Islam requires world domination. The conservative people of the USA stand
in the way of that goal in the short term. The EU is no problem to them as
they already can dictate which Islamic laws they want in many EU countries.
Several cities in the USA are already under their influence. The largest
are Portland OR & Dearborn MI.
They have quietly spread to all countries & with the high birth rate & never
assimilating into the adopted countries culture they will eventually
dominate as shown in the EU.
Ever Muslim country has a war going with a non-Muslim neighboring country.
At the present rate of progress by 2050 there will be two nations left for
the final war. That will be China & the United Nations of Islam. China
will include most of Russia's eastern part that is rich in natural
resources.
Peace & Love is their propaganda to the Liberals.
Z
.
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 08:06:45 AM |
|
|
"Z" <Z@freeDamn.net> wrote in message news:mwPGd.11976$5d2.1755@fe04.lga...
Islam requires world domination.
No, it doesn't.
The conservative people of the USA stand
in the way of that goal in the short term.
No, they don't . Certain conservative "christians" may want to create a
theocracy as brutal and repressive as anything OBL can dream up but by and
large most peole just want to get on with their lives be they ostensibly
Christian, Mulsim, Buddhist or whatever.
The EU is no problem to them as
they already can dictate which Islamic laws they want in many EU
countries.
LOL! What absolute *****. Name ONE Islamic law which has been adopted by
any EU country
Several cities in the USA are already under their influence. The largest
are Portland OR & Dearborn MI.
Eh? I thought you said the "conservative people" in the US were preventing
this from happening?
They have quietly spread to all countries & with the high birth rate &
never
assimilating into the adopted countries culture they will eventually
dominate as shown in the EU.
Er.. how, exactly do Muslims "dominate the EU"?! Of course, the vast
majority of Muslims HAVE integrated in the EU, so that rather blows away the
daft assertions in your previoud paragraph.
Ever Muslim country has a war going with a non-Muslim neighboring country.
What? Assuming you mean "every" this is patently false.
At the present rate of progress by 2050 there will be two nations left for
the final war. That will be China & the United Nations of Islam. China
will include most of Russia's eastern part that is rich in natural
resources.
Stay off the drugs, son.
Peace & Love is their propaganda to the Liberals.
Z
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 08:50:12 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Islam requires world domination.
No, it doesn't.
Yeah; actually, it does.
'Submit & Recite (the Oath of Allegiance) is the only thing that brings the
Peace of Islam- otherwise, the sword.
....Certain conservative "christians" may want to create a
theocracy as brutal and repressive as anything OBL can dream up
Hogwash.
So far, the brutal and repressive regime is the product of the PCPolice;
thought crimes, suppression of dissent in academia, revision of history,
restricting the free practice of religion.
Ever Muslim country has a war going with a non-Muslim neighboring
country.
What? Assuming you mean "every" this is patently false.
You mean there's an exception?
Where?
It's not in Africa, the Near East, the Mid East or the Far East. It's not in
SEAsia, the Malay peninsula, the Indonesian Archipelago or the Islands. It's
not in India, it's not in China-
where is this exception to the metaphysical certainty of 'every'?
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 08:59:47 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:EJKdnTHNrPA8TXbcRVn-tg@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Islam requires world domination.
No, it doesn't.
Yeah; actually, it does.
'Submit & Recite (the Oath of Allegiance) is the only thing that brings
the
Peace of Islam- otherwise, the sword.
Unfortunately, that is merely a paranoid myth put about by people with
racist agendas. the same claims can be made about Judaism and woul be
equally false.
....Certain conservative "christians" may want to create a
theocracy as brutal and repressive as anything OBL can dream up
Hogwash.
Hardly..
So far, the brutal and repressive regime is the product of the PCPolice;
thought crimes, suppression of dissent in academia, revision of history,
restricting the free practice of religion.
Care to cite some examples? I haven't seen the "PCPolice" (whoever the
shitting christ they are) locking people up without trial in the US, but I
have seen the Christian Conservaties which permeate the current
administration do EXACTLY that. Not to mention sending people abroad to be
tortured..
Ever Muslim country has a war going with a non-Muslim neighboring
country.
What? Assuming you mean "every" this is patently false.
You mean there's an exception?
Plenty.
Where?
What non-Muslim neighbouring countries (or indeed countries, full stop) are
e.g. Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, the UAE, Kuwait etc etc currently
at war with?
It's not in Africa, the Near East, the Mid East or the Far East. It's not
in
SEAsia, the Malay peninsula, the Indonesian Archipelago or the Islands.
It's
not in India, it's not in China-> where is this exception to the
metaphysical certainty of 'every'?
Chas
See above.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 10:04:31 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
'Submit & Recite (the Oath of Allegiance) is the only thing that brings
the
Peace of Islam- otherwise, the sword.
Unfortunately, that is merely a paranoid myth put about by people with
racist agendas.
Actually, it's the history of the rise of Islam.
the same claims can be made about Judaism and woul be
equally false.
Jews teach 'observance' of the law, not compulsory submission.
Christians teach a personal relationship with God that depends on the
willingness of the practitioner, not the imposition by force.
So far, the brutal and repressive regime is the product of the PCPolice;
thought crimes, suppression of dissent in academia, revision of history,
restricting the free practice of religion.
Care to cite some examples?
All the way from opposing abortion to being arrested for hollering at
homosexuals- the thought crimes are the hammer against dissent.
I haven't seen the "PCPolice" (whoever the
shitting christ they are) locking people up without trial in the US, but I
have seen the Christian Conservaties which permeate the current
administration do EXACTLY that.
What would you counsel be done with illegal combatants?
Not to mention sending people abroad to be
tortured.
Who do we send them to; their own.
If they don't like being treated in their own custom, best they stay out of
the fray.
What non-Muslim neighbouring countries (or indeed countries, full stop)
are
e.g. Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, the UAE, Kuwait etc etc currently
at war with?
What non-muslim countries do they border?
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 10:16:59 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Mc-dnThEgNSRf3bcRVn-rg@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
'Submit & Recite (the Oath of Allegiance) is the only thing that brings
the
Peace of Islam- otherwise, the sword.
Unfortunately, that is merely a paranoid myth put about by people with
racist agendas.
Actually, it's the history of the rise of Islam.
Actually.. it isn't. Otherwise we'd all be either a) Muslims or b) Dead.
the same claims can be made about Judaism and woul be
equally false.
Jews teach 'observance' of the law, not compulsory submission.
Ditto Islam.
Christians teach a personal relationship with God that depends on the
willingness of the practitioner, not the imposition by force.
"Onward Christian soldiers" anyone? the reality is, Christianity has been
forced on PLENTY of people, I don't recall Islamic conquistadors, for
example.
So far, the brutal and repressive regime is the product of the
PCPolice;
thought crimes, suppression of dissent in academia, revision of
history,
restricting the free practice of religion.
Care to cite some examples?
All the way from opposing abortion to being arrested for hollering at
homosexuals- the thought crimes are the hammer against dissent.
You think opposing abortion or disapproving of homosexuality is now illegal?
You may want to check US law/reality.
I haven't seen the "PCPolice" (whoever the
shitting christ they are) locking people up without trial in the US, but
I
have seen the Christian Conservaties which permeate the current
administration do EXACTLY that.
What would you counsel be done with illegal combatants?
They are not illegal combatants until they have been tried..
Not to mention sending people abroad to be
tortured.
Who do we send them to; their own.
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
If they don't like being treated in their own custom, best they stay out
of
the fray.
So you approve of imprisonment without trial and torture of *suspects*, I
see. Are you a christian, by the way? I can't see much difference between
your thinking and that of some murderous Muslim extremist so far..
What non-Muslim neighbouring countries (or indeed countries, full stop)
are
e.g. Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, the UAE, Kuwait etc etc
currently
at war with?
What non-muslim countries do they border?
Well, seeing as you made the assertion that "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a
war going with a non-Muslim neighboring country." I would have thought
you'd know the answer to that one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
17 Jan 2005 12:18:54 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Actually, it's the history of the rise of Islam.
Actually.. it isn't. Otherwise we'd all be either a) Muslims or b) Dead.
They're not finished.
Jews teach 'observance' of the law, not compulsory submission.
Ditto Islam.
Nope;
Submit or die.
Recite or die.
"Onward Christian soldiers" anyone? the reality is, Christianity has been
forced on PLENTY of people,
the Roman Empire was- that was a facet of Rome that predates Christianity by
centuries.
Mostly, Christian missionaries bring pump organs, pie and medicine.
I don't recall Islamic conquistadors, for
example.
Then you're woefully ignorant of the movement East through Northern India,
SEAsia, the Malay Peninsula, Indonesian Archipelago and up to the Southern
Filipines.
You think opposing abortion or disapproving of homosexuality is now
illegal?
Sure is against the 'protected classes'- and the laws about protesting
abortion are as restrictive of free speech as anything in our history.
What would you counsel be done with illegal combatants?
They are not illegal combatants until they have been tried.
Who would you have try them, and under what legal model?
Remember that the Accords would allow them to be shot out of hand for not
being in uniform, or agents of a nation-state.
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
So their law trumps law in other countries-
same as us.
So you approve of imprisonment without trial and torture of *suspects*
What 'suspects'?
the detainees were taken on the battlefield, by and large. The others can be
held as material witnesses if nothing else.
Physical compulsion isn't illegal- torture is a whole nother level of event.
I don't know what standard you are trying to apply- and I don't think you do
either.
see. Are you a christian, by the way? I can't see much difference between
your thinking and that of some murderous Muslim extremist so far.
That's because you're stupid-
no offense.
Well, seeing as you made the assertion that "Ever(sic) Muslim country has
a
war going with a non-Muslim neighboring country." I would have thought
you'd know the answer to that one.
And not surprised that you don't.
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 03:09:28 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fLCdnRpXvvYXnHHcRVn-3Q@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Actually, it's the history of the rise of Islam.
Actually.. it isn't. Otherwise we'd all be either a) Muslims or b) Dead.
They're not finished.
Even in their own countries? Reality does not support your assertion.
Jews teach 'observance' of the law, not compulsory submission.
Ditto Islam.
Nope;
Submit or die.
Recite or die.
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
"Onward Christian soldiers" anyone? the reality is, Christianity has
been
forced on PLENTY of people,
the Roman Empire was- that was a facet of Rome that predates Christianity
by
centuries.
I think that hymn postdates the Roman Empire by a fair few years..
Mostly, Christian missionaries bring pump organs, pie and medicine.
LOL! Try telling that to the Aztecs, Incas Native Americans, Australian
Aborigines etc etc.
I don't recall Islamic conquistadors, for
example.
Then you're woefully ignorant of the movement East through Northern India,
SEAsia, the Malay Peninsula, Indonesian Archipelago and up to the Southern
Filipines.
Nothing like the same scale, but all it proves is that each is as bad as the
other. My point exactly.
You think opposing abortion or disapproving of homosexuality is now
illegal?
Sure is against the 'protected classes'- and the laws about protesting
abortion are as restrictive of free speech as anything in our history.
Please cite the law which says being in opposition to abortion or
homosexuality is illegal.
What would you counsel be done with illegal combatants?
They are not illegal combatants until they have been tried.
Who would you have try them, and under what legal model?
Military tribunals. Until then, they get POW status.
Remember that the Accords would allow them to be shot out of hand for not
being in uniform, or agents of a nation-state.
Only after being tried by a competent military tribunal. It is obviuos that
many peopel were , and still are, being held in Guantanamo despite having
commited no crime or being anywhere near a battlefield.
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
So their law trumps law in other countries-
same as us.
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
So you approve of imprisonment without trial and torture of *suspects*
What 'suspects'?
the detainees were taken on the battlefield, by and large.
Plenty weren't.
The others can be
held as material witnesses if nothing else.
i.e. They have commited no crimes.
Physical compulsion isn't illegal
So you think Spc Graner is being imprisoned illegally?
- torture is a whole nother level of event.
I don't know what standard you are trying to apply- and I don't think you
do
either.
Ask Tom Ridge:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4175713.stm
see. Are you a christian, by the way? I can't see much difference
between
your thinking and that of some murderous Muslim extremist so far.
That's because you're stupid-
Perhaps, but nowhere near as stupid as your arguments. See above -
imprisonment without trial and torture for your political enemies.. sounds
an awful lot like "convert to my way of thinking or I'll kill you" to me.
no offense.
None taken.
Well, seeing as you made the assertion that "Ever(sic) Muslim country
has
a
war going with a non-Muslim neighboring country." I would have thought
you'd know the answer to that one.
And not surprised that you don't.
Ah, but I do. You see Chas, your statement is rather daft on two levels.
Let's parse your sentence "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
1) (What is every Muslim country doing?)
"Ever (sic) Muslim country has a war going "
2) (Who do they have a war going with?)
"with a non-Muslim neighboring country."
Now,
1) is obviously false as I pointed out several muslim countries which aren't
at war with anyone.
2) Is obviously false because not every Muslim country borders a non-Muslim
one.
Your assertion was rather..well... stupid, wasn't it?
Even if we give you enormous benefit of the doubt and assume you meant
"every Muslim country which borders a on-Muslim country is at war with that
bordering non-muslim country" you are still quite obviously wrong. Neither
Turkey nor Egypt are currently at war with anyone and both of them norder
non-Musoim countries.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 11:18:23 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
as contrasted with the multitude of muslim sects here.
Mostly, Christian missionaries bring pump organs, pie and medicine.
LOL! Try telling that to the Aztecs, Incas Native Americans, Australian
Aborigines etc etc.
The Aztecs/Incas/Native Americans met the Roman Church, not 'christianity'.
Show me where Yeshua directed anyone to go kill/enslave or steal from anyone
else. Show me where the Roman Empire did anything else.
Then you're woefully ignorant of the movement East through Northern
India,
SEAsia, the Malay Peninsula, Indonesian Archipelago and up to the
Southern
Filipines.
Nothing like the same scale, but all it proves is that each is as bad as
the
other. My point exactly.
The scale was/is *huge*, and far more oppressive than even the Romans.
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
Please cite the law which says being in opposition to abortion or
homosexuality is illegal.
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
Who would you have try them, and under what legal model?
Military tribunals. Until then, they get POW status.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give parole
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply here.
They're not 'military', neither are they 'civilians'. The determination of
which model of law under which to charge/try them is difficult because
neither model speaks to their unique status.
Remember that the Accords would allow them to be shot out of hand for not
being in uniform, or agents of a nation-state.
Only after being tried by a competent military tribunal. It is obviuos
that
many peopel were , and still are, being held in Guantanamo despite having
commited no crime or being anywhere near a battlefield.
Depends on what you consider a 'crime'.
The 'crime' is being an *illegal* combatant. The 'crime' is being associated
with a terrorist group- same as RICO conspiracy/enabling.
And they're certainy detainable as 'material' (witnesses, actors,
co-conspirators and so on)
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
As I say; their law trumps the law of foreign countries.
Israel refuses to extradite by race/ethnicity/religion- Mexico on
citizenship- Brunei by class status.
Their law trumps foreign law.
What 'suspects'?
the detainees were taken on the battlefield, by and large.
Plenty weren't.
No- they were tracked down as the infiltrators, saboteurs, co-conspirators
and agents of terrorism that they are.
The others can be
held as material witnesses if nothing else.
i.e. They have commited no crimes.
You have to decide what model of law designates what activities as 'crimes'.
Physical compulsion isn't illegal
So you think Spc Graner is being imprisoned illegally?
Not 'illegally'; unjustly.
I think he was ordered to soften up prisoners for interrogation- perfectly
legal insofar as 'torture' is described/prohibited. There is no
criminalization of physical compulsion that doesn't rise to that level.
The two instances of striking prisoners- neither of which injured them- are
probably 'illegal', but certainly not fifteen years worth.
Now,
1) is obviously false as I pointed out several muslim countries which
aren't
at war with anyone.
2) Is obviously false because not every Muslim country borders a
non-Muslim
one.
The ones that do border a non-muslim country are at war with them- even if
the word 'every' is considered as an understood semantic generality rather
than some statement of metaphysical certitude.
Muslim countries that don't border non-muslim countries can hardly be used
as a refutation to the statement either.
Even if we give you enormous benefit of the doubt and assume you meant
"every Muslim country which borders a on-Muslim country is at war with
that
bordering non-muslim country" you are still quite obviously wrong. Neither
Turkey nor Egypt are currently at war with anyone and both of them norder
non-Musoim countries.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in precisely that
sort of theocide.
The single incidence of Turkey- even if one doesn't consider the religious
strife in that country to rise to the level of example, and I do- doesn't do
anything except prove the truth of the social generality.
Islam is at war all over the globe; against every religious and social
organization that isn't them; Hindus, Buddhists, animist/shamanists, Jews,
Christians, Ba'hai, atheists- nothing to do with the 'West', or any economic
motivations.
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 11:42:01 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:rZidnY289rVG2XDcRVn-vg@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
Absolute total unmitigated crap.
as contrasted with the multitude of muslim sects here.
Mostly, Christian missionaries bring pump organs, pie and medicine.
LOL! Try telling that to the Aztecs, Incas Native Americans, Australian
Aborigines etc etc.
The Aztecs/Incas/Native Americans met the Roman Church, not
'christianity'.
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Show me where Yeshua directed anyone to go kill/enslave or steal from
anyone
else. Show me where the Roman Empire did anything else
Then you're woefully ignorant of the movement East through Northern
India,
SEAsia, the Malay Peninsula, Indonesian Archipelago and up to the
Southern
Filipines.
Nothing like the same scale, but all it proves is that each is as bad as
the
other. My point exactly.
The scale was/is *huge*, and far more oppressive than even the Romans.
What about the Holocaust then? Carried out by God-fearing Lutheran
protestants, the Slave trade? etc etc
Islam/Christianity/Judaism/Catholicism - same *****, different buckets.
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
There is nothing new about one bunch of religious loonies killing people who
don't agree with them. It is not limited to any one faith.
Please cite the law which says being in opposition to abortion or
homosexuality is illegal.
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
That does not outlaw being in opposition to any of those things, try again.
Who would you have try them, and under what legal model?
Military tribunals. Until then, they get POW status.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give parole
There certainly is - the nation states they are citizens of. Besides, the
GC makes provision for members of unorganised militias.
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply
here.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide - check teh GC
They're not 'military', neither are they 'civilians'. The determination of
which model of law under which to charge/try them is difficult because
neither model speaks to their unique status.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide - check the GC.Besides,
the GC makes provision for members of unorganised militias.
Remember that the Accords would allow them to be shot out of hand for
not
being in uniform, or agents of a nation-state.
Only after being tried by a competent military tribunal. It is obviuos
that
many peopel were , and still are, being held in Guantanamo despite
having
commited no crime or being anywhere near a battlefield.
Depends on what you consider a 'crime'.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide
The 'crime' is being an *illegal* combatant.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide.
The 'crime' is being associated
with a terrorist group- same as RICO conspiracy/enabling.
Whch is a criminal offence, not a military one, and should therefore be
tried in a criminal court.
And they're certainy detainable as 'material' (witnesses, actors,
co-conspirators and so on)
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide.
Civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
As I say; their law trumps the law of foreign countries.
Israel refuses to extradite by race/ethnicity/religion- Mexico on
citizenship- Brunei by class status.
Their law trumps foreign law.
Again, civilised countries don't extradite criminal suspects to countries
where
they may face the death penalty or torture.
What 'suspects'?
the detainees were taken on the battlefield, by and large.
Plenty weren't.
No- they were tracked down as the infiltrators, saboteurs, co-conspirators
and agents of terrorism that they are.
No, many were simply arbritrarily snatched by e.g. the Northern Alliance who
were given a reward for every warm body they could deliver.
The others can be
held as material witnesses if nothing else.
i.e. They have commited no crimes.
You have to decide what model of law designates what activities as
'crimes'.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide. As it is, you have a
bunch of people detained indefinitely without charge, in flagrant defiance
of international law.
Physical compulsion isn't illegal
So you think Spc Graner is being imprisoned illegally?
Not 'illegally'; unjustly.
I think he was ordered to soften up prisoners for interrogation- perfectly
legal insofar as 'torture' is described/prohibited. There is no
criminalization of physical compulsion that doesn't rise to that level.
The two instances of striking prisoners- neither of which injured them-
are
probably 'illegal', but certainly not fifteen years worth.
Define "physical compulsion" - does it not involve some degree of assault?
Now,
1) is obviously false as I pointed out several muslim countries which
aren't
at war with anyone.
2) Is obviously false because not every Muslim country borders a
non-Muslim
one.
The ones that do border a non-muslim country are at war with them
Nope. See Turkey, Egypt for example.
- even if
the word 'every' is considered as an understood semantic generality rather
than some statement of metaphysical certitude.
I suggest you but a dictionary as well as an atlas.
Muslim countries that don't border non-muslim countries can hardly be used
as a refutation to the statement either.
They certainly can when your assertion is "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a
war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
If you meant somethig else, you shoudl have written something else..
Even if we give you enormous benefit of the doubt and assume you meant
"every Muslim country which borders a on-Muslim country is at war with
that
bordering non-muslim country" you are still quite obviously wrong.
Neither
Turkey nor Egypt are currently at war with anyone and both of them
norder
non-Musoim countries.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in precisely that
sort of theocide.
1) Got any evidence that was a national policy?
2) That doesn't support the assertion "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a war
going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
The single incidence of Turkey- even if one doesn't consider the religious
strife in that country to rise to the level of example, and I do- doesn't
do
anything except prove
LOL! It doesn't prove anything other than your assertion was *****.
the truth of the social generality.
Which yiou have STILL failed to prove, or even support. You make the
assertion, you back it up.
Islam is at war all over the globe; against every religious and social
organization that isn't them; Hindus, Buddhists, animist/shamanists, Jews,
Christians, Ba'hai, atheists- nothing to do with the 'West', or any
economic
motivations.
This may apply to a few loony fundamentalists (your counterparts, it woudl
appear) but is not true of Islam as a whole.
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 02:18:56 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
Absolute total unmitigated crap.
True all the way from North Africa to the Filipines.
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Constantine was a Roman Emperor long before he became a 'christian'. The
'Pontiff of Rome' still acts more like an Emperor than a religious.
Remind me of the quotes from Yeshua about going to enslave people, kill them
and take their lands.
What about the Holocaust then?
It was Pagans, and they killed more Christians than any other group.
Carried out by God-fearing Lutheran
protestants,
Nope- Hitler was rabidly anti-Christian and contemplated wiping it from
Europe.
the Slave trade?
You mean when we bought slaves from muslims, or are you talking about the
muslim trade in Christian Europeans?
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
There is nothing new about one bunch of religious loonies killing people
who
don't agree with them. It is not limited to any one faith.
It starts to matter when they target you-
and you've been targeted.
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
That does not outlaw being in opposition to any of those things, try
again.
Certainly being used to squelch free speech- offensive speech as it may be.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give parole
There certainly is - the nation states they are citizens of.
The nation-states are not parties to the conflict, won't give parole for
them and can't negotiate the return/exchange of prisoners.
Besides, the
GC makes provision for members of unorganised militias.
Yup- the ones with markings on that clearly identify them as members of that
group; generally of an identifiable nation-state or claiming a nation-state.
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply
here.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide - check teh GC
That's why they're identified as 'illegal combatants' rather than POW's.
They're not POW's.
No, many were simply arbritrarily snatched by e.g. the Northern Alliance
who
were given a reward for every warm body they could deliver.
And the vast majority of those sorts have been released- the balance are
people of very direct interest.
Certainly there may be exceptions held, but it's still out of tens of
thousands of detainees processed and released.
Define "physical compulsion" - does it not involve some degree of assault?
The standard for torture as I've heard it expressed is 'a serious disruption
of bodily functions'.
Mild physical compulsion is certainly allowed. Making a detainee
uncomfortable is not the same as torture by any standard.
The ones that do border a non-muslim country are at war with them
Nope. See Turkey, Egypt for example.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in religious strife.
Southern Egypt sees the same sorts of depredations against
animist/Christians/tribalists as in the Sudan- absolutely along religous
lines.
Muslim countries that don't border non-muslim countries can hardly be
used
as a refutation to the statement either.
They certainly can when your assertion is "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a
war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
Not if they don't border one, dummy.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in precisely that
sort of theocide.
1) Got any evidence that was a national policy?
the utter failure of the government to mitigate it in the least.
Islam is at war all over the globe; against every religious and social
organization that isn't them; Hindus, Buddhists, animist/shamanists,
Jews,
Christians, Ba'hai, atheists- nothing to do with the 'West', or any
economic
motivations.
This may apply to a few loony fundamentalists (your counterparts, it woudl
appear) but is not true of Islam as a whole.
Submit & Recite is the most basic tenet of Islam.
Islam was founded in banditry and conquest, has pursued that role for 1300
years, and presently. They admit to some 10% of their number being zealots,
and that's about 160,000,000 of them fighting all the way from North Africa
to the Filipines.
Well, you know, maybe except for Turkey.
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Z" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 07:31:30 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:WImdne659qmw8nDcRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in
Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
Absolute total unmitigated crap.
True all the way from North Africa to the Filipines.
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Constantine was a Roman Emperor long before he became a 'christian'. The
'Pontiff of Rome' still acts more like an Emperor than a religious.
Remind me of the quotes from Yeshua about going to enslave people, kill
them
and take their lands.
What about the Holocaust then?
It was Pagans, and they killed more Christians than any other group.
Carried out by God-fearing Lutheran
protestants,
Nope- Hitler was rabidly anti-Christian and contemplated wiping it from
Europe.
the Slave trade?
You mean when we bought slaves from muslims, or are you talking about the
muslim trade in Christian Europeans?
How about the current Muslim slaves.
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
There is nothing new about one bunch of religious loonies killing people
who
don't agree with them. It is not limited to any one faith.
It starts to matter when they target you-
and you've been targeted.
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
That does not outlaw being in opposition to any of those things, try
again.
Certainly being used to squelch free speech- offensive speech as it may
be.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give
parole
There certainly is - the nation states they are citizens of.
The nation-states are not parties to the conflict, won't give parole for
them and can't negotiate the return/exchange of prisoners.
Besides, the
GC makes provision for members of unorganised militias.
Yup- the ones with markings on that clearly identify them as members of
that
group; generally of an identifiable nation-state or claiming a
nation-state.
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply
here.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide - check teh GC
That's why they're identified as 'illegal combatants' rather than POW's.
They're not POW's.
No, many were simply arbritrarily snatched by e.g. the Northern Alliance
who
were given a reward for every warm body they could deliver.
And the vast majority of those sorts have been released- the balance are
people of very direct interest.
Certainly there may be exceptions held, but it's still out of tens of
thousands of detainees processed and released.
Define "physical compulsion" - does it not involve some degree of
assault?
The standard for torture as I've heard it expressed is 'a serious
disruption
of bodily functions'.
Mild physical compulsion is certainly allowed. Making a detainee
uncomfortable is not the same as torture by any standard.
The ones that do border a non-muslim country are at war with them
Nope. See Turkey, Egypt for example.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in religious
strife.
Southern Egypt sees the same sorts of depredations against
animist/Christians/tribalists as in the Sudan- absolutely along religous
lines.
Muslim countries that don't border non-muslim countries can hardly be
used
as a refutation to the statement either.
They certainly can when your assertion is "Ever(sic) Muslim country has
a
war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
Not if they don't border one, dummy.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in precisely
that
sort of theocide.
1) Got any evidence that was a national policy?
the utter failure of the government to mitigate it in the least.
Islam is at war all over the globe; against every religious and social
organization that isn't them; Hindus, Buddhists, animist/shamanists,
Jews,
Christians, Ba'hai, atheists- nothing to do with the 'West', or any
economic
motivations.
This may apply to a few loony fundamentalists (your counterparts, it
woudl
appear) but is not true of Islam as a whole.
Submit & Recite is the most basic tenet of Islam.
Islam was founded in banditry and conquest, has pursued that role for 1300
years, and presently. They admit to some 10% of their number being
zealots,
and that's about 160,000,000 of them fighting all the way from North
Africa
to the Filipines.
Well, you know, maybe except for Turkey.
Chas
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 02:10:09 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:WImdne659qmw8nDcRVn-ig@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in
Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
Absolute total unmitigated crap.
True all the way from North Africa to the Filipines.
Where's your evidence?
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Constantine was a Roman Emperor long before he became a 'christian'. The
'Pontiff of Rome' still acts more like an Emperor than a religious.
Remind me of the quotes from Yeshua about going to enslave people, kill
them
and take their lands.
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
What about the Holocaust then?
It was Pagans
Nope, it was decent , God-fearing Lutheran protestants
, and they killed more Christians than any other group.
Now you really are proving your insanity..
Carried out by God-fearing Lutheran
protestants,
Nope- Hitler was rabidly anti-Christian
From Mein Kampf :
""Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the
Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the
work of the Lord."
From a 1922 speech:
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter.
It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few
followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to
fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but
as a fighter."
and contemplated wiping it from
Europe.
the Slave trade?
You mean when we bought slaves from muslims, or are you talking about the
muslim trade in Christian Europeans?
I'm talking about he Slave trade justified by Jefferson Davies thus:
"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in
the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed
in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization,
and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis,
President, Confederate States of America (Jefferson Davis, "Inaugural
Address as Provisional President of the Confederacy," Montgomery, AL,
1861-FEB-18, Confederate States of America, Congressional Journal, 1:64-66.)
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
There is nothing new about one bunch of religious loonies killing people
who
don't agree with them. It is not limited to any one faith.
It starts to matter when they target you-
and you've been targeted.
No, no I haven't
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
That does not outlaw being in opposition to any of those things, try
again.
Certainly being used to squelch free speech- offensive speech as it may
be.
That does not outlaw being in opposition to any of those things, try
again.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give
parole
There certainly is - the nation states they are citizens of.
The nation-states are not parties to the conflict, won't give parole for
them and can't negotiate the return/exchange of prisoners.
Besides, the
GC makes provision for members of unorganised militias.
Yup- the ones with markings on that clearly identify them as members of
that
group;
generally of an identifiable nation-state or claiming a nation-state.
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply
here.
That is for a competent miltary tribunal to decide - check teh GC
That's why they're identified as 'illegal combatants' rather than POW's.
They're not POW's.
No, many were simply arbritrarily snatched by e.g. the Northern Alliance
who
were given a reward for every warm body they could deliver.
And the vast majority of those sorts have been released- the balance are
people of very direct interest.
Certainly there may be exceptions held, but it's still out of tens of
thousands of detainees processed and released.
So you approve holding innocent people indefinitely and without trial, yet
you have the gall to moan about free speech?
Define "physical compulsion" - does it not involve some degree of
assault?
The standard for torture as I've heard it expressed is 'a serious
disruption
of bodily functions'.
Please indicate where that is the accepted definition of torture.
Mild physical compulsion is certainly allowed. Making a detainee
uncomfortable is not the same as torture by any standard.
"Uncomfortable" can cover a range of very, very different actions.
The ones that do border a non-muslim country are at war with them
Nope. See Turkey, Egypt for example.
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in religious
strife.
Southern Egypt sees the same sorts of depredations against
animist/Christians/tribalists as in the Sudan- absolutely along religous
lines.
You are claiming Egypt is at war with Sudan?
Muslim countries that don't border non-muslim countries can hardly be
used
as a refutation to the statement either.
They certainly can when your assertion is "Ever(sic) Muslim country has
a
war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country."
Not if they don't border one, dummy.
You made the statement "Ever(sic) Muslim country has a war going with a
non-Muslim neighboring country.", dummy
Egypt has killed tens of thousands of Coptic Christians in precisely
that
sort of theocide.
1) Got any evidence that was a national policy?
the utter failure of the government to mitigate it in the least.
LOL! So can we take the US governments utter failure to mitigate drug
dealing as it's complicity?
Islam is at war all over the globe; against every religious and social
organization that isn't them; Hindus, Buddhists, animist/shamanists,
Jews,
Christians, Ba'hai, atheists- nothing to do with the 'West', or any
economic
motivations.
This may apply to a few loony fundamentalists (your counterparts, it
woudl
appear) but is not true of Islam as a whole.
Submit & Recite is the most basic tenet of Islam.
Prove it.
Islam was founded in banditry and conquest, has pursued that role for 1300
years, and presently. They admit to some 10% of their number being
zealots,
and that's about 160,000,000 of them fighting all the way from North
Africa
to the Filipines.
Well, you know, maybe except for Turkey.
Chas
Any time you want to bring some verifiable facts to the argument, let me
know. Until then, you'll have to selectively snip, backpedal and obfuscate
on your own.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JimGem3015" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 11:56:18 AM |
|
|
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Latin Catholicism and its many Protestant offshoots are not pure Christianity.
You need to go back to the books...to the history of the Church in particular.
In unrecognized prophecy concerning the Latin Chuch... Jesus warned not to call
anyone "father", which is of course exactly the title that the Catholic Church
adopted as "the" name of authority in their mutation of the true faith.
Like Islam you prosper by reducing everything to its simplest or "basest" form.
Mohammed preached that God would not copulate to sire a son..what a moron. The
Creator desired a son, to act as arbitrator or mediator between man - and the
desires of the creator. (Yes desires. This world only exists because of the
desire of the Creator) The son exists as a liason of sorts. Mohammed could not
imagine this occurring without carnal contact..a pagan throwback to Greek
mythology. You are unable to see the difference between the Latin Church and
the New Testament? The New Testament and the Qu'ran? You and Mohammed have much
in common.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 02:30:04 AM |
|
|
"JimGem3015" <jimgem3015@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050119125618.21900.00000157@mb-m05.aol.com...
Catholicism isn't Christianity? Back to the books for you, old son..
Latin Catholicism and its many Protestant offshoots are not pure
Christianity.
Still Christianity, though.
You need to go back to the books...to the history of the Church in
particular.
Catholicism is the original form of Christianity Jim, that's an historical
fact.
In unrecognized prophecy concerning the Latin Chuch... Jesus warned not to
call
anyone "father", which is of course exactly the title that the Catholic
Church
adopted as "the" name of authority in their mutation of the true faith.
Half-arse "unrecognised" and alomost certainly false "prophecy" doesn't
trump historical fact, I'm afraid.
Like Islam you prosper by reducing everything to its simplest or "basest"
form.
Mohammed preached that God would not copulate to sire a son..what a moron.
No more or less of a moron than any of Christianity's various
mushroom-crazed "visionaries" and paedophile deities..
.
|
|
|
| User: "JimGem3015" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 02:10:04 PM |
|
|
Catholicism is the original form of Christianity Jim, that's an historical
fact.
Well not quite. If you read the Gnostic Gospels, and the History of the Church,
you'll find that Original Christianity was quite different from the Latin
version that was formulated and ratified through the first Seven Ecumenical
Councils (the seven churches from the book of Revelation). The original church
had a more Oriental flavor with "many" of the original church fathers embracing
reincarnation. As did Jesus.
("John was Elijah..")
Reincarnation is a "cornerstone" of Judaism. Are you aware of that?
Neither are 99% of Jews. Rabbi Abraham Sutton was recently sent from Israel to
speak to select groups in the U.S. to "quitely" admit this fact.
Fathom that.
Why not Blare it out in every Synagogue?
For the same reason that the Latin Church will never admit that Jesus was not
"true God of true God"?
Probably.
The Scribes and the Pharisee have definately taken the keys to wisdom, and have
hidden them.
But no longer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Absolute Zero" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 02:18:03 PM |
|
|
JimGem3015 wrote:
Catholicism is the original form of Christianity Jim, that's an historical
fact.
Well not quite. If you read the Gnostic Gospels, and the History of the Church,
you'll find that Original Christianity was quite different from the Latin
version that was formulated and ratified through the first Seven Ecumenical
Councils (the seven churches from the book of Revelation). The original church
had a more Oriental flavor with "many" of the original church fathers embracing
reincarnation. As did Jesus.
("John was Elijah..")
Reincarnation is a "cornerstone" of Judaism. Are you aware of that?
Neither are 99% of Jews. Rabbi Abraham Sutton was recently sent from Israel to
speak to select groups in the U.S. to "quitely" admit this fact.
Fathom that.
Why not Blare it out in every Synagogue?
For the same reason that the Latin Church will never admit that Jesus was not
"true God of true God"?
Probably.
The Scribes and the Pharisee have definately taken the keys to wisdom, and have
hidden them.
But no longer.
This I can agree with.
You never responded when I pointed to Novotich?
I haven't forgotten the ongoing, nor am I avoiding... just tired right now.
-A
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Never anonymous Bud" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 05:56:09 PM |
|
|
Trying to steal the thunder from Arnold, (JimGem3015) on 21 Jan 2005 20:10:04 GMT spoke:
Reincarnation is a "cornerstone" of Judaism.
Not the Judaism of today.
Same with Christianity. What WAS isn't was IS.
--
To reply by email, remove the XYZ.
Lumber Cartel (tinlc) #2063. Spam this account at your own risk.
This sig censored by the Office of Home and Land Insecurity....
.
|
|
|
| User: "JimGem3015" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 06:10:21 PM |
|
|
Reincarnation is a "cornerstone" of Judaism.
Not the Judaism of today.
Same with Christianity. What WAS isn't was IS.
Gee, I'm sorry, my mistake. Let me quickly fly over to Israel and tell the top
Rabbi's that Bud has corrected them. All the texts on the Kabbalah need to be
reprinted too. Geeze, gotta get started. Oh, *****, almost forgot,... gotta
rewrite those damn scriptures. Bud, I'm gonna need your help with that one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Never anonymous Bud" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
21 Jan 2005 08:53:07 PM |
|
|
Trying to steal the thunder from Arnold, (JimGem3015) on 22 Jan 2005 00:10:21 GMT spoke:
Gee, I'm sorry, my mistake. Let me quickly fly over to Israel and tell the top
Rabbi's that Bud has corrected them.
Be my guest, you have my email address.
I've had discussions with Rabbis here in San Diego,
they have always ended with the Rabbis shaking their
heads and saying something similar to
"why didn't anyone ELSE see that?"
--
To reply by email, remove the XYZ.
Lumber Cartel (tinlc) #2063. Spam this account at your own risk.
This sig censored by the Office of Home and Land Insecurity....
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cuan" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 03:57:10 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:18:23 -0700, "Chas"
<chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote:
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Nope, How come there are plenty of non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
Because they don't practice openly at all-
as contrasted with the multitude of muslim sects here.
Mostly, Christian missionaries bring pump organs, pie and medicine.
LOL! Try telling that to the Aztecs, Incas Native Americans, Australian
Aborigines etc etc.
The Aztecs/Incas/Native Americans met the Roman Church, not 'christianity'.
Show me where Yeshua directed anyone to go kill/enslave or steal from anyone
else. Show me where the Roman Empire did anything else.
Well, I also distinguish between Catholicism and Christianity, but the
Catholics don't. The word catholic itself suggests otherwise. For a
long time, Catholicism was seen as the ONLY form of Christianity.
It's a bit late to blame the advance of Christianity on the Roman
Empire. As for Yeshua...go read the Old Testament, buddy. I don't
know what you mean by "steal", but I doubt Allah instructed them to do
it either...but God did tell the Israelites to conquer the promised
land for themselves and all the tribes living in it. Now, whether
that implies that they should "steal" the land from the actual
residents of the day or not is a question for scholars.
Then you're woefully ignorant of the movement East through Northern
India,
SEAsia, the Malay Peninsula, Indonesian Archipelago and up to the
Southern
Filipines.
Nothing like the same scale, but all it proves is that each is as bad as
the
other. My point exactly.
The scale was/is *huge*, and far more oppressive than even the Romans.
And goes on presently.
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
Really? And the zionists of the US are not slaughtering Moslems en
masse?
Please cite the law which says being in opposition to abortion or
homosexuality is illegal.
That would be the hate crime statutes criminalizing conduct towards the
protected classes.
Who would you have try them, and under what legal model?
Military tribunals. Until then, they get POW status.
POW status isn't available because there's no nation-state to give parole
nor with which to exchange prisoners- the status simply doesn't apply here.
They're not 'military', neither are they 'civilians'. The determination of
which model of law under which to charge/try them is difficult because
neither model speaks to their unique status.
If I recall, the Taliban were the rulers of Afghanistan, and the
"combatants" were fighting a war between the US and Afghanistan.
Hmmmm...I suppose the term "regime change" has its benefits with
respect to which captive model should be observed. Remove the
government, then you'll be able to do what you like with their
citizens. I don't know about you, but I would call a guerilla
fighting a war for his country part of the military of that country.
And if I saw a guy walking down the road with an AK-47 strapped to his
back with the consent of his government, I doubt I'd think he was a
covillian. I think if they're fighting a war against a foreign
aggressor, then they should be called prisoners of WAR.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 09:24:50 AM |
|
|
"Cuan" <an@nymous.co.za> wrote
Show me where Yeshua directed anyone to go kill/enslave or steal from
anyone
else. Show me where the Roman Empire did anything else.
Well, I also distinguish between Catholicism and Christianity, but the
Catholics don't. The word catholic itself suggests otherwise.
Simply means 'universal'-
Romans compel a universal state church- nothing to do with Christianity
For a
long time, Catholicism was seen as the ONLY form of Christianity.
Only by 'Romans'-
the vetting of the Kings of Europe by the Pontiff of Rome, as being gifted
of the divine right to rule, was a mechanism of the Roman Empire- nothing to
do with Christianity.
It's a bit late to blame the advance of Christianity on the Roman
Empire. As for Yeshua...go read the Old Testament, buddy.
He's not in it.
I don't
know what you mean by "steal", but I doubt Allah instructed them to do
it either...
actually, there's quite a bit about conquering and requiring Submission & to
Recite the Oath of Allegiance.
but God did tell the Israelites to conquer the promised
land for themselves and all the tribes living in it.
And you conflate that with the spread of the Roman Empire and Constantinian
religion?
They're slaughering Christians, Jews, Animist/Shamanists, ancestor
worshippers, buddhists, hindus, taoists, Ba'hai, atheists- today.
Really?
Yup; really.
No particular differentiation as to which religions are incompatible with
Islam; all of them are targets.
And the zionists of the US are not slaughtering Moslems en
masse?
'Zionists'?
Islam has been coming at us for a thousand years and more.
If I recall, the Taliban were the rulers of Afghanistan, and the
"combatants" were fighting a war between the US and Afghanistan.
We told the Taliban to give up the terrs, expel them or deal with it
themselves. They didn't do it, so we did.
Hmmmm...I suppose the term "regime change" has its benefits with
respect to which captive model should be observed. Remove the
government, then you'll be able to do what you like with their
citizens.
Yup; like impose a republic instead of a strong-man-rule.
Shame on us, hunh?
I don't know about you, but I would call a guerilla
fighting a war for his country part of the military of that country.
How about foreign nationals that have no nation-state association?
And if I saw a guy walking down the road with an AK-47 strapped to his
back with the consent of his government, I doubt I'd think he was a
covillian. I think if they're fighting a war against a foreign
aggressor, then they should be called prisoners of WAR.
If that were the case, perhaps so-
but it's not.
Chas
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 09:34:10 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttmdnZ6GoZYg5nPcRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
Islam has been coming at us for a thousand years and more.
Wow, seeing as Mohammed wasn't born úntil 570 AD you must believe those
dastardly islamists have invented a time machine.You seem to have trouble
getting even the most basic facts right, don't you Chucky?
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 10:05:21 AM |
|
|
"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:CeWdnc_MvrsVHXPcRVn-sg@comcast.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Islam has been coming at us for a thousand years and more.
Wow, seeing as Mohammed wasn't born úntil 570 AD
That's over a thousand years agoduh.
Oops, you got me there. I claim mid afternoon brainfart.
This is all going much too fast for you, isn't it?
Bought a map or a dictionary yet?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chas" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
19 Jan 2005 10:39:46 AM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote
Islam has been coming at us for a thousand years and more.
Wow, seeing as Mohammed wasn't born úntil 570 AD
That's over a thousand years agoduh.
Oops, you got me there. I claim mid afternoon brainfart.
No sweat.
The point made that this isn't the first we've heard from Islamofascists,
and the initiative of aggression is theirs.
The proof that it isn't 'Western Civilization' that is their enemy is that
they are at war everywhere they meet a non-muslim culture. The proof that it
isn't some sort of economic conflict is that they're at war with the poor as
well as the affluent. The proof that it's not political is that they're
warring with a diverse selection of political models.
This is all going much too fast for you, isn't it?
Bought a map or a dictionary yet?
Read the news lately?
Chas
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "TonyZ2001" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 04:49:11 AM |
|
|
"tw"
wrote:
Nope, How come there are plenty of >non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
LOL!!!
You'll stop at nothing to defend your Terrorist friends.
Most countries that are "Muslim" are 90% or better Muslim, so WTF are you
talking about Tommy Boy?
In almost every Muslim country, the non Muslims are being attacked and are
deperately trying to get out.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 05:39:23 AM |
|
|
"TonyZ2001" <tonyz2001@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050118054911.23050.00000079@mb-m01.aol.com...
"tw"
wrote:
Nope, How come there are plenty of >non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
LOL!!!
Double LOL! You agree with me (see below)
You'll stop at nothing to defend your Terrorist friends.
What terrorist friends, you steroid-addled, lunatic pervert?
Most countries that are "Muslim" are 90% or better Muslim, so WTF are you
talking about Tommy Boy?
The other 10%, obviously Toni-Girl! . How come they're a) not dead or b)
muslim?
In almost every Muslim country, the non Muslims are being attacked and are
deperately trying to get out.
Any chance of a cite to back that up? Thought not...
.
|
|
|
| User: "TonyZ2001" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 07:29:45 AM |
|
|
"tw"
wrote:
"TonyZ2001" <tonyz2001@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050118054911.23050.00000079@mb-m01.aol.com...
"tw"
wrote:
Nope, How come there are plenty of >non-muslims alive and well in Muslim
lands?
LOL!!!
Double LOL! You agree with me (see >below)
Wrong.
You'll stop at nothing to defend your >>Terrorist friends.
What terrorist friends, you steroid-addled, >lunatic pervert?
The ones that you so vehemently defend every day.
Most countries that are "Muslim" are >>90% or better Muslim, so WTF are you
talking about Tommy Boy?
The other 10%, obviously Toni-Girl! . How >come they're a) not dead or b)
muslim?
Many are dead, many more have been prosecuted, and still more have fled or want
to flee.
In almost every Muslim country, the >>non Muslims are being attacked and are
deperately trying to get out.
Any chance of a cite to back that up? >Thought not...
Wrong again. I've posted many articles showing how Christians and Jews are
being persecuted in Muslim nations from Afriaca and the Middle East to
Indonesia.
Anyone who denies that this is going on is one of two things, clueless, or a
supporter of Islamic terrorists.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 07:58:13 AM |
|
|
"TonyZ2001" <tonyz2001@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050118082945.13387.00000069@mb-m27.aol.com...
"tw"
wrote:
"TonyZ2001" <tonyz2001@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050118054911.23050.00000079@mb-m01.aol.com...
"tw"
wrote:
Nope, How come there are plenty of >non-muslims alive and well in
Muslim
lands?
LOL!!!
Double LOL! You agree with me (see >below)
Wrong.
Nope, absolutely right. You admit Muslim countries hav non-muslim
populations, it's really very simple.
You'll stop at nothing to defend your >>Terrorist friends.
What terrorist friends, you steroid-addled, >lunatic pervert?
The ones that you so vehemently defend every day.
Please find even ONE quote where I defend terrorists or terrorist actions.
If I do it every day, that should be no problem even for someone as
monumentally stupid as you.
Most countries that are "Muslim" are >>90% or better Muslim, so WTF are
you
talking about Tommy Boy?
The other 10%, obviously Toni-Girl! . How >come they're a) not dead or
b)
muslim?
Many are dead, many more have been prosecuted
Prosecuted? LOL..
, and still more have fled or want
to flee.
So no cite. How surprising!
In almost every Muslim country, the >>non Muslims are being attacked
and are
deperately trying to get out.
Any chance of a cite to back that up? >Thought not...
Wrong again.
Nope,I'm completely right, as is usual in discussions with you.
I've posted many articles showing how Christians and Jews are
being persecuted in Muslim nations from Afriaca and the Middle East to
Indonesia.
You have NEVER posted evidence that non-muslims in "almost every Muslim
country" are "being attacked and desperately trying to get out".
Anyone who denies that this is going on is one of two things, clueless, or
a
supporter of Islamic terrorists.
...or someone with a rather better grasp on reality, than a steroid-addled
male prostitute white supremacist incest promoter..
By the way, I notice you don't quote Isaac Newton in your sig anymore. Is
this because you found it he was gay?
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1393102,00.html?gusrc=t
icker-103704
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "TonyZ2001" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 08:18:32 AM |
|
|
I find it very funny that Tommy Boy can sit there and deny that Christians and
Jews are persecuted in Muslim countries.
Only a true pinhead could do so.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: The future |
18 Jan 2005 08:32:53 AM |
|
|
"TonyZ2001" <tonyz2001@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050118091832.13387.00000080@mb-m27.aol.com...
I find it very funny that Tommy Boy can sit there and deny that Christians
and
Jews are persecuted in Muslim countries.
Where did I do that? ANd why have you snipped the entire content of the
previous post? *snicker* I merely asked for evidence to back up yuor
assertion that non-muslims in "almost every Muslim country" are "being
attacked and desperately trying to get out".
Only a true pinhead could do so.
Only a true pinhead could think I HAD...
Tony (A Real Pinhead)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
