Unf**king Believable, A mosque to be built at Ground Zero

I don't think there are Devil Worshipers around much? I mean, now a days they probably play WOW or something instead... and it's more fun

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What about Shinto who worship a River God? Are they Devil Worshipers?



We live and we die. Sadly that's it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm really not sure which is the most intolerant - haven't made my mind up yet. Of course, some people see intolerance as a virtue. :shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

INTOLLERANCE.

Genocidal demands by hordes who have no right of the lands they stand on - made on a small nation which does have rights of the land they are on.

Those who don't know are telling fibs. Like the EU and all Christians. The corruption of the Balfour was the worst crime post W.W.II and it was nothing short of a genocidal aspiration. This was affirmed when a deathly 3-state is now accounted as a 2-state. At least the Nazis were honest about it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

since when did you become a palestinian supporter? and the Israelis aren't a horde though they do have a ton of bigoted suypporters

still ignoring history to push your fantasies i see.

 

My history lessons say the term Palestinean was placed on the Jewish soveriegn land of Judea [aka not any Arab or Islamic sacred soil] by the ancesters of today's christians [the Romans], then they fastediously barred the Jews from returning to their land when Christianity begat power. In the 1960's one Egyptian born terrorist shaked hands with the Pope - and walla! This name was re-dumped on those hordes panting and chanting death to the Jews, accusing them of robbing Palestinean land. Sounds absurd but its a true story.

Is this fantasy, or does it tell Americans what happened when a mosque was dumped on the real ground zero - zip coded Jerusalem:

 

I'm not sure of the application of intollerance here.

Are you confused of signs in Jerusalem and Hebron which say DOGS & JEWS FORBIDDEN? What about a 3-state presented as a 2-state in the same land - confusing arithmetic? Is Jerusalem a capital of the Jewish homeland or Christians or Muslims? Was Moses a Zionist? Does a mosque dumped on the known sacred site of the Jews's most sacred site constitute a genocidal crime - or will it make allah happy? Yes - its oh so confusing!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What made you chose such an avatar?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

"...Who has controlled the Middle East over the course of history? Pretty much everyone..."
Animated-5,000 Years of Middle East History (in 90 seconds)

 

Not my opinion but some historical facts:

The Islamic regime states created by Briton have no history or historical borders - Israel does. And dumping mosques on another peoples sacred sites, then denying it - is a historical tradition with Muslims wherever they have thread - from Jerusalem to India - and now attacking NY, NY. The Jews have never occupied another peoples' land in all their 4000 years history, despite being dispersed throughout the nations - the reverse applies with Muslims.

 

This whole mosque thing is another staged, divisive contrivance, like the Quran burning or the Sherrod Charade.

I only hope we don't see laws being passed that limit free speech because Muslims might be offended.

 

To protect free seech, there must be conditions: there is no law without the law. Just as shouting fire in a closed theatre is not free speech - the notion that one can villify via religious beliefs and get immunity must also be overturned and made illegal.

This is inevitable for humanity's future. This will take a long time - because it impacts the two biggest religions the most - these beliefs seem cannot survive without villifications: they are 'SUBJECT TO JEWS' religions. Even when they know each contradicts the other of the same historical events their beliefs are hinged upon. Huston - we have a problem here!

 

Wow, how ignorant are you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

 

in his mind they were jewish land for a 100 years or so 200 years ago so the palestinians have no claim to it.

 

:bugeye: Eh?

 

What? Vilify?
Religions ARE ideologies and philosophies at their heart. Saying that religions should be immune from.. what? Criticism? Vilification? What degree of severity are you suggesting here and what constitutes criticism?

There is not a direct parallel between shouting fire in a theatre and criticizing a religion, whether burning a book or not. The effects may end up being the same, but I think the distinction that has been made for such things not being allowed under free speech is that one creates instant confusion and/or harm, in the same way I have seen examples used of publicly calling for people to riot or to kill someone. In that case someone is DIRECTLY calling for and thus causing the harm, rather than INDIRECTLY causing it through exercise of free speech.
This latter example (incitement to riot or cause violence) is much more likely to be seen as an after-effect of criticizing a religion or ideology from the reactionary party.

Example : Man criticizes religion/ideology by verbally denouncing its perceived errors, or perhaps burning a book which is considered important or sacred to those of the religion/ideology. In reaction, there is outrage, which may lead to leaders of the offended ideology calling for unrest or violence.
In that case, although the instigator caused some offence to the ideology, the other side reacts by causing violence.

Those who call for violence because their personal religious or philosophical ideals have been perceived as offended or violated** in some way have no excuse for their actions and should not be protected by restricting free speech. Doing so would essentially create a protected minority, above and beyond others.

Can you explain what you mean by "vilify" and making illegal?



**this does not include actions to prohibit them from practicing or voicing their ideologies by force or by law, like restricting free speech to one group over another

 

Well he would be wrong.

 

well I'd use a wee bit stronger language than could but I guess we should be nicer to people like him.

 

I guess I should have added "than one" at the end

 

where others have only fear I have awe and admiration.

 

Yes, that's what I thought you meant. I'm familiar with ye olde accusation of triunalism against Christians, but what are you talking about WRT Judaism and polytheism there?