I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

[ARCHIVE FOR WORLDS 1&2]Forum for discussing in game politics, village relations and matters of justice.

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby theTrav » Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:27 am

sabinati wrote:tell me you at least get the acronym

BSTD... what's to get about that? is this some crazy internet meme of yours?
User avatar
theTrav
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 11:25 pm

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Krantarin » Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:14 am

I still think you should go with Metropolis Of Brodgar or Brodgar Metropolis.
A Lurker from the days when Laketown was on the frontier and Bottleneck was the military superpower.
User avatar
Krantarin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:29 am

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Golbez » Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:40 am

theTrav wrote:
sabinati wrote:tell me you at least get the acronym

BSTD... what's to get about that? is this some crazy internet meme of yours?

Bottleneck
And
Swampcrazed
Towns
And
Related
Dependents

Spells out BASTARD.
Golbez
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:18 am

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Cajoes » Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:59 pm

Golbez wrote:
theTrav wrote:
sabinati wrote:tell me you at least get the acronym

BSTD... what's to get about that? is this some crazy internet meme of yours?

Bottleneck
And
Swampcrazed
Towns
And
Related
Dependents

Spells out BASTARD.


I am struggling to see a problem with this bacronym.
User avatar
Cajoes
 
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:04 am

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby niltrias » Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:57 am

I cant help but feel that theTrav used some kinda reverse-ninjutsu-backwards-ass-troll move FTW on this one...
<Marcher Lord>
Dogs! Oh god, please give us DOGS!
There are those who press on with the ardor of beer, and those who are faint with thirst.
User avatar
niltrias
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 10:19 am

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby theTrav » Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:19 pm

niltrias wrote:I cant help but feel that theTrav used some kinda reverse-ninjutsu-backwards-ass-troll move FTW on this one...

what's obtuse?
User avatar
theTrav
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 11:25 pm

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Raephire » Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:38 am

Jackard wrote:loopoo you are way too easily riled over internet words


What people fail to realize is that behavior and ideas on the internet, much like prison, tend to bleed over in to the real world. So it's safe to say any action taken on the internet, whether in jest or seriousness, will certainly affect us all.
User avatar
Raephire
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Raephire » Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:44 am

Loopoo wrote:I'm relaxed but it was just out of order. And internet words don't bother me, but he's just being stereotypical.

It's the radical Muslims that blow 'emselves up to get virgins. A true Muslim wouldn't kill a bus full of innocent people, such as women and children, or blow up a tower full of people.

:C

Makes me cry :(



Dude, There is no such thing as a conservative muslim, only really good actors, or those not well versed in their faith.
Even the "peaceful" Muslims are currently at war with the world and they are winning.

They immigrate to other countries and bring their culture WITH them, instead of doing what all who immigrate are expected to do- embrace the culture they move to. What this does is, since muslims have 3-8 chilren, and most other countries have 1-2.5 children, is creates a muslim nation, Not to mention the converts who believe they are entering a "peaceful" religion.

The immigrate, then hold protests, the outvote people, or murder in the streets until finally a government collapses and a muslim authority takes hold, Welcome sharia law - Where men are everything and women have no rights.

Do your research.
User avatar
Raephire
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Raephire » Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:51 am

loftar wrote:
Loopoo wrote:I'm not saying we deserve more respect cause we're "more equal", it's just he deliberately makes fun of the religion, using only stereotypes and nothing factual in it at all. He portrays the idea that all Muslims are dynamite-wielding, turban-headed freaks who reproduce at the speed of light.

Let me offer a more detailed account of my analysis.

Reading the OP, because it contains no obvious traces of satire against its own style or anything, I attribute its islamic style simply to romanticism. Why the author chose the islamic style as target for his romanticism, I cannot tell -- maybe he has a predilection for islamic culture; maybe he just wanted his declaration of war to sound epic, and an islamic expression was the first which popped into his head -- but it is of little import. The point is that, since it was supposed to be romantic, it, more or less by definition, has to invoke stereotypes -- the same thing could have been done with Christendom, by invoking images of archangels with flaming swords, crusaders clad in red crosses, the Ark of the Covenant, dying in the name of God and what have you; or any other style with some related stereotypes, for that matter. I can see no traces of him "mocking the religion" or "pissing on it", and I think this should be obvious to anyone. If anything, I think it was well done and if it had been done in a Christian style, I, coming from the Christian parts of the world (though atheist), would feel flattered rather than insulted.

Add to this some observations about the contemporary world:
A) There are lots of crazy muslims in the world killing people in the name of Allah and Jihad.
B) Because of A, there are haters of Islam abound in the western world.
C) Probably as a repercussion from World War II and the mistakes of Hitler (to quote J.R.R. Tolkien: "I have in this War a burning private grudge [...] against that ruddy little ignoramus Adolf Hitler[...]. Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have ever loved, and tried to present in its true light."), there are lots of cultural relativists trying to uphold the equality of all cultures. Like all socialists and other collectivists*, they would rather diminish the glory of western civilization than admit that any other culture would be worse in any aspect whatever -- even if it has to go through the laying of western culture in ruins, blood and ashes. Unfortunately, they have managed to make themselves into the current political correctness.
D) Because of C, and because B is obviously an expression of some cultures being different, it is currently popular and politically correct to defend muslims in everything and to denounce the crazy muslims as "not true muslims" (because, as we all know, Islam is the religion of love); and politically incorrect to even mention the word "Jihad" (except as something that "not true muslims"** do). This is true both of muslims and non-muslims***.

Since it is so hard to ascribe any islamic insult to the OP, I drew the conclusion that your reaction to the OP must have been a reflection of D as a result of Islamic stereotypes (or maybe just the word "jihad") having been mentioned. As a general opponent of everything that is politically correct, I felt I had to make some retort. I chose "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" because it can be applied to the situation of Islam being the darling child of cultural relativism, and though the claim is that all religions should be equally defended, noone would bother to defend e.g. Christendom**** in the same reflex-like manner. I don't know if that was obvious or not.

* Compare with welfare-statists, who would rather tax rich people out of existence than allowing there to be an economic difference between any two persons, and its direct consequence: The common people of Soviet Russia, everyone being equally poor.
** For extra collectivist points, it should be mentioned that those untrue muslims are also acting in their own, selfish interest rather than the interest of their people, that they are power-hungry and that they are misusing common values of their culture to their own ends. Before being corrupted by these egoists (men all of them, mind you!), Jihad was a beautiful concept, filled with love and sunflowers.
*** Christians, on the other hand, have to hate themselves. Except, of course, if the contrast can be the consequence of scientific rationalization of the world (so typical of the cold, unfeeling, western world): atheism.
**** Or, for that matter, even Judaism, since Israel and the USA maintain such close ties, making Israel an extension of their hated (though equal) western world.



Agreed, PC is the biggest bullshit lie spoonfed to children.
User avatar
Raephire
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:34 pm

Re: I declare Jihad on Chernobyl

Postby Potjeh » Sat Oct 24, 2009 12:58 pm

Raephire wrote:Dude, There is no such thing as a conservative muslim, only really good actors, or those not well versed in their faith.

You could say the same thing about Christians. Capitalism is the most unchristian thing ever, and yet it's the prime characteristic of USA, which is probably the most fundamentalist Christian country out there.
Image Bottleneck
User avatar
Potjeh
 
Posts: 11811
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 4:03 pm

PreviousNext

Return to [ARCHIVE]In Congress Assembled

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot] and 1 guest