Islamofacist have no honor!

Even more nauseating than a group of people who think it's okay to slaughter the women and children of their enemy, and who view their own women and children as chattel....people who can't bring themselves to condemn them, because we have accidentally killed women and children, the women and children the aforementioned pieces of shit hide behind DELIBERATELY, HOPING we will kill them.
 
Blah, blah, blah, blah.... a school with kids got blown up - and ?....and
..... how many U.S. citizens were killed in car wrecks last year?
.....how many kids died of diseases worldwide last year
.....how many kids died of starvation worldwide last year
....how many people have died in North Korean prisons
....how many familes were wiped out in Nazi concentration camps and ovens ?
....how many non-combatants in Iraq and Afghan have we wiped out from "collateral damage" ?

Who cares if Islamofacists have or dont have honor - whats more important is that we go home and stop spending more tax payer dollars on an already oil-rich country
 
In fact, if one read the Jewish history from reliable sources - it shows that the Jewish elites always have the bad habit of bitting the same hands which feed them. Here are some of the examples.

Zionist Crimes
 
They probably "saw a rocket being fired from the school", eh, GHook?

Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Israel shells UN school in Gaza


Wow...just......WOW.

You have been able to illustrate in one short post, why Islam will implode:

Instead of condemning violence, EVEN AMONG FELLOW MUSLIMS, the first thought is to compare it with a completely unrelated event.

Why don't you try finding an Al Jazeera report about how the killing of Iraqi Children was condemned in Saudi Arabia?
 
Last edited:
In fact, if one read the Jewish history from reliable sources - it shows that the Jewish elites always have the bad habit of bitting the same hands which feed them. Here are some of the examples.

Zionist Crimes

Amazing how a few Jews wield such power, eh? How is it living with mental illness?
 
Too bad the Pallies elected a terrorist regime that has been firing thousands of rockets into Israel that provoked war with Israel, right?

Never fuck with the Zionist infidel, homeboy.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GtGSvyc1Sk]YouTube - Sanakhodo ????? ??????? ????[/ame]
 
You have been able to illustrate in one short post, why Islam will implode:

Instead of condemning violence, EVEN AMONG FELLOW MUSLIMS, the first thought is to compare it with a completely unrelated event.

Why don't you try finding an Al Jazeera report about how the killing of Iraqi Children was condemned in Saudi Arabia?

I see you've noticed post of mine from a few weeks ago. Not too quick on the trigger, are you, Tex? :eusa_eh:

I believe it was manifold who pointed out that GHook could care less about what happens to Muslim children and decided to exploit their deaths as "proof" of his belief that Muslims have a propensity for unnecessary violence. Had someone else posted the story, my response would have been different.

Why don't you try finding an Al Jazeera report about how the killing of Iraqi Children was condemned in Saudi Arabia?
I don't get it. You'll have to dumb this one down for me.
 
You have been able to illustrate in one short post, why Islam will implode:

Instead of condemning violence, EVEN AMONG FELLOW MUSLIMS, the first thought is to compare it with a completely unrelated event.

Why don't you try finding an Al Jazeera report about how the killing of Iraqi Children was condemned in Saudi Arabia?

I see you've noticed post of mine from a few weeks ago. Not too quick on the trigger, are you, Tex? :eusa_eh:

I believe it was manifold who pointed out that GHook could care less about what happens to Muslim children and decided to exploit their deaths as "proof" of his belief that Muslims have a propensity for unnecessary violence. Had someone else posted the story, my response would have been different.

OK ???.....I suppose, if you must justify ignoring the obvious, this is as good excuse as any :eusa_whistle:

Why don't you try finding an Al Jazeera report about how the killing of Iraqi Children was condemned in Saudi Arabia?
I don't get it. You'll have to dumb this one down for me.


You posted a linky from Al Jazeera decribing, and denouncing Israeli atrocities, which, regardless of your hyperbolic reasoning, has nothing to do with the thread.

However, what WOULD be topical, is an Al Jazeera Article about Saudi Condemnation of the attack about which is the topic of the thread.

My guess is, that just as you cannot focus on the subject because SO-AND-SO said WHATEVER about SO-AND-SO, neither Al Jazeera or Saudis can focus on the fundamental issues that weaken Islam: Muslim v. Muslim violence that caused the killing of these Iraqi Children.

But, if you find the article, you prove me wrong.
 
Unfortunately, arab terrorists use schools as their bases, knowing that Israelis have more morality than they do.
 
OK ???.....I suppose, if you must justify ignoring the obvious, this is as good excuse as any :eusa_whistle:
I feel like I've made my position on causing civilian deaths clear.

You posted a linky from Al Jazeera decribing, and denouncing Israeli atrocities, which, regardless of your hyperbolic reasoning, has nothing to do with the thread.

However, what WOULD be topical, is an Al Jazeera Article about Saudi Condemnation of the attack about which is the topic of the thread.
This specific attack? Since the invasion, incidents such as this have been a daily occurrence in Iraq. Scholars would quickly run out of paper if they issued a fatwa in response to every Iraqi bombing. To humor you, though, I entered "Saudi cleric" into Al Jazeera's search function and found a few articles that you might like, old though they may be:

Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric urges al-Qaida surrender
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi leader urges scholars to rethink
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric renounces violence
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric urges end to radicalism

My guess is, that just as you cannot focus on the subject because SO-AND-SO said WHATEVER about SO-AND-SO, neither Al Jazeera or Saudis can focus on the fundamental issues that weaken Islam: Muslim v. Muslim violence that caused the killing of these Iraqi Children.

But, if you find the article, you prove me wrong.
Why wouldn't they? Al Jazeera has no religious affiliation and Wahhabis, who have Saudi Arabia in a chokehold, seem to love nothing more than labeling other Muslims "apostates."
 
OK ???.....I suppose, if you must justify ignoring the obvious, this is as good excuse as any :eusa_whistle:
I feel like I've made my position on causing civilian deaths clear.

You posted a linky from Al Jazeera decribing, and denouncing Israeli atrocities, which, regardless of your hyperbolic reasoning, has nothing to do with the thread.

However, what WOULD be topical, is an Al Jazeera Article about Saudi Condemnation of the attack about which is the topic of the thread.
This specific attack? Since the invasion, incidents such as this have been a daily occurrence in Iraq. Scholars would quickly run out of paper if they issued a fatwa in response to every Iraqi bombing. To humor you, though, I entered "Saudi cleric" into Al Jazeera's search function and found a few articles that you might like, old though they may be:

Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric urges al-Qaida surrender
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi leader urges scholars to rethink
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric renounces violence
Al Jazeera English - Archive - Saudi cleric urges end to radicalism

My guess is, that just as you cannot focus on the subject because SO-AND-SO said WHATEVER about SO-AND-SO, neither Al Jazeera or Saudis can focus on the fundamental issues that weaken Islam: Muslim v. Muslim violence that caused the killing of these Iraqi Children.

But, if you find the article, you prove me wrong.
Why wouldn't they? Al Jazeera has no religious affiliation and Wahhabis, who have Saudi Arabia in a chokehold, seem to love nothing more than labeling other Muslims "apostates."

Well, I appreciate your effort. Most of the articles are a fairly general finger waving attempt to insure the Saudis have covered their asses with the West

You know, I'm not some wild-eyed, anti-Muslim, itching to turn a desert into glass....but it is discouraging that Al Jazeera couldn't find the time during their busy schedule of reporting Israeli Atrocities to report on the deaths of Iraqi Muslims at the hands of Other Iraqi Muslims, despite their having "no religious affiliation.":rolleyes:
 
Well, I appreciate your effort. Most of the articles are a fairly general finger waving attempt to insure the Saudis have covered their asses with the West

You know, I'm not some wild-eyed, anti-Muslim, itching to turn a desert into glass....but it is discouraging that Al Jazeera couldn't find the time during their busy schedule of reporting Israeli Atrocities to report on the deaths of Iraqi Muslims at the hands of Other Iraqi Muslims, despite their having "no religious affiliation.":rolleyes:

The true irony of our exchange here is that the OP's article comes from a news outlet owned by Prince Salman bin 'Abd al-Aziz al-Saud. As for Al Jazeera, I managed to find these two articles featured in their "Middle East" section without much difficulty:

Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Deadly blasts hit Iraqi city
Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Iraq politician targeted in attack

Any religious bias that Al Jazeera may have is confined to its editorials.
 
Well, I appreciate your effort. Most of the articles are a fairly general finger waving attempt to insure the Saudis have covered their asses with the West

You know, I'm not some wild-eyed, anti-Muslim, itching to turn a desert into glass....but it is discouraging that Al Jazeera couldn't find the time during their busy schedule of reporting Israeli Atrocities to report on the deaths of Iraqi Muslims at the hands of Other Iraqi Muslims, despite their having "no religious affiliation.":rolleyes:

The true irony of our exchange here is that the OP's article comes from a news outlet owned by Prince Salman bin 'Abd al-Aziz al-Saud. As for Al Jazeera, I managed to find these two articles featured in their "Middle East" section without much difficulty:

Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Deadly blasts hit Iraqi city
Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Iraq politician targeted in attack

Any religious bias that Al Jazeera may have is confined to its editorials.

I agree: it is ironic.:clap2:

I appreciate the articles, both of which I read, and both of which seem like very fact-based, even handed reports.

But, they're really not what I'd call reports about any Islamic Nation (I was hoping SA would take a leadership role) condemning the attack. I think it would be UNPRECEDENTED to read an article, published by Al Jazeera or any other Islamic Media sources, quoting a leader of an Islamic Nation Condemning Iraqi Muslim v Muslim violence.

Meh..at any rate thanks.
 
I believe it was manifold who pointed out that GHook could care less about what happens to Muslim children...

Too bad Muslims could care less about what happens to their own children.

"We Desire Death"
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWIDZ7Jpdqg]YouTube - Hamas - "We desire death like you desire life"[/ame]

Islam, the religion of death.
 
Granny says, "Dat's right - an fingerprint `em too...

Priebus: No ‘Registry Based on a Religion,’ But a Temporary Ban ‘Until a Better Vetting System is in Place’
November 20, 2016 – President-elect Donald Trump is not proposing a “registry based on a religion,” his incoming chief of staff Reince Priebus said Sunday, adding that people from countries posing terrorism concerns would be temporarily barred from entry into the U.S. “until a better vetting system is put in place.”
Asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” whether he could “equivocally rule out a registry for Muslims,” Priebus replied, “Look I'm not going to rule out anything, but I wouldn’t – we’re not going to have a registry based on a religion.” He continued that “there are some people, certainly not all people,” who are radicalized. “There are some people that have to be prevented from coming into this country.” Priebus said Trump’s position was consistent with bills before Congress that essentially say, “If you come, if you want to come from a place or an area around the world that harbors and trains terrorists, we have to temporarily suspend that operation until a better vetting system is put in place.”

Once a better vetting system is in place, radicalized individuals from those places will not be allowed entry into the U.S. but “others will be allowed in,” he added. Priebus was asked by host Chuck Todd about some views on Islam expressed by Trump’s national security advisor pick, former Defense Intelligence Agency Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. Specifically, last February Flynn posted online a link to a video that listed the perpetrators of major terrorist attacks as Muslims. The video began by rejecting the term “Islamophobia,” pointing out that “phobia” means an irrational fear. In a tweet carrying a link to the video, Flynn wrote, “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL: please forward this to others: the truth fears no questions ...”

priebus-trumpap.jpg

RNC chairman Reince Priebus, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for chief of staff, speaks alongside Trump and vice president-elect, Mike Pence, at their election night rally in New York​

Asked by Todd whether Trump agrees with Flynn that “fear of Muslims is rational,” Priebus replied, “He believes that no faith in and of itself should be judged as a whole. “But there are some people in countries abroad that need to be prevented from co – there are some people that need to be prevented from coming into this country,” he said. “So I think that’s where 99 percent of Americans are at.” ‘Clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic’

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) last week urged Trump not to appoint Flynn to the senior post, drawing attention to other comments by the retired general, including suggestions that Islam was an “political ideology” hiding being a religious façade. In an appearance Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Priebus was asked about those remarks by Flynn, and whether they were in line with Trump’s views on Islam. “Well I think so, I mean, look, phrasing can always be done differently but clearly there are some aspects of that faith that are problematic. And we know them, we’ve seen it,” he said. “But it’s certainly isn’t a blanket for all people of that faith.”

MORE
 
No such group does in fact exist. America killed thousands of innocent men, women and children in Iraq. Throw in all those "Unborn" and it's even worse.
Over 250,000 Iraqis perished in an 8 hour period during the 1st Iraq War.....Enough to make Bush Senior a Blatant WAR CRIMINAL...he got away with MURDER of the Worst Kind.But Americans couldn't give a FCUK
 
No such group does in fact exist. America killed thousands of innocent men, women and children in Iraq. Throw in all those "Unborn" and it's even worse.
Over 250,000 Iraqis perished in an 8 hour period during the 1st Iraq War.....Enough to make Bush Senior a Blatant WAR CRIMINAL...he got away with MURDER of the Worst Kind.But Americans couldn't give a FCUK

Lol not true, but you are a born liar!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 

Forum List

Back
Top