The all purpose terrorism thread featuring plenty of allah akbar

[Mittelwaechter]

Originally Posted by August

Wow! Are you that threatened by a simple observation that you just had to construct this gigantic straw man to avoid it?

Where did I try to avoid a threat?

Originally Posted by August

Bottom line here is no westerner is telling Muslims how they must dress but many many Muslims have been and continue to be raped, beaten and killed for minor transgressions including not wearing fundamentalist approved clothing.

Their social rules, their problems. Their idiots raping, beating and killing - just like we have a generous portion of them. They are entitled to rule by their society? Again, their social rules, their problems.

Definitively not our business justifying any violent action. We could care for our own problems, our violent behaviour, our social rules...
Of course we only want to free the poor slaves - to exploit them our style. Some simply have to die for our good intentions.

And I know of westerners who want to order Muslimas to take their scarfs off. There have been even legal verdicts in Germany (neo-westerners third class), to enforce it in job environments.
And there are legal verdicts to counter these verdicts.

Edit: most wife beaters/killers are to be found in our allied Saudi Arabia, afair. And in Afghanistan - just after our westerners have imported a few thousand Saudi Arabian extremists to Afghanistan to fight the Russians. Those ex-mujaheddin are called Taliban now, afair.

This matches even our Google image search further up this thread!

[August]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

Their social rules, their problems. Their idiots raping, beating and killing - just like we have a generous portion of them. They are entitled to rule by their society? Again, their social rules, their problems.

Definitively not our business justifying any violent action. We could care for our own problems, our violent behaviour, our social rules...
Of course we only want to free the poor slaves - to exploit them our style. Some simply have to die for our good intentions.

Right because here in the west we all get up in the morning just to think up new and profitable ways to exploit the poor poor Muslims.

As far as idiots go at least ours tend to be prosecuted and jailed for those crimes whereas their have seized control of their societies and they maintain their iron rule by committing those crimes in mass quantities against anyone who opposes them.

And I know of westerners who want to order Muslimas to take their scarfs off. There have been even legal verdicts in Germany (neo-westerners thir

Yeah because the need to identify a person is the same thing as executing a woman for the crime of being raped. Never mind that the scarf hating westerners that you know do not have the ability to conduct mass executions, but oh yeah "legal verdicts in Germany" are just like public stonings.

And what should we do when these downtrodden peoples ask for our help? Delegations of oppressed ethnic groups from around the world do that all the time. Should we always ignore them? Would you also ignore a cry of help from a neighbor being attacked or is it just strangers who deserve such heartlessness?

[Mittelwaechter]

Originally Posted by August

Right because here in the west we all get up in the morning just to think up new and profitable ways to exploit the poor poor Muslims.

“We” usually get up to be exploited - by those thinking about new ways to exploit us and additionally about ways to enlarge their host of exploitable servants.
That's a primary concept of capitalism: raise above others and make them pay your lifestyle, make them invest lifetime to be transferred to your disposal. They work for you - instead of you - while you enjoy your lifetime. It is the freedom we fight, kill and die for - the freedom to exploit others.

Originally Posted by August

As far as idiots go at least ours tend to be prosecuted and jailed for those crimes whereas their have seized control of their societies and they maintain their iron rule by committing those crimes in mass quantities against anyone who opposes them.

Our society is entitled to define our idiots as theirs is entitled to define theirs.
Our definition of law has not to be identical with theirs, I hope.
But this is true for their expectations and hopes either. If they prefer the Sharia...

Those Egyptian Muslims really had the chance to democratically vote for our system...

Originally Posted by August

Yeah because the need to identify a person is the same thing as executing a woman for the crime of being raped. Never mind that the scarf hating westerners that you know do not have the ability to conduct mass executions, but oh yeah "legal verdicts in Germany" are just like public stonings.

My scarf haters don't try to stone someone, but deny the expression of religious belief granted by our laws. The problem is - our capitalist religion expects a worker to be as profitable as possible - and an intolerant customer may keep his money in his pocket. So a Muslima working at a counter selling tools may be harmful for business, if she wears a scarf to cover her hair, because the optional buyer may be spurning Islam and it's symbols.
The scarf I'm talking about is no veil/curtain across her face, hindering her identification.

Death penalty is uncivilized - I totally agree. Mass executions by law are as bad as single executions by law. Killing 25 people on a central place in public is just more a happening than killing 25 people across the whole country. Well - it depends...

What did you do to prevent executions by law in the US? Shall we send some weapons and instructors? Maybe we could try to motivate some Afro-American citizens to support your efforts?

Originally Posted by August

And what should we do when these downtrodden peoples ask for our help? Delegations of oppressed ethnic groups from around the world do that all the time. Should we always ignore them? Would you also ignore a cry of help from a neighbor being attacked or is it just strangers who deserve such heartlessness?

Asking us for help should motivate us to help them, but not to kill them.

We could invite them? Offer our protection here with us?
Well, not all agree on that and want to build walls and fences to keep them out.

We have accepted rules in the law of nations. But some don't consider it to be valid for them. They only insist on it while trying to enforce it on others.


We kill for our greedy capitalism, not to help strangers. Don't fall for this propaganda.
We don't want to help them, we “want” to help our capitalistic rulers to get their desired growth. Control over more ressources, cheap workers, unmet consumers, naive debtors, motivated soldiers.
Read or watch the news and learn our primary economic needs.

Did we sanctionize Syria to help them? Or did we sanctionize Syria to encourage the population to blame Assad for the miserable conditions and overturn his rule?
And did we arm a resulting 10% opposition to help the 90% rest of the population?

Encouraging Saudi Arabia - again, and still our ally - to import all kinds of Muslim extremists into the country, to support the 10%? They get out of control and start ISIS? Some TalibanII scenario? Al Nusra is Al Qaida, but we support them? Really?


Well, at least it seems Kerry is adapting to some facts right now - thanks to Putin.

[Skybird]

The father of the family that got attacked by that thug with an axe, still fights for his life , status is critical.

[August]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

“We” usually get up to be exploited - by those thinking about new ways to exploit us and additionally about ways to enlarge their host of exploitable servants.
That's a primary concept of capitalism: raise above others and make them pay your lifestyle, make them invest lifetime to be transferred to your disposal. They work for you - instead of you - while you enjoy your lifetime. It is the freedom we fight, kill and die for - the freedom to exploit others.

You have a twisted view of capitalism that sounds a lot like old Soviet propaganda. The truth is that while flawed (like any human economic system), Capitalism is all about working hard to better oneself. Creating ones own opportunity. Something that you cannot do in non capitalistic systems where your ethnic group or your loyalty to The Party means everything.

Something else you should remember. Nobody is owed a job but nobody is forced to go to work at gun point in a capitalist system. You may not like the job you're doing but you're still free to walk out the door singing a Johnny Paycheck tune and use your talents, intelligence and personal drive to create a better situation for you and your family.

Our society is entitled to define our idiots as theirs is entitled to define theirs.

You talk about societies like they are created with the assistance and approval of everyone in them. While you may have an argument when talking about a modern western society that certainly does not apply in the countries we're talking about.

My scarf haters don't try to stone someone, but deny the expression of religious belief granted by our laws.

So you're still trying to compare that with public stonings. Amazing.

The problem is - our capitalist religion

Now it's a religion? Here and I thought it was a economic system open to anyone regardless of religion... My bad.

expects a worker to be as profitable as possible - and an intolerant customer may keep his money in his pocket. So a Muslima working at a counter selling tools may be harmful for business, if she wears a scarf to cover her hair, because the optional buyer may be spurning Islam and it's symbols.

It's called a dress code. If the scarf isn't part of it then again they are free to walk out the door and go open a tool store where a head scarf is part of uniform.

The scarf I'm talking about is no veil/curtain across her face, hindering her identification.

Yeah and in doing so you deliberately confuse a few calls for government restriction on veil wearing with a private companies dress policy. Apples and oranges.

Death penalty is uncivilized - I totally agree. Mass executions by law are as bad as single executions by law.

That all depends on the set of laws you're talking about. Are they ones created and enforced at whim by the local warlord or real ones being the result of a fair trial by ones peers with extensive appeals and delays to ensure that they get it right?

Killing 25 people on a central place in public is just more a happening than killing 25 people across the whole country. Well - it depends...

Nothing wrong with public executions, I think they should all be public, but show me the last time a western country that executed 25 convicted criminals in one day.

What did you do to prevent executions by law in the US? Shall we send some weapons and instructors? Maybe we could try to motivate some Afro-American citizens to support your efforts?

I don't have any problem at all with executing a criminal. Heck i'd pull the switch myself on a McVeigh or a Zarneyev. It's just that my definition of criminal is a bit more than any woman who manages to get herself raped and didn't commit suicide from the shame right afterwards. Unless you can understand the difference better than you understand capitalism then further discussion is useless.

[Reece]

I can't say much August except

[Betonov]

I'm jealous August. Where's that passion when you're sparring with me

[Mittelwaechter]

Originally Posted by August

You have a twisted view of capitalism

Do I? Maybe you have it twisted, because you have learned your lessons well?

It's off topic, but has some brutal terror included...


Let me direct you a little movie in your head. Of course it is just a movie and can't reflect all aspects of a century long developement, but it tries to show the general picture.

Imagine there was a little homestead of 10 shacks, at the foot of a hill, close to a river leading to the village with the market place. 60 people are living in the shacks - men, women and children.
The hill provided a fresh water well, some woodland, some willow trees, gras for the sheep, eadible berries, roots, wild corn, some deer...
It was a hard life for the 60, but the hill provided for them. They used the public hill and river to make a living, cut twigs from the willow trees to weave baskets, cut trees in the woods, to roll them downhill to the river and float the trees and the baskets to the village, to sell all of it on the market, to have some money to access goods and services they couldn't provide themselves.

One day a Mr. Hillock arrived, a “giant” of man, in company of his three heavily built sons and his wife.
The four men carried clubs and entered the shacks to claim the hill to be their property from this day on. Some couraged of the 60 tried to argue, but were bludgeoned by the four bullies.
Well - the four thugs kept the 60 under control and forced them to build a nice villa at the top of the hill, with a formidable veranda at the southern side, to oversee the woods, the shacks and the river.
The 60 had to provide for the thugs, pay them the tythe, about ~ 20% of all they managed to collect, produce, hunt and sell. The Hillocks were criminals, ruling the hill, ruling the people, living a pleasurable life on top of the hill. They took what they wanted - additionally to the tythe. The natural right of the strongest justified their easy wealth and joy.

Anybody could have done it like the Hillocks, if they just tried to better their life, by raising above the community and enforcing them to pay the tythe and of course bear the discomfort of major responsibility.

So guess what? Mr. Hillock got old, one of his sons drowned in the river a few years ago, one was a toper and the third one was weakened, suffering from syphilis.
A Mr. Barrow arrived, two sons, a wife, three shotguns. He asked Mr. Hillock politely to leave the villa on top of the hill. Some shots were fired, and somehow the hill had a new master.
An able, engaged entrepreneur - a brilliant description by the way - with visionary economic talent.

The 60 were offered jobs - to be payed by Mr. Barrow now. The old system of the tythe should be considered overcome. Mr. Barrow wouldn't take the tythe, but pay for work. Imagine!
Fair conditions should be established, everybody should have the right to have some wealth, after working hard to better himself. They should be payed according to performance.

So Mr. Weaver - living in the second shack - once cut twigs from the public willow trees, weaved a basket, transported it to the village, sold it at the market and earned 100 credits per day - 100 certificates to verify his creation of value. A comfortable means to be exchanged for some salt, sugar, beans, a hair cut and a beer at the inn.
Mr. Woodpecker - living in the fifth shack - once cut public trees on the hill, rolled them downhill, foated them to the village, sold them on the market and earned 100 credits a day - 100 certificates...

With Mr.Barrow owning the hill, the trees and the twigs - both couldn't provide for themselves other than working for Mr. Barrow - or leave the shacks and try to better themselves somewhere else.
Overseas are some hills to be taken they say, from some badly equipped red people, living in tipis close by their public hills...

Mr. Barrow was clever enough to have the Weavers and Woodpeckers do specialized jobs now. Mrs. Weaver was cuting twigs, Mr. Weaver was weaving them to baskets. Timmy Woodpecker, Mr. Woodpecker's son, transported twigs to the shacks and baskets to the village. Lilly Woodpecker, Mr. Woodpeckers daughter, sold the baskets on the market and transported the money back uphill. She was gifted with trading skills and a trustworthy, honest believer in the ten commandments.

Why should they have specialized jobs, you attentive viewer ask? Well, if you understand as a worker, you are doing all the work in the chain of production, sell the product and have to carry 100 credits back uphill - to be paid from that money - you may realize some odd facts with Mr. Barrows fair system.

So, uphill the Weavers and Woodpeckers were really paid their money as Mr. Barrow told them. The more productive specialized job system enabled the selling of 4 baskets a day - so Mr. Barrow paid 100 credits to eachof his workers, because they did all the work to verify the creation of 4 baskets and the transformation into 400 credits.
Mr. Barrow made his own living by donating some of his organs and blood to the Red Cross...

Let's stop the movie here and take a break. Have some popcorn and a soda. I hope you are still enjoying the story and forgive the bad acting and rare development of characters - as the lousy text formation.
I have to admit, the ending of part one was a bit fictional. The Weavers and Woodpecker's offspring didn't get paid by Mr. Barrow. But let's watch them...

Mrs. Weaver did a simple job, so she earned 40 credits that day, while Mr. Weaver did a very skilled job - he earned 60 credits that day.
Timmy had a workers contract for 40 credits wage - and Lilly was employed, earning 60 credits, for her sophisticated performance in a position of trust.
So let's do the math and add it up: thats only 200 of 400 credits paid to the creators of value. How the heck - oh, right - the taxes...

Mr. Barrow and his friends had taken care for a civilized community by now. No person should have the right to take away some others property by force again.
Some villagers down the river had taken each others shabby clothes and worn out shoes, and some were stealing bread to survive, you know.

This civilized community had to provide some services for its members - like a school for the children to learn how to read, weave baskets and function properly in Mr. Barrow's fair economic system.
They were thought properly, to understand their freedom of working hard to better themselves. Long time ago, some slaves had to work for their owners and some uncivilized thugs blackmailed the polulation to be provided by them. Dark ages. Today we privatize (privare lat. to rob) by economic force, by the accumulation of money to be paid to some owner of property, to legally possess the property. Everybody can do it legally.

By the way - Mr. Barrow pays a private teacher for his children, so they shall learn how the system works and how to keep it running. Waeving is no necessary skill here.

Another important service was installed and to be paid by the comminity - a police force, to ensure the laws of property and society. The law granted property and heritage for Mr. Barrow as for the Weavers and Woodpeckers equally. Any criminal, taking the property of members of the community, shall be arrested and the robbed property shall be given back to the rightful owner. Take that, Mr. Hillock!

Come on! We have to admit Mr. Barrow and his friends are really smart guys. They manage to have a comfortable lifestyle, because they are clever enough to control the rest of the polulation with proper information.

So the Weavers and Woodpeckers paid Mr. Barrow de facto 200 credits - and Mr. Barrow transfers 100 credits to the community - as taxes and for social security (if installed) from the Weavers and Woodpeckers.
So he has 100 credits left. He has of course some costs for axes and knifes, not to mention the seedlings for regrowing the cut trees. Some fees for his hill owner interest group and his employer association add up too.
15 credits later he has only 85 credits left. His tax level is exremely high and he has to pay 40% taxes of his income.

Wait, he has to use a car to drive regularly down to the village to check Lilly. 7 credits cost for the car are off the taxes. That's 78 credits left. He invested into a paved river bank downhill, to enable a propper handling of the trres into the river. He had to take a credit at the bank - apportioned to the daily 100 credits it is 30 credits off the tax base. He is a trustworthy customer the banksters say.

We are down to 48 credits now. There must be something... oh, yeah, the teacher for the kids. Sure. The man has to earn his living - 70 credits for educational purposes - but only 50% accoutable for the taxes. 13 credits left. The tax free level for entrepreneurs is ... ? ... flipping papers, checking tables... 16 credits a day. Phew! That was close. So no taxes for Mr. Barrow.

Well, Mr. Barrow would have had the possibility to transfer some money to Panama - like all of us - to avoid taxes.
Mr. Barrow plans to check Mr. Holt's method, to get some taxmoney from the community, called subsidies.

Could have been a cliffhanger for the next part of our movie. But now we are just so excited to see what happens next to the capitalist hill society, right?

Well - in short - Mr. Barrow has a heart attack.

What? Yup - he dies.

Red haired Fabian Barrow, his elder son, has absolutly no intention to stay at the rural hill and with the Weavers and Woodpeckers. He's a dandy and loves gold and jewels.
He moves into the busy village and marries Constanza Rothshield. A twisted story of some accusations for tax fraud makes him take the family name of his wife.

You may want to watch the capitalist adventures of Fabian Rothshield in the movie linked in my signature.

[August]

Originally Posted by Mittelwaechter

Do I? Maybe you have it twisted, because you have learned your lessons well?

It's off topic.

Is there an actual point to this? It's so badly written it's difficult to tell.

It's biggest flaw is the idea that living in a shack, dying by age 30 after burying most of ones children first from disease and injury first is some kind of thing to be nostalgic for. "Hard life" indeed. You have no idea what that actually means if you promote it like that.

Another thing the story lacks is how those original 60 even if left alone would still happily butcher each other for all same reasons you try to pin on capitalism if the mood were to strike them. Greed is not ideology specific and evil is universal.

Finally it lacks barbarians. For obvious reasons that alone makes it useless as point making material.

[August]

Originally Posted by Betonov

I'm jealous August. Where's that passion when you're sparring with me

You're too much effort

[Skybird]

LINK - Is this what you consider evil?

[Mittelwaechter]

Originally Posted by August

Is there an actual point to this? It's so badly written it's difficult to tell....

No development - science, technology, culture - is possible without Mr. Barrow? Mankind proves you wrong.
Science, technology and culture could be much further, if the Barrows and Bishops were banned in time.

The Weavers and the Woodpeckers are after butchering? Are you living in a bad neighbourhood, or were do you get this impression from?
Mrs. Woodpecker has no interest in the shacks on the other island, but Mr. Barrow has. She wouldn't have more for a living, but he could offer more jobs.
She would have major problems in the community, with attacking her neighbour.
Mr Barrow invests money and some of his “workers”, to attack the neighbour hill. He easily cares for personal protection.

Barbarians! Next movie shall have some Barbarians. And some explosions maybe?

[Mittelwaechter]

A teaser for the new movie “Augustus, the Barbarian.”
- An alternative history of the ten shacks. -

Mrs. Woodpecker is collecting berries, to bake some pie for the 35th anniversary festivities of the ten shacks. They call the settlement “Friendship” now.
We realize she is worried. The radio this morning has told, a foreign hill society - under the leadership of Augustus the Barbarian - has stationed missiles at the other side of the river.
He has money and soldiers an masse, to threaten any hill he is intersted in. Augustus controls the overseas trade and the money flow.

Mr. Woodpecker and the Weavers had a discussion this morning, if it would be necessary to take some money of the settlement and build a bunker - and maybe a few missiles of their own.
Augustus has already taken control over the river delta, and the ships trading goods from the village to overseas are sent back. A cordon across the river has been installed.

Augustus declares, sanctions are necessary to motivate the Friendship settlement to accept his reign peacefully. He emphasizes several times, he is not after war, but would defend himself if being attacked.
Timmy Woodpecker and a few friends have built an explosive device, to destroy the barrier...

[Jeff-Groves]

Is this the Terrorism thread or the fantasy thread now?
I'm confused.

[Mittelwaechter]

I like your signature!