500 Characters [page 5]

500 Characters [Page 5]

Religion is what allows people to think they are being reasonable when they behave like monsters: killing people, raping their own children, keeping slaves, burning people to death, amputating limbs, denying rights to people, imposing irrational laws on other people because of their irrational "moral" beliefs and so on.
Stop letting religion off the hook! It is an irrational belief system shielded from criticism because too many people would rather hang on to their own religion than challenge it.

bottom line: the islam religion needs to be BANNED worldwide. i am all for the first amendment, but there are exceptions for things that are just outright evil - and this is one. remember" not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslim and practive islam". peaceful religion my ass

Not all terrorists are Muslims. All terrorists have absurd unchallengeable belief systems, and most of those are religious. There are terrorists with other religions and with none but there are very few terrorist organizations based on any other religion, e.g. you don't HAVE to be Catholic to be in the IRA or ETA, although most are.
You can't ban religions effectively. What you can do is stop pandering to them and respecting them as legitimate excuses for irrational or illegal behaviour.

only god can take of these people, there is nothing we can do...... oh and these people as in the people who do this.

Spoken like a true Christian, or Muslim or Jew...

Religion and belief in gods is the cause of the world's problems, not their solution.

not really dude. Religion is the solution. All this killing going on is all government or gang related activities. All this suicide killings for "virgins" its all government bullshit dude. I think its called brain washing bro. now im not a christian or jew or anything in that category. cause quit frankley i dont know what i am. hahaha

Some religion, you don't even know which one, is probably the answer. I'll tell you what you are. You are the problem of religion. It is people who believe in the efficacy of religion to do good who are empowering the snake-handlers, doctor-killers, kiddie-fiddlers, jihadistis, science-deniers and condom-cursers who are fucking up our planet in the name of their invisible friends. Nobody needs irrational beliefs in order to act morally, don't believe their self-serving lies!

learn about islam before u say that, you don't know a thing

I suggest you and your co-religionists open a different book. I am sure you have probably noticed that while you are still worshipping in temples with moon goddess symbols on them the infidels have been there and come back again. They managed that because the west stopped letting religion ruin everything and started to encourage people to think for themselves, rather than just accept that everything that is worth knowing was written in a old book a long time ago.

dude im not relgious you fat son of a bitch! but me not being religous, its ironic that I say that you know nothing of any religion. You can sit there and say you have read every book or testament for every religion. So dont go around saying religous people are the problem in this world, its stupid, ignorant, hypocritical fucking dumbasses like you, who are the REAL reasons for killings in this world cause you have no life! you have nothing to look forward to! stupid ass!

You believe in religion, you allow religion full reign, you even expect some religion to solve the world's problems although you have no idea which one or how. You are part of the problem because you empower the extremists, in your case the extremists of all sides. Nobody has ever started a war or genocide because they have doubts. It is absolute faith that is required to do the greatest possible evil, whether that be in religion or an unquestionable political belief.

Faith is mankind's enemy.

YouTube is full of Sick men and women killing their husbands, wives, and children and there is no mention of religion in their profile. And one Muslim and look you all......blaming Islam. Yes, there are many bad people in Islam just like any other religion, but that does not mean Islam is bad. Let's be fair and apply the same rule for all. If you look at history and today, it's followers of Jesus who killed the most innocent people.

There's a difference between the actions of criminals and the actions of states. At least there should be. If you are saying you're no worse than Christian criminals that doesn't say a lot for your religion's morals. Does it?
Morality has no need for myths and implausible threats of hellfire. Any justice system which is based on myth and superstition is damaged by it.

people can go 2 any extent to propogate against Islam..a religion , with the title 'Islam' which if translated 2 english from Arabic mean' 'Peace'...we dont call them muslims who do such acts..its forbidden in Islam..u can blame Islam if u want to..but make sure that u have full knowledge and history of the religion before doing so.. and do not relay on such videos for you judgements.. Peace ..from a true Muslim..

Babelfish translates Islam as surrender. Only traitors to our species regard surrender and peace as synonyms.

I dont understand why u people,who call Islam backwards,u yourself are backward,u know why...bcoz u just relay on such propogands to pass your judgements about Islam,you dont bother to look it up or study this religion...as far as media is concerned they just spread and exegerate stuff abt Islam but never about their own religion, HYPOCRISY..but we muslims do not hate any religion..we luv and respect all religions..thts what Islam taught us...we luv jesus...he is our beloved prophet,we luv Moses

Muslims do not love and respect all religions, you despise paganism and polytheism and Buddhism. You have very limited respect for Christianity and Judaism. Islam doesn't even seem to acknowledge the possibility of people not believing in any supernatural nonsense.
No religion deserves respect. People deserve respect, not their invented myths and gods. The one thing that Islam really does not respect is human freedom. It is a religion which wants mankind to submit. I do not and will not submit.

I am originally from Iran, and I am a devout Sunni Muslim. These acts in Iran absolutely disgust me and do not follow the clear laws of Islam. It clearly says not to kill.....the people in the "Islamic" Republic take the Quran and interpret it in such a way just to make it fit their own feelings and thoughts. The Prophet Muhammd (pbuh) would definitely not encourage anything of this sort. Eventhough I am Muslim, I believe that Islam, or any other religion should not be mixed with the government.

That makes you a heretic. Muhammad did not see any distinction between government and religion, everything was to be submitted to the will of God. Everything. That is why Islam is the problem and not the solution. The Islamic Republic of Iran isn't getting it wrong, they are doing it right. By The Book. If you don't think that's good and moral behaviour then there is hope for you, outside Islam, in the civilized world. Embrace morality and reject submission to superstition.

If that's so, then why did this girl not get to have her say? Why was she unlawfully executed? And, what about her molester?? Islam is the most hippocritical "religion" ever! In fact, it's not a religion, it's a way of life. And, not a pleasant one, at that! Keep you shit over there!

She did not get to have her say because Islam is not interested in human justice or the opinions or the rights of people. Islam is a religion of submission to the Will of God, with the will of God being defined as whatever some old men reading an old book declare that it is. A woman's opinion is automatically wrong unless it agrees with the will of God in which case it is right in the same way a stopped clock is right twice per day.

The Will of God in Islam is will of man..as far as women rights is concerned in Islam,if u make sum research and read history, u would know that Islam gave women their rights and dignity..At the time of Prophet Mohammad(PBUH), non muslims used 2 bury the girls alive n it was ISLAM n our Prophet who taught them to care forand respect their women and religion,Its Islam tht gave women their rights in every aspect of life, property share etc..before that women were treated as animals,

Mankind moves on. Civilization moves on. Islam cannot move on, it is stuck in the past.
Back in the day Islam was indeed relatively progressive compared to the alternative cultures but it is thoroughly backward compared to modern western civilization: obsessed with virginity, obedience to male authority and semi-rational hygiene codes while endorsing slavery and rape and wars of conquest. Progress and civilization is here for you to embrace, just ditch the laughable desert myths, OK?

Of course, it would not be this way in Iran if the US and England had not overthrown our Prime Minister at a time when our country was fully a democracy. When they brought the Shah in, he truly destroyed the great country. Then Khomeini came, overthrowed the Shah, and created the Islamic Republic, which is the worst thing that could have ever been done for my beloved country Iran. If it had not been for the United States, Iran would be like a little America. The U.S's foreign affaris suck.

If you have democracy in a nation of religiously motivated ill-educated bigots you're not going to get freedom and liberalism, are you? The best you can hope for is a smart, efficient and non-bellicose religious bigot running things if you're especially lucky.

Why does the people's government not have the right to do what the people are asking it it to do? Can your dogmas or the wishes of the long dead revered ancestors really ride roughshod over the wishes of the people democratically expressed? By what right? By the power of old sacred revered paper? The living should not be ruled according to the whims of the dead expressed through some long gone committee's horse-trading. The honourable founding fathers were not demigods, they were politicians.

It's amusing that you talk down to Americans for uncritically accepting the mainstream media and swallowing what they are told without question. And yet you constantly preach to the same people for not accepting a pre-medieval book full of mythology and unethical barbarism. Oh the irony.

What started the Big Bang?

It was probably a conspiracy. Just follow the money and never believe anything until it's been officially denied. Unless it's the Bible, then it's 100% true.

How do you sleep at night when you're busy exposing all these terrible conspiracies of powerful people? When do you expect to be killed for it, before or after Alex Jones?

THEY CAN'T KILL AN IDEA. you can't kill the truth... do you have anything truly productive to contribute or are you here just to cast aspersions and the comment section? MartinJWillett

Calling something the truth does not make it true. Claiming that people have been killed in its name does not make an outlandish claim true still less The Truth.
I have plenty to contribute: free expression, honest enquiry and making fun of self-important people who wouldn't know the truth if it bit them in the arse. I'll do a video response tomorrow. What with the exchange rates these days my NWO shill money barely keeps me in coke and rent boys these days. Videos pay better.

there is some truth to the radical islamic hatred for america. but desert dwellers with a third-grade education and 1940s and 50s secondhand military handguns and rifles who specialize in sheepherding. cannot take down skyscrapers.

No, for that they need knives. And the ultimate terror weapon, faith.

Why did the buildings have to collapse to achieve their nefarious ends? Wouldn't three or four plane loads of people and a few hundred casualties on the ground have been enough to stir the west out of its apathy?

Didn't anybody in this vast conspiracy anticipate that discrepancies might be noticed?

How can a conspiracy that powerful, that big, that sinister and that childishly incompetent have stood up without anybody, in a nation full of religious lunatics, cracking up and confessing?

MartinJWillett... i don't believe real true god-fearing christians were involved in the 9/11 special operations. if you and your own godless dogmatism pouring into this topic and muddying the waters. have you ever studied the empirical physics behind the destruction of skyscrapers? they fell a free fall rate NO RESISTANCE how can you can't use your science now? why are you so resistant to the basic laws of physics when it comes to the subject matter?

You didn't answer my question. Why would it have been necessary for the towers to collapse? Please explain this for us all. Why go to the trouble of using invisible CIA thermite ninjas to bring the towers down when the planes crashing into them would surely have provided more than enough of a reason to go to war with whoever the nasty government decided to point the finger at. Why did the towers have to come down?

Are you not familiar with the "insurance job" element to the 9/11 conspiracy?

The "theory" is that the owners of the towers were "in on it" and had recently increased the insurance on the towers, so the towers had to collapse in order for them to collect - otherwise they would risk having to repair them.

Collecting the insurance money was better than having to fire-treat the entire building, which was expensive and incomplete.

Don't you know anything? ;-)

Ah. I get it (at least I can understand what the conspiracy nuts believe ). But why did they believe they could get away with this demolition which is apparently against the laws of physics? Hadn't they heard of insurance investigators? Did they think that the insurance investigators would be fooled when all those rednecks who never studied physics in their life could see right through it?

Oh come on, you ask a stupid question like "How did they think they could get away with this" - can't you see? The answer is obvious!

"They have haven't they?"

Actually, I wonder if insurance investigators even bothered to investigate properly? After watching planes hit the towers on TV and then watch them collapse I'd imagine you had enough evidence and wouldn't need to investigate would you?

Anyway, blast demolish buildings collapse from the bottom, not the top don't they?

The job of insurance investigators is to detect and to deter fraudulent insurance claims. You think the insurance companies just happily paid out the money without a murmur? Why would they do that? If there is conclusive evidence that the buildings could only have been brought down by explosives then there is evidence of fraud and they could sue for their money back - even if they had already been paid off by sinister conspirators! In case you hadn't noticed Bush isn't the president any more.

Well, I suppose that depends entirely on whether they think the conspiracy case is strong enough to warrant spending the additional money investigating.

I think the USA were involved to some degree, but I DO think the attacks were planned and executed outside of the USA without the USA government arranging them.

I think they found out and allowed it to succeed, but didn't realise how bad the damage would be.

If it was insurance fraud there is enough money on the line to fund an investigation into the truth, no matter how many times they may have been paid off to forget it. Take the bribes and sue as well, why not?Now the administration has changed which sinister forces will continue to pay off the insurers? How can they enforce silence?
Claiming that they have got away with it is begging the question.

Nobody needs to let a terrorist attack take place to react to it. Remember the liquid bomb plot? Those people were arrested before they could make their attacks. That is what the police and intelligence agencies of civilized countries do. They watch plots as long as they dare, gather as much evidence as they can then arrest as many people as they can before lives are lost. That is real life, not conspiracy fantasy.

"Nobody needs to let an attack succeed"

Remember the phrase "A good day to bury bad news"? On Sept 10th the Gov announced 3 trillion dollars were missing. The next day those attacks deflected attention from the 3 trillion dollars AND as a kind of "special bonus" all of the paper work which showed where the money went was held in the exact room in the pentagon that the crashed plane destroyed.

THAT is suspicious isn't it? At the very least they lied and said the papers were there.

That strikes me as an extremely dubious claim that should require very extensive cross-checking before anybody accepts it as credible. How much did you do?
"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions" - Donald Rumsfeld (Not even the right figure!)
There is a big difference between cannot track and definitely lost. That does not mean they can track it all but they have hidden the incriminating books.
Always eliminate cock-up before you contemplate conspiracy.

This is what I find suspicious.
1: The FBI traced a $500,000 transfer to the terrorists shortly before the attack, it came from the head of the Pakistan intelligence service.
2: On Sept 10th the USA releases news which would be "Good to bury"
3: On Sept 11th the Pakistanni official was in a meeting in the USA with government officials.
4: The documents "lost" in the attack were in the very room that the plane hit.

As I said, at least they lied about the papers' location, possibly more.

Who said that documents (what documents) were in that particular room, when did they say it and where did you get that information (claim) from originally and where did you check it?
Scepticism should operate in all directions not just at those who you like to be sceptical of.

No, unfortunately I cannot find the source now.
Once questionable thing I do remember the source for though was the head of the FAA who says he was in the Pentagon on the day with Rumsfeld before the crash (Rumsfeld claims to have arrived afterwards)
During his meeting a solider kept coming in every 10 minutes.
30 minutes...
20 minutes...
At 10 he said
"10 minutes....Do the orders still stand?"
To which Rumfeld snapped they do. 10 minutes later the plane hit. I saw him say it in an interview

Which conspiracy do you believe in? We need to be clear.
Which of the following were in on it:
1 Israel
2 George W Bush
3 Larry Silverstein
4 Pakistan
5 Saudi Arabia
6 Saddam Hussein
7 al Qaeda
8 Barack Obama
9 United Airlines
10 McDonald's
11 Michael Jackson
12 Donald Rumsfeld
13 CNN
14 The Pentagon
15 Freemasons
16 New World Order
17 Reptiles
18 Illuminati
19 Dick Cheney
20 Dick van Dyke
21 Old Man Peterson the janitor

I don't believe in conspiracies.
1: People make shit up.
2: If I wanted to pull off something nasty I'd start multiple conspiracies myself to make the idea I was involved ridiculous.
My experience in life so far has been that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
So, I don't believe in any of the conspiracy theories, I don't even know what they are, but the Dick Van Dyke one would be interesting to watch - as long as he dances :-)

Why do you get to tax people for not being a believer in your religion? That is absurd. If you want to charge dues you charge members, not non-members. Charging people for not being a member of your club is extortion.

Please, research more before thinking this way. Ok, let me explain:

1. Muslims pay zakah to the poor. It is not money to the mosque, it is money for the poor. This is must and whoever does not pay zakah is not a Muslim.

2. Non-Muslims pay jizya to the Muslim government who will protect them from internal and external enemies and grant them their religious freedom on the Muslim controlled lands. It is like paying for using city services and security and other services developed by Muslim gov.

What gives you the right to tax people who do not agree with you because they do not agree with you?
In the west Muslims (and everybody else) get freedom to express their religion without a special tax on the minorities. How is extortion moral? If Muslims are attacking Christians in Muslim lands it is not the Christians alone who should be paying for police! That would be like asking women to pay a tax to protect them from gang rape: it is thoroughly immoral.

The whole policy of Muslim government for non-Muslims is called Dhimmi system. The policy terms come from Quraan and Hadith - the religious sources for Islam, i.e. holy and every Muslim must respect.

Let's say, If this Shariah Dhimmi system were in place in Pakistan instead of the current secular "democratic" government, there would never happen the recent killings of Pakistani Christian minorities. Because Dhimmi system is the best protector of non-Muslim minorities living in Muslim lands.

I am well aware of this immoral system, its terms and its foundation, don't patronize me. I am asking you to justify it without reference to its bogus claims of being god-given. Are you able to do that?

Why do minorities need protection from majorities that only the minorities pay for? I can imagine the howls of protest and the rioting if a special tax were put on Muslims in Europe to protect them from violent bigots. Can't you?

Well said, Martin. The Muslim tax of zakat is only 2.5% of their income, while jizya is sometimes half to three quarters of a Christian's income and designed to "humiliate" them as well as to raise funds for more jihad.
Add to this that the Christians are not allowed to serve in the army, government positions and justice in the courts is not applied equally to them..eg there is no punishment for a Muslim who kills a Christian but a Muslim will be punished if he kills another Muslim.

I hate parodies of Christians and Republicans almost as much as I hate drag queens. I can see what they get out of it but it is not enjoyable to watch.
Stop your self-indulgent twaddle, please, all of you. It's not big and it's not clever.

So you're saying you hate drag queens.
After that statement i don't even have to explain to you that i never said it was big OR clever.

Kindly shut your face.

I was addressing those idiots who think there is enormous enetrtainment value FOR OTHER PEOPLE in them pretending to be something that they're not that they find strangely attracted to and repulsed by. Just because a comment is a response to a comment you have made it does not follow that every statement in the second person singular (or plural) is addressed to you.
I wish that the people making parodies of the religious and political whackjobs would just give it a rest, or do it in private.

I don't. Edward Current is awesome.

I'm sure he agrees with you.

Hahaha I love how you can't see what they get out of it, yet here you are flipping out because of it.
Oh you are truly blind.

Me blind? I said I CAN see what THEY get out of it, I can't see what WE are meant to get out of it. If I want to look at women or laugh at Christian fundamentalists or Republican lunatics I can do it better with the originals than I can with the self-indulgent people who get their kicks out of pretending to be what they are not.

I'm a Christian and I think Hitchen's makes a good point with a rational voice. But I still believe in Jesus' atonement. And it's is not complete nonsense. We can and do suffer to help other people out out. To give help usually takes some sort of sacrifice.
Of course every analogy is imperfect at some point. But to say that something can't exist unless it can be understood totally by what we already know is a big assumption many people forget about...

Faith cannot move mountains (nobody I have challenged has ever been able to give me the map references) but it can enable otherwise intelligent people to dig their heels in on a preposterous notion and somehow appear to be moral. At least to themselves.
Faith never was and never could be a virtue. It is lying to yourself, denying evidence and covering up the lie as if it was an act of moral bravery.
Faith kills people, it supports tyranny and it buries truth.

thanks Martin for your comments. Yes, faith can be destructive. Like the crusades and jihad. But it's not always destructive and self-deceptive. It really depends on what we believe. Anyone who has a friend whom they trust has some faith in that friend.

Same thing with reasoning. People can use reasoning to justify immoral things. It really depends on what you are reasoning for.

Blind faith is wrong. Always. Putting absolute trust in a belief that you cannot and will not test is converting yourself into a tool or a weapon. No harm is done if you put faith in something which is true, something which doesn't need it but anything which DEMANDS faith and offers no proof is exploiting you.

Actually, Christianity offers proof and it is not blind faith. Once we established that the Bible is God's Word as the first axiom, then Christianity is true. And there are scientific, historical, and prophetical evidences that support the Bible's claim of being God's Word. Bible codes are also additional evidences.

Nobody who didn't want to believe it before they started has ever proven that the Bible is God's word.
The Bible's record on prophesy is abysmal, if we exclude all prophesies of the past and all fictional stories told to match known prophesies.

There are many that did not believe the Bible at fist, but latter became Bible-believing Christians. Examples include William Ramsay and Malcolm Muggeridge.
And, no. The Bible's record on prophesy is not "abysmal". If u read the letters to the 7 churches in the book of Revelation, and then look at church history, u'll find that they are in the exact order. That is, Ephesus corresponds to the Apostolic church (AD 70-100), Smyrna corresponds to the persecuted church (AD 100-300). CONT.

Malcolm Muggeridge was not some bored Japanese businessman who picked up a copy of a Bible in a hotel room and found it made an unanswerable logical case for belief. He was on a headlong nosedive from communist agnostic to reactionary right wing bigot. His conversion to Christianity came in the (and his) sixties when he was appalled at the permissive attitudes he saw.
Is that your best shot: a buffoon of a journalist changed his mind?

What about William Ramsay? He fully accepted the teachings of higher criticism. He then later discovered that the "discreditted" book of Acts was historically accurate. As a result, he became a Christian.

Who? Do you expect me to bat away at every name you pull out of whatever orifice you keep them in? A man from a Christian country surrounded by Christians living in a Christian era studying Pauline history becomes a Christian. Yawn.

U seem to be dodging my points about church history and the corrspondence of each period in Rev. 2-3. Anyways, i'll proceed to scientific evidences. To be concise go to
Triple w (dot) eternal (dash) productions (dot) ORG (slash) 101science (dot) html

Thyatira represents the Catholic churches around the world. Sardis represents the cold and dead state churches in Europe. Philadelphia represents those revival and missionary-minded churches. Laodicea represents the average American churches and some churches in other countries. These churches are ecumenical and lukewarm. They are the compromised churches.
Pergamos corresponds to the "married" church (AD 300-500). This period of church history is the result of Constantine's uniting of church and state.
Thyatira corresponds to the Roman Catholic church (AD 500-1500). The word "thyatira" suggests "continual sacrifice", which is exactly what the Catholic doctrine of Transubstiation teaches.
Sardis corresponds to the reformation church (AD 1500-1700).
Philadelphia corresponds to the revival and missionary-minded church (AD 1700-1900). And finally, Laodicea corresponds to the modern ecumenical and lukewarm church.
The letters to the 7 churches can be found in Rev. 2-3. All 7 churches co-exist in each of the church history, but there is only one dominant church in each period. For instance, we can look at today's churches. Ephesus represents the churches that sincerely love God. Smryna represents the persecuted churches in Communist countries. Pergamos represents various churches around the world.

I don't believe any of your key assumptions.
Using the Bible as evidence of God is begging the question.

I've just told u that the prophecies in the Bible are not "abysmal". Have u read the comments below yet?

You (not u please) have just told me. Exactly. You have told me what your interpretation of the meanings of phrases are after the events you want to show to have been prophesied have happened. You have not demonstrated that the church of Smyrna does not refer to, let's say at random, the Christian church in Smyrna. I could play exactly the same prophesying the past game with any work of literature you care to name.

Larry Silverstien sighned a 99 yr lease for the entire world trade center complex for 3.6 Billion dollars with insurance that only covers terriost attacts...3 weeks before 911...Plus American Airlines stock s went through the roof a week before the attacts...Am i missing something here?...and as far as putting bombs in the towers..sure u can..after hours and a little at a time..besides u can be in the elavator shaft durring the day while people are in the buildings and not be seen

Al Qaeda knew which planes they were going to hijack. It's what is known as insider trading.
If the insurance is dodgy the insurance would not pay out. Hello? Insurance companies understand insurance fraud, it's their job.
Why would anybody, Bush, Silverstein, CIA or even fucking al Qaeda need the towers to collapse? Surely the propaganda value of four jets hijacked and all those people plus some on the ground in iconic buildings killed would have been enough for anybody's nefarious purposes.

Never believe anybody who uses the word truth in their title.

this is true,, 9/11 is completely and totally caused by osama bin laden and his crew.
There is this conspiracy that U.S gov did it.
as IF!!!! to much money, to many innocent amerians being killed,, it just wouldnt happen. ugghh bin laden.

You are reckoning without the power of the CIA's invisible semi-competent explosive-laying ninjas. These highly trained men have no conscience, no weaknesses, never get drunk, get religion, feel guilt or contract terminal illnesses. They pledge allegiance to the NWO not to any flag and so can be relied upon 100% never to reveal their part in the plot, laying thermite and explosives on every floor.

Yes I'm making up absurd and unbelievable shit for no good reason - but I didn't start it.

Best comment I read all night. Never get drunk...lol...have no friends, spouses, lovers etc they talk too...never sleep only live 2 serve the NWO lol

Your a brainwashed pawn of the government.

Why are conspiracy theorists always illiterate?

There is nothing theoretical about this conspiracy kid. If you believe the mainstream media than you in for a big surprise. False flag operations are very common as prerequisites to war. 911 was such a an operation among other things. It's time to remove your head from your ass and see the light for the first time.

Don't call me kid. I was the age you are (or claim) now when this happened. False flag operations are possible of course but why is there any need to postulate an imaginary enemy of western civilization when you have Islam? Are all al Qaeda operations faked as part of the conspiracy to start a war on Iraq or just the ones in America conducted by citizens of America's ally and Saddam's foe Saudi Arabia?

The reason they didn't stage an attack on an american military base is becuase, this would not have caused americans to want war. They had to attack something that would effect everyday americans. Also we do not know which terrorist supposedly attacked the twin towers. The american government realized that the american people were stupid enough to believe that any middle eastern is a terrorists. So yes, it does make sense. You are just so blinded by your patriotism.

I don't believe your shit story and I am no patriot to your country. Why do I trust to common sense rather than believing that the only force capable of doing anything, ever, is the US government?
There was no need to bring the towers down. If nobody on the ground died at all there would still be a war on terror after 9/11. Four plane-loads of innocent Americans. Hello? Isn't that more than enough to justify a big military response and if desired also a huge over-reaction?

The more damage the government does, the more americans are going to put into the war effort. Its that simple. Also why would the terrorists attack, and then go into hiding for 9 years without another attack on the U.S.?

Would more terrorist attacks, whoever is behind them, make the US people more or less bellicose? I don't know the answer. I don't think anybody does.
There was no sequel to 9/11 for the same reason there was no sequel to Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.
In real life nobody can arrange prequels after a big box office success.

Jeremiah 19
4 For they have forsaken me and made this a place of false gods; they have burned sacrifices in it to gods that neither they nor their fathers nor the kings of Judah ever knew, and they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent.
5 They have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Baal something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind.

9 I will make them eat the flesh ...

Punish the people who did not obey him. THE END.

Do you enjoy defending a monster?

Everybody deserves a chance. Plus I'd like to know if I was given wrong information.
If you say the whole bible is wrong info, that's fine. It's your own opinion.

The Bible is a bunch of myths. It has no more value than Greek or Norse myths. Maybe one day the Bible will be used in just the same way as Greek and Norse myths, as source material for highbrow quiz questions and the names of delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction.

"The Bible is a bunch of myths."

You could be right. You'd be ignorant to believe that the Old Testament was real, so we have established that. I think Atheists are who they are because science or whatever answers their questions and provides proof. Religion most of the time does not. So science, answer this: What came before the Big Bang, since something cannot come from nothing? Hmm then how was God able to come from nothing? It is a mystery and we go by faith. What do Atheists go by?

Atheism is not a religion, neither is it a school of thought named after a person or a place, therefore it does not qualify for a capital letter.
"Something can't come from nothing" is a simplistic assertion not an established law of logic that works in all conceivable circumstances. It is perfectly acceptable to answer that we don't know and we're doing what we can to find out. Unless you're religious, in which case if you don't know you're likely to claim that you're not supposed to know.

Why does a monster deserve to be obeyed?

Where is the proof that he is a monster. If you don't mind, may I ask if you're atheist?

The Bible. Have you read it? The God character tortures people, goes into jealous rages, kills innocent children, sanctions war, rape, genocide and slavery and so on. I don't believe in gods of any kind and I have no reason to value Hebrew myths higher than any other sort but anybody with the ability to read and comprehend can see that the god recognized by Jews, Christians and Muslims is a monster.

I'm sorry if somebody has damaged your capacity to read and understand.

I think you agree that God is the same or worse than people like Elizabeth Bathory, Hitler, etc. So by definition "something monstrous; a person of unnatural or extreme ugliness, deformity, or cruelty". You pick the "bad" things he has done and yet to mention the good things. A monster, like Hitler, or whoever, wouldn't even consider doing those nice things for everyone. So you can't classify God as a monster. And I don't think somebody has damaged my capacity to read and understand.

Look up the phrase "but you fuck one goat".

funny how all the non Muslims will br crying on the day of judgement , regretting everything bad they ever said

You assume that your fairy story is correct. People who do not believe your myths have no reason to fear your god, just some of his more violent and less imaginative believers.

Then wish for death and see what awawaits you fif you are truthful

JihadOfTheSoul

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough before: your stories do not frighten me. The more you try to frighten me the more pathetic you look and the more pathetic you make your religion look. You cannot scare me with tales of your afterlife because I am confident that I am my body not a soul trapped in a body. Not believing in your stories has nothing to do with hating your god and everything to do with being honest to myself and what I cannot help but believe. You have no power over me.

Oh wow, you are so dramatic LMAO,
Do you think this is Shakespeare?
I dont want any control over your obese, ugly self, you have obviously read 1 or 2 books on isam and decided you know more than any of our scholars or intellectuals, I feel sorry for you.
Typical atheist westerner, arrogant and full of crap.
I wish I could see your face when you die.

Why do I find that so easy to believe?

There is no evidence supporting the notion of a soul. Bodies grow and the minds within them grow. When the brain is asleep the soul does not wander about. A damaged or diseased brain does not contain a whole soul inside. A sleeping, drunk or anaesthetized body does not contain a wide-awake soul experiencing pain. The soul hypothesis does not fit the evidence. Death cannot be experienced, it is the absence of the capacity for experience.

If that helps you to sleep at night then go ahead and believe what you wish.
I guess the oly way to test your hypothesis is when you die

You still don't get it do you? Your snide threats simply make you look like a primitive bloodthirsty superstitious savage. Is that the impression you want to give?
Belief is not a matter of choice. I can no more choose to believe in a soul and an afterlife than I can choose to believe that the Moon is made of cheese.

Oh. My. God.
Can you stop feeding your internet ego and stop replying to me, maybe you are a loser in real life and noone talks to you so you use innocent YouTube videos as an outelt, but go pick another one.
I sincerely have no interest in conversing with someone like you,
Go explain your concrete theories to someone who cares, because quite frankly, you offer nothing but confusion and denial.
May Allaah guide you.

Keep your god out of my face.

Keep your comments off of my brothers videos.

If you want nobody to have a right to reply stay in your mosque. This is the free world and I intend to keep it that way.

LOL!!!
Free world?
Where taking doubtfully about the holocaust can get you sentenced?
Now get away from this video.

Only in a few countries with a Nazi past is it a crime to deny the holocaust. In most western countries you can say whatever you want about history. If you tell the truth about Muhammad in a Muslim country you are charged with blasphemy, the ultimate victimless crime.
For the last ten years I have been denying the state religion and calling for the head of state to be deposed and insulting her son, while using my real name, and the state has ignored me all together. That's freedom. Try it.

Chance cannot create order and cannot govern the unity of the universe quantitatively, qualitatively and in the dimensions of time and space. The One Creator who controls all these events has the ultimate knowledge of all what goes on within the universe, the One Who is full of Wisdom. He Who has Power over all things.
so stop with the myth

You can use all the inappropriate capital letters you want, you're wrong. You are probably so wrong that you will never understand why. You have a passionate need to believe in the myths of your people and you are prepared to tie your brain in knots to justify your beliefs. There is no point in arguing with somebody who would rather die than think.

You are clearly afraid to see reality, how can one believe a bear became a whale and have the courage to say I believe in a myth.
If I was to tell you you're computer created itself you would call me Insane, so why when you claim that the universe inculding life suddenly appeared from nothing for no reason, want to be taken serious? You're whole line of thinking is the more complicated something is, the more possible it is, which is just.........

Evolution is a fact. Ask a biologist. The evidence for it is overwhelming.

Its a fairy tale, why must I keep repeating myself, why would I take those books and people serious? They still have pictures of lucy and pickthal manalthough one was a human being and the other a pig thooth.
I ask you ones more, where you the creator or where you created from nothing?

Reality doesn't care about your faith. I am not going to be persuaded by the assertions of the ignorant, no matter how many times you repeat them.
I come from an unbroken chain of successful beings who all survived until they managed to breed. That unbroken chain of success goes back over four billion years.
If you don't want to believe that feel free. There are no creationists employed in the oil industry or in anything of any use at all except the religious propaganda industry.

You seem to forget starlin pow hitler and mow where atheist.
Moving on where you the creator or where you created from nothing?
Its either one or the other

Stalin and Mao were communists. I am not. I have no idea what "pow" is a misspelling of. Hitler was a Catholic and his Nazi regime persecuted atheists.
I have explained to you that I was not created. I don't do remedial education for free. If you would like to be educated I could see to it once we have agreed some suitable fees.

Hitler was a racist he believed in ugenics he killed handicaped people please dont say he was a chatolic just because he was born one.
Moving on mao was a atheist, end of, so was pol pot and many more crazy people in the last century
And please if you where not created where you created from nothing or where you the creator? it has to be one of the 3 does it not? why do you avoid answering, shuting your eyes wont help change the truth.

Are you happy to be held accountable for all the deeds of everybody who ever claimed to believe in the same number of gods as you? Me neither. Communists kill people because they are totalitarian rulers not because they are atheists or materialists or have moustaches. Hitler was and remained a Catholic and the Catholic Church asked all Germans to celebrate his birthday. The Nazis did persecute atheists. Read up on it. Nobody picks on Jews without having religion behind them.

wow jews where kicked out of 140 countaries world wide, either the rest of the world has a problem or the jews are up to their tricks as always.
Scientist like einstein and newton believed in god, although that doesnt matter to me, holding a belief of non god is easier because u think u arnt accountable for ur sines, and are free from punishment for actions and wrong beliefs. Atheism is a materialistic backed idiology thats why they teach children about fake skeletons which where forgaries.

Only people who have a passionate need to believe in the Jews' creation myth have any reason to deny evolution. Your pseudo-scientific theories don't interest the Chinese, Japanese or Indians, they are as comfortable with evolution as they are with gravity.
Newton believed in all sorts of strange stuff, he lived in a different age. Einstein had no belief in a god who interfered in human lives or judged the dead. If he had been an atheist would that mean you would deny relativity?

Allahu akbar
Kufars why do u come onto this page if u do not appreciate islam??
It is because deep down u know islam is the truth but are being arrogant, the same way the accursed shaytan was, your companian the accursed shaytan motivates u to insult islam because all he cares for is how to make u sin.
How sad

I appreciate exactly what Islam is. Any delusion is best understood from the outside as from the inside its nature is hidden.
I no more secretly know Islam is correct than I secretly believe in Father Christmas or Dracula.
By the way kuffar is plural, adding an S to it shows you are illiterate in two languages simultaneously.
Why would an all-powerful god let a tempter loose unchecked to attempt but inevitably fail to thwart his plan? Your myths are silly. That is why we do not believe in them.

Ooo have I gotten to you? maybe increased your doubt in whatever fairy tale you believe?
And you ask silly qeustions, why dont we talk about whatever faith you hold and Ooo yes atheism is also up there with the other false religions.
Lol on the day of judgment what will you say? seriously consider it what will you say?
Allah(swt) guide u and me inshallah.
Making fun of me wont save you, listen when u come with what u believe then we c who is the one who believes a myth.

No you haven't.
You don't get to decide what is real. Just because you believe something it does not make it true, even for you.
The concept of a day of judgement is absurd. Anybody who believes in justice knows it should be swift and sure. Judgement after death is neither. It should also be fair. Infinite punishment for even the most heinous of genuine crimes is not fair let alone infinite torture simply for the supposed sin of not believing an incredible tale told by untrustworthy people.

Look at the dictionary definition of the word "fact"; FACT n. "Something that actually exists or has occurred." Now look at the word "evolution"; EVOLUTION n. "The THEORY that all forms of life originated by descent from earlier forms." CREATION n. ""God's bringing of the universe into existence" (reread the definition of "fact") According to the dictionary, evolution is merely a theory, while creation is a fact!

Read your dictionary definition of theory. What you are describing is a hypothesis or a guess. For scientists a theory is a model which works to explain facts. Look up germ theory, the theory of gravity, relativity and so on. Scientific theories explain facts.
Creation is a discredited pre-scientific concept that makes no testable predictions, it isn't even a hypothesis.
Dictionaries have no business defining reality, they should stick to defining words.

Great scientists who believed the Bible:
Physics: NEWTON,FARADAY,MAXWELL,KELVIN
Chemistry:BOYLE,LINNAEUS,MENDE L,PASTEUR
Geology:STENO,WOODWARD,BREWSTE R,AGASSIZ
Astronomy:KEPLER,GALILEO,HERSC HEL,MAUNDER

How many great scientists of the last 80 years are Bible literalists? None. Vague Bible believers? Few.
Go ask an oil company how many geologists they employ who believe in a six day creation and Noah's flood.
In the nineteenth century and before it was essential to be seen as a believer in the prevailing religion to receive an education and be accepted into the academic world. Heretics would not get places at university, would not be able to publish and would be lucky even to receive mail.

MUSLIMS can do what they want and nothing gets done ,all we hear OH! theres a few extremist ,when we turn round and start fighting back we are racist, fascist,football holigans ,thugs ,scum,nazi ,etc ,etc ,well we are not we have had enogh and we are not taking anymore from muslims or the liberal ass do gooders

Key word there is fight. Yes, when you go looking for a fight you will be called a bigot and a thug. This is a democratic country, to get things done you don't take to the streets and shout aggressive slogans. People march and demonstrate when they know their cause has already lost. Why do you want to fail? Why do you want to fight? Why not just win?
Losers march: CND, anti war rallies, pro-hunt rallies etc. Why do you want to lose?

these muslims are runnin round our towns beating innocent people up in pubs with families.
we have to act, THE BALLOT BOX IS REDUNDANT

So you are suggesting some sort of ethnic cleansing as a sensible alternative to democracy.
Is it any wonder that the cause of resisting Islam is portrayed as of interest only to small-minded racist thugs who relish violence?

but what if your poor, if your poor or even middle class, the higher class politicians wont listen to you unless its a piece of paper in a ballot box, demonstrations are a way of exerising freedom of speech, to get your views heard in a system where your views are disregarded. Only a select few demonstrators resort to violnce, you cant genralise this practice becuase of the few who engage it un democratically.

If you really think that these groups have been infiltrated by a minority of trouble-makers who are undermining their laudable aims with a violent agenda then you are very naive. Street protests are designed to cause disturbances, that is why football fans join up, because they enjoy such battles.

These blokes are wearing hoodies with EDL Luton Division and black polo shirts and saying "As predicted, the Racist UAF stirred up racial hatred towards members of the EDL, causing the demonstrators to be attacked and chased through the streets of Birmingham"
If they predicted that why did they march? Because the buzz of street fighting is what it is really all about for most of their members.

But demonstrations arnt meant to be violent, I am an active left wing protester and we dont go out with the mentality of harming anyone. Otherwise, what would be the point? Nobody would even consider what we have to say if the majority of us resorted to violence? The football holligans will join groups like the WDL becuase they are racist and think that these protests give the mindless facist violence a justifiable context.

Get real. Everybody with a brain can anticipate what the results will be. These groups exist only to start trouble on the streets.
Peaceful protesters don't wear black face masks.
I broadly support what the EDL claim to be about, but there's no chance of me ever joining a street demonstration with football hooligans who want more of what happened last time.
The groups opposing them should stay away and let them start a fight amongst themselves, as they are sure to do.

oh yeah sorry, i forgot, i dont have any ideologies or beliefs, i just go out on the street and beat people up and break propertie and vandalise because thats what demonstrations are about, mindless senseless violence. Its all clear now, even ghandis protests were just to go and beat the crap out of people. and im the one who needs to get real? if your relying on the media to tell you what demonstrating is about then no wonder you think its all violence and destruction.
i agree with you on the fron that radicals join the EDL as a front to be violent, but that doesnt mean that every protester across the sepctrum of political and social and religious belief wants to go out and cause violence to people.

That's a good point about Gandhi, he too did not make peaceful protests which were designed to be peaceful. He made protests which were designed to be attacked.
If a WDL/EDL protest ever went off entirely peacefully they would immediately change their tactics to be more confrontational, and you know it.

just so were clear, i am not defending the wdl protests, i realise there designed to be confrontational becuase the majority of thier members are looking to fight and abuse the ethnic minorities of there community. What im saying is that most anarchist and anti-facist protests are not designed to be violent towards innocent people, becuase thats hypocrisy and would undermine the very need to protest.

Now i love rippin on christians just as much as the next guy, but we dont need grammar police on youtube thanks

If nobody made any mistakes then yes, you could say that there was no need to correct people when they make errors.

I bet you checked your comment twice to make sure the grammer was perfect ha. Correcting errors is always good but correcting grammer on youtube is pointless an stupid

Correcting mistakes is a courtesy to the future. Not correcting mistakes is as much of a disservice to the future as strangling polar bears or not planting any trees.

Wow you really have a dim view of the future if you think correcting grammar on youtube comments is gonna effect anything. Maybe thats heaven, know one ever misses a key stroke.

Hell is wallowing in error and attacking those who seek to correct it, as though caring was the only sin.
Are you trying to fuck up and annoy people or are you simply oblivious to the errors you are making? Because American "satire" is so often unclear as to whether it is knowing or contrived it is difficult to tell whether you intended your post to be half-full of errors as a bit of half-baked comedy or you are simply unable to write a post which is either grammatical or funny.

i like how all the religous comments have thumbs down, apparently its a trend to hate on religion. go get lives if you dont believe in it then dont pay attention to it or at the very least dont be an ignorant dick.

If the religious want their views respected and unchallenged they can stay in church. When they step out of church their ideas are subject to scrutiny the same as any other ideas. If they can't stand the heat they should stay out of the kitchen.

clearly you misunderstood my whole point, sure have your opinion but DONT BE AN IGNORANT DICK about it.

Who has been an ignorant dick? I merely pointed out that the religious have a protected space to air their views, and it is not YouTube. Is that being ignorant?
Who gave you the impression that I had seen any point that you had made? I did not respond to your point, there are 149 posts here, that was your first, complaining about my response to you. WTF? Keep your sock puppets in order please.

sorry, i replied to you on the wrong account, my apologies. i was only speaking in general of how people make ignorant claims about religion or try to bash it in an innapropriate way.

When people keep their religious superstitions private and they have no impact on public policy then you will find that only arseholes care to be public about their atheism. That is not the world we live in. Atheism is not a religion, but it is for many a political stance because religion has been made political. Atheists will not treat the religious as if they were actually wearing the invisible Teflon® Armour of Righteousness, we can see right through it to the puny and ugly form underneath.

500 Characters Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7

Atheism \| Politics \| Life \| Feedback \| Email \| Search \| Forum \| Blog \| Home
Tweet	© 1999 - 2011 by Martin Willett.	mwillett.org: Debate Unlimited