Looks like the little occupation paradise is beginning to crumble.

---

Karzai 'threatens to join Taliban'

Updated Tue Apr 6, 2010 8:56am AEST

The United States and Afghan president Hamid Karzai traded fresh recriminations after failing to put a lid on a row over election fraud that is tearing at their uneasy alliance.

Mr Karzai reignited the controversy in a reported meeting with Afghan politicians and refused to back down from claims during an interview with the BBC that foreigners helped rig the Afghan elections.

"The remarks are troubling and the substance of the remarks is simply not true," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said following the latest of Mr Karzai's outbursts, which came a week after president Barack Obama's surprise visit to Kabul.

Another senior US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Mr Obama's administration was struggling to understand the motivation behind Mr Karzai's recent comments.

"Up to a point, we understand that there are things that leaders will say in their own countries for domestic consumption," the official said.

But as for Mr Karzai's latest remarks, "it was a head-scratcher", the official said.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that Mr Karzai had told politicians the US was interfering with Afghan affairs and that the Taliban would become a legitimate resistance movement if it did not stop.

The paper said that in the private meeting, the Afghan president even suggested he could join the Taliban himself if parliament did not support his efforts to take control of the country's election commission.

The Afghan leader meanwhile told BBC television in an interview that his claims last week of meddling and intimidation by overseas embassies and organisations in the disputed vote were "all true".

"That is exactly what happened," he said, dismissing suggestions that already strained diplomatic relations between his government and the international community would be affected.

"This should not affect trust," he said in the strategic southern city of Kandahar, where he has spent two days shoring up support from local tribal leaders before an expected US-NATO push against the Taliban in coming months.

Mr Gibbs said Mr Karzai's defiance would not yet cause the US to cancel his visit to the White House next month and would not effect funding requests pending in congress for the US Afghan war effort.

"The remarks are genuinely troubling," Mr Gibbs said. "The substance of the remarks, as have been looked into by many, are obviously not true."

In his meeting with lawmakers, Mr Karzai criticised those rejecting his efforts to wrest control of the country's Electoral Complaints Commission from the United Nations.

Five of the legislators gathered at the presidential palace told the Wall Street Journal that the Taliban's revolt would "change to resistance" if the US and its allies kept dictating how its government should run.

Mr Karzai was declared the reelected president in November by his own officials after his challenger Abdullah Abdullah abandoned a run-off.

Source: ABC

And now even Western medical staff are supposedly assisting the Talibaan. Not looking good at all for the supporters of the occupation.

---

Italians arrested over Afghan plot

Nine people, including three Italian medical workers, have been arrested in Afghanistan for allegedly plotting to kill a provincial official.

Gulab Mangal, who is the governor of Helmand, said those held were planning attacks in Lashkar Gah, the province's main city, "and the number one target was myself".

He said that the alleged operation, by the three Italians and six Afghans, was funded by the Afghan Taliban based in Pakistan.

Suicide bomb vests, hand grenades, pistols and explosives were found in a hospital storeroom where the three worked, which is run by the Italian charity Emergency.

Police were tipped off about a plot to kill Mangal, a government spokesman, said.

Speaking from Milan, Cecilia Strada, the head of Emergency, told Al Jazeera that this was a completely groundless claim.

"It sounds quite ridiculous that they would be involved in any plot. They have spent the last few years in Afghanistan, helping and treating people for free.

"We ask that you respect their rights, first of all, the right to communicate with us and let us know where they are and what their condition is."

The Associated Press obtained a video of the raid that shows British troops accompanying Afghan police, soldiers and government officials to the hospital.

In a storeroom, boxes are opened containing what appear to be bullets, pistols, hand grenades, and bags of explosives.

A British soldier is heard saying that an explosives-disposal unit was on its way when the explosives were found.

The three Italians are then shown sitting on outdoor benches but the names on their identification cards are not visible.
Three Italians and six Afghans were arrested for allegedly plotting to kill governor [AP]

Emergency said it had been unable to make contact with its employees since their arrest.

"The only contact we have been able to make has been through one of the employee's cell phones answered by someone who identified himself as a British military official," Strada, Emergency's head, said.

A Nato spokesman in Kabul said its forces had not taken part in any arrests.

Franco Frattini, the Italian foreign minister, was closely following developments, a foreign ministry spokesman said.

"Pending details in this matter, the government reaffirms its strictly rigorous line against any direct or indirect support for terrorism, be it in Afghanistan or elsewhere," the spokesman said.

Emergency has had a tense relationship with local authorities due to its policy of treating all patients, including suspected members of the Taliban.

It has operated in Afghanistan since 1999 and currently runs three surgical centres, a maternity centre and a network of 28 health centres that they say have treated 2.5 million people.

Karzai visit

In another security-related development, Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, was forced to cut short a trip to Kunduz, a province in the country's north, after a rocket attack.

He had been travelling with US General Stanley McChrystal to meet tribal elders and German troops when rockets fell near a base he was due to visit on Saturday.

Al Jazeera's James Bays, who was covering the Kunduz visit when the incident occurred, said the security situation in the area is volatile.

"Kunduz is the most violent part of the north of Afghanistan," he said. "He [Karzai] is trying to win over some of those elders who in the past might have supported his enemies."

The joint visit with McChrystal came as the White House tried to move on from a public row between Karzai and the US.

The dispute was sparked by Karzai's comments blaming the fraud in last summer's presidential election on foreign embassies in the country.

Source: al-Jazeerah

Abu, what do you think everyone involved should do?

I think the U.S/West need to negotiate a treaty with al-Qaedah/Talibaan.

This treaty must involve withdrawal of all U.S troops from all Islamic lands, unconditionally. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to the Zionist occupation of Palestine. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to all of the neo-colonialist regimes in the Muslim world, the Saudi pirate clan, the Egyptian dictator and so forth. In effect all 'meddling' in the Islamic world must cease.

In return AQ/Talibaan must cease all hostilities against the West. And must cease promoting any hostilities against the West at all.

A 'sink or swim' policy needs to be adopted by the West towards the Muslim world. No need for them to evacuate and clean up the Zionist mess they left in the middle of our land, just leave it to fend for itself, and let it find it's own way. Same for the despotic regimes the British & U.S setup in the Arab countries. No need to clean them up, just let go of their hands, and if they survive then so be it.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1270724010

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 12^th, 2010 at 8:04pm:

I think the U.S/West need to negotiate a treaty with al-Qaedah/Talibaan. This treaty must involve withdrawal of all U.S troops from all Islamic lands, unconditionally. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to the Zionist occupation of Palestine. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to all of the neo-colonialist regimes in the Muslim world, the Saudi pirate clan, the Egyptian dictator and so forth. In effect all 'meddling' in the Islamic world must cease. In return AQ/Talibaan must cease all hostilities against the West. And must cease promoting any hostilities against the West at all. A 'sink or swim' policy needs to be adopted by the West towards the Muslim world. No need for them to evacuate and clean up the Zionist mess they left in the middle of our land, just leave it to fend for itself, and let it find it's own way. Same for the despotic regimes the British & U.S setup in the Arab countries. No need to clean them up, just let go of their hands, and if they survive then so be it.

Would the withdrawal of troops be immediate?

Do you think that AQ/Taliban will stop fighting the west if they stop meddling?

What about Wahhabi and Salafi Jihadists?


freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2010 at 8:13pm:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1270724010

Can threads be moved/merged?

Quote:

Can threads be moved/merged?

Abu is able to, and welcome to move this to the global board, but I am not going to interfere here.


Quote:

This treaty must involve withdrawal of all U.S troops from all Islamic lands, unconditionally.

Does that include Spain?

Please name all "Islamic lands".

Will muslims then stop their push to occupy the globe, as it is their aim and their will? Will they simply be satisfied with the lands that they have and leave the rest of the world to live the way they see fit?

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 12^th, 2010 at 8:04pm:

I think the U.S/West need to negotiate a treaty with al-Qaedah/Talibaan. This treaty must involve withdrawal of all U.S troops from all Islamic lands, unconditionally. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to the Zionist occupation of Palestine. It must involve the immediate cessation of any form of support, aid or assistance to all of the neo-colonialist regimes in the Muslim world, the Saudi pirate clan, the Egyptian dictator and so forth. In effect all 'meddling' in the Islamic world must cease. In return AQ/Talibaan must cease all hostilities against the West. And must cease promoting any hostilities against the West at all. A 'sink or swim' policy needs to be adopted by the West towards the Muslim world. No need for them to evacuate and clean up the Zionist mess they left in the middle of our land, just leave it to fend for itself, and let it find it's own way. Same for the despotic regimes the British & U.S setup in the Arab countries. No need to clean them up, just let go of their hands, and if they survive then so be it.

"Our lands?" And how would you define "our lands?" Could you define "Christian lands" in the same way, or would this read as colonialism?

This platform is straight out of Al Qaeda. How do you define who the pirates and despots are?

The Taliban aren't despots?

How could the US possibly sign a "treaty" with Al Qaeda? There's no territorial sovereignty to begin with.

This reads as undiluted fundamentalist Kool Aid to me. I understand the need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan - I understand the need to stop meddling. I can fully understand the need to solve the Palestinian problem.

But the reality is that US hegemony will continue, and the struggle for remaining oil reserves will go on. The only virtue of groups like the Taliban is their potential longitivity. Looking to the future, they have the potential to be around longer than the US's hold on global power - and certainly the US's hold on the Afghani government.

I understand the frustration and anger, but I don't get the selectively applied notion of Muslim brotherhood - more fundamentalist Kool Aid. The world of Arab and Islamic politics is more labrinthine than the colonial alliances prior to WWI.

All Muslims are equal, but some are more equal than others.

There will be no unconditional treaties with the US - we all know this. If this is the best the "Muslim" world can come up with, we're all doomed.

The best groups like the Taliban can hope for is quiet assimilation with US development interests in the region. This is the way Musharraf played it in Pakistan. If the Taliban could put up with quiet, backroom meetings with US colonels, nod their heads politely, and actually attempt to distribute the aid that's available, they'd prosper.

But can they? It seems to me that the problems facing us lie with rhetoric, not objectives. Groups like Al Qaeda prosper through popular appeal to Muslim anger - but countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan will not develop through continual war. Real lives are at stake.

I think Muslims should question how their own antithetical stance to the West hinders their own living standards. Once again, I can understand it, but I can't see how such a heightened state of continual warfare is going to solve anything.

I actually think that much of this "Muslim solidarity" call comes from privaleged Muslims in the West - Muslims whose growing affluence brings about middle class guilt. Their own sense of "affluenza" brings about a shift in their own cultural identity - a shift against consumerism - but this shift becomes usurped by a call to jihad against the West.

I aknowledge that it's our problem too: we do discriminate against Muslims in many Western countries - just look at many of the arguments on this board. But its Muslims themselves that must tackle their own alienated discourses - discourses of violent jihad, etc - discourses that, in their extreme, foster suicide and mass murder.

I agree that the US should leave its puppet leaders in the middle east despite the consequences, real or imagined. The US has been against democracy in the middle east since WWII.

But we know that Al Qaeda and the Taliban will not bring democracy either. The US's stooges (like Saddam) are hardly a benign dictators, but what exactly is the Taliban?

[b]jaemi,[/b]


Quote:

Would the withdrawal of troops be immediate?

Yes.


Quote:

Do you think that AQ/Taliban will stop fighting the west if they stop meddling?

If they negotiate a treaty now, yes. If not, then probably not. They'll fight till they become dominant, and then meddle in the U.S.

That's why now is a golden opportunity.


Quote:

What about Wahhabi and Salafi Jihadists?

Sorry... they're different from AQ/Taliban??? You've lost me there.

jordan,


Quote:

Please name all "Islamic lands".

All countries where Muslims make up a majority of the population.


Quote:

Will muslims then stop their push to occupy the globe, as it is their aim and their will?

Muslims can't even occupy their own countries let alone the globe. Please leave the sensationalist garbage out of the discussion. Go and peddle it on jihadwatch where other docile gits will believe it with you.


Quote:

Will they simply be satisfied with the lands that they have and leave the rest of the world to live the way they see fit?

Probably.

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Quote: What about Wahhabi and Salafi Jihadists? Sorry... they're different from AQ/Taliban??? You've lost me there.

I was under the impression that they were the driving force of AQ.

AQ are a terrorist organisation not a country countries don't have treaties with terrorist organisations.   :D

Who represents AQ?

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

[b]jaemi,[/b] Muslims can't even occupy their own countries let alone the globe. Please leave the sensationalist garbage out of the discussion. Go and peddle it on jihadwatch where other docile gits will believe it with you.

This muslim would disagree with you-

"Do you want Islam to take over the rest of the world"

"Of course I want it to, and it will" @ 2:53min

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHRkMcVrt2w

Thanks for that clip jordan, I have not seen a lot of Dawkins, but I am always impressed when I do.
He comes across as a kind, gentle, caring sort of guy, which makes him a good messenger for humanist principles.

Personally I relate more to the p1ssed and argumentative, and a lot more confronting style of Hitchens, but I find both their reasoning very strong.

As Dawkins finished with, faith is believing what you have been told to believ, and not believing in what makes sense based on looking at the evidence.

mozzaok wrote on Apr 13^th, 2010 at 9:23pm:

As Dawkins finished with, faith is believing what you have been told to believ, and not believing in what makes sense based on looking at the evidence.

This is a very good point. I must admit, I've always wondered what faith is.

I say forget faith, and go for experience. The problem with religion is that it often solely teaches faith, when it should teach techniques to master yourself.

Faith, however, is faking it until you make it. You need to believe you're on the right path just to practice. Self development takes a whole life.

To me, it makes no difference what path you practice: Christian, Muslim, Jew. The proof is in the pudding.

The tree with the most fruit bows the lowest. The more spiritual you are, the more humble. We don't get this in the West. We think you have to be full of yourself to get anywhere, and we think getting anywhere is what it's all about.

What I like about Islam is its focus on humility. Sure, there are a few nutcases out there, but Islam itself teaches people to be gentle.

It's the politics that get in the way - always the politics. If Muslims are prepared to go against their religion and practice violence, they've lost it.

Humility? Bull. No religion teaches humility. Certainly not the Abrahamic ones. Being humble means admitting to things you do not know, that is against religion in general as they profess to know about things they simply have no idea about. Islam professes to know it all, and will kill you if you do not agree. Hardly humility.

jordan484 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2010 at 2:02pm:

Humility? Bull. No religion teaches humility. Certainly not the Abrahamic ones. Being humble means admitting to things you do not know, that is against religion in general as they profess to know about things they simply have no idea about. Islam professes to know it all, and will kill you if you do not agree. Hardly humility.

Jordan, I issue you with a challenge: go and meet an educated Muslim and discuss this question with them. It wouldn't be too hard - just start up a friendly chat. I'm sure they'll talk with you.

If they disagree, I'll eat my words and become a global Islamo-conspiracist. I'll join in on every anti-Muslim rant/joke of the day on this board, and generally spread as much fear and panic as I can.

In my experience, based on my travels and on meeting people from all over the world (as I'm sure you have), I have found Muslims to be very accomodating, generous and humble. It is taught in Islam to treat guests well - no matter who they are, and I imagine this teaching must have imparted something over the years.

If you really think you'll be killed for disagreeing, lock the door and stay inside. They're out there, you know.

Otherwise, go out and engage with the world. Life's too short to live in hate.

It's not me you need to tell that to. Go tell the thousands of hating Jews, Christians and Muslims. They all need to learn about humility. It certainly doesn't come from any of their books. You want an example of a least humble Muslim? Look no further than Abu.

I can see where Karnal is coming from, and it is good to try and hope for reconciliation, but there is just no way that Islam will be able to get the rest of the world to fall for their Pea and Thimble trick.

It is not the rest of us who are intolerant, as Islam is attempting to falsely communicate as it's message for this decade, in the hope of winning concessions for their religion, amongst secular western societies.

To their enduring shame, some governments did fall for this sly deceit in the hope of appeasing the virulent hatred from native born muslims, who had them frightened.

But that is over, the world is waking up to Islam, and now when Islam demands "understanding, and accommodation" from western society, we can now confidently say, "after you", as the very polite people we are.

[quote author=jordan484 link=1271039240/15#18 date=1271220619]It's not me you need to tell that to. Go tell the thousands of hating Jews, Christians and Muslims. They all need to learn about humility. It certainly doesn't come from any of their books. [quote]

It certainly DOES come from their books: read Psalms if you don't read anything else.

The very meaning of Islam is submission to God, which is the practice of humility. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, but if you're going to judge without first knowing, you're making a very big mistake.

Your judgements should at least come from your experience - not some third-hand social/political dogma.

It's very easy to say what others should do - much harder to do it yourself. Before we even talk about a value like humility we should practice it. People learn from our actions, not our words.

Likewise, Mozzoak, the same goes with "understanding" and "accommodating" others - we need to practice this before we send in the dogs and the waterboarding, because THIS is the crisis of modernity we've seen since Sept 11 - the US's decline into a state that legitimises torture, rendition, false arrest and imprisonment without trial.

As ye sow, so shall ye reap - I'm not advocating more violence, just the apparent laws of nature.

I understand your stance, Jordan. I was once a card-carrying athiest. My own experiences taught me that there is something other than materialism that drives this world, and sure, I read lots of books - some dogma, some not.

But blind, tribal hatred is ignorance. If others don't have the ability to understand this, we have laws in place to deal with it. We don't need a constant state of war to deal with life - it only makes things worse.

After all, we live in Australia for Christ's sake. I can't think of a more peaceful place or a more stable economy. If you've got issues with the local Leb boys or whatever, there are people to deal with it. This is hardly Palestine.

To be honest, I've never understood why white Australians would have such huge problems with Muslims - hardly any of us know any. But that's how it works - the less you see of the enemy, the better it is to those who manufacture consent. In 1984, the enemy was just a rumour.

Hatred is not productive, it will only cause more hatred. If others live in this cycle, it's easy, especially in Australia: just stay away from them.

Karnal wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 2:34pm:

To be honest, I've never understood why white Australians would have such huge problems with Muslims - hardly any of us know any.

I don't personally know any KKK members, but I do know their ideology is evil. Just like Islam.

jordan484 wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 4:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Apr 15th, 2010 at 2:34pm: To be honest, I've never understood why white Australians would have such huge problems with Muslims - hardly any of us know any. I don't personally know any KKK members, but I do know their ideology is evil. Just like Islam.

The KKK is a single-interest group with paid-up members. Islam is a set of beliefs and religious practices, often differing widely in whatever region you find yourself in. Can we say the ideology of Alcoholics Anonomous is "evil"?

I must say, for an athiest (or agnostic) you've conceptualized the ethical domain of "evil" rather incongruently - but I'm sure religious fundamentalists would concur. Perhaps you can rest assured that Muslims will all go to hell.

That sort of abhorrent thought process is reserved for the religious only.

Quote:

The very meaning of Islam is submission to God, which is the practice of humility.

'Submitting' to God by doing his will by stoning innocent people to death is hardly humble. They are not submitting to God. They are 'submitting' to a political ideology that basically involves everyone else submitting to them, or dying. "I speak for God and I act for God when I throw this stone at you" is not humility or submission, it is oppression. No amount of bowing can make up for that.

freediver wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 10:02pm:

Quote: The very meaning of Islam is submission to God, which is the practice of humility. 'Submitting' to God by doing his will by stoning innocent people to death is hardly humble. They are not submitting to God. They are 'submitting' to a political ideology that basically involves everyone else submitting to them, or dying. "I speak for God and I act for God when I throw this stone at you" is not humility or submission, it is oppression. No amount of bowing can make up for that.

Yes, I know - if you go out to the Auburn Oval on Saturday, you'll see them all throwing stones at each other. Bloodshed! Primative! Brutal!

I aknowledge that religious discourses can fall prey to religious zeal, and to the practices Freediver describes. I can't defend stoning, and I can't defend suicide/mass homicide. I can't defend the practice and beliefs of many Muslims.

But I don't think Muslims all submit to a political ideology. This is like saying Christians are all flat-earthists and climate skeptics.

And you don't see orthadox Jews stoning each other in Bondi Junction either. Take this one for J_h_va!

The religious CAN fall into to zealotry - as can Zionists, as can Baptists and Hindus. Islam has a range of schools and ideas, including reformist elements. My argument is that you become just as fundamentalist if you paint a large section of the world as evil without knowing WHAT they stand for.

This isn't knowledge, it's witch-hunting.

Quote:

'Submitting' to God by doing his will by stoning innocent people to death is hardly humble.

Are Americans not humble because they fry criminals to death?

Seems like your criteria for humbleness is a little warped fd.

So in your eyes Abu...  "criminals" are the same as "innocent people"?  
Well that explains a lot.

Grendel wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 12:20pm:

So in your eyes Abu...  "criminals" are the same as "innocent people"?   Well that explains a lot.

My brother, adulterers are not innocent people. They have sinned in the eyes of God.

that is not what Abu said...

and I didn't even mention public execution by hanging and beheading...  nor the practice of amputation etc.

Grendel wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 12:42pm:

that is not what Abu said... and I didn't even mention public execution by hanging and beheading...  nor the practice of amputation etc.

My dear one, severing of the body parts cannot occur until it is proven that the evil-one has sinned. They must prove they are blameless, God willing, and an unstained witness must state that they saw the shame occur. If the criminal's family wishes to pay for retribution, the sinner will not be mutilated, so there is much cause to rectify one's sinful actions within the process of mercy.

God wills all things, my friend, and we are all shameful in God's eyes.

No, YOU are shameful in YOUR God's eyes.

[mod: last warning jordan]

jordan484 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 4:29pm:

No, YOU are shameful in YOUR God's eyes. [mod: last warning jordan]

You have just sinned by saying this. I should not even have quoted you, may Allah have mercy on my soul. I shall be forgiven for being pure of heart, insh'alla. Allah Akbar.

You will burn in hell for all eternity, evil one. Your skin will be restored so that it may burn again. You will have no respite from this agony, and the angels shall rejoice at your torment.

Your grave shall be urinated upon by jackals. People will remember you and curse. Your name will be used in vein and slurred. Everyone shall know the name of Jordan484 and spit at its mention, Allah be praised.

Not a very forgiving God your God then eh karnal?  Oh and just a tad biased too eh if he is going to forgive all your sins and harshly punish all others...  ah...  non-muslims.

ooooooh.......I'm quivering in my little booties. What a load of crap. The very idea that you or your "God" would wish that on a human for absolutely nothing at all tells me what an abhorrent, fake and reprehensible load of codswollop it all is. I pity you.

PS. My name isn't really "Jordan".

Sucker.

Karnal, I think you're the smartest, funniest dude on here but you're not doing these people any favours by feeding their ignorance. In fact, you could be doing real damage.

Don't worry, Annie, I'm not offended by your ignorant dig.

Quote:

Don't worry, Annie, I'm not offended by your ignorant dig.

I'm so relieved. I would have lost sleep worrying ;)

Now you can sleep peacefully and dream of me in eternal hellfire, for which I apparently deserve for writing words on a website forum.

You do know Karnal's stirring you up, right? He's not even a muslim.

Quote:

My argument is that you become just as fundamentalist if you paint a large section of the world as evil without knowing WHAT they stand for.

I have tried asking. The more I ask, the less they want to tell me. Most religious zealots recognise they are in a minority. Abu claims to represent the majority of Muslims.


Quote:

Are Americans not humble because they fry criminals to death? Seems like your criteria for humbleness is a little warped fd.

No Abu. Why would I consider that humble? Just because Muslims consider it a humble act to take another life? What exactly do you think my 'criteria' are?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 8:57pm:

You do know Karnal's stirring you up, right? He's not even a muslim.

Makes sense.

Quote:

You do know Karnal's stirring you up, right? He's not even a muslim.

In case you haven't noticed annie, we don't have the sharpest tools in the shed here, so to expect them to pick up on his mockery is a little bit of an ask.

Most of them are so consumed by hate and lost in their ignorance, that anything other than an opportunity for badmouthing Islam goes straight over their heads.

Quote:

Most of them are so consumed by hate and lost in their ignorance, that anything other than an opportunity for badmouthing Islam goes straight over their heads.

pot kettle black...  ths is exactly what you do to america and the Western world.  ::)

The fact I'm merely mocking your attitudes through mimicry really has gone over your head all this time hasn't it?

So you actually think Muslims in the middle east deserve all the crap they bring on themselves?

jordan484 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 7:29pm:

PS. My name isn't really "Jordan". Sucker.

Effende, I am aware you are not Jordan, God be praised. You are Jordan484. May your name be sung by the angels in heaven for all to hear.