'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown '
Michael Laudahn eOpposition
Afghanistan's Taliban movement warned yesterday it would step up attacks
against soldiers from The Netherlands if an "insulting" anti-Islamic film by
a Dutch parliamentarian is broadcast.
There are around 1,500 Dutch troops in Afghanistan as part of a 40-nation
NATO-led force that is helping the government battle an insurgency led by
the ultra-religious Taliban who were in government between 1996 and 2001.
The film by far-right Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, leader of the
Freedom Party, is "an insult to Islam," a Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah
Mujahid said. "We in Afghanistan will increase our attacks against Dutch
forces if the film is broadcast," he said in a telephone call from an
unknown location.
"We call on the United Nations to step in and stop any such acts which
creates drifts between Islamic world and the rest of the world." The Dutch
government on Wednesday warned Wilders about the dangers of broadcasting the
film entitled "Fitna," an Arabic word used to describe all things that can
test faith and sometimes synonymous with evil.
According to a Dutch daily that has seen early rushes, the film links images
of current bloodletting in Muslim countries to chapters of the Holy Quran.
It ends with an image of the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). Islam forbids any
physical representation of the Prophet. Danish cartoons of the Prophet
prompted days of protests in Afghanistan in early 2006 in which about 11
people were killed.
--
Proudly introducing the free speech concept to german/european politicians &
jurists. >.)
'Freedom of speech - use it or lose it.'
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', "Michael Laudahn
eOpposition" <ch80...@yahoo.com.nf>, wrote
a. Do you know if Geert Wilders speaks English?
b. Do you know what his best contact address is?
FACE
Michael Laudahn eOpposition
"FACE" <AFaceIn...@today.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:hq7gs31kvu5565uvh...@4ax.com...
>
>
> a. Do you know if Geert Wilders speaks English?
>
> b. Do you know what his best contact address is?
>
Sure know. Why?
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', "Michael Laudahn
eOpposition" <ch80...@yahoo.com.nf>, wrote
>
>"FACE" <AFaceIn...@today.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:hq7gs31kvu5565uvh...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>>
>> a. Do you know if Geert Wilders speaks English?
>>
>> b. Do you know what his best contact address is?
>>
>
>
>
>Sure know. Why?
Five seconds after i sent that I answered my own question of "a.".
I can find out "b." easy enough.............
Why? ;-)
I support the airing of this "fitna" clip.
FACE
Doug
news:hq7gs31kvu5565uvh...@4ax.com...
Um, I'd think Geert Wilders really shouldn't be giving out any
"contact" information IF he wants to live and especially if
private ownership of firearms is outlawed in the civilized Nether--lands.
Michael Laudahn eOpposition
>
> Five seconds after i sent that I answered my own question of "a.".
>
> I can find out "b." easy enough.............
>
> Why? ;-)
>
> I support the airing of this "fitna" clip.
>
Just to avoid missunderstandings: I serve myself through publicly available
sources, nothing 'private-confidential' in nature. You can find yourself
what I have found, and easily.
Blue
> Afghanistan's Taliban movement warned yesterday it would step up attacks
> against soldiers from The Netherlands if an "insulting" anti-Islamic film by
> a Dutch parliamentarian is broadcast.
Interesting
Sir John Howard
I'd vote for him.
David Moss
writes...
> Afghanistan's Taliban movement warned yesterday it would step up attacks
> against soldiers from The Netherlands if an "insulting" anti-Islamic film by
> a Dutch parliamentarian is broadcast
Not exactly news. Geert Wilder has been telling everyone he expects an
explosion of violence as a result of his activity for months. Geert is
perpetrating a sophisticated form of terrorism that only works in
western liberal democracies. Freedom of expression is both a strength
and a weakness of liberal societies.
--
DM
Eristic extraordinaire
personal opinion only
The Australian Politics Resource
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com
Doug
news:MPG.2233b4928...@news.bigpond.com...
> In article <1m5ll7....@news.alt.net>, ch80...@yahoo.com.nf
> writes...
>
>> Afghanistan's Taliban movement warned yesterday it would step up attacks
>> against soldiers from The Netherlands if an "insulting" anti-Islamic film
>> by
>> a Dutch parliamentarian is broadcast
>
> Not exactly news. Geert Wilder has been telling everyone he expects an
> explosion of violence as a result of his activity for months. Geert is
> perpetrating a sophisticated form of terrorism that only works in
> western liberal democracies. Freedom of expression is both a strength
> and a weakness of liberal societies.
>
Yes movies critical of Islam are a form of terrorism...NOT.
Tonto. Idiota superior.
David Moss
no...@nowhere.com writes...
> "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2233b4928...@news.bigpond.com...
> > In article <1m5ll7....@news.alt.net>, ch80...@yahoo.com.nf
> > writes...
> >
> >> Afghanistan's Taliban movement warned yesterday it would step up attacks
> >> against soldiers from The Netherlands if an "insulting" anti-Islamic film
> >> by
> >> a Dutch parliamentarian is broadcast
> >
> > Not exactly news. Geert Wilder has been telling everyone he expects an
> > explosion of violence as a result of his activity for months. Geert is
> > perpetrating a sophisticated form of terrorism that only works in
> > western liberal democracies. Freedom of expression is both a strength
> > and a weakness of liberal societies.
> >
>
> Yes movies critical of Islam are a form of terrorism...NOT.
> Tonto. Idiota superior.
To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
engineered a riot.
tvaer...@aol.com
> To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
> fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
> engineered a riot.
Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
fire?
They must be a nice bunch of people.
Svenne
David Moss
@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, tvaer...@aol.com writes...
> On 2 Mar, 01:06, David Moss <q0320...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
> > fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
> > engineered a riot.
>
> Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
> fire?
Almost any group will do this if whipped into a frenzy with sufficient
pre-publicity.
>
> They must be a nice bunch of people.
A propaganda statement Wilders is trying to make through his actions.
Its good to see you neo-Nazis are all on the same page.
Doug
> In article <1ec0b5fb-1b0b-410f-8a75-de87e3a91fb1
> @e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, tvaer...@aol.com writes...
>
>> On 2 Mar, 01:06, David Moss <q0320...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> > To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
>> > fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
>> > engineered a riot.
>>
>> Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
>> fire?
>
> Almost any group will do this if whipped into a frenzy with sufficient
> pre-publicity.
>>
>> They must be a nice bunch of people.
>
> A propaganda statement Wilders is trying to make through his actions.
> Its good to see you neo-Nazis are all on the same page.
>
An Islamonazi accusing others of being neo-Nazis, hypocrisy defined.
tvaer...@aol.com
> > Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
> > fire?
> Almost any group will do this if whipped into a frenzy with sufficient
> pre-publicity.
People will only act like mindless barbarians and murder, loot and
burn over satire, artistic expression and criticism if they have the
perverted mind set and dysfunctional cultural/ideological context for
it. Muzzies have shown they can be just those sort of perverts and
mindless barbarians.
> > They must be a nice bunch of people.
> A propaganda statement Wilders is trying to make through his actions.
It seems Wilders is exactly right about Izlam and the Koran. As Salman
Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Hirsi Ali, Taslima Nasreen and many others
have found out.
Izlam is a very nasty and murderous superstition. It takes guts to
publicly stand up to it.
> Its good to see you neo-Nazis are all on the same page.
You are one confused featherhead, I'm no Nazi and I'm no racist and
you can't demonstrate otherwise.
Svenne
Frank Pittel
: On 2 Mar, 01:06, David Moss <q0320...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
: > To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
: > fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
: > engineered a riot.
: Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
: fire?
If past history is any guide, yes.
: They must be a nice bunch of people.
It's a religion of peace.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', "Doug"
<no...@nowhere.com>, wrote
>"David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
>news:MPG.22348c2ce...@news.bigpond.com...
>> In article <1ec0b5fb-1b0b-410f-8a75-de87e3a91fb1
>> @e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, tvaer...@aol.com writes...
>>
>>> On 2 Mar, 01:06, David Moss <q0320...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> > To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
>>> > fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
>>> > engineered a riot.
>>>
>>> Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
>>> fire?
>>
>> Almost any group will do this if whipped into a frenzy with sufficient
>> pre-publicity.
>>>
>>> They must be a nice bunch of people.
>>
>> A propaganda statement Wilders is trying to make through his actions.
>> Its good to see you neo-Nazis are all on the same page.
>>
>
>An Islamonazi accusing others of being neo-Nazis, hypocrisy defined.
>
>
What's really amazing is that just the other day Svenne was a
'crypto-jew'.
FACE
Petzl
<f...@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:
>In alt.politics.usa.republican tvaer...@aol.com wrote:
>: On 2 Mar, 01:06, David Moss <q0320...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>
>: > To a person who is beaten to death as their shop is looted and set on
>: > fire, the result is the same whether the terrorist planted a bomb or
>: > engineered a riot.
>
>: Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
>: fire?
>
>If past history is any guide, yes.
>
>: They must be a nice bunch of people.
>
>It's a religion of peace.
It's not a religion though it a fully loony tunes CULT
Petzl
--
The Truth About Muhammad: Quran is a FRAUD
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibVhjBcJuA>
tvaer...@aol.com
> What's really amazing is that just the other day Svenne was a
> 'crypto-jew'.
I can't keep up with all the things I'm supposed to be. Somebody the
other day actually accused me of being a "friend of Islamonazis". If
I'm a friend of Islamonazis I'd hate to think of what the enemies of
Islamonazis must be like.
Anyway, to various people I'm a racist, a Jew, an oriental, a Nazi, a
friend of Islamonazis, a druggie and god knows what else.
Actually I'm an ageing hippie who works hard for a living and hates
intolerance, hypocrisy, racism and fascism and loves a good pipefull
of pot now and again. Which I think I shall now have before I go to
bed.
Goodnight.
Svenne
David Moss
6fcf9f...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, tvaer...@aol.com
writes...
> People will only act like mindless barbarians and murder, loot and
> burn over satire, artistic expression and criticism if they have the
> perverted mind set and dysfunctional cultural/ideological context for
> it.
Wrong. All people do it in the right circumstances.
In The Strategy of Conflict (1960: 90) Schelling wrote, "It is usually
the essence of mob formation that the potential members have to know not
only where and when to meet but just when to act so that they act in
concert. Overt leadership solves the problem; but leadership can often
be identified and eliminated by the authority trying to prevent mob
action. In this case the mob's problem is to act in unison without overt
leadership, to find some common signal that makes everyone confident
that, if he acts on it, he will not be acting alone. The role of
``incidents'' can thus be seen as a coordinating role; it is a
substitute for overt leadership and communication. Without something
like an incident, it may be difficult to get action at all, since
immunity requires that all know when to act together."
Wilders hopes his "film" will provide such an incident and precipitate
mob violence.
David Moss
AFaceIn...@today.net writes...
> What's really amazing is that just the other day Svenne was a
> 'crypto-jew'.
I don't believe I have ever called anyone a "crypto-Jew".
Care to quote me doing it?
David Moss
f...@warlock.deepthought.com writes...
> : Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
> : fire?
>
> If past history is any guide, yes.
Are neo-Nazis going to stereotype an entire minority group with the
behaviour of a violent few?
If past history is any guide, yes.
Are the slow thinkers within society going to fall for it?
If past history is any guide, yes.
--
David Moss
pet...@gmail.com writes...
> It's not a religion though it a fully loony tunes CULT
Projecting again Petzl?
How's your loony cult going nowadays?
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au>, wrote
>In article <3b0ks3pv20t2ivnlq...@4ax.com>,
>AFaceIn...@today.net writes...
>
>> What's really amazing is that just the other day Svenne was a
>> 'crypto-jew'.
>
>I don't believe I have ever called anyone a "crypto-Jew".
>Care to quote me doing it?
I never said that you were the "sayer" of that . I have always heard
that paranoia strikes deep....or is it that you're so vain that you
think everything said is about you.......
FACE
Svenne
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>> People will only act like mindless barbarians and murder, loot and
>> burn over satire, artistic expression and criticism if they have the
>> perverted mind set and dysfunctional cultural/ideological context for
>> it.
>Wrong. All people do it in the right circumstances.
What are the right circumstances?
Being physically attacked?
Having a cartoon drawn? A film made? Not having enough deference
shown?
>In The Strategy of Conflict (1960: 90) Schelling wrote, "It is usually
>the essence of mob formation that the potential members have to know not
>only where and when to meet but just when to act so that they act in
>concert. Overt leadership solves the problem; but leadership can often
>be identified and eliminated by the authority trying to prevent mob
>action. In this case the mob's problem is to act in unison without overt
>leadership, to find some common signal that makes everyone confident
>that, if he acts on it, he will not be acting alone. The role of
>``incidents'' can thus be seen as a coordinating role; it is a
>substitute for overt leadership and communication. Without something
>like an incident, it may be difficult to get action at all, since
>immunity requires that all know when to act together."
Like going apeshit over a drawing.
>Wilders hopes his "film" will provide such an incident and precipitate
>mob violence.
Or a film?
The sort of violent mob who would do a thing like that over something
so small are very dangerous indeed.
Svenne
Doug
Are crypto-jews and crypto-facists all from the planet Crypton?
Doug
news:67fe6f44-1b39-425b...@e60g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 2 Mar, 03:24, FACE <AFaceInTheCr...@today.net> wrote:
>
>> What's really amazing is that just the other day Svenne was a
>> 'crypto-jew'.
>
> I can't keep up with all the things I'm supposed to be. Somebody the
> other day actually accused me of being a "friend of Islamonazis". If
> I'm a friend of Islamonazis I'd hate to think of what the enemies of
> Islamonazis must be like.
>
That was me, I'm sorry about the "friend of the Islamonazis"
insult.
Doug
> In article <9m0ks3da6a6in78v5...@4ax.com>,
> pet...@gmail.com writes...
>
>> It's not a religion though it a fully loony tunes CULT
>
> Projecting again Petzl?
> How's your loony cult going nowadays?
>
Well they haven't murdered any Christians or Jews or burned down
any churches or synagogues so they must be doing pretty good.
Doug
> In article <qqKdnUhzd8PGnVfa...@giganews.com>,
> f...@warlock.deepthought.com writes...
>
>> : Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
>> : fire?
>>
>> If past history is any guide, yes.
>
> Are neo-Nazis going to stereotype an entire minority group with the
> behaviour of a violent few?
>
Are Islamonazis going to stereotype everyone who isn't mudslusm?
Are they going to kill and oppress people who doesn't subscribe to
their religion of hatred and intolerance?
> If past history is any guide, yes.
>
Yes, of course.
FACE
Apparently. I'm tying to find out which one has General Zod on their
side. :-)
FACE
Svenne
>> I can't keep up with all the things I'm supposed to be. Somebody the
>> other day actually accused me of being a "friend of Islamonazis". If
>> I'm a friend of Islamonazis I'd hate to think of what the enemies of
>> Islamonazis must be like.
>That was me, I'm sorry about the "friend of the Islamonazis"
>insult.
No problem, I know where it came from.
I was attacking Michael Laudahn and it might have looked like I was
attacking those who warn of and criticise Izlam.
Laudahn is a special case. He is a Nazi racist and is as vile and
dangerous as any mad Mullah.
I don't like Izlam, and I don't like Nazis, either. They are as bad as
each other.
Svenne
David Moss
tvaer...@aol.com writes...
> >In The Strategy of Conflict (1960: 90) Schelling wrote, "It is usually
> >the essence of mob formation that the potential members have to know not
> >only where and when to meet but just when to act so that they act in
> >concert. Overt leadership solves the problem; but leadership can often
> >be identified and eliminated by the authority trying to prevent mob
> >action. In this case the mob's problem is to act in unison without overt
> >leadership, to find some common signal that makes everyone confident
> >that, if he acts on it, he will not be acting alone. The role of
> >``incidents'' can thus be seen as a coordinating role; it is a
> >substitute for overt leadership and communication. Without something
> >like an incident, it may be difficult to get action at all, since
> >immunity requires that all know when to act together."
>
> Like going apeshit over a drawing.
"Understanding Riots", by David D. Haddock and Daniel D. Polsby, tells
us: "Certain kinds of high-profile events have become traditional
'starting signals' for civil disorders. In fact, incidents can become
signals simply because they have been signals before."
Wilders seems to be a competent and well educated social engineer. He
would certainly be aware of the factors affecting riotous behaviour.
It is clear Wilders is intent on performing an act for political
purposes that he believes will result in death, injury and destruction
of property.
Thats terrorism.
David Moss
no...@nowhere.com writes...
> > Projecting again Petzl?
> > How's your loony cult going nowadays?
> >
>
> Well they haven't murdered any Christians or Jews or burned down
> any churches or synagogues so they must be doing pretty good.
Not necessarily. We have a Christian cult here in Australia who's
leaders publicly called for the destruction of Mosques, Synagogues and
brothels. Said leaders were also convicted of religious vilification,
but the matter is under appeal. The organisation publicly supported the
Howard government in the 2007 election, but it was defeated in a
landslide. God doesn't appear to be on their side.
David Moss
no...@nowhere.com writes...
> "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2234b49ab...@news.bigpond.com...
> > In article <qqKdnUhzd8PGnVfa...@giganews.com>,
> > f...@warlock.deepthought.com writes...
> >
> >> : Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them on
> >> : fire?
> >>
> >> If past history is any guide, yes.
> >
> > Are neo-Nazis going to stereotype an entire minority group with the
> > behaviour of a violent few?
> >
>
> Are Islamonazis going to stereotype everyone who isn't mudslusm?
> Are they going to kill and oppress people who doesn't subscribe to
> their religion of hatred and intolerance?
>
> > If past history is any guide, yes.
> >
>
> Yes, of course.
I'm glad we finally agree about the tactics Nazis of all persuasions
adopt. Now if only I could convince you to stop helping them...
tvaer...@aol.com
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>"Understanding Riots", by David D. Haddock and Daniel D. Polsby, tells
>us: "Certain kinds of high-profile events have become traditional
>'starting signals' for civil disorders. In fact, incidents can become
>signals simply because they have been signals before."
You can't have burning, murder and mayhem without somebody primed to
do it.
You have to have a group of murderous lunatics first.
If there is any burning, murder and mayhem it will be Muzzies doing it
and they will bear the responsibility for their own actions.
>Wilders seems to be a competent and well educated social engineer. He
>would certainly be aware of the factors affecting riotous behaviour.
He knows what Muzzies are, that is why he is giving a valid and much
needed warning of what Izlam is like.
>It is clear Wilders is intent on performing an act for political
>purposes that he believes will result in death, injury and destruction
>of property.
Of course he must be aware of what might happen because of his film.
Izlam is a violent and intolerant ideology, and despite the threat of
Muzlimz acting according to their mind set and beliefs, that warning
needs to be given.
>Thats terrorism.
Wilders will be excercising free speech within the accepted parameters
of European liberal democracy. Any acts of terrorism will be committed
by Muzlimz because they are incapable of acting within the accepted
parameters of European liberal democracy.
Wilders is right. Muzlimz are uncivilised, primitive, intolerant and
violent barbarians.
Free speech should not be compromised because of the threat of
violence from these barbarians.
Svenne
David Moss
tvaer...@aol.com writes...
> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 22:24:04 GMT, David Moss
> <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>
> >"Understanding Riots", by David D. Haddock and Daniel D. Polsby, tells
> >us: "Certain kinds of high-profile events have become traditional
> >'starting signals' for civil disorders. In fact, incidents can become
> >signals simply because they have been signals before."
>
> You can't have burning, murder and mayhem without somebody primed to
> do it.
>
> You have to have a group of murderous lunatics first.
No, you don't. First you have a self identifying subgroup of the
population. Their state of mind is irrelevant.
Next you need someone to prime them get them ready for violence.
Then you need a trigger event, something that makes each of them believe
they will not be acting alone.
Then you have a potentially murderous mob ready to go on the rampage.
> If there is any burning, murder and mayhem it will be Muzzies doing it
> and they will bear the responsibility for their own actions.
The slower thinkers and the ideologues will think so, but the truth is
that Wilders is socially engineering a terrorist attack. He knows it, I
know it, the Dutch authorities know it. You do too if you have read the
thread with an open mind.
> >Wilders seems to be a competent and well educated social engineer. He
> >would certainly be aware of the factors affecting riotous behaviour.
>
> He knows what Muzzies are, that is why he is giving a valid and much
> needed warning of what Izlam is like.
So you agree he is performing an act he believes will result in death,
injury and property damage?
Do you believe he should face consequences for this deliberate
premeditated act if he proves to be correct?
> >It is clear Wilders is intent on performing an act for political
> >purposes that he believes will result in death, injury and destruction
> >of property.
>
> Of course he must be aware of what might happen because of his film.
> Izlam is a violent and intolerant ideology, and despite the threat of
> Muzlimz acting according to their mind set and beliefs, that warning
> needs to be given.
>
> >Thats terrorism.
>
> Wilders will be excercising free speech within the accepted parameters
> of European liberal democracy. Any acts of terrorism will be committed
> by Muzlimz because they are incapable of acting within the accepted
> parameters of European liberal democracy.
>
> Wilders is right. Muzlimz are uncivilised, primitive, intolerant and
> violent barbarians.
>
> Free speech should not be compromised because of the threat of
> violence from these barbarians.
Free speech can be a weapon of terror.
Currently we restrict things like ammonium nitrate fertiliser when we
once took their use for granted. If people like Wilders start abusing
the right to free speech, we can expect that to be regulated too.
And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
Peter Webb
I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of international
relations.
David Moss
webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
> I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of international
> relations.
Are you suggesting someone should shoot Wilders before he acts?
Peter Webb
> In article <47cb71a6$0$24086$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>
>> I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of international
>> relations.
>
> Are you suggesting someone should shoot Wilders before he acts?
>
> --
No, I am suggesting that appeasement will work as poorly at stopping the
spread of militant fundamentalist Islam as it did at stopping the spread of
Nazism.
Sunny
|
| Free speech can be a weapon of terror.
| Currently we restrict things like ammonium nitrate fertiliser when we
| once took their use for granted. If people like Wilders start abusing
| the right to free speech, we can expect that to be regulated too.
|
| And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
Yep, the radical retarded Muslim ratbags, that hate the "West" and still
live in the dark ages.
Svenne
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>> You can't have burning, murder and mayhem without somebody primed to
>> do it.
>> You have to have a group of murderous lunatics first.
>No, you don't. First you have a self identifying subgroup of the
>population. Their state of mind is irrelevant.
To commit murder and mayhem they have to have a murderous state of
mind and an ideological-cultural context that allows, even condones,
brutal violence as a means of silencing criticism.
Izlam fulfills those conditions.
In this situation it is not free speech that must make concessions, it
is Izlam that must be confronted, even if there is a cost.
Free speech and liberal democracy do not come free of charge. And
those who hold those values in regard should be prepared to defend
them and exercise them and not cave in when faced with murderous
barbarians.
>Next you need someone to prime them get them ready for violence.
The Koran, the Hadith and the example of Muhammed fulfill that
condition well.
>Then you need a trigger event, something that makes each of them believe
>they will not be acting alone.
Free speech exercised well within the parameters of liberal democracy
are sufficient to set Muzlims off in a murderous rage.
The problem lies with Muzlims who cannot operate within the context of
liberal democracy and it is Izlam that will have to make concessions
and change, not liberal democracy.
>Then you have a potentially murderous mob ready to go on the rampage.
The murderous mob must not be caved in to. The stakes are too high.
The right to exercise free speech must be defended against murderous
barbarians, even if there is a cost.
>> If there is any burning, murder and mayhem it will be Muzzies doing it
>> and they will bear the responsibility for their own actions.
>The slower thinkers and the ideologues will think so, but the truth is
>that Wilders is socially engineering a terrorist attack. He knows it, I
>know it, the Dutch authorities know it. You do too if you have read the
>thread with an open mind.
Wilders is making a film critical of an ancient book which makes a
valid point in need of discussion. The fact that there are dangerous
lunatics who will use violence to try to stop this necessary exercise
of free speech is no reason to stay silent. It is even more reason to
speak up.
>> He knows what Muzzies are, that is why he is giving a valid and much
>> needed warning of what Izlam is like.
>So you agree he is performing an act he believes will result in death,
>injury and property damage?
He knows what Muzzies are capable of, which is why he is saying what
he says. It needs to be said, even in the face of mindless violence
from the intolerant enemies of free speech.
In fact, in the face of mindless violence from the intolerant enemies
of free speech, it becomes even more necessary to say it.
>Do you believe he should face consequences for this deliberate
>premeditated act if he proves to be correct?
There are many brave people who have faced the consequences of
exercising free speech in the face of homicidal lunatics. Salman
Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Hirsi Ali and Taslima Nasreen to name a few.
>> Free speech should not be compromised because of the threat of
>> violence from these barbarians.
>Free speech can be a weapon of terror.
>Currently we restrict things like ammonium nitrate fertiliser when we
>once took their use for granted. If people like Wilders start abusing
>the right to free speech, we can expect that to be regulated too.
Surrendering to an insane, intolerant mob and curbing free speech in
order to try to appease them is the worst mistake Western democracies
could make.
Izlam will never be appeased, each concession will lead to more until
there is nothing left to give. They must be confronted, even if there
is a price to pay. Especially if there is a price to pay.
>And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
Izlam and Muzlimz.
Svenne
Frank Pittel
: "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
It's clear that d. moss is one of the islam cultist spreading the cult. He
doesn't want to stop it's spread.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
David Moss
webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
What appeasement are you talking about?
If you believe we should continue our military occupation of Muslim
countries because Muslims attack us for occupying Muslim countries, its
hardly appeasement. More like realising we made a stupid mistake in the
past and correcting the situation.
Anyway, the S11 attacks were intended to get the US troops out of Saudi
Arabia. The US troops are out of Saudi Arabia as a direct result.
Currently Islamic terrorists attack our interests because they want us
to get our troops out of Iraq. The majority of our own people want that
too. Is it also appeasement to give your own people what they want?
Or is this 'appeasement" more to do with nervousness about the relative
success of Islam and Christianity in modern recruiting? Are you afraid
Muslims will gain greater political power through the ballot box and
change things to suit themselves? Do you fear democracy?
What appeasement are you talking about?
David Moss
womba...@gmail.com writes...
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.
David Moss
tvaer...@aol.com writes...
Is that the traditional Nazi "end justifies the means" argument?
> >> If there is any burning, murder and mayhem it will be Muzzies doing it
> >> and they will bear the responsibility for their own actions.
>
> >The slower thinkers and the ideologues will think so, but the truth is
> >that Wilders is socially engineering a terrorist attack. He knows it, I
> >know it, the Dutch authorities know it. You do too if you have read the
> >thread with an open mind.
>
> Wilders is making a film critical of an ancient book which makes a
> valid point in need of discussion. The fact that there are dangerous
> lunatics who will use violence to try to stop this necessary exercise
> of free speech is no reason to stay silent. It is even more reason to
> speak up.
I am pleased you agree Wilders is performing a deliberate premeditated
act he believes will result in death, injury and property damage for
political purposes. An act of terrorism in other words.
Do you believe terrorism is a legitimate political tool?
> >> He knows what Muzzies are, that is why he is giving a valid and much
> >> needed warning of what Izlam is like.
>
> >So you agree he is performing an act he believes will result in death,
> >injury and property damage?
>
> He knows what Muzzies are capable of, which is why he is saying what
> he says. It needs to be said, even in the face of mindless violence
> from the intolerant enemies of free speech.
>
> In fact, in the face of mindless violence from the intolerant enemies
> of free speech, it becomes even more necessary to say it.
Wilders knows what people are capable of, and Muslims are just people.
he is socially engineering a situation he believes will result in
violence, death, injury and property damage for political purposes. He
is in the process of planning and carrying out a terrorist act. Do you
believe terrorism is a legitimate political tool?
> >Do you believe he should face consequences for this deliberate
> >premeditated act if he proves to be correct?
>
> There are many brave people who have faced the consequences of
> exercising free speech in the face of homicidal lunatics. Salman
> Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Hirsi Ali and Taslima Nasreen to name a few.
There are many brave people who have blown themselves up in the presence
of their enemies too. An act of terrorism is an act of terrorism whether
you use semtex or semantics to accomplish the carnage.
> >> Free speech should not be compromised because of the threat of
> >> violence from these barbarians.
>
> >Free speech can be a weapon of terror.
> >Currently we restrict things like ammonium nitrate fertiliser when we
> >once took their use for granted. If people like Wilders start abusing
> >the right to free speech, we can expect that to be regulated too.
>
> Surrendering to an insane, intolerant mob and curbing free speech in
> order to try to appease them is the worst mistake Western democracies
> could make.
Creating an insane, intolerant mob for political purposes and then
claiming drastic action is needed to control it is a very Nazi thing to
do.
> Izlam will never be appeased, each concession will lead to more until
> there is nothing left to give. They must be confronted, even if there
> is a price to pay. Especially if there is a price to pay.
Why? What, precisely, is the difference between Islam in this respect
and Christianity? Should we confront both?
>
> >And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
>
> Izlam and Muzlimz.
I was thinking more along the lines of the individual who deliberately
engineered a situation he believed would result in death, injury and
property damage for political purposes. The terrorist.
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au>, wrote
>In article <47cb934e$0$8437$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
Are you really this thick?
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au>, wrote
>Is that the traditional Nazi "end justifies the means" argument?
Why do you think that is unique to naziism?
Peter Webb
> In article <47cb934e$0$8437$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>
>>
>> "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.22362b0bb...@news.bigpond.com...
>> > In article <47cb71a6$0$24086$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
>> > webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>> >
>> >> I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of
>> >> international
>> >> relations.
>> >
>> > Are you suggesting someone should shoot Wilders before he acts?
>> >
>> > --
>>
>> No, I am suggesting that appeasement will work as poorly at stopping the
>> spread of militant fundamentalist Islam as it did at stopping the spread
>> of
>> Nazism.
>
> What appeasement are you talking about?
>
> If you believe we should continue our military occupation of Muslim
> countries because Muslims attack us for occupying Muslim countries, its
> hardly appeasement. More like realising we made a stupid mistake in the
> past and correcting the situation.
>
No, were discussing Wilders film, and whether the West should try and
appease Muslim sensibilities. Nothing to do with occupied Muslim
territories.
> Anyway, the S11 attacks were intended to get the US troops out of Saudi
> Arabia. The US troops are out of Saudi Arabia as a direct result.
> Currently Islamic terrorists attack our interests because they want us
> to get our troops out of Iraq. The majority of our own people want that
> too. Is it also appeasement to give your own people what they want?
>
No, appeasement is surrending our right to free speech because some Muslim
countries don't like it.
> Or is this 'appeasement" more to do with nervousness about the relative
> success of Islam and Christianity in modern recruiting? Are you afraid
> Muslims will gain greater political power through the ballot box and
> change things to suit themselves? Do you fear democracy?
>
No, the appeasement would be surrendering our right to free speech because
some Muslim countries don't like it. Haven't you been following this thread?
> What appeasement are you talking about?
>
Appeasing the Muslims by surrendering our right to free speech. I thought
that was obvious from context; sorry if it wasn't.
David Moss
AFaceIn...@today.net writes...
Nice insult, but how about some substance?
David Moss
AFaceIn...@today.net writes...
I don't. The end justifies the means is used to justify killing people
by many groups. The Nazis provided an example on a global scale and the
neo-Nazis pine for the good old days and want to do it again.
In the 1930s Jews were an acceptable target. Today if Nazis target Jews
it gives their game away too early. So in 2008 they target Muslims.
FACE
Glad you liked it. ;-)
The appeasement is happening daily in concessions to the muslim
immigrants. There have been similar appeasements -- I am thinking
particularly of Hindus being exempted from helmet laws (their turbans)
and Sikhs being allowed to carry Kirpans in public. But I think that
the appeasements of muslims goes far beyond those things such that we in
the West are not only accommodating their culture but changing ours so
as not to offend them. Piggy banks, covered faces on driving licenses,
etc...........
FACE
FACE
'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au>, wrote
>In article <gi0ps354irolpk14g...@4ax.com>,
>AFaceIn...@today.net writes...
>
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:29:20 GMT, in uk.politics.misc, in thread Re:
>> 'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
>> <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au>, wrote
>>
>> >Is that the traditional Nazi "end justifies the means" argument?
>>
>> Why do you think that is unique to naziism?
>
>I don't. The end justifies the means is used to justify killing people
>by many groups. The Nazis provided an example on a global scale and the
>neo-Nazis pine for the good old days and want to do it again.
>
>In the 1930s Jews were an acceptable target. Today if Nazis target Jews
>it gives their game away too early. So in 2008 they target Muslims.
I disagree with you on that last part.
I think that the neo-nazis wish to be in league with the muslims. As i
often say, and say for the reason that i have seen some neo-nazis
behaviour, "sometimes when you call up monsters, it is hard to send them
back'. About the only exceptions i can think of is those that hate
both jews and muslims........
I think that islamists and nazis have a lot in common besides their
(irrational, in my opinion) jew hatred............
FACE
Max Muir
> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:29:20 GMT, in uk.politics.misc, in thread Re:
> 'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', David Moss
>
> >Is that the traditional Nazi "end justifies the means" argument?
>
> Why do you think that is unique to naziism?
It's not the traditional Nazi argument; it's the traditional Communist
argument,
made in March 1933.
I think it was used by Walter Durranty writing in THE NEW YORK TIMES.
Apparently Durranty was a shill for the USSR and said something along
the
lines of not being able to make an omlette without breaking a few eggs
when finally cornered about the millions murdered in the Lower Volga
basin
and The Ukraine by communist organised famines in the early 1930.
The omlette was the communist state, and the eggs were its victims.
http://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/russians_hungry_not_starving.htm
Max
FACE
Re: 'Taliban warn of attacks if Dutch film is shown ', Max Muir
<orb_at_ct...@fastmail.co.uk>, wrote
Thanks, Max.
FACE
Roger Dewhurst
> In article <47cb71a6$0$24086$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>
>> I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of international
>> relations.
>
> Are you suggesting someone should shoot Wilders before he acts?
There is no connection. Webb merely suggested that you are an appeaser
of the ilk of Chamberlain. That is fair comment but on the mild side.
R
>
Roger Dewhurst
> In article <47cb934e$0$8437$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>
>> "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.22362b0bb...@news.bigpond.com...
>>> In article <47cb71a6$0$24086$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
>>> webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
>>>
>>>> I guess you come from the "Neville Chamberlain" school of international
>>>> relations.
>>> Are you suggesting someone should shoot Wilders before he acts?
>>>
>>> --
>> No, I am suggesting that appeasement will work as poorly at stopping the
>> spread of militant fundamentalist Islam as it did at stopping the spread of
>> Nazism.
>
> What appeasement are you talking about?
He is talking about appeasement of the muslims in Britain and many
countries in Europe. The military actions in the Middle East are not an
issue here. Elsewhere perhaps, but thios is about appeasement in Europe.
R
>
Roger Dewhurst
Thicker, apparently. One with no sense of honour or loyalty.
R
>
Roger Dewhurst
You come across as a politically correct gutless wonder with no sense of
loyalty to the country which provides you with the space and opportunity
to shit on those who protect you.
R
>
Roger Dewhurst
There are three possible options for Britain and Europe:
1. An end to appeasement with the probability of some bloodshed soon.
2. Appeasement now and much more bloodshed later.
3. Total capitulation to islam.
You appear to want to settle for 3. Others would settle for 1. That
would be my preferred choice if living in Britain or Europe. I am glad
that I am not.
R
>
Doug
news:hj6ms3t62eb6uh7qc...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 13:03:24 -0800, "Doug" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>> I can't keep up with all the things I'm supposed to be. Somebody the
>>> other day actually accused me of being a "friend of Islamonazis". If
>>> I'm a friend of Islamonazis I'd hate to think of what the enemies of
>>> Islamonazis must be like.
>
>>That was me, I'm sorry about the "friend of the Islamonazis"
>>insult.
>
> No problem, I know where it came from.
>
> I was attacking Michael Laudahn and it might have looked like I was
> attacking those who warn of and criticise Izlam.
>
> Laudahn is a special case. He is a Nazi racist and is as vile and
> dangerous as any mad Mullah.
>
> I don't like Izlam, and I don't like Nazis, either. They are as bad as
> each other.
>
> Svenne
I agree. ALthough at this point in the temporal dimension there are
FAR more Islamonazis than there ever were Nazis and they have
far more power (political, monetary etc.)
Doug
> In article <cv6ls3pm5q44stc0c...@4ax.com>,
> tvaer...@aol.com writes...
>
>> >In The Strategy of Conflict (1960: 90) Schelling wrote, "It is usually
>> >the essence of mob formation that the potential members have to know not
>> >only where and when to meet but just when to act so that they act in
>> >concert. Overt leadership solves the problem; but leadership can often
>> >be identified and eliminated by the authority trying to prevent mob
>> >action. In this case the mob's problem is to act in unison without overt
>> >leadership, to find some common signal that makes everyone confident
>> >that, if he acts on it, he will not be acting alone. The role of
>> >``incidents'' can thus be seen as a coordinating role; it is a
>> >substitute for overt leadership and communication. Without something
>> >like an incident, it may be difficult to get action at all, since
>> >immunity requires that all know when to act together."
>>
>> Like going apeshit over a drawing.
>
> "Understanding Riots", by David D. Haddock and Daniel D. Polsby, tells
> us: "Certain kinds of high-profile events have become traditional
> 'starting signals' for civil disorders. In fact, incidents can become
> signals simply because they have been signals before."
>
> would certainly be aware of the factors affecting riotous behaviour.
>
> of property.
>
> Thats terrorism.
>
Yes a lie a day makes the mullahs' day!
Doug
> In article <0FEyj.59731$Pv2....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
> no...@nowhere.com writes...
>
>> > Projecting again Petzl?
>> > How's your loony cult going nowadays?
>> >
>>
>> Well they haven't murdered any Christians or Jews or burned down
>> any churches or synagogues so they must be doing pretty good.
>
> Not necessarily. We have a Christian cult here in Australia who's
> leaders publicly called for the destruction of Mosques, Synagogues and
> brothels. Said leaders were also convicted of religious vilification,
> but the matter is under appeal. The organisation publicly supported the
> Howard government in the 2007 election, but it was defeated in a
> landslide. God doesn't appear to be on their side.
>
Gee, I wonder why? COuld it be because Mudslums have been slaughtering
Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddists since the formation of their
religion of hatred, intolerance and violence? It's not a bad idea. Of
course,
Islamonazi collaborators such as yourself will also have to be dealt with.
Doug
> In article <bGEyj.59732$Pv2....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net>,
> no...@nowhere.com writes...>> news:MPG.2234b49ab...@news.bigpond.com...
>> > In article <qqKdnUhzd8PGnVfa...@giganews.com>,
>> > f...@warlock.deepthought.com writes...
>> >
>> >> : Are Muzzies going to beat people to death, loot shops and set them
>> >> on
>> >> : fire?
>> >>
>> >> If past history is any guide, yes.
>> >
>> > Are neo-Nazis going to stereotype an entire minority group with the
>> > behaviour of a violent few?
>> >
>>
>> Are Islamonazis going to stereotype everyone who isn't mudslusm?
>> Are they going to kill and oppress people who doesn't subscribe to
>> their religion of hatred and intolerance?
>>
>> > If past history is any guide, yes.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, of course.
>
> I'm glad we finally agree about the tactics Nazis of all persuasions
> adopt. Now if only I could convince you to stop helping them...
>
I don't like ANY Nazis -- including Islamonazis.
Ördög
> .....in the temporal dimension.......
I prefer to stay on this plane of existence. You apparently not.
> Islamonazis .....
Yeah. And goblins and sorcerers and witches and other creatures
created by wild human imagination.....
> Nazis .....
Yeah. Sadly these were and still are real.
That brings me to the question why the fuck do you support them?
Is it because they have promised to commit genocide on those people
whose race and culture you don't happen to fancy to the order of 1.3
billion human beings.
This is really a gigantic number. Well beyond the scope of the wild
dreams of Hitler.
Yeah, Nazis have a preference for ever increasing megalomania.
So why are you a scum collaborator???
Ördög (The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and
Usenet)
Either the neocons go or civilisation does!
xposting stopped, fup applied
Gregory Shearman
> No, appeasement is surrending our right to free speech because some Muslim
> countries don't like it.
What is this "right to free speech" you are babbling about?
There's no such thing in Australia. You are deluding yourself that you
have "freedoms" when in fact you have none.
--
Regards,
Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power
Svenne
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>In article <hb9ns31a31ooaitcf...@4ax.com>,
>tvaer...@aol.com writes...
>> The murderous mob must not be caved in to. The stakes are too high.
>> The right to exercise free speech must be defended against murderous
>> barbarians, even if there is a cost.
>Is that the traditional Nazi "end justifies the means" argument?
No.
It is the "some things are worth defending even if there is a price to
pay" argument.
>> Wilders is making a film critical of an ancient book which makes a
>> valid point in need of discussion. The fact that there are dangerous
>> lunatics who will use violence to try to stop this necessary exercise
>> of free speech is no reason to stay silent. It is even more reason to
>> speak up.
>I am pleased you agree Wilders is performing a deliberate premeditated
>act he believes will result in death, injury and property damage for
>political purposes. An act of terrorism in other words.
Wilders is exercising his right of free speech within the accepted
parameters of liberal democracy. If there is a violent response to
Wilders legitimate exercise of free speech, the fault lies with those
who violate the priniciples of free speech and Liberal democracy. It
is Muzlims who will be launching a terrorist assault on free speech.
>Do you believe terrorism is a legitimate political tool?
That is rather meaningless. It depends on perspective.
One mans terrorism is another mans liberation struggle.
>> >> He knows what Muzzies are, that is why he is giving a valid and much
>> >> needed warning of what Izlam is like.
>>
>> >So you agree he is performing an act he believes will result in death,
>> >injury and property damage?
>>
>> He knows what Muzzies are capable of, which is why he is saying what
>> he says. It needs to be said, even in the face of mindless violence
>> from the intolerant enemies of free speech.
>>
>> In fact, in the face of mindless violence from the intolerant enemies
>> of free speech, it becomes even more necessary to say it.
>Wilders knows what people are capable of, and Muslims are just people.
>he is socially engineering a situation he believes will result in
>violence, death, injury and property damage for political purposes. He
>is in the process of planning and carrying out a terrorist act. Do you
>believe terrorism is a legitimate political tool?
Criticising Islam and the Koran is not a terrorist act. It is the
exercise of free speech.
Wilders is carrying out perfectly legitimate free speech. If there is
a violent response to that, then it is the enemies of free speech who
will be responsible.
>There are many brave people who have blown themselves up in the presence
>of their enemies too. An act of terrorism is an act of terrorism whether
>you use semtex or semantics to accomplish the carnage.
No. You are wrong.
Legitimate argument should be met with argument, semantics should be
met within the realm of semantics. If anyone responds to the
expression of legitimate ideas and legitimate discussion with
violence, as Muzlims do, it is they who are terrorists.
>Creating an insane, intolerant mob for political purposes and then
>claiming drastic action is needed to control it is a very Nazi thing to
>do.
Wilders is not creating an insane, intolerant mob, it already exists.
It is called Izlam and it uses violence and terror to attack and
silence legitimate free speech.
>> >And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
>> Izlam and Muzlimz.
>I was thinking more along the lines of the individual who deliberately
>engineered a situation he believed would result in death, injury and
>property damage for political purposes. The terrorist.
Wilders has not engineered the situation in which violent maniacs
threaten mindless violence in response to the legitimate exercise of
free speech. That mob of violent maniacs has existed for a long time
and they have been threatening, as well as actually using, violence to
try to silence the legitimate exercise of free speech for a long time.
Muzlimz are responsible for the violence. They are the terrorists.
Svenne
Svenne
<dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote:
>There are three possible options for Britain and Europe:
>1. An end to appeasement with the probability of some bloodshed soon.
>2. Appeasement now and much more bloodshed later.
>3. Total capitulation to islam.
>You appear to want to settle for 3. Others would settle for 1. That
>would be my preferred choice if living in Britain or Europe. I am glad
>that I am not.
I'm beginning to suspect that Mr. Moss is actually a Muzlim and really
wants option 3.
It would explain a lot.
The other possibility that would explain his arguments is that he is
totally thick.
Svenne
Ördög
can.politics, alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.politics.immigration:
> David Moss wrote:
> > I was thinking more along the lines of the individual who deliberately
> > engineered a situation he believed would result in death, injury and
> > property damage for political purposes. The terrorist.
A fair assessment if I may say so!
Having said that, the fact remains that one's terrorist might be an
other one's heroic champion. Like Hitler was for the average Nazi. Or
on a smaller scale McVeigh was for the average US extremist, gun
maniac nutcase.
> There are three possible options for Britain and Europe:
>
> 1. An end to appeasement with the probability of some bloodshed soon.
> 2. Appeasement now and much more bloodshed later.
> 3. Total capitulation to islam.
>
> You appear to want to settle for 3.
Care to cite? Can you cite?
> Others would settle for 1.
Sane people would opt for option 4 (not listed by you for obvious
reasons):
Restrain the idiotic extremists from all quarters. And never bow to
extremist demands.
Educate, re-educate those who need it and treat the mentally unstable
like Heli Michi in a closed asylum!
If needed than restrain them as long as necessary.
Integrate the different cultural groups, but not with discrimination
and social neglect.
No matter how long it might take.
Review immigration policies and adjust them as needed disregarding the
demands of big business for slave labour.
And definitely NO short sighted guest worker programs!
>....my preferred choice if living in Britain or Europe. I am glad
> that I am not.
So! You are just another irritated mad neocon Yank who can't forgive
those "nasty" Europeans for not following the God given commands of
shrub leading them blindly into a stupid and useless war.
Hey. Why don't you just fuck off back to Yankland. Europe is none of
your bloody business. Get lost!
Ördög (The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and
Usenet)
Either the neocons go or civilisation does!
Moronic crossposting terminated, fup as required
Ördög
> Yes a lie a day makes the mullahs' day!
Or that of a Nazi collaborator! Or that of a rabid Zionist extremist
shill.
There are quite a lot of unexplored possibilities, ain't that so Dough-
nut?
Ördög
history:
> "David Moss" explained:
> > We have a Christian cult here in Australia who's
> > leaders publicly called for the destruction of Mosques, Synagogues and
> > brothels. Said leaders were also convicted of religious vilification,
> > but the matter is under appeal. The organisation publicly supported the
> > Howard government in the 2007 election, but it was defeated in a
> > landslide. God doesn't appear to be on their side.
> Gee, I wonder why?
So you think religious fundy extremism of one kind is quite
justifiable why others are not!
Why?
Can you say "hypocrite"?
> COuld it be because Mudslums ...
What are "Mudslums"??? The original inhabitants on the far away planet
where you live???
> have been slaughtering
> Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddists since the formation of their
> religion of hatred, intolerance and violence?
Hmmm. While those loving Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Sikhs have
behaved like little saints since the formation of their religions of
pure love, tolerance and and peaceful holy cooperation. LOL!
Have you ever learned history?
Sorry! Silly question. You are a Yank, of course you have not!
It's not a bad idea.
> Of course, Islamonazi .......
...do not exist.
However Nazi ....
> ....collaborators such as yourself will also have to be dealt with.
Make no mistake, unlike David, I am no liberal. My tolerance have
tighter limits than David's has.
The political left does not give quarter to Nazis and their henchmen.
Where does that leave you?
Peter Webb
Not quite. He is one of the left-wing psuedo-intellectuals for whom it is
fashionable to be particularly anti-US and its allies (read Israel) and
therefore find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to support
Islamic fundamentalism.
Ördög
> I don't like ANY Nazis --
And I don't like those who cooperate with Nazis or help them in any
way, for whatever purpose.
I detest those who promote the methods and goals of Nazis no matter
how they try to justify it.
I despise those who hijack elements of Nazi ideology to promote their
personal little hate campaigns.
Was I clear enough, Dough-nut boy?
Ördög
> I'm beginning to suspect that Mr. Moss is actually a Muzlim
So anyone who does not agree with you, you call a Muslim?
How are you than different from Helicopter Nazi Michi who calls
everyone who does not agree with him a Jew???
Is their any logic behind this madness?
> It would explain a lot.
It would not explain shit! David is a moderate liberal, a humanist and
a logical human being.
And almost a Christian.
> The other possibility that would explain his arguments is that he is
> totally thick.
Your arguments are very weak and based more on personal emotions then
reason.
What are you going to do about it?
Understand this:
You do not have to abandon reason, logic and your innate human
compassion to criticise Muslim extremism.
You also don't have to ignore failings in other groups of humans at
the same time.
Why do you find forming a balanced view over the problems facing
contemporary humanty so difficult???
Svenne
<odbo...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>Svenne is leaving the domain of reason:
Hardly.
>> I'm beginning to suspect that Mr. Moss is actually a Muzlim
>So anyone who does not agree with you, you call a Muslim?
No, I have never said that. I would regard anyone who does as a
paranoid conspiracy theorist.
>How are you than different from Helicopter Nazi Michi who calls
>everyone who does not agree with him a Jew???
>Is their any logic behind this madness?
A crazy paranoid Nazi like Laudmouth regards everyone who disagrees
with him as a "Jew" or an "Oriental" largely because he imagines that
mind sets and belief systems are racially or genetically determined.
This is bonkers pseudo science of the worst sort. Miki Laudmouth is as
mad as a bat.
I speculated Mr. Moss might be a Muzlim because it would set his
idiotic reasoning in a context where it could be at least be
understood why he is talking such obvious tripe.
>> It would explain a lot.
>It would not explain shit! David is a moderate liberal, a humanist and
>a logical human being.
The other explanation I considered which would explain Moss's wierd
reasoning is that he is thick. Given what you have just said, it seems
that this indeed is the correct explanation.
>> The other possibility that would explain his arguments is that he is
>> totally thick.
>Your arguments are very weak and based more on personal emotions then
>reason.
>What are you going to do about it?
Continue as I always have done for the simple reason that what I have
to say is relevant, well considered and quite true.
>Understand this:
>You do not have to abandon reason, logic and your innate human
>compassion to criticise Muslim extremism.
I don't just criticise Muzlim extremism, it's the whole perverse
belief system I take issue with.
Izlam is an insane pile of dangerous crap. That which is called Muzlim
extremism is just the worst part of something that is pretty much
beyond the pale in any version.
>You also don't have to ignore failings in other groups of humans at
>the same time.
>Why do you find forming a balanced view over the problems facing
>contemporary humanty so difficult???
I do not accept the unnaceptable.
Svenne
Doug
> In article <Z2Nyj.21715$421....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
> womba...@gmail.com writes...>> news:MPG.22360cc5d...@news.bigpond.com...
>> |
>> | Free speech can be a weapon of terror.
>> | Currently we restrict things like ammonium nitrate fertiliser when we
>> | once took their use for granted. If people like Wilders start abusing
>> | the right to free speech, we can expect that to be regulated too.
>> |
>> | And we will know exactly who to blame when it happens.
>>
>> live in the dark ages.
>
> You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.
>
You should know Davie.
Doug
Great post Svenne. Kudos.
David Moss
> > Nice insult, but how about some substance?
>
> You come across as a politically correct gutless wonder with no sense of
> loyalty to the country which provides you with the space and opportunity
> to shit on those who protect you.
Really? Think before you toss around casual insults next time.
I've signed on with the Australian Defence Forces twice, the second time
specifically because Australia was about to intervene in East Timor.
What have you done for your country Roger?
David Moss
tvaer...@aol.com writes...
> I don't just criticise Muzlim extremism, it's the whole perverse
> belief system I take issue with.
This is where you and I differ.
Islam and Christianity actually share Judaism as a common root. By
targeting the WHOLE perverse belief system you will eventually start
persecuting Jews. Again. Chances are the madness will eventually target
Christians too.
Your spelling is a bit of a giveaway Svenne. Muzlim? Kristian?
Speaking of spelling, according to Wikipedia:
---------------
Svenne is a derogatory or humorous Swedish slang term mainly used by
immigrants in Sweden in reference to ethnic Swedes. It originates from a
nickname for Sven. Although the term might be considered inevitably
derogatory by some ethnic Swedes, it has also been adopted as a term of
self description, suggesting a middle class background in an exclusively
ethnic Swedish neighborhood.
In Swedish, the word has obtained two different meanings, which
sometimes merge. One is referring to ethnicity, merely indicating that
the individual referred is an ethnic Swede, and the other indicating
that the individual referred is boring, shy and habitually conservative.
Because the latter actually is a common viewpoint in Sweden, both
different meanings are sometimes used by ethnic Swedes, often
ironically.
For expats, this word has become one of national identity and pride, and
is commonly found on auto license plates.
-----------------
Bit of a nationalist Svenne?
How do you feel about socialism?
Do they go together in your philosophy?
David Moss
webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au writes...
I'd have thought you had followed me in aus.politics for long enough to
know where I fit on the political spectrum Peter. Slightly right of
centre, just where I have always been.
It is the nature of liberals like me to treat people as individuals. The
flipside is we expect individuals to make their own way in the world.
Hardly something a genuine left winger would welcome.
Svenne
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>In article <4gmqs39ngr8l2chks...@4ax.com>,
>tvaer...@aol.com writes...
>
>> I don't just criticise Muzlim extremism, it's the whole perverse
>> belief system I take issue with.
>
>This is where you and I differ.
>Islam and Christianity actually share Judaism as a common root. By
>targeting the WHOLE perverse belief system you will eventually start
>persecuting Jews. Again. Chances are the madness will eventually target
>Christians too.
There you go again talking of persecution. Where have I ever even
spoken about, never mind recommended, persecution?
You're hurling baseless accusations around again and at the same time
demonstrating that you haven't a clue about what is being discussed.
>Your spelling is a bit of a giveaway Svenne. Muzlim? Kristian?
>Speaking of spelling, according to Wikipedia:
>
>---------------
>Svenne is a derogatory or humorous Swedish slang term mainly used by
>immigrants in Sweden in reference to ethnic Swedes. It originates from a
>nickname for Sven. Although the term might be considered inevitably
>derogatory by some ethnic Swedes, it has also been adopted as a term of
>self description, suggesting a middle class background in an exclusively
>ethnic Swedish neighborhood.
>
>In Swedish, the word has obtained two different meanings, which
>sometimes merge. One is referring to ethnicity, merely indicating that
>the individual referred is an ethnic Swede, and the other indicating
>that the individual referred is boring, shy and habitually conservative.
>Because the latter actually is a common viewpoint in Sweden, both
>different meanings are sometimes used by ethnic Swedes, often
>ironically.
>
>For expats, this word has become one of national identity and pride, and
>is commonly found on auto license plates.
>Bit of a nationalist Svenne?
>How do you feel about socialism?
>Do they go together in your philosophy?
You haven't got a clue about my philosophy. You haven't got a clue
about very much, actually.
Svenne
Doug
> In article <fqiete$cdm$4...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, dewh...@wave.co.nz writes...
>
>> > Nice insult, but how about some substance?
>>
>> You come across as a politically correct gutless wonder with no sense of
>> loyalty to the country which provides you with the space and opportunity
>> to shit on those who protect you.
>
> Really? Think before you toss around casual insults next time.
> I've signed on with the Australian Defence Forces twice, the second time
> specifically because Australia was about to intervene in East Timor.
>
> What have you done for your country Roger?
>
Gee, just because you were patriotic at one time in the distant past
doesn't mean you're NOT a traitor now. Furthermore, how do we know
you weren't merely using your position in the RAAF to sell secrets to
Islamonazi states all the while pretending to be a patriot?
Doug
A unique liberal who wants to suspend free speech to prevent any
and all criticism of Islam. A liberal Islamonazi sympathizer/collaborator/
apologist.
Petzl
<q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote:
>Islam and Christianity actually share Judaism as a common root. By
>targeting the WHOLE perverse belief system you will eventually start
>persecuting Jews. Again. Chances are the madness will eventually target
>Christians too.
Rubbish. Islam is a violent hate cult not a religion
There is absolutely no way the Islamic Moon-god worship has anything
to do with the Bible
Nabonidus ruled Babylon for 17 years until its fall in 539 BC.
Although he was a neo-revisionist he still adhered to the
time-honoured sacred rites of venerating celestial bodies as gods.
Archaeologists have discovered a stone-carved relief depicting
Nabonidus praying to the sun, Venus, and the moon-god, Allah.
The moon-god is depicted in artefacts as a crescent moon and later
cultures included the addition of a star inside the crescent.
Everywhere in the ancient world, archaeologists discover symbols of
the crescent moon on steles, clay tablets, pottery items, amulets,
seal impressions and cylinder seals themselves, official measuring
weights, wall paintings, and jewellery. In ancient Babylon, the stele
of Ur-Nammu has the moon-god crescent at the top of the list of gods
as it was the most important.
Ur (ancient Babylon) has several examples of moon-god worship. More
portable objects have been removed from their sites and are held by
the British Museum in the Babylonian Room. Many small statues have
been excavated and identified by inscriptions found on them as
‘daughters’ of the moon-god. Archaeologists working in modern Iraq
have discovered and recorded thousands of inscriptions on walls and
rocks indicating that Allah, the moon-god was regarded as the ruler of
the gods at the time of Nabonidus’ reign. Archaeological evidence is
overwhelming that the Allah of Islam is directly descended from the
ancient moon-god deity represented in rock and picture by a crescent
moon.
A cuneiform clay cylinder, discovered at the ancient temple of
Shamash, records the efforts of King Nabonidus in reconstructing the
moon-god temples in opposition to the existing gods.
The doom of King Nabonidus, his Empire, and the end of Babylon the
Great was an inevitable certainty given his negligent disregard for
matters of royal necessity. His personal diversion into archaeology
may have felled his empire but his efforts have left no lasting
scientific benefits for students of archaeology today. The fateful end
of Nabonidus remains mistily unknown. Some speculate that he perished
as a prisoner in the year after he lost his kingdom.
Petzl
--
The Truth About Muhammad: Quran is a FRAUD
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibVhjBcJuA>
David Moss
writes...
> "David Moss" <q032...@mail.connect.usq.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2239075b9...@news.bigpond.com...
> > In article <fqiete$cdm$4...@lust.ihug.co.nz>, dewh...@wave.co.nz writes...
> >
> >> > Nice insult, but how about some substance?
> >>
> >> You come across as a politically correct gutless wonder with no sense of
> >> loyalty to the country which provides you with the space and opportunity
> >> to shit on those who protect you.
> >
> > Really? Think before you toss around casual insults next time.
> > I've signed on with the Australian Defence Forces twice, the second time
> > specifically because Australia was about to intervene in East Timor.
> >
> > What have you done for your country Roger?
> >
>
> Gee, just because you were patriotic at one time in the distant past
> doesn't mean you're NOT a traitor now. Furthermore, how do we know
> you weren't merely using your position in the RAAF to sell secrets to
> Islamonazi states all the while pretending to be a patriot?
Too easy Dougie. I signed a bit of paper that allows Australian security
services to interview my friends, tap my phone, open my mail and log my
web activity whenever they want to. Thats part of the price you pay for
serving as I did.
What have you done for your country Dougie?
David Moss
writes...
> A unique liberal who wants to suspend free speech to prevent any
> and all criticism of Islam. A liberal Islamonazi sympathizer/collaborator/
> apologist.
Actually I think Wilders should be allowed to say whatever he chooses.
The flip side is that he should be held responsible for the foreseeablee
consequences of his action, should he decide to say things he knows will
likely result in death, injury and damage to property.
Personal freedom and personal responsibility are two sides of the same
coin. Take away either and you have nothing.
Peter Webb
> Actually I think Wilders should be allowed to say whatever he chooses.
> The flip side is that he should be held responsible for the foreseeablee
> consequences of his action, should he decide to say things he knows will
> likely result in death, injury and damage to property.
>
Let me get this straight. You propose that the Dutch Government allows the
film, but issues a statement that any rioting, damage and death done by
Muslims (and others?) as a result of the film will be the responsibility of
Wilders, and they will not be personally liable? Presumably this includes
Muslims (and others?) who haven't even seen the film?
I can see some problems with that. For example, why wouldn't the Muslims
just burn down the cinemas, or try and kill people who try to see the movie?
Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
Ördög
> Let me get this straight. You propose that the Dutch Government allows the
> film, but issues a statement that any rioting, damage and death done by
> Muslims (and others?) as a result of the film will be the responsibility of
> Wilders, and they will not be personally liable? Presumably this includes
> Muslims (and others?) who haven't even seen the film?
>
> I can see some problems with that. For example, why wouldn't the Muslims
> just burn down the cinemas, or try and kill people who try to see the movie?
> Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
Sanity.
---
BTW
1 What do you think how many Muslims will actually riot?
2 What will those Muslim do who don't?
3 What makes you think that the intended target audience of this film
is the Muslim population?
4 Why do you think that the resulting violence will only come from
Muslim quarters?
5 Would you object if this extremist propaganda film producer is made
answerable for the riots and violence cased by rampaging racist and
skinheads???
6 What do you think those friendly patriotic rioting racists and
skinheads will do after they have successfully attacked the Muslims
(and anyone else with "Middle Eastern appearance").
& What will hold them back to do the same to perceived Jewish people,
their shops, places of worship, cultural centers, cemeteries and their
businesses?
---
I hold Wilders personally responsible for any attacks against the
moderate Jewish and Muslim communities of Europe by this ramping right
wing extremism (be it Nazi or fundy Muslim) as a result of his hate
filled propaganda.
Ördög (Your scary shadow that says "Boo" in the dark)
77
You're my bitch, ordog, and don't you fucking forget it you snivelling
piece of shit.
Peter Webb
"Ördög" <tz81...@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:6e7eb97e-f0cb-4441...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Peter Webb contemplated:
> Let me get this straight. You propose that the Dutch Government allows the
> film, but issues a statement that any rioting, damage and death done by
> Muslims (and others?) as a result of the film will be the responsibility
> of
> Wilders, and they will not be personally liable? Presumably this includes
> Muslims (and others?) who haven't even seen the film?
>
> I can see some problems with that. For example, why wouldn't the Muslims
> just burn down the cinemas, or try and kill people who try to see the
> movie?
> Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
Sanity.
*** Amusing. Didn't seem to stop them from killing people because they come
from the same country as did a newspaper that published cartoons of the
Prophet.
---
BTW
1 What do you think how many Muslims will actually riot?
*** The question is incoherent. If you are asking how many Muslims will
riot, I have no idea.
2 What will those Muslim do who don't?
*** Stay at home and watch TV?
3 What makes you think that the intended target audience of this film
is the Muslim population?
*** I don't know that it is. I do know that the Muslims are the ones who are
trying to stop the film, and threatened rioting if it is shown.
4 Why do you think that the resulting violence will only come from
Muslim quarters?
*** I don't, which is why I explicitly said "Muslims (and others)" who riot.
5 Would you object if this extremist propaganda film producer is made
answerable for the riots and violence cased by rampaging racist and
skinheads???
*** Obviously. Skinheads have no more right to riot than Muslims.
6 What do you think those friendly patriotic rioting racists and
skinheads will do after they have successfully attacked the Muslims
(and anyone else with "Middle Eastern appearance").
*** Presumably the same thing as the rioting Muslims will do - either wait
to be bailed out, or go home and watch TV.
& What will hold them back to do the same to perceived Jewish people,
their shops, places of worship, cultural centers, cemeteries and their
businesses?
---
*** Well, its against the law. Same as currently. I can't see why a film
which supposedly offends Muslims would cause skinheads to attack Jews, but
in any event I can't see any reason that a skinhead attacking a Jew should
be treated any differently to a Muslim attacking (say) a Christian.
I hold Wilders personally responsible for any attacks against the
moderate Jewish and Muslim communities of Europe by this ramping right
wing extremism (be it Nazi or fundy Muslim) as a result of his hate
filled propaganda.
*** Does Wilders know this? You better tell him.
*** Any other questions?
Ördög
> Ördög stated:
> > I hold Wilders personally responsible for any attacks against the
> > moderate Jewish and Muslim communities of Europe by this ramping right
> > wing extremism (be it Nazi or fundy Muslim) as a result of his hate
> > filled propaganda.
> You're my bitch, ordog, and don't you fucking forget it you snivelling
> piece of shit.
Thanks for the roses.
Warms my heart to know that the likes of you have such a kind regard
for me and my ideas.
What a pity that this is as far as your success goes.........
Ördög (The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and
Usenet)
Either the neocons go or civilisation does!
PS: Your helpless rage is duly noted! LOL
Suitable fup allocated
Screaming Skull
army is going to go to war because a fucking nobody named Geert with a cute
(but gay looking) hairdo, from a country that is meaningless has made a 20
minute movie about how Moslems are shitty people.
Who the fuck cares? Except for unemployed assholes who immigrated from
Germany to Switzerland so they can post rubbish and not work instead?
What's the deal?
Seriously, if the fucker doesn't like them. Why doesn't he have the guts to
take them on face-to-face?
Ördög
> "Ördög" pointed out:
> > Peter Webb contemplated:
> > > Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
> >Sanity.
> *** Amusing.
I am glad you find sane people amusing.
> Didn't seem to stop them from killing people because they come
> from the same country as did a newspaper that published cartoons of the
> Prophet.
The latest I've heard Amsterdam still stands well after the idiotic
"cartoon" affair
was consigned into the waste bin of history.
BTW congratulations to moving the goal posts. This seems to be your
debating speciality.
> >1 What do you think how many Muslims will actually riot?
> If you are asking how many Muslims will
> riot, I have no idea.
I am glad you admit that much.
> > 2 What will those Muslim do who don't?
> *** Stay at home and watch TV?
Precisely my point, too
> > 3 What makes you think that the intended target audience of this film
> > is the Muslim population?
> *** I don't know that it is. I do know that the Muslims are the ones who are
> trying to stop the film, and threatened rioting if it is shown.
I can tell you right now that most of those Muslims who will bother to
riot won't have seen the film.
But this film will be watched in all white racist, and neo-Nazi
circles as if it was the penultimate truth about 1.3 billion human
beings. After all that is the intention of the film producer.
> > I hold Wilders personally responsible for any attacks against the
> > moderate Jewish and Muslim communities of Europe by this ramping right
> > wing extremism (be it Nazi or fundy Muslim) as a result of his hate
> > filled propaganda.
> *** Does Wilders know this? You better tell him.
Do you think I care what a rightwing extremist politician knows about
those who oppose him?
The main thing is that people do oppose him, and successfully so.
Well.
You seem to be ignorant of the fact that a Jew does not have to be an
extremist Zionist to stand up for the interest of the Jewish people.
If you weren't you would not be blind to covert Nazi propaganda.
Ördög (The friendly Hungarian Devil in service of aus.politics and
Usenet)
Screaming Skull
> "Peter Webb" is ignorant:
> > "Ördög" pointed out:
> > > Peter Webb contemplated:
> > > > Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
>
> > >Sanity.
>
> > *** Amusing.
>
> I am glad you find sane people amusing.
>
Nazis,also known as Krauts in WW2, we with Canadian flags are welcome.
I wonder if "we with Canadian flags" were some of the home-bred, ice hockey
playing Muslims that I know, would they be welcome? Or considered "wogs"?
Hmmm?
Peter Webb
"Peter Webb" is ignorant:
> "Ördög" pointed out:
> > Peter Webb contemplated:
> > > Indeed, what stops them burning down the whole of Amsterdam?
> >Sanity.
> *** Amusing.
I am glad you find sane people amusing.
> Didn't seem to stop them from killing people because they come
> from the same country as did a newspaper that published cartoons of the
> Prophet.
The latest I've heard Amsterdam still stands well after the idiotic
"cartoon" affair
was consigned into the waste bin of history.
BTW congratulations to moving the goal posts. This seems to be your
debating speciality.
> >1 What do you think how many Muslims will actually riot?
> If you are asking how many Muslims will
> riot, I have no idea.
I am glad you admit that much.
===========================
In fairness, it was a very stupid question. Obviously nobody knows.
> > 2 What will those Muslim do who don't?
> *** Stay at home and watch TV?
Precisely my point, too
======================
I actually have no idea of what point you are trying to make. All you have
done is ask some questions.
> > 3 What makes you think that the intended target audience of this film
> > is the Muslim population?
> *** I don't know that it is. I do know that the Muslims are the ones who
> are
> trying to stop the film, and threatened rioting if it is shown.
I can tell you right now that most of those Muslims who will bother to
riot won't have seen the film.
==========================
OK
But this film will be watched in all white racist, and neo-Nazi
circles as if it was the penultimate truth about 1.3 billion human
beings. After all that is the intention of the film producer.
=============================
But for that to be true, why would he want a cinema release? I am sure
neo-Nazis have DVD players. He obviously wants wider distribution than just
neo-Nazis. But so what? If you can't show why the film should be banned
because it may cause Muslim riots, I can't see you will have any more luck
showing why it should be banned because it may cause skinhead riots.
> > I hold Wilders personally responsible for any attacks against the
> > moderate Jewish and Muslim communities of Europe by this ramping right
> > wing extremism (be it Nazi or fundy Muslim) as a result of his hate
> > filled propaganda.
> *** Does Wilders know this? You better tell him.
Do you think I care what a rightwing extremist politician knows about
those who oppose him?
========================
If you are going to make him personally responsible, shouldn't you tell him
first? It only seems fair.
You seem to be ignorant of the fact that a Jew does not have to be an
extremist Zionist to stand up for the interest of the Jewish people.
If you weren't you would not be blind to covert Nazi propaganda.
=======================
Ohh goodie! Some incoherent off-topic anti-semitic babbling at the end! The
perfect way to finish your post.
Ördög
> "Ördög" argued:
> You seem to be ignorant of the fact that a Jew does not have to be an
> extremist Zionist to stand up for the interest of the Jewish people.
> If you weren't you would not be blind to covert Nazi propaganda.
>
> =======================
> Ohh goodie! Some incoherent off-topic anti-semitic babbling at the end! The
> perfect way to finish your post.
Oh goodie! Your lack of comprehension could not be better
demonstrated.
Antisemitic! ROTFLOL.
Are you really that stupid or are you just that fanatic?
Whatever the case might be, it is high time to get the idea through
your thick skull that not all Jews are Zionists.
The moderate ones definitely aren't.
Its late and your mental capabilities start to show fatigue!
I think it is better that you leave.
Doug
Of course, we have no proof that any of this is true. It could be merely
part of your Napoleonic fantasies/delusions.
> What have you done for your country Dougie?
What the fuck business is that of yours?
Doug
news:47cffbfb$0$26343$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Davie has some unique methods to quell all criticism of Islamofacism. The
above is just his latest twisted attempt to do so. It's interesting how his
legal
solution would exonerate the mudslums of all culpability for their actions
though.
I wonder how much his Islamonazi pals are paying him to facilitate their
takeover of Aus?
David Moss
no...@nowhere.com writes...
It could, but as I am one of the few people who has consistently used my
real name for over a decade on aus.politics, and had a national profile
at one stage, its not very likely.
Then again you could look at:
http://sunnybar.dynip.com/pub/aus.politics/styr.jpg
and try to work out why I'm carrying an austyr. (hint: fully automatic
weapons like the austyr are totally banned for civilians in Australia)
> > What have you done for your country Dougie?
>
> What the fuck business is that of yours?
Sounds like you are ashamed of what you have done for your country
Dougie. Or perhaps not done.
On the other hand I'm proud of what I've done for my country, and I'm
not ashamed to talk about my contributions.
Quite a contrast, don't you think?
Sunny
| Then again you could look at:
| http://sunnybar.dynip.com/pub/aus.politics/styr.jpg
| and try to work out why I'm carrying an austyr. (hint: fully automatic
| weapons like the austyr are totally banned for civilians in Australia)
Are you for real?
David Moss
womba...@gmail.com writes...
Last time I checked. I'll check again right now, just for you Sunny.
Yep, still real.
Last time I checked the steyr could be set on full auto too. Its been a
while since I fired one, but I'm pretty sure thats still the case.
Last time I checked fully automatic weapons were banned for civilian use
in Australia. Its been that way since federation. Some people confuse
semi-auto weapons with fully auto, but I know YOU don't make silly
mistakes like that.
I also know you have done your bit for the country, unlike Dougie the
armchair patriot.
So, whats the deal with "are you for real"?