Presidential debate

[Jim]

Originally Posted by southnow

Their Quran calls for the death and slaughter of non-Muslums.

quran 2:191
"And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers."

I just want to believe that you're a misinformed, innocuous person. Why would you give misinformation otherwise?
Quran doesn't call for the death and slaughter of non-Muslims. Here is a sure of Quran. It's called Al-Kâfirûn:

109:1-6
Say: "O Al-Kâfirûn (disbelievers in Allâh)! I worship not that which you worship, nor will you worship that which I worship. And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping. Nor will you worship that which I worship. To you be your religion, and to me my religion."

It doesn't need any explanations I think. This is one of the examples. Disbelievers are not to subject to any antagonism in Islamic belief. But with the translation and misquotation (which you did) of 2:191, even I can believe that Quran calls for the slaughter of non-Muslims.

2:191 is the 191th ayet (each sentence of Quran) of Al-Baqarah (2nd sure of Quran). There are 190 other ayets in Al-Baqarah. You just picked one of them and used it to support your point of view. Here it is with 2:190 and 2:192:

2:190. And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors.

2:191. And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Harâm (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

2:192. But if they cease, then Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

So, we know who "they" are in 2:191 now, don't we?
Please. Do not use the words of Quran to support any ideas which doesn't included in Quran.

I say it again. I just want to believe that you're a misinformed guy.
For the people who truly believe that Islamic belief is all about to conquer the world and make all the people Muslims or slaughter non-believers: Please read some books. Historical (i.e. Ottoman Empire) or religious books. Or just anything else... Read something to wake up. Wake up before you become a puppet-voter (which can be manipulated easily) and nothing else.

[Fusion]

The sun has got his hat on hip hip hip hurray the sun has got his hat on and hes coming out to play

[South]

Originally Posted by Jim

I just want to believe that you're a misinformed, innocuous person. Why would you give misinformation otherwise?
Quran doesn't call for the death and slaughter of non-Muslims. Here is a sure of Quran. It's called Al-Kâfirûn:


It doesn't need any explanations I think. This is one of the examples. Disbelievers are not to subject to any antagonism in Islamic belief. But with the translation and misquotation (which you did) of 2:191, even I can believe that Quran calls for the slaughter of non-Muslims.

2:191 is the 191th ayet (each sentence of Quran) of Al-Baqarah (2nd sure of Quran). There are 190 other ayets in Al-Baqarah. You just picked one of them and used it to support your point of view. Here it is with 2:190 and 2:192:

So, we know who "they" are in 2:191 now, don't we?
Please. Do not use the words of Quran to support any ideas which doesn't included in Quran.

I say it again. I just want to believe that you're a misinformed guy.
For the people who truly believe that Islamic belief is all about to conquer the world and make all the people Muslims or slaughter non-believers: Please read some books. Historical (i.e. Ottoman Empire) or religious books. Or just anything else... Read something to wake up. Wake up before you become a puppet-voter (which can be manipulated easily) and nothing else.

I'll go study that and reply, perhaps I can learn something here. If I find that I'm wrong I'll say I'm wrong.

[docquesting]

Fusion would you behave before I sit you in the corner

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by docquesting

Fusion would you behave before I sit you in the corner

hehe you're funny.

[awall19]

this guy
http://www.genuine-islam.com/
talked on the phone with me a while ago

it was a choppy weird internet call from Kuwait, but it was obvious he intended to harm nobody. instead of spending money to help try to spread his peaceful message we invest in MURDER and breed more people who will be killed and who will be willing to trade their lives for a broken cause (in the same way our soldiers currently are doing)

I think everyone who supports the war should be willing to send themselves, their parents, or their children off to die (for an often bogus cause).

[South]

If the content of the call was the same as the content of the website, it's nothing but a pitch for Islam recruitment. We should invest US $'s into religeous recruitment now?

Would you support equal government dollars to other religeons?

[awall19]

Originally Posted by southnow

If the content of the call was the same as the content of the website, it's nothing but a pitch for Islam recruitment. We should invest US $'s into religeous recruitment now?

Would you support equal government dollars to other religeons?

instead of supporting any type of organization we are investing in economic and social chaos....an our way or the highway program which is obviously thusfar not going "our way"

I am not saying that I agree with any particular religion, more that we can not control the world and force our political and / or religious beliefs onto others. when we force our crap on others what makes us better than the formerly "evil" communist Russians? ... the same Russians that were so bad that we had to give Iraq weapons to defend themselves in the past...and the same Russians who were supporting an Iran that was so bad that we had to "accidentally" shoot down a plane full of civilians.

our current bogus foreign policy should be questioned.

[South]

I'm putting this here to keep from starting a new thread about US politics.

The Dems should have hired a sit-in for Edwards tonight. What a slaughter.

Edwards is used to being able to charm his way past logic to win trivial lawsuits. Tonight he found out that empty campain jargons against a man like Cheney will only lead to looking foolish in front of the world.

All of the faulty data Dems have been using to support thier anti-war agenda was thrown back in his face.

I only wish Bush could have performed as well.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by awall19

I think everyone who supports the war should be willing to send themselves, their parents, or their children off to die (for an often bogus cause).

I think everyone who does not support the war should be willing to have their parents, their children, and themselves killed or injured in it, by the enemy (no matter their cause).

I've been pondering these 2 statements for quite a while. I'm kind of stuck.

[ferret77]

"The Dems should have hired a sit-in for Edwards tonight. What a slaughter. "

yeah Cheney looked really sharp, lying about saying he never meet john Edwards even there are videos to prove otherwise

then also blatantly lying about inferring there is a link between Iraqi and al queda

here is what Cheney said on the debate

Cheney responded: “I have not suggested there’s a connection between Iraq and 9/11.”

then this is what the said in June

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...iraq.al.qaeda/

doesn't he know people will look up these things?

then he said for people to consult factcheck.com

which goes to an anti bush website, which is sort of funny

because it will absolve him of any shady business with Halliburton

but if actually go to the site it confirms some shady stuff


"On other matters, Edwards said Halliburton "did business with Libya and Iran, two sworn enemies of the United States" and is now "under investigation for having bribed foreign officials" while Cheney was CEO.

Iran: Indeed, Halliburton has said it does about $30 million to $40 million in oilfield service business in Iran annually through a subsidiary, Halliburton Products and Services Ltd. The company says that the subsidiary fully complies with US sanctions laws, but the matter currently is under investigation by a federal grand jury in Houston.

Bribery Investigation: U.S. and French authorities currently are investigating whether a joint venture whose partners included a Halliburton subsidiary paid bribes or kickbacks to win a $12 billion construction project in Nigeria.

Libya: Edwards was wrong to include Libya, however. In 1995, before Cheney joined the company, Halliburton pled guilty to criminal charges that it violated the U.S. ban on exports to Libya and said it would pay $3.81 million in fines. Those violations dated back to 1987 and 1990."

This is from the site cheney meant to say to check

[evilregis]

Originally Posted by southnow

The Dems should have hired a sit-in for Edwards tonight. What a slaughter.

That was the furthest thing from a slaughter. I don't know what debate you were watching.

As stated above, Cheney was caught in more lies, EASY lies to verify... I just don't know how he didn't think anyone would kill those.

I am also not moronic enough to say that Edwards slaughtered or even won the debate. That was a far fairer debate than the previous. And I think that it all but confirms that Cheney isn't actually the Vice President as much as he is the Co-President. Bush is a clueless schmuck and he needs Mr. Burns, er, Cheney on his side.

[docquesting]

To be fair and I didnt watch but only segments. I think it was pretty much a draw. So yall quit your arguing as I am more conservative than anyone in this forum lol.

What really sucks is Micheal Moore handing stuff out too folks to persuade em to go vote. There is a law against that I beleive.

[Buskerdoo]

Originally Posted by ferret77...then also blatantly lying about inferring there is a link between Iraqi and al queda

here is what Cheney said on the debate

Cheney responded: “I have not suggested there’s a connection between Iraq and 9/11.”

then this is what the said in June

[url

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/18/cheney.iraq.al.qaeda/[/url]

doesn't he know people will look up these things?

I don't normally spend much time on these things but I'm confussed on this statement.

I read the cnn link and it says that Bush and Cheney say they believe there is a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq but NOT between Iraq and 9/11.
Two differnent things...

In fact, even your statement above refers to two DIFFERENT issues. A link with Al Queda vrs a Link with 9/11. So, I guess what he said isn't a lie???

[evilregis]

Originally Posted by Buskerdoo

I read the cnn link and it says that Bush and Cheney say they believe there is a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq but NOT between Iraq and 9/11.
Two differnent things...

In fact, even your statement above refers to two DIFFERENT issues. A link with Al Queda vrs a Link with 9/11. So, I guess what he said isn't a lie???

Yes, it is a lie, Cheney described Iraq as "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

[Buskerdoo]

Originally Posted by evilregis

Yes, it is a lie, Cheney described Iraq as "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

But, I don't see that in the linked to CNN report. Where is the direct quote?

[awall19]

Originally Posted by docquesting

What really sucks is Micheal Moore handing stuff out too folks to persuade em to go vote. There is a law against that I beleive.

I can go door to door and it is legal.

ever wonder why high voter turnout is considered a bad thing for the republican party?

[evilregis]

That was a direct quote. Here's the full quote:

If we're successful in Iraq...we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.

That was taken from the Meet the Press transcript of Sept. 14, 2003 which has been quoted numerous times all over the net.