BF2S Forums Syrian Reactor "not intended for peaceful purposes."

CameronPoe wrote:

Dec45 wrote:

Hey there authoritarian internet guy, with the big virtual whip in your hand... I never said I didn't like it. I realize that this is a forum in which people express opinions, which is specifically why I stated my opinion, that I think your opinion sucks ass. If you don't like it, you can shut the fuck up. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by making a valid point, albeit a highly witty one.

But you make an interesting point in asking me to talk about the issues being discussed here, because I wasn't aware that Syria's reactors had anything to do with your wet dream fantasies about how to go about destroying Israel. And to extrapolate that, it means that you are in fact strategizing economics and military strategy. So, as long as that's true, I believe I'm well within my rights to call you out on your lame attempt thereof.

You didn't make a valid point. In fact you didn't really address anything. You just came into the thread and flamed because you didn't like my opinion. Arabs hate Israel. FACT. I know that from the rather obvious fact I can not travel to pretty much any Arab nation bar Jordan and Egypt because I have an Israeli stamp on my passport. Arab popular opinion despises Israel. The Arab goal is to get rid of Israel. I just expounded on potential paths to said goal. If you think my assessment of the situation is wrong then please explain.

You're right, I don't like your opinion.

'Arab' is an ethnicity encompassing some 400 million people. So you're fantasy about all of them hating Israel, isn't founded on anything except your personal interests in the embellishment of reality, with racist undertones. Your passport isn't the smoking gun proof of unanimous Arab hatred for Israel. It's merely a physical metaphor for a political problem, which as you ironically just stated, doesn't apply to Jordan and Egypt.

The point behind my post to you, was that you are expounding on potential paths to kill huge numbers of people, in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with Syria claiming such an endeavor. You brought up the topic of a massive war between the 'Arab world' and Israel, which is largely based on a fantasy that which is fueled by your personal hatred, when the thread is simply about Syria's nuclear program. It has nothing to do with the topic. It's merely your obsessive tendency to kick dust on Israel and incite violence against them, at every opportunity. Really, you're attempting to embody the voice of the Arab people, and preaching in their stead. Considering that you're some Irish Joe, that's borderline pathetic. What makes it all the more sad, is that when you're called out on your lame attempts to strategize regional conflict, you retract into your 'I just an engineer stating my opinion' cubby hole. Well, you're right. You're not an economist, nor a soldier. You're not Arab, either. You're just some lame ass armchair general, who screams rally cries for war from the comfort of your home, tons of miles away from where the battles would take place, assuming that they would ever actually happen.

Dec45 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Dec45 wrote:

Hey there authoritarian internet guy, with the big virtual whip in your hand... I never said I didn't like it. I realize that this is a forum in which people express opinions, which is specifically why I stated my opinion, that I think your opinion sucks ass. If you don't like it, you can shut the fuck up. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by making a valid point, albeit a highly witty one.

But you make an interesting point in asking me to talk about the issues being discussed here, because I wasn't aware that Syria's reactors had anything to do with your wet dream fantasies about how to go about destroying Israel. And to extrapolate that, it means that you are in fact strategizing economics and military strategy. So, as long as that's true, I believe I'm well within my rights to call you out on your lame attempt thereof.

You didn't make a valid point. In fact you didn't really address anything. You just came into the thread and flamed because you didn't like my opinion. Arabs hate Israel. FACT. I know that from the rather obvious fact I can not travel to pretty much any Arab nation bar Jordan and Egypt because I have an Israeli stamp on my passport. Arab popular opinion despises Israel. The Arab goal is to get rid of Israel. I just expounded on potential paths to said goal. If you think my assessment of the situation is wrong then please explain.

You're right, I don't like your opinion.

'Arab' is an ethnicity encompassing some 400 million people. So you're fantasy about all of them hating Israel, isn't founded on anything except your personal interests in the embellishment of reality, with racist undertones. Your passport isn't the smoking gun proof of unanimous Arab hatred for Israel. It's merely a physical metaphor for a political problem, which as you ironically just stated, doesn't apply to Jordan and Egypt.

The point behind my post to you, was that you are expounding on potential paths to kill huge numbers of people, in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with Syria claiming such an endeavor. You brought up the topic of a massive war between the 'Arab world' and Israel, which is largely based on a fantasy that which is fueled by your personal hatred, when the thread is simply about Syria's nuclear program. It has nothing to do with the topic. It's merely your obsessive tendency to kick dust on Israel and incite violence against them, at every opportunity. Really, you're attempting to embody the voice of the Arab people, and preaching in their stead. Considering that you're some Irish Joe, that's borderline pathetic. What makes it all the more sad, is that when you're called out on your lame attempts to strategize regional conflict, you retract into your 'I just an engineer stating my opinion' cubby hole. Well, you're right. You're not an economist, nor a soldier. You're not Arab, either. You're just some lame ass armchair general, who screams rally cries for war from the comfort of your home, tons of miles away from where the battles would take place, assuming that they would ever actually happen.

Maybe you should continue your vendetta via PM.

You claim Cameron is deviating from the subject, while your continued heckling does exactly what you are complaining about.

CameronPoe wrote:

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Why must you infer from a statement made about Israel alone that the same does not apply to anyone else with a political goal? You take words out of my mouth that aren't there.

Its your history of reactions and statements here that tell me how you look at the world. Israel can do no right in your eyes and anyone against Israel is basically excused for their actions. Honestly, I rarely see anything different from you. At least Serge, who I often don't agree with, can see the bigger picture and isn't so focused on big, bad America or the evil empire of Israel.

Now you treat what happened in Syria as everyone else's fault. Syria is pretty clearly messing around, using UNDERHANDED tactics to produce weapons that most of the world does not want a country like Syria to have. Instead of laying blame where it should be in this case...Syria...you lay blame on Israel for its actions and almost claim that what happened was probably made up.

If you are going to come in here and lay blame at Israel for the Palestinian issue, lay blame on America for the Iraqi situation, then lay blame on Syria for the actions it is taking. Lay blame where it should be, not where it fits your agenda of who you like or dislike. The Syrian government is very underhanded, please don't play dumb and believe anything else....you are smarter than that.

I am biased against Israel. I believe the creation of the state of Israel at the expense of the inhabitants of Palestine was unjust. It's as simple as that. Syria are still technically at war with Israel. No peace agreement was signed. As such, they should be attempting to better themselves imilitarily to defend themselves from Israeli attacks and to attempt to take back territory of theirs that Israel annexed. Every protagonist in a war will do WHATEVER it takes to beat the opponent, by means both underhand and honest. I expect Syria to be as underhand as Israel if they want to get ahead. I don't blame them for wanting nuclear weapons when their neighbour, with whom they are at war, has by some estimates 100 nuclear warheads. I wouldn't exactly be surprised at their attempts or feel what they are doing is morally reproachable in the context of Israel's nuclear arsenal (which you seem to overlook, correct me if I'm wrong).

Israel IS TO BLAME for the Palestinian issue btw. There is no other culprit (perhaps maybe the UN).

I guess it's one rule for Israel and another rule for everyone else.

No, it is the same rules..............Do not attack a country you can not defeat, and you will not get your ass kicked in less than a week and sent running for the hills with your tail between your legs, without the land you attacked from, or your toys taken away, begging mercy and the UN to do something.

Dec45 wrote:

The focus of my complaint, is not in the simple act of deviation from the subject. The focus is in that this deviation is about killing people, and how to go about starting wars. It's lame.

"Starting" wars? Here's a little history lesson for you Dec45. Israel and Syria are at war. No peace agreement was signed after the Yom Kippur war. There is currently a ceasefire in place, that is all. Non-recognition of this very obvious fact is lame.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-25 05:17:48)

Watching one of the reports last night, an interview with the Syrian president. He said, 'no there was nothing inside it.' Yet they've set up another building exactly the same, connected by pipes to a water treatment facility on the banks of a river. Everything points to that being a reactor. What I'd say is most worrying is that they're keeping it a secret, its the same as Iran, they're not out and open about letting people see what they're building. Why the need for secrecy on a civilian power station?

CameronPoe wrote:

The problem with your debating is that you presuppose to much about me. I am an advocate of a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict - along 1967 borders with reparations to those displaced in 1948. The blame for the mess, originating in the early part of last century, lies at the feet of the international community, Britain and Zionists. They are the root cause of the problem that exists today and that is the core driver of my opinions on the matter.

Now you lambast me about 'travel schmavel' and then play the Muslim wife card. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that the same Muslim wife that m3th0d - our erstwhile Muslim colleague on this forum - lambasted you continuously about. He obviously disagreed with you. What was wrong with him? I would hasten to add that an Indonesian Muslim is probably a darn sight different to an Arab Muslim. I'm not stating your opinions have any less validity than mine just highlighting some aspects of what form the 'basis' of your opinions. When did this turn into a discussion about Islam anyway? I thought this was about the Arab-Israeli conflict?

Your third paragraph is ludicrous. Why should Iran and Syria be transparent about nuclear weapons programs when Israel CLANDESTINELY developed their own???? On military and national secutiry matters nobody needs to be transparent. That would be self-defeating for a start! In this you show your own inherent bias, while claiming elsewhere that you have none. Ridiculous! Or do you advocate removing Israel's nuclear arsenal from them?

First, nice hypocritical line of thinking. No one plays more cards than you in these forums. Who plays the "I've been there, I know" travel card in almost every thread. You!!! If I want to use my wife in examples of people talking about the middle east and conditions, feelings that Muslims share...then of course I will use it since I live that life and live inside of that community and to sit there and say that an Arab Muslim is that much different than an Asian Muslim is outright ignorant and offensive to Muslims everywhere.

Method teased me about me bringing up my wife and it got old but he never "continuously lambasted" me for talking about it as you have here. He did not disagree with me, in fact, I can't recall anything other than one-liners from him that he discussed. I don't recall any argument with any substance in regard to my wife. So if you want to use your "travel" card, your "my friend is a muslim" card, "I took a picture with a Palestinian" card and therefore you know more than anyone, then be prepared for others to use their life experience.

I will say this, just because you have traveled, does not make you an expert on those situations. On the other hand, living, marrying and raising my daughter with a Muslim and having her family and friends involved with my every day life does give me a much deeper and real life perspective on what people of the Muslim faith feel and believe and it is idiotic of you to say that Islam has nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many muslims hang their hat on that. That shows how out of touch you are in dealing with REAL Muslims.

Now, your last paragraph shows that you cant even read what was written. If you read what I said again, you will notice what I said. I said...

"Anyhow, Syria, Iran and any country involved in building or experimenting in nuclear technology needs to be open about their intentions or to make clear what they are doing, especially if they come out and say it is for peaceful purposes. If you claim that, be prepared to prove it."

Let me make it more clear, if you are going to mess with nuclear tech and then claim its for civilian or peaceful purposes, then prove it or allow others to verify it. Simple as that. I am not stupid enough to think that countries aren't trying to obtain weaponry of nuclear capability, but if you are caught red-handed then be ready to face the consequences. Don't piss on my leg and call it rain. Do you understand now or should I speak slower.

CameronPoe wrote:

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

First, nice hypocritical line of thinking. No one plays more cards than you in these forums. Who plays the "I've been there, I know" travel card in almost every thread. You!!! If I want to use my wife in examples of people talking about the middle east and conditions, feelings that Muslims share...then of course I will use it since I live that life and live inside of that community and to sit there and say that an Arab Muslim is that much different than an Asian Muslim is outright ignorant and offensive to Muslims everywhere.

Nice generalisations yourself. 'Ignorant and offensive to Muslims everywhere'. Are you married to every Muslim? lol. Does your wife need a permit to travel from her home town to her place of work? Does your wife live in a refugee camp? Does your wife's hometown now have a Hebrew name?

PS It was you who wanted 'to use my wife in examples of people talking about the middle east', not me. I used the opinions of those people actually from the middle east that I have met and that I work with and the bare facts of documented history of the region.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

Method teased me about me bringing up my wife and it got old but he never "continuously lambasted" me for talking about it as you have here. He did not disagree with me, in fact, I can't recall anything other than one-liners from him that he discussed. I don't recall any argument with any substance in regard to my wife. So if you want to use your "travel" card, your "my friend is a muslim" card, "I took a picture with a Palestinian" card and therefore you know more than anyone, then be prepared for others to use their life experience.

m3th0d, as you well know, was a vehemently anti-Israel British Muslim of Pakistani origin. You can search my karma records for what he thought of your imperious 'I'm unbiased, really I am'/'My wife makes all of my arguments irrefutable' mumbo jumbo. I'll take the views of my Bahrainian colleague at work and those I spoke to in Palestine over an Indonesian opinion anyday. It's a petty I cleared out my inbox because m3th0d and his later incarnation Left_Hand sent me several PMs specifically about you.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

I will say this, just because you have traveled, does not make you an expert on those situations. On the other hand, living, marrying and raising my daughter with a Muslim and having her family and friends involved with my every day life does give me a much deeper and real life perspective on what people of the Muslim faith feel and believe and it is idiotic of you to say that Islam has nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many muslims hang their hat on that. That shows how out of touch you are in dealing with REAL Muslims.

'Wife, wife, wife', 'look at my wife', 'I have a wife', 'Muslim, muslim, wife'. THE ISRAELI PALESTINE CONFLICT IS A TERRITORIAL DISPUTE with a religious flavour. What the fuck does your wife know about not having enough food to put on the table or trying to avoid a roadblack that makes her commute to work five hours each way!!!? The same roadblocks I watched being thrown up with my own eyes. If you think Indonesia is in as tough a position as Palestine is then I suggest you read the UN reports on the humanitarian catastrophe there. Take their word for it.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

Now, your last paragraph shows that you cant even read what was written. If you read what I said again, you will notice what I said. I said...

"Anyhow, Syria, Iran and any country involved in building or experimenting in nuclear technology needs to be open about their intentions or to make clear what they are doing, especially if they come out and say it is for peaceful purposes. If you claim that, be prepared to prove it."

Let me make it more clear, if you are going to mess with nuclear tech and then claim its for civilian or peaceful purposes, then prove it or allow others to verify it. Simple as that. I am not stupid enough to think that countries aren't trying to obtain weaponry of nuclear capability, but if you are caught red-handed then be ready to face the consequences. Don't piss on my leg and call it rain. Do you understand now or should I speak slower.

Did Syria claim to be pursuing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes? No, they did not. Your point is therefore redundant as I was not referring to peaceful programs. I quite specifially referred to military programs.

m3thod also hurled petty insults about people through karma messages.

Even if it is a military program why lie about it? 'There's nothing in that building' when there blantantly is something there they don't want us to see. Besides what need to they have for nuclear weapons anyway? Israel's had them for 40+ years and never once used them in the conflicts its been involved in. So Syria does not need them for deterrance, even in a ground war in the unlikely circumstance that Syria was halfway to annhilating Israel, the Israeli's will only use them as a last resort, whether Syria had them or not.

IRONCHEF wrote:

I dunno...  Call it the "logic" in me that thinks this is all BS as usual.  Seriously, I have ZERO reason to trust our government or it's intelligence. Very sad actually, because it could be true and there's NO WAY of knowing..short of Syria admitting it, publishing their own independent, unCIA'd version of their story in public.

If it's true, my guess is that it's either a way to make more war with Iran, because of course Syria and Iran are the same thing -- Petroleum Raping Stumbling Block Countries (PRSBC's going forward).

Or..and this is a big "or"  Bush is making his pathetic attempt to safe face, create a minimal amount of appearance of actually doing his job for once, and cracking down on the ONE real threat to our country and the world...nuclear proliferation from N Korea.  N Korea should have been more of a priority than attacking Afghanistan and Iraq (not to detract from the importance for putting down Al Quaeda).  But as it is, Bush will gesture, finger point, and make big bad threats merely for politcal gain and set up his successor for failure in dealing with whatever shit he decides to do regarding the real threat of N Korea.  8 years too late bub.

Chef, for Crissakes.  We've been in a pissing match with Iran and Syria since the eighties.  It might make you feel better thinking Bush is always to blame for everything...but the truth is it's kinds of like implementing company policy.

Not that he didn't have the opportunity to turn it around, not that he didn't have the opportunity to change policy.

But it's kind of tiresome to read "It's Bush's Fault" in every thread, when the problem is a little more systemic.

I'm not a big fan of Bush, but I know the difference.

On the topic - I guess its important to consider whether the IAEA (did I get that right?) really is effective, is the terms dictated for allowing nuclear power acceptable?

IRONCHEF wrote:

Ok, I'll make this simple.  Since 2001, which nation has been the biggest threat to the USA?  The ones with oil and no nukes, or the one with nukes, with missiles, with a crazy leader, and one of the nations we called a member of the "axis of evil?"

The current president is actually bush and I'll gladly badger, complain, and bemoan him all the days of his presidency (and throughout history when such topics come up).  Also, have i been wrong in ANY of my accusations against Bush when putting the "blame" on him for something?  Do I always blame bad things on him?  No.  I never blamed any gun related problems on him, nor have I said it was his fault for NAFTA (though he could reverse it), or a host of other things.  Believe me, I give blame where blame is due, so please don't put me in the "blame bush for everything" crowd.  I apologize for being someone who believes the leader of our country stands for something and will freely criticize that person for failing...especially when the person cowboys up and says the buck stops with him...and the buck never stops with him.

We aren't talking about Iraq.  And to that degree, whether Iraq was or was not a threat to the US wasn't the primary reason why I can understand why the invasion was needed.  Now whether it was worth it is where I disagree with why we invaded.

But lets think about the "what if" you are proposing.  "What if the US was trying to manufacture a war by using this incident?"

Do you really think Israel is going to send jets over to bomb an innocent building unless they had something solid about what was in the building?
I don't.  Therefore, I believe the story.

Which means, I believe they bombed a reactor in construction.  Therefore, is it a Bush-driven agenda to inform the world this occurred?

Then isolating it to Bush - how long have we been at odds with Iran?  Since 1980.  Where was Bush then?

Deathbecomes had a good point - why didn't they open up the program then and request nuclear technology, just like Jordan did in January?  If it was a peaceful project, well fine...but then shouldn't the country work with IAEA?  Is it because the IAEA terms are unfair?  What's unfair about them then?  So that's Bush's fault?

If you are hell-bent on riding the Syrians are innocent, WTF Israelis bandwagon...why do YOU think they bombed the building?

IRONCHEF wrote:

Also, have i been wrong in ANY of my accusations against Bush when putting the "blame" on him for something?

It's always debatable.  That's the point.  And yes you have.  In this thread for one, but there's plently of follow-the-party thinking.  Who cares really?  I'm just telling you its tiresome because it leads to posts like this one and triggers an automatic defensive mechanism by you.  Goading is part of the game...I get it.


Anyone want to talk about the real problem here?

My opinion is that Syria and Iran want nuclear power, possibly even nuclear weapons.  But what about the IAEA policies is keeping them from getting reactors?  Why AREN'T they interested in complying with the policies to get them?

IRONCHEF wrote:

So you know, I'm not talking about the same conversations you are.  I made my isolated opinion and without explaining every detail of it, I'll yield since  you're taking me into the topic of your discussion derived from the OP.

Fact:  When Bush was elected president, N Korea was a nuclear threat.  After 9/11, N Korea was added to a clever little slogan called "Axis of Evil" which would have been useful if he substantiated that designation and possibly did something about it.  He had to assault the Taliban to get to OBL.  Fine.  He tried, he failed.  End of that subtopic.  The additional theater of focus should have then been on the other, equally if not more so of a threat, the NUCLEAR POWERED N KOREA.  Not a thing has been done.  China has done more to qwell that problem than anything Powell/Rice have done since Bush didn't lift a finger.  So yeah, the topic of this thread being Syria getting nuke tech from N Korea can indeed be linked to the failure of Bush.  Is that overly bashing him, or is it just tiring you out because you've caught me making legitimate attacks on the bane of existence for this planet over the last 8 years?  Sorry for tiring you with my well substantiated opinion.  Get over it.  My automatic defensive mechanism?  Was it me who challenged you to shut up with the bush bashing, or was it you challenging me to?

Yeah, I got that part.  I'm talking 'bout the first part of your post though, aka "BS as usual".

Last edited by Pug (2008-04-25 12:11:24)

IRONCHEF wrote:

The "BS as usual" remark was meant to convey the usual quality of White House derived hype and lies.  I also included the clause in there saying it could be true but it'd still be hard to know.  I wasn't debating the article, any video evidence or any non-US intel...just stating my state of mind which probably isn't very far fetched.  When I see Dana Perino/Snow/Scotty/Ari, etc speaking, there's little for me to do but guess what the truth is by analyzing what the opposite is of what they're saying.

Well, then my post is accurate.  You are looking thru donkey-colored glasses.

I'm talking about your lack of faith of what was in the building...and about the toothlessness of the IAEA.

CameronPoe wrote:

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

First, nice hypocritical line of thinking. No one plays more cards than you in these forums. Who plays the "I've been there, I know" travel card in almost every thread. You!!! If I want to use my wife in examples of people talking about the middle east and conditions, feelings that Muslims share...then of course I will use it since I live that life and live inside of that community and to sit there and say that an Arab Muslim is that much different than an Asian Muslim is outright ignorant and offensive to Muslims everywhere.

Nice generalisations yourself. 'Ignorant and offensive to Muslims everywhere'. Are you married to every Muslim? lol. Does your wife need a permit to travel from her home town to her place of work? Does your wife live in a refugee camp? Does your wife's hometown now have a Hebrew name?

PS It was you who wanted 'to use my wife in examples of people talking about the middle east', not me. I used the opinions of those people actually from the middle east that I have met and that I work with and the bare facts of documented history of the region.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

Method teased me about me bringing up my wife and it got old but he never "continuously lambasted" me for talking about it as you have here. He did not disagree with me, in fact, I can't recall anything other than one-liners from him that he discussed. I don't recall any argument with any substance in regard to my wife. So if you want to use your "travel" card, your "my friend is a muslim" card, "I took a picture with a Palestinian" card and therefore you know more than anyone, then be prepared for others to use their life experience.

m3th0d, as you well know, was a vehemently anti-Israel British Muslim of Pakistani origin. You can search my karma records for what he thought of your imperious 'I'm unbiased, really I am'/'My wife makes all of my arguments irrefutable' mumbo jumbo. I'll take the views of my Bahrainian colleague at work and those I spoke to in Palestine over an Indonesian opinion anyday. It's a petty I cleared out my inbox because m3th0d and his later incarnation Left_Hand sent me several PMs specifically about you.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

I will say this, just because you have traveled, does not make you an expert on those situations. On the other hand, living, marrying and raising my daughter with a Muslim and having her family and friends involved with my every day life does give me a much deeper and real life perspective on what people of the Muslim faith feel and believe and it is idiotic of you to say that Islam has nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many muslims hang their hat on that. That shows how out of touch you are in dealing with REAL Muslims.

'Wife, wife, wife', 'look at my wife', 'I have a wife', 'Muslim, muslim, wife'. THE ISRAELI PALESTINE CONFLICT IS A TERRITORIAL DISPUTE with a religious flavour. What the fuck does your wife know about not having enough food to put on the table or trying to avoid a roadblack that makes her commute to work five hours each way!!!? The same roadblocks I watched being thrown up with my own eyes. If you think Indonesia is in as tough a position as Palestine is then I suggest you read the UN reports on the humanitarian catastrophe there. Take their word for it.

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

Now, your last paragraph shows that you cant even read what was written. If you read what I said again, you will notice what I said. I said...

"Anyhow, Syria, Iran and any country involved in building or experimenting in nuclear technology needs to be open about their intentions or to make clear what they are doing, especially if they come out and say it is for peaceful purposes. If you claim that, be prepared to prove it."

Let me make it more clear, if you are going to mess with nuclear tech and then claim its for civilian or peaceful purposes, then prove it or allow others to verify it. Simple as that. I am not stupid enough to think that countries aren't trying to obtain weaponry of nuclear capability, but if you are caught red-handed then be ready to face the consequences. Don't piss on my leg and call it rain. Do you understand now or should I speak slower.

Did Syria claim to be pursuing nuclear technology for peaceful purposes? No, they did not. Your point is therefore redundant as I was not referring to peaceful programs. I quite specifially referred to military programs.

You clearly just don't get it. You act as if you are the only one who has experience in dealing or talking with Muslims from the middle east. Because traveling there gives you some magical authority to talk about the situation. It makes me laugh to hear your musings on an Asian Muslim compared to arab Muslims. Do you think that my wife doesn't have communications with Muslims of different races, especially in a Muslim community in the Midwest United States....if you don't then you are a serious idiot.

Do you think that you are the only person ever to speak to Palestinians, a Muslim, an arab.....my work and my family puts me in contact with them almost every day. The city where I live is near one of the largest, if not the largest, arab/ muslim communities in the United States. I deal with Palestinians all the time living and working in the United States. I recently sat down with a group of Palestinians who were helping build my new home. My wife and I had a long talk with them over what they felt about the issues in and around their conflict and guess what, they have more tolerance than you do. They definitely don't think or spew the bullshit you come up with and to this day I have a great working relationship with these guys.

Finally, if you think that Muslims in Indonesia don't suffer some of the things you have mentioned (even though its Muslim against Muslim) then you seriously don't understand the Muslim world and what is going on even inside their own religion. Putting the suffering of one people above others and placing more importance on one is pretty stupid in my opinion. I would love for you to tell some of her family that what they have experienced isn't worth shit. Some parts of Indonesia are very dangerous and unforgiving but I guess you have have to "travel" there and talk to someone first, so you can be a guru for all of us ignorant/ uneducated drools.

As far as Syria, again you choose to read what you want: I specifically said that if you are going to claim peaceful OR get caught red-handed with tech that the rest of the world is trying to halt...then be prepared for the consequences. I have repeated myself 3 times but I am sure you will pick and choose some more.

As far as method, I don't give a shit. After he made a very racist, pretty weird, offensive PM to me about my wife, I had nothing to do with him from that point on. If you are going to hang out and uplift that kind of person, then that tells me even more about your character. I am not the only one who has experienced his personal messages and since I didn't respond to him, I guess he had to run to you. As far as I am concerned, he is a worthless piece of shit and not worth anyone's time, maybe except yours.

I think it is extremely childish to use PM to bash someone else, to offend someone else and to attack someone behind their back or so that others can't see it, but I see that it is in your nature as well. I have used my PM a grand total of 5 times and had nothing to do with any person here, basically hello and helping one guy out. It looks like you place a very high importance on karma and private messages. I have better things to do than go around trashing people in secret and getting enjoyment out of it. Honestly, if Method claims to be Muslim, he sure doesn't act or behave like the Muslims I know and live with. I can't see any of them acting like he has and for that matter how you are right now. I find it strange that you actively try to bring up things that offended my wife and myself. It seems you also find pleasure in that as well......

Last edited by DeathBecomesYu (2008-04-25 15:29:00)