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.

 

Muslim student threatens to kill epileptic teacher's service dog

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Here where I live, service dogs are protected under law. You cannot threaten to harm one under assault laws. They are protected just like police dogs, and a person that feels threatened by them cannot make any verbal threats against the animal. I believe in many states this is the law also,so this man may have ,in fact , committed an assault.
Zindo




posted on May, 14 2008 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Hadiths are 200 years of chinese whispers and agendas put into a book.

Isn't it funny that one of the hadiths shows mohammed telling people NOT to write things about him, and ordered anyone that wrote things about him to burn it, because he was worried that "false" beliefs about him would spread in the future.

That is why it took 200 years for them to eventually get away with making hadiths, because mohammed wasn't around any more haha.





[edit on 14-5-2008 by _Phoenix_]



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
I would say that the rudeness she observed is not limited to Pakistanis or Cubans, but exhibited by all ethnicities. And certainly not limited to the US, as you seem to imply.


I'm not implying it's endemic only to America. However, the poster, being American and having said experiences in America, set America as the standard for this part of the discussion. Again, I care not for what happens elsewhere, we're talking about America and the rudeness growing in our own culture, and as you pointed out (basically verifying my whole point in that paragraph) is that it is exhibited in America by all ethnicities.


I can't see the women wanting to live under such a system. But as long as they are kept repressed and uneducated, they don't know any better. Which is why the Taliban forbade women from attending school.


The Taliban is an extremist group. Sharia law throughout most of the Muslim world does not forbid the education of women, though there are some places where this is so.


They are entitled to an education and may be appointed to public office - as was illustrated by Shifa bint Abdullah who was appointed to the important position of Inspector of Markets by the Caliph Omar.

However, just as initial liberating ideas in other world religions such as Christianity and Judaism succumbed in time to the influence of patriarchy, so in Islam. The status of women became diminished over the ages as men reserved for themselves the right to interpret the scriptures and adopted interpretations which favoured men and kept women in their “place”. In time, for a variety of reasons, the status of women in Muslim societies declined so that today, in some Muslim countries, they are among the most oppressed in the world. Today many of the conservative interpretations are being challenged by progressive Muslim thinkers but change on the ground remains slow.


Source


We not only have the right, buty we have a duty to condemn repressive regimes.


And what document, what Authority, grants us this "duty"? Most living under Sharia law live in sovereign nations. What right do we have, and under whose Authority is it granted, that we can condemn "repressive regimes" and attempt to force them to change?

One cannot change a regime from the outside, by force. One can only remove it, and hope that in the power vaccuum that follows a new, more "enlightened" regime takes its place. Usually this is not the case.


I don't know of a single American woman who would want to exchange places with a woman living under Sharia law. Can you say the same about muslim women?


It doesn't matter whether they would want to or not. It is not our place to make that, or any, decision for them.


When they point to the Quran as justification for their acts, it most certainly does have to do with Islam.


And people who bomb abortion clinics right here in the US point to the Bible for justification. Pot, kettle.


You're equating those religions with being American.


No, I'm equating those religions with Islam, which is where the comparison lies. And yes, since many consider America to be a "Christian Nation" and Christianity comprises the majority of American faith, then to some degree they do equate on a national/theological level.


America has long been known as the melting pot. What other county on earth is made up of more cultures than the US? Do not confuse acceptance of cultures with acceptance of cruel and inhumane behavior. As I mentioned, men have a duty to recognize that.


Within one's own country, yes. Outside the US we have no right or responsibility for how sovereign nations are run. Would you have us cut all trade ties with China for being a repressive regime? Should we get back to demonizing Russia? What kind of a world would you rather live in--one embroiled in constant war over cultural differences, or one in which nations get along despite those differences? Because there's a dirty secret about playing nice--it usually works better than an invasion force for changing those regimes you hate. It's not flashy and it takes longer, but exposure to outside culture through normalized relations is the surest way to change a repressive culture. And it can be done without antagonizing rhetoric!


You can't change American culture either, esp. since Americans can tell when you are talking trash.

And I'm begining to question your motives, esp. when you post falsehoods like "This lack of empathy, along with a general lack of curiosity for fact and truth, leads us to often violent conclusions about the motives and intentions of the "other".


What "motives"? Peace? Understanding? Real freedom, instead of what the authorities want us to believe?


How can you say such bs about America? Do you really hate it that much?


I'm sorry, I thought I was conversing with jsobecky, not Sean Hannity. Your attempt at deflection aside, my observation is valid. Read Pat Buchanan if you doubt.


You keep saying they are happy. How do you know they aren't just terrified enough to stay low?


How do you know they are terrified? It's much easier to condemn than to wrap one's brain around the possibility someone might be happy with a lifestyle we ourselves abhor.


After all, apostates are subject to harsh punishment, even death.


This is not necessarily true. But, even if it were, why do you assume they live in fear?


What it should look like? There is no "final solution" proposed in the US. We welcome those things that scare and confuse you - change and flux.


I've never suggested these things scare and confuse me. Don't put words in my mouth. My observation as an American is that many Americans do feel this way. They see an influx of immigrants, people of different cultures and religions, and they fear for their safety and their vision of "American culture", when in reality there is no such thing. And if anyone fears, it's YOU, as a Conservative, who fears a progressive society Liberalism seeks.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 


Since when was Islam a race?

I'm English and Muslim. This Somalian nerd is firstly wrong. It is only necessary to ritually clean yourself after stroking a dog, before praying, nothing more.

This idiot was simply ignorant or lazy or both.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
In this world there are people who want to move countries to get away from their persecutions and become free or to live more freely.

Some move to other countries and do not understand our culture and they think their culture rules the world.

Others come over and purposely try and put a wedge in and some even grow in groups to try and impose a system that contradicts freedom for all for 'I don't accepts' and man has battled through thousands of years to reach a life style where we can all get along. Only for some to complain that a dog offends their beliefs where one passage says Dogs and Pigs are dirty animals and another says they are okay is a chosen verse, unless their own culture reflects their attitudes.

So which writings are more tollerant, the Sura's or the Hadith's? If people wrote after Mohammad and they were not inspired then how can they be right? Hence the Sunni's and the Shiites seperations of beliefs and Laws.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
What a bunch of horse shi*.
That's all we need is another idiot making threats.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 



Originally posted by The Nighthawk

Originally posted by jsobecky
I would say that the rudeness she observed is not limited to Pakistanis or Cubans, but exhibited by all ethnicities. And certainly not limited to the US, as you seem to imply.


I'm not implying it's endemic only to America. However, the poster, being American and having said experiences in America, set America as the standard for this part of the discussion. Again, I care not for what happens elsewhere, we're talking about America and the rudeness growing in our own culture, and as you pointed out (basically verifying my whole point in that paragraph) is that it is exhibited in America by all ethnicities.


You made a very poor choice of words when you used endemic:



en·dem·ic Audio Help /ɛnˈdɛmɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[en-dem-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective Also, en·dem·i·cal.
1. natural to or characteristic of a specific people or place; native; indigenous: endemic folkways; countries where high unemployment is endemic.
2. belonging exclusively or confined to a particular place: a fever endemic to the tropics.
–noun
3. an endemic disease.


dictionary.reference.com...

What makes rudeness endemic (i.e., native to, or confined to) to America?




Originally posted by The Nighthawk


The Taliban is an extremist group. Sharia law throughout most of the Muslim world does not forbid the education of women, though there are some places where this is so.


They are entitled to an education and may be appointed to public office - as was illustrated by Shifa bint Abdullah who was appointed to the important position of Inspector of Markets by the Caliph Omar.

However, just as initial liberating ideas in other world religions such as Christianity and Judaism succumbed in time to the influence of patriarchy, so in Islam.


Your source is biased and in error. There has been no backward swing of women's lib under Christianity. The author is just using it as an excuse to justify Islam's demented ideas.




We not only have the right, buty we have a duty to condemn repressive regimes.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And what document, what Authority, grants us this "duty"? Most living under Sharia law live in sovereign nations. What right do we have, and under whose Authority is it granted, that we can condemn "repressive regimes" and attempt to force them to change?

Our duty as civilized people. As adults. As people who believe that watching a woman being raped without intervening on her behalf is wrong. Our responsibility to use reason to realize that merely because a culture practices atrocities, we are not obligated to "celebrate" them.




I don't know of a single American woman who would want to exchange places with a woman living under Sharia law. Can you say the same about muslim women?

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
It doesn't matter whether they would want to or not. It is not our place to make that, or any, decision for them.

It is our duty to create and maintain an atmosphere of equality for all, regardless of race, gender, or religion.





When they point to the Quran as justification for their acts, it most certainly does have to do with Islam.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And people who bomb abortion clinics right here in the US point to the Bible for justification. Pot, kettle.

And how many people have been killed by abortion clinic bombers as opposed to how many have been killed by Islamo-Fascists? One is an isolated incident, the other is a religious practice.




You can't change American culture either, esp. since Americans can tell when you are talking trash.

And I'm begining to question your motives, esp. when you post falsehoods like "This lack of empathy, along with a general lack of curiosity for fact and truth, leads us to often violent conclusions about the motives and intentions of the "other".

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
What "motives"? Peace? Understanding? Real freedom, instead of what the authorities want us to believe?

You're not promoting peace and understanding. You're apologizing for oppressive regimes by using hyperbolic comparisons to the US.

You cannot justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.




How can you say such bs about America? Do you really hate it that much?

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
I'm sorry, I thought I was conversing with jsobecky, not Sean Hannity.

And I didn't realize I was talking to Ward Churchill.

I happen to like Sean Hannity. Thanks for the comparison.





What it should look like? There is no "final solution" proposed in the US. We welcome those things that scare and confuse you - change and flux.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
I've never suggested these things scare and confuse me. Don't put words in my mouth.


Uh-huh.


That change scares some people, and I can sympathize with that,



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And if anyone fears, it's YOU, as a Conservative, who fears a progressive society Liberalism seeks.

The only true progress in this country has been because of the hard work and efforts of conservatives like me, not whiners who constantly point out what they think is wrong with America. In their eyes, everything. They'd much rather apologize for a terrorist than defend their country.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
You made a very poor choice of words when you used endemic:


I see that, and I apologize. I also think any rational person would get my point without resorting to pointing out grammatical errors.


Your source is biased and in error. There has been no backward swing of women's lib under Christianity. The author is just using it as an excuse to justify Islam's demented ideas.


Says you. And thanks for proving my point about you being anti-Islam.


We not only have the right, buty we have a duty to condemn repressive regimes.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And what document, what Authority, grants us this "duty"? Most living under Sharia law live in sovereign nations. What right do we have, and under whose Authority is it granted, that we can condemn "repressive regimes" and attempt to force them to change?

Our duty as civilized people. As adults. As people who believe that watching a woman being raped without intervening on her behalf is wrong. Our responsibility to use reason to realize that merely because a culture practices atrocities, we are not obligated to "celebrate" them.

Who is celebrating? Of course one can objectively agree that it's wrong. However that does not give America the right to play police, invade a sovereign nation, and destroy their government in favor of one we agree with. Not only is it wrong (war of aggression is the ultimate war crime) but it doesn't work. Your assertion is that we would be justified in doing so because they do something we don't like. That just is not the case, and if the rest of the world thought as you do, the entire world would be in a state of constant war and anarchy, because different cultures have different value systems that clash with others.


I don't know of a single American woman who would want to exchange places with a woman living under Sharia law. Can you say the same about muslim women?

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
It doesn't matter whether they would want to or not. It is not our place to make that, or any, decision for them.

It is our duty to create and maintain an atmosphere of equality for all, regardless of race, gender, or religion.

In the United States, and we can't even handle that very well most of the time. Not in the rest of the world.


When they point to the Quran as justification for their acts, it most certainly does have to do with Islam.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And people who bomb abortion clinics right here in the US point to the Bible for justification. Pot, kettle.

And how many people have been killed by abortion clinic bombers as opposed to how many have been killed by Islamo-Fascists? One is an isolated incident, the other is a religious practice.

Again, thanks for proving yourself an anti-Islam bigot. The killing you blame Islam for has more to do with tribal values than with Islam itself, which forbids the killing of the innocent.


You're not promoting peace and understanding. You're apologizing for oppressive regimes by using hyperbolic comparisons to the US.


Those "oppressive regimes" are the regimes chosen by the people of those nations, either by vote or consent by silence. We have no right to change that from the outside by force.


You cannot justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.


And yet the US does so constantly. We train terrorists to overthrow democratically-elected governments (bad behaviour) because those governments don't play along with our exploitive business interests, and justify it by calling them "communists" (whether they actually are or not). Our swath of destruction across Central and South America is staggering. we do terrible things and point our fingers yelling "But look at THEM!!!!"


I happen to like Sean Hannity. Thanks for the comparison.


And I happen to like Ward Churchill. Difference is, Churchill thinks for himself, while Hannity is a paid shill who takes his marching orders from his corporate overseers.


What it should look like? There is no "final solution" proposed in the US. We welcome those things that scare and confuse you - change and flux.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
I've never suggested these things scare and confuse me. Don't put words in my mouth.


Uh-huh.


That change scares some people, and I can sympathize with that,


Sympathizing does not necessarily mean I feel the same way. It means I can understand why someone might feel that way. There's a difference.


The only true progress in this country has been because of the hard work and efforts of conservatives like me, not whiners who constantly point out what they think is wrong with America.


You can't fix a problem until you know it exists. Diagnosis 101.


In their eyes, everything.


In your eyes we could nuke the whole damn world and it would be OK because they all deserve it.


They'd much rather apologize for a terrorist than defend their country.


Ahmadinejad has not been proven to be a terrorist. But, by Bush's definition, ANYONE could be... Even... You?

As for "defending my country", if that means marching in lock-step like a brown-shirted Nazi and making lame rationalizations for the crap we pull around the world, then I want no part of it.

I'll remind you of your own words:


Our duty as civilized people. As adults. As people who believe that watching a woman being raped without intervening on her behalf is wrong. Our responsibility to use reason to realize that merely because a culture practices atrocities, we are not obligated to "celebrate" them.


That duty requires looking inwards first, which is difficult and painful, because one might find one's own land is guilty of the very same atrocities we blame others for.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Why is it that when you post a thread like this there's always at least a few people who immediately disagree and rush to post some derogatory remark about how we have it out for the muslims? It makes me wonder if they're just looking for a fight, or if they post just to stand out as "different" in the thread.

You think we haven't considered that there ARE good muslims in the world? Of course there are. However when a muslim does something violent, potentially violent, or just plain stupid, you're going to have to accept that society today will not let it go un-published.

It's not the individual, it's what the individual believes.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 



Originally posted by The Nighthawk

Originally posted by jsobecky
You made a very poor choice of words when you used endemic:


I see that, and I apologize. I also think any rational person would get my point without resorting to pointing out grammatical errors.

You have obviously not worked in a professional environment such as law, science, or medicine. Words have definitions for good reason.




Your source is biased and in error. There has been no backward swing of women's lib under Christianity. The author is just using it as an excuse to justify Islam's demented ideas.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Says you.

Let's see.. "Online Opinion" is the name of your source.

My opinion is as valid and correct.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And thanks for proving my point about you being anti-Islam.

I'm anti Islamo-Fascist.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Who is celebrating? Of course one can objectively agree that it's wrong. However that does not give America the right to play police, invade a sovereign nation, and destroy their government in favor of one we agree with. Not only is it wrong (war of aggression is the ultimate war crime) but it doesn't work. Your assertion is that we would be justified in doing so because they do something we don't like.

You're making up facts. I said condemn, not invade. Please try to stay with the program.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
That just is not the case, and if the rest of the world thought as you do, the entire world would be in a state of constant war and anarchy, because different cultures have different value systems that clash with others.

The world is in a constant state of war, and it is because people like you think that we must accept atrocities as "cultural differences".






Originally posted by jsobecky
It is our duty to create and maintain an atmosphere of equality for all, regardless of race, gender, or religion.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
In the United States, and we can't even handle that very well most of the time. Not in the rest of the world.

At least we try. Can you say the same about your Islamo-fascist buddies?





Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Again, thanks for proving yourself an anti-Islam bigot. The killing you blame Islam for has more to do with tribal values than with Islam itself, which forbids the killing of the innocent.

Riiight...

Which "tribes" might those be? They all seem to have one thing in common - they scream the same words when they self-detonate.



You're not promoting peace and understanding. You're apologizing for oppressive regimes by using hyperbolic comparisons to the US.


Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Those "oppressive regimes" are the regimes chosen by the people of those nations, either by vote or consent by silence. We have no right to change that from the outside by force.

Which nations have fair and legal elections? Current day Iran? Iraq under Saddam? N. Korea?





You cannot justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And yet the US does so constantly. We train terrorists to overthrow democratically-elected governments (bad behaviour) because those governments don't play along with our exploitive business interests, and justify it by calling them "communists" (whether they actually are or not). Our swath of destruction across Central and South America is staggering. we do terrible things and point our fingers yelling "But look at THEM!!!!"

Always with the condemnation of the US. Why do you hate the US so much, and why do you stay?




I happen to like Sean Hannity. Thanks for the comparison.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And I happen to like Ward Churchill. Difference is, Churchill thinks for himself, while Hannity is a paid shill who takes his marching orders from his corporate overseers.

I'm sure you'd feel comfortable calling victims of 9/11 "little Eichmanns", too. Shame on you.







Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Sympathizing does not necessarily mean I feel the same way. It means I can understand why someone might feel that way. There's a difference.

Again, a poor choice of words. Empathize is what you meant.





Originally posted by The Nighthawk
As for "defending my country", if that means marching in lock-step like a brown-shirted Nazi and making lame rationalizations for the crap we pull around the world, then I want no part of it.

That is the problem with people like you. Totally nattering nabobs of negativism, to quote Agnew. Whiners who can add no positive to a country, only sneer at our best efforts to make and keep America the best country on earth. You think you are doing so much good when all you are doing is making people walk away from you real fast because all you do is complain about us and kiss the arse of the people like Ahmadinejead and Chavez.

That's where you are so transparent, and your "patriotism" shows it's false nature: you are too quick to condemn the US, but you never condemn those who do us harm and wish us harm. You are too quick to praise and defend them. That's where your heart is.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
*double post*

[edit on 5/14/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
You have obviously not worked in a professional environment such as law, science, or medicine. Words have definitions for good reason.


No. I worked in radio. Same difference.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And thanks for proving my point about you being anti-Islam.

I'm anti Islamo-Fascist.


Do you see a difference between mainstream Islam and the extremists?



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Who is celebrating? Of course one can objectively agree that it's wrong. However that does not give America the right to play police, invade a sovereign nation, and destroy their government in favor of one we agree with. Not only is it wrong (war of aggression is the ultimate war crime) but it doesn't work. Your assertion is that we would be justified in doing so because they do something we don't like.

You're making up facts. I said condemn, not invade. Please try to stay with the program.


You're the one who implies we need to take action, not me. Waht exactly do you mean by that, if not military force?


The world is in a constant state of war, and it is because people like you think that we must accept atrocities as "cultural differences".


But it is not up to the US to solve the world's problems.


At least we try. Can you say the same about your Islamo-fascist buddies?


Why do you assume they're my "buddies"? Because I don't see a point to throwing stones at our neighbors from our own glass house?


Which "tribes" might those be? They all seem to have one thing in common - they scream the same words when they self-detonate.


You prove me right once again. Just admit you hate them all and get it over with.


Which nations have fair and legal elections? Current day Iran? Iraq under Saddam? N. Korea?


Iran has fair and legal elections. And, with the amount of fraud in the last two presidential elections here at home, we're hardly in a position to dicate what "fair and legal" means.



You cannot justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And yet the US does so constantly. We train terrorists to overthrow democratically-elected governments (bad behaviour) because those governments don't play along with our exploitive business interests, and justify it by calling them "communists" (whether they actually are or not). Our swath of destruction across Central and South America is staggering. we do terrible things and point our fingers yelling "But look at THEM!!!!"

Always with the condemnation of the US. Why do you hate the US so much, and why do you stay?


Why do you deflect a valid point with baseless accusations? Can you refute my point with facts?



I happen to like Sean Hannity. Thanks for the comparison.

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
And I happen to like Ward Churchill. Difference is, Churchill thinks for himself, while Hannity is a paid shill who takes his marching orders from his corporate overseers.

I'm sure you'd feel comfortable calling victims of 9/11 "little Eichmanns", too. Shame on you.


No, but I'm sure you feel perfectly fine labeling anyone who disagrees with you a treasonous traitor. Shame on YOU, "sir".



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Sympathizing does not necessarily mean I feel the same way. It means I can understand why someone might feel that way. There's a difference.

Again, a poor choice of words. Empathize is what you meant.


Again, the hair-splitting. You know exactly what I meant, and you're just trying to deflect the point again.


That is the problem with people like you. Totally nattering nabobs of negativism, to quote Agnew. Whiners who can add no positive to a country, only sneer at our best efforts to make and keep America the best country on earth.


I fail to see how training terrorists and killing innocent people so Big Business can exploit other nations, their peoples and their resources "makes and keeps America the best country on earth". You have an odd value system. You condemn Iran for crimes they haven't even committed, yet the US gets a free pass? How does that work, exactly?


You think you are doing so much good when all you are doing is making people walk away from you real fast because all you do is complain about us and kiss the arse of the people like Ahmadinejead and Chavez.


Both democratically elected by their people. Look it up. And, note that they're not the ones invading other nations.


That's where you are so transparent, and your "patriotism" shows it's false nature: you are too quick to condemn the US, but you never condemn those who do us harm and wish us harm.


I do condemn those who do us harm--BUT, unlike You, I recognize their hatred is NOT the product of a vague generalization such as "hating our freedoms", but rather a direct result of our actions. If we run around the world meddling in sovereign nations' affairs we have to expect consequences. We make our own enemies. Ahmadinejad is not Hitler. He's not out to rule the world. There's no evidence. He may spout nonsense now and then but it's all bluster. He doesn't want war with us any more than anyone else does. You say I'm "kissing his arse"--You're looking for excuses to put him in a noose.


You are too quick to praise and defend them.


Because Iran hasn't done anything wrong.


That's where your heart is.


My heart is with Fact and Truth, not ideology. If that's too much for you to handle well boo hoo.

[edit on 5/14/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 



Originally posted by The Nighthawk

No. I worked in radio. Same difference.

I can relate. I've been told I have a face made for radio.




Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Do you see a difference between mainstream Islam and the extremists?

Yes, I do.




Originally posted by The Nighthawk
You're the one who implies we need to take action, not me. Waht exactly do you mean by that, if not military force?

Economic sanctions?



At least we try. Can you say the same about your Islamo-fascist buddies?

Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Why do you assume they're my "buddies"? Because I don't see a point to throwing stones at our neighbors from our own glass house?

Because you defend them so fiercely. I have never heard you say a negative word about them. If presented with two arguments, you will believe them every time over your own country.





Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Iran has fair and legal elections.

Please, please tell me you're joking. That you actually realize that a regime which arbitrarily disqualifies thousands of candidates including all women, is not fair. That there is absolutely no comparison between them and the US irt elections.

Please, or I'm going to have to conclude that you are a) a paid propagandist, b) a disinfo agent for Iran, c) extremely naive, d) very young, or e) all of the above.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
No, but I'm sure you feel perfectly fine labeling anyone who disagrees with you a treasonous traitor. Shame on YOU, "sir".

Only those who are such obvious apologists and sympathizers.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
I fail to see how training terrorists and killing innocent people so Big Business can exploit other nations, their peoples and their resources "makes and keeps America the best country on earth".

That's the difference between you and me. When I look at America, I see the good we are, the good people here, the promise, the possibilities. I know we have problems, but I am confident that we can conquer them by working together.

You spend your time on anti-American blogs trying to dig up justification for your piss-poor attitude about this country.




Originally posted by The Nighthawk
I do condemn those who do us harm--BUT, unlike You, I recognize their hatred is NOT the product of a vague generalization such as "hating our freedoms", but rather a direct result of our actions.

In other words, any reason we give for our actions is just a "vague generalization", but their actions are our fault.




Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Because Iran hasn't done anything wrong.

And to you, America can do no right.

Sorry to say this, Nighthawk, but you disgust me.
I won't be continuing this discussion with you anymore.



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 09:42 PM
link   
In general reply to the thread:
1.) Muslims and Arabs (and to a lesser extent the Jews of Christ's day) had a prejudice against dogs because of the packs of feral Pariah dogs (that often were rabid) and livestock killers. (Look in the New Testament
for what Jesus said in dialog about children and dogs.)

2.) It is my considered opinion that Islam is a thirteen hundred year old political criminal conspiracy similar to a modren street or drug gang that has taken over a nation. (Once you join either, it is death to leave.) As a criminal political organization, a state "religion", a Mosque is a government building and not a house of worship, and a legetimate military target.
As a matter of historic record, legend has it that Mohamad's daugter Fatama, after his death left Islam, returned to Christianity and settled in what is now Portugal, near the town that bears her name, Fatima.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by The time lord
Shria Law Courts proposed to have one rule for one people and one for another.


You must have missed the part where the Archbishop of Cantebury was nearly laughed out of office and every major political party, and the major muslim community leaders all said that such things were a stupid idea and will never be a part of the legal system in the UK.

You don't read the Daily Scaremonger by any chance do you?


www.islamic-bank.com...
Islamic Bank of Britain is wholly operated in accordance with Sharia’a principles. It is regulated by the UK regulator (the Financial Services Authority) and meets UK banking regulations and safeguards for the customer.

news.bbc.co.uk...
The Islamic Bank of Britain has also said it will not invest in companies associated with tobacco, alcohol or pornography.

Like said they are making their own laws here.

No but in Canada the same thing is being proposed, it was shown on BBC World that Muslims wanted their own courts and it was a proposed fact.

I may not cover all my ground when I write but its okay to ask away and presume at me I will answer back to straighten it out.

[edit on 15-5-2008 by The time lord]



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
hope the dog savages this savage- he should be deported anyway, he is clearly incompatible with western norms, send him back to his east african hell hole



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by The time lord

www.islamic-bank.com...
Islamic Bank of Britain is wholly operated in accordance with Sharia’a principles. It is regulated by the UK regulator (the Financial Services Authority) and meets UK banking regulations and safeguards for the customer.

news.bbc.co.uk...
The Islamic Bank of Britain has also said it will not invest in companies associated with tobacco, alcohol or pornography.

Like said they are making their own laws here.


A private institution is free to run itself as it see's fit, providing it stays within the laws of the country it operates in. Obviously this bank does - as I highlighted in your post.

Likewise, the investment choices of a bank are its own affairs.

The Co-Operative Bank in the Uk has an "ethical" investment and trading programme. Has that been over-run by fanatical UK farmers? No.



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

A private institution is free to run itself as it see's fit, providing it stays within the laws of the country it operates in. Obviously this bank does - as I highlighted in your post.

Likewise, the investment choices of a bank are its own affairs.

The Co-Operative Bank in the Uk has an "ethical" investment and trading programme. Has that been over-run by fanatical UK farmers? No.



odd analogy- the laws of our country *the UK* have been adapted to suit Islamic demands (no surprise given the shower of appeasers we have in power.

No laws had to be amended to allow the Co Op to invest ethically, the laws were adapeted to allow Islamic mortgages vis a vis interest issues



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 



I can relate. I've been told I have a face made for radio.


Don't know about the face but you got a mouth that could put a Sewerage Processing Plant to shame without the amount of crap it intakes.



Yes, I do.


Lol... no you don't. Republicans can't even make the distinction between dissent and treason, or Liberals and terrorists; let alone Muslims and Islamic Fundamentalists.


Economic sanctions?


Already in place? Iran has about 50 collective embargoes on what it can import and export, from food, electronics, cars even the types of wheat crops it's allowed.
Real great way to punish those enriching Uranium, take their food away. Good one America


www.treas.gov...
larvatusprodeo.net...


Because you defend them so fiercely. I have never heard you say a negative word about them. If presented with two arguments, you will believe them every time over your own country.


So everyone should criticize and scrutinize a particular religion or ethnic group just because it's popular to do so?
Refresh my memory since when has discriminating on the basis of religion or race become part of popular culture?
So much for your "Utopian America" fantasy....

Gee.. It's too bad you weren't born earlier, you would have had a blast in Germany in 1939.



Please, please tell me you're joking. That you actually realize that a regime which arbitrarily disqualifies thousands of candidates including all women, is not fair. That there is absolutely no comparison between them and the US irt elections.


What's so shocking about that?
The American people didn't even get a choice in 2000.

Women have had the vote in Iran since 1980 and there have been plenty of Iranian female candidates for Legislative elections. There were about 90 of them in Iranian's 2005 Legislative elections when Ahmadinejad was elected: stephiblog.wordpress.com...


Only those who are such obvious apologists and sympathizers.


What is fundamentally wrong with empathizing with your enemy? Why do you see any attempt to try and understand somebody else's viewpoint or perspective apart from your own as tantamount to backing the other side?

Why is it Republicans just have no sense of ethical compassion?
Their brains seem to be very effective at blocking out other voices and simply lack any reasoning or deducing capabilities when it comes to problem solving.
Did your parents all beat you as children, did you have an overbearing mother? What is it?

Any movement towards tolerance and acceptance of different nations and cultures is seen as backward by Republicans. Precisely the same reasons they use to invade and topple "oppressive" foreign regimes.
Hypocrisy knows no bounds within the Republican agenda.


That's the difference between you and me. When I look at America, I see the good we are, the good people here, the promise, the possibilities. I know we have problems, but I am confident that we can conquer them by working together.


When you look at America you are looking at glazed coating of a poorly cooked Soufflé.
It looks nice and wonderful from a distance but it falls apart instantly when you try to examine or touch it.

You look only skin deep, like you do with foreigners and Muslims; and see the sugar coating the government has saturated the problems of America as a whole with.
America has problems? That's a bit of understatement.

America has an identity crisis would be a more appropriate estimation.
You can't decide if your Dr. Jekyl or Mr. Hyde.

You preach on and on about freedom, security and equality for all; yet on the other hand you deny all of the above to anyone whom you disagree, dislike, or simply don't understand.
America may be a melting pot of cultures but that melting pot is sitting on a powder keg. Racial strife and conflict is abundant, Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, immigrants are all discriminated in many aspects of life.

You strive so hard to erode the freedoms and liberties your forefathers gave their lives for in the pursuit of a false sense of security from a threat that is almost non-existent.
You government is hardly a democracy, it's almost a front, behind which big business, powerful individuals and those with established connections all vie to run America for their own interest.

What you love about your country is not actually a part of your country any more. The the home of brave, the land of the free... all that etc....

The brave who invade others to exploit their lands and recklessly kill their people under false pretenses?
The free who try to suppress dissent, torture and hold people without charge or cause, and pass legislation to government intrusion into every nook and cranny of your life?


In other words, any reason we give for our actions is just a "vague generalization", but their actions are our fault.


Bingo. Uno. Yahtzee.

You just answered your own question. You can try to pawn off blame for terrorism, defiance of American hegemony and hatred of US values onto Muslims, Islam's beliefs and history, racial/ethnic differences, political history, etc...

The fact is America provides Islamic Extremists with all the justification and pretext they ever need to expound their vile, perverted views and attack US interests and it's people.

Your dominance over their land, American duplicity in Foreign Policy and insensitivity to the wellbeing and beliefs/lifestyles of others breeds generations of people who grow up disenfranchised and in squalor.

And their obliviousness they seek vengeance against those whom they see occupiers, terrorists and fanatics to their people.
Remember, Terrorism is in the eye of the beholder.

What you consider good, righteous and justified; they see as bad, evil and ungodly.
If Osama hates the way Americans live their Western lifestyles in freedom then why doesn't he blow up us Australians? Why doesn't he attack Sweden? Or Denmark or the Netherlands?

All very liberal, open, Western societies..
There is a reason extremists focus on the US as the source of their problems. No other countries foreign policies have had such a negative impact on the Arab World & Muslims

[edit on 15/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]



posted on May, 15 2008 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky


Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Do you see a difference between mainstream Islam and the extremists?

Yes, I do.


You have a funny way of showing it.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
You're the one who implies we need to take action, not me. Waht exactly do you mean by that, if not military force?

Economic sanctions?


Hey, that's great! Iran, you're not playing the game the way we want you to, so we're putting a strangle-hold on your economy. Yeah, that's a wonderful way to win friends. You do realize that support for anti-American hard-liners grows exponentially among the peoples of countries we oppress economically, right? That punishing a country for something they don't even see as "wrong" just makes the situation worse?



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Why do you assume ["Islamo-Fascists"] are my "buddies"? Because I don't see a point to throwing stones at our neighbors from our own glass house?

Because you defend them so fiercely. I have never heard you say a negative word about them. If presented with two arguments, you will believe them every time over your own country.


Actually I only see one argument, the one between Right and Wrong. As for "Islamo-Fascists" I don't give a Damn about what they do in their own countries, it's THEIR culture and THEY have to live with it and indications are, Shock and Surprise, they're HAPPY with that! Neither YOU nor I nor the United States Government has the right to tell them how to live their lives, and that's just the Facts, Bunky. WE wouldn't want THEM to dictate OUR way of life, thus WE have NO RIGHT to dictate THEIRS. See how that works? And you can scream all you want about how "evil" their lifestyle is and how if they were "educated" they'd choose OUR way. Fine. You want to educate them?

NORMALIZE RELATIONS. Open fair trade with them. Remove economic sanctions. You know what will happen? The huge majority of Iran's population is under 35. They're young, they're dissatisfied, and many want more reform (Ahmadinejad's election actually has DECREASED the power of the old Mullahs and he's largely seen as a Reformer in Iran). Open access to trade brings open access to other cultures. If they like what they see they'll push for more reform the RIGHT WAY, Democratically. This is the Civilized way to do things.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
Iran has fair and legal elections.

Please, please tell me you're joking. That you actually realize that a regime which arbitrarily disqualifies thousands of candidates including all women, is not fair. That there is absolutely no comparison between them and the US irt elections.


Godfather already burst that bubble with the facts on Iran's elections. As far as US elections are concerned, hey, we disqualify thousands too! It's called Voter Caging, and it's illegal--used to challenge and nullify the votes of Tens of Thousands of mainly Black Voters (who by and large vote Democratic) and disenfranchise whole populations. And that's just part of it. Rigged voting machines that, according to sworn testimony, literally changed people's votes from Kerry to Bush in 2004 right in front of their eyes when they put the card in the machine. The completely illegal and unconstitutional Supreme Court decision in 2000. Article 2 of the Constitution FORBIDS the US Supreme Court from involvement in state electoral processes--INCLUDING Presidential elections. Don't give me crap about it. Look it up!! Fair US elections, my ass.


Please, or I'm going to have to conclude that you are a) a paid propagandist, b) a disinfo agent for Iran, c) extremely naive, d) very young, or e) all of the above.


I'll have to conclude that you are a) a paid propagandist (the Right Wing is well known to use this tactic), b) a disinfo agent for Bush, c) scared #%&*less that the rest of the world isn't exactly like YOU and you're convinced they need to be punished for it, d) young and lacking the base curiosity to seek truth and form your own opinions or old and incapable of processing new information, or e) all of the above.



Originally posted by The Nighthawk
No, but I'm sure you feel perfectly fine labeling anyone who disagrees with you a treasonous traitor. Shame on YOU, "sir".

Only those who are such obvious apologists and sympathizers.


Thanks for proving my point. You're an obvious supporter of Corporate Fascism in the United States. Who's the real traitor?


That's the difference between you and me. When I look at America, I see the good we are, the good people here, the promise, the possibilities. I know we have problems, but I am confident that we can conquer them by working together.


Duck, dodge, evade. Answer the point. Do you agree with an aggressive foreign policy that includes ruining other countries in favor of corporate interests?


You spend your time on anti-American blogs trying to dig up justification for your piss-poor attitude about this country.


You spend YOUR time hiding behind a dirty flag on a rusty pole. I'm the one trying to get that flag CLEAN and put up a nice, shiny new pole for it to fly from, and spotlights to shine on it at night. You can't do that until you accept the flag is dirty in the first place.


In other words, any reason we give for our actions is just a "vague generalization", but their actions are our fault.


No, their actions are the consequences of aggressive foreign policy that screws with their sovereignty and hurts their people. If you haul off and hit someone on the street, would you not expect them to hit back?


And to you, America can do no right.


Sure it can. But first it has to accept that it HAS done wrong, and make amends.


Sorry to say this, Nighthawk, but you disgust me.
I won't be continuing this discussion with you anymore.


Because you don't understand and won't accept the Truth. The Truth hurts, and your nationalistic "pride" might suffer a grievous wound from which it can't recover. I'm a Patriot. You're a Nationalistic Fascist. Have fun goose-stepping to the book-burning tonight.



[edit on 5/15/2008 by The Nighthawk]




top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join