Could you please lay out your argument in one post without the word appeasement please. I'm trying to work out why this has ruffled your feathers so much.
THEY ARE NOT APPEASING RADICAL ISLAM!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE APPEASING MAINSTREAM ISLAM TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT GET UPSET!!!.WE ALL KNOWCARTOONSWHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN MAINSTREAM ISLAM GETS UPSET!!!adam1503 wrote:
That is complete bollocks. How does making it sound like we are not at war with radical Islam appease radical Islam? Youre argument is falling apart...lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.
I am consistent with my statements......Try looking up the word POTENTIALadam1503 wrote:
lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.First you argued that this is intended to keep radical Muslims happy, then you suggest that it is to keep mainstream Muslims happy. Im giving you the chance to clarify your argument: which is it? Or are you just struggling to string together a coherent argument?lowing wrote:
they didn't do this to piss off Bin Laden, they did this to keep from pissing off other Muslims, and we all know what can happen when you piss off a member of this peaceful religion don't we? So they appeased them
You and David P. suggested that most terrorists were Muslims.lowing wrote:
Who said all Muslims were terrorists Serge? I defy you to show me.sergeriver wrote:
Maybe because they think it's more intelligent to turn the moderate Muslims against the extremists than to generalize about all Muslims as terrorists.lowing wrote:
I agree GB is using PC to appease the Muslim community from getting mad. I wonder why they would be afraid of that? Hmmmmmmmmmmm
start at page one. My argument has been laid out CONSISTENTLY and clearly, throughout this thread.ShowMeTheMonkey wrote:
Could you please lay out your argument in one post without the word appeasement please. I'm trying to work out why this has ruffled your feathers so much.
Ummmmm yeah Serge,MOST Islamic Terrorists are Muslims. It is what we are talking about is it not?Even saying that does not imply that all muslims were terrorists.sergeriver wrote:
You and David P. suggested that most terrorists were Muslims.lowing wrote:
Who said all Muslims were terrorists Serge? I defy you to show me.sergeriver wrote:
Maybe because they think it's more intelligent to turn the moderate Muslims against the extremists than to generalize about all Muslims as terrorists.
You are reaching and failing
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-20 06:33:30)
I didn't say Islamic.lowing wrote:
Ummmmm yeah Serge,MOST Islamic Terrorists are Muslims. It is what we are talking about is it not?sergeriver wrote:
You and David P. suggested that most terrorists were Muslims.lowing wrote:
Who said all Muslims were terrorists Serge? I defy you to show me.
So according to you, all Muslims are potential radicals? That is along the same lines as saying all Christians are potentially White-Supremacists.lowing wrote:
I am consistent with my statements......Try looking up the word POTENTIAL
you are reaching and failingsergeriver wrote:
I didn't say Islamic.lowing wrote:
Ummmmm yeah Serge,MOST Islamic Terrorists are Muslims. It is what we are talking about is it not?sergeriver wrote:
You and David P. suggested that most terrorists were Muslims.
back up and try again...Tell me where I said most Muslims are terrorists
You back up and read what I posted before. Address that first.lowing wrote:
you are reaching and failingsergeriver wrote:
I didn't say Islamic.lowing wrote:
Ummmmm yeah Serge,MOST Islamic Terrorists are Muslims. It is what we are talking about is it not?
back up and try again...Tell me where I said most Muslims are terrorists
The world wide cartoon riots pretty much suggests that mainstream Islam can ride the ragged edge to radical behavior.adam1503 wrote:
So according to you, all Muslims are potential radicals? That is along the same lines as saying all Christians are potentially White-Supremacists.lowing wrote:
I am consistent with my statements......Try looking up the word POTENTIAL
call me crazy, but any religious group that goes out and commits violence in protest of being called violent seems pretty radical to me. ANd this was mainstream Muslims that did it. Not terrorists
Sorry pal, your attempts to show Islam as some peace loving tolerant religion just goes against the facts of the matter.....Being wrong must suck
Sorry pal, your attempts to show Islam as some peace loving tolerant religion just goes against the facts of the matter.....Being wrong must suck
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-20 06:40:33)
They were hardly worldwide. And those that were rioting were quickly denounced by the Muslin community as not representative of Islam as a whole. Dont jump to conclusions about a religion based on the actions of an extreme minority.lowing wrote:
The world wide cartoon riots pretty much suggests that mainstream Islam can ride the ragged edge to radical behavior.adam1503 wrote:
So according to you, all Muslims are potential radicals? That is along the same lines as saying all Christians are potentially White-Supremacists.lowing wrote:
I am consistent with my statements......Try looking up the word POTENTIAL
Mmmm, your OPlowing wrote:
THEY ARE NOT APPEASING RADICAL ISLAM!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE APPEASING MAINSTREAM ISLAM TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT GET UPSET!!!.WE ALL KNOWCARTOONSWHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN MAINSTREAM ISLAM GETS UPSET!!!adam1503 wrote:
That is complete bollocks. How does making it sound like we are not at war with radical Islam appease radical Islam? Youre argument is falling apart...lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.
Now show me where you were talking about mainstream Islam and not terrorism here.lowing wrote:
Unfortunately it appear GB can no longer face calling Islamic Terror what it is.....ISLAMIC TERROR.
how can you fight this war on terror if you can not even muster the courage to call it what it is.
You Euro-weenies are too much.
Like seriously, wtf.
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam. They broke away from calling this war exactly what it is. to some watered down lie to make sure moderate muslims do not get upset. Period. I said nothing about them doing this t oappease the radicalssergeriver wrote:
Mmmm, your OPlowing wrote:
THEY ARE NOT APPEASING RADICAL ISLAM!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE APPEASING MAINSTREAM ISLAM TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT GET UPSET!!!.WE ALL KNOWCARTOONSWHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN MAINSTREAM ISLAM GETS UPSET!!!adam1503 wrote:
That is complete bollocks. How does making it sound like we are not at war with radical Islam appease radical Islam? Youre argument is falling apart...Now show me where you were talking about mainstream Islam and not terrorism here.lowing wrote:
Unfortunately it appear GB can no longer face calling Islamic Terror what it is.....ISLAMIC TERROR.
how can you fight this war on terror if you can not even muster the courage to call it what it is.
You Euro-weenies are too much.
Are you trying to make a point?
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam.
lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam. They broke away from calling this war exactly what it is. to some watered down lie to make sure moderate muslims do not get upset. Period. I said nothing about them doing this t oappease the radicalssergeriver wrote:
Mmmm, your OPlowing wrote:
THEY ARE NOT APPEASING RADICAL ISLAM!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE APPEASING MAINSTREAM ISLAM TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT GET UPSET!!!.WE ALL KNOWCARTOONSWHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN MAINSTREAM ISLAM GETS UPSET!!!Now show me where you were talking about mainstream Islam and not terrorism here.lowing wrote:
Unfortunately it appear GB can no longer face calling Islamic Terror what it is.....ISLAMIC TERROR.
how can you fight this war on terror if you can not even muster the courage to call it what it is.
You Euro-weenies are too much.
yer lost. and like sergeriver you are reaching and failingadam1503 wrote:
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam.lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.
see abovesergeriver wrote:
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam. They broke away from calling this war exactly what it is. to some watered down lie to make sure moderate muslims do not get upset. Period. I said nothing about them doing this t oappease the radicalssergeriver wrote:
Mmmm, your OP
Now show me where you were talking about mainstream Islam and not terrorism here.
I think your thread is not that consistent as you claimed before.lowing wrote:
yer lost. and like sergeriver you are reaching and failingadam1503 wrote:
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam.lowing wrote:
Then what the hell do you call it when a country is going to re-phrase a war with radical Islam. To make it sound like they are not at war with radical Islam for no other reason than to keep potential radical muslims happy? It is appeasement no matter you want to try an slice it.
You deleted the highlighted text. Np. I know I'm right. This isn't appeasement and you are generalizing.lowing wrote:
see abovesergeriver wrote:
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam. They broke away from calling this war exactly what it is. to some watered down lie to make sure moderate muslims do not get upset. Period. I said nothing about them doing this t oappease the radicals
Again you accuse me of it. Show me the inconsistencies.sergeriver wrote:
I think your thread is not that consistent as you claimed before.lowing wrote:
yer lost. and like sergeriver you are reaching and failingadam1503 wrote:
lowing wrote:
You show me where I suggest they changed their phrasing to appease radical Islam.
show me where I said all Muslims are terrorists.
Show me how the definition of appeasement DOE NOT apply to the OP. Because I have showed you all several times the difination can apply
You keep saying it........SHOW ME
It was most Terrorists are Muslims if I remember...lowing wrote:
you are reaching and failingsergeriver wrote:
I didn't say Islamic.lowing wrote:
Ummmmm yeah Serge,MOST Islamic Terrorists are Muslims. It is what we are talking about is it not?
back up and try again...Tell me where I said most Muslims are terrorists