INTENSITY²
Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: Anonymous on December 09, 2006, 04:27:28 AM
-
I don't hate terrorists. Do you?
I don't consider them exceptionally stupid, or ignorant, and I certainly don't consider them cowardly.
I rather consider them victims of a poorly constructed society, and bad luck.
-
Terrorist/guerilla = freedom fighter/liberator depending on which side you are on ... Hero or criminal. One man's garbage is another man's treasure and so forth. Some issues ARE nearly black and white.
-
but by the grace of god, there go i.
i was not raised in that mindset. but i have established my own mindset about right and wro0ng. i think that the rich elite are wrong. the major corporations. i wouldn't mind doing somewthing about them.
now, i suspect that other countries view america as the major corporations, the rich elite. i do not blame them for wanting to get even with their percieved oppressors.
-
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. :P
-
I would'nt mind these fucktards so much if they didn't want to establish a Theocracy. They may have some legitimate gripes with America and western civilization, but more often then not they don't address any real concerns. They just bitch about how we don't dress our women head to toe or something totaly fucking retarded like that.
-
I have mixed feelings about how they treat their women, and how seriously they take religion. On a gut level, I too hate theocracy, I think that if you don't base your decisions on empirical evidence, rather than "directives" from a force you cannot see, hear, or test, you have no idea when theyre going to decide that one of the directives is to just kill you randomly. I also dislike how they treat their women because it seems unfair, but fairness is just my value, it might not be theirs. I don't feel it is my business to tell them how to be happy; to tell them how to live.
I am about as close to a 100% of a moral relativist as you can get, and although my gut has some problems with how they run their lives, and while I might ask them to consider alternatives, I would not be in favor of forcing or coercing them to change.
-
Someone made a funny video about the twin towers.
I'm going to hell.
-
I hate Al Q***da, but it's not just because of September 11. It's because of people they hurt in their OWN country, too, and because they don't value human life.
-
Al q..que? souds like Al kyda, is a terrorist organization, not a country, right? And do you really hate them because they don't value human life? Being a suicide bomber is an incredible sacrifice, I would assume they value their suicide bombers lives to give them such high praise.
And I was thinking up funny situations relevant to the twin towers the morning of september 11th, so I think I am pretty far ahead of you in the line to hell.
-
Al q..que? souds like Al kyda, is a terrorist organization, not a country, right? And do you really hate them because they don't value human life? Being a suicide bomber is an incredible sacrifice, I would assume they value their suicide bombers lives to give them such high praise.
And I was thinking up funny situations relevant to the twin towers the morning of september 11th, so I think I am pretty far ahead of you in the line to hell.
My point was they hurt the people in their own countries who aren't terrorists and may want to live. The suicide bombers kill other people besides themselves, so I hate them for that. They make their countries a horrible, scary place to be for the people who live there.
And yeah, joking about 9/11 is kinda fucked up, because you're disrespecting those who lost their loved ones. Maybe in Michigan you don't know that many people who lost loved ones, but living less than an hour from Manhattan, there are a lot of people around me who lost loved ones.
-
I don't feel I am disrespecting them. Joking about someones death is not necessarily disrespecting them.
And the funny wasn't really a joke. It was a morbid humor situation. A few hours after they fell there were rumors going around about people who "Surfed the rubble down" and everyone with any sense knew that was bullshit, but I had this mental image of Wiley E. Coyote surfing the rubble down to the song, "Wipe out", and the funny part was his expression slowly going from "Oh shit!" to "...Wait a minute... i think i'm getting the hang of this.." And then he slams into the ground with a loud smack.... Apparently surfing rubble at the speed of free falling is still moving towards the ground at the speed of free falling.
Does it really matter that they hurt people in their own country? America hurts people all the time. And you may say that those are sacrifices that must be made to preserve our way of life. But the suicide bombers would say the exact same thing.
-
All governments hurt their own people, one way or the other.
-
So few people can create such havoc. >:D
-
I don't feel I am disrespecting them. Joking about someones death is not necessarily disrespecting them.
And the funny wasn't really a joke. It was a morbid humor situation. A few hours after they fell there were rumors going around about people who "Surfed the rubble down" and everyone with any sense knew that was bullshit, but I had this mental image of Wiley E. Coyote surfing the rubble down to the song, "Wipe out", and the funny part was his expression slowly going from "Oh shit!" to "...Wait a minute... i think i'm getting the hang of this.." And then he slams into the ground with a loud smack.... Apparently surfing rubble at the speed of free falling is still moving towards the ground at the speed of free falling.
Does it really matter that they hurt people in their own country? America hurts people all the time. And you may say that those are sacrifices that must be made to preserve our way of life. But the suicide bombers would say the exact same thing.
I still think it's fucked up to make jokes about it. And it does matter to me that they hurt people in their country. We don't have suicide bombers harming people all the time, and we have more freedoms than them. I think they deserve to be safe just like we do.
-
Doesn't it matter more that they kill at all than that they kill themselves? We are killing people too. Why is it less evil for us to kill other people than ourselves?
On another matter, freedom is subjective. We have a lot of freedoms they don't have, and they have some freedoms we don't have. But what if they don't want our freedoms, they only want their freedoms, how is it our right to imprison them into our definition of freedom?
They have a freedom we don't have. They have the freedom to own their women almost like property. We can't do that here. We have a freedom they don't have, our women are free to be treated as equal, they don't have that freedom over there. It is just two sides of the same coin.
And as for joking about it, personally, I consider joking about it to be more respectful than to make it taboo.
-
.....They have a freedom we don't have. They have the freedom to own their women almost like property. ....
Actually, that's not called freedom, that's called LICENSE. License is almost always bad for one party but not another.
-
No, it is a freedom they have and we dont. Over here women being equal to men is not a matter of negotiation. Over there, they can tip the scales at their leisure.
-
No, it is a freedom they have and we dont. Over here women being equal to men is not a matter of negotiation. Over there, they can tip the scales at their leisure.
Right... and that's called License not Freedom, look thre two up and you will see the nuance between the two.
-
I dont care if there is a legal difference, it is the principle of the thing.
-
Doesn't it matter more that they kill at all than that they kill themselves? We are killing people too. Why is it less evil for us to kill other people than ourselves?
On another matter, freedom is subjective. We have a lot of freedoms they don't have, and they have some freedoms we don't have. But what if they don't want our freedoms, they only want their freedoms, how is it our right to imprison them into our definition of freedom?
They have a freedom we don't have. They have the freedom to own their women almost like property. We can't do that here. We have a freedom they don't have, our women are free to be treated as equal, they don't have that freedom over there. It is just two sides of the same coin.
And as for joking about it, personally, I consider joking about it to be more respectful than to make it taboo.
You're completely misunderstanding what I said. It's MORE evil to kill others than it is to kill yourself, because you're taking away that person's freedom to live and hurting the people that love them. Suicide is a while other issue. Those suicide bombers aren't just killing themselves, they're killing others. I also never said it was ok for the US to kill people. I'm against us going into Iraq and killing all those people. I'm also against our troops dying because of Bush, though it is partly their own fault for being in the military. Bush is evil too, IMO...I consider him a terrorist too.
I also don't have a problem with talking about 9/11; I just think it's disrespectful to those who have lost people to joke about it. If one of my parents had died in 9/11, would you still want to joke about it with me? Because if that were the case, I would hate you.
-
.....They have a freedom we don't have. They have the freedom to own their women almost like property. ....
Actually, that's not called freedom, that's called LICENSE. License is almost always bad for one party but not another.
Amen. In western countries the governments have monopoly on licenses to keep away people whom they don't trust from having access to certain things, in muslim countries private citizens (males) have licenses to keep their wives as slaves. Both systems are evil and just for the sake of taking freedom away from certain people.
-
Okay, but do you think they value human lives?
I suppose it matters more how you feel I am respecting them, but if someone I knew someone who died in 9/11 I would honor their memory by not allowing their death to sour a good joke.
-
Okay, but do you think they value human lives?
Terrorists by definition don't value human lives very high. But our "democratic" western governments do neither.
-
But they hold their suicide bombers in such high esteem. Perhaps they value human life as much as we do, they just want their way of life more than we do.
-
They want to force islam upon the entire planet Earth, that's what they're doing. That's called fanaticism. GWB is also a fanatic, but he's a pretty moderate western fanatic, so it isn't that obvious to most of people in the west, at least not in the US itself.
-
Okay, but do you think they value human lives?
I suppose it matters more how you feel I am respecting them, but if someone I knew someone who died in 9/11 I would honor their memory by not allowing their death to sour a good joke.
That's a strange way to look at it...and "good" is relative. I wouldn't consider the joke good if it was about something like that.
-
If I died, and I existed afterwards, I would be really pissed off if something funny could be drawn from it and everybody was all mournful and quiet and shit.
-
It's not about the dead person, it's about the people who LOST the person.
-
For no reason would I prefer another person to not laugh just because I am dead.
-
It's not about the dead person, it's about the people who LOST the person.
-
Okay, but do you think they value human lives?
Terrorists by definition don't value human lives very high. But our "democratic" western governments do neither.
but our "democratic" western governments do value the lives of the rich. that is the reason that military enrollment is basically skewed to recruiting the poor as a promise of a brighter tomorrow. sad that we have become a never ending war machine. fighting for the rights of riches, such as oil. and the poor are giving their lives to line the pockets of the rich war mongers.
-
but our "democratic" western governments do value the lives of the rich. that is the reason that military enrollment is basically skewed to recruiting the poor as a promise of a brighter tomorrow. sad that we have become a never ending war machine. fighting for the rights of riches, such as oil. and the poor are giving their lives to line the pockets of the rich war mongers.
I know. We formally have compulsory military duty here, but I sneaked out. Why would I do military service and give a year of my life to the army, when I'm not allowed to buy a gun like a free man and carry it for my own private protection? I'm "allowed" to be cannon-fodder for Sweden but not protect myself against criminals.
-
all in the name of the pursuit of wealth.
lets be frank. countries do not go to war with other countries just to dipose an evil dictator. they do so to rape and pillage.
if it was about defense, like finding weapons of mass destruction, or to liberate the people so that they may experience democracy, then why the hell have we not invaded north korea.
why?
they are not a rich country, and we do not need them strategically, since we already have japan and south korea.
-
all in the name of the pursuit of wealth.
lets be frank. countries do not go to war with other countries just to dipose an evil dictator. they do so to rape and pillage.
if it was about defense, like finding weapons of mass destruction, or to liberate the people so that they may experience democracy, then why the hell have we not invaded north korea.
why?
they are not a rich country, and we do not need them strategically, since we already have japan and south korea.
In the specific case of North Korea, it actually might be very dangerous for the US. They have proven that they really have nuclear arms, and Kim Il Jong is a madman, who even makes Saddam looking pretty sane. They wouldn't hesitate to nuke you, even if they would be totally wiped out themself in retaliation.
But of course, war is about raping and pillaging. The US didn't do much about Hitler before the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor and Adolf proclaimed war on you to support his Japanese "buddies".
-
In the specific case of North Korea, it actually might be very dangerous for the US. They have proven that they really have nuclear arms, and Kim Il Jong is a madman, who even makes Saddam looking pretty sane. They wouldn't hesitate to nuke you, even if they would be totally wiped out themself in retaliation.
Not to mention what would happen if China got involved.
But of course, war is about raping and pillaging. The US didn't do much about Hitler before the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor and Adolf proclaimed war on you to support his Japanese "buddies".
Both of those theaters had oil as a theme as well. Germany went straight for Romanian and Soviet oil fields. Japan started it's war against the Allies as a result of U.S. oil embargo.
-
They want to force islam upon the entire planet Earth, that's what they're doing. That's called fanaticism. GWB is also a fanatic, but he's a pretty moderate western fanatic, so it isn't that obvious to most of people in the west, at least not in the US itself.
My guess is that your more moderate fanatic has caused the deaths of more people than the muslims you blame.
-
My guess is that your more moderate fanatic has caused the deaths of more people than the muslims you blame.
When you count Saddam along with all the other Mid-East dictators, we can't match thier fanaticism or need to kill to maintain order. The Islamic world is going through one of it's bloody phases. It's too bad we need to ally ourselves with Saudi Arabia. Thet're actually the home base of what America is fighting.
We're only a fraction of the muderers that Arabs and Muslims currently are.
-
I have to disagree, Scrapheap. Even before the current war, GWB and Clinton before him were responsible for killing far more civilians than Saddam and his soulmates. The almost daily bombings over Iraq since the end of the Gulf War contributed both directly and indirectly, as did the trade blockades. None of the dictators has that kind of power--they can kill off whole villages of people and still not be able to match the numbers.
And before anyone protests: I'm NOT defending the dictators in any way. I'm merely pointing out that GWB has the means, while the dictators do not.
If you are interested in real killers other than GWB and the muslim fanatics, take a look at the Chinese.
-
I have to disagree, Scrapheap. Even before the current war, GWB and Clinton before him were responsible for killing far more civilians than Saddam and his soulmates. The almost daily bombings over Iraq since the end of the Gulf War contributed both directly and indirectly, as did the trade blockades. None of the dictators has that kind of power--they can kill off whole villages of people and still not be able to match the numbers.
And before anyone protests: I'm NOT defending the dictators in any way. I'm merely pointing out that GWB has the means, while the dictators do not.
If you are interested in real killers other than GWB and the muslim fanatics, take a look at the Chinese.
Simply because we have greater means than they do means nothing.
Saddam, King Abdullah (and his half brother Fahd) Assad and others all rule with an iron fist and have both the means AND motive to kill thier own people. Throw in Islamic laws (many carry the death penalty) and you have a system that needes murder to sustain itsself. Order in thier society is maintained through fear on every level.
America by contrast, is more dependent on greed to create order and less on a need to controll the minds of the people.
Can you point to the civilians DELIBERATELY killed by America?? (i.e. specifically targeted for murder as opposed to those caused by collateral damage)
-
Most Europeans don't understand this, Scrap. They're muslim sympathizers for I don't know what reasons.
-
Can you point to the civilians DELIBERATELY killed by America?? (i.e. specifically targeted for murder as opposed to those caused by collateral damage)
I'd say that the over a half a million of children killed as a direct result of the post-Gulf War sanctions (Unicef report, 1999) was deliberate. The effects of the sanctions were well-known to the US but completely ignored. Lifting some of those sanctions would not have mattered at all to the US, but would have saved thousands upon thousands of lives.
I'm sure most of the dictators would defend themselves with your "collateral damage" argument, by the way. Saddam did, at his trial.
My point is that you cannot defend your leader's actions by saying that the other country's leader was even worse. That's kindergarten stuff.
Now, show me where, say, King Abdullah DELIBERATELY killed civilians. Then tell me why his collateral damage defense isn't as good as GWB's.
Most Europeans don't understand this, Scrap. They're muslim sympathizers for I don't know what reasons.
I'm sorry you misread my post, Litigious. This has nothing to do with muslims per se, although I do sympathize with their plight, especially now that the Western world use them as new scapegoats (Jews aren't PC today, see). The issue at hand is about numbers, as in the number of deaths caused by the respective leaders. I already stated that I don't defend, or condone, the actions of any one of these leaders in regards of innocent civilians of ANY nationality. Please accept that my statement is sincere.
-
I'd say that the over a half a million of children killed as a direct result of the post-Gulf War sanctions (Unicef report, 1999) was deliberate. The effects of the sanctions were well-known to the US but completely ignored. Lifting some of those sanctions would not have mattered at all to the US, but would have saved thousands upon thousands of lives.
Right and this is Saddam's fault. He could've fed his people, instead he collaberated with French and Russian companies to get cold hard cash to keep his police state funded.
I'm sure most of the dictators would defend themselves with your "collateral damage" argument, by the way. Saddam did, at his trial.
Simply because they use a "collateral damage defense" means nothing. There's a big difference between stray bombs hitting civilians or bad inteligence that hits civilian targets, and systematicaly killing populations to punish them and make them cower.
My point is that you cannot defend your leader's actions by saying that the other country's leader was even worse. That's kindergarten stuff.
On the contrary, I'm acknowledging that ALL governments do evil things. We're simply the lighter shade of grey. It's kindergarden stuff to see thing in black and white.
Now, show me where, say, King Abdullah DELIBERATELY killed civilians. Then tell me why his collateral damage defense isn't as good as GWB's.
I don't feel like looking up links to this right now, but it's a well known fact that Saudi Arabia's "Morality Police" are still going around the country enforcing Islamic Law at the point of a gun. I'd imagine dozens of people are killed every day. We just don't hear about it often because the press tends to give Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt.
Most Europeans don't understand this, Scrap. They're muslim sympathizers for I don't know what reasons.
I'm sorry you misread my post, Litigious. This has nothing to do with muslims per se, although I do sympathize with their plight, especially now that the Western world use them as new scapegoats (Jews aren't PC today, see). The issue at hand is about numbers, as in the number of deaths caused by the respective leaders. I already stated that I don't defend, or condone, the actions of any one of these leaders in regards of innocent civilians of ANY nationality. Please accept that my statement is sincere.
-
Now, show me where, say, King Abdullah DELIBERATELY killed civilians. Then tell me why his collateral damage defense isn't as good as GWB's.
I don't feel like looking up links to this right now, but it's a well known fact that Saudi Arabia's "Morality Police" are still going around the country enforcing Islamic Law at the point of a gun. I'd imagine dozens of people are killed every day. We just don't hear about it often because the press tends to give Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt.
Actually, this is not killing innocent civilians at all, according to their reasoning and their laws. You may not like fundamentalist Islamic Law (and I don't either) but I thought we were talking about deliberately targeting (innocent) civilians?
-
Actually, this is not killing innocent civilians at all, according to their reasoning and their laws. You may not like fundamentalist Islamic Law (and I don't either) but I thought we were talking about deliberately targeting (innocent) civilians?
Islamic law deliberatly targets innocent civillians with made up bullshit "laws" which are meant for no other purpose that to dominate and controll people through intimidation. So to answer your question, yes, I have'nt strayed off subject. Islamic law is simply the excuse used to murder ones own people too keep them in line through fear.
-
Okay, but do you think they value human lives?
Terrorists by definition don't value human lives very high. But our "democratic" western governments do neither.
but our "democratic" western governments do value the lives of the rich.
That is one of the things that pisses me off the most about our system.
-
Actually, this is not killing innocent civilians at all, according to their reasoning and their laws. You may not like fundamentalist Islamic Law (and I don't either) but I thought we were talking about deliberately targeting (innocent) civilians?
Islamic law deliberatly targets innocent civillians with made up bullshit "laws" which are meant for no other purpose that to dominate and controll people through intimidation. So to answer your question, yes, I have'nt strayed off subject. Islamic law is simply the excuse used to murder ones own people too keep them in line through fear.
You may have low opinions of their laws, but per definition, they are NOT targeting innocent civilians. They are acting according to an interpretation of the Qur'an. Remember, some countries consider the US breaking basic human rights (and relevant treaties--Guantanamo Bay comes to mind) and thus persecuting innocent civilians, but the US, predictably, doesn't agree (for more, see, for example, the Human Rights Watch page on the US (http://hrw.org/doc/?t=usa)).
An argument could be easily made to support the notion that the Patriot Act is in place to dominate and control the population through intimidation. On second thought, I believe such a claim has been made, by Americans no less.
-
The nazis didn't break any laws by killing Jews. They actually took away their civil rights in 1935. So it's ridiculous to compare what's formally legal and not. It must be the acts carried out that count.
-
I wouldn't let the death of a family member ruin a good joke about them either.
-
that's you but other people might get offended
-
The nazis didn't break any laws by killing Jews. They actually took away their civil rights in 1935. So it's ridiculous to compare what's formally legal and not. It must be the acts carried out that count.
Actually they did. The Nuremberg Laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws) took away their rights as German citizens but did not authorize the killings. The Jews were also persecuted and killed in Germany long before 1935.
The point I'm trying to make is that if we don't respect the rights of sovereign nations to uphold their own laws, there will be a lot of Iraqs in the future. I completely agree with you and Scrap that the fundamentalist Islamic Law as sometimes implemented is an abomination, but then, that's not the only set of laws I find abominable.
I do not accept the US as a world police because their actions and agendas have little or nothing to do with liberating undemocratic countries. In the case of Iraq, it's about the oil more than anything. If it had been about freedom or other relevant buzzwords, there are lots of other countries to liberate and China is a good place to start. North Korea is another, Saudi Arabia yet another, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam.
But then, the US would also have to do something about their own shortcomings, from Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, from the acceptance of some forms of torture to the persecution of Muslims living in the US.
I doubt they will, anytime soon.
-
Whoa there, Odeon, I don't like what my country does either and if the last election was any indication neither do a majority of Americans. In many ways I'm damned scared of the future, but, I'm also optimistic that the American art of compromise and /or moderation can get the upper hand from the religious/conservative fundamentalists.
As for persecution of muslims here, I'm not denying it happens. But so far the voices of moderate muslims speaking out against their extremist bretheren has been oddly muted even in this country.
I don't want the US to be the world police, especially since it revolves around what the Oil tycoons, Saudi Sheiks, and international conglomerates want. Not whats best for the country or our own people!
Yeah it gets pretty sickening what comes out of Washington. But I'm also sick of hearing about how people from other countries complaining about regular Americans abroad and dumping on them just because they are "Americans". That happened to some friends of mine when they were visiting Iceland recently! It's making me rethink a future trip with our family to Europe if we're going to be treated like shit because of our nationality!
Sorry to rant, but I needed to get that off my chest! Nothing personal Odeon!
-
Sorry about that, Ozy. I realize my post was pretty harsh but it's not personal, not against you or anyone else here. If I offended anyone personally, I apologize.
I know a few 'mericans, and they are all nice, intelligent, and peaceful, and it's sad how they need to be the ones to face all these accusations and take the blame. The Europeans--or anyone else--jumping on Americans abroad just because they are Americans are as bad as the fundamentalists, muslim or otherwise, that the 'mericans are attacking. Because it's the same thing. Can you see that? I hate mindless fundamentalism wherever I spot it. And right now, Muslims are the world's scapegoats, just like the Jews were some seventy or eighty years ago.
The fact is, though, that lots of good things are coming from the US, too. More good than bad, I'd say, from space shuttles to computer technology, from great writers to ditto TV shows, etc. And often necessary military assistance to those needing it. It's not all bad, not at all.
But it doesn't mean that I'll turn the other cheek when I see that people are summarily judged because of their religious conviction, and because wars are based on lies.
As for the persecution of Muslims in the US, I'm not the one accusing anyone. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are. They are keeping their eyes on the Saudis, too, just as they are watching Iran, China, Sweden, and lots of other countries.
-
No Problem, I realize that a lot of what happens is because our government wants to hog the world stage! In many ways we have let the fear mongers have their way in deciding foreign policy. Personally, I'd love to see us pull our troops out of the Saudi bases and stop sending so much money to Israel. The politicians in Israel are as shameless in their manipulation of our foreign policy as the Saudi Sheiks are. It makes me sick all the way around!
-
You may have low opinions of their laws, but per definition, they are NOT targeting innocent civilians. They are acting according to an interpretation of the Qur'an.
Yes, according to the Qur'an, you and I are infidels who must be murdered. Low opinion of Islamic law is understatement. It's one of the purest forms of totolitarianism on earth. It hides behind the facade of a benevolent, loving god to hide it's true intentions
-
........I hate mindless fundamentalism wherever I spot it.........
Oh this is GOLDEN!!! you make several posts apologizing for mindless fundamentalism, then turn around and say you hate it..... ::)
You seem to be confused about who the mindless fundementalists are. :o
-
You may have low opinions of their laws, but per definition, they are NOT targeting innocent civilians. They are acting according to an interpretation of the Qur'an.
Yes, according to the Qur'an, you and I are infidels who must be murdered. Low opinion of Islamic law is understatement. It's one of the purest forms of totolitarianism on earth. It hides behind the facade of a benevolent, loving god to hide it's true intentions
This is simply not true. Islam Online (http://www.islamonline.net/) explains this quite clearly, in this article, When and How to Fight (http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996015848&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE), and this one, True Teachings of Islam (http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996015784&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE), among others. Read them, please (and browse for others if need be), but for clarity, let me quote the following from the Qur'an:
*{Say: "The truth is from your Lord": Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject [it].}* (Al-Kahf 18:29)
You seem to be confused about what Islam really stands for. I'll give you a hint: it's not about killing infidels. Which brings me to your next post:
........I hate mindless fundamentalism wherever I spot it.........
Oh this is GOLDEN!!! you make several posts apologizing for mindless fundamentalism, then turn around and say you hate it..... ::)
You seem to be confused about who the mindless fundementalists are. :o
I am NOT apologizing for mindless fundamentalism. I am, however, reacting against the mindless islamophobia here and elsewhere, where otherwise seemingly rational people completely lose their perspective, choosing to believe in what the (mainly, but not exclusively) Western propaganda machine feeds them, instead of trying to use whatever brains they have to collect their facts with some degree of objectivity.
The fact is that the majority of Muslims are perfectly peaceful, tolerant people, just as the majority of Christians. In both camps, however, there are fundamentalists and those that will use the religion to further their own agendas. Didn't GWB, to pick but one example, tell the world right after 9/11 how he waged his war against terrorism in the name of God? That God was on his side?
-
Hippies like you, odeon, will be brushed aside once Europe becomes an Islamic republic living under shariah law. Maybe then you'd appreciate the freedoms that will be lost to you under the tryanny of Bin Laden's cronies and you wont be so keen to appease muslim fundamentalists. :tooledup: :squit:
-
When I was talking about terrorists, I wasn't talking about fundamentalist islamics. I was talking about all terrorists everywhere.
Something I protest is hating what you don't agree with. You don't need to hate terrorists if you don't agree with them. You don't need to hate islamics if you don't agree with them.
But what I really disagree with is considering terrorists cowardly. I think considering terrorists cowardly is just an attempt to dehumanize them. For one thing, killing yourself in the name of (from their perspective) freedom is just NOT cowardly. As far as I can tell people who believe terrorism is cowardly are thinking that way because they think terrorists "choose" to commit terrorism rather than working peaceably toward bettering their society and attempting to diplomatically alter the political agenda of their country. They commit terrorism because they feel like they can't change their society, and they feel cornered and overpowered. And if you think they're wrong and being stupid and should obviously see this, keep in mind they are willing to DIE over their belief. So whatever they believe, apparently the belief is strong.
Some would hate them because the terrorists view on how society and the world should be is different from theirs. And since they are killing people in the name of that "wrong" belief, they are evil. But just as a thought experiment, say that the entire world is fundamentalist islam, and you and a few hundred like you are the last americans left with belief in your view of equality, justice, and freedom. You have tried campaigning, you have tried reasoning, you have gone door to door with your beliefs, and nothing has persuaded people to go over to your ways DESPITE people "obviously" suffering from their stupid ways. Would you die to try and change that world?
-
Would you die to try and change that world?
Christ did and He was not a terrorist.
Would I, I believe I would, I would give My Life if it could save Others Lives.
-
Christ didnt change anything. He just died. It was the billions of people who followed him that changed the world in his name, and they did kill people. Looooads of people.
-
Would you die to try and change that world?
Christ did and He was not a terrorist.
He was regarded as one by the authorities.
-
Hippies like you, odeon, will be brushed aside once Europe becomes an Islamic republic living under shariah law. Maybe then you'd appreciate the freedoms that will be lost to you under the tryanny of Bin Laden's cronies and you wont be so keen to appease muslim fundamentalists. :tooledup: :squit:
Chill, man. All we're saying is give peace a chance.
Want a flower? :P
-
I want a flower!
-
I have five Amaryllis bulbs growing in my house. One of them has a blossum fourteen inches in diameter with yellow lined white stripes radiating from the center on a purplish petal fading to red towards the end. They were my friends. At first I thought they enjoyed our conversations and responded with bigger smiles, but I learned they only care about my carbon dioxide. I felt used.
-
My kitty is only using me for food and heat and soft surfaces to sleep on. I lub him anyway.
-
I have an amaryllis bulb in my house, too, and know that they only use you.
-
/me huggles his kitty.
Yes, you're a evil, vicious killing machine. Bein' all cute and cuddly!
/me 's kitty has an expression like, "Agh, jesus, when will it end?"
Such a cute self serving monster. Yes, yes you are. Little baby kitty.
/me hugs and smothers him.
/me 's kitty's expression say, "I know you're my human, but I'm gonna fuck you up, I really am."
-
Christ didnt change anything. He just died. It was the billions of people who followed him that changed the world in his name, and they did kill people. Looooads of people.
He died for humanity's sins, apparently, therefore he became the percursor for change in that time period.
Fucking hell, for allowing himself to die, he had big cojones.
-
For one thing, explain to me WHY jesus dying redeems mankind. Seems like a huge leap in logic to me.
Secondly, how can we know his death causes christianity to take off and become so popular. The religion and social movements became strong and then they decided to name it after just that one guy who died. They crucified a lot of motherfuckers back then.
Thirdly, why are we giving him so much credit for dying? "Let's see, I can stay down here for a while, where everybody hates me, i'm misunderstood, everybody walks around with open sores on their feet, their syphlidic, they're protein difficient, I can't eat one meal without getting sand in it, so I could stay here for a little longer... or I could be martyred... go up to heaven, where all my pets are, apparently, and sit at my fathers side in judgement of all of man kind for the rest of eternity. Hmmmm, *motions a balancing with two hands* I wonder which- Okay! Okay guys. I'm ready! What do you mean you've only got three nails? Well do my feet like this. Let's go! Less time here, more time there... in heaven." - David Cross.
-
You call it terrorism, we call it a holy war.
You call us barbaric, we label you as immoral.
You call me a comedy flaming arse, I call myself a martyr.
Kiss my allah! :finger:
-
I use the Quran as toilet paper. :poop: :tp:
-
I use the Quran as toilet paper. :poop: :tp:
Die, you Crusading infidel!
-
I use the Quran as toilet paper. :poop: :tp:
Die, you Crusading infidel!
FSM is the only true God you Infidelic scum!! :arrr: :arrr: :arrr: :fsm: :arrr: :arrr: :arrr:
-
Arrr piratey goodness. :glug: :arrr: :arrr: :arrr: