Comments by thewhitepearl

Comment #236735 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 8:19 am

(think Holy Grail taunting),

I wave my private parts at your aunties, you cheesy load of second hand electric donkey bottom biters!

Any way,

I usually enjoy the q&a section but I get incredibly exahausted by it all. Same questions, different callers.

452. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236620 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 10:19 pm

booted and horsed brigade

And what is that sir?

Damn, it's hard to stay away from this site!

Right, I know. Same problem here. I feel ya Goldy.

TTFN!

This is the second time I've had to hear of goldy and his gin bottles.

453. Q&A with Richard Dawkins after lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #236598 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 9:14 pm

After the evolution tree jungle,

chrissakes that's funny.

454. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236591 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 8:58 pm

I wonder where Laurie ran off to?

J Mac I believe we scared him off.

[edit]

Loooooooooooooooooooooz Where are yoooooou??

If we can look at the arguments themselves we'll get a bit further.

I tried to make that point way early on to a certain individual and was accused of not mainting a polite atmosphere. Any way well put J

*applaudes*

455. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236574 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 8:13 pm

J Mac,

He hasn't given in yet. Although the sudden silence from him yields me to believe that perhaps he is googling facebook and weighing out whether it is worth the effort.

456. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236571 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 8:04 pm

Lol Laurie, you make me laugh. Facebook allowed me the [ahem] privilege of seeing Goldy's infamous buddha likeness.

Except for now everytime I think about goldy and beer belly's I'm going to gag. For reasons not to be brought up here.

J Mac,

You know I was being facetious....Kinda hinting at previous threads.

edit

457. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236567 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 7:58 pm

Quite simply, and without wishing to cause any offence to anyone, I think the discussion has been superficial

Perhaps. It started off as just me and him passing back a few ideas, I was trying to understand some issues and well, the shit hit the fan from there.

Anyway, aren't you supposed to be swanning around the countryside, young lady?

I did when I drove up here, spent some time by myself, with friends, and without getting into to much details had to pull out the laptop. I've been sucked in for the rest of the weekend, as things are not going quite according to plans.

Any way Laurie, uuuuuuuuuhm facebook? All the cool kids are networking on it right now.

458. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236564 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Maybe it's my English - maybe I am becoming more Kiwi...

Sorry, can't resist-

"NO POOFTAHS"

aww where's 8?

459. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236552 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 7:20 pm

J Mac,

He's the first one that pops up! The second bloke though...I dont know about him ha ha ,hes a strange one!

460. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236542 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 7:01 pm

Goldy,

Yeah yeah lowering standars, going off topic, laughing and chatting back and forth, I feel the topic nazis coming.

Yeah screw the can I need a bottle. Facebook? I'm on it.

Laurie,

I can feel you reading through all of the posts. I know you are out there. I'm waiting.

461. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236537 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:50 pm

I suppose serving a cucumber or pickled cucumber to a muslim woman would be considered torture.

462. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236534 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:42 pm

Kkelly,

Dude, uh girl... you have no idea.

463. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236532 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:41 pm

Mac,

ha ha ha.

goldy

I'll try and give you a touch of slack, but some might think I am a fawning admirer because of your avatar (how a man can fawn over a naked dog is beyond me...). Heaven forbid - I am married! Imagine the scandal! ;-)

[flicks hand] I'm over it. I'm quite tired of this accusations of "club pearl" or "cliques" or "fawning". It's bullshit.

I mean,

Suck it. You know? Sometimes that's what I feel like saying. Suck it.

Any way on the dog issue-On top of that he is a male naked dog and quite ugly.

464. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236525 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:33 pm

Well, I was wrong. You just don't get it. You would change the law based on knee-jerk prejudices instead of upholding the principles of three hundred years of jurisprudence as a shining example for the world to follow or before trying less drastic measures that likely do work. Did you miss Nairb's statistics? It is clear you have not really read or thought about anything I or others have posted.

Wrong. I know that changing the law is not something that can be done now. It would take an almost annihilation of human kind before anyone would think to reform the law. You obviously were missing the tone. And quite don't feel like explaining it.

No, the spouse and the children would not be legally deported, but they would be in practice. I see it happen every day.

Ok what do you mean they would be in practice?

I was also wrong about your willingness to learn

You are wrong about that as well. If I wasn't so keen on learning I would have told you to fuck off a while ago and gone about my merry way. Futhermore I wouldn't have asked you any questions or engaged in any debate with you.

I have a feeling that by learning you mean agreeing with every thing you say and as you so delicatley put it coming to the "light side".

Your "research" program to learn about Muslims is clearly going to be about reading anything that confirms your prejudices about Muslims and will justify your fascist beliefs.

Why don't you try meeting and getting to know a few American Muslims?

Foot in mouth Missy. My stepdads family is muslim.
Any more clever retorts you want to casually toss my way?

Fascist how so?

You know what it is like to live in a free country where civil rights are more guaranteed that at any time or place in human history, and you would change the entire system to take away the civil rights of the native born.

Oh you know where Fanusi grew up and lived? Where he has lived? You sure are fond of the taste of your own foot aren't you?

Please do explain how your views are any different than a Muslim extremist in Saudi Arabia.

Tempting. However you are the one making "the claim". The burden is on you.

I am wasting my energy, so I'm off to bed.

Perhaps that is best. You were complaining of being tired earlier, it's quite clear your brain is mush and can't function right now. Come back again tomorrow.

465. Priest Antonio Rungi wants beauty contest - for nuns

Comment #236520 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:22 pm

Hey Mac,

What are the new 7 deadly sins?

466. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236518 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:20 pm

Goldy,

I've been in this arugument for too long, allow me some slack right now. Don't get testy with me young man.

Any way for future reference you guys know what I mean, don't think for one minute because one of you smart asses wants to come along and catch me slipping on language a few times that you can argue against a position I don't hold. You will be quick to find you are wasting your breath and as Steve got the gist of earlier, that will make me lose my temper.

Any way Goldy that little rant wasn't really directed towards you. I know you aren't giving me a hard time. Well you are but I'll chalk you up to tough love.

[sigh]

I'd like to know how the brewery is coming along. But we'll have to take that to a dead thread.

467. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236506 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 6:00 pm

Would she have the choice?

I don't know that's why I asked the question. And I didn't even finish it. I mean what about the wife/mother would she have to go as well. And if not I suppose the child would be allowed to stay behind as well.

How do you mean "extremists of sharia"? What are law abiding and quite people who do not trust the "western" laws and insist on going to a sharia court to settle matters? That could be labelled an extreme of sharia. I believe there are Jews that go to a beth din court before troubling the laws of the land - would they be deported too?

G-O-O-O-L-D-E-E-U-U-H! I've already answered most of those questions.

I don't enough about the Jews of the beth din courts. Edumacate me oh great booby leader.

468. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236493 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 5:36 pm

TWP, I must ask you to clarify whether you include citizens in with the group "all followers of Sharia?"

Oy I feel that I have answered this question umpteen plus 12 times!! If they are indeed the extremists of sharia yes.

When you deport jihadists, you will be deporting their children as well

I suppose a change in the consititution is required as well. But that being said if it is a male terrorist would the female HAVE to go as well?

I understand where you are coming from but issues that are raised like this make me want to combat the problem with change. It's against the law now? Change the law.

I'm not going to cross over to Fanusi's "dark side" as you put it our everyone elses "light side". I'm on my side and that being said hope that everyone reading takes note of that.

469. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236467 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 4:38 pm

CFL

but when a few people start agreeing on a few fairly well-intentioned, not fully thought out, phrases it worries me where their thinking might take them.

I sympathise with your concern. However sir that is why we are bouncing ideas back and forth. While I can not completely speak on behalf of Fanusi I can tell you that if given the power to do whatever I would see being the most befitting approach to the topics under discussion, I wouldn't run out and demand the ideas that have been brought up here as the final say so. As is the way with brain storming you often throw out any and every idea as unlikely or unsettling the idea might be. At least this is the way I have always brain stormed. No matter how small or crazy the idea seems at first it can be reformed and furthermore can be a stepping stone to other better ideas and solutions. Which brings us to:

It is for this reason that I'm pleased to see Steve Z trying to apply the brakes, and why I was really interested in what Titiana had to say

I agree to a certain extent. Steve Z is not exactly the brake system I would use however. I have very much welcomed Titiana's input.

We are talking about carefully framing laws, and they have to apply to everyone.

Agreed. Not all of the brainstorming ideas that the fanus and I have mentioned today are so horrible. And not all of the one's that have been brought up I have agreed with. As I believe I mentioned in another post directed towards you.

The sad part is there are very few percentage of people on this thread that are actually presenting ideas or suggestions that I can agree or disagree with. It seems that a few people have fallen victim of Ad Hominem and cherry picked phrases or used the foundation of their arguments, on arguments of the past.

think Steve Z's comment "We need a political campaign to ensure that incitement to violence is not protected by religious or cultural sensitivity" may be unspecific, but for me it's the "money shot". Let's stop walking on egg shells and start hammering these people. But for me you've got to remove religion from the argument. We need to say, "I am not going to be sensitive about your Islamic sky-fairy requirements". To ensure we can do this comfortably we have to not be sensitive about anyone's special invisible friend. You threaten Rushdie with those words, then you're going down, sunshine!

Agreed. Couldn't agree more.

edit

Chewedbarber,

I'm sorry I'm not sure I understand your question.

470. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236447 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:53 pm

Goldy,

In vitro, cells, alleles? CYP2B6 PCR what?

471. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236435 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Mark,

Do you understand what I was responding to?

The video.

Have you watched the video? If had put two and two together you would indeed have came to the sum of four. That I was talking about the muslims that are portrayed in this documentary.

Certainly not the moderate, cherry picking kind.

goldy

What same services? the Spanish Inquisition?

472. A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash

Comment #236431 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:35 pm

I do believe I want to send this teacher flowers.

473. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236427 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Goldy

Nooooooooobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Quetz

G'Night dear!

474. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236423 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:27 pm

So if all muslims have to follow sharia
And all sharia supporters have to be deported
That means that .... :-)

Is that what you TWP and Fanusi are arguing for?

[chuckles] Nairb, touche.

Of course it states that all muslims have to follow Sharia. Thank goodness we have those cherry picking muslims. It's not my fault they don't follow the rules. ;)

Not all sharia followers, it would be hard to go around and find them all. I do believe my intentions are directed towards the extremists. The muslims that are engaging and planning on engaging in acts of terrorism in accordance to the sharia. I do agree with Fanusi's point of allowing citizenship by renouncing the sharia. It all comes back to my main protest "prevention, prevention, prevention".

Deportation should happen to men like the preacher in the documentary. If they want to run and rule and islamic nation, why not send them to an islamic nation.

Surely taking a stand against the more active sharia supporters will be a slap in the face to the rest of the islamic world. Make them realise that we are serious.

475. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236409 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:17 pm

So do I. But by winning the arguments, by education, by persuasion. Not by the imposition of draconian penalties.

Christ it's like you totally missed all of the posts Fanusi and I made on this thread and latched on to one issue, not even fully understanding the point we were making on that issue.

The real problem is that the Mid-East has that sweet crude oil we so crave. Costs less to refine. So we have to play.

Not entirely so, as the fanus and I discussed briefly earlier today. That was an issue I had also raised. It was a very interesting discussion before it turned into accusations of anti humanism in the form of oil robbery.

476. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236392 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 3:02 pm

Nairb

Very well then I will re-read the question so that I can understand it better in the entire context and get back to you.

Perhaps. But as Steve and others have been trying to get across, that doesn't mean every single follower - especially those settled, perhaps born, in the West - agrees with its supposed political aims. What is your attitude to those Muslims who perhaps do cherrypick the best bits, and actually aren't out for world-domination? Because at the moment you don't seem to acknowledge that any such human beings might exist.

MPhil, if you will allow me the honor of taking into consideration my opinion on that comment;In all fairness, I do believe that is because at the beginning of this thread, Fanusi and I weren't discussing the muslims that cherry pick. We were indeed referring to the Islamic leaders and followers that can be found by watching the documentary.

CFL

eeek! I am reminded that I still have to reply to the post you made earlier. You had a lot of good points that I wanted to touch on. Forgive me, I will get around to is shortly.

but I am not going to hang around and be patronised by people like Fanusi and TWP.

Bloody hell Steve, when have I patronised you? I've almost ignored all of the back and forths between you and Fanusi and the last comment I directed at you was in no way patronising. That's a bit of a pouty approach to take.

GOLDY

Technically, no-I'm cheating and I'm starting to sound like a broken record. Thank you though!

Quetz

[Looks side to side, around both shoulders, opens the door looks outside, and down the street before closing the door]

Did you say cricket ?

477. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236370 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 2:39 pm

Fanusi,

295. Comment #236338 by Diacanu on August 24, 2008 at 2:07 pm

and

298. Comment #236341 by Diacanu on August 24, 2008 at 2:11 pm

Do you suppose that in your future posts if we are engaging in otherwise thought stimulating debates/discussions you can exclude remarking back to such posters that are applying nothing other than child playground "nanee nanee boo boo" games?

No school of Shariah law considers non-Muslims equal. How could they? The Qur'an - the Word of God - says that the kaffirs are the most accursed creatures.

Right. And if I do recall the statement correctly muslims that claim they are apart of the Islamic faith but do not agree or abide by the Sharia are also considered kaffirs. And according to the more extreme views should also be dealt with accordingly?

Titania

Taken this into consideration do you believe that if this misunderstanding is made aware by the powers that be it would be easier and allowed to deport all followers of Sharia?

When Fanusi and I were discussing our little "methods" earlier I believe that between us it went without saying we were throwing ideas based on the event that political leaders and the leaders of nations would very much realise the threat of Islam and the truth of Sharia, ergo allowing deportation to be an appropriate step. I'm sure if that wasn't clear one of us should have stated that outloud.

EDIT

Quetz,

From what I read on jihadwatch.com

"The precepts of Sharia are derived from the commandments of the Quran and the Sunnah(the teachings and precedents of Muhammad as found in the reliable hadiths and the Sira). Together, the Quran and the Sunnah establish the dictates of Sharia, which is the blueprint for the good Islamic society. Because Sharia originates with the Quran and the Sunnah, it is not optional. Sharia is the legal code ordained by Allah for all mankind. To violate Sharia or not to accept its authority is to commit rebellion against Allah, which Allah's faithful are required to combat."

478. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236340 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 2:08 pm

As I understand it, the sharia advocated by Islamic activists in the UK is a severely truncated form of sharia different than would be found in Saudi Arabia and would mainly deal with civil, domestic and religious matters. I do not think someone who advocates sharia in such a form would be deportable. They would be wise to call it something else

As I understand it, it's the same sharia (laws and principles) that are used to deal with all of the Islamic faith, however it is against Sharia law to go against the laws already set in a non-muslim country. But of course they are not above trying to make it a muslim country.

If the issue of the Sharia is indeed what I have so far understood it to be then eventually, and when it boils right down to it will justify a complete take over by a non-muslim country. Jihad is very much a part of the Sharia, if I remember correctly.

I hope I'm making sense. Fanusi?

479. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236335 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 2:00 pm

TWP
Do I understand you are not supporting deporting muslim citizens. Point?
Yes. The extreme ones, and anyone that commits in a violent act as a result of Islamic faith.
This is what me and fanusi have BOTH been saying.

Uh Nairb, check your editing issues as you are quite making it seem like I answered yes to your first question when in fact I was saying yes to the second half.

Fix that and then get back to me.

Now, as a lawyer, could you say that a case could be made for a law to be passed that hardline Shariah-supporting nuts - Hizb ut-Tahrir and so on - could be deported? I'd welcome your views

For what it is worth I would to.

EDIT

P.S Titania, I do hope you continue butting in on these conversations. An enlightenment on legal issues is a big factor. I do apologise for earlier, now that I am calmed down for the little boys and girls slinging mud I do owe your previous posts a good thorough reading. I hope you can understand that I was very heated and you just happened to cross right in my line of fire. Apologies, aplogies.

480. Kamikaze bacteria illustrate evolution of co-operation

Comment #236328 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 1:53 pm

Here we again, another thread down the drain because of Joe.

Try not to feed him guys really. I don't think my scroll bar can handle all of the action that will result from posts containing pages and pages of copy and pasted material.

Any way,

Kamikaze bacteria study is very interesting indeed. I think I recall a conversation about this on one of the threads a while back. Maybe. The conversation somehow ended up on sperm competition theory.

481. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236303 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 1:04 pm

Logicel,

Diancanu, you can do justice describing the shallow opinions of twp without resorting to sexism (bimbo). I trust you can.

Based on your logic I'm going to go ahead and cry a stench of sexism rising from your comment. Of course that was just another excuse for a lame rebuttal towards me.

482. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236297 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Or are you saying that you support deporting some subset of them, eg Sharia supporters

Yes. The extreme ones, and anyone that commits in a violent act as a result of Islamic faith.

This is what me and fanusi have BOTH been saying.

483. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236291 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:52 pm

Sorry, but I honestly don't know. I took "Topic nazi" to mean an insistence of staying on topic (equivalent to "grammar nazi")

You're right that is what I meant by it. But lets say that Richard Dawkins hadn't made that comment earlier this morning, would you then still be clueless?

I was indeed referring to comments made on a particular thread. Like I told Quetz, it had been relayed to me that comment nazis were indeed on the prowl. Any way we are now off topic and as much as I seem to disagree with you, I don't want you getting bitched at for nonsense.

484. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236286 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:46 pm

Quetz,

I'm psychic, I had already read and replied before I got back over here.

And I am reading the debate with great interest.

Which debate is that?

485. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236281 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:40 pm

Steve,

I saw that this morning! Joe challenged him. I scoffed.

But I do believe he was more upset in the fact that they were feeding a troll. I see a slight difference. Besides, I wasn't referring to him, you know good and well what I was referring to. That particular thread was still quite active.

486. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236279 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Quetz,

Well you never know when someone wants to bitch about something and I guess a few of us seem to be the "easy targets".

Any way PM for you sir.

487. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236275 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:31 pm

Kind of hard to do when you have your feces smeared across half the threads here every day for as you admit, 12 hours.

But, I'll give it a shot.

Not really. But then again you do actively look for a reason to be asinine. I suppose for someone of your childishish temper it would be quite difficult.

I do not fear the topic nazis.

Me neither but this thread is still active.

488. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236271 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Titania,

I meant newbie in the sense of I haven't seen you post that often and also in relations to the direct thread.

I just don't agree that Muslims should not hold political office or should be deported or presumed guilty where no crime has yet been contemplated or committed.

As for the first part let me make myself clear in that I did mean muslims that are active in the Islamic faith. As for the rest of your comment, I agree fully and haven't stated otherwise. Although I can see how it could have been mistranslated within the frequency of posts and such.

489. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236264 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:17 pm

Quetz,

Are you quite sure you want to get into a how are you doing discussion with me on this forum right now? It's been relayed to me that we have certain topic nazis in the midst.

PM for you in about 3 minutes.

490. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236258 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:11 pm

Oh I'm terribly sorry to be so nit-picky, but I found the point quite interesting.

Wasn't talking about you Quetz! Sorry if it seemed I was.

491. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236254 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 12:06 pm

Ah, spoke too soon, she's still jabbering.

You could of course ignore me like bonzai does you childish whine bag.

The only reason that a convicted jihadist would think that pork is a torture is his stupid belief

Apparently there are more islamic apologists on this forum then I had previously thought.

492. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236243 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:56 am

Well, let me clarify, they may not be deportable for advocating sharia (unless the sharia advocates violent acts or the overthrow of the government)

I'm surprised by this. Do you have any idea what the sharia contains?

What I find disturbing is that when people in one breath say it is a form of torture for the muslim, then in the next breath say that we have the right to torture them.

I don't feel it is a form of torture. I don't believe in "torturing" humans. My objection to whoever cried torture on giving muslims pork to eat, was in fact an objection of the word torture, in that sense in the first place.

Bonzai seemed like he was being serious, that's why I was questioning it. If he wasn't, then I'll stop.

When I first read the comment didn't seem like it to me. I think he has stated this. What it is now, I'm not sure because quite honestly find this a stupid argument. Especially when the discussion had started not so nit picky on trivial matters.

What well-established principles? On what do they rest? And what case have you made about problems?

Fanusi, [big sigh] we have been asking that question for about twelve hours now.

493. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236226 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:43 am

See my post 190.

Quite I saw it. Had a smart ass comment in mind for it as well. But since you are so good at tossing round profanity and insults perhaps you would be better suited at it. Something along the lines of muslims, pork, religion, and apologist.

Because revenge is bullshit.
Revenge doesn't belong in a civilized society.
Revenge isn't justice.
Justice is the code of a civil society.
You want a society founded in revenge, go live on a Lord Of The Flies island.
You tedious, and excruciating fucking bimbo.

No comment. Just wanted to point out that piece of half-assed attempt at an insult wrapped in irony.

494. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236217 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:35 am

Our tactics should not match those against which we fight. If we find the tactics of the terrorists horrendous and worthy of punishment, our punishment cannot be equally horrendous.

Agreed J Mac, however, um serving a muslim pork-hardly equally horrendous, which is the issue they Mark seemed to be picking on. Silly.

Yes, but Bonzai seems to be arguing that the pork treatment would have some kind of deterrent factor, which I don't think it would.

I personally am not for or against the pork treatment. It's fucking food. I am however a little exasperated at the whole pork issue being made into such a big deal. That was the only point I was trying to make.

Good lord I can't believe I'm arguing about pork.

My point is there are no grounds for expulsions of US citizens unless there was fraud in the permanent resident or naturalization process. If a person renounces US citisenship, then that person is no longer a citizen.

Just to clarify you do realise that we weren't talking about immediatley shipping out all muslims in our land correct?? I want to make sure that is ABSOLUTLEY clear, since for some unknown reason fanusi and I are repeatedly being accused of wanting to "deport all "native" citizens".

495. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236207 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:25 am

I was not responding to you but to earlier posts by TWP wherein she seemed to indicate that people should be presumed guilty if caught with a ticking bomb and suffer certain consequences for their actions before trial.

Oh really I did? Don't remember saying that at all. You see this is exactly why I didn't read your post(s) thoroughly. You aren't familiar to me and you are interjecting into a conversation that is waaaaaaay in depth. Although I am not saying your opinion is not valid, or not welcome when I see a very lengthy post such as yours, I am very wary of it. Especially when I am already under previous discussions. No offense. But as you quite proved , in anxious to catch up and try to get the "jist" of the conversations you misunderstood what I was really saying. Or had commented on.

I'm sure whatever it is that you have to say or did say is very valid, like I did explain to Fanusi, at that point in time really didn't have the patience to respond.

I'm sure I will read what you said and take it into consideration.

496. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236202 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:18 am

1. Because sadism isn't justice.

2. Sadism serves nothing but sadism itself (see 1)

3. Where does it stop once you've opened that door?

There, there's 3 off the top of my head.

No but they are already in prison, justice served. They have to eat, why not throw them a pork? Are you telling me that the men who commit acts of extreme violence and among the least of things justify bombing innocents, really deserve a second thought to the fact we are feeding them pork? Come on get real. The argument about pork like I said earlier is ridiculous and getting tiring when it was quite obvious when Bonzai made the comment [at the time] wasn't being fully serious.

Because we're talking about the law. And the law of a civilised, liberal democracy should be above that. It's about setting an example.

For jesus christ sake let me re-phrase this for all of you jihad terrorist human rights activist out there:

Why sadistic revenge for a jihad terrorist is something to whine about?

On top of all that feeding a prisoner food isn't what I would classify as sadistic.

What a pretty image this paints; We feed a [muslim] terroist pork and we have pickeeters out front of the prison shouting chants like "repect the muslim faith-stop the sadistic revenge"

This pork feeding girly whining is quite ridiculous and beyond the point of further argument.

497. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236185 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 11:05 am

And do what with them exactly? Put them in prison where they can recruit a nice little army of mujahideen to their cause?

I wonder what Steve's opinion is on the suggestion we touched upon earlier. Prisons dedicated specifically for the jihad terrorist.

498. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236162 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 10:24 am

But why do it, if not for a kind of sadistic revenge?

Well they have to eat, unless you would like for us to starve them. Sadistic revenge and torture aren't exactly the same thing. Furthermore, please point out to me why sadistic revenge for a jihad terrorist is something to whine about?

499. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236160 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 10:16 am

Personally, as something of an Americanophile, I like the US constitution, and think it is morally justified

Yes I realise this. In all honestly and at my own fault I'm going to have to admit after having such a long discussion on this thread (it's been about tweleve hours and the majority of those hours being hours in which I should have been sleeping) a post from a newbie that is so long and incredibly detailed in the middle of it all, didn't warrant the full attention it should have prob deserved. I admit I didn't really read all of it, didn't really find it worth my time at this particular point, as wrong as that may be.

For example the comment the quomak felt was deserving as quoting twice I didn't even notice. But do agree with. However I most certainly wasn't claiming to be an expert and as far as I was aware I wasn't talking about ALL citizens being deported and denied rights that are found in our law system. I was indeed referring to the likes of the preachers found in the documentary.

Case in point, my husband. His last name happens to be Singh and he has brown skin. EVERY time we go to the airport and try to check in, he is held up and I breeze right through. He is asked ridiculous questions and me and my white family and friends never are

I always, and I mean always-it never fails, get picked for random search and ridiculous questions when traveling via plane. And I'm white, blonde, and can barely see over raised counters. I do wonder what is so terroristic about me.

Any way, I can understand the annoyance of having to go through it, although it's not for the same reasons.

500. Channel 4 announces return of Undercover Mosque

Comment #236140 by thewhitepearl on August 24, 2008 at 9:44 am

If it is torture it is self inflicted because of their stupid beliefs. They could stop the torture if they stop believing.Many starving people would cry Jesus if you feed them pork chops and bacon everyday.

First of all, I don't understand what the big broohaw haw about Bonzai's statement is. Goodness I feel like everyone on this thread is just finding something to whine about.

Locking a jihad terrorist up in a dungeon and feeding them nothing but pork for the rest of their lives is not torture. It's a step up from my suggestion of bread and water only. And most would agree better than the death penalty.