August 2012
Watching the 2012 Republic Convention in Tampa
*Grand music playing in the background*
“America is the greatest nation in the history of the earth. The Arab nations, the world, are at our feet looking up to us and begging us to have faith in ourselves so that we may be their saviours, bringing freedom and democracy to the world. Ladies and gentlemen, my friend here, Mitt Romney, is that saviour”
Play
Silver continues to rise outside of it’s trendline. In my earlier post about it, I said that I feared it was looking parabolic, but thankfully it had a consolidation after reaching $30.80. However it was a very weak bounce, only 50 cents. It’s now at $31.12 as I speak, however I won’t be satisfied it’s a certain sign of a trend change until it reaches around $33.
Silver is looking better than gold. Gold is just sitting slightly above the trendline at $1675, about the same where it was a couple of days ago.
#114.
What the Oxford Dictionary said regarding POC in the 1600’s: “Deeply stained with dirt ; soiled , dirty , foul . Having dark or deadly purposes, malignant pertaining to or involving death ; baneful , disastrous , sinister ; Foul iniquitous , atrocious , horribly wicked . Indicating disgrace , censure , liability to punishment “
What Islam said regarding POC in the year 620: “O mankind, there is no superiority for an Arab man/woman over a non-Arab man/woman, or for a non-Arab man/woman over an Arab man/woman, or for white man/woman over a black man/woman, or for a black man/woman over a white man/woman. All of you are descended from Adam and Adam has been created from dust of the ground.”
You tell me who’s backward and savage.
EDIT: The point of disagreement is that the source did not actually say that the Oxford Dictionary’s definition was in reference to people of colour, the defintion was of the colour black, and the point that the original source is making is that Africans were associated with the colour black which was defined as vile, filthy, etc.
The quote from the source:
Sometimes it is noted that, even before 1600, when the slave trade had just begun, before Africans were stamped by it—literally and symbolically—the color black was distasteful. In England, before 1600, it meant, according to the Oxford English Dictionary: “Deeply stained with dirt; soiled, dirty, foul. Having dark or deadly purposes, malignant; pertaining to or involving death, deadly; baneful, disastrous, sinister. Foul, iniquitous, atrocious, horribly wicked. Indicating disgrace, censure, liability to punishment, etc.” And Elizabethan poetry often used the color white in connection with beauty.
I would have no qualms if the source was presented as is, or at least accurately represented. But it is an important distinction to say it was defining the colour black, not black people. The responses I have recieved say ‘Well ok, it’s a misrepresentation, but it’s the main point about vilifying Africans that matters’, to which I’d say ok, but I think it’s important to acknowledge the misrepresentation nonetheless.
An Eid celebration in the Odense district of Vollsmose exploded in violence shortly before midnight Monday night in attempted murder, violent unrest, vandalism and grave disturbance of peace and order inside a hospital. Police officers had to draw their service weapons.
A large group of people had gathered at an amusement park at the shopping center in Vollsmose Square to celebrate the end of Ramadan, when a car parked in a nearby parking lot.
“As the car drove into the parking lot, the two men in the car were identified as ‘enemies’, and were shot at from several directions. A 26-year-old from the car was hit by at least two shots in one leg and was subsequently stabbed multiple times with a knife in the other leg. His 24-year-old friend took flight in the car”
When the police and an ambulance arrived to take the 26-year-old victim out of Vollsmose, more trouble arose.
“They threw stones at the police and two patrol cars were completely destroyed, but we managed to get the man out without any of the officers getting physically harmed,” said the head of security at Funen Police60-70 men armed with various blunt weapons tried Tuesday night to reach the 26-year-old victim.
“They poured into the emergency department with clubs and started to smash vases, lamps and other furniture, and tore pictures from the walls. The staff at the hospital had to run for their lives, and several police officers had to pull their service weapons to force the group out of the living room area.”
Source (Google English Translation)
Islam.. It’s a religion of peace!
Play
Pedophiles Want the Same Rights as Homosexuals →
greeleygazette.com
and this is why you fail, modern moral society. a stronger reason why we need an authoritative source outside of our own thinking. i won’t be surprised that less than a decade from now that pedophilia will be morally acceptable. and how does one do that? the same way homosexuality has done it: maybe stick some lovable characters in a tv show, maybe a stonewall-type incident, and add in some famous celebrities speaking in support, then voila, we have respect now for “intergenerational intimacy”
>a stronger reason why we need an authoritative source outside of our own thinking
godfag detected. Or perhaps not, but either way, people do not need an ‘authoritative source’. Think about it, authoritarianism is when the society derives it’s views from a small group. The extreme of authoritarianism, totalitarianism, takes it a step further, making the a supreme individual the authoritative source. Some examples: Adolf Hitler, Kim Jong-il, the god of Abraham. What is better is having the entire society think on an individual level. Of course this can lead to a chaotic state of affairs, i.e. anarchism, but there are compromises: a democracy, or a republic.
>i won’t be surprised that less than a decade from now that pedophilia will be morally acceptable. and how does one do that? the same way homosexuality has done it
Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is not morally equivalent, because homosexual acts are not immoral. I know godfags disagree, but whilst their disagreement is listened to and noted, it has been refuted and deserves no further discussion. Speaking not to the godfags now, whose mind I know will not change, but to those who are not - is it not true that homosexual acts are not immoral in part because they cause no physical nor psychological harm that heterosexual acts wouldn’t? And is it not true that acts of pedophilia can indeed be harmful, at least to the child, who is simply not biologically developed enough to either have sexual desire or engage in sexual acts?
And the main point on which I disagree: It is not that pedophiles want pedophilic actions to be considered moral, but merely to have the same rights that a non-pedophile has. It is a touchy topic, and I don’t comment much on it, because I think it is not ready to be discussed so much yet, but I’ll make a comment now and say that pedophiles do deserve these rights. I’m no expert on the subject, but reading about various testimonies and events, it seems to me that pedophiles recieve a great deal of public shame. This is undeserving of many of them, because pedophilia in many cases is a mental health problem just as complusive gambling or drug addiction is. And I mention the testimonies, because if you read them, you find that most pedophiles abstain from indulging their desires, because they know that pedophilic acts are morally wrong. Some don’t take that position, but they do note the moral incongruence by providing rationales for justifying pedophilic acts, i.e. children become sexual at a young age well below 18, or they will genuinely see it as a loving and protective relationship. Pedophiles, including the ones who are geuininely attempting to be loving/protectful, are concerned that they are being shamed and punished for the acts of pedophilic rapists - those who force children do acts against their will. For instance, a pedophile who views child pornography online to satisfy his desires instead of enacting his desires upon children, because he regards that to be immoral due to the harm it would cause, usually gets a prison sentence lasting several years. Is that severity of that sentence appropriate to the harm of the crime? And because of these harsh sentences, and the intense social stigma that is attached to pedophilia, it makes it impossible for them to find any form of therapy or support. A more important question from my view: How can hope to eliminate pedophilia, when we do not even acknowledge it occurs naturally in a society? ‘Natural’ does not mean right, I mean in the same way that schizophrenia occurs naturally, we should not outcast those with schizophrenia, but instead find the appropriate treatment for them, and hopefully one day be able to eliminate schizophrenia from occuring.
The reason why I don’t think the discussion is ready to be brought to the table yet is because of people like you, who make ridiculous claims like comparing it to homosexuality. You are not ready to accept that pedophilia is not a choice, but a physical dysfunction of the mind. You are not ready to try and eliminate pedophilia, but simply ignore it. You do not consider pedophiles to be people with thoughts and feelings, you simply outcast them as immoral creatures that should be locked up for life. Pedophilia is in my view, a multi-faceted issue, and with greater consequences than the plight of homosexuals, because getting it wrong with pedophilia could actually induce real harm. There’s nothing wrong with entertaining an outlandish or controversial idea, because you might at least find a grain of truth in it. One does not have to be an immoral being to read the work of Marquis de Sade, or listen to the words of Holocaust deniers. If their words contain no truth, then why fear listening to them? If there is no truth to their claims, then we simply give our reasons for refuting them, just as I have chosen to read and refute your thoughts on this matter.
how many followers do you have ?
Three digits worth
>Just get in at precisely the right moment to see that 100-year-old norweigan mystery package getting unwrapped
>mfw I don’t understand norweigan
It seems to be a disappointment though. Just some contemporary national historical documents. It seems it’s not a hundred years old either, given that there’s a newspaper in there dated 1914.
Another day, another follower lost
Gold and silver has been making some impressive gains in the past few days.
Since 3 days ago:
Gold: +US$73 (+4.5%)
Silver: +US$2.80 (+10%)
Haven’t seen a move like this since last year
It is looking worringly parabolic though
That is not supposed to mean that 1500 people were murdered by God. To God, we all belong and to Him we shall return. God definitely doesn't like the proud. God owns whatever is in this universe and doesn't need to get jealous and even care of whatsoever the flesh made man claims.
What does any god have to do with the Titanic?
Edit: Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but god is all-powerful, all-knowing and has a plan for all of us. The death of those 1500 people must have been part of god’s plan. God must have knew they were going to die, but didn’t intervene, which is homicide, and because he forsees all and it is part of his plan, then it is premeditated murder.
raw curiosity; do you have many friends?
No
Muslim: ‘Religion of Peace’
Orwell: ‘Ministry of Love’
Some people honestly piss me off with off with just accepted religion bashing.
Oppression cannot be met with more oppression.
Hate can’t be fought with hate.
So bragging about desecrating someone’s holy book and then defending yourself by saying ” I can’t get married because of this fucking book”
You wanna cookie or something? Yea me neither, but I at least have enough common courtesy to also respect other people and their beliefs.
The people I can’t stand are the Heterophobic, anti-christian ones, because you’re just as bad as any bible-humping homophobe any day.
>Heterophobic
Son, you’re making a fool of yourself.
>So bragging about desecrating someone’s holy book and then defending yourself by saying ” I can’t get married because of this fucking book”
You know I think often, why do homosexuals even want marriage - why do they want to be sanctioned by an archaic religion that rejects them?
But marriage has important legal implications, where a civil partnership does not suffice, and religion should not have a monopoly on marriage. Same-sex marriage is not about ‘holy books’, although perhaps for some it is in part, it’s about equality.
It is not up for negotiation, it is a demand. They say ‘I can’t get married because of this fucking book’ not as a plea, but a message to make the populace - ignorant people like you - aware that their birthright to equality is being denied. If you too claim these birthrights, if you are a citizen of your society, then it is your responsibility not to stand and watch as an outsider, but to involve yourself as an active participant in order to fulfil your side of the social contract.
What does all that matter? It matters because it might be you next who has your birthrights denied, your social contract violated. Break down the social contract, and you will find nothing left to protect you when you turn back for safety.
So what will you do now, as many of your fellow human beings point to religion and claim ‘I have the right to be married; it is an aberration that it is denied to me because of this archaic book’. Will you stand by and write posts about how much they whinge, and say what they need to do is just be amiable so that maybe the church might in turn give them a bit of leverage?
>but I at least have enough common courtesy to also respect other people and their beliefs.
You don’t respect homosexuals and you don’t respect anti-christians, and you definitely don’t respect their beliefs. That’s at least half the world’s population right there. Christianity deserves no respect, that’s why it should recieve none.
certain after scrolling down your blog and noticing you really only pick on the extremist sides of those things in which you disagree with
I’ve made about half a dozen posts criticizing the hijab alone. I don’t think you’d consider wearing the hijab ‘extremist’.
I critisize religious fundamentalism (that is, the fundamentals of religion), and the religious moderates that foster and encourage religious extremism - a term which really just means people who take their religious dogma seriously.
EDIT: BTW if I only pick on ‘extremist sides’ on this blog, then you must be an extremist, because I’m picking on you too - Not as a person, because you’re posting anonymously, I’m just critizing your view and posting it publically.
Listen
Every muslim should listen to this
Pakistan’s president has ordered a report into the arrest of a girl with mental disabilities, reportedly as young as 11, accused of desecrating pages of the Koran.
Police say the girl was arrested last week in a Christian area of the capital, Islamabad, after a furious crowd demanded she be punished.
Officials said the girl could not properly answer police questions.
Her parents have been taken into protective custody following threats.
Many other Christian families have fled the neighbourhood after unrest erupted. Reports say that police arrested her under pressure from the large crowd.
It is thought that the girl has Down’s syndrome, which is a congenital condition that causes various degrees of learning difficulties and certain physical abnormalities.
Welcome to Islam
Sorry but this had nothing to do with Islam, rather with epic-idiosyncratic behavior of an uneducated and degenerated lot! If they knew anything about Islam, they would have known that a mentally incapable person let alone an immature individual is not liable for any such thing. Finally given that even President of Pakistan has taken notice and large number of influential clerics have spoken against it goes on to show that it is not a popular opinion within Islam or for that matter even Pakistani Muslims.
>Has nothing to do with Islam
Thisiswhatmuslimsactuallybelieve.jpg
>It [anti-blasphemy] is not a popular opinion within Islam
Have you been living under a rock?
Search these articles up on wiki:
- 2012 Afghanistan Quran burning protests
- Dove World Outreach Center Quran-burning controversy
- 2005 Quran desecration controversy
- Sudanese teddy bear blasphemy case
- Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
- Lars Vilks Muhammad drawings controversy
I don’t have the statistics on what percentage of Pakistani muslims believe that blasphemy should be punished by the law, but if their other statistics are something to go by..
Source: Pakistani Public Opinion, Growing Concerns about Extremism, Continuing Discontent with U.S.Religion, Law, and Society (Pg.3) - Pew Research Center, August 13, 2009.
Pakistan’s president has ordered a report into the arrest of a girl with mental disabilities, reportedly as young as 11, accused of desecrating pages of the Koran.
Police say the girl was arrested last week in a Christian area of the capital, Islamabad, after a furious crowd demanded she be punished.
Officials said the girl could not properly answer police questions.
Her parents have been taken into protective custody following threats.
Many other Christian families have fled the neighbourhood after unrest erupted. Reports say that police arrested her under pressure from the large crowd.
It is thought that the girl has Down’s syndrome, which is a congenital condition that causes various degrees of learning difficulties and certain physical abnormalities.
Welcome to Islam
In what is a quite ridiculous coincidence, a man known as Walter White is wanted by police in Alabama for charges relating to the manufacture and trafficking of methamphetamine.
Like the fictitious Walter White, his real-life namesake is involved in the manufacture of methamphetamine and is wanted for violating probation in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama, that began in 2010.
According to Al.com, he was arrested in 2008 for on charges of trafficking methamphetamine, unlawful manufacturing of a controlled substance, possession of a controlled substance and possession of precursor materials.
