Denial

[Michele 1]

Quote

Muslims are thought or at least I was thought that if you can do something to protect your self your family or country from being abused, hurt, or invaded you should. If you don’t and get bullied then you are making it easy for the sinner to sin.

First, let me say that I'm surprised at your initial quote. I indeed thought that islam was a peaceful religion, that it was the extremists in it that were the problem (and the same goes for extremists of all religion).

But Darius, I'd like to ask for a clarification, if you would. You say that aggression towards others is acceptable - in fact, it could be unprovoked, as long as the threat is there - and indeed by preventing such attack - perceived or real - prevents someone from sinning. In essence, then, are you saying that it is a righteous, good thing, to prevent the sinner from sinning, or should you allow the sinner to sin, and punish accordingly?

Thanks for any clarification you might provide. I most certainly don't want to twist anything around...

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[crozby 0]

Quote

Not a single arab newspaper make an editorial comment/opinion.

Well except for maybe this one.

Quote

"Ahmadinejad's statements hurt the Palestinian cause because Israel and the Holocaust enjoy international recognition, and any denial of the Holocaust and Israel hurt not only those behind it, but also justify Israeli actions against them," Hani al-Masri said in the Al Ayyam newspaper, which is close to the Palestinian Authority.

Its from the article you posted.

[Steel 0]

Quote

I am proud that Islam doesn’t tell me to turn the other cheek. It is a simple concept leave me alone and don’t fuck with me and I will leave you alone and not fuck with you.

I think that should seem fair to any one. If you decide to brake this peace then I am not going to take it. I will fight back.

I find that honorable.

If people got slapped and turned the other cheek what message does it send to the people doing the slapping?

I am wondering why standing up for your self is viewed as a negative?

If this were true I would be the first to agree with you. Because, I too do not believe in turning the other cheek. However, we all know that it was not the Spanish (Catholics) that invaded the (Islamic) Morrocans as soon as their religion was first created.

The fact is that this is just one example but all throughout history Islamic regimes have been the invaders, even in Israel. The only thing that Islam can confuse people with when trying to claim what is their's that was taken from them, is that which was created by Arabs before there even was an Islam.

On a slightly different note, I recall you saying you were from Iran (Persia). I don't remember what the name of the religion is right now but I recall reading somewhere that the the oldest, if not one of the oldest religions still being practiced in the world is from Iran (Persia). I realize that most Iranians are Muslim but what say you about this other religion? (if you know what I am talking about.) It would be interesting to see what the position of these few followers is, since these are members from only religion that was actually around in earlier times.
.

If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass.
Can't think of anything I need
No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound.
Nothing to eat, no books to read.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I am proud that Islam doesn’t tell me to turn the other cheek. It is a simple concept leave me alone and don’t fuck with me and I will leave you alone and not fuck with you.

This is a good position for any. But the issue is in application in that it REALLY means - I'm allowed to stand up for myself, but the other guy has to turn his cheek. You can see it in your own post and positions.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[AlexCrowley 0]

I was wondering, actually, where you got the 'no arab paper has said anything' - is there a website where you can read them all in English? or arabic?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

You say that aggression towards others is acceptable - in fact, it could be unprovoked

Not if unprovoked I did not say that.

If someone attacks you or “Slaps you” we are thought to slap back and fight back.

He who initially broke the peace is at fault and is the sinner.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Darius11 12]

You are speacking of Zoroastrians.

All Iranins were Zoroastrians before they were invaded by the arabs. Many Iranin still consider them selfs Zoroastrians.

It is a beautiful religion based on worshipping nature, and a peaceful existence with the world.

Korosh (Cyrus the great) was one of its followers and is viewed as one of the first kings in history to practice human rights. He has been mentioned I believe in the bible as well.


The Iranian culture like New Year celebrations are still based on the Zoroastrian cultures, and has nothing to do with Islamic holidays. Are New Year is the first day of spring.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Steel 0]

Quote

You are speacking of Zoroastrians.

All Iranins were Zoroastrians before they were invaded by the arabs. Many Iranin still consider them selfs Zoroastrians.

It is a beautiful religion based on worshipping nature, and a peaceful existence with the world.

Korosh (Cyrus the great) was one of its followers and is viewed as one of the first kings in history to practice human rights. He has been mentioned I believe in the bible as well.


The Iranian culture like New Year celebrations are still based on the Zoroastrian cultures, and has nothing to do with Islamic holidays. Are New Year is the first day of spring.

thanks for the info
,

If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass.
Can't think of anything I need
No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound.
Nothing to eat, no books to read.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

If someone attacks you or “Slaps you” we are thought to slap back and fight back.

Do you see the escalation and consequences inherent in what you are taught? Some jerk slaps you but instead of walking away you “slap … back so hard that it will make [the jerk] realize [he was] wrong” as you had stated in another post.

Because it’s in the nature of jerks to respond to your escalation with a closed-fist punch, then you counter with a kick and the jerk further escalates by clobbering you with a chair. Eventually somebody pulls a knife and the other guy draws his gun. Or perhaps one of you anticipates an escalation and goes straight for his gun thereby preventing the other guy from using his own gun first. Blood gets shed, both parties may even die, when you could have simply walked away and ended the situation knowing the other guy is just a big jerk.

That’s a practical aspect of “turning the other cheek” to flee, which is not to say there aren’t legitimate and sensical times when you may have to fight to save your own life or the lives of your countrymen. Consider you’re a tiny nation cornered with your back to the sea and suicidal neighbors pledge and keep trying to kill you over the decades. In that case you must fight with no holds barred or else perish, and the situation only defuses if and when the neighbors show by their actions that they have abandoned their bloodlust.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

You say that aggression towards others is acceptable - in fact, it could be unprovoked

Not if unprovoked I did not say that.

If someone attacks you or “Slaps you” we are thought to slap back and fight back.

He who initially broke the peace is at fault and is the sinner.

I'd say the Iranian backed "insurgents" trying to destabilize Iraq with terrorist attacks and ballot stuffing during the recent elections qualifies as provocation. Don't be surprised if sometime in the future Iran is "slapped."

[AlexCrowley 0]

my god, your hipocrisy is astounding if you meant that as a criticism of Islam.

You were blasting liberals for not wanting to bomb the fuck out of the middle east last month.

Thats why I asked if you had quit drinking recently, your statements are inconsistent and seem to merely reflect your knee jerk emotional reaction of the moment.

Or was I missing the biting satirical humor in your 'bomb the fuck out of everyone' comments?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

You were blasting liberals for not wanting to bomb the fuck out of the middle east last month.



Or was I missing the biting satirical humor in your 'bomb the fuck out of everyone' comments?

Please direct me to where I said this.

Edited to add: I searched all posts that I made in November and December. I did not say what you are attributing to me.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[AlexCrowley 0]

I dont have the motivation to search through your old posts. It was during someone ranting and doing the usual SC "kill all the towel head" type racist remarks.

You said something about 911 and how the US should bomb the middle east in retaliation and that that people who didnt support military action were pussies, or something similar.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

It was during someone ranting and doing the usual SC "kill all the towel head" type racist remarks.

You said something about 911 and how the US should bomb the middle east in retaliation and that that people who didnt support military action were pussies, or something similar.

That is patently false. You have apparently confused me with somebody else. I have not uttered any racist remarks here or elsewhere. Nor have I used the word "pussies" or something similar.

When you or a delegate can find the time, please search through my posts during the past several months, this will confirm what I am saying is true. Until then please give me the benefit of the doubt and do not attribute these vile things to me.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[AlexCrowley 0]

You probably didnt use the word 'pussies'. I remember the post because at the time I thought it seemed to be less well thought out than your usual ones.

I still dont have the time or motivation to search through your posts.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[billvon 3,109]

>You were blasting liberals for not wanting to bomb the fuck out of the
>middle east last month.

I believe you may have him confused with someone else. I have seen only a few people take that position.

[AlexCrowley 0]

no, thats why it stuck in my head. While the language was obviously my own I distinctly recall there being criticism of those who were against the war and a little chest beating going on.

Maybe linked to the whole 911 revenge thing, dont recall the details.

I enjoyed reading the good Senators posts, which is really the only reason it struck me as odd.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

I still dont have the time or motivation to search through your posts.

Well I found the time and went back through them to September 1. Like most posters I would have preferred to have made some choices differently in terms of what I wrote, however, nothing I posted since that time approaches the level of depravity you have attributed to me.

Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[Michele 1]

Alex, when you make an allegation like that, you **really** should take the time and back it up with a quote. Otherwise, it's just a bizarre statement, and should be disregarded.

Darius, the difficulty I have, and that you didn't address, is the aggression which seems apparent in your statement. You said something that gave me the idea that if you thought something was going to happen, then you had the right - and indeed the obligation - to take action to prevent the action, or in your terms, the sin.

Can you elaborate on that a bit, or maybe clarify your statement so I don't have that idea? I'm just trying to understand it more fully.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[AlexCrowley 0]

No not really, that wouldnt be any fun now, would it?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

Quote

I distinctly recall there being criticism of those who were against the war and a little chest beating going on

You are correct, I did that. I'll bow out from this discussion and drop the matter. Adieu.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Darius, the difficulty I have, and that you didn't address, is the aggression which seems apparent in your statement. You said something that gave me the idea that if you thought something was going to happen, then you had the right - and indeed the obligation - to take action to prevent the action, or in your terms, the sin.

where did i say that ot said something that made you think i said that?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Darius11 12]

Quote

I'd say the Iranian backed "insurgents" trying to destabilize Iraq with terrorist attacks and ballot stuffing during the recent elections qualifies as provocation. Don't be surprised if sometime in the future Iran is "slapped."

Lets recap for a sec.

We entered and started a war. Iraq had no links to 9-11, we have no WMD, we were never invited or asked to step in and help bring democracy, and according to polls most Iraqis want us out. But we still cal the guys trying to kick us out “Insurgents”. That makes me laugh.

What are we the freedom fighters?


Another thing you might have missed in the way we conduct wars. We don’t really ever fuck with guys who can hurt us. Look at North Korea? Do you think Kim Sun FUCK is a nicer guy then Sadam or poses a lesser treat. We won’t go in to Iran because Iran has a good capability of slapping us back hard, and we only like to attack countries that were are pretty sure don’t have the capability of slapping us back.
Of course we have made assumptions in the past (Vietnam) and got royally fucked. Let’s hope Iraq doesn’t turn out to be the same.

My Guess is the Iranian people will do something from within to take out the government, and I can see the US helping in that effort as it would be good for everyone.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[AlexCrowley 0]

My confusion comes from the fact that it was made public knowledge in mid-2004 that the CIA were helping fund various democratic groups in Iran to assist them in formenting cultural and political change. Certainly a smarter concept than putting a crazed dictator in place.

Which makes a great deal of sense with regards to the statement that Iranians on the whole dislike their leadership.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I'd say the Iranian backed "insurgents" trying to destabilize Iraq with terrorist attacks and ballot stuffing during the recent elections qualifies as provocation. Don't be surprised if sometime in the future Iran is "slapped."

Quote

Lets recap for a sec.

We entered and started a war. Iraq had no links to 9-11, we have no WMD, we were never invited or asked to step in and help bring democracy, and according to polls most Iraqis want us out. But we still cal the guys trying to kick us out “Insurgents”. That makes me laugh.

Yes lets recap. The US invaded Iraq, not Iran, but the Iranians have unilaterally injected themselves into the fight by providing arms and money to the very small percentage of Iraqi's who want us out badly enough to murder their own people to achieve their goals. Iran wants a govt in Iraq less dominated by Shiites and more dominated by Sunni's. I'd say thats a pretty hard slap at the US and one not easily forgotten. You also seem confused that the majority of the Iraqi's who want the US out are also insurgents.

Quote

Another thing you might have missed in the way we conduct wars. We don’t really ever fuck with guys who can hurt us. Look at North Korea? Do you think Kim Sun FUCK is a nicer guy then Sadam or poses a lesser treat.

PRNK pose very little threat to the US as much as the lefties like to bring it up. First of all they don't even have a misslle capable of reaching the US with any accuracy. Second of all they aren't going to lauch anything unless China approves of it because to do so would initiate an immediate retaliation, or as you like to put it a "slap back" by the US and China doesn't want the confrontation. If they did, they would have already invaded Hong Kong.

Quote

We won’t go in to Iran because Iran has a good capability of slapping us back hard, and we only like to attack countries that were are pretty sure don’t have the capability of slapping us back.
Of course we have made assumptions in the past (Vietnam) and got royally fucked. Let’s hope Iraq doesn’t turn out to be the same.

My Guess is the Iranian people will do something from within to take out the government, and I can see the US helping in that effort as it would be good for everyone.

We have been hearing this for over 20 years and still Iran has fanatical leaders who continue to endanger the people with their inflammatory statements and constant challenges to the Western World. Don't think for one second that Iran poses any real threat to the US. They fought Iraq to a draw in the 1980's and Iraq was thouroughly whipped by the US during Gulf War 1. The US Military capabilities are much more advanced since 1991 and I don't think Iran poses any real military threat.

I can tell you that if Iran continues down the path of seeking nuclear weapons that they will very likely get the "slap" they have been asking for since taking American hostages in 1979. Most Americans still remember that and would probably support some kind of military response.

• Quote