ScottSA

Ingrish preez?

There's not much I can say to this startling ignorance of the way the world works except to ask you a couple of almost rhetorical questions. Did you notice the global "threat to the way of life for people living outside the region" when two planes ran into the WTC? What do you think might be the chain of reactions to tel aviv being reduced to radioactive dust? Do you think that "people living outside the region" will just yawn and go back to reading the paper? What do you think the Dow might do? What do you think might happen to world currency? What about world trade? Do you think Israel might respond? What then? What would the response to the response be? I can't think of anything more calculated to suck the world into a maelstrom than tel aviv being nuked. How silly. And btw, when did I say the USSR was no danger to us?

How true. How short memories are...I remember reading a survey in the early 80s polling us "young people," and finding that around 80% of us fully expected nuclear annihilation within 10 years. I was one of them. We don't know what the effect on our society of such a belief was or is, but I'd hazard a guess that it had something to do with the "live for today," "me generation," along with a good many other things.

I think 300 pulled it off fairly well.

I don't believe that a Zulu and a Scotsman have much likelyhood of being genetically closer to each other than to members of the same race. In any event I find this entire argument to be absolutely ludicrous...the extent to which some people are willing to deny the ever so blatantly obvious fact that there are differences between races is almost scary.

Goodness. Such hate and anger. Bad, bad US for making bumpiles. Far worse than the thousands of deaths a month in the global Jihad. Your own credibility went out the window the second you uttered the word "lies." That's just sooooo lame.

Why do you bother posting here? Your posts are 9/10 troll, you display a profound inabiltiy to grasp the simplest concepts, and you write as if you're in some flirty thirties chatroom.

I daresay you have demonstrated profound dhimmitude instead of "dismissing" anything. Did you miss the entire thread?

I bet you don't see the irony of this post.

Can we assume they chose not to publish them because they said they were afraid? Here's a survey of journalists themselves, overwhelmingly claiming that the danish cartoons were not published by most news outlets in the west because of fear: http://www.compas.ca/data/060219-FreedomOf...ressPrt1-PC.pdf On top of that there are 100s of lawsuits every day, many with the backing of CAIR, whose pockets lead directly into Saudi Arabia, fatwas, and actual deaths, and I don't see how any sane person can claim there's not a pattern of intimidation. Just because most people don't cringe from it doesn't mean it's not there.

You have, as usual, demonstrated a profound misunderstanding of international relations. No one outside of a few "red dawn" movie makers ever envisioned an an "invasion of North America." That was never an issue. The purpose of MAD was to keep them out of western Europe, and it worked. That doesn't mean the USSR was not a threat...in fact, to say it wasn't is just farcical. It kept alive proxy wars all over the globe, one of which took the lives of almost 60,000 US soldiers, and kept central Africa in a state of ongoing revolutionary turmoil it's still recovering from. But aside from being utterly wrong about the threat of the USSR, you're completely mischaracterizing this battle too. There is a significant threat from these idiotic terrorists and even the "Islamic countries," at least if they get their hands on WMD, but there is a far worse threat from their so-called "moderate" co-religionists in the west. And hey, guess what? That's where this conference is taking place, and that's the expressed aim of the so-called "moderates" in the west. And yes, reducing tel aviv to radioactive dust would have far reaching implications all over the globe, even if one completely ignored the humanitarian aspect. If you don't get why, this conversation has gone on long enough.

The chicken littles who thought communism was a threat to us were right. Just like the chicken littles who were scoffed at all the way up to 1938 in England. It's just that we were lucky in both cases to have more resources than the other side. This time the other side is not only over there, but over here too. That's a big difference, and it renders our superior resources irrelevant. And Muslim countries have had 1500 years to come around to our way of thinking. The trouble is that they respected our way of thinking for most of those years, when our way of thinking involved thrashing them up one side of the holy land and down the other. Unfortunately our way of thinking has changed a bit of late, and they don't respect it anymore. Now they see it as weakness, and they're quite right. You are a case in point.

Anecdotally, this happens very frequently. There's another little scam a Chinese woman in Calgary tried to enlist me in while I was there a couple years ago. Apparently there are people in China willing to pay up to $15,000 each to have someone sponsor them as an "employee" and then just ignore them once they got here. She was raking in quite a bundle.

Not quite. A great number of them are also screeching for western Sharia and a change in western foreign policy.

Astounding blindness.

You just don't get it, do you? I suppose you thought the Comintern was just the rantings of a few Commies too.

Why, yes I do. Don't you?

What do you think Muslims would do if they were forced to dress up like Christians and, say, walk the stations of the cross? What do you think would happen if some teacher tried to do it in Saudi Arabia? Given that pushing Christianity over thar is I believe a beheading offense, or at least a damned good jailing offense, I suspect I know. How come the double standard?

American woman, unlike many on the left, seems like a reasonable person who just hasn't looked into this issue well enough. It's just atrocious that huge segments of the population just don't have a clue what inroads are being made in our society by the allegedly "moderate" counterparts of these 6th century thugs.

Dion faces a number of challenges, not least of which is trying to speak some semblence of English and keeping from wetting himself in a bout of hand-wringing and dithering. Actually getting votes is right out of the question. Any that he gets are protest votes by Torontonians.

700,000 Iraqis killed this month? That's a lot! Link please? Then perhaps you can explain what that totally irrelevant link that you DID supply was all about?

It's scary when someone can actually invoke the 17th century in order to draw a parallel with the 21st century. It's even scarier when they are such shallow thinkers that they actually expect not to be laughed at.

What is wrong with you? Since when is he being used as "booga booga?" Are the London tube bombings, 911, the Spanish train bombings, and about 1000-5000 deaths a month all over the globe not enough "booga booga" for you all by themselves? Why would anyone need bin Laden to keep up the "booga booga?" Who is the one closing their eyes?

I don't expect you to admit you're wrong...you're not that kinda guy...but just on the odd chance that you actually ARE looking for "facts" instead of rhetoric, there's a huge and quite well known effort to shut down criticism of Islam...through all means possible, including the fabrication of words like "Islamophobia," legal means, threats of lawsuits, even implied threats of violence. Here's another example right here:...And who's behind that radicalization? Who funds the mosques and Islamic centers that in the past 30 years have set up shop on just about every Main Street around the planet? For the answer, let us turn to a fascinating book called "Alms for Jihad: Charity And Terrorism in the Islamic World," by J. Millard Burr, a former USAID relief coordinator, and the scholar Robert O Collins. Can't find it in your local Barnes & Noble? Never mind, let's go to Amazon. Everything's available there. And sure enough, you'll come through to the "Alms for Jihad" page and find a smattering of approving reviews from respectably torpid publications: "The most comprehensive look at the web of Islamic charities that have financed conflicts all around the world," according to Canada's Globe And Mail, which is like the New York Times but without the jokes.... http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/mark-ste...7-exposs-column Try to understand that just because they haven't fully succeeded doesn't mean they are not trying. Issuing fatwas against authors, killing nuns over cartoons and shooting film makers is just the tip of the iceberg. The huge sums of money and legal threats all over the world are the real danger. Useful fools will continue to deny it of course, no matter how many "facts" and showed to them. Are you a useful fool or did you really mean it when you appealed to "facts?"

But I thought all this talk about a Caliphate was just the imaginings of the far far far hard far hard right?