a conspicuous silence from our infallible islamic expert, here
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
uzique is now the 20/20 of bf2s
But mooslums ur evul.
Just because the guy is a convicted criminal and raving fruitcake doesn't mean he's wrong.
(I mean Peter Oliver)
Just because the guy is a convicted criminal and raving fruitcake doesn't mean he's wrong.
(I mean Peter Oliver)
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-07-02 17:33:38)
Fuck Israel
no, of course not- but it sure makes lowing's 'counter my FACTS, hard and rational, objective FACTS - with FACTS of your own'.
not even worth the time to properly debunk so-called 'facts' presented by a neo-nazi. im sure hitler had a nice sprinkling of 'facts' and 'statistics', as well as historical anecdotes, in Mein Kampf. doesn't mean it's an admirable political text, or a reliable text on Judaism.
not even worth the time to properly debunk so-called 'facts' presented by a neo-nazi. im sure hitler had a nice sprinkling of 'facts' and 'statistics', as well as historical anecdotes, in Mein Kampf. doesn't mean it's an admirable political text, or a reliable text on Judaism.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
We need a "Brilliant Posts" thread, and this should be in it. I'm floored, that was awesome Uzi.Uzique wrote:
lowing leave that shitty anti-islam hate site out of this... it is not credible, and exists only to further bolster the views of people that are ALREADY islamophobic. it's a website run by neo-con scumbags in order to incite hatred; it feeds off and exploits the fear created post-9/11 in american people and turns them, in turn, into their own form of american/christian extremist.
here, i did a little bit of research into the guy that runs your anti-islam 'bible', and here's his history before his current 'venture':where does the 'here' link lead? to some very convincing FBI-history and police records on your 'scholar', namely:Neo-Nazi Glen Reinsford, who used to run the horrifically anti-Islamic site of www.cairbaby.com, had his site taken down, as his hosting company has restrictions against racism.
You can find an archived copy of the site’s front page at http://web.archive.org/web/20070304120840/cairbaby.com/
The site was temporarily taken down in December 2007, when Reinsford violated copyright laws, and now appears to be gone permanently as Reinsford refused to remove the racist content. The permanent takedown appears to have happened in April 2008. (Shows how often I read his site.)
Reinsford is an indicted co-conspirator of Jeanette Runyon, on charges of conspiracy, forgery, cyberstalking, money laundering, wire fraud, theft of a social security number, and using interstate communications to make personal threats.
You can read more about Reinsford here.furthermore:New information has been developed in the past six months that conclusively shows "Glen Reinsford" is in reality Peter Oliver, who lives on Highland Club Dr. in Marietta GA. Oliver also goes by the name of Linda Lucile Oliver, and a lengthy list of both male and female names. Oliver has a criminal history of 55 convictions for robbery, felonious assault, burglary, theft, bad checks, etc., and a few stints in prison, all for which we have the documentation.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_-Ozu2Wj_J3Y/T … bsites.PNG
so i would very much appreciate it if you would stop basing your fucking worldview on the PROPAGANDIST site of a NEO-NAZI.
thank you very much, oh wise one.
cut and paste is brilliant?
is all we are going to do is debate links? ya great.
is all we are going to do is debate links? ya great.
Last edited by 11 Bravo (2010-07-02 21:41:34)
the fact is that it's the only link he has relied on for a long-time and he constantly asks us to argue against 'FACTS', in his words.
something presented by an individual of such obvious extreme political and racial leanings isn't going to present 'facts'- or if he is, they're going to be extremely well-selected 'facts' that suit to only further substantiate his extremely warped (and bigoted, racist and neo-nazi) worldviews. i think it's silly for lowing to get all of his information and education on islam from such an individual. debating links is a weak and lazy way to debate, yes, i agree-- but there's something a little exceptional about lowing's source. it saves time to go through every single 'fact' and disprove it as wrong when the entire content and scope/intention of the site is to spread race-hate...
something presented by an individual of such obvious extreme political and racial leanings isn't going to present 'facts'- or if he is, they're going to be extremely well-selected 'facts' that suit to only further substantiate his extremely warped (and bigoted, racist and neo-nazi) worldviews. i think it's silly for lowing to get all of his information and education on islam from such an individual. debating links is a weak and lazy way to debate, yes, i agree-- but there's something a little exceptional about lowing's source. it saves time to go through every single 'fact' and disprove it as wrong when the entire content and scope/intention of the site is to spread race-hate...
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
question:
would i be able to open a baptist church in mecca without any resistance?
would i be able to open a baptist church in mecca without any resistance?
*You may not karma the same person in a 24 hour period.*Uzique wrote:
lowing leave that shitty anti-islam hate site out of this... it is not credible, and exists only to further bolster the views of people that are ALREADY islamophobic. it's a website run by neo-con scumbags in order to incite hatred; it feeds off and exploits the fear created post-9/11 in american people and turns them, in turn, into their own form of american/christian extremist.
here, i did a little bit of research into the guy that runs your anti-islam 'bible', and here's his history before his current 'venture':
...
...
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
You'd struggle to open a Hooters in the Vatican, whats your point?11 Bravo wrote:
question:
would i be able to open a baptist church in mecca without any resistance?
Fuck Israel
yes.11 Bravo wrote:
question:
would i be able to open a baptist church in mecca without any resistance?
It's called research.11 Bravo wrote:
cut and paste is brilliant?
is all we are going to do is debate links? ya great.
and that research basically makes Lowing's 'facts' seem retarded. it's not ad hominem as such...Jaekus wrote:
It's called research.11 Bravo wrote:
cut and paste is brilliant?
is all we are going to do is debate links? ya great.
it's kinda like continuously quoting osama bin-laden for months for facts about christianity as a 'decadent' and 'shit' religion. relying upon a neo-nazi (criminal) source for mostly all of your world-views on islam (world-views that contradict even your own personal experiences/dealings with muslims) is absolute delusion; 'bigoted' to a dictionary-definition.
and bravo fuck knows what point you're even trying to make, because most muslim countries have christian minorities that have their own places of worship, their own lifestyles and their own standards. look at egypt with their coptic minority - a minority of arab-christians that are actually pretty damn wealthy and prosper under the islamic culture.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
well gee, I do not know really where to start.
you speak of credibility as paramount over facts. Ok well then lets address credibility of the blogger who runs the website you linked and then bashed me into the ground over. His name is "Rev." Jim Sutter. and here he is:
http://www.phonyrev.com/ please note this site is not just full of mere statements about the guy, it proves them. Something you all do not seem to deem necessary.
shit here is another, http://www.exposingsutter.com/ I do notice that this guy has even the honor of having an entire website named after him .
Here are the pictures of your beloved credible source: http://petroshapko.narod.ru/index.html complete with proof of their claims. Again something alien to you all.
Now, I have read your source, I can not find anything in it that backs up the claim that Glen Reinsford is a Nazi. there is nothing that proves he is a racist, I mean since Islam is not a race and all.
You spared no expense on me and what I link claiming all sorts of unsubstanciated shit. Will you now look at who you have championed and stand by your need of credibilty?
So far all you have done is attack the man, be it me or Glen Reinsford and beat your chests proudly in self proclaimed victory. Can you still do so given all you have said and claimed?
I will also add, even Glen Reinsford was a confirmed Nazi, this does not automatically make him wrong in what he says. Attack the claims not the person. If Glen Reinsford said the sky was yellow, are you going to attack the man or the facts? Would he be wrong because he was a Nazi? Or would he be wrong because the facts prove him worng? If he said it was blue what then?
So now what? Do I get inducted into your "brilliant post" thread? I suspect not.
So here we have it, you lean heavily on credibility and use a guy with a PROVEN track record as having none as your savior from what I post. So where do you stand now?
you speak of credibility as paramount over facts. Ok well then lets address credibility of the blogger who runs the website you linked and then bashed me into the ground over. His name is "Rev." Jim Sutter. and here he is:
http://www.phonyrev.com/ please note this site is not just full of mere statements about the guy, it proves them. Something you all do not seem to deem necessary.
shit here is another, http://www.exposingsutter.com/ I do notice that this guy has even the honor of having an entire website named after him .
Here are the pictures of your beloved credible source: http://petroshapko.narod.ru/index.html complete with proof of their claims. Again something alien to you all.
Now, I have read your source, I can not find anything in it that backs up the claim that Glen Reinsford is a Nazi. there is nothing that proves he is a racist, I mean since Islam is not a race and all.
You spared no expense on me and what I link claiming all sorts of unsubstanciated shit. Will you now look at who you have championed and stand by your need of credibilty?
So far all you have done is attack the man, be it me or Glen Reinsford and beat your chests proudly in self proclaimed victory. Can you still do so given all you have said and claimed?
I will also add, even Glen Reinsford was a confirmed Nazi, this does not automatically make him wrong in what he says. Attack the claims not the person. If Glen Reinsford said the sky was yellow, are you going to attack the man or the facts? Would he be wrong because he was a Nazi? Or would he be wrong because the facts prove him worng? If he said it was blue what then?
So now what? Do I get inducted into your "brilliant post" thread? I suspect not.
So here we have it, you lean heavily on credibility and use a guy with a PROVEN track record as having none as your savior from what I post. So where do you stand now?
Oh by the way there are no other sources that I can find that substantiates the claims of Jim Sutter. Meaningless to you all I know, as facts do not play a part in your arguments, only dismissal, denial, ignore or superiority.
lol okay so anti-islamic and anti-neo-nazi american pundits have an enjoyable discourse (which i did not know about, thanks for entertaining me) over their 'credentials' and their police rap-sheets (two john dillingers?) it seems as though there is a back-and-forth dialogue of argument here between two 'sources', one a confirmed neo-nazi utilizing a network of websites such as 'mosquewatch' to discredit a white-knight walt who obviously has a few indiscrepancies of his own (impersonating an officer, however, is not being a racist bigot- may I add). i don't really care about the petty arguments that exist between blogging ideologues - neo-nazis campaigning for 'free speech' and against 'blog censorship', slinging mud at guys that obviously need better things to do themselves. the important evidence here is that he unearthed an undeniable neo-nazi ideology operating beneath all of 'your' websites... and does it not look suspect to you that he is networked and allied/relying upon other websites, namely 'mosquewatch'? you really think it so unlikely that he isn't a lone-wolf and cooperates with several other neo-nazi bloggers? the 'evidence' against the guy i source even refers back to the 'CAIR' website... i website that was confirmedly TAKEN OFF THE INTERNET for criminally RACIST content. anyway, i digress...
i still stand in the same place- you are relying on a neo-nazi for your 'information' on islam. if you cannot see how that 'information' is in fact more like 'misinformation', then i really cannot help you.
i still stand in the same place- you are relying on a neo-nazi for your 'information' on islam. if you cannot see how that 'information' is in fact more like 'misinformation', then i really cannot help you.
ive already said that attacking sources and not attacking the debate is a pretty weak way to engage with a discussion. but come on, this is a glaring fault in your 'source' that cannot be ignored. you read the official statements by muslim scholars re: jihad, islam, sharia but then see it as 'suspicious' and read what you want into the text (i.e. you fail to even basically comprehend their information). you then lean back upon, time and time again, a neo-nazi website as the key-basis for your 'stance'... can you not see how that will be just a liiiiitle bit ideologically bias?it's kinda like continuously quoting osama bin-laden for months for facts about christianity as a 'decadent' and 'shit' religion.
Last edited by Uzique (2010-07-03 06:56:20)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
and yet you have not attacked the facts as of yet, and still maintain an attack on the source? Even after what I just posted? Get real.. Start by NOW PROVING the guy is a Neo-Nazi. I mean you go to great lengths making the claim, do you not feel obligated to prove it?Uzique wrote:
lol okay so anti-islamic and anti-neo-nazi american pundits have an enjoyable discourse (which i did not know about, thanks for entertaining me) over their 'credentials' and their police rap-sheets (two john dillingers?) i still stand, however, in the same place- you are relying on a neo-nazi for your 'information' on islam. if you cannot see how that 'information' is in fact more like 'misinformation', then i really cannot help you.ive already said that attacking sources and not attacking the debate is a pretty weak way to engage with a discussion. but come on, this is a glaring fault in your 'source' that cannot be ignored. you read the official statements by muslim scholars re: jihad, islam, sharia but then see it as 'suspicious' and read what you want into the text (i.e. you fail to even basically comprehend their information). you then lean back upon, time and time again, a neo-nazi website as the key-basis for your 'stance'... can you not see how that will be just a liiiiitle bit ideologically bias?it's kinda like continuously quoting osama bin-laden for months for facts about christianity as a 'decadent' and 'shit' religion.
Oh by the way, you have 1 source and has been proven bullshit,
here is another http://www.springfieldcolorado.com/sutter.html plenty more where these come from. You have championed a complete fraud to showcase your argument and what is laughable is, you did so proudly and got everyone to jump on your bandwagon. Now that is brilliant!!
Last edited by lowing (2010-07-03 06:57:36)
lowing if you cannot recognize what is going on in the 'discrediting' of Sutter and so-forth then i really cannot help you.
the ego-war isn't the important thing... your guy has a criminal conviction and has a history of websites being taken offline for RACIST content. if independent authorities, federal police and internet service providers all judge his stuff to be categorically racist and an abuse of internet freedom-of-speech rights, then WHY should anyone try to 'discredit' their facts?
please go through Mein Kampf and SHOW ME and PROVE to me that jews are not evil and that jews are not inferior.
the task is just as desirable, no?
the ego-war isn't the important thing... your guy has a criminal conviction and has a history of websites being taken offline for RACIST content. if independent authorities, federal police and internet service providers all judge his stuff to be categorically racist and an abuse of internet freedom-of-speech rights, then WHY should anyone try to 'discredit' their facts?
please go through Mein Kampf and SHOW ME and PROVE to me that jews are not evil and that jews are not inferior.
the task is just as desirable, no?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
shit another.. http://pibillwarner.wordpress.com/2009/ … im-sutter/ lmao!!!
ok-ok lowing, you have already shown that a network of neo-nazi ideologues are all itching to 'debunk' this guy...
doesn't change their own criminal convictions and ideological bigotry.
doesn't change their own criminal convictions and ideological bigotry.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
is? Do you have proof of this? Or are you relying on your "credible source" again? Since when does the govt. have a racist site removed? Kinda sorta goes along the lines of violating free speech.Uzique wrote:
lowing if you cannot recognize what is going on in the 'discrediting' of Sutter and so-forth then i really cannot help you.
the ego-war isn't the important thing... your guy has a criminal conviction and has a history of websites being taken offline for RACIST content. if independent authorities, federal police and internet service providers all judge his stuff to be categorically racist and an abuse of internet freedom-of-speech rights, then WHY should anyone try to 'discredit' their facts?
please go through Mein Kampf and SHOW ME and PROVE to me that jews are not evil and that jews are not inferior.
the task is just as desirable, no?
unless you didn't notice , that's the grounds of appeal/protest that most of your 'source' websites are crying for.
'open up freedom-of-speech in blogging!'
check the margins of the links you fucking post, dude.
it defies belief that you cannot see what is going on here... you swallow this neo-nazi bullshit and freely ignore rationality and objectivity.
'open up freedom-of-speech in blogging!'
check the margins of the links you fucking post, dude.
it defies belief that you cannot see what is going on here... you swallow this neo-nazi bullshit and freely ignore rationality and objectivity.
Last edited by Uzique (2010-07-03 07:07:33)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
DO you have any proof he is Neo Nazi? I mean outside your "credible source"?Uzique wrote:
ok-ok lowing, you have already shown that a network of neo-nazi ideologues are all itching to 'debunk' this guy...
doesn't change their own criminal convictions and ideological bigotry.
and they are right to do so, do you not agree?Uzique wrote:
unless you didn't notice , that's the grounds of appeal/protest that most of your 'source' websites are crying for.
'open up freedom-of-speech in blogging!'
check the margins of the links you fucking post, dude.
http://1389blog.com/pix/stop_blog_censorhip01.png
it defies belief that you cannot see what is going on here... you swallow this neo-nazi bullshit and freely ignore rationality and objectivity.
By the way....You do realize Islam is NOT a race .........................right?
Last edited by lowing (2010-07-03 07:09:32)
So how about it? do I get into that "BRILLIANT POST" thread all of your sheep nominated you for?