Bob Calco wrote: >> Problem is, Bob, that just by hearing your POV's I can tell you would >> applaud my murdering if I were in any way in the path you think your >> country should take. > > Problem is you don't really hear my POV. You hear some caricature of my POV > that I barely recognize. > > The idea that I'd be OK with your murder is simply ridiculous. > > I would like you to elaborate on what you think my POV is, though. Perhaps I > can clarify. >
Are you ok with the invasion to Irak? Do you stand for 'our poor boys abroad'? Those same boys who choose to be trained to kill and choose to go to other countries and kill, torture and rape? Are those "boys" under US law or under Sharia? >> We have a saying "Cuando las barbas del vecino >> veas >> cortar, pon las tuyas a remojar" (when you see they are shaving your >> neighbour's beard start wetting yours), so I don't think I should wait >> till you turn against me, it might be too late. >> BTW, you are so "loving" that I think "I bear the duty of explaining >> with endurance and love" that "war" is murder and hate and rape and >> terrible things. There is no "love" in war, just FYI. > > Will you take a step back and tell me when the subject of this thread became > war? The minute you took the flag for hatred of everything muslim (jew/chinese/japanese/etc..). Do you take me for a fool? All this rant stems from your country's state of undeclared war to muslims. Twenty years ago you wouldn't even know what Sharia is and you would give a damn about Brit law allowing civil cases to be judged under it. > > We are talking about the introduction of one framework of law (Sharia), into > another framework of law (British common law and constitutional law > generally) None of which you know at all. >, based on entirely different (not to mention inimical) principles > (not to mention assumption about human rights). I note that they are > incompatible So it is your "humble" opinion that Brit lawyers, judges, and parliament know nothing about their own laws, that they didn't give the matter a moment's thought, and that it is your "mission" to enlighten them. >; Helio observes that the adherents of Sharia will not think of > it the way the high-minded Brits, by allowing it, intend it--a point with > which I concur, albeit Helio and I arrive at this conclusion by different > paths of reason. Funny that you two can only coincide in the common hate towards a third party. Wonder what this reveals about you two. > > At no point in this thread did I (or Helio) proclaim war was love and peace > and happiness and everything sweet, nor do I promote hate. I don't profess > to have the most tightly reasoned set of convictions ever put forth by a > mortal, but I do make an effort to be honest and sincere about my evolving > views, even where they conflict internally or with some party line. We are > all learning as we go. And I make an effort to highlight the contradictions, hatreds, and prejudices in your set of convictions. It's just that my loving nature sees you in the path to hell and wants to save you from satan's claws, it's for your own good. > > My opposition to Sharia is in part based on a conviction--yes based on > study--that it is hate-filled and indeed evil. Again! So you are telling us Brit parliament and their lawyers and judges are stupid people that have not studied the Sharia as profoundly as you have. Go figure! These uncivilized Europeans! > So your lecture is addressing > a point that I did not make--you seem to insist that I'm the hater. You > sound like you enjoy giving such lectures, but I'm not clear at all where > you get off assuming you know me well enough to jump to any conclusions > about the motivations of my heart. How did it go? You shall be known by your acts? or something like that. > This wouldn't matter if you didn't go > beyond mere banter or all-in-good-fun poking to descend to personal > analysis. You should read The Godfather. It is ALWAYS personal. > > That said, I do enjoy your rants. > Thanks, so do I. _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
