So what will happen with those beams of light?
Hope the Mosque doesn't obscure them at all.
Hope the Mosque doesn't obscure them at all.
You do know those haven't been on in years or are you just doing one of your off topic fail jokes?
I... don't get it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I didn't know that. Why haven't they been on? Pretty bad memorial if thats the case.Macbeth wrote:
You do know those haven't been on in years or are you just doing one of your off topic fail jokes?
I'll put that down as fail joke.
Was I supposed to get the joke?Macbeth wrote:
I'll put that down as fail joke.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You do realize that Albanians are very different from Saudi Arabians, right?...ATG wrote:
Oh?
Tell me, how do we deal with them then?
We saved them from getting slaughtered in Serbia and what was our thanks?
" dirka dirka, death to America "
http://ricketyclick.com/blog/wp-content … d-w480.jpg
fuck 'em.
Kill them all and let allah sort them out.
Well, it depends on how you define genocide. Some people would say that the dropping of nukes on Japan was genocide, but if it is defined that way, that would be a rare example of it being ok IMHO.Uzique wrote:
out of interest - when is genocide right?ATG wrote:
So, genocide is 100% wrong a 100% of the time?
Sorry. I disagree and I sleep well at night.
He has no idea Bush is revered as a hero in Albania. ATG get a fucking clue, the albanian people worship your country.Turquoise wrote:
You do realize that Albanians are very different from Saudi Arabians, right?...ATG wrote:
Oh?
Tell me, how do we deal with them then?
We saved them from getting slaughtered in Serbia and what was our thanks?
" dirka dirka, death to America "
http://ricketyclick.com/blog/wp-content … d-w480.jpg
fuck 'em.
Kill them all and let allah sort them out.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6738055.stm
The rest of think think the Iraq war/American occupation is the biggest pile of bullshit we've ever had the misfortune to live through and now generally disregard the 'good' your country has ever done post 1945.
Last edited by m3thod (2010-08-16 14:42:36)
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
The mosque site may be moved
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/16/musli … ty-center/
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/16/musli … ty-center/
Love is the answer
the damn mooslims..
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
Killing 150k civilians is "ok" to you?Turquoise wrote:
Well, it depends on how you define genocide. Some people would say that the dropping of nukes on Japan was genocide, but if it is defined that way, that would be a rare example of it being ok IMHO.Uzique wrote:
out of interest - when is genocide right?ATG wrote:
So, genocide is 100% wrong a 100% of the time?
Sorry. I disagree and I sleep well at night.
o god.Jaekus wrote:
Killing 150k civilians is "ok" to you?Turquoise wrote:
Well, it depends on how you define genocide. Some people would say that the dropping of nukes on Japan was genocide, but if it is defined that way, that would be a rare example of it being ok IMHO.Uzique wrote:
out of interest - when is genocide right?
inb4 a million+ civilians would have died in a land invasion line.
Last edited by Macbeth (2010-08-16 14:52:50)
I'm sure if it had been the other way around the US would have made it pretty well known how horrific it was. But seeing as they did it, it makes it alright, doesn't it?Macbeth wrote:
o god.Jaekus wrote:
Killing 150k civilians is "ok" to you?Turquoise wrote:
Well, it depends on how you define genocide. Some people would say that the dropping of nukes on Japan was genocide, but if it is defined that way, that would be a rare example of it being ok IMHO.
inb4 a million+ civilians would have died in a land invasion line.
Talk about irony.
Last edited by Jaekus (2010-08-16 15:00:24)
While I hope that this isn't true, it would be amusing to see how a good part of the "appeasement" crowd feel about being appeased in this manner after vociferously demanding it.
Oh don't start with that shit. If Australia was a superpower and we were a large island/continent with a small population instead, you would've been the ones to nuke the Japanese -- why? Because it was the most pragmatic choice at the time.Jaekus wrote:
I'm sure if it had been the other way around the US would have made it pretty well known how horrific it was. But seeing as they did it, it makes it alright, doesn't it?Macbeth wrote:
o god.Jaekus wrote:
Killing 150k civilians is "ok" to you?
inb4 a million+ civilians would have died in a land invasion line.
Talk about irony.
Bombing the shit out of Germany killed a lot of people during WW2, but I don't hear people moaning about that.
Besides, we did kill far more Japanese with firebombs anyway.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-08-16 17:47:44)
It's just a fucking Mosque. This is getting blown way out of proportion by the media and shows just how oversensitive people are.
My girlfriend had me watch this today, and while he's very articulate and I find myself nodding along, I still can't shake my belief that the Constitution is paramount and we can't tear it up piece by piece to placate people who are offended. Do I think it is in terrible taste? Absolutely. Do I think it should be moved elsewhere? Probably. But symbols only have power if you let them, and if this mosque fizzles instead of becoming a rallying point, it fails.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Where in that did I say killing 150k civilians is "ok"?Turquoise wrote:
Oh don't start with that shit. If Australia was a superpower and we were a large island/continent with a small population instead, you would've been the ones to nuke the Japanese -- why? Because it was the most pragmatic choice at the time.Jaekus wrote:
I'm sure if it had been the other way around the US would have made it pretty well known how horrific it was. But seeing as they did it, it makes it alright, doesn't it?Macbeth wrote:
o god.
inb4 a million+ civilians would have died in a land invasion line.
Talk about irony.
Bombing the shit out of Germany killed a lot of people during WW2, but I don't hear people moaning about that.
Besides, we did kill far more Japanese with firebombs anyway.
That's right, I didn't. You did though.
Last edited by Jaekus (2010-08-16 18:36:06)
It ended the war they started. Yes, we all know how horrific it was, but war, in general, is pretty horrific. What part of surrender did they not understand? And as Turq pointed out, we could have firebombed those cities and achieved the same casualty success. Those two wonderful bombs brought a special, needed clarity to the situation.Jaekus wrote:
Where in that did I say killing 150k civilians is "ok"?
That's right, I didn't. You did though.
we will never apologize for what we did.
on topic:
This mosque is to be built by ground zero, not on ground zero. who cares? Is a "few blocks" in all directions the official boundary for sacred sites? They've already anointed ground zero in an endless mire of government beaurocracy. What's more american than that?
Last edited by Reciprocity (2010-08-16 19:08:49)
Indeed. Because of the HBO series "The Pacific", I just finished reading "Helmet For My Pillow" and "With the Old Breed". I dare anyone to read those books, books written through the eyes of two common infantrymen, and state that the shortest route to ending the war wasn't the correct route no matter what the cost.Reciprocity wrote:
It ended the war they started. Yes, we all know how horrific it was, but war, in general, is pretty horrific. What part of surrender did they not understand? And as Turq pointed out, we could have firebombed those cities and achieved the same casualty success. Those two wonderful bombs brought a special, needed clarity to the situation.Jaekus wrote:
Where in that did I say killing 150k civilians is "ok"?
That's right, I didn't. You did though.
we will never apologize for what we did.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
So which part of the Constitution gives a religious group the right to build their place of worship at the site of a national tragedy perpetrated by radicals of said religion? Guess some would argue the establishment clause, but that's free exercise of religion which doesn't require a building.JohnG@lt wrote:
My girlfriend had me watch this today, and while he's very articulate and I find myself nodding along, I still can't shake my belief that the Constitution is paramount and we can't tear it up piece by piece to placate people who are offended.
What part of the constitution says they can't, or that someone can tell them they can't?Stingray24 wrote:
So which part of the Constitution gives a religious group the right to build their place of worship at the site of a national tragedy perpetrated by radicals of said religion? Guess some would argue the establishment clause, but that's free exercise of religion which doesn't require a building.JohnG@lt wrote:
My girlfriend had me watch this today, and while he's very articulate and I find myself nodding along, I still can't shake my belief that the Constitution is paramount and we can't tear it up piece by piece to placate people who are offended.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-08-16 19:06:06)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Right next to the part where it says black people are three fifths as valuable as honkies.Stingray24 wrote:
So which part of the Constitution gives a religious group the right to build their place of worship at the site of a national tragedy perpetrated by radicals of said religion? Guess some would argue the establishment clause, but that's free exercise of religion which doesn't require a building.JohnG@lt wrote:
My girlfriend had me watch this today, and while he's very articulate and I find myself nodding along, I still can't shake my belief that the Constitution is paramount and we can't tear it up piece by piece to placate people who are offended.
I Did, I was there for the Islamic cultural exchange on 9-11. I worked the site for 2 days - still own a Condo there if you know anyone who wants it ( asking around 1 or a tad less )JohnG@lt wrote:
Do you live in New York City?Hunter/Jumper wrote:
Just did, They move pretty fast it seems, I heard some one mention it. Now its on, How can I donate to its construction ?.
Ps. If some one told me a year ago I would be pumped to build a Gay Bar I would have been like HUH ? I don't think so. yet here I am.
Where's that pink sweater I saw in this closet...Hmm !