Demand Koran Replace U.S. Constitution

[SteveGrenard]

I am not doing any back pedalling at all, Steve. Is it all he did? Favor these viewpoints?

Because if he was, then you are arguing that merely having a viewpoint is indeed a capital crime in the US.

He first was arrested at immigration where on questionning he indicated he favored these viewpoints when asked by authorities. Further investigation led to him doing things like taking flying lessons and having one of the hijacker's phone numbers. He admitted he was in favor of the 9-11 operation, he praised it in open court. He thought it was the greatest thing in the world.

That's pretty gruesome, Steve. As well as being rather futile, given the evidence that, since this is involuntarily, said Muslims would not be kept out of Paradise.

I agree it ain't pretty taking two dollars worth of pork lard and smearing it on this guy's noggin. But the references/evidence you gave referred to accidental not involuntary contact with pork. The reference you gave also allowed for pork to be eaten if the moslem was starving .... a fact that should be brought to the attention of the folks running soup kitchens for the poor in France. It didn't say anything about it being okay as an involuntary punishment. It didn't say anything about pork being used as a weapon against moslem extremists.

Have you informed the media about this? Or are you not man enough to stand behind your word?

The press already is filled with articles about moslems and the pork problem. It would not be up to me or the press to call for this, it would be up to the AG to petition the judge and would have to be legally done by court order. It can probably go all the way to the Supreme Court on cruel and unusual punishment grounds ..... poor Zachy might not get his virgins. Also it would be useless as a deterrent if while alive it was known this would happen since all the pro-terrorist imans will absolve him. They can't do that after he's dead. Then again who knows? It will cost two dollars to find out unless there's a lengthy legal challenge. The pork solution will not be on the table unless his appeals are exhausted and the ultimate decision is to execute him.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Larsen:

To which you replied by posting Moussaoui's case, which was not about being in favor of terrorism, but about conspiring to kill Americans.

Do you understand the difference, Steve? Yes or no? If yes, please explain.

Moussaoui's case was posted as an example of a law under which favoring terrorism and terroristic acts as enumerated calls for the death penalty inthe United States. I know that Europeans are opposed to the death penalty, even for these scum, so I do not expect you to understand the stakes although the Danish cartoon jihad gave you a taste.

What I understand Claus throughout this debate and I will repeat it again:

you are clearly sympathetic to the terrorists beliefs that they at least die as purified uncontaminated martyrs so that they can go to heaven and have their virgins. I understand that you favor killing them in battle so that they can achieve their noble goals. You ignore the innocents who they use as shields who died along with them, also for their noble ideals. I also understand that you do not want to offend them in anyway even if their own practices by any stretch of the non-muslim civilized world are barbaric on their own (decapitations, stoning, chopping off limbs to name a few) including the deliberate murder of innocent civilians and children in the name of jihad.

That you feel so strongly that shaming or offending these extremist muslims, of any stripe, is barbaric and evil sounds as if you are taking a page from their book. I will keep this in mind in the future.

If you favor terrorism or if you harbor or voice an opinion that some egregious terrorist act is a good thing then you deserve whatever you get.

 

[CFLarsen]

That is really bad luck or stupidity from their part.

People with bad luck or stupid people are just cannon fodder?

1. In my case we have captured a terrorist, so he has already aided terrorists.
2. And even in this case we give that thrash a chance to live.

"Aided"? In what way? Any way, and off to the gas chamber you go?

He first was arrested at immigration where on questionning he indicated he favored these viewpoints when asked by authorities. Further investigation led to him doing things like taking flying lessons and having one of the hijacker's phone numbers. He admitted he was in favor of the 9-11 operation, he praised it in open court. He thought it was the greatest thing in the world.

That's a far cry from merely favoring a viewpoint. You are, in fact, arguing that having a certain viewpoint is a capital offense in the US.

I agree it ain't pretty taking two dollars worth of pork lard and smearing it on this guy's noggin. But the references/evidence you gave referred to accidental not involuntary contact with pork. The reference you gave also allowed for pork to be eaten if the moslem was starving .... a fact that should be brought to the attention of the folks running soup kitchens for the poor in France. It didn't say anything about it being okay as an involuntary punishment. It didn't say anything about pork being used as a weapon against moslem extremists.

Rubbish. It clearly stated that if a Muslim isn't at fault when coming in contact with pork, then he gets off, scot free.

Your idiotic method does not work.

The press already is filled with articles about moslems and the pork problem. It would not be up to me or the press to call for this, it would be up to the AG to petition the judge and would have to be legally done by court order. It can probably go all the way to the Supreme Court on cruel and unusual punishment grounds ..... poor Zachy might not get his virgins. Also it would be useless as a deterrent if while alive it was known this would happen since all the pro-terrorist imans will absolve him. They can't do that after he's dead. Then again who knows? It will cost two dollars to find out unless there's a lengthy legal challenge. The pork solution will not be on the table unless his appeals are exhausted and the ultimate decision is to execute him.

I have already asked you two days ago to list just 10 of these articles about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them.

Can you do it? It should be easy, since the press is already "filled" with them.

Moussaoui's case was posted as an example of a law under which favoring terrorism and terroristic acts as enumerated calls for the death penalty inthe United States.

Not just that: He was found to be eligible for the death penalty. He conspired. That's a far cry from merely being in favor of terrorism.

I know that Europeans are opposed to the death penalty, even for these scum

Yes, even for these scum. The death penalty is barbaric, unjust and uncivilized.

so I do not expect you to understand the stakes although the Danish cartoon jihad gave you a taste.

Speaking of which: You seem to hold contradicting viewpoints wrt the Danish cartoons. Do you think it was a good thing or a bad thing that JyllandsPosten and the rest of the newspapers published the cartoons?

What I understand Claus throughout this debate and I will repeat it again:

you are clearly sympathetic to the terrorists beliefs that they at least die as purified uncontaminated martyrs so that they can go to heaven and have their virgins.

You are, once again, up to your old tricks of misrepresentating what I say. I don't believe that the terrorists will go to Heaven and have their virgins, nor am I "clearly sympathetic" to their beliefs.

I understand that you favor killing them in battle so that they can achieve their noble goals.

Again, you are wrong. I favor capturing them and bringing them before a court. If sentenced, they should remain in prison for as long as possible.

You ignore the innocents who they use as shields who died along with them, also for their noble ideals.

I do no such thing. You know that I lived in New York on 9/11. I do not ignore any innocents who are used in any way by these people.

I also understand that you do not want to offend them in anyway even if their own practices by any stretch of the non-muslim civilized world are barbaric on their own (decapitations, stoning, chopping off limbs to name a few) including the deliberate murder of innocent civilians and children in the name of jihad.

Again, you are wrong. I see no point in antagonizing the rest of the world by using these idiotic methods of yours. Methods that will not work.

That you feel so strongly that shaming or offending these extremist muslims, of any stripe, is barbaric and evil sounds as if you are taking a page from their book. I will keep this in mind in the future.

If you favor terrorism or if you harbor or voice an opinion that some egregious terrorist act is a good thing then you deserve whatever you get.

Next thing, you'll be arguing that I should also be put to death.

 

[AWPrime]

AWPrime
That is really bad luck or stupidity from their part.

People with bad luck or stupid people are just cannon fodder?

No just stupid or unlucky, in the sense that they get blown up.

AWPrime
1. In my case we have captured a terrorist, so he has already aided terrorists.
2. And even in this case we give that thrash a chance to live.

"Aided"? In what way? Any way, and off to the gas chamber you go?

If they are captured while fighting for a terrorist organisation, then they have aided them. But if they publicly repent then I can forgive them.

Yes, even for these scum. The death penalty is barbaric, unjust and uncivilized.

Well I am an european, the only thing I have with it is that it is final and in a lot of cases they may sentence an innocent man by mistake.

However in my example there is no room for error.

But if public opinion couldn't be turned in favor of it then, we should use something worse then the death penalty, but keeps them alive.

 

[CFLarsen]

No just stupid or unlucky, in the sense that they get blown up.

Perhaps. But that is not acceptable in today's world. Which is why we have refugees in Libanon right now, and have had massive rescue missions to get people away from the fighting areas.

If they are captured while fighting for a terrorist organisation, then they have aided them. But if they publicly repent then I can forgive them.

How about if they merely stand on a corner and say "Hey, I think what they are doing is great!"? Is that "aiding" them?

But if public opinion couldn't be turned in favor of it then, we should use something worse then the death penalty, but keeps them alive.

We already have that: Incarceration after a fair trial. That takes the wind out of their claims of martyrdom. By killing them, we are rewarding them and creating a culture of martyrhood. By putting them in jail after a fair trial, we show them justice.

 

[AWPrime]

Perhaps. But that is not acceptable in today's world.

That is not true, it is acceptable, but it is regretable.

How about if they merely stand on a corner and say "Hey, I think what they are doing is great!"? Is that "aiding" them?

That warrents a b*tchslap, and an investigation.

We already have that: Incarceration after a fair trial. That takes the wind out of their claims of martyrdom. By killing them, we are rewarding them and creating a culture of martyrhood. By putting them in jail after a fair trial, we show them justice.

Too bad reality doesn't work that way. Many of those terrorists try to covert other prisoners. If they aren't killed then put them in isolation for the rest of their lives, with measures to prevent suicide.

 

[CFLarsen]

That is not true, it is acceptable, but it is regretable.

If it were acceptable, there would not be rescue missions of people caught in Libanon.

That warrents a b*tchslap, and an investigation.

And what constitutes the former?

Too bad reality doesn't work that way. Many of those terrorists try to covert other prisoners. If they aren't killed then put them in isolation for the rest of their lives, with measures to prevent suicide.

The same can be said about other criminals: They teach each other to become better criminals.

Are you suggesting that we should get rid of prisons and just start executing all criminals?

 

[Rob Lister]

Are you suggesting that we should get rid of prisons and just start executing all criminals?

We could certainly put all criminals we do not kill in their own 6x6 cell, 24/7/365 until their sentence is up.

ETA, I also recommend sound-proof walls and doors.

 

[SteveGrenard]

People with bad luck or stupid people are just cannon fodder?

No and if one were using non-lethal weapons and psyops they needn't be.

"Aided"? In what way? Any way, and off to the gas chamber you go?

If you physically aided or supported a terrorist in ANY WAY in the U.S. you could be charged with a capital offense. You would not be off to the gas chamber until after the charges were investigated, defended, prosecuted and then decided by a court having jurisdiction.

Where are the lawyers on this forum to discuss this? Why do I have to do this?

That's a far cry from merely favoring a viewpoint. You are, in fact, arguing that having a certain viewpoint is a capital offense in the US.

If you favor terrorism as a means to an end, whether a specific terroristic act of not, that would be a precondition to you just merely conspiring to carry out that act even if you never commit the act at all. In the U.S. this can rightfully end up getting you charged with a capital offense in the case of conspiring but not actually pulling the proverbial trigger.

Rubbish. It clearly stated that if a Muslim isn't at fault when coming in contact with pork, then he gets off, scot free.

Read the two relevant parts of your references again. They exonerate muslims from coming into contact with or eating pork under two situations: it was accidental or if you are starving and have to eat pork because its the only thing to eat. It says nothing about involuntary contact with pork when used against them as a weapon.

Your idiotic method does not work.

Perhaps not. But there is a lot of press indicating that muslims are extremely concerned of pigs and pork (see below).

I have already asked you two days ago to list just 10 of these articles about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them.

There may be more than ten on the following two sites which assembles these accounts and archives them. They cover not only muslims and pork but wider issue of muslims and pigs, pig images or statues, anti-islamic cartoons, and their practices in general:

Here is a wrap up of the press stories on muslims, what insults or motivates them
including pigs and pork through September 2005:

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/514

Here is another useful site that assembles this information:

http://jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/

Not just that: He was found to be eligible for the death penalty. He conspired. That's a far cry from merely being in favor of terrorism.

To conspire all it takes is merely for you to talk about the subject to someone else. He clearly did this, he favored these acts and told others about it. He bragged about how much he favored these acts in open court and before he got to court. He bragged to the press about how wonderful he thought the 9-11 operation was, what a great victory it was. He would have been one of those we saw dancing in the streets back home before he decided to return to the U.S.

Yes, even for these scum. The death penalty is barbaric, unjust and uncivilized.

I would agree if they can be annointed with pork lard and fed pork and beans daily for the rest of their lives. But you think thats barbaric and pure evil also.

Speaking of which: You seem to hold contradicting viewpoints wrt the Danish cartoons. Do you think it was a good thing or a bad thing that JyllandsPosten and the rest of the newspapers published the cartoons?

I thought the cartoons were great. But when they caused the loss of life in the cartoon jihad riots, I thought they weren't worth any additional loss of life so disagree with publications such as Harpers or FI to reprint them. We should all agree with Mrs. Resiman wanting to protect her customers and staff from reprisals by muslim extremists. Her business is a high profile Jewish owned company and is a target already. By her taking positive steps to prevent the additional sale of the cartoons, she performed a logical and sensible thing. Muslim extremists who may've thought about targeting her business should appreciate her sensitivity. It is too bad you, Flynn and Kurtz cannot understand that. And you can tell that to Kurtz to his face. Invite Kurtz or his editor Flynn to come in and defend their reprinting of the cartoons and criticize Mrs. Reisman for having her company place their magazine on its watch list, even if only temporarily. The proof of the puidding is what happened in Seattle Friday. Indigo has 260 unprotected targets throughout Canada. Flynn and Kurtz, by going public with this, placed them all in jeopardy.

You are, once again, up to your old tricks of misrepresentating what I say. I don't believe that the terrorists will go to Heaven and have their virgins, nor am I "clearly sympathetic" to their beliefs.

I didn't say you believed in the virgins fiction. I said you were sympathetic to the muslim extremists believing in it because you clearly favor them dying without being offended or besmirched by anything that will make them unclean and therefore unable to go through the gate.

Again, you are wrong. I favor capturing them and bringing them before a court. If sentenced, they should remain in prison for as long as possible.

Not much of a deterrent. They get three halal hots and a cot, their prayer rugs, their korans, free medical and dental.

I do no such thing. You know that I lived in New York on 9/11. I do not ignore any innocents who are used in any way by these people.

Not talking about 9-11 innocents. Talking about innocents in Lebanon.9-11 victims were not used as shields by terrorists. They were innocent victims of a deliberate terroristic act. Lebanese woman and children are being used as shields by hezbollah.

Again, you are wrong. I see no point in antagonizing the rest of the world by using these idiotic methods of yours. Methods that will not work.

How is using the psyops idea on one group of terrorists.... hezbollah, going to affect the entire rest of the muslim world who are not Hezbollah terrorists operating in Southern Lebanon. unless they are, as I suspect, lemmings after all or perhaps you are suggesting that they are The Borg. You can't tell me there arn't moderate muslims who wouldn't agree with any means possible to stop terrorism?

 

[CFLarsen]

No and if one were using non-lethal weapons and psyops they needn't be.

Only your methods don't work.

If you physically aided or supported a terrorist in the U.S. you could be charged with a capital offense.

If you favor terrorism as a means to an end, whether a specific terroristic act of not, that would be a precondition to you just merely conspiring to carry out that act even if you never commit the act at all. In the U.S. this can rightfully end up getting you charged with a capital offense in the case of conspiring but not actually pulling the proverbial trigger.

But that's not what you argue: That merely sharing his views is reason for him to be executed.

Read the two relevant parts of your references again. They exonerate muslims from coming into contact with or eating pork under two situations: it was accidental or if you are starving and have to eat pork because its the only thing to eat. It says nothing about involuntary contact with pork when used against them as a weapon.

Rubbish, Steve. How is that not accidental?

Perhaps not. But there is a lot of press indicating that muslims are extremely concerned of pigs and pork (see below).

There may be more than ten on the following two sites which assembles these accounts and archives them. They cover not only muslims and porks but wider issue of muslims and pigs, pig images or statues, anti-islamic cartoons, and their practices in general:

Here is a wrap up of the press stories on muslims, what insults or motivates them
including pigs and pork through September 2005:

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/514

Here is another useful site that assembles this information:

http://jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/

None of which deal with using pork as a weapon.

Now, do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

To conspire all it takes is merely for you to talk about the subject to someone else. He clearly did this, he favored these acts and told others about it. He bragged about how much he favored these acts in open court and before he got to court. He bragged to the press about how greta he thought the 9-11 operation was, what a great victory it was. He would have been one of those we saw dancing in the streets back home before he decided to return to the U.S.

So, merely holding an opinion in the US will get you executed. According to you, of course.

I would agree if they can be annointed with pork lard and fed pork and beans daily for the rest of their lives. But you think thats barbaric and pure evil also.

Of course. I am not surprised that you don't see it that way, Steve.

I thought the cartoons were great. But when they caused the loss of life in the cartoon jihad riots, I thought they weren't worth any additional loss of life so disagree with publications such as Harpers or FI to reprint them. We should all agree with Mrs. Resiman wanting to protect her customers and staff from reprisals by muslim extremists. Her business is a high profile Jewish owned company and is a target already. By her taking positive steps to prevent the additional sale of the cartoons, she performed a logical and sensible thing. Muslim extremists who may've thought about targeting her business should appreciate her sensitivity. It is too bad you, Flynn and Kurtz cannot understand that. And you can tell that to Kurtz to his face.

You don't think that using pig bullets against Muslims will cause a riot with people getting killed? Aren't you the one arguing just how serious all Muslims take this (e.g. in the links above)?

Make up your mind, OK? Are all Muslims very serious about handling pork - or are they not very serious about handling pork?

I didn't say you believed in the virgins fiction. I said you were sympathetic to the muslim extremists believing in it because you clearly favor them dying without being offended or besmirched by anything that will make them unclean and therefore unable to go through the gate.

I am not sympathetic to the Muslim extremists at all. I understand how your idiotic methods will antagonize not only the rest of the Muslim world (like you your self have just argued), but also the rest of the world.

Not much of a deterrent. They get three halal hots and a cot, their prayer rugs, their korans, free medical and dental.

Yeah. And denied their status as martyrs, while they rot away in jail. If they can't become martyrs, why become terrorists at all?

Not talking about 9-11 innocents. Talking about innocents in Lebanon. 9-11 victims were not used as shields by terrorists. They were innocent victims of a deliberate terroristic act. Lebanese woman and children are being used as shields by hezbollah.

I am talking about 9-11 innocents, Steve. I do not ignore any innocents who are used in any way by these people.

How is using the psyops idea on one group of terrorists.... hezbollah, going to affect the entire rest of the muslim world who are not Hezbollah terrorists operating in Southern Lebanon. unless they are, as I suspect, lemmings after all. You can't tell me there arn't moderate muslims who wouldn't agree with any means possible to stop terrorism?

The onus is not on me. You find the Muslims who agree with your methods, Steve.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Larsen:

Yeah. And denied their status as martyrs, while they rot away in jail. If they can't become martyrs, why become terrorists at all?

Exactly. Thank you. Case Closed.

 

[CFLarsen]

Not so fast, Steve.

If a Muslim is hit by a pork bullet, how is he responsible for that? He would have to be, since it isn't an accident.

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

Are all Muslims very serious about handling pork - or are they not very serious about handling pork?

Can you find Muslims who agree with your methods?

 

[SteveGrenard]

But that's not what you argue: That merely sharing his views is reason for him to be executed.

I argued what you originally said. That favoring 9-11, for example, can lead to conspiracy
charges which can lead to, if convicted, the death penalty.

Rubbish, Steve. How is that not accidental?

The deliberate launch of a pork based product at a muslim extremist/terrorist or the deliberate application of a pork based product to such persons is not accidental by deifnition. If the target is aware of the fact they could be rendered unclean this way, it would not be accidental.

None of which deal with using pork as a weapon.

It indicates that muslims and by extension muslim extremists have a
profound antipathy toward anything pork or pig related.

Now, do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

By the very reaction of muslims to pork or pig based products it is apparent that any contact with pork or pigs, even as innocuous as having to look at an image of Miss Piggy, is a grave insult to them.

So, merely holding an opinion in the US will get you executed. According to you, of course.

Holding an opinion that, for example, 9-11 was a good thing and that you were favoring and app;lauding it could lead to further investigation on how far up that ladder you have been willing to go. The opinion itself that you favored the result of 9-11 is a precondition or starting point. All criminal investigations start somewhere. And yes, you do not have to pull the trigger or commit the act to be found guilty of being complicit some way in the performance of the terrositic act. This is how conspiracy laws work. They are complicated and a lawyer familiar with them can explain it better than I can.

You don't think that using pig bullets against Muslims will cause a riot with people getting killed? Aren't you the one arguing just how serious all Muslims take this (e.g. in the links above)?

Not if the pork weapon is targeted only at extemists and terrorists, combatants if you will. If an innocent the terrorist is using at a shield gets splattered they will not die. This is preferable to them being killed because they were forced into be used as human shields. Muslims forced into being used as shields would not dispensated. They are not there of their own free will. And a case could be made that the opposing forces hit them by accident. The hitting of a combatant would not be an accident, however.

Make up your mind, OK? Are all Muslims very serious about handling pork - or are they not very serious about handling pork?

The fact that I have proved all muslims are very serious about not wanting to come into any contact with any pork or pig related is an indication that the subset of muslim extremists/terrorists are similarly disposed and this couldbe played against them. I have never suggested using such a psyop against muslims living in Derby, UK who are non-combatants in southern Lebanon or Iraq.

I am not sympathetic to the Muslim extremists at all. I understand how your idiotic methods will antagonize not only the rest of the Muslim world (like you your self have just argued), but also the rest of the world.

Well you sure could've fooled me. I would hope that moderate, non-combatant muslims who would like to see an end to the violence and killing would accept the need to use any means necessary. If it's a non-lethal means that should be so much the better to any rational person.

Yeah. And denied their status as martyrs, while they rot away in jail. If they can't become martyrs, why become terrorists at all?

This deserved a separate reply above. I agree with you.

I am talking about 9-11 innocents, Steve. I do not ignore any innocents who are used in any way by these people.

A case could be made that the 9-11 victims were used by the terrorists but bottom line is that they were just murdered by them ... the largest mass murder of American civilians and non-combatants in history since Jonestown. The civilians in Lebanon and in Gaza who come into harms way are being USED as shields by Hezbollah and Hamas respectfully.

The onus is not on me. You find the Muslims who agree with your methods, Steve.

I frankly don't know how to do that but would be delighted to hear from any rational muslim reading this forum right here. You are speculating
right now.

 

[CFLarsen]

I argued what you originally said. That favoring 9-11, for example, can lead to conspiracy charges which can lead to, if convicted, the death penalty.

If they are conspiring, of course. But merely sharing your view is conspiracy? Idiocy, Steve.

The deliberate launch of a pork based product at a muslim extremist/terrorist or the deliberate application of a pork based product to such persons is not accidental by deifnition. If the target is aware of the fact they could be rendered unclean this way, it would not be accidental.

It would not be accidental? It is their own fault?

So, if you shoot someone, it is their own fault, because they are aware of the fact that they could be hit by your bullet?

It indicates that muslims and by extension muslim extremists have a profound antipathy toward anything pork or pig related.

Yeah. Exactly. Thanks for proving yourself wrong.

By the very reaction of muslims to pork or pig based products it is apparent that any contact with pork or pigs, even as innocuous as having to look at an image of Miss Piggy, is a grave insult to them.

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

Holding an opinion that, for example, 9-11 was a good thing and that you were favoring and app;lauding it could lead to further investigation on how far up that ladder you have been willing to go. The opinion itself that you favored the result of 9-11 is a precondition or starting point. All criminal investigations start somewhere. And yes, you do not have to pull the trigger or commit the act to be found guilty of being complicit some way in the performance of the terrositic act. This is how conspiracy laws work. They are complicated and a lawyer familiar with them can explain it better than I can.

You are very confused, Steve. Now, you are saying that it is not a capital offense to share your views.

Not if the pork weapon is targeted only at extemists and terrorists, combatants if you will. If an innocent the terrorist is using at a shield gets splattered they will not die. This is preferable to them being killed because they were forced into be used as human shields.

But you have just argued that any kind of pork in any situation will result in a very heated response from all Muslims.

The fact that I have proved all muslims are very serious about not wanting to come into any contact with any pork or pig related is an indication that the subset of muslim extremists/terrorists are similarly disposed and this couldbe played against them. I have never suggested using such a psyop against muslims living in Derby, UK who are non-combatants in southern Lebanon or Iraq.

Fine: All Muslims are very serious about not wanting to come into any contact with any pork or pig related.

Why would you shooting pork bullets against extremist Muslims not result in riots, then? You argue that all Muslims exhibit "lemming"-like behavior. Why won't they riot?

A case could be made that the 9-11 victims were used by the terrorists but bottom line is that they were just murdered by them ... the largest mass murder of American civilians and non-combatants in history since Jonestown. The civilians in Lebanon and in Gaza who come into harms way are being USED as shields by Hezbollah and Hamas respectfully.

Really? How about these children being killed by the Israelis?

Were they also beind USED as shields by the Israelis?

I frankly don't know how to do that but would be delighted to hear from any rational muslim reading this forum right here. You are speculating right now.

You argue that Muslims would agree with your methods. You find them.

 

[SteveGrenard]

If a Muslim is hit by a pork bullet, how is he responsible for that? He would have to be, since it isn't an accident.

If the muslim is not a combatant or extremist/terrorist it would be an accident and they'd be absolved. If the muslim hit was a combatant/terrorist/extremist/hezbollah/hamas fighter it would not be an accident. It would be deliberate.

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

I explained above how it would be possible for this weapon to work. early on in this thread we recounted the early use of a pork based weapon by British military operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It's time to revisit history.

Are all Muslims very serious about handling pork - or are they not very serious about handling pork?

When you use adjectives like ALL it's a larsen-trap so I won't bother responding to this. Based on press accounts it would seem the vast majority of muslims have an antipathy to pork and pigs. When such muslims are women and children used as shields by Hezbollah they are being forced into this situation so should not be punished for this. Hezbollah, in fact, other muslims, albeit extremist terroist muslims, have put their co-religionists if not their whole country at risk in the Lebanon.

Can you find Muslims who agree with your methods?

No, none have step forwarded but they are invited to do so and express their opinions. It's not up to me to find them, it's up to them and the person seeking their opinions to find them or themselves and invite them to comment yea or nay. I would hope there are moderate moslems who would agree, surmise there are. Of course you notice that moderates are fearful of extremists and either mildly protest, don't protest or make feeble attempts at supporting the extremists. I don't blame them for trying to walk the fine line so getting them on the record, something only Larsen would want to do, would put them at risk. They can stand mute as far as I am concerned because they would be fearful of reprisals from the criminal muslims who have the guns and would kill them if they came out against them (see former PM of Lebanon assainated by Syria) ...perversely rationalizing they have spoke out against allah.

 

[CFLarsen]

If the muslim is not a combatant or extremist/terrorist it would be an accident and they'd be absolved. If the muslim hit was a combatant/terrorist/extremist/hezbollah/hamas fighter it would not be an accident. It would be deliberate.

Rubbish. You said:

If the target is aware of the fact they could be rendered unclean this way, it would not be accidental.

People who are caught in a crossfire would also know that they would - not "could" - be rendered unclean this way. After all, you have already spread the word to all Muslims that you are using these pork bullets, haven't you?

I explained above how it would be possible for this weapon to work. early on in this thread we recounted the early use of a pork based weapon by British military operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It's time to revisit history.

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

When you use adjectives like ALL it's a larsen-trap so I won't bother responding to this. Based on press account its would seem the vast majority of muslims have an antipathy to pork and pigs. When such muslims are women and children used as shields by Hezbollah they are being forced into this situation so should not be punished for this. Hezbollah, in fact, other muslims, albeit extremist terroist muslims, have put their co-religionists if not their whole country at risk in the Lebanon.

You are the one who claims that ALL Muslims exhibit "lemming"-like behavior. So, you can answer this:

Why would you shooting pork bullets against extremist Muslims not result in riots, then? You argue that all Muslims exhibit "lemming"-like behavior. Why won't they riot?

No, none have step forwarded but they are invited to do so and express their opinions. It's not up to me to find them, it's up to them and the person seeking their opinions to find them or themselves and invite them to comment yea or nay. I would hope there are moderate moslems who would agree, surmise there are. Of course you notice that moderates are fearful of extremists and either mildly protest, don't protest or make feeble attempts at supporting the extremists.

Yes, it is up to you to find them. Otherwise, you cannot claim that they would support your method.

Were the children killed today being USED as shields by the Israelis?

 

[SteveGrenard]

Larsen comments:

Really? How about these children being killed by the Israelis?

Were they also beind USED as shields by the Israelis?

No, they were being used as shields by Hezbollah. What nonesense are you spouting now? Did you even read the first few lines of this report?

QANA, Lebanon (CNN) -- Israel said it mistakenly destroyed a four-story building near a Hezbollah rocket-launching site in Qana, Lebanon, on Sunday where officials said 60 people died, including 19 children.

If Israel dropped a non-lethal pork based weapon, these kids would be alive today. Hezbollah placed their rockets near these civilians including women and children. They were using them as shields. They are despicable cowards.

 

[CFLarsen]

No, they were being used as shields by Hezbollah. What nonesense are you spouting now? Did you even read the first few lines of this report?

If Israel dropped a non-lethal pork based weapon, these kids would be alive today. Hezbollah placed their rockets near these civilians including women and children. They were using them as shields. They are despicable cowards.

Are you out of your mind, Steve? The Israelis hit a village.

Also Tuesday a Katyusha rocket killed a 15-year-old girl in the village of Meghar in the Galilee region, Israeli police and medical service officials said.

At least 18 people were injured when more than a dozen Hezbollah rockets landed in three or four places in Haifa, officials said.
Source

Did the Israelis similarly use this young girl and the others as shields?

From the same article:

Tuesday afternoon, a series of explosions hit Beirut's southern suburbs, sending gray smoke wafting through the city's high-rise buildings. Flashes of fire accompanied the blasts, which reverberated throughout the city.

Where were the Hezbollah rockets?

Have you not already spread the word to all Muslims that you are using these pork bullets?

Why would you shooting pork bullets against extremist Muslims not result in riots, then? You argue that all Muslims exhibit "lemming"-like behavior. Why won't they riot?

And:

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?

 

[SteveGrenard]

Are you out of your mind, Steve? The Israelis hit a village.

They hit A BUILDING in a village that was near a rocket emplacement. I agree they need to pin point their targets better but it was still close to the village and to the building hit.
Hezbollah is to blame. Finish reading the Israeli side of the account in the CNN article.

Did the Israelis similarly use this young girl and the others as shields?

Are you out of your mind? How does this translate into the Israelis using civilians or a civilian as a shield( s)?

Where were the Hezbollah rockets?

Obviously too close to the civilians. Hezbollah was using them as shields and placed them there thinking Israel would not want to hit civilians. Clearly Hezbollah was using its civilians as shields but that's okay for Claus Larsen he just changes the context to Israelis using them as shields.

Why would you shooting pork bullets against extremist Muslims not result in riots, then? You argue that all Muslims exhibit "lemming"-like behavior. Why won't they riot?

The simple answer is that pork weapons would only be used on combatants. The cartoons were viewed by the whole world. Women and children accidentally splattered by pork weapons have no control over that. They are involuntary hostages, they are targeted by Hezbollah as providing them with sanctuary from attack by their mere existence. The f**ing extremists think that these civilian women and children exist solely for that purpose. To protect their cowardly butts. Their gender biases are world renown.

Why you persist in defending the Hezbollah terrorists against humiliation, using the irrelevant liklihood muslims in New York or Copenhagen would riot if Israel did that, is beyond my comprehension.

 

[CFLarsen]

They hit a village that was near a rocket emplacement. I agree they need to pin point their targets better but it was still close to the village.

How close, Steve?

Are you out of your mind. How does this translate into the Israelis using civilians or a cibvilian as a shield?

I asked you a question: Did the Israelis similarly use this young girl and the others as shields?

Obviously too close to the civilians. Hezbollah was using them as shields and placed them there thinking Israel would not want to hit civilians.

How close can either side put rockets to civilians without using them as shields?

Clearly Hezbollah was using its civilians as shields but that's okay for Claus Larsen.

No, it isn't. Where have I expressed that? Stop these idiotic lies, Steve.

The simple answer is that pork weapons would only be used on combatants.

You can't secure that they wold only be used on combatants. Precisely the way you can't secure that only soldiers are hit in any war.

The cartoons were viewed by the whole world. Women and children accidentally splattered by pork weapons have no control over that. They are involuntary hostages, they are targeted by Hezbollah as providing them with sanctuary from attack by their mere existence. The f**ing extremists think that these civilian women and children exist solely for that purpose. To protect their cowardly butts. Their gender biases are world renown.

Why you persist in defending the Hezbollah terrorists against humiliation, using the irrelevant liklihood muslims in New York or Copenhagen would riot if Israel did that, is beyond my comprehension.

I do not defend the Hezbollah terrorists at all, Steve. Again, you resort to lies.

Why is it unlikely? They rioted because of the cartoons. You have argued that Muslims exhibit a "lemming"-like behavior. You have argued that all Muslims take pork very seriously. You are contradicting yourself here, Steve.

And:

Do you have those press stories about Muslims and how to use pork as a weapon against them?