NationStates Jolt Archive

So, what does everyone think of the reaction of the Islamic community to the Danish cartoons??? I know there is a thread for that, but THIS thread is for you to have the chance to express your outrage at actions perpetrated by the radical Muslims.

Such as the destruction of ancient Buddhist statues.
or
the abysmal human rights records (womens rights, rights of minorities, right to free speech, rights of Gays/Lesbians) of any nations such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the U.A.E....
or
the ridiculous intolerance of OTHER religions in these nations
and many, many, many more injustices in the name of Islam.

Please, feel free to vent about how these injustices infuriate you!

EDITED TO ADD RADICAL

and by rights of Gays/Lesbians, I mean at the very least the acknowledgment of their right to exist, under law.

I know the Musims are offended by the cartoons, but for 3 or 4 days now muslim immigrants have rioted in several of our largest cities, thowing rocks at the police and firefighters, burnt cars and destroyed shop windows and yesterday they set fire to several schools and even a kindergarten!! They demand that we respect them and Islam, hell no when they act like this :mad:

and I know this because I'm danish.

well, perhaps in their culture burning down kindergartens is an appropriate response to being offended by a cartoon. Socio-political moral-relativism, or some BS like that? :rolleyes:

You see, the way to be liberal or defend liberalism is not to get upset when other people get offended at stuff. Nor is it to deliberately try to offend as many people as you can - that's not liberalism, that's called being a dickhead.

But even if I felt the need to vent, it would be venting against individuals, not some faceless hivemind called "the Muslims".

I know the Musims are offended by the cartoons, but for 3 or 4 days now muslim immigrants have rioted in several of our largest cities, thowing rocks at the police and firefighters, burnt cars and destroyed shop windows and yesterday they set fire to several schools and even a kindergarten!! They demand that we respect them and Islam, hell no when they act like this :mad:

and I know this because I'm danish.

EDIT: I know that some of the protestors are danes, but most of the riots and burnings take place in neighbourhoods with mostly immigrant habitants.. and the trouble only began when the media announced that they were going to reprint the cartoons..

You see, the way to be liberal or defend liberalism is not to get upset when other people get offended at stuff. Nor is it to deliberately try to offend as many people as you can - that's not liberalism, that's called being a dickhead.

But even if I felt the need to vent, it would be venting against individuals, not some faceless hivemind called "the Muslims".

This. ^^

Thread fails due to sweeping generalizations. Please try again.

I know the Musims are offended by the cartoons, but for 3 or 4 days now muslim immigrants have rioted in several of our largest cities, thowing rocks at the police and firefighters, burnt cars and destroyed shop windows and yesterday they set fire to several schools and even a kindergarten!! They demand that we respect them and Islam, hell no when they act like this :mad:

and I know this because I'm danish.
Small groups of youths have set dozens of cars and dumpsters ablaze. Police officers and fire brigades have been met with stonethrowing and molotov cocktails in five consecutive nights of violence in the capital that have gradually spread to other Danish towns.

Some 50 people aged 15 to 25 have been arrested during the past week, charged with arson and violence against police officers.

While last year's riots were caused by youths angry over the closure of the youth centre, this time around authorities were at a loss to explain the violence.

"We don't know exactly what's behind it," Copenhagen police spokesman Flemming Steen Munch told AFP.

The riots began at the weekend [before the cartoons were published] in Copenhagen's heavily immigrant populated neighbourhoods of Noerrebro and Vesterbro, but have since spread to several other areas, including Denmark's second biggest city Aarhus and other regions have no significant numbers of immigrants.

According to media reports, some of those taking part in the riots were aged 10 to 12 years old, though police said no one that young had been arrested.

Some have suggested that new regulations that allow police to search people at random for weapons, even without suspicion, have left youths in Noerrebro feeling harassed, while others accused the police of racism.

Munch said those could be the reasons for the riots, but also offered up other explanations.

"They don't like that we are in the area of Noerrebro and looking for weapons on youngsters, they don't like that we are trying to stop the cannabis market, and a few other things have been mentioned too, such as the problem with the Mohammed drawings," he said.
Damn youths... (http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Denmark_vows_zero_tolerance_after_w_02152008.html)

You see, the way to be liberal or defend liberalism is not to get upset when other people get offended at stuff. Nor is it to deliberately try to offend as many people as you can - that's not liberalism, that's called being a dickhead.

But even if I felt the need to vent, it would be venting against individuals, not some faceless hivemind called "the Muslims".

What??? Did you not read the title. Your chance to vent at Islamic FANATISTS. I guess that too is too large a group??? I agree there are very many of them, but I am not talking about Muslims in general. God, the ability to read WOULD be a plus before making a contribution.

Can you not even decry the Islamic fanatists who blow up ancient statues of another religion? Can you not even decry these PEOPLE?

Thats called being a dick.....i mean hypocrite.

PS....Gravlen.....^^that.

What??? Did you not read the title. Your chance to vent at Islamic FANATISTS. I guess that too is too large a group??? I agree there are very many of them, but I am not talking about Muslims in general. God, the ability to read WOULD be a plus before making a contribution.
I know there is a thread for that, but THIS thread is for you to have the chance to express your outrage at actions perpetrated by the Muslims.

That. You fail yet again, and with a nice little flame too.

You see, the way to be liberal or defend liberalism is not to get upset when other people get offended at stuff. Nor is it to deliberately try to offend as many people as you can - that's not liberalism, that's called being a dickhead.

But even if I felt the need to vent, it would be venting against individuals, not some faceless hivemind called "the Muslims".

Ah, dude, there are reasons I like you despite your Lex Luthor ways...;)

That. You fail yet again, and with a nice little flame too.

Not really....you a person who only comes to the defense of Muslims when they are 'wronged' (by the printing of a cartoon...the HORRORS) yet cannot come to the defense of the Buddhists, for example, are certainly not in the position to decide whether I have failed or not. A stamp of failure from someone with your tendencies cannot be construed as actual failure.

So, what does everyone think of the reaction of the Islamic community to the Danish cartoons??? I know there is a thread for that, but THIS thread is for you to have the chance to express your outrage at actions perpetrated by the radical Muslims.

Such as the destruction of ancient Buddhist statues.
or
the abysmal human rights records (womens rights, rights of minorities, right to free speech, rights of Gays/Lesbians) of any nations such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the U.A.E....
or
the ridiculous intolerance of OTHER religions in these nations
and many, many, many more injustices in the name of Islam.

Please, feel free to vent about how these injustices infuriate you!

EDITED TO ADD RADICAL
Yeah, it kind of sucks, just like fanatical anything.

Not really....you a person who only comes to the defense of Muslims when they are 'wronged' (by the printing of a cartoon...the HORRORS) yet cannot come to the defense of the Buddhists, for example, are certainly not in the position to decide whether I have failed or not. A stamp of failure from someone with your tendencies cannot be construed as actual failure.


I like to think most of us come to the defence of whoever is getting the shit kicked out of them undeservedly, myself. That runs from Tibet to Papua.

Not really....you a person who only comes to the defense of Muslims when they are 'wronged' (by the printing of a cartoon...the HORRORS) yet cannot come to the defense of the Buddhists, for example, are certainly not in the position to decide whether I have failed or not. A stamp of failure from someone with your tendencies cannot be construed as actual failure.

Aaaw, how cute. But you give me far too much credit.

I suggest you go through all of my posts instead of that one thread (which you don't seem to understand either) before assuming things again. You keep making a fool of yourself when you do that you know.

Who says wouldn't come to the defence of the Buddhists? Who says I haven't done so in the past?

Yet again you fail. It's becomming a habbit for you, isn't it.

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/Gravlen/NSG/Thread20Failed.gif

Can you not even decry the Islamic fanatists who blow up ancient statues of another religion? Can you not even decry these PEOPLE?

Thats called being a dick.....i mean hypocrite.
People are weak, simple-minded and stubborn fools - manipulable, and easily so, yet undeterrable from whatever irrational convictions they have had handed to them. This is true no matter what creed you are conned into following. What would be the point in blaming individuals for the behaviour of a collective? That's like blaming the individual bubbles in a glass of lemonade for its fizzyness.

Lemonade is fizzy because of its chemical composition, given to it and preserved in the manufacturing process and realised through environmental factors. Fanaticism is no different. Extremists can exist because our current political environment of isolation and systematic abuse of resources subtly drives people to radicalisation, and they do because it is carried out by sadistic tyrants and megalomaniacs who seek to reap the profits of their own personal army of mindless masses. Why blame the byproduct when it's the manufacturing that's responsible?

Aaaw, how cute. But you give me far too much credit.

I suggest you go through all of my posts instead of that one thread (which you don't seem to understand either) before assuming things again. You keep making a fool of yourself when you do that you know.

Who says wouldn't come to the defence of the Buddhists? Who says I haven't done so in the past?

Yet again you fail. It's becomming a habbit for you, isn't it.

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/Gravlen/NSG/Thread20Failed.gif

Wow, a written notice of Failure AND a picture!!!

Now you've really done it, Gravlen. That picture, if nothing else, convinced me of my failure :(, where your ridiculous claims couldn't.

Aaaw, how cute. But you give me far too much credit.

I suggest you go through all of my posts instead of that one thread (which you don't seem to understand either) before assuming things again. You keep making a fool of yourself when you do that you know.

Who says wouldn't come to the defence of the Buddhists? Who says I haven't done so in the past?

Yet again you fail. It's becomming a habbit for you, isn't it.

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/Gravlen/NSG/Thread20Failed.gif

ps. please refer to my last post. perceived failure in the eyes of Gravlen et at =/= failure. Even when fancy pictures are included. Try larger text next time.

Wow, a written notice of Failure AND a picture!!!

Now you've really done it, Gravlen. That picture, if nothing else, convinced me of my failure :(, where your ridiculous claims couldn't.

I'm not trying to convince you, sorry. Just stating the facts.

I'm not trying to convince you, sorry. Just stating the facts.

Thread a huge success!

Just stating the facts, Gravlen. Sorry.

Thread a huge success!

Just stating the facts, Gravlen. Sorry.

Reality (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13458270&postcount=578) disagrees.

Honestly, atrocities committed in the name of islam dull in comparison to atrocities committed in the name of christianity and judaism. Now those guys really knew how to fuck people up. Muslims are amateurs. :p

Honestly, atrocities committed in the name of islam dull in comparison to atrocities committed in the name of christianity and judaism. Now those guys really knew how to fuck people up. Muslims are amateurs. :p

What about the Ottomans killing all those, was it Armenians? In Turkey.
What did the Jews do?
Now i can agree with Christianity, they did lots of nasty stuff because God told them too.

What did the Jews do?
Now i can agree with Christianity, they did lots of nasty stuff because God told them too.
Have you read the old testament? Heathens being slain left-right-and-centre. The OT Israelites were complete assholes, looking at it objectively.

'course, if everyone's happy to admit the bible to be apocryphal then I guess the only thing we've got on them is Palestine, really.

Meh.

What? Utter blathering nonsense. The Thetans were easily the most cruelest ever :p

Ah that rings a bell, scientology? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thetan)

What? Utter blathering nonsense. The Thetans were easily the most cruelest ever :p

Reality (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13458270&postcount=578) disagrees.

LOL

Reality is a post by you????

:D

Just :D

Have you read the old testament? Heathens being slain left-right-and-centre. The OT Israelites were complete assholes, looking at it objectively.

'course, if everyone's happy to admit the bible to be apocryphal then I guess the only thing we've got on them is Palestine, really.

Yeah, plus, did you see the way the Neanderthals used to just eat meat raw, and smash each other on the head if they got in the way of a meal. Made those Christians look really amateurish.

Thank god we don't live in the Neolithic any more....or the medieval ages.

What did the Jews do?
Old Testament much?

LOL

Reality is a post by you????

:D

Just :D

Actually it's a post by you, where you responded to me, and thus outlined the reason for this thread. And you have failed to follow through, and failed to make a point.

Honestly, atrocities committed in the name of islam dull in comparison to atrocities committed in the name of christianity and judaism. Now those guys really knew how to fuck people up. Muslims are amateurs. :pWhat did Judaism ever fuck up except the minds of its few followers and Palestine?

Old Testament much?You mean that text that is the Jewish rant about being (allegedly) fucked up by everyone else? I wonder when the Germans will make it into the Tanakh...

There are many extremist groups who cause havoc and do terrible terrible things, but I certainly don't think an "outlet to express your rage" is thread-worthy. Where's the "outlet to express your rage at the KKK" post?

What did the Jews do?

King David Hotel bombing back when Palestine was under British Mandate...

King David Hotel bombing back when Palestine was under British Mandate...And that compares to Christian domination of medieval/renaissance Europe and its colonies overseas in what way?

Yeah, plus, did you see the way the Neanderthals used to just eat meat raw, and smash each other on the head if they got in the way of a meal. Made those Christians look really amateurish.

Thank god we don't live in the Neolithic any more....or the medieval ages.
Yep. Historical humanity sucks. The key is learning how not to repeat its mistakes, and we're not very good at that yet either. But we're getting better. At least, we were.

And that compares to Christian domination of medieval/renaissance Europe and its colonies overseas in what way?

Never said it came even close - someone just asked what the Jews had done, and I answered.

Old Testament much?

Most likely, none of that actually happened. At least not in a way anything close to what was described.

Never said it came even close - someone just asked what the Jews had done, and I answered.The post was still in reference to what Lunatic Goofballs wrote : "Honestly, atrocities committed in the name of islam dull in comparison to atrocities committed in the name of christianity and judaism. Now those guys really knew how to fuck people up. Muslims are amateurs."

The post was still in reference to what Lunatic Goofballs wrote : "Honestly, atrocities committed in the name of islam dull in comparison to atrocities committed in the name of christianity and judaism. Now those guys really knew how to fuck people up. Muslims are amateurs."

And? What debate is there to be had about my answer? I never said it came close, not at all - Christianity has done far worse things - I really don't know what you expect me to say about it.

What did the Jews do?
Now i can agree with Christianity, they did lots of nasty stuff because God told them too.
Plenty! Just read a few books of the old testament! But I fail to see the nasty stuff that Christians did because God told us to. If you're thinking about the crusades, or the spanish inquisition, that was partly political, and partly that the Pope didn't want to lose his power to a new Religion (Or new sect of Christianity)
And? What debate is there to be had about my answer? I never said it came close, not at all - Christianity has done far worse things - I really don't know what you expect me to say about it.

It was more the time period. If Islam was the major religion in Europe, there probably wouldn't be too much difference in what they would have done. They might have been a bit more tolerant of other religions, but if you look back at the ottoman Empire, it's not much better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
Just a different target

There are many extremist groups who cause havoc and do terrible terrible things, but I certainly don't think an "outlet to express your rage" is thread-worthy. Where's the "outlet to express your rage at the KKK" post?

Hmm...so, if one is to make a thread on the atrocities of Pol Pot, one isn't allowed to UNLESS you make a thread on every single atrocity that has ever taken place on the history of this planet first?

Similar to the argument I continuously hear from people on this forum....one isn't allowed to criticize Islam UNLESS you first criticize every other religion on this planet FIRST.

What would the morning paper look like if YOU were in charge of things.....it would be the size of an entire encyclopedic collection, just because the front page story talked about anti-abortion activists?

Also Graveln....I think there are some Afghanis who need your defense today. They killed 80 innocent Afghanis, but I'm sure they offended the Islamists who committed the act SOMEhow. Repeated provocation would just make them blow up 80 more people, so as in the case of the Newspapers, they should learn not to offend the Muslims.

Don't you see, the people who deserve your support are the murderers, not the people who simply offend them (cartoonist, women, gays).

What does it matter, leftist's would rather live under Islamic law than live with and around Christians. You can never get them to say terrorism is bad, and that maybe, just maybe, christians are not ebil Munt1rs.

I dont know, leftists or not, they are simply people who cannot face up to cold, hard facts.

What does it matter, leftist's would rather live under Islamic law than live with and around Christians. You can never get them to say terrorism is bad, and that maybe, just maybe, christians are not ebil Munt1rs.

What does it matter, leftist's would rather live under Islamic law than live with and around Christians. You can never get them to say terrorism is bad, and that maybe, just maybe, christians are not ebil Munt1rs.

Also Graveln...
*Snip*

I have no idea what you're on or on about, but I must say, it's kinda flattering that you have such an obsession with me. Unfortunately it's just after Valentines Day... But oh well, you're still allowed to send me chocolate.


My very own stalker! *Giggles*

What does it matter, leftist's would rather live under Islamic law than live with and around Christians.

Bullshit. Also, most "leftists" ARE Christians.

You can never get them to say terrorism is bad

Terrorism is bad. That's why I oppose the Iraq war.

and that maybe, just maybe, christians are not ebil Munt1rs.

So your entire post was essentially:

LOL LEFTISTS ARE NON-CHRISTIANS WHO LIKE ISLAMIC LAW AND TERRORISM AND HATE CHRISTIANS!

Really, grow the fuck up and say something meaningful.

Really, grow the fuck up and say something meaningful.

Honestly, I wouldn't expect any different in a thread the OP started because I said I thought reposting the danish cartoons were a bad idea even though I supported their right to repost them, thus leading him to label me as a "fanaticism sympathizer" and starting this thread.

It's bound to attract such posts by its very nature.

But even if I felt the need to vent, it would be venting against individuals, not some faceless hivemind called "the Muslims".

What about radical Islam? Whats so bad about criticising such a terrible doctrine?

Bullshit. Also, most "leftists" ARE Christians.



Terrorism is bad. That's why I oppose the Iraq war.



So your entire post was essentially:

LOL LEFTISTS ARE NON-CHRISTIANS WHO LIKE ISLAMIC LAW AND TERRORISM AND HATE CHRISTIANS!

Really, grow the fuck up and say something meaningful.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists. I am sorry facts get in the way of your delusions. To your other point, yes, Islamic terrorism does not exist to a lot of leftists. For the ones it does exist for, it is justifiable. You condem abortion bombers (which you should) and praise "freedom fighters" who just happen to attack civilians. Nice caps by the way, it makes you seem REAL mature.

Honestly, I wouldn't expect any different in a thread the OP started because I said I thought reposting the danish cartoons were a bad idea even though I supported their right to repost them, thus leading him to label me as a "fanaticism sympathizer" and starting this thread.

It's bound to attract such posts by its very nature.

Yeah, because you seemed far more outraged at teh author than the reaction.

What about radical Islam? Whats so bad about criticising such a terrible doctrine?
It should be criticised. However, the OP had a blanke statement about muslims (in general), and only later added the "Radical" part.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists. I am sorry facts get in the way of your delusions. To your other point, yes, Islamic terrorism does not exist to a lot of leftists. For the ones it does exist for, it is justifiable. You condem abortion bombers (which you should) and praise "freedom fighters" who just happen to attack civilians. Nice caps by the way, it makes you seem REAL mature.
You obviously haven't been here very long.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists. I am sorry facts get in the way of your delusions.

That counts as a "fact" in your little mind? That explains a lot...

Yeah, because you seemed far more outraged at teh author than the reaction.

When? Where? Quotes please. And outrage? You must be mixing me up with another poster again.

Thread sucks. Must we really continue with this 'evil muslims' nonsense?

Well, I'm sure he never intended to make blanket statements about all Muslims, and I don't think we should second guess his motives just because of an error in his syntax, especially when the title clearly states its about Islamic fanaticism.

If you had seen the debate that lead to this thread, you wouldn't have been so sure. I wasn't.

And the first post always carry more weight than the title...

It should be criticised. However, the OP had a blanke statement about muslims (in general), and only later added the "Radical" part.


Well, I'm sure he never intended to make blanket statements about all Muslims, and I don't think we should second guess his motives just because of an error in his syntax, especially when the title clearly states its about Islamic fanaticism.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists

Most people in the US are Christians.... and that about half of them (at least) are "leftist" to you.

Of course there's also the Christian Democrats (http://christiandemocrats.org/) specifically.

So obviously, you are wrong because you have never met or heard about a Great Many People.

. I am sorry facts get in the way of your delusions.

What fact? The fact that you live in a basement? Yeah that was really persuasive there. You can see how many people in this thread agree with you that all leftists are atheists.

To your other point, yes, Islamic terrorism does not exist to a lot of leftists.

Why did you say "yes" when that not only doesn't AGREE with anything I said, it doesn't even ADDRESS anything I said at all?

For the ones it does exist for, it is justifiable.

This is an interesting fiction you're creating. Strawman fallacy, of course. Not that you know what a fallacy is.

You condem abortion bombers (which you should) and praise "freedom fighters" who just happen to attack civilians.

I do? When did I do either one? Oh that's right I didn't, and this is just your stupid strawman fallacy again.

Nice caps by the way, it makes you seem REAL mature.

Yes I'm sure everyone who is reading this is going, "Gosh, Kontor is being so reasonable, unlike that mean immature Greater Trostia!"

Have you read the old testament? Heathens being slain left-right-and-centre. The OT Israelites were complete assholes, looking at it objectively.

Most of it didn't happen. The conquest of Canaan has been comprehesively demolished by archaeology, which has shown that, far from being the land of fortified cities and mighty kings described in the Bible, the 'cities' were barely even villages and the kings were so weak that as few as fifty Egyptian soldiers were sufficient to put down an attempted landgrab. Most of the 'cities' didn't even have walls to destroy in the 13th century BC, a few of them didn't even exist at all at the time...

Islamic terrorism does not exist to a lot of leftists.
I think you’ll find many people, no matter their political persuasion, rightly believe that the threat of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is greatly exaggerated for political means, and that the idea of an International Islamic Conspiracy is in the same category of ‘bullshit’ as the International Communist/Jewish/Illuminati/etc Conspiracy.

You mean that text that is the Jewish rant about being (allegedly) fucked up by everyone else? I wonder when the Germans will make it into the Tanakh...

Actually significant parts of it are attacks on other Jews: the rival kingdoms of Israel and Judah both give each other a lot of stick throughout the Pentateuch.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists.

Then you must not get out much. I recommend taking some time off NSG, where well nigh everyone is an atheist, be they right or left.

Back to relevant topics, people can “say” they are Christians, it does not mean that they are.
Wait: so in this thread you’re arguing that just because some people say they’re Christians doesn’t mean they’re Christians, yet in this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13458807#post13458807) thread, you’re arguing that just because some people call themselves liberals, they are liberals.

Which position are you going to take?

Plenty! Just read a few books of the old testament! But I fail to see the nasty stuff that Christians did because God told us to. If you're thinking about the crusades, or the spanish inquisition, that was partly political, and partly that the Pope didn't want to lose his power to a new Religion (Or new sect of Christianity)

Host desecration: the belief in transubstantiation led to fears that heretics would sneak consecrated wafers out of church to spit or stamp on them. Hundreds of innocent people were murdered (with religious motivation) on suspicion of having committed a completely imaginary crime.

You can do better: at least find a stalker who can spell your name. :p

Aaaw, you popped my fantasy :(

I wub you anyway :fluffle:


>.>
<.<


*Stalks*

>.<

W00t! Six-minute time warp! :eek:

Radical, fundamentalist Muslims are pricks. Nothing else for it. Radical, fundimentalist anythings are pricks.
As a thread there is value here, because the actions of the accused are in the news constantly and cause pain and suffering to heaps of people worldwide, yes other people cause equal if not more pain and suffering if you add it all up, however this post is not about them. If you want to talk about that, start up a new post.
No one has the right to decide if a post has "failed" or not if you don't like the OP or they way things have gone in the thread, fuck off and post in another thread!

AMK
xxx

Most people in the US are Christians.... and that about half of them (at least) are "leftist" to you.

Of course there's also the Christian Democrats (http://christiandemocrats.org/) specifically.

So obviously, you are wrong because you have never met or heard about a Great Many People.



What fact? The fact that you live in a basement? Yeah that was really persuasive there. You can see how many people in this thread agree with you that all leftists are atheists.



Why did you say "yes" when that not only doesn't AGREE with anything I said, it doesn't even ADDRESS anything I said at all?



This is an interesting fiction you're creating. Strawman fallacy, of course. Not that you know what a fallacy is.



I do? When did I do either one? Oh that's right I didn't, and this is just your stupid strawman fallacy again.



Yes I'm sure everyone who is reading this is going, "Gosh, Kontor is being so reasonable, unlike that mean immature Greater Trostia!"

*Gasp* How did you know I lived in the basement! Are you stalking me??!!!:rolleyes: Back to relevant topics, people can "say" they are Christians, it does not mean that they are.


A whole lot of leftists on this forum ARE atheists, I am not saying that leftists can't be Christians, but the very nature of the ideology of the left makes it difficult. But, you can't argue with a bigot, so I guess I best be heading back to my "basement".

What does it matter, leftist's would rather live under Islamic law than live with and around Christians. You can never get them to say terrorism is bad, and that maybe, just maybe, christians are not ebil Munt1rs.

Two bullshit claims in two sentences (it's probably three bullshit claims, but I can't for the life of me work out what a 'Munt1r' is).

I have no idea what you're on or on about, but I must say, it's kinda flattering that you have such an obsession with me. Unfortunately it's just after Valentines Day... But oh well, you're still allowed to send me chocolate.


My very own stalker! *Giggles*

You can do better: at least find a stalker who can spell your name. :p

But then just pointing out the mere existence of Al Qaida, and many other blatantly non secretive terrorist organisations totally debunks the idea that it is at least non existent, and not against the west in any way.
How so?

You’ve pointed out the existence of one or more particular terrorist cells that may or may not inspire one another, cells that kill and injure a relatively tiny number of people when compared to any real danger the world faces.

No International Terrorist Conspiracy there.

Conspiracy? Who ever said that?
Listen to innumerable speeches by Bush, Blair et al post-2001.

I always assumed people knew it was a few thousand people with a very strong will and a lot of way’s.
You’d be sorely mistaken.

I think you’ll find many people, no matter their political persuasion, rightly believe that the threat of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is greatly exaggerated for political means, and that the idea of an International Islamic Conspiracy is in the same category of ‘bullshit’ as the International Communist/Jewish/Illuminati/etc Conspiracy.

But then just pointing out the mere existence of Al Qaida, and many other blatantly non secretive terrorist organisations totally debunks the idea that it is at least non existent, and not against the west in any way.

What did the Jews do?

Wiped the Amalekites off the face of the Earth. Three times. Now that's quality destruction.

I think you’ll find many people, no matter their political persuasion, rightly believe that the threat of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism is greatly exaggerated for political means, and that the idea of an International Islamic Conspiracy is in the same category of ‘bullshit’ as the International Communist/Jewish/Illuminati/etc Conspiracy.


Conspiracy? Who ever said that? I always assumed people knew it was a few thousand people with a very strong will and a lot of way's.

Every single leftist I have ever seen or met or heard about are atheists. I am sorry facts get in the way of your delusions. To your other point, yes, Islamic terrorism does not exist to a lot of leftists. For the ones it does exist for, it is justifiable. You condem abortion bombers (which you should) and praise "freedom fighters" who just happen to attack civilians. Nice caps by the way, it makes you seem REAL mature.

Kontor, you're a moron. I've never met a leftist whose praised or denied terrorism. Nor one who says they'd rather live under Shariah law. I'm not exactly sure where you're getting your bullshit ideas. Out of your ass, perhaps.

Two bullshit claims in two sentences (it's probably three bullshit claims, but I can't for the life of me work out what a 'Munt1r' is).

Sorry, I misspelled a misspelling. :p

Wiped the Amalekites off the face of the Earth. Three times. Now that's quality destruction.

And don't forget Shamgar: he killed six-hundred Philistines with nothing but a pointy stick! That's hardcore!

*Gasp* How did you know I lived in the basement! Are you stalking me??!!!:rolleyes: Back to relevant topics, people can "say" they are Christians, it does not mean that they are.

Oh sure. And you can SAY you don't live in a basement, it doesn't mean you don't!

A whole lot of leftists on this forum ARE atheists, I am not saying that leftists can't be Christians, but the very nature of the ideology of the left makes it difficult. But, you can't argue with a bigot, so I guess I best be heading back to my "basement".

You went from 'all liberals' to ' all leftists i have met or heard of' to 'a whole lot of leftists on this forum.' Hoo boy, that's some subtle goalpost changing!

Have fun in the basement.

Wait: so in this thread you’re arguing that just because some people say they’re Christians doesn’t mean they’re Christians, yet in this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13458807#post13458807) thread, you’re arguing that just because some people call themselves liberals, they are liberals.

Which position are you going to take?

Well, if they are not liberals what are they then?

Aaaw, you popped my fantasy :(

I wub you anyway :fluffle:


>.>
<.<


*Stalks*

>.<

:eek:


*Stalks Waztakan to form kinky love-triangle*

No one has the right to decide if a post has "failed" or not if you don't like the OP or they way things have gone in the thread, fuck off and post in another thread!
When the OP states a specific purpose for the thread in another debate, yet misses the target completely when making the new thread, I'd say that the thread has failed.

If you don't like it you can... um... go and read the original intent of the OP and see the unedited opening post I suppose...

:eek:


*Stalks Waztakan to form kinky love-triangle*

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u275/Gravlen/NSG/Smilies%20and%20animated%20stuff/01_Charming_04_66757_t.jpg

Well, if they are not liberals what are they then?
Any number of things; democratic socialists, anarcho-syndicalists, Marxist-Leninists, social ecologists, autonomous Marxists, Trotskyites... The list goes on.

But they’re not liberals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberals).

Oh sure. And you can SAY you don't live in a basement, it doesn't mean you don't!



You went from 'all liberals' to ' all leftists i have met or heard of' to 'a whole lot of leftists on this forum.' Hoo boy, that's some subtle goalpost changing!

Have fun in the basement.

Fairly interchangable, very few non leftist liberals.

A whole lot of leftists on this forum ARE atheists, I am not saying that leftists can't be Christians, but the very nature of the ideology of the left makes it difficult. But, you can't argue with a bigot, so I guess I best be heading back to my "basement".
Dude, Jesus was a damn leftist. If anything, Christians should have it the easiest of all.

Fairly interchangable, very few non leftist liberals.

Despite the two terms being pretty much mutually exclusive?

It should be criticised. However, the OP had a blanke statement about muslims (in general), and only later added the "Radical" part.


You obviously haven't been here very long.

BULLSHIT....the title ALWAYS said Islamic fanatacism....

Despite the two terms being pretty much mutually exclusive?

Not where I live.

Fairly interchangable, very few non leftist liberals.

Way to miss the point.

"All liberals/leftists are atheists" and "all liberals/leftists that I've met or heard of" and "many liberals/leftists on this forum" are not interchangeable. They are examples of you changing the goalposts when each successive stupid statement is proven or demonstrated wrong.

Who the fuck is this guy and why is he cluttering NSG with this crap?

Anyway, I don't really get the point of this thread.

Venting mindless anger? Is this an encounter session, are we in therapy?

I think the US has had more than enough "expressing" against "Islamic fanaticism." I remember in the days after 9/11 and hearing so many otherwise or hitherto reasonable persons say shit like "Nuke the towelheads!"

What, you people didn't get enough of that? Addicted to the hate?

Anyway, I don't really get the point of this thread.

Venting mindless anger? Is this an encounter session, are we in therapy?

I think the US has had more than enough "expressing" against "Islamic fanaticism." I remember in the days after 9/11 and hearing so many otherwise or hitherto reasonable persons say shit like "Nuke the towelheads!"

What, you people didn't get enough of that? Addicted to the hate?

Blanket statements regarding the US? No balnket statements of any kind are allowed to be made on this Forum.

You don't need to get the point of this thread. You are unwilling to see the point that there are many many actions carried out by Islamic fanaticisms that should be severely criticized. You are free to, as others have, open your own thread criticizing US policy (even though other nations make bad policy....what, that apparently counts as an argument with the fanatic sympathizers here), criticizing Israeli policy (even though other nations make bad policy....why aren't we talking about them ALL) or criticising Christian fundamentalists for not allowing a female to be a coach (I don't know if that's even legal, I mean without a disclaimer that OTHER religions have fundamentalists too).

THIS thread is about the many atrocities committed by the many, many fanatic Muslims. Want to bring up every other religion, start a fucking thread about it.

And don't forget Shamgar: he killed six-hundred Philistines with nothing but a pointy stick! That's hardcore!

Sodom and Gomorrah much?

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_left

Who the fuck is this guy and why is he cluttering NSG with this crap?

Because I'm sick of fanatic Islam being treated differently than fanatic Christianity. Every fucking Islamosympathizer comes to criticize the loser Kansas school, but when it comes to Islam, people actually suggest some newspaper shouldn't have printed some offensive cartoons (even while acknowledging their RIGHT to do so, apparently) , and if they do, they should EXPECT this kind of behavior.

WHAT THE FUCK???

Perhaps gays shouldn't have parades in the conservative parts of the US ("even though I support their RIGHT to do so"), because they know their practices offend Christianity?

WHY the fuck should people care more about offending Muslims than about offending Christians???

Because I'm sick of fanatic Islam being treated differently than fanatic Christianity.

It's not. Nobody treats radical islam any different than radical christianity. What does happen however is that sane, rational, and intelligent people refuse to lump all of islam in with the radicals, just as we refuse to lump all of christianity in with the radicals.

Which apparently confuses and infuriates knuckle dragging mouth breathers like yourself.

Every fucking Islamosympathizer comes to criticize the loser Kansas school, but when it comes to Islam, people actually suggest some newspaper shouldn't have printed some offensive cartoons (even while acknowledging their RIGHT to do so, apparently) , and if they do, they should EXPECT this kind of behavior.

Let me get this straight. School does "offensive, stupid, and dumb thing" and people criticize them. Newspaper does "offensive, stupid and dumb thing" and people criticize them.

What, the fuck, exactly, is your problem, or are you under the impression that it's "OK" to criticize institutions that discriminate against women but it's not "OK" to criticize institutions that go out of their way to insult muslims?

Any number of things; democratic socialists, anarcho-syndicalists, Marxist-Leninists, social ecologists, autonomous Marxists, Trotskyites... The list goes on.

But they’re not liberals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberals).

Whew, have we got the names wrong here. The definition of liberals sound more like conservatives to me. If that is the case, why call em libs?

It's not. Nobody treats radical islam any different than radical christianity. What does happen however is that sane, rational, and intelligent people refuse to lump all of islam in with the radicals, just as we refuse to lump all of christianity in with the radicals.

Which apparently confuses and infuriates knuckle dragging mouth breathers like yourself.



Let me get this straight. School does "offensive, stupid, and dumb thing" and people criticize them. Newspaper does "offensive, stupid and dumb thing" and people criticize them.

What, the fuck, exactly, is your problem, or are you under the impression that it's "OK" to criticize institutions that discriminate against women but it's not "OK" to criticize institutions that go out of their way to insult muslims?

Hm....I find it very telling that "Muslim fanatic attempts to kill cartoon author for printing offensive cartoon" wasn't one of the things you listed. That was my fucking point (you see, I can swear too...yipee!). In the case of the school, it is the religion that is at fault, but in the case of the newspaper, it is the authors that are at fault. What the fuck (yoohoo!) is so hard to grasp here? You criticise the retarded action of the school (but forget that the woman might have offended the Christian head of the school), but when it comes to the Newspaper, you even fail to MENTION (that was classic) the fact that it was the Islamic NUT who was going to be a little more than offensive, he was going to commit murder.

In Neo Arts books: crimes ordered by severity:

1. Discriminating against women (only by christians)
2. Printing offensive cartoons
3. what....there is no other crime here!!!

Hm....I find it very telling that "Muslim fanatic attempts to kill cartoon author for printing offensive cartoon" wasn't one of the things you listed. That was my fucking point (you see, I can swear too...yipee!). In the case of the school, it is the religion that is at fault, but in the case of the newspaper, it is the authors that are at fault. What the fuck (yoohoo!) is so hard to grasp here? You criticise the retarded action of the school (but forget that the woman might have offended the Christian head of the school), but when it comes to the Newspaper, you even fail to MENTION (that was classic) the fact that it was the Islamic NUT who was going to be a little more than offensive, he was going to commit murder.

In Neo Arts books: crimes ordered by severity:

1. Discriminating against women (only by christians)
2. Printing offensive cartoons
3. what....there is no other crime here!!!

*Warms his hands on the Strawman*

So...any Islamic fanaticists spontaneously combust this hour? I guess we still have 27 minutes left, right????

In about 40 years I will be living in Switzerland with my gun close to me forming the last European bastion against the caliphate, cant wait!

...

...what?

Which apparently confuses and infuriates knuckle dragging mouth breathers like yourself.



An INSULT! Thats outrageous!!! You know, you're offending me. I think a lot of people here would agree with my right to burn your house down and attempt to murder you.

In about 40 years I will be living in Switzerland with my gun close to me forming the last European bastion against the caliphate, cant wait!

Yes. I never said otherwise did I?

I said it was added in the Original Post.

You need to get glasses I think.

Of course they're allowed. They'll just get picked apart quickly.

Making up assumptions about people and creating straw men again? It's getting kinda old, don't you think?

Its not a strawman.

Its getting kind of old, don't you think, this stamping strawman on any view you don't agree with? It doesn't really make a difference, your opinion matters as much to me as the opinion of those you sympathize with, those who would kill as a reaction to being offended. But it IS irritating.

In Neo Arts books: crimes ordered by severity:

1. Discriminating against women (only by christians)
2. Printing offensive cartoons
3. what....there is no other crime here!!!

I really must memorise this debating technique. I'd forgotten it after I left primary school.

BULLSHIT....the title ALWAYS said Islamic fanatacism....
Yes. I never said otherwise did I?

I said it was added in the Original Post.

You need to get glasses I think.
Blanket statements regarding the US? No balnket statements of any kind are allowed to be made on this Forum.
Of course they're allowed. They'll just get picked apart quickly.
In Neo Arts books: crimes ordered by severity:
Making up assumptions about people and creating straw men again? It's getting kinda old, don't you think?

I really must memorise this debating technique. I'd forgotten it after I left primary school.

Tee Hee. FUN-ny.

You criticise the retarded action of the school (but forget that the woman might have offended the Christian head of the school), but when it comes to the Newspaper, you even fail to MENTION (that was classic) the fact that it was the Islamic NUT who was going to be a little more than offensive, he was going to commit murder.

Let me get this straight. Let me make sure I understand this. You are under the impression that I didn't include an attempted murderer, who was muslim, as a character who did a "bad thing", that somehow I support murder. That because I didn't go ahead and say "you know guys, I think murder is wrong" that somehow, magically, I think it's just a-ok and while printing offensive cartoons is an eggregious sin, murder...well that's just fine.

That in all the debates about whether publishing the cartoons was bad or not, the fact that each post did not end with a parenthetical "by the way guys, just so you know, even though I think publishing offensive material is bad, murder is of course far worse" that we don't actually think this, or believe it.

We didn't "fail to mention" the attempted murderer. We didn't "fail to condemn" his actions. We know. And like every single person in the world capable of demonstrating a shred of rationality and intelligence (read: not you) we don't need to go about explaining ad nausium that murder is bad, because it goes without saying.

Except, perhaps, for you, who feels that if we don't pepper every single thread with giant fucking flashing neon signs saying "murder is bad, mkay?" that somehow we forgot one of the most basic tenants of civilized society.

We didn't bother to explain our feelings on murder because we assumed that saying "murder is bad" is such an obvious fucking truism that anyone who had enough literacy to read the post and enough intelligence to turn on a fucking computer would understand that it goes without saying.

Except, I suppose, for you, who in a stunning display has demonstrated your complete and utter inability to understand that we don't need to exclaim "murder is bad". we don't need to directly chastise would be murderers. We know this already. Everybody knows this. We don't need to say it. Everybody understands we don't need to say it. Everybody, except, perhaps, for you. Congratulations, you set the bar for humanity even lower. You fail

In about 40 years I will be living in Switzerland with my gun close to me forming the last European bastion against the caliphate, cant wait!

50p says you wont be. There are still more christians than muslims.

And srsly tho, I think that the radical muslims may have overeacted slightly. But those demonstrations and attempted murders were not exactly spontaneous. Certain groups in Islam, such as Hamas, called for the cartoonists death, and roused a rabble. I don't think that those people can truly be classed as muslims, as various parts of the Qur'an say thou shalt not kill. I don't think this is a no true scotman fallicy, but please tell me if i'm wrong in any of the above.

50p says you wont be. There are still more christians than muslims.

And srsly tho, I think that the radical muslims may have overeacted slightly. But those demonstrations and attempted murders were not exactly spontaneous. Certain groups in Islam, such as Hamas, called for the cartoonists death, and roused a rabble. I don't think that those people can truly be classed as muslims, as various parts of the Qur'an say thou shalt not kill. I don't think this is a no true scotman fallicy, but please tell me if i'm wrong in any of the above.

You're not wrong. Your resonable, rational, and intellegent. You have a much better grasp of the world than imported_Sozy, (unless she was being sarcasitic, in which case I apologize and withdraw my earlier statement). And you're not nuts like..........well, we all knwo who I'm referring to....

Let me get this straight. Let me make sure I understand this. You are under the impression that I didn't include an attempted murderer, who was muslim, as a character who did a "bad thing", that somehow I support murder. That because I didn't go ahead and say "you know guys, I think murder is wrong" that somehow, magically, I think it's just a-ok and while printing offensive cartoons is an eggregious sin, murder...well that's just fine.

That in all the debates about whether publishing the cartoons was bad or not, the fact that each post did not end with a parenthetical "by the way guys, just so you know, even though I think publishing offensive material is bad, murder is of course far worse" that we don't actually think this, or believe it.

We didn't "fail to mention" the attempted murderer. We didn't "fail to condemn" his actions. We know. And like every single person in the world capable of demonstrating a shred of rationality and intelligence (read: not you) we don't need to go about explaining ad nausium that murder is bad, because it goes without saying.



Umm.... congratulations...you managed a whole fucking post without swearing. Unfortunately, there is absolutely NO substance left now. Somehow, you felt the need to repeat, ad nauseum, that the Danish cartoonist had offended the Muslim community. That not every Muslim is a terrorist. Expressing constant and monotonous outrage at the fact that the newspapers chose to reprint the cartoons. That the Muslim community would be subject to this horrific torture again.

It really doesn't seem that you understand the difference here. The fact that you even fail to mention the attempted murder IS telling. It means that you do NOT think it is relevant.

You're not wrong. Your resonable, rational, and intellegent. You have a much better grasp of the world than imported_Sozy, (SNIP) and you're not nuts like..........well, we all knwo who I'm referring to....

Why thankyou.

Its not a strawman.
It is.

Its getting kind of old, don't you think, this stamping strawman on any view you don't agree with?
Not when it's true.

It doesn't really make a difference, your opinion matters as much to me as the opinion of those you sympathize with, those who would kill as a reaction to being offended.
My, you have yet to show me where I have sympathized with those who would kill as a reaction to being offended, so I can only interpret your post to mean that my opinion matters a lot since you care about the opinion of the cartoonist - a man I do sympathize with.

But it IS irritating.
I can only imagine that being wrong all the time would be irritating, indeed.

It is.


Not when it's true.

My, you have yet to show me where I have sympathized with those who would kill as a reaction to being offended, so I can only interpret your post to mean that my opinion matters a lot since you care about the opinion of the cartoonist - a man I do sympathize with.


I can only imagine that being wrong all the time would be irritating, indeed.

1. What. Self affirmation, again? Or will Neo Art and the rest come to the rescue?
2. No...I said those who are willing to kill *snip....that does not include the cartoonist.
3. Again, YOU irritate me, but YOU declaring something 'false' or 'wrong' does not make it so.

PS Are you stalking me?

You're not wrong. Your resonable, rational, and intellegent. You have a much better grasp of the world than imported_Sozy, (unless she was being sarcasitic, in which case I apologize and withdraw my earlier statement). And you're not nuts like..........well, we all knwo who I'm referring to....

Ahh...the stamp of approval....How I crave it from the fanatic sympathizers.


And....Rakysh, did you just talk bad about Hamas??? Do you know about other religions which have also done certain bad things. How dare you not mention them, choosing to offend only Hamas. What's next, a CARTOON?

It really doesn't seem that you understand the difference here. The fact that you even fail to mention the attempted murder IS telling. It means that you do NOT think it is relevant.

And once again we come to the crux of the problem. You think my failure to point out that attempting murder is "bad" is somehow "telling" that I think it's ok.

My failure to 'mention the attempted murder" does not mean I don't think it's relevant. My not mentioning it is about as important as the fact that I did not wake up, get on this forum, and declare to everyone here that water is wet, the sky is blue, my cat has fur, and that Boston is cold in February. It falls into one of those "we already know this" catagory. One of those particular quanta of information that every sane rational person here is aware of. No, I didn't mention the attempted murder and take time to condemn it. Because every single person with a shred of intelligence and honesty would be able to know my position already. Just like I didn't come into this thread and tell you that 2+2 = 4. I assumed you had a fundamentally basic understanding of certain facts, and a fundamentally basic intelligence sufficient enough to apply those facts to the real world. I had assumed that you were capable of understanding "murder is bad", capable of understanding that I would also think "murder is bad" and have reasoned your way through that particular train of thought to reach the conclusion that I don't need to tell you what you already know.

I assumed you were capable of demonstrating a level of rationality and intellect equal to that of anyone who is not severely retarded. I see I have misjudged you. In the future when I am interacting with you, I will remember that you lack even the most basic level of competance and will address you accordingly.

Let's see....how should I do that...um....I know. Would you like a lolipop?

Great, we now have a whole thread dedicated to ranting about teh ebil moslam hivemind.


I actually think we should keep this up. That way, all the Islamophobes can just come here to rant, without filling every other thread with their irrational paranoia...

Ahh...the stamp of approval....How I crave it from the fanatic sympathizers.


And....Rakysh, did you just talk bad about Hamas??? Do you know about other religions which have also done certain bad things. How dare you not mention them, choosing to offend only Hamas. What's next, a CARTOON?

Fuck off yeah? I've lurked for most of this thread, and frankly, I think you're a twazzok.

Hamas are political orgaisation, and are basically militant. You are the one who wants everyone to metion bad things muslims have done in the past. Try and get past your bigoted part, and realise that there are evil people in almost every orgaization, and that bringing attention to them all the time only grants them more power over our fears

And now you've made me break my "no swearing" thing for lent.

2. No...I said those who are willing to kill *snip....that does not include the cartoonist.
And you have yet to back up your assertion in any way, so it's not my fault that it would be the only logical interpretation given that I do sympathize with the cartoonist.

3. Again, YOU irritate me, but YOU declaring something 'false' or 'wrong' does not make it so.
You're quite right. The errors, falseness, wrong assumptions and lies in your post does, however.

PS Are you stalking me?
Only in your wet dreams.

And once again we come to the crux of the problem. You think my failure to point out that attempting murder is "bad" is somehow "telling" that I think it's ok.

I think that my failure to point out that attempted murder is "bad" is about as relevant as the fact that I did not wake up, get on this forum, and declare to everyone here that water is wet, the sky is blue, my cat has fur, and that Boston is cold in February. It falls into one of those "we already know this" catagory. One of those particular quanta of information that every sane rational person here is aware of. No, I didn't mention the attempted murder and take time to condemn it. Because every single person with a shred of intelligence and honesty would be able to know my position already. Just like I didn't come into this thread and tell you that 2+2 = 4. I assumed you had a fundamentally basic understanding of certain facts, and a fundamentally basic intelligence sufficient enough to apply those facts to the real world. I had assumed that you were capable of understanding "murder is bad", capable of understanding that I would also think "murder is bad" and have reasoned your way through that particular train of thought to reach the conclusion that I don't need to tell you what you already know.

I assumed you were capable of demonstrating a level of rationality and intellect equal to that of anyone who is not severely retarded. I see I have misjudged you. In the future when I am interacting with you, I will remember that you lack even the most basic level of competance and will address you accordingly.

Let's see....how should I do that...um....I know. Would you like a lolipop?

I warned you about offending me. I have the support of many in carrying out a severe beating of you as a response to this offensive name-calling.

But really, if a newspaper were to cover the story, and simply mention the Danish side of the story, or just the AllahBorg side of it, you wouldn't think they would be biased?

The point is, the original goal of the cartoonist was to see if if were possible to break the taboo of not insulting Islam. He had said every other religious figure had been parodied, but not Mohammed. You whining about offending the Muslims, while failing to even MENTION the reaction of the AllahBorg, which was perhaps far more severe than the author had ever expected, seems severely retarded. Comparing this to having to mention that the sky is blue, seems severely retarded.

Although, I do not wish to collectively punish the mentally retarded so.

I warned you about offending me. I have the support of many in carrying out a severe beating of you as a response to this offensive name-calling.

Huh? Someone's taking this too seriously...

Whew, have we got the names wrong here.
Yes, you very much have.

The definition of liberals sound more like conservatives to me.
That’s not surprising, seeing as most of those on the right stress individual liberty as a thing of primary importance, and support the basic tenets of classical liberalism: protection of one’s life and well-being, one’s liberties and one’s personal property.

That’s not to say that all liberals are right-wing, far from it; but it highlights the uselessness of characterising political discourse as ‘liberals vs. conservatives’, as many conservatives (if not all) are also also liberals. Indeed, both the Republican party of the US and the Conservative party of the UK are, in the most part, strongly supportive of liberal policies, and could well be described as parties of liberalism.

And you have yet to back up your assertion in any way, so it's not my fault that it would be the only logical interpretation given that I do sympathize with the cartoonist.


You're quite right. The errors, falseness, wrong assumptions and lies in your post does, however.


Only in your wet dreams.

1. Of course I do...your outrage for the wronged AllahBorg. The one responsible for the action you were so outraged by carries your sympathy. BULLSHIT.

2. errors, falseness, wrong assumption and lies.....according to you and which troll army?

3. Oh come on....how would you be able to make that assumption....can you read my mind? The "falseness" in this statement is just painful. As are the wrong assumptions.

I really don't dream of being stalked by one of the AllahBorg. It is in fact one of my worst nightmares.

?????


Epic fail.

Oh come ON....he Offended me (that a capital O)....does he have to draw a fucking CARTOON??? Allahu Akbar?

Fuck off yeah? I've lurked for most of this thread, and frankly, I think you're a twazzok.

Hamas are political orgaisation, and are basically militant. You are the one who wants everyone to metion bad things muslims have done in the past. Try and get past your bigoted part, and realise that there are evil people in almost every orgaization, and that bringing attention to them all the time only grants them more power over our fears

And now you've made me break my "no swearing" thing for lent.

FUCK yeah....you did it!!! you mentioned "THE OTHERS"

I warned you about offending me. I have the support of many in carrying out a severe beating of you as a response to this offensive name-calling.




?????


Epic fail.

Oh come ON....he Offended me (that a capital O)....does he have to draw a fucking CARTOON??? Allahu Akbar?

So you threaten them physically, not knowing who they are, what they look like, or where they live?

PHAIL. EPICLY.

1. Of course I do...your outrage for the wronged AllahBorg. The one responsible for the action you were so outraged by carries your sympathy. BULLSHIT.

2. errors, falseness, wrong assumption and lies.....according to you and which troll army?

3. Oh come on....how would you be able to make that assumption....can you read my mind? The "falseness" in this statement is just painful. As are the wrong assumptions.

I really don't dream of being stalked by one of the AllahBorg. It is in fact one of my worst nightmares.

The Allahborg? What the hell is wrong with you? I have never heard such a shitting ridiculous term in my life. If every Muslim were part of the so-called "Allahborg" there wouldn't be much left in the West, seeing as we have 7 million muslims alone in the US. You're attempt to classify Muslims as a vast evil collective is stupid. Fail.

So you threaten them physically, not knowing who they are, what they look like, or where they live?

PHAIL. EPICLY.

Didn't the ALLAHU AKBAR scare the bejeesus out of you. It's THEIR pre suicide moment of ejaculation.

Again....how many members of other religions spontaneously combusted in the past decade. Why is it, that, regardless of the socio economic or political factors, that it is almost always the AllahBorg? If it was only the socio economic or political factor, then one would not expect to see such a high correlation between acts of terrorism and religion. One would expect a rather uncorrelated relationship.

IRA, Tamil Tigers, Assamese Tribes, Lords Resistance ARmy, they are all, or have all committed acts of terrorism. But what about

Iraqis, Saudis, Taliban, Bali, Madrid, London, New York, Darfur, Washington, New Delhi, Kashmir, public stoning, beheading, abyssmal womens rights

there may be many groups involved here, but they all claim to be somehow serving one God. They may say they are implementing Islamic law (Iran, stoning, Taliban), they may be defeatin the infidels who anger Allah(Bali, Madrid, London, New York) etc etc.

Those may not be the ONLY reason mentioned (even Osama Bin Laden mentions reasons other than wanting a Caliphate), but it is NOT a coincedence that they ALL do have this one common belief in common. They all believe that Allah is the one true god, and nonbelievers must be punished. Why the large correlation between terrorist acts and Islam?

Great, we now have a whole thread dedicated to ranting about teh ebil moslam hivemind.


I actually think we should keep this up. That way, all the Islamophobes can just come here to rant, without filling every other thread with their irrational paranoia...

Just out of curiosity....did you mean "evil" there?

Could it be the fact that the US has invaded 2 muslim countries in the past 7 years?

If you can't fight a war against an oposition traditionaly, then you find new methods- going for the civilians.

You can't declare a "war on terror" (god how I hate that phrase... you've just declared war ON AN EMOTION!) and not expect "terror" to fight back.

1. Of course I do...your outrage for the wronged AllahBorg. The one responsible for the action you were so outraged by carries your sympathy. BULLSHIT.
*Sigh*

One day you might even read my posts. I'm not holding my breath though.

Until then I guess you'll just have to continue to spout incorrect drivel. You have yet to back up a single one of these posts by a single quote from me to show this so-called "outrage" - and you keep ignoring every post I make claiming the opposite. Your selective blindness is impressive.

2. errors, falseness, wrong assumption and lies.....according to you and which troll army?
That would be reality. Funny you should mention "troll" though...

3. Oh come on....how would you be able to make that assumption....can you read my mind? The "falseness" in this statement is just painful. As are the wrong assumptions.
And now you've stopped making sense. Well, "Now" is being kind...

I really don't dream of being stalked by one of the AllahBorg. It is in fact one of my worst nightmares.
I would have assumed it would be the use of logic. I stand corrected.

Didn't the ALLAHU AKBAR scare the bejeesus out of you. It's THEIR pre suicide moment of ejaculation.

Again....how many members of other religions spontaneously combusted in the past decade. Why is it, that, regardless of the socio economic or political factors, that it is almost always the AllahBorg? If it was only the socio economic or political factor, then one would not expect to see such a high correlation between acts of terrorism and religion. One would expect a rather uncorrelated relationship.

IRA, Tamil Tigers, Assamese Tribes, Lords Resistance ARmy, they are all, or have all committed acts of terrorism. But what about

Iraqis, Saudis, Taliban, Bali, Madrid, London, New York, Darfur, Washington, New Delhi, Kashmir, public stoning, beheading, abyssmal womens rights

there may be many groups involved here, but they all claim to be somehow serving one God. They may say they are implementing Islamic law (Iran, stoning, Taliban), they may be defeatin the infidels who anger Allah(Bali, Madrid, London, New York) etc etc.

Those may not be the ONLY reason mentioned (even Osama Bin Laden mentions reasons other than wanting a Caliphate), but it is NOT a coincedence that they ALL do have this one common belief in common. They all believe that Allah is the one true god, and nonbelievers must be punished. Why the large correlation between terrorist acts and Islam?

Lord's Resistance Army rapes small girls and sends them into combat. I don't see how that's any less worse than what the terrorists do.

And secondly, you're views indicate that you've never actually read the Quran, so I'd advise shutting up before your ignorance humiliates you further. The Quran, is Sura 109 says

"In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Say: O disbelievers! (1) I worship not that which ye worship; (2) Nor worship ye that which I worship. (3) And I shall not worship that which ye worship. (4) Nor will ye worship that which I worship. (5) Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion. (6)"

And if you knew your history at all, Islamic communities have traditionally been the most tolerant in the world.

Lord's Resistance Army rapes small girls and sends them into combat. I don't see how that's any less worse than what the terrorists do.

And secondly, you're views indicate that you've never actually read the Quran, so I'd advise shutting up before your ignorance humiliates you further. The Quran, is Sura 109 says

"In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Say: O disbelievers! (1) I worship not that which ye worship; (2) Nor worship ye that which I worship. (3) And I shall not worship that which ye worship. (4) Nor will ye worship that which I worship. (5) Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion. (6)"

And if you knew your history at all, Islamic communities have traditionally been the most tolerant in the world.

BULLSHIT....you mean how they went into Iran and forced the Persians to either convert to Islam or to die....or how the Moghuls placed a tax on Hindus in their own country. Or do you mean in modern times, how all forms of "deviant" sexual behavior is punishable by law, and idol worshipers are not allowed to build any places of worship, because Idol Worshiping is forbidden in Islam. That is the first time I have heard Islam is tolerant.

And about the Quran....first I wouldn't wipe my ass with that filth. Second, why do the people find it so hard to follow this quote. Third, there are parts where Mohamed talks about killing the non-believers who refuse to convert.

Didn't the ALLAHU AKBAR scare the bejeesus out of you. It's THEIR pre suicide moment of ejaculation.

Again....how many members of other religions spontaneously combusted in the past decade. Why is it, that, regardless of the socio economic or political factors, that it is almost always the AllahBorg? If it was only the socio economic or political factor, then one would not expect to see such a high correlation between acts of terrorism and religion. One would expect a rather uncorrelated relationship.

IRA, Tamil Tigers, Assamese Tribes, Lords Resistance ARmy, they are all, or have all committed acts of terrorism. But what about

Iraqis, Saudis, Taliban, Bali, Madrid, London, New York, Darfur, Washington, New Delhi, Kashmir, public stoning, beheading, abyssmal womens rights

there may be many groups involved here, but they all claim to be somehow serving one God. They may say they are implementing Islamic law (Iran, stoning, Taliban), they may be defeatin the infidels who anger Allah(Bali, Madrid, London, New York) etc etc.

Those may not be the ONLY reason mentioned (even Osama Bin Laden mentions reasons other than wanting a Caliphate), but it is NOT a coincedence that they ALL do have this one common belief in common. They all believe that Allah is the one true god, and nonbelievers must be punished. Why the large correlation between terrorist acts and Islam?

Actually it's not a form of ejaculation for "terrorists", but an innocent phrase for Arabic speakers and a buzz phrase for insane islamophobes. "Allahu Akbar" literally translates to "God is great". Even Christian Arabs would use the phrase, because Allah is God in Arabic, not some otherworld deity you're trying to create.

Economic factors are much of the cause, and political ones are the rest. You seem to be thinking that Islam is the only influence on life for Muslims, but that is far from the truth. For instance, you will see that almost all terrorists attacks are carried out by those in poverty. It is also a less destructive alternative to massive bombing campaign carried out by so-called "civilized" countries. I'm quite sure that Hamas would use planes and tanks against Israel if it could, but it is denied any chance at building an economy, and thus it's only means of attack is either rocks, or suicide bombings. It isn't some battle between Islam and Judaism, but a fight over land and resources.

The thing to keep in mind here is that there are many horrible things that go in the world, and Muslims are not the only one's to blaim. Terrorist attacks are mild compared to bombing campaigns and large scale wars, and genocide occurs even today across the world.

BULLSHIT....you mean how they went into Iran and forced the Persians to either convert to Islam or to die....or how the Moghuls placed a tax on Hindus in their own country. Or do you mean in modern times, how all forms of "deviant" sexual behavior is punishable by law, and idol worshipers are not allowed to build any places of worship, because Idol Worshiping is forbidden in Islam. That is the first time I have heard Islam is tolerant.

And about the Quran....first I wouldn't wipe my ass with that filth. Second, why do the people find it so hard to follow this quote. Third, there are parts where Mohamed talks about killing the non-believers who refuse to convert.

You are such a moron, it's almost funny. So you're telling me that you make blanket statements about Islam without reading the Quran to see if they're correct? How stupid. The people don't find it hard to follow that quote; we're talking about a small minority of individuals who actually deviate from it. In Iran, persecutions were very rare (though there were a few). If you knew anything about the Islamic expansions in the 7th century, you'd know that the Arabs didn't have the manpower to force Islam on the population. And you're dislike of Islamic penalization of sex, how does that compare with the US purposely outlawing condoms to increase the likelihood of AIDS and pre-marital childbirth to discourage sexual deviance? The Muslims aren't alone in that one.

And the Moghuls? I thought this was about modern terrorism, but if you want to delve into history, the atrocities committed during the Crusades trump any harm done by the Moghul jizra.

And I'm an atheist, btw.

BULLSHIT....you mean how they went into Iran and forced the Persians to either convert to Islam or to die....or how the Moghuls placed a tax on Hindus in their own country. Or do you mean in modern times, how all forms of "deviant" sexual behavior is punishable by law, and idol worshipers are not allowed to build any places of worship, because Idol Worshiping is forbidden in Islam. That is the first time I have heard Islam is tolerant.

And about the Quran....first I wouldn't wipe my ass with that filth. Second, why do the people find it so hard to follow this quote. Third, there are parts where Mohamed talks about killing the non-believers who refuse to convert.

Ok, 2 quick questions.

How many people have actually sided with you? Surely if you are right, someone must have seen sense. Whats that? None? oh dear, oh dear...

Ok, question number 2. How many of "teh Ebil Mulsims" do you actually know? I mean properly know. Thankyou for your time.

BULLSHIT....you mean how they went into Iran and forced the Persians to either convert to Islam or to die....or how the Moghuls placed a tax on Hindus in their own country. Or do you mean in modern times, how all forms of "deviant" sexual behavior is punishable by law, and idol worshipers are not allowed to build any places of worship, because Idol Worshiping is forbidden in Islam. That is the first time I have heard Islam is tolerant.

And about the Quran....first I wouldn't wipe my ass with that filth. Second, why do the people find it so hard to follow this quote. Third, there are parts where Mohamed talks about killing the non-believers who refuse to convert.

Not quite true, some may have been forced to convert, but many converted by their own free will, and other's kept to their old religion.

The Mughals were extremely tolerant of other religions during their great years, more tolerant than any state in Europe at the time in fact. It was Aurangzeb, the last "great" Mughal emperor that taxed Hindus, the preceding five were tolerant.

Just because some states punish homosexuals (who still can't get married in the US of all places) does not mean that all Muslims are evil, I have found myself to be more tolerant towards "sexual deviants" than 99% of the people I know, and I would say 99% of the people I know are Christians, and I'm a Muslim. Not to say that Christians are intolerant, but the point is that sweeping generalizations are bad, because there are people on both sides who are extremely homophobic and others who are the opposite.

Also, you claim many things are forbidden or mandated by Islam. Would you care to provide some links, especially where you say that Muhammed said to kill non-believers.

You know what? It's covered in the Muslim cartoon thread.