Sorry, all of national documents mention God as was pointed out earlier by dtingray. Our country is founded on Christian based faith, morality and values. To completely disconnect from that, IE remove God from everything historically American, is removing history.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
Honouring a day like Independence/Veterans/Memorial is different than clinging onto Religion and making sure it stays important. Abandonment or making religion less important in a country can be seen as a sign of progress to some as religion is often thought of as an archaic/old school of thought. If anything, the days that you mentioned (except xmas/religious holidays) are infact days that celebrate progress. Whether that's celebrating independence from a foreign power or winning a war or giving people rights etc..lowing wrote:
I see, so we can safely do away with black history month, 4th of July, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Veterans Day, Memorial Day, MLK Day, all because we are "progressing" and we should see no need to honor where we came from or the "progress" we have made in comparison to now.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
You may view it as erasing history, tradition and pride but others can view it as progress.
Shitting in the woods can also be seen as part of humanities glorious history and tradition but the toilet is a shining example of progress. I think that's a fitting alternate example.
Yeah, just the kinda thinking of a person who I want to be in charge.
It's not quite the same as holding onto religion.
OMG CAM, you are absolutely 100% correct, our history is about freedom OF religion. It is not about freedom FROM religion. Just as our govt. has no right to tell you how to carry a faith. YOU have no right to tell others how NOT to.CameronPoe wrote:
Am I a state institution? Nope. Am I a government of a modern purportedly secular nation? Nope. The history of your nation is about freedom of religion, not freedom to indoctrinate others. Well that's what I gathered from reading the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, which I picked up copies of in Boston recently.lowing wrote:
I'm sorry, I coulda swore you were lecturing to me about your "Christian heritage" in another thread.... Well our patriotism and history, like it or not, is faith based. Faith, reigned over the land for good or bad through out our history, to now dismiss it because some one is offended is pandering, apologetic and PC. Typical leftist activity amd ideology.
Typical 'rightist activity and ideology' in the US seems to be to shove Christianity down people's throats: similar to countries like Saudi Arabia where Islam is shoved down people's throats.
The classroom, an institute of the nation, is not the place for displaying any faith of any description. The government has no right to tell you how to carry a faith, it also has no right to wave the paraphernalia of a faith you might not share in your face or the face of your children. Nowhere in the founding documents of your nation is a particular faith mentioned.lowing wrote:
OMG CAM, you are absolutely 100% correct, our history is about freedom OF religion. It is not about freedom FROM religion. Just as our govt. has no right to tell you how to carry a faith. YOU have no right to tell others how NOT to.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-09-13 16:18:17)
I know a girl who worked in a clinic in London specilising in trying to fix female genital mutilation. It goes on allot. The girls all had pycological problems from it.Kuffar wrote:
Forced marriageVilham wrote:
firstly. 1.3%Kuffar wrote:
No. What is getting me down is the Islamification of Europe in general and the UK in particular.
What is getting me down is being called a racist because I won't accept cultural and religious practices that are barbaric and medieval.
In no particular order:
-forced marriage
-female genital mutilation
-honour killing
-the formal subjegation and isolation of women
-the belief that homosexuality should be punished by death
-the belief that a Muslim that leaves Islam must be killed
-that Jews are monkeys and Christians pigs
I could go on.
Are you down with all that?
Second. Most Muslims I have met in England are actually incredibly British as they are like 2nd or 3rd generation.
thirdly. I have yet to actually hear of any of the above being used or believed or happening in Britain, and when it does happen its by the quacks.
So what was your point again?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ma … ommunities
Honour killings
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main … dl0401.xml
Female genital mutilation
http://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/Content/FGM~UK
Subjegation of women
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/a … 000798.php
http://jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/002103.php
Homosexuality
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog … ality.aspx
Apostasy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam
Jews and Christians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_antisemitism
Mate, I'm not making this stuff up. Just do a little search. Read it and weep.
I'm guessing he watched the Dispatches documentary on Wahabism within the UK Muslim population last week and is perhaps failing to distinguish it from moderate Islam. Basically his own quoted figures and statistics show that Muslims are still a huge minority in the UK and the barbaric and medieval practices he's talking about here are carried out by a small minority within this minority.oug wrote:
Apart from the last one which is too stupid to even talk about, I have a question about the rest:Kuffar wrote:
No. What is getting me down is the Islamification of Europe in general and the UK in particular.
What is getting me down is being called a racist because I won't accept cultural and religious practices that are barbaric and medieval.
In no particular order:
-forced marriage
-female genital mutilation
-honour killing
-the formal subjegation and isolation of women
-the belief that homosexuality should be punished by death
-the belief that a Muslim that leaves Islam must be killed
-that Jews are monkeys and Christians pigs
I could go on.
Are you down with all that?
How do they affect you? Sure they're barbaric and medieval. But they are practices that stay among them, right?
But hey, why let the reality that most people here on this forum see and experience every day get in the way of some good old fashioned xenophobic scaremongering?
Yeah it's just that, history. It isn't removing it, it will be there in the history books. There's no need to keep the sheeple in a dying religion for the sake of tradition.lowing wrote:
Sorry, all of national documents mention God as was pointed out earlier by dtingray. Our country is founded on Christian based faith, morality and values. To completely disconnect from that, IE remove God from everything historically American, is removing history.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
Honouring a day like Independence/Veterans/Memorial is different than clinging onto Religion and making sure it stays important. Abandonment or making religion less important in a country can be seen as a sign of progress to some as religion is often thought of as an archaic/old school of thought. If anything, the days that you mentioned (except xmas/religious holidays) are infact days that celebrate progress. Whether that's celebrating independence from a foreign power or winning a war or giving people rights etc..lowing wrote:
I see, so we can safely do away with black history month, 4th of July, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Veterans Day, Memorial Day, MLK Day, all because we are "progressing" and we should see no need to honor where we came from or the "progress" we have made in comparison to now.
Yeah, just the kinda thinking of a person who I want to be in charge.
It's not quite the same as holding onto religion.
Even conservative Catholic Ireland grew enough hair on its balls to remove any special mentioning of the Church from its constitution. I'd have thought you of all people would be appalled at the idea of living in a religious state that holds people of one faith above all others, no?jord wrote:
Yeah it's just that, history. It isn't removing it, it will be there in the history books. There's no need to keep the sheeple in a dying religion for the sake of tradition.lowing wrote:
Sorry, all of national documents mention God as was pointed out earlier by dtingray. Our country is founded on Christian based faith, morality and values. To completely disconnect from that, IE remove God from everything historically American, is removing history.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
Honouring a day like Independence/Veterans/Memorial is different than clinging onto Religion and making sure it stays important. Abandonment or making religion less important in a country can be seen as a sign of progress to some as religion is often thought of as an archaic/old school of thought. If anything, the days that you mentioned (except xmas/religious holidays) are infact days that celebrate progress. Whether that's celebrating independence from a foreign power or winning a war or giving people rights etc..
It's not quite the same as holding onto religion.
I wouldn't say appalled, I don't know any different.Braddock wrote:
Even conservative Catholic Ireland grew enough hair on its balls to remove any special mentioning of the Church from its constitution. I'd have thought you of all people would be appalled at the idea of living in a religious state that holds people of one faith above all others, no?jord wrote:
Yeah it's just that, history. It isn't removing it, it will be there in the history books. There's no need to keep the sheeple in a dying religion for the sake of tradition.lowing wrote:
Sorry, all of national documents mention God as was pointed out earlier by dtingray. Our country is founded on Christian based faith, morality and values. To completely disconnect from that, IE remove God from everything historically American, is removing history.
Bingo, A is not faith mentioned on these posters either Cam.It is a reflextion of patriotismCameronPoe wrote:
The classroom, an institute of the nation, is not the place for displaying any faith of any description. The government has no right to tell you how to carry a faith, it also has no right to wave the paraphernalia of a faith you might not share in your face or the face of your children. Nowhere in the founding documents of your nation is a particular faith mentioned.lowing wrote:
OMG CAM, you are absolutely 100% correct, our history is about freedom OF religion. It is not about freedom FROM religion. Just as our govt. has no right to tell you how to carry a faith. YOU have no right to tell others how NOT to.
Expression of belief in any deity is A FAITH. Where's the inclusiveness when it comes to those without faith, whose interests are presumably covered by the second amendment. lol at God being a reflection of patriotism - that's middle ages bullshit that is, the kind of shit they still believe in in Iran and Saudi Arabia.lowing wrote:
Bingo, A is not faith mentioned on these posters either Cam.It is a reflextion of patriotism
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-09-14 16:17:11)
Faith yes, a specific religion No which is what I was addressing. Again you have freedom of religion ( or not) you do not have freedom FROM religion. All of this bullshit is nothing more than people with too much time on their hands trying to get their 15 minutes.CameronPoe wrote:
Expression of belief in any deity is A FAITH. Where's the inclusiveness when it comes to those without faith, whose interests are presumably covered by the second amendment. lol at God being a reflection of patriotism - that's middle ages bullshit that is, the kind of shit they still believe in in Iran and Saudi Arabia.lowing wrote:
Bingo, A is not faith mentioned on these posters either Cam.It is a reflextion of patriotism
allah is just another name for god
The last of the bullet points above may be too stupid to mention but it's right there in the Koran. This is the kind of stuff that is being used to define the world view of Muslims who are exposed to it. Yes, Wahabhism is being promoted by the Saudi establishment (Wahabhi was the name of a Saudi cleric) with billions of pounds behind it to fund schools, mosques, madrassas and academic centres of Middle Eastern studies all over the world and that includes in Britain. I watched Undercover Mosque 2 which looked at the UK's most famous mosque which is headed by a Saudi diplomat, but I have been studying the evolution of the global jihad for a number of years.Braddock wrote:
I'm guessing he watched the Dispatches documentary on Wahabism within the UK Muslim population last week and is perhaps failing to distinguish it from moderate Islam. Basically his own quoted figures and statistics show that Muslims are still a huge minority in the UK and the barbaric and medieval practices he's talking about here are carried out by a small minority within this minority.oug wrote:
Apart from the last one which is too stupid to even talk about, I have a question about the rest:Kuffar wrote:
No. What is getting me down is the Islamification of Europe in general and the UK in particular.
What is getting me down is being called a racist because I won't accept cultural and religious practices that are barbaric and medieval.
In no particular order:
-forced marriage
-female genital mutilation
-honour killing
-the formal subjegation and isolation of women
-the belief that homosexuality should be punished by death
-the belief that a Muslim that leaves Islam must be killed
-that Jews are monkeys and Christians pigs
I could go on.
Are you down with all that?
How do they affect you? Sure they're barbaric and medieval. But they are practices that stay among them, right?
But hey, why let the reality that most people here on this forum see and experience every day get in the way of some good old fashioned xenophobic scaremongering?
The difference between moderate Islam and and Wahabhism is that moderate Islam (as opposed to Muslims of moderate belief) does not exist, in so far as the main schools of Islamic thought teach at any rate. There are moderate suras in the Koran (and hadith and fatwas based upon them) however all four of the main Sunni schools have abrogated these 'Meccan' verses in favour of the later 'Medinan' verses which are in general far more violent and uncompromising. This is perhaps based on the necessity for Muhammad to keep things friendly when Islam was starting out and was weak, so that his followers were not seen as too big of a threat.
But as soon as Islam had conquered sufficient territory to be sure of itself Big Mo began to have revelations that reflected his desire to expand Islam by force and conquest. These later verses are what formal classical Islam is based around today. Unless and until Islam is reformed Muslims who follow Muhammad's example in all things will always see the non-Muslim world as an opportunity for jihad, both non-violent and violent, depending on their particular gifts.
Furthermore, even if all that is 'bullcrap', I don't accept that we can simply abandon British Muslim women to the practices mentioned above because they 'stay among them'. These practices are utterly unnacceptable in 21st cetnury Britain, no ifs or buts. Why is the progressive left so keen to allow this butchery and repression a free hand in Europe and elsewhere? Plus, Islam is the UK's fastest growing religion so this problem is not going away.
As regards the Tiny Minority of ExtremistsTM, there are a number of factors you need to consider before you can hide behind this.
1. Demography, specifically the relative birth rates amoung various sectors of your population and the distribution of ethnic groups in your cities, plus the average age of your various ethnic groups.
2. The European Union and its unending desire to expand to take in Turkey, perhaps Morocco, what about Tunisa, Algeria and Libya. Think I'm joking? It's only a matter of time.
3. The UK has seen a number of opinion polls that have shown light on what passes for mainstream in much of Muslim society here in the UK. The worst thing about all of this is that attitudes among young Muslims are often far more extreme than they are among older British Muslims. this begs the question: will attitudes harden or soften in Islamic immigrant communities over time? At least part of the answer, to my mind, is that is depends on whether the UK government finds the courage to crack down on extremist preaching like that seen on Undercover Mosque and countless websites, bookshops and other sources.
http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/a … rcID=33182
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/23/uk.religion
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u … 682585.ece
Ok so for the highlighted parts:Kuffar wrote:
The last of the bullet points above may be too stupid to mention (1) but it's right there in the Koran. This is the kind of stuff that is being used to define the world view of Muslims who are exposed to it. Yes, Wahabhism is being promoted by the Saudi establishment (Wahabhi was the name of a Saudi cleric) with billions of pounds behind it to fund schools, mosques, madrassas and academic centres of Middle Eastern studies all over the world and that includes in Britain. I watched Undercover Mosque 2 which looked at the UK's most famous mosque which is headed by a Saudi diplomat, but I have been studying the evolution of the global jihad for a number of years.
The difference between moderate Islam and and Wahabhism is that moderate Islam (as opposed to Muslims of moderate belief) does not exist, in so far as the main schools of Islamic thought teach at any rate. There are moderate suras in the Koran (and hadith and fatwas based upon them) however all four of the main Sunni schools have abrogated these 'Meccan' verses in favour of the later 'Medinan' verses which are in general far more violent and uncompromising. This is perhaps based on the necessity for Muhammad to keep things friendly when Islam was starting out and was weak, so that his followers were not seen as too big of a threat.
But as soon as Islam had conquered sufficient territory to be sure of itself Big Mo began to have revelations that reflected his desire to expand Islam by force and conquest. These later verses are what formal classical Islam is based around today. Unless and until Islam is reformed (2) Muslims who follow Muhammad's example in all things will always see the non-Muslim world as an opportunity for jihad, both non-violent and violent, depending on their particular gifts.
Furthermore, even if all that is 'bullcrap', I don't accept that we can simply abandon British Muslim women to the practices mentioned above because they 'stay among them'. These practices are utterly unnacceptable in 21st cetnury Britain, no ifs or buts. Why is the progressive left so keen to allow this butchery and repression a free hand in Europe and elsewhere? Plus, Islam is the UK's fastest growing religion so this problem is not going away.
As regards the Tiny Minority of ExtremistsTM, there are a number of factors you need to consider before you can hide behind this.
1. Demography, specifically the relative birth rates amoung various sectors of your population and the distribution of ethnic groups in your cities, plus the average age of your various ethnic groups.
2. The European Union and its unending desire to expand to take in Turkey, perhaps Morocco, what about Tunisa, Algeria and Libya. Think I'm joking? It's only a matter of time.
3. The UK has seen a number of opinion polls that have shown light on what passes for mainstream in much of Muslim society here in the UK. The worst thing about all of this is that attitudes among young Muslims are often far more extreme than they are among older British Muslims. this begs the question: will attitudes harden or soften in Islamic immigrant communities over time? At least part of the answer, to my mind, is that is depends on whether the UK government finds the courage to crack down on extremist preaching like that seen on Undercover Mosque and countless websites, bookshops and other sources.
http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/a … rcID=33182
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/23/uk.religion
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u … 682585.ece
1. Where does it say exactly in the Koran that "that Jews are monkeys and Christians pigs"? Find that one for me please. Then I will accept everything you say.
2. When was the last time that Muslims sought to gain land from Christians? And respectively, when did the opposite happen last? To my mind the answer to the above question proves who the aggressor is - and therefore the liar, the racist and the pig.
As for the rest: I agree that their religion belongs to the past. So the question is what can we - the more advanced - do about it. Historically I know for a fact that the more primitive always adapted to the more advanced - provided that the latter would at least allow them to.
The only times when people go back to obsolete beliefs and way of life is when they feel threatened. You said that older muslims in the UK were less extreme in their views than the young ones. I wonder if that has anything to do with the hostile climate these people are faced with every day, as opposed to the laid back stance of older times.
And as for womens' rights, I find it odd that your interest for them coincides with the general anti-muslim sentiment of our days. Back in the day when there was no "muslim problem" in the UK I doubt you'd give a damn about women.
ƒ³
Sorry, I was referring to lowing... I forgot that I had quoted him via one of your quotes.jord wrote:
I wouldn't say appalled, I don't know any different.Braddock wrote:
Even conservative Catholic Ireland grew enough hair on its balls to remove any special mentioning of the Church from its constitution. I'd have thought you of all people would be appalled at the idea of living in a religious state that holds people of one faith above all others, no?jord wrote:
Yeah it's just that, history. It isn't removing it, it will be there in the history books. There's no need to keep the sheeple in a dying religion for the sake of tradition.
Minus the constitution part it applies to the UK too, God chose our head of state.Braddock wrote:
Sorry, I was referring to lowing... I forgot that I had quoted him via one of your quotes.jord wrote:
I wouldn't say appalled, I don't know any different.Braddock wrote:
Even conservative Catholic Ireland grew enough hair on its balls to remove any special mentioning of the Church from its constitution. I'd have thought you of all people would be appalled at the idea of living in a religious state that holds people of one faith above all others, no?
Sigh.
Yeah Braddock I am appalled at all your pandering to special interest groups and to PC. The references to God in our history and our documents is what it is. It is what the US was founded on and one should not have to cower from it for no other reason than because some liberal figured out he could stir the pot and found some way to be "offended" for no other reason than to be a complete pain in the fucking ass.Braddock wrote:
Sorry, I was referring to lowing... I forgot that I had quoted him via one of your quotes.jord wrote:
I wouldn't say appalled, I don't know any different.Braddock wrote:
Even conservative Catholic Ireland grew enough hair on its balls to remove any special mentioning of the Church from its constitution. I'd have thought you of all people would be appalled at the idea of living in a religious state that holds people of one faith above all others, no?
1. Koranic verses and hadith that reference Jews and Christians as the descendants of pigs and apes or as having turned into pigs and apes, also recent references to these concepts by Islamic clerics:
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?A … ID=SR01102
Not happening in Britain now though?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti … article.do
Elsewhere?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 02323.html
2. Who is the aggressor?
Abu Izzadeen warns Home Secretary to leave Muslim areas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Izzadeen
Senior bishop warns of No-go areas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ … slims.html
French intifada
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun … 11111.html
Danish jihad
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/938
Netherlands collapsing
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1 … 22,00.html
Copts in Egypt
http://www.copts.com/english1/index.php … pyt-today/
Thailand (no-Buddhists please, we're Islamic)
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/009732.php
The reality is that Iraq and Afghanistan (I assume that you are referring to these as support for your decision to call me a racist and pig (how ironic) and a liar)) are both and will remain Muslim countries. American and coalition forces/NATO are in the process of handing them over to their newly elected governments. All that stands between the ordinary people of those countries and democracy are the fanatics and murderers who wish to hold them in spiritual chains.
By and large the bombers and would-be bombers have been reasonably well-educated people with jobs and families and futures. The 'hostile climate' you refer is a myth.
Women's rights just to have a pop at Islam? I've got a daughter. Grow up.
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?A … ID=SR01102
Not happening in Britain now though?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti … article.do
Elsewhere?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 02323.html
2. Who is the aggressor?
Abu Izzadeen warns Home Secretary to leave Muslim areas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Izzadeen
Senior bishop warns of No-go areas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ … slims.html
French intifada
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun … 11111.html
Danish jihad
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/938
Netherlands collapsing
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1 … 22,00.html
Copts in Egypt
http://www.copts.com/english1/index.php … pyt-today/
Thailand (no-Buddhists please, we're Islamic)
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/009732.php
The reality is that Iraq and Afghanistan (I assume that you are referring to these as support for your decision to call me a racist and pig (how ironic) and a liar)) are both and will remain Muslim countries. American and coalition forces/NATO are in the process of handing them over to their newly elected governments. All that stands between the ordinary people of those countries and democracy are the fanatics and murderers who wish to hold them in spiritual chains.
By and large the bombers and would-be bombers have been reasonably well-educated people with jobs and families and futures. The 'hostile climate' you refer is a myth.
Women's rights just to have a pop at Islam? I've got a daughter. Grow up.
It's the same fundamental concept seen in countries like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Republic of Iran and Israel i.e. a nation that holds those of one faith in higher regard than others. I'd have thought that you being something of a libertarian would have balked at the idea of a Government having an influence or opinion on the religious practices of its citizens.lowing wrote:
Yeah Braddock I am appalled at all your pandering to special interest groups and to PC. The references to God in our history and our documents is what it is. It is what the US was founded on and one should not have to cower from it for no other reason than because some liberal figured out he could stir the pot and found some way to be "offended" for no other reason than to be a complete pain in the fucking ass.Braddock wrote:
Sorry, I was referring to lowing... I forgot that I had quoted him via one of your quotes.jord wrote:
I wouldn't say appalled, I don't know any different.
Well educated people don't blow themselves up for a religion.Kuffar wrote:
1. Koranic verses and hadith that reference Jews and Christians as the descendants of pigs and apes or as having turned into pigs and apes, also recent references to these concepts by Islamic clerics:
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?A … ID=SR01102
Not happening in Britain now though?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti … article.do
Elsewhere?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 02323.html
2. Who is the aggressor?
Abu Izzadeen warns Home Secretary to leave Muslim areas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Izzadeen
Senior bishop warns of No-go areas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ … slims.html
French intifada
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun … 11111.html
Danish jihad
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/938
Netherlands collapsing
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1 … 22,00.html
Copts in Egypt
http://www.copts.com/english1/index.php … pyt-today/
Thailand (no-Buddhists please, we're Islamic)
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/009732.php
The reality is that Iraq and Afghanistan (I assume that you are referring to these as support for your decision to call me a racist and pig (how ironic) and a liar)) are both and will remain Muslim countries. American and coalition forces/NATO are in the process of handing them over to their newly elected governments. All that stands between the ordinary people of those countries and democracy are the fanatics and murderers who wish to hold them in spiritual chains.
By and large the bombers and would-be bombers have been reasonably well-educated people with jobs and families and futures. The 'hostile climate' you refer is a myth.
Women's rights just to have a pop at Islam? I've got a daughter. Grow up.
Glasgow doctors?
I don't consider anyone who follows the cause of al Quida educated. If they were they'd realise that instead of fighting progress in their country they should work towards peace and a better future. Then the coalition will be gone and they can prosper.
I don't care if you're a Brain Surgeon, if you blow yourself up in the name of religion to further back track progress in your homeland then you're a fucking idiot by me.
I don't care if you're a Brain Surgeon, if you blow yourself up in the name of religion to further back track progress in your homeland then you're a fucking idiot by me.
QFTjord wrote:
I don't consider anyone who follows the cause of al Quida educated. If they were they'd realise that instead of fighting progress in their country they should work towards peace and a better future. Then the coalition will be gone and they can prosper.
I don't care if you're a Brain Surgeon, if you blow yourself up in the name of religion to further back track progress in your homeland then you're a fucking idiot by me.
Last edited by Kuffar (2008-09-15 07:06:31)
So I am guessing the American founding fathers are uneducated idiots because they chose to fight for a cause instead of maintaining a peaceful status quo? Sorry I can not agree.jord wrote:
I don't consider anyone who follows the cause of al Quida educated. If they were they'd realise that instead of fighting progress in their country they should work towards peace and a better future. Then the coalition will be gone and they can prosper.
I don't care if you're a Brain Surgeon, if you blow yourself up in the name of religion to further back track progress in your homeland then you're a fucking idiot by me.
I know more about the current situation than I do America's founding I'll admit. So I'm unsure on that one and will admit I don't know enough about that.lowing wrote:
So I am guessing the American founding fathers are uneducated idiots because they chose to fight for a cause instead of maintaining a peaceful status quo? Sorry I can not agree.jord wrote:
I don't consider anyone who follows the cause of al Quida educated. If they were they'd realise that instead of fighting progress in their country they should work towards peace and a better future. Then the coalition will be gone and they can prosper.
I don't care if you're a Brain Surgeon, if you blow yourself up in the name of religion to further back track progress in your homeland then you're a fucking idiot by me.