ScottSA

I see we've been reading the Protocals of Zion again...

Those of you who hold this view, are you aware that it is contrary to international law? If you are aware, how do you reconcile that position? Actually, occupying conquered territory is not a violation of international law. Claiming ownership of it is iffy, since 'right of conquest' is out of vogue, but there are a great many examples of occupations and enforced neutral zones. One can start with the demilitarized Rhineland following WW I and work up to the occupation of Iraq by the US; neither one of which is "illegal."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull Oh well, it saves the Nobel Committee having to issue one to Hamas.

We don't have the information needed to draw those probabilities. We would have to know the exact chemical conditions and circumstances for the generation of carbon-based life in order to draw the probability of carbon-based life existing elsewhere, and we certainly can't begin to be able to draw probability parameters around the existence of God.

The NSDAP didn't know the first thing about politics in 1923 either.

I find it deeply disturbing, but not at all surprising. In fact, ask Morris or Sweal...I've been warning of this inevitable result of multiracial immigration for 10 years or more. There seems to be a critical point of no return, when a racial or cultural group reaches a self-sustaining mass and becomes a powerbloc. This is only the first. What began as a wonderful dream of inclusion last century is destined to turn into a nightmare this century. Unfortunately, as we can see in this thread, there are a significant number of lemmings who will refuse to see what's happening until it's far too late to stop.

And Canada is entitled to pick and choose who lives here, in spite of radical handwringing leftists who believe it is a "human right." Presumably you wouldn't invite AIDS viri into your body on the basis that it has a "right" to equal treatment, so why would we want to let him, OR his family, for that matter to remain here? Why should Canada lift a finger to help this traitor?

No. What an arrogant thought to think we are so special as to be the only living creatures to ever evolve in a place so vast as the universe. Yes Man created god(s). It/they are nothing more than a way to explain the unknown. They have been perverted by man to further his own needs, by using them to control the scared and uneducated, and systematically rob them a little at a time. The same argument you use for the existence of other beings can be used against your broad proclaimation that God doesn't exist. Especially the "arrogant" part. Imagine the arrogance of claiming that the vast majority of the people on this planet are merely "scared and uneducated." I can point out a dozen theologians right off the top of my head who are quite a bit more educated than you.

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/sto...49-0758bc13461f

A man who once described Canada -- his adopted homeland -- as a "fully paid-up member of the Anglo-Saxon mafia" is being honoured tomorrow evening following a two-day meeting of the Canadian Arab Federation at Toronto's City Hall. http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Cor...15/4262158.html

Excuse me.I am not politically correct. I am standing up for the people I work with. And I'll stand up for people to whom I'm loyal any minute of the day, any day of the week, not matter what you think. That's fine and I applaud you for your loyalty, but don't expect to hand out lectures to people and not get flac for them. This is not your workplace. This is an internet forum. And I note that like many of us, you don't mind slagging Islam, in time to the washtub n' spoons cackles from the left of "bigot" and "racist," sop you're hardly in a position to preach. Good for your co-worker...she probably doesn't go hope and cut loose at homies with automatic weapons, and that's very commendable. Unfortunately many of her fellow countryment do, so she gets saddled witht he stereotype. I don't shag sheep either, but unfortunately other Scotsmen...well, anyway...lighten up.

Really? The record speaks otherwise: VATICAN CITY (CNN) -- Pope John Paul II has acknowledged mistakes in the handling of the U.S. priest sexual abuse scandal plaguing the Roman Catholic Church. "The abuse which has caused this crisis is by every standard wrong and rightly considered a crime by society; it is also an appalling sin in the eyes of God." — Pope John Paul II http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/...ndal/index.html The pontiff was addressing American bishops. Where is the apology for sexual abuse by priests worldwide? Where are the apologies for the rampant beheadings and violence in just about every country in Asia from Islam? Let's see...sexual abuse or having one's head sawn off with a paring knife...I wonder which is worse? Hmmmm....

Stop running around as the self-appointed pottymouth police. If you can't muster a sense of humour, then don't read whatever it is you don't like. I'm sick unto death of political correctness precluding honest discussion and or harmless sideswipe humour. Make fun of me and my sheep shagging ancestors all you want, I don't care. Lighten up for God's sake.

I would have thought that would be glaringly...nay, startlingly...obvious to even the most obtuse and sedentary armchair general. Do you really have no answer to your own question?

Nothing to be alarmed about, but a check wouldn't hurt. Ok, thanks.

I was not asking about the degree of hate, but merely asking for a clarification about who "they" are... because I get the feeling that Scott and Kuzadd are using two different criteria for the question. Nonetheless, truth be known, there's all kinds of hate. I can hate your POV, but I don't hate you. I can hate you, but I could live side by side next to you. I could hate you and not want to kill you. Or I could hate you and do want to kill you. I could hate you and go as far as trying to kill you. Many different ways to hate someone. Yes, all very complicated indeed. Why don't we just define hate as wanting to triumph over us by whatever means. Some are willing to act on it by any means anywhere at any cost, and others are willing to act on it under certain circumstances, and the vast majority hate passively, in that they don't want to act, but they want others to act and are willing to cheer them on or in many cases give them material aid. There are a few Muslims on the other side of the spectrum who put their humanity before their religion and actively fight fundamentalism, but by Islam's very nature, those Muslims are few and far between, and not strong enough as a faction to stop the fundamentalist juggernaut sweeping through Islam. Islam thinks of the Ummah in very much the same way Hitler thought of the Aryan...one is defined by religion and the other by race, but the similarity in outlook is profound. If we keep trying to live in the myth that the "vast majority" of Muslims are actively pacifist, we're doomed. If we keep pretending that "civil rights" trumps our lives, we're doomed.

more baloney................... do you ever regurgitate facts? or just spew nonsense? http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...,702062,00.html "The Yusuf Islam incident earlier this week, in which the former Cat Stevens was denied entry into the U.S. when federal officials determined he was on the government's "no-fly" antiterror list, started with a simple spelling error. According to aviation sources with access to the list, there is no Yusuf Islam on the no-fly registry, though there is a "Youssouf Islam." The incorrect name was added to the register this summer, but because Islam's name is spelled "Yusuf" on his British passport, he was allowed to board a plane in London bound for the U.S. The Transportation Safety Administration alleges that Islam has links to terrorist groups, which he has denied; British foreign minister Jack Straw said the TSA action "should never have been taken." ok, now let's move on. Ok, but just before we move on, mind taking a look at this: A British charity has been accused by the American government of financing Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. The Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), which is based in Birmingham and provides aid for orphanages and water wells in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, has been designated by the United States treasury as being part of a network of "terrorist" charities that have allegedly "provided hundreds of thousands of dollars to Osama bin Laden". The Telegraph has also discovered that Yusuf Islam, the singer formerly known as Cat Stevens who was refused entry to America last September because his name was on a security watch list, has previously donated thousands of pounds to the Birmingham charity. The reason for his exclusion has never been publicly revealed, but last night American officials indicated that the entertainer's funding of the ISRA was one of the reasons for him being banned. Mr Islam has always denied financing terrorism. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...2/13/ncat13.xml TORONTO - Yusuf Islam, the British singer formerly known as Cat Stevens, was the guest of honour at a Toronto fundraising dinner hosted by an organization that has since been identified by the Canadian government as a "front" for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. In a videotape of the 1998 event obtained by the National Post, Mr. Islam describes Israel as a "so-called new society" created by a "so-called religion" and urges the audience to donate to the Jerusalem Fund for Human Services to "lessen the suffering of our brothers and sisters in Palestine and the Holy Land."http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/003377.php and this: Yes, in 1988, the singer of “Peace Train” authored an “informational pamphlet,” called “Eyewitness,” containing these peaceful words: “The Jews seem neither to respect God nor his creation. Their own holy books contain the curse of God brought upon them by their prophets on account of their disobedience to Him and mischief in the earth. We have seen the disrespect for religion displayed by those who consider themselves to be 'God's chosen people.'...There will be no justice until all the land is given back to its rightful owners... Only Islam can bring peace back to the Holy Land.” http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column092204.shtml I'm sure there are more. Lies, no doubt. All lies. Cat is as innocent as the folks who paraded through the Nurembourg trials, all piously proclaiming their innocence.

Damn good point. Thank-you. It's just unfortunate that the question will fall on deaf ears. Actually, most heterosexuals couldn't care less whether fags convert. Most of us would just like fags to shut up about it already. No one is going after homosexuals...homosexuals are coming after us and our institutions and our approval. I for one would never say another word about faggotry if I didn't have it shoved in my face on a daily basis. I'm pretty sure that most homosexuals don't want your approval given that they are apparently doing so much to annoy you. Indeed, given your stated opinions, most homosexuals would likely hold you in extreme contempt, rather than seek your approval. Btw, your assertion that homosexuals are seeking your approval tells us more about you than it presumes to say about homosexuals. Just sayin'. I'll just ignore streetcorner psychology slag and let it speak for you by itself. I'd be very pleased if fags were not trying to get everyone's approval, but unfortunately they are, and demonstrably...nay, obviously...so.

I love rebuttals like this. Nothing underscores an abject rout more vividly. No, just contempt. There is a difference. Right. I understand. You're just too smart to have to actually make a point, right? You knew all about the Frankfurt school and the origins of the American school, and you know all about Lucaks and feuerbach and Kant and Gramsci, but you're just too damned clever to feel the need to discuss it with the likes of me. You were just testing me by saying something really really dumb, right?

Oh, thanks BC Girl. Glad you have that all figured out.

They hate us for the same atavistic reason Hitler hated Jews. Yes, it really is that simple, although for the western mind this is too difficult to grasp, which explains why everyone feels the need to cast about for rational explanations. They hate us because we're not Islamic.

maybe, seeing a doctor? (If that's your casual attitude to primitive lifeforms) I'm not sure I'm the one who needs to see a doctor. We're talking about crabs here. Food.

His incident may have been different for he was using a new Muslim name when buying the ticket. He converted to Islam some time ago. This is the reason he was on the no fly list. Not because he was 'Cat Stevens'. He will always be Cat Stevens to me. So what if he was using a Muslim name, or had converted to Islam? it's irrelevant. He wasn't a terrorist. The only thing that indicates is, have a "muslim name " or a muslim sounding name and your on the terrorist list. He supported 911 and has made noises about Jihading against Jews. Why in God's name should he allowed to fly?

There are a great number of self-haters about these days. You are one yourself, if one were to judge by your constant attacks on your own culture in favor of other cultures, or your moral relativism, so it should come as no surprise that self-haters exist.

Agreed, except that design theory has some interesting scientific applications as well. But in general, holding one to the criteria of the other will always create a tautology. Demanding that Creationism be held to scientific standard is as profitless as demanding that design be found in evolution. For my part, I believe in the existence of an afterlife and almost certainly a God or higher design. I also happen to believe in evolution via natural selection. My jury is still out on whether we evolved from apes or whether there is a qualitative and ordained difference between apes and sentient beings, but for the most part I agree with much of what Darwin said and much of what design theory says.