# Why is it always Muslims?



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.

Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 9, 2015)

The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking of all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.



Your question only works within a narrow context since Christians have a long history of killing each other for no good reason at all.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking of all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...



Bullshit, you didn't answer my question.  Christians and Jews aren't killing people because someone offended their religion or prophet.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.


The Crusades only occurred as a response to Muslim invasions of the holy land and Christian Europe.  Muslims drew first blood.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Everyone goes to war believing God is on their side.


----------



## orogenicman (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.
> ...



Really?  Perhaps you should rethink that claim.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Again, we aren't talking about war, or history of the last 1000 years.  

We have a cartoon, mocking all three faiths, yet it's only Muslims that feel an obligation to slaughter those that offend their religion.  Why is that?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Oh I see, first you want to make sweeping generalizations and now you'd like to confine your alleged argument.   I can see why.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

orogenicman said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Had Muslims not initially invaded the holy land and Western Europe, the crusades would have never occurred.

History of the Crusades

"Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity—and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion—has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.

With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, theSeljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. Why did they do it? The answer to that question has been badly misunderstood. In the wake of the Enlightenment, it was usually asserted that Crusaders were merely lacklands and ne'er-do-wells who took advantage of an opportunity to rob and pillage in a faraway land. The Crusaders' expressed sentiments of piety, self-sacrifice, and love for God were obviously not to be taken seriously. They were only a front for darker designs.


Urban II gave the Crusaders two goals, both of which would remain central to the eastern Crusades for centuries. The first was to rescue the Christians of the East. As his successor, Pope Innocent III, later wrote:

_How does a man love according to divine precept his neighbor as himself when, knowing that his Christian brothers in faith and in name are held by the perfidious Muslims in strict confinement and weighed down by the yoke of heaviest servitude, he does not devote himself to the task of freeing them? ...Is it by chance that you do not know that many thousands of Christians are bound in slavery and imprisoned by the Muslims, tortured with innumerable torments?_

"Crusading," Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith has rightly argued, was understood as an "an act of love"—in this case, the love of one's neighbor. The Crusade was seen as an errand of mercy to right a terrible wrong. As Pope Innocent III wrote to the Knights Templar, "You carry out in deeds the words of the Gospel, 'Greater love than this hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friends.'"

The second goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and the other places made holy by the life of Christ. The word crusade is modern. Medieval Crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims, performing acts of righteousness on their way to the Holy Sepulcher. The Crusade indulgence they received was canonically related to the pilgrimage indulgence. This goal was frequently described in feudal terms. When calling the Fifth Crusade in 1215, Innocent III wrote:

_




Consider most dear sons, consider carefully that if any temporal king was thrown out of his domain and perhaps captured, would he not, when he was restored to his pristine liberty and the time had come for dispensing justice look on his vassals as unfaithful and traitors...unless they had committed not only their property but also their persons to the task of freeing him? ...And similarly will not Jesus Christ, the king of kings and lord of lords, whose servant you cannot deny being, who joined your soul to your body, who redeemed you with the Precious Blood...condemn you for the vice of ingratitude and the crime of infidelity if you neglect to help Him?_

"


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 9, 2015)

orogenicman said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



1 400 Years of Islamic Aggression An Analysis

Maybe you need to read.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

orogenicman said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Clearly some people around here don't quite have a sense of chronology.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



"Sweeping generalization", you have a serious sweeping problem with logic. 

My claim is, the magazine ridiculed all three faiths, but why was it people from the Muslim faith that found it necessary those that mocked their religion.  Why is it always Muslims that behave this way when someone ridicules their religion?  Is that a sweeping generalization?  Ha ha ha.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 9, 2015)

...and then some just choose to ignore fact.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 9, 2015)

Not like its the first time a Muslim killed in response to a Fatwah.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> orogenicman said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Difficult to measure the Crusaders piety since they spent so much of their noble efforts pillaging Christian Byzantines and slaughtering Jews


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Not like its the first time a Muslim killed in response to a Fatwah.


Yes of course.  Muslims do this all the time.  They killed Theo Van Gogh, and many other journalists, writers, and cartoonists for the same exact reason....the crime of ridiculing or telling the truth about Islam.  But the appeasers want to keep making irrelevant stupid diversions to historical events like the crusades. 

 Truly entertaining.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 9, 2015)

Never underestimate your enemy.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > orogenicman said:
> ...



Stay focused.  The crusades were instigated by Muslim jihadist invaders, and, as bad as they were, are not the subject of this thread.  Nor is war, or the history of Christianity which at times was brutal.  We get it, you love Islam and hate Christianity.  

We're talking about Muslim reaction to people criticizing their religion. What say you?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I particularly enjoyed the part about  "Muslim animals"..........was that a generic reference to all Muslims or were you talking about camels?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



You seem to know just about as much about Islam as you do about Christianity and European history.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



I'm sorry I didn't mean to compare the savages who kill innocent people just because they drew an "offensive cartoon" to animals who don't know better.  My bad.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Yeah?  So you think Muslims didn't invade Christian lands first?  PROVE IT.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

who invaded Arabia?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



So then you apparently believe that all or at least a majority of Muslims bear responsibility for terrorism......is that right?


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> The Crusades only occurred as a response to Muslim invasions of the holy land and Christian Europe.  Muslims drew first blood.


The crusades happened because the Byzantine Empire was under pressure from the Turks and the emperor Alexios I appealed to the West for help.  Invasions of the Holy Land and Europe were hardly the instigating factors as they had happened hundreds of years before.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Are you sure you want to go back to discussing history now?  You can't seem to make up your mind.    At the time of the Crusades the only place in Europe under Muslim occupation were parts of Spain.   I wonder why the Crusades didn't make more of an effort there?  Maybe it's because of all that loot and plunder lying around in the crumbling Byzantine Empire.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Wow.  You have serious reading comprehension problems.  Can you point to where I said that?  

I asked, why is it always Muslims that kill people who criticize their religion?  

You seem to have a serious problem with that true statement.  If Christians were doing it too, I'd say, why is it always Christians and Muslims.  But they're not.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > The Crusades only occurred as a response to Muslim invasions of the holy land and Christian Europe.  Muslims drew first blood.
> ...



"Were hardly the factor" blah blah blah.  They were other factors, but certainly the Muslim invasions into Christian lands was definitely the MAJOR FACTOR. 

So, you admit that Muslims invaded Christian Europe first.  Good.  Let's take some baby steps.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Remember, I didn't want to discuss the Crusades, you did, as a lame attempt to change the discussion to "Christian sins".  What exactly does the crusades and the reason behind the crusades have to do with Muslims today, being the only ones killing anybody who criticizes their religion?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Uh-huh.....like I said earlier, your alleged argument only works within a narrow context.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Sort of a shallow one dimensional view of history.


----------



## Porker (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> I particularly enjoyed the part about  "Muslim animals"..........was that a generic reference to all Muslims or were you talking about camels?



Camels are nice people compared to muslims. They let us know when it's humpday.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



You're the one who wants to make sweeping generalizations.   Did you ever figure out what kind of animals you're talking about?  We're you referring to the breed as a whole or just certain individuals in the herd?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

Porker said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > I particularly enjoyed the part about  "Muslim animals"..........was that a generic reference to all Muslims or were you talking about camels?
> ...



Lucky for you they don't eat pork.


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> "Were hardly the factor" blah blah blah.  They were other factors, but certainly the Muslim invasions into Christian lands was definitely the MAJOR FACTOR.  So, you admit that Muslims invaded Christian Europe first.  Good.  Let's take some baby steps.


Sorry, you can't blah, blah, blah your way out of this one.  Invasions of the Holy Land and Europe WERE NOT the proximate causes of the crusades.  If they were, why not go to Iberia first?  That would have been a lot closer and cheaper.


----------



## Porker (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Sort of a shallow one dimensional view of history.



Roudy is only thinking of all those people who have been discomHEADulated. I think about that a lot also, and the savages that are responsible.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 9, 2015)

There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.


----------



## Porker (Jan 9, 2015)

MaryL said:


> There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.



The latter is impossible to do.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > orogenicman said:
> ...



why would you try to measure the piety of those who peopled the armies of Europe sent out on the crusades?     I doubt that more than  2 percent of them ever read the bible

the  crusades were ordered by the rulers


----------



## MaryL (Jan 9, 2015)

Porker said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.
> ...


Please. It is quite  possible.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

MaryL said:


> There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.



Some folks are little bit slow to realize that the people doing most of the fighting and dying in the war against Muslim extremists are also Muslim.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 9, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Not like its the first time a Muslim killed in response to a Fatwah.


Or didn't.

FatwaonTerrorism.com Tackling Terrorist Narrative


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Remember, I didn't want to discuss the Crusades, you did, as a lame attempt to change the discussion to "Christian sins".  What exactly does the crusades and the reason behind the crusades have to do with Muslims today, being the only ones killing anybody who criticizes their religion?


If you didn't want to talk about the crusades, why answer a post about them, particularly when your post was patently false and so easily debunked?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > "Were hardly the factor" blah blah blah.  They were other factors, but certainly the Muslim invasions into Christian lands was definitely the MAJOR FACTOR.  So, you admit that Muslims invaded Christian Europe first.  Good.  Let's take some baby steps.
> ...



Did you read what to posted earlier?  Muslims invaded Christian Europe first, is that a yes or no?  "Oh but that wasn't the REAL reason for the crusades."  My ass...yes it was.

Now, after this brief desperate diversion, let's talk about the topic of this thread. Why is it always Muslims?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, I didn't want to discuss the Crusades, you did, as a lame attempt to change the discussion to "Christian sins".  What exactly does the crusades and the reason behind the crusades have to do with Muslims today, being the only ones killing anybody who criticizes their religion?
> ...



Because one of you terrorist apologists brought the crusades up.

What do the crusades have anything to do with Muslim incapacity to handle the concept of free speech in Western democracies?

Pfffffft!


----------



## Godboy (Jan 9, 2015)

If i had no logical answer to explain why i took the opposite position from the OP, i think i would do my best to steer the conversation in another direction... perhaps i might start talking about events from the distant past, like the crusades. Deflection is a useful tool, if used on people who are easilly distracted. 

To answer the OPS question, its because they are people who come from an inferior culture, who also belong to an inferior religion. Yes, even an atheist like myself can recognize that not all religions are equal. Islam is a blight on humanity.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.
> ...


Would that include folks who keep pointing fingers at America, Christianity, and the West every time Muslims commit savagery?  And what does that have to do with the topic.  Another diversion.


----------



## Porker (Jan 9, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Porker said:
> 
> 
> > The latter is impossible to do.
> ...



Well we need to drop you off in the middle east country of your choice to quite possibly do it.


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > If you didn't want to talk about the crusades, why answer a post about them, particularly when your post was patently false and so easily debunked?
> ...


You don't even know who you answered.  LOL!!!  What a dweeb.  The first person to mention the crusades was supporting you, shortbus.


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Would that include folks who keep pointing fingers at America, Christianity, and the West every time Muslims commit savagery?  And what does that have to do with the topic.  Another diversion.


Why shouldn't we point fingers?  What makes a Christian jihadi any better than a Muslim jihadi?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Would that include folks who keep pointing fingers at America, Christianity, and the West every time Muslims commit savagery?  And what does that have to do with the topic.  Another diversion.
> ...



Do you see Christians killing anybody because they  drew an insulting cartoon about Jesus?  Where?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy----where have you been------IT'S MUSLIMS BECAUSE 
JOOOOOS CONTROL  all written word----and words broadcast
on DA WAVES


----------



## skye (Jan 9, 2015)

Islam is a violent religion...let's face it... you either submit or you die.

lots of violence right there... it's bad news


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

so the bottom line is  moooslems do it and jooooos
write about it--------and since the pen is mightier than
the scimitar-----OBVIOUSLY   ----its   da jooos bad. 
JOOOOS is armed with pencils------not fair


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Do you see Christians killing anybody because they  drew an insulting cartoon about Jesus?  Where?


It's only a matter of time, if we let people with your attitude gain ascendance.  It's happened before.  It can happen again.  You spout off trash and someone else takes it to the next step.  You're to be opposed as much as any mideastern mullah issuing fatwas.


----------



## konradv (Jan 9, 2015)

Roudy said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Why shouldn't we point fingers?  What makes a Christian jihadi any better than a Muslim jihadi?
> ...


Why can't you answer my question?  All you do is pose more questions.  I'm asking a broad question and you're weaseling out by trying to narrow it down to something nobody would object to and then expand it to take in all aspects of the controversy.  Sorry, but we learned that we need to battle demagogues from day one and not repeat the darkest times of the last century.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > There is only two sides here. Western freedom or muslim extremism. You can side with freedom or rationalize islamic fascism.
> ...



how does your comment relate to the issue under question?----muslims do fight each other ------SO????----they engage
in sectarian and tribal conflict-----how does that fact help?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Do you see Christians killing anybody because they  drew an insulting cartoon about Jesus?  Where?
> ...




I missed it-------the only question you posed was  
how is a muslim jihadi different from a Christian
jihadi?                            ????      what is a Christian
jihadi?


----------



## Katzndogz (Jan 9, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Do you see Christians killing anybody because they  drew an insulting cartoon about Jesus?  Where?
> ...


So it's the brave muslim fighters that is all that is standing between the world and Christian murderers?

Quite nice of them to do that for you.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking of all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...


Typical lib comeback.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 9, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> orogenicman said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


And clearly some people around here LIKE YOU cannot come up with anything other than historical atrocities.

Let's talk about TODAY, since that's all that really matters !! And today around the world the problem is with followers of this one particular religion.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 9, 2015)

Are there any GOOD muslims out there? HELLO?  If you are there: Why don't  you  stop the bad ones? At least TRY to stop the madness?  I can't stand islam anymore.  We in the west have  had enough of you  muslims. I am Charlie...


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 10, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Are there any GOOD muslims out there? HELLO? .....



Do you imagine yourself a good anything?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

Unkotare said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Are there any GOOD muslims out there? HELLO? .....
> ...



Mary asked an interesting question-------one must DEFINE
---the term  "muslim"  ----I have run into muslims who claim
 that if a muslim does not support the Islamic beliefs COMPLETELY-----then he is not a  "muslim"-----thus there
can be no good muslims since shariah stinks


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Did you ever figure out which animals you're talking about?  Is it just some or is it all Muslims you refer to as animals?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



How does it relate?  Because the whole Islam vs western civilization rhetoric is exactly what the terrorist are hoping for.   The terrorists should be thanking people like you for spreading their message for them.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > orogenicman said:
> ...



Another supporter of Islamic extremists weighs in.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Do you see Christians killing anybody because they  drew an insulting cartoon about Jesus?  Where?
> ...



Actually its cowards like you that were afraid to tell the truth and helped give rise to evil ideologies like Nazism.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...



Keep up.  My question is the same one I posed in the original OP while your questions are irrelevant diversions of someone in denial. 

And who is "we"?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




They make shit up on the fly. Lame diversions, false comparisons, and total lies.  That's the name of their game.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Actually you got it ass backwards.  People like me are stating the obvious, and cowards like you keep shoving your head in the sand, no matter what.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



It's beyond   "backwards"-------it's like completely incoherent----
   the scrambled logic of a psychotic


----------



## konradv (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Actually its cowards like you that were afraid to tell the truth and helped give rise to evil ideologies like Nazism.


I am telling the truth. I haven't said I approve of jihadis or fatwa issuing mullahs.  That's just your mind twisting anything that doesn't fit its bias.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 10, 2015)




----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

konradv said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Actually its cowards like you that were afraid to tell the truth and helped give rise to evil ideologies like Nazism.
> ...



to what  "bias"  do you refer?     Roudy commented accurately
on the ethos of  "the ummah"     You insisted that describing
that ethos  is somehow wrong


----------



## ninja007 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



religionofpeace.com


----------



## indiajo (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> [
> 
> You seem to know just about as much about Islam as you do about Christianity and European history.



You can ask me. I am European.
The countless wars beween European forces never had religion as a reason behind it. It was always a fight about wordly power and ressources, although religion was persistently used as carrot for the stupid battlefield donkey.
This is also the case with conquering the american continent, or africa and the colonisaton of parts of Asia.
And please don't try as US citizen to lecture me about the good or evil of fighting wars, extermnation of populations or else for materialistic reasons. Not you.

Islam is absolutely different. Islam is all about spreading the Ummah over the whole planet. the philosophy behind it is not to use Islam as motivation. The philosophy is to install Islam.
The crusades were the pretty late response to the unprecedented expanion of Islam. If somebody here should not know that, before the crusades almost whole of Spain and parts of south France were already conquered and supressed by Islam.
This happened, BECAUSE christianity in Europe couldn't get their act together to prevent that. The reason is that in christian Europe there was no religious foundaton of military expansion.

Actually the crusades were also pretty weak responses. They were just able to put islamic expansion on hold for some time. The often used argument that the crusade forces conquered a lot of areas around todays Turkey, Libanon and Syria is caused just by the inability to see that they had no modern logistics and had no other chance as to build up real longterm kind of warlord areas along their way to proceed further.

We had Islam two times at the gates of vienna, don't dare to lecture Europeans about islamic expansion attitudes.
Presently we have them already inside the gates. In all European countries, due to irresponsible and fucking stupid immigration policies.. The consequences are already visible.

The future will not be very nice.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.



A bunch of pig-ignorant savages doing something really stupid because a Holy Man told them to?  

That describes the Crusades in a nutshell.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Had Muslims not initially invaded the holy land and Western Europe, the crusades would have never occurred.



Wow, didn't you post this same nonsense on the other thread?  

Hey, dumbass...  The Muslims invaded Spain. 400 years before the Crusades and no one was really that concerned about it. 

The Crusades happened in 1090 becuase a corrupt Pope was trying to burnish his street cred in a dispute with the Holy Roman Emperor.   They ended up weakening the Byzantine empire and opening the Balkans up for a Muslim Invasion when the Ottomans became the dominant tribe.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.
> ...



not exactly-----the people were ruled by kings-----it is true
that the educational level was almost as crappy as that
or their muzzie oponents


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Jan 10, 2015)

Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
A comparison of Islamic terrorism today, has absolutely zero to do with the crusades from approx. 3000 generations ago. That is dumb.


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Jan 10, 2015)

Terrorism wins again On Air Videos Fox News


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

iamwhatiseem said:


> Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> A comparison of Islamic terrorism today, has absolutely zero to do with the crusades from approx. 3000 generations ago. That is dumb.



It is both dumb and inaccurate-----the crusades were, indeed,
a response to   meccaist aggression-----the pigs and dogs have invaded even the southern part of France


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Jan 10, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> > Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> ...



It doesn't even matter whose fault it was, or who struck first, or who was right or wrong. It is simply and totally irrelevant to today's issue of Islamic Jihad.
How do we stop the twisted message of hate that is taught throughout the world in Islamic schools. Primarily in the Middle East. How do we stop these organizations from recruiting gullible and easily impressed young people?
  The answer to this is not that difficult to identify. But the left are avoiding it like the plague. *Identify the problem for what it is - a deeply entrenched, large and influential body within the Muslim faith. Period. *


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

iamwhatiseem said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > iamwhatiseem said:
> ...



your comment is not politically correct-----you are not
supposed to mention the fact that violence is deeply
entrenched in the entire UMMAH----it is a muslim ethic---
you are supposed to pretend   "muzzies is just like
quakers"


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.
> ...



Crusades crusades crusades. That's all the Muslim can point to. 

Muslims today are slaughtering innocent people because Christians kicked them out of Christians lands they invaded?  You're a lame terrorist apologist.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Had Muslims not initially invaded the holy land and Western Europe, the crusades would have never occurred.
> ...



Nope, you keep making up your own shit. The main reason the crusades occurred was to purge Islam out of Christian lands.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

iamwhatiseem said:


> Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> A comparison of Islamic terrorism today, has absolutely zero to do with the crusades from approx. 3000 generations ago. That is dumb.



Okay, you really think that there are 3000 generations in 700 years?   

I think that works for Sea Monkeys, but not people.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> > Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> ...



right    depends on the species-----for fruit flies it probably approaches   one million


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Nope, you keep making up your own shit. The main reason the crusades occurred was to purge Islam out of Christian lands.



Except none of those places had been "Christian" lands for 400 years.  

The main reason for the Crusades was that Pope Urban II was being challenged by Emperor Henry IV.  Henry set up an Anti-Pope, Clement III, Urban set up an anti-Emperor, Conrad.  Then Urban decided to call up a "Crusade" to free the Holy Land when the Byzantine Emperor asked for his help.  

The end result was that the Crusades HASTENED the demise of Byzantine Empire and opened the Balkans up for the Ottomans.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Crusades crusades crusades. That's all the Muslim can point to.
> 
> Muslims today are slaughtering innocent people because Christians kicked them out of Christians lands they invaded? You're a lame terrorist apologist.



Guy, innocent Muslims in the Gaza, in Iraq, in Afghanistan this very century.  

Again, you keep fucking that hornet's nest and then complain about getting stung.  

Stop fucking the hornet's nest.  Novel idea.


----------



## Wildman (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...


<><><><><><><><><>
muslimes are murderers and killers of peace and harmony.., read this, and if you do let us all know your conclusions, OK ?

The Quran s Verses of Violence


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Wildman said:


> muslimes are murderers and killers of peace and harmony.., read this, and if you do let us all know your conclusions, OK ?
> 
> The Quran s Verses of Violence



The Bible's Verses of Violence.  -1318 verses advocating violence

Cruelty and Violence

You see, here's the thing.  Christianity, Judaism and Islam all worship the same cruel, dumb, mean-spirited Diety. 

And all of their "holy books' are filled with all sorts of verses of what to do to people who disagree with your religion.

So Christians and Jews have "evolved" to a point where they outright admit they are just after land and resources when they start a war, without all that religious bullshit, and that makes us better, then?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

double post


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Not like its the first time a Muslim killed in response to a Fatwah.
> ...


 
So as long as only a few do it your okay with it.  Awesome position.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Somebody help me, when was the last Christian terrorist act against Islam?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Somebody help me, when was the last Christian terrorist act against Islam?



The Iraq War. 

You know, the one where 1 million people were killed over weapons that didn't exist.  

Ah, but we don't call that "Terrorism", we call that "War".  

Just like we called Bin Laden a "Freedom Fighter" when he was killing Russians and we called him a "terrorist" when he was killing Americans.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Separation of church and state bumpkin Joe.  You can't call it a religious war and promote the separation at the same time.  You lose.


----------



## Brain357 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Separation of church and state bumpkin Joe.  You can't call it a religious war and promote the separation at the same time.  You lose.



Its not a stretch to think the Middle East looked at it as a holy war.  I would say they are wrong, but I'm sure many feel that way.  Primarily Christian country attacks Moslem country.


----------



## AvgGuyIA (Jan 10, 2015)

Witnessing the result of having "No-go Zones" in France should stop any further discussion of allowing our Muslims to have Shiria courts here.  A country cannot exist with two sets of laws.  France needs to take back those zones.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Incorrect in each instance Christians or Western nations responded to Islamic aggression.

The fact we use war instead of terrorism speaks volumes on our honesty and integrity.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Incorrect in each instance Christians or Western nations responded to Islamic aggression.
> 
> The fact we use war instead of terrorism speaks volumes on our honesty and integrity.


Unless used as a last resort, war_ is_ terrorism.

Lying to a nation, just to go to war, is terrorism.

More specifically, drone strikes, is US terrorism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Separation of church and state bumpkin Joe.  You can't call it a religious war and promote the separation at the same time.  You lose.



When our President says God told him to invade Iraq, it's a religious war. 

Bush totally said God told him to invade Iraq.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Incorrect in each instance Christians or Western nations responded to Islamic aggression.
> 
> The fact we use war instead of terrorism speaks volumes on our honesty and integrity.



I'm reminded of the French Film "The Battle of Algiers" when the rebel leader was asked why he used women's baskets to deliver bombs.  And he replied, "Why do you use planes?  We'll gladly trade our baskets for your planes."  

Maybe if we stopped bombing them with planes, they'd stop bombing us.


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...


That's right asshole.
ALL Muslims bear the responsibility for every other Muslim's behaviour when it comes to committing violent crimes against anyone who doesn't believe in that jerk-off pedophile 'What's-his-name' command to kill everyone on the planet who doesn't agree with mutilating little girls genitals.
GOD what a sick fucking religion who belong to.
Where are all these "peaceful" Muslims? No where b/c there aren't any.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Forgive the brevity of this history.  Mohammad misunderstood the Bible (the Trinity to be precise), so he wrote a new Bible named the Koran.  Later as he murdered rivals and husbands of women he wanted he wrote more chapters.  He used his new book to justify murder, rape, theft and many other things.  No small wonder it is so easily misread and we see the results we do.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> That's right asshole.
> ALL Muslims bear the responsibility for every other Muslim's behaviour when it comes to committing violent crimes against anyone who doesn't believe in that jerk-off pedophile 'What's-his-name' command to kill everyone on the planet who doesn't agree with mutilating little girls genitals.
> GOD what a sick fucking religion who belong to.
> Where are all these "peaceful" Muslims? No where b/c there aren't any.


And we're responsible for all the crimes this nation has committed against humanity, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, etc.


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Forgive the brevity of this history.  Mohammad misunderstood the Bible (the Trinity to be precise), so he wrote a new Bible named the Koran.  Later as he murdered rivals and husbands of women he wanted he wrote more chapters.  He used his new book to justify murder, rape, theft and many other things.  No small wonder it is so easily misread and we see the results we do.


If you have the mental illness that makes you want to murder/rape/steal/mutilate innocent people for your pleasure, boy have I got a book/religion for you! You can do anything you want to anyone and simply wave your pedohile What's His Name's book in people's faces and keep on doing what you like.
The book? It's the Koran.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Seems like we helped the Kurds and folks in Qatar along with nearly countless females in many of the nations you mentioned.  Interesting you define humanity as male only Billyboy.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> ALL Muslims bear the responsibility for every other Muslim's behaviour...




You are exactly the kind of weak-minded idiot that would be all-too-easily recruited to mindless violence had you been born in a different environment. Make no mistake, you are part of the problem, fool.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 10, 2015)

iamwhatiseem said:


> Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> A comparison of Islamic terrorism today, has absolutely zero to do with the crusades from approx. 3000 generations ago. That is dumb.



I know, but the moment the discussion of Islamic terrorism of TODAY comes up, libs always rush in to remind us of the Crusades.
I guess when you've got nothing to compare to today, bringing up something from hundreds of years ago makes them feel better.


----------



## Katzndogz (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > orogenicman said:
> ...



TODAY liberals believe that muslim violence and atrocities are justified by Christian atrocities a thousand years ago.   It's just like black violence.  TODAY liberals believe that slavery 200 years ago justifies pouring lighter fluid down a girl's throat and burning her alive.   There is no passage of time to liberals and never a change of circumstances.  It is all justified.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Incorrect in each instance Christians or Western nations responded to Islamic aggression.
> ...



Drone strikes are terrorism ? Then Obama is a terrorist, is that what you're telling us ?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



Amazing how you can be a chickenshit asshole and a terrorist supporter at the same time.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Separation of church and state bumpkin Joe.  You can't call it a religious war and promote the separation at the same time.  You lose.
> ...



Stupid Iraqis, don't they know when their being killed for their own good.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> > Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> ...



It was the half wit author of the OP who first mentioned the Crusades.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



By logical extension that makes you responsible for anything I do.   Holy shit these people are stupid.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> Forgive the brevity of this history. Mohammad misunderstood the Bible (the Trinity to be precise), so he wrote a new Bible named the Koran. Later as he murdered rivals and husbands of women he wanted he wrote more chapters. He used his new book to justify murder, rape, theft and many other things. No small wonder it is so easily misread and we see the results we do.



You mean he replaced one book full of batshit crazy superstitions with another book of batshit crazy superstitions?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Incorrect in each instance Christians or Western nations responded to Islamic aggression.
> ...



No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks.   They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks. They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.



when was the last time you heard about Islamists attacking Japan?  

Oh, that's right. they don't.  

Because the Japanese aren't sticking their noses into their business or supporting Israel.


----------



## Marianne (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.



"Why is it always muslims?"

Because they are seventh century asshats living in the 21st century.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks. They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.
> ...



So your theory is that if we just roll over and play dead the bad guys will be nice.    Does that about sum up your position?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Drone strikes are terrorism ?


That's right.  American, state-sanctioned, terrorism.

How would you like to live in an area where, at any moment, you could get hit with a missile?  It doesn't matter what you're doing, or where you're going, to the store, a wedding, or out finding firewood, the danger is present 24/7. Do you realized the psychological effects that has on the population of that area?



DigitalDrifter said:


> Then Obama is a terrorist, is that what you're telling us ?


If I had to be responsible for Bush, then you got to be responsible for Obama.  Actually, we're both responsible for both.  Everything the government does, it does so in our name.  So that makes us responsible.  And in this case, it also makes us terrorists.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

Marianne said:


> "Why is it always muslims?"
> 
> Because they are seventh century asshats living in the 21st century.


What about Zionists driving almost a million people from their homes, because of some shit that happened in the 1st century?


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Forgive the brevity of this history. Mohammad misunderstood the Bible (the Trinity to be precise), so he wrote a new Bible named the Koran. Later as he murdered rivals and husbands of women he wanted he wrote more chapters. He used his new book to justify murder, rape, theft and many other things. No small wonder it is so easily misread and we see the results we do.
> ...


 
Once again your reading comprehension has failed you.  Stay stupid, it is all you have.


----------



## toastman (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Marianne said:
> 
> 
> > "Why is it always muslims?"
> ...


What does Israel have to do with this topic you Palestinian ass kisser?


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

Might want to note what Muslims do when we aren't around to shoot at.  They kill each other over religious differences.  Ie:  Syria, Iraq, and so on.


----------



## Marianne (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Marianne said:
> 
> 
> > "Why is it always muslims?"
> ...


What about Colonials driving native peoples off their lands due to the widespread belief in Manifest Destiny?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks. They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.
> ...



Japan 


Billo_Really said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Drone strikes are terrorism ?
> ...



Ahh, so we're all terrorists, no better than those who strap explosives to themselves and walk into a mall. Got it.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks. They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.
> ...


That's because Japan severely restricts Islamic activity inside their country, and do not grant citizenship to Muslims. They have it right.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> That's because Japan severely restricts Islamic activity inside their country, and do not grant citizenship to Muslims. ...




Not true.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Crusades crusades crusades. That's all the Muslim can point to.
> ...



So these guys slaughtered the cartoonists because of Afghanistan?  Joe Blow the Muslim chasing his tail like a dog:

"It was the crusades!  It was the Iraq invasion!  It was French people mistreating these poor savages!" 

Ha ha ha. You are one pathetic Muslim making excuses for something that is totally inexcusable.  Tell you what, Joe Blow, it doesn't matter what bullshit you make up, people all over the world are seeing the fruits of this ugly, barbaric, violent, intolerant religion named Islam.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > That's right asshole.
> ...



Oh ok, so that's why those Muslim animals slaughtered the cartoonists and Jews in a Kosher supermarket.  Riiiiiight.


----------



## asaratis (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.
> ...


The same scenario and response reoccurs daily in the attacks on Israel.  Rockets are fired from Gaza...Israel replies...Israel is blamed.

The Crusades indeed were in response to Muslim atrocities.   Somehow the Crusaders were depicted as the bad guys for "killing in the name of God".

That in quotes IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF ISLAM!!!  Submission or death!  Those are the choices.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> > Hey...just thought I should say that the Christian Crusades ended 700 years ago.
> ...



Joe Blow is a Muslim playing as a lib.  Don't tell me he has you fooled. He's spewing all the typical Islamic taking points. Maybe because it's hard to tell the difference these days.  "It's the West's fault those cartoonists were slaughtered, those poor innocent peaceful people really had no choice". Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > No, nothing we do or don't do is going to stop terrorist attacks. They aren't simply responding to us, they have their own agenda.
> ...



Islamists are cowards. They won't fuck with people who will fuck with them ten times worse.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

asaratis said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



That is correct, Israel is on the front lines of Islam's goal of conquering the West.  And it is doing so on its own and with great success.  All people who want to live in a free, democratic societies,  and not on their knees in submission to Islam and Shariah law should support Israel.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> So your theory is that if we just roll over and play dead the bad guys will be nice. Does that about sum up your position?



No, but you obviously don't have good reading comprehension skills.  

Okay, going to make this easy for you.  Maybe if we stopped BOMBING these people and stopped aiding the ZIONISTS in taking their homes and stopped PROPPING UP terrible governments over there, maybe, just maybe they wouldn't see us as the source of a lot of their misery.  

The Japanese didn't roll over and play dead.  They just made a conscious decision to not interfere in their politics.  (Mostly because we stuck them with a constitution that kept them from doing so.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > when was the last time you heard about Islamists attacking Japan?
> ...



Actually, the Japanese would have to ask us for help, as they have no aircraft carriers, or ability to project strength beyond Japan.   

The Islamists don't fuck with the Japanese because the Japanese aren't fucking with them.


----------



## Lipush (Jan 10, 2015)

Because the japanese are smart enough to keep them at arms' length, telling them "We won't tolerate your terrorist shit, so take it someplace else".


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> That's because Japan severely restricts Islamic activity inside their country, and do not grant citizenship to Muslims. They have it right.



They also don't knock over governments, support Israel or bomb anyone. 

THey also don't let North Koreans into the country, but Kim Jong Il still managed to hit them a few times with terrorists strikes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Lipush said:


> Because the japanese are smart enough to keep them at arms' length, telling them "We won't tolerate your terrorist shit, so take it someplace else".



That's awesome.  The Zionists need to do the same thing. Pack up, go the fuck back to Europe and be done with it.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > So your theory is that if we just roll over and play dead the bad guys will be nice. Does that about sum up your position?
> ...



Ah I see.  The cartoonists were slaughtered because of the Joooooooos, it's always the Jooooooos with you Muslims, isn't it?  

You kit want to decide which it was though, was it the Jooooos, or the cruuuuuusades?


----------



## Lipush (Jan 10, 2015)

Yeah, after they're shot in a supermarket on a ramdom day by random terrorists. You know, I always knew you weren't exactly the sharpest pencil in the drawer, but I also see that you're tactless. After what happened this weekend, you should be at least smart enough and don't suggest the "go back to europe" bullshit after Jews and just been shot in _Europe_!

MORON!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> > Because the japanese are smart enough to keep them at arms' length, telling them "We won't tolerate your terrorist shit, so take it someplace else".
> ...



I find it interesting and pathetic that no matter what Muslims do, other Muslims like Joe Blow will always try to blame the Joooooos.  

These people are truly sick in the head.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Lipush said:


> Yeah, after they're shot in a supermarket on a ramdom day by random terrorists. You know, I always knew you weren't exactly the sharpest pencil in the drawer, but I also see that you're tactless. After what happened this weekend, you should be at least smart enough and don't suggest the "go back to europe" bullshit after Jews and just been shot in _Europe_!
> 
> MORON!



And guess who's shooting Jews in Europe?

SAME ISLAMONAZI ANIMALS THAT ARE TRYING TO KILL JEWS IN ISRAEL.


----------



## Rusty Houser (Jan 10, 2015)

Yes it's true, Muslims are alone in shutting down liberals that mock their God. They have my complete Christian respect.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Ah I see. The cartoonists were slaughtered because of the Joooooooos, it's always the Jooooooos with you Muslims, isn't it?
> 
> You kit want to decide which it was though, was it the Jooooos, or the cruuuuuusades?



Actually, all of Islam didn't kill these racist cartoonists.  It was just three guys.  

Again, kind of like the asshole who goes into the biker bar and starts talking smack to the bikers.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 10, 2015)

Lipush said:


> Yeah, after they're shot in a supermarket on a ramdom day by random terrorists. You know, I always knew you weren't exactly the sharpest pencil in the drawer, but I also see that you're tactless. After what happened this weekend, you should be at least smart enough and don't suggest the "go back to europe" bullshit after Jews and just been shot in _Europe_!



You might have a point.  Maybe you need to move somewhere where you haven't offended anyone yet.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Ah I see. The cartoonists were slaughtered because of the Joooooooos, it's always the Jooooooos with you Muslims, isn't it?
> ...



Yes, but this is a totally isolated, now isn't it. They didn't kill Theo Van Gogh over the same thing, they did to kill the Danish cartoonist, they didn't try to kill Salman Rushdie, they didn't target others who either made movies or said negative things about Islam.

*Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy*




The controversial cartoons of Muhammad, as they were first published in _Jyllands-Posten_ in September 2005 (English version). The headline, "Muhammeds ansigt", means "The face of Muhammad".
The *Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy* (or *Muhammad cartoons crisis*) (Danish: _Muhammedkrisen_)[1] began after 12 editorial cartoons, most of which depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad, were published in the Danish newspaper_Jyllands-Posten_ on 30 September 2005. The newspaper announced that this was an attempt to contribute to the debate about criticism of Islam and self-censorship. Muslim groups in Denmark complained, and the issue eventually led to protests around the world, including violent demonstrations and riots in some Muslim countries.

*Reactions to Innocence of Muslims *
*Reactions to Innocence of Muslims*



Thousands of protesters march towards the US Embassy in Kuala Lumpur in protest at the film
*Date* September 11, 2012 – September 29, 2012
*Location* Worldwide
*Causes* _Innocence of Muslims_

*Deaths and injuries*
Over 50 deaths

12 (Afghanistan)[1]
23 (Pakistan)[2][3][4]
4 (Yemen)[5]
4 (Tunisia)[6]
4 (Israeli border)[7]
3 (Sudan)[8]
3 (Lebanon)[8][9]
1 (Egypt)[10]
At least 694-695 injured

At least 280 (Pakistan)[4][11][12]
250 (Egypt)[13]
46 (Tunisia)[6]
35 (Yemen)[5]
25 (India)[14]
25 (Australia)[15]
15 (Lebanon)[8][9]
4 (France)[16]
1-2 (Indonesia)[17]
At least 1 (Afghanistan)[18]
1 (Niger)[19]
1 (Belgium)[20]
On September 11, 2012, a series of protests and violent attacks began in response to a YouTube trailer for a film called _Innocence of Muslims_, considered blasphemous by many Muslims. The reactions began at U.S. diplomatic mission in Cairo, Egypt, and quickly spread across the Muslim world to additional U.S. and other countries' diplomatic missions and other locations, with issues beyond the offense at the movie trailer becoming subjects of protest. In Cairo a group scaled the embassy wall and tore down the American flag to replace it with a black Islamic flag.

On September 13, protests occurred at the U.S. embassy inSana'a, Yemen, resulting in the deaths of four protesters and injuries to thirty-five protesters and guards. On September 14, the U.S. consulate in Chennai was attacked, resulting in injuries to twenty-five protesters.[14] Protesters in Tunis, Tunisia, climbed the U.S. embassy walls and set trees on fire. At least four people were killed and forty-six injured during protests in Tunis on September 15.[6] Further protests were held at U.S. diplomatic missions and other locations in the days following the initial attacks. Related protests and attacks resulted in numerous deaths and injuries across the Middle East, Africa, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

*Context of reactions*
The late 20th and early 21st centuries have seen several major incidents of the Islamic world taking offence at pictorial or written representation of Muhammad and his teachings.[21][22][23] In practice people have been brought to trial, killed or had a_fatwa_ called on them for a wide range of acts that have been cited as blasphemous, including depicting Mohammad either in writing or in some other manner that was perceived as insulting.[22][24][25][26]


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



*Mohammed Bouyeri*

*Mohammed Bouyeri*



Bouyeri in 2004
*Born* 8 March 1978 (age 36)
Amsterdam, Netherlands
*Criminal charge*
Murder, terrorism
*Criminal penalty*
Life without parole
*Criminal status* In prison
*Mohammed Bouyeri* (Arabic: محمد بويري‎) (born 8 March 1978) is a Dutch–Moroccan Islamist and convicted murderer who is serving a life sentencewithout parole for the assassination of Dutch film director Theo van Gogh. He holds both Dutch and Moroccan citizenship and was a member of theHofstad Network.


*Assassination of Theo Van Gogh *
*Background*
Filmmaker Theo van Gogh was notorious for his crude insults to "everyone respected in postwar multicultural Dutch society, including Jews and Muslims" but who "also helped bring Muslim actors onto Dutch television."[1] In 2004, he and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali refugee who was a Dutch member of parliament at the time, directed a short film called _Submission, Part I_about violence against women, and the Islam. In the film women are shown wearing transparent clothes with verses of theQuran written on their bodies. The film aired in August 2004 on Dutch television in prime time, the ensuing outcry led the Dutch police to offer police protection for both directors, but van Gogh refused. His death was a "direct result of the film".[1]

*Assassination*
The 26-year-old Bouyeri assassinated Van Gogh in the early morning of 2 November 2004, in Amsterdam, in front of the city's East Borough office (_stadsdeelkantoor_) on the corner of the Linnaeusstraat and Tweede Oosterparkstraat (52°21′32.22″N 4°55′34.74″E), while he was bicycling to work.[2] Bouyeri shot van Gogh eight times with a handgun, who was hit, as were two bystanders. Wounded, Van Gogh ran to the other side of the road and fell to the ground on the cycle lane. According to eyewitnesses, Van Gogh's last words were: "Mercy, mercy! We can talk about it, can't we?"

Bouyeri then walked up to Van Gogh, who was still lying down, and calmly shot him several more times at close range. Bouyeri then cut Van Gogh’s throat and tried to decapitate him with a large knife, after which he stabbed the knife deep into Van Gogh's chest, reaching his spinal cord.[3] He then attached a note to the body with a smaller knife before fleeing. Van Gogh died on the spot.[4] The note threatened Western governments, Jews and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and referenced the ideologies of the Egyptian organization Takfir wal-Hijra.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




*Censorship of the depiction of Muhammad*
We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.


*Zachary Adam Chesser*[74]
The season 10 episodes "Cartoon Wars Part I" and "Cartoon Wars Part II" feature a plot in which the Fox network plans to air an episode of the animated show _Family Guy_ that contains an uncensored cartoon depiction of the Muslim ProphetMuhammad. Residents of South Park panic, fearing a terrorist response and a repeat of the real-life violent protests and riots that occurred worldwide after some Muslims regarded the prophet's cartoon depiction in a Danish newspaper as insulting and blasphemous. The first episode had a cliffhanger ending instructing viewers to watch part two to find out whether the image of Muhammad would be shown uncensored. In the second episode, Kyle persuades a Fox executive to air the _Family Guy_ with the image uncensored, while echoing Parker and Stone's sentiments regarding what should or should not be censored of "[either] it's got to all be OK or none of it is".[2] Within the universe of the episode, the _Family Guy_ episode is aired uncensored, despite a retaliation threat from Al-Qaeda. However, the actual _South Park_ broadcast itself ran a black screen that read "Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Mohammed on their network" instead of the scene containing Muhammad's depiction, which Parker and Stone say was neutral and not intended to insult Muslims.[2][26]

Parker and Stone note the contradiction in being allowed to feature a profane depiction of Jesus, while being forbidden to feature a purely benign depiction of Muhammad, but claim they harbor no hard feelings toward Comedy Central for censoring the scene, since the network confessed to being "afraid of getting blown up" rather than claim they refrained from airing the scene uncensored out of religious tolerance.[2][50] Parker and Stone claim the only regrets they have over the incident was that their mocking of the show _Family Guy_ in the episode generated more attention than its commentary on the ethics of censorship.[75] Previously, Muhammad was depicted uncensored and portrayed in a heroic light in the season five(2001) episode "Super Best Friends", which resulted in virtually no controversy.[2] Muhammad also appears among the large crowd of characters gathered behind the main characters and "South Park" sign in some of the show's previous opening sequences.[76]


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

*Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case*

The *Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case* concerns the 2007 arrest, trial, conviction, imprisonment and subsequent release of British schoolteacher Gillian Gibbons, who taught middle-class Muslim and Christian children at Unity High Schoolin Khartoum, Sudan.

*Arrest*
Gillian Gibbons was born in 1953 and gained a Bachelor of Education degree from the CF Mott College of Education inPrescot in 1975 (the college closed in 1992). Teaching in a school in Sudan, she was arrested for allegedly insulting Islam by allowing her class of six-year-olds to name a teddy bear "Muhammad".

*The Satanic Verses controversy*

Satanic Verses controversy



Salman Rushdie, the author of the novel _The Satanic Verses_



Ayatollah Khomeini,Supreme Leader of Iran who issued the fatwa

*The Satanic Verses controversy*, also known as the *Rushdie Affair*, was the heated and frequently violent reaction of Muslims to the publication ofSalman Rushdie's novel _The Satanic Verses_, which was first published in theUnited Kingdom in 1988. Many Muslims accused Rushdie of blasphemy or unbelief and in 1989 Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwaordering Muslims to kill Rushdie. Numerous killings, attempted killings, and bombings resulted from Muslim anger over the novel.


----------



## saveliberty (Jan 10, 2015)

We have a bunch of pastors running around the US asking for people to be killed?  Rev. Sharpton excepted of course.


----------



## whitehall (Jan 10, 2015)

What about "piss Christ"? American artist Andres Serrano received funding from taxpayers through the "National Endowment for the Arts" to produce perhaps the most offensive "art" in modern history featuring Jesus Christ upside down on a Cross in a vat of urine. Libs loved it, Christians were understandably angered  and Serrano is presumably still around pissing on various sacred objects. Nobody died. The radical Muslems who mentally live in the 6th century do not conform to the mores of modern human society. The question is why does the jihad American left continue to defend these maniacs?


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking of all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...



Those were Catholics!  Catholics are not Christians, guys!  Hello???????!!   IS ANYONE HOME OUT THERE?  Christians don't do crusades, mass slaughter, any of that.  Enough already.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 10, 2015)

whitehall said:


> What about "piss Christ"? American artist Andres Serrano received funding from taxpayers through the "National Endowment for the Arts" to produce perhaps the most offensive "art" in modern history featuring Jesus Christ upside down on a Cross in a vat of urine. Libs loved it, Christians were understandably angered  and Serrano is presumably still around pissing on various sacred objects. Nobody died. The radical Muslems who mentally live in the 6th century do not conform to the mores of modern human society. The question is why does the jihad American left continue to defend these maniacs?


Sad that Christians allow this act of blaspheme to happen.

No wonder their religion has become so weak and marginalized..     ....


----------



## MAGOG89 (Jan 10, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking of all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...



Two wrongs=right?, and you know most people are not too fond of the Old Testament or New Testament for that matter.

The topic is Islam, we need more explanations and less diversions.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Today the words Islam and Muslims are synonymous with terrorism, intolerance, and failed states.  

And yet Muslims think its Christinty and not Islam that is on the decline. They must be living in an alternate universe.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

Marianne said:


> What about Colonials driving native peoples off their lands due to the widespread belief in Manifest Destiny?


What about the Mexicans driven off their land so I could have a place to live?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Ahh, so we're all terrorists, no better than those who strap explosives to themselves and walk into a mall. Got it.


If you're a US citizen, that's it, whether you like it or not.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Oh ok, so that's why those Muslim animals slaughtered the cartoonists and Jews in a Kosher supermarket.  Riiiiiight.


No.  They were slaughtered, because France wanted sanctions to end against Russia.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

toastman said:


> What does Israel have to do with this topic you Palestinian ass kisser?


If they're talking about people living in the 7th century, I can't talk about people living in the 1st?

It looks like you're the kiss-ass!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Oh ok, so that's why those Muslim animals slaughtered the cartoonists and Jews in a Kosher supermarket.  Riiiiiight.
> ...



Reeeeeally?  So when they yelled "we have avenged the prophet, Allah  Akbar!" after slaughtering the cartoonists, they actually meant "we want the sanctions to end!"  

One lunatic leaves, and another one enters. What fun!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What does Israel have to do with this topic you Palestinian ass kisser?
> ...




Yes we understand, all of your Muslims together now: 
It was because of the Joooooos......the Joooooooooos......Joooooooos.


----------



## toastman (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



   

Nice one Roudy!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

Honestly I don't even think the cartoons were that great. 

But still, he had a right to create and publish them. And no Muslim Neanderthal subhuman should be allowed to take that right away.


----------



## toastman (Jan 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Oh ok, so that's why those Muslim animals slaughtered the cartoonists and Jews in a Kosher supermarket.  Riiiiiight.
> ...


WTF did I just read??


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

toastman said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



As with the terrorists, there is a certain amount of lunacy that is required to be an Islamic terrorist apologist.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 10, 2015)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The effects of a $5 bottle of whiskey on a lonely looser on a Saturday night.


----------



## toastman (Jan 10, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


He must be hanging out at one of those gay bars he's always talking about.


----------



## 007 (Jan 10, 2015)

Sunni Man said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > What about "piss Christ"? American artist Andres Serrano received funding from taxpayers through the "National Endowment for the Arts" to produce perhaps the most offensive "art" in modern history featuring Jesus Christ upside down on a Cross in a vat of urine. Libs loved it, Christians were understandably angered  and Serrano is presumably still around pissing on various sacred objects. Nobody died. The radical Muslems who mentally live in the 6th century do not conform to the mores of modern human society. The question is why does the jihad American left continue to defend these maniacs?
> ...


"Reported for the second time to the FBI" ----------- ^


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 10, 2015)

toastman said:


> WTF did I just read??


I said, the attack happened because France wanted sanctions to end against Russia.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > So your theory is that if we just roll over and play dead the bad guys will be nice. Does that about sum up your position?
> ...



Maybe you're simply fucked in the head if you believe the terrorists are only responding to what we do.   Maybe we should consult the terrorists first before making any foreign policy decisions in the future.  Your simple minded one dimensional view works well with the logic of the OP.......flip side of the same coin.    I'm sorry the world is a little more complicated than you'd like it to be.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 11, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Ahh, so we're all terrorists, no better than those who strap explosives to themselves and walk into a mall. Got it.
> ...


You're a lunatic.


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Honestly I don't even think the cartoons were that great.
> 
> But still, he had a right to create and publish them. And no Muslim Neanderthal subhuman should be allowed to take that right away.



Muslim Neanderthal subhuman.........were you referring to the terrorists or does that apply to all Muslims?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 11, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> You're a lunatic.


Have you ever seen an official government deposition? 

It's always_......"The People vs ______ "
_
 We are responsible for the government we put in office.  Everything they do is in our name.  Everything they do, reflects on us.  If you are a US citizen, that is the burden you carry and it cannot be derogated unless you renounce your citizenship.  So man up and be a responsible adult.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 11, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



That isn't what he said.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly I don't even think the cartoons were that great.
> ...



Having reading comprehension problems again? 

Let me spell it out for you. I believe any Muslim who either commits, advocates, or justifies violence and terror against those that "insult" their religion or prophet as a Neanderthal subhuman mongoloid animal.  Especially those that live in the West. How's that?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The tactics they use are always the same lame ones.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > WTF did I just read??
> ...


Where's your proof of this crap ??


----------



## indiajo (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> [
> 
> 
> Let me spell it out for you. I believe any Muslim who either commits, advocates, or justifies violence and terror against those that "insult" their religion or prophet as a Neanderthal subhuman mongoloid animal.  Especially those that live in the West. How's that?



Don't insult the Neanderthals. They were a pretty skilled subspecies that lived on this planet successfully a significant longer time than we do.
It is yet not clear why they disappeared, but what's very clear is hat the homo sapiens races who carry a certain percentage of Neandethal genes are quite better off by means of intelligence.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Where's your proof of this crap ??


It's right here.




> _You have to ask yourself: *what did France do that could brought this “punishment”?* It cannot be a small tactical thing. Well* the biggest strategic change in the strategy of the French government was the declaration by Hollande on the necessity to put an end to the sanctions against Russia* and to launch an era of cooperation between Europe and Russia. On Janury 4, three days before the massacre he gave an unprecedented two-hour interview to France Inter radio: “The sanctions must stop now!”
> _
> _He stated:
> “If Russia has a crisis, it is not necessarily good for Europe, I’m not for the policy of attaining goals by making things worse,* I think that sanctions must stop now*… Mr Putin does not want to annex eastern Ukraine. He has told me that. What he wants is to remain influential. What he wants is for Ukraine not to fall into the NATO camp.”
> ...


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.


Religious extremism, and even religious conservatism, is the problem.

The difference is only the scope and severity of the reaction to moral outrage.

Muslim extremists seem to use killing to try and stop people bad mouthing Islam.

Bill O'Reilly seems to use shame to try and stop people bad mouthing Christianity.

Please don't start about how Christians don't kill people for A,B, and C, but Muslims do for A, B, and C....because that's not my point and I already accept that.

I'm talking about the root cause of the killing, and it's moral outrage fueled by religion.

And while the horse has left the barn for Islam, I see the religious right in the US opening the barn door and getting the horse ready. I feel like the terrorists win when isolated terrorism causes people on this site to suggest entire populations and religions are evil


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> "Reported for the second time to the FBI" ----------- ^


 .........


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yes, but this is a totally isolated, now isn't it. They didn't kill Theo Van Gogh over the same thing, they did to kill the Danish cartoonist, they didn't try to kill Salman Rushdie, they didn't target others who either made movies or said negative things about Islam.



Yes, you kick people long enough, they will kick back.  

You whine all day about these 12 cartoonists, but 2000 people slaughtered in Gaza by your fellow Zionists, meh, the fuckers had it coming because they were firing totally ineffective rockets


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, but this is a totally isolated, now isn't it. They didn't kill Theo Van Gogh over the same thing, they did to kill the Danish cartoonist, they didn't try to kill Salman Rushdie, they didn't target others who either made movies or said negative things about Islam.
> ...



Yes, firing rockets, ineffective or not, at innocent civilians is a justification for killing you.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 11, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...



Oh Puhleeze, you're just too fucking stupid to bother arguing with.


----------



## 007 (Jan 11, 2015)

Sunni Man said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > "Reported for the second time to the FBI" ----------- ^
> ...


You are a radical muslim that condones islamic violence, therefore you need to be watched.

I reported you once before a couple years ago, so I'm sure they already have a file on you.

I hope you enjoy knowing you're  being investigated and your phone is bugged. Keep it up and I'm sure you'll also be questioned.

But why don't you save us all some tax payer money and time and go kill yourself, you creepy sons a bitchin' muslim pile of pig shit. Hell has plenty of room for all of you stone age cultists.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> You are a radical muslim that condones islamic violence, therefore you need to be watched.
> 
> I reported you once before a couple years ago, so I'm sure they already have a file on you.
> 
> ...


I am a loyal patriotic American born citizen and veteran. Who pays taxes, votes, and does not break any laws.

But they do need to investigate your crazy ass.   ......       .


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> Yes, firing rockets, ineffective or not, at innocent civilians is a justification for killing you.



Your right.  It's a lot more sensible than actually living in a place where they AREN'T trying to kill you.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

t


bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


My Grandpa, a WWI vet, had a great saying that explains dangerous people like you. And I quote:

"When angry people stop talking, they usually start fighting"

I'm not supporting appeasement of the terrorist, rather we should kill every last one of them wherever we find them.

What I'm supporting is keeping dialog open with the Muslims that aren't terrorists, but capitulate to, and DO NOT actively resist the terrorists. If we start saying all Muslims are bad, we make enemies of them too, and the terrorists win.

See, people as stupid, and angry as you, are the terrorist's best weapon against the rest of us


----------



## 007 (Jan 11, 2015)

Sunni Man said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > You are a radical muslim that condones islamic violence, therefore you need to be watched.
> ...


No you're not, and I have forwarded your approvals of the muslim slayings in France that you wrote here to the FBI as well.

They already have a file with your JIHAD bull shit from before that I reported, which oddly disappeared real fast after I did.

So you better check what you say here, asshole, because the world is getting real fed up with you muslim pricks and your talk of TAKING OVER COUNTRIES, which you have ALSO done here, talked about "WHEN AMERICA BECOMES A MUSLIM NATION," which I have also forwarded, so ya, you better be back peddling, mother fucker, because the way you've been talking here is exactly the kind of people the FBI want to know about.

Start looking over your shoulder...


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> So you better check what you say here, asshole, because the world is getting real fed up with you muslim pricks and your talk of TAKING OVER COUNTRIES, which you have ALSO done here, talked about "WHEN AMERICA BECOMES A MUSLIM NATION," so ya, you better be back peddling, mother fucker, because the way you've been talking here is exactly the kind of people the FBI want to know about.
> 
> Start looking over your shoulder...


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, but this is a totally isolated, now isn't it. They didn't kill Theo Van Gogh over the same thing, they did to kill the Danish cartoonist, they didn't try to kill Salman Rushdie, they didn't target others who either made movies or said negative things about Islam.
> ...



So Israel should just sit around and do nothing while its citizens are running to shelters all day long and houses are grtting damaged. It doesn't matter if the rockets rarely kill, no country would tolerate that.
Your logic is pathetic just like yourself.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Where's your proof of this crap ??
> ...


Nothing in there says the motive of the attackers was sanctions. They were not even Russian. They attacked for obvious reasons . In fact, they had threatened to attack the place when the Mohamed cartoon was drawn.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...


You can't reason with a troll as big as Sunni Stalker Troll. 
It's like you're talking to a little kid.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> You can't reason with a troll as big as Sunni Stalker Troll.
> It's like you're talking to a little kid.


So says the hebe troll.   .....


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

Uh oh, looks like I hurt Sunni Stalker Trolls feelings


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...


The FBI gets reports all the time, and if you reported him a couple years ago, they probably don't care, especially if you're still taking up important time they need to devote to legitimate threats.

Wow...it just hit me.....007.....phones bugged.....the FBI.....

You're a crackpot, aren't you.....


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Uh oh, looks like I hurt Sunni Stalker Trolls feelings


Nope.......but keep trying.   .....


----------



## 007 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...


He's knows I'm not joking.

He thinks he can play all the anti America, pro radical islam things he's said here off as a joke, but people are sick of that, and it's not a joke. From what I got from the FBI agent I talked to, and yes an agent did call me whom I now have his personal contact info, they take ALL these reports seriously.

So just know this, sunnifuck, you ARE being watched. All the pro radical muslim shit you say here, all the take over America shit you say here, all the pro jihad, sharia law shit you say here, is being REPORTED.

Think about that next time you use your phone.


----------



## 007 (Jan 11, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...


If you had any idea who you were talking to, what I'm involved with, or any clue how the FBI operates, you'd realize that you just made an absolute IMBECILE out of yourself with what you said.

How does your foot taste, shit for brains?


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

Sunni Man said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You can't reason with a troll as big as Sunni Stalker Troll.
> ...


You know.......

Here in the US, some of these Fox News addicts and hotheads obviously think you're a terrorist, and probably think I'm an appeaser and a traitor.

I'm sure in ISIS controlled Syria or Iraq, those ass holes would call me the devil, and probably you a traitor.

But so far...you, I, and a handful of others, are the only ones who have stated they want peace.

Granted, I've made assumptions about you, and don't know you at all, so because this is the internet, any one of us could be completely different than presented.

Buy based on your words so far, both sides need more people that seek peace, not revenge.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> So just know this, sunnifuck, you ARE being watched. All the pro radical muslim shit you say here, all the take over America shit you say here, all the pro jihad, sharia law shit you say here, is being REPORTED.
> Think about that next time you use your phone.


Oh my!!  .....  what shall I do??    .....


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...


I hit a nerve obviously.

Why don't you dispatch your minions Mr. all powerful connected man.

This is what you probably look like


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Here in the US, some of these Fox News addicts and hotheads obviously think you're a terrorist, and probably think I'm an appeaser and a traitor.
> 
> I'm sure in ISIS controlled Syria or Iraq, those ass holes would call me the devil, and probably you a traitor.
> 
> ...


Over the years of posting on this and other boards. I've had nitwits like 007 turn me in based on their paranoia.

But obviously I'm no threat. Just an average person with a minority opinion posting on a message board.   .....


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> So Israel should just sit around and do nothing while its citizens are running to shelters all day long and houses are grtting damaged. It doesn't matter if the rockets rarely kill, no country would tolerate that.
> Your logic is pathetic just like yourself.



Actually, what Israel should do is go the fuck back to Europe where they came from.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 11, 2015)

Sunni Man said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Here in the US, some of these Fox News addicts and hotheads obviously think you're a terrorist, and probably think I'm an appeaser and a traitor.
> ...


I gotta admit.....I did use the FBI web site to report another poster one time.......it was because he suggested someone should assassinate our president.


----------



## Sunni Man (Jan 11, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> I gotta admit.....I did use the FBI web site to report another poster one time.......it was because he suggested someone should assassinate our president.


I would have done the same thing.   .....


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > So Israel should just sit around and do nothing while its citizens are running to shelters all day long and houses are grtting damaged. It doesn't matter if the rockets rarely kill, no country would tolerate that.
> ...


Nope. People born in Israel are Israelis, even if their parents or grand Parents are from Europe.
They're not going anywhere, and there's nothing you can do about it


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > So Israel should just sit around and do nothing while its citizens are running to shelters all day long and houses are grtting damaged. It doesn't matter if the rockets rarely kill, no country would tolerate that.
> ...


BTW, most Americans are of European heritage. Should they also go back to Europe?


----------



## Discombobulated (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



This makes you sound like less of an idiot, almost reasonable.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Nothing in there says the motive of the attackers was sanctions. They were not even Russian. They attacked for obvious reasons . In fact, they had threatened to attack the place when the Mohamed cartoon was drawn.


3 days after Hollande went public with his speech.

Now Netanfuckyou is sending Mossad agents to assist French authorities.

Could it possibly be to make sure it doesn't get known that the terrorists who committed the attack, were trained and funded by Israeli authorities?



> _What the Times of Israel report fails to mention is that *Netanyahu has been actively supporting Islamic State (ISIS) and Al Nusrah terrorists out of the occupied Golan heights*.  While coming to France’s rescue, * Netanyahu does not deny his government’s support of the jihadists in Syria*.  The IDF top brass has acknowledged that *“global jihad elements inside Syria”* are supported by Israel:_
> _Netanyahu toured the Golan Heights with Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz.
> 
> At a lookout point overlooking the Syrian border, OC Northern Command Maj.-Gen. Yair Golan briefed Netanyahu *on the presence of global jihad elements inside Syria,* as well as on the work being done to fortify the Israeli-Syrian border fence. (Jerusalem Post, February 19, 2014)_​



_Keep it, comin love,
Keep it, comin' love,
Don't stop  it now, 
don't stop it no

_


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Thanks for your vote of confidence.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing in there says the motive of the attackers was sanctions. They were not even Russian. They attacked for obvious reasons . In fact, they had threatened to attack the place when the Mohamed cartoon was drawn.
> ...



^^^^
I bet you Anus Mouth found this bullshit in some neo nazi nutjob conspiracy website.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...



Yes I will agree with you. The Christian world is getting sick and tired of islamic savagery and will soon give them the modern version of Crusades they've been begging for.  A few more of these attacks on the West and its values by Muslims, and Christians will be taking their gloves off.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> ^^^^
> I bet you Anus Mouth found this bullshit in some neo nazi nutjob conspiracy website.


The_* Times of Israel*_ is a Nazi site?

Who would've thunk it?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

007 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > 007 said:
> ...



But without Sunni around, where will we go for laughs?


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing in there says the motive of the attackers was sanctions. They were not even Russian. They attacked for obvious reasons . In fact, they had threatened to attack the place when the Mohamed cartoon was drawn.
> ...



Could it be that you just made an incredible idiot out of yourself you Palestinian ass kissing conspiracy nut? The answer is yes.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Which isn't an unusual occurence when it comes to Anus Mouth.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Nope. People born in Israel are Israelis, even if their parents or grand Parents are from Europe.
> They're not going anywhere, and there's nothing you can do about it



WHen the Arabs do overrun the Zionist entity, they aren't going to make that distinction.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yes I will agree with you. The Christian world is getting sick and tired of islamic savagery and will soon give them the modern version of Crusades they've been begging for. A few more of these attacks on the West and its values by Muslims, and Christians will be taking their gloves off.



Guy, if you really don't think that the Western World wouldn't happily throw you Zionists to the wolves to appease htem, you are delusional.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> BTW, most Americans are of European heritage. Should they also go back to Europe?



If we were constantly at war with the Native people here and couldn't co-exist with them, maybe.


----------



## boedicca (Jan 11, 2015)

To the OP:  It is not Always Muslims, but it is Always Barbarians.

Evidence:  witness the recent Black Lives Matter protests which devolved into violence perpetrated by anarchists and thugs.

The thing they have in common with Islamofascists is a desire to destroy Civil Society.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. People born in Israel are Israelis, even if their parents or grand Parents are from Europe.
> ...


You mean like they tried to in 1948, 1967, and 1973 ?? 

Keep dreaming Nazi Joe


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BTW, most Americans are of European heritage. Should they also go back to Europe?
> ...


That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. You want Israelis born in Israel who have European heritage to go "the fuck back to Europe" because they are at war with some 'natives' ? 


Ya, that totally makes sense. Jewish Israelis are going to listen to their enemies and just pick and and leave


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> You mean like they tried to in 1948, 1967, and 1973 ??
> 
> Keep dreaming Nazi Joe



Read up on the Crusades, buddy.  these things never end well for invaders.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. You want Israelis born in Israel who have European heritage to go "the fuck back to Europe" because they are at war with some 'natives' ?
> 
> 
> Ya, that totally makes sense. Jewish Israelis are going to listen to their enemies and just pick and and leave



Or they can die horribly when Arabs are in the majority, which they eventually will be. 

I really, really don't care which.  

I suspect the rich ones will go back to Europe and the poor ones will get killed and we will get another dose of "Please give us stuff because someone did something nasty to us."


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You mean like they tried to in 1948, 1967, and 1973 ??
> ...


Except Jews did not invade Israel. Most of them were invited by the British. An invasion is a military offensive. 
If you call that an invasion, then you are calling every mass immigration an invasion.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

As for the Arab majority, that's unlikely to happen. Even if it would, it would be a long time away. Inside Israel, it's 75% Jews    25% Arabs


----------



## GHook93 (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.



They were particular harsh on Jews. They only attacked one side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict! There artwork could have been mistaken as Goebbels. Yet not one Jewish threat against the antisemitic cartoonist. Not one attack of violence by Jews.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 11, 2015)

Lipush said:


> Because the japanese are smart enough to keep them at arms' length, telling them "We won't tolerate your terrorist shit, so take it someplace else".




That post about Japan was not accurate anyway.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> Except Jews did not invade Israel. Most of them were invited by the British. An invasion is a military offensive.
> If you call that an invasion, then you are calling every mass immigration an invasion.



You mean because the British LIED to the Arabs to get them to revolt against the Turks and then double crossed them, that makes the Zionist invasion of Palestine okay?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 11, 2015)

toastman said:


> As for the Arab majority, that's unlikely to happen. Even if it would, it would be a long time away. Inside Israel, it's 75% Jews 25% Arabs



Yep, keep pretending the West Bank and Gaza aren't there, or the 2 million Palestinian refugees.


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > As for the Arab majority, that's unlikely to happen. Even if it would, it would be a long time away. Inside Israel, it's 75% Jews 25% Arabs
> ...


But that's not Israel. So what if the Arab population there surpasses the Jewish population? What do you think they are going to do ? Gather at the Israeli border and try and overrun Israel ?? Common. You;re delirious


----------



## toastman (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Except Jews did not invade Israel. Most of them were invited by the British. An invasion is a military offensive.
> ...


You clearly didn't read my post properly.European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was not an 'invasion', In fact, the British invited most of them, AND the British promised them a Jewish homeland. Also, an invasion is a military offensive. Unarmed Jews leaving Europe for obvious reasons to create a safe haven is not invading. 
Weather it was fair or not, is a completely different issue.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 11, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I never thought in a million years that I would ever seriously consider the use of nukes. Lately I've been noticing more and more that I could probably be talked into it.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. People born in Israel are Israelis, even if their parents or grand Parents are from Europe.
> ...


We understand your daily need to jerk yourself off to that thought, but this isn't the Israel Palestine forum, Achmed.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 11, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



Nukes will not be necessary if all Christians get truly united.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 12, 2015)

toastman said:


> But that's not Israel. So what if the Arab population there surpasses the Jewish population? What do you think they are going to do ? Gather at the Israeli border and try and overrun Israel ?? Common. You;re delirious



Population trends are not your friend, buddy.   Especially with young Israelis realizing that living next to people who want to kill you because your Magic Sky Fairy Said So is kind of stupid.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 12, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Nukes will not be necessary if all Christians get truly united.



Meh, guy, if we stopped fucking with them, we wouldn't have a problem with them. 

Make, sweet, sweet love to that hornet's nest.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 12, 2015)

toastman said:


> You clearly didn't read my post properly.European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was not an 'invasion', In fact, the British invited most of them, AND the British promised them a Jewish homeland. Also, an invasion is a military offensive. Unarmed Jews leaving Europe for obvious reasons to create a safe haven is not invading.
> Weather it was fair or not, is a completely different issue.



The Palestinians didn't invite them.  Ergo- INvasion.


----------



## toastman (Jan 12, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > But that's not Israel. So what if the Arab population there surpasses the Jewish population? What do you think they are going to do ? Gather at the Israeli border and try and overrun Israel ?? Common. You;re delirious
> ...


So far , the Jewish population has been increasing. Let me know when your bullshit fantasy comes true


----------



## toastman (Jan 12, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You clearly didn't read my post properly.European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was not an 'invasion', In fact, the British invited most of them, AND the British promised them a Jewish homeland. Also, an invasion is a military offensive. Unarmed Jews leaving Europe for obvious reasons to create a safe haven is not invading.
> ...


You can't make up your own vocabulary. Look up the word invasion yourself.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 12, 2015)

Roudy said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Only since I'm part of this progression of dialog....

I'm not at all convinced this is in fact a religious war.

What solutions, military or otherwise...that are not currently available...would appear if Christians were "truly united"

Are you talking about mobilizing Christian soldiers, marching as to war? as one might say?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 13, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > But that's not Israel. So what if the Arab population there surpasses the Jewish population? What do you think they are going to do ? Gather at the Israeli border and try and overrun Israel ?? Common. You;re delirious
> ...



 Keep dreaming Achmed, there are no population trends going on, other than a whole bunch of French Jews heading to Israel because of the IslamoNazi invasion of Europe.  And the latest terrorist attack by your Muslim brethren in France just caused more French Jews to head to Israel.  

True story.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 13, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Oh it's a religious war, whether you are convinced of it or not.  It began about about 35 years ago with the Islamic revolution of Iran and has continued until this day.  There are many in the West that keep shoving their heads in the sand, despite constant reminders.  That won't make the supremacist Jihadists cease and desist from creating Islamic terrorist Caliphates across the world.

I am not talking about a war at all.  Although a few military confrontations using extreme force might be necessary (because that is the only language Jihadists seem to respond to), most of what is needed can be done through legislation and identifying the enemy, it's nature, and how it multiplies.  As they say "drain the swamp" that creates this kind of mindset.. Muslims in the West must agree to coexist and accept the laws and culture of the countries they have immigrated to, or get the fuck out. That's exactly what the mayor of Rotterdam, a Muslim himself said:


----------



## Roudy (Jan 13, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You clearly didn't read my post properly.European Jews immigrating to mandatory Palestine was not an 'invasion', In fact, the British invited most of them, AND the British promised them a Jewish homeland. Also, an invasion is a military offensive. Unarmed Jews leaving Europe for obvious reasons to create a safe haven is not invading.
> ...


It was Ottoman territory for 700 years and then British.  The so called Palestinians didn't even exist then.  That means the Arabs had jack to say about what happens to ancient Israel.


----------



## oreo (Jan 13, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...





Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



When you find a Christan or Jew that cuts off someone's head or commits mass slaughter of innocents while screaming "glory to God" wake me up.


----------



## hipeter924 (Jan 14, 2015)

oreo said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Every historical period has its 'barbarians', the bronze age had the 'sea peoples', and today it is radical Muslims. They won't believe it is war between enlightenment thinking and Islam, until there is an Islamic flag on the White House, and public executions on the street. As Hitchens put it to Muslim apologist leftists, 'if you want to surrender don't do it in my name'.


----------



## Dante (Jan 14, 2015)

*



			Why is it always Muslims?
		
Click to expand...

*
*because it is not*


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

Dante said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's not Muslims only that kill journalists that create cartoons that insult their religion?


----------



## Claudette (Jan 14, 2015)

Why only Muslims??

Because they are murderous shitbags who have no problem killing anyone who they think insults their religion.

Religion at its worst.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Keep dreaming Achmed, there are no population trends going on, other than a whole bunch of French Jews heading to Israel because of the IslamoNazi invasion of Europe. And the latest terrorist attack by your Muslim brethren in France just caused more French Jews to head to Israel.



A week of emigration doesn't make up for long term population trends, dude.  A lot of young Israelis are moving back to Europe.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2015)

Claudette said:


> Why only Muslims??
> 
> Because they are murderous shitbags who have no problem killing anyone who they think insults their religion.
> 
> Religion at its worst.



And how are other beliefs in Sky Fairies better?


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


I'm surprised you think what you call a "religious war" started after the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and their revolution. Have you completely forgotten about Israel in 1947?

Which of Obama's few military confrontations using extreme force were inadequate to you? And exactly what else should he do. Please try to answer this with specifics. I know very well you have a problem with "leadership"...so I'm interested in EXACTLY what military confrontations he should do, that he hasn't already


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Keep dreaming Achmed, there are no population trends going on, other than a whole bunch of French Jews heading to Israel because of the IslamoNazi invasion of Europe. And the latest terrorist attack by your Muslim brethren in France just caused more French Jews to head to Israel.
> ...



You're fulla shit. Israelis aren't emigrating to Europe, why should they?  Europe is now overpopulated with terrorist worshiping Muslims like you, and as anti Islam sentiment spreads Europe is about to to explode into another religious civil war. 

 French migration to Israel has been occurring for over 15 years. When will you move to Syria to join your fellow ISIS brethren?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



Today's religious war was started with the Iranian revolution, and the establishment of the modern Islamic state ruled by Shiite clerics practicing pure Islam.  Iran then began spreading their supremacist version of Shiite Jihadism and Islamic terror throughout the region and the world.  The Sunni Muslims then countered the Shiite threat by creating their own version of pure Sunni Islamists via the Muslim brotherhood and Wahabbism, which gave rise to jihadists like Al Queda, Taliban, Hamas, etc. 

In essence, these Islamic terrorist groups want to establish their own Caliphates aka Iskamic states in the regions they are active, which are ruled by a Caliph aka Islamic terrorist leader such as Al Bagdadi of ISIS, or the leader of Al Queda in Yemen, or leader of Boko Haram in Africa, or Hamas in Gaza, etc.  In other words they want to go back to the 7th century, and are doing exactly what Muslims did to achieve those Caliphates.  

We have been in a religious war whether people like you accept it or like it.


----------



## Dante (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...


there are Orthodox Jews in Israel that would and have


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

Dante said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



Bullshit.


----------



## Dante (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


denial


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 14, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> > Why only Muslims??
> ...



Other beliefs are not routinely terrorizing the world in the name of their god and prophet.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

Dante said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Dante said:
> ...



To you that's a river in Egypt.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Fine...go ahead and call it what you like, it doesn't change what it is.

Now...Which of Obama's few military confrontations using extreme force were inadequate to you? And exactly what else should he do. Please try to answer this with specifics. I know very well you have a problem with "leadership"...so I'm interested in EXACTLY what military confrontations he should do, that he hasn't already


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



He's already fucked it up, and it can't be repaired, because he has no CREDIBILITY left internationally, and domestically.  When Obama drew a red line  for Syria and failed to act many times, when he refused to back the protesters in Iran, when he removed American troops too early from Iraq, leaving a vacuum which was filled by ISIS, when he virtually pushed Mubarek out of office to be replaced by radical Muslim Brotherhood, etc.  These are all examples of what led to where we are today.  

Look, the rise of modern Islamic fundamentalism, Jihadism and Muslim terrorism began with the Islamic revolution of Iran 1979.  That was the opening salvo.  It was Carter's weakness (another fuckup much like Obama,but probably not as bad) that caused a series of unfortunate events to occur  which was due to a perceived weakness in the White House by our enemies, triggering the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which led to Sunni Jihadism, which led to Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, and we are where we are today.  Therefore our enemies today preceive Obama much like they did back in the Carter days, an indecisive weak ideologue paper tiger.  Islamists are and have been in a religious war with the US and the West, whether or not you like it or admit it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Other beliefs are not routinely terrorizing the world in the name of their god and prophet.



Really, so When Bush said God told him to invade Iraq, and we inflicted a decade of death and misery on that country, you don't think that was terrorizing the world?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Other beliefs are not routinely terrorizing the world in the name of their god and prophet.
> ...



Leaders are not excluded from praying and speaking with God, especially the president of the US and the leader of the free world, who can order the world's deadliest military force at a snap of his finger.  But I doubt the Muslim born atheist we have in office ever prays or speaks to God at all.  

The invasion of Iraq was a national security issue, it had nothing to do with  Bush's religion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Leaders are not excluded from praying and speaking with God, especially the president of the US and the leader of the free world, who can order the world's deadliest military force at a snap of his finger. But I doubt the Muslim born atheist we have in office ever prays or speaks to God at all.
> 
> The invasion of Iraq was a national security issue, it had nothing to do with Bush's religion.



Nobody actually speaks to God because there is no God. 

Some people speak to voices in their heads, but we have medicines for that now.  It's probably a bad idea to let them make decisions to go to war.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 14, 2015)

To Defend Our Beloved Prophet Let Us Exemplify His True Ideals Say Imams - Muslim Council of Britain MCB


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Leaders are not excluded from praying and speaking with God, especially the president of the US and the leader of the free world, who can order the world's deadliest military force at a snap of his finger. But I doubt the Muslim born atheist we have in office ever prays or speaks to God at all.
> ...


Well you as a Muslim may now professes not to believe in a God. But majority of the world are believers in a supreme being or force.   And praying and talking with your own God, especially if the  person is a believer and his  work involves situations where he has to perform under extreme pressure and make life or death or death situations, would be expected.

Speaking of voices in your head, are you taking your meds now?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Well you as a Muslim may now professes not to believe in a God.



Uh, Guy, I was brought up Catholic and became an Atheist after a Nun said God had a reason for my mom to die of cancer.  



Roudy said:


> But majority of the world are believers in a supreme being or force.



That just means that the majority of people can't deal with their own mortality.  It does not prove Sky Pixies. 



Roudy said:


> And praying and talking with your own God, especially if the person is a believer and his work involves situations where he has to perform under extreme pressure and make life or death or death situations, would be expected.



I would prefer someone who actually evaluated facts and evidence, and not an imaginary sky man who lives in his head.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 14, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Well you as a Muslim may now professes not to believe in a God.
> ...



Actually I think atheists are the fools that deny the simple, logical, scientific fact that this universe that we are in had to come from something. Even Einstein eventually came around to admitting that. 

So you're a Catholic brought up to hate Jews.  What a fucking surprise. I bet you think more you hate those Christ killin' Jews, the more you increase your chance of going to heaven. 

Old habits are hard to let go.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Other beliefs are not routinely terrorizing the world in the name of their god and prophet.
> ...



So you think it was a religious war then ? I wish they had taken the time to explain that to our troops, whom I sincerely doubt realized they were fighting in the name of Jesus.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Leaders are not excluded from praying and speaking with God, especially the president of the US and the leader of the free world, who can order the world's deadliest military force at a snap of his finger. But I doubt the Muslim born atheist we have in office ever prays or speaks to God at all.
> ...



In your opinion, there is no god.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 15, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



No one was ever killed by the Christian Church for heresy or blasphemy?

Are you sure about that?


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jan 15, 2015)

lol, what if the Muslims are right?  What if their God is the one true God?  What if the most fundamentalist interpretations of the Koran are the correct ones?

Who's to say they couldn't be right?

Isn't this the great contradiction of religion in general?  That humans view religion as coming from a Higher Power, but then,

humans decide, based on human values, and sensitivities, and opinions of law and morality, what the Higher Power may or may not command his subjects to do,

man's law thus trumping God's law.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 15, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Actually I think atheists are the fools that deny the simple, logical, scientific fact that this universe that we are in had to come from something. Even Einstein eventually came around to admitting that.



Actually, Einstein died an atheist.   The universe is not evidence of a God.  But even if it were, the foolishiness that a God would create an entire fucking universe just so he could give a strip of desert to one band of assholes in the Middle East is kind of... stupid.  



Roudy said:


> So you're a Catholic brought up to hate Jews. What a fucking surprise. I bet you think more you hate those Christ killin' Jews, the more you increase your chance of going to heaven.



Uh, no, guy.  In fact, my Catholic education rarely talked about the Jews, other than they didn't think Jesus was God. (I don't think he was God, either.)  I don't hate Jews, even the ones I've worked for who gave me plenty of justification.  Now, you want to see hate, just get me started on the fucking Mormons.  

I just think that insisting on oppressing the Palestinians because your magic sky fairy said so and stirring up terrorism and war for decades that everyone else has to pay for is stupid, and the world should stop putting up with your bad behavior becuase they feel guilty about what Hitler did.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 15, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



so when God told Bush to go to war in Iraq, was he just punking the guy?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



regardless of what Bush dreamed up, do you think America went to war in the name of Jesus ? You think our troops believed the whole affair was about Christians versus Muslims ?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 15, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> regardless of what Bush dreamed up, do you think America went to war in the name of Jesus ? You think our troops believed the whole affair was about Christians versus Muslims ?



no more than I think that they went to war over "Mohammed'.  

All wars, at the end of the day, are fights over resources.  The only reason we care about the Middle East is that is where the world gets its oil.  

So I pay less attention to the crazy rhetoric and more to the real reasons wars are being fought.  

Or we could do the incredibly novel thing of getting ourselves off our Petroleum Addiction and stop empowering these clowns.  

Failing that, the next time the CIA comes into the President's office and says, "Hey, this Crazy Person over there is the guy we can really work with!", the President throws him out on his can.  

Since that is pretty much what the CIA told Reagan about Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in the 1980's.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 15, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



We are talking about modern times. I know you are dying to rehash the crusades as justification.  Funny part is the crusades would have never started had Muslims not invaded Christian a Europe and the Holy Land. 

Strike three and you're out.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > regardless of what Bush dreamed up, do you think America went to war in the name of Jesus ? You think our troops believed the whole affair was about Christians versus Muslims ?
> ...



Real reasons Muslims are at war with the West is to establish Islamic Caliphates all over the globe. That's what they are saying loud and clear. It's been the same reason for the last 1400 years: the world must submit to Islam or else.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 15, 2015)

NYcarbineer said:


> No one was ever killed by the Christian Church for heresy or blasphemy?




When?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 15, 2015)

Unkotare said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > No one was ever killed by the Christian Church for heresy or blasphemy?
> ...



be fair       it did happen-----about 400 years ago


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 15, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Okay, so do what with the Iranians greens?....stay in Iraq, and Afganistan?

A non specific, and two things that he didn't run on.

I don't agree, nor am I impressed.

But thanks for responding, sort of


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 15, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Real reasons Muslims are at war with the West is to establish Islamic Caliphates all over the globe. That's what they are saying loud and clear. It's been the same reason for the last 1400 years: the world must submit to Islam or else.



You know what, I work with some Muslims, and not a one of them every talked to me about a Caliphate.  

Imagine that.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Real reasons Muslims are at war with the West is to establish Islamic Caliphates all over the globe. That's what they are saying loud and clear. It's been the same reason for the last 1400 years: the world must submit to Islam or else.
> ...



depends on your relationship with them.    aspects of your personality and theirs and the kind of work you do.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 15, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...


Muslim born Atheist.....

You're just pretending to be rational, aren't you...


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 15, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> t
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> ...



We can't treat terrorism on a case by case basis.  There are 1.6 billion Muslims in this world.  Time will come to an end before we sort out the terrorists from the ones that don't want to kill anyone.  Your plan is a prescription for paralysis.  

Whether all Muslims are bad, there isn't a single credible reason for letting more of them immigrate to this country.  I don't really care if most of them don't want to kill me.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 15, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Your belief that your "rational" is amusing.  I think you have confused rationality with being a pompous ass.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 15, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, firing rockets, ineffective or not, at innocent civilians is a justification for killing you.
> ...


I'm not sure I follow that.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 16, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Many Muslims have become atheists after realizing what Islam and its followers have come to represent. Is this news to you?  I personally know three Muslims like that.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



You know, you have a point.  I also used to work with a Jehovah's Witness who just couldn't stop trying to push her religious bullshit on me.  

I told her I'd love to be a Jehovah's Witness, but I didn't see the accident.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Because you're stupid?  

Living in a place where the people who already live there are going to kill you because you stole their land is kind of stupid.   Doing it because a Magic Fairy In The Sky said so is even stupider.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jan 16, 2015)

Why is it always Muslims?

One need look no further than the content of Q'uran and Hadith and the manner in which they spread from Arabia like a cancer and the barbarism of their cultures.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 16, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Oh God...another righty who knows a few Muslims.

First, I don't believe you.

Second, righties always say they have this black friend who thinks the Democrats are trying to keep them down.

Or they have a gay friend who is against gay marriage

Or a Muslim who hates Islam

Yeah....sure ya do.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Why is it always Muslims?
> 
> One need look no further than the content of Q'uran and Hadith and the manner in which they spread from Arabia like a cancer and the barbarism of their cultures.



Again, Christianity has been responsible for Imperialism, the Native genocides of the Americas and Australia, and two world wars... if anyone is bothering to keep score. 

"Gott Mitt Uns!"


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it always Muslims?
> ...



And once again all's you can do is point to past atrocities that no one currently living is connected to.
This isn't about "keeping score", it's about WHERE the threat of terrorist acts is coming from TODAY, and TODAY the threat is coming from the members of ONE religion. I-S-L-A-M  !!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Actually, the threat is that we keep arming them, getting in the middle of their politics and wondering why we get stung when we stick our dicks in their hornet's nest.  

And even then, we've killed more of them than they've killed of us.


----------



## Indofred (Jan 16, 2015)




----------



## Indofred (Jan 16, 2015)

Charlie Hebdo Founder Blames Editor for Attack - Global Agenda - News - Arutz Sheva



> Less than a week after the massacre at its Paris headquarters, a founding member of the satirical magazine _Charlie Hebdo _accused the paper's slain editor of provoking the attack and dragging his staff down with him.


----------



## August West (Jan 16, 2015)

The reality is that Muslims are being killed more often than westerners....they`re being killed by fake muslims.
Pakistan attack reveals the truth about terrorism it kills more poor Muslims than rich westerners Ben Doherty Comment is free The Guardian


----------



## Indofred (Jan 16, 2015)

August West said:


> The reality is that Muslims are being killed more often than westerners....they`re being killed by fake muslims.
> Pakistan attack reveals the truth about terrorism it kills more poor Muslims than rich westerners Ben Doherty Comment is free The Guardian



That's only when American terrorist drone strikes aren't murdering wedding guests.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



In other words, the Jews should just get the hell out.  Hey, perhaps the Mexicans should just stay the hell where they are instead of coming here, eh?  Apparently you believe we are justified in killing them all.  Isn't that what you just said?

BTW, the Jews didn't steal anyone's land.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



Yeah, and you claim to be a Republican!


----------



## August West (Jan 16, 2015)

Indofred said:


> August West said:
> 
> 
> > The reality is that Muslims are being killed more often than westerners....they`re being killed by fake muslims.
> ...


How do you think we should be dealing with these people? I think the use of drones is a far better idea than invading some random country just for sport but I`ll listen to your ideas.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 16, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Tell it to the FLDS.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



He's never been a Republican, in fact based on his posts he's one of the most far left members of this board.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



I think he claimed to be an Eisenhower Republican, but perhaps my memory is faulty.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jan 16, 2015)

Roudy said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.
> ...




exactly


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Yes he did. Just to show what a crock that is, there is NO ONE on the board who is more ant-gun than Joe. He makes no bones about that he believes civilians should not be allowed to own firearms at all.
The funny thing is, Eisenhower was an NRA member.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it always Muslims?
> ...


Doesn't matter.

That's old shit.

We're talking about the here-and-now.


----------



## hipeter924 (Jan 16, 2015)

Indofred said:


> Charlie Hebdo Founder Blames Editor for Attack - Global Agenda - News - Arutz Sheva
> 
> 
> 
> > Less than a week after the massacre at its Paris headquarters, a founding member of the satirical magazine _Charlie Hebdo _accused the paper's slain editor of provoking the attack and dragging his staff down with him.


What an asshole, then you always have people that go to the media to make a cheap point and get 'fame' by slighting someone.


----------



## Indofred (Jan 16, 2015)

hipeter924 said:


> get 'fame' by slighting someone.



I'm trying to think who else did that - ah, the twit that got his staff killed.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

Indofred said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > get 'fame' by slighting someone.
> ...



You're obviously a despicable muzzie piece of shit.


----------



## hipeter924 (Jan 16, 2015)

Indofred said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > get 'fame' by slighting someone.
> ...


If you think keeping silent, rather than stirring the pot increases chances of living, you are wrong there.

Everything westerners do offends Islamic terrorists:
1) Women not being fully covered
2) Music
3) Alcohol
4) Watching porn 
5) Females getting educated
6) Depictions of Mohammad
7) Books about Mohammad
8) Cartoons about Mohammad 
9) Following western culture or values
10) People not being the 'right Muslim' or not being Muslim at all
Doing anything on this list warrants death in the eyes of Islamic terrorists/extremists, the cartoonists could have cowered in fear or just gone on with their lives - they did the later.

 When all is said and done, you are talking about three 'Muslims' out of 5 million, who were twisted in the head.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

hipeter924 said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > hipeter924 said:
> ...



A large percentage of the 5 million approved of what they did.  And even larger percentage don't have a problem with it.


----------



## JFK_USA (Jan 16, 2015)

Were Muslims behind the Norway attacks? Nope fundamentalist right-wing Christian was.

OKC bombing? Nope.

Atlanta Olympic bombings? Nope.

Milwaukee Sikh temple terrorist attack? Nope.

So again how is it "Always Muslims?"


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 16, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...


God...just give you old geezer dillweeds a few minutes to talk, and you completely forget what I was even saying.

My point was that Obama has never said he's an Atheist, and he goes to church.

Furthermore...I never said I was a Republican, I said I was an Eisenhower Conservative.

Moreover, which bears no resemblence to Tae Party or Fox News Republicans these days.

It's you bible thumping, militia, Tea Party, bigoted old limp dick white boys that have nothing to do with moderate Republicans.

The spectrum changed, just like how KKK Democrats are all in the Republican Party now.

Go back to your afternoon naps on social security/medicare welfare.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> In other words, the Jews should just get the hell out. Hey, perhaps the Mexicans should just stay the hell where they are instead of coming here, eh? Apparently you believe we are justified in killing them all. Isn't that what you just said?
> 
> BTW, the Jews didn't steal anyone's land.



i would say if Mexicans ever tried to pull what Israelis are pulling, you'd be the first one out there trying to kill them.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > In other words, the Jews should just get the hell out. Hey, perhaps the Mexicans should just stay the hell where they are instead of coming here, eh? Apparently you believe we are justified in killing them all. Isn't that what you just said?
> ...



What is it you think the Israelis are "pulling,"  defending themselves against bloodthirsty savages?


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > In other words, the Jews should just get the hell out. Hey, perhaps the Mexicans should just stay the hell where they are instead of coming here, eh? Apparently you believe we are justified in killing them all. Isn't that what you just said?
> ...


Bripat wants everyone who isn't a white Christian Fox News watcher who votes Republican to die.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



"Eisenhower conservative/Eisenhower Republican" - what difference does it make?  the reality is that you're a lying lib/commie/fascist trying to pose as someone who believes in capitalism and freedom.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...




ROFL!   You're just a non-stop liar, aren't you?  You and your sidekick want the Arabs to commit genocide against the Jews.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> What is it you think the Israelis are "pulling," defending themselves against bloodthirsty savages?



You mean other than stealing other people's land. 

Again, if Mexicans decided that they were going to set up their own country in California and declare whites as second class citizens, you'd be the first one joining the ALO (Anglo-Liberation Organization)


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > What is it you think the Israelis are "pulling," defending themselves against bloodthirsty savages?
> ...



Whose land did they steal?  By that I mean, name one person with legal title to some land that had it taken by the Israeli government.


----------



## Indofred (Jan 16, 2015)

hipeter924 said:


> Everything westerners do offends Islamic terrorists:
> 1) Women not being fully covered
> 2) Music
> 5) Females getting educated



That's odd.
In Indonesia, the country with more Muslims than any other, we have a national Hero called, Kartini.
She championed girls' education.
There is a national holiday and special events in schools,where people party and sing.

I've been here well over 7 years, but I don't think I've seen more than about 50 fully covered women.

Perhaps you'd like to revise your bullshit.


----------



## hipeter924 (Jan 16, 2015)

Indofred said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > Everything westerners do offends Islamic terrorists:
> ...


Perhaps you should learn to read. 

I said radical/extremists and terrorists, not all Muslims. Unless you actually believe that all Muslims are terrorists and extremists/radicals, in which case you are very silly to say the least.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Eisenhower would have never been in favor of the Tea Party's attack on the social safety net.

The GOP would never allow a current Republican to say something like this,  “We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.”

Republicans wanted Eisenhower to repeal the New Deal when he was elected; instead he expanded programs like Social Security. They also wanted him to support Senator Joseph McCarthy, but he recognized his type of intellectual filth, and denied McCarthy the authority to subpoena federal witnesses and receive classified documents.

He once was talking about Republicans who were  NOT moderate like him. You call these people RINO's these days...he said:  "There is a certain reactionary fringe of the Republican Party, which hates everything for which I stand, their number is negligible, and they are stupid"

Ike raised the minimum wage, created a stimulus program, extended unemployment, and opposed Vietnam.

I could go on, but I forget I'm talking to Bripat...and I've probably used too many big words already


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 16, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



Eisenhower wasn't a conservative.  He was a liberal.  The phrase Eisenhower conservative is an oxymoron.



toxicmedia said:


> The GOP would never allow a current Republican to say something like this,  “We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.”



That's right.   That's because most of them are actual conservatives, not liberals posing as conservatives.  Of course, if Kennedy was running for office today, people like you would be calling him a right-wing reactionary.



toxicmedia said:


> Republicans wanted Eisenhower to repeal the New Deal when he was elected; instead he expanded programs like Social Security.



Yep, that's what happens when you elect a liberal Republican and expect him to implement conservative policies:  you get stabbed in the back.  Same thing is going on now with Boehner and McConnel.



toxicmedia said:


> They also wanted him to support Senator Joseph McCarthy, but he recognized his type of intellectual filth, and denied McCarthy the authority to subpoena federal witnesses and receive classified documents.



What he failed to recognize is that he was a useful idiot just like all the libs who made war on McCarthy and the American people.



toxicmedia said:


> He once was talking about Republicans who were  NOT moderate like him. You call these people RINO's these days...he said:  "There is a certain reactionary fringe of the Republican Party, which hates everything for which I stand, their number is negligible, and they are stupid"



they aren't a fringe.  They're the Republican base.  RINO's like Eisenhower are the fringe.



toxicmedia said:


> Ike raised the minimum wage, created a stimulus program, extended unemployment, and opposed Vietnam.



All you're doing is proving that neither you nor Eisenhower are conservatives.  You are liberals.  You swallow the entire liberal program.  You can name one issue where you take the conservative stance?



toxicmedia said:


> I could go on, but I forget I'm talking to Bripat...and I've probably used too many big words already



Yeah, I'm sure you can spew your babble forever.  Before you accuse me of not understanding the meaning of words, try looking up the word "conservative."  I'm certain you will be offended by it.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 16, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Glad I've educated you about how Eisenhower, and for that matter, Goldwater, Nixon, and Reagan would not fit into the mess of racist evangelical southern segregationists that now make up the Republicans party.

You're not a Conservative....you're a Fox News/Tea Party Republican.

That is something new, not something that compares to the founding fathers like you'd like to think


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



The accusation of racism proves you are nothing but a lib/commie/fascist.  That's their modus operandi.  I, on the other hand, have never claimed to be a conservative.  I'm an anarcho-capitalist - something totally beyond your understanding.  

Those of us on the right really don't give a hoot how you choose to characterize us.  You're the enemy.  You're not on our side.  Your intention is to promote tyranny, not freedom.  I don't know who you think you're fooling by calling yourself a "Eisenhower conservative."  Certainly not anyone in this forum.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> The accusation of racism proves you are nothing but a lib/commie/fascist. That's their modus operandi. I, on the other hand, have never claimed to be a conservative. I'm an anarcho-capitalist - something totally beyond your understanding.



Actually, you're just an angry little man who is upset that the rich have taken away your decent lifestyle, and you are looking for the wrong people to blame.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 17, 2015)

If an anti-abortion activist bombs an abortion clinic and waves a Bible in the air at trial, does he rreflect on all of Christianity? If not, why do violent mentally ill people waving Qur'ans reflect on all of Islam?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> If an anti-abortion activist bombs an abortion clinic and waves a Bible in the air at trial, does he rreflect on all of Christianity? If not, why do violent mentally ill people waving Qur'ans reflect on all of Islam?



Your comparison is totally false.

Why do you guys have such a big problem accepting the fact that Islamic Jihadi terrorism is a global epidemic that is threatening the entire civilized world?  Does a  Muslim Jihadi nutjob have to kill some people closer to home for you to understand?


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > If an anti-abortion activist bombs an abortion clinic and waves a Bible in the air at trial, does he rreflect on all of Christianity? If not, why do violent mentally ill people waving Qur'ans reflect on all of Islam?
> ...



Reasons people commit murder and other atrocities never interested me as much as the actual act and crimes. Whether in the name of religion, a cult leader, a government, or anything else doesn't alter the fact that someone murdered someone else. The only reason I cans ee people make hay out of the 'why' of it all is they themselves wanna justify murder for their own cause while condemning others doing the exact same thing for their's.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

according to the  DSM I     DSM II      DSM  III  
  DSM  IV    and   DSM   V ----adherence to a standard
  creed is not mental illness.    Muslim men who slit
  the throats of infants whilst yelling   "allahuakbarrrr"
  and sluts who tie bombs to their whorish asses  and
  then shriek   "allahuakbarrrr" whilst murdering children
  are NOT MENTALLY ILL------they are normals carrying
  out the precepts of their religion.    Christian men who
  shoot abortionists are not carrying out the precepts
  of Christianity.    Jesus said  "go and sin no more"----
  Therefore those shooters can be mentally ill


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



Interesting perspective,   Delta.    Let me know when
a Buddhist couple in love-----decide to attack a HALAL
grocery store for the purpose of killing people in the act
of buying apples and onions of even  MEAT-----in honor
of  BUDDHA   (peace upon him)


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Buddhists interestingly have their terrorists too. Afaik they don't have a beef (hehe) with Jews though.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



So what you're saying is you wouldnt care if during the 1930's Germans were invading and slaughtering people in the name of supremacist Nazi ideology, therefore you also don't care why Jihadi Muslims are slaughtering, raping, and terorising in the name of their supremacist idelogy?  Doesn't sound like a mature opinion.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



But Buddhism isn't a threat to modern civilization and Western values, and Islamism is.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



If Islam was a threat to anyone else, with 1.5bn of them we'd have heard about it by now.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



Buddhists in sri lanka are an upper class as compared to
somewhat economically oppressed   TAMILS  (hindus)---
The two groups do face off violently----but I have yet to
hear of Buddhist attacks on women and children in the
market place or Buddhist chicks with bombs on their
asses motivated to murder children for  BUDDHA
(pbuh)


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



you haven't heard?      talk to anyone who has survived
a shariah shit hole


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Delta4Embassy said:
> ...



If ya haven't heard about it it's because you're willfully ignorant about it. Hit no. 2 on google:

Extremist Buddhist Monks Target Religious Minorities TIME.com

"The fault lines of conflict are often spiritual, one religion chafing against another and kindling bloodletting contrary to the values girding each faith. Over the past year in parts of Asia, it is friction between Buddhism and Islam that has killed hundreds, mostly Muslims. The violence is being fanned by extremist Buddhist monks, who preach a dangerous form of religious chauvinism to their followers."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Your comparison is totally false.
> 
> Why do you guys have such a big problem accepting the fact that Islamic Jihadi terrorism is a global epidemic that is threatening the entire civilized world? Does a Muslim Jihadi nutjob have to kill some people closer to home for you to understand?



I guess I have a big problem with it because we've killed far more of them than they've killed of us. We killed 100,000 Iraqis in the first Gulf War, maybe half a million in the sanctions that followed.  The Zionists have slaughtered hundreds of thousands.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 17, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> That's because Japan severely restricts Islamic activity inside their country, and do not grant citizenship to Muslims. They have it right.



Japan s Muslims dismayed by latest Charlie cover but united against violence The Japan Times


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Delta4Embassy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



try again    Delta-dawn      your article cites NO TERRORISM----it cites face offs between battling communities.       The only issue it red flags is that
Buddhists are no longer expressing their feelings by simply starving themselves or by self immolation------thanks anyway


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Your comparison is totally false.
> ...



in the entire history of Judaism-----jews have not killed  "HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS"   of anyone-----
muslims have murdered in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS--
in  their short  1400 year history.    Just in the past 100 years ------at least   20 million in genocides------not wars---GENOCIDES


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



If you add up all the slaughters aka Jihads conducted in a period of 400 years, it ads up to 280 million.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Is that the past 400 years?      seems about right to me-----
quite a record-------certainly beats the Zionist tally by
orders of magnitude


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Horseshit.

The genocide in Palestine is something that the Zionists will be condemned for.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Funny how you feel you actualy have the authority to speak for "the right", or everyone else on this forum. Not having the confidence in your opinons on their own, is a shining display of inadequacy.

This delusional self description "anarcho-capitalist"..tsk tsk tsk...that is simply code for an anti social Republican guy with a presecution complex. And I just remembered...you're the guy that will never see a doctor, and you'll pay for it out of pocket even if you rack up a $200,000 bill at the ER.

This is not "your" country, it's our country, and if my side votes in greater numbers, the people we elect get to implement their policies. Go to another country if you want to isolate yourself economically. I suggest an underdeveloped country, where your imeasurable wealth can go into a private security force, and a walled compound.

You're not free, you're a prisoner of your own anti social resentments


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



what genocide ,   horseshit???


----------



## indiajo (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> [
> 
> Horseshit.
> 
> The genocide in Palestine is something that the Zionists will be condemned for.



Nice Genocide.
The so called Palestinians multiplied from originally a few hundred thousand in the 1950's to now roundabout 4 Million in Gaza and West Jordan, plus about 1 Million in Israel itself.

As far as I learned in school a Genozide means wiping out of a population.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Genocide!  Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Gawd why is it always the illterate morons that become Pali Nazi supporters?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

indiajo said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



yes---according to accepted definitions of genocide---the jews of  Iraq,  Libya,  Iran,  Syria,  Lebanon,  yemen, morocco, Algeria, Tunisia   have all been subjected to genocide in the
20th century-----the arabs of Israel have not been so subjected.    It looks like the jews of france are headed down the same road


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> yes---according to accepted definitions of genocide---the jews of Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, yemen, morocco, Algeria, Tunisia have all been subjected to genocide in the
> 20th century-----the arabs of Israel have not been so subjected. It looks like the jews of france are headed down the same road



There are 4 million Palestinians who live outside of Palestine becaue the Zionists drove them out.  

Yes, according the the accepted definition of genocide, that's what the Zionists are doing, and that is why Israel is the most hated nation on the planet.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...


I'm not in the least anti-semitic, or anti Israeli...in fact, quite the opposite.

But last night my roomate put on this documentary about the USS Liberty during the 6 Day War...and it offered some very disturbing assertions, including junk on Israel, LBJ, and others

Sorry, off topic


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > yes---according to accepted definitions of genocide---the jews of Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, yemen, morocco, Algeria, Tunisia have all been subjected to genocide in the
> ...



Actually the left of their own accord because Syria and Egypt told them they would wipe out the Jews for them and they should just get out of the way.



JoeB131 said:


> Yes, according the the accepted definition of genocide, that's what the Zionists are doing, and that is why Israel is the most hated nation on the planet.



They aren't doing anything of the sort.  Only anti-semites hate the Jews.  Thanks for identifying yourself.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



It's obvious you're an anti-Semite.  You spout the same manure that every other anti-Semite I've ever encountered spews.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)




----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


If I'm an anti semite.....why don't I dislike Jews, or criticize them for being Jewish?

I thought that's what anti semitism was all about.

You dream up a new definition for it?


----------



## suplex3000 (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


>



Good picture 
The most interesting thing that the US supported radical Islam for 3 decades. We sponsored and used them to fight against the Soviet influence in Afghanistan and the Central Asia in 80's then we used them to fight against Iranian liberal government. 
And don't you think that it's just a little bit strange that our best ally in the Middle East is Saudi Arabia professing wahhabism (the most radical and fundamental branch of Islam)?


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)

suplex3000 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


The US never aided radical islamists to fight Iran. The US backed the secular Shah until Carter abandoned him and let Islamic Revolution take place where Ayatollah Khomeini took power. 

I know you are trying to make the point that America is evil and responsible for radical Islam, but you are wrong. I disagree for example with Obama's policy to aid islamist rebels through Turkey and Saudi Arabia against Assad, but to suggest that the US created radical Islam is absurd.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...





suplex3000 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Saudi Arabia is a complex situation-----in fact something like
the Taliban------they do fight the enemies of decency  like Isis-----but support the filth of Islamism-----the USA should  BEWARE


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> suplex3000 said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...


I'm forced to agree. The US didn't create redical Islamic extremism.

It has been complicated by a few things the US has been involved in...like the creation of Israel, US support for the Shah, and our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan

But IMO....the whole thing is just what happens when a devoutly religious region gets an unreasonable cash influx over just a few generations. It creates all manner of screwed up behavior from people who used to be isolated


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > suplex3000 said:
> ...


Fair enough. Don't disagree, I think intervention plays into segments of the Islamic world disliking us.

However, I don't think for radical terrorist groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS or Hamas it really plays in. It would be naive an counter productive to suggest there would be less acts of islamist violence and terror if we were to just pull out of the region all together. While I agree with a more non-interventionist foreign policy, I think the best way to fight radical islam is by controlling immigration, securing the border, intelligence gathering, and other internal security methods.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...



I almost agree-----but I do believe that the USA has an obligation to try to salvage victims----like the Christians of
Iraq and Syria and Jordan-----and ---possibly the kurds


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...


We should have never gone to Iraq in the first place. But once we were there, just pulling out was irresponsible. Also indirectly aiding islamist rebels against Assad was adding fuel to the fire. If we were going to be aiding any side in the Syrian Civil war, it should be the side of the Syrian Government, which is secular and protecting christian and shia minority populations against sunni islamist chauvinism.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...




BULLSHIT------assad is a Baathist pig------and even worse---an ally of Iran-----Baathism is Islamic Nazism.   ----its list of
adherents include  PIG GAMAL NASSER,   AL HUSSEINI----
---boyfriend of adolf hitler,   SADAAM HUSSEIN and MURDERER PAPA ASSAD.     For information on the assad's protection of Christians----speak to a Christian Syria----or----a Coptic Christian or a Chaldean Christian.     BAATHISM is as secular as was Nazism ----(also secular and out for peace and justice for all)


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...


What I wouldlike to know, and we never will without a control group...is how much Islamic extremism aimed at the west, would exist today, if Israel wasn't created, the Shah not supported by the US, and Iraq/Afghanistan weren't invaded.

Without those...one would have to believe that middle eastern Islamic extremists have seized on the 21st century to end Christianity.

But there are many more less defended Christian nations closer to the middle east than the US.

Hmmm.....why us?


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...


I thought the Baathists and Iran hated each other...is Asaad just in cahoots with them both? or is he an Iranian Baathist?


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...


Agreed on the Iraq thing, unfortunatly......it's another variation on the concept "you broke it, you bought it"


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



We did not break it -----it was already broken long ago-----


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> It's obvious you're an anti-Semite. You spout the same manure that every other anti-Semite I've ever encountered spews.



When the Zionist gets caught being a murderous asshole, scream "anti-Semite" (Forgetting the Palestinians are Semitic as well).   

And if you can keep playing the Hitler card, do that. 


"But...but... but... Hitler." 

When you stand in the blood of dead children.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > It's obvious you're an anti-Semite. You spout the same manure that every other anti-Semite I've ever encountered spews.
> ...


Fuck Palestine, if you love them so much move there.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 17, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Fuck Palestine, if you love them so much move there.



Fuck Israel.  If you love them so much, move there.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 17, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Fuck Palestine, if you love them so much move there.
> ...



Fuck Israel and Palestine. Both can blow each other off the map for all I care and the world will be better off without them. 

These fifth column yids and kebabs and their enablers on both sides have no place in Western Civilization.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 17, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...


Really?

More people died during our invasion and occupation than they did under Saddam Hussein.

Now ISIS controls half of it.

It's even more broken now, and I'm very disappointed that there are people like you who seem to deny our good intentions have led to that


----------



## Roudy (Jan 17, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Yeah right, the only chanels that are broadcasting that anti semetic pile of manure about the liberty are either RT Russian news propoganda or Al Jazeera Arab News propoganda.  

Ha ha ha. You guys are so transparent.


----------



## rdean (Jan 17, 2015)

*Why is it always Muslims?*

*It isn't.*






Timothy McVeigh was a registered republican, a member of the NRA and voted Libertarian.


----------



## armada (Jan 18, 2015)

Pakistan is main factory where extremist Muslims are being prepared and exporting all over the world... i saw them in Madrasas


if you want tragedies like this not happen again then you have to clean Pakistan


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 18, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



"More people died during our invasion and occupation than they did under Saddam Hussein."

That's horseshit, like most of the claims you post.


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 18, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


It was Al Jazeera.

And whats this crap about being so transparent? Did I make some previous statement swearing I'd never watch Al Jazeera? No.

And did I not say clearly enough "I'm not in the least anti-semitic, or anti Israeli...in fact, quite the opposite"

Did you think I said I believed what I saw in that documentary? I only stated they were disturbing assertions. You do know what an assertion is, right?

Furthermore...the narration of the documentary didn't concern me, it was the interviews with the crew of the USS Liberty. I had never even heard of the incident before.

Moreover...sounds like you'll not watch Al Jazeera, and that's your choice, but that does not make it wrong for me to watch it, and make up my own mind.

Lastly...for you...what a great way to hear all opinions you have. Don't listen to anything but Fox News, and tell everyone else they shouldn't hear opposition. I watch Fox News myself just to hear what the other side is saying, even though IT is white Christian political propaganda. I no more unconditionally accept what Fox says, than I do MSNBC or Al Jazeera.

Oh yeah, once more with feeling "I'm not in the least anti-semitic, or anti Israeli...in fact, quite the opposite."


----------



## toxicmedia (Jan 18, 2015)

bripat9643 said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...


I'm talking about a combination of civilian and armed combatant deaths, on both sides, in Iraq between 1970-2010


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 18, 2015)

armada said:


> Pakistan is main factory where extremist Muslims are being prepared and exporting all over the world... i saw them in Madrasas
> if you want tragedies like this not happen again then you have to clean Pakistan



Pakistanis now know it is up to them to clean their house. Tragically, many families can't afford to care for their kids so they dump them at the madrasses, some of which are funded by wealthy Wahabi (Salafist) Saudis who espouse literal, strict, puritanical approaches to Islam and turn Pakistani kids into terrorists to be used against those they deem to be enemies of Islam.


----------



## armada (Jan 18, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> armada said:
> 
> 
> > Pakistan is main factory where extremist Muslims are being prepared and exporting all over the world... i saw them in Madrasas
> ...


that's true those Madrasas are being funded by middle eastern countries...


----------



## Roudy (Jan 18, 2015)

toxicmedia said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > toxicmedia said:
> ...



That documentary you banked everything on,  which you didn't want to mention initially was all false propoganda and crap.

Just because I don't watch Al Jazeera, doesn't mean I only watch Fox News.  Personally I watch more CNN than Fox. And PMSNBC for laughs.  Yet none of those channels ever broadcasted that Liberty propoganda piece.  

But like I said, very transparent to make it sound like that garbage coming out of Al Jazeera had an ounce of credibility.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 18, 2015)

Roudy said:


> toxicmedia said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




FOX news is supposed to be an insult-------like it used to be an insult to say about a person who makes a statement
about science or politics   "where did you get that ---reader's digest"        I never watch fox news-------I just don't seem to
be at the right place at the right time-------I get CNN and BBC----but there is always someone around to DECLARE---that I am a fox news girl


----------



## Roudy (Jan 19, 2015)

rdean said:


> *Why is it always Muslims?*
> 
> *It isn't.*
> 
> ...



Plenty of left wing assholes going nuts as well.  

Keep using that Timothy Mc Veigh false comparison, desperado. 

Been keeping up with the news lately?


----------



## elektra (Jan 19, 2015)

Has anyone said this yet?

*Cause its Allah's will.*


----------



## MaxGrit (Jan 19, 2015)




----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 19, 2015)

Guy, you need to read up on the Fourth crusade some time.  

That was the hilarious hijinks where the Crusaders never got to the Holy Land, because they were too busy looting Constantinople and weakening the Byzantine Empire.  By the time they were done, the Byzantines were shattered and it was no problem for the Ottomans to mop them up and invade the Balkans, where they were until well into the 19th century.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 19, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Guy, you need to read up on the Fourth crusade some time.
> 
> That was the hilarious hijinks where the Crusaders never got to the Holy Land, because they were too busy looting Constantinople and weakening the Byzantine Empire.  By the time they were done, the Byzantines were shattered and it was no problem for the Ottomans to mop them up and invade the Balkans, where they were until well into the 19th century.



Guy, you need to read up on who attacked and invaded who first. It was the MUSLIMS. And the the Christians responded to remove them via the Crusades.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 19, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy, you need to read up on the Fourth crusade some time.
> ...



Guy, given what dicks the Byzantines were, the Muslims were welcomed with open arms when they got to Palestine.


----------



## indiajo (Jan 19, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> [
> 
> There are 4 million Palestinians who live outside of Palestine becaue the Zionists drove them out.
> 
> Yes, according the the accepted definition of genocide, that's what the Zionists are doing, and that is why Israel is the most hated nation on the planet.



No, they didn't. 
I do not think that positive about Jews in general or Israel, and I don't have a reverse Stockholm syndrome as a German in this behalf.
But the truth must stay the truth.

1. there were only a few 100.000 Palestinians when Israel was founded.
2. They were not Palestinians but various Arab dwellers, the term Palestinian was created by Arafat.
3. Only a few were driven out of Israel, during the first war directly after the declaration of Israel  that was started by the surrounding Arab nations, Syria, Jordan and Egypt.
The majority who fled the country did this because of the lies which were spread by the above mentioned countries about atrocities the jews would commit on Palestinians.
Nothing of that had happened, there was only one incident with a few dozen victims during a fight over a village.
4. Jews had not stolen any land from palestinians, they had bought it. Or they took idle land that belonged to nobody except the british protectorate that was in place that time. as you may know if you ever learned history there never was a palestinian state. before that it was part of the Osman Empire, or call it Turkey.
5. Actually the plan, after the British could not prevent the Jewish state (actually because YOUR government had their fingers in it) was to make Jordan the palestinian state. Jordan was the first defeatet in this war, and most of the "Palestians" went there. (Reason above)
This was not in favour of the Beduin tribe of the Hashemites living there, and on the black September 1971 the civil war cumulated, and THEY drove the Palestinians out of Jordan.
6. Today live arounf three timrs more "Palestinians" in Israel as in the 1940's, and what the rest was doing since then everybody without blinds knows.

So, Where th fuck is your genocide committed  by Israel?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 19, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



not exactly----hordes of scimitar swinging arabs TOOK OVER


----------



## Liminal (Jan 19, 2015)

A war with Muslims, funny.   How do win a war against an idea?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 19, 2015)

Liminal said:


> A war with Muslims, funny.   How do win a war against an idea?



its been done many times in the past------in fact,  muslims did it.
They warred with   Zoroastrianism,  Judaism,  Christianity and---
pre Islamic  "paganism"--------that's why there are only muslims
in Arabia.    Pol Pot warred against captialism


----------



## theHawk (Jan 19, 2015)

Muslims have been raping, enslaving, and murdering for 1400 years.
Very early on they took North Africa and began piracy in the Mediterranean, looting ships, capturing Europeans for ransom and slavery.  They did this all the way up until the early 19th century.  It really wasn't until America stood up against the muslim pirates in the first Barbary War.  The US put them in their place and got a treaty to stop the practice of "tribute".  Unfortunately shorty after the US had to deal with the Brits again in 1812, so the Muslim horde went right back to pirating the Mediterranean again.  Then in 1815 they US Navy went back in force and obliterated the Muslims again.  Afterward Europeans stopped fighting each other which lead to European powers dominating the Mediterranean making it peaceful and safe.  This finally put an end to Islamic dominance in the Mediterranean.

Now we have liberal immigration policy that has been allowing these Muslims right back into the countries they fought for centuries to get into.
Islam has always been and still is an ideology of enslavement and murder.  Yet here the progressives still defend it.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 19, 2015)

Muslims idealize their past----EXTRVAGANTLY---their past as noted was based on ----attack, conquest, oppression and most
delightful of all for muslims   TRIBUTE


----------



## Roudy (Jan 19, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Ya right, I already posted that the first crusade were started to free Christian lands from the Muslim invaders. remove your head from Uranus and face the music, Achmed.


----------



## Liminal (Jan 19, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > A war with Muslims, funny.   How do win a war against an idea?
> ...



Got any examples from any time in the past thousand years or so?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 19, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Ya right, I already posted that the first crusade were started to free Christian lands from the Muslim invaders. remove your head from Uranus and face the music, Achmed.



No, the first crusade was started because Urban II wanted to do something really cool so people would recognize he was Pope instead of the other guy.  

it mostly attracted the second sons of nobles with no prospects, none of the kings of Europe got involved.  It was actually kind of a clusterfuck that only worked because the Muslim world was equally in disarray at that point.


----------



## Liminal (Jan 19, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Sounds familiar, sort of like when we were told invading Iraq was about spreading democracy.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jan 19, 2015)

JFK_USA said:


> Were Muslims behind the Norway attacks? Nope fundamentalist right-wing Christian was.
> 
> OKC bombing? Nope.
> 
> ...


Whoops...

You're right...

It's not _always_ Muslims...

Just Muslims, 99 times out of 100...

There, all fixed...


----------



## Roudy (Jan 19, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Ya right, I already posted that the first crusade were started to free Christian lands from the Muslim invaders. remove your head from Uranus and face the music, Achmed.
> ...



Yeah, that's what it was, the Pope wanted to do something "cool". 

Ha ha ha


----------



## Roudy (Jan 19, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Are you telling us minimal-brain, that historians got it all wrong? That Muslims didn't invade and occupy Christian Europe and the Holyland first, causing Christians to take up arms to purge them from their lands?

Look, like I told the other idiot Achmed Joe Blow, if you guys want divert the conversation to talk about the Crusades, just open another thread and I'll post my evidence, and we'll stack it up against yours and take it from there.

But how all of that is relevant as to why Muslims are the only ones that go around murdering people who draw cartoons about their prophet, or say anything negative about Islam...I see that as a lame, pathetic, attempt by you terrorist asskissers.


----------



## Liminal (Jan 19, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Some people are sold on the advertisement I guess.  They can satisfy themselves with cartoon versions of history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Are you telling us minimal-brain, that historians got it all wrong? That Muslims didn't invade and occupy Christian Europe and the Holyland first, causing Christians to take up arms to purge them from their lands?



well, y eah, except that all happened 300 years before the crusades. It's like saying i did somethign because I was really upset about the Salem Witch Trials. 



Roudy said:


> Look, like I told the other idiot Achmed Joe Blow, if you guys want divert the conversation to talk about the Crusades, just open another thread and I'll post my evidence, and we'll stack it up against yours and take it from there.



I know you want to avoid the fact that Christians can be just as bloodthirsty as Muslims, as can Atheists.  And the only reason Jews haven't racked up a death toll is there's never been enough of you to rack up one. 



Roudy said:


> But how all of that is relevant as to why Muslims are the only ones that go around murdering people who draw cartoons about their prophet, or say anything negative about Islam...I see that as a lame, pathetic, attempt by you terrorist asskissers.



Yeah, they need to do what European Christians have done for the last few centuries.  Go around killing brown people for something worthwhile, like stealing their resources!!!!  I mean, if you are going to murder someone, it should be over something important, right?  

Of course, we could try the novel approach of minding our own business and not unnecessarily antagonizing people....


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 20, 2015)

Joe is such a great American.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Joe is such a great American.



Well, unlike you I served in the armed forces, so yes, i am a great American. 

I don't mistake Exxon and Israel for America, that's the thing.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 20, 2015)

I served too pal !!!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



^^^^^^
Then again some people know jack shit about history, and hide from reality.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Joe is such a great American.
> ...



So did Johnny Mohammad, and Nidal Hasan.


----------



## Liminal (Jan 20, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Liminal said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I'm sure history in one dimension is easier for some people to understand.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Are you telling us minimal-brain, that historians got it all wrong? That Muslims didn't invade and occupy Christian Europe and the Holyland first, causing Christians to take up arms to purge them from their lands?
> ...



And the reason you can't back up your claim that the crusades weren't in response to Muslim invasions is because you're full of shit.  Do you really think by constantly squealing like an Islamic shill "it wasn't because if Muslims!"  It actually makes it so?

"Christians have been as violent and bloody as Muslims". That wasn't the argument either asswipe.

So to conclude, history proves that Jews have been one of the most peaceful non violent people.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

The reason all these morons can't handle the simple fact that it's only Muslims that murder those who insult their religion or craw cartoons of their prophet is because it then goes to the fact that there is something inherently wrong about Islam.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

Liminal said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Liminal said:
> ...



One dimensional?  Sure sure. Muslims invaded Christian Europe first, at some point the Christians in Europe rose up to defend their land, culture, and heritage.   What are the other dimensions?  That there were other factors such as politics, corruption, etc.?  Of course there were, that has always been the case.  But the singular driving force behind the Crusades was to take back Christian lands.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 20, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Joe is such a great American.



Yup, he never misses an opportunity to bash America, Christianity, Jews, and Israel.

I wonder why?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2015)

Roudy said:


> And the reason you can't back up your claim that the crusades weren't in response to Muslim invasions is because you're full of shit. Do you really think by constantly squealing like an Islamic shill "it wasn't because if Muslims!" It actually makes it so?
> 
> "Christians have been as violent and bloody as Muslims". That wasn't the argument either asswipe.
> 
> So to conclude, history proves that Jews have been one of the most peaceful non violent people.



Naw, they just wear out their welcome like bad houseguests.  

Fact is, the "Holy Land" had been Muslim for 400 years, and some pig-ignorant farmer in France didn't even know where it was before someone said, "God Wills It" and they were following some army on a crusade.  The crusades were a Darwinian event.  They got the stupid out of the gene pool.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 20, 2015)

Roudy said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Joe is such a great American.
> ...



Sorry, you see, I don't see Israel as being part of America, and we were founded by Diests who thought the bible were bullshit.  (They were also slave-raping assholes who didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes.)


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > And the reason you can't back up your claim that the crusades weren't in response to Muslim invasions is because you're full of shit. Do you really think by constantly squealing like an Islamic shill "it wasn't because if Muslims!" It actually makes it so?
> ...



Again, back up your claims otherwise it's going straight in the garbage bin of a Isamic propoganda, as usual.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



What a coincidence, most people don't see an ideology that can coexist with American values. 

Israel will be a strong ally of America whether or not you Islamo Nazi lovers like it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Again, back up your claims otherwise it's going straight in the garbage bin of a Isamic propoganda, as usual.



whatever, guy.  No historian outside a university that teaches about Talking Snakes in Science Class thinks of the Crusades as a good thing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> What a coincidence, most people don't see an ideology that can coexist with American values.
> 
> Israel will be a strong ally of America whether or not you Islamo Nazi lovers like it.



Israel will keep dragging us into wars until American mothers get tired of their sons coming home in boxes.  

Oh, wait. That's already happened.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jan 21, 2015)

.

The PC-protected religion certainly does have the usual suspects spinning and deflecting for it, doesn't it?

.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> The PC-protected religion certainly does have the usual suspects spinning and deflecting for it, doesn't it?



again, Mac, if you want a crusade, no one is stopping you from walking down to the Recruiter's office and signing up.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > The PC-protected religion certainly does have the usual suspects spinning and deflecting for it, doesn't it?
> ...


Yet another great example of my point, your specialty, thanks.

.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...



You mean, "Joe you totally debunked and mocked my santimonious bullshit- again!"  

Yes, yes, I know. 

Our "Problem" with Muslims exist because WE created it. We armed Bin Laden. We armed Saddam. We keep provoking coups and dictators over there who turn on us or so antagonize their people they become enemies.  And of course, we cap it all off by supporting Israel, which is like slapping a giant dick in their faces. 

Then we act all surprised when they turn on us?  Really? Really?


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



He meant what he said Joe and made you look, once again, like the typical leftist.

As far as a dick in the face, I bet you sat at the TV screen last night hoping Obama would pull his out so you could figuratively suck it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> He meant what he said Joe and made you look, once again, like the typical leftist.
> 
> As far as a dick in the face, I bet you sat at the TV screen last night hoping Obama would pull his out so you could figuratively suck it.



I'm sure you obsess on Obama's dick.


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > He meant what he said Joe and made you look, once again, like the typical leftist.
> ...



You're the one that brought them up.  I just recognized that you're the type that does that to him.  At least wipe off your chin.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> ...Our "Problem" with Muslims exist because WE created it. We armed Bin Laden. We armed Saddam...


Incorrect.

Our 'problem' is the Warrior Religion to which these 'notables' and their peoples subscribe, the lack of a central authority (historical or present-day) for the interpretation and reformation of such dogma, and the savage, violent, aggressive mindset which that dogma has so frequently spawned over the centuries.

Thugs like Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein, and our on-again-off-again alliances with such vermin, are merely singular episodes in a much broader Islamic Re-Awakening and Re-Militarization and potential future conflict on a catastrophic scale.



> ...We keep provoking coups and dictators over there who turn on us or so antagonize their people they become enemies...


Playing-off one side against the other is the best way of keeping those barbarians outside the gates.



> ...And of course, we cap it all off by supporting Israel, which is like slapping a giant dick in their faces...


Phukk 'em... they will not be allowed to dictate to us, whom we may befriend, and whom we may consider allies, and whom we may not.

The best way to reinforce that position is to continue a strong support for Israel... no caving-in... no appeasement... no submission... zero.



> ...Then we act all surprised when they turn on us?  Really? Really?


True.

Only the most naive and gullible amongst us should be surprised when various elements of Islam turn upon us (The West, in general, and the US, in particular).

After centuries of degeneracy, and further centuries of submission to European Imperialism, most of the regions within the domains of Islam are just now - within Living Memory - coming out from under the EuroTrash heel. Islam is re-awakening, finding itself centuries behind The West, and it's pissed, and rapidly re-arming, and returning to its old, historically familiar aggressive ways, directed against those peoples and regions that do not believe and think the same way they do.

Those who understand history, and who can look at the macro-level picture, will not be surprised in the slightest, any nearly any outrage committed by these savages.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...



Look, guy, I know you are worried about your "shortcomings", but you need to get over it.  

(Pssst. The guns don't "Compensate" for them.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Incorrect.
> 
> Our 'problem' is the Warrior Religion to which these 'notables' and their peoples subscribe, the lack of a central authority (historical or present-day) for the interpretation and reformation of such dogma, and the savage, violent, aggressive mindset which that dogma has so frequently spawned over the centuries.



Well, now, you see, I remember when Reagan called Bin Laden and his ilk "Freedom Fighters" and Saddam was described as "A reasonable leader we could work with."  Until they turned on us, of course.  But, no, it has to do with their religion, not that they were violent men who were willing to do violence on our behalf.  

You know, when you recruit ruthless killers to do your dirty work, you always run the risk they'll turn on you. 



Kondor3 said:


> Playing-off one side against the other is the best way of keeping those barbarians outside the gates.



It's also a good way to piss them off and make them a bigger threat. The "War on Terror" is the first conflict in history where the American Consumer paid to arm both sides.  



Kondor3 said:


> Phukk 'em... they will not be allowed to dictate to us, whom we may befriend, and whom we may consider allies, and whom we may not.



The Zionists aren't our "Allies".  They are playing us for suckers and have been for 60 years.  



Kondor3 said:


> Only the most naive and gullible amongst us should be surprised when various elements of Islam turn upon us (The West, in general, and the US, in particular).
> 
> After centuries of degeneracy, and further centuries of submission to European Imperialism, most of the regions within the domains of Islam are just now - within Living Memory - coming out from under the EuroTrash heel. Islam is re-awakening, finding itself centuries behind The West, and it's pissed, and rapidly re-arming, and returning to its old, historically familiar aggressive ways, directed against those peoples and regions that do not believe and think the same way they do.
> 
> Those who understand history, and who can look at the macro-level picture, will not be surprised in the slightest, any nearly any outrage committed by these savages.



You know what, guy. the worst atrocities in human history still belong to the Civilized West.  

Maybe we can try the novel approach of leaving them alone.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Joe is such a great American.
> ...


He's your garden variety American liberal.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



As opposed to the Garden Variety American Conservative who cheers for wars from his couch while eating potato chips, and let's some brown kid do the actual fighting. 

Trust us, you'll get a college degree when your done.  Really.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


LOOK DICKHEAD, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER I SERVED !!!


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

You're not serving now.  

Maybe you need to talk to your fellow conservatives to go down to the recruting station and sign up for that Holy Crusade to convert the unbeliever!  That would be totally awesome.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> You're not serving now.
> 
> Maybe you need to talk to your fellow conservatives to go down to the recruting station and sign up for that Holy Crusade to convert the unbeliever!  That would be totally awesome.



I'm agnostic, but members of the military already lean more to the right than left. In fact only about 15% admit they're Dims.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > You're not serving now.
> ...



I was right wing when I was in the service. 

Then I got to learn what a shit sandwich Corporatism is.  

I don't mistake Exxon's interests for America's anymore.


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


 
Don't need guns to compensate for something that doesn't need compensated.  I own guns because I have a RIGHT to do so.  Don't won't one, don't buy one.  Don't want me to have one, come get it son.


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


 
You still eat the shit sandwich.


----------



## dannyboys (Jan 21, 2015)

It's always Muslims b/c they don't know how to live any different. They've been killing each other over some stupid argument since the seventh century. When they aren't killing each other they are looking for any excuse to kill the 'Infidel'. If there weren't any more 'infidels' left they be waging a Holy War on fucking sand flies.
Violence is part of their gene code.
http://www.cfr.org/peace-conflict-a...!/?cid=otr-marketing_url-sunni_shia_infoguide


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Again, back up your claims otherwise it's going straight in the garbage bin of a Isamic propoganda, as usual.
> ...



Did you see me say the crusades were a good thing?  No.  But I bet you think Muslim animals invading other lands wasn't that bad, eh?  Oh wait, the European Christians "welcomed" the invading Muslims, didn't they?  Ha ha ha. 

But you still haven't been able to produce any evidence that the crusades weren't in response to Muslim invasions, other than the rantings of a mentally ill arsehole named Joe. 

And how all of this relates to why it's always Muslims that feel empowered to murder those who draw cartoons of their prophet, or criticize Islam?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > What a coincidence, most people don't see an ideology that can coexist with American values.
> ...



No it hasn't. Not even once, you whiny anti semtic radical Musłim in need of an FBI interrogation.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > The PC-protected religion certainly does have the usual suspects spinning and deflecting for it, doesn't it?
> ...



^^^^^^
Funny how Joe Blow so desperately defends everything and anything Islam.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



His being a Liberal is just a cover.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



At least its hallal.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

Once again, history shows that the crusades started as a response to Muslim invasions of Christian lands. If anybody has anything to the contrary, then put up or shut up!

Had Muslims not initially invaded the holy land and Western Europe, the crusades would have never occurred.

History of the Crusades

"Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity—and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion—has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.

With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, theSeljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. Why did they do it? The answer to that question has been badly misunderstood. In the wake of the Enlightenment, it was usually asserted that Crusaders were merely lacklands and ne'er-do-wells who took advantage of an opportunity to rob and pillage in a faraway land. The Crusaders' expressed sentiments of piety, self-sacrifice, and love for God were obviously not to be taken seriously. They were only a front for darker designs.


Urban II gave the Crusaders two goals, both of which would remain central to the eastern Crusades for centuries. The first was to rescue the Christians of the East. As his successor, Pope Innocent III, later wrote:

_How does a man love according to divine precept his neighbor as himself when, knowing that his Christian brothers in faith and in name are held by the perfidious Muslims in strict confinement and weighed down by the yoke of heaviest servitude, he does not devote himself to the task of freeing them? ...Is it by chance that you do not know that many thousands of Christians are bound in slavery and imprisoned by the Muslims, tortured with innumerable torments?_

"Crusading," Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith has rightly argued, was understood as an "an act of love"—in this case, the love of one's neighbor. The Crusade was seen as an errand of mercy to right a terrible wrong. As Pope Innocent III wrote to the Knights Templar, "You carry out in deeds the words of the Gospel, 'Greater love than this hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friends.'"

The second goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and the other places made holy by the life of Christ. The word crusade is modern. Medieval Crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims, performing acts of righteousness on their way to the Holy Sepulcher. The Crusade indulgence they received was canonically related to the pilgrimage indulgence. This goal was frequently described in feudal terms. When calling the Fifth Crusade in 1215, Innocent III wrote:

_




Consider most dear sons, consider carefully that if any temporal king was thrown out of his domain and perhaps captured, would he not, when he was restored to his pristine liberty and the time had come for dispensing justice look on his vassals as unfaithful and traitors...unless they had committed not only their property but also their persons to the task of freeing him? ...And similarly will not Jesus Christ, the king of kings and lord of lords, whose servant you cannot deny being, who joined your soul to your body, who redeemed you with the Precious Blood...condemn you for the vice of ingratitude and the crime of infidelity if you neglect to help Him?_


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 21, 2015)

By the way, I'd like to thank Joe for continuing to reply to this thread and keeping the title fresh in everyone's mind.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> Don't need guns to compensate for something that doesn't need compensated. I own guns because I have a RIGHT to do so. Don't won't one, don't buy one. Don't want me to have one, come get it son.



You own guns because you are a scared little man...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Once again, history shows that the crusades started as a response to Muslim invasions of Christian lands. If anybody has anything to the contrary, then put up or shut up!
> 
> Had Muslims not initially invaded the holy land and Western Europe, the crusades would have never occurred.



Yes, those Christians were terribly upset about something that happened 400 years ago that the vast majority of htem didn't know anything about becuase they were completely illiterate.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Did you see me say the crusades were a good thing? No. But I bet you think Muslim animals invading other lands wasn't that bad, eh? Oh wait, the European Christians "welcomed" the invading Muslims, didn't they? Ha ha ha.



Well, actually, some of them did.  The Monophysites in Egypt were subject to decades of Byzantine oppression, and they welcomed the Muslims with open arms.  

Here's the thing, the reason why the Muslims overran so much of the world was because they embraced science and technology while the Christians were burning cats and Jews every time a plague broke out.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, history shows that the crusades started as a response to Muslim invasions of Christian lands. If anybody has anything to the contrary, then put up or shut up!
> ...



Reading problems again?  Muslims had invaded Christian lands, and were slowly creeping all over Europe.  They had to be stopped.  Here let me put it in larger print for you, dumbass:

*With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, theSeljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.

That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.

Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. *
*
Urban II gave the Crusaders two goals, both of which would remain central to the eastern Crusades for centuries. The first was to rescue the Christians of the East. As his successor, Pope Innocent III, later wrote:

How does a man love according to divine precept his neighbor as himself when, knowing that his Christian brothers in faith and in name are held by the perfidious Muslims in strict confinement and weighed down by the yoke of heaviest servitude, he does not devote himself to the task of freeing them? ...Is it by chance that you do not know that many thousands of Christians are bound in slavery and imprisoned by the Muslims, tortured with innumerable torments?*


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Did you see me say the crusades were a good thing? No. But I bet you think Muslim animals invading other lands wasn't that bad, eh? Oh wait, the European Christians "welcomed" the invading Muslims, didn't they? Ha ha ha.
> ...



Joe Blow, you need to stop vomiting Islamist propaganda, you are once again proving you are nothing but a Muslim shill. 

The only reason certain people "submitted" to Islam was because Muslim animals had slaughtered, raped, and looted many other lands before them! That is how Islam spread.  In fact, if you take ISIS back about a thousand years, they are doing exactly what Muslims did back then.  

Now, what does all of this have to do with why Muslims feel empowered to slaughter anybody who draws their prophet? 

Or should I report you to the mods for being the off topic troll that you usually are.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Reading problems again? Muslims had invaded Christian lands, and were slowly creeping all over Europe. They had to be stopped. Here let me put it in larger print for you, dumbass:



why, it doesn't make your argument that pig-ignorant illiterate peasants were upset about something that happened 400 years earlier...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 21, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Joe Blow, you need to stop vomiting Islamist propaganda, you are once again proving you are nothing but a Muslim shill.
> 
> The only reason certain people "submitted" to Islam was because Muslim animals had slaughtered, raped, and looted many other lands before them! That is how Islam spread. In fact, if you take ISIS back about a thousand years, they are doing exactly what Muslims did back then.



Um, no, not really. 

I would ask you to compare what the Crusders did when they took Jerusalem in 1099 compared to what Saladin did when he took it back in 1187.  

The Crusaders slaughtered every man, woman and child in the city, Christians and Jews as well as Muslims. 

Saladin not only didn't slaughter the Franks in Jerusalem, he allowed most of them leave without even paying the customary ransom.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Reading problems again? Muslims had invaded Christian lands, and were slowly creeping all over Europe. They had to be stopped. Here let me put it in larger print for you, dumbass:
> ...


It wasn't a single invasion, that's not how things went down back then, Muslims kept invading, and getting greedier, until it became alarming.  You of course choose to ignore the words of the Pope which I posted about cleansing the land from Islam.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 21, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Joe Blow, you need to stop vomiting Islamist propaganda, you are once again proving you are nothing but a Muslim shill.
> ...


Islamic history didn't begin and end with Saladin, you are ignorant, and TRANSPARENT BEYOND BELIEF.

Whereas Islam _began_ with killing of unbelievers right from the start.

For the first century of its existence, Islam was absolutely _soaked _in blood. The killing only slowed down as the Islamic empire finally ran into boundaries in the 8th century, after about a century of expansionist, imperialist, unprovoked Islamic aggression.

Even after the initial expansion slowed, the killings did not end. Slaughter (_jihad_) and oppression (_sharia_) are part of the core doctrines of Islam. Killing for Islam is not a modern idea, and it will never end until some sort of reformation takes place within the religion. Medieval Christianity was equally violent, but Christianity has since reformed.

For many years now, Islam has been the most violent religion in the world.

*Tears of Jihad*
 by Bill Warner 

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell,_ Race and Culture_, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, _David Livingstone_, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
_120 million Africans_

Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson,_ World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200_, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in _History of Asia Minor _is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
_60 million Christians_

Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst,_Negationism in India_, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”
_80 million Hindus_

Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam) everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, _World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200_, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.] _10 million Buddhists_

Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

_This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad._


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> It wasn't a single invasion, that's not how things went down back then, Muslims kept invading, and getting greedier, until it became alarming. You of course choose to ignore the words of the Pope which I posted about cleansing the land from Islam.



I make a habit of ignoring shit that is said by Popes.  

The point being by 1190, the Caliphate had broken down into several competing groups, and they really weren't encroaching on Europe at that point.  Urban II simply wanted to enhance his street cred against an 'anti-Pope' by calling a crusade that all the Kings of that time ignored. 



Roudy said:


> Islamic history didn't begin and end with Saladin, you are ignorant, and TRANSPARENT BEYOND BELIEF.
> 
> Whereas Islam _began_ with killing of unbelievers right from the start.
> 
> For the first century of its existence, Islam was absolutely _soaked _in blood. The killing only slowed down as the Islamic empire finally ran into boundaries in the 8th century, after about a century of expansionist, imperialist, unprovoked Islamic aggression.



First, don't post shit by Uncle Tom Sowell.  That guy has no credibility with me when he's shining the Koch Brothers shoes.  

Second, Christians had an even bloodier history of killing "unbelievers" and "infidels". (Yes, "Infidel" is a western term, not an islamic one.)  That's why you'll never meet an Albigensian today. Or an Arian.  Or a worshipper of Odin of Zeus or Quezacoatl.  The Christians totally wiped those fuckers out. 

Meanwhile, the Islamic world did allow Mandeans, Zoroasterians, Samaritans, Jews, Coptic and Assyrian Christians, Yazidis and other non-Islamic types to live in their countries for centuries. 

So the last thing I want to hear from you guys is "My Sky Pixie makes me less of a dick than their sky pixie." 

Becuase at the end of the day, you all worship the same Sky Pixie.... who doesn't exist.


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Don't need guns to compensate for something that doesn't need compensated. I own guns because I have a RIGHT to do so. Don't won't one, don't buy one. Don't want me to have one, come get it son.
> ...


 So, are you coming to get them pussy?  Didn't think so.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't a single invasion, that's not how things went down back then, Muslims kept invading, and getting greedier, until it became alarming. You of course choose to ignore the words of the Pope which I posted about cleansing the land from Islam.
> ...



Muslims   "allowed"   Zoroastrians, Christians, Mandeans etc to  live  as an underclass enslaved and tributory to muslims. 
Southern Christians  in the USA  "allowed"  blacks to live
as slaves too.        In fact even European Christians allowed
gypsies and jews  to live.    Both Christians and muslims have
a history of genocide.     Christians gave it up


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Muslims "allowed" Zoroastrians, Christians, Mandeans etc to live as an underclass enslaved and tributory to muslims.
> Southern Christians in the USA "allowed" blacks to live
> as slaves too. In fact even European Christians allowed
> gypsies and jews to live. Both Christians and muslims have
> a history of genocide. Christians gave it up



Christians just went on a bender in 1940 and gave it up for a while.  

Sorry, if you stack up the death toll by Christians and compare them to the death toll of Muslims, Christians really come out looking a lot worse.  Which is what happens when you think your imaginary Sky Fairy tells you to do something.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims "allowed" Zoroastrians, Christians, Mandeans etc to live as an underclass enslaved and tributory to muslims.
> ...



actually you are wrong about the stats.    Your comments about the imaginary sky fairy are useless too.    Try to stick to that which you know


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> actually you are wrong about the stats. Your comments about the imaginary sky fairy are useless too. Try to stick to that which you know



Um, no, my stats are pretty accurate. 

Christians you have- 
The Crusades
The Inquistion
The Thirty Years War 
The colonization of the Americas with the genocide of Amerind peoples. 
The trans-Atlantic slave trade
The colonization of Australia with the genocide of the Aborignes. 
World War I
World War II (European theatre) 

Easily hundreds of millions. 

The Muslims/  Well, you make some whacky claims about the Hindu-Kush genocide being 20 million, but that's sort of laughable. But even if I toss you that bone they still don't get even close.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > actually you are wrong about the stats. Your comments about the imaginary sky fairy are useless too. Try to stick to that which you know
> ...



Historians agree that in the first 100 years of Moghul occupation of   India-----muslims murdered 100 million
hindus.       keep laughing
There are actual reason why Iranians still despise arabs.
I have important news------Saudi Arabia is  ON THE SILK ROAD------and was once a very culturally diverse place----
today the citizenry of that "country" is 100%   muslim.    
the country does have an enslaved  underclass of non muslim workers --------a century ago ----no non muslims other than
LAWRENCE    ---why?   comprehensive genocide-----muhummad was better at it than adolf

   (PS----Iranians really do despise arabs----it is an
        interesting phenomenon---left over from massive
        genocide------there are ethnic arabs living in iran---
        even they are DESPISED)


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Conservative65 said:
> 
> 
> > Don't need guns to compensate for something that doesn't need compensated. I own guns because I have a RIGHT to do so. Don't won't one, don't buy one. Don't want me to have one, come get it son.
> ...


This is why people like you have no business being part of the discussion of firearms. Your above response which is typical of you, and continual comments regarding a gun owners "appendage", only tells others that you have no real knowledge regarding guns and their owners.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Historians agree that in the first 100 years of Moghul occupation of India-----muslims murdered 100 million
> hindus. keep laughing



Actually, historians don't agree with that at all. 

You actually have to do some pretty serious handstand to get to that number, counting 1300 years of wars, where the Hindus gave as good as they got. 

Okay, I'm going to break this to you gently.  Muslims are not The Borg.  They are not a hive mind.  





*"You will be assimilated in the name of Allah!" *


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


And at the same time, is always there to take a swipe at Christians and Christianity.
It's typical of American liberals. Instead of being biased towards their own country's dominate culture and religion, they are just the opposite. This is why I truly believe they have never viewed America as the shining beacon on top of the hill.
Instead, they only wish to ridicule America, and only wish to discuss the country's faults.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> This is why people like you have no business being part of the discussion of firearms. Your above response which is typical of you, and continual comments regarding a gun owners "appendage", only tells others that you have no real knowledge regarding guns and their owners.



Actually, I used to not care about guns that much, until I had discussions with people like Conservative65 talking about all the people he can't wait to shoot.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> And at the same time, is always there to take a swipe at Christians and Christianity.
> It's typical of American liberals. Instead of being biased towards their own country's dominate culture and religion, they are just the opposite. This is why I truly believe they have never viewed America as the shining beacon on top of the hill.
> Instead, they only wish to ridicule America, and only wish to discuss the country's faults.



Actually, the only way you fix your country's problems is by acknowledging them.  I'm sure that Reagan made you all feel better about yourself with his happy talk, but we've been in decline since that asshole got working folks to vote against their own economic interests. 

Muslims aren't the ones who let big multinational corporations dismantle the American Middle Class.  We can thank "Christians" for that one.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This is why people like you have no business being part of the discussion of firearms. Your above response which is typical of you, and continual comments regarding a gun owners "appendage", only tells others that you have no real knowledge regarding guns and their owners.
> ...


Did you make his list ?


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > And at the same time, is always there to take a swipe at Christians and Christianity.
> ...


And boy oh boy, do you guys on the left ever "acknowledge" them !! In fact, that's fucking all you guys ever do !
Ever thought about moving to Canada ? It really does fit your taste much better.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Historians agree that in the first 100 years of Moghul occupation of India-----muslims murdered 100 million
> ...



either you have never actually known muslims or you like to parrot islamo Nazi propaganda-----in fact considering the fact
that you quote islamo Nazi propaganda----you could,  yourself--be a muslim.       I have interacted very closely with
muslims over the past 45 years.     I learned about islam----
and about muslims FROM MUSLIMS -----later on I learned
about being a non muslim in shariah cesspits from people
who were non muslims in shariah cesspits      In fact my
husband was born in a shariah cesspit      I learned about
hindu and muslim history from hindus and muslims from
south east Asia        You know nothing or you are a Liar


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Oh, yes, he can't have a conversation with me wihtout expressing that fantasy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> either you have never actually known muslims or you like to parrot islamo Nazi propaganda-----in fact considering the fact
> that you quote islamo Nazi propaganda----you could, yourself--be a muslim. I have interacted very closely with



So either I don't know any Muslims or i'm secretly a Muslim... er.... that's confusing.  

Here's the thing you don't get.  I'm actually kind of indifferent to Muslims or Hindus.  they are people who live on the other side of the planet.  We don't fuck with them, they won't fuck with us.  

Instead, we support guys like bin Laden and Saddam (both guys the CIA told Reagan we could work with) and then wonder why they turn on us, and we support the Zionists which is like slapping a big dick in the face of the Islamic world.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> And boy oh boy, do you guys on the left ever "acknowledge" them !! In fact, that's fucking all you guys ever do !
> Ever thought about moving to Canada ? It really does fit your taste much better.



Why when we can fix this country?  You see, the big anchor on America progressing is really that we have "Jesus-Land" attached to us.  The part of the country where thousands of you got killed trying to protect the rights of rich people to own black people like that was something to be proud of.  

Sadly, you all seem to have never outgrown that mentality.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > either you have never actually known muslims or you like to parrot islamo Nazi propaganda-----in fact considering the fact
> ...



oh----ok     you are an isolationist idiot------now I got it.
Indifferent to the world and utterly ignorant.      Now I know---
reading your posts is something like listening to the learned
conversation that takes place in the allyways of saloons on the
edge of town. -------or in the methadone clinic waiting rooms


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > This is why people like you have no business being part of the discussion of firearms. Your above response which is typical of you, and continual comments regarding a gun owners "appendage", only tells others that you have no real knowledge regarding guns and their owners.
> ...



So you didn't used to care, but now because of one poster you want every American to surrender their firearms ?


----------



## Conservative65 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Conservative65 said:
> ...


 
He's the typical Liberal.  Joe can support something and if another person opposes it, that other person is simply not supposed to do it.  For example, the arugment for same sex marriage includes if you don't want to take part in one don't but don't keep others from doing it.  However, if people like Joe opposes something, he feels it's his place to support a ban on it.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > And boy oh boy, do you guys on the left ever "acknowledge" them !! In fact, that's fucking all you guys ever do !
> ...



You're not going to see America lose the "Jesusland" moniker as you put it. If anything, it will only increase as Hispanics who are the future are even more likely to be Christians, and more likely to be practicing the faith.
I've said for many years now that the future here is likely to become more socially conservative as it is now.
Hispanics have lots of kids, and white libs have very few kids.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't a single invasion, that's not how things went down back then, Muslims kept invading, and getting greedier, until it became alarming. You of course choose to ignore the words of the Pope which I posted about cleansing the land from Islam.
> ...



The Pope was in charge and his words meant everything. We aren't arguing "violence committed by Christians".   The crusades were initiated as a response to Muslim invasions of Chritian lands. That is indesputable, and so far all your blabbering hasn't contradicted it. 

Now, let me remind you of the topic you are trying so hard to avoid, why is it only Muslims that respond to cartoons in this manner?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims "allowed" Zoroastrians, Christians, Mandeans etc to live as an underclass enslaved and tributory to muslims.
> ...



Actually you're wrong, Muslims have killed far more.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

One need not go back to the Crusades to find examples of western based violence with religious themes. Such themes were used in abundance during the Atlantic slave trade and Europe's colonial experiments.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



And Hispanics are Catholics who take their religion very seriously.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Actually you're wrong, Muslims have killed far more.



Turning this into a pissing contest isn't very intellectually honest or useful; that being said you have absolutely no supporting evidence for your above statement.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> One need not go back to the Crusades to find examples of western based violence with religious themes. Such themes were used in abundance during the Atlantic slave trade and Europe's colonial experiments.


Meanwhile the general theme of Islam is Arab imperialism, invading people and forcing Arab language, culture, shariah law, and religion down their throats.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Meanwhile the general theme of Islam is Arab imperialism, invading people and forcing Arab language, culture, shariah law, and religion down their throats.



An amusing sentiment since most Muslims aren't Arabs.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Actually you're wrong, Muslims have killed far more.
> ...



Sure I do, one example: how many Hindus did Muslim animals slaughter in the Islamic conquest of India?  About  70 to 80 million. 

Intellectually honest. From someone who defends Islamism?  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Sure I do, one example: how many Hindus did Muslim animals slaughter in the Islamic conquest of India?  About  70 to 80 million.
> 
> Intellectually honest. From someone who defends Islamism?  Ha ha ha.



Having basic standards for information doesn't equate to 'defending" anything. And I am sure you'd be more than happy to cite appropriate sources for your claims. Of course the Americas experienced a 90% depopulation when the Europeans started coming over, going from around 100 million persons to only 10 million. So if I am supposed to be blown away by your number, you rather missed the mark.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Meanwhile the general theme of Islam is Arab imperialism, invading people and forcing Arab language, culture, shariah law, and religion down their throats.
> ...



Duh, you are repeating what I said. You are even dumber than Joe.  Arabs invaded Iran and shoved the Arabic alphabet, shariah law, and religion down their throats, did they not?  To this day the Iraians are trying to remove the shackles of this Arab religion off their necks. All these countries that now consider themselves Arab or Arab republics were never Arab.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Duh, you are repeating what I said. You are even dumber than Joe.  Arabs invaded Iran and shoved the Arabic alphabet, shariah law, and religion down their throats, did they not?  To this day the Iraians are trying to remove the shackles of this Arab religion off their necks. All these countries that now consider themselves Arab or Arab republics were never Arab.



Cultural expansion through empire building is hardly a religious trait. It isn't happenstance that much of Africa speaks either French or English today; and early Arabic empires placed a far greater emphasis on ethnicity (Arab identity) than they did on religion until after the Abbasid came in and opened the empire up ethnically. Pointing to The Arab conquest of Persia doesn't really do much to promote your anti-Islamic rhetoric. It is hardly historically unique or contingent upon religion.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Sure I do, one example: how many Hindus did Muslim animals slaughter in the Islamic conquest of India?  About  70 to 80 million.
> ...



Oh ok. So you admit that Muslims slaughtered millions of people in their conquest of India, it's just a question of how many millions this peaceful religion of Islam slaughtered.

Remind us again, what beef did Muslims have with the Hindus in India, that caused them to invade and start committing genocide on the Indian subcontinent?  Same beef Muslims had with Christians in Europe. Mohammad told them to conquer and kill to spread Islam.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Duh, you are repeating what I said. You are even dumber than Joe.  Arabs invaded Iran and shoved the Arabic alphabet, shariah law, and religion down their throats, did they not?  To this day the Iraians are trying to remove the shackles of this Arab religion off their necks. All these countries that now consider themselves Arab or Arab republics were never Arab.
> ...



I'm just pointing to just one example of Arabs invading a nation and shoving their religion, language, and culture down their throats at the point of the sword. Islam is Arab imperialism.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Oh ok. So you admit that Muslims slaughtered millions of people in their conquest of India, it's just a question of how many millions this peaceful religion of Islam slaughtered.



I am familiar with the Arab invasion of Persia yes; though I did ask you for a source to corroborate you 80 million dead figure. 



> Remind us again, what beef did Muslims have with the Hindus in India, that caused them to invade and start committing genocide on the Indian subcontinent?  Same beef Muslims had with Christians in Europe. Mohammad told them to conquer and kill to spread Islam.



The same beef that the Germans had when they invaded south west Africa and engaged in genocide against the Herero and Nama people. The same beef that the Mongols had when they invaded the Middle East. Expansion of empire. No religion required.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



He could very well be a Muslim posing as a Christian.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> I'm just pointing to just one example of Arabs invading a nation and shoving their religion, language, and culture down their throats at the pint of the sword. Islam is Arab imperialism.



Would you find it fair to cite European imperialism as Christian then? I don't find either particularly useful, but since you seem bent on pushing forward with the pissing contest it is easy enough to disprove your assertion that Muslims have historically killed more people than other populations have.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Oh ok. So you admit that Muslims slaughtered millions of people in their conquest of India, it's just a question of how many millions this peaceful religion of Islam slaughtered.
> ...



So Arabs invaded other lands in the name of Islam, just like Germans and other imperialists.  I rest my case.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> So Arabs invaded other lands in the name of Islam, just like Germans and other imperialists.  I rest my case.



Islam was hardly needed for Arabs to expand their empire. It certainly wasn't a requirement for the Seljuks or the Mongols. You're basing your hatred of Islam on an intellectual fallacy, and a rather narrow vision of history.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just pointing to just one example of Arabs invading a nation and shoving their religion, language, and culture down their throats at the pint of the sword. Islam is Arab imperialism.
> ...



Yes, the Crusades were imperialistic.  But were initiated by Muslim invaders. That is what I have been trying to say. 

Now what does all of this have to do with the way Muslims react to cartoons or criticism of their religion?


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yes, the Crusades were imperialistic.  But were initiated by Muslim invaders. That is what I have been trying to say.



I'm not talking about the Crusades. I'm talking about colonial European conquest and empire building. I don't need Medieval Europe in order to combat your assertion.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, the Crusades were imperialistic.  But were initiated by Muslim invaders. That is what I have been trying to say.
> ...



So?  This is all part of past history.  Europeans have moved on, and are now open, free, tolerant societies based on democratic Western values.  While Muslims are behaving like they are still in the dark ages trying to conquer lands and create imperialistic Islamic Caliphates through Jihad.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So Arabs invaded other lands in the name of Islam, just like Germans and other imperialists.  I rest my case.
> ...



That's why all lands conquered by Muslim invaders had a nice crescent and sword flag of Islam as its emblem?  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> That's why all lands conquered by Muslim invaders had a nice crescent and sword flag of Islam as its emblem?  Ha ha ha.



The Crescent moon is historically a Turkish one. Popularized by the above mentioned Seljuks and the Ottoman Empire.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> So?  This is all part of past history.  Europeans have moved on, and are now open, free, tolerant societies based on democratic Western values.  While Muslims are behaving like they are still in the dark ages trying to conquer lands and create imperialistic Islamic Caliphates through Jihad.



It's part of recent modern and 20th century history, and rather convenient of you to ignore. There is nothing really unique about the violence we see coming from Islamic populations today outside of the transnational non-state actor nature of them which is an adaptation to a more globalized world setting.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So?  This is all part of past history.  Europeans have moved on, and are now open, free, tolerant societies based on democratic Western values.  While Muslims are behaving like they are still in the dark ages trying to conquer lands and create imperialistic Islamic Caliphates through Jihad.
> ...



Is that a fancy way of of saying Muslims missed the boat on the 21st century, and are still living  in the dark ages, thanks to Islam?  So now they lash out like savage barbarians. Got it.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > That's why all lands conquered by Muslim invaders had a nice crescent and sword flag of Islam as its emblem?  Ha ha ha.
> ...



Wrong, the crescent moon is derived from the moon god idol worshippers that existed in the Arabian peninsula.  Ramadan was pre Islamic pagan holiday which occurs during a crescent moon.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Is that a fancy way of of saying Muslims missed the boat on the 21st century, and are still living  in the dark ages, thanks to Islam?  So now they lash out like savage barbarians. Got it.



State building difficulties have hardly been limited to Islamic countries (most of Sub-Saharan Africa for example is Christian, and places like Burma and Thailand have large Buddhist populations). It is also rather intellectually dishonest to ignore the longer period of rather devastating colonization that took place under many European powers that still haunts state and institution building processes today. Feeling high and mighty because we live in the west is an indication of a poor sense of global history.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Wrong, the crescent moon is derived from the moon god idol worshippers that existed in the Arabian peninsula.  Ramadan was pre Islamic pagan holiday which occurs during a crescent moon.



Ramadan is a fasting period commemorating the Battle of Badr and it is not pre-Islamic. I think you are thinking of the other holy months for fasting within Islam which are rooted in pre-Islamic Arabian tradition. The crescent moon symbol is not part of that tradition though, and the Quran specifically mentions NOT idolizing the moon, which also rather pokes holes in your theory.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Is that a fancy way of of saying Muslims missed the boat on the 21st century, and are still living  in the dark ages, thanks to Islam?  So now they lash out like savage barbarians. Got it.
> ...



Muslims are not state building, they are trying to build Islamic Caliphates, spreading death and misery throughout the globe.  ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Queda, Hezbollah, Irans Ayatollahs, Hamas, Taliban, Islamic Jihad, etc. Etc.  They all have more or less the same Islamic supremacist imperialistic mission statement.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Muslims are not state building, they are trying to build Islamic Caliphates, spreading death and misery throughout the globe.  ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Queda, Hezbollah, Irans Ayatollahs, Hamas, Taliban, Islamic Jihad, etc. Etc.  They all have more or less the same Islamic supremacist imperialistic mission statement.



Once again it's rather convenient for you to leave out the vast majority of the global Islamic population in your above analysis and the fact that most of the victims of the above mentioned groups tend to be Muslim.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So?  This is all part of past history.  Europeans have moved on, and are now open, free, tolerant societies based on democratic Western values.  While Muslims are behaving like they are still in the dark ages trying to conquer lands and create imperialistic Islamic Caliphates through Jihad.
> ...



The "uniqueness" lies in the fact that it's (Islamists) the foundation of the organized violence and terror that is occurring around the world today.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> The "uniqueness" lies in the fact that it's (Islamists) the foundation of the organized violence and terror that is occurring around the world today.



So is colonialism, and late state failure in the 20th century.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims are not state building, they are trying to build Islamic Caliphates, spreading death and misery throughout the globe.  ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Queda, Hezbollah, Irans Ayatollahs, Hamas, Taliban, Islamic Jihad, etc. Etc.  They all have more or less the same Islamic supremacist imperialistic mission statement.
> ...



What vast majority are you talking about?  Pakistan? Afghanistan? Iran? Iraq, Egypt? Saudi Arabia (the cradle of Islam), Yemen? Algeria? Or should I continue....

Meh, their religion commands that they:

1- Create Islamic Caliphates ruled by true Muslims, by force aka Jihad, if necessary.
2- Said Caliphate must live under Shariah law.  
3- Conquer the entire planet, those who do not submit to Islam, Shariah law, or pay the Jizya Tax (Islamic religious apartheid tax, applies only to Jews and Christians however)  must be slaughtered.

Those nations that are "victims" as you falsely portray (more like enablers), are simply not following what their religion is saying, and will be considered apostates by the true Muslims like ISIS.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong, the crescent moon is derived from the moon god idol worshippers that existed in the Arabian peninsula.  Ramadan was pre Islamic pagan holiday which occurs during a crescent moon.
> ...



The only hole I see is inside your head:

*Origin of the Name Allah*
The word "Allah" comes from the compound Arabic word, *al-ilah. *Al is the definite article "the" and ilah is an Arabic word for "god", i.e. the god. We see _immediately _that (a) this is not a proper name but a _generic name _rather like the Hebrew *El *(which as we have seen was used of _any _deity; and (b) that Allah is not a foreign word (as it would have been if it had been borrowed from the Hebrew Bible) but a purely Arabic one. It would also be wrong to compare "Allah" with the Hebrew or Greek for God (*El*and *Theos, *respectively), because "Allah" is purely an Arabic term used exclusively in reference to an Arabic deity.

The _Encyclopedia of Religion _says: "'Allah' is a pre-Islamic name . . . corresponding to the Babylonian Bel" (ed. James Hastings, Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1908, I:326).

I know that Muslims will find this hard to believe so I am now going to make many citations and present the archaeological evidence to prove conclusively that is true. Though this data will be painful for many of our readers, it is necessary to face the truth. Facts are facts, and unless you are willing to desert all logic, reason and common sense, and the evidence of your eyes, they must be faced.

"Allah is found . . . in Arabic inscriptions prior to Islam" (_Encyclopedia Britannica, _I:643)

"The Arabs, before the time of Mohammed, accepted and worshipped, after a fashion, a supreme god called allah" (_Encyclopedia of Islam, _eds. Houtsma, Arnold, Basset, Hartman; Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1913, I:302)

"Allah was known to the pre-Islamic Arabs; he was one of the Meccan deities" (_Encyclopedia of Islam_, ed. Gibb, I:406)

"_Ilah . . . _appears in pre-Islamic poetry . . . By frequency of usage, _al-ilah _was contracted to _allah, _frequently attested to in pre-Islamic poetry" (_Encyclopedia of Islam, _eds. Lewis, Menage, Pellat, Schacht; Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1971, III:1093)

"The name Allah goes back before Muhammed" (_Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend_, "The Facts on File", ed. Anthony Mercatante, New York, 1983, I:41)

The origin of this (Allah) goes back to pre-Muslim times. Allah is not a common name meaning "God" (or a "god"), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity" (_Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, _ed. James Hastings, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1908, I:326)

Scholar Henry Preserved Smith of Harvard University stated:

"Allah was already known by name to the Arabs" (_The Bible and Islam: or, the Influence of the Old and New Testament on the Religion of Mohammed_, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1897, p.102)

Dr. Kenneth Cragg, former editor of the prestigious scholarly journal Muslim World and an outstanding modern Western Islamic scholar, whose works were generally published by Oxford University, comments:

The name Allah is also evident in archaeological and literary remains of pre-Islamic Arabia" (_The Call of the Minaret_, New York: OUP, 1956, p. 31).

Dr. W. Montgomery Watt, who was Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at Edinburgh University and Visiting Professor of Islamic Studies at College de France, Georgetown University, and the University of Toronto, has done extensive work on the pre-Islamic concept of Allah. He concludes:

"In recent years I have become increasingly convinced that for an adequate understanding of the career of Muhammad and the origins of Islam great importance must be attached to the existence in Mecca of belief in Allah as a "high god". In a sense this is a form of paganism, but it is so different from paganism as commonly understood that it deserves separate treatment" (_Mohammad's Mecca, _p.vii. See also his article, "Belief in a High God in pre-Islamic Mecca", _Journal of Scientific Semitic Studies, _vol.16, 1971, pp.35-40)

Caesar Farah in his book on Islam concludes his discussion of the pre-Islamic meaning of Allah by saying:

"There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews" _(Islam: Beliefs and Observations, _New York: Barrons, 1987, p.28)

According to Middle East scholar E.M.Wherry, whose translation of the Koran is still used today, in pre-Islamic times Allah-worship, as well as the worship of Baal, were both astral religions in that they involved the worship of the sun, the moon, and the stars _(A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran, _Osnabrück: Otto Zeller Verlag, 1973, p. 36).

"In ancient Arabia, the sun-god was viewed as a female goddess and the moon as the male god. As has been pointed out by many scholars as Alfred Guilluame, the Moon god was called by various names, one of which was Allah (op.cit., _Islam,_p. 7)

"The name Allah was used as the _personal _name of the Moon god, in addition to the other titles that could be given to him.

"Allah, the Moon god, was married to the sun goddess. Together they produced three goddesses who were called 'the daughters of Allah'. These three goddesses were called Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat.

"The daughters of Allah, along with Allah and the sun goddess were viewed as "high" gods. That is, they were viewed as being at the top of the pantheon of Arabian deities" (Robert Morey, _The Islamic Invasion, _Eugene, Oregon, Harvest House Publishers, 1977, pp.50-51).

The _Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend _records:

"Along with Allah, however, they worshipped a host of lesser gods and "daughters of Allah" (op.cit., I:61).

It is a well known fact archaeologically speaking that the cresent moon was the symbol of worship of the Moon god both in Arabia and throughout the Middle East in pre-Islamic times. Archaeologists have excavated numerous statues and hieroglyphic inscriptions in which a crescent moon was seated on the top of the head of the deity to symbolise the worship of the moon-god. Interestingly, whilst the moon was generally worshipped as a female deity in the Ancient Near East, the Arabs viewed it as a male deity.

In Mesopotamia the Sumerian god Nanna, named Sin by the Akkadians, was worshipped in particular in Ur, where he was the chief god of the city, and also in the city of Harran in Syria, which had close religious links with Ur. The Ugaritic texts have shown that there a moon deity was worshipped under the name _yrh. _On the monuments the god is represented by the symbol of the crescent moon. At Hazor in Palestine a small Canaanite shrine of the late Bronze Age was discovered which contained a basalt stele depicting two hands lifted as if in prayer to a crescent moon, indicating that the shrine was dedicated to the Moon god.

"The Quraysh tribe into which Mohammad was born was particularly devoted to Allah, the Moon god, and especially to Allah's three daughters who were viewed as intercessors between the people and Allah.

"The worship of the three goddesses, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat, played a significant rôle in the worship at the Kabah in Mecca. The first two daughters of Allah had names which were feminine forms of Allah.

"The literal Arabic name of Muhammad's father was Abd-Allah. His uncle's name was Obied-Allah. These names reveal the personal devotion that Muhammad's pagan family had to the worship of Allah, the Moon god" (op.cit., Morey, p.51).

History proves conclusively that before Islam came into existence, the Sabbeans in Arabia worshipped the moon-god Allah who was married to the sun-goddess. We have also seen that it was a matter of common practice to use the name of the moon-god in personal names in Muhammad's tribe. That Allah was a pagan deity in pre-Islamic times is incontestable. And so we must ask ourselves the question: why was Muhammad's God named after a pagan deity in his own tribe?

It is an undeniable fact that an Allah idol was set up at the Kabah along with all the other idols of the time. The pagans prayed towards Mecca and the Kabah because that is where their gods were stationed. It made sense to them to face in the direction of their god and pray since that is where he was. Since the idol of their Moon god, Allah, was at Mecca, they prayed towards Mecca.

As we have seen, and as is acknowledged amongst all scholars of Middle Eastern religious history, the worship of the moon-god extended far beyond Allah-worship in Arabia. The entire fertile crescent was involved in moon-worship. The data falls neatly in place and we are able therefore to understand, in part, the early success Islam had amongst Arab groups that had traditionally worshipped Allak, the moon-god. We can also understand that the use of the crescent moon as the symbol of Islam, and which appears on dozens of flags of Islamic nations in Asia and Africa, and surmounts minerets and mosque roofs, is a throwback to the days when Allah was worshipped as the moon-god in Mecca.

*Here is your "allah", feast your eyes: *


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong, the crescent moon is derived from the moon god idol worshippers that existed in the Arabian peninsula.  Ramadan was pre Islamic pagan holiday which occurs during a crescent moon.
> ...



Hey look, another "hole", ha ha ha:

Ramadan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

*Origins*
*Ramadan was originally a pagan festival in the pre-Islamic Sabaean culture of Arabia. Originally the fast was from moon-rise to moon-set, a festival in dedication to the moon god. *This festival was observed by many pagan societies throughout Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq and even Persia. This was later adopted by Muhammad, and the fast rules were set to sunrise to sundown. Prior to Islam's exclusion of intercalary days from its calendar, the name of this month was _Nātiq_ and, due to the intercalary days added, always occurred in the warm season.

RAMADAN AND ITS ROOTS

*Ramadan has Pagan Roots in India and the Middle East*

*Ramadan, the ninth month of the Islamic calendar and the rigid observance of thirty days of fasting during the daylight hours, has pagan roots *developed in India and the Middle East. The observance of fasting to honor the moon, and ending the fast when themoon’s crescent appears, was practiced with the rituals of the Eastern worshippersof the moon. Both Ibn al-Nadim and the Shahrastani tell us about al-Jandrikinieh, an Indian sect which began to fast when the moon disappeared and ended the fast with a great feast when the crescent reappeared

The Sabians, who were pagans in the Middle East, were identified with twogroups, the Mandaeans and the Harranians. The Mandaeans lived in Iraq during the2nd century A.D. As they continue to do today, they worshipped multiple gods,or “light personalities.” Their gods were classified under four categories: “first life,” “second life,”“third life”and “fourth life.” Old gods belongto the “first life” category. They summoned deities who, in turn, created “second life”deities, and so forth.

****So basically we have a pagan holiday as one of the "five pillars of Islam".  Hilarious, just hilarious!


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> oh----ok you are an isolationist idiot------now I got it.
> Indifferent to the world and utterly ignorant. Now I know---
> reading your posts is something like listening to the learned
> conversation that takes place in the allyways of saloons on the
> edge of town. -------or in the methadone clinic waiting rooms



Sorry, I just point out the obvious, we are our own worst enemy in that region of the world. 

Take Bin Laden.  Do you think the CIA didn't know he and his homeys were religious nuts?  Of course they did. But they were religious nuts willing to kill Russians. And instead of thinking, "Hey, maybe we shouldn't be enabling crazy jihadists", reagan and his boys thought, "Now we can get back at those Commie bastards for screwing us in Vietnam."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> The Pope was in charge and his words meant everything. We aren't arguing "violence committed by Christians". The crusades were initiated as a response to Muslim invasions of Chritian lands. That is indesputable, and so far all your blabbering hasn't contradicted it.



Urban II wasn't even considered the valid pope, the "Anti-Pope" that Henry IV put up was.  Which is why the Kings of England and France stayed home when he called a crusade.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> You're not going to see America lose the "Jesusland" moniker as you put it. If anything, it will only increase as Hispanics who are the future are even more likely to be Christians, and more likely to be practicing the faith.



Yeah, but they aren't going to be the Kind of Christians who think Jesus was about wars and tax  cuts for rich people... so it works out.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Actually you're wrong, Muslims have killed far more.



Uh, no, they haven't.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> He's the typical Liberal. Joe can support something and if another person opposes it, that other person is simply not supposed to do it. For example, the arugment for same sex marriage includes if you don't want to take part in one don't but don't keep others from doing it. However, if people like Joe opposes something, he feels it's his place to support a ban on it.



Same Sex marriages don't kill 33,000 Americans every year. 

Guns do.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 22, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Sure I do, one example: how many Hindus did Muslim animals slaughter in the Islamic conquest of India? About 70 to 80 million.
> 
> Intellectually honest. From someone who defends Islamism? Ha ha ha.



Probably nowhere near that, as we seem to still have plenty of Hindus picking up customer service lines and running 7-11's.

On the other hand, Aztecs, Incas, Apaches, AUstralian Aborignes and a lot of other people who happened to be on land Jesus wanted for his peeps aren't around anymore.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > The Pope was in charge and his words meant everything. We aren't arguing "violence committed by Christians". The crusades were initiated as a response to Muslim invasions of Chritian lands. That is indesputable, and so far all your blabbering hasn't contradicted it.
> ...



Mohammad Joe Blow: "Urban II wasn't even considered the valid pope" 

I seriously think you need to see a doctor for your FOOT IN MOUTH DISEASE, you are a moron of epic proportions.  Very typical though:  

First Crusade - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The *First Crusade* (1096–1099) started as a widespread pilgrimage (France and Germany) and ended as a military expedition by Roman CatholicEurope to regain the Holy Lands taken in the Muslim conquests of the Levant (632–661), ultimately resulting in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099. It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine EmperorAlexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuq Turks from Anatolia. An additional goal soon became the principal objective—the Christian reconquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land and the freeing of theEastern Christians from Muslim rule.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 22, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Actually you're wrong, Muslims have killed far more.
> ...



Sure they did, but what would an ignorant fuck like you know?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Mohammad Joe Blow: "Urban II wasn't even considered the valid pope"
> 
> I seriously think you need to see a doctor for your FOOT IN MOUTH DISEASE, you are a moron of epic proportions. Very typical though:



Point was. The Holy Roman Emperor had a rival Pope that most of the Catholic World recognized.  Urban was trying to pump up his street cred by calling for a crusade.  

200 year of mind-fucking stupidity and Christian carnage followed. 

The nice thing about the Crusades. It's a nice preview of what's going to happen to you Zionists... Heh, heh, heh...  
Better start stocking up on water wings, baby!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 23, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Mohammad Joe Blow: "Urban II wasn't even considered the valid pope"
> ...



Point is I humiliated you again. The first crusade was to repel Muslim invaders from Christian lands, and Pope Urban II ordered it. 

The political crusade against Islam has already started. Islam is now designated as Europe's number one enemy.  Been keeping up with the anti Islam rallies in France and Germany lately?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 23, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Long long ago---when I had candid discussions with muslims
from muslim lands------objecting to some of the policies of
muslim lands------a happy Pakistani seemed to answer each objection with the logic of    "nothing you can do about it" ----with a kind of PRIDE as in  "we muslims can screw the world"

My response was----something like----"but anyone can do that"     <<< the implication being  "we can do it to you guys"
He just maintained his joyful confidence and shook his head and laughed----"no you can't"

My prediction is that there will come a time when -----we will
follow some of the Islamic precedents.   Some countries will
begin to exclude muslims from citizenship or disallow
mosques --------ie marginalize muslims in ways similar to the ways muslim countries marginalize non muslims


----------



## Roudy (Jan 23, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



That has also begun. European countries aren't granting any more visas to Muslims. Why commit national suicide?  They already have enough problems with what they let in.

It was good to see the millions in France come out and march in defense of Western values and against IslamoFacism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 23, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Point is I humiliated you again. The first crusade was to repel Muslim invaders from Christian lands, and Pope Urban II ordered it.



First crusade was because Urban II was an incredible douche.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 23, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Point is I humiliated you again. The first crusade was to repel Muslim invaders from Christian lands, and Pope Urban II ordered it.
> ...


Oh ok, Mr. Historian D Bag.  Now tell us why it's always Muslims that go postal when somebody draws a cartoon of Mohammad.  I mean Jesus is basically son of God to Christians.


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 23, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> It's always Muslims b/c they don't know how to live any different. They've been killing each other over some stupid argument since the seventh century. When they aren't killing each other they are looking for any excuse to kill the 'Infidel'. If there weren't any more 'infidels' left they be waging a Holy War on fucking sand flies.
> Violence is part of their gene code....



Violence is, and always has been, a conspicuous aspect of human nature.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 23, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> It's always Muslims b/c they don't know how to live any different. They've been killing each other over some stupid argument since the seventh century. When they aren't killing each other they are looking for any excuse to kill the 'Infidel'. If there weren't any more 'infidels' left they be waging a Holy War on fucking sand flies.
> Violence is part of their gene code.
> http://www.cfr.org/peace-conflict-a...!/?cid=otr-marketing_url-sunni_shia_infoguide


_"It's always Muslims"_ is the little bullshit lie you keep telling people hoping it will somehow become true, but it's not.  According to FBI records, more terrorist acts in the US between 1980-2005, were committed by Jewish terrorists (7%), than Muslim ones (6%). And in Europe, less than 1% of terrorist acts were committed by Muslims.



> _*Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database*
> _
> _*According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%)*.  These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion.  These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, *they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.*_​_
> (Loon Watch also notes that __less than 1%__ of terror attacks in Europe were carried out by Muslims_.)


Have a nice day.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 23, 2015)

Muslims need to stop hurting innocent people. Charlie Hedo, 9/11. Christians  don't do stuff like that, it's ALWAYS  muslims, Isis  hacking of westerners heads demanding ransom before hand...this is what "muslims" do. Why is it always muslims?


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 23, 2015)




----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 23, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Muslims need to stop hurting innocent people. Charlie Hedo, 9/11. Christians  don't do stuff like that, it's ALWAYS  muslims, Isis  hacking of westerners heads demanding ransom before hand...this is what "muslims" do. Why is it always muslims?


So called Christians started the Iraq war that killed over 1 million innocent civilians.  So called Christians invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and over 35 African nations over made up bullshit in the name of corporatism.  So called Christians tried to redefine Geneva Convention terms that would make torture, not appear to be torture.  So called Christians are locking up people indefinitely with no charges.

The truth is, so called Christians, lost Christ a long time ago.

Muslims have their radicals, but American mullahs of the PNAC are far worse.

Why are you talking about Christ, anyway?  You're spreading hate.  Christ was not about hate.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 23, 2015)

It's always muslims....all over the world....


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 23, 2015)

An excellent moral deity to follow....


----------



## MaryL (Jan 24, 2015)

Iraq was a waste of time, most people didn't  agree to the logic used. Bush may have held hands with King Abdullah. Bush was an idiot. Islam and  most of the 9/11 attackers  were from Saudi Arabia. That makes them our ...enemy. But Bush held hands with their KING! We should have  isolated  Arabia. Or bombed them into the bloody ground, but instead,  we invade a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Way to go,  Republicans!


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims need to stop hurting innocent people. Charlie Hedo, 9/11. Christians  don't do stuff like that, it's ALWAYS  muslims, Isis  hacking of westerners heads demanding ransom before hand...this is what "muslims" do. Why is it always muslims?
> ...



When the Shiite hits the fans pretty much anywhere on the planet America gets the call for help and PNAC has been gone for 9 years and only existed for 9 (1997-2006). You need a new boogeyman, Princess.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 24, 2015)

Same old shit, just a new name ......


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> When the Shiite hits the fans pretty much anywhere on the planet America gets the call for help and PNAC has been gone for 9 years and only existed for 9 (1997-2006). You need a new boogeyman, Princess.


I'm sorry, but our foreign policy is still the PNAC agenda.  And the lowest form of human life, lower than Zionists, still populate our government_*...................neocons!*_

I don't know why people still listen to a group that has been wrong about everything!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> dannyboys said:
> 
> 
> > It's always Muslims b/c they don't know how to live any different. They've been killing each other over some stupid argument since the seventh century. When they aren't killing each other they are looking for any excuse to kill the 'Infidel'. If there weren't any more 'infidels' left they be waging a Holy War on fucking sand flies.
> ...



How many times are you going to post that same bullshit chart?  

Let us know why all the wanted terrorists on FBI's most wanted happen to be MUSLIMS...


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims need to stop hurting innocent people. Charlie Hedo, 9/11. Christians  don't do stuff like that, it's ALWAYS  muslims, Isis  hacking of westerners heads demanding ransom before hand...this is what "muslims" do. Why is it always muslims?
> ...



Gee, anus mouth never blames Muslims for anything.  I wonder why?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I've got a degree in history. 

At Universities where they dont' teach about talking snakes in Science Class, they all admit the Crusades were a horrible idea and Urban II was kind of a douchebag for coming up with the idea.  

Again.... Crusades.  Look at them and See Israel's future. 

Muslims go postal because they are tired of the west fucking with them. But keep making sweet, sweet love to that hornet's nest.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Muslims need to stop hurting innocent people. Charlie Hedo, 9/11. Christians don't do stuff like that, it's ALWAYS muslims, Isis hacking of westerners heads demanding ransom before hand...this is what "muslims" do. Why is it always muslims?



So let me get this straight, we invade Iraq over weapons that don't exist, kill 100,000 Iraqis, leave the country in ruins, and nope, the Muslims are the bad ones because some thugs shoot up some racist cartoonists.  

Got it.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Gee, anus mouth never blames Muslims for anything.  I wonder why?


I blame them for things they're responsible for, not the shit you try to make up about them.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> How many times are you going to post that same bullshit chart?
> 
> Let us know why all the wanted terrorists on FBI's most wanted happen to be MUSLIMS...


That "bullshit chart", is from the same source you got your "most wanted".


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Evidently because Dildo_Really believes nothing is ever their fault. A far more knowledgeable and honest voice says the hate and violence being taught and preached to impressionable young Muslims is the source of the terrorist mayhem we see today and has made Islam "the world's enemy":

"On Jan. 1, the president of Egypt made a stunning speech.

Abdel Fattah al-Sisi spoke at Al Azhar, the greatest university in the Arab world, a place of Islamic scholarship dating back more than a millennium.

Al-Sisi didn’t just speak to scholars though. He also addressed the Awqaf Ministry, the government’s religious department that funds mosques and Muslim imams across Egypt.

Al-Sisi is Egypt’s president and he’s also its top general. And his speech was an order. A plea, but a command as well: Islam needed to reform itself.

The problem was Islam’s violence. Islam, said al-Sisi, has become the world’s enemy. “It's inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible!”

It wasn’t Islam, the religion, he said. It was Islam, the radical political force. “That thinking—I am not saying 'religion' but 'thinking'—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It's antagonizing the entire world! Is it possible that 1.6 billion Muslims should want to kill the rest of the world's inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!”

It was the closest thing Islam has seen to Martin Luther nailing his 95 theses to the church door in Wittenberg. Al-Sisi was calling for nothing less than a Reformation of Islam. And he was doing so in the heart of Al Azhar. He continued:

“I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this ummah is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.”

 In need of a religious revolution Levant Columnists Opinion Toronto Su


----------



## NoTeaPartyPleez (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




*It was two Jihadists who showed up with guns in Paris.  Not 1,600,000,000 Muslims. 
Try to keep things in perspective. *


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 24, 2015)

NoTeaPartyPleez said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



It was 3 or more and the problem isn't just the attacks but rather - according to Egypt's president - the Arab/Muslim culture which teaches and preaches violent hatred:
“That thinking - I am not saying 'religion' but 'thinking' - that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It's antagonizing the entire world! Is it possible that 1.6 billion Muslims should want to kill the rest of the world's inhabitants - that is 7 billion - so that they themselves may live? Impossible!” 
 In need of a religious revolution Levant Columnists Opinion Toronto Su


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> Evidently because Dildo_Really believes nothing is ever their fault. A far more knowledgeable and honest voice says the hate and violence being taught and preached to impressionable young Muslims is the source of the terrorist mayhem we see today and has made Islam "the world's enemy":
> 
> "On Jan. 1, the president of Egypt made a stunning speech.
> 
> ...


What was it you just said?

Oh yeah, this was it...

_*"...the hate and violence being taught and preached to impressionable young Muslims is the source of the terrorist mayhem we see today..."*_

It has nothing to do with the fact that we keep bombing the shit out of their country's; murdering entire families; taking out entire neighborhoods with 2000 pound bombs; starving entire populations with illegal blockades and immoral sanctions; terrorizing entire cities with drone strikes; and basically doing every conceivable  thing that is evil and illegal to them; and if that was not enough, we top it off by blaming them for all of the above.

That doesn't teach them to hate us? They're fine with that.  They're used to that.  They don't mind that.  It's their religion that makes them hate and be violent for _*NO APPARENT REASON!*_

And to think, you actually prefaced that garbage with_ "honest and knowledgeable". _


----------



## NoTeaPartyPleez (Jan 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> NoTeaPartyPleez said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



*Oh, excuuuuuuuuse me.  There were 3 or 4.  Looks like the Arab/Muslim teachings of violence is a miserable failure, doesn't it?  
I mean, you can do the math, right?*


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



"I got a degree in history" <--------BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Would that be the same degree that taught you that a "Jihadist" is not a terrorist?  Or the degree that says Muslim invasions had nothing to do with the crusades?  

I doubt you even graduated from middle school.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Gee, anus mouth never blames Muslims for anything.  I wonder why?
> ...



And for what does anus mouth ever blame Muslims for?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Evidently because Dildo_Really believes nothing is ever their fault. A far more knowledgeable and honest voice says the hate and violence being taught and preached to impressionable young Muslims is the source of the terrorist mayhem we see today and has made Islam "the world's enemy":
> ...



The drone strikes and bombs came after, not before, Muslim jihadists declared war in the West and all non Muslims.  Anus mouth never gets it right.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Would that be the same degree that taught you that a "Jihadist" is not a terrorist? Or the degree that says Muslim invasions had nothing to do with the crusades?
> 
> I doubt you even graduated from middle school.



Well, you see, I went to one of those schools where they laugh at you if you say "Terrorist", because one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Would that be the same degree that taught you that a "Jihadist" is not a terrorist? Or the degree that says Muslim invasions had nothing to do with the crusades?
> ...



Yeah? So Al Queda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, and Hamas are freedom fighters to you Islamic Madrassa graduates? Ha ha ha ha.  Give it a break, knuckle head.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yeah? So Al Queda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, and Hamas are freedom fighters to you Islamic Madrassa graduates? Ha ha ha ha. Give it a break, knuckle head.



Not to me... 

but to some people, they are.  

Just like Mechnacem Began was a terrorist to the British, and a Freedom fighter to Zionists.  The same could be said of Mandella -  the Afrikaners saw him as a terrorist, the Xhosa and Zulus saw him as a Freedom Fighter

The Contras were Freedom Fighters to Reagan, but Terrorists to Ortega. 

Now, when you get down to it, when Bin Laden was killing Russians in Afghanistan, Ronny Reagan called him a "Freedom Fighter".  

When he started killing Americans in New York, he became a "Terrorists".  

So maybe we need to get over the silly labels and ask ourselves a sensible question. 

Do we have a vested interest in fighting these people?  

If they want to kill Zionists, why is that MY problem?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah? So Al Queda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, and Hamas are freedom fighters to you Islamic Madrassa graduates? Ha ha ha ha. Give it a break, knuckle head.
> ...



I do not recall bin laden killing Russians in  Afghanistan-----he was not over there to kill Russians----he was there to establish  Afghanistan as a   SHARIAH SHIT HOLE-----nor do I recall Reagan calling  bin laden a "FREEDOM FIGHTER"----
you are confused.     The white house DID make the mistake of  calling the  TALIBAN   freedom fighters.      Bin laden was not running the TALIBAN pigs       Russians in Afghanistan were  soldiers--------you and yours like to murder infants for Allah's pleasure


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah? So Al Queda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, and Hamas are freedom fighters to you Islamic Madrassa graduates? Ha ha ha ha. Give it a break, knuckle head.
> ...



Reagan did not call Bin Laden a freedom fighter. He called the secular shah Massoud a freedom fighter, who was later killed by Al Queda and the Taliban.  

When you get down to it, you're just a fulla shit lair and terrorist ass licker.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Oh but you see he studied Islamic history at the University of Shariah Stupidity.  He may in fact be an honor student if I'm not mistaken. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> The drone strikes and bombs came after, not before, Muslim jihadists declared war in the West and all non Muslims.  Anus mouth never gets it right.


Who made the declaration?  When was it made?  Where's the link?


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Have some compassion for poor Joe------his post made me
wonder.     How could anyone be THAT ignorant?


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Reagan did not call Bin Laden a freedom fighter. He called the secular shah Massoud a freedom fighter, who was later killed by Al Queda and the Taliban.
> 
> When you get down to it, you're just a fulla shit lair and terrorist ass licker.


And now Israel calls al Qaeda and Sunni's_*................ally's.*_


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > The drone strikes and bombs came after, not before, Muslim jihadists declared war in the West and all non Muslims.  Anus mouth never gets it right.
> ...



acts of war -------.     The japs did not DECLARE war on the USA----they bombed pearl harbor.       The meccaist pigs ---
a million at a time farted out   "DEATH TO AMERICA"---
whilst walking around their rock "god" ------and in between
they murdered americans to make the rock happy


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > The drone strikes and bombs came after, not before, Muslim jihadists declared war in the West and all non Muslims.  Anus mouth never gets it right.
> ...



Declaration?  Who bombed the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, the marine barracks in Lebanon, etc.?  Wake up and smell the jihad.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Reagan did not call Bin Laden a freedom fighter. He called the secular shah Massoud a freedom fighter, who was later killed by Al Queda and the Taliban.
> ...



Ha ha ha.  You need to change your meds. What a mental case.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 24, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Evidently because Dildo_Really believes nothing is ever their fault. A far more knowledgeable and honest voice says the hate and violence being taught and preached to impressionable young Muslims is the source of the terrorist mayhem we see today and has made Islam "the world's enemy":
> ...



"Honest and knowledgeable" referred to Egyptian President el-Sisi's comments (January 1, 2015) at Al Azhar, the greatest university in the Arab world when he addressed the Awqaf Ministry, the government’s religious department that funds mosques and Muslim imams across Egypt. His opinions in this matter are far more "honest and knowledgeable" than anything you have ever posted here and he courageously said (and you deny) that what the imams teach and preach to those impressionable young Muslims has caused "the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world."

 In need of a religious revolution Levant Columnists Opinion Toronto Su


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 24, 2015)

NoTeaPartyPleez said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > NoTeaPartyPleez said:
> ...



You assiduously avoided Egyptian President el-Sisi's conclusions about the damage done not only to the victims of Islamic terrorism but to his religion by imams who teach and preach hate and violence. BTW, I thank you in advance for not altering my posts when you quote me ... it's a TOS violation.

The problem was Islam’s violence. Islam, said al-Sisi, has become the world’s enemy. “It's inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world...
I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this ummah is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.”

 In need of a religious revolution Levant Columnists Opinion Toronto Su


----------



## Roudy (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...


 
He got his PHD from the Taliban University of Islamic Stupidity


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> I do not recall bin laden killing Russians in Afghanistan-----he was not over there to kill Russians----he was there to establish Afghanistan as a SHARIAH SHIT HOLE-----nor do I recall Reagan calling bin laden a "FREEDOM FIGHTER"----
> you are confused. The white house DID make the mistake of calling the TALIBAN freedom fighters. Bin laden was not running the TALIBAN pigs Russians in Afghanistan were soldiers--------you and yours like to murder infants for Allah's pleasure



I can't be responsible for your profound ignorance. A quick trip to Wiki will discuss how Bin Laden was got his start fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.  And Reagan called those assholes "Freedom fighters".  

Those dirty stinking commies might teach girls how to read or something.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Reagan did not call Bin Laden a freedom fighter. He called the secular shah Massoud a freedom fighter, who was later killed by Al Queda and the Taliban.
> 
> When you get down to it, you're just a fulla shit lair and terrorist ass licker.



Reagan called the fighters in Afghanistan 'Freedom fighters".  


Besides, I thought according to you, there were no "secular" Muslims.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Have some compassion for poor Joe------his post made me
> wonder. How could anyone be THAT ignorant?



You claim you didn't know Bin Laden fought the Russians in Afghanistan. 

That's being ignorant. 



After leaving college in 1979 bin Laden joined Azzam[7][8] to fight the Soviet Invasion[9] and lived for a time in Peshawar.[_citation needed_] According to Rahimullah Yousufzai, "Azzam prevailed on him to come and use his money" for training recruits.[10] In the early 1980s, bin Laden lived at several addresses in and around Arbab Road, a narrow street in the University Town neighborhood in western Peshawar, Yusufzai said. Nearby in Gulshan Iqbal Road is the Arab mosque that Abdullah Azzam used as the jihad center, according to a Reuters inquiry in the neighborhood.[_citation needed_]

By 1984, with Azzam, bin Laden established a Saudi Arabian funded organization named Maktab al-Khadamat (MAK, _Office of Order_ in English), which funneled money, arms and Muslim fighters from around the Arabic world into the Afghan war. Through al-Khadamat, bin Laden's inherited family fortune[11] paid for air tickets and accommodation, dealt with paperwork with Pakistani authorities and provided other such services for the jihad fighters. In running al-Khadamat, bin Laden set up a network of couriers traveling between Afghanistan and Peshawar, which remained active after 2001, according to Rahimullah Yusufzai. It was during this time that Bin Laden met his future al-Qaeda collaborator, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, a member and later head of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Declaration? Who bombed the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, the marine barracks in Lebanon, etc.? Wake up and smell the jihad.



Okay.  The WTC bombing in 1983 was not related to the Marine Barracks in Lebanon.  In fact, when that happened, Bin Laden was still on OUR SIDE.  No, really.  

Well, I guess all them muslims all look the same to you. 

Here's the problem.  We keep sticking our dicks in the hornet's nest and wondering why we get stung.  

Here's a novel idea.  Don't stick your dick in a hornet's nest.  Don't put troops over there, don't play games in their politics, don't prop up the Zionist Entity.  Take all those hundreds of billions we are pissing away every year doing that and instead invest it in renewables and energy independence.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > I do not recall bin laden killing Russians in Afghanistan-----he was not over there to kill Russians----he was there to establish Afghanistan as a SHARIAH SHIT HOLE-----nor do I recall Reagan calling bin laden a "FREEDOM FIGHTER"----
> ...



I don't do  wikki------bin laden was in Afghanistan in order to
develop   AL QAEDA  -----which is an organization motivated to force the filth of islam down the throats of the entire world. 
bin laden was Yemeni on his mother's side-----a land similar to  Afghanistan in terrain and "culture"   -----easy place to hide and to convince the local idiots to be nuts.    His objective in joining up with the mujahadeen was "get rid of Russians" and make a    SHARIAH SHITHOLE STATE---not freedom----it is and was the Taliban and al qaeda idiots who stop education for girls.
As to the blatant error in thinking of the white house in the 80s----no one asked me -----if they had I would have said ----
never put guns in the hand of a muslim for any reason.   Oliver North tried to let them know.    Osama saw Afghanistan
as his  BASE  for this ----BIG JIHAD ----world wide filth


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> I don't do wikki------bin laden was in Afghanistan in order to
> develop AL QAEDA -----which is an organization motivated to force the filth of islam down the throats of the entire world.
> bin laden was Yemeni on his mother's side-----a land similar to Afghanistan in terrain and "culture" -----easy place to hide and to convince the local idiots to be nuts. His objective in joining up with the mujahadeen was "get rid of Russians" and make a SHARIAH SHITHOLE STATE---not freedom----it is and was the Taliban and al qaeda idiots who stop education for girls.
> As to the blatant error in thinking of the white house in the 80s----no one asked me -----if they had I would have said ----
> ...



Um, yeah your ignorance is pretty obvious.  

the point was, the reason the Muhajadin and the Taliban and Al Qaeda were fighting the Russians was not because of their love of "Freedom".  They just hated outsiders and the Russians were outsiders. And dumb-fuck Reagan armed them and called them "Freedom Fighters". 

Oh, Ollie North was a too-bit crook.  He was part of that whole brilliant scheme to swap weapons for hostages while we were also Arming Saddam.  

Again, we keep sticking our dicks in the hornet's nest and wondering why we get stung.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't do wikki------bin laden was in Afghanistan in order to
> ...



Wrong again    I am fully aware of what was going on and how idiotic was Washington in putting armaments in the hands of   muslims -----just to get them to kill each other
and a few Russians in the bargain.     Very bad judgement and  unfortunate misunderstanding as to the danger of
islam


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

PS----the  "mujahadeen"    were not much of an issue-----
it was the Taliban and Al quaeda  that were IT-----their objective was   SHARIAH SHIT unimpeded  and  ---Afghanistan as a base
for the   BIG JIHAD ON THE WORLD------something like
today's   ISIS-------bin laden wanted to invade  Saudi Arabia too


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> Wrong again I am fully aware of what was going on and how idiotic was Washington in putting armaments in the hands of muslims -----just to get them to kill each other
> and a few Russians in the bargain. Very bad judgement and unfortunate misunderstanding as to the danger of
> islam



No, it's the stupidity of trying to get involved in fights that have nothing to do with us. 

There was no "Misunderstanding".  We knew who these people were, and we did business with them anyway.  Just like we did business with a lot of bad characters like Marcos in the Philippines, Somoza in Nicaragua, Noriega in Panama, Mobutu in Zaire.  

I would also throw the Zionists on that list.  they routinely abuse the Palestinians and then wonder why they've had a terrorist problem for 70 years.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> PS----the "mujahadeen" were not much of an issue-----
> it was the Taliban and Al quaeda that were IT-----their objective was SHARIAH SHIT unimpeded and ---Afghanistan as a base
> for the BIG JIHAD ON THE WORLD------something like
> today's ISIS-------bin laden wanted to invade Saudi Arabia too



Yeah, there's a big bad muslim hiding under your bed, right now.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > PS----the "mujahadeen" were not much of an issue-----
> ...




People in my city have died as a result of the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD    ----the costs of homeland security are astronomical---because of  the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD
People from my city have been murdered by jihadist pigs


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong again I am fully aware of what was going on and how idiotic was Washington in putting armaments in the hands of muslims -----just to get them to kill each other
> ...



jews have had a terrorist problem with muslims since the
inception of islam.   -----


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

irosie91 said:


> People in my city have died as a result of the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD ----the costs of homeland security are astronomical---because of the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD
> People from my city have been murdered by jihadist pigs



Move somewhere else, then.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > People in my city have died as a result of the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD ----the costs of homeland security are astronomical---because of the stink and filth of Islamic JIHAD
> ...


Tuck your tail between your legs and run.   Yep a liberal poster.............


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > irosie91 said:
> ...



If i lived in a place where my neighbors hated me being there so much they were strapping bombs onto their kids to try get me to leave/kill me, then fucking right I'd move.  

But I wouldn't listen to an imaginary sky fairy telling me to move there to start with.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Sky Fairy...a new name for the MohamMAD! LOVE IT, Thanks JoeBlowhard!


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Of course you would............Jews have been in the middle east pretty much forever............but people like you believe they don't belong or don't deserve a place, a home, and or a country of their own..............Most of the land was desert that was called Israel..............I guess it was just another version of Holy Sand.................

Irregardless, they are a country and your stance is that they should just pack up and leave.............To WHERE................................Abandon their country.............that's your logical solution............

LOL


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Of course you would............Jews have been in the middle east pretty much forever............but people like you believe they don't belong or don't deserve a place, a home, and or a country of their own..............Most of the land was desert that was called Israel..............I guess it was just another version of Holy Sand.................



Except it hasn't been called Israel in 3000 years before the Zionist State appeared.  It was called Judea, Palestine, the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, etc.  

NO, I don't think religious apartheid is any more acceptable than racial apartheid, though. 



eagle1462010 said:


> Irregardless, they are a country and your stance is that they should just pack up and leave.............To WHERE................................Abandon their country.............that's your logical solution............



I'd have no objections to the United States taking them in.  They could also go back to Europe, they seem to be over that Nazi thing.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you would............Jews have been in the middle east pretty much forever............but people like you believe they don't belong or don't deserve a place, a home, and or a country of their own..............Most of the land was desert that was called Israel..............I guess it was just another version of Holy Sand.................
> ...



I'm sure your subversive women will approve...


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you would............Jews have been in the middle east pretty much forever............but people like you believe they don't belong or don't deserve a place, a home, and or a country of their own..............Most of the land was desert that was called Israel..............I guess it was just another version of Holy Sand.................
> ...


It wasn't until after WWI that any of the countries even existed.............It was called the Ottoman Empire.................Iraq, Jordan, Syria............etc.........didn't exist................

The Ottomans LOST..............Britain and France took it by force and divided it up as they saw fit.............Jews were already there.................

Your logic solution..................ALL JEWS LEAVE THE WHOLE AREA...........Leave your homes........pack your bags and give it to the Muzzies.................

Were you dropped on your head at birth..............


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 24, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> I'm sure your subversive women will approve...



You know what, guy. here's the thing. We aren't going to change them.  they need to do that on their own.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Vigilante said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure your subversive women will approve...
> ...


We can certainly POINT IT OUT and anyone with a functioning brain, will realize what we do with those little cartoons is TRUE! Need me to post some pictures of muslim women being stoned for being with a boy from another muslim cult, or perhaps, she CHEATED on her husband, and now is stoned to death, BUT while she is being raped, it takes 4 male witnesses for her to PROVE that she was?


----------



## percysunshine (Jan 24, 2015)

I think we should make a list of the Muslim countries which allow women to drive cars.

Ok, alphabetically we have....

um ... ah ...


Malaysia!


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 24, 2015)

percysunshine said:


> I think we should make a list of the Muslim countries which allow women to drive cars.
> 
> Ok, alphabetically we have....
> 
> ...



Saudi Arabia under Abdullah was another... I doubt it today!


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> "Honest and knowledgeable" referred to Egyptian President el-Sisi's comments (January 1, 2015) at Al Azhar, the greatest university in the Arab world when he addressed the Awqaf Ministry, the government’s religious department that funds mosques and Muslim imams across Egypt. His opinions in this matter are far more "honest and knowledgeable" than anything you have ever posted here and he courageously said (and you deny) that what the imams teach and preach to those impressionable young Muslims has caused "the entire Islamic world to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world."
> 
> In need of a religious revolution Levant Columnists Opinion Toronto Su


I'm not saying they don't teach that, I'm saying the reason they teach that has more to do with the bombs we drop, than it does some old book.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Declaration?  Who bombed the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, the marine barracks in Lebanon, etc.?  Wake up and smell the jihad.


That's not a global declaration of war.  You just think that, because you hate Muslims, like the Nazis hated the Jews.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> We can certainly POINT IT OUT and anyone with a functioning brain, will realize what we do with those little cartoons is TRUE! Need me to post some pictures of muslim women being stoned for being with a boy from another muslim cult, or perhaps, she CHEATED on her husband, and now is stoned to death, BUT while she is being raped, it takes 4 male witnesses for her to PROVE that she was?



Good. You pointed out that they have a different value system than we do. 

So what? 

If you conservatives had your way, you'd take us closer to them on those values, not further away. 

My point, which you guys don't get, is that we should have nothing to do with them.  The only reason why we "care" is because they are sitting on a shitload of oil and the Zionists think it's their God-given perogative to set up a state in the middle of their territory.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jan 25, 2015)

.

Very impressive how tolerant and defensive the PC Police are of religion.

Well, SOME religions.

Well, ONE religion.

.


----------



## Daniyel (Jan 25, 2015)

Discombobulated said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...


In our time?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> Very impressive how tolerant and defensive the PC Police are of religion.
> 
> ...



Our problems in the MIddle East have nothing to do with religion and a lot to do with stupid foreign policies. 

But the people who benefit from those policies are happy to wag their fingers and say, "Look at all the crazy stuff they believe!"  to keep bigots like you distracted from actually questioning their policies.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


Being called a bigot by JoeB:  Priceless!



.


----------



## indiajo (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> [
> 
> 
> Our problems in the MIddle East have nothing to do with religion



You are right. YOUR problems in the Middle East have really nothing to do with religion.
Just keep your greedy hands off and YOU have no problems.

Only thing is, the problems in the Middle East will stay. Or would have been there without YOU anyway.
And they have very well to do with religion. Not only that, they are solely caused by religion.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Reagan did not call Bin Laden a freedom fighter. He called the secular shah Massoud a freedom fighter, who was later killed by Al Queda and the Taliban.
> ...



Here's the guy Reagan called called a freedom fighter, you ignorant, arrogant asshole. 

*Ahmad Shah Massoud* (Dari Persian: احمد شاه مسعود;[1] September 2, 1953 – September 9, 2001) was an Afghan political and military leader, who was a powerful military commander during the resistance against the Soviet occupation between 1979 and 1989 and in the following years of civil war. He was assassinated on September 9, 2001.

Following the rise of the Taliban in 1996, Massoud, who rejected the Taliban's fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, returned to the armed opposition until he eventually fled to Kulob, Tajikistan.  assassinated, probably at the instigation of al-Qaeda, in a suicide bombing on September 9, 2001, just two days before the September 11 attacks in the United States which led to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation invading Afghanistan, allying with Massoud's forces.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



You're a terrorist loving ignorant coward. What makes you think your opinions count?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



Some were hurled at the wall.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Here's the guy Reagan called called a freedom fighter, you ignorant, arrogant asshole.



Ronald Reagan was too senile to be specific.  

He called all the guys fighting the Russians in Afghanistan "Freedom Fighters".   Not just the "nice" ones.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> You're a terrorist loving ignorant coward. What makes you think your opinions count?



The fact you get so upset about them.  Zionism is one of those things that's obviously stupid, but no one wants to say it's stupid.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Declaration?  Who bombed the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, the marine barracks in Lebanon, etc.?  Wake up and smell the jihad.
> ...



So, blowing up barracks and slaughtering 200 marines, bombing the USS Cole, or bombing the WTC in 1993 isn't a declaration of war because you, the Anus Mouth of the board says so? Even if the enemy specifically declares war, and acts on it?   Ya okay.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> It wasn't until after WWI that any of the countries even existed.............It was called the Ottoman Empire.................Iraq, Jordan, Syria............etc.........didn't exist................
> 
> The Ottomans LOST..............Britain and France took it by force and divided it up as they saw fit.............Jews were already there.................
> 
> ...



Well, the French and British had no business "Dividing it up" nor did they have any business handing it over to European Jews they wanted to get rid of.  

That was the original idea, BTW.  Get Jews out of Europe.  Then Hitler came up with a different idea. 

So now you have all these European Jews, who are surprised to find the Arabs don't want them any m ore than the Europeans did.  

Eventually, the Muslims WILL be in the majority.  They are breeding faster and a lot of these young Jews are starting to question the wisdom of living next to people who want to kill you and paying a very high price for hte privilage.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Here's the guy Reagan called called a freedom fighter, you ignorant, arrogant asshole.
> ...



Bullshit, here is the picture of Reagan meeting with Shah Massoud, where he called his group freedom fighters.  Shah Massoud was anti Taliban and anti Al Queda, and was assassinated for it.  He was the reason Afghanistan had not yet turned into a Taliban terrorist shithole.

Shah Massoud in the brown attire.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bullshit, here is the picture of Reagan meeting with Shah Massoud, where he called his group freedom fighters. Shah Massoud was anti Taliban and anti Al Queda, and was assassinated for it. He was the reason Afghanistan had not yet turned into a Taiban terrorist shithole.



except that it turned into a Taliban shithole pretty quickly, didn't it? 

Come on, Dude, Reagan was probably too fucking senile to know who he was getting us into bed with, but his pals at the CIA, the ones who knew these guys couldn't give shit one about "Democracy" or "Freedom" or "Capitalism", but just wanted to kill Russians for trying to bring modernity into their country. 

That's what happened.  We didn't just stick our dicks into hornets nest, we actually bred a meaner species of Hornet, in the hope it would torment our enemies.

And then it stung us right in the balls on 9/11/2001.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't until after WWI that any of the countries even existed.............It was called the Ottoman Empire.................Iraq, Jordan, Syria............etc.........didn't exist................
> ...



Sure they did.  The land was owned by the Ottoman Turks for 700 years, who sided with the Germans in WWI and when they lost the war, the conquerors could do as they saw fit. Arabs had jack shit to say about land they had no control of.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Sure they did. The land was owned by the Ottoman Turks for 700 years, who sided with the Germans in WWI and when they lost the war, the conquerors could do as they saw fit. Arabs had jack shit to say about land they had no control of.



You know what, guy.  That's what every imperialist says right before he's evacuating the roof of an embassy.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bullshit, here is the picture of Reagan meeting with Shah Massoud, where he called his group freedom fighters. Shah Massoud was anti Taliban and anti Al Queda, and was assassinated for it. He was the reason Afghanistan had not yet turned into a Taiban terrorist shithole.
> ...


Reagan was senile? If so, senility should be a prerequisite for the presidency. Hillary is almost there.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Meathead said:


> Reagan was senile? If so, senility should be a prerequisite for the presidency. Hillary is almost there.



Yup.  The Reagan years. 

Homeless swarming our streets. 
SHattered middle class
Coke being flown in by the Contras.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Yup.  The Reagan years.
> 
> Homeless swarming our streets.
> SHattered middle class
> Coke being flown in by the Contras.


Don't forget falling asleep at Cabinet meetings.


----------



## Billo_Really (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> So, blowing up barracks and slaughtering 200 marines, bombing the USS Cole, or bombing the WTC in 1993 isn't a declaration of war because you, the Anus Mouth of the board says so? Even if the enemy specifically declares war, and acts on it?   Ya okay.


No it's not a declaration of war, because Muslims are not one entity, with one mindset and one common goal.

People who think that, have the mind of a child and lack sufficient grey matter required for complex thought.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Reagan was senile? If so, senility should be a prerequisite for the presidency. Hillary is almost there.
> ...


There were no "homeless" swarms before Reagan? I see a lot more homeless "swarms" under Obama. I see a lot more poverty under Obama than I did under Bush. I see a far more racially divided country today than I did with either on of them.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you would............Jews have been in the middle east pretty much forever............but people like you believe they don't belong or don't deserve a place, a home, and or a country of their own..............Most of the land was desert that was called Israel..............I guess it was just another version of Holy Sand.................
> ...



And as even those just casually knowledgeable know, over 20% of the Jewish Homeland's CITIZENS are not Jewish. Now compare that to any Islamic country before choosing the target of your hatred.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Sure they did. The land was owned by the Ottoman Turks for 700 years, who sided with the Germans in WWI and when they lost the war, the conquerors could do as they saw fit. Arabs had jack shit to say about land they had no control of.
> ...



You mean the Islamic Arab imperialists who are tying to establish terrorist  Islamc states all over the region.  It must bother you that Israel doesn't allow the animals to do that.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Meathead said:


> There were no "homeless" swarms before Reagan? I see a lot more homeless "swarms" under Obama. I see a lot more poverty under Obama than I did under Bush. I see a far more racially divided country today than I did with either on of them.



HOw do you see ANYTHING when you don't live in this country?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> You mean the Islamic Arab imperialists who are tying to establish terrorist Islamc states all over the region. It must bother you that Israel doesn't allow the animals to do that.



NO, it bothers me that the Zionists are the ones keeping them in a perpetualy angry mood. 

We didn't have any problems with the Islamic World before the Zionists started pissing them off.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> And as even those just casually knowledgeable know, over 20% of the Jewish Homeland's CITIZENS are not Jewish. Now compare that to any Islamic country before choosing the target of your hatred.



Actually, it's about HALF if you count the occupied territories, and they are treated as second class citizens in their own country.  

Zionism was just as ugly under it's original title, Apartheid.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So, blowing up barracks and slaughtering 200 marines, bombing the USS Cole, or bombing the WTC in 1993 isn't a declaration of war because you, the Anus Mouth of the board says so? Even if the enemy specifically declares war, and acts on it?   Ya okay.
> ...



ISLAMISTS have declared war on the US, Israel, and the West decades ago. They've followed up on their words by attacking and killing Americans, and many Muslim nation states are supporting such actions.  We also have individual MUSLIMS in the West attacking the very freedoms the West was built on. What's there to figure out, Anus Mouth with sufficent brown matter inside your head?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> ISLAMISTS have declared war on the US, Israel, and the West decades ago. They've followed up on their words by attacking and killing Americans, and many Muslim nation states are supporting such actions. We also have individual MUSLIMS in the West attacking the very freedoms the West was built on. What's there to figure out, Anus Mouth with sufficent brown matter inside your head?



Don't you love how the Zionist scum are happy to say "Let's you and him fight".


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > You mean the Islamic Arab imperialists who are tying to establish terrorist Islamc states all over the region. It must bother you that Israel doesn't allow the animals to do that.
> ...


So what's making those poor Alqueda and ISIS "perpetually angry"?  Ha ha ha.  The fact that Zionists won't let the savages commit genocide on them is making them perpetually angry.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > ISLAMISTS have declared war on the US, Israel, and the West decades ago. They've followed up on their words by attacking and killing Americans, and many Muslim nation states are supporting such actions. We also have individual MUSLIMS in the West attacking the very freedoms the West was built on. What's there to figure out, Anus Mouth with sufficent brown matter inside your head?
> ...



No I mean how subhuman Islamist scum keep killing non Muslims in the name of Mohammad the terrorist prophet.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> NO, it bothers me that the Zionists are the ones keeping them in a perpetualy angry mood...


 
Again your hate is misguided (but at least you are consistent). It is and long has been their own failed leadership, the wider Arab World and UNRWA that has trapped these hapless Palestinian "refugees" in squalid camps in order to foment the desperation necessary to spawn generation after generation of human cannon fodder. It's a business for the enablers and a way of life for the Palestinians.


----------



## SAYIT (Jan 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Don't you love how the Zionist scum are happy to say "Let's you and him fight".



Zionist scum? Who do your think you're kidding?


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees (Jan 25, 2015)

I'm watching _Schindler's List_ right now and all I can think of is greater Islam of today.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

Jow Blow forgot that as far back as Thomas Jefferson and the Barabry Wars, Muslim animals were kidnapping and beheading Americans in the name of Mohammad. In fact their behavior was IDENTICAL to how ISIS and Al Queda are acting today. 

Oh wait, what am I thinking. It was because of those evil  Jooooooos that MUSLIMS got perpetually angry over 200 years ago and hpbehaeidng Americans and asking for ransom, or else!  Allah Akbar! Ha ha ha.


----------



## hipeter924 (Jan 26, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > NO, it bothers me that the Zionists are the ones keeping them in a perpetualy angry mood...
> ...


There is a solution, but the Arab world would hate it; which is UN administration of Gaza and parts of the West Bank, as well as disarmament of Hamas and Fatah. 

They won't be satisfied in their revenge till all Jews in Israel are dead, and they have ' their land' back. Propaganda, religious fanaticism, and material and economic desperation is a toxic mix.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> So what's making those poor Alqueda and ISIS "perpetually angry"? Ha ha ha. The fact that Zionists won't let the savages commit genocide on them is making them perpetually angry.



If you Zionists gave their land back and went back to Europe where you belonged, they wouldn't be all that angry. 

But keep hoping America keeps bailing you out.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Jow Blow forgot that as far back as Thomas Jefferson and the Barabry Wars, Muslim animals were kidnapping and beheading Americans in the name of Mohammad. In fact their behavior was IDENTICAL to how ISIS and Al Queda are acting today.



They were attacking ships that were IN THEIR WATERS.  Heeellllllooooooo.  Not that this was vicious or really invovled "Beheadings".  They usually just held these people until they got a payoff.  

Of course, what followed was 100 years or European colonization that has caused most of the radicaliziation of the Islamic world, Zionism just being the last sad act of htat stupidity.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So what's making those poor Alqueda and ISIS "perpetually angry"? Ha ha ha. The fact that Zionists won't let the savages commit genocide on them is making them perpetually angry.
> ...



Yeah?  So why did Muslims attack Americans back in Jeffersons days, and the WTC 1993 and 9-11?  Why did Muslims slaughter those cartoonists and Jews in France?  Why are Muslims committing genocide and ethnic cleansing on Christians and others?  

You're fulla shit.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Jow Blow forgot that as far back as Thomas Jefferson and the Barabry Wars, Muslim animals were kidnapping and beheading Americans in the name of Mohammad. In fact their behavior was IDENTICAL to how ISIS and Al Queda are acting today.
> ...



No actually, nobody was in their "waters", they were practicing piracy and being criminal terrorists because they believed their religion sanctioned it.

Look it up.  Helllooooooooo.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

*Barbary Wars*
The *Barbary Wars* were two wars fought at different times over the same reasons between the United States of America and the Barbary states (the _de jure_ Ottoman Empirepossessions of, but _de facto_ independent, Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli) of North Africa in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. At issue was the Barbary pirates' demand for tribute from American merchant vessels in the Mediterranean Sea. If ships of a given country failed to pay, pirates would attack the ships and take their goods, and often enslave crew members or hold them for ransom. When Thomas Jefferson became President he refused to pay tribute and sent a United States Naval fleet to the Mediterranean; they bombarded the various fortified pirate cities, ultimately extracting concessions of fair passage from their rulers. Both the administrations of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison undertook the actions against theBarbary States at different times. Jefferson led the first, from 1801 to 1805, against pirates' cities in what are today Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria. Madison directed forces for the second war in 1815.

During the American Revolution, the Islamic pirates attacked American ships. On December 20, 1777, Morocco's Sultan Mohammed III declared that the American merchant ships would be under the protection of the sultanate and could thus enjoy safe passage into the Mediterranean and along the coast. The Moroccan-American Treaty of Friendship stands as the U.S.'s oldest non-broken friendship treaty[4][5] with a foreign power. In 1787 Morocco had been one of the first nations to recognize the United States.

*In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:*

*"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."*

Ring a bell? Ding ding ding ding. The cancer of a Islam as early as the American revolution.


----------



## MDiver (Jan 26, 2015)

To see the root of the problem, one must read the Quran.  While Muhammads early teachings were peaceful and did some good for his people, his latter teachings were about hate and violence against all who rejected his teachings.  A Muslim who considers him/herself to be a "true" Muslim, must believe that Muhammads latter teachings of hate and violence supercede his earlier teachings. 
Islam has no central figure like the Pope and thus any individual can declare themselves an islamic scholar (Imam, Mullah, Cleric).  Teaching of the Quran is left to the individual who leads mosque he preaches from.  The entity that funds the building of the mosque (Saudi Arabia as an example), decides who can teach.
The problem is that no matter whether the teaching is Sunni or Shia, the ultimate goal remains the same, to conquer the world, destroy all other religions and convert all, forcing non-believers to submit to being a second class populace, enforcing taxes on them and ultimately killing all non-believers. 
Those raised in Islamic nations are fed this nonsense from infancy on in their families, their mosques, their required religious indoctrination schools (madrazzas), their friends and so on. 
Thus, when some article or cartoon lampoons or ridicules their belief system, the Imams, Mullahs, Ayatollahs, Clerics, seize the opportunity to foment the preached hate in their followers toward the infidels, all with the ultimate goal of suppressing any criticizm of their religion and furthering the agenda of world domination.
The reason for many Muslims not rising up can probably fall into three categories:
1.  Work and providing for their families takes precedence.
2.  Some aren't caught up in the furor because they've been living in secular western democracies for generations and are happy with it.
3.  The Islamic population may be very small in a nation and as such are concerned with their own safety should the host nation and its population get reason to react to any radical movement on the Muslims' part. 
For those non-Muslim nations allowing Islam to grow within its borders, they may want to take a good hard look at "all" Islamic nations and how "non-believers" are treated and realise that if Islam gains a majority within their borders, their non-Muslim populace can be expected to be treated the same as their counterparts in Islamic nations, no matter what a Muslim may say to their face.  After all, one must remember that the "doctrine of Taqqiya" (deception, lies) is allowed to protect the religion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 26, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yeah? So why did Muslims attack Americans back in Jeffersons days, and the WTC 1993 and 9-11? Why did Muslims slaughter those cartoonists and Jews in France? Why are Muslims committing genocide and ethnic cleansing on Christians and others?
> 
> You're fulla shit.



Why does anyone do anything.

Some crazy prepper kid shoots up a school, you guys would never say it was an indictment of Christianity, or America or anyone but that kid.  But some Muslim does something, and Gosh Darn, they all must be in on it.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah? So why did Muslims attack Americans back in Jeffersons days, and the WTC 1993 and 9-11? Why did Muslims slaughter those cartoonists and Jews in France? Why are Muslims committing genocide and ethnic cleansing on Christians and others?
> ...



Riiiiight.  There's crime and shootings in cities all over the world, let's not be too harsh here.  Just because Muslims are waving the Koran and yelling "Allah Akbar" while committing genocide and slaughtering people in the name of Islam and Mohammad, doesn't mean anything.  Yeah, why should it be of concern that Muslims seem to be the only group that murders cartoonists just for drawing cartoons? 

Sure sure, everybody move on, nothing strange going on here, move on....


----------



## Roudy (Jan 26, 2015)

MDiver said:


> To see the root of the problem, one must read the Quran.  While Muhammads early teachings were peaceful and did some good for his people, his latter teachings were about hate and violence against all who rejected his teachings.  A Muslim who considers him/herself to be a "true" Muslim, must believe that Muhammads latter teachings of hate and violence supercede his earlier teachings.
> Islam has no central figure like the Pope and thus any individual can declare themselves an islamic scholar (Imam, Mullah, Cleric).  Teaching of the Quran is left to the individual who leads mosque he preaches from.  The entity that funds the building of the mosque (Saudi Arabia as an example), decides who can teach.
> The problem is that no matter whether the teaching is Sunni or Shia, the ultimate goal remains the same, to conquer the world, destroy all other religions and convert all, forcing non-believers to submit to being a second class populace, enforcing taxes on them and ultimately killing all non-believers.
> Those raised in Islamic nations are fed this nonsense from infancy on in their families, their mosques, their required religious indoctrination schools (madrazzas), their friends and so on.
> ...


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Riiiiight. There's crime and shootings in cities all over the world, let's not be too harsh here. Just because Muslims are waving the Koran and yelling "Allah Akbar" while committing genocide and slaughtering people in the name of Islam and Mohammad, doesn't mean anything. Yeah, why should it be of concern that Muslims seem to be the only group that murders cartoonists just for drawing cartoons?



Exactly, guy. There's crimes all over the US. You guys whine about "No-Go Zones", but the fact is, most of them are a lot safer than the inner cities of America. 

Look, sonny, you need to get over your Islamaphobia.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Yeah?  So why did Muslims attack Americans back in Jeffersons days, and the WTC 1993 and 9-11?  Why did Muslims slaughter those cartoonists and Jews in France?  Why are Muslims committing genocide and ethnic cleansing on Christians and others?
> 
> You're fulla shit.



1.) Eliciting protection money, especially during the days of Thomas Jefferson has nothing to do with religion or with theology. It was also a common practice for Europeans at that time in Africa; so the notion that it was "Just Muslims" is as silly as it is untrue.

2.) There is a lot of bad blood between Algerians / Muslims and France stemming from France's long and brutal occupation of Algeria and their not too distant war for independence. It's worth noting that the French terrorist organization the O.A.S. targeted cartoonists in their campaigns as well. In fact, their first victim was a lawyer who had drawn an editorial cartoon that they found offensive. So once again, then notion that it is "only Muslims" isn't even true if we examine modern French history let alone the rest of the world.

3.) The strongest case for ethnic cleansing engaged in by an Islamic population would be in Darfur; and there both sides are majority Muslim. As far as Christian populations being targeted, your best bet would be to point either to ISIL or Boko Haram, and it would be easy enough to point to Christian examples that exist in parallel with them from the Lord Resistance Army which has historically been just as bloody as Boko Haram, to the indiscriminate killing of Muslims in the C.A.R. by 'Christian' militias. So once again, your notion that it is "just Muslims" falls incredibly short.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jan 27, 2015)

Conservative65 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


If you don't like murder don't murder but don't make it illegal for other people to murder. Are you for real?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 27, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah?  So why did Muslims attack Americans back in Jeffersons days, and the WTC 1993 and 9-11?  Why did Muslims slaughter those cartoonists and Jews in France?  Why are Muslims committing genocide and ethnic cleansing on Christians and others?
> ...



Really, even though Muslims said they did it because of Islam, Jefferson also made similar observations?  Nah, I'll take the written words of impartial people at the time:

*In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:*

*"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."*

So you see, it's the same shit with Muslims about 200 years ago, as it is today. Not much has changed.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



A couple of things here:

1.) If it was as clear cut as that the Barbary states wouldn't have been the only Islamic states engaging in such protection rent seeking.

2.) You are ignoring the fact that the Europeans were doing it too.

3.) You are ignoring the fact that the Europeans were, at the time, invoking Christianity as justification for the mass conquest of Africa and the murder and enslavement of its peoples. 

4.) You completely glossed over the fact that French terrorists have killed cartoonists in modern times for drawing cartoons that they found insulting which in and of itself destroys the entire premise of your thread.

5.) You have once again completely ignored the existence of non0Muslim violence throughout modern history simply so that you can push an anti-0Islamic agenda.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 27, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



What are you talking about.  They were Islamic pirates who attacked merchant and other ships, with no provocation whatsoever, because they felt that Islam gave them a right to do that to that to non Muslims.

This is the undeniable common theme in Muslim behavior.  And it was even observed by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

We know you are desperate to divert the discussion to Europeans and their sins, but it has absolutely zero to do with it.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



And is exactly what European states were doing at the time in Africa as well. Islam hardly needs to exist for such incidents to occur; nor does Quranic theology demand such actions be taken.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

I also find it rather telling how quickly you have dropped the whole cartoon line after being reminded of basic French history and of the O.A.S.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 27, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



Muslim modus operandi: when confronted with truths about Islam or Muslims, change subject to Europeans and Christians ASAP.  Fact is the Islamic pirates attacked American vessels, took hostages and beheaded them, and they SAID they were doing it in the name of Islam, and so did their victims. And all of this has been recorded and documented. 

But but but but Europeans had pirates toooooo!  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 27, 2015)

Osomir said:


> I also find it rather telling how quickly you have dropped the whole cartoon line after being reminded of basic French history and of the O.A.S.



Haven't dropped anything. The conversation kept changing because Muslims and their terrorist loving appeasers like you kept trying to derail the OP. 

"French History".  What does that have to do with why Muslims are the only people that slaughter cartoonists, artists, journalists in democratic societies where such freedoms are allowed? 

These barbaric killings are occurring all over Europe. They killed Van Gogh for making a movie about Islamic oppression of women, they killed another Danish cartoonist for drawing cartoons of Mohammed.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Muslim modus operandi: when confronted with truths about Islam or Muslims, change subject to Europeans and Christians ASAP.  Fact is the Islamic pirates attacked American vessels, took hostages and beheaded them, and they SAID they were doing it in the name of Islam, and so did their victims. And all of this has been recorded and documented.
> 
> But but but but Europeans had pirates toooooo!  Ha ha ha.



1.) The entire premise behind this thread (as reflected by its title) is the idea that it is only ever Muslims. So showing that it isn't always Muslims isn't a logical fallacy, it is quite simply showing that you were wrong in your assumptions at best; and terribly ignorant of world history at worst.

2.) I'm not a Muslim. Nice try though.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Haven't dropped anything. The conversation kept changing because Muslims and their terrorist loving appeasers like you kept trying to derail the OP.
> 
> "French History".  What does that have to do with why Muslims are the only people that slaughter cartoonists, artists, journalists in democratic societies where such freedoms are allowed?
> 
> These barbaric killings are occurring all over Europe. They killed Van Gogh for making a movie about Islamic oppression of women, they killed another Danish cartoonist for drawing cartoons of Mohammed.



1.) The OP was about killing people over cartoons and your assumption that it was only Muslims who do this. It is very easy to point to France's own modern history to show that this isn't the case, and groups like the F.A.F. and O.A.S. demonstrate this with ease. 

2.) Muslims aren't the only people who have killed cartoonists for the illustrations that they create. I just gave you an example of a French Christian group doing exactly this in France as well.

3.) You were wrong. Deal with it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 27, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Muslim modus operandi: when confronted with truths about Islam or Muslims, change subject to Europeans and Christians ASAP. Fact is the Islamic pirates attacked American vessels, took hostages and beheaded them, and they SAID they were doing it in the name of Islam, and so did their victims. And all of this has been recorded and documented.
> 
> But but but but Europeans had pirates toooooo! Ha ha ha.



The United Kingdom attacked American vessels and took hostages.  That's what the War of 1812 was about.  

at the same time that these bad old Barbary Pirates were taking hostages (most of whom were released when ransoms were paid), European Christians in North America were killing Native Americans and paying for their scalps to be brought in as proof they were doing it.  

And the ironic thing. Most people equate scalping with the Native Americans today. 

Scalping - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Roudy (Jan 27, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Muslim modus operandi: when confronted with truths about Islam or Muslims, change subject to Europeans and Christians ASAP. Fact is the Islamic pirates attacked American vessels, took hostages and beheaded them, and they SAID they were doing it in the name of Islam, and so did their victims. And all of this has been recorded and documented.
> ...



The ironic thing is you bring up scalping, when you should be discussing the lessons the Founding Fathers learned on how to deal with Islamic piracy and terrorism, which is, that ISIS and Al Queda need to be crushed, and negotiating and "degrading" will not work.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> The ironic thing is you bring up scalping, when you should be discussing the lessons the Founding Fathers learned on how to deal with Islamic piracy and terrorism, which is, that ISIS and Al Queda need to be crushed, and negotiating and "degrading" will not work.



Actually, the Founding Slave Rapists really didn't do all that much.  the problem wasn't solved until the EuroTrash decided to take those places over, which is a large part of why we STILL have a problem today. 

Now, if we could do the novel thing of just leaving them the fuck alone, that might be progress. 

But idiots like you want to keep sticking your dick into a hornet's nest and complain about getting stung.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 28, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



So tell us all again about how it is always only Muslims?


----------



## Roudy (Jan 28, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



I'm the one asking.  Why is it Muslims always that are slaughtering people in the West exercising their free and democratic rights to draw cartoons, or portray religions negatively?  Come on now, you know the answer.....


----------



## Roudy (Jan 28, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > The ironic thing is you bring up scalping, when you should be discussing the lessons the Founding Fathers learned on how to deal with Islamic piracy and terrorism, which is, that ISIS and Al Queda need to be crushed, and negotiating and "degrading" will not work.
> ...



Barbary wars and the fact that Muslims were the ones that invaded and colonized Europe first, prove you wrong.  Islam is an imperialistic expansionist ideology.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> I'm the one asking. Why is it Muslims always that are slaughtering people in the West exercising their free and democratic rights to draw cartoons, or portray religions negatively? Come on now, you know the answer.....



Okay, how many incidents have their been of Muslims slaughtering people over cartoons?  One? Two?  

How many mass shootings do we have in the US every year because some gun nut heard voices in his head but was able to buy a gun, anyway?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Barbary wars and the fact that Muslims were the ones that invaded and colonized Europe first, prove you wrong. Islam is an imperialistic expansionist ideology.



So is Christianity.  and Christianity is more genocidal.  Just ask my Cherokee ancestors.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


The answer is, that it isn't. I even gave you a specifically French Christian example. The answer to your question, is that you were / are wrong.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Muslim modus operandi: when confronted with truths about Islam or Muslims, change subject to Europeans and Christians ASAP.  Fact is the Islamic pirates attacked American vessels, took hostages and beheaded them, and they SAID they were doing it in the name of Islam, and so did their victims. And all of this has been recorded and documented.
> ...



1- The premise of this thread is the idea that it's always Muslims.  "IT IS" means present day, not it is only "ever", as you tried to cleverly imply.  Your claim that others have killed those who defamed their religion in the past is hardly groundbreaking, nitwit. 

2- Being a Muslim isn't a requirement for spreading Islamist propaganda, lies, and justifications for Muslim barbarism and terrorism.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Barbary wars and the fact that Muslims were the ones that invaded and colonized Europe first, prove you wrong. Islam is an imperialistic expansionist ideology.
> ...



Um stay focused, mental case.  Your assertion was that Muslims wouldn't be so barbaric if only others wouldn't be sticking their dicks in the hornet's nest.  

Islamic history clearly refutes that.  Muslims were the first to invade Christian Europe, and Muslims were attacking and terrorist Americans with no provocation, over 200 years ago.  Since Muslims are clearly the ones sticking their dicks in other peoples homes and lands, perhaps they should stop whining when they receive the consequences of their actions.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I'm the one asking. Why is it Muslims always that are slaughtering people in the West exercising their free and democratic rights to draw cartoons, or portray religions negatively? Come on now, you know the answer.....
> ...



Your attempt to minimize Islamic barbarism are futile.  The entire European continent is now on high alert due to this very reason.  

Last time Pope Benedict merely mentioned something about Islam and how it spread, Muslims nearly burned down half of Europe.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



Yet you can't show me a similar case or pattern of behavior in people of other faiths, can you?  Just hot air and empty claims.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The O.A.S. was a Christian organization. They hated Muslims (most of their leaders did at least save for one idealist) and sought to encourage the creation of an apartheid state in Algeria in which Muslims would be systematically discriminated against. Also, just as an FYI, the 1960's weren't all that long ago.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The 1960s easily fall into the academic category of modern history. Furthermore the Charlie Hebdo incident surrounds an Algerian minority population in a majority French population. Since your contention is that there is something unique in modern times about these attacks and that no one else does them, it is worth observing how a minority Christian French population acted in a majority Algerian population. The simple fact is that we saw acts of violence perpetrated by groups like the O.A.S. that are on par with any attack engaged in by a Muslim anywhere in modern Europe that you will be able to point to. I already gave you a specific example of the O.A.S. specifically targeting someone for drawing an editorial cartoon. But I can easily cite more examples. I literally know of hundreds of them.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Um stay focused, mental case. Your assertion was that Muslims wouldn't be so barbaric if only others wouldn't be sticking their dicks in the hornet's nest.
> 
> Islamic history clearly refutes that. Muslims were the first to invade Christian Europe, and Muslims were attacking and terrorist Americans with no provocation, over 200 years ago. Since Muslims are clearly the ones sticking their dicks in other peoples homes and lands, perhaps they should stop whining when they receive the consequences of their actions.



Make up your mind, guy. Either you take ALL OF HISTORY or you don't. 

You can't say "All of History" to include Ottoman Imperialism while exempting British Imperialism (which was much, much, much worse).  

If you want to just include the modern day, then, yes, it's because we keep sticking our dicks into their hornets nest. 

Oh, why is it only the Muslims when it isn't the Jews, Hindus, Christians, Atheists and Shintoists!


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Your attempt to minimize Islamic barbarism are futile. The entire European continent is now on high alert due to this very reason.
> 
> Last time Pope Benedict merely mentioned something about Islam and how it spread, Muslims nearly burned down half of Europe.



Yeah, okay, Hyperbole much?  Half of Europe?  Really?


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Um stay focused, mental case. Your assertion was that Muslims wouldn't be so barbaric if only others wouldn't be sticking their dicks in the hornet's nest.
> ...


I'll take current history for a 1000 Alec...........................

Not having to go back to the 7th Century for the argument.
We evolved...............they DEVOLVED BACK IN TIME.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> I'll take current history for a 1000 Alec...........................
> 
> Not having to go back to the 7th Century for the argument.
> We evolved...............they DEVOLVED BACK IN TIME.



I don't think we are all that "evolved", to be honest.  How many hate crimes against not only Muslims but Hindus and Sikhs have happened since 9/11? 

If the Muslims are "Savage", it because they live in a world where they are routinely bombed.  

Fuck, given how many wingnuts on this website I've seen fantasize about all the people they can't wait to shoot, I'd imagine what we'd become if our civilization fell apart under the  pressures of war and poverty.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll take current history for a 1000 Alec...........................
> ...


How many on this board are cutting little kids heads off in the middle east right now..............

Huh..................

and they are killing their fellow Muslims in doing so.........................

Everything is everybody else's fault in your tiny mind..............blaming us for the barbarism in the middle east right now...............

WE GOT BOMBED............quick.................cut off that little girls head..............that'll stop it..............

Do you realize how stupid you really sound all the time with your standard bs posts.................

Probably not, but I do.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 29, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> How many on this board are cutting little kids heads off in the middle east right now..............
> 
> Huh..................
> 
> ...



Once again. The French did this in Algeria in the 60s too. One need not go back too far in time to witness brutality from "civilized" nations. We also see non-Islamic groups currently engaged in such atrocities as well. I think that people tend to forget that most of Sub-Saharan Africa is Christian.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 29, 2015)

Osomir said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > How many on this board are cutting little kids heads off in the middle east right now..............
> ...


and once again ISIS has displaced over half a country...............and the Muzzies in africa are going door to door in their killing sprees...................


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



So....now you're bringing the Algerian independence movement from French colonists as justification and equivalent Muslims slaughtering cartoonists?  Just how lame are you? That isn't even CLOSE.

Unfortunately for you, your entire premise collapses from the getgo because Chalie Hebdo wasn't an isolated incident, it was the hair that broke the camel's back.  There were so many similar incidents of Muslims having a sudden jihad moment and murdering writers, journalists, film producers, artists, Van Gogh's son, etc. all over Western Europe, that Europeans got sick and tired and had to do somethung about their Western freedoms and ideals being held hostage by Muslim savages. That's why so many millions marched in France, and why so many world world leaders showed up. They had enough.

So yes, there is something unique about Islam and what it does to Muslims.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Um stay focused, mental case. Your assertion was that Muslims wouldn't be so barbaric if only others wouldn't be sticking their dicks in the hornet's nest.
> ...



Try to focus, braindead.  Muslims are the only ones slaughtering those who speak negatively about their prophet or religion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> How many on this board are cutting little kids heads off in the middle east right now..............
> 
> Huh..................
> 
> ...



Okay, guy, here's the problem. They aren't cutting off the heads of little kids.  They are cutting off the heads of western hostages who should have shown a lick of sense to not be their to start with. 

You can huff and puff all day, but the fact is, I don't see you running down to a recruiter's office to sign up.  

Let me know when you do.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Try to focus, braindead. Muslims are the only ones slaughtering those who speak negatively about their prophet or religion.



Except when Christians and Jews have done the same thing.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Try to focus, braindead. Muslims are the only ones slaughtering those who speak negatively about their prophet or religion.
> ...



Can you show us?  No you can't.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



you mean other than the Bible and history texts?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Okay, best way to understand Roudy the Zionist. 

Roudy "Hey, I'm going to climb into this Tiger's Cage because God told me it was mine!" 

Me- "That's kind of a dumb idea." 

Roudy: "Oh my God, the Tiger is mauling me!" 

Me- "Um, yeah, that's why they had a fence around it." 

Roudy- "Don't you know Tigers are evil and have a history of eating people'. 

Me- Yeah, stupid people who put themselves in that territory. Why don't you just climb out of his cage. Roudy? Roudy? Where did you go? 

Tiger: BURRRRRRP!!!!!!


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



I mean show us how Jews and Christians today are killing those who insult their religion, for example cartoonists.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, best way to understand Roudy the Zionist.
> 
> Roudy "Hey, I'm going to climb into this Tiger's Cage because God told me it was mine!"
> 
> ...



Now that was pretty lame.  If you want to be funny just say the stupid things you normally do. You'll get laughs every time.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 29, 2015)

Roudy said:


> I mean show us how Jews and Christians today are killing those who insult their religion, for example cartoonists.



I don't know, those 130,000 people who died in Iraq because Jesus told Bush to invade or those 2000 Palestinians who were killed in the Gaza because Bibi wanted to look tough are pretty good examples. 

But I'm sure you'll claim those things are "justified".


----------



## toastman (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I mean show us how Jews and Christians today are killing those who insult their religion, for example cartoonists.
> ...



The problem is that the incidents you posted had NOTHING to do with religion.

Whereas Muslim extremists kill BECAUSE of their religion.


----------



## toastman (Jan 29, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, best way to understand Roudy the Zionist.
> 
> Roudy "Hey, I'm going to climb into this Tiger's Cage because God told me it was mine!"
> 
> ...


What an incredibly dumb and childish comparison. How many times does it have to be said to you that most Jewish Israelis are secular?

And when they arrived to the regions, it was not a Tiger's cage. 

Reading your posts, it's almost as if you have no knowledge on the subject.


----------



## Vigilante (Jan 29, 2015)




----------



## sealybobo (Jan 29, 2015)

saveliberty said:


> The Apologists like to portray the Crusades as some type of Catholic blood lust, but I think they just recognized the threat for what is was and still is.



Jews killed christians and christians killed anyone who wasn't christian. It was for territory power and control. Like gangs.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > I mean show us how Jews and Christians today are killing those who insult their religion, for example cartoonists.
> ...



And this has what exactly to do with Muslims running around killing cartoonists, journalists, writers, etc. who dare to criticize their religion or prophet?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> The problem is that the incidents you posted had NOTHING to do with religion.
> 
> Whereas Muslim extremists kill BECAUSE of their religion.



That's fucking retarded. 

God told Bush to go into Iraq.  Seriously, he said so.  

As for the continued genocide of the Palestinian people by Zionist scum, they only pick that place because "God" gave it to them. It's in the fucking bible.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> And this has what exactly to do with Muslims running around killing cartoonists, journalists, writers, etc. who dare to criticize their religion or prophet?



they, are 100 times worse? 

Okay- 

130,000 Iraqis-  most of them women and children
    2,000 Palestinains - most of them women and children
         13 racist cartoonists- None of them children, and most of them not women, either.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> What an incredibly dumb and childish comparison. How many times does it have to be said to you that most Jewish Israelis are secular?
> 
> And when they arrived to the regions, it was not a Tiger's cage.
> 
> Reading your posts, it's almost as if you have no knowledge on the subject.



Reading your posts, it's amazing how much in denial you are. 

You stole their shit. Now they want to kill you.  It's pretty fucking simple, really.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > And this has what exactly to do with Muslims running around killing cartoonists, journalists, writers, etc. who dare to criticize their religion or prophet?
> ...


So you're comparing people killed in war as collateral damage to 13 cartoonists just doing their job where there was no war. Fuck you're incredibly stupid.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > The problem is that the incidents you posted had NOTHING to do with religion.
> ...


No, you're fuckin retarded, and your posts are proof of that. Genoicde? The Palestinian population has been growing for the last 70 years you brainwashed shill. 
Whatever happens to the Palestinians is a result of the Palestinian scum themselves. Don't like it? Don't attack a country 100 times stronger than you.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Nothing. Joe is a closet Muslim who likes to blame everyone but them. One of the dumbest posters I've come across.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What an incredibly dumb and childish comparison. How many times does it have to be said to you that most Jewish Israelis are secular?
> ...


No, YOU claim that Israel stole their shit. Which of course is not true.

Then you expect Israel to sit still when they are getting attacked, and you whine when they hit back. 

Your extreme hatred for Israel is the issue here, and it is skewing your logic.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > And this has what exactly to do with Muslims running around killing cartoonists, journalists, writers, etc. who dare to criticize their religion or prophet?
> ...


Yea, "racist" cartoonists, half of whom were jewish socialists, all of whom were avowed "anti-racists" calling for banning the "racist" Front National. They also had many anti-zionist cartoons. 

But please, tell us more about how these backward algerian goat fuckers killing anti-theist, anti-war french leftists is a legitimate response to the American invasion of Iraq. But it isn't a big deal because most of the writers were men.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



The ironic thing is, the guy has always claimed he's an "Eisenhower Republican", but as it's slowly but surely turned out, he's actually one of the absolute farthest to the left of all members here. He has zero in common with Ike.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> So you're comparing people killed in war as collateral damage to 13 cartoonists just doing their job where there was no war. Fuck you're incredibly stupid.



I would think that "collateral damage" would be worse.  Those people didn't sign on to being killed. They were just living their lives and someone decided to blow up their homes over weapons that didn't exist. 

The racist cartoonists knew what they were doing and did it anyway.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Yea, "racist" cartoonists, half of whom were jewish socialists, all of whom were avowed "anti-racists" calling for banning the "racist" Front National. They also had many anti-zionist cartoons.
> 
> But please, tell us more about how these backward algerian goat fuckers killing anti-theist, anti-war french leftists is a legitimate response to the American invasion of Iraq. But it isn't a big deal because most of the writers were men.



The fact that they were socialists didn't make their cartoons racist?  

Can't get weepy when people who go looking for trouble find it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> The ironic thing is, the guy has always claimed he's an "Eisenhower Republican", but as it's slowly but surely turned out, he's actually one of the absolute farthest to the left of all members here. He has zero in common with Ike.



Actually, Ike never would have gotten us involved in stupid wars, because he understood war.  

Ike was the guy who got us out of Korea.  He refused to side with the Zionists and British in the 1956 war and even put pressure to put an end to that war.  

Oh, yeah, and Ike had a 93% top marginal rate on the rich and used the money to fund public works projects.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Yea, "racist" cartoonists, half of whom were jewish socialists, all of whom were avowed "anti-racists" calling for banning the "racist" Front National. They also had many anti-zionist cartoons.
> ...


Islam is a race now? Were they racist when they attacked Christian and Jews? Oh wait, that's right, its ok to shit on those religions but if you criticize the religion started by an bloodthirsty pedophile you deserve to die.

Glad to know you think it is ok to kill innocent people if they publish a "racist" cartoon though you fucking faggot.

I'd like to see a reality where you go to prison.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Islam is a race now? Were they racist when they attacked Christian and Jews? Oh wait, that's right, its ok to shit on those religions but if you criticize the religion started by an bloodthirsty pedophile you deserve to die.
> 
> Glad to know you think it is ok to kill innocent people if they publish a "racist" cartoon though you fucking faggot.
> 
> I'd like to see a reality where you go to prison.



I don't think it's "ok", but I also don't express surprise when it happens. 

Just like when a guy walks into a biker bar and starts talking smack about how all the bikers are pussies, I'm not terribly surprised when he ends up in traction the next day.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Islam is a race now? Were they racist when they attacked Christian and Jews? Oh wait, that's right, its ok to shit on those religions but if you criticize the religion started by an bloodthirsty pedophile you deserve to die.
> ...


I like your analogy of comparing Muslims to a violent biker gang. But yea, Islam is a religion of peace and the paris shooters were victims of the "racism" of some jewish left wing anti-fascists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> I like your analogy of comparing Muslims to a violent biker gang. But yea, Islam is a religion of peace and the paris shooters were victims of the "racism" of some jewish left wing anti-fascists.



When did I say Islam is a religion of peace? 

Islam is a belief in a Magic Sky Fairy who validates all your bad behavior.  

The problem is, so are Christianity and Judaism. 

The nice thing about being an Atheist is you get to validate all your own bad behavior.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > I like your analogy of comparing Muslims to a violent biker gang. But yea, Islam is a religion of peace and the paris shooters were victims of the "racism" of some jewish left wing anti-fascists.
> ...


And the nice thing about you being an idiot is you get to say anti-racist anti-war cartoonists "asked for it" when they made cartoons criticizing islam, because of Palestine or racism or something.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> And the nice thing about you being an idiot is you get to say anti-racist anti-war cartoonists "asked for it" when they made cartoons criticizing islam, because of Palestine or racism or something.



I wouldn't know. Since you are an idiot, is that what you are saying?  Because following your trolling is really kind of hard.  

Okay- reality check. the guys who shot the Cartoonists where hunted down and killed themselves.  

That's how it should be.  

And the fact they were Muslims has no more bearing than the guy who saved Jewish Patrons by hiding them from them was also a Muslim.  

Individuals make decisions, not religions.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > So you're comparing people killed in war as collateral damage to 13 cartoonists just doing their job where there was no war. Fuck you're incredibly stupid.
> ...


So you're blaming the cartoonists now?? How are they racist? Because they drew a picture of a pedophile prophet?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> So you're blaming the cartoonists now?? How are they racist? Because they drew a picture of a pedophile prophet?



It wasn't like they didn't know what they were doing, is it? 

Again, I can't get worked up about someone who provokes people and then gets his ass kicked for it.  

I just can't.  

Too many people have bad things happen to them  just by being somewhere.  

Like those 2000 Palestinians your fellow Zionists slaughtered because Bibi wanted to look tough after those three kids got killed by someone else.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > And the nice thing about you being an idiot is you get to say anti-racist anti-war cartoonists "asked for it" when they made cartoons criticizing islam, because of Palestine or racism or something.
> ...


I like how you go from saying religion validated their behavior to saying religion had nothing to do with their decision to kill innocent people. You can't even keep your story straight from post to post. 

LOL at saying Islam had no bearing in an terrorist attack where the "men" said, "allah akbar" and "we have avenged the prophet", while they attacked.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > So you're blaming the cartoonists now?? How are they racist? Because they drew a picture of a pedophile prophet?
> ...



They weren't doing anything wrong, and they didn't get their asses kicked. They got murdered by scum. 

Do you think they deserved it, yes or no ?


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...



When you start to question his posts, his story always falls apart.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> I like how you go from saying religion validated their behavior to saying religion had nothing to do with their decision to kill innocent people. You can't even keep your story straight from post to post.
> 
> LOL at saying Islam had no bearing in an terrorist attack where the "men" said, "allah akbar" and "we have avenged the prophet", while they attacked.



Religion doesn't validate anything.. Except in the minds of religious fanatics. 

So shooting racist cartoonists for Mohammed or blowing up a gay bar for Jesus, religious stupidity is religious stupidity.  

Saying one is worse than the other is kind of silly, though.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> They weren't doing anything wrong, and they didn't get their asses kicked. They got murdered by scum.
> 
> Do you think they deserved it, yes or no ?



I not weeping for them.


----------



## chesswarsnow (Jan 30, 2015)

Sorry bout that,


1. Its always going to be islam until they either, 1 gain the world, and you will be dead, or 2 we take these mother fuckers out of the world sending them to God.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > The ironic thing is, the guy has always claimed he's an "Eisenhower Republican", but as it's slowly but surely turned out, he's actually one of the absolute farthest to the left of all members here. He has zero in common with Ike.
> ...



And Ike would have never worked to take gun rights away from Americans like you would.He  was also a member of the NRA.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > I like how you go from saying religion validated their behavior to saying religion had nothing to do with their decision to kill innocent people. You can't even keep your story straight from post to post.
> ...


----------



## Osomir (Jan 30, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



And a guy claiming to channel the Holy Spirit and fight for a state based on the ten commandments has had over 11,000 people killed and has abducted over 60,000 others and continues to remain at large. The simple fact is that it isn't only "Muslims" and that looking simply at religion as the sole causal variable affords one a very shallow understanding of current conflict.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> So....now you're bringing the Algerian independence movement from French colonists as justification and equivalent Muslims slaughtering cartoonists?  Just how lame are you? That isn't even CLOSE.



March 15th 1962, a group of French Christians abduct writer Mouloud Feraoun (close former friend of French writer Albert Camus), they shoot him 12 times in the chest for the "liberalism" of his writings. His offending line: "The War in Algeria is ending. Peace to those who are dead. Peace to those who are going to survive. Let the terror cease. Vive la liberte!"


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

Osomir said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



The history of the world has seen many outbreaks of religious based violence, and certainly Christianity has more than it's share of murder and pillage.
BUT, around the world TODAY, the religion that is the home of the majority of terrorism, murder, and mayhem, is Islam.
And when liberals go out of their way to look past that fact, especially when their defense is always to point to past events such as the Crusades, they lose credibility.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 30, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> The history of the world has seen many outbreaks of religious based violence, and certainly Christianity has more than it's share of murder and pillage.
> BUT, around the world TODAY, the religion that is the home of the majority of terrorism, murder, and mayhem, is Islam.
> And when liberals go out of their way to look past that fact, especially when their defense is always to point to past events such as the Crusades, they lose credibility.



The Lord's Resistance Army is still in operation today. But also, as I said, relying on religion as your fundamental explanatory variable for conflict often affords one a very poor understanding of the root causes of modern conflict. Mathematically Islam isn't a significant contributing factor, religion in general isn't in fact, and has been studied intensely by economists such as Paul Collier. Identity plurality within a contained population set (usually based around state lines), does show some statistical significance in explaining conflict and such identities can exist surrounding religious identity, but it is just as potent of a factors as say ethnic plurality, or rigid party identity, nor does it matter what religions make up said pluralistic identity.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

Osomir said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > The history of the world has seen many outbreaks of religious based violence, and certainly Christianity has more than it's share of murder and pillage.
> ...



I don't totally disagree with you, but in the case of Islam, in certain regions of the world this religion keeps much of the followers in a perpetual state of alienation from the modern world due to the refusal of a sizable number of the followers to let go of ancient fundamental beliefs and views.
Thus the growth of poverty and the growth of extremism and thus a more likely possibility that followers of this particular religion will turn to jihad to force their ways on others


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > The problem is that the incidents you posted had NOTHING to do with religion.
> ...



Wow, two totally incorrect statements, non of which explains why it's always Muslims that attack freedom of expression in Western nations.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > And this has what exactly to do with Muslims running around killing cartoonists, journalists, writers, etc. who dare to criticize their religion or prophet?
> ...



These are all bullshit diversions. Muslim citizens of Western nations are attacking the rights of artists, journalists and artists to express themselves.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Joe Mohammad Blow: "But but but....the Crusades!"  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



He's got something Muslim up his butt somewhere. Just mention the word Islam or Muslims and he's all over you, like a Mohammad on 8 year old Aisha.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Steinlight said:
> ...



According to Joe Mohammad Blow, Muslims are these violent out of control animals that Westerners should know better not to mess with.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 30, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > So....now you're bringing the Algerian independence movement from French colonists as justification and equivalent Muslims slaughtering cartoonists?  Just how lame are you? That isn't even CLOSE.
> ...



You are desperate and a fucking idiot aren't you?  Algeria was a French colony 70 years ago, and there was an ongoing war to liberate it.  What the fuck does that have to do with Muslims  all over Western Europe attacking Western values, and freedom of artistic expression by slaughtering those who mock Islam?

Is Europe a Muslim colony, or perhaps occupied Muslim lands?


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > I like how you go from saying religion validated their behavior to saying religion had nothing to do with their decision to kill innocent people. You can't even keep your story straight from post to post.
> ...


Islamic texts don't validate anything, except when the actual texts inspire Islamic extremists to engage in terrorism, wow what an insightful post.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> And Ike would have never worked to take gun rights away from Americans like you would.He was also a member of the NRA.



Back in Ike's day, the NRA wasn't a bunch of crazy people who said we needed guns to shoot "Jack booted" government employees.  

In fact, back in those oldy days the NRA supported common sense gun control.  

When 1966 Reagan passed a law against open carry in California, the NRA totally supported him.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Wow, two totally incorrect statements, non of which explains why it's always Muslims that attack freedom of expression in Western nations.



Uh, yeah, guy it wasn't about freedom of expression. 

It was about a bunch of racists pulling the tiger's tail once too often.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> These are all bullshit diversions. Muslim citizens of Western nations are attacking the rights of artists, journalists and artists to express themselves.



Yeah, well, if you intentionally offend people you know don't take well to being offended, you shouldn't act surprised. 

Like I said, If I went into a biker bar and called them all a bunch of pussies, it would be a crime if they beat the hell out of me. 

But doing it was a really stupid idea.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Islamic texts don't validate anything, except when the actual texts inspire Islamic extremists to engage in terrorism, wow what an insightful post.



Or Christian texts, for that matter.  A whole bunch of people have been killed over the centuries and they used the bible to justify it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Roudy said:


> He's got something Muslim up his butt somewhere. Just mention the word Islam or Muslims and he's all over you, like a Mohammad on 8 year old Aisha.



NO, I've got something against little Zionists cowards trying to get us to fight their battles.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Islamic texts don't validate anything, except when the actual texts inspire Islamic extremists to engage in terrorism, wow what an insightful post.
> ...



Yea exactly, no difference between Christianity and Islam. Remind me again of when the Catholic terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo occurred after the cartoonists insulted the Pope?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Yea exactly, no difference between Christianity and Islam. Remind me again of when the Catholic terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo occurred after the cartoonists insulted the Pope?



What I remember is the pope being involved in a 50 year conspiracy to hide pedophile priests... 

Obviously, what 13 guys do is not indicative of "Islam", any more than Eric Rudolf blowing up abortion clinics and gay bars is indicative of "CHristianity".


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > He's got something Muslim up his butt somewhere. Just mention the word Islam or Muslims and he's all over you, like a Mohammad on 8 year old Aisha.
> ...


Funny you would lie about that, since America has never fought an Israeli war. Why do you lie so much ?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2015)

toastman said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



You mean other than taking out Saddam for them, occupying Lebanon in the 1980's for them, bombing Libya.  

I mean, it always seems that whoever the Zionists are scared of always seem to find themselves on the business end of American weapons.  

And just because AIPAC and Bill Krystol are out there beating the war drums for Iran right now, even though the Iranians are nowhere near a bomb according to our own intelligence estimates, we shouldn't take that seriously, either.


----------



## toastman (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


Iraq was not an Israeli war and neither was Libya. Oh, and America made the decision on their own to attack those two countries.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Yea exactly, no difference between Christianity and Islam. Remind me again of when the Catholic terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo occurred after the cartoonists insulted the Pope?
> ...


Yup, islamic fundamentalists killing cartoonists because the cartoonists insulted muhammad has nothing to do with Islam. Sound analysis there. Because yea, why don't you tell the French people and the rest of us Europeans how Radical Islam is no more a threat than Christianity. Tell us how muslim terrorism  has nothing to do with Islam, and we in europe should be equally worried about some obscure american abortion clinic bomber. Why don't you see how that goes

So they killed the guys and just shouted "allah akbar" and "we have avenged the prophet" to cover their tracks. They were probably zionist undercovers or something like the Palestinian press says right?

You are more likely to get molested in a public school than at a Catholic Church.
http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/misconductreview/report.pdf

I guess public schools are more of a threat than islam since in your mind christianity and islam are no different and you are more likely to get molested there than your local parish.

Yup, Christianity just as bad as Islam. Public Schools even worse, lets tear down public schools and build madrassas for the children of tomorrow!


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jan 30, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > And Ike would have never worked to take gun rights away from Americans like you would.He was also a member of the NRA.
> ...



You don't want civilians to have guns PERIOD ! So regardless of how the NRA was in the past, you would have been against them.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

toastman said:


> Iraq was not an Israeli war and neither was Libya. Oh, and America made the decision on their own to attack those two countries.



sure we did.  It's not like we were lied to or that AIPAC wasn't lobbying heavily for that or all the pundits and politicians arguing for it happened to be, you know, members of a certain religion.


----------



## rdean (Jan 31, 2015)

Why is it always Muslims?

Perhaps you should ask Republican Timothy McVeigh that question.  Oh wait, you can't.  He's dead.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> You don't want civilians to have guns PERIOD ! So regardless of how the NRA was in the past, you would have been against them.



There's no reason for civilians to have guns.  Not a good one. And back in Ike's day, not every civilian had them and we had common sense gun control and the government did regulate who could have them. 

which is exactly my point that a lot of you don't get.  When I started voting Republican in 1980, the GOP was not dominated by gun nuts, religious nuts and libertarian nuts.  Republicans stood for smart, efficient government that paid its bills and took care of its obligations.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

Steinlight said:


> Yup, islamic fundamentalists killing cartoonists because the cartoonists insulted muhammad has nothing to do with Islam. Sound analysis there. Because yea, why don't you tell the French people and the rest of us Europeans how Radical Islam is no more a threat than Christianity. Tell us how muslim terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, and we in europe should be equally worried about some obscure american abortion clinic bomber. Why don't you see how that goes



I could give a fuck less what people in Europe are worried about. The argument here is why you guys think that a few extremists committing acts of violence should be taken out on a religion that involves 1.3 billion people, most of whom AREN'T shooting racist cartoonists.   

Just like most Christians aren't bombing abortion clinics and gay bars.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



January 28th, 1962 French terrorists plant explosives into a printing press that produces political posters that offends them (posters saying "neither the suitcase nor the coffin but cooperation" - a message of peace). When opened, the press explodes and kills nineteen people and cripples two others. Dr. Jean-Claude Perez, head of the O.R.O. would call the larger mission "the last battle for White Christian civilization in the northern part of Africa."


----------



## Roudy (Jan 31, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



That's the closest you can get?  The Algerian independence war against the French colonial powers? 

Is Europe an ex Muslim colony?  Why did Muslims kill Van Gogh's son for producing an anti Islam movie, and a Sweedish cartoonist? Are Muslims in Denmark, Sweden, England, Canada, Australia and France fighting to keep their Islamic colonies? 

Such a similar and relevant example you provided. But hey, that's all ya got, that's all ya got.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > DigitalDrifter said:
> ...



Islam has surrounded a significant part of political and identity based violence recently, but that is more happenstance / situational than anything to do with theology. It has more to do with state evolution and the emergence of transnational identities in the face of weak domestic identities/ institutions than anything else. Many parts of the world face such issues, Europe did too when it was in that period of state building and identity, we even had two world wars (among many others) over it. With former colonial regions though we tend to see the rise, during the Cold War and their respective periods of independence, of socialist big men states. This was not unexpected. Capitalism was associated with the west who had just gotten done lording over these regions as autocratic governments that had prevented their freedom. So when many of these states developed afterward they swung in the opposite direction in Africa we saw the rise of African socialism, and in the Middle East we saw heavy secular nationalist regimes, socialist regimes, and even the emergence of some fascism. 

As we know though socialism doesn't tend to wok out too well, throw on top the discord of just starting out and many of these states either collapsed or faced huge internal problems that required either regime change, or the hardining of political lines, dictatorial rule and a crackdown on civil society. We saw this all over the third world. Such state crackdowns wasn't very good for the fostering of broad political identities. Instead, opposition movements had to exist within society wherever they could survive. For many African states opposition then resorted to tribal lines and region specific areas of African states where they had bastions of resistance within a physical space. This led to a lot of civil conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa, and to the eventually the African spring of 1990. In the Middle East,  which tended to have stronger centralized state structures and institutions, and where the reach of the government tended to be wider, the primary safe(ish) sector of opposition was within religious institutions. It was one of the only areas where public discourse could take place that the government had a harder time controlling. So we saw the emergence particularly in the 50s 60s and 70s of opposition groups surrounding religious dialogue during the period of late state failure. That's just where we are in the state evolutionary process. It isn't anything particularly special or unique, just the particulars have differed. Nor is it anything permanent. Islamists are likely to be poor rulers and like their dictatorial strong men and socialist governments before them, they will eventually be washed away in the state building process.


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 31, 2015)

a bunch of sophistry------the issue of institutional breakdown
does nothing to explain why young people tie bombs to their
asses


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Jan. 1962 A French terrorist known as Le Monocle orders attacks against liberal writers and speakers in Paris. In a single night 18 bombs are detonated, dubbed 'la nuit bleue' by the French press. 

You keep trying to dismiss this as a war. It wasn't. It was terrorism. Besides much of the operations took place after the war was over or in direct response to open ceasefires and peace talks.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 31, 2015)

Osomir said:


> DigitalDrifter said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



What are you blabbering?  These are Muslim immigrating into Europe from various middle eastern countries, who are dictating to these Western style democracies, that they have no right to freedom of expression when it comes to Islam or their prophet, and they kill you for it. 

There are many other immigrant groups in Europe, but it's only Muslims that do this kind of shit. That's a fact. They cannot coexist and do not accept the rules of the Western democracies they themselves immigrated to.


----------



## Roudy (Jan 31, 2015)

Osomir said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Osomir said:
> ...



But that's all you got right?  Some Frenchmen trying to hold on to a colony. Pretty pathetic if you ask me.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

Roudy said:


> That's the closest you can get? The Algerian independence war against the French colonial powers?
> 
> Is Europe an ex Muslim colony? Why did Muslims kill Van Gogh's son for producing an anti Islam movie, and a Sweedish cartoonist? Are Muslims in Denmark, Sweden, England, Canada, Australia and France fighting to keep their Islamic colonies?
> 
> Such a similar and relevant example you provided. But hey, that's all ya got, that's all ya got



No, they are committing crimes, dipstick.  

Just like your boy Eric Rudolf blew up abortion clinics or that guy who shot Doctor Tiller in his church.  

But it's only bad when the Muslims do it.


----------



## toastman (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > That's the closest you can get? The Algerian independence war against the French colonial powers?
> ...



No one said it's only bad when Muslims do it. But most terrorists are Muslim, and you cannot refute that.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated (Jan 31, 2015)

Out of curiosity, how does Christianity's -historical- atrocities make it -currently- as big an offender as Islam?  Why is it that the fact that we can site a tiny handful of non-Islamic terrorists who've committed acts of violence since the 1960's excuses the fact that the vast, vast majority of people committing acts of violence specifically targeting non-combatant civilians in the name of political and social progress today are Muslim?  This doesn't mean that all Muslims are responsible, but if a disproportionate number of terror acts are committed by people of one particular ideology. . . if a disproportionate number of governing bodies adhering to an ideology are committing acts of oppression and atrocity against its people (i.e. executing homosexuals, mutilating female genitals to prevent promiscuity, that sorta thing). . .  if a disproportionate number of people from a particular ideology believe that women should have less protection under the law than men. . .  Is it possible that I might question what about that ideology might be contributing to the concentration of violence surrounding it?

If I concede that a religious book that says essentially that unbelievers should be killed and fought until only believers in Allah are left might actually be inspiring people to kill unbelievers, does that make me a bigot?

I get that there were the Crusades and the Inquisition (several of those, really), and those were horrible things perpetrated in the name of the Christian faith.  Hundreds of years ago.  When's the last time Christians danced in the streets en masse to celebrate the murder of someone who insulted Jesus?  When's the last time a Christian army formed to start a nation for Jesus and swept through a landscape committing horrible acts of mass torture, genocide, and enslavement against any and all non-Christians in their path?

When's the last time a self-identified Christian government enacted a law to punish consensual sexual acts between adults with physical violence?  Might be hard to even think of a self-identified -Christian- government, seeing as how it's been a couple hundred years since the church was in the business of running countries and exerting direct political authority over Europe.

While we're comparing stuff, how many abortion clinic bombings have been perpetrated in the name of Christ in the last decade, and is that more or less than the number of Jewish establishments/gathering places bombed in the name of Mohammed in the same time-frame?  If the disparity between the two numbers is vast enough, am I allowed to consider that one of those religions might actually be more inflammatory than the other, at least in current, popular practice?

Maybe all religions are equally dangerous.  For every Islamist beheading a Japanese hostage on the internet, there's probably a Satanist without a camera doing the same thing, right?  The media likes to make a big deal about boko haram, but what about when a group of hindus abducts a schoolbus full of young girls and holds them ransom for months on end?  You never hear about those cases, damn biased media.

Seriously, though, even with Christianity, which has had a history violent enough to shame any oppressive organization, comparing it to Islam in terms of inspiring violence right here -today-, is like comparing Mohammed Ali to Floyd Mayweather.  Ali might be the greatest of all time, but Mayweather is -currently- the champ, and if I gotta fight one of those two -today-, the guy posing less threat is undoubtedly the GOAT shaking in his wheel chair.

Lastly, before you start firing off the predictable "Racist!"  "Islamophobe!" responses, understand that I'm not blaming those sharing the faith for the actions of the extremists who've hijacked their international identity.  I truly feel for the vast majority of peaceful muslims out there, cuz the crazies are seriously setting you folks back socially.  I'm not putting the blame on any demographic of people, and I'm not trying to say people of ethnic backgrounds commonly associated with Islam are genetically predisposed to acts of violence.  For me, it's this simple:  If all the wars -currently- being perpetrated in the name of religion are all being perpetrated by people who identify with one particular religion, and if all the nutjobs out there murdering civilian hostages on the internet in the name of their religion all identify with the same religion, and all the world governments who -legally classify- women as subhuman and stone/hang/behead homosexuals in the name of religion all identify with that same religion, -then- is it okay to at least -suggest- that some scrutiny of that religion's tenets is in order?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

toastman said:


> No one said it's only bad when Muslims do it. But most terrorists are Muslim, and you cannot refute that.



Well, yeah, I can.  

It's just that most other terrorists are called other things.  

Frankly, I think "Terrorist" is one of those dishonest words meant to confuse a conversation.


----------



## Not2BSubjugated (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > No one said it's only bad when Muslims do it. But most terrorists are Muslim, and you cannot refute that.
> ...



There's nothing dishonest about it.

ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/
_noun_
noun: *terrorism*

the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
The dishonest part is when one tries to equate terrorism with all acts of violence, usually in an attempt diffuse the obvious concentration of terrorist acts around the ideology of Islamism with irrelevant figures of non political violence.  We get it, murder happens everywhere and is perpetrated by people of all shapes, sizes, colors, religions, nose shapes, fruity-or-frosted preference. . . people are just generally fucked up.  HOWEVER. . . When a person or group of people decides that the best way to achieve the socio-political advancements they desire is to specifically target and murder citizen non-combatants with no regard for women or children, that person/group tends, more often than not in the last couple decades, to be Muslim.  Or a sub-Saharan African warlord.

Granted, some of you view the wars perpetrated by the west as terrorism, and, in literal English terms and given my lack of absolute knowledge as to whether or not the government's just feeding us BS to justify bombing motherfuckers, I couldn't entirely fault your reasoning.  Under that presumption, one singular demographic could then be said to produce more terrorists and more terror events currently than the demographic of people who identify with the religion of Islam:  Politicians in power.

Now, if you're going to tell me that politicians per capita are far, far more dangerous than Muslims per capita, you'll be preaching to the choir.  The only religion -currently- contributing to the inspiration of more acts of mass violence than Islam is Statism.


----------



## Steinlight (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Steinlight said:
> 
> 
> > Yup, islamic fundamentalists killing cartoonists because the cartoonists insulted muhammad has nothing to do with Islam. Sound analysis there. Because yea, why don't you tell the French people and the rest of us Europeans how Radical Islam is no more a threat than Christianity. Tell us how muslim terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, and we in europe should be equally worried about some obscure american abortion clinic bomber. Why don't you see how that goes
> ...


Well, you put "aren't" in CAPS, so these attacks must have nothing to do with Islam. Very convincing argument.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

Not2BSubjugated said:


> The dishonest part is when one tries to equate terrorism with all acts of violence, usually in an attempt diffuse the obvious concentration of terrorist acts around the ideology of Islamism with irrelevant figures of non political violence. We get it, murder happens everywhere and is perpetrated by people of all shapes, sizes, colors, religions, nose shapes, fruity-or-frosted preference. . . people are just generally fucked up. HOWEVER. . . When a person or group of people decides that the best way to achieve the socio-political advancements they desire is to specifically target and murder citizen non-combatants with no regard for women or children, that person/group tends, more often than not in the last couple decades, to be Muslim. Or a sub-Saharan African warlord.



Or the people who carpet bombed Berlin, Nuked Hiroshima, bombed Hanoi, or Baghdad.   What did you think were were doing there, when we were bombing non-combantants?


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Not2BSubjugated said:
> 
> 
> > The dishonest part is when one tries to equate terrorism with all acts of violence, usually in an attempt diffuse the obvious concentration of terrorist acts around the ideology of Islamism with irrelevant figures of non political violence. We get it, murder happens everywhere and is perpetrated by people of all shapes, sizes, colors, religions, nose shapes, fruity-or-frosted preference. . . people are just generally fucked up. HOWEVER. . . When a person or group of people decides that the best way to achieve the socio-political advancements they desire is to specifically target and murder citizen non-combatants with no regard for women or children, that person/group tends, more often than not in the last couple decades, to be Muslim. Or a sub-Saharan African warlord.
> ...


Fighting a War............like WWII...............

Another post to say we are the bad guys and not Hitler, the Emperor, Communist, and the Butcher of Bagdad..................................

Typical Lib who damns his own country over our enemies...............Why don't you go and join them punk.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Fighting a War............like WWII...............
> 
> Another post to say we are the bad guys and not Hitler, the Emperor, Communist, and the Butcher of Bagdad..................................
> 
> Typical Lib who damns his own country over our enemies...............Why don't you go and join them punk.



The children of Dresden were not Hitler, and the Children of Hanoi were not Ho Chi Mihn. 

The point I was making that went over your head because you are kind of a retard is that if you want to define violence as "Terror", than anyone who fights a war is a terrorist, at least if civilians are targetted. 

Now here's the thing. I have no problem with going after Bin Laden and his ilk.  They killed Americans, there should be a price for doing that.  

But trying to pretend our use of violence is somehow superior is just a little silly.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Osomir said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The fact that you think that's what they were demonstrates that you don't know much about French history or about the cultural issues that exist within France. But if you'd like to skip to other French actions I would be more than happy to. We could move on up to 1994 and nip on over to Randa and the eastern DR Congo, where, during the Rwandan genocide, France provided the Hutu Power movement and its militias with five different weapon drops while they slaughtered 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus. 

"You Hutu girls, go wash yourselves and put on a good dress to welcome our French allies. The Tutsi girls are all dead, so you have your chance." ~ Radio Mille Collines June 23rd, 1994.


----------



## toastman (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > No one said it's only bad when Muslims do it. But most terrorists are Muslim, and you cannot refute that.
> ...



Here is a good definition of terrorist from Wikipedia:

*Terrorism* is commonly defined as violent acts (or threat of violent acts) intended to create fear (terror), perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants


----------



## Not2BSubjugated (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Not2BSubjugated said:
> 
> 
> > The dishonest part is when one tries to equate terrorism with all acts of violence, usually in an attempt diffuse the obvious concentration of terrorist acts around the ideology of Islamism with irrelevant figures of non political violence. We get it, murder happens everywhere and is perpetrated by people of all shapes, sizes, colors, religions, nose shapes, fruity-or-frosted preference. . . people are just generally fucked up. HOWEVER. . . When a person or group of people decides that the best way to achieve the socio-political advancements they desire is to specifically target and murder citizen non-combatants with no regard for women or children, that person/group tends, more often than not in the last couple decades, to be Muslim. Or a sub-Saharan African warlord.
> ...



Ok, so you're telling me that WWII was a bigger threat to citizens in its theaters than Muslim terrorism currently is?  Mind. . . blown!  No shit, genius.  War before the Geneva Convention was down and dirty.  Wasn't until after the end of that big one in the 40's that everyone, the US included, decided that targeting civilians was a super fucked up way to fight a war.  But seriously, saying that the indiscriminate warfare that ruled the day 2 generations ago somehow excuses or legitimizes the -current- terrorism carried out by Muslim extremists is just silly.  "How can you say Islam's a threat?  What about cave men?  They used to mate almost -exclusively- via rape!"  "What about the atrocities of Atilla the Hun?  Atilla was a terrorist, too, and he wasn't Muslim!"  I get it.  Historically, people did some horrible shit.  We're not discussing historical wrongs.  Just current terrorism.  Currently, Islam's the ideology lighting up the map with civilian targeting violence.

You did include Hanoi, which was slightly more recent than WWII, so I'll address that one directly.  Vietnam was a state sponsored war.  The BS of politicians put that one into motion, and in war, soldiers subject to its conditions do some fucked up things on the battlefield.  Not trying to excuse some of the horrific things that transpired during that war, but what you're describing boils down to the terrorism of politicians in power.  As I said before, if you're going to tell me that the demographic of politicians in power has a higher per-capita rate of terrorists than the demographic of self-identified Muslims, I'm going to tell you that you're preaching to the choir.  Statism is way more dangerous and divisive than Islam.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

toastman said:


> Here is a good definition of terrorist from Wikipedia:
> 
> *Terrorism* is commonly defined as violent acts (or threat of violent acts) intended to create fear (terror), perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants



So by that definition. 

Bombing Hiroshima was a "terrorist" act.  In fact, it almost defines the notion of a terrorist act.  The city had no strategic value, and it's bombing was accompanied by a message to the Japanese to "surrender or face annihilation".


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a good definition of terrorist from Wikipedia:
> ...


Worked didn't it...................


----------



## toastman (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a good definition of terrorist from Wikipedia:
> ...



I'm not too sure I would call that terrorism.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

Not2BSubjugated said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Not2BSubjugated said:
> ...



I don't think that anyone is trying to justify or legitimize current terrorist violence. This entire thread is based on the faulty assumption that is is "only Muslims" (the thread title itself says it all). Giving examples of other types of such violence is the easiest way to refute such an absurd suggestion. This entire thread is a testament to how short our memory as a species tends to be. 

To say that Islam's ideology is lighting up the map is also demonstrative of a rather short historical memory. If it were that simple then we would see constant levels of violence over time from Islamic populations across the board. We don't and never have. The problem here has nothing to do with being naive, or with being PC, it is about not being overly simplistic to the point of being unable to accurately analyze ongoing violence. It is simply inaccurate to suggest that Islam causes most of the violence in the world even currently let alone in say the last generation.


----------



## Osomir (Jan 31, 2015)

Not2BSubjugated said:


> When's the last time a self-identified Christian government enacted a law to punish consensual sexual acts between adults with physical violence?  Might be hard to even think of a self-identified -Christian- government, seeing as how it's been a couple hundred years since the church was in the business of running countries and exerting direct political authority over Europe.



Uganda, just a year or two ago. Sexual prudence has been a big topic of discussion in Sub-Saharan Africa socially speaking. In fact, just a month or two ago a group of men attacked a woman on a bus in Kenya for wearing a miniskirt and stripped her naked. This stuff still happens all of the time, just in countries that we pay less attention to.


----------



## Tilon (Jan 31, 2015)

Calling the bombing of Hiroshima 'terrorism' is absolutely hilarious and clearly shows the historical ignorance of the left.

Ever heard of the Rape of Nanking, Progressive geniuses?

Do you have ANY idea how brutal Japan was in its imperialist conquests?

Clearly not. If we could save the lives of millions of American soldiers (also saving Japanese lives!) by forcing them to capitulate before a home invasion, it was the absolute right thing to do.

Keep on calling attempts to subdue Tokyo 'terrorism'. They should have had more time to rape the Chinese, Phillipines, et al, right?

Let me guess, the rape of Nanking was our fault too, because of the oil embargo, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



Not really. The Japanese surrendered because the USSR entered the war, not because of nukes.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

If only Hitler had made National Socialism  a "religion", and used illegal aliens instead of panzers, we would all be shouting zeig heil.  Islam is like that. But at least the NAZIS respected  life, their own at least. Muslims, not so much. Suicide cells, crashing planes into buildings, strap on bombs...Even the  fascists didn't sink to such horrific levels of nihilism that Muslims  are doing. Why is it we pretend to accept Islam as a respectable "religion"?  Even the KKK hasn't sunk to this level of depravity.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

toastman said:


> [
> 
> I'm not too sure I would call that terrorism.



Why not? It MEETS the definition you put forth.  Let's look at your definition. 

*Terrorism is commonly defined as violent acts (or threat of violent acts)... *

Okay. the bombing of Hiroshima and the accompanying threats were violent. 

*intended to create fear (terror),*

Okay, they were trying to scare the Japanese by threatening complete annihilation. 

*perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal,*

Okay. There was a political goal, to secure Japan's surrender without conditions. 

*and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants*

Most of the people killed at Hiroshima were in fact civilians. 

So the Hiroshima bombing met ALL the conditions you set down in your definition. 

Thanks for playing.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

MaryL said:


> If only Hitler had made National Socialism a "religion", and used illegal aliens instead of panzers, we would all be shouting zeig heil. Islam is like that. But at least the NAZIS respected life, their own at least. Muslims, not so much. Suicide cells, crashing planes into buildings, strap on bombs...Even the fascists didn't sink to such horrific levels of nihilism that Muslims are doing. Why is it we pretend to accept Islam as a respectable "religion"? Even the KKK hasn't sunk to this level of depravity.



Okay, so which Countries have Muslims "invaded" with "Panzers" again?


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

Jee wiz, ya got me. 9/11, and all that happy incidental stuff. Should I hit you on the head with a mallet too? Little reminder here. Islam isn't such a po witto victim of hate it makes itself to be. And as for illegal immigrants, damn. I can't say enough negative stuff, but that's better left to another board,


----------



## Tilon (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...



It was a total war, you blinding retard. Japan had targeted civilians indiscriminately.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Jee wiz, ya got me. 9/11, and all that happy incidental stuff. Should I hit you on the head with a mallet too? Little reminder here. Islam isn't such a po witto victim of hate it makes itself to be. And as for illegal immigrants, damn. I can't say enough negative stuff, but that's better left to another board,



Okay, terrorism is bad, and 9/11 was really bad because the Airlines were more interested in profit than their passenger's safety.  (Had they hired professional guards and put steel doors on cockpits like Al Gore suggested in 1996, not a problem. 

But it's not an "existential threat".


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

Tilon said:


> It was a total war, you blinding retard. Japan had targeted civilians indiscriminately.



Okay.  But how does it not fit the definition Toasty gave us?


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Jee wiz, ya got me. 9/11, and all that happy incidental stuff. Should I hit you on the head with a mallet too? Little reminder here. Islam isn't such a po witto victim of hate it makes itself to be. And as for illegal immigrants, damn. I can't say enough negative stuff, but that's better left to another board,
> ...


 Ordinary, I would just  put you on ignore and get on with it. Do you understand any of that junk you just posted?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2015)

MaryL said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Perfectly. Did you? Because you actually come off as being more retarded than Sarah Palin's offspring.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


You need to reread history..................Japan's main army was still intact at the end of the War but isolated in Indochina.................the Russians only had one major battle there.............


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

Really? My mother lived through the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. She told me that 9/11 was WORSE. An existential threat my sweet bippy, do you even know what that means? I think of Islam  like it was a glorified hate group. And we in the west, we need to rethink what the hell this pile of well intentioned ideological crap REALLY is.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 31, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Really? My mother lived through the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. She told me that 9/11 was WORSE. An existential threat my sweet bippy, do you even know what that means? I think of Islam  like it was a glorified hate group. And we in the west, we need to rethink what the hell this pile of well intentioned ideological crap REALLY is.



And what's your solution, for "we in the West"?


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

Coyote said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > Really? My mother lived through the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. She told me that 9/11 was WORSE. An existential threat my sweet bippy, do you even know what that means? I think of Islam  like it was a glorified hate group. And we in the west, we need to rethink what the hell this pile of well intentioned ideological crap REALLY is.
> ...


Bomb the oxygen thieves into the stone age.....................Let God sort it out.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 31, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



Bomb American Muslims?


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

Coyote said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Misunderstood the comment.................thought we were talking about the Middle East................

Stop taking them in for starters.............NO VACANCY............We don't need them here to start the same thing going on in EUROPE...............

There's no law stating we have to keep accepting them now is there.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

I like freedom of speech, of religion. I am like that a sucker for the underdog. But ,  Islam, after what the hell they have done, talk about biting the hand that feeds you...Enough is enough, treat islam like  a run of the mill hate group like the the KKK or whatever brand hate group, put and end to this stupidity.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 31, 2015)

MaryL said:


> I like freedom of speech, of religion. I am like that a sucker for the underdog. But ,  Islam, after what the hell they have done, talk about biting the hand that feeds you...Enough is enough, treat islam like  a run of the mill hate group like the the KKK or whatever brand hate group, put and end to this stupidity.



In other words you don't like freedom of religion.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

Please don't paraphrase me. Religion is fine. 9/11,  not so much. What religion sanctions mass murder? HMMM. Who cares. It's all the same . You really don't  believe that, do you? Islam has just become an excuse. For whatever. Sorry I don't buy that logic. Islam isn't a religion to me anymore, it's hiding under the robes of religion, but it's something else, a deadlier and  nihilistic ideology. I not only don't understand It, I don't want IT here. Allah is a  sort of the cosmic Santa Claus. Really.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Jan 31, 2015)

Coyote said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> > I like freedom of speech, of religion. I am like that a sucker for the underdog. But ,  Islam, after what the hell they have done, talk about biting the hand that feeds you...Enough is enough, treat islam like  a run of the mill hate group like the the KKK or whatever brand hate group, put and end to this stupidity.
> ...


Freedom of Religion is fine as long as they respect our laws, our culture, and country................NOT what they are doing in Europe, and protesting saying DEATH TO AMERICA from the country that gave them a new home.

That is Sedition and a VIOLATION OF THEIR OATH of CITIZENSHIP......................Call it their new home and say death to the country they now live in.


----------



## MaryL (Jan 31, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...


Now, if the Klu Klux Klan had rammed  two plane loads of people into THREE THOUSAND AMERICANS, we would be shutting these weasels down big-time. Islam, not so much. They can do that. Their brand of hate is OK.  ( Stealing line from George Carlin or Peggy Lee) Is that all there is to religion? It's  a religion, let them off the hook?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> You need to reread history..................Japan's main army was still intact at the end of the War but isolated in Indochina.................the Russians only had one major battle there.............



The russians didn't have ANY major battles in "Indochina".  They did, however, roll up the Kwantung Army in Manchuria in about a week.  

And in history taught at universities where they don't teach about Talking Snakes in Science Class, most historians agree that the Japanese saw their position was hopeless when the Russians opened up a whole new front on them, and were in a better position to invade the home Islands than the Americans were.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

MaryL said:


> I like freedom of speech, of religion. I am like that a sucker for the underdog. But , Islam, after what the hell they have done, talk about biting the hand that feeds you...Enough is enough, treat islam like a run of the mill hate group like the the KKK or whatever brand hate group, put and end to this stupidity.



Again, I think you are confusing "Muslims" for "The Borg".  They aren't a hive mind. There isn't even one flavor of "Islam".  Like Christianity, it has sects.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Please don't paraphrase me. Religion is fine. 9/11, not so much. What religion sanctions mass murder?



Islam. Judaism. Christianity.  I'm not sure about Hinduism because I don't know enough about it, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did, too.  

I can post a shitload of bible quotes where God either commits, commands or advocates mass murder. 



MaryL said:


> Islam has just become an excuse. For whatever. Sorry I don't buy that logic. Islam isn't a religion to me anymore, it's hiding under the robes of religion, but it's something else, a deadlier and nihilistic ideology. I not only don't understand It, I don't want IT here. Allah is a sort of the cosmic Santa Claus. Really.



I agree, Islam isn't the problem. The problem is that since 1980, we have invaded, occuppied or bombed no less than 15 Islamic Nations, and we prop up the Zionist Entity.   In short, or Middle East policy is essentially one of sticking our dicks into a hornet's nest and griping about getting stung.  

That's when we aren't breeding our own bigger, meaner hornets.  Both Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were people the CIA said we could work with and we provided with weapons and technical expertise- until they turned on us.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Really? My mother lived through the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. She told me that 9/11 was WORSE. An existential threat my sweet bippy, do you even know what that means? I think of Islam  like it was a glorified hate group. And we in the west, we need to rethink what the hell this pile of well intentioned ideological crap REALLY is.



Yes.  Islam is not an "Existential Threat".  There is simply nothing Al Qaeda, ISIL, etc can do that will make the US Cease to Be. 

True, we do a lot of damage to ourselves because of them.  We allowed George W. Stupid to fuck up the country because he was fighting the "evil-doers".


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > You need to reread history..................Japan's main army was still intact at the end of the War but isolated in Indochina.................the Russians only had one major battle there.............
> ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_War_(1945)

83,000 Japanese casualties, with over 600,000 captured...........as 2.8 Million faced off


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)




----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > eagle1462010 said:
> ...



You do get that "Manchuria" is nowhere near "Indochina", right. (What they used to call Vietnam before they threw the French out.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


>



Nice map. Now, for those who don't read military symbols, a box with four X's on top is an ARMY. One with FIVE X on top of it is an Army GROUP

So three Army Groups consisting of 13 Armies just bitch slapped Manchuria, the prize of the Japanese Empire and overran it in a week.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


So sue me............over a simple one word misquote, but it was the major battle at the end of the War, but didn't end it as you say..............

The A bomb ended it, along with the carpet bombing of Japan and their losses on their home turf islands...........they were prepared to fight to the death and the bomb ended that.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


So........you were the one who said no major battle occurred and I was just showing you different.......the only thing you have proved is that it is not classified as Indochina.................

You said that Russia ended the War in Japan and not the bombs............and I think you are full of it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> So sue me............over a simple one word misquote, but it was the major battle at the end of the War, but didn't end it as you say..............
> 
> The A bomb ended it, along with the carpet bombing of Japan and their losses on their home turf islands...........they were prepared to fight to the death and the bomb ended that.



Well, no, it's a basic misunderstanding of what happened.  

Japan was defeated by 1945, it was just a matter of what terms they got to surrender on.  They had hopes that Russia, which was neutral up to that point in the Pacific War, could broker a favorable peace that would let Japan keep some of its gains during the war in China. 

Once Russia declared war and unleashed 13 armies that had spent the last four years fighting Germans, the Japanese knew the game was up.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> So........you were the one who said no major battle occurred and I was just showing you different.......the only thing you have proved is that it is not classified as Indochina.................
> 
> You said that Russia ended the War in Japan and not the bombs............and I think you are full of it.



Again, guy, when you understand, you know, geography, you can move on to history. 

I wouldn't try to tackle theology if I were you, though. Too complicated.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > So........you were the one who said no major battle occurred and I was just showing you different.......the only thing you have proved is that it is not classified as Indochina.................
> ...


Your version of history is BS........and part of your anti american campaign.
Our country beat the Japanese and not the Russians.......

Your just trying to rewrite history because we dropped 2 atomic bombs on them which ended the war.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Your version of history is BS........and part of your anti american campaign.
> Our country beat the Japanese and not the Russians.......
> 
> Your just trying to rewrite history because we dropped 2 atomic bombs on them which ended the war.



No, we dropped too atomic bombs on them because we had them.  Then we realized the implications of atomic bombs- that with enough of them you can extinquish the whole human species, so let's build 20 times that number - and we had to rationalize why we were the only ones to actually use them on people. 

Fact was, there was this conference in Potsdam after Germany surrendered, and the Western allies BEGGED Stalin to get into the Pacific War. 

Truman even wrote in his diary on July 17, 1945
"He'll _[Stalin and Russia]_ be in the Jap War on August 15th. Fini Japs when that comes about." 

In short, they knew THAT was the game changer, not the atomic bombs.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Your version of history is BS........and part of your anti american campaign.
> ...


Russia didn't get into it until the very end of the War and the Japanese were already beaten.

Spare me your rubbish.


----------



## Coyote (Feb 1, 2015)

MaryL said:


> Please don't paraphrase me. Religion is fine. 9/11,  not so much. What religion sanctions mass murder? HMMM. Who cares. It's all the same . You really don't  believe that, do you? Islam has just become an excuse. For whatever. Sorry I don't buy that logic. Islam isn't a religion to me anymore, it's hiding under the robes of religion, but it's something else, a deadlier and  nihilistic ideology. I not only don't understand It, I don't want IT here. Allah is a  sort of the cosmic Santa Claus. Really.



9/11 is not a religion.  Try to keep up.


----------



## Coyote (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > MaryL said:
> ...



American Muslims respect our laws, our culture and country as much as American Christians, Jews, Athiests etc.



> That is Sedition and a VIOLATION OF THEIR OATH of CITIZENSHIP......................Call it their new home and say death to the country they now live in.



Where are Americans chanting "Death to America"?


----------



## Kondor3 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Your version of history is BS........and part of your anti american campaign.
> ...


We dropped atomic bombs on Japan because we knew that the cost of invading Japan would be far higher than we wanted to pay.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

eagle1462010 said:


> Russia didn't get into it until the very end of the War and the Japanese were already beaten.
> 
> Spare me your rubbish.



Russia getting into it is what ended it.  Once the Russians were in, the Japanese knew they had no chance of holding their possessions on the mainland of Asia, and were in serious risk of being invaded and partitioned like Germany was.  

Meanwhile, America suddenly forgot Hirohito was a war criminal we wanted to hang.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> We dropped atomic bombs on Japan because we knew that the cost of invading Japan would be far higher than we wanted to pay.



No, we dropped the atomic bombs because we had them. we knew that the Russians getting into the war was going to end it.


----------



## Kondor3 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > We dropped atomic bombs on Japan because we knew that the cost of invading Japan would be far higher than we wanted to pay.
> ...


How so?

Were we going to have Russian invade Japan, with us sitting back and letting them do all the heavy lifting, so that we could spare ourselves such horrendous casualties?

I don't think so.

Impressing the (by then, increasingly untrustworthy and dangerous) Russians with the atomic bomb was certainly one reason why we dropped them.

But it was by no means the PRIMARY reason why we dropped them - merely a secondary consideration - an extra-added bonus.

The PRIMARY reason was to spare ourselves hundreds of thousands of casualties.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> How so?
> 
> Were we going to have Russian invade Japan, with us sitting back and letting them do all the heavy lifting, so that we could spare ourselves such horrendous casualties?
> 
> I don't think so.



Actually, I don't think we'd have had much of a choice. the Russians were much better positioned to invade Japan than we were. They merely had to cross the Sea of Japan from jumping off points in Salahkin, Korea or Vladivostok. 

We were still slogging through the philippines, gathering forces from jumping off points, still trying to relocate unite from Europe and get them halfway around the world.



Kondor3 said:


> Impressing the (by then, increasingly untrustworthy and dangerous) Russians with the atomic bomb was certainly one reason why we dropped them.
> 
> But it was by no means the PRIMARY reason why we dropped them - merely a secondary consideration - an extra-added bonus.
> 
> The PRIMARY reason was to spare ourselves hundreds of thousands of casualties.



Except hundreds of thousands of casualties was a bullshit number.  the worst case scenarios for Olympic and Coronet was 46,000 American fatalities, and that assumed the Japanese would fight to the bitter end. 

The "Hundreds of Thousands" numbers were things people said in the 1950's, when the horrific nature of what we had done was starting to dawn on people. 

.


----------



## eagle1462010 (Feb 1, 2015)

Coyote said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

Yes, an out of context picture is completely convincing.


----------



## Kondor3 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > How so?
> ...


I don't believe it.

No reflection on you, but...

I don't believe it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

I can't be responsible for your lack of knowledge of history, guy. 

The point was, no one really expected the war with Japan to last much longer, they knew Japan was exhausted.


----------



## Kondor3 (Feb 1, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> I can't be responsible for your lack of knowledge of history, guy...


Your conclusions are faulty... nothing to do with my knowledge of history.



> ...The point was, no one really expected the war with Japan to last much longer, they knew Japan was exhausted.


Perhaps you need to review first-hand accounts of the fanaticism with which the Japanese fought for Iwo Jima and Okinawa, as well as the civilian defense forces and militias organized to engage the Japanese civilian population against Allied invaders.

I will trust the Common Wisdom here rather than Revisionist and America-Bashing interpretations of those events.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Perhaps you need to review first-hand accounts of the fanaticism with which the Japanese fought for Iwo Jima and Okinawa, as well as the civilian defense forces and militias organized to engage the Japanese civilian population against Allied invaders.
> 
> I will trust the Common Wisdom here rather than Revisionist and America-Bashing interpretations of those events.



You mean Cold War Propaganda?  

They fought so hard for those Islands because they were the base points for the bombings.   

By August, the Japanese knew they were beat, and they were putting out feelers to Stalin to negotiate a peace for them.  

When they saw Stalin sending 13 Armies in their general direciton, they surrendered.  Bombings not needed. 

Anyway, we are getting off track here.  Toastman put forth a definition of terrorism- an attack on civilians to acheive a political end.  

Hiroshima met his definition.


----------



## Contumacious (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.




*Roudy = Hebrew for he who sucks Bibi's Dick*

*https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/01/eric-margolis/charlie-hebdo-boosts-socialist-jerk/*
*What Does Charlie Hebdo has to do with free speech?*

*Nothing.*


*France and much of the western world erupted in high moral outrage over the Paris massacre. Defending the sacred right of free speech was declared a holy war. Politicians fell over themselves to join the crusade of the righteous. Even Israel’s Bibi Netanyahu, who had just killed over 2,000 Palestinians, including some 15 journalists.*

*Meanwhile, the hypocrisy of all the ado about free speech is beginning to sink in. We learn that “Charlie Hebdo” fired one of its cartoonists for mocking the son of Sarkozy’s marriage to a wealthy Jewish heiress. A French-African not very funny comic faced charges of anti-Semitism.*

*Pro-Palestinian marches in Paris were banned by the free speech government. In France,  questioning details of the Holocaust  is a crime*


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> 
> Yet only Muslim animals react the way they do.



It wasn't Muslims. It was the Mossad. One could say using your own terminology, it was the Israeli animals doing what they do.


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 24, 2015)

islamo Nazi dogs are so   REPETICIOUS


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 24, 2015)

Contumacious said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...





JoeB131 said:


> Yes, an out of context picture is completely convincing.




what is an  ""out of context picture"'???      it is labeled as taking place in
in a city in  THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?     are you suggesting
that the picture is fraudulent? -----or part of weird comedy?


----------



## irosie91 (Jul 24, 2015)

Contumacious said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps you need to review first-hand accounts of the fanaticism with which the Japanese fought for Iwo Jima and Okinawa, as well as the civilian defense forces and militias organized to engage the Japanese civilian population against Allied invaders.
> ...



I can't believe anyone is still trying to sell that silly anti-American POV. The Japanese were still working on the bomb and building jet fighters the day Hiroshima was hit. The fact is just like the battle of Midway, we got to them before they could get to us.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Charlie Hebdo was an equal opportunity satirist.  Here he is mocking all three faiths in one cartoon.
> ...


Right, every time Muslim animals commit an act of savagery....the Joooos did it.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




Look up *mista 'aravim*.

Mista'aravim are Israelis who dress up like Arabs when they commit terrorism. Jewish terrorists have been getting away with that trick since they blew up the King David hotel (while dressed as Arabs)  in Cairo back in 1946, killing 91 innocent people.

How?

Because the jewish owned media is the *ACCOMPLICE* of the jewish terrorists.

While you're at it, look up *Irgun/Stern Gang/Hagnah* and how those terrorists evolved into today's Mossad in Israel.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bobby1250 said:
> ...



False accusations and bullshit, all based in Islamic antisemtism. 

Look up the Nazi Palestinian Mufti.  He was the first IslamoNazi animal who merged Nazism with Islamism and Arab nationalism.  The stern gang and Haganah were Jewish militias formed to defend against the genocidal  Arab Muslim Nazis.  Not much has changed since then.

Amin Al Husseini Nazi Father of Jihad Al Qaeda Arafat Saddam Hussein and the Muslim Brotherhood - Tell The Children The Truth - Homepage

Hitler s Mufti Catholic Answers


----------



## Vigilante (Jul 24, 2015)




----------



## SAYIT (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Right, every time Muslim animals commit an act of savagery....the Joooos did it.
> ...



Looks like we have another of those Nazi types who justifies his silliness with that Joooz-start-all-the-wars camel crap. How original.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Vigilante said:


>


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Ever read what your pal Churchill wrote about Bolshevik Jews?


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



A Jew, Moses Hess invented National Socialism in 1862; aka Nazism.

Your point being?


----------



## Vigilante (Jul 24, 2015)




----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 24, 2015)

You notice the rewards you get are always after you're dead and it's too late to prove that they're a lie told to get you to behave?


----------



## Vigilante (Jul 24, 2015)




----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 24, 2015)

No such thing as an extreme Muslim. There are practicing Muslims who goes around stoning people and cutting off their heads and there are non-practicing Muslims who pretend to be moderates.


----------



## Vigilante (Jul 24, 2015)




----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Slyhunter said:


> No such thing as an extreme Muslim. There are practicing Muslims who goes around stoning people and cutting off their heads and there are non-practicing Muslims who pretend to be moderates.



Where do you find this drivel?

ADL?

SPLC?

Btw? Did you hear Abe "F*cksmen" Foxman was kicked out of the ADL the other day?

It came to light he is HIV+.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bobby1250 said:
> ...



He did no such thing. Moses Hess - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 Were you born this stupid or did you have to work on it?


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




Whitewash much?

*National Zionism:German Jewish Elite created Hitler's National Socialist Party*


National Zionism:German Jewish Elite created Hitler's NAZI or National Socialist Party

Very interesting to learn that it was a European 'Jew' ,Moses Hess,who created the tern 'National Socialist' and NOT Hitler nor anyone who could be accused of being 'anti-Semitic',(to use an incorrect term because Europeans ,Jewish or otherwise,aren't 'Semites' anyway).

And besides with so many Jews in high and low levels of the NAZI hierarchy just how could even the German NAZI Party that was in fact supported by Zionists in Palestine and around the world be truly or seriously considerd anti'Semitic muchless anti-Zionist ?

And still no good answer or no answer at all to my query of just where the 'ZI' in NAZI came from. And if German Jewish Zionist Moses Hess or his followers were able to get the Jew Hess's term 'National Socialist' that had originally been intended for a Zionist organization, placed into the name of Adolf Hitler's German National Socialist Party,then it only becomes more plausible that the ZI in Hitler's term NAZI was put there by closet Zionists within his own ranks ! After all Adolph Hitler  had a number of Jewish friends and  backers in his art as well as his political career.And it is HIGHLY unlikely that someone would spell Socialist in German with a 'Z' when socialist is spelled in German ,just as in English, with an 's' and NOT a 'z'.

political and science rhymes National Zionism German Jewish Elite created Hitler s National Socialist Party


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Bobby1250 said:
> ...



Tell you what you can do with that site, roll it up and shove it up your Mecca I mean ass.  LOL


----------



## skye (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



I second that!


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

*Israel - not even a democracy for Jews*

There is a law in Israel, passed in 1985, which forbids political parties to openly oppose the principle of a Jewish state. Neither are they allowed to work for a change of this principle through democratic means. A party so doing will be banned from elections to the Knesset. Democracy is thus denied to those citizens - even Jews - who wish to work within the parliamentary system towards replacing the Jewish state with a secular state which represents all its citizens' equal rights regardless of religion or ethnic origin. This law alone prevents Israel from being seen as a liberal democracy of Western type.

All Jews living outside Israel are entitled by law to immigrate and become citizens immediately, while the Palestinian refugees who were expelled from their homes are prohibited from returning. This is a violation of international law. Israel is the only country in the world that defines its land as belonging to just one group of its citizens, namely Jews. This law works as a fundamental national apartheid law and turns all Jews into potential enemies of the Palestinians.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Oh look another article from that site he needs to shove up his ass.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

*Israel is an apartheid state*

Other laws and administrative regulations emphasize Israel as a Jewish apartheid state. Israeli ID cards indicate whether the holder is Jewish or not and Jews in Israel may not marry non-Jews. Non-Jewish Israelis cannot purchase government-owned land. Many Arab villages in Israel are not zoned as residential areas, as a result of which they have no access to public services such as electricity and water. The disqualification of most Arab Israelis from military service reinforces discrimination as regards social benefits, education and the like.

*In Israel/Palestine today, there are three apartheid classes of people.*

1. Jews are fully qualified citizens of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and the whole world.

2. Non-Jews in Israel, mainly Palestinians (20 percent) are second class citizens

3. Palestinians are stateless non-citizens on the West Bank, in Gaza or in refugee camps in neighbouring countries.



*Israel continues to violate international law and commit crimes against humanity. *They have conducted genocide against the Palestinians for a hundred years. When Israel became a member of the UN in 1949 an objection was raised regarding a previous UN demand that the refugees be allowed to return home at the earliest possible date and that they should receive full compensation for property, according to international law and practice. For 55 years, Israel has completely ignored this demand. On these grounds alone Israel could be expelled from the UN. No other state, saving Israel, has so completely ignored so many UN resolutions. Israel is a military superpower with nuclear weapons and took active part in the US and England's war against Iraq. Without any provocation, Israel recently bombed targets in Syria and armed its fleet with nuclear weapons. Previously they attacked Egypt and Lebanon amongst others.

How could this evolve? What is the ideology behind this very special project of colonialism, the only one that has survived two turns of a century?* What sort of ideology is Zionism?*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> I can't believe anyone is still trying to sell that silly anti-American POV. The Japanese were still working on the bomb and building jet fighters the day Hiroshima was hit. The fact is just like the battle of Midway, we got to them before they could get to us.



Uh, no, guy.  the Japanese industrial base was largely smashed. The Japanese didn't have a nuclear program and their big weapon was the Ohka Rocket Piloted bomb, a weapons that almost never hit their targets. 

More to the point, the Japanese were talking to the Russians about a brokered peace, something they knew was impossible once Russia entered the war.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> *Israel is an apartheid state*
> 
> Other laws and administrative regulations emphasize Israel as a Jewish apartheid state. Israeli ID cards indicate whether the holder is Jewish or not and Jews in Israel may not marry non-Jews. Non-Jewish Israelis cannot purchase government-owned land. Many Arab villages in Israel are not zoned as residential areas, as a result of which they have no access to public services such as electricity and water. The disqualification of most Arab Israelis from military service reinforces discrimination as regards social benefits, education and the like.
> 
> ...



Oh look, the Nazi donkey can copy and paste more garbage from the same site!


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 24, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > I can't believe anyone is still trying to sell that silly anti-American POV. The Japanese were still working on the bomb and building jet fighters the day Hiroshima was hit. The fact is just like the battle of Midway, we got to them before they could get to us.
> ...



You're an idiot, JoeB, and I mean that with all due respect. BTW, I notice you are in agreement with this board's newest Nazi, Bobby1250. Why am I not surprised that the loony leftist agrees with the Nazi types?

Japanese nuclear weapon program - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia 

I-400-class submarine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



You can't blame Joehammad, he is repeating what he hears at the mosque.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 24, 2015)

Roudy said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Nah ... he's a dime-a-dozen loony leftist who believes he's earning his wings by hating Jooooz. The Leftist/Jihadist/Anarchist/Nazi cabal is about the strangest combo of all time but their common thread is as old as time ... hate.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 24, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



They sure make strange bed fellows.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 24, 2015)

*Zionism and Nazism*

Moses Hess put together the fundamental components Race, People, Nation and "the Chosen" to make a National Socialist version of colonialism. It was later to be known as Zionism. Hitler, 60 years on, put together the same components in Mein Kampf and formed his National Socialist Party. Hess' opinions about the "purity of the Jewish race" correspond to Hitler's belief in "the pure Aryan race".

This is extreme chauvinism based on the theory of the connection between "Blood and Soil". Despite the similarity of ideological structure, there are differences in constitutional and organisational structures. The same goes for similarities to the former apartheid State of South Africa. Family ties (Blood ties) are however still basic to Jews all over the world and in the Jewish state of Israel. A person with a Jewish mother is defined for religious purposes as a Jew, according to the Jewish Community in Stockholm, even if he considers himself an atheist. Jewish religion and family ties today are interwoven at a personal level, like religion and politics are in Society as a whole, as shown above.

"I too, like Hitler, believe in the power of the blood idea", Chaim Nachman Bialik writes this in "The Present Hour" (1934) Bailik is Israel's most acclaimed poet. Had it been 10 years later he would probably have chosen to refer to Moses Hess, or kept quiet on the matter. Bialik's sentiments on the enigma of the Blood can also be found in the above mentioned Martin Buber's book "On Judaism" (1967).


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> *Zionism and Nazism*
> 
> Moses Hess put together the fundamental components Race, People, Nation and "the Chosen" to make a National Socialist version of colonialism. It was later to be known as Zionism. Hitler, 60 years on, put together the same components in Mein Kampf and formed his National Socialist Party. Hess' opinions about the "purity of the Jewish race" correspond to Hitler's belief in "the pure Aryan race".
> 
> ...



Jöran Jermas? Really dude? You may as well be quoting David Duke.
No less a "raving Zionist" as Normie Finkelstein says your boy is a fraud.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> You're an idiot, JoeB, and I mean that with all due respect. BTW, I notice you are in agreement with this board's newest Nazi, Bobby1250. Why am I not surprised that the loony leftist agrees with the Nazi types?



With all due respect, you are a retard.  The links you gave were for hypothetical projects the Japanese hadn't gotten anywhere close to completing.

And frankly, the only Nazis I see here are the Zionists.  They treat the Palestinians the same way the Nazis treated the Jews.


----------



## Roudy (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > *Zionism and Nazism*
> ...



Joran's real last name is Germs.  LOL


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > You're an idiot, JoeB, and I mean that with all due respect. BTW, I notice you are in agreement with this board's newest Nazi, Bobby1250. Why am I not surprised that the loony leftist agrees with the Nazi types?
> ...



But the fact is 3 of the aircraft carrier submarines were built and operational. One was sunk at sea when attacked by TBM Avengers and a US Destroyer. The other two surrendered to the US Navy at the War's end. We had no way of knowing - just as you have no way of knowing - just how advanced the Japanese nuke program was and given what we knew of the Nazi nuke program it was prudent to act as though they had been cooperating. Japan was so ready to quit the war that they failed to do so after one of their major cities - Hiroshima - was destroyed by one, terrifying new weapon and hesitated after a second city - Nagasaki - was similarly destroyed. When knowledge of the Emperor's intention to surrender became known, his military attempted a coup, evidently so they could have more of Japan nuked.
BTW, the fact that you can't see the true nature of Bobby1250 says way more about you than it does about Bobby. He's an Internet trained 21st Century garden-variety slug.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > You're an idiot, JoeB, and I mean that with all due respect. BTW, I notice you are in agreement with this board's newest Nazi, Bobby1250. Why am I not surprised that the loony leftist agrees with the Nazi types?
> ...



Could you provide some pix of Zionist concentration camps, extermination facilities and industrial crematoria?


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

Roudy said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Bobby1250 said:
> ...



Yeah ... it seems awfully shady that the guy has multiple aliases, moves from country to country and even switched religions but what is most telling is his connection to Europe's Holocaust Denier network and the fact that even a hardcore anti-Zionist such as Norm Finkelstein claims the guy is a fraud.
"People" like Bobby1250 are forced to use such sources (and whine about the MSM) because no credible historian or political pundit supports his Nazi-ish POV. JoeB, a hardcore loony lefty, evidently does. Why does that not surprise me?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> But the fact is 3 of the aircraft carrier submarines were built and operational. One was sunk at sea when attacked by TBM Avengers and a US Destroyer. The other two surrendered to the US Navy at the War's end. We had no way of knowing - just as you have no way of knowing - just how advanced the Japanese nuke program was and given what we knew of the Nazi nuke program it was prudent to act as though they had been cooperating. Japan was so ready to quit the war that they failed to do so after one of their major cities - Hiroshima - was destroyed by one, terrifying new weapon and hesitated after a second city - Nagasaki - was similarly destroyed. When knowledge of the Emperor's intention to surrender became known, his military attempted a coup, evidently so they could have more of Japan nuked.



I-400 class carried all of 3 Planes. 

We nuked a beaten country because they wouldn't surrender on our terms. Then we accepted their terms when it looked like the Russians might claim all the prizes. 

But we are going to totally tell the Iranians they can't have a nuke. Because we're special. 



SAYIT said:


> BTW, the fact that you can't see the true nature of Bobby1250 says way more about you than it does about Bobby. He's an Internet trained 21st Century garden-variety slug.



Whatever, I've gotten bored with you Zionshits playing the Nazi Card every time someone criticizes you. It gets old. 



SAYIT said:


> Could you provide some pix of Zionist concentration camps, extermination facilities and industrial crematoria?



2000 Palestinians were killed in Bibi's false flag operation last year.  Most of them women and children.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> ...We nuked a beaten country because they wouldn't surrender on our terms. Then we accepted their terms when it looked like the Russians might claim all the prizes...



As always you twist the facts to suit your need:
"Tsuyoshi Hasegawa - a highly respected historian at the University of California, Santa Barbara - has marshaled compelling evidence that it was the Soviet entry into the Pacific conflict, not Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that forced Japan’s surrender..."

“Hasegawa has changed my mind,” says Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of “The Making of the Atomic Bomb.” “The Japanese decision to surrender was not driven by the two bombings...”

"Hasegawa - who was born in Japan and has taught in the United States since 1990, and who reads English, Japanese, and Russian - rejects both the traditional and revisionist positions. According to his close examination of the evidence, Japan was not poised to surrender before Hiroshima, as the revisionists argued, nor was it ready to give in immediately after the atomic bomb, as traditionalists have always seen it. Instead, it took the Soviet declaration of war on Japan, several days after Hiroshima, to bring the capitulation."

In other words Japan was not ready to surrender either before (as you claim) or after Hiroshima nor did we cave to Japanese surrender terms, as you also claim. The entry of the USSR did not motivate the US (as you claim) but rather motivated Japan to call it quits.

Why did Japan surrender - The Boston Globe



JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > BTW, the fact that you can't see the true nature of Bobby1250 says way more about you than it does about Bobby. He's an Internet trained 21st Century garden-variety slug.
> ...



Yeah, I understand how the truth about you can be tiresome but right on cue your boy Bobby1250 has authored a spankin' new Holocaust Denial thread. You guys form the new and very strange cabal motivated by one very thin common thread:

Jean-Marie Le Pen to Face Sanhedrin for Questioning the Importance of the Alleged Jew Holocaust US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum



JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Could you provide some pix of Zionist concentration camps, extermination facilities and industrial crematoria?
> ...



False flag? I'll accept that bit of lame propaganda to mean you have nothing which supports your claim that Israelis are Nazis. Got it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> As always you twist the facts to suit your need:
> "Tsuyoshi Hasegawa - a highly respected historian at the University of California, Santa Barbara - has marshaled compelling evidence that it was the Soviet entry into the Pacific conflict, not Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that forced Japan’s surrender..."



Guy, you just posted a source that agreed with my point- that the Japanese ONLY surrendered because the USSR entered the war.  

This is the point I was making.  

Atom bombs were not the cause of the Surrender.  Soviet Entry into the war, which brought in hundreds of divisions against Japan's undefended western flanks, did.  



SAYIT said:


> Yeah, I understand how the truth about you can be tiresome but right on cue your boy Bobby1250 has authored a spankin' new Holocaust Denial thread. You guys form the new and very strange cabal motivated by one very thin common thread:



You know what, the whole world is sick of hearing about teh Holocaust. You guys have been milking that for 70 years now.  



SAYIT said:


> False flag? I'll accept that bit of lame propaganda to mean you have nothing which supports your claim that Israelis are Nazis. Got it.



Not at all. Bibi used the excuse of 3 Zionists killed on the West Bank as an excuse to attack Gaza.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> Guy, you just posted a source that agreed with my point- that the Japanese ONLY surrendered because the USSR entered the war. This is the point I was making...



You are cornered & lying. Your claim was that the US caved to Japan's surrender terms because we didn't want the USSR to enjoy the spoils of our victory when, in fact, Japan surrendered because _they_ didn't want the USSR to enjoy those spoils.



JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I understand how the truth about you can be tiresome but right on cue your boy Bobby1250 has authored a spankin' new Holocaust Denial thread. You guys form the new and very strange cabal motivated by one very thin common thread:
> ...



Yeah, and for 70 years lying Nazi slugs have been denying the actions of your forebears. I can see why one such as you would be so upset he could convince himself that he speaks for "the whole world."



JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > False flag? I'll accept that bit of lame propaganda to mean you have nothing which supports your claim that Israelis are Nazis. Got it.
> ...



That, thousands of rockets fired into Southern Israel and the tunnels - none of which qualify as the "false flag" as you claim - was all the justification necessary to spank Gaza. You have failed miserably to support your Israelis-are-Nazis claim. In fact, you have failed miserably to support _any_ of your hateful, bogus claims.
So how does it feel to always be wrong?


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > *Zionism and Nazism*
> ...



Who says it's from Jöran Jermas? You make a claim but don't post a link to support your claim?

That's called defamation.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy, you just posted a source that agreed with my point- that the Japanese ONLY surrendered because the USSR entered the war. This is the point I was making...
> ...



Never heard of Israelis firing rockets into Israel (that never hit anything), huh?

Oh LOOK ! A "terrorist"...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




The sunglasses are to hide his blue eyes.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > Bobby1250 said:
> ...



You're an asshole Bobby, and that's not defamation ... just the truth.
You posted unmitigated BS and don't even know anything about the author or his aliases?
WTF is wrong with you?


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 25, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



 You really are every bit as dim as you seem (perhaps even more so).
I thought you were just pretending. My bad.
Oh yeah ... your ride is here:


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT
BTW, the fact that you can't see the true nature of Bobby1250 says way more about you than it does about Bobby. He's an Internet trained 21st Century garden-variety slug.
==================

ORLY?

No, I'm not. But, I recognize you as a_ hasba*rat*_ (emphasis on the bolded area) with a serious allergy to facts and truth.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 25, 2015)

SAYIT
You're an asshole Bobby, and that's not defamation ... just the truth.
You posted unmitigated BS and don't even know anything about the author or his aliases?
WTF is wrong with you?
=================================================

Ok, I get it. You hate me because I post facts you can't or won't rebut.

I am well aware of the tactics of you, my Zionist brethren, use to quiet anyone who attempts to expose any of your subversive acts. 

If the person is a Gentile, you cry, "You're anti-semitic" which is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide your actions. 

When that doesn't work, you resort to other tactics.


First, you ignore the charges, hoping the information will not be given widespread distribution.
If the information starts reaching too many people, you ridicule the information and the persons giving the information.
If that doesn't work, your next step is character assassination. If the author or speaker hasn't been involved in sufficient scandal you are adept at fabricating scandal against the person or persons.
If none of these are effective, you are known to resort to physical attacks.
But, *NEVER* do you try to prove the information wrong.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 26, 2015)

Bobby1250 said:


> SAYIT
> You're an asshole Bobby, and that's not defamation ... just the truth.
> You posted unmitigated BS and don't even know anything about the author or his aliases?
> WTF is wrong with you?
> ...



I don't hate you, Princess. You are a pathetic but very useful tool. Believe it or not (and I know you can't) you are the poster child for everything any rational person rejects. Your routine has been employed by dozens of mindless haters (and enablers like JoeB) and most here simply roll their eyes and tune you out. I know you believe you have found some fountain of knowledge ("Stalin and Lenin were Jewish") but it's just another of the rabbit holes into which you have stumbled headfirst your whole pathetic life. Carry on.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 26, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> Bobby1250 said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT
> ...



Sure you hate me, Princess. You wouldn't be making all these "attack the messenger" posts attacking me if your motive wasn't hate.

Oh and you can project all you want to, but the simple fact is that YOUR _routine has been employed by dozens of mindless haters and most here simply roll their eyes and tune YOU out.
_
So you're an honest man, huh?

Great ! Lets discuss the Talmudic Kol Nidre and the Talmudic law of Moserim, *shall we?*

But, of course you won't do *THAT*, amirite?

Instead we will just see more and more and still more excuses from you, because in the end that is all you are good for.

Back on topic....

Jewish movies love to depict two fanged blood-suckers as an allegorical inside joke of them inflicting horror upon a mostly White audience.  The real life vampire leads a parade of lies, leaving a blood stained trail of death and destruction.  An honest appraisal of the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the U.S.S. Liberty and the horrendous attacks of September 11, 2001, just to mention the most obvious, clearly indict jewish treachery as an ongoing modus operandi.

Can the motto of their Mossad be any more incriminating?  It reads: *"By way of deception, shall we wage war."*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 26, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> You are cornered & lying. Your claim was that the US caved to Japan's surrender terms because we didn't want the USSR to enjoy the spoils of our victory when, in fact, Japan surrendered because _they_ didn't want the USSR to enjoy those spoils.



The two are not mutually exclusive.  The thing was, the USSR had not been expected to enter the Pacific war until September or October.  Instead, they entered the war in August, and made very short work of the Kwantung Army in Manchuria.  within weeks they'd have overrun Korea and possibly Hokkadio (the Northernmost Island in Japan, only guarded by about two divisions).

Meanwhile, the US wouldn't have been able to launch Operation Olympic, the invasion of Kyushu (the Southernmost island) until September. 

So now confronted with the idea that Tokyo might fall into Soviet hands instead of American hands, and no doubt hearing what the Russians did to the women in Berlin, the Japanese were a lot more keen to make a deal, as were the Americans.  



SAYIT said:


> Yeah, and for 70 years lying Nazi slugs have been denying the actions of your forebears. I can see why one such as you would be so upset he could convince himself that he speaks for "the whole world."



Not at all.  I think that when every argument made by the Zionists about their general stupidity is 'but, but, but... Hitler", that gets kind of old for most people. The Holocaust was bad. It doesn't excuse what you are doing to the Palestinians. 



SAYIT said:


> That, thousands of rockets fired into Southern Israel and the tunnels - none of which qualify as the "false flag" as you claim - was all the justification necessary to spank Gaza. You have failed miserably to support your Israelis-are-Nazis claim. In fact, you have failed miserably to support _any_ of your hateful, bogus claims.
> So how does it feel to always be wrong?



WHEN the Zionist Entity is pushed into the sea, it's going to feel pretty awesome.


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > That, thousands of rockets fired into Southern Israel and the tunnels - none of which qualify as the "false flag" as you claim - was all the justification necessary to spank Gaza. You have failed miserably to support your Israelis-are-Nazis claim. In fact, you have failed miserably to support _any_ of your hateful, bogus claims.
> ...



And at the end of the day that is the dream of all Nazi-types but you can't push a movement (Zionism) into the sea so what you really mean is the Joooz ... push the Joooz into the sea.
Unfortunately (for you) I'd say the chances are awfully slim (but you can keep prayin' & brayin').
BYW, you really should drop by and give your boy Bobby1250 a hand over on his Holocaust Denial thread. I'm sure you'd feel right at home.

Jean-Marie Le Pen to Face Sanhedrin for Questioning the Importance of the Alleged Jew Holocaust Page 6 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## MathewSmith (Jul 26, 2015)

There’s a range of mosques in the US that are more or less radical. Some, perhaps, are not radical at all. Some definitely are, like The Islamic Society of Boston – where the Tsarnaev brothers (of the Boston bombing) went – and which has many proven ties to terrorism. I do wonder where it’s all going, where it will end up. I wonder how much stuff is being disguised right now. For sure, it’s not “nothing.”


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 26, 2015)

SAYIT said:


> And at the end of the day that is the dream of all Nazi-types but you can't push a movement (Zionism) into the sea so what you really mean is the Joooz ... push the Joooz into the sea.
> Unfortunately (for you) I'd say the chances are awfully slim (but you can keep prayin' & brayin').
> BYW, you really should drop by and give your boy Bobby1250 a hand over on his Holocaust Denial thread. I'm sure you'd feel right at home.



Not interested in Holocaust denial. I know it happened. My dad liberated a concentration camp in WWII.  

Still doesn't excuse what the Zionists do to the Palestinians. You've milked that excuse long enough.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > And at the end of the day that is the dream of all Nazi-types but you can't push a movement (Zionism) into the sea so what you really mean is the Joooz ... push the Joooz into the sea.
> ...


Israel isn't doing anything other than defending their right to exist. What else should they do when folks on their border fires rockets into their towns, blows up busses and tea shops, and slices infants throats and then celebrate it. People who will send their own kids out to die if it means an Israeli will look bad while doing it. These people don't value their own lives why should anyone else?


----------



## SAYIT (Jul 26, 2015)

JoeB131 said:


> SAYIT said:
> 
> 
> > And at the end of the day that is the dream of all Nazi-types but you can't push a movement (Zionism) into the sea so what you really mean is the Joooz ... push the Joooz into the sea.
> ...



Thing is, that Holocaust thread was authored by your boy, Bobby1250, who _you_ claim is no anti-Semite. "People" like you _claim_ to reject the Nazi BS while encouraging and enabling raging Nazi idiots like Bobby.
Sorry ... you can't have it both ways.
Oh, and BTW, your shrill attempts to make America the bad guy in WW2 is just as bogus as Bobby's attempts to trash the Jooooz.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Jul 26, 2015)

Slyhunter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > SAYIT said:
> ...



Actually this disguises the reality of what often happens.

There's defending the right to exist, and there's promoting a situation which allows Israel to increase settlements. 

Two different things. The latter being extremely aggressive and happens. 

Sharon was, by a long way, the worst leader Israel has had in a long time. He was often doing things to annoy the Palestinians so they would react. A reaction from the Palestinians would then lead to a reaction from Israel, which would lead to another reaction from the Palestinians, which in turn would lead to an increased campaign from Israel. 

It served Hamas's purposes, it served Sharon's purposes. They both needed to put fear into their people in order to get their support. And it worked. Well, it worked but it caused loads and loads of problems. 

So the reality is Israel is doing more than just defending itself. In order to defend itself the best Israel needs neighbors which are passive, and friendly towards Israel. However such a policy would mean the end of expanding Israel. So they don't bother with such a policy.


----------



## Bobby1250 (Jul 26, 2015)

*World Jewry feels increasingly endangered, embarrassed by Israel, study finds*

*Jews around the world, especially younger ones, feel increasingly embarrassed and endangered by Israel and its actions, especially after last summer’s massacre in Gaza.

This is a key conclusion from a new report by the Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI), a think tank supported by Israel lobby groups that works with the Israeli government to bolster Jewish support for Israel and Zionism.

The study identifies a “sense of crisis” in many Jewish communities “regarding their relationships with Israel.”

The report, “Jewish Values and Israel’s Use of Force in Armed Conflict: Perspectives from World Jewry,” is based on in-depth discussion groups and surveys in Jewish communities from Australia to South Africa, in Europe and in North and South America.

JPPI is co-chaired by Israel lobby stalwart and former US “peace process” diplomat Dennis Ross and Stuart Eizenstat, a longtime US government official who now serves as the State Department’s “Special Adviser to the Secretary on Holocaust Issues.”

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2015/07/world-jewry-feels-increasingly-endangered-embarrassed-by-israel-study-finds/


*


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 27, 2015)

Slyhunter said:


> What else should they do when folks on their border fires rockets into their towns, blows up busses and tea shops, and slices infants throats and then celebrate it.



They could try going the fuck back to Europe where they came from.  

That's what else they could do. 



SAYIT said:


> Thing is, that Holocaust thread was authored by your boy, Bobby1250, who _you_ claim is no anti-Semite. "People" like you _claim_ to reject the Nazi BS while encouraging and enabling raging Nazi idiots like Bobby.



I have made no such claim.  I kind of reject the notion of "anti-Semite" in the context of the Arab-Israeli Wars because the Semitic Arabs are more Semites than the European Zionists.  

Also I suspect that guy is just trolling you to get you guys upset, but do have at it.


----------

