when they blow shit up don't they say it's in the name of Islame?
Love is the answer
You have missed the entire point of calling it "anti-Islamic".Mek-Izzle wrote:
When a terrorist blows up a train it's not "Anti-Islamic", it's "Anti-Everything" - It's not just against the religion of fucking Islam to blow up a Train full of innocent people, it's against all the god damn rules in all the god damn books.
Ok fuck it. Let's not call it Islamic Terrorism, or Anti-Islamic terrorism. Can't we just call it Terrorism. There.
You are not even funny. The title and the thread are both insulting to the UK, but what do you care? And it also is insulting to Muslims, but you don't care. The other day you posted a thread about a congressman donating money to terrorists, did you call it GJ America? It seems to me that titles aren't important if they don't touch your country.usmarine2005 wrote:
lol title police.......alert alert alert///title police. Not a title about the US...alert alert alert
Last edited by sergeriver (2008-01-20 04:01:59)
Actually I'm willing to bet the percentage would go down...David.P wrote:
Now if i took into account attacks on the UK and other US allies the numbers will be higher percentage wise.
As I've said before. Northern Ireland...
I beg you to quote me as saying."I paint all Muslims as bad people". The closest you can get is my admittance that I think Islam is a violent religion and that religion does not blend well into a western society.CameronPoe wrote:
You can keep terrorism originating from the middle east at the top of your priority list if you like, and you can continue to use a misnomer to suit your agenda of painting all Muslims as bad people too but that's your choice. I hope you enjoy the government spending your money abroad and getting nothing appreciable in return. Think of all the airlines you could support with that!lowing wrote:
Well, you won't mind if I keep Islamic Terrorism at the top of my priority list for national security do ya?
You are no better than the race mongers in this forum. You apparently would have no problem calling me a racist and saying I hate all black people because I hate gangstas. Forget the FACT that a gangsta is not a race. I wonder why they would associate gangstas with black people anyway? Perhaps their own stereotypical mentality??
No I haven't. They're calling it anti-Islamic because they think what the terrorists are doing is against the religion of Islam. What I'm saying is what they're doing is against everything. Not just Islam. And just because they're doing it in the name of Islam, even though it's against Islam. Doesn't make it just anti-Islamic.adam1503 wrote:
You have missed the entire point of calling it "anti-Islamic".Mek-Izzle wrote:
When a terrorist blows up a train it's not "Anti-Islamic", it's "Anti-Everything" - It's not just against the religion of fucking Islam to blow up a Train full of innocent people, it's against all the god damn rules in all the god damn books.
Ok fuck it. Let's not call it Islamic Terrorism, or Anti-Islamic terrorism. Can't we just call it Terrorism. There.
Terrorism is Terrorism. No need to add stupid prefixes to it.
It's not appeasement, but it is PC. Can't they just call them Terrorists and call it a fucking day.
Last edited by Mek-Izzle (2008-01-20 04:01:44)
Every time you use the term 'Islamic Terror' you paint all Muslims as bad people.lowing wrote:
I beg you to quote me as saying."I paint all Muslims as bad people". The closest you can get is my admittance that I think Islam is a violent religion and that religion does not blend well into a western society.
I personally don't think your racist, you just have a habit of using imprecise language (like 'Islamic Terror').lowing wrote:
You are no better than the race mongers in this forum. You apparently would have no problem calling me a racist and saying I hate all black people because I hate gangstas. Forget the FACT that a gangsta is not a race. I wonder why they would associate gangstas with black people anyway? Perhaps their own stereotypical mentality??
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-20 04:12:19)
Cams title thread:sergeriver wrote:
You are not even funny. The title and the thread are both insulting to the UK, but what do you care? And it also is insulting to Muslims, but you don't care. The other day you posted a thread about a congressman donating money to terrorists, did you call it GJ America? It seems to me that titles aren't important if they don't touch your country.usmarine2005 wrote:
lol title police.......alert alert alert///title police. Not a title about the US...alert alert alert
"When will the US (and their poodles) withdraw from Iraq?
Place Your Bets!!! "
Well at least I didn't call every country in the world allied to the US a "POODLE". Now I think I know exactly what Cam meant by that phrasing and it could be insulting to to all countries listed including GB..............So.................where is the uproar over this??
I think you guys are pissed about this title thread becausee it is SPOT ON and true, and you guys are scrambling to debunk it. Pulling out every trick in the book
1. You're generalizing <-------one of my favorites
2. You hate all Muslims <-------this ine is funny considering number 1.
3. You are insulting
4. You're source sucks
etc, etc,..........
One thing that is missing is the fact that this OP is NOT true by the definition of the word APPEASEMENT.
The thread title is fine because you are referring to an action of the British government.lowing wrote:
Cams title thread:
"When will the US (and their poodles) withdraw from Iraq?
Place Your Bets!!! "
Well at least I didn't call every country in the world allied to the US a "POODLE". Now I think I know exactly what Cam meant by that phrasing and it could be insulting to to all countries listed including GB..............So.................where is the uproar over this??
I think you guys are pissed about this title thread becausee it is SPOT ON and true, and you guys are scrambling to debunk it. Pulling out every trick in the book
1. You're generalizing <-------one of my favorites
2. You hate all Muslims <-------this ine is funny considering number 1.
3. You are insulting
4. You're source sucks
etc, etc,..........
One thing that is missing is the fact that this OP is NOT true by the definition of the word APPEASEMENT.
As for my thread title - the term poodle did not extend to 'all allies' of the US, just those who went against the will of their own people to engage in a folly in Iraq.
I say CORRECTLY Islamic Terrorists because the terror that is being done is done by members of Islam in the name of Islam.CameronPoe wrote:
Every time you use the term 'Islamic Terror' you paint all Muslims as bad people.lowing wrote:
I beg you to quote me as saying."I paint all Muslims as bad people". The closest you can get is my admittance that I think Islam is a violent religion and that religion does not blend well into a western society.I personally don't think your racist, you just have a habit of using imprecise language (like 'Islamic Terror').lowing wrote:
You are no better than the race mongers in this forum. You apparently would have no problem calling me a racist and saying I hate all black people because I hate gangstas. Forget the FACT that a gangsta is not a race. I wonder why they would associate gangstas with black people anyway? Perhaps their own stereotypical mentality??
ANTI-ISLAMIC ACTIVITY is totally inaccurate, since flying a plane into our Pentagon, our WTC, etc......... is hardly anti- Islamic. ANTI-WESTERN SOCIETY. Since it was performed AGAINST the WEST.....ANTI=AGAINST.
All of the attacks in the ME that are Islam on Islam is a result of one group SUPPORTING the west and its efforts their so it is still ANTI ( against) the west.
Stop sugar coating this Cam and trying to make all of this sound so benign.
Islamic terrorists= a Muslim performing terror in the name of Islam. sit there and tell me that terrorism=activity
let me get my twizzers out since we are splitting fine hairs again.CameronPoe wrote:
The thread title is fine because you are referring to an action of the British government.lowing wrote:
Cams title thread:
"When will the US (and their poodles) withdraw from Iraq?
Place Your Bets!!! "
Well at least I didn't call every country in the world allied to the US a "POODLE". Now I think I know exactly what Cam meant by that phrasing and it could be insulting to to all countries listed including GB..............So.................where is the uproar over this??
I think you guys are pissed about this title thread becausee it is SPOT ON and true, and you guys are scrambling to debunk it. Pulling out every trick in the book
1. You're generalizing <-------one of my favorites
2. You hate all Muslims <-------this ine is funny considering number 1.
3. You are insulting
4. You're source sucks
etc, etc,..........
One thing that is missing is the fact that this OP is NOT true by the definition of the word APPEASEMENT.
As for my thread title - the term poodle did not extend to 'all allies' of the US, just those who went against the will of their own people to engage in a folly in Iraq.
So GB is not one of those countries??
Can I assume you mean to include ALL of those countries citizens as poodles to the US???
I know, you never complained about the title this goes for all those that I "insulted"
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-20 04:29:58)
You say it incorrectly in the sense that it is insulting to all those who practice true Islam. It's like calling KKK activity Christian terrorism, which gives a distinct impression if used repeatedly in the mass media that Christians are barbaric murderers. The fact that they may do it 'in the name of Islam' or 'in the name of Christianity' is irrelevant.lowing wrote:
I say CORRECTLY Islamic Terrorists because the terror that is being done is done by members of Islam in the name of Islam.
Islamic terrorists= a Muslim performing terror in the name of Islam. sit there and tell me that terrorism=activity
Their choice of phrase as I mentioned earlier is poor. It is poor because it doesn't mention the term terrorism. Perhaps we should call it Anti-Western Terrorism then - that would be about as accurate as you could get it. I think you've just come up with the winning phrase.lowing wrote:
ANTI-ISLAMIC ACTIVITY is totally inaccurate, since flying a plane into our Pentagon, our WTC, etc......... is hardly anti- Islamic. ANTI-WESTERN SOCIETY. Since it was performed AGAINST the WEST.....ANTI=AGAINST.
All of the attacks in the ME that are Islam on Islam is a result of one group SUPPORTING the west and its efforts their so it is still ANTI ( against) the west.
Stop sugar coating this Cam and trying to make all of this sound so benign.
GB is one of those countries.lowing wrote:
let me get my twizzers out since we are splitting fine hairs again.
So GB is not one of those countries??
Can I assume you mean to include ALL of those countries citizens as poodles to the US???
I know, you never complained about the title this goes for all those that I "insulted"
When we refer to a nation on this forum we are generally referring to the government in question. If we say 'Americans' or 'British' instead of 'USA' or 'UK' we are referring to people, not governments.
No I do not consider the citizens poodles because, as I mentioned, their governments went against their will.
It's not anti-Western terrorism. These guys have probably killed more Muslims in their own countries than "Westerners" in that past few years. Like I said it's just Terrorism. They do it in the name of Islam, though it doesn't make it anti-Islamic (well it does, but that's like saying killing someone with a gun is just breaking firearms laws by having a gun in your possession and nothing else, get me?). It's just anti-Everything-in-general
Yeah, I think I did. I think I like that. I would buy that as a non-appeasing non-PC phrase.CameronPoe wrote:
You say it incorrectly in the sense that it is insulting to all those who practice true Islam. It's like calling KKK activity Christian terrorism, which gives a distinct impression if used repeatedly in the mass media that Christians are barbaric murderers. The fact that they may do it 'in the name of Islam' or 'in the name of Christianity' is irrelevant.lowing wrote:
I say CORRECTLY Islamic Terrorists because the terror that is being done is done by members of Islam in the name of Islam.
Islamic terrorists= a Muslim performing terror in the name of Islam. sit there and tell me that terrorism=activityTheir choice of phrase as I mentioned earlier is poor. It is poor because it doesn't mention the term terrorism. Perhaps we should call it Anti-Western Terrorism then - that would be about as accurate as you could get it. I think you've just come up with the winning phrase.lowing wrote:
ANTI-ISLAMIC ACTIVITY is totally inaccurate, since flying a plane into our Pentagon, our WTC, etc......... is hardly anti- Islamic. ANTI-WESTERN SOCIETY. Since it was performed AGAINST the WEST.....ANTI=AGAINST.
All of the attacks in the ME that are Islam on Islam is a result of one group SUPPORTING the west and its efforts their so it is still ANTI ( against) the west.
Stop sugar coating this Cam and trying to make all of this sound so benign.
They kill those that lean toward western ways or help the west. Still anti-west, they are just caught in the middle.Mek-Izzle wrote:
It's not anti-Western terrorism. These guys have probably killed more Muslims in their own countries than "Westerners" in that past few years. Like I said it's just Terrorism. They do it in the name of Islam, though it doesn't make it anti-Islamic (well it does, but that's like saying killing someone with a gun is just breaking firearms laws by having a gun in your possession and nothing else, get me?). It's just anti-Everything-in-general
Yes - their reasoning behind killing of fellow Muslims is that a) they are appeasing or helping the west or b) are members or supporters of a pro-western government. You don't see Al Qaeda targeting the Ayatollah.lowing wrote:
They kill those that lean toward western ways or help the west. Still anti-west, they are just caught in the middle.Mek-Izzle wrote:
It's not anti-Western terrorism. These guys have probably killed more Muslims in their own countries than "Westerners" in that past few years. Like I said it's just Terrorism. They do it in the name of Islam, though it doesn't make it anti-Islamic (well it does, but that's like saying killing someone with a gun is just breaking firearms laws by having a gun in your possession and nothing else, get me?). It's just anti-Everything-in-general
So whatcha think, 10 pages in less than a day!!........Now this was one hot thread.
Concluded with some element of agreement too, for a change.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-20 05:10:29)
Do you see how we can all get along when everyone agrees with me?rdx-fx wrote:
FFS, what is D&ST coming to?!CameronPoe wrote:
Concluded with some element of agreement too, for a change.
wait.. what?
..agreement?
oh.. wow.
LOL......."666 karma for you. HAIL LOWING, bringer of Armageddon! ".........<----------my latest karma
lol. Your initial assertion was that it had to be called 'Islamic Terror', anything other than that was practically joining their ranks!lowing wrote:
Do you see how we can all get along when everyone agrees with me?rdx-fx wrote:
FFS, what is D&ST coming to?!CameronPoe wrote:
Concluded with some element of agreement too, for a change.
wait.. what?
..agreement?
oh.. wow.
Nope my assertion was that it not be dressed up and made into something it was not, for the sake of giving warm fuzzies to the Muslims so they would not go radical on them as well.CameronPoe wrote:
lol. Your initial assertion was that it had to be called 'Islamic Terror', anything other than that was practically joining their ranks!lowing wrote:
Do you see how we can all get along when everyone agrees with me?rdx-fx wrote:
FFS, what is D&ST coming to?!
wait.. what?
..agreement?
oh.. wow.
But all that is behind us now...................GROUP HUG!!!
"*Stops Armageddon* - world hero Mek "<--------karma 667 bringing my plans for world domination and chaos to an untimely end.Oh well, I guess I will watch some TV instead.
This is not spot on.lowing wrote:
I think you guys are pissed about this title thread becausee it is SPOT ON and true, and you guys are scrambling to debunk it. Pulling out every trick in the book
1. You're generalizing <-------one of my favorites
2. You hate all Muslims <-------this ine is funny considering number 1.
3. You are insulting
4. You're source sucks
etc, etc,..........
One thing that is missing is the fact that this OP is NOT true by the definition of the word APPEASEMENT.
1-True.
2-Kinda true.
3-True.
4-Kinda true.