Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

---

At 6/2/07 12:33 AM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 6/2/07 12:13 AM, Mathaeus wrote: Really?

Your an idiot.

Don't you mean "you're", as in "you are"?

your
-pronoun

"a form of the possessive case of 'you' used as an attributive adjective"

Just thought I'd help clear that up for you.

As for me being an idiot: how can I be an "idiot" when I am pretty much capable of operating a computer, accessing the Internet, and typing with little or no spelling or grammatical errors whatsoever?

Physician, heal thyself!

He didn't not convey pro-Zionism in 'this' thread.

Didn't not? That's a double negative. You just can't help yourself, can you? Oh well, we all make mistakes.

I don't understand how you bringing in information from 'another' thread makes it into context with 'this' thread.

It hardly matters; and it doesn't even look like he has recanted of this racist doctrine either.

Nope.

Maybe so, but it's undeniable that you are a bigot.

Let's see:

From dictionary.reference.com

bi*got
–noun

a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

As far as I can see, none of this applies to me whatsoever. If it appears so, it's probably because I am either joking (I do that often) or showing an example.

As for our good friend Dante, looking back on some of his earlier posts it's obvious who the real bigot is.

But who am I to pass judgment?

Also remember:

Anti-zionism =/= anti-Semitism

Sweet dreams, buttercup. Or as they say in Islam:

Assalamu alaykum

---

Mathaeus, just because the right-wing extremists are usually wrong doesn't mean we have to oppose them just for the sake of diagreeing with them. Sparda may say some stupid things but that doesn't mean he might have picked up one thing that the right-wingers have right. (Albeit for the wrong reasons, usually) Being pro-Israel is one of the few things they do have right. War crimes happen in every war; the actions of certain specific Israeli soldiers do not justify the hatred of the entire state of Israel and its people. Hamas and other groups are much more menacing than Israel. Hamas's official policy is to kill ALL JEWS. It's not about stealing land, they just want to destroy Israel because it allows Jews to have an equal place in society. In the non-Palestinian authority regions of Israel Arabs and Jews can live side by side with no problems, but it is the hate-mongering Islamist extremists who break every treaty and ceasefire they are offered and continue to extend the cycle of violence who should be fought against, not the State of Israel which is just trying to protect its people. It may make its fair share of poor decisions in handling the conflict but this does not mean that the PLO or any of its hateful Islamist anti-peace groups are any better. The Palestinian Authority could be just as free as the rest of Israel (Israel even has a better freedom of the press ranking with reporters without borders than the United States) if the PLO did not keep igniting anti-Semitic violence which kills innocent Palestinians and Israelis. On purpose! They are terrorists, killing civilians is their OFFICIAL POLICY. That is wrong. Continuing the cycle of violence is WRONG. The PLO is WRONG. Israel, stolen land or not (it's not) is a legitimate, democratic state with freedoms found nowhere else in the middle east. For the PLO to destroy that just so they can start another state under Sharia law and oppress women and Jews is WRONG. There are enough oppressive Islamic regimes. For there to say there cannot be a state that is Jewish that doesn't even enforce Jewish law while there are so many states that are officially Islamic and enforce Islamic law is HYPOCRISY.

When the BRITISH Mandate of Palestine was given the 1948 U.N. Partition Plan that gave Israel only a tiny piece of land, it was not good enough for some arab states' leaders. Instead they started a war to make sure that Jews could never be equal in the society they live in. This conflict is born out of anti-Semitism. There were Jews living in Palestine too, they didn't "steal" the land any more than Syria or Jordan did.Come on. What good can come out of the PLO destroying Israel? Look at how far the state has come, it is a developed first world nation. Letting the PLO destroy it will only turn it into a powderkeg like Lebanon. Israel has its problems like any state, and does unjust things like any state, but the PLO is not making it any better. In fact, they are causing the injustice by disrupting peace and continuing to force Israel to take drastic measures it would not otherwise have to take. Do you really think violence is better? Violence is not necessary here. Look at how free the rest of Israel is? Why? Because the PLO does not cause so much chaos there! Chaos like the kind the PLO brings oppression. The PLO is working against its name; Palestine WOULD be liberated if they just allowed there to be peace. But nope, breaking every ceasefire and murdering innocent Israeli civilians, then hiding behind your own and causing more of your own to get killed kind of prevents that.

To conclude: Israel has made its own mistakes, but the PLO helps create these terrible incidents by preventing peace using its terroristic tactics and inciting anti-Semitic hatred. Jews and Arabs can live side-by-side in Israel; let there be peace so it can be the same in Gaza in the West Bank by stopping the PLO from continuing the hatred and violence and let there be a democratic free state, not another one ruled by corrupt anti-Semites and Sharia law so people of all faiths can be treated as equals.

---

On the subject of Malaysia, it's too bad that separation of church and state isn't enforced there. I think freedom of and from religion is one of our fundamental rights (such as freedom of speech). I'm glad that most First World nations have it protected in their constitution, it's too bad Malaysia doesn't.

Didn't mean to get too frantic (I was typing fast!) in my last post. I'd like to correct that I said "Killing all Jews is the official policy of Hamas". To be honest I'm not too well versed on Hamas official policy, that was a flawed statement. However I would point out that they do advocate violent anti-Semitism; at least they do on their Al Aqsa TV station. (You might remember the pro-militant Mickey Mouse-type thing). I also said "the State of Israel just wants to protect its own people." I'd like to acknowledge that like pretty much every country, Israel has its own levels of political corruption, but you gotta remember that with the position Israel is in it does need to defend itself, and that it is a contradiction to defend whatever hostilities are brought against Israel but then get mad when Israel fights back against militants. That doesn't mean it should use the same tactics that terrorists like Hamas use, but collateral damage and mistakes do happen, and you should not fault the entire state of Israel for the actions of some certain soldiers.

---

At 6/2/07 01:25 AM, Mathaeus wrote: Don't you mean "you're", as in "you are"?

It's the internet, nothing is technically correct.
Using letter abbreviations is an example.

Just thought I'd help clear that up for you.

Grammar police tee-hee.

As for me being an idiot: how can I be an "idiot" when I am pretty much capable of operating a computer, accessing the Internet, and typing with little or no spelling or grammatical errors whatsoever?

An idiot can do a lot of things, especially when it takes a very lack of brainpower to use a computer.

Didn't not? That's a double negative. You just can't help yourself, can you? Oh well, we all make mistakes.

What I find funny is you attack peoples spelling errors when you are unable to come up with an answer to a main point.

It hardly matters; and it doesn't even look like he has recanted of this racist doctrine either.

Yes it does matte, see above.

As far as I can see, none of this applies to me whatsoever. If it appears so, it's probably because I am either joking (I do that often) or showing an example.

Examples of your bigotry or so called jokes:

You're such an adorable little zionist sheep, aren't you?
LOL
I never really thought about constructing a public profile as I was having way too much fun pissing off arrogant Islamophobes such as yourself.

As for our good friend Dante, looking back on some of his earlier posts it's obvious who the real bigot is.

Quit connecting threads togeather to make a personal attack on someone it's very childish.
If you can't argue within the realm of this single thread then you do not belong here.

But who am I to pass judgment?

You sure do it a lot.

Sweet dreams, buttercup. Or as they say in Islam:
Assalamu alaykum

You really did drift off the topic, and yes I'm aware of the fact of your idiocy also causing me to go off topic as well.

---

At 6/2/07 12:24 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 6/2/07 01:25 AM, Mathaeus wrote: As far as I can see, none of this applies to me whatsoever. If it appears so, it's probably because I am either joking (I do that often) or showing an example.

Examples of your bigotry or so called jokes:

You're such an adorable little zionist sheep, aren't you?

Truth is oftentimes intolerant, I agree.

LOL

ROFLMAO

I never really thought about constructing a public profile as I was having way too much fun pissing off arrogant Islamophobes such as yourself.

Preoccupation, LOL.

Besides, there's nothing wrong with hatred provided said hatred is directed at things that are themselves hateful (i.e. Zionism and Islamophobia).

Then again, I'm not the one who has a sig pic of a soldier shooting baby carriages for target practice.

As for our good friend Dante, looking back on some of his earlier posts it's obvious who the real bigot is.

Quit connecting threads (sic)togeather(sic) to make a personal attack on someone[;] it's very childish.

Sorry but he brought this on himself.

If you can't argue within the realm of this single thread then you do not belong here.

I have to disagree.

But who am I to pass judgment?

You sure do it a lot.

Oh well.

Sweet dreams, buttercup. Or as they say in Islam:
Assalamu alaykum

You really did drift off the topic,

Not really.

and yes I'm aware of the fact of your idiocy also causing me to go off topic as well.

So then who's the bigger idiot:

The "idiot", or the idiot who allows said "idiot" to get the better of him?

---

At 6/2/07 01:55 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Nothing new

Israel is a joke.

---

How is Zionism "hateful"?

---

At 6/2/07 05:16 PM, Dr-Worm wrote: How is Zionism "hateful"?

http://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/oppositi on.cfm

---

At 6/2/07 04:47 PM, Mathaeus wrote:

At 6/2/07 01:55 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Nothing new

Israel is a joke.

Ah, I can tell you're an expert debater. You just ignored everything I said and just posted a link that refutes none of my arguments. Nice one. I thought you might actually have a thought out response, but nope, apparently you're not here to listen or learn; apparently you're just here to troll us. And don't complain about me using ad hominem, dismissing my entire post and replacing it with "Nothing new" and then just posting that link is pretty insulting.

The hypocrisy of saying there cannot be a Jewish state (Israel being a "Jewish" state that is democratic and allows religious freedom) while there are so many officially Islamic states that do NOT allow religious freedom is amazing.

---

Okay, the ad hominem wasn't necessary, but really, if we're gonna debate a subject, actually argue your point, don't just post a link.

---

At 6/2/07 09:28 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote:

At 6/2/07 04:47 PM, Mathaeus wrote:

At 6/2/07 01:55 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Nothing new

Israel is a joke.

Ah, I can tell you're an expert debater.

Thank you.

You just ignored everything I said and just posted a link that refutes none of my arguments.

Did not.

Nice one.

Now you're making me blush.

I thought you might actually have a thought out response, but nope, apparently you're not here to listen or learn; apparently you're just here to troll us. And don't complain about me using ad hominem, dismissing my entire post and replacing it with "Nothing new"

It is nothing new; I see and hear about it just about all the time in the mostly Zionist influenced media.

and then just posting that link is pretty insulting.

You can always leave.

After all, this isn't public school, LOL.

The hypocrisy of saying there cannot be a Jewish state (Israel being a "Jewish" state that is democratic and allows religious freedom) while there are so many officially Islamic states that do NOT allow religious freedom is amazing.

Israel is far more "atheistic" than it is "Jewish". Even Zionism's founder, Theodore Herzl, was an atheist.

Democratic and religious freedom? Israel is the only 'Western' country to legally sanction torture, and the Israeli Defense Forces use bone-breaking and shoot-to-maim policies against Palestinians, and even reporters. Furthermore, Israel forbids marriages of Jews to non-Jews, just like nazi Germany.

And as for these so-called Islamic states (most of which are more secular than religious BTW) that don't allow religious freedoms, that is a direct contradiction to what real Islam teaches.

---

What I do not understand is what the judges mean when they say that you cannot make a life altering choice of faith on a whim. I am a muslim and I grew up with all the people at the mosque saying that Islam and Christianity are the two closest religions. If I decided to convert to Christianity I think the only thing that I would have to change in my beliefs is that Jesus is the son of God. So theres barely any change in faith.

---

At 6/2/07 11:05 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: stfu mat that post was made before I became a athiest.

You're just going through a phase (most teenagers do).

---

At 6/2/07 10:25 PM, Mathaeus wrote:

You just ignored everything I said and just posted a link that refutes none of my arguments.

Did not.

Okay, cite exactly where it refutes my arguments or tell me yourself, because I see no counter-reasoning on your part.

The hypocrisy of saying there cannot be a Jewish state (Israel being a "Jewish" state that is democratic and allows religious freedom) while there are so many officially Islamic states that do NOT allow religious freedom is amazing.

Israel is far more "atheistic" than it is "Jewish". Even Zionism's founder, Theodore Herzl, was an atheist.

Well, if it's not a "Jewish" state, then it isn't Zionism is it?

Democratic and religious freedom? Israel is the only 'Western' country to legally sanction torture, and the Israeli Defense Forces use bone-breaking and shoot-to-maim policies against Palestinians, and even reporters. Furthermore, Israel forbids marriages of Jews to non-Jews, just like nazi Germany.

Israel is also not even 100 years old. I'd have to say it's doing pretty well, consider it ranks higher than every single other nation in the Middle East in press freedom, according to Reporters Without Borders (Surprassing some Western Nations, including the U.S. and all members of the Arab League), and it is also the only nation in the region to receive a "Free" rating from Freedom House, while most other nations in the Middle East received Not Free with the exception of about six nations, which received "Partly Free" rankings. I also assure you that it is not the only Western nation to have allegedly participated in unscrupulous interrogation and battlefield tactics, but I doubt you're going to find many non-Western nations doing better. They are considered "Western" nations because they are modernized nations that while, not PERFECT are still better than the oppressive regimes you find in many places in the rest of the world. I think that the term "First World" is probably better because the geographical connotations of "Western" can make it misleading when you consider some of the freer Eastern nations, such as Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan.

Wrong. Israel does NOT forbid marriages of Jews to non-Jews, it forbids marriages of Israeli citizens and Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza; religion has absolutely no standing in this law. In fact, the law was only upheld in 2006 by a 6 to 5 vote. I don't support the law and it is unlikely that most Israelis do. In democracies crappy laws occasionally get passed, and Israel is no different.

Most of the problems that you say makes Israel like Nazi Germany are not results of the policy of Israel but the results of the government of the West Bank and Gaza. Blaming Israel for what is happening in the Palestinian is ridiculous. Israel does not govern the West Bank and Gaza, the Palestinian Authority does. Don't blame the Knesset, blame Hamas. The reason that the Palestinian Authority ranks so low on Freedom House and Reporters without Borders is because of what the government there is doing, not the government of Israel. Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip, and was greeted with rocket attacks. Israel has offered peace and it has offered land back, but when it did it received armed uprisings and cries of "NO PEACE!". The reason that the Palestinians are oppressed are not because of what Israel has done, or the fact that Israel exists, but the pride of their own government leaders and refusal to accept peace or give decent civil rights to their own citizens.

Why is there such a double standard? Every other nation in the Middle East has a terrible human rights record, but whenever one terrible incident happens in the Palestinian territories Israel is accused as if it was Nazi Germany? Israel is not Nazi Germany, and it gives much better rights to its citizens than any other country in the area. Please don't blame Israel for the misdeeds of the PLO and individual wackos and terrorists. It makes mistakes, but its overall record is much cleaner than its neighbors.

---

At 6/3/07 01:29 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Okay, cite exactly where it refutes my arguments or tell me yourself, because I see no counter-reasoning on your part.

I did not ignore everything you said and the link I provided does refute your arguments.

Well, if it's not a "Jewish" state, then it isn't Zionism is it?

Judaism =/= Zionism.

More Zionist propoganda.

You are so wonderfully naive.

---

At 6/2/07 11:11 PM, AttAl07 wrote: What I do not understand is what the judges mean when they say that you cannot make a life altering choice of faith on a whim.

i hardly call it 'on a whim' when shes been trying for 6 years, it's not like she got up one morning and thought to herself ' hmm, i want to be christian ' then went straight to the court house and got refused, shes been trying for 6 years.

---

At 6/2/07 10:25 PM, Mathaeus wrote: Israel is far more "atheistic" than it is "Jewish". Even Zionism's founder, Theodore Herzl, was an atheist.

Right, the guy who came up with the idea of a Jewish homeland wasn't Jewish. I think you're just confused. Herzl personally didn't want to actually live in the new Jewish homeland, but he wanted to make it for Jews who did want to live there.

Israel is completely a Jewish state, only unlike other Middle Eastern countries, they let other religions live there, too.

Democratic and religious freedom? Israel is the only 'Western' country to legally sanction torture, and the Israeli Defense Forces use bone-breaking and shoot-to-maim policies against Palestinians, and even reporters. Furthermore, Israel forbids marriages of Jews to non-Jews, just like nazi Germany.

Proof? Or is this just wild speculation and flat-out lies?

And as for these so-called Islamic states (most of which are more secular than religious BTW) that don't allow religious freedoms, that is a direct contradiction to what real Islam teaches.

More secular than religious? That's hilarious. You're kidding, right? You're trying to tell me that these countries aren't based on extremist Muslim belief and Sharia law.

And you're damn right it's a direct contradiction. The Qu'ran considers the Torah and Bible to be holy books and Abraham, Moses, and Jesus to be prophets. These leaders aren't real Muslims, they're just power-hungry radical maniacs.

---

At 6/3/07 01:45 AM, Mathaeus wrote:

At 6/3/07 01:29 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Okay, cite exactly where it refutes my arguments or tell me yourself, because I see no counter-reasoning on your part.

I did not ignore everything you said and the link I provided does refute your arguments.

Then could you cite where exactly it does refute each argument?

Well, if it's not a "Jewish" state, then it isn't Zionism is it?

Judaism =/= Zionism.

Alright, then what is Zionism!? AskOxford.com defines it as "a movement for the development and protection of a Jewish nation in Israel." What do you define it as (minus all the hyperbole)

More Zionist propoganda.

You are so wonderfully naive.

Apparently I'm not so naïve that i can't explain my own side of the argument with actual statistics and rational thought and not just post a link to a website without defining where its information applies to the arguments being made. I have thought my argument out enough that I can respond without just dismissing your entire post, you apparently can't. Please prove me wrong by actually responding to my previous post with counter-arguments. If you're going to debate you should actually try to tell how your sources support your argument and not just post a link and just insult the other guy for the rest of your post. You are not changing my opinion by just calling me naïve and not explaining how you think I am wrong.

---

At 6/3/07 01:54 AM, Dr-Worm wrote: Right, the guy who came up with the idea of a Jewish homeland wasn't Jewish.

Unless one considers Judaism an ethnicity.

I think you're just confused. Herzl personally didn't want to actually live in the new Jewish homeland, but he wanted to make it for Jews who did want to live there.

There was nothing to stop them from doing so.

Israel is completely a Jewish state,

The Neturei Karta (a mostly Jewish organization) says otherwise.

only unlike other Middle Eastern countries, they let other religions live there, too.

Other Middle Eastern countries such as Turkey, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia?

Also, the Qur'an states that "there should be no compulsion in religion." (Qur'an 2:256)

Proof?

The Israeli government even persecutes the very people whom they supposedly speak for.

More secular than religious? That's hilarious. You're kidding, right?

I wish I was.

You're trying to tell me that these countries aren't based on extremist Muslim belief

"Allah loveth not aggressors." (Qur'an 2:190)

and Sharia law.

What's wrong with laws that prohibits and punishes murder, theft, rape, vandalism, and other things that are particularly looked down upon in just about all other nations?

And you're damn right it's a direct contradiction. The Qu'ran considers the Torah and Bible to be holy books and Abraham, Moses, and Jesus to be prophets. These leaders aren't real Muslims, they're just power-hungry radical maniacs.

I'm glad we can agree on something.

At 6/3/07 02:07 AM, SyntheticTacos wrote: Then could you cite where exactly it does refute each argument?

Just about everything provided in the link refutes your claims.

Alright, then what is Zionism!? AskOxford.com defines it as "a movement for the development and protection of a Jewish nation in Israel."

AskOxford also defines 'jihad' as "holy war", which is not true. Jihad is the Arabic word for "struggle". Just about anything could be labled as jihad: from doing homework to climbing a tall mountain.

And if you ask me, there is nothing "holy" about war. Most Muslims (and non-Muslims) hopefully can agree on this. The only time a war should be fought would be in defense.

What do you define it as (minus all the hyperbole)

Pretty much the same way the Neturei Karta defines it.

Apparently I'm not so naïve that i can't explain my own side of the argument with actual statistics

...without any sources to back them up?

and rational thought

That mostly depends on the viewer's perspective, not the writer's.

and not just post a link to a website without defining where its information applies to the arguments being made.

It all looked so good I didn't really know where to begin.

Besides, I really don't want to cram the forums with walls and walls of text.

I have thought my argument out enough that I can respond without just dismissing your entire post, you apparently can't. Please prove me wrong by actually responding to my previous post with counter-arguments. If you're going to debate you should actually try to tell how your sources support your argument and not just post a link and just insult the other guy for the rest of your post. You are not changing my opinion by just calling me naïve and not explaining how you think I am wrong.

I'll try and do that next time.

And I do apologize for the put-down earlier (when I called you naive). It's just that I see so much injustice going on it makes my blood boil.

Again I apologize. It was totally uncalled for.

---

If she has been trying for 6 years then that even more reason to allow her. Sometimes I feel like I just don't understand Islamic peoples motives.

---

At 6/1/07 08:17 PM, JakeHero wrote:

At 6/1/07 05:36 PM, Bolo wrote: Now, that isn't racist at all, is it?

Muslims aren't a race.

Good point there champ, that means it a-ok to brand them all terrorists, right?

---

i say, fuck the system. if she cant legally do something cause of this, she should just do it. i would.

"you cant marry that person"
"well mr.priest, my gun says i can!"

there, now your married.

guns and money rule the world. they make people above the law.

all she really needs to do is get a new id card and lie to them. its not that difficult.

---

At 6/3/07 11:59 AM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

At 6/3/07 11:45 AM, DeadSun wrote: all she really needs to do is get a new id card and lie to them. its not that difficult.

in the islamic world that crime is punishable by death

they have to catch her first.

---

At 6/3/07 12:23 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

At 6/3/07 12:02 PM, DeadSun wrote:

At 6/3/07 11:59 AM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:

At 6/3/07 11:45 AM, DeadSun wrote:

they have to catch her first.

go to america cant catch her there

that or stock up on guns