Gibran Bham October 13, 2004
#81 Posted by arjun_m on October 20, 2004 6:55:03 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#82 Posted by arjun_m on October 20, 2004 6:55:03 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#83 Posted by BruceLee on October 20, 2004 6:55:03 am
DRUMZ
So anyone who constructs a line of oppression/persecution can legitimately react with violence? You just justified Rwanda and Gujarat, you sap.
fartex
See above, Mr Jihad. Christians and Animists from Africa also have a good case for bombing hairy Arab ass to extinction following the genocides in Sudan, right? I mean, you can understand that too, no?
#84 Posted by vertex on October 20, 2004 10:02:19 am
BruceLee,
``See above, Mr Jihad. Christians and Animists from Africa also have a good case for bombing hairy Arab ass to extinction following the genocides in Sudan, right? I mean, you can understand that too, no? ``
Yeah..I do. And in fact that`s a very good example (although poorly formulated by you)...let me ask: why is it when the state of Sudan commits attrocities, everyone pussy foots around the issue...yet if, say, the Darfur rebels commit a terrorist act in retaliation, they`d be considered the biggest pricks on face of this earth by your ilk. Answer me that...that is the essence of the open challange.
Of course, here`s the catch. IF there were terrorist attacks against Sudan (like the Southerns often do), the West would be mum unless they thought it served their interest. Guess what kind of attitude they`d sport? Yup: you had it comming, so stop bitchin.
Arjun,
``A school that counts among it`s illustrous graduates, the hindu nuts who keep saying that any discussion of the killing of innocent muslims in gujrat has to accompanied by a discussion on godhra and past muslims atrocities against their faith......``
Of course, Muslims of India aren`t bombing hindu villages (note: hindus being the majority, and in a position of power) willy-nilly, or sodomising Hindu men in makeshift prisons. Foolish example...try again.
Said school of thought is talking about paralell acts. Terrorism and the American response do not follow each other by a few centuries...
``And I think America is every bit justified in bombing whoever it needs to as payback...If the US armed forces used nukes against the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11, I wouldn`t bat an eyelid... ``
OBL? Is that you?! No wait..your pro-American...damn...had me confused there for a second.
``See above, Mr Jihad. Christians and Animists from Africa also have a good case for bombing hairy Arab ass to extinction following the genocides in Sudan, right? I mean, you can understand that too, no? ``
Yeah..I do. And in fact that`s a very good example (although poorly formulated by you)...let me ask: why is it when the state of Sudan commits attrocities, everyone pussy foots around the issue...yet if, say, the Darfur rebels commit a terrorist act in retaliation, they`d be considered the biggest pricks on face of this earth by your ilk. Answer me that...that is the essence of the open challange.
Of course, here`s the catch. IF there were terrorist attacks against Sudan (like the Southerns often do), the West would be mum unless they thought it served their interest. Guess what kind of attitude they`d sport? Yup: you had it comming, so stop bitchin.
Arjun,
``A school that counts among it`s illustrous graduates, the hindu nuts who keep saying that any discussion of the killing of innocent muslims in gujrat has to accompanied by a discussion on godhra and past muslims atrocities against their faith......``
Of course, Muslims of India aren`t bombing hindu villages (note: hindus being the majority, and in a position of power) willy-nilly, or sodomising Hindu men in makeshift prisons. Foolish example...try again.
Said school of thought is talking about paralell acts. Terrorism and the American response do not follow each other by a few centuries...
``And I think America is every bit justified in bombing whoever it needs to as payback...If the US armed forces used nukes against the terrorists who were responsible for 9/11, I wouldn`t bat an eyelid... ``
OBL? Is that you?! No wait..your pro-American...damn...had me confused there for a second.
#85 Posted by DRUMZ on October 20, 2004 9:34:33 pm
Bruce lee: OFCOURSE a group which is enslaved for 400 years and killed can be justified in attacking back.
You dont seem to mind the initial oppression, u just mind the oppressed hiting back, sellout. And since when was rwanda about retribution.
Arjun: And i think someoene is just as justified in killing thousands of americans. the cycle continues.
You dont seem to mind the initial oppression, u just mind the oppressed hiting back, sellout. And since when was rwanda about retribution.
Arjun: And i think someoene is just as justified in killing thousands of americans. the cycle continues.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- ajeya: #136 mohar11 The ONLY caveat... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- ajeya: #136 mohar11 Amen to... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- masadi: Ras writes "RE: #6... Three Cups of Tea
- Inaara: http://allpoetry.com/poem/3988919
Inaara... Demon - Inaara: I was moved by... Demon
- pmishra2: Thanks, KaalChakra for posting... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- pmishra2: ugh, yet another of... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- captainjohann: Nobody is stopping legal... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content