Come friendly airliners, fall on Europe...

Jam1eSc0tland · Tar Sands Joined: Apr 05, 2005 Posts: 23

Hi Andrew,
I'm practically a nobody in this large IT company & have no input whatsoever on appointments. So it is hard for me to give any further insight. I am merely making an observation. I understand your point about AA being racist, & to be honest I do not have enough knowledge on the matter to argue sufficiently well. But I do believe that an appointment should be made on the best person for the job.....But who is to say a black person or a women isn't the best person for the job?
I think we are all able to discriminate without falling fowl of the law. Maybe AA is addressing this inbalance.

Hi Rogerhb,
What situation haven't you come across?

rogerhb

gg3

JayBee, let's see if I understand you correctly here.

You started this topic with the title "Come friendly airliners, fall on Europe."

Clearly, when airliners *fall* rather than *land,* they are crashing, and the passengers are getting killed, right?

Okay.

Now in your first post you say, "I hope the Taleban or Al-Qaeda can form their caliphate in Europe and thoroughly cleanse this continent."

There has been no news of a breakdown in the Public Cleansing Services (sanitation departments) in Europe, nor that there is such a labor shortage for dustmen (refuse collectors) that you'd have to hire terrorists to empty the bins.

The last time airliners fell on cities, the relevant public authorities (Department of Sanitation, City of New York) were quite capable of cleaning up the rubble, debris, and ash accumulations that covered most of the downtown area. So I don't see how a Caliphate could improve on this.

Since the Taleban and Al Qaeda were responsible for *making* that particular mess, it's not a good idea to expect them to *clean up after themselves.* In any case, just because they could fly airliners into buildings, doesn't mean they're qualified to operate road sweepers in crowded urban areas.

They do however seem uniquely capable of slaughtering people in large numbers, in furtherance of an ideology of religious extremism.

The other meaning of "cleanse," as recent history has unfortunately shown, occurs in the phrase "ethnic cleansing," which roughly translates as "treatment of unpopular minorities as if they are a form of refuse that needs to be disposed of." However we did fight a world war against that sort of thing about fifty or sixty years ago, and last time I checked, that ideology had been thoroughly discredited. Put in the proverbial dustbin of history, to use a relevant metaphor!

So, ghastly as it may be, it appears that you are calling for Taleban and Al Qaeda terrorists to crash airliners and slaughter large numbers of people across Europe, in order to treat the members of some unpopular minority as if they are refuse that needs to be disposed of.

This of course is highly inefficient, since crashing airplanes is terribly expensive compared to other methods. History's last significant practitioners of the concept were much more efficient, with their gas chambers and crematoria and so on, but even they couldn't keep up since the rest of the world just wouldn't let them get along with the job and be done with it.

But why, oh why...? What evil are you concerned about whose only solution is a Final Solution...?

The hint is in your link. *Click!* And up comes a story about some silly local officials who changed the artwork in their office because all those pictures of heterosexual couples getting married might offend gay couples who come to the office to get their marriage papers.

Well I agree those bureaucrats were silly. After all, even though gay people are supposed to be better judges of interior design than straight people, I doubt they expect a local government office to be appointed like a first-class restaurant or hotel. Much less to have artwork on the walls that would qualify for a museum or university gallery. All those gay couples are really interested in is equality under law, and as long as they can get their wedding cakes made up with two grooms or two brides, they shouldn't give a hoot about government officials' taste in paintings.

But somehow I don't think you're promoting a Final Solution over a disagreement in art appreciation. It must be something else.

Aha!, it must have something to do with gay people, not paintings or local government art critics!

Now it's well known that straight people who are particularly vociferous about hating gay people, are usually secretly afraid of their own homosexual feelings. JayBee, have you ever had sex with, or had a burning desire to have sex with, someone of your own gender? If so, that's OK, you don't have to hide it here, much less call for mass slaughter by terrorists in order to keep your secret.

It's perfectly normal for a straight person to be put off by the thought of having gay sex, just like it's perfectly normal for a gay person to be put off by the thought of having straight sex, or a rap music aficionado to be put off by the comparatively boring 4/4 beat of conventional rock-n-roll music, or a vegetarian to be put off by the thought of a steak dinner. But when someone goes into Jihad mode over it, there's obviously more to the story than just not liking what someone else "does."

So let's get this whole thing clear.

1) So we understand, you are asking for the Taleban and Al Qaeda to perform a type of task in a highly inefficient manner, that a European nation's government couldn't perform successfully despite its much greater efficiency. If anything, a sane person would call for *greater* rather than *lesser* efficiency, to improve the probability of success. Clearly your call for inefficient methods is a sign of defective reasoning abilities.

2) The task you wish to see completed, is for terrorists to commit mass slaughter of people in Europe. That was not a call for defensive warfare against an external attacker, nor a call for a swift law-enforcement response to an internal criminal threat; it was a call for acts of mass terrorism. So you have identified yourself with the cause of terrorists. This makes you an enemy of both my country and yours. And by any standard, calling for terrorist slaughter of innocent people also establishes that you are an *evil* person.

3) Your rationale for the terrorism is hatred of gay people, which demonstrates that you are secretly afraid of your own homosexual inclinations. This is the "projection defense," which, when carried to that extreme, is evidence of serious psychiatric disturbance. Your impaired reasoning in (1) supports that conclusion.

Therefore we can conclude that you are a seriously disturbed and evil person: a criminal psychopath.

You need serious help before you hurt someone. Pick up the phone, right now, and dial 999. The police and paramedics know how to handle this. You'll feel much better after you make that call. Really.

actionreplay

gg3

Yes, but at least they're *harmless* idiots. Unlike JayBee, whose call for mass-casualty terrorism is harmful idiocy, motivated by a projection defense against his own cognitive dissonance about his sexuality.

I'll take the helpful & harmless kind any day.