hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Response to you fact 1 You wrote Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron If anyone on this forum can say that this is not a general swipe at all Sikhs, they must be nuts, or I live in the twilight zone. This defunct's anything you say after. The fact that you come on this forum, acting all sanctimonious, responding to others about being objective about muslims and how not all are bad blah, blah blah, then you have the audacity to do exactly the opposite. How 2 face is that, this is what's wrong with society, too many keyboard junkies portraying themselves as something they aren't. I will have the final word cus, you are the type of scum that needs to be put into it's place!!! Just to clarify perhaps the choice of words were not clear. A few 'you's were perhaps missed.'You being Sikh is very neutral when you're talking about Muslims...Oh and you can fook right off if you call me a scum again you **** Get off your high horse if you think you have any right to put anyone in their place - show your true colours with that arrogant statement
separator Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Its threads like this that make me happy that I'm an Atheist. Seriously, religion has been the source of conflict for hundreds of years and its not going to change, whatever deity you believe in.
bovril Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Clegg responds to Farage's cheap point scoring with.. cheap point scoring.
Stadt Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 It's the extreme preachers that need targeting, stop the radicalisation and the majority of attacks will stop.
Guest MattP Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Clegg responds to Farage's cheap point scoring with.. cheap point scoring. That's what I thought. If Farage is asked a question he can't just ignore it.
Ghost Troop Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Religion is the excuse used by extremists and gangsters to either press their extreme beliefs or gain profit. Not usually the cause but more often the tool. Seen this with my own eyes in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Clever words to make religion fit your actions. People make war, they may seek to justify it using religion or some other moral defence, but its a human failing.
bovril Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Religion is the excuse used by extremists and gangsters to either press their extreme beliefs or gain profit. Not usually the cause but more often the tool. Seen this with my own eyes in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Clever words to make religion fit your actions. People make war, they may seek to justify it using religion or some other moral defence, but its a human failing. Well put.
DennisNedry Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Religion is the excuse used by extremists and gangsters to either press their extreme beliefs or gain profit. Not usually the cause but more often the tool. Seen this with my own eyes in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Clever words to make religion fit your actions. People make war, they may seek to justify it using religion or some other moral defence, but its a human failing. But Islam is the direct cause of these attacks so I'm sure how you can say this...? The Quran states numerous times that those who insult the Prophet should be executed. As my grandad used to say 'there will never be peace on this earth whilst there's an arab left alive' - I can't imagine what he'd think today seeing millions of them in Europe.
Ghost Troop Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I said more often not always, and if we all followed religious text to the he letter like an Instruction manual there would be few of us left. Generally, people know that this text may have been relevant 500 years ago and despite what they may claim, they know its unacceptable today. Those that kill for this reason know it too, but it suits. And the direct cause of these attacks was the jaundiced belief of the few individuals who pulled the trigger, it was for them, not anyone or anything else.
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Just to clarify perhaps the choice of words were not clear. A few 'you's were perhaps missed.'You being Sikh is very neutral when you're talking about Muslims... Oh and you can fook right off if you call me a scum again you **** Get off your high horse if you think you have any right to put anyone in their place - show your true colours with that arrogant statement I know what you meant!! I've got your card. now the story is, 'oh it's a typo' Why would you even need to use the word SIkh Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron to the new story You being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron The second statement makes no sense. So my english may not be so good , but sentence explained to me is your calling 1993fox a Sikh, and the rest is as the statement above, replacing yes with you makes no difference. Considering the discussion you were having with 1993fox, it was never going to be positive. So it sarcasm, as we know Sikh-Muslim history, hence a slander. So know were scraping the barrel, the swear words come out , the typo excuse, which again as it reads exactly the same as the original, your a 2 headed scummy snake mate!!
hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I know what you meant!! I've got your card. now the story is, 'oh it's a typo' Why would you even need to use the word SIkh Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron to the new story You being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron The second statement makes no sense. So my english may not be so good , but sentence explained to me is your calling 1993fox a Sikh, and the rest is as the statement above, replacing yes with you makes no difference. Considering the discussion you were having with 1993fox, it was never going to be positive. So it sarcasm, as we know Sikh-Muslim history, hence a slander. So know were scraping the barrel, the swear words come out , the typo excuse, which again as it reads exactly the same as the original, your a 2 headed scummy snake mate!! Again I repeat, because of history, some Sikhs still have a problem with Muslims, not the other way round. You've 'got my card'? Oh dear.... Too many issues I have no issues with Sikhs for the 4th time, you and 1993fox on the other hand can't get over what happened in history obviously. GET OVER IT! And by the way you misquoted my second adjusted statement, you missed out a 'you're' perhaps now you'll get it? Unlikely though
hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Religion is the excuse used by extremists and gangsters to either press their extreme beliefs or gain profit. Not usually the cause but more often the tool. Seen this with my own eyes in Northern Ireland, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Clever words to make religion fit your actions. People make war, they may seek to justify it using religion or some other moral defence, but its a human failing. Agree!
Guest MattP Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 But Islam is the direct cause of these attacks so I'm sure how you can say this...? The Quran states numerous times that those who insult the Prophet should be executed. As my grandad used to say 'there will never be peace on this earth whilst there's an arab left alive' - I can't imagine what he'd think today seeing millions of them in Europe. Heard an old boy say tonight he just wished he could go back in time 40 years where you barely ever heard the word Islam in day to day life.
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 This entire post is slanderous and you accuse me of slander, you have seriously lost the plot, I explained my choice of words already and explained that I was not generalising and was simply explaining why he particularly is not being unbiased. Please explain exactly when I have stoked up hatred before you start throwing your toys out of the pram and accusing me. I have nothing against Sikhs, historically it was Sikhs who had issues against Muslims because of what they allegedly did, I have close friends who happen to be sikh and have never even come close to acting the way you are at the moment. You butt in simply because I used word sikh in a post, answer this do you agree with everything 1993fox has said? Let's look at previous posts which have relevance to this subject, have you not been extra vocal in your views? So again who is stiring up religious hatred? Oh dear oh dear, WTF, shows how bigotted you are, so it's Sikhs who had issues, nothing to do with the Muslims, you know nothing about history. Actually overall in history it was Muslims were always the agressor, SIkhs were always the minority, throughout history a price has always been put on a Sikhs head. Did you know under the Sikh rule, the Sikh empire created more Mosques then any muslim ruler in the region, the reverse could not be said. They had the exact same rights as a Sikh, not in any period of Islamic rule was a non muslim (dhimmi) treated as there equal. Difference between Muslim Punjab and Sikh Punjab, TODAY, In SIkh Punjab the Muslim shrines, road names, town names, Mosques remain. Muslim Punjab, all SIkh historical monuments lay in ruin, SIkh town names changed, roads changed. It's sad that the Sikh Rule of that land is not taught in schools in Pakistan, all non Muslim parts are ignored. I have muslim friends, that behave in a much better manor then you would ever do.
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Again I repeat, because of history, some Sikhs still have a problem with Muslims, not the other way round. You've 'got my card'? Oh dear.... Too many issues I have no issues with Sikhs for the 4th time, you and 1993fox on the other hand can't get over what happened in history obviously. GET OVER IT! And by the way you misquoted my second adjusted statement, you missed out a 'you're' perhaps now you'll get it? Unlikely though Know your making stuff up, it's you that brought 'history' up, not me!! If you've not got any issues, why not say so, why make lies up. You've been caught out. You change your story again Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron\ Now it's You're being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron You're, does not make sense. Please clarify, or should I say, more lies!!
hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Oh dear oh dear, WTF, shows how bigotted you are, so it's Sikhs who had issues, nothing to do with the Muslims, you know nothing about history. Actually overall in history it was Muslims were always the agressor, SIkhs were always the minority, throughout history a price has always been put on a Sikhs head. Did you know under the Sikh rule, the Sikh empire created more Mosques then any muslim ruler in the region, the reverse could not be said. They had the exact same rights as a Sikh, not in any period of Islamic rule was a non muslim (dhimmi) treated as there equal. Difference between Muslim Punjab and Sikh Punjab, TODAY, In SIkh Punjab the Muslim shrines, road names, town names, Mosques remain. Muslim Punjab, all SIkh historical monuments lay in ruin, SIkh town names changed, roads changed. It's sad that the Sikh Rule of that land is not taught in schools in Pakistan, all non Muslim parts are ignored. I have muslim friends, that behave in a much better manor then you would ever do. I don't disagree with the history that you have said, that is why I said that Sikhs in this day and age have an issue with Muslims with what they have done in the past. Read my posts carefully before you jump to conclusions. I don't know what happens in Pakistan as I'm not Pakistani and have no affiliation to Pakistan. What happens there is not my business, I care what happens in my country.
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 I don't disagree with the history that you have said, that is why I said that Sikhs in this day and age have an issue with Muslims with what they have done in the past. Read my posts carefully before you jump to conclusions. I don't know what happens in Pakistan as I'm not Pakistani and have no affiliation to Pakistan. What happens there is not my business, I care what happens in my country. Both sides have issues, bigotry is there, like i've said, i hope future generations can move on. Having kids, it's not something I want them to take from us!
hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Know your making stuff up, it's you that brought 'history' up, not me!! If you've not got any issues, why not say so, why make lies up. You've been caught out. You change your story again Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron\ Now it's You're being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron You're, does not make sense. Please clarify, or should I say, more lies!! You really do love accusing people of lieing and being 'caught out' Read the post again, it makes perfect sense. You're as in you are Ie You being Sikh is very neutral when YOU'RE talking about Muslims..
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 You really do love accusing people of lieing and being 'caught out' Read the post again, it makes perfect sense. You're as in you are Ie You being Sikh is very neutral when YOU'RE talking about Muslims.. Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron to You being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron or Yes being Sikh is very neutral when you talking about Muslims.......Moron to Yes being Sikh is very neutral when you are talking about Muslims.......Moron Doesn't make sense, why would being Sikh make you neutral when discussing muslims. It still sounds the same, mate!!
hejammy Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Yes being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron to You being Sikh is very neutral when talking about Muslims.......Moron or Yes being Sikh is very neutral when you talking about Muslims.......Moron to Yes being Sikh is very neutral when you are talking about Muslims.......Moron Doesn't make sense, why would being Sikh make you neutral when discussing muslims. It still sounds the same, mate!! I think on this occasion we are going to have to agree to disagree, perhaps my English isn't upto scratch but to me it makes perfect sense. Before others on this forum tell us to STFU or even worse 'get a room' let's leave it at that. Anyways the bigger issue here was the atrocities and how to resolve these underlying issues. Let's not escape from that
Dr The Singh Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Singh Singh Singh!You have seen the film Candyman, say that 5 times in the mirror..............
Grewks Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 The members of the islamic group who carried out the attacks in Paris yesterday were not acting upon religious beliefs. I have yet to here a majority voice from fellow Muslims back their actions. They haven't, the muslim world has strongly condemned the actions which took place. It is far too easy to use religion as an excuse for crimes in the modern world. If a christian man kills his cheating wife because she was having an affair....is that a form of extremeism? Because he too is following his religious book to the very letter.
Grewks Posted 8 January 2015 Posted 8 January 2015 Technically i am a christian, as i was baptised shortly after birth. However, i haven't attended a single service that hasn't been a baptism, wedding or a funeral. I would in fact consider myself an atheist. I was simply making the point that it is too easy to label an event such as yesterday as an 'act of terrorism'. A punch up in the local on a friday night is essentially an act of 'terror'...... People using the phrase are the ones who are essentially raising the terror levels.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.