Mumbai gunmen 'were BRITISH'

[IFBBwannaB]

If I could scam people into buying pills that didn't even exist, ...and have them coming back for more for 3 yrs,
...do you think I'd be wasting my time selling $2 gas pills? I'd be selling them $5 million dollar condos, $10 million dollar yachts, $500 million dollar estates! I'd be on Wall Street, or even better, I'd be the Fed, selling a $750 billion dollar bailout! 

ps: Learn to type English. I had to think much too hard to try to figure out what you were even trying to say. 

It's not my fault you need an explicit referral for every part of the sentence.

Also, speaking several languages make me write with mixed grammar.

There's a sucker born every minute and one who buys from you ever now and then.

It's amazing how it's always the most uneducated that have the most revolutionize inventions 
Just like "free energy" it's always some hill billy retard that found a sketch and replicated it claiming he disproved the most basic law of physics 

[Fury]

I guess all those posts around "dancing in the rain" and all that other bullshit where she hints at the gas caps weren't advertising? You need to get off your apologist high horse.

[danielson]

Don't get lippy Boy.

[Dos Equis]

Can someone delete this spam?

Done.

[danielson]

Done.

Thanks, I come here for political discussion, not product endorsements. 

[24KT]

It's not my fault you need an explicit referral for every part of the sentence.

Also, speaking several languages make me write with mixed grammar.

There's a sucker born every minute and one who buys from you ever now and then.

Especially those who would rather listen to some idiot whose never tried something, but claims they have definitive knowledge as to how it will or won't work.

It's amazing how it's always the most uneducated that have the most revolutionize inventions 
Just like "free energy" it's always some hill billy retard that found a sketch and replicated it claiming he disproved the most basic law of physics 

Actually Wilkinson, the inventor of the technology was very well educated, ...even won a nobel prize. 
As for hillbilly's, ...well, I'll admit, I've met alot of them in the past 3 years, and I have to say they haven't been given a fair shake. They're some of the best people you'll ever meet. If you ever found yourself in a tight spot, you should only be so lucky as to have a hillbilly watching your back. And I'll tell you another thing about hillbillies, at least the one's I've met anyway... they're open minded about trying new things, AND they have common sense and a code of ethics, something I doubt you would understand. I heard about one woman in the insurance business who dropped her initial skepticism after she discovered a "hillbilly" had been a distributor for the past 3 yrs in a small little town in TX. She was on a 3 way call with a "hillbilly" who was telling her about how it worked, and she said "I don't need to know that. All I need to know is that you've been selling this product for the past 3 years in that little town of yours, cause I know that if it was snake oil, ...they would have already run you straight out of town!" With that she purchased the products, liked what she saw from them, ...and then went on to recommend them to all the truckers whose policies she was writing.

As well too necessity has ALWAYS been the mother of invention. Many of our long term users admit to having tried it simply because their backs were up against the wall. It was either try this last ditch attempt to save on fuel, ...or go out of business. We provide people with solutions.

[IFBBwannaB]

Especially those who would rather listen to some idiot whose never tried something, but claims they have definitive knowledge as to how it will or won't work.

Science + common sense + logic = your lame redundant text book style hustler sentence is doesn't work.

[Nordic Superman]

Jag, who are you to claim a islamic cleric with a huge audience (an whole nation) is a fundamentalist? He is islamic truth to more muslims that exist in the western world alone, but you have the authority to label him a fundamentalist? Comical... REAL comical...

You're the biggest apologist on here, and you're an apologetic for something you obviously know nothing about.

[24KT]

Jag, who are you to claim a islamic cleric with a huge audience (an whole nation) is a fundamentalist? He is islamic truth to more muslims that exist in the western world alone, but you have the authority to label him a fundamentalist? Comical... REAL comical...

You're the biggest apologist on here, and you're an apologetic for something you obviously know nothing about.

Because I am of the opinion that only someone whose politics trend towards fundamentalism could issue a fatwa.
If I am wrong, I'm wrong, but that is my opinion and it will not change.

[Nordic Superman]

Because I am of the opinion that only someone whose politics trend towards fundamentalism could issue a fatwa.
If I am wrong, I'm wrong, but that is my opinion and it will not change.

Islamic nations, with islamic history above and beyond that of your perceived conceptions of islam implement sharia law. So, Fatwa's are not a decree of fundamentalism, they are in fact at the very core of islam.

And... WOW, just WOW!

You are the most apologetic idiot I have ever come across. You even say that if you are WRONG that your opinion will not CHANGE.

Damn, must be the most ridiculously retarded statement ever. You're an intellectual loser.

[24KT]

Islamic nations, with islamic history above and beyond that of your perceived conceptions of islam implement sharia law. So, Fatwa's are not a decree of fundamentalism, they are in fact at the very core of islam.

And... WOW, just WOW!

You are the most apologetic idiot I have ever come across. You even say that if you are WRONG that your opinion will not CHANGE.

Damn, must be the most ridiculously retarded statement ever. You're an intellectual loser.

Then let me restate that: If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, ...but my opinion will not be changed by the likes of you!

[Nordic Superman]

Then let me restate that: If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, ...but my opinion will not be changed by the likes of you!

So you're selective with what truth you take on board? Equally moronic. 160 IQ once again rebutted

[Hedgehog]

Nordic, I went back to my old political science books last night to re-check a few facts re: Islamism.

It's basically stems from the 1970's political movement in Iran, so you're incorrect in claiming it is much older.

Ayatollah Khomeney is a central figure in the creation of Islamism. He penned several of the ideologies that are central to Islamism today.

You could claim this is all semantics though. But facts are facts.


You're correct however, and this is much more critical IMO, when you point out the fact that one of the main principles of Islamism is to become global, it is aggressive.

This is something undeniable.

Islamism is totalitarian in that the clergyship is considered to fit to lead and decide how the rest of the society should be run.

And then of course the whole world is suppposed to become Muslim. However, Khomeney advises against using "bad" methods fighting the infidels.

But world domination is a goal.

Fact is, Islamism came about as an reaction to what many fundie Muslims saw as a secular movement in Islam countries.


If jaguar would actually take the time to learn about the facts of Islamism, and not just listen to either racists or cultural apologists, she might just be able to see that Islamism is in fact an antagonist to Democracy (as Robert Dahl would put it).

[Nordic Superman]

It's true that facts are facts, islamism == islam

Islamism is simply an "-ism" constructed to represent islam ideology originally with French roots. Can you refute this? Whenever I speak of islamism I refer to it as an "-ism" not some fringe political ideology created in the 70's -  the man simply lay claim to it and put his own persuasions to it, kinda like people on Getbig claiming to be nutritionist whilst just re-packaging the keto or calorie deficit diets. The koran itself enforces islamism - it calls on believes to murder in certain situations and its final goal is to have dictatorial control over the entire world, the dictator being the koran itself, timeless, infallible laws created by God. It also puts muslim in the position of power by default, i.e. a Jewish baby born in an true Islamic government would have to pay the jizya and be a second class citizen compared to a muslim baby.

Ruhollah Khomeini himself was the man to enforce a islamic government and courts in Iran, which the koran demands. He was an islamist because he desired this totalitarian islamic "paradise". Throughout the history of islam, the same applies. The enforcers of the past were islamists.

[Hedgehog]

It's true that facts are facts, islamism == islam

Islamism is simply an "-ism" constructed to represent islam ideology originally with French roots. Can you refute this? Whenever I speak of islamism I refer to it as an "-ism" not some fringe political ideology created in the 70's -  the man simply lay claim to it and put his own persuasions to it, kinda like people on Getbig claiming to be nutritionist whilst just re-packaging the keto or calorie deficit diets. The koran itself enforces islamism - it calls on believes to murder in certain situations and its final goal is to have dictatorial control over the entire world, the dictator being the koran itself, timeless, infallible laws created by God. It also puts muslim in the position of power by default, i.e. a Jewish baby born in an true Islamic government would have to pay the jizya and be a second class citizen compared to a muslim baby.

Ruhollah Khomeini himself was the man to enforce a islamic government and courts in Iran, which the koran demands. He was an islamist because he desired this totalitarian islamic "paradise". Throughout the history of islam, the same applies. The enforcers of the past were islamists.

You're being correct about the Islamists using the Koran.

But Iran and Khomenei were responsible for the "rebirth" of Islam as a political theory.


He and others formulated how to apply the good ol book on todays political system, just like you mention.

Or rather, Khomenei was the man who formulated the idea that Muslims, and eventually everyone, had to live in a society that were set by the rules of the Koran.

Which he got straight out of the book of course.

I wonder if so called "Black Muslims" or the those "Muslims" that jaguar claims to live next to are even aware of the fact that Islamism, and their holy book, seeks world domination?

FWIW, I see "Black Muslims" as some kind of Diet Pepsi version of Muslims. Do they even believe in Allah? Or is it just the hat thing for them?

[Nordic Superman]

Or rather, Khomenei was the man who formulated the idea that Muslims, and eventually everyone, had to live in a society that were set by the rules of the Koran.

No, he wasn't. The koran (God) himself formulated the idea that everyone must submit either as a muslim or non-muslim and must be ruled by sharia law. His thought process was nothing new, check the history books. You're simply applying the term "islamism" to his attempt to enforce it.

[Hedgehog]

No, he wasn't. The koran (God) himself formulated the idea that everyone must submit either as a muslim or non-muslim and must be ruled by sharia law. His thought process was nothing new, check the history books. You're simply applying the term "islamism" to his attempt to enforce it.

Alright, I should've called it "his political ambitions to enforce the Koran".


The question is whether Islamism, as a reaction to the secular movement in the Muslim world, will eventually run into a counter-reaction itself.

Or even a more interesting question is: What would trigger such a counter-reaction in the Muslim world?

It seems like the Christian fundies are starting to lose ground the last year or so.

The secular society has fought back after a few decades of setbacks.

What would cause something similar in the Muslim world?

Can this financial crisis force the Muslim countries to "go secular"?

[Nordic Superman]

Alright, I should've called it "his political ambitions to enforce the Koran".


The question is whether Islamism, as a reaction to the secular movement in the Muslim world, will eventually run into a counter-reaction itself.

Or even a more interesting question is: What would trigger such a counter-reaction in the Muslim world?

It seems like the Christian fundies are starting to lose ground the last year or so.

The secular society has fought back after a few decades of setbacks.

What would cause something similar in the Muslim world?

Can this financial crisis force the Muslim countries to "go secular"?

Don't use the roley eyes. We're on the same ship as far as opinions on this are concerned so it's not in my interest to undermine you, but I believe you to be incorrect. Islamic aggression is sold as a modern phenomenon by our Western governments, and I think you've been somewhat sold into it to by claiming islamism is a creation of a -single man 40 years ago. I simply asked you to refute that "islamism" as an "-ism" that was coined in France over 100 years ago.

But yes, in your example you're right, with the idea that Khomeini reignited, like-minded islamic nations (oil producers) increased oil prices by lowering output, which put "islam" via the economics of the region into light as a world power and influencer.