Minneapolis Police -- slimy amoral cnuts, united...

Further to the negligent murder of Australian woman Justine Damond by one of their "finest" back in July, slimy fucktard police union boss Bob Kroll has further worsened their case by claiming that the officer responsible should not be charged with her killing...

Basically his argument comes down to something like == "We're the police, and you're not.  No matter how good you are, or how bad, devious or perverted we are, we're still higher than God..  And we will shoot whoever, whenever and wherever we like..."

Read more at :
.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-15/justine-damond-shooting-union-boss-defends-officer-noor/8948260
.
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/minneapolis-police-union-boss-bob-kroll-questions-charging-justine-damonds-killer-mohamed-noor/news-story/32dcd4ccf604d6facd6179b34c43d241

And so many local/regional/state police forces still wonder why they are so often mistrusted, despised, even hated, by communities that they are supposed to "serve and protect" ?  Electing fucktards like Kroll to their unions/associations does them no favours..  Who will police the policemen, when they sink as low as they have in Minneapolis  ???

Bounce this topic for Veya's attention...

And any of the usual corrupt-cop-apologist suspects, waiting in the wings..

Why are there so many corrupt police? These are the very people we are supposed to trust.

lol

we have finally found something that puppy dog cant blame on me

smelly-bandit wrote:lol

we have finally found something that puppy dog cant blame on me

What has that got to do with the OP? Oh that's right...nothing.

eddie wrote:Why are there so many corrupt police? These are the very people we are supposed to trust.

Racism. Notice the people the police murder are black?

America has a race war on it's hands, and it's not started by the African-Americans. It's started and maintained by the Neo-Nazis, KKK'ers and white supremacists you saw in Charlottesville. It's perpetuated by the president who hates Hispanics, minorities and women, 'Pussy-grabber' Trump.

The police are not corrupt. The nation is.

eddie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:lol

we have finally found something that puppy dog cant blame on me

What has that got to do with the OP? Oh that's right...nothing.

i thought my contribution should equal wolfies

a nothing comment from a nothing poster on a nothing thread

nothing wrong with American police

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Why are there so many corrupt police? These are the very people we are supposed to trust.

Racism.  Notice the people the police murder are black?

America has a race war on it's hands, and it's not started by the African-Americans.  It's started and maintained by the Neo-Nazis, KKK'ers and white supremacists you saw in Charlottesville.  It's perpetuated by the president who hates Hispanics, minorities and women, 'Pussy-grabber' Trump.

The police are not corrupt.  The nation is.

that's thanks to obama the race baiter, who set race relations in america back 100 years, but has since been fixed thanks to global warming and trumps magnificent handling of the disaster it left in its wake, and of course REAL AMERICA rising to the challenge and showing the world that the America hating leftist are nothing but a minority

there is no "race war" in pipeline, just the Brownshirt thugs of antifa and the black supremacists of BLM looking to start something

and Charlottesville was all antifa, they started it and their actions killed that women.

smelly-bandit wrote:

eddie wrote:

What has that got to do with the OP? Oh that's right...nothing.

i thought my contribution should equal wolfies

a nothing comment from a nothing poster on a nothing thread

nothing wrong with American police

Desperate for attention.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Racism.  Notice the people the police murder are black?

America has a race war on it's hands, and it's not started by the African-Americans.  It's started and maintained by the Neo-Nazis, KKK'ers and white supremacists you saw in Charlottesville.  It's perpetuated by the president who hates Hispanics, minorities and women, 'Pussy-grabber' Trump.

The police are not corrupt.  The nation is.

that's thanks to obama the race baiter, who set race relations in america back 100 years, but has since been fixed thanks to global warming and trumps magnificent handling of the disaster it left in its wake, and of course REAL AMERICA rising to the challenge and showing the world that the America hating leftist are nothing but a minority  

there is no "race war" in pipeline, just the Brownshirt thugs of antifa and the black supremacists of BLM looking to start something

and Charlottesville was all antifa, they started it and their actions killed that women.

Nice try, titty-kisser.  The reason why Obama baited rednecks, is they thought their white-supremacy gig would go on forever.  When they saw a black become President, they lost it out both ends.

I think the idea of a Civil War was wrong, but not the idea of breaking up the United States.  If we simply cast off the piece from Virginia to El Paso, and let them float away, there would be no race war in the US.

Of course, there would be a new Banana Republic     but no one cares about them.  

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

that's thanks to obama the race baiter, who set race relations in america back 100 years, but has since been fixed thanks to global warming and trumps magnificent handling of the disaster it left in its wake, and of course REAL AMERICA rising to the challenge and showing the world that the America hating leftist are nothing but a minority  

there is no "race war" in pipeline, just the Brownshirt thugs of antifa and the black supremacists of BLM looking to start something

and Charlottesville was all antifa, they started it and their actions killed that women.

Nice try, titty-kisser.  The reason why Obama baited rednecks, is they thought their white-supremacy gig would go on forever.  When they saw a black become President, they lost it out both ends.

I think the idea of a Civil War was wrong, but not the idea of breaking up the United States.  If we simply cast off the piece from Virginia to El Paso, and let them float away, there would be no race war in the US.

Of course, there would be a new Banana Republic     but no one cares about them.  

i don't remember rednecks rioting like antifa when obama won,quite strange that isn't?? the alleged perpetrators of your fantasy race war nowhere to be seen when the first black president was elected obviousy they weren't that racist

from across the pond?? the KKK neo nazis and assorted scum seemed like a defeated force up until obama, its only in his wake that the KKK et al have reared their ugly heads again.

Why??because when he threw his weight behind BLM and antifa,he gave their beliefs,that the traditional christian white American lifestyle was under attack, credibility.

obama let the genie out of the bottle, when trump makes america great again, the genie will be put firmly back

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Nice try, titty-kisser.  The reason why Obama baited rednecks, is they thought their white-supremacy gig would go on forever.  When they saw a black become President, they lost it out both ends.

I think the idea of a Civil War was wrong, but not the idea of breaking up the United States.  If we simply cast off the piece from Virginia to El Paso, and let them float away, there would be no race war in the US.

Of course, there would be a new Banana Republic     but no one cares about them.  

i don't remember rednecks rioting like antifa when obama won,quite strange that isn't?? the alleged perpetrators of your fantasy race war nowhere to be seen when the first black president was elected obviousy they weren't that racist

from across the pond?? the KKK neo nazis and assorted scum seemed like a defeated force up until obama, its only in his wake that the KKK et al have reared their ugly heads again.

Why??because when he threw his weight behind BLM and antifa,he gave their beliefs,that the traditional christian white American lifestyle was under attack, credibility.

obama let the genie out of the bottle, when trump makes america great again, the genie will be put firmly back    

Remember what Trump said about Antifa:"...they are some good people." They are just peacekeepers, showing up at rallies to assure that order is kept.

Isn't the world wonderful when we have public-spirited folks like that?

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

i don't remember rednecks rioting like antifa when obama won,quite strange that isn't?? the alleged perpetrators of your fantasy race war nowhere to be seen when the first black president was elected obviousy they weren't that racist

from across the pond?? the KKK neo nazis and assorted scum seemed like a defeated force up until obama, its only in his wake that the KKK et al have reared their ugly heads again.

Why??because when he threw his weight behind BLM and antifa,he gave their beliefs,that the traditional christian white American lifestyle was under attack, credibility.

obama let the genie out of the bottle, when trump makes america great again, the genie will be put firmly back    

Remember what Trump said about Antifa:"...they are some good people."  They are just peacekeepers, showing up at rallies to assure that order is kept.

Isn't the world wonderful when we have public-spirited folks like that?

so you agree with trump that there WERE good people on both sides.

there i was thinking that you had an issue with him saying that

before you know it quill we will having you wearing a maga hat and lining up to pick another brick in the wall

smelly-bandit wrote:lol

we have finally found something that puppy dog cant blame on me

Gotta prove what a nasty little troll you are, don't you SlimyBumBandit !?!

I have yet to see any actual constructive/productive posts from you -- but that's your "raison d'etre", isn't it. 'Flop's leading troll when your cohorts are failing so miserably.

smelly-bandit wrote:

eddie wrote:

What has that got to do with the OP? Oh that's right...nothing.

i thought my contribution should equal wolfies

a nothing comment from a nothing poster on a nothing thread

nothing wrong with American police

You're the last person on this planet qualified to critique me...

You vacuous apologist fascist spineless floptard puppet of a coward..

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Racism.  Notice the people the police murder are black?

America has a race war on it's hands, and it's not started by the African-Americans.  It's started and maintained by the Neo-Nazis, KKK'ers and white supremacists you saw in Charlottesville.  It's perpetuated by the president who hates Hispanics, minorities and women, 'Pussy-grabber' Trump.

The police are not corrupt.  The nation is.

that's thanks to obama the race baiter, who set race relations in america back 100 years, but has since been fixed thanks to global warming and trumps magnificent handling of the disaster it left in its wake, and of course REAL AMERICA rising to the challenge and showing the world that the America hating leftist are nothing but a minority  

there is no "race war" in pipeline, just the Brownshirt thugs of antifa and the black supremacists of BLM looking to start something

and Charlottesville was all antifa, they started it and their actions killed that women.

Now that your little fascist retard chum Stormee is history, you are determined to establish your proud position as #1 racist fool here, aren't you your Slimyness !?!

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Remember what Trump said about Antifa:"...they are some good people."  They are just peacekeepers, showing up at rallies to assure that order is kept.

Isn't the world wonderful when we have public-spirited folks like that?

so you agree with trump that there WERE good people on both sides.

there i was thinking that you had an issue with him saying that

before you know it quill we will having you wearing a maga hat and lining up to pick another brick in the wall

I never have issues with good people.  What I was pointing out was how good the Muslims are.  Wonderful people.  

We should stop killing their babies.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

so you agree with trump that there WERE good people on both sides.

there i was thinking that you had an issue with him saying that

before you know it quill we will having you wearing a maga hat and lining up to pick another brick in the wall

I never have issues with good people.  What I was pointing out was how good the Muslims are.  Wonderful people.  

We should stop killing their babies.

What Muslim babies have the Yazidi's killed?

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I never have issues with good people.  What I was pointing out was how good the Muslims are.  Wonderful people.  

We should stop killing their babies.

What Muslim babies have the Yazidi's killed?

Who cares?  I was thinking of the US primarily, and the lapdog nations who trot along in these petty wars.  Just get out of the Muslim's territories.

I'm sure if we stopped going over there and killing their babies, they would stop trying to do damage in western countries.  It's just basic reasoning.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

What Muslim babies have the Yazidi's killed?

Who cares?  I was thinking of the US primarily, and the lapdog nations who trot along in these petty wars.  Just get out of the Muslim's territories.

I'm sure if we stopped going over there and killing their babies, they would stop trying to do damage in western countries.  It's just basic reasoning.

So where the whole bases for your argument on Muslim babies being killed falls down. You thus say you do not care. Mainly as it rubbishes your argument. It also emphatically proves that there is something wrong with the doctrine of Islam itself.

It also shows you know nothing of history, because we have been attacked in the west by Islamic countries, since its inception and they have never stopped attacking us.

So what you are saying is we should bow down to terror and their demands?

That is effectively what you are saying.

So where is all the Christian terrorism, by those Arab Christians in the Middle East, considering their babies have been killed for centuries in the Middle East by Muslims?

How about the Druze?

You see how your argument is for all intents and purposes, nothing more than a poster boy for Muslim extremists. They did not want us to interfere in East Timor, when the Indonesians were committing genocide. Its the number 3 position on the list of Al-Qaeda.

You may want to bow down to Islamic extremism, but thank goodness, the rest of us do not listen to quislings like you.

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Who cares?  I was thinking of the US primarily, and the lapdog nations who trot along in these petty wars.  Just get out of the Muslim's territories.

I'm sure if we stopped going over there and killing their babies, they would stop trying to do damage in western countries.  It's just basic reasoning.

So where the whole bases for your argument on Muslim babies being killed falls down. You thus say you do not care. Mainly as it rubbishes your argument. It also emphatically proves that there is something wrong with the doctrine of Islam itself.

So what you are saying is we should bow down to terror?

That is effectively what you are saying.

So where is all the Christian terrorism, by those Arab Christians in the Middle East, considering their babies have been killed for centuries in the Middle East by Muslims?

How about the Druze?

You see how your argument is for all intents and purposes, nothing more than a poster boy for Muslim extremists. They did not want us to interfere in East Timor, when the Indonesians were committing genocide. Its the number 3 position on the list of Al-Qaeda.

You may want to bow down to Islamic extremism, but thank goodness, the rest of us do not listen to quislings like you.

You make it too difficult, didge. If we left their countries, with our arms, they would not bother with us. Quid pro quo...it's as simple as that.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

So where the whole bases for your argument on Muslim babies being killed falls down. You thus say you do not care. Mainly as it rubbishes your argument. It also emphatically proves that there is something wrong with the doctrine of Islam itself.

So what you are saying is we should bow down to terror?

That is effectively what you are saying.

So where is all the Christian terrorism, by those Arab Christians in the Middle East, considering their babies have been killed for centuries in the Middle East by Muslims?

How about the Druze?

You see how your argument is for all intents and purposes, nothing more than a poster boy for Muslim extremists. They did not want us to interfere in East Timor, when the Indonesians were committing genocide. Its the number 3 position on the list of Al-Qaeda.

You may want to bow down to Islamic extremism, but thank goodness, the rest of us do not listen to quislings like you.

You make it too difficult, didge.  If we left their countries, with our arms, they would not bother with us.  Quid pro quo...it's as simple as that.

And yet for 1400 years they have been attacking the west, showing you have no idea what you are talking about.

Only with the end of the Ottoman Empire, were we able to make great gains in stopping them attacking the west. Yet we still failed to prevent more attacks.

So based on your thinking, maybe they should stop attacking the west and we would not bother them.

You see how really poor and dumb your circular argument is.

Like i say, its based on an ideology, one that wants to control the world. Islam and some of its extremist proponents will stop at nothing to achieve that, whether we left them alone or not.

Oh and for the record Quill the US never started on any Muslim states.

They did on the US. So where does that leave your argument?

In March 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once.^[25]

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

Thorin wrote:Oh and for the record Quill the US never started on any Muslim states.

They did on the US. So where does that leave your argument?

In March 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:


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

Perfectly fine, because what you say is untrue.  

The US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for no reason whatsoever (except oil, but that's another matter).  Whatever mixed complications there may have been, it all started there.  End of discussion.

the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Bounce this topic for Veya's attention...

And any of the usual corrupt-cop-apologist suspects, waiting in the wings..

I seen it, but being in the US this is the status quo for the US

you don't go to Saudi Arabia and expect the freedoms and justice of Australia
nor would an educated person go to the USA and expect freedoms and justice.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:Oh and for the record Quill the US never started on any Muslim states.

They did on the US. So where does that leave your argument?

Perfectly fine, because what you say is untrue.  

The US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for no reason whatsoever (except oil, but that's another matter).  Whatever mixed complications there may have been, it all started there.  End of discussion.

Oil in Afghanistan?

Where is all these oil contracts from Iraq?

You see how your arguments fall down and how it was an attack on the US with 9/11 that led to Afghanistan. As it was the Taliban had such terrorists with terrorist camps there. 

So was what I said previously untrue?

As seen, the US never even started on any Muslim states, they did on the US. You had to fast forward over centuries later.

So it is the end of the discussion, as you clearly have been schooled on history again

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

Which again shows another one not even knowing history.

Islam, from its inception through the Arabs, invaded the Byzantine (an Empire that adapted Christianity who employed Arabs from Arabia as auxiliary troops, who then betrayed them) and Sassanid empire (was not even Christian). Both weak after years of war with each others. It then went onto conquer great tracts of the Middle East, North Africa through Arabization, to then attack and invade Europe. Islam is the plagiarism of Judaism and then Christianity into an Arab form of Monotheism. It started wars from its inception to conquer and attempt to Islamify the world.

Laughed at you apply evolution to religion, based on man made concepts as if its natural. 

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

oh look we are back in the land of make believe

Thorin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

Which again shows another one not even knowing history.

Islam, from its inception through the Arabs, invaded the Byzantine (an Empire that adapted Christianity who employed Arabs from Arabia as auxiliary troops, who then betrayed them) and Sassanid empire (was not even Christian). Both weak after years of war with each others. It then went onto conquer great tracts of the Middle East, North Africa through Arabization, to then attack and invade Europe. Islam is the plagiarism of Judaism and then Christianity into an Arab form of Monotheism. It started wars from its inception to conquer and attempt to Islamify the world.

Laughed at you apply evolution to religion, based on man made concepts as if its natural. 

you have learned my lessons well

im proud of you

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:lol

we have finally found something that puppy dog cant blame on me

Gotta prove what a nasty little troll you are,  don't you SlimyBumBandit  !?!

I have yet to see any actual constructive/productive posts from you --  but that's your "raison d'etre", isn't it.  'Flop's leading troll when your cohorts are failing so miserably.

sounds like ive really gotten under your skin

its always a pleasure to get such good result for so little effort

smelly-bandit wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Gotta prove what a nasty little troll you are,  don't you SlimyBumBandit  !?!

I have yet to see any actual constructive/productive posts from you --  but that's your "raison d'etre", isn't it.  'Flop's leading troll when your cohorts are failing so miserably.

sounds like ive really gotten under your skin

its always a pleasure to get such good result for so little effort

Is that your motive? I was wondering why, substantively, you have nothing to say. So, you're basically a flim-flam man.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

sounds like ive really gotten under your skin

its always a pleasure to get such good result for so little effort

Is that your motive?  I was wondering why, substantively, you have nothing to say.  So, you're basically a flim-flam man.  

no quill ive not come back just to get under wolfies skin, i did that well enough when I was in exile.

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Is that your motive?  I was wondering why, substantively, you have nothing to say.  So, you're basically a flim-flam man.  

no quill ive not come back just to get under wolfies skin, i did that well enough when I was in exile.

I don't think it's relative to Wolf. But I stand by my comment that, substantively, you have nothing to say. You seem bent on 'goading' more than debating news topics.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

no quill ive not come back just to get under wolfies skin, i did that well enough when I was in exile.

I don't think it's relative to Wolf.  But I stand by my comment that, substantively, you have nothing to say.  You seem bent on 'goading' more than debating news topics.

perhaps you're not intellectually evolved enough to grasp what im saying??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I don't think it's relative to Wolf.  But I stand by my comment that, substantively, you have nothing to say.  You seem bent on 'goading' more than debating news topics.

perhaps you're not intellectually evolved enough to grasp what im saying??

So nothing intellectual then...or has changed  

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I don't think it's relative to Wolf.  But I stand by my comment that, substantively, you have nothing to say.  You seem bent on 'goading' more than debating news topics.

perhaps you're not intellectually evolved enough to grasp what im saying??

It's not a difficult chore, sweet pea.  You create new metaphors and similes in order to insult people.

smelly-bandit wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Gotta prove what a nasty little troll you are,  don't you SlimyBumBandit  !?!

I have yet to see any actual constructive/productive posts from you --  but that's your "raison d'etre", isn't it.  'Flop's leading troll when your cohorts are failing so miserably.

sounds like ive really gotten under your skin

its always a pleasure to get such good result for so little effort

".. gotten under your skin."

Like scabies and ringworm...

Thorin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

Which again shows another one not even knowing history.

Islam, from its inception through the Arabs, invaded the Byzantine (an Empire that adapted Christianity who employed Arabs from Arabia as auxiliary troops, who then betrayed them) and Sassanid empire (was not even Christian). Both weak after years of war with each others. It then went onto conquer great tracts of the Middle East, North Africa through Arabization, to then attack and invade Europe. Islam is the plagiarism of Judaism and then Christianity into an Arab form of Monotheism. It started wars from its inception to conquer and attempt to Islamify the world.

Laughed at you apply evolution to religion, based on man made concepts as if its natural. 

this is why 'you anit science bitch'
 
It is natural, it is a naturally occurring phenomena in the hominid species Homo Sapiens.

As a social construct we can see the evolution of religions from the original natural religions where the gods are often animal inspired to a more reflective level of deity inspired by natural elements like storms and volcanoes, then to when homo sapiens introspection develops further to the deities become manifestations of Emotions/'human traits' then as governance is developed in Homo Sapiens collectives the deities become 'monarchistic' with rulers and hierarchies.

smelly-bandit wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

oh look we are back in the land of make believe

of coarse you are too scared to read the Koran your opinions are pretty meaningless

veya_victaous wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Which again shows another one not even knowing history.

Islam, from its inception through the Arabs, invaded the Byzantine (an Empire that adapted Christianity who employed Arabs from Arabia as auxiliary troops, who then betrayed them) and Sassanid empire (was not even Christian). Both weak after years of war with each others. It then went onto conquer great tracts of the Middle East, North Africa through Arabization, to then attack and invade Europe. Islam is the plagiarism of Judaism and then Christianity into an Arab form of Monotheism. It started wars from its inception to conquer and attempt to Islamify the world.

Laughed at you apply evolution to religion, based on man made concepts as if its natural. 

this is why 'you anit science bitch'
 
It is natural, it is a naturally occurring phenomena in the hominid species Homo Sapiens.

As a social construct we can see the evolution of religions from the original natural religions where the gods are often animal inspired to a more reflective level of deity inspired by natural elements like storms and volcanoes, then to when homo sapiens introspection develops further to the deities become manifestations of Emotions/'human traits' then as governance is developed in Homo Sapiens collectives the deities become 'monarchistic' with rulers and hierarchies.

PMSL

Do you not see how the above is gobbledygook?
I will give you a clue with certain words, social constructs, natural, Evolution, natural selection.

Take your time

Umm no Mine is completely correct, you are just too basic and not scientifically minded in you assessment of the world, It is your preconception based in Abrahamism that see the humans as special and not just animals.

Homo Sapiens are natural, just animals evolved through exposure to  environmental factors,
their social structure are organically developed, their 'religions' are merely an extension of their current level of social evolution.

small tribes of hunter gathers make gods of the things that feed/threaten them, small communities make gods of the natural elements which can threaten their social structures and basic agriculture. When societies are 'safe' enough to allow reflective philosophy they make gods that are reflections of their idealized selves and aspects of the human condition (a.k.a. love, war etc). When communities become large enough to require the governance they make gods that are symbolic of their governance.

veya_victaous wrote:Umm no Mine is completely correct, you are just too basic and not scientifically minded in you assessment of the world, It is your preconception based in Abrahamism that see the humans as special and not just animals.

Homo Sapiens are natural, just animals evolved through exposure to  environmental factors,
their social structure are organically developed, their 'religions' are merely an extension of their current level of social evolution.

small tribes of hunter gathers make gods of the things that feed/threaten them, small communities make gods of the natural elements which can threaten their social structures and basic agriculture. When societies are 'safe' enough to allow reflective philosophy they make gods that are reflections of their idealized selves and aspects of the human condition (a.k.a. love, war etc). When communities become large enough to require the governance they make gods that are symbolic of their governance.

Well so you are saying people through natural selection are born with a selective religious belief and that it is not chosen by being taught. Read back at what you originally claimed on religions and evolution. I am very scientifically minded and clearly more so than you on this.

One moment



Then explain using your theory with now no belief, based on your evolution from Christianity to Islam, being that no-belief has been around since before either and is now see countless people shun religious beliefs/

See ya later dummy

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

oh look we are back in the land of make believe

of coarse you are too scared to read the Koran your opinions are pretty meaningless

Ive forgotten more about the qur'an and islam than you will ever learn sonny, including its correct spelling

if you had read the qur'an, you would know that it teaches that jesus was never crucified

how can islam be an evolution of a religion it disproves??

top tip : dont bring a rock to a gunfight veya

3: 45 Behold! the angels said "O Mary [Mariam]! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus the son of Mary held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah

lol

the so called evolution of Christianity cant even get jesus's name correct

"christ" is an honorific title not his first name

well that was even easier than schooling didge normally is

top tip : do some ---------------->

smelly-bandit wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

oh look we are back in the land of make believe

of coarse you are too scared to read the Koran your opinions are pretty meaningless

Ive forgotten more about the qur'an and  islam than you will ever learn sonny, including its correct spelling

if you had read the qur'an, you would know that it teaches that jesus was never crucified

how can islam be an evolution of a religion it disproves??

top tip : dont bring a rock to a gunfight veya  

LOL no it doesn't

it says he was not the son of god but it never says he wasn't crucified 

It doesn't disprove at ll it just points out that Jesus was  not the literal son of god just another messenger of god and that all people are the children of god

So  lets see the evolution
Jews: This Hebrew tribe is the only special one
Christian: this guys and any one that follows him are the special ones
Islam: Every one is Special

and it says المسيح المسيح
not Christ Jesus   that is it translated to english dim wit

Thorin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:Umm no Mine is completely correct, you are just too basic and not scientifically minded in you assessment of the world, It is your preconception based in Abrahamism that see the humans as special and not just animals.

Homo Sapiens are natural, just animals evolved through exposure to  environmental factors,
their social structure are organically developed, their 'religions' are merely an extension of their current level of social evolution.

small tribes of hunter gathers make gods of the things that feed/threaten them, small communities make gods of the natural elements which can threaten their social structures and basic agriculture. When societies are 'safe' enough to allow reflective philosophy they make gods that are reflections of their idealized selves and aspects of the human condition (a.k.a. love, war etc). When communities become large enough to require the governance they make gods that are symbolic of their governance.

Well so you are saying people through natural selection are born with a selective religious belief and that it is not chosen by being taught. Read back at what you originally claimed on religions and evolution. I am very scientifically minded and clearly more so than you on this.

One moment



Then explain using your theory with now no belief, based on your evolution from Christianity to Islam, being that no-belief has been around since before either and is now see countless people shun religious beliefs/

See ya later dummy

NO, your not cause we know direct genetic natural selection cease to be the driving factor once a species forms multimember collectives, it has been a long time since Darwin evolution was considered accurate.

In humans, it is not only our genes that can predispose us to behave in particular ways. Our behaviour can also be controlled by beliefs and emotional reactions that are instilled in us, usually when we are young. Through the process of socialisation, our parents and others inculcate us with ways of behaving that become part of who we are, and influence our actions for the rest of our life. As a consequence, inculcated behaviours, like genes, are able to organise cooperative groups by establishing distributed internal management. In this Chapter we will see how inculcated behaviours produced the cooperative bands and tribes of early humans that represented the sixth major organisational milestone in the evolution of life on earth.


read on here
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/jes999/14.htm


Like genetic predispositions, inculcated behaviours are resistant to change during the life of the individual. Once a person is inculcated with a system of religious beliefs and norms, they are likely to be followed no matter what the consequences to the individual. The individual will continue to follow norms even though it may mean giving up more immediate biological and social satisfactions. History gives abundant examples of where individuals have been prepared to die for their beliefs. An individual can be as immutably hard wired with inculcated behaviours as with genetic predispositions.
Of course, most behaviours that humans learn during their life are not as fixed and inflexible as inculcated norms and moral codes. Practical behaviours that are used in our day-to-day activities such as preparing food and performing work can be changed and improved continually during a person’s life. We are able to adapt these behaviours in whatever way works best. In contrast, inculcated norms are followed even when they do not work well for the individual, and bring nothing but trouble.
But it is the ability of inculcated behaviours to control our actions no matter what the consequences that enabled them to produce a new form of cooperative organisation in humans. This ability enabled inculcated behaviours to establish distributed internal management^[2]. Like genes, if inculcated behaviours are reproduced in each member of a group of individuals through time, they can control and organise the group. Inculcated behaviours can hard wire the individual to behave in ways that would not otherwise be in his immediate interests. They can cause individuals to act cooperatively, and to avoid non-cooperative behaviour that would otherwise produce immediate gratification.

Please stop pretending you have education just because you read some neck beard on patheos

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

To prove Veya us disinginious.

I argued off this point from the beginning and how it is gibberish.

I also asked Veya to prove that we would be born with an inherited specific religion.

What does Veya do.

Off er nothing to prove his false claims, but offer beliefs through a life time and nothing biological itself

Doh

You cannot make it up how funny this is

Thorin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:the other way to look at is the West has attacked them for 1400 years. Islam is the natural theological evolution of Christianity(book 3 in the  trilogy), western political economic powers fought against it's spread.

To prove Veya us disinginious.

I argued off this point from the beginning and how it is gibberish.

I also asked Veya to prove that we would be born with an inherited specific religion.

What does Veya do.

Off er nothing to prove his false claims, but offer beliefs through a life time and nothing biological itself

Doh

You cannot make it up how funny this is

I never said or implied we are born with a inherited religion, you just don't understand that evolution is of a species not an individual.

get an education read the link I posted

veya_victaous wrote:

Thorin wrote:

To prove Veya us disinginious.

I argued off this point from the beginning and how it is gibberish.

I also asked Veya to prove that we would be born with an inherited specific religion.

What does Veya do.

Off er nothing to prove his false claims, but offer beliefs through a life time and nothing biological itself

Doh

You cannot make it up how funny this is

I never said or implied we are born with a inherited religion, you just don't understand that evolution is of a species not an individual.

get an education read the link I posted

I understand evolution very well, and that is just someones view that you posted.

Has his views been peer reviewed?

Look, I know you do not like the fact I am that much smarter than you, its why you have banned me so many times, that is what happens when a person is jealous.

Don't worry chap, you will never be that intelligent, but experience will help get you by in life.

The reality is you made a claim, I asked you to back it up, you went off onto a completely different tangent and made yourself look really stupid.

I found it great..