Dog Snot Diaries

I write, you whine….

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Am I ready to hang up on Islam?

Almost, but not quite.

I’m getting pretty sick of it, though. I only have a handful muslim friends and acquainences. Of those, there are only one or two that I’d consider “friends”. One of them is from Iraq, the other from Iran. Others, that I’m not so close with, are from various countries or born here in the US. When we get together, we often talk religion or politics. Why wouldn’t we? A good number of my friends are pretty involved with politics. That only makes sense, since I am as well.

Last week, we were discussing the Pope’s speech that has the muslim community in an uproar. Most muslims were. An American born muslim didn’t really give a shit. Her attitude was that religious leaders say stupid things every day and if we got upset over all of the them or acted upon their furor, we’d spend most of our lives in jail or pissed off. A very good point. Mosques are much like christian churches in their diversity. You can go to one church and hear hell-fire and damnation, yet travel a mile down the road and hear love and tolerance. Neither one is particularly a “bad” thing, it just is or isn’t something you agree with. You settle in a church that most closely aligns with your personal interpretation of the Bible, God, and life. The same applies to mosques.

My Iranian friend had a different view, though. He was pretty pissed off. He was upset that the Pope would further the hatred of Islam, and portray them as a religion of violence. He feared this would start a Christian/Muslim war in certain parts of the country. I asked him what he thought about the churches that were shot up and fire-bombed following the Pope’s speech. He didn’t have much to say. First, he blamed it on the “emotional youth”. Then he said it was too bad the different religions couldn’t be more tolerant. At one point, he stated that although they acted badly, you couldn’t blame them for being pissed off.

In fact, he did everything except condemn the attacks. I didn’t really sit down and think about our conversation until later. Is this representative of the average muslim? Every time you see a cartoon depicting Allah or hear a statement that offends the muslims, they don’t seem to have trouble coming together with a unified front to denounce it, call for an apology, threaten violence, and/or kill people and commit violent acts. However, you rarely see ANY front condemning the acts committed by “emotional youth” or bringing those people to justice. Muslim leaders are still demanding a personal apology from the Pope, but I’ve yet to see one demanding their community rebuild the churches, most of which weren’t even catholic.

Am I missing the boat here? If I’m wrong, I’d love to be set straight. It certainly seems that Islam is a religion of violence, either through direct action or acceptance.

posted by Geoffrey at 8:25 am


  1. You aren’t missing anything. Muslims want us to be tolerant, but when push comes to shove, they never condemn the radical behavior of their own. When I see Muslims marching in the streets condemning their brothers behavior, I will start thinking about tolerance…until that time, they can kiss my ass. I’m through.

    Comment by Pam — September 17, 2006 @ 4:29 pm

  2. I\’m so fucking sick and tired of Muslims being offended.

    Further, I think it\’s complete and utter INTOLERABLE bullshit that they keep perpetrating violent acts as reprisals to people exercising their freedom to speech.

    Imagine if we burned down a mosque every time they burned an American Flag.

    They can go fuck themselves.

    Comment by Gordon — September 17, 2006 @ 7:29 pm

  3. One other observation about the outrage expressed by Muslims about things someone in the West supposedly did to “insult” or “offend” Islam is that much of it is based on misunderstanding, or statements taken out of context. Too many, even among the educated among this community, tend to react unreasonably without doing the necessary homework to get a full picture of the offenses.

    Ironically enough, upon reading the entire text of the Pope’s speech, one would see that this touches the real subject of his message – the influence of Greek reasonablity on religion, specifically, Christianity. The reference to Mohammed was actually his citing a quote made by a Greek-influenced Byzantine Emporer in a discussion with an Islamic Persian about the relationship of reason and God’s will.

    It was actually an Islamic scholar who declared reasonability is irrelevant when describing God’s will – going “so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practice idolatry.”

    If anything, these outraged Muslims should direct their outrage at Ibn Hazm – not the Pope. Too many messengers have already been killed in this unreasonable “Jihad.”

    Comment by Chet — September 17, 2006 @ 8:00 pm

  4. Islamic leaders can find thousands of reasons to hate the actions of US representatives and troops, on a daily basis. Likewise, US reps and troops can find thousands of reasons to blow up Islamic representatives.

    Make every automobile engine in the US powered by water, and remove every reason for the US to even talk to every country in the Middle East (including Israel), and tell me how much time we’ll waste debating these bullshit things again?

    Comment by His Daddy — September 18, 2006 @ 1:56 am

  5. Is taht the latest moonbat spin? You aren’t calling them terrorists now? They’re “Islamic Representatives”?

    Reason number 569846 why moonbats are bad for America.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 18, 2006 @ 6:29 am

  6. tell me how much time we’ll waste debating these bullshit things again?

    The debate would probably be over at that point because even the moderate Muslims would turn against us for ignoring their (albeit whispering) pleas for help in getting rid of murderous regimes that have hijacked thier governments and culture.

    We’d lose virtually all the allies that assist us in preventing attacks from loons who really care less about our wanting their oil than our “infidelic” existence.

    Isolationism is simply an idiotic policy for any superpower, let alone the sole superpower in the world, to practice.

    Comment by Chet — September 18, 2006 @ 9:20 am

  7. Okay, I get it. Catholics talking shit about Muslms is good, Muslims complaining about it is bad. Maybe the Pope should keep his mouth shut, and stick to talking about his own pedophile brethren. Eh, Chet?

    Comment by Jonathan — September 18, 2006 @ 10:20 pm

  8. Complaining is a little different than burning churches and shooting nuns.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 18, 2006 @ 10:41 pm

  9. “Complaining is a little different than burning churches and shooting nuns.”

    You expect moonbats to see the difference?

    Where’s the Muslim apology for the arson and murder? Where’s the Islamic denouncements of the violent behiavior from their “emotional youth??


    Comment by Gordon — September 18, 2006 @ 10:49 pm

  10. “Complaining is a little different than burning churches and shooting nuns.?

    Shit happens. Those are the radicals, just like the radical Catholics have been “terrorizing” protestants in Ireland for years. Typical right-wing mentality though, focus on a few bad eggs to scare us into submission.

    The majority of offended muslims were just complaining. Or was Geoff’s Iranian friend shooting nuns as well??


    Comment by Jonathan — September 18, 2006 @ 11:01 pm

  11. Yeah. Just a couple “eggs”.

    And a few towers. And a plane into a field. And the Pentagon. And numerous thwarted attacks thanks to people focusing on eggs.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 18, 2006 @ 11:04 pm

  12. That’s the spirit, I knew it wouldn’t take long for a good repug to link it back to 9-11. Taking lessons from Dubya?? When in doubt, refer to the Trade Centers. I’d have to be quite the Un-patriotic fuck to argue that, eh??

    Comment by Jonathan — September 18, 2006 @ 11:11 pm

  13. “Those are the radicals, just like the radical Catholics have been “terrorizing? protestants in Ireland for years.”

    I don’t recall anyone here defending radical catholics or any radicals for that matter. How’s your point even relevant, Fancy John?

    A radical is a radical no matter what color or religion he comes from. They should all swing from yardarms.

    Comment by Gordon — September 19, 2006 @ 12:46 am

  14. “That’s the spirit, I knew it wouldn’t take long for a good repug to link it back to 9-11.”

    I forgot that the Towers had nothing to do with Islamofacism. Why’d they bomb the towers again? Those “restless youth” just acting out?

    I think the short bus has arrived for a pit stop.

    Comment by Gordon — September 19, 2006 @ 12:53 am

  15. Moonbats like to pretend 9/11 had nothing to do with islamofascists. It makes it easier to take their side if you forget they killed your neighbors.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 19, 2006 @ 6:37 am

  16. It figures a liberal would try to avoid any mention of 9/11! And those silly radicals that burned up French villages! I’m sure France had that coming…

    Jonathon, those “few eggs” you refer to are actually millions. Those few people are now calling for the Pope to convert to Islam….Those few are the voice of the majority.

    Comment by Pam — September 19, 2006 @ 2:12 pm

  17. That’s not a bad idea Pammy. If the Pope converted to Islam that would be a true testament to his religous tolerance. After all, he REALLY is the “voice” of the Catholic majority, unlike the few Muslims burning churches are.

    Comment by Jonathan — September 19, 2006 @ 7:23 pm

  18. Or the billion that support those few.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 19, 2006 @ 9:52 pm

  19. Fancy John takes a year off from blogging and only reappears to defend radicals and terrorists.


    Comment by Gordon — September 20, 2006 @ 1:18 am

  20. Jonathan, is your head really that far up your ass? Go back to the links Chet provided in Comment 3. The Pope was using a 14th century quote to explain how various religions SHOULD BE MORE TOLERANT. I guess the ranting Muslims missed that point.

    That’s like taking the passage, “…beating your wife is a good idea…” and saying it expresses my feelings, when it is actually part of the sentence, “Nothing could be worse than believing that beating your wife is a good idea.”

    Educate yourself and understand the meaning of the word “context” before you make an ass out of yourself. Again.

    Comment by The Other Mike S — September 20, 2006 @ 6:52 pm

  21. Hmm, maybe Mikey doesn’t realize that the Pope wasn’t speaking out of context. That’s why he apologized for his remarks. Stupid Mikey, maybe you should take lessons from the Pope, and admit when you’re wrong.

    Comment by Jonathan — September 21, 2006 @ 1:31 am

  22. Welcome back to the mutual admiration society with another one of Gordon\’s allter egos put in. \”Jonathan\” is yet another creation to create another \”side\” of an argument.

    Comment by ha — September 21, 2006 @ 8:11 am

  23. My parents would be shocked to learn that Gordon created my brother. If you’d been a long time reader, you’d have realized he was one of the original posters here after I opened the blog up to other authors.

    I don’t expect you to actually look into something before you flap your cockhole, though. If you did that, you wouldn’t have to post anonymously.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 21, 2006 @ 8:15 am

  24. DUDE. Gordon is your brother’s dad? That’s fucked up, man.

    Comment by girl — September 21, 2006 @ 9:14 am

  25. So Jon, you have a line into the Pope, so you know why he appologized? My WAG is that he was being a spineless PC politician afraid to stand up for what is right. Honestly, I expected more from him.

    That being said, your head is still up your ass. Read the entire speech, not just the selected MSM quotes. If you still can’t understand what he’s trying to say, you must be deaf, blind AND stupid. Must be from all of that ass-air.

    Comment by The Other Mike S — September 21, 2006 @ 2:18 pm

  26. Actually, he said he was sorry for the reaction from the Muslims..he didn’t say he was sorry for actually saying what he said.

    Comment by Pam — September 21, 2006 @ 7:56 pm

  27. Oh Chucklehead Mike, the Pope’s speech was fine. He didn’t say a single thing for me, a non-muslim, white democrat stone mason, to complain about. If he had insulted beer or toothless women, I might have taken issue.

    I’m sure when your fellow Cardinals elect you the next Pontiff, it’ll be happier times. A time when good catholics can insult all religions. Don’t know how many nuns you’ll have left at the end of your reign, but hey, at least you can say that you weren’t PC about what you said. Moron.

    Comment by Jonathan — September 21, 2006 @ 9:14 pm

  28. You really need to stop drinking before you write. Each post becomes more and more incoherent.

    Get help and try and stay on thread. Dumbfuck.

    Comment by The Other Mike S — September 21, 2006 @ 11:59 pm

  29. Greetings to the Imprisoned Citizens of the United States. We are Unitarian Jihad. There is only God, unless there is more than one God. The vote of our God subcommittee is 10-8 in favor of one God, with two abstentions. Brother Flaming Sword of Moderation noted the possibility of there being no God at all, and his objection was noted with love by the secretary.

    Greetings to the Imprisoned Citizens of the United States! Too long has your attention been waylaid by the bright baubles of extremist thought. Too long have fundamentalist yahoos of all religions (except Buddhism — 14-5 vote, no abstentions, fundamentalism subcommittee) made your head hurt. Too long have you been buffeted by angry people who think that God talks to them. You have a right to your moderation! You have the power to be calm! We will use the IED of truth to explode the SUV of dogmatic expression!

    People of the United States, why is everyone yelling at you??? Whatever happened to … you know, everything? Why is the news dominated by nutballs saying that the Ten Commandments have to be tattooed inside the eyelids of every American, or that Allah has told them to kill Americans in order to rid the world of Satan, or that Yahweh has instructed them to go live wherever they feel like, or that Shiva thinks bombing mosques is a great idea? Sister Immaculate Dagger of Peace notes for the record that we mean no disrespect to Jews, Muslims, Christians or Hindus. Referred back to the committee of the whole for further discussion.

    We are Unitarian Jihad. We are everywhere. We have not been born again, nor have we sworn a blood oath. We do not think that God cares what we read, what we eat or whom we sleep with. Brother Neutron Bomb of Serenity notes for the record that he does not have a moral code but is nevertheless a good person, and Unexalted Leader Garrote of Forgiveness stipulates that Brother Neutron Bomb of Serenity is a good person, and this is to be reflected in the minutes.

    Beware! Unless you people shut up and begin acting like grown-ups with brains enough to understand the difference between political belief and personal faith, the Unitarian Jihad will begin a series of terrorist-like actions. We will take over television studios, kidnap so-called commentators and broadcast calm, well-reasoned discussions of the issues of the day. We will not try for “balance” by hiring fruitcakes; we will try for balance by hiring non-ideologues who have carefully thought through the issues.

    We are Unitarian Jihad. We will appear in public places and require people to shake hands with each other. (Sister Hand Grenade of Love suggested that we institute a terror regime of mandatory hugging, but her motion was not formally introduced because of lack of a quorum.) We will require all lobbyists, spokesmen and campaign managers to dress like trout in public. Televangelists will be forced to take jobs as Xerox repair specialists. Demagogues of all stripes will be required to read Proust out loud in prisons.

    We are Unitarian Jihad, and our motto is: “Sincerity is not enough.” We have heard from enough sincere people to last a lifetime already. Just because you believe it’s true doesn’t make it true. Just because your motives are pure doesn’t mean you are not doing harm. Get a dog, or comfort someone in a nursing home, or just feed the birds in the park. Play basketball. Lighten up. The world is not out to get you, except in the sense that the world is out to get everyone.

    Brother Gatling Gun of Patience notes that he’s pretty sure the world is out to get him because everyone laughs when he says he is a Unitarian. There were murmurs of assent around the room, and someone suggested that we buy some Congress members and really stick it to the Baptists. But this was deemed against Revolutionary Principles, and Brother Gatling Gun of Patience was remanded to the Sunday Flowers and Banners committee.

    People of the United States! We are Unitarian Jihad! We can strike without warning. Pockets of reasonableness and harmony will appear as if from nowhere! Nice people will run the government again! There will be coffee and cookies in the Gandhi Room after the revolution.

    Comment by 403 Frobidden Access — September 23, 2006 @ 10:13 am

  30. Wapishhhh!

    Fancy John’s nowhere to be seen….

    Must be icing up the cheek from all of Mike’s bitchlaps.

    Comment by Gordon — September 24, 2006 @ 2:19 am

  31. Says Chet:
    “The debate would probably be over at that point because even the moderate Muslims would turn against us for ignoring their (albeit whispering) pleas for help in getting rid of murderous regimes that have hijacked thier governments and culture.

    We’d lose virtually all the allies that assist us in preventing attacks from loons who really care less about our wanting their oil than our “infidelic? existence.

    Isolationism is simply an idiotic policy for any superpower, let alone the sole superpower in the world, to practice. ”

    Who the fucks cares? Let all the “loons” hate us. With what are they going to attack us? When Abu abin ab al Loon has to choose between six months of truck driving school in France, and feeding his two kids, things will change. Right now, private Saudi citizens get salaries to not work. Don’t talk to me about supporting Paul to support Peter when you’re supporting regimes that give both millions, bitch.

    When we’re totaly out of their worlds, not buying their oil nor invested in their sandboxes, with WHAT resources will they use to fund their attacks against us? When both Peter and Paul are being incessantly bugged by their wives about hunger and health, tell me again how an Iranian can attack a Michigander (Michiganian, their call, NOT yours), again, bitch.

    And you bitches call me a Moonbat? I call you self-nominated bitches “Pussies.” Supporting a pussy because you don’t have the balls to front a better leader. Shame on you WGBH umbrella-toting, Jane Fonda video-practicing, party assholes.

    Comment by His Daddy — September 29, 2006 @ 2:14 am

  32. It gives me a chuckle to watch someone call Bush a “pussy” after fronting Billary, Kerry, then Billary again.

    Oh the irony.

    Comment by Geoffrey — September 29, 2006 @ 8:56 am

  33. I dare anyone here to publicly proclaim that “nothing but evil” came from Moses, and then take a walk by the Wailing Wall… see how long it takes before some black coated fundamentalist Jew makes mince meat of you.

    Matter of fact, I bet there are bars in Texas where if’n one dared to berate Bush junior fer his lyin’ hate-mongerin’ tongue, he’d be takin’ out back n’ stabbed mighty quick…

    But then… THAT kind of hatred is fine, right?

    Comment by M. Parker — October 1, 2006 @ 4:21 am

  34. Would you care to provide some examples of your fantasy, Parker? Otherwise, you’ve just made shit up and used it to make your point.

    Oh yeah. That’s why you had to make shit up. There ARE no examples of your fantasy.

    Comment by Geoffrey — October 1, 2006 @ 7:37 am

  35. “It gives me a chuckle to watch someone call Bush a “pussy? after fronting Billary, Kerry, then Billary again.

    Oh the irony.”

    I’m a republican, dude. I never wanted Bush, and I didn’t vote for either Bush or Kerry.

    This isn’t a government where you only have two choices. Supporting one fuckhead because you can find faults with the other fuckhead is rather fuckhead logic, wouldn’t you logically agree? Only folks who don’t pay attention would think there are only two choices.

    And don’t talk to me about reality, and how there really are ONLY two choices, when you’re outright accepting “realities” that we all know, even now, aren’t. You’re just looking for an easy choice, not a real choice.

    I’d rather vote for a retarded gorilla over Kerry. I also said the same thing about GW, yet the dems ran someone WORSE than a retarded gorilla against GW last time. Sounds like both parties don’t want smart people to be in charge.

    Argue that, smart guy.

    Comment by His Daddy — October 6, 2006 @ 12:37 am

  36. Argue that?

    You got to be shitting me?

    You expect me to argue with someone that openly admits they’d vote for a “retarded gorilla” for President?

    Ummm, okay.

    Comment by Gordon — October 6, 2006 @ 3:25 am

  37. No this isn’t a government where you only have 2 choices. Yet it is. You can vote for anyone you’d like. However, doing so is a vote for one of the 2 choices, indirectly. One of two people is going to win. If you vote for a third person, you’re actually helping one of the two primary candidates.

    That IS reality, “smart guy”.

    Comment by Geoffrey — October 6, 2006 @ 8:40 am

  38. Couldn’t disagree more. That’s simply a defeatist’s excuse, and most of you kids here have never struck me as anything but the opposite of that.

    You know, the whole, “have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead, blah blah blah?” Seems like you kids have no problem tossing your sidearms over the fence the moment Walmart or the Big K asks for it, whichever is your sellout Big Government excuse for a political party.

    I wonder, Gordon and Geoffrey, if I asked you guys to write down your thoughts on Gun Control, the Death Penalty, The War on Drugs, and Welfare, how much neither of your resposnes would look like the GOP’s current platform, nor anything whined by the Democrats, either…

    Comment by His Daddy — October 9, 2006 @ 12:24 am

  39. A defeatists attitude? No, it’s reality. Use as an example our own impending election.

    Rather than take the top two, let’s look at the top three.

    Patrick in first. He’s a shitbag racist.

    Healey next. Much better than Patrick, but weak on gun control with a huge socialist streak running up her back.

    Mihos. He doesn’t have a prayer, however, he’s my first choice. I agree with much of his platform.

    However, just about every vote for him is a vote for Patrick. If you took Mihos out of the race, most of his votes would go to Healey.

    Therefore, it’s much better to vote for Healey and increase the odds that we won’t have a shitbag like Patrick in office.

    Why? Because as I stated before, there are only two candidates. By voting for a third party, you’re helping someone else.

    Look at the 1992 election. Ross Perot took almost 19% of the vote. As a result, we had 8 years of Slick Willie and are now stuck with a widespread war on terror.

    Comment by Geoffrey — October 9, 2006 @ 7:50 am

  40. I never expected you to blame our war or terror on Clinton. That’s probably the funniest thing I’ve seen you type.

    You also forgot to mention that Perot was blowing away America, until he quit the race, and restarted it again. THAT’S why he wasn’t president. Had he stayed strong, the election would have been his. 19% is pretty impressive.

    Still, your explanation that we HAVE to vote for Healey because Mihos will ensure a Patrick victory is defeatist. Outright, you’re saying he has no chance. Dude, that’s what “defeatist” means. Look it up. Either that, or you’re working for Healey and using terror tactics to give her support. Your call.

    I’m a repub. Hated Clinton. Would give anything to have him back over GW.

    Comment by His Daddy — October 10, 2006 @ 12:33 am

  41. “I never expected you to blame our war or terror on Clinton.”

    Are you suggesting that George Jr. took the helm and terrorism gave birth eight months later?

    It began with the pacifism and incompetence of Carter and culminated with Clinton. Bush Jr. got handed the legacy.

    Comment by Gordon — October 10, 2006 @ 2:49 am

  42. Perot never had a chance. Ever. As impressive as 19% may be, it doesn’t put you in the White House. It puts Clinton in the White House, which gives North Korea nukes and the middle east terrorists.

    You can label my statement on Healey whatever you’d like. It doesn’t change on thing, though. That it’s fact.

    If you’re so sure that Mihos will win, I’ll give you the opportunity to make some money.

    $1000 says Mihos loses the election. Are you ready to put your money where your moonbat mouth is, or are you going to sit contentedly on the moonbat bench? You’re a republican in name only.

    Comment by Geoffrey — October 10, 2006 @ 7:35 am

  43. “$1000 says Mihos loses the election. Are you ready to put your money where your moonbat mouth is, or are you going to sit contentedly on the moonbat bench? You’re a republican in name only.”

    That’s AWESOME! You’re both calling ME a moonbat at the same time you’re openly regurgitating the warcries of the politically-weak Healey.

    If you’re not with us, you’re against us. I’ve heard that logic somewhere before.

    You REALLY think terrorism started in the last 30 years? I’m sorry, did I miss the point where the US funding regimes in the Middle East started with Carter? If I remember correctly, there was some guy called the Pah of Iran, or the Flah of Iran, or something like that, where radical elements, fed up after years and years of American-supported facism, bit our government in the ass, and overthrew the people we “liked.”

    Thank God we didn’t have terrorism before G.W. We can thank him that the 1972 Olympics went off without a hitch?

    Back to your question — Massachusetts continues to elect assholes over leaders. The last real leader of Massachusetts in the gov. role was Bill Weld. I won’t take your sucker’s bet when you’re ready to vote for one of two assholes, instead of demanding better leadership. You talk and talk, but really, have you led yet? Instead of being all fatalistic and defeatist, how about believing and trying for something?

    In our state (and OUR party, for that matter), we’re missing half of what we need. We need one-half the right ideas, and one-half the moral conviction necessary to do the right thing. Here, and nationally, we have neither as the GOP, and that’s more that the Dem’s can claim.

    I want both. You call me a moonbat? I call you John Fucking Kerry, because I’m trying, you’re just bitching, and looking for results.

    Comment by His Daddy — October 15, 2006 @ 1:44 am

  44. Does that mean you’re willing to take the bet, or you’re a defeatist?

    You’re a Republican in name only.

    Comment by Geoffrey — October 15, 2006 @ 7:51 am

  45. The “Flah of Iran”?


    Comment by Gordon the Magnificent — October 15, 2006 @ 12:37 pm

  46. I am definately not fond of Fonda. I am amazed at some of the things she’s publicly said in the past.

    Comment by mr skin — October 25, 2006 @ 5:37 pm

  47. Jane’s definitely not helped make people fond of her. The muslim culture has definitely not helped make people fond of listening to them either…particularly not when they threaten aggression and use cowardly attacks to commit non stop violence.

    Comment by bonnie — October 25, 2006 @ 11:43 pm

  48. You wait until it becomes like here in the u.k.
    demo after demo,demands after demands, over 1600 mosques and still demand more!
    next week a tv programme is to show an imman spouting hate speech muslims as usual are demanding it is not shown.
    i have never known a country as unhappy as we are now, no freedom to speak out nor protest otherwise it’s we that go to jail!
    the more i learn of islam and muslims i curse the day that one was allowed to enter this once happy nation.
    You watch millions will be voting bnp it’s the only party that speaks out how we are bowing down to muslims all the time and our politicians should follow saddams fate, they have sold us out to this bunch of murderring scum.
    You wait until they feel confident, then you also will have the rapes the riots the no go areas and sharia laws,
    in the u.k a jew or hindu is not allowed to sit on a jury where a muslim is on trial, nor if they are the spouse of one!
    democracy in iraq? we would love democracy in England scotland ireland and wales.
    marxism and islam rule now in the u.k.
    Americans should when approached by the baghdad broadcasting corp tell them to do one! it is the mouthpiece for islam………..
    The first guy is learning very quickly that is islam and ALL are the same and follow an evil death cult.
    american and israel hatred here is very sad to witness daily thats’ the muslim influence.
    get into some british or danish blogs.
    up pompii is good…gates of vienna is excellent..and lead to many other sites learn now don’t wait i swear it will be too late if you do! beware of islamic double speak….

    Comment by VERONICA — January 11, 2007 @ 1:09 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress