Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2017 at 1:08pm:
Why doesn't Europe sue China for knocking out one third of it's population during the black death dear.

Karnal wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2017 at 1:22pm:
Only after the Greeks and the Spanish sue to the Ottomans. And while we are at it we can sue the Muslims for all their conquests around the world.

freediver wrote on Nov 28^th, 2017 at 6:36pm:


Great argument FD - its not the people who raped and pillaged who are to blame for the consequences of that rape and pillage - no, we have to blame the people who may or may not have determined the course of said rape and pillage because of the completely unrelated things they did hundreds of years earlier. FD logic at its finest. But at least do me one thing for me FD. Please don't ever again accuse others of going to the most absurd lengths to spinelessly apologise for atrocities committed.

Quote:


I'll once again explain my exceedingly simple analogy - as I can't believe you are having this much trouble understanding it...

1. A man rapes a woman
2. You can even think of him as a black man if you like - I have a funny feeling the idea of blaming a black man for rape is a little more palatable to you than thinking of him as a white man.
3. the (black) man just happens to have HIV - but he doesn't know that
4. victim of rape contracts HIV as a result

Now after you've had enough time to absorb the above scenario, consider this questions:

Do you blame the man for infecting the woman with HIV?
Do you blame him - even though his assault hinged on intentions that had nothing to do with the disease - or in other words, in raping the woman, he didn't do it in order to give the woman a terrible disease?

The answer of course is a no-brainer. We don't absurdly say a man who raped a woman and infected her with HIV is not to blame for infecting her based on the logic that he had no intention of infecting her - do we?? Of course not. In exactly the same way, only the most spineless of spineless apologists would even consider employing the excuse that the European rape and pillagers who invaded the new world and decimated entire populations with their diseases - shouldn't be blamed for infecting the people.

But I guess it is difficult to bring yourself to attribute blame for the effects of rape and pillage, if you are unwilling to acknowledge the rape and pillage in the first place - right FD? I mean, lets be fair, you have spent this entire discussion thinking up every strategy imaginable to obfuscate, apologise for, and flat out ignore the greatest period of rape, pillage and slaughter known to man to that time. What happened in the Congo again? Oh thats right, nothing but a bit of bad weather and arab diseases - and naturally the Belgians came in to help out. 



Quote:


What a strange analogy for you to make FD considering the absurd logic you keep applying. Naturally I blame the man, black, white or yellow or pink. And yet, if you applied your logic consistently, you would blame someone else other than the (black) man - so long as he didn't know he had AIDS. Right? Or.... are you now revising your logic - are you now saying that a group of people (lets call them "Europeans") who invade, rape and pillage an inhabited place, and in the process inadvertantly infect these people with terrible diseases - they actually *ARE* to blame for the transmission of those diseases - just like the black man who raped the mexiwoman? Sorry FD, to understand this logic, you actually have to first acknowledge the Europeans raped and pillaged. Sorry, thats going to be quite traumatic for you, I know.

Because you have spent the entire thread blaming white people for diseases, even if non-white people were obviously involved in the spread of the disease and regardless of the intentions of the white people.

Quote:


Generally I take the radical view that charges of racism should involve actual racism.

If a white supremacist started blaming Europeans for spreading diseases in the new world because of their rape and pillage expeditions - I'm fairly confident I would defend him against charges of racism, cause you know, it wouldn't be racist. I wouldn't be petulant like you and insist that regardless of what he actually says, everything he says must be racist - just because he is a white supremacist. Even if he's talking about christmas pudding, presumably you would stand their yelling "RACIST! RACIST! RACIST!" - if your childish views of muslim attitudes are anything to go by

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 20^th, 2017 at 2:37pm:


Oh G, praise Allah you're back! So much has changed since you've been away. Herbie's joined forces with Lisa, Bogie and poor Cods to become a renegade team of victims - so unfair. FD's defending their right to not be offended. Everybody hates Greggery and silly old Karnal. Aussie and JS have been banished. I'm back on Herbie's Ignore List. And Moses and the old boy have turned up the heat on the Muselman. This time, it's serious.

As you can see, nothing's changed.

[quote author=Karnal link=1510807868/82#82 date=1513747841]Oh G, praise Allah you're back! So much has changed since you've been away. Herbie's joined forces with Lisa, Bogie and poor Cods to become a renegade team of victims - so unfair. FD's defending their right to not be offended. Everybody hates Greggery and silly old Karnal. Aussie and JS have been banished. I'm back on Herbie's Ignore List. And Moses and the old boy have turned up the heat on the Muselman. This time, it's serious.

As you can see, nothing's change[/quote]


for a moment I thought this was a karmel/hammer thread...

and there we all get a mention...

... nothing has changed after all..

no FD, you and you alone brought in this irrelevant rubbish about races.

Me, I blame the rapist(s). It really is that simple.

freediver wrote on Dec 20^th, 2017 at 9:13pm:


Oh dear, poor confused FD. I actually thought when you attempted to argue the same analogy in your last reply (of course making it more palatable for yourself by making the rapist black), you might actually be catching on.

Can you clear this up for me FD - very simple: if a man rapes a woman and gives her AIDS - is he to blame for infecting her - even if he had no idea he had AIDS in the first place? Yes or no. And it really is possible to answer it without bringing in irrelevant nonsense about race.

ah interesting use of the word "would" there issue. Its a sneaky way of saying "never actually has".