ham in public

[Lestat]

haha nice try dunce, but no luck. The French bit was generalisation the respect to their govt, and contribution to society post industrial revolution - no regret!

Yes....justifying your racist drivel hey. Doesn't surprise me....i'm guessing anything I post...you'll defend.

A generalisation....a racist generalisation.

And I speak of Malaysia and Indonesia with respect to their govts, who I know PLENTY about due to my relos involvement with their respective govts, and my work.

Oh...how convenient. Lets add 'with respect to their govts'...well well, what a surprise.

Its a shame that your posts make no mention of govt (in most cases)...perhaps you should make yourself clear Knuckles.

And I've noticed you haven't defended yourself against the 'anti-Islamic' and anti-arab drivel you post.

Keep trying dunce boy.

Keep the insults coming....luv it

Here's another one sunshine.

I seriously doubt that Palestine can unify anyone but terrorists.

I'm sure you'll justify this as well hey.

The threads are never "gone" IT expert

I apologise for not being an expert on the functionality provided by the Big Footy web site. But don't worry....I've already asked my boss to send me on an extended training course.

keep looking, I'm sure you have the time.

Thats the way...run away old man. You asked me to show one post where you've generalised or been racist..and I did just that.

After a number of excuses and justifications (quite predictably)...now your asking for more.

Don't you get sick of being embarrased...or are you a glutton for punishment.

 

[evade28]

Originally posted by Mobbenfuhrer
Now evade is saying, some people might thing, what the frig, and quickly stir the veges with the same spoon as has recently had eye-of-moo pasted upon.

Lestat, on the other hand, is referring to the people who quickly pick up a bit of cow and crush it up, and sneak it in amongst the vegies. Deliberately, because the missus don't eat moo and is proud of the fact.

yes that was my point too, but as per usual it was taken out of context by lestat.

 

[evade28]

Originally posted by Lestat
I've read some studies on fast food, and believe me, if people really knew the health risks, they would not come near fast food).

oh really? you think?

people are well aware of the health risks involved in smoking so i dont think theyre gonna be worried about fast food!

 

[Lestat]

yes that was my point too, but as per usual it was taken out of context by lestat.

How so?

people are well aware of the health risks involved in smoking so i dont think theyre gonna be worried about fast food!

You really wanna prove me wrong hey

Sorry, I wasn't aware that fast food ingredients were addictive as niccotine.

But then again...you could be right...if you believe the rumours about McDonalds

 

[evade28]

Originally posted by Lestat
How so?



You really wanna prove me wrong hey

Sorry, I wasn't aware that fast food ingredients were addictive as niccotine.

But then again...you could be right...if you believe the rumours about McDonalds

well you reckon that i would do that, oh we know the truth etc etc.

rumours about mcdonalds? what are you talking about? dont you know that they have those big posters up saying what exactly is in their food, dont you BELIEVE THEM???? im shocked.

 

[knuckles]

Originally posted by Lestat
Yes....justifying your racist drivel hey. Doesn't surprise me....i'm guessing anything I post...you'll defend.

A generalisation....a racist generalisation.



Oh...how convenient. Lets add 'with respect to their govts'...well well, what a surprise.

Its a shame that your posts make no mention of govt (in most cases)...perhaps you should make yourself clear Knuckles.

And I've noticed you haven't defended yourself against the 'anti-Islamic' and anti-arab drivel you post.



Keep the insults coming....luv it

Here's another one sunshine.



I'm sure you'll justify this as well hey.



I apologise for not being an expert on the functionality provided by the Big Footy web site. But don't worry....I've already asked my boss to send me on an extended training course.



Thats the way...run away old man. You asked me to show one post where you've generalised or been racist..and I did just that.

After a number of excuses and justifications (quite predictably)...now your asking for more.

Don't you get sick of being embarrased...or are you a glutton for punishment.

Haha no fool...having trouble finding the anti Islamic stuff...probably b/c it doesn't exist. Bad breaks dummy.

Should have no problem finding your posts condoning urinating on Jews, killing Westerners, the day of reckoning for the US being close,the rant about Islam being under siege for 1300 years..all funny.
Where's the one where you thought I was a GI stationed in Iraq...we all had a laugh with that
Keep searching.

Ha...I just worked out Lestat must be Arabic for stupid.

I'm off to the UAE tomorrow, then Ghana, then meeting an important person from Johor...can I bring you back anything? a brain perhaps, or a lever to remove the chips off your shoulder?

 

[evade28]

ha! well i went to a council function 2nite in BROADY and the broady mayor was there and all that, and i spotted the sandwiches coming out so of course i had to go and investigate, lol and i was pleased to notice that there was ham in a few of them!

 

[mantis]

So you ate ham sandwiches then & left the others for the non ham eating people.

 

[evade28]

no actually i didnt bcos i had already eaten.

but seriously, i only usually eat ham sandwiches cos theyre usually just ham and cheese where as chicken sandwiches always have spinach and stuff in them and i dont like that and i also dont eat cucumber and pickles and all that other stuff thats in them so i wouldnt eat them anyway.

but if theres nothing there i like i simply dont eat it, just like muslims, if i think theres gonna just be sh1t there, i bring my own.

 

[Hawkforce]

Originally posted by Lestat
Hawk...all I have ever put up with here is attack after attack and ridicule of Islam and Muslims from you, jane and other posters here. Posts such as slax...and worst....yet only now do you feel the need to intervene on a racist post.

THat you name Gurujane and myself as "attackers" who "ridicule Islam" shows the desperate poverty of your argument.

Your persecution complex is staggering. If a practising and vocal Christian were to post here with the passion and vehemence that you do (not necessarily a bad thing mind you) they would receive a far more hostile reception from the majority of this board that you could possibly imagine.

THe only time you have had anything close to a real theological debate has been when you and Roylion go head to head. THese threads have been among the most fascinating on this board IMO.

Roylion's a self-confessed agnostic.

Is he a racist simply because he challenges your faith based declarations - and consistently shows your "facts" to be erroneous?

Originally posted by Lestat
Do you recall Frodo's thread regarding arabs and respect for life....you didn't seem to mind his views then.

I do recall that thread - although it appears to have been deleted.

I've called Frodo on what I percieve to be racist statements before - usually about Aboriginals. My recollection of the thread you refer to was that, although poorly phrased, Frodo was asking a legitimate question regarding the appalling acceptance (if not encouragement) of suicide bombers in Arab society.

I don't believe that Cult of Death is intrinsic to Arab SOciety - and as I recall did not post on that thread.

Regardless, even if Frodo's premise was racist in intent (and I don't believe it was) - the growing death culture fostored in extremist Arab Society is an abomination and must be stopped.

Originally posted by Lestat
Please Hawk....don't take the high moral ground here....you have absolutely no claim!

It's spirited defence of what was clearly a hate post that you are mounting Lestat.

What was that about moral high grounds?

Originally posted by Lestat
You think?? I see what Slax's post is, and as I said, I disagree with his views.

I believe that you do disagree. I also believe that you are willing to abide such views as long as it serves your interests. This makes you no better than Slax or Ah_19 - in fact "Zionist Nazi Entity" came from your own mouth.

I think you are closer to Slax's views than you realise.

Originally posted by Lestat
Slax's views regarding jews don't differ much from your views regarding Islam...do they Hawk??

Quite simply a ridiculous and possibly defamatory post.

Like Ah_19 you associate Palestine with Islam. As secular, agnostic, Gentile I associate Palestine with Palestinians - Islamic, Christian whatever...

You must learn to recognise your antagonists Lestat. I've never been involved in any of the threads about religion - Islamic or not - on this site.

Provide proof or retract - or I will have to do something I never thought I would stoop to: report you to the Mods.

Originally posted by Lestat
The way I read it...your views (and Janes) on Islam and muslims in general are the same as slax's...the difference being you two are a little more 'diplomatic' about it!

The way you read it is hopelessly skewed - even paranoic.

Originally posted by Lestat
Terms such as Islamofacism and Janes call to 'Nuke saudi Arabia' all reflect a deeply entrenched hatred of all things Islamic.

Islamofascism is a political term to describe the abuse of religion as a tool of fascism.

It is in no way a judgement on the religion itself - except for the unfortunate reality that Islam lends itself to Theocracy (and therefore fascist rule) far more easily than Christianity - hence the whole renaissance/reformation/enlightenment thingy that gets brought up.

Jane's "Nuke Saudi Arabia" quip has nothing to do with hatred of ISlam - it's ALL about Islam being ENFORCED.

As a woman I reckon Jane's entitled to feel a little more passionate about Saudi Arabia than you or I, don't you?

Originally posted by Lestat
You had no problem with Janes 'nuke saudi arabia' post, did you hawk...yet here you are jumping down Slax's throat regarding his post.

If you expect me to accept there's a moral equivalence here, you are more deluded than I thought.

Originally posted by Lestat
Its this hypocricy that I am highlighting.

Unfortunately, all you are highlighting is your own propensity for myopia.

Originally posted by Lestat
Both are as bad as each other I guess. Yet you remained silent during Moosters racist drivel. Speaks volumes!

I don't believe that Mooster's post was racist at all. Insensitive? Probably. Provocative? Yes. Ill-judged? Evidently.

Racist? Definitely not.

Bush and Blair are widely mocked, held in contempt even, across Western world for being - Christians.

That's what secular society is all about Lestat. Your whining about racism on this board is petty beyond belief. At worst you come across ignorance - which you are more than adequately equipped to deal with. THis thread itself shows that most secular posters are quick to defend Moslems against the more outrageous claims of the ignorant.

Disturbingly those same posters haven't bothered to question Slax's bizarre outburst.

Lestat - you have it easy!

Maybe that's why you feel the need to invent anti-Islamism where it simply doesn't exist?

 

[Mooster7]

Originally posted by iceman

Im thinking more of Mooster who made the comment and others who agreed with him and then continued to ridicule the Muslim religion - total lack of respect on their behalf

I stand by my comments 100%. I think it is foolish not to eat wholesome food. When someone can explain to me why a properly butchered tusky hog is unclean, I'll listen.

In a famine, people don't have time to sit around and discuss hypothetical matters and grey areas. It's eat or die. I'll take my bow out into the bush and sink a 100 grain broadhead into angry razorback, and share with Christians, Muslims and Jews alike. Come one, come all to Mooster's pignic.

I said something to the effect of "bring on a famine, and they'll come running.' I believe that is true. I agree that the exact wording I used in that one sentence could lead someone to believe that I was wishing for a famine.....if they really wanted to believe that. Not if they read the entire post.

In my second post, I clarified that I wasn't wishing for a famine, and that I would share pork with Muslims if they wanted it. Lestat's response was that I didn't read my own writing. He tried to get a preemptive argument in by 'predicting' that I would claim he was taking me out of context. That's not even clever, of course, because unless he is a fool, he knows he was taking me out of context.

I don't have to respect other religions. I don't have to respect any religion. I have to respect people, and support laws which give people the right to practice their religions. If I'm critical of a particular religion, that doesn't make me a racist.

I believe starving vegans and Muslims would eat pork. Lestat "wouldn't **** on a Jew if he was on fire." I might be wrong about the pork, but anyone equating that with Lestat's venom needs to sit down and rework their thinking on the subject.

Peace,


Peace,

 

[Mobbs]

Originally posted by Mooster7
I believe starving vegans and Muslims would eat pork. Lestat "wouldn't **** on a Jew if he was on fire." I might be wrong about the pork, but anyone equating that with Lestat's venom needs to sit down and rework their thinking on the subject.

Gotta pull you up on an innaccuracy. Lestat didn't say that. Slax did.

 

[Mooster7]

Originally posted by Mobbenfuhrer
Gotta pull you up on an innaccuracy. Lestat didn't say that. Slax did.

Yup, and my apologies to Lestat.

Peace,

 

[Lestat]

THat you name Gurujane and myself as "attackers" who "ridicule Islam" shows the desperate poverty of your argument.

Hawk...the posts speak for themselves.

Your persecution complex is staggering. If a practising and vocal Christian were to post here with the passion and vehemence that you do (not necessarily a bad thing mind you) they would receive a far more hostile reception from the majority of this board that you could possibly imagine.

Well...thats just speculation...isn't it.

Besides....all I reply to are posts which clearly spread incorrect information regarding Islam.

If the same was done regarding Christianity....then I'd be the first to correct it, if I knew the information to be incorrect! (this was done when someone judged Christianity on the actions of the Inquisition...I pointed out that a religon cannot and should not be judged on the actions of people!)

Roylion's a self-confessed agnostic.

Is he a racist simply because he challenges your faith based declarations - and consistently shows your "facts" to be erroneous?

No...not at all.

Its one thing to raise points during a discussion (or argument), I have no problem with this. And 95% of the time I have no problems with our discussion, though I nearly almost always disagree with you...however its another to post something that you know to be highly offensive. eg...bombing of Mecca (the most holy site to muslims...which I'm sure Jane knew of).
There have been other examples...would you like me to now highlight them whenever they come up.

It's spirited defence of what was clearly a hate post that you are mounting Lestat.

Please Hawk...show me where exactly I have defended his post.

I'm not defending his post....what I'm saying is that its hypocritical that you jump down his throat...when you (on occasions) and others have ridiculed Islam...and made highly offensive comments regarding muslims...yet you don't seem to mind those.

Bit similar to what you have accused Jim Boy of doing I guess.

All I am saying is practice what you preach!

I believe that you do disagree. I also believe that you are willing to abide such views as long as it serves your interests.

And this is my point...re: hypocricy. The same can be said of you Hawk. You do exactly what your accusing me of. YOu are willing to abide with certain views, as long as it serves your interests.

This makes you no better than Slax or Ah_19 - in fact "Zionist Nazi Entity" came from your own mouth.

And I stand by it!

This is not a racist comment...in fact far from it. Zionism is a political movement....there are plenty of Jews that would find it highly offensive to be described as Zionists...I have friends that are jewish...close friends Hawk.

I have repeated this a hundred of times now...I have no problems with Jews....and you might find this hard to believe...but I have no problems with fundamentalist jews either....its zionism that I strongly appose.....a political movement which I believe has many parallels with Nazi'ism.

Why don't instead disprove my statement...show me the differences, and I'll show you the similarities.

A majority of NGO's found Zionism = Aparthied. Only two countries (world wide) rejected the findings (US and Israel)...of course you, and the western pro-zionist media portrayed this as 'anti-semetic'....but, like you, they threw around a whole lot of accusations...without bothering to point out 'WHY'??

Their are plenty of similarities between Zionism and aparthied...as is there are plenty of similarities between aparthied and Nazi'ism.

I think you are closer to Slax's views than you realise.

well...fortunately I don't have to prove myself to you.
Of course...you'd like that wouldn't you...great way to discredit me.

Fine Hawk...you believe that if you like!

Like Ah_19 you associate Palestine with Islam. As secular, agnostic, Gentile I associate Palestine with Palestinians - Islamic, Christian whatever...

Excuse me??

Where exactly have I associated Palestine with Islam. To the contrary....I have pointed out to you a number of times that the mid east conflict has nothing to do with religon...and more to do with Land.

Ah_19 has provided plenty of articles showing that Christian Palestinians are a part of the armed struggle against the occupation.

I'm not to sure where you've came up with this statement from!

I assure you Hawk...as a muslim, I see Palestinians as Muslims, Christians, Druids, Bedouins...and wait for it....Jews!

I have stated this to you before...you already know this. I appose a two state solution.

I advocate a one state solution....with all these people living side by side. You say it can't be done...well I say it can..and has been for the past 2000 years...where Jews, Palestinians, Bedouin's, and Christians all lived in peace....under firstly the Islamic Calipha's, then the Abasids, then the Moors, then the Ottamans.

The framework...a true democratic framework, with states (similar to what we have here I think could work)...but of course the Zionists would reject this plan...for the State would lose it 'jewishness'. And under this plan, all citizens (jews, and Palestinians Christians, muslims, and bedouins) would have to be treated equally.

This is currently NOT the case in Israel...is it?

You must learn to recognise your antagonists Lestat. I've never been involved in any of the threads about religion - Islamic or not - on this site.

Not religon threads...however political threads in which Islam plays and integral part in discussion!

Islamofascism is a political term to describe the abuse of religion as a tool of fascism.

No hawk...it isn't a term at all. Its something fabricated by Jane...I have never heard the term anywhere besides this forum.

Facism is facism...there's nothing Islamic about it.

Arparthied in South Africa was driven by the Dutch Reformist church (Fact!)....I have never heard anyone describe Aparthied to be 'Christio-facists'.

Are the settlers, the Likud party and the Ultra orthadox jewish parties 'Judeofacists'....are the current US administration with their strong Christian roots to be described as Christio-facists.

Its a highly offensive term which Jane invented...and you quickly jumped on...which gives you the opportunity to attack Islam....while hiding behind the 'its a political term' line!

It is in no way a judgement on the religion itself - except for the unfortunate reality that Islam lends itself to Theocracy (and therefore fascist rule) far more easily than Christianity - hence the whole renaissance/reformation/enlightenment thingy that gets brought up.

This explanation is very thin at best Hawk.

You say it is no judgement on the religon...yet the very term is doing just that. 'Islamo' and 'facism'.

If this isn't a judgement on Islam....I'm guessing that pigs fly around you backyard!

Jane's "Nuke Saudi Arabia" quip has nothing to do with hatred of ISlam - it's ALL about Islam being ENFORCED.

Now its you that is defending a 'hate' post.
Her post to 'nuke Mecca' clearly indicates an attack on Islam (since Mecca is the centre of the Islamic world).

All muslims face Mecca when we pray.....to 'nuke Mecca' is to destroy the centre of the Islamic world. Now how can you say this has nothing to do with a hatred of Islam

As a woman I reckon Jane's entitled to feel a little more passionate about Saudi Arabia than you or I, don't you?

Why? Why should Jane...as a woman feel more passionate about Saudi Arabia....then I, as a muslim??

As I've said earlier...perhaps Jane should take a look at her own backyard first. People in glass houses throwing stones!

If you expect me to accept there's a moral equivalence here, you are more deluded than I thought.

Fine...help me then! Show me 'how I'm deluded'. Show me what in Janes post makes her statement 'acceptable'.....yet Slax's is not. (I better highlight here again...I believe both to be unnacceptable).

Racist? Definitely not.

Hoping for a 'famine' to behold muslims pretty much says it all.

Bush and Blair are widely mocked, held in contempt even, across Western world for being - Christians.

Really? Who by?

That's what secular society is all about Lestat. Your whining about racism on this board is petty beyond belief.

Who's whining about racism?? With regards to Moosters post..It was I who was accussed of being racist (in my return post). I just pointed out to those posters that they remained silent when Mooster made his post...yet I (for returning fire) is now accussed of being 'racist'.

And what I'm accusing you (and knuckles) of is not racism...but hypocricy...of attacking Slax but remaining silent (and sometime contributing) to the continuous anti-Islamic and anti-arab rubbish I read on these boards!

THis thread itself shows that most secular posters are quick to defend Moslems against the more outrageous claims of the ignorant.

I'm sure they'd defend anyone against outrageous claims of the ignorant!

Disturbingly those same posters haven't bothered to question Slax's bizarre outburst.

As with those that haven't bothered to question Moosters!

Lestat - you have it easy!

Of course I do. I live in a great country...I have all my needs, no bombs dropping on my head!

Maybe that's why you feel the need to invent anti-Islamism where it simply doesn't exist?

Well if jane can invent new phrases..why can't i

I'm just curious....does 'anti-americanism' exist. Now there's a new term that seems to be coined around the media these days

You can't be serious ....that anti-Islamism does not exist??

 

[Lionel Lyon]

Originally posted by Lestat
No hawk...it isn't a term at all. Its something fabricated by Jane...I have never heard the term anywhere besides this forum.

Lestat, I first heard the term just after 911 from, Chris Hitchens, an English political writer who lives in America. Here's a source. That said, I think, and you can see this from the article above, that he's just the kind of guy who'd use "Christo-fascist" or "Judeo-fascist" too, to describe fanatics from those religions also. I haven't read him in a while--911 really changed him--but as far as I know I have not yet seen him propose the nuking of Mecca or anywhere else, for what it's worth...

 

[Lestat]

Lestat, I first heard the term just after 911 from, Chris Hitchens, an English political writer who lives in America. Here's a source. That said, I think, and you can see this from the article above, that he's just the kind of guy who'd use "Christo-fascist" or "Judeo-fascist" too, to describe fanatics from those religions also. I haven't read him in a while--911 really changed him--but as far as I know I have not yet seen him propose the nuking of Mecca or anywhere else, for what it's worth...

Thanks for the link Lionel...was an interesting read.

Jane....is this guy of the 'real left'??

One paragraph I found rather interesting .....in particular the last line.

"Islamofascism" is the word Mr. Hitchens coined after Sept. 11 to describe radical Islamic fundamentalism. He has always loathed religious fundamentalism of every kind and, for that matter, religion of every kind (which helps explain his evisceration of Mother Teresa). He calls himself a committed "anti-theist," and defines the real ideological battle not as Islam v. the West but as faith v. reason. He is certain that it cannot be won peacefully.

Is he advocating a 'war on religon'??? A battle of faith vs reason?? I would of thought that the two overlap.

Seems a very 'athiest vs religon' point of view. Is this 'non-religous or athiest extremism'...as apposed to religous extremism?

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by Lionel Lyon
Lestat, I first heard the term just after 911 from, Chris Hitchens, an English political writer who lives in America. That said, I think, and you can see this from the article above, that he's just the kind of guy who'd use "Christo-fascist" or "Judeo-fascist" too, to describe fanatics from those religions also. I haven't read him in a while--911 really changed him--but as far as I know I have not yet seen him propose the nuking of Mecca or anywhere else, for what it's worth...

Thank you Lionel. I knew I didn't invent the term but couldn't remember where I'd seen it.

Of course. Christopher Hitchens. Good taste, GJ.

Lestat, as you very well know I never used the term "nuke". I used the term "baboom"

And also as you very well know I was not advocating the "babooming" of Mecca because I am bigoted about Islam ...

but because it seemed the perfect place to baboom millions of men who do not allow women to drive cars.

I was being mischievous at the time, as you also well knew. Otherwise you would have called me racist and bigoted at the time. And had I used those phrases you would have been right.

However I dislike very much your rewriting my posts in order to give the impression that I am racist and a bigot to other posters who may not have read the original thread.

I would like a retraction from you, and an apology.

 

[Lestat]

And also as you very well know I was not advocating the "babooming" of Mecca because I am bigoted about Islam ...

If this was the case...then why wouldn't you have used the capital (Riyadh). Sorry if I misunderstood Jane...however the reference to Mecca...I see a direct attack on Islam!

'Baboom' to Mecca as you put it...is to destroy the most holy...and most revered place in Islam....and I in fact found that highly offensive. I'm sure you would of realised that from the tone of my reply to that post!

I was being mischievous at the time, as you also well knew. Otherwise you would have called me racist and bigoted at the time. And had I used those phrases you would have been right.

Being 'mischevious' isn't really an excuse is it. I'm sure Slax can come now and say he was 'being mischevious'....doesn't make it right.

And at the time...I found it very offensive, the terms racist and bigotted weren't what came my mind.

However I dislike very much your rewriting my posts in order to give the impression that I am racist and a bigot to other posters who may not have read the original thread.

I would like a retraction from you, and an apology.

Jane..

I haven't rewritten you posts at all. What I am highlighting is the hypocricy of posters attacking Slax for his post (which I may add should be attacked) yet letting other posts (which can be seen as offensive) by. I used your post as an example. Yes...Slax has posted a hate post aimed at Jews....and we should speak up...however lets be consistent.

Your post regarding Mecca...to me gives the impression of anti-Islamic stance.....add this to your accusations of 'Islamic arragonce' on the one hand, while ignoring 'Jewish arragonce' smacks of double standards.

The jews believe THEY ARE THE CHOSEN PEOPLE.....yet its muslims who you say are arragont.

I have never accused you of being a bigot....or racist. Not once have I ever accused you of being so...and believe me, if I believed you were...I'd say so. A phobia of Islam...yes...racist, definately not!

My purpose here was to highlight the hypocricy...and I still stand by that! I can't believe the commotion made about Slax's post...in which he was referring to FUNDAMENTALIST JEWS.

This was the line I think Hawk and others found highly offensive and rightly so.

I wouldn't **** on a fundemantalist Jew if he was on fire but I would tell an muslim if there was ham in something.

Now how many posts have you and Hawk...how many comments have you made regarding FUNDAMENTALIST MUSLIMS. You describe them as 'terrorists'...and 'Islamofacists'. You or Hawk have made you feelings regarding 'fundamentalist or Islamic extremism' quite clear. Yet now slax makes a comment regarding 'fundamentalist Jews....and out come the racist accusations.

A number of things you and Hawk have posted have been highly offensive.....I'll highlight them for you from now on if you like. If we're to follow the precedent set with Slax's post....then every post where you describe fundamentalist muslims as 'terrorists'!

My sister is a fundamentalist (as in she follows the fundamentals of Islam)....I strive to be a fundamentalist (to follow the fundamentals of Islam)....yet she IS NOT A TERRORIST, I am NOT A TERRORIST. Do you see where I'm coming from.

If you'd like an apology for 'giving the impression that you are racist'...then I apolagise...for that was not my purpose.

However...I ask you to think twice before attacking my beliefs!

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by Lestat
Jane..

I haven't rewritten you posts at all.

You said that I used the word "nuke" when I did not.

You said I was attacking Islam when I was attacking men who do not allow women to drive cars.

I want a clear acknowledgement from you on this board Lestat, that you have rewritten my post and other people have been given the impression that I am a bigot and racist.

Then just say you're sorry.

 

[Mobbs]

Originally posted by Lestat
My sister is a fundamentalist (as in she follows the fundamentals of Islam)....I strive to be a fundamentalist (to follow the fundamentals of Islam)....yet she IS NOT A TERRORIST, I am NOT A TERRORIST. Do you see where I'm coming from.

I think different people work with different definitions of the term 'fundamentalist'.

Fundamentalist christians, jews, muslims, greenies, I have a standard disliking for them all. But to me, fundamentalist meant ONLY THEIR WAY, ALL ELSE IS UNWORTHY OF RESPECT AND TO BE SACRIFICED IF NEED BE.

This of course, is NOT the dictionary definition. The dictionary basically only reckons 'fundamental' is 'basic', or 'back the roots'. But it IS the popular usage definition.

I often describe myself as a fundamentalist Fitzroy supporter ... in order to comically portray myself as psycho ... in regard to my votarical fanship of the Roy.

It sounds, lestat, as though 'fundamentalist' means something completely different to you, than it does to me. NEITHER ARE WRONG!

But sheeze I got a fright when you said your sister was a terrorist ... and then I realised you didn't say she was a terrorist at all, only said she was a fundamentalist.

Much can be misinterpreted through this form of medium.

 

[mantis]

Originally posted by GuruJane
I want a clear acknowledgement from you on this board Lestat, that you have rewritten my post and other people have been given the impression that I am a bigot and racist.

Jane, I got that impression from your posts, not Lestats changing the word Nuke to Baboom, let's face it, Baboom means to bomb them does it not & saying you were just being mischievious, is an attempt to try & gloss over what your post implied.

In case you didn't know, if you Baboom Saudi Arabia, women & children are going to die, as well as men, unless you have heard of a bomb that just kills men.

 

[Slax]

GuruJane I have to agree with mantis. Most people have developed an opinion that you are educated well informed but still you are narrow-minded on some topics, disrespectful to other customs and arrogant.

Not everyone in the world wants to live in a western style corrupt democracy where big business runs the country not the government. Currently the western democracies are losing civil rights and becoming more undemocratic than ever before.

Australians have less civil rights than we did in the 1920s. So who lives under an authoritarian gobernment then. Remember what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.

 

[Hawkforce]

Originally posted by Slax
GuruJane I have to agree with mantis. Most people have developed an opinion that you are educated well informed but still you are narrow-minded on some topics, disrespectful to other customs and arrogant.

High comedy.

Or Tragic Farce.

 

[Lestat]

I want a clear acknowledgement from you on this board Lestat, that you have rewritten my post and other people have been given the impression that I am a bigot and racist.

I apologise for using the word 'nuke' instead of tha actual word in your post which was 'baboom' in which you were referring to the bombing of Mecca.

Now perhaps you can apologise for making a disrespectful comment....in which you clearly state that you wish for the most holy site in Islam to be bombed!

I won't hold my breath

 

[GuruJane]

Originally posted by Lestat
I apologise for using the word 'nuke' instead of tha actual word in your post which was 'baboom' in which you were referring to the bombing of Mecca.

Apology accepted.

Now perhaps you can apologise for making a disrespectful comment....in which you clearly state that you wish for the most holy site in Islam to be bombed!

Well only as long as the Saudis don't let women drive cars!

But you're right, it it was disrespectful and I apologise for that.

I won't hold my breath

And I thought you'd think better of me!