PDA

View Full Version : The “Leader” of the free world!



Rehmat
01-18-2005, 11:16 PM
Muslims cannot forget Bush’s famous lie (greater than the “Axis of Evil”), after September 11, 2001 – “They hate US for our democracy, freedom and wealth…..”

A study, just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, confirms that there is more mental illness and insanity, far more, in America than you find in other advanced societies.

The study, led by a Harvard Medical School researcher, found evidence of mental problems in 26.4 % of people in the United States, versus, for example, 8.2% of people in Italy. The researchers were concerned with matters such as lack of access to treatment and under-treatment, but for those concerned about a safe and decent world, I think the salient finding is simply America's high percentage. The world is being led by a nation where more than one-quarter of the people have genuine mental problems.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
root
01-25-2005, 03:34 PM
Muslims cannot forget Bush’s famous lie (greater than the “Axis of Evil”), after September 11, 2001 – “They hate US for our democracy, freedom and wealth…..”
I don't think even the US can forget Sept 11th, never mind the Axis of Evil, or are you saying that Afghanistan was Just in the way it ruled. Or that N.Korea is open to world influence, or Iran don't whip young boys to death for breaking a fast. Or Iraq was just for running the country into poverty.

A study, just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, confirms that there is more mental illness and insanity, far more, in America than you find in other advanced societies
Don't see what this has to do with the price of oil, but have you compared the same stats with life expectency and offered a conclusion, the US must be hugely tolerent for it created a massive country where everyone sees themselves as united as Americans. Not divided by Muslim group.
Reply

aamirsaab
01-26-2005, 11:13 AM
The US is not divided because their shadow govenment locks evrything down - forcing them 2 be the same - yet if they were truly united would they not be using a communist style of rule? or is that far to 'russian' for the americans?

with regards to the afghanistan unjust ruling - to a lot of people it was and still is regarded as unjust/barbaric/wrong etc.

let me explain 2 u why that is, in order 2 clarify everything:
afghanistan rules under an islamic governement. with islamic laws enforced as written in the quran. To many westerners, it seems to them that being forced 2 wear hijab is bad thing and it affects this and that of a women.

HOWEVER. what they fail to realise is that wearing hijab IS compulsory in the Quran. The taliban are not these violenet warmongers that people make them out to be. they are the ''governement'' of afghanistan and this should not be disrespected.

Just because something looks barbaric/wrong etc - it doesnt mean that it is.
sometimes we have to see things from both sides in order 2 fully understand what is going on, unfortunately we, as humans, do not always do that.

It is amazing how many people think that afghanistan's ruling is unjust - just cus its different to what the UK(or any other country for example) has does not mean it is unjust. It is just DIFFERENT. we as humans have 2 accept that.

to put it in another way: to an afghan, the british ruling (or italian,japanese, etc) may seem barbaric or wrong because they are in different cultures.
what is right for one maybe wrong for another
and vice versa
Reply

root
02-06-2005, 03:11 PM
It is amazing how many people think that afghanistan's ruling is unjust - just cus its different to what the UK
Different! I think that is the understatement of the year. The Hijab is NOT compulsary, your one ill informed individual blinded by your own unique perception of the world that you see as distorterd......

The US is not divided because their shadow govenment locks evrything down - forcing them 2 be the same - yet if they were truly united would they not be using a communist style of rule? or is that far to 'russian' for the americans?
LOL. Yeah right,
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Uthman
02-14-2005, 09:37 PM
Root in his arrogance left the forum with this 'thing' as the goodbye note :brother:
Reply

aamirsaab
02-15-2005, 09:55 AM
Originally Posted by root
Different! I think that is the understatement of the year. The Hijab is NOT compulsary, your one ill informed individual blinded by your own unique perception of the world that you see as distorterd......



LOL. Yeah right,

i cant believe he just said that!

the nerve of that git!

and then he leaves before i get a chance 2 reply

i think i know my own religion, punk. more than any atheist!

i agree with hash's posts before me. He and I see things similarly. :teeth:

p.s if any one else does something like what root just did then i swear im gonna pin them down b4 they even get a chance.
ill probably get banned 4 doing it ...but hey :p

his "fault" was that he underestimated my knowledge and the fact that he couldnt accept what he saw right infront of his own two eyes....these are the people who will never see islam for what it truly is: peace
Reply

Uthman
02-15-2005, 11:35 AM
You go Aamirsaab! I mean there are the open-minded and the just plain arrogant. Come on. Root didn't come to this forum to find out about Islam or even see why there are so many converts to Islam some even atheists!!! Root came to insult us and when he could take it no more he left.

Lucky we have people like Hash on the forum, eh? Not afraid to speak his mind; the truth. Top! :)
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
02-15-2005, 10:48 PM
Alhamdulilah. :teeth:
Reply

hawk
02-16-2005, 04:56 AM
Originally Posted by Hash
Roots, i understand you are a idiot but listen up. You are obvously western brainwashed idiiot out to attack islam. You say that afganistan was not just in its rule? Well the talliban ruled with the islamic law, and this was a time of peace and harmony in this region which had been war torn and ravanged for decades befoe the talliban. Whilst the talliban was in control, drug rates was down 100%, when the US army TERRORISTS took over, drugs up 400%. When the talliban was in control, rape and murder, and general crime was down 97%, when the US took over with their tyrannical oppresive evil army, all of the above and general crimes was up 86%. As for iraq, you say that sadam was running the country into poverty and destruction.
Hash the Taliban are were a bunch of thugs and hooligans.

They married women, only to rape them and divorce them, making a mockery of your faith.

Dont support lunatics like them.

You have the luxury of living in the west, learn from what it has to offer you.
Reply

hawk
02-16-2005, 04:57 AM
Originally Posted by Hash
You say the hijaab is not compulsyary, then you insult my fellow muslim brother! You sick joke, you dont know jack about islam. So dont speak out of ignorance, arragance, and stupidity. The hijaab is compulsary, it is a obligation upon the muslim women to have only the hands and the face not covered up, the rest copvered.
I thought there was no compulsion in religion?
Reply

hawk
02-16-2005, 04:58 AM
Originally Posted by Hash
You want to compare 'demoxcracy and islamic law root, okay, play it your way. I already explained the peace, harmony and good times whilst the talliban was in control, and i provided the statistics to help you out root, i kmnwo your a bit slow. Okay root, play with this. Saudi arabia has the islamic law, last year there was a total of 3 murders in saudi. In the US, a murder every 30 seconds! Islamic law, divine law, the khilafah system, is without a doubt superior to your 'democracy' in every way!!!
3 murders not counting the amount of people the government is murdering, what?
Reply

kadafi
02-16-2005, 10:25 AM
Originally Posted by hawk
I thought there was no compulsion in religion?
:sl:

It's obligatory to wear the Hijab since it's a command from Allah, just as it's a obligatory (for the ones to become a Christian) to accept Jesus in their hearts in order to "saved".
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 10:32 AM
lol hawk

dont u realise the trap u have fallen into
perhaps u dont see it the way a muslim sees it
perhaps still need 2 learn

islam literally means: to submit to allah(god)
islam is like no other religion in that aspect.
the ones who have fully sumbitted 2 allah are the best muslims on earth (e.g. the prohpets)

islam is not just a religion - its a way of life...it teaches a muslim values that the averag person may not understand. e.g. peace
ill give u the same example i gave 2 root:
when a muslim says goodbye:
:w:
that means: peace be upon you brother....simple things like that remind us muslims that we are still a peaceful people - sure there are extremists - but like iv said before - the talibaan arnt the only violent oppressors who claim to use their religion as an excuse.....

should i bring up the kkk? and then we can have a Root : return of the root?
i wish not to fight you hawk. because that is not why im here.
i am here to learn and to listen. whether u do the same is upto u - that is ur decision to make - not mine. i see people for who they are. Islam does not keep me blinded. islam is my light
Reply

root
02-16-2005, 02:10 PM
You go Aamirsaab! I mean there are the open-minded and the just plain arrogant. Come on. Root didn't come to this forum to find out about Islam or even see why there are so many converts to Islam some even atheists!!! Root came to insult us and when he could take it no more he left
Your so wrong your on the Moon..............

I actually spent a considerable ammount of 2004 in Karachi, Pakistan. For my employer who was setting up a major operation. I came here because I loved my time their and "Lived" in Pakistan with my Pakistani Muslim freinds. Those here who insulted me for I think different need to re-examine the world around them. Wearing of the Hijab, is from your own religoun that attempts to answer the question "Should a women cover up her natural buety", the answer of which is not as black and white as you let on. In fact it is the "Human" side of religion that dictates what part of "natural buety" is spoken of How comes two Muslim sisters in Karachi, one was more moderate than the other one wore the Jihab the other DID NOT......... Yet I came here and a Muslim LIVING in the west tries to lay down the Law. (Unless you can share me your experience of an Islamic republic!!!

It's not that I am blinded by the West, I speak from my PERSONAL experience of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, to which I would add would not share some of your opinions that you pass off as being Muslim in it's entirety.

I left, because I won't tolerate double standards on a forum, in that obscene language can be used against a jewish state or it's representation.

Root
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 02:21 PM
brother root
pakistan isnt eaxctly the best example of a muslim run country
afterall,its lead by a military drunk (aka musharef) - well last i checked neways..

what we are saying on this forum, as muslims, is that hijab IS compulsory as it is written in the quran. As a muslim, if it is written in the Quran taht we must do something then we HAVE to do it.

thats what we mean by hijab is comulsory

as for pakistan - well iv been there several times
half my family is there - wel from my dad's side.
so dont think that i dont know what pakistan is....i know it from both sides
the people are not bad
but sadly, musharef is---i mean he is no imam or anything - just a drunk militant
Reply

Riaz
02-16-2005, 02:26 PM
SALAMS ALL,
mAYBE PEOPLE LIKE ROOT SHOULD GET BANNED FROM THIS SITE AS SOON AS THEY MAKE A COMMENT LIKE THEY DID BECAUSE MANY BROTHERS AND SISTERS GET OFFENDED BY STUPID COMMENTS WHICH ROOT AND OTHER KAFIRS SAY.
p.S SORRY ABOUT THE CAPITALS.
Reply

Uthman
02-16-2005, 03:06 PM
Or maybe we should have piece. Islam tells us to forgive. We think Root did wrong and Root obviously doesn't. So how about we let bygones be bygones and try to understand each other more. :) My God, I have a feeling I'm gonna regret saying this. :brother:
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 05:27 PM
im with osman on this 1

let us have peace amongst one another.
we are all brothers, like it or not, and so i shall 4 give root.
whether root 4gives me or not is entirely up2 him - it is his decision to make not ours or nebody elses
frankly i dont mind, whthr the slate is cleaned or not.
we live our lives how we chose.
but i have found my peace
i have found my light - ---- > islam
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 05:32 PM
i understand u hash
however, there are people in this world, as i mentioned before, who will never truly see islam 4 what it is
if they cannot see that then fine
let them carry on --- dont force them...it never works

if they want 2 learn then teach
do not teach to those who dont want 2 learn---its just a waste of ur time, sadly.
Reply

hawk
02-16-2005, 06:28 PM
Originally Posted by Hash
And why the rate of rape and murder, and general crime was down at least 94% and why the when the americans invaded, back up 74%. Huh, hawk, explain this hawk?
Hash you havent seen the videos of the Taliban murdering people, fellow muslims from the norhtern alliance?

Yes the rate of rape went down, because they would marry, rape, divorce...in that order.

An Afghan I met at a masjid I go to told me that.
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 07:18 PM
lol hawk
do u believe every tape u see?
if it shows an afghan jump off a cliff - do u automatically think that all afghans are mindless lemmings?

tell me this hawk
did the video tape of those taliban have subtitles
was there a USA symbol on the back of the cover?
or was it a pirate copy - - haha pirate copy of a fake video - even funnier...

i fear, hawk, that u use ur eyes 2 much
i leave u with this:
how does a blind man know if the person in front of him has a gun in his hand and is about 2 shoot him?
(hint: it aint with his eyes)
Reply

kadafi
02-16-2005, 08:03 PM
Hash you havent seen the videos of the Taliban murdering people, fellow muslims from the norhtern alliance?

Yes the rate of rape went down, because they would marry, rape, divorce...in that order.

An Afghan I met at a masjid I go to told me that.
:teeth:

Fabricatin' accounts -- makes your reference more "trustworty" haha.

The Northern Alliance, a rebel group, known for killin' thousands of innocent people, burnin' homes and commitin' acts of ethnic cleansin'.
In 1996, they massacred 50k Afghanis. Additionaly, they also engaged in to mass-rape and drug-peddlin'. How convient to hire a terrorist-group that it's known to have commited large-scale attrocities -- to fight against the Taliban. Perhaps we should recall the container incident where 3k Afghanis who had surrerend to Northern Alliance were rammed in to truck containers. And then later on, they lined them up and murdered them in cold blood.
Reply

aamirsaab
02-16-2005, 08:30 PM
finally some well deserved back up! :p
cheers kadafi...but a bit late lol

*gives high five to kadafi* :thumbs_up
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 07:09 AM
In reading some of these post, I can tell that there are few Iraqis or Afghanis in this forum. The truth is that they are glad to see Saddam gone and the Taliban disbanded. They were thrilled to be able to vote recently, many for the first time in their lives. Sure, Iraq is a mess. If it wasn't for the insurgents, billions of reconstruction money would be flowing into the country right now, and the US would be in the process of reducing the number of troops in the country. Also, Iraq would be able to rebuild very quickely with the money from oil sales. It is possible that Iraq today has more oil in the ground then Saudi Arabia. All that oil is worthless if insurgents keep blowing up the pipe lines. The days of the insurgents are numbered however. Majority of Iraqi's went out to vote in spite of death threats. In one village recently, five insurgents were killed by the Iraqis who they threatened to kill for voting. People want freedom. One Iraqi said, when he put his finger in the bottle of ink, he did it as if he was sticking it in the eye of every tyrant who ever lived. I have heard more then one Iraqi say, America didn't need to go searching for WMD's, Saddam and his sons functioned as such against the Iraqi people.
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 05:13 PM
Iraqi villagers kill 5 insurgents

By Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy

The residents of a small Iraqi village have killed five insurgents who had attacked them for voting in last weekend's national elections.

Several other insurgents were also wounded.

The insurgents raided the village of al-Mudhiryah south of Baghdad after warning its inhabitants not to vote in the election.

The villagers fought back, killing five of the insurgents and wounding eight others.

The insurgents' cars were then set alight.

Al-Mudhiryah's tribal sheikh says his people are sick of being threatened by Islamic extremists.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1295847.htm

Hash, if this story false, or make believe, you would be doing everyone a great public service if you could prove this with facts rather then with an emotional outburst.
This site has shocking pictures of Iraqi children which even most Americans have never seen - http://www.operationiraqichildren.org/OICAction_Pg8.asp
Look at your own risk. Do not say you were not warned in advance.
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 05:53 PM
Sorry the link doesn't work, but it was photos of school children happy to see the American troops who helped rebuild their schools.
Go and look at some pictures of iraqis being abused by US forces in abu ghraib prison etc, sick dogs!
The people responsible for this abuse have been punished. Having said that, what happened in Abu Ghraib was isolated to one cell block, by a few GIs. Most of the prisoners in this prison were not abused. I would also add, compared to what happed to prisoners in Abu Ghraib, when Saddam was in power, what these few GIs did, were disgusting X-rated college pranks in comparision. These prisoners did not lose their lives or any limbs. They were not dis-membered, blinded, skinned alive, slowly killed by dripping acid or thrown into wood-chipping machines.
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 06:35 PM
America is in a no-win situation it seems. We get blamed for putting or keeping despots in power in the Middle East. When a President comes along who says this is wrong and announces that it is time for these thugs to step aside, we are then accused of trying to destroy Islam and the Arab people.
Reply

Khattab
02-26-2005, 06:37 PM
The Glorius Qu'ran sums it up well:

When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 06:41 PM
Here is one Arab leader who is beginning to see things in a different light.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/p...RTICLE_ID=43010

Now sees it as catalyst for democracy across Mideast

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
The leader of the Lebanese opposition, a sharp critic of Washington foreign policy, says he's changed his view of the U.S. war in Iraq, seeing it now as a catalyst for democratic change across the Arab world.


Walid Jumblatt

Druze Muslim leader Walid Jumblatt, who is calling for an uprising against Lebanon's Syrian occupiers, is almost sounding like a neoconservative, says Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who interviewed him in Beirut Monday.

"It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq," Jumblatt told the Post columnist.


"I was cynical about Iraq," Jumblatt said. "But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world."

Jumblatt said this spark of democratic revolt is spreading.

"The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing," he said. "The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it."

In an exclusive interview with WorldNetDaily Monday, Jumblatt blamed the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri on Lebanese security officials backed by Syria.

Jumblatt said Hariri told him in a meeting two weeks ago he felt they both were in danger.

The Druze leader told WND he is calling for an "uprising for independence" demanding Damascus withdraw its nearly 20,000 troops from the country and urging the current pro-Syrian government to step down.

"We ask all in Lebanon to claim independence from Syria peacefully and democratically," said Jumblatt.

Jumblatt, in conjunction with other major figures of the anti-Syrian movement, put out a statement Friday urging the "dismissal of the government, which has no legitimacy, and the formation of a transitional administration to protect the Lebanese people and ensure the immediate withdrawal of the Syrian army from Lebanon to pave the way for holding free and honest legislative elections."
Reply

root
02-26-2005, 07:10 PM
Originally Posted by Hash
The insurgents as you call them, are freedom fighters. Resistance fighters, and i resent you speaking ill of them. They are supported by all, and that fake story of the village was laughable! No iraqis dispise the resistance fighters. The americans on the other hand are a differnt story. We see them dying every day, and the numbers of US casualties is rising rapidly. The entire world sees images of US bases, envoys and soldiers under fire from groups of resistance fighters, the raqi children pelting them with stones and screaming abuse, and the standard routine nearly every day from the news channels, '2 more US solderis killed, 3 US marines killed'. Even today 3 US soldoers were kiled, ALLAHU AKBAR. So the resistance days are not numbered, the invading dogs the US and their croneis are numbered.

I had a real ball reading this one for two reasons:

1. the people who often talk about the spilling of US blood are often the most remote from where they can actually do it.

2. They need to us as USA hosted server in order to have the right to say it in the first place.

You may Live in England, but you live as a minority, not because of your race or religion but because your view is just not supported in England.
Reply

Brother_Mujahid
02-26-2005, 07:20 PM
Originally Posted by root

You may Live in England, but you live as a minority, not because of your race or religion but because your view is just not supported in England.
actually quite a big portion of the public do not wish for the british or think they should be participating in the war in iraq, and concequently want the british soldiers out of iraq.
Reply

root
02-26-2005, 07:23 PM
actually quite a big portion of the public do not wish for the british or think they should be participating in the war in iraq,
Your right, we call the them Loud Minority!
Reply

Sinner
02-26-2005, 07:27 PM
I will just remind the people on this forum, that the Iraqi people have just elected people into office who have no love for the insurgency.
Reply

Khattab
02-26-2005, 07:39 PM
Well the puppet goverment wont really have much of a say, these people are fighting against the oppressors and invaders and the more of these soldiers that are killed the better until they leave Iraq and go home.
Reply

root
02-26-2005, 08:11 PM
Originally Posted by Amir
Well the puppet goverment wont really have much of a say, these people are fighting against the oppressors and invaders and the more of these soldiers that are killed the better until they leave Iraq and go home.
A "Minority" population running a totality country falls, the now free "Majority" vote in who they want for themselves. The "Majority" vote in a new Government, this Government is a Puppet?

Go figure........
Reply

Khattab
02-26-2005, 08:25 PM
These people are just a front for America and the bush administration, there wont be peace in Iraq and I will give this goverment 2 years before if falls, you go figure that................
Reply

root
02-26-2005, 08:40 PM
These mujahideen fighting in iraq will destroy the devil forces
Where was the Mujahideen when Saddam was persecuted and killed thousands of Muslims..... I often wonder. Though I wonder why they don't help the Kurds after Saddam gassed em either.

Amir, may I ask. Who is that rabble looking group of people in your Avata\Pic?

Root
Reply

Khattab
02-26-2005, 08:52 PM
Originally Posted by root
Where was the Mujahideen when Saddam was persecuted and killed thousands of Muslims..... I often wonder. Though I wonder why they don't help the Kurds after Saddam gassed em either.

Amir, may I ask. Who is that rabble looking group of people in your Avata\Pic?

Root

Root it is the Mujahideen army who fought against Russia when they invaded Afghanistan
Reply

root
02-26-2005, 09:02 PM
I agree with the tight leash, such problems can be controlled by a ruthless minority and a strict religion you just need to look at Medieval Europe to see this. Not only is it a shame that for Iraq, we don't have to go back in time.

Germany shortly after the Second World War was a majority elected government which had the approval of the US. I would not call this a Puppet state!

I know they thought in Russia, they did in Bosnia and they fight in The Pakistan\India border for years and a load of other places to. But they don't go to the aid of oppressed muslims by oppressing muslims. (Unless I am wrong)!
Reply

Genius
02-26-2005, 11:13 PM
Originally Posted by Amir
Root it is the Mujahideen army who fought against Russia when they invaded Afghanistan
The soldiers in your avatar are from the 7th Muslim division of the Bosnian army based in Zenica, they were known for their religous zeal, they did not fight in afghanistan, though it has been noted that their were arabs and other foriegners amongst their ranks who served in Afghanistan.
Reply

Sinner
02-27-2005, 01:23 AM
This puppet 'elected' government
This statement doesn't fit the facts. The election was completely open, except to former senior Baathist Saddam hacks. Other then that, any party, and individual who wanted to run, was allowed. More than 120 parties fielded candidates for the assembly. Each had to present a list of at least 12 candidates, and less than 276, according to the rules which were dawn up. A third of these had to be worman, so they would get some representation. Just because "only" 60 % of the population showed up does not negate the results. In America less then 50% of the population shows up for elections usually. In a free country, people are not forced to the polls. The government which the majority of Iraqis just elected is only an interim one. They will draft a Constitution which will be sent back to Iraqi public, where it must get a 2/3's of the vote for it to be passed. Once this is done, a new election will be conducted where the members of a new democratic Iraqi government will be selected. If anything, the next election should draw even more Iraqis to the polls. This will be in the first half of 2006.
Reply

root
02-27-2005, 03:56 PM
Originally Posted by Hash
A 'election' cannot be operated under apached helicopters and armed US marines, this is not a election.
I guess you prefer 1 candidate 1 vote of the Sadam ere eh!
Reply

Sinner
02-27-2005, 04:16 PM
Not to add the so called freedom fighters, killing off all the Iraqi voters they possibly can.
Reply

root
02-27-2005, 04:24 PM
Originally Posted by Sinner
Not to add the so called freedom fighters, killing off all the Iraqi voters they possibly can.
"Freedom fighters" bank roled by Syria, such fighters in Bosnia against the Muslims were called and quite rightly so "Militia", I think this is more applicable. Militia objective is to spread fear by ruthless violence, their is no if, but's or maybe.
Reply

Sinner
02-27-2005, 05:08 PM
Still, without a strong American military presence, for now, the Iraq people will have no chance of a democratic state. Too many "Militia" are doing their best to set off a civil war and/or anarchy in the hopes that their dear leaders from Iran or Syria can impose their government on Iraq in exchange for peace. Just what the Middle East needs, another Iran or Syria ... sigh.....
Reply

root
02-28-2005, 05:47 PM
Originally Posted by Hash
That is exactley what the world needs, MORE irans and MORE syrias. To defy and rebel against the US. These freedom fighters that you critize did not cross the ocean and jump in america, and start attacking and invading. They are not running around the streets of washington and new york with ak-47s and RPG. They are defending their land against the invading forces. Think about it.
I had a freind who actually went to the training camp and run away from it too after he questioned what he was being taught, incidentally one of his other freinds was driving home one night in Pakistan on his motorcycle when he accidently crashed into a car, some people jumped out with weapons and by some big twist of fate he had actually crashed into a Politician's wife car ("They thought he was a suicide bomber")......... LOL, he reappeared several months later only with the intervention of "Contacts" who proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that it was just a straight forward accident, I beleive the US was also responsible for his release.

The problem with them I think is two fold, firstly in that participating in armed conflict's makes them "Militia" wether you want to accept this or not and as such are not bound by the Geneva Convention which makes them "Illegal Combatants", which only goes to futher complicate a FEBA (Forward Edge of Battle Area), without a recognizable dress to identify themselves only goes to create greater confusion in a soldiers ability to identify a fighter or a civilian to which British soldiers have been convicted of innocent killings. Don't get me wrong after experiencing at first hand the ruthlessness of a "Militia" force an unstated rule is "Show no quarter & give no quarter" With the Mujahid I do offer a certain ammount of "respect" for them but would question who were the invading forces when they fought in Bosnia, since I feel that Mujahid will fight where ever Muslims are perceived to be oppressed and this does not necessarily indicate against an invading force. Yet they have still not come to the aid of oppressed muslims by muslims. Militia forces are not terrorist forces this is true I beleive though some make no distinction at all.

As for Syria & Iran needing a higher population to fight, I think that is a ridiculous notion to state since surely it must be better for Syria & Iran to educate & look after their people better (A 14 year old boy being whipped to death in Iran for breaking his fast is not acceptable by most countries standards irrespective of what beleif you may have). Bodies on the battlefield is no longer a strength of the battlefield and I can't understand why you call for this while you live in England. (Though those who do call for such actions rarely do reside and act what they preach).

It is said that the UK is a multi-cultural society, and I think this is wrong. It is what our Government want us to beleive. A far more accurate perception is that the UK is turning into a Multi-cultural society, that has a long way to go yet. But I have a question for you out of interest. The British society is one of hardship and devotion to their country, and I think the Afghanistan issue of British Muslims going to fight against british forces is an act of treason. Would you fight against the british Forces as a British Subject...........
Reply

kadafi
02-28-2005, 05:54 PM
Originally Posted by root
A 14 year old boy being whipped to death in Iran for breaking his fast is not acceptable by most countries standards irrespective of what beleif you may have).
Peace
That story was fabricated and has been propagated by only one anti-Iran source who conceals their identity.
Reply

root
02-28-2005, 07:11 PM
http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/source/001327.html
Reply

kadafi
02-28-2005, 07:48 PM
Peace,

And I like I stated in my previous reply, it's a dubious source. The only source that mentions this fabricated story. Furthermore, examine the image carefully and see how it's outdated. Looks more like a image capture from an movie. And lastly, (despite the fact that the whole site is riddled with Anti-Iran messages), the source conceals it identity. Now why would a reputable source conceal its identify on the internet.

If one does a simply WHOIS, it reveals:

The registrant for www.iranpressnews.com is Domains by Proxy.

Domains by Proxy, Inc.
15111 N Hayden Rd., Suite 160
PMB353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States

http://www.domainsbyproxy.com/

In other words, the owner wishes to keep his/her identity unknown.

But despite all these reasons that I stated, the fact that this propagandic site (iranpressnews) is the only site that reports it is enough evidence to reject it.
Reply

Protected_Diamond
03-08-2006, 07:13 AM
Originally Posted by Hashim
You want to compare 'demoxcracy and islamic law root, okay, play it your way. I already explained the peace, harmony and good times whilst the talliban was in control, and i provided the statistics to help you out root, i kmnwo your a bit slow. Okay root, play with this. Saudi arabia has the islamic law, last year there was a total of 3 murders in saudi. In the US, a murder every 30 seconds! Islamic law, divine law, the khilafah system, is without a doubt superior to your 'democracy' in every way!!!
:D :bravo: :rock: :clever: :awesome:
Reply

Christian_dove
03-08-2006, 07:53 AM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11709270/

Teacher in Colorado compared George W. Bush with Adolf Hitler. There are some remarkable similarities...

And remeber, NBC is "pro-Bush", as all of the american media is...
Reply

i_m_tipu
03-08-2006, 08:37 AM
LET ME PRESENT A STATISTIC

Statistic of Murder

USA (FOLLOW NO 1 CIVILISED LAW) .................................................. ..........SAUDIA (FOLLOW NO LAST CIVILISED LAW)

2 murder in 1 MN................................................ ...............................................0 murder in 1 MN

120 murder in 1 HOUR.............................................. ...............................................0 murder in 1 HOUR

2880 murder in 1 DAY............................................... ...............................................0 murder in 1 DAY

86400 murder in 1 MONTH............................................. ...........................................0 murder in 1 MONTH

345600 murder in 4 MONTH :)................................................ .................................1 murder in 4 MONTH (CRIMINAL)

1036800 murder in 1 YEAR :) (IT'S NOTHING). .................................................. ..........3 murder in 1 YEAR (THE CIVILISED WORLD MUST STOP THIS GENOSIDE)
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 09:42 AM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Teacher in Colorado compared George W. Bush with Adolf Hitler. There are some remarkable similarities...
Oh really? How many Jews has Bush incinerated recently? How many women and children has he gased? Has he suspended the Constitution? Set up any Concentration Camps?

This is lame. It is worse than lame.

And remeber, NBC is "pro-Bush", as all of the american media is...
Rubbish. Fox is pro-Bush but the traditional media is viciously anti-Bush. Look at the Air Gaurd fuss.
Reply

Cheb
03-08-2006, 10:06 AM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Oh really? How many Jews has Bush incinerated recently? How many women and children has he gased? Has he suspended the Constitution? Set up any Concentration Camps?

This is lame. It is worse than lame.
I really dont think it is lame at all. Bush killed his own people in 9/11 (say what you want this is my opinion), killed his own soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan for the sake of money, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians in the wars that he and his administration created. I think the similarities are quite interesting indeed. The only difference is religion and country.

Originally Posted by HeiGou
Rubbish. Fox is pro-Bush but the traditional media is viciously anti-Bush. Look at the Air Gaurd fuss.
I am sorry but you are truly blinded. Bush would be in prison now if not for the media being pro-Bush.
This is an article I found interesting:
http://tvnewslies.org/html/the_truth...e_w__bush.html
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 10:26 AM
Originally Posted by Cheb
I really dont think it is lame at all. Bush killed his own people in 9/11 (say what you want this is my opinion),
I could say many things to that but I won't. The distinction here is that Hitler actually killed 6 million people. Bush has killed no one, not even on September 11. Seek medical help.

killed his own soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan for the sake of money,
I fail to see what money Bush has got from either invasion. On the contrary it has cost the US plenty. Nor has Bush killed a single person. The insurgents have killed some soldiers, but not many.

killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians in the wars that he and his administration created.
Again Bush has killed no one. Nor have the Americans killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. Perhaps tens of thousands. Perhaps.

I think the similarities are quite interesting indeed. The only difference is religion and country.
Then I feel sorry for you. Morality is the ability to tell real evil from mild evil and right from wrong.

I am sorry but you are truly blinded. Bush would be in prison now if not for the media being pro-Bush.
What could Bush go to jail for?
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 10:32 AM
Originally Posted by i_m_tipu
LET ME PRESENT A STATISTIC

Statistic of Murder

USA (FOLLOW NO 1 CIVILISED LAW).............................................. ..............SAUDIA (FOLLOW NO LAST CIVILISED LAW)

2 murder in 1 MN................................................ ...............................................0 murder in 1 MN

120 murder in 1 HOUR.............................................. ...............................................0 murder in 1 HOUR

2880 murder in 1 DAY............................................... ...............................................0 murder in 1 DAY

86400 murder in 1 MONTH............................................. ...........................................0 murder in 1 MONTH

345600 murder in 4 MONTH :)................................................ .................................1 murder in 4 MONTH (CRIMINAL)

1036800 murder in 1 YEAR :) (IT'S NOTHING). .................................................. ..........3 murder in 1 YEAR (THE CIVILISED WORLD MUST STOP THIS GENOSIDE)
Uh Huh. And let me present a fact or two to complement this rant.

Crime Statistics for the United States in 2004.

Population 290,788,976
All Violent Crimes 1,367,009
Property Crimes 10,328,255
Murder 16,137
Forcible Rape 94,635
Robbery 401,326
Agg. Assault 854,911
Burglary 2,143,456
Larceny-Theft 6,947,685
Vehicle Theft 1,237,114

Saudi Arabia produced no statistics worth noting. It is likely that some crimes are less frequent. Theft for instance. But it is likely that some are more so. Rape and murder perhaps.

Who knows?
Reply

MinAhlilHadeeth
03-08-2006, 10:41 AM
Lol.... funny in a sad sort of way:D.
Reply

Cheb
03-08-2006, 10:48 AM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
I could say many things to that but I won't. The distinction here is that Hitler actually killed 6 million people. Bush has killed no one, not even on September 11. Seek medical help.
You really are blinded. I do not expect it to be different anyway. Bush and the media have done a good job in keeping the important questions unanswered. Many of the American people have the same views too. SEEK KNOWLEDGE!


Originally Posted by HeiGou
I fail to see what money Bush has got from either invasion. On the contrary it has cost the US plenty. Nor has Bush killed a single person. The insurgents have killed some soldiers, but not many.
I did not expect this response at all. I thought you would be a little less bias than this! What about the TRILLIONS of dollars in Iraqi oil, what about the pipe-lines in Afghanistan... The war will cost the US nothing, it will only cost the Iraqi and Afghan people.

Originally Posted by HeiGou
Again Bush has killed no one. Nor have the Americans killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. Perhaps tens of thousands. Perhaps.
That is what you are told. It depends who you believe in this situation.

Originally Posted by HeiGou
Then I feel sorry for you. Morality is the ability to tell real evil from mild evil and right from wrong.
And I can see that you dont have it.

Originally Posted by HeiGou
What could Bush go to jail for?
Stealing candy from a child. What do you think?
You know what I think.
Reply

Cheb
03-08-2006, 10:50 AM
Originally Posted by i_m_tipu
LET ME PRESENT A STATISTIC

Statistic of Murder

USA (FOLLOW NO 1 CIVILISED LAW) .................................................. ..........SAUDIA (FOLLOW NO LAST CIVILISED LAW)

2 murder in 1 MN................................................ ...............................................0 murder in 1 MN

120 murder in 1 HOUR.............................................. ...............................................0 murder in 1 HOUR

2880 murder in 1 DAY............................................... ...............................................0 murder in 1 DAY

86400 murder in 1 MONTH............................................. ...........................................0 murder in 1 MONTH

345600 murder in 4 MONTH :)................................................ .................................1 murder in 4 MONTH (CRIMINAL)

1036800 murder in 1 YEAR :) (IT'S NOTHING). .................................................. ..........3 murder in 1 YEAR (THE CIVILISED WORLD MUST STOP THIS GENOSIDE)
Sorry brother but these statistics are definitely not true. They are way exaggerated and meant to confuse and misguide us rather than inform us.
Peace.
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally Posted by Cheb
You really are blinded. I do not expect it to be different anyway. Bush and the media have done a good job in keeping the important questions unanswered. Many of the American people have the same views too. SEEK KNOWLEDGE!
I may be blinded, but it is more likely that, like the vast majority of the rest of the world's population, I am not. Would you even consider for a moment that in fact I am not wrong and you are?

What important questions have been unanswered?

I did not expect this response at all. I thought you would be a little less bias than this! What about the TRILLIONS of dollars in Iraqi oil, what about the pipe-lines in Afghanistan... The war will cost the US nothing, it will only cost the Iraqi and Afghan people.
The trillions of dollars of oil, if there are that much, belong to the Iraqi people. I do not see George Bush getting any of it. The Taleban was willing to build pipelines across Afghanistan, and even if they were not, so what? What is worth the cost of the war in Afghanistan? The War has cost the US a lot already and is costing more every day.

That is what you are told. It depends who you believe in this situation.
And who do you believe? Why do you want to believe something that is so absurd? Why is it you have chosen to believe something so insane? What has gone wrong in your life that you feel this is an appropriate response?
Reply

Cheb
03-08-2006, 12:50 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
I may be blinded, but it is more likely that, like the vast majority of the rest of the world's population, I am not. Would you even consider for a moment that in fact I am not wrong and you are?
Oh I already did. In fact for a while I actually believe all that @#$%. But tha is only because I was ignorant and believed all the bull the media fed me. It is not only until I started to really look into this that I realized I was a fool for believing what I was told to believe. Trust me my eyes are wide open.

Originally Posted by HeiGou
What important questions have been unanswered?
Why have the important questions regarding hte 9/11 attacks not been answered?
Why is it that coincidently the US is occupying key positions to prepare itself for a greater "threat"?
Why did the Bush administration keep changing its intentions for invading Iraq?
Why are most members of the Bush administration mostly convicts?

This is just form the top of my head that I can think of right now. There are many more.




Originally Posted by HeiGou
The trillions of dollars of oil, if there are that much, belong to the Iraqi people. I do not see George Bush getting any of it. The Taleban was willing to build pipelines across Afghanistan, and even if they were not, so what? What is worth the cost of the war in Afghanistan? The War has cost the US a lot already and is costing more every day.
Oh do they really belong to the Iraqi people?? Please look into this more because it seems like you have made your mind up.



Originally Posted by HeiGou
And who do you believe? Why do you want to believe something that is so absurd? Why is it you have chosen to believe something so insane? What has gone wrong in your life that you feel this is an appropriate response?
Why is it absurd?
Believe me nothing has gone wrong in my life. Thank God my life is good and I am a happy man. I believe this because I believe what makes sense. You believe what you are told. That is the difference between us.
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 01:00 PM
Originally Posted by Cheb
Oh I already did. In fact for a while I actually believe all that @#$%. But tha is only because I was ignorant and believed all the bull the media fed me. It is not only until I started to really look into this that I realized I was a fool for believing what I was told to believe. Trust me my eyes are wide open.
Uh huh. Perhaps that is the appeal of conspiracies - they provide a sense of power and knowledge. After all only you know how the world is really run. You can't see how bad this is for you?

Why have the important questions regarding hte 9/11 attacks not been answered?
Such as?

Why is it that coincidently the US is occupying key positions to prepare itself for a greater "threat"?
Which key positions?

Why did the Bush administration keep changing its intentions for invading Iraq?
Domestic politics - to justify it to a doubtful electorate and hostile media.

Why are most members of the Bush administration mostly convicts?
Which members of the Bush administration are convicts?

This is just form the top of my head that I can think of right now. There are many more.
I look forward to hearing about them.

Oh do they really belong to the Iraqi people?? Please look into this more because it seems like you have made your mind up.
Yes the oil belongs to the Iraqi people or more accurately the Iraqi government. Who else would it belong to?

Why is it absurd?
Because the world is such a screwed up place - you think any masterminds thought this nonsense up and then conspired to inflict it on the world? Why would they bother?

Believe me nothing has gone wrong in my life. Thank God my life is good and I am a happy man. I believe this because I believe what makes sense. You believe what you are told. That is the difference between us.
How does all this make sense to you?
Reply

Christian_dove
03-08-2006, 01:20 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Oh really? How many Jews has Bush incinerated recently? How many women and children has he gased? Has he suspended the Constitution? Set up any Concentration Camps?
Guantanamo, for one. There are probably several internation camps worldwide designed and created by both the Bush regime and the former american regimes. You must be a retard not to know this.

Rubbish. Fox is pro-Bush but the traditional media is viciously anti-Bush. Look at the Air Gaurd fuss.
All the national news channels are pro-Bush. Or actually, they are pro-whoever-is-in-charge. Cause it really doesn't matter, the ones in control is not Bush nor any other president... It's the same people who runs the show anyway.

Are you payed by CIA? You are extremely favourable towards the US.
Reply

HeiGou
03-08-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Guantanamo, for one. There are probably several internation camps worldwide designed and created by both the Bush regime and the former american regimes. You must be a retard not to know this.
So you are claiming that in Guantanamo people are being murdered on an industrial scale and their bodies incinerated in crematoria? Or just that the relatively small number of people being held prisoner in Cuba is equivalent of the Holocaust?

All the national news channels are pro-Bush. Or actually, they are pro-whoever-is-in-charge. Cause it really doesn't matter, the ones in control is not Bush nor any other president... It's the same people who runs the show anyway.
This does not explain why the media has hounded Bush for years with tales of drug use, draft dodging, and the like. Explain to me why anyone who was so pro-Bush would be reproducing faked memos from the Alabama Air Guard? It is true that if you occupy the more fringe end of the political spectrum every one looks pro-Bush, but that is not our problem, it is your problem.

Are you payed by CIA? You are extremely favourable towards the US.
If only. If the CIA wants to pay me, and are listening to this, well you guys know where to find me. It is the extremism of the Anti-American feeling here that drives me to defend what I would rather not defend. You are mad if you think Bush is the same as Hitler.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-08-2006, 11:46 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
So you are claiming that in Guantanamo people are being murdered on an industrial scale and their bodies incinerated in crematoria? Or just that the relatively small number of people being held prisoner in Cuba is equivalent of the Holocaust?
No, in fact I didn't mention a word in regards to the amount of people killed by the Bush regime, there are no doubt several million victims of american foreign politics, but not all were killed by the current US gouvernment. But I consider such numbers a possibility in the near future. And btw, I see no difference between the invasion of Iraq and the invasion of Poland in 1939. Bush used the September 11 attacks as Hitler used the 1933 burning of the Reichstag to repress domestic dissidents.


If only. If the CIA wants to pay me, and are listening to this, well you guys know where to find me. It is the extremism of the Anti-American feeling here that drives me to defend what I would rather not defend. You are mad if you think Bush is the same as Hitler.
Actually I think Bush and Hitler are very much alike. Well, obviously, Hitler probably had a sharper intellect whereas Bush seems to be more of an idiot. Bush simply is not the orator that Hitler was. And of course, there are other differences. Hitler, for example, was legally elected. And he had a plan--not one that I like, but a plan--for the period after the war. But they both seem to share the same fascination for "blonde haired, blue eyed, white super-race. (funny, that's how I look..)" I say this because since squatting in the White House, Bush has been intent on bombing other far-away, dark-skinned people of Middle Eastern countries, as part of his "War on Terror," which is really a War of Terror.

Adolf Hitler claimed to have launched a 'defensive' war against the Jews, Slavs and the rest of Europe to protect the German race. Similarly Bush has waged the same 'defensive' war against the Islamic world and anyone else that does not to conform to the US dictates. ... Hitler claimed the supremacy of the Aryan race, Bush calls for the supremacy of US democracy run by its Multinationals, as exemplified by Paul Bremer of Iraq with the likes of Halliburton and Bechtel.

Adolf had the Gestapo; Bush has the FBI and CIA, who are far more efficient with killings, kidnapping, torture and now arbitrary imprisonment without charge or legal representation. ... There are 'Arabs' and 'Muslims' campaigning and raising funds along with the Zionist camp to re-elect Bush. They are staunch supporter of US democracy and a believer in Adolf Bush. ..

I'll be happy to stop comparing Bush to Hitler when he stops acting like him. Maybe I am mad. So be it.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-08-2006, 11:56 PM
Now for something a lot more entertaining:

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/campaign_lies.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/the_liars__den.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/on_th...ck_bottom.html
Reply

seek.learn
03-09-2006, 04:28 AM
Salaam o alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatahu

AllahuAlim (Allah knows best)

Im unfortunately not really upto date with my politics. So just ignore me if you will. I just wanted to say a wee little bit directed mainly towards my muslim brothers and sisters.

"But speak to him mildly; perchance he may take warning" 20:44, Abdullah YusufAli translation.

This ayat is related to pharoh. Allah commands Musa (AS) to speak mildly to Pharoh! Please dear brothers, Yes stand for your belief, may Allah guide us to the truth and spread it through us InshaAllah! But isnt it inappropriate for us to call pakistan and saddam and musharaff and all those ppl not ideal muslims and we judge their faith and in doing so imply we're better muslims (forgive my assumption, trying to make a point) and at the same time use such attitudes and words which do not reflect the teachings of ur deen???

Im sorry this comes in b/w all this political talk and has really nothing to do with whats going on. Truth be told in my urgency i havent even read all the replies, just zoomed over them in hope of someone having said something about how such an attitude and these rude words are not appropriate for a believer. Let us work to improve ourselves InshaAllah.

InshaAllah may Allah guide us and teach us better. Aameen.
Sorry for the interruption again, for this post being completely unrelated to the topic. And my intent was not to offend anyone.

Assalam o alaikum wa rahmatullah
Reply

renak
03-09-2006, 06:35 AM
I don't think that citizens of the USA have more mental illness, we just have more access to psychological drugs. Big pharma plays a HUGE role in our country. We are overmedicated, which probably needs to stop.
Reply

HeiGou
03-09-2006, 10:24 AM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
No, in fact I didn't mention a word in regards to the amount of people killed by the Bush regime,
I wrote "Oh really? How many Jews has Bush incinerated recently? How many women and children has he gased? Has he suspended the Constitution? Set up any Concentration Camps?" and you responded "Guantanamo for one". Exactly how would a normal English-speaking person read that other than as a claim by you that Bush was incinerating people in Guantanamo?

there are no doubt several million victims of american foreign politics, but not all were killed by the current US gouvernment. But I consider such numbers a possibility in the near future.
Exactly how has the US foreign policy killed millions? And so you are saying you expect Bush to kill millions in the 2 years he has left in power?

And btw, I see no difference between the invasion of Iraq and the invasion of Poland in 1939. Bush used the September 11 attacks as Hitler used the 1933 burning of the Reichstag to repress domestic dissidents.
Which goes to the heart of your problems. If you cannot see the distinction between a policy designed to annihilate the Polish nation and the Jewish people through mass murder and repression on the one hand, and a foolish policy designed to create democracy in Iraq on the other, you are one sick puppy. Did Bush suspend Parliament? Lock any of those all-too-vocal domestic "dissidents" (by that you mean people who express an anti-Bush opinion I guess) in concentration camps? If you can seriously compare these two incidents - the death of Democracy in Germany and a tightening of security laws in the US - there is something wrong with your moral compass.

Actually I think Bush and Hitler are very much alike. Well, obviously, Hitler probably had a sharper intellect whereas Bush seems to be more of an idiot.
Again we have established your lack of judgement on moral issues. But I agree with you about the intellect. Hitler was probably much smarter than Bush. Although Bush does play it up a little.

Bush simply is not the orator that Hitler was.
Absolutely.

And of course, there are other differences. Hitler, for example, was legally elected.
Ironically, Bush was legally elected - Twice in fact - and Hitler was not. He did not win a majority of seats ever. He got into power through a backroom deal with the Conservatives and Catholics.

And he had a plan--not one that I like, but a plan--for the period after the war.
Unlike Bush who does not even have a plan for the war. That is the real difference between someone who wants to conquer the world and Bush who wanted to stay at home until he was forced into global politics.

But they both seem to share the same fascination for "blonde haired, blue eyed, white super-race. (funny, that's how I look..)"
Really? This is the same George Bush who appointed Colin Powell as his Secretary of State? Condi Rice as his successor? A guy called Gonzalez as his Cheif Council? Elaine Chao as his secretary of labor? Where he George W ever expressed an interest in blond-haired blue-eyed white members of a super race? This is a pathetic smear even by your standards.

I say this because since squatting in the White House, Bush has been intent on bombing other far-away, dark-skinned people of Middle Eastern countries, as part of his "War on Terror," which is really a War of Terror.
So it is all George W's fault - not Osama at all? George W was in power for a while before September 11. How many dark-skinned people did he bomb before 9-11? How many has he bombed since? He is a remarkably restrained President all things considering. Nor is there any evidence that he is bombing dark-skinned people so much as terrorists who happen to be Muslims.

Adolf Hitler claimed to have launched a 'defensive' war against the Jews, Slavs and the rest of Europe to protect the German race.
The difference here is that Jews did not attack anyone.

Similarly Bush has waged the same 'defensive' war against the Islamic world and anyone else that does not to conform to the US dictates.
Like Castro? Chavez? Nor is Bush waging any war against Islam but against terrorists as he repeatedly says. He main allies are Muslim countries.

... Hitler claimed the supremacy of the Aryan race, Bush calls for the supremacy of US democracy run by its Multinationals, as exemplified by Paul Bremer of Iraq with the likes of Halliburton and Bechtel.
And yet Bush is not interested in forcing anyone into such a system. He says it is better, and by any measure it is, but he does not force Cuba to join. Nor Mali.

Adolf had the Gestapo; Bush has the FBI and CIA, who are far more efficient with killings, kidnapping, torture and now arbitrary imprisonment without charge or legal representation.
Really? Between 1941 and 1945 the Nazis killed six million Jews. George W will have been in power twice as long when he goes. You claiming the "more efficient" CIA will have killed 12 million or more by then? Seek medical help.

... There are 'Arabs' and 'Muslims' campaigning and raising funds along with the Zionist camp to re-elect Bush. They are staunch supporter of US democracy and a believer in Adolf Bush. ..
Uh huh.

I'll be happy to stop comparing Bush to Hitler when he stops acting like him. Maybe I am mad. So be it.
No maybe about it. How old are you by the way?
Reply

Christian_dove
03-09-2006, 11:32 AM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
I wrote "Oh really? How many Jews has Bush incinerated recently? How many women and children has he gased? Has he suspended the Constitution? Set up any Concentration Camps?" and you responded "Guantanamo for one". Exactly how would a normal English-speaking person read that other than as a claim by you that Bush was incinerating people in Guantanamo?




Exactly how has the US foreign policy killed millions? And so you are saying you expect Bush to kill millions in the 2 years he has left in power?
GW's lasting legacy will be that he committed America to an eternal war.

Which goes to the heart of your problems. If you cannot see the distinction between a policy designed to annihilate the Polish nation and the Jewish people through mass murder and repression on the one hand, and a foolish policy designed to create democracy in Iraq on the other, you are one sick puppy. Did Bush suspend Parliament? Lock any of those all-too-vocal domestic "dissidents" (by that you mean people who express an anti-Bush opinion I guess) in concentration camps? If you can seriously compare these two incidents - the death of Democracy in Germany and a tightening of security laws in the US - there is something wrong with your moral compass.
Well, we have become more sivilized in the western world. But if Bush had been the president in the 1930'ies, I bet he would have been just as mean as Hitler.
Ironically, Bush was legally elected - Twice in fact - and Hitler was not. He did not win a majority of seats ever. He got into power through a backroom deal with the Conservatives and Catholics.
George W. Bush was installed as President of the United States by a conservative Supreme Court. In both cases, governments used "national security" as an excuse to launch an assault on democratic freedoms. While "lebensraum" was a rallying cry for Hitler, Bush's "evil axis," referring to North Korea, Iran and Iraq, was supposed to generate patriotic "no-think" in the USA.

Just as Hitler detached himself from the League of Nations, George W. has been assuming a more insular position internationally. ... Just as the burning of the Reichstag provided the Nazi party with the opportunity for shredding the Weimar Constitution, so did the attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11/01 provide the Republican administration (Cheney/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld) with the rationale for abolishing the freedoms granted to all citizens in the American Constitution. ...

Unlike Bush who does not even have a plan for the war. That is the real difference between someone who wants to conquer the world and Bush who wanted to stay at home until he was forced into global politics.
If american authorities didn't want to conquer the world, what in Gods name are they doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? I am not just calling Bush an idiot, the whole line of presidents since Kennedy were all corrupted and just puppets in the hands of others.

Really? This is the same George Bush who appointed Colin Powell as his Secretary of State? Condi Rice as his successor? A guy called Gonzalez as his Cheif Council? Elaine Chao as his secretary of labor? Where he George W ever expressed an interest in blond-haired blue-eyed white members of a super race? This is a pathetic smear even by your standards.
Powell, just another puppet. Rice, a puppet. All puppets... Actually, I think the american racism is more based on cultural issues than skin color.

So it is all George W's fault - not Osama at all? George W was in power for a while before September 11. How many dark-skinned people did he bomb before 9-11? How many has he bombed since? He is a remarkably restrained President all things considering. Nor is there any evidence that he is bombing dark-skinned people so much as terrorists who happen to be Muslims.
The feds and CIA knew all to well what was going to happen before 9/11. It was convenient, they needed a new Pearl Harbour (an attack which american authorities ALSO knew of before it actually happened) in order to invade Iraq for the sake of securing future oil import. How many lives are lost because of american authorities? Nobody knows, but not few.

Like Castro? Chavez? Nor is Bush waging any war against Islam but against terrorists as he repeatedly says. He main allies are Muslim countries.
His main allies are Blair/England and some rather psychopatic dictators around the globe, which proves that the man couldn't give a s h i t about democracy or not democracy. They just need oil..
And yet Bush is not interested in forcing anyone into such a system. He says it is better, and by any measure it is, but he does not force Cuba to join. Nor Mali.
He says a lot, doesn't he...
Really? Between 1941 and 1945 the Nazis killed six million Jews. George W will have been in power twice as long when he goes. You claiming the "more efficient" CIA will have killed 12 million or more by then? Seek medical help.
Again, GW's lasting legacy will be that he committed America to an eternal war.
Reply

HeiGou
03-09-2006, 12:02 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
GW's lasting legacy will be that he committed America to an eternal war.
No, that will be Osama Bin Laden's legacy. George W simply struck back.

Not that I think it will be eternal. I think Islamic fundamentalism of OBL's sort is on the decline - it is loosing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Well, we have become more sivilized in the western world. But if Bush had been the president in the 1930'ies, I bet he would have been just as mean as Hitler.
So I will take it you accept there is no comparison whatsoever between what George W has done and what Hitler did. You are forced to fall back on what George W "might" have done had he been born in 1890. Fine. What a waste of my time.

George W. Bush was installed as President of the United States by a conservative Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court was split in 2000 between Liberals and Conservatives with some swing voters. The Swing came down on the side of the Republicans. Take it up with them.

In both cases, governments used "national security" as an excuse to launch an assault on democratic freedoms. While "lebensraum" was a rallying cry for Hitler, Bush's "evil axis," referring to North Korea, Iran and Iraq, was supposed to generate patriotic "no-think" in the USA.
Except Lebensraum involved invading countries, murdering their women and children and taking their land. George W has not launched an assault of democratic freedoms, or if he has it has been extremely lame, and he is not trying to take anyone's property much less murder their families. As I said, if you cannot see the distinction there is something wrong with you.

Just as Hitler detached himself from the League of Nations, George W. has been assuming a more insular position internationally.
Well that is not true. He is more isolated from the UN - but he has not left it. Another analogy down the drain. And he is the most engaged President when it comes to international issues for decades - probably since Eisenhower. All his important issues are foreign issues.

... Just as the burning of the Reichstag provided the Nazi party with the opportunity for shredding the Weimar Constitution, so did the attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11/01 provide the Republican administration (Cheney/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld) with the rationale for abolishing the freedoms granted to all citizens in the American Constitution. ...
What freedoms mentioned in the Constitution have been abolished? The difference here is that people died in a terrorist attack on America in 9-11. No sign George W wanted it or planned it or knew of it.

If american authorities didn't want to conquer the world, what in Gods name are they doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? I am not just calling Bush an idiot, the whole line of presidents since Kennedy were all corrupted and just puppets in the hands of others.
Uh huh. They are seeking justice. What else would they be doing?

Odd places to start conquering the world from don't you think?

Powell, just another puppet. Rice, a puppet. All puppets... Actually, I think the american racism is more based on cultural issues than skin color.
So it isn't racism at all you mean? Fine. Puppets? Of those shape-changing inter-galatic lizards again perhaps?

The feds and CIA knew all to well what was going to happen before 9/11. It was convenient, they needed a new Pearl Harbour (an attack which american authorities ALSO knew of before it actually happened) in order to invade Iraq for the sake of securing future oil import. How many lives are lost because of american authorities? Nobody knows, but not few.
Uh huh. What is the evidence for your absurd claims?

His main allies are Blair/England and some rather psychopatic dictators around the globe, which proves that the man couldn't give a s h i t about democracy or not democracy. They just need oil..
He is sending soldiers out there to bring democracy. He clearly does care. His main enemies are ALL psychopathic dictators. That is the difference.

Again, GW's lasting legacy will be that he committed America to an eternal war.
We will see. No doubt terrorism will splutter on, but it is not winning so far.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-17-2006, 04:17 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou


He is sending soldiers out there to bring democracy. He clearly does care. His main enemies are ALL psychopathic dictators. That is the difference.
Actually, I think you are a moron and discussing with you is like discussing with a blind and deaf 5-year old who is incapable and unwilling of understanding even the easiest of concepts. The 5 year old I can excuse...

How can USA (or a moron like you) justify the support of dictators on one hand, and the removal of others on the other? Who gave Saddam Hussein support for decades until he became to "difficult" to deal with? USA. Who gave him chemical weapons? Who supported Taliban? USA. For years the United States has helped arm dictators -- to keep them out of the communist bloc, to keep the oil flowing, to keep the arms makers happy. And to empower themselves.

USA armed the Shah of Iran before the militants in the streets overthrew him. USA armed Suharto in Indonesia, whom used American arms to invade East Timor and repress its people. USA armed the generals and colonels throughout Central America. They ruled through death squads and terror even when civilian presidents were elected.

According to Amnesty International, "arbitrary arrest, torture, 'disappearance' and political killings were everyday realities" for Guatemalans during decades of U.S. financed military dictatorship.

USA armed the generals who ruled Pakistan, in violation of US law that sought to block aid to countries developing their own nuclear weapons. According to journalist Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker, Pakistan and India almost used nuclear weapons against each other in May 1990.

USA armed Marcos in the Philippines and Noriega in Panama.

USA even created Bin Laden.

Why don't you read a little bit about some of the latin-american dictators supported by the US through the years. Or some of the other crimes commited by the US.


We will see. No doubt terrorism will splutter on, but it is not winning so far.
You are so full of yourself, I don't think you are able to see anything. Terrorism will not win, but fighting it also means fighting a clearly corrupted US gouvernment.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
03-17-2006, 04:20 PM
nicely said dove :)
Reply

HeiGou
03-17-2006, 11:03 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Actually, I think you are a moron and discussing with you is like discussing with a blind and deaf 5-year old who is incapable and unwilling of understanding even the easiest of concepts. The 5 year old I can excuse...
Strange you are not having more success - isn't it a little embarrassing you are being outclassed by a five year old?

How can USA (or a moron like you) justify the support of dictators on one hand, and the removal of others on the other?
Very easily I expect. Everyone older than a five year old knows perfect justice is impossible to achieve and the world is a complex place. So the real question is not whether the US supports, from time to time in a few places, dictators, but whether the US is on the whole a force for good, freedom and democracy. Which by and large it is. No one but a child expects anyone to be as morally pure as Superman.

Who gave Saddam Hussein support for decades until he became to "difficult" to deal with? USA. Who gave him chemical weapons?
No doubt the US felt that Iran was a bigger threat. Were they wrong? It looks less and less like it all the time. So what? Did they like Saddam? No. Did they produce Saddam? No. Did they put him in power? No. Until the US really does rule the world, the US will have to deal with whatever government the Middle East throws up. The US did not give him chemical weapons. An American company sold him equipment. So did German, Swiss and Swedish companies. So what?

Pakistan but not the US.

For years the United States has helped arm dictators -- to keep them out of the communist bloc, to keep the oil flowing, to keep the arms makers happy. And to empower themselves.
And a good thing too.

USA armed the Shah of Iran before the militants in the streets overthrew him.
And what are you claiming - that Iran has become a better place since the US was kicked out?

USA armed Suharto in Indonesia, whom used American arms to invade East Timor and repress its people.
Thus preventing a Communist take over in both Indonesia and East Timor.

USA armed the generals and colonels throughout Central America. They ruled through death squads and terror even when civilian presidents were elected.
Better than another Cuba. Your point is what?

USA armed the generals who ruled Pakistan, in violation of US law that sought to block aid to countries developing their own nuclear weapons. According to journalist Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker, Pakistan and India almost used nuclear weapons against each other in May 1990.
And your complaint is what exactly?

USA armed Marcos in the Philippines and Noriega in Panama.
And supported democracy in both countries when the risk of Communism disappeared. What is your point?

USA even created Bin Laden.
Nonsense.

You are so full of yourself, I don't think you are able to see anything. Terrorism will not win, but fighting it also means fighting a clearly corrupted US gouvernment.
Terrorism may win and it will only be defeated through repression. The US is not corrupted. It is just not very good at getting what it wants.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-17-2006, 11:42 PM
As I said, you are a moron, and you would defend USA no matter what.
Reply

Knut Hamsun
03-18-2006, 07:41 AM
How can USA (or a moron like you) justify the support of dictators on one hand, and the removal of others on the other?
Christian Dove:
Have you ever heard of the geopolitical philosophy called REALISM or REALPOLITIK? If not, look them up and presto! there you have your answer to your incredibly naive question (above). When you cease your adolescent rage at discovering that the world doesn't operate in a vaccum, and that there are more often than not 3 choices for a leader to make, all of them being ugly but one less ugly than the other two, than only then may you be ready to understand the way the world works. Your lofty intentions and ideals, unfortunately, have no basis in the grit and grime that is "reality".
Yes, some of the conflicts you cite to Hei Gou are indeed ugly spots on the fabric of History, but it did allow the US to win the COLD WAR. And I don't think there can be any rational debate as to how much better off the world is with the USA as the world leader than as with the USSR in the same position. So that is a classic example of how "realism" wove history-- only 2 possible outcomes, and luckily the "better" one was victorious. It's not fair, but neither is life. I will step off of my soap-box now, thank-you!
Reply

Christian_dove
03-18-2006, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by Knut Hamsun
Christian Dove:
Have you ever heard of the geopolitical philosophy called REALISM or REALPOLITIK? If not, look them up and presto! there you have your answer to your incredibly naive question (above). When you cease your adolescent rage at discovering that the world doesn't operate in a vaccum, and that there are more often than not 3 choices for a leader to make, all of them being ugly but one less ugly than the other two, than only then may you be ready to understand the way the world works. Your lofty intentions and ideals, unfortunately, have no basis in the grit and grime that is "reality".
Yes, some of the conflicts you cite to Hei Gou are indeed ugly spots on the fabric of History, but it did allow the US to win the COLD WAR. And I don't think there can be any rational debate as to how much better off the world is with the USA as the world leader than as with the USSR in the same position. So that is a classic example of how "realism" wove history-- only 2 possible outcomes, and luckily the "better" one was victorious. It's not fair, but neither is life. I will step off of my soap-box now, thank-you!
Sure, great answer. But that wasn't the issue at all. It is one thing to admit to atrocities for "good" reasons (something which is bad, but at least one is able to see some sort of meaning behind it).. HeiGou however, doesn't seem to think that USA ever did anything wrong anywhere to anyone. That's something completely different... Who is the realist?
Reply

HeiGou
03-18-2006, 11:21 AM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Sure, great answer. But that wasn't the issue at all. It is one thing to admit to atrocities for "good" reasons (something which is bad, but at least one is able to see some sort of meaning behind it).. HeiGou however, doesn't seem to think that USA ever did anything wrong anywhere to anyone. That's something completely different... Who is the realist?
I have repeatedly made it clear that the US did and does do bad things. What I deny is that the US is uniquely evil or that it only does evil things. As you seem to think.
Reply

Cheb
03-18-2006, 12:06 PM
The main difference is that you think the US has a goal of a world where democracy exists everywhere (incredibly Naive), while Christian Dove and many Muslims including me believe that this is a bunch of #$%^.
Sure you can talk when you live thousands of miles away form all the action, and you have not witnessed anything worse than a fly being squatted in front of you, but that is NOT REALITY. You believe what you are told and that is the sad reality. It is not until you really look into what your precious country stands for that you realize what reality actually is.
Reply

HeiGou
03-18-2006, 12:15 PM
Originally Posted by Cheb
The main difference is that you think the US has a goal of a world where democracy exists everywhere (incredibly Naive), while Christian Dove and many Muslims including me believe that this is a bunch of #$%^.
And what possible reason can there be for denying it? In 1941 when the US stepped into its Global role, there were how many democracies in the world? The US and Britain and its White Dominions. A small number of Nordic states. Switzerland. The period of American domination has also been the period of democratic growth in the world. Now the US is not perfect, but they are better than, say, the French. Can we all agree on that? What did anyone else ever do for democracy?

Sure you can talk when you live thousands of miles away form all the action, and you have not witnessed anything worse than a fly being squatted in front of you, but that is NOT REALITY. You believe what you are told and that is the sad reality. It is not until you really look into what your precious country stands for that you realize what reality actually is.
Not my precious country as it happens. What reality is this? And compared to what? Algeria? Morocco? The US is not perfect, but a reasonable person would have to say there is good and bad in all of us and in all (secular) things. This includes the United States. Now I think there are quite a few good things about the role of the US. Not 100 percent, but better than most. Why does that annoy you so much?
Reply

Christian_dove
03-18-2006, 01:29 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
And what possible reason can there be for denying it? In 1941 when the US stepped into its Global role, there were how many democracies in the world? The US and Britain and its White Dominions. A small number of Nordic states. Switzerland. The period of American domination has also been the period of democratic growth in the world. Now the US is not perfect, but they are better than, say, the French. Can we all agree on that? What did anyone else ever do for democracy?
Ehem... And why exactly did US "step into its Global role"? Was it because they saw Hitler-Germany as a threat to democracy? Do you know what the american opinion on the matter was at that time? Have you ever heard of Pearl Harbour? The US was FORCED to take action because they were attacked, americans in general had absolutely no interest in the war non what so ever.. So much for your great defenders of the democracy... All they wanted was to save their own sore ass...

Not my precious country as it happens. What reality is this? And compared to what? Algeria? Morocco? The US is not perfect, but a reasonable person would have to say there is good and bad in all of us and in all (secular) things. This includes the United States. Now I think there are quite a few good things about the role of the US. Not 100 percent, but better than most. Why does that annoy you so much?
I can't answer for anyone else, but it annoys me because it is a lie.
Reply

HeiGou
03-18-2006, 01:50 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Ehem... And why exactly did US "step into its Global role"? Was it because they saw Hitler-Germany as a threat to democracy? Do you know what the american opinion on the matter was at that time? Have you ever heard of Pearl Harbour? The US was FORCED to take action because they were attacked, americans in general had absolutely no interest in the war non what so ever.. So much for your great defenders of the democracy... All they wanted was to save their own sore ass...
Well yes it was because they, meaning the Roosevelt administration, saw the Germans as a threat to democracy. American opinion was isolationist. So? The US was not forced to take action, they told the public they were forced to take action. Roosevelt had been taking action - he had been patrolling the Atlantic and sinking German U-Boats, he sent the AVG to China, he sent aid to Britain, he imposed sanctions on Japan.

Again the US is not perfect and many Americans wanted to stay out of other people's quarrels. As they still do. But this merely shows how hypocritical your argument is: the Americans are damned if they intervene in Iraq or Latin America, and now you damn them again if they want to wait it out. On top of which, and please correct me if I am wrong, but your Swedish for crying out loud. What did the Swedes do during the War but 1. contribute to the secret German re-armament program and then provide the Germans with all the military supplies they needed? Are you holding up your own country as a better example than the US?

Not my precious country as it happens. What reality is this? And compared to what? Algeria? Morocco? The US is not perfect, but a reasonable person would have to say there is good and bad in all of us and in all (secular) things. This includes the United States. Now I think there are quite a few good things about the role of the US. Not 100 percent, but better than most. Why does that annoy you so much?
I can't answer for anyone else, but it annoys me because it is a lie.
But it isn't. It is true. You may not like it but that is irrelevant. It still remains true.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-18-2006, 03:37 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Well yes it was because they, meaning the Roosevelt administration, saw the Germans as a threat to democracy.
Actually it was Germany who declared war on the USA. Not the other way around. USA couldn't give a s h i t about the values of democracy then, and they don't give a s h i t now either. Well, unless it means it will somehow affect them negatively, such as not getting their precious oil, etc.
American opinion was isolationist. So? The US was not forced to take action, they told the public they were forced to take action. Roosevelt had been taking action - he had been patrolling the Atlantic and sinking German U-Boats, he sent the AVG to China, he sent aid to Britain, he imposed sanctions on Japan.
They were not forced? Ok.. Sure, they could just let their whole fleet be destroyed by the japs in the pacific.. And when italy and Germany declared war in december of 1941, they could just sit and wait for the bombs to be dropped. No problemo...
Again the US is not perfect and many Americans wanted to stay out of other people's quarrels. As they still do.
That's probably because they think so highly of themselves, why bother to help others... But thanks for stating that US is not perfect. It's not neccessary however, I am aware of this.
But this merely shows how hypocritical your argument is: the Americans are damned if they intervene in Iraq or Latin America, and now you damn them again if they want to wait it out.
Hypocritical? How much of an idiot are you? The support of dictators in Latin America (or anywhere else for that matter) is not my idea of intervening to create democracy.
On top of which, and please correct me if I am wrong, but your Swedish for crying out loud. What did the Swedes do during the War but 1. contribute to the secret German re-armament program and then provide the Germans with all the military supplies they needed? Are you holding up your own country as a better example than the US?
Hm. Are you by any chance Australian? A "democracy" founded by criminals and convicts? A land who refused to look at the aborigines as human beings until, ws it 1967?

Sweden was "neutral", but definitely anything but neutral during ww2. They supported Germany with iron ore for some time (did they have a choice?), but they also took care of great many jewish refugees, and secretly supported the norwegian resistance. And no, Norway is not the capital of Sweden... I am norwegian. Cry out loud as much as you want. You and your fantastic USA probably would have been nuked way before Hiroshima and Nagasaki if it wasn't for the norwegians.
But it isn't. It is true. You may not like it but that is irrelevant. It still remains true.
Say that to the men in white coats. Cry it out loud. "It's true! It's true!! Awww!!! Don't take me!!!"
Reply

HeiGou
03-18-2006, 03:55 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Actually it was Germany who declared war on the USA. Not the other way around. USA couldn't give a s h i t about the values of democracy then, and they don't give a s h i t now either. Well, unless it means it will somehow affect them negatively, such as not getting their precious oil, etc.
As usual you miss the point. Roosevelt was firing on German naval vessels well before the Germans declared war. Look at when the Americans began to patrol the Atlantic. So while the American public was not concerned with other peoples' fights, the Roosevelt administration was.

And the fact remains there has been an enormous growth in wealth and freedom since 1945. Thanks to the US.

They were not forced? Ok.. Sure, they could just let their whole fleet be destroyed by the japs in the pacific.. And when italy and Germany declared war in december of 1941, they could just sit and wait for the bombs to be dropped. No problemo...
Except you again ignore the fact that the US was, in effect, at war with both powers already by 1941. As I said embargoes against Japan, the AVG, the naval clashes, Lend Lease etc etc etc.

That's probably because they think so highly of themselves, why bother to help others... But thanks for stating that US is not perfect. It's not neccessary however, I am aware of this.
Well there is so much you are not aware of, how was I to know?

Hypocritical? How much of an idiot are you? The support of dictators in Latin America (or anywhere else for that matter) is not my idea of intervening to create democracy.
But that is because you are, well, let's not say that. The US government has preferred military dictators to Communism, but has always prefered a free and fair democratic system if it can get it. You will notice that Reagan forced out the dictators and demanded elections in South America.

Hm. Are you by any chance Australian? A "democracy" founded by criminals and convicts? A land who refused to look at the aborigines as human beings until, ws it 1967?
Snappy. And amusing considering who it is aimed at and who it is coming from - a descendent of Vikings calling anyone else criminals and convicts?

Sweden was "neutral", but definitely anything but neutral during ww2. They supported Germany with iron ore for some time (did they have a choice?), but they also took care of great many jewish refugees, and secretly supported the norwegian resistance. And no, Norway is not the capital of Sweden... I am norwegian.
My mistake. As if there is a difference. The Swedes also provided aid before the war especially with German re-armament and after the war with sheltering many Germans especially scientists. They also provided higher-tech materials that the Germans needed such as ball bearings. Nice of them.

Cry out loud as much as you want. You and your fantastic USA probably would have been nuked way before Hiroshima and Nagasaki if it wasn't for the norwegians.
Yeah yeah yeah. If the Norwegians had put up half a fight the Germans would not have got near the Heavy Water. Not that they were close to building a bomb themselves.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-18-2006, 04:53 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
As usual you miss the point. Roosevelt was firing on German naval vessels well before the Germans declared war. Look at when the Americans began to patrol the Atlantic. So while the American public was not concerned with other peoples' fights, the Roosevelt administration was.
Really? So you admit that the american authorities were actually involved in a military operation without the knowledge of the american people? Hmm.. Doesn't sound like democracy to me...
And the fact remains there has been an enormous growth in wealth and freedom since 1945. Thanks to the US.
Perhaps the enourmous growth would have been even greater without their increasingly disturbing involvements? We will never know, will we...

Except you again ignore the fact that the US was, in effect, at war with both powers already by 1941. As I said embargoes against Japan, the AVG, the naval clashes, Lend Lease etc etc etc.
Embargo? Yes, american authorities are found of those things..

Well there is so much you are not aware of, how was I to know?
At least I know that there are things I am unaware of. You, on the other hand seem to be unaware of your shortcommings... You have that in common with several american presidents, so perhaps you should be proud.

But that is because you are, well, let's not say that. The US government has preferred military dictators to Communism, but has always prefered a free and fair democratic system if it can get it. You will notice that Reagan forced out the dictators and demanded elections in South America.
That's just -------s and proves what an idiot you are. They don't even have a free democratic system themselves. Why would they care about what other countries have? And what makes a military dictator any better than a communist? Basically, what you say is that cholera is fine but the plague isn't. Problem with your reasoning is that USA have even supported the removal of legally ellected gouvernments.

Snappy. And amusing considering who it is aimed at and who it is coming from - a descendent of Vikings calling anyone else criminals and convicts?
Well, there is a difference between something that happened 1000 years ago, and last century. Or.. Wait, let me rephrase that. Today actually, as the aborigines are still in the gutter and you have a fanatic racist for a prime minister (John Howard, The "deputy-sheriff to the United States")... And he is a conservative rightwinger just as his american counterpart, Bush.. And he supported the invasion of Iraq and even sent troops.. Hmmm.. You are his little brother, aren't you?

Norwegian got their eyes opened to this pathetic loser, when the australian gouvernment refused to help refugees on a boat situated outside your coast some time ago. The refugees from a sinking ship was picked up by a norwegian cargo boat (and included children and women), but John Howard himself denied assistance.. How brave. Applause. Not to mention the olympic Games in Australia, a disgrace in regards to the people who are the true australians, the aborigines. We didn't get to see too many pictures of them nor their ghettos... But let's get back to the issue.

My mistake. As if there is a difference. The Swedes also provided aid before the war especially with German re-armament and after the war with sheltering many Germans especially scientists. They also provided higher-tech materials that the Germans needed such as ball bearings. Nice of them.
Really? From where did you get this info? From what I've heard the swedes did a good job fooling the germans throughout the war. Sheltering the german scientists? Hello? What do you think the americans and the russians did? Plenty of german technology used in american weapon industry during the cold war.

Yeah yeah yeah. If the Norwegians had put up half a fight the Germans would not have got near the Heavy Water. Not that they were close to building a bomb themselves.
We had a gouvernment very much like the one you (and Britain and USA) have now, consisting of idiots. But we did put up a fight, In fact, the germans suffered their first defeat of WW2 in northern Norway.
Reply

i_m_tipu
03-19-2006, 06:36 AM
it really does not make any sense to Defend their Terrorism if not u want to be blind.

first they distroy then they give money and other Materials to stop mouth
and Shocking media, Shocking yellow Journalism let them escape even they know every thing

they r the mastermind of current durty world....:heated:

they take permission from their people and their friend (many of them know their intention) on Excuse of Religion, homeland security, global administration , business, prosperity and so many fake thing but they forget they have to die one day then.................

can anyone escape death................?
can anyone escape Judgment day.......?

Allaah is the only protector:)
Reply

HeiGou
03-19-2006, 12:36 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Really? So you admit that the american authorities were actually involved in a military operation without the knowledge of the american people? Hmm.. Doesn't sound like democracy to me...
I was waiting for you to clue on to that. Yes that is what Roosevelt did. It is, however, democratic, no matter how much you may not like it, because the Constitution, arguably, allowed him to do so. It is typical of you though that any American is damned whatever they do - whether they support War or do not, whether they engage in confronting dictators or not. Regardless the Americans are in the wrong. Would you agree that this is your approach and it is thoroughly childish?

Perhaps the enourmous growth would have been even greater without their increasingly disturbing involvements? We will never know, will we...
No but common sense and fairness, even decency, means you ought to consider the full record of the last 50 years not just the bits you pick out to make the Americans look bad. What is certainly true is that the Americans, over rough every dozen years or so since 1945, have created as much wealth in the world as the British period of 120 years or so of domination before 1945 which was about the same as created in in the previous 100,000 years of human civilisation before that. By any means that is an impressive record. Look around - we owe the Americans pretty much everything you can see that is shiny, new and technological - the video screen you are looking at, the computer it is attached to, the internet you are using so poorly.

Embargo? Yes, american authorities are found of those things..
Indeed they are. They prefer not to fight if they possibly can. No doubt you think that is a bad thing too.

That's just -------s and proves what an idiot you are. They don't even have a free democratic system themselves. Why would they care about what other countries have? And what makes a military dictator any better than a communist? Basically, what you say is that cholera is fine but the plague isn't. Problem with your reasoning is that USA have even supported the removal of legally ellected gouvernments.
This is so, well, let's avoid that word too. But it makes it hard to even begin to point out what is wrong with this steaming pile of, well, you know. America has a free and democratic system of government and have done so for much longer than the vast majority of European states. They do care about other countries and have put in a great deal of work to create free and democratic societies elsewhere. Including Latin America. Military dictators kill very few people, they run their countries better, they are not genocidal or totalitarian and they fall from power fairly soon. By any means better than a Communist dictatorship. Look at Cuba. No that is not what I am saying but of course I understand that what I am saying is mildly complicated and you just do not get it. Fine. So what if the US has supported the removal of legally elected governments? Saddam for instance. I have never said they were perfect.

Norwegian got their eyes opened to this pathetic loser, when the australian gouvernment refused to help refugees on a boat situated outside your coast some time ago. The refugees from a sinking ship was picked up by a norwegian cargo boat (and included children and women), but John Howard himself denied assistance.. How brave. Applause. Not to mention the olympic Games in Australia, a disgrace in regards to the people who are the true australians, the aborigines. We didn't get to see too many pictures of them nor their ghettos... But let's get back to the issue.
Uh huh. Take it up with an Australian or someone who cares.

Really? From where did you get this info? From what I've heard the swedes did a good job fooling the germans throughout the war. Sheltering the german scientists? Hello? What do you think the americans and the russians did? Plenty of german technology used in american weapon industry during the cold war.
No doubt. But then we have established the limits of what you know. The Swedes of course sheltered the German re-armament program before the war as well and in fact were major contributors to the process. All Aryans together of course.

We had a gouvernment very much like the one you (and Britain and USA) have now, consisting of idiots. But we did put up a fight, In fact, the germans suffered their first defeat of WW2 in northern Norway.
Uh huh.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-19-2006, 12:56 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
I was waiting for you to clue on to that.
Did you bite your tongue (or your fingers) after you realized what you wrote?

Because what you agree to is exactly what this thread is all about, the american authorities are running their own show (and has done so for a very long time), not for the sake of americans (or any oter country) but to gain wealth to some dodgy, political structures made up by the few in power.

The americans have provided the world with a lot. The american authorities have not.

No doubt. But then we have established the limits of what you know. The Swedes of course sheltered the German re-armament program before the war as well and in fact were major contributors to the process. All Aryans together of course.
Actually, me as a norwegian didn't know these things even though I am familiar with sweden and have spent a good amount of time there. Source, please?

Here is what wikipedia says about sweden and the WW2:

Sweden remained neutral during World War I and World War II, although its neutrality during World War II has been disputed. Sweden made concessions to both sides during the war. Sweden secretly allowed Allied spies to work within Sweden, trained Norwegian soldiers at Swedish bases, allowed American planes to use Swedish air bases, and towards the end of the war was actually preparing a millitary action to liberate Denmark and Norway, in collaboration with the Allies. The Swedish intelligence agency was able to work in Germany and contributed information to the Allies. Sweden also gave supplies to Finland, and allowed granted asylum to thousands of refugees, including Jews from Denmark, and Swedes such as Raoul Wallenberg were responsible for saving many thousands of Jews. However, Sweden also supplied Nazi Germany with iron ore in exchange for coal. A great part of the iron used by Hitler to build war machines came from Swedish mines. Sweden cancelled trade agreements with Germany in 1943, when it was well known that Hitler could no longer win the war. These concessions were forced upon Sweden by the Nazis rather than voluntary, and were considered necessary to maintain Swedish neutrality. Sweden´s contribution to the Allies, and the humanitarian contributions, are unfortunately often overlooked in the shadow of the concessions to the Nazis.

Now, your sources please?
Uh huh.
What's with the Uh huh's? Are you an owl?
Reply

HeiGou
03-19-2006, 03:46 PM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
Did you bite your tongue (or your fingers) after you realized what you wrote?
No. That is what happened. It happened. I have never said the US was perfect. Nor do I hold a candle for Roosevelt. It is bizarre that you think the US can only do evil in the world and are happy to adopt any position as long as it makes the US look bad, but I am happy to take them, and things, as they come and not how I would like them to be.

Because what you agree to is exactly what this thread is all about, the american authorities are running their own show (and has done so for a very long time), not for the sake of americans (or any oter country) but to gain wealth to some dodgy, political structures made up by the few in power.
Exactly how did defeating the Nazis and the Japanese (a) not benefit pretty much everyone else besides the Americans and (b) improve the wealth of those in power in the US? Even if it were so, and Roosevelt started the War to make all his Yale buddies rich, who but you and some other, well, let's not say that, let's say morality impaired, would think it not worth it?

The americans have provided the world with a lot. The american authorities have not.
The two are inseparable. The Internet was provided by DARPA. The silicon chip by Texas Instruments and the NASA Moon program. You may not like it but you need to deal with it.

Actually, me as a norwegian didn't know these things even though I am familiar with sweden and have spent a good amount of time there. Source, please?
I think not. You are not worth it and certainly not worth my time. But you are welcome to look at the development of, for instance, the German 88mm gun which was, like so many others, initially done in Sweden to get around the Allies controls.

Here is what wikipedia says about sweden and the WW2:

Sweden remained neutral during World War I and World War II, although its neutrality during World War II has been disputed. Sweden made concessions to both sides during the war. Sweden secretly allowed Allied spies to work within Sweden, trained Norwegian soldiers at Swedish bases, allowed American planes to use Swedish air bases, and towards the end of the war was actually preparing a millitary action to liberate Denmark and Norway, in collaboration with the Allies. The Swedish intelligence agency was able to work in Germany and contributed information to the Allies. Sweden also gave supplies to Finland, and allowed granted asylum to thousands of refugees, including Jews from Denmark, and Swedes such as Raoul Wallenberg were responsible for saving many thousands of Jews. However, Sweden also supplied Nazi Germany with iron ore in exchange for coal. A great part of the iron used by Hitler to build war machines came from Swedish mines. Sweden cancelled trade agreements with Germany in 1943, when it was well known that Hitler could no longer win the war. These concessions were forced upon Sweden by the Nazis rather than voluntary, and were considered necessary to maintain Swedish neutrality. Sweden´s contribution to the Allies, and the humanitarian contributions, are unfortunately often overlooked in the shadow of the concessions to the Nazis.
Let me change the high-lighting a little. Disputed. Naturally. So Sweden did supply the Germans with oodles of war material. And did so right up to the point where it was obvious the Germans would lose when they proudly and bravely cancelled their obligations. Neat. Cowardly and greedy.
Reply

mahdisoldier19
03-19-2006, 03:50 PM
Originally Posted by hawk
Hash the Taliban are were a bunch of thugs and hooligans.

They married women, only to rape them and divorce them, making a mockery of your faith.

Dont support lunatics like them.

You have the luxury of living in the west, learn from what it has to offer you.

Which taliban you talking about? Do you even know what your talking about? have you ever even been to Afghanistan? Dont tell me you know the taliban just from the news.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-19-2006, 11:59 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou

The two are inseparable. The Internet was provided by DARPA. The silicon chip by Texas Instruments and the NASA Moon program. You may not like it but you need to deal with it.
What has the Internet to do with this? Have I ever said that everything that comes out of America is crap? Or that only the good guys can make great inventions? Wow, the nazis didn't like tobacoo, therefor tobacco must be good for us, right..? And the computer, nazi invention, wasn't it? Konrad Zuse, or whatever his name was. Are you still online? Goodness, turn that thing off, it's from Nazi-Germany.

Where is your logic? Well, keep clutching at straws...

I think not. You are not worth it and certainly not worth my time. But you are welcome to look at the development of, for instance, the German 88mm gun which was, like so many others, initially done in Sweden to get around the Allies controls.
You don't have a source, do you? You just made it up because you thought Norway was the capital of Sweden, and that I was swedish.. And when you started searcing for "evidence" that the swedes were pro-nazis, you couldn't find any and now you start clutching at straws again.

Let me change the high-lighting a little. Disputed. Naturally. So Sweden did supply the Germans with oodles of war material. And did so right up to the point where it was obvious the Germans would lose when they proudly and bravely cancelled their obligations. Neat. Cowardly and greedy.
When great powers are waging war, small countries can't afford to be heroic. Disputed, yes. Because Sweden comprimised the policy of neutrality in favor of the Allies.

You are laughable. I rest my case.
Reply

Ghazi
03-20-2006, 12:02 AM
You are so full of ****
Salaam

Chill out man no need to insult people.
Reply

Christian_dove
03-20-2006, 12:06 AM
Originally Posted by islam-truth
Salaam

Chill out man no need to insult people.
What I meant was ; you are so full of salt.

That's all...
Reply

DaSangarTalib
03-20-2006, 12:07 AM
Lol
Reply

HeiGou
03-20-2006, 10:46 AM
Originally Posted by Christian_dove
What has the Internet to do with this? Have I ever said that everything that comes out of America is crap? Or that only the good guys can make great inventions? Wow, the nazis didn't like tobacoo, therefor tobacco must be good for us, right..? And the computer, nazi invention, wasn't it? Konrad Zuse, or whatever his name was. Are you still online? Goodness, turn that thing off, it's from Nazi-Germany.

Where is your logic? Well, keep clutching at straws...
Because the internet is more than just an invention. Science comes from a culture. It requires certain things like openness, tolerance and lots of money and investment. Which American society provides. It is also, in this case, the result of American defence spending which they very generously shared with the world. You seem to think that the Americans are all Nazis and so we should not touch anything to do with them - why foist your argument on me? The computer was not the work of Germans as it happens. John Von Neumann was Hungarian. And Jewish.

You don't have a source, do you? You just made it up because you thought Norway was the capital of Sweden, and that I was swedish.. And when you started searcing for "evidence" that the swedes were pro-nazis, you couldn't find any and now you start clutching at straws again.
I have never thought Norway was the capital of Sweden. After all the brown haired girl from Abba fled Norway for Sweden because the Norwegians were so vile to her (her father was a German soldier). I am just utterly indifferent to where you are from. And I remain so.

I notice that you have selected very carefully from that article. You do not mention Sweden providing transit for German Army units to attack Finland and Norway - a violation of their neutrality. You suggest that the iron ore was cut off in 1943, when the Article does not seem to say that to me. I don't think I said the Swedes were pro-Nazis although, obviously, a lot of them were.

When great powers are waging war, small countries can't afford to be heroic. Disputed, yes. Because Sweden comprimised the policy of neutrality in favor of the Allies.
By allowing the German Army to pass through Sweden to attack Norway? Un huh. Switzerland managed better than this. For that matter, so did Italy. They rejected the German alliance and were occupied for it. They fought. What can you say about a country that makes Italy's war record look heroic?
Reply

Christian_dove
03-20-2006, 11:56 AM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Because the internet is more than just an invention. Science comes from a culture. It requires certain things like openness, tolerance and lots of money and investment. Which American society provides. It is also, in this case, the result of American defence spending which they very generously shared with the world. You seem to think that the Americans are all Nazis and so we should not touch anything to do with them - why foist your argument on me? The computer was not the work of Germans as it happens. John Von Neumann was Hungarian. And Jewish.
Americans are not nazis. And everything that comes from america is not bad. Exactly how many times do I have to say this before it reaches the inner side of your seemingly confused head?
I have never thought Norway was the capital of Sweden. After all the brown haired girl from Abba fled Norway for Sweden because the Norwegians were so vile to her (her father was a German soldier). I am just utterly indifferent to where you are from. And I remain so.
Good.
I notice that you have selected very carefully from that article. You do not mention Sweden providing transit for German Army units to attack Finland and Norway - a violation of their neutrality. You suggest that the iron ore was cut off in 1943, when the Article does not seem to say that to me. I don't think I said the Swedes were pro-Nazis although, obviously, a lot of them were.
So rather than pretend being neutral and thus allowing the resistance movement of the allies to make use of their teritory, Sweden should have just let Germany invade them? Something that would have resulted in more killings of jewish people. Well, I can see why you think this is a great idea, considering your sympathies for corrupted politicians and the support your beloved US gouvernment gives dictators around the globe. Fortunately the swedes are a bit smarter than you.
By allowing the German Army to pass through Sweden to attack Norway? Un huh. Switzerland managed better than this. For that matter, so did Italy. They rejected the German alliance and were occupied for it. They fought. What can you say about a country that makes Italy's war record look heroic?
In your eyes, I am certain that Italy's war record look heroic. First of all, Switzerland didn't have resources Germany needed, and Switzerland is surrounded by steep mountain chains, obvioulsy a lot easier to defend than the rather flat swedish countryside. The germans didn't bother to attack Switzerland, so what is your point? Being neutral isn't very difficult if you are never attacked or threatened...

You are the only person I have ever heard providing the information that Sweden was an allie to Germany. It is just nonsense.

Just to make some sort of relevance to the theme of this thread; in fact, Hitler approved of USA and its race policy, simply because of their clearly racistic views on black people at the time...
Reply

R_Mujahed
03-20-2006, 05:34 PM
Aslamualikum Warahmatu ALLAH Wabarakatoh
BismALLAH Arhman Arheem

Dear Respected Brothers and Sisters when you are having a discussion with anyone, especially Kufar... I have a tip for you!

Use the Words of ALLAH... the Quran... We surely have enough arguments to shut down many of these Kafirs attacks! but ALLAH says it in a better way... and you would be satisfied...

And you never know... these Kafirs might become Muslim... and this gives them a chance to explore the Quran and the Sunnah... So when they ask a question answer with a verse(s) and the hadith, and say nothing more, no matter how tempting it is!

Hish there are many verses you can use to shut down these people, especially root... so I will start, I will answer one of roots question about the Hijab not being obligatory! and as much as I would like to answer all of their questions, I will give you the pleasure of starting off after me...haha......

Hey roots, your Hijab Question:

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof (hands and face); that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss. (Al-Noor:31)

Brothers and Sisters try it... you can go wrong!

Waslamualikum Warahmatu ALLAH Wabarakatoh
Reply

HeiGou
03-20-2006, 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by R_Mujahed
Hish there are many verses you can use to shut down these people, especially root... so I will start, I will answer one of roots question about the Hijab not being obligatory! and as much as I would like to answer all of their questions, I will give you the pleasure of starting off after me...haha......

Hey roots, your Hijab Question:

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof (hands and face); that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss. (Al-Noor:31)
Just out of curiousity, would you agree, as one of your Brothers has pointed out, that the words in brackets (must ordinarily) and (hands and face) do not actually appear in the Quran but have been added by the translator based on later scholarship?
Reply

kadafi
03-20-2006, 09:24 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
Just out of curiousity, would you agree, as one of your Brothers has pointed out, that the words in brackets (must ordinarily) and (hands and face) do not actually appear in the Quran but have been added by the translator based on later scholarship?
Obviously these parentheses serve as an explanatory note since many arabic words have no equivalences in the english language. Furthermore, parentheses are also added if a hadeeth explains the ayaah in detail.
Reply

R_Mujahed
03-20-2006, 11:14 PM
Originally Posted by kadafi
Obviously these parentheses serve as an explanatory note since many arabic words have no equivalences in the english language. Furthermore, parentheses are also added if a hadeeth explains the ayaah in detail.
JazakaALLAHo Kol Khayr
Reply

HeiGou
03-21-2006, 09:34 AM
Originally Posted by kadafi
Obviously these parentheses serve as an explanatory note since many arabic words have no equivalences in the english language. Furthermore, parentheses are also added if a hadeeth explains the ayaah in detail.
So the answer is yes?

Which of those two options, in your opinion, applies here?
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
03-21-2006, 04:42 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
So the answer is yes?
The answer is no. The meanings are not the result of later scholarship. Due to the different grammatical structure of arabic from english, in order to bring out the implicit meanings, parentheses are used. This is the case with "(must ordinarily) appear thereof". As for (hands and face) this is derived from the hadith as br. Kadafi pointed out.
Reply

R_Mujahed
03-21-2006, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by HeiGou
So the answer is yes?

Which of those two options, in your opinion, applies here?
BismALLAH Arhman Arheem

We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that ye may learn wisdom. (12:2)

Thus have We sent this down - an arabic Qur'an - and explained therein in detail some of the warnings, in order that they may fear Allah, or that it may cause their remembrance (of Him). (20:113)

(It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein): in order that they may guard against Evil. (39:28)

Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur'an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities and all around her,- and warn (them) of the Day of Assembly, of which there is no doubt: (when) some will be in the Garden, and some in the Blazing Fire. (42:7)

We have made it a Qur'an in Arabic, that ye may be able to understand (and learn wisdom). (43:3)

Arabic= Richest language, most expressive

O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft- Forgiving, Most Merciful. (33:59)

We only send the messengers to give Glad Tidings and to give warnings: But the unbelievers dispute with vain argument, in order therewith to weaken the truth, and they treat My Signs as a jest, as also the fact that they are warned! (18:56)
Reply

seek.learn
03-21-2006, 09:16 PM
Salaam o alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu

MashaAllah brother R_Mujahid...

MashaAllah

Alaikum salaam wa rahmatullah
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-10-2015, 09:04 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-10-2015, 09:02 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-17-2011, 09:40 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-07-2008, 06:18 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-10-2006, 08:26 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!