Je Suis Charlie (1 Viewer)

Bladerunner

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:58
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
1,799
I'm sorry Blade, but as you say its your opinion. I don't know what has swayed you to such a hate of Muslims but not all of Muslims want to destroy you because you don't believe in their religion.

I have known many Muslims who have followed the rule as said in the Koran, that religion must not be forced upon anyone as it is a personal connection between them and Allah.

I would suggest going and speaking to some of the Muslim people and you will soon know they condemn the terrorists just as much as you do. (of course some of them support terrorists but they are also classed as extremists)

By the way, Not believing in their religion is classed as disagreeing with them. so it's the same thing ;)[/QUOTE
]

I saw this same type of answer a bit ago from you and wondered about it then. I let it go on the chance your were busy or something. But now that you have said it again, I ask why do you want to label me as a Muslim Hater? I believe I have made it clear in more than one case that the Radical Islamic Terrorists are the problem. However, I do take exception to the religion itself. Whether or not they (moderate Muslims) practice it, Islam is not a peaceful religion any way you put it. For those that refuse to see that, well they got their 'Head in the Sand and A...s in the Air'.

The moderate Muslims who want to move to another country and assimilate to that countries laws and ways of living are fine people. However because their religion is a violent religion they ,in my book (My OPINION), will always be suspect. This reaction would be the same as walking along a dark street and see three men coming toward me at a brisk pace. My bristles get up just enough to allow me to adjust my demeanor (reaction) according to what these three unknown men might try or NOT try.?

By the same token, I am more at ease with a person whose religion is like that of the transcendentalist. Buddhism ,etc are peaceful religions and do not promote the killing of any person who does not believe .


Shall I state it again. I am only against the Radical Islamic Terrorists. The ones that want to kill you and me for not-believing in their Religion, GOD or Prophet.

Blade
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
]

I saw this same type of answer a bit ago from you and wondered about it then. I let it go on the chance your were busy or something. But now that you have said it again, I ask why do you want to label me as a Muslim Hater? I believe I have made it clear in more than one case that the Radical Islamic Terrorists are the problem. However, I do take exception to the religion itself. Whether or not they (moderate Muslims) practice it, Islam is not a peaceful religion any way you put it. For those that refuse to see that, well they got their 'Head in the Sand and A...s in the Air'.

The moderate Muslims who want to move to another country and assimilate to that countries laws and ways of living are fine people. However because their religion is a violent religion they ,in my book (My OPINION), will always be suspect. This reaction would be the same as walking along a dark street and see three men coming toward me at a brisk pace. My bristles get up just enough to allow me to adjust my demeanor (reaction) according to what these three unknown men might try or NOT try.?

By the same token, I am more at ease with a person whose religion is like that of the transcendentalist. Buddhism ,etc are peaceful religions and do not promote the killing of any person who does not believe .


Shall I state it again. I am only against the Radical Islamic Terrorists. The ones that want to kill you and me for not-believing in their Religion, GOD or Prophet.

Blade
The main reason Blade is because on numerous occasions you have cooped together all of the Muslim people into one category.

lets refer back to your older post "One People" - I and probably every other person on this thread knew who you were talking about because you do

May it not be intentional

Target Muslims and/or Liberals in almost every post.

Lets call it, an educated opinion.

I may have got you wrong Blade, but it is MY OPINION
 

Bladerunner

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:58
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
1,799
I'm sorry Blade, but as you say its your opinion. I don't know what has swayed you to such a hate of Muslims but not all of Muslims want to destroy you because you don't believe in their religion.

I have known many Muslims who have followed the rule as said in the Koran, that religion must not be forced upon anyone as it is a personal connection between them and Allah.

I would suggest going and speaking to some of the Muslim people and you will soon know they condemn the terrorists just as much as you do. (of course some of them support terrorists but they are also classed as extremists)

By the way, Not believing in their religion is classed as disagreeing with them. so it's the same thing ;)

One other item; it was not too long ago a teenage girl fled her father and went to court in order to release them from custody of her. WHY. because she had committed a great sin (SEX) and her father by the rules of Islam had to KILL her. They too lived in a neighborhood amongst us*, had assimilated to our laws and customs. Well...........not all the laws.

*us = Americans. While they may live in another state (take Mr. Froshingslosh), they are still Americans.

Someone once said it must be hard going around suspecting everyone all the time. Well, 99.9% of the time there is no need to suspect anyone. Only in those 1% situations do I become alerted. I guess that makes me a sheepdog,,,,NO


Blade
 

Frothingslosh

Premier Pale Stale Ale
Local time
Today, 17:58
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
3,276
Fearing and hating everyone different than you is not what makes one a sheepdog.
 

Bladerunner

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:58
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
1,799
The main reason Blade is because on numerous occasions you have cooped together all of the Muslim people into one category.

lets refer back to your older post "One People" - I and probably every other person on this thread knew who you were talking about because you do

May it not be intentional

Target Muslims and/or Liberals in almost every post.

Lets call it, an educated opinion.

I may have got you wrong Blade, but it is MY OPINION

Yes, I did say 'One People' and you Mr.ConnorGiles purposely took it out of context. Here is what I actually said:

"All well and good my friend but the article and the gov. website attest that at that time ,2012, there was a large number of 'one people' within these disturbed areas."

Now, the government website actually stated who these 'One People' are, NOT me!
If you knew who I was talking about then I am impressed at your mind reading abilities especially from such a distance. You have a big future in front of you my friend.


Come on Connor I am not really a Hater.....But I am a pragmatist who meets problems head on and in most cases I try to tell it like it is as I see it. In other words, My Opinion.

I do believe I left out 'Liberals' here,,,,,ooops.

Blade
 

Bladerunner

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 14:58
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
1,799
The main reason Blade is because on numerous occasions you have cooped together all of the Muslim people into one category.

lets refer back to your older post "One People" - I and probably every other person on this thread knew who you were talking about because you do

May it not be intentional

Target Muslims and/or Liberals in almost every post.

Lets call it, an educated opinion.

I may have got you wrong Blade, but it is MY OPINION

Decided to make this a two part reply. I actually thought this thread was about the killing of 12 innocent people at Charlie Hebdo in Paris France by WHO? WHO?????
Radical Islamic (Muslim) Terrorist.

Maybe I was wrong! Sorry
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
One other item; it was not too long ago a teenage girl fled her father and went to court in order to release them from custody of her. WHY. because she had committed a great sin (SEX) and her father by the rules of Islam had to KILL her. They too lived in a neighborhood amongst us*, had assimilated to our laws and customs. Well...........not all the laws.

*us = Americans. While they may live in another state (take Mr. Froshingslosh), they are still Americans.

Someone once said it must be hard going around suspecting everyone all the time. Well, 99.9% of the time there is no need to suspect anyone. Only in those 1% situations do I become alerted. I guess that makes me a sheepdog,,,,NO


Blade

First of all, I think you misunderstand the meaning of the phrase sheepdog, *(See Frothingslosh's reply)

Secondly, As said in my reply that you have purposely missed out - I said "numerous occasions you have cooped together all of the Muslim people into one category" - No mind reading needed to see which side of the fence you stand on Blade when it comes to the muslim population.

Was it not you who said this :

"Not all Muslims are terrorist but 99.5% of all terrorist are Muslim. I am sure you deal with percentages all the time and like I said "where there is smoke, there is Fire"

I agree with you to almost all your points of conversation but I ask that you simply apply the percentage above to your daily life. Every time you see one of these people (the ones that you yourself place into this category) on the street do you wonder if they are within the 99.5% or NOT. If you do, then you are just as bad as you are claiming I am. If you don't well,,,,,,,,,
"

Now I am not one of those people who see a Muslim and think "are they a terrorist?" - so I do believe you left out the end part of this comment - what does that make me?

Anyone could be a terrorist, believe it or not not 99.5% are muslims my friend - Let me share with you some websites to shoot down your claims :

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-mu...0-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

My friend you believe that these attacks are 99.5% Muslims but you fail to check before hand, The media has been covering it (which I jump to the conclusion) that is why you think this percentage is correct.

But as I proclaimed earlier on somewhere on this forum, If it was a Christian who committed these atrocities such as killing multiple people on a rampage around a city, you would be calling him a fruit loop (crazy) not a terrorist.

FYI - Terrorism doesn't just mean killing for religious reasons, for example It could be killing one innocent to cause unrest in the public .

It just goes to show what has been drilled into the heads of people via the media.

I hope this answered why I view you the way I do Blade, I have no ill intentions towards you personally, but I do feel you have a tainted view on certain things such as terrorism.
 

Brianwarnock

Retired
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
12,701
Connor
A terrorist kills for a cause, and in certain circumstances is seen by some as a freedom fighter, a killer on a rampage round a city is called a fruit loop because he is.
The catholic IRA were called terrorists by the British and patriots by their supporters, they murdered for a cause whether you believe in it or not.

Brian
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
Connor
A terrorist kills for a cause, and in certain circumstances is seen by some as a freedom fighter, a killer on a rampage round a city is called a fruit loop because he is.
The catholic IRA were called terrorists by the British and patriots by their supporters, they murdered for a cause whether you believe in it or not.

Brian

Many people kill for a cause Brian, Many people who are classed as terrorists are fruit loops, But even a killer on a rampage usually has a cause but isn't called a terrorist.

Terrorists are called terrorists because they inflict unrest, panic, or Terror. Anyone even a killer on a rampage inflicts terror on the public which should place them as a terrorist as well as a fruit loop.
 

Brianwarnock

Retired
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
12,701
So the killer at Sandy Hook, I think I've got that right, was a terrorist?

Brian
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
I would say so,

Let me put it this way - the way I see it, also the way the media puts it -

A gunman walks into a large public space and begins shooting, killing or wounding some bystanders and forcing others to cower under tables or run away in fear.

Does that sound like terrorism to you Brian?
 

Twincam

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
34
Ultimately we have differing amounts of freedom, depending on where we live etc.

Some freedoms are worth fighting for, some are not.

I am not 100% free because I have (for example) willingly given up the freedom to kill people. In fact, as a society we have jointly given up that freedom and insist that everyone in society do the same. Killers are regarded as dangerous to society and get locked up.

Should we defend the freedom to draw cartoons of a religion's prophet? I'd give that freedom up too in the cause of binding society together.
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
Quite interesting points you raised there Twincam,

You seem quite intelligent, would you proclaim that giving up certain (maybe most) freedoms would bind society as one?
 

Twincam

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
34
Quite interesting points you raised there Twincam,

You seem quite intelligent, would you proclaim that giving up certain (maybe most) freedoms would bind society as one?

Ouch! Tough question! If all those freedoms were willingly given up by everybody on the planet... theoretically... it would work...???? Not going to happen any day soon though is it.

We have to look for the middle ground. I don't believe in a god but a sod of a lot of people do, so that freedom stays. Also, the vast majority of people who do believe in a god are perfectly reasonable about it. They don't make me go to church or stop me from shopping on a specific day or.... so why would I even think of suggesting taking it away???

Why would I do something that will upset billions of people when it doesn't actually do much (if anything) for me.

I need to get some work done!

I may come back and edit this!

Thanks for "you seem quite intelligent" by the way. I'll take that on the chin.
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
Ouch! Tough question! If all those freedoms were willingly given up by everybody on the planet... theoretically... it would work...???? Not going to happen any day soon though is it.

Sorry about the toughie Twincam!

Theoretically you aren't wrong, but as you said when things are brought in, it will be a wail of a time trying to remove it again.

We have to look for the middle ground. I don't believe in a god but a sod of a lot of people do, so that freedom stays. Also, the vast majority of people who do believe in a god are perfectly reasonable about it. They don't make me go to church or stop me from shopping on a specific day or.... so why would I even think of suggesting taking it away???

It appears we share the same mentality, I also do not believe in a god and certainly don't mind if other people do as long as it isn't forced upon me.

Why would I do something that will upset billions of people when it doesn't actually do much (if anything) for me.

If it ain't broke, why fix it ? would be good terminology for this.

I need to get some work done!

I may come back and edit this!

Thanks for "you seem quite intelligent" by the way. I'll take that on the chin.

I look forward to it Twincam,

No offence intended my friend, In fact it was intended to be a compliment :(

Let me just replace it now : "You seem an intelligent person"

Hope you didn't take much offence mate.
 

Twincam

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
34
I didn't take offence at all, none at all. :) I've bever been good at handling compliments. I can cope with insults, but I always trip over compliments.
 

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
Haha, I'm the same mate.

I'm glad you saw my good intentions :D

Another question (Sorry!)

Would you believe finding the middle ground would work realistically?
 

Frothingslosh

Premier Pale Stale Ale
Local time
Today, 17:58
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
3,276
Okay, first off, since we went off and started talking the definition of terrorism while I was busy sleeping, let me jump back there and throw this in:

According to the Oxford Dictionary, terrorism is defined as
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims
and that is pretty much the way I've always read it. A terrorist can be religiously or politically inspired, but they always, always, always are attempting to effect a political change of some sort, be it the freeing of prisoners, an attempt to make a nation change a course of action or behavior, or similar acts. Nowhere in there is there a requirement that terrorists be Muslim, and as was pointed out, many many terrorists aren't. Just look at Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, Guy Fawkes, the KKK, the IRA, Scott Roeder, Anders Breivik, and many, many more - they ALL were trying to force political change of some sort through violence and terror.

As to freedoms, I still maintain Ben Franklin had the right idea: "Those who give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety in the end deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." There was no reason, for example, to give the FBI the ability to place wiretaps whereever they want without getting a warrant when there was already a special court established specifically for terrorism warrants, and which approved something over 99% of all warrants requested of it.

Twincam, not sure where you live, but the thing about being forced to observe other folks' beliefs is slowly being changed in America. The Hobby Lobby case allows employers to refuse health care coverage for anything they object to on religious grounds, regardless of whether the item in question affects them and regardless of YOUR beliefs on the matter. That means that if your boss is a particularly devout Catholic, for example, then any and all birth control is out-of-pocket, along with any form of abortion. A Jehova's Witness could demand blood transfusions be not-covered, while a company run by Scientologists can now legitimately force any and all mental health care to be dropped from your plan, regardless of your beliefs. In Michigan, now not only is it illegal for insurance to cover abortion in any situation (including for ra**/incest survivors), not only can any pharmacist not fill any prescription they don't like, but now it's legal to discriminate as long as you're not 'unduly inconveniencing' the person, a term which has a terrifyingly wide definition. In theory, if an EMT shows up at an accident and discovers you're gay, they can refuse service as long as a different EMT can be routed there. The very week that law went into effect, the largest hospital in Flint immediately discontinued tubal ligations because they go against God's injunction to 'be fruitful and multiply'.

Edit: Correction - the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is stalled. The hospital used Hobby Lobby to justify refusal to perform tubal ligations.
 
Last edited:

ConnorGiles

Strange Traveller
Local time
Today, 22:58
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
1,068
When it comes to medical issues, I believe that their beliefs should count.

They say they don't want a blood transfusion because it is against their beliefs, don't give it to them - I'm sure there is someone out there that needs it just as much.

I would just let them live the way they want to be honest - Don't want Don't Get, would fit the bill here
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom