lol http://www.vice.com/read/golden-dawn-camp-photosI just noticed that Panos used the same symbol as forum avatar and on Steam... :(
didnt think this was legal :p
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
[...]Instead some of the braindead "hitler did nothing wrong" guys of this forum will drop crude one-liners.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
I'll tolerate anyone except the intolerant. Fascists can literally die in a fire.
BTW get rick rolled more panos, you fucking scrub.
I just noticed that Panos used the same symbol as forum avatar and on Steam... :(
I just feel pity for him now.
I've seen pretty convincing clues that Panos has been or still is in the military, that alone makes guessing his real ideology quite easy.Was him stating he's been in the military one of the clues?
Antifascists are currently attacking Golden Dawn headquarters, of course police are after them, especielly since a lot of cops in Greece are golden dawn supporters.By antifascists you mean socialist fascists who want some other despot ruling, right?
You can't reason with fascists, violence is the only language worth speaking. Liberals have never been able to stop them with their talking. Must feel nice forpeoplecunts like Panos to have the cops backing him up.
By antifascists you mean socialist fascists who want some other despot ruling, right?
Communists don't want despots ruling but they inevitably lead the most powerhungry and cynical of their members into power because all the others are incapable of doing anything productive.There's a reason I said socialist, and the communist idea requires a period of fascism anyhow.
Warning: Don't read if you are a brainwashed moron.2nd gen immigrants are always problematic(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
2nd gen immigrants are always problematicWich comes naturally if in the only place you call your home people keep telling you that you and your culture don't belong there.
It's about another culture taking over and replacing your own culture. And that is happening in more and more european countries. Of course it's a very slow process.No way in hell that would happen, that is a beyond silly statement.
On the other hand, it won't take more than 50 years until every european nation has more muslim inhabitants than non-muslim, which will result in sharia law being introduced, christianity and western-values being banned or at least limited to a certain extent, and discrimination of non-muslims being a daylie issue.
That is the simple outcome of mass-immigration (from mostly muslim countries), politicians throughout all parties know that multiculturalism has failed and was set to fail at some point before it began.
Western/european/christian culture and muslim-culture simply can't coexist peacefully longer than a few decades within the same country, they are incompatible. Everybody denying that is a liar, hypocrite or really is that stupid.
If repeating every single line of the standard right-wing populist speech makes you the one informed by the "true media", then I guess you are.You're only a 2nd gen if both your parents are immigrants/2nd gens whose family originate from the same area.
Still, just repeating shit w/o even one single own thought in it makes you rather pathetic and "brain-washed" in my book.
Not to mention, if you girlfriend is "half-german" - which as a statement is already wrong on soooo many level - she is prolly "2nd generation" too. At least a half... so she`s half... what...?
Nevermind, don't bother to answer.
As I am the one with the most posts here, I guess this is pointed at me:
I am neither a fanatic of any kind, nor associated with any right wing political organisation or party. I never voted for a right winged party since my very first vote. One time I even voted for the big left-wing party in Germany, but that only was to steal at least some seats from the established parties calling themselves right-center, left-center, liberal and so on.
All the right winged "parties" in Germany, if you can even call them so, are dumb retards, and their voters are indeed mostly poor white fucks. I am not.
This is what I am saying. Talk about immigration, islam, some facts and the truth about it and everybody calls you a chocolate chip cookie and facist and right wing member and so on.
It's just the typical nonsense blabla, because you have no arguments whatsoever to disprove what I say.
How could you, it's facts, personal experience, things I witnessed personally or people I know (who are by no means chocolate chip cookies or facists) told me.
Good night, I stop here, as it makes no sense to argue with people that are deadlocked in indoctrinated leftist views.
Comrades Mollydon, Pripyat Prips & Dadason can confirm. We're as red as it gets and we love to party on every possible occasion.
I don't know why you people keep dragging Panos into this, he has been in a left-oriented tolerant open-for-all clan, he was a very good teammate with catholics, orthodox, muslims & atheists, as well as communists, apolitical folks and probably some undercover jews or something. Maybe we even had blacks & asians without knowing it, you can't always tell by their voices. Hell he was even commanded by a commie so I think he's obviously trolling you all. Quite successfully.(click to show/hide)
enough drama done.
They are not following some sinister plan to take over the world, they just go wherever they can earn the most money.They aren't following a sinister plan, but that doesn't mean the end result won't be the same.
Typical for multicultural-fanatics, throw shit at others instead of giving counter-arguments.
Warlord, you are using the word "truth" very liberally (pun intended), but you don't seem to have anything to back your claims except "My likeminded friend circle confirmed my prejudices" and "I read it somewhere on the internet". Can you point me to a peer-reviewed study of european population projections, or any actually neutral source that confirms your eurabia claims ? Because otherwise I wouldn't be that sure about the "truth" of it.http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4385024,00.html
And Xant disqualifies himself already with having the fat face of Timo Soini in his avatar before. Can't get more right wing populist than that... pathetic.visitors can't see pics , please register or login
And Xant disqualifies himself already with having the fat face of Timo Soini in his avatar before. Can't get more right wing populist than that... pathetic.
visitors can't see pics , please register or loginvisitors can't see pics , please register or login
In Germany, the was recently something going through the media which clearly shows that Germany isn't overtaken but tries well to get everyone under the hood:
A 14 yrs old muslim girl was supposed to go swimming during the sports lesson. She didn't want to cuz of her strict beliefs, like being not properly clothed and she said that she doesn't want to see other girls and boys "naked".
The school said that there are bathing suits for women which are exactly for this purpose, like diving suits, not leaving any skin uncovered. So, they refused to let her off the sports lesson.
She went to trial for her right of not going to the swimming lesson cuz of her religious beliefs. The judge said "Nope, you have to go cuz there are options for you which are officially okay with your religious "leaders" and therefore it ain't a religious but a personal problem and about that I don't give a damn."
The result is now that she still doesn't go swimming but will get the worst note for that lesson because she could...
How could someone seriously see the democratic values in danger in a country where things are handled like this?
What annoys me the most is the generalizations going on in here:You forgot "chocolate chip cookieIIIIS!!!! KILL!! KILL!! KILL!!!!!"
The MUSLIMS are overtaking Europe.
The IMMIGRANTS are criminals.
The CHRISTIAN CULTURE is erased.
And that is just bullshit.
The majority of Muslims are just fine people. Bad people are in every group.
The majority of immigrants are just poor people trying to find a way to lead a "normal" life.
The Christian culture is mostly already gone cuz everyone is just thinking of their well-being only anyway.
So, spare me the nonsense about your truth. Your truth is just a bunch of stereotypes and generalizations. And about those statistics, if you even had just the minimal knowledge about actual statistical math, you would know that I could set up something that correlates the rise of women underwear thefts with the loss of potatoes to rain this year. Just because I can mathematical make something shiny and look solid, doesn't make it an actual useful fact.
And Xant disqualifies himself already with having the fat face of Timo Soini in his avatar before. Can't get more right wing populist than that... pathetic.
That's the correct way to do it, although I think it shows that the judges even mentioned "religious leaders", why are their opinions relevant ?I lack a proper word. Maybe religious authorities would be better.
I lack a proper word. Maybe religious authorities would be better.Way to completely miss the point.
What they ment was that there is no religious reason left to not go swimming when everyone that matters on the religious level tells her that those suits are fine. There is an "official" solution that she personally doesn't like. And that is her personal problem she has to deal with, not the school, the teacher or the other pupils.
Way to completely miss the point.Nope, you just didn't understand.
Nope, you just didn't understand.No, Kafein was making a point that religious authorities shouldn't have a say in it. Religion should be completely private and even mentioning that religious authority X agrees with policy Y is completely irrelevant and thus shouldn't be brought up.
Germany guarantees every religion to enact their beliefs freely. That said, you have to belong to an acknowledged religious group to get that right.
Saying "The spaghetti monster forbids!" is not enough as long as the Spaghetti monster isn't an acknowledged religion in Germany.
The Islam is officially acknowledged, therefore the girl has rights, guaranteed by the German constitution.
Since the religion doesn't forbid her to go swimming when properly clothed with that mentioned swimming suit, she doesn't have the right to "not go swimming".
Kafein asked why religious authorities have a say in this. I answered him on point and now even explained it to you.
No, Kafein was making a point that religious authorities shouldn't have a say in it. Religion should be completely private and even mentioning that religious authority X agrees with policy Y is completely irrelevant and thus shouldn't be brought up.No, you still don't get it.
Unsurprisingly, it's you who didn't understand.
No, you still don't get it.How the fuck can you still not get it?
The judges asked an expert to a certain case about his opinion. He stated his opinion as an expert and the judges decided. Works with everything in court like this all day, every day.
Just because you seem to see the need to make a difference between a ballistics guy stating his expert opinion about a gun and some Islam expert stating his opinion about religious rules doesn't make you correct.
inb4 Xant calling everyone stupid for not agreeing to his view of things he then calls facts/truths.
No, you still don't get it.Good almighty deity. Let me try this one more time. Kafein did not ask you a question that he wanted an answer to. It was a rhetorical question.
The judges asked an expert to a certain case about his opinion. He stated his opinion as an expert and the judges decided. Works with everything in court like this all day, every day.
Just because you seem to see the need to make a difference between a ballistics guy stating his expert opinion about a gun and some Islam expert stating his opinion about religious rules doesn't make you correct.
inb4 Xant calling everyone stupid for not agreeing to his view of things he then calls facts/truths.
A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point. The question is used as a rhetorical device, posed for the sake of encouraging its listener to consider a message or viewpoint.
Good almighty deity. Let me try this one more time. Kafein did not ask you a question that he wanted an answer to. It was a rhetorical question.Yeaaaah
YeaaaahThe straw man is strong in this one.
all religious matters should be judged by not asking anybody who knows the shit.
just listen to your inner fears and prejudices and it will be fine.
why do judges even listen to anyone they know everything because they are judges.
YeaaaahAll religious matters should be judged by asking somebody who knows what they're talking about, unfortunately, the only fucking people who knows how they interpret are themselves, no fucking random douchebag can tell me how a book that has been written centuries ago (the bible or whatever) is meant to be interpreted, unless you wrote the shit you're no more of an expert on it than anyone else who has read it. It is beyond retarded and racist to go off and say "These religions are real religions, they're interpreted this way, and this is true because I asked some expert asshole.). If you look at your average Christian religion, and Mormonism, both of them tell you not to kill people, however, due to some random experts opinion Mormons are somehow less allowed to enter the army by their god, Catholicism is like the only Christian religion with an actual expert, and if you look at Catholicism there have even been a shitload of antipopes in previous centuries.
all religious matters should be judged by not asking anybody who knows the shit.
just listen to your inner fears and prejudices and it will be fine.
why do judges even listen to anyone they know everything because they are judges.
Why are you guys even talking about immigration?Going off topic is fun
The thread is about a bunch of dumb nazi murderers who can't even spell that word and about their leaders who manipulate them for money and power.
The straw man is strong in this one.It was meant to be ironic :oops:
Why are you guys even talking about immigration?Well, I mean, I would talk about dumb nazi murderers but I'm disqualified from taking part in that discussion because you edited your favorite politician, Timo Soini, on my avatar's face.
The thread is about a bunch of dumb nazi murderers who can't even spell that word and about their leaders who manipulate them for money and power.
Good almighty deity. Let me try this one more time. Kafein did not ask you a question that he wanted an answer to. It was a rhetorical question.A rhetorical question is used in most times to provoke a reaction to the point made. I reacted in explaining the situation in my country given by the constitutional laws and to his point about the questionable relevance of religious authorities and how they in fact are relevant.
Well, I mean, I would talk about dumb nazi murderers but I'm disqualified from taking part in that discussion because you edited your favorite politician, Timo Soini, on my avatar's face.I didn't know it was cmps doing and therefore I apologize. Tho most of the time you certainly sound like a fan boy of fat Timo.
A rhetorical question is used in most times to provoke a reaction to the point made. I reacted in explaining the situation in my country given by the constitutional laws and to his point about the questionable relevance of religious authorities and how they in fact are relevant.You still don't get it.
Please, if you wanna do the smart guy, do it properly and not by trying to come at me all cheap.
You still don't get it.Maybe you re-read the full article about rhetorical questions and try again.
Maybe you re-read the full article about rhetorical questions and try again.Sigh.
Sigh.This is when the point still flies five miles over benkeis head and he starts talking about "Just because you seem to see the need to make a difference between a ballistics guy stating his expert opinion about a gun and some Islam expert stating his opinion about religious rules doesn't make you correct."
Okay, let me go quarter-speed for you.
Kafein, essentially, says this: "religious authorities shouldn't (in an ideal situation) be consulted and religion should be a strictly private matter and not grant any privileges."
No one is questioning German law. I'm certain Kafein knows why the judge asked religious leaders about it, but the point is that it shouldn't happen. Right now it does, because (certain, specified) religions are given special privileges on account of being recognized by the state.
I'm not sure if I can go any more 1+1=2 for you.
All religious matters should be judged by asking somebody who knows what they're talking about, unfortunately, the only fucking people who knows how they interpret are themselves, no fucking random douchebag can tell me how a book that has been written centuries ago (the bible or whatever) is meant to be interpreted, unless you wrote the shit you're no more of an expert on it than anyone else who has read it. It is beyond retarded and racist to go off and say "These religions are real religions, they're interpreted this way, and this is true because I asked some expert asshole.). If you look at your average Christian religion, and Mormonism, both of them tell you not to kill people, however, due to some random experts opinion Mormons are somehow less allowed to enter the army by their god, Catholicism is like the only Christian religion with an actual expert, and if you look at Catholicism there have even been a shitload of antipopes in previous centuries.Are you really that simple??
Sigh.Oww for fucks sake...
Okay, let me go quarter-speed for you.
Kafein, essentially, says this: "religious authorities shouldn't (in an ideal situation) be consulted and religion should be a strictly private matter and not grant any privileges."
No one is questioning German law. I'm certain Kafein knows why the judge asked religious leaders about it, but the point is that it shouldn't happen. Right now it does, because (certain, specified) religions are given special privileges on account of being recognized by the state.
I'm not sure if I can go any more 1+1=2 for you.
It was meant to be ironic :oops:
But back to topic:
If the law guarantees the freedom of religion and the freedom to live according to your religion, who else should be asked about how to protect the religious requirements, bans and rules if not religious authorities.
Oww for fucks sake...
Nah, not gonna keep going like this. Alright, I am stupid, you are smart. Let's settle on this. I am unable to discuss, you're the king of the hill. Same goes for Zlisch, of course.
Have a nice day.
snipOne of the most ridiculous things about the whole affair is precisely the fact that concessions are made based on the size of a religion. Why is a Spaghetti Monsterist's religion less important than a Christian's? It's utterly hypocritical. Basically, as long as you have enough people to cause a ruckus, you get "religious" concessions.
Or an example from Finland: certain religious groups are exempted from military service, while others have to go. The amount of questions that raises......especially as most officially recognized religions aren't really pro killing.
...especially as most officially recognized religions aren't really pro killing.
I actually had a pretty crazy dream a few days ago, a muslim-christian conflict, started with muslims wreaking havoc on the streets of Rome and especially the Vatican.
Yeah, weird.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
At least you don't dream about chopping the head of your best friend from behind while he is sitting on a tree stump. :wink:
Actually, Christianity is a NO MURDER religion. But in a war, you fight to your heart's content. IE, fight in self defence, and if the state asks you to fight for them, you do it. You just do not commit murder(what we would define it in legal definition). While a war is killing, most won't call a soldier killing another as murder(legal or otherwise), unless you kill a surrendered enemy. Of course, I'm not 100% sure on this, cause I'm no expert :wink:, but these guys sure seem like it. (http://www.gotquestions.org/military-Christian.html)Oh yeah, Christianity, the NO MURDER religion.
Islam technically promotes violence (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm) against members of opposite religions, but like anything, that is phrases that can be bastardized by those who wish to gain something by promoting it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_violence)
And then there's other religions, of such a large amount that they can't be classified. But in context, we are only looking at these 2 for purposes of discussion.
dafuq
(click to show/hide)
snip
But, you don't care, you'd rather show off how easy it is for you to feel superior on the internet by sounding cool linking to shit that's not even your own works.Yes, admittedly, the Bible is not my own work.
The key to understanding this issue is knowing that the Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians. Some of the laws were to reveal to the Israelites how to obey and please God.From your link. You think this makes it any better? "Oh, we just have this bloodthirsty, genocidal, baby-killing god that we revere but he doesn't necessarily force us to do all of that, it's just guidelines on how to please him!
Why are you guys even talking about immigration?
The thread is about a bunch of dumb nazi murderers who can't even spell that word and about their leaders who manipulate them for money and power.
Some views are just less wrong.
Also, why do people even bother discussing religious legitimacy? Really, no view is "correct"
Some views are just lesswrongretarded.
Honestly, yes. If religions were invented now, you'd be classified as mentally ill for buying into them. Mental hospitals are full of people who see, hear and believe things that don't exist.
The least you could do is worship a deity that isn't written so inconsistently and in such bad prose. Silmarillion is more believable than any mainstream religion and better written to boot. And the deities aren't as cruel as that of the mainstream religions' is.
That's a sad Generalization. Go research Wiggans. I do believe that's the term.Uh, what do Wiccans have to do with anything?
We've changed from a belief in higher beings to beliefs in certain people/ideas.You mean to say we've changed our beliefs in nonexistent beings to beliefs in things that actually exist and have the power to change the state of the world? Well, ehm, yes...
so i concluded that the sun is my "god"
You mean to say we've changed our beliefs in nonexistent beings to beliefs in things that actually exist and have the power to change the state of the world? Well, ehm, yes...
Believing that a simple ideology is going to "save the world" is utopist at best.Of course it is, (the ideology wouldn't be simple!) and there are ideologies that are just as retarded as religions, but at least they lack some of the other deplorable characteristics of religion.
Of course it is, (the ideology wouldn't be simple!) and there are ideologies that are just as retarded as religions, but at least they lack some of the other deplorable characteristics of religion.
I don't know. Look at these golden dawn fools. That's clearly an ideology and nearly as bad as any religious one.As far as ideologies go, Golden Dawn is still on the mild end of the spectrum.
There is no "clean" ideology. At our hearts, humans are naturally close-minded in some regard(Intolerant) or otherwise violent. We can't escape it, but in most instances, we mitigate it with our ability to reason, rather than just acting on it.
benkei : I don't care about German law. What I was saying is, there shouldn't be any recognised religion. Religion is a private matter that neither should be invaded by state matters (freedom of spirituality) nor invade state matters itself (state-religion separation). What I'm saying is, it is wrong and un-secular for a state to recognise individual religions and give any kind of authority in matters that regard the state and the state only (case in point, the law). Individuals can consider themselves part of a religious group and be open about it if they want just like their sexual orientation (as long as it is not proselytism). They can follow religious "laws" if they want to and be "judged" by their religious authorities if they want to as long as everything is actually legal by state laws. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the state to ensure people affiliated with a given religion don't eat X, just because that religion has many followers. Religious neutrality is not giving concessions based on the size of arbitrary religious groups, it is ignoring religion altogether. People having "problems" just because their religion is forbidding/forcing them to do illegal things have only themselves to blame.
This is precisely what I'm talking about when I say that's not how freedom of religion works. You, as an individual, are allowed to have any spiritual belief you like. You can invent imaginary do's and don'ts to make your life harder for yourself if you like. However You cannot force others to do anything based on those rules you have chosen for yourself. This is a private and strictly individual matter. If those personal rules makes you do things that are outright illegal (e.g. the lamb sacrifice), you are commiting a crime, and you have only yourself to blame. You alone have decided to be religious, precisely because you have the freedom to choose. As an atheist I can also sacrifice a lamb, and just because I'm an atheist doesn't mean I shouldn't be treated the exact same way. We are both humans and equal in rights, that is all that should matter.
Just to show how ridiculous the whole idea of "reasonable exceptions" goes, what if tomorrow the whole atheist population pushed for say, banning paper ? We could all pretend our beliefs prevent us from using paper.
edit : just spotted a missing "not"
As far as ideologies go, Golden Dawn is still on the mild end of the spectrum.
What is a "clean" ideology? How are humans naturally inescapably close-minded and what does that have to do with violence? "Or otherwise" seems to suggest that if you aren't close-minded, you're "otherwise violent." So you can be open-minded but in return must be violent? Is violence always bad?
To clarify: This is not about the state passing laws, enforcing religious rules or allowing criminality because it's ok in the criminals religion. This is simply about the question how existing law (which is perfectly fair and neutral imo) is applicated.
It is allowed to excuse yourself from compulsory service if that entails doing things which are against your convictions. For example the state doesn't force vegans to eat meat. It also doesn't force Jews to eat non-kosher meat (freedom of spirituality). So both groups can excuse themselves from cooking lessons where meat is made. In that case it was about a Muslim wanting to be excused from swimming because it was against her religion. They were asking religious authorities in the context of whether that was actually the case and if they should accept the excuse. This is all that is about.
If you'd want to avoid that in the first place and reject the reasons outright as Muslim/religious, that'd be you trying to force a religion/value set on the state, unless you are not accepting any excuses. Which would probably entail tying a vegetarian to a chair and force feed him meat. Sounds terribly funny, but I think I'll still stick with the more liberal way (hell, since this is about swimming, I'd actually consider "I just don't feel like it" a valid excuse to be honest - how far it goes plays a big role also, obviously, good luck trying to fund a religion which is against taxes).
In any case this is far removed from any actual integration problems, since real problem kids and their parents do not care the slightest about failing school.
Point was, we often have natural instincts/inclinations to act certain ways. In most instances, we don't act on them because we can reason, either with ourselves, or others, why not to do that.(In addition to societies/cultures laws also helping in this regard) But, when you get people who manipulate others(IE Example in this thread) for their own gain(Political/Social in this case) that's where Politics/Ideology starts to equal Religious "Fanaticism."That doesn't answer any of my questions.
And Violence is inherent to humans. Bad things sell, simple as that. We like violent and grim movies and games, dark stories, even physical and damaging sports. It's not Colosseum bad(IE real death/Blood and animals, etc) but it's as close as we get with our enlightened perspective.
That doesn't answer any of my questions.
That doesn't disprove my point.No, but it kills the discussion.
No, but it kills the discussion.
Your vegan analogy isn't a good analogy. Arguing you shouldn't fail swimming classes because your religion doesn't allow you to swim is not the same as not swimming because your religion doesn't allow you to swim. Case in point, the latter is perfectly fine. But if you don't attend swimming classes, you don't learn to swim. No matter the reasons, the end result is that you didn't learn to swim, and that means you fail the class. The vegan analogy equivalent would be arguing that you should be able to become a non-vegan gastronomy critique without eating meat.
This guy has the easiest face to caricatureThose eyebrows :D