Manchester bombed by goat fuckers

Faithly reporting the official position of Saudi Arabia and several other Islamic shitholes is just being truthful. I understand you don't like this truth and would prefer to wish it away but that does not change reality.

So stuff it with that horse shit. The very fact that you had no idea about that and dozens of other fundamental Islamic beliefs really does show how ignorant you are on this topic. It is not just Christianity for brown people as you liberals like to think, it is a fundamentally evil ideology.

The Regressive Left really does love trying to draw a false equivalency between islamofascist terrorism and western Christianity. Somehow, in their twisted thinking, bombing a concert and killing pre-teen girls (and before that opening fire and slaughtering patrons at an Eagles of Death Metal concert), is analogous to Baptists advocating against abortion and gay marriage.

The sister of the bomber has come out and declared the bombing was in retaliation to the UK bombing ISIS targets in Syria. They openly support ISIS, the whole family does. Why do we let such animals move to the west? This is madness.

Indeed. Pathological insecurity and ignoring inconvenient facts. I couldn't have summed up the typical libtard mindset any better.

Garamet channeling The Silver Surfer. The Surfer, trapped here by Galactus, sails the stratosphere on his cosmic board, gazing down on primitive, puny Earth and it's barbaric inhabitants. The Surfer laments his sad existence, forced to spend his days in the company of lesser evolved bipeds, made to endure their tiny minds and bizarre foibles.





Garamet is a perfect example of the kind of delusional narcissism that infects the Regressive Left. They truly believe they are morally superior.

Islam/muslim culture are totally incompatible with western democracy. There's no overlap between cultural norms in Saudi Arabia and America. The two cannot exist in the same space. The two *should* not exist in the same space. Apparently libtards like Quest and Garamet are cool with radical islam. That's kinda surprising, given that Garamet wouldn't last a week in one of the islamic theocracies.

The evil parts of the Koran and the Bible are virtually indistinguishable.
And Christianity has at various times in history been every bit as vile as ISIS.
They've all got that ticking timebomb in them.

To appeal to some special extra sprinkles that make Islam worse, you have to appeal to either racism, or supernaturalism.
Or, some lovely hybrid of the two.

Which you gonna go with?
Because" it's just more evil because it just is!", ain't gonna cut any ice.

I disagree, mainly as what qualifies as being a good Muslim differs not only between sects, but regional interpretations that have been exported with migrants.

For example, the UK has a fair few West Asian immigrants, and you'll find many regard being a good Muslim as being submissive to the patriarch. Now that may have jibed nicely with the West in the 1950's, but hey guys, welcome to the 21st century!

The debate has to be more granular than that. We need to stop being so accommodating and respectful - there is a fear that the kind of mockery given to other religions can be accused, rightly or wrongly, of being racist or islamophobic - and we have to be pretty clear that rights come with responsibilities.

There needs to be an understanding that, as members of a modern Western society, certain expectations exist, and some of those expectations may conflict with imported morals and beliefs and where they do such conflicts must be resolved to accommodate the West. The West, for all it's faults, provides a wide and flexible framework for all beliefs, so it's not exactly unreasonable to expect the like of forced marriages and vaginas=submission to be left at the door.

Europe also comes with additional issues. The US has concepts such as African-America or Asian-American, and most flags you see are the Stars and Stripes. Europe has no such concept as a subculture-European, it's alien, and national pride is conflated with nationalism so the flags you see are many and rarely that of the host nation (sporting events aside). This creates enclaves and ghettos, places where extremism can thrive as the host nation becomes a foreign country. So whilst the US has many racial issues is it at least set-up to be much more accepting and integrational than Europe is.

Europe, at a political level, fails to understand that integration is about cultures merging, learning the best parts, it's not about assimilation where the host devours the migrant.

In the UK and Europe it's not just the right that needs to wind its neck in, the left's absolutist haughty dismissal of national identity needs to be challenged too.

I usually expect the far right to capitalise on these things, however the left has decided to leave any semblance of classiness in its sock drawer because, duh, election.

So far we've had:

"imagine if the NHS was privatised" (not on the table, and the government that did the most privatisation was, ahem, Labour) - from Corbyn supporters on Facebook
"convenient timing" - left-leaning comedian Rufus Hound (shame, I like him) and a few Corbynistas on Twatter

Really? You, and any of the far-right fuckos, go bake yourself a pile of rat poison cupcakes and have a dickhead's picnic outside Chernobyl.

Road trip to Chernobyl bitches! BTW Road trip To Chernobyl is a great band name!

Thanks Trump!

More at the leak link.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/british-pm-may-challenge-trump-over-intelligence-leaks-073459071.html

>EDITED to remove graphic photograph<

Do it again, @Skrain Dukat and you'll get warned.

I'm definitely not going to go with the one that asserts himself as being God, aka atheism. One Hitler was enough for the world.

Well, that was a bunch of BearTM level derp.
Thanks for the trip down memory toilet flush.

You say the host should not devour the migrant, yet, in this instance, the host stands to be devoured if it does not defend itself. And then what? Paradise?

At least I put a smile on your face.

Nothing but new window dressing for the same tired, discredited argument.

For the billionth time, while not all islamic folks are bomb-vest wearing terrorists, islamic/muslim culture is totally, completely 100% incompatible with Western democracy and the two cannot co-exist. Sharia law & forced theocracy can not co-exist with western legal principles and constitutional civil rights. Islamic culture that persecutes women as nothing but chattel and violently restricts any expression of female sexuality cannot co-exist in western cultures where women are allowed to leave the house without a male escort, drive, work, earn profit, and wear string bikinis to the beach if they so choose.

You know the problem with these discussions? Limp-wristed couch liberals sitting in their safe suburban apartments, defending the honor of muslims and islamic culture as benign, arguing that it can be "tamed" for civilized nations. Quest has never spent a single day living in an islamic theocracy and wouldn't last two days before posting something on the internet that would lead the religious police to drag him to the public square for beheading. People like Quest are soft-bellied suburbanites with no concept of life beyond the borders of middle-class banality.

I'll pay attention to people like Quest, Garamet, 14th Douche and the other libtards when they and their girlfriends/wives have lived in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen for a year. Let's see what the women in their lives have to say about muslims trying to import their culture to America after that.

It is factually incorrect to claim that all Muslims wish to impose Sharia Law and theocracy upon western societies.

Is it? How would you define "Muslim?" And how certain are you that your definition/sentiment aligns with those who actually claim to be Muslims?

If you're denying that Muslims who don't support theocracy aren't actually Muslims, then you're again aligning yourself with Islamic State.
And while there are troubling numbers of them who are at least somewhat sympathetic to those things - something like 50% in Europe, I think - the flipside is that there are substantial numbers against them as well.

For example: Four in ten British Muslims want some aspect of Sharia Law enforced in UK

That is like comparing a fire cracker to a nuclear bomb. It is just willful deception.

So? Are they wrong?

So you hope to "devour" them like @Ebeneezer Goode hopes?

The Bible and the Koran both attempt to constrain human behavior for the sake of bettering our species. The difference is the Bible recognizes the humanity inherent in all people; the Koran says only certain people can qualify as human.

If you were really were interested in just coming up with a better interpritation of the evil that is Islam then you would be actively pushing to make that happen instead of constantly excusing and enabling those supposedly reformable practices. But you are not only not doing that but you oppose people who do. You have to criminalize, shame, denigrate, and make clear those negative parts of Islam (which despite your weak and ignorant denials are core Islamic beliefs) are completely unacceptable in civilized societies and following them will automatically lead to death, imprisonment, or deportation.

Zero tolerance is the only way the civilized world should deal with radical Islam which is most of Islam.

Why do you imagine he'd want to promote your agenda?

You have a (extremely minor) point about not always following religious commands but where you go completely off the rails into la la land is when you claim thou shalt not kill is even in the same ball park with homosexuals must be killed, adulters must be killed, people must be killed for converting, or that men have the absolute right to beat their wives for any reason they so wish. This is not reformable as these are so called commands from god.