The Common Denominator: Islam

[kaz]

[

So Muslim radicals who kill tens and hundreds of thousands are "political." but a nut job who shoots one guy who isn't supported by anyone is a Christian nut job. You win, you're logical.

LOL, you're an idiot. Seriously, man, you are an idiot.

First, where are you getting the "hundreds of thousands" figure is beyond me.

Second, if you want to go there, Christians are just as likely to kill people to resolve a political or religious difference as a Muslim.

If I want to go there? You already went there. That's the point I'm addressing. You're brain damaged if you look at the world and say OMG, Christians are killing people in the name of religion like Muslims. You're a joke of a human being if you actually believe that. Right now you're just a joke of the Internet.

 

[kaz]

[

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

Except that all stopped in 1991, when Iraq agreed to a bunch of disarmarment and inspections and no fly zones and sanctions that pretty much reduced Saddam to the "Mayor Of Baghdad".

You can't come back 12 years after the fact and say, "Hey we are attacking you for what you did 12 years ago."

That's not how your boy George W. Stupid sold the war.

George W. Stupid didn't sell his war on "Saddam did very bad stuff 12 years ago but my Daddy left him in power."

He sold it on, "Saddam has a nuke, and he's going to give it to Al Qaeda and you are ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!"

Strawman.

 

[JoeB131]

[

So carnage is okay if you use billion dollar technology?

aggression vs retaliation, murder vs war-------------look up the words, then you might get it.

Okay, the problem was, the attack on Iraq where we killed 130,000 mostly innocent Iraqis wasn't retaliation. It was aggression by a bunch of fanatics who believed that we could make the Middle East safe for the Oil Companies and Zionists if we just took out Saddam.

Iraq hadn't attacked us, wasn't involved in 9/11.

 

[JoeB131]

[

If I want to go there? You already went there. That's the point I'm addressing. You're brain damaged if you look at the world and say OMG, Christians are killing people in the name of religion like Muslims. You're a joke of a human being if you actually believe that. Right now you're just a joke of the Internet.

Guy, the Christians killed in the name of religion in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Uganda, in Northern Ireland, in the crusades and the inquistion.

The fact that there were Christian communities in the MIddle East for century is testament to the fact the Muslims were pretty much tolerant until we started fucking with them.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

Except that all stopped in 1991, when Iraq agreed to a bunch of disarmarment and inspections and no fly zones and sanctions that pretty much reduced Saddam to the "Mayor Of Baghdad".

You can't come back 12 years after the fact and say, "Hey we are attacking you for what you did 12 years ago."

That's not how your boy George W. Stupid sold the war.

George W. Stupid didn't sell his war on "Saddam did very bad stuff 12 years ago but my Daddy left him in power."

He sold it on, "Saddam has a nuke, and he's going to give it to Al Qaeda and you are ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!"

Strawman.

So what was the compelling reason we had to go to war with Saddam in 2003?

He wasn't slaughtering the Kurds at that point.
He wasn't making WMD's.
He wasn't in cahoots with Al Qaeda.

He just humiliated Bush's Daddy by surviving in power when the American people had the good sense to throw Poppy Bush out on his ass.

 

[JoeB131]

[

and Bush did not go into that stupid war on his own. both parties supported and funded it. It was supported by the UN, UK, EU, and most of the civilized world.

it was a foolish waste of lives and money------------but they are all responsible. To say Bush did it all on his own is to ignore reality.

But Bush was the prime instigator, that's the point. Absent Bush, we would never have gone to war with Iraq.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

So Muslim radicals who kill tens and hundreds of thousands are "political." but a nut job who shoots one guy who isn't supported by anyone is a Christian nut job. You win, you're logical.

LOL, you're an idiot. Seriously, man, you are an idiot.

First, where are you getting the "hundreds of thousands" figure is beyond me.

Second, if you want to go there, Christians are just as likely to kill people to resolve a political or religious difference as a Muslim.

If I want to go there? You already went there. That's the point I'm addressing. You're brain damaged if you look at the world and say OMG, Christians are killing people in the name of religion like Muslims. You're a joke of a human being if you actually believe that. Right now you're just a joke of the Internet.

The religion of people who are terrorists is irrelevant to the question of how you treat people of the same religion who are not terrorists.

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[kaz]

Guy, the Christians killed in the name of religion in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Uganda, in Northern Ireland, in the crusades and the inquistion.

Yes, so if I'm a random person in the world, I'm like:

Muslims are killing each other today all over the Middle East, murdering Jews in Israel, murdering people in Western Europe including Spain, Germany, France and Britan, committing terrorism in the East including Sri Lanka, India, Malaysia and Indonesia, in Eastern Europe and Russia and murdering people in the US in Boston, New York.

And you have to go to the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition to try to drum up more than a couple examples.

Obviously I'm as afraid of Christians as Muslims. Yeah, two peas in a pod, six of one and a half dozen of the other. LOL, you just crashed and burned, that was hilarious.

 

[kaz]

[

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

Except that all stopped in 1991, when Iraq agreed to a bunch of disarmarment and inspections and no fly zones and sanctions that pretty much reduced Saddam to the "Mayor Of Baghdad".

You can't come back 12 years after the fact and say, "Hey we are attacking you for what you did 12 years ago."

That's not how your boy George W. Stupid sold the war.

George W. Stupid didn't sell his war on "Saddam did very bad stuff 12 years ago but my Daddy left him in power."

He sold it on, "Saddam has a nuke, and he's going to give it to Al Qaeda and you are ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!"

Strawman.

So what was the compelling reason we had to go to war with Saddam in 2003?

He wasn't slaughtering the Kurds at that point.
He wasn't making WMD's.
He wasn't in cahoots with Al Qaeda.

He just humiliated Bush's Daddy by surviving in power when the American people had the good sense to throw Poppy Bush out on his ass.

I realize you have no long term memory, but we weren't debating the war, which we both oppose. Me because it was bad policy, you because W is followed by an R and you're rewriting history.

The discussion was over religious fanaticism. Hussein had WMDs. I didn't consider that to be sufficient to invade him. You did, until you didn't. But "Christianity" had nothing to do with the war. Try to focus.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Muslims are killing each other today all over the Middle East, murdering Jews in Israel, murdering people in Western Europe including Spain, Germany, France and Britan, committing terrorism in the East including Sri Lanka, India, Malaysia and Indonesia, in Eastern Europe and Russia and murdering people in the US in Boston, New York.

Okay. They are killing Jews in Israel because the cocksuckers stole their land. Let's not forget, good Christians in Germany killed a lot more Jews for things they didn't actually do.

Same thing in Russia. The Russians flattened their country because they wanted independence.

[
And you have to go to the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition to try to drum up more than a couple examples.

Obviously I'm as afraid of Christians as Muslims. Yeah, two peas in a pod, six of one and a half dozen of the other. LOL, you just crashed and burned, that was hilarious.

I'm not really afraid of either. Statistically, I'm more worried about a gun nut than a Muslim, since that's far more likely what I'm going to encounter.

 

[JoeB131]

I realize you have no long term memory, but we weren't debating the war, which we both oppose. Me because it was bad policy, you because W is followed by an R and you're rewriting history.

The discussion was over religious fanaticism. Hussein had WMDs. I didn't consider that to be sufficient to invade him. You did, until you didn't. But "Christianity" had nothing to do with the war. Try to focus.

No, guy we were discussing is why Bush thought his Friend Jesus told him to invade Iraq, even though his generals and diplomats all told him it was a terrible idea.

 

[Discombobulated]

As hard as it is to believe, the President of the United States.....the very same one who owned last year's "Lie of the Year," ( 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor....')...yeah, that one....
...unveiled his latest attempt at reprising his award winning performance.

This one:
Obama says the Islamic State 'is not Islamic.'

And, wonder of wonders, his sycophants are turning themselves inside out trying to prove the truth of the obvious falsehood.

OK....read the following horror tale from New Jersey, and let's see the "not Islamic" fest continue.





1. "NEW YORK CITY — A New York radio personality is calling for increased attention to the June murder of a 19-year-old Livingston man, calling it evidence that “domestic terrorism is already here.”

2. ....host of WPLJ’s “The Todd Show”, discussed the death of Brendan Tevlin for more than eight minutes this morning, asking why the case has not received more attention despite the alleged murderer’s admissions that he killed Tevlin as an act of vengeance for U.S. military actions in the Middle East.

3. ....an act of jihad, perpetrated by a fellow American who sympathized more with those who want to annihilate us than with his own country and its people,”...

4. Essex County authorities have charged 29-year-old Ali Muhammad Brown with killing Tevlin in a West Orange intersection on June 25. Since being taken into custody on July 18, he has confessed to the murder, along with three others in Washington state, saying they were carried out as retribution for innocent lives lost in Iraq, Syria and other parts of the Islamic world.

5. Pettengil criticized President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder for not referencing the case in recent addresses and downplaying the level of threat radical Islamists currently living in America ....focusing instead on other protests such as those in Ferguson, Mo.,...“If there was ever a reason to riot in the streets in the name of humanity it would for this case."
Brendan Tevlin s murder evidence that domestic terrorism is already here says radio host AUDIO NJ.com




6. "...the police initially called it as a robbery gone wrong.That is what it may have fist appeared to be; however, the murder of 19 year old Brendan Tevlin was far from a robbery, it was an act of terrorism and as the defendant, Ali Muhammad Brown, called it … a “Just Kill”. Ali Muhammad Brown, a devout Muslin told prosecutors that, “All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life.” Ali Muhammad Brown..."

7. Once again we are witness to political correctness where the MSM refuses to cover what they consider uncomfortable. It is okay to riot in the streets when a black teen is shot by a white police officer, but it is not okay to even cover the story when a white teen is murdered as a result of domestic terrorism by one who follows Islam?

8.Officers said Brown fired 10 shots into Tevlin’s Jeep Liberty when it was stopped at intersection early in the morning in West Orange, N.J. Then he got into the 19-year-old’s car and drove it to a nearby apartment complex to abandon it "
The Untold Story by the MSM 8230 Ali Muhammad Brown Called Murdered 19 Year Old Brendan Tevlin as a 8220 Just Kill 8221 and said Was an act of 8220 Vengeance 8221 Against U.S. Military Killings in the Middle East Update Audio PLJ 8217 s Todd Pettengill Scared Monkeys




9. "....he murdered a New Jersey teenager as revenge for Muslims killed overseas."
Suspect says he murdered New Jersey teen as revenge for U.S. military killings in Middle East police - NY Daily News


10 ."....the murder of 19-year-old college student Brendan Tevlin....On June 25, Tevlin was driving home to Livingston when he was shot and killed in West Orange....Tevlin had no prior contact with Brown or the other two men charged with his murder."
Ali Muhammad Brown suspect in Brendan Tevlin murder accused in 2 Seattle murders - News 12 New Jersey




It seems that, unlike Trayvon Martin, if Barack Obama had a son, he would not have looked liked Brendan Tevlin.

This kind of thinking sounds vaguely familiar.......reminiscent of another time.

 

[Pogo]

[

You haven't shown "God told him to" kill any Iraqis. So if God tells a man to ru into a burning building and save three children and he fails, obviously that was a Christian fanatical murder of three children, wasn't it Joe?

That's not a particularly good analogy. Iraq wasn't "on fire' when Bush invaded it. Even though Saddam was an abuser of human rights, the fact was that the No-Fly zones imposed over the Kurdish and Shi'ite areas really prevented him from causing more greif to those folks.

Those Iraqis would not have died had Bush simply minded his own business.

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

None of that was happening in 2002. Not a single one.

--- anything else?

and Bush did not go into that stupid war on his own. both parties supported and funded it. It was supported by the UN, UK, EU, and most of the civilized world.

it was a foolish waste of lives and money------------but they are all responsible. To say Bush did it all on his own is to ignore reality.

I said nothing about "on his own". I pointed out that the androgynous poster was temporally conflating events completely out of order.

How come you have to stick extra words in other people's mouths to make a point?

 

[kaz]

Let's not forget, good Christians in Germany killed a lot more Jews for things they didn't actually do.

So now the Nazis were waging a holy war? It was about Christianity?

Tell me about how you're terrified about Christians over the crusades again.

 

[kaz]

[

You haven't shown "God told him to" kill any Iraqis. So if God tells a man to ru into a burning building and save three children and he fails, obviously that was a Christian fanatical murder of three children, wasn't it Joe?

That's not a particularly good analogy. Iraq wasn't "on fire' when Bush invaded it. Even though Saddam was an abuser of human rights, the fact was that the No-Fly zones imposed over the Kurdish and Shi'ite areas really prevented him from causing more greif to those folks.

Those Iraqis would not have died had Bush simply minded his own business.

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

None of that was happening in 2002. Not a single one.

--- anything else?

and Bush did not go into that stupid war on his own. both parties supported and funded it. It was supported by the UN, UK, EU, and most of the civilized world.

it was a foolish waste of lives and money------------but they are all responsible. To say Bush did it all on his own is to ignore reality.

I said nothing about "on his own". I pointed out that the androgynous poster was temporally conflating events completely out of order.

How come you have to stick extra words in other people's mouths to make a point?

Because Hussein had used WMDs repeatedly prior to 2002 didn't prove he had them because he wasn't using them IN 2002. Got it. Quite the rhetorical master you are.

 

[Pogo]

That's not a particularly good analogy. Iraq wasn't "on fire' when Bush invaded it. Even though Saddam was an abuser of human rights, the fact was that the No-Fly zones imposed over the Kurdish and Shi'ite areas really prevented him from causing more greif to those folks.

Those Iraqis would not have died had Bush simply minded his own business.

I see, so Hussein using WMDs on his own people, attacking Iran and using WMDs on them, invading Kuwait and torching their oil wells when he lost wasn't "on fire." Actually, it was literally "on fire." You and Pogo just need to ream each other in the ass and leave normal people alone, you're sick.

None of that was happening in 2002. Not a single one.

--- anything else?

and Bush did not go into that stupid war on his own. both parties supported and funded it. It was supported by the UN, UK, EU, and most of the civilized world.

it was a foolish waste of lives and money------------but they are all responsible. To say Bush did it all on his own is to ignore reality.

I said nothing about "on his own". I pointed out that the androgynous poster was temporally conflating events completely out of order.

How come you have to stick extra words in other people's mouths to make a point?

Because Hussein had used WMDs repeatedly prior to 2002 didn't prove he had them because he wasn't using them IN 2002. Got it. Quite the rhetorical master you are.

I can count linear time too.

 

[Clementine]

The president is trying not to condemn innocent Muslims for the actions of the guilty Muslims. What's wrong with that?

Nothing. Maybe he should use that way of thinking next time he bashes Republicans.

Thing is, it's perfectly fine to condemn terrorists. I am sick of hearing that we can't say anything for fear of offending Muslims. If they are offended when they hear someone speak ill of radical Muslims, then it's on them.

 

[JoeB131]

Let's not forget, good Christians in Germany killed a lot more Jews for things they didn't actually do.

So now the Nazis were waging a holy war? It was about Christianity?

Tell me about how you're terrified about Christians over the crusades again.

Every time I hear one of you Christian Assholes scream about gays and abortions, I'm worried about you starting another crusade.

 

[kaz]

Because Hussein had used WMDs repeatedly prior to 2002 didn't prove he had them because he wasn't using them IN 2002. Got it. Quite the rhetorical master you are.

I can count linear time too.

And you can count to 10 as well and recite the alphabet. Cool! Have fun in school today.

 

[kaz]

So now the Nazis were waging a holy war? It was about Christianity?

Tell me about how you're terrified about Christians over the crusades again.

Every time I hear one of you Christian Assholes scream about gays and abortions, I'm worried about you starting another crusade.

I'm not Christian, I'm pro-choice and I don't give a shit what gays do. Asshole is a matter of opinion so I'll concede that one. It's fun debating non-functional people, you're a hoot.

Don't forget the west, we were fighting the Indians over Christian zealotry.