Loose Change 911

That's what I can't understand, if it's all innocent then why not just post the explanation?

 

You never denied that you made or took the pictures in question did you?
Denying at this point is a little late now don't you think?

 

These are strawman arguments. It's easy to assert these things (the strawman), then beat the strawman down by saying they are bad. But the points are moot, because no one is suggesting such.

I can't say I agree with that. bin laden is a good example of why I don't agree that it's about money/power. He has more money than he'll ever be able to use, yet lives in caves and for the most part (as many have described) the life of a poor person. He's driven by religious ideology, not power and money.

I think we would all like to see that, but I don't think it's practical. Even in the UK, there are muslims using the system to call for establishing shari'a law, using the system to preach hatred, etc. We have the same problem here. A report last year showed how hatred was being preached in mosques here and how Saudi Arabia was funding hate literature distributed in many mosques here.

It's not uncommon to see a blanket condemnation after a terrorist attack. Watch for it next time (or even look up previous ones). To what degree "unanimously condemned" is accurate, I don't know. But the blanket condemantions usually go something like "we condemn all acts of violence on innocent people." Usually not a specific condemnation and then you'd have to know who islam considers "innocent" and not. The kafir is not innocent. The problem is, the kafir don't realize it!

I disagree. It is not wrong to focus on the religion, because the inspiration for such attacks come from the religion. From the religious scriptures. As for the moral equivalence on which as done more in history, I don't know of any source that has tabulated such. I contend though, that most people don't care about yesterday, they care about today. People often point to the Crusades. The Crusades were started as means to fight back against the muslims. Granted, a few of the Crusades went past that. One can surely take a look at how islam was spread by the sword throughout the continent. To focus on comparisons of the past isn't going to solve the problems of today.

Sure, we can find parallels to actual scriptures. That's where the parallels end though. As I pointed out, we find day to day activities of muslims around the world acting upon these types of scriptures in their holy book. To illustrate the same for Christians, we need only look at how irrational they seem, when put into a daily context:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=110161

 

So that pretty much makes the argument you presented null and void. You were so sure he did, but now admit that he never admitted such.

You just wiped out your whole argument, Edz. Thanks for proving the point I had been trying to make.

 

Are you about finished?

Not denying is an admission? You'd make a great litigator.

 

Matt, thanks for the civil debate on a hot issue. Need to take a break and get some work done, will check back later.

 

So what are you saying? That's what I'm struggling to understand. You say you realise not all Muslims are terrorists, but then you sy you can't isolate them. I think you can, but the negative reaction to Islam rather then terrorism angers the moderates and pleases the terrorists.

There's always an excetion to the rule. I was referring to the middlemen. The guys that come to the west, set their familys up comfortably in houses at the taxpayers expense and preach their evil to those that don't know any better.

Yes, but wouldn't it be better to react against that without angering moderates. By all means remove the guys preaching hated. There have actually been Muslim clerics reported by the Muslim community over here in the UK that have been deported. Surely it's better to keep guys like that on our side instead of condemning the religion they follow and isolating them as well?

Yes, there's always people that use ambiguous language to avoid a direct condemnation. Sadly it's quotes like that which receives the publicity and airtime. A muslim condemning terrorist doesn't make a good news story as a muslim trying to avoide condemning terrorism at the moment.

Okay, we'll look to a more recent example. Religious volence in Northern Ireland. Another example of a 'religious' war that got hijacked by greed and power. I wouldn't make the assumption that either denomination wasn't peaceful and I also wouldn't assume that the majority of either religion were in favour of the violence. The reactions of both communities did more to end the conflict than any political moves. Sadly the IRA and Loyalist organisations still exist as criminal gangs, which is all they were in the first place. In my eyes it's a moral equivalenent on a smaller scale without the worldwide media attention.

 

No worries, it's good to put the bitching to rest. I better go get some work done too.

 

And you'd be one of the worst by not denying or disputing the accusations against your client or yourself for that matter.

 

Sorry to burst your Bubble Gtech but your trying to speak for me and saying things i do not say.

I do not admit he never admitted such, that's your version. Since his whole behaviour is a confession.
He could have said from the beginning that he did not took the pictures but he choose not to.

Suspicious and guilty behaviour. Nobody wants to be percieved the way numerous people percieve Mia as of now yet he did not do anything about it when confronted.

 

Can someone close this thread please ?

Jeremy is not the person to be flamed.

I would never enforce anyone to defend himself in a forum. Do that in private.

 

Then who?

I'd normally agree, but since the information was published in a public forum I guess the explanation should be as well.

 

Not always. I would still advise that the problem should be solved in private.

Ask the first 40 pages of members (sorted by nr. of posts or join date) about Jeremy. You'll see what I mean.

 

It doesn't look like it's being solved in public or private at the moment. Mia still hasn't admitted or denied anything so I guess people will always think the worst.

I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean?

 

Try harder.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Mason

Ask that guys victims if they care what his family and friends say about him.

 

Does this thread need to be closed?

 

Yo-yo .. Are you comparing Jeremy with a murderer ? Are you sick in the head ?

YES. It should be closed.

 

Not until questions have answers

 

Seriously, please!

I'm not taking sides...the personal issues need to be kept PRIVATE.

Pretty PWEASE, buddies!