lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

lowing wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

No offence lowing. But I'm going to go with the 4-5 people commenting who actually live in the country in question (Braddock/Cam seems to know what they're talking about tbh). It would seem to me that they probably have a better idea of the context and the results of these actions etc. I see the tangents you are drawing as loose and flimsy at best and extreme prejudice and fear mongering at worst.

Now I'm obviously not an expert, I really have very little idea about Irish law/religious activities etc, but to me this law would seem more aimed at violence or hate bred by the integration of Catholic and Protestant people in parts of Ireland. (Excuse me if this is completely wrong its just my best guess )
none taken.

However Europeans are widely known for their denial. If you deny something you will not have to deal with it. Kinda like the denial of the rise of Nazi Germany.
Not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany after losing millions only years before is slightly different to the possible increase of Muslim population and power in Europe...
and how "did not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany" work out for ya?


  according to the stats regarding Islamic expansion, and stated agendas in speeches and protests, it is more than a possibility, it is happening, but hey like I said.

Last edited by lowing (2010-01-08 05:25:09)

IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
You still have not supplied a single shred of evidence to support that claim in the Irish context - i've now waited two days for you to respond with anything from a legitimate source other than crackpot-hatmongers-r-us and I see still nothing, nada, zip..
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

You still have not supplied a single shred of evidence to support that claim in the Irish context - i've now waited two days for you to respond with anything from a legitimate source other than crackpot-hatmongers-r-us and I see still nothing, nada, zip..
hard to accommodate you since anything posted that disagrees with you will dismiss as crackpot or hate mongering. It is the common theme with this forum.

I am also waiting for you to explain how Ireland all of a sudden, is in such a rush to expel their freedom of speech and freedom of press without any reason whatsoever.  I mean since you claim there has never been outrage or incitement over religion in Ireland, and the focus of this law is to prevent just that. By the way, before you slam it. It was Cams source that says it.

Might also wanna explain the coincidence between your new law and the timing of other laws with verbatim verbiage that is creeping up everywhere that is directly resulted from stifling any negativity regarding Islam.
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
No Lowing you dismissed my explanation, there is a difference.  C'mon there is a huge internets out there!!! you must be able to find one page from any "reputable" source or news agency to support your claim, just one? to show a direct correlation between Islam and the Irish constitutional reform. i'm still waiting..
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

No Lowing you dismissed my explanation, there is a difference.  C'mon there is a huge internets out there!!! you must be able to find one page from any "reputable" source or news agency to support your claim, just one? to show a direct correlation between Islam and the Irish constitutional reform. i'm still waiting..
You will not find one source that admits PC or appeasement even when it is obvious. PC forbids it.

My opinions are based on the coincidence and timing of this legislation and others with the same wording that IS catering to Islam, the fact that never before has there ever been a concern of outrage or incitement regarding religion other than Islam, the fact that a western society is so willingly anxious to throw away 2 of their basic freedoms for no reason at all,  and the denial of Europe as a whole, that Islam is creeping its way across the continent.

Your explanation was "3 Irishmen said so", well I posted opinion form other Irishmen that disagreed. The only source that your side provided was from Cam, and I have, for several pages now, asked questions regarding the information provided. questions that have never been answered.

SO I will ask it again:

CAMS OWN SOURCE admits this legislation is necessary to stifle outrage or incitement of religious groups, yet, according to you, there has never been an example of outrage or incitement over blasphemy, ( except for Islam). Why then are you so anxious to do away with 2 of your basic freedoms in western society if, according to you, there is no reason to do so?

Admit it or not, your new legislation sets you back as a society, and puts you right in line with Islamic nations and demands regarding free speech. Do you not find it funny that only Islamic nations seek to copy you for international law within the UN, and applaud your efforts?

You are sucking up to somebody, and it isn't those that hold free speech and press as essential. So who then?

Last edited by lowing (2010-01-09 15:46:36)

IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
What is important Lowing is the Constitutional reform, what happens next? in my analysis of it I stated -

ps - this has nothing to do with Muslims per se Lowing, it's to do with the Constitutional protection of Catholicism in the Republic of Ireland.
I further surmised that -

- I reckon that this is a step in the process to actually remove the constitutional Protection of Catholicism in the Republic to make a one state solution more suitable palatable to Northern Protestants come reunification - you remove the protection of Catholicism by affording it to all religions - then repeal the law so none is protected - as it should be to separate church and state.
Now I just wait to test my hypothesis and I still maintain that your analysis is full of shit..

It's all a question of what happens next, where does this go?

So in brief you think it's about Muslims I think it's about Protestants (now given Irelands history over the last 400 years and the more recent 40 odd years of conflict - taking a wild stab in the dark, which do you think is the more likely answer given the fact that Ireland has a minuscule Muslim population?

Last edited by IG-Calibre (2010-01-09 16:08:57)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

What is important Lowing is the Constitutional reform, what happens next? in my analysis of it I stated -

ps - this has nothing to do with Muslims per se Lowing, it's to do with the Constitutional protection of Catholicism in the Republic of Ireland.
I further surmised that -

- I reckon that this is a step in the process to actually remove the constitutional Protection of Catholicism in the Republic to make a one state solution more suitable palatable to Northern Protestants come reunification - you remove the protection of Catholicism by affording it to all religions - then repeal the law so none is protected - as it should be to separate church and state.
Now I just wait to test my hypothesis and I still maintain that your analysis is full of shit..

It's all a question of what happens next, where does this go?

So in brief you think it's about Muslims I think it's about Protestants (now given Ireland's history over the last 400 years and the more recent 40 odd years of conflict - taking a wild stab in the dark, which do you think is the more likely answer given the fact that Ireland has a minuscule Muslim population?
The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6972

lowing wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

What is important Lowing is the Constitutional reform, what happens next? in my analysis of it I stated -

ps - this has nothing to do with Muslims per se Lowing, it's to do with the Constitutional protection of Catholicism in the Republic of Ireland.
I further surmised that -

- I reckon that this is a step in the process to actually remove the constitutional Protection of Catholicism in the Republic to make a one state solution more suitable palatable to Northern Protestants come reunification - you remove the protection of Catholicism by affording it to all religions - then repeal the law so none is protected - as it should be to separate church and state.
Now I just wait to test my hypothesis and I still maintain that your analysis is full of shit..

It's all a question of what happens next, where does this go?

So in brief you think it's about Muslims I think it's about Protestants (now given Ireland's history over the last 400 years and the more recent 40 odd years of conflict - taking a wild stab in the dark, which do you think is the more likely answer given the fact that Ireland has a minuscule Muslim population?
The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Can this thread be lowing free please?
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
jord
Member
+2,382|6934|The North, beyond the wall.

lowing wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

lowing wrote:


none taken.

However Europeans are widely known for their denial. If you deny something you will not have to deal with it. Kinda like the denial of the rise of Nazi Germany.
Not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany after losing millions only years before is slightly different to the possible increase of Muslim population and power in Europe...
and how "did not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany" work out for ya?


  according to the stats regarding Islamic expansion, and stated agendas in speeches and protests, it is more than a possibility, it is happening, but hey like I said.
It's a pretty loose subject for me to debate because every European nation was a lot more independent back then but I'll reply for a UK point of view that Chamberlain wasn't a warry politician and did everything he could to deny our intervention in ww2, despite large amounts of politicians from most parties wanting it. Be easier if when you did refer to Europe you referenced a specific country or group of countries, cause there is still some differences... Believe it or not.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

Cybargs wrote:

lowing wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

What is important Lowing is the Constitutional reform, what happens next? in my analysis of it I stated -


I further surmised that -


Now I just wait to test my hypothesis and I still maintain that your analysis is full of shit..

It's all a question of what happens next, where does this go?

So in brief you think it's about Muslims I think it's about Protestants (now given Ireland's history over the last 400 years and the more recent 40 odd years of conflict - taking a wild stab in the dark, which do you think is the more likely answer given the fact that Ireland has a minuscule Muslim population?
The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Can this thread be lowing free please?
Dismissal, denial, mis-direction and now censorship. Yup I think you have covered all of the debate tactics typically used to promote self righteousness in this forum and by the left as a whole, good job...

Last edited by lowing (2010-01-10 16:01:13)

IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

lowing wrote:

The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Guess that's your interpretation of it. however I disagree and until you can show one single shred of any evidence at all to prove that "Muslim" outrage in any way influenced the Irish situation i'll continue to think you're full of shit no matter how much you QQ, you have contributed zero to the debate because you  cannot substantiate any of your ridiculous hatemongering as you claim some farcical  PC conspiracy.  you're a joke..
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

lowing wrote:

The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Guess that's your interpretation of it. however I disagree and until you can show one single shred of any evidence at all to prove that "Muslim" outrage in any way influenced the Irish situation i'll continue to think you're full of shit no matter how much you QQ, you have contributed zero to the debate because you  cannot substantiate any of your ridiculous hatemongering as you claim some farcical  PC conspiracy.  you're a joke..
Actually I have made a pretty good argument, the fact that you ignore my questions is a good indication of it.

I have asked specific questions regarding sources provided by your side of this debate and they have gone largely ignored and or dismissed, replaced only by insult.

Like I said, you expect a source that flat out admits appeasement, there is no such admittance anywhere regarding appeaement, and you use this as proof that appeasement somehow does not exist. Can't help that kind of denial.

Fact is,  this law is celebrated and copied by Islamic countries and condemned by western freedom loving societies, so you tell me what are you doing wrong, if you think anything is wrong that is?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

jord wrote:

lowing wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:


Not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany after losing millions only years before is slightly different to the possible increase of Muslim population and power in Europe...
and how "did not wishing to engage in another bloody war with Germany" work out for ya?


  according to the stats regarding Islamic expansion, and stated agendas in speeches and protests, it is more than a possibility, it is happening, but hey like I said.
It's a pretty loose subject for me to debate because every European nation was a lot more independent back then but I'll reply for a UK point of view that Chamberlain wasn't a warry politician and did everything he could to deny our intervention in ww2, despite large amounts of politicians from most parties wanting it. Be easier if when you did refer to Europe you referenced a specific country or group of countries, cause there is still some differences... Believe it or not.
fair enough.
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

lowing wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

lowing wrote:

The history of Irish hatred between Catholics and Protestants has nothing to do with outrage or incitement over blasphemy. You are trying to fix a problem that never existed, even by your own account. It also does not make any sense anyway, if the intent was to REMOVE protection from Catholics, then they would abolish the blasphemy law all together, not seek definition and enforcement of it.
Guess that's your interpretation of it. however I disagree and until you can show one single shred of any evidence at all to prove that "Muslim" outrage in any way influenced the Irish situation i'll continue to think you're full of shit no matter how much you QQ, you have contributed zero to the debate because you  cannot substantiate any of your ridiculous hatemongering as you claim some farcical  PC conspiracy.  you're a joke..
Actually I have made a pretty good argument, the fact that you ignore my questions is a good indication of it.

I have asked specific questions regarding sources provided by your side of this debate and they have gone largely ignored and or dismissed, replaced only by insult.

Like I said, you expect a source that flat out admits appeasement, there is no such admittance anywhere regarding appeaement, and you use this as proof that appeasement somehow does not exist. Can't help that kind of denial.

Fact is,  this law is celebrated and copied by Islamic countries and condemned by western freedom loving societies, so you tell me what are you doing wrong, if you think anything is wrong that is?
It all becomes a question of how it plays out constitutionally. The Supreme Court has to interpret it yet and given the last ruling it still doesn't really define what Blasphemy is, I can see this playing out for years yet Lowing, what Islamic countries do? I don't really care, i'm confident that in a free democracy that this law will be repealed as unworkable - certainly in time for reunification in 2016
jord
Member
+2,382|6934|The North, beyond the wall.

IG-Calibre wrote:

lowing wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

Guess that's your interpretation of it. however I disagree and until you can show one single shred of any evidence at all to prove that "Muslim" outrage in any way influenced the Irish situation i'll continue to think you're full of shit no matter how much you QQ, you have contributed zero to the debate because you  cannot substantiate any of your ridiculous hatemongering as you claim some farcical  PC conspiracy.  you're a joke..
Actually I have made a pretty good argument, the fact that you ignore my questions is a good indication of it.

I have asked specific questions regarding sources provided by your side of this debate and they have gone largely ignored and or dismissed, replaced only by insult.

Like I said, you expect a source that flat out admits appeasement, there is no such admittance anywhere regarding appeaement, and you use this as proof that appeasement somehow does not exist. Can't help that kind of denial.

Fact is,  this law is celebrated and copied by Islamic countries and condemned by western freedom loving societies, so you tell me what are you doing wrong, if you think anything is wrong that is?
It all becomes a question of how it plays out constitutionally. The Supreme Court has to interpret it yet and given the last ruling it still doesn't really define what Blasphemy is, I can see this playing out for years yet Lowing, what Islamic countries do? I don't really care, i'm confident that in a free democracy that this law will be repealed as unworkable - certainly in time for reunification in 2016
I find if you're pessimistic about unlikely things it's a nice surprise if they actually do happen

Last edited by jord (2010-01-10 16:43:50)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

lowing wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:


Guess that's your interpretation of it. however I disagree and until you can show one single shred of any evidence at all to prove that "Muslim" outrage in any way influenced the Irish situation i'll continue to think you're full of shit no matter how much you QQ, you have contributed zero to the debate because you  cannot substantiate any of your ridiculous hatemongering as you claim some farcical  PC conspiracy.  you're a joke..
Actually I have made a pretty good argument, the fact that you ignore my questions is a good indication of it.

I have asked specific questions regarding sources provided by your side of this debate and they have gone largely ignored and or dismissed, replaced only by insult.

Like I said, you expect a source that flat out admits appeasement, there is no such admittance anywhere regarding appeaement, and you use this as proof that appeasement somehow does not exist. Can't help that kind of denial.

Fact is,  this law is celebrated and copied by Islamic countries and condemned by western freedom loving societies, so you tell me what are you doing wrong, if you think anything is wrong that is?
It all becomes a question of how it plays out constitutionally. The Supreme Court has to interpret it yet and given the last ruling it still doesn't really define what Blasphemy is, I can see this playing out for years yet Lowing, what Islamic countries do? I don't really care, i'm confident that in a free democracy that this law will be repealed as unworkable - certainly in time for reunification in 2016
I do not care what Islamic countries do either, this does not mean we can not recognize and acknowledge it.

This legislation is appeasement and the one religious group that cares the most and will benefit the most from it is Islam. You might wanna care about that since from what I read the Islamic community in Ireland has jumped exponentially and is still on the rise. Given that no other relgious group gives a shit about blasphemy as you have admitted, this should concern you.
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
you still have shown no evidence to prove that Lowing, zero, zip, zilch! until you  provide just one shred of verifiable independent evidence it's just you raving like a looney, oh yeah that's right it's all a conspiracy I forgot..  you're just a hatemongering joke.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

you still have shown no evidence to prove that Lowing, zero, zip, zilch! until you  provide just one shred of verifiable independent evidence it's just you raving like a looney, oh yeah that's right it's all a conspiracy I forgot..  you're just a hatemongering joke.
And what proof do you have to support your argument. I admit, my opinion is just that, opinion. I have posted arguments to support my opinion only to be met with insult.

Are you now demanding that I prove that Islam will benefit most from this legislation? OK I offer you as my proof. You have already claimed that no outrage or incitement has ever existed regarding blasphemy and the Catholic or Prodestant churches, which basically makes it a non-issue.. Thank you. I can show where outrage and incitement are ever present regarding Islam and how after this passes, Islam will no doubt try to inforce it., where no other relgion gives a shit about it.

Am I now to prove that Islam is growing rapidly in Ireland? I can if you demand it. Easy google search there.

Am I to prove that this is curtailing 2 of western societies basic freedoms? Yup, I can prove that as well. Painfully obvious I would think.

Am I to prove that this legislation is the same direction pushed for by Islamic countries, and a step backwards for any freedom loving country, yup can do, shouldn't be too hard given the freedoms this affects..
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
Blah blah blah - evidence or give over..

PS - for the umpteenth time you cretin I showed that there was outrage so quit saying " You have already claimed that no outrage or incitement has ever existed regarding blasphemy" there was christian outrage so stop saying there wasn't, that's your probelm you're just a wanker who only sees what he wants to see to skew their reality.. warped, you can bang on but until you can provide one link to back up your claim that Islam had any influence on the Irish situation, shut the fuck up and stop spouting unfounded nonsense, simply put up or shut the fuck up...

Last edited by IG-Calibre (2010-01-11 10:59:28)

Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6837|SE London

IG-Calibre wrote:

Blah blah blah - evidence or give over..
He has already admitted it's just his opinion and that he doesn't have any evidence. Just a few more opinions from other people with fairly extreme anti-Islamic views (or arguments as he calls them).
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
the Church was very vexed about it

https://anacarlo.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/father-ted-careful-now.jpg
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

Bertster7 wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

Blah blah blah - evidence or give over..
He has already admitted it's just his opinion and that he doesn't have any evidence. Just a few more opinions from other people with fairly extreme anti-Islamic views (or arguments as he calls them).
Aye, but it's irrational Bert, The fact that his opinions are incorrect is immaterial to Lowing, his ignorance fuels his hatred of all things Islamic - unless of course he is making money out of it when he's off war profiteering.  Fact of the matter is he is completely wrong about the Ireland situation,  that's why 10 days later he cannot in the whole of the internets, find a single reputable source to back up his opinion only hatemongering sites & blogs, which of course he rationalises as being some kind of "PC conspiracy" - that makes him a grade a asshole in my book. no matter how he trys to portray himself as some kind of victim..
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

Blah blah blah - evidence or give over..

PS - for the umpteenth time you cretin I showed that there was outrage so quit saying " You have already claimed that no outrage or incitement has ever existed regarding blasphemy" there was christian outrage so stop saying there wasn't, that's your probelm you're just a wanker who only sees what he wants to see to skew their reality.. warped, you can bang on but until you can provide one link to back up your claim that Islam had any influence on the Irish situation, shut the fuck up and stop spouting unfounded nonsense, simply put up or shut the fuck up...
I see, so there was Christian outrage over blasphemey? The masses were rioting in the streets? Cars and buildings were set on fire? People were killed? Death threats were taken seriously? Protesters were going nuts? All over blasphemy? Or is this the "outrage" you speak of was the 1 obscure 15 year old court case that no one took seriously and could not  be bothered with? Is this the "outrage" you speak off? If so I guess you and I are on different levels regarding outrage and incitement.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6907|USA

IG-Calibre wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

IG-Calibre wrote:

Blah blah blah - evidence or give over..
He has already admitted it's just his opinion and that he doesn't have any evidence. Just a few more opinions from other people with fairly extreme anti-Islamic views (or arguments as he calls them).
Aye, but it's irrational Bert, The fact that his opinions are incorrect is immaterial to Lowing, his ignorance fuels his hatred of all things Islamic - unless of course he is making money out of it when he's off war profiteering.  Fact of the matter is he is completely wrong about the Ireland situation,  that's why 10 days later he cannot in the whole of the internets, find a single reputable source to back up his opinion only hatemongering sites & blogs, which of course he rationalises as being some kind of "PC conspiracy" - that makes him a grade a asshole in my book. no matter how he trys to portray himself as some kind of victim..
Please provide me evidence that says  that this new legislation is DIRECTLY supposed to break the stranlehold of the Catholic Church.

Lets see if you can live up to the burden of proof you demand from me. Remember, it better be stated as a fact in this legislation and not an opinion in a blog.

Also your cheap shots about my working in Iraq, does not work. My deployment over there had nothing t odo with love or hatred of Islam. It had everything to do with being sent there because that is where the helicopters were that needed to be upgraded.

Last edited by lowing (2010-01-11 13:45:23)

IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6998|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

lowing wrote:

Please provide me evidence that says  that this new legislation is DIRECTLY supposed to break the stranlehold(sic) of the Catholic Church..
OMG!!!!!!  you fucking PLANK - I direct you to the 37 Constitution, I direct you to the new definition of Blasphemy.  GTFO..

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard