Harleyman Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 that's the funniest thing about Harleyman's rants. When the people that founded his adopted nation designed the First Amendment, they weren't thinking about television shows. They were thinking about religous freedom for all. How about other kinds of freedom callippo? Like some kind of freedom and decency towards the Palestinians from Israel? Did I hit a raw spot? You've posted enough arguments on the forum in support of Israel and it's policies which have been condemned by much of the rest of the world. I may have my occasional rants as you call them but I have a fair idea about what freedom is all about. It's about the right to self determination, the right to be treated with dignity and humanity the right to stop Israelis building settlements on land that belongs to them and the right to receive food and medical aid from the people who feel some compassion for them and not have their boats seized and impounded by the Israeli police I have no good words to say about Islamic extremists who treat women as animals and brainwash gullible young people into hating the west and by the same token have no good words to say about the Israeli terrorists who blew up the King David hotel and shot British soldiers in the back. Perhaps the very same soldiers who liberated your people from concentration camps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 that's the funniest thing about Harleyman's rants. When the people that founded his adopted nation designed the First Amendment, they weren't thinking about television shows. They were thinking about religous freedom for all. How about other kinds of freedom callippo? Like some kind of freedom and decency towards the Palestinians from Israel? Did I hit a raw spot? You've posted enough arguments on the forum in support of Israel and it's policies which have been condemned by much of the rest of the world. I may have my occasional rants as you call them but I have a fair idea about what freedom and also rights are all about. It's about the right to self determination, the right to be treated with dignity and humanity the right to stop Israelis building settlements on land that does not belong to them and the right to receive food and medical aid from the people who feel some compassion for them and not have their boats seized and impounded by the Israeli police That's also what freedom and rights are about I am not anti-Muslim. only biased against those who have hijacked the religion and use the religion as a justification to wage a jihad against the west. I'm not anti-Semitic either but biased against those who 65 years ago also practiced terrorism by blowing up the King David hotel and shooting British soldiers in the back, perhaps some of them the soldiers who liberated your people from the concentration camps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 Where do people dig up these links from? I've never heard of this woman. I read a little of it and figured it wasn't worth my time. I'm a little surprised at Wildcat about this, though he does use an awful lot of links. He uses Rush Limbaugh and whoever this woman is in all his arguments. I guess he thinks I get all my ideas from these kinds of people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 No they don't I married into a catholic family, though I'm not one. The blame rests solely on the clergy and them alone. Even then, most catholic priests are decent men. The fault lies with the Vatican down to the Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops afraid to admit to the world that celibacy has its limits. There were possible remedies they would not listen to, marriage for priests, ordination of women. etc. Anyone who ever read the News of the World knows that there is pedophilia among vicars and scoutmasters, with one difference, they get caught. Stories of the vicars and the choirboys were regular reading on Sundays even as far back as when I was a kid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 And that is all the founding fathers were thinking of, freedom of WORSHIP in something like the American chapel, and everyone has it. They were not giving planning permission to build extravagant religious symbols. So maybe we should run a bulldozer through all the extravagant religious symbols in America? Would you approve of that? The fact is this building will be a community centre for all, being built by Muslims and with a two storey area for worship. On reflection the constitution is a red herring, since the proposal doesn't require it's protection-or perhaps you could identify the reasons why it shouldn't be built? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 You sure? You sure no victims groups or families didn't oppose it, for sure? Perhaps opposition grew as it gained more publicity. I don't think any New Yorker would have to be a neo nazi to be offended by this. The Muslims are not victims of intollerance by any means, but I'd expect you to paint them as victims. Victims of what? People grieving for their dead? The commercial interests of Lower Manhattan have superseded the feelings of those grieving the dead, there are 7 office tower blocks being built at Ground Zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 You sure? You sure no victims groups or families didn't oppose it, for sure? Perhaps opposition grew as it gained more publicity. I don't think any New Yorker would have to be a neo nazi to be offended by this. The Muslims are not victims of intollerance by any means, but I'd expect you to paint them as victims. Victims of what? People grieving for their dead? I'm sure some of them do oppose it - and equally sure some of them don't. You're not seriously suggesting the relatives of the dead should have a veto on this are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 How about other kinds of freedom callippo? Like some kind of freedom and decency towards the Palestinians from Israel? Did I hit a raw spot? You've posted enough arguments on the forum in support of Israel and it's policies which have been condemned by much of the rest of the world. I may have my occasional rants as you call them but I have a fair idea about what freedom and also rights are all about. It's about the right to self determination, the right to be treated with dignity and humanity the right to stop Israelis building settlements on land that does not belong to them and the right to receive food and medical aid from the people who feel some compassion for them and not have their boats seized and impounded by the Israeli police That's also what freedom and rights are about I am not anti-Muslim. only biased against those who have hijacked the religion and use the religion as a justification to wage a jihad against the west. I'm not anti-Semitic either but biased against those who 65 years ago also practiced terrorism by blowing up the King David hotel and shooting British soldiers in the back, perhaps some of them the soldiers who liberated your people from the concentration camps Which is simply you trying to distract the topic from your own lack of concern at the islamaphobic rabble rousing against a project given planning permission by an overwhelming majority in Manhattan when planning approval as granted. Your protection of nasty racists first amendment rights at the expense of innocent muslims first amendment rights to go about their business in freedom, stinks. I may have some minor disagreements with Calippo over Israel, but at least he conducts himself with decorum and consistency and avoids the nasty stereotyping and hypocrisy you have been involved in on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 I'm sure some of them do oppose it - and equally sure some of them don't. You're not seriously suggesting the relatives of the dead should have a veto on this are you? No. It's evident enough though that expecting anybody to cut them a little slack, be gracious enough to show some compassion, tolerance and sensitivity towards them is simply too much to ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted August 20, 2010 Share Posted August 20, 2010 No. It's evident enough though that expecting anybody to cut them a little slack, be gracious enough to show some compassion, tolerance and sensitivity towards them is simply too much to ask. You're making the naive assumption that relatives will view the proposals as an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.