Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If I am retarded then you are a plant... next time you get sick, go see a botanist!Crazywumbat said:You, my friend, are a ****ing retard.
errrr... because Mohammed(may piss be upon him) was a pedophile! (Why am I answering you? My bermuda is smarter than you!)Firstly, why must you continue to use this pedophile bullshit as an argument?
Oh, I guess this somehow makes the peodophile prophet a little less pedophilic! NOT!It's already been proven that your Christian ancestors married their children off before they were in their teens,
LOL! "your knowledge" is such an oxymoron!and, to my knowledge ...
again I ask (and not you stupidwumbat because you aren't smart enough to answer with anything coherent) How does this make mohammed(may piss be upon him) any less of a pedophile?...atleast, the only religious figures in modern times that have committed acts of pedophilia have been Christian...
pedophile prophet.so enough with that **** already.
WHAT?????? ... Earth to retard! Reality calling.Secondly, most of the lands that was conquered by Muslims was filled with strife and war and had been for centuries UNTIL IT WAS CONQUERED BY THE MUSLIMS.
Do you know anything about the Crusades? Obviously not! The crusades were started by the Saracens(muslims) invading the Byzantines(Christians)... Do you prefer Scotts 29/3/3 for greenness?Palestine is just one example, and Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived in PEACE there, along with many other areas, UNTIL you christians initiated the Crusades. Not a moment of peace inbetween? How retarded are you?
Firstly, Secondly, Firstly... I have never tried to teach a plant how to count by ordinal numbers before, but here goes "Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly"...Firstly, you bring into the argument a figure that you COMPLETELY misenterperet, and then tie him to a religion that has absolutely NOTHING to do with him. Congratulations, you are a ****in dumbass.
Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell said:errrr... because Mohammed(may piss be upon him) was a pedophile! (Why am I answering you? My bermuda is smarter than you!)
Oh, I guess this somehow makes the peodophile prophet a little less pedophilic! NOT!
Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell said:You should change your name from "Stupidwumbat" to "Stupidbladeofgrass".
I know you are too illiterate to read.. So I'll explain it it to you. Your prophet of terror(may piss be upon him) ****ed a 9 year old girl. No amount of back-peddling, explaining, or BS changes this FACT! If you you like pedophilia, if you forgive him, or if you simply don't care then fine... but you can't change the facts!ALLAH IS GREAT said:MRIH,this is seriouly gettin' old.Every argument with you leads to this.
Keep on explaining away facts, it'll never work. You might as well explain why the sky is not really blue.And we keep explaining,yet you act deaf and dumb(well maybe it ain't an act,who knows?).
Yawn ....I'll try and explain and I hope you get it.
So ****ing 9 year-olds is ok in islam. I don't doubt it for a minute... It's the religion of pedophilia.As CW already said,christians in the past had no objection in marrying 9 year olds.And the only people alive today who still do it are your christian priests(well they don't marry them,but you get what they do).
OK OK OK, ****ing 9 year olds is OK with you sick bunch of ****s... I don't care (it's ancient history anyway) but the fact still remains. And that fact is: Mohammed(may piss be upon him) ****ed a nine year old girl!The hilarity of the whole saga of Christians like you accusing the Prophet(Pbuh) of committing "child molestation" is that this contradicts the basic fact that a girl becomes a woman when she begins her menstruation cycle.
She was a bleeding nine year old, I hope ole' Mo didn't get his dick dirty!The significance of menstruation that anyone with the slightest familiarity with physiology will tell you is that it is a sign that the girl is being prepared to become a mother.
So, you say by age 12 all women are primed for their muslim master's to begin their life-long sexual abuse on them?Women reach puberty at different ages ranging from 8-12 years old depending on genetics, race and environment.
Except when the weather's nice they can be deflowered by age 10?Women in warmer environments reach puberty at a much earlier age than those in cold environments.
I'm sure it was. The sheep were probably a bit nervous as well.Marriage at the early years of puberty was acceptable in 7th century Arabia as it was the social norm in all Semitic cultures from the Israelites to the Arabs and all nations in between.
WTF??? Ok, america didn't exist (it probably did, it was just inhabited by peaceful indians who ****ed their nine year old daughter-in-laws?????)And at that time your precious america didn't exist,therefore your rules didn't apply back then.
Kind of like Stalins' contemporaries accepted the murder/assination of 10 million Russians political enemies? No one dared complain!The Prophet's contemporaries (both enemies and friends) clearly accepted the Prophet's marriage to Aishah(RA) without any problem. We see the evidence for this by the lack of criticism against the marriage until modern times. However, a change in culture has caused the change in our times today.
Nine year olds?Even today in the 21st century, the age of sexual consent is still quite low in many places.
I'll take your word for because I don't care... Mohammed(may piss be upon him) ****ed a 9 year old, not a 13 year old.In Japan, people can legally have sex at age 13,
again not "9 years of age"and in Spain they can legally have sex at the age of 12 years old.
Maybe we oughta drop the age o' consent down to 9? Just to please you?A 40-year-old man having sex with a 14-year-old woman may be a "pedophile" in the United States, but neither in China today, where the age of consent is 14, nor in the United States in the last century. Biology is a much better standard by which to determine these things, not the personal choice of human culture. In the U.S. during the last century, the age of consent was 10 years old. California was the first state to change the age of consent to 14, which it did in 1889. After California, other U.S. states joined in and raised the age of consent too.
This is hardlymy only argument, unless you have been living under a rock, you'd know that I don't really care how perverted the prophet of death(may piss be upon him) was.So MRIH,stop using this as your only argument.
Funny, my shoe size is "Nine". Am I ready for the prophet of pedophilia(may piss be upon him)?Start speakin' like an adult.Or as the saying goes,act your age not your shoe size.
Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell said:If I am retarded then you are a plant... next time you get sick, go see a botanist!
errrr... because Mohammed(may piss be upon him) was a pedophile! (Why am I answering you? My bermuda is smarter than you!)
Oh, I guess this somehow makes the peodophile prophet a little less pedophilic! NOT!
LOL! "your knowledge" is such an oxymoron!
again I ask (and not you stupidwumbat because you aren't smart enough to answer with anything coherent) How does this make mohammed(may piss be upon him) any less of a pedophile?
pedophile prophet.
WHAT?????? ... Earth to retard! Reality calling.
Do you know anything about the Crusades? Obviously not! The crusades were started by the Saracens(muslims) invading the Byzantines(Christians)... Do you prefer Scotts 29/3/3 for greenness?
Firstly, Secondly, Firstly... I have never tried to teach a plant how to count by ordinal numbers before, but here goes "Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly"...
You should change your name from "Stupidwumbat" to "Stupidbladeofgrass".
ALLAH IS GREAT said:OH,call him what you like.He still smarter than you.And how many times have you used this line?It's so ****in' old,I can see the RUST!!God!OIL IT UP A BIT!
ArabChick said:BBC. Sunday 24 July, A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was a Brazilian electrician unconnected to the incidents.
The man, who died at Stockwell Tube on Friday, has been named by police as Jean Charles de Menezes, 27. Scotland Yard said Mr Menezes, who lived in Brixton, south London, was completely unconnected to the bomb attacks and added: "For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets."
My cousin was a victim of government's mistakes
Now I wonder how many innocent people are in jail..dead because of a mistake! Wakeup BLAIR
Ms. ArabChick
Mr X said:Yeah I saw that on the news....I just want to know,why was he running for?
...the guy is in the middle of crowded london for crying out loud.
What's your source AIG... (let me guess. "AL Jazeera")ALLAH IS GREAT said:Latest news shows that the metropolitan police withheld information about what really happened.Someone leaked the documents to the ITV NEWS.
The brazilian guy was just a normal citizen on his way to work.He didn't jump over the ticket barrier.Hell,he even picked up a free newspaper.
And once he was in the train,he was restrained in a chair by one officer.Then the other officer shot him,mercilessly and dragged him to the floor,were he unloaded 8 bullets in the guy.3 others missed.
I think that answers your questions.The first information given to the public was full of lies.
Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell said:What's your source AIG... (let me guess. "AL Jazeera")
The prevailing "split-second decision" thesis, which has dominated UK press reaction, might be more reasonable if the police had received serious, credible information that de Menezes was a suicide bomber a short time before and really believed they were in hot pursuit of him on his way to carry out an attack. But the claim that the police officers only had a split second to act is contradicted by what is already known. The Observer reported on 24 July that de Menezes' "address in Tulse Hill was identified from materials found inside the bombers' unexploded rucksacks on Thursday and was immediately put under surveillance. When Menezes, dressed in baseball cap, blue fleece and baggy trousers, emerged from it at around 10am on Friday, he was followed. When he headed for the nearby tube station, officers decided to arrest him. An armed unit took over, ordering him to stop. He did not. His unseasonally thick jacket apparently prompted concern that he had explosives strapped beneath."
What is already known, therefore, is that almost 24 hours before they saw de Menezes emerge from his house, police had put it under surveillance based on information they found at the scene of one of the attempted bombings at lunchtime the day before. If the overriding goal of the police is to prevent further attacks, why did they not raid the house right away? They might have discovered sooner what they found out too late -- that de Menezes was totally uninvolved in any terrorist plot. The police clearly had more than a "split-second" to act and they need to explain why they did not act.
Yet, something made the police suspicious between the time de Menezes left his home on Friday morning and the time he ran from an armed squad drawing their guns on him. What was it? Surely de Menezes can't have been the only Londoner to leave his house on Friday morning heading for a Tube stop. We are told that it was his fleece jacket that was "unseasonably thick." Here in Chicago, a thick jacket in July would almost surely be unseasonable, although I often take one out at this time of year because I find the airconditioning in most buildings excessive. But in London? I have frozen through many northern European summers in my life, but perhaps the weather has been hot lately. So far as we have been told, all previous bomb attempts in London, like those in Madrid, were carried out with rucksacks, not suicide belts. Did the police have any reason other than de Menezes' appearance that morning to suspect a change in tactics? Had they searched his house when they had the chance, they might have satisfied themselves that he owned a fleece, but no explosives, without needing to kill him.
ALLAH IS GREAT said:Latest news shows that the metropolitan police withheld information about what really happened.Someone leaked the documents to the ITV NEWS.
The brazilian guy was just a normal citizen on his way to work.He didn't jump over the ticket barrier.Hell,he even picked up a free newspaper.
And once he was in the train,he was restrained in a chair by one officer.Then the other officer shot him,mercilessly and dragged him to the floor,were he unloaded 8 bullets in the guy.3 others missed.
I think that answers your questions.The first information given to the public was full of lies.
eisanbt said:Her source is simply the News, I heard the same reports form CTV and CBC news. The Brits were lying to us and they got found out.
ALLAH IS GREAT said:Latest news shows that the metropolitan police withheld information about what really happened.Someone leaked the documents to the ITV NEWS.
The brazilian guy was just a normal citizen on his way to work.He didn't jump over the ticket barrier.Hell,he even picked up a free newspaper.
And once he was in the train,he was restrained in a chair by one officer.Then the other officer shot him,mercilessly and dragged him to the floor,were he unloaded 8 bullets in the guy.3 others missed.
I think that answers your questions.The first information given to the public was full of lies.