Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
Jews and Christians simply do not resort to murder when they are made fun of by a guy no one had heard of.
They do in central Africa. Militant, poorly educated, poor, and jobless populations tend to turn violent for stupid reasons.
How many Jews are there in the Congo?
Examples of a riot over a US film, Shuma?
It should be fairly clear to you that I was speaking about Christians, the only largescale jewish population outside of the U.S. is in Israel and they bulldoze peoples homes and keep countries hostage when they get insulted. You're also now asking for specificity in one region for one act, which isn't what you were doing before. Previously you just wanted examples of violence spurred by insultation. Sectarian violence is common in central Africa and there are numerous violent rebel groups based on radical christian beliefs, the Lords Resistance Army for example.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/09/14 18:50:13
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
You let the embassy Marines standing around with you go weapons free. The embassy's sovereign US territory. You don't get to storm it, tear down the flag, and replace it with your own. You definitely do not get to kill an ambassador.
Someone remind me again why we haven't just glassed that whole region? We always need more off-site parking.
Politics. Nuff said.
motyak wrote:[...] Yes, the mods are illuminati, and yakface, lego and dakka dakka itself are the 3 points of the triangle.
Pragmatism, rather. And/or the simple morality of not wanting to mass murder millions of people.
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
Thinking its time to implement "benchmarks" to the ME countries if they want US Foreign Aid.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Revoke all visa application of the date it was perpatrated. Stop all foreign Aid Remove the embassy personnel. Implement the "Benchmark" plan to that country. Majority of the ME people think we're stupid for continuing on given aid to government s that severely dislike us. Notice the DoS already stated the Aid to the Egyptian military military will not be touched?
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
By Kirsten Powers ( she's very distracting... wait, what she say? yes, I'm a Neanderthal )
"Disgusting and reprehensible." said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. "Truly abhorrent," an outraged White House official told an international conference. Were they talking about the murder of four Americans in Libya? Or perhaps the hoisting of an Islamist flag over the U.S. Embassy in Cairo?
No. For that they stuck to diplomatic speak. For the president, the harshest language was: "I strongly condemn the outrageous attack." For Clinton it was that the US is heartbroken and she condemned "this senseless act of violence." But "disgusting and reprehensible" and "truly abhorrent " were reserved for an amateurish and silly film by someone nobody has ever heard of.
In fact, what is "disgusting and reprehensible" is that there are people in the world who think they are justified in attacking and killing people because someone hurt their feelings or offended their sensibilities. The US government should not act as a validator or enabler of this upside down worldview, which is exactly what the Obama administration has done repeatedly as they have responded to these abhorrent attacks against the United States.
I have defended the Obama administration against the complaints from the right that they have run an "apology tour" in the Middle East because I believe the US should admit when we make mistakes, such as the accidental burning of Korans. But what we shouldn't do is affirm the wrongheaded view that people should be protected from the free speech of others.
Worse, our leaders shouldn't let our enemies know that when they kill our people and attack our embassies that the US Government will act like a battered wife making excuses for her psychotic husband. Wake up: we weren't attacked because of a movie made by an American. We were attacked because there are crazy religious fanatics who hate the United States. We didn't ask for it.
Egypt's President Morsi reportedly asked Obama "to put an end to such behavior"—presumably freedom, constitutional rights and the like -- as it led to the making of, in his eyes, the offensive movie.
Obama has no legal recourse but our president seems to be acquiescing to Morsi’s request by trying to silence the movie-maker through verbal intimidation, including a call from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Dempsey who asked Pastor Terry Jones to withdraw his support for the film. Additionally, The Hollywood Reporter reveals that the FBI was dispatched to Hollywood to uncover the identity of the filmmaker. (Don't they have real terrorists to catch? I'll be looking for the administration's condemnations next for the selling of the DVD of “The Da Vinci Code,” the blockbuster American movie that claims Jesus had sex with Mary Magdalene.)
Team Obama’s unseemly groveling to violent extremists has been cloaked in a newfound concern on the left for respecting religious sensibilities. Tuesday, a liberal professor argued in USA Today that the maker of the Mohammed film should be arrested.
President Obama said in the Rose Garden: "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others" and Clinton asserted that, "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough endorsed efforts to create "a world where the dignity of all people—and all faiths—is respected."
Apparently our foreign policy is now being run by Dr. Phil. Someone needs to explain to the White House that our Constitution protects freedom of religion from government interference, not the protection from people who say mean, critical or offensive things about one's religion.
But if this is truly their new position, then they have a lot to be outraged about right here at home. Remember Amanda Marcotte, one of the left's top bloggers and a columnist for the left-wing Guardian who chose last Easter -- the holiest day of the Christian calendar -- to chime "Happy Jeebus Day"? She once asked: "What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? [Answer]: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology."
Then there was the tweet last year by Bill Maher about Tim Tebow during a particularly bad game: "Wow, Jesus just f----- #TimTebow bad! And on Xmas Eve! Somewhere in hell Satan is Tebowing, saying to Hitler "Hey, Buffalo's killing them." This was so offensive that President Obama's PAC still managed to take a million dollars from this man to help finance his reelection.
If Christians had burned down Maher's house in response, would the administration put out a statement condemning the violence but pointing out that he should have respected the religious beliefs of others?
Of course not. Nor would anyone want that.
But that is what the administration keeps doing with their responses to the attacks in the Middle East. The condemnations are paired in with claims about respecting religious beliefs, which is implicit sympathy for the claims of some of the attackers and rioters.
It’s time for the Obama administration to stop blaming the victim.
Muslims rise to the bait every time. From Salman Rushdie to the Danish cartoons and now the US ambassador killed in Libya. A Right-wing Islamophobe in the West publishes incendiary material, and as if on autopilot, a Muslim mob will turn angry and unleash violence. How to stop these repeat performances of medieval intolerance?
I write as a Muslim. I detest the negative, to me blasphemous, portrayal in such films of the Prophet Mohamed I venerate and love. But in a free society I am fully within my rights to rebut the anti-Muslim propaganda with facts, not force.
To resort to violence is to lose the argument. The freedom of religion that allows 30 million Muslims to thrive in the West today came about because religion was mocked in Europe after the Enlightenment period — no single religion could enforce its will as “The Truth”. The freedoms to proselytise, apostasise and blaspheme are all interlinked.
Without those liberties, we Muslims would not be practising religious freedom in the West, building mosques, creating cemeteries, prospering as faith communities. In other words, we cannot burn the very bridges that let us and other communities be here as free people.
To continue to value our freedoms in the West, and help project this model into newly free Arab societies, three things must happen.
First, in Libya, the terrorists who were behind killing consular staff in Benghazi must face the full force of the law. No moral equivocation such as “we must be more sensitive” should be advanced. Such excuse-making not only encourages this behaviour but risks undermining the foundational pillars of liberty and free societies in the West. And it sets a terrible example to Arab countries looking to advance democracy.
Second, there is a backstory to the news headlines. For every protest or killing, there is an underlying cause of Muslims not coming to terms with the modern world. We are easily offended. Our clerics in mosques have not updated their understanding of blasphemy or heresy. In short, we need thicker skins and must accept that just as we can be critical of other faiths and ideologies, others are free to do so about us.
Finally, al Qaeda and its followers have popularised a narrative in Muslim-majority countries that the West is at war with Muslims and Islam. From the crusades to empire to Guantánamo Bay to Iraq, this reading of history and collection of half-truths helps animate many Muslims.
This false mindset, a flawed belief, needs urgent discrediting. Who better to do this than the Muslims who live and prosper as Westerners in Europe and the United States?
Friday prayers tomorrow in Arab and Muslim countries may be used by clerics to fan the flames of anger. But the Prophet Mohamed they claim to defend stood by and watched a Bedouin urinate in the mosque. He forgave that blasphemy. Where is that spirit of compassion?
Muslims in free societies must not be divided by the radical Salafi Muslims of the Middle East, or the Right-wing Muslimphobes in the West. The clash of extremes cannot be allowed to reverse our freedoms.
Ed Husain is author of The Islamist and a senior fellow at the US Council on Foreign Relations.
Are they taking criminal actions against the maker of the film? - No.
Are they preventing his freedom of speech? - No.
Anybody who claims that this is a freedom of speech issue is missing the point.
You can allow somebody to make this movie and still call him out for making it. The people that made this video knew exactly what would happen, and that is the reason they made it. And you can call them out for being jackasses who were perfectly okay with giving fuel to people who would use it.
None of that diminishes that:
1) The idiots are still free to make idiotic movies that are the artistic equivalent of throwing a molotov cocktail into a region of the world that they knew would ignite riots.
2) That people who protest peacefully have a right to do so.
3) That people who cross that line are worthless.
When the men who killed our ambassador to Libya were in the final stages of their preparation, Hillary Clinton was in the Cook Islands, being regaled by locals in traditional dress. Her seemingly endless world tour has prioritized symbolism and pageantry over substance. So too has the administration of her boss, Barack Obama, and the costs are now becoming clear.
This explains why Obama’s chief diplomat said of the Libya attack: “I asked myself—how could this happen? How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction?”
Madam secretary, it is time for you and your boss to wake up and smell the global jihad.
There are people in this world—and not a small number of them—who share the vision bin Laden had and have the will and means to act. No amount of apologizing for America, embracing our adversaries or mistreating our allies will change that.
It is worth recalling that Cairo, the city where a mob entered the US embassy compound and burned an American flag, was the epicenter of what critics call Obama’s “apology tour.” It was there that he apologized for critical steps American officials took in the Middle East to defend against the Soviets eight years before Obama was born. It was there that he criticized his own nation’s response to 9/11.
That was the reason US diplomats in Cairo instinctively put out an apologetic condemnation of those who “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” They were simply channeling the Obama view of the world.
Hillary also said that the attack was the result of a “small and savage group.”
Wrong again.
Viewed correctly, the attack was perpetrated by a very large group. Terrorism as we have known it since 9/11 is but the violent vanguard of the Islamist political ideology. This ideology unifies diverse terrorists from Jemmah Islamiyah in Indonesia to Al-Shabaab in Somalia to Boko Haram in Nigeria to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to the Haqqani network in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
While the groups are diverse and at times antagonistic toward each other, their hatred of America unites them, and they work toward a generally common goal. Behind them is a large body of people who cheer on and support Islamists—a minority of Muslims, but hardly a body of people we should ignore.
The American people have instinctively understood this threat since Islamists took over Iran and took our diplomats hostage there in 1979. Our political class never has never understood this.
Instead, our foreign policy establishment, led by presidents of both parties, has spoken of “violent extremists” as if they had no common thread or clear ideological motivation. More recently, President Obama has thumped his chest about killing Al Qaeda’s founder and implied that Al Qaeda is our only real enemy. This is convenient and politically correct—but it is wrong.
If we killed everyone in Al Qaeda tomorrow, we would still have a problem that Obama, Hillary and the Washington foreign policy establishment refuse to recognize. There is a tyrannical political force in the world that is waging war on us wherever it can—both politically and militarily.
On Obama’s watch, the Islamists have done very well. They have taken over Egypt and are set to take over Syria and its chemical weapons arsenal without a change in US policy. They look ahead to the day U.S. forces leave Afghanistan—which Obama has conveniently announced to them. And in the country where modern Islamism first came to life at the nation-state level, Iran, the government is set to gain a nuclear weapons capability—another Obama legacy.
Hillary ought to park the plane and understand that diplomacy—or more accurately statecraft—ought to be about recognizing and fighting these problems. Pageantry, apologies and photo ops are obviously not getting it done.
Christian Whiton was a State Department senior adviser from 2003-2009. He is principal at DC International Advisory. Follow him on Twitter @ChristianWhiton.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Anybody who claims that this is a freedom of speech issue is missing the point.
You can allow somebody to make this movie and still call him out for making it. The people that made this video knew exactly what would happen, and that is the reason they made it. And you can call them out for being jackasses who were perfectly okay with giving fuel to people who would use it.
None of that diminishes that:
Yup.
1) The idiots are still free to make idiotic movies that are the artistic equivalent of throwing a molotov cocktail into a region of the world that they knew would ignite riots.
Right... 'cuz he "dared" speak out.
2) That people who protest peacefully have a right to do so.
Agreed... but, in some parts of the world (looking at ME), not necessarily true.
I disagree. An old adage about sticks and stones comes to mind.
Which is a fundamentally false adage, especially in this age where we are seeif more and more young people hurt or kill themselves over words.
You might not be able to control what offends you (I think this is arguable though), but you do choose how you react to that offense.
I would also add that the vast majority of people who hurt or kill themselves suffer from some kind of mental illness. I'm not saying that to lessen any of the blame on bullies who have been extremely cruel to other people, but rather to point out it often isn't just words that make people hurt themselves. In most cases there is already a serious underlying issue or issues present.
Anybody who claims that this is a freedom of speech issue is missing the point.
You can allow somebody to make this movie and still call him out for making it. The people that made this video knew exactly what would happen, and that is the reason they made it. And you can call them out for being jackasses who were perfectly okay with giving fuel to people who would use it.
None of that diminishes that:
Yup.
1) The idiots are still free to make idiotic movies that are the artistic equivalent of throwing a molotov cocktail into a region of the world that they knew would ignite riots.
Right... 'cuz he "dared" speak out.
2) That people who protest peacefully have a right to do so.
Agreed... but, in some parts of the world (looking at ME), not necessarily true.
3) That people who cross that line are worthless.
What line is that? Speech that inflames violence?
1) If the video violates the terms, then YouTube should be allowed to take it down. If it doesn't it should stay up. Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you get to violate TOS of a company that is hosting your speech, just as freedom of speech doesn't protect you from getting fired for calling your boss a jackass.
2) It has nothing to do with "he dared to speak out". If anybody even pretends that he didn't know that this would happen then they are seriously idiotic.
3) We still shouldn't prevent people from protesting peacefully, and if they want to protest peacefully in front of our embassy, they should be allowed to.
4) The people who crossed that line are people burning diplomatic buildings and engaging in violence. Don't even pretend that there was any ambiguity in that statement. The "crossing the line" statement comes directly after an affirmation of peaceful protest and a full affirmation of freedom of speech. If you want to play a game of "put words in my mouth" you can play by yourself and just be a copypasta to the conservative talking heads.
I disagree. An old adage about sticks and stones comes to mind.
Which is a fundamentally false adage, especially in this age where we are seeif more and more young people hurt or kill themselves over words.
You might not be able to control what offends you (I think this is arguable though), but you do choose how you react to that offense.
I would also add that the vast majority of people who hurt or kill themselves suffer from some kind of mental illness. I'm not saying that to lessen any of the blame on bullies who have been extremely cruel to other people, but rather to point out it often isn't just words that make people hurt themselves. In most cases there is already a serious underlying issue or issues present.
And very rarely in any of those cases is it "a mental illness".
When you look at the majority of young people who are hurting or killing themselves, it ties in to issues in their home life or social acceptance of things such as homosexuality or transgender individuals.
I understand that you're making a point, but I think you're looking at it from the wrong perspective. "Mental illness" alone is not enough to make someone decide to kill themselves.
Anybody who claims that this is a freedom of speech issue is missing the point.
You can allow somebody to make this movie and still call him out for making it. The people that made this video knew exactly what would happen, and that is the reason they made it. And you can call them out for being jackasses who were perfectly okay with giving fuel to people who would use it.
None of that diminishes that:
Yup.
1) The idiots are still free to make idiotic movies that are the artistic equivalent of throwing a molotov cocktail into a region of the world that they knew would ignite riots.
Right... 'cuz he "dared" speak out.
2) That people who protest peacefully have a right to do so.
Agreed... but, in some parts of the world (looking at ME), not necessarily true.
3) That people who cross that line are worthless.
What line is that? Speech that inflames violence?
1) If the video violates the terms, then YouTube should be allowed to take it down. If it doesn't it should stay up. Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you get to violate TOS of a company that is hosting your speech, just as freedom of speech doesn't protect you from getting fired for calling your boss a jackass.
So you don't see a problem that a Federal Government asking a company to review something *they know is protected speech* to see if it violates that said company's ToS?
2) It has nothing to do with "he dared to speak out". If anybody even pretends that he didn't know that this would happen then they are seriously idiotic.
Oh... he knew what would happen.
3) We still shouldn't prevent people from protesting peacefully, and if they want to protest peacefully in front of our embassy, they should be allowed to.
Absolutely. They can protest all they want, burn their own version of the American Flag... post up Bush/Hitler signs... I have no problem with that.
4) The people who crossed that line are people burning diplomatic buildings and engaging in violence.
Good!
Don't even pretend that there was any ambiguity in that statement. The "crossing the line" statement comes directly after an affirmation of peaceful protest and a full affirmation of freedom of speech. If you want to play a game of "put words in my mouth" you can play by yourself and just be a copypasta to the conservative talking heads.
We'll... if got sites galore claiming that what the video creator did was "crossing the line"... that he should be prosecuted/sued.
And you play that copypasta from Liberal talkings heads very good as well...(that face palm pic is golden )
*psst: Shuma said I haz supa powah... looks like you to!
The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9-0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. It held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] ... have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."
Here's the hard part...
Is there evidence that he did that on purpose, knowingly that people will die? That's very hard to prove.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/14 21:21:05
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Jihadin wrote: Thinking its time to implement "benchmarks" to the ME countries if they want US Foreign Aid.
Yeah... heres a simple response.
If the embassies are breached... immediately revoke all Visas in USA and suspend all Aids to that country.
Which will result in every U.S. embassy on earth being attacked by isolationist, extremist, or foreign elements in those countries. The U.S. will then automatically expel itself from that country. It's like a "go away" button. And here I didn't think you liked supplicating extremists.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/14 21:23:56
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
You need to do your own research, because you come across as an ill-informed individual who does nothing but parrot Fox News and other pro-Republican talking heads whenever you engage in "discussions" here about politics.
And if "all you could find" is the Fighting Words doctrine--you're not looking hard enough.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/14 21:25:37
"Disgusting and reprehensible." said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. "Truly abhorrent," an outraged White House official told an international conference. Were they talking about the murder of four Americans in Libya? Or perhaps the hoisting of an Islamist flag over the U.S. Embassy in Cairo?
No. For that they stuck to diplomatic speak. For the president, the harshest language was: "I strongly condemn the outrageous attack." For Clinton it was that the US is heartbroken and she condemned "this senseless act of violence." But "disgusting and reprehensible" and "truly abhorrent " were reserved for an amateurish and silly film by someone nobody has ever heard of.
In fact, what is "disgusting and reprehensible" is that there are people in the world who think they are justified in attacking and killing people because someone hurt their feelings or offended their sensibilities. The US government should not act as a validator or enabler of this upside down worldview, which is exactly what the Obama administration has done repeatedly as they have responded to these abhorrent attacks against the United States.
bs. She's an idiot, making up her own reality. Nothing the Obama administration has done has been to validate or enable violence over hurt feelings. That's a straight-up falsehood invented to further a political agenda, painting the President as something other than what he is.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/09/14 21:35:47
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
Well in your mind I'm a blood thisty killer for the US Army Shuma. Don't defend that. I point out the Federation Gov't thread
By implementing a benchmark for US foriegn Aid you make those country cleanup their act
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
The problem is that your suggestion would allow the violent and hateful few to use us to punish the good guys. The folks coming over here to study or work are the bedrock of establishing good relations and tolerance of our cultural differences.
Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++ A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.
Jihadin wrote: Well in your mind I'm a blood thisty killer for the US Army Shuma. Don't defend that. I point out the Federation Gov't thread
By implementing a benchmark for US foriegn Aid you make those country cleanup their act
No, you just give the criminal elements in a country de-facto control of American policy in the region. That would be one of the most idiotic policies ever implemented by America. Also, I don't think you're a bloodthirsty killer for the U.S. army, I think you're truly and woefully deluded concerning geopolitics and economics, but I don't really consider very many people bloodthirsty killers. It helps to have an accurate and useful worldview when you don't jump to hysterical and personal labeling of people after reading something they said on the internet.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/14 21:53:57
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
So your saying Shuma that we need to be a major influence in the ME?
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
good point...