Andy9o8

Yeah, that would have gone well. "Infidel!" "Raghead!" "Vagina of a camel!" "Pig fucker!" "Die, you dog!"

He singled himself out. See above.

Bwahaha! Oops!

Conveniently ignoring the fact that the majority of "Royal" attractions are either only tenuously linked to the royal family and/or would continue to hold most, if not all, of their cultural, historical and aesthetic interest if there was no monarch (or if the monarch's duties and priviliges were severely downgraded). Really. Take France. (Please!) They slotted their royals, too; they had a Reign of Terror; they're utterly ungrateful for the sacrifices of the foreigners buried on their soil; they produced de Gaulle; they eat fucking snails; and they hate everybody. And still the tourists flock there in droves. So, slot the Brit Royals. But first, show us their tits!

Neither are redneck motherfuckers. Sounds like they were rather evenly matched.

Hey, thanks for ducking out of your self-imposed banning to tell us that. So much for the conspiracy theorists.

Kind of like the mountian of the same type of research that disputes what you beilieve Got it If you can't bring the mountain to Muhammad, bring Muhammad to the mountain. Sorry, isn't this the Muslim thread?

Such a star, or a crucifix, etc., is an expression of what one IS. The word "infidel" written in Arabic on the leg of a non-Muslim means - in that context, all semantic bullshit aside - "not a Muslim". At some point, it becomes silly parsing out all the fact-twisting analogies which do not apply. Either these fucking people (whoever they may be) get it, or they don't. The repetition is becoming repetitious.

Which translates to "Andy is a fucking Muslim." For the record.

Except, just like every other investment that's too good to be true, it isn't true. Yeah. So basically the distillation of their argument is that the institution of the Royalty should be kept on in the 21st Century because... wait for it... it's good for the tourism industry. How very dignified. Elizabeth I would be proud. Not.

To behave like a fucking asshole toward the entire religious group, and not just the extremists? That's just bullshit.

You know, I've lost track of how many times I've heard and read this type of statement: just slightly less than an implied direct threat of violence, but still the implication that if someone dared to exercise their right to speak ill about the military in the presence of enlisted men or veterans, they'd get their asses kicked. Shame on you for saying that. Every time you do that, you dishonor the Constitution. Please. You mean to tell me that this line of conversation would bode well in a group of vets? Sure it would. I mean to tell you that any time a group of US vets directly or impliedly threatens physical violence against someone who speaks out against the military in their presence, they disgrace the uniforms they wore and dishonor the Constitution they took an oath to "bear true faith and allegiance" to. They want to tell the person he's full of shit? That's one thing. To threaten physical violence? Disgraceful.

You know, I've lost track of how many times I've heard and read this type of statement: just slightly less than an implied direct threat of violence, but still the implication that if someone dared to exercise their right to speak ill about the military in the presence of enlisted men or veterans, they'd get their asses kicked. Shame on you for saying that. Every time you do that, you dishonor the Constitution.

No; please see post #18, where this was explained by an Arabic linguist.

It's really a matter of who did what first. The answer to that is: the ex-soldier did, by displaying that tat on his leg with the deliberate intent to insult and inflame. The only reason it wasn't noticed (for what it is) until the Qataris pointed it out was because it's written in Arabic, which presumably the DZ staff doesn't read. I dare say, had the ex-soldier's tat been a swastika or said something like "fuck Muslims" or "no niggers allowed" in English, and someone on the DZ's staff had noticed and read it, the DZ management would likely have approached the ex-soldier right away. The ex-soldier picked the fight, and he got one; it all flows from that point of origin.

Remember, he's half Kenyan. He probably has a large P.

Obama didn't do anything to increase 2012 taxes except for single filers with over $200K in taxable income and married couples with over $250K. Tax refunds are also a completely separate issue from tax liabilities. A refund traditionally means you paid to much and gave the government an interest free loan. They're not a good thing. I've been getting significant tax refunds because 1. Bernanke's meddling produced negative real interest rates and I've lagged a bit adjusting my withholding to compensate for the drop in income. 2. I planned on our adult son having a job which would make him his own dependent and reduce my tuition and fees deduction. I'll be glad when that stops. I dislike Obama because he's an elitist corporatist pig. He eliminates capital gains for investors then increases capital gains taxes 59% on significant startup wins for rank and file employees. As a wealthy person who doesn't need all his money now he slowly moves $9 million tax free out of his estate while calling for estate taxes that will decrease the amount of money prudent middle class savers can pass on to their heirs after holding on to it until they die because they need it to live off the investment proceeds. He supports the Federal Reserve's interest rate manipulations which punish middle class savers and retirees who must keep a disproportionate fraction of their wealth liquid while making bigger profits for banks and the real-estate industry. His "health care reform" does more to maximize insurance industry profits (mandatory purchase, no price caps, limits on catastrophic plans for people over 30, must charge young people at least 1/3 of old people) than it does to improve heath care. Obama does plenty to complain about. Next time please pick something he's actually responsible for. OK, he raised FICA. http://mythfighter.com/2013/01/02/9293/ The only way FICA affects one's refund is that if someone overpays FICA (such as by working more than one job or by switching jobs during the year; but otherwise, most people generally do not overpay FICA), he's entitled to a refund on the overpayment or to have it counted as a credit for tax paid when he files his return. Other than that, it has no effect on tax refunds, and does not rehabilitate your original premise.

Being an asshole and picking a fight, then lying about it to stir shit are pretty offensive, too. There's more than one way of being loud, Tom.

Actually, in this instance, if he worked at the DZ, along-side another employee who was a Muslim, and the DZ did not require him to cover-up his tattoo, the Muslim employee could bring a discrimination claim against the DZ for creating and/or tolerating a hostile work environment. OK, pay me.

I find it warmly ironic that one of the best savings acct rates in the US is apparently offered by Pioneer Muslim Federal Credit Union at 3.03% APY. http://www.gobankingrates.com/savings-account/what-is-the-average-savings-account-interest-rate/ Its field of membership is "Any person representing Shia Imami Ismaili Muslim belong to Momin Community from India, Gujarat Sidhpur district" What do we need to do to qualify? I imagine you have to represent a Shia Imami Ismaili Muslim belonging to the Momin Community from India, Gujarat Sidhpur district. Are you in the business of "representing"? I am.

Bwahaha. Good luck with that. I feel your pain.

Or around the bonfire. Same reason.

It's irrelevant to the narrow point of what the 1st Amendment is, and is not.

Oh no!!