It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Danish queen raps radical Islam

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 07:38 AM
link   
To state Muslims are not in beheadings is clearly contrition which is clearly stated in the koran to behead non muslims. If the koran said to rap chickens the muslims will do it. They never question it, they just do what ever it says and thinks it's moral way of life, fighting for allah fanstasy.

About the muslims in europe. Well i think there muiltculture race mixing agenda going on. The only reason muslims are there so they can interbreed with europeans and create a state from all the european country's. I believe the elite want destroy, nations and culture and create a one culture and one people. I suspect this immgration, multculture and the laws of racism, was created in order to keep this agenda together.

1. Destroy religion
2. Destroy culture
3, Destroy nations
4. Create one religion

White nationalists are the worst enemy of the elite. This why they fire shoots at them in the media, and call them hilter supports, in order to distort their real msg, which means no immgration, no race mixing, no destroy of nations, no to global world government policy.
5. Create one nation under government
6. Max sure blacks, asians, indian, whites all race mix, so they can be no more differenece between people.

[edit on 16-4-2005 by TheTruth123]




posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   


No - they have NOT. That is the thing. When you become an American, you speak English. When you live in Russia, you speak Russian.


Did the American pioneers make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians who were the rightful owners of the land where you now live?



You don't need frigging language courses to pick up a language. If you make any attempt at all to TRY and speak it, to TRY and learn it you WILL! It takes effort, and that is EXACTLY the problem with some immigrants. They make no effort to pick up the language (and culture for that matter) of the place they live.


Sounds pretty much like the close to 200,000 Americans who lived in Iran during the Shah's time - 99.9% didn't speak one word of Farsi and never made any attempt to learn it or to integrate in Iranian society.



Who cares - you don't NEED an education! You learn from TRYING. The problem is some of them don't! If you live in a country for a bloody decade how could you NOT learn the native language? Are all the immigrents that STUPID? Or is it just that they make no damn effort to try?


I wonder where in the U.S. you live.... China town in San Francisco? Elsewhere in the U.S. I would say that the overwhelming majority speak English pretty well, so I don't know how you can generalize in such a fashion as if most immigrants in the U.S. do not speak English. I wouldn't get so hung up on the English language factor if I were you, because as things are going right now statistics show that Hispanics will become a majority in the U.S. in the future and already we can see that both languages are being more and more used on an official level. There's nothing wrong with that. In tiny Switzerland they have three official languages, and they have not taken any harm from it, so if the U.S. will become Spanish, Chinese and English linguistically in the future there shouldn't be any problem. Your attitude seems to be that you can impose your will, culture, language and everything else on everyone else, but that others shouldn't even dare think about doing the same to you - The real world works in a very different way!

So what if people in a country do not speak your language? Is it really such a big deal? How come we Iranians don't have a problem with immigrants in Iran not speaking our language? Because we don't really care! It's silly to get hung up on such pityful issues. If anyone suffers from their lack of speaking the language of where they live it is they themselves and nobody else. Let people speak whatever languages they want, and wear what ever they want, and mind your own business instead.
Did the Americans make any effort to learn the language spoken in Hawaii when they took it? No, they insisted on the Hawaiians to learn English. Immigrants did not take the U.S. as the U.S. took Hawaii and other territories - they applied for legal visa status and were approved.



No - maybe they should MAKE AN EFFORT TO LEARN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COUNTRY THEY DECIDED WAS BETTER THEN THEIR OWN!


Yeah! Just like the pioneers made an effort to learn the language of the native American Indians when they took their country because they decided that it was better than their own!


How hard is it to live in a country and learn to speak the language after a whole damned year!?!?!?! Again, I ask - are they THAT STUPID? Or do they just not care?


Yeah! I was asking myself the same question about the 200,000 Americans who lived in Iran prior to the Iranian revolution who didn't speak a word of Farsi even after having lived there for years!



In California, we have whole schools teaching in SPANISH instead of English because none of their parents bothered to try and learn English. Thus, their children don't know English. And then they get pissed off because they can't get a job. Well no # they can't get a job - how in the hell is anyone going to work with them?


That's their problem though, don't you think? And again, I think you are generalizing too much. The overwhelming majority of immigrants in the U.S., including hispanic immigrants, speak sufficient English to land them a job and function in society.



.... but have heard from people that do live in Europe that they have the same problem - mainly with people who speak Arabic. And by the way - I do not mean this as an attack on Mexicans or Arabs. If an American moves to Germany, he better damned well learn to speak German! The thing is, it is mainly Arabs fleeing their country for western Europe and Mexicans fleeing for America. Thus they are the ones most guilty.


Yes, in Sweden there are some people who bitch about immigrants who go there and do not speak their language, but then I was visiting Spain and found that the Spaniards where bitching about those Swedish immigrants in Spain who live there wihtout ever learning Spanish. I'm sure that if Americans were forced to emigrate to other countries for a better life or to find a safe haven, many of them would also not make a sufficient effort to learn the language of their adopted homeland, just like in Iran or the American military personell in Germany who mostly also do not speak much German. Almost all the Arabs I have come across in the U.S. speak English. Perhaps some of the older ones do not, and that I think is understandable as it becomes much more difficult to learn a new language the older you become.



As I have said, this is not always the case. And I am sorry, but if a person grows up and spends the bulk of their life in a country, and yet still can not speak the native language must be an idiot. There is no excusenot to learn the language when you spend 10+ years of your life in the damned country! Hell, if freaking chimps can learn sign language, without ever having anything close to a human language and with half the brain power, no immigrant has any excuse NOT to learn the language!


I don't understand why you have such an issue with someone who doesn't speak your language..... They're the ones who will suffer from it if anyone, not you.... People are dying from cancer, aids, wars, earthquakes, and others loosing everything they had in tsunamis, including their loved ones, and then we have people like you furiously ranting about those "horrible immigrants who come here and do not speak our language!" I think you and people like you need to relax more and follow the flow of the Universe instead of trying to fight it all the time.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
No, she's a radical because she said that MUSLIMS should learn to speak Danish, - And that is not only radical, but it's totally idiotic, irrational, biased, and ignorant!


She should not have to walk on eggshells in order to avoid offending your sensitivities. Would you be so offended if she said that WHITE people should learn to speak the language? I don't think so.


Wait a moment! I suppose you are a native Indian American? Or....? If you are not a native Indian American, you really have some guts to bash immigrants when the country where you live was literally taken away from the native American Indians. And ALL - I repeat ALL... Americans who are not native American Indians, are immigrants, including yourself! I can't believe that people can be so incredibly ignorant, intolerant and shortminded.


So what? It's history and you are way off topic here.


I'm not objecting to the notion that as an immigrant one should try to learn the language of the adopted country - I'm objecting to that the Danish Queen states that MUSLIMS should learn Danish. Muslims are not a race, an ethnicity or a nationality. Muslims are more than one billion people who come from many different countries and are of all races. you can't bundle us all together and make such an utterly unintelligent claim as that we do not speak the language of the country where we have immigrated. Not only is that a totally false accusation, but it's outright stupid to think that people who have certain religious beliefs do not speak Danish.


I think that the Queen has a better view of this situation than you do. Maybe the fact is that muslims present a special problem in this area. Once again, I state that she should not be bound by PC-ness in order to avoid hurting your feelings. Your attitude in this situation indicates that you are looking for something, anything, to continue the division between the Danes and muslims.

Just remember who is in whose house here. I doubt very much that the Queen begged you (figurative you) to come settle in Denmark. I'd bet it was the other way around.


Did the American pioneers make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians who were the rightful owners of the land where you now live?


The settlers came here with the express intent of taking it over. Are you saying that the muslims have the same intention?

[edit on 16-4-2005 by jsobecky]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
This is a big issue in Europe right now. Today's Telegraph:


France is facing the problem that dare not speak its name. Though French law prohibits the census from any reference to ethnic background or religion, many demographers estimate that as much as 20-30 per cent of the population under 25 is now Muslim. The streets, the traditional haunt of younger people, now belong to Muslim youths. In France, the phrase "les jeunes" is a politically correct way of referring to young Muslims.


Is France on the way to becoming an Islamic state?

[edit on 16-4-2005 by blablablaxyz]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
No, she's a radical because she said that MUSLIMS should learn to speak Danish, - And that is not only radical, but it's totally idiotic, irrational, biased, and ignorant!


The thing is, it IS mostly Muslims (and of them mostly Arabs) who represent who she is talking about. There is nothing idiotic in what she says - it's true!



Wait a moment! I suppose you are a native Indian American?


First off, there is no such thing as a 'native American Indian' - they themselves came from what was today Russia and Mongolia. Second, no - I am not. This country (the US), is where my familly came to, the national language is English, hence we learned English!




Re you pretending that you do not quite understand what I'm saying or do you genuinely have a difficult time comprehending even simple sentences? I'm not objecting to the notion that as an immigrant one should try to learn the language of the adopted country - I'm objecting to that the Danish Queen states that MUSLIMS should learn Danish...

Not only is that a totally false accusation, but it's outright stupid to think that people who have certain religious beliefs do not speak Danish.


The problem with your objection is that it IS mostly Muslims who don't learn the language!

I am not going to go all PC - the problem in this case IS mostly from the Muslims in that country. It's just the way it is and no amount of arguing is going to change that.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTruth123
To state Muslims are not in beheadings is clearly contrition which is clearly stated in the koran to behead non muslims.


I challenge you to post a referene here to the Sura (Verse) in the Holy Quran that states that one should behead non-Muslims! I would be very interested to read that part. Can you please do me and others the favor to post the reference to that Sura here? Thank you!


If the koran said to rap chickens the muslims will do it. They never question it, they just do what ever it says and thinks it's moral way of life, fighting for allah fanstasy.


You need to learn to not generalize about the people of a faith. Muslims are as diverse as is the population of the United States or even the entire planet, and not only in race, ethnicity and nationality, but also in the way they practice Islam. For you to say that Muslims are all a bunch of fanatic barbarians just because of what you have seen on your TV screen from Palestine/Israel, Taliban's Afghanistan, and Iraq is absurd. You will not gain any knowledge about Islam and Muslims from watching your evening news reports from those areas. What happened and is happening in Afghanistan, Israel/Palestine, and Iraq, among other places has very little to do with Islam and Muslims per se, and much more to do with POLITICAL and SOCIAL factors.

Some Palestinians blow themselves up because their country was taken away from them, and because they're fed up with the cruel treatment by the Israelis, not because Islam says that they should blow themselves and other up. One of the absolutely BIGGEST sins in Islam is suicide, and another one is to take the life of an innocent human being!

The Taleban came to power in Afghanistan, not with the support of the Afghani people, but because Afghanistan was invaded by the Soviet Union, and as a consequence the United States supported this radicalized "Islamist" fundamentalist movement in Afghanistan which led to a victory for the Taliban. Prior to the invasion, Afghanistan was a sleeping beauty where people lived in peace with one another.

And as for Iraq you should know that the problems are not at all because of Islam, but rather because a CIA backed coup brought the Baath party into power in the 1950's, and because the U.S. supported and armed the cruel dictator Saddam Hussein during all those years when it "benefitted" U.S. interests to do so. Ultimately the U.S. decided to invade Iraq because of it's neo-imperialistic ambitions under the guise of the "war on terror", although Iraq had never been involved in any terror attacks, and this has led to the beheadings of foreigners in Iraq, both Muslim and non-Muslim, by a minority of insurgents who are mostly supporters of Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein and his Baath party were secularists and did never get well along with the religious authorities in Iraq, so to assume that these beheadings are done by Muslim fanatics is totally false!


About the muslims in europe. Well i think there muiltculture race mixing agenda going on. The only reason muslims are there so they can interbreed with europeans and create a state from all the european country's.

Are you serious? Do you really believe that? If you do, I think you are suffering from a severe case of paranoia and Muslim-phobia! Muslims in Europe, as in America, are from a variety of different countries and cultures and have much less in common than you would imagine. Muslims communities are very disunited. There is very little bondage of any sort between Iranian, Turkish, Arab, Indonesian and Chinese Muslims. I am first a human, then Iranian, then a Muslim. And that is how the overwhelming majority of Muslims feel as well. They primarily identify with their nationality, and not with their religion. Iranians identify themselves as Iranian, not as Muslims, and the same goes for most other Muslim nations. What you say is absolutely ridiculous! I'm stunned that there actually are people who think like you and at the same time take pride in living in civilized and highly evolved societies - yet their intellectual level is equivalent to that of the people who lived during the time of the whitch hunts.

The reason that there are so many immigrants from the Muslim world is primarily because the colonial powers and the U.S. have messed up things in their countries with their meddling or direct involvement. The Kurds and Shia Iraqis left Iraq in the millions because Bush senior asked them to launch an uprising against Saddam Hussein in 1991-92, promising them that the U.S. would stand behind them. But when the uprising took place, Saddam's forces brutally slaughtered hundreds of thousands of them, and the U.S. just stood silently and watched. There are clear and precise reasons to why the U.S. did this, and it was all part of their plan, but I won't go into it here becuase it will become too lengthy. So as a result millions of Kurds and Shia Iraqis fled to other countries, and many of them to the West where they then instead were met with racism and biased attitudes like yours, and this in turn radicalized many of their youth..... which is another story. The Afghanis fled to other countries, including to the West because of the Soviet invasion and the war. Iranians fled to other countries because of the revolution and the Iran-Iraq war - and if you study both the Iranian revolution and the Iran-Iraq war, you will find the finger prints of the U.S.A. in various ways imprinted on both! The U.S. had backed the Shah of Iran against his popular nationalist prime minister Dr. Mossadeq and his quest to nationalize Iranian oil so that the British would no longer get 60% of the profits in concession - The Iranian supporters of Mossadeq and his movement will never forget the U.S. involvement - Then as the Shah built up his empire and had created the most powerful and important chair in OPEC for himself, the U.S. wanted to get rid of him. Read about the U.S. involvement in the Iranian revolution and about General Huyser's mission in Tehran against the Shah.

So you see, the overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants have not come to "conquer" the West - this is just the ridiculous propaganda of some fanatic and corrupt Christian evangelics and "crusaders". The majority of Muslim immigrants were forced to leave their countries to either escape prosecution, tyranny or war, which all were the direct or indirect result of foreign (Mostly U.S. and Israeli) intervention, meddling, manipulation or invasions.

The reason I say that you may suffer from a severe form of paranoia is because you think that millions of Muslims from approximately 60 different Muslim countries who have immigrated to the West are all part of a major conspiracy to take over the West. Make a little reality check and ask yourself how in the world it would be possible to launch such a major conspiracy..... When different Muslim nations do not get along with each other and fight wars with one another, and when there are so many different and conflicting schools of thought among Muslims - some that violently oppose one another - like:

1) Shia Muslims

2) Sunni Muslims

3) Orthodox theocratic Shia/Sunni Muslims (Like SOME of the Iranian reformist clerics who are enlightened on one hand but still oppose secularism)

4) Orthodox secular Shia/Sunni Muslims (Like Ayatollah Sistani)

5) Orthodox fundamentalist shia/Sunni Muslims (Like Ayatollah Khomeini for the Shias, and the official religious authorities of Saudi Arabia inspired by the teachings of Wahabism.

6) Radical and/or leftist fundamentalist Shia/Sunni Muslims (Like the Ansar Hezbollah of the Shias, and the Taliban of the Sunnis which is also based on the radical, strict and backwarded teachings of Wahabism.

7) Liberal, secular and enlightened Muslims (This is a huge group and consists of a wide spectrum of different schools of thought. Many figures of the Iranian reformist movement belong to this school although they are forced to distance themselves from any level of secularism at this time because of the restrictions posed by the theocracy.)

8) Sufi, Ahl-e Haqq and other Islamic mystical orders.

So you think that all these Muslims from some 60 different countries, and who are so at odds with one another, have united in a major conspiracy to conquer the West by immigrating there in large numbers? What can I say.... except that I hope that you and people like you will come to your senses! Not that much has changed since the days of the Nazis if there still are so many people who think like you....


[edit on 16-4-2005 by Siroos]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I don't have time to adress this point by point, but I think I have covered just about all of your comments.



Originally posted by Siroos
Did the American pioneers make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians who were the rightful owners of the land where you now live?


First off, they lived SEPERATELY! The Europeans didn't decide to join the Apache tribes without speaking the language for crying outloud! Second, YES, as a matter of fact they DID learn the native languages so they could interact, and third, the Europeans paid for or battled for the land we have in America today. Both are perfectly reasonable ways to aquire land if you study a little history.



Sounds pretty much like the close to 200,000 Americans who lived in Iran during the Shah's time - 99.9% didn't speak one word of Farsi and never made any attempt to learn it or to integrate in Iranian society.


And thats what you don't get! You think I am just speaking about Muslims in Europe! I am not. Those Americans SHOULD have learned the damned language! They were in the wrong.



I wonder where in the U.S. you live.... China town in San Francisco? Elsewhere in the U.S. I would say that the overwhelming majority speak English pretty well, so I don't know how you can generalize in such a fashion as if most immigrants in the U.S. do not speak English.


I am originally from Philly, but I have also lived in New York, New Orleans, and for a brief (3 month) stint California. I know what I am talking about.

And by the way - I never said that most immigrants don't speak English. I said we have a huge problem with some Mexicans not learning the language. If you have ever lived in southern California you would know what I mean. I am not just making it up - it is the way it is.



Your attitude seems to be that you can impose your will, culture, language and everything else on everyone else, but that others shouldn't even dare think about doing the same to you - The real world works in a very different way!


Bull#! I never said anything like that. What I said was if you are going to move to a new country, you should learn that new countries language.

What you just said is a complete fabrication in your own mind because you can't accept that Muslims could perhaps do something better, that they make no attempt to learn the language.



That's their problem though, don't you think?


No - it is MY PROBLEM because I have to PAY for THEM to live through SOCIAL PROGRAMS! It is this whole countries problem!

Any way, let me sum up my stance. If anyone immigrates to another country, they should adopt the language of that country. It doesn't matter if it is Americans moving to the middle east, Europeans moving to South America, Chinese moving to Africa - what ever. The same rules aply to all.

I have no problem with any ethnicity or whatever moving legally to another country. The US is the most diverse country in the world, and I love that aspect of it. What I do have a problem with is the group of immigrants, such as the Americans you mentioned who moved to Iran or the Mexicans who have come (mostly illegally of course) to the US, who make no attempt to learn that countries language.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   


She should not have to walk on eggshells in order to avoid offending your sensitivities. Would you be so offended if she said that WHITE people should learn to speak the language? I don't think so.


She's free to say what the heck she wants, and I'm free to critisize her. It's a bad example to bring up white people here, because we all know that most Danes are white. I happen to be white too as are my family members - and I take offense if a non-white would make racial slurs against whites, but not because I am white, but because it's wrong. I react the same way when people make racial slurs against Jews, Hispanics, or Blacks. It's stupid to think that all the people of a certain religious faith do not speak the language of their adopted homeland. There are just as many non-Muslim immigrants who do not speak the language of their adopted homelands. If she would have said that Arabs, or Iranians, or those Bosnians need to learn to speak Danish, it would make more sense, but to state that all the Muslims in Denmark need to learn Danish is so irrational that I doubt that the educated and elightened Queen of Denmark ever made such a foolish remark.

The Iranians are one of the largest immigrant groups in Scandinavia, and it is also primarily Muslim (99%) and the most educated and professional among all immigrant groups, and as such the vast majority of them speak the respective languages of their adopted lands. On the other hand there are many Christian immigrants from Eritrea, Somalia and Syria, and I have found that many of them do not speak the languages of their adopted homelands. Now these are Christians and not Muslims..... Do you follow me and my argument? I don't mean to generalize, however, I believe it's much more valid to generalize about a nationality rather than about a vast group of people from different countries, races, cultures and continents who only have a religion in common. For instance, It is a fact that very, very few people of the some 200,000 Americans in Iran did not speak Farsi or make any effort to learn it. I know from experience because I lived there and met Americans everyday and everywhere in Iran. Now, while there were also other Westerners who lived in Iran and did not speak Farsi, there were also those Westerners in Iran like the Italians, French and Spaniards, who indeed made an effort to learn Farsi and spoke it well enough. It would thus be wrong for me to come and say that "those Christians who live in Iran need to make an effort to learn Farsi" and the same goes for the Muslims who live in Denmark. There might be some Muslims, perhaps from a certain country or culture who do not make any effort to learn Danish there, but then on the other hand there are many more Muslims who speak Danish, and perhaps most of them come from certain Muslim countries where they have a culture which has taught them that it's a good thing to learn the language of the country where you live.

I don't think I'm way off the topic here when I assert that the American pioneers did not make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians. I'm very much on the topic, and you dropped that one very fast because you couldn'f defend your position on that one! What's the difference? The American pioneers came to a country that was not theirs, and where there were a native population who had lived there for thousands of years. So did the immigrants who came to Denmark or America in the last 40 years. You say that it's history - Well, yes ofcourse it is history, just like today will be history in the future, and just like the Muslim immigrant issue in Denmark will be history one day.... I don't follow your argument there.... You seem to think that it's ok for white Europeans to go to other peoples' lands, and even TAKE other peoples' lands and kill the native people of those lands, and ofcourse not make any effort to learn their language (Why would you want to learn the language of an extinct people anyway?) But it's not ok for a tiny minority of Muslim immigrants or other immigrants to come to your lands and not speak your language.



I think that the Queen has a better view of this situation than you do. Maybe the fact is that muslims present a special problem in this area. Once again, I state that she should not be bound by PC-ness in order to avoid hurting your feelings. Your attitude in this situation indicates that you are looking for something, anything, to continue the division between the Danes and muslims.


First of all I live in Sweden and travel to Denmark and would think that I know a whole lot more Danish and Scandinavian Muslims than the Queen of Denmark does. Her circle of Muslim friends is probably limited to Empress Farah Diba of Iran, and the Queen of Jordan, and perhaps a few others. Secondly, I repeat that I doubt very much that the Danish Queen made any such remarks, because I know her to be an enlightened and educated person rather than a shortminded bigot. I would be most surprised if she indeed made such a remark.

I think it is rather YOUR attitude and wish to create division between the Danes and the Muslims.


Just remember who is in whose house here. I doubt very much that the Queen begged you (figurative you) to come settle in Denmark. I'd bet it was the other way around.


I doubt likewise that the natives of Greenland begged the Danes to come and take their homeland, just as little as the native Indians of America begged the pioneers to come and slaughter them and take their homeland. I wish also that a lot of the Americans who lived in Iran prior to the revolution would have respected our laws and customs, instead of behaving wrecklessly and disrespectfully. Can you imagine the frustration of Iranians over the fact that Americans could by law not be prosecuted in Iran for ANY crimes? The Shah was pressured/bullied to accept this by the Americans. Can you imagine an Iranian coming to the U.S. and raping a woman there and not being allowed to be prosecuted in the U.S.?


SIROOS: "Did the American pioneers make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians who were the rightful owners of the land where you now live?"

The settlers came here with the express intent of taking it over. Are you saying that the muslims have the same intention?


Oh, so are you implying that it's better to just invade or take a country by violent means "with the express intent of taking it over" rather than immigrating to a country and applying for a resident status? How are you thinking??? !!! Your "logic" is a little bit freightening...



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:42 AM
link   


France is facing the problem that dare not speak its name. Though French law prohibits the census from any reference to ethnic background or religion, many demographers estimate that as much as 20-30 per cent of the population under 25 is now Muslim. The streets, the traditional haunt of younger people, now belong to Muslim youths. In France, the phrase "les jeunes" is a politically correct way of referring to young Muslims.


What is the problem? Let me ask you, what is RELIGION to you? Is it about race? Is it about ethnicity? Is it about culture? or is it about FAITH?

If it is any of the thre first ones, then you're off the track. Religion is all about faith - It's about what you believe in regards to our existence in the terrestrial world(s), about what we are supposed to do here, about our relation to God and our duties towards God and towards the society in which we live, and it's about the here after. So if it is about faith, then we can conclude that it's about WHAT ONE BELIEVES.... Are you saying that one should only allow people who believe in one certain way to live in France or other countries in the West? Then what about communists, liberals, fascists, socialists, etc.... They all believe in different things. If we should allow only people who believe in the Christian faith to live in France, then shouldn't the next step be to only allow people who believe in a certain political ideology to live there...... like let's say Fascism as an example? After all, what is the difference? One relates to the religious beliefs of the individual, while the other relates to the political beliefs of the individual.

Or is this perhaps about race, ethnicity and culture? If it is than it's wrong to refer to Muslims here. One should then instead refer to immigrants in general who are racially, ethnically or culturally out of sync with the rest of France. Sure there are some very fanatic radical "Muslims" who have immigrated to these countries, but these people are just a tiny minority amongst the Muslims, and they are just as much out of place in their original homelands as they are here with their extremist views. Furhtermore, their extremist views are more about politics rather than about religious issues. But they use religion and religious issues as a platform for their political agenda. The vast majority of Muslims in France and Europe are peaceful and law-abiding people.

The French should have thought twice before having ventured into North Africa colonializing these countries and brutally massacring people like they did in Algeria. You can't invade other peoples' countries, exploit their resources, opress them and kill them, and just wash the blood of your hands and pretend as if nothing ever happened. There will always be consequences down the line for everything we do. This is the universal law called CAUSE and EFFECT! Today there are millions of mostly Algerian immigrants in France, and many of them have turned to criminal activities because of the discrimination they are confronted with at every turn. Such an Algerian youngster is not only full of resentment towards the French socitety because of what the French did in his country, but also because of the way he and his relatives now are treated in France. "First they come and rape us and rob us dry, and killing us if we dare to oppose their occupation of our country, then when we go to their country in peace to create a better life for ourselves after they have exploited our resources and left us in povery, we are met with hate, discrimination and racism - Screw them! I want revenge!" That may very well be what goes on in the mind of such youngsters in France's ghetto areas. It's not strange then that many of these youngsters in France and elsewhere in Europe and the U.S. will be easy targets for the recruiters of radical terrorist organizations like Al Qaida! And that is exactly what has happened. And instead of trying to objectively seek the source of the problem in order to reverse this destructive trend, some people in the West is doing the opposite - they are blowing air into the flames not realizing that the giant fires will eventually engulf them too.


[edit on 16-4-2005 by Siroos]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
I happen to be white too as are my family members - and I take offense if a non-white would make racial slurs against whites, but not because I am white, but because it's wrong. I react the same way when people make racial slurs against Jews, Hispanics, or Blacks.


Who is making racial slurs?



The Iranians are one of the largest immigrant groups in Scandinavia, and it is also primarily Muslim (99%) and the most educated and professional among all immigrant groups, and as such the vast majority of them speak the respective languages of their adopted lands. On the other hand there are many Christian immigrants from Eritrea, Somalia and Syria, and I have found that many of them do not speak the languages of their adopted homelands. Now these are Christians and not Muslims..... Do you follow me and my argument?


Yes, and you are implying that muslims are better than Christians. This is not about religion.




I don't think I'm way off the topic here when I assert that the American pioneers did not make any effort to learn the languages of the native American Indians. I'm very much on the topic, and you dropped that one very fast because you couldn'f defend your position on that one!


No defense needed. As I stated, we didn't come here to fit in with a population that we had no prior knowledge of, and who were already centuries behind us in technology and science.

You are obviously trying to deflect the conversation away from the topic with weak arguments like that.


You seem to think that it's ok for white Europeans to go to other peoples' lands, and even TAKE other peoples' lands and kill the native people of those lands, and ofcourse not make any effort to learn their language (Why would you want to learn the language of an extinct people anyway?) But it's not ok for a tiny minority of Muslim immigrants or other immigrants to come to your lands and not speak your language.


The muslims are just as guilty of similar wrongdoings in their past. Stop throwing stones since you live in a glass house.


I think it is rather YOUR attitude and wish to create division between the Danes and the Muslims.


Think what you want. No skin off my back. I'm not the one whining because the Queen had the temerity to imply something about the muslims.


Can you imagine the frustration of Iranians over the fact that Americans could by law not be prosecuted in Iran for ANY crimes? The Shah was pressured/bullied to accept this by the Americans. Can you imagine an Iranian coming to the U.S. and raping a woman there and not being allowed to be prosecuted in the U.S.?


Not our fault that you have stupid laws.



Oh, so are you implying that it's better to just invade or take a country by violent means "with the express intent of taking it over" rather than immigrating to a country and applying for a resident status? How are you thinking??? !!! Your "logic" is a little bit freightening...


Who were the early settlers supposed to see about immigration? I would have thought you were smart enough to pick up on that...



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   


The thing is, it IS mostly Muslims (and of them mostly Arabs) who represent who she is talking about. There is nothing idiotic in what she says - it's true!


If it is mostly Muslims, then that is because MOST of the recent immigrants to Denmark are Muslims, not BECAUSE they are Muslims! It is totally idiotic to say that Muslims need to learn Danish, because Muslims are not one homogenous group, but on the contrary consists of a wide variety of different nationalities, races, ethnicities and cultures. If the Arabs have a tendency to not learn Danish then that doesn't mean that it's because they're Muslims. The vast majority of the Iranians in Denmark speak Danish and so do the Turks. In Sweden though it appears that many Arabs of the Christian faith such as the Syrians, and Christian Eritreans and Somalis do not tend to speak Swedish. It would be just as wrong for me to conclude that Christian immigrants in Sweden need to learn Swedish, because it has nothing to do with the fact that they are Christians, but could possibly be a national cultural issue.



First off, there is no such thing as a 'native American Indian' - they themselves came from what was today Russia and Mongolia. Second, no - I am not. This country (the US), is where my familly came to, the national language is English, hence we learned English!


Oh Pleeeeease!!! There is indeed such a thing as the Native American Indian nation, and you know it! If you want to think that way then we all came from elsewhere at some point in history: The Finns of Finland are the kin of the Hungarians and migrated to the north of Europe at some point in history, which is why they do not speak an Indo-European language. The Scandinavians did not even inhabit the Scandinavian peninsula before some 8-10,000 years ago since the ice age covered all of Scandinavia under a thick layer of ice. Very few nations if any have remained in one place throughout history. But in the U.S. we are not talking about 10,000 years ago, but rather about 200+ years ago, and we are talking about a violent onslaught involving the systematic and planned extermination of the native peoples of those lands.

The national language of the U.S. is English because someone made it such. If it's wrong that some immigrants come to the U.S. and do not speak English, then it is no more right that pioneers came to the land of native American Indians and did not speak their language. They forced themselves and their language on the native Americans and their lands, and now you are afraid that muslims and others are doing the same, although your fear is uncalled for since the vast majority of immigrants in the U.S. and Europe, Muslim and non-Muslim (Since this seems to matter to some) do learn to speak English or the respective language of their adopted country, and have no intention of killing the inhabitants of these lands and take their lands from them.





I am not going to go all PC - the problem in this case IS mostly from the Muslims in that country. It's just the way it is and no amount of arguing is going to change that.


"No amount of arguing is going to change that" stands true only for those who choose to be deaf and blind to the rational arguments presented to them and to instead continue to blindly reason in the same irrational fashion as if going around and around in the eternal circle of ignorance. I repeat again: If most of those immigrants who do not learn to speak Danish are Muslims, it is not BECAUSE they are Muslims, but rather because the overwhelming majority of immigrants in Denmark are Muslims.

This is the voice of reason and rationality and we conclude our broadcasting for today. It's been a tiring one and has showed us that the world has a long way to go before its horizon will shimmer with the hope of a peaceful coexistence between its diverse variety of colorful species. Until then may the glorious battles against ignorance continue and multiply until the forces of the Truth and the Light will be eternally victorious in this terrestrial world. Thank you.

- Siroos

[edit on 16-4-2005 by Siroos]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   


First off, they lived SEPERATELY! The Europeans didn't decide to join the Apache tribes without speaking the language for crying outloud! Second, YES, as a matter of fact they DID learn the native languages so they could interact, and third, the Europeans paid for or battled for the land we have in America today. Both are perfectly reasonable ways to aquire land if you study a little history.


First off, many of the immigrants who do not learn the language of their adopted lands live SEPARATELY - Like the Chinese of China town in San Francisco - you will find MANY Chinese elderly there who were even born in the U.S. and who do not speak one word of English, and I hate to dissapoint you, but they are NOT Muslims!

The only place where they learnt the native languages of the Indians were in Hollywood old western films! Perhaps a handful of the settlers ever learnt the languages of the Indians, and why should they learn the language of a people whom they had declared war on because they were determined to take their country from them? Violence doesn't require any lannguage skills since it is a language by itself.

Oh come on! The only thing the pioneers paid to the Indians were bullets in their chests, diseases, and biological warfare. They took their lands, killed them and put the remaining survivors in reservations. Studying history is not equal to watching discovery channel or old John Wayne westerns.



And by the way - I never said that most immigrants don't speak English. I said we have a huge problem with some Mexicans not learning the language. If you have ever lived in southern California you would know what I mean. I am not just making it up - it is the way it is.


Well, as long as it doesn't hurt you, why do you care? They're the ones who will suffer from it, nobody else. To be honest with you it never even crossed my mind that the Americans in Iran did not speak Farsi. I and most other Iranians never cared. They were welcome in Iran as long as they behaved and respected our society and way of life.

Well, I might have confused you with some of the hardcore Muslim-phoebics here, and if so I apologize and take back what I said about you in regards to imposing your way of life and language on others....or whatever it was I said. Sorry.


What you just said is a complete fabrication in your own mind because you can't accept that Muslims could perhaps do something better, that they make no attempt to learn the language.


The whole argment I'm holding here is that it is entirely wrong to say "Muslims" do or do not speak Danish sufficiently. This has absolutely nothing to do with religion. If you say Arabs, Iranians, or this or that people, then you might have a point because there might be an inherent NATIONAL and CULTURAL trait of a particular ethnic group or nationality which causes them to beheve in a certain manner, but this does not hold true about a faith like Islam which has a billion followers of various races, countries, ethnic groups and continents. And if you study the teachings of Islam there is nothing there that suggests that Muslims should be inspired not to learn the language of the country to which they have migrated. On the very contrary! Islam teaches that ONE SHOULD FOLLOW THE FASHION OF THE TIME AND SPACE OF WHICH YOU ARE PRESENTLY IN.




No - it is MY PROBLEM because I have to PAY for THEM to live through SOCIAL PROGRAMS! It is this whole countries problem!

Well, then the problem is not really language here for you, but rather about immigrants using the social programs of your country. I'm sure that there are just as many immigrants who speak English and use your social programs and perhaps even more than there are those who recieve welfare and do not speak English. Likewise there are many immigrants who do not speak English and no not receive any welfare. And I know that U.S. laws have become very strict since the time of Clinton't welfare programs, so it's not as easy to recieve welfare, and you certainly will not recieve welfare just just because you do not speak the language!



I have no problem with any ethnicity or whatever moving legally to another country. The US is the most diverse country in the world, and I love that aspect of it. What I do have a problem with is the group of immigrants, such as the Americans you mentioned who moved to Iran or the Mexicans who have come (mostly illegally of course) to the US, who make no attempt to learn that countries language.


Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and while I think that it's better for the individual himself to learn the language of his adopted country, I doesn't bother me the least that they do not speak my language, as long as they do not hold a job of importance where their lack of language skills would affect me and society. I think that most of the immigrants who do not speak English in the U.S. or any of the respective European languages in Europe are mostly the elderly, and I think we need to have some empathy for them, because it's very difficult for an older person to learn a new language. Also they are less likely to integrate in the mainstream society of their adopted country and tend to surround themselves with elderly friends of their own native nationality. Old age changes many things in the human and I think we need to be tolerant about that. Other than that it's usually those who have recently arrived or illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are usually afflicted with a series of dilemmas like depression, poverty, or the lack of access to institutions where they can attend language classes, etc.

[edit on 16-4-2005 by Siroos]



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Who is making racial slurs?


I'm not saying that anyone is making racial slurs - What I am saying is that I take offense at someone making racial slurs about whites, blacks or whoever else.



The Iranians are one of the largest immigrant groups in Scandinavia, and it is also primarily Muslim (99%) and the most educated and professional among all immigrant groups, and as such the vast majority of them speak the respective languages of their adopted lands. On the other hand there are many Christian immigrants from Eritrea, Somalia and Syria, and I have found that many of them do not speak the languages of their adopted homelands. Now these are Christians and not Muslims..... Do you follow me and my argument?



Yes, and you are implying that muslims are better than Christians. This is not about religion.


WHAT??? Where did I imply that Muslims are better than Christians??? I am the one who keeps arguing that this is not about religion, and I said while there are some Muslims who do not speak the languages of their adopted country, there are also Christian immigrants who do not speak the languages of their adopted countries. I think you must have totally misunderstood it. Supposedly, the Queen of Denmark made the remark that Muslims in Denmark should learn to speak Danish, which I have a hard time believing that she said. But in any case, I'm arguing that this issue has nothing to do with religion, so therefore it is wrong to say "Muslims" should learn Danish. She should have instead said SOME IMMIGRANTS.



No defense needed. As I stated, we didn't come here to fit in with a population that we had no prior knowledge of, and who were already centuries behind us in technology and science.


What has techonology and science got to do with it all? We are talking about taking land that doesn't belong to you and about killing the natives of that land. Does the fact that you have technology and science which is superior give you the right to act in such a manner? According to what laws?


You are obviously trying to deflect the conversation away from the topic with weak arguments like that.


Weak arguments seems to be one of your specialties.



The muslims are just as guilty of similar wrongdoings in their past. Stop throwing stones since you live in a glass house.


Again you keep referring to Muslims. "Muslims do this or that" "Muslims don't do this or that"..... We Muslims are not one race, continent, ethnic group or nationality. We are much more diverse than the people of the West are. In our countries we may refer to you as "The West", "The Americans" or "The Europeans", we do not refer to you as "Those Christians". But it seems that people like you since Bush jr came to power have bundled all of us into one convenient package called "Muslims" - If there are pro-Saddam insurgents in Baghdad who behead someone, then it is the "Muslim terrorists" who have beheaded someone instead of pro-Saddam insurgents. If there are Palestinian nationalists who have blown themselves up in a suicide mission then it's again "Muslim terrorists" who have acted. But if it's the Bader Meinhof of Germany or the IRA of Ireland, or the ETA of Spain who commit terrorist acts they are never referred to as "Christian terrorists" are they?

What are we Muslims guilty of? Any specifics? The Turks if attacking another country would do so as TURKS and not as Muslims, and the same goes for the Iranians. It was the MOORES of Northern Africa who invaded Spain on behalf of Moores not on behalf of all Muslims. I was talking about the pioneers who came to America, and NOT about Christians.... So I do not see why you have to drag Islam and Muslims into this....




Siroos: Can you imagine the frustration of Iranians over the fact that Americans could by law not be prosecuted in Iran for ANY crimes? The Shah was pressured/bullied to accept this by the Americans. Can you imagine an Iranian coming to the U.S. and raping a woman there and not being allowed to be prosecuted in the U.S.?

Not our fault that you have stupid laws.


It was the U.S. government that insisted and pressured other governments such as the Imperial regime of the Shah to accept these laws


Who were the early settlers supposed to see about immigration? I would have thought you were smart enough to pick up on that...


Oh, so you call it immigration.... hmmm, interesting. Based on that we can then conclude that Hitler "immigrated" to Austria, Poland, Chechoslovakia, France, etc, I'm sure that if there was an Indian immigration authority they would have rejected the applications of all immigrants who came to their lands to settle their with their own laws and authorities and kill the native inhabitants who rejected that they came their.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   

You gotta be kidding right ? The muslims have destroyed 150 Christian churches in the last two years in Serbia's occupied Kosovo & Metohija province. Most non muslims and even some decent albanians have abandoned the province already. Looks like their goal of creating an Islamic state in the heart of Europe is working well. I don't think Chinese and black immigrants in Serbia are involved in the heroin trade, human trafficking and illegal arms trading.


Aren't you twisting the facts quite a bit here? I recall that it was the (Christian) Serbian ultra-nationalists who started prosecuting the Muslims of Bosnia, putting them in concentration camps, burning their mosques and raping their women. And later the same happened in Kosovo. If there were Muslims who attacked churches there, they did so in revenge. You can not deny the fact that churches and synagogues have stood side by side in Muslim lands for up to 1400+ years! And they still stand there. While there have been local violent outbursts against Christians like in Turkey against the Armenians, this was a local thing and not at all supported by Islam. Islam preaches tolerance towards faiths. Iran is a prime expample of a Muslim society where this tolerance was practiced for centuries and is still practiced today. Spain is yet another such an example. You can read about Islamic tolerance towards Jews and Christians as written by the British Orientalist Pickthall

www.cyberistan.org...



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheTruth123
To state Muslims are not in beheadings is clearly contrition which is clearly stated in the koran to behead non muslims.

WOw, and not even a quotation.

The Koran does not demand that muslims behead non muslims. I don't know if you are lying or simply uneducated on the matter.



If the koran said to rap chickens the muslims will do it. They never question it, they just do what ever it says and thinks it's moral way of life, fighting for allah fanstasy.

Gosh, how stupid and bigoted. Not all muslims act like pigs, any more than not all christians act like pigs.

About the muslims in europe. Well i think there muiltculture race mixing agenda going on. The only reason muslims are there so they can interbreed with europeans and create a state from all the european country's.
Thats postively senseless.


White nationalists are the worst enemy of the elite.

White nationalists are stupid pigheaded morons who are too cowardly to even state that they are white nationalists....


This why they fire shoots at them in the media, and call them hilter supports, in order to distort their real msg, which means no immgration, no race mixing, no destroy of nations, no to global world government policy.

That seems to infact be precisely what hitler was calling for. DUH! Does it take a genious to figure out why they are called hiterlites? Because they are.



6. Max sure blacks, asians, indian, whites all race mix, so they can be no more differenece between people.

Since you yourself are the result of different races mixing together, how can you be opposed to race mixing?



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
First off, many of the immigrants who do not learn the language of their adopted lands live SEPARATELY - Like the Chinese of China town in San Francisco - you will find MANY Chinese elderly there who were even born in the U.S. and who do not speak one word of English, and I hate to dissapoint you, but they are NOT Muslims!


The difference is that the Europeans WERE NOT LIVING ON INDIAN LAND! It was European land, paid for in cash or blood.

If the Chinese can buy the land from the US government and start their own new nation fine. If they can take on and beat the US government in war, well then it is now theirs. Since they can't do either of these things, THEY NEED TO LEARN THE DAMNED LANGUAGE!

And another thing - I don't give a # about what religion or Ethnicity is in question. It could be Mexicans or Americans - in this case it happens to be MUSLIMS. Your Islam glasses are really shrowding your view. Stop trying to act like this is some injustice against Islam - it's not. If there is an injustice, it is that immigrants who come to a new country to better their lives can't show the least bit of effort to assimilate into the country.




Well, as long as it doesn't hurt you, why do you care? They're the ones who will suffer from it, nobody else.


As I said, it is because it DOES hurt me! I end up paying for these peoples lives because they can't adapt. Why the hell should we pay for illegal Mexicans children to learn Spanish in school instead of English when it is just going to cost me more money to pay for their government hand outs!


The whole argment I'm holding here is that it is entirely wrong to say "Muslims" do or do not speak Danish sufficiently. This has absolutely nothing to do with religion. If you say Arabs, Iranians, or this or that people, then you might have a point because there might be an inherent NATIONAL and CULTURAL trait of a particular ethnic group or nationality which causes them to beheve in a certain manner, but this does not hold true about a faith like Islam which has a billion followers of various races, countries, ethnic groups and continents.


Sorry, but how can you simply dismiss the FACT that it IS Muslims that this aplies to? In your mind it is OK to label them as Arabs because that puts them in a group defined by genes, but yet people can not define a group by their religion? It makes no sense.

And by the way, since you said it, I would like to point out that Islam IS a cultural trait! Religion is ALWAYS a cultural trait.

And if you study the teachings of Islam there is nothing there that suggests that Muslims should be inspired not to learn the language of the country to which they have migrated.



I never said it was the religion - I said it was the people who practice Islam. Just as you could say that Christianity never said to burn women in the inquisition. SOME Christians did it, but it was not indicative of the true teachings of the religion.



Well, then the problem is not really language here for you, but rather about immigrants using the social programs of your country.

No, it is a part of my problem with some immigrants who don't bother to learn the native language.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos

You gotta be kidding right ? The muslims have destroyed 150 Christian churches in the last two years in Serbia's occupied Kosovo & Metohija province. Most non muslims and even some decent albanians have abandoned the province already. Looks like their goal of creating an Islamic state in the heart of Europe is working well. I don't think Chinese and black immigrants in Serbia are involved in the heroin trade, human trafficking and illegal arms trading.


Aren't you twisting the facts quite a bit here? I recall that it was the (Christian) Serbian ultra-nationalists who started prosecuting the Muslims of Bosnia, putting them in concentration camps, burning their mosques and raping their women. And later the same happened in Kosovo. If there were Muslims who attacked churches there, they did so in revenge. You can not deny the fact that churches and synagogues have stood side by side in Muslim lands for up to 1400+ years! And they still stand there. While there have been local violent outbursts against Christians like in Turkey against the Armenians, this was a local thing and not at all supported by Islam. Islam preaches tolerance towards faiths. Iran is a prime expample of a Muslim society where this tolerance was practiced for centuries and is still practiced today. Spain is yet another such an example. You can read about Islamic tolerance towards Jews and Christians as written by the British Orientalist Pickthall

www.cyberistan.org...


Always the victims.

In former Yugoslavia it was Alija Izetbegovic's Islamic declaration "Bosnia must be an independent muslim state" that started the war. Not Serbian nationalism. Parrot the mainstream Serbian "oppression" of the muslims line as much as you like. It's nonsense and more and more people are seeing this. Look at Sarajevo. It was 50% Christian, 45% Muslim , 5% other.

3 Christian Orthodox churches for the Serbs
1 Catholic Church for the Croats
1 Synangogue for the Jews.

and

100+ mosques... oh the inhumanity of those oppressive Christians...

After Dayton gave Sarajevo to the muslims the Serbs/Croats/Jews abandonded the city. That's half a million people. Clinton-Albright-Genscher belong in a prison for what they did.

Kosovo & Metohija was 80% Serb before World War Two. Now it's 98% Albanian. Who is the oppressed and who is the oppressor ? Looks like the muslims were so oppressed by the Serbian military that 5 minutes after their "liberation" they invaded Macedonia.

If coexistence didn't work in former Yugoslavia it won't work anywhere else.

BTW: 1,000,000 dead Christian Armenians was not a local violent outburst committed by the Turks. It was genocide.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Where will the current generation of Europeans draw their strength from when Muslims outnumber them 2-1?

From our nationality.



America is still a Christian nation and we draw strength from our Christian faith, but Europe is losing that faith and that may be their downfall.

Dont bring this crhistianity is the light side and muslims are the dark side BS again.
Both sides are equal, not in each others eyes but over all are equal.
I really do laugh at this idea that europe will "fall" , we stood in 2 world wars. We wont fall.


Do you think they will have their courage of their ancestors?
[/qutoe]
We already do, unless your saying Private Scott McArdle or the other 9,000 of his brothers and sisters in arms dont have "the courage of their ancestors"?


...or will they scream for America to come rescue them again? Of course we will help, because thats the kinda people we are...a European continent ruled by Mullahs will do the world no good.

Oh so its back to the "we saved your asses" arguement is it?
What would you do?
Make "concentration camps" for the muslims?
The last time someone tried to eradicate a religion there was over a million dead.


Yeah, the Crusaders maybe burned a few villages too many, but S**t happens in war. Your a smart guy, you already know all about this, but I will always look at the Crusaders as HERO'S, but that just my opinion.

A bit more than "a few" , so if we use that arguement, if a GI shoots " a few" of his own guys on purpse its fine?



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
I have to disagree, I did not see any IBM, Exxon or GE logo's on Al Qaeda members following 9/11. All I saw was radical Islam declaring war on the west.

Did You know?

- That IBM had a deal with Nazi Germany, to be exact with Concentration Camps: they have developed a primitive computer, that calculated how many months do the prisoners have, and converted that into a primitive code.

- Coca-Cola company was not allowed to have a deal with Nazi Germany to sell them their product Coca-Cola, so they invented a new one for German market especially - Fanta!

Corporations really do not care about sides, or lives of innocent people. They just care about profit and their stocks. They control everything.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
"First they come and rape us and rob us dry, and killing us if we dare to oppose their occupation of our country, then when we go to their country in peace to create a better life for ourselves after they have exploited our resources and left us in povery, we are met with hate, discrimination and racism - Screw them! I want revenge!"


This has got to be one of the most moronic statements I have ever heard. First the French go to Algeria and roundly kick their Algerian arses, then the Algerians wonder why they are not welcome in France.

Darwin's principle, to be sure.:shk:




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join