Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Turbulence in the Muslim world(Lebanon, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan)

Turbulence in the Muslim world(Lebanon, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan) (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2011, 09:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Peaceful?

Slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood:

Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
Quran is our law.
Jihad is our way.
Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

* The Brotherhood is widely believed to have had a "secret apparatus" responsible for attacks in Egypt, including the assassination of Mahmoud an-Nukrashi Pasha, the Egyptian Prime Minister in 1948[97] and the president of Egypt in 1981[98]
* Rachel Aspden's article, The Rise of the Brotherhood states that The Muslim Brotherhood currently advocates suicide bombing attacks on civilians to fight Zionism, and its self-admitted Palestinian wing Hamas indiscriminately targets Jews as such, both civilians and the military, in Israel.[99] In its Charter, Hamas cites The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and prophesizes the ultimate complete annihilation of Jewry.[100]
* Newsweek journalists Mark Hosenball and Michael Isikoff reported connections between al-Qaeda and Brotherhood figures Mamoun Darkazanli and Youssef Nada.[101]
* A similar article in the Financial Times reported financial links between 74-year-old Swiss Muslim convert, and businessman Ahmed Huber, and members of the Muslim Brotherhood, notably Youssef Nada, Ali Ghaleb Himmat. According to the U.S. government, Al Taqwa "has long acted as financial advisers to al-Qaeda." Huber is noted in Europe for his links with alleged neo-Nazi and other far right elements.[102][103] He is reported to have "confirmed" having "had contact with associates of Osama bin Laden at an Islamic conference in Beirut," whom he called `very discreet, well-educated, very intelligent people.`[102]
* Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi was an influential lobbyist and founder and head of the Brotherhood-linked American Muslim Council before being convicted and sentenced to 23 years in prison for conspiracy to murder Saudi Prince Abdullah at the behest of Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi.[104]
Just a tip: you should link to the Wikipedia article that you're pulling those references from.
Muslim Brotherhood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2011, 10:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Just a tip: you should link to the Wikipedia article that you're pulling those references from.
Muslim Brotherhood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have to give him credit; he doesn't give up, even though he makes himself look silly.

From the same Wiki page:

The Brotherhood's stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the "sole reference point for ... ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community ... and state".[4] Since its inception in 1928 the movement has officially opposed violent means to achieve its goals.[5][6] Jeremy Bowen, BBC Middle East editor, calls it "conservative and non-violent,"[7] The Brotherhood condemned terrorism and the 9/11 attacks,[8][9] but whether or not it has ties to terrorism is a matter of dispute.[10] The Brotherhood's nonviolent stance has resulted in breakaway groups from the movement, including the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya and Al Takfir Wal Hijra.[11] Osama bin Laden has similarly criticized the Brotherhood, and accused it of betraying jihad and the ideals of Sayyid Qutb, an influential Brother member and author of Milestones.[12][13] In Egypt, the Brotherhood has stated that, while it seeks the establishment of an Islamic state, it would not force women to cover up.[14]
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2011, 10:31 AM
 
Sure they state they are non-violent (lying to the infidels) but explain:

Slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood:

Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
Quran is our law.
*Jihad* is our way.
*Dying in the way of Allah* is our highest hope.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2011, 11:59 AM
 
That's just their insane terrorist arm. I'm sure their political arm is much more civil.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2011, 12:17 PM
 
What the **** are you one about, BadKosh? Again, from their own website:

Thus, as the Muslim Brotherhood, we reiterate our rejection of any form violence and coercion as well as all forms of coups which destroy the unity of any nation, because such plots may allow their organizers to supersede the political social realities; but would never allow the masses the opportunity to exercise their free will. Furthermore, these methods would create a great crack in the wall of political stability and form an unacceptable assault true legitimacy in the society.
Next paragraph:
The Muslim Brotherhood dissociate themselves totally, without any hesitation, from all kinds and forms of violence and we denounce terrorism of any form and from any source.
And from the paragraph after that:
we have always remained committed to the laws and constitution and fought back using our only weapon, which is truthfulness and honesty
You also have to understand that the Muslim Brotherhood that exists today is 100% different than the Muslim Brotherhood of the future. It's not even really Muslim, but secular. If you dig deeper into their current theology, they don't even believe that you have to be a Muslim or Christian to get into heaven, rather just of a sound heart and mind.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2011, 08:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
You sound like a typical German at the start of WWII.
That makes absolutely no sense, though it's not out of the ordinary for you.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2011, 09:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
That makes absolutely no sense, though it's not out of the ordinary for you.
It makes complete sense. By invoking Godwin's Law, he's clearly signaling that he can't prove his point.
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 17, 2011, 04:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Sure they state they are non-violent (lying to the infidels) but explain:

Slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood:

Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
Quran is our law.
*Jihad* is our way.
*Dying in the way of Allah* is our highest hope.
Allah is our objective:
To be expected for a religious organization, I bet christian and jewish ones would say Jesus or Jahwe.

The prophet is our leader:
Same as above.

Quran is our law:
Same as above

Jihad is our way:
I guess that's what tickled your suspections. Jihad is the best and most important concept in the Quran, it means to strive with heart and soul for the good, to overcome evil both inside of one's heart and soul and in society. In certain situations it can mean to fight physically, in cases of war, but that is only the small and easy way of jihad, the biggest part and most difficult is the non-violent-jihad to overcome evil in one's heart and soul and to strive for good in society.

Dying in the way of Allah:
Every muslim and every christian and every jew hopes that (of course in relation to jesus and jahwe for the latter two), namely to die in God's way, ie. to die as a believer in righteousness and obedience to his/her creator, cause whoever dies not in God's way would risk his/her eternal fate.

Verdict: I don't know if the muslim brotherhood has indeed chosen to follow the non-violent route or if it was just a tactic during the dictatorships in Egypt, but the statements above don't give any hints whatsoever.

Taliesin
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 17, 2011, 04:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
You also have to understand that the Muslim Brotherhood that exists today is 100% different than the Muslim Brotherhood of the future.
How do you know that? Can it really be, that you are a time-traveller?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 18, 2011, 12:41 PM
 
Gotta love this. Does this fall under "do as i say, not as I do?"
VETERAN�S GROUP DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM SEC. OF STATE CLINTON<BR>Claims vet was manhandled for silent protest | BREAKING NEWS | Sky Valley Chronicle Washington State News (CNN video included)
(NATIONAL) -- Could it be the U.S. government thinks peaceful, civilian protest against government is fine on the streets of Cairo, Egypt but not on U.S. soil?

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech at George Washington University yesterday condemning governments that arrest protestors and do not allow free expression - and lauding freedom of speech on the Internet - 71-year-old military veteran Ray McGovern was grabbed from the audience in plain view of her by police and an unidentified official in plain clothes and hustled out of the building and, according to McGovern and his supporters, was “brutalized and left bleeding in jail.”

What McGovern did was simply remain standing silently in the audience and turned his back on her as Secretary Clinton began her speech.

That was it.

McGovern, a veteran Army officer who also worked as a C.I.A. analyst for 27 years, was wearing Veterans for Peace t-shirt.

Blind-sided by security officers who pounced upon him, McGovern remarked, as he was hauled out the door, "So this is America?"
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 18, 2011, 01:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
There's a difference between public streets and private property. The school had every right to have Mr. McGovern removed. If Clinton was giving a speech in a public park, I would be concerned. I agree that it's kind of silly given the context of the speech, Clinton probably should've intervened and let the man speak.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 18, 2011, 01:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin View Post
How do you know that? Can it really be, that you are a time-traveller?
I'm a middle east history major. I've studied them before anyone else ever gave a crap. Oh, and their website clearly defines the changes that have occurred in the movement.
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 18, 2011, 01:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Well, we are supportive of democratic movement in Egypt, but yet we give billions of dollars in aid towards two of some of the most oppressive governments in the middle east every year.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 10:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Well, we are supportive of democratic movement in Egypt, but yet we give billions of dollars in aid towards two of some of the most oppressive governments in the middle east every year.
I have traveled a lot, and I love how people(non americans) seem to think that the U.S. Is somehow obligated to ensure representative governments in countries it considers allies.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the u.s. Like any other 'entity' will do what's in it's best interests, to expect otherwise of anyone or any country is unreasonable. If the people revolt and change governments on their own, it would be in anyones interest to forge allegiances. (having recently watched John Adams, France would be the first example).

Back on topic:
Bahrain: if the government there is overthrown, a major strategic base of the U.S. Navy Will be compromised/lost. Iran is a stones throw away and has been threatening islands in the Arabian/Persian gulf for decades(including Bahrain, and I can't help but suspect iran's hand in the upheaval there). If security of the waterway through the gulf is compromised, chances are all hell will break loose.

In related news, Iran has moved a couple of warships through the suez, possibly off the coast of Israel, heading to Syria. Stability in the region is crumbling, and Iran is getting cocky. Suddenly having troops in Afghanistan and Iraq seem to be a strategic advantage. And it's only February. Jeeze.

Cheers
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 10:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the u.s. Like any other 'entity' will do what's in it's best interests, to expect otherwise of anyone or any country is unreasonable.
You can say it as many times as you like, it will still be false every single time.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 11:28 AM
 
I love how when the US wants to get rid of a repressive government it doesn't like, it appeals to the world that we have a moral responsibility to bring freedom to the repressed people of that country.

But, when confronted with the dichotomy of supporting repressive governments that it does like, the US says it isn't "obligated to ensure representative governments".

And, of course the US isn't obligated to do any such thing, just don't use the illusion of such an obligation the *next* time you need the backing of the rest of the world when you want to overthrow the government of an independent nation.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 12:30 PM
 
I'm sure the U.S is the ONLY country in ALL of history that has ever done anything pragmatic that wasn't 100% by its basic tenets. I'm sure no other country has ever made a deal that its leaders thought-at the time-was the least bad of a sheaf of bad options. I'm sure no other country has ever had to back track and try to avoid having all the crap splatter over it for having to live with the repercussions of its past decisions. No, this is all unique and completely current day.

I should at least point out that the U.S. does take as much action as it can within limitations its government feels bound by to press for greater freedom everywhere. Unfortunate how all that "complete freedom of action regardless of the consequences" is just a myth.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
You can say it as many times as you like, it will still be false every single time.
False as in ? People, states, nations, etc...don't do what's in their best interests ? Get real.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
I love how when the US wants to get rid of a repressive government it doesn't like, it appeals to the world that we have a moral responsibility to bring freedom to the repressed people of that country.

But, when confronted with the dichotomy of supporting repressive governments that it does like, the US says it isn't "obligated to ensure representative governments".

And, of course the US isn't obligated to do any such thing, just don't use the illusion of such an obligation the *next* time you need the backing of the rest of the world when you want to overthrow the government of an independent nation.
Yeah i've heard that argument. The U.S. can say whatever it needs to try to persuade others to support/agree with what it does, and the other nations have the right to believe/agree or not to.

Type of government isn't the issue to the U.S.(IMHO), it's whether or not the government is aligned with U.S. interests or not, irrespective of whether it's a democracy or monarchy, etc. And the U.S. will and *should* support the government which is most beneficial to it, and is in no way obligated to support/fight for the interests of non-citizens. IMHO
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 19, 2011, 01:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
The U.S. can say whatever it needs to try to persuade others to support/agree with what it does, and the other nations have the right to believe/agree or not to.
Quite true. However, one can only cry "Wolf!" so often before they begin to lose credibility in the matter. And, it's very difficult to be credible about Freedom™ when one argues for the freedoms of one group of people (who's dictator one happens not to like), but is completely mum on the freedoms of another group of people (who's dictator one happens *to* like).
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 08:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Quite true. However, one can only cry "Wolf!" so often before they begin to lose credibility in the matter. And, it's very difficult to be credible about Freedom™ when one argues for the freedoms of one group of people (who's dictator one happens not to like), but is completely mum on the freedoms of another group of people (who's dictator one happens *to* like).
I understand what you are saying, and i agree with you.

What i am suggesting is that, maybe trust and credibility isn't the goal.

Also, FWIW, I dont think other governments(such as those in Europe) are that naive. I'm sure some back room diplomacy (probably involving economic, financial, military, issues) is routinely used to persuade foreign governments to come to agreements.

Diplomacy and politics as a science at work. IMHO
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 09:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
False as in ? People, states, nations, etc...don't do what's in their best interests ? Get real.
False in two ways. One, that supporting dictators is in the US national interest, and two, that expecting the US to oppose dictatorship is unreasonable.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 10:38 AM
 
Drudge Report Headline of the morning.

As Europe and the U.S. condemned the violence, Gaddafi's son Saif said his family would 'fight until the last bullet'.

Read more: Libya protests: Gaddafi flees Tripoli as parliament building set alight | Mail Online
Meanwhile, in Bahrain. YouTube - WARNING GRAPHIC Bahrain royal family orders army to open fire on innocent people
Should be another interesting week.
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 12:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
False in two ways. One, that supporting dictators is in the US national interest, and two, that expecting the US to oppose dictatorship is unreasonable.
Supporting ruthless regimes in is the US's best interest when that dictator happens to have reserves of oil or can promise to not be mean to Israel.

If any of you can remember back to 2003, President George W. Bush made it sound as if the United States would absolutely not support any hardcore regimes while he prosecuted the war in Iraq. Of course, he failed to mention how US troops were using Saudi military bases to strike from and actively supporting one of the largest human and women's rights violators in the world today.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 01:30 PM
 
For those who would like "unbiased" coverage of the unrest: Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
I'm a middle east history major. I've studied them before anyone else ever gave a crap. Oh, and their website clearly defines the changes that have occurred in the movement.
May I requote what you wrote?

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
You also have to understand that the Muslim Brotherhood that exists today is 100% different than the Muslim Brotherhood of the future.
So you are a time-travelling middle east history major? Interesting .

On topic: Currently it seems like Lybia's dictatorship is in crisis, I guess it takes just a few days or less before it completely breaks down. Unfortunately Gadaffi and co decided to turn it into a blood-bath before they wither away.

Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
For those who would like "unbiased" coverage of the unrest: Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English
So now Al-Jazeera is "unbiased" after all? I've said it years ago, Al-Jazeera may be sensationalist but they are the best arabic network ever and their reporters go into areas of conflict no other reporters dare to, it's exciting.
( Last edited by Taliesin; Feb 21, 2011 at 02:33 PM. )
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 02:30 PM
 
My mistake, I did not notice my typo.
     
Helmling
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2011, 03:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
...the u.s. Like any other 'entity' will do what's in it's best interests...
But the United States aspires to be more than these other entities.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 22, 2011, 07:33 PM
 
It appears that Libya is in serious danger of descending into all-out civil war. If various news reports are to be believed, the Qaddafi regime has effectively lost control of the eastern part of the country when the major tribes and military forces in that area turned against his rule. The nation we call Libya now did not have much of a national identity until the current regime. Prior to that it was organized primarily as 3 autonomous regions controlled by different tribes. The Qaddafi regime has apparently secured the capital in Tripoli ... the various tribes are taking sides ... and control of one of the world's largest oil exporters is at stake. Unless Qaddafi's forces in Tripoli turn on him I don't see this situation being resolved without a lot more bloodshed. And even if that happens there's going to be a serious power struggle for control afterwards which will likely involve much bloodshed as well.

OAW
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2011, 07:57 AM
 
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2011, 10:18 AM
 
Interesting. Are things about to get much worse now?

NYT -- Qaddafi Forces Capture 3 Dutch Aircrew
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2011, 08:50 AM
 
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2011, 01:59 PM
 
France formally recognises Libyan rebels' authority.
France24 - France formally recognises Libyan rebels&#039; authority
In a major diplomatic victory for the Libyan opposition, France has become the first country to formally recognize Libya’s rebel leadership, pledging to exchange ambassadors between Paris and the Libyan opposition stronghold of Benghazi.
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2011, 02:09 PM
 
Oh good. The last time France were involved in northern Africa, it went well.
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2011, 09:17 PM
 
I think I've figured out why Bad Kosh thinks that every Muslim is a terrorist. He is a cop, and his handler is this guy.

The Shocking Way US Cops Are Trained to Hate Muslims | Civil Liberties | AlterNet
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2011, 10:11 PM
 
Damn that's scary. It's like the loon from JihadWatch and his crazy girlfriend from AtlasShrugs2000 had a baby.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2011, 10:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
I think I've figured out why Bad Kosh thinks that every Muslim is a terrorist. He is a cop, and his handler is this guy.

The Shocking Way US Cops Are Trained to Hate Muslims | Civil Liberties | AlterNet
With such adherence to thread relevance, I'm surprised you didn't pick up one of the other articles on that page such as the horrors of global warming, Save NPR, Rachel Maddow plug, what happened at my first orgy, or how female sexuality is still terrifying to Conservative lawmakers.

I'm not certain their concerns are any more valid than the concerns of the Arab police trainer.
ebuddy
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2011, 11:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
With such adherence to thread relevance, I'm surprised you didn't pick up one of the other articles on that page such as the horrors of global warming, Save NPR, Rachel Maddow plug, what happened at my first orgy, or how female sexuality is still terrifying to Conservative lawmakers.

I'm not certain their concerns are any more valid than the concerns of the Arab police trainer.
If you had paid attention, he was the one who brought up, in this thread, the ridiculous notion that all Muslims are prone to being terrorists.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2011, 07:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
If you had paid attention, he was the one who brought up...
... 28 days ago. At this point you're just exploiting BadKosh to post more unabashed partisan blather.

Pick on someone your own size... like screener. Now that was fun to watch!
ebuddy
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:18 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,