Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 And I too am curious to see Oprah's take on this. I'd be surprised if she had the courage to stand up to Sharpton and Jackson, but she has a strong voice herself in the African-American community, I'd love to be surprised on this one. If Oprah supports Whitlock and Bill Cosby's position on this, I'll have a newfound respect for her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Cracker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Fair enough - extortionism seems to be a terrorist tactic to me, but if you wanna' split hairs knock yourself out. I'm not going to get into a semantics war here but terrorists blow people up. The Pepsi plane thing clearly labels Jackson and Sharpton as extortionists, not through threat of violence but through threat of monetary loss e.g. advertiser boycotts. The T word needs to be retained for killers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 (edited) I'm not going to get into a semantics war here but terrorists blow people up. The Pepsi plane thing clearly labels Jackson and Sharpton as extortionists, not through threat of violence but through threat of monetary loss e.g. advertiser boycotts. The T word needs to be retained for killers. terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion Jesse and Al certainly fall into the "coercion" category, so I don't think it's that much of a stretch at all. Edited April 16, 2007 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Terrorists? Me thinks this conversation has crossed the line where there's no point in proceeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion Jesse and Al certainly fall into the "coercion" category, so I don't think it's that much of a stretch at all. If words like terrorist get overused, they lose their meaning. If you want to get all semantic, then let's look at what it says: terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion This implies that terrorism is ONE means of coercion. It does not imply that all coercion is terroristic. I would suggest that Jackson and Sharpton do not have the means to be terrorists but do have the means to be extortionists (coercing favors, coercing policy changes). There's no way that you can convince me these two toads are systematically using terror per se. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Whitlock nailed it. Unfortunately we are hearing these more grounded and thoughtful opinions well after Imus was lynched in the court of public opinion. Shoot first and ask questions later............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 (edited) If words like terrorist get overused, they lose their meaning. If you want to get all semantic, then let's look at what it says: terrorism - the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion This implies that terrorism is ONE means of coercion. It does not imply that all coercion is terroristic. Well, duh. I never said that it did. Jesse and Al use threats, intimidation, fear, and coercion to achieve their goals. In the place of violence, they use the "racist" stigma as a weapon. Those tactics are not very far-removed from those that conventional terrorists use. Would I use the word "terrorist" to describe Al and Jesse? Not necessarily. I think that "race-baiter", "poverty pimp", and "bigot" are more appropriate terms. Edited April 16, 2007 by Bill Swerski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 IMO, it's not terribly different than what Islamic terrorists do. I think you just lost this discussion, Bill. I have yet to see either of these two or any of their followers driving a truckload of explosives into a market and blowing 80 people all to hell. It is precisely this loose use of terms that makes them lose their impact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 I don't think it's that much of a stretch at all. You must be quite good at yoga, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 I think you just lost this discussion, Bill. "I'm not going to read your posts or think about the points that you make, so I'll just say that you "lost the discussion" to make myself feel smarter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 "I'm not going to read your posts or think about the points that you make, so I'll just say that you "lost the discussion" to make myself feel smarter. Okay, if it isn't that much of stretch to think of Sharpton and Jesse as "terrorists" then you must at least see the merit in Ward Churchill calling many of the victims of the WTC attack "little Eichmans" - after they (and we all) certainly turned a blind eye to the negative impact our lifestyle and country have on the 3rd world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Okay, if it isn't that much of stretch to think of Sharpton and Jesse as "terrorists" then you must at least see the merit in Ward Churchill calling many of the victims of the WTC attack "little Eichmans" - after they (and we all) certainly turned a blind eye to the negative impact our lifestyle and country have on the 3rd world. So, did we attack the third world with weapons or damning, career-ending accusations of racism? I'd say that's a very significant stretch, with the Al/Jesse comparison being a much shorter one. And like I said before, Al and Jesse are deserving of different labels, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 swerski = victim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 "I'm not going to read your posts or think about the points that you make, so I'll just say that you "lost the discussion" to make myself feel smarter. You could clearly see that I offered you a counter argument three times, including the one you truncated just now. I know you have NEVER admitted defeat before but you would be wise to pack this foolishness up before you make an ass of yourself. You do realize you compared Jackson / Sharpton to an Islamic bomber / murderer, don't you? What are your thoughts on comparisons of Bush to Hitler? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Good god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 You do realize you compared Jackson / Sharpton to an Islamic bomber / murderer, don't you? What are your thoughts on comparisons of Bush to Hitler? Clearly we are at fault for misunderstanding Swerski's specious and utterly ridiculous over-exaggeration, and should stop gang-raping the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 You could clearly see that I offered you a counter argument three times, including the one you truncated just now. I know you have NEVER admitted defeat before but you would be wise to pack this foolishness up before you make an ass of yourself. Why are you allowed to make an ass of yourself, while I can't? You do realize you compared Jackson / Sharpton to an Islamic bomber / murderer, don't you? What are your thoughts on comparisons of Bush to Hitler? I pointed out that they use the same basic TACTICS, you moran. So go ahead and take your simplistic strawman argument and shove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Clearly we are at fault for misunderstanding Swerski's specious and utterly ridiculous over-exaggeration, and should stop gang-raping the thread. The lefties smell blood and come to feed like piranhas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Ursa wins again ., bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 I pointed out that they use the same basic TACTICS, you moran. So go ahead and take your simplistic strawman argument and shove it. Okay, no. There is no threat of violence when Sharpton and Jesse Jackson show up. As a matter of fact, their tactics are very much in line with those of Focus on the Family and their retarded ilk who boycott networks for showing people that homos are OK. Somehow I doubt that most would be willing to compare family-friendly religious groups to terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 Okay, no. There is no threat of violence when Sharpton and Jesse Jackson show up. So, are you saying that violence is needed to destroy somebody's life? People like Sharpton and Jackson use the "racist" stigma to destroy reputations and get people fired from their jobs all of the time. What is a man without his reputation and livelihood? As a matter of fact, their tactics are very much in line with those of Focus on the Family and their retarded ilk who boycott networks for showing people that homos are OK.Somehow I doubt that most would be willing to compare family-friendly religious groups to terrorists. If you're trying to get me to defend Focus on the Family, you're barking up the wrong tree. You can call Focus on the Family "terrorists" all you want, but I won't resort to personal attacks even if I did disagree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 So, are you saying that violence is needed to destroy somebody's life? People like Sharpton and Jackson use the "racist" stigma to destroy reputations and get people fired from their jobs all of the time. What is a man without his reputation and livelihood? Well, alive, for one. And in Don Imus case, extremely wealthy. You can call Focus on the Family "terrorists" all you want, but I won't resort to personal attacks even if I did disagree with you. Jesse and Al use threats, intimidation, fear, and coercion to achieve their goals. In the place of violence, they use the "racist" stigma as a weapon. Those tactics are not very far-removed from those that conventional terrorists use. Replace "Jesse and Al" and "racist" with any number of pressure groups on EITHER side of the aisle, and you've just called a big chunk of activists akin to terrorists. Your words, not mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 well, this sure got dumb in a hurry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 16, 2007 Share Posted April 16, 2007 well, this sure got dumb in a hurry. Swerski has that effect on threads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.