Very, very different contexts, pal. I mentioned British Columbia because, like the people who took the decision to go to war in Iraq, youâre a long, long way away from the prospective arena of war you desire, ie. Saudi Arabia. War would appear to be merely a game to you. I made no snide comment about you living in British Columbia.
You, on the other hand, went into multiple personal rants against me. Again, if you want to do that, fine, Iâve no problem with that, but if youâre using it as a tool to try and win this argument, itâs an automatic admission of defeat.
I donât think Iâm dealing with a rational person here or so the past 16 hours would suggest, so please stop, you win, donât reply to me again, in any thread.
And exactly what has been non-rational about my debating on this thread?
Donât bore me, now, with allusions to spelling or grammar mistakes etc., because, as Iâve already reminded you, I havenât pulled you up on anything of the sort, neither have I tried to ridicule your personal life (I donât give a shit about it) - you have.
Who is we? No, I didnât favor invading Iraq and I donât advocate invading Saudi, sorry if that doesnât fit your narrative. I favor active intolerance of hateful ideology and donât make excuses for it because itâs protected as religion. Time for the human race to grow up and stop teaching venomous fairy tales to children.
Sorry. Iâll revise what I wrote to âWhich it can be assumed you also advocateâ, given youâve decided to start your own branch of the grammar police, or should I say, possessive pronoun police (PPP).
Iâve already stated the following several times: I believe in freedom of religion, as long as that religion is not breaking laws. Law trumps religion every time.
Hateful ideology is not protected under most European hate speech laws. It is protected under the US constitution, which you have so vehemently defended in previous posts on the Trump thread.
Hard to do when religion has such influence over government. You have clearly misunderstood my posts on this subject. I oppose the US first amendment and believe it is time to amend it to reflect todayâs realities. Europe opposes secular hate speech but allows religious hate speech. All hate speech needs to be outlawed.
If you canât conclude that I oppose the US first amendment from my belief that Islam ideology as it currently exists should be banned, then I have to question your comprehension skills. The US is by far the most tolerant country in the civilized world in terms of the right to free speech. This right in my view should no longer be afforded to violent Islamic beliefs.
Abu Hamza was convicted, both in the UK and the US, for soliciting murder and other violent crimes. More notably, he raised another generation to pursue violence. An extreme example like this does not make your case, whatever your case is. Extremists like Hamza have to be exterminated, but the ideology that motivates them has also to be confronted and exterminated.
