Replies

You are seriously going to claim that almost all international terrorists are not Muslim.... Really.....

That's not what I'm claiming at all. You said 99%. Prove it.

I suppose that a guy who gets his news entirely from Wikipedia and what he can find on Google - probably sitting at a public terminal in a student union in New York - can't be expected to actually follow current events for the last 30 years....

"Free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things."

-- Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

You're relishing your freedom to be wrong, aren't you?

If he actually believes the Koran to be true and wants to see it inacted, then yes. Just like Ibrahim Hooper.

What other American heroes do you want to imprison? Perhaps some of our fine Muslim soldiers currently serving? Or our new nominee for the UN ambassadorship?

Actually, their political goals and allegiance.

So Zalmay Khalilzad is actively working against the United States?

Does he denounce the Koran?

Answer the question: Who has Kareem Abdul-Jabbar killed?

I would for the same reason we detained 1st generation Japanese.

It sounds like you would for the same reason we detained Sansei: Paranoia.

As I doubt you are an American in the first place, what's this "our"? You support and defend those who want to destroy the Constitution.

Does ZAlmay Khalilzad want to destroy the Constitution? What would that entail, since you think that arresting innocent people based on their religious and/or ethnic background is perfectly acceptable?

If we lose one more American life to Islam, I'm going to hold you and yours responsible.

So if someone dies in your concentration camps, are you responsible? And if you make our country moslemrein then no one will die at all? Tim McVeigh wannabes will disappear?

I am not willing to see more Infidels die just so you can feel better.

It sounds like you are, given that you want to lock up everyone whose religious beliefs don't meet your standards.

"That's not what I'm claiming at all. You said 99%. Prove it."

Point to an act of international terrorism that didn't involve Muslims as the aggressors in the last 30 years.

"You're relishing your freedom to be wrong, aren't you? "

I'm not wrong. I wish I was.

"Answer the question: Who has Kareem Abdul-Jabbar killed? "

Who did the average Nazi party member actually, personally, kill?

"Does ZAlmay Khalilzad want to destroy the Constitution? What would that entail, since you think that arresting innocent people based on their religious and/or ethnic background is perfectly acceptable? "

If he is a believing Muslim, then yes. Oh, and it's "ideological background", not "ethnic background".

"So if someone dies in your concentration camps, are you responsible? And if you make our country moslemrein then no one will die at all? Tim McVeigh wannabes will disappear? "

You keep on attempting to paint the opposition to Nazi-like fascism as itself fascist. Oh, and just how many "Tim McVeigh wannabes" do you think exist?

"It sounds like you are, given that you want to lock up everyone whose religious beliefs don't meet your standards."

You're confused.

Answer the question: Who has Kareem Abdul-Jabbar killed?

This is a classic example of attempting to an impose artificial construct on the debate by intentionally limiting it to an unrepresentative question that is designed to allow only a single desired answer, also unrepresentative.

Zimdog does this all the time, particularly when he would otherwise have to confront an uncomfortable truth. But the fact is, no matter how many times he demands you answer a question about Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, that question remains completely irrelevant to this discussion