OT - JSB - what do ya' think of...

Dec 27, 2007 130 Replies

I didn't say that. I said they came under attack because of Muslim ass-kissing. It's a bit different from letting girls wear headscarves.

It's very wrong to think of the terrorists that way. They are very disciplined and principled, only their principles are immoral.

Actually they do, only they're not those of conventional warfare.

This is why nation building is also necessary, but in reality we don't look like ruthless thugs to the civilians, who know that Americans are reluctant to kill non-combatants.

Treating POWs decently did not make George Washington look weak to the British, nor, in WWII, did the Japanese think the US was weak because of that (but letting captured soldiers live at all was seen as weakness).

Emulating al-Qaeda in that respect is not the way to victory over them.

Not according to the recent tone of bin Laden. He seems weak and defeated.

Why? The last attack here occurred only after Clinton had been out of office for a long period and his successor ignored all the warnings, both those given by Clinton's people during the transition phase and by Bush's own administration, including "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

You told me to watch/listen to the BBC. I told you I didn't have the time to sit around waiting for that particular report. You then questioned my schedule, wondering why I couldn't arrange it so I could watch what you do.

You mentioned ass-kissing, and YOU MENTIONED HEAD SCARVES as being somehow connected with your theory as to why certain countries have been attacked by Islamic nuts.

This is the only information you have offered, which leaves no possible conclusion except that you think head scarves are connected with the attacks. If you can expand on your ass-kissing theory, I'm ready to listen. You've had what...48 hours so far? Is it that hard for you to put ideas together and type them?

That's a very strange interpretation. Who told you to say that?

I didn't assimilate Spanish. I intentionally learned some because I was dating a woman from Puerto Rico. She liked to hear things in Spanish when I was tying her to the bedposts.

Same thing I do when Jehovah's Witnesses get in my face. If they take a different approach, I will, too.

I think for myself, thanks.

Tie me to the bedpost....

Except the Muslims will kill you.

Stream the BBC World Service from

formatting link
and listen to itinstead of relistening to old Clinton speeches...

Because they bend over backwards to accomodate Muslims, don't engage in "Racial Profiling" and do their best not to offend anyone. And then get their buses, subways, airliners, etc blown to smitereens...

I have better things to do than to do your homework for you. Strem the BBC instead of reruns of Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

Clintoon left the door open and didn't give as much information as he said he did. Remember, the Clintons are congenital liars.

No. Here's the deal: Because you were drunk when you heard this mythical BBC story, you heard only two words: head scarves

You heard no other words. Just head scarves.

Now, explain what you heard, or shut the f*ck and go kill yourself. Nobody will miss you.

No, Sally. They won't kill me. Who told you to say that?

Ya know what? I'd rather have Islamic loonies in my neighborhood than you. I'd kill you to vacate a house for them. I'd prefer intelligent lunatics to you. You're as interesting as the green algae that grows on a pond's surface.

Have you taken your medication yet today?

What would YOU do if Muslims "got in your face"?

Pick up the phone and wait for an hour to talk to Hush Bimbo?

Go back and read what you wrote to Hachi. You need some serious help.

I know exactly what I wrote to Hach. Do you remember what he stated as the reason why other countries have been attacked by AQ since 9/11, but we have not?

DO YOU REMEMBER?

You very likely already do, Joe. Don't forget, according to many here, belief in ANY deity, even the demon-god Al'lah, constitutes being somewhat looney.

I should've included "+/- 2%" because I'm honestly not sure about the last presidential election. In any case, that's your cite: The last two elections.

Interesting correlation. So the last two elections determined the percentage of scarves versus crosses that were banned.

In college, I thought statistics was boring. Who'da thunk it?

Glass doesn't stay molten very long. But that there would be that kind of response should be made clear BEFORE another attack happens.

Starting with Mecca.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required