THE Grand Mufti of Australia and Islamic leaders have united to reject the fatwa issued against Australia

by veya_victaous Wed Sep 24, 2014 5:22 am

First topic message reminder :

THE Grand Mufti of Australia and other Islamic leaders have united to reject the fatwa issued by against Australia by members of the terrorist group IS.

The Grand Mufti of Australia Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohamed made his comments in Sydney at a press conference today, saying: “The sanctity of life is of paramount importance to all people of faith and to all people of goodwill.”

Lebanese Muslim Association president Samier Dandan also revealed that four Australian mosques in Sydney had received threats in the wake of recent incidents.

He condemned the IS threats, saying: “We do not stand for our faith to be hijacked by any minority group whatsoever.”

“God forbid something happens here and it only takes one person, who would pay the price the most? That’s my biggest fear.”

“We all play a role, we all need to come together as one family making sure the notion of family is very strong.”

“We don’t want our youth to be instructed by Imam YouTube or Sheikh Google and this is the dilemma.”

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/Muslim-man-shot-dead-in-melbourne-was-known-terror-suspect/story-fnii5sms-1227068663096

by Guest Sun Sep 28, 2014 10:44 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:
people who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones BEN....

mind you since you hail from the richest third world county on the planet, and have the least educated population in the western world, perhaps such wisdom is beyond you.....

I've always been upfront about the U.S.'s problems, Vicki. You're the one who wants to make your country out to be something it's not (at least when you're talking to a dirty farner like myself).

tut tut benji boy, that musta stung to make you try to provoke with a "drinky" like tactic like that, You have all the insight of a brain dead aardvark if you think things lif "feminizing" my avi holds any relevence....give you a clue...it doesnt, however of course what it does is clearly signal that your are in the same league as the village idiot Bee, and hence forth subject to the same contempt.

it also doesnt change the facts of what i wrote.

also kindly show where? i "make out my country to be something its not", particularly in reference to the posts I have made here?
the one thing it ISNT nowadays is "MY country"
and that is due as you accurately allude, to "the dirty farner"

by Ben Reilly Sun Sep 28, 2014 10:57 pm

Settle down, Vicks, it was just banter! You've gotten super-serious about things since you decided you're "not amused" ...

by Guest Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:10 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:Settle down, Vicks, it was just banter! You've gotten super-serious about things since you decided you're "not amused" ...

so now its didge excuse time is it? Rolling Eyes

and yes I have rather....but I did tell you at the time It was not the old amiable victor returning.....

You see I have had it up to here with the (usually) ~~liberalists~~ progressives (of all political shades) telling me how wonderfully their experiment in multiculturalism is going, when the stark evidence points the other way (bear in mind YOUR idea of multiculturalism is a different fish altogether to the "british" model). I am sick to death of being told how "beneficial" it all is, when NO-ONE can show me actual benefits...that we wouldnt have got anyway, given the global network of trade etc).

and most of all I am sick of those that promulgate these lies refusing to discuss the matter openly and condemning anyone who dares to ask the question as some sort of evil bigot.

learn to live with the fact that I am, simultaneously the left AND the rights biggest nightmare.

I am a nationalistic socialist....go figure.....

by Guest Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:19 pm

oh and in relation to that picture you posted? clearly you dont know the difference between "red necks" and "chavs"

red necks are unique to the states....stupid but have an opinion (usually equally stupid)
chavs....are stupid, but have no opinion....and are too stupid to know they dont have an opinion.....

by veya_victaous Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:34 pm

Britain has probably bought in too many migrants too quickly trying to catch up places like USA and Australia. Plus it does seem that they have too few ethnicities/religions coming so it is throwing out the Balance.

Plus the whole ethnic ghetto thing doesn't really work, communities need to be integrated BUT that is not all on the migrants it does mean that, yes, the local need to accept the building of a mosque or whatever in THEIR suburb...

Part of the issue is the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) that likes the idea but not the reality, so wants immigrants to settle but NIMBY, because this means that you create enclaves where they are allowed to settle where ALL the Churches are replaced by Mosques etc. and more importantly although in the country (and even born there) they are held apart for the the rest of the community and don't see themselves as part of it working towards a joint future.

by veya_victaous Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:38 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:oh and in relation to that picture you posted? clearly you dont know the difference between "red necks" and "chavs"

red necks are unique to the states....stupid but have an opinion (usually equally stupid)
chavs....are stupid, but have no opinion....and are too stupid to know they dont have an opinion.....

we got rednecks too
we also got 'chavs' but we call them 'Bogans'

for us the difference mainly is Rural-ness

rednecks do/like/hate it "cause the grandpappy did/like/hate it"
Bogan are just dumb, uneducated and lazy

by Guest Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:57 pm

veya_victaous wrote:Britain has probably bought in too many migrants too quickly trying to catch up places like USA and Australia. Plus it does seem that they have too few ethnicities/religions coming so it is throwing out the Balance.

Plus the whole ethnic ghetto thing doesn't really work, communities need to be integrated BUT that is not all on the migrants it does mean that, yes, the local need to accept the building of a mosque or whatever in THEIR suburb...

why? I mean, who the fuck wants to be woken up at 5 am (or whatever stupid time it is) to the sound of some imman caterwauling from the top of his tower. Cockerels etc at dawn I can sleep through, that row....no. Out in the sticks I suppose we are used to a certain anount of noise early in the morning, but some areas just dont have that, why should they "have to get used to it? Thats not "multiculuralism", thats imposition

Part of the issue is the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) that likes the idea but not the reality, so wants immigrants to settle but NIMBY, because this means that you create enclaves where they are allowed to settle where ALL the Churches are replaced by Mosques etc. and more importantly although in the country (and even born there) they are held apart for the the rest of the community and don't see themselves as part of it working towards a joint future.

Mainly because THEIR idea of the future is radically different from the host populations idea of the future. Considering most of the immigrants from islamic origins are religiously constipated, thats not going to change is it?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:02 am

Give me strength, your argument is based upon now a time in the morning where church bells are far more nosier and wake everyone upon do you thus choose to argue then against churches Victor?

No, you are thus looking for excuses to why you want to deny people a right to live here which is an absurd philosophy, unless you apply your same methodology to everything.

What you are claiming is also flawed, claiming people cannot change when they constantly do, even religious people, in fact this country is living testimony of this very fact

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:08 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:You have no country as we are all one species,

totally incorrect. the fact that we are one species does not in and of itself preclude the right to have "our own territory"

reasoning

amongst nearly ALL social species each group (tribe?) has its own territory and will fight to maintain that....try watching "meerkat manor" or watch what happens when a roaming "stranger" ivades the territory of another badger sett.

secondly your assumption is sociologically communistic (and by extension invalid) since the same argument could be applied even to YOUR HOME...It would not be unreasonable to use your argument to force anyone to take in any random homeless or recently landed immigrant into their home ...EVEN IF IT CREATED OVERCROWDING and with no regards to the safety/integrity of wealth etc...after all..you have no rights to your own territory acording to your argument...

clearly what you have posited here is idealistic nonsense....

Utter gobbledygook.
We have the ability to share our land, to claim off how lesser species act does not mean we should act the same, that is a ridiculous argument, based around yet again selfishness.
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd.
All animals share the same water hole do they not?
Again the bases for your argument is on your own self needs, which at present nothing is affecting your self needs, so what you posted is utter bollocks and shows that you fail to be human yourself.

Do you know what it takes to be human?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:13 am

Didge wrote:Give me strength, your argument is based upon now a time in the morning where church bells are far more nosier and wake everyone upon do you thus choose to argue then against churches Victor?

fuck off you pillock....church bells DONT ring at obscene hours of the day..a (VERY) few of the remaining abbeys may well ring the bells through the night but churches in general dont these days ring except for the main communion bell at around 8-10 am depending. You are making false comparisons again in your rabid desire to justify the unjustifiable

No, you are thus looking for excuses to why you want to deny people a right to live here which is an absurd philosophy, unless you apply your same methodology to everything.

Bullshit, what I'm saying is ...when in rome ...do as rome does...in otherwords, you come here, you live (except in those matters soley concerning and affecting yourselves) as we do, and you do not complain/criticise/want to change anything we do, nor do you impose your requirements upon us overetly or covertly...

What you are claiming is also flawed, claiming people cannot change when they constantly do, even religious people, in fact this country is living testimony of this very fact

is it?
can i burn a koran (assuming I had bought it and therefore it was my property to dispose of as I will)without starting a riot, (or come to that getting dragged up in front of the local beak???)
can I draw a picture of any one of a number of subjects without the same happening (thus negating my "freedom of expression")

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:18 am

@Victor
they really are not... MOST people want a safe place to raise their kids where their is opportunity for their children to make the most of their lives..

the Mosques generally don't do that in suburbia when they are but one of many religions, that's my point about too many of the one type you need the Buddhists and Hindu to balance it out, thus it is not a case of one versus one trade it is a 5 way trade here (atheist and Christian being the other) so every one is giving and getting a little, plus here Atheists generally win out with regards to noise etc. as no special exceptions are meant to made for religion so they are normally treated like a corporation (So mosques that do want to be loud set themselves up in industrial zones where it is allowed).

Plus I can tell you from experience, Many Muslim Girls raised in a secular country prefer a Secular Guy over a Muslim guy, because of the freedom and inverse attitude to gender roles... I mean they are not dumb if you were a woman who would you prefer to be with the guy preaching 'the man is the master of the house and woman is to serve him' , or the guys with saying like 'happy wife happy life'.

most People here are not that concerned knowing our way is better and with in a generation or 2 they will be converted to thinking the same, AS is already the case with the immigrants from the 60's and 70's.

they may be religiously constipated but we are the Atheist enema, the logical laxative that will help shift the crap that is lodged in there. Razz

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:19 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:Give me strength, your argument is based upon now a time in the morning where church bells are far more nosier and wake everyone upon do you thus choose to argue then against churches Victor?

fuck off you pillock....church bells DONT ring at obscene hours of the day..a (VERY) few of the remaining abbeys may well ring the bells through the night but churches in general dont these days ring except for the main communion bell at around 8-10 am depending. You are making false comparisons again in your rabid desire to justify the unjustifiable

No, you are thus looking for excuses to why you want to deny people a right to live here which is an absurd philosophy, unless you apply your same methodology to everything.

Bullshit, what I'm saying is ...when in rome ...do as rome does...in otherwords, you come here, you live (except in those matters soley concerning and affecting yourselves) as we do, and you do not complain/criticise/want to change anything we do, nor do you impose your requirements upon us overetly or covertly...

What you are claiming is also flawed, claiming people cannot change when they constantly do, even religious people, in fact this country is living testimony of this very fact
is it?
can i burn a koran (assuming I had bought it and therefore it was my property to dispose of as I will)without starting a riot, (or come to that getting dragged up in front of the local beak???)
can I draw a picture of any one of a number of subjects without the same happening (thus negating my "freedom of expression")

Fuck off you pillock?
There is a failed counter if ever I heard one you pathetic old fuckwit ha ha
What is shows is you are unable to adapt.
Stop being a twat, matti holds that tittle and yet now you want to argue the same you fucking dickhead.

Why would you want to burn a Quran?
The fact you want to burn something that you have no need of doing shows you have some psychological issues. The reality is all you are doing is making a case for the fact you cannot live along side other people or that they cannot change which is absurd, it shows you are unwilling to change yourself which means you will get left behind, so if you want to be an ignorant fuckwit of which you are doing now with your stupidity, I will continue to show you up for the fuckwit you are.
It seems you cannot debate without throwing your dummy out so I will treat as a child then

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:24 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

totally incorrect. the fact that we are one species does not in and of itself preclude the right to have "our own territory"

reasoning

amongst nearly ALL social species each group (tribe?) has its own territory and will fight to maintain that....try watching "meerkat manor" or watch what happens when a roaming "stranger" ivades the territory of another badger sett.

secondly your assumption is sociologically communistic (and by extension invalid) since the same argument could be applied even to YOUR HOME...It would not be unreasonable to use your argument to force anyone to take in any random homeless or recently landed immigrant into their home ...EVEN IF IT CREATED OVERCROWDING and with no regards to the safety/integrity of wealth etc...after all..you have no rights to your own territory acording to your argument...

clearly what you have posited here is idealistic nonsense....

Utter gobbledygook.
We have the ability to share our land, to claim off how lesser species act does not mean we should act the same, that is a ridiculous argument, based around yet again selfishness.
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd.
All animals share the same water hole do they not?
Again the bases for your argument is on your own self needs, which at present nothing is affecting your self needs, so what you posted is utter bollocks and shows that you fail to be human yourself.

Do you know what it takes to be human?

bollocks you self opinionated nut job, just because YOU declare it so dont mean its so.......

having the ability and having the desire to do so is (are?) two different matters....just because you would be stupid enough to take in an unknown family, to your own detriment doesnt make you a saint...its makes you a prize prick....
and NO all animals share the same water hole, thats another of your disney myths....true predators dont usually hunt AT a water hole...they simply wait on the way TO the waterhole Rolling Eyes

. Moreover even if they DID "nicely share" it would be because the water hole was seen as "neutral territory" not the same thing at all as group territory..

AND in fact two prides of lions will NOT share the same water hole, at least not peaceably so your reference to animals sharing waterholes doesnt apply to "same species"

you are full of false arguments lately....

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:27 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

Utter gobbledygook.
We have the ability to share our land, to claim off how lesser species act does not mean we should act the same, that is a ridiculous argument, based around yet again selfishness.
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd.
All animals share the same water hole do they not?
Again the bases for your argument is on your own self needs, which at present nothing is affecting your self needs, so what you posted is utter bollocks and shows that you fail to be human yourself.

Do you know what it takes to be human?

bollocks you self opinionated nut job, just because YOU declare it so dont mean its so.......

having the ability and having the desire to do so is (are?) two different matters....just because you would be stupid enough to take in an unknown family, to your own detriment doesnt make you a saint...its makes you a prize prick....
and NO all animals share the same water hole, thats another of your disney myths....true predators dont usually hunt AT a water hole...they simply wait on the way TO the waterhole . Moreover even if they DID "nicely share" it would be because the water hole was seen as "neutral territory" not the same thing at all as group territory..

AND in fact two prides of lions will NOT share the same water hole, at least not peaceably so your reference to animals sharing waterholes doesnt apply to "same species"

you are full of false arguments lately....

Oh dear someone is throwing his dummy out again ha ha
You are completely wrong as per usual as humans are unique in that they do and coexist together, which you constantly you ignore you fucking senile fuckwit.
It is thus you that is the issue, where you have no intention of being what you can be, human.
Again all animals share a water hole this is a fact, all of which you are ignoring because you are a sad pathetic idiot it seem.
We are not lions either, which as stupid a point as one can be.
Fuck me what have you been smoking today?

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:28 am

that is sort of fair point...
Can you burn a Koran?
I could in my own home

Might be a bit different if i was out the front of a Mosque yelling stuff about Muslims being Devils while doing it .... (pretty sure then you are inciting unrest)

but I could chuck it in the Barbecue

And Didge..... Why not? it is just paper (if it were an old or special copy well that would be bad but just another copy of a new common print?)

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:31 am

veya_victaous wrote:that is sort of fair point...
Can you burn a Koran?
I could in my own home

Might be a bit different if i was out the front of a Mosque yelling stuff about Muslims being Devils while doing it .... (pretty sure then you are inciting unrest)

but I could chuck it in the Barbecue

And Didge..... Why not? it is just paper (if it were an old or special copy well that would be bad but just another copy of a new common print?)

I am not questioning the right to burn the quran but why you would want to burn it?
Do you often burn books?
We have seen in history why people burn books if they dislike something, so I have to ask why would anyone being so inflamed to burn a book, which does not actually affect them?
It proves how immature some members of a society realy are

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:33 am

Learn from history of what hate does to people:

THE Grand Mufti of Australia and Islamic leaders have united to reject the fatwa issued against Australia - Page 3 016792630_30300

THE Grand Mufti of Australia and Islamic leaders have united to reject the fatwa issued against Australia - Page 3 016792630_30300

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:35 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:
is it?
can i burn a koran (assuming I had bought it and therefore it was my property to dispose of as I will)without starting a riot, (or come to that getting dragged up in front of the local beak???)
can I draw a picture of any one of a number of subjects without the same happening (thus negating my "freedom of expression")

Fuck off you pillock?
There is a failed counter if ever I heard one you pathetic old fuckwit ha ha

I rather think the fuckwittery is yours

What is shows is you are unable to adapt.

I can...but.....why should I, just to please someone else..with no benefit to me??

Stop being a twat, matti holds that tittle and yet now you want to argue the same you fucking dickhead.

Why would you want to burn a Quran?

Indeed...why would I? In fact i have an inbuilt objection to destroying books full stop, but the point is NOT whether I would or not, but whether I could or not...a matter of freedom..(not of course that there is equity in law here....THEY can burn/destroy symbols of remembrance (which are just as important to some people here) with impunity, but hey ho...I suppose we can surrender (adapt in didges language) to that....

I note you have conveniently avoided making your self look a twat about the drawing of certain subjects and freedom of expression....

The fact you want to burn something that you have no need of doing shows you have some psychological issues. The reality is all you are doing is making a case for the fact you cannot live along side other people or that they cannot change which is absurd, it shows you are unwilling to change yourself which means you will get left behind, so if you want to be an ignorant fuckwit of which you are doing now with your stupidity, I will continue to show you up for the fuckwit you are.
It seems you cannot debate without throwing your dummy out so I will treat as a child then

well i supopose you wouold since yoiu are full of nothing but the most childish, ill thought out and illogical arguments going. You argue like a 12 year old...

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:38 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:that is sort of fair point...
Can you burn a Koran?
I could in my own home

Might be a bit different if i was out the front of a Mosque yelling stuff about Muslims being Devils while doing it .... (pretty sure then you are inciting unrest)

but I could chuck it in the Barbecue

And Didge..... Why not? it is just paper (if it were an old or special copy well that would be bad but just another copy of a new common print?)

I am not questioning the right to burn the quran but why you would want to burn it?
Do you often burn books?
We have seen in history why people burn books if they dislike something, so I have to ask why would anyone being so inflamed to burn a book, which does not actually affect them?
It proves how immature some members of a society realy are

which just goes to prove my point.....didge will argue ANYTHING to defend his idiocy, and lacks the ability to see beyond what is actually the written word....

He took my question as to burning a koran literally, rather than the political/symbolic implication of it....

they question was WHY CANT I

NOT SHOULD I

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:40 am

victorisnotamused wrote:00]I rather think the fuckwittery is yours

I can...but.....why should I, just to please someone else..with no benefit to me??

Indeed...why would I? In fact i have an inbuilt objection to destroying books full stop, but the point is NOT whether I would or not, but whether I could or not...a matter of freedom..(not of course that there is equity in law here....THEY can burn/destroy symbols of remembrance (which are just as important to some people here) with impunity, but hey ho...I suppose we can surrender (adapt in didges language) to that....

I note you have conveniently avoided making your self look a twat about the drawing of certain subjects and freedom of expression....

well i supopose you wouold since yoiu are full of nothing but the most childish, ill thought out and illogical arguments going. You argue like a 12 year old...

You are the one acting like a 3 year old you dickhead, where your argument has no validity which is based off hate, so explain to me how hate has any validity?It does not and you take a view of surrender, surrender to what exactly? Coexistence with my fellow humans?
Wow, you have been smoking the weed again tonight it seems
The point is on why you should want to burn a book you fucking idiot, as to argue over the right to do something is based off a reason to do so, which is why you are such a fucking ignoramus.

Go off and have a sulk you pathetic child, you are being a fucking idiot

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:40 am

Didge wrote:Learn from history of what hate does to people:

here we go...exactly what I said to Ben earlier.....

the moment you question/challege the idiot liberalists love affair with multiculturalism you are instantly a "hater" a "nazi" etc....

a good look into the feeble mental capacity of the liberalist....

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:42 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

I am not questioning the right to burn the quran but why you would want to burn it?
Do you often burn books?
We have seen in history why people burn books if they dislike something, so I have to ask why would anyone being so inflamed to burn a book, which does not actually affect them?
It proves how immature some members of a society realy are

which just goes to prove my point.....didge will argue ANYTHING to defend his idiocy, and lacks the ability to see beyond what is actually the written word....

He took my question as to burning a koran literally, rather than the political/symbolic implication of it....

they question was WHY CANT I

NOT SHOULD I

The question is why would you want to dummy?
The reality is you want the right to burn something of which you have no sound reasoning as to why you would want to do so in the first place, hence why your view is a failed disposition.

You are one fucking daft prick

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:42 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

totally incorrect. the fact that we are one species does not in and of itself preclude the right to have "our own territory"

reasoning

amongst nearly ALL social species each group (tribe?) has its own territory and will fight to maintain that....try watching "meerkat manor" or watch what happens when a roaming "stranger" ivades the territory of another badger sett.

secondly your assumption is sociologically communistic (and by extension invalid) since the same argument could be applied even to YOUR HOME...It would not be unreasonable to use your argument to force anyone to take in any random homeless or recently landed immigrant into their home ...EVEN IF IT CREATED OVERCROWDING and with no regards to the safety/integrity of wealth etc...after all..you have no rights to your own territory acording to your argument...

clearly what you have posited here is idealistic nonsense....

Utter gobbledygook.
We have the ability to share our land, to claim off how lesser species act does not mean we should act the same, that is a ridiculous argument, based around yet again selfishness.
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd.
All animals share the same water hole do they not?
Again the bases for your argument is on your own self needs, which at present nothing is affecting your self needs, so what you posted is utter bollocks and shows that you fail to be human yourself.

Do you know what it takes to be human?

bollocks you self opinionated nut job, just because YOU declare it so dont mean its so.......

having the ability and having the desire to do so is (are?) two different matters....just because you would be stupid enough to take in an unknown family, to your own detriment doesnt make you a saint...its makes you a prize prick....
and NO all animals share the same water hole, thats another of your disney myths....true predators dont usually hunt AT a water hole...they simply wait on the way TO the waterhole . Moreover even if they DID "nicely share" it would be because the water hole was seen as "neutral territory" not the same thing at all as group territory..

AND in fact two prides of lions will NOT share the same water hole, at least not peaceably so your reference to animals sharing waterholes doesnt apply to "same species"

you are full of false arguments lately....

While I have made it clear I believe the benefits of Multiculturalism out weight the negatives

Victor has a fair and valid point about he waterhole being an inaccurate analogy as they don't share.. not really.

@didge
heaps of books get burnt just because no one wants them.... I know I save 'good ones', best find is an 100 year old copy of the scarlet pimpernel.
But in saying that I have seen greater literary works that the Koran or Bible go up in flames, and admit defacing a bible as a teen Twisted Evil

{what I was into Marilyn Manson at 14 Suspect

}

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:44 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:Learn from history of what hate does to people:

here we go...exactly what I said to Ben earlier.....

the moment you question/challege the idiot liberalists love affair with multiculturalism you are instantly a "hater" a "nazi" etc....

a good look into the feeble mental capacity of the liberalist....

Well this is a example which shows what hate does if allowed to go uchecked, luckily with have the ability to lock up idiots as well, so do not over concern yourself when the men in white coats come knocking on your door.
The reason I showed this to prove my point on the failed reasoning behind people wishing to show hate by burning books, as burning books that represent people is nothing short of hate and stupidity, all of which seems to go above your teeny tiny brain I guess.

You have no valid reason to burn a book, so why would you argue to fight for the reason to be hateful?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:46 am

veya_victaous wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

bollocks you self opinionated nut job, just because YOU declare it so dont mean its so.......

having the ability and having the desire to do so is (are?) two different matters....just because you would be stupid enough to take in an unknown family, to your own detriment doesnt make you a saint...its makes you a prize prick....
and NO all animals share the same water hole, thats another of your disney myths....true predators dont usually hunt AT a water hole...they simply wait on the way TO the waterhole . Moreover even if they DID "nicely share" it would be because the water hole was seen as "neutral territory" not the same thing at all as group territory..

AND in fact two prides of lions will NOT share the same water hole, at least not peaceably so your reference to animals sharing waterholes doesnt apply to "same species"

you are full of false arguments lately....

While I have made it clear I believe the benefits of Multiculturalism out weight the negatives

Victor has a fair and valid point about he waterhole being an inaccurate analogy as they don't share.. not really.

@didge
heaps of books get burnt just because no one wants them.... I know I save 'good ones', best find is an 100 year old copy of the scarlet pimpernel.
But in saying that I have seen greater literary works that the Koran or Bible go up in flames, and admit defacing a bible as a teen {what I was into Marilyn Manson at 14 }

Failed disposition.

Burning a book because nobody wants it is different from burning a book due to hate.
If you burn something due to hate, you are arguing to allow yourself to be hateful.
Is there such an argument that backs being hateful?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:47 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:00]I rather think the fuckwittery is yours

I can...but.....why should I, just to please someone else..with no benefit to me??

Indeed...why would I? In fact i have an inbuilt objection to destroying books full stop, but the point is NOT whether I would or not, but whether I could or not...a matter of freedom..(not of course that there is equity in law here....THEY can burn/destroy symbols of remembrance (which are just as important to some people here) with impunity, but hey ho...I suppose we can surrender (adapt in didges language) to that....

I note you have conveniently avoided making your self look a twat about the drawing of certain subjects and freedom of expression....

well i supopose you wouold since yoiu are full of nothing but the most childish, ill thought out and illogical arguments going. You argue like a 12 year old...

You are the one acting like a 3 year old you dickhead, where your argument has no validity which is based off hate, so explain to me how hate has any validity?It does not and you take a view of surrender, surrender to what exactly? Coexistence with my fellow humans?
Wow, you have been smoking the weed again tonight it seems
The point is on why you should want to burn a book you fucking idiot, as to argue over the right to do something is based off a reason to do so, which is why you are such a fucking ignoramus.

Go off and have a sulk you pathetic child, you are being a fucking idiot

No it isnt you brain dead aardvark, we have many rights which are not actually based on any sensible reason to do so (most of which are not actually laid down in law, but are "assumed " rights)

There are many "rights" which we claim, but never actually use...and whose existance ONLY becomes an issue when someone wants to use those rights...

moreover i see you are STILL dodgeing 2 crucial issues.....the right to make drawings of certain subjects....and the consequent freedom of expression...

AND the fact that THEY appear to have a right WE dont....... which is rather more important....

so when you get it together you semi intelligent simian let me know your answer

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:50 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

You are the one acting like a 3 year old you dickhead, where your argument has no validity which is based off hate, so explain to me how hate has any validity?It does not and you take a view of surrender, surrender to what exactly? Coexistence with my fellow humans?
Wow, you have been smoking the weed again tonight it seems
The point is on why you should want to burn a book you fucking idiot, as to argue over the right to do something is based off a reason to do so, which is why you are such a fucking ignoramus.

Go off and have a sulk you pathetic child, you are being a fucking idiot

No it isnt you brain dead aardvark, we have many rights which are not actually based on any sensible reason to do so (most of which are not actually laid down in law, but are "assumed " rights)

There are many "rights" which we claim, but never actually use...and whose existance ONLY becomes an issue when someone wants to use those rights...

moreover i see you are STILL dodgeing 2 crucial issues.....the right to make drawings of certain subjects....and the consequent freedom of expression...

AND the fact that THEY appear to have a right WE dont....... which is rather more important....

so when you get it together you semi intelligent simian let me know your answer

Ha Ha the pathetic idiot is trying to argue to justify hate, when there is never an argument to justify hate, what a fucking infantile dickhead.
The reality is what is logical about hate rights?
This is why you are so easily confused, you wish to justify hate, based on what grounds, burning a book and having the right to be hateful.
That is not a logical argument, it is a daft position.
Again if people want to burn books or make cartoons I am not denying their right, I am questioning why, which seems to be so far above any comprehension you have.
You have to justify a reason to be hateful.

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:54 am

This is why you and Matti are complete idiots Victor, you think the views of one person outweighs the views of 7 billion, showing you are both selfish individuals.

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:54 am

Didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

While I have made it clear I believe the benefits of Multiculturalism out weight the negatives

Victor has a fair and valid point about he waterhole being an inaccurate analogy as they don't share.. not really.

@didge
heaps of books get burnt just because no one wants them.... I know I save 'good ones', best find is an 100 year old copy of the scarlet pimpernel.
But in saying that I have seen greater literary works that the Koran or Bible go up in flames, and admit defacing a bible as a teen {what I was into Marilyn Manson at 14 }

Failed disposition.

Burning a book because nobody wants it is different from burning a book due to hate.

Did I say I was burning it out of hate?? NO...FAIL....in fact I made NO allusion to why I wanted to burn it...merely making the point that doing so...FOR WHATEVER reason would result in "consequences" whereas, as we all know ...THEY can make an open public display of destroying symbols of remembrance with impunity

If you burn something due to hate, you are arguing to allow yourself to be hateful.

Irrelevant in the light of the above...
Is there such an argument that backs being hateful?

you are one twisted puppy....

where are your replies to the question of freedom of expression?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:56 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

Failed disposition.

Burning a book because nobody wants it is different from burning a book due to hate.

Did I say I was burning it out of hate?? NO...FAIL....in fact I made NO allusion to why I wanted to burn it...merely making the point that doing so...FOR WHATEVER reason would result in "consequences" whereas, as we all know ...THEY can make an open public display of destroying symbols of remembrance with impunity

If you burn something due to hate, you are arguing to allow yourself to be hateful.

Irrelevant in the light of the above...
Is there such an argument that backs being hateful?

you are one twisted puppy....

where are your replies to the question of freedom of expression?

Why else would you wish to argue for burning the Quran?

To claim it is not hate shows what a fuckwit you really are.

Again justify a valid reason to have hate laws

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:56 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:Learn from history of what hate does to people:

here we go...exactly what I said to Ben earlier.....

the moment you question/challege the idiot liberalists love affair with multiculturalism you are instantly a "hater" a "nazi" etc....

a good look into the feeble mental capacity of the liberalist....

Well this is a example which shows what hate does if allowed to go uchecked, luckily with have the ability to lock up idiots as well, so do not over concern yourself when the men in white coats come knocking on your door.
The reason I showed this to prove my point on the failed reasoning behind people wishing to show hate by burning books, as burning books that represent people is nothing short of hate and stupidity, all of which seems to go above your teeny tiny brain I guess.

You have no valid reason to burn a book, so why would you argue to fight for the reason to be hateful?

But at the same time it must be balanced against the secularist reality... a book is just a book it is not magic and we don't need to make it illegal for fear of offending so magic sky giant. Keep in mind that in some countries YES it is Illegal to deface a Koran or Bible, So I think we have to clear that it should not be illegal JUST because someone thinks it's 'magic'.

in saying that burning a book out of provocation (as opposed to being cold or something) is inciting hatred and can be dealt with under that.

the problem is the too opposite extremes, while I agree we don't want to see mass book burning at the same time we don't want to see a religious text getting special legal protection.

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:57 am

brain dead aardvark

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:58 am

The argument is not whether the book is magical or seen as sacred to a bunch of people, again missing the point the point is why people would want to deface or burn such books in the first place all of which lead back to the same point again, hate.
What people are doing is avoiding the main issue here, not whether we can burn a book but why would someone want to.

Again people here are trying to justify a reason to be hateful

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:01 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

No it isnt you brain dead aardvark, we have many rights which are not actually based on any sensible reason to do so (most of which are not actually laid down in law, but are "assumed " rights)

There are many "rights" which we claim, but never actually use...and whose existance ONLY becomes an issue when someone wants to use those rights...

moreover i see you are STILL dodgeing 2 crucial issues.....the right to make drawings of certain subjects....and the consequent freedom of expression...

AND the fact that THEY appear to have a right WE dont....... which is rather more important....

so when you get it together you semi intelligent simian let me know your answer

Ha Ha the pathetic idiot is trying to argue to justify hate, when there is never an argument to justify hate, what a fucking infantile dickhead.
The reality is what is logical about hate rights?
This is why you are so easily confused, you wish to justify hate, based on what grounds, burning a book and having the right to be hateful.
That is not a logical argument, it is a daft position.
Again if people want to burn books or make cartoons I am not denying their right, I am questioning why, which seems to be so far above any comprehension you have.
You have to justify a reason to be hateful.

which just goes to show that you should not be allowed to promote yourself to "spokesman" for the alleged 7 billion people.....
again...where did I say "cartoons" (and disrespectful ones at that).....ANY depiction in art of the prophet or what the artist may imagine allah to be would result in the same .....

you really are NOT on the ball are you...you are "assuming, once again, that I am stating something rather different to what I am actually saying....

I repeat, you have the insight (just like ben) of a brain dead aarvark....

where has ONE thing...go on quote the actual text....that i have said, promoted "hate" , you on the other hand would roll over to have your belly tickled in your efforts to appear multicultural.....

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:06 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

Ha Ha the pathetic idiot is trying to argue to justify hate, when there is never an argument to justify hate, what a fucking infantile dickhead.
The reality is what is logical about hate rights?
This is why you are so easily confused, you wish to justify hate, based on what grounds, burning a book and having the right to be hateful.
That is not a logical argument, it is a daft position.
Again if people want to burn books or make cartoons I am not denying their right, I am questioning why, which seems to be so far above any comprehension you have.
You have to justify a reason to be hateful.

which just goes to show that you should not be allowed to promote yourself to "spokesman" for the alleged 7 billion people.....
again...where did I say "cartoons" (and disrespectful ones at that).....ANY depiction in art of the prophet or what the artist may imagine allah to be would result in the same .....

you really are NOT on the ball are you...you are "assuming, once again, that I am stating something rather different to what I am actually saying....

I repeat, you have the insight (just like ben) of a brain dead aarvark....

where has ONE thing...go on quote the actual text....that i have said, promoted "hate" , you on the other hand would roll over to have your belly tickled in your efforts to appear multicultural.....

Failed counter again

You are trying to justify hate it is that simple, there is no reason to target a specific book unless you have hateful reasons behind doing something to that book and shows why you have the intelligence of a turd.

Ben has more intelligence than you will ever hope to obtain, his life is not led by hate of which yours is, where you place your views above the collective views of others, which shows you are anti democratic and thus base your views around tyrannical views.

Again roll over to what?
Coexistence, something you have no comprehension of, where again you wish to be allowed to be hateful, what valid reason do you have not to coexist we other humans, when many do so daily without any issue.

You really are a said fucking Nazi

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:06 am

Didge wrote:The argument is not whether the book is magical or seen as sacred to a bunch of people, again missing the point the point is why people would want to deface or burn such books in the first place all of which lead back to the same point again, hate.
What people are doing is avoiding the main issue here, not whether we can burn a book but why would someone want to.

Again people here are trying to justify a reason to be hateful

And here we have the false ascribing of motive argument to justify stupidty from an addled fruit bat....

the MAIN ISUUE is actually why CANT we burn a patiucular book...for whatever reason, without there being consequences???
the issue is NOT why would you want to....obviously some reasons are "distateful" others may not be.....
the SIDE issue ...which didge is doging is why there are consequence for that when there are clearly NO consequences for the hate inspired destruction of symbols of remembrance...

but then didge cant cope with the concept that his pets may be hating us ......that would destroy his multiculturalism outright......

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:11 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

which just goes to show that you should not be allowed to promote yourself to "spokesman" for the alleged 7 billion people.....
again...where did I say "cartoons" (and disrespectful ones at that).....ANY depiction in art of the prophet or what the artist may imagine allah to be would result in the same .....

you really are NOT on the ball are you...you are "assuming, once again, that I am stating something rather different to what I am actually saying....

I repeat, you have the insight (just like ben) of a brain dead aarvark....

where has ONE thing...go on quote the actual text....that i have said, promoted "hate" , you on the other hand would roll over to have your belly tickled in your efforts to appear multicultural.....

Failed counter again

You are trying to justify hate it is that simple, there is no reason to target a specific book unless you have hateful reasons behind doing something to that book and shows why you have the intelligence of a turd.

Ben has more intelligence than you will ever hope to obtain, his life is not led by hate of which yours is, where you place your views above the collective views of others, which shows you are anti democratic and thus base your views around tyrannical views.

Again roll over to what?
Coexistence, something you have no comprehension of, where again you wish to be allowed to be hateful, what valid reason do you have not to coexist we other humans, when many do so daily without any issue.

You really are a said fucking Nazi

I claim Godwins law!!!!!!!!

you dopey turd of the month.....do you know what "example" is I could have picked an number of subjects and in anycase...as veya says ...perhaps the copy I have is worn out and illegible....you FAIL sonney jim...badly....to produce evidence, except in your abjectly inadequate mind, to show wher I have made any suggestion even of hate....and as usual avoided ANY issues, just spouted your purile agenda

ah well laters you spineless echidna (waits for the uproar Rolling Eyes

)

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:12 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:The argument is not whether the book is magical or seen as sacred to a bunch of people, again missing the point the point is why people would want to deface or burn such books in the first place all of which lead back to the same point again, hate.
What people are doing is avoiding the main issue here, not whether we can burn a book but why would someone want to.

Again people here are trying to justify a reason to be hateful

And here we have the false ascribing of motive argument to justify stupidty from an addled fruit bat....

the MAIN ISUUE is actually why CANT we burn a patiucular book...for whatever reason, without there being consequences???
the issue is NOT why would you want to....obviously some reasons are "distateful" others may not be.....
the SIDE issue ...which didge is doging is why there are consequence for that when there are clearly NO consequences for the hate inspired destruction of symbols of remembrance...

but then didge cant cope with the concept that his pets may be hating us ......that would destroy his multiculturalism outright......

Of course the argument is about why you want to burn a book, thus the reason to be allowed to burn a book.
There has to be a valid reasoning behind any action we take, you are trying to ignore this fundamental fact, because it shows up your complete stupidity.
Do you go around fighting for a reason to burn the Beano, Lord of the Rings?
No, you thus have to justify a reason to burn all books, not a specific book, which is where your argument is failing.
Pets, what a pathetic thing to say of other humans, using a failed guilt by association concept.
Thank goodness the youth of today do not share your stupidity
Your reasoning is absurd, you look for reasons to coexist, not reasons to divide people, that again Is Nazism

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:15 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

Failed counter again

You are trying to justify hate it is that simple, there is no reason to target a specific book unless you have hateful reasons behind doing something to that book and shows why you have the intelligence of a turd.

Ben has more intelligence than you will ever hope to obtain, his life is not led by hate of which yours is, where you place your views above the collective views of others, which shows you are anti democratic and thus base your views around tyrannical views.

Again roll over to what?
Coexistence, something you have no comprehension of, where again you wish to be allowed to be hateful, what valid reason do you have not to coexist we other humans, when many do so daily without any issue.

You really are a said fucking Nazi

I claim Godwins law!!!!!!!!

you dopey turd of the month.....do you know what "example" is I could have picked an number of subjects and in anycase...as veya says ...perhaps the copy I have is worn out and illegible....you FAIL sonney jim...badly....to produce evidence, except in your abjectly inadequate mind, to show wher I have made any suggestion even of hate....and as usual avoided ANY issues, just spouted your purile agenda

ah well laters you spineless echidna (waits for the uproar )

A made up law on the internet ha ha

You are a self confessed national socialist.
You have no reason again based off the book is old, by saying that we should burn any fragments of early books, is that what you are claiming now.
You see your reasoning is abusrd, we actually keep books even if they are in parts missing many of the texts.
Go and have a little cry if you are so bent up with hate, because you cannot get your way ha ha

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:21 am

Anyway good night I hope Victor can sleep off that arse that has inhabited his body tonight.

On that I wish him the best of luck

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:33 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

I claim Godwins law!!!!!!!!

you dopey turd of the month.....do you know what "example" is I could have picked an number of subjects and in anycase...as veya says ...perhaps the copy I have is worn out and illegible....you FAIL sonney jim...badly....to produce evidence, except in your abjectly inadequate mind, to show wher I have made any suggestion even of hate....and as usual avoided ANY issues, just spouted your purile agenda

ah well laters you spineless echidna (waits for the uproar )

A made up law on the internet ha ha

You are a self confessed national socialist.
You have no reason again based off the book is old, by saying that we should burn any fragments of early books, is that what you are claiming now.
You see your reasoning is abusrd, we actually keep books even if they are in parts missing many of the texts.
Go and have a little cry if you are so bent up with hate, because you cannot get your way ha ha

I see irony is lost on the pratling pillock

further you are just plain nuts.....fragments of early books are important...because thats all there is left of them (usually)
same generally applies to books with missing parts...they are usually rare or are kept for sentimental reasons....
the koran...is neither rare or particularly (as an individual copy) of any great value....since it is so prevalent ...

no..YOU ascribe hate....where there is none displayed, in order to either boost your own inadequate ego or create problems where none exist...

your counter earlier about church bells is nonsense..since they ring MUCH later than the imman wails (and incidently is a FAR less intrusive sound)
you cannot find a counter to my point that if I was to burn that book, whether out of hate or NOT, I would be in trouble....whereas THEY can burn symbols of remembrance IN FULL FLEDGED HATE...and nothing is done, they do so with impunity...presumably thats ok with you and you support their right to hate........

and you deflect still about my point of making drawings/paintings artwork (NOT as you implied by default disrespectful cartoons) of certain subjects and freedom of expression....
I assume you are OK with the idea of stifleing freedom of expression in your desire to lick the arses of your favoured subjects....

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:35 am

here fishy fishy fishy......(or should that be aardvark). ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg::

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:42 am

OH and BTW...WE have just solved the UK housing problem

we will atke all the immigrants (say over the past 10 years) and move em from wherever they are now and put em into the homes of didge and his fellow liberalists

quote "
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd."

thus freeing up loads of houses for OUR own youngsters who cant get a home of their own. (including those of "other ethnicities" who have been here "multi generationaly)

cheers your dodgy didgyness.....

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:43 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

A made up law on the internet ha ha

You are a self confessed national socialist.
You have no reason again based off the book is old, by saying that we should burn any fragments of early books, is that what you are claiming now.
You see your reasoning is abusrd, we actually keep books even if they are in parts missing many of the texts.
Go and have a little cry if you are so bent up with hate, because you cannot get your way ha ha

I see irony is lost on the pratling pillock

further you are just plain nuts.....fragments of early books are important...because thats all there is left of them (usually)
same generally applies to books with missing parts...they are usually rare or are kept for sentimental reasons....
the koran...is neither rare or particularly (as an individual copy) of any great value....since it is so prevalent ...

no..YOU ascribe hate....where there is none displayed, in order to either boost your own inadequate ego or create problems where none exist...

your counter earlier about church bells is nonsense..since they ring MUCH later than the imman wails (and incidently is a FAR less intrusive sound)
you cannot find a counter to my point that if I was to burn that book, whether out of hate or NOT, I would be in trouble....whereas THEY can burn symbols of remembrance IN FULL FLEDGED HATE...and nothing is done, they do so with impunity...presumably thats ok with you and you support their right to hate........

and you deflect still about my point of making drawings/paintings artwork (NOT as you implied by default disrespectful cartoons) of certain subjects and freedom of expression....
I assume you are OK with the idea of stifleing freedom of expression in your desire to lick the arses of your favoured subjects....

://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:

Never heard so much bullshit in all my life, seriously can someone pluck out the idiot that is inhabiting Victors body, seriously that has to be the biggest load of bullshit I have heard from the Nazi to date.

First of all our church bells are set to the quarter hour mark to chime with the time of day, we get used to them and can sleep through them, but they go off all day log and night, so your position on Imans is yet again a childish pathetic excuse to be hateful towards people you dislike based off a fallacy.

Again I have no problem if people want to create cartoons about anything what I will question is the intent behind something if it is hateful, which is the point you are utterly stupid to I guess or the fact you were not arguing for any books to be burnt but a specific book which your intent would be to burn it out of hate, because would you like me to burn your Lord of the Rings collection?
You see I would be burning that out of hate or dislike for you, luckily enough I do not hate you but just pity a senile nazi fuckwit.

Your arguments get more stupid by the minute.

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:46 am

victorisnotamused wrote:OH and BTW...WE have just solved the UK housing problem

we will atke all the immigrants (say over the past 10 years) and move em from wherever they are now and put em into the homes of didge and his fellow liberalists

quote "
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd."

thus freeing up loads of houses for OUR own youngsters who cant get a home of their own. (including those of "other ethnicities" who have been here "multi generationaly)

cheers your dodgy didgyness.....

I am happy to share my home.

Again the argument of an idiot, who does not want to share the earth, which he thinks he alone owns himself.
You are just one insignificant human on this planet, luckily many intelligent humans have no problem coexisting the point you are missing and if you are for division of people it is based off an argument again of hate.

I speaks volumes you were no doubt brought up as a spoilt brat

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:50 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:OH and BTW...WE have just solved the UK housing problem

we will atke all the immigrants (say over the past 10 years) and move em from wherever they are now and put em into the homes of didge and his fellow liberalists

quote "
I have o problem taking in people, so again your argument is absurd."

thus freeing up loads of houses for OUR own youngsters who cant get a home of their own. (including those of "other ethnicities" who have been here "multi generationaly)

cheers your dodgy didgyness.....

I am happy to share my home.

untill you had to.....

Again the argument of an idiot, who does not want to share the earth, which he thinks he alone owns himself.
You are just one insignificant human on this planet, luckily many intelligent humans have no problem coexisting the point you are missing and if you are for division of people it is based off an argument again of hate.

I speaks volumes you were no doubt brought up as a spoilt brat

you ceratainly do...none of which makes any sense whatsoever

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 1:54 am

victorisnotamused wrote:
Didge wrote:

I am happy to share my home.

untill you had to.....

Again the argument of an idiot, who does not want to share the earth, which he thinks he alone owns himself.
You are just one insignificant human on this planet, luckily many intelligent humans have no problem coexisting the point you are missing and if you are for division of people it is based off an argument again of hate.

I speaks volumes you were no doubt brought up as a spoilt brat

you ceratainly do...none of which makes any sense whatsoever

You never make any sense you arguments seek to divide society based off fear, that is daft and no better than the Nazis did with the Jews.
There is a big difference between being critical or religion and being hateful as you are.

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 2:01 am

Didge wrote:
victorisnotamused wrote:

I see irony is lost on the pratling pillock

further you are just plain nuts.....fragments of early books are important...because thats all there is left of them (usually)
same generally applies to books with missing parts...they are usually rare or are kept for sentimental reasons....
the koran...is neither rare or particularly (as an individual copy) of any great value....since it is so prevalent ...

no..YOU ascribe hate....where there is none displayed, in order to either boost your own inadequate ego or create problems where none exist...

your counter earlier about church bells is nonsense..since they ring MUCH later than the imman wails (and incidently is a FAR less intrusive sound)
you cannot find a counter to my point that if I was to burn that book, whether out of hate or NOT, I would be in trouble....whereas THEY can burn symbols of remembrance IN FULL FLEDGED HATE...and nothing is done, they do so with impunity...presumably thats ok with you and you support their right to hate........

and you deflect still about my point of making drawings/paintings artwork (NOT as you implied by default disrespectful cartoons) of certain subjects and freedom of expression....
I assume you are OK with the idea of stifleing freedom of expression in your desire to lick the arses of your favoured subjects....

://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:
://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/:

Never heard so much bullshit in all my life, seriously can someone pluck out the idiot that is inhabiting Victors body, seriously that has to be the biggest load of bullshit I have heard from the Nazi to date.

First of all our church bells are set to the quarter hour mark to chime with the time of day, we get used to them and can sleep through them, but they go off all day log and night, so your position on Imans is yet again a childish pathetic excuse to be hateful towards people you dislike based off a fallacy.

bullshit...have you ever heard them..the volume they put out is unbeleiveable...about 100 times louder than the best church bell.....

Again I have no problem if people want to create cartoons about anything what I will question is the intent behind something if it is hateful, (IDIOT......try reading...i think you will find I SPECIFICALLY ECLUDED "cartoons"......again you are making up an argument based on false assumptions and distortions ) which is the point you are utterly stupid to I guess or the fact you were not arguing for any books to be burnt but a specific book which your intent would be to burn it out of hate, because would you like me to burn your Lord of the Rings collection?
You see I would be burning that out of hate or dislike for you, luckily enough I do not hate you but just pity a senile nazi fuckwit.

Your arguments get more stupid by the minute.

and your arguments get more desperate by the moment....

you are a liar and a distorter of facts, your whole argument to me his evening is based on lies, distortion and deflection...You have taken something I have said, assigned intent to it and used that figment of your imagination to construct a world of distorted fabrications that has the foundations of a house built on swamp water...

you have FAILED to show where i have implied "hate", failed to adress the fact that very real hate is shown in the actions of destroying symbols of remembrance...with NO penalty exacted

are there NO depths to which you wont stoop to promulgate your pet fantasy......

oh and claiming to be spokes man for 7 billion is .......megalomania didge......I should get treatment for that soon...though the way you are going perhaps its too late.....

by veya_victaous Mon Sep 29, 2014 2:04 am

would you like me to burn your Lord of the Rings collection?

not the same, the question should be how would he like you to buy the lord of the rings books and burn you're own copies... I don't think Victor is saying he should be allowed to take someone else's book and light it on fire.

DO Church bells still ring in England????? Isn't that annoying?
they generally don't here maybe on Christmas or Easter but that's pretty much it. definitely not in a time keeping capacity?

by Guest Mon Sep 29, 2014 2:07 am

Ha Ha a counter based all on me.

Epic fail

Your reasoning is based off hate, there is no reason to pick out a specific book and ask for the right to burn it, it proves your intent is hateful.

When you learn to be adult I shall treat you as such, you spat opur dummy out being abusive for no reason and thus you pay the penalty for doing so and treat you in kind with infantile abuse back, this is why you are being so idiotic.

You are one individual that has little thought for the other 7 billion humans that live on this planet to argue over people living in homes which is also daft as nobody is asking you to do any such thing but to share the land you were lucky enough to born onto, which seems to give you some insane belief you can deny others a right where to live, it is the most idiotic argument made by selfish people.

The reality is multiculturalism does work, and you have no valid argument to claim otherwise, because people can and do generally live in peace.

by Sponsored content