As far as I understand, there are some certain 'sides' one should take to post in this forum. This is obvious to any new eye like mine, who doesn't have any history with members, mods, admins or anyone related to it. It's obvious that no one can post without getting labeled, if they disagree with anything related American policy. According to my observation, this is openly supported by mods, pointing out members as 'issues' and their opinions as 'trolling'. I can't even reply a simple thread, elaborate something I wrote and misunderstood, because it's closed just like that for no apparent reason than disagreement. All the closed threads are the threads started or replied by the minority of people who happened to disagree with American thought or policy. On the other hand, I've coincided a thread started by a declaration of love of the deadliest virus ever faced by human race, because it kills the group of people the poster hates. Written in an expression of pleaded sympathy, because 'he is honest and can't help it'. And disgustingly sarcastic remarks like 'nuke the am all' and the sort, flying around without any disapproval or sanction. But if somebody points out a very simple fact that Israel is America's ally and because of this, no opinion of supporting the side, or the right of existance of Palestinians would be accepted in this forum, I am trolling. Is that right? If it is so, why don't you put that in the rules. At least that would be honest and straight. People mostly chose to be a member of forums like SciForums, because they are supposed to be the only places among the others to discuss about these subjects. I am one of the anti-Americans, now aren't I? I am not an anti-anything. I am only an anti-fascist. I was born in the center of between the West and the Middle East, and I can look both sides from outside. I'll be straight. Do I have to chose a side, if I enjoy to be a member of this forum? Please be straight answering that.
I'll try to be fair, but being an obvious liberal I can only see the liberal point of view so you will have to forgive any conclusions I present that turn out to be errorneous because of my bias against right wing or extreme illiberal views. I think the fact that my first ban on this forum just happened 15 days ago after over 60k posts [the highest on this forum] is an indication of how far I am tolerated on this forum. The fact that the usual rules of one, three and seven day bans for repeated offences were skipped and I was banned for fourteen days [with a currently outstanding threat of a one month ban followed by a permaban given today] is an indication that the tolerance for my "radical" views has been wearing thin for some time and it was necessary to underline that fact. Yes, you have to be "sensitive" to western views, yes you have to be "sensitive" to a conditioning towards "criticism of Jews" and you will be called a bigot, an anti-western and an anti-American for daring to suggest that people outside the pale are also human beings and should be treated in the same way as one would treat their own citizens. See for example, this thread on the war on terror and how it is being treated for attemoting to draw an equivalence between American civilians and those who have been victimised by the War on Terror Certain admins and occasionally a mod or two [not to mention extremists on all sides of the specturm] will stalk you once your egalitarianism is known and attempt to paint your views as radical for daring to not conform to the format of political correctness they have defined as acceptable parameters of discussion. I have tried various ways to highlight my frustrations [which is one of the reasons for the 60k posts, most of them are exercises in futility repeating the same themes ad nauseum]. For example, I have substituted atheists for theists to highlight my outrage at the treatment of people who have beliefs that do not conform to what is defined as "rational thinking" by the pro-active atheists here. I have substituted westerners or white people for Arabs, Muslims, "Palestinians" [in quotes] to express how the other side sees these arguments made in the name of freedom of expression. I have also addressed the curious phenomenon of the protectionism accorded Jewish exceptionalism and Zionist racism by attempting to describe Jews as similar to other people in history. Moreover, I have done all of the above using ONLY scientific/atheist, white, western or Jewish sources, depending on the theme I was addressing. And I have used ONLY those arguments which were being used against the groups that were targeted and I have ALWAYS described my intentions and motivations when asked. Hence I am now a confirmed anti-white, anti-American, anti-atheist, anti-semitic "hater" who is incapable of seeing the big picture. I guess I should applaud myself at my success in at least attaining the accolades I wished to convey in my little drama, even if the lights never did come on and its almost time for the curtains to come down. Anyway, if I disappear suddenly, rest assured that it will be with a sense of bemusement at the blindness of prejudice and the righteousness of ignorance. I did have a lot of fun along the way and there are many, many good people here who do "get it". So don't be discouraged by the trolls, even if they do wield their authority irrationally and with their own biases firmly in place. I have to admire their fortitude since my own opinionated, argumentative and exhaustive "crusade" has not been without its own casualties on the forum. I really liked your post in Iraq war thread and I hope you don't lose too many of your illusions here. Best of luck.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, I meant that it's obvious, if you are not supporting a certain side, you are being bashed as a troll.
S.A.M., I completely understand what you mean. I wish there was enough time to elaborate my post. I couldn't reply to the thread as it was closed. I am sorry that you are permenantly banned. If people want brain masturbating, you or me (I am sure we would also be disagreeing if we had a chance to discuss,lol and that's important in a good way ) or anyone talking smoothly or harshly can't do anything unless they support their views. Farewell. Good luck to you too,lol. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Geez hon, at least wait till they perma ban me! [you'll see a "banned" under my name when that happens] Glad to see another person to add to the minority here who can say what they think without worrying about how it sounds.
Lol. Well a little drama wouldn't hurt anyone. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Well, they will ignore my posts anyway. Mostly because of where I am. I can already feel that. If I was from Europe, that would be different of course. But then I would be 'politically correct' and there wouldn't be anything to discuss. Or I would be French, lol. Isn't it tragic. Anyway, anything's better than finding yourself in a "I love AIDS, because it kills people I hate" thread. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I could tell you're not from Europe or French, it was obvious from your ability to see things in a way I am accustomed to considering as the normal view of humans. Don't worry its not bad as it seems. Why you might even start appreciating threads like "I love AIDS, because it kills people I hate" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I don't know. Depends on what I am talking about. I am an art historian, when we refer to the Byzantine period, we use Constantinopolis. What does 'Constantinople' means exactly, I have no idea. Modified form in English? But if you mean using the old name to provoke turkish people, I don't know, it's been officially called as Istanbul for the last 560 something years, don't you find it forced and lame?
No appreciation. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I mean anything's better than that. The thread made me feel really bad. Didn't even know how to click out of it. Blood got up to my brain. Can't shake it off, lol.
By the way S.A.M. Earlier, on seeing people as 'people'. This was my opinion. It's about how different cultures regard to the concept of 'people', to a 'person', to 'human life'. It's what we're learning while we grow up, without even knowing. Conventional prejudices, stereotypes and so on. But in my opinion there could be a rough way to distinguish. If a person is born in a economically independent country, see let's say, in one of the G-6-8? -I don't know the last name of the club- she/he can afford space for being an individual. By an individual, I am using the oldest sense of the word. You are free to chose what to eat, wear, study, with whom to be with, what's more important what to do with yourself in accordance to make yourself real. And this requires to maintain a standart in a country, right? In time, in that country, you have a solid aspect of life (more or less), of a single person and over all, how 'people' is to be 'people' which is we may call as socio-cultural profile of that country. Now, in 3rd or 4th world countries' basic is completely different than that. They can not afford for individuals. Because they don't have the circumstances, sources or any other possible dynamics to build a society or to provide any 'individual' as one I described in above. So, don't you find it naive to claim that 1st world country cultures (you name it Western or not) and people regard the others 'as people' as they know it? The only possible benign reaction would be "What's it to me, if they couldn't get developed?" And to say this out loud is racism and bigotry? I coincided a thread in this forum, on declaration of love to the deadliest virus human race ever faced, because it kills some groups of people a person hated and expressed in a pleaded way of sympathy, "Because it's honest and he can't help it." Bigotry, racism, fascism. I really wonder, what do we all understand from those words. Do you remember the MTV commercial that is banned and considered as an ugly scandal, because it was thought to be a great insult to the families of 9/11? Well, personally I found it as the most courageous and intelligent reaction to the horrible event of 9/11. But it isn't the case is it? Because, the commercial expressed 'the people' as people every where, because it compared the huge numbers of people dying and that have died of terrorism, famine, poverty and because of the lack of most primitive basics all around the world with 'the people' died in that day. It was not an insult nor anything of the sort. It was trying show 'the biggest picture' of 'the people' living around the world. But, it's all about 'the picture' you are willing to see though, isn't it?
Indeed. This is called the fallacy of moral equivalence in the west. Its one of those strange notions of morality you have to adopt to become immune to people dying by the thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions even, becoming an irrelevant statistic that is not worth considering
I would guess it would reflect the anglocized naming convention, my actual question was just to prove that sometimes people ask quite ludicrous questions which can occasionally be provocative, of course it's usually something they say without actually defining what they are really getting at and is meant to draw a response to cause to person responding to output something that will cause an either greater reaction. Btw, I wasn't trying to provoke any upset or outrage, even if you don't like the song.
Stryder is an administrator here and generally pretty much in lock step with James R, also our administrator. Don't believe I've ever seen the two disagree on anything yet. Both of them will tell you how much they like you and admire your views right up until they kick you out. Very professional.
Weren't you here in the D'ster days? He was our token Jewish white supremacist. http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=56658
He was a young kid who was struggling with his identity and tried too hard to be radical. I almost felt sorry for him.
