Pam Geller is technically right .

a reply to: glend

And not point out logical mistakes in spiritual teaching to try to create a peace that will never be since humanity will never transcend the duality game, as long as they keep listening to small minded prophets like Paul and Muhammad who teach the duality thinking, that is creating teams that fight each other of stupid reasons.

Better there is a big lesson learned for all souls here now (the next 50 years), than keeping making the same stupid mistake for thousands of years more.

a reply to: Greathouse

She is right about her and everyone's freedom of speech, she as anyone else should be able to reasonably believe that what she says or holds contests for, will not bring the government down on her head nor turn zealots into murderers. However, that doesn't mean she actually should target Islam in the manner she is doing so. The kind of fanaticism she is so nobly (cough) targeting exists outside of Islam, it exists in ALL religions and ALL ideologies. Is it really so hard to acknowledge that? To demonize one over others? Is it necessary to offend all of a particular group?

Anyway, I get daily updates from Pam Geller, into my email inbox, that lady is quite fond of quoting the Quran, wherein it states to kill unbelievers, I must mention a recent quote from Prime minister Erdogon, that Jerusalem is a Muslim city, quite forgetting that city has been there a thousand years before Mohammed was born, just shows the mindset of modern islam!
That snippet of information curtasy of the Gatestone Institute, another daily update into my inbox.
Erdogon? prime minister or president of Turkey, a nation rapidly going full islam. (where the few Jews and Christians still in that country are treated like ****).

a reply to: Kali74


I understand your thoughts. But the same reply has been given in multiple versions of multiple threads on the freedom of speech.


And while I don't agree with the way she presents her stance. I Will support entirely her right to do so. You do realize the majority of the public. Could all get up and be offended at the speech on here tomorrow. Would you agree that this site should be silenced because it offends most of the other people?

a reply to: Kali74

In a way it is a test for the group to test the fruit of the group. If the group is pure it will still under pressure not produce bad fruits as it will resist the urge to act.

Buddhist in Burma is also failing to keep their calm. They are clearly not following their teachings and creating karma for themselves.

Humanity under Pressure.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

Nothing spiritual about these wars at all. Islam rejects usury which has no place in a world that is controlled by banks and corporations (fascism). And lets face it, if US runs out of enemies, what would happen to all the profits that the Military Industrial Complex enjoys today. Those trillions would end up going somewhere else like repairing infrastructure and creating new jobs. Can't have that, can we! Especially when there are Muslims hiding under your bed to kill you!

a reply to: glend

True that usury is a abomination that should never be allowed in any moral society since it is parasitical in behavior. I also agree that US is moving toward fascism (political power and economic power controlled by few enslaving the rest). And Wahhabi is a Sunni Saudi Arabian sect from the beginning so Iran and Assad is their natural enemies while Saudi Arabia is their natural allies. So if you want to end 911 like sects the country to attack was Saudi Arabia not Iraq or Libya. The fact that US/Saudi Arabia is using Wahhabi to remove Assad, do not change the fact that what Paul and Muhammad left behind is in fact creating more problems than the solve towards creating a peaceful world. The Wahhabi could not claim to follow the Quran if it was better written and Islam was a Religion of Peace. I wish Muhammad or Uthman legacy was better.

a reply to: greencmp

Bloody splinter groups...

a reply to: glend

Not at all ,NOW we have Russia and China to play with in a whole NEW COLD WAR!

Joy.

a reply to: LittleByLittle

China, Russia, Iran, Syria etc etc all know whats going on. The only people in the dark are the hoodwinked public that doesn't understand that western media is a propaganda machine that promotes death for profit (MIC owns large chunk of media).

Iran's former intel minister has stated that Mossad, MI6, And CIA created the islamic state so they not buying the sunni-shia divide BS. link. Why do you?

Greed controls this world, not religion. Follow the money and you will find those responsible for starting these wars.

a reply to: Greathouse

My post was pretty clear. I don't think she should be required nor forced to stop. But if I could tell the hate mongering bigot to stfu to her face, I certainly would and would enjoy doing so.

originally posted by: LittleByLittle

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

Cherry pick all you want, but the ratio is the problem.

Pick any Verse you like and I'll prove that it's you who is cherry picking.

You always improve on what Muhammad really taught instead of seeing the logical flaws in his teachings.

This is the example you give.

This is the thing what the Quran really say:

Sahih International
Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

The first one is a pure spiritual teaching non dualistic teaching probably influenced by Sufi-ism. The 2nd is an impure spiritual teaching that any insane Wahhabi will use to kill by defining corruption like they want. Muhammad keeps giving a lot of room to do what would by both Christian faith and eastern faith (Buddhism, Hindusim) be regarded as a sin/karma action that will destroy the soul.

We argued this before...

& last time we did I showed you the verses preceding & following that cherry picked verse...


It is to do with fighting back against persecution.

It was also a call to jihad decreed because of Cain & Abel...



So again read the verses before & after and you'll recognise that I cannot just kill someone and claim piety...

Only in self defence.


The point of the photo, the verse you say I shared as if to imply I was hiding the entirety of the verse, is actually just the basic moral of the story.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Greathouse

My post was pretty clear. I don't think she should be required nor forced to stop. But if I could tell the hate mongering bigot to stfu to her face, I certainly would and would enjoy doing so.

How is drawing a picture of a historical figure 'hate mongering' and 'bigotry'? I simply can't compute that statement.

a reply to: Metallicus

"Hatred" and "Bigotry" ("Hater" and/or "Bigot") are two labels which only liberals can use to describe other groups, or individuals they strongly disagree with. Most often, these labels are applied to those who are assumed to be "right wingers".

This should be Websters new definition of those words. Very, very heavily used these days in such a fashion. It's a super weird fad. Just thought I would throw that in for clarity! Carry on!

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Pamela Geller may be a rancidly, vacuous khanzeer...

But I say let her spout her ignorance...
Often...

The more she does, the more alienated the far right become.

Oh wow I can see why you were doing a bit of batting for Buster. Your a shape shifter just like he is.

a reply to: Wookiep

Hate+ someone who I want to kill then and there.
Bigot+ someone obsessed with their epidermal shade. Or ONLY their own collective.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Correct. And based on the actual definitions, there are FAR less "haters" than those tossing the word around so much think..or at least trying to convince everyone to think...More bigots than haters indeed! However, many of the actual bigots are the ones accusing everyone of bigotry! It's a strange world, I know.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Kali74


I understand your thoughts. But the same reply has been given in multiple versions of multiple threads on the freedom of speech.


And while I don't agree with the way she presents her stance. I Will support entirely her right to do so. You do realize the majority of the public. Could all get up and be offended at the speech on here tomorrow. Would you agree that this site should be silenced because it offends most of the other people?

What the lefties don't really like is that she demonstrates both left hypocrisy and Islamic intolerance to western philosophy about speech.

If one looks over the history of left propaganda they have been provocative for decades. They absolutely have no mercy on religious and political ideas that they don't like. Hard lefties hate christianity, the constitution ect. Some cant even sleep well knowing that the statement "endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights" is on our primary documents and foundation of our political philosophy. They are tyrants at heart and so love anyone that would kill those who demonstrate these rights to the point.

originally posted by: Wookiep
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Correct. And based on the actual definitions, there are FAR less "haters" than those tossing the word around so much think..or at least trying to convince everyone to think...More bigots than haters indeed! However, many of the actual bigots are the ones accusing everyone of bigotry! It's a strange world, I know.

Yea the bigot police out there have always thought that political satire, hyperbole, protest ect belongs to them. Such things are their exclusive right and tool in the realm of things. They have even changed the meaning of the word bigot to mean white, christian, western ect anytime they use it.

a reply to: Logarock

Good job. You have hit the nail right on the head . What you are talking about is rule number one for liberals .

You justify your beliefs about yourself by your status as a liberal, not your deeds. The most sexist liberal can think of himself as a feminist while the greediest liberal can think of himself as generous. This is because liberals define themselves as being compassionate, open minded, kind, pro-science and intelligent not based on their actions or achievements, but based on their ideology. This is one of the most psychologically appealing aspects of liberalism because it allows you to be an awful person while still thinking of yourself as better than everyone else.

12 unspoken rules for being a liberal