Islam Threatens The Free World
Moderator: EC
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
This is the reason why I've been debating with you. You have been using your sense of ALL to judge Americans based on American history. Now, please just answer the simple question that I've asked you several times. It might be the fourth or the fifth time I've asked; I've lost count.Admiral wrote:My teacher told me that all Americans think in this way more or less. I can't give my own thoughts because I haven't been in America, but I hope (and I'm sure) there are also Americans who are sensible and know how to deal with such problems.
Not all Americans voted and supported Bush. Tell me, what about those who didn't vote and support him? Were they supporting Bush, a terrorist, in your eyes?
Thank you for giving me his point of view, Lennye. Yeah, if danyet really meant this, I wouldn't have posted my critisicm.His point 1. That guy is a terrorist to him.
His point 2. Muslims must worship him and praise him, no matter what he'd done.
His point 3. The poster was a Muslim who denied what M. did. Or in other words, if you were a Gernman who didn't question anything about Hitler's action, but you said you didn't like the thought of killing a Jew. It'd would be s hypocritical saying since you'd already indirectly supported him by not questioning his ways.
His point 4. Since the poster didn't try to question what he'd done, he indirectly supported a terrorist in Danyet's eyes.
What I think to these opinions, is that Americans should have let the culture develope itself, because a strong bind to religion is what all countries had in their primal state.
I can understand that Americans were very angry because of 11.9., and so the Irak War was (although it's wrong) imaginable.
But however I guess the Americans now want to shut out the danger that there could be a terror act again, so they wanted to shut out any reason of terrorism.
But I still think it's wrong to shut out the religion, because a religion is only a sort of paper to me. And I think America should rather attack the terrorist organisation than to attack the countries where the terrorists are staying, because the countries didn't have anything to do with the terrorists.
For a president voting, it's only important what the majority said. Is it right? So, I meaned "Americans" by "the majority of Americans", I thought it could be counted as the same, at least for talking about voting.Not all Americans voted and supported Bush. Tell me, what about those who didn't vote and support him? Were they supporting Bush, a terrorist, in your eyes?
I should have said: "the majority of Americans", sorry.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
Exactly! I never said his examples were right, but I could see where he was coming from. As for yours, I couldn't see the relations. That's why I've been asking you. As you know American population is approximately around 250 millions, and 48% of them voted for Kerry in the 2004 presidential voting. Do you know how many Americans you've said supported for a terrorist while they didn't?
- eman
- Rising Star
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 1:36 pm
- Location: country of peace and love
say whatever you want.......danyet
I really believe in my religion....
and every individual has his own personality.....even you danyet
and my prophet mohammed had sent to this world to guide people to islam...because allah asked him to do that
USA is responsible for all the wars around the world not islam...because USA trying to judging islam and finish it.....this is the main reason
I really believe in my religion....
and every individual has his own personality.....even you danyet
and my prophet mohammed had sent to this world to guide people to islam...because allah asked him to do that
USA is responsible for all the wars around the world not islam...because USA trying to judging islam and finish it.....this is the main reason
- fortminor
- Rising Star
- Posts: 283
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 4:05 pm
- Location: Iran
- Danyet
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: USA
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
Did you really read what you quoted? Your religion abandons and shuns people who leave Islam. You can figure out the rest of what I'm trying to say, can't you?fortminor wrote:i strongly accept this part, and Islam is a religion of peace and Love in my opinion.I dont wanna change yours!LennyeTran wrote: Religions were built to teach others to love, not to form a gang and shun someone out of the group.
She thought you were speaking in a friendly way without bad background intentions. How can you require others to don't think Islam is evil to think in your way?fortminor wrote:
LennyeTran wrote:
Religions were built to teach others to love, not to form a gang and shun someone out of the group.
i strongly accept this part, and Islam is a religion of peace and Love in my opinion.I dont wanna change yours!
Did you really read what you quoted? Your religion abandons and shuns people who leave Islam. You can figure out the rest of what I'm trying to say, can't you?
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
She only wanted to believe what she wanted to believe, which was not what I was originally talking about. As I said,Admiral wrote:She thought you were speaking in a friendly way without bad background intentions. How can you require others to don't think Islam is evil to think in your way?fortminor wrote:
LennyeTran wrote:
Religions were built to teach others to love, not to form a gang and shun someone out of the group.
i strongly accept this part, and Islam is a religion of peace and Love in my opinion.I dont wanna change yours!
Did you really read what you quoted? Your religion abandons and shuns people who leave Islam. You can figure out the rest of what I'm trying to say, can't you?
I criticize any religion that tries to shun others because they don't share the same faith anymore. It's wrong! Religions were built to teach others to love, not to form a gang and shun someone out of the group. Acting otherwise than bringing love and peace is a cult-like group, to me.
Her religion abandons and shuns people who don't share the same faith anymore. She left out that part because she didn't wanna accept it and went on to praise it instead. She can do that to whoever she likes, but not in front of me when I just fnished criticizing it. It's a slap in my face, to me.
danyet wrote:Did Jesus wage wars?
So Jesus wanted, but only didn't achieve. http://bitflow.dyndns.org/german/Andrea ... 030216.docJesus wrote:Don't think I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace to the earth, but the sword! Quoted from Matthäus, 10th chapter, verse 34, and Jesus said it.
And what do you say about the crusades against the Orthodox and the Islam? Wikipedia says that the motives are religious and economical.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreuzzug
Buddha himself didn't, but for example Japan made war towards USA in the 2nd world war because they said it's a defense for the buddhist nations.danyet wrote:Did Buddha wage wars?
Sometimes Buddhist temples in Japan or Tibet made wars against others, sometimes Buddhist countries made wars against others (for example Thailand and Burma).
I really wonder whether the mankind can live without war.
edit: Ok it was my fault I quoted danyet's post but I thought he was Lennye, sorry very much to you both. I have already corrected it.
Last edited by Admiral on Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
However, you see that you can interpret mostly anything out of religious books like Koran or Bible because their writers tried to write mostly everything into their books.
So my really really serious sentence is: Religion is NOT a reason for a war.
Marx said that religion is the opium of the people. But I say that religion is the fury-tablet of the people.
So my really really serious sentence is: Religion is NOT a reason for a war.
Marx said that religion is the opium of the people. But I say that religion is the fury-tablet of the people.
- Danyet
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: USA
Firstly, I am not here to argue and compare religions. Only to expose Mohammed as a fraud through his historical actions.Admiral wrote:However, you see that you can interpret mostly anything out of religious books like Koran or Bible because their writers tried to write mostly everything into their books.
The Crusades have nothing to do with the Jesus compared to Mohammed argument anyway! The only reason I mentioned Jesus is because Muslims keep saying that "Islam is the religion of peace". And you still haven't shown where Jesus was a killer!
Mohammed ordered 86 military actions against non-muslims 22 of which he personally led.
That fact alone exposes him as the killer he was and not a man of peace.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
I don't see what you've brought up is related to this topic, but I'm gonna straighten it out, anyway.Admiral wrote:Buddha himself didn't, but for example Japan made war towards USA in the 2nd world war because they said it's a defense for the buddhist nations.danyet wrote:Did Buddha wage wars?
Your statement about Japan's motive in WWII is invalid. I don't know where you got your source from, but it was clear in history that Japanese soldiers fought for their Emperor even though they were Buddhists. They didn't fight the war in the name of religion. They forced the US into this war because,
In the summer of 1941, the United States began an oil embargo against Japan, which was a protest of Japan's incursion into French Indo-China. (WWII)
Or you can read here for more information,
Check the sanction part
Japan had a dream to control the Asian part, and this was the reason why they were in the WWI and II. I don't see how Buddhism has anything to do with it like you said.
Because of religion? :?Admiral wrote:Sometimes Buddhist temples in Japan or Tibet made wars against others, sometimes Buddhist countries made wars against others (for example Thailand and Burma).
- Danyet
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: USA
http://www.iivs.de/~iivs01311/H-B-K/deba.hi.05.htm It tells about Japan, the second world war, and Hitler, how they all used Buddhism as their reason for the war. But this text is very long and it's in German, I would suggest you to buy a translating programm.Your statement about Japan's motive in WWII is invalid. I don't know where you got your source from
hahaha Lennye/danyet, I laugh at you.
So, if you find a true fact that doesn't fit into your head, you need a source. What about the lies which fit in your head? Haha why haven't you ever criticised the "sources" of your cute boyfriend?Lennye wrote:Your statement about Japan's motive in WWII is invalid. I don't know where you got your source from
My advice to you: I understand, that you want to help danyet. But: The truth is always more important than your boyfriend.
PS: I got my source from the site I quoted above.
So you feel strong when your girlfriend helps you?Are you blind or does your ignorance forbid you to read? The first post on page 11. I would be very happy to if my fiancee helps me soo much, too, but the fact that she helps you doesn't allow you to be overzealous.danyet wrote:Admiral seems to have no recourse against the fact that Mohammed was a killer, that is why he tries to bring up Japan but there is no evidence that either Buddha or Jesus waged war. Only Mohammed!
- Danyet
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 779
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:29 am
- Status: Teacher of English
- Location: USA
Of course i have not bothered to answer your lame post on page 11!!
Because it does not have anyting to do with my answering assertation that only Mohammed killed people. Not Jesus and not buhdda.
You can twist the words of Jesus and Mohammed to mean anything you want. That is why I have brought only the actions of these three into judgement and comparison.
Now, get that stuck into your brain because your arguments are nothing but drivel to me and do not even address the subject at hand. I would rather stick needles in my eyes than read one more of your inane posts.
PS On an interesting side note. Far be it from me to be a name caller...but..
This is what I found when I searched THE ENCYCLOPEADIA BRITANNIA for the word "Moron".
Adimiral
Gold Member. Joined 24 September 2005
Because it does not have anyting to do with my answering assertation that only Mohammed killed people. Not Jesus and not buhdda.
You can twist the words of Jesus and Mohammed to mean anything you want. That is why I have brought only the actions of these three into judgement and comparison.
Now, get that stuck into your brain because your arguments are nothing but drivel to me and do not even address the subject at hand. I would rather stick needles in my eyes than read one more of your inane posts.
PS On an interesting side note. Far be it from me to be a name caller...but..
This is what I found when I searched THE ENCYCLOPEADIA BRITANNIA for the word "Moron".
Adimiral
Gold Member. Joined 24 September 2005
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
If you can't even get your source right, please don't waste my time. Rewriting biased information for history is a crime. Ony gullible people would actually believe Japanese soldiers fought in the WWII because of Buddhism.Admiral wrote:http://www.iivs.de/~iivs01311/H-B-K/deba.hi.05.htm It tells about Japan, the second world war, and Hitler, how they all used Buddhism as their reason for the war. But this text is very long and it's in German, I would suggest you to buy a translating programm.Your statement about Japan's motive in WWII is invalid. I don't know where you got your source from
hahaha Lennye/danyet, I laugh at you.
Members of EC, would you please do me a favor and raise your hand, so I can see how many people believe this information he posted?
I'm not gonna waste my time to defend this. I don't waste time with kids who don't know much. You'll grow up some day. When you do, give me a call and we'll discuss about world crisis.Admiral wrote: So, if you find a true fact that doesn't fit into your head, you need a source. What about the lies which fit in your head? Haha why haven't you ever criticised the "sources" of your cute boyfriend?
My advice to you: I understand, that you want to help danyet. But: The truth is always more important than your boyfriend.
PS: I got my source from the site I quoted above.
Lennye wrote:Members of EC, would you please do me a favor and raise your hand, so I can see how many people believe this information he posted?
PS: (besides, if the members here really follow Lennye's childish behaviour of voting) I am a normal Chinese living in a very liberal country like Germany. I have nothing to do with USA or Islam or Christianity or Buddhism.Lennye wrote:I'm not gonna waste my time to defend this. I don't waste time with kids who don't know much. You'll grow up some day. When you do, give me a call and we'll discuss about world crisis.
Let's imagine a society like esl club. If somebody goes and spreads anger through the whole society, like what danyet does, don't you want him to stop? If yes, don't you want to tell him what is true?
And I think it's apparent who the real kid is.
Don't you want to check whether this blaim fits better to another user?I don't waste time with kids who don't know much.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
If asking people to show me that they also think that your view is wrong is childish, then you need to get a dictionary to see the real meaning of childish.Admiral wrote: PS: (besides, if the members here really follows Lennye's childish behaviour of voting) I am a normal Chinese living in a very liberal country like Germany. I have nothing to do with USA or Islam or Christianity or Buddhism.
I'm tired of telling you that you can't read English. Maybe, it's better if you hear from others. It'd be helpful for you since you've been reading information from websites that can't be trusted, or you've posted information that have nothing to do with the main points.
If you want people like me to believe what you quoted, first you should try to do it the correct way. This is an example how a source should be trusted,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love
Scroll down to the bottom and see the notes, references, and external links. An article without one of these is a personal opinion. I don't see the notes, references, or external links at the end of that article. Hence, I don't give a darn about the personal opinion of that site you quoted. A personal opinion can be biased unless is proven right.
Quoting a source that has only copyright has nothing to do with it as being a reliable source. If I wrote something my own and would like to get it copyright, I would have the right to do so. But would my source be reliable? Well, it would depend on how and where I collect my information.
Please, give me something that I could actually spend my time to read.
It depends on how a person sees it. To someone who can't understand English like you I don't try to waste my time with this.Admiral wrote:Let's imagine a society like esl club. If somebody goes and spreads anger through the whole society, like what danyet does, don't you want him to stop? If yes, don't you want to tell him what is true?
- Shazzam
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 4:40 am
- Location: Australia
Firstly Lenny we are here to help people that don't understand and are trying to learn english (foremost) I thought. So I have to disagree with your last post. I do agree that sometimes things get a little hostile in some of the threads, however that is how conversations start, so there is nothing wrong with that.
Sometimes things do get a little personal I think that at times we all have to agree to disagree. That is just life. If we all felt the same about everything it would be a very boring world.
Sometimes things do get a little personal I think that at times we all have to agree to disagree. That is just life. If we all felt the same about everything it would be a very boring world.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
I can help people who ask for help. He doesn't think he needs help with his English. If I did think he was that ignorant and could not be changed to learn more, I wouldn't have bothered to reply to his posts at all. I can choose not to reply to posters that cannot be helped.Shazzam wrote:Firstly Lenny we are here to help people that don't understand and are trying to learn english (foremost) I thought. So I have to disagree with your last post. I do agree that sometimes things get a little hostile in some of the threads, however that is how conversations start, so there is nothing wrong with that.
Sometimes things do get a little personal I think that at times we all have to agree to disagree. That is just life. If we all felt the same about everything it would be a very boring world.
This is a nice website.
Why do you tell this to me? I guess there is another guy who deserves this critic more.If you want people like me to believe what you quoted, first you should try to do it the correct way.
This sentence of Lennye also depends on how the public sees it, not only Lennye.It depends on how a person sees it. To someone who can't understand English like you I don't try to waste my time with this.
hey any admins here? Don't you think this thread is finished now? It's not very productive to mess around with blaims.
Last edited by Admiral on Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
I don't care about whoever you're talking about. You're arguing with ME, so either get your sources in the correct way or stick with the topic. You can't do neither one of them.Admiral wrote:This is a nice website.
Why do you tell this to me? I guess there is another guy who deserves this critic more.If you want people like me to believe what you quoted, first you should try to do it the correct way.
You were asking ME. If you're curious of how people see Danyet, ask them. Do not ask me and then expect me to see it like everyone else does. How lame!Admiral wrote:This sentence of Lennye also depends on how the public sees it, not only Lennye.It depends on how a person sees it. To someone who can't understand English like you I don't try to waste my time with this.
You CAN'T get your sources correct or stay with the topic to persuade others to believe you. Not only that you tried to changed history with your biased personal opinion article that some lame person wrote it. Then you expect me to believe it. And let me see what you said, hahaha Lennye/danyet, I laugh at you. Yeah, very mature. What a lame-o!Admiral wrote:hey any admins here? Don't you think this thread is finished now? It's not very productive to mess around with blaims.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
You mean all Muslims? Of course, you guys love to hang people who talk about your prophet. What else is new?mr_Love wrote:i dont know whats wrong with Danyet,,,
he hates Islam,,, but he always talk about it,,,\\
whereas if a muslim member write any thing about Islam,, all people here get mad off him
Discussions about policy and worldly news should be objective, so I'm not arguing with you, I hope you could get it.I don't care about whoever you're talking about. You're arguing with ME, so either get your sources in the correct way or stick with the topic. You can't do neither one of them.
And do you always stick to the topic? Don't come with rules like "stick to the topic", do you stick to the topic?
Sometimes you bully other members, and last time you mentioned Redrose, maybe that should be an attack to me...
See above, I don't have time fooling around with you, I speak to everybody who reads this thread. I hope it's clear now.You were asking ME
Of course I can get my sources correct. I always post the German article on which my post is based on at the beginning of political discussions.You CAN'T get your sources correct or stay with the topic to persuade others to believe you. Not only that you tried to changed history with your biased personal opinion article that some lame person wrote it. Then you expect me to believe it.
Mr.Love means all esl club users. Is Mr.Love a muslim?You mean all Muslims? Of course, you guys love to hang people who talk about your prophet. What else is new?
Listen, we are not racist. I hope you are not racist, too. Why not thinking about it: Do you really want to become racist only because your boyfriend is racist? You don't belong to him.
- MissLT
- Top Contributor
- Posts: 2530
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 3:05 pm
- Status: Other
This is what you wrote,Admiral wrote:
Discussions about policy and worldly news should be objective, so I'm not arguing with you, I hope you could get it.
The reason why I jumped into this topic because of this. You insulted not only him (your business with him), but you also insulted ALL Americans who didn't vote and support Bush, which meant you insulted ME, a Vietnamese-American who did not vote nor support him along with that group.Admiral wrote: 3 Danyet is American = 4 Danyet supports at least one terrorist.
You replied to Danyet as a personal attack, using his own way to "work" on him. In fact, this is what you said in your other post. Is this "objective" to you to generalize like this? I guess this is your definition of objective.
No, I don't, but I try my best in Current News. I don't try to generalize or give biased information like "Japanese Buddhist soldiers died for their religion in WWII" Ha, still laughing at this!Admiral wrote:And do you always stick to the topic? Don't come with rules like "stick to the topic", do you stick to the topic?
Yes, it was. I do not like you.Admiral wrote:Sometimes you bully other members, and last time you mentioned Redrose, maybe that should be an attack to me...
You think someone bullies another because you, like many others, hate to be corrected. I correct people; I don't bully.
Admiral wrote:See above, I don't have time fooling around with you, I speak to everybody who reads this thread. I hope it's clear now.You were asking ME
The post was directly for me, but the "YOU" was to everyone. Should I teach you to write as well?Admiral wrote:Let's imagine a society like esl club. If somebody goes and spreads anger through the whole society, like what danyet does, don't you want him to stop? If yes, don't you want to tell him what is true?
Admiral wrote:Of course I can get my sources correct. I always post the German article on which my post is based on at the beginning of political discussions.You CAN'T get your sources correct or stay with the topic to persuade others to believe you. Not only that you tried to changed history with your biased personal opinion article that some lame person wrote it. Then you expect me to believe it.
Sure, he's not. When did you change your faith, Mr_Love? How come this kid didn't know you were a Muslim?Admiral wrote:Mr.Love means all esl club users. Is Mr.Love a muslim?You mean all Muslims? Of course, you guys love to hang people who talk about your prophet. What else is new?
I doubt your definition of racism; therefore, I'm not gonna waste my time to defend to a person who thinks it's not an attack or childish to call Danyet my "boyfriend" or "cute boyfriend" in his every post.Admiral wrote:Listen, we are not racist. I hope you are not racist, too. Why not thinking about it: Do you really want to become racist only because your boyfriend is racist? You don't belong to him.