Im going to respond on Nordics behalf in the name of sanity. By your logic no one can ever criticize anyone else for doing anything ever because in the past they may have done something similar. So in other words we cant criticize any of the islamic countries that penalize female rape victims with floggings because they commited the crime of being in the presence of a man unescorted? Is that because America used to have that kind of law in place? How about the death penalty for homosexuality? I mean your way of thinking is so unbelievably stupid it defies explanation.
But WHY is it so unbelievably stupid? I mean, put your finger on something man! You talk about the death penalty, mistreatment of women, other things that I've actually AGREED with Nordic on (remember the "their society is just a shithole" comment I made before?) but you morons still throw it in my face as though I'm argumenting otherwise. You miss my point TIME AND TIME again. It's frustrating to have a conversation with you guys because you can't EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT IS BEING WRITTEN.
My point is that you have to be one of the BIGGEST hypocrites is the history of the world to criticize another country for their human rights violations when YOUR COUNTRY'S record is even worse. I mean, if you do not understand this very fact then there isn't really anything we can talk about. I mean, you can criticize Iran's institutional killings of homosexuals, but any Iranian could criticize your justice system for being
racist and your know what, he'd have as valid of a point as you. You can criticize the Iranians for treating women like shit, and they can criticize you for killing 500,000 Iraqis during the last invasion and due to the sanctions we imposed onto them. Hell, they can point to Vietman, Central America, you know, places where we didn't even give women the choice to either put a Burqa on or die. We just killed them. They, ANY ARAB, can point at what is going on in Guantánamo and have a better point than yours. So all in all, I do understand their society is a shithole, but it's THEIR shithole. It's THEIR SHITHOLE to fix. If you're a thief yourself and you call out another thief, what does that make you?
You also make the absurd assertion that we cant criticize islams model of society because our way of life isn't perfect either.
How is it an absurd assertion? Have you ever heard about the term hypocrisy?: "is the act of preaching a certain belief or way of life, but not, in fact, holding these same virtues oneself". How can you teach a kid the evils of drugs when you're a crackhead yourself?
It is precisely that kind of thinking that highlights the delusion most liberals base their lives on. Everybody is the best at everything and nobody is better than anyone else right?
Again with the liberal bullshit story!! Nope, we have to stop being hypocrites, strive toward a more egalitarian society and then we can maybe begin to talk. I have to break it to you, if the entire Muslim population comes into my town and tries to force me out of my house, no one is saying that they may be able to do that, but I ain't going down without taking some motherfuckers with me! The only difference between us and the shortcut republicans is that while you're busy losing sleep over preemptive bullshit and worrying about the martians coming over and planning a takeover of the USA (beginning in Secaucus I presume) we're busy hitting the
puss, showing up at work well-rested and coming home only to hit the
puss some mo'. Dig it? We do not worry about shit we do not control.
Let me ask you a question Slapper- Would you prefer to live under the Islamic model or the American model?
Well, I had no choice, I was born here, hence the "American model" does it for me. But at the same time, if you ask someone in Algiers or Mecca which model they'd chose I guarantee you they'd say the "Islamic model". So I do not understand your point. If you're trying to show that our model is better than their model... well, it may be to you, but it may be otherwise to someone in Karachi. Why is it so hard for you to understand that?
Are immigrants flooding into the middle east to live the Syrian dream? How about the Pakistani dream? No, wait I can already predict your response before its typed- " Well, American foreign policy is the reason why people aren't living the Syrian or Pakistani dream, etc etc".
Nope, but in Saudi Arabia there are a lot of immigrants. Not as many as we have here frankly because their immigration policies are tighter than ours. Besides, I'll have you know that people do not come to this country because of the "freedom" or the "openness" of our society, they come here because of the $$.
Your next moronic point involves blaming Christianity for slavery and the death toll resulting from the discovery of America. Apparently you never passed 8th grade history. The purpose of exploration was for money. The spread of religion was incidental and a by-product of exploration. You think Columbus or the Spaniards traveled to America to discover America so the word of God could be spread or because they were trying to go to India to make money and got lost? Ill give you a hint. Its the latter.
This is he reason why I say you guys have a reading comprehension problem. In no way, shape or form did I ever say that the discovery of America was backed by any religion. NEVER. Still you grab that comment you just made up, grabbed right out of your ass I'd say, and actually argument it further, without even noticing that you just made it up! It's hilarious!
I'll have you know that I lived in Spain for many years and know a thing or two about the "discovery". At first, the first voyages to the Americas were financed by many Sephardi Jews, some living in Spain and some in Italy. Eventually the Spanish kingdom, which had lost a lot of money in the reconquista of Southern Spain and expelled all the Jews (who chose not to convert) and Moriscos out of Spain, found itself unable to finance the exploration an conquest of the American territories. Since the Jews had been thrown out of the country, the
Reyes Católicos found themselves with insufficient funds to launch a full-fledged conquest. That is where the Vatican came in. They accepted to finance the conquest under one condition: The population must be converted. At one point, when it became clear that there was a lot of gold in the New World, the option to kill all natives found was put on the table. I ain't making this up, it is an actual fact. Google Bartolomé de Las Casas and ye shall see.
I could continue berating you for hours but ill stop there.
Berating? Not at all. I love seeing your arguments fall like a deck of old cards. Are you American?
