Hamas claims majority in new Palestinian elections

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Ann said:
One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying "Stop, stop -- we ran out of virgins!" -- which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular -- oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims' predilection for violence.

In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.

Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
Flav, do you believe EVERYthing you see man???
What, you expect a video from "turntoislam" to reflect an un-bias documentary?
 

flavio

Banned
catocom said:
Flav, do you believe EVERYthing you see man???
What, you expect a video from "turntoislam" to reflect an un-bias documentary?
Do you make an excuse to dismiss ANYTHING that doesn't fit you're preconceived ideas??? Now read this bit below and maybe keep a little more open mind before you try and label things away....

As the Israel-Palestinian conflict threatens to plunge into all out war, this program lays bare the shocking level of violence and murderous hatred in the Gaza Strip.

Palestinian civilians live under constant threat of Israeli military attacks. Israeli settlers live in fear of suicide bombs.

Now it is not only Palestinians and Israelis who are dying. In recent weeks westerners have come under attack from the Israeli army.

In this report for Britain's Channel 4, reporter Sandra Jordan and producer Rodrigo Vasquez face gunfire and tear gas within hours of arriving at a memorial service for Rachel Corrie, the peace activist crushed by an army bulldozer two days before.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
flavio said:
Do you make an excuse to dismiss ANYTHING that doesn't fit you're preconceived ideas???
Nope I try to disprove ANYTHING period, even my own conspiracy theories.
If there is some question as to the truthfulness of ANYTHING, I take that into account.
If I can't disprove any part of it, I believe it until I'm PROVED that the disproof wrong.

So don't take it personal because I try to disprove your stuff.
Any time I see something from a site that seems to have a clear agenda,
I have to question it, starting with that.
 

flavio

Banned
catocom said:
Nope I try to disprove ANYTHING period, even my own conspiracy theories.
If there is some question as to the truthfulness of ANYTHING, I take that into account.
If I can't disprove any part of it, I believe it until I'm PROVED that the disproof wrong.
That is obviosly not what you do. If the white house tells you something you assume it's true against all reason and logic. Anything that disagrees with that HAS to be false.

For example....

1. "it just looks to me like another...."The evil US wants to control the oil in the middle east" story.
Dismissed without disproving any part of it.
Result: Bush agenda.

2. "NRDC ???? "
Dismissed a 100 or so examples with one label without disproving a single one.
Result: Bush agenda.

3. They are not as you say "playing by the rules".
Assume Iran is developing nuclear weapons and falsely assuming rule breaking without any proof.
Result: Bush agenda.


So don't take it personal because I try to disprove your stuff.
Any time I see something from a site that seems to have a clear agenda,
I have to question it, starting with that.
You didn't try to disprove it. You tried to label it. Now that you know it's not from a site with an agenda maybe you'll check it out.

Even if information comes from a site with agenda it doesn't always make it useless. If a brocolli farmer with a money agenda makes a site ranting about how good brocolli is for you it doesn't mean brocolli isn't good for you and his facts are useless. You just might want to verify some of them.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
flavio said:
That is obviosly not what you do. If the white house tells you something you assume it's true against all reason and logic. Anything that disagrees with that HAS to be false.
See I told you, you didn't understand me. :lol2:
You assume too much, then put it up as fact.

You show me a person that doesn't have some preconceived notions, and I show you a vegetable.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
Flav, why do you always go back to bush to prove I'm his puppet or something...

Here's a good non-political example of my openmindedness.
I've alway have a preconceived notion that the shy was blue. Then when I
saw the science behind it, I knew it was clear, and why it appeared to be blue.
 

flavio

Banned
catocom said:
Flav, why do you always go back to bush to prove I'm his puppet or something...
Only because there's quite a few examples and these particular ones were recent threads.

Here's a good non-political example of my openmindedness.
I've alway have a preconceived notion that the shy was blue. Then when I
saw the science behind it, I knew it was clear, and why it appeared to be blue.
Thats' good, I think people hold on to their polital, religious, and cultural notions much tighter than academic ones.
 

catocom

Well-Known Member
flavio said:
Thats' good, I think people hold on to their political, religious, and cultural notions much tighter than academic ones.
For me ...religious, and cultural, but not political really.
Political is on the same level as academic for me. If there is irrefutable proof...
(caught red-handed for instance) I'll run with it.

I do not for instance think the Bush and admin will touch the immigration problem.
Congress might, but I'm not holding my breath.
He said he would, or more like it needs to be addressed, but I don't see
anything being done, unless they are keeping it secret, like other things.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
flavio said:
Thats' good, I think people hold on to their polital, religious, and cultural notions much tighter than academic ones.

I think that's true for most people. I think perception usually outweighs reality too (like the sky being blue). Do you think Muslims are more devout in general than Jews or Christians? It seems that way to me.
 

freako104

Well-Known Member
chcr said:
I think that's true for most people. I think perception usually outweighs reality too (like the sky being blue). Do you think Muslims are more devout in general than Jews or Christians? It seems that way to me.



to me not more. Individuals is what I look at in that some are and some are not. Same with Pagans, jews, christians et al.
 
Top