[quote]MaximusB wrote:
No one from the Bam Admin showed up ? Not even someone useless like Biden or Kerry ?[/quote]
Does anyone know who the super-babe was that I kept seeing in one of the pictures (not this one) of all the world leaders in attendance?
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
No one from the Bam Admin showed up ? Not even someone useless like Biden or Kerry ?[/quote]
Does anyone know who the super-babe was that I kept seeing in one of the pictures (not this one) of all the world leaders in attendance?[/quote]
Not sure, I’m busy watching Josh Earnest stumble all over himself as reporters question him as to why no one from the US showed up to show support.
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
No one from the Bam Admin showed up ? Not even someone useless like Biden or Kerry ?[/quote]
Does anyone know who the super-babe was that I kept seeing in one of the pictures (not this one) of all the world leaders in attendance?[/quote]
This one?
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
No one from the Bam Admin showed up ? Not even someone useless like Biden or Kerry ?[/quote]
Does anyone know who the super-babe was that I kept seeing in one of the pictures (not this one) of all the world leaders in attendance?[/quote]
This one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Rania_of_Jordan[/quote]
Gawd dayum.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lmao… and you wonder why you’re called elitist.
[/quote]
Acquiesce is not an elitist word =([/quote]
If it was a commentary on his vocabulary I would have said “good word”, because it is a good word, and I like it.
It’s the air of “oh fine, if I must entertain you surfs, I shall” tone to it. [/quote]
That reminds me:
Q: What did Mohammed say when his wife called him a pedophile?
A: “‘Pedophile’ is a big word for a 9-year-old, Aisha.”
Yeah, I don’t care. Like they will fatwa me more.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lmao… and you wonder why you’re called elitist.
[/quote]
Acquiesce is not an elitist word =([/quote]
If it was a commentary on his vocabulary I would have said “good word”, because it is a good word, and I like it.
It’s the air of “oh fine, if I must entertain you surfs, I shall” tone to it. [/quote]
That reminds me:
Q: What did Mohammed say when his wife called him a pedophile?
A: “‘Pedophile’ is a big word for a 9-year-old, Aisha.”
Yeah, I don’t care. Like they will fatwa me more.
[/quote]
https://www.google.com/search?q=Aisha+Muhammad+comic&source=lnms&tbm=isch
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I have no idea if this is a corner stone or not, but above you said one had to “prove god”, and then here say it isn’t required that God be. So which is it? Does one have to prove God or is God not required?
Can you prove it doesn’t come from “any type of divinity”?
[/quote]
Good grief, you’re talking in circles. This is my point. God isn’t required for morality.
[/quote]
Okay, just so I’m clear:
You said
Which leads to my question: But you don’t have to prove the opposite, because you think morality just “is”, and because of your faith, don’t need evidence?
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
That reminds me:
Q: What did Mohammed say when his wife called him a pedophile?
A: “‘Pedophile’ is a big word for a 9-year-old, Aisha.”
[/quote]
lol^
Q: What did Mohammed say when his wife called him a pedophile?
A: “‘Pedophile’ looks like your jaw has healed nicely, smack.”
A2: “how did you get out your cage?”
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
No one from the Bam Admin showed up ? Not even someone useless like Biden or Kerry ?[/quote]
Wasn’t Holder in town… maybe just a rumor, but I heard of someone giving out awesome shoe shines for $5 or the equivalent in toilet paper that the frogs call currency…
[quote]Aggv wrote:
.
[/quote]
Q: Why did Mohammed make homosexuality a sin in the Koran?
A: Because his boyfriend thought that would make their sex hotter.
How does every Islamic joke start? By looking over your shoulder!
How can you tell the difference between the different Islamic sects anyway? They’re all blowing the Shi’ite out of each other.
Inb4 “Let’s bomb Birmingham the next time something blows up”
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
The idea to nuke Mecca could be the War on Terror equivalent of the Cold War M.A.D. theory, that neither side would start a war because of the dreaded consequences. I think that’s what chicken is trying to imply. Since the terrorists “love death like we love life” and are downright suicidal, possibly threatening something that’s sacred to them would get them to think twice…am I right chicken?[/quote]
yes[/quote]
Responded to your post on page 21.
[quote]MaazerSmiit wrote:
Inb4 “Let’s bomb Birmingham the next time something blows up”[/quote]
I’ll make a wager with you. You grow your beard and wear a black suit. I’ll lend you a kippa (yarmulke), and have you GoPro your experiences in certain parts of Birmingham.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]BPCorso wrote:
In many instances what you say is correct. But with terrorism like what happened in Paris the issue is entirely religious. Fanatical people who acted radically, purely based on religion.[/quote]
Absolutely. Their religious belief caused them to do this.
[quote]BPCorso wrote:
Without fanatical religious beliefs, and assuming no severe mental disorders, I just don’t see how people can indiscriminately murder others or use barbaric actions like a pocket knife beheading.[/quote]
This is what I disagree with. Of course people can commit mass murder without being religious or having mental disorders. Stalin and Mao Zedong are two easy examples. The people who worked under the two and actually committed the orders are as well.
[/quote]
I’m just not conveying my message well. You are right with what you’re saying. But certain things like shooting up a movie theater, beheading people with a pocket knife, or flying a plane into a building – you need to have a severe mental disorder, religious fanaticism, or both.
If it was just about power, you’d go about your mayhem and killing of innocents in a much different and controlled manner.
Frankly I’d be more concerned about the reaction of white youths to me walking around dressed in that attire, but alas, due to my pitiful beard growing genetics we’ll never be able to put it to the test.
Now instead of silly scenarios which involve a 4 hour train journey for me, do you have input which doesn’t involve entertaining the idea that bombing a city of innocent people would be an ethical, acceptable, or effective method of discouraging evil people from doing evil things?
Granted, I’ve only read the first 3 pages of this thread, 23 pages of bigotry is a little much for me to swallow.
[quote]MaazerSmiit wrote:
effective method of discouraging evil people from doing evil things?
[/quote]
saudi arabia could denounce the jihadist and those who support violent islam, and then deny them entry to mecca.
[quote]MaazerSmiit wrote:
Frankly I’d be more concerned about the reaction of white youths to me walking around dressed in that attire, but alas, due to my pitiful beard growing genetics we’ll never be able to put it to the test.
Now instead of silly scenarios which involve a 4 hour train journey for me, do you have input which doesn’t involve entertaining the idea that bombing a city of innocent people would be an ethical, acceptable, or effective method of discouraging evil people from doing evil things?
Granted, I’ve only read the first 3 pages of this thread, 23 pages of bigotry is a little much for me to swallow.[/quote]
Well, as a Jewish man who often travels in England, I’ve never had problems with “white youths,” but have been routinely hassled by “Asians” – not including Indians.
That said, I’ve never contemplated bombing Birmingham, nor said anything of the sort.
I do stay that France traded its productive, integrated, professional, and very French Jewish population for a non-productive, non-integrated, dole-sucking, and refusing to integrate population. As business model, I’d say that’s a brave, but poor, idea.
England will shortly be in a similar situation, and after they are done with us, they will come for you. My recommendations:
Consider a cessation of new immigration from troubled areas for a time (say 50 years) to permit time for integration. Enforce the borders and deport illegal immigrants post-haste.
Consider getting over PC nonsense and setting out to rid yourselves of minor-sex-trafficking immigrants, imans who preach hate, and the like. Be bold and quick about returning criminals and malcontents to their home countries, regardless of family situations and other excuses.
Greatly reduce the dole and condition the dole on things like English classes, English history classes, and useful jobs and skills. I really didn’t speak English when I arrived in the USA (Hebrew, French, Yiddish and high school English and Arabic). Seem to do fine, now. My accent is mistaken for English by everyone that is not English, and they think I am Irish. It’s not that hard, and should be expected of any immigrant.
Sharia schools paid for by taxes should be closed, and focus on integration. If they want religious schools, well, get together and pay for them with your own private money like us Jewish folk.
[quote]MaazerSmiit wrote:
Granted, I’ve only read the first 3 pages of this thread, 23 pages of bigotry is a little much for me to swallow.[/quote]
lmao…
“Hey guys, I’ve not even read 15% of the thread, but I know you are a bunch of racist fucks…”
The leftist is strong in this one.