NationStates Jolt Archive

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?
Give it a couple of months.

Because they supply America with 1.7 million barrels per day of crude oil.

And every time we fill up our SUVs and waste gas like there's no tomorrow, we're giving them billions of dollars more to spend on beating women, imprisoning and killing homosexuals, keeping their people in poverty and ignorance, and training new generations of terrorists to kill innocent people. That's okay, though, as long as America gets cheap oil...it doesn't matter who suffers because of it.

Those bastards are supposedly our "allies" but they're really just bloodsuckers that have worked with our government for decades to keep us dependent on them. :rolleyes:

Give it a couple of months.

Note: I don't want a war with them, I'm just saying, if we had to go to war in the Middle East, why not with them?

Oh, and if you believe we'd actually go to war with them, you're terrible naive. There's nothing the Saudi royal family could do to make Bush stop fellating them.

A few very important reasons:

1) We need their oil. They are very well placed in OPEC, which in turn has a huge amount of lean on us because of our oil addiction.

2) Mecca. It happens to be in Saudi Arabia, and is basically the Vatican of Islam. Attack SA and it's likely that EVERY single islamic fundamentalist is going to come after you in a heartbeat.

3) The leader of Saudi Arabia didn't "try to kill [Dubya's] father." I hope at least a few of you remember that line from pre-Iraq war Bush

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Why?

1) The Saudis and the US have a deal. We help keep the scumbags in power and they keep OPEC from getting out of hand.

2) The house of Bush and the house of Saud are good friends.

3) A military invasion into the lands in and around Mecca and Medina would spark a world war involving every Muslim nation and many Muslims living in the civilised world against the US and its allies.

Why?

1) The Saudis and the US have a deal. We help keep the scumbags in power and they keep OPEC from getting out of hand.

2) The house of Bush and the house of Saud are good friends.

3) A military invasion into the lands in and around Mecca and Medina would spark a world war involving every Muslim nation and many Muslims living in the civilised world against the US and its allies.

Beat you to it :D

Delightful system they have there, yes. :(

Give it a couple of months.

Nope. The Saudis are allies of the US in the "War on Terror", hence they are "good guys" and should not be criticised. The fact they are far more repressive than Iran (which doesn't mean Iran is a paradise of civil rights, far from it) notwithstanding, Iran is "bad" and Saudi Arabia is "good".

Haven't you learnt that, yet? They're either with the US or against it. Saudi Arabia is "with".

1) The Saudis and the US have a deal. We help keep the scumbags in power and they keep OPEC from getting out of hand.

No, they pretend to keep OPEC under control. In fact, they have been the most vocal supporters of the recent production cuts, and were the first to put them in to place. In reality, they're the ones that use their power in OPEC most effectively to keep prices high, and they're the only ones that actually adhere to quotas seriously.

They hate us, and they have always hated us. They're just better than Iran at keeping it hidden.

Ariddia has it right. Iran is a libertarian paradise compared to Shitty Arabia.


And note I don't hate the citizens of S.A., just the maniacally corrupt despots who misrule the place.

Beat you to it :D

:confused: :eek: :( :mad:

And note I don't hate the citizens of S.A., just the maniacally corrupt despots who misrule the place.

The citizens of Saudi Arabia have suffered so much under those monsters that it will take decades to reverse the damage the monarchy and the countries that purchase their oil have inflicted on them.

The Middle Eastern oil industry has been unequivocally one of the most prolonged systems of oppression ever inflicted on a culture in human history.

The citizens of Saudi Arabia have suffered so much under those monsters that it will take decades to reverse the damage the monarchy and the countries that purchase their oil have inflicted on them.

The Middle Eastern oil industry has been unequivocally one of the most prolonged systems of oppression ever inflicted on a culture in human history.

QFT.

I don't know how Bush, a so-called "Christian" can befriend camel humping savages (read: the Saudi royal family) who so ruthlessly repress Christians.

I don't know how Bush, a so-called "Christian" can befriend camel humping savages (read: the Saudi royal family) who so ruthlessly repress Christians.

Because his brand of Christianity serves Mammon rather than God.

Because his brand of Christianity serves Mammon rather than God.

LOL

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Simple. Because their big mates with that chimp you guys (EDIT ie US citizens of voting age) elected president.

Simple. Because their big mates with that chimp you guys (EDIT ie US citizens of voting age) elected president.

I didn't vote for Curious George, though. I voted third-party. ;)

Because his brand of Christianity serves Mammon rather than God.

I'm at work, and I actually laughed out loud when I read that. You rock.

I can't wait until the oil runs out. Sure it will mean problems for the US and other nations, but I want to see the look on the faces of the Saudis when they realize that the pigs and apes are set up to survive and they're left penniless and starving in the desert despite their wahabi leader's claims to superiority.

Simple. Because their big mates with that chimp you guys (EDIT ie US citizens of voting age) elected president.

I and many other US citizens never voted for him. In fact, the majority of American voters didn't vote for him.

I and many other US citizens never voted for him. In fact, the majority of American voters didn't vote for him.

Yay for the Electoral College!

I can't wait until the oil runs out. Sure it will mean problems for the US and other nations, but I want to see the look on the faces of the Saudis when they realize that the pigs and apes are set up to survive and they're left penniless and starving in the desert despite their wahabi leader's claims to superiority.

It's coming quite soon; in fact, there are rumors out there that the Saudis already are at peak production. Once that happens, it's all downhill for them. We'll have to pay more for oil, but I'm pretty sure we can cut our consumption by 6% (our demand supplied by Saudi oil exports) with no difficulty. Hell, we could do that overnight if we wanted to.

I look forward to the future where we our economy is powered by clean, domestically produced alternative sources and they are not only left penniless and powerless but they have to face a very angry people ready to exact 70 years worth of revenge for their suffering.

The Middle East will finally be free, and I really think from there the war on terrorism will finally be won.

Nice schools the Saudis run...

I see your Saudi schools and raise you Pakistani schools (another tight ally of the US :) ).

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007/02/07/story_7-2-2007_pg7_19
Baton-wielding female students of the madrassa occupied the library last month after the government demolished Hamza Masjid and issued demolition notices to 10 other mosques and seminaries, including Jamia Faridia and Jamia Hafsa, that have been built illegally on state land. The students have demanded that the government withdraw the demolition notices, rebuild Hamza Masjid, and enforce Sharia law in the country.

The letter, seen by Daily Times, says the Pakistan Army has “forgotten its motto of jihad”, hence losing “credibility and dignity among the masses”. It calls upon the government to stop the media from portraying jihad as terrorism.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007/02/02/story_2-2-2007_pg7_18
Enforce Sharia or we won’t leave library: girl students

ISLAMABAD: The girl students of Jamia Hafsa have refused to vacate a children’s public library until the government enforces Sharia law in Pakistan.

“We want Sharia or we are ready to embrace martyrdom,” representatives of the ‘Students Action Committee’ told reporters here on Thursday. They said they would not vacate the library until Sharia was enforced in the country and action against mosques did not stop. They said they wanted an assurance in this regard from the president. The girl students occupied the library after the government demolished a part of their Lal Masjid seminary, which was constructed illegally on state land. The Council of Islamic Ideology had ruled that such mosques and seminaries built on encroached land were un-Islamic and should be demolished. Around 4,000 female students of the seminary have been standing guard at the library with batons in their hands for over two weeks. Earlier, the administration of Lal Masjid had said that the library would be vacated if the government stopped its campaign to demolish mosques built on encroached land. But the students’ representatives - Hamna Abdullah, Khola Abdur Rehman, Ume Aimen and Amna - said that they were ready to carry out suicide attacks if the authorities took any action against their madressa. “We are ready to give our lives for our religion. If any commando action is taken, it will be retaliated. We are ready for Fedai (suicidal) attacks,” they said.

Asked whom they would carry out such attacks against, the students said: “Those who are against Islam.” They said Islam permitted suicide attacks.

Incidentally this is allegedly where Molly Campbell / Misbah Rana has been enrolled. Happy times.

wait... FEMALES promoting SHARIA LAW?! :eek:

Wow girls who want Sharia law.
Doesn't Sharia law basicly make women property?

Sad when someone WANTS to be oppressed.
They are obiviously insane and should be locked away.

Note: I don't want a war with them, I'm just saying, if we had to go to war in the Middle East, why not with them?

Oh, and if you believe we'd actually go to war with them, you're terrible naive. There's nothing the Saudi royal family could do to make Bush stop fellating them.
You seem to be under the bizarre impression that the individuals running the US are rational beings who consider various options in terms of their practicality and effectiveness.

Myself, I think they're mainly chimps flinging dung at a map of the world to see what to blow up next. :D

wait... FEMALES promoting SHARIA LAW?! :eek:

Stockholm Syndrome ?. :headbang:

Stockholm Syndrome ?. :headbang:

Not really unusual. Most people in the world support laws that restrict them in some way. And I'd bet that a lot of western women support public decency laws that hold women to a higher standard of clothing required than men. It's not to the same extent, but it's the same principle.

Stockholm Syndrome ?. :headbang:

No. The awful, awful power of faith.

You seem to be under the bizarre impression that the individuals running the US are rational beings who consider various options in terms of their practicality and effectiveness.

Myself, I think they're mainly chimps flinging dung at a map of the world to see what to blow up next. :D

why not they got them running NASA, so why not the Department of Defense too

Myself, I think they're mainly chimps flinging dung at a map of the world to see what to blow up next. :D

Sounds about right. :p

I see your Saudi schools and raise you Pakistani schools (another tight ally of the US :) ).

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007/02/07/story_7-2-2007_pg7_19


http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007/02/02/story_2-2-2007_pg7_18


Incidentally this is allegedly where Molly Campbell / Misbah Rana has been enrolled. Happy times.

Wait, some self-hating lunatics lock themselves in a building and say they won't come out unless their particular breed of lunacy is implemented across the country? I can't see a problem here. ;)

Not really unusual. Most people in the world support laws that restrict them in some way. And I'd bet that a lot of western women support public decency laws that hold women to a higher standard of clothing required than men. It's not to the same extent, but it's the same principle.

So true. One of the reasons that there are so few female Conservative MPs is because the local conservative associations are usually run by elderly ladies who don't approve of women standing for parliament.

I need to start my own school.

Just imagine all those malleable young minds in the palms of my hands.

MWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! :D

I need to start my own school.

Just imagine all those malleable young minds in the palms of my hands.

MWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! :D

I have a feeling that if I'd been on this forum longer I'd be terribly afraid of that statement.

wait... FEMALES promoting SHARIA LAW?! :eek:

You'd never heard of that? There always have been.

A few months ago French television interviewed a Moroccan woman, covered from head to foot, who was a raving Islamist. It was insane.

On a completely different scale, but still revealing, when the pilot episode of Star Trek (containing a woman as second-in-command of the Enterprise) was screened to a limited public in 1964 in the US, women in the audience were outraged, insisting firmly that "a woman's place is in the home".

I have a feeling that if I'd been on this forum longer I'd be terribly afraid of that statement.

Most likely. :)

You seem to be under the bizarre impression that the individuals running the US are rational beings who consider various options in terms of their practicality and effectiveness.

Myself, I think they're mainly chimps flinging dung at a map of the world to see what to blow up next. :D

The thing is that it seems that most of the civil service in the US are contractors...

Feb. 3, 2007, 11:44PM
Federal contractors proliferate, and so do the questions
Katrina, Iraq war, domestic security fuel the increase in outsourcing


By SCOTT SHANE and RON NIXON
New York Times

WASHINGTON — In June, officials at the General Services Administration were short of people to process cases of incompetence and fraud by federal contractors, and they responded with what has become the government's reflexive answer to almost every problem.

They hired another contractor.

It did not matter that the company they chose, CACI International, had itself recently avoided a suspension from federal contracting; or that the work, delving into investigative files on other contractors, appeared to pose a conflict of interest; or that each person supplied by the company would cost taxpayers $104 an hour.

Six CACI workers soon joined hundreds of other private-sector workers at the GSA, the government's management agency.

Without a public debate or formal policy decision, contractors have become a virtual fourth branch of government. On the rise for decades, spending on federal contracts has soared during the Bush administration, to about $400 billion last year from $207 billion in 2000, fueled by the war in Iraq, domestic security and Hurricane Katrina, but also by a philosophy that encourages outsourcing almost everything government does.

Contractors still build ships and satellites, but they also collect income taxes and work up agency budgets, fly pilotless spy aircraft and take the minutes at policy meetings on the war. They sit next to federal employees at nearly every agency; far more people work under contracts than are directly employed by the government. Even the government's online database for tracking contracts, the Federal Procurement Data System, has been outsourced (and is famously difficult to use).

The contracting explosion raises questions about propriety, cost and accountability that have long troubled watchdog groups and are coming under scrutiny from the new Democratic majority in Congress. While flagrant cases of fraud and waste make headlines, the concerns go far beyond outright wrongdoing. Among them:

•Competition, intended to produce savings, appears to have sharply eroded. An analysis by The New York Times shows that fewer than half of all "contract actions" — new contracts and payments against existing contracts — are now subject to full and open competition, Just 48 percent were competitive in 2005, down from 79 percent in 2001.
•The most secret and politically delicate government jobs, such as intelligence collection and budget preparation, are increasingly contracted out, despite regulations forbidding the outsourcing of "inherently governmental" work. Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group, said that allowing CACI workers to review other contractors captured in microcosm "a government that's run by corporations."
•Agencies are crippled in their ability to seek low prices, supervise contractors and intervene when work goes off course because the number of government workers overseeing contracts has remained level as spending has shot up. One federal contractor explained candidly in a conference call with industry analysts last May that "one of the side benefits of the contracting officers being so overwhelmed" is that existing contracts are extended rather than put up for new competitive bidding.
•The most successful contractors are not necessarily those doing the best work, but those who have mastered the special skill of selling to Uncle Sam. The top 20 service contractors have spent nearly $300 million since 2000 on lobbying and have donated $23 million to political campaigns. "We've created huge behemoths that are doing 90 or 95 percent of their business with the government," said Peter W. Singer, who wrote a book on military outsourcing. "They're not really companies, they're quasi agencies."
The biggest federal contractor, Lockheed Martin, which has spent $53 million on lobbying and $6 million on donations since 2000, gets more federal money each year than the Justice or Energy departments.
•Contracting almost always leads to less public scrutiny, as government programs are hidden behind closed corporate doors. Companies, unlike agencies, are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. Members of Congress have sought unsuccessfully for two years to get the Army to explain the contracts for Blackwater USA security officers in Iraq, which involved several costly layers of subcontractors.


Weighing the limits
The contracting surge has raised bipartisan alarms. A just-completed study by experts appointed by the White House and Congress, the Acquisition Advisory Panel, found that the trend "poses a threat to the government's long-term ability to perform its mission" and could "undermine the integrity of the government's decision-making."

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, whose new Democratic chairman, Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California, added the word "oversight" to signal his intentions, begins a series of investigative hearings on Tuesday focusing on contracts in Iraq and at the Department of Homeland Security.

"Billions of dollars are being squandered, and the taxpayer is being taken to the cleaners," said Waxman, who got an "F" rating last year from the Contract Services Association, an industry coalition. The man he succeeded as chairman, Rep. Thomas M. Davis, R-Va., earned an "A."

David M. Walker, who as U.S. comptroller-general leads the Government Accountability Office, has urged the new Congress to take a hard look at the proper limits of contracting. Walker has not taken a stand against contractors — his agency is also dependent on them, he admits — but he says they often fail to deliver the promised efficiency and savings. Private companies cannot be expected to look out for taxpayers' interests, he said.

"There's something civil servants have that the private sector doesn't," Walker said in an interview. "And that is the duty of loyalty to the greater good — the duty of loyalty to the collective best interest of all rather than the interest of a few. Companies have duties of loyalty to their shareholders, not to the country."

Even the most outspoken critics acknowledge that the government cannot operate without contractors, which provide the surge capacity to handle crises without expanding the permanent bureaucracy. Contractors provide specialized skills the government does not have. And it is no secret that some government executives favor contractors because they find the federal bureaucracy slow, inflexible or incompetent.

Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, which represents government contractors, acknowledged occasional chicanery by contractors and too little competition in some areas. But Soloway asserted that critics had exaggerated the contracting problems.

"I don't happen to think the system is fundamentally broken," he said. "It's remarkable how well it works, given the dollar volume."


Blurring the lines
Wariness of government contracting dates at least to 1941, when Sen. Harry Truman declared, "I have never yet found a contractor who, if not watched, would not leave the government holding the bag."

But the recent contracting boom had its origins in the "reinventing government" effort of the Clinton administration, which slashed the federal work force to the lowest level since 1960 and streamlined outsourcing. Limits on what is "inherently governmental" and therefore off-limits to contractors have grown fuzzy, as the General Services Administration's use of CACI International personnel shows.

"Hi Heinz," wrote Renee Ballard, a GSA official, in an e-mail message to Heinz Ruppmann, a CACI official, last June 12, asking for six "contract specialists" to help with a backlog of 226 cases that could lead to companies being suspended or barred from federal contracting. The CACI workers would review files and prepare "proposed responses for review and signature," she wrote.

Amey, of the Project on Government Oversight, which obtained the contract documents under the Freedom of Information Act, said such work was clearly inherently governmental and called it "outrageous" to involve contractors in judging the misdeeds of potential competitors. CACI had itself been reviewed in 2004 for possible suspension in connection with supplying interrogators to the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The company was ultimately cleared, though the GSA found CACI employees had improperly written parts of the "statements of work" for its own Iraq contract.

The price of $104 an hour — well over $200,000 per person annually — was roughly double the cost of pay and benefits of a comparable federal worker, Amey said.

Asked for comment, the GSA said decisions on punishments for erring contractors "is indeed inherently governmental." But the agency said that while the CACI workers assisted for three months, "all suspension/debarment decisions were made by federal employees." A company spokeswoman made the same point.

The GSA, like other agencies, said it did not track the number or total cost of its contract workers. The agency administrator, Lurita Doan, who previously ran a Virginia contracting firm, has actively pushed contracting. Doan recently clashed with her agency's inspector-general over her proposal to remove the job of auditing contractors' proposed prices from his office and to hire contractors to do it instead.

On some of the biggest government projects, Bush administration officials have sought to shift some decision-making to contractors. When Michael P. Jackson, deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, addressed potential bidders on the huge Secure Border Initiative last year, he explained the new approach.

"This is an unusual invitation," said Jackson, himself a contracting executive before joining the agency. "We're asking you to come back and tell us how to do our business."

Boeing, which won the $80 million first phase of the estimated $2 billion project, is assigned not only to develop technology but also to propose how to use it, which includes assigning roles to different government agencies and contractors. Homeland Security officials insist that they will make all final decisions, but the department's inspector-general, Richard L. Skinner, reported bluntly in November that "the department does not have the capacity needed to effectively plan, oversee and execute the SBInet program."


A 'blended work force'
If the government is exporting some traditional functions to contractors, it is also inviting contractors into agencies to perform delicate tasks. The State Department, for instance, pays more than $2 million a year to BearingPoint, the consulting giant, to provide support for Iraq policymaking, running software, preparing meeting agendas and keeping minutes.

State Department officials insist that the company's workers, who hold security clearances, merely relieve diplomats of administrative tasks and never influence policy. But the presence of contractors inside closed discussions on war strategy is a notable example of what officials call the "blended work force."

That blending is taking place in virtually every agency. When Polly Endreny, 29, sought work last year with the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, she was surprised to discover that most of the openings were with contractors.

"The younger generation is coming in on contracts," said Endreny, who likes the arrangement. Today, only the "Oak Management" on her ID badge distinguishes her from federal employees at the NOAA's headquarters.

She says her pay is "a little higher" than that of comparable federal workers, and she gets dental coverage while they do not.

Such disparities can cause trouble. A recent study of one NOAA program where two-thirds of the work force are contractors found that differences in salary and benefits could " substantially undermine staff relations and morale."

The shift away from open competition affects more than morale. One example among many: With troops short in Iraq, Congress in 2003 waived a ban on the use of private security guards to protect military bases in the United States. The results for the first $733 million were dismal, investigators at the Government Accountability Office found.

The Army spent 25 percent more than it had to because it used sole-source contracts at 46 of 57 sites, the investigators concluded. And screening of guards was so lax that at one base, 61 guards were hired despite criminal records, auditors reported. Yet the Army gave the contractors more than $18 million in incentive payments intended to reward good performance. (The Army did not contest GAO's findings and has changed its methods.)


A coalition for contracting
Soloway, of the contracting industry group, argues that the contracting boom has resulted from the collision of a high-technology economy with an aging government work force — twice as many employees are over 55 as under 30. To function, Soloway said, the government must now turn to younger, skilled personnel in the private sector, a phenomenon likely to grow when what demographers call a "retirement tsunami" occurs over the next decade.

"This is the new face of government," Soloway said. "This isn't companies gouging the government. This is the marketplace."

But Paul C. Light of New York University, who has long tracked the hidden contractor work force to assess what he calls the "true size of government," says the shift to contractors is driven in part by federal personnel ceilings. He calls such ceilings a "sleight of hand" intended to allow successive administrations to brag about cutting the federal work force.

Yet Light said the government has made no effort to count contractors and no assessment of the true costs and benefits. "We have no data to show that contractors are actually more efficient than the government," he said.

Meanwhile, he said, a potent coalition keeps contracting growing: the companies, their lobbyists and supporters in Congress, and many government managers, who do not mind building ties to contractors who may hire them someday. "All the players with any power like it," Light said.

That is evident wherever in Washington contractors gather to scout new opportunities. There is no target richer than the Homeland Security Department, whose Web site, in a section called "Open for Business," displays hundreds of open contracts, including "working with selected cities to develop and exercise their catastrophic plans" ($500,000 to $1 million) and "Conduct studies and analyses, systems engineering, or provide laboratory services to various organizations to support the DHS mission" ($20 to $50 million).

One crisp morning in an office building with a spectacular view of the Capitol, Alfonso Martinez-Fonts Jr., the agency's assistant secretary for the private sector, addressed a breakfast seminar on "The Business of Homeland Security." The session drew a standing-room crowd.

Martinez-Fonts, a banker before joining the government, said he could not personally hand out contracts but could offer "tips, hints and directions" to companies on the hunt.

Joe Haddock, a Sikorsky Helicopters executive, summed up the tone of the session. "To us contractors," Haddock said, "money is always a good thing."

The thing is that it seems that most of the civil service in the US are contractors...
Hmm. That is a valid point. I was overlooking the monkey trainers.

Okay, so we probably won't bomb Iran because the monkey trainers know that it won't be the most profitable course of action. But couldn't we, like, go all Wag The Dog and just pretend we're attacking Iran? I think it would play real well in the sticks. Plus, people wouldn't have to learn a whole new name for The Enemy...just swap one letter, and hey presto! We have always been at war with Iraq/n!

Pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor and practice draconian gender apartheid, eh? This sounds like a pretty nice place to live...if you're a guy.

Pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor and practice draconian gender apartheid, eh? This sounds like a pretty nice place to live...if you're a straight, Muslim guy.

^^Fixed. :)

I need to start my own school.

Just imagine all those malleable young minds in the palms of my hands.

MWAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! :D

I'd send my kids there, but I don't have any. :(

The best way to deal with Saudi Arabia (and the rest of that "culture", for that matter) in the long run is to develop alternative fuels. Once we no longer need their oil--which is the only thing they have that is of any value to civilized humanity-- their entire economy will collapse, terrorist funding will evaporate, and they will all be reduced to eating sand and f*cking their camels. End of threat.

Speed the day.

The saudis are among the worst people in the world.

Unearned oil wealth ruins the character of the people who benefit from it. It is as true in Saudi as it is in Alberta or Texas - the result is bankruptcy of character.

The best way to deal with Saudi Arabia (and the rest of that "culture", for that matter) in the long run is to develop alternative fuels. Once we no longer need their oil--which is the only thing they have that is of any value to civilized humanity-- their entire economy will collapse, terrorist funding will evaporate, and they will all be reduced to eating sand and f*cking their camels. End of threat.

Speed the day.

Another quality post from our resident nazi.

Hmm. That is a valid point. I was overlooking the monkey trainers.

Okay, so we probably won't bomb Iran because the monkey trainers know that it won't be the most profitable course of action. But couldn't we, like, go all Wag The Dog and just pretend we're attacking Iran? I think it would play real well in the sticks. Plus, people wouldn't have to learn a whole new name for The Enemy...just swap one letter, and hey presto! We have always been at war with Iraq/n!

I'd rather if we could all find a way to exist together peacefully. A pipe dream I know...

I think whats happening at the moment is playing quite nicely in the sticks...*ugh*

The saudis are among the worst people in the world.

Unearned oil wealth ruins the character of the people who benefit from it. It is as true in Saudi as it is in Alberta or Texas - the result is bankruptcy of character.

And, unlike Canada or the United States, they control everything. The Saudi royal family's corruption has twisted and dominated every aspect of life in that country...nothing any unethical corporation in the history of the United States has done can even remotely compare to what they have done to the people and economy of that nation.

They are that bad.

Did you know the Saudis also granted Idi Amin asylum in their grand country?

He killed 100,00 people.

I can't wait until the oil runs out. Sure it will mean problems for the US and other nations, but I want to see the look on the faces of the Saudis when they realize that the pigs and apes are set up to survive and they're left penniless and starving in the desert despite their wahabi leader's claims to superiority.

This will force us to overcome the need for petroleum-Thats when we are at our best-when we have to adapt or suffer. We'll make a cheap,readily available fuel to power our cars and heat our homes.

Then we wont need to be so friendly-we can start to attend to the fat,smiling scumbag Saudis that grin while they fuck us behind our backs. We can start looking into whom they are really friends with and start siezing whats left of their wealth.

my already low opinion of saudi arabia just fell further.

.
Then we wont need to be so friendly-we can start to attend to the fat,smiling scumbag Saudis that grin while they fuck us behind our backs. We can start looking into whom they are really friends with and start siezing whats left of their wealth.

Nah, let's let the people of Saudi Arabia get their revenge first...they've got lot of anger to work out on the people that kept them poor, underemployed, and uneducated for 70 years.

Did you know the Saudis also granted Idi Amin asylum in their grand country?

He killed 100,00 people.

Over 300,000, actually. And yes, I knew that. Another reason to hate the fuckers.

Another quality post from our resident nazi.

you're sensitive because he is so close to being correct

I've saying this for the last five or six years.

reduce our dependence on oil...we get 2 benefits...

1 - less involvement in the mid east

2 - environmentally friendly

winner!

This school would be a liberal paradise compared to what the neocons wantin the US...

This school would be a liberal paradise compared to what the neocons wantin the US... Where have you been living? Neoconservatism is a godless lie.

I've saying this for the last five or six years.

reduce our dependence on oil...we get 2 benefits...

1 - less involvement in the mid east

2 - environmentally friendly

winner!

Agreed

By the way, the Saudis have extremist schools (and mosques) in the UK as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

In Arabia they're bad enough. In a formerly civilised country they're intolerable.

Please don't be so quick to judge this school.After all theese are the finest minds of the fourteenth centuary.

By the way, the Saudis have extremist schools (and mosques) in the UK as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

In Arabia they're bad enough. In a formerly civilised country they're intolerable.

Yeah. Not happy about that either. The Rev Smiler is all for faith schools.

fucking religion. what a load of fucking bollocks.

Yeah. Not happy about that either. The Rev Smiler is all for faith schools.

fucking religion. what a load of fucking bollocks.


Can we donate him to Saudi Arabia?

Don't go blaming all religion for Islamic problems. At least, not until Jews and Christians start gang-raping girls and parading them naked through streets, or exhorting cheating the "kuffar".

Although it's probably safer to do so, since that teacher got banned from a school for saying in a debate that most suicide bombers were Muslim. I ought to stop now, I'm starting to sound like Littlejohn.

Another quality post from our resident nazi.

He's an idiot, sure, but what is your response to the substance of what he posted?

Once their oil revenue is gone and they cease to be able to extort their way into international affairs, what will prevent the saudis from going back to fighting amongst their sand tribes and being ignored and abandoned by the rest of the world?

They've chosen to contribute nothing as people to the world, they are content to do nothing but guard their oil valve.

They will deserve what they get.

To Misqoute Bismarck "If there is ever another war in World, it will come out of some damned silly thing in the Middle-east".

I don't know how Bush, a so-called "Christian" can befriend camel humping savages (read: the Saudi royal family) who so ruthlessly repress Christians.
Because to Bush, Christianity is just a tool that can be occasionally deployed to get some convenient votes from the stupid.

Give it a couple of months.
That would imply that the US Government cares about human rights.

Can we donate him to Saudi Arabia?

You joking? Imagine what would happen!

Nah...he should be in Den Hague.

Because to Bush, Christianity is just a tool that can be occasionally deployed to get some convenient votes from the stupid.

True.

That would imply that the US Government cares about human rights.

We do...in unfriendly countries. Hence, the shrill chorus over countries like Cuba and Iran, and the dead silence over countries like Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, and Shitty Arabia.

That would imply that the US Government cares about human rights.

It does...but only the RIGHT kind of human rights...

It does...but only in the RIGHT kind of countries...

Edited for accuracy.

Another quality post from our resident nazi.
Mitanni is more of a fascist than a Nazi, but I expected him to trot out his usual solution (i.e. bomb it), but this was surprisingly reasonable.

Edited for accuracy.

Yeah that works for me.

Mitanni is more of a fascist than a Nazi, but I expected him to trot out his usual solution (i.e. bomb it), but this was surprisingly reasonable.

I rarely agree with him, but he's dead-on when it comes to Shitty Arabia.

...Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?because if the US gov take the Saudi dictators down.. the US gov would have to call elections.. And the US gov does not want democratic elections over there.

because if the US gov take the Saudi dictators down.. the US gov would have to call elections.. And the US gov does not want democratic elections over there.

They only want elections where the outcome is foreordained and their boys always win.

Don't go blaming all religion for Islamic problems. At least, not until Jews and Christians start gang-raping girls and parading them naked through streets, or exhorting cheating the "kuffar".

Although it's probably safer to do so, since that teacher got banned from a school for saying in a debate that most suicide bombers were Muslim. I ought to stop now, I'm starting to sound like Littlejohn.

Absolutely in agreement with you. The Western powers are corrupt; if anyone criticizes Islam or Nazi Germany, I mean "Saudi Arabia" (not that there's much difference) the one speaking the mind is labelled as racist. The truth is, that racism is racism. Criticizing and combating the racists (who in this case happen to be Saudia Arabians) is NOT racism. It's common sense and free speech.
I wish more people would stand up and speak the truth.

And another thing. Fundamentalist Muslims complain of dirty Westerners taking drugs, drinking, smoking; Western girls wearing miniskirts. The thing is, it's a fact that a lot of drugs come from the Middle East, and they are sold by Arab gangs and pushers. They are selling the alcohol and cigarettes, and they are raping the girls! The people in question are just mindless, hateful imbeciles.

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Ok, who actually READ the article?

I gather from the general lack of awareness in this thread that no one actually bothered to read it, as it may be about Saudi diplomats' children, but the school is NOT in Saudi Arabia, it's in Acton, west London.

The article is about a teacher whose employment was terminated because he has complained that the books the school is using to educate the students are racist against Christians and Jews.

If this was actually in Saudi Arabia I'd see no need to act surprise, but peop,e this is taking place in England, where there is a growing extremist Islamic population that is taking to the principles of Wahhabism, the Islamic denomination practiced in Saudi Arabia.

Before anyone continues to talk about how backwater Saudi Arabia is and how corrupt the monarchs there are, and how Bush turns a blind eye to their policy, note that this is taking place in a western nation, despite being funded by the Saudis, and there are British students there as well as those of foreign diplomats.

Now, here are the Cliffs Notes for you people who didn't bother to actually read the article before writing little racist remarks about the nature of Saudi Arabia (as the oil money benefits only those whose pocket it lines; the average person doesn't benefit from it).

A teacher by the name of Colin Cook (he converted to Islam) has complained about the nature of the text books which lambast Christianity and Judaism. The texts also glorify bin Laden and the attacks of 9/11. While the school IS Saudi-funded, the school IS located in London. So, this is taking place in a WESTERN nation.

And now, the FULL article for those who have an acute fear of link clicking:

A Saudi-run school in London uses textbooks which describe Jews as monkeys and Christians as pigs, according to papers filed with an employment tribunal by a former teacher.

Teaching materials used at the King Fahd school in Acton, west London, translated from Arabic for an unfair dismissal claim against the school, say Jews "engage in witchcraft and sorcery and obey Satan", and invite pupils to "name some repugnant characteristics of Jews" and to give examples of worthless religions, such as Judaism and Christianity.

Colin Cook, 57, a British convert to Islam who taught English at the school for 19 years until he was dismissed last December, said pupils had been heard saying they wanted to kill Americans, that 9/11 was good, and that Osama bin Laden was a hero. He is claiming £100,000 compensation for unfair dismissal, race discrimination and victimisation.

The school was originally set up to educate the children of Arab diplomats, but most of its 750 pupils are now British Muslims. It teaches Wahhabism, the dominant faith in Saudi Arabia, which is an extreme form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Qur'an.

Mr Cook's solicitor, Lawrence Davies, said he was taking the "extraordinary step" of issuing a statement because British pupils were being put at risk. "We are concerned at the fact that these racist textbooks are being taught in a Saudi-funded school to British pupils and to date no school inspection by Ofsted has identified this appalling practice."

The teacher, who earned £35,000 a year, says he blew the whistle to Edexcel, the examinations body, after children were allowed to refer to their annotated texts in an English language exam in breach of the rules. The school denies his allegations and claims he was rightly dismissed for misconduct. His tribunal hearing is expected to be held later this year.

Because they supply America with 1.7 million barrels per day of crude oil.

And every time we fill up our SUVs and waste gas like there's no tomorrow, we're giving them billions of dollars more to spend on beating women, imprisoning and killing homosexuals, keeping their people in poverty and ignorance, and training new generations of terrorists to kill innocent people. That's okay, though, as long as America gets cheap oil...it doesn't matter who suffers because of it.

Those bastards are supposedly our "allies" but they're really just bloodsuckers that have worked with our government for decades to keep us dependent on them. :rolleyes:

Couldn't have said it better myself. :)

Iraq was a secular regime comparatively.

Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Oil. Lots and lots and lots of oil.

Are you questioning Bandabar Bush, family friend of the Bush family?

-snip-

No, Saudi Arabia really does suck.

Ok, who actually READ the article?
Who actually READ the thread?

I gather from the general lack of awareness in this thread that no one actually bothered to read it, as it may be about Saudi diplomats' children, but the school is NOT in Saudi Arabia, it's in Acton, west London.
In the entire thread, I noticed only one post that clearly indicated the poster had not both read and properly comprehended the article, but hey please do assume everyone but you is a congenital idiot, it's a great way to impress and persuade others, and to generally make friends.

The article is about a teacher whose employment was terminated because he has complained that the books the school is using to educate the students are racist against Christians and Jews.
Actually it's about a teacher who was fired - the reason for his dismissal is in contention. Even if we accept the teacher's side, the article is not clear on the exact reason other than that he 'blew the whistle'; whether this means he reported the texts, the cheating in exams, or both simultaneously is not clear from the article, as anyone who has read it should know.

If this was actually in Saudi Arabia I'd see no need to act surprise, but peop,e this is taking place in England, where there is a growing extremist Islamic population that is taking to the principles of Wahhabism, the Islamic denomination practiced in Saudi Arabia.

Before anyone continues to talk about how backwater Saudi Arabia is and how corrupt the monarchs there are, and how Bush turns a blind eye to their policy, note that this is taking place in a western nation, despite being funded by the Saudis, and there are British students there as well as those of foreign diplomats.
Wow, lucky you're here to state what appears to obvious to the majority of people posting in the thread.

Now, here are the Cliffs Notes for you people who didn't bother to actually read the article before writing little racist remarks about the nature of Saudi Arabia (as the oil money benefits only those whose pocket it lines; the average person doesn't benefit from it).

A teacher by the name of Colin Cook (he converted to Islam) has complained about the nature of the text books which lambast Christianity and Judaism. The texts also glorify bin Laden and the attacks of 9/11. While the school IS Saudi-funded, the school IS located in London. So, this is taking place in a WESTERN nation.

And now, the FULL article for those who have an acute fear of link clicking:
Before you quit your day-job for a gig writing Cliffs Notes, you might want to note that an accurate summarisation of the material at issue is probably a minimum requirement for that particular line of work.

No, Saudi Arabia really does suck.

Even if it does, basing the plethora of negative actions on the actions of a school done in another country is no reason to say that a nation does suck. Further, the article did say 'Arab', which in some cases doesn't just mean the Saudi kingdom. There are other 'Arabs' besides those who come out of Saudi Arabia, such as the Israeli-Arabs, and others.

Before you quit your day-job for a gig writing Cliffs Notes, you might want to note that an accurate summarisation of the material at issue is probably a minimum requirement for that particular line of work.
I don't have to quit my day job, 'cause I have none! :p so there! I can do whatever I want to do.

the school is NOT in Saudi Arabia, it's in Acton, west London.

Saudi-funded, though.

Mitanni is more of a fascist than a Nazi, but I expected him to trot out his usual solution (i.e. bomb it), but this was surprisingly reasonable.

Oh, right. Surprisingly reasonable. "Eating sand and fucking camels." Color me impressed. It's a real feat of reason to blurt out some ann-coulteresque "lol sandniggers" type comment.

His only points, in these types of threads, is to rant on about how inferior, barbaric, evil, and deserving of death other "cultures" (he puts it in quotes, because he means "race" but is too chickenshit to be that honest) are. He's a fucking nazi, whether or not he happens to be carrying a card.

Oh, right. Surprisingly reasonable. "Eating sand and fucking camels." Color me impressed. It's a real feat of reason to blurt out some ann-coulteresque "lol sandniggers" type comment.

His only points, in these types of threads, is to rant on about how inferior, barbaric, evil, and deserving of death other "cultures" (he puts it in quotes, because he means "race" but is too chickenshit to be that honest) are. He's a fucking nazi, whether or not he happens to be carrying a card.

"Eating sand and fucking camels."

If he means only the Saudi royal family, I agree.

If he means their oppressed citizenry, than yes, he is a Nazi, and a deplorable one at that.

His only points, in these types of threads, is to rant on about how inferior, barbaric, evil, and deserving of death other "cultures" (he puts it in quotes, because he means "race" but is too chickenshit to be that honest) are. He's a fucking nazi, whether or not he happens to be carrying a card.

The Saudi regime is backward, evil, and deserving of death for the crimes they have perpetrated against their own people.

But the people themselves, no. They deserve the opportunity to be free and to build their own country without the repression imposed upon them by the Saudi government.

An interview with the Saudi Foreign Minister: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,464807,00.html

And an article about their role in the region:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,463674,00.html

Give it a couple of months.

Just the Sauds? Why not the whole middle east?

Because they supply America with 1.7 million barrels per day of crude oil.

And every time we fill up our SUVs and waste gas like there's no tomorrow, we're giving them billions of dollars more to spend on beating women, imprisoning and killing homosexuals, keeping their people in poverty and ignorance, and training new generations of terrorists to kill innocent people. That's okay, though, as long as America gets cheap oil...it doesn't matter who suffers because of it.

Those bastards are supposedly our "allies" but they're really just bloodsuckers that have worked with our government for decades to keep us dependent on them. :rolleyes:

Sucks to have such a large carbon footprint. I don't own a car. Or heat my home with oil. And right now, the only artificial light on in my home is that of the LCD monitor I'm using to read this thread - like every other night of the week. My carbon footprint is tiny.

Sucks to have such a large carbon footprint. I don't own a car. Or heat my home with oil. And right now, the only artificial light on in my home is that of the LCD monitor I'm using to read this thread - like every other night of the week. My carbon footprint is tiny.

Mine is pretty small as well, and definitely smaller than most Americans'. Right now, I walk everywhere, I turn lights off when I'm not using them, and I try to reduce as much waste heat as possible (especially important since the university is heated by an old coal power plant). Compared to most people, it's minimal; I even turn off my power strip before going to sleep to conserve electricity.

And after I graduate, I'm buying a hybrid Prius. Eventually, I'd like to own a zero-energy house with solar panels and geothermal heating...it would be expensive, but the carbon footprint would be next to nothing.

I can't wait until the oil runs out. Sure it will mean problems for the US and other nations, but I want to see the look on the faces of the Saudis when they realize that the pigs and apes are set up to survive and they're left penniless and starving in the desert despite their wahabi leader's claims to superiority.

It's coming quite soon; in fact, there are rumors out there that the Saudis already are at peak production. Once that happens, it's all downhill for them. We'll have to pay more for oil, but I'm pretty sure we can cut our consumption by 6% (our demand supplied by Saudi oil exports) with no difficulty. Hell, we could do that overnight if we wanted to.

I look forward to the future where we our economy is powered by clean, domestically produced alternative sources and they are not only left penniless and powerless but they have to face a very angry people ready to exact 70 years worth of revenge for their suffering.

The Middle East will finally be free, and I really think from there the war on terrorism will finally be won.

Vet, did you read Friedmans piece last Friday about how to take down the ayatollahs?
http://donkeyod.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/the-oil-addicted-ayatollahs/

Vet, did you read Friedmans piece last Friday about how to take down the ayatollahs?
http://donkeyod.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/the-oil-addicted-ayatollahs/

No, I haven't. Thanks for the link.

Edit: I read the article. This is very similar to what many of us on this forum have been predicting; Iran's economy is tottering on the edge of collapse because they are exhausting their foreign exchange and oil revenues on subsidies, and they can't remove those subsidies since they're one of the few things keeping their people from rebelling against the already unpopular clerical regimes. To paraphrase what I said in an earlier thread, they are using Ahmadinejad and the "bread and circuses" approach to divert and subdue public opinion, but they are also making themselves incredibly vulnerable to any drops in oil prices.

To make matters even worse for the Iranian regime, they are not investing in their oil industry because they have to spend money on subsidies instead. This is causing their production to decline, further worsening their revenue situation; I read recently that Iran may not export any oil as soon as 2010 due to their collapsing oil industry.

Wow girls who want Sharia law.
Doesn't Sharia law basicly make women property?


Here's an idea. Enforce it. But for this lot. Then send in some male relative to tell them to pack up and go home or face bringing dishonor to the whole family.

Then demolish the building.

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Yeah they've been doing that for a while. Iran does it too. Sadly nothing new but invading the place of the two holiest cities in Islam would definitely be worse PR than Iraq.

"Eating sand and fucking camels."

If he means only the Saudi royal family, I agree.

If he means their oppressed citizenry, than yes, he is a Nazi, and a deplorable one at that.

Oh, he means pretty much all Muslims. From what I've read from him over his time here he's routinely dismissed them as "Mohammadans" who are "death cultists" and "barbarians." Doesn't distinguish between terrorist and Muslim. Ultranationalistic. And of course "Mitanni" is the name of an Aryan kingdom. Believe what you want, but New Mitanni is, aside from the apparently-gone likes of Ny Nordland, as nazi as NSG gets without possibly being parody, satire or trolling.

Oh, he means pretty much all Muslims. From what I've read from him over his time here he's routinely dismissed them as "Mohammadans" who are "death cultists" and "barbarians." Doesn't distinguish between terrorist and Muslim. Ultranationalistic. And of course "Mitanni" is the name of an Aryan kingdom. Believe what you want, but New Mitanni is, aside from the apparently-gone likes of Ny Nordland, as nazi as NSG gets without possibly being parody, satire or trolling.

I think Potato Factory is more Nazi than New Mitanni.

The best way to deal with Saudi Arabia (and the rest of that "culture", for that matter) in the long run is to develop alternative fuels. Once we no longer need their oil--which is the only thing they have that is of any value to civilized humanity-- their entire economy will collapse, terrorist funding will evaporate, and they will all be reduced to eating sand and f*cking their camels. End of threat.

Speed the day.The only clear threat that kind of culture presents, is towards the people living in it. Apart from that however, I can only agree. There's no reason to have anything to do with the crazed loons, in any way. Trading with them only empowers them & their shit. Waging war on them just eases their social problems by us killing what might otherwise become dissidents & the catalyst for a social revolution & reformation of what 'real Islam' is.

But all that's true for pretty much every cracked regime on the planet, not just SA or the ME in general. It's too fucking bad it's more convenient for our ruling classes to get filthy rich from trading with the fuckers, and using them as distractions when domestic policies fail.

The solution to child indoctrination camps is equally simple & obvious. Simply create guidelines for what education can be, and must be. Several countries already do this, and while it doesn't prevent people fron trying to establish brainwashing facilities for their - apparently deeply hated - offspring, it does enable the affected societies to close them down before they ever get off the ground.

Oh, he means pretty much all Muslims. From what I've read from him over his time here he's routinely dismissed them as "Mohammadans" who are "death cultists" and "barbarians." Doesn't distinguish between terrorist and Muslim. Ultranationalistic. And of course "Mitanni" is the name of an Aryan kingdom. Believe what you want, but New Mitanni is, aside from the apparently-gone likes of Ny Nordland, as nazi as NSG gets without possibly being parody, satire or trolling.

Then yeah, he is a Nazi. Gross.

Having something against Muslims does not mean you're a nazi. It is bloody stupid if you do not come from Europe or the Middle East, or a very tall building, though.

I have to say though, I have never heard of anything good coming out of Saudi Arabia.

I have to say though, I have never heard of anything good coming out of Saudi Arabia.Repeat that next time you need a taxi.

Vet, did you read Friedmans piece last Friday about how to take down the ayatollahs?
http://donkeyod.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/the-oil-addicted-ayatollahs/

Nope. Thanks for posting it though. Pretty interesting. I'm not sure oil prices are going to drop enough to put pressure on Iran though. The shit's getting more and more scarce and demand is going up as China and India modernize.

Repeat that next time you need a taxi. All the times I've needed to use a taxi it's been middle aged red faced men. I'm not from Miami.

Repeat that next time you need a taxi.

You have Saudi taxi drivers? I always get a Pakistani or a Hatian. Oh, and taxi drivers aren't particularly good. They're necessary when I'm drunk and can't drive, but I hate wasting money on a cab.

Repeat that next time you need a taxi.

Most taxi drivers where I live are Somalis.

Why?

3) A military invasion into the lands in and around Mecca and Medina would spark a world war involving every Muslim nation and many Muslims living in the civilised world against the US and its allies.

I'm pretty sure that once a nation reaches a certain population of Muslim residents, it ceases to be a "civilized" nation anymore.

I'm pretty sure that once a nation reaches a certain population of Muslim residents, it ceases to be a "civilized" nation anymore.

Funny, I think the same thing about Christian residents.

Only not really, because I'm not an intolerant jerk.

I'm pretty sure that once a nation reaches a certain population of Muslim residents, it ceases to be a "civilized" nation anymore.

Ah yes, I keep forgetting how it's cool for people like you to hate people based on religion. As long as they're only Muslims and not Jews, few will call you the nazi trash you are.

Ah yes, I keep forgetting how it's cool for people like you to hate people based on religion. As long as they're only Muslims and not Jews, few will call you the nazi trash you are.

Nazis loved Muslims. There were Muslim SS divisions and the Mufti of Jerusalem was an ally of the Nazis.

Funny how Christian nations and the one and only Jewish nation are generally civilised, but the Muslim nations are generally not by our standard.

Only not really, because I'm not an intolerant jerk. Glad to hear it, I feel wary around those who would behead gays, kill apostates, and beat up women who don't go around in ninja gear - the last of which is already happening in some European countries, by the way.

Nazis loved Muslims. There were Muslim SS divisions and the Mufti of Jerusalem was an ally of the Nazis.

Modern nazis don't love Muslims. As I've just shown.

Modern nazis don't love Muslims. As I've just shown.

Meh, I remember seeing neonazis describe 9/11 as a "good hit on Jew York". Maybe they only like the asshole muslims.

All the times I've needed to use a taxi it's been middle aged red faced men. I'm not from Miami.Right, so your taxis don't run on petrol. Bad example.

EDIT: I wasn't trying to comment on who/what drive the damn things, just what they run on.

Meh, I remember seeing neonazis describe 9/11 as a "good hit on Jew York". Maybe they only like the asshole muslims.

I think there's room in the black nazi heart for hatred of pretty much everyone other than goofy-looking bald-headed leather-philes.

I think there's room in the black nazi heart for hatred of pretty much everyone other than goofy-looking bald-headed leather-philes.

They're Judas Priest fans?

http://i11.tinypic.com/347vi0z.jpg

They're Judas Priest fans?

Nah.

But they probably don't hate them.

Nah.

But they probably don't hate them.

Well they must pretend to. Rob Halford is openly gay.

Modern nazis don't love Muslims. As I've just shown. A significant number seem to be on the same side as the far-lefties on the Palestine question, and also admire "Islamofascism".

Just in case you're wondering, I did not find this out from being a member of Stormfront, because I am not.

A significant number seem to be on the same side as the far-lefties on the Palestine question

Because they hate Jews more than Muslims doesn't mean they have any liking of Muslims.

and also admire "Islamofascism".

Just in case you're wondering, I did not find this out from being a member of Stormfront, because I am not.

So how did you find it out?

Because they hate Jews more than Muslims doesn't mean they have any liking of Muslims. No, but we didn't like Stalin in the second world war either.

So how did you find it out? I decided to go and see what Stormfront was all about, so had a look around for a while. It wasn't to my liking, especially all the anti-semitism, so I basically came away with that interesting tidbit of info I just shared with ye all.

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

What are you talking about? Your comments are no different then that of what the extremist teach "If they are different, get rid of them", same notion. America did the right thing and not attack Saudi Arabia because look how America is in deep mess in Iraq, now multiply that by a thousand. Any foreign, non-Muslim nation that sets its feet into Saudi Arabia (some of Islam's holiest sites are located in Saudi Arabia) in such a hostile manner will not be tolerated. One of the reasons why Osama Bin laden use as a pretext to attack America is that America has set its foot in Saudi Arabia in the past (Gulf war 1) Aside that, yes, I do believe Wahabism is on the extreme side, but in all truth, look all other societies as well. Christians believe that non-Christians will go to hell so they must save their poor souls by converting them to Christianity, Judaism believes that they are right and anyone else is wrong, and Islam believes the same thing. So don't focus on one religion and its backwardness, when all of them have some faulty lines. Besides, it’s little bit hard for Muslims to reform themselves when bombs are landing on their lands, when everything they have is being destroyed in front of them, and the last thing they hold on dear to is their faith. Remember, hate begets hate.

Nazis loved Muslims. There were Muslim SS divisions and the Mufti of Jerusalem was an ally of the Nazis.

Actually, that's scarily true. Muslims and Nazis both had a hatred of Jews, which is why they allied. Sadly, a frightening number of Muslims still believe in this killing infidel-Jews crap. What makes it worse, is that lots of Jews see Muslims as brothers and sisters to them; Judaism and Islam are similar religions, and both come from the same roots. At least there are some forward-thinking Muslims who see Judaism's right to exist.

...not.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2006576,00.html

These fuckers (the Saudis) sponsor militant Islamists, pay their citizens not to work while hiring foreigners as cheap labor, practice draconian gender apartheid, execute people over "crimes" such as apostasy, homosexuality, and witchcraft, and are almost as repressive as North Korea in regards to religion (non-Islam religion, anyway). Instead of Iraq, why didn't we go after these fuckers?

Oh noes! You must be a racist bigot in the eyes of the NS General crew!

Oh noes! You must be a racist bigot in the eyes of the NS General crew!

It would be "sectarian bigot"and thats generally your job, isn't it?

cause iraq had more oil. i mean when the oil fields in iraq dry up the nxt president's gonna go looking for another country with lots'a oil

It would be "sectarian bigot"and thats generally your job, isn't it?

So, is Congo my puppet too?

Let me see - there wouldn't be any atheists on this forum who are anti-sectarian (read as anti-religious) bigots? :eek:

So, is Congo my puppet too?

No, I'm saying hes a long way to go (downward) before he reaches your "standard".

Let me see - there wouldn't be any atheists on this forum who are anti-sectarian (read as anti-religious) bigots? :eek:


I wasn't aware I preferred any particular sect over another....

I wasn't aware I preferred any particular sect over another....

Plenty prefer atheists over people with religion, who have been characterized as backwards-ass supersititious freaks who need to be kicked out of any position of public authority - not necessarily by you, but by plenty of atheists on this forum.

That sounds like sectarian bigotry to me - or at least anti-religious bigotry.

Give it a couple of months.

Thirded.