Give THEM a choice!
Bodie
these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
They leave the hellholes of their birth to settle in Western Countries and
then start running off at the mouth about how decadent and depraved the
Western Culture actually is.
I am of the opinion that they (Islamists) should be asked a question which
has two (2) answers.
The question is as follows:
(a) Do you consider yourself a citizen of (insert country is residence here)
first?
or
(b) Do you consider yourself an Islamist first?
Those that choose (a) to continue to be the valued citizens they are.
All those that choose (b) to be provided with a one way ticket to an Islamic
country of their choice on the first available flight and an armed escort to
ensure they or on that flight.
One way to get rid of them!!
Bodie ... **totally pissed off at these homicide bombers**
--
*~For what is it to die,
*~But to stand in the sun and melt into the wind?
*~And when the Earth has claimed our limbs,
*~Then we shall truly dance.~*
~~- Kahlil Gibran-~~
tg
"Bodie" <Bo...@home.net> wrote in message
news:xPudnR1_m9J...@is.co.za...
>I think the world should show that they (we) have had just about enough of
> these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
he he he.
fuckwit
the idiot
> these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
> They leave the hellholes of their birth to settle in Western Countries and
> then start running off at the mouth about how decadent and depraved the
> Western Culture actually is.
>
> I am of the opinion that they (Islamists) should be asked a question which
> has two (2) answers.
>
> The question is as follows:
> (a) Do you consider yourself a citizen of (insert country is residence
here)
> first?
> or
> (b) Do you consider yourself an Islamist first?
>
>
are you a christian or are you (insert country) first?
Joann Evans
>
> I think the world should show that they (we) have had just about enough of
> these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
> They leave the hellholes of their birth to settle in Western Countries and
> then start running off at the mouth about how decadent and depraved the
> Western Culture actually is.
>
> I am of the opinion that they (Islamists) should be asked a question which
> has two (2) answers.
>
> The question is as follows:
> (a) Do you consider yourself a citizen of (insert country is residence here)
> first?
> or
> (b) Do you consider yourself an Islamist first?
>
> Those that choose (a) to continue to be the valued citizens they are.
>
> All those that choose (b) to be provided with a one way ticket to an Islamic
> country of their choice on the first available flight and an armed escort to
> ensure they or on that flight.
>
> One way to get rid of them!!
>
> Bodie ... **totally pissed off at these homicide bombers**
What's an 'Islamist?' A beliver in Islam? Why should they deny that?
But if you're asking if they'll commit violence in the name of their
belief....
News flash: Sometimes human beings lie.
--
You know what to remove, to reply....
Bodie
"the idiot" <sin...@thesands.co.uk> wrote in message
news:SrScnYk_KvI...@karoo.co.uk...
Do you see ME running around extolling the virtues of lopping off people's
heads????
Your name fits your cerebral capacity, it seems.
Bodie
"Joann Evans" <bon...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:42EB06DC...@frontiernet.net...
I am referring to those, as stated in my post, that set about the systematic
destruction of the western culture/ideology that chose to shelter them after
their escape from the barbaric country they initially fled from.
Islamists pay lip service to moderacy, to religious freedom but are united
in their belief that theirs' is the true religion.
This belief is what drives them to commit atrocities against the infidel,
that and the promise of their 72 virgins in paradise.
They then have the gall to publically state that their adopted (western)
country is morally bankrupt and should be destroyed by the rath of THEIR
god(s) and this they do while enjoying those very freedoms hard won by the
true natives of their adopted land.
THEY should be treated as in my original post.
The rest, AS LONG as they behave, stick around.
You move to another country, you assume their culture and way off life. You
DO NOT try and destroy theirs.
the idiot
and have you asked a christian the question?
the idiot
Skokkie
The Christian would say that the question has no relevance because he
believes in the Separation of Church and state. Islamicists do not. The
Bible says that Christians should obey civil authorities whilst leaving
their souls open to God and free of human domination. The Quaran says that
a Moslem should only obey religious authorities. Socialist monopolies
similarly expect to rule over man's spiritual life.
The Bible has an end scenario that sees the redeemer coming forth in a
second coming and redeeming the nations. Islam sees an and scenario whereby
its adherents arise and kill those who do not submit to their spiritual
domination.
Islam is concerned with the aquisition of territory that should be declared
consecrated to it's religion, and once claimed in the name of Islam, can
never be returned. A Christian sees the holy place within. (Your body is the
temple of the Holy Spirit)
Christianity is about the choices that you make - (Choose this day who you
will serve) - Islam and Socialism refer to cenral control that conforms them
to the will of the central authority that has the power to condemn them.
The answer would be therefore
Yes the Christian will consider himself a citizen of (insert your country
here)
No he will not consider himself an Islamicist first.
He will render all assistance to the development of the common good, but the
province of his own soul is not the business of the State. His leaders will
guide him, counsel him and even punish him when he strays against the common
good, but he sees no jurisdiction by mullahs, or presidents over his body
temple.
This is the basis of most democratic establishments and is one reason why
they flourish amongst Christian nations.
the idiot
"Skokkie" <Gle...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dcfapg$6i4$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
so you havent asked a christian the same question either....
Skokkie
Unlike many asylum seekers, the English have generally not been in a
situation where they have gone abroad as minority refugees seeking escape
from the oppressive systems that have caused serious decline in their own
countries and then tried to reintroduce the elements of failure in the new
situation.
They were highly organised with a heritage of building and improving who
built and developed their imperial empire that was generally based on merit.
English literature is full of brave heroes of war and faith, both infidel
and patriotic, however you will not see a book by Rudyard Kipling that
glorifies something like a suicide bomber.
Idiot - I think that you should go and live in Iran or Afghanistan and get
an angle on why these people regard your public transport system so
jealously. It would seem that their system got in the way of developing such
things in just the same way as it is now impeding yours
The lack of choice and the claims of marginalisation of youth are no excuses
for the depraved criminal activity that has caused this terror. The
anti-social perpetrators of the London bombings fall into the same category
as the suicidal criminals who shot pupils and threw bombs at Cullumbine high
school in America. Satanism did not justify their religious extremism in the
same way that Islamicism does not justify the attacks by these so called
moslems against their fellow citizens.
uNkulunkulu
news:kvidnbRDw97...@karoo.co.uk...
ubholongwe
--
VOTE FOR AN INDEPENDENT ENGLAND
VOTE SNP
uNkulunkulu
uMvelinqangi
Mina bona wena
mina bona lo mombi yena lo shatini
Skat lo Boss yena fika, nika yena iwhisky
uNkulunkulu
glad you said english you racialist
spizz
"uNkulunkulu" <iz...@kya.kamina> wrote in message
news:OiHGe.79588$G8.5...@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Why? It doesn't make him a racist saying that, just uninformed. Take English
to mean British, 9 times out of 10, amongst the ignorant of the world. I'm
constantly amazed that I'm accepted as a Scot in South Africa because it was
the English who were the bad guys, and the English who caused no end of
grief with a couple of wars and a great trek. Scotland has been the most
willing and complicit of partners for it's English brothers for a couple of
hundred years. The Scots were/are as bad as the English, accept it and don't
be as ignorant as the uninformed.
Spizz
Jordi
>
>
>
> The Scots were/are as bad as the English, accept it and don't
> be as ignorant as the uninformed.
>
> Spizz
>
>
Speak for yourself Campbell.
Clydeside Red
Americans may say that, but not neccessarily Christians.
> Islamicists do not.
Neither do Christian members of the established Church in the UK.
spizz
"Jordi" <Jor...@happy.org> wrote in message
news:dcfkn2$b6s$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
Other side actually, my Grandmother was a MacDonald.
Spizz
Skokkie
Yes I have - he has given a qualified answer - on the other hand what would
the moslem's answer be? In the case of many thinking Moslems it may be the
same as the Christians, In the case of the violent fundamentalists they
cannot pledge allegiance to the state in the spiritual or the temporal.
Skokkie
"Clydeside Red" <myrea...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:N7Wdna35w94...@rogers.com...
The seperation of church and state was a Christian institution brought
forward by Christian political reformers such as William Wilberforce
>
>> Islamicists do not.
>
> Neither do Christian members of the established Church in the UK.
Separation of Church and State is Christian Democrat 101 - the church is a
seperate body like the judiciary is a seperate body. It is called Seperation
of powers. There are very few established UK Christian churches who advocate
a direct theocratic civil government. I cannot name one, but maybe you can.
The Christian People's Alliance, the UK's Christian Democratic party have
separation of Church and State written into their party constitution. Most
Christian Church leaders in the UK would blow a fuse if you suggested that
the Church take on the role of civil government.
Electing Christian leaders who advocate a Christian moral climate in a
democratic system is not the merging of Church and state.
The use of coercion in order to impose religious practices on the citizenry
uses religion as a power to affect the democratic will of the people. I do
not know of any religious leader outside Islam that advocates this.
the idiot
in the case of any extremists you will get extreme answers though what they
have to do with the mainstream im not sure unless you is trying to tar folk
with the same brush..
Bodie
And THAT is why I chose not to answer your idiotic reply in the first place.
Show me an Islamist that is NOT mainstream.
One cannot apply civilized principles with fundamentalists of which the
moslems are the worst.
the idiot
a - you appear to be contradicting yourself with that reply unless in your
excitement you typed the wrong words.
b - you never mentioned fundamentalism in your original post.
sportsfan
>
> "Clydeside Red" <myrea...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:N7Wdna35w94...@rogers.com...
>>
>> "Skokkie" <Gle...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:dcfapg$6i4$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>>>
>>> "the idiot" <sin...@thesands.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:SWWdnTncf7l...@karoo.co.uk...
>>>>
>>>> "Bodie" <Bo...@home.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:UoedncQby-K...@is.co.za...
>>>>>
>>>>> "the idiot" <sin...@thesands.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>> news:SrScnYk_KvI...@karoo.co.uk...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > "Bodie" <Bo...@home.net> wrote in message
>>>>> > news:xPudnR1_m9J...@is.co.za...
> The use of coercion in order to impose religious practices on the
> citizenry uses religion as a power to affect the democratic will of the
> people. I do not know of any religious leader outside Islam that advocates
> this.
The very *Christian* Reverent Ian Paisley springs to mind and he is
equally as hostile as any Muslim.
>
John P. Mullen
Nor a significant number of Christians in the US, unfortunately.
John Mullen
John P. Mullen
Skokkie
"sportsfan" <big...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
news:dcfum2$c47$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
You have got me there, but I did not see him as a religious leader - he now
calls himself Dr Ian Paisley and defends a more nationalistic point of view
than a religious one.
As far as I know he has not been involved in any suicide bombing campaigns
like the Moslems, but he is a little angry at the moment as some of his
people have lost kneecaps and been tortured and beaten and stuff, but I
think that he will come around when he sees that the IRA are genuine this
time and that there are no splinter groups and that the criminal element of
the IRA are prepared to reform and come on board and that the "real IRA"
have also laid down their arms. The poor guy has already laid down his arms
a couple of times and the IRA have not come to the party so you will have to
give him a bit of time.
John P. Mullen
> <snip>
>
>
> And THAT is why I chose not to answer your idiotic reply in the first place.
> Show me an Islamist that is NOT mainstream.
>
Pick any of the suicide bombers.
> One cannot apply civilized principles with fundamentalists of which the
> moslems are the worst.
>
>
I see. Who, exactly, attacked whom in Iraq? Are you aware of the level
of death an destruction that country is now experiencing? Have you
heard the "Christian" justifications of this terrible situation?
John Mullen
the idiot
why do you seem to think suicide bombings are worse than (non suicide)
bombings? do you feel there is maybe something "barbaric" about looking into
the eyes of the people you are about to kill?
Clydeside Red
may not be head of government, but she is head of state, and head of the
church.
Clydeside Red
He is head of a "Free" Church, whiche means that it is seperate from the
state church, and he does hold and promote some very fundamentalist
religious beliefs.
http://www.ianpaisley.org/
> As far as I know he has not been involved in any suicide bombing campaigns
> like the Moslems, but he is a little angry at the moment as some of his
> people have lost kneecaps and been tortured and beaten and stuff, but I
> think that he will come around when he sees that the IRA are genuine this
> time and that there are no splinter groups and that the criminal element
> of the IRA are prepared to reform and come on board and that the "real
> IRA" have also laid down their arms. The poor guy has already laid down
> his arms a couple of times and the IRA have not come to the party so you
> will have to give him a bit of time.
He will never "come around" read what he says about "papists". He is like a
rabid dog.
Brock Ulfsen
> I think the world should show that they (we) have had just about enough of
> these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
> They leave the hellholes of their birth to settle in Western Countries and
> then start running off at the mouth about how decadent and depraved the
> Western Culture actually is.
>
> I am of the opinion that they (Islamists) should be asked a question which
> has two (2) answers.
>
> The question is as follows:
> (a) Do you consider yourself a citizen of (insert country is residence here)
> first?
> or
> (b) Do you consider yourself an Islamist first?
>
>
>
>
> All those that choose (b) to be provided with a one way ticket to an Islamic
> country of their choice on the first available flight and an armed escort to
> ensure they or on that flight.
> One way to get rid of them!!
> Bodie ... **totally pissed off at these homicide bombers**
Shall we ask the same Question of Jerry Falwell and his ilk, but
substitutie Christian for Islamist?
Or is being a fundamentalist whackjob worshiping YHVH under the name
Jehovah somehow different to being a fundamentalist whackjob who
worships YHVH under the name Allah?
...Brock.
Brock Ulfsen
>>are you a christian or are you (insert country) first?
> Do you see ME running around extolling the virtues of lopping off people's
> heads????
The vast majority of Moslems don't think Sharia Law is a good idea.
That is why the US's 2nd favourite Moslem Country, Indonesia just had
it's highest religious body condemn rational interpretation of the
Koran, because their push for a Sharia state was threatened by the fact
that most Indonesians consider them less and less sane.
...Brock.
Brock Ulfsen
> The Christian would say that the question has no relevance because he
> believes in the Separation of Church and state. Islamicists do not. The
> Bible says that Christians should obey civil authorities whilst leaving
> their souls open to God and free of human domination. The Quaran says that
> a Moslem should only obey religious authorities. Socialist monopolies
> similarly expect to rule over man's spiritual life.
Er...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
> The Bible has an end scenario that sees the redeemer coming forth in a
> second coming and redeeming the nations. Islam sees an and scenario whereby
> its adherents arise and kill those who do not submit to their spiritual
> domination.
Er, Battle of Armagedon etc?
> Islam is concerned with the aquisition of territory that should be declared
> consecrated to it's religion, and once claimed in the name of Islam, can
> never be returned. A Christian sees the holy place within. (Your body is the
> temple of the Holy Spirit)
Crusades?
> Christianity is about the choices that you make - (Choose this day who you
> will serve) - Islam and Socialism refer to cenral control that conforms them
> to the will of the central authority that has the power to condemn them.
Er, not all Socialists are Totalitarian. Nor if conformity and control
absent from some so-called Democracies (PARTRIOT Act?).
> The answer would be therefore
> Yes the Christian will consider himself a citizen of (insert your country
> here)
Write to the top 50 evangelists and christian leaders in your area, ask
then the question as to if they think of themselves as Christian or
(insert nationality) here, and if you should think of yourself as a
Christian or (insert nationality here).
> No he will not consider himself an Islamicist first.
> He will render all assistance to the development of the common good, but the
> province of his own soul is not the business of the State. His leaders will
> guide him, counsel him and even punish him when he strays against the common
> good, but he sees no jurisdiction by mullahs, or presidents over his body
> temple.
Hmmm, so condemnations of Homosexuality, Pornogrpahy and sex before
marriage are made by who? Wandering Taoist sages?
> This is the basis of most democratic establishments and is one reason why
> they flourish amongst Christian nations.
Huh?
...Brock.
Brock Ulfsen
> The use of coercion in order to impose religious practices on the citizenry
> uses religion as a power to affect the democratic will of the people. I do
> not know of any religious leader outside Islam that advocates this.
Assemblies of God churches and their political arm the Family First
Party in Asutralia.
Indeed pretty much the whole of the Properity Theology crown like Hillsong.
Not to mention these crowds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Reconstructionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
Represented ably by:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_North_%28Christian_Reconstructionist%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Horsley
Gunner
wrote:
Who?
Odd that Ive heard of Muslims..but not him. I guess he isnt much of a
player.
Gunner
"Considering the events of recent years,
the world has a long way to go to regain
its credibility and reputation with the US."
unknown
sportsfan
"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:8dooe19ivfuh7ut6k...@4ax.com...
Read up on the recent history of Northern Ireland. Are you
an Arsenal supporter ?
Clydeside Red
His Reverend status is kinda dodgly as he was ordained by people not
authorized by their denominations to perform ordination. The DR is from an
honrary degree from an unaccreditted scholl in the US called Bob Jones
University. He founded both his present church and political party. He has
been an MP for about 30 yeards. My bigoted Orange parents even though he
was a "nutter" and an "instigator:
Jordi
>
>
> ... because their push for a Sharia state was threatened by the fact
> that most Indonesians consider them less and less sane.
>
> ....Brock.
You have a source for this?
BFB
> Shall we ask the same Question of Jerry Falwell and his ilk, but
> substitutie Christian for Islamist?
>
> Or is being a fundamentalist whackjob worshiping YHVH under the name
> Jehovah somehow different to being a fundamentalist whackjob who
> worships YHVH under the name Allah?
>
So, you equate bin laden with Falwell?
Clydeside Red
"BFB" <fatc...@noway.com> wrote in message
news:GqydnX2fIeb...@adelphia.com...
Bin Laden uses his personal wealth to advance his people and his cause.
Falwell begs from poor people to support his life style. Other than that
they are both evil, both megalomaniacal, both idealogues, the difference is
in scale with Osama being way off the scale,
Rahasya
>
> "BFB" <fatc...@noway.com> wrote in message
> news:GqydnX2fIeb...@adelphia.com...
>> Brock Ulfsen wrote:
>>
>>> Shall we ask the same Question of Jerry Falwell and his ilk, but
>>> substitutie Christian for Islamist?
>>>
>>> Or is being a fundamentalist whackjob worshiping YHVH under the name
>>> Jehovah somehow different to being a fundamentalist whackjob who worships
>>> YHVH under the name Allah?
>>>
>> So, you equate bin laden with Falwell?
> Clydeside Red
> Bin Laden uses his personal wealth to advance his people and his cause.
> Falwell begs from poor people to support his life style. Other than that
> they are both evil, both megalomaniacal, both idealogues, the difference is
> in scale with Osama being way off the scale,
>
>
Bin laden is just a good boy, serving his family interests, doing the
occasional favour for his family's 3-generation business associates, the
Bush family.
As a CIA operative, he's done a creditable job. 9/11 was, to any student of
history, an obvious repeat of the Reichstag burning in 1933. At the time,
the hysterical blaming of "terrorists" enabled the passing of the Homeland
Security Act, which got Hitler going in a big way, and helped IG Farben
hugely. Bin Laden's mission got the American Homeland Security Act passed,
which enabled Bush to wage war without checking with his people, and got
Bayer (part of IG Farben) out of some v serious trouble.
BFB
I'll take that as a yes...
BFB
>
>>"BFB" <fatc...@noway.com> wrote in message
>>news:GqydnX2fIeb...@adelphia.com...
>>
>>>Brock Ulfsen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Shall we ask the same Question of Jerry Falwell and his ilk, but
>>>>substitutie Christian for Islamist?
>>>>
>>>>Or is being a fundamentalist whackjob worshiping YHVH under the name
>>>>Jehovah somehow different to being a fundamentalist whackjob who worships
>>>>YHVH under the name Allah?
>>>>
>>>
>>>So, you equate bin laden with Falwell?
>
>
>
>
>>Clydeside Red
>>Bin Laden uses his personal wealth to advance his people and his cause.
>>Falwell begs from poor people to support his life style. Other than that
>>they are both evil, both megalomaniacal, both idealogues, the difference is
>>in scale with Osama being way off the scale,
>>
>>
>
>
> Bin laden is just a good boy, serving his family interests, doing the
> occasional favour for his family's 3-generation business associates, the
> Bush family.
>
U R outta here!!
Clydeside Red
Take it any way you want, and grease it before you shove it up your keister.
Rahasya
> BFB:
> U R outta here!!
Of course - just like any idiot in 1933 that suggested that Nazis had
something to do with the Reichstag fire bombing. What a crazy idea. Not at
all in line with right thinking people who let the media tell them what's
what.
History shows that it's generally the fellow who had the most to gain that
did the thing. Bin Laden gained:???, the US administration gained hugely,
Bayer and Smith-Klein gained hugely. Do a little research, friend!
George Santayana
"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Brock Ulfsen
> Brock Ulfsen wrote:
>> ... because their push for a Sharia state was threatened by the fact
>> that most Indonesians consider them less and less sane.
> You have a source for this?
Only conversation with some Indonesian and Malaysian friends.
While the press support the government in crazy claims like MOSSAD or
the CIA were behind the Bali Bombing, and so most people tend to beleive
that, at the same time, people are getting worried that Sharia law will
spread from its current zone and take away their fun in the rest of the
country.
...Brock.
Clydeside Red
"Rahasya" <rah...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
news:BF12B8D6.274A%rah...@telkomsa.net...
You need to do a little yourself. Smith *Kline* Beckman became Smith Kline
Beecham in 1989 and about 5 years ago merged with Glaxo Wellcome to become
GlaxoSmithKline. To stay up to snuff as a conspiracy theorist, you really
should keep up to date with pharmaceutical companies they are as bad, if not
worse than insurance companies.
Brock Ulfsen
Bin Laden has more money, and possibly more idiots willing to die for
his cause. I suspect not many more who'd kill for it.
Oh, and I suspect Fallwell hates Le=iberal Democracy more.
...Brock.
westprog
> Of course - just like any idiot in 1933 that suggested that Nazis had
> something to do with the Reichstag fire bombing. What a crazy idea. Not at
> all in line with right thinking people who let the media tell them what's
> what.
Check history and you'll find that there is still little evidence that the
Nazis bombed the Reichstag. They took advantage of it.
J/
SOTW: "All Is Yellow - Hot Hot Hot" - Auto Da Fé
Rahasya
> Clydeside Red:
> You need to do a little yourself. Smith *Kline* Beckman became Smith Kline
> Beecham in 1989 and about 5 years ago merged with Glaxo Wellcome to become
> GlaxoSmithKline. To stay up to snuff as a conspiracy theorist, you really
> should keep up to date with pharmaceutical companies they are as bad, if not
> worse than insurance companies.
>
>
I don't think "conspiracies" are necessarily involved. Just people working
for the "good" of their shareholders and politicians working for the "good"
of their constituents, as they see it.
The results of 9/11 = Americans lost some civil liberties, but had their
savings (invested in these corporations) preserved. At the cost of very few
lives, the USA got cheap access to 30 years' oil supply (the Afganistan
pipeline) and got control of rival Japan's main oil supplier (Iraq). Just
good business. No conspiracy required.
Joann Evans
>
> "Joann Evans" <bon...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
> news:42EB06DC...@frontiernet.net...
> >
> > But if you're asking if they'll commit violence in the name of their
> > belief....
> >
> > News flash: Sometimes human beings lie.
>
> I am referring to those, as stated in my post, that set about the systematic
> destruction of the western culture/ideology that chose to shelter them after
> their escape from the barbaric country they initially fled from.
>
> Islamists pay lip service to moderacy, to religious freedom but are united
> in their belief that theirs' is the true religion.
> This belief is what drives them to commit atrocities against the infidel,
> that and the promise of their 72 virgins in paradise.
> They then have the gall to publically state that their adopted (western)
> country is morally bankrupt and should be destroyed by the rath of THEIR
> god(s) and this they do while enjoying those very freedoms hard won by the
> true natives of their adopted land.
> THEY should be treated as in my original post.
>
> The rest, AS LONG as they behave, stick around.
>
> You move to another country, you assume their culture and way off life.
Whatever that is...some places aren't all that culturally monolithic.
> You
> DO NOT try and destroy theirs.
And if you ask them just where thet personally stand;
The sincerely peaceful will, of course, say: "I have no intention of
committing violence."
The smopuldering terrorists will, of course, say; "I have no
intention of committing violence."
Someone intent on blowing up others (possibly including themselves),
will have no problems telling that lie.
Therefore, what has this public statement acheived?
--
You know what to remove, to reply....
Jordi
> Jordi wrote:
>
>> Brock Ulfsen wrote:
>
>
>>> ... because their push for a Sharia state was threatened by the fact
>>> that most Indonesians consider them less and less sane.
>
>
>> You have a source for this?
>
>
> Only conversation with some Indonesian and Malaysian friends.
>
Well are we not on dangerous ground here? Is this not a product of
wishful thinking rather than fact?
> While the press support the government in crazy claims like MOSSAD or
> the CIA were behind the Bali Bombing, and so most people tend to beleive
> that, at the same time, people are getting worried that Sharia law will
> spread from its current zone and take away their fun in the rest of the
> country.
>
> ....Brock.
There you go again with "so most people tend to believe that" and
"people are getting worried that". What more can I say?
Skokkie
You have lost it completely geezer.
The bombers do not look into the eyes of the people they are about to kill.
They are shameless cowards who cannot fight man to man in a declared war.
They have purposely killed unarmed civilians, without alerting them that
there was a fight on - a sneak attack.
The suicide bombers have had their minds bent with pseudo- religion. as in
weak minded. There is plenty that is barbaric in that. Sneaking up behind
someone and killing them is barbaric and it is murder.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "the idiot" <sin...@thesands.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:M86cncv7kcF...@karoo.co.uk...
>
>
and killing them is something that 'Special Forces' are rather known for
doing as well.
--
Secretly I have always held the opinion that it would be less depressing
to be alcoholic than to be anonymous- Quinten Crisp, Resident Alien
* TagZilla 0.057 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
spizz
LOL. Instigator is a bit of an understatement. He was the biggest factor
responsible for the present bout of troubles from the mid 60's to present,
with his hard line approach to the Catholics and their demands for equal
rights. His soap box politics and counter demonstrations stirred up a
hornets nest and the climate of mistrust and fear resulted in the call to
arms for the republicans, and the formation of the defence associations for
the unionists. Cue a stalemate of 1st war trench proportions and a dislike
for each other that will take generations to rectify.
Spizz
Clydeside Red
news:dcjdqm$1q1$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> "Clydeside Red" <myrea...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:ssKdndrp-f8...@rogers.com...
>> "Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>> news:8dooe19ivfuh7ut6k...@4ax.com...
>> authorized by their denominations to perform ordination. The DR is from
> an
>> University. He founded both his present church and political party. He
> has
>> was a "nutter" and an "instigator:
>>
>
> LOL. Instigator is a bit of an understatement.
Yeah, well I *did* say my parents were Orange bigots.
>He was the biggest factor
> responsible for the present bout of troubles from the mid 60's to present,
Really? I always though British discrimination against Catholics in things
like jobs, housing, and civil rights was what caused it.
> with his hard line approach to the Catholics and their demands for equal
> rights. His soap box politics and counter demonstrations stirred up a
If there had been no mistreatment, there would have been no demands. No-one
should have to *demand* fairness, they should be able to take it for
granted.
> hornets nest and the climate of mistrust and fear resulted in the call to
> arms for the republicans, and the formation of the defence associations
> for
> the unionists. Cue a stalemate of 1st war trench proportions and a dislike
> for each other that will take generations to rectify.
I wonder if he's a good MP? I came across a guy in another ng who went to
the legislature to address a committee about something to do with his
industry. He was very surprised to find his MP (Bud Wildman) there waiting
for him, as he had not contacted his MP, and didn't vote for him because he
loathed his party. Turns out Wildman always scoured the Hansard for
anything to do with his constituents, and always showed up for them, even if
not asked, so the guy always voted for him after that. I wonder if Paisley
represents *all* his constituents.
spizz
I was brought up much the same and I still find it hard to be impartial. For
instance, I will *always* refer to Celtic in the most derogatory terms.
> >He was the biggest factor
> > responsible for the present bout of troubles from the mid 60's to
present,
>
> Really? I always though British discrimination against Catholics in
things
> like jobs, housing, and civil rights was what caused it.
>
No, that was what caused the civil rights movement. Paisley whipped up the
storm that started the troubles preaching distrust and spreading fear
amongst the Protestant communities. Remember, the army were originally
called in to protect the Catholics and were warmly welcomed.
> > with his hard line approach to the Catholics and their demands for equal
> > rights. His soap box politics and counter demonstrations stirred up a
>
> If there had been no mistreatment, there would have been no demands.
No-one
> should have to *demand* fairness, they should be able to take it for
> granted.
>
I'm not disagreeing with you.
> > hornets nest and the climate of mistrust and fear resulted in the call
to
> > arms for the republicans, and the formation of the defence associations
> > for
> > the unionists. Cue a stalemate of 1st war trench proportions and a
dislike
> > for each other that will take generations to rectify.
>
> I wonder if he's a good MP? I came across a guy in another ng who went to
> the legislature to address a committee about something to do with his
> industry. He was very surprised to find his MP (Bud Wildman) there
waiting
> for him, as he had not contacted his MP, and didn't vote for him because
he
> loathed his party. Turns out Wildman always scoured the Hansard for
> anything to do with his constituents, and always showed up for them, even
if
> not asked, so the guy always voted for him after that. I wonder if
Paisley
> represents *all* his constituents.
>
LOL, fair point. I can't imagine Father O'Brien from the chapel down the
road going to see Mr Paisley to complain about the holes in the roads.
Interesting nickname BTW. My Dad was a trade union official in Glasgow in
the 50's and 60's. Then he became a Clydeside Nat.
Spizz
Clydeside Red
>
> "Clydeside Red" <myrea...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:PM-dnRzjHdy...@rogers.com...
>> "spizz" <nor...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:dcjdqm$1q1$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>> > "Clydeside Red" <myrea...@rogers.com> wrote in message
>> > news:ssKdndrp-f8...@rogers.com...
>> >>
>> >> authorized by their denominations to perform ordination. The DR is
> from
>> > an
>> >> honorary degree from an unaccreditted scholl in the US called Bob
>> >> Jones
>> >> University. He founded both his present church and political party.
> He
>> > has
>> >> been an MP for about 30 years. My bigoted Orange parents even though
> he
>> >> was a "nutter" and an "instigator:
>> >>
>> >
>> > LOL. Instigator is a bit of an understatement.
>>
>> Yeah, well I *did* say my parents were Orange bigots.
>>
>
> I was brought up much the same and I still find it hard to be impartial.
> For
> instance, I will *always* refer to Celtic in the most derogatory terms.
Not me. When they came here last year I cheered for the Scots against the
furriners, that was my thinking. Course the Gers are the best team in the
history of the world.
<snip>
>> I wonder if he's a good MP? I came across a guy in another ng who went
>> to
>> the legislature to address a committee about something to do with his
>> industry. He was very surprised to find his MP (Bud Wildman) there
> waiting
>> for him, as he had not contacted his MP, and didn't vote for him because
> he
>> loathed his party. Turns out Wildman always scoured the Hansard for
>> anything to do with his constituents, and always showed up for them, even
> if
>> not asked, so the guy always voted for him after that. I wonder if
> Paisley
>> represents *all* his constituents.
>>
>
> LOL, fair point. I can't imagine Father O'Brien from the chapel down the
> road going to see Mr Paisley to complain about the holes in the roads.
Father O'Brien just might have other resources, I'm more worried about wee
Mrs Flaherty who husband was injured at work, and is still in the hospital,
and she hasn't received his workers compensation, or money from the social,
or any help at all and she's got 3 kids, and not even the bus fare to the
hospital to see her husband, or someone similarly destitute and or
powerless.
>
> Interesting nickname BTW. My Dad was a trade union official in Glasgow in
> the 50's and 60's. Then he became a Clydeside Nat.
I changed from shewobbles, cuz I was a wobbly, but the nic attracted too
many weird questions.
Skokkie
Sorry Peter - your response was deleted from the server and I did not get a
chance to see it.
Would you re post it?
Skokkie
"Jordi" <Jor...@happy.org> wrote in message
news:dcivor$kqq$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
I have not seen you posting much that is substantive on these ng's. We need
to consider the possibility that you are reflecting with these responses
> What more can I say?
>
Preferably nothing
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "the idiot" <sin...@thesands.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:M86cncv7kcF...@karoo.co.uk...
>
>
Skokkie
....Er would that be my prejudices?
Peter H.M. Brooks
rid of the person who was cancelling posts. It looks as if the
irritation might still be there. I'm not sure, though, you seem to be
missing posts, but I can find them for several days back, this wasn't
the case when the illegal CMSG CANCEL messages were on the go.
--
Those who know anything about the matter are aware that every writer,
from Epicurus to Bentham, who maintained the theory of utility, meant by
it, not something to be contradistinguished from pleasure, but pleasure
itself, together with exemption from pain; and instead of opposing the
useful to the agreeable or the ornamental, have always declared that the
useful means these, among other things. -- J.S.Mill Chapter II,
Utilitarianism
myal
> I think the world should show that they (we) have had just about enough of
> these Islamists!!!!!!!!!!!!
> They leave the hellholes of their birth to settle in Western Countries and
> then start running off at the mouth about how decadent and depraved the
> Western Culture actually is.
Its as bad as the colonists of earlier years , stupid euros settling in
other peoples countries and running off abut how bad the local culture
is and changing it refusing to adopt local ways etc etc ...
Get used to it , its histlry repeating itself , you the victim this time
tho , ... suits ya tho , you wear it well .
>
> I am of the opinion that they (Islamists) should be asked a question which
> has two (2) answers.
>
> The question is as follows:
> (a) Do you consider yourself a citizen of (insert country is residence here)
> first?
> or
> (b) Do you consider yourself an Islamist first?
>
>
>
> Those that choose (a) to continue to be the valued citizens they are.
>
> All those that choose (b) to be provided with a one way ticket to an Islamic
> country of their choice on the first available flight and an armed escort to
> ensure they or on that flight.
>
> One way to get rid of them!!
>
> Bodie ... **totally pissed off at these homicide bombers**
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *~For what is it to die,
> *~But to stand in the sun and melt into the wind?
> *~And when the Earth has claimed our limbs,
> *~Then we shall truly dance.~*
> ~~- Kahlil Gibran-~~
>
>
--
you dont make old friends
you lose them
BFB
>
> George Santayana
> "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
>
Tinfoil hat
Jordi
>
> I have not seen you posting much that is substantive on these ng's. We need
> to consider the possibility that you are reflecting with these responses
>
>
Whose the "we" Snoekie?
93FXR
No he who fails to remember is condemned to repeat.....................
Bodie
> Rahasya wrote:
>
> >
> >>sportsfan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>There is also a lot of sustentative evidence on Christian atrocities,
> >>>which certain churches would like the world to forget. The Muslims
> >>>do not have an exclusivity on killing in the name of their religion.
> >>>The object should be to condemn all murders whether committed
> >>>in the name of the church or not. I do not believe that killing an
> >>>enemy when engaged in a war is murder as some people contend.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Jordi:
> >>
> >>I suggest that maybe, just maybe the only christians left who have
> >>enough fire in their bellies "to kill for Christ" are in the US. For the
> >>rest they such a lily livered bunch they have no redeeming factor.
> >>
> >
> >
> > The new US way of war doesn't require "fire in the belly" or any
variation
> > of courage. It's mass murder by high-tech and remote control.
As far as you are concerned!!!
For MANY OTHERS it is a noble attempt to bring freedom and stability to
those suffering under years of TRUE TERRORISM (MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALIST
RULE)!!!
>>All it requires is the belief that one's way is superior, that others
don't deserve life.
What a load of BOLLOCKS!!
>
> It requires the belief that to wage war is justified and legitimate.
> That requires some courge of conviction at least. The lily livered bunch
> elsewhere don't have the balls to do anything.
Speak for yourself, mate!!!
You have no idea what anybody else thinks/does.
Bodie.
Bodie
> Rahasya wrote:
>
>
> >
> > E.g. I've come across a few people lately who refuse to be called
> > "Christian", preferring to be individuals who love the message of Jesus,
and
> > consider themselves to be disciples - individuals taking on a spiritual
> > discipline. This is very different from allowing some organisation to do
> > ugly things because it counts you among their number.
> >
>
> This is interesting and I understand fully why they would do such a
> thing. The vast majority of christians are such obvious hypocrites that
> everyone assumes that the religion is just plain bullshit. So therefore
> people who wish to actually live like christians need to reinvent
> themselves and refocus the religion itself. Good for them! They clearly
> don't want to associated with the shite (like those on this list) who
> claim to be christians but have the ethics and morals of a Nigerian drug
> lord.
OOOOO... found a little mate interested in slagging Christians, have you????
And as for the morals of niggerian drug lords, you seem quite knowledgeable
...
Stangely enough, arrested one a while ago (about two months back) that wet
his pants then shat himself after I refused his bribe, charged him with
bribery as well, and then watched as his fellow cell mates smiles when they
saw the WAN come into the cell in such a pathetic state.
T'was truely a sight for sore eyes.
Bodie ...
westprog
...
> I wonder if Paisley represents *all* his constituents.
The propaganda is that Paisley is an excellent constituency MP, and looks
after all his constituents regardless of religion or politics. Whether that
is true or not is another matter.
J/
Geronimo W. Christ Esq
>>I wonder if Paisley represents *all* his constituents.
>
> The propaganda is that Paisley is an excellent constituency MP, and looks
> after all his constituents regardless of religion or politics.
Unless they're being burnt out, of course.
In the past two weeks, Ian Paisley's public utterances have been
restricted to an article in the Belfast Telegraph on the purely
hypothetical possibility of unionist speaking rights in the Dail.
Apparently, neither the loyalist feud nor the almost daily attacks on
his constituents occupy his mind as much as the distant possibility that
unionists might one day be able to shout across the Dail at the Taoiseach.
Danny
Why is this even an issue?
He was elected by a majority so that is that. He represents the
constituency in parliament. Finished.
John P. Mullen
The duty of an elected official is to serve his or her constituency.
All of it.
John Mullen
Danny
OK, so now set the same standard for all MP's.
westprog
"Danny" <d...@jordan.org> wrote in message
news:p4KdnQ8IMYH...@is.co.za...
> John P. Mullen wrote:
...
> >> He was elected by a majority so that is that. He represents the
> >> constituency in parliament. Finished.
> > The duty of an elected official is to serve his or her constituency. All
> > of it.
> OK, so now set the same standard for all MP's.
Paisley would say that he best serves the interests of his constituents by
protecting them from the pernicious doctrine of Papacy, that traps them in
ignorance and damns their immortal souls.
An MP isn't bound to support the beliefs of his constituents, just their
interests.
J/
John P. Mullen
Why not?
John Mullen
Danny
Good then do it and stop whinging about this guy.
John P. Mullen
> <snip>
>
> An MP isn't bound to support the beliefs of his constituents, just their
> interests.
>
> J/
>
>
>
I think you hit the nail on the head.
John Mullen
Clydeside Red
Who was whinging? I just asked a question. I watch the Parliamentary
channel most days. During the time for petitions, usually, most MP's sign
the petitions they present. I live in Ontario, and the MP who extended full
funding to abortion clinics hands in pro-life petitions by saying that she
is presenting on behalf of so-and-so, and while not agreeing with the
petition, she is pleased to present it to the house on his behalf.
Danny
> "Danny" <d...@jordan.org> wrote in message
>>
>>Good then do it and stop whinging about this guy.
>
>
> Who was whinging? I just asked a question.
Ok
>I watch the Parliamentary
> channel most days.
My god! Really. Is there a cure?
Clydeside Red
being worse than the disease. The Parliamentary channel is not 24/7. We
have 2 of them, federal and provincial, neither are sitting now. Have you
ever seen the Taiwanese Parliament? Now that is something else, bench
clearing brawls break out, the jump over chairs to beat each other about the
head with shoes.
Danny
> "Danny" <d...@jordan.org> wrote in message
> news:eJCdnbZD0qv...@is.co.za...
>
>>Clydeside Red wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Danny" <d...@jordan.org> wrote in message
>>
>>>>Good then do it and stop whinging about this guy.
>>>
>>>
>>>Who was whinging? I just asked a question.
>>
>>Ok
>>
>>
>>>I watch the Parliamentary channel most days.
>>
>>
>>My god! Really. Is there a cure?
>>
>
> Yeah, it's called Usenet. I think this is one of those examples of the cure
> being worse than the disease. The Parliamentary channel is not 24/7. We
> have 2 of them, federal and provincial, neither are sitting now. Have you
> ever seen the Taiwanese Parliament? Now that is something else, bench
> clearing brawls break out, the jump over chairs to beat each other about the
> head with shoes.
>
>
If you are looking for action try watching motorcycle racing, so pretty
spectacular stuff happens there. Although I must say that there is some
attraction to being witness to politicians kicking and gouging each
other. The problem is though that we don't get to select who will take
part in these knock down, drag outs.
Clydeside Red
I don't watch for the action, but because I care about the issues. However
if you are really interested in seeing them kicking each other, there may be
some video here.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?L201127AB
Danny
That was in Quicktime. No good for me.
Liked this two-in-one on brawls in Somali and Indonesian Parliaments
though. (if you have Real)
Clydeside Red
Pretty wild stuff.
We had a politician here named Sheila Copps. An MP said a line of a song
about her in a speech at some dinner. She brought it up in the house, and
he called her "baby" and she vaulted over chairs to try and get at him,
screaming that she wasn't his baby, she wasn't anybody's baby. His name is
John Crosbie, he's from Newfoundland, but his accent sounds Irish. Anyway,
the song has the line "pass the tequila Sheila, and lay down and love me
again". That tune may have been better suited to the Ozzie Parliament.
Later Sheila wrote a book called "Nobody's Baby"
Peter H.M. Brooks
>
> Pretty wild stuff.
>
> We had a politician here named Sheila Copps. An MP said a line of a song
> about her in a speech at some dinner. She brought it up in the house, and
> he called her "baby" and she vaulted over chairs to try and get at him,
> screaming that she wasn't his baby, she wasn't anybody's baby.
>
--
All persons are deemed to have a _right_ to equality of treatment,
except when some recognised social expediency requires the reverse. And
hence all social inequalities which have ceased to be considered
expedient, assume the character not of simple inexpediency, but of
injustice, and appear so tyrannical, that people are apt to wonder how
they ever could have been tolerated; forgetful that they themselves
perhaps tolerate other inequalities under an equally mistaken notion of
expediency, the correction of which would make that which they approve
seem quite as monstrous as what they have at last learnt to condemn. The
entire history of social improvement has been a series of transitions,
by which one custom or institution after another, from being a supposed
primary necessity of social existence, has passed into the rank of an
universally stigmatized injustice and tyranny. So it has been with the
distinctions of slaves and freemen, nobles and serfs, patricians and
plebeians; and so it will be, and in part already is, with the
aristocracies of colour, race, and sex. -- J.S.Mill Chapter V.
Danny
>>
>>http://helix.ksl.com/video/ksl/2/267/26722.ram
>
>
> Pretty wild stuff.
>
> We had a politician here named Sheila Copps. An MP said a line of a song
> about her in a speech at some dinner. She brought it up in the house, and
> he called her "baby" and she vaulted over chairs to try and get at him,
> screaming that she wasn't his baby, she wasn't anybody's baby. His name is
> John Crosbie, he's from Newfoundland, but his accent sounds Irish. Anyway,
> the song has the line "pass the tequila Sheila, and lay down and love me
> again". That tune may have been better suited to the Ozzie Parliament.
> Later Sheila wrote a book called "Nobody's Baby"
>
>
Wonderful. It is amazing just how politicians can turn defeat into
victory. Kind of like a criminal selling the film rights and writing a book.
It amazing what one can find on viral video now days. Here you can be a
spectator to a aircraft crash caused by a bird strike. They don't say
what the outcome was ... pilots seemed cool until the end.