I didn't like bouncing around up & down the thread like that either.

Paul Rhoads - ... sheesh. l give up. There is no cure for terminal stupidity.

Muhammad Rasheed - I have no idea why you are reacting that way. I'm stupid because I told you "no" and rejected what you were offering?

Perhaps you should instead do a better job of making it not sound monstrous and insane, instead of calling me names.

Paul Rhoads - "stupidity" _no offence_ just reality as l see it.

Paul Rhoads - l can do no better. You are blessed with the eye cusps of Underherd and see all things in the perspective of some demon world.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol This is what it is like arguing with the Racial Contract signatory.

Paul Rhoads - ... yech ... spit out that sh..t man!

Paul Rhoads - ... :(

Muhammad Rasheed - You two are literally insane. You are monsters.

Please change utterly; repent of your behavior, and beg God to forgive you. And then do good in the earth so you are cleansed. Stop being the way you are IMMEDIATELY so you may avoid hellfire.

Paul Rhoads - agg!!! ok!!! l repent!@ l beg God's forgiveness!! Hence fourth l will be different!! (spare me hellfire, oh please l beg and implore!!!!!)

William Michael Mott - You're delusional, Rasheed.

William Michael Mott - Thanks for yet more silly insults. Double-standard, indeed...

Muhammad Rasheed - Are you not saying that you want to say whatever you want, but you want me to shut up and only respond on your terms? You don't consider that a double-standard? What is it then?
William Michael Mott - You're an idiot.

Muhammad Rasheed - No, I am not.  And that's why you are upset.




See Also:

Son of the Fray: Shedding the Big Two

WARNING! This Discussion Forum is Guarded by the Thought Police! NO DISCUSSIONS ALLOWED!

The Spirit of Trullion: A Religious Dialogue within the Alastor Cluster

Churchill's Anti-Islam Drivel Revisited

A Tribute to Jack Vance (August 28, 1916 – May 26, 2013)

WARNING! This Discussion Forum is Guarded by the Thought Police! NO DISCUSSIONS ALLOWED!

Alan Brodie - NOTICE!

Q. What kind of people patronize the tavern?
A. People who want quiet and a chance to rest. Occasionally a traveler from inside the Pale or an explorer.

Q. I've heard that some of your clientele is pretty rough. In fact - not to mince matters - it's the general belief that Smade's Tavern is frequented by the most notorious pirates and freebooters of the Beyond.
A. I suppose they occasionally need rest too.

Q. Don't you have difficulty with these people? Maintaining order, so to speak?
A.No. They know my rules. I say, "Gentlemen, please desist. Your differences are your own; they are fugitive. The harmonious atmosphere of the tavern is mine and I intend it to be permanent."

Q. So then they desist?
A. Usually.

Q. And if not?
A. I pitch them into the sea.

Geoff Freeman - Wouldn't you love to have a drink there and observe the clientele?

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm more concerned as to whether Rhoads can tread water.  O_O

Muhammad Rasheed - what if a demon prince decides to impromptu recruit you for some suicide mission?

Geoff Freeman - I'd find it hard to refuse, I suppose. I could always flash my IPCC badge...

Muhammad Rasheed - I think that would probably be the single WORST thing you could do. lol

Rob Wilkinson - I set this group up for people to share their love of Jack Vance and his writing. It is not a political messageboard. It is not a place for people to antagonise or display their ability to best others with dazzling debate that ultimately fills the page with irrelevant invective. There is no place for any vitriol. There are millions of websites/groups for just such a hobby. My co admin Alan Brodie is more forgiving than I on this matter. You will be demoted to under Worminger. And if it is an intention of any member to continue with posts not true to the spirit of the group, I will have to remove you. This is not specific to any one individual. It applies to all the community. Sorry to have to make a post such as this. Rob.

Paul Rhoads - Another space rendered useless by punctillious, nuncupatory sissys. l'd like to learn more about this neo-Fanchrade but only in an intelligent public area.

Muhammad Rasheed - Hush, before you drown!

Paul Rhoads - clean and nice. "bravo". And here l had gone to all that trouble to tame the savage beast and draw him toward vancian terrain.
l suppose you concider yourself worthy of Vance, and to be upholding ... something or other. Enjoy!

Rob Wilkinson - I just like reading. And I have always considered fans of Vance, all of you, to be people I would like to know. My opinion on this matter has not changed. I am off to read 'Showboat World'.  :-)

Muhammad Rasheed - One of my VERY favorites. Enjoy!

Paul Rhoads - There is vocabulary for this:
complacency
hypocracy
squeemishness
blindness

As for 'The Showboats of the Lower Vissle River, Lune XXlll, Big Planet' (know your Vance titles, at least!)  >:-(  ...here again is a story rife with rough and tumble and serious issues with which, one gets the impression, certain people could not even begin to cope with in real life, given that in virtual life they insist on bland tranqillity - though low-level snarks alway seem to pas muster.

Richy Clarke - Vissle?

Paul Rhoads - To wow a dainty Spelling bee

l thought to blow a silver wistle

No sooner did l toot a "C",

Then Richy Clarke disgurgled "vissle".

Cugel Phandaal Law - Give em some blue concemtrate

Chris Koop - Aillas couldn't have said it better.

Jose Brutinel Sampol - Amen.

Deuce Richardson - Right on.

Hal Jordan - Full support. One of my favorite FB group ever

David Hurst - Thank you!

Emphyrio Glawen Clattuc - Spiced sausage, ramp and beer for everyone!

Muhammad Rasheed - beef sausage...?

Emphyrio Glawen Clattuc - All kinds of sausage for all tastes...now with steamed leeks :)

William M Ramsell III - Quite right too.

Bodwyn Wook - I concur, Mr Wilkinson. I should only add that in aid of fostering a certain minimum sort of serenity in these pp, a very good point will be for us all to refrain from imbibing any more of the phenolic 'Bold Lion Reserve'; as we have now seen, alas, it IS a vile decoction & it indeed does clabber the bile!

Stephen Rawlins - I love this group. Yes, please moderate it to keep it clean and true to the spirit of all things Vancian.

Muhammad Rasheed - Hahaha You all seem to have walked away from Jack's works with an interesting interpretation of their 'spirit.' I'm pretty sure none of them are sterile, PC, and without conflict to keep the reader "safe" from opposing ideas that might frighten their over-sensitive gizzards. :P  lol

Muhammad Rasheed - "The Augmented Agent" tale in particular bravely explored some racial-political concepts that made me really proud of him, and sealed his spot as my favorite writer... remarkable for a person his age, and from his particular ethnic demographic considering. It goes far towards explaining why you lot seem to only notice his thesaurus, and shy away from deep discussions of his social-political commentaries, as my archnemesis Rhoads pointed out above. The Spirit of Jack Vance was far more potent than even his fans could grasp. May God have mercy upon his soul.



See Also:
Churchill's Anti-Islam Drivel Revisited

The Spirit of Trullion: A Religious Dialogue within the Alastor Cluster
A Tribute to Jack Vance (August 28, 1916 – May 26, 2013)

The Spirit of Trullion: A Religious Dialogue within the Alastor Cluster

Paul Rhoads - Vocabuary didn't work out, nor Cadwal. What about Trullion?

What a beautifully ironic and Spenglerian creation is this story! Or, one could say, anti-spengerian, in the sense that Jack [Vance], though a fervent admirer of Spengler, toyed with ways of out-foxing spenglerian cultural decay.

So here we have a society, so amusingly modeled on the Califonian hippy ideal of the 60s (you callow yoots may know something about this via golden-oldy rock-n-roll, but some of us were there.... whatever : -). What happens? Two brothers come allong: one attuned to this society, the other dissatisfied. This is greatly amusing beacause Jack mixes everything up! The hippys were (in an extreemly mushy manner) revolutionarys against - let us say - a sober social order (no drugs and easy sex, plus hard work). In Trullion the revolutionary is Glay, the sober Fancher who disaproved of his slovenly society and dreamed of order, dicipline and self-improvement.

In the story the "consevative" Glinnes manages to defend his hippy-dippy slovenly "social order" against the revolutionary attempt of Glay to over-throw that order in favor of self-dicipline and so on.

Now, why take interest in this marvellous anatomy of social disequilibrum, this perhaps idealistic or even wistful recipie contre Spengler, at this moment?

The reason is in the _here_ and _now_ (or yesterday)!

See Muhammad Rasheed - and S. Brain in another way - as Glay: his ideals are opposed to the society in which he lives; like Glay he would over-turn all its values, and to this end - like Glay - he is ready to take radical and even "violent" (at least retorically) steps (such as gratuitus accusations of nescience and so on, or in the Brain mode more tricky and snarky tactics). Now the society in question is not the Fens, but American and western society, out of which Vance comes and of which - other things being equal - he defends. Here John Justin Green and - (Magnus Ridolph patted his chin with a hankerchif) - myself, represent Glinnes, driven to all sorts of desperate measures to preserve the world we love.

Then there are those who, like Acady the Mentor, set themslves up as arbitors, as mediator, while in fact, and dispite themselves, aiding and abetting the wrong side - which is beacuse they lack moral vssio and courage.
I commend a re-reading of Trullion; there are lessons for all!

Muhammad Rasheed - (i don't think it actually HAS values.  :P  )

Paul Rhoads - Exacty. This is the meaning of "totally oppose".
And yet, even in your rébellion, your effort to unmake and remake western society, you depend on and use that society: it's openess, it's forms of discourse. Your fundamental arguments are all of western origen. No such things as your anti-colonial, anti-rarcist, anti-establishment and religiously "tollerant" attitudes ever arose or have ever been effective in non-western society (muslim "tollerance" based on dhimmini is not "tollarence" in the western manner of actual and effective non-discrimination).

You have not examined yourself. You are a proud rebel, but it is the pride more than the rebellion which counts, for what do you really want - l mean appart from "winning"? 
It's so empty to accuse others of ignorance and hate and so on, people, who for all you know, may be better than you. 
What do you truly hope to accomplish? 
Perhaps you wish to legalise poligamy?

Muhammad Rasheed - Your opinions regarding the non-western world reflect the intense, and actually evil, lens of your idol Churchill that you see them through. With every line you typed you grew further and further away from any kind of pretend objectivity as you belittle and offend. This both from the effort to hold up fake Western world "values," as well as your verbal kicking of the non-western society, downed while it still flops around in the damage caused from colonialist conqueror abuses.

Does your foolishness ever come to an end? I ask only as an interested scholar collecting such data for science.

John Justin Green - Nonsense

John Justin Green - But clearly that is how you have decided to see it.

John Justin Green - The way you use the term science is as a cape of spendor. A status building symbol. Science would hold no admiration as a term if that was how it came about. Argument based on authority are anti scientific.

Paul Rhoads - l get it! western civilization and it's defenders are wrong and evil in all aspects and phases! No need to further beat that dead horse.

Now, Glay, what does your Fancherade look like, the good you will build on the ashes of the evil you heroicly destroy? 
ls poligamy on the menu?

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, the primary item needed is a serious and hearty reform, in which currently only weak band-aid efforts are placed to give the illusion that a system of balanced fairness is being achieved. This has been ineffective since the balance of power remains not only tilted in the hands of the descendants of the original offenders, but they are also falsely under the impression that nothing is wrong at all, and the disenfranchised victims whine over fictional wrongs. The New Deal of the 20th century deliberately excluded Blacks while it enabled Whites to get ahead and build the Middle Class; this "affirmative action" policy has continued in many other ways ever since, when institutionalized efforts to prevent Blacks from an equal playing field. I resent being artificially held down -- as a group -- while another is artificially propped up to coddle a fake superiority complex that does NO ONE any good.

The bottom line is that I want only artificial barriers and artificial boosts removed for true fairness to reign. This is the nature of the Western society's evil in practice.

Muhammad Rasheed - As an aside, I do not long for polygamy. The Qur'an permits this during special circumstances, but it acknowledges it is not the best relationship, and advises against it, turning us towards a single spouse as marital best practice.

John Justin Green - Is that in both original mecca version and later redacted medina version? Membership sored after he fixed it up.

Muhammad Rasheed - @Paul Rhoads... My "fundamental arguments" come from my understanding of the Qur'an as sacred scripture; God wants only the best for mankind. You are unaware of this because of your limited "the gist" level of study into it.

John Justin Green - At one time you had a gist level as well. Did you have any concerns about anything at that point as I do or were you sll in even then?

Muhammad Rasheed - @Paul Rhoads... You're also trying to give the impression that only our society had the openness that enables our technological achievements, but this is far from the truth. The Islamic golden ages that made Spain and old Baghdad Meccas of learning and achievement for scholars around the globe held that same level of openness.

John Justin Green - Dhimi Zoastrian mathmaticians etc. It is amazing we saved as much as we did with all the burning.

Muhammad Rasheed - Paul Rhoads wrote: “and - (Magnus Ridolph patted his chin with a hankerchif) – myself”
Psh! You WISH! lol

Muhammad Rasheed - John Justin Green wrote: "Argument based on authority are anti scientific."

Do you then think that arguments based on wishes & feelings should take their place instead? Because they make poor tools to anchor science upon.  Be reasonable!



Paul Rhoads - ...thus?

M. Rasheed - Precisely so!

Paul Rhoads - ok...

so far here is what l have learned (continue to correct me), with further questions.

Poligamy will be allowed, subjet to financial criteria:

- How much (apoximately) for 4 wives?
- how much for 3 and 2?
- Will there be a financial criteria for 1 wife? Could indigents marry?
- Homo marriage?
- 3 homos?
- 2 heteros and 1 homo?
-Who will council married men, how often, and what powers will they have in case of abuse?
You will have - I presume - a universal minimum wage?
- How will the rulers of this universal social wellfare system be prevented from discrimination?

M. Rasheed - Paul, I was only answering your questions regarding polygamy in Islam, and the Qur'an's restrictions as a best practice. By no means would I care to force the religious law upon a secular government proud of its "separation of church & state." I'm not trying to instigate a civil war.

Paul Rhoads - Fine, but l am not asking about sharia (beacuse l already know). What interests me is your flavor of Fancherade!

You believe western society is integrally evil. You work to replace it with your conception of the good. This is what interests me.

Now, poligamy is utterly incompatable with western society. You, however, regard this as bad and would destroy this incompatibility. So, you impose poligamy. Good. What l want to know is how your new society - call it Fancher society - would be ordered.

So, in Fancherade, how would poligamy work?

Apparently you have a multiculturalist vission in which each group has a say. This does not seem take into account the profound incompatibilities of these groups, but we'll get into that - if you are willing. To start: how would poligamy work in Fancharade?

Financial limits?

M. Rasheed - Paul Rhoads wrote: “You believe western society is integrally evil. You work to replace it with your conception of the good. This is what interests me.”

One of the functioning components of Western society is White Supremacy that was there from the beginning. Efforts to soften it have been of the smoke & mirrors, “These are not the droids you are looking for” variety, leaving the exploited-conquered class embittered and resentful. The reason why slavery in America was abolished was because it caused a socio-political conflict with the paradoxical  “Land of the Free” doctrine this nation’s government was crafted around, and over time it erupted in a bitter war that threatened to destroy the great experiment for good. The laws and structure are now strong enough… because of those ‘freedom/fairness’ wordings in the source documents... that make it possible to excise the cancerous White Supremacy from American society with a great and focused effort, nullifying the need to replace the whole kit-n-kaboodle with another society altogether. I believe America is worth salvaging. All they have to do is be fair, provide consistent justice for all equally, and actively do the hard work to achieve it. The signatories of the Racial Contract naturally hate and fear this simple but difficult solution, as they lust for the “power over all non-whites” perk of their position above all else, and have sabotaged those efforts on every level (they blocked Lani Guinier from the appointed position President Clinton nominated her for because of her keenly-developed sense of fairness). In other words, my “Fancharade” would be remarkably similar to an ideal state America… with that ideal coming from the perspective of a fair-minded non-white who actually loves his country, as opposed to the 50 state, exclusivist Whitopia my ideological enemy prefers.

Paul Rhoads wrote: “Now, poligamy is utterly incompatable with western society.”

It’s incompatible with any society, that’s why the omniscient One God advised against it except under unusual circumstances. But of course, predictably, those who are led by their lusts interpret the verses differently. lol

Paul Rhoads wrote: “You, however, regard this as bad and would destroy this incompatibility.”

Not so, unless you are actually just weaving a role playing scenario that you want me to be a sport and take part in. Is this the nature of your postings here? If so, then state it loudly with nerve and zeal! Otherwise you come across as if you are only half fluent in an obscure English dialect (which I already suspected).

Paul Rhoads wrote: “So, you impose poligamy. Good. What l want to know is how your new society - call it Fancher society - would be ordered. So, in Fancherade, how would poligamy work? To start: how would poligamy work in Fancharade? Financial limits?”

At this point, your fascination with the subject is revealing your own secret lusts for all the world to witness. It’s actually starting to make me uncomfortable. hahaha I DON'T own an escort/dating service, Rhoads, if that's what you're really probing into. All Black men aren't pimps. lol

Paul Rhoads wrote: “Apparently you have a multiculturalist vission in which each group has a say. This does not seem take into account the profound incompatibilities of these groups…”

I think each distinctive group having a representative present in the leadership role so that every voice is fairly heard for the final judgments/rulings to pull from is vital; there can be no ideal fairness-based system without knowing what everyone’s needs are. A single viewpoint to lead all others – particularly a viewpoint that believes it is inherently superior to everyone else and worships only its own lust for power – has already proven to be an irresponsible failure of a system.

See Also:
Churchill's Anti-Islam Drivel Revisited

WARNING! This Discussion Forum is Guarded by the Thought Police! NO DISCUSSIONS ALLOWED!

A Tribute to Jack Vance (August 28, 1916 – May 26, 2013)

Deep Trigger: The Personal Turmoil Beneath the Stage

Gary McCoy - It's strange that the media seems to be relishing the opportunity to "out" the Orlando shooter postmortem.  Ex-wife’s bombshell claim: Club shooter was gay

David Hitch - Not only that, Gary, I'm seeing stories in our local paper about victims of the shooting who are from around here, and my first reaction was, are they being outed against their wishes by reporting this?

Mitchell Berger - It's not gratuitous, it's a major part of the story - just as his complete ignorance of who the players among the terrorists is. It's beginning to appear that this was much more about his struggle with his homosexuality than his alleged radicalization.

Rick McKee - That's what they want you to believe. He wanted to shoot up Disney World, but the security was too good. Does that mean he was a Goofysexual?

David Hitch - He wasn't on the FBI'S watch list for his sexual preferences.

Mitchell Berger - He wasn't on their list at all when this happened, because as far as Jihad went they determined that he was talking out of his ass.

Gerry Harris - They were so right.......now you're talking out of yours.

Muhammad Rasheed - His claims of allegiance to known terrorist groups were contradictory, that's why he was let go.

Mitchell Berger - @Muhammad Rasheed… Exactly, it was if he said "I'm rooting for the Yankees and I'm Red Sox fan too."

David Hitch - He did at one time get the attention of the FBI, which was the point I was making. Mitchell, why must you always split hairs?

Muhammad Rasheed - lol Because "getting their attention" didn't mean what you are implying through the lens of your bias.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's literally the difference between what actually happened, and what the partisan talking heads want to have happened for their narrative agenda.

Gary McCoy - He could have been both, gay, AND, a follower of ISIS' radical Islamists ideology. Which, by his own pledge of allegiance to them, he obviously was. But who are you going to believe... the deflectors of truth, or your lyin' eyes?

David Hitch - And what bias exactly are you accusing me of?

Muhammad Rasheed - You're the one that thought he was on the FBI watch list when he wasn't, right? That was you, right?

Muhammad Rasheed - What bias do you THINK I meant?

David Hitch - Um, I heard on the NEWS he was on the FBI watch list. I don't get information from voices in my head.

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, considering he wasn't on the watch list, we now know that the "news" you watch is completely worthless. You might as well listened to the voices in your head.

Muhammad Rasheed - Gary McCoy wrote: "Which, by his own pledge of allegiance to them, he obviously was..."

Oh, it's "obvious," huh? He "pledged allegiance" to both the Hatfields AND the McCoys, demonstrating his attempt to pin his personal issues onto those groups was full of crap, and that's why the professionals let him go. But to YOU it was "obvious." lol

Gary C Li - I thought Mateen went to Pulse just to case it and get familiar with how to kill people.

Muhammad Rasheed - He'd been frequenting the bar for years because he was the clientele.

David Hitch - Muhammad, what's your frickin point?

Muhammad Rasheed - The same as yours: sharing my opinions on the Internet.

Problems, David?

David Hitch - No problems here.

Muhammad Rasheed - Muslims aren't allowed to do that now?

I was never on a watch list either if that helps with the authorization paperwork.   ;)

David Hitch - Muslims aren't allowed to do what? Share opinions? Please tell me where you come to that conclusion from what I said.

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, it might help if you try to put yourself in my shoes, and try to imagine how "what's your frickin point?" may have been received. I took it as hostile btw.

David Hitch - You say I was biased.
I took that as hostile.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol You shouldn't considering that's normal. Having a bias towards your preferred partisan ideologies is what most people do. It's not inherently wrong.

It's only wrong if you ignore deeper research and studies to hold onto biased opinion circulated as fact by the talking heads.

David Hitch - So you're assuming what my bias is? You know me that well from a couple of FB posts?

Muhammad Rasheed - No, I'm assuming it from both that and the content of your editorial cartoons.

Muhammad Rasheed - ...and your agreement with Gary percentage. lol

Mitchell Berger - @David Hitch… I wasn't "splitting hairs" I was responding to a substantial factual error in your statement. The point is that the FBI investigated him out of concern that he was a potential terrorist, instead they found a weird blowhard, who didn't know enough about the terrorist groups to have formed a serious allegiance.

I know how important it is for both sides of this issue to have Mateen fit one meme over the other. We're still waiting for the investigation to be completed. The way it currently looks, Mateen was mentally ill and was at least experimenting with homosexuality. He may have assumed some of the trappings of ISIS out of self-aggrandizement that is a hallmark of mass killers.

But as I said, the facts are not all in yet. Before we all "know" what happened, why don't we wait and see?

Muhammad Rasheed - Political cartoonists can't afford to wait & see! The editor's deadline is a harsh mistress!

Mitchell Berger - @Muhammad Rasheed… Oh yeah, but clearly there's no editors here, and all the deadlines are self-imposed.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, but once the idea pops up in their heads, from an oft practiced partisan-slanted way of interpreting the news, they must draw it up and add it to the Outbox.

Mitchell Berger - I know many cartoonists and they are all capable of surprising the reader with cartoons that defy the left/right paradigm.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm sure.

Though if Gary manages such a feat I would die from shock.

David Hitch - I'm game, Mitchell. Name some.

Mitchell Berger - But sometimes Gary is so funny it transcends partisanship.

Muhammad Rasheed - He IS funny though, if sometimes philosophically infuriating.

Muhammad Rasheed - And David here is a wonderful draftsman.

David Hitch - ^Thank you Muhammad.

Muhammad Rasheed - You're welcome. I've been admiring your lines for a while now, though the content will sometimes make me want to throw my shoe at you like you were George W.   :P

David Hitch - ^I can live with that.

Muhammad Rasheed - (i wear soft nautical moccasins, sans-bomb apparatus, so you're safe)

Gary McCoy - Mitchell and Muhammad, considering your conciliatory tones, I'm temporarily taking you both off my 'yard-job' list. But I'm not yet washing my truck... just in case.


See Also:  Made in the USA

Gorilla versus Alligator

Chastity Pratt Dawsey - So, a black baby gets into an enclosure with a gorilla in the Cincinnati zoo and the parents are vilified (you know where I'm going with this...) and people say the gorilla shouldn't have been shot to save the boy. Now a two-year-old baby from Nebraska (I will presume, a white baby because Nebraska is 82% white) gets into a no-swimming lagoon at Disney World and is killed by an alligator. Do you hear anyone saying the parents should be charged? Is the criminal record of parents under scrutiny? Anybody speaking up about the cruelty against the four alligators that were rounded up and killed as part of the search for the baby? Not judging you, America. Just asking...

Clyde Mize - Omg,we are all racist,what is the deal with some people who can't utter three words without bringing up race?You know lady it really gets exhausting after a while.

Byron Pitts – Exactly

Daria Bryant - Racism started when one race kidnapped, destroyed the culture, raped the women, discriminated, disenfranchised and suppressed the humanity of another. Yes you too are a racist because you refuse to see the difference between the treatment of blacks vs the treatment of whites.

Clyde Mize - Well,it damn sure never happened in your lifetime.

Muhammad Rasheed - The discrepancy in treatment between the two certainly is still going on in our lifetimes as a continuation of the effects of first slavery, then jim crow, then the current institutionalized racism. The willful ignorance of those on your level does not negate these facts.

Muhammad Rasheed - Shining the spotlight on racist practices isn't the point that the mention of race was first brought up. Chastity's post is the RESPONSE to the race issue, not the beginning of it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Those who want the fed up to stop shining the spotlight on our nation's greatest evil is what is exhausting.

Clyde Mize - Both incidents were irresponsible by the parents and treated as such.You just live your whole life looking to cry about something.Oh boo hoo,get a life,loser.

Muhammad Rasheed - You want to live your whole life pretending your people's historic wrongs don't exist so you can live in a villainous La-La Land inside of your psychotic head. Get out of my life and learn how to leave other people alone for once, please. Thank you.

Clyde Mize - The issue of race would have been brought up either way.The only differance is if it resulted in the death of a black child,oh now we're going to burn down the city.How dare you use the tragic death of a child to further your activist agenda.

Clyde Mize - No,I will not.you can go on social media and spout off this bunch of nonsense crap,and the minute someone calls you on it,its get out of my life.

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Racism keeps getting brought up as a reaction to your folk continuing to perform it.

2.) The riots happen out of frustrated reaction from your folks' racist practices. Stop treating people that way and you will have more time to get drunk, riot and destroy towns when your hockey teams win.

3.) How dare you pretend you care about human life to have a tantrum whenever the disenfranchised complain about your people's evil?

Muhammad Rasheed - "Get out of my life" as a racism-perpetuating evil in the lives of non-whites. Stop spreading your evil around the globe and leave people alone for the first time in the last five centuries. "YOU" as a representative of all that is wrong with Western Society.

Clyde Mize - I never treated anybody any such way my entire life,yet somehow I have been guilty of some unspeakable act since birth.The real battle is between rich and poor.Do you actually think anything ever got accomplished by a riot?The only ones who ever got hurt are other poor people just like you and I.

Clyde Mize - You can go down the road of violence,its just going to get you dead and me dead,and in the end for a brief moment someone might laugh and say,what a couple of dumbasses.

Muhammad Rasheed - I didn't mention anything about violence, but reject the continuous infliction of violence and economic sanctions and unfair practices from your people onto my people. I reject your La-La Land fantasies designed to launder history so you can pretend you aren't the bad guy. I'm SICK of your evil, and especially your continuous penchant for pretending the "race issue" starts whenever I get mad at your evil. I'm TIRED of you inflicting your horror upon my people. Please sit down somewhere and focus on yourself, and stop exploiting the whole world like a monster of legend. Leave. People. ALONE.

WTF is WRONG with you???

Muhammad Rasheed - You claim you "never treated anybody wrong," yet here you are furthering racism by denying its affects! Treating the historical victims of it like WE'RE the ones that are crazy, but you magically think that ISN'T harmful???

WTF is WRONG with you??????

Muhammad Rasheed - White people riot and destroy towns when their favorite sport teams win OR lose, but you want to come in here and lecture ME when I riot from the powder-keg frustration of actual EVIL inflicting upon me by YOUR people, yet you somehow believe your unsolicited insane opinion isn't harmful?

WTF is WRONG with you????

Clyde Mize - What do you mean,my people??STATED REPEATEDLY!!I am part of no group.You are are unfairly judgeing me because of the color of my skin,but thats ok because its you doing it.YOU ARE INSANE!!

Clyde Mize - Have a good day,although its impossible because your miserable thinking everybody is screwing me 24 hrs a day.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm judging you based solely on how you've been responding in this thread. It's dismissive and disrespectful, and unworthy of respect. And I only know ONE ethnic type that acts defensive whenever Blacks get mad at blatant racism discrepancies.

The insane is anyone that defensively protests -- like YOU are doing -- whenever the historically exploited/disenfranchised push back against the ideology of White Supremacist Racial Contract.

Brooklyn Symone - The black parents at the zoo were completely negligent and need to be held responsible for the murder of a innocent gorilla! The white people, they are from Nebraska, I'm sure all the lakes,rivers and water ways are safe to put your feet in on a warm night! Maybe,the parents thought these florida waters are the same as their hometown!

Muhammad Rasheed - This is extremely divisive and racist. You want to throw the book at the Black family for negligence, but coddle and make excuses for the White family for THEIR negligence.

Your post is of the specific type of evil opinion that breeds hatred, and you lack value here. Everything wrong with our society can be traced directly to the mindset in which you typed this insanity.

Presidential Material: Comparing Political Flaw

Gary McCoy –



Muhammad Rasheed - Those were all slave owners, right?

Oh, okay.

Gary McCoy - Not a single one put the country's security at risk by carelessly handling top-secret government information.

Mitchell Berger - Um, how do you think B Arnold got his secrets?

Gary McCoy - And it's more than a bit ironic that one of the men Benedict Arnold confided American secrets to, was name... "Clinton".

John Butler - John Adams? Not a slave owner, sorry.

Mitchell Berger - @Gary McCoy… His private server?

Muhammad Rasheed - How many slaves did Hillary own again?

Gary McCoy - I don't know... how many dependents are there on the welfare state?

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Did Hillary invent the "welfare state?"
2.) The New Deal excluded Blacks from taking part in the start of the "welfare state."
3.) Poor Whites that self-identify as Republicans TODAY make up the vast majority of people on the tiny "government assistance for the poor" part of the welfare pie.
4.) Wealthy corporations receive the vast majority of government free money welfare as legal stream of income.

How was your comment supposed to be answering my question? Because it seems like a ridiculous distraction from it.

Gary McCoy - My comment directly answered your question. Every single person shackled by dependency on government entitlements -- something the democrats preach, embrace, and foster to maintain their voting base, is a "slave" to that very government. PS. It doesn't matter whether Hillary "invented the welfare state". It's her, and every other democrat's bread and butter.



Muhammad Rasheed - How did your comment directly answer the question when "slave" is not synonymous with "dependent?"

Democrats believe in the economic safety net... whether the way they go about it is the best practice or not is up for debate. But since it is the poor White self-identifying Republicans that are eating up the bulk of that "bread and butter," what does that have to do with my question? All it shows is how hypocritical the GOP true believers are.

The idea that advocating for an economic safety net to keep the poorest Americans from starving to death is somehow worse than literally owning people in the evilest chattel slavery in history, makes this officially your worst thread to date. Take a bow.

Brian Fairrington - Bush 41 was far more qualified than Hillary was when he became Prez...

Rob Spitz - I don't like Hillary, but this meme makes no sense.

Made in the USA

Gary McCoy - Obama said this morning that yesterday's attack was due to "homegrown extremism". When was the U.S. annexed by the Middle-East?

Jeff Jacques - I'm sick and tired of him apologizing for them. They deserve none.

Rob Spitz - The guy was born and raised here.

Gary McCoy - He's not talking about the guy's birth certificate. He's talking about from where the dude got his brand of "extremism". And it sure as hell isn't America. Or do you think Princess Cruises don't stop in Syria because they're racists?

Rob Spitz - Hatred towards gays is in the media constantly. He could have easily been radicalized here. You think it's just a coincidence this happen right after gay marriage became legal and all the hype about transgenders?

Gary McCoy - You've got to be kidding me. So, opposition by some, to gay marriage caused this? The "hype" about transgenders is by people like myself, who don't want to see a voyeur who uses a fake "gender identity" to get into a ladies' restroom with my young niece or any other potential victim. The guy belonged to the same religion as the people who've actually been "KILLING" gays.

Horrific moment ISIS throw a man off the top of a building

Gary McCoy - Quit using the weak argument people who oppose gay marriage (I've never voiced an opinion on this), are equal to "hating gays". That's a pathetic, and intellectually lazy defense.

Mike Beckom - ...and your pal clay jones is expressing his disdain for conservatives who are today blaming radical islamic terrorism......supposedly for 'ignoring part of the problem'. not sure what the other part may be....but I'm sure, sooner or later, being that fount of superior knowledge that he is....clay will enlighten us.

Todd Schowalter - No shit.

Muhammad Rasheed - Gary, you are 100% wrong on this topic by every possible measure...

Here Are All The [non-Muslim] People Applauding The Orlando Gay Club Shooter

Gary McCoy - @Muhammad, I wish I was. But I'm not...  ISIL takes credit for mass shooting in Orlando

Chris Bassett - @Muhammad, Have you seen all of the condemnation for this on all outlets? Perhaps, you would like to "enlighten" us on what every possible measure means? Likely you do not even know how to use a ruler

Muhammad Rasheed - @Gary... This shooter was an American, born in NY, who was witnessed by friends and acquaintances engaged in a closeted gay lifestyle for years. When officials point blank asked his ex-wife if he was gay, she said that she didn't know, and confessed that he did have "gay tendencies." Meanwhile, when he would see homosexual couples being affectionate in public, he would have a rage fit about it, using typical "homophobic" slurs -- hypocritical behavior often demonstrated by vocal anti-gay Republican politicians who are later revealed to be secretly homosexual in a scandal.

Where he chose to channel this inner turmoil-rage, and whether the politically opportunistic ISIL claims fake credit for it or not, this is clearly a homegrown domestic terror event. It was an American that did it.

Chris Bassett - Muhammad you are real big on spouting b.s. without any proof. I am still waiting for your response for what does every possible measure means? What is your proof the ISIL is taking fake credit? Are you saying that U.S. citizens cannot be recruited for foreign causes? So I guess by your reasoning when Americans were spying for the soviets in the old days they were home grown. Have you heard about the 911 call the shooter made? You know they do not get more homophobic than ISIL right?

Muhammad Rasheed - It's not "my" reasoning, whoever you're supposed to be. It's the intelligence we've been trained on from the Threat Awareness & Reporting Program (TARP). Go away now.

Gary McCoy - @Muhammad, so when Obama uses anti-Constitutional conservative rhetoric, does that mean he's really a closet Reagonite? And what the hell are "homosexual tendencies?" I have a pink, long-sleeve button-down shirt I'm fond of. Does that mean I'll soon be craving skinny jeans?

The dude was "homegrown", only in the geographical sense. He pledged allegiance to the "Islamic" state before his massacre. Where are they based, Boise? Kinda hard to pin this one on conservative Christian Americans.

Chris Bassett - Once again Muhammad B.S has spoken.On my way leaving I decided to google TARP. Muhammad you can read the whole pdf. How does TARP training qualify you to assess if a
Terrorist org claims credit to determine if it is fake?

Muhammad Rasheed - Gary McCoy wrote: “@Muhammad, so when Obama uses anti-Constitutional conservative rhetoric…”

Give me an example so that we are on the same page regarding the reference.

Gary McCoy wrote: “…does that mean he's really a closet Reagonite?”

The President is a well-known Moderate, and has put in place items that support our capitalist tradition. The far left have been infamously critical of this, so if he demonstrates some traits that remind you of past conservatives, this is no accident nor illusion.

Gary McCoy wrote: “And what the hell are ‘homosexual tendencies?’"

Well, in context they would come in two forms:

1) His first marriage didn’t last 4 months, and his ex-wife (from whom the quote came) literally couldn’t definitively say whether he was a homosexual or not. Considering the nature of the marriage relationship, when a wife says such a thing I will assume she means in ways that only a very intimate partner would be privy to.

2) Other friends, police academy classmates, co-workers, etc., admitted that since at least 2006 he frequented gay clubs, made sexual passes to male friends that he knew were gay, danced with gay males in gay clubs, used a gay dating app called “Jack’d.”

Gary McCoy wrote: “The dude was ‘homegrown,’ only in the geographical sense. He pledged allegiance to the ‘Islamic’ state before his massacre. Where are they based, Boise?”

Where he decided to focus/pin his personal frustrations and rage upon was just a symptom that these very American, homegrown shooters often do… Dylan Roof, Seung-Hui Cho, Adam Lanza, all operated from the same template. Whatever radicalized ideological lens they later decided to focus their personal neuroses through was irrelevant, since it had nothing to do with the actual root cause of what was really going on with them.

Gary McCoy wrote: “Kinda hard to pin this one on conservative Christian Americans.”

Nor would I try as that would mean I was distracted by your strawman argument (I am not). What conservative Christian Americans ARE doing wrong however, is trying to pin this incident upon “Islam” while conspicuously ignoring all of the conservative Christian American shooters who did the exact same things… pinning them on whatever radicalized ideologies those shooters claimed to drive them. This “Bassett” person mouthing off in the post directly above – who’s been following behind me like a puppy, nipping at my heels – claims to have found the TARP training in a pdf. I doubt it, but on the off chance that this isn’t more of his proud, continuous stream of willfully ignorant nonsense, try to secure it for yourself, Gary, and find the portion where it explains the profile traits that actually causes an individual to become radicalized into performing acts of terror, espionage, sedition, etc. This ISN’T about Islam, it’s about the individual and his personal mental issues, that are clear as a blaring noise and available in the public record at this point. To continue to insist that it’s about religion is to ignore the facts in favor of deliberate divisive hate of the kind you only pretend to be against. Wake up, step out of your partisan-prejudiced comfort zone, and practice critical thinking for once.

Gary McCoy - @Muhammad, I have deadlines, so I'll be brief. But in the meantime... look -- I found a story of men from the "non-Islamic" Islamic State fighters, who are obviously conflicted homosexuals themselves, distraught over their self-torturous identities, tossing gays off buildings. Gee, what's the common denominator here?.... Oh yeah, radical Islamists killing homosexuals.

Correction: conservative Christian Americans are NOT pinning this on "Islam", but on "radical Islam". I'll admit there's a difference.

The key difference between the American shooters you listed, and Mr. Mateen, is that whatever perverted ideology the former followed, it wasn't rooted in their religion. For instance, there are no followers of Christianity routinely tossing gays from rooftops.

Muhammad Rasheed - To date, this has to be your MOST intellectually dishonest post. Or you genuinely just don't "get it."

To play your game briefly before we go back to the actual root cause of these events, are you going to honestly tell me that the religion of Christianity is pro-homosexual? That the WELL documented, centuries long, anti-gay tradition in conservative America ISN'T coming from a religious ideological base? Did you REALLY just claim that?

I'll give you a moment to take that point back before I beat you up in front of your friends & family.

You just lost your mind...  lol

Gary McCoy - Yes, fundamentalist Christians may not agree with the gay lifestyle. I'm not one who judges are pries into people's bedrooms. But do you honestly want to do a body count of gays killed by Christians and those killed by Muslims in the last, say, fifty years? Sorry, that sound is me cracking my knuckles.

Muhammad Rasheed - You said that the anti-gay violence demonstrated by the other American shooters WASN'T embedded within their religion. That's clear crazy talk. Comparing the body counts of our respective radicalized crazies is irrelevant; the real test of your claim is what each of our 'Word of God' source texts say regarding treatment of the homosexual... that's how we determine what they do is actually embedded or not. Crack your knuckles over that, Mr. Strawman.

Jeremy Genin - LOL

Gary McCoy - Correction: I did NOT say that "...the anti-gay violence demonstrated by the other American shooters WASN'T embedded within their religion." I said,"...whatever perverted ideology the former (Dylan Roof, Seung-Hui Cho, Adam Lanza) followed , it wasn't rooted in their religion. You mangled my words worse than Obama does the Constitution.

After foolishly trying to hang the Orlando tragedy on some American-born ideological snafu, I correctly educate you to its roots in radical Islam. When things got down to hard numbers of gays killed by Christian versus Muslims, you suddenly can't find your cipherin' cap.

In regard to your challenge on my faith's teaching on homosexuals versus yours, any Christian knows that the New Testament is the final word of God, having to do with Jesus Christ - the Savior and foundation of Christianity. And it's from there that the ultimate word on how gays and everyone else are to be treated, when Jesus said: "Love one another. As I have loved you, so also you must love one another." So stay in the A.D., unless you want to defend every word the Quran says about homosexuals.

Muhammad Rasheed - Gary McCoy wrote: “You mangled my words worse than Obama does the Constitution.”

lol I didn’t mangle anything, you just decided to play slippery-slick. I summed your comment up that way because you pointedly used anti-gay violence in your “for instance” example of the other American shooters… despite those killings being tied to other reasons. I was continuing the train of thought from your own example, which ridiculously implied that the routine killing of homosexuals didn’t have links to direct biblical commands.

Gary McCoy wrote: “After foolishly trying to hang the Orlando tragedy on some American-born ideological snafu, I correctly educate you to its roots in radical Islam.”

You’re being ridiculous again. You would have been better off accepting my advice to seek out that Bassett character’s (albeit probably fictional) pdf of the TARP training from USG Intelligence. There are identified clear traits that will lead to someone becoming radicalized, and the “roots” do not start with the ideology itself. Lots of people subscribe to extreme ideologies of various types across the country, but only very specific types of individuals “go postal” within those groups.

Gary McCoy wrote: “When things got down to hard numbers of gays killed by Christian versus Muslims, you suddenly can't find your cipherin' cap.”

The “hard numbers” you wanted to focus on had zero to do with your actual claim. You claimed that the radical ideologies they killed under weren’t rooted in their religion. The actual hard numbers would be the number of references within their religious source texts that proved that the radical version of the religion DID have roots in the mainstream religion. Those are the real metrics that back up your claim.

Gary McCoy wrote: “In regard to your challenge on my faith's teaching on homosexuals versus yours, any Christian knows…”

I ain’t a Christian, chief, just as you ain’t a Muslim. In this post you are actually pulling your ‘doctrinal expert’ card to carefully explain to me that the Christian believes XYZ about their sacred texts, therefore whatever I believe about it is wrong, and that I should listen to your opinion of the matter because it’s your religion and you know best about it. In all seriousness, do you recognize your blatant attempt to actually switch roles with me in our religious debate? If I go down that road with you it will officially set the precedent for how I expect you to act when I’m carefully explaining that “ABC isn’t Islam.”

Do you choose to go forward? Yes or no?

Gary McCoy wrote: “So stay in the A.D., unless you want to defend every word the Quran says about homosexuals.”

That’s EXACTLY what I want to do, and the whole point in correcting what the actual “hard number” metrics will look like for your claim. En garde.

Artifacts of the Black Superheroes

Long ago, mighty beings convened in a special place set aside to collect the tropes, paraphernalia, costumes, and powers of the people of African descent -- a Museum of Black Superheroes, if you will -- in which they engaged in truly epic HeroTalk.

They discussed the past, possible futures, solutions to time-honored problems, laughed, cried, fought, celebrated, roasted, lurked, posted, bickered, fellowshipped, collaborated, and produced wonderful and inspiring Black Art. It was a truly great time, a personal Golden Age of the Internet for me, and I considered myself blessed to be a member. This sacred Hall of Black Justice was my online homeroom.

But alas, the group broke up and each of the Black Superheroes went their separate ways. With great powers came great egos, and a sufficient amount of petty bickering eventually proving too heavy to bear, caused the Curator to bolt the doors shut on the fabled HeroTalk Conference Forums. The halls are now coldly silent to those curious lurkers who peek in today. The mighty voices are now spread throughout the Social Media-verse.

**************************

Muhammad Rasheed - I cut my teeth on my argument style in those days. When you see me quote something from a debate opponent before I respond, or breakdown their post in multi-quotes, commenting under each section in kind, it is only a nostalgic hold over from the use of the message board quote response option:

                                     
I got used to it as an argument tool, and now rely upon it to help me keep track of exactly what and to whom I'm responding. Today, in other social media sites, I just copy/paste what the opponent is saying (Abdur Rasheed wrote: "Who left that thing on the shelf? Stop it!") and respond under it like I was still in a classic message board forum. Sometimes it bugs the person I'm in the discussion with, who often tries to read something more into it, but I don't care. I do it for me not for them, and usually just advise them to get over it if I feel like responding to their gripe at all.

Most importantly I learned to value a good, rich dialogue to flesh out ideas, and challenge long-held opinions, that often were forced to evolve because they didn't hold up under the scrutiny of my Black Superhero peers. A candid & courageous discussion, with as many game contributors as possible, is vital to learning a difficult subject.

I've learned from my time walking among the Black Superheroes that a sure sign of a weak intellect, is the practice of hiding from those who challenge what they think about a given topic. I WILL challenge your claims... both for you and for me. If you know what you are talking about on a topic I'm interested in, then I want to learn from the expert. If you make a claim, then I WILL push back to test your mettle; to test the strength of your argument. If you cower and run? Then you are a fake. If you say such items as "I WOULD sit and argue this subject that I know SOOOO much about, but you aren't worth my time" then you are a fake. If I ask you to explain a point you made and you get mad and block me? You are a fake.

The true top intellects never have a problem discussing what they know, and fielding questions that probe into the depths of their knowledge. That's a big part of how they got to where they are, and achieved their levels of expertise.

Don't be a coward. Stand and trade and prove that you are what you claim to be. Or don't and prove yourself a fake-ass and a villain. It is all one to me.

“The great outline of research comes to light best in dialog.” ~Otto Toeplitz, mathematician (1 Aug 1881 – 15 Feb 1940)


See Also:  Coming to the Stage

HeroTalk: Master Spy Files

Delusions of the Conscious

Clifton Hatchett -


Bartholemew Powers - Truth!

Digga Smith - Sound about right to me..

Aisha Stillme Rogers - I agree!

Donnell Leigh - So true

Steven Slink Everett - I do this at work with church folks all day...and end it with you can believe what u want to believe...but here some facts for ya though

Jim Dyar - eh. for most people. i find that religion is the one thing that has kept my dark side in check. better for everyone that way

Muhammad Rasheed - In my experience, it's the people who are so SURE that religion/spirit/God are fiction who do all of the ducking, intellectual dishonesty, and blind faith assertions. They appear to hate logic/reason actually, and see only the narrow-minded box of their Goldless pet ideologies.

Clifton Hatchett - Typically it's my experience that the faithful condemn you as a Godless heathen if you do not subscribe to a specified ideology.
It's as though a self-righteous piety envelopes the mentality of the devotee.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol The whole point of the meme is condemnation of the religious because they won't accept the narrow-minded and skewed versions of logic & reason proselytized by the so-called "conscious."

A heathen is one who decides not to believe in the One God. Logic dictates that if that label offends, then one should then believe in the One God so that the heathen status will change.

Muhammad Rasheed - How is posting this meme not an act of self-righteous condemnation from the POV of a specified (the "conscious" movement) ideology?

In fact, it seems like the true reason there is no resolve when the two opposing groups butt heads, is because the "conscious" can't recognize their own hypocrisy and double-talk. O_O

Digga Smith - I think it goes both ways as far as the hypocrisy when the 2 talk..neither of the other wants to listen fareal or "believe" the other's ideology or faith..

Clifton Hatchett - So that's what you got for this morning?
"You too."
Com'on man.
Typically it's my GOD, my Prophet, and that's it.
Pascal's wager.

How is it not an act of self righteousness?
When it's an honest observation.

Muhammad Rasheed - I believe in all the prophets. It's a major Pillar of my faith. I don't believe in the concept of "my God versus your God," since there is only One God. My God and your God are One.

By definition, self-righteousness is a feeling or display that one's beliefs or actions are better than the average person, and that very concept is dripping in that meme... especially since the very term "conscious" defines the concept even more than "the faithful." lol

"Honesty" when demonstrated by a subjective mindset, doesn't represent "truth." It represents tacky bluntness with no filter. Truth is objective. A self-blind hypocrite -- the inability to see oneself demonstrate the very traits one condemns in others -- will never be able to speak a useful objective truth.

Clifton Hatchett - "My GOD, and your GOD are One."
Excellent.
Is this thought synonymous with your faith, or is this your personal view?

Muhammad Rasheed - lol Both. That's why I believe it, crazy.

Clifton Hatchett - A reference for people to see?
ONE GOD?

Muhammad Rasheed - What do you mean? You want the verse quote citation address?

Muhammad Rasheed -

The Holy Qur'an 29:46-49
And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better than mere disputation, unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong and injury: but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow in Islam." 
And thus it is that We have sent down the Book to thee. So the People of the Book believe therein, as also do some of these pagan Arabs: and none but Unbelievers reject our signs. 
And thou wast not able to recite a Book before this Book came, nor art thou able to transcribe it with thy right hand: In that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted. 
Nay, here are Signs self-evident in the hearts of those endowed with knowledge: and none but the unjust reject Our Signs.

Clifton Hatchett - Thank you.