Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What about Fred Phelps? Doesn't he believe in the same god?
If he doesn't spread hatred, I don't know what you'd call it.
What's the difference between him and what people are accusing muslims of?
I think it's a matter of the numbers of followers that both have, no?
I also think that, although our economies are in bad shape now, we will eventually be independent of oil (which is running out, anyway).
This will probably stop the flow of resources to Muslim terrorists and Sharia supporters and severely cut down on their followers.
This, to my thinking, is why Phelps has few followers. People who enjoy his idiocy are too busy earning a living to bother with such nonsense.
I did not know that people in Britain are somehow legally accused of being racist for criticizing another religion or the house of worship of another religion.
I have no problem with mosque building. Believers have to go somewhere.
I do have a problem with two sets of laws.
But, here in the states, drugs are illegal except for Native Americans, who use it in their services. And, in some states, for ill people.
I think the Hasidim in the US also have their own laws in their communities, but they are not allowed to conflict with our laws. It is just a sort of wiggle room.
Again, this is a huge country, and there is more room for people to exist without getting on each other's nerves.
It's liberal politicians who tend to prevent wars. They just go a bit overboard every now and then and have to be reigned in.
The same liberal politicians that have shown such contempt for the indigenous people of Britain, are the very same ones that have involved us in no less than three wars in the last 11 years. NOTHING to to with us or our welfare (as if they cared, anyway). Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Don't tell me 'liberal' politicians are averse to a bit of bloodshed.
The same liberal politicians that have shown such contempt for the indigenous people of Britain, are the very same ones that have involved us in no less than three wars in the last 11 years. NOTHING to to with us or our welfare (as if they cared, anyway). Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Don't tell me 'liberal' politicians are averse to a bit of bloodshed.
Over here, it is the right wing flagwavingguntotingJesusloving folk who tend to relish wars and easily engage in them.
Certainly, liberals have had their share, but the big drawback is that their following in the public generally condemn such actions.
You folks always seem to volunteer for our wars, and we have frequently wondered why.
Over here, it is the right wing flagwavingguntotingJesusloving folk who tend to relish wars and easily engage in them.
Certainly, liberals have had their share, but the big drawback is that their following in the public generally condemn such actions.
You folks always seem to volunteer for our wars, and we have frequently wondered why.
Talk about getting your wires crossed!
I am not 'you folk'. I don't even vote.
There is nothing to choose between our politicians. I was unable to join the over ONE MILLION people in this country who protested against the invasion of Iraq. If I could have got there, believe me I would.
Britain must have one of the lowest turn-outs when it comes to voting.
And small wonder.
Don't bracket me with any political party. You have got this seriously wrong.
The same liberal politicians that have shown such contempt for the indigenous people of Britain, are the very same ones that have involved us in no less than three wars in the last 11 years. NOTHING to to with us or our welfare (as if they cared, anyway). Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Don't tell me 'liberal' politicians are averse to a bit of bloodshed.
Can you provide some credible links for your assertions?
Iraq and Afghanistan were Bush's babies.
I don't know enough about Yugoslavia to make a comment.
Can you provide some credible links for your assertions?
Iraq and Afghanistan were Bush's babies.
I don't know enough about Yugoslavia to make a comment.
This was Blair's first big adventure, on the coat-tails of Clinton. They invaded Yugoslavia in 1999.
It was an illegal invasion. Many lost their lives. It was the first time I had ever heard of cluster bombs.
The Serbs eventually threw in the towel, but apparently it is still a very precarious 'peace' out there. No doubt atrocities are still occurring but they are not reported anymore.
There is nothing to choose between our politicians. I was unable to join the over ONE MILLION people in this country who protested against the invasion of Iraq. If I could have got there, believe me I would.
Britain must have one of the lowest turn-outs when it comes to voting.
And small wonder.
Don't bracket me with any political party. You have got this seriously wrong.
Sorry, by 'you folks' I was referring to how much the British seem to support the US in our wars.
I'm not sure what elicited the heated response, but I apologize.
very true but only those of us exposed to the mid east culture and homelands know that.
thank you for a very good post. the only place where queens rules are practiced is here.
the rest of the world does as it pleases. most americans do not have a clue.
I apologise too, then. I thought you were implying that I was a war crazy Christian...you did say something along those lines.
The majority of Britain is disgusted and embarrassed at the way our government, when asked to jump, by the US, says "How high?"
Oh, never. I was probably clumsy in my 'speech'. Sorry.
I suppose we well never really know what the relationship between Bush and Blair was.
I sometimes think our governments may be privy to embarrassing secrets of one another and so there is this peculiar linkage.
Clinton and Blair each has charm and intelligence, and I could see them getting on in a personal way, but BUSH?
It certainly was not a common religion, at least in my opinion.
I read somewhere that Gordon Brown wanted to formulate a written document, like a 'bill of rights' for British citizens. With all this blending of nations and the threat of loss of sovereignty and terrorists, I think this might be a good idea.
Do you know if the people were receptive to this, and if it is still in the works?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
