Hillary Clinton is Seriously Dangerous

[Iamwhomiam]

I don't want my neighborhood full of men that treat women like second rate defective goods and your virtue signaling doesn't change my mind or make me feel ashamed to say it.

Me neither, btia! But I've never had the good fortune to have lived in such a neighborhood.

Any apartments available in your la-la-land neighborhood?

~~~~~~~~~

Nordic, what's been deleted?

[mentalgongfu2]

Iam, the deleted is post is something btia said back on page 67. Although btia later deleted the post after a few hours, Rory quoted it on page 68.

Unless I'm missing something and he's referring to some other deleted post.

[JackRiddler]

Untitled.png

[Wombaticus Rex]

Last three posts have me laughing in the kitchen; interesting times indeed.

Sorry to see RI fracturing into safe spaces but there's a lot of cognitive dissonance here, patrolling these threads to the limited extent I can read everything. I get it, if certain opinions are too much, the option to tune 'em out is there.

So what disappeared? BTIA posted a long, photo-enhanced and very vivid 5 am rant to SLAD which was...well, he deleted it. That says a lot to me.

I did give the gentleman in question a month off. It's not about "Islamophobia," because I don't think that can be allowed to become a thought-stopper here. Let's keep Islam just as much of a pinata as Christianity and Judaism -- fuck their gods.

It is about lecturing women, crudely. I was very tempted -- and perhaps too hesitant -- to ban the gentleman in question. Especially since my personal rubric for such decisions is my past 5 years on public transportation as commute. "Would I tolerate this directed to a woman on the bus, or would I have this gentleman by the collar about seven sentences in?"

As ever, anyone with more than a week off is being given the most explicit form of feedback possible here at RI.

[American Dream]

Islamophobia shouldn't really be considered as synonymous with a critique of the religious institutions empowered by the power structure that dominates our lives.

Defining "Islamophobia"

The term "Islamophobia" was first introduced as a concept in a 1991 Runnymede Trust Report and defined as "unfounded hostility towards Muslims, and therefore fear or dislike of all or most Muslims." The term was coined in the context of Muslims in the UK in particular and Europe in general, and formulated based on the more common "xenophobia" framework.

The report pointed to prevailing attitudes that incorporate the following beliefs:

Islam is monolithic and cannot adapt to new realities
Islam does not share common values with other major faiths
Islam as a religion is inferior to the West.
It is archaic, barbaric, and irrational.
Islam is a religion of violence and supports terrorism.
Islam is a violent political ideology.

For the purposes of anchoring the current research and documentation project, we provide the following working definition:

Islamophobia is a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure. It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic, political, social and cultural relations, while rationalizing the necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve "civilizational rehab" of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise). Islamophobia reintroduces and reaffirms a global racial structure through which resource distribution disparities are maintained and extended.

http://crg.berkeley.edu/content/islamop ... lamophobia

[Iamwhomiam]

mentalgongfu2, thank you. That post.

[tapitsbo]

The Runnymede Trust's founders' bios (quoted in this post) list at least one of them as an upper-class British intelligence officer. So this must not be the hidden hand 8bitagent was talking about.

Eliot Joseph Benn 'Jim' Rose (7 June 1909 – 21 May 1999) was a British intelligence officer, journalist and campaigner.

Born into an "elite" Jewish family,[1] Rose was educated at Rugby School and New College, Oxford.

During World War II, he served with the Royal Air Force as an intelligence officer with 609 squadron. In 1941 he moved to the Government Code and Cypher School at Bletchley Park where he assessed decrypted messages sent by the German Luftwaffe. In 1944 he transferred to London to where he worked on coordination with the Air Ministry. He retired from the RAF in 1945 with the rank of Wing Commander, and took a job as a journalist with Reuters.

From 1948 to 1951, Rose was literary editor of the Observer.

In 1951, he moved to Zürich, Switzerland, to become director of the newly formed International Press Institute.

Rose returned to England in 1962 to become director of Survey of Race Relations, a five-year study into post-war immigration in Britain. The study was published in 1969 as Colour and Citizenship. In 1968, he co-founded the think-tank, the Runnymede Trust with politician Anthony Lester.

Anthony Paul Lester, Baron Lester of Herne Hill, QC (born 3 July 1936) is a British barrister and politician, sitting in the House of Lords as a Liberal Democrat.

Born into a Jewish family,[1] he was educated at the City of London School, and then studied history and law at Trinity College, Cambridge, and Harvard Law School. In the 1960s and 1970s Lester was directly involved with the drafting of race relations legislation in Britain. During these periods, he acted as the chair of the legal subcommittee of the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination (C.A.R.D.) and was a member of several organizations working for racial equality such as the Society of Labour Lawyers, Fabian Society, Council of the Institute of Race Relations, British Overseas Socialist Fellowship and the National Committee for Commonwealth Immigrants.[2] In 1968, he co-founded the Runnymede Trust left-wing think-tank with Jim Rose. He was a special advisor to Roy Jenkins at the Home Office in the 1970s, and moved with Jenkins from the Labour Party to found the SDP in 1981. He was Chairman of the Runnymede Trust from 1991 to 1993.

He was created Baron Lester of Herne Hill, of Herne Hill in the London Borough of Southwark on 13 October 1993.[3] As a barrister he works from Blackstone Chambers. He was appointed Adjunct Professor of the Faculty of Law at University College Cork (Ireland) in 2005.

On 29 June 2007, Lord Lester was appointed by Prime Minister Gordon Brown as a special advisor on constitutional reform to the Secretary of State for Justice.[4] He is a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights.

Lester is a patron of the Family Planning Association, previously called the National Birth Control Committee. He represented the FPA in a contentious case in Northern Ireland where it was widely claimed that the FPA were trying to use strategic litigation to introduce liberalised abortion laws into the country.

Just a hand, offering us a particular take. No surprise it would be adopted over in Berkeley. I'm grateful for the opportunity to learn this history.

What are we supposed to believe IS the hidden hand, though, alluded to in 8bit's analysis?

[OP ED]

Islamaphobia is definitely a real concern. A tool of power structures. I personally find all hierarchical religious expression abhorrent so I probably have some of those tendencies myself. I have an reflexive response to all outward expression of theological submission that borders on phobia, to the extent that I go out of my way to avoid contexts wherein overt religiosity exists. And not just because I can't shape shift proper on hallowed ground.

That said, some of the more blatant fear mongery wrt Islam is hypocritical at best for the disproportionately believing American public and should be ostracized like plagued rats. Most of the stupid things Islam practices are ideas they stole from Jews and Christians and are merely less backslidden in directly applying them. Generally oppressing women chief among these applications.

Wombat, I would caution against using direct violence to disrupt implied violence during public transportation if only due to the obvious presence of witnesses. There are other reasons but I don't take moralism seriously so we needn't concern ourselves with these.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Wombat, I would caution against using direct violence to disrupt implied violence during public transportation if only due to the obvious presence of witnesses. There are other reasons but I don't take moralism seriously so we needn't concern ourselves with these.

I appreciate the concern, but it's really been a hobby of mine (starting fights more than chivalry) for years now and never been an issue yet. LEOs watch the footage and I walk home. I live in the woods now so those days are behind me anyway, public transportation can get back to their daily rituals of feigned inattention and total cowardice.

[OP ED]

I guess I understand that. When I was a bit younger I used to wear dresses and combat boots to public spaces with the express interest of being harassed so I would have an excuse to beat someone into unconsciousness. I eventually found better ways for venting my aggression. Drugs helped too.

[82_28]

I know nobody wants to hear from me but I've never ever in my life struck anyone in anger. Sorry, just had to bring that up since this has now veered here somehow. But yeah, no fights ever. I would just warn people, you don't want to do this. They back off, we shake hands and that's the end of it. The closest I ever got was throwing a kid across a yard because he was picking on my brother. I just picked him up off the ground and said don't fuck with my brother any more. Thanks. Anyhoo. Back to the Clinton shit.

[8bitagent]

I know nobody wants to hear from me but I've never ever in my life struck anyone in anger. Sorry, just had to bring that up since this has now veered here somehow. But yeah, no fights ever. I would just warn people, you don't want to do this. They back off, we shake hands and that's the end of it. The closest I ever got was throwing a kid across a yard because he was picking on my brother. I just picked him up off the ground and said don't fuck with my brother any more. Thanks. Anyhoo. Back to the Clinton shit.

I'm with you. I hate violence, especially in the macho hur dur dur lets-go-some proving ground way. Be it sports bars in Boston or the streets of inner city South Chicago. I aint no emasculated SJW, but
the testosterone fueled violence in America is beyond retarded.

[kool maudit]

I was over in Rosengård the other day (Malmö). As far as the freedom of women goes, sorry but there is a bit of a hit compared to, say, central Copenhagen just over the bridge. The norms there are not... I mean, it's not ISIS or whatever. But it's like working-class Cairo (if working-class Cairo were a pocket of southern Sweden with friction along the edges of the improbable circumstance).

This is a departure from the norms of areas inhabited mainly by ethnic Swedes and you do notice it. Not that this act of noticing should legitimise bigotry against Muslims or people from the Middle East/Maghreb in general, but the right has a point with this. It's not nothing.

[tapitsbo]

I met a couple from Malmö (ethnically Swedish and English) a few months ago and they told me Sweden is run by fascist xenophobic Nazis.

Perceptions are interesting.

It's also interesting that "freedom of women" of the Ontario/Sweden kind is hated and mocked by leftists, rightists, feminists, and beyond and not exactly envied by women around the planet, at least not in any sort of simple way.

The right and left seem to agree and have a point with how that culture naturally should tend to cede ground to one that is very different and some would say less maladaptive and misguidedly engineered (purposefully dismantled?)

Clinton the Saudi funded feminist is a nice totem for these anxieties/disagreements though.

[kool maudit]

I met a couple from Malmö (ethnically Swedish and English) a few months ago and they told me Sweden is run by fascist xenophobic Nazis.

Perceptions are interesting.

It's also interesting that "freedom of women" of the Ontario/Sweden kind is hated and mocked by leftists, rightists, feminists, and beyond and not exactly envied by women around the planet, at least not in any sort of simple way.

The right and left seem to agree and have a point with how that culture naturally should tend to cede ground to one that is very different and some would say less maladaptive and misguidedly engineered (purposefully dismantled?)

Clinton the Saudi funded feminist is a nice totem for these anxieties/disagreements though.

There is an ascendant far right in Sweden as well as a progressive consensus. It's complicated. Rosengård does generally have the sexual street-norms of outer Cairo, somewhere between Tirana and the Gulf cities. You can feel that. Whatever the rest, Scandinavian women have long been more independent than many of their northern and middle European counterparts, forgetting even the Mediterranean and North African situations for a second. The Norse laws were interesting in this regard. It's an old thing up here to a degree, more so than the generally post-60s thing of even Canada. It's pretty baked in to how people comport and carry themselves.