• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Suicide bomber was former Guantanamo detainee

Voidwar said:
So, if you don't even really know what Islam is, why should I care if you call me a bigot for condemning it ? Its hot air from the ignorant at that point.
Click to expand...

I didn't call you a bigot for condemning Islam. Read my posts.

Every believer in the Druidic religion supported the practices and participated in the rituals. They are all complicit, even if only the high druid actually lit the fire.
Click to expand...

I'll decline to accept your say so.

They all did it or facilitated it as it was part and parcel of the religion. All the Thuggee's temples were built from the proceeds of stolen property. all Thuggee believers were involved in this inherent Thuggee pratctice.
Click to expand...

I'll decline to accept your say so. But if all Thugees robbed then I agree it is not bigotted to say a person who was a Thugee was a robber.

All of the believers supported the practices and participated in the rituals. They are all complicit even if it was only a few priests wielding the obsidian knife in their name.
Click to expand...

I'll decline to accept your say so. It doesn't make them all heart carvers.

Why do I care if a bigot calls me bigot ?
Click to expand...

I don't care what you care about. If you feel you've been called a bigot unfairly for asserting that every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorist you can explain to the board why, if you want.

And, I obviously HAVE a basis for it, since I know about Islam. I know the negatives are inherent to Islam.
Click to expand...

I decline to accept your say so, or that you have a basis for claiming every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorists.

If that is your claim it is you who are ignorant as to Muslims, as much as a person who says all Christians wish US soldiers dead because some Christians do that.

This would already be known to you if you had done your homework. The proof is in understanding the concepts of . . . Dar al Harb , al Tekkeya , and dhimmihood. Once you understand these concepts, they ARE the proof that any Muslim is a sleeper cell, biding time and awaiting the numbers to force the rest of us into dhimmihood.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Rank bigotry. Prove it.
 
Last edited:
Voidwar said:
His momma named him Clay , I'll call him Clay.
Click to expand...

Why? You don't believe that people have the right to choose what religion they are and what name to be called?
 
Iriemon said:
I'll decline to accept your say so.
Click to expand...

What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?

Iriemon said:
I'll decline to accept your say so.
Click to expand...

What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?

Iriemon said:
But if all Thugees robbed then I agree it is not bigotted to say a person who was a Thugee was a robber.
Click to expand...

Iriemon said:
I'll decline to accept your say so.
Click to expand...

What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?

Iriemon said:
It doesn't make them all heart carvers.
Click to expand...

They are all complicit even if it was only a few priests wielding the obsidian knife in their name
Click to expand...

Iriemon said:
I don't care what you care about. If you feel you've been called a bigot unfairly for asserting that every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorist you can explain to the board why, if you want.
Click to expand...

I think my point was that I have been called bigot by a bigot, so it don't mean jack.

Iriemon said:
I decline to accept your say so, or that you have a basis for claiming every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorists.
Click to expand...

Of course you do, because of your ignorance of Islam.
None so blind as those who refuse to see.

Iriemon said:
Bullshit. Rank bigotry. Prove it.
Click to expand...

I already did prove it. The concepts, inherent to Islam, of Dar al Harb, al tekkeya, and dhimmihood are the proof. The fact that you wish to remain ignorant of the proof I have already given you is no reason for me to supply you with more.
 
Iriemon said:
Why? You don't believe that people have the right to choose what religion they are and what name to be called?
Click to expand...

Ali's conversion was a political stunt.

So was his name change.

As I said, his momma called him Clay.
 
Voidwar said:
What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?
What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?
What do YOU think "believer" means ? ? ?
Click to expand...

Someone who believes something.

I think my point was that I have been called bigot by a bigot, so it don't mean jack.
Click to expand...

If you don't feel you have to defend that you're not a bigot after claiming that every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorist that's up to you.

Of course you do, because of your ignorance of Islam.
None so blind as those who refuse to see.

I already did prove it. The concepts, inherent to Islam, of Dar al Harb, al tekkeya, and dhimmihood are the proof. The fact that you wish to remain ignorant of the proof I have already given you is no reason for me to supply you with more.
Click to expand...

You've taken a few terms you've found on the internet and then made the bigotted conclusions that all Muslims are terrorists. Nothing any more than if I were to take phrases from the Bible or uttered by certain Christians and then claim that proved all Christians held those beliefs.
 
Last edited:
Iriemon said:
If you don't feel you have to defend that you're not a bigot after claiming that every Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorist that's up to you.
Click to expand...

Why would I need to defend myself, if I'm a bigot , you are a bigot, whats your point ?

Iriemon said:
You've taken a few terms you've found on the internet
Click to expand...

What would YOU know about the nature of my investigations ?

Iriemon said:
and then made the bigotted conclusions that all Muslims are terrorists.
Click to expand...

You are paraphrasing again. I said Islam is at war with us.

I also said it is only a tiny percentage that actually strap on the bomb vest.
 
Voidwar said:
Why would I need to defend myself, if I'm a bigot , you are a bigot, whats your point ?
Click to expand...

If you decide calling every person a sleeper cell terrorist because they are Muslim is not bigotted, then you don't have to defend it. Everyone gets to decide for themselves.

What would YOU know about the nature of my investigations ?
Click to expand...

I know you've indicated that every person who is a Muslim is a sleeper cell terrorist.

You are paraphrasing again. I said Islam is at war with us.
Click to expand...

You are asserting that a person is a sleeper cell terrorist just because he or she is a Muslim.

If you are not you can correct it.

I also said it is only a tiny percentage that actually strap on the bomb vest.
Click to expand...

And the rest of them are just terrorists in waiting, right?
 
Last edited:
Iriemon said:
If you decide calling every person a sleeper cell terrorist because they are Muslim is not bigotted, then you don't have to defend it. Everyone gets to decide for themselves.
Click to expand...

Right, why should either of us worry about being bigots, since we both are, what is your point about bigotry ?

Iriemon said:
And the rest of them are just terrorists in waiting, right?
Click to expand...

More like support and logistics, but you are starting to understand.
 
Voidwar said:
Right, why should either of us worry about being bigots, since we both are, what is your point about bigotry ?
Click to expand...

I have said nothing worthy of being called a bigot. I have nothing to defend.

If your claim that every person who is a muslim is a sleeper terrorist, then don't defend it.

More like support and logistics, but you are starting to understand.
Click to expand...

I understand completely. You're a prejudicial bigot.
 
Iriemon said:
I have said nothing worthy of being called a bigot. I have nothing to defend.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.
I showed you exactly how you are a bigot, three times.
I simultaneously showed you to be a hypocrite.

Again, do you even read the thread ?

Voidwar said:
If you don't think that practice is ok, and it was a inherent part of druidic religion, then that means that you don't think Druidism was ok right ? So that means you are bigotted against Druidism right ? Well, if you're bigotted, and you called me bigotted, then I think your status as a hypocrite is assured.



Well, if you don't think robbing travellers was ok, and it was an inherent part of Thuggism, then that means that you don't think Thuggism was ok right ? So that means you are bigotted against Thuggism right ? Well, if you're bigotted, and you called me bigotted, then I think your status as a hypocrite is assured.



Well, if you don't think cutting out hearts was ok, and it was an inherent part of Azteca religion, then that means that you don't think Azteca religion was ok right ? So that means you are bigotted against Azteca religion right ? Well, if you're bigotted, and you called me bigotted, then I think your status as a hypocrite is assured.
Click to expand...
 
Iriemon said:
I understand completely. You're a prejudicial bigot.
Click to expand...

You are a bigot also, as I have shown, however I don't think I can buy you "understanding completely" due to the ignorance of Islam you have revealed.
 
Iriemon said:
Not that I see. 1) "typical" is not the same as accusing every member of the group with the negative attribute. 2) accusing a person of being a terrorist is hateful. Saying that a person is afraid of unknown men in streets is not.
Click to expand...



So you would have no problem with me for example saying "typical Muslims are terrorists."?
 
Iriemon said:
Which distinction could you not see:

1) the word "typical" is not the same as saying every member of the group has the attribute; or

2) Calling someone a terrorist being more hateful that saying a woman is afraid of strange men in the streets?
Click to expand...



Typical liberals make such silly statments like this. It is typical of liberalism.
 
Voidwar said:
Incorrect.
I showed you exactly how you are a bigot, three times.
I simultaneously showed you to be a hypocrite.

Again, do you even read the thread ?
Click to expand...

That's pretty persuasive how you have to use your own words of mine to try to prove your "if you call me one you are too" argument.

Your own words condemn you.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So you would have no problem with me for example saying "typical Muslims are terrorists."?
Click to expand...

If it were made as a statement of fact, as opposed to an innacurate stereotype intended to invoke hatred and derision against the group, which would be the act of the bigot.

Judging from your posts and the fact that typical Muslims are not terrorists, its pretty clear the latter as opposed the former applies.
 
Iriemon said:
If it were made as a statement of fact, as opposed to an innacurate stereotype intended to invoke hatred and derision against the group, which would be the act of the bigot.

Judging from your posts and the fact that typical Muslims are not terrorists, its pretty clear the latter as opposed the former applies.
Click to expand...



What are you trying to say?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So then you would also have to say that Obama calling typical white people racist is in itself racist.
Click to expand...

IMO it was not an innacurate stereotype intended to invoke hatred and derision against the group.
 
Iriemon said:
IMO it was not an innacurate stereotype intended to invoke hatred and derision against the group.
Click to expand...


So "typical Muslims are terrorists"

Is not the same as "typical white people" make "racial utterances" and "fear" black people.


:confused:
 
Goobieman said:
Can someone tell me:
-What US law did those prisomers we collected in the field supposedly break?
-If they didnt break a law... what, exactly, are they supposed to be tried for?
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!!

This is the problem that people like Iriemon cannot fathom. I have stated before that we have come to a time where our laws are not adequate to accuse this enemy. We cannot imprison a person simply because he affiliates with gang members on the streets of New York. Nor can we simply find guilt in a person for associating with known terrorists or for coming out of particular terrorist camps.

The problem we face today is that we cannot "prove" an individual is a terrorists until they have detonated themselves or destroyed the lives of others. We can't even monitor telephone calls that are under suspicion without the left whining about their rights, which have nothing to do with anything. With events like what went on throughout the 90's and on 9/11, we cannot simply pretend that these monsters wear signs that "prove" their intentions.

Setting them free to prove their innocence is also stupid, because we can see the result of this. Only few cases have been proven to be a mistake and they have been released. The vast majority of every single body in GITMO is under suspicion for a reason. The only alternsative to accepting this truth is to believe that our government is wringing its hands and salivating over incarceration for absolutely no reason. This is equally STUPID.

They are not exactlyh POWs and they are not exactly common criminals. Our laws only cover either or.
 
Last edited:
GySgt said:
EXACTLY!!!

This is the problem that people like Iriemon cannot fathom. I have stated before that we have come to a time where our laws are not adequate to accuse this enemy. We cannot imprison a person simply because he affiliates with gang members on the streets of New York. Nor can we simply find guilt in a person for associating with known terrorists or from coming out of particular terrorist camps.

The problem we face today is that we cannot "prove" an individual is a terrorists until they have detonated themselves or destroyed the lives of others. With events like what went on throughout the 90's and on 9/11, we cannot simply pretend that these monsters wear signs that "prove" their intentions.

Setting them free to prove their innocence is also stupid, because we can see the result of this. Only few cases have been proven to be a mistake. The vast majority of every single body in GITMO is under suspicion for a reason. The only alternsative to accepting this truth is to believe that our government is wringing its hands and salivating over incarceration for absolutely no reason. This is equally STUPID.
Click to expand...


So we abandon the rule of law?
 
GySgt said:
EXACTLY!!!

This is the problem that people like Iriemon cannot fathom. I have stated before that we have come to a time where our laws are not adequate to accuse this enemy. We cannot imprison a person simply because he affiliates with gang members on the streets of New York. Nor can we simply find guilt in a person for associating with known terrorists or from coming out of particular terrorist camps.

The problem we face today is that we cannot "prove" an individual is a terrorists until they have detonated themselves or destroyed the lives of others. With events like what went on throughout the 90's and on 9/11, we cannot simply pretend that these monsters wear signs that "prove" their intentions.
Click to expand...
Here's the best part...
Those that who most commonly claim that the Constitution is a living document, one that needs to be able to 'grow with the times' without the messiness of actually amending it, are the least willing to recognize what you just said.

What's that boil down to?
Their objection to the detention of the prisoners in Gitmo has nothing to do with national security or the Constitution, but their desire to gain and obtain partisan political power and their willingness to do anything to that end.
 
Doc Howl said:
So we abandon the rule of law?
Click to expand...
Rule of law?
-What US law did those prisomers we collected in the field supposedly break?
-If they didnt break a law... what, exactly, are they supposed to be tried for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom