Friday, January 27, 2012

“This is Not a Threat, It's a Warning”

As reported here last weekend, a group of protesters gathered outside the parliament building in Oslo a week ago to protest the presence of Norwegian troops in Afghanistan.

In the video clip below, a culturally enriched demonstrator harangues the crowd and threatens the people of Norway, afterwards receiving the expected “Allahu akhbar!” as a response.

Many thanks to Cecilie for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


ib said...

The more you back down the more they advance. Take heed.

Chiu ChunLing said...

The critical difference between a threat and a warning is that a warning describes consequences for actions that exist regardless of the choices of the person or persons describing them. Usually this means that the consequences will not involve the person describing them in any way...cautions on various products and roads saying that it is unsafe to use them in certain ways are examples. The people who write and post these warnings are not at all involved in the consequences if someone ignores the warning.

There can be cases where the person giving the warning is involved in the consequences, but not as a matter of choice. You can warn someone that, if they remove your hands, you will no longer cook and clean for them. This is because, with your hands removed, you are not able to cook and clean. Of course, it might still be possible to re-learn how to do these things without hands, but the warning is still a valid one. You are causally involved in the immediate consequence of you no longer cooking and cleaning, but it is still not a matter of your choice.

When the described consequence exists only as a result of the choice of the person describing it, then that is a threat rather than a warning.

There can be borderline the case of people not cooking and cleaning for you anymore if you cut of their hands. While it is a natural thing that they cannot continue cooking and cleaning with their hands cut off, it is not absolutely impossible for them to have chosen to learn how to continue doing these things without hands. On the other hand, it is not particularly natural to learn how to do without hands while you have them, nor is it natural to go to great lengths to continue helping those who cut off your hands. So while the case may approach a border, it is still clearly a warning rather than a threat to say that you will no longer cook and clean for someone that cuts off your hands.

Muslims should be warned that they are provoking a genocide against themselves. I have nothing to do with that...if Islam continues to create intolerable conditions for Europeans, then Europeans will cease to tolerate it. I am not a European, let alone all Europeans. My choices have nothing to do with what will happen to Muslims in Europe once enough Europeans are sufficiently angered. And even if I were a European, the situation of non-integrated Muslim immigration would not exist as a consequence of my choices (since I'm not a leftist).

On the other hand, when Muslims voluntarily immigrate into European countries because those countries are far nicer places to live than Islamic nations, then everything that Muslims then do in those countries is ultimately the result of their choice to immigrate. It is not possible for a Muslim, who has voluntarily immigrated to Europe, to talk of future actions of the Muslim community in which he intends to take part and have that not be obviously a result of his own choices. He chose to come to Europe, he is choosing to be part of the future violence, the consequences being described exist entirely and only as a direct result of the choices of these Muslims.

They are making threats, they are a threat, and they must be dealt with accordingly.

Chiu Chun-Ling.

Anonymous said...

Good video clip, although he should paint his beard white, talk about more pleasant matters and be Santa Claus. (Sorry, one should be serious on these fascists!)