You said "I hate most muslims, or do not trust them for that matter." So, there is a difference, isn't there?usmarine2007 wrote:
We all know there is a difference. I hate Micheal Moore, which means I would piss on his grave. I don't like Bill O'Rly, but would not piss on his.sergeriver wrote:
You used that word first. But hate, don't like, in this case it doesn't make the difference.
Poll
Islamophobia: The New Anti-Semitism?
| Yes | 53% | 53% - 67 | ||||
| No | 46% | 46% - 59 | ||||
| Total: 126 | ||||||
That is what we call a "trap." Read the whole thread if you like.sergeriver wrote:
You said "I hate most muslims, or do not trust them for that matter." So, there is a difference, isn't there?usmarine2007 wrote:
We all know there is a difference. I hate Micheal Moore, which means I would piss on his grave. I don't like Bill O'Rly, but would not piss on his.sergeriver wrote:
You used that word first. But hate, don't like, in this case it doesn't make the difference.
I already did. The thing is while many persons deny that Islamophobia is growing, there are many who say "I hate Muslims, or I don't trust them, or I don't like them". And that generalization is very dangerous.usmarine2007 wrote:
That is what we call a "trap." Read the whole thread if you like.sergeriver wrote:
You said "I hate most muslims, or do not trust them for that matter." So, there is a difference, isn't there?usmarine2007 wrote:
We all know there is a difference. I hate Micheal Moore, which means I would piss on his grave. I don't like Bill O'Rly, but would not piss on his.
How many people do you trust? I can count how many people I trust on one hand.
Me too, but that doesn't mean I hate or fear the rest of the World.usmarine2007 wrote:
How many people do you trust? I can count how many people I trust on one hand.
Yes I post my opinion. Show me where people are taught that the US attack on Japan was terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Yours are all opinions. Fact is what I posted before, where many American personalities, called the bombings a crime against humanity. Was Truman your grandfather anyway? How come the attack on Pearl Harbor was a terrible act, even when the US knew about it, but the bombings are cool for you? Pls, I want an answer without the words BS, liberal, pal...lowing wrote:
OPINION is not fact.Vilham wrote:
You can say that all you like, it doesnt change the fact that you are naive to think that just because the winning side writes history it makes anything they do right. As to providing a counter to nuking japan = good, 2 people have already done that. So please if you are the adult you claim to be get a grip.
I asked where in the world, ( other than Osama Bin Laden Elementary ) is history being taught that the US is a terrorist state and that the attack on Japan was a terrorist act.
I acknowledge that history is written by the winners. What is it that is taught in Germany and Japan about the bombings, is it that it was terror attack or not??
You have posted OPINONS not fact from these people. No history books has judged the US bombing of Japan as a terrorist attack.
The attack on Peral Harbor was terrible, it started a war for the US where millions of people have died.
I never said the bombings of Japan was "cool for me". It was unfortunate that it had to come to that. But it was the lesser of 2 evils. AND it wasn't terrorism.
History has not judged the bombings as a crime against humanity either, only in INDIVIDUALS opinions not in history. Hell I could post an opinion that the KKK was rightous and just in their actions early in the century. HISTORY disagrees ( as it should) with that position. SO basically my opinion doesn't really matter about it.
I never said that was terrorism, but it was a crime against humanity.lowing wrote:
Yes I post my opinion. Show me where people are taught that the US attack on Japan was terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Yours are all opinions. Fact is what I posted before, where many American personalities, called the bombings a crime against humanity. Was Truman your grandfather anyway? How come the attack on Pearl Harbor was a terrible act, even when the US knew about it, but the bombings are cool for you? Pls, I want an answer without the words BS, liberal, pal...lowing wrote:
OPINION is not fact.
I asked where in the world, ( other than Osama Bin Laden Elementary ) is history being taught that the US is a terrorist state and that the attack on Japan was a terrorist act.
I acknowledge that history is written by the winners. What is it that is taught in Germany and Japan about the bombings, is it that it was terror attack or not??
You have posted OPINONS not fact from these people. No history books has judged the US bombing of Japan as a terrorist attack.
The attack on Peral Harbor was terrible, it started a war for the US where millions of people have died.
I never said the bombings of Japan was "cool for me". It was unfortunate that it had to come to that. But it was the lesser of 2 evils. AND it wasn't terrorism.
History has not judged the bombings as a crime against humanity either, only in INDIVIDUALS opinions not in history. Hell I could post an opinion that the KKK was rightous and just in their actions early in the century. HISTORY disagrees ( as it should) with that position. SO basically my opinion doesn't really matter about it.
Your opinion, show me in the history books, serge. Show me what schools are teaching thissergeriver wrote:
I never said that was terrorism, but it was a crime against humanity.lowing wrote:
Yes I post my opinion. Show me where people are taught that the US attack on Japan was terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Yours are all opinions. Fact is what I posted before, where many American personalities, called the bombings a crime against humanity. Was Truman your grandfather anyway? How come the attack on Pearl Harbor was a terrible act, even when the US knew about it, but the bombings are cool for you? Pls, I want an answer without the words BS, liberal, pal...
You have posted OPINONS not fact from these people. No history books has judged the US bombing of Japan as a terrorist attack.
The attack on Peral Harbor was terrible, it started a war for the US where millions of people have died.
I never said the bombings of Japan was "cool for me". It was unfortunate that it had to come to that. But it was the lesser of 2 evils. AND it wasn't terrorism.
History has not judged the bombings as a crime against humanity either, only in INDIVIDUALS opinions not in history. Hell I could post an opinion that the KKK was rightous and just in their actions early in the century. HISTORY disagrees ( as it should) with that position. SO basically my opinion doesn't really matter about it.
And the bombings were not necessary according to many American opinions:lowing wrote:
Your opinion, show me in the history books, serge. Show me what schools are teaching thissergeriver wrote:
I never said that was terrorism, but it was a crime against humanity.lowing wrote:
Yes I post my opinion. Show me where people are taught that the US attack on Japan was terrorism.
You have posted OPINONS not fact from these people. No history books has judged the US bombing of Japan as a terrorist attack.
The attack on Peral Harbor was terrible, it started a war for the US where millions of people have died.
I never said the bombings of Japan was "cool for me". It was unfortunate that it had to come to that. But it was the lesser of 2 evils. AND it wasn't terrorism.
History has not judged the bombings as a crime against humanity either, only in INDIVIDUALS opinions not in history. Hell I could post an opinion that the KKK was rightous and just in their actions early in the century. HISTORY disagrees ( as it should) with that position. SO basically my opinion doesn't really matter about it.
"We are the inheritors to the mantle of Genghis Khan," wrote New York Times editorial writer Hanson Baldwin, "and of all those in history who have justified the use of utter ruthlessness in war." Norman Thomas called Nagasaki "the greatest single atrocity of a very cruel war." Joseph P. Kennedy, father of the President, was similarly appalled. When he was informed in mid-July 1945 by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson of the decision to use the atomic bomb, General Dwight Eisenhower was deeply troubled. He disclosed his strong reservations about using the new weapon in his 1963 memoir, The White House Years: Mandate for Change, 1953-1956 (pp. 312-313): During his [Stimson's] recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face." "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Eisenhower said in 1963.
Very good......................OPINIONS..................... NOT terrorism ,NOT crimes against humanity as judged by history. Nanking was, Concentratyion camps was. etc. not bombing Japansergeriver wrote:
And the bombings were not necessary according to many American opinions:lowing wrote:
Your opinion, show me in the history books, serge. Show me what schools are teaching thissergeriver wrote:
I never said that was terrorism, but it was a crime against humanity.
"We are the inheritors to the mantle of Genghis Khan," wrote New York Times editorial writer Hanson Baldwin, "and of all those in history who have justified the use of utter ruthlessness in war." Norman Thomas called Nagasaki "the greatest single atrocity of a very cruel war." Joseph P. Kennedy, father of the President, was similarly appalled. When he was informed in mid-July 1945 by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson of the decision to use the atomic bomb, General Dwight Eisenhower was deeply troubled. He disclosed his strong reservations about using the new weapon in his 1963 memoir, The White House Years: Mandate for Change, 1953-1956 (pp. 312-313): During his [Stimson's] recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face." "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Eisenhower said in 1963.
Actually, technically speaking it was both terrorism and a crime against humanity: a weapon of mass destruction targetted against civilians. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Actually , technically speaking, history does not judge it as such. Already been through that.Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, technically speaking it was both terrorism and a crime against humanity: a weapon of mass destruction targetted against civilians. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Wrong, opinion doesn't dictate it as such, technically does. All technical facts need are a dictionary and an event.lowing wrote:
Actually , technically speaking, history does not judge it as such. Already been through that.Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, technically speaking it was both terrorism and a crime against humanity: a weapon of mass destruction targetted against civilians. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Radical Islam is on the rise but it is important we not lose focus as well. The odds of being a victim of a terrorist attack are still 1 in 80k. You are more likely to drown in the bathtub. This is not to say that we should not be aware of the threat or even not take extra security precautions. But we damn sure should not be antagonizing the situation. Going around arresting people marketing the Terrorist Cartoon network might be a bit overboard (Although they used incredible shitty judgment on the locations they chose).
Do not forget the Moderate Muslims are our greatest asset and ally against hate towards the west.
Do not forget the Moderate Muslims are our greatest asset and ally against hate towards the west.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-01 21:48:25)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
History is written by historians: that is, it's biased. According to the definitions, the US attack was both a terrorist attack and a crime against humanity.lowing wrote:
Actually , technically speaking, history does not judge it as such. Already been through that.Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, technically speaking it was both terrorism and a crime against humanity: a weapon of mass destruction targetted against civilians. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
EXACTLY! Lowing will never accept this though.Bubbalo wrote:
History is written by historians: that is, it's biased. According to the definitions, the US attack was both a terrorist attack and a crime against humanity.lowing wrote:
Actually , technically speaking, history does not judge it as such. Already been through that.Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, technically speaking it was both terrorism and a crime against humanity: a weapon of mass destruction targetted against civilians. But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Of course he will. Just as soon as historians say something he doesn like.
Read the thread about this.lowing wrote:
Very good......................OPINIONS..................... NOT terrorism ,NOT crimes against humanity as judged by history. Nanking was, Concentratyion camps was. etc. not bombing Japansergeriver wrote:
And the bombings were not necessary according to many American opinions:lowing wrote:
Your opinion, show me in the history books, serge. Show me what schools are teaching this
"We are the inheritors to the mantle of Genghis Khan," wrote New York Times editorial writer Hanson Baldwin, "and of all those in history who have justified the use of utter ruthlessness in war." Norman Thomas called Nagasaki "the greatest single atrocity of a very cruel war." Joseph P. Kennedy, father of the President, was similarly appalled. When he was informed in mid-July 1945 by Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson of the decision to use the atomic bomb, General Dwight Eisenhower was deeply troubled. He disclosed his strong reservations about using the new weapon in his 1963 memoir, The White House Years: Mandate for Change, 1953-1956 (pp. 312-313): During his [Stimson's] recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of "face." "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Eisenhower said in 1963.
Until this forum or forums like this and the discussions in them, you never were taught or thought or raised to think that America was a terrorist state AND the bombing of Japan in WW2 was an act of terrorism. ONLY, now, for the sake of trying to prove America is evil are you spewing such BULLSHIT.Bubbalo wrote:
Of course he will. Just as soon as historians say something he doesn like.
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
*ring ring*gun.KingRat wrote:
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
Medication time! Come and get it!
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Have you read the Koran in it's entirety? There are plenty of translated online versions. What you are referring to is a perverse interpretation. Most Muslims do not consider everyone else "Fair Game".gun.KingRat wrote:
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Unless you print a cartoon of Muhammad. Then the gloves come off and they will kill you for implying they are a violent religion. There is an irony there somewhere.Kmarion wrote:
Have you read the Koran in it's entirety? There are plenty of translated online versions. What you are referring to is a perverse interpretation. Most Muslims do not consider everyone else "Fair Game".gun.KingRat wrote:
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
Their Religion is 600 years younger than Christianism. How was Christianism doing in 1400?lowing wrote:
Unless you print a cartoon of Muhammad. Then the gloves come off and they will kill you for implying they are a violent religion. There is an irony there somewhere.Kmarion wrote:
Have you read the Koran in it's entirety? There are plenty of translated online versions. What you are referring to is a perverse interpretation. Most Muslims do not consider everyone else "Fair Game".gun.KingRat wrote:
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
The muslims learned from their Nazi allies defeat. The free world cannot be conquered by outside forces. This is why muslims today worm their way into civilizations and then destroy them from within. Islam teaches that it is only wrong to lie to, or steal from , another muslim. Everyone else is fair game. This is why no muslim can be trusted to do what he says, and why they should all be expelled from free nations while there is still time.
LOL, yeah but the event that refer is about a year old. Not quite understanding your point.sergeriver wrote:
Their Religion is 600 years younger than Christianism. How was Christianism doing in 1400?lowing wrote:
Unless you print a cartoon of Muhammad. Then the gloves come off and they will kill you for implying they are a violent religion. There is an irony there somewhere.Kmarion wrote:
Have you read the Koran in it's entirety? There are plenty of translated online versions. What you are referring to is a perverse interpretation. Most Muslims do not consider everyone else "Fair Game".
YOu will never find me defending Christians, but ot be fair, I can honestly say none have flown planes into our buildings or strapped bombs on children's chests to blow up other children.