Originally posted by scherzoYou know, the knowledge that something elicits a violent physical reaction
You make points here that I revoke in other posts, but your comment about using the wall for defense elicited a particularly violent physical reaction on my part.
The wall is not used for defense. It is used as a form of aggression. The Zionist settlers and the IDF who stole the land are using it for intimidation. The settlers have no viable need for defe ...[text shortened]... rs?!? It's blasphemous!! The Zionists are the aggressors in the West Bank. Even BBC admits it!
should actually serve as a reminder to you that maybe you're not being
reasonable.
The wall is both offense and defense; of this, there can be no dispute.
It protects people, but it also serves as an assault on other people. It's
really not that complicated. There are nutcase Zionists and nutcase Moslems
in that area, all of whom would love to see the 'other' wiped off of the
face of the map.
A person of sober judgment should cast harsh judgment on the mindset
of hatred that both sides espouse, whether that person is Arab, Jew or
something else. One should decry both suicide bombings as well as
sniping those lacking yarmulkes. It's really quite simple. When both
sides can chastise the hatred generally, rather than the 'other,' then
peace is reasonably possible. Walls will come down, and guns will be
put away.
As long as you continue to point the finger at only the Zionists while
turning a blind eye towards the suicide bombers (or even showing a little
sympathy for them), you perpetuate the exchange of hatred.
I am opposed to much of what Israel has done and much of what its
government has supported. I am also opposed to much of the violent
reactions that the Palestinians have responded with.
I am also opposed to some of the hateful remarks you have made about
both Jews and Christians; by doing so, you only characiture those of
Arab descent as 'haters.'
I do not know why you were banned from the Vatican. Maybe it was closed
that day, but it's not normally closed. And I have seen those who are
obviously of Semitic descent within the Vatican and St Peter Church personally,
so I cannot explain your experience, but I assure you it doesn't concord
with normative experience.
You did not dispute my point about 'Angels and Demons,' except to say
that 'it's fiction.' Do you think that the Palestian government should allow
a director to make film a fictional movie which depicts Moslems as corrupt
and sinister in Ramallah?
Nemesio
Originally posted by scherzoI find it amusing that you think Al-Jazeera is going to be the best source
www.aljazeera.net -- It's in Arabic, but I believe an English version of the site is available at english.aljazeera.net. It gives what McCain would call "an insider's view," and considering it's centered in Qatar, it's pretty good on Arab and Muslim politics. Not too much about suicide attacks in Mecca.
LBC's site. Not sure what that is in English.
www ...[text shortened]... rst site that you come up with on a google search for "islam" after the news articles.
for unbiased information on suicide bombing. As a search vehicle, it's
quite suspect. The archives go back to 2004, but the word 'Mecca' only
appears 91 times. In the past 365 days, the word 'Mecca' shows up 94
times in the New York Times. That's not a ringing endorsement.
But I found one of the two bombing stories that I found on the other
media anyway.
http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2003/06/200849155947401626.html
LBC doesn't allow searching in English.
And 'islam.com' is a discussion board, not a news site.
Nemesio
Originally posted by scherzoPlease elaborate on the fact that you weren't allowed into the Vatican! How exactly were you restrained? Why were you not allowed in? I want details. I guarantee if you weren't allowed in it was NOT because you weren't Catholic!
I was not allowed into the Vatican.
It's called "fiction." Of course, Christians are dedicated to believing in the truth of fiction.
Well, duh, of course it's fiction!! However a lot of people who don't bother to research stuff think it's true and the Catholic church sure doesn't want people to believe it. So again I ask you why would they allow the producers of the film onto their property to help defile the church?! You actually side with the producers on this one? Huh? It's like someone doing a horribly untrue and damaging documentary about you without your permission and then asking you if they could film it in your house. Would you let them?
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI said that it seems that some muslims want to die in Mecca. I drew on the fact that many do actually die. So I speculated that it could be a kind of suicide.
These are deaths, but no mention of suicide? You've got Nemesio all in a flap over nothing.
You have to agree Bosse that an event that leads to the death of hundreds on a regular basis will be considered odd in most parts of the world. If 400 people died in the recent olympics in China there would be a huge investigation and steps taken to ensure it does not recur. But not in Mecca. The deaths continue as if its part of the proceedings. Dont you think thats unusual?
Scherzo responded with
"...I have never heard of a Muslim who have gone to Mecca and heard of people dying or wanting to die."
I dont know if there were suicide deaths in Mecca but there were unusually high deaths. Scherzo is even doubting these reports of these deaths. Thats when Nemesio intervened and asked him to provide alternative info.
Originally posted by scherzoNot to worry. When you go to heavan with your 36 virgins, you cant get heart attack, because youre dead already.
Are you trying to give me a heart attack?!?
I suspect that your dick will also be dead ... so we are going to have yet another 36 disappointed virgins in heaven.
Sigh ....
Originally posted by Rajk999Do you really think that it's the Christ-like thing to do to make jocular remarks at another person
Not to worry. When you go to heavan with your 36 virgins, you cant get heart attack, because youre dead already.
I suspect that your dick will also be dead ... so we are going to have yet another 36 disappointed virgins in heaven.
Sigh ....
in regards to their faith? Do you really believe that these barbs at his expense give him any
more reason to respect Christianity?
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioYou know, the knowledge that something elicits a violent physical reaction should actually serve as a reminder to you that maybe you're not being reasonable.
You know, the knowledge that something elicits a violent physical reaction
should actually serve as a reminder to you that maybe you're not being
reasonable.
The wall is both offense and defense; of this, there can be no dispute.
It protects people, but it also serves as an assault on other people. It's
really not that complicated. There are nutca ...[text shortened]... nal movie which depicts Moslems as corrupt
and sinister in Ramallah?
Nemesio
Au contraire, it's what I feel whenever I see Sarah Palin on TV.
It protects people, but it also serves as an assault on other people. It's
really not that complicated. There are nutcase Zionists and nutcase Moslems
in that area, all of whom would love to see the 'other' wiped off of the
face of the map.
I am not aware of any "nutcase Muslims." Oh, wait, right, the people whose land and culture were stolen from them. heh.
They have every right to fight!! They should get an identity before the Zionists kill them off!!
It's really quite simple.
Therein lies the problem. It's not simple. Just read one book on the subject and you'll see that.
Do you think that the Palestian government should allow
a director to make film a fictional movie which depicts Moslems as corrupt
and sinister in Ramallah?
No, because Muslims are not corrupt and sinister. When the Pope does it, though, it's ridiculous, coming from the one who has the post of others who have started Inquisitions and killed people for the purpose of making money.
Originally posted by NemesioAl-Jazeera has its flaws, granted. But they do have some aspects of their channel that serve them well that no one else has.
I find it amusing that you think Al-Jazeera is going to be the best source
for unbiased information on suicide bombing. As a search vehicle, it's
quite suspect. The archives go back to 2004, but the word 'Mecca' only
appears 91 times. In the past 365 days, the word 'Mecca' shows up 94
times in the New York Times. That's not a ringing endorsement.
...[text shortened]... ching in English.
And 'islam.com' is a discussion board, not a news site.
Nemesio
Like a healthy fear of Zionism.
Concerning the story: acknowledged. I did not see that one.
Sorry, I meant islam101.com.
Originally posted by chappy1I was allowed into the Vatican, then called back to the gate and thrown out.
Please elaborate on the fact that you weren't allowed into the Vatican! How exactly were you restrained? Why were you not allowed in? I want details. I guarantee if you weren't allowed in it was NOT because you weren't Catholic!
Well, duh, of course it's fiction!! However a lot of people who don't bother to research stuff think it's true and the Cath ...[text shortened]... permission and then asking you if they could film it in your house. Would you let them?
And of course I wouldn't let them film a documentary. My point is that this is not a documentary! Fiction is fiction! Documentary (is supposed to be) nonfiction!
Originally posted by NemesioI don't know what either of you are trying to prove, but his remarks only point to his sad, racist upbringing. I would not trust him on the UN.
Do you really think that it's the Christ-like thing to do to make jocular remarks at another person
in regards to their faith? Do you really believe that these barbs at his expense give him any
more reason to respect Christianity?
Nemesio
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioBut the fool loves me Nemesio.
Do you really think that it's the Christ-like thing to do to make jocular remarks at another person
in regards to their faith? Do you really believe that these barbs at his expense give him any
more reason to respect Christianity?
Nemesio
He is nuts over me (and just plain nuts as well too).
He starts this thread and includes me in a somewhat derogatory way becuase he knows for a fact my reply is going to be an insult to both him and Islam. And he loves the insults ... obviously.
It hurts me to insult him but I just dont have the heart to disappoint the poor loser. So I let the moron have it .
And thats the Christ-like thing to do.
Originally posted by scherzoBBC has its flaws, granted. But they do have some aspects of their channel that serve them well that no one else has.
Al-Jazeera has its flaws, granted. But they do have some aspects of their channel that serve them well that no one else has.
Like a healthy fear of Zionism.
Concerning the story: acknowledged. I did not see that one.
Sorry, I meant islam101.com.
Like a healthy fear of Islam.
Originally posted by scherzo
Au contraire, it's what I feel whenever I see Sarah Palin on TV.
Well, here is the root of your problem. You think that anger is a validation
of your beliefs. You think it does not obscure your ability to be rational.
I think that's too bad.
I am not aware of any "nutcase Muslims." Oh, wait, right, the people whose land and culture were stolen from them. heh.
They have every right to fight!! They should get an identity before the Zionists kill them off!!
I think both should stop fighting. If 'fighting' is 'identity,' I think that's a
sad state of affairs.
Yes, the Zionists are wrong in many cases. But your unwillingness to see
that the Moslems are also wrong in many cases is what contributes to the
fighting. Both you and the Zionists feel that you are right, and so you
will both continue to fight, spilling the blood of innocents.
Therein lies the problem. It's not simple. Just read one book on the subject and you'll see that.
I've read many articles on the subject. The notion of purchasing a book
about a senseless war between two Semitic peoples is unappealing to me.
It is simple in the sense that perpetuating hatred (as you seem inclined
to do) will only perpetuate the fighting.
No, because Muslims are not corrupt and sinister. When the Pope does it, though, it's ridiculous, coming from the one who has the post of others who have started Inquisitions and killed people for the purpose of making money.
The fact that you are unable to recognize that there are, in fact, some
corrupt and sinister Moslems should be proof positive that your world view
has some flaws.
You think that the Church should endorse a fictional movie that mocks it,
but somehow you think that Moslems should not tolerate the same thing.
As long as you embrace a hypocritical world view, you will give people who
are already looking for an excuse to hate you fuel. Consequently, the
goal you really want -- respect for you and your associated beliefs -- will
always be absent.
If you like fighting, then I guess that's okay. But if your true goal is peaceful
coexistence, then you're going to have to abandon your hate.
Nemesio