Another one that hurts

You're right, I got my signals crossed jumping between the different Islamic threads and misinterpreted what Tangle was saying. Sorry. If I skip back to my post from a couple days ago I can see the thread of logic I was originally following.I guess I should try to clear up any confusion I may have caused. Tangle earlier seemed to be arguing that the Islam followed by immigrants was in need of reform, which I disagree with. He later argued that greater assimilation of Islamic immigrants was necessary, that past efforts have been a failure, but I can only agree with some of this. I don't think there's evidence that ethnic or religious conclaves are bad.--Percy

Hi Tangle,I mostly agree with your last two posts. Immigrants must follow local laws (I assume that all countries have forms that immigrants must sign stating that they agree to follow local laws). That seems to me a given.But forcing a religious community to give up some religious beliefs *can* cause enduring problems. Here in the US the federal government pressured the Mormons to forswear polygamy back in the late 1800's, yet some Mormon sects continue the practice right up to today, most famously the fundamentalist Mormon sect led by Warren Jeffs which suffered mass arrests under suspicion of child abuse, primarily sexual contact with minors. I wasn't sure what you meant by 'cultural' crimes until you mentioned FGM. Sure, agreed. Yeah, this is a tough one. Immigrant Imams sign the same immigration forms as all other immigrants, but proving that they're urging law-breaking practices so they can be deported is likely very difficult.--Percy

I'm less interested in the respect issue than in whether hate speech constitutes a crime. I'm only familiar with US law, and of course you're both in Britain, so my comments may not be relevant to you, Modulous and Tangle. Much hate speech is protected in the US, but there are limits. Probably "homosexuals are evil" is protected, while "homosexuals should be thrown off buildings" may not be. The latter might "incite an immediate breach of the peace" (Supreme Court, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572 (1942)). If the breach isn't immediate it might be considered conspiracy if some followers interpret instructions in a sermon as orders to commit a crime.--Percy

People dying anywhere around the world in any numbers large or small seem like they should be a concern to everyone everywhere. Some are within our power to do something to some degree, some aren't. Some threaten us to some degree, some don't. Where there *is* something we can do we have to marshal our resources carefully, for they are not infinite. Where we do nothing or have done nothing doesn't mean we don't or shouldn't care.So your opinion, if I understand it, surprises me a great deal. Am I correct in interpreting you as saying you don't think the terrorist acts in Paris merit concern and action?--Percy

Okay, now this adds a nuance. You do see the Paris terrorist attacks as a concern and a problem that deserves action, but you think think the problem is the exploitation of fear in ways that erode freedom and cost a great deal. I agree, but I think prevention of further terrorist acts also deserves a great deal of attention.My own sentiments are against bombing ISIS back to the stone age, but some of the military actions against ISIS make a lot of sense to me. I've found it puzzling that ISIS has so quickly and effectively projected their terrorism around the world, and I learned a couple weeks ago that ISIS has oil income of around $500 million a year, perhaps explaining their rapid rise and ability to project their power and influence so widely. Given this, the recent attacks against their oil transportation system seems a good idea, as do many things that could hurt their ability to carry out terrorist attacks and recruit western support.But in the long term I still think the solution requires solving the Middle East problem, as impossible as that sounds. I'm not saying I know the solution, just that without a solution the problem will persist, that unrest and death and destruction will continue to pour out of that region.--Percy

I don't think Tangle was using personal attacks as a tactic to disguise a lack of knowledge and insight. I know two isn't a statistically valid sample, but it's twice as good as one, and I had pretty much the same interpretation of what you were saying earlier as Tangle. I found it shocking and heartless when you said that there have been huge numbers of deaths over the course of human history, and that the death and destruction in Paris wasn't a problem. It turns out you had a larger and more complex point, but you chose a way of introducing it that painted you as uncaring, even crossing the border well into the inhumane. I'm not trying to attack you, just explaining, because you don't seem aware of how that post (Message 306) came across to at least some people.In this post you've added another nuance I wasn't aware of, that you *are* apparently in favor of action in against ISIS, but you think the details of how to effectively carry it out, given the interplay of factions and sects, are very involved and complex.--Percy

Hi Modulous,I don't want to get into a back and forth with you. I was just trying to help discussion along by describing how some of your posts look to others, that it wasn't just Tangle but me, too, and also, apparently, Capt Stormfield. You can argue all you want that they don't, but they do. Trying to make people's natural reaction to such posts their fault only makes it worse.--Percy

I wasn't commenting on Modulous's views in that post and the one before. You can find such comments in my other posts. I think I understand what Modulous thinks is his foundational point.But as you note yourself, Modulous has chosen a particularly provocative and offensive way of saying it. Modulous thinks Tangle is attacking him, and I was just trying to explain to Modulous why I don't think he is. That such views are repugnant is something that multiple people have noted now. People cannot be blamed for expressing their natural reactions to statements that boil down to, "The Paris murders of 130 people by terrorists aren't a problem."--Percy

Hi Modulous,As this thread's originator I have a natural wish that it keep to a constructive path, but as a participant I have little power to do that, so I sought to explain what I thought was being missed. I wasn't trying to play the blame game, which never ends well. I was just trying to suggest that making your points in the way you did would naturally draw the types of responses you received.I do think that simple humanity demands a great deal of concern about any deaths anywhere anytime. Our power to do anything will naturally vary widely, and sometimes there will be difficult choices about this many deaths of this people versus that many deaths of that people, but a blas response to human death is difficult to both fathom and accept.I agree that western entry into the Middle East caused many problems, but a withdrawal now won't solve them. Once you poke a hole in a piece of paper, withdrawing the piercing instrument doesn't fix the hole.--Percy

No big solutions, no. I do believe that removing dictators/fascists/whatever creates power vacuums that are highly destabilizing, e.g., Yugoslavia after Tito and Iraq after Sadaam. In other words, if you think the dictator was bad, wait'll you see what comes after his fall. I think Asad has to stay.And I do like the idea of cutting off ISIS's sources of income. That rebel groups in places like Libya, Mali and Nigeria are pledging allegiance to ISIS, and that terrorists are increasingly taking their commands from ISIS, can't be because ISIS's brand of Islam is so attractive. It's because ISIS has money. My opinion, anyway.--Percy

Yes, it's messy. My only point was that history tells us that outsiders removing dictators makes things messier. I used Tito as an example earlier, but to argue against my own point there's a counterexample in Franco. He rose to power through civil war, but after his death a democracy reemerged in Spain. And then there's Ceaușescu in Romania. After his execution a democracy emerged there, too. So the argument that Asad should stay is maybe not as strong as I originally thought. Not really. I'm mainly just noting that the more the west screws around with the Middle East the more screwed up it becomes.--Percy

Your point isn't clear to me. Are you rebutting Tangle's argument that some culture's *are* morally better than others by arguing that the west is no better than ISIS? Or Tangle's argument that people naturally care most about those most like themselves? Or are you just going after Tangle? Brits in general?--Percy

If there's an entire island of sociopathic people off the north coast of France who support war criminals, and if there are racist members of this bulletin board, could we maybe take those discussions and accusations elsewhere? Like to another board entirely?In other words, could we maybe raise the tenor of discussion?--Percy

Okay, sure. We should probably just leave it at that.--Percy

Removing my words from the context of the post and of the exchanges between you and Tangle communicates a strong misimpression. I'm just a participant in this conversation, so ignore my laments about the tenor of discussion if you wish, but if you're going to quote me then at least do a good enough job to let people understand my true point.--Percy