"Everyone Use Muhammed as Your Avatar Day" for message boards

[Kalam]

Well, I think it has a lot to do with it when you bring up us "invading" your countries. Saddam ignited it with Kuwait. He ignored surrender conditions.

That was none of the West's business. Usama bin Ladin offered to destroy the invaders himself with the support of the former Afghan mujahideen and was perfectly capable of doing so. Instead, the United States and the Saudi stooge government thought that American involvement would be a good idea. It wasn't. Instead of destroying Saddam Hussein, then, Usama bin Ladin decided to have planes flown into American skyscrapers, which made the situation worse for everyone.

He committed genocide and mass murder on the great people of Iraq.

Today, coalition forces and the groups that their invasion created are continuing Saddam's tradition of mass murder. Way to go.

Are you saying you approved of him, since you say they were capable of killing him but decided not to?

I don't "approve" of any secularist leaders in the Muslim world, especially not Saddam Hussein, who openly supported the Russian kuffar in their genocide of Chechen Muslims.

I suppose the Iraqi women and Kurds were approving of Saddam, right?

Don't know what you're going on about here...

And the Taliban? Well, in case you didn't notice, Al Qaida was training in Afghanistan. And there was this big thing on September 11th, 2001.

As we've seen, that was largely a result of your choice to involve yourself in the Gulf War. Do you really think that the Taliban were interested in playing host to an international nuisance after the 9/11 attacks? They were perfectly willing to negotiate and engage in diplomacy, but the United States rejected all offers and invaded anyway; I'm convinced that this must have been its intention from the beginning.

CNN.com - U.S. rejects Taliban offer to try bin Laden - October 7, 2001

I wonder why the US was so hesitant to present evidence? What harm would there have been in doing that?

Radical Islam is holding back the Middle East. If that cancer were rooted out, the people there would prosper as well as anyone in any part of the world. But they don't have the power to topple dictators. I will say, however, that our cozy relationship with the Saudis, while toppling other dictators, troubles me.

We have the power to topple anything; a few thousand of us have kept the millions-strong Russian military on its toes for the past two decades. Even if we didn't, Western help is not wanted, especially when that "help" involves an occupation and the imposition of puppet rule.

I will say, however, that our cozy relationship with the Saudis, while toppling other dictators, troubles me.

America only "topples dictators" when those dictators refuse to toe the American line. The United States supports the most oppressive stooge governments in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is only one of them.

 

[California Girl]

Are you under the impression that mocking the prophet (SAWS) only upsets "extremists"?

No, thousands take to the streets, burn embasseys; rant a rave like four year old children when it happens.

The religion is so insecure in it's faith it can not just say this is free speech we shall ignore it because we believe it to be untrue.

Perhaps your cartoons would receive a more tepid response from Muslims if you weren't invading our countries and slaughtering our civilians at the same time.

That argument is laughable, because Muslims have killed people and threatened to kill people who have made 'anti-Islam' movies, written books and drawn cartoons. Please don't pretend it's our fault. That is moronic.

 

[Vel]

Are you under the impression that mocking the prophet (SAWS) only upsets "extremists"?

No, thousands take to the streets, burn embasseys; rant a rave like four year old children when it happens.

The religion is so insecure in it's faith it can not just say this is free speech we shall ignore it because we believe it to be untrue.

Perhaps your cartoons would receive a more tepid response from Muslims if you weren't invading our countries and slaughtering our civilians at the same time.

Off topic..but I find it interesting that you live in the U.S yet refer to the U.S as "YOUR". What countries does the "our" refer to?

 

[Kalam]

No, thousands take to the streets, burn embasseys; rant a rave like four year old children when it happens.

The religion is so insecure in it's faith it can not just say this is free speech we shall ignore it because we believe it to be untrue.

Perhaps your cartoons would receive a more tepid response from Muslims if you weren't invading our countries and slaughtering our civilians at the same time.

Off topic..but I find it interesting that you live in the U.S yet refer to the U.S as "YOUR". What countries does the "our" refer to?

I was speaking in religious terms, not nationalistic terms. "Your" referred to non-Muslims.

 

[bucs90]

Yep. Christians in Africa are murdering folks. And you wonder why we want our way of life exported to the rest of the world?????????????

I sure do, considering the current state of affairs in Africa is a direct result of your way of life. Did you forget that Uganda and Sudan were British colonies until halfway through the 20th century? The LRA is a product of your way of life. Excuse us if we choose to explore alternatives.

Um..........I'm in America. Not England. Remember, we broke off from them cuz they sucked ass.


The current state of affairs in Africa is the result of warlords and dictators who massacre and abuse their people. It's because, unfortunately, no major world power sees any value on helping those in Africa, so they are left to suffer under the evil dictators there.

"Our way of life" includes womens rights, the right to not be beheaded because of your religion or sexual preference, the right to watch cable TV, to get an education, to eat pork, to earn money, to CHOOSE your job and wife, etc, etc. AKA freedom. Whats going on in Africa and under dictator rule in the Middle East and South America is not "our" way of life.

 

[bucs90]

And Kalam, I was referrring to women and Kurds opinions of Saddam because he, you know, used WMD's against them and raped and tortured women. I bet they are now glad we took him out.

And no, Bin Laden and his rag-tag bunch of wannabe soldiers would not have defeated the Iraqi Army that invaded Kuwait. Not even close.

So, I suppose since you say the Iraq-Kuwait invasion was "none of the West's business" you would also have said the Nazi Germany invasion of Austria would've been "none of the West's business" also????

 

[California Girl]

Perhaps your cartoons would receive a more tepid response from Muslims if you weren't invading our countries and slaughtering our civilians at the same time.

Off topic..but I find it interesting that you live in the U.S yet refer to the U.S as "YOUR". What countries does the "our" refer to?

I was speaking in religious terms, not nationalistic terms. "Your" referred to non-Muslims.

I refer to you as a moron. That is not to say that all Muslims are morons, just you.

 

[Kalam]

And Kalam, I was referrring to women and Kurds opinions of Saddam because he, you know, used WMD's against them and raped and tortured women. I bet they are now glad we took him out.

They were probably glad to be rid of them until the occupation got underway. Coalition forces have done all of those things and more to Iraq's civilian population. I suppose the difference is that they don't limit mass murder to Kurds.

And no, Bin Laden and his rag-tag bunch of wannabe soldiers would not have defeated the Iraqi Army that invaded Kuwait. Not even close.

Erm... not to burst your bubble, but al-Qa'idah is anything but "rag-tag" or "wannabe." They don't use those training camps for baking pastries. Underestimating the strength of the enemy is a deadly mistake.

So, I suppose since you say the Iraq-Kuwait invasion was "none of the West's business" you would also have said the Nazi Germany invasion of Austria would've been "none of the West's business" also????

Uh... no. Austria and Germany are part of the West.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Someone here in SC is advocating that on July 4th, everyone on the internet use paint and photoshop to design an image of Muhammed to use for your avatar or id photo on internet message boards. I love it.

you have to learn how to make a thread stand out and make sense...and have that grab ya touch.

I thought this was old...it's about the 4th of July?

 

[skookerasbil]

Someone here in SC is advocating that on July 4th, everyone on the internet use paint and photoshop to design an image of Muhammed to use for your avatar or id photo on internet message boards. I love it.

Im in.............cuold somebody please post up some avatar sized Muhammed phots so I can do some MS Paint gay Photobucket classics???????

 

[FA_Q2]

And Kalam, I was referrring to women and Kurds opinions of Saddam because he, you know, used WMD's against them and raped and tortured women. I bet they are now glad we took him out.

They were probably glad to be rid of them until the occupation got underway. Coalition forces have done all of those things and more to Iraq's civilian population. I suppose the difference is that they don't limit mass murder to Kurds.

There goes any shed of credibility that you may have had. The coalition forces are not over there raping and killing women. We are not needlessly murdering civilians. You have no ida what is going on over there.

An Iraqi once put things in great perspective for me when he said
"Iraqi government takes people. The American government takes people. At least when the American government takes people we know where they are and might see them again. When the Iraqi government takes people they just disappear."

Basically, it meant they did not like the American government in their country however they disliked them less than their own government. The reason the serge worked in Iraq was not that the troops made us a better fighting force. The serge worked because we were able to show the PEOPLE that we could defend them. The minute that there were sufficient troops to go and defend innocent towns from incurtion they started calling us in to do so. They trusted the coalition forces.

And no, Bin Laden and his rag-tag bunch of wannabe soldiers would not have defeated the Iraqi Army that invaded Kuwait. Not even close.

Erm... not to burst your bubble, but al-Qa'idah is anything but "rag-tag" or "wannabe." They don't use those training camps for baking pastries. Underestimating the strength of the enemy is a deadly mistake.

As a fighting force they sure are. As a terrorist organization they are quite deadly but on a real battlefield where they are forced to face the enemy in a firefight they are some of the worst solders around.

So, I suppose since you say the Iraq-Kuwait invasion was "none of the West's business" you would also have said the Nazi Germany invasion of Austria would've been "none of the West's business" also????

Uh... no. Austria and Germany are part of the West.

You dodged the point and it still stands. A stable world is in the interest of all nations and that includes when Muslim nations attack their neighbors. There IS a vested interest in not allowing other nations to conquer smaller neighbors.

 

[Kalam]

There goes any shed of credibility that you may have had.

Rest assured, I'll be crying myself to sleep to night now that my credibility is in poor standing with you.

The coalition forces are not over there raping and killing women. We are not needlessly murdering civilians.

Yes, enough of you are that it has become a major problem. Are coalition forces as a whole participating in these atrocities? No, and I've never made that claim.

BBC NEWS | Americas | US soldier spared death penalty

You have no ida what is going on over there.

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses and has occupied it for nearly a decade. A puppet government was established under the auspices of the invaders and they, along with crusader mercenaries, continue to terrorize the people of Iraq. They're assisted in tormenting civilians by al-Qa'idah bandits, who were able to establish themselves in Iraq thanks to the destabilizing foreign invasion.

An Iraqi once put things in great perspective for me when he said "Iraqi government takes people. The American government takes people. At least when the American government takes people we know where they are and might see them again. When the Iraqi government takes people they just disappear."

An Iraqi put things in perspective for me when he described how his family's safety was constantly threatened by coalition forces and hirabi-bandits. Have no doubt, the United States has operated Abu Ghraib in a way that would have made Saddam proud.

Basically, it meant they did not like the American government in their country however they disliked them less than their own government. The reason the serge worked in Iraq was not that the troops made us a better fighting force. The serge worked because we were able to show the PEOPLE that we could defend them. The minute that there were sufficient troops to go and defend innocent towns from incurtion they started calling us in to do so. They trusted the coalition forces.

Forgive me if I don't buy in to your analysis.

As a fighting force they sure are. As a terrorist organization they are quite deadly but on a real battlefield where they are forced to face the enemy in a firefight they are some of the worst solders around.

If they were told to march in formation and exchange volleys on the battlefield, you'd be correct. When it comes to guerrilla warfare, however, they're experts, and that's the only sort of warfare in which al-Qa'idah participates.

You dodged the point and it still stands. A stable world is in the interest of all nations and that includes when Muslim nations attack their neighbors. There IS a vested interest in not allowing other nations to conquer smaller neighbors.

I've said before that if the US or any country launched a full military campaign wherever "instability" was found, they'd empty their coffers before they left Sub-Saharan Africa. Plus, I don't care what the West believes its interests are or aren't when it comes to the Muslim world. Your invasions and imposition of Western-style rule exacerbate a problem that we're trying to eliminate, namely the artificial and undesirable division of Islam into different nations. Foreign interference stands in the way of unity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Get over it, Kalam. No Caliphate will ever be permitted by the West, for you are subservient to western needs and desires. That won't change, and your struggle only leads to more disaster in your countries.

 

[Kalam]

Get over it, Kalam. No Caliphate will ever be permitted by the West, for you are subservient to western needs and desires. That won't change, and your struggle only leads to more disaster in your countries.

For better or for worse, the West is on the decline. What was once considered the "third world" is now on the rise. Unity is the only way forward, not to mention our divinely-ordained destiny. There's no reason to oppose it.

 

[Againsheila]

Someone here in SC is advocating that on July 4th, everyone on the internet use paint and photoshop to design an image of Muhammed to use for your avatar or id photo on internet message boards. I love it.

Can't I just name sniper kitty "Muhammad" for the day?

 

[Madeline]

Someone here in SC is advocating that on July 4th, everyone on the internet use paint and photoshop to design an image of Muhammed to use for your avatar or id photo on internet message boards. I love it.

Much as I enjoy pissing off the Pompous, can i get some sort of URL to a site explaining WHY? I am at all interested in merely hassling Arabic folks or ridiculing their beliefs.

Why don't we select a date and all come here as Che Guevera? Mexico worries me more'n the Middle East atm, though I admit some days I dunno whether to shit or go blkind, so to speak.

 

[Coyote]

Sorry Kalam, I just cannot tolerate much from anyone supporting those who would massacre over 300 women and children in a middle school in the name of their religion. Which is what happened in Chechnya.

Whoa.

How about a little accuracy for a change? What's going on in Chechnya has little to do with religion. It's a seperatist movement. Like the Basks in Spain for example. Just because they happen to be Muslim doesn't mean those actions are being undertaken in the "name of their religion".

Here in America, we all have the right to practice our religion peacefully, and we also have the right to peacefully mock any religion we want. So far, only one religion has retaliated with death threats to the South Park incident. Still waiting on the Buddhists and Christians, but no luck. Heck, most Christians probably will buy the DVD and laugh along with it, as they know it's just a joke and a political statement. Here in America, we make many statements without bombs or beheadings. Thats so 21st century.

Umh...no. Only some members of one religion has done so. Extremists do not define an entire religion.

As for other religions, certain Christian denominations have been up in arms about religious insults or anti-religious actoins but - like any civilized western country - most go to court or boycott.

 

[stars]

I say we use princess jasmine day: PHOTOS Kim Kardashian in a Princess Jasmine Halloween costume Starcasm.net

 

[Lakhota]

Someone here in SC is advocating that on July 4th, everyone on the internet use paint and photoshop to design an image of Muhammed to use for your avatar or id photo on internet message boards. I love it.

Childish retarded shit from some deranged teabilly NaziCon.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

My my how far bucs has come since this thread was created. Lol