RE: Favorite Scene

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Favorite Scene

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Favorite Scene

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/20/2008 4:53:45 AM

Gem35

Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Dallas, Texas
Status: offline

Caddyshack : Rodney Dangerfield yells "Four !.... I should have yelled Two"
Airplane : "Joey... have you ever seen a grown man naked?"

< Message edited by Gem35 -- 1/20/2008 4:54:55 AM >

_____________________________

It doesn't make any sense, Admiral. Were we better than the Japanese or just luckier?

Banner By Feurer Krieg

(in reply to sabre1)

Post #: 61

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/20/2008 6:30:16 AM

goodwoodrw

Posts: 2661
Joined: 2/14/2005
Status: offline

Another couple.
"Sometimes there ain't just enough rocks"
and " the morale of this is story is, you can't steal 27 carats from a rabbit and get away with it!"

_____________________________

Formerly Goodwood

(in reply to Gem35)

Post #: 62

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/22/2008 7:45:54 AM

ilovestrategy

Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I like that part on "Airplane" where the inflatable pilot suddenly has a smile on his face.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to goodwoodrw)

Post #: 63

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/22/2008 10:18:28 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

And later when it's smoking! lmao at that

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 64

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 3:00:55 PM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything

? Or did you watch Saving Private Ryan thinking "man, look at all those Christians getting killed..."?

That said, regarding the subject at hand...

The Mexican Standoff in "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly"

In the beginning of "The Wild Bunch", when the gang is about to make their getaway from the bank. The atmosphere is so tense that you could cut it with a knife.

I always liked the scene in "The Winter War", where the small Finnish force tries to attack the church-hill, only to be beaten back, and then followed by thousands of Soviet troops swarming down the hill. It shows the size-difference in the opposing forces quite well indeed.

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to Doggie)

Post #: 65

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 3:04:09 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

And here we go again...round and round

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 66

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 3:08:04 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything ? Or did you watch Saving Private Ryan thinking "man, look at all those Christians getting killed..."?

That said, regarding the subject at hand...

The Mexican Standoff in "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly"

In the beginning of "The Wild Bunch", when the gang is about to make their getaway from the bank. The atmosphere is so tense that you could cut it with a knife.

I always liked the scene in "The Winter War", where the small Finnish force tries to attack the church-hill, only to be beaten back, and then followed by thousands of Soviet troops swarming down the hill. It shows the size-difference in the opposing forces quite well indeed.

I don't know, maybe because their primitive superstitions seem to be the sole driving force for everything they do, for every offense they take and for every threat they make to murder we infidels for our transgressions in insulting their primitive superstitions. Would you have preferred he refer to them by their race rather than their religion so you could take offense at that instead?

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 67

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 3:28:22 PM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
I don't know, maybe because their primitive superstitions seem to be the sole driving force for everything they do, for every offense they take and for every threat they make to murder we infidels for our transgressions in insulting their primitive superstitions. Would you have preferred he refer to them by their race rather than their religion so you could take offense at that instead?

Was the conflict in Somalia "religious" conflict? I don't think so. Sure, somalis were muslim, but were they fighting the UN and Americans because they were muslims? No. If Somalia was a war between religions, then it would be OK to divide the participants in to "Muslims" and "Christians". But since it was not a religious conflict, I fail to see why religion needs to be dragged in to it.

How would I have referred to them instead? Well, how about "Somalis"? I mean, we refer to Germans as "Germans". We refer to Americans as "American". But when we talk about Somalis, the correct nomenclature is related to their religion and not their nationality? Why?

As to their "primitive superstitions".... Their superstition is not that different from the primitive superstition of Christians. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't care for the muslims who play the "eternal victim"-fiddle. I feel that Islam is a deeply dysfunctional religion. But Christianity is only marginally better. Neither do I care for the Christians who feel that they are being persecuted by godless heathens. They are both equally lame whiners in my book. They both want to push their morality and opinions on others. But in this particular case my question was only about the fact that Doggie felt compelled to drag religion in to the discussion, when discussion was not related to the subject at hand in any shape or form. We had a depiction of battle between Somalis and Americans, and Doggie turned it in to battle between "Muslims and Americans".

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 68

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 3:51:06 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

I'm afraid you completely misunderstood my reference to "primitive superstitions". It was not an attempt to single out the muslim faith. I consider all religions to be equally based on primitive superstition.

And you couldn't be more wrong about why the Somali muslims were fighting. The undeclared war between the muslim faith and the rest of humanity IS the reason why muslims in MANY different countries have been, are now, and will continue to fight. So the reference to them as muslims as opposed to Somalis is a prefect valid and technically correct reference. Singling out nationalies when the muslim "we must kill the infidels" plague is clearly pan-nationalistic is what would be an incorrect and insulting reference.

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 69

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 4:10:02 PM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

And you couldn't be more wrong about why the Somali muslims were fighting. The undeclared war between the muslim faith and the rest of humanity IS the reason why muslims in MANY different countries have been, are now, and will continue to fight.

But we are talking about Somalia here. The Somalis did not fight the UN and Americans because they viewed them as infidels or something. They would have fought them had UN and US only sent muslim forces of their own in to Somalia. Hell, they fought the Pakistanis as well, and they were muslim as well!

quote:

So the reference to them as muslims as opposed to Somalis is a prefect valid and technically correct reference.

Only if you also stopped referring to the Americans in Somalia as "Americans" and started calling them "Christians" instead. Like I said, the conflict between US and Somalis was not religious in nature. USA did not go there because of religious needs, Somalis did not fight them because they were "infidels". The reasons were elsewhere.

Don't get me wrong: I'm well aware of the various conflicts around the world that have religious implications in them, and are more or less caused by bunch of ultra-religious muslims running around with AK-47's. I just don't see the conflict between Somalis and USA as one. Or do you feel that every single conflict where one party is USA and the other participant happens to (mostly) adhere to Islam, is by default a "conflict between USA and Islam", even if the reasons for the conflict are not related to religion at all?

Was the war between USA and Japan a "war between USA and militant Shinto"? No. It was a war between USA and Japan. Anyone who referred the Pacific Theater of WW2 as "war between the Allied and militant shinto" would get strange looks from other people.

To simplify: Suppose a war broke out between USA and Mexico. Would you call that war "War between USA and Mexico", or "war between USA and Catholicsm" (since Mexico is predominantly Catholic country)? No you would not. What if everything else was identical, but Mexico was a muslim country. Would it then suddenly be OK to call it "War between USA and Islam", as opposed to "War between USA and Mexico"? By your logic, it would be.

quote:

Singling out nationalies when the muslim "we must kill the infidels" plague is clearly pan-nationalistic is what would be an incorrect and insulting reference.

Since this WAS a conflict between nationalities and not between religions, I fail to see why religion needs to be dragged in to it. Because one side of the participant happened to be followers of Islam? By that logic, since most Americans are Christians, therefore the war in Iraq was a "War between Christianity and Islam", right?

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 70

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 4:25:24 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

I think perhaps both of us are a bit guilty of attempting to narrowly pigeonhole that conflict into an either/or status of nationalistic/religious nature.

While it is probably valid to portray the Somali muslims as fighting against foriegn occupiers as "nationalistic", the underlying animosities and arousal to fight the "infidel" cannot be discounted as a part of their motivation. Furthermore, the argument that they fought for nationalistic reasons is somewhat suspect when considered against the simple fact that there was no effective national government. They were in the midst of a civil war between factions motivated by the far more simple to assess human desires for greed and power.

As for your reference to WWII in the Pacific not being able to justifiably be portrayed as a struggle between the U.S.A. and militant shinto, I believe you are quite wrong. It was militant shinto that took over the Japanese society, as much by intimidation as anything else and set them on the course toward war. So, it is completely correct and justifiable to portray that conflict as one of the U.S.A against militant shinto, just as the war in the Eurpoean theater is often portrayed as a crusade against Nazism and Fascism and not just as a war between Germany/Italy and the rest of Europe.

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 71

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 5:27:45 PM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
While it is probably valid to portray the Somali muslims as fighting against foriegn occupiers as "nationalistic", the underlying animosities and arousal to fight the "infidel" cannot be discounted as a part of their motivation.

Well, they were killing each other quite efficiently as it was, even though they shared the same religion. The war in Somalia was fought between warlords and semi-independent "states", and not between religious factions as such. When USa and UN got involved, their attention was divided towards them as well, and they did not do that because UN and USA represented "wrong religion". They did it because it seemed to them that they were interfering in the conflict and taking sides.

quote:

Furthermore, the argument that they fought for nationalistic reasons is somewhat suspect when considered against the simple fact that there was no effective national government.

I'm not saying that the somali-fighters represented the nation of Somalia which was fighting against USA and UN. What I AM saying is that they didn't represent Islam either. They represented various factions inside Somalia.

quote:

As for your reference to WWII in the Pacific not being able to justifiably be portrayed as a struggle between the U.S.A. and militant shinto, I believe you are quite wrong. It was militant shinto that took over the Japanese society, as much by intimidation as anything else and set them on the course toward war.

you are absolutely right there, but fact remains that the war is still not called "War between USA and Shinto", and the Japanese soldiers are not referred as "Shintoists", it's called "War between USA and Japan", with Japanese being called "Japanese". So I fail to see why the fighting in Somalia should be referred to as "fighting between USA and Islam", and somali fighter specially referred as "muslims" when reasons for that fighting were even less religious than they were in the pacific theater.

quote:

So, it is completely correct and justifiable to portray that conflict as one of the U.S.A against militant shinto

But fact remains that it is not portrayed as such, it's portrayed as war between USA and Japan, period.

quote:

just as the war in the Eurpoean theater is often portrayed as a crusade against Nazism and Fascism and not just as a war between Germany/Italy and the rest of Europe.

But when we look at Pacific theater, religion did not appear there. While the reasons for Japanese imperialism were rooted in militant Shinto, the grunts were not told that "this is a war against Shinto". The war was and is not referred as "war against Shinto". It has always been referred as war between USA and Japan.

In Europe the war has been referred as "war against fascism" or "war against nazism". But those are clearly identifiable political factions, with identifiable leaders that were at the very core of the conflict. Defining the two was easy, whereas defining "militant shinto" is harder. When does shinto turn from regular shinto in to militant shinto? Where do we draw the line? Shinto was not eliminated due to the war, it's alive and well as we speak. Same could not be said about national-socialism or fascism.

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 72

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 6:42:07 PM

Toby42

Posts: 1626
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 73

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 7:36:39 PM

mack2

Posts: 243
Joined: 6/29/2007
Status: offline

"I hate illinois nazis".

"Conn - Bilge Bay, Seawater hatch is secured Sir"

(in reply to sabre1)

Post #: 74

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 8:08:57 PM

morvwilson

Posts: 510
Joined: 11/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Clearly it depends on the size of the round peg and square hole...and vice versa

No, No, NO!

It depends on the political leanings and religion of the pegs and holes in question!

(pardon my farcical sarcasm)

_____________________________

http://www.outskirtspress.com/Feud_MichaelWilson

Courage is not measured by the presence of fear, but by what a person does when they are scared!

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 75

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 8:41:19 PM

andym

Posts: 1117
Joined: 7/12/2006
From: Kings Lynn UK
Status: offline

I think one of the ALL TIME great scenes has to be from Zulu.The one where the Roll Call is being called by Col SGT Bourne,he calls out a name and there is silence to which he replies

"..........you arent dead,ive just seen you!"

"Arent i?Ooooo,thank you very much,Col Sgt"

"Sir,answer, Sir,Officer on Parade, Laddy!"

_____________________________

Press to Test...............Release to Detonate!

(in reply to morvwilson)

Post #: 76

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 9:05:43 PM

morvwilson

Posts: 510
Joined: 11/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: andym

I think one of the ALL TIME great scenes has to be from Zulu.The one where the Roll Call is being called by Col SGT Bourne,he calls out a name and there is silence to which he replies

"..........you arent dead,ive just seen you!"

"Arent i?Ooooo,thank you very much,Col Sgt"

"Sir,answer, Sir,Officer on Parade, Laddy!"

Although the effects are a little dated by today's standards, that whole movie was one of my favorites!

_____________________________

http://www.outskirtspress.com/Feud_MichaelWilson

Courage is not measured by the presence of fear, but by what a person does when they are scared!

(in reply to andym)

Post #: 77

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 9:31:04 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Treale

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

I don't know, maybe because General forums were created to encourage discourse.

Why does every divergent thought and the discourse that folows it find itself being attacked by someone descrying the "highjacking" of the original thought?

(in reply to Toby42)

Post #: 78

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 9:58:32 PM

ezzler

Posts: 863
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline

Eary in the film when the soldiers are first standing to, waiting, CSGT Bourne calls out
'Hitch , do your tunic up , where do you think you are?'

Reminds of a story about sailors unloading ships at Malta during the constant air raids.
A stick of bombs falls into the water some 500 yds away. The old sweats are unfazed but the newly arrived sailors begin to take cover.
A man with a megaphone shouts out 'what do you lot think you're up to ? get to work. . Those bloody bombs are nothing to do with you'

(in reply to morvwilson)

Post #: 79

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 10:07:03 PM

Toby42

Posts: 1626
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Treale

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

I don't know, maybe because General forums were created to encourage discourse.

Why does every divergent thought and the discourse that folows it find itself being attacked by someone descrying the "highjacking" of the original thought?

For me to argue the point with you would take this subject even farther off topic. Then I would be just as bad as the people that I was talking about !!!

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 80

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 10:32:10 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Treale

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Treale

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

I don't know, maybe because General forums were created to encourage discourse.

Why does every divergent thought and the discourse that folows it find itself being attacked by someone descrying the "highjacking" of the original thought?

Assuming, of course, that the "people you are talking(?) about" are indeed actually bad and the "bad" isn't just a figment of your imagination.

Oh, and btw, aren't you guilty of being "bad" by your own professed standard by even replying at all to state that you won't reply?

For me to argue the point with you would take this subject even farther off topic. Then I would be just as bad as the people that I was talking about !!!

(in reply to Toby42)

Post #: 81

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 11:48:59 PM

Doggie

Posts: 3244
Joined: 9/19/2001
From: Under the porch
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything ?

Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism. You don't see people in Ethiopia murdering peace Corps workers and hijacking foreign aid shipments.

quote:

Or did you watch Saving Private Ryan thinking "man, look at all those Christians getting killed..."?

Nah, I watched it with a lump in my throat, thinking what a shame it is that so many Europeans don't appreciate what those Christians in Normandy sacrificed for them.

quote:

Was the conflict in Somalia "religious" conflict? I don't think so. Sure, somalis were muslim, but were they fighting the UN and Americans because they were muslims?

When was the UN fighting anyone in Somalia? The UN just stood by and watched as Muslim fanatics butchered everyone, like they always do.

quote:

They would have fought them had UN and US only sent muslim forces of their own in to Somalia. Hell, they fought the Pakistanis as well, and they were muslim as well

They did not "fight" the Pakistanis; they murdered them. It takes two to make a "fight". The Pakistanis were butchered for delivering U.S. supplied food to starving Somalies without paying off the Imams and their drones.

quote:

Why do people continue to hijack a thread for their own agenda? Why does Matrix allow this?

Beats me. My original comment was a bit of sarcasm. "Poor innocent Muslims" trying to murder the people who are trying to feed them. Nemesis tried to inject a "Islam is a religion of peace" take into things, as if the religion of the criminals who steal relief supplies from their own people has nothing to do with the situation.

_____________________________

Visit the New, Improved Mad Dog's Drive Thru

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 82

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/29/2008 11:53:46 PM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Poor innocent Muslims being getting shredded by gunships in Blackhawk Down

Um, maybe I'm stupid or something, but what does their religion have to do with anything ?

Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism. You don't see people in Ethiopia murdering peace Corps workers and hijacking foreign aid shipments.

I can name atleast one other religion that has actively encouraged killing its opponents throughout the ages

(in reply to Doggie)

Post #: 83

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 2:53:33 AM

JMHawkins

Posts: 7
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline

Oh, there are so many.

Tuco: "When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

_____________________________

-----------------------
-JohnH
-----------------------

(in reply to Gem35)

Post #: 84

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 3:54:23 AM

ilovestrategy

Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JMHawkins

Oh, there are so many.

Tuco: "When it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk."

I laughed so hard at this scene!

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to JMHawkins)

Post #: 85

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 9:36:19 AM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Islam is the only organized religion in the world that actively encourages murder, extortion, kidnapping, and terrorism.

Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

quote:

Nah, I watched it with a lump in my throat, thinking what a shame it is that so many Europeans don't appreciate what those Christians in Normandy sacrificed for them.

Sure we appreciate it. But that does not mean that we should be _eternally_ grateful for it, nor does it mean that we should do whatever US asks us to do. Are you still grateful for the help French gave to USA during your fight for independence? If you are, how do you show it?

quote:

When was the UN fighting anyone in Somalia? The UN just stood by and watched as Muslim fanatics butchered everyone, like they always do.

By the Somali-standpoint, UN was interfering in their business. And why do I get the feeling that if UN became more proactive and "aggressive" in dealing with violence all over the world, you would start whining how UN is creating a military of their own, and how we are sliding towards NWO?

quote:

They did not "fight" the Pakistanis; they murdered them.

But the point stands: they were not killed (or murdered, take your pick) because of their religion. The fact that you are now arguing that were the Pakistanis "killed" or "murdered" is just pointless hair-splitting that does not change the point I was making in one way or the other.

quote:

Beats me. My original comment was a bit of sarcasm. "Poor innocent Muslims" trying to murder the people who are trying to feed them. Nemesis tried to inject a "Islam is a religion of peace" take into things

No I did not. Learn to read and more importantly: learn to understand what you read. What I was _trying_ to say was that the religion of the somali-fighters was completely off-topic. Specially mentioning that they were muslim is like going out of your way to make the point that "you do realize that most of the people in Omaha Beach were Christians?". Um, so? What does the religious beliefs of the participant of the US force have to do with anything that happened in Normandy? It doesn't.

quote:

as if the religion of the criminals who steal relief supplies from their own people has nothing to do with the situation.

Well, does it? If people who steal those supplies are Muslim, does that mean that Islam is to blame? By that exact same logic: The snipers who shot civilians in Sarajevo were Christians. The Serbs who killed thousands of Muslims in Srebrenica were Christians. The IRA was Christian. Therefore, by Doggie-logic, those facts indisputably proove that Christianity is evil. Yet, for some reason, we never talk about "genocide of Muslims in Srebrenica my Christians", we always talk about "genocide of Bosnians in Srebrenica by Serbs". Why is that? Surely you agree that we should be talking about religious beliefs of the participants, instead of their nationality?

Could you please explain this double-standard to me? Why is it OK to drag religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators happen to be muslim, yet we do not drag the religion in to the discussion when the perpetrators are Christian?

< Message edited by Nemesis -- 1/30/2008 9:41:26 AM >

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to Doggie)

Post #: 86

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 9:45:16 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 87

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 11:01:12 AM

Nemesis

Posts: 126
Joined: 1/11/2001
From: J�rvenp��, Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Yeah, I must admit that there is a risk that this might turn "ugly". But it does not have to.

I for one have zero desire to fight with someone on a web-forum. But I still feel that my question was valid. I just hope that Doggie will keep the discussion civil, as opposed to making claims that are 100% false (like saying that I made claims about Islam being "religion of peace", when in reality I said nothing of the sort).

But it must be said that the fact that Doggie went out of his way to specificly mention that the Somalis happened to be muslim, betrays his bias and prejudice on this matter. Hell, it would be similar if I said something like "Look at those nice Christians who killed all those people in My Lai" or ""look at all those Christians killing Tutsis in Rwanda".

Yes, there are loads of Muslims who are running around and trying their best to ruin this planet for everyone. But that still does not mean that we should drag religion in to things that have very little to do with religion. We don't go out of our way to mention that Americans in Vietnam were mostly Christians. We don't go out of our way to specificly mention that Finns in WW2 were mostly Christians. We don't go out of our way to mention that Japanese in WW2 were Shinto. But if there's a conflict where one (or both) participants happen to be muslims, then we SHOULD specificly underline that fact, and the draw somekind of conclusions from it?

_____________________________

oderint dum metuant

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 88

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 12:11:21 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemesis

Besides Christianity, that is? Go read the Bible some day.

You're the one that needs to read it and don't stop at the Old Testament. Christianity springs from the New Testament. Also note that just because something is chronicled in the OT, that doesn't mean Christians actively encourage the activity today.

_____________________________

(in reply to Nemesis)

Post #: 89

RE: Favorite Scene - 1/30/2008 12:12:45 PM

mjk428

Posts: 1944
Joined: 6/15/2002
From: Western USA
Status: offline