Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Assuming your responding to me. Though I may be incorrect in that assumption.
Let me restate. Or rather clarify if I may.
I think its the Christians that had the right idea
clearly, but I would remove "christians" and replace it with displaced people. the moslems are rapidly displacing anyone who will not submit to their creed and they seem to have no problems with putting entire villages to the sword, or ak47 as it were.
we forget that we live cozy lives in a posh land and we can be soft and sloppy. this is simply not the case with 80% of humanity.
only here can there be a national debate over what some overpaid guy who can run fast and catch a ball does with his dogs or chickens.
the reactions to stuff like the dog thing would be laughable were it not so incredibly stupid.
moslems wipe out entire other religion's villages every day in africa and the far east yet you see nothing on the national news.
the only clear "outrage" over moslem actions that I can recall was way back when the taliban destroyed some buddhist icons in afghanistan some seven or so years ago. the liberals were all aghast over the loss of these irreplacable art treasures but in typical liberal fashion not a word over the thousands, tens of thousands put to death by the moslems.
so yes let's worry about dead chickens and dogs or defaced religious art, never mind the thousands murdered, that is of course unless a few of them successfully fight fire with fire. why the very nerve of those "christians".
