UK, the take over is nearing completetion.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://news.yahoo.com/islamic-history-now-foisted-british-kids-school-123204739.html Edit content preferences (http://profile.yahoo.com/y/settings/interests/) <button class="done-btn" data-rapid_p="2">Done</button> http://l.yimg.com/os/152/2011/12/12/Daily-Caller-158by27_174921.png (http://www.dailycaller.com/) <cite class="byline vcard top-line"><abbr>2 hours ago</abbr> </cite> Religion (http://news.yahoo.com/religion-and-beliefs/)Education (http://news.yahoo.com/education/)




<iframe tabindex="-1" id="yom-ad-LREC-iframe" src="http://l.yimg.com/rq/darla/2-6-3/html/r-sf.html" frameborder="no" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; width: 300px; height: 266px; display: block; visibility: inherit; position: absolute; z-index: 100;" hidefocus="true" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>

Beginning in 2014, the United Kingdom will require all British schoolchildren to complete a unit on the history of Islam, proudly reports (http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/15/313868/islam-his-enters-new-uk-curriculum/) Press TV, Iran’s very own 24-hour English language news organization.
British Education Secretary Michael Gove announced the addition of a Muslim-specific component after revisions were made to address an outcry over a prior draft that did not include any references to the monotheistic Abrahamic religion.
Muslims were among the most vocal critics. The Muslim Council of Britain, which represents about 500 Islamic institutes across Britain, declared that it was “deeply disappointed.”
The revised curriculum is “great,” though, according to Salim Mulla, chairman of the Lancashire Council of Mosques. Sulla believes that people in the country could use “a better understanding of all faiths,” notes Press TV.
“There is already a good understanding of Christianity taught in schools,” Mulla told the Iranian media outlet. “But I don’t think a lot of Christians really understand what the Muslim faith is about.”
Islam is technically the third-largest religious affiliation in the country, according to (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/dec/11/census-2011-religion-race-education) The Guardian. Christianity is the largest religious group. People claiming to have no religion is the second. Those two groups make up the vast majority of Britons.
A spokesman for the Blackburn Diocese Board of Education spoke favorably of the new draft curriculum.
“As is well known, the early Islamic civilizations gave much to the world,” the spokesman said, “and we would certainly support the teaching of such an important part of world history.”
The British government is currently establishing a new national curriculum for primary and secondary education. The finished product is supposed to be introduced in schools in the fall of 2014. ------------------------------------------- --- Both Drummond and I told you people about whats happening in Britain and how they take over. Now the process will proceed at lightning speed. Already to teach the magnificence and superiority of the great enlightenment known as the Religion of Peace -Islam. What do you want to bet that teaching does not tell of the tens of millions murdered by Islam an instead teaches all Islam's wars were in defensive in nature? Don't worry when the text they use comes out I remind you people of how right we were just like IM doing now. Britain will not last another decade. It will become another Islamic state. Try studying the true history of Islam and what Islam does today. Ignore the lying propaganda CAIR AND OTHER ISLAMIC GROUPS PUT OUT AND ALL PUT OUT BY THEIR FFING APPEASERS. You can do so by researching historic texts and many of the pre 9/11 articles on Islam. Read what Winston Churchill had to say about them and see how he tried to warn Britain . Then look at Britain today with its hate speech laws designed explicitly to protect Islam and the Koran. Then consider how even now here in USA they are already demanding blasphemy laws to protect their ffing cult! And have politicians here jumping on board with them already.. edit. Can a mod please edit the title ? I need the word completion to be spelled correctly. Just saw my error. -Tyr

[Marcus Aurelius]

I wonder if they'll include a chapter on marrying 6 year old girls and having sexual relations with them when they're 9, like Mohammed did.

[jafar00]

Tyr, this is ridiculous.

The UK national curriculum for religious education is overwhelmingly Christian (Catholic) in nature with only a passing mention of "other" religions.
http://www.deni.gov.uk/re_core_syllabus_pdf.pdf

Are you equally outraged that that the children also learn about Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions?

[Marcus Aurelius]

Tyr, this is ridiculous.

The UK national curriculum for religious education is overwhelmingly Christian (Catholic) in nature with only a passing mention of "other" religions.
http://www.deni.gov.uk/re_core_syllabus_pdf.pdf

Are you equally outraged that that the children also learn about Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions?

Show us where education on other religions includes a chapter on marrying 6 year old girls and having sexual relations with them when they're 9, like Mohammed did, and we'll be outraged.

[aboutime]

Tyr, this is ridiculous.

The UK national curriculum for religious education is overwhelmingly Christian (Catholic) in nature with only a passing mention of "other" religions.
http://www.deni.gov.uk/re_core_syllabus_pdf.pdf

Are you equally outraged that that the children also learn about Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions?


jafar. In a way. You are right. This is ridiculous. Ridiculous that you still base everything you say on Propaganda that has been embedded in your easily-led, unchallenged ability to never question lies that you worship as truth.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Tyr, this is ridiculous.

The UK national curriculum for religious education is overwhelmingly Christian (Catholic) in nature with only a passing mention of "other" religions.
http://www.deni.gov.uk/re_core_syllabus_pdf.pdf

Are you equally outraged that that the children also learn about Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions? I think you know there is more to it than that. It is an attempt by the State to indoctrinate the kids to Islam, etc. Made to appease the demands of the Islamists. Lets see if the true history of Islam is taught or will it be a version given by today's Islamist leaders? -Tyr

[revelarts]

2 local Christian schools that i know of Both have chapters in history on Islam.... and Buddhism and Hinduism.

It's Not indoctrination, it's education, at least in the cases I'm aware of. I'm surprised there wasn't a a few classes on it before now in the UK. I know they get a pretty good history of "Christianity" in schools. Here what they get would be banned by the ACLU in some schools. As secular as the UK is the Christan education hasn't seemed to help.

But Depending on how it's taught of course it I don't see a problem. It's a major world religion, people should have some basic facts.
And i doubt that they'll get the marrying the 6 year girl in school. though She might be mentioned as a "wife". Probably get plenty on the holy wars. but Schools gloss over personal stuff like that often. Do we read about JFK's affairs in school history books.
High school classes might get some of that but...

IMO this is not a sign of the the end.
there are plenty of other issues that are more serious on the Muslim political growth IMO.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

2 local Christian schools that i know of Both have chapters in history on Islam.... and Buddhism and Hinduism.

It's Not indoctrination, it's education, at least in the cases I'm aware of. I'm surprised there wasn't a a few classes on it before now in the UK. I know they get a pretty good history of "Christianity" in schools. Here what they get would be banned by the ACLU in some schools. As secular as the UK is the Christan education hasn't seemed to help.

But Depending on how it's taught of course it I don't see a problem. It's a major world religion, people should have some basic facts.
And i doubt that they'll get the marrying the 6 year girl in school. though She might be mentioned as a "wife". Probably get plenty on the holy wars. but Schools gloss over personal stuff like that often. Do we read about JFK's affairs in school history books.
High school classes might get some of that but...

IMO this is not a sign of the the end.
there are plenty of other issues that are more serious on the Muslim political growth IMO.
Rev this is in addition to the other stuff both Drummond and I have been posting about the muslim takeover in Britain. For the government to yield to a demand and institute a program that will undoubtedly sanitize Islam and present it as a true religion of peace does point to just how rapidly the end will come there. Don't worry I'll post how the course is presented as soon as they present it but know this the muslim already have far, far too much control/influence in government there--think the kids will get a true history and presentation of Islam? or an indoctrination version? -Tyr

[Drummond]

Tyr, this is ridiculous.

The UK national curriculum for religious education is overwhelmingly Christian (Catholic) in nature with only a passing mention of "other" religions.
http://www.deni.gov.uk/re_core_syllabus_pdf.pdf

Are you equally outraged that that the children also learn about Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions?

Yes, well, Jafar ...

You conveniently left out of your post the fact that your link comes from THE NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE, AND IT'S MEANT TO ADDRESS ISSUES SPECIFIC TO THAT CORNER OF THE UK ONLY .. THE 'NI' PART OF 'DENI' REFERS TO THAT REGION. ['DENI' stands for 'Department of Education, Northern Ireland' ..]

Anyone caring to examine Northern Ireland's theological climate will understand that there are marked differences between THAT and the rest of the UK !!!

Here, enjoy a page from that site in IRISH ....

http://www.deni.gov.uk/preaseisiuinti.htm :laugh:

Here's their 'contact us' page ....

http://www.deni.gov.uk/contact-us.htm

[Drummond]

MANY THANKS TO TYR FOR THIS THREAD.


2 local Christian schools that i know of Both have chapters in history on Islam.... and Buddhism and Hinduism.

It's Not indoctrination, it's education, at least in the cases I'm aware of. I'm surprised there wasn't a a few classes on it before now in the UK. I know they get a pretty good history of "Christianity" in schools. Here what they get would be banned by the ACLU in some schools. As secular as the UK is the Christan education hasn't seemed to help.

But Depending on how it's taught of course it I don't see a problem. It's a major world religion, people should have some basic facts.
And i doubt that they'll get the marrying the 6 year girl in school. though She might be mentioned as a "wife". Probably get plenty on the holy wars. but Schools gloss over personal stuff like that often. Do we read about JFK's affairs in school history books.
High school classes might get some of that but...

IMO this is not a sign of the the end.
there are plenty of other issues that are more serious on the Muslim political growth IMO.

Indoctrination isn't involved ? Political correctness gone mad, gone into appeasement overdrive, this is NOT the case ?

Take it from me, someone who's lived in the UK his whole life, that Tyr knows what he's talking about !!!

Or, if you refuse to do that (.. and I just bet you do ..) ... try THIS out for size !! .....

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness


In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.
In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: "There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger." Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.

British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.

British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

In an effort to counter "Islamophobia" in British schools, teachers now are required to teach "key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero" in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented "no pork" policies.

Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a "no pork" policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.

The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.

The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).

The Haringey Town Council recently issued "best practice" advice to all schools in its area to "ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons."

Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.

Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.

At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu "as a result of pupil and parental feedback."

The announcement states: "Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork."

In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.

In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.

Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).

The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough's 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.

According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, "It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don't see why the same can't apply to pork."

Lunch menus are not the only area in which "cultural sensitivity" is escalating in British schools.

In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including "The Three Little Pigs," in case they offend Muslim children.

In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.

Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque......

... etc ...

It's all 'lies', is it, Revelarts ? H'mm ?

[aboutime]

MANY THANKS TO TYR FOR THIS THREAD.



Indoctrination isn't involved ? Political correctness gone mad, gone into appeasement overdrive, this is NOT the case ?

Take it from me, someone who's lived in the UK his whole life, that Tyr knows what he's talking about !!!

Or, if you refuse to do that (.. and I just bet you do ..) ... try THIS out for size !! .....

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness



... etc ...

It's all 'lies', is it, Revelarts ? H'mm ?


Sir Drummond. I fear saying this will irk the devil out of many here who claim to admire Rev. But. Honestly. Rev continually reminds me of DP's wannabe version of AL SHARPTON in many instances.
I have never claimed to be, nor have I ever pretended to be the sharpest knife in the drawer here. But. I can say...I'm not gullible enough not to notice when someone like Rev. depends on others to always admire, and always believe him in everything he preaches here...then brags, and challenges others to argue with his PERFECTION.
In other words.
I do not trust rev, and several others. Any farther than I can Physically THROW THEM.
It may be insulting, or offensive of me to say such things. But. I refuse to always Bow Down to anyone. And I do mean ANYONE who must always insist their educational background must never be challenged, and make anyone a lifelong FOLLOWER.

[red state]

I wish REV would go back to his old avatar (that was from a KraZy film that should have simply been a commercial) Anyway, I agreed with REV more then but to ignore what is going on in Europe (as well as Canada and the US) you'd have to be blind. Drummond is correct. I have clients in the UK and unlike my clients in CA, the hatred from the UK's own WHITE people is too great for any of them to overcome the ignorant state they've been led to. They have been filled with so much hatred and detest the success of others so much that they are willing to follow any cult that comes along. An yes, the muSLUM element is just as much a bully as MOST muSLUMS are all over the world.

We have some very nasty liberals and muSLUMS BUT Canada and the UK have it much worse because they, for one, do not have the foundation that we have. If we lose that foundation....it is all over with. The libs and the muSLUMS want nothing more than to replace our foundation we call the Constitution. I lump the libs into a muSLUM thread because I see them as much the same and suspect that the libs truly believe they can "train" the muSLUMs to be their personal brown shirts or use them as an excuse to further weaken this Nation.

Rev, I believe you are very smart and I agree with you much of the time but you'll need to dig in deep and find all this material that you're missing out on cuz it is out there. Speaking of digging.....I am STILL waiting on jafar to answer that question that I've posted several times. Perhaps you guys can put it to him again and demand an answer whenever he defends his cult with the same ole rhetoric.

[Drummond]

Sir Drummond. I fear saying this will irk the devil out of many here who claim to admire Rev. But. Honestly. Rev continually reminds me of DP's wannabe version of AL SHARPTON in many instances.
I have never claimed to be, nor have I ever pretended to be the sharpest knife in the drawer here. But. I can say...I'm not gullible enough not to notice when someone like Rev. depends on others to always admire, and always believe him in everything he preaches here...then brags, and challenges others to argue with his PERFECTION.
In other words.
I do not trust rev, and several others. Any farther than I can Physically THROW THEM.
It may be insulting, or offensive of me to say such things. But. I refuse to always Bow Down to anyone. And I do mean ANYONE who must always insist their educational background must never be challenged, and make anyone a lifelong FOLLOWER.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Drummond]

I wish REV would go back to his old avatar (that was from a KraZy film that should have simply been a commercial) Anyway, I agreed with REV more then but to ignore what is going on in Europe (as well as Canada and the US) you'd have to be blind. Drummond is correct. I have clients in the UK and unlike my clients in CA, the hatred from the UK's own WHITE people is too great for any of them to overcome the ignorant state they've been led to. They have been filled with so much hatred and detest the success of others so much that they are willing to follow any cult that comes along. An yes, the muSLUM element is just as much a bully as MOST muSLUMS are all over the world.

We have some very nasty liberals and muSLUMS BUT Canada and the UK have it much worse because they, for one, do not have the foundation that we have. If we lose that foundation....it is all over with. The libs and the muSLUMS want nothing more than to replace our foundation we call the Constitution. I lump the libs into a muSLUM thread because I see them as much the same and suspect that the libs truly believe they can "train" the muSLUMs to be their personal brown shirts or use them as an excuse to further weaken this Nation.

Rev, I believe you are very smart and I agree with you much of the time but you'll need to dig in deep and find all this material that you're missing out on cuz it is out there. Speaking of digging.....I am STILL waiting on jafar to answer that question that I've posted several times. Perhaps you guys can put it to him again and demand an answer whenever he defends his cult with the same ole rhetoric.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

This is very well said, Red State. Particularly on our lack of a foundation the equivalent of yours. It makes our culture (and that of Canada's) a lot more malleable, therefore prone to subversion.

I've never understood the British hatred of success, even despite being a born-and-bred Londoner myself ! It cripples us, makes us small, and small-minded. It leads to a lack of personal pride or conviction which others then step in to exploit.

But there's a cultural bedrock in America that must make you a VERY hard nut to crack by comparison. Little wonder that the likes of Al Qaeda consider you their special enemy.

[Gaffer]

While rev gets his fair share of thanks here, don't think that he has a huge fan base and following. Rev loves his conspiracies. No matter how far out in left field they may be. How many of you guys are Ron Paul supporters? Die hard Paul supporters, supporting him long after he was out of the race?

How many of you believe the military are out to get you?

How many feel we should close all over seas military bases and pull them all back here to defend the country?

How many feel 911 was an inside job with explosives planted in the buildings?

Rev, at times, posts things that I totally agree with, but he will inevitably cross over a reality line. Sometimes he can be reeled back in, other times he's wandering around behind the little animals.


If you want a good argument, without name calling, and don't mind a lot of youtube examples, rev's your guy. Personally I like him. Sometimes I want to slap him upside the head, but I like him.

[aboutime]

While rev gets his fair share of thanks here, don't think that he has a huge fan base and following. Rev loves his conspiracies. No matter how far out in left field they may be. How many of you guys are Ron Paul supporters? Die hard Paul supporters, supporting him long after he was out of the race?

How many of you believe the military are out to get you?

How many feel we should close all over seas military bases and pull them all back here to defend the country?

How many feel 911 was an inside job with explosives planted in the buildings?

Rev, at times, posts things that I totally agree with, but he will inevitably cross over a reality line. Sometimes he can be reeled back in, other times he's wandering around behind the little animals.


If you want a good argument, without name calling, and don't mind a lot of youtube examples, rev's your guy. Personally I like him. Sometimes I want to slap him upside the head, but I like him.


Gaffer. Instead of answering each of your questions above.

Would a big "NATTA, or ZILCH" do? By the way. I like every member of this forum.
Never have met anyone from this forum. Which is probably why I like them.
Don't know whether rev would like me or not.
But...I didn't come here looking for anyone to like me.
That wouldn't be any fun at all.

[revelarts]

MANY THANKS TO TYR FOR THIS THREAD.



Indoctrination isn't involved ? Political correctness gone mad, gone into appeasement overdrive, this is NOT the case ?

Take it from me, someone who's lived in the UK his whole life, that Tyr knows what he's talking about !!!

Or, if you refuse to do that (.. and I just bet you do ..) ... try THIS out for size !! .....

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness



... etc ...

It's all 'lies', is it, Revelarts ? H'mm ?

I never questioned tyr's post as to it's truthfulness, I question whether that education bit was a sign of the apokolips.

But what you've posted is a true horror show.
and the type of thing i had in mind as WORSE things happening.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

While rev gets his fair share of thanks here, don't think that he has a huge fan base and following. Rev loves his conspiracies. No matter how far out in left field they may be. How many of you guys are Ron Paul supporters? Die hard Paul supporters, supporting him long after he was out of the race?

How many of you believe the military are out to get you?

How many feel we should close all over seas military bases and pull them all back here to defend the country?

How many feel 911 was an inside job with explosives planted in the buildings?

Rev, at times, posts things that I totally agree with, but he will inevitably cross over a reality line. Sometimes he can be reeled back in, other times he's wandering around behind the little animals.


If you want a good argument, without name calling, and don't mind a lot of youtube examples, rev's your guy. Personally I like him. Sometimes I want to slap him upside the head, but I like him. Damn, you beat me to it Gaffer. Pretty much what I was going to post including the part about liking the Rev. ... You never get a bullshat argument from the Rev, maybe a crazy one on some conspiracy but never a bullshat one! Here's another thing too, I never read a post by him in which I thought he lied or deliberately tried to deceive in order to strengthen his argument. Can not say that about every poster I have ever read here. Also the slap part too but I like the cat too much for that...:laugh:- Then when I read his take on the corruption of our government I want to shake his hand and buy him a few rounds of beer.. We all have our strengths and weaknesses but lack of integrity is not one he harbors! No touting a dumbass media line for him.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

MANY THANKS TO TYR FOR THIS THREAD.



Indoctrination isn't involved ? Political correctness gone mad, gone into appeasement overdrive, this is NOT the case ?

Take it from me, someone who's lived in the UK his whole life, that Tyr knows what he's talking about !!!

Or, if you refuse to do that (.. and I just bet you do ..) ... try THIS out for size !! .....

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness



... etc ...

It's all 'lies', is it, Revelarts ? H'mm ? This is how they do! Force one concession after another. Why the hell should non-muslim be deprived of eating pork because muslims have a religious objection to it! Its caving in in order to not offend that will eventually make the non-muslim subordinate to the muslim. They do this in all Western countries as soon as their population gets large enough. Then they go on to eventually supplant all that is not of their damn liking! The damn frog has been in the pot of boiling water for a long time there. We should observe what's happening there because they have already started it here. Good to read confirmation from Drummond about my warnings and the conditions in Britain. You people need to wake the hell up or else you are going to see your grandchildren slaves to the muslims. And by God I do mean actual slaves !!!!-Tyr

[red state]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Gaffer http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=652766#post652766)
While rev gets his fair share of thanks here, don't think that he has a huge fan base and following. Rev loves his conspiracies. No matter how far out in left field they may be. How many of you guys are Ron Paul supporters? Die hard Paul supporters, supporting him long after he was out of the race?

How many of you believe the military are out to get you?

How many feel we should close all over seas military bases and pull them all back here to defend the country?

How many feel 911 was an inside job with explosives planted in the buildings?

Rev, at times, posts things that I totally agree with, but he will inevitably cross over a reality line. Sometimes he can be reeled back in, other times he's wandering around behind the little animals.


If you want a good argument, without name calling, and don't mind a lot of youtube examples, rev's your guy. Personally I like him. Sometimes I want to slap him upside the head, but I like him.



Damn, you beat me to it Gaffer. Pretty much what I was going to post including the part about liking the Rev. ... You never get a bullshat argument from the Rev, maybe a crazy one on some conspiracy but never a bullshat one! Here's another thing too, I never read a post by him in which I thought he lied or deliberately tried to deceive in order to strengthen his argument. Can not say that about every poster I have ever read here. Also the slap part too but I like the cat too much for that...:laugh:- Then when I read his take on the corruption of our government I want to shake his hand and buy him a few rounds of beer.. We all have our strengths and weaknesses but lack of integrity is not one he harbors! No touting a dumbass media line for him.. -Tyr

__________________________________________________ _______________________GREAT, HEART FELT POST THERE TYR!!!!
I'm CERTAIN that I'd click the GAFF award on that magnificent piece of writing. I agree that REV is the REAL DEAL.....I just don't care for being labeled this or that simply because I stand with WEST and others who have gotten important info from our ENEMY (without hurting them....too much) HA!!!!! Before I use Gaffer's post as a list, I want to second that motion about REV. I agree with much of his posts and realize that I can read what he's written in honesty. I also respect anyone who can stick to their guns and not allow the wind or stream to sway their bullet. Too many on these type sites who will change their positions or pull some junk out of their hat (which always starts a thread wrongly).

OK...now for Gaff:
How many die hard Paul supporters, supporting him long after he was out of the race?
Just following that nut almost qualifies one as a nut so I'm sure they'd drive off the side of a mountain (if he did).

How many of you believe the military are out to get you?
Depends on who you're talking about.....I truly believe there are globalists under B.O., placed in power by B.O. (and other current presidents) who do not have the USA's best interest. Same goes for any law agency....not all of them are good ole boy Constitutionalists.

How many feel we should close all over seas military bases and pull them all back here to defend the country?
I feel that we should have bases wherever there are embassies but I the number should be a minute one....I'd prefer them to house MOST of our forces on our continental borders and coasts (YES...even Canada).

How many feel 911 was an inside job with explosives planted in the buildings? .REALLY....please don't tell me the REV believes that. This was a litmus on what the REV has said (right)?

Rev, at times, posts things that I totally agree with, but he will inevitably cross over a reality line. Sometimes he can be reeled back in, other times he's wandering around behind the little animals. .We all wonder...I'm even a bit KraZy Town at times but most of the times my insanity is to make a point or simply out of frustration. I see REV's argument about the Constitutionality of torture and stuff but I still believe the Constitution should be read in its entirety (much like the Bible) instead of picking and choosing what works and what doesn't. I'm always careful to NOT include our enemies within the Constitution (unless it specifically says to "be nice"). HA!!!

OK...I"m DONE....

[jafar00]

I think you know there is more to it than that. It is an attempt by the State to indoctrinate the kids to Islam, etc. Made to appease the demands of the Islamists. Lets see if the true history of Islam is taught or will it be a version given by today's Islamist leaders? -Tyr

I would agree with you if that were the case, but they also teach Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism etc... Are they trying to indoctrinate kids into becoming Hindus too?

I hope they do get an accurate education on the history of Islam from an Islamic source. It is history as it was faithfully recorded.


Yes, well, Jafar ...

You conveniently left out of your post the fact that your link comes from THE NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE, AND IT'S MEANT TO ADDRESS ISSUES SPECIFIC TO THAT CORNER OF THE UK ONLY .. THE 'NI' PART OF 'DENI' REFERS TO THAT REGION. ['DENI' stands for 'Department of Education, Northern Ireland' ..]

Anyone caring to examine Northern Ireland's theological climate will understand that there are marked differences between THAT and the rest of the UK !!!

Here, enjoy a page from that site in IRISH ....

http://www.deni.gov.uk/preaseisiuinti.htm :laugh:

Here's their 'contact us' page ....

http://www.deni.gov.uk/contact-us.htm

Excuse me for not wanting to waste too much time googling the UK national curriculum from a site based in England. Northern Ireland is still the UK unless something has changed last time I checked?

[Drummond]

Excuse me for not wanting to waste too much time googling the UK national curriculum from a site based in England. Northern Ireland is still the UK unless something has changed last time I checked?

I'm sorry to see that the desire to offer the results of thorough research is lacking, Jafar. But the fact remains ... had I not pointed out that your site was limited to just one corner of the UK, you might well have succeeded in giving the impression that it represented the UK in its entirety. However .. IT DOES NOT.

Ever heard of Stormont ? Ever heard of the Northern Ireland Office ? Ever heard of the fact that Northern Ireland is governed as its own entity within the UK, and that consequently, laws will exist that are specific to Northern Ireland ?

The theological makeup of Northern Ireland is NOT typical of the UK as a whole. There is a far greater Catholic representation there. Abortion issues, for example, are treated with greater prominence than would be true for the rest of the UK. Protestant and Catholic enmities are altogether more pronounced there.

[Drummond]

I never questioned tyr's post as to it's truthfulness, I question whether that education bit was a sign of the apokolips.

But what you've posted is a true horror show.
and the type of thing i had in mind as WORSE things happening.

Yes, Revelarts, I've offered 'thanks' for your post.

You've surprised me with it. I thought you'd take a more typically dismissive Leftie line than you have.

It seems your openness to the truth is greater than I'd imagined, then. Point conceded, and, thank you.

[red state]

Excuse me for not wanting to waste too much time googling the UK national curriculum from a site based in England. Northern Ireland is still the UK unless something has changed last time I checked?


You got time to Google "where are all the REAL muSLUMs" cuz they sure ain't in any of the muSLUM nations where mass exodus of other religions take place to avoid persecution, imprisonment or death. Where are the REAL muSLUMS anyway....some hide-E-hole in Antarctica? Google it.....at least compare the tolerance of non-muSLUM nations to muSLUM nations and tell me who is tolerant and who is not. Make a list and I'll do the same but I guarantee the comparison will be extremely lop-sided.

You know....you may be the only and last REAL muSLUM the world has left....or has ever seen.

[red state]

....what you've posted is a true horror show.
and the type of thing i had in mind as WORSE things happening....

Yes, REV, the world and culture of muSLUMS are indeed MUCH worse than anything we in a FREE, tolerant and civil society could EVER imagine. It is a horrific, evil cult that has plagued the world since its young beginnings.

[jafar00]

I'm sorry to see that the desire to offer the results of thorough research is lacking, Jafar. But the fact remains ... had I not pointed out that your site was limited to just one corner of the UK, you might well have succeeded in giving the impression that it represented the UK in its entirety. However .. IT DOES NOT.

Ever heard of Stormont ? Ever heard of the Northern Ireland Office ? Ever heard of the fact that Northern Ireland is governed as its own entity within the UK, and that consequently, laws will exist that are specific to Northern Ireland ?

The theological makeup of Northern Ireland is NOT typical of the UK as a whole. There is a far greater Catholic representation there. Abortion issues, for example, are treated with greater prominence than would be true for the rest of the UK. Protestant and Catholic enmities are altogether more pronounced there.

Ok so you find a copy of the UK religious education curriculum as applies to the other parts of the UK that are not Northern Ireland then. Then show me that Islam is a major part of the curriculum with Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and others reduced to a small section by themselves because if there really is a takeover going on, the curriculum would be overwhelmingly Islamic, instead of the reality which is overwhelmingly Christian.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Ok so you find a copy of the UK religious education curriculum as applies to the other parts of the UK that are not Northern Ireland then. Then show me that Islam is a major part of the curriculum with Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and others reduced to a small section by themselves because if there really is a takeover going on, the curriculum would be overwhelmingly Islamic, instead of the reality which is overwhelmingly Christian.

You want someone else to prove your point? Doesn't work that way. You make a claim, you provide the proof.

If you think the religious education section of UK curriculum is 'overwhelmingly Christian', then post proof.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I would agree with you if that were the case, but they also teach Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism etc... Are they trying to indoctrinate kids into becoming Hindus too?


We will see how they choose to cover Islam . That will tell if its being covered the same way the others are. I already know that it will not be because it is being done at all to appease the Islamists.--Tyr

[aboutime]

Doesn't anyone see, or recognize how 'jafar' must always come up with another form of an Excuse to validate his lies?

jafar is nothing but a Propagandist, False Prophet who loves, and supports any organization that will destroy Americans, or anyone who vocally disagree's with jafar...on any topic.

5285

[Drummond]

Ok so you find a copy of the UK religious education curriculum as applies to the other parts of the UK that are not Northern Ireland then. Then show me that Islam is a major part of the curriculum with Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and others reduced to a small section by themselves because if there really is a takeover going on, the curriculum would be overwhelmingly Islamic, instead of the reality which is overwhelmingly Christian.

I'm with Marcus. I think the burden of proof is on you, Jafar.

But in any case, these things aren't arranged with such simple tactics in mind.

I've ALREADY provided proof of how increasingly biased towards consideration of Muslim practices and sensibilities our education system is becoming ... either the material provided is true, or it is false. Your position in this, if you choose to refute what's been posted, is to demonstrate, beyond doubt, that it's falsehood.

So come on, Jafar, DO THAT, if you think you can .. because so far, all you've supplied evidence about is Northern Ireland, which is NOT typical of the UK as a whole.

But here's the truth. The way it's done ...

Religious instruction in the UK, these days, covers many faiths. It started from a position of consideration of Christianity as the overwhelmingly dominant faith, with others having little or no interest to UK citizens. Then .. a massive boom in immigration occurred, courtesy of a nearly open-border policy practiced by our Socialists when in power, namely, the Labour Party.

Thanks to this, whole communities have sprung up which don't integrate, but insist upon being catered for. So ... upon pain of being branded 'racist' if anything ELSE is ever preferred ... the process of greater inclusion of those so-called 'minor' faiths is ongoing.

The truth is that it's a growing phenomenon, and even our current Government is pandering to it. Always the emphasis is greater and greater consideration of faiths NOT originally our own .. and the sheer arrogance of Islamic methodology forces .. more and more of it down our throats.

In another thread a long while ago, I discussed some research to find out which mosque Jafar might've attended .. since both he and I know the area of London he was associated with when he lived in England. And - checking out the Seven Sisters Road, running through north London, I found no less than SIX mosques within that one locality !!!!

Doesn't this tell its own story ??

But still, I shall now post another link. It, too, shows the ever-onwards drive that exists to create greater Muslim inclusivity. Jafar can have some fun in denying what THIS tells us, as well ...

http://socrel.org.uk/islam-and-the-university-curriculum-call-for-papers/


The 2013 Socrel / HEA Teaching and Studying Religion symposium will explore the theme: Islam and the University Curriculum: Experiences of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education
Venue: BSA Meeting Room, Imperial Wharf, London
Date: 7 December 2013
10 a.m. – 5 p.m.

In a fast-changing, multi-faith context, the incorporation of Islam on the curriculum is a salient issue for higher education disciplines. Religious diversity is growing, highlighted in the recently-released 2011 Census figures detailing the re-configuration of religious identification in England and Wales. According to the Census data, Muslims constitute the second-largest religious grouping, and the number of the population identifying as Muslim is increasing. This raises debate and discussion about how Islam is integrated into teaching and learning contexts in higher education settings. In recent years there has been widening interest about the place, or even non-place, of Islam on the curriculum, not only because of increases in Muslim students, but also because of the (often negative) discourses circulating about Islam. Debate has occurred around the need for greater religious literacy around religion more generally, and Islam in particular. To what extent are higher education institutions responding to these issues? How do Muslim students feel Islam is represented in higher education? Does a Christianised curriculum still dominate? How do non-Muslim students respond to the religious content of courses? And how do teachers respond to a more diverse student body?

Topics can include, but are not limited to:

• Islam on the curriculum

• Absence/silence of Islam on the curriculum

• Muslim students’ experiences of the teaching of religion

• Expansion of Muslim student numbers in HE

• The hidden curriculum

• Inclusion of Islam in sociology of religion pedagogy

• Teacher positionality

• Institutional contexts

The day will be highly participative and engaged. The symposium will be organised as a single stream so that the day is as much about discussion as it is about presentation, and therefore the number of formal papers will be limited.

Does any more need to be said ? The drive towards seeing to it that Islam is increasingly favoured and even more dominant, is all too plain to see.

[jafar00]

I'm with Marcus. I think the burden of proof is on you, Jafar.

No. You have to prove the claims in the OP which also doesn't offer an iota of proof. Just a load of bluster based on an article by an Iranian website which also offers nothing.

The education website for England is a maze of circular references which nothing to say what the curriculum is. Only the Northern Irish (UK!) site lists the subjects in the curriculum.

Islam is just a module in an overwhelmingly Christian curriculum. Even the PressTV article says that. JUST A MODULE.

Your outrage is misplaced. Storm in a teacup.

[Drummond]

No. You have to prove the claims in the OP which also doesn't offer an iota of proof. Just a load of bluster based on an article by an Iranian website which also offers nothing.

The education website for England is a maze of circular references which nothing to say what the curriculum is. Only the Northern Irish (UK!) site lists the subjects in the curriculum.

Islam is just a module in an overwhelmingly Christian curriculum. Even the PressTV article says that. JUST A MODULE.

Your outrage is misplaced. Storm in a teacup.

Yes, well. On the issue of the Northern Ireland site -- aren't you proving my point for me ? Northern Ireland, as I've said already, is not theologically typical of the UK as a whole.

But I'll tell you what the 'mainland UK' approach is, at least, generally speaking.

Religious Instruction has to be offered by all schools (though I think those having 'academy' status differ). HOWEVER, exactly what this IS, is not nearly as set in stone.

Also ... parents, if they opt for it, can make sure that their children do not attend certain classes of a particular faith if that's what they want. Which leads to an unfortunate disparity, as it tends to be the case that Christian parents don't get nearly as proactive as Muslim ones would.

Having said that ... and as I've shown from articles I've posted, there are cases of where schools insist that the children they teach learn Muslim customs, even DRESS as Muslims, or attend places on Awayday events, such as mosques, where they can be again shown more about Islam. If ever challenged on that, they say that school inspectors expect them to meet standards consistent with multiculturalism, and 'diversity' correctness ! HOWEVER .. 'strangely', it never works the other way, where Muslim children are forced to go to Christian churches, or abandon habits or requirements demanded of them by Islam.

There are 'faith' schools in Britain, operating outside of the State system. Some are Christian, but there are a rising number of Islamic ones. I have posted horror stories of just what these schools get up to elsewhere on this forum. Last time I checked, which was a while ago, 85 purely Islamic schools existed.

So there it is. The British system, whilst catering for Christian religious teaching, nonetheless is biased towards an increasing bias towards favouring Islam ... and headmasters know they'll get 'brownie points' from outfits such as Ofsted (the official regulator) if they do things which further a 'multicultural' agenda.

So the bias, and the educational skewing, continues .. and gathers pace. With NOTHING ranged against it to stop it.

[aboutime]

Yes, well. On the issue of the Northern Ireland site -- aren't you proving my point for me ? Northern Ireland, as I've said already, is not theologically typical of the UK as a whole.

But I'll tell you what the 'mainland UK' approach is, at least, generally speaking.

Religious Instruction has to be offered by all schools (though I think those having 'academy' status differ). HOWEVER, exactly what this IS, is not nearly as set in stone.

Also ... parents, if they opt for it, can make sure that their children do not attend certain classes of a particular faith if that's what they want. Which leads to an unfortunate disparity, as it tends to be the case that Christian parents don't get nearly as proactive as Muslim ones would.

Having said that ... and as I've shown from articles I've posted, there are cases of where schools insist that the children they teach learn Muslim customs, even DRESS as Muslims, or attend places on Awayday events, such as mosques, where they can be again shown more about Islam. If ever challenged on that, they say that school inspectors expect them to meet standards consistent with multiculturalism, and 'diversity' correctness ! HOWEVER .. 'strangely', it never works the other way, where Muslim children are forced to go to Christian churches, or abandon habits or requirements demanded of them by Islam.

There are 'faith' schools in Britain, operating outside of the State system. Some are Christian, but there are a rising number of Islamic ones. I have posted horror stories of just what these schools get up to elsewhere on this forum. Last time I checked, which was a while ago, 85 purely Islamic schools existed.

So there it is. The British system, whilst catering for Christian religious teaching, nonetheless is biased towards an increasing bias towards favouring Islam ... and headmasters know they'll get 'brownie points' from outfits such as Ofsted (the official regulator) if they do things which further a 'multicultural' agenda.

So the bias, and the educational skewing, continues .. and gathers pace. With NOTHING ranged against it to stop it.



Sir Drummond. I am reminded, almost daily. How I, as a Christian. Have NOTHING to prove, nor must I find any need to convince, make up, embellish, or lie about my faith.
And I feel good about that.
Unlike jafar, who must constantly find reasons to defend, or make excuses. Even attempting to blame others in a manner to distract from the denied...religious teachings of Islam, and the Muslim faith.
If it was near as fulfilling as a faith, like Christianity. There would never be any need for jafar to defend anything.
That's what I find so interesting about FAITH. It is something Unseen, and in the minds and hearts of people like me who call ourselves Christians.
Therefor. There is no need to find excuses, or reasons to Defend MY FAITH.
It just is. And the rest of the world has been trying to get rid of us for many thousands of years....All in the name of Phony Religions that preach Death to anyone who doesn't follow the so-called Religion of Peace.

[Noir]

If you think the religious education section of UK curriculum is 'overwhelmingly Christian', then post proof.

Having lived through the 'Religious education' system only a few years ago, and with a younger brother currently going through it, i can confirm the education is vastly and overwhelmingly christian, and it is certainlty not confirmed to the classroom.

[Drummond]

Having lived through the 'Religious education' system only a few years ago, and with a younger brother currently going through it, i can confirm the education is vastly and overwhelmingly christian, and it is certainlty not confirmed to the classroom.

... and ... correct me if I'm wrong ... you're from Northern Ireland. Yes ?

See my other posts.

[Noir]

... and ... correct me if I'm wrong ... you're from Northern Ireland. Yes ? See my other posts.

Oh damn, your right, and during those years i never networked with anyone from across the rest if the UK. DAS WAR VERBOTEN!

[Drummond]

Oh damn, your right, and during those years i never networked with anyone from across the rest if the UK. DAS WAR VERBOTEN!

Well, if it was 'verboten', how come we're conversing here ?

Fact is, though, that you will have more familiarity with your area than mine. And mine IS other parts of the UK. Principally London and SE England, and now Wales.

And my posts stand.

[fj1200]

Both Drummond and I told you people about whats happening in Britain and how they take over. Now the process will proceed at lightning speed.

Who knew the Brits would be so easily conquered. :dunno:

[Drummond]

Who knew the Brits would be so easily conquered. :dunno:

That's what comes of literally DECADES of Lefties tinkering with social values, doing their damndest to make everyone think as they do ..

... to say nothing of 'highly porous' (maybe an understatement) border controls, AGAIN arranged thanks to our Lefties.

Observe ... this from a Leftie publication, so I'm sure you'll be inclined to trust it ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/27/our-borders-are-porous


What will be the abiding legacies of Labour's era? What will last? Governments list those things that they planned and politicked for, but more enduring may be the shadow of things over which governments seem powerless.

This week the immigration figures were a reminder of that helplessness. How did it happen that the last decade saw the greatest inward migration the country has ever known – whichever estimates you choose? Unplanned, unwilled and only slightly controlled, "it just happened" is all you can get from experts and officials. Labour tried hard to prevent it, setting targets, being tough, angrily denouncing the wretched Home Office as "unfit for purpose". But the truth is more alarming – a lot of things these days seem beyond the power or nerve of government. No wonder trust in politics falls when grandiose promises, targets and "world class" boasting is matched by impotence. How odd that a whole new paranoid fear of the big state springs up during the time it becomes clear that Big Brother is more mouth than trousers.

People want government to do more on most things – controlling immigration, preventing globalisation stealing away jobs to China, banning obscenely high pay. This week a Commons committee warns that the government still can't make absent fathers pay for their children. A Home Office-commissioned report shows no one can stop the damage done to girls, driving them to *anorexia and depression for not matching airbrushed, breast-implanted perfection, while boys think mobile-phone porn is real life. But the state can't liberate unhappy e-slaves from 24-hour email inboxes, nor stop the bullying blogosphere turning national discourse nastier. Yet governmental incapacity to do many things people care about will not deter electioneering filled with extravagant promises on lesser matters amid bluster on the impossibles.

Controlling the borders is a first duty of government. Sudden and unexpected immigration has abruptly changed the nature of some communities and there is no point pretending it can or will be reversed.

BEING a Leftie rag, of course, the Guardian has no interest in blaming Labour for anything more than it must .. hence the tone of this article. Nonetheless, what you have here is an acknowledgment that it was under Labour, our Leftie Party, that the immigration issue became what it was, and even still is.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Who knew the Brits would be so easily conquered. :dunno:
Who knew that we Americans can be too!!??? Obama is proof of that IMHO. HE GETS 8 YEARS AND --IF - ANOTHER ONE LIKE HIM COMES IN IMMEDIATELY AFTER WITH 8 MORE YEARS OF THIS NATION DESTROYING ROT WE TOO SHALL FALL. I bet millions of native infidel Brits are now saying--this can not be happening,, yet it is!!! -Tyr

[fj1200]

Observe ... this from a Leftie publication, so I'm sure you'll be inclined to trust it ...

I see your pony is still laden with only one trick.


Who knew that we Americans can be too!!??? Obama is proof of that IMHO.

He's proof that we've been conquered? Hardly. He's proof that Democrats can win elections.

[aboutime]

That's what comes of literally DECADES of Lefties tinkering with social values, doing their damndest to make everyone think as they do ..

... to say nothing of 'highly porous' (maybe an understatement) border controls, AGAIN arranged thanks to our Lefties.

Observe ... this from a Leftie publication, so I'm sure you'll be inclined to trust it ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/27/our-borders-are-porous



BEING a Leftie rag, of course, the Guardian has no interest in blaming Labour for anything more than it must .. hence the tone of this article. Nonetheless, what you have here is an acknowledgment that it was under Labour, our Leftie Party, that the immigration issue became what it was, and even still is.



Sir Drummond. Take note. fj is nothing but a Liberal, Wishful thinker who gets great pleasure in distracting attention away from his own, sorry, miserable theft of breathable air from the rest of us.

[fj1200]

Sir Drummond. Take note. fj is nothing but a Liberal, Wishful thinker who gets great pleasure in distracting attention away from his own, sorry, miserable theft of breathable air from the rest of us.

:laugh: So much for hoping you'd get smarter over my vacation.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

He's proof that we've been conquered? Hardly. He's proof that Democrats can win elections.

Yes, we've been conquered and just don't know it yet. When truth, justice and the American way are both ridiculed and abhorred by this many millions we've been properly propagandized and conquered. When true patriotism is vilified and ridiculed while it is compared to terrorism we've been conquered. Those of us unconquered do think its a sad waste letting millions of sub-humans destroy the greatness of this nation while they prance around patting their damn ignorant selves on the back as supremely, enlightened geniuses. This when 99% are not even worth the price of a bullet to dispatch their ffing sorry asses with IMHO. Even should I stand alone , I'd still say, ffkk all the ffing scum! I detest every GD one of their sorry wretched ignorant asses. ...-Tyr

[fj1200]

Yes, we've been conquered and just don't know it yet.

Yes, we've been conquered by .8% of the population. :rolleyes:




<tbody>
United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States)
2,595,000
0.8


</tbody>


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

I guess I have a higher opinion of the US.

[aboutime]

:laugh: So much for hoping you'd get smarter over my vacation.


Obviously. You didn't!

And nobody noticed you weren't here. Nice and civil, quiet, and pleasant.

[fj1200]

Obviously. You didn't!

And nobody noticed you weren't here. Nice and civil, quiet, and pleasant.

Yeah, I noticed the love fest between you knuckleheads who didn't have to worry about any dissenting opinions, being shown your errors, and challenges to your ideology... such that it is.

[Marcus Aurelius]

No. You have to prove the claims in the OP which also doesn't offer an iota of proof. Just a load of bluster based on an article by an Iranian website which also offers nothing.

The education website for England is a maze of circular references which nothing to say what the curriculum is. Only the Northern Irish (UK!) site lists the subjects in the curriculum.

Islam is just a module in an overwhelmingly Christian curriculum. Even the PressTV article says that. JUST A MODULE.

Your outrage is misplaced. Storm in a teacup.

dumb ass. other people have to prove what they say, but you don't???


http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum


The current National Curriculum is set out in the primary National Curriculum until 2014 (http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/primary) and secondary National Curriculum until 2014 (http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/secondary) sections. Further information is available on the 2014 National Curriculum page. (https://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum2014)



Primary National Curriculum until 2014... http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/primary Details by clicking links on page

Secondary National Curriculum until 2014... http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/secondary Details by clicking links on page


Specifics on Religious Education in the UK...
http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/religious%20education%20guidance%20in%20schools.pd f

Section 78 (1) of the 2002 Education Act

states that all pupils should follow a
balanced and broadly based curriculum which
‘promotes the spiritual, moral,
cultural, social, mental and physical devel
opment of pupils and of society, and
prepares pupils for the opportunities, res
ponsibilities and experiences of later
life’. Learning about and from
religions and beliefs, through the distinct
knowledge, understanding and skills contai
ned in RE within a broad-based
curriculum, is essential to achieving
these aims. Exploring the concepts of
religion and belief and their roles in t
he spiritual, moral and cultural lives of
people in a diverse society helps indi
viduals develop moral awareness and
social understanding.



Hardly sounds overwhelmingly Christian to me.

[aboutime]

Yeah, I noticed the love fest between you knuckleheads who didn't have to worry about any dissenting opinions, being shown your errors, and challenges to your ideology... such that it is.


Sure you did. So when did you stop beating your wife?

[fj1200]

Sure you did. So when did you stop beating your wife?

Will drummond take you to task for your vile lies? :laugh: Who am I kidding, he'll back his knucklehead comrades to the end.

[aboutime]

Will drummond take you to task for your vile lies? :laugh: Who am I kidding, he'll back his knucklehead comrades to the end.


Thank you......Robert II.

[fj1200]

Thank you......Robert II.

Is that all you have left? Weak sauce.

[fj1200]

other people have to prove what they say, but you don't???

Point of order; I believe the burden of proof is on the OP. Jafar's standard is reasonable doubt.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yes, we've been conquered by .8% of the population. :rolleyes: I did not say we were conquered by any one entity did I? I'VE ALWAYS MAINTAINED THAT THE LEFTISTS HERE ARE IN AN ALLIANCE WITH THE ISLAMISTS. Are you presenting that the resulting propagandizing of tens of millions Americans does not exist and never happened? How about a clear example of how effective propaganda is and has been in the recent past? Think the effects and resulting outcome from the Nazi propaganda preceding and during WW2. Do you think that all German citizens were Nazi's? I think you fail to consider the whole...--Tyr


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

I guess I have a higher opinion of the US. Good that you do, I'll not fault you at all for having such an opinion. How you are able to have after what we have seen happen the last twenty years and especially the last 5 years is beyond me. I dearly hope you are the one that is correct on that count !!!! - Tyr You fail to consider the entirety of the situation . The reeducation of America is hard to comprehend because it took place over a 50+ year span of time. -Tyr

[Drummond]

dumb ass. other people have to prove what they say, but you don't???


http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum







Specifics on Religious Education in the UK...
http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/religious%20education%20guidance%20in%20schools.pd f

Hardly sounds overwhelmingly Christian to me.

EXACTLY. That's because it's not.

Little wonder isn't it, that Jafar wanted to pass something off from Northern Ireland as typical of the rest of the UK.

What we have here is political correctness in action. The UK 'mainland' approach is to, YES, cater for Christianity, in so far as its teaching needs to be available, and a fact. That said, the wider context is that other religions MUST be included as well.

The UK is ceasing to be identifiable, bit by bit, as a predominantly Christian 'nation'. The agenda is Secularist, in that Lefties want to cater for all faiths .. thereby removing the authority of any one of them.

Enter aggressive Islam on to the scene, where its adherents invade entire communities. Integration doesn't happen, rather, exclusively Muslim communities form. As in the case of what Choudary attempted in east London, he and his followers tried to turn the place into a Sharia-controlled zone, believing that the resident Muslims would be so compliant that the British authorities would just sit back and watch it happen !!

Educationally, they open their own Muslim-only schools. They build mosques by the hundreds. They open up Sharia courts and demand Muslim compliance. And all the while, if anyone thinks of challenging it, well, then this must be deemed a 'racist' act.

In the meantime, educationally speaking ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356361/Shame-Britains-Muslim-schools-Secret-filming-shows-pupils-beaten.html


.. Welcome to one of Britain’s most influential Islamic faith schools, one of at least 2,000 such schools in Britain, some full-time, others part-time. They represent a growing, parallel education system.

The school is the Darul Uloom Islamic High School in Birmingham, an oversubscribed independent secondary school. Darul Ulooms are world-renowned Islamic institutions and their aim is to produce the next generation of Muslim leaders. In fact, these schools have been described as the ‘Etons of Islam’.

This school is required by its inspectors to teach tolerance and respect for other faiths. But the Channel 4 current affairs programme Dispatches filmed secretly inside it – and instead discovered that Muslim children are being taught religious apartheid and social segregation.

We recorded a number of speakers giving deeply disturbing talks about Jews, Christians and atheists.

We found children as young as 11 learning that Hindus have ‘no intellect’ and that they ‘drink cow p***’.

And we came across pupils being told that the ‘disbelievers’ are ‘the worst creatures’ and that Muslims who adopt supposedly non-Muslim ways, such as shaving, dancing, listening to music and – in the case of women – removing their headscarves, would be tortured with a forked iron rod in the afterlife.

In 2009 this school was praised by Government-approved inspection teams for its interfaith teachings. The report said that ‘pupils learn about the beliefs and practices of other faiths and are taught to show respect to other world religions’.

It seems that the inspectors were unaware of the teaching methods revealed by our undercover reporter, Osman. He was taken on as a volunteer at the Darul Uloom school in Birmingham in April 2009 and was allowed to sit in on some lessons – but not their Islamic classes.

So, in July last year, he went into one of the rooms where we’d heard they taught Islamic studies and left a secret camera to record the lessons.

Filming intermittently over a period of four months, the camera recorded children being taught a hardline, intolerant and highly anti-social version of Islam.

During the same period our reporter also attended the Markazi Jamia mosque in Keighley, West Yorkshire, after hearing of serious allegations that children were being hit at its madrassa.

Madrassas in the UK are part-time after-school or weekend classes, often held in mosques, where children are taught to read the Koran. In Keighley it is not what they are being taught that is the problem, but how.

Again, Osman went into the mosque and left the camera in the room where classes took place.

The film shows children as young as six sitting on the floor of a large room in the mosque, one of the biggest in the country. The boys are hunched over wooden benches, rocking backwards and forwards as they rote-learn the Koran in Arabic. A man with a long white beard dressed in a traditional shalwar kameez – tunic and trousers – sits at the head of the class.

Periodically he gets up and walks behind the boys. As he passes, the children appear to cower and watch him nervously. It soon becomes clear why.

He unexpectedly raises his hand and slaps a young boy hard on the head. Moments later he strikes another. And then he kicks a third child.

In just two days of filming in December 2010, the camera recorded the teacher hitting children as young as six or seven at least ten times, in less than three hours of lessons ....

... All 'Ofsted-approved' .. eh ?

No doubt Jafar would now like to convince us all that none of this was 'really Islamic' ....

[fj1200]

You fail to consider the entirety of the situation . The reeducation of America is hard to comprehend because it took place over a 50+ year span of time. -Tyr

So we've been undergoing an Islamic based reeducation of America for 50 years??? No wonder they're taking over the world what with all of their superior methods of governance, winning those wars, and all. :rolleyes:

[Drummond]

Will drummond take you to task for your vile lies? :laugh: Who am I kidding, he'll back his knucklehead comrades to the end.

Perhaps you've forgotten a series of posts which appeared a while ago alleging 'puppy torturing' ... ?

Care to remind us of their origin ?

[fj1200]

Perhaps you've forgotten a series of posts which appeared a while ago alleging 'puppy torturing' ... ?

Care to remind us of their origin ?

Bam!!! Called it.


Will drummond take you to task for your vile lies? :laugh: Who am I kidding, he'll back his knucklehead comrades to the end.

This should go along with your big government leanings:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxcP7TRY178

[Drummond]

So we've been undergoing an Islamic based reeducation of America for 50 years??? No wonder they're taking over the world what with all of their superior methods of governance, winning those wars, and all. :rolleyes:

Try to comprehend.

There are some of us who prefer not to sleepwalk to disaster.

How much incursion is TOO much ?

Not that it's that simple in any case. The real point is that attitudes are softened up over an extended period, so as to ensure that tolerance is expanded upon.

Then that, too, is worked on. Goalposts shift. Perceptions of what is, or is not, an 'antisocial attitude' to hold .. likewise.

In the end, the death of cultural identity is assured, eroded by political correctness expectations.

So the questions need to be asked .. where do you draw the line in the sand ? And on what basis ?

Do you NOT draw that line at all, and let incursions continue ? Or, if you do draw it .. why prevaricate about it ?

[Drummond]

This should go along with your big government leanings:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxcP7TRY178

Aha. When all else fails .. demonise. This 'big Government' nonsense of yours is meant to be a distraction from the merits of the argument I'm putting forward.

Well, at least YOU know where to find Soviet stuff on YouTube. Me ... I've never tried to.

But then, maybe I didn't have any comrades to suggest I try.

[fj1200]

Try to comprehend.

There are some of us who prefer not to sleepwalk to disaster.

How much incursion is TOO much ?

Not that it's that simple in any case. The real point is that attitudes are softened up over an extended period, so as to ensure that tolerance is expanded upon.

Then that, too, is worked on. Goalposts shift. Perceptions of what is, or is not, an 'antisocial attitude' to hold .. likewise.

In the end, the death of cultural identity is assured, eroded by political correctness expectations.

So the questions need to be asked .. where do you draw the line in the sand ? And on what basis ?

Do you NOT draw that line at all, and let incursions continue ? Or, if you do draw it .. why prevaricate about it ?

Do you have a listing of all the incursions that have been made that make tyr declare that the US is lost?

[Drummond]

Bam!!! Called it.

Yes ...

[fj1200]

Aha. When all else fails .. demonise. This 'big Government' nonsense of yours is meant to be a distraction from the merits of the argument I'm putting forward.

Well, at least YOU know where to find Soviet stuff on YouTube. Me ... I've never tried to.

But then, maybe I didn't have any comrades to suggest I try.

That would be your comrade here:


Sir Drummond. Take note. fj is nothing but a Liberal, Wishful thinker who gets great pleasure in distracting attention away from his own, sorry, miserable theft of breathable air from the rest of us.

and here:


Sure you did. So when did you stop beating your wife?

But of course you won't call out your pal; at least your loyal... to a fault.

But yes google is an amazing thing where I can type in three words and find something apropos to the theme. You should get out more.

[Drummond]

Do you have a listing of all the incursions that have been made that make tyr declare that the US is lost?

You're asking me to be an expert on YOUR country, now ?

I'm sure Tyr can answer for himself. However, I've two comments.

One - what's dealt with in this thread is a process which, by its nature, is one which erodes over time. Meaning, that the situation described is never static, but rather, one where inroads are always made. Without remedial countering responses, this just continues on, gathering momentum, getting worse.

Two - you are in any case straying from the thread title. But - if you MUST, then why not do so constructively ?

Tyr has been as constructive as any American patriot could possibly be, in the service of his country's interests.

And you should have respect for that.

If you don't .. WHY NOT ?

I'll wait for you to confer with your comrades on that one.

[aboutime]

That would be your comrade here:



and here:



But of course you won't call out your pal; at least your loyal... to a fault.

But yes google is an amazing thing where I can type in three words and find something apropos to the theme. You should get out more.


fj. Why is it, you always find reasons to scold, or belittle other members when they just happen to tell the truth, or present facts you cannot Honestly dispute?

[Drummond]

That would be your comrade here:



and here:



But of course you won't call out your pal; at least your loyal... to a fault.

But yes google is an amazing thing where I can type in three words and find something apropos to the theme. You should get out more.

This all boils down to one thing.

You can dish it out. But you can't take it.

My advice .. don't dish it out in the first place.

I find it 'rich' that you ever consider taking anyone to task, this from a basis which has seen you come up with worse. And unbidden, at that.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, Fj ...

[aboutime]

fj. Are you in Moscow, or somewhere in Russia?

I am asking since you like to use that Comrade word, almost as if it just naturally slides off your tongue.

KGB...got your tongue?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So we've been undergoing an Islamic based reeducation of America for 50 years??? No wonder they're taking over the world what with all of their superior methods of governance, winning those wars, and all. :rolleyes: Nice to see how you just keep leaving the globalists out of the equation. By doing that I now see its the globalist agenda you favor overall and not Islam. Always suspected it but this is three times you've pretended I was only speaking about the Islamists. Sometimes its a keen idea to pay attention to what people so desperately avoid speaking about. You just keep hammering it back to the Islamists only. When as in the past I've noted the alliance with the Islamists does not go back that far. Perhaps only as far back as the last 20 years . Such tactics may work on others but not me.. Try again , Hoss. Certainly the leftists found and allied with this nation's enemies. None are more against our freedoms than are these two- leftists and muslims.. Your attempt at misdirection fails.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Do you have a listing of all the incursions that have been made that make tyr declare that the US is lost? Any google search on the spread of socialism in America can and will give ample evidence but if you are as intelligent as you present that you are here you'd already know that. The problem is that you reject it and willfully refuse to admit here when others present it as an ongoing process. A process that took over our education system and deeply infiltrated our government. Good God man , its common knowledge among people that are not dunces, government indoctrinated leeches and dumbasses! And please don't bother my friends about giving answers for me. They may do so with my blessing because I trust them but I am perfectly capable myself. Instead just ask me and usually I'll oblige with an answer. -Tyr

[fj1200]

You're asking me to be an expert on YOUR country, now ?

I'm sure Tyr can answer for himself. However, I've two comments.

One - what's dealt with in this thread is a process which, by its nature, is one which erodes over time. Meaning, that the situation described is never static, but rather, one where inroads are always made. Without remedial countering responses, this just continues on, gathering momentum, getting worse.

Two - you are in any case straying from the thread title. But - if you MUST, then why not do so constructively ?

Tyr has been as constructive as any American patriot could possibly be, in the service of his country's interests.

And you should have respect for that.
If you don't .. WHY NOT ?

I'll wait for you to confer with your comrades on that one.

I wouldn't ask you to be an expert on my country because it's clear that you are not. If you don't want me to follow up with you then don't inject yourself into posts between another poster and me; That's a pretty simple thing.

One - Is this where you start arguing for ever increasing government? Because it sounds like your MO.

Two - Nevertheless your buddy is the one who has been straying from the thread title so you might want to take it up with him - I won't wait for that because I know the outcome. And FWIW I'll choose what I have respect for and file your advise as appropriate. ;) I tend to appreciate posters who can make rational arguments.

Who are these "comrades" of which you speak? It seems that you are quite in the midst of the love fest here. :slap:

[fj1200]

Any google search on the spread of socialism in America can and will give ample evidence but if you are as intelligent as you present that you are here you'd already know that. The problem is that you reject it and willfully refuse to admit here when others present it as an ongoing process. A process that took over our education system and deeply infiltrated our government. Good God man , its common knowledge among people that are not dunces, government indoctrinated leeches and dumbasses! And please don't bother my friends about giving answers for me. They may do so with my blessing because I trust them but I am perfectly capable myself. Instead just ask me and usually I'll oblige with an answer. -Tyr

You might want to counsel your pals not to answer for you if you don't expect me to "bother" them. He replied to my post which clearly quoted you. Understanding of circumstances; it's a wonderful thing. It's also a wonderful thing if you would actually know my positions rather than creating them in your own mind. You shouldn't trust that :decoder" so much. ;)

As to the former part of your post, drummond requests that you stick to the thread title which clearly references the takeover by the "muzzys." If you want to have a conversation about the increase in socialism in America that would be fun but as we have been talking about the Muslim takeover then something responsive to that would be helpful. I'm guessing that we wouldn't have to much argument about increasing government in the US though; if you can keep your decoder under wraps that is.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Try to comprehend.

There are some of us who prefer not to sleepwalk to disaster.

How much incursion is TOO much ?

Not that it's that simple in any case. The real point is that attitudes are softened up over an extended period, so as to ensure that tolerance is expanded upon.

Then that, too, is worked on. Goalposts shift. Perceptions of what is, or is not, an 'antisocial attitude' to hold .. likewise.

In the end, the death of cultural identity is assured, eroded by political correctness expectations.

So the questions need to be asked .. where do you draw the line in the sand ? And on what basis ?

Do you NOT draw that line at all, and let incursions continue ? Or, if you do draw it .. why prevaricate about it ?
^^^^ This seems to be the problem with fj he pretends there is no need to stop or reverse the socialist changes. Seems he favors the progressives (globalists) far more than even the Islamists. -Tyr

[fj1200]

fj. Why is it, you always find reasons to scold, or belittle other members when they just happen to tell the truth, or present facts you cannot Honestly dispute?

:laugh: You must have been looking in the mirror when you made that post. :laugh:


This all boils down to one thing.

You can dish it out. But you can't take it.

My advice .. don't dish it out in the first place.

I find it 'rich' that you ever consider taking anyone to task, this from a basis which has seen you come up with worse. And unbidden, at that.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, Fj ...

I can't take it? :laugh: You and the knucklehead crew are truly weak sauce with 'at' struggling to retain some sort of relevance by taking his weak potshots at me and then when it's pointed out to him your hypocrisy comes in to save the day. I am mildly surprised when you're able to make it through a few posts without injecting your "leftie" crutch though.


fj. Are you in Moscow, or somewhere in Russia?

I am asking since you like to use that Comrade word, almost as if it just naturally slides off your tongue.

KGB...got your tongue?

I know what big government looks like and it looks like your krew.

[fj1200]

^^^^ This seems to be the problem with fj he pretends there is no need to stop or reverse the socialist changes. Seems he favors the progressives (globalists) far more than even the Islamists. -Tyr

I thought this thread was about the "muzzy" takeover of the UK and, by extension, the US. It would be helpful if you would stick with the particular boogeyman at hand.


Nice to see how you just keep leaving the globalists out of the equation. By doing that I now see its the globalist agenda you favor overall and not Islam. Always suspected it but this is three times you've pretended I was only speaking about the Islamists. Sometimes its a keen idea to pay attention to what people so desperately avoid speaking about. You just keep hammering it back to the Islamists only. When as in the past I've noted the alliance with the Islamists does not go back that far. Perhaps only as far back as the last 20 years . Such tactics may work on others but not me.. Try again , Hoss. Certainly the leftists found and allied with this nation's enemies. None are more against our freedoms than are these two- leftists and muslims.. Your attempt at misdirection fails.. -Tyr

Now we're talking about the globalists? Pardon my "tactics" of attempting to stay on topic but maybe you could make a rational argument I could agree with without interjecting more and more to your arguments. At least you're down to admitting that you were wrong about something; Islam, and we can get down to you just being wrong about my support of the globalist agenda; however you define that one. :poke:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You might want to counsel your pals not to answer for you if you don't expect me to "bother" them. He replied to my post which clearly quoted you. Understanding of circumstances; it's a wonderful thing. It's also a wonderful thing if you would actually know my positions rather than creating them in your own mind. You shouldn't trust that :decoder" so much. ;)

As to the former part of your post, drummond requests that you stick to the thread title which clearly references the takeover by the "muzzys." If you want to have a conversation about the increase in socialism in America that would be fun but as we have been talking about the Muslim takeover then something responsive to that would be helpful. I'm guessing that we wouldn't have to much argument about increasing government in the US though; if you can keep your decoder under wraps that is. I've been year just over a year and never have I separated the muslim/leftist alliance from the takeover! I've always maintained that the Alliance existed and each helps to promote the other's agenda. Sure the muslim takeover will be the main thrust but the socialist policies will allow it and even force it to be ! My friend Drummond knows this very well and surely did not state it the way you just relayed it to me. He is far more knowledgeable on the Leftists while I daresay that I am on the Islamists. AND NEITHER OF US ARE WEAK ON THE COMBINATION OF THE TWO. I MAY HAVE BEEN STUDYING IT A BIT LONGER AND HAVE THE ADVANTAGE AS FAR AS THE USA IS CONCERNED BECAUSE I LIVE HERE BUT HE HAS ADVANTAGE IN REGARDS TO THE DESTRIUCTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE ALLIANCE IN BRITAIN. I'm sure you'd never admit it but the dude is brilliant and never afraid to speak the truth.. A much coveted and rare thing these days IMHO.-TYR

[fj1200]

I've been year just over a year and never have I separated the muslim/leftist alliance from the takeover! I've always maintained that the Alliance existed and each helps to promote the other's agenda. Sure the muslim takeover will be the main thrust but the socialist policies will allow it and even force it to be ! My friend Drummond knows this very well and surely did not state it the way you just relayed it to me. He is far more knowledgeable on the Leftists while I daresay that I am on the Islamists. AND NEITHER OF US ARE WEAK ON THE COMBINATION OF THE TWO. I MAY HAVE BEEN STUDYING IT A BIT LONGER AND HAVE THE ADVANTAGE AS FAR AS THE USA IS CONCERNED BECAUSE I LIVE HERE BUT HE HAS ADVANTAGE IN REGARDS TO THE DESTRIUCTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE ALLIANCE IN BRITAIN. I'm sure you'd never admit it but the dude is brilliant and never afraid to speak the truth.. A much coveted and rare thing these days IMHO.-TYR

A "brilliant dude" would know an actual leftie when he sees one. The rest is... well...

[Drummond]

I wouldn't ask you to be an expert on my country because it's clear that you are not.

Oh, I'll agree with you on that one. Yes, I've a certain familiarity with the US. But 'expert' .. I'm definitely not. Not at all.

I'd have to say that I'm rather more expert on my own neck of the woods than yours .. which is only to be expected. Which in turn means that when I post about my locality, you'd be wise to heed what I have to say.


If you don't want me to follow up with you then don't inject yourself into posts between another poster and me; That's a pretty simple thing.

... as is what SHOULD be your understanding that I'll take no advice whatever from anyone stooping, EVER, to 'puppy torturer' posting-depths.


One - Is this where you start arguing for ever increasing government? Because it sounds like your MO.

No, it doesn't. And no, I'm not arguing for that here. After all, the political climate that exists here, all the tinkering we've seen with 'attitude management', and porous borders, all this has come, ultimately, from the 'big Government' you keep going on about !

Why would I welcome MORE of that ?


Two - Nevertheless your buddy is the one who has been straying from the thread title

And you haven't ?

AGAIN, is this a 'glass houses and stonethrowing' situation ?


And FWIW I'll choose what I have respect for and file your advise as appropriate. ;)

... like, I 'care' ... ?


I tend to appreciate posters who can make rational arguments.

Why, how very kind. Thank you !


Who are these "comrades" of which you speak? It seems that you are quite in the midst of the love fest here. :slap:

You don't know who your own comrades are ?? How come ? Do they remain anonymous from you ?

I think I can imagine it ....

[Drummond]

A "brilliant dude" would know an actual leftie when he sees one.

Much appreciated - thank you.

[fj1200]

Much appreciated - thank you.

I see comprehension is not your strong suit. But that's been obvious for awhile.

[fj1200]

Oh great, another classic 'd' post where you take a nine sentence post and parse it seven different ways. Let's see the sort of cluster that you put on this one.


Oh, I'll agree with you on that one. Yes, I've a certain familiarity with the US. But 'expert' .. I'm definitely not. Not at all.

I'd have to say that I'm rather more expert on my own neck of the woods than yours .. which is only to be expected. Which in turn means that when I post about my locality, you'd be wise to heed what I have to say.

Whew, finally some agreement. There is some hope for you yet. "Heed." :laugh: does that mean, "read with mild amusement"?


... as is what SHOULD be your understanding that I'll take no advice whatever from anyone stooping, EVER, to 'puppy torturer' posting-depths.

Hell, reading your posts is like being subjected to torture (thankfully I'm not a puppy); but I know, you'll back your comrades no matter. But try this, when you respond to my posts don't fall back on your "not an expert" claim. Heed that! :poke:


No, it doesn't. And no, I'm not arguing for that here. After all, the political climate that exists here, all the tinkering we've seen with 'attitude management', and porous borders, all this has come, ultimately, from the 'big Government' you keep going on about !

Why would I welcome MORE of that ?

It doesn't? At every turn I hear you arguing for increasing the power of the State over the individual; it's your fallback. Besides you want the government to continue to advocate (i.e. what it teaches) based on your worldview.


And you haven't ?

AGAIN, is this a 'glass houses and stonethrowing' situation ?

Not really, just following the rabbit trails. I personally have no issue with threads going off topic, sometimes it's necessary just to keep things interesting.


... like, I 'care' ... ?

I wouldn't expect that you do except for all your requests that I "heed" and such.


Why, how very kind. Thank you !

Nice "leftie" move of declaring victory. How often you've admonished others for such things. A word for that...


You don't know who your own comrades are ?? How come ? Do they remain anonymous from you ?

I think I can imagine it ....

I bet you do imagine it. Just like your buddies "imagine" so many things that aren't really true either.

[aboutime]

fj actually believes he is smarter than...even, Obama.

And everyone already knows. Obama's just an idiot who talks big from a tiny mind.

Your impression is perfect fj. Does Obama know you even exist?

[Drummond]

I see comprehension is not your strong suit. But that's been obvious for awhile.

.. but you'd just argued the opposite ! My ability to spot Lefties is a proven fact.

Isn't it, Fj .. ?

Come on. Be honest, now.

Give it your best shot ..

[fj1200]

fj actually believes he is smarter than...even, Obama.

And everyone already knows. Obama's just an idiot who talks big from a tiny mind.

Your impression is perfect fj. Does Obama know you even exist?

Actually I think even you are smarter than BO. He just has better writers.


.. but you'd just argued the opposite ! My ability to spot Lefties is a proven fact.

Isn't it, Fj .. ?

Come on. Be honest, now.

Give it your best shot ..

It's not really spotting lefties when you yell "leftie" at everything. I'm still waiting for you to identify my leftie positions where your advocating of the State over the individual is legendary.

[Drummond]

"Heed." :laugh: does that mean, "read with mild amusement"?

... and you try to be critical of MY comprehension skills .. ????

This is rich ! :laugh::laugh:


Hell, reading your posts is like being subjected to torture (thankfully I'm not a puppy);

So 'torturous', in fact, that you evidently haven't put me on 'ignore' ...:laugh:

And why would you be thankful to not be a puppy ?

In view of past comments you've offered on that subject, your imagination ditto, well, do I already know the answer to that ?


but I know, you'll back your comrades no matter.

Yes, I too observe your fondness for that word 'comrades'.


But try this, when you respond to my posts don't fall back on your "not an expert" claim. Heed that! :poke:

What, so you think I should always claim to be one ??

Sorry. When I don't think it fair to claim such a thing, I won't. It's called - wait for it --- 'telling the truth'.

It's something Conservatives do, FJ.


It doesn't? At every turn I hear you arguing for increasing the power of the State over the individual; it's your fallback.

Really ?

Review this post, to this point. It's strangely devoid of any argument that argues for that. As was my previous post. Etc ...


Besides you want the government to continue to advocate (i.e. what it teaches) based on your worldview.

Er'm ... why would I want any Government to DEFY my worldview ?


Not really, just following the rabbit trails. I personally have no issue with threads going off topic, sometimes it's necessary just to keep things interesting.

I suppose this could explain the 'puppy torturer' jibe, eh ?

Trouble is, it doesn't EXCUSE it.

[fj1200]

... and you try to be critical of MY comprehension skills .. ????

This is rich ! :laugh::laugh:

Are you really that bad at identifying sarcasm? The evidence suggests... yes.


So 'torturous', in fact, that you evidently haven't put me on 'ignore' ...:laugh:

And why would you be thankful to not be a puppy ?

In view of past comments you've offered on that subject, your imagination ditto, well, do I already know the answer to that ?

"Ignore" is to be used in only the most extreme circumstances; even you have not broached that level; I know, I'm surprised too.


Yes, I too observe your fondness for that word 'comrades'.

Like I said, I know what big government sounds like and well, you have that familiar tone.


What, so you think I should always claim to be one ??

Sorry. When I don't think it fair to claim such a thing, I won't. It's called - wait for it --- 'telling the truth'.

It's something Conservatives do, FJ.

I know that you shouldn't claim to be an expert, but it's also helpful to not claim that you're not one when the going gets tough. Nevertheless, I know what conservatives do. ;)


Really ?

Review this post, to this point. It's strangely devoid of any argument that argues for that. As was my previous post. Etc ...

Right, the "this post doesn't advocate for big government so none of my posts advocate for big government" defense. :rolleyes: You don't acknowledge it even when blatant so why would I expect that you ever would.


Er'm ... why would I want any Government to DEFY my worldview ?

There's a difference between not defying your worldview and having it actively promote your worldview.


I suppose this could explain the 'puppy torturer' jibe, eh ?

Trouble is, it doesn't EXCUSE it.

Oh geez. You sure drone on about puppy torturing when you actively promote torturing actual humans. It's so I can't even take it seriously.

[aboutime]

Sir Drummond. FJ sounds more, and more like a typical Democrat in Denial. Whenever a Liberal insists his remarks were just Sarcasm. That is a RED FLAG, used by Liberals, Democrats, Leftists, and Progressives....pretending their statements are accidental, or sarcastic to cover up, and further deny their real intent...of the words they used. Calling them sarcasm to disguise their Ignorance, Hatred, and Stupidity.

[fj1200]

Sir Drummond. FJ sounds more, and more like a typical Democrat in Denial. Whenever a Liberal insists his remarks were just Sarcasm. That is a RED FLAG, used by Liberals, Democrats, Leftists, and Progressives....pretending their statements are accidental, or sarcastic to cover up, and further deny their real intent...of the words they used. Calling them sarcasm to disguise their Ignorance, Hatred, and Stupidity.

:laugh: Please point out... never mind.




































Patton and I... :laugh:

[Drummond]

"Ignore" is to be used in only the most extreme circumstances; even you have not broached that level; I know, I'm surprised too.

Someone dictates that approach to you ? Nope. Fact is, now, you're trying to excuse a disparity between what you claim is 'true' of my posts, and what it would be logical for you to do, if you were being accurate.

Perhaps you secretly enjoy being educated.


Like I said, I know what big government sounds like and well, you have that familiar tone.

Oh, so NOW, it's just down to TONE ?

Says it all. Thanks.


I know that you shouldn't claim to be an expert, but it's also helpful to not claim that you're not one when the going gets tough. Nevertheless, I know what conservatives do. ;)

Maybe I'm not a stranger to tactical argumentation. Nonetheless, it's all subordinate to service to THE TRUTH.


Right, the "this post doesn't advocate for big government so none of my posts advocate for big government" defense. :rolleyes: You don't acknowledge it even when blatant so why would I expect that you ever would.

But, no specifics ?

Make up your mind. Is it down to 'tone', or, according to you, more than that.

OK. Try supplying evidence of what you claim about me. Judging from what you claim, such evidence should be plentiful. So go to it - justify your claims.


There's a difference between not defying your worldview and having it actively promote your worldview.

There's also a difference between being right and wrong. I prefer to see Governments do what is right.

Don't you ?


Oh geez. You sure drone on about puppy torturing when you actively promote torturing actual humans. It's so I can't even take it seriously.

I have NEVER, repeat, NEVER, promoted the torturing of any human beings !!!!

I think you confuse human beings with SUBhuman beings. And that is a very typical, even 'insisted upon', LEFTIE error, which, BEING Lefties, they'll never admit they're wrong about.

Will you, FJ .. ? H'mm ?

[fj1200]

Someone dictates that approach to you ? Nope. Fact is, now, you're trying to excuse a disparity between what you claim is 'true' of my posts, and what it would be logical for you to do, if you were being accurate.

Perhaps you secretly enjoy being educated.

I openly enjoy education. I just don't find any in your posts. That first part is just gobbledygook.


Oh, so NOW, it's just down to TONE ?

Says it all. Thanks.

Sometimes tone, other times overt calls for the supremacy of the State over the individual. You've got it both.


Maybe I'm not a stranger to tactical argumentation. Nonetheless, it's all subordinate to service to THE TRUTH.

:confused: Truth is good.


But, no specifics ?

Make up your mind. Is it down to 'tone', or, according to you, more than that.

OK. Try supplying evidence of what you claim about me. Judging from what you claim, such evidence should be plentiful. So go to it - justify your claims.

Specifics have been shown in practically every thread we've had discussions. You're advocating the supremacy of the State over the individual is clear.


There's also a difference between being right and wrong. I prefer to see Governments do what is right.

Don't you ?

You prefer to see governments do what you believe is right? True? I prefer governments do little even if I may disagree.


I have NEVER, repeat, NEVER, promoted the torturing of any human beings !!!!

I think you confuse human beings with SUBhuman beings. And that is a very typical, even 'insisted upon', LEFTIE error, which, BEING Lefties, they'll never admit they're wrong about.

Will you, FJ .. ? H'mm ?

I see the lie in your position. Conservatives don't, or shouldn't, ignore what is obvious.

[Drummond]

I openly enjoy education. I just don't find any in your posts. That first part is just gobbledygook.

I think, then, that we're back to consideration of comprehension skills.

You should seek some help, obviously.


Sometimes tone, other times overt calls for the supremacy of the State over the individual. You've got it both.

Examples .. ?


:confused: Truth is good.

Judging by your 'smilie', you don't seem too sure ?


Specifics have been shown in practically every thread we've had discussions. You're advocating the supremacy of the State over the individual is clear.

A claim ... and only that. SHOW ME EXAMPLES.


You prefer to see governments do what you believe is right? True? I prefer governments do little even if I may disagree.

One function - and a highly necessary one, at that, one which no Government can opt out of responsibly - is that it passes laws.

If I read your comment correctly, you'd prefer Governments to do so little that they help promote lawlessness ?


I see the lie in your position. Conservatives don't, or shouldn't, ignore what is obvious.

And neither have I.

A human being thinks and acts as one. Subhuman entities, whether ever formerly human or not, DO NOT.

But a Leftie won't care about that. To a Leftie, a human being must be one, even when he isn't !!!!

And that's your position, too. Isn't it ?

[aboutime]

:laugh: Please point out... never mind.




































Patton and I... :laugh:


Must be a pretty miserable, sad, frustrating life for you fj. Got nobody who cares about you, or anything you say?

Go to facebook. You'll find thousands of fellow, miserable, sad, frustrated people just like you.

[Drummond]

Must be a pretty miserable, sad, frustrating life for you fj. Got nobody who cares about you, or anything you say?

Go to facebook. You'll find thousands of fellow, miserable, sad, frustrated people just like you.

No worries, Aboutime.

What we have here is a posturer. When challenged to back up his attacks with something of substance, suddenly, we hear nothing more which answers that challenge.

Those with the stronger, more meritorious, more worthy arguments, prevail. Those grounded in truth and decency prevail.

So it will ultimately be with opposition ranged against the Left more generally.

Right, and justice, is on OUR side.

[fj1200]

I think, then, that we're back to consideration of comprehension skills.

You should seek some help, obviously.

Advise appropriately filed. ;)


Examples .. ?

Torture.


Judging by your 'smilie', you don't seem too sure ?

Oh don't worry, I'm sure. It's your rambling comments that are confusing.


A claim ... and only that. SHOW ME EXAMPLES.

Torture again. It seems you've blocked all the other times I've identified your big government tendencies. But you asking for examples is quite amusing given the multiple failures of yours in identifying my leftie positions.


One function - and a highly necessary one, at that, one which no Government can opt out of responsibly - is that it passes laws.

If I read your comment correctly, you'd prefer Governments to do so little that they help promote lawlessness ?

Which, not surprisingly, you don't read correctly. An actual conservative would understand that the government that governs best, governs least. Besides, you didn't answer my question.


And neither have I.

A human being thinks and acts as one. Subhuman entities, whether ever formerly human or not, DO NOT.

But a Leftie won't care about that. To a Leftie, a human being must be one, even when he isn't !!!!

And that's your position, too. Isn't it ?

This isn't even worth going over again. Even if you're disgusting subhuman "argument" had any merit, you're still granting the power of the State over the individual.


Must be a pretty miserable, sad, frustrating life for you fj. Got nobody who cares about you, or anything you say?

Go to facebook. You'll find thousands of fellow, miserable, sad, frustrated people just like you.

Which is why you spend so much time making your pathetic comments to me/about me. Got it.


No worries, Aboutime.

What we have here is a posturer. When challenged to back up his attacks with something of substance, suddenly, we hear nothing more which answers that challenge.

Those with the stronger, more meritorious, more worthy arguments, prevail. Those grounded in truth and decency prevail.

So it will ultimately be with opposition ranged against the Left more generally.

Right, and justice, is on OUR side.

Wow, you've got it bad.

[Drummond]

Torture.

Oh, that one.

So what are you saying ? That 'big Government' is acting heinously in being unkind to terrorist trash ? That, maybe, a Government shouldn't have the power to do anything about them, or to govern their fate in any way ? That it's better to be critical of the status and applied power of a Government that tries to make them accountable for their savageries ?

... and perhaps most importantly of all .. that no 'big Government machine' should ever do what's necessary to protect life and limb of its own citizens ??


Oh don't worry, I'm sure. It's your rambling comments that are confusing.

Cop out.


Torture again. It seems you've blocked all the other times I've identified your big government tendencies. But you asking for examples is quite amusing given the multiple failures of yours in identifying my leftie positions.

As you say .. torture AGAIN. Interesting. For all you've said about the supposed 'sheer quantity' of evidence to back you up, it ultimately comes down to your ONE example.

And I've already countered you on that one to a useful degree.


Which, not surprisingly, you don't read correctly. An actual conservative would understand that the government that governs best, governs least.

So, in the aftermath of 9/11 (.. since you seem to be centred on the issue of terrorism ..) ... you think that a LACK of your Government's response to it, was what was really called for ???


Besides, you didn't answer my question.

Never mind. You've answered mine, to a very limited degree.

Or perhaps I should say that you've answered a suspicion, at any rate.


This isn't even worth going over again. Even if you're disgusting subhuman "argument" had any merit, you're still granting the power of the State over the individual.

It REALLY bothers you that there's a Government machinery out there, ready, willing and able, to defend America from its enemies !!

It also REALLY bothers you, doesn't it, that I can see a terrorist subhuman for what it is, what it's worth, and that consequently, I can want them dealt with as THEY DESERVE.

So tell me. Why DO you like terrorists that much ?

And in any case, your position lacks logic. If terrorists aren't human, they don't merit consideration as such. So for you to talk as though there was some sort of conferred 'worthwhile status' they've 'earned' as 'individuals', is simply offensive. Offensive in terms of the truth I'm addressing. Moreover, offensive to the memories of all who've perished, or suffered, at the hands of 'individuals' such as those.

Does it get any more perverse than to hold that a Government which keeps terrorist 'individuals' in check in places such as Gitmo, is MORE culpable of supposed 'wrongdoing' than those terrorists themselves ???

Let's say that 9/11 had been more successful than it had been. What if one of those planes had managed to demolish, say, the Pentagon ? Or, had flown straight into the White House ? Would you have been happy with that, on the grounds that mighty State institutions had been dealt a great blow by 'individuals', whom you prize more highly than those they were attacking ???

I take it that you now see where your sympathies can lead you.

Fj, you should recognise who's your true enemy .. and WHAT that enemy IS .. and be resolved to FIGHT IT, UNTIL ITS DEFEAT IS ASSURED.


Wow, you've got it bad.

Spoken as an evident adversary of Conservatism, and the decency that goes with it. Well, quite.

Now tell me that you're not a Leftie !!

[fj1200]

Oh, that one.

So what are you saying ? That 'big Government' is acting heinously in being unkind to terrorist trash ? That, maybe, a Government shouldn't have the power to do anything about them, or to govern their fate in any way ? That it's better to be critical of the status and applied power of a Government that tries to make them accountable for their savageries ?

... and perhaps most importantly of all .. that no 'big Government machine' should ever do what's necessary to protect life and limb of its own citizens ??

I see you ask what I'm saying and then proceed to ramble with your stock list of false assumptions. The most disgusting of which is your argument that torture should somehow be used as an "accountability" tool. Government of course has the responsibility of protecting its' citizens but it should not be given the right to deny natural rights to humans.*

* And yes I'm aware that you'll insert your "subhuman" blather.


Cop out.

Truth.


As you say .. torture AGAIN. Interesting. For all you've said about the supposed 'sheer quantity' of evidence to back you up, it ultimately comes down to your ONE example.

And I've already countered you on that one to a useful degree.

The sheer evidence of your big government position as it relates to torture is undeniable.


So, in the aftermath of 9/11 (.. since you seem to be centred on the issue of terrorism ..) ... you think that a LACK of your Government's response to it, was what was really called for ???

You'd be better off if you didn't proceed to ask ignorant questions based on false assumptions. Please point out where I stated that we shouldn't have responded after 9/11.


Never mind. You've answered mine, to a very limited degree.

Or perhaps I should say that you've answered a suspicion, at any rate.

You get to dismiss not answering questions with, "never mind"? You could just claim to be "not an expert."


It REALLY bothers you that there's a Government machinery out there, ready, willing and able, to defend America from its enemies !! No.

It also REALLY bothers you, doesn't it, that I can see a terrorist subhuman for what it is, what it's worth, and that consequently, I can want them dealt with as THEY DESERVE. Yes, your attitude bothers me as well as your 'torture as retribution' position.

So tell me. Why DO you like terrorists that much ? I don't.

And in any case, your position lacks logic. If terrorists aren't human, they don't merit consideration as such. So for you to talk as though there was some sort of conferred 'worthwhile status' they've 'earned' as 'individuals', is simply offensive. Offensive in terms of the truth I'm addressing. Moreover, offensive to the memories of all who've perished, or suffered, at the hands of 'individuals' such as those. Your 'horse is a horse of course' definition lacks logic.

Does it get any more perverse than to hold that a Government which keeps terrorist 'individuals' in check in places such as Gitmo, is MORE culpable of supposed 'wrongdoing' than those terrorists themselves ??? Non-sequitur. Point out where I think we should close GITMO.

Let's say that 9/11 had been more successful than it had been. What if one of those planes had managed to demolish, say, the Pentagon ? Or, had flown straight into the White House ? Would you have been happy with that, on the grounds that mighty State institutions had been dealt a great blow by 'individuals', whom you prize more highly than those they were attacking ??? WTF are you even talking about?

I take it that you now see where your sympathies can lead you. I only see where faulty logic leads.

Fj, you should recognise who's your true enemy .. and WHAT that enemy IS .. and be resolved to FIGHT IT, UNTIL ITS DEFEAT IS ASSURED. Yet another false premise.

No, what REALLY bothers me is that there are people out there who think like you do. Should I list all of the false assumptions inherent in your rambling response or should I just state that practically every sentence contains at least one? I'll address them above.

My position lacks logic. :laugh: You slay bro'.


Spoken as an evident adversary of Conservatism, and the decency that goes with it. Well, quite.

Now tell me that you're not a Leftie !!

:facepalm99: I'm a leftie as you torture puppies. :slap:

[Drummond]

I see you ask what I'm saying and then proceed to ramble with your stock list of false assumptions. The most disgusting of which is your argument that torture should somehow be used as an "accountability" tool. Government of course has the responsibility of protecting its' citizens but it should not be given the right to deny natural rights to humans.*

I did ask you what you were saying. Then, I realised how obvious it was. But of course, you've done nothing to demonstrate that my 'assumptions' are 'false'.

Naturally not. Those 'false assumptions' are EVIDENT TRUTHS.


* And yes I'm aware that you'll insert your "subhuman" blather.

As I've already explained, I'm loyal to truthful positions, so of course, I'm going to continue on with the truth. The truth is that (a) you cannot show us that a so-called 'person' who demonstrates ZERO HUMANITY is in fact, therefore verifiably, HUMAN .. and (b) that your Government, in dealing with terrorists as it does, is in any way depriving human beings of human treatment.

Besides, I'd also like you to explain, once and for all, why you're so determined to fight for TERRORISTS .. and you don't put those same energies into fighting for their VICTIMS' RIGHTS.

If you can distance yourself from Leftie thinking completely enough, you'll come to realise that's what really disgusting is that Americans will fight so hard for terrorists, and in doing so, GIVE NOT SO MUCH AS A SECOND'S THOUGHT FOR HOW DISGUSTING AN INSULT THAT IS TO THEIR VICTIMS.

Now, why do I think that such distancing from bog-standard Leftie thought is something you'll never demonstrate to us ? H'mmm ?


The sheer evidence of your big government position as it relates to torture is undeniable.

... but what's actually evident is that the ENTIRETY of your 'big Government' accusation is centred on that one issue. Which is NOT what you led us to believe before, now, is it ?

My previous argument stands. A prime job of any Government is to keep its citizens safe and secure. It either does that job, or it fails. As I understand your disdain for the existence of Governmental powers applied in a major way towards that basic goal, you'd rather see terrorists go unpunished, unconfined, and so free to continue on their merry way, bombing the guts out of decent American citizens (probably literally so).

After all, you attribute 'humanity' to those who exhibit NONE, and you do so in their defence against that 'big, bad Government' who'd meaningfully oppose them.

Yes, FJ. You're a Leftie, all right. You argue just like one.


You'd be better off if you didn't proceed to ask ignorant questions based on false assumptions. Please point out where I stated that we shouldn't have responded after 9/11.

Point taken, I suppose. You obviously hate that your Government reacted meaningfully, in the way that it needed to. But, OK, maybe they could've done something ineffectually 'small', instead.

So yes, you have a point - of sorts.


You get to dismiss not answering questions with, "never mind"? You could just claim to be "not an expert."

Your comprehension skills are failing you (or is it your memory ?). I did claim not to be an expert.

If you need reminding of my wording, say so.


No, what REALLY bothers me is that there are people out there who think like you do.

Exactly. Lefties hate it when people think in an unapproved-of manner. You are no different.


Should I list all of the false assumptions inherent in your rambling response or should I just state that practically every sentence contains at least one? I'll address them above.

Such a list would be replete with untruths. There's nothing false in what I've stated.


My position lacks logic. :laugh: You slay bro'.

Yes, I know. I don't need reminding of what I already know, thanks.

:facepalm99: I'm a leftie as you torture puppies. :slap:

You are warned not to repeat such an accusation against me. EVER.

[fj1200]

I did ask you what you were saying. Then, I realised how obvious it was. But of course, you've done nothing to demonstrate that my 'assumptions' are 'false'.

Naturally not. Those 'false assumptions' are EVIDENT TRUTHS.

:roundandround: Is there a point to this? Besides, I can only do so much about the ignorance in your own mind.


Blah, blah, blah, subhuman blather inserted.

If you can distance yourself from Leftie thinking completely enough, you'll come to realise that's what really disgusting is that Americans will fight so hard for terrorists, and in doing so, GIVE NOT SO MUCH AS A SECOND'S THOUGHT FOR HOW DISGUSTING AN INSULT THAT IS TO THEIR VICTIMS.

Now, why do I think that such distancing from bog-standard Leftie thought is something you'll never demonstrate to us ? H'mmm ?

I know that you will just continue to deny the undeniable that terrorists, despite their horrific acts, are human. It's a tough truth to be sure.


... but what's actually evident is that the ENTIRETY of your 'big Government' accusation is centred on that one issue. Which is NOT what you led us to believe before, now, is it ?

My previous argument stands. A prime job of any Government is to keep its citizens safe and secure. It either does that job, or it fails. As I understand your disdain for the existence of Governmental powers applied in a major way towards that basic goal, you'd rather see terrorists go unpunished, unconfined, and so free to continue on their merry way, bombing the guts out of decent American citizens (probably literally so).

After all, you attribute 'humanity' to those who exhibit NONE, and you do so in their defence against that 'big, bad Government' who'd meaningfully oppose them.

Yes, FJ. You're a Leftie, all right. You argue just like one.

I'm debating putting in the effort to do the search for all the times I have pointed out your big government leanings because you are unable to put together a whole paragraph without going off into the weeds of your own false assumptions.

Nevertheless; you enjoy when the "right" power is consolidated (against Muslims), you desire government interject itself into interpersonal relationships (when Muslims are involved), you demand a perpetual state of war (against Muslims)... I'm sure there's more but time is limited. Looking at the list however I am struck by another commonality. Hmmm.


Point taken, I suppose. You obviously hate that your Government reacted meaningfully, in the way that it needed to. But, OK, maybe they could've done something ineffectually 'small', instead.

So yes, you have a point - of sorts.

So you can't point it out so you need to fall back on more ignorant assumptions.


Your comprehension skills are failing you (or is it your memory ?). I did claim not to be an expert.

If you need reminding of my wording, say so.

No reminder needed. Your dodge of the question was what was noted there.


Exactly. Lefties hate it when people think in an unapproved-of manner. You are no different.

You must be a "leftie" then as well since you argue ad nauseum for your subhuman principle. Glass houses old chap.


Such a list would be replete with untruths. There's nothing false in what I've stated.

:laugh: The whole thing was balderdash.


Yes, I know. I don't need reminding of what I already know, thanks.

:slap:


You are warned not to repeat such an accusation against me. EVER.

If you had a scrape of intelligence you might understand that I levied no accusation. You asked a question and since you would have just ignored a simple "no" answer I thought I would give you a logical path of sorts to come to your own conclusion. Let's review.


Now tell me that you're not a Leftie !!


I'm a leftie as you torture puppies.

Maybe this (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/602836/transitive-law) will be helpful:


transitive law, in mathematics and logic, statement that if A bears some relation (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/496799/relation) to B and B bears the same relation to C, then A bears it to C. In arithmetic, the property of equality (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/190608/equality) is transitive, for if A = Band B = C, then A = C.

Now just fill in what you know. Given that you have been repeatedly unable to find my leftie positions among thousands of posts it should be no surprise that my statement, I'm a leftie as you torture puppies, is true.

[aboutime]

No worries, Aboutime.

What we have here is a posturer. When challenged to back up his attacks with something of substance, suddenly, we hear nothing more which answers that challenge.

Those with the stronger, more meritorious, more worthy arguments, prevail. Those grounded in truth and decency prevail.

So it will ultimately be with opposition ranged against the Left more generally.

Right, and justice, is on OUR side.


I am still convinced, the letters 'fj' stand for "f'in jerk'!

He is unable, and unwilling to admit, or recognize TRUTH, HONESTY, Right, and Justice. And anyone who is unable to understand that must be an "f'in jerk"!

[Drummond]

FJ, this is a remarkably weak posting of yours. I seriously wonder if you're worth replying to under these circumstances.


:roundandround: Is there a point to this? Besides, I can only do so much about the ignorance in your own mind.

... a case in point. Zero substance. Just abusive.


I know that you will just continue to deny the undeniable that terrorists, despite their horrific acts, are human. It's a tough truth to be sure.

Just SAYING they're human doesn't prove a thing. Whereas, subhuman acts committed by so-called HUMAN BEINGS is a provable nonsense.

I deny that terrorists are human. There y'go. Which according to you, I can't do ... yet, I do.

Your nonsense - your PRO TERRORIST NONSENSE - is wasting my time.


I'm debating putting in the effort to do the search for all the times I have pointed out your big government leanings because you are unable to put together a whole paragraph without going off into the weeds of your own false assumptions.

A mixture of abuse and lack of substance. Pointless as it stands.


Nevertheless; you enjoy when the "right" power is consolidated (against Muslims), you desire government interject itself into interpersonal relationships (when Muslims are involved), you demand a perpetual state of war (against Muslims)... I'm sure there's more but time is limited. Looking at the list however I am struck by another commonality. Hmmm.

The other side of this rather dubious coin is that, without 'big Government' interference, Muslim incursions wouldn't have managed their progress in the first place. This is a matter of a reversal of a previous error being required.

And all I 'demand' is the means to defend against, and reverse, Muslim arrogance which I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR. Again, you see, this is a matter of the proper effective defence against an aggressive faith.


So you can't point it out so you need to fall back on more ignorant assumptions.

More substanceless abuse.


No reminder needed. Your dodge of the question was what was noted there.

And again.


You must be a "leftie" then as well since you argue ad nauseum for your subhuman principle. Glass houses old chap.

.. Yet again.

You can't counter what I say with logic or evidence. So you rely instead on this weak old standby tactic instead.



:laugh: The whole thing was balderdash.



:slap:

Guess what my comment is ....

I'm tired of this, Fj. You've run out of steam, very evidently. And, as I've observed you do elsewhere, you just lamely rely on abusive put-downs when you can't argue more usefully (... which is most of the time anyway).

I've a suggestion for you.

Since it's glaringly obvious that you're utterly determined to defend terrorists, explain to us WHY this is so.

I'll leave it up to your conscience as to whether you have any wish - or capacity for it - to apologise to any of terrorism's victims for that pro-terrorist defence.

[fj1200]

FJ, this is a remarkably weak posting of yours. I seriously wonder if you're worth replying to under these circumstances.

The substance is that you are doing nothing more than repetition of your false assumptions. Nice how you attempt to make it my fault that you don't understand that.


... a case in point. Zero substance. Just abusive.

Your mindless repetition should be noted.


Just SAYING they're human doesn't prove a thing. Whereas, subhuman acts committed by so-called HUMAN BEINGS is a provable nonsense.

I deny that terrorists are human. There y'go. Which according to you, I can't do ... yet, I do.

Your nonsense - your PRO TERRORIST NONSENSE - is wasting my time.

See, here we go again; you just saying that they're subhuman doesn't prove a thing while a simple DNA check proves me right. And you again denying the undeniable is not really a defense for anything. And as I said before; they're human and it sucks.

BTW, I haven't said anything that is "pro-terrorist;" I have merely identified an unfortunate fact. Grabbing the subhuman mantle was wrong when the Nazis did it, it was wrong when the Japanese Nationalists did it, and it's wrong today. I refuse to take the big-government position that it's acceptable for any government to be able to make that declaration and I refuse to take the big-government position that government retains the authority to remove the natural rights of man without process.


A mixture of abuse and lack of substance. Pointless as it stands.

But an accurate statement nonetheless.


The other side of this rather dubious coin is that, without 'big Government' interference, Muslim incursions wouldn't have managed their progress in the first place. This is a matter of a reversal of a previous error being required.

And all I 'demand' is the means to defend against, and reverse, Muslim arrogance which I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR. Again, you see, this is a matter of the proper effective defence against an aggressive faith.

There is clear commonality to what you demand. Nevertheless I call fallacy; Which incursions? Which error? Muslim arrogance? Defense against 2.8% of the population? Your language is telling.


More substanceless abuse.

And again.

.. Yet again.

You can't counter what I say with logic or evidence. So you rely instead on this weak old standby tactic instead.

There was no substanceless abuse there; it was merely identification of truth. I've already countered what you say with evidence and logic multiple times; that you insist on running down the rabbit trail is not my fault.


Guess what my comment is ....

I'm tired of this, Fj. You've run out of steam, very evidently. And, as I've observed you do elsewhere, you just lamely rely on abusive put-downs when you can't argue more usefully (... which is most of the time anyway).

I've a suggestion for you.

Since it's glaringly obvious that you're utterly determined to defend terrorists, explain to us WHY this is so.

I'll leave it up to your conscience as to whether you have any wish - or capacity for it - to apologise to any of terrorism's victims for that pro-terrorist defence.

Running out of steam eh? Don't worry about that, I can go all day. But the steam you're sensing is your inability to make an argument but instead complaining about how I may word my posts while at the same time repeating your tired arguments. One of those new tired arguments is my apparent "pro-terrorist defense;" I defend truth and small government principles; not a terrorist defense anywhere in the mix.

[Drummond]

My replies to your postings can now become markedly shorter, FJ. After all, there's less and less of worth to reply TO ...


See, here we go again; you just saying that they're subhuman doesn't prove a thing while a simple DNA check proves me right. And you again denying the undeniable is not really a defense for anything. And as I said before; they're human and it sucks.

You just saying that they're human doesn't prove a thing.

As for actual proof ... if you have it to offer, then where is it ???

You say that a simple DNA check proves you right .. which is nonsense.

Imagine someone lying in a hospital bed somewhere, completely and irrecoverably brain-dead. Or, if you prefer, a mere husk of a body where a brain hasn't properly formed (an extremely rare condition, but medically, it IS known). In each case, you can't claim that they're viable human beings, YET, their DNA would 'identify' them as human. So ... DNA study, of itself, is insufficient to prove 'humanity'.

Still unconvinced ? OK, try this ..

Imagine a banana; whole, uneaten. Then imagine that same banana mashed to a pulp. So, tell me ... has the DNA makeup of the 'mashed pulp' radically altered from what was true of the original, whole banana ? Or, has the mashed pulp changed from its original form NOT AT ALL ?

.... so .. you see, your so-called 'DNA proof' is nothing of the kind.

By the way, did you know that human DNA sequences match those of a banana to 50 percent ? Does that make a banana half human .. or humans, half banana ??

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/evolution/what-is-the-evidence/morphology/dna-molecules/


DNA is found in all known living organisms, from complex animals like chimpanzees and humans, to single-celled organisms like plankton in the oceans.

The same 4 bases occur in the DNA molecules of all these types of organisms. Also, the A, T, G and C bases always occur in a similar sequence from one end of the DNA molecule to the other. This is evidence that humans are related to every other species on Earth.

The genes of organisms that look very different are surprisingly similar. For example, human DNA sequences are over 95% identical to chimpanzee sequences and around 50% identical to banana sequences.

You have to go back in time a long way to find a common ancestor between humans and bananas, but ultimately they have both emerged from the same family tree, the tree of life, and that is why they share common characteristics.

I look forward to seeing a banana compose half of a symphony.


BTW, I haven't said anything that is "pro-terrorist;"

Oh, really ? You absolutely insist upon giving them a status they haven't earned, and one they fall short of meeting to a massive degree. And with what purpose in mind ? Why, to argue that they deserve much better treatment !!

OF COURSE yours is a pro-terrorist stance. You want them unsupportably favoured !!


Grabbing the subhuman mantle was wrong when the Nazis did it, it was wrong when the Japanese Nationalists did it

Fair enough. But then, for example, did Jews ever do what Muslim terrorists exult in doing ? Give me even ONE example of Jews demolishing skyscrapers and killing 3,000 innocent human beings. Or, point to Jewish fondness for beheadings, as we see today.

-- Or - create an equivalent to the long-running thread we have on this very forum, one detailing Muslim terrorist attacks BY THE HUNDRED. But of course, you can't do it .. because Jews NEVER proved themselves to be subhuman as Muslim terrorists do.


I refuse to take the big-government position that it's acceptable for any government to be able to make that declaration and I refuse to take the big-government position that government retains the authority to remove the natural rights of man without process.

But nothing has been 'removed' by so-called 'big Government' action. It was NEVER THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE ..


... Muslim arrogance? Defense against 2.8% of the population? Your language is telling.

... as is yours. See ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?41822-UK-the-take-over-is-nearing-completetion&p=653379#post653379


There, you state the figure as a 'mere' '0.8 percent' .. now, it's 2.8 percent.

With increases like that, I suggest that you refrain from blinking.


Running out of steam eh? Don't worry about that, I can go all day.

A lot of boring people can, FJ.


One of those new tired arguments is my apparent "pro-terrorist defense;" I defend truth and small government principles; not a terrorist defense anywhere in the mix.

Already refuted. You're fighting tooth and nail to make terrorists be seen as way better than they are, to in turn say they do NOT deserve what many of us easily perceive that they DO deserve.

And in so doing, you insult the memories of those who've suffered, or died, BECAUSE OF THEIR SUBHUMAN ACTS OF SAVAGERY.

[fj1200]

My replies to your postings can now become markedly shorter, FJ. After all, there's less and less of worth to reply TO ...

Does this mean that you'll refrain from your ignorant assumptions and previously refuted arguments? A quick perusal ahead suggests, no.


You just saying that they're human doesn't prove a thing.

As for actual proof ... if you have it to offer, then where is it ???

You say that a simple DNA check proves you right .. which is nonsense.

Imagine someone lying in a hospital bed somewhere, completely and irrecoverably brain-dead. Or, if you prefer, a mere husk of a body where a brain hasn't properly formed (an extremely rare condition, but medically, it IS known). In each case, you can't claim that they're viable human beings, YET, their DNA would 'identify' them as human. So ... DNA study, of itself, is insufficient to prove 'humanity'.

Still unconvinced ? OK, try this ..

Imagine a banana; whole, uneaten. Then imagine that same banana mashed to a pulp. So, tell me ... has the DNA makeup of the 'mashed pulp' radically altered from what was true of the original, whole banana ? Or, has the mashed pulp changed from its original form NOT AT ALL ?

.... so .. you see, your so-called 'DNA proof' is nothing of the kind.

By the way, did you know that human DNA sequences match those of a banana to 50 percent ? Does that make a banana half human .. or humans, half banana ??

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/evolution/what-is-the-evidence/morphology/dna-molecules/

I look forward to seeing a banana compose half of a symphony.

Brain dead or otherwise, the "husk of a body" is still a human being. Viability is not the issue. I do see you dancing away from the proof that DNA would provide however.

Nevertheless, taking your ridiculous banana example that you state has changed from its original form "NOT AT ALL;" Is it your position that a child is born a terrorist and therefore subhuman? I'm going to guess no, that is not your position. So when that child grows up and becomes a terrorist has the "mashed pulp" of a human changed from its original form? Not at all.


Oh, really ? You absolutely insist upon giving them a status they haven't earned, and one they fall short of meeting to a massive degree. And with what purpose in mind ? Why, to argue that they deserve much better treatment !!

OF COURSE yours is a pro-terrorist stance. You want them unsupportably favoured !!

Unfortunately they don't need to earn what they are given but those who favor smaller government wouldn't grant government the right to take just by mere declaration.


Fair enough. But then, for example, did Jews ever do what Muslim terrorists exult in doing ? Give me even ONE example of Jews demolishing skyscrapers and killing 3,000 innocent human beings. Or, point to Jewish fondness for beheadings, as we see today.

-- Or - create an equivalent to the long-running thread we have on this very forum, one detailing Muslim terrorist attacks BY THE HUNDRED. But of course, you can't do it .. because Jews NEVER proved themselves to be subhuman as Muslim terrorists do.

Non-sequitur. Excuses are the domain of the weak... and big government advocates.


But nothing has been 'removed' by so-called 'big Government' action. It was NEVER THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE ..

A big government denial by a big governmentalist. You wear the hat well.


... as is yours. See ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?41822-UK-the-take-over-is-nearing-completetion&p=653379#post653379


There, you state the figure as a 'mere' '0.8 percent' .. now, it's 2.8 percent.

With increases like that, I suggest that you refrain from blinking.

Please pay attention and keep up with the facts, the .8% references the US Muslim population that has been argued we've already lost to and the 2.8% is the GB Muslim population that's been argued that you've already been taken over by.


A lot of boring people can, FJ.

But they can't run circles around you. :slap:


Already refuted. You're fighting tooth and nail to make terrorists be seen as way better than they are, to in turn say they do NOT deserve what many of us easily perceive that they DO deserve.

And in so doing, you insult the memories of those who've suffered, or died, BECAUSE OF THEIR SUBHUMAN ACTS OF SAVAGERY.

You've refuted nothing other than restate previously flawed logic as well as demonstrate the lie to your first sentence here.

[aboutime]

Sir Drummond. "f'in jerk" is just going on because he is entertaining himself by posing as someone with an ability to think, reason, and use common sense. Which he fails at...in every attempt.

He's nothing but a waste of time. Which is why I like wasting my time sparing with him.

Eventually. His brand of stupidity will help him SELF-DESTRUCT.

[fj1200]

^The banana speaks.

[Drummond]

Does this mean that you'll refrain from your ignorant assumptions and previously refuted arguments? A quick perusal ahead suggests, no.

The 'no' answer, in truth, means that I shall remain loyal to the truth in my postings.

But then, you know that already.


Brain dead or otherwise, the "husk of a body" is still a human being. Viability is not the issue.

On reflection, I see that the point is arguable. Possibly.

Nonetheless, consistency argues that I'm right. The brain-dead (or brain-absent) body has no capacity to exhibit humanity, any more than a store mannequin does. Neither, and demonstrably so, does the Jihadist, bomb-happy, beheadings-happy, skyscraper-demolishing-happy, murderous terrorist savage !


I do see you dancing away from the proof that DNA would provide however.

Nope. What I see, however, is your dancing away from the sheer logic of the argument I've put ... which you've not addressed in worthwhile detail.


Nevertheless, taking your ridiculous banana example that you state has changed from its original form "NOT AT ALL;" Is it your position that a child is born a terrorist and therefore subhuman?

I fail to see any consistency between the examples. But no matter.

The DNA of the original, whole banana is THE SAME as the pulped remains of one. Even so, the pulp is NOT a banana, once pulped. Try going to a store and agreeing with the salesman that any mashed banana pulp he wants to sell you is the same item as a fully formed, shaped, banana in its skin !

One has undergone a radical change and ceased to be a banana, though its DNA hasn't changed at all.


I'm going to guess no, that is not your position. So when that child grows up and becomes a terrorist has the "mashed pulp" of a human changed from its original form? Not at all.

I actually don't know. I think that some ARE born terrorists, in that they are predisposed to savagery. And, I also think that some start out as human, but have their humanity driven out of them by the evil of their creed's demands on them.

Either way ... just as in the banana example, THE FINAL SHAPE, FORM, NATURE of the banana into mash, or the terrorist from onetime human beginnings, IS that neither resembles, has the recognisable characteristics, of what they once were.

Mashed pulp is not a banana. A terrorist is not a human being.


Unfortunately they don't need to earn what they are given

Thanks to Leftie perversion, that's the way of it. But I tell you, a cockroach is more deserving of 'human rights' than a terrorist. Since when did a cockroach fly planes into buildings, much less exult in witnessing such savagery afterwards ?


but those who favor smaller government wouldn't grant government the right to take just by mere declaration.

Would they grant the right of a Government to effectively act to protect its citizens from harm, and to do what it takes to get the job done ?


Non-sequitur. Excuses are the domain of the weak... and big government advocates.

COP OUT. My argument was valid.


A big government denial by a big governmentalist. You wear the hat well.

Lies don't cease to be lies because you keep repeating them.


Please pay attention and keep up with the facts, the .8% references the US Muslim population that has been argued we've already lost to and the 2.8% is the GB Muslim population that's been argued that you've already been taken over by.

And until right now, where did you clearly state a differentiation according to nationality ?

See this ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

The table states a 2.7 percent Muslim count, this from the UK's 2001 Census.

Reading further on, note the FOUR percent count, that from a survey taken in 2010, just nine years later. By the way, though I'm not sure it's clear from the page, the Office for National Statistics is the official Statistical authority which produced BOTH of those statistics.

Perhaps I'm the one who'd be better off not blinking .... and this testifies to our highly porous border controls over that period, courtesy of our ruling LEFTIES !!


But they can't run circles around you. :slap:

... Indeed .. you never HAVE been able to run circles around me .... :lol::laugh:

[Drummond]

^The banana speaks.

How about the puppy-torture accuser ? H'm .. ?

I wonder if a study has ever been undertaken to determine the percentage of human DNA present in such an accuser ?

I'm guessing 'no' to that one. After all - what would be the point ? The form of accusation indulged in, truly says it all.

[fj1200]

The 'no' answer, in truth, means that I shall remain loyal to the truth in my postings.

But then, you know that already.

The "no" was in reference to your failure in holding to your promise of shorter posts. I'm quite disappointed that I still have to wade through the BS of your posts.


On reflection, I see that the point is arguable. Possibly.

Nonetheless, consistency argues that I'm right. The brain-dead (or brain-absent) body has no capacity to exhibit humanity, any more than a store mannequin does. Neither, and demonstrably so, does the Jihadist, bomb-happy, beheadings-happy, skyscraper-demolishing-happy, murderous terrorist savage !

:laugh: You got had by your own analogy and now you stick your head in the ground. This smacks of the other thread where you had to back away from the definitions that YOU posted. Good grief.


Nope. What I see, however, is your dancing away from the sheer logic of the argument I've put ... which you've not addressed in worthwhile detail.

I just took you to task on your own logic. Own it brother.


I fail to see any consistency between the examples. But no matter.

The DNA of the original, whole banana is THE SAME as the pulped remains of one. Even so, the pulp is NOT a banana, once pulped. Try going to a store and agreeing with the salesman that any mashed banana pulp he wants to sell you is the same item as a fully formed, shaped, banana in its skin !

One has undergone a radical change and ceased to be a banana, though its DNA hasn't changed at all.

Oh man this is rich.


I actually don't know. I think that some ARE born terrorists, in that they are predisposed to savagery. And, I also think that some start out as human, but have their humanity driven out of them by the evil of their creed's demands on them.

Either way ... just as in the banana example, THE FINAL SHAPE, FORM, NATURE of the banana into mash, or the terrorist from onetime human beginnings, IS that neither resembles, has the recognisable characteristics, of what they once were.

Mashed pulp is not a banana. A terrorist is not a human being.

Born terrorists? It just keeps getting better. The fact of the matter that your example states that a person is born human and remains human regardless of any transformation. Mashed banana is still banana, just like the banana is mashed to make my banana bread... unless you think I should rename the recipe sub-banana bread.


Thanks to Leftie perversion, that's the way of it. But I tell you, a cockroach is more deserving of 'human rights' than a terrorist. Since when did a cockroach fly planes into buildings, much less exult in witnessing such savagery afterwards ?

A God-given gift is a leftie perversion? Who knew?


Would they grant the right of a Government to effectively act to protect its citizens from harm, and to do what it takes to get the job done ?

Here's the thing, I could accept the argument that torture used to save lives and stop future attacks may be necessary if much of the evidence didn't suggest that it's counterproductive, not to mention other deleterious effects, but you have gone beyond and suggested that torture is somehow a justice tool; that's a sad position not to mention the other negative effects.


COP OUT. My argument was valid.

Not so much.


Lies don't cease to be lies because you keep repeating them.

I have repeated no lie let alone told one in the first place.


And until right now, where did you clearly state a differentiation according to nationality ?

See this ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

The table states a 2.7 percent Muslim count, this from the UK's 2001 Census.

Reading further on, note the FOUR percent count, that from a survey taken in 2010, just nine years later. By the way, though I'm not sure it's clear from the page, the Office for National Statistics is the official Statistical authority which produced BOTH of those statistics.

Perhaps I'm the one who'd be better off not blinking .... and this testifies to our highly porous border controls over that period, courtesy of our ruling LEFTIES !!

Context, it's a good thing. I was replying to tyr and his insistence that the US is lost, .8%, and the 2.8% was clearly directed at you. You are in the UK right? Nevertheless, my memory did fail me on the figure, the link stated 4.6% but it referenced 2.8 million. You got me. :rolleyes:


... Indeed .. you never HAVE been able to run circles around me .... :lol::laugh:

You might want to reread that whole banana incident. ;)

[fj1200]

How about the puppy-torture accuser ? H'm .. ?

I wonder if a study has ever been undertaken to determine the percentage of human DNA present in such an accuser ?

I'm guessing 'no' to that one. After all - what would be the point ? The form of accusation indulged in, truly says it all.

I see that you didn't take the other logic lesson to heart either. You ask a question; I give you an answer.

[Drummond]

The "no" was in reference to your failure in holding to your promise of shorter posts.

Good grief. You can't even be accurate about something THAT simple ...

What I posted, was ...


My replies to your postings can now become markedly shorter, FJ.
'CAN now become'. This falls short of a commitment. Or so-called 'promise'.


I'm quite disappointed that I still have to wade through the BS of your posts.

Then cheer up, pronto ! Since I've posted no 'BS', curb the disappointment. My guess .. your lack of attention to detail (.. see above ..) has led you to read YOUR posts instead, and mistake them for mine.

.. which takes quite some doing, I'd have thought. But, still ....


:laugh: You got had by your own analogy and now you stick your head in the ground.

I don't know what you're talking about.

But let me clarify. You see, to us non-Lefties, free thinking is normal. We consider what possibilities there are in a fair and balanced manner. We aren't constrained by politically correct diktat, you see, so we can do that. But of course, you cannot cope with such a phenomenon.

This is sad.


This smacks of the other thread where you had to back away from the definitions that YOU posted.

Is this a reference to where you tried to tie me into a behaviour which you, yourself, wouldn't identify with ? Tut tut ...


I just took you to task on your own logic.

... You wish.

You just can't face being comprehensively proved wrong.


Own it brother.

Follow your own advice !!!


Oh man this is rich.
Not really. It's just a mixture of logic and truth. So, you don't like facing up to being bested by such things. To which I say .. get over it.:lol:


Born terrorists? It just keeps getting better.

I'm glad you think so.

But I don't see your difficulty. For example, ever heard of the XYY chromosome, and the psychological effect this can predispose people to ?

Genetic predispositions exist. It's a fact.

Check this out ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987314/


Research in behavioural genetics has used molecular genetics research, linkage and association studies in an attempt to find which genes might be involved in behavioural phenotypes. In particular, some studies1, 2, 3 have focused on the heritability of ‘increased impulsive' and ‘antisocial' behaviours and have expanded the debate about how scientific findings such as these could affect criminal law and whether such information should mitigate criminal responsibility.4 These questions gained renewed prominence after the sentence of an Italian judge who decided to further reduce the prison sentence of a person convicted of murder by 1 year – from 9 to 8 years – because he was found to be a carrier of a few genetic variants that were thought to be associated with a predisposition to aggressiveness.

The convicted man was an adult male affected by schizophrenia who was actively psychotic at the time of the crime, having discontinued his psychotropic medication against medical advice. He was found guilty at the first level of judgement and was given a reduced sentence (9 years) owing to his mental illness. At the appeal court, a new expert assessment took place, and genetic testing was requested by the defence. In particular, he was tested for variants within the MAOA, COMT, SCL6A4 and DRD4 genes. The judge based his sentence on the fact that the accused was affected by a mental disorder and that, because of the mental disorder, he was not fully capable of understanding the seriousness of his actions. The judge, however, reduced the sentence from 9 to 8 years, based on the fact that the accused had tested positive for genetic variants that made him particularly prone to be aggressive under stressful circumstances and therefore he was even more vulnerable because of that.

So you see, the idea that an individual may, in essence, be 'a born terrorist', does have scientific precedence. It IS perfectly possible.

That said, it doesn't explain why so many Muslims are inclined to take the 'terrorist' route compared to those from non-Muslim backgrounds, cultures, social orders. Taking it that Islam ITSELF is the dehumanising factor makes far more sense for the vast majority.

As much as you'd like to, FJ, you cannot possibly explain away the total absence of human thought and feeling in Muslim terrorists and yet reconcile it with any claim that those terrorists are 'human'. IT IS A TOTAL NONSENSE. Human beings possess the humanity to act like what they truly are. NON-humans DO NOT.


Mashed banana is still banana, just like the banana is mashed to make my banana bread... unless you think I should rename the recipe sub-banana bread.

Correction. Mashed banana is not A banana !! The banana ceased to exist as one, when it became something else. What you have in mashed banana are the remnants of what was ONCE a banana.

A terrorist - in the main, anyway - may be a remnant of what was once a human being. But its thoughts and actions are far removed from humanity.


A God-given gift is a leftie perversion? Who knew?

What the hell are you talking about ?


Here's the thing, I could accept the argument that torture used to save lives and stop future attacks may be necessary if much of the evidence didn't suggest that it's counterproductive, not to mention other deleterious effects, but you have gone beyond and suggested that torture is somehow a justice tool; that's a sad position not to mention the other negative effects.

All of this is comprehensively negated by one simple truth: it IS possible to extract useful information from the application of torture, and it's very possible to accept that, with certain unresponsive individuals, ONLY torture may work.

In your Leftie enthusiasm to reject that out of hand, FJ, tell me ... how many lives are you willing to put on the line for the sake of your myopic dogma ? Indeed, IS there an upper limit to this ? Does terrorist welfare trump, in your view, ANY AND ALL SUCH CONSIDERATIONS ?

Tell me that it doesn't, and that you're willing to put the life of an ordinary, decent American citizen before terrorist trash !!! And prove to me that you can operate outside of Leftie diktat for once !!


Context, it's a good thing. I was replying to tyr and his insistence that the US is lost, .8%, and the 2.8% was clearly directed at you. You are in the UK right? Nevertheless, my memory did fail me on the figure, the link stated 4.6% but it referenced 2.8 million. You got me. :rolleyes:

Confession is good for the soul, FJ. Well done.


You might want to reread that whole banana incident. ;)
Not at all. But, clearly, YOU should .... :lol:

[Drummond]

I see that you didn't take the other logic lesson to heart either. You ask a question; I give you an answer.

I dismissed your cop-out argument.

Fact is, you crossed a line, big-time. You should take responsibility for that.

[aboutime]

"fj's" Lonely, Miserable, Selfish, Arrogant World must be a real load of fun. Impressing himself so much with reminders to the rest of us, how ignorance is Bred, and Taught so well.

[fj1200]

I dismissed your cop-out argument.

Fact is, you crossed a line, big-time. You should take responsibility for that.

Yes, I've noticed what you "dismiss" when the going gets tough.

[fj1200]

Good grief. You can't even be accurate about something THAT simple ...

What I posted, was ...

'CAN now become'. This falls short of a commitment. Or so-called 'promise'.

That must be the sound of you backtracking. If you would simply leave out "leftie" diatribes and other ignorant assumptions then your posts could immediately be smaller.


Then cheer up, pronto ! Since I've posted no 'BS', curb the disappointment. My guess .. your lack of attention to detail (.. see above ..) has led you to read YOUR posts instead, and mistake them for mine.

.. which takes quite some doing, I'd have thought. But, still ....

:roundandround:


I don't know what you're talking about.

But let me clarify. You see, to us non-Lefties, free thinking is normal. We consider what possibilities there are in a fair and balanced manner. We aren't constrained by politically correct diktat, you see, so we can do that. But of course, you cannot cope with such a phenomenon.

This is sad.

Backtracking again. Non-lefties! :laugh: You mean big-government non lefties?


Is this a reference to where you tried to tie me into a behaviour which you, yourself, wouldn't identify with ? Tut tut ...

Nope, reference where you ran kicking and screaming from the definitions that you posted. Have you decided at what level the mentally handicapped are subhuman yet? The world is waiting for your learned opinion.


... You wish.

You just can't face being comprehensively proved wrong.

I can face it; the trick is in waiting until it happens.


Follow your own advice !!!

I own all my posts.


Not really. It's just a mixture of logic and truth. So, you don't like facing up to being bested by such things. To which I say .. get over it.:lol:

Yes, the logic of the "sub-banana bread." :facepalm99:


I'm glad you think so.

But I don't see your difficulty. For example, ever heard of the XYY chromosome, and the psychological effect this can predispose people to ?

Genetic predispositions exist. It's a fact.

Check this out ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2987314/

So you see, the idea that an individual may, in essence, be 'a born terrorist', does have scientific precedence. It IS perfectly possible.

That said, it doesn't explain why so many Muslims are inclined to take the 'terrorist' route compared to those from non-Muslim backgrounds, cultures, social orders. Taking it that Islam ITSELF is the dehumanising factor makes far more sense for the vast majority.

As much as you'd like to, FJ, you cannot possibly explain away the total absence of human thought and feeling in Muslim terrorists and yet reconcile it with any claim that those terrorists are 'human'. IT IS A TOTAL NONSENSE. Human beings possess the humanity to act like what they truly are. NON-humans DO NOT.

Now they are "NON-humans"? Wow, that's an even less provable assertion than you've made previous. And you should check your presumptions again; I don't explain away anything, they make despicable acts but I don't dismiss the undismissable.

But getting back to your new argument; are you taking the position that those who carry the XYY chromosome are also subhuman and should be subjected to torture as a form of revenge and justice if they carry out on their predispositions?


Correction. Mashed banana is not A banana !! The banana ceased to exist as one, when it became something else. What you have in mashed banana are the remnants of what was ONCE a banana.

A terrorist - in the main, anyway - may be a remnant of what was once a human being. But its thoughts and actions are far removed from humanity.

No, it's still a banana. Not a pretty banana but still a banana which makes delicious banana bread; would you like the recipe?


What the hell are you talking about ?

A basic truth too much to grasp?


All of this is comprehensively negated by one simple truth: it IS possible to extract useful information from the application of torture, and it's very possible to accept that, with certain unresponsive individuals, ONLY torture may work.

In your Leftie enthusiasm to reject that out of hand, FJ, tell me ... how many lives are you willing to put on the line for the sake of your myopic dogma ? Indeed, IS there an upper limit to this ? Does terrorist welfare trump, in your view, ANY AND ALL SUCH CONSIDERATIONS ?

Tell me that it doesn't, and that you're willing to put the life of an ordinary, decent American citizen before terrorist trash !!! And prove to me that you can operate outside of Leftie diktat for once !!

"possible... possible... may..." The evidence suggests otherwise or were you ignoring all the previous links on the subject. Like I said, I could accept an argument that rests on that but you don't stop there... sadly. Nevertheless, assuming it were possible for you to no longer lean so heavily on your leftie crutch, I don't put terrorist "welfare" before honest citizens but I do prioritize basic values. Just like I accept innocent until proven guilty and that some guilty go free I don't accept that we grant government carte blanche authority to deprive natural rights from whomever it deems to not be worthy; if I accept it per my safety today then I lose the moral authority to challenge it later.


Confession is good for the soul, FJ. Well done.

Now if only you were capable. :poke:


Not at all. But, clearly, YOU should .... :lol:

No, I'm happy with the clear truth of it all.

[aboutime]

"fj's" Lonely, Miserable, Selfish, Arrogant World must be a real load of fun. Impressing himself so much with reminders to the rest of us, how ignorance is Bred, and Taught so well.


fj. You should copy this image, 5312 save it to your pc, or laptop, and use it as your avatar.

It identifies your ignorance...right from the Get-GO!

[Drummond]

That must be the sound of you backtracking. If you would simply leave out "leftie" diatribes and other ignorant assumptions then your posts could immediately be smaller.

Actually, my posts can be a lot smaller if I stop replying to the rot.

For example, your claim that I was 'backtracking', when - obviously ! - what I was REALLY doing, was proving you wrong.


:roundandround:

Getting dizzy ? Walk a straight, logical line, instead. It works every time.


Nope, reference where you ran kicking and screaming from the definitions that you posted.

... which you tried to make me take personal responsibility for, in the very way that you REFUSED to do, when the shoe was on the other foot !

I had a case to make at the time, which I duly made. But then, as now, you didn't like the outcome.


Have you decided at what level the mentally handicapped are subhuman yet? The world is waiting for your learned opinion.

Since this is your own personal obsession and not mine, perhaps I should leave you to determine what your own answer is. However, I thank you for the obviously very high value you place on my opinion. No wonder you insist on keeping these exchanges going !


I can face it; the trick is in waiting until it happens.

Which, of course, you've recently learned from experience ...


I own all my posts.

I suspect there's some shadowy Governmental peeping Tom out there that might disagree with you. Led by a Socialist-inspired Government, but of course.


Yes, the logic of the "sub-banana bread." :facepalm99:
Only YOU could look at a pile of pulp and mistake it for a fully-formed banana !!!:facepalm99:

Little wonder that you can't recognise a terrorist for what it truly is.

Have you ever been able to identify your own front door ?


Now they are "NON-humans"?

As opposed to 'humans', yes.

You catch on quickly for a Leftie ...


Wow, that's an even less provable assertion than you've made previous. And you should check your presumptions again; I don't explain away anything, they make despicable acts but I don't dismiss the undismissable.

Subhumanity staring you in the face, which can't be interpreted as anything BUT a total absence of humanity, is as 'undismissable' as it gets !! But you manage it anyway.


But getting back to your new argument; are you taking the position that those who carry the XYY chromosome are also subhuman ...

That would be illogical. For one thing, there are variable states of severity of the condition. And not everyone thus afflicted turns into a conscienceless savage.


...and should be subjected to torture as a form of revenge and justice if they carry out on their predispositions?

If severely afflicted, and taken to the extreme point where subhumanity is not only prevalent but has manifested as murderous terrorism, then the creature we're talking about wouldn't be definable as deserving of human rights.

But we're talking, here, about a medical condition. If there is the possibility of a cure, that cure should be sought. But in the meantime, you treat a savage as it deserves to be treated ... especially if that savage has killed, and wants to kill again.

Who else but a Leftie would insist upon conferring human rights where they absolutely could not POSSIBLY apply ??


No, it's still a banana. Not a pretty banana but still a banana which makes delicious banana bread; would you like the recipe?

How can you have a recipe for A WHOLE BANANA ?? If you're offering one, then you're conceding my argument !!

[aboutime]

Actually, my posts can be a lot smaller if I stop replying to the rot.

For example, your claim that I was 'backtracking', when - obviously ! - what I was REALLY doing, was proving you wrong.



Getting dizzy ? Walk a straight, logical line, instead. It works every time.



... which you tried to make me take personal responsibility for, in the very way that you REFUSED to do, when the shoe was on the other foot !

I had a case to make at the time, which I duly made. But then, as now, you didn't like the outcome.



Since this is your own personal obsession and not mine, perhaps I should leave you to determine what your own answer is. However, I thank you for the obviously very high value you place on my opinion. No wonder you insist on keeping these exchanges going !



Which, of course, you've recently learned from experience ...



I suspect there's some shadowy Governmental peeping Tom out there that might disagree with you. Led by a Socialist-inspired Government, but of course.


Only YOU could look at a pile of pulp and mistake it for a fully-formed banana !!!:facepalm99:

Little wonder that you can't recognise a terrorist for what it truly is.

Have you ever been able to identify your own front door ?



As opposed to 'humans', yes.

You catch on quickly for a Leftie ...



Subhumanity staring you in the face, which can't be interpreted as anything BUT a total absence of humanity, is as 'undismissable' as it gets !! But you manage it anyway.



That would be illogical. For one thing, there are variable states of severity of the condition. And not everyone thus afflicted turns into a conscienceless savage.



If severely afflicted, and taken to the extreme point where subhumanity is not only prevalent but has manifested as murderous terrorism, then the creature we're talking about wouldn't be definable as deserving of human rights.

But we're talking, here, about a medical condition. If there is the possibility of a cure, that cure should be sought. But in the meantime, you treat a savage as it deserves to be treated ... especially if that savage has killed, and wants to kill again.

Who else but a Leftie would insist upon conferring human rights where they absolutely could not POSSIBLY apply ??



How can you have a recipe for A WHOLE BANANA ?? If you're offering one, then you're conceding my argument !!



Sir Drummond. I am convinced now. fj is Gabby's Psychiatrist, and treating her with Viagra, and Botox that eventually creates a relly BIG...UGLY mistake.:laugh2:

[fj1200]

Actually, my posts can be a lot smaller if I stop replying to the rot.

For example, your claim that I was 'backtracking', when - obviously ! - what I was REALLY doing, was proving you wrong.

The "rot" is your ignorant "leftie" diatribes.


Getting dizzy ? Walk a straight, logical line, instead. It works every time.

My logic is straighter than ever,


... which you tried to make me take personal responsibility for, in the very way that you REFUSED to do, when the shoe was on the other foot !

I had a case to make at the time, which I duly made. But then, as now, you didn't like the outcome.

Personal responsibility? Clearly you won't accept that but it was the basis for your "logic" which you couldn't run away from fast enough. I'm good with the links I've provided.


Since this is your own personal obsession and not mine, perhaps I should leave you to determine what your own answer is. However, I thank you for the obviously very high value you place on my opinion. No wonder you insist on keeping these exchanges going !

I place zero value on your opinion because you fail to follow your own logic and provided definitions.


Which, of course, you've recently learned from experience ...

I have no issue acknowledging that I misremembered and posted incorrectly. I see you do have those issues.


I suspect there's some shadowy Governmental peeping Tom out there that might disagree with you. Led by a Socialist-inspired Government, but of course.

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean... as nonsensical as it is and all.


Only YOU could look at a pile of pulp and mistake it for a fully-formed banana !!!:facepalm99:

Little wonder that you can't recognise a terrorist for what it truly is.

Have you ever been able to identify your own front door ?

I can clearly recognize it that it is not a nice ripe yellow banana but it's still a banana.


As opposed to 'humans', yes.

You catch on quickly for a Leftie ...

From subhumans to non-humans. Your logic is despicable.


Subhumanity staring you in the face, which can't be interpreted as anything BUT a total absence of humanity, is as 'undismissable' as it gets !! But you manage it anyway.

:facepalm99:


That would be illogical. For one thing, there are variable states of severity of the condition. And not everyone thus afflicted turns into a conscienceless savage.

I'm glad you see the failure of your logic. But I'm sure you'll run away even further from this one. What state of severity gives rise to their non-humanity? Should I alert the XYY folks to your position? They might take disagreement.


If severely afflicted, and taken to the extreme point where subhumanity is not only prevalent but has manifested as murderous terrorism, then the creature we're talking about wouldn't be definable as deserving of human rights.

But we're talking, here, about a medical condition. If there is the possibility of a cure, that cure should be sought. But in the meantime, you treat a savage as it deserves to be treated ... especially if that savage has killed, and wants to kill again.

Who else but a Leftie would insist upon conferring human rights where they absolutely could not POSSIBLY apply ??

Wow.


How can you have a recipe for A WHOLE BANANA ?? If you're offering one, then you're conceding my argument !!

Nope, your argument is dumb.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The "rot" is your ignorant "leftie" diatribes.



My logic is straighter than ever,



Personal responsibility? Clearly you won't accept that but it was the basis for your "logic" which you couldn't run away from fast enough. I'm good with the links I've provided.



I place zero value on your opinion because you fail to follow your own logic and provided definitions.



I have no issue acknowledging that I misremembered and posted incorrectly. I see you do have those issues.



I don't even know what that's supposed to mean... as nonsensical as it is and all.



I can clearly recognize it that it is not a nice ripe yellow banana but it's still a banana.



From subhumans to non-humans. Your logic is despicable.



:facepalm99:



I'm glad you see the failure of your logic. But I'm sure you'll run away even further from this one. What state of severity gives rise to their non-humanity? Should I alert the XYY folks to your position? They might take disagreement.



Wow.



Nope, your argument is dumb. I have pretty much stayed out of this up to now but fj your contention that man has not the capacity to become a thing void of all humanity is ridiculous. History is chalked full of men that have done just that. However no group has come close to being as large or as bad as are the Islamist terrorists IMHO. One god study of their goals and ongoing actions proves that.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

I have pretty much stayed out of this up to now but fj your contention that man has not the capacity to become a thing void of all humanity is ridiculous. History is chalked full of men that have done just that. However no group has come close to being as large or as bad as are the Islamist terrorists IMHO. One god study of their goals and ongoing actions proves that.. -Tyr

That's a ridiculous statement on its own but even if granted the other arguments made are even worse and the granting of governmental power to declare such is extremely dangerous; I think even you recognize that.

[Drummond]

I have pretty much stayed out of this up to now but fj your contention that man has not the capacity to become a thing void of all humanity is ridiculous. History is chalked full of men that have done just that. However no group has come close to being as large or as bad as are the Islamist terrorists IMHO. One god study of their goals and ongoing actions proves that.. -Tyr:clap::clap::clap:

Agreed - completely ridiculous. And I agree with your assessment of Islamist terrorists, Tyr.

But, EVEN taking them out of this (.. though I don't see why I should ..) .. FJ, perhaps you'd like to wax lyrical about the 'humanity' of some of the world's most bloodthirsty tyrants ? After all, it 'must be there' ... yes ?

Start with Hitler, why don't you .. and tell us of the 'humanity' of the Holocaust. Or, Stalin's massacres. Pol Pot, ditto.

History is replete with stark examples proving this wrong.

Then again, putting Islamist terrorists back INTO the equation .. visit the thread elsewhere on this forum, a very long-running one, which details all of those 'humanitarian' acts of terrorism in the world which happen ON A DAILY BASIS, and explain the 'humanity' of what you see described there.

[Drummond]

That's a ridiculous statement on its own but even if granted the other arguments made are even worse and the granting of governmental power to declare such is extremely dangerous; I think even you recognize that.

... and here, folks, we see the truth of what motivates FJ's argument.

The point is that what's at stake is the unassailability of the position where Governments 'dare not' treat terrorists less than 'well'. Never mind actually recognising the enemy for what it is, and treating it accordingly. No, we are all 'mandated' to buy into the Leftie illusion that no matter how strong the evidence of subhumanity, no matter how heinous the atrocity committed, terrorists must still have their 'human rights' catered for. Regardless of how ridiculous doing that really is.

AND WHAT ABOUT THEIR VICTIMS ?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's a ridiculous statement on its own but even if granted the other arguments made are even worse and the granting of governmental power to declare such is extremely dangerous; I think even you recognize that. I am not big on government declaring such as in taking action by any large scale program (as was done to the Jews (WW2) to execute non-combatants but individuals that are clearly engaging in such activities(terrorism) should be deemed as targets to be eliminated with extreme prejudice! One must compare one danger against the other in this case. Sure it is a fine line that must be walked but that is better than just letting the terrorists have free reign. Don't get me wrong I see in that specific case your alarm at giving government free reign has merit too. Yet on the other hand we must give government enough power/free reign to be effective in defeating the terrorists. It is by no means an easy issue to deal with.. With that firmly in mind I still have to go with taking the chance on government rather than giving any type of aid to the terrorists. We must remember our government and even military did bomb civilian targets during WW2 . And that was a hard decision but the right one now that we look back on it.. I got to go with Drummond on this because the greater danger is in not hitting the Islamic terrorists as hard as we can . Decided on the merits as I see them not on our friendship and I'm sure Drummond would agree as I have presented that view before when backing others comments not just his alone. -Tyr

[Drummond]

The "rot" is your ignorant "leftie" diatribes.

The truth is never 'rot'


My logic is straighter than ever,:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Posts I've just added to this thread defy that conclusion about yourself.


Personal responsibility? Clearly you won't accept that but it was the basis for your "logic" which you couldn't run away from fast enough. I'm good with the links I've provided.

What you're good at is denial. Oh, and gratuitous crossings-out ...


I place zero value on your opinion because you fail to follow your own logic and provided definitions.

Nope. You just hate being bested.


I can clearly recognize it that it is not a nice ripe yellow banana but it's still a banana.

... Make up your mind !!!

Banana PULP is not 'A' banana.

If a tornado flattened your house, and you took a picture of the rubble, would you then be able to go into an Estate Agent's office and say, 'Look here, I've got a house I want you to sell' .. ??

The rubble of a demolished house is not A HOUSE. Equally, the pulp of a banana is not A BANANA !!

Tell you what .. provide me with an argument which says that, even though the Twin Towers were demolished, they still exist as skyscrapers ..... !!!! ...


From subhumans to non-humans. Your logic is despicable.

No it's not. But regardless of how you conveniently 'grade' my logic, at least I've got some !!! See above for a complete absence of yours.


I'm glad you see the failure of your logic. But I'm sure you'll run away even further from this one. What state of severity gives rise to their non-humanity? Should I alert the XYY folks to your position? They might take disagreement.

Would the 'XYY folks' be in a position to reasonably assess their own condition, or would it, to them, seem like normality ?

Likewise a Muslim terrorist. Its disconnection from human decency would be 'normal' to such a creature, but unacceptably abnormal to everyone else.

To answer your question .. isn't the answer in fact obvious ? When all trace of humanity is discernibly absent, THEN such a judgment can be reached.


Nope, your argument is dumb.

This is provably nonsense.

Here's the proof ..

You cannot offer a 'recipe' which describes, purely, exclusively and simply, A WHOLE BANANA.

[Drummond]

I am not big on government declaring such as in taking action by any large scale program (as was done to the Jews (WW2) to execute non-combatants but individuals that are clearly engaging in such activities(terrorism) should be deemed as targets to be eliminated with extreme prejudice! One must compare one danger against the other in this case. Sure it is a fine line that must be walked but that is better than just letting the terrorists have free reign. Don't get me wrong I see in that specific case your alarm at giving government free reign has merit too. Yet on the other hand we must give government enough power/free reign to be effective in defeating the terrorists. It is by no means an easy issue to deal with.. With that firmly in mind I still have to go with taking the chance on government rather than giving any type of aid to the terrorists. We must remember our government and even military did bomb civilian targets during WW2 . And that was a hard decision but the right one now that we look back on it.. I got to go with Drummond on this because the greater danger is in not hitting the Islamic terrorists as hard as we can . Decided on the merits as I see them not on our friendship and I'm sure Drummond would agree as I have presented that view before when backing others comments not just his alone. -Tyr

Yep. Can't disagree with a word of this. And FJ, you should trust in Tyr's effort to be totally even-handed in his conclusions.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yep. Can't disagree with a word of this. And FJ, you should trust in Tyr's effort to be totally even-handed in his conclusions. I tried to be just that my friend. I was torn between wanting a smaller less intrusive/powerful government and the desire to see the damn terrorist scum vanquished as completely and soon as possible. And that was a large part of the disagreement once one got past the human or subhuman part. Again on that I had to go with evidence that history provides and compare that with what the Islamic terrorist scum are currently doing. Once having completed that comparison the decision was made for me.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

.. FJ, perhaps you'd like to wax lyrical about the 'humanity' of some of the world's most bloodthirsty tyrants ?

It's amazing how much you suck at reading.


... and here, folks, we see the truth of what motivates FJ's argument.

The point is that what's at stake is the unassailability of the position where Governments 'dare not' treat terrorists less than 'well'. Never mind actually recognising the enemy for what it is, and treating it accordingly. No, we are all 'mandated' to buy into the Leftie illusion that no matter how strong the evidence of subhumanity, no matter how heinous the atrocity committed, terrorists must still have their 'human rights' catered for. Regardless of how ridiculous doing that really is.

AND WHAT ABOUT THEIR VICTIMS ?

You can not even comprehend that the issue isn't about terrorists it's about government and the power that we grant it. Is it even worth discussing what you are unable to understand?

[fj1200]

The truth is never 'rot'

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Posts I've just added to this thread defy that conclusion about yourself.



What you're good at is denial. Oh, and gratuitous crossings-out ...



Nope. You just hate being bested.



... Make up your mind !!!

Banana PULP is not 'A' banana.

If a tornado flattened your house, and you took a picture of the rubble, would you then be able to go into an Estate Agent's office and say, 'Look here, I've got a house I want you to sell' .. ??

The rubble of a demolished house is not A HOUSE. Equally, the pulp of a banana is not A BANANA !!

Tell you what .. provide me with an argument which says that, even though the Twin Towers were demolished, they still exist as skyscrapers ..... !!!! ...



No it's not. But regardless of how you conveniently 'grade' my logic, at least I've got some !!! See above for a complete absence of yours.



Would the 'XYY folks' be in a position to reasonably assess their own condition, or would it, to them, seem like normality ?

Likewise a Muslim terrorist. Its disconnection from human decency would be 'normal' to such a creature, but unacceptably abnormal to everyone else.

To answer your question .. isn't the answer in fact obvious ? When all trace of humanity is discernibly absent, THEN such a judgment can be reached.



This is provably nonsense.

Here's the proof ..

You cannot offer a 'recipe' which describes, purely, exclusively and simply, A WHOLE BANANA.

:roundandround: I've never seen so many words from someone who must seek to deny their big government position.

[fj1200]

Yep. Can't disagree with a word of this. And FJ, you should trust in Tyr's effort to be totally even-handed in his conclusions.

As surprised as I am to hear myself say this; Tyr appears to not have gone completely off the deep end of the argument such as yourself.


I am not big on government declaring such as in taking action by any large scale program (as was done to the Jews (WW2) to execute non-combatants but individuals that are clearly engaging in such activities(terrorism) should be deemed as targets to be eliminated with extreme prejudice! One must compare one danger against the other in this case. Sure it is a fine line that must be walked but that is better than just letting the terrorists have free reign. Don't get me wrong I see in that specific case your alarm at giving government free reign has merit too. Yet on the other hand we must give government enough power/free reign to be effective in defeating the terrorists. It is by no means an easy issue to deal with.. With that firmly in mind I still have to go with taking the chance on government rather than giving any type of aid to the terrorists. We must remember our government and even military did bomb civilian targets during WW2 . And that was a hard decision but the right one now that we look back on it.. I got to go with Drummond on this because the greater danger is in not hitting the Islamic terrorists as hard as we can . Decided on the merits as I see them not on our friendship and I'm sure Drummond would agree as I have presented that view before when backing others comments not just his alone. -Tyr

As I've said before, government grows ever larger, ever expansive, grabbing ever more power. To grant it the power that you wish is another step into that abyss. Nevertheless what I've bolded above are strawmen, fallacies, etc. that are used to justify certain actions: 1. Clearly engaging ignores mistakes that can be, and are, made in eliminating with 2. extreme prejudice, are you suggesting that we should move beyond mere torture and battlefield operations to execution? 3. No one has EVER suggested that terrorists have "free reign." To suggest otherwise is disingenuous. 4. "Aid to the terrorists"? NOT killing indiscriminately and NOT committing to torture is NOT giving aid to the terrorists.

You repeatedly tell me that BO is a "Muslim in disguise," anti-Christian, etc. The argument you are making is that the current CiC should be able to run a war and torture campaign against an enemy that is based almost entirely on the religion of the enemy; Do you not see the problem in your position?

Of course none of this mentions that actual effectiveness of torture and other negative effects.

[Drummond]

It's amazing how much you suck at reading.

Well, that's right ! Just think of all those history books I've misread over the years.

Hitler .. a nice, amiable old chap who was everyone's friend ... eh ?

Stalin, likewise. Never had anyone killed at all.

Pol Pot .. chief claim to fame, the inventer of a new brand of Pot Noodle ...


You can not even comprehend that the issue isn't about terrorists it's about government and the power that we grant it. Is it even worth discussing what you are unable to understand?

I comprehend - and despite this smokescreen of yours that you're trying to use, to hide what TRULY motivates you - that you HATE the idea of terrorists not being treated 'nicely' .. and you want to go so far as to say that no Government should wield so much power and judgmentality as to consider saying or doing anything differently to that.

Well, guess what ? Leftie political correctness, my son, is NOT sacrosanct .. and no amount of your trying to dictate to them how they must treat and regard a subhuman, vicious enemy will necessarily matter a damn.

Trying to demonise me doesn't help you, either.

[Drummond]

As surprised as I am to hear myself say this; Tyr appears to not have gone completely off the deep end of the argument such as yourself.

I'm happy that you're prepared to confer a smidgen of respect to Tyr. Now try expanding on that, by taking on board some - or all - of what he has to tell you, instead of trying to find variations on ways to save terrorists some 'uncomfortable times'.

[Drummond]

As I've said before, government grows ever larger, ever expansive, grabbing ever more power. To grant it the power that you wish is another step into that abyss. Nevertheless what I've bolded above are strawmen, fallacies, etc. that are used to justify certain actions: 1. Clearly engaging ignores mistakes that can be, and are, made in eliminating with 2. extreme prejudice, are you suggesting that we should move beyond mere torture and battlefield operations to execution? 3. No one has EVER suggested that terrorists have "free reign." To suggest otherwise is disingenuous. 4. "Aid to the terrorists"? NOT killing indiscriminately and NOT committing to torture is NOT giving aid to the terrorists.

You repeatedly tell me that BO is a "Muslim in disguise," anti-Christian, etc. The argument you are making is that the current CiC should be able to run a war and torture campaign against an enemy that is based almost entirely on the religion of the enemy; Do you not see the problem in your position?

Of course none of this mentions that actual effectiveness of torture and other negative effects.

Are you trying to promote a 'be kind to terrorists' week ? Looks that way to me ...

Do you think there will ever come a time when you're prepared to fully understand the nature of the enemy, and therefore agree with what's REALLY needed as a response to them ? Or does Leftie pap completely govern your every thought ?

[fj1200]

Ignorant statements... blah, blah, blah... strawman arguments... yada, yada, yada... unfounded presumptions... reliance on ridiculous leftie crutch... fallacy upon fallacy...


Are you trying to promote a 'be kind to terrorists' week ? Looks that way to me ...

Do you think there will ever come a time when you're prepared to fully understand the nature of the enemy, and therefore agree with what's REALLY needed as a response to them ? Or does Leftie pap completely govern your every thought ?

Those must be some good drugs d. No change to what I've been seeing that there is absolutely no point in responding because you only come back with more of the same.

[fj1200]

I'm happy that you're prepared to confer a smidgen of respect to Tyr. Now try expanding on that, by taking on board some - or all - of what he has to tell you, instead of trying to find variations on ways to save terrorists some 'uncomfortable times'.

He's entitled to some because at the very least he was able to present coherent thoughts, in paragraph form no less, as well as get through a whole post without typing "leftie." Now if only others could... But alas he did still present a few fallacies and imagined some positions that I haven't argued but at least it's a start.

[Drummond]

Those must be some good drugs d. No change to what I've been seeing that there is absolutely no point in responding because you only come back with more of the same.

Is it possible to get 'high' on the truth ?

Well, maybe.

And you're probably right. I will 'come back with more of the same'. Now .. if I decided to stop being truthful, then the sort of variation you're looking for may be possible. But then, I'm a Conservative, so there's no chance of that, I'm afraid.

[Drummond]

He's entitled to some because at the very least he was able to present coherent thoughts, in paragraph form no less, as well as get through a whole post without typing "leftie." Now if only others could... But alas he did still present a few fallacies and imagined some positions that I haven't argued but at least it's a start.

How condescending of you.

Look, if the categorisation 'Leftie' really bothers you, THEN STOP ARGUING LIKE ONE.

It would be a start if you recognised terrorist enemies for what they are, and stopped trying to argue that they deserve what they could NEVER deserve.

[aboutime]

Are you trying to promote a 'be kind to terrorists' week ? Looks that way to me ...

Do you think there will ever come a time when you're prepared to fully understand the nature of the enemy, and therefore agree with what's REALLY needed as a response to them ? Or does Leftie pap completely govern your every thought ?


Sir Drummond. fj promotes that all the time. Explaining why he comes here.

[fj1200]

How condescending of you.

Look, if the categorisation 'Leftie' really bothers you, THEN STOP ARGUING LIKE ONE.

It would be a start if you recognised terrorist enemies for what they are, and stopped trying to argue that they deserve what they could NEVER deserve.

I'm glad you caught that. But I do see the problem; you think that arguing with truth, fact, and reason is arguing like a leftie. A shame that you do.

[aboutime]

I'm glad you caught that. But I do see the problem; you think that arguing with truth, fact, and reason is arguing like a leftie. A shame that you do.


fj. If you aren't the leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive a few of us think you are. Why then, do you act, sound, and talk so much like all of them if...as you insist so often. You aren't a liberal?

You are like several other members who never seem satisfied to come here without causing an argument, or disagreement. For whatever reason you choose, other than the miserable, frustrated satisfaction you get from being such a Nimrod all the time.

[fj1200]

fj. If you aren't the leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive a few of us think you are. Why then, do you act, sound, and talk so much like all of them if...as you insist so often. You aren't a liberal?

You are like several other members who never seem satisfied to come here without causing an argument, or disagreement. For whatever reason you choose, other than the miserable, frustrated satisfaction you get from being such a Nimrod all the time.

Apart from your fervent desire that no one challenge your point of view could you care to point out how my "leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive" self expresses viewpoints challenging the size and growth of government. In defense of you being a conservative though please show me which other conservative, limited government countries have sought to label it's enemies as subhuman.

[aboutime]

Apart from your fervent desire that no one challenge your point of view could you care to point out how my "leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive" self expresses viewpoints challenging the size and growth of government. In defense of you being a conservative though please show me which other conservative, limited government countries have sought to label it's enemies as subhuman.

<strike>Apart from your fervent desire that no one challenge your point of view could you care to point out how my "leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive" self expresses viewpoints challenging the size and growth of government. In defense of you being a conservative though please show me which other conservative, limited government countries have sought to label it's enemies as subhuman.</strike>

You were saying?

[fj1200]

<strike>Apart from your fervent desire that no one challenge your point of view could you care to point out how my "leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive" self expresses viewpoints challenging the size and growth of government. In defense of you being a conservative though please show me which other conservative, limited government countries have sought to label it's enemies as subhuman.</strike>

You were saying?

You didn't do it right. Nevertheless I was asking you for validation of what you believe. I'm not surprised that you offered none.

[aboutime]

You didn't do it right. Nevertheless I was asking you for validation of what you believe. I'm not surprised that you offered none.


Have no need to offer anything to you. You are NOBODY to me. That's why I am having so much fun here. You want excuses. Talk to yourself.

[fj1200]

Have no need to offer anything to you. You are NOBODY to me. That's why I am having so much fun here. You want excuses. Talk to yourself.

Revel in your ignorance then.

Have a nice day. (A pleasantry, from nobody)

[Drummond]

I'm glad you caught that. But I do see the problem; you think that arguing with truth, fact, and reason is arguing like a leftie. A shame that you do.

Except for the fact that I observed your condescention (which you seem to be PROUD of ??) ... your reply is a total perversion.

It's THE LEFT that relies on propagandist pap. Conservatives, however, are grounded in truth and decency.

If you were a Conservative, you'd know that. Instead, you take the Leftie line of sanitising / being considerate to your country's enemies.

[Drummond]

fj. If you aren't the leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive a few of us think you are. Why then, do you act, sound, and talk so much like all of them if...as you insist so often. You aren't a liberal?

You are like several other members who never seem satisfied to come here without causing an argument, or disagreement. For whatever reason you choose, other than the miserable, frustrated satisfaction you get from being such a Nimrod all the time.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

EXACTLY !

[fj1200]

Except for the fact that I observed your condescention (which you seem to be PROUD of ??) ... your reply is a total perversion.

It's THE LEFT that relies on propagandist pap. Conservatives, however, are grounded in truth and decency.

If you were a Conservative, you'd know that. Instead, you take the Leftie line of sanitising / being considerate to your country's enemies.

I deem as propaganda the lie that individuals are subhuman and weak attempts to demonize anyone that opposes your ignorant line of thought. See? Truth, fact, and reason have just proven you to be a leftie big government hack. I'll give some lessons on actual conservatism later.

I see though that there is some hope for you to develop your powers of observation. Faint, but it's there. Now if we could just work on that crutch that you limp around on.


:clap::clap::clap::clap:

EXACTLY !

If you agree with his ignorant tripe so much perhaps you would care to attempt to answer where he has failed.


Apart from your fervent desire that no one challenge your point of view could you care to point out how my "leftie, democrat, liberal, progressive" self expresses viewpoints challenging the size and growth of government. In defense of you being a conservative though please show me which other conservative, limited government countries have sought to label it's enemies as subhuman.

[Drummond]

I deem as propaganda the lie that individuals are subhuman and weak attempts to demonize anyone that opposes your ignorant line of thought. See? Truth, fact, and reason have just proven you to be a leftie big government hack. I'll give some lessons on actual conservatism later.

More condescention. You clearly have problems.

One is the level of determination with which you deny clear evidence not to your liking. CERTAIN individuals - terrorists - prove through their thoughts and actions that they cannot, in truth, be called 'human'. The truth of that is staring you in the face ! Yet, you remain loyal to a Left-wing script which insists you never acknowledge this.

I suppose if your comrades handed you a script which insisted that the Moon was made of cheese, you'd post on thread after thread that it was ?


I see though that there is some hope for you to develop your powers of observation. Faint, but it's there. Now if we could just work on that crutch that you limp around on.

You want to work on being a Leftie ???

It takes all sorts, I suppose.

[Drummond]

If you agree with his ignorant tripe so much perhaps you would care to attempt to answer where he has failed.

I see neither ignorance nor failure.

In fact, I don't know what you mean at all.

You will have to explain further. Assuming that you can.

[fj1200]

More condescention. You clearly have problems.

One is the level of determination with which you deny clear evidence not to your liking. CERTAIN individuals - terrorists - prove through their thoughts and actions that they cannot, in truth, be called 'human'. The truth of that is staring you in the face ! Yet, you remain loyal to a Left-wing script which insists you never acknowledge this.

I suppose if your comrades handed you a script which insisted that the Moon was made of cheese, you'd post on thread after thread that it was ?

You want to work on being a Leftie ???

It takes all sorts, I suppose.

:facepalm99: You have yet to identify a truth.


I see neither ignorance nor failure.

In fact, I don't know what you mean at all.

You will have to explain further. Assuming that you can.

Of course you wouldn't, you dare not go against the words and actions of your knucklehead krew no matter the level of failure that they exhibit. And if you can't understand that post then you are beyond help.

[Drummond]

:facepalm99: You have yet to identify a truth.

.. Good grief ..

Are you sitting comfortably ? Are you paying attention ? SURE ??? Then here it comes ...

TERRORISTS LACK THE HUMANITY WHICH PERMITS THEIR CLASSIFICATION AS HUMAN BEINGS.

It doesn't get any truer than that.

... Now get ready with the peevish crossings-out ...


Of course you wouldn't, you dare not go against the words and actions of your knucklehead krew no matter the level of failure that they exhibit. And if you can't understand that post then you are beyond help.

We agree on issues because it's right that we do so.

And if you really can't understand THAT, then it's YOU who is beyond help.

[aboutime]

I see neither ignorance nor failure.

In fact, I don't know what you mean at all.

You will have to explain further. Assuming that you can.


Sir Drummond. As I have said previously. fj only comes here to Impress himself. Just ask him.

Living his miserable life, where everything he says, and does is designed to bring others DOWN to his level of misery, and frustration is his only purpose here, and probably...in life.

He's so smart (or so he would like us to think). He's not even willing to use the "LAST WORD" graphic I dedicated to him, for use here.
He simply cannot, and will not ever be satisfied unless he, and he alone has the final say, and uses his master ability as the CHIEF PATRONIZER of his own, wasted existence, as long as he never fails to have the exact...last word.
This is all a game to fj. And his "f'in Jerkship" never fails to expose himself for all to see.

[fj1200]

.. Good grief ..

Are you sitting comfortably ? Are you paying attention ? SURE ??? Then here it comes ...

TERRORISTS LACK THE HUMANITY WHICH PERMITS THEIR CLASSIFICATION AS HUMAN BEINGS.

It doesn't get any truer than that.

... Now get ready with the peevish crossings-out ...



We agree on issues because it's right that we do so.

And if you really can't understand THAT, then it's YOU who is beyond help.

Blah, blah, blah... My post still stands.


:facepalm99: You have yet to identify a truth.



Of course you wouldn't, you dare not go against the words and actions of your knucklehead krew no matter the level of failure that they exhibit. And if you can't understand that post then you are beyond help.

[Drummond]

Blah, blah, blah... My post still stands.

As do all of mine.

But at least mine are logical, rooted in realism. Mine tell the TRUTH.

Yours just immovably follow a script.

[fj1200]

As do all of mine.

But at least mine are logical, rooted in realism. Mine tell the TRUTH.

Yours just immovably follow a script.

Oh brother. Of course there's no script from you. :rolleyes: Only meaningless declarations of "truth." Your "truth" is backing away from definitions you don't like, not understanding posts that speak to emptiness of your rhetoric, and mindless declarations of "leftie."