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.
The concept of "Semitic" peoples is derived from Biblical accounts of the origins of the cultures known to the ancient Hebrews. Those closest to them in culture and language were generally deemed to be descended from their forefather Shem. Enemies were often said to be descendants of his cursed nephew, Canaan. In Genesis 10:21-31, Shem is described as the father of Aram, Asshur, and Arpachshad: the Biblical ancestors of the Arabs, Aramaeans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Chaldeans, Sabaeans, and Hebrews, etc., all of whose languages are closely related; the language family containing them was therefore named Semitic by linguists. However, the Canaanites and Amorites also spoke a language belonging to this family, and are therefore also termed Semitic in linguistics, despite being described in Genesis as sons of Ham (See Sons of Noah). Shem is also described in Genesis as the father of Elam and Lud, although the Elamites and Lydians usually thought to descend from these spoke languages that were not Semitic. The hypothetical Proto-Semitic language, ancestral to historical Semitic languages in the Middle East, is thought to have been originally from either the Arabian Peninsula (particularly around Yemen) or the adjacent Ethiopian highlands. But its region of origin is still much debated and uncertain with, for example, a recent bayesian analysis identifying an origin for Semitic languages in the Levant around 5,750 BP with a single introduction from southern Arabia into Africa around 2,800 BP
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by oozyism
You are the Holocaust denier.
Yours is the culture that supports suicide bombers, murdering school girls for going to school and all that.
It is not hate that makes people support ending the immigration of people whose leaders want to enslave you and your kind at the first opportunity.
The message is clear, stop having so many kids, join the 21st century, learn how to be productive, stop treating your women like property, and develop a sense of humor.
Ne, we don't need death camps in the U.S.. Just some laws that prevent the radicals from controlling the Muslim population. Laws against burqas and Hadress, extremely harsh penalties for honor killings, treating Imans who encourage such acts as the criminal they are, using similar laws that are used against the mob, because that is what they are.
At the first opportunity Islamic teenage girls will flee Islam for a western way of life, once we eliminate the threats.
Honor Killings:
Of the 5328 women murdered in 1990, FBI data indicate that about half or more of them by a husband or boyfriend.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by oozyism
No, these types of laws should be applied to any organization who engages in this type of criminal activity. We already go after gang members who wear gang symbols.
I have made the reasons for my dislike about Islam very clear, and it is on record.
Banning the Burqa and the headress is no different than banning any other from of hate speech. They are symbols of oppression, and they should not be allowed in Modern nations. The mark these girls as the property of Islam, essentially like any other gang.
By harsh sentence I mean death by injection, or life in prison without parole. I think the later would be most appropriate.
The same for any premeditated killing.
Ordering a hit, or ordering someone to death in non slang terms, is not a freedom of speech. Anyone who uses threats of violence or death to control others is a criminal and should be locked in prison under highly controlled circumstances for a very long term.
IT would simply be using laws against organized crime to fight organized religious criminal organizations.
No, your twisted sense of morality has not infected me. I have been fairly consistent on the topic.
If you are gonna ban Burqah, why not ban American flag? Doesn't that mean American women are part of the American PIMP industry? Ban women from wearing American flag? Does it make sense?
Originally posted by NoamC
I do support the idea that Islamic culture condones, rather than promotes, violence.
It is a patriarch culture,
a tribal culture,
a secular, unopen and unadvanced culture.
It is not evil, it is different.
How different can a person be from his cousin?
Western society should not fear Islam,
rather than learn it's ways and adjust its policies.
c'mon they're not all bad..
Google Video Link |
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by oozyism
At the first opportunity Islamic teenage girls will flee Islam for a western way of life, once we eliminate the threats.
Originally posted by shamus78
Hey
You are a religious bigot and have no purpose here on ATS. The same could be said for any religion.
Deny Ignorance indeed.
Cheers
Shane